SyFy Channel July 20, "ALIENS ON THE MOON: THE TRUTH EXPOSED"

a reply to: seagull

How could you not like Mansquito?

I had such a hard time correcting my editing errors that I had to remove the quoted material so that I could move on.


New word created for this doc.: "EXPOSTED"! I know, I know, they meant "EXPOSED".

Seeing those photos will be worth the price of admission! Where have these photos been stored with full knowledge by those who decided they should be stored and by those who did the storing. Who came forward to advertise their existence?

Except for a couple of individual entries such as the female alien, the majority of the claims sound as if they were taken from George Leonard's and Fred Steckling's books claiming they saw lunar anomalies on photos of the moon taken by NASA Orbiters, etc.

And we know about Ken Johnston's saga after Mr. Oberg "outed" him.

If the photos that are to be shown and the claims made on what they allegedly show are taken from Leonard's and Steckling's books I'm gonna hunt the producers down and force them to apologize publicly on a video made especially for YouTube!

a reply to: buckwhizzle

After years of therapy, I'd almost forgotten that one... Thanks so much...

I'm going to go curl up in the corner and suck my thumb now...

originally posted by: JimOberg

originally posted by: Ectoplasm8

originally posted by: Thorneblood
a reply to: Ectoplasm8

I wonder about buzz....he seems to lead interviews right up to aliens/ufos then falls back to some canned response when pressed for a definitive yes/no.

NDA or old hero tryin to get paid?

....

If you watch any complete interview with Buzz Aldrin about this "UFO" incident, you'll see him making a point that he's frequently misquoted and wants to set the record straight. Unfortunately, as this program shows, it doesn't work.

Agreed. Here's where he tried to explain it.

www.csicop.org...

This UFO has apparently made it to Yahoo's first page for the day as well. Maybe it will finally sink in.

Yahoo

originally posted by: Kandinsky

High five! Hoagy's sure to be a guest and, in between treatments by his mental health assistant, he does entertain. Worth watching just for him. "I see cars, roads, aliens, towns and cities, but NASA keep hacking my laptop before you the public can be exposed to the Truth!!! Please hit up my PayPal so the fight can continue!"

I was considering planning to watch this, but if there is any indication that "Dr. Richard C Hoagland" is involved, I'm out.

originally posted by: TXRabbit
Let's play a game

Pick the time into the show that they start the segment on Roswell.

I'm going with 6:20

Would that be about lunar crater Roswell, next to crater Hill and crater Walton?

originally posted by: JimOberg

originally posted by: parad0x122
a reply to: JimOberg



What do you think Jim, any truth to what they're claiming?

Someday it will become true, on some world out there, or between them. A thousand previous false alarms will be swept away and forgotten.

But this new version seems a basic retread of long-rotted-out misunderstandings and confabulations and deliberate distorions -- of course, I shouldn't judge until I've seen it. [grin]

If it helps sharpen the recognition criteria for future perceptual puzzles, it will be useful. If in its transparent bogusity it desensitizes people to 'next times', it's unhelpful.

IMHO.

But what about what you know about lunar photos versus what is being claimed will be shown? If they show real, unenhanced NASA photos of non-human constructs on the moon, would you feel that your NASA contacts failed you by not opening to you as they sound that they will to others?

originally posted by: FosterVS

I was considering planning to watch this, but if there is any indication that "Dr. Richard C Hoagland" is involved, I'm out.

My information is that Hoagland is not involved but his attack gerbil Mike Bara is all over it, in his stead.

originally posted by: Uggielicious
.....But what about what you know about lunar photos versus what is being claimed will be shown? If they show real, unenhanced NASA photos of non-human constructs on the moon, would you feel that your NASA contacts failed you by not opening to you as they sound that they will to others?

What any rational responsible approach to alleged lunar anomalies absolutely requires is not fuzzy out-the-window Apollo pix, or fifty year old scans, but precise lunar latitude/longitude locations on the surface that can be examined by later-generation high-resolution imagery from international missions.

What's YOUR expectation from the producer of 'Alien Autopsy'?

front page of yahoo.com today:

finance.yahoo.com...

The SyFy program is picking up a lot of media buzz, we're supposed to be panting in anticipation.

Latest rumor is an alleged "inside source" claimed he heard the Apollo-11 astronauts use "a secret channel" to report there were "UFOs lined up on the other side of the crater watching us."

That sounds awfully like the bogus "Pepper Transcript" that appeared in a grocery store tabloid newspaper a few months after the mission.

