Mostly true, but there are a few that lean towards artificial. That lower pic of an edifice on Phobos isn't the best one, but is certainly difficult to explain in near vacuum.
There are a few on Mars and Luna.
On Mars, for instance, there's a pic from one of the rovers that shows what looks like a vast structure, like a dam or aqueduct with arches, rectangular areas at even spacing and straight lines, in the background, that jumps out with lightening the pic. The foreground looks like a damp stream bed (tho could just be darker dust). It took me days to find it, again, and perhaps someone has it saved, but it was very interesting.
Whelp, that single pic I remember is still a too timely chore to find, but it was one that went through quite a bit of vetting on ATS years ago and ended up as a valid unanswered question, despite some good efforts by intelligent, reasonable folks. There are many, many more, but all the symmetrical faces, right angles and perfect circles could be argued as natural fracturing, drip basins and such.
That one pic I brought up remains a puzzler as the "structure" was distant, yet distinct, and took up a good portion of a valley some great distance in the background. It's regularity and seeming intentional composition just popped in memory as one image that cemented the probability of construction beyond all the other oddities. Hopefully, some interested party is more invested than I and saved it, and my memory isn't exaggerating its novelty.
Since then, a few pther images strain natural explanations, likely found on some of the better compilations some pages back on search engines and stretching from decades ago. The xenon 129 on Mars remains a big question as well. Admittedly, there are more explicable images than not, but the few are actual puzzlers. Cheers.
You might find this interesting - as I have deep dived this topic.
So the often claimed issue is as you rightly point out - the USSR would have called cap on the landings.
The often used response to this from the moon landing was fake party is 'the US bribed Russia (former USSR) with wheat and food sources. Which as you can imagine, is a weak response.
But this is often cited by the fakers.
Ultimately, I think they did go, so I think the footage shared is from the same voyage, no. Do I think they had to doctor footage due to elements that are part of the disclosure we seek today? Yes.
What do the elites get by faking the moon landing? If they did fake it, one of the biggest reasons would be to get one over on thr soviets and yet the soviets confirmed it
That doesn’t really call for all that, though, does it? Makes it seem super extra when there’s a repeat episode of Gunsmoke on tonight that’ll do fine.
Oh that 1 mega pixel photos taken from a Chinese mission.But india space org already surveyed the moon in 2008 i believe.You should have mentioned that in your post.
I believe thats what a lot of the other folks are talking about.
They don’t like the idea that the USA isn’t the only country that’s been to the moon, nor the notion that other countries have actually photographed the moon.
Let's not forget that for quite a few years, the US and the west had NO capability to even get people into orbit, or resupply the International space station, and had to rely entirely on Russian Soyuz launches.
You are not wrong, and yet something does not add up. The moon enviroment does not change rocks like on earth. Water can erode rocks into round shapes, sharp edges and geometrical figures can be the result of cristalization or lava cooling quickly. I have yet to hear a convincing explanation for these shapes on non air enviroments, no water, wind or volcanic activity to suggest external factors being the cause of their shape.
And yes, resolution is crap... They need to improve quality on pictures like this, unless what they want is to keep objects like these hidden in plain sight.
I have yet to hear a convincing explanation for these shapes on non air enviroments, no water, wind or volcanic activity to suggest external factors being the cause of their shape.
Just because you've not heard of something doesn't actually mean it doesn't exist. I recently found out about the parietal eye some reptiles have. Before I read about that if you told me some lizards have 3 eyes I'd call you one of the stupidest people on the planet.
Ignorance does not have to lead to conspiracy theories. There are plenty of explainable, natural phenomena for why the moon looks the way it does. One of them is solar wind. It does indeed cause erosion on bodies without an atmosphere. This obviously takes an exceptionally long time though. But coincidentally the moon is about 4.5 billion years old, just like the earth. That means it's had more than enough time for solar erosion to do its thing.
geometrical figures can be the result of cristalization or lava cooling
The moon was volcanically active to some degree at one point in its life. There are visible lava tubes on its surface
Again just to reiterate, just because you don't know about something or understand how something works does not mean you need to a link it to some wild conspiracy theory. That's honestly what leads to someone becoming a flerf or a "space doesn't exist" type of "person."
