Moon Mystery House/ Mystery Hut/ Cube: Secret Buildings in Background of the Photo

a reply to: JamesChessman

I was discussing the 'Lunomalies' video. If you made that, you didn't zoom all the way in and you didn't check other sources.

a reply to: JamesChessman

How many pixels did the rock in the original image occupy compared with now?

As for the UMSF thread, this thread also started last month when no-one knew what it was, other than it being a rock. They, and we, now know for certain it's a rock. Your disappointment about your expectations not being fulfilled is clouding your judgement.

originally posted by: Ophiuchus1
a reply to: JamesChessman

I don’t know for sure………but in seeing this object as a natural rock feature of the landscape…. If I were the Chinese, I would no longer use operational time and money continuing on and instead try to find something more interesting. I don’t know what all other instruments are on the rover….but if they have other scientific studies they could do…then, I would think the Chinese would move on to something else.

👽🛸🔬⛏

Well, every individual decides for themselves, what they find interesting, or not.



But regardless of our personal preferences:




There's a factual timeline of events, and it's important that we try to keep that as CLEAR as possible.

(And I'm saying that because it's VERY EASY to lose track of the basic, clear timeline of events, re: The Mystery House.

Because there is so much extra stuff, around it: So much discussion, analyzation, imagination / speculation, color manipulation, web searching, etc.)












^So just for the sake of keeping CLARITY of the BASIC TIMELINE OF EVENTS:



Here's the most basic factual timeline of events:

1. Early December, 2021:

First public headlines: First images and first information, about the Mystery House.


Note: As explained earlier:
Initially there seemed 3 images, but I soon realized there were only 2 images published. (The 3rd was just a zoom, of 1 of the 2 pics.)


Note: Of the 2 images: The landscape shot is this thread's topic, containing hidden background imagery.

The 2nd shot is the CLOSE-UP SHOT, with its background OBVIOUSLY CROPPED OUT, and filled with a solid color.




^So again, last month only gave us TWO PICTURES, ONLY.

One with hidden background stuff. The other with background ERASED.





2. EARLY JAN., 2022:

-- Our current, new headlines, with ONLY ONE NEW IMAGE.

Note: Current reports MIGHT LOOK LIKE THERE'S TWO NEW IMAGES. THERE'S NOT.

THERE'S ONE NEW IMAGE... plus a SMALL ZOOM SHOT, from the one new image.








...So at a quick glance, initially it looks like the public has 5 IMAGES, total.

***NO, WE DON'T. WE HAVE 3 IMAGES TOTAL.

...And since one of the original 2 pics, has its background blatantly cropped out, we could say that we only have TWO POSSIBLE NATURAL IMAGES.

(After all, we only have 2 images with the actual background.)



...And then, of the two possibly-NATURAL images, i.e. the 2 shots which show the background: That's the topic photo, and the new one, which unfortunately EXCLUDES MOST OF THE BACKGROUND.

(Apparently by the tilt of the camera, although, it's also possible that the new image MIGHT HAVE originally captured more background... and then later, the entire image could have simply been CROPPED, to exclude the background, before released to the public, in its current form.)





...ALSO, as I mentioned earlier: This NEW giant-landscape image, is so HUGE that its hi-resolution... is actually LOW-RESOLUTION when zooming onto any specific spot, such as the Mystery Hut, or THE LANDER.

BOTH are in the NEW image, but we can not see any detail or clarity. Even though one of those objects - the LANDER - is something that WE KNOW EXACTLY WHAT IT IS.

Even then, despite knowing exactly what the LANDER is, we can't see it, in any clarity or detail, that we already know about it!









*** IN CONCLUSION:

It's WAY TOO EARLY TO LOSE INTEREST in this topic, imo.




Especially that first glance, there seems MUCH MORE images, than there really are!

As just explained, we ONLY HAVE THREE IMAGES.

ONLY TWO WITH A NATURAL BACKGROUND.

AND ONLY ONE NATURAL BACKGROUND ACTUALLY SHOWING (in OP photo), because the NEW image EXCLUDES it, mostly.






PLUS: WE HAVE ZERO CLEAR IMAGES OF THE MYSTERY HUT OBJECT, OR THE LANDER.

We only have THREE SHOTS of the Mystery Hut: ALL 3 PICS UNCLEAR, LOW-RES.

