It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.

Please white-list or disable AboveTopSecret.com in your ad-blocking tool.

Thank you.

 

Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.

 

Soviets Found Something ....

page: 3
20
<< 1  2    4  5  6 >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Jan, 13 2008 @ 11:56 AM
link   
Hello again. Busy weekend sadly so havent had much time to post, I couldn't agree more that on earth there are many strange natural formations but as armap said it's VERY unusual to see this sort of thing on the moon.

Another image that was taken by Luna-13 shows several metal objects. There is a good chance that they are pieces off the lander but I would like to get the communitys opinion.

Luna 13 returned just 5 panoramas of the moon:

Panorama 1

Panorama 2

Panorama 3

Panorama 4

Panorama 5

Here is an example of just a few of the objects:



If you look there are alot of metalic objects spread around. I have been looking at images of the lander however havent had much time to look in detail. I cant see where these objects "fit" into the lander?

Luna-13



Im thinking there must be some information around if it did indeed break apart. However the mission said the lander was a "perfect soft landing on the moon"

/rich




posted on Jan, 13 2008 @ 01:04 PM
link   
I'm sure my good ol friend John Lear will back me up on this one, good thread as you can actually for the first time see stars in the Russian moon pictures as with Naza you never do, so I would say these Russian pictures are very real with very little to no airbrush, and its also good to note you can see old technological artifacts just dumped all over the surface the way it really would look if you go there, mostly buried under dust but grab a shovel and you should find some interesting stuff, John if you read this contact me, like to hear from ya, you haven't been posting past few days, you ok ?



posted on Jan, 13 2008 @ 05:44 PM
link   
How do you know this isnt just space debris from one of the many missions to space by all the space agencies of the world.



posted on Jan, 13 2008 @ 06:38 PM
link   
reply to post by olegkvasha
 
When looking at your first pic [buried rectangle] on the moon do you have any info on the size or dimension of the object in discussion because when observing the lunar landscape in comparison it looks huge.

Mabe some ATS member with knowledge in this area can give us some insight on this.



posted on Jan, 13 2008 @ 07:20 PM
link   
Hi,

Thanks for the post - very interesting!

I too don't see how this can be a rock - I have a basic understanding of geology and know that weathering occurs mainly through a process like attrition i.e. the wind throws debris particles against a surface for a long period of time and "chips" away its surface. Simple I know but I wanted to sound vaguely intelligent
p

However, since the moon is considered a vaccum its impossible for any real weathering to occur as there is no wind to cause this attrition like effect right? So it could be some naturally forming material perhaps ice or like mentioned elsewhere debris from other moon landings?

I've taken a look at the original photo lined here Original Image and have you noticed how there seems to be a "crater" near the object in question - what do you think that is??

Cheers



posted on Jan, 13 2008 @ 07:31 PM
link   

Originally posted by rawsom
I was thinking the same thing. How did they get stars to pictures? If I recall correctly, NASA had some explanation as to why stars won't be visible in their photos. Different camera and exposures help of course..


Hello?

Don't you realize the entire picture has those white splothces? It's due to the film quality which like tabloid prints mentioned earlier in this thread.

Those are not stars...



posted on Jan, 13 2008 @ 08:21 PM
link   
Maybe that rectangular thing is an alien pirates treasure chest.



posted on Jan, 13 2008 @ 08:29 PM
link   
reply to post by shiman
 


If you think that these objects may be space debris, then you do agree with the OP that these objects appear to be artificial. The objects are anomalous because they appear to be unique in comparison to the surroundings. If they are artificial and are not remnants of other space missions then the implication of their presence is very interesting.



posted on Jan, 14 2008 @ 05:05 AM
link   

Originally posted by shiman
How do you know this isnt just space debris from one of the many missions to space by all the space agencies of the world.

Maybe because no other missions landed nor crashed there?


