hoagland has really dissected this story and provided quite a bit of info and the evidence is highly unusual here are a few pics that uses to prove his theory-which includes the moon being a geodesic construct with anomalous crate alignments and geodesic forms as well as anomalous structures AND an equatorial wall -its uncanny ressemblance to vaders "death star" is remarkable-the article is a must read -check it out -oops-"manufactured"
http://www.enterprisemission.com/moon1.htm
************************************************************

this gives a new meaning to pink floyds "dark side of the moon"--more anolalous pics from hoaglands report-
*************************************************************



"The only way of discovering the limits of the possible is to venture a little way past them … into the impossible."

-- Clarke’s Second Law



… the ship had long since passed the boundary set by outermost Phoebe, moving backward in a wildly eccentric orbit eight million miles from its primary. Ahead of it now lay Iapetus, Hyperion, Titan, Rhea, Dione, Tethys, Enceladus, Mimas, Janus – and the rings themselves. All the satellites showed a maze of surface detail … Titan alone – three thousand miles in diameter, and as large as Mercury – would occupy … months …



There was more; already he was certain that Iapetus was his goal.



… One hemisphere of the satellite, which, like its companions, turned the same face always toward Saturn, was extremely dark, and showed very little surface detail. In complete contrast, the other was dominated by a brilliant white oval, about four hundred miles long and two hundred wide. At the moment, only part of this striking formation was in daylight, but the reason for Iapetus’s extraordinary variations in brilliance was now quite obvious ….

*****************************************

In 1965, when Arthur began collaborating with the brilliant film director, Stanley Kubrick, it was to bring their unique view of Mankind’s most enduring mystery – “Where do we really come from …?” – to the silver screen, in a way never seen before. They succeeded ... brilliantly.



The result was the immortal “2001: A Space Odyssey.”



Simultaneously, Arthur penned the “Saturn approach” scene we began with (above), his own independent version of the same story -- a novel – which, to some at least, has made portions of Stanley’s very enigmatic “2001” perhaps a little more accessible (at least, certain “transcendental” aspects of the film …).

In Kubrick’s extravaganza, the climax comes when David Bowman -- the lone surviving astronaut of the deep space expedition, sent by a future “NASA” in search of the Force which, “godlike,” has somehow repeatedly intervened in “the million plus year evolution of Mankind …” – finally encounters the “Monolith” … a black enigmatic “door,” in orbit around the giant planet Jupiter.



The Monolith turns out to be (among its other wonders) a “star gate” – a literal doorway (which, of course, is why Kubrick cinematically made it a door …) to other dimensions of space and time … and, ultimately, the mysterious “Progenitors” of the Human Race itself.



When Bowman eventually falls through it, he enters the Star Gate’s vast Hyperdimensional transport system, culminating in his own ambiguous meeting with “the Progenitors” (or, at least as much of them as they allow him to experience …), which results in his final “transformation” and return to Earth … the latest agent in Humanities continuing “managed evolution.”



In Arthur’s novel (removed from the pre-CGI, 1960’s limitations on film “special effects” that even Stanley Kubrick had to live with …), the Monolith is waiting much farther from the Sun … on one of Saturn’s distant moons—

Strange! at first glance it appears much like a weld line in two half spheres.
Could it have been constucted?

I sometimes have wierd dreams of being inside this huge artificial space, like an arcology or battle star. I sometimes wondered if it was the moon, but now maybe.................

Okay, I'll admit that the bulge on the equator is most intriguing. But the rest of those pictures are a little ridiculous.

Give Hoagland and inch and he takes it 50 miles. Stick to the center of that moon. That is the intriguing part. The rest of the stuff is simple nonsense. Like when he started spotting "Mars Machinery".

You know, the guy had me at Cydonia. Very cool stuff. Very unexplainable and something to actually think about.

But now he just looks for things and finds things in ordinary objects that are so ridiculous that he's been relegated to the back page humor column of the internet. IE, he's a laughingstock.

I'm more than willing to discuss why that ridge is on the equator of that moon, though. That, to me, is interesting. But even my meager intellect is bigger than to fall for the other crap.

Hoagland's long awaited part 4 of his "Moon with a View" article has been posted--heres the link and the opening image and paragraph--
http://www.enterprisemission.com/moon4.htm

Ok, this is the part the critics hate the most—



Where we freely speculate about what all of this might mean ….



