It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.

Please white-list or disable AboveTopSecret.com in your ad-blocking tool.

Thank you.

 

Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.

 

SyFy Channel July 20, "ALIENS ON THE MOON: THE TRUTH EXPOSED"

page: 9
41
<< 6  7  8    10  11 >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Jul, 29 2014 @ 11:58 PM
link   

originally posted by: C-JEAN
I can't believe nobody talked about
"Ingo Swann" and his book
PENETRATION
!

Hey now!

This is a family forum, I'll have you know!

Harte




posted on Jul, 30 2014 @ 06:55 AM
link   

originally posted by: Blue Shift

originally posted by: onebigmonkey
For more info, here is a photograph I just took of my copy of "The moon as viewed by lunar orbiter" (1970), which has that boulder trail in it. Moonquakes is their preferred explanation



Here's my favourite "mysterious image" from the Aristarchus crater:



For me, it's the mineshaft entrance shape at the bottom. It looks like it's a set of steps surrounded by a balcony/parapet. Then there is what seems to be a diamond shaped ridge with a mound in the centre. Behind that there is also shape that looks like a half-buried car.

The URL of the original webpage is located inside the picture.
edit on 30-7-2014 by stormcell because: (no reason given)



posted on Jul, 30 2014 @ 02:27 PM
link   
a reply to: stormcell

Interesting, but it appears to be an optical illusion resulting from the perspective of the image.

If you view Aristarchus from above (and believe me it took a while to find where this feature was!), what looks like the 'bridge' across an entrance hole is actually a vertical rock face running behind another one, giving the appearance of a cross piece to a hole.



The view from above is larger than the oblique one.

I've highlighted where it is in red on this image.




posted on Jul, 30 2014 @ 07:01 PM
link   

originally posted by: onebigmonkey
a reply to: stormcell

Interesting, but it appears to be an optical illusion resulting from the perspective of the image.

If you view Aristarchus from above (and believe me it took a while to find where this feature was!), what looks like the 'bridge' across an entrance hole is actually a vertical rock face running behind another one, giving the appearance of a cross piece to a hole.



The view from above is larger than the oblique one.

I've highlighted where it is in red on this image.


Good work there, I hope the eyes are still sound.

There are big problems with that SyFy channel IMO. In a word, disinfo.
Years ago when Blue book was around, or rather when Blue Book was eventually done and dusted it became pretty clear that the whole thing was based on assumption, or you could say presume to assume on the part of the investigators. In the first instance, and from what I have read organisations like the CIA took the whole thing seriously, when it came down to Blue Book, the idea was to make any sighting fit any given, 'plausible' assumption..aka if it walked like a duck... That suited in many ways, because if someone had clearly seen a flying wing, and knew it was a strange nuts and bolts thing, then they probably got destroyed with that sighting being put down to misidentification like a big bird flying high and so on, whether Blue Book investigators would have known about flying wings or not. It didn't matter about the person, the public at large in the main had no copy to disagree.
Up to date, things have changed somewhat, there are the more prolific people like Greer, who take sightings and embellish them with add ons like where they come from, (what was it Zeta Reticuli and exchange programmes blah blah) again, ultimately adding ridicule to some poor, honest sap.
Same goes for SyFy, only here they want you believe a given pareidolia, because that's all it is, that is all that is being given, photographic ambiguity, along heaps of white noise in your ears.
So, for a moment just go with the documentary, and the so called satellite dish sometimes a radar dish and assembly, more than hinted at as proof positive as being, 'them up there far beyond our technology'..what does the fecking thing look like? Yup, a satellite dish, same as the ones we make!



posted on Aug, 2 2014 @ 12:55 PM
link   
a reply to: smurfy

A satellite dish on a body that has no satellites?

Of interest is the fact that a selenostationary orbit would be impossible. The radius of such a theoretical orbit works out at 89,800 km -- on the Earth side of the L1 libration point. Any such satellite would therefore wander off into Earth orbit and be useless.



posted on Sep, 7 2014 @ 11:13 AM
link   

originally posted by: Harte
The aliens have been on the Moon since the 1960's prepping for invasion?

WTF is taking them so long?

