Astronauts speak of Aliens?

[echnaton]

lionking said:

echnaton
you forgot to say Amen. You'll go to the hells of Mars without protection from radiation

I thought it might be the “Searing Radiation Hell” on the moon, but I’ll accept your judgment on this.

[sts60]

I took LO's introduction of this site as a sign of his belief in its credibility, since he didn't refute it.

LO will have to clarify it, but I have little doubt that he merely cited it to identify the alleged incident, and places no faith in its credibility.

Besides, what do you call the previous video presented on another thread on this forum of people admitting some hidings of NASA's ET's? Can you please expand on this.

I'm not going to look for it, but if you give me a specific reference I'll look it over and let you know what I think.

Second, you say "but every instance of this you have brought up has been debunked. ", whereas this is not true at all.

Every one that I can recall - your insistence that the LM's appearance "devalued people's minds", your insistence on the third-hand fairy tale of a cosmonaut saying Apollo didn't happen, your insistence, depsite extensive explanations to the contrary, that the photographic record ("Elbow Crater") was faked - has been debunked.

While this source can be uncredible, you didn't prove it is so.

It's not credible because there is no, repeat no, evidence for its claims. While I didn't mention it before, there are also a whole lot of people, including payload personnel, listening on the A/G (air-to-ground) channels live who would have heard this - not to mention the live public broadcasts of NASA Select TV and audio.

I think we'll have to contact them for more info.

I don't see what they could offer that would boost their credibility above zero, but if you want to, feel free.

As the claims of the site are not solid fact, this is not solid fact. You are smarter than "I am virtually certain" . What made you so certain?

See above. I've been involved with the space program for years, I've been in Mission Control and the surrounding support rooms during Shuttle flights, I know just how many people are listening and just how hard - no, impossible - it would be to cover up such a discussion. This was not a DoD flight, and plenty of people were listening the whole time - see above.

Stop meowing and imagining scenarios.

The scenario I proposed accounts perfectly for the observed facts, with no conspiracies or UFOs required. It is in fact the most reasonable and economical scenario of all, yet it apparently never occurred to you, since your determination to brand NASA as liars and conspirators is not reasonable.

A decade after Armstrong's crater sighting, a former chief of NASA communication systems, Maurice Chatelain, said:
"The encounter was common knowledge in NASA, but nobody has talked about it until now."

Quoting the site of LO.

Was this said by NASA man?

Again, don't make it sound like LO endorses the site. I'm sure he doesn't, but I will let him speak for himself.

As for the credibility of the site: Chatelain was most certainly not a "former chief of NASA communication systems" and in fact never worked for NASA. He was a low-level contractor technician, and was fired before Apollo 11.

The site in which you put so much faith has no credibility, and you could have found this out with minimal work. And you accuse us of taking things on faith?

Pot, kettle, black. Rinse, lather, repeat.

[lionking]

LO will have to clarify it, but I have little doubt that he merely cited it to identify the alleged incident, and places no faith in its credibility.

LO should have stated this from the beginning. His reference to the site without explanations as usually done when any of you doesn't believe in something, suggests he believed in it.

I'm not going to look for it, but if you give me a specific reference I'll look it over and let you know what I think.

apollohoax.proboards21.com/index.cgi?board=theories&action=display&thread=1158061481

Every one that I can recall - your insistence that the LM's appearance "devalued people's minds", your insistence on the third-hand fairy tale of a cosmonaut saying Apollo didn't happen, your insistence, depsite extensive explanations to the contrary, that the photographic record ("Elbow Crater") was faked - has been debunked.

I hav had debates privately with some members on Elbow , with other experiments done and agreed to disagree bcz no one coyuld convince the other, As for the astronaut, I went to the Russian Cultural Center, contacted other person who heard the conference, in addition to my friend, and the results were positive. An astronaut who flew with Gagarin said so.

[lionking]

While I didn't mention it before, there are also a whole lot of people, including payload personnel, listening on the A/G (air-to-ground) channels live who would have heard this - not to mention the live public broadcasts of NASA Select TV and audio.

so explain to me how did the man working at NASA record that. Even if the workers heard it, it could be that they didn't speak about it, maybe for fear of being fired or something, so this is not a valid proof.

