Buzz Aldrin says there are no Aliens!

Originally posted by mcrom901

Originally posted by Arbitrageur
How about this explanation?

you mean this......

I should have known better, I actually thought you might post something on topic in response to that quote of mine which was about how upset Buzz Aldrin was that the producers of the video edited out his panel explanation to make it sound like he saw a UFO. So I actually watched that whole 10 minute video waiting for the part about Buzz Aldrin's Apollo 11 sighting that might be on topic to the thread and my quote, but it never came, so maybe next time you post a video you can include a time reference you want us to look at so I don't have to waste the full 10 minutes only to find out there's nothing responsive to my quote.

But at least I can try to make an on-topic reply to that video since many people in this thread have made claims that Buzz Aldrin and other astronauts must be getting pressure from NASA or TPTB to not talk about UFOs. McDivitt's UFO sighting, and the fact that he talks about it freely seems to contradict this claim:

www.frontierscience.us...

McDivitt said, the space agency made no attempt to prevent his telling his UFO story.

In 1975, McDivitt adds: "I never made a big deal out of it. It was something I definitely couldn't identify. I reported it to the ground ... Ed was asleep and we were rotating at a pretty high rate in drifting flight. The windows were dirty, I recall ... All of a sudden there was this white object out there."

These two pictures are posted in relation to McDivitt and Gemini IV, but neither looks like the object he described as "a cylindrical object - it was white - it had a long arm that stuck out on the side."
[atsimg]http://files.abovetopsecret.com/images/member/c84937261c94.jpg[/atsimg]
[atsimg]http://files.abovetopsecret.com/images/member/aacb15de395a.jpg[/atsimg]

McDivitt: I took a picture. I just hope it comes out.
Capcom: So do we.

It looks like McDivitt's hope that "it comes out" wasn't realized. He never did find a picture that matched what he saw though he noted some pictures were blank or overexposed so the camera settings could have been wrong when he took that one. I would have hoped they might be able to tie it down to a specific frame where the image should have been but apparently they didn't have things labeled well enough for that.

But this seems to show the astronauts can talk about UFOs if they want to, contrary to some claims in this thread.

[edit on 14-4-2010 by Arbitrageur]

Originally posted by Arbitrageur
I should have known better, I actually thought you might post something on topic in response to that quote of mine which was about how upset Buzz Aldrin was that the producers of the video edited out his panel explanation to make it sound like he saw a UFO.

if you perceived it in such a way.... then it sure resonates with your confusions....

Originally posted by mcrom901

Originally posted by Arbitrageur
I submit it's not really clear what it looked like from all the descriptions they gave.

i.e. unidentified aka ufo.....

Originally posted by Arbitrageur
But at least I can try to make an on-topic reply to that video since many people in this thread have made claims that Buzz Aldrin and other astronauts must be getting pressure from NASA or TPTB to not talk about UFOs.

any 'prosaic explanations' in regards to the various sightings in that clip?

Originally posted by Arbitrageur
It looks like McDivitt's hope that "it comes out" wasn't realized. He never did find a picture that matched what he saw though he noted some pictures were blank or overexposed so the camera settings could have been wrong when he took that one. I would have hoped they might be able to tie it down to a specific frame where the image should have been but apparently they didn't have things labeled well enough for that.

concerning your comments about the mcdivitt sighting..... you could also try digging a little more.....

Originally posted by mcrom901
pegasus b.....

The facts are plain. On June 3, 1965, Gemini-4 was launched into orbit 150 miles above the Earth's surface. Rookie astronauts McDivitt and White were headed for the USA's first long-duration flight, the first to attempt extensive visual observations and photography. On the second day, over Hawaii, the 35-year-old McDivitt reported seeing an object -- "like a beer can with an arm sticking out" -- which NASA officials later announced had been identified by Air Force space radars as the thousand-mile-distant Pegasus-2 (but that range was too great, it turned out, for McDivitt's object to have been the winged Pegasus satellite). Together with a mysterious "tadpole" photo, the McDivitt report has achieved UFO superstardom and has been firmly enshrined in UFO literature and lore.

norad......

