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: 7
<< 4  5  6    8  9  10 >>

log in


posted on Sep, 20 2007 @ 06:59 PM

Originally posted by chickeneater
Billion dollar device made exclusively just to take pictures, yet have blurs around areas that would measure miles in scale?
Not a billion dollar device, the whole project cost was $80,554,160.


posted on Sep, 20 2007 @ 07:03 PM

Originally posted by mikesingh
Pokey, you'll be surprised to know that NASA has completely edited out the anomaly in the subsequent ver of the Clementine browser!!
The browser (both versions) uses the images available here.

posted on Sep, 20 2007 @ 07:15 PM
Nice job everyone and I really enjoyed and appreciate your input Zorgon!! I agree, that we should all demand everything from these agencies. We are and did pay for everything that has happened and is happening! They work for us thanks to your taxes. So, we should have the right to know!!

Why is everyone prone to an audit of their businesses and personal income, but when it comes to these agencies, they are exempt?!?! And I don't care if they are government, if anything these people and agencies should be held more accountable for their actions and spending..

Just my thoughts and thanks for everyone's additions to these GREAT photos!! Hopefully, we can see more!!

posted on Sep, 20 2007 @ 08:04 PM
I wonder what Richard C. Hogland would say about these pics. I think there was something on the moon. too much evidence showing there is. NASA needs to tell the truth to us once and for all.

posted on Sep, 20 2007 @ 08:17 PM
On topic have many of you checked this out and
what are your thoughts? It shows a photographic map of the equatorial region with pan and zoom capability, showing locations of the Apollo landings.

posted on Sep, 20 2007 @ 10:08 PM

Originally posted by omi_kron_gravitron
moon conspiracy theories are becoming moot arguements.
NASA is not the only Organization that is allowed on the moon.

True The DoD can but then they 'absorbed' NASA

NASA cant block out earth based telescopes from looking at the moon...

Wanna bet? Ask the head guy at Mt Palomar 200 inch scope where are the Moon pictures... go on I did

if you live in jersey, near Rutger University, you can use their telescope to star gaze. pretty much any major university with giant telescopes have "free" night for people to use the equipment they pay taxes for.

Call up an observatory of your choice and set up a viewing time please.. and post your answer

We have one in the UK a 10 inch scope he took a really nice picture of the moon You shoud see Aristarchus

But a telescope would be useless as all the anomalies we are looking at are on the farside...

Here is Aristarchus the Fusion Reactor

Gorgeous isn't it?

[edit on 20-9-2007 by zorgon]

posted on Sep, 20 2007 @ 10:13 PM

Originally posted by PokeyJoefor everyone to find...

Please deny ignorance.

Found this one on a NASA site

They are leaving us bread crumbs... and once you start following the trail of crumbs you would be very surprised to see where it leads

I caught one poster here put it in perspective...

"when you are ready" You sir don't know how right you are (or maybe you do)

posted on Sep, 20 2007 @ 10:21 PM

Originally posted by stompk
We need to put together a group of people and win that $30 mil Google prize, and go check out the moon for ourselves.

That group would be Pegasus
and our tech dept. thinks 30 mill would be just about enough to whip up a 4 seater anti gravity craft... For 250.000 we should be able to send a remote camera up there

Any donations?

I have an idea that I've been working on for an
anti-gravity propulsion system, that would work equally as
well in zero gravity, that I would like to share with someone
who has mechanical/electrical engineering background.

U2U me... I will put you on to the tech boys and see what ya got

posted on Sep, 20 2007 @ 10:48 PM

Originally posted by instrumentality
heres the link. please someone tell me that they see the cut out part of the picture. its like black and the stars are cut off so you can easily tell something was cut out of the picture. again its almost in the center to the left a bit.

Certainly glad to help..

First there are no starts in your picture It's galaxies thousands of them from a long long time ago..

Second the image is a composite. Hubble takes little sections and makes a mosaic just like NASA does of the Moon and of Mars

posted on Sep, 20 2007 @ 10:52 PM

Originally posted by Brainiac
First of all get an image with better clarity then try to smudge the image. You can easily re-make this. All you need is Microsoft Paint, a filled in Beveled square and a smudge tool from ANY photo editing software, and you 'd probably get a more believable image...

And before anyone replies, I'm an expert on this bit. I'm a computer game designer.

So what you are saying ... based on your expertise... that this image Mike posted on page one of this thread has been created by photoshop or microsoft paint?

