Originally posted by itsthatsow
shadows, shadows of stones, long shadows of stones
come on seriously, spires?
Wow! Thanks for the very in-depth scientific analysis!
Now if these are just natural rocks producing these shadows, has it occurred to you what type of objects have produced them? Let's not talk only of
the shadows per se but what's producing them? If all the shadows look very similar, it means that all those 'rocks' producing them must also be
similar? Either squares, rectangular blocks or triangular? All of them grouped in the same place? All similar? Doesen't that raise your eyebrow? It
does mine at least!
lately ive pondered the idea that this earth as we know it is not the earth we knew,
for some reason ive been stuck with the idea of man coming back to earth and re populating it from the moon ,
in this thinking ive deliberetly tried to stay away from subjects as we "where populated by beings from cluster x-65m" because i belive the truth is
much closer to home,
imagien that the anunaki or any other god wherent god´s but miners/settlers from the moon.
Most ancient astronaut stories ive read describes them wearing helmets ,gasmasks, jumpsuits wich is very common equipment for our times but what if
back then humans suffred from a catastof and acording to discovery chanel and other theories most of what we have here decays without maintainace in
100-500 years not leaving much of a trace,
and for some reason this happend to earth,
it was left without maintainance.
the reasons why this happend can be man made or natural ,
but some of humanity survived while being on the moon mining or even trying to populate it.
it would explain all the moon anomalities we can wittness in most photos showed here on ats and other places wich describes cranes, towers, roads,
dare i say even signs of settlement.
to me the ancient astornaut stories and these moon phots just go hand in hand,
they left and could not return but brought with em knowlege and here we are some 25000 years later and looking back up towards the sky.
This thread is running so fast that I can't read it as fast as it flows.
Here are other anomaly on the Moon that I would like some answers about.
ALIEN SPACESHIP ON THE MOON preflight study for APOLLO 20 www.youtube.com... www.youtube.com...
Added: April 05, 2007, update: May 04, 2007
TV Feed from the lunar module LM-15 during the last revolution before descent. LM passes over Tsiolkovski, Fermi, Delporte and Lukte before passing on
the Izsak Y crater. The spaceship is filmed with close telephoto lens, revealing more details. CDR communicates the South -East coordinates of the
major parts of the spaceship, approximately 4 kilometers long. Color distortions are caused by the rotating wheel inside the Westinghouse Color TV
Added: July 28, 2007 (Less info)
The main feature of this video comes during the second half, which shows a "normalized" version of the 16MM film of the alien craft shot by L.
Marietta Snyder during her CSM flyovers.
The video begins with the AS15-P-9625 zooming in. Then the AS15-P-9625 shot morphs into the AS20-1020 shot, also zooming in.
Then, when AS20-1020 starts to get fuzzy, it morphs into the shot of the ship taken with the Westinghouse color TV camera. For this effect, the main
image is a composite of four different frames from the original video taken during Apollo 20 CSM flyover. This composite was tone adjusted and
desaturated to bring out more detail.
Finally, the Westinghouse TV camera shot morphs into a composite of the ship taken by Leona using a 16MM movie camera.
Thanks for bringing this up here. Whether Apollo 20 was faked or not is a moot point. However, what’s really striking is the image from Apollo 15,
of what looks like an artificial object near a crater, shown below:
The alleged image from Apollo 20:
Alleged image by ‘Apollo 20’
Now whether that translates to the reconstructed image below of an alien spaceship purportedly photographed by ‘Apollo 20’ is a million dollar
But true or not, the Apollo 15 image which is genuine, is intriguing!
It absolutely amazes me that some of you look at odd rock formations, shadows, and rover tracts and decide that the moon is inhabited. Most of these
"conclusions" are factually erroneous. Knowledge of geological structures, depth perception, shadowing, and photo angles are imperative. Haven't
you ever seen the pictures of people holding up the Leaning Tower of Pisa? I am the first person to believe that life exists elsewhere in the
universe. However, this isn't it!
There are some more features like that, but the ones that are lying on the ground without any shadow to make them look more like towers were probably
not seen as such and not considered to be the same type of feature.
Or maybe I am wrong by considering them the same type of feature.
I looked at those pics with a very open mind. I tried my best to make out towers. All I see is ridges and natural rock formations. Even if I KNEW the
moon was inhabited, had visited them personally, I still couldn't make these structures anything other than natural formations.
