It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.

Please white-list or disable in your ad-blocking tool.

Thank you.


Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.


Classified N.A.S.A. Lunar Photography

page: 1
<<   2 >>

log in


posted on Mar, 10 2006 @ 04:41 PM
I came across this website earlier today. A lot of it seemed complete poppycock, but I eventually realized that the site was just a compilation of articles from all sorts of sources. One caught my eye, called NASA Moon Photos. The original article appeared in the 1995 June/July issue of 'Houston Sky,' a locally based Mutual UFO Network newsletter, as far as I could work out.
It is quite a coinincidence that Enkidu just posted something slightly relating to this not all that long ago.

The author of the article, one Vito Saccheri, was a well respected industrial engineer, a project manager for an engineering company at teh time of writing - and still could be for all I know; as my efforts to contact him have been rather unsuccessful.

I would recommend that you read his entire story

Read it off this site, because the others' text is a touch hard too read.

In 1979 Saccheri was informed by a Venezuelan oil company's chief engineer that the National Aeronautics and Space Administration was withholding photographs of the lunar surface in its vaults, and he wanted Saccheri's help in obtaining these pictures. Saccheri was given a book to read, entitled Somebody Else Is On The Moon, penned by George Leonard, a former NASA scientist who had worked in the photo intelligence division of NASA, as well as the Jet Propulsion Laboratory.
In the book Leonard accused NASA of having photos that confirmed a non-human presence on the moon. Photographs were included, but they were so grainy as to be useless, althrough the pictures were accompanied by the identification code numbers, which enabled Saccheri and the man who got him involved, Lester Howes, to go the Johnson Space Center in Houston, Texas, and request to see the specific photographs.

After appromaxately 7 or 8 days of the usual bureaucratic runaround, which included contacting the head NASA office in Langley, Virginia, I will add, the men were finally directed to the Photo Library, located off site of the main compound, interestingly enough.

Saccheri travelled east along NASA 1 road, to the eastern limit of the property line, where he found a small dirt road that travelled parallel to the border fence (I got east and west mixed up here which cost me a lot of time :lol
. On Google Earth there are no long roads visible in the wooded areas, but there appears to be a housing estate that was not there in even the late 80's, as I got my hands on a high-resolution aerial shot that showed a north-east view over the compound. But there seems to be a lot of roads around those wooded areas to the north and north-east of the JSC, and there is a highly suspect building at 29° 34' 18.52"N 95° 04' 54.74"W, if anyone's bored enough to check it out.

Once they found the building, marked 'Lunar Landing Observatory' in tiny letters, they were directed down a staircase to an underground tunnel which took them to the actual library.
After waiting 5 more days after this, they were finally allowed to view the filed photos.

I am sorry for the large quotations, but these are the main points of the whole article, less than 390 words.

Originally written by Vito Saccheri 1995

The photos were huge, approximately 32 by 24 inches, with a dull grey,
almost dull-black look.

Frustratingly, we had all the technical data for triangulation--simple
trigonometry and algebra were all that we needed to compute the size
and distance of anything shown. But without paper, calculators, or
pencils, we were limited to what we could do in our heads, and we
weren't up to it--the numbers were too big, the angles too acute.

To this day, I can remember these views: A boulder that seemed to have
been rolled uphill, leaving its tracks in the side of the hill;
obvious machinery on the surface, showing bolted sections; three
dilapidated "bridges" crossing a chasm that reminded me of the Grand
Canyon; pipe fittings that looked like four-way Ts (or Xs) that could
be seen in every photo, some with their ends turned up or down as they
hung over the edge of a crater; three surprising pyramids that
prompted me later to closely study the Egyptian Giza pyramid complex;
apparent pipelines criss-crossing the surface, running to and from
craters; a UFO rising from the surface and photographed directly above
a crater; and perhaps the most memorable, the unmistakable figure of a
rectangular structure placed squarely in the biggest crater pictured-
the structure looked either very old or under construction, but the
crater had to be miles wide, and the camera angle gave a perfect
three-dimensional view.

The men were allowed three eight-hour business days to view the pictures, and were not allowed pens, pencils, paper, calculators, cameras, or recording devices of any kind. They could not be left alone with the photos. They would be escorted in and out for lunch and bathroom breaks.
On the last day Saccheri got tired and went to stretch his legs with the librarian following him. Saccheri noticed a panel out of place in the main room of the Lunar Landing Observatory, and asked the librarian what was in the room behind the panel. The librarian, as he had got on well with the men and had quite liked the opportunity to see the photos himself, told Saccheri that the room was full of binders that recorded details of scientific experiments and mission transcrips. Saccheri was allowed to enter the room.

After looking at the scientific data to waste time, he picked up a transcript binder.

Originally written by Vito Saccheri 1995

. . . killing the last 15 minutes of time. Then my
eyes caught it- "Houston, we've got a bogey at two o'clock."

