Help ATS with a contribution via PayPal:
learn more

Astronaunt Credibility: What do we believe?

page: 9
18
<< 6  7  8    10 >>

log in

join

posted on Sep, 20 2012 @ 05:40 PM
link   
reply to post by Loopdaloop
 



However, he was also friends with Erich von daniken, who for some is considered not credible.

Yet through this association it is evident that Neil Armstrong felt that Erich von daniken was credible.
Neil believed in Erich's credibility enough to put his own money on the line and go searching for the Tayos Library. The question is why?


No, the question is: wherever did you get the idea that Neil Armstrong ever had anything at all to do with Erich von Daniken?




posted on Sep, 20 2012 @ 08:43 PM
link   

Originally posted by Loopdaloop
btw: does anyone know the source for the Neil Armstrong 'Moonbase' comments ?


I found these links interesting and informative.

post by JimOberg
 



Here are some links with the background on the bogus Armstrong story:

Here’s a full presentation of that Armstrong quote, attributed [I believe correctly] to Otto Binder.
nasa-image.blogspot.com...

Numerous Apollo mission quotations:
xenophilius.wordpress.com...

An original and important piece of independent research on Otto Binder:
secretsun.blogspot.com...





posted on Sep, 26 2012 @ 06:03 PM
link   

Originally posted by DJW001
reply to post by Loopdaloop
 



However, he was also friends with Erich von daniken, who for some is considered not credible.

Yet through this association it is evident that Neil Armstrong felt that Erich von daniken was credible.
Neil believed in Erich's credibility enough to put his own money on the line and go searching for the Tayos Library. The question is why?


No, the question is: wherever did you get the idea that Neil Armstrong ever had anything at all to do with Erich von Daniken?


What do you mean by that? Do you believe that this is in doubt?
I put forward the question, common courtesy dictates that if you disagree to put forward an argument as to why,
as opposed to throwing out one line questions.


and to: www.abovetopsecret.com... (ZETAREDICULIAN)
Thank you I will have a look through those links now.
edit on 26-9-2012 by Loopdaloop because: (no reason given)
edit on 26-9-2012 by Loopdaloop because: (no reason given)



posted on Sep, 26 2012 @ 08:05 PM
link   

Originally posted by Loopdaloop
Don't forget that Neil Armstrong claimed that we were 'warned off' by aliens on the moon
The first man on the moon also had an interest in the Tayos Library of Gold and went on a visit there, the same library which Erich Von Daniken states possibly contains the history of the ancient alien visitors. www.philipcoppens.com...

For men who are scientists, I believe them.


I was really puzzled about how you were so sure that Armstrong was on von Daniken's tunnel expedition, until I followed youe link and saw that you believe the captioned photo

Stan Hall with Neil Armstrong during the 1976 expedition
www.philipcoppens.com...

actually shows Neil Armstrong.

But if you compare the faces in that photo to published images of Armstrong, especially this shot taekn of him while he was teaching at the U of Cincinnati in the mid=-1970s,

magazine.uc.edu...

you might find it more likely that the author of the website you seem to believe, was misleading you.

Is there any OTHER evidence, aside from Stan's claim about a photograph that does not seem to even SHOW the real ;Neil Armstrong;.that supports your belief that Armstrong endorsed the von Daniken theories?



posted on Sep, 26 2012 @ 08:06 PM
link   

Originally posted by Cosmic911
Gordon Cooper, Edgar Mitchell, and Buzz Adrin have publically stated their belief that we have been visited by extraterrestrial entities. These are highly decorated American heroes, M.I.T. Graduates, and experienced combat pilots. What are we to believe? I tend to believe them as credible witnesses. Did they really see E.T. UFOs? Or did they see secret advanced aircraft?

I pose this question to forum members...what are your thoughts on this subject.


Your post is nebulous, nothing to take to the bank. You're dealing with beliefs which are created by the mind due to mental conditioning. It doesn't matter who believes anything about what. You are not dealing with evidence, just opinions and every one has opinions based on likes an dislikes.or who has exerted their mental superiority on a weaker mind that easily accepts, iow, not a questioner.

