Ruins of Ancient industrial Base City or Spaceport near Newton Crater.

originally posted by: LABTECH767
which needed to be chained down to four steel reinforced concrete posts which still exist to this day as evidenced by the photographs in his book

Those were simply supports for a cooling tower....

over hambourg allied bombers after late 44 had to fly over five thousand

What are you babbling about now? The US flew between 25,000 and 30,000 feet. For the RAF the typical height is around 20,000. Mosquito pathfinders and bombers often operated at 25,000 to 35,000 feet depending on mission. Pathfinders using OBOE tended to fly towards the upper end of that range for example. The Germans likewise flew at about 20,000 to 25,000 feet. So why claim they wanted to fly below 5,000 feet?

a reply to: hellobruce

Hmm let me see the shuttle program was not top secret but it was the cold war and the technology's which went into it were classified, now maybe top secret was the wrong phrase to use but certainly classifies, the soviet's still got there grubby little hand's on the data though as there almost identical clone the Buran showed, it was a clone of the space shuttle but intended to place bomb's in space and to use as an orbital bomber, check it out.
I am quoting the altitude from memory of a book I read over ten years ago so I may be off on the exact specific fact's but it told how allied bombers making run's over the city experienced a number of malfunctions including engine failure as did the german civilians themselves and only diesel engine's would work (because as you know they do not have spark plug's) and it was found that flying above a specific ceiling they were not affected. I think the story was also in that book "The Hunt For Zero Point" and those chains had nothing to do with a cooling tower, they were made to hold something down not up and are still there standing in the middle of a forest.
Another story I also can not remember clearly so there may be some error in my recollection of this one so I urge you to buy or borrow the book form a library, I lent my copy to my brother and have not seen it since (he broke up with his wife at about almost the same time), told of an experiment which was witnessed in which inanimate object's then later plant's and finally subjects (prisoners) where put into the middle of a circular apparatus and a liquid resembling mercury but glowing as it was increased in speed of flow around them.
The inanimate object's turned to dust
The plant's turned grey then turned to ash
The prisoners were liquified by whatever the energy or radiation it produced was.

The guy Nick Cook used to write for janes so though he may not be a scientist and he was writing to sell a book (with the known von danikan pit fall there *** ) he nevertheless did his homework and it was I found a compelling read but at time's very technical which as you know makes sections dry.

Anyway before you go along the same path as several others of deridingly dismissing data I have provided to the best of knowledge do your own homework please and try not to belittle people it has a way of coming back on you eventually and actually makes you appear to have a negative agenda of some kind.

Best of wishes, Read that book.


*** Von daniken was cought out lying after claiming the existance of platinum disc's with alien information on in a cave, disc's which never existed in a cave he never visited, I do not remember the full story but remember how I was angry already as he had destroyed a whole area of alternative research in one fell swoop with his charlatain tactic's, indeed his book's touched a subject a true author Maurice Chatalain had also wrote about and eclipsed mister chatalains more intelligent work, indeed there are many on this site whom even use there bias grounded in the lies of von danikan to deny a whole subject the consideration it rightly deserve's, (probably former daniken fans angry over being made fool's of).

Well an old friend i had made from China recently hinted that the Chinese have found proof on the moon. I have not heard from him in a while though. New restrictions are apparently in place there. For some reason he is able to get out when he gets to visit Hong Kong. Never understood why lol.

He told me their moon rover had found some things. They have also found large deposits of helium 3, and will look room exploit their finds within five years. They are not going to be a player, they want to own it and are going after it in a big way.

They making plans for both the moon and mars and plan on permanent presence within five to ten years.

It would be wonderful if they would share some of what they may have learned. I don't think we will see close up hd pictures of what they found.

The Bot

Interesting pics and thread. Pareidolia (/pærɨˈdoʊliə/ parr-i-doh-lee-ə) is a psychological phenomenon involving a vague and random stimulus (often an image or sound) being perceived as significant. These aren't all random and vague though so therefore, not all Pareidolia.

