Aliens on the Moon? (oh my!)

[Burnt State]

And again, regarding alien reconnaissance of earth and leaving their trash behind on the moon - how does this make any sense whatsoever? Let's think critically, and not like some human that needs a duck blind or a platform in some trees so they can shoot the bears. If these aliens can traverse the stars is it really likely, by any stretch of the imagination, that they need to set up binoculars to spy in real time on us? Would they not just send out an orbiting nano-probe, invisible to all us humans, and send back relevant info via data stream technology entirely beyond our understanding? I don't see how lunar anomalies could possibly connect to aliens. So much of this discussion is premised upon a very limited human vision of the universe and how other intelligences would interact with or observe us.

 

[Tyger]

And again, regarding alien reconnaissance of earth and leaving their trash behind on the moon - how does this make any sense whatsoever? Let's think critically, and not like some human that needs a duck blind or a platform in some trees so they can shoot the bears. If these aliens can traverse the stars is it really likely, by any stretch of the imagination, that they need to set up binoculars to spy in real time on us? Would they not just send out an orbiting nano-probe, invisible to all us humans, and send back relevant info via data stream technology entirely beyond our understanding? I don't see how lunar anomalies could possibly connect to aliens. So much of this discussion is premised upon a very limited human vision of the universe and how other intelligences would interact with or observe us.

Dead-on! Exactly so. It's not even good Science Fiction.

 

[Constance]

All information regarding the supposed American astronauts comes from a YouTube comments interview conducted by the Italian reporter who is the sole contact for Rutledge following his videos. And while the two supposed American astronauts may be real names of real people, there is nothing connecting them to a real rocket to the moon. All of the info to be found stems from the YouTube interview - so basically one story has been repeated exponentially online,

I'd adjust the statement in blue to read: all of the available information (available online). You seem to believe that only individual hoaxers and 'ufologists' are capable of generating misinformation. We know how much misinformation and disinformation has been introduced into the subject of ufos and related anomalies by the alphabet agencies. I assume you know that as well. {?} I wonder why you reserve your ire and contempt concerning the frustrating mixture of information and disinformation that plagues ufo research for the least powerful individuals involved in the subject. That is what you appear to do fairly consistently. I can't fathom the mentality of hoaxers in general, but it appears clear to me that the greatest motivation for confusing the ufo subject lies with government and military officials, especially in the US. Among ufologists, there are, and have been for 60 years, both capable and dedicated researchers working against official secrecy and also a variety of lesser lights who sometimes go off half-cocked on the basis of limited knowledge of the history of ufo events accumulated over these 60 years. In my opinion the baby is the body of ufo research produced by serious investigators (far from perfect, but coherent) , and you seem to want to throw that baby out with the contaminated and confusing bathwater in which the baby has been immersed by popular 'ufology'.

. . . and they never should have been, but those fake videos have given birth to something that has now been validated by this television broadcast. That's kind of sad actually, as it invalidates the core premise of the show if they're going to close with someone's hoaxed video.

Some of the videos that have been made available at youtube might not be hoaxed. There might be a core of highly significant information there. The Aliens on the Moon documentary did not 'validate' the Apollo 20 and Mona Lisa footage and claims. It presented parts of the footage and clearly indicated that many people consider all of this to have been a hoax. Nobody knows if the entire complement of it was a hoax. Among the statements made to Luca Scantambula (sp?) by 'William Rutledge' was his explanation for releasing what he could -- that humanity has a right to know if evidence of other intelligent species in the universe has been discovered, and where.

So with one false story, and some hoaxing, a legend is born. And what's interesting is that inevitably some other anonymous digital identity then came out online to validate Leona and William as astronauts that were still all in contact, like any of it was real to begin with. Is this how Roswell began - a staged event, that others jumped on top of? At least there you have real live human beings to talk with, unlike this complete fabrication. . . . .

You're convinced that your interpretation of both events is correct. I wouldn't be so sure. I don't think any of us can be. Re Roswell, what are your thoughts on the motivation of officials of the US army and the government it reported to in hoaxing a ufo recovery at/near Roswell AFB? Under the circumstances of the sudden wave of ufo sightings beginning in WWII and increasing exponentially over the US in the spring of 1947, why would the PTB want to announce and quickly disclaim a ufo crash in the New Mexico desert?

Re this: "some other anonymous digital identity then came out online to validate Leona and William as astronauts that were still all in contact," I vaguely remember that but no longer have any links to it. Do you?

