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: 4
20
<< 1  2  3    5  6 >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Jan, 14 2008 @ 09:44 AM
link   
reply to post by internos
 



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


GEX does but I notice he hasn't been on since 30th december it may be worth a U2U, ArMap I think can read a little russian.

The original enlarged anomaly images where in fact made by internos on the JL moon pics thread after I had mentioned there were a couple of other odd shapes in the pic, so due credit to internos also.

olegkvasha I am glad you have started another thread for them they are probably worth a little more discussion. :up




posted on Jan, 14 2008 @ 10:28 AM
link   

Originally posted by sherpa
reply to post by internos
 



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


GEX does but I notice he hasn't been on since 30th december it may be worth a U2U, ArMap I think can read a little russian.

Yes, i know he can. My idea is to ask some infos to someone about these two images:

which are, at the end, the most interesting ones.



The original enlarged anomaly images where in fact made by internos on the JL moon pics thread after I had mentioned there were a couple of other odd shapes in the pic, so due credit to internos also.

Heck, that was a joke because what happened to Mike with his threads:

but when we share our contents here, it really doesn't matter to be given the credits at all. Besides, olegkvasha has mentioned those images as "examples".



posted on Jan, 14 2008 @ 05:47 PM
link   
reply to post by internos
 


You dont have to land on the moon to get debris on the moon. You people are forgetting the moon has its own gravitational force. And there has been many missions that went near or past the moon



posted on Jan, 14 2008 @ 06:21 PM
link   

Originally posted by shiman
reply to post by internos
 


You dont have to land on the moon to get debris on the moon. You people are forgetting the moon has its own gravitational force. And there has been many missions that went near or past the moon


I have a question for you: do you really think that there's a chance in a MILLION that a debris would fall exactly in front of the camera?

[edit on 14/1/2008 by internos]



posted on Jan, 14 2008 @ 07:50 PM
link   
reply to post by internos
 



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


How many years have we been sending people and machines to the moon when this picture was taken? It is of course plausible as any to theorize that an object lost or discarded in orbit around the moon would fall and hit A location depending on its trajectory.

in short, it had to land somewhere why not right there? That is a possible place for random debris randomly floating around a random area of surface to land.

Back to topic, I haven't seen the Archimedes's Screw picture before
That's interesting.



posted on Jan, 14 2008 @ 08:01 PM
link   

Originally posted by radiodjguy
reply to post by internos
 



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


How many years have we been sending people and machines to the moon when this picture was taken? It is of course plausible as any to theorize that an object lost or discarded in orbit around the moon would fall and hit A location depending on its trajectory.

in short, it had to land somewhere why not right there? That is a possible place for random debris randomly floating around a random area of surface to land.

Back to topic, I haven't seen the Archimedes's Screw picture before
That's interesting.

I researched about it, and posted, BEFORE:


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)


The coordinates spells that NO, no previous missions have something to do with this area and frankly i'm beginning to ask to myself if you (not you personally) are serious when you assume that we are talking about a possible debris lost by other crafts.
Anyway, the idea that a debris fell exactly in the area capured by the camera of Luna 17 mission, is INSANE, if you ask me.

[edit on 14/1/2008 by internos]



posted on Jan, 14 2008 @ 08:26 PM
link   
Doesn't the lander that took the picture also jettison debris? Would make sense that it came from the same platform that took the images since in some images the lander itself is visible.



posted on Jan, 14 2008 @ 08:32 PM
link   
reply to post by PsykoOps
 


Yes, it makes much sense.
(no one line, just succint)



posted on Jan, 14 2008 @ 09:50 PM
link   
Found something in one of the pictures on that Soviet Moon Images site you posted at the beginning of this thread.

Not sure if it just some reflection on the lens of the camera, bad copy of the picture or if there really is something there.

Well, here it is:


Not sure if that it could be another lunar satellite, dust or dirt on the lens or what!

Here is a link to The Original Photo.

It's fairly obvious if you look at the original picture, the part I blew up (the picture posted above) is from the top left of the original photo.



[edit on 14/1/08 by Keyhole]



posted on Jan, 14 2008 @ 10:51 PM
link   
I don't know about you but I think I deserve some ATS points
for this research find.

Most of you do not know that directional boring machines
are used to excavate underground in a particular direction.
It is a tunnel maker of sorts here on earth. Since the moon
surface is not that tough then directional boring would be
an ideal way for someone to get under the surface of the moon
in a way to get supplies into a hidden place out of sight.
However, please note that these types of augers have been around
since before we were on the moon and todays (2008) technologies
are far more advanced than these augers for drilling underground.
So in my opinion, this auger is probably dated from the 60-70's
when it was the main stream way to bore underground. So
I'd say this auger bit has been there for quite some time.

This appears to me to be a man-made auger bit used in drilling
tunnels. Question is:

what the he!! is it doing on the moon ???
And who the he!! put it there ??

The very next thing I'd be looking for on the moon ....
is an entrance to a tunnel. As they didn't take it to the moon
for no reason. However, note the tip of the auger bit in the
moon photo. The main (first) blade appears to be broken
on one side. Maybe they hit something hard while using it
and discarded it as junk.

Ever watch Armageddon with Bruce Willis and Ben Afleck??
The same type drilling setup was portrayed in that movie
cept they used more advanced drilling technologies which
we have today that we didn't have back in the 60's and 70's.
that moon base everybody is looking for .....
just might be underground
as this is the first clue which lends credence to that theory.

your views ???




posted on Jan, 14 2008 @ 11:16 PM
link   
more evidence of directional drilling on the moon I found
is this image of what looks like rectangle shaped object.
Looks almost exactly like the Tru-Grade MKII directional
drilling machine that has been partially dismantled.
Notice the yellow rectangle part in the color photo
looks like the object found on the moon.
Lends more credence to the theory that the moon has had
some tunnel excavation going on.
NASA is not telling us everything !!!!





posted on Jan, 15 2008 @ 12:42 AM
link   
reply to post by SimonSays
 


Hi Simon,
Interesting comparison!


