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.


Weird Moon Anomaly! A Big UFO Or Artificial Structure?

page: 6
<< 3  4  5    7  8  9 >>

log in


posted on Sep, 20 2007 @ 02:10 AM
I would accept a glitch BUT... it looks like NASA's tried to cover it up with one of their smudges. NASA doing what they do best!

The REAL questions are, (given the photoshopping technology NASA must have):
-Why leave bits hanging out?
-Why the obvious dodgy smudges?

It's obvious they want people who research (people who are ready?) to know something's going on at the moon. Or they're just sick and tired of lying and are starting to give up.

[edit on 20/9/07 by NuclearPaul]

posted on Sep, 20 2007 @ 02:39 AM

Originally posted by mikesingh
reply to post by internos

How the devil do you get hold of such stuff? Amazing!
Now that's something our experts need to explain. And have a look at this tower on the Moon...

Have a nice day!

Another amazing find Mike!

Do you know approx the location on the moon and the year it has been taken?

By the way, i assume someone else has already noticed this:

Original Caption Released with Image:
About 50,000 Clementine images were processed to produce the four orthographic views of the Moon. Images PIA00302, PIA00303, PIA00304, and PIA00305 show albedo variations (normalized brightness or reflectivity) of the surface at a wavelength of 750 nm (just longward of visible red). The image projection is centered at 0 degree latitude and 180 degrees longitude. Mare Moscoviense (dark albedo feature upper left of image center) and South Pole-Aitken Basin (dark feature at bottom) represent maria regions largely absent on the lunar farside. The Clementine altimeter showed Aitken Basin to consist of a topographic rim about 2500 km in diameter, an inner shelf ranging from 400 to 600 km in width, and an irregular depressed floor about 12 km in depth.


EDIT to add:
About these pics
This is just a wild theory:
it looks that someone made a triangular layer (darker) in order
to cover the brighter one: and then something's gone wrong and
the two layers doesn't match.

Just a crazy idea here....

[edit on 20/9/2007 by internos]

posted on Sep, 20 2007 @ 03:16 AM

Originally posted by slaveearth
reply to post by mikesingh

please check out my thread on'

Nice find, but I'm a trifle skeptical about what RCH writes. OK, some stuff of his is good, must most others is imagination gone a little wild. Like the face on mars being a nuclear reactor just because of its shiny appearance in a dawn pic! That was nothing but sunlight reflecting off the surface!

But yes, Mike Bara (Not related to me!!
) is more credible and thus I await his 'Secret History Of NASA'. Let's see what he's got!


posted on Sep, 20 2007 @ 03:36 AM
reply to post by internos

Wow! Super find internos!!

OK. Here’s the original pic of the tower. Thanks to Keith for the find.

Apollo Orbital Image AS16/H/AS16-118-18957
Courtesy: Keith Laney

And do you notice an object in space above the horizon? Well, it could be dust on the lens, a photographic glitch, ice particles, or the ubiquitous swamp gas!!


posted on Sep, 20 2007 @ 04:19 AM
reply to post by internos

So I am not crazy , like i posted before I did see a triangularshape there , well first I thought its a tetrahydron but after looking closely at what you show I think your assumption is more correct , whatever we see is a side of a triangular shaped object

posted on Sep, 20 2007 @ 04:34 AM

Originally posted by internos
About these pics
This is just a wild theory:
it looks that someone made a triangular layer (darker) in order
to cover the brighter one: and then something's gone wrong and
the two layers doesn't match.

Just a crazy idea here....

Hell's bells!!
You rock!
Now that's a theory I like very much!! So that fella at the image processing (Read air brushing) lab at NASA did a bad fit! He's probably displaced the smudge inadvertently. Sack him! NOW. But hey, on second thoughts...NO! We need more screw-ups from NASA so we get to see more!!


posted on Sep, 20 2007 @ 09:11 AM
I did not read all the comments, but are you familiar with the website of Joseph P. Skinner, Mikesingh?

I found the same picture on his website.