The moon, and all planets, have chunks of meteorites scattered all around. This looks like a quasi-rectangular chunk of rock with maybe a rounded side. The image is blurry but there are chunks of rock around everywhere in space. It’s literally what everything in space is made of.
If there was something funky going on I would expect lots of traces and not just a couple of fascinating rocks here and there.
If the moon, fx, had visitors wouldnt there be multiple landing platforms, buildings, straightline caves etc? Even if these places had been left for 500 mill years there would still be more than 2-3 structures imho.
I will lean to discount the moon as everybody can buy a telescope and have a look and it is probably the most looked after object in space.
Here’s the freeman hills scientific paper that NASA pretends doesn’t exist. IT FOUND WATER VAPOR BEING OMITTED AT REGULAR INTERVALS OVER A 700km PORTION OF THE MOON. NASA also claims their satellites malfunction right when they’re about to find something: MARS and Cydonia, Luna and Ganymede, Any satellite and 3i/atlas, Any camera better than on ‘03 Motorola Razr and the moon. Lastly they also found neptunium 237 on the moon that DOESNT OCCUR NATURALLY.
Aye, the pareidolia and dunning-kruger effect are unfortunately a very potent combo in the ufology community.
No point trying to convince the diehards of this tho tbh - it's like trying to convince a religious person that gods aren't real.
Some people have a faith based approach to the topic of unidentified phenomena, and aren't trained in critical reasoning or the scientific method - it's why these sorts of folks are often prone to taking huge leaps of faith and using an uncritical/biased/woo stance on things, rather than looking at things objectively and accepting that sometimes there is no satisfying answer until more data arrives.
How can anyone trust the government in what they do and what they say? Your taxes go to the government, those taxes pay for NASA etc. They allegedly have been on space and on the moon. This should be all public viewing and nothing redacted or edited as it is public funded. Hell anyone should be able to go up to space, your taxes pay for it. Hundreds of billions of dollars spent on space per year. In the last 20 years, what has NASA actually done??? Everything is subbed-out, they keep reusing extremely old rockets by refitting and renaming them. They are years and years behind schedule. NASA spends so much time developing and perfecting new technology for the rocket. That the technology is way put of date by the time it should fly. Trillions over the years spent on what. Nothing is changing.
OP this goes a lot deeper than you think it does. There have been numerous whistleblowers independently reporting viewing objective structures (“cities”) in photos they were not supposed to see.
Highly recommended you watch WhyFiles on YT episodes on the moon. He presents the stories and discusses/debunks them.
Not regarding the moon, but Mars. John Brandenburg (planetary scientist who came up with the water on Mars theory) has another theory, showing almost irrefutable evidence of nuclear weapons being used on Mars.
I don't necessarily agree with his final theory on what happened, I rather think they nuked themselves. It shows a chicxulub sized impact, and this supposedly did massive damage to the planet and his water, maybe this ended up in some kind of "water wars" event and one group nuked the northern cities.
Both impacts are near the "faces" on Mars, pyramid shaped hills, and what looks like remnants of ancient city walls on the mountain.
Also, nuclear explosions make more than just 1 element. If a nuclear explosion is responsible for the high concentrations of Xenon-129, where are the Stronium and Cesium isotopes. Those would measure high on atmospheric tests as well. John Brandenburg doesn't have an answer to these questions despite them being critical to his theory.
I believe he actually covers the natural decay in the first couple slides, not only Xenon but others as well later in the presentation
Iodine 129 decays to Xenon 129 in 17 million years, normal low neutron energy creates little Xenon 129
Xenon isotope spectrum indicates fast neutron event, not moderated reaction
I believe he is saying natural decay doesn't account for almost 3x the amount of expected Xe129. Another fascinating point is that Xe129 is consistent throughout our solar system, the only two places we have ever detected with higher rates is Mars, and areas on Earth were we practiced open air nuclear testing.