And there was more- "Roger that, Apollo. Switching to alpha. Roll
eight degrees and begin sequence... "

"Roger, Mission Control. Confirming alpha."

Though I knew instinctively what it meant, I couldn't believe what I
was reading. I raced through the pages and other mission transcripts
and found similar dialogue-

"Mission Control, we've got Santa Claus coming over the hill...."

"Roger, Apollo. Hold your fix. Switching bravo. Do you copy?"

"Roger, Houston. Bravo link...."

These guys were reporting UFO activity, but I couldn't remember ever
hearing this during the live TV broadcasts of lunar missions in `69
and `70. I was too dumbfounded to say a word and too scared to tell
Les or Roger [librarian]. I didn't want to get either of them in
trouble-we had no clearance to see these documents.

Very interesting, I must say, as when reading this part I remembered something along similar lines I must have looked at years ago, something about astronauts reporting unidentified craft skitting along the surface of the moon as they were coming in to land.

Apparently 'alpha' and 'bravo' are switching stations that divert transmissions around Houston and Mission Control directly to CIA headquarters in Langley. Hmmm . . .

There are a number of errors in this story, such as a part when Saccheri mentioned the librarian talking about the lenses of the cameras, and that fact they they zoom in on an anomaly when the computer picks it up. The onboard computers had tiny RAM, and the lenses were unable to zoom in, as this website says. The site also had a lot of other arguments. But Saccheri could have simply made a mistake. Perhaps the librarian said something about wishing that the cameras could zoom in, and he misheard?

As the editor of Houston Sky said, "Vito is one of the few people whose story I could accept based just on his word... Credibility is a given in Vito's work. The success of his business -- he owns a technical investigations company -- rests on expertise, reputation and integrity... As someone whose advice I have relied on over the last two years, he has been rational and dispassionate, conservative in his ufological assumptions, and utterly dependable. To me, he is as credible as they come."

What reason would Saccheri have to make up this story? An obviously well respected businessman is not going to soil his reputation by publishing rubbish.

This kind of stuff has always intrested me. Althrough I am not entirely sure that humans made it to the moon, if we did, and found all this; well, jeez, the cover-up is one hell of a conspiracy, don't you think?

If you would care to look around the web, there are a lot of sites that talk about UFO's/structures on the moon. Here's a starting point: good account of an employees experiences at the JSC at He talks about walking into restricted rooms with a fire team to check out activated fire alarms only to see photographs of UFO's covering the walls and military captains pointing their weapons at them and telling them to get out of the room. Well worth a read.

Mods, I was not 100% on where to put this post. UFO's or Skunk Works. Do what you will.
------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- This one has pictures of suspect craters. I can't for the life of me work out what they're talking about. Diagonal gridlike trending??

MOD EDIT: Changing quote tags to external source tags.

[edit on 3/10/2006 by cmdrkeenkid]

posted on Mar, 10 2006 @ 05:57 PM
This was an awesome read thanks so much for the links I have them bookmarked now.

I don't know why but for some strange reason I think I believe the two stories from these gentlemen

posted on Mar, 10 2006 @ 06:09 PM
OK if i had a vote you would get it!

An awesome piece of work thank you very much for that. Spent a good hour going through the links and all.

Well worth the read people.

posted on Mar, 11 2006 @ 07:10 AM
I own a copy of the Leonard book. In fact, it was the first conspiracy theory I "investigated" when I was about 10 years old. Bought it (in translation) with my own money
Several of the pictures included in the book are low-res copies of photographs that I discovered in my father's National Geographics from the late 60s to early 70s.

The book versions of the photographs seem to show connected rectangular structures, factories, etc. The National Geographic versions of the same features show natural objects like boulders and ridges. In other words, the structures are artifacts of resolution.

Needless to say, I was heartbroken.

posted on Mar, 14 2006 @ 05:26 AM
Really? That's a bit of a disappointment, isn't it? I just said what i'd been told, through. And the book started this investigation by these guys, so at least something good came out of it.

posted on Mar, 15 2006 @ 12:01 PM
It is interesting, however, that it's so hard to track down good, high-resolution photos of the lunar farside. I know more details about Mars than I do about the Moon. We have four satellites orbiting Mars. How many around the Moon (that we know of)?

Previously classified lunar farside photo, showing large deposits of
green cheese and ancient alien cheese mining facilities.

posted on Mar, 26 2006 @ 06:39 PM
Great job on the research...but sounds like some of the men have made some crucial mistakes surrounding the details (and the devil is in the details so they say...) which show the stories to be more fiction than fact.

I can say that I definitely believe the Apollo 11 mission ran into some kind of "Santa Claus" (codename for UFO) encounter, based largely on some overheard traffic at the time by HAM radio operators...but I'm not swallowing the structures on the moon theory.