As noted earlier, the late cosmologist Sir Fred Hoyle once remarked “I don't see the logic of rejecting data just because they seem incredible.” So, despite what you might have heard, speculation to sort out which data is “incredible” has to be at the heart of the true scientific method. All scientific hypotheses are really nothing more than “dressed up speculations.”



Without venturing a hypothesis, even an “outrageous one” -- attempting to knit together all the various assembled facts into some kind of a coherent storyline (the speculative part) -- “science” would simply be an exercise in making lists ….



In truth, astronomers have engaged in many, many speculations over the mysterious nature of Iapetus for literally hundreds of years: starting with the source and origin of “the Dark Side of Iapetus.” Here (below - courtesy of Tilmann Denk, from the Cassini Team) are just a few of the most recent speculations on Iapetus, offered by professional astronomers (including, some other current members of the Cassini Team …) to explain this “oldest riddle in plantology.”

WOW he gets technical but i had to add this brief segment from the end of the piece where some "incredible" assertions are pondered-----
*************************************
If it was discovered that nothing could be accomplished technologically to prevent such a catastrophic core explosion, the only reasonable alternative would have been a mass migration of the Martian population (or, a reasonable fraction thereof …) to another planet. And one definitely well away from the inner solar system ... as the effects of the explosion would be felt even billions of miles away ….



And that would have called for either an interstellar migration to another solar system, or the terraforming of another planet … in the outer reaches of this one. Or—



The creation of a totally new “planet!”



So, was Iapetus part of all three options …?



In other words, was Iapetus a specifically designed “interstellar ark” -- created on a crash basis in the Saturn system (see below) to transport a significant population from a doomed Mars (if not from other worlds in the entire imperiled inner solar system!) … to the stars?



Is that what the “number 4” – indelibly encoded in the very orbit of Iapetus – is telling us ... across the millions of miles and the literally millions of years since that inconceivable explosion: that it all goes back to … Mars!?



Did mass interstellar migration with such a large population turn out to be impossible, in time … so Iapetus was built as the “replacement planet” in this system -- for some small percentage of the teeming populations of those soon to be destroyed inner system worlds (the Earth, the Moon, Mars …) whose peoples would literally have no place else to go …?



Was this “ark” (Noah anyone …?) then left in orbit around Saturn … because – like in the interstellar scenario above -- the Saturn system was an abundant source of raw materials for its construction, if not the vital resources needed to sustain a long-term biosphere for those who would be “saved?” Was Saturn also chosen because it was far enough from the impending cataclysm to insure survival … yet still close enough to the warm center of the solar system to allow the next phase in this extraordinary Plan to be initiated--





The increasingly fascinating enigma of Titan -- as a literal “Saturn system terraforming project?” A valiant attempt to recreate a whole new world for the rescued populations of the soon-to-be-destroyed entire inner solar system … but on an even grander scale …?


stay tuned...

Very interesting.
Even if the moon isn't a strange ark or sign of ancient civilization,spacestaion or death star? its still really weird,the wall and straight angles of the horizan raises alot of questions?
Great website, ...I love the internet!

Yes, I concur. I'm sure it won't surprise you sonofone that I tend to take a much more mundane position than you perhaps about the subject, but that site is very interesting, and Iapetus is just freakishly weird.

I for one would love to discover that stuff is true.

Oh, and that deathstar/Iapetus comparison is very cool.

Nice site.

Synopsis of this whole thing, maybe today is my dumb day?

part 5 and it just keeps getting better-
http://www.enterprisemission.com/moon5.htm

here are some sample pics and text from this amazing installment-
*******************************************************


Since “Moon with a View” was originally posted, reaction has been varied – to say the least!

Some, on reading, have become intrigued. Others are repelled. And some, typified by this truly wondrous comment on “Coast to Coast AM” a few nights ago – “This time Hoagland has really walked off the cliff!” – are simply, as the phrase goes, “out to lunch.”

Fundamental to many criticisms of this theory is the scale of the construction we’re proposing. These critics see the entire idea of an “artificial moon” – and one almost a thousand miles across -- as totally preposterous, mainly because of the size of such an undertaking. What they forget is that some of these (artificial world) ideas are actually quite old … and increasingly achievable – even (as you will see) within the constraints of current technology and physics!

