Help ATS with a contribution via PayPal:
learn more

Apollo 11 UFO in Moon Picture

page: 8
43
<< 5  6  7    9  10  11 >>

log in

join

posted on Oct, 14 2009 @ 11:25 AM
link   
reply to post by weedwhacker
 


Hello Weed!
A simple question,
Do you think that if NASA really had a UFO knowledge, do they tell us?
Yes or Not?

SNC




posted on Oct, 14 2009 @ 12:33 PM
link   
Forgive me but I find it amusing that you would attack my claim that there are no wings on the object but let my:
"headlights reflecting off a flight of geese passing through an inversion layer in the atmosphere" stand.

You also seemed to failed to enjoy my "reflectivity of empty space in a vacuum"

Guess I'm just losing it. :-(



posted on Oct, 14 2009 @ 12:42 PM
link   
reply to post by Robin Goodfellow
 


Touché ... LOL



posted on Oct, 14 2009 @ 03:27 PM
link   
reply to post by Whiteone
 


Lens flare are a common sight in the Moon photos, and those blue "lights" appear in several photos, some with the sky as the background some with the ground, so whatever they were (I think some people say they could have been cosmic rays, the astronauts saw some of those with their eyes closed) they were not large lights at a distance.

This photo

was not taken on the Moon, and there are several things pointing to a studio photo, like the difference in the colour of the light, the way the flag looks and the lack of reflected light from the ground.

It's a Magnum photo, taken by Rene Burri, as you can see here.



posted on Oct, 14 2009 @ 03:33 PM
link   
reply to post by Nichiren
 


I guess you missed this post by Jinni, the white spot of the video was always in the same spot, regardless of changes in the scene, because it was not on the Moon.

[edit on 14/10/2009 by ArMaP]



posted on Oct, 14 2009 @ 06:22 PM
link   
reply to post by ArMaP
 


Hi ArMaP,

No, I didn't miss that post at all. Have you noticed that when the astronaut walks in front of the flag pole, the pole is also still visible. That is a strange video anyway, but it doesn't proof that the object in question was not on the moon.

Anyway, can you explain why that object (UFO) would show up on the televised feed (Parks Station Australia) AND on the pic taken on the moon? One was taken with a Hasselblad photo cam, the other with a TV cam. Curiously the object stays at the same location on both instances. Are you saying that there was an anomaly in both cams at the exact same spot?

Thank you.



posted on Oct, 14 2009 @ 07:42 PM
link   

Originally posted by Nichiren
Anyway, can you explain why that object (UFO) would show up on the televised feed (Parks Station Australia) AND on the pic taken on the moon?
Why do you think it was the same object?
It's not on the same place (the view from the TV camera is more to right than the photo) and it's not the same size, unless it was closer to the TV camera, but in that case it was almost between the TV camera and the flag.

Also, you are basing your assumption on one copy of the photo that has a white spot while ignoring the other two photos without a spot on that place. When you have three copies of one thing and only one of those has something different, do you consider that the best copy and the other two faulty?



posted on Oct, 15 2009 @ 05:37 AM
link   
At the end of the day it would be ignorant to deny that such things exist, so why not say that this is something of alien origin.

I know full well that we are not in control anymore and the government is in self denial itself, oh how they don't want there control taken.

I know im going to not stop until this information is available to all and if the government is not going to give it us, we will have to take it.



posted on Oct, 23 2009 @ 06:48 PM
link   
Pretty interesting stuff for a latecomer...

Went back to the source and lo and behold, look at the pics NASA have on their own site free for everyone to check out:

www.hq.nasa.gov...

Thats the frame before, and then the frame of discussion:

www.hq.nasa.gov...

On my screen there clearly spots of light to be seen in the background, but they seem to move as well, since they seem not to stay in the same spot...

But the most interesting in this whole thread is something nobody seemed to pay any attention to in page 2, the post of:


Originally posted by curiousindian



I also saw this thing in a picture check it out it dosent seem like foot print seems like a squarish object lying there on moon from a long long time
just a thought. by the way i believe landings were real


Digged around a while to find it but its there as well at NASA:

www.hq.nasa.gov...

And thats, gentlemen, is mindboggling from my point of view. That small square frame of something is a clear mystery in the open...



posted on Jan, 14 2010 @ 09:54 PM
link   
I feel that Nasa has cropped, changed, and modified all picture's of the moon that could prove that UFO's were on the moon. There is so much evidence that there are things on the moon that are not natural formations and are geometric shapes that HAVE to be "made" from someone or something.

I would like to see some kind of proof or recording or just have the astronauts themselves confirm the events of their alleged UFO encounter on the moon. Neil Armstong is always giving clue's, in his speeches, as to something fishy going on...(Armstrong said: Astronauts are like parrots - refering to the fact that astronauts say what they are told to say - and also that there are things waiting to be discovered beyond our imagination if only truth's protective layer can be taken away) and Buzz Aldrin confimed (on video) that a UFO was following them for a period of time. But, other than Buzz Aldrins confession of the UFO following them, there is really no documented proof of Armstrong saying or admitting to saying that he said those statements on the moon (example: .....I'm telling you, there are two ufo's on the edge of that crater over there....their on the moon watching us!!!). I have read elsewhere that Armstrong confirmed the event, and have seen dialogue on Armstong addmitting the event to an anonymous professor.....but that, also, cannot be verified.

My question is, does anyone know of any confirmations of the alleged statements of our Astronauts regarding the UFO's and Bogeys and Santa Clauses and large boulders, etc.......... as well as any confessions of of our astronauts to other interviewers as to whats out there. I see many things out there about what Astronauts have said, but have not seen any proof or statements from the astronauts themselves.

