Buzz Aldrin says there are no Aliens!

page: 19
23
<< 16  17  18    20 >>

log in

join

posted on Apr, 15 2010 @ 06:54 AM
link   
reply to post by spacevisitor
 


i dont see any statements from the astronauts that they thought it was an alien spaceship if you could quote where they say that it would be easier. I see them talk about an object they cant identify and summise its apollo hardware but cant tell what.

How is that evidence for an alien spaceship? yuor clinging on to the fact they cant identify the object therefor it must be an alien spaceship
why cant it be anything else? why cant it be apollo hardware?

[edit on 15-4-2010 by yeti101]




posted on Apr, 15 2010 @ 07:45 AM
link   

Originally posted by yeti101
i dont see any statements from the astronauts that they thought it was an alien spaceship if you could quote where they say that it would be easier. I see them talk about an object they cant identify and summise its apollo hardware but cant tell what.
How is that evidence for an alien spaceship? yuor clinging on to the fact they cant identify the object therefor it must be an alien spaceship
why cant it be anything else? why cant it be apollo hardware?


Well, it seems quite obvious to me that we don’t come to an agreement regarding that in any way, so I assume that you agree with me that any further discussing about that has no point anymore.



posted on Apr, 15 2010 @ 10:44 AM
link   

Originally posted by yeti101
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.


sorry.... but its your responsibility to provide those specific detailed references, in order for illiterate folks like me to be in a better position to comprehend your uber language proficiencies.....


all i've seen in your endless babblings thus far are the typical pseudo-skeptical/comical straw man arguments ..... where is it mentioned alien spacecraft..... panel is not unidentifiable.... yada yada....


can you point out the posts in regards to your claims where you seem to be reading about alien spacecraft certainties?

as it has already been demonstrated; this sighting was UNIDENTIFIED; but you still fail to accept the fact that all the proposed 'prosaic mundan'ties' have been shown to be FALSE...


in any case; coming back to your initial post concerning the trajectory graphs.... as i understand now, you were referring to the larry king video...

transcripts.cnn.com...


BUZZ ALDRIN, FORMER ASTRONAUT/APOLLO 11: What did I see? Well, we -- the first day out, maybe six hours after launch, we were scheduled to make a mid-course correction. And I'd like to show you a few things in this rocket just to point out the condition that we were in. During launch, this boost protective cover comes off, hopefully not with the command module attached. And then the first stage drops off, the second stage drops off. Unfortunately, I can't take this apart, but there's the third stage and inside is the lunar module. And this is the command and service module.

Once after going in orbit and a half around the earth we fire for five minutes, this engine here, and we head toward the moon. Now shortly after that, we separate the command and service module. And it turns around like this. And it docks with the lunar module. I'm going to have to be pretty ambidextrous.

KING: Are we getting to a UFO?

ALDRIN: We're getting to that, yes.



which according to the actual data; was @ met.....


003:16:54 Collins (onboard): Here we go.

003:16:55 Armstrong (onboard): Okay, Houston; we're about to Sep.

003:16:58 Collins (onboard): Thrusting...

[Mike thrusts forward in the plus-X direction with the small Reaction Control System engines, so that when Buzz pushes the Sep (Separation) button on Panel 2, the CSM immediately starts to move away from the S-IVB stage and the jettisoned panels.]

003:16:59 Armstrong: Houston, we're about to Sep.

003:17:00 Armstrong (onboard): Sep!

003:17:02 McCandless: This is Houston. We copy.

003:17:03 Aldrin (onboard): Look at that trash.

003:17:05 Armstrong (onboard): Sep complete.



003:18:15 Aldrin (onboard): Your Man(ual) Att(itude), Pitch, to Accel Command?

003:18:19 Armstrong (onboard): It went to Rate - Okay, I see an SLA panel going out.

[This is one of the four Spacecraft Launch-vehicle Adaptor panels which contained the Lunar Module during launch. They were jettisoned by partial hinges once they had rotated 45° away from the LM.]

003:18:23 Aldrin (onboard): Okay, you got to get a pitch rate in there -

003:18:30 Armstrong (onboard): See that SLA panel?

003:18:35 Aldrin (onboard): Is it flying - yet?