He goes over the different element results of the events, Argon Thorium, Potassium, Krypton, saying that these show signs of being created by irradiation rather than natural decay over billions of years. Also things like the prevailing winds moving the fallout from the epicenters.
He also covers natural reactor events, and the result of that would show different than we see on Mars. It seems pretty well thought out. Have you watch the video or went through the slides?
I believe he is saying natural decay doesn't account for almost 3x the amount of expected Xe129.
Right, that's why there is specifically the detail that the Iodine-129 was trapped in the crust and only escapes/decays after the majority of Mars' atmosphere has dissapated into space. If the Xenon-129/Iodine-129 was already present in the atmosphere before atmospheric dissapation than it would've resulted in a levels. Crustal encapsulation of the Iodine is required for this theory.
He goes over the different element results of the events, Argon Thorium, Potassium, Krypton, saying that these show signs of being created by irradiation rather than natural decay over billions of years.
Taking a look at the PowerPoint he says that Argon, Potassium and Krypton distributions are/could be consistent with a neutron capture explanation. I don't think he disputes the distribution of those elements, just Xenon-129.
He also covers natural reactor events, and the result of that would show different than we see on Mars. It seems pretty well thought out. Have you watch the video or went through the slides?
Not recently, but I have read his theory before. I was actually really on board with J. Brandenburg's work before I learned how much he was pushing the artificial nuclear explosion angle. Everyone agrees with his data, it's just the conclusions that end up being so divisive.
Finding evidence and imagining evidence are very different. Many people want to believe in something so much that they accept anything that helps them believe regardless of the validity of the "evidence". It is further complicated by our unwillingness to accept that we were wrong.
This would hit a lot harder if OP put pictures of like things on Google maps that are natural formations. Though it's not a fair comparison because the moon has no weather erosion which would be necessary to form some odd shapes, at least it's something.
This post comes off as very "nothing to see here, folks" without some examples at least.
All they said was that:
- people are vulnerable to being misled by the oversensitive pattern-seeking software in their brain
when these interesting features actually do exist and aren’t a consequence of shadows and photography, there are other, more likely and well-understood processes by which they can and do form, even in terrestrial environments
if the government(s) is/are secretly competent enough to be hiding this kind of information, they’re obviously not going to release evidence to the contrary in their officially published photos, which are low-enough resolution to be seamlessly edited in undetectable ways
Many of these are no more clearly a ‘false' alarm than they are a ‘true' alarm. There simply isn’t enough information to say one way or the other. I’m tired of the biased “it is a structure” and “it’s pareidolia” claimants arguing about it when neither has satisfactory evidence one way or the other. Why not just say it’s interesting, we don’t know what it is, let’s see if we can find some additional information about it?
For example, is there any information about the chemical and mineralogical structure of the surrounding geology? What about nearby meteor impacts that might have melted and cooled minerals into that shape? Are there any other seemingly aberrant features nearby that differ from this one and would require a different geological process to be natural? How would the angle of the light striking it possibly cause an illusory effect?
It’s too bad we don’t have a laser/telescope/spectrograph system powerful enough to hit these structures, ablate them somewhat, and determine their chemistry. Granted it is a long shot for these things being created by intelligences, but just naysaying is also not evidence.
I don't believe scientists have been compromised in masse all over the world with varying creeds and affiliations. When I see American and Chinese scientists discussing it over, then I'll believe it.
It is my impression that there are thousands if not more of pretty amazing telescopes that local amateur astronomers and even you and me can use to survey the surface of the moon.
I haven’t heard anything has been found on the visible sides.
Oh yeah? Prove it that it's just pareidolia or strange rock formations.... I'll wait for you to zip on over to Mars or the Moon, take some boots-on-the-ground photos and prove to me once and for all they ARE just strange but normal rock formations.
*insert your counter-response of 'no, the burden of proof is on the one making the claim!!"*
Sounds a lot like you're making some definitive statements on one side of the argument but providing even less evidence than OP, at least they have photos.
Now, I understand the argument for pareidolia is just like saying 'life doesn't exist on other planets because we haven't talked to any yet'
Just like we know the exact amount of species on this planet, right? We don't find new ones every year, that would be crazy, like we don't actually know everything and are still learning...
