NASA's Apollo DSE "Black Box" Transcripts - revealing the unscripted truth about the Moon & E.T.

reply to post by Jay-morris

How about seeing a structured craft

and if they don't use "structured crafts" what then ?

How is that wrong?

you said "Its always evidence that skeptics have a decent answer for" and i said your wrong because i disagree there's always a decent answer.

I mean, you still believe that the tether footage shows something unexplained

yes i believe the video is still unexplained but that doesn't mean i think the objects are intelligent and from planet Klatu.

it has been explained many times

theories are not proof and if your satisfied with a certain explanation then that's ok with me but don't force your opinions on myself or anyone else. if you want to spin that into me not being rational then be my guest because at the end of the day you will still have no proof of anything.

When its just a dot of light in space, then yes, considering ice and debris can look exactly the same.

most objects are explainable but if not, they are unidentified objects.

like i said, i'm glad your satisfied the video has been explained but the truth of the matter is, nobody can pin point the origin of the objects and nobody has acquired NASA's copy of the video for further analysis and until then i will remain undecided about it. is that ok with you ?





reply to post by ngchunter

What do YOU think they are then?

unidentified objects

reply to post by easynow

and if they don't use "structured crafts" what then ?

Oh, i see. You are going down the david sereda road. The man who believes that billy meier photos are real!. Ok, what he says could be true, but there is no evidence that this is the case when it comes to the nasa footage.

you said "Its always evidence that skeptics have a decent answer for" and i said your wrong because i disagree there's always a decent answer.

Sorry, what i meant was when it came to the nasa footage. Every explanation i have heard i am happy with. Here is an example. The footage that shows a disc shapped ufo by the moon. This footage has been proven to be EVA [spacewalk] floodlight/boom link but people still believe this to be unexplained and is always seen on youtube nasa ufo videos.

yes i believe the video is still unexplained but that doesn't mean i think the objects are intelligent and from planet Klatu.

But it has been explained perfectly. Experiments show that the objects were close to the camera, and there is no evidence that they are anything different.

theories are not proof and if your satisfied with a certain explanation then that's ok with me but don't force your opinions on myself or anyone else. if you want to spin that into me not being rational then be my guest because at the end of the day you will still have no proof of anything.

I am not forcing my opinions on anyone. I have my opinions on the footage, and you have yours. This is a forum, and its all about peoples opinions. If we were not aload to voice our opinions, then there would be no forum.

most objects are explainable but if not, they are unidentified objects. like i said, i'm glad your satisfied the video has been explained but the truth of the matter is, nobody can pin point the origin of the objects and nobody has acquired NASA's copy of the video for further analysis and until then i will remain undecided about it. is that ok with you ?

I hope i am wrong, more than anything. But i have come to my conclusion with what i have seen. I don't jump on any bandwagon, as many people do in this field. I see what i see and make my own mind. I have looked at many ufo cases and many are unexplained, and i hate the way the subject is treated, as some sort of joke when i know that something strange is going on here. But the problem here are the people. One side we have the de-bunkers who love nothing more than de-bunking, no matter what evidence they come across. Then we have the believers who believe in everything they see, and even when proved wrong, they dont change there opinions. These are the ones that bring this subject down.

reply to post by Jay-morris

Oh, i see. You are going down the david sereda road. The man who believes that billy meier photos are real!. Ok, what he says could be true, but there is no evidence that this is the case when it comes to the nasa footage.

that is funny stuff bro, thanks for the laugh.

your imagination is running wild, a ufo might not be a nuts and bolts "structured craft" like you see in your fantasies and that possibility doesn't connect me to Sereda in any way shape or form. nice try but we all can see right through your lame attempt to discredit me.

Sorry, what i meant was when it came to the nasa footage. Every explanation i have heard i am happy with. Here is an example. The footage that shows a disc shapped ufo by the moon. This footage has been proven to be EVA [spacewalk] floodlight/boom link but people still believe this to be unexplained and is always seen on youtube nasa ufo videos.

like i said i'm glad your happy and satisfied , but just because one case has been solved doesn't mean they all have and your attempt to insinuate that is a bit repulsive. it's almost comparable to what your whining about with "believers"

But it has been explained perfectly. Experiments show that the objects were close to the camera, and there is no evidence that they are anything different.

no sorry, in my opinion it hasn't been explained "perfectly", not even close but it's ok with me if you think it has, i won't try to persuade you.

