What's this unusual Lunar feature, showing in Google Moon?

[Smersh]

... Can you get me a top-down image of that area. Something that shows the area in question but also shows some other features nearby?

I can use that to create a false-topo image to see how it compares. It won't, necessarily, show anything. But, it could explain the way it appears in that isometric view ......

The picture I posted earlier shows a top-down view, but at a greater altitude ie this one:

I'll make some more shots at different altitudes and see what comes up. There isn't really a whole lot else there surrounding the object though, as it's in the Sea of Serenity.

 

[MeteorWayne]

Since a lot of people are interested in this picture, will Nasa try to get a better more clear picture anytime soon to put all the questions at ease?

Nope

Agreed. Why should they waste their time? Besides, who said the image came from NASA in the first place?

 

[jim48]

Since a lot of people are interested in this picture, will Nasa try to get a better more clear picture anytime soon to put all the questions at ease?

Nope

Agreed. Why should they waste their time? Besides, who said the image came from NASA in the first place?

God forbid I should agree with Wayne but this should raise some red flags, folks. It reminds me of those YouTube UFO videos. They look great, don't they? But they are fakes. Doesn't it strike you as odd that this image keeps getting clearer thus better defined? Soon we'll be able to see Alice Kramden.

 

[Smersh]

... God forbid I should agree with Wayne but this should raise some red flags, folks. It reminds me of those YouTube UFO videos. They look great, don't they? But they are fakes. Doesn't it strike you as odd that this image keeps getting clearer thus better defined? Soon we'll be able to see Alice Kramden.

Yes, but this ISN'T a Youtube video Jim. It's a whole series of photos and, (depending on the altitude and angle you view from) taken by Selene, NASA and other agencies' lunar orbiters. Anyone can view it for themselves and take snapshots in Google Moon by entering the co-ordinates I gave in the op and zooming in. The pictures have "NASA" "Selene" "ASU" etc stamped on them. The only way it's a fake is if somebody at Google or one of the space agencies faked it, but don't forget there are hundreds, (if not thousands) of separate images involved taken by different agencies for it to be viewable in Google Moon, and viewed from different altitudes and different angles, so if it is faked all those images would have to have been faked individually. (Wouldn't they?)

ALP asked me to make some more shots and post them, so I'll do that tomorrow, but of course anyone else here who has Google Moon can do so as well if they wish.

 

[a_lost_packet_]

...ALP asked me to make some more shots and post them, so I'll do that tomorrow, but of course anyone else here who has Google Moon can do so as well if they wish.

Is there any other source of data out there that we can cross-check against? IOW, a Lunar photo database from another source that we can input lat/long into and isolate this area to compare images?

I seem to recall one that I could put lat/long into but, I can't find it now. Google Moon (online) just lets you tool around without being too specific and other sites require landmark navigation or have chunks of lat/long segments but no way to fine-tune your selection.

That would be an excellent first-stop on trying to identify the source for this apparent anomaly.

PS - I'll mess around later and create some height maps and topos (Both will be "false" btw and rely on only the texture itself) with the above texture you linked. If there are higher resolutions available, feel free to upload them to a filesharing site and I'll go out and grab them instead.

 

[silylene]

MacMauro, an Open Minds Forum member and who found this in Google Moon, has seen this thread now and asked me to post this:

It's said to be the object with the contrast enhanced a little.

I've just put a similar overhead view into Paintshop Pro to see if I could reproduce the same effect just by increasing the contrast, but so far I haven't been able to. I don't believe the above photo was enhanced by Macmauro but possibly by somebody at ATS or another board so I can't vouch for how it was done.

Since a lot of people are interested in this picture, will Nasa try to get a better more clear picture anytime soon to put all the questions at ease?

I believe higher resolution pictures will gradually become available and be incorporated into Google Moon, as is gradually happening with Google Earth. Hopefully, pictures such as the ones taken by the LRO will be used by Google Moon, then we can see what appears at the same co-ordinates.

I wonder if anyone has queried this object with Google, NASA or the Japanese (Selene) yet?

Looks like a large Lego block, embedded end-on.

 

[jim48]

There is something rotten in Denmark. We are seeing what someone wants us to see. Peeling away layers of an onion. Why haven't we seen this previously? How many decades have we been photographing the moon from here and from lunar orbit? We are playing in Richard Hoagland's back yard.

