Alien Artifacts On The Moon? Images from Russian Luna Probes!

Originally posted by underpassdweller

Originally posted by underpassdweller Similarly, I've wondered why our military satellites can supposedly ID a single person through 35 miles of polluted atmosphere here on earth yet they can't take a single decent hi-res picture of the moon. There's an obvious explanation for your bewilderment. You've confused Hollywood's 'Enemy of the State' (Will Smith) with reality. Such resolution remains physically impossible, while making some people (eg, bin Laden) THINK it's possible has tactical advantages).

Nevertheless, anyone can use satellite view on Google Maps and easily distinguish their car in the driveway of their house - seems anything the size of the lunar lander or bigger would be extremely easy to ID.

You're confusing the view from 6,000 ft, or sometimes 400 miles, with the view from 240,000 miles.

the thing that looks like a wheel gear with 3 round parts i think might be a transformer for an electrogravity craft. the other larger craft looking things may be scrapped shells of the craft whic hwas damaged and scrapped for parts? I so want to fly through space in a gravitic craft before i kick this lame world.

Originally posted by watchZEITGEISTnow
I remember in the 70s my dad showing me a national geographic detailing a satellite image that could zoom from space into the cell structure of a hand. So you are misinformed or BSing.

Let's find out who's doing which.

National Geographic back issues are a dime a dozen.

$500 says you can't find, scan, and post that image from that issue.

Do you accept -- today, before you look and fail? Today, in your confidence that what you remember is actually true. Right now.

Are are you less certain than you're pretending...?

Bet?

There are a few cool looking photos there. Some of then just look like dust and rocks but a couple do jump out at you. As for being weathered though, you need an atmosphere to do that!

Originally posted by JimOberg

Originally posted by watchZEITGEISTnow
I remember in the 70s my dad showing me a national geographic detailing a satellite image that could zoom from space into the cell structure of a hand. So you are misinformed or BSing.

Let's find out who's doing which.

National Geographic back issues are a dime a dozen.

$500 says you can't find, scan, and post that image from that issue.

Do you accept -- today, before you look and fail? Today, in your confidence that what you remember is actually true. Right now.

Are are you less certain than you're pretending...?

Bet?

All i know is what i know. I also know what I know is what you may or may not know. Knowing what you know, I know you know I know.

More rhetoric BS from a mind controlled NAZA employee.

Who the heck are you anyway? Are you still paid by NAZA?

Something smells fishy - and it ain't the bait you're offering.

wZn

Perhaps this is mentioned already (later) in the messages, but image 7 from Luna 9 seems to be a highly streamlined "needleship" throwing a shadow and connected with a tube at the exhaust end. Hardly "bits and pieces" from prior earthly missions! Perhaps that short cylinder-like object on the top of it is a part of the servicing of it? That means a support BASE! It seems to the only question is theirs or ours?

reply to post by mikesingh


let me just say that there is no way that is a alien artifact, it is WAY to much human engineering looking....and the photos supplied of our equipment look too similar.. nice find tho

reply to post by mikesingh


Those so-called "wheels" appear to be an auger such as used for making post holes and such as used in drilling large tunnels. This latter explanation would not be an unexpected find on the Moon or Mars once we get the capability to move such large items to those places--Wait a minute, I almost forgot. We have those magnificient triangles for those kinds of jobs!

I'm pretty sure satellites can take quite high resolution photo's from space. I was recently watching a program on the history channel, something about Noahs ark, where a russian satellite took quite a high res photo of Mt. Ararat and it was a crisp hi-res photo. I distinctly remember them saying it could photo a grapefruit from space, and this was with technology a decade or so old, from Russia... Weither or not that could translate to something that could take hi-res photo's of the lunar surface or not, I'm not sure but I would think it could.

As for the op's pic's. I once again fail to see how the leap to 'aliens' or 'alien tech' is being made. Sure, it appears to be legitimate debree of some sort, but considering the shape(s) which look all to humanistic, and the fact we are leaving debree behind all the time, not to mention the possability of space debree collecting on the moon, I just can not see where one makes the leap to anything non-human.

If I am missing something, please point it out!

How can anything get weathered on the moon? It has no atmosphere hence no weather. You can go there and all the stuff left there looks as good as the day it left earth. It just might be faded a little from uv rays. I agree completely with Easynow's theory. No weather,no rust,no decay, they are pieces of the lander itself. Russian Space control might have had a few vodkas when they were landing it and banged up the front end a little. No offense to my Russian brothers.

[edit on 2-4-2009 by cyberg]

Another great post Mike, what I would like to add is why would the russian government take pictures of parts of its own equipment left overs on the moon and then publish them. Surely they would want to publish all of the best photos and anything like parts that have fallen off their probe would have been deleted as not to show there tech was substandard. Think this was of interest and that is why it was leaked/published. I agree with mikes very many points that there is too evidence of a nasa consipracy. all of the covered up, blurred pictures, coded lauguage used by astronauts, sun bleached out piramids etc something is going on up there and it will eventually come out, hopefully in my lifetime.

In the very first picture Mike posted, at the left side, there seems to be a mismatch between the "ground" material such as two images were combined from different areas. So that brings the validity of at least that photo into question.

Originally posted by HomeBrew
I'm pretty sure satellites can take quite high resolution photo's from space. I was recently watching a program on the history channel, something about Noahs ark, where a russian satellite took quite a high res photo of Mt. Ararat and it was a crisp hi-res photo. I distinctly remember them saying it could photo a grapefruit from space, and this was with technology a decade or so old, from Russia... Weither or not that could translate to something that could take hi-res photo's of the lunar surface or not, I'm not sure but I would think it could.

