30 replies to this topic

[Hum]

People claim to videotape UFOs in the sky above Earth. They also spot unusual-looking objects in NASA camera feeds at the International Space Station.

Now, a growing number of individuals insist they're using their telescopes and cameras to reveal UFOs around the moon, according to the International Business Times.

Many odd things have been seen by amateur and professional astronomers on the moon over decades, and YouTube affords the opportunity to look at alleged UFOs flying across, toward and away from our nearest astronomical neighbor.

http://www.youtube.c...e&v=vshlUbWz2zY

Part of the problem with most videos like these is the lack of specific, helpful information to accompany the visual "evidence," so it's difficult to know what's real and what was created from a clever software app.

But, lunar anomalies are not new phenomena. They've been reported by astronomers going back to the 1700s. Strange things seen by the scientists of centuries past included mysterious bright lights or glowing spots on the moon. In 1869, Great Britain's Royal Astronomical Society conducted a study of unusual moving lights. After numerous observations of this activity, the lights just turned off.

On July 29, 1953, New York Herald Tribune science editor John J. O'Neill noticed, through his telescope, a huge bridge-like object spanning 12 miles in the lunar area known as Mare Crisium. Other observers, including Hugh Percy Wilkins of the British Astronomical Association, confirmed O'Neill's sighting on the lunar surface. The object that became known as O'Neill's Bridge, was eventually thought to be nothing more than a combination of lights and shadows.

The history of the Apollo flights to the moon in the late 1960s into the 1970s included countless tabloid stories of supposed UFO encounters experienced by the astronauts.

Apollo 11 astronaut Buzz Aldrin describes a UFO that accompanied them en route to the moon in 1969.

more & video

[HSoft]

I thought Buzz's "sighting" had been debunked as being one of the SLA panels that was jetisoned from the S-IVB stage?

[2xSilverKnight]

HSoft, on 31 January 2013 - 16:20, said:

I thought Buzz's "sighting" had been debunked as being one of the SLA panels that was jetisoned from the S-IVB stage?

That's what they want people to believe.

[C-Squarez]

I'm still under the impression that no matter what proof or evidence is presented, people will still scream fake. Buzz for instance was HIGHLY trained and would know what a panel from his own ship looked like. But all it takes in someone to say something that lines up with what a skeptic believes and the story is automatically "debunked" and the highly skilled professional is all of a sudden delusional.

I remember Buzz saying that there are monoliths on Mars. But he's nothing but a senile old fool...

[mudslag]

C-Squarez, on 31 January 2013 - 21:14, said:

I'm still under the impression that no matter what proof or evidence is presented, people will still scream fake. Buzz for instance was HIGHLY trained and would know what a panel from his own ship looked like. But all it takes in someone to say something that lines up with what a skeptic believes and the story is automatically "debunked" and the highly skilled professional is all of a sudden delusional.

I remember Buzz saying that there are monoliths on Mars. But he's nothing but a senile old fool...

No matter how fake something is, how far out an idea is,regardless of what ever counter evidence may exist, someone out there will still believe in it. It goes both ways.

[compl3x]

C-Squarez, on 31 January 2013 - 21:14, said:

I'm still under the impression that no matter what proof or evidence is presented, people will still scream fake. Buzz for instance was HIGHLY trained and would know what a panel from his own ship looked like. But all it takes in someone to say something that lines up with what a skeptic believes and the story is automatically "debunked" and the highly skilled professional is all of a sudden delusional.

I remember Buzz saying that there are monoliths on Mars. But he's nothing but a senile old fool...

I guess you missed this part:

Quote

Part of the problem with most videos like these is the lack of specific, helpful information to accompany the visual "evidence," so it's difficult to know what's real and what was created from a clever software app.

It's like the Cydonia region on Mars which people thought had a face on it and proved E.T. or Martians were there. Turns out it was just another case of pareidolia.


http://en.wikipedia....(region_of_Mars)

http://science.nasa....001/ast24may_1/


But, hey, maybe it's another cover-up.

[C-Squarez]

mudslag, on 31 January 2013 - 21:29, said:

No matter how fake something is, how far out an idea is,regardless of what ever counter evidence may exist, someone out there will still believe in it. It goes both ways.