Their most famous incarnation is, in major part, due to Princeton University’s Institute for Advanced Studies’ professor, Dr. Freeman Dyson. Almost half a century ago, Dyson published a remarkable idea in the prestigious mainstream journal, Science [Dyson, F. J. "Search for Artificial Sources of Infrared Radiation," Science, 131, 1667 (1959)] – which described something termed a “Dyson Sphere.” Dyson ended his Science paper with the following conclusion:


“I think I have shown that there are good scientific reasons for taking seriously the possibility that life and intelligence can succeed in molding this universe of ours to their own purposes [emphasis added]
In Dyson’s 1950’s calculations, he envisioned huge, artificial planets -- built from the “disassembly” of a star’s natural planetary system, and its subsequent reassembly into a vast number of smaller, precisely engineered artificial worlds. The resulting “Dyson Sphere,” in Dyson’s speculations, seemed the largest artificial structures that an advanced civilization could probably ever technologically create. And as such, he believed, they might even be observable light years away, with our “primitive” technology from Earth ….



In this classic Science paper, Dyson was suggesting that such extraordinary objects – by literally englobing an entire solar system in a swarm of artificial “worlds,” thereby trapping almost all the parent sun’s emitted light and converting it to heat -- would glow brilliantly in the infrared region of the spectrum ... thus giving themselves away even in Earth’s 20th/21st Century telescopes, as “artificially modified star systems” (below).


Dyson’s inspiration for this extraordinary idea (as was Arthur C. Clarke’s for many of his …) ultimately derived from famed science fiction writer, Olaf Stapledon – in particular, his 1937 classic, “Star Maker”:


… As the eons advanced, hundreds of thousands of worlds were constructed, all of this type, but gradually increasing in size and complexity. Many a star without natural planets came to be surrounded by concentric rings of artificial worlds. In some cases the inner rings contained scores, the outer rings thousands of globes adapted to life at some particular distance from the Sun ….



Since Dyson’s pioneering publication of his “outrageous” speculation some 50 years ago, other workers have followed up with a variety of additional scenarios. All agree that, given enough time and current technological advancement, even our own terrestrial civilization could construct the beginnings of a “baby” Dyson sphere (see schematic - below), perhaps in the next hundred or so years. The key is in those terms: “time” … and “technological development.”
*************************....
In other words -- a 900-mile-wide, C60 “fullerene?!”


Amazing as it may sound, there is actual human precedent for this idea: embodying the geometry of the material used in constructing a particular monument … in the monument’s final macro-geometric form! The most striking example of this practice (before Iapetus, that is …) was brought to my attention several years ago, by my good friend and colleague, Stan Tenen.


Stan pointed out that the Great Pyramid, located on the Egypt’s Giza Plateau, is composed primarily (except for a bit of granite “here and there” inside …) of another carbon-compound known as “calcium carbonate” (CaCO3). Most folks know it better as “limestone.” It’s also known as “calcite” -- the rock type that forms huge layers of the 70-million-year-old strata making up the Plateau, as well as much of the rest of Egypt -- extending east, all the way to Indonesia ….


Huge blocks of calcium carbonate were quarried (not far from the Plateau …), and carefully shaped into the “six million tons of limestone blocks …” that were then used to create a structure over 750 feet on a side and almost 500 feet high: the legendary Great Pyramid itself.

Stan, both to me and on the radio, noted that if you just look at the exterior geometry of the Great Pyramid (below), shaped visually by the three angles it presents from any one side -- the 76-degree angle at the apex, and the two 52-degree angles where it touches the ground at the base -- you will actually be looking at a giant replica of the same internal angles of the calcium carbonate crystal of which it is composed!!

In other words: the Great Pyramid – exactly like Iapetus in our scenario – is a demonstrable giant replica of the precise material that someone used to build it!

Looked at in a larger context, creating a moon-sized “truncated icosahedron” would simply be the ultimate means of saying “five-sided/six-sided symmetry is crucially important in the Universe ....”


* * *

Finally, a major, serendipitous aspect of this model is a completely integral explanation for Iapetus’ latest, fascinating mystery -- “the Wall.”

since this thread deals with possible artificial constructs on extra terrestrial soil i was wondering if this image has been discussed yet?-it is supposed to be an original nasa moon image
*******************************************

Truncated Icosahedron?

Buckminsterfullerene?

You gotta be kidding me!!!!!!!!!!!

Where is the picture that has the caption:

"Hoaglandfullofshit"?

