NEW Moon Structures?

B

btimsah

Registered Senior Member
Okay, after some time at this site: http://cps.earth.northwestern.edu/LO/
I was able to find several, interesting things which think are much more interesting than some of the older anomalies found by Richard Hoagland. The site above simply has the highest quality .TIFF Lunar Orbiter images I've ever seen. Below are some of the strange thing's I've found thus far. Due to the quality of the images you are able to get down and actually see some surface elements typically not noticable on older/lower quality images.

screenhunter0092sc.jpg


The one above features what can only be called a cut out area with bridges going across it. If you can't find it (because it is a bit subtle) I can circle it.

screenhunter0066uz.jpg


Looks like a damn spotlight.. I've tried to think of everything else it could be or how something else is fooling me, but it looks so damn obvious... lol. Anyone wanna try to debunk it? Surely NASA saw it.
 
Anyone have a real substantive response?

BTW It's the highest quality image of it's kind. ;)
 
Here's a bit easier to see version of the first one:

screenhunter0083pn.jpg


If you consider yourself a debunker and are close minded, then don't bother wasting anyones time. If you are a skeptic and take offense to me thinking you might be close minded - then tell me one anomalous image you have seen that actually did look anomalous to you, and still does.

A debunking skeptic literally think there are no anomalous images. What do you think?
 
>>>>What do you think?

i think i must be a skeptic. just look like rocks with sunlight on one side and the shadows on the other.
 
The first image has bridges going across a depression. The bridges shadow can be seen going across the bottom of the depression.

In the second image, I see a brilliantly lit light or object that is a perfect sphere.
 
If you can't prove it's nothing but a rock, then you're response is the junk.

If moving this would help me to get some legit responses then, I would be glad to.
 
>>>>..... to get some legit responses then....

you've got them....it's just rocks. oh you mean agree that they are structures and signs of civilisations either extant or extinct. i'm sorry i can't do that
.....
 
Because you're close minded... So carry on, and get lost then.

And don't come back with crap that you are open minded, UNLESS you can name 1 SINGLE ANOMALY IN SPACE that you think is unexplainable.
 
>>>>And don't come back with crap that you are open minded, UNLESS you can name 1 SINGLE ANOMALY IN SPACE that you think is unexplainable.

yes sir!
 
btimsah said:
If you consider yourself a debunker and are close minded, then don't bother wasting anyones time.
Click to expand...

If you think you're being innovative and observant by citing "bridges" on a world that only a few people have visited a handfull of times, or that someone forgot to turn off a spotlight (a large rock with the Sun's illumination judging by the shadow), then don't waste our time.

You're making some very extraordinary claims and merely providing some blurry black and white photos of rocks, which you say are the best you've seen.

I'm more inclined to discuss the power of belief and what drives people to look for extraordinary explanations for ordinary things. Your thread got dumped in the right forum.

Boris2 and RedDevil might remember the passage in Demon Haunted World where Sagan discusses the natural ability and tendency of people to look for patterns... a similar phenomenon is common among those that see cities and monuments on Mars.
 
Well it _is_ the Pseudoscience section of a Science board.

Not the science section of a Pseudoscience board. :cool:
 
btimsah said:
If you can't prove it's nothing but a rock, then you're response is the junk.
Click to expand...

_I_ can't prove? You're the one making the claims, the onus of proof is on you. You can't proove I'm not god, and that I know I only put a rock there, so the idea of the other providing counter proof is a bit bogus, and well, worthy of pseudoscience!

[quoteIf moving this would help me to get some legit responses then, I would be glad to.[/QUOTE]

Nope, you won't get any legit respones to your post, because you're seeing things. Pseudoscience is just where we put all the crap that uses words too long for the cesspool.
 
Just rocks. It's an accepted fact, so you're [btimsah] the one who has to have proof about bridges.
 
I must admit, the photo of the "Bridges" does look like some kind of bridge,structure.

What we need is clearer photos!, hopefully these new probes will take some higher quality photos of the moon.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top