I agree 100%! Problem I have is with people that swear everything is fake. That bothers me. Not everything in the skies is an alien craft from Venus, Mars etc. But some things that have been sighted are extremely convincing and the skeptics will still dismiss it as fake. Some things will never be good enough for some people.

[mudslag]

C-Squarez, on 31 January 2013 - 22:31, said:

I agree 100%! Problem I have is with people that swear everything is fake. That bothers me. Not everything in the skies is an alien craft from Venus, Mars etc. But some things that have been sighted are extremely convincing and the skeptics will still dismiss it as fake. Some things will never be good enough for some people.

To be fair "extremely convincing" is subjective. In this day and age of technology, visual evidence is no where near a standard that qualifies as actual evidence, which seems to be pretty much the only thing anyone can ever provide these days. Eye witness testimony is even further down the flag pole then video or picture evidence. Til someone can provide hard proof, such as something that is actually alien to us, then "extremely convincing" will remain subjective.

[theyarecomingforyou]

C-Squarez, on 31 January 2013 - 22:31, said:

I agree 100%! Problem I have is with people that swear everything is fake. That bothers me. Not everything in the skies is an alien craft from Venus, Mars etc. But some things that have been sighted are extremely convincing and the skeptics will still dismiss it as fake. Some things will never be good enough for some people.

If there was any evidence for it then people would take it seriously but eyewitness accounts are inherently unreliable. People swear they see ghosts and that they can talk to the dead but I wouldn't give that a second thought. As for astronauts, they're under huge psychological pressure and tend to have very extreme personalities - it's not a surprise that many snap, just like so many soldiers do. I'm perfectly willing to consider what they say but I won't believe it without evidence.

Occam's Razor dictates that the theory with the least assumptions is the most likely to be correct. Which is more likely - that somebody mistook what they saw for an alien craft; or that an advanced alien civilization has travelled thousands of light years to fly around our planet undetected and without any attempt at communication? It's one thing to remain open-minded; it's another to believe in something without evidence.

[C-Squarez]

mudslag, on 31 January 2013 - 22:39, said:

To be fair "extremely convincing" is subjective. In this day and age of technology, visual evidence is no where near a standard that qualifies as actual evidence, which seems to be pretty much the only thing anyone can ever provide these days. Eye witness testimony is even further down the flag pole then video or picture evidence. Til someone can provide hard proof, such as something that is actually alien to us, then "extremely convincing" will remain subjective.

That's fair and again, I agree with your train of thought as I have plenty of other times on a wide range of topics. Now, let's take the following video, can everything in that video be explained? Take out the parts of explainable cloud phenomenon and "Norway Missile Tests" and can every one of the things in that video be explained? You don't want to be so open minded that your brain falls out but you don't want to be so closed minded that your brain suffocates. There is even one scenario in that video that the Chinese government couldn't even explain and they shut down a Chinese airport. Can that be explained? Air traffic controllers and pilots had no idea what it was. My point is, while something’s can be explained, not everything can. So if ONE thing might not be able to be explained, that's enough evidence, for me at least that intelligent life exists. Should be for most scientists but personal opinion gets in the way.

[C-Squarez]

theyarecomingforyou, on 31 January 2013 - 22:54, said:

If there was any evidence for it then people would take it seriously but eyewitness accounts are inherently unreliable. People swear they see ghosts and that they can talk to the dead but I wouldn't give that a second thought. As for astronauts, they're under huge psychological pressure and tend to have very extreme personalities - it's not a surprise that many snap, just like so many soldiers do. I'm perfectly willing to consider what they say but I won't believe it without evidence.

Occam's Razor dictates that the theory with the least assumptions is the most likely to be correct. Which is more likely - that somebody mistook what they saw for an alien craft; or that an advanced alien civilization has travelled thousands of light years to fly around our planet undetected and without any attempt at communication? It's one thing to remain open-minded; it's another to believe in something without evidence.

But that's what I'm saying. No matter the evidence it will never be good enough. When you have NASA officials, Air Force officials, the Mexican Government, hackers, released evidence from Britain and God knows what else, what more is needed? Before Photoshop, there was great evidence and people still never believed.

