The towers on the dark side of the moon

The shard and the tower on the dark side of the moon what are they?These images are from Lunar Orbiter frame LO-III-84-M. Taken with the medium
resolution camera at a distance of at least 250 miles, it shows an object dubbed by Hoagland the "Shard".
The star-like object above the "Shard" is a camera registration mark. The "Shard" has a shadow cast in the
correct direction for it to be a real object on the Moon and is aligned with the local vertical rather
than the grain of the film, decreasing the chance it is an emulsion abnormality. Close-ups reveal a
cellular-like internal structure. Above and behind the "Shard" is the "Tower", a massive 7 mile high
structure with a central "cube" suspended by a tripod like base. Enhancements of the "Tower" show a
similar cellular construction to the "Shard", but with a distinctly hexagonal pattern.

Category:

Science & Technology

Tags:

• outer
• space
• ufo
• news
• military
• discussion
• apollo
• Gemini
• mars
• moon
• earth
• hoax
• truth
• lie's
• science
• documentary
• history
• photography

[arobekie]

NASA geologist farouk elbaz did say that not all discoveries made on the moon have been made public.

[lbawop]

@mik99D The photos of phobos was taken by Europe's Mars Express spacecraft that doesnt get that close to phobos, but the HD camera did reveal the rocky Phobos with a resolution of just 14.5 feet per pixel.. its is funny that every craft that has been sent to look for life on mars or phobos doen't make it.. Russian Federal Space Agency has lost 3 spacecraft trying to get to that moon, Britian lost one on mars, but NASA has never sent a probe to look for life on mars. i think that is weird

[lbawop]

@mik99D We have never had any craft land on phobos yet.. and to say that it is a part of the apollo mission booster just means you cant do any research, as the only booster they lost was Apollo 12's third stage but now they have found it... If it was.. tell me how some thing traving at 22.000 mph slows down to 5 mph even though Mars and phobos gravity would be pulling it and making it go faster.. Mars gravity would of increased its speed.. Sorry you comment has no facts or Physics in it

[mik99D]

@FEEDNINEofcl Again these are possible artefacts of image processing or coarse grained imagry. Why are there never ever clear and indisputable images? They are always fuzzy, grainy and can be interpreted as anything one wants. The Phobos monolith is probably the remains of one of the many failed Mars craft sent there. Or it is where some part of an earlier apollo mission booster has settles or a shield. I bet it isn't alien. It may be natural, such as a small (irregular) asteroid impact.

[FEEDNINEofcl]

@mik99D

Yes I knew that already, thanks for giving me your own condescending reply. I really needed that simple information explained in high detail. Whatever the case, something standing that far off the surface could not occur naturally. That alone is justification for speculation on what it is.

[lbawop]

@mik99D So true.. Richard Hoagland does go over the top on most things.. and people should always do their own research on his claims..

So what do you think on the pictures from the Russian probe Zond III in 1965 that shows a object on the moons horizon sticking out of the ground by a few miles? Or the photos of that "Monolith" on Phobos?

Just asking thats all

[mik99D]

@mik99D Because the detail is not there. Remember the 'face on Mars' taken by the Viking orbiter in the 1970s? That gave rise to all kinds of interpretation, from shadows to ancient civilisations akin to the ancient Egyptians. Richard Hoagland has made a career out of this geologic object. He went quiet about it in the 1990s as the Mars orbiter took fine grain images of the mesa. The face was no longer a face. That is the problem here. I have done a lot of investigation as one should.

[mik99D]

@FEEDNINEofcl Do you know the difference between 'coarse grain' information and 'fine grain' information? Well the images we are looking at are all coarse grain. This means that a pixel of the image could be a kilometre across. So any detail below that size is marked as one of 256 grey-scale hue. The way an image is built up to decide the greyscale hue is an average of what the smaller detail would give. Course grain data allows for many different interpretations. Rest next

[XiaoGia96]

FUCKING SENTINEL PRIME

[FEEDNINEofcl]

@mik99D

It is not my fault if you fail to make the obvious assumption that I’m referring to UFOs of an extra-terrestrial nature. If I thought the readers of my comments had the IQ of a snail I would have explained my exact meaning, although doing that may have come across as condescending. However, it appears you obviously required the condescending version.