Structures/bases on the far side of the moon - where is ATS at

a reply to: ZetaRediculian

LOL...i like the ACES. Nice.

This is a topic I find very interesting and have done quite a bit of research into.

After years of study I'm convinced there is something on the far side of the moon's surface that is totally out of the ordinary.

The Clementine Moon Probe is one of the most telling pieces of evidence that decades of stories of things on the dark side of the Moon are real.

For those not aware, Clementine was satellite that mapped the lunar surface with pictures in the mid 90's. It mapped the entire surface of the moon. For years the pictures were available on a navy website if I recall properly before being moved. A huge amount of the pictures from the dark side of the moon had smudged objects, copy/pasted sections of other photos to cover up sections of image that were not to be seen by the public and a general piss-poor job of hiding whatever is on the back side of the Moon.

The pictures have since been moved to another website and edited quite a bit more to make the edits no such crap quality. This begs the question why were they edited to begin with? None of the front of the moon we can see was edited, only pictures from the back side.

This is the most famous picture of a clear and blatant smudge to hide evidence.
www.thelivingmoon.com...

There are many, many more pics of such things edited quite poorly. Mid 90's photo editing wasn't even close to what it is today.

Here's another high quality edit of something resembling a tower shape smudged.
www.marsanomalyresearch.com...

I used to go on the navy website that had the lunar browser and look up these images myself right off the government website. These aren't some hoax images, they were the same on the navy website! The edits were clear as day right from the source.

There have been a lot of things said by Apollo astronauts and other space personell about things on the back of the moon. They speak of towers, massive buildings kilometers in size and domes. Many people say the same thing and describe the same structures, all super massive in size.


The proof is slim, it's heavily covered up and not easy to access since we can't get a regular look at the far side of the moon.

a reply to: SovereignZuul

Those are some objective, unbiased, highly scientific sources you've linked there.


I'm convinced.

a reply to: draknoir2

www.thelivingmoon.com...

As said, the old lunar browser was taken offline and the images edited and a new version put up.

The only source I know of left is websites like I've linked.

The original source is directly off the Navy Military websites. Want to argue that? You going to dispute with me that the direct source right from the Navy is somehow compromised or biased?

Even the new 2.0 version of the browser map has huge sections of missing data.
www.nrl.navy.mil...

Post showing how the browser was taken offline.
www.davidicke.com...

originally posted by: SovereignZuul
a reply to: draknoir2

www.thelivingmoon.com...

As said, the old lunar browser was taken offline and the images edited and a new version put up.

The only source I know of left is websites like I've linked.

The original source is directly off the Navy Military websites. Want to argue that? You going to dispute with me that the direct source right from the Navy is somehow compromised or biased?

Even the new 2.0 version of the browser map has huge sections of missing data.
www.nrl.navy.mil...

Post showing how the browser was taken offline.
www.davidicke.com...

And as we all know missing data = alien structures.

Anonymous postings on the David Icke forum... nice.

originally posted by: Wolfenz

originally posted by: resistanceisfutile
So I have been recently reading about these structures and bases on the far side of the moon, as well as seeing these photos of odd shapes which look structural, and areas photo brushed out.

I'm am here to simply ask a couple of questions, and although I know there will be difference of opinions I am curious what the OVERALL opinion is on this.

- what is the consensus on ATS on this subject and photos, fake, real, etc ?

- what is the most compelling evidence to support there is an alien colony of the far side?

Hmm Far Side of the Moon .. use your best Judgement..


Apollo 11 photo reveals base on far side of moon

Written by Dr Michael Salla on July 7, 2013. Posted in exopolitics research, science and technology

exopolitics.org...

Michael Salla is a known hoaxer with a track record of steaming BS. Do not believe a word he says.

originally posted by: FeistyFemme
It's funny how on the daily I see people's comments saying things along the lines of "that's not true" or "they're just making it up" so my question to those people are why are u on here??? Why so quick to shut it down? Are u guys CERTAIN of this? If so, then by all means LAY THE FACTS, if not, then let us speculate in PEACE. So annoyed by some members on here. Go be a member of a skeptic site. DUECES.

Isn't ATS meant to be a skeptic site? "Deny ignorance"?

Look, we know there are no alien bases on the far side of the moon. The entire thing has been mapped in extremely high resolution. If you don't believe the Americans then you can check the Chinese images. Or the Japanese. Or the Indian.

The far side of the moon is not a mystery. We know more a lot more about it than we do about the bottom of the oceans on Earth.

originally posted by: FeistyFemme
It's funny how on the daily I see people's comments saying things along the lines of "that's not true" or "they're just making it up" so my question to those people are why are u on here??? Why so quick to shut it down? Are u guys CERTAIN of this? If so, then by all means LAY THE FACTS, if not, then let us speculate in PEACE. So annoyed by some members on here. Go be a member of a skeptic site. DUECES.