The person's station in life is immaterial. None of the people you name have stated that they've seen ETs, they've stated a belief in them. What are you to believe, whatever your mind is impressed with. They may be credible witnesses if they witnessed a real event. Secret, advanced aircraft? Still nothing out of the ordinary as all human aircraft require wings and motors and when the motors fail they fall like rocks. Hardly any UFO.



posted on Sep, 27 2012 @ 05:51 AM
link   
reply to post by Loopdaloop
 



What do you mean by that? Do you believe that this is in doubt?
I put forward the question, common courtesy dictates that if you disagree to put forward an argument as to why,
as opposed to throwing out one line questions.


Actually, as the one making the claim, it is up to you to support it with evidence. That is common courtesy. It is as though I said "Everyone knows the Moon is made of green cheese." It would be perfectly reasonable for you to ask: "Why do you say that?"



posted on Sep, 28 2012 @ 12:16 PM
link   

Originally posted by Loopdaloop

Originally posted by DJW001
No, the question is: wherever did you get the idea that Neil Armstrong ever had anything at all to do with Erich von Daniken?


What do you mean by that? Do you believe that this is in doubt? I put forward the question, common courtesy dictates that if you disagree to put forward an argument as to why, as opposed to throwing out one line questions.


Ball's in your court, Loop. You offered as evidence a link that includes a photograph that you are claiming shows Neil Armstrong on the expedition, but I am suggesting it is somebody else, since it doesn't look like the moonwalker Neil Armstrong at all.

...and your response is?

Showing common courtesy?



posted on Sep, 30 2012 @ 06:02 PM
link   
It is beyond my remit to go hunting down Stan Hall's estate and the film crew that went with them and Neil armstrong on the 1976 expedition. I am sure that there are plenty of other things from 1976 that arn't easily accessible on the internet also.

The only two people that are suggesting that there is a dispute to this narrative is yourselves and without any evidence yourself to suggest that this did not happen aside from your own supurious conjecture the burden does actually lie with yourselves. Is There concerns as to the versacity of Stan's
Record of the event?

How does it impact upon the credibility of Neil Armstrong if:

A) he was there or
B) he wasn't

From both your perspectives?
edit on 30-9-2012 by Loopdaloop because: (no reason given)



posted on Sep, 30 2012 @ 09:46 PM
link   

Originally posted by arbiture

Originally posted by JimOberg

Originally posted by Mcupobob
WHOA Whoa whoa. I want to see a source on this like yesterday, Its not that I don't believe you its just I want to see it for myself! If our moon/space walkers say theres aliens then theres aliens!


If they told you there was a Noah's Ark, would you conclude there really was a Noah's Ark?



Noah"s Ark? likely misidentified, likely something "else". As for Noah and the Ark? It's a composite on the old legend of "stories to explain what ain't easy to explain", such as the vast number of flood stories, etc. and other flood myths through history. Not that floods DON'T happen, they do why build such elaborate protocols&attempts to understand such things? Poop happens, and people need REASONS, at least thats a good sign in and of itself. The need to know is a basic human need to "figure things out". When we wrap it in a specific religious motif we deny the reason we invented religion in the first place; To understand when poop, etc, happens, and why we are, or "the meaning of it all", etc.


Noah's ark is extremely easy to explain. It didn't exist as related in the questionable jewish old testament which borrowed from many sources and also made up them as it went along. The story came out of the Mediterranean and enough underwater archaeology has been done and shown on documentaries indicating that the flood was a localized event. No one has any evidence of an impossible whole-Earth flood. Noah's ark myth creator saw a good thing and ran with it.



posted on Sep, 30 2012 @ 10:22 PM
link   
reply to post by JimOberg
 


Never mind the separate links, let's have them "both" on the same page! And compare the roundness of Neil's face, the thinness of his hair, what side Neil parted his hair on, and the difference in the chins.


edit on 30-9-2012 by The Shrike because: To add pertinent details



posted on Sep, 30 2012 @ 10:49 PM
link   

Originally posted by Loopdaloop
It is beyond my remit to go hunting down Stan Hall's estate and the film crew that went with them and Neil armstrong on the 1976 expedition. I am sure that there are plenty of other things from 1976 that arn't easily accessible on the internet also.

