Finally! - A REAL Lunar Anomaly?

page: 6
<< 3  4  5    7  8  9 >>

log in


posted on Mar, 5 2012 @ 02:59 PM

Originally posted by Kluute

Originally posted by xX aFTeRm4Th Xx
reply to post by BeforeTheHangmansNoose

Um... because theres thousands of them on the moon maybe

Looks more like an image processing defect to me
edit on 5-3-2012 by xX aFTeRm4Th Xx because: (no reason given)

As usual then?

Why do you people have trouble believing anything that the government has not told you.

You are a bunch of self serving sheep!
edit on 5/3/2012 by Kluute because: (no reason given)

And WHO told you there is alien life on the moon? Other people? People with very little evidence and a lot of vivid imagination? And you conclude this to be truth?

Yet I looked at the surrounding area, saw many similar objects that I consider imaging artifacts or compression artifacts, and came to my own conclusion.

Sheep huh...

You, sir, are the very reason people get narky in threads like this, you're so 100% certain you are right, when in fact you have absolutely nothing to base your conclusions on but fantasy.

Now, back to YOUR flock...

posted on Mar, 5 2012 @ 03:01 PM

Originally posted by greeneyedleo
Why is it not a crater?

Because its a hole. A crater would be recessed with no through fare.

posted on Mar, 5 2012 @ 03:07 PM

Originally posted by rickyrrr

Originally posted by spav5

Originally posted by rickyrrr

Originally posted by spav5
Do you not see the v shape of what appear to be dots. 7 craters in alignment? apparently you people are not seeing what I am seeing or you are refusing to look.


You do realize that the dots are precisely on pixel boundaries right?

I mean, they MAY be actual things out there that line up perfectly with the pixels of that camera at the precise position and orientation that it was passing by when it snapped it... but the chances of that are so incredibly slim.


What is your point? So you see them? or don't see them?


My point is that it is far more likely that this is a photographic anomaly because the features coincide with the boundaries of the pixels.

I thought that when I said "are precisely on pixel boundaries" it would be understood that I can *see the dots* in order to tell where they are. Find it strange that would be so hard to discern from my words.

edit on 5-3-2012 by rickyrrr because: (no reason given)

My bad...I guess I should have made my point clearer...Why are you writing this comment in response to what I said. Either way it is not just a crater. At the very least it is a crater with 7 dots that "possibly" are just a pixelation "anomoly".


posted on Mar, 5 2012 @ 03:08 PM
This was discussed a little some time ago, I called it the 'Flying V' it is not alone, the effect appears at a point somewhere in close zoom in many of the pictures in dark areas of those pictures, try it for yourself. I'm not sure what the reason is, perhaps it is overlays by Selene pictures. If the scene is moving sometimes there is a transient line that appears, it is interesting and perhaps Google has an answer for it.

Sorry, I got knocked off-line, here's a link,
edit on 5-3-2012 by smurfy because: Link.

posted on Mar, 5 2012 @ 03:09 PM

Originally posted by stirling
Lots of closed minds, lots of blase` BS.....
I think this is worth an better wondering if the co ords are available through other orbital surveys?
Might be worth a look???
Gotta be an artifact of some kind, but other than the V the rest has to be imagination for now.....
Nive find!
I still find myself highly puzzled that they sent up these expensive survey cameras that never seem to get any clear defined pictures!
Beginning to think life in space is just plain blurry!

There is plenty of higher definition imagery of the area, as others have posted in this thread. The problem is GOOGLE. It's using official imagery but compressing it. Can you imagine just how large the bandwidth would be if google used the uncompressed full images?

Feel like pulling down gigs of data when you load up google earth?

Google is NOT a space exploration tool. It's no better than a kids toy, it's neat to play with, but you don't rely on it.

Google also have a Navigation app for android... It tells you NOT TO RELY ON IT. I know for a fact if they did not have this disclaimer, then someone, somewhere would use it and drive off a cliff, and all that would be heard as they disappeared down into the distance would be "But google said turn leeeeeeffffftttt....."

posted on Mar, 5 2012 @ 03:22 PM
OK, I'll weigh in for a second. Sorry if I cause any redundacies. I have spent quite a good deal of time looking into and analyzing things that don't look right on the moon, Mars and elsewhere.Two thinks bug me about this anomaly.

The first is the shape of the crater. Though it is not without precedent, it is somewhat rare. By itself, not alot to get all shaky about. Second , and more curiously, is that whatever is causing the V shape in the bottom of this "depression" it does not cut a 90 degree angle. It's more like 80-something. If it was completely digital artifact, I would expect a 90 degree angle here. It's not. The amount of light coming from the V-shape also makes it worth further examination to determine (if possible) if the V artifact falls above or below the depression/crater rim.

I'll snoop around and see if there are, by chance, some NASA images of the same area and see if we have gotten at all lucky. Maybe this site has been imaged more than one time and/or by more than one satellite.

It would be just like digital goblins to line things up at nice angles to the perimeter of the whole picture, but one arm of that V is off the anyone with even a decent eye can see.

Interesting catch.I need to stare at this some more.


posted on Mar, 5 2012 @ 03:23 PM
Please, let me make this clear. Google moon was setup by google to make the landscape and topography of the lunar surface accessible and understandable to the masses.