 

[abq_farside]

There is something rotten in Denmark. We are seeing what someone wants us to see. Peeling away layers of an onion. Why haven't we seen this previously? How many decades have we been photographing the moon from here and from lunar orbit? We are playing in Richard Hoagland's back yard.

Interesting image, but kind of agree with you Jim.

 

[Smersh]

... Is there any other source of data out there that we can cross-check against? IOW, a Lunar photo database from another source that we can input lat/long into and isolate this area to compare images? ...

It's possible there may be, not sure. There are other astronomy programmes of course such as Celestia and Starry Night but I don't know if they have a lunar database of photos. If anyone here has any other programmes that show lunar views please let us know, cheers. I guess the other programmes may be using the same database as Google Moon anyway.

Here are a few other views I just made (I removed the co-ordinates from some because they were obscuring the object, but the co-ordinates again are) ...

19 58 48.31 N 21 11 35.57 E

Some high altitude shots that show the surrounding terrain:

A few more close-ups (the best angle to get the 3D seems to be similar to the one I posted in the op - with other angles it appears flatter.) ...

There is something rotten in Denmark. We are seeing what someone wants us to see. Peeling away layers of an onion. Why haven't we seen this previously? How many decades have we been photographing the moon from here and from lunar orbit? We are playing in Richard Hoagland's back yard.

Possibly, but can anyone explain how it got onto all these NASA / Selene etc pictures and into Google Moon? :?

(Edited to correct speling)

 

[CalliArcale]

It's possible there may be, not sure. There are other astronomy programmes of course such as Celestia and Starry Night but I don't know if they have the lunar database of photos. If anyone here has any other programmes that show lunar views please let us know, cheers. I guess the other programmes may be using the same database as Google Moon anyway.

They'll be using the same imagery, but not the same software for stitching them together. Google Earth shows plenty of quite bizarre artifacts which are definitely caused by the software; I see no reason to assume Google Moon would be free of the same problems.

So I agree that we'll need to see the original images (from whatever orbiter) before making any conclusions.

 

[Smersh]

I agree there are glitches and data drop-outs etc in Google Earth but this seems nothing like that. It's so well-defined so seems it's either real or has been faked somehow by somebody at Google or one of the space agencies. (And all the images in the different views have been faked.)

I guess images from another orbiter of the exact same location, that doesn't have images in Google Moon might help, to see if the object appears on those.

 

[SpeedFreek]

In the "enhanced contrast" close-ups of the "artefact" the black areas on the lower left "sides" seem to imply shadows as if cast by a building of some kind. It kind of looks like a large flat building with a higher block at one end.

But when compared to the shadows in the craters near the artefact, the artefacts shadows are on the wrong side. If that is supposed to be a building casting shadows, it is being lit from a different direction to the direction shadows are cast on the moons surface.

I have had a look around for any hi-res pictures of that area but have been unsuccessful. Any photos I did find showed nothing unusual there, but I couldn't find anything hi-res enough to be sure.

I am guessing this was faked by someone.

 

[Smersh]

Actually Speedfreek, I wouldn't take too much noticed of the enhanced contast picture, because that has been modified in some way by a person on another board and I don't know if was just the contrast that was enhanced or if anything else has been added in.

All the rest of the pictures I posted are exactly as they appear in Google Moon, with nothing enhanced or altered.

 

[SpeedFreek]

Those "shadows" are there in google-moon too of course, if they are supposed to be shadows.

Either that or the thing is floating above the lunar surface! :lol:

Either way, if the edges of the artefact are supposed to be shadows, they are in the wrong place compared to the rest of the lunar surface.

Perhaps the thing is flat, with a lot of something dark oozing out of it around the edges, eh?

 

[Wellington1114]

Hey guys

I saw that tonight on the Science Channel, there's a program on called "Tank on the moon". It's about the Us and Soviet race to the moon, it contains new information (supposedly kept as a secret, for one reason or another) that was released from russian archives about programs that put 2 remote control vehicles on the moon.

I guess this happened leading up to the apollo missions, It reminded me of this discussion and the picture so I thought id spread the word.

