Strange structure on NASA photo

[Nimless]

Hi, not sure if it has been posted before and I hope it's the right section.

http://www.nasa.gov/centers/ames/images/content/393894main_ACD09-0220-089_full.jpg

I saw this picture around the web, people are speculating that in the photo on the desk (it's supposed to be a Moon photo of the Cabius crater) there is a clear artificial building structure in the middle.

People are saying that it's actually a marker/object/sd card on the photo and not a building.

For me it doesn't like an object on the paper, it looks like it's in the actual photo.

I'm not saying that there are aliens/humans structures on the moon and NASA is hiding it . I just wanted to know what the ubuntu community thought of it, to me it seems a pretty interesting photo :)

Maybe someone can debunk it for me or something?

Sorry for my english (not my native language).

[Retlol]

If Nasa or ANY sort of goverment/company found proof of alien life we would know.

You can't keep these things secrets, someone is always gonna talk. Especially on a subject like this.

A more interesting thing was the recent discovery that there are about 1 billion earth-like planets in our galaxy. It's almost becoming impossible to say alien life in the universe doesn't exist with a straight face.

[Nimless]

If Nasa or ANY sort of goverment/company found proof of alien life we would know.

You can't keep these things secrets, someone is always gonna talk. Especially on a subject like this.

People DO talk ( see Roswell accident and Edgar Mitchell ) but governments are still keeping a secret on it and denying everything, most of the time with banal explanations.

Back to the photo, maybe it's a misunderstanding and it isn't a photo of the Moon but of Earth?

[rk0r]

I think thats linus torvalds house, he has already migrated to the moon.

[bouncingwilf]

That's where Lord Lucan stables Shergar! ( apologies to non-uk readers - the significance will probable escape you)

Bouncingwilf

[Grenage]

As easy as it is to identify a vague square object in a photo which was taken from space, poorly printed onto a piece of paper, then shown in another photograph, at a distanced angle.

;)

[Nimless]

I still can't understand why NASA can't quickly publish the actual high resolution photo to show that there is nothing there...

[Retlol]

I still can't understand why NASA can't quickly publish the actual high resolution photo to show that there is nothing there...

They would be rather busy if they had to do stuff for every claim made on the internet.

[Nimless]

They would be rather busy if they had to do stuff for every claim made on the internet.

Since it's public funded I actually think they should, and seriously how much time does it take to take the photo and upload it to the website with a small description?

It's probably a marker, but since THEY took the original photo and published it they should at least, in my opinion, give an explanation.

[yetiman64]

As easy as it is to identify a vague square object in a photo which was taken from space, poorly printed onto a piece of paper, then shown in another photograph, at a distanced angle.

;)
Also a "nope" from me. To me that is nothing but an optical illusion created as a result of the use of the firefox zoom feature.

Test yourself on the photo in the browser, zoom in with the compiz zoom feature as fully as possible with no firefox zoom function in use. It appears natural.

Zoom out with the compiz plugin then in again with only the firefox zoom feature. OOOH, there I see it. :)

Wanna make it look even better ? Leave the firefox zoom fully in then use compiz zoom as well :p

See the attached pics both from the browser (same photo - using different zoom utility combinations). I've made some notes re "features" (more like optical illusions from a distant space photo).

You can read anything you like into a photo like these, nothing to it in my opinion. Cheers.

Edit: No alterations were done to the "building" image, purely cropping and noting. It is the use of the browser zoom feature that stands out in this for me.

[Erik1984]

I've downloaded the picture and did a zoom with Gwenview. I'm not sure what it is, probably just another rock but it does seem to be a little different than its surroundings. I also know we humans are giftet pattern recognizers, we see patterns everywhere because we hate randomness :p

[yetiman64]

I've downloaded the picture...
Could you post a link to it please? I'd love to test various apps zoom functions with it and note the differences some more if possible.


we see patterns everywhere because we hate randomness
+1

[Erik1984]

Could you post a link to it please? I'd love to test various apps zoom functions with it and note the differences some more if possible.


+1

I'm sorry if you misunderstood me. With "the picture" I meant the image that the OP links to not the picture that lies on that NASA desk unfortunately. My image is just a crop from a zoom in on that picture. The same thing you did.

[yetiman64]

I'm sorry if you misunderstood me. With "the picture" I meant the image that the OP links to not the picture that lies on that NASA desk unfortunately. My image is just a crop from a zoom in on that picture. The same thing you did.
Ok mate, no problems, I had thought there that someone published the original, darn it :lol:

[cprofitt]

That is clearly the Tardis.

[Nimless]

For further infos watch this video :

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=B0TqG0EWkNU

I'm not sure there is an actual proof that the e-mail conversation between a guy and Anthony Colaprete ( guy in the photo ) really happened, but if it did, does it really look like like a digital marker?:confused:

Talking about banal explanations...

http://files.abovetopsecret.com/files/img/au4f62ce67.JPG

[KiwiNZ]

Conspiracy theories, where fact becomes fiction and what is fiction becomes evidence.

[Paqman]

A more interesting thing was the recent discovery that there are about 1 billion earth-like planets in our galaxy. It's almost becoming impossible to say alien life in the universe doesn't exist with a straight face.

Yeah, their definition of "Earth-like" is pretty broad though. Sure, a rocky planet ten times the mass of Earth is very similar in astronomical terms, but the press are reporting on it as if they'd be habitable.

[CharlesA]

That is clearly the Tardis.

Must be. Has anyone seen a hospital on the moon bychance?

[QIII]

+1 to human brain pattern matching illusions.

+1 to fiction becoming "evidence".

But I think what everyone is missing here is that the Moon is less dense than the Earth, therefore it is hollow, therefore it is a giant space ship, therefore the large craters on the far side of the moon are not impact craters but engines...

