Originally posted by Cygnific
One thing that bugs me is. Why if he is Aleena and very much younger he uses this 'numberthx1139@yahoo.com' as his youtube account email address.

He claims to be 76 years old. Now 'numberthx' it is suggesting something with a number (Probably a date). '1139 > 1931'

2007 - 1931 = 76

This is the kind of reasoning that makes hoaxes so easy.

numberthx1139 == means he is 76 years old! IT MATCHES! YAY!

If you calculate the position in the alphabet of every letter in all of his usernames (in alphabetic order), and then multiply all the vowels by 2, and replace all "A"s with "G"s, then, if you reverse the alphabet, and recalculate the letters indicated by the numbers you got (leave out the vowels this time), you will see that the word "THIZIZAHOAX" is spelled out. Of course, this will only work using the cryllic alphabet, and only after drinking 10 pints of lager.

Originally posted by Dantes

This is the kind of reasoning that makes hoaxes so easy.

numberthx1139 == means he is 76 years old! IT MATCHES! YAY!

If you calculate the position in the alphabet of every letter in all of his usernames (in alphabetic order), and then multiply all the vowels by 2, and replace all "A"s with "G"s, then, if you reverse the alphabet, and recalculate the letters indicated by the numbers you got (leave out the vowels this time), you will see that the word "THIZIZAHOAX" is spelled out. Of course, this will only work using the cryllic alphabet, and only after drinking 10 pints of lager.

No, your calculation is not matching "THIZIZAHOAX" so if you want to argue about my suggestion atleast come with a calculation that fits.

Did you drink the 10 pints?

Originally posted by Dantes
Did you drink the 10 pints?

No sorry, and i doubt it will help

I just noticed that he's removed the videos of the crew embarking, and the externals of the rocket on the launch structure. Wonder why.

[edit on 2/7/07 by Implosion]

He put up those two as tests for different video compressions. I'm more wandering how long it will be before his next "masterpeice" is uploaded.....

Originally posted by Spoodily
It looks like an aquarium filmed through a beaker of water...

Yea whats up with the waves? There's no wind on the moon!



ffffffaaaaakkkkkeeeeeeee!!!!

Thats the longest Aprils fool I've ever seen, he uploaded stuff until June and even gave an interview

The whole Apollo 20 story is very elaborate, he would have to fake dozens of details on different areas (leonov like logo, hires models, cameras, sounds, language, huge background-knowledge, ..)

And until now, he is NOT SELLING ANYTHING


what we need are REAL PROOFS

[edit on 18-8-2007 by Deloo]

[edit on 18-8-2007 by Deloo]

Dude, you can see small craters in areas where there should be nothing if it was a spacecraft: below the "nose" of the "ship". This and enhancement of the photo reveals nothing but continuity on the surface of that particular area, i.e., it's not an embedded object.

Retardafb has posted any more videos, the video of the "city" has been proven to be fake (an array of photos from Apollo 17 and audio from Apollo 15), the real identity of retiredafb points to a french photographer....... you do the math!

I'm off to read something more interesting.

Cheerio

The whole thing about these vids are that… no one has any way to prove them to be either real or fake.

I just found them about a week ago. You have to exhibit a healthy degree of doubt or you’ll get eaten for dinner on the web. But after reading all the disses, nobody has come across with anything but opinion. If you are going to dismiss them as fakes, use something more than how they look like miniatures to you... or that the angle/size doesn’t fit your scheme on how it ‘should’ look if it were real. Show some objectivity!

Fake? Yeah… probably. But you gotta give the devil his due... IF it is a fake. Honestly... no one else here could duplicate this unless they had a full-blown studio. Even good CGI doesn’t replicate this degree of detail and represent the technical standards of a quarter of a century ago.

You don’t have to believe to admit that anything is possible.

Originally posted by skeptical2012

Finally this guy states that there was a secret Apollo20 mission. I wonder how the heck they assemblied and launched a giagantic SaturnV rocket without thousands of people notice anything about it!

Assuming the launch site was Vandenberg, a secret launch would be no problem. Missile launches were and are a regular occurance. A night flight would only display an exhaust flare as it rose... locals would think nothing of it.

The rocket on the launch pad could be painted with various schemes to reduce its outline and confuse identification even in broad daylight... especially at a distance.

To prove this a fake, you need to find the small flaws... like the supposed 'mission patch'. Even blurred, fitting the names of the purported astronauts... except for Leonov, is nearly impossible.

Then there is the words of the author... 'retiredafb' at YouTube. Notice the use of grammar and punctuation. This is supposedly a guy from the old school when writing was an art... not a hobby for acronyms. His capitalization is really poor and so is his spelling. Not exactly your college educated Air Force lifer type.

But finally... there has been not a single word of denial from the one person who 'could' send this story packing: Alexi Leonov.

Never mind all that though, what do I know? I'm doggone near as old as Leonov. I know for a fact that I'm not young enough to know everything anymore...

...