But since 1969, when the Condon Report was published, some new resources have become available concerning McDivitt's UFO. Furthermore, Dr. Roach himself put his finger on the key to his forced endorsement of the McDivitt case, with the words "if the NORAD listing . . . is complete." An inquiry to the NORAD Directorate of Public Affairs did not produce a definitive solution. "Your comments on the NORAD role related to [Gemini 4] appear to be logical," replied NORAD Public Information Officer Del W. Kindschi, "but our space people tell me they no longer have copies of the messages that were sent to NASA Houston on the sightings," he added. How did McDivitt describe the UFO? His first report came in at Mission Elapsed Time (MET) 29 hours, 52 minuses, 17 seconds. Five minutes later he described it better. "It had big arms sticking out of it, it looked like. I only had it for a minute...."

usaf & nasa....

The Air Force wasn't interested, either: McDivitt never even filed a UFO report with Project Blue Book or anyone else. NASA did not bother with the story, it seems, because nobody was particularly puzzled by the object. when queried by Congressman Robert Michel (himself queried by a constituent), NASA Assistant Administrator for Legislative Affairs, Richard L. Callaghan, replied that "We believe it to be a rocket tank or spent second stage of a rocket."

the debunker.....

During a 1975 interview between Philip Klass (Aviation Week and Space Technology) and Col. Bernard Szczutkowski (USAF-ret.) ot NORAD, Klass mentioned his interest in investigating and exposing UFO cases. Szczutkowski reached into his desk, pulled out a photo, and asked Klass: "Do you want to see a photo of McDivitt's UFO?" Klass quickly assented. The NORAD officer handed Klass the PAO print of the Titan-II second stage. This, he told Klass, was what McDivitt had seen but was unable to identify. It was the Titan booster. Klass obtained a copy of the photo from NORAD and sent it to McDivitt, asking if it did not closely correspond to his verbal description of the UFO he had seen. McDivitt replied: "Thank you for sending me the slide of the Gemini-IV photograph. I very quickly identified the object in the photograph as the second stage of the Titan rocket which launched us . . . I am sure that this is not a photograph of the object which I described many times and which many people refer to as the Gemini IV UFO...." The reasons which McDivitt gave for this certainty, however, were very revealing. It was not because the objects were shaped differently at all. Instead, McDivitt explained, "At the time I saw whatever that object was, the background was nothing but the black of deep space. There was not a horizon anywhere within my view." (Author's note: Roach described the field of view from a Gemini as follows: "The astronauts are able to see only . . . about three percent of the celestial sphere." McDivitt's reply to my preliminary 1976 identification of his UFO with the Titan-II second stage was equally explicit: "The reason I did not assume that the object I saw was the upper stage of the Titan II was simple. During the first orbit of our mission my job was to fly formation with the upper stage of the rocket. This I attempted to do, and I spent approximately one-and-a-half to two hours looking at this upper stage from various angles and distances, and was quite familiar with its appearance. The object I saw later was indeed not the upper stage of the Titan II used in Gemini IV. It may have been a lot of other things, but it definitely was not that upper stage."

and finally the mysterious 'tadpole' pic.....

The "McDivitt UFO photo" -- the "tadpole" -- had a life entirely apart from the actual McDivitt UFO report. When pressed by newsmen for the photo which McDivitt had reportedly taken of the object, officials at the Public Affairs Office at NASA headquarters went through the flight film and selected a series of shots which they thought might have been the object. This was before McDivitt had a chance to review the film himself. The original NASA caption on the photo (PAO 65-H-1013) was as follows: "This photograph . . . shows the satellite McDivitt observed on the 20th revolution i of his four-day space flight . . . he said the Gemini-4 spacecraft was turning and the sun was coming across the window when he filmed the object." Later, after consultation with the astronaut, NASA press officials changed the caption to read: "Astronaut James McDivitt photographed this sun flare through the spacecraft window.... McDivitt explained later after the flight that the sun was coming across the window as the spacecraft rolled, the sun rays struck a metal bolt, causing the flares in the camera lens." This is hardly a useful photo to print. It is the kind that amateur photographers prefer to throw out. But under pressure from reporters who wanted to see "McDivitt's UFO," it was the best that NASA could come up with.

www.jamesoberg.com...

hmmm...... given the fact that those images were never released.... i can understand why he didn't care to file a report in the first place....