 

[CommonMan]

Hey guys

I saw that tonight on the Science Channel, there's a program on called "Tank on the moon". It's about the Us and Soviet race to the moon, it contains new information (supposedly kept as a secret, for one reason or another) that was released from russian archives about programs that put 2 remote control vehicles on the moon.

I guess this happened leading up to the apollo missions, It reminded me of this discussion and the picture so I thought id spread the word.

Are you saying OUR Govenment sent a remote lander to the moon, and didn't tell US? Come on OUR Govenment wouldn't lie to us. Would they?

 

[Wellington1114]

Hey guys

I saw that tonight on the Science Channel, there's a program on called "Tank on the moon". It's about the Us and Soviet race to the moon, it contains new information (supposedly kept as a secret, for one reason or another) that was released from russian archives about programs that put 2 remote control vehicles on the moon.

I guess this happened leading up to the apollo missions, It reminded me of this discussion and the picture so I thought id spread the word.

Are you saying OUR Govenment sent a remote lander to the moon, and didn't tell US? Come on OUR Govenment wouldn't lie to us. Would they?

I can sense your sarcasim Actually i think it said that the Soviets sent up the Bots, but that just leaves more to the imagination to what the good ol' US of A have been up to with the Top- Secret projects.

 

[JonClarke]

The images look very much like dirt on the film or scanner. Not something on the Moon.

 

[JonClarke]

[Yes, but this ISN'T a Youtube video Jim. It's a whole series of photos and, (depending on the altitude and angle you view from) taken by Selene, NASA and other agencies' lunar orbiters.

How do you know it is a "whole series of photos" and not just in one? How do you know which images it is in?

I know there is a way in Goodle Earth to find out the source image but I don't know how to do it. That should be the first step. Then find out which image(s) actually show it.

After that find an alternative copy. All lunar images are publically available through the PDS

The pictures have "NASA" "Selene" "ASU" etc stamped on them.

Actually no. the particular feature is in an image (or set) that says NASA/ASU.

The only way it's a fake is if somebody at Google or one of the space agencies faked it, but don't forget there are hundreds, (if not thousands) of separate images involved taken by different agencies for it to be viewable in Google Moon, and viewed from different altitudes and different angles, so if it is faked all those images would have to have been faked individually. (Wouldn't they?)

Who says it is a fake? There are plenty of ways erroneous features can be generated without deliberate fakery.

 

[JonClarke]

Hey guys

I saw that tonight on the Science Channel, there's a program on called "Tank on the moon". It's about the Us and Soviet race to the moon, it contains new information (supposedly kept as a secret, for one reason or another) that was released from russian archives about programs that put 2 remote control vehicles on the moon.

I guess this happened leading up to the apollo missions, It reminded me of this discussion and the picture so I thought id spread the word.

The Lunakhods were during the Apollo program, not before. And they weren't exactly secret as they were widely reported in the media at the time and much scientific data published in peer reviewed international journals. Of course a lot of the specifications and background information was not public information until the post Soviet era.

 

[JonClarke]

Hey guys

I saw that tonight on the Science Channel, there's a program on called "Tank on the moon". It's about the Us and Soviet race to the moon, it contains new information (supposedly kept as a secret, for one reason or another) that was released from russian archives about programs that put 2 remote control vehicles on the moon.

I guess this happened leading up to the apollo missions, It reminded me of this discussion and the picture so I thought id spread the word.

Are you saying OUR Govenment sent a remote lander to the moon, and didn't tell US? Come on OUR Govenment wouldn't lie to us. Would they?

I can sense your sarcasim Actually i think it said that the Soviets sent up the Bots, but that just leaves more to the imagination to what the good ol' US of A have been up to with the Top- Secret projects.

What evidence do you have for top secret US space projects?

 

[StarRider1701]

I had an old video game. You built a castle on a shoreline then defended it against attacking ships. If a ship managed to land, you then had ground troops to contend with.
These pictures, especially this one, looks a lot like those castles - 90 degree angles and open courtyards with battlemented walls - checkerboard squares in the courtyards. I'm guessing someone carefully and cleverly inserted something like this into a picture of the lunar landscape. If something this big were really on the moon, people with good telescopes would ave seen it long ago.
I think its a fake.

