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.


Lunar Sightings Research Images

page: 2
<< 1    3  4  5 >>

log in


posted on Dec, 24 2007 @ 11:53 PM

Originally posted by NGC2736
reply to post by Nohup

I haven't taken sides on this photo one way or the other. But like many people, you assume that anyone who doesn't agree with your flippant off hand views must be diametrically opposed to you, so you attack.

Now the subject is the photo, not your show off ego, and some of us are awaiting more information from the OP, to show us what he has for evidence. How he arrived at his conclusions that these were structures.

These will also be viewed by some of our own people with a great deal of experience in photos as well, I am sure.

And Nohup, you may be entirely right. But there is no sense in just blowing off analysis because your naked eye cannot find anything. So let us all take a wait and see attitude.

Merry Christmas to each and all.

Well said NG, Merry Christmas, Happy Holidays etc. etc. to everyone. Thank you for taking the time to consider my findings. You too Nohup
The greatest realization is not that 90+% of everything for sale in Best Buy is a direct result of NASA, but rather that we, humanity, are one in the same. Once we figure that out - we'll look back like "what the hell were we thinking?"

(posted under heavy influence of holiday cheer)

posted on Dec, 26 2007 @ 08:11 AM
Thank you for sharing this information with us ATS readers. I am sure you are aware that plenty of different Moon surface photos exist on many Internet sites. Although the ones taken by NASA that showed anything of interest have been tampered with, one can still see a few details of what actually is supposed to be beneath all that airbrushing.

Many still look like natural formations, some people just cannot make any sense out of them so their opinion is that there is nothing strange in them unless they have a trained eye to look out for certain features, but a few really seem like structures, buildings, artifacts and so on.

You cannot really blame people for not seeing anything in particular, I for one cannot say that there is positive proof of anything alien in them, but judging by other thousands of ufo, alien photos and video available, thanks to the Internet, credible witnesses accounts, and having seen a couple of unidentifed objects myself at close range I am 100% convinced that we certainly aren't the only ones around and it would be arrogant of me to think otherwise IMHO.

Please keep up the good work and just let anyone believe what they want to believe in . We and millions of others know that we are certainly not alone and nothing is going to change that in the end. I am hoping that true disclosure will happen in my lifetime but that still seems a long way off so far.

posted on Dec, 26 2007 @ 11:33 AM
As Giorgio described, we we hear about 'tampering' in the form of airbrushing, over/underexposure, object removal, wrong or missing frame numbers, etc. Often we don't see any clear evidence of it - relying on the opinions and remarks made by others.

Well... here ya go. Side-by-side comparison of the same official archive photo ID from two different sources. Compare for yourself. I didn't know there were dust storms on the Moon, but I guess there are?

I know there are those of you out there that want to storm the castle and kill Frankenstein (the crowd chants 'conspiracy! conspiracy!)... but that isn't the focus of my research. My research focuses on revealing geometric and organic shape-forms found on the surface of the Moon. Still, it's a little hard to stay so 'stale scientific' (pseudo-scientific actually) in my approach when the images range wildly in quality (showing complete ignorance of the creation and management of these images) and in the case above, look so different. Some images i get are 1,800 dpi versions of previously GIF'd (reduced to 256 colors) and then JPEG'd image... not quite the quality of the special B&W and color film NASA had spec'd for their cameras.

posted on Dec, 26 2007 @ 11:56 AM

Originally posted by jaamaan
i see a post stamp.

Come on man give us some more than.
Is this the carrot on a stick strategy to sell a new book ?
Are you realy going to show us some of your findings here in public?

Will do

Mod Note: One Line Post – Please Review This Link.

[edit on 26-12-2007 by elevatedone]

I will be posting more images as time goes on. We'll start with this object.

Oh.. and here's something to note... as I was exploring and cataloging the images, we determined that presentation of the material would not be by image number, rather the objects of interest - which sometimes can be found on multiple images and missions.

[edit on 26-12-2007 by lunarSightings]

posted on Dec, 26 2007 @ 03:42 PM
reply to post by lunarSightings

Without any intention of offending, let me say that if you say that those two images are from official sources you should state what are those sources, just posting two different images and say that they are from official sources means nothing to those (like me
) that like to see things with their own eyes.

posted on Dec, 26 2007 @ 07:14 PM

Originally posted by ArMaP
reply to post by lunarSightings

Without any intention of offending, let me say that if you say that those two images are from official sources you should state what are those sources, just posting two different images and say that they are from official sources means nothing to those (like me
) that like to see things with their own eyes.

