Lunar surface objects in plain sight.

Originally posted by pinobot

Originally posted by Liquesence

Of course, I could be completely incorrect in my analysis but I will leave it for you to judge whether these objects are structures or not.

Analysis? Exactly what is your analysis based on? What scientific grounds?

I wouldn't call the OP an analysis. At all. Just a wishful observation, and as others have stated, pareidolia.

I see rocks. The surface of the moon.

edit on 21-7-2013 by Liquesence because: (no reason given)

There are no rocks on the moon.

Would you care to:

1) Clarify what you mean by your statement of: "There are no rocks on the moon."

2) Explain what they are, if not rocks.

3) Provide sources for those claims so that we may read them.

4) Show how you arrived at the conclusion that there are no rocks on the moon.

reply to post by eriktheawful

I know its a crazy thing to say but i truly started to believe that what we consider to be rocks aren't rocks at all.
I've stared for hour on end at pictures from Mars and the Moon trying to figure out what it is i'm looking at and to me this is the only logical explanation. These ancient 'rocks' aren't just rocks. The hills on the moon aren't just hills made of rock and Mount Sharp on Mars isn't a mount but some kind of structure.


Pareidolia:
Superman III

Originally posted by pinobot
reply to post by eriktheawful

 

I know its a crazy thing to say but i truly started to believe that what we consider to be rocks aren't rocks at all.
I've stared for hour on end at pictures from Mars and the Moon trying to figure out what it is i'm looking at and to me this is the only logical explanation. These ancient 'rocks' aren't just rocks. The hills on the moon aren't just hills made of rock and Mount Sharp on Mars isn't a mount but some kind of structure.


Pareidolia:
Superman III

You may not realize what the above sounds like, but, you may want to consider stepping back and taking a look at what you just said.
I'm not trying to insult you. I'm not trying to call you names by saying any of this.
The above statements sound like a case of obsessive delusion.

I'm not saying you are Obsessive Delusional. I'm just saying statements made such as the above sound an awful lot like things said by Obsessive Delusionals, especially those expressing Obsessive Delusional Heterodoxy Disorder (ODHD).
Similar statements may be symptomatic expressions of something else altogether too.
None of that, however is really worthwhile in getting into.

Just, please, step back from obsessive tendencies regarding moon maps for a little while.
At the very least, taking some time away from the images might give you new insight to "see" details in perspectives and ways you hadn't seen before.
I hope, however, taking some time away from these maps might give you time to study another subject, possibly a related subject, like geology, and the chemistry involved in the formation of the geology represented on the moon.

Step away from the maps for a while.

Also, I'm not sure if you realize that the term Pareidolia refers to an illusion, a trick your own mind plays on you to convince you through it's pattern recognition abilities to give false positive impressions.
Pareidolia means it aint real.

Originally posted by pinobot
reply to post by eriktheawful

 

I know its a crazy thing to say but i truly started to believe that what we consider to be rocks aren't rocks at all.
I've stared for hour on end at pictures from Mars and the Moon trying to figure out what it is i'm looking at and to me this is the only logical explanation. These ancient 'rocks' aren't just rocks. The hills on the moon aren't just hills made of rock and Mount Sharp on Mars isn't a mount but some kind of structure.


Pareidolia:
Superman III

I've stared at the moon for many years. Some times with just my eyes, more often with my telescopes and through the view finder of my camera.

I've poured over Apollo images, and for a long time now, the LROC images.

You say what you see is structures, and that the rocks are not rocks.

Well, to each their own I would have to say.

This is what I see:

Lava channels cutting through the lunar surface:


Channels that when we zoom into them:


I can see a lot of rocks:


I see craters made with huge forces from the impacts of meteors:


And when I zoom into them......I see rocks. A lot of them:


I can see many crevices from fractured lava:


Sheer cliffs in a impact crater:


But when I look, I'm not seeing structures........yet. What I do see is:

Rocks:


Rocks:


And even more rocks:


If all that I have shown here, do not look like rocks to you, but instead are artificial structures....all I can say is:

If that's what you see, then I guess that is what YOU see.

But for me, anyone would have a very hard time trying to make me think that they are anything but rocks....

reply to post by eriktheawful


erik is quite correct. There are plenty of rocks on Mars and the moon as is shown in his images above. In erik's presentation there is one image that I felt would be worthy of further investigation.

Shown below is an adjusted view of the cliff face view. If you are a trained or qualified observer you should have no problem in seeing the features in the adjusted image shown below. I know what I can see in the image but what is more important is what objects or features can you observe.

You may feel that you can see a number of facial representations with human-like form or even figures landscaped into the cliff face. It is also possible that you may see some structures but if you do they will be very small. I would advise that the image is downloaded, zoom in slightly but do not over-zoom otherwise pixelization will occur.

