Check out the differences in the visors etc:

well seen as though the photographs are fake then no they are not alien boots.

If the "alien" is from earth, most likely a Russian. After all, they beat the U.S. into space, into orbit, who says they weren't on the Far Side, laughing at the stupid Americans who try to claim first prize for the moon, while they were probably already preparing to receive their Mars-crew returning a few weeks later?

The logical alternative, is the common "it was staged in the desert"- story.

But then, i would rather believe earthlings stole the Mars Observer than some bug-eyed Humpty-Dumpty with sticks for its body and limbs....

Well I guess that NASA has then made the Aliens boots for them then since it clearly seems like the spacing in the ridges of the shoes are the same. Exactly the same in fact.

Originally posted by mikesingh
And notice the ridge in the bottom right pic? Now that's NOT the astronaut boot design. But could this be two prints overlapping? But then this is a five ridge pattern!

The 5 ridge footprint is the one marked "not small" in yellow in my last post. A few ridges have collapsed in the large area to the right that you conveniently cropped, you can easily see their remainders in the hires scan.

So all this discussion of a twisting boot in the dust, many boot marks, overlapping footprints, dust blown over, lighter left foot, gravitational effect on the left side etc, etc, doesn't hold much water!

Good logic. Must be alien.

Imprints:
Clearly, the whole foot did not fully step down. It is a partial print.

"Mysterious" Astronaut:
As somebody else said, he simply had his visor down. He looks smaller because of perspective.

Helmet differences:
Again, the visor is down on one astronaut, but not the other. The visor itself must have some sort of flap. One visor is retracted far enough in the helmet for the separate parts to appear "invisible".

I believe this thread has been put to sleep...partial foot print and visor flipped up...enough said.

This may sound a little straightforward but wouldnt the aliens taylor there own clothes? I mean it sounds most obvios unless the Apollo suit suplier had all the moon landing of 1969 fashion rights.

Originally posted by Monger
So the Moon People wear boots with identical tread patterns to the Apollo astronauts? Wow, talk about coincidence!

Convergent evolution at its finest!

ok maybe not.

Originally posted by NavalFC
to the second poster, you are aware the hoaxed moon landing theory has been debunked several times

Ummm no... it hasnt...
Parts have here and there... but the theory all together, not even close to being debunked... you are aware of that arent you?
and if you would be so kind, since you said it yourself, please, debunk it for us. Inform us of how this theory has been debunked several times. U2U me, I'm sure ill send you more info back that youve never even seen before.
so dont be so quick to jump to conclusions.

---

Mike.
-Great thread as usual. If it is indeed a different footprint, then I would have to go with a crew member as well.
While I think we have been to the moon, the footage we all saw was so incredibly fake imo, that any of the flaws in the footage or pictures is simply due to a rushed filming job.
Thats my 2 cents... but I do believe in bases on the moon... just never thought they were ours.

its just a partial footprint... that doesn't mean there isn't a base already there...

Originally posted by Odessy

Originally posted by NavalFC
to the second poster, you are aware the hoaxed moon landing theory has been debunked several times

Ummm no... it hasnt...
Parts have here and there...

Yeah, sorry but the only things about the moon landing hoax that have been debunked are the things that serious CTers never bought into anyway. Surely you do not count that worthless mythbusters attempt as a debunking do you? It is that crap that has debunked things that are not even really an issue. The things that truly reveal lies, coverups, and the possibility that we never went to the moon that I have read and seen, have never been debunked. Not even a little.

thats a partial print...


how do you get a different length and width? very easy, go stand on the side of your foot. your toes wont touch the ground, the length will then obvoiusly be shorter

Sorry its not an alien on left.....suits are different, only one has a sun visor, but both are usng chest-positioned Haselblad large format cameras.

Originally posted by NavalFC
to the second poster, you are aware the hoaxed moon landing theory has been debunked several times

Quite right.

And the actual moon landing has been debunked several times too.

Originally posted by mikesingh

Originally posted by Monger
So the Moon People wear boots with identical tread patterns to the Apollo astronauts? Wow, talk about coincidence!

No! They don't! Check it out here:


Source: LunarArcheology

And notice the ridge in the bottom right pic? Now that's NOT the astronaut boot design. But could this be two prints overlapping? But then this is a five ridge pattern!

So all this discussion of a twisting boot in the dust, many boot marks, overlapping footprints, dust blown over, lighter left foot, gravitational effect on the left side etc, etc, doesn't hold much water!

And what's more, there seem to be not two, but three types of footprints! Wow! No equipment standardization at NASA, what?

Cheers!

Although I don't believe this has anything to do with aliens, these footprints don't look the same at all.

First, the nine ridge print has a pattern of "triangular" raised ridge pattern all the way across with a consistant angle. You can tell by the shadowing. There is nothing there that shows that this pattern is anything like the other two.

The second seven ridge pattern is completely different. To those saying this is a partial print and a result of stepping on the side of the foot, why is there an outline on both sides of the print instead of an incomplete pattern on one side where the side of the foot didn't touch the ground? The heel of that print is clearly outlined on both sides and is also clearly much smaller than the first print. That print looks complete to me, otherwise, there would not be an outline on both sides of the print. Also, the ridge pattern is different. There is nothing triangular about that pattern in any way. The "valleys" of the print are flat as are the raised part of the pattern. This does not exist in the first print. These two prints did not come from the same boot in relation to both size and pattern.

The third five ridge pattern looks more like a tire to me. It is kind of similar to the seven ridge, but the valleys of the print are more narrow and the raised parts are longer. This print also appears to be curved. The left side of the print is not at the same angle as the rest of it, kind of like it was turning. It could be the result of an illusion based on an elevation change, but would the print still look like this across an elevation change? It looks wider than the other two especially the seven ridge pattern and this one too has no resemblance to the first print's triangular raised ridge pattern.

In my opinion, all three of these prints are from different sources. Prints one and two are most definitely not the same in any way, shape or form. I believe print three looks more like a tire imprint, but even if it was a boot, it doesn't look enough like the second and looks nothing like the first. I don't think aliens have anything to do with this at all though.