MOON BANDING EVIDENCE
Report #070
July 4, 2004 (documentation replaced 2/16/2010)
I have a few comments that I want to express
before we get into this report's evidence. The images in this report demonstrate
evidence that some may eventually find disturbing, not so much in the visual
imaging itself, but rather via growing eventual awareness of the implications
that arise from such evidence. Many will not be so affected but some will
be in an accumulative effect.
The problem is that first we begin to consider from previously reported evidence
here that there may very well be a considerable highly advanced civilization
presence on what we've always thought of as our lifeless Moon and that is
not our own. If that isn't enough of a stunner, now we may have to actually
seriously consider real evidence that the physical Moon itself may be something
quite different than what we've all grown up thinking it to be and as it has
been previously officially reported to us to be.
Some may eventually have problems handling this as their psychology finds
it just too fantastic, too far outside what they consider the acceptable norm,
and therefore rejectable. Further, others at the opposite end of the spectrum
already deeply immersed in paranoid psychologies and stories may try to use
this evidence to support and confirm already established theories. For those
of you trying to figure out what to believe, just don't become overly concerned
about this evidence and its implications.
Remember that the Moon so nearby overhead has for many of the ages of Man
here on Earth been a familiar influence on our lives all through known history
without being perceived as a threat or risk of some kind. If we are only now
waking up to a long established truth of a more complex reality involving
the Moon, this is a function of an awakening process going on inside our own
heads not to be confused with or interpreted as any new increased real risk
external to us.
So regardless of what some others may say or try to make out of this evidence,
just remember that what ever the real Moon truth is, rationally we Earth humans
have done just fine and flourished so close to its influence for at least
many hundreds and thousands of years. That this will some how change just
because we suddenly may be becoming more aware of the presence of a greater
long standing Moon reality and complexity has no rational reasonable logic
to it. Our long favorable past experience with the Moon is undeniable historical
hard evidence. Never forget that evidential fact when others may wish to twist
this information to feed their own ends and psychologies.
The bottom line is, don't allow yourself to be stampeded into emotional reactions
by yourself or by others.
In the above first image, what you are
looking at are many rigidly uniform very straight vertical and parallel bands
on the Moon's surface. What ever these bands are, you should first recognize
that they are all without exception oriented south to north on the Moon as
well as uniformly, evenly and precisely separated the exact same distance
from one band across horizontally to the next band. In this Clementine imaging,
they are best seen at and appear to be the most exposed at the Moon's equator
visibly tapering away into nothing in the upper and lower hemispheres.
The bands are the most visible in the mid equatorial region around the Moon's
surface girth and they appear to become increasingly buried beneath the surface
as they extend further away into the global northern and southern hemispheres
away from the equator toward the Polar regions. However, just how far they
extend away from the equatorial region on the surface is visually difficult
to determine. Why? Because the entire Clementine Moon imaging is visually
a sea of a great many different types and levels of image tampering applications
and obfuscation techniques covering and hiding evidence and creating false
illusions as to terrain detail in the process and essentially covering and
obscuring most of the Moon's entire surface as well as these bands.
The net result is that we can only visually see disrupted sections of these
bands and even then that view is still compromised by image tampering. For
example, what you see in the above first image is actually a very distant
view where we are seeing only every other band because the bands in the center
between the visible ones have been effectively covered up by image tampering,
at least in the first image's official 100% view. This will become increasing
apparent as more visual evidence in this report unfolds.
There is also one other piece of strong evidence in this scene pointed out
with the red arrow and label. It is obviously a geometric rectangular structure
demonstrating sharp uniform right angles and highly suggestive of a elevated
building top and/or a walled compound area containing evidence that has been
visually covered up by the pervasive image tampering on its top area. Remember,
this is a very distant scene and such a structure would therefore have to
be very much larger than the visual impression of a normal size building given
in this imaging where all sense of scale size reference is lost in a sea of
image tampering.
Take special note to of the light color smaller area projecting off the mid
area of the left end of the structure and located right up against it. As
you can see, there appears to be arrow on it pointing to our right toward
the structure. Remember that such an arrow in such a location could only be
meant to be seen from the above implying artificial flight ability. Does it
say land here?