Harte


Actually remember the case in 1977 over in Brazil? It was a so called invasion, but at the same time UFOs were going all across the world and abducting people. That is why people like Budd Hopkins even began doing work like that. Even the abductee doesn't know where they are from, but it is obvious. So we were invaded, but it happens to be that the aliens did not want us to know - so it was a secret invasion. Interesting, because humans would think in different terms. By the way all the cattle mutes were associated with the invasion. You don't have young new people like Budd Hopkins appearing because the invasion is over. In fact the music, the culture, the whole earth changed as a result of being visited.

The show is back up on youtube. Many many hoaxes. But a couple of new photos of some towers. They called them satellites and power plants but they are the standard moon tower that people have been seeing, covering up and blurring out. Many towers have come and gone over net in the last decade.

The most powerful evidence is probably the boulders. By the way, those aren't boulders making tracks. How do I know? The darn top of the 'machine' has a pyramid or point on the top. So it is not like what we see in desert valley, in the picture you can see the point on the top even besides the shadow.






posted on Sep, 7 2014 @ 12:45 PM
link   
I have missed that... it must be this



I am not a skeptic or a believer, I am objective but as it has happened even real cases of UFOs that were considered undeniable might be and likely are fabricated or half true, the alien part being on the false side, I do not expect this video to bring anything to make me feel Aliens on Earth are reality.
edit on 7-9-2014 by CollisioN because: (no reason given)



posted on Sep, 7 2014 @ 07:06 PM
link   

originally posted by: CollisioN
I am not a skeptic or a believer, I am objective but as it has happened even real cases of UFOs that were considered undeniable might be and likely are fabricated or half true, the alien part being on the false side, I do not expect this video to bring anything to make me feel Aliens on Earth are reality.


Yeah that's it.

After years of study, I personally believe as Astronaut Edgar Mitchell, every time he vehemently said ' Without A Doubt, We Have Been Visited.'

If you had time to watch it. Everything in a way comes down to the monolith on the moon of mars. They said mainstream accepted it was not natural. It obviously doesn't look natural. But why a monolith? Out of all things, a darn monolith...

Why are there so many monoliths on earth that are unexplained? And they cannot truly be dated.

It does make sense, that if ancient aliens were true and behind the ancient mysterious of earth, they would be coming back right before we had our hand wrapped around technology - which directly is the last century. And there would be a monolith on the moon of mars, as there is. It all comes together.



posted on Sep, 7 2014 @ 11:44 PM
link   
a reply to: CollisioN

Thanks for posting the video, I hadn't ever seen it before, and it shows some very convincing evidence. These same kinds of things were even being reported since Galileo's time. There have also been over 500 satellites sent to the moon from Earth by NASA and the Soviet Union, many of those classified. (This info I read in the book quoted in the video you just posted, "Someone else is on the Moon". That book has a lot of pertinent data, and that book was also a sore spot with NASA administrators, and probably still is.




posted on Sep, 8 2014 @ 03:54 AM
link   

originally posted by: BugOut
Here is WHY you will NEVER learn anything from SyFy or History Channel or any other cable channel for that matter with regards to secret information or aliens or whatever......

SyFy is owned by NBC.

NBC is owned by General Electric.

General Electric does business with the following (partial list from militaryindustrialcomplex.com):
US Army
US Navy/Marines
US Air Force
Defense Logistics Agency
SOCOM
Transportation Command
DARPA
Missile Defense Agency
Defense Information Systems
Defense Finance and Accounting
Defense Commissary Agency
Defense Media Agency
Defense Threat Reduction Agency

This is just a partial list of who GE does business with. It does not list the CIA, FBI, NSA or the other classified business it does with the US Government. GE also does business with several other allied governments as well. What I am getting at is this. Most of the media is owned by very large corporations and these corporations rely on the government/military/black project contracts they get for a nice chunk of money they get annually. The money they receive comes from my (and your) taxes. There is no way that any of these corporate giants will publish anything substantial to the public. The government will not allow it to happen. Sorry to rain on the parade but if you look at who owns all these channels we watch and what other business they do with the US Government it is quite clear that the lid is not coming off anything anytime soon. I enjoy watching anyway BUT the truth is and will stay buried based on who owns what. IMO.





