First men on moon saw ufos

[Mindsky]

credible, ignored, suppressed, science, religion, culture, media, health | headline news | unknowncountry


I've heard this "rumor" for years. Seen Buzz even criticize people and ufology like a debunker would. He appeared on shows and lied appearantly for years. Out of all the people you'd think would be honest with us about what went on up there...... I'm quite ticked if this is true. I even defended the liars. So did Edgar Mitchel.

And to think I actually seen Buzz punch someone for calling him a liar...... There's a vid on the net showing it.

To read about the "One small Punch"
Floridian: Lunar lunacy

I'll look for the vid so you can see it with your own eyes.

Here it is:

http://dumpalink.com/media/1118149764/Buzz_Aldrin_Punch


I didn't want to make a poll, but it made me do it in order to post this thread. What's up with that? More non-mac user related issues? I made a thread before without this occuring.

 

[themacx]

UK television has a show on recently with Buzz admitting he saw "something"
for me the whole ufo story is a cover up for the other scam the moon landings but that my point of view. the clip can be found here:

(I think they did see the SIV-B so they where still in high orbit......)

reason why I say it's a cover up is for one thing this new article:
Search Is on for Original Apollo 11 Footage

"That optimism is what makes him certain that somehow, somewhere,
they will find the lost Apollo 11 tapes."

...they lost the original tapes????? :- the one's with the reported Coke bottle i guess.

 

[michael]

I've heard on more than a few shows and documentaries that the astronauts did see some kind of craft while out there. And I think that someone even mentioned the possibility of an alien base on the moon.

I'd love to be able to read more about it or hear someone with knowledge of the incident be interviewed on the Paracast.

 

[nshanks]

A UFO appeared in the studio while they filmed the landing???

 

[Joan]

Heck, I am old enough to remember the first TV coverage of the moon landing and thinking: Who is filming them leaving the moon?
Yes there it was, a shot worthy of The Thunderbirds, of the space ship taking off from the moon!! LOL

 

[Rick Deckard]

UK television has a show on recently with Buzz admitting he saw "something"
for me the whole ufo story is a cover up for the other scam the moon landings but that my point of view. the clip can be found here:

(I think they did see the SIV-B so they where still in high orbit......)

I just watched the video - mission control told the crew that the Stage 4 Booster was 6000 nautical miles away. Buzz says he doubts that they were looking at an object that far away.

 

[auntiegrav]

I just watched the video - mission control told the crew that the Stage 4 Booster was 6000 nautical miles away. Buzz says he doubts that they were looking at an object that far away.

Stage 4 booster? I thought the S-V was a 3 stage rocket.
Oh well, Buzz Lightyear. He SEEMS so normal.

 

[Mindsky]

First men on moon saw ufos/ Well, not really

I just read that the documentary skewd and put a spin on Buzz's account (figures). It had nothing to do with ETs.

I'm unsure if it's ok to link to another radio shows site, but there is info. on it there. Here is a copy and paste of part of the news on Buzz.

"Aldrin also clarified his rumored UFO sighting. What he actually saw were bright flashes at night-- which at the time were quite mysterious. But on a later mission, he said these flashes were identified as "high velocity Z particles," --nothing related to an ET craft. "

 

[Rick Deckard]

Stage 4 booster? I thought the S-V was a 3 stage rocket.

Yeah, not knowing much about the 'hardware', I assumed that when they were talking about the "S-4-B" they meant Stage-Four-Booster - my mistake.

I just read that the documentary skewd and put a spin on Buzz's account (figures). It had nothing to do with ETs.

I'm unsure if it's ok to link to another radio shows site, but there is info. on it there. Here is a copy and paste of part of the news on Buzz.

"Aldrin also clarified his rumored UFO sighting. What he actually saw were bright flashes at night-- which at the time were quite mysterious. But on a later mission, he said these flashes were identified as "high velocity Z particles," --nothing related to an ET craft. "

I can't believe you posted that - have you seen the video? It's only 3 minutes 47 seconds long, so it won't take up too much of your time.

I decided to watch it again and type up Buzz Aldrins words - here they are:

...

...there was something out there that, er, was close enough to be observed and er, what could it be?

...