:D

Oh. And that hexagonal "cloud pattern" on Saturn's north pole is actually a plug for deflating it so it can be moved to the Oort cloud for storage.

[Eddie Wilson]

+1 to human brain pattern matching illusions.

+1 to fiction becoming "evidence".

But I think what everyone is missing here is that the Moon is less dense than the Earth, therefore it is hollow, therefore it is a giant space ship, therefore the large craters on the far side of the moon are not impact craters but engines...

:D

Oh. And that hexagonal "cloud pattern" on Saturn's north pole is actually a plug for deflating it so it can be moved.

I knew sooner or later someone would come up with a logical explanation. \\:D/

[MisterGaribaldi]

How can you even judge what the photo is of, given the oblique angle it's at in this photo, and that most of it is covered by either that dude's arm, or the other page laying on top of it? Geez, what a waste of time.

[Old_Grey_Wolf]

That is clearly the Tardis.

:lolflag:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=lFfx9YFqRQI

[forrestcupp]

I'm just shocked that someone posted this before sdowney did. :D

[Old_Grey_Wolf]

__________________
What do you get if you multiply six by nine?

:lolflag:

"I always thought something was fundamentally wrong with the universe".

_________________________________________________

I think you aught to know, I am feeling very depressed.

I'm not getting you down at all am I?

I wouldn't like to think I was getting you down.

Life...don't talk to me about life.

It all is absolutely ghastly. Let's not even talk about it.

Here I am with a brain the size of a planet. They tell me to take you up to the bridge. You call that job satisfaction? Cause I don't.

[Gremlinzzz]

Life's Building blocks come from the Universe.Earth is a small part of the universe.The material for life didn't just land on earth its every where in the universe!nothing can be Alien its all part of the Great design.
:popcorn:

[QIII]

In truth, all you consider life and the universe is nothing more than a very sophisticated simulation on a powerful super computer I use sometimes while goofing off at my job as a janitor in a research center about 150 years from now. I like to inject my consciousness into the simulation from time to time to laugh at you for thinking you are actually real...

[Gremlinzzz]

I knew it nothing is real!:popcorn:
strawberry fields forever

[jwbrase]

Since it's public funded I actually think they should, and seriously how much time does it take to take the photo and upload it to the website with a small description?

Well, it might actually take them a fair while to ascertain which exact photo is shown in the picture. But even if they can manage that in a relatively short time, there's still the question of how often they have to deal with such a thing. What makes you think this is the only photo they've ever had to explain?

[Mr. Picklesworth]

Usually these things are easily disproven by the fact that these photos are never taken at such high resolution. Those craters are quite large, so something that occupies as much space in the printout as your 'structure' is going to be gigantic. So, yeah, probably not interesting.

[forrestcupp]

Usually these things are easily disproven by the fact that these photos are never taken at such high resolution. Those craters are quite large, so something that occupies as much space in the printout as your 'structure' is going to be gigantic. So, yeah, probably not interesting.

it's interesting. just not a giant building.

[MisterGaribaldi]

forrestcupp and Mr. Picklesworth:

I don't get it, and maybe one of the two of you can explain it to me, but how the heck can anyone see ANYTHING in the photo on the desk from the angle the photo of this situation was taken? It doesn't even look like anything.

[jwbrase]

forrestcupp and Mr. Picklesworth:

I don't get it, and maybe one of the two of you can explain it to me, but how the heck can anyone see ANYTHING in the photo on the desk from the angle the photo of this situation was taken? It doesn't even look like anything.

I wondered that too until I zoomed in on it. The image is about 4000x4000 pixels, so your browser has to scale it down to fit it even in a full screen window. When you look at the image at full resolution it's pretty obvious.

My own thinking is that it's an artifact from the compression used for the *.jpg format.

[Nimless]

I wondered that too until I zoomed in on it. The image is about 4000x4000 pixels, so your browser has to scale it down to fit it even in a full screen window. When you look at the image at full resolution it's pretty obvious.

My own thinking is that it's an artifact from the compression used for the *.jpg format.

If you look at the video I posted before, the guy in the picture explained it's a digital marker (maybe the response it's actually a fake one, not sure about this).

So, if for a moment you take the hypothesis that the e-mail response is real, a doubt arise.

The doubt arise because he apparently took the time to explain it; meaning that there IS actually something in the picture and he explained it with a banal explanation. A digital marker looks completely different from the one in the picture, they basically screwed themselves with the answer.

He pretty much said: "There is something: it's a digital marker" and he posted a picture with a marker example that looks completely different from the original.

A basic explanation like all of you suggested ( it's an optical glitch/illusion) would have been easier to give and harder to refute.

To me the idea that a NASA cospiration could be revealed just by a guy distraction it's so damn funny that I want to believe it :p.

Also, in my opinion, if NASA would eventually find something artificially made on Moon, Mars or some other planet they wouldn't reveal it to the public for two reasons:

1) They would wait for more analysis and photos before announcing something so important that could be disproven later on.

2) They would first send something (a Rover maybe?) to check it out before other countries check it out first. Remember that NASA is funded by the government and any useful technology it's supposed to be handled by the US first.

Do you really think they would actually say: "Hey there is something on the Moon artificially made, first country who gets there wins the jackpot (scientific knowledge)".

My two cents, and again sorry for any English error :P

[Copper Bezel]

You're kidding, right?

NASA's funding is abysmally low right now. They'd want to be sure before publishing anything, but if they had a really solid hint of something interesting, they'd want everyone to know about it, and they'd want the funding to be the first to get to poke it with sticks or whatever. Hell, that's what led to the ridiculous hype for the supposed arsenic-munching bacterium.