 

[Smersh]

... Either that or the thing is floating above the lunar surface! :lol: ...

Here's a picture I saw on another board (made by somebody from a picture of the object that I posted there.) It's not floating, but is on legs which would probably give a similar effect ...

:lol:

... Either way, if the edges of the artefact are supposed to be shadows, they are in the wrong place compared to the rest of the lunar surface ...

Yes, that is a good point I agree. They don't seem to match some of the shadows in the deep craters like Hadley, which all seem to run east to west (right to left.) The shadows (if that's what they are) on the strange object seem to be thickest mostly all around the northern edges but there is black all around it. Having said that, some shadows elsewhere on the lunar suface, such as around some of the mountains don't seem to be entirely consistent, but I guess there can be any number of digital glitches right across the terrain.

... Perhaps the thing is flat, with a lot of something dark oozing out of it around the edges, eh?

See the picture I posted above for an unlikely explanation for the dark ooze. :lol:

 

[Smersh]

... How do you know it is a "whole series of photos" and not just in one? How do you know which images it is in?

I know there is a way in Goodle Earth to find out the source image but I don't know how to do it. That should be the first step. Then find out which image(s) actually show it.

After that find an alternative copy. All lunar images are publically available through the PDS ...

Surely it has to be a whole series of photos, in order to have so many different views, at any angle you like and at varying altitudes from about 3,000 metres or lower, doesn't it?

The pictures have "NASA" "Selene" "ASU" etc stamped on them.

Actually no. the particular feature is in an image (or set) that says NASA/ASU.

Ok my mistake - NASA and ASU are the same. Selene is an orbiter owned by the Japanese though.

Who says it is a fake? There are plenty of ways erroneous features can be generated without deliberate fakery.

I agree. But this object isn't like a data drop-out glitch, or bits of black that appear in some places on the lunar surface, or terrain that gets repeated like a wallpaper pattern in some places in Google Earth or Moon. It's a single, large object with a definite shape to it so I'm not sure how a simple data glitch could put it there.

Here's a page that explains how Google Moon works. This is an extract from that page:

We've included four different types of data in Google Moon:
Visible - A mosaic of images taken by the Clementine mission. This is a black-and-white version of what you would see if you were in orbit around the moon. This composite imagery was prepared by the USGS.
Elevation - A lunar terrain map generated by the USGS in conjunction with the The Unified Lunar Control Network 2005, and shaded using an airbrushed shaded relief map. This map is color-coded by altitude, so you can use the color key at the lower left to estimate elevations.
Apollo - A collection of placemarks that tell the story of the Apollo missions that landed on the moon. This includes stories, quotes, images, panoramas, audio clips, and links to videos of the astronauts' adventures on the lunar surface.
Charts - A collection of geological and topographic charts of various regions of the moon ...

I had an old video game. You built a castle on a shoreline then defended it against attacking ships. If a ship managed to land, you then had ground troops to contend with.
These pictures, especially this one, looks a lot like those castles - 90 degree angles and open courtyards with battlemented walls - checkerboard squares in the courtyards. I'm guessing someone carefully and cleverly inserted something like this into a picture of the lunar landscape. If something this big were really on the moon, people with good telescopes would ave seen it long ago.
I think its a fake.

I tend to go with fake as well SR, for the reasons I just explained to Jon. I still don't know how though. It might be a real feature as well of course but does seem somewhat unlikely, to say the least.

Whatever, I called the Daily Telegraph news desk yesterday and followed up with an e-mail giving the co-ordinates and a link to this thread. The papers have printed stories in the past about anomalies in Google Earth (such as that "Atlantis" thing for example) so maybe they'll be interested in this.

I also just sent an e-mail to NASA, giving them the Google Moon co-ordinates and a link to this thread as well. I asked them to forward my e-mail to USGS, Google or any other experts as neccessary. Maybe we'll get an answer from somebody soon.

 

[silylene]

it looks like one of these:

It's the shell of a giant horseshoe crab that got stranded when the Mare dried up ('Mare' does mean 'sea', after all). Some dust and micrometeorites have softened the image and created a few small dents.

And no I am not claiming it is alive, like that high-speed E Coli which was identified in the GoogleEarth photo (a different thread).