 

[Constance]

And again, regarding alien reconnaissance of earth and leaving their trash behind on the moon - how does this make any sense whatsoever? Let's think critically, and not like some human that needs a duck blind or a platform in some trees so they can shoot the bears. If these aliens can traverse the stars is it really likely, by any stretch of the imagination, that they need to set up binoculars to spy in real time on us? Would they not just send out an orbiting nano-probe, invisible to all us humans, and send back relevant info via data stream technology entirely beyond our understanding? I don't see how lunar anomalies could possibly connect to aliens. So much of this discussion is premised upon a very limited human vision of the universe and how other intelligences would interact with or observe us.

Supposing for the moment that the object in question on the far side of our moon might be millions of years old as Rutledge speculated, what 'us' would there have been to 'spy on'? Paul Davies, in the article I posted in full yesterday, clarifies the immense span of time during which our solar system might have been visited, and the motivation for such visits by advanced species to Luna in the distant past can be rationally accounted for by the Helium 3 available in great quantities on Luna. Alien visitation on Luna, if it has occurred, might never have had anything to do with human 'civilization' on earth.

 

[Burnt State]

Constance, I think that the field of ufology is mostly corrupt due to a fouled history of planned deception, extremist & fundamentalist debunkers, hoaxers, jokers, cultists, adbduction experts, contactees and the retelling of mythic stories without basis. The limited serious, openly accessible scientific investigation that has taken place pales in comparison to mountainous morass of unsubstantiated and reckless beliefs systems created concerning UFO's. I have a lot of ire to go around & do my best to spread it calculatingly according to the thread's subject. I think Richard Doty is almost as evil and irresponsible as Bo & Peep, but not quite. This thread is about the moon and its relationship to alien intelligence in our solar system - so I reserve my comments this way.

The are indeed some strange babies that should be kept and examined carefully as real examples of anomalous events & evidence of that which suggests an alien intelligence among us and/or in our airspace. I would never throw those away, but Ingo Swann IMHO should not be used as fact checker regarding what or who is on the moon. Some in ufology do. Speculation has a lot of problems attached to it but I do think the hoaxer has a special place in the annals of misperception, belief systems & myth making i.e. crop circles artists.

And not to repeat myself, but my posts in general make it clear that I acknowledge a true UFO phenomenon exists, but what it is ???? I think that's still all up for debate. I do not doubt the entire field, just its mythologizing. Making leaps and speculations though on shoddy or non-existent evidence is just perpetuating all that's wrong with a fouled field.

For your reading pleasure

A good Magonia piece on Apollo 20:

conspiracy | MAGONIA

Link to username Marduk's Thierry Speth critique with images of his eBay sales and retiredafb's YouTube user identity (sure this could be all invented too but more probable than the reality of a mummified alien astronaut appearing in badly composited video):

The Apollo 20 Hoax : Sun & Space Anomalies

The original interview:

An Alien Spaceship on the Moon: Interview With William Rutledge, member of the Apollo 20 Crew - by Luca Scantamburlo, May 2007

Lucas's concerns regarding retiredafb's identity - could he be an imposter he asks:

The Apollo 20 Case: Debunking or a Trojan Horse for the Truth? - by Luca Scantamburlo

"Inspired by Rutledge’s bravery, the commander of Apollo 19 contacted Scantamburlo with his own exclusive story of a secret mission. The unnamed commander goes by the username “moonwalker1966delta” told his story like Rutledge through Youtube comments."

from:
Apollo 18 Reviewed by an Apollo-Era Historian | Motherboard

 

[Burnt State]

Supposing for the moment that the object in question on the far side of our moon might be millions of years old as Rutledge speculated, what 'us' would there have been to 'spy on'? Paul Davies, in the article I posted in full yesterday, clarifies the immense span of time during which our solar system might have been visited, and the motivation for such visits by advanced species to Luna in the distant past can be rationally accounted for by the Helium 3 available in great quantities on Luna. Alien visitation on Luna, if it has occurred, might never have had anything to do with human 'civilization' on earth.

Yes, there is the remote possibility of mining the universe, or local galactic cluster as it were, but would a type 2 or type 3 civilization ever really indulge in anything pedantic as mining resources from a rock orbiting a planet? That sounds more like something humans still working on their type 1 status would get up to.

 

[IsaacKoi]

Unfortunately almost all trace of (Thierry Speth's original Apollo 20 video), his eBay purchases of NASA paraphernalia, his interview and confession to the hoax have been scrubbed clean from the net. So all that's left is an obviously hoaxed video and an accompanying wild story about a space mission that never happened. It has grown speculative wings of its own despite the lack of evidence. I don't thnk that there's anywhere to go with that. Repeating it is to engage in the building of Ufological mythology.