The only two people that are suggesting that there is a dispute to this narrative is yourselves and without any evidence yourself to suggest that this did not happen aside from your own supurious conjecture the burden does actually lie with yourselves. Is There concerns as to the versacity of Stan's
Record of the event?



The only evidence Stan Hall offers that Armstrong was there, is a photograph that clearly does NOT show moonwalker Neil Armstrong.

Your own gullibility is NOT evidence for the authenticity of Hall's claim.

Are you suggesting that Neil Armstrong visited that area but nobody else noticed he was there, and nobody back home noticed he was gone? And that he underwent plastic surgery to alter his appearance?

The Occam's Razor preferred explanation is that somebody claiming to be Armstrong showed up, and nobody on the expedition remembered what he really looked like so they believed him -- or better, Stan Hall made it all up counting on the gullibility of his target audience.



posted on Oct, 9 2012 @ 10:17 PM
link   
reply to post by The Shrike
 


The picture you posted at the bottom is interesting. I think we may find that this picture (of his decayed teeth) would tell us about his mental state at the time the picture was taken. It's pretty clear, from the teeth alone, that Neil's health was not very good at the time.

The "official" story of NASA "glory" tells us that Neil was shy and avoided attention, etc. But could this be a cover story for Neil's major depression? Lack of personal hygiene can be an indicator of major depression.

How many years did Neil Armstrong avoid going to see the dentist to cultivate that many dental cavities?



posted on Oct, 10 2012 @ 03:41 AM
link   
reply to post by SayonaraJupiter
 


What cavities? Are you so used to Hollywood smiles with their capped and veneered teeth that you don't recognize a healthy, natural smile any more? In any event, you're really reaching with this one.



posted on Oct, 25 2012 @ 09:38 PM
link   
A response from Loop to this objection is still awaited.

The offered evidence appears to be spuriious.

So why believe the original claim?


Originally posted by JimOberg

Originally posted by Loopdaloop
It is beyond my remit to go hunting down Stan Hall's estate and the film crew that went with them and Neil armstrong on the 1976 expedition. I am sure that there are plenty of other things from 1976 that arn't easily accessible on the internet also.

The only two people that are suggesting that there is a dispute to this narrative is yourselves and without any evidence yourself to suggest that this did not happen aside from your own supurious conjecture the burden does actually lie with yourselves. Is There concerns as to the versacity of Stan's
Record of the event?



The only evidence Stan Hall offers that Armstrong was there, is a photograph that clearly does NOT show moonwalker Neil Armstrong.

Your own gullibility is NOT evidence for the authenticity of Hall's claim.

Are you suggesting that Neil Armstrong visited that area but nobody else noticed he was there, and nobody back home noticed he was gone? And that he underwent plastic surgery to alter his appearance?

The Occam's Razor preferred explanation is that somebody claiming to be Armstrong showed up, and nobody on the expedition remembered what he really looked like so they believed him -- or better, Stan Hall made it all up counting on the gullibility of his target audience.



posted on Oct, 26 2012 @ 12:24 AM
link   

Originally posted by JimOberg
A response from Loop to this objection is still awaited.

The offered evidence appears to be spuriious.

So why believe the original claim?


Originally posted by JimOberg

Originally posted by Loopdaloop
It is beyond my remit to go hunting down Stan Hall's estate and the film crew that went with them and Neil armstrong on the 1976 expedition. I am sure that there are plenty of other things from 1976 that arn't easily accessible on the internet also.

The only two people that are suggesting that there is a dispute to this narrative is yourselves and without any evidence yourself to suggest that this did not happen aside from your own supurious conjecture the burden does actually lie with yourselves. Is There concerns as to the versacity of Stan's
Record of the event?



The only evidence Stan Hall offers that Armstrong was there, is a photograph that clearly does NOT show moonwalker Neil Armstrong.

Your own gullibility is NOT evidence for the authenticity of Hall's claim.

Are you suggesting that Neil Armstrong visited that area but nobody else noticed he was there, and nobody back home noticed he was gone? And that he underwent plastic surgery to alter his appearance?