He has fantastic pictures on his site, which he regards as evidence of even forests on Mars.

Look at this page!
Skinner Site Forest on Mars
I spend two hours on his website. Amazing stuff, although it is impossible for me to give a final conclusion. It looks great, however.

[edit on 20-9-2007 by Pjotr]

posted on Sep, 20 2007 @ 09:54 AM
reply to post by Pjotr

Yes, Pjotr. JP is an acquaintance of mine. And by the way, he's JP Skipper, not skinner!!

If you read a couple of pages back, I've said more about him! And yes, JP's got a great site going, though I haven't had the time to wade through it in detail so far!


[edit on 20-9-2007 by mikesingh]

posted on Sep, 20 2007 @ 01:19 PM

Originally posted by CyborgPirateNinjaJesus

That makes sense, but one would assume NASA of all people, wouldn't tape things to their photos ( just considering the importance and quality of them) but thats just my view on it. plus people make mistakes all the time so it could just be tape ..

Now why would that make sense?

You guys really get me some time
Silly Lemmings

First of all have any of you looked in to check how NASA processes these images? Do you really think they make prints and then scan them for us? And leave sticky notes and coffee stains on them? Come on NASA makes mistakes but seriously... And you guys say John has crazy ideas

Gee great research here guys

You have also missed the obvious...
These are NOT FROM NASA The only thing NASA did with Clementine is run Mission Control Its a US NAVY Department of Defense Star Wars project...

The source of the image should have given you that much info. NAVY.MIL Everyone picks on NASA... :shk: (but then that's why NASA is there)

How about just reading the opening statement on the image source site?

Naval Research Laboratory
NRL was responsible for the design, manufacture, integration, and mission execution of the Clementine spacecraft for the Ballistic Missile Defense Organization. During its two-month orbit of the Moon in 1994, Clementine captured 1.8 million images of the Moon's surface. The Laboratory provides the Clementine Lunar Image Browser as a courtesy to scientific researchers, as well as the general public, and you are welcome to browse the over 170,000 images that are available.

Now why would the Ballistic Missile Defense Organization want pics of the moon? Surely they don't want to stick WEAPONS up there on the 'high ground'??

If you notice 1.8 million pictures taken
We are allowed to see 170.000 not even 10%

Your taxes paid for them... write congress and DEMAND to see them!

As to the "coverup" these were first generation images at the Version 1.5 browser and they did not care to be good in hiding stuff. The images are pixellated because they are low resolution JPEG files VERY low res... After all they didn't want you to see the full color HIGH RES images...

Too good for Lemmings

Now then... I love Mike's work and he is now featured on Pegasus... and so because he works so hard I will toss a few into the ring...

And if you have any questions about Clementine just ask... but drop me a U2U because I can't follow all the threads ...

Now the images I will post first are from the Version 2.0 Navy Browser Harder to use you need coordinates and the NAVY has a different Lat/Long system... but they are better quality...

Exhibit A

Reiner Gamma showing DATA LOSS Not cover up... I can say this because I have the original full color without the square...

Exhibit B

Ukert Crater
Richrd Hoagland's "Arcology Row" Area
This one shows 'smudging' You can see the triangular crater Ukert but the famous Hoagland anomaly area looks like a cloud front moved in and we all know there are no clouds on the moon

Exhibit C

This one I lost the coordinate for... if anyone has them please let me know
This one has been shown as a 30 kilometer building on the Moon... This one is not bad but without the coordinates I cannot find it on the color images

Exhibit D

These next two are coverups Not Data Loss... not tape... coverup.. and they don't care that you know they cover them up. All you have to do is visit Langley and read the files... they even created a 3-d moon

Exhibit E

Now in this one it was so badly covered you can still see pieces behind...

I will give you coordinates for this one...

Use the V1.5 browser

Set Resolution to 1 pixel = 1 kilometer
Set image size 768x768
Set Lat -70
Set Long 137

Hit "use lat/long" button

continued next post.....

posted on Sep, 20 2007 @ 01:50 PM
Now then let me show you our favorite one from these images..

