Home Alternative Knowledge Do NASA Photo...

Do NASA Photos Confirm Moon Is Artificial?


by Zen Gardner

According to David Icke’s postulation regarding the Moon Matrix, and based on the research of many others who’ve studied the moon’s many anomalies, the moon is an artificial orb that was pulled here for specific gravitational and other earth controlling purposes.

The recent striking NASA photos of the moon give a very clear impression.

First, it’s obvious the moon is hardly geographically similar to the earth. You see no huge irregular ridges like earth’s massive mountain ranges or deep trenches such as those within our oceans. (see photos below)

But even more than that, the moon very much does look like a metallic sphere with a dust covering that has been hit many times over but only to a specific depth–much like the affect of rain drops on a hard surface with a substantial covering of dust.

Here’s the new NASA photo and story:

Say cheese! NASA captures stunning images of the far side of the moon

These amazing pictures capture the moon’s cratered surface in the most intricate detail ever recorded.

The images, which were taken by NASA’s Lunar Reconnaissance Orbiter (LRO), have boosted the resolution of images of the far side of the moon over 100 times.

Digital elevation and terrain maps based on the new data reveal the heavily cratered and bumpy surface of the moon in all its complexity.

(Read more here)

Now contrast that with the irregular contours of the earth:


Not very regular…


Again, very irregular. Topographical satellite mapping from science.co.il

I don’t know. But it’s hard to see how the moon broke off from the earth and it remained a perfect sphere with hundreds of huge raindrop type pock marks, while the earth is this convoluted, seemingly traumatized molten rock in comparison – and with hardly any visible craters.

Other Anomalies

The first academic enigma must surely be that the Moon is apparently in its wrong orbit for its size. However, this would presumably be based on its assumed density. Technical reports claim a density of 3.3 for the Moon compared with 5.5 for Earth. Astronomy data indicates that the internal regions of the Moon are less dense than the outer, giving rise to the inevitable but outrageous speculation that it could be hollow. The eminent scientist Carl Sagan, a typical sceptic, made the statement, ‘A natural satellite cannot be a hollow object’. But meaning here that if it is hollow, it is not a natural satellite—and therefore artificial.

Rings Like A Bell

Possibly the strongest evidence for it to be a ‘hollow ob-ject’ comes from the fact that when meteors strike the Moon, the latter rings like a bell. More specifically when the Apollo crew in November 20, 1969 released the lunar module, after returning to the orbiter, the module impact with the Moon caused their seismic equipment to register a continuous reverberation like a bell for more than an hour. (Source)

And why does the moon have hundreds of massive craters, while the earth has hardly any in comparison? I know our atmosphere burns some up, but those marks indicate some pretty big shots it’s taken, never mind the quantity.

Did you Know the Crater Bottoms Are Convex Instead of Concave?

It has been found that asteroids and meteors not only create shallow craters on the Moon’s surface but produce a convex floor to the crater instead of concave as expected, supporting the idea of a rigid shell. Countless other pieces of evidence from astronomers and NASA scientists began to reveal that some 2-3 miles down there appear to be dense layers of metal—which would explain why the craters were convex. But the most astonishing conclusion is that the only theory which can completely explain all the anomalies is that the Moon is hollow with a shell about 20 miles thick—mostly metal. (Source)


Are the meteor pockmarks from the trek over here from wherever the moon was built? Is it evidence of space warfare activities here or in other parts of the Universe?

I don’t know if it was brought here or who lives on or in it, but I don’t buy the party line. There’s a lot going on out there and those who could confirm a lot more information for us won’t. Thankfully wonderful research is being made, and some ‘in the know’ are speaking up, and the dots are connecting.

Something to think about.

Just wondering.

Love, Zen


ZenGardner.com welcomes differing viewpoints and thought provoking opinions that add value to the discussion. For the interest of the community and a healthy conversation, please refrain from posting attacks and offensive content. Inappropriate comments and spam will not be published.



  1. this is retarded. why should the moon bear any resemblance towards the earth? the way the moon supposedly formed (which you clearly haven’t researched) is by a collision with a planet sized body which formed a ring of protoplanetary dust around the earth which then compacted into what we call the moon. there is no reason to believe that the moon should look like the earth, especially considering the fact that it isn’t the f–king earth. it doesn’t have an atmosphere or active tectonics, which is the basic reason behind why the earth looks like the earth and not the moon. just because there is something unexplained does not mean you can invent an explanation and run with it. you are the bane of humankind, and the reason religion exists. please kill yourself.

    • Steve,

      The mind works like a parachute, only when it’s open. Since your mind is obviously closed to anything new, you must know it all. Please enlighten the rest of us about the moon and it’s origins. While you’re at it maybe you can explain to us how the universe was formed. By the way, your IQ is showing when you must resort to foul language, name calling and down right rudeness. GROW UP!