I am not forcing my opinions on anyone. I have my opinions on the footage, and you have yours. This is a forum, and its all about peoples opinions. If we were not aload to voice our opinions, then there would be no forum.

hey we finally agree on something LOL

I hope i am wrong, more than anything. But i have come to my conclusion with what i have seen. I don't jump on any bandwagon, as many people do in this field. I see what i see and make my own mind. I have looked at many ufo cases and many are unexplained, and i hate the way the subject is treated, as some sort of joke when i know that something strange is going on here. But the problem here are the people. One side we have the de-bunkers who love nothing more than de-bunking, no matter what evidence they come across. Then we have the believers who believe in everything they see, and even when proved wrong, they dont change there opinions. These are the ones that bring this subject down.

for the most part i agree with you but i find it a little ironic that you haven't examined all the evidence from the STS75 mission but yet your here in this thread acting like a debunker by broadcasting unproven claims and using under the radar deceptive tactics to try and paint me as some blind believer or someone like Serada who supposedly thinks the Meier photos are real.

thanks for the reply

Originally posted by easynow
reply to post by Jay-morris

 

What do YOU think they are then?

unidentified objects

Do you accept that they are very small and close to the camera then?

Originally posted by easynow
reply to post by Jay-morris

 

But it has been explained perfectly. Experiments show that the objects were close to the camera, and there is no evidence that they are anything different.

no sorry, in my opinion it hasn't been explained "perfectly", not even close but it's ok with me if you think it has, i won't try to persuade you.

I'll take that as an indication you do not accept that they are small and close to the camera, causing them to be bokehs. I could have some fun with this then.

reply to post by ngchunter

I'll take that as an indication you do not accept that they are small and close to the camera, causing them to be bokehs. I could have some fun with this then.

until i see all the evidence i don't "accept" anything

do you accept the fact you haven't seen all the evidence either ?



[edit on 13-8-2010 by easynow]

Originally posted by easynow
until i see all the evidence i don't "accept" anything

do you accept that fact you haven't seen all the evidence either ?

No, I do not accept that proposition. If you don't accept that they're small and close to the camera then I wonder what you'll say when I show you some very similar "objects" in space.

reply to post by ngchunter

No, I do not accept that proposition.

seems illogical to come to a conclusion when you haven't seen all the evidence

doesn't say much for your investigative skills or your credibility

If you don't accept that they're small and close to the camera then I wonder what you'll say when I show you some very similar "objects" in space.

do you realize how stupid that sounds ?

your wanting me to accept some conclusion you believe when none of us have seen all the evidence. if you want to make erroneous connections to other videos to try and prove your point, please start your own thread or contribute to one of the existing threads discussing the STS 75 video

thanks

Originally posted by easynow
reply to post by Jay-morris

 

Oh, i see. You are going down the david sereda road. The man who believes that billy meier photos are real!. Ok, what he says could be true, but there is no evidence that this is the case when it comes to the nasa footage.

that is funny stuff bro, thanks for the laugh.

your imagination is running wild, a ufo might not be a nuts and bolts "structured craft" like you see in your fantasies and that possibility doesn't connect me to Sereda in any way shape or form. nice try but we all can see right through your lame attempt to discredit me.

Sorry, what i meant was when it came to the nasa footage. Every explanation i have heard i am happy with. Here is an example. The footage that shows a disc shapped ufo by the moon. This footage has been proven to be EVA [spacewalk] floodlight/boom link but people still believe this to be unexplained and is always seen on youtube nasa ufo videos.

like i said i'm glad your happy and satisfied , but just because one case has been solved doesn't mean they all have and your attempt to insinuate that is a bit repulsive. it's almost comparable to what your whining about with "believers"

But it has been explained perfectly. Experiments show that the objects were close to the camera, and there is no evidence that they are anything different.

no sorry, in my opinion it hasn't been explained "perfectly", not even close but it's ok with me if you think it has, i won't try to persuade you.

I am not forcing my opinions on anyone. I have my opinions on the footage, and you have yours. This is a forum, and its all about peoples opinions. If we were not aload to voice our opinions, then there would be no forum.

hey we finally agree on something LOL

I hope i am wrong, more than anything. But i have come to my conclusion with what i have seen. I don't jump on any bandwagon, as many people do in this field. I see what i see and make my own mind. I have looked at many ufo cases and many are unexplained, and i hate the way the subject is treated, as some sort of joke when i know that something strange is going on here. But the problem here are the people. One side we have the de-bunkers who love nothing more than de-bunking, no matter what evidence they come across. Then we have the believers who believe in everything they see, and even when proved wrong, they dont change there opinions. These are the ones that bring this subject down.

for the most part i agree with you but i find it a little ironic that you haven't examined all the evidence from the STS75 mission but yet your here in this thread acting like a debunker by broadcasting unproven claims and using under the radar deceptive tactics to try and paint me as some blind believer or someone like Serada who supposedly thinks the Meier photos are real.

thanks for the reply

Sigh!
You can say im doing this, and im doing that, i really don't care. You have your opinions, and i have mine. I have seen enough evidence that these objects are natural, you believe otherwise.

I don't care if you think im some sort of nasty de-bunker, when if you read my posts, its clear that i am not. Also, what makes you think i have not studied the sts75 footage. Is it because i came to this conclusion, so that means i did not study it?