Don't mean to lead you on... All will be revealed at a later date. I need to protect my research at this time. I re-read my earlier post - to be honest, I was typing in a hurry. One is from a 'trusted' source, the other is from an official source. The 'trusted' source does a lot of work on lunar and planetary images.

Come to think of it, none of these sources can be trusted for I have seen first hand generation loss and there's no naming convention in place to distinguish a 1st generation print from a 3rd... which is why this will always be pseudo-science -- never being able to test an original in any form (unless you're Arizona State). Ugh. Oh, well... I can only work with what we can get our hands on.

By the way, has anyone seen a photo of an astronaut with his helmet down while being on the Moon? Some Moon Hoax author (just saw his book at Barnes & Noble) has one with NASA ID... got distracted and didn't write it down.

posted on Dec, 27 2007 @ 05:29 AM
One thing that puzzles me though is how grainy and bad quality a lot of the NASA photos are, the Apollo crew brought Hasselblad cameras with them, the Lunar orbiters used similar high quality equipment that could have produced excellent images. I really dislike those blurry photos, probably is the bad quality to blame for much of the conspiracy thinking and it also feeds the imagination of the human mind.

One of the lunar pictures on your blogger site that resembles a structure for example, it is most probably a shadow, but your brain will fill in the gaps and perhaps you see ' a small cottage or a house' or a 'church with a small tower' even.

China, Japan and the EU should send super equipment to the moon and feed us with super quaility images, in case of a US/NASA cover up it would complicate things.

- China plan to launched its first lunar spacecraft by 2007,and it is the first step of China deep space exploration plan. The mission objectives of the lunar exploration are: obtaining the lunar surface three-dimensional stereo image; analyzing the distribution of the useful elements and estimating their abundance; surveying the thickness of lunar soil and evaluating resource of He-3; exploring the environment between the Moon and Earth.

- Chinese Taikonauts

- Chinese Premier Wen Jiabao unveils the moon image captured by China's lunar orbiter Chang'e-1 during an unveiling ceremony at the Beijing Aerospace Control Center in Beijing Monday, Nov. 26, 2007

[edit on 27-12-2007 by tangent45]

posted on Dec, 27 2007 @ 03:17 PM
reply to post by tangent45

The problem is that the fundamentalist conspiracy believers say that the US, China, Japan, Europe and whoever sends a probe to the Moon or other planet are all part of a great conspiracy.

posted on Dec, 27 2007 @ 03:41 PM
Well, it's hard to believe that the Chinese, Russia or the EU would take orders from USA just to protect NASA lies, the global cover up would have to be so large it would be imposssible to maintain. However, any country with their own space program that find anything of value, artifact, information or any other clue that would give them an advantage, would take the opportunity and try to keep it for themselfs no doubt. Anyway the broad public would not know.

posted on Dec, 27 2007 @ 04:19 PM
reply to post by tangent45


I couldn't agree more. Imagine my frustration! The hold-up on the book so far has been presentation in print form. You could certainly be right about the 'utility structure' on the blog. I just can't wrap my head around a mid-century, middle America looking barn the size of a Home Depot. Although I did find it in two other angles, those images are far from pristine - suffering from motion blur and the other poor exposure.

Also, I can't ignore the rumor of airbrushing (of which I have intermediate skills in)... and after speaking with my airbrush teacher about this topic (and showing him some images), he told me, 'no problem salt-and-peppering' an area to make the (object) appear to be more like the background terrain - way before having to completely fake an area (total cover-up).

Then I bounce back to the basic engineering reality that one could build (at least) 6 times larger.

"CargoLifter hangar, located in Brand, Germany (60 kilometres south of Berlin) on a former Soviet military airport, is the largest self-supporting hangar in the world. With 360-meters in length, 210-meters in width and 107-meters in height the hanger was designed to accommodate the planned CargoLifter CL 160, a 260-meter long airship."

That's 8,089,200 cubic meters of volume or 285,667,402 cubic feet.

x6 (assuming no fancy alien technologies, just human engineering know-how)

Now we are at 48,535,200 cubic meters which is a square box some 365m x 365m x 365m .... now we're talking a single structure nearly a quarter mile long, wide, and high.

