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.

 

Must Read: UFO Fuel & Moon Bases - Breakthrough

page: 2
0
<< 1    3  4 >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Jul, 29 2005 @ 03:04 PM
link   
I highly doubt Neil Armstrong ever said anything remotely close to there being aliens on the moon...




posted on Jul, 29 2005 @ 03:41 PM
link   
www.ufos-aliens.co.uk... is the page I was speaking about. Its far more in depth and has many photos from those trips to the moon, confirmed



posted on Jul, 29 2005 @ 04:48 PM
link   

Originally posted by RemusUK
Because if we never went to the moon, none of this information is credible.


Agreed, but as I said this thread assumes we did go to the moon.

And if you are so sure why put an if your response?......



posted on Jul, 29 2005 @ 05:54 PM
link   
Think about what your saying. Even if we did not go to the moon, there has been THOUSANDS of THOUSANDS of photos from satellites of odd, glowing discs within craters which move around, disappear etc. NASA censors many of these. There is activity around the moon which is non - human, that’s a bloody fact. 2nd, if u don’t believe on grays then why are you a member of this site and posting under aliens and UFOs, plz use logic.


BTW Neil DID. And so did MANY other astronauts, and I find it hard to believe that we never landed on the moon on a single Apollo mission, regardless. VISIT THIS LINK ! , read it and then say what you just said!!!!!

Many of these posts are just following the bandwagon and saying BS, but use your own logic and not what other people said to understand what’s happening.

- DRAKE -

[edit on 29-7-2005 by drakefist]



posted on Jul, 29 2005 @ 06:05 PM
link   

Originally posted by Uncle Joe
Its easier to extract He3 from Jupiter, simply due to the scale of the place. If Aliens can travel light years between planets then its easy to mine Jupiter!


No. The size of the planet makes ZERO difference to the speed and efficiency of mining and extracting this isotope. Plz think about what you’re saying m8. Also the dark side of the moon faces the earth at ALL times, so its the perfect base for alien conquest, and does Jupiter have as much H3 back there as the moon? No. And, there's no way you could know this, or any human for that matter.
ps be sure to read the other posts in this thread, they have info.
-Drake



posted on Jul, 30 2005 @ 01:36 AM
link   
Hey drake, check out this thread... www.abovetopsecret.com...

Could this possibly prove your theory?



posted on Jul, 30 2005 @ 02:19 AM
link   
That object looks like a huge building. How could something natural be a completely perfect rectangle on all sides? Good Job again on that one GreatAncientWhiteDragon.

There is a huge amount of evidence from totally unaffiliated people about moon bases, strange rectangles, pyramids and other structures both large and small. Many people have sent clear, amazing images of such things that could alone prove their existence on the lunar surface to NASA. They would get the images back in about a month with a note saying it was due to a smudge on the mirror, etc. and the image would in every case be altered so that there was no evidence of intelligent life.

I think because so many people have found these irregularities -even someone on this very forum- it’s more than likely that it’s no joke. And supposing it is, I think we have found out just why they are so interested in our moon.
=drake=



posted on Aug, 1 2005 @ 02:01 PM
link   

Originally posted by drakefist
Think about what your saying. Even if we did not go to the moon, there has been THOUSANDS of THOUSANDS of photos from satellites of odd, glowing discs within craters which move around, disappear etc. NASA censors many of these. There is activity around the moon which is non - human, that’s a bloody fact. 2nd, if u don’t believe on grays then why are you a member of this site and posting under aliens and UFOs, plz use logic.


BTW Neil DID. And so did MANY other astronauts, and I find it hard to believe that we never landed on the moon on a single Apollo mission, regardless. VISIT THIS LINK ! , read it and then say what you just said!!!!!

Many of these posts are just following the bandwagon and saying BS, but use your own logic and not what other people said to understand what’s happening.

- DRAKE -

[edit on 29-7-2005 by drakefist]



Dude, dude, dude,


Where's you're source for all this information? The Internet? What a reliable source that is. If you think logically about all this instead of believing everything you read or hear then you might see where us 'level-heads' are coming from


[edit on 1-8-2005 by RemusUK]



posted on Aug, 1 2005 @ 02:45 PM
link   
This thread is getting whacky....

