Lunar Anomalies.

[nephilim12]

With many private lunar observers all over the world having access to powerful telescopes and filming what appear not to be natural structures, the latest pictures that flood the net were often dismissed as hoaxes until the Indian Space Research Organisation ( A fully Government agency ) released pictures of the lunar surface showing anomalies taken by their powerful imaging equipment.

This revelation is shocking for the public since agencies around the world had suppressed such information for the last 4 decades.

Any one can see these pictures in the official site of ISRO.

Most shocking are the presence of building shaped structures, the ruins of a cigar shaped massive spaceship estimated to be taller than the Eiffel tower, triangular markings, mayan style step pyramids in the centre of some craters, etc.

Check guys. We have a right to know what lies beyond.

[Timothy]

With many private lunar observers all over the world having access to powerful telescopes and filming what appear not to be natural structures, the latest pictures that flood the net were often dismissed as hoaxes until the Indian Space Research Organisation ( A fully Government agency ) released pictures of the lunar surface showing anomalies taken by their powerful imaging equipment.

This revelation is shocking for the public since agencies around the world had suppressed such information for the last 4 decades.

Any one can see these pictures in the official site of ISRO.

Most shocking are the presence of building shaped structures, the ruins of a cigar shaped massive spaceship estimated to be taller than the Eiffel tower, triangular markings, mayan style step pyramids in the centre of some craters, etc.

Check guys. We have a right to know what lies beyond.

I'm going to be the first to throw it out there, without looking at any photos, by saying it's all natural baby!

Still interested in seeing some strange natural formations though. Any pictures in particular?

Edit: I'd be happy for you to convince me otherwise though... Can you post the images of what you've described?

(And can we make this strictly about the ISRO images, there are plenty of topics on moon anomalies already)

Edited May 22, 2012 by Timonthy

[Rafterman]

With many private lunar observers all over the world having access to powerful telescopes and filming what appear not to be natural structures, the latest pictures that flood the net were often dismissed as hoaxes until the Indian Space Research Organisation ( A fully Government agency ) released pictures of the lunar surface showing anomalies taken by their powerful imaging equipment.

This revelation is shocking for the public since agencies around the world had suppressed such information for the last 4 decades.

Any one can see these pictures in the official site of ISRO.

Most shocking are the presence of building shaped structures, the ruins of a cigar shaped massive spaceship estimated to be taller than the Eiffel tower, triangular markings, mayan style step pyramids in the centre of some craters, etc.

Check guys. We have a right to know what lies beyond.

Please link to these photos directly and provide us your detailed analysis.

[Pax Unum]

With many private lunar observers all over the world having access to powerful telescopes and filming what appear not to be natural structures, the latest pictures that flood the net were often dismissed as hoaxes until the Indian Space Research Organisation ( A fully Government agency ) released pictures of the lunar surface showing anomalies taken by their powerful imaging equipment.

This revelation is shocking for the public since agencies around the world had suppressed such information for the last 4 decades.

Any one can see these pictures in the official site of ISRO.

Most shocking are the presence of building shaped structures, the ruins of a cigar shaped massive spaceship estimated to be taller than the Eiffel tower, triangular markings, mayan style step pyramids in the centre of some craters, etc.

Check guys. We have a right to know what lies beyond.

Replying to bolded:

Complex craters have uplifted centers, and they have typically broad flat shallow crater floors, and terraced walls.

Tycho crater is an example

So a pile of rubble in the center of a crater isn't a Maya style pyramid, it's just a pile of rubble...

LINK-> http://en.wikipedia..../Complex_crater

Edited May 23, 2012 by Pax Unum

[Englishgent]

Replying to bolded:

Tycho crater is an example

So a pile of rubble in the center of a crater isn't a Maya style pyramid, it's just a pile of rubble...

