MOON TOWERS & SHADOWS

Report #153

December 7, 2008

 

I have been asked to enter into the discussions at the Open Minds Forum at the thread located HERE. The reason I've been asked to participate is because the evidence under discussion is my own Moon tower discoveries as sampled by the the above four images drawn from my 2004 Moon Report #067 and Report #068. At the forum there is disagreement by a few with my analysis and it is based on the absence of any shadows in the surrounding terrain for these obscured huge objects. The alternative theory presented is that the blurred areas are really just imaging or processing artifacts. As you can see in the above four images, none of this evidence displays a shadow and that is the bone of contention.

I tried to explain that disagreement is a normal part of first the resistance and then the awakening process and that I really do not have time right now for diversions into forum arguments like this. However, they insisted. Their insistence did not sway me but, upon reflection, the insistence reminded me that my weighing in on this may be of some interest to followers of this work and offer some additional insight that should not be confined to a forum response. Besides, in this type of reporting, I get to bla, bla, bla as much as I want to without taking up someone else's Web space. So I've made a place for it here.

It always amazes me that when one presents evidence that there may be very advanced technology presence on the Moon, some that can accept that much can still not take the next step and grasp the full implications of that technology. For example, consider that if the Moon's surface is essentially airless and yet at the same time demonstrates what clearly appear to be the presence of huge artificial structures and Earth space exploration has avoided returning to the Moon for decades, all that evidence combined together implies something.

It likely implies that someone here on Earth was suitably impressed enough by what ever was discovered on the Moon, including any advanced technology observed there, not to want to return there very readily in any kind of manner that might be regarded as intrusive by the Moon occupants. Note that this concept quickly does away with any wishful thinking that any Moon occupants are long gone and left behind a bonanza of advanced technology to plunder and is inconvenient to thinking in that regard.

Consider this. Even at our lesser level of technology, we are already developing invisibility that bends light visually hiding objects and that is just what is being publicly admitted to. We also know that black hole mechanisms suck in everything including light, energy, and mass not allowing it to escape. It is not unreasonable to extrapolate that it is entirely possible that someone's else's higher level of technology may have harnessed to some degree one or the other or both of these principles to their benefit.

Why then would it be such a shock to logically contemplate that someone on the Moon with very advanced technology may have the capability to hide their structures on the near side from our relatively crude forms of visual viewing? Why would it be so hard to contemplate that they may have developed a technology that absorbs light and not allowing it to pass in a very efficient conversion to solar energy process supporting their civilization? Once the basic concept of such technology is grasped, the next step is to consider that such technology could easily impact the issue of shadows for artificial objects on the Moon.

As a race, we are beginning to now understand that there is much that exists that goes well beyond what we consider our primary senses. Remember, all of us know that just because we can't visually see the wind, it is most certainly there and we ignore its existence and force at our peril. The same for magnetism and gravity. I suspect no one here reading this is stupid enough to want to put gravity's presence to the test by personally jumping out of an airplane without a safety devise like a parachute.

If technology advanced beyond our own does exist on the Moon and since the Moon's near side is close enough to have been viewed by Earth telescopes for centuries, it should logically come as no particular surprise that obfuscation of the Moon's surface for distant viewing from our location may have become a part of someone else's life for hundreds of years, someone that is not us. It should also come as no surprise that Earth cameras and personnel orbiting around the Moon in more recent times may have observed much of what could not be seen from Earth at greater distances.

As some of us know, the human brain is like a computer but on an organic level instead of on a mechanical one. It can clearly be programmed and reprogrammed via either internal and external influences. Further, access to that organic computer processing is not as limited as we would like to think as any competent hypnotists can quickly demonstrate. Also, a certain light exposed behind a knee where no optical sensors are known to exist or could be explained by evolution none-the-less can reset biological clocks. Sounds like a computer back door to me.

Now consider camera systems orbiting a planetoid like the Moon. Whether operating with film or digital with onboard processing, it is still just a mechanical/optical devise. Now add the human factor with its organic brain processing. Some of these are very sophisticated concepts from the Earth human point of view but that has nothing to do with someone else's level of development. Someone else's level of technology may have passed far beyond this long ago. It may be a relatively simple matter for them to manipulate either processing system to fit their agenda.

Some of you may be aware of what is known as subliminal clips in TV advertising. The is a sub message buried in the main message. The main message appeals to conscious awareness while the subliminal message by passes the conscious and appeals directly to the deeper level subconscious. The conscious mind is never aware of it and neither of course is the target consciously. It is a form of hypnosis and it has been illegal for many decades. It is literally raw invasive mental programming and that's why it is illegal. I know that this is uncomfortable for many to contemplate but my point here is that this type of thing exists whether we want to deal with it or not.

