It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.

Please white-list or disable in your ad-blocking tool.

Thank you.


Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.


Zeeman crater hides an alien factory and more ...

page: 1
<<   2 >>

log in


posted on Feb, 2 2012 @ 10:46 AM
Hi there,

This time a video about an alien factory (powerplant) which is located on the edge of the Zeeman crater

Yes the same crater as seen in the preview. Next time when we send someone to the Moon we should go to the South pole as that appears the place to be. I know that I should be careful saying words like "alien factory or spaceship" but I have no doubts. Take a closer look at this video and than try to comprehent what you see!

This subject was briefly touched on the internet and also on ATS last year but never with so many details.

Be ready for a big surprise ...

Enjoy the video!



P.S. I just analyzed the new released NASA "Grail" video of the Moon's dark side using super high resolution stacking and the above-mentioned anomaly on the crater edge is there, plus an unknown triangle shape object
standing on the crater floor casting a matching shadow and two smaller ones hovering overhead which also produce the matching shadows on the surface. I will make a video of it and upload that soon.

posted on Feb, 2 2012 @ 11:00 AM
reply to post by 1967sander

Ah yes. The Timex on the Moon.

You should avoid using Google Moon for "research".
The artifact is a result of stretching the image to fit the Digital Elevation Model.
Here's the original Lunar Orbiter image. Frame V-5021 M.

There are a few areas in the global mosaic where spikes or artifacts in the ULCN 2005 topographic or digital elevation model (DEM) caused artifacts or errors in the LO mosaic. For each pixel in a LO frame, radius values from the same site in the DEM file are used to project the pixel onto the surface. Pronounced artifacts in the DEM were propagated to the projected LO image data. The resulting pattern in the LO mosaic is a "log cabin" or "checkerboard" effect where the image data is compromised in a few isolated areas.

Here's a different LO image of Zeeman

edit on 2/2/2012 by Phage because: (no reason given)

posted on Feb, 2 2012 @ 11:03 AM
reply to post by Phage

Watch the video first! Try to come up with a logical explanation for certain objects in this video..

posted on Feb, 2 2012 @ 11:04 AM
reply to post by 1967sander

I've seen your videos before.

posted on Feb, 2 2012 @ 11:05 AM
reply to post by Phage

Not this one!

posted on Feb, 2 2012 @ 11:05 AM
reply to post by Phage

Ah yes. The Timex on the Moon.

Far be it from me to disagree, but I believe that has been identified as a 1973 vintage Pulsar digital, as seen in "Live and Let Die."

posted on Feb, 2 2012 @ 11:06 AM
reply to post by 1967sander

Are you using Google Earth?
Are you overzooming?
Are you claiming that you are finding hidden data?
...I've seen it.

posted on Feb, 2 2012 @ 11:08 AM

I see you have fallen into the trap of our dear friend Richard Hoagland.

1.Take low resolution, pre-altered Google Moon image and assume that it is the only "accurate" version of available image.

2.Ignore all other NASA photography of specific area (and not even bother to look for other nation's probes) by saying that they have all been manipulated.

3.Use an ill defined series of image manipulations to bring out "hidden" details...which are obviously .jpeg artifacts.

4.Claim that resulting blown-up, stretched, de-blurred, re-focused, AMS'd leftovers are evidence for moon factories and moon Coca Cola plants.

Compared to your previous threads, this one seems to be lacking imagination.


posted on Feb, 2 2012 @ 11:16 AM
I have to admit, when I finished watching the video I was thinking... Really? Is this real or fake I honestly was confused and didn't know what to say...

That was until I read Phage's post and clicked on the first thread link.

Go on there and see for yourself. The original picture is on there and a different one but of the same crater.

You can clearly see the difference between the two.

I totally see how you could believe that video though. It seems for real and nearly had me for a few minutes.

ETA: Just realised Phage put the same pictures on here...
It's been a long cold day.

edit on 2-2-2012 by SilentE because: (no reason given)

posted on Feb, 2 2012 @ 11:22 AM
Google is not a very reliable tool when it comes to investigating topographic "anomalies:"

I suggest you explore the "Google Earth Hacks" site before continuing in your research.

posted on Feb, 2 2012 @ 11:25 AM
Please take the images in your video that do not show the artifact, and show instead those that you say they were manipulated to "remove" the artifact. That would be a better way to show something. In other words, prove that the pictures that do not show this artifact were manipulated.

Show other pictures that also have this artifact in it.

