Large Object On Far Side Of Moon

reply to post by blahdiblah


Good point!

You can see in the embosed version the definate straight edges, i would also say it looks like a triange.

Maybe some sort of landing point or Commuications building??

Just a guess...

Thanks
Sostyles

This does bear some investigation, but unless we are just crapping around there needs to be some more serious study. Intelligence and especially Science demands more than just associating a blurry shape with our own impressions is a waste of time and dead-end strings. We need to do the homework. NASA has doctored, and rather badly, many of the images from the Moon since photographic studies where first done, but with their budget and the hundreds of thousands of images to futz with, they miss some. It takes hours to view these images and alter them. We can listen to people like Lear and others who do the due diligence, and also do a bit of work ourselves. With good science methods we can find much truth in these odd seeming hidden or intentionally obscured "features".

Artifacts from pixelization when optimizing or re-sizing show up when a composite section was a slightly darker exposure. Original imagery can look fine, but in the process of conversion to a JPGs or GIFs the offset of the tonal range can increase contrasts. Many artifacts can "appear" in a conversion or resize with a "lossy" (meaning detail is lost or pixels smooshed) codec routine. Jpegs are notorious for doing this, as are older size trimming codecs like GIFF. So you need to account for this by comparison of such anomalies with completely different images in other formats like TIFF, TGA, PNG, etc.

Sometimes codec artifacting can account for the illusion, or in our excitement to make a discovery we make an interpretation that is biased to our "impression" of the shapes. If it is a tower, look for the shadow that corresponds to other natural prominences on the surface. That and other logical paths done you can properly evaluate such visual anomalous features.

Go to NASA and ESA photo sites and troll for the same area in higher detail and lighting conditions. Also for some of you who want to have a reference for named features and coordinates, NASA has a free 3D moon map as a companion to the Earth sim.

NASA World Wind

Moon World Wind

These are much like Google Earth, especially the size of the downloads. The NASA equivalent of Google Earth is more seamless and you can see the Earth in many different research grade frequencies of light and satellite sets.

The Moon version is not high resolution and is not useful in this particular instance, but it can help you readily identify areas to investigate by getting crater and other feature names to reference photos from NASA and other sources.

We can fight science with science by doing it better, spending more time then them and learning from each other on good ways to take these conversations out of the "wack-chat" category and into news worthy investigations.

The Government will not do this for us, and will not be inclined to listen unless we use tried and true methods they must apply to in their own research.

As the many thousands of us who are convinced there is more than rock and dust on the Moon, the burden of proof is in our court. Let's do it right, let's do it better.

ZG

You folks might just be a little bit crazy. Try getting out more...

There is nothing in that picture. You're trying way too hard.

reply to post by sostyles


I'm not going to waste my time reading this whole thread, so I apologize if this objection has already been raised, but let's get this straight: you download a JPEG image from wikipedia and start seeing artificial objects when zooming way in? JPEG. Compression. Artifacts.

Before anyone can take this seriously you are going to need an original image with careful notes about exactly how it was processed and under what lighting conditions, etc. it was taken. Then, show that no alternative hypothesis to artificiality holds up under close examination. That's called science, and it's hard, but it's the only way that hunches and speculations can become knowledge.

[edit on 17-10-2007 by disownedsky]

Originally posted by ZeroGhost
This does bear some investigation, but unless we are just crapping around there needs to be some more serious study. Intelligence and especially Science demands more than just associating a blurry shape with our own impressions is a waste of time and dead-end strings.

I gotta say that some people around here must have a lot better photo interpretation skills than me. On most of these threads I might see a few lines that kind of run in the same direction or something, but I'm not seeing the thing that makes them "alien cities." What with bad photography, digital pixelation, image compression artifacts, and the way NASA has to twist and patch images together from little strips, I understand that the images are not going to look quite right sometimes. Add to that the fact that sometimes nature lines things up and makes geometric shapes all by itself, and I really can't see where somebody can definitively say anything about much.

Some people sure get a charge out of it around here, though! They get all excited, like they've made some kind of important scientific discovery. Like nobody ever looked at those Moon pictures before them. It's cute.

In my opinion (given this is not an artifact), it is simply an impact of a meteorite glancing off of the surface of the moon. The "blurred" out area is simply the dust rising from the impact. That's what I see anyway.

reply to post by sostyles


interesting find to me it looks like a ship above the surface or a pixel blip

The 'helicopter-like' image is most definitely a crater impact spread/splatter or whatever you might call it.
You can see it prominently all over the place on the larger moon pic..
There's a real big one on the center-rightish side of the whole moon pic. Probably famous too..

I see amazing constructs in the area. I noticed them about 6 months ago when Zorgon brought this photo tp my attention. We had so many other things going that this particular area went on the back burner but there is no doubt that there are some incredibly huge 'constructs' (as the astronauts used to call them).

As to those of you who see 'nothing' I totally believe you. Zorgon and I are planning a study on why some people literally cannot see what what some us see clearly. But is a definate phenomena.

When I originally posted the moon photos there were several people who could really not see the bucket wheel excavator even when we colorized it. We originally put that down to possible government shills. But then we noticed otherwise intelligent human beings could not see what we could.

So now we figure that some people are 'not ready' to see what the rest of us see and as insulting as some may take it this, in fact, this may be what is happening.

So if you can't see what the rest of us are seeing let me respectfully suggest that you moderate your insults and digs. You simply are not ready.

Originally posted by johnlear
So if you can't see what the rest of us are seeing let me respectfully suggest that you moderate your insults and digs. You simply are not ready.

