AB110004 and Mars
 

As if two of these objects on the Moon weren't enough! (To see objects on the Moon "click" HERE)

For our next view of another very similar object we’ll have to switch planets, missions, and image sources to Mars, the Mars Global Surveyor and MSSS. Shortly after going into service while still undergoing aero braking, MGS returned image AB110004. This image and it's associated ancillary data is readily viewable via Malin Space Science Systems' archival website at the following HERE or at their website.

The object lies near -47.10 lat 341.20 long on the right side of what may be described as a crater, but in appearance is more alike to a sludge or settlement pool. The whole image is entirely too large to display here, so I’ve cropped it down to a large part of its lower section for convenience. The arrow points to the object.

AB110004

MGS' Mars Orbital Camera (MOC) produces excellent digital images at a nice resolution for the most part, and since it measures the images in meters per pixel we can obtain a nice estimate of actual object size. In this case, a little over 9 meters per pixel. The object appears to be both rectangular and tiered.

A size estimate of it reveals a length width and height of approx. 246x183x118 meters at base. Around it are some very intricate shapes and surfaces, also indicative of outlying structures within a complex.. That this is in fact an impact is not at all necessarily evident, as is the case of several other "impact features" on Mars not covered here. We will assume it is.

Unlike the similar objects shown above on the Apollo images, this one is on the crater's side. Both structure and crater are much smaller. Also unlike the others, Mars has an atmosphere and is possibly a living world. The planetary geology is very different from that of the Moon, but not so much the impact structures.

Here we again find the same type of object. Its shadows reveals its shape just like the others. The dynamics of position and size may a bit different, the appearance is not. The lighting is coming from the upper right, which would be east.

Now let’s look at all of the above structures together on one image as a collage to compare them, and for easy correlation.

Three similar right angled, tiered, possibly artificial structure found on two different worlds during three different missions. All not fitting the standard and accepted models as being impact originated.

The shapes and lines within these craters as displayed in this study stand out as being very well placed, exhibiting complex geometric organization.

All of them contain attributes far more reminiscent of being archaeological in nature than geological. Quite frankly, it resembles many ancient ruins on Earth as seen from the air.

Aerial archaeology has been the single most important development in that branch of science since its inception. It has so far proven invaluable as a principal means of locating and identifying suspected ancient ruins of this type on Earth. There is absolutely no reason other than negligence for the same principles not being applied to suspected artificial ruins elsewhere. The Moon's surface has been pored over by geologists, but not by archaeologists. This is a result of either gross oversight, or overt avoidance and neglect of scientific responsibility.

The possibility of finding remnants from other civilizations during our ever developing space endeavors has been discussed for decades, and by think tanks no less illustrious than The Brookings Institution. Their conclusions on this matter were that it would be detrimental to our civilization if knowledge of such findings were announced. This is more than likely the reason why the Moon has escaped the attention of archaeologists and the research application of archaeological principles and practices.

The fact that this study must be purely photogrammetric is of little consequence, because photographic analysis is the primary focus of aerial archaeology. The only thing lacking towards applying this to our planetary neighbors is physical verification, or ground truth.

That impact origination is the explanation for all the above areas which contain these structures is possible, theoretically plausible, and nearly unquestionable except for these tiered objects which do not follow impact uplift peaking patterns as referenced by accepted models. The one on Mars figures prominently in this respect, because it is inexplicable for a central crater uplift or peak to be formed on the crater's side, almost outside of the crater completely, and it is far higher than the crater rim.

In summation, the similarity of these objects both to each other and to ancient ruins and step pyramids (with their associated outlying structures) found here on our world calls for a much closer look into the likelihood that we are actually seeing structural evidence of ancient human or extraterrestrial habitation. It may be that there is a not-so-common natural phenomenon that churned out some fairly equal sized right angled tiered structures surrounded by rectilinear geometric objects in the middles and sides of some impact craters. I opt from evidences personally witnessed to agree with the former.

Perhaps objects of the type found on Earth, such as these seen below, might offer a better explanation as to the origin of the structures I've shown above from the Moon and Mars? I see them as being highly similar. Huge tiered right angled ruined structures with outlying infrastructure, built by man or his predecessors (be they an ancient advanced civilization or extraterrestrially originated), still standing defiantly against the damages wrought by time. Although their origins are thought known, they stand as the silent sentinels of what we actually don't know at all, both here and on our neighbors.

As a parting shot to all who can't see me in the forest for the trees..
Is it a crater or an archaeological site?

With another hundred or so more miles of distance and the decay of several thousand more years they might be indistinguishable.