And if they did want to keep some other sort of thing under wraps, they wouldn't pose with it in a publicity still. = P

As for all the other "conspiracy" moments, the made-up explanations that the military has produced and NASA's lack of enthusiasm for responding to these things: imagine that you run a business where every other telephone call you get is someone freaking out over seeing messages from aliens in a slice of rye toast, who will take everything you say as confirmation of what they wanted you to say.

No response? They're hiding something! A response - clearly they want to cover it up! Noncommittal explanation in case it's a processing artifact instead of a dust grain - they're hiding something! Banal response in absolute terms? Clearly wrong, because that doesn't reinforce my preconceived narrative that they're hiding something!

I can't find it now, but the original "weather balloon" thing, apparently, was a conspiracy by the military - to cover up other, non-weather-related high-altitude balloons. (For imaging and such.)

[sdowney717]

So did we go to the moon in the 60's?

I think we did, I have friends who say it was faked.
They claim the radiation belts would have killed the astronauts.

But they were not there long enough to receive fatal dosage.
http://www.bautforum.com/showthread.php/3885-Statement-from-James-Van-Allen-on-radiation-effects?

[x-shaney-x]

I don't even believe in the moon.

[Old_Grey_Wolf]

So did we go to the moon in the 60's?


It was Apollo 11 that landed on the moon in July 1969.

A few people lost their lives trying to get to the moon. It wasn't easy to accomplish, and the people making the effort knew they were taking the risk.

The dead included astronauts Virgil Grissom, Edward White, and Roger Chaffee.

It amasses me that people would think that exploring the solar system would be safe for tourists.

[overcast]

Well we can make out such structures due to cloud formation or due to star positioning too. So it';s not quite hard to imagine structures with shadows on it.

[wojox]

It's pretty obvious to me that is definetly a Cylon Base.

Rise of the Cylons.......

[MisterGaribaldi]

It's pretty obvious to me that is definetly a Cylon Base.

You mean like this one?

http://www.sadgeezer.com/Legacy/gallery/BSG/s1/110/110u.JPG

[wojox]

You mean like this one?

that's the one :KS

[tehchibipanda]

All I can think of is zerg rush o_o; If that's the case we're all doomed!

Seriously, though, it's an interesting photo. Life on other planets would be awesome to see. I believe its out there, I just want to see it for myself. I wonder what those other life forms would look like...How similar to us they may or may not be.

[Bandit]

If Nasa or ANY sort of goverment/company found proof of alien life we would know.


Actually No you wouldnt. Its the policy of the US Government to that aliens, UFO or any other form of extra terrestrial species do not exist. Thus they can not be confirmed nor denied if they dont exist. Reasoning behind this is NOT to keep secrets from those who need to know, or already know. But in term to keep the spread of the information to a minimal. Why you ask? This is done to keep people from panicking and rioting. Humans have become so wrapped up in them selfs over the years that they believe they are master and kind of their environment, to learn that they are not and that they are/could be others out there that possible posses the technology/power per se to destroy or dramatically change the lives of said humans would be to much for most to handle. Many have speculated over the years that the US Government has had a hand is helping influence many movies or TV series to get the population accustomed to idea of us "not being alone".
But honestly IMHO, they are correct in this measure. Humans are not ready to know the truth. Maybe in 50 years they time may be right, but thats a bridge we will have to cross when we get there.

[Copper Bezel]

[citation needed]

[QIII]

There aren't aliens on the Moon. At least our Moon. Not any more, anyway.

I should know.

The aliens have been coming back every year since the first time in '73 to take me away for a few days. Ganymede and Europa are where there big bases are. Ganymede is quite the little base. You know that Ganymede is actually a little bigger than Mercury and only half its mass? Yep. It's hollow. Just like our Moon. But unlike our Moon it's still occupied.

The aliens had a bit on an accident on our Moon, they say. Something about some punk-@$$ alien kids dropping an atomic cherry bomb in a toilet at a High School. Wrecked the plumbing. The Alien Welfare Department came in and condemned it because every toilet in the whole place was backed-up for over a year.

They never said what happened to the alien kids that made the mess. But rumor has it they made their way to Earth, where they hid away for a while, interbred with humans and eventually became politicians.

So I hear.

[forrestcupp]

So did we go to the moon in the 60's?

I think we did, I have friends who say it was faked.
They claim the radiation belts would have killed the astronauts.

But they were not there long enough to receive fatal dosage.
http://www.bautforum.com/showthread.php/3885-Statement-from-James-Van-Allen-on-radiation-effects?

I used to wonder about that until I found out that it can be easily proved by aiming lasers at the retroreflectors that were planted on the moon by the Apollo project.

[Bandit]

I used to wonder about that until I found out that it can be easily proved by aiming lasers at the retroreflectors that were planted on the moon by the Apollo project.

They did go to the moon. The big question is why havent we went back more often these past few years. Yes there was a lot of things that went wrong with the missions mostly due to electrical and mechanical glitches. But home computers these days are more stable and a lot of efficient. So why dont we have a base or a temporary makeshift outpost on the moon? The point is, if the space race would have kept at the speed it was going, we all would have been in space by now. That being said, whats the driving force holding space exploration back?

[CharlesA]

My bet is $$$$$$$

Besides, didn't they already retire the shuttle?

[Bandit]

Bah! Real men dont take the shuttle. Titan Rockets are the way to go...
http://www.universetoday.com/wp-content/uploads/2011/03/Titan-IV-Rocket.jpg

[Copper Bezel]

Yeah, the shuttle can only reach low Earth orbit. It's not the same kind of vehicle as something like the Saturn V. NASA hopes to push the basic shuttling off to private industry and focus on the hard stuff, as it were.

Bandit, when you say that we should have gone back to the moon more often, are you counting both manned and unmanned missions? I can't help thinking that the fact that the moon is relatively uninteresting has played a part in our relative absence.

