It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.

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

Thank you.


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


Italian Astronomers stumble upon UFO on the Moon

page: 4
<< 1  2  3    5  6  7 >>

log in


posted on Sep, 26 2007 @ 11:25 AM
I'm with shots here,

Can the source be verified?

Looks kind of like a black sharpie dot that's been manipulated to move across in the shown path. Possibly could be actual astronomers just mapping a certain route or pattern, tracing a lunar crack or something. Someone else gets a hold of it and changes the story.

It just looks too artificial to me, the "shadow" that is.

I am open to any possibility though.

posted on Sep, 26 2007 @ 11:39 AM
As most know by now I'm not one to jump to conclusions but this video is very impressive. It does seem to maneuver like a craft and can't be written off as space-ice in my opinion.

Nice find!

You debunkers out can do better than you have on this video. "Maybe it's a craft but prove it's alien!" Classic.

posted on Sep, 26 2007 @ 11:51 AM

Originally posted by cris_y2k_se
how can they claim venus if the object does that crazy turn...

great post !!!...i wonder what comes up from this...i wonder if it will make it to main stream media

Well i thought it would be cool to email Sky and see if they were interested, lets see.

Heres my email.

Italian Astronomers stumble upon UFO on the Moon

Ok this is hitting forums on the net, and the video is quite impressive, some posters on this site im about to link you too, wonder if this would hit mainstream media, so i thought i would highlight this for you.

[edit on 26-9-2007 by Denied]

[edit on 26-9-2007 by Denied]

posted on Sep, 26 2007 @ 11:55 AM
I got a automated response, would be cool if they run this.

Thank you for contacting Sky News.

If you have sent in a comment on a news story, please make sure you have
included your name and where you are emailing us from. (We appreciate that
you may have done so already.)

We reserve the right to edit all contributions before broadcast or use on
our website.

posted on Sep, 26 2007 @ 12:12 PM
I think the op video is quite interesting, either a fake or an actual ufo (since it changes direction etc)

my comment here is about that shadow over the rover thingy: read a bit further on their site and apparently the mars face is a message in ancient heiroglyphics, it means:

"the truth is out there"

ahem... perhaps a joke me thinks?

posted on Sep, 26 2007 @ 12:28 PM

Originally posted by lee anoma
As most know by now I'm not one to jump to conclusions but this video is very impressive. It does seem to maneuver like a craft and can't be written off as space-ice in my opinion.

Nice find!

You debunkers out can do better than you have on this video. "Maybe it's a craft but prove it's alien!" Classic.

Was you on the "craft"? There is no proof its a craft of any kind lol. Its a shadow of something at the most and thats it.

posted on Sep, 26 2007 @ 01:15 PM

Originally posted by onthefence81
Was you on the "craft"? There is no proof its a craft of any kind lol. Its a shadow of something at the most and thats it.

No sir, I was not. Never claimed to be.

I never said it was a craft so if you want to "relax" and "re-read", feel free.
You may be surprised.

posted on Sep, 26 2007 @ 01:17 PM
First of all, it's not "Italian Astronomers". It's an "Italian Amateur Astronomer", Alberto Mayer.

Here's an interview with him. In Italian.

Babel translation...

29 June 2007, hours 09.50

How many times are capitato to feel to speak to us about strange sights, objects that sfrecciano fast crossing the celestial time, unexpected flares in a serene night or fascinating drawn near planetary conjunctions; but for the overwhelming majority draft of natural phenomena scientifically is tried to you. Small percentage of events remains however one that leave a aura mystery their shoulders, in part cleared or scientifically adapts to you.

Recently a our beloved gotten passionate reader astrofilo and of meteorology like many of we, has accidentally captured during one
resumption astronomical video, a "object identified" not R-in.transito on the lunar disc.

We propose you the integral interview to our Alberto reader Mayer, than us illustrer?eglio the phenomenon of which?tato witness,
exposing its opinion to us with respect to the possible nature of the object.