It was certainly much easier to trace this hoax back in 2007 because of the number of relevant websites that are now defunct, but it is still possible to find most of the relevant material online by using the Wayback Machine's Internet archive to resurrect relevant webpages. It's just more time consuming, as I found when I went down this path again a week or two ago.

As part of that exercise, I did try to contact the creator of the Apollo 20 videos via a couple of different routes about a week ago - but have not had any replies yet.

In my experience, most hoaxers have been prepared to discuss the creation of their hoax/artwork when approached directly - with some exceptions (including at least one hoaxer that got rather annoyed with me for spoiling his fun by posting details of how his hoaxed video was created, with links to some of the 3D artwork used in his video...).

One fact that has emerged rather strongly from discussing hoaxed videos with their creators is that hoaxing videos is MUCH easier than many UFO researchers/fans think.

I think this provides a partial explanation of why many people think that hoaxed UFO videos are disinformation - because they think that a lot of time and effort must have gone into creating UFO videos that actually are fairly quick and easy to make.

This is just one of the (many) misconceptions that hinder UFO research...

 

[Constance]

We have no idea what a type 2 or 3 civilization might do or need in the way of raw materials provided by nature. If I remember correctly, Kaku classified us as not yet even a type 1 civilization.

 

[Constance]

Burnt, thank you for the links. I'm looking forward to reading all that can be found in those texts.

 

[owlman]

Constance I'm shocked ...your last two responses were so short I nearly missed my mouth drinking my tea here..lol

Ps. Great links Burnt State. Something to read later (at work)

 

[Tyger]

For a variety of reasons I was looking at a website linked below where I came across a great quote that sums up, I think, what happens for a lot ufology situations. I am giving the context for this quote because it's interesting but it's the quote that I am interested in relaying here.

I give the full quote and bold the part that is the sum up: "Whenever I read a passage from The Two Babylons, I cannot help recalling a note which was scribbled on one of my university essays by a lecturer in ancient history:

Your discussion of the various cultural forces at work is sound, although here you become the victim of too little learning combined with a boldness of style. Sounding plausible doesn’t make it right, as your analysis of the cultural influences implies. The idea is good; the sensitivity to evidence is less apparent.

A careful examination of The Two Babylons will reveal that the Reverend Hislop has fallen victim to the same rush of enthusiasm. He has begun with a preconceived idea, located a number of sources that appear to give it credit, and extrapolated a probable (but ultimately fallacious) conclusion from what amounted to very little evidence in the first place."

The Two Babylons - Hislop's hypothesis debunked
LINK: The Two Babylons - Hislop's hypothesis debunked - Christadelphian Info

The 'field' of alternate histories is littered with extrapolations and 'ultimately fallacious' conclusions, sad to say.

As the man said: 'Sounding plausible doesn’t make it right.'

 

[Tyger]

Relevant to this discussion - the hoax of Jessica Lynch's 'capture and rescue' in Iraq -

Comment: "Edward Bernays and Ivy Lee had predicted that by means of conditioning, at about the year 2000, the majority of the population would no longer be able to discern a theatrical event from reality.

The process of anomie was described by Marx as the general disassociation from social awareness because of over exposure to a stimulus which did not represent a real working interaction within a functional community (geimenschaf)."

In many respects the 'field' of ufololgy/alternate history/conspiracy etc suffers from the above in spades (and with iPads and iPhones and all our gadgets and 'social' media, Marx's words regarding anomie are scarily prescient for our time).

 

[Constance]

Constance I'm shocked ...your last two responses were so short I nearly missed my mouth drinking my tea here..lol

 

[Enceladus]

I watched the documentary last night and I agree with earlier comments in this thread that the Apollo 20 stuff looked completely bogus. The two female guests were dreadfully edited as well to make them sound less sceptical.

The rest of it was interesting but I ended up shouting at the TV several times "It's just f%^&in rocks!!!". It must be me and my crap eyesight but I just don't see anything interesting there. I want to I really do but the majority of it just seems like wishful thinking and pareidolia.

Can anybody point me at some pictures that would help convince me?
http://www.google.co.uk/url?sa=t&rc...=BKVcjf9TYqUvMcT1YMtzoA&bvm=bv.72938740,d.ZGU

 

[MARKO]

There is nothing to point out..... its just another fuzzy photo Documentary.

 

[chikane]

I just watched the entire show. I have been waiting for this kind of moonstuff for quite a while and found that it was overall a good show. So thanks a lot Don for putting your time and energy to get this one done! I guess we are all embedded to your commitment on this subject and production!