I was wondering if it might have come from something like this:




It's from Lunakod 1. The current position is not known apparently!


Current location
The final location of Lunokhod 1 is uncertain by a few kilometers since lunar laser ranging experiments have failed to detect a return signal from it since the 1970s. [1]. Notwithstanding, Lunokhod 1 and the Luna 17 lander were sold by auction for $68500 in 1993 at Sotheby's in New York. The auction catalog listing described the spacecraft as "resting on the surface of the moon".


source: en.wikipedia.org...

Just suppose it got 'hit' by a meteorite and scattered the debris, in that gravity it could travel a fair distance I guess!

Just a thought, (yours is more interesting though!)

Cheers!
H






posted on Jan, 15 2008 @ 01:28 AM
link   
reply to post by Havalon
 

well I have to say your hypothesis sounds interesting no doubt.
It cannot be any part of Lunokhod 1 or Lunokhod 2 in the
photo. As the original poster states that these photos were
taken by Lunokhod 1. Which means it's arm was still attached
to it and working when the photo was taken. And it could not have
been Lunokhod 2 since it didn't reach the surface of the moon til
2-3 years later. And there was no Lunokhod 3. So claiming it is
part of the Lunokhod space models is really not possible unless
you're saying that a meteorite hit the Lunokhod 1 and knocked it's
arm off and it went to find it's own arm. Now on top of that coincidence
top it off with the chances of a meteorite hitting a moving target
on the moon and I think the chances of all those possibilities
happening is probably 1 in a trillion. So I'd be more inclined
to think it's drilling stuff from NASA if these photos were taken in early
70's by a Soviet Moon Walker. Unless some ATS members here
still believe that NASA never made it to the moon to leave their
drill bit behind. As it looks more man made than ET to me. But
that's just my humble opinion.



posted on Jan, 15 2008 @ 01:37 AM
link   
reply to post by SimonSays
 


Thanks for that Simon, That'll teach me not to forget to re read what the OP's post said, after a couple of days away from the computer and then picking up from where I left off!! (big red face!!)


Oh well! back to the start and re-read again. Thanks for the 'heads up'

H



posted on Jan, 15 2008 @ 01:44 AM
link   
reply to post by SimonSays
 


Interesting theory but the object on the moon seems like 3 round discs that are separate rather than connected like the drill.



posted on Jan, 15 2008 @ 02:01 AM
link   

Originally posted by PsykoOps
reply to post by SimonSays
 


Interesting theory but the object on the moon seems like 3 round discs that are separate rather than connected like the drill.

the auger drill bits have interlocking threads on the ends which
you can add as many bits to it as you want providing your bits
are strong enough and you have the horsepower to drill with
all that surface area. It's possible it is just one section (broken)
of a bit that had many added to it, depending on how deep or
how far they wanted to drill. They were built like legos back
then. One piece interlocked onto another one just like it.
If one blade broke, you could replace that section very easily
without having to replace the whole long bit.

If what you are mentioning is that you think the 3 disks are not
connected in any way. I highly doubt any 3 disks on the moon surface
would be lined up so perfectly as to create a perfect line thru
their circumference. They are straight in a line. That means they are
connected by the center piece which extrudes on the end which
is visible in the moon photo as it casts a shadow on the blade behind
it.



posted on Jan, 15 2008 @ 02:29 AM
link   
Sorry for not making myself clear. I meant that the drill parts are threaded (or is the right term fillet?), but the moon image has 3 discs that seem only connected at the center.



posted on Jan, 15 2008 @ 03:32 AM
link   
In a vain attempt to redeem myself I post this for your comment


from: www.mentallandscape.com...



and embossed:



It looks solid enough!

H



posted on Jan, 15 2008 @ 04:25 AM
link   
Glad to see that there are some ongoing attempts to provide logical explanations.
Thank you, SimonSays, for sharing your very interesting construction, and thank you for putting efforts on this one.
I would like to point out that now i don't remember exactly where, but Buddhasystem noticed that this could be a part of the antenna of Lunakhod. Now, i think that he could have been right.

Sherpa and ArMap should remember it better than me.
Now, there's a detail here:

This *may* show that we have a spiral instead of a series of parallel rings: but the antenna is not shaped like a spiral (i'm not sure).

Anyway, an antenna may keep on working even if broken, once given certain conditions: but i don't know if this is what happened, of course.
Edit: darn bbcode


[edit on 15/1/2008 by internos]



posted on Jan, 15 2008 @ 05:38 AM
link   
Yes I also agree that this object looks like the top of Lunokhod 1's steerable transmitting antenna. HOWEVER.... how can that be when the images were taken by Luna-13 in 1966? Luna-17 (with Lunokhod 1) didnt launch until 1970.

Please try to remember that the image with the "spiral" in was taken by Luna-13. Luna-13 was a stationary vehicle which took photos of the surrounding area.

Luna-13 with the object

From what I can see so far Luna-13 doesn't have this antenna at all OR nothing similar to it.

Here is an Image of Luna-13:




I found an article that desribes the 2 different antennas and what they did ( on the Lunokhod 1)

First look at the image:




Now this is the caption from Zarya Original Source

"The two antennae (one spiral and one conical) above the TV cameras provide communication with Earth. The spiral one is the main, steerable transmitting antenna."


/rich



new topics

top topics



 
20
<< 1  2  3    5  6 >>

log in

join