LANDER is UNCLEAR in the new image, and I think it's the only ONE image of the lander, so far?







*** SO IN FINAL CONCLUSION:

I THINK WE SHOULD stay interested, and we SHOULD STILL WANT MORE IMAGES of the Mystery Hut, and the rover's lander, and the general area.

We still should want more clarity and detail of the Mystery Hut, the lander, and everything.








...Even if we were to ONLY focus our interest on the "Mystery House" object itself:

Even THEN, let's remember that we STILL DON'T EVEN HAVE ONE CLEAR IMAGE OF IT.





*** FINAL NOTES:

I understand that all the governments in the world, have MANY REASONS TO BE SECRETIVE with such amazing discoveries, like the current topic of the thread: The "Mystery Hut" and its surroundings.

So everyone is VERY UNDERSTANDING that in this case, China feels the NEED TO BE SECRETIVE, when releasing any public images & information.

It's 100% understandable because the United States is VERY WELL-KNOWN TO BE EXACTLY THE SAME, WITH ITS SECRECY AND PRIVACY, in general.

It's the nature of ANY & ALL GOVERNMENTS TO BE PRIVATE AND SECRETIVE.






So I just want to be very clear about that. There is no blame or criticism about China or the United States being secretive and private about such amazing new discoveries like the Mystery House.




However, the topic still leaves everyone VERY CURIOUS AND HOPEFUL TO SEE MORE AMAZING IMAGES AND INFORMATION!




For starters: China: Can we please get a BETTER, HIGHER-RESOLUTION version of the SAME NEW IMAGE?

Because everyone would LOVE to see better clarity and detail, of the Mystery Hut, and also of the LANDER, too!

(Because aside from the Mystery House and surrounding area: China's current lunar-exploration ITSELF is AMAZING and impressive! So we want to see that LANDER in better clarity and hi-res. China's technological and scientific accomplishments are INCREDIBLE here, with this moon mission. They are exploring NEW lunar territory, which has NEVER been explored before, like this! So China is MAKING HISTORY just from the fact of exploring the FAR SIDE of the moon like this, including the unique accomplishment of FLYING and SAFELY LANDING the rover, inside its special LANDER.)






^So let's everyone please keep interested, lol, for more amazing images and information.



The most natural thing to hope for, next, would be... Please give us a BETTER, HIGHER RES version of the current new image? So we can see the Mystery Hut, PLUS so we can admire the LANDER.

And please show us more of the background, lol, if possible.

*fingers crossed*

originally posted by: OneBigMonkeyToo
a reply to: JamesChessman

I was discussing the 'Lunomalies' video. If you made that, you didn't zoom all the way in and you didn't check other sources.

I don't believe you're seriously asking me if I made that "Lunomalies" video.

But for the record: No, of course not.

There was never any reason to think that, lol.



I only have one YouTube channel, which is 100% not-monetized, in any way. So I have absolutely ZERO BENEFIT from anyone visiting my YT channel.

My channel is based on my own natural, genuine, honest interest, just like this thread. And that should be obvious to anyone who is honestly looking at my thread and / or my YT channel.

It should be visible that it's all based on honest interests, because it's the ONLY thing that it's based on.






...







...Over the years, there is SO MUCH criticism and negative accusations thrown around, regarding someone making vids about his own honest interest.

In fact, every time I make a thread, with a vid or two that I made: Every time, there are negative remarks about it.






But the honesty of my channel and threads, should shine through, for those who are honestly looking.






...






Re: The idea of somehow profiting from having a YT channel, and making videos on it:




*** First and foremost, I don't even have the OPTION of profiting from my YT channel. I've never had the option.


-- The most basic threshold for a YouTuber to START to profit from YT ad revenue... STARTS with a channel having a minimum of 1,000 subscribers.

This is not going to happen anytime soon, nor was it ever my goal, of creating vids and threads about topics of honest interest.





-- Besides, if I someday gain 1,000 subs... and if I THEN decided to start to monetize my channel: I WOULD MAKE IT VERY CRYSTAL-CLEAR.

There's be 100% crystal-clear announcement, if I ever got to that point.