003:18:37 Collins (onboard): It's alright. She's darn well unbelievable - something.

003:18:47 Armstrong (onboard): I see it...

003:18:50 Aldrin (onboard): Do I need some circuit breaker in to get - -

003:18:52 Armstrong (onboard): I see another - No, that's alright.

003:18:54 Aldrin (onboard): ... to get this camera going? Mike?

003:18:57 Collins (onboard): No, you need the power on over there, though.

003:19:00 Aldrin (onboard): I turned it on.

003:19:01 Armstrong (onboard): I got it. ... beautiful.



003:22:23 Aldrin (onboard): How far out are you, Mike?

003:22:25 Collins (onboard): I'm still quite a ways. That's definitely an SLA panel - there's no doubt about that. Sure looks like... panel.


PAO: This is Apollo Control at 4 hours, 34 minutes. Apollo 11's velocity is 14,972 feet per second. Its distance from Earth is 15,895 nautical miles. Spacecraft weight: 96,760.9 pounds. We're about 5 minutes away from the evasive maneuver that will ensure there will be no problems of re-contact between the spacecraft and the S-IVB stage of the launch vehicle.

Day 1, part 3: Transposition, Docking and Extraction


continuation of the interview from larry king....


ALDRIN: Right. Now notice these three and four panels. Whenever the command module separates and turns around, those panels go off in four different directions. The rocket -- now we're separated from the rocket, and the rocket and the spacecraft, the lunar module and command module, are heading towards the moon.

Now we orient perpendicular to the plane of the sun, the earth and the moon, and rotate slowly like this. And we can look out these windows and see the earth drift by and see the moon drift by.


additional data.....




Imagine the point where this line intersects the planet's surface. We can further imagine a flat plane at this point parallel to the horizontal. Obviously, as the spacecraft moves across the planet, the absolute orientation of this plane keeps changing but it provides a useful reference for orbital velocity computation. In this arrangement, the plus-Z axis is along the vertical line towards the planetary centre, the plus-X axis is in the direction of orbital motion parallel to the local horizontal and the plus-Y axis is perpendicular to the orbital plane.


history.nasa.gov...

cnn cntd....



KING: And what did you see?

ALDRIN: And I saw a light out there, OK. This is after we had witnessed the upper stage rocket next to us make an evasive maneuver to miss the moon. Later missions, it crashed into the moon so that we could determine the seismic effect of crashing into the moon.

KING: So you saw a light?

ALDRIN: So we saw a light and we thought, I wonder what that is. You know there are a lot of lights out there when you're not looking in the direction of the sun. There are a lot of stars. And they're all fixed relative to each other.

KING: What was unusual...

ALDRIN: Now when one of them starts moving or it's moving, and we know that that's another object. It's not a star.


@ met.....


PAO: This is Apollo Control at 5 hours, 11 minutes into the mission. The S-IVB slingshot maneuver was completed about 5 minutes ago. Designed to put the third stage of the launch vehicle into a trajectory that will take it behind the trailing edge of the Moon and then into a solar orbit. The crew did not witness this maneuver. The Command Module was not in the proper attitude where they could see the S-IVB at the time. We've advised the crew that we do not believe that we'll do the first midcourse correction. That we'll wait for midcourse correction 2 tomorrow and expect a Delta-V to be performed in that maneuver of about 21.3 feet per second. We've also had some other brief transmissions including, eh, comments from Neil Armstrong on the view out the window, and a weather report on the part of the world he can see. We have the tape of these transmissions that have occurred during the news conference at the Cape. We'll play that for you now and catch up live.




cntd....



posted on Apr, 15 2010 @ 10:45 AM
link   

Now, we know that if we were to say, Houston, we've a light out the _ It going along with us, heading for the moon. A lot of these guys are going to go ape, you know. And it's really going to endanger the mission and occupy a lot of our time trying to explain what's going on.

KING: All right.

ALDRIN: So we very shrewdly, Neil did, said, "Houston, where is the upper stage?" They didn't know right away. But they said we'll check with the guys in the back room. The guys in the back room in 10 minutes came back and said, "It's 6,000 miles away."


and when was that.....



