Google Moon - Even weirder than Antarctica?

Ok, so this is getting very odd.

I posted a thread yesterday about some of the oddities about google earth.

I became curious about the new google moon feature and started tooling around the google moon rendering of the south pole on the moon and how they are getting around the issues of rendering our south pole. I've been learning alot from some of the other members here.

I know my posts about Antarctica's uber-weird landscape is mainly explained by software glitches, which I readily concede, but whats up with this one?

So the weird line I found on Antarctica, which I drew the 777 mile radius circle around somehow appears on the moons surface of the south pole (see image below).

I have not drawn these lines on the moon ever, they are replicated from the Antarctic lines I drew.

Huh? What gives? Insights from the peanut gallery appreciated – I don’t mind being ignorant, just curious as to what might cause this “rendering error”?

Maybe someone else can try making notations on the south pole region of google earth and see if they are appearing on the south pole region of the moon?

I know.... nutz right?

Actually, it's any notations I make on the earth at any location. They also appear on both the moon and the mars renditions on google earth 5.0. Not specific to antarctic, any notation anywhere on the planet appears there too... why?

Thanks!

These are the original notes I made on google earth:



And this is how google mars is being rendered:

a reply to: androal

Is it possible that both places are actually the same place? Dimensional portals etc.

a reply to: androal

maybe the mapping used has a hard time stitching all the seems together in one central location...this seems to be where the distortion are coming from?

I think you may have found the entrance to the moon, proving once and for all that the moon is hollow.

Keep up the great investigative work.

a reply to: androal

This is a very interesting find. Nice investigative work. Will be following this thread with interest

Maybe google is using the same model? It would keep the cost down to make one sphere fit all.

But of course if they are using the same software but on different spheres that would probably be your reason.

a reply to: TEOTWAWKIAIFF

But the relative scaling matches the earth's?

Last I heard the moon is smaller than the earth.
Noy sure how big mars allegedly is...

a reply to: androal

allegedly

I couldn't answer that, only Ed (Christof) Harris can
" The Truman Show "
You live in a simulation

a reply to: androal

First, before I say anything else, welcome to ATS. I meant to tell you that yesterday, but I got sidetracked.

So...you've posted other threads highlighting oddities from Google Earth. Very intriguing, especially since you've now uncovered an apparent pattern there. I don't know jack about rendering or any of that technical whatnot, but I do have eyes and they are telling me that something does indeed look odd here. It could be the software or something technical like that, or it could be....what? I don't know.

However, I think you do know what...or at least you have a pretty good idea. You write as if you're puzzled by the oddities, but not too concerned by them...carefully skirting around the edges of Woo by offering vague, mundane possibilities while claiming to be perplexed by the whole thing.

However, you've taken an awful lot of time and effort over the past couple of days to present very detailed images and information for someone who has just a casual interest in these oddities. You even posted a long, involved thread in the introductions forum about the Antarctica map because you knew that was the only place you could post as a brand new member, and that indicates far more than just a passing interest in the subject. You posted all of this for a reason; you want people to pay attention.

The problem with that here is that this is a site dedicated to and chock full of oddities and perplexities. If you try too hard to make it seem like nothing, which is precisely what you are doing, people will react accordingly. So...why don't you go ahead and tell us what it is you're driving at with these images, what is so important that you couldn't even wait until you had five little posts to put this information up?

Just come out with it so we can have a discussion about what might be going on. You don't think it's a computer glitch, or you wouldn't be revealing patterns and a connection to the Moon and making long, detailed posts about it. Tell us what you think it is.

Also, less penguins.

I think its a developer issue. Could be adding the correct values to the software that Google is using

I have validated the KML (/gvvjlab) and opened it in Google Earth and it seems to be well formed (I think), but Cesium complains about a rectangle crossing the pole: "DeveloperError: Rotated rectangle is invalid. It crosses over either the north or south pole."

github.com...

There was a floating point error that happened if rectangle === Rectangle.MAX_VALUE and rotation === 0 that would make the values of north and south go just barely out of bounds after entering this if block:

github.com...

a reply to: androal

As stated, a sphere is a sphere. It is just a math construct. Size is relative in math terms (like Big O and Little O are just saying "large (or not as large) order of magnitude"). So rendering a sphere to any size you wish is easy once you make one (like clip art!). Sphere earth size, check! Sphere 1/6th the earth's size, divide by six (size of Mars) yet the description of a sphere does not change.

a reply to: TEOTWAWKIAIFF

And making flat images fit a sphere is problematic.

a reply to: Phage

So is viewing them! Hence you get "mega structure on Mars" threads popping up.

a reply to: tigertatzen

Wow, so much to respond to in that!

