Why doesnt Nasa have any detailed pictures of the Moon anomally Shard?

reply to post by AthlonSavage


Is That on The "Dark Side' of the surface?
If you have the coordinates I'm sure with the tech available today
and amateur astronomer could capture pix of that.
Especially if it is on the visible side of Luna.

Originally posted by Phage
reply to post by jaffer44

 

What if they destroyed the tower at some point since origanal pictures were taken.

That was bound to be said.

But what if it is just a photographic flaw? One of many others on the image. Why is that so hard to accept? There is nothing that says it is not.

You are correct
I wasnt saying that i believe it lol
Just that there are so many variables here i don't think anyone can say they no it's there or not.
Because you believe NASA would never put out bad infomation you think you know the answer.
Yet a couple of ineligent posters have shown good reason why NASA may have to lie wether they want to or not.

What about the maps made by the Chinese, Japanese, Indian, European, and Soviet lunar orbiters?

Why do the shardophiliacs continue to black out any discussion of THEM?

reply to post by Helious


"Everything should be made as simple as possible, but not simpler."

I don't care for mathematics as a dead cert on everything that has ever existed. That's not to say that I think it's Bullshazzle or doesn't have a place here, it's just that it is often wrong or over complicated.

Like the guy who made the above quote.... he was wrong about a few things.

I expanded on my previous post by the way. Though I don't think I need to teach you to suck eggs.

~ CrzayFool

reply to post by jaffer44

Because you believe NASA would never put out bad infomation you think you know the answer.

What I believe about NASA has nothing to do with it. I know of no statement from NASA about the "shard".

I can see that the "shadow" from the "shard" is wrong. This means it is not a tower.
I can see that there are many other flaws in that image and others.
I have taken the time to learn about how the image was produced and understand how that process can and did result in flaws.
I have every reason to think it is a flaw in the image and not an actual object. Can you provide a reason for me to think otherwise?

This post is hilarious.

I mean, go grab a coffee and sit down and really think about it.

The answer if the french got to the moon before the Americans and put a bigger Eiffel Tower there. It's the only logical explanation unless you believe in aliens who are too scared to show themselves to a people incapable to doing anything about it.

Mind you, I knew a guy who thought he was an orange and used to try and peel himself. He was in the same hospital as one who said he's talked to aliens. The similarity in nature and actions from these two was identical....although the one who thought he was an orange was far more convincing.

What if the United States government was threatened with the destruction of our country if they continue to investigate them moon. So we stoped sending people there. Perhaps they are trying to keep us all alive. Why would this alien race choose to not expose themselves to those who could do nothing about it? What if they are not supposed to be their either. Like an illegal outpost and if they are found out, they will be in trouble. Of course, we do not know that they really cannot destroy us, so those in charge do everything in their power to eliminate all proof. Perhaps the Chinese were not in the loop about the possible danger of going back to the moon. Perhaps they dont care or disbelieve. I have no idea what is going on in space. I do know just the age of the universe as well as the enormity of it, dictates that there should be interstellar traveling species eventually. I mean hell, it was only a couple of hundred years ago that we started making machines to move us around rather than use animals. Think where we could be in 1000 years.

Why would anyone believe anything that comes out of NASA?
They are a government administration wrapped up with politics, special interests, and national security. Everything that goes through that organization is vetted, combed and preened before public consumption.Just saying, if credibility is an issue on this thread, NASA is going to lose and to prove that point you can look at this thread www.abovetopsecret.com...

Why believe NASA when they get caught doing stuff like changing global warming temperature archive data
I bet no one at Nasa would have thought that people would back up their data. I guess its true, once its on the internet, its there forever

And then there is this buried video and And thanks to ChoaticOrder for uploading this video. www.youtube.com/watch?v=FTn4bjpPocQ Its amazing that technology is growing at a faster rate than the ability to keep secrets and IMO it makes it a whole lot harder to dismiss everything and say, nothing to see here. Its probably a big reason for the push for cloud computing, so that the internet can be scrubbed of data conflicting with the official story and it won't ever come back because there won't be any independent storage. I bet in the not to distant future there will be an attempt to criminalize what ChoaticOrder did here. And the whole idea that the video somehow was taken of a different location that the original picture of the shard... would that not mean that there are two shards on the moon. A picture of the first and a video of the second. See what I mean, being in a different location does not disprove what you see on the video.

