The notion that the Moon, our natural satellite, might
harbor ruins of an ancient civilization or artificial structures has captivated
the imagination of many over the years. One of the primary proponents of this
narrative in the Spanish-speaking world has been journalist and writer Juan
José Benítez, particularly through his 2004 documentary Mirlo Rojo (Red
Blackbird), part of the Planeta Encantado series. In this work, Benítez claims
that Apollo 11 astronauts Neil Armstrong and Buzz Aldrin discovered and filmed
extraterrestrial ruins in the Sea of Tranquility, a finding allegedly concealed
by NASA. Additionally, various photographs—many attributed to NASA—have gained
popularity, supposedly showing lines resembling roads, monoliths, and
artificial structures. But how credible are these claims? How much truth could
there be in all of this? Below, I will explore this topic by combining
available information with reasoned analysis, aiming to separate fact from
speculation.
Juan José Benítez’s claims and “Mirlo Rojo”
In “Mirlo Rojo”, Benítez presents an alleged 14-minute
video showing astronauts exploring ruined structures on the Moon, accompanied
by a narrative involving an anonymous informant—a deceased “high-ranking U.S.
military official” whom he calls “Red Blackbird.” According to Benítez, these
ruins would be evidence of an ancient alien presence, and NASA, alongside the
U.S. government, supposedly destroyed these structures with tactical nuclear weapons
to prevent “chaos” on Earth. The story has all the makings of a thrilling
conspiracy: unseen footage, government secrets, and a massive cover-up.
However, a critical examination of this narrative
raises serious doubts. Firstly, the video showcased in “Mirlo Rojo” was later
revealed to be a recreation produced by an animation company at Benítez’s
request. This is no minor detail: what was marketed as “unseen footage” turned
out to be fiction, undermining the credibility of the centerpiece of his
argument. Benítez has defended his work by arguing that, while the video may
not be real, the story it tells could be, based on testimonies he deems
reliable. But this introduces a fundamental problem: the lack of verifiable
evidence. The supposed informant, “Red Blackbird,” is anonymous and, according
to Benítez, deceased, making independent corroboration impossible. This is a
recurring pattern in his works, such as Trojan Horse, where he also relies on
mysterious, untraceable sources.
Reasoning beyond what is presented, if a high-ranking
military official wanted to reveal a secret of this magnitude, why would they
choose a Spanish journalist known for his sensationalist approach over an
internationally prestigious outlet like The New York Times or The Washington Post?
Furthermore, the idea that the United States used nuclear weapons on the Moon
raises logistical and scientific questions. Nuclear explosions would leave
detectable traces, such as elevated radiation levels or specific craters, yet
no subsequent lunar missions or probes sent by other nations have reported such
anomalies. This suggests that the “Mirlo Rojo” story lacks a solid foundation
and appears more like a narrative construct than a documented fact.
NASA photographs: Evidence of artificial structures?
Another cornerstone of the lunar ruins theory is the
photographs, many attributed to NASA, that show supposed anomalies: lines
resembling roads, upright monoliths, and structures that defy natural
formations. Among the most well-known are images from Lunar Orbiter 2, which
captured what some call the “Blair Obelisks” in the Sea of Tranquility, and
other Apollo mission photos showing unusual shadows or geometric shapes.
Let’s examine this closely. The Lunar Orbiter 2
images, taken in 1966, do indeed show elongated shadows that could be
interpreted as artificial structures. However, NASA and most astronomers
explain these shapes as the result of low-angle sunlight (the Sun was just 11
degrees above the lunar horizon), which exaggerates the shadows of natural rock
formations. The human mind tends to seek patterns—a phenomenon known as
pareidolia—which could explain why some see “obelisks” where others see mere
rocks. Moreover, the Lunar Orbiter cameras were not directly aimed at these
supposed structures, limiting clarity and leaving room for subjective
interpretations.
As for the “roads” and other structures, many of these
images have been analyzed by independent experts. For instance, straight lines
could be geological fractures or marks left by meteorite impacts, common on an
airless body like the Moon. Monoliths, such as the famous “pillar” seen in some
photos, are typically isolated rocks whose shadows create optical illusions.
There is no evidence that these shapes are artificial, and modern missions like
the Lunar Reconnaissance Orbiter (LRO), which has mapped the Moon with
unprecedented resolution, have found nothing to suggest constructions made by
an intelligence.
Yet, let’s reason a step further: if artificial
structures did exist, why haven’t they been detected by other nations with
space programs, such as Russia, China, or India? The Moon is not an exclusive
secret of NASA; it has been observed by telescopes and probes worldwide. The
absence of independent confirmation suggests that these anomalies are more
likely natural or misinterpreted rather than evidence of ruins.
Transient Lunar Phenomena (TLP) and other clues
Benítez and other advocates of lunar ruins often cite
Transient Lunar Phenomena (TLP)—observations of lights or temporary changes on
the lunar surface reported for centuries. Some speculate these could be signs
of artificial activity. However, science has yet to fully explain TLP, with the
most accepted hypotheses pointing to natural causes like gas releases,
micrometeorite impacts, or optical effects. Linking them to an ancient
civilization requires a speculative leap unsupported by concrete data.
How much truth is there?
After examining Benítez’s claims and the alleged
photographic evidence, it seems clear that the narrative of ruins on the Moon
lacks solid support. The “Mirlo Rojo” case collapses due to its reliance on a
fabricated video and unverifiable sources, while the photographs, though
intriguing, have more plausible natural explanations. This doesn’t mean the
Moon is a dull place or devoid of mysteries; it simply means there is no
compelling evidence of artificial structures.
However, reasoning leads to a broader reflection: the
absence of evidence is not evidence of absence. If a civilization had visited
the Moon millions of years ago, the passage of time and meteorite impacts could
have erased nearly all traces. But this possibility, while fascinating, remains
speculative and does not alter the fact that, based on what we know today,
there is no credible basis to claim lunar ruins exist.
In conclusion, Benítez’s ideas and the interpretations
of certain images appear to be more a product of imagination and the human desire
to find the extraordinary than of verifiable facts. The Moon remains a silent
witness to our curiosity, but until more substantial evidence emerges, ruins
will remain a myth rather than a reality.
A chance encounter will take him far away, on a thrilling adventure full of action and emotion that will change his life... but also the lives of everyone around him…
No hay comentarios:
Publicar un comentario