Weird Moon Anomaly! A Big UFO Or Artificial Structure?

Originally posted by mikesingh

Originally posted by internos
BTW:
Mike:It seems that you've found a sheep on the Moon (a space sheep?)
Don't worry about it, that's normal: i've found a dog on Mars.

Sheep? Wow, then that critter could be almost a mile high from hoof to horn!!

Lol! And errmmm....where's that 'dog' you mentioned? Can't make out hair nor hide of him!

BTW, those pics you posted in the post above are intriguing to say the least! Man, you really rock!

Let's see what comes up by way of explanations!

I've enlarged the portion of the pic of that elongated object you posted and added some filter enhancements. This is what comes up...

Now what the heck is that?

Cheers!

[edit on 25-9-2007 by mikesingh]

Mike, have you seen the last pic, the one with comparison?

Seriously, it looks very odd IMHO:

About the dog,sadly you're right:

I still miss the two right legs, one eye and one ear, but i hope to find them somewhere

Good work with the embossing.
What could it be?

[edit on 25/9/2007 by internos]

Awesome find mikesingh!! Another blue star for your collection there!

If this thing that, to me, looks like an obvious structure is a "glitch" as some people say... (a "glitch" with a perfectly straight edge and pointed corners, I might add) then I suppose they'd better pack the whole lunar image thing up completely and just toss it, as that means *none* of the information on it would be reliable. That just doesn't make sense to me.

I pulled up the coordinates too and in my opinion, it's real, and I wouldn't be surprised if there were more to be found as well! Of course, I'm sure there are certain people that would *like* for us to think it was a glitch, especially if some info accidentally got out to the public. "Oopsie! They weren't supposed to see that! Let's just tell them that everything odd they see on there is a mistake." :/ Haven't we been too gullible for long enough already?

I also have wondered if possibly someone in certain places is helping to get info out to the people. This particular image is not like "making imaginary animal pictures with clouds." This looks to be a bona fide structure and sorry, but yes... it looks like a pyramid, as one person stated earlier, or at least something that has a similar shape.

Like the theme of this site says.... deny ignorance. If it looks like a duck... sounds like a duck... walks like a duck... it's probably a duck. As the saying goes.

Thanks for sharing.


P.S. Very strange... I was typing my edit here and suddenly my browser just "quit" with no warning. Probably just coincidence. All my tabs came back up when I reopened the browser, except for the one with the moon image pulled up.

edited to further add my 1.5 cents.


[edit on 9/25/2007 by Sunalei]



[edit on 9/25/2007 by Sunalei]

reply to post by Sunalei


You're bang-on, Sunalei! Doesn't seem likely that the expensive equipment costing half a billion dollars can screw up so bad! If it is, then they'd better throw that muck out of the window and get some better equipment available off the shelf from that run-down wooden shack in Sub Saharan Africa! At least a pinhole camera would be more cost effective!!



Cheers!

Originally posted by internos

Ah..
Do you know if there are moon pics from the far side available somewhere (NOT made by Clementine of course.)?

Yes by Apollo but you need to scan old books that were printed BEFORE 1971...

The Russians... but they are hard to find...



I am also going to try an FOIA request to the DoD for those 1600 Lunar Orbiter images... it's worth a shot

[edit on 25-9-2007 by zorgon]

Originally posted by Sunalei
I also have wondered if possibly someone in certain places is helping to get info out to the people.

I have only one thing to say to that...

YES

Originally posted by internos
Maybe i'm wrong, but IMHO the shape of the object looks odd? I'll check.

It has been suggested by several people that Tsiolkovsky Crater hides the big spaceship that Norm Bergrun claims towed the Moon into Orbit. There are many anomalies surrounding this area.



The thing with spending days and weeks searching through thousands of photos looking for little tidbits of Data that THEY overlooked... is that you find a lot of ''could be', 'looks like' and 'glitches'... but once in a while diligence pays off...

Today my friend, you have earned that paycheck

Cigar shaped object ?

www.lpi.usra.edu...

I have sent this up to Jack (our image expert) I will post the results


The following image is also taken from the area near Tsiolkovsky...





[edit on 25-9-2007 by zorgon]

Originally posted by infamouskiller
Why don't we mark these long and lats and take pictures ourselves of these locations with a telescope

Can be done, if on the facing side. I have a 17" dia, dob I am trying to sell so I can get a good alt asmith scope with a drive to get crisp exposures at high resolution. Just a matter of time, some geographic targeting and effort.

