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.


Incredible Crashed UFO **Video**on Moon

page: 4
<< 1  2  3    5  6  7 >>

log in


posted on Jun, 4 2009 @ 07:20 AM
As said in the past, his story is a confirmed CROCK: it's SAD that is still being taken it seriously. The only person in the world who endorsed retiredafb's tales joined ATS and instead of providing us with some PROOFS he injected the forum with a whole bunch of BS.
He claimed to be a "victim of some disinfo campaign in Italy" (which national UFO center was member of, now he's no longer):
i've asked to him where, when and by whom would the alleged disinfo campaign in Italy be orchestrated: i got no response.

What You need is Just THIS: no need to listen more-

121:05:30 Allen: Presto chango; there's the TV.

['Presto Chango', sometimes spelled 'presto change-o' is a incantation usually associated with amateur magicians.]
121:05:36 Scott: Oh, beautiful, I'm glad to hear that.


Listen to the Apollo 15 audio here

Compare it with his HOAX known as "the city" and you will be done, unless you need to know more lies from BOTH them.

See also Michael E. Salla, Ph.D update HERE:
The images of "city" were taken from Bruce Pennington's work: you can find it on pages 24 and 25 of his book: "ESCHATUS: Future Prophecies From Nostradamus' Ancient Writings".

And... floating torso ...?

Here Kentaro Mori describes it in the best way possible, worthy to be quoted:

But the smoking-gun evidence of hoax can be seen on the second video in this post.
As “bishop1971” commented on Youtube, at around 1:15 you can see a very bad compositing blunder in the video. “Leonov”, the astronaut in the footage, suddenly becomes a floating torso, as you can see the background moving below his waist.
Below, a frame of the crude error, note the background below Leonov’s waist, but check for yourself on the video:

That video was actually created mixing at least three different sources: one of the “Mona Lisa” alien, a clay sculpture, the background inside the Lunar Module, a nice computer generated video, and finally the footage of “Leonov”. But that final footage only had Leonov from the waist up, and Speth made a very bad error on compositing — “mixing” — everything together. There’s no doubt that’s a hoax, unless you believe on flying torsos.

Do you believe in flying torsos? I, don't.
It is also interesting to notice that the astronaut “William Rutledge” doesn’t exist (unless someone will PROVE the contrary), while something more than guesses point that the man behind it all is French artist Thierry Speth.

He was linked with “retiredafb”, the original alias publicizing the videos, through his shopping for Apollo paraphernalia and Carey Lowell nudes on ebay: take a look here:

And read this article, titled "An alien with boobies (and floating torsos)"
by Kentaro Mori

There's no need to be a rocket scientist to realize that what he tried to pass as the body of an ALIEN WOMAN was a Clay sculpture.

Need to know about more lies?
CUN Veneto: (CUN= Centro ufologico nazionale = national UFO center)
"We got the proof that an Apollo 20 video is FAKE.
One of their readers, Mr. Claudio Sammartino, found out something of very interesting:

Full series here:

William ROFLMAO rutlege:

posted on Jun, 4 2009 @ 07:54 AM
This was always one of my favorite videos on the subject.

posted on Jun, 4 2009 @ 07:55 AM
reply to post by zarp3333

Go to You Tube and punch in "Apollo 20 and alien" For some reason I can't upload videos yet or I would post it. This one's been around for awhile. Was there an Apollo 20? Something tells there wasn't I'll check and comeback.

posted on Jun, 4 2009 @ 07:59 AM
Go and Google Apollo 20. There's allot of sites and info. Good luck. I'm going back to the Google page now. Have a good day!