See above. I've been involved with the space program for years, I've been in Mission Control and the surrounding support rooms during Shuttle flights, I know just how many people are listening and just how hard - no, impossible - it would be to cover up such a discussion. This was not a DoD flight, and plenty of people were listening the whole time - see above.

you see above

The scenario I proposed accounts perfectly for the observed facts, with no conspiracies or UFOs required. It is in fact the most reasonable and economical scenario of all, yet it apparently never occurred to you, since your determination to brand NASA as liars and conspirators is not reasonable.

No. Since your blind faith in NASA is not reasonable, you believed this scenario you put and got so sure about it before making sure how it was said. My reasoning for that was the site was brought from a pro-apollo member without being refuted, so I thaught it was believed by you, and since I trusted that you know what you are speaking about,... you understand? I didn't do this in the first quotes since the site I brought was refuted successfully by another member ,Phantomwolf. Now refute the video thing from Cosmic Dave I put above

Again, don't make it sound like LO endorses the site. I'm sure he doesn't, but I will let him speak for himself.

As for the credibility of the site: Chatelain was most certainly not a "former chief of NASA communication systems" and in fact never worked for NASA. He was a low-level contractor technician, and was fired before Apollo 11.

The site in which you put so much faith has no credibility, and you could have found this out with minimal work. And you accuse us of taking things on faith?

Pot, kettle, black. Rinse, lather, repeat.

Again, see above. I took LO's reference for faith since he didn't refute the site, something, of course, I shouldn't have done.

[lionking]

www.ufoarea.com/nasa_airbrush.html

who is this Donna also?

[hplasm]

Lionking- why do you continue to bring us these sow's ears, and then complain when we try to tell you that they cannot be made into silk purses- no matter how much you insist?

[LunarOrbit]

I never said I believed the story on that site. Freon made a vague reference to some story he heard, I googled it and came up with that site. The fact that I linked to it does not mean I believe it.

Should I include a disclaimer every time I link to another site? "The opinions expressed on the following website do not necessarily reflect the beliefs of this forum or it's administrator. No endorsement is implied."

I did not bother to speculate about the explanation behind the story because I don't know the facts. But like with any UFO story I'm certain the truth is much more boring.

[sts60]

LO should have stated this from the beginning. His reference to the site without explanations as usually done when any of you doesn't believe in something, suggests he believed in it.

He simply said "I'm betting this is the story you are referring to." If you think this constitutes an endorsement, well, I suppose one had better to explain their exact motivations every time they make any statement to you.

I hav had debates privately with some members on Elbow , with other experiments done and agreed to disagree bcz no one coyuld convince the other,

I didn't "agree to disagree" with you, nor did several other people here. Your view of the situation was wrong, and we did virtually all the work for you.

As for the astronaut, I went to the Russian Cultural Center, contacted other person who heard the conference, in addition to my friend, and the results were positive. An astronaut who flew with Gagarin said so.

Someone said that someone who claimed to be a cosmonaut said that. Once again, you are willing to believe anything that fits with your ideas about Apollo, no matter how flimsy the story or unreliable the source.

As for the link you gave me, I will look at it, but it's pushing midnight here and it will have to wait.

[sts60]

I had a lengthier reply drop in the bit-bucket, so here is a somewhat terser version.

so explain to me how did the man working at NASA

He didn't work at NASA. Why do you bring things up and not pay attention to the materials? The alleged source (Donald Ratsch) is allegedly a ham radio operator with no connection to NASA. I note that Mr. Ratsch's website also proclaims "Bible Predicts Alien Attack!"

record that.

I listened to the clip. Anyone at all with a tape recorder or computer could have made up that little audio snippet. You are begging the question when you assume that it was an actual air-to-ground transmission.

Even if the workers heard it, it could be that they didn't speak about it, maybe for fear of being fired or something, so this is not a valid proof.

Standard appeal to conspiracism. The point was that such transmission are heard live in lots of places by lots of people, not just in Mission Control by NASA personnel. You are simply waving your hands that all of those people must have somehow been silenced. I suppose NASA also tracked down every space enthusiast with a C-band dish or cable television who was listening to the live feed on NASA Select TV?

you see above

A disappointingly childish comeback. I have real experience in this field; you don't. Expertise really does count. So does doing your homework and paying attention to the materials in question.

