Ian & Stuart's Australian Mac: Not for Sale/Another.not.for.sale (Australia).iso/hold me in your arms/nanomius/ufo/hoagland

Text File | 1994-08-27 | 20KB | 431 lines

ORVOTRON, BIMONTHLY NEWSLETTER JUL/AUG 1994

HOAGLAND'S LUNAR MATERIAL

Submitted by Glenda Stocks of SearchNet.

[By Kortron: This report is based on data which was
obtained from NASA archives and is available to the
public. Unfortunately, NASA has kept this information
under wraps for many years even though they have stated
they were NOT holding things back from the public. In
addition they went so far as to publish a catalog with the
pictures blanked out or they purposely over exposed
images of the pictures.

I had the pleasure of talking with Dr. Bruce Coronet and
Bill Coty. The VIDEO of the Moon is out and rolling off
the assembly line! To Order: BC Video, P.O. Box 2284,
South Burlington, VT. 05407. Toll Free Phone Orders:
1-800-424-0031; $39.95 + Shipping for two, two hour
long tapes.]

This report, and the pictures, are clear evidence of the im-
mense data NASA has been hiding from the public for
over 30 years. This evidence is not going to be easy to
explain away since the evidence has been known to
NASA's own scientists for many years. However, it is
"too devastating" to admit that NASA may have hard
evidence of artifacts on the surface of the moon of proof
of ET origins of life, and refused to admit to the
American people, and the scientific community that it
exists. It is unfortunate that people who have access to this
information have been for many years part of a carefully
orchestrated campaign to misinform and deceive the
public. (Marc Whitford)

Interpretation of Anomalous Structures on the Moon

Author of report: Dr. Bruce Cornet, geologist and
paleontologist, 27 Tower Hill Ave., Red Bank, NJ 07701,
[phone].

Interpretation of anomalous structures on the moon, based
on evidence shown to me by Richard C. Hoagland on 24
April, 28 April, 7 May, and 11 May, 1994, and
discussions of said evidence with Hoagland.

Areas of interest: Central area and southwestern area of
Sinus Medii, center of moon disk; Mare Crisium,
northwest area of moon disk. DATA: All photographs at
same scale.

Lunar Orbiter, February 1967

Original negative from National Space Science Data
Center (NSSDC) at Goddard Space Flight Center,
Greenbelt, MD: III-84M of "Shard" and "Tower" on
southwest side of Sinus Medii from 30 miles altitude,
taken by 3" camera objective (film developed on board
satellite; scanned with 6.5 mu dot scanner; images trans-
mitted, reconstructed, and reassembled at NASA).
Horizon at 256 miles; "Shard" and "Tower" about 230 and
200 miles distance from camera, respectively; resolution
of Shard and Tower calculated at about 70 and 60 meters,
respectively. Orientation of this photograph 45 degrees to
south of Apollo 10 photographs AS10-32- 4854,
AS10-32-4855, and AS10-32-4856.

Surveyor 6, November 1967

One of seven photographs published in NASA Technical
Report 32- 1262 (NAS7-100), entitled: Surveyor 6
Mission Report, Part III, television data; published by JPL
at Cal. Tech., August 15, 1968. View angle of photograph
west from western part of Sinus Medii, showing
refraction of intense light from Sun (beads are image of
photosphere) by surface material on horizon.

Apollo 10, May 1969

NASA catalog SP-232: AS10-32-4822, AS10-32-4854,
AS10-32-4855, and AS10-32-4856 of Sinus Medii from
70 miles in orbit, taken by hand held Hasselblad camera.
Photographs 4854-56 looking west at terminator (lunar
surface sunrise line) from above eastern side of Sinus
Medii; photograph 4822 looking northeast across Ukert
crater in the most intensively photographed northern edge
of Sinus Medii (this photograph intentionally blacked out
in cata- log).

The Lunar Orbiter photograph and the three sequential
photographs (AS10-32-4854-56) taken from the Apollo
spacecraft all 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 basin. All
of these unnatural structures appear to have sustained
varying degrees of damage from meteorite and micro
meteorite impact. Small impact craters (1-2 miles), for
example, exist within the anomalous area near Ukert, and
clearly post-date the anomalies. Recognition of such
damage is important in understanding and interpreting the
nature and time sequence in the origin of these structures.

Apollo 16, June 1972

NASA photograph AS16-121-19438, looking northwest
from above the eastern edge of Mare Crisium and across
Mare Tranquilitatus from 70 miles altitude.

Ukert

Ukert is a crater-like feature that displays a
circumscribed equilateral triangle at full Moon (Noon
local time) in its center. I agree with 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 cen- ters of each bright area across the
triangle 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; McDaniel, 1993).