PAO: This is Apollo Control at 60 hours, 37 minutes. We said goodbye - goodnight to the crew about 10 minutes ago. We expect that they will be settling down for their rest period shortly. At the present time, Apollo 11 is 184,600 nautical miles [341,800 km] from Earth. The spacecraft velocity is presently 3,023 feet per second [921 m/s].

060:45:38 Armstrong: Houston, Apollo 11.

060:45:41 Duke: Go ahead, 11. Over.

060:45:46 Armstrong: Do you have any idea where the S-IVB is with respect to us?

[The crew have noticed an unexplained flashing object out of the window, which appears to be catching the sunlight as it tumbles. Neil is wondering whether it is the abandoned third stage of the Saturn launch vehicle.]

060:45:50 Duke: Stand by.

[Long comm break.]

PAO: This is Apollo Control at 60 hours, 47 minutes. We just got a call from the spacecraft requesting that we give them the position of the S-IVB in respect to the spacecraft and we're currently coming up with that bit of information, so we'll stand by.

060:49:02 Duke: Apollo 11, Houston. The S-IVB's about 6,000 nautical miles from you now. Over. [Pause.]

060:49:14 Armstrong: Okay. Thank you.


Day 3, part 3: Flight Plan Updates

anyways......


Well, we figured that's not what we're looking at. So we started thinking a little bit more about these four panels.


well.... we can't know for sure what they actually were thinking.... however the details from the debriefing, paints a totally different picture.... nonetheless its important to keep in mind as to 'when' the s-ivb & sla panels were in fact separated....


btw... how is it that nobody sees any contradictions in regards to the actual info from nasa concerning the s-ivb claims....


anyhow....


And I'd seen a graph where it showed the separation distance that was calculated before liftoff, before the whole mission went of where these panels would be in case the spacecraft made some maneuver. And they guaranteed there would be no contact.


though its true that these reports did confirm the 'no contact' factor.... but i don't understand as to how he is trying to appeal to authority here....

maybe you could clarify that....


here you go....

Apollo 9 SLA panel jettison separation and recontact analysis (5.98mb PDF)

Apollo 11 - Trajectory Reconstruction & Postflight Analysis (4.6mb PDF)


TB-6 predicted start: This is calculated from current tracking data to be at 002:35:14, which implies that engine start will be commanded at 002:44:44 and that Tig (time of ignition) will be at 002:45:52. The actual start time is based on the solution to trajectory equations which depend on the vehicle's state vector.

Attitude for TLI: is 179°, 71°, 1° in roll, pitch and yaw respectively. This is with respect to the orientation the guidance platform has held since launch.

Burn duration: 5 minutes, 47 seconds.

Delta-VC prime: 10,435.6 fps (3,180.8 m/s). This is the figure they will enter into the EMS to allow them to monitor the burn.

Inertial velocity at engine cut-off, (VI): 35,575 fps (10,843.3 m/s).

Attitude for separation of the CSM from the launch vehicle: 357°, 107°, 41° in roll, pitch and yaw respectively. Among the criteria for adopting this attitude is solar illumination of the S-IVB to allow the crew to practice maneuvering relative to it.

Attitude for the extraction of the LM: 301°, 287°, 319° in roll, pitch and yaw respectively.

history.nasa.gov...





posted on Apr, 15 2010 @ 02:29 PM
link   
Wow, good original research. Sincere kudos.

Aren't we all overlooking another powerful argument that what they were looking at were spacecraft-generated objects?

These sightings on mission after mission were all on the way out from the Earth.

None reported on the way back. Nor was there any spacecraft-related debris on that leg.

Hmmmm?



posted on Apr, 15 2010 @ 04:07 PM
link   
reply to post by JimOberg
 



None reported on the way back.



does that prove nothing was observed on the way back ?

nope





"the crew was weary of reporting the ufo"


and Buzz said...

"obviously the three of us were not gonna blurt out" ...


Hey Houston we got something moving alongside of us and we don't know what it is

can you tell us what it is ?

we weren't about to do that because we know those transmissions would be heard by all sorts of people


www.youtube.com...



the lie is different at every level (RCH)

[edit on 15-4-2010 by easynow]



posted on Apr, 15 2010 @ 05:29 PM
link   

Originally posted by easynow
reply to post by JimOberg
 



None reported on the way back.



does that prove nothing was observed on the way back ?

nope



That's right. What the first-hand witnesses say doesn't confirm what I want to believe.