To my opinion, there are indeed some quite compelling photos, especially the ones with linear/rectangular shapes, the one with multiple rounded features or the seamingly object around mars. But I think we must also be cautious with what they might be, as the light and shadow with some poor resolution can easily create misleading figures...For example, for myself I cannot really see any compelling figure in the photo supposedly representing a giant saucer shape object that was featured many times during the show. I mostly tend to see only a summit of a hill with some relief...As for the bridge one, someone might also think of a natural explanation, one that come to my mind would be of some debris of an asteroïd that the underside was somehow fractured and collapsed with time, leaving this strange figure of a bridge. This is not to say that there is not some quite compelling photos and testimonies as I said, but that we have to be careful in our conclusions and judgment till we have better piece of evidence on these.

As many have expressed, I've also been very disappointed to see that bogus stuff about the alien mumy and secret apollo mission, while the rest of the show tend to remain reasonnably presented. Where does that sh... come from and what it's doing here?!! It's too bad that this sh... sends the end of the show in the woo woo land as the rest of the show was quite well handled in my opinion.

Finally, that leave us with more questions than answers , so I guess till we'll have some more genuine real high resolution pictures or new missions to the moon we'll be left with some unanswered questions!

 

[Decker]

I just watched the entire show. I have been waiting for this kind of moonstuff for quite a while and found that it was overall a good show. So thanks a lot Don for putting your time and energy to get this one done! I guess we are all embedded to your commitment on this subject and production!

As many have expressed, I've also been very disappointed to see that bogus stuff about the alien mumy and secret apollo mission, while the rest of the show tend to remain reasonnably presented. Where does that sh... come from and what it's doing here?!! It's too bad that this sh... sends the end of the show in the woo woo land as the rest of the show was quite well handled in my opinion.

Where did that shit come from?? From the suits and producer who I damn near begged to NOT include that garbage. I knew and Kiviat knew it was totally bogus but ... it will drive up ratings! Yes, I was pissed but there was not one thing I could do about it.

Decker

 

[chikane]

Hi Don,
yup I saw that you weren't pleased to see that stuff included too but couldn't do anything with it...
My grief against it it that it makes the show sounds that it's some woo woo stuff, especially for those open minded skpetics (in which I tend too see myself), who might be interested in the subject but be repelled because of this bogus BS, although IMHO the film is mostly well handled and balanced.

But hey, that was overall a hell lot of a good show!

 

[marduk]

Let's follow the logic here.

Aliens come from distances vast and empty through endless wastes of space and time...

And camp out on a chunk of basalt about 400,000km away. That's airless, goes from 120C to -150C, bombarded by cosmic rays, and far enough down a gravity well that it's difficult to leave.

Oh, and it's surface weathering is so non-existent that any record of any physical activity will stay essentially until our sun goes all red and gianty and eats us all.

We can't see any of their fantastic stuff from Earth, so they must be on the dark side. But if they're on the dark side, what would be the point? They can't watch us from there, they're energetically as far away as lots of asteroids which have a smaller gravity well and more abundant interesting rocks to use for stuff. And hell, we probably wouldn't even notice if a bunch of them got busted up and used for stuff.

Oh, and oops! We've mapped the whole surface repeatedly by several different nations. Are they all "in" on it?

Now, I'm not one to say that it makes no sense, therefore there must be nothing there, except in this case there actually is zero evidence in my opinion AND it makes no sense. We should be looking at the Lagrange points. That's where I'd go and just sit there for free. L1 wouldn't make sense because you'd be silhouetted by the sun. L2's pretty close, and we'd probably see it quickly. L3 would be pointless because the Sun would be in the way and they couldn't see us. L4 & L5 are big regions filled with Trojan asteroids if they want minerals to use for some reason, and far enough away that we probably wouldn't notice them.

I mean I know it's mysterious and romantic and all, but even manned bases on the moon as "way stations" for Mars don't even make sense in my opinion.

I'm not saying we shouldn't put a manned base on the moon and go all Space: 1999 on it. Hell, sign me up. But do it for the science, the helium-3, and as a rescue boat in case our planet goes all melty from a giant asteroid we can do zero about.

 

[chikane]

I personnally have a less sharp point of view about these moon anomalies. On one hand, yes it may not make obvious sense but on another hand we don't know anything about the way any hypothetic aliens might be travelling and their logic, and if looking for a place close to the earth without any disturbance the moon is quite a good candidate... IMHO the point is as with UFOs, one should also pay attention to bits of evidence, as subtle they may be, suggesting there may be something more than meets the eye.

ps: I'm not sure that all the pictures showed were from the dark side, nor that several nation mapped the whole surface of the moon with real good accuracy.