Could any of the features showing in the image be a case of pareidolia or some form of undiscovered reality?

The image was rotated to the right slightly and has been cropped. Adjustments were made to brightness, contrast, mid-tone and shadow levels.

Originally posted by All Seeing Eye
reply to post by arianna

 

Good catch. As to what it is, well, anyone's guess. It almost looks like a dehydrated body laying on its belly with some type of apparatus laying next to it. It almost looks like a rib cage from the back side.

So this creature was several miles tall in life?

The rock formations on mars are actually very similar to those on the earth and though there is now no flowing water and the atmosphere has depleted there are still many of the same environmental factors at work on the surface of mars (Now weather you do not trust the agency or otherwise) this is why the scientists involved have really been so very interested, those same scientists are no different to you or me and cover a wide range of belief's some are more sceptical but the scientific rigour of being and analytical scientist while it tolerates the wish to search does create a sceptical mindset.
The rock's on the moon are actually chemically similar to those on the earth, however the mean density is somewhat lower due to the reduced gravity and there geological exposure is also different, while sub strata rock is probably similar, the surface rock has none of the weathering and environmental exposure that rocks on the surface of the earth or mars do however they are exposed to extremes of cold and heat as well as being mostly unprotected from solar radiation and solar particle bombardment (think about it like slow sub atomic sandblasting) and over time weaker molecular structures would break down as the atomic bond's failed also there is another factor, due to the lack of an atmosphere (there may be a very thin one that is negligible) any impacts on the surface throw out debris and this debris ranging from boulders to fine particles and dust is not slowed down or cushioned by atmospheric drag so like the test with the feather and the hammer they are not impeded. The full force of there ejection velocity is maintained until they impact and the only thing that effects there trajectory is the gravity of the moon, if you stood several miles from an impact the dust that it threw out that reached you would be like tiny bullets and would shred you or your surface exposed area,. Over time a thin layer of dust may protect whatever is under it and the lunar dust also has great thermal insulation property,. So any relic or artefact that would be recognisable even to the sceptical mind would likely be buried or of geologically recent origin like the Apollo missions.
Just remember that what we believe is only the image our minds paint on the screen we all have in the back of our mind's and we have all seen things that are not there or missed things that are, even the trained observers amongst us.
It is also sometimes easier to see something that you are familiar with than what you are not.

There can be no doubt that the psychological function that actually serves a purpose called pareidolia does play a significant part and it is a firmware program of our minds that helps us to see recognisable patterns, something that may have been of very great importance to the (Redevelopment or re-evolution) evolution of the human mind and without it we could not see the paintings in the louvre as indeed some animals probably can not so it is therefore an immensely important function of human psychology and therefore it is a shame when it is used to criticise someone else for seeing what you do not but then again some of us do see what is not there mostly the artistic minds amongst us.
LONG MAY THEY SEE.

reply to post by Druscilla

Thanks for caring but i'm quite alright.
I think i'm just tapping global consciousness. I've had many instances of that happening, just slightly ahead of the curve.

reply to post by pinobot


You know that there is an argument that each of us sits at the heart of our own reality, it is when idea's clash that the criticism flies, glad to see you are o.k. who knows I have never been to the moon and neither have the others whom criticised so we only know what we see on photographs.
Peace and stay well.

Many people think there could not possibly be any structures on the moon but some of the images tell a completely different story.

The image shown below is a cropped section from the image shown in the OP.

I hav eplaced a yellow rectangle around some of the single objects and the groups of structures but to see them you have to study the image very closely. I apologise for the quality of the view but when zooming in the greater the degradation of the image.

The pipe-like object as shown in the OP is rectangled in red.

Originally posted by HairlessApe

Originally posted by All Seeing Eye
reply to post by arianna

 

Good catch. As to what it is, well, anyone's guess. It almost looks like a dehydrated body laying on its belly with some type of apparatus laying next to it. It almost looks like a rib cage from the back side.

So this creature was several miles tall in life?

To reiterate:

From what others have shared, and what I have concluded, this is a Humanoid Robot. Think the children's toy Transformer.

It may also be a very early attempt at a vehicle that may have been manned, similar to the movie "Alien, 1979" where Sigourney Weaver mounts a "Fork lift" that is adapted to the human body. I have scaled the photo down and have no way to measure this mechanical apparatus, but I doubt it is any taller, when standing, than 50 ft.

The questions that result are simple, its the correct answers that will be complicated.

Who created this.
What was it used for.
How old is it.
How did it come to be where it is.
And, who wants this information suppressed, and for what reason.

Originally posted by All Seeing Eye

Originally posted by boymonkey74
reply to post by All Seeing Eye

 

That's gonna big a big body If it is one.

