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

a reply to: JimOberg

I'm not I have conducted my own research over many years with the information available ,as you state some far more credible than others and it's MY OPINION that something is going on we have simply been kept in the dark about.

What would it take for you to change your view? Seeing something for yourself? Obama live on T.V claiming he's friends with an Alien? Or would you still claim it all to be a hoax?

My friend we may never know but there is no harm in believing

a reply to: Conspiracyclass

he don't need no alien friends, he has sluggy



funbox

a reply to: Conspiracyclass

Your lack of a response with even one link says it all.

originally posted by: Conspiracyclass
a reply to: JimOberg

I'm not I have conducted my own research over many years with the information available ,as you state some far more credible than others and it's MY OPINION that something is going on we have simply been kept in the dark about.

What would it take for you to change your view? Seeing something for yourself? Obama live on T.V claiming he's friends with an Alien? Or would you still claim it all to be a hoax?

My friend we may never know but there is no harm in believing

Fair question, gently posed, deserving reciprocal response -- my answer about what I would consider proof of ET contact is on my home page here: www.jamesoberg.com...

My studies of the spaceflight related UFO evidence, and the mass influence of space/missile events on witnesses, suggest constructive insights into a phenomenon which continues to baffle, confuse, and frustrate.

I desire to diminish bafflement, confusion, and frustration because I believe there are actual stimuli of genuine interest and importance in the body of reports. So far I've seen little evidence that too-easy 'belief' has made any progress in identifying and isolating those potential pearls.

The 'harm' of believing a false causation can be profound, if the actual causation is different. Any responses will be useless, or worse. Consider medieval medical practices. What harm did believing in them cause, for centuries?

In Mission Control we jumped onto all unusual apparitions or other detections, because mission success and crew survival could be -- and in several cases, WAS -- dependent on immediate diagnosis and response. In one awful case, the 2003 Columbia catastrophe, a critical observation was not made in time to allow repair or rescue efforts to begin.

Excess noise, or distractions, or false-interpretations, can in space lead to inadequate
[or non-existent] responses, and consequent disaster. I take that very personally, I knew the people who died.

Hahah.. this thread is hilarious.

Ats; the true star wars

People call rocks anything on this site. They call moon hills flying/hovering objects. Misinterpret or use false dialogue on Nasa missions.

Insane, people will try and force themselves to belive something that is incompletely verified whatsoever.

Using super grainy pictures of moonscapes, Mars rocks, artifacts, light/shadow affects..

The history of this website has so many of these types who think they NEED to believe based on poor and little evidence.

There is no evidence! That's what a cover up IS. Hide anything and manipulate the source before public domain release.
If indeed the agency that uses government funding and tax payer dollars in the billions, is as sinister behind the curtain as some belive.

Never A Straight Answer.

Regardless, there ARE unexplained anomalies, on the moon, on Mars, in space. There is shady and strange things in communication dialogue and the missions themselves, amongst NASA.

But too many people show belief, and their justification is poor sources or manipulated source with no trace. . That's what I'm getting a chuckle out of.

originally posted by: Elementalist....

Regardless, there ARE unexplained anomalies, on the moon, on Mars, in space. There is shady and strange things in communication dialogue and the missions themselves, amongst NASA.

But too many people show belief, and their justification is poor sources or manipulated source with no trace. . That's what I'm getting a chuckle out of.

Share the chuckles. What are some astronaut dialogs that seem shady and strange to you? Have you asked anybody who actually is familiar with normal astronaut dialog?

You aren't baffled by "order to stay vector", are you?

a reply to: JimOberg

Well said pal I'll check out your site who knows maybe you can educate me further that's why I'm here in the first place

a reply to: wmd_2008www.ufos-aliens.co.uk...

Here is a link

a reply to: JimOberg

I now know what it would take for you to believe, was a really good read and I will pass on the questions if I'm ever abducted

Going to research you whole site by the way really interesting

originally posted by: Conspiracyclass
a reply to: wmd_2008www.ufos-aliens.co.uk...

Here is a link

Click on the link you provided and try to watch the video, it's been removed I suggest YOU learn how some of the early Moon Probe images were taken and how they got back to Earth !

a reply to: wmd_2008

I was not linking the video,read the testimony of Eliane, you asked for a link, I provided one.... Happy Hunting

wow looking at the footage again I could not see what I saw before and that is a square boarder around the craft that was pixelated and now I have changed my view about the craft and my view is that it looks and could very well could be genuine and I think that the craft would have to have been seen by the crew it was close enough to be obvious

originally posted by: Conspiracyclass
a reply to: wmd_2008

I was not linking the video,read the testimony of Eliane, you asked for a link, I provided one.... Happy Hunting

So NOTHING NEW then!