*edit - also, sorry for coming across heated, but like - do you think any of our space agencies or governments WOULD publicly share that information? You don't think it would get classified as national defense? Because our govt has done that to us, time and time again. we have been their test subjects for as long as they've had power and i personally don't have any faith in their integrity or honesty. Sure, individuals working for the govt are most likely not in-the-know and innocent in any deceit or coverup, but any time I hear someone try to push the 'oh come on guys, you REALLY think they would lie/cover this up from us?!' I say yes. Yes a thousand times, yes.
look up mk ultra, tunguskee experiment, the trinity/castle bravo tests and coverups, gulf of tonkin incident, the USS liberty, like - yea - want more examples? I'm sure I can keep them coming. Trusting the govt is like putting your baby in a lions mouth and trusting it not to swallow.
" But don’t you think you’re giving the government way too much credit when it comes to aliens?"
I mean, no. I don't even know if aliens exist, but I do know the government has a vested interest in the topic, project bluebeam was an interesting framework for possible future operations.
I'm not here saying every photo, every little thing that looks peculiar is unnatural - but the mainstream agenda pushes an opinion like we know everything, we don't have to try to explain anything because it all just follows science.
But science isn't fact, it's a process of learning. And learning never stops - so while I think it's fair to apply the pareidolia title to many images that may come up, I whole heartedly disagree that they are all that and challenge you and others to at least try to stimulate some critical thinking. I for one do not need to be told what to believe, so I will question everything. That includes both sides, Im often a very critical commentator on many 'UFO' sightings when they're much more likely than not to be stadium lights or a SpaceX launch for example.
But this topic of discussion exists for a reason, either because it's a real phenomenon that we publicly cannot explain, or it's a long term govt psyop meant to manipulate people into certain beliefs/view points. because it's not 'nothing'
I will answer your question about why the government would not hide it. Because the government has realized that it cannot hide everything, and mainly because the edited photos have been exposed so many times that the edits themselves have become the best proof. Why edit and hide something if there was nothing there? Answer that yourself. Skeptics like you no longer have a chance to stop what has long since gotten under people's skin, and they believe that we are not alone more and more, and thanks to remote viewing, many are even further along...we no longer just believe, we know and understand the truth.
Who are you talking to, bro?
[deleted]
Man im sure glad you were put in charge of determining what is and isn't convincing evidence
Mostly true, but there are a few that lean towards artificial. That lower pic of an edifice on Phobos isn't the best one, but is certainly difficult to explain in near vacuum.
There are a few on Mars and Luna.
On Mars, for instance, there's a pic from one of the rovers that shows what looks like a vast structure, like a dam or aqueduct with arches, rectangular areas at even spacing and straight lines, in the background, that jumps out with lightening the pic. The foreground looks like a damp stream bed (tho could just be darker dust). It took me days to find it, again, and perhaps someone has it saved, but it was very interesting.
[deleted]
Whelp, that single pic I remember is still a too timely chore to find, but it was one that went through quite a bit of vetting on ATS years ago and ended up as a valid unanswered question, despite some good efforts by intelligent, reasonable folks. There are many, many more, but all the symmetrical faces, right angles and perfect circles could be argued as natural fracturing, drip basins and such.
That one pic I brought up remains a puzzler as the "structure" was distant, yet distinct, and took up a good portion of a valley some great distance in the background. It's regularity and seeming intentional composition just popped in memory as one image that cemented the probability of construction beyond all the other oddities. Hopefully, some interested party is more invested than I and saved it, and my memory isn't exaggerating its novelty.
Since then, a few pther images strain natural explanations, likely found on some of the better compilations some pages back on search engines and stretching from decades ago. The xenon 129 on Mars remains a big question as well. Admittedly, there are more explicable images than not, but the few are actual puzzlers. Cheers.
I think the people finding these “structures” in NASA images forget that the ESA, Russia, China, Pakistan and others have also surveyed the moon.
It's what convinces me that the moon landing was legit. The USSR wouldn't have let them get the dub.