As for the op's pic's. I once again fail to see how the leap to 'aliens' or 'alien tech' is being made. Sure, it appears to be legitimate debree of some sort, but considering the shape(s) which look all to humanistic, and the fact we are leaving debree behind all the time, not to mention the possability of space debree collecting on the moon, I just can not see where one makes the leap to anything non-human.

If I am missing something, please point it out!

Yes, but are you comparing, literally, a mountain to an molehill? Whatevery the auger-like thing, if a piece of our space equipment cannot be any larger than a school bus. Camera capabilities of the Soviets up to and including the Mars Phobos 2 mission of '89 was not that great. In fact, their images do not even compare to our images from the Viking missions of the '70s. So, as always, the question remains: What the hell is it...and the rest of them too. But they can't be dinky things.

reply to post by daersoulkeeper


I have to agree that these objects seem to be more human like than alien, not like I know what a alien engineer would produce, but the similarities are great.

To me there are two options, either this is left overs from previous secret missions or debris from other human made craft that have collided with the moon.

Given that the effect of gravity on the moon is less than that of Earth it is conceiveable that given enough force debris could be thrown out for many miles and in turn litter the surface. Damage from an impact could account for the appearance of the objects.

Either that or the Aliens, like many humans, have no problems droping litter everywhere.

Great find and an excellent picture…S&F



I’m not sure if this has mentioned so far, my apologies if it has…there appears to be a chunk missing from the near wheel, in the shape of a crescent, unless it was made originally that way by design. If it was not made that way and this object has a chunk missing could it have been involved in some kind of accident, assuming it’s from one our satellites or Luna missions, which I believe it is. Assuming this object is made of metal, I can’t imagine a piece of it braking off, from a collision with the moon lol


Just a thought.


- JC

reply to post by bloodsearch

The third option is that the USSR is having some fun and spiking their photos with photos of other things in remote regions on this planet.
They are not above a little disinformation.

Originally posted by ChemBreather
Well, IF they are what they appears to be

What's that? April fools joke? That's what it appears to be, y'see?

OK, ok. I accept there have only been 5 or so posts I have read up to, so far (Internos, I'm surprised at you!!) but I really hope the date is realised VERY SOON!!

Great April Fools gag though, Mike!

If this turns out not to be an AF gag, then I would be absolutely astounded!!

BUT... This thread has been completely ruined for me, just due to the date it was posted on.
I want to read through it but I would hate to waste so much time reading 6 pages, only to find that it WAS an AF joke.

EDIT: I have seen any suggestion that this ISN'T legitimate yet and Mike is still posting into the 2nd of April. OhhhHHHH what do I do!? What do I do!?!
Suppose I better read through it but if I find out it was a joke, right at the very end, well... I'll... erm... I'll think of something to do when I get some more time!!

[edit on 2-4-2009 by triplesod]

reply to post by mikesingh


Great find mike...

you know... I have a tremendous difficulty in figuring the scale for those images... I mean, sometimes I think I could be looking at something huge or really small...
looks can be deceiving, after all..

so can anyone help me out with this?

Thanks

Nice thread with great pics, my only question is if they didn't deliberately land the probe at the sight of a previously crashed earth made object (US, Russain) and the objects are not from the actual probe itself (ie just what constitutes 'soft landing' and how much could it afford to loose and still operate).

Then just how probable is it that the probe would land in an area with so much debris close at hand, I mean a failed probe that crashes into the Luna surface even a few hundred yards away from the touch down sight would spread so much debris in so many directions you just wouldn't be able to see it unless it was real close (not sure of the scale of those objects but they seem to be pretty close), I mean what sort of debris field are we talking about here, since I just dont know how you'd get that lucky, unless a previous crashed probe covered every square meter of the area with debris, and from what ive read the closest known area was 'miles' away.

So to me that makes me feel that either they landed it deliberately close to known (unknown or unrecorded for the public) debris from a previous probe (even then its pretty hard for me to believe they could get that many pieces in view), or they landed it and got real 'lucky' in what was close by and the debris isnt some of ours.

Hmm I just dont know, As to the comment some one mentioned about an inconsistency in parts of the image, unless we know how they generated the image it might be just an artifact from how they compile the final picture (ie lots of smaller images sent back to earth then stuck back together, some one mentioned it took 100 minutes or so for the entire image to get back).

Great all the same.

Sator:- To me looking at Panorama 2 - Left , id say its from ground level so those pics of the 3 wheeled spindle would be to me at least be taken looking on a downward angle so what ever it is its pretty damn close to the Probe (2-6 meters?, cant tell since just how high off the ground is the probes camera? if you knew that you could possible start to triangulate some rough distances).

[edit on 2-4-2009 by BigfootNZ]

Originally posted by mikesingh
reply to post by easynow

 

Hi easynow! Good find!

But as kryties mentioned above, these don't resemble the 'wheel' on the probe. Take a look...

Firstly, check out the 'antiquity' of the wheel. It looks hundreds of years old. Pretty weathered!

Secondly, the part on the probe does not have any discs.

Thirdly, the Moon artifact has a single spindle/axle.

But most important is the condition of that 'wheel' artifact that looks pretty old and corroded and partly covered with a layer of Moon dust.

Cheers!

Edited: i read the whole thread from start and saw Jom Obergs remarks on the similarity to the Lunokhod antenna. My guess its leftovers from a failed russian mission. Thread star and flagged, thank you, always interesting stuff from you Mike.

[edit on 2009/4/2 by reugen]