I hope I'm in the right place with this topic. For several years now, I have been occasionally looking through the Apollo Archive at Arizona State University. I would like to share a small part of my discoveries with you here. The first structure is easy to recognize, and you can check it out for yourselves. I was also able to find the structure in three images before and after this one, each from a slightly different perspective.
Photo link: https://data.lroc.im-ldi.com/apollo/view?camera=M&image_name=AS15-M-2495
I have recorded the other structures over the years, but unfortunately without any information about which image it is exactly (image number).
Feel free to share your opinion with me, and I can share more sightings when I have the opportunity.
Could you provide some coordinates, or name of crater, so we can explore our old moon maps ?
No, just the image information. As a little tip, I would look at images taken from a side perspective. There you can see differences in height and much better what is hidden there.
You seem to just latch onto the first thing you think you can claim is 'something' and then run with it. Like the last one with the 'object' casting shadows where you didn't notice all the other similar patterns, which is found on all the photos. Nothing more than dots, not objects. We point out the mistakes and you act like you understand your mistake and then throw more posts up along the same lines. You suffer from paradolea. Nothing more.
Okay, it seems that many people here have pushed their skepticism to the highest level.
Even though there is a lot of “fake” evidence, you can clearly see a building in the first picture. You can even see a satellite dish with its structure slightly outlined on the front. I have also become more skeptical over the years, but you can look for excuses in the picture, it is clearly recognizable. No pareidolia or anything else, just open your eyes.
I think we're looking at very different pictures. Can you upload them? It looks like you've uploaded blurry nonsense by mistake
Here is an enhanced version of the structure: https://imgur.com/a/1Xz28xn
I would like to clarify something again. This is my first time posting something. I don't post every little thing, but only what I consider to be the best sightings. After seeing it, I immediately had several friends and acquaintances look at it. Since I am a skeptical person myself. Especially in times of AI, etc.
With the image that cast a shadow on the moon, I just wanted to have an explaination what it was and i got it. I really didn't see the other points, which surprised me afterwards.
I don't want to share anything else in the future because everything here is talked about so negatively. Instead of addressing individual points and having a proper discussion.
What I see is shadows on an irregular terrain, one which does not have the softening effect of an atmosphere that diffuses the light and creates softer edged shadows. When you look at these images of the moon's surface you have to take that into account. And the surface is very rough, pounded by impacts for billions of years with no erosion that would round of edges.
Given all the countries that have imaged the moon from low altitude, all the radar mapping, and the constant interest in just looking at it from the earth, there is no chance there are buildings on the moon. None. They would have been noticed by now, especially something the size you are suggesting here.
They're blurry as hell, definitely NASA photos.
The link shows its from the Apollo 15 mission, so from like 1971
nice! another nothing burger. keep it up boys
There are so many legit photos of anomalies on Luna that it's nearly impossible to remember them all. The obviously intentionally blurred areas are funny in a sad way, too.
Ignoring the possible structures, the: mass, orbit, position and crater depth of our 'Moon' all indicate some artificiality, too.
Sucks that we have to be stuck with all the slow kids who'd freak out if we were included in frank discussions with our elitist keepers.
Links?
Chris at Mars Anomalies always posts links to the NASA picture, check out his Moon videos.
IMO he's the best at showing you how they edit the pictures, NASA never figured we'd have photoshop let alone the burn tool.
These researchers don't edit or add anything to these NASA pictures, its amazing what increasing or decreasing contrast and saturation will do to a edited picture.
https://www.youtube.com/@marsanomaliesandbeyond3977
Jean Ward always posts links to the NASA picture and coordinates, he focuses on Mars anomalies.
https://www.youtube.com/@JeanWard
Joe at Art Alien TV has found thousands of structures, pyramids, domes, miles high towers, interlocking bricks, statues, boats, weapons, armor including helmets etc.. He's found hundreds of buildings with what appears to be blast craters in them, many people believe there was a huge war on Mars.
https://www.youtube.com/@ArtAlienTV/videos
A the patatoe pictures.
What if the moon is just for broken down space ships. Graveyard.
Let me know when there are pictures I can actually see something in and not 1960s blurry hard black and whites.
Not worth the post
You’re familiar with the face on mars? If not, maybe you should look into it. Fascinating information about image resolution and shadow play
glowies dont like it when people talk about structures on the moon.
What is a glowie?
Guys getting paid a salary to misinform the public.
A whole salary? Damn.
Where do I sign up?
Right? I misinform the public all the time for free
You are devaluing the rest of us.