First let me thank you for taking the time to be thoughtful and articulate. Many have lost the courage to step forward and speak their mind of the truth they know. And it's the truth that I think many of us come to sites like this to seek.

In a word, that is my "agenda". Truth. There is nothing hidden in my intentions, I simply am observing this stuff and this forum gives me a place to vent what I'm seeing. The value in that comes from the catharsis achieved from sharing "secrets" at a group level, something that is not done regularly enough I think.

Jung said that all neurosis stem from our efforts to hide our secrets and suppress our emotions, whether consciously or not. I agree with that, as its been my experience. I think our governments and institutions are merely comprised of individuals just like you and me, and thus exhibit similar group patterns and dynamics as the individuals that comprise them. There is not enough truth telling at the individual level or group level of our society, and that's what I stand for - telling the truth.

One of the most valuable sources for truth I've found is from skepticism. Skeptics bring things to light that would not normally come to my mind. I value the skepticism of this forum, as it challenges me to think more clearly about truth.

I value your skepticism.

I hope to challenge others with my own.

In the end, I hope we both walk away more educated and perhaps with more truth, which usually involves some ego deflation along the way. I can handle that. I embrace it. Its what keeps life interesting, and to me, different than what the scientific community offers - which gets stale and clinical and misses the forest through the trees. I seek the forest.

I was trained as a strategist and performed that role for nearly 20 years, working on wall street. I had offices in midtown (45th and Lex) and in lower Manhattan (2 World Financial Center) on 9/11. It changed my life and I still grapple with the realities of that truth. It's haunting and this forum helps me vent subconscious, suppressed emotion.

That's whats going on as best as I know. I retired at 41 after a disabling event took part of my cognitive abilities away. I enjoy conspiracy stuff because it challenges my cognitive skills in novel ways that help me heal from multiple brain surgeries. This is why I put so much into these posts, not because of some secret agenda, quite the opposite , in truth.

My bent towards most conspiracy is skepticism - from every angle. Mostly of myself, as I can make myself believe all kinds of crazy things, and I seek truth. That comes from within and from without.

Challenge everything. This world is not what I think it is. In the end, come away with respect for others and myself. And ultimately, love more. Love more humanity and myself. In an odd way, that's what conspiracy means to me, and represents the agenda of my conscious mind. Reality exists beyond that.

"You write as if you're puzzled by the oddities"

"Tell us what you think it is."

Puzzled is precisely what I am, and a puzzle is what I think this is. I used to earn a living by helping people to take calculated risks (aka risk management) and solving puzzles. I'm taking a calculated risk by exposing myself here. As far as what I think the puzzle is: I've stated in a few messages, I think the government has legitimate reasons to keep certain things secret. I think that ordinary people are out there making some extraordinary decisions, and are not managing risk very well. I want to help us all (especially myself) heal from trauma caused by unintended consequences of others' risky behaviors and hopefully not cause too many more of my own accord.

For goodness sake. You got the explanation for Antarctica. Why would the moon be any different? They have to stitch thousands of images together. Of course there will be glitches.

And as has been explained to you, wrapping textures on spheres presents tons of problems

What we're told the moon is, might not be. Same with Antartica. There really isn't any actual proof of either of them exact what's fed to us by tptb, so how can you trust that? You can't. I'm waiting for definitive proof. Until then the jury is out.

originally posted by: bigpatato
What we're told the moon is, might not be. Same with Antartica. There really isn't any actual proof of either of them exact what's fed to us by tptb, so how can you trust that? You can't. I'm waiting for definitive proof. Until then the jury is out.

With the moon yeah we only know what we're told, but Antarctica? Nope, no secret there. Hundreds of people visit the South Pole each year. You too can go there if you have a spare mid 5 figures in cash burning a hole in your pocket.

the bottom line is that if they weren't trying to hide something on the moon. that or trying to cover up the moon, then they would have gone back decades ago many many times. It would be like christopher columbous getting to "the new world" and then saying "ahhh waste of time" and never going back.

So that only leaves 2 explainations. 1) a cover up of some sort 2) they never went