[edit on 14/4/10 by mcrom901]

Originally posted by mcrom901

Aldrin: We thought it could have been a panel, but it didn't appear to have that shape at all.

Collins: That's right.

history.nasa.gov...

Thanks for this very interesting and important interview mcrom901, absolutely great find.

The same counts for both of that videos of course, and what an interesting statement from Buzz in the last one.

Buzz; Listen, “we just about could have said, look we see a UFO out the window going along with us.”

You know, what would have happened?

“The public would have gone crazy!”

“Yeah, we were smart enough to say ‘where is the upper stage rocket?”

“We think we might be looking at that out the window”

In my opinion you brought this case to a happy end mcrom901, because what is said in that interview alone is more than enough evidence for throwing that panel claim out of the window.

Originally posted by mcrom901
www.jamesoberg.com...

hmmm...... given the fact that those images were never released.... i can understand why he didn't care to file a report in the first place....

I did read Oberg's article and several others but this point from Oberg's article talks about that issue:

There has been some controversy over what became of the shots McDivitt really had made. Some UFO promoters have implied -- or even stated explicitly -- that the actual films were squirreled away by NASA and that McDivitt was never allowed to see them. But McDivitt disagrees: "In those days we didn't number the film magazines, we couldn't go back and say which pack of film it was on. But I looked through each and every film that we had and it just didn't appear there at all. But there are a lot of photographs that are blank or overexposed or underexposed." Elsewhere, the astronaut had worded it this way: "I reviewed the file myself a week or so later, frame by frame, and there was never anything that I saw in the pictures that looked like what I saw in space. the cameras were not set properly or the lighting wasn't right or something."

Well if he used the wrong camera settings and the photo came out blank as that would imply is a possibility, what would be the point in releasing it? McDivitt said he looked through frame by frame for it, I think Jim Oberg said he did too at one point. Anyway even if he did have a photo of some fuzzy dot, he didn't seem to doubt that it was a manmade object, whatever it was.

[edit on 14-4-2010 by Arbitrageur]

reply to post by spacevisitor


sorry ,why does that quote from the video make you throw out the panel theory?



[edit on 14-4-2010 by yeti101]

Originally posted by yeti101
reply to post by spacevisitor

 

sorry ,why does that quote from the video make you throw out the panel theory?



[edit on 14-4-2010 by yeti101]

Please reread my post and start at the top.

Originally posted by mcrom901
hmmm...... given the fact that those images were never released.... i can understand why he didn't care to file a report in the first place....

It must make holding comfortable opinions so, so easy to just make up desirable 'facts' and make them seem true by calling them 'facts'... such as the non-fact that there were photographs of Gemini-4's UFO that were never released. Imagination is always more pleasant than reality.

There's no evidence there ever were any such photographs. The guy in charge, Dick Underwood, and I went over the 1st-gen flight film with white gloves over a light table in 1976, and showed it all to Allen Hynek. No images. No missing film, either.

It's really very simple:

During a space mission, Buzz and his crew saw a UFO, but didn't want to admit it because of fear of ridicule. Many years later, they still don't want to admit it because of fear of ridicule, and possibly they were hushed by the government.

And the "panel" explanation is a bunch of bull.

Case closed.

reply to post by Viper2

If you're so sure it wasn't a panel, maybe you can tell us what happened to the 4 panels?

They were only drifting away at perhaps 5 miles an hour which means they couldn't have gone too far from the astronauts.