You might find this interesting - as I have deep dived this topic.
So the often claimed issue is as you rightly point out - the USSR would have called cap on the landings.
The often used response to this from the moon landing was fake party is 'the US bribed Russia (former USSR) with wheat and food sources. Which as you can imagine, is a weak response.
But this is often cited by the fakers.
Ultimately, I think they did go, so I think the footage shared is from the same voyage, no. Do I think they had to doctor footage due to elements that are part of the disclosure we seek today? Yes.
Plus they went 6 times, not just once
[deleted]
What do the elites get by faking the moon landing? If they did fake it, one of the biggest reasons would be to get one over on thr soviets and yet the soviets confirmed it
[deleted]
That doesn’t really call for all that, though, does it? Makes it seem super extra when there’s a repeat episode of Gunsmoke on tonight that’ll do fine.
Do you also think they share a faith? If so please do elaborate.
Yeah, they probs feeding on Tubby Custard
Lol..pakistan..you mean india with their moon rover.
I shouldn't be able to tell which nationality you belong to over a comment in an UFO sub
Don’t move the goalposts to avoid your Pakistan comment.
Why are you calling India’s space agency as Pakistan’s?
They didn’t?
Both countries have had successful moon missions. As have others.
Sorry..pakistan hasn't had a moon mission.India had one recently.Whats with the incorrect information on this post?!
So what’s ICUBE-Q, then?
Here you go
https://www.cbc.ca/news/science/india-fourth-country-to-land-on-moon-1.6944716
That’s moon landings. I was talking about images taken from orbit. I specifically mentioned people surveying the moon.
Oh that 1 mega pixel photos taken from a Chinese mission.But india space org already surveyed the moon in 2008 i believe.You should have mentioned that in your post.
I believe thats what a lot of the other folks are talking about.
No, people are just being racist.
They don’t like the idea that the USA isn’t the only country that’s been to the moon, nor the notion that other countries have actually photographed the moon.
You realize both are pathetic compared to 1st world nations right?
Let's not forget that for quite a few years, the US and the west had NO capability to even get people into orbit, or resupply the International space station, and had to rely entirely on Russian Soyuz launches.
Pathetic in what sense?
Lol..im an american..there..made it clear.
Your favorite Reddit community is based around masterbating to Indian actress Shilba Shetty. Try again.
Master debating?
South Pakistan then will be the compromise name per the Mars Accords of 2250 which shall eternally retroactively recursively be in place.
ProtoIndoEuropeanistan will be considered second
Because nature forms these shapes too and the resolution is crap. So, it’s not evidence. Just identifying shapes in the clouds…
Correct. As an avid hiker and rock climber, I see crazy shapes in nature often. You too can witness this by leaving the house.
Can confirm. I go outside periodically and also see crazy shapes in nature often.
You are not wrong, and yet something does not add up. The moon enviroment does not change rocks like on earth. Water can erode rocks into round shapes, sharp edges and geometrical figures can be the result of cristalization or lava cooling quickly. I have yet to hear a convincing explanation for these shapes on non air enviroments, no water, wind or volcanic activity to suggest external factors being the cause of their shape. And yes, resolution is crap... They need to improve quality on pictures like this, unless what they want is to keep objects like these hidden in plain sight.
Just because you've not heard of something doesn't actually mean it doesn't exist. I recently found out about the parietal eye some reptiles have. Before I read about that if you told me some lizards have 3 eyes I'd call you one of the stupidest people on the planet.
Ignorance does not have to lead to conspiracy theories. There are plenty of explainable, natural phenomena for why the moon looks the way it does. One of them is solar wind. It does indeed cause erosion on bodies without an atmosphere. This obviously takes an exceptionally long time though. But coincidentally the moon is about 4.5 billion years old, just like the earth. That means it's had more than enough time for solar erosion to do its thing.
The moon was volcanically active to some degree at one point in its life. There are visible lava tubes on its surface
Again just to reiterate, just because you don't know about something or understand how something works does not mean you need to a link it to some wild conspiracy theory. That's honestly what leads to someone becoming a flerf or a "space doesn't exist" type of "person."