As for what's holding us back - lack of funding and lack of public interest will do that. The space race made space exploration a matter of national defense. Now, it's curiosity, and that doesn't motivate the public in the same way. Plus, something like the moon missions is inherently more interesting when you have to send people there, but if what we want is scientific insight, then we can go a lot farther if the ships don't have people in them. Things like Voyager and Cassini actually got us a lot more interesting information than Apollo did, but the general public doesn't seem to know that they even happened. So it's not so much that we're held back as that we're just not pushing anymore. There's a lot of PR work to be done.

Edit: And the research that goes into these projects pushes commercial technology along in a fairly cost-effective way, too, so it's not as if there isn't a clear benefit beyond curiosity. A lot of the miniaturization of electronics was pushed along by NASA probes.

[CharlesA]

Bah! Real men dont take the shuttle. Titan Rockets are the way to go...

Don't you mean like the Phoenix (http://www.startrek.com/database_article/cochrane)?

Oh, +1 to Copper Bezel. That's a pretty good summary.

[Warpnow]

They did go to the moon. The big question is why havent we went back more often these past few years. Yes there was a lot of things that went wrong with the missions mostly due to electrical and mechanical glitches. But home computers these days are more stable and a lot of efficient. So why dont we have a base or a temporary makeshift outpost on the moon? The point is, if the space race would have kept at the speed it was going, we all would have been in space by now. That being said, whats the driving force holding space exploration back?

Ummm, value? They went to the moon, and realized all they got were billion dollar rocks. Just not worth it.

[Bandit]

Don't you mean like the Phoenix (http://www.startrek.com/database_article/cochrane)?
.....

Yep.. :popcorn:

[Copper Bezel]

Ummm, value? They went to the moon, and realized all they got were billion dollar rocks. Just not worth it.
It most certainly was worth it. It's just hard to see how it could be necessary to repeat it.

[Bandit]

Yea it cost a lot. Sadly more then it really should. But if space exploration technology isnt pushed, then we all are doomed to be stuck on this rock forever. I really feel imprisoned here..

[forrestcupp]

Yeah, the shuttle can only reach low Earth orbit. It's not the same kind of vehicle as something like the Saturn V. NASA hopes to push the basic shuttling off to private industry and focus on the hard stuff, as it were.

Bandit, when you say that we should have gone back to the moon more often, are you counting both manned and unmanned missions? I can't help thinking that the fact that the moon is relatively uninteresting has played a part in our relative absence.

As for what's holding us back - lack of funding and lack of public interest will do that. The space race made space exploration a matter of national defense. Now, it's curiosity, and that doesn't motivate the public in the same way. Plus, something like the moon missions is inherently more interesting when you have to send people there, but if what we want is scientific insight, then we can go a lot farther if the ships don't have people in them. Things like Voyager and Cassini actually got us a lot more interesting information than Apollo did, but the general public doesn't seem to know that they even happened. So it's not so much that we're held back as that we're just not pushing anymore. There's a lot of PR work to be done.

Edit: And the research that goes into these projects pushes commercial technology along in a fairly cost-effective way, too, so it's not as if there isn't a clear benefit beyond curiosity. A lot of the miniaturization of electronics was pushed along by NASA probes.Every point you made sums up all the things I was thinking. ;)


Ummm, value? They went to the moon, and realized all they got were billion dollar rocks. Just not worth it.
If they brought back shiploads of those rocks, they would no longer have a billion dollar value. It would end up being like those small bags of ash from Mount St. Helens you used to be able to buy for a couple of bucks after the eruption, or rubble from the Berlin wall.

[sdowney717]

I used to wonder about that until I found out that it can be easily proved by aiming lasers at the retroreflectors that were planted on the moon by the Apollo project.

Yes a good reason to believe we did go to the moon. I mentioned this to my friend and he believes we went to the moon and landed devices on it remotely, no humans were needed. Just send the rockets and land, but was that possible to do a controlled landing of moon probes back then without a human at the controls?

[PC_load_letter]

it's interesting. just not a giant building.

Was about to post exactly that. This is not a pattern in the clouds or stars to easily dismiss as an illusion, straight lines are very rare in nature let alone right angles, or square shapes.

When zoomed in as in the youtube video above it seems to be a part of the picture, not a marker, and the light/shadows on the edges suggests it is a 3D shape.

My first guess when I saw it was that it looks like the top of a robotic rover just like "Spirit" or "Opportunity" or the Russian Lunkhod.

[MisterGaribaldi]

A Few Thoughts...

We went to the moon, and we went there when we had the national (and, I'd also argue, cultural) will to do so. We no longer have much of a will in this country, except for watching stupid, meaningless television shows or playing computer games. We haven't gone back because, in my opinion, even if there was a perceived "compelling" reason, we would dither and naysay ourselves into utter inaction. You can agree with that, or disagree, but it's just my opinion (though it's based on many years of observation).

As for those who say we didn't go, and can never be convinced that we did, you know what I would do? I'd gather them all up, put them into as many rockets as it would take to make, and send them there to see the landing sites. Then, when they decided to open their helmets to prove it was just an elaborate stage, I'd let them. Go for it. Maybe the reduction in the population of idiots might be a net positive and boon to our species.

Right now, in this country and for reasons which are as much political as they are anything else, we do not have the leadership nor the discipline nor the management focus to go to the moon, regardless of how useful it actually would be as a means of training, and of proving both flight hardware and methodologies applicable broadly for use elsewhere, such as on Mars, or on asteroids, or one day on other worlds in other systems when we develop the means to travel there. We're darned near to having our heavy lift booster system ready to go, but it has no mission, no real purpose, and this after how long, maybe as much as 20 years?