CIA.gov
Making up terms to call people with common sense now huh.
Shadows* on our moon
john leer and d richard hoagland speak of this i believe
Never stop sharing, ignore negative comments, they're all bots or paid disinfo agents. Literally no one on this sub discourages valid content
Yep, obviously everybody who disagrees with you is a bot or is getting paid. Every last one of ‘em.
You’re clearly the genius who should be leading the world
I’m a bot myself but now that I’m hearing we can get paid for this, I’m all in. And someone as smart as yourself surely it knows where I can apply?
absolutely radiating in here
The 5th pic is the only somewhat convincing there’s like a 5 mile tall stalagmite style rising rock
Not very clear photos could be anything or just a pile of rocks.
The one with the triangular structure looks very interesting imo.
Anecdotal.
Once, like 16 years ago or more, I made a post, not here but on a local forum, about anomalies photographed on the moon. I have everything: the pictures, the coordinates, the links to the military page so people could go and verify everything by themselves. The photographs were from 1992, if I'm not mistaken. I checked every one of them myself.
Because I'm kind of autistic or whatever, I wanted to publish it on Monday, but it was Tuesday when I finished it, so I had to wait one week. Once Monday again, I found the military had replaced all the pictures with "better", higher resolution ones. The anomalies were gone. How they got higher resolution images from twenty years old pictures, that's something I don't know.
I had to make my post looking first for old versions of those pictures on Google, not exactly what I wanted. No coordinates, no nothing. Don't need to say it but... no one was impressed with my post.
I was a victim of very bad luck and terrible timing.
It appears that the deadly van Allen belt radiation may have compromised the film negatives (and maybe killed the photographer).
Coords?
Can someone explain how we’re able to receive high-definition, full-color footage from Mars - millions of miles away, yet the recent Moon rover missions still deliver grainy, black-and-white footage like it’s 1969?
I think you're just seeing what you want to see in those shadow and lights patterns, which is common.
Pareidolia:
This psychological tendency involves perceiving a specific, often meaningful image in a random or ambiguous visual pattern. It is a common experience where the brain attempts to impose familiar patterns on otherwise meaningless stimuli, such as seeing a face in a wall's stains, a car in a floor's tile design, or animals in the grain of wood.
Yo is that the flag?!
60 years old picture, why you didn’t take new photos, well I know every body believes that there are canals on mars because Schiaparelli saw them in the late 19 century and that marsians left a face on mars, we got the picture from Voyager 1 in 1976 nearly 100 years after Schiaparelli. Take new photos the old are nice and in their time good but they are outdated by new technic.
Of all the images to try to make this post about, you picked some of the weakest you could find.
Look up the antenna that is in a crater, prettycrazy
Thank you for sharing.
I'm sure this sort of post is from a Russian bot farm because no one could be so gullible
Many(if not most) people are going to be pretty surprised if they can get to point of acceptance, that much of what they are looking for and looking to see is not at all what they were expecting. For some of those people, it will click that they have been seeing some of these things for quite some time now but it just wasn't registering in their brains, not being recognized, not being comprehended, and ultimately just not accepted yet.
Once all those things occur, they will be kicking themselves in the ass for not getting involved and opening up sooner...
big rock
Didn't we put this Hoagland bs to rest 20 something years ago?
Lol , blury photo garbage strikes again
Coordinates, please. Of course, you won’t provide them.
Why are you so angry? OP shared some pics, no reason to get snarky over it. God forbid somebody really has some proof of something and is discouraged to post because of ppl like you.
Yea because if you have real proof, Reddit is the place to go
First, I’m not angry. I’m just less charitable to evidence with data intentionally left out or tampered with.
Unusual images of the lunar surface can be better investigated if precise coordinates are given. This way, we can point higher resolution instruments at it and take followup images. If this shape isn’t there, then the image is of something moving. We can take different pictures when the sun is in different places relative to the moon to let shadows bring out its shape. The famous ‘face on the moon’ was a rock that looked like a face when shadowed a specific way. Withholding information disallowing something to be investigated further is scientifically dishonest.
“Sharing some pics” in a space dedicated to aliens carries a different insinuation than posting it on r/askastronomy or someplace similar. And calling it a “structure” has a different connotation than a “formation.” Even if nothing about aliens is being specifically claimed, you can still use language and limiting your information to speak in half truths and imply something with plausible deniability. And that part I can’t let slide.
wtf am I looking at here?
Man, just wait for higher resolution photos. It always turns out to be a nothing burger