• NEW! LOWEST RATES EVER -- SUPPORT THE SHOW AND ENJOY THE VERY BEST PREMIUM PARACAST EXPERIENCE! Welcome to The Paracast+, eight years young! For a low subscription fee, you can download the ad-free version of The Paracast and the exclusive, member-only, After The Paracast bonus podcast, featuring color commentary, exclusive interviews, the continuation of interviews that began on the main episode of The Paracast. We also offer lifetime memberships! Flash! Take advantage of our lowest rates ever! Act now! It's easier than ever to susbcribe! You can sign up right here!

    Subscribe to The Paracast Newsletter!

Italian Astronomers stumble upon UFO on the Moon

Forums New posts

Free episodes:

Why is this not a balloon passing between the telescope and the Moon, within our atmosphere?

It could just be an old Mogul balloon that hasn't come down yet.

(Ha, ha, I was just kidding about the Mogul, but it still might be someone's escaped helium balloon.)
 
fitzbew88 said:
Why is this not a balloon passing between the telescope and the Moon, within our atmosphere?

It could just be an old Mogul balloon that hasn't come down yet.

(Ha, ha, I was just kidding about the Mogul, but it still might be someone's escaped helium balloon.)
Click to expand...

Due to the focus, and size of object, it doesn't appear to be a small object relatively close. If it was a balloon in our atmosphere it would appear much larger compared to the moon.
 
Paranormal Packrat said:
Due to the focus, and size of object, it doesn't appear to be a small object relatively close. If it was a balloon in our atmosphere it would appear much larger compared to the moon.
Click to expand...

No, a 12 inch diameter object about 29,800 feet away from the scope would do it.

I'm giving it an angular size of about of about .001925 degrees (about 1/250 of the diameter of the moon). I suspect something larger and even further away --- a real weather balloon could have quite an impressive diameter at 60,000 or so feet. Some research ballons are 40 inches in diameter while they are at sea level and they expand as they get higher and the air is thinner. (eventually they burst.)

Focus has nothing to do with it; the scope is focused on infinity. Anything sufficiently far enough away from the scope is going to appear resolved.
 
I try to use common sense at all times when I look at stuff, but I am unfortunately not an expert at pictures/videos.

That's what I love about this place, David Biedney is here to shed some light on it, right?
 
fitzbew88 said:
Paranormal Packrat said:
Due to the focus, and size of object, it doesn't appear to be a small object relatively close. If it was a balloon in our atmosphere it would appear much larger compared to the moon.
Click to expand...

No, a 12 inch diameter object about 29,800 feet away from the scope would do it.

I'm giving it an angular size of about of about .001925 degrees (about 1/250 of the diameter of the moon). I suspect something larger and even further away --- a real weather balloon could have quite an impressive diameter at 60,000 or so feet. Some research ballons are 40 inches in diameter while they are at sea level and they expand as they get higher and the air is thinner. (eventually they burst.)

Focus has nothing to do with it; the scope is focused on infinity. Anything sufficiently far enough away from the scope is going to appear resolved.
Click to expand...

I thought you said the weather balloon was a joke, so I went with a party balloon.
 
Assuming it wasn't doctored and is real video...could a weather balloon make a turn like that? Maybe, if it hit a different air current I suppose.
 
Does it look to anyone else like there is already a path on the moon that the object follows? It seems like there is a faint line where it will go.
 
Paranormal Packrat said:
Vid
http://video.google.com/videoplay?docid=-2705745539059578202

ATS thread on it.
http://www.abovetopsecret.com/forum/thread305257/pg1
Click to expand...

This is compelling video. Not a smoking gun by any means, but definitely one to raise some people's eyebrows.
 
Guess I'd feel a little better about it if I could see a shadow. Yes, I suppose it might not be close enough to cast one or that the angle of the sunlight might be wrong, something like that.

Think I'll head to Keith Laney's board to see if he's looking at it. He might know the related moon topography. I'll post something if I find something.
 
The way it "flys" off in the last video box inset (or whatever you call that) would suggest it's not near the moon surface because it doesn't have a rounded path. Watch how in the last seconds when it flys past the edge of the moon's surface it seems to continue in a straight line. IMO it's in our own atmosphere.
 
Can someone post the video to youtube? Google's blocking it or claiming a "video error" and I'm not downloading that gargantuan file.

Thanks
 
Just FYI, this was taken through a Celestron C-8 telescope by an amateur astronomer (one--not several). That doesn't reduce the quality of the video, but I think some people are assuming that 'Italian astronomers' imples some sort of professional or official group with professional equipment. It was one guy in his backyard using a fairly good, but typical amateur telescope. It would be the same if I posted a video on YouTube and the headline was "American astonomers discover UFO on Moon." It's not exactly Hubble or Mt. Palomar. It's not exactly official; and it's not more than one guy. The headline is hype.
 
Schuyler said:
Just FYI, this was taken through a Celestron C-8 telescope by an amateur astronomer (one--not several). That doesn't reduce the quality of the video, but I think some people are assuming that 'Italian astronomers' imples some sort of professional or official group with professional equipment. It was one guy in his backyard using a fairly good, but typical amateur telescope. It would be the same if I posted a video on YouTube and the headline was "American astonomers discover UFO on Moon." It's not exactly Hubble or Mt. Palomar. It's not exactly official; and it's not more than one guy. The headline is hype.
Click to expand...

