Russian scientists in the 1970s: “Is the Moon the work of an extraterrestrial intelligence? »

Is the Moon the work of extraterrestrial intelligence?

Article published in the prominent Soviet newspaper “SPUTNIK” by Russian scientists Mikhail Vasin and Alexander Shcherbakov, in the 1970s.

People have long wondered if the “canals” on Mars were the creation of cosmic engineers, but for some strange reason it hasn’t occurred to them to look with the same eyes at the peculiarities of the lunar landscape, much closer.

And all arguments about the possibilities of the existence of intelligent life on other celestial bodies have been limited to the idea that other civilizations must necessarily be on the surface of a planet, and that the interior as that habitat is out of the question.

Abandoning the traditional ways of “common sense”, we have plunged into what may at first sight seem like an unbridled and irresponsible fantasy.

But the more we carefully examine all the information collected by man on the Moon, the more we are convinced that not a single fact invalidates our supposition.

Not only that, but many things hitherto considered lunar puzzles are explicable in light of this new hypothesis.


The origin of the Moon is one of the most complicated problems in cosmogony. So far, three hypotheses have essentially been discussed.

HYPOTHESIS I: The Moon was once part of the Earth and broke away from it. This hypothesis has been refuted by the evidence.

HYPOTHESIS II: The Moon formed independently from the same cloud of dust and gas as Earth, and immediately became Earth’s natural satellite.

But then why is there such a big difference between the specific gravity of the Moon (3.33 grams per cubic centimeter) and that of the Earth (5.5 gr.)?

Moreover, according to the latest information (analysis of samples brought back by American astronauts from Apollo), the lunar rock does not have the same composition as that of the Earth.

HYPOTHESIS III: The Moon formed separately, and, moreover, far from the Earth (perhaps even outside the solar system).

Thus, the Moon would not have had to be fashioned from the same “clay” as our own planet. Sailing through the Universe, the Moon came close to Earth and, by a complex interplay of gravitational forces, was brought into a geocentric orbit, very close to circular. But such capture is virtually impossible.

In fact, scientists who study the origin of the Universe today have no acceptable theory to explain how the Earth-Moon system came into being.

OUR HYPOTHESIS: The Moon is an artificial satellite orbited around the Earth by intelligent beings unknown to us.

We refuse to engage in speculation about who staged this unique experience, which only a highly developed civilization was capable of.

Speculative cutaway model of the lunar ship.


If one wants to launch an artificial sputnik, it is advisable to make it hollow.

At the same time, it would be naive to imagine that anyone capable of such a gigantic space project would be content with some kind of giant empty chest launched on a near-Earth trajectory.

It is more likely that we are dealing with a very old spacecraft, the interior of which was filled with fuel for the engines, materials and devices for repairs, navigation, instruments, observation equipment and all kinds of machinery…

In other words, whatever is necessary for this “caravel of the Universe” to serve as a sort of Noah’s Ark of intelligence, perhaps even as a home for an entire civilization contemplating an extended existence ( thousands of millions of years) and long peregrinations in space (thousands of millions of kilometres).

Naturally, the hull of such a spacecraft must be super strong in order to withstand the blows of meteorites and the strong fluctuations between extreme heat and extreme cold.

It is likely that the hull is a double-layered affair: the base is dense armor about 35 km thick, and on the outside some kind of looser coating (a thinner layer – about 5km on average).

In some areas – where the lunar “seas” and “craters” are, the upper layer is quite thin, or even non-existent in some cases.

Since the diameter of the Moon is 3,500 km, it is, from our point of view, a thin-walled sphere.

And, of course, not an empty sphere. There could be all kinds of materials and equipment on its inner surface.

But the greatest proportion of the lunar mass is concentrated in the central part of the sphere, in its core, which has a diameter of 3,500 km.

Thus, the distance between the kernel and the shell of this nut is of the order of 50 km. This space was undoubtedly filled with gases necessary for respiration and for technological or other purposes.

With such an internal structure, the Moon could have an average specific gravity of 3.3 grams per cubic centimeter, which differs considerably from that of the Earth (5.5 grams per cubic centimeter).


The most numerous and interesting formations on the lunar surface are the craters.

Their diameter varies considerably. Some are less than a meter in diameter, while others exceed 193 km (the largest has a diameter of 238 km). How come the Moon is so cratered?

There are two hypotheses – volcanic and meteoric. Most scientists are in favor of the second.

Kirill Stanyukovich, a Soviet physicist, has written a whole series of books since 1937 in which he expounds the idea that craters are the result of bombardment from the Moon over millions of years.

And he does speak of bombardment, for even the smallest celestial body, when involved in one of the fastest head-on collisions so frequent in the cosmos, behaves like a warhead loaded with dynamite, even sometimes like an atomic warhead.

Instant combustion occurs on impact, turning it into a dense cloud of glowing gas, plasma, and there is a very clean explosion.

According to Professor Stanyukovich, a “missile” of significant size (say 9.5 km in diameter) must, during the collision with the Moon, penetrate to a depth equal to 4 or 5 times its own diameter (40-50 km) .

