Alleged spacecraft/objects on moon

Originally posted by allMIGHTY
Interesting but some photos look fake to me. Some pics look like
photographs with reflected light on a tv screen. You can also see
the dots of the screen.

I think I know exactly what most of these images actually are, as I used to own a large telescope myself once. They look to me like pics os satelites that orbit the earh in their hundreds. You can see them on any clear night with the human eye - although they look like fast moving points of light withut the aid of a telescope. Spcecraft? Well, they are in space I guess - they are craft (albeit man-made)....so, yeah, although I think the correct term is 'satelite'.

[edit on 14-6-2007 by jimbo999]

There was no Apollo 20. If you Google "Apollo 20," here is a quote from the 3rd-to-top result:

There were originally 3 more Apollo missions scheduled to fly to the Moon in the initial Apollo plan, all were cancelled due to budgetary constraints. Apollo 20 was cancelled in January 1970. The flights planned for Apollo 15 and Apollo 19 were cancelled in September, 1970, the remaining missions were then renumbered 15 through 17. (end quote)

The YouTube video of the "city" says it was shot in August, 1976 - almost 4 years after the last Apollo (17) mission in December, '72... I remember reading somewhere else that Apollo 20 was a secret/classified mission, but it can't be proven as anything other than hearsay/rumor that I know of.

Originally posted by SuicideVirus
Well, we'll just put this into the "interesting but unknown" file, and wait for any additional data that might appear. Even if it were "real," the resolution is so bad that we can't gather any reasonable information out of it at this time.

What more do you want us to do about it? Admit that it's a bona fide photo of an alien starship? There's just not enough information available for us to do that.

So into the file it goes.

Like I said - these are sattelites

Jimbo999

Originally posted by Moserious

Originally posted by Stale Cracker

Originally posted by Moserious
Here are the pics I was impressed with from the OP post. Seriously what are those?

That does not look like a satellite and the three "orbs" next to it, I mean c'mon. What do you think ATS?

And another of the same thing:

I wonder if someone with expertise in this field can weigh in with their opinion of the images.

ya know, I almost hesitate to say this but it looks like a station with a "suncruiser" docked to it...

I've studied the ISS and I don't think so. No matter what is "docked to it" the body does not resemble the ISS IMO.
Here is a pic of the ISS at various stages from the NASA website:
spaceflight.nasa.gov...

Here's another from Wikipedia:
en.wikipedia.org...

Hmmm...they look like out of focus pictures of sattelites taken with a telescope to me. Sorry - I'm no de-bunker either as I've seen daylight dics from very close up - but these are simply satelites.

Jimbo999

s'kinda funny how the distributer of thee pic's has (still) not released any futher information... I'm remaining a skeptic until the man takes the initiative... you don't discover spaceships and buildings on the moon then remain inactive for weeks...

Perhaps the transformers are here?






Interesting pictures none the less, but to suggest they are just satellites is just an assumption. They could anything.

Originally posted by jimbo999

Originally posted by allMIGHTY
Interesting but some photos look fake to me. Some pics look like
photographs with reflected light on a tv screen. You can also see
the dots of the screen.

I think I know exactly what most of these images actually are, as I used to own a large telescope myself once. They look to me like pics os satelites that orbit the earh in their hundreds. You can see them on any clear night with the human eye - although they look like fast moving points of light withut the aid of a telescope. Spcecraft? Well, they are in space I guess - they are craft (albeit man-made)....so, yeah, although I think the correct term is 'satelite'.

[edit on 14-6-2007 by jimbo999]

I find your interpretation to be the most probable. But since we havn't heard back from Mr. Lenard yet regarding periodicity/predictability of these objects or coordinates, we can't make that assumption.

Originally posted by Veenous
s'kinda funny how the distributer of thee pic's has (still) not released any futher information... I'm remaining a skeptic until the man takes the initiative... you don't discover spaceships and buildings on the moon then remain inactive for weeks...

That's because (if you've been paying attention ) you'll know that he doesn't have an ATS account as far as we know. The original images were uploaded to an account at space.com.

I invited John to join us here at ATS to discuss these images, but unfortunately lame one-liners and agressive accusations will probably keep him scared away...

Those satellites move fast and the only way to see one with a telescope is to plot its course. Without tracking software, its gone before you even know it. And if some of you have seen satellites why not post some pictures to compare?

Lenard's Moon pictures look really fake. The tower looks like a tree from "The Hobbit".

But, I am not accusing anyone of intentionally faking anything. They just look un-real to me. I am not any kind of expert at all.

It's a shame that now with all the technology people have readily available, the easiest thing you can do is deceive people on the Internet.
I've never heard of "viral" advertising until I started participating on this board.

In my humble opinion, I'm starting to believe that most (98%) of what is being proposed as alien UFOs, conspiracies, paranormal phenomena, etc. are not real, or are misinterpreted objects or events.

These are very interesting, nonetheless.


[edit on 14-6-2007 by Electro38]

Originally posted by AMANNAMEDQUEST
Those satellites move fast and the only way to see one with a telescope is to plot its course. Without tracking software, its gone before you even know it. And if some of you have seen satellites why not post some pictures to compare?

Agreed, unless they're geosynchronous.

what would look real to you? As long as it fits with your imaginary idea of what alien hardware should look like then its 'ok'?