GREAT then you just proved that the NAVY created fake images of the moon
(considering the image is on the NAVY site as Mike show's it)

So your expert testimony is that the NAVY fakes moon pictures..

Can I have that in writing with your certification please? Thank you

posted on Sep, 20 2007 @ 11:04 PM

Originally posted by poltergeist

Oh one other thing I forgot to mention as well. These pics were taken from the Clementine satellite, which was mentioned in another thread. The pics were being taken from a US military site with .mil as its extension. I'm ex military and know for a fact that site is legit.

Yippeeee there IS inteligent life on ATS afterall...
Seems you are the only one who noticed it... Hey drop me a U2U... you seem to be 'our kind of guy'

probably in the likelihood that the NSA or NASA or the CIA or some branch of our government might delete those pictures from its website and send debunkers onto certain forums to give scientific reasons why it would be fake.

No fear there , mate... they won't be removing them... They are there for a purpose... and just for everyone's information...

The dataset for V1.5 that Mike linked to and the one for V2.0 ARE THE SAME It just depends on the resolution setting

And the Color dataset is the same as well... only they had 10 years to make sure nothing got through on those. So the color images are great for beauty, but not much else...

It is interesting though that if you look at the image I posted of Ukert with the blurring... it seems they 'lost' more data later....

But one thing to remember the images ALL came from ONE dataset taken in 1994...

And these days they use Algorithms to 'hide' stuff So that if you have the right Algorithm on your computer you can 'unmask' it Only hitch is even possesing a copy of those will get you tossed in jail

Ukert Crater .01km/pix

Arcology Row lost and gone forever....

Kudos to the guy for saving the pics. He's doing something similar to what I'm doing, which is archiving all of this data for future reference.

posted on Sep, 20 2007 @ 11:37 PM

Originally posted by mikesingh

I like the row of little craters leading up to the stick...

Kieth has some nice images in his collection... trouble is you cannot get an original to compare... We had the same problem but found old books that were printed before they expected us all to have high speed computers and digital editing tools

The image here is AS16-118-18957 of that there is no question..

Here is the same image in the great resolution that LPI provides

I have looked for this one in all my Apollo directories and it is missing from all the galleries. If you look at the Apollo galleries you will find MANY images gone for viewing Ask yourself why...

And no they did not skip a number

The only place I found it is in the Targa image list these are the full high res raw images that are SUPPOSED to be able to be ordered direct from NASA. The ones we have purchased turned out to be simply enlarged versions of the low res.

I bet it depends on from who the
request comes. I hope someone else will try here is the list

AS16-118-18957 is 20,122,685 bytes

Now then a question...

Lunar Orbiter took 1600 high res pictures from 22 miles above the surface with clarity 'enough to recognize a card table'
Smart 1 took hundreds of images 'at a res able to see a basketball court' before it crashed...
LROC same thing....
Clementine... well they took REALLY high res in full volor


NASA Apollo took pictures with a 70mm full color Hasselblad camera
IMAX theaters use 70mm film
NASA images were first made public in .tiff and .jpg image formats

So WHERE ARE THE .tiff's?

And what is happening with the Japanese ship? Any word yet?

[edit on 20-9-2007 by zorgon]

posted on Sep, 20 2007 @ 11:45 PM

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

Thats the point Skipper and I disagree on Some show the big trees that Arthur C Clarke pointed out but some of those Skipper calls forest are in the polar regions, where the melting CO2 ice does some weird things.. Mike, Bluebird ans I all have some great Martian images too...

I wonder what happened to Bluebird though
Trouble with anonymous names you can't find out what happened... All her pics from her server are gone as well

posted on Sep, 21 2007 @ 12:24 AM

Originally posted by internos
Zorgon, after publishing it, you'd better to hide somewhere:
MIB will be soon on you!

No worries on that ...yet. We (John and I) have already had one 'visitor' from a three letter club... and as I mentioned in that cryptic note. I am talking to a "Rabbit' that is higher than the 'MIB's'

Just where do you think we get some of those 'documents' from?

BTW welcome to Pegasus

On that Navy Observatory image you posted ... did you find a caption? I suspect that is not our moon, but its hard to tell...

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

Okay that helps... Your 'triangle' is to the left of Mare Marginis COOL I will see what I can find

And thanks I remember now I just forgot to label it
(the rectangle)
That is Mare Fecunditis The 'objects' are Messier and Messier A

Now let me explain how this works...
First you see it then you don't..
BTW Google uses the Clementine Data set...
Back to Algorithms

A Long Time Ago...On a Planet not so far away...