No. Since your blind faith in NASA

Rubbish. I have no "blind faith" in NASA. I'm aware of plenty of real problems with the agency, not only because I work in this field but also because I pay attention to events. The real problems have nothing to do with moon hoaxes or alien spacecraft, though. They are real-world problems with a large government bureaucracy, and so are not interesting to conspiracists.

is not reasonable, you believed this scenario you put and got so sure about it before making sure how it was said.

No. It was a hypothetical scenario, and clearly presented as such. It simply fits the observed facts without requiring alien spacecraft, vast conspiracies of silence, and conversations about ETs which are super-secret yet conducted in the clear so any interested ham operator can listen in!

My reasoning for that was the site was brought from a pro-apollo member without being refuted, so I thaught it was believed by you, and since I trusted that you know what you are speaking about,... you understand?

Not really. Suffice it to say that (a) LO has specifically disclaimed any such endorsement, and (b) I do know what I am talking about in this subject. The latter is not a boast, but a fact.

Now refute the video thing from Cosmic Dave I put above

Oh, very well. What's a few less minutes of sleep?

I watched the video and found it laughable. There were crappy images of the Moon apparently tampered with by - hell, not even Photoshop was necessary for the blobs somebody threw on there.

Donna Hare has been debunked before; for instance here. As for the other guy, his description of a supposedly high-security operation is laughably amateurish. Finally, there's no evidence for such an operation, just uncorroborated stories from two people.

Moreover, it doesn't make any sense. How do you conceal half-mile structures from Earthbound telescopes or the cameras of other nations' spacecraft?

In short, the story makes no sense, the details are literally incredible, the claimants have no credibility, and there's no evidence to back up the claims. And now I want back the few minutes of my life I wasted watching that drooling idiocy.

[lionking]

thnx LO for your explanation.
In order not to go into the details of everything sts60 said, I can take your explanation of the transmission thing. I certainly don't believe in aliens, and if somebody said so from NASA, then it is a hoax to me. However, I wonder why doesn't NASA sue people who claim they have clearances? Why no investigations are carried into such acts? Wouldn't that serve the truth more?

[sts60]

I imagine its simply not worth it. Remember how people laughed at NASA for wanting to spend $15,000 commissioning a book debunking "hoax" claims? Lawyers are mighty expensive and it would cost a lot more to sue such people. Worse, it would give them the publicity they crave.

On the other hand, if someone pretended to have a clearance and actually tried to use it obtain classified information, they'd be in a world of hurt. But it's the FBI that would deal with that, not NASA. NASA doesn't issue clearances and nothing that NASA does, with the exception of some projects with DoD, requires classification.

[lionking]

So why doesn't the FBI deal with it?. It is not anything to claim that an organization connected to the government is falsifying things, and that they are star witnesses of this. It is not that they will give the mpublicity or stuff, but it is the duty of intelligence t ogo after falsifications

[grashtel]

lionking said:

So why doesn't the FBI deal with it?. It is not anything to claim that an organization connected to the government is falsifying things, and that they are star witnesses of this. It is not that they will give the mpublicity or stuff, but it is the duty of intelligence t ogo after falsifications

A) Free speech.
B) Limited time, money, and manpower that is better spent dealing with actual criminals rather than people who post stupid stuff on the web.
C) The fact that chasing them down would just add credibility to the story in many people who are already of a conspiracy theorist type mindset.
D) The website's owners may not be American (I haven't checked so don't know) seriously limiting what the FBI can do about them.

[lionking]

Not the website's owners, byt the ppl themselves claiming they have secret information. I disagree that it will add to their credibility. It will be written infront of everybody, by conclusive proof , that they were wrong, and on the internet and everything. As for wasting money, I don't think this is a good reason, as it would teach others not to break the rules and lie in front of people about dangerous issues. Besides, breaking the law should be punished. Applying the law is a must for everybody, in a country that respects itself.

[LunarOrbit]

lionking said:

I disagree that it will add to their credibility. It will be written infront of everybody, by conclusive proof , that they were wrong, and on the internet and everything.

Do people care that a court of law has proclaimed OJ Simpson innocent?

If NASA went after these people hoax believers would say "oooh, I guess they have something to hide or else they wouldn't go to so much trouble over one person". It's a no-win situation for NASA.