LINK-> http://en.wikipedia..../Complex_crater

Exactly. It is a natural occurence due to an impact by a meteor or asteroid. It is exactly the same effect as water dripping into a pool. . A central column appears immediately after the drip hits the pool of water. Same happens when a meteor strikes.

[badeskov]

Exactly. It is a natural occurence due to an impact by a meteor or asteroid. It is exactly the same effect as water dripping into a pool. . A central column appears immediately after the drip hits the pool of water. Same happens when a meteor strikes.

Yeah...or try flour on a plate and a marble...same pattern, no mystery.

Cheers,

Badeskov

[Hazzard]

What about the rest of your building shaped structures, the ruins of a cigar shaped massive spaceship estimated to be taller than the Eiffel tower, triangular markings, mayan style step pyramids in the centre of some craters?

Any pictures?

Edited May 23, 2012 by Hazzard

[DBunker]

What about the rest of your building shaped structures, the ruins of a cigar shaped massive spaceship estimated to be taller than the Eiffel tower, triangular markings, mayan style step pyramids in the centre of some craters?

Any pictures?

I have seen some of these pictures, and I must say that Im not impressed. Most of them can be explained in other ways than ancient aliens or ET artifacts.

[Space Commander Travis]

With many private lunar observers all over the world having access to powerful telescopes and filming what appear not to be natural structures, the latest pictures that flood the net were often dismissed as hoaxes until the Indian Space Research Organisation ( A fully Government agency ) released pictures of the lunar surface showing anomalies taken by their powerful imaging equipment.

This revelation is shocking for the public since agencies around the world had suppressed such information for the last 4 decades.

Any one can see these pictures in the official site of ISRO.

Most shocking are the presence of building shaped structures, the ruins of a cigar shaped massive spaceship estimated to be taller than the Eiffel tower, triangular markings, mayan style step pyramids in the centre of some craters, etc.

Check guys. We have a right to know what lies beyond.

And thousands and thousands of amateur astronomers have equipment that enables them to take a pretty good look at the Moon, and very very few have ever tried to claim that they've seen anything that They might want to hush up. Why is it only on "fringe" websites that this sensational news ever seems to be Revealed?

I must say it all sounds rather like that Apollo 20 hoax. http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=tV8k3YOamdY&feature=related

[DONTEATUS]

OMG ! Im sold ! WHen do we go back ?

[nephilim12]

Uhuh yep. The gravity being a fraction of Earth's and the vacuum, no erosion or rather minimal.

i'm not entirely convinced, not even amused by these anomaly assumptions. After all, a bush in the moonlight can be a ferocious bear.

Strange though, the moon, so close to the earth, full of large craters, some several hundred kms wide, obviously meteor impacts. And none of them hit earth ? Just the moon. Even considering the earth's atmosphere and smaller meteors breaking up due to friction....

Is it chance we've consistently been so damn lucky throughout history ?

Well, we know of the Yucatan crater and recent Tungaska incident only.

No crater in Tungaska though, just a forest area with 80 million trees flattened for 2000 sq kms, being a mid-air explosion supposedly 1000 times more powerful than Hiroshima.

[ChrLzs]

And none of them hit earth

????

Sigh. We have an atmosphere and as you even point out, erosion. This is a VERY well understood situation. Seriously, you need to do some very basic research.

Anyway, before posting the links to these images*, nephilim, can you tell us what experience/knowledge you have about enlargement, and jpeg compression?

* In regard to posting those images - are you not planning to do so? Seems strange that you would ignore that request, as you appear to have done. Please post a link to that which, in your opinion, is the very best example. And I take it that will be a full-resolution, original and unprocessed image... The reason I say that will become clear...

[nephilim12]

well u can google and scutinise the various links. The possibilities are various - 1. Edited hoaxes. 2. Private astronomers with access to equipment.

You be the judge in the meantime.

[Oniomancer]

Uhuh yep. The gravity being a fraction of Earth's and the vacuum, no erosion or rather minimal.

i'm not entirely convinced, not even amused by these anomaly assumptions. After all, a bush in the moonlight can be a ferocious bear.