All we have is a moon with an anolmalous ridge running around it. Everything else is pure fiction. It could be true. But equally, Iapetus could be an organic being from Alpha Centuri. Or made our of lego bricks.

that woulda had to have been one helluva big blow torch eh ?

pretty cool stuff!

part 6 will blow you away!!!!--could iapetus be a massive uft field propulsion system? is it (my prefered theory) an ancient "noah's ark" used to rescue a portion of a highly advanced civilisation from a planet that was destroyed by an incoming asteroid like "tiamet" perhaps? if a known collision was going to take place wouldnt you prepare by constructing an ark that could be placed far enough away to witness and document such a momentus event? with hopes of returning one day--and could iapetus be evidence of "seeding"?--anyway here is thelink and some sample text
*****************************************************************
http://www.enterprisemission.com/moon6.htm
In previous sections of this series, we’ve presented a variety of imaging (and other) evidence, from the on-going Cassini Mission, that “something” about the eighth moon of Saturn is radically wrong: that, after almost half a century of NASA’s looking, based on multiple surface features and orbital parameters, Iapetus seems increasingly unlikely to be a “purely natural moon” ….

Exhibit #1: the baffling, highly geometric, precisely equatorial ~ 60,000-foot-high “Iapetus Wall.”
Exhibit #2, the equally astonishing, equally unnatural rectilinear geometry -- evident all across the surface of this “moon”:
Exhibit #3, without doubt our most astonishing Iapetus discovery – unique (so far …) in the entire solar system:
That, instead of being spherical – as natural moons larger than about 250 miles across must be (due to inexorable gravitational contraction) -- the overall 900-mile-wide form of Iapetus is highly geometric (below) … specifically, apparently an eroded truncated icosahedron!

With this brief review, we can now get to “the good part.”

As can be seen in this 1950’s classic (below), painted by another of Arthur’s long-time friends – the “father of space art” himself, Chesley Bonestell -- because of its highly tilted orbit, Iapetus is the only “moon” with a spectacular perspective on both the Ringed Planet … and all of Saturn’s other moons ….

Which brings us back to the overarching, crucial question: just what the hell is Iapetus … if it’s not just a “natural” moon!?

In Part 5 we laid out two possible scenarios.

1) That, this extraordinary object was deliberately constructed as an “ark” – an artificial, world-sized spacecraft -- designed to rescue as many as possible from the imminent, hyperdimensional explosion of an entire world, the destruction of a former major member of the sun’s planetary system which now no longer exists: Planet V. An event which would have inevitably, disastrously, affected the very existence of even an extremely advanced, solar system wide civilization … which we (and others) -- based on a myriad of accumulating evidence -- have proposed arose long before us … literally millions of years ago.

Or, 2) that Iapetus was indeed a “Deathstar world” -- created as an instrument of war by that same civilization (which is still humans’ primary occupation, isn’t it?) – an “instrument” then used in some unimaginable conflict in this solar system a long, long time ago ….

That Iapetus may somehow have even been instrumental in creating the almost unimaginable holocaust – a literal “war in Heaven” -- which ultimately resulted in the deliberate destruction of that same doomed world … with Iapetus itself caught by the aftermath. As an eternal, silent tomb, forever trapped now in a permanent, unique orbit around Saturn ….

But, as we hinted in earlier sections of this Series, there are problems with both of these “solutions” to the current, increasingly profound mysteries presented by Iapetus … major problems.

And, the it struck us.



That -- some time before the destruction of Planet V -- in the natural course of the inexorable expansion through and colonization of the ancient solar system (by our posited “ancient, advanced human civilization”) … Iapetus (as a previously natural moon, but one laden with highly desirable raw materials) was specifically transformed for another purpose altogether: from being just a completely natural satellite … into an artificially-modified, carefully crafted “designer world”… to serve as another highly specialized purpose:

Which was then moved from its original location (maybe in this system, maybe farther out … Uranus … or Neptune … or even from the so-called “Kuiper Belt”) -- to finally occupy the most coveted location in the entire ancient solar system: a look-down orbit on the most visually stunning (and hyperdimensionally-significant) planet known ….



Saturn!

In fact, there is in this discovery a startling, potential “fourth explanation” for Iapetus. But … it is not an explanation anyone will easily accept ….





* * *





It is now known that for most of the history of Earth, the most sophisticated form of life was simple algae – “pond scum.” From about four and a half billion years ago up until about six hundred million years before the Present, a relatively narrow range of algae were the most advanced organisms living anywhere on the planet.



