Strange building on the moon!

Status
Not open for further replies.
O

OnlyTheBrave

Guest
Has anyone seen this video, I couldn't find it anywhere else on the forum? I didn't film this just came across it whilst browsing YouTube...

[youtube]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=30W-bxsfah4[/youtube]

OnlyTheBrave.
 
F

FlatEarth

Guest
Hi, OTB, and welcome to the SDC Forums.

The video is a hoax, IMO. If you look at the shadow of the "building" compared to the natural rock formations, you'll see that it's not falling in exactly the same direction. In any case, such a large structure would be visible with a very modest telescope, and that would have created quite a buzz, which didn't happen. ;)
 
I

ILUVSPACCE

Guest
Yep its a hoax. This object's size and shape would be something that many even amateur astronomers could see.
 
Z

ZenGalacticore

Guest
Oooooh, but the cool semi-eerie space music makes it seem real.
 
V

vladdrac

Guest
For a moment I thought it was the solar panel top of a Russian moon walker.
 
S

Smersh

Guest
MeteorWayne":11l705mc said:
What a pile of steaming crap :)

It couldn't be "steaming" Wayne, because the lack of an atmosphere on the moon would prevent that. :lol:

I agree with the "crap" though!
 
M

Mee_n_Mac

Guest
Smersh":1w8aseyd said:
MeteorWayne":1w8aseyd said:
What a pile of steaming crap :)

It couldn't be "steaming" Wayne, because the lack of an atmosphere on the moon would prevent that. :lol:

I agree with the "crap" though!

I dunno Smersh. Don't comets outgas ? Is some of that gas water vapor ? If so then comets steam and if so then this might steam as well. Mind you a comet steaming has a lifetime but I'm sure this crap will last forever. Like a comet it'll probably return to be seen again.
 
S

Smersh

Guest
Hmmm ... interesting point there Mee_n_Mac, and might even be worth a topic over in ATA or somewhere. If there was recently-generated crap on the moon, would it let off steam or not?

(Or maybe that question could be answered in this thread. It's still on topic, because at the end of the day this thread is about crap, after all. :ugeek: )
 
M

Mee_n_Mac

Guest
I might ask if sublimation is the same a steaming in this case as certainly a block of crap this size on the Moon would tend to freeze, at least on the surface. Yet it might have latent heat on the inside, enough to make water sublimate on the Moon. Very serious questions indeed.
 
N

nimbus

Guest
Anyone remember back when realistic (enough to fool) computer graphics and photo/video editing were still only looming on the horizon, when the prospect only made a few blips in mainstream media? Soon enough everyone and his grandma will have computing power and software available to fake all sorts of stuff, enough to fake some alien conspiracy from A to Z with enough spare time and effort.. From the news anchor reporting it to high quality rendering of just-weird-enough "structures" in space.
 
Y

yevaud

Guest
Smersh":1lncmr90 said:
MeteorWayne":1lncmr90 said:
What a pile of steaming crap :)

It couldn't be "steaming" Wayne, because the lack of an atmosphere on the moon would prevent that. :lol:

I agree with the "crap" though!

*Ahem*

What an outgassing piece of crap. ;)
 
G

Gravity_Ray

Guest
As Darth Vader said: I find your lack of faith disturbing

It’s possible that an alien species landed on the Moon millions of years ago, built this structure there with unobtainum so that it would not turn into rubble. Placed a device in it, so that when humans finally get to the Moon and approach this object it would emit a shrieking noise. This will alert the Aliens that the human species has advanced enough to make it to the Moon which will start the process of a transmission to the source. Bringing about the first contact between a fledgling human race and an advanced alien civilization with a tremendous amount of patience.

Or

It is a block of steaming/sublimating/frozen crap.
 
A

aphh

Guest
But there are buildings on the near side of the Moon visible with a suitable telescope. The catch is, you need to know where to look, the moon has to be in just the correct phase for the shadows to appear and you need a decent scope. A formidable, albeit not impossible, challenge for the backyard astronomer.

This is the reason why there are almost no imagery of the moon from the serious large observatories. I dare you to find an image of the moon taken by some serious earth or space based telescope. Besides the moon probes, of course. You will find almost no such images.

This video is just another attempt to mix crap with the real thing, so that the real thing would become marginalized.
 
S

StarRider1701

Guest
FlatEarth":3k1koyt2 said:
The video is a hoax, IMO. If you look at the shadow of the "building" compared to the natural rock formations, you'll see that it's not falling in exactly the same direction.

I agree that this is some kind of hoax. But, if you look at second #36 in the 45 second video and compare the shadow with the two rocks above and to the left, they do appear the same. You are correct, if this were real there would be no way that someone would not have seen it before now! :cool:
 
O

origin

Guest
aphh":oe5ysr09 said:
But there are buildings on the near side of the Moon visible with a suitable telescope. The catch is, you need to know where to look, the moon has to be in just the correct phase for the shadows to appear and you need a decent scope. A formidable, albeit not impossible, challenge for the backyard astronomer.