GMM

Originally posted by Mclane

Originally posted by Brainiac
And before anyone replies, I'm an expert on this bit. I'm a computer game designer.

Being a games designer makes you an expert on stay awake drinks, late nights, annoying producers heavily trashed code!!

Said with a smile...

Actually game designers need to know about digital imaging as much as a scientist and will have more technical data and experience after a few years. I would not dis a game artist. Even with a smile.

Smiling wryly too.

reply to post by zorgon


Nice finds. I've never seen these.

Library of Congress is another place to troll for imagery associated with the space program and just about anything else.

Originally posted by ZeroGhost

Originally posted by infamouskiller
Why don't we mark these long and lats and take pictures ourselves of these locations with a telescope

Can be done, if on the facing side. I have a 17" dia, dob I am trying to sell so I can get a good alt asmith scope with a drive to get crisp exposures at high resolution. Just a matter of time, some geographic targeting and effort.

GMM

You will not be able to get any close up shots that will shed much light on anything, resolution will not be high enough for that from most all earth based telescopes. Otherwise, you would see pictures posted all the time that would end this debate one way or another.

reply to post by internos


Hi guy's, I'm not sure if this is off topic, but I wanted to ask Internos to do the voodo that you do so well on this mars crater!

From: ida.wr.usgs.gov...


co-ordinates: Geometry
Latitude 39.44°
Longitude 243.87°
Resolution * 5.98 meters/pixel
Phase Angle 29.60°
Incidence Angle 29.61°
Emission Angle 0.26°
North Azimuth 93.89°
Slant Range (km) 412.41
Spacecraft Altitude (km) 412.41
Sorry MikeS if this is oof, but I would value input on the metalic looking object in there!



[edit on 25-9-2007 by Havalon]

Originally posted by Havalon
Hi guy's, I'm not sure if this is off topic, but I wanted to ask Internos to do the voodo that you do so well on this mars crater!

From: ida.wr.usgs.gov...

co-ordinates: Geometry
Latitude 39.44°
Longitude 243.87°
Resolution * 5.98 meters/pixel
Phase Angle 29.60°
Incidence Angle 29.61°
Emission Angle 0.26°
North Azimuth 93.89°
Slant Range (km) 412.41
Spacecraft Altitude (km) 412.41
Sorry MikeS if this is oof, but I would value input on the metalic looking object in there!

[edit on 25-9-2007 by Havalon]

In b/w it's actually metalic-like: maybe due to the bad quality of the pic:
most likely obtained from this source: i've found it intriguing.


but, once compared to other crater's pics, its look is closer to them, ordinary we can say.

Here you'l find some related series:
www.nagii.com...
ida.wr.usgs.gov...

This is the best i managed to do with the pic you provided:

Every attempt to enhance it more, would upset the original shape.
Sadly, at that def, a small reflection could determine strages shapes...
The strange shape of the objects inside, looks to be determined by the shadow generated from the shape of the most external part of the crater.



Some links to the same crater (different pic):
www.msss.com...





View full-size processed and map-projected image
(lossy JPEG, medium quality, rapid download)
www.msss.com...


View full-size processed and map-projected image
(lossless GIF, best quality, slow download)
www.msss.com...

View full-size image, processed but NOT map-projected
(lossy JPEG, medium quality, rapid download)
www.msss.com...

View full-size image, processed but NOT map-projected
(lossless GIF, best quality, slow download)
www.msss.com...



Thank you for posting the pic: the crater, anyway looks actually odd. I'll try to find more pics.




[edit on 25/9/2007 by internos]

reply to post by internos


Thank you for your excellent work and the links
I was more intrigued by this anomoly (In the blue square) maybe I'm seeing things cast by shadows but do you see a reflection off the 'barrel'
for want of a better description.

(Man you are quick at this stuff!) Thanks.

reply to post by ArMaP


So far, I see a normal crater dynamic in most of these. I know, because I have illustrated craters and cratering for science and fiction work. Depending on an infinite variation in the impact event, angle of decent, mass of object, composition of regolyth and underlaying geology, any number or combination of factors are possible. It is not at all strange to find odd shaped craters. The squinty eye crater is a low angle impact and the other ones ejecta stain is also an indicator of a .shallow angle impact.

Collapsed sides of craters will vary as much also in configuration, depending on the "lifted" materials, density variations etc.

You can also see "skipped" craters that the meteoric body skipped across the regolyth a few times like a flat rock thrown on a pond. You can find such impacts on every cratered surface in the solar system.