NASA has lost much -- if not most, in truth -- of the braintrust it had developed during the Shuttle and ISS era. They've all basically been laid off, and so they've left, after several years of on again/off again dithering by this and the previous Administration on whether we have a space program or not, or if we have a manned program or not. It's gone, folks, and I'll tell you what, they're generally disgusted with the situation and made (in many cases) a might too wearied to come back.

So who is it you think exactly is going to work on and be a part of a new space program here in the U.S. that we might -- or might not -- have in a few years? It's not going to be the people who put the Shuttle into orbit, I can tell you that much right now. Those folks at the Cape are nearly all gone, with just a last few involved in the process of de-commissioning the remaining shuttle fleet and making them ready for display in museums.

If you're at all interested, go read "Riding Rockets" by Mike Mullane. That will give you a really good insight on NASA, including some of the darker details of that organization. To be honest, I'm not sure that I would ever trust NASA (management and senior leadership in particular) ever again with a major space program. But, I sure as heck don't trust their bosses, past or present.

[forrestcupp]

As for those who say we didn't go, and can never be convinced that we did, you know what I would do? I'd gather them all up, put them into as many rockets as it would take to make, and send them there to see the landing sites. Then, when they decided to open their helmets to prove it was just an elaborate stage, I'd let them. Go for it. Maybe the reduction in the population of idiots might be a net positive and boon to our species.

That's taking it a little bit too far. These people may be wrong, but they're not necessarily mindless idiots. There is a lot of convincing evidence that backs up the belief that it was all staged. All of it can be refuted, but it's not like they're just talking out of their backsides mindlessly.

[MisterGaribaldi]

Actually, I'd have to say "Yes, they are" in fact.

[bob-linux-user]

+1 To Mr Garibaldi and a few other points:-

Although NASA should be as transparent and responsive to queries as possible, should they really pay someone to answer every daft question that come their way? If I write to NASA saying "Prove the moon is not made of green cheese!", am I entitled to a reply?

We didn't go back to the moon for a number of reasons, amongst others, the cold war is now over, one of the reasons for going to the moon was beating the Russians. Also what politician is going to vote in the budget needed?

[Gremlinzzz]

+1 To Mr Garibaldi and a few other points:-

Although NASA should be as transparent and responsive to queries as possible, should they really pay someone to answer every daft question that come their way? If I write to NASA saying "Prove the moon is not made of green cheese!", am I entitled to a reply?

We didn't go back to the moon for a number of reasons, amongst others, the cold war is now over, one of the reasons for going to the moon was beating the Russians. Also what politician is going to vote in the budget needed?

As a tax payer you are entitled to a reply,you would also be entitled to a visited from the men with the big net and white coats if needed:popcorn:
As for the reason no one visited the moon is it's crawling with Alien's!
:popcorn:

[Nimless]

+1 To Mr Garibaldi and a few other points:-

Although NASA should be as transparent and responsive to queries as possible, should they really pay someone to answer every daft question that come their way? If I write to NASA saying "Prove the moon is not made of green cheese!", am I entitled to a reply?

We didn't go back to the moon for a number of reasons, amongst others, the cold war is now over, one of the reasons for going to the moon was beating the Russians. Also what politician is going to vote in the budget needed?

In my opinion there is a BIG difference between mindless and unanswerable questions and legitimate ones. Nasa should be as trasparent as possible regarding questions that any intellectual person should ask after some strange and unexplicable facts, like the picture above.

[MisterGaribaldi]

Well, for what it's worth, microbes sent to the moon in Surveyor were found a couple years later, by Apollo 12, to have survived in a harsh vacuum / sun / shade / radiation environment. Who would ever have expected that?

[Gremlinzzz]

In my opinion there is a BIG difference between mindless and unanswerable questions and legitimate ones. Nasa should be as trasparent as possible regarding questions that any intellectual person should ask after some strange and unexplicable facts, like the picture above.

If the picture is real it was built by
us or them
:popcorn:

[CarpKing]

Anyone notice that the computer screen in the background on the left has the same image? It looks like there's some kind of marker over the same spot as the mystery object. Perhaps the object is just a simplified square representation of the flashier tool in use on the screen, to allow for a less cluttered printout.

[haqking]

If you look real close at the reflection on the womans glasses you can see the screen she is looking at which shows a reflection of her looking at the screen with the reflection on which shows the man next to her pointing at a screen where he is looking at a online forum and laughing at all the threads on the internet about the things you can see in photos ;-)

[Copper Bezel]

Requisite (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Vxq9yj2pVWk).

Edit: You know, that's actually more plausible than a marker graphic. This is, again, a publicity still. Sometimes people get bored. NASA is trolling.

[hughr2005]

Looks to me like a trick of the light. It seems there's something in the photo, but it doesn't look like a structure to me.

[sdowney717]

I went looking for the picture and if you watch the video then it is more apparent what you guys are talking about. Shows the source at his elbow.

http://www.thetruthbehindthescenes.org/2012/03/15/nasa-accidentally-confirms-moon-structures-exist/

This other site shows more interesting pictures.
http://alien-ufo-research.com/alien_moon_bases/

I doubt there are any alien moon bases. People can manipulate images and even if there were, dont you think the government would never say so?

[sdowney717]

So how fake, that is a site in Iran!:lolflag:
see what I mean? People will spoof and fraud you.
https://sites.google.com/a/misteridellaterra.com/www/ilmisterodeitemplari

Il Santo Graal si trova a Takht-I-Sulaiman (Iran)

https://sites.google.com/a/misteridellaterra.com/www/am03f22g.jpg





Secondo questa ipotesi il Santo Graal sarebbe il simbolico "Fuoco Reale" fonte della conoscenza, adorato dai seguaci di Zarathustra a Takht-I-Sulaiman, il principale centro del culto di Zoroastro. Takht-I-Sulaiman potrebbe essere dunque la mitica Sarraz, da cui il Santo Graal (Fuoco Reale) giunse, a cui ritornò e dove forse si trova ancora.