Take a look at Roswell, the Air Force put out a press release saying they recovered a flying saucer, after a few hours they corrected that saying it was a weather balloon. Do people really believe that? This is the Air Force, they deal with fighter jets and ****. They KNOW what a weather balloon is vs a flying craft. It's like if you go to a Mercedes Benz dealership and buy a S550 AMG but realize when you get home that it's a Kia Optima. That doesn't happen.

As far as staying incognito, reports have said that we have been in contact with other civilizations from different planets and have even sent people to other planets as a sort of intergalactic trade. How true that is, I have no idea. Then you have the Russian* PM saying that aliens exist among us but he would never say how many because it would cause a public panic.

But I know, even the Russian* PM is delusional and there are reasons they people I mentioned are wrong and their claims can be debunked. Doesn't matter how credible they were before speaking of UFO's.

These are just my opinions, I'm not trying to sway anyone either way.

[mudslag]

A number of those in that video have been talked about on this forum in the past. Like the Jerusalem one was found to be a hoax. The spiral one and a few others (the China one) were rockets that gave a unique reaction look in the atmosphere, the hole in the cloud in Russia was a "Hole punch cloud" also called a "Fallstreak Hole". Most of these are identified later after the fact but people like this video creator still use them trying to make it out to be more then they are. The agenda is to make it seems like a conspiracy or alien related, nothing here identifies or unidentified equates alien or cover up as being suggested.

[theyarecomingforyou]

C-Squarez, on 31 January 2013 - 23:26, said:

But that's what I'm saying. No matter the evidence it will never be good enough. When you have NASA officials, Air Force officials, the Mexican Government, hackers, released evidence from Britain and God knows what else, what more is needed? Before Photoshop, there was great evidence and people still never believed.

And none of that has reached the threshold of conclusive evidence. Most of it is grainy video, unreliable eyewitness testimony and hoax documents. It's no more credible than the birther movement or the 9/11 conspiracy theories.

C-Squarez, on 31 January 2013 - 23:26, said:

Take a look at Roswell, the Air Force put out a press release saying they recovered a flying saucer, after a few hours they corrected that saying it was a weather balloon. Do people really believe that?

Even if it was a "flying saucer", there is no reason to believe it is of extra-terrestrial origin. It's far more likely a US or Russian experimental plane that was unknown to the people who found it.

C-Squarez, on 31 January 2013 - 23:26, said:

As far as staying incognito, reports have said that we have been in contact with other civilizations from different planets and have even sent people to other planets as a sort of intergalactic trade. How true that is, I have no idea.

Oh, "reports" hey? Case closed then. Aliens are real.

I honestly don't know how to respond to people who take this sort of nonsense seriously.

[Dot Matrix]

C-Squarez, on 31 January 2013 - 21:14, said:

I'm still under the impression that no matter what proof or evidence is presented, people will still scream fake. Buzz for instance was HIGHLY trained and would know what a panel from his own ship looked like. But all it takes in someone to say something that lines up with what a skeptic believes and the story is automatically "debunked" and the highly skilled professional is all of a sudden delusional.

I remember Buzz saying that there are monoliths on Mars. But he's nothing but a senile old fool...

Not exactly. An object at a distance on the Moon can look completely different than the same object at the same distance on Earth. Our atmosphere distorts light, since there is no atmosphere on the moon, the light doesn't get distorted, and will throw off an observer's senses.

Same thing applies here, thanks to orbital mechanics, there's no telling how far these objects are from the moon, or what their size actually is. Take this photo as an example:

[Lamp0]

C-Squarez, on 31 January 2013 - 23:13, said:

That's fair and again, I agree with your train of thought as I have plenty of other times on a wide range of topics. Now, let's take the following video, can everything in that video be explained? Take out the parts of explainable cloud phenomenon and "Norway Missile Tests" and can every one of the things in that video be explained? You don't want to be so open minded that your brain falls out but you don't want to be so closed minded that your brain suffocates. There is even one scenario in that video that the Chinese government couldn't even explain and they shut down a Chinese airport. Can that be explained? Air traffic controllers and pilots had no idea what it was. My point is, while something’s can be explained, not everything can. So if ONE thing might not be able to be explained, that's enough evidence, for me at least that intelligent life exists. Should be for most scientists but personal opinion gets in the way.

Brilliant.

Can't be explained = evidence for aliens.