Not every picture of an anomaly or artifact is Pareidolia. If that was the case, we wouldn't have any archeologists now, would we? These 'Skeptics' crack me up.

a reply to: amazing

I and others fully know what that is, but as for stimulus why did that make me think of pamela anderson in her bay watch day's.

Yes I see thing's that others do not and I also look very carefully to make certain it is not an illusion, I am mono optical with a bad eye on one side (my right) so tend not to see stereo images at all and all the world is essentially a two dimensional image to me so I tend to better at discerning a two D illusion from a real object as that is how I see the world, OK these are photographs but for me it is a hell of a lot more like being there than the average stereo vision person.

originally posted by: dlbott
They have also found large deposits of helium 3, and will look room exploit their finds within five years. They are not going to be a player, they want to own it and are going after it in a big way.

Already been done

I'm going to be fair here and say that I hadn't actually realised a key area of inconsitency being argued was a result of the bad scan - I hadn't spotted that there was that difference. Well done to Rob48 for explaining it better.

This doesn't change the fact that the panoramas posted have been publicly available for years, long before the internet, and existed in non-digital formats that anyone can buy. Anyone can search eBay for copies of National Geographic - the Apollo 17 issue goes for about £10 when you include postage, cheaper if ou're in the US. They're well worth getting because the quality of the photographs are excellent. The Apollo 17 PSR of mine was an eBay bargain at £17, usually they go for at least double that. They are well worth looking at because by and large the scans are not of good enough quality to make any sense from the photographs.

I've been browsing lunararchaeology this morning and it exhibits the three characteristics that I believe typify any conspiracy discussion and that prevents their arguments from being criticically analysed.

Firstly, they argue that if there isn't the proof out there, it's because it's been hidden and it's top secret. They know about it obviously, but they don't actually have any evidence of it. The classic example of this is their claim there are top secret Hubble images of the moon that have never been seen. Hubble's telescopes are completely inappropriate for observing the moon, it's like a long sighted person using short sighted glasses. Hubble has imaged Taurus-Littrow, but you can do almost as well from a decent terrestrial telescope.

Secondly, what has been published is all edited and modified. How they know this without copies of the alleged originals is not made clear other than by referencing supposed whistleblowers with dubious credibility.

Thirdly, there is what I always call the "Emperor's new clothes" gambit. You can't see the evidence because 'they' have conditioned you not to - you're not smart enough see? The website authors, however, are clever because they can see it. In order not to feel stupid, you then go along with whatever claptrap they come out with. Ironically, this is exactly what they claim NASA (who always own and control everything space related despite there being many other countries with some kind of space research programme) have been doing to the public. Scientists are just baffling you so you can't even see what's under your nose - listen to us, we're smarter and we won't use long words.

The site goes to impressive and very thorough lengths to prove their point, but unfortunately because they are starting with a conclusion and bending the evidence to fit it they make lots of mistakes.

At least they acknowledge we went to the moon, so I have slightly more respect for them than people who claim we didn't.

originally posted by: Rob48

...and you will see that "Apollo 20" was just an extremely poorly done hoax job/art project using Photoshopped versions of existing Apollo photography.

Apollo 20 is as hoax as the fact that the Russians or better the Soviets went to the Moon.


LABTECH767,

i already knew the info you posted but i had no clue of the specific webpages and videos. Thank you very much! If you have more info about the subject, please do me the favor and post them. Thank you once again.

As for the Philadelphia Project, there were some people in the ATS who called that a hoax too. But i tell you, you must pay a visit to the ship! I had the chance to be near the specific ship for 15 days while i was in the army and it is not a lie that everyone, EVERYONE, who passes a few days next to that ship will hear strange noises coming from every corner of it, noises which are very familiar to human whispers and voices.

originally posted by: JesusChristwins

originally posted by: Rob48

...and you will see that "Apollo 20" was just an extremely poorly done hoax job/art project using Photoshopped versions of existing Apollo photography.

Apollo 20 is as hoax as the fact that the Russians or better the Soviets went to the Moon.