[yetiman64]

So how fake, that is a site in Iran!:lolflag:
see what I mean? People will spoof and fraud you.
https://sites.google.com/a/misteridellaterra.com/www/ilmisterodeitemplari

Il Santo Graal si trova a Takht-I-Sulaiman (Iran)

https://sites.google.com/a/misteridellaterra.com/www/am03f22g.jpg





Secondo questa ipotesi il Santo Graal sarebbe il simbolico "Fuoco Reale" fonte della conoscenza, adorato dai seguaci di Zarathustra a Takht-I-Sulaiman, il principale centro del culto di Zoroastro. Takht-I-Sulaiman potrebbe essere dunque la mitica Sarraz, da cui il Santo Graal (Fuoco Reale) giunse, a cui ritornò e dove forse si trova ancora.

Na, it was really a bunch 'o little green martians on a Sunday drive who spotted the Iran site, took a liking to it and beamed up a copy on the moon to use for themselves. ;) ... :biggrin:

Edit:
NASA is trolling:lolflag:

[Mariane]

Movie makers assume that knowledge about aliens has to be kept secret. "This is done to keep people from panicking and rioting". There is a big difference between news such as "extraterrestrial life exists" and "the aliens are attacking Earth" :lolflag:

New about the discovery of some extraterrestrial life would no more panic people than news about some distant war. Some people would spend more time in front of the TV, maybe, listening to what people say about it. Even if some aliens really did build something on the moon, why would people riot? Would you riot about it?

[Paqman]

New about the discovery of some extraterrestrial life would no more panic people than news about some distant war. Some people would spend more time in front of the TV, maybe, listening to what people say about it. Even if some aliens really did build something on the moon, why would people riot? Would you riot about it?

Exactly. It's also highly likely that the news wouldn't come out as a single blockbuster event. It's likely that (just like most other scientific discoveries) the evidence for alien life was amassed gradually and carefully. I suspect the discovery would go more like:

"We don't know if there are aliens" >> "We have some tentative results that suggest there might be aliens" >> "We have strong evidence" >> "They live at XYZ, let's say hi".

And it might take years or decades (or centuries) to get from one end of that scale to the other. People might have a very long time to get used to the idea.

[jwbrase]

Actually, I'd have to say "Yes, they are" in fact.

I think this video says it best: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=mo_nltYf9gw

[jonathonblake]

whats the driving force holding space exploration back?

The first reason is that the Lunar missions were done wrong. Heck, virtually all space exploration by NASA started in the wrong place.

The first goal should have been to establish a permanent manned orbiting space station in "Earth Parking Orbit".

All missions should have been launched from that space station.


The second reason is money. Because NASA flubbed on the first point --- Earth Parking Orbit --- it can't afford manned missions to the moon, much less the planets.

Had NASA done the right thing, and established a large permanent manned orbiting space station in Earth Parking Orbit, they would have had the money to continue manned trips to the moon, and elsewhere.

To do that, NASA would have to have designed and built:

A shuttle to take people up to Earth parking orbit, and bring them back down;
A booster to launch from Earth parking orbit to the planets and stars;
A space station similar to the one depicted in 2001;


Earth Parking Orbit is half way to anywhere in the Solar System, and possibly the Galaxy.

jonathon

[Copper Bezel]

Why? ISS is above parking orbit, and you still have to get all of the same things into space even if you assemble and "launch" them from there. Having a base camp to stop at is kind of irrelevant - at least, anything more than the ISS.

Even if you're not using parking orbit, but another, more distant position, it still doesn't really offer any advantage.

[Nimless]

Exactly. It's also highly likely that the news wouldn't come out as a single blockbuster event. It's likely that (just like most other scientific discoveries) the evidence for alien life was amassed gradually and carefully. I suspect the discovery would go more like:

"We don't know if there are aliens" >> "We have some tentative results that suggest there might be aliens" >> "We have strong evidence" >> "They live at XYZ, let's say hi".

And it might take years or decades (or centuries) to get from one end of that scale to the other. People might have a very long time to get used to the idea.

[cospiration mode on] what if that is exactly what NASA is actually doing at the moment: "filtering" what the public knows to slowly adapt the public opinion to extraterrestrial life?[cospiration mode off]

That's what Edgar Mitchell suggests and he is not a random "idiot" of the internet: "I urge those who are doubtful: Read the books, read the lore, start to understand what has really been going on. Because there really is no doubt we are being visited".

IF he is telling the truth, thinking that NASA knows nothing about this would be really naive in my opinion.

IF he is lying why would he screw up his reputation at the end of his career? From what I know it is not like he is trying to sell a book or something... ( I could be proven wrong on that though :p)

Don't get me wrong, I still don't have a strong opinion on this matter: I just like to think about all the possibilities.

[Smilax]

[cospiration mode on] what if that is exactly what NASA is actually doing at the moment: "filtering" what the public knows to slowly adapt the public opinion to extraterrestrial life?[cospiration mode off]

That's what Edgar Mitchell suggests and he is not a random "idiot" of the internet: "I urge those who are doubtful: Read the books, read the lore, start to understand what has really been going on. Because there really is no doubt we are being visited".

IF he is telling the truth, thinking that NASA knows nothing about this would be really naive in my opinion.