I do see anomalies, but not in the cratering dynamics.

For those who do not know, a large part of cognition and visual pattern recognition is operating in humans all the time. We can see faces on anything sufficiently complex visually. That is because for survival and communication our brain has hardwired software to see these configurations, shapes and other visual data. That same capability can be utilized for recognizing other objects we might find fit. Not to say anything for those here that know this, but it is important to be objective and account for this natural visual acuity for pattern recognition.

I'll have comments after I read the full thread. Been chastized for not reading everything and being objective. Who wants objectivity when you are looking for the unknown???

GMM

GMM

Now, what about this pic from lunar orbiter?
IMHO, this looks to be some kind of a triangle-shaped "object".
Of course i could be wrong; but i still haven't found an explanation.
Looking for other pics of the same area.
Please, opinions needed about it!



www.lpi.usra.edu...

Originally posted by zorgon
It has been suggested by several people that Tsiolkovsky Crater hides the big spaceship that Norm Bergrun claims towed the Moon into Orbit. There are many anomalies surrounding this area.


The thing with spending days and weeks searching through thousands of photos looking for little tidbits of Data that THEY overlooked... is that you find a lot of ''could be', 'looks like' and 'glitches'... but once in a while diligence pays off...

Today my friend, you have earned that paycheck

Cigar shaped object ?

www.lpi.usra.edu...

I have sent this up to Jack (our image expert) I will post the results



[edit on 25-9-2007 by zorgon]

Zorgon, thank you for sending that pic to Jack.
I'm excluding from posting everything i can manage somehow to explane: when i can, i gather more than one pic of the same area in order to compare...


[edit on 26/9/2007 by internos]

Originally posted by mikesingh

Originally posted by zorgon

Mike and Internos You have just GOT to see this... I found the fossil rock!!! Its called "Humphrey"

Ok, this is kinda off topic, for the Mars Critters thread actually!!

Wow! That sure looks like a four-legged critter, fossilized perhaps! Now why has NASA brushed it out in the enlargement? It's clearly tampered with! And if there was nothing there in the first place, why was it circled/highlighted? You don't go around circling stuff for the heck of it! So there was something there which has been wiped clean.

And why is nobody talking about this impression-in-the-mud pic. I find it equally fascinating if not more than Humphrey!

So what made that very geometrically lined impression? A fossil with a backbone??

Cheers!

Can you give us the source for this? This is a terrestrial Trilobite fossil, right? You say it is from where?? I have full clean fossil here and have even modeled one in 3D for a science website. This is a crossection of the creature that dominated the life on Earth 300 million years ago, filled the seas. There are 17,000 species. All died way before the Dinosaurs.

www.trilobites.com...

I can't find it in the thread. Seriously, what planetary scientist would not see that?

GMM

reply to post by internos


Fasinating! I have tried to doa bit of enhancing myself! (and a rotation)
do you have the co-ordinates please?


Remember that "thing over my sisters house" thread? can't find it at the moment but will look!

I have some photos to show but I'm having trouble with 'Photobucket' .I was wondering if you guys could help me. What is that other photo upload website?

reply to post by Havalon


Found it, Hmmmm! makes ya wonder!

www.abovetopsecret.com...'




Nice find Int!

Originally posted by IgnoreTheFacts

Originally posted by ZeroGhost

Originally posted by infamouskiller
Why don't we mark these long and lats and take pictures ourselves of these locations with a telescope

Can be done, if on the facing side. I have a 17" dia, dob I am trying to sell so I can get a good alt asmith scope with a drive to get crisp exposures at high resolution. Just a matter of time, some geographic targeting and effort.

GMM

You will not be able to get any close up shots that will shed much light on anything, resolution will not be high enough for that from most all earth based telescopes. Otherwise, you would see pictures posted all the time that would end this debate one way or another.

Actually depending on how detailed a section you want you are right, but in good conditions, upper air stable, a mirror perfect to a fraction of a wave and a good optics if not a good camera on the scope, you could get some fairly detailed shots you can zoom to.

We had a 13inch mirror that was so perfect it was better than scopes twice the diameter. You could put the highest power Plossil 15mm and it was still sharp. We knew people who made them and picked our mirror from several and tested. Got the best. We'll find another too.

But ,yea, we can only confirm an object from so far through atmosphere, but detail would be luck, good equipment and knowledge of astrophotography. Good conditions just happen, and some I have seen that had such good condition rival orbital versions.

GMM