Originally posted by jamamiss
It absolutely amazes me that some of you look at odd rock formations, shadows, and rover tracts and decide that the moon is inhabited.
It absolutely amazes me that you can say they are nothing but rocks and shadows and in the same sentence say 'rover tracks'
Of course had you read the thread you would know we had no rovers up there when these photos were taken...
Now you signed up just to point this out? What was the need that compelled you to join just so you can say "Only Rock..." I am doing a study on
this facet of human behavior... I have seen this exhibited at photo sites where hundreds of people feel the need to day "Pretty picture" and don't
even get me started on Youtube
Now here is a picture of NASA scientists (?) looking at the anomalies... near Mare Crisium.... but they have bigger copies... much easier to see
Please tell me how you KNOW when these pics were taken? And, yes, there is a pic of NASA scientists looking at an enlarged photo. That does not mean
they think the moon is inhabited. Of course, there are anomolies. The universe is much, much too large not to have any anomolies.
I will tell you that i KNOW that NASA looks an anomolies. Jim Oberg will come in here occassionally, and on his last visit he began discussing "Moon
Pigeons" a little. This is an explanation of many of the UFO images from the Apollo days.
Not to mention an interesting "crop" taken from a NASA image (by a NASA employee) that i found. I will share later. For now, the crop shows
something odd, but on the official photo the whole photo is nearly black.
I have seen the NASA is very interested in anomolies. And they spend quite a bit of time investigating them.
Now, if that is wha tthey are doing in Zorgons picture or not, i don't know. However, it would be easy to assume that Zorgon spoke
So, now that we are done nitpicking each word in a tenured members post, can we move on? What is it that makes you think they are just rocks?
Have you seen the whole thread? What about the "Walled compound" image i posted. Are those just rocks, too? Lined up in a square shaped, walled
Originally posted by jamamiss
Please tell me how you KNOW when these pics were taken?
Oh good grief did you even LOOK at the first post on PAGE ONE of the OP?
I KNOW when these pictures were taken because the SOURCE is Lunar Orbiter 1 thru 5 that flew between 1966 and 1967 mapping the moon for the Apollo
Now I know Mike will chastise me again for bothering to educate the sadly ignorant... sorry Mike.. as Kahn said "They Task me... they do..." And we
are here to "Deny Ignorance" after all
Originally posted by rocksarerocks
I wish you would stop speculating, and posting off topic images that have absolutely nothing to do with this thread.
Those are the lunar orbiter pictures that we are talking about in this thread, spread out on the floor of Langley building 8... The whole premise of
this and similar threads is the idea of editing or not editing NASA images
This is the building where all the 'alleged' adjustment of these photos was done
The image below is from the same building... The picture mosaic behind the scientist is the set of lunar orbiter images we are discussing, He is
transferring the data to a 3d model that was used for the Apollo Missions...
So is this guy with the paint brush
And here is the film crew taking the pictures of the finished product
These photos are ALL related to the Lunar orbiter missions and the Apollo mission...
This is the youtube video on NASA airbrushing... it too is talking about the SAME BUILDING at Langley. From two people who worked there
NASA Airbrushed Buildings on the Moon
You may see only rocks... but please do not display your ignorance by not understanding how and why they were used... This information is all
available online and in a book published by NASA Langley...
"if you disagree with the idea of supporting highly-speculative ideas as a means to test the upper boundaries of our imagination, then quite frankly,
ATS is not for you."
- Mark "Springer" Allin
I think they are rocks for the simple reason that they look like rocks and /or shadows. One truism in science (and life) is that the simplest
explanation is usually the correct explanantion.
About NASA investigating anomolies, I think that they would be remiss in their jobs if they did not. We are trying to understand the universe.
Everything should be studied and analyzed. An anomoly does not indicate life. Could it? Of course. But, with the knowledge we already have of space,
it is a far jump to make these anomolies anything other than natural.
Feel free to call me ignorant. I am so ignorant that I believe in misdating items for effect. I am also so ignorant that I question everything. I am
so ignorant that I want proof. In fact, my ignorance is so profound that I look at things logically and carefully.
Now if you want to believe that the moon is inhabited, go right ahead and believe that. I, in my ignorance, do not believe. I think I'll take my
chances with the other "ignorant" people of the world.
This content community relies on user-generated content from our member contributors. The opinions of our members are not those of site ownership who maintains strict editorial agnosticism and simply provides a collaborative venue for free expression.