UFOs or Space Junk Near the Surface of the Moon?

Originally posted by Heliocentric
I like this one that you took, I don't think it's close to the OP video, but it's in the right direction.

I thought it was very close, why do you think it's not close? The main difference is there's only one instead of multiple objects in the OP but I thought it looked very similar to any one object in the OP. It doesn't move, it appears just prior to the edge of the moon, and it fades away just after the edge of the moon, in a very similar fashion to the objects in the flaxius video.

Originally posted by Heliocentric
Just put your money where your mouth is and show us an equivalent to the OP video in picture, with droplets, dust specks or whatever you want.

I think virraszto has now done that.

But this one could perhaps be a bird.

Birds move. These things in the OP don't move, unless the camera moves.

Originally posted by sensible thought
reply to post by qonone

 

It's not "space junk the size of a city" It is stuff (satilites) orbiting Earth passing infront of moon.

Most visible satellites move, with the exception of geosynchronous satellites which may appear in a fixed position, but those are really far away as geosynchronous orbits are much higher than low earth orbits. The main reason I think it's not geosynchronous satellites is because of the way the objects fade out once they get a certain distance from the edge of the moon. Why would a satellite fade out like that? I don't think it would. That's also a reason to think it's not birds, why would birds fade out like that? Contamination in the optical system such as a condensation droplet will fade out exactly as seen for reasons I've described based in optical physics.

If virraszto can wiggle the camera a little in the next video as the object crosses the moon's edge, we can see if the object moves with the camera and if so, it's in the camera's optical system somewhere, and it's not anything in the sky of the Earth or the moon. Depthoffield already showed such a wiggle for the OP video demonstrating it's not in the sky. If it moves with the camera, it's not in the sky, it's in the camera.

Originally posted by Arbitrageur
I thought it was very close, why do you think it's not close? The main difference is there's only one instead of multiple objects in the OP but I thought it looked very similar to any one object in the OP. It doesn't move, it appears just prior to the edge of the moon, and it fades away just after the edge of the moon, in a very similar fashion to the objects in the flaxius video.

No I don't think it's close. There's not the same texture and definition in the object, you don't get the same dynamic, orbiting movement in it (I know we don't agree on that one), and as you said, there's but one instead of eight.

Had he posted that video here on ATS in a thread of his own and tried to pass it off as a UFO, he would have been tarred and feathered in less than a page (by who one may ask).

Originally posted by Heliocentric
Just put your money where your mouth is and show us an equivalent to the OP video in picture, with droplets, dust specks or whatever you want.

Originally posted by Arbitrageur
I think virraszto has now done that.

I know you want to wrap this one up and move on to the next. But no. The OP video still stands out as unique. And don't forget virraszto denies that it's dirt, droplets or even camera related. He doesn't support your theory.

Originally posted by Heliocentric
But this one could perhaps be a bird.

Originally posted by Arbitrageur
Birds move. These things in the OP don't move, unless the camera moves.

Birds don't move if they glide, which they have a tendency to do on high altitude. And we see it for how long, a couple of seconds at the most?

But, I'm not going to argue for a theory I don't really believe in. It can be a bird, but probably isn't.

Originally posted by sensible thought
It's not "space junk the size of a city" It is stuff (satilites) orbiting Earth passing infront of moon.

Sorry to disappoint you, but no.

Geosynchronous/geostationary sats have been checked on the info that we have (date 9th of July, north Holland-Eindhoven area, early/late evening) and there is no match.

hold on in all the mentions of swamp gas iv never once seen a videos of it i call bull # not the tv show but i mean hoax !!!

reply to post by alfa1


not only that they seem to be way too low too actually be in orbit

cool video..i wish i had a big enough telescope i would stare at the moon for hours, S+F

It's nice to see the OP will just not give up, seeing as he did the right thing and took the video to an astronomy forum to ask astronomers. However after ignoring the responses he didn't like is still maintaining there is some type of mystery around this video, this thread died a couple of days ago so you keep pushing the one at the astronomy forum. The answer has been given on both forums, it's clear it's not what you want to hear but so be it.

Very interesting, but I know lots of amateur astronomers and professional, and they usually just guess based on best information just like everybody, but these are too distinct and could be occulting stars being distorted or otherwise magnified by optic abborative or CCD issues. All speculation.

We do know of debris found by the Apollo missions that they had no idea where it came from. There were many probes and lander missions from many countries we cited in the conversation here many years ago also.

www.abovetopsecret.com...