In the above second image with its closer
view, you can see that the rectangular structure apparently had some objects
on its top surface but these have been covered and smoothed over by some image
tampering coordinated color wise to the structure's lighter color. Why didn't
the large dark field of tampering mimicking darker Mare areas on the Moon
it sits in just simply cover over this object? Frankly, I can't say for certain
why it occasionally does this with an object or two in some scenes while effectively
covering everything else up of similar geometric shapes.
Could it be a flaw or blip in the programming? What I suspect is that the
automated AI programming in the presence of too much geometric form evidence
over too much of a broad area and working on balancing percentages gets overwhelmed
with the need to leave some real detail out so that the broad blur/smudge
tampering field isn't so obvious and drawing attention to itself? However,
could it also be intervention by someone wishing to provide some occasional
evidence clues for future researchers going through this evidence with a closer
more objective look? If intervention, by whom? Could it be one of our own
or someone else entirely doing this?
The rectangular structure was one of the main reasons for my choice of presenting
this particular scene along with the bands. The bands are identifiable but
not well displayed here in this scene. Part of that is because I optimized
the rectangular structure in the very dark area and that came at the expense
of lightening the already light color area a little too much, which tends
to obscure detail.
Still, even in this scene, you can clearly see that the bands are ground based
detail buried in and enmeshed in the other ground level detail as opposed
to digital imaging splice line artifacts. The tiny specks also seen in some
of the imaging here in this report representing normal size evidence as I
have reported on previously, confirms that this is a very distantly seen scene
resolution wise. Further, the CLIB form indicates that the resolution here
is 1 pixel = 1 kilometer in the official 100% views. If this is anywhere close
to truth, then that means that this is indeed a very distant view and the
size of any objects seen are much larger than they may first appear to us.
That in turn means that the rectangular structure is a incredibly large object.
It also means that the true width of these bands is considerable to the point
of being gigantic and far too much to qualify as thin digital imaging junction
splice line artifacts. Add to that the fact the surface texture patterns seen
on each band differ from any other nearby bands and are unique only to that
band. That simple fact would fly right in the face of any contention that
these bands are associated digital image splice line processing artifacts
that could be expected to be more uniform and repeating in their patterns.
Note to how the sea of smudge image tampering crosses over and covers areas
of the bands hiding them and parts of them from view UNDER these applications.
This again demonstrates very obviously that this is true ground based detail
not to be confused with digital imaging artifacts, image mosaic junction splice
lines, or the image tampering applications themselves.
I refer to this here because I anticipate that the official take on these
bands will be that they are digital imaging strip splice line artifacts as
the Clementine craft made its south to north orbital path and shifted over
west only 2.3 degrees per each next orbit. Such a explanation may have worked
fairly well with the very distant Clementine global imaging such as the first
two images shown in my report #066 titled "The
Clandestine Moon: An Overview" where the south to north imaging
strip splice lines converging on the Polar regions can be seen. But, here
in this closer imaging, we have the separation of this true ground based banding
evidence from the digital imaging orbital path artifact evidence revealed.
You can also appreciate why I suspect that one of the primary reasons they
set up this particular camera south to north orbital path process to start
with was an attempt to deal with and confuse this banding issue by the camera
path tracking to the bands. When the south to north "lines" are
noticed at the more distant official global or individual imaging resolution,
the ready made dismissal explanation that these are digital imaging strip
junction splice lines based on the camera's orbital path is ready and waiting.
However, to work successfully this depends on a certain naiveté as
to official credibility and begins to fall apart under closer more careful
objective examination such as in the image evidence you see here.
The above third image demonstrates the
equatorial banding again at the largest 1 pixel = 1 kilometer official resolution.
Here all the banding lines are more or less visible where every other one
was covered by image tampering in the above first and second images in this
report. I say more or less visible because the image tampering is very thickly
applied obscuring most of the length of each band.