So they're obviously liars!



posted on Apr, 15 2010 @ 06:59 PM
link   
reply to post by JimOberg
 



So they're obviously liars!


just remember, YOU said that not me


is there anywhere to quote the Apollo Astronauts from ? where it say's they didn't see anything on the TEC ? if not how can you/someone call them liars ? i agree with Zorgon...NASA doesn't lie, they just don't tell us everything !



and since i have your attention , what's up with you saying " McDivitt didn't even touch the video camera" ... when it clearly says in the transcripts that he did use the movie camera to take a couple of pictures ?




the astronaut did see a nearby satellite, but did not succeed in getting a photo; he never even touched the movie camera.

www.debunker.com...




www.jsc.nasa.gov...
www.youtube.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...




do you enjoy rewriting history for no good reason ?



[edit on 15-4-2010 by easynow]



posted on Apr, 16 2010 @ 12:17 AM
link   

Originally posted by easynow
and since i have your attention , what's up with you saying " McDivitt didn't even touch the video camera" ... when it clearly says in the transcripts that he did use the movie camera to take a couple of pictures ?


Interesting. My notes from Underwood, head of the photo lab, says he saw no exposed movie film that might have been associated with those attempts. But McDivitt does say he tried to use the camera so it can't be true that he never touched it. My bad.



posted on Apr, 16 2010 @ 12:51 AM
link   

Originally posted by JimOberg

Originally posted by easynow
and since i have your attention , what's up with you saying " McDivitt didn't even touch the video camera" ... when it clearly says in the transcripts that he did use the movie camera to take a couple of pictures ?
Interesting. My notes from Underwood, head of the photo lab, says he saw no exposed movie film that might have been associated with those attempts. But McDivitt does say he tried to use the camera so it can't be true that he never touched it. My bad.


Thanks, I wondered about that too and asked you about the movie camera in another thread where like this one, McDivitt wasn't really the main topic so I didn't follow up there, but now that finally answers the question I asked you in the other thread.

So apparently you and McDivitt scrutinized the Hasselblad exposures, but we aren't so sure about the movie camera exposures.

The claim in the other thread where I asked about this was made by UFO Hunters that McDivitt thought he may have photographed a secret spy satellite, though I have been unable to confirm anywhere that McDivitt actually said that. And if in fact he did do that (which I have my doubts about) I could understand why the photos might not be released as secret satellite pictures could be a national security issue which is the way UFO hunters spun the incident.



posted on Apr, 16 2010 @ 01:48 PM
link   
reply to post by JimOberg
 



Interesting. My notes from Underwood, head of the photo lab, says he saw no exposed movie film that might have been associated with those attempts. But McDivitt does say he tried to use the camera so it can't be true that he never touched it. My bad.



my bad ? LOL

i'm glad you are acknowledging the mistake but jee whiz Jim, this obvious wrong information has been out there for over 30 yrs !




Astronaut "UFO" Sightings
James Oberg
THE SKEPTICAL INQUIRER

Journal of the Committee for the Scientific Investigation of Claims of the Paranormal
Volume III, No.1, Fall 1978

www.debunker.com...


i'm not gonna go into detail and ridicule you like i should because that isn't the topic of this thread but this raises some serious concerns about all your research. i'll leave it at that.





But McDivitt does say he tried to use the camera


NO !

according to the transcript he said....

" I GOT A COUPLE OF PICTURES WITH A MOVIE CAMERA "

do you understand the difference ?

:shk:







on topic...


i respect Buzz and all the Astronauts for what they accomplished but at the same time i feel sorry for them because they have been burdened with keeping the secrets of the Apollo missions and the military industrial complex.




Dr Farouk El Baz, one of NASA's foremost scientists, confirmed public suspicions when he stated 'not every discovery has been announced to the public'.

www.greatdreams.com...