But assuming we did make it to the moon, then the original premise is feasible. Aliens could use the moon as a refueling base. None of the presently available information does anything more than support that hypothesis... nothing even remotely proves it though.

Is it easier to get the H3 from the moon rather than Jupiter? Of course! Look at the atmosphere on Jupiter. Who would land a craft there, rather than on the nice, quiet moon? Aliens may have advanced technology, but I doubt they have magic. Landing a craft on Jupiter would require immensely greater technology than on the moon, making the moon a good choice (especially since there is intelligent life nearby, which is probably why they came here anyway).

Did we actually land a man on the moon? Go to another thread. I say yes, but I wasn't actually there and watched it all on TV as a wee lad.

To be honest, this thread should focus on the actual "news" and not the ancillary conspiracy theories. Since the actual "news" is very old, the title of the thread should be changed. There's no breakthrough here.



posted on Aug, 1 2005 @ 05:52 PM
link   

Originally posted by RemusUK


Dude, dude, dude,


Where's you're source for all this information? The Internet? What a reliable source that is. If you think logically about all this instead of believing everything you read or hear then you might see where us 'level-heads' are coming from


[edit on 1-8-2005 by RemusUK]


It's the huge amount of different sites on the net and forums, not their location that makes what they are saying more likley to be true. Yeah, some stuff on the internet is bogus BUT most people are just like you and I, trying to seek the truth. Only some are liars...



posted on Aug, 1 2005 @ 06:48 PM
link   
We landed on the moon, and actually were racing the Russains to get there. I have read reports that many of the astronauts thougth they saw things there. This may have been, and we wil never know.

What I can't believe is that no one beleives we are 'on' the moon right now. IF we can hit a comet with a satellite, we can land on the moon. It is just very expensive, and there is no real need anymore. It was a race, case closed, we won because we sabotaged the Russian moon program to make sure we won, and we did, by hours.

news.bbc.co.uk...

Here is a quick timeline. Russia got there in 59, and no one landed for another 10 years. I beleive we found out they were stealing our technology based on the fact they experienced some of the same set backs we did, and somehow 'we' learned from them.



posted on Aug, 1 2005 @ 08:04 PM
link   

Originally posted by Uncle Joe
Its easier to extract He3 from Jupiter, simply due to the scale of the place. If Aliens can travel light years between planets then its easy to mine Jupiter!


It's probably more efficient for them to mine the moon since the moon has very little gravity. Jupiter is immense. Dealing with the gravity while mining for 3He is probably a complicated affair. Or not. I imagine that if there are aliens with civilizations on "our" moon who can travel vast interstellar distances in a reasonable time, then they could probably mine whatever they want without much difficulty.

The "scale" you speak of is directly proportional to the gravity.

As for the moon landings. I believe they happened. It would be too massive and cynical a scam to suggest that America's best scientists and minds couldn't make that giant leap for mankind. Why the moon landings stopped so suddenly is another question. The dark side is forever obscured to us due to the lockstep of the moon's rotation around the Earth. And it would be an absolutely ideal place for them to set up shop and observe our every infinitessimal develpment. Must be entertaining watching us attempt to leave our cradle slowly but surely.



posted on Aug, 1 2005 @ 08:35 PM
link   
From what I read it takes around one cubic kilometer of moon dirt to get 1 pound of helium 3. and yes it is potentially amazingly useful. Hopefully we'll get more than grainy pictures and post cards from outer space some day. But I am not holding my breath yet



posted on Aug, 1 2005 @ 09:25 PM
link   

Originally posted by RemusUK
Man has never even set foot on the moon! NASA lied because the US had to be the winners of the Space Race that was going on between The US and Russia.

Do you seriously believe that they knew how to land a manned rocket on the moon AND blast it back to the Earth?! IN THE 60's??!! They can't even do that now!! Do you also think there would be any survivors in a pod burning through the Earth's atmosphere at devistating speed?! Dude it would be a million degrees in there!!!

As for these so called radio broadcasts, can you confirm their legitimacy?