I'm especially interested in anyone with any knowledge of Neil Armstrong admitting to the story being true of the UFO's on the moon. I DO know that Armstrong has admitted to seeing a lght in a crater on the moon, with it being a mainly white light, with some red in it as well. Armstong also confirmed that he saw a ball of light on the moon....actually saw a couple of them. There is a pic on ATS showing the pic before Nasa did their changes, which show the ball of light clearly off in the short distance.



posted on Jan, 14 2010 @ 10:25 PM
link   

Originally posted by ArMaP
reply to post by Whiteone
 


Lens flare are a common sight in the Moon photos, and those blue "lights" appear in several photos, some with the sky as the background some with the ground, so whatever they were (I think some people say they could have been cosmic rays, the astronauts saw some of those with their eyes closed) they were not large lights at a distance.

This photo
[edit]
was not taken on the Moon, and there are several things pointing to a studio photo, like the difference in the colour of the light, the way the flag looks and the lack of reflected light from the ground.

It's a Magnum photo, taken by Rene Burri, as you can see here.


Your link to the Burri photo returned this:
Web site page not available or expired
The link you clicked on is invalid or expired. If you believe that you have received this message in error, please contact corex@orangelogic.com
Magnum web team.


[edit on 14-1-2010 by The Shrike]



posted on Jan, 14 2010 @ 10:59 PM
link   

Originally posted by A-star
[edit]
But the most interesting in this whole thread is something nobody seemed to pay any attention to in page 2, the post of:


Originally posted by curiousindian
[edit]
I also saw this thing in a picture check it out it dosent seem like foot print seems like a squarish object lying there on moon from a long long time
just a thought. by the way i believe landings were real


Digged around a while to find it but its there as well at NASA:
[edit]
And thats, gentlemen, is mindboggling from my point of view. That small square frame of something is a clear mystery in the open...


I don't see it as a "clear mystey in the open..." I see it only as litter. There are other similar photos showing what could only be described as discarded unneededs.



posted on Jan, 14 2010 @ 11:10 PM
link   

Originally posted by 48Donbray
I feel that Nasa has cropped, changed, and modified all picture's of the moon that could prove that UFO's were on the moon. There is so much evidence that there are things on the moon that are not natural formations and are geometric shapes that HAVE to be "made" from someone or something.
[edit]


I could be wrong but I do not for one second think that you have any evidence to support your feelings. Your evidence should be a NASA lunar photo before it was "cropped, changed, and modified..." accompanied by the same photo after the changes. There is not "...so much evidencee..." and there have been and are threads dealing with this topic and, so far, no one has been able to provide a convincing argument.

Where do these feelings come from? What generates/triggers them? Do you know the meaning of evidence? Since you don't sound as if you do, here is an example: "Evidence in its broadest sense includes everything that is used to determine or demonstrate the truth of an assertion. ..." Source is immaterial.



posted on Jan, 15 2010 @ 07:57 AM
link   



NASA has people that alter or change images.

that ^ is not debatable , the reason why they do this , is debatable.



spaceflight.nasa.gov...



posted on Jan, 15 2010 @ 08:08 AM
link   
reply to post by The Shrike
 

It was working at the time.


This is the best I can find for now.

PS: looking further I found that some NASA photos appear with the same copyright.


Edit: I found that photo again, here .

[edit on 15/1/2010 by ArMaP]



posted on Jan, 15 2010 @ 08:34 AM
link   
Apollo 11 --> UFO ? or image artifact ?





@ 1:14 mark in the video



posted on Jan, 15 2010 @ 03:56 PM
link   
reply to post by easynow
 

It moves in the same way as the astronaut to the left of the image, and from the way it looks I think it could be a reflection from that astronaut's visor.



posted on Jan, 15 2010 @ 04:25 PM
link   
reply to post by easynow
 


Thank you for starting this very interesting thread, easynow.

Might I also say how much I've enjoyed your debate with Armap


And.....a thumbs up to you too, Armap


My 2 cents worth.....

I think it's probably lens flare or reflections.

As I look at the image below, I believe I can see a row of reflections or flares, with the "far left" one showing near the leg of the lander & the "far right" one being the original "object" that is the subject of the thread & one of the "middle" ones showing on Aldrin's backpack.

I also agree these could be image artifacts from dust, etc..., but I think I'll go with the reflection or flare option.



Kind regards
Maybe...maybe not



posted on Jan, 15 2010 @ 04:31 PM
link   
reply to post by easynow
 


Easy, easy easynow.........

Ahem.

You posted a photo, what looks like an artsy re-do of a regualr Lunar surface Apollo mission photo, then your LINK thakes us to the original-looking, unaltered photo???


Still, unsourced as to the provenance of the weird one, the one that looks like Andy Warhol got ahold of it....

...and you think this is proof of.....what, exactly?????

(Other than someone has a creative side??)

PS...remember the Obama image? The "false-color" (no pun) that's plastered all over T-shirts and stuff, and the 'artist' got accused of copyright infringement by the news source who owned the original photo image? Is NASA in on that too?



posted on Jan, 15 2010 @ 06:32 PM
link   

Originally posted by weedwhacker
Still, unsourced as to the provenance of the weird one, the one that looks like Andy Warhol got ahold of it....

...and you think this is proof of.....what, exactly?????
It wasn't Andy Warhol, but his name also starts with an "A".


The only thing I did was increase the brightness of the pixels closest to black. The result gives me the idea that someone used the clone tool from an image manipulation program to cover areas of the sky that probably didn't look "clean" with copies from "cleaner" areas.

Other versions of the photo do not show that effect.

[edit on 15/1/2010 by ArMaP]






top topics



 
43
<< 5  6  7    9  10  11 >>

log in

join