Well no, it is a hoax in the fact that it was an art project by a Frenchman, who admitted the fact a few months later. Unlike the real missions to the real moon. Distinguishing fact from fantasy not your strong point?

As for the Philadelphia Project, there were some people in the ATS who called that a hoax too. But i tell you, you must pay a visit to the ship! I had the chance to be near the specific ship for 15 days while i was in the army and it is not a lie that everyone, EVERYONE, who passes a few days next to that ship will hear strange noises coming from every corner of it, noises which are very familiar to human whispers and voices.

You were in the army in the 1940s? Or was this on a trip to Greece?

a reply to: JesusChristwins

The scientists involved may have played with something they did not understand, I have only heard the story and seen the dramatized sci fi movie but do believe it really happened, it sound's haunted from your description but could the souls of the men who were killed in the experiment be trapped there somewere in between dimensions.

And to onebigmonkey, You know as do I that science DOES NOT have all the answers and too many people are making it there god (the last think a scientist should ever do as true science is about observation and analysis not empty conjecture based on what is imagined to be there), I have not approached this from a scientific stand but instead from a search for information and a sharing of what little I have to give, yes most conspiracy theorys are based on a house of card's but such usually fall by the way side and yet the fascination and belief there is something there is a fundemental trait deeply ingrained in our pshyche, cavemen could not fly yet the worshiped people in the sky, most religons have talk of wars between the god's, in egypt the under world is actually in the heavens and they believed there heaven to be in the duat or as well call it the constellation of Orion, they regarded the milky way as a heavenly river and the nile as an earthly reflection of it, so where did this ancient belief that we a species whom have never had wing's, never evolved to fly and whose entire existance revolved around matters at ground level should have developed a strong emotional belief shared across oceans by un connected people's some of whom even claim we came form there (there is a pacific tribe I think in indonesia but can not remember there location so maybe some other reader can fill that in, anyway they build there houses with upturned eaves and say they are modelled on ships that brought there ancestor's here from another world They are not fake whatever the source of there belief, what about the dropa stone's could there be any voracity to that tale).
How did it become entrenched in our psyche and you yourself with your interest are no different there.
Maybe some of my fact's are skewed or even wrong and maybe some of your's are skewed and even wrong but we have to agree there is a mystery here, Nasa is a good agency and sadly they are cut back even though it was the very space race which created the technology boom of the 1960s-1980s only for our corportate greedsters to outsource manufacturing to the chinese whom are now reaping it's benefits more than our own nations (but then in armstrong's word's FOR ALL MANKIND).

I never actually believed the apollo 20 story because a saturn rocket to the moon could only realisticaly have been launched at cape canaveral as that was the only capable facility in the word at the time and it would have been massive new's, I even believe the astronaut's themselve's may possible have missed this artifact's in the image's such as the seemingly ancient badly degraded astronaut lying on it's back, they would not have noticed it or if they did kept silent perhaps even for our own good and I believe they where good men especially jim irwin, and they were brave men.
However the artifact that is shown as the crashed alien mothership in the fake apollo 20 video is real and that is what the thread I put up about it a while ago is talking about, a concerned person put the original image's up on a video and even said that the apollo 20 film was dis information, Now some forms' of dis information like the alien autopsy video (of which it was arguably a clone) and von danikan's made up information are self generating and for someone whom takes it seriously like myself they whom deliberatly create such are actually worse than they whom may know and be keeping secret information that PERHAPS we should also be allowed to know (PERHAPS as I and you do not have a real clue as to there motivation but most of the personell at NASA and even the AIR BRUSH MONKEY's and they were real, were actually good people) but like anybody else I am like a cat with a string and my eye's have gone very wide, I want to know.
Is that a conspiracy theory.

a reply to: LABTECH767

However the artifact that is shown as the crashed alien mothership in the fake apollo 20 video is real

Only in the sense that it is a real hill/valley combination that looks "cigar shaped" in certain sun angles.

Here is the Apollo 15 "mothership" followed by a higher resolution view rotated to have north at the right (angle is not quite the same but close enough)...