I don't mean any insult or dig. I do see some things, like I said. Lines, shapes, and so on. I guess I'm just asking for more clarity that doesn't depend on somebody's interpretation. Show me progressively clear photos of a blurry chair, and there's a point at which we can all pretty much agree that it's a chair, and you don't have to try to convince me that it is with a lot of crayon drawings and arrows and lines. Or enthusiasm. Enthusiasm doesn't make the photo any clearer.

Then once we agree that it's a chair, then maybe you can show me just what makes in an alien chair or a human chair. I'll believe you. I'd like to believe you. Just get the clarity up a little. Thanks!

Originally posted by johnlear
I see amazing constructs in the area. I noticed them about 6 months ago when Zorgon brought this photo tp my attention. We had so many other things going that this particular area went on the back burner but there is no doubt that there are some incredibly huge 'constructs' (as the astronauts used to call them).

As to those of you who see 'nothing' I totally believe you. Zorgon and I are planning a study on why some people literally cannot see what what some us see clearly. But is a definate phenomena.

When I originally posted the moon photos there were several people who could really not see the bucket wheel excavator even when we colorized it. We originally put that down to possible government shills. But then we noticed otherwise intelligent human beings could not see what we could.

So now we figure that some people are 'not ready' to see what the rest of us see and as insulting as some may take it this, in fact, this may be what is happening.

So if you can't see what the rest of us are seeing let me respectfully suggest that you moderate your insults and digs. You simply are not ready.

I guess by your logic then we could say the same about what you "do" see. Maybe you are eager to see something that we don't. Perhaps you are not ready either?

John......to be fair........

You and the others who do see things....may have vivid imaginations and there is nothing really there.

Hopefully the Japanese hi-def mapping will show these 'anomilies' in better light.

It's pretty simple.

This is a bucket wheel excavator on the road carved in the north interior face of Copernicus.

If you can see a colorized bucket wheel excavator then you are ready to find other stuff and comment on anomolies.

If you can't see a colorized bucket wheel excavator you need to move on. This thread does not concern you. You are not ready for whatever reason. And I have no idea what that reason could be. Thanks.

If I took a photo of my behind I'm sure anyone could make it out to be whatever their mind wanted it to be? Seriously, a bucket wheel excavator?

I could color a million areas on the photo you just posted and due to the pixel size I could make a blob look like anything you could imagine. I could even show the face of Christ if you believe in that.

[edit on 17-10-2007 by sr71b]

I suggest looking at this thread as I believe it is the same anomaly.

www.abovetopsecret.com...'

Very nice find i saw it in the second image straight away, Nasa's attempts to airbrush these anomolies from public view are not that good lol, i wonder if there is anyway to reverse the airbrushing effect? like how they reversed the pic distortion of that paedophile fella??? anyway flagged this one...

Originally posted by blahdiblah
Remember your concealing things for a public of the 1960's not a public of 2007.

No one thought anything weird in the 60's ?

Somehow I doubt that..

As to those of you who see 'nothing' I totally believe you. Zorgon and I are planning a study on why some people literally cannot see what what some us see clearly. But is a definate phenomena.

I have some theory about this discrepancy in individuals ability to see these specific structures. One is visual acuity and pattern recognition drop-off in visual perceptive ability. The other is much more involved and is based on perceptual and general consciousness having "bandwidth" limitations or otherwise ability.

I think we are (our physical/awareness/consciousness) like radio crystal sets in that we have sometimes wider bandwidth where we can be aware of areas of reality that bleed over or blend into adjacent dimensions and universes beyond the printed numbers on our dials.

I think people who where thrust into an experience (by altered states, alien encounters and interaction, sickness, stress etc.) that was inclusive of these wider fields retain the "channel" on their radio dials and either can access them at will, or if in a state of denial can be re-thrust into them by circumstances of stress or anxiety or just happen at random. Remember "flash backs" from the days when use of ACID (Lysergic acid diethylamide)? People where spontaneously tuning to those states (stations) and tripping out at random.

I believe some can see plainly what others cannot perceive and have direct evidence in my own work as an illustrator this is true on very common levels. But, in the more serious levels where some can see whole civilizations on NASA surveyed supposedly dead worlds, and no photographic evidence is available, or is just not found, it still could be true with what we are now finding out about close by dimensions and universes coexisting with our own.

I think everyones radio dials are unique, but that we can all get access by sharing information and "station frequencies" with each other. I am an amateur astronomer and science artist and have seen things that science can't begin to discuss with its narrow choice of AM mono stations.

A good place to see simple but profound ideas on this is in the writings on altered states and aboriginal peoples interpretations of this knowledge. Carlos Castanea's writings on Don Juan Matus are great, so is Jane Roberts Seth's writings.

Don juan called these stations "assemblage points" on our eggs of awareness. Carlos told how Don Juan would move his assemblage point to different areas "stations" in order to make Carlos experience completely different worlds and eventually could transport himself thousands of miles instantaneously by knowing how to move the point himself.

You can move these points yourself too and do with psychoactive drugs, meditation, concentration, anxiety, high fever and illness, emotional states or the effect of a bad ham sandwich. Many have have contact with entities outside our little bubble of reality who can "tune" them, or possibly give them the new addresses and expand their dials. Or, you where born with the ability or grew into it.

With a billion stations to choose from, people run the gamut in what they believe. I personally have seen too much in too many other frequencies to discount anyones experience. I listen to everyone carefully and consider. If they believe it, on a certain level, in most cases I can too.

ZG