Plenty of threads on here re that subject and the people involved do a quick search on here and you will find out.

Have a read at this post by JimOberg

www.abovetopsecret.com...

Why airbrush photos to then display in public via the net when you could choose never to show them and save yourself a lot of problems.

Many members on here are into photography (me for 35+ years) some are professionals, we spend lots lots of time setting up shots taking and editing pictures, some us from years ago using fully manual film cameras and working in our own darkroom to now using multi megapixel DSLR'S and photoshop etc

We have a good idea of the processes and pitfalls, all these claims re NASA pictures give us a good laugh considering some members that post this junk on here cannot even understand how shadows work.

originally posted by: Doozied
wow looking at the footage again I could not see what I saw before and that is a square boarder around the craft that was pixelated and now I have changed my view about the craft and my view is that it looks and could very well could be genuine and I think that the craft would have to have been seen by the crew it was close enough to be obvious

If you look through the thread you would have saw this gif by member Ectoplasm8



It's not a ufo !

originally posted by: Doozied
wow looking at the footage again I could not see what I saw before and that is a square boarder around the craft that was pixelated and now I have changed my view about the craft and my view is that it looks and could very well could be genuine and I think that the craft would have to have been seen by the crew it was close enough to be obvious

The following is meant as good-natured ribbing.....

a reply to: wmd_2008

Look you asked for a link I supplied a link, it's not upto me too change your views I am simply a student not a teacher but given all you experience which by the way I can only take your word on alot like Elaine,s testimony, I'm sure you came on this particular thread to help educate us.
I'm not being flippant either I am always happy to learn a new perspective on things Jims site was really interesting and I have taken some new ideas on board so far you simply say my opinion is wrong because you know more than me lmao
Not really a solid argument but hey thanks for participating have a beer on me

a reply to: Conspiracyclass

So what is YOUR opinion on this gif by member Ectoplasm8 then



As for my experience re photography I have no need to lie, I am old enough that I watched the Moon Landings on tv

If you look at some of my threads or my posts in this Members Astrophotography

You will get an idea I know what I am doing.

A few posts to confirm

www.abovetopsecret.com...

One of my images & how it was done and where it was taken.



15 pictures using DSS, they were taken with a 70-300 zoom lens at 210mm focal length but what really surprised me was the exposure was iso 1600 f4.5 for only 2 seconds each.

I don't have a tracking system and didn't want stars to trail hence the 2 seconds it turned out better than I thought it would more so considering I was in my back garden in the middle of 150 other houses and street lights.

For those that don't know it's M42 in Orion.

From another

This shows a major problem living in a built up area, I live in the middle of a housing estate of about 150 houses in a small town surrounded by some larger towns and within 10 miles of a major city.

This photo below is taken at f4, 20 secs at iso 3200, 18mm focal length. I used the high iso to really show the problem.

Orion in the center, Taurus top right and Sirius bottom left.



Yet with a little bit of editing.



I joined here to see some real evidence when I do I will back it, but like the many other members on here with long term photographic experience if we see BS we will say what and why we think it is.

a reply to: wmd_2008

A gif is a small animation for jokes as far as I'm aware, I don't think that it's a Ufo in the picture I never have.
NASA have to release something to the public as it's not privately owned but I'm not nieave enough to think they release anything of massive importance.
How do you explain the recurring background on the video of the moon landing? Or the incorrect shadow patterns?
In more recent photos exact rock formations appearing in photos of different areas?
The light pollution seems a major issue I have family on the Isle of Mull in Scotland where this is motion issue and you would be amazed at what you can see with your eyes alone.
Here is a hyperthetical question,let's say nasa found structures on any of the planets ,do you believe they would simply release that information ?
You have shown what can be done with a little editing can you imagine what they can do with the technology at their disposal?
Great pics btw

originally posted by: Conspiracyclass
let's say nasa found structures on any of the planets ,do you believe they would simply release that information ?

Absolutely, as their funding would likely increase exponentially, virtually instantaneously. Big bad gubment or not, most of the folks at NASA are just regular people like you and I (only with a much stronger background in science), and would drool at the possibility of finding and being able to confirm life outside of our planet.

a reply to: Conspiracyclass

Well lets start gif is a format for an image to be saved just like jpeg, bmp and a host of others.

There are NO shadow problems in NASA images only people who have a problem understanding shadows

Well I live in Scotland and have travelled to most parts of it due to my job, I have even been to the Galloway Dark Sky Park to take pictures and will take more this winter.

You have to remember the Apollo pics were taken over 40 years ago and shown then so they would not have the ability to do what we xan today.

Post a link to the images that puzzle you re shadows, rocks etc you will get sn explanation