New moonbase picture?

Came across this, wondering if anyone could shed any light on it.

www.metacafe.com...

And here's the picture; ca.geocities.com...

(wasnt sure how to post it, so I linked it to my site)


What does anyone think? This looks a lot more convincing than any john lear picture ive seen.

Doesn't look like anything to me. But things that don't look like anything specific around here often get labeled a "moon base" "starship" "alien" or whatever the poster wishes it was, so my post doesn't mean anything.

A perfect rectangle doesnt look like anything to you"?

The "perfect" rectangle you refer to is not really there. It is a picture artifact. Like I said, anything I say will not matter to those that already have their mind made up.

Originally posted by IgnoreTheFacts
The "perfect" rectangle you refer to is not really there. It is a picture artifact. Like I said, anything I say will not matter to those that already have their mind made up.

I was thinking artifacting as well......

The photo is of Messier and Messier A in the Mare Fecunditatis just to the south of Mare Crisium. The rectangle doesn't look like a 'glitch' it looks like it was placed there by someone.

Below are some photos I have of Messier and Messier A. First here is a Galileo photo of the moon that shows where Messier is located: (Yellow rectangle):



Here is a photo of Messier taken last year by Mike in the UK with his 10 inch telescope:



Messier is on the right and Messier A is on the left.

And here is a photo of Messier taken by the Lick Observatory in January of 1946 with their super powerful 36" telescope:



Notice the high resolution and definition with a 36 inch telescope compared with a 10" commercially available telecope. Notice the clarity of the crater walls and surrounding countryside. You can almost see the people walking around. (I mean if there were people walking around you could almost see them).

I don't see any rectangle in any of these photos so either it is some kind of photo aberration or somebody put a rectangle there for some reason during the processing.

Damn, John. Your the last person I would think I'd end up agreeing with around here, lol. I don't know if that's such a good thing, lol.

Thanks for the pics!

Gotta agree with the glitch idea, though it would be kind of nice if I didn't have too.

The "base" in the photo, (which is unavailable as of 20:08 GMT, btw) is just a little too sharp, and a little too perfectly square. I don't want to have to say that, believe me, but, unfortunatley, it just is.
I can't imagine the logic behind any secret moonbase being built, or even placed, in such a way that it is so easily identifiable.

Wouldn't it be far more logical to disguise them, or even build them in an organic shape, so they can't be seen or readily identified by nosey telescopes?

I've no doubt there are some clandestine operations on the lunar surface. With the current, unending clamour for fossil fuel fields, mineral rights beneath the artic, industry's growing need for raw materials combined with the USA's alledged, incredibly advanced space going capabilities, wouldn't it make sense for man to be plundering our nearest neighbour? What would be stopping us?

John maybe this is a stupid question but in that moon picture why does parts of the moon appear to be blue and green. Is this some result of the camera or the light????

The resolution selected is 1 pixel = 1 kilometer. The rectangle is approximately 48 pixels by 29 pixels. (Just lift out the rectangle with any editing software and view the remaining attributes.) So at one pixel per kilometer you have a building 24 kilometers long by about 15 kilometers wide. To put it in miles: a building 15 miles long by 9.3 miles wide, nearly 140 square miles. This is about 4 billion square feet, which is about 375 times larger than the biggest building ever built on earth in terms of surface area square feet.

Even at 1/6 earth's gravity (or 1/2 according to Lear) you have quite an engineering feat there. You'd have to figure out where all that material came from and who put it together how and for what purpose.

Or alternatively, do the math on the rectangle and realize the probability of that being a "base" is near zero.

Probably the camera being used i would have thought, or the roll of film being used. Does anyone use rolled film these days or is it all cards?

Originally posted by thesaint
John maybe this is a stupid question but in that moon picture why does parts of the moon appear to be blue and green. Is this some result of the camera or the light????

Ummm because they are? That is one of the points we have been making the Moon is NOT black and White as you have been lead to believe...

That picture is from Galileo and is the only real color image of the Moon from NASA and while I am sure they have it in full high resolution SOMEWHERE, you can't get it on the net

thelivingmoon.com has the highest resolution of that image here..

And we have Mike Deegans image taken from Earth with a 10 " scope in the UK




Now the image mike took is on our site in 80% of the original and that one is 10 times better resolution than the Galileo image... Hmmmm

We also have another image from another Astronomer Noel Carboni, that also shows the colors. Noel has hyper saturated this image to show the colors... To get the original simply desaturate it and it will match the other two...




NOTE These images in the thread are the small versions... the full size are available on our website and on CD

Get used to it... the Moon in LIVING COLOR... not the old NASA stuff that is made from composites like this one... a black and white moon, with an over enhanced blue earth... one that we proved had obvious tampering

Apollo 11 AS11-44-6552




[edit on 4-9-2007 by zorgon]

Originally posted by wingzero93
And here's the picture; ca.geocities.com...
What does anyone think? This looks a lot more convincing than any john lear picture ive seen.

That is an old anomaly on the old version Clementine images the first generation V1.5 and is an artifact of pixellation as it is not on the V2.0 image of the same area...

So you think that is better than John's stuff? Hmmmm

You obviously haven't seen this one then

Apollo 11 AS11_41_6156 Daedalus Crater (Crater 308)

Originally posted by Beamishwouldn't it make sense for man to be plundering our nearest neighbour? What would be stopping us?

Nothing actually as the Mineral rights have already been secured and by people who work for the government creating stealth technology that hides buildings...

The one above got missed in the editing

Hey Zorgon cheers for the heads up. I had seen the Noel Carboni pic before but assumed it was CGI or something. It is truly amazing. I take it it looks white/grey to the naked eye due to the intense light reflected from the Sun then

Originally posted by thesaint
Hey Zorgon cheers for the heads up. I had seen the Noel Carboni pic before but assumed it was CGI or something. It is truly amazing. I take it it looks white/grey to the naked eye due to the intense light reflected from the Sun then

If you mean when you look at it from Earth, yes the intense reflection does do that... but few of us ever look close with a good scope

The Earth looks colorful from the moon so why wouldn't the moon look colorful from Earth? I can go outside right now and tell that the moon is all greyish-white.