Even so, note that in a horizontal swath across the middle of the image from
side to side there are short sections of light color more solid appearing
bands visible. Look close and note that these visible sections actually represent
every other band. However, it isn't just that the darker bands between the
every other lighter color more visible ones are covered up, it is also that
these bands are bit different from the more visible ones. Where the lighter
color more visible every other bands appear to have more light reflective
solid surfaces, the less visible every other bands have a more open network
of right angle lines associated with them. This is typical and can be seen
better in the next fourth closer view image below.
Also, in this third more distant image with its wider field of view, please
note that there is a visual slight distortion of the bands to our right. This
irregularity is real, right on the equator, and not an optical illusion. It
is important and will be explored in my next report rather than here. But,
I've brought it to your attention here to point out that this irregularity
demonstrates that this is true ground detail effect and such a slight bulge
or wiggle would obviously not be possible with the straight uniform orbital
path of the Clementine craft or its cameras imaging survey path over this
planetary body's surface.
Before leaving the third image evidence, note the two darker color geometric
rectangular and square forms pointed out with the two red arrows. These objects
have been thoroughly covered over by image tampering. I can't say for sure
what these are but certainly their sharp right angle geometry speaks more
of likely artificiality than anything like natural geology in the terrain.
Something very large and artificial has apparently been thoroughly covered
over here by image tampering mapping precisely to their outlines.
Note on the larger top one where smudge tampering like a irregular cloud has
been applied over the top of it. This is clearly evidence of the precise object
specific outline mapping type darker image tampering being digitally applied
at one level and the more random slightly lighter color more diffuse image
tampering being applied over the same area and on top of it in another level.
This conclusively demonstrates tampering on top of tampering in levels. This
is typical in the official Clementine Moon surface imaging producing mostly
a visual meaningless jumble and why so little can be seen of the true Moon's
surface.
The point is that the whole of the Moon's surface is mostly obscured by this
type of thing. How well educated scientists with with strings of PhDs and
big careers being paid to do this work and considered professionals and experts
can look at such imaging and not see any of this is just beyond incredible.
In the above fourth image closer view,
we can better see the differences between the every other one more solid surface
appearing light reflecting banding and the every other one open network of
lines appearing darker banding between them. In fact, please note that this
open network of lines banding evidence, including parallel lines, is the same
as in the last image in my previous report #069 titled "Moon
Miscellaneous Structures" and typical of these every other
bands.
Unfortunately, I had to lighten this scene a fair amount to properly show
the normally darker open network of line banding detail. This came at the
expense of too much light saturation on the more solid appearing light color
and light reflecting band sections partially obscuring some of their detail.
It is often not easy striking a proper balance between these different types
of evidence appearing in the same image under differing lighting and color
conditions.
More multiple images with differing lighting conditions would solve this but
also take up to much file size room in a report like this on the Web and cut
out other images that need to also be seen. Although my reporting may be more
in depth than many of you may be used to in surfing the Web, the subject matter
in most of my reports are necessarily brief relative to what it would take
to properly explore this kind of evidence in the depth it needs in absolute
terms.
In the above fifth image, now we are dealing
visually with only the solid surface appearing every other light color and
light reflective bands. This time there is no visible rectangular structure
evidence and the visible open network of lines banding evidence as been essentially
covered over by the image tampering, so we don't have to make as many visual
compromises in taking a better look at the more light reflective and solid
appearing type of bands.
That's why I've chosen this particular scene for presentation to you. The
fifth image above demonstrates the wide angle context official resolution
view while the closer view sixth image below provides the best examination
of these particular type of bands in this report.
As you can see in the above sixth image,
the solid appearing surface light color light reflective bands are shown at
their best relatively speaking even though still heavily compromised by image
tampering in absolute terms. Note that each band is thicker and wider in its
upper visible portion and more narrow and tapering in its lower portion. Unfortunately,
the image tampering applications are so thick that one can't be sure whether
this visual effect is something physically real with the bands on the ground
or an illusion created by the tampering applications cover them. The latter
is certainly true, at least to a significant extent.
Note that these poorly seen rows of artificial structures of some kind do
not give the impression of buildings so much as of giant solid, sectional,
possibly contoured, appearing reinforced alternating clamping system structures.