    • I was with you up until you became a complete and utter dick wad. Don’t ever tell someone to kill themselves. You are now the bane of mankind- idiot!

  2. … hmmm ??

    Thanks, i found this article on ‘before its’s news’ … i just wanted to make mention of a couple somethings.

    How does anything naturally form ‘within’ a crater … for which there are many ‘anythings’ living ‘inside’ craters … just look at the pictures. )) Also, its time WE all stopped calling the craters, ‘craters’ … meteorites “ALL” crashing into the moon at exactly 90 degrees, to create perfectly circular ‘craters’ is RIDICULOUS !! So, if they are craters … they are explosion or implosion holes … but, more likely, ‘transportation dimples’ like on a ‘golf ball’ ?? … so as in y-our mentioning the convex nature of the ‘holes’ … at least 50% of what WE know about the moon is BS, and WE all know, that a half truth = a whole LIE.

    Anyways, just wanted to share with someone(s) thinking outside of the box … so tired of all the mind controlled drivel, masquerading as wisdom.

    Happy Solstice )
    a GrebBear

    Peace Love Light TRUTH
    (- ;
    ; -)

  3. mr. gardener –
    i know you know we’re being lied to by the powers… and i realize we’re between the rock and a very hard place trying to gather information with which to elucidate our understanding … but bringing up the supposed NASA moon landings to shed light on what the moon is instantly delegitimizes serious inquiry (or at least throws cold water on it). how can we pursue this without the ‘help’ of NASA, and it’s formulated-for-the-masses disinformation program?

    as far as secrets being kept – the moon is one of the big ones. perhaps it leads to THE big one. who knows? one aspect of its’ artificiality that always amazes me is the exact same relative diameter of our moon and sun as observed from earth. these two bodies that are anything but the exact same. this implies a purposeful placement of the moon for said observation. also, that we have the same side of the moon always facing the earth in perpetuity is so astonishing so as to be unbelievable. yet, there it is.

    gurdieff believed the moon to be an earth fragment – contradictory to the argument you’ve presented here – but he states repeatedly that the whole function of humanity is to somehow ‘maintain’ the moon. it’s overly simplified but according to him this maintenance is performed through the production of certain types of energy and vibrations produced by humanity in toto.

    i’m new to your site and look forward to reading more of your posts. my real name is brian morrison. i think we should all start using our names… proclaiming our identity and claiming our existence. this anonymity thing gives the enemy of humanity too many cracks in which to hide. when they created the internet it’s something they counted on happening. it weakens us all. who is what and who is who? you get my meaning?

    anyhow. thanks

  4. That is “thinking outside the box” but you can say that about anything equally insane. Other moons in the solar system are very similar. Are you saying they are all artificial? I have read some really crazy ideas, but this is as bad as anything the religious reich can devise. Well, a free and open internet has room fro even the certifiably insane.

  5. Hi there. I think I can answer some of your questions about the moon. This is all accurate to the best of my knowledge, but I can be trained, as they say. Let’s dive right in.

    First, the Moon isn’t hollow. It’s not possible.

    The Moon’s mass along with its orbit is something we understand very well. We also have a pretty good idea of its composition. All this ties in together.

    Luna is composed primarily of silicates and other lighter materials. No iron is to be found there, for example. The lack of an iron core would explain handily its relative low density when compared with Earth. We can get that density, (mass divided by volume), by relatively simple mathematics which I won’t bore you with here. But suffice it to say that we know the radius of her orbit and the time it takes for the moon to make a complete orbit around Earth. When you plug all this in, you find the Moon to be exactly where it’s supposed to be.

    So why is it so round? Because while it has a relatively low mass, it is still massive enough to become round under its own gravitation. It cannot be hollow because any structure so massive would collapse under its own gravitation to form a perfect sphere.

    Why are there domes in the bottom of craters? I’m not sure. Ejecta peaks and rebound from the crust becoming molten come to mind, as does possible deformation upon cooling. However, the means by which a metallic shell would lead to domed crater peaks escapes me.

    Impactors upon a massive body make holes, and most of them come in orthogonal to the surface due to gravitation. If lunar gravity catches an object in such a way as to make it impact, it will tend to deflect its incoming vector (i.e. pull it straight “down”) toward the center of its mass. You’re not going to have things “skim in” at a shallow angle on something the mass of the Moon (or larger) very often, although it can happen. The deeper into the object’s gravity well you go, the stronger the force of gravitation becomes, and the more vertical your angle of approach will be. And even if something did come in at a shallow angle, the point of impact would still likely lead to a circular crater as energy would be released at the surface in an even distribution.