This is the reason why there are almost no imagery of the moon from the serious large observatories. I dare you to find an image of the moon taken by some serious earth or space based telescope. Besides the moon probes, of course. You will find almost no such images.

This video is just another attempt to mix crap with the real thing, so that the real thing would become marginalized.

I assume this is a joke but with aphh you just never know. I took your dare, here are 160 high resolution pictures.. It is not that difficult to find 1000s of them, just google high resolution moon pictures.
 
A

abq_farside

Guest
aphh":2hpcw9ro said:
But there are buildings on the near side of the Moon visible with a suitable telescope. The catch is, you need to know where to look, the moon has to be in just the correct phase for the shadows to appear and you need a decent scope. A formidable, albeit not impossible, challenge for the backyard astronomer.
.....

Link please
 
G

Gravity_Ray

Guest
origin":2lly2ht5 said:
aphh":2lly2ht5 said:
But there are buildings on the near side of the Moon visible with a suitable telescope. The catch is, you need to know where to look, the moon has to be in just the correct phase for the shadows to appear and you need a decent scope. A formidable, albeit not impossible, challenge for the backyard astronomer.

This is the reason why there are almost no imagery of the moon from the serious large observatories. I dare you to find an image of the moon taken by some serious earth or space based telescope. Besides the moon probes, of course. You will find almost no such images.

This video is just another attempt to mix crap with the real thing, so that the real thing would become marginalized.

I assume this is a joke but with aphh you just never know. I took your dare, here are 160 high resolution pictures.. It is not that difficult to find 1000s of them, just google high resolution moon pictures.

I thought he was joking. Anyway there is a reason why you don’t have pictures of the Moon surface with large Earth and Space based telescopes. These telescopes are not designed to take pictures of an object that close, they are designed to take pictures of objects that are many hundred and many thousand light years away AND many hundred and many thousand light years across. So if say the Keck telescope takes a picture of the Apollo landing area it will be just one pixel and you wouldn’t be able to see anything anyway.

That’s why there are satellites in Moon orbit taking pictures of the surface that Origin provided. Anyway, I didn’t mean to interject logic into this thread.
 
A

aphh

Guest
Gravity_Ray":2nph6z1o said:
I thought he was joking. Anyway there is a reason why you don’t have pictures of the Moon surface with large Earth and Space based telescopes. These telescopes are not designed to take pictures of an object that close, they are designed to take pictures of objects that are many hundred and many thousand light years away AND many hundred and many thousand light years across. So if say the Keck telescope takes a picture of the Apollo landing area it will be just one pixel and you wouldn’t be able to see anything anyway.

That’s why there are satellites in Moon orbit taking pictures of the surface that Origin provided. Anyway, I didn’t mean to interject logic into this thread.

That's what we are being told, but is of course not true. You could point a large telescope to moon just as any other object and get great results. No difference.

Big telescopes are VERY controlled items. You need to file a report in advance where you are going to point the scope. Then there are engineers making sure the scope points to where you reported that you would point it. Most large telescopes are government operated or entities close to government.

The resolution that could be had with a large telescope would be excellent from the moon. If you can read 10 cm tall headlines of a newspaper or license plate from earth orbit (~300 km), from the moon you could get similar results of a 10 000 cm tall object or 100 meter practical resolution. Apollo sites would definitely show plenty of detail.
 
A

aphh

Guest
abq_farside":235sjnrc said:
Link please

You need to do some digging. I've seen some amateur footage that clearly show shadows sticking out that do not seem to follow natural shapes. However, as those images do not report accurate coordinates and the moon phase, I have not used them as evidence of anything, just picked my interest and definitely would be enough for a closer look.

If I had access to clear skies (which I don't), I'd get a scope and follow the dividing line of the night and day on the moon cloesly to see whatkind of shapes I could resolve. Perhaps one day I will do that.
 
A

aphh

Guest
origin":r92zv86g said:
I assume this is a joke but with aphh you just never know. I took your dare, here are 160 high resolution pictures.. It is not that difficult to find 1000s of them, just google high resolution moon pictures.

That's not what I asked. I asked an image of the moon from a ground or space based telescope, not a moon orbiter. We had large telescopes before we had lunar orbiters, you know.

So where are the images from the moon from those telescopes? Link, please?
 
E

esokujo

Guest
aphh":dntatlfn said:
abq_farside":dntatlfn said:
Link please

You need to do some digging. I've seen some amateur footage that clearly show shadows sticking out that do not seem to follow natural shapes. However, as those images do not report accurate coordinates and the moon phase, I have not used them as evidence of anything, just picked my interest and definitely would be enough for a closer look.

If I had access to clear skies (which I don't), I'd get a scope and follow the dividing line of the night and day on the moon cloesly to see whatkind of shapes I could resolve. Perhaps one day I will do that.

Seeing as how you made the assertion that there are structures, it is your job to provide the evidence, especially when it's pertaining to something as outlandish as this.

Is this guy working with ks15?
 
Status
Not open for further replies.

Latest posts