IF he is lying why would he screw up his reputation at the end of his career? From what I know it is not like he is trying to sell a book or something... ( I could be proven wrong on that though :p)

Don't get me wrong, I still don't have a strong opinion on this matter: I just like to think about all the possibilities.


well, nasa's not the only space people, what about china, japan, russia.

japan for example has really hi def images of the entire moon.

are they all in it together, seems unlikely

as for screwin your rep at the end of your career, nothing new their, think kelvin, and his whole, x-rays don't exist latter years (however he did backtrack on that one)

[Nimless]

well, nasa's not the only space people, what about china, japan, russia.

japan for example has really hi def images of the entire moon.

are they all in it together, seems unlikely

as for screwin your rep at the end of your career, nothing new their, think kelvin, and his whole, x-rays don't exist latter years (however he did backtrack on that one)

These are valid points: I don't have enough knowledge about the advance of other countries space programs to comment on that but I think a tacit agreement, between countries, of non-disclosure to the public regarding some topics is unlikely but still possible.

Regarding Edgar Mitchell my point was that highly educated and well respected people (he is not the only one, there are others) think there might be a huge cover-up, it's not a "tin foil hat guy" topic as someone here suggested.

[Gremlinzzz]

I do believe that there is life everywhere in the universe!
My personal thoughts is they would look like us,same with there bugs and animals.I don't believe they have the ability or technology to travel beyond there star system.Nor do i think that they ever will,same with us.
Universe is expanding making galaxy hopping more difficult.best we could hope for is some kind of signal contact.But i could be wrong :popcorn:

[Nimless]

I do believe that there is life everywhere in the universe!
My personal thoughts is they would look like us,same with there bugs and animals.I don't believe they have the ability or technology to travel beyond there star system.Nor do i think that they ever will,same with us.
Universe is expanding making galaxy hopping more difficult.best we could hope for is some kind of signal contact.But i could be wrong :popcorn:

If travelling outside a solar system is not possible then all the civilizations around the universe have probably depleted, or almost depleted, all the resources of their planet/stars. Thinking that we are basically stuck in this solar system forever, destined to die of energy/food starvation is pretty sad.

[Copper Bezel]

Regarding Edgar Mitchell my point was that highly educated and well respected people (he is not the only one, there are others) think there might be a huge cover-up, it's not a "tin foil hat guy" topic as someone here suggested.
Then he's a terrible example. He's not a scientist, he's a pilot. His highlights since walking on the moon are, apparently, hocking his NASA mementos and being healed of undiagnosed kidney cancer by psychic telepresence. He's bronzed his tin-foil hat at this point.

[Paqman]

I think a tacit agreement, between countries, of non-disclosure to the public regarding some topics is unlikely but still possible.


The thing is that the people who would have knowledge of the existence of aliens aren't all grouped under a convenient command structure that could ensure their silence.

Most (radio)astronomers don't work for government space agencies. SETI itself is a private organisation, neither the US nor any other government has control over them.

Coupled to this, the first thing anyone with a candidate signal would do is get it confirmed by an independent source separated from them geographically (to rule out a local source). The further away the better, as this would also allow more accurate measurement of the location of the source. So pretty much by definition any actual evidence of aliens would be beyond the hands of any one government by the time it was confirmed.

It would have to be a hell of a coverup to shut the news down. It just doesn't sound plausible to me.

[Nimless]

The thing is that the people who would have knowledge of the existence of aliens aren't all grouped under a convenient command structure that could ensure their silence.

Most (radio)astronomers don't work for government space agencies. SETI itself is a private organisation, neither the US nor any other government has control over them.

Coupled to this, the first thing anyone with a candidate signal would do is get it confirmed by an independent source separated from them geographically (to rule out a local source). The further away the better, as this would also allow more accurate measurement of the location of the source. So pretty much by definition any actual evidence of aliens would be beyond the hands of any one government by the time it was confirmed.

It would have to be a hell of a coverup to shut the news down. It just doesn't sound plausible to me.

Interesting , in fact SETI actually found something and it's public domain :) (WoW signal). But you forget to take into account that the really expensive technology , like Kepler-Cassini-Hubble are all pretty much under the same agency control, pretty much all NASA. Yes there are different agencies working together on those missions but I would be curious as to WHO receive the data sent from them first, my guess? NASA.

I agree BIG evidence like a space ship dropping into low orbit would be hard to conceal, but small evidence would be possible :)

I'm not against NASA , but since the US government still hasn't disclosed informations about Roswell accident, and the NASA is funded/controlled by the government, basic logic suggests that it has the same "policy".


Then he's a terrible example. He's not a scientist, he's a pilot. His highlights since walking on the moon are, apparently, hocking his NASA mementos and being healed of undiagnosed kidney cancer by psychic telepresence. He's bronzed his tin-foil hat at this point.

I didn't know that, can you give me some sources to read please? Thanks

[Smilax]

kepler, detect planets that transit their host star, wavelength 400–865 nm
Hard to see how it would detect a 'signal' from the aliens, likely swamped by their host star.

cassini, Flyby, orbiter, lander of planets, moons in our solar system,
can't detect signals from other stars, but may collide with a cloaked warbird...

hubble, again, great telescope, but hard to see how it would detect a 'signal' from the aliens

radio seems to be the way to go, and most radio astronomers are half way to hippys,
they def won't be on side with the cia in covering up any aliens radio talk shows they happen to tune in to.

[Paqman]

radio seems to be the way to go, and most radio astronomers are half way to hippys,
they def won't be on side with the cia in covering up any aliens radio talk shows they happen to tune in to.

Definitely, although there is some optical SETI being done now too.

[MisterGaribaldi]

Regarding Edgar Mitchell...

http://t0.gstatic.com/images?q=tbn:ANd9GcT-e-VZ5FWzMSZ_P3SM1k7Nc72CTy9IrnjadYcB8HKQMVzoH5NPQ-zDtW7v

And that's all I gotta say about that.

[Smilax]

Definitely, although there is some optical SETI being done now too.


nice, i didn't know that, i'll have a read.


and Nimless, the wow signal is really interesting candidate, as it freq was approx 1420 MHz, which is associated with hydrogen, good to transmit in as many distant aliens may be observing at this freq. but whats intresting to me is that they came up with 2 (competing) values for it's freq, being about 100kHz apart, pretty much equal distant either side of the freq associated with hydrogen, which to me is what would be expected from a freq modulated signal. it didn't repeat, however our own signal to the stars (arecibo) was only sent one time to.

so maybe.