I always have to remind myself that space is weird.
Gas giants that are sideways, storms that last for an eternity, planets that rain diamonds.
Maybe it is alien structures, however we have definitive proof that mother nature is unreal.
The moon, and all planets, have chunks of meteorites scattered all around. This looks like a quasi-rectangular chunk of rock with maybe a rounded side. The image is blurry but there are chunks of rock around everywhere in space. It’s literally what everything in space is made of.
If there was something funky going on I would expect lots of traces and not just a couple of fascinating rocks here and there.
If the moon, fx, had visitors wouldnt there be multiple landing platforms, buildings, straightline caves etc? Even if these places had been left for 500 mill years there would still be more than 2-3 structures imho.
I will lean to discount the moon as everybody can buy a telescope and have a look and it is probably the most looked after object in space.
Just a thought.
NASA employee whistleblowers have verified the existence of programs to sanitize or classify photos before release to the public….. NASA employees
Here’s the freeman hills scientific paper that NASA pretends doesn’t exist. IT FOUND WATER VAPOR BEING OMITTED AT REGULAR INTERVALS OVER A 700km PORTION OF THE MOON. NASA also claims their satellites malfunction right when they’re about to find something: MARS and Cydonia, Luna and Ganymede, Any satellite and 3i/atlas, Any camera better than on ‘03 Motorola Razr and the moon. Lastly they also found neptunium 237 on the moon that DOESNT OCCUR NATURALLY.
They ARE evidence, just not conclusive evidence.
Aye, the pareidolia and dunning-kruger effect are unfortunately a very potent combo in the ufology community.
No point trying to convince the diehards of this tho tbh - it's like trying to convince a religious person that gods aren't real.
Some people have a faith based approach to the topic of unidentified phenomena, and aren't trained in critical reasoning or the scientific method - it's why these sorts of folks are often prone to taking huge leaps of faith and using an uncritical/biased/woo stance on things, rather than looking at things objectively and accepting that sometimes there is no satisfying answer until more data arrives.
My god, it it’s full of stars
Dave, that you?
Until we get multiple angles it’s just rocks. Like the face on mars
It's my "happy meal" of Mc Donalds.
Nice try I know your an alien working for the damn goverment
How can anyone trust the government in what they do and what they say? Your taxes go to the government, those taxes pay for NASA etc. They allegedly have been on space and on the moon. This should be all public viewing and nothing redacted or edited as it is public funded. Hell anyone should be able to go up to space, your taxes pay for it. Hundreds of billions of dollars spent on space per year. In the last 20 years, what has NASA actually done??? Everything is subbed-out, they keep reusing extremely old rockets by refitting and renaming them. They are years and years behind schedule. NASA spends so much time developing and perfecting new technology for the rocket. That the technology is way put of date by the time it should fly. Trillions over the years spent on what. Nothing is changing.
OP this goes a lot deeper than you think it does. There have been numerous whistleblowers independently reporting viewing objective structures (“cities”) in photos they were not supposed to see.
Highly recommended you watch WhyFiles on YT episodes on the moon. He presents the stories and discusses/debunks them.
Curious here… do you have anything specific that has intrigued you?
To chime in, I was intrigued by the monolith on the moon of mars. Here is a clip of Buzz Aldrin pointing it out. You can google it to for the image.
C-SPAN: Buzz Aldrin Reveals Existence of Monolith on Mars Moon - YouTube
Not regarding the moon, but Mars. John Brandenburg (planetary scientist who came up with the water on Mars theory) has another theory, showing almost irrefutable evidence of nuclear weapons being used on Mars.
Here is his PowerPoint which has the data, and his video presentation was great.
I don't necessarily agree with his final theory on what happened, I rather think they nuked themselves. It shows a chicxulub sized impact, and this supposedly did massive damage to the planet and his water, maybe this ended up in some kind of "water wars" event and one group nuked the northern cities.
Both impacts are near the "faces" on Mars, pyramid shaped hills, and what looks like remnants of ancient city walls on the mountain.