I think the OP has a very valid point, if he is not satisfied with the state of the evidence from NASA, then he is not satisfied. Anyone else can say what they want, but it won't change the fact that he is not satisfied. Demanding information is the first step towards the real truth and away from the official truth as dictated by others.

A few things I've learned from this thread:

1) If you see something in a blurry, pixilated video of the moon.. it MUST be there.
2) If NASA has no information on said anomaly, and no pictures.. they MUST be covering something up.
3) Apparently, no other space agency exists on earth except NASA.
4) There is a huge 1.5 mile tall round topped mystery thing on the moon, and in the entire history of space observation, it has never been discovered or found until someone watched a YouTube video and "discovered it".

Forgive my sarcasm here.. but much like the "Moon landing was a hoax" nonsense, I just don't buy into this. Phage has clearly given locations and links and references to basically state this mystery "shard" does not exist. And all I keep hearing from people who don't believe him is he is wrong, NASA is lying, he didn't watch some amateur YouTube video, etc etc etc.

How about this.. why doesn't someone TRY and contact NASA about the location. Or maybe try and contact one of the other hundreds of observatories across the earth. Maybe someone would have some information on this "mega mystery structure".

To seek the truth one must look past there own leanings.
To see the truth one must see it with there own eyes.
To know the truth is to have only after opening ones eyes after having cleared the fog of lies.
Just because you see the sky dose that mean you can touch it or its even really there?

Originally posted by NeoVain

Originally posted by pacifier2012
It might be for the same reason there is no NASA picture of the 'crashed' space ship on the other side of the moon.... it doesn't exist?

There is certainly more proof to the contrary than there is proof that it "doesn´t exist". No idea how you got those stars for such an ignorant post, on a forum where the motto "deny ignorance" is held in such high regard.

(talking about the tower here, not the spaceship)

edit on 8-2-2013 by NeoVain because: (no reason given)

It's because the self-proclaimed "skeptics" on this site jump on each other's band-wagons. It seems like the "skeptics" can pretty much say whatever they want when trying to "debunk" something without fear of reprisal from the moderators. I'm not mad about it I just think it's sad that a few mods cant give fair treatment to both sides of the arguments.

I dont know how someone can say this object doesnt exist, I think there is enough proof of that. As to what it is I think we still need further evidence.

Originally posted by dieseldyk
Why would anyone believe anything that comes out of NASA?
They are a government administration wrapped up with politics, special interests, and national security. Everything that goes through that organization is vetted, combed and preened before public consumption.Just saying, if credibility is an issue on this thread, NASA is going to lose and to prove that point you can look at this thread www.abovetopsecret.com...

That NASA is a gvt administration "wrapped up with politics and special interests and national security" might certainly be true, but I ENTIRELY disagree w/ your statement that NASA would lose when it comes to credibility.

When I evaluate credibility of a source and what they are saying, I am looking at the source, their competence, explanations etc.

I am terrible, terrible sorry, but 95% of the people who *attempt to* make a point in regards to some conspiracy theory (such as faked moon landing, Mars/Moon artifacts etc.) have NO CREDIBILITY and NO EXPERTISE in this matter whatsoever.

* Some people are examining footage or images where it's clear those people have no knowledge whatsoever about basics of image editing, they don't even know what JPEG artifacts, dead pixels etc.... are. HECK, many of those people cannot even SPELL right. Talk about credibility!

It seems to be "hip" to be "against" NASA and "the government" and for me its clear that many folks don't even CARE about evidence or credibility because their mind is already made up. (Example: If those people WOULD come across images which do NOT show this "shard" there can only be one conclusion for those people: That the images must be "fake" or "photo-shopped"...so REGARDLESS of contrary evidence produced you would sitll believe in your conspiracy theory - in fact use the *contrary evidence* as "proof" that your theory is right. Eg. "Image is missing shard: Proof that the images must be photo-shopped!"

