Extremely bizarre forms in moon picture or craters?

These objects do look like aircraft hangers, there is a very similar object in Antarctica, it's easily seen using Google maps, possibly, the Antarctic example could be a prototype?
Maybe used to practise assembly prior to shipping them out to the Moon?
Who knows? very interesting though.
Horsegiver.

Originally posted by olegkvasha
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.

Bingo! You hit the nail on the head olegkvasha! That's the correct explanation! Apollo boom. Heck! If it wasn't, do you think NASA would not have brushed it out? It's too obvious.

The other pic looks like a photographic glitch, probably a dual exposure or a reflection. But I really can't lay a finger on the correct explanation as of now!

Cheers!

these are exactly the kind of pictures i've been trying to snap from my telescope. Very strange'

I'd see all sorts of bright dots scattered across the moon and when its like a crescent moon you got that hard light comming in so it's more visible. What I saw was a bunch of black craters with bright white dots in the center of them. It seemed like there was something very very bright there, or something taller then the crater itself so that it would catch the reflecting light, because the crater was black.. I don't think it would be normal for a big rock spike to be sticking up in the middle of a crater but I'm not a geologist. This struck me as very strange, especially since there was more then one. I coudln't believe it, it was so visible, it was right there...and you didn't even need a very good telescope. Well its cool to look at if you have a telescope

I'm glad someone posted something like this. It looks to be what I saw.

by the way i'm not referring to that arm thing, but you had a picture of an interesting looking crater there. If I manage to get a picture of what I saw I will post it. I need a laptop though but I think I found one I can use.

I edited the pictures so that one outlines shadow, and other as drawing, and as you can see those objects are definitely 3D.

Originally posted by olegkvasha
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

I dunno I find alot of differences in these two images. For one, the circular part on the right is much much larger in the Moon photo, but that's probably due to the glare. But then why does this refllection/sunglare, cover or at least come closer to the first of the two dots circled???

The dimensions just do seem exact, unless the picture on the right is a scalled down model, or not the actually boon that was used?

It really makes no difference too me, because I believe without doubt we have been building on the moon for a long time now, all sorts of different structes, so it would be understandable they would need some equipment to raise large structures and stuff.

It will all come out as soon as some Korea(I believe it's Korea, planning some moon rovers), well whoever it is is gonna be hella suprised that the US and Russia have claimed the moon for themselves, and probably have divided it up, amonst themselves.

But when a third party gets there (I'm sure there gonna have some "strange malfunctions"(read sabatoge), with their first efforts), but they;ll get up there, and the pictures they're gonna send back is gonna leave the U.S. mainly with alot of explaining to do.

Hope it doesn't turn hostile.

Excellent post, and excellent pictures by the way!

Originally posted by CavemanDD
I don't think it would be normal for a big rock spike to be sticking up in the middle of a crater but I'm not a geologist.

As a note on this, its a common phenomena in crater formation. I have no idea what (and if there is one) the term for this but its fact. In comparison, check out this photo of the Tycho crater from wiki: Tycho
Regarding the OP, the "hangars" are quite interesting and it'd be interesting to see if they are shown in any other footage. The thing on the left is clearly the boom, as proven in other posts.

[edit on 11-11-2007 by merka]

reply to post by merka


oh yeah, it was just like that. There was more then one. It doesnt have much data on it does it? I still think its a little strange. I'm not saying its anything but I think there could be more to it. Thanks for posting that.

while it is odd how one can propagate parallel lines by connecting the leftmost corner of object 'a' to the leftmost corner of object 'b' and by continuing the same method with the rightmost corners parellel lines are clearly visible. however, the 'corners' themselves are questionable to due to shading, glare, and pixelation. and amongst other things the objects in question appear to have for the most part a largely 'circular' outline.
the 'opening' is in itself undetermined to be an actual entrance per se.
what is visible to the viewer from this angle, however, is a placement of two anomalies that are nearly vertically aligned. however one can easily say that this is also questionable.
exercise results are here:

next, it becomes apparent that by undergoing a simple rotation process the 'anomalies' in the picture in question quickly lose their pre-mentioned shape. furthermore the as called 'openings' also lose their aforementioned appearence. one can speculate that while no physical changes have been made nor was the picture in question tampered with, that it can be said that perhaps, and simply perhaps, the 'anomalies' were not being viewed from the correct vantage point. it can also be noted that it does in fact appear that the 'objects' are casting a shadow, as too whether this appearence of shadowing is in fact genuine is left to be discussed.
nonetheless, here is the image after being rotated.