Originally posted by JimOberg
There's no evidence there ever were any such photographs. The guy in charge, Dick Underwood, and I went over the 1st-gen flight film with white gloves over a light table in 1976, and showed it all to Allen Hynek. No images. No missing film, either.

ahhh.... i was not aware of that.... thanks for reminding.....

Originally posted by JimOberg
PR stunt?? When a scheduled transmission was made for the public, they stopped the roll?

Originally posted by mcrom901

Aldrin: We were in PTC [Passive Thermal Control] at the time so each one of us had a chance to take a look at this and it certainly seemed to be within our vicinity and of a very sizeable dimension.

Thanks, this tells us that the spacecraft was indeed slowly rotating at the time of the sighting.

Originally posted by JimOberg
Thanks, this tells us that the spacecraft was indeed slowly rotating at the time of the sighting.

and

The crew did indeed report to earth about another tiny object they watched through their monocular. To some of the astronauts, it looked cylindrical, just like their spent rocket stage which was known to be pacing them in a parallel orbit. Said Armstrong, "It was right at the limit of resolution of the eye; it was very difficult to tell just what shape it was." NASA's reasonable assumption was that it was indeed the rocket stage, since it was behaving just like a rocket stage should; other Apollo flights had reported much the same thing.

Explanations and exposes (such as in the Fall and Winter 1977 Search magazine, the February, 1977 Space World, the 1978 issues of the Skeptical Inquirer, and official NASA news releases) are ignored or misrepresented -- and here indeed is the real coverup conspiracy, if one can be said to exist. The reputation of the space program and of the astronauts has suffered, the public has been confused and misled, and the money rolls in. Where, I often wonder, are the courageous investigative journalists who will rip the lid off of this UFO scam? Where does that leave readers after seeing what looked like a watertight space UFO story fall apart into mistakes, forgeries, and lies? Experienced UFO specialists must wonder how many other "classic" UFO cases which look equally as good are equally as rotten below the surface.

That is the true moral of the Phantom UFOs of Apollo 11!

The Apollo-11 UFO Incidents
by James Oberg
Excerpt from UFOs and Outer Space Mysteries
www.debunker.com...

Originally posted by spacevisitor

Buzz; Listen, “we just about could have said, look we see a UFO out the window going along with us.”

You know, what would have happened?

“The public would have gone crazy!”

“Yeah, we were smart enough to say ‘where is the upper stage rocket?”

“We think we might be looking at that out the window”

cheers.... thanks for the quote

compare that to the claims highlighted in RED in the above post....

Mission Control: 'Apollo 11, Houston. The S-IVB is about 6,000 nautical miles from you now, over.'

Buzz: 'We really didn't think we were looking at something that far away.'

Buzz: 'So we decided that after a while of watching it, it was time to go to sleep; not to talk about it any more until we came back and did briefing.'

www.youtube.com...

July 16, 1969-Apollo 11: This was a mission on which a UFO reportedly chased the spacecraft. "Reportedly, " indeed, but not very accurate. Actually, several UFO stories have attached themselves barnacle-like to man's first moon landing. A photo of an insulation fragment taken soon after third-stage separation has been widely published as a "UFO." The astronauts watched their booster through a telescope on the way to the moon. A series of "UFO photos" allegedly taken by astronaut Aldrin in lunar orbit are actually forgeries by a Japanese UFO magazine. An alleged "astronaut radio conversation " describing a UFO ambush is a hoax.

Astronaut "UFO" Sightings
James Oberg
www.debunker.com...

[edit on 15/4/10 by mcrom901]

reply to post by spacevisitor


this is what i find interesting about this subject , the psychology of belief systems. Nowhere does buzz or the rest of the crew state they think theyre looking at an alien spaceship but you still manage to come to that conclusion.

No intelligent controlled manouvers , no change of direction. All astronauts summise its apollo debris. Buzz testifies the location is correct acording to trajectory graphs he's seen for the panel.