(Unfortunately: The aspect of NON-MONETIZATION was previously MORE OBVIOUS. Because up till this past year, 2021: YouTube didn't used to run ads on NON-monetized channels... At least, that's what I previously THOUGHT the arrangement was, that YT only ran ads on monetized channels. So it's slightly misleading that my channel now contains ads, lol. My channel is still 100% NON-MONETIZED and it always WILL BE, unless someday I make a VERY CLEAR ANNOUNCEMENT, if it ever changed, in the DISTANT FUTURE.)







...






TL;DR:


MY YT CHANNEL ABSOLUTELY CAN'T BE MONETIZED.

Monetization requires 1,000 subs.

My channel has less than 250 subs. So IT'S IMPOSSIBLE TO MONETIZE.

So people can stop with whatever vague implications / criticisms / accusations... about someone simply having a YT channel.



My threads and channel have never had any goal of any profit, in any way, and they never will, in the foreseeable future.












...







ALSO: My channel's UPLOAD TIMELINE shows my lack of ambitions of any kind of profit.

Because check my timeline. It's been ONE FULL YEAR since I last made a video about a meaningful, mysterious topic (like this current topic, the Mystery Hut).

Likewise, that means it's a full year since I made a thread on ATS, like this (a meaningful topic with a vid).





^So I'm just saying... a timeline of ONCE A YEAR should be OBVIOUS, in-and-of-itself, that there's no financial venture happening here, lol!!

originally posted by: JamesChessman

originally posted by: OneBigMonkeyToo
a reply to: JamesChessman

I was discussing the 'Lunomalies' video. If you made that, you didn't zoom all the way in and you didn't check other sources.

I don't believe you're seriously asking me if I made that "Lunomalies" video.

I was specifically responding to a comment about the lunamolies video posted in teh thread. You claimed to be the only video maker in the thread.

But for the record: No, of course not.

There was never any reason to think that, lol.

There was, because a video was posted in the thread and you claimed to be the only video maker in the thread. Maybe check which comment is being discussed before wading in.

I only have one YouTube channel, which is 100% not-monetized, in any way. So I have absolutely ZERO BENEFIT from anyone visiting my YT channel.

My channel is based on my own natural, genuine, honest interest, just like this thread. And that should be obvious to anyone who is honestly looking at my thread and / or my YT channel.

It should be visible that it's all based on honest interests, because it's the ONLY thing that it's based on.






...







...Over the years, there is SO MUCH criticism and negative accusations thrown around, regarding someone making vids about his own honest interest.

In fact, every time I make a thread, with a vid or two that I made: Every time, there are negative remarks about it.






But the honesty of my channel and threads, should shine through, for those who are honestly looking.






...






Re: The idea of somehow profiting from having a YT channel, and making videos on it:




*** First and foremost, I don't even have the OPTION of profiting from my YT channel. I've never had the option.


-- The most basic threshold for a YouTuber to START to profit from YT ad revenue... STARTS with a channel having a minimum of 1,000 subscribers.

This is not going to happen anytime soon, nor was it ever my goal, of creating vids and threads about topics of honest interest.





-- Besides, if I someday gain 1,000 subs... and if I THEN decided to start to monetize my channel: I WOULD MAKE IT VERY CRYSTAL-CLEAR.

There's be 100% crystal-clear announcement, if I ever got to that point.



(Unfortunately: The aspect of NON-MONETIZATION was previously MORE OBVIOUS. Because up till this past year, 2021: YouTube didn't used to run ads on NON-monetized channels... At least, that's what I previously THOUGHT the arrangement was, that YT only ran ads on monetized channels. So it's slightly misleading that my channel now contains ads, lol. My channel is still 100% NON-MONETIZED and it always WILL BE, unless someday I make a VERY CLEAR ANNOUNCEMENT, if it ever changed, in the DISTANT FUTURE.)

I'm really not interested in what your motives are for your channel or your opinions on youtube's business model.

I also have a youtube channel that doesn't make money. Youtube doesn't exist as a public information service or some sort of human right.

All I did was comment on a video that was posted in this thread. You assumed it was about you. You were wrong.

a reply to: OneBigMonkeyToo

I was specifically responding to a comment about the lunamolies video posted in teh thread. You claimed to be the only video maker in the thread.

^Lol. I think your phrasing is misleading there.

I was accurate when I "claimed to be the only video maker in the thread," in that I seem to be the only thread participant who's also... occasionally making / uploading my own videos online.




It has nothing to do with someone else posting a video that OTHER PEOPLE created.