[edit on 16-4-2010 by easynow]



posted on Apr, 16 2010 @ 03:19 PM
link   

Originally posted by easynow
i respect Buzz and all the Astronauts for what they accomplished but at the same time i feel sorry for them because they have been burdened with keeping the secrets of the Apollo missions and the military industrial complex.




Dr Farouk El Baz, one of NASA's foremost scientists, confirmed public suspicions when he stated 'not every discovery has been announced to the public'.

www.greatdreams.com...




Let's see, somebody in 'Saga' magazine SAID that's what El-Baz said. While you're into productive original research, why don't you go ask El-Baz what he said or what he really meant?



posted on Apr, 16 2010 @ 03:33 PM
link   

Originally posted by easynow

Dr Farouk El Baz, one of NASA's foremost scientists, confirmed public suspicions when he stated 'not every discovery has been announced to the public'.
www.greatdreams.com...


I went to that link and tried searching for the
'not every discovery has been announced to the public'
you cited by entering the word "discovery" in my browser's search, and found these two sentences:


Following the discovery of flying discs....

The recent discovery of ice at the poles.....


I didn't find any other occurrences of "discovery", am I missing it? Sorry I've already read as much about majestic-12 as I care to so when I saw that in there I didn't feel like reading through the entire document, that's why I used the search function.

And yeah nobody's perfect but I'd still take Jim Oberg's 99.8% accuracy rate over most contributors on ATS, as few others have an accuracy rate that high, in fact even my own accuracy may not be that high. I have to admit I'm wrong once in a while. (I won't even talk about your accuracy beyond my question about why I can't find the quote you cited in the source you cited).



posted on Apr, 16 2010 @ 04:16 PM
link   
reply to post by JimOberg
 



Let's see, somebody in 'Saga' magazine SAID that's what El-Baz said. While you're into productive original research, why don't you go ask El-Baz what he said or what he really meant?



good idea maybe i will but what i am wondering is,

if he didn't say it, then why no public rebuttal ? and if i actually got to talk to him about the quote, would he tell me the truth or would it be the military industrial complex approved truth ? LOL



on to the topic of Buzz claiming no Aliens have ever visited this planet..



how can Buzz Aldrin make a claim like that when other people who were employed by the US goverment and associated with NASA, say/believe the exact opposite ?




one of many examples is the Ex-NAZI , Herman Oberth who supposedly believed ufo's were interplanetary craft !





During the 1950s and 1960s, as a sideline, Oberth offered his opinions regarding unidentified flying objects (UFOs). He was a supporter of the extraterrestrial hypothesis for the origin of the UFOs that were seen at the Earth. For example, in an article in The American Weekly magazine of October 24, 1954, Obert stated, "It is my thesis that flying saucers are real, and that they are space ships from another solar system. I think that they possibly are manned by intelligent observers who are members of a race that may have been investigating our earth for centuries..."

en.wikipedia.org...





In his reference to NASA, Oberth said: "NASA is busy telling us that there is a high probability of life in the universe but it's all far out there, not here. Frankly, when one looks long and carefully at the UFO evidence one wonders if perhaps it's not conceivable that some of it has found us - rather than vice versa. But to date my own efforts to get NASA to consider that intriguing possibility seem to have been ignored.. I realize, of course, that there may be semi-political considerations that make it awkward for NASA to fish in these waters.."

www.mufon.com...





Hermann Oberth -- "we have been helped by the people of other worlds"




posted on Apr, 16 2010 @ 04:43 PM
link   

Originally posted by easynow
i'm not gonna go into detail and ridicule you like i should because that isn't the topic of this thread but this raises some serious concerns about all your research. i'll leave it at that.


Hi easynow, I give you my compliments for making such a decision, because ridiculing people or bringing them in discredit is the easiest and most low level thing to do in discussions like this.
Too bad such discreditable methods are regarding this subject unfortunately used too often by professional debunkers for decades now.

So, by doing that you show the right ATS spirit here.


And regarding your remark here,


Originally posted by easynow
i respect Buzz and all the Astronauts for what they accomplished but at the same time i feel sorry for them because they have been burdened with keeping the secrets of the Apollo missions and the military industrial complex.


Good point, I absolutely agree with you here.