But no , its still most likely an alien spaceship in your opinion. Except you cant articulate why. Very revealing indeed. Goes back to my previous post.

the only way someone could reach that conclusion is because they desperately want to. Not becuase its the most likely.

reply to post by JimOberg

Thanks, this tells us that the spacecraft was indeed slowly rotating at the time of the sighting.

yes, slowly would be correct....

PAO: This is Apollo Control. That was Neil Armstrong reporting that they are now reinstalling the probe and drogue, which is just about on the Flight Plan schedule, and they reported that they would be putting the spacecraft in a slow roll shortly to maintain Passive Thermal Control. In that mode, the spacecraft rotates at a rate of about 3 revolutions per hour to maintain even heating. We have a precise time on that sphere-of-influence change, the point at which the Moon, for calculation purposes here in Mission Control, comes under the predominate influence - the spacecraft comes under the predominate influence of the Moon's gravitational field, and we now calculate that that event will occur at 61 hours, 39 minutes, 55 seconds Ground Elapsed Time.
history.nasa.gov...

3 revolutions per hour is a very slow roll and with 5 windows to point a camera threw, it would have been very easy for them to get some images of the ufo.


all three Astronauts viewed the UFO with the monocular and also observed it with the sextant/telescope.
transcript


www.ion.org...


Apollo 14 Sextant Footage of Lunar Surface



implying the Apollo 11 Astronauts could not have taken any imagery of the UFO because of the PTC maneuver is simply ridiculous.







for more info on the McDivitt missing photo , see this thread here...
www.abovetopsecret.com...

the fact that he admits to taking a minimum of three photographs of this UFO using two different camera systems is also important.

Like we were chatting about in above posts, when McDivitt made his initial report of this UFO sighting to Mission Control, he blatantly stated that he used both the 70mm Hasselblad still camera and the 16mm movie camera to photograph it (I guess we have to give McDivitt the benefit of the doubt and assume that the 16mm motion-picture camera had been set to 1 frame-per-second exposure and he was using it as a still camera rather than a motion-picture camera at the time). Keep in mind that McDivitt's assertion that he used two cameras to film this UFO was made to Houston just minutes after the actual sighting and filming took place, so it is not like McDivitt was mistaken and only used one camera or anything. He obviously, admittedly used two cameras during this encounter.

Now (just to throw some more NASA double-speak and contradiction into the mix), in 1978 Jim Oberg wrote an article that was called Astronaut "UFO" Sightings that was published in a magazine called "The Skeptical Inquirer", and in that article, Oberg references this Gemini IV UFO sighting and states that McDivitt apparently has claimed that he "never touched" the movie camera at all during this sighting! This is obviously in direct contradiction to the transcript evidence from the mission where McDivitt is caught admitting that he DID use the movie camera to film it! Why would McDivitt change his tune over a decade after the fact and suddenly deny he used the movie camera at all? Well, by denying that he ever even used the movie camera, NASA then gets to try to claim that that evidence from that camera system never even existed in the first place! Luckily however, the mission transcript tells us the real tale.

In that same article, Oberg also says makes a point to say that the story of this UFO sighting during Gemini IV "has been embellished and distorted in dozens of publications." Yeah, I think that goes without saying! No argument from me there!

online link to the SKEPTICAL INQUIRER article
www.debunker.com...
www.abovetopsecret.com...

NASA captioned the wrong picture as such: "(PAO 65-H-1013) was as follows: This photograph . . . shows the satellite McDivitt observed on the 20th revolution of his four-day space flight."


In conclusion, there is no certainty. The publicized picture is not the correct one, and the correct one will probably never be seen. There are many pros and cons and do not have an opinion one way or another

www.ufologie.net...

Originally posted by yeti101
reply to post by spacevisitor

 

Buzz testifies the location is correct acording to trajectory graphs he's seen for the panel.

translation:

BS

what would the trajectory of those four panels look like?