That's a completely different action, to post someone ELSE'S videos, in a general, fair-use sort of way.

There was, because a video was posted in the thread and you claimed to be the only video maker in the thread.

^Lol! Oh please, lol. I hope you are not pretending that you were confused about the creator of the "Luminomolies" video.

I didn't post it, nor was there any reason to wonder if I made that video... lol.




Semantically you don't even have a point in your argument.

Someone else posted the "Luminomolies" vid, fair-use, with presumably no connection to the actual vid-creator.




Nobody said anything about who created the Luminomolies vid, so there was no reason to think anyone in the thread had a creative connection to it.





...So I'm guessing that you think you have a semantic argument, but no, you don't.

The Luminomolies vid creator was never mentioned as being here in the thread.




So: My statement stands as accurate, even in the strictest semantics, my statement was sound. I'm the only thread-participant who also makes online vids, AFAIK.












...I wouldn't even respond to all this nonsense lol, except it relates to my previous post, which actually is meaningful in explaining the general YT situation.

And the total lack of profit-goal, when I make such threads and videos, about my real genuine interests.

Maybe check which comment is being discussed before wading in.

^Well that's just being obnoxious, and meaningless, there.







Whatever comments you made about YT content-creators... would seem that they PROBABLY relate to the ONLY actual content-creator who's participating in the thread, lol.

Well anyway, I'm glad that I explained the non-profit situation, for anyone who's inclined to make negative comments and implications about it.

All I did was comment on a video that was posted in this thread. You assumed it was about you. You were wrong.

^Fine, it's always possible that people are really not saying much of anything, at all. It seems common especially in conversations with obnoxious people...

a reply to: OneBigMonkeyToo

How many pixels did the rock in the original image occupy compared with now?

It's really not the point, to try to quantify the number of pixels, of the Mystery Hut, in the 3 released images.


However, this is a nice point to embed ALL THREE IMAGES of the Mystery Hut, all in one post, in full-size.




1. The NEW image is a smaller size / resolution, in TOTAL, compared to the OP image (from a month ago).

Current NEW image: 1080 x 409:







2. Here's the full-size OP pic, published last month. Much LARGER & HIGHER-RES, at 2198 x 1143:



^That's actually my 1st time embedding the FULL-SIZE OP pic, in the thread, because at first, I didn't know we could upload large images like this, when I started the thread.











Finally:

3. Here's full-size: the infamous 3rd image... which has its background blatantly erased / cropped out, and filled in with solid dark-purple.

This is my brightened version of it, but it's the same original full-size, full resolution: 2048 x 1152:

a reply to: OneBigMonkeyToo

As for the UMSF thread, this thread also started last month when no-one knew what it was, other than it being a rock. They, and we, now know for certain it's a rock. Your disappointment about your expectations not being fulfilled is clouding your judgement.

You're misunderstanding, or mischaracterizing, your linked thread that you're describing there.

I checked it earlier today.

Unless it changed drastically in the last few hours, which I doubt, then: No, your linked thread is completely inconclusive about everything discussed.

Plus you embedded that image, from your linked thread, and then I asked you to clarify what your image is showing, and you failed to explain or clarify, what you think it's showing.

Which leaves that image as unclear, as well as its thread, unclear.

And you were not even clear enough to acknowledge that.

For more clarity and comparison:





Here's BRIGHTENED, the full-size OP pic:




Now for comparison:
Here's the NEW image, full-size and brightened:






^We can see, as described earlier, that: New image is much smaller / lower-res, in total.


Also: As noted earlier: The background sky is mostly absent from the NEW image. Whether the camera was tilted down, and / OR the total image was simply cropped before public release, to crop out most of the sky...








...So of course, this is why I'm hoping for a BETTER version of this new image, I hope.

originally posted by: JamesChessman
For more clarity and comparison:





Here's BRIGHTENED, the full-size OP pic:

Now for comparison:
Here's the NEW image, full-size and brightened:

^We can see, as described earlier, that: New image is much smaller / lower-res, in total.


Also: As noted earlier: The background sky is mostly absent from the NEW image. Whether the camera was tilted down, and / OR the total image was simply cropped before public release, to crop out most of the sky...








...So of course, this is why I'm hoping for a BETTER version of this new image, I hope.