WRITING: then Mr. Alberto Mayer, as it has made to characterize and to resume the appeared mysterious object in skies of the north-west?

ALBERTO: The evening of the 29 you open them, I was proceeding to the putting to fire of one video camera applied to a telescope. The high blowup and the elevated atmospheric turbulence, rendered complicated the procedure than put to fire rather. The image of the Moon appeared tremolante, but I perceived endured the presence of a black dot on the border of our satellite. At the moment I thought was be a matter of soil, present powder particles on the sensor of the video camera. But later on to a pi?ccurata observation I became account that also the dot traslava slowly and introduced the typical distortions produced from the bad one seeing (atmospheric turbulence). To that point I convulsamente began a po' to start the resumption, with the hope to obtain stable images the pi?itide and possible.

WRITING: We can understand the emotion of that moment, the tension to make one moved false, with the risk to lose the collected data and
the knowledge to assist to something of unusual. What has thought, of what could be dealt?

ALBERTO: in before struck I have thought next to a geostazionario satellite in phase of librazione, or to the transit of a sounding balloon for
survey of meteorological data, but at the moment I thought to frame the object in the better possible way, annotating the relative data coordinated you space-thunderstorms.

WRITING: Therefore once carried out the resumption has elaborated the filmato one so as to to render it the pi?efinito one possible. But which conclusions?iunto after to have analyzed to the relative resumption video and data you to the object?

ALBERTO: The first hypothesis, cio?uella of the geostazionario satellite?tata discarded after one first analysis of the data, even if in effects the area in examination coincided with the trajectory of a GeoSync satellite, but they did not square the dimensions, in fact the object must have had the dimensions of approximately a kilometer and the thesis of the satellite was improponibile. The second hypothesis, and cio?l sounding balloon, seemed the pi?lausibile at first, but also in this case, based on trigonometrical calculations, they did not square n?e perspective dimensions and the much less timetable of the sight, too much far away from the launch carried out from the airport bases.

WRITING: Therefore we are of forehead to an object not identified, a possible UFO?

ALBERTO: After years of observations, of nights passed to observe and to photograph the celestial time, I have matured the personal opinion that
the universe could accommodate million if not billions life shapes, from the pi?lementari shapes to those said cosi "intelligent".
The structure of the?ostanzialmente uniform universe and, for how much we know, the stars all obey to the same physical laws and
they possess all the same chemical composition. The present conditions on the Earth, that they have allowed the development of the life from the microbes until we could turn out rare rather, but to allegate ours "unicit?mi seem presuntuoso somewhat. To support the thesis of a rich universe of life however, does not want to say to accept the fact that averse shapes of life run about indisturbate in our skies, with the scope to study, to analyze to us to us, making fun of itself of we with strange designs on the grain or sporadic apparitions, prerogative of little elect ones. Firmly they are convinced that ci?he I have filmato does not have null to that to make with fantascientifici you omit greens in tries of paparazzi.

WRITING: But then of what draft; qual'?a pi?lausibile theory in order to explain such phenomenon?

ALBERTO: Often, when it is found to us of forehead to mysterious facts, they are the pi?emplici explanations to reveal of the true nature.
Supported from the group Astrofili Sheratan that has entusiasticamente asked opinions average world, they have been man hand set aside the satellitari theories, of the sounding balloons and strange flying objects, and?revalsa the hypothesis less pi?mana intriguer but.

To the end of this long vicissitude, it could echo between the public squares of the Italy North I plant deprived of hope of a child who?isto
to escape from the hands its loved balloon. Per?on there?lcuna certainty in merit...

posted on Sep, 26 2007 @ 01:37 PM
Here's Nick Pope talking on Sky News in june 07.
Click on video on the right.

