alien presence on moon???

[qso1]

APHH:<br />Real issues? I'd say there are numerous real issues that the powers that be rather wanted to sweep under the rug. One that immediately comes to mind is the inflation.<br /><br />Me:<br />Actually, budgetary issues are public knowledge and I assume you are referring to economic inflation in using the term inflation. You can get budgetary data on the web and if you wish to go way back, save your Almanacs as I have.<br /><br />I can give you the following budget numbers from almanacs dating to the 1960's. NASA/DOD/Federal budgets and deficits. I can probably get inflation rates going back to the late 1970s.<br /><br />I'm an average Joe, a nobody with no connection to money and power. If I'm able to provide these numbers which I have in numerous posts (NASA and federal spending figures mostly). Then the federal carpet sweepers have done a poor job of sweeping this under the rug.<br /><br />If OTOH, there are aliens on the moon, the government covers it up which translates to the government being the servants to more advanced technologies...and if the numbers I come across are somehow not real...<br /><br />Then sit back, relax, don't worry be happy because you, me...anyone not connected to power will never be able to know the truth behind inflation of red dots on the moon. We were taken over long ago according to various theories involving aliens, illuminati, glitterati etc. <div class="Discussion_UserSignature"> <p><strong>My borrowed quote for the time being:</strong></p><p><em>There are three kinds of people in life. Those who make it happen, those who watch it happen...and those who do not know what happened.</em></p> </div>

 

[aphh]

* Do you know who posted the jpeg to the hosting site and<br />* who made the markings (dots, crosses, lines) ?<br /><br />I indeed know, because I did all that. <br /><br />Edit: besides the original red dot on the map, that was done by somebody at NASA. Crosses and other markings have been done at NASA. Original image here:<br /><br />http://www.lpi.usra.edu/resources/mapcatalog/apolloindex/apollo17/as17indexmap04/150dpi.jpg<br /> <br />Yes, you are right, the distance between the dots is many kilometers. But as you can see, the marking that somebody at NASA did, is still within their field of view.<br /><br />http://www.zweg.com/dump/photo/reddot2.jpg<br /><br />So, if the anomaly was spaceborne, the actual sighting might have occurred where the dot is, and the photo was taken after the initial sighting. <br /><br />But, many people on this thread are right, it's not productive to commit more resources on it right now. I'd say it's still a "better anomaly", meaning the sources are original material.<br /><br />These are the anomalies that I'd just put aside after acknowledging it. Just in case. So that nobody could later come to me and say that I missed something significant.

 

[aphh]

qso1,<br /><br />you make a point. However, those with actual power know that "reality" is not based on reality, but the reality we live in is more like a perception of reality. Facts have been replaced by political decisions.<br /><br />Few people have the interest to study correlation between various things. The less people who do that, the more power the powerful have.

 

[qso1]

I'm one of the few who have studied...for three plus decades, almost evrything connected to space exploration from astronomy to UFOs. I have come up with no convincing evidence that the government can cover up space based aliens of any kind, especially if said aliens are far ahead of us technology wise. The only concievable way this could happen IMO, were if the aliens allowed it. If they allowed it, then there is nothing we can do about it.<br /><br />This is why these subjects end up the same way. The person proposing the subject is trying to convince others to believe what they believe...in part to save mankind but, if this is really true, mankind is done!<br /><br />However, what I have researched over the years has provided no convincing evidence of space aliens residing on the moon. And when I cite the simplest flaws in the presented ideas, such as the "Calling Apollo" bit. Well, suffice it to say thats just one reason I'm not convinced. <div class="Discussion_UserSignature"> <p><strong>My borrowed quote for the time being:</strong></p><p><em>There are three kinds of people in life. Those who make it happen, those who watch it happen...and those who do not know what happened.</em></p> </div>

 

[datalor]

I dont know why I keep checking back on this thread, and yet, I do. I would reccomend to lock it and archive it. It has been fun, but I think its time to stop now, lest the mother ship come get us all. <img src="/images/icons/tongue.gif" /> <div class="Discussion_UserSignature"> </div>

 

[aphh]

What about 2nd, secret, space program? <br /><br />The U.S. military and NRO have been sending up huge rockets for decades now with little information about the payload or destination. Heck, the Soviets tried to launch some sort of huge battle-station in the 80ies called Polyus with unknown capabilities.<br /><br />Certainly governments can keep secrets, if they wish to do so. Sometimes something is leaked, but not always.

 

[aphh]

* I dont know why I keep checking back on this thread, and<br />* yet, I do. I would reccomend to lock it and archive it. It has<br />* been fun, but I think its time to stop now, lest the mother<br />* ship come get us all.<br /><br />We've only scratched the surface here <img src="/images/icons/wink.gif" /><br /><br />We've studied the evidence. Now comes the speculation. 10 - 20 more pages for you to monitor!