This opinion (humans never landed on the moon) has been debunked over and over. We DID land on the moon, we DID return to Earth. The fact that we can't do it now has NOTHING to do with our technical ability to do it, we (industrialized society), do not think it is WORTH going to the moon, very different reasons.

You couldn't survive re-entry? What about the space shuttle? How about the Russian Soyuz re-entry vehicles? Are you saying that the Columbia crew really didn't die when their shuttle broke apart? They were never on it, they were killed to prevent them from talking? Sheesh. FYI, the heat shielding of the space shuttle sees about 1200 to 2300 Degrees Fahrenheit, not a million degrees. It works because the ablative cermic it is made of (tiles) sheds the heat nearly as rapidly as it absorbs it and keeps the lander frame less than 350 degrees (the melting point of aluminum). The surface of the sun is (I think) 11,000 or 12,000 Degrees F.



posted on Aug, 1 2005 @ 10:11 PM
link   
Ran across this while looking for the 1959 photos that the Soviet satellite took of the darkside of the moon.

www.greatdreams.com...



posted on Aug, 1 2005 @ 10:43 PM
link   

Originally posted by RemusUK
Man has never even set foot on the moon! NASA lied because the US had to be the winners of the Space Race that was going on between The US and Russia.

Do you seriously believe that they knew how to land a manned rocket on the moon AND blast it back to the Earth?! IN THE 60's??!! They can't even do that now!! Do you also think there would be any survivors in a pod burning through the Earth's atmosphere at devistating speed?! Dude it would be a million degrees in there!!!

As for these so called radio broadcasts, can you confirm their legitimacy?


Why dont you take a look at some posts on this site in regards to the moon landings authenticity. And ya in the 60's we definitely could have, its just physics, which you clearly know nothing about, sending things into orbit is not hard, landing is harder, but with the most brilliant minds in the world of the time it is an achievable task.



posted on Aug, 2 2005 @ 02:43 AM
link   

Originally posted by CaptAvatar
You couldn't survive re-entry? What about the space shuttle? How about the Russian Soyuz re-entry vehicles? Are you saying that the Columbia crew really didn't die when their shuttle broke apart? They were never on it, they were killed to prevent them from talking? Sheesh. FYI, the heat shielding of the space shuttle sees about 1200 to 2300 Degrees Fahrenheit, not a million degrees. It works because the ablative cermic it is made of (tiles) sheds the heat nearly as rapidly as it absorbs it and keeps the lander frame less than 350 degrees (the melting point of aluminum). The surface of the sun is (I think) 11,000 or 12,000 Degrees F.


You're bang on with those heat numbers for the shuttle during reentry. The tiles experience different heat levels on different surfaces.

Thousands of tiles of various sizes and shapes cover a large percentage of the Space Shuttle Orbiter's exterior surface, although over the two decades of Shuttle operation, many tiles have been removed from the upper wings and fuselage of the Orbiter and replaced with a lighter and less expensive material. Some tiles have a side dimension of six inches (15 centimeters) or less; others are about eight inches (20 centimeters) on a side. There are two main types of tiles, referred to as Low-temperature Reusable Surface Insulation (LRSI) and High-temperature Reusable Surface Insulation (or HRSI).

LRSI tiles cover relatively low-temperature areas of one of the orbiters, the Columbia, where the maximum surface temperature runs between 700 and 1,200 degrees Fahrenheit (370 and 650 degrees Celsius), primarily on the upper surface of fuselage around the cockpit. These tiles have a white ceramic coating that reflects solar radiation while in space, keeping the Columbia cool. HRSI tiles cover areas where the maximum surface temperature runs between 1,200 and 2,300 degrees Fahrenheit (650 and 1,260 degrees Celsius). They have a black ceramic coating, which helps them radiate heat during reentry. Most of these tiles cover the bottom of the Orbiter. Both LRSI and HRSI tiles are manufactured from the same material and their primary difference is the coating.

Two other types of tiles, known as FRCI and TUCI (Fibrous Refractory Composite Insulation and Toughened Unipiece Fibrous Insulation), which protect against temperatures between 1,200 and 2,300 degrees Fahrenheit (650 and 1,260 degrees Celsius), are also used in small numbers. FRCI is used in a few areas and TUCI is used on the extreme back of the Orbiter, near the engines. The forward nose cap is made of a material called Reinforced Carbon Carbon, or RCC. RCC covers the highest temperature areas of the Shuttle and is also used on the leading edges of the wings.