Because it must regarding what you said there being very difficult to stand in their shoes. [I hope you understand my saying here]



[edit on 16/4/10 by spacevisitor]



posted on Apr, 16 2010 @ 05:13 PM
link   

Originally posted by easynow
Hermann Oberth -- "we have been helped by the people of other worlds"


Great video easynow, thanks for posting. :up;

I am personally convinced that what Dr. Herman Oberth NASA Space Scientist says here is absolutely right.

“…We cannot take credit for our record advancement in certain scientific fields alone”.

“...We have been HELPED”.

“…And we have been helped by the people of OTHER WORLDS”.



posted on Apr, 16 2010 @ 07:06 PM
link   
reply to post by Arbitrageur
 



I didn't feel like reading through the entire _/quote]
maybe this will help ? i dunno

google search results



nobody's perfect

true that, that's why were debating Buzz Aldrins proclamations !




I won't even talk about your accuracy


this is a discussion board where theory's are proposed and debated and the difference is, the information posted on debunker.com, about Astronaut UFO sightings is a opinion based white paper article and gives nobody the opportunity to debate or correct any possible mistakes.









reply to post by spacevisitor
 



Because it must regarding what you said there being very difficult to stand in their shoes. [I hope you understand my saying here]


hi spacevisitor ! always good to hear from you my friend


yes i understand what your saying and most people respect and admire their accomplishments but if these Astronauts do in fact know about things that are not public knowledge , then yes one could easily speculate that it must be somekind of burden to carry.

i believe the Apollo missions were really military operations , that means these Astronauts were told what to do and what to say so any interaction with the general public might be a awkward situation for them. (my opinion)








glad you liked that video about Hermann Oberth , it sure is interesting to hear his take on the ufo subject especially since he was involved with the NAZI secret projects.




[edit on 16-4-2010 by easynow]



posted on Apr, 17 2010 @ 02:43 AM
link   
reply to post by easynow
 


Agreed whit you on all the line.



posted on Apr, 17 2010 @ 05:03 AM
link   

Originally posted by easynow
this is a discussion board where theory's are proposed and debated and the difference is, the information posted on debunker.com, about Astronaut UFO sightings is a opinion based white paper article and gives nobody the opportunity to debate or correct any possible mistakes.


Opportunities for debate and correction are always appreciated, but that's not the format of the vast majority of UFO websites either.

The 'debunker' report is not opinion-based reporting, it is research-based reporting. Since you've never done any of the latter, and appear to be unfamiliar with the genre in your citations of other people's supportive opinions, your confusion is understandable and excusable.



posted on Apr, 17 2010 @ 07:10 AM
link   

Originally posted by easynow
most people respect and admire their accomplishments but if these Astronauts do in fact know about things that are not public knowledge , then yes one could easily speculate that it must be somekind of burden to carry.


Hi easynow, regarding your saying above I am shore you will find this interesting my friend.

It’s said in this interview by Edward Leverne Moragne, Ph.D.

Linda Moulton Howe's May 8, 1997, interview with Edward Leverne Moragne, Ph.D., at his Houston, Texas, home:


Dr. Moragne was [he died in January 2000] a physicist who is nearing 80 years in age and in fair, but steadily declining health. His knowledge might soon follow his name into quiet obscurity, even though he has worked closely with equally brilliant men - men like J. R. Oppenheimer; Albert Einstein; and Dr. Edward Teller, 'Father' of the hydrogen bomb.


At a certain moment in that interview, Linda asked him.


DO YOU KNOW IF ANY U. S. ASTRONAUTS SAW DISCS OR UFO CRAFT ON THE MOON?

I know astronauts have seen UFOs, but they don't want to talk about that because people will say they are kooks.

WHAT HAS BEEN DESCRIBED TO YOU?

Huge circular craft, but they aren't going to talk about it.

WHY IS THE UFO/E.T. TRUTH SO SUPPRESSED. WHY SHOULDN'T EVERYONE KNOW ABOUT IT?

All you do is get up a hot steam in Washington when you try to discuss it.


This video you posted had always my interest for a certain reason.



I even did made a thread about it.

www.abovetopsecret.com...





new topics

top topics



 
23
<< 16  17  18    20 >>

log in

join