Why? For starters, we aren't the only ones who've been taking pictures of the Moon. Other nations would certainly have seen these structures too, given the size mentioned. After all, even Clementine (about the best res I can think of that we've had there, other than landing), pics show the blastmark from the LM.... Also, I'd think we'd be pretty worried about the Chinese plans to go to the moon, but so far, I haven't seen the concern....

posted on Mar, 28 2006 @ 03:36 PM
Before the Internet, people had to rely on letters and word of mouth to get their crazy conspiracy stories out. A lot of them have to do with "HAM radio operators" picking up some kind of secret stuff, whether it's about the Moon, or Russia, or Cuba, or whatever. Of course, it's essentially impossible to track down the source of these little myths. What are you going to find, some hunched up little guy in his basement with a dusty tape of NASA broadcasts where they discuss flying saucers? I don't think so.

Classified photos are about the same. The old "this guy working at NASA saw them in a TOP SECRET drawer" story is as vauge and unverifiable as anything. It would be cool if any of this stuff was (or could be) researched correctly and found to be authentic, but I'm afraid that's just not going to happen.

posted on Mar, 28 2006 @ 04:02 PM
I remember seeing some of these photos on one of late William Coopers lectures that circles the net. Unfortunately, the video wasnt exactly of great quality, but thats the things he talked about, same things these people describe, right down to machinery and NASAs explanation of boulders that roll uphill

posted on Mar, 28 2006 @ 05:42 PM
where are the damn pictures!

what could possibly live on the barren wasteland that is our moon?

this conspiracy is straight up ignorant

posted on Apr, 6 2006 @ 01:01 PM

Originally posted by madnessinmysoul
where are the damn pictures!

what could possibly live on the barren wasteland that is our moon?

this conspiracy is straight up ignorant

No onelives there its just showing you proof of structures on the moon and all kinds of wierd untold objects No one said anyone lives there.

MOD EDIT: Now, now... It's not nice to call names.

[edit on 4/6/2006 by cmdrkeenkid]

posted on Apr, 12 2006 @ 01:00 AM
Maybe it's a barren wasteland. Or not. I read something that referred to white (science research) papers published between the 70's and 90's referring to a very small atmosphere on the moon, but alas I didn't keep the book and am not sure where to look for a reference. I can't validate it but until I have the time and money to do a major search for that I won't say it's false.

Most the theories about "some kind of something on the moon" would suggest more that 'life' was dominantly inside it, not outside it except on occasion. So its apparent dead-ness outside may not be relevent to whether or not there is anything or anybody living there.

edited to add: seems to me the most practical focus is simply that we know we are severely limited in the information we're receiving about it, and there seems to be no logical reason for that; this breeds conspiracy theories, of course. One should not need to have a big conspiracy to request the government we fund provides the information we funded them to gather.

[edit on 12-4-2006 by RedCairo]

posted on Apr, 12 2006 @ 01:09 AM

Originally posted by madnessinmysoul
where are the damn pictures!

what could possibly live on the barren wasteland that is our moon?

this conspiracy is straight up ignorant

I don't think it is impossible. If you had the technology you could live underground and who knows what minerals are on the moon. You can get water from other planets if you want.

Just because it is difficult for us to envision it doesn't mean it can't be done.

posted on May, 29 2006 @ 04:43 PM
For your consideration, an intriguing and apparently censored photo from the Clementine survey of the lunar surface. What's peaking out from behind the blurred spot?

posted on Sep, 20 2006 @ 11:41 PM
Nice find I will have to look that one over closely

posted on Sep, 21 2006 @ 03:48 AM

Originally posted by watch_the_rocks

I came across this website earlier today. A lot of it seemed complete poppycock, but I eventually realized that the site was just a compilation of articles from all sorts of sources.

You call sacred -text archives "poppycock" and "just" a compilation...

Youv'e got to be kidding! Its the internets greatest UNBIASED source of all ancient and onorthodox publication archive...

Godd Grief!!!

posted on Sep, 18 2007 @ 01:19 PM

Originally posted by Tandoku
For your consideration, an intriguing and apparently censored photo from the Clementine survey of the lunar surface. What's peaking out from behind the blurred spot?

Apparently nothing, see : Google Moon

Why would Google have better images than Nasa?

posted on Sep, 18 2007 @ 02:58 PM
on the googlr image of the moon,them "zoomed" place marks dont match the ground underside,look close and you'll see this.. why?

posted on Sep, 18 2007 @ 04:09 PM
Nice link

I second the motion on sacred texts they give you everything and let you decide. Being the archives are free online is a great contribution to the community of related interests.

posted on Sep, 19 2007 @ 07:29 AM
There is no moon conspiracy I think it's all a bunch of crap. If there was some solid proof of a conspiracy I would believe it but it's all really just speculation and that's all.

new topics

top topics

<<   2 >>

log in