Unexplained Mysteries On The Moon And Mars! An Alien Connection?

If we could PLEASE discuss the material and not each other, that would be great.

Originally posted by Phage
The rocks in the opportunity image are not equidistant from each other and it cannot be determined from the image if they, or any of the other rocks in the image are "in a row".

[atsimg]http://files.abovetopsecret.com/files/ede81378bffa3c7f.gif[/atsimg]

Phage,
Source for these measurements?
Thank you

reply to post by Exuberant1

The best we can do with such images is speculate and discuss.

Well I disagree, ATS is such a large site that if anything major (that was agreed upon by skeptics and believers alike) came about there is a lot of people on these boards, some with a lot of contacts that could get this out in the open.

I always appreciate your insights jkrog,

Thanks, and yours as well.

What do you think of this image? What do you think the object is?

I have to agree with Armap, I looked at the same images from another source and could not see it. Now either it is an image artifact or you have a non-photoshopped (airbrushed by NASA) version. The first seems more plausible, but who knows. There is no conclusive proof either way. Below you can see another picture of the exact same area, but note the object is missing.

This from Lunar Orbiter 2…..


Here is another, wider view of the area in question taken by Apollo 12.



Images courtesy of wikpedia.org

It is always good to put the name of the craft and source of the images, it makes for easier cross-research.

As far as your other picture, yes it is an antenna.


[edit on 5/11/2009 by jkrog08]

reply to post by BUYthepeopleFOREthepeople


I pasted the bitmap into a CADD program and used it to make angled measurements. The units are arbitrary but they are to scale.

Personally, I find some of the information buried from the scientists and NASA in the past to reveal some pretty extensive mysteries on the moon.
And whatever you think of Hoagland, he's the messenger here and relating information (which is why I actually like the guy alot, and his sharp wit).


I took a few notes:

In 1958...Kozyrev discovered that the moon actually appeared to be active as opposed to being a dead world. And his one mainstream claim to fame was not this theory but was in fact the discovery of emissions of some kind of carbonic material, carbon and methanegeons, and other things, from the interior of the moon in the crater alphonsis, in 1958, which was incredibly controversial and contentious and caused all kinds of uproar in the scientific community because the moon at that point,just before we were going there, in the 60s, was viewed as a dead world, where nothing ever happened again. And Kozyrev's astrophysical observations proved something was going on.

...In hindsight his theory as to what he was seeing, I think was in error. In fact what he saw was something much more interesting than what he thought it was, which was volcanic emissions of gasses from the inside, which would indicate and active world as opposed to a dead geological world. What I think he saw were actual emissions from some of the ruins deep underground when doors break and walls collapse and corrosion and the gases in these interior spaces, in these underground cities, now buried by rubble several miles deep break down as they must cause of corrosion and oxygen are released to the outer vacuum of the moons surface.

That happened during the Appolo mission, and oh boy did NASA scramble to keep that one a secret, to the point where they actually accused their own scientists, their principal investigators, of making up the data. The secret must be kept at all cost. We must never be allowed to know the extraordinary solar system and reality that we inhabit, cause if we find out theres no limit to what we will be able to do.

[edit on 11-5-2009 by mystiq]

I know this is probably a dumb question but can anyone tell me what color the actual color photos are of Mars? I get confused because I always thought everything was red but then there are others with brown dirt and blue skies and then all the various tinted ones. It makes it hard for me to understand what I'm supposed to be looking for when the colors keep changing. Thanks for your help.

I just found the reference to this picture in John Lear's "Moon Pictures on ATS" in a post by SteveR Original post pg.6

Original picture

I just lightened the crater (bottom) and downscaled the entire picture (top) so it's easy to see where it's located.

Look inside the big crater in this picture. It's an entrance leading into the interior of the moon !!!!!

It really looks like an impact crater, and there is no reason why there even excists such an anomaly inside the crater unless it is a volcanoe (on the moon???) or ............. ????

reply to post by Skallagrimsson


That is Euler Crater.

Here is another image similar to the one you showed.



Here is another view of the crater with the interior fully lit.



And another from the same metric camera as in the one you showed, but one Earth day later so the shadows are different.



Here is a very high resolution image from Lunar Orbiter IV
astrogeology.usgs.gov...

[edit on 5/11/2009 by Phage]

reply to post by missvicky


As far as I understand it, the colours on Mars are like the photo I posted some posts back, with many areas with that blue dust, some bluish volcanic rocks, some almost white rocks, some almost white slab-like rocks, etc., but everything gets a reddish hue because of the dust in the air, like what happens on Earth when there is dust in the air.

So, while the reddish photos may be correct as what they show (how things looked at the time) they may not be correct as to how things look in a clear environment, that would be better represented by the not reddish photos.

reply to post by Skallagrimsson


Your monitor may not be well calibrated, I see that the darker area is just that, a darker area.