I should mention:

If you want to compare the full size of these images, embedded in the thread:


Here's a great way to do that.
Here in the thread: Just right-click on each image, then choose: Open Image in New Tab.

Then, your new tab will contain the full-size image.

The new tab with OP pic will have a magnifying glass to click and EXPAND to its FULL SIZE.



^So do that, and you'll see that your tab of the NEW image... is a tiny sliver, compared to full size OP pic from a month ago, when it's fully expanded.



(Just explaining for anyone that it might help see the difference, in comparing these images.)

originally posted by: JamesChessman
originally posted by: charlyv

Apologies but I don't see really what you're getting at, unless your point is just... that there don't seem straight lines?

Do you get it now?

a reply to: JamesChessman

Its interesting.

Mystery Hut given a new name…….

Jade Rabbit

Mon, January 10, 2022, 11:33 AM
China finds explanation for "mystery hut" spotted on the moon

…….”Oh, this is amazing. Close to tears. Ourspace has published an update on the "mystery hut" and it's so underwhelming it's brilliant. It's just a small rock on a crater rim that they're now calling "jade rabbit" for its appearance. “……..

And from a Twitter feed…you’ll have to translate (try Google translate)
mp.weixin.qq.com...

It’s a definitive conclusion…

A Rock is a Rock

👽☕️🍩

Haha gotta give it to ATS, multipage thread overanalyzing a rock!

We still literally only have 3 images. Even now, with the new linked Twitter post, lovingly describing the rock as resembling a rabbit.


That's still just the same 3 unclear images.



And only 1 of those 3 images, shows the background (OP pic), with the other 2 images, deliberately avoiding the background.





So the background is still mysterious, if not the object... which really is still mysterious too, since there's still not one good shot yet.




Even if the object is 100% natural rock, let's please see it in HD.

Plus can we please just get more images in general, of the object, and the background?








...We shouldn't be making final conclusions that there's nothing to see, based on only 3 unclear images of the object, only 1 with the background and 2 avoiding it.


There seems excessive scarcity of public released images!

China finds explanation for "mystery hut" spotted on the moon

UPDATE: It turns out the YUTU-2 is close enough now to see the structures behind the Jade Rabbit …..and drum roll 🥁 …….it is The Emerald City!

That’s Amazing …. now, now, we know the Truth.


👽🥂

originally posted by: Ophiuchus1
China finds explanation for "mystery hut" spotted on the moon

UPDATE: It turns out the YUTU-2 is close enough now to see the structures behind the Jade Rabbit …..and drum roll 🥁 …….it is The Emerald City!

That’s Amazing …. now, now, we know the Truth.

👽🥂

Lol.

It's easy to overlook how secretive this topic still is, though. It may feel like a 2-month topic, but realistically, it's only been about 5-6 weeks, since initial headlines.

And every step SEEMS like it's more open than it really is. Especially that online vids and articles and discussions can multiply without new content actually coming out.

So it's why I've been emphasizing: Let's keep realistic about the images and information that have been published. It's a lot less than it seems, at a glance.

There's a false impression that the topic has been exhausted, but that's a false impression.

The topic will remain a mystery, shrouded in secrecy... as long as PICS are so extremely limited!




-- There have basically only been 2 cycles of news headlines about the Mystery Hut.

The first yielded ONLY TWO IMAGES.
The 2nd news cycle yields ONLY ONE NEW IMAGE.

TOTAL: ONLY THREE LOW-RES PICS of the object, one with mysterious background, and 2 with blatantly AVOIDED BACKGROUND.



-- The fact of HIDING THE BACKGROUND, in 2 of 3 pics, begs the question: WHAT is there, to hide? And why?

-- Plus: Why has the object has only gotten low-res shots?

-- And: Why aren't there just MORE photos, overall?







--We need to compare to normal-life, a bit, to really grasp this situation: 2 months... and only 3 pics?



Just compare to normal life:

-- If a guy went on a first-date with someone, they'd probably take MORE THAN 3 PICS, in that one date, lol.

-- And then, if they dated for 2 months, they'd probably have HUNDREDS of pics.

-- Conversely, if a guy CLAIMED that he dated someone for 2 months, but his only proof was 3 PHOTOS, then NOBODY WOULD consider that proof of dating for 2 months, lol!!





Other normal-life comparisons:


--I photograph MY CATS: maybe 100 (or 200) pics, in 2 months.
(So then how is the rover only giving us THREE PICS, in that time?)