The Occam's Razor preferred explanation is that somebody claiming to be Armstrong showed up, and nobody on the expedition remembered what he really looked like so they believed him -- or better, Stan Hall made it all up counting on the gullibility of his target audience.


Armstrong was indeed on this "expedition", and Hall and Daeniken were there as well. However, the whole story is very different than what is being told. in fact, Armstrong exposed Daeniken for the Charlatan that he is.

Full story here:

www.jasoncolavito.com...

I've seen Neil walk on the Moon back in 1969, I was 10 years old and will never forget the moment he stepped down that ladder. A true hero.



posted on Oct, 26 2012 @ 01:49 AM
link   
I'm kind of iffy about government officials, especially astronauts, coming forward. I believe we have been visited and if anyone on this planet has had encounters it has to be astronauts, but at the same time, they are "company men" and I wouldn't put it past some of them to put out disinformation for the government. I would say the most credible would be Gordon Cooper, I've never doubted one word of his testimony. On the flip side, and what makes me believe most of the astronauts who make claims on the subject, is the fact that at the end of the day these are men and women of science and I'm sure to them the knowledge of the existence of E.T.'s would be really exciting for them from a scientific standpoint and they would step beyond any loyalties they felt toward the government in the name of science.



posted on Oct, 26 2012 @ 05:59 AM
link   
reply to post by nv4711
 


Terrific piece of original scholarship. I stand corrected and accept this evidence that Armstrong was there.



posted on Oct, 26 2012 @ 06:04 AM
link   

Originally posted by MadhatterTheGreat
I'm kind of iffy about government officials, especially astronauts, coming forward. I believe we have been visited and if anyone on this planet has had encounters it has to be astronauts, but at the same time, they are "company men" and I wouldn't put it past some of them to put out disinformation for the government. I would say the most credible would be Gordon Cooper, I've never doubted one word of his testimony. .....


And that's the problem. Cooper's later years were full of stories that cannot possibly be believed, such as his claim in his autobio that he saved the shuttle program from a lethal design flaw by relaying to NASA a telepathic warning from space aliens. And the knee-jerk gullibility you share with so many other people was the fundamental cause of millions of dollars of investor funds disappearing into hoaky aviation projects endorsed by Cooper in the 1980s.



posted on Oct, 26 2012 @ 04:16 PM
link   

Originally posted by Cosmic911

Originally posted by expat2368
I am constantly amazed that people refuse to believe even our own astronauts.

Everyone is screaming for "disclosure", what do they want? The Astronauts come out and openly state the y have seen ET craft and say we are being visited and it is met with disbelief. Millions spent to train those guys, professionals who have been into space and even to the Moon.. and they are not believed.

It just is beyond comprehension.


I tend to feel the same way as you. Gordon Cooper had a pretty significant sitting at Edwards AFB, filmed to boot, of course the Pentagon quickly secured it. Mitchell, while intelligent and well spoken, I find nebulous at times. Aldrin I find right in the middle of the two. Now Armstrong, I find most intresting. I thought it odd that Vice Pres Gore thanked him for his "silent service." I believe he has taken his oath of silence most literal, and it bothers him, which is why he has said very little about the subject, neither confirming oe denying Aldrins claims. Yes, I believe we have a great deal of disclosure.


Only that Gore didn't say "silent service" he said "quite dignity", which is a character trait,, not something sinister. It aptly describes how Armstrong handled himself, despite that he could have been a rock star he chose to teach. He did what he was asked to do and didn't ask for anything. That's the quite dignity of true heroes.

But your post is a good example of how things get misquoted (purposely or not) and then people ponder over the meaning of words that were actually never spoken.



posted on Nov, 18 2012 @ 02:02 PM
link   

Originally posted by JimOberg
reply to post by nv4711
 


Terrific piece of original scholarship. I stand corrected and accept this evidence that Armstrong was there.


Just got back to this topic...

For my future sanity, was the man there or not or are you being sarcastic here?


Thanks.






top topics



 
18
<< 6  7  8    10 >>

log in

join