Huge Alien Structure Revealed - Far Side of the Moon 2010 *PHOTOS*, page 3
Pages: <<  1    2    3    4    5    6  >>
ATS Members have flagged this thread 86 times


reply posted on 29-6-2010 @ 10:54 AM by seanizle
reply to post by PsykoOps


Heres evidence of NASA tampering with the color of mars

And some day you have off, Google structures on the moon.

My apologies, I suppose this will not be "Proof" for some, but the evidence is there. I'll leave it up to you guys to connect the dots.

Heres an article about the moon and what a handful of scientists think it really is

[edit on 29-6-2010 by seanizle]

[edit on 29-6-2010 by seanizle]


reply posted on 29-6-2010 @ 10:55 AM by Skeptron
reply to post by watchZEITGEISTnow
[mor

Where did you get this picture? I lost that watch 15 years ago and have looked for it ever since. Seriously though I agree it looks stretched to look like a structure.

[edit on 29-6-2010 by Skeptron]


reply posted on 29-6-2010 @ 11:17 AM by supernova49
reply to post by thebozeian


speculation has is that the moon was towed into place its orbit and rotation are very strange. Many of the apollo astronauts have come forword "buz aldren" there's a monolith on mars. And why has neil armstrong a national hero been so quit all these years. Did you see the speech he gave at the white house comparing astronauts to parrots and there are wonders out there that you can not even imagine. Why is so hard to believe there is other life besides are's. We are just a bunch of knuckle draggers thinking the earth is still flat. Open your minds and quit insulting everyone who doesn't agree with your ideals. Its a shame ats allows its members to insult one another.


reply posted on 29-6-2010 @ 11:20 AM by weedwhacker
reply to post by seanizle


I CAUTION you, in the post of yours at top of this thread --- the second link MAY have some malacious code...I am using a computer at the Hotel Business Center, and its program detected a 'thjreat' from that website!!!

Anyway, what I was able to read before being thrown off was gibberish...something it opened with, a statement "Beyond all doubt" that the nature of the Moon is in question!!

Silly, silly nonsense.


reply posted on 29-6-2010 @ 11:20 AM by {davinci}
reply to post by SKUNK2


In order to get any type of resolution on the surface ot the moon you need a telescope with a 18 inch (+) mirror. In most cases this means having it custom ground by an optics manufacturer.

Any idiot can check the brouchers and see how expensive that type of hardware is.


reply posted on 29-6-2010 @ 11:22 AM by Son of Will
Originally posted by tyranny22
The "artifact" is just a "data clone". A "glitch", if you will, when the data was recorded and sent back to earth.

The image appears as it does because there was probably a pause of some sort when the data was processed and caused the data to be written over and over, rather than recording exactly what was suppose to be there.

It's obviould when you compare the new images with the old images that it was a fraction of the crater that was recorded over and over and over again in a hiccup.

I recreated a somewhat similar effect using the "image clone" tool in photoshop. I could have recreated an exact replica, but I'm not going to waste much time on a data clone. You can see that the image clone acts much like the data clone in re-writing the information that's there:



[edit on 29-6-2010 by tyranny22]


That's not bad, but for one thing, the OP's image shows more detail than one feature that's been dragged a bit. It's not a repetitive structure, except with the horizontal lines. But even those aren't evenly spaced or even of the same width. There would need to be multiple objects being dragged, while also being corrupted and reoriented and lastly, entirely new features would have to be created like the concentric lines of the feature's perimeter. Just because a data glitch can produce a similar feature, that's certainly not proof that that is what occurred here.

Secondly, has that kind of defect happened on any other lunar photographs? Or for that matter any photographs that had to be sent back to Earth via radio? That would greatly help your case if you could find some similar glitches in other photographs.


reply posted on 29-6-2010 @ 11:43 AM by Lisa12
reply to post by IgnoreTheFacts



"However, the ignorance of those that treat their desire to believe like a religion will take ridiculous stuff like this and run with it. In the end, we all get lumped into one group and looked down upon as a bunch of ignorant wackos."

I concur. I believe in aliens and UFO's. At some point, maybe we'll have full disclosure, if not, I still believe. Back in the early 70's, I had an object (not a spinning flying saucer, but more like a manta ray shape) fly over my head and stop right above me and my friend. I have no idea how long it stayed there because I was terrified. It seemed that a short time later it moved slowly forward and took off at an angle so fast that I couldn't even locate it in the night sky. After seeing something like that, full disclosure doesn't even seem to matter.

I don't know whether the object is real or not. Sure, I'd like to believe, but I'm not going to just jump on the bandwagon, though. Did they photoshop? Didn't they photoshop? Who can show 100% proof?
Pages: <<  1    2    3    4    5    6  >>    ^^TOP^^