[Paqman]

From what I've read I think it's definitely plausible that the wow signal was the real thing. IIRC there aren't really any stars that are particularly good candidates for an origin, but it could have been a transmission from something in space.

The alarming thing is that apparently the way we search for signals still isn't able to actually extract any useful data from one-off transmissions. Unless ET was giving us a constant blast we'd miss it again.

[Copper Bezel]

I didn't know that, can you give me some sources to read please? Thanks
Honestly, I just read his Wikipedia entry (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Edgar_Mitchell).


can't detect signals from other stars, but may collide with a cloaked warbird...

There Ain't No Stealth in Space. (http://www.projectrho.com/rocket/spacewardetect.php)

[Nimless]

From what I've read I think it's definitely plausible that the wow signal was the real thing. IIRC there aren't really any stars that are particularly good candidates for an origin, but it could have been a transmission from something in space.

The alarming thing is that apparently the way we search for signals still isn't able to actually extract any useful data from one-off transmissions. Unless ET was giving us a constant blast we'd miss it again.

In my opinion we are listening with the wrong technology, our technology is very primitive, look at neutrino-based communications for more advanced technology:
http://physicsworld.com/cws/article/news/2012/mar/19/neutrino-based-communication-is-a-first

We are basically using smoke signals at the moment...

[Bandit]

In my opinion we are listening with the wrong technology, our technology is very primitive, look at neutrino-based communications for more advanced technology:
http://physicsworld.com/cws/article/news/2012/mar/19/neutrino-based-communication-is-a-first

We are basically using smoke signals at the moment...

I am inclined to agree with you.
Radio band is nice for close earth orbit or on the surface of the planet, but it looses practicality by the time you get past the moon or further away. I mean good lord, the guys that were operating the Martian lander/probes were sending a signal burst once a day then waiting the next day to see if the probes followed through with the commands, and that just one planet away.. Smoke Signals, yep you summed it up..

I am no communication expert, but there is got to be something better. Hate to drag scifi into this, but something like off stargate sg-series had like sub-space communications.

[Nimless]

I am inclined to agree with you.
Radio band is nice for close earth orbit or on the surface of the planet, but it looses practicality by the time you get past the moon or further away. I mean good lord, the guys that were operating the Martian lander/probes were sending a signal burst once a day then waiting the next day to see if the probes followed through with the commands, and that just one planet away.. Smoke Signals, yep you summed it up..

I am no communication expert, but there is got to be something better. Hate to drag scifi into this, but something like off stargate sg-series had like sub-space communications.

Check out quantum entanglement communication, that's pretty interesting.

From what I can understand the fun thing is that it's actually impossible to intercept those communications , so it explains why the Universe seems "silent".

[forrestcupp]

Hate to drag scifi into this, but something like off stargate sg-series had like sub-space communications.

Sub-etha is even better. ;)

[JRV]

People DO talk ( see Roswell accident and Edgar Mitchell ) but governments are still keeping a secret on it and denying everything, most of the time with banal explanations.

Back to the photo, maybe it's a misunderstanding and it isn't a photo of the Moon but of Earth?

Ask any propagandist, the best place to hide a truth is among a pack of lies.

[Paqman]

our technology is very primitive

Possibly, but we can't exactly use technology we don't have. Besides, it makes sense for a civilisation that was actively trying to be found to use the simplest possible technology to do so. If we decided in a thousand years time to build a beacon including radio would be a sensible idea.


I am inclined to agree with you.
Radio band is nice for close earth orbit or on the surface of the planet, but it looses practicality by the time you get past the moon or further away. I mean good lord, the guys that were operating the Martian lander/probes were sending a signal burst once a day then waiting the next day to see if the probes followed through with the commands, and that just one planet away.. Smoke Signals, yep you summed it up..

Why is that impractical? Radio is cheap, and goes as fast as it's possible to go. You're always going to have a massive time penalty when communicating at interstellar distances, that's just a given. The length of a human lifespan isn't really a big problem IMO. You're talking about events on a scale bigger than any individual. Besides, once the initial link is made and communication protocols established there's no reason the civilisations at either end couldn't arrange to beam each other an AI that could be chatted to in real time. We probably have the technology to host a pretty good alien AI right now, and it won't be long before we could write a half decent one to send to them.

[fatality_uk]

Bear in mind radio waves are the most common, naturally occurring signal in the universe. Any life outside our solar system would know this if they are as advanced or more than Humans. Therefore looking for a radio signal is eminently sensible.

[Paqman]

Bear in mind radio waves are the most common, naturally occurring signal in the universe. Any life outside our solar system would know this if they are as advanced or more than Humans. Therefore looking for a radio signal is eminently sensible.

Exactly. We've traditionally done all our SETI work on receivers built for radio astronomy. Any alien civilisation at an equivalent or higher tech level is going to be doing radio astronomy too. So we can be pretty sure they'd have receivers that can hear us as long as we're still pumping the RF out into sky. The problem might be that they're not broadcasting, with cable and satellites we're already putting out a lot less than we used to. The solution to the Fermi paradox might be that it's simply very hard to spot aliens that aren't going out of their way to be seen.

[sdowney717]

Interesting video of flying objects in space, especially the ones zooming around inspecting the lost Nasa tether.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=X-RPWhigpQg&feature=player_embedded

I dont know what they are, but objects seems to have intent and vary trajectory according to their own purposes. Perhaps a physical manifestation of fallen alien angels...
http://fallenalien.com/

[MasterNetra]

Curses they found the entrance to my secret moon base! :p