And what i say about some believers is right. They will believe in anything, just like de-bunkers will dismiss everything. This subject is full of people like this.

reply to post by Jay-morris

I have seen enough evidence that these objects are natural, you believe otherwise.

where did i say i believe otherwise ?

my official viewpoint is, i don't know what the objects are therefore i am neutral and not taking sides. they could be space trash or they could be something else but arriving at a conclusion when you haven't seen or examined ALL the evidence is illogical.

nuff said on that,

the topic of this thread is the Apollo black box recordings and transcripts and if you have something to contribute other than negativity i would be interested in discussing it with you. thanks

Originally posted by easynow
reply to post by Jay-morris

 

I have seen enough evidence that these objects are natural, you believe otherwise.

where did i say i believe otherwise ?

my official viewpoint is, i don't know what the objects are therefore i am neutral and not taking sides. they could be space trash or they could be something else but arriving at a conclusion when you haven't seen or examined ALL the evidence is illogical.

nuff said on that,

the topic of this thread is the Apollo black box recordings and transcripts and if you have something to contribute other than negativity i would be interested in discussing it with you. thanks

I believe there is enough evidence that these things are natural, and you believe overwise means you don't believe that the evidence proves that these things are natural, be it that you are in the middle or whatever. Again, the black box recordings are interesting. Has any of the astronauts commented on these?

Originally posted by easynow
reply to post by ngchunter

 

seems illogical to come to a conclusion when you haven't seen all the evidence

What evidence do you claim I lack and how would that affect my determination that these bokehs indicate the "objects" are very close and small.

doesn't say much for your investigative skills or your credibility

If you're going to attack me personally in order to make your case you're not going to get very far.

your wanting me to accept some conclusion you believe when none of us have seen all the evidence.

I don't know what evidence you assume we lack that would somehow be relevant to reaching this conclusion, but if I show you the same shaped "objects" in space and illustrate the phenomenon causing it then it really doesn't matter.

if you want to make erroneous connections to other videos to try and prove your point, please start your own thread or contribute to one of the existing threads discussing the STS 75 video

It'll be up to you to prove the connection is erroneous, but I will post it here. Just because you assume the connection is erroneous a priori without even having seen it does not mean I will refrain from posting it here, so don't thank me for not doing something I'm going to do.

[edit on 13-8-2010 by ngchunter]

reply to post by ngchunter

but I will post it here

if you do your post will be off topic , i will report it and i won't respond to it.

please contribute to one of the existing threads for the STS75 video or start your own. thank you

Originally posted by easynow
if you do your post will be off topic , i will report it and i won't respond to it.

Wow, so you think it's ok for you to talk about the tether footage and your opinion of it, but it's not ok for someone to post evidence to the contrary? It's fascinating to see who is trying to silence who here. It really exposes the weakness of one's position.

[edit on 13-8-2010 by ngchunter]

Originally posted by ngchunter

Originally posted by easynow
if you do your post will be off topic , i will report it and i won't respond to it.

Wow, so you think it's ok for you to talk about the tether footage and your opinion of it, but it's not ok for someone to post evidence to the contrary? It's fascinating to see who is trying to silence who here. It really exposes the weakness of one's position.

[edit on 13-8-2010 by ngchunter]

"Jay-morris" is the one who started this off topic conversation not me,

www.abovetopsecret.com...


if you want to discuss in detail your viewpoint then please contribute to one of the existing threads for the STS 75 video or your post will be off topic.

thank you and have a nice day

Originally posted by easynow
"Jay-morris" is the one who started this off topic conversation not me,

You had no problem replying to it until this point. Now, suddenly and conveniently, it's "off-topic" and it's a large enough concern that you'll refuse to reply and actually report and try to silence it. Amazing how quick that transition happened.

[edit on 13-8-2010 by ngchunter]

reply to post by ngchunter


a brief exchange of opinions isn't a big deal but you want to start posting supposed evidence to have a detailed discussion and that is not the topic of this thread. this thread is about the Apollo missions and not one of your posts has been on topic, not one.

post what you got in one of the other threads , nobody is trying to stifle that discussion, it's just not appropriate here in this thread.

capiche ?

Originally posted by easynow
a brief exchange of opinions isn't a big deal but you want to start posting supposed evidence to have a detailed discussion and that is not the topic of this thread.

Sounds like a double standard if I ever heard one. Posting evidence, oh no, can't have that. My desire was not a long drawn out discussion, in fact the evidence and its inevitable conclusion would be quite brief, far more so than most of the opinion posts to this point.

post what you got in one of the other threads , nobody is trying to stifle that discussion, it's just not appropriate here in this thread.

Your long drawn-out opinion debates are? You're afraid of what that evidence would show, that much is clear to me.

The personal bickering stops now.

Please keep all further replies on topic and not each other.

Thank you.

Originally posted by easynow
if you do your post will be off topic , i will report it and i won't respond to it.

So, why did you made this post?

edit: considering the above post I will ask you to ignore this post. I took too long to make my post, as usual.

[edit on 13/8/2010 by ArMaP]