Well lets consider the alternative explanations for the high Xenon-129 concentration. We know that Iodine-129 can decay into Xenon-129 so any trapped Iodine in the crust could have been released after Mars' atmosphere had dissipated which would then decay into the observed high concentration of Xenon-129.
Also, nuclear explosions make more than just 1 element. If a nuclear explosion is responsible for the high concentrations of Xenon-129, where are the Stronium and Cesium isotopes. Those would measure high on atmospheric tests as well. John Brandenburg doesn't have an answer to these questions despite them being critical to his theory.
I believe he actually covers the natural decay in the first couple slides, not only Xenon but others as well later in the presentation
I believe he is saying natural decay doesn't account for almost 3x the amount of expected Xe129. Another fascinating point is that Xe129 is consistent throughout our solar system, the only two places we have ever detected with higher rates is Mars, and areas on Earth were we practiced open air nuclear testing.
He goes over the different element results of the events, Argon Thorium, Potassium, Krypton, saying that these show signs of being created by irradiation rather than natural decay over billions of years. Also things like the prevailing winds moving the fallout from the epicenters.
He also covers natural reactor events, and the result of that would show different than we see on Mars. It seems pretty well thought out. Have you watch the video or went through the slides?
Right, that's why there is specifically the detail that the Iodine-129 was trapped in the crust and only escapes/decays after the majority of Mars' atmosphere has dissapated into space. If the Xenon-129/Iodine-129 was already present in the atmosphere before atmospheric dissapation than it would've resulted in a levels. Crustal encapsulation of the Iodine is required for this theory.
Taking a look at the PowerPoint he says that Argon, Potassium and Krypton distributions are/could be consistent with a neutron capture explanation. I don't think he disputes the distribution of those elements, just Xenon-129.
Not recently, but I have read his theory before. I was actually really on board with J. Brandenburg's work before I learned how much he was pushing the artificial nuclear explosion angle. Everyone agrees with his data, it's just the conclusions that end up being so divisive.
The why files hollow moon episode is insane
Evidence and proof are two different things.
Finding evidence and imagining evidence are very different. Many people want to believe in something so much that they accept anything that helps them believe regardless of the validity of the "evidence". It is further complicated by our unwillingness to accept that we were wrong.
This would hit a lot harder if OP put pictures of like things on Google maps that are natural formations. Though it's not a fair comparison because the moon has no weather erosion which would be necessary to form some odd shapes, at least it's something.
This post comes off as very "nothing to see here, folks" without some examples at least.
You're right. Let's just not look for any evidence until the government tells us the truth.
That’s not what they said.
All they said was that: - people are vulnerable to being misled by the oversensitive pattern-seeking software in their brain
when these interesting features actually do exist and aren’t a consequence of shadows and photography, there are other, more likely and well-understood processes by which they can and do form, even in terrestrial environments
if the government(s) is/are secretly competent enough to be hiding this kind of information, they’re obviously not going to release evidence to the contrary in their officially published photos, which are low-enough resolution to be seamlessly edited in undetectable ways
[deleted]
Many of these are no more clearly a ‘false' alarm than they are a ‘true' alarm. There simply isn’t enough information to say one way or the other. I’m tired of the biased “it is a structure” and “it’s pareidolia” claimants arguing about it when neither has satisfactory evidence one way or the other. Why not just say it’s interesting, we don’t know what it is, let’s see if we can find some additional information about it?
For example, is there any information about the chemical and mineralogical structure of the surrounding geology? What about nearby meteor impacts that might have melted and cooled minerals into that shape? Are there any other seemingly aberrant features nearby that differ from this one and would require a different geological process to be natural? How would the angle of the light striking it possibly cause an illusory effect?
It’s too bad we don’t have a laser/telescope/spectrograph system powerful enough to hit these structures, ablate them somewhat, and determine their chemistry. Granted it is a long shot for these things being created by intelligences, but just naysaying is also not evidence.
But from an independent perspective, this is impossible. What counts as clearly false? Who does the debunking?
If your post isn't calling for verification (and rejection) by some (presumably compromised) higher authority, what is it you're proposing exactly?