    The source you cited “Our Enigmatic Moon” isn’t right. In fact it’s not even wrong. It’s just incoherent half-wittery and new age crap. (This is not your fault – they’re simply without education or shame.)

    Hope this clears up a few things.

    Alan Wortman
    Research Assistant
    Arkansas State University
    Department of Chemistry and Physics

    • Alan, where are the sources of what you stated?

      I’ve read that the moon actually self corrects from time to time to keep the same face toward earth. That is quite odd.

      From the looks of the craters, many where very big impacts. We know that the speed of the objects flying toward the moon are very fast. With the moons density and lack of atmosphere, it would be silly to think the moon’s gravitational force make all the impacts right in the center.

      I’m new to this site and like it’s consciousness.

      • Well, I’m a physicist if that helps credibility along.

        The moon does have a bit of wobble to it, but it is tidally locked with the Earth because of its proximity. We see this with “Hot Jupiter” exoplanets that orbit their parent stars too closely as well. The short explanation is that the math holds up.

        As to the craters, I already explained that. This is how impacts work. You would expect to find oblique impacts only when dealing with low-mass bodies. Baseballs could easily strike each other off-center. For bodies that have been falling down each other’s gravity wells for a few months, they tend to hit pretty close to head-on. When they *don’t* hit head on, you tend to have circular craters anyway because of the energy transfer at the point of contact.

        Take any two round objects and touch them together. Try it from all kinds of angles if you like. You’ll see that the point of contact always looks precisely the same regardless of angle. This is important.

        In physics, we have a formula that says the amount of force something feels during a collision is equal to the mass in the collision times its velocity (speed). At the velocities impactors achieve, even small mass bodies can transfer a *tremendous* amount of energy. A BB for an air rifle travelling at the speed of a typical impacting body would cavitate the ground in a beautiful round crater about a foot and a half in diameter. Even if you shoot it in at an angle. This is because the shock wave from the initial moment of contact ripples out at considerable speed as the kinetic energy of the collision disperses. The initial contact is what digs the hole, and its size is modified by the speed at which the impacted body can transmit the shock waves and the speed at which the impactor arrived. The rest of the impactor (usually in quite a few pieces at this point) buries up in the ground below the bowl of the crater.

        Round craters are not a mystery. Egg-shaped craters are oddities.

      • doesn?t take an irbledicne telescope to participate in this irbledicne exploration. If you have a telescope larger than 6-inches aperture, or a radio antenna of at least one square meter, you should be able to pick up this asteroid

    • Very interesting item. What blows me away is that my name is Alan Wortman and you answered this question on January 8th – my birthday!!!!!

  6. Nice website – I love this type of information!
    I wish I was as knowledgeable about the moon as Alan, or some of the others who have responded, but I’m not.. I do know that the moon is THE PERFECT SIZE for it’s task of aiding and sustaining life on earth. A few miles less or more in circumference, or a small change in distance from us and we wouldn’t be having this conversation.
    It’s fascinating to imagine that she is hollow… Some say it’s impossible but the way everything we have always “KNOWN” keeps changing as of late – I DON’T KNOW.
    I have seen NASA images of the moon showing” uniformed banding” – like seams where each “small” section the orb was constructed – strange.. Also I understand that our moon has a near perfect orbit – much, much more precise than any of the other moons in the Milky Way..
    Norm Bergruen, a longtime JPL/NASA insider wrote a book entitled THE RINGMAKERS OF SATURN.. He believes the moon IS artificial.. as a matter of fact he believes the EMV used to tow the moon to it’s present location is actually still ON the moon, and rests in the middle of the Tsiolkovsky crater(!)
    The moon rings like a bell when it is struck… Our Apollo missions verified this- that seems very strange to me if the thing is solid…

    Great site-


    • Hey Adam…thanks for “getting it”. Hardened dogmatic viewpoints seem to rule, don’t they? Strange universe, but even stranger inhabitants on planet Earth. Thanks for your sanity. Love, Zen

  7. I just find it interesting when scientific types get so worked up about stuff they disagree with. Having a weird theory doesn’t make one insane. On the contrary, it is evidence of a mind that is liberated from spoon-fed learning. Nothing new has ever come from sticking with the “facts” as they are presented to us. My spoon-fed brain has trouble accepting the hollow moon theory, but it makes perfect sense on another level.

    • Hey Rob…never feel alone. That’s the right attitude IMO…keep questioning, keep asking, keep “wondering”…..I mean, c’mon!…..;)

  8. i heard the moon was hollow long ago buzz aldrin on you tube monolith on the moon of mars . they are hollow as well and did not appear until the middle of the 18th centuary funny that eh . who built the moon by chris knight & lomas . moongate by will brian & who parked the moon by t marrs or look up immanuel velikovskys archive .the earth without the moon happy reading

Leave a Reply