Note how precisely horizontally distance separated one vertical row is from
the other forming a clear definitive rigidly uniform south/north north/south
orientation and precisely spaced apart pattern. So, not only does each of
the individual bands speak clearly of artificiality, so to does the over all
pattern of the many bands.
It is very difficult to regard this as anything less than conclusive definitive
proof of massive scale artificiality present on the Moon and on a colossal
scale. Certainly there is no chance that this evidence can be confused with
natural Moon terrain geology or Clementine orbital path survey imaging factors.
But, beyond that, what exactly does it mean? That is of course the BIG question
that this evidence alone can not quite answer without getting into more subjective
speculation.
Certainly this kind of artificial banding on such a massive global scale around
such a large planetary body as the Moon demonstrates a incredibly high technology
well beyond our own. If we can have confidence in the scientific dating of
the age of the Moon, then we are talking about such high technology dating
back into antiquity possibly long before the age of Man here on planet Earth
with all the implications for humanity that may come with that concept.
What purpose do these bands fill? Are they to reinforce a true planetary body
that may have in ancient times been exposed to more violent and unstable Earth
influences and the Moon was regarded by someone as a more acceptable settlement
target back then worthy of protective measures? Perhaps even with an atmospheric
envelope similar to Earth's?
We on Earth perceive and judge things based on our own experiences and familiar
frames of reference and tend to assume that any one else will have similar
outlooks. In other words, our perceptions tend to be heavily influenced by
our assumptions. That kind of extrapolation from personal and accumulative
experience might work for us fairly well here on Earth where we contend only
with ourselves but it isn't very conducive to putting oneself in the shoes
of someone else not from this world.
For example, we love our world but the Earth environment that has produced
our populations is unique when compared to other planetary environments. We
have a very thick atmospheric envelope that could be consider too heavy and
poisonous (too much oxygen can be very lethal even to us) for comfort by other
standards. Further, Earth is a relatively small world with a minimal even
smaller amount of land mass exposed out of its 70% water coverage. Add to
that a fairly severe gravity well that could easily be considered crushing
to others from lighter gravity environments.
The point that I'm trying to make is that highly technologically advanced
space travelers, now or in ancient times, as hard as it might be for us to
accept, might see Earth as a beautiful looking but too hostile environment
to be attractive for serious direct settlement considerations. The lighter
gravity nearby Moon and a little more distant Mars with its much greater exposed
land areas could for example have been viewed as more attractive settlement
targets, especially considering that any traveler's high level of technology
sufficient enough to produce the artificiality evidence we see here on the
Moon could have made up for most problems associated with these environments.
So, could the Moon be an artificially reinforced but otherwise natural planetary
body? Or, could it be an essentially artificial body exterior coated with
a planetary earth crust layer as insulation? Could it be or have been a space
traveling world ship of some kind as others have speculated about for years?
Is the Moon actually some kind of colossal hollow artificially constructed
space vessel that came to permanent rest in our Solar System parked next to
this planet? Is it the original source of human or humanoid life in this system
or just one example of the variety of advanced intelligent life out there?
If it is actually a craft of some kind, that would explain some things about
the Moon. For example, it could explain why the far side is more heavily cratered
indicating that this could have been the leading front side of the round vessel
facing the passage direction. It could explain why the thicker sediment areas
identified as darker color Mares by us are so prevalent on the near side as
this may have been the lee side of the passage direction. It could also explain
why the first sounding experiments on the Moon's surface discovered that the
Moon resounded from deep within like a bell or tuning fork. All of that is
of course speculation but it is now at least speculation based a little more
on evidence than pure subjective supposition.
Another question is could the Moon be a great repository of advanced knowledge
and technology? It is logical to anticipate that based on the type of evidence
we are seeing here but are the originators long gone or is the Moon currently
actively occupied by someone? That cannot be directly extrapolated from this
image tampering crippled severely limited satellite imaging evidence but it
can be better extrapolated from other broader evidence considerations.
For example, there is the presence of such a massive amount of image tampering
in the Clementine imaging. Remember, this is evidence to that can't be ignored.
Obviously they are not doing this just to waste their time and our money.