Then, at the boundary between the last two great geological epochs -- known as the great “Pre-Cambrian/Cambrian transition” -- there was a veritable “explosion” of much more complex life … which formed the pattern for the development of all the future “kingdoms,” “phyla,” “genera,” “families” and “species” that we now recognize on Earth.



This so-called “Cambrian Explosion” is without doubt the single biggest mystery of life on Earth—



Save, of course, for the even more mysterious appearance of Life itself.



Why, for literally billions of years, was Earth home to only an extremely narrow range of microscopic cyanobacteria, some organized in great algal mats (below) called “stromatolites” … ? And then, in the space of less than 5 million years (as judged by the latest evidence) – BANG!! – every form of life currently appearing on Earth suddenly emerged …?



In fact, this profound mystery is termed by some biologists “the Big Bang of Evolution.”

A major American clearing house for these revolutionary physics and engineering developments quietly taking place around the world, is The American Anti-Gravity Foundation -- which tracks current “anti-gravity” research through direct interviews with major workers in the field, published technical papers, and status reports from a wide variety of leading governmental and private sector (including major corporate) researchers.



This astonishing compendium – both theoretical physics breakthroughs and actual “gravity engineering” – curiously ignored by mainstream journals and media outlets (with some singular exceptions – such as the recent Russian News Agency story …), is publicly accessible world-wide on the American Anti-Gravity website.



One of those breakthroughs is a thorough reanalysis of the major “physics failure” of the 20th century – the widely reported “inability of even Albert Einstein” to come up with a workable “Unified Field Theory” (UFT) combining gravity and other forces, before his death in 1955.



In fact, according to American Anti-Gravity documents, this is simply NOT true: well before his death, Einstein DID succeed in producing a viable (and radically simplified!) theory of gravity ... which was not only experimentally confirmed by other scientists and engineers of the period, but is now leading to several breakthrough engineering developments re gravity control!



According to one key “insider”:



“The modern (mainstream) physics community insists on making a fundamental error in their attempts to unify the fundamental forces. Some day a scientist is going to get a Nobel prize for what I am about to [say] ….

“The mistake with modern unified field theories is that they are working under the false belief that gravity only links with the other interactions at exceedingly high energies. In other words, the type of extreme conditions that existed a tiny fraction of a second after the Big Bang. At that short instant, gravity and electromagnetism -- and the other forces -- are all interchangeable, they are all more or less indistinguishable. One might say at this point there is a clear interchange between electromagnetic and gravitational forces; they are strongly coupled, or inductively ‘linked,’ at this condition.

“Right there, is the error in modern gravity theories: the assumption of ultra-high energies! Gravity and electro-magnetism are linked at low energies. Gravity and electromagnetism are coupled together in conditions that can be as ‘everyday’ as those inside a whirling polyphase electrical motor. In fact, one way of thinking of an antigravity device is to think of it as an unusual form of electrical motor [emphasis added].

“With this in mind, consider some of the [currently obscure] contributions that Einstein made towards anti-gravity ….





“1) He recognized the inherent limitations of General Relativity [GRT] and sought to correct those. “The [Einstein] unified field theories [UFT] are his improved theory of gravity. Gravity and EM are brought together as a result of a radical new concept of space. This is an amazing approach …. Einstein emerges into a truly breakthrough realm: General Relativity gave us non-Euclidean space ... but UFT goes to non-Euclidean and non-Riemannian [beyond four-dimensional ‘space-time’] space. This is constantly ignored by writers who trash [his] UFT. They ignore that Einstein had said GRT was ‘only an approximation that dealt with gravity’ and as such, a theory he was not [ultimately] satisfied with .…

“2) His UFT introduces the idea of ‘sub-space’ or ‘hyper-space.’

“Modern theories talk of ‘hidden dimensions’; Einstein's UFT has something different. He says that there is a space out of which our space-time -- including any hidden dimensions – is ‘constructed.’ The idea is thus a space structure that transcends [or underlies] our own. Or ... expressed differently … that our space-time is a limited sub-set of – or geometric projection of -- this more fundamental [space] structure ….”

Sounds an awful lot like “Hyperdimensional Physics” to me ….


“3) … Einstein introduces the concept that only the vector magnetic potential has a physical reality in electrodynamics, the electric and magnetic fields are merely concepts we have developed due to reciprocity of the field. Most modern physicists still do not accept this assertion of Einstein ... although more recent experimental research -- the Arahnov-Bohm experiment -- suggests that the A field is real (the experiment shows that A can alter the quantum wavefunction … [even] when all other EM effects have been completely shielded out).