Further, it points to the need to be cautious and always as questioning as practically possible when examining the visual science data and its apparent content. For example, one should never forget that subliminal conditioning is not illegal to black opts here on Earth even as it is often very effective. Because it is effective, it is not a tool that they would likely abandon. Also, its illegal use is not likely even an issue at all to any alien presence.

So when a camera scene comes back from the Moon showing .....well nothing much of anything or an astronaut comes back and wonders why people like us are making such a stupid fuss about nothing or when a scientist thinks we've all lost our minds, don't just think they're hiding something. It could be much more complex than that. Likewise, it should come as no particular surprise that such observations without the obfuscation presence would be regarded as disconcerting to the first Earth types and a reason for secrecy as the brain becomes overloaded with such complex considerations.

Even now popular TV series like Stargate and its spin offs constantly pound home the psychological message into the public consciousness that secrecy associated with alien life should not necessarily be regarded as a bad thing by populations and military intelligence is your friend. Even occasionally on the show's plot lines there are explorations of the concept of the public becoming knowledgeable and involved. When that happens, bad guys or misguided types are always associated with such plot directions. Then, when that direction is defeated or marginalized, thank goodness it's back to the simplified conditioning that a bullet was dodged and father military intelligence knows what's best for us all. Of course the flip side of that message is also that ignorance in the population is a good thing. Do you really think it is?

However, although I've strayed far a field here, I suspect that Moon alien obfuscation technology does not really play a role in what we see in the above Clementine lunar orbit sample satellite images. I suspect that the satellite imaging was just too close to the Moon's surface for obfuscation tactics designed for distance viewing to be a factor. Rather, I suspect that what we are seeing, and I might add, not seeing in the above Clementine images is mostly about Earth based obfuscation tactics. Remember that Naval Intelligence and the Department of Defense (DOD) are the outright principle players here in this data and not NASA or JPL, etc.

I suspect that a major part of the Clementine Moon mission was at least two fold. The first purpose was to thoroughly survey the Moon and its evidence via many thousands of images from what appears to be a safe distance allowed by who ever is there. The second and equally important purpose was to test new object specific automated visual obfuscation technology advancements made since the 1960s and 1970s that were to serve future use on Mars missions.

The problem with the earlier 1960s and 1970s tampering technology was that it was applied like a crude blanket or carpet in layers over anomalous scenes in individual small image strips that were later joined into mosaic wider field of view images. Because different techniques were used in the different small strips, the demarcation lines between the differing tampering fields showed up very strikingly in the mosaic images released revealing what was going on. It was only because of scientist naivety and fear avoidance psychology that they got by with it at the time.

So something had to be done about it. Part of the answer is the advent of super computers and their speed as well as those using artificial intelligence for increased programming accuracy and learning capability. Another part of it is the advancement of mapping and evidence recognition software that starts out concentrating primarily on civilization evidence on the Moon but that later must branch out and include a greater variety of surface water and biological surface life on Mars. The major difference between the old and the new technology is that the new can deal with much larger image scenes through the mapping technology and the applications are made to specific targets (object specific) in the scene rather than as wholesale blanket applications.

The Clementine tampering work is thorough but it also leaves everything in a visually confused mess that brings attention to itself in a different way. Further, there are some outright mistakes. A primary mistake is that the tampering applications are literally mapped and conforming too closely to the offending objects. When the objects are small, this doesn't amount to much. However, when the objects are large, long and narrow such as with the bands I've reported on, what ever makes up the band is covered over all right but the fact that it is a long narrow straight band like object or series of objects is still revealed by its outline still coming through. Likewise, the tall or squat massive object outlines are also still revealed as the tampering application conforms too closely to the object rather than blending out into its surrounding terrain.

So the Clementine obfuscation technology level is more effective in disguising normal size objects like building structures we might be familiar with here on Earth. This would be logical to expect in the initial programming since that is what the programmers are most familiar with here as Earth evidence. On the other hand, it is also logical to expect that the programming would be less effective in dealing with massive bulky objects like the towers and squat structures and the long narrow geometric structures not familiar with here on Earth due to sheer scale.