I can't believe somebody is now claiming to have been there and actually heard it himself. How delusional can you get?

Here are the details from my 1982 book.

The Apollo-11 UFO Incidents by James Oberg
Excerpt from UFOs and Outer Space Mysteries
(Donning Press, Virginia Beach, VA, 1982, Chapter 3).
Web version published with the author's permission.
Entire chapter at www.debunker.com...

[O]nly shortly after the astronauts returned to earth in mid-1969, a bootleg "tape" and voice transcript of what was really said on the moon has been circulating clandestinely in UFO circles. The headline on the cover of National Bulletin magazine (distributed in Canada but printed in New York City) for September 29,1969 cries out that "Phony Transmission Failure Hides Apollo 11 Discovery. . . . Moon is a U.F.O. Base!" Author Sam Pepper gave this version of the "Top Secret Tape Transcript" from "a leak close to the top," as follows:

What was it, what the hell was it? That's all I want to know....
These. . . (garbled) . . .babies were huge, sir, they were enormous....
No, No, that's just field distortion....
Oh, God, you wouldn't believe it....
What...what...what the hell's going on? Whatsa matter with you guys . . . ?
They're here, under the surface....
What's there.. .malfunction. . .Mission Control calling Apollo 11....
Roger, we're here, all three of us, but we've found some visitors....
Yeah, they've been here for quite a while judging by the installations....
Mission control, repeat last message....
I'm telling you, there are other spacecraft out there. They're lined up in ranks on the far side of the crater edge....
Repeat, repeat....
Let's get that orbit scanned and head home....
In 625 to the fifth, auto-relays set...My hands are shaking so bad....
Film...yes, the damned cameras were clicking away from up here...
Did you fellows get anything?
Had no film left by the time. . . (garbled) . . . three shots of the saucers, or whatever they were. . .may have fogged the film.
Mission Control, this is Mission Control...are you under way, repeat, are you under way? What's this uproar about UFOs? Over.
They're set up down there...they're on the moon... watching us....
The mirrors, the mirrors . . . you set them up, didn't you?
Yes, the mirrors are all in place. But whatever built those spacecraft will probably come over and pull 'em all out by the roots tomorrow....
When this account was discussed by Fate editor Curtis Fuller in 1970, he confessed to "extreme skepticism about the whole alleged transcription" But the account has been printed elsewhere, (science fiction author and UFO buff Otto Binder helped spread it widely), and it reminds observers of the radio signals picked up in Europe in the early 1960s from doomed Russian cosmonauts on secret space shots which ended in their undisclosed deaths. Radio amateurs have become very proficient in smoking out 'official secrets' in the past few decades

…
Fuller's skepticism about the "Pepper Transcript" appears have been justified. From internal evidence alone, it looks more and more like a crude hoax. This can be deduced from the vocabulary itself:
"Mission Control"...this was never a phrase used astronauts, who instead referred always to "Houston."
Technical-sounding gibberish such as "field distortion," "orbit scanned," "625 to the fifth," "auto-relays," etc. were never found in real transcripts.
"Repeat, repeat" is never used on the radio; instead, astronauts and Mission Control use the phrase "Say Again."
"Three of us"...actually, only two men were on the lunar surface.
In addition, interviews with the handful of amateur radio listeners who are known to have tuned in the S-band (2270 megahertz) moon signals produced testimony that they heard the same conversations which were released by NASA. Since listening to the moon required the use of ten-foot diameter radio dishes, few people actually could do it, and they were known t each other, having done similar space eavesdropping for years
(The consensus among such experienced American ''hams'' is that the old stories of "radio transmissions from secret dying Russian spacemen" were either dumb mistakes, outright hoaxes, or playful publicity stunts by Italian and German radio amateurs.)
The unavoidable conclusion is that Pepper either fabricated the fake "transcript" himself or used very poor judgment in allowing himself to be victimized by somebody else's fake. As is often the case with UFO reports, it is very hard to prove definitely that something did not happen. But in this case, fortunately, the hoax was so rickety that it collapses under its own weight.

I do not exclude the possibility that aliens may have visited the Earth centuries ago or in the distant past, nor am I certain about it. However. I am highly doubtful of the whole 'Structures on the Moon/Mars, aliens on the Moon/Mars, structures' that actually are nothing more that craters which in different angle look like pillars or obelisks. The point is, there have been people here who post various things of that kind on the Moon or Mars, but every time it is rocks or craters which under different angles look like something else.