“Finally, here is an interesting thought: the A field appears to cut through shielding, and [still] effect matter [even]when all normal forms of the EM field have been excluded. Controversial research suggests that changes in an electron's quantum wavefunction, induced by the A potential, is identical to what a ‘psychic’ does by concentrating on an electron interference experiment.

“In other words ... maybe Einstein's UFT might also be related to psychic effects!

We have, in just the last few days, discovered dramatic experimental support for precisely this astonishing proposal: evidence that “anomalous cognition” (as “ESP/psychic” experimentation is now termed) is dramatically affected (by up to 600%) by key parameters of hyperdimensional physics! Again, there is no room to provide the critical documentation here; that will be done in a future paper on Enterprise, on this specific subject.

“4) … Einstein invents the Einstein/Szilard refrigeration system (what is this doing here? Well, just wait!).

“Very few people are even taught that Einstein was an experimentalist and an inventor. This refrigerator is possibly the first application of magneto-hydrodynamics [MHD]; it uses AC magnetic fields to create MHD forces in liquid metals. The metals are pumped around through a heat exchanger. But … look at the story beneath the obvious .... Here we have Einstein using AC inductive fields to circulate liquid metals: strangely similar to some current antigravity concepts …. His system is [also] oddly similar to two experiments that produced an [actual] ‘AG type effect’ – one of them you will never hear about, even in the fringe community… but it happened at an AEC [Atomic Energy Commission] facility in the 1960's ….

“5) Einstein develops experimental methods to study UFT predictions and does this right at the same time he is doing experiments for things like the D'Hass-VanAlfven Effect, and Einstein D'Hass Effect.

“In these effects, we have a study of diamagnetism and the magnetization of spinning objects -- bismuth samples – materials we have [also] heard about in various antigravity projects. These experiments get into some very fascinating areas, that show that spinning or precessing atoms can store energy in a field, and the field can collapse and re-spin the whole sample! So, we have spinning diamagnetic materials and EM fields being a known area of experimental investigation for Einstein: yet one more similarity to certain AG stories ….

What are the first “Three Laws” of Hyperdimensional Physics again … “rotation … rotation … rotation …?”



“6) Einstein actually predicts antigravity!!!!

“Right here, this ought to be enough to really turn the heads of the conservative mainstream crowd …. In personal correspondence in the early 1930's, Einstein openly speculates that UFT will lead to some form of “propulsion.” Think of the implications of that! He is the man who revolutionizes our understanding of gravity … and ‘Einstein the inventor’ sees in his equations the probability of antigravity! And yet most physicists in the mainstream -- and certainly most in the AG fringe -- would (incorrectly) assert that Einstein's theories show no possibility of AG! How wonderfully ironic!




“7) Einstein receives a confirmation of his UFT.

“‘[Gabriel] Kron's equations’ are the only ones able to predict and explain the strange behavior of ‘synchronous machines’ [synchronized, rotating electric motors and other spinning electrical devices]. UFT effects -- including EM induced torsion and curvature fields -- are the explanation for strange anomalies [in these massive rotating systems] like ‘phase slip,’ ‘creep’ and the bizarre effect of ‘hunting.’

“And who is interested in Kron's theories?

“The US Navy – because they want to use the [rotating] power selsyns and amplidynes onboard ships. So Kron's practical form of Einstein's equations proves the validity of UFT. This again is still utterly lost on the mainstream crowd, and sadly wasted on [parts of] the AG crowd ….




“8) Einstein works for the Navy during WW-II. “His office mate is JD Krauss. I don't even know how to begin with this one .... All I suggest is just look at Krauss' legacy ... the areas he worked in practically shout ‘radar invisibility!’ Those two must have had some amazing sessions. The Navy was the one service with high value assets, that were large enough and had enough power to try some wild things ... I am convinced those two cooked [up] ideas about how to use high-power AC magnetic fields to deflect and disable mines and torpedoes, and how a big AC field could alter and ‘stealth’ the L-band radar cross- section of a ship. I think Kron and John Moore did the analysis on the generators, and Tesla MIGHT have been used as a short term consultant to do a resonant circuit to further amp up the field created by the modified degaussing coils. John VonNeumann probably did the analysis of effects on RCS [radar cross section], and Donald Menzel looked at the optical and atmospheric effects. Vannevar Bush talked the Navy into the project. [Bush and Menzel also worked together after the war on what we would now call ‘foreign threat assessment’ (very foreign) ….]