...Mike decided he thought he could see it in the telescope and he was able to do that and when, when it was in one position that it had a series of ellipses, but when you made it real sharp it was sort of L-shaped...that didn't tell us very much.

...

...now obviously the three of us were not going to, er, blurt out "Hey Houston, we got something moving along' side of us and, er, we don't know what it is, you know!. Can you tell us what it is?". We weren't about to do that, er, 'cos we know that the, er, those transmissions would be heard by all sorts of people and, er, who knows what somebody would have demanded that we, er, turned back because of 'aliens' or whatever the reason is. So we, we didn't do that, but we did, er, decide we'd, we'd just cautiously ask, er, Houston where, how far away was the S-4-B.

...

...and, er, a few moments later when they came back and said something like it was six thousand miles away because of the manoeuvre, so we, we really didn't think we were looking at something that far away so we decided that after a while of watching it, it was time to go to sleep and not to talk about it any more until we came back and in debriefing.

...

Now, I can see that the his interviewed comments have been edited (I've put the "..." to indicate the breaks) but what he says in that video in no way describes "flashing lights".

 

[d.braun]

The thing that I find most telling about the video is not so much that they saw "something," as is Aldrin's statement that the crew feared the mission might even be aborted because of it.

Why would anyone even THINK that scrubbing the flight would be a consideration (as in, Budget Bucks $$$ wasted) unless the possibility of an alien "threat" was generally known and accepted as real?

Dennis

 

[Rick Deckard]

I just read that the documentary skewd and put a spin on Buzz's account (figures). It had nothing to do with ETs.

I'm unsure if it's ok to link to another radio shows site, but there is info. on it there. Here is a copy and paste of part of the news on Buzz.

Could you send me the link? I'd be interested to read it. Thanks.

"Aldrin also clarified his rumored UFO sighting. What he actually saw were bright flashes at night-- which at the time were quite mysterious. But on a later mission, he said these flashes were identified as "high velocity Z particles," --nothing related to an ET craft. "

This 'explanation' sounds like an adapted conversation with one of the space shuttle pilots who described seeing faint 'points of light' when closing their eyes before going to sleep on the shuttle. These points of light became more frequent the closer they got to the radiation belts and are caused by high-velocity, sub-atomic, radioactive particles exciting the back of the retina as they passed through the skulls of the astronauts.

My recollection of the shuttle astronaut interview is that these 'lights' could only be seen when the astronauts closed their eyes in the darkness of the sleeping quarters - this does not sound at all like the events that Buzz describes in the video.

And lets not forget that the crew on Apollo 11 were looking at this 'object' through a telescope and it is Buzz himself that says "there was something out there and it was close enough to be observed".

Oh and the video of Buzz punching a reporter - this is from a 'documentary' where the reporter is arranging to meet all the Apollo astonauts under false pretences, to talk "about the moon landings". Then some way into the interview, the interviewer raises the question of "faked landings" and asks each Astronaut to swear on the bible, on camera, to the fact that they did indeed land on the moon. Buzz refused and stopped the interview at that point.

From that point onwards, the interviewer followed Buzz around and harrassed him, calling him "a fraud" and "a liar" because he wouldn't swear on the bible. He got right in Buzz's face and pushed him to the point where Buzz lost his cool and punched him.

So, that episode has little to do with Apollo astronauts seeing "ET" and more to do with the "conflicting" conspiracy that the USA never went to the moon in the first place.

 

[Rick Deckard]

Any chance of sending me that link, Mindsky? Thanks.

 

[Lonesome George]

There are two explanations from Buzz Aldrin about this incident, and they conflict with each other.

Firstly, the Coast to Coast quote where he says it was the Z particles:
Missing Apollo 11 Tapes - Shows - Coast to Coast AM

Secondly, an official NASA explanation saying Buzz told them 'on the phone' it was panels from the upper stages, and that the documentary edited that part out:
http://nai.arc.nasa.gov/astrobio/astrobio_detail.cfm?ID=1568

So who do we believe?
Either way I don't trust the documentary, seeing as they have acted dishonestly with their editing, but I also think NASA has been caught out aswell...

...and why is Buzz talking to such people in the first place? Especially after the whole entrapment/punching incident where you'd think he would've learned to be less trusting of documentary makers...?