[edit on 26-9-2007 by Denied]

[edit on 26-9-2007 by Denied]

posted on Sep, 26 2007 @ 01:48 PM
Interesting vid. Thanks for posting it. Quite a few theories can be debunked right off the bat imho. A fly, bug or optical spot on the lens or close to the telescope wouldn't even show on the camera. Focal point reason. A finger or branch 10 feet away from the lens would barely be seen across the image as a slight haze when focal point is as far as that. Give it a try with binoculars or a telescope.

Change in direction by the "object" also tells of a non natural event. A meteorite, satellite can't change direction like that. Which leaves only a few alternative and logical theories. The "object" is real and near the moon or the "object" is a hoax. Can't download the hi-res video from the IP address for some reason... However, the lack of shadows of the object/blob/spot from the low-res video is intriguing, and does raise a few alternatives. If the "object" is close enough to the ground, you wouldn't see the shadow. If it were the shadow itself being tracked, depending on altitude, that shadow would have been diffused to the point of not being noticeable. So back to a different theory, cloaked object flying not to far from the surface at high speed

Entertaining, nonetheless

As for the Pathfinder "shadow" going above it and Sojourner, if you look at the video enough times, there is an unnatural path to it, as in when it gets off the rover there seems to be a shift in the position, king of a non-linear zigzag path to it. So I think that one is a hoax.

edit: typos...

[edit on 26-9-2007 by whatsthatthingy]

posted on Sep, 26 2007 @ 01:50 PM
More analysis here on a newsgroup. Includes a link to a zip file full of goodies regarding this case.

Click me

And I won't name names but why do some of you come in to this thread and post content that has zero relationship to the case? I just sat through video of Nick Pope NOT talking about this case. WHY?

[edit on 26-9-2007 by IAttackPeople]

posted on Sep, 26 2007 @ 02:04 PM
This object moved on the surface of the moon. If you look closely what it reached the huge crater, it drops and comes back up again. Interesting post OP, how did you come about this video?

posted on Sep, 26 2007 @ 02:25 PM
If the object is a shadow being cast on the surface of a spherical moon, wouldn't we expect the shadow to become increasingly stretched and more elliptical as it gets closer to the horizon?

If you examine the footage at around 1:44 the shadow seems to maintain it's circular appearance.

posted on Sep, 26 2007 @ 02:37 PM
It's probably an Eagle trying to find Moonbase Alpha !!
But seriously joking apaert, it does look rather interesting. One of these days we are gonna snap something so undeniable that NASA and co CANt shrug it off as being a blip, CGI or whatever.....

posted on Sep, 26 2007 @ 02:53 PM
I emailed Mr. Alberto Mayer,the guy who filmed the UFO .
He very kindly answered to me in short time.

(my mail in-box

the object only "apparently" changes its path: we can see the change of path if we do not consider that the focus was on the Moon. But, since the Moon was/is NOT still, and the focus was on the Moon, the apparent result is similar to the one of an object which changes path. The object NEVER changed its path: just a few times changed its speed. We debated it some time ago: at the discussion partecipated even the French scientist who discovered one of the newest moons of Saturn: after the discussion and the scientific analysis of the technical data, we assested that it was most likely a balloon which diameter was between 11 and 15 inches, at an altitude of approx 4 miles.
You probably downloaded the excel file in which the data about the subtraction of the movement of the moon is missing.

Anyway, i invited mister Mayer to join ATS and discuss the detail of the video.

Thanks to the OP for the find

Edit to add:
i'd like to make notice that Mr Mayer decided to share his video only in order to try to find a possible explanation, which conclusively has found.