This is a thread worthy post, and I hope people have seen what this person has wrote.



posted on Sep, 8 2014 @ 11:28 PM
link   

originally posted by: greyer

The most powerful evidence is probably the boulders. By the way, those aren't boulders making tracks. How do I know? The darn top of the 'machine' has a pyramid or point on the top. So it is not like what we see in desert valley, in the picture you can see the point on the top even besides the shadow.


The mechanisms causing movement are completely different

minnesota.cbslocal.com...

There are thousands of boulder trails on the moon, all of them on slopes. That is not a coincidence.



posted on Sep, 8 2014 @ 11:55 PM
link   

originally posted by: NoCorruptionAllowed
a reply to: CollisioN

Thanks for posting the video, I hadn't ever seen it before, and it shows some very convincing evidence. These same kinds of things were even being reported since Galileo's time. There have also been over 500 satellites sent to the moon from Earth by NASA and the Soviet Union, many of those classified. (This info I read in the book quoted in the video you just posted, "Someone else is on the Moon". That book has a lot of pertinent data, and that book was also a sore spot with NASA administrators, and probably still is.



500 lunar probes amounts to one a month every year. it would have been noticed, both physically from seeing them and noticing the data streams they would have sent back and financially in the holes on national budgets. Seeing as that figure was being quoted in a book published in the 1970s, the figure translates to almost one a fortnight, which is ludicrous.

The book you read lied to you, and no-one at NASA cares about it.



posted on Sep, 9 2014 @ 12:01 AM
link   

originally posted by: onebigmonkey

The book you read lied to you, and no-one at NASA cares about it.


Besides, the author, George Leonard, repudiated his own book, asked people to stop criticizing it, and expressed hope everybody would just forget they had ever seen it. So he came to his senses and was embarrassed by his earlier foolishness.



posted on Sep, 9 2014 @ 02:33 PM
link   

originally posted by: JimOberg

originally posted by: onebigmonkey

The book you read lied to you, and no-one at NASA cares about it.


Besides, the author, George Leonard, repudiated his own book, asked people to stop criticizing it, and expressed hope everybody would just forget they had ever seen it. So he came to his senses and was embarrassed by his earlier foolishness.


Then why did he let this movie from 2014 go public, it's clear he sticks to his ideas.

I only haven't seen the last third of the video with the alien but I can say some critics and positive feedback.

Positive

- I never cared or considered there would be any truth in 'structures on the Moon and Mars' - yet alone alien ones, I've always seen craters and boulders, and cooled down lava formations, nothing resembling artificial objects. This movie changed my perception of the Moon and that maybe not all is just boulders and craters.

What really wins it for me is the UFOs that are observed flying in some of the NASA videos, especially the one that shot off the exosphere, the comments of astronauts, the evidence of doctoring images, witnesses and people that have taken part in it directly.

This brings a hope that maybe there are some beings around.


Critics

- It's hard to make anything out of the formations on the Moon - the images are so unclear, that how could one make an artificial item out of them only cause they look like a dish or pipes or spaceship? As if we didn't have plenty of cases on Earth and Mars that look like many living things or man-made structures but in the end are weathered and crushed rock formations. And making them alien - it's too big stretch of the existing data.

- Are some of the people involved in brushing out images, another group of disinfo agents to keep the alien myth alive? If so, what is the purpose of this? Everybody can't be a paid agent whose work is to speak of fake alien cases.

- The alien body (which I haven't watched) - is either another starchild type of human - with defects or mutations, not rly alien. I would not believe it

- the plasma or protuberance released from the sun seems natural and as the Sun usually does... I do not think any objects around the Sun are artificial objects

- the movie itself says to decide if you believe it or not. This means there is no difference compared to any other TV show or documentary about aliens, this is all a speculation

----

In all that the documentary still shows, thanks to some UFO videos, that there may be something on the Moon afterall, and I've seen enough footage with objects that look intelligent controlled to be always some 'ice particles' - and would astronauts be always so clueless to call such particles or space junk UFOs - I don't think so.



posted on Sep, 9 2014 @ 02:49 PM
link   

originally posted by: CollisioN....