“9) And in 1943, Hoffman at Princeton in a public lecture ... about Kron's version of the UFT … says ‘we now have experimental confirmation of Einstein's Unified Field Theory.’ He was talking about the effects in motors ... but, he means what he says. Einstein's theory of a [low energy!] relation between ‘electromagnetism and gravity’ has been proven – because of observable effects it predicts in [rotating] motors …."

Man you people will belive anything, the Unverse is full of unique objects and this moon is just one of them.

~Thanato

im not sure what you meant by "you people" but just to clarify--if it is in reference to people that believe 9/11 was an inside job and the wtc was demolished i could be considered "you people" but if you are implying that i believe in aliens or "extra terrestrials" then you are mistaken and i "cannot" be classifed as "you peple" --it is my opinion that this is evidence of a "supressed human history" where the revelations are so grim that if the "masses" knew it would change the path of history itself--s secret "worth" a global empire

Why do you automatically disregard any explaination that it could be of natural cause and jump right to some woo woo theory?

You think we are not able to get man to the Moon, but yet we can make some "massive uft field propulsion system" or a "Death Star"? If Hoagland said that Star Wars was a true story would you believe that too?

There are basically 2 theories, neither are confirmed, but make much more sense then Hoaglands crazy claims. I more so agree with the 2nd, but still it may be something else all together. I will put my money on the fact that is is not made man made!

http://www.answers.com/topic/iapetus-moon

Deeper look into possible collision with Saturn's Rings
http://www.universetoday.com/

Some NASA info
http://saturn.jpl.nasa.gov/

.

Whatever the explanation may be to the formation of this anomalous moon, thanks sunofone for posting this thought provoking subject. Though I lean towards there being a natural explanation to the formation of this object, I found the "constructed" theory an entertaining read.

The more outlandish the theory, the more they seem to like it.

Agreed, cyncial cristicism is stupid. But chasing off anyone who questions the validity of your claims merely reinforces the critics. Personally? I think its worth giving some notice to, But theres no enough conclusive information to draw any conclusions.

right. I am open to ANYTHING as long as there is validity, plausibility, and some bit of verifiable truth.

This moon is strange. I mean, a wall around the equator that's 60,000 feet(!) high? That's like 11 MILES! Unbelieveable. Imagine standing next to that thing...Great Wall of where?

Before you discredit any theory, just remember Shakespeare, in Hamlet:

"There are more things in heaven and on Earth, Horatio, than are dreamt of in your philosophies."

I'm finding this just a tad hard to believe...

Except, as is clearly shown in the pictures, it's not a wall - it's a high mountain ridge.

It's like describing the Andes, or the Mid Atlantic Ridge, as walls

Until we get better picture we can only speculate. But it looks like the moon was put under strong gravitational stress whilst the surface was still molten. Thus, whilst planets like Earth have just a slight bulge (relative to their size) along their equator, Iapetus has a much more pronouced one. Simple as that really.

If it's a death star then that means Jar Jar Binks is real. And that's one reality I'm simply not prepared to consider!

i happen to think that the distance it is from satrun,the orbit duration around saturn,its size in relation to these equations in conjuntion with the highly anomalous geometric anomalies present point to something far too irregular to be chance--here are some example--
straight lines!!

more straight lines plus perfect angles!!?!



or "our ancestors" were able to do this--i dont think we went to the moon in the 70's but i do happen to think that a whole lot of technology was lost at some point and yet the evidence seem to get suppressed for some reason--why? which is a good enough question to start its own thread but if anyone wants post their ideas here id love to hear them

hmmmmmm we have to analyze this. Dont let the steel circlers know, but i think there is almost enough evidence to have this taken seriously, these dont look too much like photshop. Especially becuase some of them have A copyright to NASA in the corners. Anyway, a deathstar, no, that is just a coincidence... But possible artificial I may believe with some more evidence

we all know i dont believe in et's or that we went to the moon in the 60's so i have to chalk this one up to "forbidden history"-- this recent article outlining the "new" agenda for astrobiology reminded me of this old hoagland thread-- that is such an interesting topic though huh..."macro engineering"

2 year old necro posting. Oh my. RIP.