Thanks for pointing that out. I think I just copied and pasted the title.
 
Friggin' raised my eyebrows, that's for sure. A HELL of a lot more compelling than the Haiti video, which smacked of hoax the moment I saw it. I watched it a few times, just because it looked cool, but there was little doubt in my mind that it was a hoax.

On this, let's consider the source. This comes from an amateur astronomer, right? Am I right about that? If so, he has a serious consideration in his career to think about. And why has the US government not gone back to the moon in all this time?

Every mission that was involved in the space race or the space shuttle benefited the military-industrial complex in some way. Until the discovery of helium 3 on the moon, I submit that the military saw little use in manned moon missions (I know, I know, we didn't really go to the moon), and that's why after the space race, we pursued low Earth orbit missions that allowed us to control, in fact, dominate, what got put into orbit. We even had the Russians thinking we had a fully-functional SDI program, when in reality, they were the first in space-based anti-satellite weapons that actually worked.

The US government treats NASA like a redheaded stepchild (apologies to all ginger people out there, I married one) until it came to matters of military importance, and even then sometimes they circumvented NASA by having a secret payload on the top of an unscheduled Titan missile night launch.

I submit that there ARE and have been for many, many years, TWO space programs. One paved the way for the other. You have to get the experience for the public one somewhere, and if you're going to be on live TV, you have to make sure you don't get egg on your face.

It's obscene the amount of money the US govt. has spent to insure their domination of the military-industrial complex, especially lately For more really upsetting news, not including the last six years of the Bush administration (Bad president! BAD President!) see Pulitzer-prizer winning author Tim Weiner's book, "Blank Check: The Pentagon's Black Budget". Worth a read for anyone that doubts that trillions and trillions of dollars have entered the world of black budgets not under congressional oversight, referenced directly by Stanton Friedman in his "UFOs ARE REAL" lectures.

If it _is_a hoax--and let's face it--if they were going to fake video, they'd be risking their careers; they have a lot to lose--it's not worth THEIR hoaxing it. Which means whatever was photographed up there was really there.

Discuss.
 
With the length of time devoted to black budget technology and the dollars spent in the black arena, I think we'd be blown away by technology in use today, should we ever understand it to be ours. I don't think many would agree with that, however. The idea that all ufos are alien still gets too much play in the public. Maybe it's easier on minds to go with that option though it is certainly more odd.

A year or so back, I watched a fascinating program on the Discovery Channel on the miniaturized drones developed that can fly around corners, enter caves or dark buildings and even land on tripods within any given area. The smallest looked just like discs, but had cameras and specialized sensing equipment. They were flown remotely and were touted as the next big thing in combat preparedness.

I remember less about the drone that could land on its tripod, but I think I forgot about it on purpose. Either little was said about it or it bothered me enough to forget everything it could do. I really don't know. Anyway, it was much larger that the small disc - like drones.

If these things were used in Afghanistan or in Iraq, I've never heard them mentioned. Also, I don't remember anyone on the show mentioning how the craft were propelled, but it's hard to believe Discovery could show them if the technology that drives them is top secret. Anyone else see the show?
 
No, they didn't, but the remote system seemed rather elaborate to me. It had to be if the objects could fly around corners and into dark caves and buildings. I got to thinking that the control feature was probably flying itself rather than fixed on the ground. (Satellite?) Maybe the larger and weirder tripod object had something to do with that, but if I remember correctly, it landed in remote areas. It was very hard to judge the size of it with nothing in the landscape to compare. It was shown flying and landed also, if I remember correctly. (See how awful my memory is?)

I'm also left with the impression that it could do more than just spy on goings-on, like maybe it could explode(?) It was such a curious looking thing that I could see it attracting attention of onlookers. More of it's function was explained but I only remember that it was a spy apparatus.

I've thought of registering at ATS just to ask if anyone there saw it, but I don't read there often. The board's membership is large enough that someone else may have seen it, but I don't have the time to keep up with all the goings on there. It may have already been mentioned.

Imagine an ice cream cone, the kind that flairs at the top to hold the scoop of ice cream. Cut off the pointed end of the cone and enclose it with a flat bottom. Turn the whole thing upside down, extend the tripod legs and you've basically got the image. I think I remember hardware on the outside of it like perhaps gauges or small doors. It's just been too long, longer than my current memory serves. But then I was creeped out by it too.

The flight of the discs was pretty smooth and they flew at what appeared to be eye-level. A camera man obviously followed behind it to record the flight around corners. I wasn't surprised to see the robotic dragon flies on the internet recently when I remember this particular show.

I'm the only person I know, so far, to have seen this program. I've asked dozens of people if they might have seen it in order to shore up my memory of the parts that are muddy. It could have been on the History Channel instead of Discovery, but I've never found it repeated on either channel. Doesn't mean it wasn't repeated because I'm not the most avid TV watcher. Only stumbled onto the show myself.
 
Back
Top