NASA’s 1971 Apollo 15 Video Clip Shows UFO Parked On Lunar Surface Observing Moon Landing, (?)

originally posted by: taoistguy

What if the ufo has been altered to look like a hill?

What if the hill has been altered to make room for the UFO disguised as a hill?


I just blew your mind.

a reply to: draknoir2

What if the UFO has been altered to look like the hill that's been altered to look like a UFO that's been altered to look like a hill?

My head hurts.

originally posted by: AdmireTheDistance


My head hurts.

Must have something to do with the eyeball.

And take my advice: avoid aftershave.

originally posted by: taoistguy


No, I do get it. I'm not that thick. He's saying there were trees but they are gone now. Hence, he can't give a picture.

No YOU don't Google Ent's and see how that refers to trees and what Springer said

Here i will save you the time.

Ents are a race of beings in J. R. R. Tolkien's fantasy world Middle-earth who closely resemble trees

LOL yeah OK !


If were to be anything ....

it Might as well be American Captured NAZI Vrils ...

Or the NAZI Base on the Moon .. LOL

originally posted by: wmd_2008

originally posted by: taoistguy


No, I do get it. I'm not that thick. He's saying there were trees but they are gone now. Hence, he can't give a picture.

No YOU don't Google Ent's and see how that refers to trees and what Springer said

Here i will save you the time.

Ents are a race of beings in J. R. R. Tolkien's fantasy world Middle-earth who closely resemble trees

Tolkien was an academic. He musta had a telescope.

originally posted by: wmd_2008

originally posted by: taoistguy


No, I do get it. I'm not that thick. He's saying there were trees but they are gone now. Hence, he can't give a picture.

No YOU don't Google Ent's and see how that refers to trees and what Springer said

Here i will save you the time.

Ents are a race of beings in J. R. R. Tolkien's fantasy world Middle-earth who closely resemble trees

It's obvious that tolkien knew about the trees and adapted it for his book. Anyhow, he was right about the wizards and palantirs.

originally posted by: Springer
a reply to: taoistguy

Really? You want to leave this post up for all of history?
What if the trees started walking around grunting like, well I don't know, Ents?

I am not going to tell you my name, not yet at any rate.' A queer half-knowing, half-humorous look came with a green flicker into his eyes. 'For one thing it would take a long while: my name is growing all the time, and I've lived a very long, long time; so my name is like a story. Real names tell you the story of things they belong to in my language, in the Old Entish as you might say. It is a lovely language, but it takes a very long time saying anything in it, because we do not say anything in it, unless it is worth taking a long time to say, and to listen to.”

www.goodreads.com...

-yes yes off topic but there's something about the ents.
Maybe they could teach a person or two here about not being too ...hasty...

I don't doubt for a second that the greys were observing the men on that mission because I do believe that the moon is home to the greys but looking at the footage close up I can see that the ufo looks like it could have been added in there is a faint boarder line around the craft that looks different to the surrounding footage

Well edgar mitchell, believes in the existence of aliens but claims he has never seen one and he has been to the moon.

originally posted by: AdmireTheDistance
a reply to: Ectoplasm8

Excellent job! Anyone still want to say it's a "UFO"?

Yes, I still want to say it's a UFO.

In the debunking photo, there is a hill present. In the UFO picture, why is there no hill visible, only the object? Because it is not a hill, it is a UFO.





Here is another screen capture from the video.

You are delusional if you think that object is part of the moon, it has a clearly defined shape, much different color, clear underside shadow.......



I encourage anyone new to the thread to watch the video and make up their own mind, start at about 2:50 in:

Another good example of how illusions and the desire to believe deceive people into wrongheaded conclusions. It should be clear to anybody looking at this thread it's a hill not a ufo, but apparently not.