-- If there was a crime that happened, on Earth: 3 BLURRY PICS of a person, probably wouldn't even identify him, let alone convict him.




-- I took a quick video recently, my dad was driving a giant truck, that I didn't know he could, so I recorded it.

That 2-minute video, probably has HUNDREDS or THOUSANDS of photo's.



-- By the way: Why doesn't the rover just take video? There'd be hundreds / thousands of images, just by the format of recording video.















-- Alright, one LAST example:

I've mentioned that I learned photo-editing / manipulation myself, years ago, because of being a fan of the most beautiful model in the world. (I asked if anyone wanted me to mention who she is, but nobody asked, lol.)

Alright so last March, 2021: I was a nervous wreck for some days, from family stress & arguing, etc.

I got around to browsing her online content, because I've been collecting her photo's for years, and typically, I'll check her content, at least once a year.

Because usually, I'd find one or more new photo's, publicly available, which I hadn't seen before.

(She stopped actually modeling around 2005, so such "new" pics are only "new" to being publicly available, each year.

Also, she really vanished from public life, so many people have formed terrible ideas that she got killed!

But no solid proof, or indication of that. I always figured that she just DECIDED to become a private person. And I figured that her ongoing shifts in her content, PROBABLY shows that she's alive & well, over the years.)

Alright so in March, I found a FLOOD of newly-available photo's, THOUSANDS of new pics.
I took it as the most proof, ever, that she's alive and well, and involved in her web content.

I was very happy to see it, MOSTLY on the HUMAN LEVEL, as I interpreted her as basically announcing herself as alive & well.

PLUS: Her "new" photo's have a NEW EMPHASIS on wholesome, legitimate modeling, more than ever before.




And so... in a couple / few days: I downloaded nearly 800 PICS.






The Mystery Hut's THREE BLURRY PICS, in two months, is very EXTREME SECRECY.

I just hope that China will decide to show the world much, much more!

Especially that the world is very excited to see / learn more about the Mystery Hut and its area. And very impressed with China's lunar exploration.

So if they release MORE pics, the world will be MORE impressed by China's amazing accomplishments, and China will have MORE things to be proud of.

There's no factual basis for the serious argument and consideration that this shows some type of building. Rocks on the Moon and Mars have been misidentified and turned into objects for years.

originally posted by: Ectoplasm8
There's no factual basis for the serious argument and consideration that this shows some type of building. Rocks on the Moon and Mars have been misidentified and turned into objects for years.

I don’t want to be overly repetitive in the thread, but the 3 images, speak for themselves:

Self evident is that China deliberately CHOSE to publish the OP image, with that background imagery, on purpose.

Then one pic replaced the background with… purple paint can, and now the new image is simply avoiding the background.

It suggests that there is mysterious stuff in the background there, which China chose to reveal in one shot, and hide in two shots.

And the fact is that it looks like buildings, there’s even windows etc.

It’s also not a crazy idea, as it’s 100% physically possible to make buildings there, since 1969 landed men and craft there. There could have been secret space programs building stuff on the moon, ever since.

originally posted by: JamesChessman

originally posted by: Ectoplasm8
There's no factual basis for the serious argument and consideration that this shows some type of building. Rocks on the Moon and Mars have been misidentified and turned into objects for years.

I don’t want to be overly repetitive in the thread, but the 3 images, speak for themselves:

They do - they speak of jpeg compression artefacts.

Self evident is that China deliberately CHOSE to publish the OP image, with that background imagery, on purpose.

They chose to show the image. You are deliberately choosing to interpret the background as buildings, on purpose.

Then one pic replaced the background with… purple paint can, and now the new image is simply avoiding the background.

The new image is focussing on the thing they went to investigate.

It suggests that there is mysterious stuff in the background there, which China chose to reveal in one shot, and hide in two shots.

It suggests there are jpeg compression artefacts in there.

And the fact is that it looks like buildings, there’s even windows etc.

The fact is that you are choosing to see those.

It’s also not a crazy idea, as it’s 100% physically possible to make buildings there, since 1969 landed men and craft there. There could have been secret space programs building stuff on the moon, ever since.

It is 100% physically possibelo to build buildings there, except no-one has, and it would be a remarkable coincidence if all those buildings were black and on the horizon