I don't believe scientists have been compromised in masse all over the world with varying creeds and affiliations. When I see American and Chinese scientists discussing it over, then I'll believe it.
You need to go read "The Boy Who Cried Wolf" until you understand it!
Have you been out there? Where’s the proof that it ISNT? So far pictures at the moon..but never any on the moon or IN the moon.
It is my impression that there are thousands if not more of pretty amazing telescopes that local amateur astronomers and even you and me can use to survey the surface of the moon.
I haven’t heard anything has been found on the visible sides.
This guy critical thinks
AnY pHoTo EvIdEnCe iS oBvIoUsLy FaKe
[deleted]
Oh yeah? Prove it that it's just pareidolia or strange rock formations.... I'll wait for you to zip on over to Mars or the Moon, take some boots-on-the-ground photos and prove to me once and for all they ARE just strange but normal rock formations.
*insert your counter-response of 'no, the burden of proof is on the one making the claim!!"*
Sounds a lot like you're making some definitive statements on one side of the argument but providing even less evidence than OP, at least they have photos.
Now, I understand the argument for pareidolia is just like saying 'life doesn't exist on other planets because we haven't talked to any yet'
Just like we know the exact amount of species on this planet, right? We don't find new ones every year, that would be crazy, like we don't actually know everything and are still learning...
*edit - also, sorry for coming across heated, but like - do you think any of our space agencies or governments WOULD publicly share that information? You don't think it would get classified as national defense? Because our govt has done that to us, time and time again. we have been their test subjects for as long as they've had power and i personally don't have any faith in their integrity or honesty. Sure, individuals working for the govt are most likely not in-the-know and innocent in any deceit or coverup, but any time I hear someone try to push the 'oh come on guys, you REALLY think they would lie/cover this up from us?!' I say yes. Yes a thousand times, yes.
look up mk ultra, tunguskee experiment, the trinity/castle bravo tests and coverups, gulf of tonkin incident, the USS liberty, like - yea - want more examples? I'm sure I can keep them coming. Trusting the govt is like putting your baby in a lions mouth and trusting it not to swallow.
[deleted]
" But don’t you think you’re giving the government way too much credit when it comes to aliens?"
I mean, no. I don't even know if aliens exist, but I do know the government has a vested interest in the topic, project bluebeam was an interesting framework for possible future operations.
I'm not here saying every photo, every little thing that looks peculiar is unnatural - but the mainstream agenda pushes an opinion like we know everything, we don't have to try to explain anything because it all just follows science.
But science isn't fact, it's a process of learning. And learning never stops - so while I think it's fair to apply the pareidolia title to many images that may come up, I whole heartedly disagree that they are all that and challenge you and others to at least try to stimulate some critical thinking. I for one do not need to be told what to believe, so I will question everything. That includes both sides, Im often a very critical commentator on many 'UFO' sightings when they're much more likely than not to be stadium lights or a SpaceX launch for example.
But this topic of discussion exists for a reason, either because it's a real phenomenon that we publicly cannot explain, or it's a long term govt psyop meant to manipulate people into certain beliefs/view points. because it's not 'nothing'
Why these same blurry photos from the 1970s, when there are multiple independent and much higher resolution photos available for free today? 🤔
Please share the links.
Literally a “mars reconnaissance orbiter image download” google search away!
https://pds-imaging.jpl.nasa.gov/
https://stac.astrogeology.usgs.gov/docs/data/mars/uncontrolled_hirise/
https://www.reddit.com/r/HighStrangeness/s/9HyJVCdh65
I will answer your question about why the government would not hide it. Because the government has realized that it cannot hide everything, and mainly because the edited photos have been exposed so many times that the edits themselves have become the best proof. Why edit and hide something if there was nothing there? Answer that yourself. Skeptics like you no longer have a chance to stop what has long since gotten under people's skin, and they believe that we are not alone more and more, and thanks to remote viewing, many are even further along...we no longer just believe, we know and understand the truth.
I have something similar on Mars; in a completely uniform sea of dunes, something resembling a container stands out.