The massive degree of this tampering demonstrates that there is a great deal
on the Moon to hide and, as the evidence presented here at this web site demonstrates,
a lot of it is on a colossal scale. Further, their choice of camera orbital
path coinciding with the bands tells us that they knew about the bands and
what they would be having to deal with while the Clementine mission was still
in its planning stages. That demonstrates prior knowledge dating back in time
long before the 1994 Clementine mission at least into the 1970s.
It is now 10 years later after the Clementine mission and still with little
apparent perceived interest publicly on our leadership's part in returning
to the Moon or in what may be there. Before that, there was little publicly
demonstrated interest on their part in returning to the Moon since the 1970s
even though the military's Clementine mission planning indicates that they
had prior information of something very anomalous there. This is all evidence
to, evidence of intentionally avoiding the Moon and what ever is there.
When you add all this and previously reported here evidence up, it logically
and clearly points to someone in our society secretly knowing very well that
something highly anomalous is on the Moon and, not only trying to hide it
from the public, but also essentially carefully avoiding the place altogether,
except possibly for secret covert missions unknown to the public. If the Moon
was free of intelligent life as we are led to believe, then why publicly avoid
the place? The fact that we are avoiding the Moon, at least publicly, logically
tends to indicate that it may be currently occupied and by someone able to
defend their interests there that no one here wants to offend or mess with.
Does all of this seem just too fantastic and too complex to you to be true
and therefore it must be the musings of some crackpot or fruitcake? Well,
all I can say is that each of us must choose whether we will go with the perceived
comfort of established belief systems or objectively follow evidence to its
conclusion, even if it winds up offending our belief systems. This is a right
of passage we must all individually make on our own and no one can do it for
us.
As for me, since I am evidence oriented, it is becoming increasingly clear
to me from the steadily accumulating evidence that we live in a environment
far more complex than originally believed and that we are not alone now and
may have never been.
DOCUMENTATION (added 2/16/2010)
The military's Clementine Lunar Browser (CLIB) version
1.5 has been "retired" and the new "improved" version
2.0 data that replaces it now conveniently (for secrecy) does not contain
the discovery evidence presented here in this report and it appears that those
former discovery sites have been altered in the 2.0 data to sanitize them
away. Therefore, to facilitate verification and prove that the anomalous discoveries
were in fact in the older 1.5 science data and part of it for the past 16
years, the links immediately below access the unaltered version 1.5 originals
downloaded by this researcher in 2004 and now made available here.
Report 1st & 2nd source image from
the 1.5 data
Report 3rd & 4th source image from
the 1.5 data
Report 5th & 6th source image
from the 1.5 data
Since the general terrain around these discovery sites can still be identified
in the new 2.0 data despite changes, you can compare the old 1.5 versus the
new 2.0 sites and see the sanitization for yourself. Even though this may
be historically consistent with past secrecy treatment of anomalous Moon evidence,
I see this foolishness 16 years later military move targeting these anomalous
discoveries as particularly offensive, arrogant, and of very poor judgment.
Worse it demonstrates a serious disconnect with and disregard for the American
people who paid for this and who's sole property it is. However, you must
decide for yourself.
http://www.cmf.nrl.navy.mil/clementine/clib:
This link accesses the Clementine Lunar Image Browser (CLIB) version
2.0 noting that version 1.5 data is now no longer available. There
one can search the official military Clementine science data based via either
the graphical interface or Moon latitude and longitude coordinates. When using
those coordinates below highlighted in green, just enter them in the appropriate
coordinate boxes and hit your return key. Remember that
any coordinate numbers in the Moon's southern hemisphere must be preceded
by a minus sign.
Report 1st & 2nd images
of bands & a rectangular structure with an arrow on it distant & closer
views: At the above link on the form provided enter 0
and in the Longitude box and 318 in
the Longitude box and then hit your enter or return key.
Report 3rd & 4th images
of bands distant & closer views: At the above link on the form
provided enter 1 and in the Latitude
box 140 in the Longitude box and then
hit your enter or return key.
Report 5th & 6th images
of more bands distant & closer views: At the above link on the
form provided enter –5 and in
the Latitude box and 335 in the Longitude
box and then hit your enter or return key.
, Investigator