But this particular video would need separate imaging from another location and different optical, video, CCD package to know anything for sure.

ZG

reply to post by K-PAX-PROT


Aliens as well like leaving junk around the place like dumping a willy jeep in a crater on the moon

There is a lot of data out there pointing to the fact that the moon is an artificial satellite.

Richard Hoagland has been heavily into this, but he is not the only one.

There's another researcher who amassed a huge number of drawings of odd things on the moon simply by looking in old British astronomy journals.

I like George Kavassilas' approach to the subject.

There are also several people connected to secret projects like Montauk who claim to have visited bases on the moon. They are run by ETs.

At this point, the truth is still up for grabs.

nice post, from my point of view, unless they are rockj/ice debris orbiting the moon, this cant be man-made space debris orbiting the moon because they would had crash into it long ago... its obviously ufos.

reply to post by K-PAX-PROT


You cant tell if that's near the moon, that could be in earth orbit or a high flying bird nothing to prove it's near the moon!

hmm....the distance at which these floating/hovering objects can be seen, they're massive in size; thus @ the magnification of the telescope, which we see in the video, if the objects were closer we'd see them ALOT bigger.. thus we might conclude that the objects are at the same distance of the moon..

Originally posted by l_e_cox
There is a lot of data out there pointing to the fact that the moon is an artificial satellite.

Care to share that data with everyone?

Richard Hoagland has been heavily into this,

Oh dear, you must not realise he is a known liar and hoaxer - remember his "face on Mars" crap?

There's another researcher who amassed a huge number of drawings of odd things on the moon simply by looking in old British astronomy journals.

Link?

name of "researcher"?

List of Journals?

Originally posted by spoor

Originally posted by l_e_coxRichard Hoagland has been heavily into this,

Oh dear, you must not realise he is a known liar and hoaxer - remember his "face on Mars" crap?

You must realise this debate is not about the credibility of Hoagland. Lets not start a thread derailing argument about that 6 months after his name was mentioned.

If you want to chip in, please have a quick scan through the debate first, just to show you are intereste din denying ignorance.

Even though we have already been on the moon, yes aliens and fairyflies and unicorns are all on the moon, just waiting.

Also, out of the millions of people who view the moon on a daily basis, only you guys on ATS found anything. Why don't telescope manufacturers tell their customers that they need an ATS account before they can see big alien bugs visibly crawling and prancing around the moon?

Originally posted by BrokenCircles

Originally posted by ThinkingCap

Some great evidence. It appears that the debunkers cannot shout swamp gas or missile, so this thread stays very quiet.

So I give this thread a bump, a flag, and a star.

In the short time that I have been on ATS, I have seen the term 'swamp gas' quite a few times. I have not once, seen it stated by anyone who was giving any effort to actually debunk. The only people who ever use that term, are those who are making a very weak attempt to discredit debunkers, or those who are trying to be funny. Regardless of which reason, it fails every time.

I don't think the term 'swamp gas' is being used as an actual excuse. It more refers to the typical explanations to expect from people.

Peace

Originally posted by Komodo
hmm....the distance at which these floating/hovering objects can be seen, they're massive in size; thus @ the magnification of the telescope, which we see in the video, if the objects were closer we'd see them ALOT bigger.. thus we might conclude that the objects are at the same distance of the moon..

Sorry but you dont understand how focal length of a lens?telscope effects perspective of what you see a good example here the concrete block dosen't change in size or position only the focal length of the lens!




Thats why you can tell if those objects are near the moon or not!

I'm going with water droplets on or in the lens of the telescope.

Doing a very rough estimation of scale, unscientiffically, because we really can't be very scientific due to the resolution, and blur, would put these 'UFO's over 20 miles in diameter. It's up to you if you believe a craft over 20 miles in size wouldn't be all over the astronomy community, and probably on the MSM.

So look below and tell me how far off I might be in size estimating. Images had to be downsized due to the large pixel count, viewing here, but the original frame captures are the size I took.






All of the droplets were about the same size (as can be determined with such poor resolution). Tey all acted the same, and if really there over 20 miles big. Believe what you want.

As I've said before, my doubt is that nobody seems to be able to reproduce the effect. I'll buy it if you can.

Go get some condensation or whatever on the lens and take some video shots of The Moon. If you get footage like that being discussed then case closed. If nobody can then it must be something else.