"i got to be honest about it and either say well its detail but we saw nothing other than something that we were 99.99% was a man made object it was part of the spacecraft; but we did happen to see it and according to the technical definition of unidentified flying object, it has to fit in that category, cause there was no way for us to tell it was panel one two three or four, without bringing in the rest of the world and disturbing what the heck we were about going to the moon"

"i think it was one of the panels to very nearly the absolute certainty"

www.youtube.com...

hmmmm..... graphs.....

The fibbing is being done by the producers of this video. They left off the second half of the interview in which Aldrin explained what the astronauts had seen. And the supposed video of the object that they inserted in the program is not at all like the flat panel that Aldrin was describing. Needless to say, Buzz was angry and asked them to correct this reversal of what he had said, but they refused. Here is the answer I posted when this video first was aired: I just talked to Buzz Aldrin on the phone, and he notes that the quotations were taken out of context and did not convey the intended meaning. After the Apollo 11 crew verified that the object they were seeing was not the SIVB upper stage, which was about 6000 miles away at that time, they concluded that they were probably seeing one of the panels from the separation of the spacecraft from the upper stage. These panels were not tracked from Earth and were likely much closer to the Apollo spacecraft. They chose not to discuss this on the open communications channel since they were concerned that their comments might be misinterpreted (as they are being now). This discussion about the panels was cut from the broadcast interview, thus giving the impression that the astronauts had seen a UFO.

-David Morrison Interim Director NASA Lunar Science Institute
lunarscience.arc.nasa.gov...

reply to post by mcrom901


so you think nasa would launch a manned spaceflight where panels come off but they wouldnt bother working out where those panels would go? or if it would endanger the module at anytime ? amazing!


your failure to understand english is your downfall. They never tracked them real time from the ground. They worked out before launch where they would go after being released, there was no need to track them.


[edit on 15-4-2010 by yeti101]

Originally posted by yeti101
reply to post by spacevisitor

 

this is what i find interesting about this subject , the psychology of belief systems.

That’s interesting, because the same counts for me.

Originally posted by yeti101
Nowhere does buzz or the rest of the crew state they think theyre looking at an alien spaceship but you still manage to come to that conclusion.

Despite I asked it so nicely, you obvious did not reread my posts.
But this is what I said for instance in an answer to Arbitrageur.

That is exactly the point Arbitrageur, because you said “they thought they were looking at a piece of the space craft” and that “they kept seeing different shapes which didn't seem to match the panel shape”, it is also very well possible that they saw and where followed by something else then a piece of the space craft.

And because of the today’s available evidence for an Extraterrestrial presence here you cannot rule out the possibility that it could have been a UFO/ET craft in my opinion.

And this is what I said in my answer to you.

Originally posted by spacevisitor

Originally posted by yeti101
The whole point of his panel story is that people can see things they cant identify but that doesnt mean they are alien.

Because as you say they see things they can't identify, it nevertheless doesn’t mean that you can rule out that Alien possibility don’t you think?

Originally posted by yeti101
No intelligent controlled manouvers , no change of direction. All astronauts summise its apollo debris.

Look what’s said here.

Aldrin: Yes, and we werent sure but that it might be the S-IVB [Saturn Rocket Third Stage]. We called the ground and were told the S-IVB was 6000 miles away. We had a problem with the High Gain about this time, didn't we?

Collins: There was something. We felt a bump or maybe I just imagined it.

Armstrong: He was wondering whether the MESA [Modular Equipment Stowage Assembly] had come off.

Collins: I don't guess we felt anything.

Aldrin: Of course, we were seeing all sorts of little objects going by at the various dumps and then we happened to see this one brighter object going by. We couldnt think of anything else it could be other than the S-IVB. We looked at it through the monocular and it seemed to have a bit of an L-shape to it.

Armstrong: Like an open suitcase.

Aldrin: We were in PTC [Passive Thermal Control] at the time so each one of us had a chance to take a look at this and it certainly seemed to be within our vicinity and of a very sizeable dimension.