the third and final simplistic process undertaken was a basic tactic of color invertation along with an undergoing of magnification. upon doing so, it becomes apparent that there are clearly two distinct 'dark' areas. these 'dark' areas in general appear to relatively resemble a circular shape, one of which appearing more so than the other. another notable change that is apparent is that of overall difference in previous shape; being that where it was once seen in the object to loosely resemble the letter 'C', it can now be seen that there is a possible disconnection from the lower end of the previous 'C' form to a smaller top of the 'C' section; which now appears to not connect any longer. however, due to the inverting of colors this perhaps can be written off as an error and purely speculative. the process also showed that by undergoing these changes the 'objects' no longer appear to have the previous 'entrance' form within them. however, this is only due to the inverting and does not prove that these objects lack that of an 'entrance' whatsoever, granted, this process also does not prove that there is in fact an 'entrance' afterall.
the inverted and magnified picture:

one can easily reason to say that the objects in question do in fact exhibit forms of dimentionality. however, it is possible to see that the objects also lack visible right angles, at least from the perspective in which they were originally posted. furthermore there is clearly a form of glare reflecting largely from quadrant I, were the picture to be mapped in 'graph' form. i find this glare to be in itself an anomaly due to the fact that the exact source of which is not visible in the picture itself. however deductive reasoning would suggest that the source is in fact the sun; although one can speculate on this as well. another anomaly that can be seen in this same picture is that of distortion along the topmost edge stretching from what would be quadrant I into that of quadrant II. this distortion also exhibits nearly the same colorization of the objects in question. however what it lacks is that of a distinguishable shape. this so called 'distortion' does not appear to contain a glare as do the 'anomalies'. therefore it is quite possible that whatever may be causing the distortion is perhaps located at a higher point. although admittedly, there is nil to suggest that this is in fact accurate. the last and final assessment to be made is that of recognizing a dome, which is not clearly evident. while the objects may appear to show a slight sloping from the top of the 'entrance' stretching along the anomalies 'back' and stopping at gound level, it is quite difficult to prove being as that there are limited to no other photographic vantage points available at this time to one's knowledge.
image exhibiting said distortion along top-most edge:









[edit on 11/11/2007 by agent violet]

Really interesting teories.

Each one is valid compared with the crater´s teory.

reply to post by internos


That "morphing spherical object" sure looks a lot like a reflection of a light inside the capsule, in the glass of the window through which the pic was taken.

reply to post by buddhasystem


It could be, of course: i've seen that many reflections have often been mistaken for actual objects, so it could be this time too

Originally posted by merka
As a note on this, its a common phenomena in crater formation. I have no idea what (and if there is one) the term for this but its fact.

The term I've seen used is "central uplift" which is caused when material rebounds after initial impact. It's just like what happens when a water drop hits the pool...

Regarding the OP, the "hangars" are quite interesting and it'd be interesting to see if they are shown in any other footage.

As has already been pointed out, they are just craters shot when the sun is at a very low angle (notice how close they are to the terminator) at low resolution. Here's a much better shot of the region...

As someone else noticed, they are definately craters.
In according with the description of the image,

Apollo Image Atlas

AS15-91-12403

Image Collection: 70mm Hasselblad
Mission: 15
Magazine: 91
Magazine Letter: M
Lens Focal Length: 80 mm
Film Type: SO-368
Film Width: 70 mm
Film Color: color
Feature(s): WALLACE WOLFF B

www.lpi.usra.edu...

We know that what we see are Wallace and Wolff b.

That being said, i've searched these features on Lunar and Planetary institute website:
i've found this photo which shows the same features, even the "Hangars".

Digital Lunar Orbiter Photographic Atlas of the Moon

Photo Number IV-114-H3


Sun Angle: 70.7 °
Spacecraft Altitude: 2687.21 km
Medium Res. Photo Center Coordinates: 13.46°N/10.97°W

Feature Name Feature
Latitude/Longitude Feature Size
Bancroft 28.0°N/6.4°W 13 km
Beer 27.1°N/9.1°W 9 km
Feuillee 27.4°N/9.4°W 9 km
MacMillan 24.2°N/7.8°W 7 km
Montes Archimedes 25.3°N/4.6°W 163 km
Timocharis 26.7°N/13.1°W 33 km
Wallace 20.3°N/8.7°W 26 km

www.lpi.usra.edu...

In this photo the features are clearly visible, but their orientation is reversed if compared to the Apollo one: so i rotated it by 180 degrees, and
here we are:



since the spacecraft's altitude were different, even the final results are, but these are definately the same features, IMHO.

www.lpi.usra.edu...


By the way, good work IattackPeople and agent violet
Stared both your posts.
(A.V. what happened to your avatar )


[edit on 12/11/2007 by internos]

nice picture of low res craters on the moons surface congratulations for your discovery hehe...keep in mind the lack of atmosphere here and how light plays in those frigid conditions

Well i´ve been debunked by my self again

By the way great work Internos comparing the images to reinforce the crater´s teory.

reply to post by Orion437


wat sort of camera do u use? i am dieing to see if the moon paterns change so i can ad it to my studies, email me at [email protected]