Else what it looks to me is corrupt data that happened during transmission.

posted on Feb, 2 2012 @ 11:27 AM
People are always going to keep looking for "structures" because NASA is known to manipulate images. The quote below is from Zorgon's thread about this crater and the smudges... I think it pretty much sums it up...

Originally posted by blaenau2000
As a new member I am just getting into NASA and all their dodgy business, editing video and photos.
And all I can say is I am shocked that a public funded organisation can get away with not releasing raw data so everyone gets to analyze the information.

And to the people that come on and say NASA are great, and believe any little excuse they give, Please dont humour us.

ONE QUESTION - Why manipulate and edit photos and videos of somewhere supposedly there aint nothing?

posted on Feb, 2 2012 @ 11:29 AM
reply to post by JibbyJedi

People are always going to keep looking for "structures" because NASA is known to manipulate images.

And the people looking for "structures" also manipulate images.

posted on Feb, 2 2012 @ 11:48 AM
When I was 11 years old, my father was stationed in Seoul, South Korea. One day when we were walking down the street, this guy came up to my father and wanted to sell him a gold ring with a big diamond in it.

Looked impressive to me, and the guy only wanted 50 bucks for the thing!

My father shook his head and tried to walk away, but the man grabbed his arm and walked over to a display window, put the "diamond" to the window and scratched it.

My father shook his head again, and said "No." and we walked away.
I said, "Dad, everyone knows diamonds cut glass!"
To which my father answered: "Correct. But glass will also scratch another piece of glass."

Point: Don't buy everything you see. Accept no substitutes.

If something is going to be put forth on here, it needs to be done so in a way that does leave a good question about it.
One photo, that is from Google, that is then messed with graphic software on a computer, and make many things, look like many things. Especially if you really, REALLY want to believe that there is something there.

Questions: If it's a factory (and if it is, what in the world....excuse me....what on the Moon could they be manufacturing?), why is it on the side of a crater, and lopsided?
If those are pipes, then you have to be insane, simply because you are exposing your liquid/gas that is in those pipes to extreme temp changes which I would imagine would be bad for the pipe's contents, not to mention the pipes themselves.
Are there ANY other photo's that are original, that show this?
If the answer is "No" followed by "The great big scary NASA guys changed all the other pictures!" then PROVE it.
Using the very same software that you are using on the first picture, and be easily used to show that the other pictures have been messed with. You can show how things were cut / pasted, air brushed, etc, etc.

Don't show me a single picture and then say: Trust me. Because I'm going to want to know if your asking me to buy a real diamond? Or is it a piece of glass made to look like a diamond?

posted on Feb, 2 2012 @ 11:59 AM
What kinds of "logical" reasoning did you use to come to the conclusion that this was a power plant? This looks like one of the pictures of top secret robot manufacturing facilities.

posted on Feb, 2 2012 @ 12:02 PM
Nearly didnt watch the vid after reading the comments but glad I did.

I agree it looks interesting, not sure why its been labelled a factory but meh........

I know nothing about photography but some of the close up details didnt seem likely for a "glitch or whatever they call it, from a distance it does kinda jut look like one of the surrounding craters that ha been stretched out.

Not sure what to make of it but figured it was worth a star.

Out of curiosity did you make the vid or just find it?

posted on Feb, 2 2012 @ 12:29 PM
I find it funny that he focuses on one photo with an anomaly, then shows four or five other photos without said anomoly and claims it was removed from them.

more likely the photos without his anomaly are in fact real, unedited, higher detail pictures and his anomaly is just a glitch.

Using photo manipulation to show things does not prove the things you see are there. you are finding 'factories' because it is what you want to find

posted on Feb, 2 2012 @ 02:04 PM

Originally posted by Phage
reply to post by 1967sander

I've seen your videos before.

Phage YOU couldn't even get the date correct for a failed Nasa Ballon Launch in Alice Springs when you trolled the US NAVY Space Command Thread.


edit on 2-2-2012 by Somamech because: Nasa said so

posted on Feb, 2 2012 @ 02:15 PM
We all know using Google Earth as a source is a big NO,NO but nevertheless please go on searching...we all want to KNOW, that is why we are here on this forum!
This anomaly has been "investigated' a couple of times and no matter what the verdict was(if it really matters at all???),the "pipes" were new to me and just for that I'd say thanks for your effort.

posted on Feb, 2 2012 @ 02:21 PM
Interesting video, with some interesting anomalies!

If I was you Sander, I wouldn't bother with this paid troll populated site...

new topics

top topics

<<   2 >>

log in