Strange though, the moon, so close to the earth, full of large craters, some several hundred kms wide, obviously meteor impacts. And none of them hit earth ? Just the moon. Even considering the earth's atmosphere and smaller meteors breaking up due to friction....

Is it chance we've consistently been so damn lucky throughout history ?

Well, we know of the Yucatan crater and recent Tungaska incident only.

No crater in Tungaska though, just a forest area with 80 million trees flattened for 2000 sq kms, being a mid-air explosion supposedly 1000 times more powerful than Hiroshima.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_impact_craters_on_Earth

You said it yourself, little or no erosion, virtually no tectonic activity either, so no sublimation or subduction of craters into the landscape. And How old do you think most of the craters on the moon are?

[Waspie_Dwarf]

well u can google and scutinise the various links. The possibilities are various - 1. Edited hoaxes. 2. Private astronomers with access to equipment.

You be the judge in the meantime.

You haven't provided any links. How can people be sure they are looking at the same thing as tou unless YOU provide those links.

nephilim12, I strongly advise you to read this FAQ page on sourcing. I would particularly point out these parts:

Do I have to post sources when I present information in a post?

We do not have a specific requirement for members to provide source links to relevant data when making a claim or presenting factual statements in their posts however it is often a very good idea to do so whenever you can. If there are specific facts you are relying on in a discussion to support your argument and the provision of a source is possible then being able to provide one to back up those facts helps you to solidify your position and will go a long way to convincing others that your argument has merit. Obviously there are many cases where it isn't possible or practical to provide a source but where it is and where one is warranted then its a good idea to do so.

Why should I post a source - its up to everyone else to do research and validate what i'm saying

No it isn't, if you are making a claim that requires validation and you are able to provide it then it is generally up to you to do so; you are making the claim and therefore you need to back it up with sources if you want it to be taken seriously. Again while there is no strict enforcement of this if you are looking to convince others that your point is correct but are telling others that they will need to look up the facts themselves or to "do their homework" then you are unlikely to elicit much support.

Put simply, whilst you are not breaking any rules, do not expect to be taken seriously UNLESS you provide links.

[Mentalcase]

The Earth was hit probably harder by asteroids, meteors etc. Thing is, volcanism, water and glaciers reshape the land.

I would love some hi res photos of Tycho and the surrounding area though.

[JesseCuster]

Strange though, the moon, so close to the earth, full of large craters, some several hundred kms wide, obviously meteor impacts. And none of them hit earth ? Just the moon. Even considering the earth's atmosphere and smaller meteors breaking up due to friction....

The big difference is that the earth is very active tectonically and therefore the surface of the earth is constantly being slowly worked over. I think there has recently been discovery of some tectonic or volcanic activity on the moon, but it's nothing compared to the turmoil going on with the earth's surface (relatively speaking). The moon simply retains its ancient scars from a time when the solar system was a much more violent place and the lack of an atmosphere and sea to erode things away and the lack of tectonic activity means things don't really change (unless somethings big hits it of course).

No crater in Tungaska though, just a forest area with 80 million trees flattened for 2000 sq kms, being a mid-air explosion supposedly 1000 times more powerful than Hiroshima.

As devastating as the Tunguska blast was, it was a relatively small object, I think I heard estimates of a <100m meteor. In cases like that, the atmosphere makes a huge difference as on the moon an object like that would simply hit the ground directly and cause a crater, but in the earth's atmosphere, the atmosphere slows it down while it heats up and glows hot and something like ice or frozen carbon dioxide in the rock can cause a steam explosion causing it to explode far enough above the ground to cause no crater but to cause significant other damage.

Note that the Nagasaki and Hiroshima bombs didn't leave craters either for the same reason - they exploded in air to maximise the spread of the damage they caused and to prevent a significant amount of the energy of the bombs forming a crater.