What started as a coffee table book of cool photos of the Apollo missions turned into something entirely different. Seriously, I don't know what to think of these things. What does one put in a quarter mile wide building??? A big UFO? Who knows. And further more, why would it look like a barn? Just because of that I want to ignore it, but my research is firm in that it presents all things that do not appear to be as a result of ancient volcanic activity or as the result of 30,000 mile per hour meteor impacts - trust me when I say I have tossed out way, way more than will be presented because of bad photography, generation loss, or digital file mismanagement (purposely or not) even though after getting cozy with the whole image and all the details within, it's apparent that something else is going on.... In the book I stress that each and every object can and should be scrutinized heavily. Collectively, all the images presented will be hard to ignore.

Thanks for your comments and taking the time spent on the blog.

posted on Dec, 27 2007 @ 04:32 PM

Originally posted by ArMaP
reply to post by tangent45

The problem is that the fundamentalist conspiracy believers say that the US, China, Japan, Europe and whoever sends a probe to the Moon or other planet are all part of a great conspiracy.

Day in and day out I'm working with these images. One thought that passed through my mind has to do with black ops. I will assume that all major governments have a black ops of some sort - what they do (or the breadth of their efforts) probably varies significantly, but in any case, they probably all have one.

Working from that angle, these 'inner governments' are probably aware of each other to some degree. On the outside are the public facing enterprises (like the NASA we know - Astronauts talking to grade school children from the ISS or Shuttle). Extending this assumption, other (than USA) government black ops programs are busy trying to one up or catch up to the leaders (for whatever reason). The unpublicized discussion over martinis at someone's mansion could easily be imagined to suggest, 'well, when you 'mature' you can play along too'...

That leaves Japan, China, and Russia/India naturally desiring to shine their best - the spoils of participation like candy on the brain of a 5 year old.

If I found myself in that position (in the know), and my life's efforts led me to that martini conversation, I probably wouldn't be calling up the New York Times to discuss it - we only live so long... why not be part of something fantastic?

So, I agree. There's an old-boys club out there when it comes to these topics and I'm sure they don't want every Tom, Dick and Harry getting involved.

posted on Dec, 27 2007 @ 04:58 PM
Well, good luck with your work, hopefully the chinese space program will not post any image spoilers on the web ruining your book.

posted on Dec, 27 2007 @ 05:45 PM
So far I see a pile of moon rocks and no evidence of anything out of the ordinary. I guess I'll just keep watching this thread for something interesting.

posted on Dec, 27 2007 @ 11:18 PM
Here's another take on the object(s) of interest. Rocks don't form like this (yellow lines):

I have no idea what the shapes (outlined in yellow) could be - all I know is that after living and hiking in the desert for 15 years, I've never seen shapes like this - small or large --- matter of fact, it's conceivable that one could find something like that here on Earth --- we have Mother Nature doing all kinds of fancy things with raw materials.

The Moon, on the other hand, is supposed to be nearly absolutely still... like a big, dead, pulverized for billions of years rock. No chance for giant round stones with support arms to form while rolling down the rivers of the Moon.... and then end up resting next to each other...

Maybe someone has seen something like these in industrial parks? Damns? Giant generator housings? Anything infrastructure related? Organic?

posted on Dec, 27 2007 @ 11:54 PM
Here's the deal folks. Seriously.

If you only see a pile of rocks, fine.

But if I told you all that this was a giant spoof - that the images posted above were taken in the early 1900's of an unknown dilapidated structure in a mining town in southern Arizona that suffered an earthquake, you'd probably all take my word for it - curse me for trying to fool everyone - and then tell me to go take a hike (in not so kind words).

BUT IT'S NOT --- it's from a photograph of the Moon that was taken 30+ years ago and has suffered mismanagement and generation loss (to some degree).

The moment I (or anyone else) suggests it's on the Moon and Whoa! Now hold on! You better fly up there and bring back proof. Which leads me to believe that the popularity of this website has attracted misinformation/disinformation, foggers, and distraction specialist who take about 10 seconds before responding that what they are seeing is complete hogwash. Shame on those of you performing that service - get a life.

Try looking at my (and any other image 'proofs' all over this website) with open eyes and stop waiting for a picture of what you think a spaceship or UFO looks like, or what you think a 'structure' (i.e. building) SHOULD look like (on the Moon or Mars).

Form follows function and we barely even made it to the Moon (disregarding other theories)... so none of us can even scratch the surface as to what structure (the form of the function) would end up looking like if we don't have functions on the Moon. NASA is even having a hard time with that right now and they are probably the world's expert on the topic.

If you're having a hard time getting over the fuzzy images, think of it as spy photos from the 60's. People made all kinds of life vs. death decisions using the crappiest of photos back in the cold war. They learned how to recognize what objects were without having to rely on high contrast, atmospherically hazed, perfectly developed photos.