So to me this will be too exaggerating some of the things that the astronauts saw and other things will be the usual assumptions as if they are more than that.

Thinking that there are aliens or bases on the Moon, especially the 'dark side' said in that way sounds like some fiction 'Transformers: the Dark side of the Moon?'

originally posted by: alienjuggalo
a reply to: JimOberg

Curious if this is going to be one of those mocumentarys.

Since one of NASA's greatest friends has authored this thread, i'd say that is a very distinct possibility, but as always, i'll remain open minded.

(a metaphorical kick in the pants for the first to say 'not so open your brains fall out'...i 'love' that phrase)

originally posted by: MysterX
..
Since one of NASA's greatest friends has authored this thread, i'd say that is a very distinct possibility, but as always, i'll remain open minded.

Friend of space exploration, fer shoor. friend of NASA, not so much.

Here's how to find the official NASA press release where they called me 'wacko' for questioning their safety and reliability:

www.jamesoberg.com...

originally posted by: MystikMushroom
If there's anything on the moon we don't know about, it isn't "alien" but human in nature.

I have a feeling since this is on SyFy, it'll be more akin to that fake "mermaid" documentary. Just my .2

On the Moon, humans are "alien."

Harte

originally posted by: BugOut
Here is WHY you will NEVER learn anything from SyFy or History Channel or any other cable channel for that matter with regards to secret information or aliens or whatever......

SyFy is owned by NBC.

NBC is owned by General Electric.

NBC has been owned by Comcast since last year.

At any rate, anyone that invests in any stock can eventually be "tainted" with doing business with some part of the government.

Harte

originally posted by: JimOberg

originally posted by: MysterX
..
Since one of NASA's greatest friends has authored this thread, i'd say that is a very distinct possibility, but as always, i'll remain open minded.

Friend of space exploration, fer shoor. friend of NASA, not so much.

Here's how to find the official NASA press release where they called me 'wacko' for questioning their safety and reliability:

www.jamesoberg.com...

Aw..but friends rib each other all the time Jim..we've been around long enough to have experienced professional banter.

From your web site's FAQ page: Jim Oberg FAQ

After 22 years at NASA’s Mission Control in Houston..

After a almost lifetime working with NASA, i would imagine you would have been exposed to worse than 'wacko' here and there.

originally posted by: JimOberg

originally posted by: Uggielicious
.....But what about what you know about lunar photos versus what is being claimed will be shown? If they show real, unenhanced NASA photos of non-human constructs on the moon, would you feel that your NASA contacts failed you by not opening to you as they sound that they will to others?

What any rational responsible approach to alleged lunar anomalies absolutely requires is not fuzzy out-the-window Apollo pix, or fifty year old scans, but precise lunar latitude/longitude locations on the surface that can be examined by later-generation high-resolution imagery from international missions.

What's YOUR expectation from the producer of 'Alien Autopsy'?

Yes, lat. & lon. will definitely help when hd imagery is eventually achieved. But to stir the pot it will be nice to see what is promised if they really do exist and have not been touched as far as any enhancement. Raw imagery of past missions is something that has driven some to continue pestering for them. Now, it looks as if we'll get to see something that was always considered a fantasy.

I have no expectation 'cause once a pattern has been established the notoriety from that fiasco will always hang over his head. If he delivers what is promised that could put him in a new light for making up for the first hurt.

As I've stated, I think that some if not most of the photos are going to be rehashes of George Leonard and Fred Steckling showing nothing but wild imaginations, as currently done.

I'll be interested to watch it to see if, a couple of photos that were "doing the rounds" back in the late 1970s and early 1980s are used. The copies I saw were Black and White and they did indeed purportedly show clear evidence of some kind of activity of an mechanical/industrial nature on the dark side of the moon. Strangely enough neither of the photos I saw have ever shown up in books or online. I say strange because, they were that good, that clear, you'd expect someone to have printed or published them anyway.

My personal thoughts are , if they do show up and the "moon crawler machine" referred to in the article does sound like content of one of them, is that. They are unauthorised and unreleased publicity shots from a TV series that was never made, well actually, it was made however, not as it was originally intended. The ITV series UFO was cancelled out of the blue and in the mid 70s a new series called Space 1999 was made and aired. However, the original plot was to be a continuation of the series UFO only, solely focused on Moonbase with very little action taking place on Earth. The plot is meant to have contained an "Alien Base" built on the Moon's dark side and I strongly suspect the photos are stills of the sets built for that unmade series. Anyway, will be interesting to see what they come up with.