 

[lsbd]

<font color="yellow">The U.S. military and NRO have been sending up huge rockets for decades now with little information about the payload or destination.</font><br /><br />I was a passenger on one such mission. destination - alien base on the moon. mission - sperm donor for alien/human hybrid experiment. Let me tell you, brother, those alien chicks are HOT HOT HOT!!!!!

 

[deapfreeze]

" I would reccomend to lock it and archive it."<br /><br />If we lock and archive everything we diagree on we will get no where either. Thats like saying we agree to disagree. I to believe the anomaly exists. I won't say it's a mother ship or an alien craft but is definately something that even NASA had to take several pictures and map. So I will continue to say anomaly exists but at this time not sure what it is. <div class="Discussion_UserSignature"> <p><font size="2" color="#0000ff"><em>William ( deapfreeze ) Hooper</em></font></p><p><font size="1">http://deapfreeze-amateur-astronomy.tk/</font></p><p> </p> </div>

 

[bearack]

<blockquote><font class="small">In reply to:</font><hr /><p>If we lock and archive everything we diagree on we will get no where either. Thats like saying we agree to disagree. I to believe the anomaly exists. I won't say it's a mother ship or an alien craft but is definately something that even NASA had to take several pictures and map. So I will continue to say anomaly exists but at this time not sure what it is. <p><hr /></p></p></blockquote> <br /><br />I agree 100%. This thread is in the proper location and people can make thier own judgements, but I see no reason why it should be locked and archieved. <div class="Discussion_UserSignature"> <p><br /><img id="06322a8d-f18d-4ab1-8ea7-150275a4cb53" src="http://sitelife.space.com/ver1.0/Content/images/store/6/14/06322a8d-f18d-4ab1-8ea7-150275a4cb53.Large.jpg" alt="blog post photo" /></p> </div>

 

[deapfreeze]

I am happy to see I am not the only one that thinks we should not lock and archive this thread. We definately need to do more research on this before we just give up and say nobody is right just lock it away. <div class="Discussion_UserSignature"> <p><font size="2" color="#0000ff"><em>William ( deapfreeze ) Hooper</em></font></p><p><font size="1">http://deapfreeze-amateur-astronomy.tk/</font></p><p> </p> </div>

 

[telfrow]

As long as everyone follows UPG and TOS, and the discussion stays on topic, the thread won't be locked. <div class="Discussion_UserSignature"> <strong><font color="#3366ff">Made weak by time and fate, but strong in will to strive, to seek, to find and not to yeild.</font> - <font color="#3366ff"><em>Tennyson</em></font></strong> </div>

 

[deapfreeze]

Thank you and please everyone get along and lets do this like grown adults. No name calling and lets look at everyones point of view. Everyone has very valuable input and if we work together who knows maybe we will see that it's just a rock or a piece of floating debri or even aliens. Who knows what will come out of this thread but definately there is something so lets work together to see what it is. <div class="Discussion_UserSignature"> <p><font size="2" color="#0000ff"><em>William ( deapfreeze ) Hooper</em></font></p><p><font size="1">http://deapfreeze-amateur-astronomy.tk/</font></p><p> </p> </div>

 

[Mee_n_Mac]

<font color="yellow"> I to believe the anomaly exists. I won't say it's a mother ship or an alien craft but is definately something that even NASA had to take several pictures and map. So I will continue to say anomaly exists but at this time not sure what it is. </font><br /><br /><br /><b>Had</b> to take several pictures of and map ? May I ask what anomaly you're refering to ? Last I knew (and I may still be on the slow train here) the "anomaly" seen in picture 2159 was not at the location of the mystery red dot. That there may have been more than 1 picture of "the spot" just means pictures were being taken at a rate so their regions overlapped. Look at the 'Apollo 17 lunar photography index map' provided at the link APHH gave. It shows the regions corresponding to every 10'th pic taken along the track of the spacecraft over the Moon. There were a lot of overlapping pictures. They didn't <b>have</b> to take multiple pics because of some "anomaly", they <b>choose</b> to take many overlapping pictures of wide regions of the Moon because mapping was part of the mission.<br /><br />You may choose to believe that the "anomaly" is not a dust speck caught by the scanning process but I don't see how the red dot nor multiple pictures indicate what it is or isn't ... other than the fact that it (the "anomaly") isn't present in 2160 or other pics of the same area tend, to me, to indicate that it's a scanning artifact.<br /><br /> <div class="Discussion_UserSignature"> <p>-----------------------------------------------------</p><p><font color="#ff0000">Ask not what your Forum Software can do do on you,</font></p><p><font color="#ff0000">Ask it to, please for the love of all that's Holy, <strong>STOP</strong> !</font></p> </div>

 

[deapfreeze]