Sources: Shuttle Thermal Protection System (TPS), How Astronauts Survive Reentry, Insulation for the Space Shuttle, Space Shuttle Columbia disaster, Space Shuttle Science, reentry thermal protection.

-=-

But, back to the original post, and some of the followups, and my response to it/them.



Originally posted by drakefist*Keep in mind, all the facts here are backed up: its real.


Neil Armstrong never came forward with anything regarding UFOs on the moon.

Every website and every book I've read regarding Neil Armstrong's supposed quotes end with the same problem. Everything is quoted from "an anonymous professor" and from "a source who wanted to remain nameless" -- gosh how convenient is that? They're all the same sort of baloney - first they make up a story, and then they toss in a "professor" (because obviously somebody that is a professor makes us believe they're that much more credible) but they never, ever, name a source or a person. Never. Even when sites repeat the exact same stuff, and attribute some quotes to "a Dr. Aleksandr Kasantsev" (same wording every time) there is no mention of who this Dr is, or if he actually exists. I have never been able to confirm or find anyone by that name associated with any NASA project, any Soviet project, any university or college or any astronomical observatory. Strange isn't it?

But that's not the best part. Lets look at Vladimir Azhazha and where he comes from. This is interesting stuff!

Where did all this Neil Armstrong "quote" originate from? A story in The National Enquirer.
Fittingly enough, the ultimate word (too date!) in these Apollo 11 absurdities lies with the old familiar National Enquirer, the weekly grocery store tabloid known for its Hollywood gossip, psychic predictions, miracle medical cures, and flying saucer stories. "Aliens on Moon When We Landed" was the screaming banner headline on the September 11, 1979 issue (the same story made the September 9 Sunday Mirror in London and was subsequently endorsed in the backdated July-August 1979 issue of the prestigious British journal, Flying Saucer Review).

"The astronauts saw UFOs and even photographed them," wrote the authors (Eric Faucher, Ellen Goodstein, and Henry Gris), "but the stupifying close encounter has been kept completely under wraps by NASA until now. . . (they evidently hadn't read -- or hadn't believed -- the Cronkite interview in their own paper!). NASA's coverup was so massive that the news has taken ten years to reach the American public -- and had to be first disclosed by Soviet scientists, who found out about it two years ago."

And that's the catch: the National Enquirer, in a man-bites-dog reversal of standard practice, had been itself a victim of somebody else's news hoax. The source was none other than Vladimir Azhazha, who somehow neglected to mention to Henry Gris, his contact, that the story was based entirely, not on official Soviet sources, but on Chatelain's strange 'ancient astronauts' book! "I am absolutely certain this episode took place," Azhazha told Gris (who is fluent in Russian) during a telephone interview. "According to our information . . . his (Armstrong's) message was never heard by the public -- because NASA censored it."

According to Gris (who was soon thereafter discharged from the staff of the National Enquirer). Azhazha "refused to identify the source of his information -- but he and other Russian space experts say the encounter has been common knowledge among Soviet scientific circles."

To close the loop by swallowing its own tail/tale, the National Enquirer then quoted from . . . Maurice Chatelain, "a former top consultant to NASA," who supposedly corroborated independently the Soviet version of the story! Also testifyi ng were leading UFOlogists Leonard Stringfield of MUFON ("If the government rele ased one little bit of what happened on the moon, it would be the story of the century" is how he's quoted, but he subsequently denied saying anything like that); John Schuessler ("I work with astronauts at NASA and have heard the story from them" is how he's quoted, but he has since angrily charged that Ellen Goodstein dropped the "never" which he spoke before "heard.")