It was not used, or ever will be used, as a tool for experts in any field of lunar studies.

Google moon, should therefore, not be used as a tool to search for anomalies on the lunar surface, as it has many imperfections and there is better material one can use if he wishes to search for anomalies.

posted on Mar, 5 2012 @ 03:39 PM
There is one other thing, and is probably closer to resolving what is ultimately this unwanted effect. Many of the pictures are multi-composites, pulled together and possibly resized to match up. They do this to get the best possible detail/highlight from pictures with differing contrasts as here,

My guess is that in close up, these are wayward pixels from these composites, and possibly from one part of the composite.
edit on 5-3-2012 by smurfy because: Text.

posted on Mar, 5 2012 @ 03:39 PM

off-topic post removed to prevent thread-drift


posted on Mar, 5 2012 @ 03:46 PM
Here you guys go, thought it would be fun to compare pictures. The left side is Google Earth, the Right side is LROC.

I tired to size up the craters as closely as possible, but it was very hard since Google's pic is no where near as detailed as LROC. Still, it's the very same area:

posted on Mar, 5 2012 @ 03:53 PM
reply to post by eriktheawful

Thanks for taking the time to do that, star for you.

I'm betting some people will disregard it though, and continue in their pursuit for 'truth'.

posted on Mar, 5 2012 @ 03:57 PM
One other thing I might add. I notice when manipulating the contrast on this image that the "sphere" or uppermost aspect of the V fades last (compared to the rest of them) when darkening the image so either the light changes along this feature or it may be more exposed, i.e., above the rim. Rim could also be lower at that point.

It is true if you take a few minutes and look around the very large rim while manipulating contrast and brightness there are some other curiosities which I will post a bit later . If you let your imagination go unchecked you could convince yourself you have stumbled upon a "facility" with "attending operations". Further scrutiny is demanded here.

While it may be true enough that Google set this up for pleasure or elementary science, this does not rule out the possibility that real discovery can be made from such images. Most of these images do, if fact, come from legitimate scientific endeavor even if Google has watered it down a bit for public usage.

Many good observations along the road in this post. Too bad so many of us are still way more than happy to bash each other rather than simply leaving the question open for more serious debate. M

posted on Mar, 5 2012 @ 04:01 PM
reply to post by Malkuth

Why don't you look at the original Clementine mission images (the images google used for google moon) rather than the google moon images themselves?

posted on Mar, 5 2012 @ 04:07 PM
Here's another V-plus, same area, and yes, there are thousands of similar effects, and notice too that this is a fourway composite.

Sorry, eriktheawful,

I was doing the same as you posted.

edit on 5-3-2012 by smurfy because: Text.

posted on Mar, 5 2012 @ 04:12 PM
reply to post by AmatuerSkyWatcher


I think what I don't understand is why people spend so much time with old photo's, and low resolution things. There is SO much at the LROC, that if you look there, even if you don't find a alien moon base or ship, you will definately enjoy the landscape.

And just think: if you do find something that raises eyebrows, or makes you wonder, using one of these images is not going to make someone automatically discount it because it's from Google Earth. If you find something there, no one is going to point out that it's a blurry 45 year old photo.

Many claim that LROC is photoshopped by NASA. Well here's yer chance! Find something there and show it! That would impress me much more than someone just saying it.

All sorts of things you can find, and either debunk, try to show others that no, it's the real deal, but at least you'd be arguing over the latest images.

Here's LROC pic of the Apollo 17 lander:

And here is a random something I found (most likely a HUGE bolder, but still you get the idea):

I'd rather argue over current pics than old ones. I'm telling you it's a win/win. Skeptics will have a great time, or NASA haters will finally show a smoking gun!

oops. I said "NASA".........that causes some on here to start foaming at the mouth! hehehehehe.

posted on Mar, 5 2012 @ 04:20 PM
reply to post by eriktheawful

Well the images that google used are not 45 years old, the Clementine mission bwas in 1994, but I get your point.

Google did however alter the original images to make them fit the sphere in their program. Did I mention the images were already altered prior to that too? Ooops must have forgot.

posted on Mar, 5 2012 @ 04:44 PM

Originally posted by Thisbseth
What ever happened to that high res photo of the moon the Chinese took?

Informations show that China will be releasing all the data and images from the Chang’e-2 in the coming weeks and months, so maybe there is a chance something will show up from China some time.

Or Japanese I'm not to sure but I heard it's supposed to be the highest res picture taken of the moon?

Footage of anomalies on Lunar surface reportedly taken from Japan's orbiter Some images of Lunar "anomalies" from Japan

Indian images reportedly show "anomalies" on Lunar surface, and reports that there is convincing evidence that both NASA and the U.S. Department of Defense (DOD) has censored or altered satellite imagery, pointing to the existence of artificial structures and artefacts on the lunar surface.

posted on Mar, 5 2012 @ 04:54 PM
wow nice find dude, how big is the creater (sorry if i spelled that wrong)

posted on Mar, 5 2012 @ 04:56 PM
Nice found! Looked it up myself on Google Earth, and if you go a little north east (from the perspective OP puts his pictures out) you'll see theres TONS of these "craters" with V shaped dots in them

posted on Mar, 5 2012 @ 04:57 PM

off-topic post removed to prevent thread-drift


new topics
top topics
<< 3  4  5    7  8  9 >>

log in