Luna 2 USSR 12 Sep 59 Sep 14 59 29.10N 0.0
Ranger 4 USA 23 Apr 62 Apr 26 62 15.5S 130.7W
Ranger 6 USA 30 Jan 64 Feb 2 64 M Tranquilit.
Ranger 7 USA 28 Jul 64 Jul 31 64 10.35S 21.58W
Ranger 8 USA 17 Feb 65 Feb 20 65 2.67N 24.65E
Ranger 9 USA 21 Mar 65 Mar 24 65 12.83S 2.37W
Luna 5 USSR 9 May 65 May 65 31S 8E
Luna 7 USSR 4 Oct 65 Oct 65 9N 40W
Luna 8 USSR 3 Dec 65 Dec 65 9:08N 63:18W
Luna 9 USSR 31 Jan 66 Feb 3 66 7:08N 64:33W
Surveyor 1 USA 30 May 66 Jun 2 66 2:27S 43:13W
Lunar O. 1 USA 10 Aug 66 Oct 29 66 7N 161E
Surveyor 2 USA 20 Sep 66 Sep 22 66 S Copernicus
Lunar O. 2 USA 6 Nov 66 Oct 11 67 3N 119.1E
Luna 13 USSR 21 Dec 66 Dec 24 66 18:52N 62:03W
Lunar O. 3 USA 5 Feb 67 Oct 10 67 14.32N 92.7W
Surveyor 3 USA 17 Apr 67 Apr 20 67 2:56S 23:20W
Lunar O. 4 USA 4 May 67 Oct 31 67 ? 22-30W
Surveyor 4 USA 14 Jul 67 Jul 17 67 0:26N 1:20W
Lunar O. 5 USA 1 Aug 67 Jan 31 68 2.79S 83W
Surveyor 5 USA 8 Sep 67 Sep 11 67 1:25N 22:15E
Surveyor 6 USA 6 Nov 67 Nov 10 67 0:25N 1:20W
Surveyor 7 USA 7 Jan 68 Jan 10 68 40:53S 11:26W
Luna 15 USSR 13 Jul 69 Jul 21 69 17N 60E
Apollo 11 USA 16 Jul 69 Jul 20 69 0:41N 23:26E
Apollo 12 USA 14 Nov 69 Nov 19 69 3:11S 23:23W
Luna 16 USSR 12 Sep 70 Sep 20 70 0:41S 56:18E
Luna 17 USSR 10 Nov 70 Nov 17 70 38:18N 35W (Mare Imbrium)

seds.org...

Unless we'd assume that a debris lost *somewhere* in orbit would fall exactly in that area of the Moon surface.



Originally posted by olegkvasha
Here is an example of just a few of the objects:
/rich

olegkvasha, those images look familiar to me...



[edit on 14/1/2008 by internos]



posted on Jan, 14 2008 @ 05:11 AM
link   
reply to post by olegkvasha
 


Thats where I left my lunch box. Man I would loose my head if it weren't attached to my neck.


Seriously though, are we sure that this image was not in some way doctored? perhaps it is something that warrants further investigation, perhaps its even phenomenal, but from this one photo you really can't make out much of anything.



posted on Jan, 14 2008 @ 05:32 AM
link   

Originally posted by K-illuminati
I'm sure my good ol friend John Lear will back me up on this one, good thread as you can actually for the first time see stars in the Russian moon pictures as with Naza you never do.


Stars? Where? Can you see any in this pic?



The white dots you see in some other pics are due to grains!



posted on Jan, 14 2008 @ 06:47 AM
link   
Originally posted by internos


Maybe because no other missions landed nor crashed there?


Internos there was only one other landing on the moon before luna-13 and that was in the same area (Oceanus Procellarum) by Luna-9. However that was still a distance away. I have found the pictures that luna-9 took:

Panorama 1

Panorama 2

Original source and credit to: www.strykfoto.org

Both Luna-9 and Luna-13 had a very similar design. So if the objects on the luna-13 images were jettisoned by the lander. Then why are they non around the luna-9?


olegkvasha, those images look familiar to me...


