NEW Moon Structures?
- Thread starter btimsah
- Start date
Ophiolite, here is a link to one website. It list reports extending far back into the
history of astronomy including observations by several famous astronomers. There
are also updates to around the year 2000.
http://www.xdream.freeserve.co.uk/UFOBase/Astronomers.htm
EDIT: You may also be interested in this survey of members of the American
Astronomical Society by Prof. Peter Sturrock of Stanford University. Almost
5% of astronomers responding to the survey reported they had personally
witnessed a UFO event. Over half thought a scientific study of UFOs would
be a good idea, but few had any ideas of how such a study could be accomplished.
http://www.ufoevidence.org/documents/doc604.htm
history of astronomy including observations by several famous astronomers. There
are also updates to around the year 2000.
http://www.xdream.freeserve.co.uk/UFOBase/Astronomers.htm
EDIT: You may also be interested in this survey of members of the American
Astronomical Society by Prof. Peter Sturrock of Stanford University. Almost
5% of astronomers responding to the survey reported they had personally
witnessed a UFO event. Over half thought a scientific study of UFOs would
be a good idea, but few had any ideas of how such a study could be accomplished.
http://www.ufoevidence.org/documents/doc604.htm
Last edited:
Stryder, my posts were on topic, I've just re-read them all. I gave btimsah some advice on getting qualified for image processing to get access to quality data, you chimed in with some bad advice, and then I explained to btimsah why your advice should be avoided and demonstrated what a pseud you are.
All of this was ON TOPIC.
Now, you take it personally, and you are able to abuse your position as a moderator to silence me.
If you do so, you just demonstrate that you're unfit for the post.
Oh, and by the way, if you'd not wanted the thread to digress, you could have PM'd me when you first had a problem with anything I'd said, but _you_ chose to play it out here. So don't accuse me of what _you_ are guilty of.
All of this was ON TOPIC.
Now, you take it personally, and you are able to abuse your position as a moderator to silence me.
If you do so, you just demonstrate that you're unfit for the post.
Oh, and by the way, if you'd not wanted the thread to digress, you could have PM'd me when you first had a problem with anything I'd said, but _you_ chose to play it out here. So don't accuse me of what _you_ are guilty of.
'pseud', contraction of 'pseudo' used as a label;
Main Entry: pseu·do
Pronunciation: 'sü-(")dO
Function: adjective
Etymology: Middle English, from pseudo-
: being apparently rather than actually as stated : SHAM, SPURIOUS <distinction between true and pseudo humanism -- K. F. Reinhardt>
http://www.m-w.com/cgi-bin/dictionary?book=Dictionary&va=pseudo
So, quite literally in this case, someone who talks like a scientist, but isn't.
Main Entry: pseu·do
Pronunciation: 'sü-(")dO
Function: adjective
Etymology: Middle English, from pseudo-
: being apparently rather than actually as stated : SHAM, SPURIOUS <distinction between true and pseudo humanism -- K. F. Reinhardt>
http://www.m-w.com/cgi-bin/dictionary?book=Dictionary&va=pseudo
So, quite literally in this case, someone who talks like a scientist, but isn't.
Ophiolite
Valued Senior Member
I wasn't ignoring you 2inquisitive, but it is an interesting link with a lot of information. I will say so far (and I am still in the 19th century) we seem to be dealing with NEO's crossing the sun and TLPs (Transient Lunar Phenomena) rather than 'conventional' UFO's. The casual reader could easily think "Wow. All these guys saw UFO's. There must be something in it." Instead we have sometimes questionable (Let's not forget the Percival Lowell farce) observations of rare, but natural, astronomical phenomena.2inquisitive said:
I shall read further.
btimsah said:I have said repeatedly that the object merely look's like it COULD be an artificially built structure. Toward the end of this response you admit you are the one close minded, so what's your point? I could only be wrong if the image was an optical illusion, though nobody has illustrated HOW it's an optical illusion, thus you have no explanation for these structures except to suggest I'm close minded, when I am not, and you admit you are the one close minded. Talk about madness.
First of all, there is no need for insults.
We have established that these photographs resemble structures according to you. But to others they don't (to me for example). I don't believe your opinnion is of a higher value than anyone elses here unless you have somekind of training in landscape surveilance, interpretation of satelite photos or lunar geography.
So our oppinions are of equal value.
I have looked at the photos, and I can't see what you see. It's not because my mind isn't open to it, it's because I don't recognize the structures.
You hold that they may be structures, so prove this claim sufficiently for me to take it seriously.
"Thus, again you are too close-minded even attempt to offer an explanation."
The mere fact that I bothered to post here means that I am in someway willing to consider it. But I am being challenged to interpret these photos in a certain way with no criteria to work from and no basis. All I have are a couple of photos and a claim that they resemble structures.
It's not my job to offer an explanation, it's yours. YOU are making the claim not I.
"I am open to any natural explanation, none of which you or anyone else has given except, "a rock". That's not an explanation, that's just being stupid. Open minded in this case would be considering that it's something other than natural, which I have done. You have not, so again you're the one who IS close minded as you admitted.
""A Rock" is just as good of a claim as "A Structure".
I might claim "Rock" because I know that there are rocks on the moon. And rocks can look very different and come in many shapes and sizes.
So what about "Structure"?
btimsah said:
Are you realy open-minded about it? Will you admit that it might be nothing? If yes, then fine you are open-minded about it.
Will I admit that it might be a structure? Well... As I am not in any way trained to interpret these photos I'll say yes, judging from the photographs alone it could be structures. It could be entire cities aswell, it could be water, or it could be clouds. It could be things that are not supposed to be on the moon according to modern explanations.