Despite that, I think there're too many witnesses to UFOs for them all to be illusions and desires. It only takes 1. While the universe is a big place, I believe ET's should be out there and probably are watching us distantly, unless we truly are alone. And yet unless convincing evidence emerges--showing this to be the case--it's difficult to entertain as I age. Sure, there might be 1 genuine case and that might in fact explain why we do not have the evidence, but to rely on it's foolish. Much much better to spend our time on worthwhile activities which actually have supporting evidence. We wouldn't be at the doorstep of space if we hadn't been practical.

originally posted by: PlanetXisHERE

In the debunking photo, there is a hill present. In the UFO picture, why is there no hill visible, only the object? Because it is not a hill, it is a UFO.

The part of the 'hill' that is missing is mostly a crater hidden in shadow. It's the bit that is partly obscured by the rover antennae.

a reply to: onebigmonkey
You've already stated all you can onebigmonkey. The people who choose to believe it's a UFO aren't going to change their viewpoint with your repeated replies. They might come to see the genuineness of your posts and appreciate the truthfulness someday, but it's not today neither is it likely soon. In my eyes, they're still children and cannot see.

Fortunately the children are not running things. Or are they?

originally posted by: jonnywhite
Another good example of how illusions and the desire to believe deceive people into wrongheaded conclusions. It should be clear to anybody looking at this thread it's a hill not a ufo, but apparently not.

Despite that, I think there're too many witnesses to UFOs for them all to be illusions and desires. It only takes 1. While the universe is a big place, I believe ET's should be out there and probably are watching us distantly, unless we truly are alone. And yet unless convincing evidence emerges--showing this to be the case--it's difficult to entertain as I age. Sure, there might be 1 genuine case and that might in fact explain why we do not have the evidence, but to rely on it's foolish. Much much better to spend our time on worthwhile activities which actually have supporting evidence. We wouldn't be at the doorstep of space if we hadn't been practical.

I have no desire to believe anything except what my own eyes tell me.

Of course the official NASA picture shows a hill, but the view in the video is different and clearly shows a UFO.

a reply to: onebigmonkey

Why is there a shadow on the underside of the UFO in the screen shot from the video and not from the official NASA picture?

Why is there space between the UFO and the ground?





I don't see anything obscured in this picture or blocked, there is just no hill where there should be one if there really was a hill there:

originally posted by: PlanetXisHERE
a reply to: onebigmonkey

Why is there a shadow on the underside of the UFO in the screen shot from the video and not from the official NASA picture?

Why is there space between the UFO and the ground?

There isn't, on both counts.

originally posted by: AdmireTheDistance

originally posted by: PlanetXisHERE
a reply to: onebigmonkey

Why is there a shadow on the underside of the UFO in the screen shot from the video and not from the official NASA picture?

Why is there space between the UFO and the ground?

There isn't, on both counts.

You're denying what is clearly seen in the pictures?

originally posted by: PlanetXisHERE

originally posted by: AdmireTheDistance

originally posted by: PlanetXisHERE
a reply to: onebigmonkey

Why is there a shadow on the underside of the UFO in the screen shot from the video and not from the official NASA picture?

Why is there space between the UFO and the ground?

There isn't, on both counts.

You're denying what is clearly seen in the pictures?

Your're denying what has been shown to be unseen in the picture with other pictures.

Just admit that nothing will sway you from your personal belief that the hill is a flying saucer... sometimes.

originally posted by: PlanetXisHERE

originally posted by: AdmireTheDistance

originally posted by: PlanetXisHERE
a reply to: onebigmonkey

Why is there a shadow on the underside of the UFO in the screen shot from the video and not from the official NASA picture?

Why is there space between the UFO and the ground?

There isn't, on both counts.

You're denying what is clearly seen in the pictures?

Not at all. I'm entirely accepting of what's in the pictures: a hill. What I'm denying, is the ridiculous notion that shadows on an extremely poor resolution image somehow depict anything other than what is plainly evident in the higher resolution images of the same area. What I'm denying, is ignorance. You should try it sometime.