Most of the people who are so "against" NASA are terrible incapable to produce evidence, its not only the lack of knowledge they would require to even make CREDIBLE or convincing statements in the first place, but I personally never have problems following an explanation of an official source, such as NASA, in regards to an explanation - because I CAN FOLLOW THEM with my own logic and verify them, plus when I accept THEIR explanation (I am sorry!) I can understand it and it makes sense - and this has *nothing* to do with politics or whatever special interest NASA might have.

And this is NOT the case when I try to understand the reasoning of someone making up some theory about faked Moon/Mars pictures or whatever, be it some person here on the forum or probably someone more known.

Example...when you research the "Moon shard" or "Moon tower", the first hits on Google you are getting are Richard Hoaxland's enterprise mission site, this is were LIKELY the entire hype originally comes from.

He is STILL pictured with his "Mars Face" from 1976 and STILL the same crap on his site which has already proven wrong multiple times over - so again, talk about CREDIBILITY. The other source on a google search for the moon shard was David Icke's site, a man who believes in reptilioids.

Now....guess WHAT side here I'd consider to have more credibility?

HINT: If you want to be convincing about making a theory about an picture with an "artifact", UFO etc. on an image or video, the least thing i'd expect that you demonstrate a knowledge about things such as image editing, optics or whatever else might be required, and then make a proper "case" where you show that such an explanation will not apply and that the image/footage is indeed worthy of investigation and that your theory has a base to stand on. But this does NOT happen in 99% of all cases because the underlying knowledge is just not there. Worse, if someone WHO HAS the knowledge than points out where you are wrong, all you guys do is call them "paid disinfo agents"...

reply to post by dieseldyk

I think the OP has a very valid point, if he is not satisfied with the state of the evidence from NASA, then he is not satisfied. Anyone else can say what they want, but it won't change the fact that he is not satisfied. Demanding information is the first step towards the real truth and away from the official truth as dictated by others.

Nicely said because its sums up my feeling on the issues of the shard and other moon anomalies. Nasa does not provide enough data to allow the average Joe person to check and be satisfied with what is being told by Nasa is the truth. Im not a US citizen so accept they have no obligation to me but if i was a US taxpayer i wouldnt be satisified.

reply to post by flexy123

I like how you completely glossed over the thread I linked to that proves that NASA was caught lying about data and not just lying actually falsifying data all the way back to 1880. Now that is very bold. In my book lying = no credibility. Whose to say that NASA is not also doctoring pictures. Sorry, you can't simply point to the words "this message is NASA approved" and expect me to accept it as the unassailable truth, I won't let you have that high ground sorry. And I won't simply accept the words of a fellow poster either, does not matter who it is, unless it comes on NASA letterhead, they don't speak for NASA. To me its just another person with another opinion.

Fact is, if there is something to hide, this is exactly how I would expect certain people to react. Sounds like I struck a nerve and it peeks my curiosity further.

So, Let's not bring in lizard men and all that, let's keep this simple. You show me where the op is lying. All he wants is more data. And if I am not mistaken the search for data used to be a pillar of science.

But never mind go back to your angry rant and pointing fingers. I believe those bullying tactics only work on the weak and feeble minded. Its obvious that asking valid questions and questioning credibility may cause consternation in certain circles but tough I'm sure you'll survive.

reply to post by flexy123


Is it unreasonable for a layman to ask for more information on a particular area of the moon, or a particular low resolution picture? No i cant see one reason why not if they already have a detailed picture for the place requested.and also since Nasa is purported and sold by themselves to the public as a civilian space agency they are bound then to accomodate and expect such requests from the curious elements of the public. If they dont like that idea then simply tell people sorry we are not a civilian space agency.

I dont think anything i said in para above was unreasonable or incorrect. Your response however was not so and was full of emotional animation.

Originally posted by Phage
reply to post by AutOmatIc

 

It is a flaw in the image. Do you see any flaws in the image?