posted on Jun, 4 2009 @ 08:00 AM
reply to post by Thain Esh Kelch

Lets just say for a second "albeit a quick one," that we use your logic of "where is the impact site." If that be the case, then where is the impact site from SHANKSVILLE, Pa? I'm not sure as to wether that is a real UFO or not. But to dismiss it on the grounds of "impact site" is nonsense. We have no way of knowing how long that may have been there, thousands of years, maybe longer and if its real. I can dismiss photo's and video, but what I can't dismiss is Dr Edgar Mitchell's accounts.
This is no qack who's speaking. This person is credited and well respected in his field, and when he comes out and says "we have been visted, I know this for a fact" to me, thats powerful s**t. I have yet to hear one response from NASA saying Dr Mitchell is mistaken, lying, oh just an all around nut-job. That tells me they want nothing to do with what Dr Mitchells has to say.

posted on Jun, 4 2009 @ 08:04 AM
There are many here on ATS that know UFO's and Aliens are the real deal because they live it in there lives.

It's pretty sad when even an Astronaut comes out and says this stuff IS REAL and it isn't still believed.

As I have mentioned before with these skeptics, the aliens will have to come down to them and bite them in the a&&.

I wait patiently the day when there proof comes

[edit on 4-6-2009 by observe50]

posted on Jun, 4 2009 @ 08:10 AM
Man, I thought I've seen everything there is, but those are some new ones. Too cool!


posted on Jun, 4 2009 @ 08:26 AM
reply to Textpid6442483" target="_blank" class="postlink">post by zarp3333

Text Red
Excellent series of disclosure videos! Just when I was growing tired of poor quality evidence, these have re-ignited my interest again.

posted on Jun, 4 2009 @ 08:35 AM
reply to post by JimOberg

Nope- I mean the 'hard' sciences, like medicine, astronomy, ect. You know, the idiots who claim to know it all, decry UFOs, and then in a dark room, fake their OWN data. The switch is the fact they get grant money and a buttload of cash of their nonsense.

Say... How do we know that some of these better hoaxes aren't done by the scientific community for whatever reason?

posted on Jun, 4 2009 @ 08:53 AM
Hmmm yer Apollo 20 footage is one of the most intriguing ufo film out there. I think it might be fake! The initial rocket/stage separation looks digital rendered but that could also be caused by digital compression or film analog to digital conversion.

But the inside the capsule looks authentic! The graphic of the russian/american flag symbol is actually in the frame and not matted onto the frame,And no sign of tracking errors that I can see.

The Alien space craft dosen't look digital either,There are no obvious signs of bump mapping or displacement maps. So either it is real or a very clever miniature set.

So if this is a fake it's as well done as any I have ever seen. But the question who has access to a space capsule to fake this stuff and why would they bother?

But one thing of interest in some of the Apollo 20 that I have seen all the dial's and knobs look worn like it might be an old NASA simulator .


posted on Jun, 4 2009 @ 09:00 AM

Originally posted by JimOberg

Originally posted by wylekat
reply to post by bigfatfurrytexan

I refuse to put faith in a system that picks and chooses what is worthy for review.

EXACTLY! Not only does 'the system' pick and choose what is worthy- if the conclusions drawn don't fit what they want, they manipulate, fake, and outright lie to make the data fit their conclusions! ....

You're talking about 'ufology', right? I'm not clear on that.

I believe he was talking about science in general. You don't see much politicking in UFOlogy, honestly. In the circles of science? Most certainly. And the control mechanism is 100% funding related.

I am sure you are well aware of the myriad "anomolous findings" that are officially ignored (or all too often labelled as "Moon Pigeons"

Originally posted by JimOberg

Well, maybe the real problem is not the hoaxers, but the eager hoaxees.

The issue is, there are phenomena that are seen, witnessed by credible people. People who are trained observers (police, pilots, etc). Many times these phenomena are easily described by their physical traits, and the physical traits point to there being actual craft that are operating in Earth vicinity.

Now, one would expect a scientist would want to find out facts about what these objects are. Instead, however, we see the embracing of ignorance, based on the fact that incidents are ignored.

It isn't just UFO's, either. "ESP" is another realm where there are obvious phenomena that, instead of true investigation, are completely ignored.

