Something crossing the moon? or misidentification of something from earth.

this should help you get going.

wstaw.org...
wstaw.org...

a reply to: jedi_hamster

ahah! the "crater" the ufo visits is cgi too
just as i suspected
mods hoax bin this thread

originally posted by: jedi_hamster
this should help you get going.

wstaw.org...
wstaw.org...

Thank you. It is where I thought. (more or less).

a reply to: humanoidlord

got any proof other than your ramblings?

this is The Gray Area on a conspiracy forum, if you don't like it, leave.

also, the moon photo i've used is old, my post was just meant to pinpoint the characteristic locations so others may find that exact spot on more current moon photos easily.

wether there's nothing there currently, remains to be seen.

a reply to: jedi_hamster

the structure should be a bit above or below the blue dot, yet it isnt
also its impossible for such an big crater go un-noticed

a reply to: humanoidlord

if it's artificial, it may be - in theory - recent, correct?
missed the part where i've said that photo is old and we need to check current ones, like from today?

a reply to: jedi_hamster

yeah however there is no way to hide such an bigass object from the public
so its probally not there
otherwise, there would be like 100 riots going on in NASA facilities

Is this any use?

It seems to show the correct area, and was taken 2 weeks ago, according to the site.

earthsky.org...

a reply to: Mandy555

not really. far too low resolution.

I remember decades ago someone doing the same hoax on youtube, this is just a rehash version of it... the old flying above the Moon through a telescope trick lol.

cgi...art....hoax....water bug....hippo....whale....????? I Think it's cool ! Someone posted something that....Doesn't Have Anything To Do With Political Nonsense....Doesn't Even Have A Politicians Name In It....STAR AND FLAG....from the ole redundant one!

It is interesting, because if it is CGI, it is done very well. That is why we are here to debunk it if we can. I have a problem with the crater because I cannot exactly locate it, however, different photography of the moon by different telescopes and camera tend to show varying shadowing. The google moon representation cannot reproduce many moon anomalies and shadows because it is stitched from many different sources, and the Sun would have to be in relatively the same position when the strips were shot, and they are not. I have tried some of the NASA resources, but without cross-referencing coordinates, it is almost impossible to pinpoint it, yet.

originally posted by: humanoidlord
a reply to: jedi_hamster

yeah however there is no way to hide such an bigass object from the public
so its probally not there
otherwise, there would be like 100 riots going on in NASA facilities

Check photos of Copernicus at different moon phases. You might think it is not the same place.
If NASA was interested in it, we would not be told, I am sure. There are too many ways that video can be manipulated today. What is needed is more information from the photographer about dates, times and more info on the equipment. The fact that their channel has other wierd content, does not sit well for professional serious study. I would like to hear from Jim Oberg, as to what he thinks, because he is an expert debunker and might be able to pick something up that would shed new light on this thing.

a reply to: charlyv

I don't think this falls in to his balliwick. It sure as hell ain't a rocket or anything in orbit.

originally posted by: Phage
a reply to: charlyv

I don't think this falls in to his balliwick. It sure as hell ain't a rocket or anything in orbit.

Yes, I am afraid you are correct, however I would think he would chomp at the bit if he could bury it somehow.

a reply to: charlyv

I would love to be able to identify it myself. Looks neither natural or artificial. But with the lack of data, oh well.

originally posted by: Mandy555
Is this any use?

It seems to show the correct area, and was taken 2 weeks ago, according to the site.

earthsky.org...

Nice shot but not enough resolution. That image needs to be flipped horizontally, and then you can make out the general area, but zooming in , it is too pixilated. Thanks!

originally posted by: Phage
a reply to: charlyv

I would love to be able to identify it myself. Looks neither natural or artificial. But with the lack of data, oh well.

You are one of the best debunkers on here as well , so if you had found something , we would know about it. So, it still has legs, a bit crippled, but still walking...

a reply to: charlyv

You see legs? I need a new computer.

But yeah, not readily identifiable and a lack of data.

a reply to: Phage

I am really tempted to get my old C8 out of the attic. It is so cold here in Boston....