THE BLAIR CUSPIDS:LUNAR TETRAHEDRAL GEOMETRY
 
 

"There is a principle which is a bar against all information, which is proof against all arguments and which cannot fail to keep a man in everlasting ignorance; that principle is contempt prior to investigation" - Herbert Spencer



 
Since the dawn of time when early man first cast his gaze towards the heavens, the Moon has held an inexorable fascination. This dead, airless world some 221,438 miles away at perigee, consistently drew the attention of observers throughout the ages until on 20th July 1969 Neil Armstrong finally set foot on the surface at a location known as the Sea of Tranquility. It was during the years leading up to this first manned landing that a photograph was taken of a region on the Western edge of the Sea of Tranquility that seemed to show several anomalous objects....... 

On November 2nd 1966, NASA published the image taken by Lunar Orbiter 2 and speculation grew that the objects pictured were of artificial origin. The apparent height coupled with the possible geometric placement of the objects first drew William Blair of the Boeing Institute of Biotechnology to analyse what is now known as frame LO2-61H3. A 345k GIF version can be viewed by clicking here. Blair came to the conclusion that seven obelisks were pictured. These are the objects that came to be known as The Blair Cuspids. He also noted that a rectangular 'depression' could also be seen in the lower right of the image. Although initially NASA appeared interested in the objects, an official explanation attributed the elongated shadows to a very low sun angle. Thanks to the research of Fran Ridge of the Lunascan Project, Mike Lomax and Lan Fleming it was discovered that the Sun was in the East at an angle of 79.1 degrees from the lunar vertical with the region itself located at lunar coordinates 15.5 degrees East, 5.1 degrees North. Whilst this sun angle is indeed low (10.9 degrees above the horizon) it isnt low enough to support NASA's explanation.

Dr.Richard Shorthill of NASA claimed the objects were a "result of some geophysical event" but Blair countered this by responding, "If the cuspids really were the result of some geophysical event, it would be natural to see them distributed at random: as a result, the triangulation would be scalene or irregular, whereas those concerning the lunar objects lead to a basilary system with coordinates x, y, z to the right angle, six isosceles triangles and two axes consisting of three points each." Of the rectangular 'ditch', Blair said, "The shadow thrown by such depressions seems to suggest four angles at 90 degrees, and the structure persuades one to think it is like an excavation whose walls have been eroded or fallen inwards."

With remarks such as these it wasnt long before Blair was asked if he thought the cuspids were the work of intelligence. "Do you want me to confirm it so you can discredit me?"replied Blair, "Well I will tell you this: if a similar thing had been found on Earth, archaeology's first concern would have been to inspect the place and carry out trial excavations to assess the extent of the discovery." It was suggested that special conditions could exist where symmetry is detected in natural formations, "But if this 'axiom' had been applied to similar on Earth,"responded Blair, "more than half the Maya and Aztec architecture known today would have still been buried under hills and depressions covered in trees and woods...'a result of some geophysical event': archaeology would never have developed and most of the facts relating to human evolution would have remained veiled in mystery."

A LUNAR/CYDONIA CONNECTION

What follows is a step by step analysis of a possible tetrahedral connection between the Blair Cuspids and the geometrical layout of Cydonia.

NB. As with the research into the mound configuration of Cydonia, certain factors have to be taken into consideration. As accurately as the images allow, the centre of each cuspid is used for each alignment although, as with the Cydonia investigation, differences in personal opinion may lead to tolerances being applied. The geometry of the 'rectangular depression' is also subjective but as this feature isnt the focus of this paper it may be disregarded. Misalignment of framelets (a problem with many of the Lunar Orbiter images) may also bring errors into the measurements but again tolerances may be applied. Due to the limited accuracy of LO2-61H3, therefore, these measurements must act only as a guide to provoke further study until higher resolution images of the area in question can be obtained.

(please click on the images to obtain full size versions)


 
Fig.1
 Fig. 1 For identification each cuspid identified by Blair is given a letter A-G.
Fig.2 A right angled triangle is formed by joining cuspids A-B-C.
Fig.2
Fig.3
 Fig.3 Drawing a line from cuspid B through cuspid F intersects with a line drawn at a right angle from cuspid C at a point x. Point x is situated on one corner of the 'rectangular depression'.
Fig.4 A line drawn from cuspid C through cuspid F locates a second corner of the 'rectangular depression'.
Fig.4
Fig.5 
 Fig.5 The 'rectangular depression' can now be completed. The angle measured between B-x and x-y = 19.5 degrees-the tetrahedral angle incorporated into the geometry of Cydonia.
Fig.6 A further cuspid not indicated by Blair is found at the bottom of LO2-61H3. Cuspid H appears to be approximately the same size as cuspid A and when lines are drawn to points y and through cuspid D,the angle measured = 19.5 degrees-the tetrahedral angle incorporated into the geometry of Cydonia.
Fig.6
Fig.7
 Fig.7 The angle measured between a line drawn from point x through cuspid G and line x-B =19.5 degrees-the tetrahedral angle incorporated into the geometry of Cydonia.
Fig.8 The angle measured between a line drawn from cuspid C to a point z located at the corner of the 'rectangular depression' and cuspids F/E =19.5 degrees-the tetrahedral angle incorporated into the geometry of Cydonia. NB.This angle requires further study as the exact geometry of the 'rectangular depression' is subjective.
Fig.8 

 

Thanks to Lan Fleming for help in researching this article.

For further discussion on the shape and height of the cuspids including a photometric analysis of the slopes visit VGL
 
 

home