Wednesday, November 15, 2017

The Moon’s City and Towers

It goes almost without saying that the unique nature of the moon as a tool for Terraforming Earth, and humanities prior high civilization prior to the Pleistocene Nonconformity 12950 BP makes a physical presence a near certainty.  It also makes a continuing presence an equal certainty, just as deep underground facilities surely exist on Earth itself.

Thus a sustained effort to collate surface data should be fruitful although most should be underground.  They certainly will not be hiding anything from the likes of us.

The assumption is made that much of what is seen is abandoned.  Why?  The whole purpose of surface hardware is to protect life.  Once built, it is easily sustained and even maintained.  The huge scales involved merely reflects the low gravity.  Space frames  covering a square mile is plausible and huge inflated domes as well. 

The Moon’s City and Towers

The average person will be surprised to learn that there are huge structures on the Moon that appear to be quite old. The photographs certainly suggest an ancient advanced civilization and an attempt to keep it secret by blacking out various photographs. While I was stationed at Langley I drove past the NASA Apollo Moon buildings every day where the study of the Moon was being examined. Working in Tactical Air Command Headquarters Intelligence our photo personnel worked closely with the NASA personnel who were examining possible landing spots on the moon. The reports of compelling evidence of ancient structural artifacts present on the Moon was secretly rumored and expressed confidentially,

Dr. Bruce Cornet was able to confirm the secrets through cross comparisons of overwhelming imaging evidence from several separate NASA missions — with different photographic technologies, different lighting, and different viewing geometries many years later. These studies now leave little doubt that this solar system has been host to some prior habitation by intelligence, Also some within NASA have apparently known about and deliberately suppressed this robust evidence for more than thirty years.

The Lunar Orbiter photographs and the three sequential

photographs (AS10-32-4854-56) taken from the Apollo 10 shows Rhaeticus Crater above,

The spacecraft show the “Tower” (and “Shard”) in the southwestern area of Sinus Medii from different angles and different perspectives. ‘

The Surveyor 6 photograph shows anomalous geometric structures above the ground, like those associated with the tower extending to the north of the “Tower” for about a hundred miles.

The censored Apollo 10 photograph near Ukert crater shows anomalous geometric structures extending on the ground for tens of miles over an area the size of the Los Angeles.

Regarding possible motivations for this inexplicable (if unconstitutional) behavior, additional documentary evidence discovered by Professor Stanley V. McDaniel, Ph.d. McDaniel in his independent ethical inquiry now seems particularly relevant.

According to Dr. McDaniel, an early NASA study was commissioned from the Brookings Institution in 1959 and may have formed the basis of current NASA policy. This study specifically anticipates the possible future discovery of intelligently designed artifacts elsewhere in the solar system by unmanned NASA probes, and considers “how might such information, under what circumstances, be presented to or withheld from the public, for what ends?”

The apparent reason given for considering the possibility of withholding information from the public, should extraterrestrial artifacts be discovered, was the apprehension voiced within this Study that society itself might “disintegrate.” Everything in NASA’s (otherwise inexplicable) behavior regarding the possibly artificial structures on Mars, and those now discovered on the Moon, indicates that NASA has been following, and intends to follow for the indefinite future, the policy of withholding information outlined in the Brookings Institution Report.

Areas of interest: Central area and southwestern area of Sinus Medii, center of moon disk; Mare Crisium, northwest area of the moon disk.

UKERT is a crater-like feature that displays a circumscribed equilateral triangle at full Moon (Noon local time) in its center. I agree with Richard C. Hoagland’s interpretation that this triangle is not natural, because the sides of the “crater” are much brighter only opposite the sides of this triangle. The apices or angles of the triangle intersect the darkest three areas of the “crater” rim, while the brightest three areas of the rim are opposite the sides of the triangle. In addition, the brightest parts of the rim are midway between the apices of the triangle, and are at 120 degrees orientation from one another. If a line is drawn from the centers of each bright area across the triange to the opposing angle, the lines will exactly bisect each angle. Such regular geometry is not a natural feature of any terrain, either on Earth or on the Moon. Furthermore, the symbolism of an equilateral triangle within a circle is a two dimensional representation of a tetrahedral pyramid within a sphere. Tetrahedral geometry is hypothesized to be the primary message encoded in the geometry of the Cydonia complex on Mars (Hoagland, 1992; Dr. Stanley V. McDaniel, 1993).