What is surprising is that, whatever the size of the meteorites that fell on the Moon (some have a diameter of more than 96 km), and whatever the speed at which they must have moved (in in some cases the combined speed reached 60 km per second), the craters they left behind are, for some strange reason, all about the same depth, 2-4 km, although their diameters vary enormously.

Take this 238 km diameter crater. In area, it surpasses Hiroshima hundreds of times.

What a powerful explosion it must have been to blast millions of tons of moon rock over tens of miles!

At first glance, one would expect to find a very deep crater here, but it is not so: there are at most five kilometers between the upper level and the lower level, of which a third is due to the rock wall erected around the crater like a toothed crown.

For such a large hole, it is too shallow. In addition, the bottom of the crater is convex, following the curve of the lunar surface.

If you were standing in the middle of the crater, you wouldn’t even be able to see the rim of the crater – it would be beyond the horizon. A hollow that looks more like a hill is a rather odd affair, perhaps.

Not really, if we assume that when the meteorite hits the outer layer of the moon, it acts as a buffer and the foreign body finds itself facing an impenetrable spherical barrier.

The explosion, which only slightly dented the 30 km armor layer, threw fragments of its “cladding” away.

Bearing in mind that the defensive lining of the Moon is, according to our calculations, 4 km thick, we see that this is approximately the maximum depth of the craters.


Now consider the chemical peculiarities of moon rock.

After analysis, American scientists found chromium, titanium and zirconium in it. They are all metals with refractory, mechanically strong and anticorrosive properties.

A combination of all these metals would have an enviable resistance to heat and the ability to resist means of aggression, and could be used on Earth for coating electric furnaces.

If a material had to be designed to protect a giant artificial satellite from the adverse effects of temperature, cosmic radiation and meteorite bombardment, experts would probably have chosen these metals.

In that case, it’s hard to understand why moon rock is such a poor conductor of heat – a factor that surprised astronauts so much? Wasn’t that what the designers of Earth’s super-sputnik were looking for?

From an engineering point of view, this spaceship of times gone by that we call the Moon is superbly constructed. There may be a good reason for its extreme longevity. It is even possible that it predates our own planet.

In any case, some pieces of moon rock turned out to be older than the oldest on Earth, although it is true that this applies to the age of the materials and not the structure for which they were used. .

And judging by the number of craters that dot its surface, the Moon itself is no wimp.

It is of course difficult to say when it began to shine in the sky above the Earth, but based on some preliminary estimates, we can venture to think that it was about two billion years ago. years.

We do not imagine, of course, that the Moon is still inhabited, and it is probable that many of its automatic devices have ceased to function. The stabilizers stopped working and the poles shifted.

Even though the moon keeps this same side facing us, it has for some time been unstable on its own axis, sometimes showing us parts of its reverse that were once invisible to observers on Earth – for example, the Selenites themselves. if they made expeditions here.

Time has taken its toll. The body and rigging have more or less disintegrated; some inner hull welds have obviously diverged.

We speculate that the long chains of small craters (up to 1,512 km) once attributed to volcanic activity were caused by gas eruptions through cracks in the shielding caused by accidents.

There is no doubt that one of the most splendid features of the lunar landscape – a straight “wall” almost 500 meters high and more than 100 km long – was formed when one of the plates of armor bent under the impact of sky torpedoes and raised one of its straight, even edges.

The population of the Moon probably took the necessary measures to remedy the effects of the meteor bombardment, for example by sealing the cracks in the outer shield covering the inner shell.

For this purpose, a substance from the lunar core was probably used, a kind of cement being made from it. After processing, this substance was piped to surface sites where it was needed.

Recently, astronomers have discovered variations in the gravitational fields near the great “seas”. We believe the reason is this: the dry seas of the Moon are actually areas where the protective layer has been stripped from the armor coating.

To repair the damage to these vast expanses, the facility producing the restorative substance would have had to be brought immediately below the site so that it could flood the area with its “cement”. The resulting flat expanses look like seas to the terrestrial observer.

The stocks of materials and machinery needed for this operation are probably still where they were, and are massive enough to give rise to these gravitational anomalies.

What is the Moon today? Is it a colossal necropolis, a “city of the dead”, where a form of life has died out? Is she some kind of cosmic Flying Dutchman? A ship abandoned by its crew and controlled automatically?

We don’t know and we won’t try to guess.


We have presented in this article only some of the reasons – unfortunately, the evidence so far is only circumstantial – for our hypothesis, which may seem crazy at first sight.

A similar “crazy” idea was put forward in 1959 by Professor Iosif Shklovsky, a prominent scientist, about the “moons” that revolve around Mars.

After carefully weighing the pros and cons, he concludes that they are both hollow and therefore artificial satellites.

We believe that the questions we have raised about our Moon provide enough material for serious reflection on the subject; the result could be the illumination of our many lunar enigmas.

Now, of course, we have to wait for direct evidence to support our idea. Or refute it…

The wait probably won’t be long.

Leave a Reply