posted on Jul, 22 2009 @ 10:35 PM
I just reread Richard Hoagland and Mike Bara's Dark Mission and, just like the first time, found it to be a good read with compelling
arguments and a pretty good selection of evidence. I'm left with a few questions though that I can't answer with some quick research.
Some Background. Hoagland and his Enterprise Mission support the theory that there are ancient artifacts on the moon and mars and possibly other
planets and satellites. On the moon there are supposedly enormous glass domes supported by a darker rebar like skeleton. It's the claim that the
domes are glass that raises the questions.
1) Assuming that there are glass domes on the moon, wouldn't they be visible from Earth under limited circumstances? Specifically, I'm talking
about reflections, some light catching a structure just right and creating a 'bling' on the moon. My first thought was that the lights that have
been forever seen on the moon could be reflections, but those lights are often said to move and wander across the moon's surface.
2) How big would a structure on the moon have to be to be visible from the Earth through a commercially available telescope. I'm aware that the
object would have to be gigantic, but Hoagland is talking about gigantic structures. This seems to me to be the most important questions. If it
would be possible to see the objects Hoagland claims are up there from Earth, then his conspiracy dissolves.
3) In doing a bit of research into this subject, I came across one of Hoagland's videos on youtube wherein he describes the prism/rainbow effect
that would happen if a picture was taken on the surface of the moon with the dome remains refracting sunlight. One commenter of the video claimed the
prism effect could be caused by the lens of the camera. While this seems unlikely to me (the effect would happen on a wide array of photos rather
than only in a consistent set), it is one of those deceptively simple explanations that often pops up. Could a camera's lens create a prism
That's it, I hope some of you can help clarify these points. I also recommend Dark Mission. Even if the claims seem absurd (and I'd imagine
they would to most), Hoagland is by no means a crackpot; it's a good read.