[edit on 26/9/2007 by internos]

posted on Sep, 26 2007 @ 03:10 PM
Cover up is common practice to protect national security and to prevent mass hysteria by John Q. Public. I worked on the camera for the moon buggy, (Tells you how old I am) tested several different wave length cameras for Sky Lab, built and tested towed sonar arrays for submarines, built, tested and installed around the world radar & infrared cameras for aerostat surveillance. To think we are the only intelligent life form in this vast universe is a comfortable feeling but incorrect. I know for a fact that we are not alone. Whether this is a balloon, bug, shadow, doctored up photo, etc does not matter. We are not alone. What is out there I can’t say for sure. They are not built like us but more resemble insects like here on earth. I am not saying this because of the movie Men in Black but because of conversation with the people I worked with. My co-workers knew more than me. Even if a craft landed at your front door, how would you handle it? I remember when I first saw an unknown on radar. My supervisor said, “Well, we now all know we are not alone.” After that I had the shakes for days. I wanted to tell the world but was held in compliance with my security clearance. I wanted to tell my wife & friends but was afraid they would think I was crazy and telling lies.

Believe it or not, we are not alone. I have never seen an alien but using specialized equipment, I have seen crafts that appear to ignore our current understanding of physics. Be this a hoax or not, there is something out there. Sure this video makes us take a side to believe or not. Let’s think why Nasa stopped all live feeds from the ISS to be available for public viewing. They still get the feeds, they just don’t share them. It wasn’t because they are afraid of Russia or China. Israel has an extensive network of surveillance equipment all thru their country. Some of it was put there by the US and when we left, they improved on it. We saw many unexplained targets of interest. I’m sure they are not all UFO’s. Electronic equipment has an operating tolerance. Exceed it and you get strange results.

People who think we are the only life form have to be the same people that change lanes without looking. Let’s stop worrying about proving UFO’s and think more about getting off this planet before it’s too late. ET did it, so can we!

It’s all relative to time. 1000 years ago people of the world believed the world was flat. 200 years ago people of the world believed flying was a fantasy. 100 years ago going to the moon was impossible. Today’s beliefs will change as time goes on. Some day we might find a cure for cancer, we might prove ET is visiting us, but we will never have world peace which is the main requirement for communication with ET. If we can’t get along with ourselves, how can we get along with our galactic neighbors? ET is skeptical of us but he is ready for what we are capable of. Trust me. They are watching us and thinking what a bunch of screwballs. Torn between the desire to create and destroy. It’s just human nature!!!

posted on Sep, 26 2007 @ 03:30 PM
I, as I am sure many other people at ATS as well, grow tired of such annoying trifles. Can we get this proved one way or the other already? I'm getting so sick of seeing topics skyrocket with thousands of posts, full of back-and-forth arguing, only to see it turn out to be a hoax in the end. We need to get some CGI experts on the case and have some people do research about the astronauts who took this video. I will try to find out the latter myself, but I don't know how far I can get.

One thing that needs to stop is this immature arguing. Some of you look like prepubescents. There is no point in arguing over the authenticity of this video until we have fully looked everything up and come to a conclusion. Everything else is just mindless prattle that adds nothing to the conversation.

posted on Sep, 26 2007 @ 03:49 PM

Originally posted by Mudshark
If the object is a shadow being cast on the surface of a spherical moon, wouldn't we expect the shadow to become increasingly stretched and more elliptical as it gets closer to the horizon?

If you examine the footage at around 1:44 the shadow seems to maintain it's circular appearance.

good thinking batman. so what does that leave us with?

a) Hoax?
b) On the lens?
c) On the surface of the Moon?

[edit on 26-9-2007 by onthefence81]

posted on Sep, 26 2007 @ 04:14 PM
I doubt it's anything on the lens or in the optics.

Given the focal point of the telescope anything that close up wouldn't appear as a sharp black blob. In fact you would be hard pressed to see anything

You can do a simple experiment with a pair of binoculars. Stick a tiny blob of blu-tack on the lens and then focus the binoculars at infinity. If you can see the blob it certainly won't be a distinct object with sharp edges such as we see in the film.

[Edited to correct a typo]

[edit on 26-9-2007 by Mudshark]

posted on Sep, 26 2007 @ 04:25 PM
John Lear is on ATS right now. I asked for his insight on this thread, but so far no post. Come on, John!

top topics

<< 1  2  3    5  6  7 >>

log in