Yes im sorry about that, I was meant to give credit and thanks to Sherpa for posting the image
sorry Sherpa

/rich


[edit on 14-1-2008 by olegkvasha]



posted on Jan, 14 2008 @ 07:01 AM
link   
By the way the reason why I nicknamed the object in the original post "the washing machine" is because of what Blanche Lovell said in Apollo 13:

"If they could get a washing machine to fly, my Jimmy could land it."

take a bow everyone. We have located the landing place of Jim Lovell's washing machine!!!

/rich



posted on Jan, 14 2008 @ 07:16 AM
link   
Sorry for the 3 posts in a row. But I think I have found the square object in another image (this was the image shot after the original one posted):

Panorama 13



If you look at the full image you will see similar formations to the original image. When I get some time I will try and match them up.

/rich



posted on Jan, 14 2008 @ 07:24 AM
link   

Originally posted by olegkvasha
Originally posted by internos


Maybe because no other missions landed nor crashed there?


Internos there was only one other landing on the moon before luna-13 and that was in the same area (Oceanus Procellarum) by Luna-9. However that was still a distance away. I have found the pictures that luna-9 took:


I thik that there's a little misunderstanding: i was talking about Luna 17, the one of the OP post




Luna 17
Launched 10 Nov 1970
Landed on Moon 17 Nov 1970 at 03:47:00 UT
Latitude 38.28 N, Longitude 35.00 W - Mare Imbrium
Lunar Rover - Lunokhod 1
www.fourmilab.ch...


All the other missions were FAR to say the least, heck

About the previous missions, in the list that i posted above, are inclued even the crashed ones: the purpose was to rule out that what we see in the OP image could have been a debris coming from another mission, as guessed here
www.abovetopsecret.com...
and my post was in response to the post linked above.

olegkvasha, if may i ask: do you speak russian?



olegkvasha, those images look familiar to me...


Yes im sorry about that, I was meant to give credit and thanks to Sherpa for posting the image
sorry Sherpa

/rich


Come on, that was a joke (do you see the smile?
)


[edit on 14/1/2008 by internos]



posted on Jan, 14 2008 @ 07:32 AM
link   

Originally posted by PsykoOps
I can honestly say that I have never seen a natural square rock. Even though I spend a decent amount of my time observing my surroundings. And that doesn't mean moms basement btw, comments like that are infantile.

I've been told by SFI freak friends that 90o right angles (prefectly square lines) dont exsist (naturally) i.e. in nature.



posted on Jan, 14 2008 @ 07:41 AM
link   
reply to post by internos
 


Yes does seem to be a missunderstanding. Nice find Internos
Luna-17 was the only lander at Mare Imbrium at that time. I think the only other lander was Apollo 15 which landed to the southwest a good few years later.

P.S. Sadly I don't speak russian. Im actually from the U.K.


/rich



posted on Jan, 14 2008 @ 07:53 AM
link   
reply to post by olegkvasha
 

This is a nice find: the position of the object, relatively to the rest of the crater, looks to be the same. I made this crop, hoping it helps


The position looks really the same, and even the orientation of the object. What still doesn't appear to be the same is the shape, and how it's buried, but i may be wrong: these images have been taken from two different angles, and is hard to make a comparison. It would be interesting to know someone else's opinions about it ...



posted on Jan, 14 2008 @ 08:50 AM
link   
reply to post by internos
 


Found what I believe to be another angle of the object:

Pano 10




What do you guys think?

/rich



posted on Jan, 14 2008 @ 09:02 AM
link   
Here is an example of an "Almost a perfectly square rock".
Its possible this could happen by unknown circumstances on the moon if you use your imagination.


Link

[edit on 14-1-2008 by Digital_Reality]



new topics

top topics



 
20
<< 1  2    4  5  6 >>

log in

join