 

[Rick Deckard]

Thanks for the links George - I think the NASA explanation is a reasonable one, although I too am troubled by conflicting 'clarifying' statements.

Still doesn't change the fact that other astronauts have gone on the record about UFOs in space...

...my own feelings about the moon landings is that they did go in 1969, but found something unexpected. I wouldn't be surprised if the Apollo missions were the first AND last 'public' trips to moon - it's possible further trips have been made by the military. What else would account for the 300 billion dollar annual budget the US spends on the military?

 

[Mindsky]

Sorry, haven't checked this thread since my last post here. Yes, it was a article I saw off C2Cam I think someone linked above. At the time of making this thread I hadn't seen the video as it wasn't on the net at that time. Atleast I couldn't find it.

I posted his statements because it's relative to this thread. One might pick the vid over the article, I personally don't.

 

[klatuu_berada_nicto]

NASA has been operating what I like to call "The Big Space Dump Truck" a.k.a. the shuttle program for 30+ years now. So while there maybe some very small segment of the organization that does photo editing (McKinnon case), the vast majority of their staff are mundane and unimaginitive and probably incapable of concieving a complex and detailed hoax, much less covering it up since the days of Apollo. Why do the vast majority our unmanned spacecraft look like goofy erector set contrivances (excepting the Mars rovers, go baby go!)? Yeah, I'm a little negative about the reasons why the federal government continues to fund this organization and hope that the private space initiatives make them do some serious house cleaning!

On the flip side, why hasn't there been a manned mission to the moon since Apollo? Our materials and methods of design are much more advanced now and most of the mistakes were made so we can avoid them in the future. Money might be one reason, but, it probably costs about as much to put up a shuttle into LEO as it did to launch a Saturn V and get into a TLI orbit. If I recall correctly, the latest U.S. lunar mission was the Lunar Prospector and that one was unmanned and purposefully crashed. Did we find something or did we see the "no vacancy" sign?
I think that the reason we haven't gone back is that there is no competition to get back to the moon. When someone (China or India) are seriously headed there to plant their flag on the surface, we will see massive effort expended to make sure that they don't knock down our flag during their visit...

 

[Rick Deckard]

I think NASA went on the record recently and said that if they started now, the earliest that they could go back to the moon would be 2025.

I find that suspicious, but hey, I still have doubts about the original landings... 8)

I read somewhere that the moon has at least 1 million tons of helium-3 isotope - there's enough energy in 1 ton to power the planet Earth for 1 year - it wouldn't surprise me if the US have already claimed the mining rights...

...so, if that IS true, the commercial incentive is definitely there.

 

[Sukrillux]

Now, some of you are confusing the explanations of the sightings that Buzz describes in the interviews. First, they see the object outside of their craft and radio to Houston to find the whereabouts of the S-IVB to rule out that. After the smart folks at Houston replied with an answer without a question of "Why did you ask that, Eagle?", they observed it for a while longer and then decided to go to sleep. That is where their other observation happened. The Z-particles caused a light show when interacting with their retina. There are two different observations here. When asked to confirm his account of the first observation in a later radio interview, he told them that he had only one observation and that was of the Z-particles. He said there was no unidentified object flying along side them on the way to the moon. Therefore, why would they have radioed to Houston about the location of the S-IVB? That sounds like an authentic audio clip to me, but he says it never happened. Anyways, because of the maneuver, the S-IVB could have not been sailing beside them 2 days after separation. It is rather odd how Buzz changed his story like he did and used his fist to stamp it with his seal of approval.

 

[Tony2007]

I think it's a bit more complex than just simply Yes or No. I think part of the government "takeover" of NASA was to prevent any UFO or ET-related material being leaked or spread to the media, and while there may be people within NASA with access to UFO evidence, there's a government element working to suppress it.

If not a government element, then definitely a military/industrial element.

 

[Rick Deckard]

I think it's a bit more complex than just simply Yes or No. I think part of the government "takeover" of NASA was to prevent any UFO or ET-related material being leaked or spread to the media, and while there may be people within NASA with access to UFO evidence, there's a government element working to suppress it.

If not a government element, then definitely a military/industrial element.

I think that's very probable.