The Shard is an obvious structure which rises above the Moon’s surface by more than a mile. Its overall irregular spindly shape (containing a regular geometric pattern) with constricted nodes and swollen internodes, if natural, has got to be a wonder of the Universe. No known natural process can explain such a structure. Computer enhancement with about 190 feet (60 meters) resolution shows an irregular outline with more reflective and less reflective surfaces. The amount of sunlight reflecting from parts of the Shard indicate a composition inconsistent with that of most natural substances.

Only crystal facets and glass can reflect that much light (polished metallic surfaces are unnatural). Single crystals the size of city blocks are currently unknown. I concur with Hoagland that the Shard may be a highly eroded remnant of some sort of artificial structure made of glass-like material. Other larger structures and their reflectivity in the area support this theory.

This highly enhanced close-up of the tip of the “Shard” displays characteristics of a cellular, regular and geometric construction.

The absence of any spray tends to diminish the “outgassing” theory, and the presence of a comparable glass like haze on the horizon behind “Shard” argues that it is amongst a field of artificial structures.

THE TOWER The Tower represents an enigma of the highest magnitude, because it rises more than five miles above the surface of the Moon, and has been photographed from five different angles and two different altitudes (from 30 miles altitude, and from 70 miles altitude at three different distances). In all four photographs the same structure is visible, and can be viewed from two different sides. The Tower exists in front of and to the left of the Shard in the Lunar Orbiter III-84M photograph. The distance from the Tower and the camera is estimated at about 200 miles, while the distance of the Shard beyond the Tower is estimated at about 230 miles. The top of the Tower has a very ordered cubic geometry, and appears to be composed of regular cubes (similar in size) joined together to form a very large cube with an estimated width of over one mile!

There is apparent damage to the outline and surface of this mega cube, because many cubic spaces or indentations occur over its surface (these spaces are 50-60 times larger than pixel size, and their shapes are not controlled by the rectangular shape of the pixel). A narrow columnar structure connects this cube with the surface of the Moon. The columnar support is at least three miles tall, and tapers towards its base. The taper may be in part due to perspective, if the Tower is oriented at an angle and is leaning towards the camera.

The leaning Tower may be part of a larger more transparent structure, which is also inclined. Surrounding the Tower are faint indications of additional light- reflective material. The amount of light coming from this material is very small compared with the amount of light reflected off the lunar surface. In order to make it visible, the surface of the Moon has to be over-exposed on the photograph. The pattern that becomes visible above the Moon’s surface is not caused by the scan lines that make up the Lunar Orbiter photography. The scan lines can be seen clearly, and are oriented at different angles from the orientation of patterns in the sky.

The regular cubic and/or rectangular nature of this pattern, and indications of radiating structures that connect the Tower with the surface indicate that material of low light reflectivity exists above the Moon’s surface over a large area measured in hundreds of miles. The irregular splotchy reflection from some of this aerial material may be due to meteorite and projectile damage over millions of years. Its highly transparent nature (bright stars can be seen behind and through this material) indicates either an open grid with cubic spaces or glass-like material held together by some sort of structural grid or a combination of both.


NASA Lunar Orbiter LO-III -84M

Total image was recorded in primary data, and variations in image reproduction are due to processing differences.

NASA Lunar Orbiter LO-III -84M Close UP

This image is an overexposed 44x enlargement of 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.

The three Apollo 10 photographs showing the Tower in the distance also show the grid structure from above. These photographs were taken at three different distances from the Tower as the Apollo spacecraft moved towards the Tower. Within the sky above the horizon and around the Tower a regular grid pattern emerges with proper contrast control. This grid pattern appears to be three-dimensional, and is expressed as dark lines with random points of reflection around those lines. The grid appears to be some sort of support structure, perhaps formed from a metallic rebar. The reflective material associated with it is cubic and hexagonal in design, but incomplete. With different attitudes or angles of sight, different areas of the grid structure become illuminated or reflective, implying that angle of incidence is important. I agree with Hoagland’s interpretation of this material as remnant portions of the glass structure, which still remains attached and suspended above the Moon’s surface. The Tower is visible in all three photographs, because there is much more glass remaining than on the suspended grid structure around the Tower. Even from different angles and distances in these photographs, the top of the Tower appears as a giant cube made up of smaller cubic and hexagonal objects. There is no way to get around this evidence once it becomes apparent. 