Exhibit F

This is one of the ones used in the disclosure video.. where they talk about airbrushing... There is something you people need to understand about 'disclosure' Many on the inside want to talk but can't They can however leak out certain things...

They also use misdirection. In this image a lot of fuss has been made about the "two tall towers' that have been airbrushed out... Well you can see what they mean and everyone focuses on the "towers" Just look around the web...

But lets talk a bit about scale... if these were 'towers" they would be several kilometers tall Remember I said set the resolution to 1 pixel = 1 kilometer

Think about it...

Here is the picture

Now when hunting anomalies on the Moon it is important to keep scale in mind... This image was 'leaked out' and made prominent in disclosure films because they left something on it... but they wouldn't come out and say it

Look just to the right of center, to the left of that "tower" This artifact was found by Johnny Annonymous, a member of and fellow researcher.

This object is reflecting sunlight very strongly, is hovering above the surface and casts a triangular shadow. Looking close you can see the "fins" behind the craft, and the matching shadow. Below is a closer view. We will attempt to locate this in later versions. This is an example of the scale we need to keep in mind when looking for anomalies

In the John Lear Lunar Orbiter V image we found this...

And then there is NASA's secret project(This one was canceled but there are many others of this design 'floating around'

Here is another one

OH almost forgot... to those new to our threads... in case you don't believe me about the Color images that Clementine REALLY took and only gave the Lemmings poor low quality pixellated JPEGS to oggle over...

Eat yer Heart out... then call yer Congress Person and DEMAND ANSWERS

Reiner Gamma as it REALLY Looks (This is one tenth size the other is too big for here

[edit on 20-9-2007 by zorgon]

posted on Sep, 20 2007 @ 02:00 PM
The only thing I noticed is that the top left side of the object is hanging directly over a crater a pretty damn big one too.

posted on Sep, 20 2007 @ 02:09 PM

Originally posted by mikesingh
This particular pic was a result of trying to find anomalies that were apparently airbrushed by NASA in the same general area.

Okay one last time...

[rant on]

Mike and all others... Great work and we love ya at Pegasus... but the only way to build a reputation as a researcher is to be accurate...

1) Skipper's site has a LOT of images and I myself have exchanged many letters with him. We disagree on many finds... He prefers using the old data set... we use the newly released ones...

On Mars stuff yes we have many people at Pegasus who SPEND HOURS looking through Malin Images. Some of the posts on Skippers site are also taken from other sites... As much as possible we give credit to those who spot it first but there are hundreds of websites looking for anomalies so duplication WILL occur... Skipper has no problem with this

2) It is also very important when 'blaming' someone that you get your facts straight...



The photos were taken for Defense purposes and SOME were given to the public These images are NOT ON A NASA WEBSITE

You skeptics pounce on the "Skipper' issue for credit where due... but you are all willing to blame NASA or cite NASA as the source

Please can we at least get this correct?

The Navy has released the Color images to the Arizona State University and the USGS but NOT NASA

[rant off]

Okay now then back to your regularly scheduled program...

And here is a color Clementine shot from the Mare Marginis magnetic anomaly on the Farside

posted on Sep, 20 2007 @ 02:24 PM
I have my own "Secrets of NASA History"

Here are the NSA workers at Langley looking over the Lunar Orbiter images...

Too bad we cannot get THOSE size pictures (1967)

Here is the staff at Langley preparing a three D mockup of the moon for the Apollo Mission

The first one is the "blank" On a rotating motor against a white back screen You can see the camera tracks

Here you see the Lunar Orbiter images pasted as a map and being transfered accurately to the three D model. He is standing on the camera track

Applying final details BY HAND BRUSH (They didn't have 'air brushing' and 'photoshop' back then) Actually they still don't... the spacecraft hve computer algorityhms that automatically 'cover' anomalies
hence the 'poor job' ( look it up at Sandia National Labs)

I WANT those big photos


CAMERA (don't forget the spaceship window)

ACTION ( add a little color lighting to give that yecky color Apollo images are famous for.)