As you can see the sun angle is almost exactly opposite in the newer image, but you can still see the landform.

To find it, search for crater Izsak on the LROC map then head due north, just past the prominent "figure 8" crater and you will see it.

Link to map here

originally posted by: WakeUpBeer
I have yet to see any convincing images for structures or artifacts on the Moon or Mars, or the ancient alien hypothesis. Very intriguing and even entertaining ideas but in the realm of science fiction. The main problems I have with these conspiracies is the huge lack of credibility the people behind them have and the lack of real evidence. Coincidentally, Coast to Coast AM promoting these easily dis-credible ideas is what made me realize the truth means nothing them.

Show me something solid and I'm willing to reconsider.

Amen! You'll be waiting a long time for "something solid" since almost every photo taken of the moon has been viewed by the public and almost all of the photos are on the internet. High res. photos are the best source and nothing has been shown that is not natural. In order to attract an audience the "evidence" is always in grainy, overpixelated photos which have certain features colored to make them stand out since they are not sharp enough to begin with. Or they're blown up beyond mondo totally destroying their imagined artifacts.

Almost every "anomaly" that I found and presented here was explained by a few knowledgeable members. But at least mine were in clearer photos and were free from blur and/or pixelation. I was not impressed with the video and the footage should be processed to lighten and sharpen it, as they did with the Zapruder film.

originally posted by: LABTECH767
And to onebigmonkey, You know as do I that science DOES NOT have all the answers and too many people are making it there god (the last think a scientist should ever do as true science is about observation and analysis not empty conjecture based on what is imagined to be there),

As a scientist (or at least one with 2 science degrees and therefore a science training) I am aware, as all scientists are, that science is a method not a religion. It is a process by which we arrive at results, and from logical argument based on those results, answers. Science has not provided all the answers, nor will it ever, but it is the process by which answers are reached.

I have never met a scientist who regards science as a god, but I know many who have absolute faith in the method. Science is the process that has allowed humanity to challenge doctrine and indoctrination and on many occasions has allowed one theory to be replaced by another.

As far as I am concerned the people at lunararchaeology are using empty conjecture based on what they imagine is there. They have decided on the outcome and manipulated the data to fit. That is not science, it is fraud.

Going back to their source material, sadly the postage is too much for me but it would be a good bargain for anyone in the US:

www.ebay.co.uk...

I will accept that as a good argument Rob as there is insufficiant images to verify or dismiss either argument due to the light being at only one or two angle (I am not up on how many times it was imaged from orbit).

And one big monkey as a victim of Criminal fraud I do not like being called a fraud, an opinion is equal in all regard's until being proven wrong and as you may remember the old addage a theory can never be proven but it can definitely be disproven, now in today's science many modern physicists are stretching there science into the realm's of pure conjecture would you not agree and though they are great argument's I myself use on occasion quantum reference and chaos theory are simply opt out's for inconsistant data and irregular outcome of experiment's which are used in place of admiting the model they are using is not yet complex enough to model the factor they are trying to theoretically explain, given this they are essentially going on faith as are they whom use there model's in there own equations and calculations.
Therefore I put it to you that they are indeed treating it not in a scientific fashion but are replacing estimable accurate data with conjecture and belief, perhaps not absolute belief as the term used is often best estimate or best projection with the given data if these assumptions are correct.
Back to that rock and to some more conjecture in an unscientific manner by myself, remember that the image you have is a photographic reproduction that was released by NASA so it is not the actual image no matter how close though I have no doubt it is better than what I have seen in pixelated digital format as with mose analogue images, Rob's explanation of the split and merge is the best I have ever heard and truly threw me but I stand by the image of the body as not a trick of light and shadow,.
Is it not possible that a planetary system about half to two thirds of the way along the spiral arm of a major galactic arm may at one time have been visited or even been a nice habitable stop on a route from the outer galaxy to the element rich core for a race whom chose or perhaps needed due to perhaps use of hydrogen fuel to use the stars as stoping point's along the way and could such an ancient civilization have not left one or two traces, perhaps suffered tragedy's though for me the remains and I will call them that as that is what I see, show evidence of violence or warfare.
You have a strong opinion but until this theory is absolutely proven wrong it remains valid and there has as yet been no such absolute proof, with in my opinion the exception of caseys rock which is still mighty wierd as shown by Rob and yourself and I also see you did not address the reason for the cultural emphasis since our earliest known history toward the stars and sky and the beliefs prevalent among many indiginous (Or are they / we) groups around the world, I have already on another thread discussed the possibilty of viral propegation of genetic material and how pathogenic and other trans species virus over time may homogenize the genetic material of disparate species to evolve a better shared environment for there own propegation, a virus not only infects it's host but since it is made up of the materion of it's previous host even though it is a copy of the virus which infected that host it may include dormant or otherwise genetic material form those previous hosts and if it fails to replicate then integrate it into it's new host, etc.
Therefore as a scientist (you did not say what particular disciplines) you can definitely see the potential for integration of similar but alien genetic material into a enclosed system and the ecosystem recalibration that may take an indeterminate time but will definitely take place given time along with the multitude of possible implications.