The Russians went to Venus.. (Venera 9) and took pictures...
NASA released ONE Only ONE

But what the Russians took was this...

Bigger Picture

Quite a difference yes? Hey they were the "Bad Guys" wouldn't do to keep letting them one up us...

Then come Algorithms

Step One

Step Two

Ta Da!!! BTW did you know that both Mars Rovers are equipped with automatic image editing software ie Algorithms? Thats why they mis some anomalies They are not perfect...

Besides they are not there to take photos only... they have 'another' mission... The 'Rabbit' told me

Oh an in that Russian pic... anyone notice how clear the sky is?

[edit on 21-9-2007 by zorgon]

posted on Sep, 21 2007 @ 01:03 AM
Thank you. Pegasus is really one of the most exciting place i've ever been.
For me is like to taste a precious wine, a rare one

I can't believe what i see in the russian pic!
An optical illusion?


So, now is official, (thank you zorgon)


Rectangle = Messier & Messier A


Now, what about this other one:

i have some doubts about this one (taken from the one on your website: different angle of course):
some details doesn't match

We have still the triangle and i have to get some infos about that
pic you were talkin' about.

[edit on 21/9/2007 by internos]

posted on Sep, 21 2007 @ 01:12 AM

Originally posted by Irradiatus
Here's proof:

First of all your picture is too big Messes up the thread

Proof? Nah only YOUR opinions

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).

I have to do no such thingie... I can look at all the wavelengths and I suggest you read up on the Clementine Cameras but I have been there done that in many threads so look it up

Okay here is the "Bemuda Triangle" on the Moon... low res natural color (low because 60 megs won't fit on here
) As you can see it is near Mare Marginis that i posted earlier

And here it is in reduced size .01 kilo/pix resolution.

And Thanks Internos for reminding me where the rectangle was... would you like to see how pretty that area is? The following image is "enhanced" According to my contact at the USGS "enhanced" means natural color with a little of the ultraviolet ranges INCLUDED so you get a little more intense colors... (And no ArMaP we won't go into THAT here

Messier and Messier A

What I've done... Stuck them together in photoshop... Nuff said.

You got THAT right
I just need to reduce them in size

posted on Sep, 21 2007 @ 01:28 AM
Found a couple of cool things in those color images though... and we are still investigating what they are but we can do a preview of some... these are in the Reiner Gamma image posted earlier...

We nick named them...
Live with it ... its a time honored NASA tradition...



Critter Nursery in Reiner Crater
(.1 res full size)

Critter Nursery in Reiner Crater
(.01 res full size)

Critter Nursery in Reiner Crater
(.01 res full size) Greyscale

[edit on 21-9-2007 by zorgon]

posted on Sep, 21 2007 @ 02:19 AM
After seeing these pics from the Moon we just can state that it's ALIVE.

About this:

Found the same area here:

Simple resize

Now we have just to know if the click is the same or if it isn't
(i mean: did they generated these two pics with a single one? Or they didn't?
The difference between these two options is big, IMHO).

[edit on 21/9/2007 by internos]

posted on Sep, 21 2007 @ 04:34 AM
Here's another 'Moon tower' I've highlighted overlooking Copernicus.

Courtesy: NASA

Check it out here and click to enlarge...


Now this tower could be big, real big! But wait. There's another pic of the same area in a NASA website showing NO tower! So it's either brushed out or the darn thing is mobile! And did you notice the shine on it?

Have a nice day!

And Ron! Yer pics were mind blowing!
(As usual!)

[edit on 21-9-2007 by mikesingh]

posted on Sep, 21 2007 @ 05:35 AM

Originally posted by bigvig316
I wonder what Richard C. Hogland would say about these pics. I think there was something on the moon. too much evidence showing there is. NASA needs to tell the truth to us once and for all.

Too much evidence ??
Ive seen fuzzy pics, pics of moonrocks, pics with pixelations on that people make the most remarkeable of assumptions about yet ....piece....of......evidence.

There are anomalies, as yet unexplained, the same as there are strange anomalies on the earth, but dont take that quantum leap and suggest because something looks weird or out of place it has to be something that constitutes habitation of the mon.
Dont mistake geography and pages and pages of totally unrelated rubbish posted by others who want you to believe.
There is, in fact, not one scrap of verifable evidence for anything on the moon other than dust, geography and rocks.

<< 4  5  6    8  9  10 >>

log in