Now let's see what it looks like on TV...

Brought to you by the Film Makers at Langley Research Facility
Co-producerss USAF, NSA, NASA

Thank you for watching...

Have a Nice Day

[edit on 20-9-2007 by zorgon]

posted on Sep, 20 2007 @ 02:27 PM
Zorgon, after publishing it, you'd better to hide somewhere:
MIB will be soon on you!

I owe you hundred beers, GERMAN ones.

________________________________________ -|-

Top: clementine @ 1 pixel = 2 kilometers

Bottom: PIA00304 (Clementine images processed)

Clearly same location, different appearence because
the shape-shifting from spheric to flat.

Now, i think i've found the location of the triangle on the moon:

Of course i could be wrong.

EDIT to add:

Exhibit C

This one I lost the coordinate for... if anyone has them please let me know
This one has been shown as a 30 kilometer building on the Moon... This one is not bad but without the coordinates I cannot find it on the color images

You can find it here (left side)

in this point

Appearance on clementine website:

Appearance on Google moon


[edit on 20/9/2007 by internos]

posted on Sep, 20 2007 @ 03:36 PM
I do believe that NASA is covering up those alien structures..

=/ But even if we do have all of these pictures..not like we can show it to anyone who's actually gonna listen or even care...

posted on Sep, 20 2007 @ 05:11 PM
reply to post by internos

Well I have got to say I am impressed by your speed and presentation internos.
This is the first time I have seen those anomalies processed so quickly and displayed so well.
Your investigative skills on the internet are exceptional.

Thank you for your contribution.

posted on Sep, 20 2007 @ 05:33 PM

Here's proof:

These are higher res pictures perfectly available from Clementine
Only some of the 415 nanometer wavelength shots are unavailable. You have to look at the other two wavelength images (The moon is imaged with three different wavelength filters).

What I've done:

1) Found the high res images over the spot in question.
2) Stuck them together in photoshop (there was alot of overlap, so easy to do - also, my own composite had much more images over a much larger area, but I cropped to just this region to make the point - I could show you a fade of the individual shots to show the overlap, but that's pointless).
3) I am showing below: the original, then my own composite gradually fading over the original, and finally a zoom of the region in question.

Nuff said.

[edit] Oh, and before I hear "they just 'painted it out'", I'll say this:
Don't you think if they were gonna go to all the trouble of painting out an object in high res to look realistic, they would have done the same in the crappy glitchy low res too? Hmm.

[edit on 20-9-2007 by Irradiatus]

posted on Sep, 20 2007 @ 06:13 PM
reply to post by sherpa

Thank you for what you wrote, i really appreciate it

i try to do my best

posted on Sep, 20 2007 @ 06:26 PM
the construction you've done is interesting, and logical;
however, i whish just to consider something:
the morphology of the area.

What we need to see is what you see in this map. Nothing more, nothing less;
no craters/rocks bigger/smaller than before, not vanished craters replaced with
empty spaces, no cutted/replaced areas.
I understand that data is missing, but where are the details between
Jules Verne & Mare Ingenii?
I'm NOT saying it's wrong, just noticing that with the triangle are
vanished away many other details
Is there any way to rebuild all the area in a single image
in order to make a comparison, which is the ONLY way in order
to prove something? The only aree to replace is the triangle one.
Consider that the only Jules Verne diameter is approx 90 miles...




Of course, you'll find a better one.
BTW, what about the stripes comin'out from there? Something to do with
T H I S ?

[edit on 20/9/2007 by internos]

posted on Sep, 20 2007 @ 06:58 PM
If you think 3-dimensionally, it looks like a sky view of a pyramid. The serrated edge might by artifacts caused by poor resolution of the camera taking the shot, too. I have a very cheapo digital camera that creates ragged edges like that if there is a glare on the object I am photographing. Could be the sunlight was at an angle on the "pyramid".

top topics

<< 3  4  5    7  8  9 >>

log in