Now review the above four images again. Do you really think using a little common sense that this smudge and blur treatment is the result of camera or processing flaws or does it appear as though it is smudge and blur conforming too closely to the dimensions of huge objects in the terrain? Take special note of the huge but squat object in the fourth image where a little of the object beneath can be seen. One might say okay maybe but that still doesn't fully explain the lack of any shadows cast if these are to be consider obscured massive upright structures. So where are the shadows?

Fair enough. Now take note of the surface texture of the smudge and blur conforming to the objects. As you do so, now move your eye out into the terrain surrounding these huge objects and you'll see the same smudge and blur texture there. Did you really think that an immense artificial structure on the Moon would be sitting there all by itself in geological terrain bare of any other civilization evidence? Did you think that image tampering applications would be limited to just the largest most massive objects?

In all of these scenes look closer and note that there are actually short shadows thrown by some smaller objects in the clear of the smudge tampering. Note that the shadows are thrown forward toward the viewer indicating sunlight is likely coming from behind the massive objects meaning that any shadows present for the massive objects would be thrown forward toward the viewer with some angle to it. Note that none of the shadows thrown by the smaller objects are very long indicating a fairly high overhead position of the Sun and certainly not lower on the horizon. That equates to shorter size shadows.

Now, while your looking closer in the surrounding terrain, note how strangely speckling looking that terrain is. This is not natural and, if you were a scientist, this should be drawing your attention and raising questions inside you as to why this is so? What you are looking at in each one of the many small speckle spots is the roof top of a relatively normal size geometric shaped building structure. The tampering applies the smudge/blur application all around the geometric structure to hide it but the software is programmed to leave a little something out to leave a little detail behind. If it did not do this, the smooth featurelessness of the tampering smudge field would be broad and blanketing drawing attention to itself.

After all, large blanketing fields of tampering is the very thing the new still developing tampering technology with its object specific methodology is suppose to prevent. If you will look closely at the second image above, you'll see that several small rectangular structures were actually left out of the smudge as the software no doubt got overloaded with so much detail and got confused as to what to cover and what not. Although effective at hiding the normal size structure evidence, the only trouble is that there are just too many roof tops and it gives the whole scene a strange speckled look again drawing attention to itself. Note however that there isn't a single one of the speckle spots located on any of the massive object areas.

These inadequacies would have amounted to a disaster for the secrecy crowd but you'll note that they were still confident enough to publicly release this messy business anyway. That's likely because they were becoming more and more confident that population ignorance combined with scientific/academic naivety and fear of trying to stand alone and make waves would deliver the effective secrecy they sought. Further, if it didn't, they can always fall back on camera or processing artifact explanations. Worse, hind sight practiced in this current time indicates that they were right.

So ask yourself, how are these secrecy types to respect you and I and the science and academic communities when we behave in this kind of self blinded manner? When we drop the ball for others to pick up, then how can we get too outraged at what others have done with the ball. We are nearly as much at fault as they are trying to blissfully float along and not deal with complex issues leaving it for others to handle for us. Doesn't sound very responsible on either side to me nor should it be surprising that we would be treated like ignorant children.

It is as simple as this, if we're too trusting and just can't acknowledge the presence of the intentional obfuscation tactics in the science data, then we cannot accurately understand that data, the little bit of truth that is still in it via mistakes made, or its implications. We wind up being the pawns of someone else's secret agenda.

So, again, where are the massive object's shadows? They are of course under that sea of image tampering in the surrounding terrain and covered over by it. What must be understood with all of its implications is that what we are looking at in the Clementine imaging as released for public consumption is highly manipulated and distorted material. It is not the true science data that our tax dollars paid for and that is our property. What we get is the dangling distraction false birdie right off the end of our nose while the real information slips way quietly low and behind for someone else's private knowledge to fit their secret agendas.

Note that, except for a few small objects, we actually see absolutely no true un obfuscated physical objects in this Clementine data must less their shadows. What we see are where the real objects have been covered over and hidden from view but still providing an outline of their shape and dimensions. Accordingly it is speculation as to what these objects are that we cannot actually see.

However, logic and reason tells us that we are looking at civilization evidence on the Moon that isn't us as well as very advanced technology. Add the fact that our kind has clearly avoided the Moon for decades. The combination evidence suggests that what ever is there is alive, active, and not to be messed with having sent us packing long ago.

Right now the Japanese, Chinese, Indian and Russian leaderships are in the process of discovering and rediscovering this fact for themselves via direct experience because someone here on Earth wants them to. Right now a global power tactical is unfolding behind the leadership scenes and I'll discuss that in a separate follow up piece.

, Investigator