Originally posted by Electro38
Lenard's Moon pictures look really fake. The tower looks like a tree from "The Hobbit".

But, I am not accusing anyone of intentionally faking anything. They just look un-real to me.

It's a shame that now with all the technology people have readily available, the easiest thing you can do is deceive people on the Internet.

In my humble opinion, I'm starting to believe that most (98%) of what is being proposed as real UFOs, conspiracies, paranormal phenomena, etc. is not real, or are misinterpreted.

These are very interesting, nonetheless.

Well if he can see them, should'nt others be able to too? we only need to know where to look surely

Originally posted by SuicideVirus
Well, we'll just put this into the "interesting but unknown" file, and wait for any additional data that might appear. Even if it were "real," the resolution is so bad that we can't gather any reasonable information out of it at this time.

If by "WE" you mean "YOU" go right ahead,... I know, it's silly to follow up on potential evidence with silly things like "research" and "patience"... best move on and expect the info we want to land square in our lap.

What more do you want us to do about it? Admit that it's a bona fide photo of an alien starship? There's just not enough information available for us to do that.

Who said anything about it being an "alien" starship???
..... and what's with the "WE" and "US" bit
Do you assume you speak for the rest of ATS?

I would also love to know what his coordinates are. I own a 12" celestron newtonian with all that go-to junk on it (I really can't stand it, it frustrates me most of the time) - but I disgress - I'd love to see what he's seeing - ESPECIALLY the moon. That would be pretty eye-opening.

Hopefully this guy gets on ATS, I'd love to talk to him.

it'll probably not happen, like "Chad" they will remain in the shadows...

Originally posted by zeeon
I would also love to know what his coordinates are. I own a 12" celestron newtonian with all that go-to junk on it (I really can't stand it, it frustrates me most of the time) - but I disgress - I'd love to see what he's seeing - ESPECIALLY the moon. That would be pretty eye-opening.

Hopefully this guy gets on ATS, I'd love to talk to him.

Originally posted by zeeon
I would also love to know what his coordinates are. I own a 12" celestron newtonian with all that go-to junk on it (I really can't stand it, it frustrates me most of the time) - but I disgress - I'd love to see what he's seeing - ESPECIALLY the moon. That would be pretty eye-opening.

Hopefully this guy gets on ATS, I'd love to talk to him.

Nice rig! I've been drooling over on of those Go-To motorized mounts for a while...

Do you have a CCD eyepiece or cam mount for it? If John drops some info. I'm sure you could unleash it's power for us!

Mine is in desperate need of collimation.

[edit on 14-6-2007 by Stale Cracker]

The International Space Station (ISS)

►Do these images this look familiar?
jimbo999 also hit on this as being possibly the ISS or some other satellites, but here are images VERY SIMILAR ot John Lenards images, but are taken by a DIFFERENT AMATEUR ASTRONOMER.


www.space.com...

This is readily identified as the International Space Station, the ISS in orbit about Earth. Taken by another www.space.com... user named:

ISS, Submitted by: maginoiss

...and here...


www.space.com...

So these two images by another user at www.space.com... identify the same sort of anomalies as listed by John Lenard as the ISS (possibly MIR)...

In addition more images taken by the same user...

EXTERNAL IMAGES:
www.space.com...
www.space.com...
www.space.com...

Some of the smaller anomalies can be other satellites that he's catching and imaging, he may be catching some secret, communications, relay and foreign satellites as well, at different orbital altitudes and orbital slots and catching the sun light and/or earthshine in different ways. Interesting stuff, but I think alien mothership can be ruled out for of the images

►Its interesting that one with a large enough telescope can possibly capture i fairly good silhouette profile, some of the satellites, some of which may be classified by the US or even other countries. This could be a whole new ATS thread...!

►Also I have to wonder about the credibility of Lenard, spotting a satellite or the ISS should be common knowledge of what is and what isnt to even an amateur astronomer. Satellites move in a known fashion, don't 'twinkle' and move very fast across the sky, all these attributes clearly denoting a satellite to an astronomer.

►As far as the lunar image of the tower, that one in still yet unexplained, still waiting back from an email to him with regards.

...more reference images...

I believe thsi one is an early ISS in the construction phase...

www.space.com...

The unmistakable ISS or at the least a satellite in the night sky to any astronomer...
i141.photobucket.com...
www.space.com...

Great page on satellites, the ISS, and other Earth orbiting objects as seen from a telescope...
www.satobs.org...

Guide to seeing manmade stuff...
www.skyandtelescope.com...

sol.as.arizona.edu...

www.iss-tracking.de...
These guys track satellites and image them with amazing quality!
Check them out!

[edit on 6/14/2007 by greatlakes]

The imagines could be almost anything from fakes to what ever. Are they on the moon I doubt it most show no back ground at all and as far as I know it is impossible to film or look at the dark side of the moon from earth, therefore I say this is rubbish. Members of ATS had far beter explainations then this lenoard or who ever he claimed to be.

BTW if you are watching lenoard send me your address so I can send you new glasses

[edit on 6/14/2007 by shots]

The lights in the sky anomalies are not faked, they are just misinterpretations of manmade objects, the ISS, MIR, satellites etc. (excluding the lunar anomaly). See my above post. However as stated in my post, for an amateur astronomer to "NOT KNOW" these simple observation conclusions IS questionable in my book....