Your probably right about that. It does seem to have mechanical attributes at the same time. Maybe it is a very large, very old robot of some type. Maybe even the original Lunar Rover

Or Megatron.

Its more than meets the eye

reply to post by All Seeing Eye


Comparing that image to the same area using the LROC images, allows for saying what the resolution is (meters per pixel).

Going down to 2 meters per pixel, then capturing the image and pasting it in a photoshop program, allows for counting the pixels.

The area that has been highlight for the "figure" is about 525 pixels long at a resolution of 2 meters per pixel.

2 x 525 = 1,050 meters or 1.05 kilometers.

So.....if the figure were real, and standing it would do so at a staggering height of just over 1 kilometer or just over 1/2 a mile in height.

So yes.....that would be a pretty tall robot....

Maybe this image will help to throw some light on what the two pipe-like objects could possibly be.

The image has been rotated 180 degrees.

Could what is contained within the rectangle be a lunar air production plant?

Could there possibly be a civilization living on the moon by artificial means?

What do you think?

reply to post by arianna


You might want to look at this set of images somebody put on photobucket so you know you are not alone,
s242.photobucket.com...
Just start at this one and click next looking at each one, these are mars but still interesting.

Or this rectangular craters anyone
i242.photobucket.com...
Or this,
www.thelivingmoon.com...
Peri-whatever Hmmf.

reply to post by LABTECH767


I've had a look at the images at the links. Some I am familiar with, some not.

Not so sure about the Cydonia face, but if true the formation would be a giant monlithic creation.

Is it possible that in ancient times the martian people may have left their mark on the surface?

reply to post by arianna


My theory and it is just that, is that civilisation or rather sentient intelligence arrived in the solar system over 2 billion years ago, sol is about half way along one of the spiral arms of the milky way galaxy and a more ancient race may have evolved further out then developed space travel and we were a handy point along the way to the element rich core of the galaxy, it is also possible they actually evolved here.
I believe that the life on mars may have come from earth about 2 billion years ago when the earth became uninhabitable when a geologic epoch that ran until about 750 million years ago began, this epoch has been called the snow ball earth but is currently gaining acceptance but is not yet cannon to the geological belief system.
Imagine that about 2 billion 2 hundred million years ago an unknown age of evolution came to an end along with 99.999 percent of all life on earth maybe even because of something they did to themselves and a race decided to try to survive by leaving the earth and colonising some of the other planets were conditions may have been quite different then such as mars now the life forms that may have evolved would likely be genetically quite different but would still have some of the same Endron (Junk) DNA,
This is much younger but may indicate that they are not extinct.
www.starchildproject.com...
They then may have taken to using such technology as mass drivers to deliver resources that were rare on mars from the asteroid belt and even to function as weather control and orbital stations.
note the linear structuring of the crater tracks on the surface of phobos almost as if a mobile mass driver that would mine the surface and after superheating the material use is as a propellant to control the attitude and direction of phobos, it is in too close an orbit and there fore must be either of low density or hollow and the surface would suggest it is not low density material,

This well known site on this page has an interesting IR image of ruin like features on mars.
www.enterprisemission.com...
marsruins.com...
There was a short video released over a year and a half ago that seems to have disappeared completely and I can not find any trace but it showed a linear cut over rocky terrain that was cut into the terrain and when zoomed in appeared to show two lanes with a central reservation, it was broken by vast crevice's that must have opened up long after it was built and led to a typical jumble of shapes with a exterior wall like feature like many supposed ruin's on mars on a raised plateau, God I wish I had downloaded that as they acted too quick and it was removed, as I remember it was taken from a study of high resolution data on mars and was very thin and inconspicuous at first until he zoomed in on a section and digitally enhanced it there seemed to be more crevice than road and it was like it had been almost washed away - such a road must indicate vehicular transport or else why the central reserve unless it was a monorail of some kind,.

Then after life re evolved on the earth and the epoch of ice had past 1.45 billion years off planet would have made them no longer compatible with the new ecosystem and it indeed would have been hazardous to them, the only answer, either hybridisation or genetic modification of extant species to recreate themselves but why.

Are they or another colony on the moon, how many subspecies may have evolved and the planet dwellers on mars well did they survive or are they now extinct as a sub species, will we ever be allowed to leave the zoo.

reply to post by LABTECH767


Found it please watch this video and try not to cry as I did, these people were very much like us and something or somebody swept them away like they were nothing, we are children in the graveyard of a forgotten and far more advanced past so let them call these rocks.
Please look at the video.
www.youtube.com...

I think disclosure is approaching rapidly.
New pictures of Curiosity reveal much.

This video on you tube has some interesting insights and is of interest, a former NASA Employee talks about the air brushing and a former Air Force member talks about the base on the far side of the moon.
www.bing.com... F&view=detail&FORM=VIRE4