I see what your saying here. The red dot is not exactly where the anomaly is located but someone else also had an answer to this. Maybe just maybe the anomaly was first spotted where the red dot is located and the moved on to where we see it. I am not saying aliens but could be floating debri. If it is floating debri then it would be able to travel which in turn would explain the distance between the red dot and the anomaly. ( this is my thought not asking you to agree with it just my thoughts.) <div class="Discussion_UserSignature"> <p><font size="2" color="#0000ff"><em>William ( deapfreeze ) Hooper</em></font></p><p><font size="1">http://deapfreeze-amateur-astronomy.tk/</font></p><p> </p> </div>

 

[bearack]

What red dot are you referring to? The anomaly being discussed is more of a white dot with several white dashes trailing the dot. It appears in 1 of four images and doesn't appear to be a photo malfunction. <div class="Discussion_UserSignature"> <p><br /><img id="06322a8d-f18d-4ab1-8ea7-150275a4cb53" src="http://sitelife.space.com/ver1.0/Content/images/store/6/14/06322a8d-f18d-4ab1-8ea7-150275a4cb53.Large.jpg" alt="blog post photo" /></p> </div>

 

[telfrow]

Actually, if you check the thread, it does <i>not</i> appear in a number of photos from Apollo 15 and Apollo 17. See this post and this post.<br /><br />It appears in <i>one</i> of four images in the sequence AS-17-M-2158-2161 (2159) - images taken seconds apart. <br /><br /><i>Edited to correct a typo.</i> <div class="Discussion_UserSignature"> <strong><font color="#3366ff">Made weak by time and fate, but strong in will to strive, to seek, to find and not to yeild.</font> - <font color="#3366ff"><em>Tennyson</em></font></strong> </div>

 

[Mee_n_Mac]

You are correct that picture 2159 shows what you said above. The map mentioned earlier, and crops of the same, both provided by links APHH gave us show a red dot in the same region but not at the same location, as the white anomaly in pic 2159. It had been suggested that the red dot and white anomaly were somehow related to each other. I tend to think any such correlation exists only in the viewer's imagination. <div class="Discussion_UserSignature"> <p>-----------------------------------------------------</p><p><font color="#ff0000">Ask not what your Forum Software can do do on you,</font></p><p><font color="#ff0000">Ask it to, please for the love of all that's Holy, <strong>STOP</strong> !</font></p> </div>

 

[deapfreeze]

The red dot on the trajectory map is in roughly the same area as where the anomaly is in the 1 photo. There has to be a reason for NASA to put the red dot in this area. What is it? <div class="Discussion_UserSignature"> <p><font size="2" color="#0000ff"><em>William ( deapfreeze ) Hooper</em></font></p><p><font size="1">http://deapfreeze-amateur-astronomy.tk/</font></p><p> </p> </div>

 

[telfrow]

The maps were produced in 1973. It might be interesting to reflect on how lines on maps were created in 1973....and what process was used to create the original map. <div class="Discussion_UserSignature"> <strong><font color="#3366ff">Made weak by time and fate, but strong in will to strive, to seek, to find and not to yeild.</font> - <font color="#3366ff"><em>Tennyson</em></font></strong> </div>

 

[aphh]

Yes, it looks that they were drawn by hand using a marker pen.<br /><br />But what is the probability for the tip of the red pen to land on the same region that an anomaly is seen in the picture? The probability is miniscule.<br /><br />If there were to be a further study, which I do not suggest at this point, the correlation would certainly need to be studied, whether correlation exists.<br /><br />If the red dot marks the initial sighting of the anomaly, then travelling many kilometers in just seconds means orbital velocities.

 

[deapfreeze]

"But what is the probability for the tip of the red pen to land on the same region that an anomaly is seen in the picture? The probability is miniscule."<br /><br />I agree 100% the chance of someone accidentally putting a red dot in the same region as the anomaly is very low. I am sure there is a reason that dot is there and I am sure it wasn't an accident. <div class="Discussion_UserSignature"> <p><font size="2" color="#0000ff"><em>William ( deapfreeze ) Hooper</em></font></p><p><font size="1">http://deapfreeze-amateur-astronomy.tk/</font></p><p> </p> </div>

 

[aphh]

I had a quick look at the map, <br /><br />and I found atleast three more dots with various colors. Atleast one dot is nowhere near the AS-17 flight path, so it could be that these are either markers of points of interest, or just dots on the map.

 

[aphh]

Okay, I'm just not sure whether we should be using resources for this but here goes:<br /><br />Another red dot (Madler region), X=2595, Y=1770<br />Brown dot, X=5406, Y=2057<br />Green dot (Paracelsus region), X=6887, Y=2219<br />

 

[lsbd]

<font color="yellow">Atleast one dot is nowhere near the AS-17 flight path,</font><br /><br />which lends credance to the idea that these are just random, accidental marks and that the one near the "mothership anomaly" is just a coincidence.<br /><br /><br /><br /><br />