Hi, new member beating a very very dead horse, but iv read every page on this topic over the past few hours, used every single piece of software I have access to, and have come to these conclusions about the videos presently viewable on the before mentioned youtube account.
The "Apollo 20 launch video" is NOT FAKE! I know what some of you are thinking/screaming into your monitors, but I have proof! With, I kid you not, a 0.00% chance of error, the clip "Apollo 20" launch is infact the Apollo 11 launch. Absolutely everything matched for one of the many views of this oh so publicized event. The flame pattern, color, sky glow, burn noise, radio chatter, even the "USA" writen in red on the side of the Saturn V rocket. The frames from the video of a rocket on tower was a Saturn 1B, no doubt about it. The preflight brief is just the same pictures you all have been kicking around put in a slide show.
Alexei Leonov, the only guy we can find information on in this story, was in charge of a training facility in russia at the time. Now this can be taken two ways, that there is no way he could have gone unnoticed for so long to train for such a mission, OR seeing as how it was a training facility itself, they could have just trained there. If it did happen, it was a big high-five for the russians im sure, seeing as how they had been grooming Leonov to be the first Russian on the moon for years. And yes, I understand it actualy adds credit to the story, in that the "Apollo 18" mission was a sort of interview to see if the russians and americans could work together, which, for a mission like this, Leonov would be their top pick. It also makes sense that a russian and an american would be the ones to do it, seeing as how there is no way in hell your going to get a rocket to the moon and back without the russians noticing. Pretty clever for a hoaxer. If you subscribe to the theory that the cold war was actualy just a PR cover for massive defence research and arms build up incase aliens attacked us, it would make sense the russians would send one of their own for a report.
Now the mission itself. Remember, they somehow supposedly got on this "alien craft" which appears over a mile long and retrieved a... I believe he called her a non-living person who was not dead... anyway, they got into this craft and kidnapped an alien zombie and took a head as a suvinear before hightailing it out. Not sure where they would have reenterd, but with the russians helping that wouldent be a problem.
Now the main video.. the fly over.. I am truely not sure what to make of it. its such a complex and mind blowingly real thing while at the same time lifting flags as a complete and utter hoax. the lense flares are clearly not natural, but the physics of the movement, the color shifts the landscape its all dead on. With the number of official photos showing an anomaly, i just cant help but wonder, maybe its the grain of truth in a sea of lies.
lets count them:
launch video, lie.
"white room" clearly fake, though very complex
preflight, slideshow, easy fake.
"city", mind-numbingly fake
flyover, shows signs of crappy CGI work, shows two frames for no reason which could easily have been edited out which both times identify it as apollo 11, while the actual flyover part shows it to not be... and the flyover itself... well i already coverd that.
its as if this guy went to such great lengths for the flyover clip. he found an anomaly, he got high res pictures of it and recreated it in a near perfect model, flimed a flyover, made sure to time it just right for lunar orbit, then made sure it moved the right way, jolted the right way, a true piece of art, and a story to match, a true lifes work. then he piled s*** on it and tossed it to us. Would it be possible to take a real video and edit it to look like a crappy fake? As in, the fly over is real, but made to look hoaxy, grouped with the very obviouse fakes to discredit?

who, why?

Using my so obviously strained and goofy crazy brain, I have come up with these possibilities.

The first being that its all real. This has already been proven false.
The second is its all fake.
Third, the story is real, the videos are not.
Fourth, some of the videos are real, others are not.
Fifth, the anomaly is real, everything else is not.

This leaves us with about four possibilities. I say about, because there should always be room for error when dealing with these sorts of things.

To reach a conclusion we must look to all information, and when it gets spooky, find the who and why. Given the level of complexity of the story alone, and the ratio of utter crap in the videos id say the third is a good option. The flyover video was pretty amazing though, as a large number of you have explained in far greater detail, so the fourth is best so far. Here is where we get into the who and why stuff. If this person knew about this anomaly, this secret mission, why would they bundle it with obviously fake media? The only reachable conclusions are: this person is a moron, or they were trying to discredit the story, or in the case of possibility #4, also to discredit this snippet of video. Ignoring the moron conclusion, for it would make for a very short response, I will follow the possiblity that the majority of the videos, as well as part of the story, were engineered to discredit the real parts. Who would want to discredit a Lunar anomaly? Depends on what that anomaly is. NASA seems a possible suspect, they do afterall have lots of moon photage we are not likely to see on youtube. They would also be able to film from the inside of an authentic craft with an Apollo 20 patch and a US/Russian flag taped up. They would certainly have Apollo 11 launch video, access to a white room, pictures from inside the Apollo 11 craft in return. Perhaps a large part of the story is true. Perhaps they feared a leak of information of post Apollo 17 clandestin flights, what with that generation geting old and chatty, and decided to pop the lid first, and add plenty of crazy on top so no one else would believe it. I doubt any of you know this saying, but you boil truth with a crack pot. If someone tomarow said they were on what ever crew retrieved the pod after reentry for apollo 20, would you take your time and investigate their every word and collaberate it with the present claims the best you could, or would you raise your fists to the sky and cry out "NOT THIS S*** AGAIN!"

It has been military policy to leak selective information, deluted with crazy junk, and after the public gets a taste of it, anything that smells of it from that day on is no more then a joke. Read the tabloids, sometimes you find some pretty interesting things. Granted, its usualy only a sentence or so per magazine but its a grain of truth non the less.

So, is this a misinformation campaign against moon flights after Apollo 17, or just a confusing hoax?

[edit on 18-10-2007 by karatos]

karatos,

"white room" clearly fake

what does you lead to this conclusion?
I think this is one of the most convincing parts for his story