The fission bombs used on Japan were also far less powerful than later fusion based weapons. The Soviet Tsar Bomba had an original yield of 100 megatons, that's 5,000 times more powerful than the Fat Man bomb dropped on Nagasaki, but was scaled down to 57 megatons because even the Soviets realised dropping a nuclear bomb that big could have devastating far ranging consequences due to nuclear fallout. The energy from the Tunguska event has been estimated at 30 megatons, in other words, humans have made bigger explosions than the Tunguska event.

edit: A lot of what I just said has already been said multiple times. I should read threads completely before responding.

Edited May 24, 2012 by Archimedes

[Waspie_Dwarf]

I would love some hi res photos of Tycho and the surrounding area though.

Your wish is my command!

By pure coincidence I posted a coupleof LRO images of Tycho in the UM image gallery two days ago. You can find them HERE and HERE and one from June 2011 HERE.

[Mentalcase]

Your wish is my command!

By pure coincidence I posted a coupleof LRO images of Tycho in the UM image gallery two days ago. You can find them HERE and HERE and one from June 2011 HERE.

Thanks Waspie!

I am still looking for the surrounding area though (above and beyond the crater wall). That LRO takes some great pics tho!

Edited May 24, 2012 by Mentalcase

[Waspie_Dwarf]

I am still looking for the surrounding area though (above and beyond the crater wall). That LRO takes some great pics tho!

What exactly do you define as "the surrounding area"? The rays from Tycho extend hundreds of kilometres in all directions, covering a vast area. There will not be one single hi-res image covering an area that vast.

If it is the immediate area you mean the Pax Unit's post (no. 4 in this topic) shows some of that.

[Mentalcase]

What exactly do you define as "the surrounding area"? The rays from Tycho extend hundreds of kilometres in all directions, covering a vast area. There will not be one single hi-res image covering an area that vast.

If it is the immediate area you mean the Pax Unit's post (no. 4 in this topic) shows some of that.

I'm a very skeptical person, but a few years back I was messing with GE and I seen a number of "anomalous" features. I made a thread about it and all of a sudden (a pure coincidence I'm sure) the res changed on GE and was never able to verify those coordinates. It made my thread appear fringy, when in fact I was trying to get an expert analysis. Suffice it to say, I'mstill interested in that particular area. I've spent endless hours viewing GE Mars, Moon, etc. This is the only area that truly grabbed my attention.

Edited May 24, 2012 by Mentalcase

[DBunker]

I would love some hi res photos of Tycho and the surrounding area though.

I would love some high res photos of the stuff that nephilim was talking about.

[Waspie_Dwarf]

I'm a very skeptical person, but a few years back I was messing with GE and I seen a number of "anomalous" features. I made a thread about it and all of a sudden (a pure coincidence I'm sure) the res changed on GE and was never able to verify those coordinates. It made my thread appear fringy, when in fact I was trying to get an expert analysis. Suffice it to say, I'mstill interested in that particular area. I've spent endless hours viewing GE Mars, Moon, etc. This is the only area that truly grabbed my attention.

I vaguely remember the topic. Your best bet would be to look through NASA's vast catalogue of images. The problem is that the moon is a big place and the "surrounding area" of Tycho is just to vague to really pin down what you are looking for.

I would love some high res photos of the stuff that nephilim was talking about.

Wouldn't we all.

[JesseCuster]

Does anyone know if there's a browsable map of the LRO images the same way there is with the Mars images?

The ASU database of images that you can find via a map of Mars is a hell of a resource and I'd love to have access to a similar Moon based tool.

[Waspie_Dwarf]

I am still looking for the surrounding area though (above and beyond the crater wall).

I've added THIS Hubble image showing Tycho and the surrounding area. I'm not sure if it will be detailed enough for you though.

Does anyone know if there's a browsable map of the LRO images the same way there is with the Mars images?

Will this do you? The LROC WMS Image Map

This might also be of interest: Consolidated Lunar Atlas