Changing the gamma it is visible.

I am about to supply a very important piece of information that should not be overlooked.

BERKELEY – The planet-wide dust storms that periodically cloak Mars in a mantle of red may be generating a snow of corrosive chemicals, including hydrogen peroxide, that would be toxic to life, according to two new studies published in the most recent issue of the journal Astrobiology. Based on field studies on Earth, laboratory experiments and theoretical modeling, the researchers argue that oxidizing chemicals could be produced by the static electricity generated in the swirling dust clouds that often obscure the surface for months, said University of California, Berkeley, physicist Gregory T. Delory, first author of one of the papers. If these chemicals have been produced regularly over the last 3 billion years, when Mars has presumably been dry and dusty, the accumulated peroxide in the surface soil could have built to levels that would kill "life as we know it," he said.

Clicky

P.S. There is no evidence to suggest storms on mars have electrical activity

[edit on 11-5-2009 by DaMod]

reply to post by ChemBreather


The moon would have a hollow core just as the earth has a hollow core.

Nothing too surprising about that, but some people do have some strange ideas about planetary structure.

The history of China makes reference to trips to the moon, which would suggest understandings and knowledge far beyond what we have today or at least far beyond what is commonly accepted to be the case.

Originally posted by Phage
reply to post by Exuberant1

 

Oh, come on.Do a bit of research.
The object is the Apollo command module.





[edit on 5/10/2009 by Phage]

I have said it before and I will say it again Phage they want it so much that any object in a photo they are not sure about is a UFO first and last anything else anyone says is disinfo they are the ones producing the disinfo because they are wrong this photo is a prime example, that and the russian farmer video in another thread which is the sun!

Originally posted by ArMaP
reply to post by Skallagrimsson

 

Your monitor may not be well calibrated, I see that the darker area is just that, a darker area.

Changing the gamma it is visible.

Thanks Phage for those photos

YES, I can see thats a darker area, and YES those pictures by Phage are from the same crater as the patterns on the crater edge can show, but something does not add up in those pictures somewhere...

The "darker area" in the first picture looks like an entrance, or opening to a cave or something (yes I have ajusted the GAMMA myself). The angle of the picture doesn't make you look further inside. If there is an inside it's impossible to know, but from the first photo it can look like that.
The terrain/details shown in the interior of the other protographs don't add ut to the interior with the "darker area" (from the same crater).

Either something is altered in the first photograph, og in the other ones. I do not believe that the interior of the crater can possibly look so different, even if the angles and shadows are different.

Something definately does not add up here....


_________
The high res tiff in Phage's post did show the interior of the crater very well, but with the sunlight/shadows in a different position than in the first picture (that shows the "entrance"/"darker area"), but in the high res tiff there are no darker areas where there is supposed to be one. Even though the sunlight/shadows are different the interior of the crater should not look so different. It still doesn't add up.....

[edit on 11-5-2009 by Skallagrimsson]

reply to post by DaMod


Any information put forward by a scientist making reference to billions of years should not be taken too seriously.

The very issue of light years and the aging of the universe etc. is based on pure fantasy, as no such years exist or can be shown to exist.

At best it is a smoke and mirrors trick.

Holy Cow..if those photos are authentic, and I'm not qualified to say whether they are or not, then the governments of the world are way overstepping the boundary of conspiracy and withholding vital infromation from the civilian population.

reply to post by russlimbo


Why?

(This is one of those occasions where I think a one word post is enough. )

With reference to Armap's pictures of "the puddle" and slabs (pic 5)
image post

Doesn't the puddle look suspiciously blurred/smudged?

It's also the same on the image of the tracks (the edges near the "water" are blurred). Is this just the imaging? As it's noticeable on alot of the colour images.

Originally posted by ArMaP
reply to post by russlimbo

 

Why?

(This is one of those occasions where I think a one word post is enough.

)

-National Security

(which in Portugal may actually mean 'National Security' - But in America is more often than not, used as an excuse to keep information away from those who paid for it; the taxpayer....)

The determinations reached in the Brookings Report are often cited as reason d'etre for the security measures and information-control adopted and implemented by NASA. I actually agree with most of the conclusions from the Brookings report;

Brookings Report (Page 215)


Brookings Report (Page 216)


*Armap,

What think you about the McDaniel Report;

Do you believe that it accurately conveys the realty of the situation, or do you feel that Dr. McDaniel is misrepresenting the nature of the space program?

Lunar Orbiter 1, 1102
13 degrees south 107 east

[atsimg]http://files.abovetopsecret.com/images/member/8123ccef620e.jpg[/atsimg]

And the zoom :

[atsimg]http://files.abovetopsecret.com/images/member/599611bffef3.jpg[/atsimg]


*Another lunar "parking garage" perhaps?


(yeah, I read that old thread... and you guys think I'm nuts )

[edit on 12-5-2009 by Exuberant1]