Then why did he let this movie from 2014 go public, it's clear he sticks to his ideas.


I haven't seen the movie, is it really George Leonard, and when was the interview conducted?



posted on Sep, 9 2014 @ 03:43 PM
link   
With the heat haze quite visible in the video, I think its an earth based telescope, I did not recognise anything artificial, even the engineers metal washer was no surprise, considering the amount of junk in orbit, but then, it would be too small for an earth based 'scope' to focus on it, so perhaps its one of the interstage joint rings in orbit, one of those should be big enough to see?



posted on Sep, 10 2014 @ 09:18 PM
link   

originally posted by: onebigmonkey
all of them on slopes


You are working so hard to be from the ego that you fail to miss in front of us we see the object move down and up a hill. Also the testimony if you watched it was that it went uphill, out of a cater.

That is common, that people work so hard in their ego they are determined to mistake reality, it's reaction that happens when being bombarded with so many untruths it becomes grandeur delusion.



posted on Sep, 10 2014 @ 11:22 PM
link   
a reply to: greyer

Aah the old "I'm better than you because I can see special stuff and you can't" line. Who's playing an ego trip now?

It's not ego - it's observation. The boulder trails on the moon are boulder trails caused by movement on slopes. The movement could be initiated by quakes or by being disturbed by impacts. It is perfectly possible for momentum to carry this motion uphill, and you only have the word of the video that this is the case. The patterns they make are because they are uneven and they are rolling.

They are not little cars.
edit on 10-9-2014 by onebigmonkey because: typo



posted on Sep, 11 2014 @ 11:16 PM
link   

originally posted by: greyer

originally posted by: Harte
The aliens have been on the Moon since the 1960's prepping for invasion?

WTF is taking them so long?

Harte



Actually remember the case in 1977 over in Brazil? It was a so called invasion, but at the same time UFOs were going all across the world and abducting people. That is why people like Budd Hopkins even began doing work like that. Even the abductee doesn't know where they are from, but it is obvious. So we were invaded, but it happens to be that the aliens did not want us to know - so it was a secret invasion. Interesting, because humans would think in different terms. By the way all the cattle mutes were associated with the invasion. You don't have young new people like Budd Hopkins appearing because the invasion is over. In fact the music, the culture, the whole earth changed as a result of being visited.


Your reply seems to be a classic text-book entry into the "believe me" camp. You make all kinds of assertions that are not based on facts. I would love to see evidence for the reality of aliens, terrestrial and extraterrestrial, and that said alleged aliens are actually abducting humans and performing all kinds of physical tests. And, amazingly, that you know what these alleged aliens are thinking! What gall! Cattle!


The show is back up on youtube. Many many hoaxes. But a couple of new photos of some towers. They called them satellites and power plants but they are the standard moon tower that people have been seeing, covering up and blurring out. Many towers have come and gone over net in the last decade.


No one can name alleged lunar structures when all that is visible are natural features usually reproduced very poorly and pareidolia is to blame.


The most powerful evidence is probably the boulders. By the way, those aren't boulders making tracks. How do I know? The darn top of the 'machine' has a pyramid or point on the top. So it is not like what we see in desert valley, in the picture you can see the point on the top even besides the shadow.


Those are boulders rolling downhill and they may not be round but with just enough curve to move from side to side due to lunar earthquakes.

You'll have to do better but you seem to lack logic, common sense and reason.



posted on Sep, 11 2014 @ 11:21 PM
link   

originally posted by: JimOberg

originally posted by: onebigmonkey

The book you read lied to you, and no-one at NASA cares about it.


Besides, the author, George Leonard, repudiated his own book, asked people to stop criticizing it, and expressed hope everybody would just forget they had ever seen it. So he came to his senses and was embarrassed by his earlier foolishness.


On the other hand, Leonard's competitor Fred Steckling, admitted on the air to me that he may have made some mistakes based mainly on the advice given him by his "experts". So Leonard can be "admired" for having come clean but Steckling still needs some soap! And his son carries on the lies.




top topics



 
41
<< 6  7  8    10  11 >>

log in

join