Thanks for the reply! Got busy at work just now able to respond. Yes I saw multiple flaws in the image kind of "scattered" across it if you will. Interesting photo "artifact" if that's what it truly is Also the amateur video was interesting as well. I hope that if it is not some flaw in the film that we get more and much better pics of this thing (if it is not just a flaw in the film of course). That's why I dig it here...if it's out there I'm sure someone will find it...you never know eh? Peace.

reply to post by AthlonSavage


ive often wondered about the "tower" structures on moon

on one hand they are either there and or were there or they are just craters and light tricks

it could also be from a large impact that liquified the crust material, hit so hard it bounced back up as molten something and froze in position, could also be an idea, thats how they portray earth killers, as hitting the earth , melting the rock and then bouncing back up like a drop of milk in a glass of milk, the classic crown effect, all we see is the crown left over because we have erosion and its warmer here, but moon is much colder and no rain. but i also dont see it sitting in a crater nor do i see a crown around it so..... but it could be something similar to an event like that.

personally i dont see crater light trick, i see two distinct sides of an object that seems to extend beyond surface, that dont match sorrounding colors/hues. i dont know about the floating thing, but as for the towers i dont see why they couldnt be there.

but again 20 pages later nothing really better, just a bunch of people fighting back and forth whether they believe aliens exist or not and thats really what it comes down to. those that dont believe will never see any structures, and those that do will always see structures.

it cant be that hard really, i know tons of people here have many talents and or tools/toys. out of the supposed membership count someone has to have a better camera/telescope that can shoot the same thing BETTER?
and by hard i mean out of our selection of thousands of people in different fields it shouldnt be hard, not in actual location finding, talent, skills, ect ect.

reply to post by ~widowmaker~




gizmodo.com...

The quoted text below comes from an article in the link attached.

The artcile shows respected scientists who have the same idea in mind which is suggesting Nasa provide to the Public detailed pictures of the moon surface and let the Public expend their efforts scouring through the thousands of pictures to pick out ones which have details which look artifical. You know is Nasa is a Civilian space agency then why not use the Public for support.

Scientists Say We Should Search Moon for Alien Traces


Arizona State University's professor Paul Davies—a theoretical physicist and cosmologist now working on astrobiology—and Robert Wagner—Research Technician at the School of Earth & Space Exploration—have published a scientific paper calling for the search of alien artifacts on the Moon..

I know. I find this insanely awesome too. And it actually makes some sense.

They argue that, while the Search for Extraterrestrial Intelligence "has a low probability of success", the potential impact of finding proof requires to "widen the current search" as much as possible. Instead of just looking for radio messages, we should search for traces of alien explorers in the celestial bodies of our solar system. These are the highlights of their research paper:


• Alien civilizations may have sent probes to our region of the galaxy.
• Any mission to the solar system would probably have occurred a very long time ago. The lunar environment could preserve artifacts for millions of years.
• Lunar Reconnaissance Orbiter provides a photographic database to search for artifacts.
• Searching the LRO database would make an excellent educational project.

Their first idea is to use photographs from the Lunar Reconnaissance Orbiter—340,000 images now, one million in the future—for computer-based and crowd-sourced analysis that may identify potential alien structures, from machinery to debris. The cost is very low, they say, and there will be gains no matter what: either we find signs of aliens or people learn a lot about the Moon in the process. It's a win-win proposition.

Davies and Wagner believe that, if there's something, it will be perfectly preserved because there's very little activity on the lunar surface. They think that, if aliens actually were there, they may have left a "We were here" capsule on a place like the Tycho crater or perhaps in one of the many lava caves that populate our silver satellite. Just like space exploration experts believe humans should use these caves to set up outposts, Davies and Wagner believe that there's where the alien explorers may have installed their bases millions or thousands of years ago.

reply to post by AthlonSavage


Wow! Cool. I think this deserves it's own thread!

It's possible the human beings to have built some tiny base or station on the Moon and to be brushing it off on all pictures. But considering the oxygen and supplies they need, the every going to and back to that station, it may be rather visited once per several years.

I am curious about what is on the other side of the moon, why never pictures taken. I've been taught the Moon consist of either crashed meteros, rocks, cooled down lava in the more flat areas but the dark side, needs special investigation.