The Shard

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
reflec- tive 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.

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 cube (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 megacube, 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. Other
photographs described below confirm the size and extent
of this grid-like construction.

The Sky Grid

The Surveyor 6 photograph of the Sun's corona at the
horizon (Photograph published in NASA Technical
Report 32-1262) is a view just to the north of the Tower
(less than 100 miles). Total image was recorded in
primary data, and variations in image reproduction are
due to processing differences. Two major anomalies are
apparent in this photograph: 1) sunlight at the surface of
the Moon is refracted towards the camera and appears as
elongate beads of bright light on top of the horizon (JPL
measurements indicate light saturation for the camera was
reached in these beads); 2) a regular cubic pattern of
horizontal benches appears above the surface, and extends
nearly as high as the view in the photograph to an altitude
of several miles. Due to the angle of incidence of backlit
sunlight from the Sun, which was located below the
horizon, the visibility of the pattern above the surface
decreases with increasing angular reflection from the
center of the Sun. This means that whatever was causing
the reflection and refraction above the Moon's surface is
geometrically dependent on the Sun's position below the
Moon's horizon, and is therefore not likely an artifact of
imaging, reproduction, or processing. Six additional
pictures of this horizon were taken within 90 minutes, and
if available (obtainable) will provide additional data for
further analysis.

The bright beads of light on the surface decrease or
become more non-continuous laterally along the horizon.
This anomalous beading was explained by NASA as
diffraction by fine dust suspended above the surface. No
such suspended dust was found by the Apollo astronauts,
and an alternative hypothesis is warranted. I agree with
Hoagland's interpretation that a) the light is refraction,
and the intense concentration of light is likely caused by
glass imaging the Sun from beyond the horizon. It is
unlikely that the material causing this phenomenon is
natural dust or glass tektites on the surface, which are
largely opaque to only partly transparent. The glass
refracting the light has to be nearly transparent to
transmit so much light to such a height above the surface,
particularly if the refracting material has any depth to it.
It may represent the basal more intact part of a
superstructure that is apparent above the surface. Because
of less damage, and more massive glass support structures
at the base (visible in some photographs as a hierarchy of
stacked glass arches, each with expanded bases), more
light is conducted and focused there like a series of glass
lenses. Simple reflection can be ruled out as an
explanation for the beads because of the position of the
Sun below the horizon.

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
on a metallic cross support structure. The Tower, by
contrast, 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. Altering the contrast of the Moon's
surface can make this faint structure seem to disappear,
but such photographic manipulation will not invalidate it.
The evidence that Hoagland has brought to light may
assail one's sensibilities because of its magnitude and
artificial implication, but it cannot be dismissed or
ignored. It is there and it must be explained.

The City Complex Near Ukert

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. 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.
Furthermore, rills and wrinkles on the surface of a
cooling magma outflow do not form such a regular
pattern, as is evident in so many mare on the Moon. 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. In
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 micro
meteorites over millions of years would have provided an
abrasive force as damaging as our weather and
earthquakes on Earth over centuries or even decades.

I agree with Hoagland that someone or some group within
NASA deliberately concealed this picture in the catalog
because of its content, and that 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 an open and honest visit by astronauts to the
Moon, would cause Man 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 and its
humanoid face on Mars, as major mysteries of our Solar
System.

The Dome Over Mare Crisium

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 lightreflecting 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 micro meteorite-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.

I support Hoagland's interpretation that 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.

[By Kortron: What this means is the government has been
lying to the public about Extraterrestrials when they have
had proof for many years. This also verifies much of what
is contained in the ancient texts which reveals outside
intervention and help to many evolving civilizations on
Earth, and explains the upper world and the lower. Could
the Moon have been the home of the Gods referred to in
Sumerian, Greek and other ancient texts which has been
taken as mere legend or fantasy? What you are seeing,
dear ones, is the lid coming off the lies and hoaxes
perpetrated by the elite and the secret government.

In early April Richard Hoagland was to be in Asheville,
N.C. but was unable to conduct the scheduled seminar
because he was suddenly summoned elsewhere on
important business. As it turned out he was viewing the
pictures described above. We had made plans to go to the
seminar but on the day we were to leave my guides said he
would not be there and I was to meet him at a later date.

The sad thing is many will not accept any of this and so
far I have not seen anyone on the computer network put
this together and understand the real implications of what
was revealed. It's as if even the UFO guys have blinders
on and cannot see beyond the lies and disinformation
constantly being evaluated. So, there you have it - lied to
again. Maybe the book Alternative 3 was not a hoax.
Anyway folks, this revealing video will open your eyes.]