Here are three definitions of structure:

1. The arrangement of and relations between the parts or elements of something complex.
2. A building or other object constructed from several parts.
3. The quality of being organized.

Before some of you smarty pants out there run off and find me photos of Earth things that conform to those three definitions, try instead to one in a photo on the Moon. Once you get used to the geology of the Moon (definitions 1 and 3), then you'll start seeing the objects that don't belong - just like I did. But I'm sure most of you don't have the next 1000+ hours to devote to it like I did.

- Well, that kinda sounded like a rant, but don't take it that way.

P.S. Maybe I should change the book's title to read, "What did you expect? 7-Eleven?

posted on Dec, 27 2007 @ 11:56 PM

Originally posted by tangent45
Well, good luck with your work, hopefully the chinese space program will not post any image spoilers on the web ruining your book.

The Japanese are busy up there... A friend of mine suggested that the Chinese, should they see something out of the ordinary and realize that we (USA) knew about it, would use it as political leverage.

posted on Dec, 28 2007 @ 12:35 AM
While I'm at it and nobody is reading these, I'd like to offer a theory that many of you have either heard or considered yourself, that, by the look of these objects (to include other people's research) they sure look busted up and left to rot - as if fading into the background noise of the Magnificent Desolation.

The reigning theory suggests that NASA (et all) printed the photos large scale, had air brush artists 'fog' or camouflage out 'objects', then reshot the photo back onto film - of which that version was handed to the likes of LPI for archiving.

Well... maybe. There are people that say they heard it 1st hand, even claim to have seen the originals, but as far as I know, no air brush artist has come forward (maybe they're all dead?)

I keep leaning towards, at least circa 1970ish, that most of the stuff that I'm finding was abandoned and has suffered many, many years of extreme hot and cold, solar radiation, and meteor bombardment.

Considering all the UFO sightings and people that swear they've been abducted, it's quite possible that there still are operations on the Moon, but on a minimal scale. Maybe there were at one time major operations on the Moon - prior to us having achieved enough technology that we might detect them.

I know - old news for most of you reading this, but I thought I throw it out there again because it sure explains what I'm seeing.

posted on Dec, 28 2007 @ 01:09 AM

posted on Dec, 28 2007 @ 08:01 AM
Addition to previous posts:

Check out the Japan Aerospace Exploration Agency (JAXA) - Kaguya (Selene) image archives, there you will find perfect images of the lunar surface, images in 3D. movies and even HDTV.

KAGUYA (SELENE): Shifting to Regular Operations

The Japan Aerospace Exploration Agency (JAXA) is pleased to announce that the operation mode of the lunar explorer, KAGUYA (SELENE), was shifted to regular operations from its initial verification on December 21, 2007 (Japan Standard Time) as we were able to acquire satisfactory verification results for all fifteen observation missions. JAXA had been conducting an initial functional verification of the KAGUYA onboard equipment for about two months since the KAGUYA was injected into a lunar orbit at an altitude of about 100 km on Oct 18, 2007. From now on, we will perform observation of the Moon’s surface for about ten months to acquire data on “Moon Science” and other studies.

Image archives:

TC image of lunar surface

Here, in the middle a possible "structure" found in the older NASA photos of the moon?

A 3D movie

Cheers (gaah!)

P.S Wanted to post these URLs and images in case you haven't seen them, the real Kaguya (Selene) mission will begin with start 21 december 2007, so it's pretty new. I am somewhat certain that new lunar images from the Chinese, Japanese and European space agencies will debunk many of the moon anomalies found in the older NASA photos. Most probably it is He-3 (helium 3) all these supernations are looking for, a new energy resource.

[edit on 28-12-2007 by tangent45]

posted on Dec, 28 2007 @ 08:47 AM
Not to be negative, but give me pictures of a whole planet, and I'll 100% show you things that 'look' and appear to be artificial.

Forteans call it 'simulacrum'. The Human eye/mind, likes to make seemingly random things look like things it can relate to to lessen confusion in the conscious mind.

All I saw was blurry pictures with some interesting patterns. Sorry, but from where I am sitting I see nothing that says to me 'OMG! MOON BASE!".

This is not just your pictures, and I am in no way singling you out, it is on *all* pictures I have seen of the Moon and Mars, be they on ATS or from supposed experts such as Hoagland...

Until we see the words 'Hello' spelled out in rocks on the surface of Mars of the Moon, I am afraid that no amount of gazing at pictures, and 'seeing' patterns is going to help.

new topics

top topics

<< 1    3  4  5 >>

log in