The evidence because of its magnitude cannot be dismissed or ignored. It is there and it must be explained.


Photograph AS10-32-4822 in NASA catalog SP-232 is blacked out, along with several other photographs. When it was ordered, the image was of high quality, contrary to what was implied by it being blacked out in the catalog. Instead of a poor photograph, the image shows features near Ukert crater that defy conventional explanation. Panorama of “City” structure, showing that it occurs below the original lunar surface, which has been stripped off by a flood from the left, coming from Copernicus impact area as traced by radiating lines that become sinuous and develop into river-like channels, then stop behind mountain ranges in the way where the water apparently momentarily ponded before freezing and subliming. Copernicus impact probably punctured a large cluster of water chambers below the surface.

A linear dome-shaped hill runs diagonally across the photograph. To the north of that hill a large area exists with regularly aligned rows of structure. Within this anomalous area more than a dozen small craters can be seen that modify the landscape. From a distance the regular rows appear like benches. On Earth such a feature would be interpreted as the pattern produced by the eroded edges of layered rocks that dip below the surface. But on the Moon there have been no physical processes that can account for such a regular geologic structure. and this anomalous pattern has definite boundaries beyond which it is absent. Upon magnification, this anomalous pattern begins to take on a different character: Rectangular features exist along the rows, with many having gaps between them. n addition, thin spires project up from the surface in several places along some rows. Upon further magnification some of the rectangular structures take on a form like buildings and skyscrapers.

Resolution at high magnification (for the image I saw) is not good enough to resolve more than the outlines of possible buildings. The whole area resembles what one might expect for a city the size of Los Angeles that had been abandoned and left to decay for centuries. The crater impacts and constant barrage from micrometeorites over millions of years would have provided an abrasive force as damaging as our weather and earthquakes on Earth over centuries or even decades. This area may contain one of several city complexes that were built under an enormous glass dome within Sinus Medii. The sheer implications of such massive structures on the Moon, if verified by astronauts to the Moon, would cause humans to rethink many ideas and question many beliefs about other intelligent life in the Universe. Clearly, such structures are well beyond our current technologies and rank with the Pyramids and Sphinx on Earth, and with the Cydonia complex on Mars.


Further evidence for such massive constructs on the Moon can be found in Mare Crisium. The photograph that Hoagland showed me of that area (NASA photograph AS16-121-19438) has a strange set of large, concentric, circular light patterns within the mare. To one side an enormous spire or tower rises from the surface within the perimeter of these light circles. Magnification of the area around this spire shows cubic patterns like those around the Tower in Sinus Medii. Numerous holes of varying size can be detected within this cubic pattern, probably caused by meteorites. Around the edges of these holes I can see layers of light-reflecting cubic glass-like material and suggestions of strands of rebar support. Below this cover on the ground there is more structure, which can be detected under some of the holes. There is an unusual interference pattern below the cubic pattern as well. None of these patterns can be explained as normal or natural. I interpret the major cubic pattern as reflections off rebar and micrometeorite-frosted glass of the dome that covers most of Mare Crisium. I interpret the pattern below the dome as possibly caused by artificial structures on the surface of the Moon, such as the city-like construct near Ukert, and the concentric circles of light over the surface of Mare Crisium as light reflection and refraction through the remaining portions of the glass dome.

The anomalous patterns in photographs from Sinus Medii and Mare Crisium cannot be explained as natural. I further support his interpretation that these patterns above the surface are caused by enormous structures of artificial origin, structures that may represent the remains of glass domes that were built to cover, protect, and provide a life-support environment for habitable structures on the surface. Clearly, further independent investigation and analysis by experts is warranted. There is also a relevant need to press the Pentagon into releasing all 1.5 million Clementine photographs immediately and without censorship.

The moon base above was taken by Chang’s 2 Orbiter on February 2012. Chang’e 2 was part of the first phase of the Chinese Lunar Exploration Program, that conducted research from a 100-kilometer-high lunar orbit with an advanced camera onboard with a resolution of only one meter. A soft landing by the Chang’e 3 Lander and rover is programmed later this year. The probes are named after an ancient Chinese moon goddess.

No comments:

There was an error in this gadget