Extremely bizarre forms in moon picture or craters?

Please if somebody knows what this is...

I´ve posted this on the excellent moon pictures thread also, im a regular participant there..i´ve posted it here to see if anyone knows what this represents.

Maybe just craters ?

www.abovetopsecret.com...

Sorry for my english.


www.lpi.usra.edu...

[edit on 10-11-2007 by Orion437]

reply to post by Orion437

Orion437, i post the link to the catalog, in order to show the previous and the next images.

Apollo Image Atlas


70mm Hasselblad Image Catalog

Apollo 15, Magazine M

Images AS15-91-12329 to AS15-91-12405

www.lpi.usra.edu...


It's odd the object to the left too, uh?



[edit on 10/11/2007 by internos]

wow those pics are awesome, clearly not a natural formation.

Originally posted by internos

It's odd the object to the left too, uh?

[edit on 10/11/2007 by internos]

Yes it is indeed; i choose to think that is a part of the Apollo "antena" or something like that...(?) but it is strange too.

Maybe somebody has a clue of what these things are?

[edit on 10-11-2007 by Orion437]

reply to post by Orion437

I've searchead something about this image, but i've found only a website which notices the anomalies in it, and the LPI/NASA websites. Sadly, these images haven't caption


page.freett.com...


[edit on 10/11/2007 by internos]

These images are some of what Richard Hoagland is talking about in his new book. There has been a huge cover up for years, decades. Forget the debunkers on here. They want to mislead you in another direction, whatever that is, for whatever reason. I've watched craft of some kind orbit the moon on consecutive nights in 2004. Its why there's 2 trillion dollars that cannot be accounted for at the pentagon over the last decade. Whatever they are preparing for it doesn't include us. I wonder if Steve Fossett is up there now.

Originally posted by internos
reply to post by Orion437

 

Orion437, i post the link to the catalog, in order to show the previous and the next images.

Apollo Image Atlas


70mm Hasselblad Image Catalog

Apollo 15, Magazine M

Images AS15-91-12329 to AS15-91-12405

www.lpi.usra.edu...


It's odd the object to the left too, uh?

[edit on 10/11/2007 by internos]

I cant explain what the 2 disc shapes are on the moons surface however the object that Internos pointed out.. is in fact part of the CSM also seen in this image that alot of people believed was a ufo



As you can see on this image the boom hangs below the window:



and close up:



Awesome image though.. and those things on the moon are very strange. Good find

/rich

reply to post by cosmicstorm


I don't understand how that conclusion can be drawn. The resolution is terrible. The pictures are blurry. You can't zoom in on a picture, identify one pixel, and draw any useful conclusions. It's the same problem with much of Richard Hoagland's work.

Yes olegkvasha, i think that the image of the left is a part of the apollo CSM (it looks funny as Internos pointed, but it think that´s an explanation).

About the two "things" in the surface, i have not even a clue.

Let´s wait at Zorgon, Mikesingh , J. Lear, what will they say?

Maybe they are just identical craters?

reply to post by olegkvasha


www.nasa.gov...
You took the explanation from here.

Well, it has been one of the first things i tought, (Not today, but the first time i saw the photo) and i have to say that i'm not totally convinced that it's the same, but of course it could be. It's a convincing explanation in the case that NASA explained, but in this case we haven't a black background...



IMHO, a part of the module but an actual part, not a reflection at all, i mean.

In this sequence of two frames is visible a spherical object which morphs and (at least apparently) moves:




Source: Lunar and planetary institute
www.lpi.usra.edu...
www.lpi.usra.edu...


[edit on 10/11/2007 by internos]

reply to post by internos


IMO if ur gonna compare the images... use the good picture of the boom and u can see that the object IS the boom.




Of course im always willing to listen to peoples suggestions... I just wouldnt look into this one too much

/rich

reply to post by olegkvasha


Now, THIS is an explanation: agreed 100%
and a star for you.