The fact that they are on here instead of a skeptic site suggests that they are willing to listen, no?

People decrying skeptics as close-minded eats up at least as much bandwith with non-substantive posts as the skeptics do.

a reply to: conundrummer

Well, from what I've observed the skeptics either ignore key points or just totally disregard it all together. I'm not going to completely say it's not true. That's like saying God isn't true when the fact of the matter is we just don't know.

Hey everyone.

I have enjoyed reading through the comments and opinion. I am still undecided. But will keep reading what I can and try to stay open on the idea.

The moon has already been determined to be a great place to build a space station and launch from, so in that respect it is logical to think advance beings from other planets would also station themselves there, if they were visiting Earth.

On the other hand I hope, and I believe we have our own bases on the moon,for purposes of war and communication with unknowns or earth based. In the future I could see a robot civilization building on the moon that the public is aware about. If we are to send humans to Mars we will need a base on the moon. I believe with our direction studying the universe, a publicly known base on the moon is well within the next 1-3 decade from commercial space companies.

originally posted by: game over man
The moon has already been determined to be a great place to build a space station and launch from .

i thought a space station is in space and not on the moon.. and how do you 'launch' a space station ?

originally posted by: FeistyFemme
a reply to: conundrummer

Well, from what I've observed the skeptics either ignore key points or just totally disregard it all together. I'm not going to completely say it's not true. That's like saying God isn't true when the fact of the matter is we just don't know.

I don't mean to be unkind but it seems to me from your comments that it is you who should be considering moving on to a close-minded forum and yap with those that share your distorted point of view about how skeptics think. And, BTW, god is a belief similar to santa claus and the boogeyman. You don't have to capitalize the g.

While the ATS motto is 'DENY IGNORANCE' , im sure they meant that people also USED THEIR BRAINS or Thinking Cap or Analytical Mind before BLINDLY BELIEVING EVERY KIND OF FICTION AS FACT..

originally posted by: FeistyFemme
a reply to: conundrummer

Well, from what I've observed the skeptics either ignore key points or just totally disregard it all together. I'm not going to completely say it's not true. That's like saying God isn't true when the fact of the matter is we just don't know.

I am even worse than that. I don't even bother reading these threads really and I have no idea why I even posted here to begin with. "Structures on the moon"? Yeah, you are right, I didn't give it a chance. I concede

a reply to: Rob48

Michael Salla is a known hoaxer with a track record of steaming BS. Do not believe a word he says.

I like Michael, having a background in conflict resolution is a good start for such conflicted topics. I find a lot of his work is well researched and not afraid to go where most reporters and investigators fear. Like many involved with such topics he acknowledges the various risks associated with the information, but presents it as he finds it.

originally posted by: kwakakev
a reply to: Rob48

Michael Salla is a known hoaxer with a track record of steaming BS. Do not believe a word he says.

I like Michael, having a background in conflict resolution is a good start for such conflicted topics. I find a lot of his work is well researched and not afraid to go where most reporters and investigators fear. Like many involved with such topics he acknowledges the various risks associated with the information, but presents it as he finds it.

You are much kinder than I would be. He presents the wildest spin and ignores or demonizes any contrary evidence and arguments, in my experience. He had no reluctance, when Neil Armstrong died, to use the astronaut's coffin for a soapbox for his theory that Armstrontg was a liar.

a reply to: JimOberg

For anyone to get involved in the topics of exopolitics it is dark and far out there. Lots of claims and counter claims with some interesting trends.

This is the first I heard about Neil Armstrong dying, I though the stories of him hitting people who thought the moon landing was a hoax was pretty cool, good on him.

originally posted by: kwakakev
a reply to: JimOberg

For anyone to get involved in the topics of exopolitics it is dark and far out there. Lots of claims and counter claims with some interesting trends.

This is the first I heard about Neil Armstrong dying, I though the stories of him hitting people who thought the moon landing was a hoax was pretty cool, good on him.

Armstrong did not hit anyone claiming that the moon landings were a Hoax.

That was Buzz Aldrin that did that.

originally posted by: kwakakev
a reply to: Rob48

Michael Salla is a known hoaxer with a track record of steaming BS. Do not believe a word he says.

I like Michael, having a background in conflict resolution is a good start for such conflicted topics. I find a lot of his work is well researched and not afraid to go where most reporters and investigators fear.

His work is not "well researched". It is incredibly poorly researched.

My first encounter with Salla was this article of his which claims that the Mars Curiosity rover photographed a "huge cylindrical UFO".

A few minutes of very basic research would have told him that this object was Mars' moon Phobos, photographed using long exposures: a possibility that he discards for no apparent reason.

I then looked up the rest of his articles and the standard of research doesn't get much better.

I don't understand people like that. Apparently they are not at all embarrassed about putting their name to total nonsense. I can only assume that they believe their readers are too stupid or lazy to do the research that shows it to be nonsense. Sadly he is probably right in most cases.