Perhaps there would be no "eager hoaxee's" if science would confront these issues and attempt to understand them, instead of just ignoring them as if they do not exist?

posted on Jun, 4 2009 @ 09:14 AM
the guy makes these video's best i remember.

i think he stay's on disclurse tv online now

but he made them folk's.
im almost 100% sure.
this video was asked about maybe over a year ago....

posted on Jun, 4 2009 @ 09:15 AM
wow that 1st video was awesome.
well it's june now, did america disclose any more information and images of ufos.

posted on Jun, 4 2009 @ 09:18 AM
reply to post by internos

Internos you are one of my most respected members of this site.I read your threads and like how you really dig into a subject

posted on Jun, 4 2009 @ 09:19 AM

PS That's not a composite it's a shadow!

posted on Jun, 4 2009 @ 09:20 AM
That footage is a very obvious fake.

posted on Jun, 4 2009 @ 09:31 AM

and, no scientist is talking about ufos, thats the most important thing ... the scientific community is afraid to investigate ufos ... and thats the main thing

Don't be so sure, man! Check this guy out:

Ervin Laszlo: Contact with Extraterrestials soon Pt.1

Ervin Laszlo: Contact with Extraterrestials soon Pt.2

Ervin Laszlo: Contact with Extraterrestials soon Pt.3

This is an excellent interview with, IMO, one of the great thinkers of our time. I highly recommend his books.

posted on Jun, 4 2009 @ 10:04 AM
well, it seems that the apollo 20 video is a hoax ... it could be ... it is more possible to be a hoax than not to be, since there are no evidences pointing that nasa launch this mission ...

sorry for the guys who believe in everything,

EVERYTHING can be made in a video, EVERYTHING, the only thing that really matters is the witness ... in this case, there are no witness, there are no mission, so, u must assume there are no aliens on the video ... this all will implie in a hoax

posted on Jun, 4 2009 @ 10:04 AM
I saw all 3 parts too, and the most interesting part is testimony of Dr. Edgar Mitchell.

There are several outcomes in my opinion:

  1. Governments start releasing some official military UFO-related documents which may either prove nothing or prove just something.
  2. Dr. Mitchell writes a book full of wacky "true" stories and becomes a millionaire. He then forms a church of Mitchellism or something.
  3. Someone decides to blackmail Dr. Mitchell and sues him for occultism and pedophilia which would definitely distract him from any further testimonies.
  4. Everyone just ignores him, and some of his "friends" or colleagues say that he always had a wild imagination on in some popular TV show.

All those videos and photos prove nothing really, they can all be faked. Even if it's military publishing them, those could all be random hoaxes. What matters the most is testimony of people willing to sacrifice their reputation for a progress in relations with ET's, which is still mostly a myth.

But... what is the point? I don't believe at all that US military would release any technology they have learned from ET, or any other useful information whatsoever. It took them very much effort to just release GPS technology to public, satellite imagery, and some other stuff that was already in hands of competitive nations. So how can we hope they would release anything US can't directly gain profit from?
The only way I see it is if some competitive nation such as Russia would threaten to sell or openly militarize some of it, just as it always used to be the case with top-secret technology. Simply put, if their top secret technology is still that - secret, then there is no reason at all for it to be published, not even if it would cure all the diseases of this world.

If the US military is the only organization that has some "X" information from an ET source, and if it is not certain whether that "X" information can or cannot be used as a weapon then it won't see the light of the day.

[edit on 4-6-2009 by SassyCat]

posted on Jun, 4 2009 @ 10:19 AM

Originally posted by IgnoreTheFacts
The funniest part of the whole "Apollo 20" hoax is how they used some lift-off footage that was easily identified...guess the fools who put it together didn't figure anyone would actually turn their brains on and actually look into it, lol.

There was no Apollo 20, no matter how many youtube videos and retiredafb dudes you watch/listen to.

Why don't you then tell us exactly what happened.....You seem to have proof there was no apollo 20 and you appear as though you think you know more than us...

Please sure what you know then........... can you?????

new topics

top topics

<< 1  2  3    5  6  7 >>

log in