[edit on 10/11/2007 by internos]

reply to post by internos


still staring at those other objects... the are almost identical in every way. Couldnt debunk them if I tried.

Also save the image to your computer... Ive noticed in the last few months every archive image that gets alot of attention seems to accidentally go offline and tend not to come back up again.

/rich

[edit on 10-11-2007 by olegkvasha]

reply to post by olegkvasha

It would be helpful to calculate their approx. size:
I think that this link could help:
apollo.sese.asu.edu...

Also save the image to your computer... Ive noticed in the last few months every archive image that gets alot of attention seems to accidentally go offline and tend not to come back up again.

/rich

O yeah, this strange phenomenon happened to me several times with some photos from Mars

Edit to add:

What is the resolution of each image? We can easily calculate the size of a pixel projected on the surface. For instance the frame AS15-M-0081 has a pixel size of 6.2 meters (20.3 feet) at the center of the image in the raw scan. The large PNG file has been reduced by 1.414x, thus its center pixel resolution is 8.8 meters (28.9 ft). But what do these resolutions really mean? A seemingly simple question that is really quite complicated. The angular size of a pixel is important in terms of resolution, but so are other factors. In the case of the Metric films the spatial resolution is limited by the grain of the film and how well the image is exposed. For example in very bright regions the film may saturated thus lowering the effective resolution in that region of the image. Likewise in vary dark regions the image may appear noisy and thus the effective resolution is lower. The focus of the scanner itself also has an effect of the true resolution of the scan. Though the Leica DSW 700 Scanner is of very high quality it is certainly not perfect. Keep in mind that understanding the the true resolution of an image can indeed be complicated.

apollo.sese.asu.edu...

Well, we're interested to an aproximate measurement: i aproximatively calculated the height of the whole structure, not just the opening:


Due to the perspective, there are some variables, but as said, is approximative, just to have an idea... anyway take it with a gr... ehrm, some ounces of salt

60 meters = 196 feet aprox.
70 meters = 230 feet aprox.

This should rule out the hypothesis that they are football doors

[edit on 10/11/2007 by internos]

reply to post by Orion437


Now they are strange, two identical structures casting massive shadows across the landscape, the first thing that came to mind when looking at these two objects were, aircraft hangers,

With those hangar doors at about 230 feet across, imagine how freaking cool (or intimidating) it would look to see a fleet of vehicles exiting them. Scary and impressive at the same time. So, does the "clown car" effect come into play here? Ya know say its time to invade/ or save our planet and vehicle after vehicle after vehicle are leaving those hangars... I hope they have a nice video when that happens, regardless whats goin on - its gonna look pretty darn cool.

sorry double post....

[edit on 10-11-2007 by spikedmilk]

Looking for WALLACE WOLF moon pictures, i think i came across a posible explanation:

www.lpod.org...

www.lpi.usra.edu...

www.lpi.usra.edu...

www.lpi.usra.edu...


Probably they are just those two craters at the bottom of the image, what do you think? It seems like that indeed.

I love to debunk my self

In any case, i would love to know what was the process to obtain this pic:

img130.imageshack.us...

[edit on 10-11-2007 by Orion437]

reply to post by aceace


its considerably more than two trillion,theyve probably spent that in the past 6 month.

funding for secret operations is of course,pretty much secret.

my thoughts on these objects,the surface of the moon is ancient,these objects look a different colour and texture to the eroded surface of the moon.

so i believe they are not a natural moon object.

also,does a boom have such a big spherical base?.

[edit on 10-11-2007 by wierdalienshiznit]

[edit on 10-11-2007 by wierdalienshiznit]

reply to post by Orion437


They do look similar, but the reason i dont think they're crators is because you can see the sun glinting on the sides of these two objects & two massive shadows are cast eastwards, the sun is to the west in these pictures, in the pictures of the actual crators the sun is shining from the east, & crators dont cast shadows like these two objects,