posted on Jul, 19 2013 @ 01:11 AM
First of all, look at the artifacts that are created in the picture, that are not really there on the surface. Look kind of in the middle, towards the
bottom of the picture, slightly to the left. It is most obvious here, and once you see it, you can see how it permeates the entire picture. See those
wavy sort of artificial lines? THAT is having an effect on what we see in the first place.
And second, when one attempts to zoom too far into a picture, depending on how and with what the picture was taken, things will become distorted. You
say the zoom is not enough to cause distortion, yet I say look at the wavy lines I described above.
Moving on, anyone who analyzes pictures of the moon should realize one fact...The angle of the picture will affect how things look. A shot from
directly above obviously will not present an accurate picture of the landscape. And another fact is that it is often difficult to tell what is a
crater, and what is a mound or hill of lunar soil. What may appear to be sloping down into the ground, can actually be a hill. And if we cannot even
tell that much regarding the lunar landscape, how can one claim that we are getting an accurate enough picture to discern between artificial and alien
structures? It would be simple if the alien structures actually looked anything like structures, but what you are pointing out is nothing more than
And then there is the fact that albedo, the light reflected by different surfaces, affects what we see. The areas that seem darker and lighter than
others is NOT indicative of an artificial surface or structure. The fact that surface dust, and soil upturned from a deeper layer, are going to have
different coloration or shades, and albedo, is common sense. The area that you suggest as being "concrete" is obviously due to some natural
I just finished commenting on another thread regarding basically this same issue of distortion of the lunar landscape in photographs, so I don't
really feel like rehashing all of that information. So it will suffice to say that there is this widely held belief that is absolutely wrong, that one
can simply look at geological features on an alien world and easily distinguish between that geology and ET life. First of all, most people have no
knowledge of either.
How can someone who is not absolutely familiar with geology, or lunar geology for that matter, state what is or is not natural? And then how can they
go a step further to claim that not only is something not geologically naturally, but is actually extraterrestrial, when they don't even know what an
ET presence would look like? Often people point out things on the moon or mars and claim it is proof of alien life, when in fact to the trained eye
they are seeing nothing more than natural features. And often times these supposed structures and artifacts appear completely unorthodox in that they
are not indicative of how we would lay out a complex, or build a structure, etc. What I mean is that when something appears all misshapen, and is a
different color, one should not assume it is alien.