"At a meeting with Neil Armstrong I asked him about 'flying saucers.' "We didn't see them," answered the astronaut; "and with what we, cosmonauts and astronauts, are doing in space, that's a real wonder." Vladimir Gubarev, Pravda, March 2 1980

(sources: UFOs and Outer Space Mysteries , Apollo 11 Lunar Surface Journal, Apollo 11-The entire air-to-ground communications)

The 70's and 80's saw stories of Gordon Cooper apparently claiming he saw UFOs while in space and that UFO was tracked by Australian observatories and all recorded by NBC. All of that was lies, and he said so many times including when he was interviewed by Art Bell, "No, somebody made a lot of money selling … lies on that one." Gordon Cooper was also an outspoken proponent of the existence of extra terrestrials and was convinced the government was covering them (UFOs) up.

But the fact remains, the same websites that keep spouting the nonsense about Armstrong, Lovell, etc., also spout nonsense about Cooper - and Cooper believed in UFOs and claimed to have seen one in the early 50s (here on Earth, while flying). Yet the stories all these UFO sites post, and the quotes they all quote are all fabrications. Go figure.

I've heard hours (literally) of HAM radio recordings from private citizens over the years of the Apollo missions (I'm funny like that, I find recordings/videos/photos/etc from the Apollo program exciting and wish I'd been part of it). The thing that I do not understand, however, is with all those thousands of HAM operators out there, all listening LIVE to the Apollo missions, and dozens of them recording the whole time -- why hasn't ONE single HAM operator stepped forward to corroborate these stories? Why isn't there a recording of these supposed conversations about ufos and alien objects from the moon?

I can tell you why -- it's all made up to sell supermarket tabloids and books!



[edit on 2-8-2005 by CatHerder]



posted on Aug, 2 2005 @ 03:56 AM
link   

Originally posted by lost_shaman

Originally posted by drakefist
Think about this, will the aliens (supposing they already are harvesting it) allow us to leech some?


Why would they stop us? Its our Moon!



Why was there always activity around our landings on the moon if it would not be a problem?


I think it most likely had nothing to do with 3He. It would seem "They " like to watch what we are doing , no matter if its on Earth in Space or on the Moon!


Perhaps beccause they have more powerfull weapons and they want the He3. Or perhaps it isn't our moon at all, i mean, if we only got there with the first moon landing, then we didn't 'own' it until then, and of course.. if the aliens were there first, I think they wouldn't like us claiming it suddenly.



posted on Aug, 2 2005 @ 05:05 AM
link   

Originally posted by RemusUK
Dude, dude, dude,

Where's you're source for all this information? The Internet? What a reliable source that is. If you think logically about all this instead of believing everything you read or hear then you might see where us 'level-heads' are coming from



OK, so we ignore all sources of information on the internet, can you tell me where you get your evidence for debunking the lunar landing's from?

[edit on 2-8-2005 by Koka]



posted on Aug, 2 2005 @ 06:53 AM
link   

Originally posted by CaptAvatar

Originally posted by RemusUK
Man has never even set foot on the moon! NASA lied because the US had to be the winners of the Space Race that was going on between The US and Russia.

Do you seriously believe that they knew how to land a manned rocket on the moon AND blast it back to the Earth?! IN THE 60's??!! They can't even do that now!! Do you also think there would be any survivors in a pod burning through the Earth's atmosphere at devistating speed?! Dude it would be a million degrees in there!!!

As for these so called radio broadcasts, can you confirm their legitimacy?


Are you saying that the Columbia crew really didn't die when their shuttle broke apart? They were never on it, they were killed to prevent them from talking? Sheesh. FYI, the heat shielding of the space shuttle sees about 1200 to 2300 Degrees Fahrenheit, not a million degrees. It works because the ablative cermic it is made of (tiles) sheds the heat nearly as rapidly as it absorbs it and keeps the lander frame less than 350 degrees (the melting point of aluminum). The surface of the sun is (I think) 11,000 or 12,000 Degrees F.


I ain't saying anything about the columbia crew. That was a horrific accident. If I'm saying it I'd have said it, a spade's a spade with me. So WTF are you on about?

I'm on about the fact that man has never been to the moon, due to the usual facts like the US flag 'blowing in the wind' and the landing site being 'lit up like a film set', that sort of stuff.

Yeah I did say 'a million degrees' I was exhaggerating, but it's still too hot.







 
0
<< 1    3  4 >>

log in

join