I'm pretty sure structures and artifacts on the Moon and Mars have been proven false time and time again. I personally don't think you're a fraud but I do believe you're clinging to bad arguments because you want to believe. Sure anything is possible but that shouldn't be used like a life preserver.

That's just my opinion!

If there are indeed structures on the Moon wouldn't it be easy enough for amateur astronomers to point there telescopes up there and get pictures? I'm by no means an expert in this area so I don't know if it's even possible to get the kind of view you would need to see the surface of the Moon from Earth with enough detail. I can't see why not though. Maybe Rob48 can chime in on that.

P.S. Richard C. Hoagland is the hyper-dimensional face on Mars!

originally posted by: WakeUpBeer

That's just my opinion!

If there are indeed structures on the Moon wouldn't it be easy enough for amateur astronomers to point there telescopes up there and get pictures? I'm by no means an expert in this area so I don't know if it's even possible to get the kind of view you would need to see the surface of the Moon from Earth with enough detail. I can't see why not though. Maybe Rob48 can chime in on that.

Well a large "amateur" telescope will only resolve objects down to about 1km across on the moon. And the "mothership" illusion is actually on the far side of the moon so we wouldn't be able to see that from here.

But the entire moon has been imaged by orbiting satellites down to a resolution of just a few metres, so any supposed "anomalies" can be checked against high-res maps. Changing sun angles can easily fool the eye and make hills and craters look artificial.

a reply to: Rob48

Thanks for the info. I was trying to think of a source that couldn't be accused of editing out these proposed cities etc. I assumed telescopes from Earth would be powerful enough, since the one time I've looked through a one I was able to see Saturn and even a distant galaxy (Andromeda I think). Absolutely amazing!
I should really do some research and invest in a good telescope.

When I see such images I Always need juuuuuuust a little more resolution. But those straight lines and yhose close to perfect half circles give me a sense there could have been man or alien made structures..

An other thing... when this camera is scanning the surface I see some kind of parralel lines on the ground. Well.. it is easy to imagine things which are not there,...or are they?

Always interesting to see such claims..

originally posted by: WakeUpBeer
a reply to: Rob48

Thanks for the info. I was trying to think of a source that couldn't be accused of editing out these proposed cities etc. I assumed telescopes from Earth would be powerful enough, since the one time I've looked through a one I was able to see Saturn and even a distant galaxy (Andromeda I think). Absolutely amazing!
I should really do some research and invest in a good telescope.

Well, Saturn and Andromeda can both be seen with the naked eye. (Andromeda needs dark sky but Saturn is easily seen as a pretty bright "star" - and you only need a very small telescope to make out the rings.)

a reply to: Rob48

And why do conspiracy theorists always use "whom" instead of "who"? Labtech must be the third one with this particular stylistic quirk I have come across in recent days. Do they think "whom" is what educated people say?

To whom it may concern;

Let's just have the facts please ma'am, and leave out the childish attacks...go and eat a snickers or something, you're turning into a right diva.