Armstrong: We should say that it was right at the limit of the resolution of the eye. It was very difficult to tell just what shape it was. And there was no way to tell the size without knowing the range or the range without knowing the size.

Aldrin: So then I got down in the LEB [Lower Equipment Bay] and started looking for it in the optics. We were grossly misled because with the sextant off-focus what we saw appeared to be cylinder.

Armstrong: Or really two rings.

Aldrin: Yes.

Armstrong: Two rings. Two connected rings.

Collins: No, it looked like a hollow cylinder to me. It didn't look like two connected rings. You could see this thing tumbling and, when it came around end-on, you could look right down in its guts. It was a hollow cylinder. But then you could change the focus on the sextant and it would be replaced by this open-book shape. It was really weird.

Aldrin: I guess there's not too much more to say about it other than it wasn't cylinder.

Collins: It was during the period when we thought it was a cylinder that we inquired about the S-IVB and we'd almost convinced ourselves that's what it had to be. But we dont have any more conclusions than that really. The fact that we didnt see it much past this one time period - we really don't have a conclusion as to what it might have been, how big it was, or how far away it was. It was something that wasnt part of the urine dump, were pretty sure of that. Skipping ahead a bit, when we jettisoned the LM, you know we fired an explosive charge and got rid of the docking rings and the LM went boom. Pieces came off the LM. It could have been some Mylar or something that had somehow come loose from the LM.

Aldrin: We thought it could have been a panel, but it didnt appear to have that shape at all.

Collins: That's right, and for some reason, we thought it might have been a part of the High Gain Antenna. It might have been about the time we had high gain antenna problems. In the back of my mind, I have some reason to suspect that its origin was from the spacecraft.

history.nasa.gov...

Originally posted by yeti101

Buzz testifies the location is correct acording to trajectory graphs he's seen for the panel.

For the second time; if he was able to figure that out, it would have been no doubt an enormous achievement, therefore I assume that you saw the information about how he did that and therefore I hope that you can or will show me where I can find that information, so I can read it myself.

Originally posted by yeti101
But no , its still most likely an alien spaceship in your opinion. Except you cant articulate why. Very revealing indeed.

I also wonder how many times I must explain that to you, but you can read that here.

reply to post by spacevisitor

Originally posted by yeti101
Goes back to my previous post.

the only way someone could reach that conclusion is because they desperately want to. Not becuase its the most likely.

I reached that conclusion because of the available evidence for it, the evidence that you so desperately ignore.



[edit on 15/4/10 by spacevisitor]

reply to post by spacevisitor


Nothing that’s said suggests an alien spaceship. Theyre looking at an object they cant identify. That’s all.

you only reach that conclusion becuase you desperately want to . Not becuase theres any evidence for it. Lets stack up the evidence.

We know panels exist.
We know panels were in space (and other apollo debris)
Theres no suggestion the object was doing manouvers or intelligently controlled.
Buzz testifies in the larry king show he saw the graphs of the panel trajectory and it matched the location of the object.

whats the evidence of it being an alien spaceship? none.

But despite that you still come to the alien spaceship conclusion. Fascinating.

[edit on 15-4-2010 by yeti101]

Originally posted by yeti101
reply to post by spacevisitor

 

Nothing that’s said suggests an alien spaceship. Theyre looking at an object they cant identify. That’s all.

you only reach that conclusion becuase you desperately want to . Not becuase theres any evidence for it. Lets stack up the evidence.

We know panels exist.
We know panels were in space (and other apollo debris)
Theres no suggestion the object was doing manouvers or intelligently controlled.
Buzz testifies in the larry king show he saw the graphs of the panel trajectory and it matched the location of the object.

whats the evidence of it being an alien spaceship? none.

Well, if you cannot come up with any other evidence then this, it is quite obvious to me that my remark about the evidence that I provided you and which you obviously so desperately ignore is therefore correct.

Originally posted by yeti101
But despite that you still come to the alien spaceship conclusion. Fascinating.

Despite what may I ask?

It's fascinating indeed.