So thats said and done, now fucking prove it or hold your claim.
exsto_human said:First of all, there is no need for insults.
We have established that these photographs resemble structures according to you. But to others they don't (to me for example). I don't believe your opinnion is of a higher value than anyone elses here unless you have somekind of training in landscape surveilance, interpretation of satelite photos or lunar geography.
So our oppinions are of equal value.
I have looked at the photos, and I can't see what you see. It's not because my mind isn't open to it, it's because I don't recognize the structures.
You hold that they may be structures, so prove this claim sufficiently for me to take it seriously.
"Thus, again you are too close-minded even attempt to offer an explanation."
The mere fact that I bothered to post here means that I am in someway willing to consider it. But I am being challenged to interpret these photos in a certain way with no criteria to work from and no basis. All I have are a couple of photos and a claim that they resemble structures.
It's not my job to offer an explanation, it's yours. YOU are making the claim not I.
"I am open to any natural explanation, none of which you or anyone else has given except, "a rock". That's not an explanation, that's just being stupid. Open minded in this case would be considering that it's something other than natural, which I have done. You have not, so again you're the one who IS close minded as you admitted.
"A Rock" is just as good of a claim as "A Structure".
I might claim "Rock" because I know that there are rocks on the moon. And rocks can look very different and come in many shapes and sizes.
So what about "Structure"?
Are you realy open-minded about it? Will you admit that it might be nothing? If yes, then fine you are open-minded about it.
Will I admit that it might be a structure? Well... As I am not in any way trained to interpret these photos I'll say yes, judging from the photographs alone it could be structures. It could be entire cities aswell, it could be water, or it could be clouds. It could be things that are not supposed to be on the moon according to modern explanations.
So thats said and done, now fucking prove it or hold your claim.
This was a long time ago, and I never saw this repsonse, but here goes.
How could I prove it, with this photo? What kind of evidence would you need? How much of it, and by what time? What is you're mailing address?
Just so were on the same level, this is the image:
And here's a second one I find really cool:
The thing I think you need to understand is that these images are just like eye-witness testimony. It's the only "proof" we can have. If someone like you pretends not to see anything they just ask for more proof over and over again. It's a game, but I see through it.
And here's a second one I find really cool:
The thing I think you need to understand is that these images are just like eye-witness testimony. It's the only "proof" we can have. If someone like you pretends not to see anything they just ask for more proof over and over again. It's a game, but I see through it.
I searched the net to try and find moon immages with anomalous things on them.
This one clearly shows a landing strip of some kind.
This one shows a very interesting structure, could nature form such things?
I think my images are more anomalous than yours.
Surely I have found better evidence of alien/anchient civ visitors to the moon.
Don't be closed-minded and say that they are not anomalous!
This one clearly shows a landing strip of some kind.
This one shows a very interesting structure, could nature form such things?
I think my images are more anomalous than yours.
Surely I have found better evidence of alien/anchient civ visitors to the moon.
Don't be closed-minded and say that they are not anomalous!
Well sort of...btimsah said:
I assume you mean it's the only proof you have. Clearly it is not enough at the moment.
We are pretending not to see things? It's a game? hmm.
If you have real proof even sceptics would believe. At the moment you have fuzzy images of what looks like natural formations.
This should keep you crackpots going for a while.
Can you find the alien artifacts on this image. Walls, towers, pyramids, and more.. (warning large image)
This image was acquired on the Lunar Orbiter 2 Mission of nearside of the Moon (10 degrees N., 20 degrees W.).
Can you find the alien artifacts on this image. Walls, towers, pyramids, and more.. (warning large image)
This image was acquired on the Lunar Orbiter 2 Mission of nearside of the Moon (10 degrees N., 20 degrees W.).
Obviously a strip mining operation... and can you see the power-line tower on the horizon?
Blindman said:
Haha, I've seen this image before. The only thing I really found of interest is below. This is a higher quality image of the one you showed: http://lisar.larc.nasa.gov/IMAGES/MEDIUM/EL-2001-00450.jpeg
Here's the interesting thing I noticed can be found on it:
I am not saying this is alien, but interesting to see. Some sort of smoke/dirt/fog.. whatever.
Zooming in on an image does not make it higher quality... Infact it severely deteriorates the quality of an image making it almost indistinguishable.
Anyway, this was amusing for a time, but it bores me now.
Whatever you do don't drop out of junior high school because of some conspiracy theory about education and mind controll.
I remember when I was younger I also fantisized about life/signs of life on other planets and the moon. I wished aliens would take me up in their ufos and carry me off. But then I grew up and found other things much more interesting.
Anyway, this was amusing for a time, but it bores me now.
Whatever you do don't drop out of junior high school because of some conspiracy theory about education and mind controll.
I remember when I was younger I also fantisized about life/signs of life on other planets and the moon. I wished aliens would take me up in their ufos and carry me off. But then I grew up and found other things much more interesting.
exsto_human said:
Remember, it's the skeptic's who typically claim almost every unsolved UFO is a conspiratorial "secret military craft". However, when I or someone claim's that perhaps some evidence regarding ETI is secret, you call that crazy?
Typical double standard and hypocrisy.If this would make you feel better, here's the regular 100% zoom of the area:
And here's the same area a bit closer:
BTW I never said the zoom was better, I said the FULL SIZE IMAGE I provided was better than the one he provided. The zoom was merely to force some people to see it.
I never wanted, nor do I want to be taken off by UFO'S. I also don't think it's fair or mature to hold ME accountable for you're own personal hangup's about you're childhood beliefs about aliens abducting you. Go see a shrink, but don't try and blame me.
Now you have a choice to make. Did I zoom in too show something that bug's you, or did I zoom in to show "nothing"?