Alien Moon Base Captured By Chang'e-2 Orbiter 2012

reply to post by TimesUp


I agree. I think it is very likely a base on the moon. It could have been abandoned long ago. Certainly if the American government wants to build one now, either their working with the aliens as some believe, or possiblly this is what has given them the idea.

Originally posted by Anunaki10

Originally posted by VreemdeVlieendeVoorwep
Why oh why is this not in the hoax bin yet??? Its been proven this is an hoax, yet it still goes on. It boggles the mind, how hard some want to believe.

Do you know why it hasn't been moved to the hoax section? Because it have not been proven as hoax. The other forums also indicate that this "Alien Moon Base Captured By Chang'e-2 Orbiter " case can't find out wether that case is true or not.

Posted on February 17, 2012

Possible Alien Moon Base Captured By Chang’e-2 Orbit

I was sent some pictures by a source who claims China will be releasing Hi Res images taken by the Chang’e-2 moon orbiter, which clearly show buildings and structures on the moons surface.

He also claims NASA has deliberately bombed important areas of the Moon in an effort to destroy ancient artefacts and facility’s.

Pictures yet to be released clearly show nuclear impact craters and building debris caused by explosions in an effort by NASA to destroy the truth. China is moving toward full disclosure of the Extraterrestrial reality, if these images and future ones are verified genuine then NASA should be investigated for fraud and treason. China will be releasing all the data and images from the Chang’e-2 in the coming weeks and months, lets hope this is the beginning of a new era.

As you can see for yourself, informations show that "China obviously will be releasing all the data and images from the Chang’e-2 in the coming weeks and months", and when someone write informations like that, then we have to be patient and wait and see if they really are going to release something more about this case...

and when nothing happens will you come back to eat crow?

Originally posted by bknapple32
and when nothing happens will you come back to eat crow?

If nothing happens, then i will begin to doubt this "Alien Moon Base Captured By Chang'e-2 Orbiter" case, yes. Until then, i still remain open...

In this www.abovetopsecret.com... "Uncensored NASA Moon Images!!" thread, there seems to be some photos of "anomalies" on Lunar surface, you should try check it out, looks interesting...

Originally posted by Anunaki10

Originally posted by bknapple32
and when nothing happens will you come back to eat crow?

If nothing happens, then i will begin to doubt this "Alien Moon Base Captured By Chang'e-2 Orbiter" case, yes. Until then, i still remain open...

In this www.abovetopsecret.com... "Uncensored NASA Moon Images!!" thread, there seems to be some photos of "anomalies" on Lunar surface, you should try check it out, looks interesting...

edit on 23-2-2012 by Anunaki10 because: (no reason given)

Fair enough... But im on record that these things are hoaxes

Originally posted by bknapple32
Fair enough... But im on record that these things are hoaxes

I'm really not sure if i should take your word on that, but if you really are on record to believe these photos are hoaxes, then it's your belief, speculation with nothing to back it up.
www.abovetopsecret.com... The debates in that "Uncensored NASA Moon Images!!" thread does not indicate any mention of hoax, not what i know of, beside, even if there were any ATS members in that thread claiming hoax with no proof to back up such claims, you still don't know if these images are hoax or not...

Originally posted by Anunaki10

Originally posted by bknapple32
Fair enough... But im on record that these things are hoaxes

I'm really not sure if i should take your word on that, but if you really are on record to believe these photos are hoaxes, then it's your belief, speculation with nothing to back it up.
www.abovetopsecret.com... The debates in that "Uncensored NASA Moon Images!!" thread does not indicate any mention of hoax, not what i know of, beside, even if there were any ATS members in that thread claiming hoax with no proof to back up such claims, you still don't know if these images are hoax or not...

Gotta admit, hard to follow your train of thought on a lot of your posts. Youre not sure if you should believe me that Im on record that this is a hoax? Or that I think what you said was fair enough.... How can you not understand that some people are going to think this may be a hoax. Or are you that deep into the rabbit hole with your train of thought??? ( not a good thing no matter what your conclusion is)

Originally posted by Anunaki10
If you really are done here, then that's your problem. It's really sad to see that you give up so easily. I think it would be best for you to stay and try to keep up a "constructive" debate, instead of giving up and run away so easily. Like i said, the report states "North of Moltke crater" and the report states the Apollo landing spot norheast of Moltke crater, but the report does NOT state how far the distance between the alleged socalled "incredible building" and the reported Apollo landing spot is. It could be anywhere from short, to less short, or maybe a little long distance, but it does NOT state HOW far that distance is...

edit on 23-2-2012 by Anunaki10 because: (no reason given)

Dude, we have been going back and forth for like 6 pages now or something. It's a waste of time because you do not listen to anything. Your mind is made up, and you think it is a picture the Chang'e 2 took. You think the picture is real even though the original image has been shown, and it was taken by Lunar Orbiter III in 1967. You deny this, so the debate can not go anywhere. I do not know how you can deny this unless you did not look at both of the images. It's not something that's deniable.

I know what you are saying. I understand, but you are not understanding me.
Since the Westinghouse lunar camera only had 100ft of cord, they would have literally had to land at the site of the 'building' for Armstrong to 'record' anything. The crater has nothing to do with it. It was 30 miles away, why does mentioning the crater even matter? There are many other craters on the moon, and there were other craters much closer. It is irrelevant to mention the crater. They could have simply said it was at the Apollo 11 landing site. Do you get it? This is telling me the person who made up the story is trying to add complexity to make it seem more believable without taking into account the crazy distance from where exactly Apollo 11 even landed, and other simple factors such as the distance they were able to bring the camera. It's bunk.

I've said all I have to say...simple as that. I am tired of repeating myself.

Originally posted by m0rphine

Originally posted by Anunaki10
If you really are done here, then that's your problem. It's really sad to see that you give up so easily. I think it would be best for you to stay and try to keep up a "constructive" debate, instead of giving up and run away so easily. Like i said, the report states "North of Moltke crater" and the report states the Apollo landing spot norheast of Moltke crater, but the report does NOT state how far the distance between the alleged socalled "incredible building" and the reported Apollo landing spot is. It could be anywhere from short, to less short, or maybe a little long distance, but it does NOT state HOW far that distance is...

edit on 23-2-2012 by Anunaki10 because: (no reason given)

Dude, we have been going back and forth for like 6 pages now or something. It's a waste of time because you do not listen to anything. Your mind is made up, and you think it is a picture the Chang'e 2 took. You think the picture is real even though the original image has been shown, and it was taken by Lunar Orbiter III in 1967. You deny this, so the debate can not go anywhere. I do not know how you can deny this unless you did not look at both of the images. It's not something that's deniable.

I know what you are saying. I understand, but you are not understanding me.
Since the Westinghouse lunar camera only had 100ft of cord, they would have literally had to land at the site of the 'building' for Armstrong to 'record' anything. The crater has nothing to do with it. It was 30 miles away, why does mentioning the crater even matter? There are many other craters on the moon, and there were other craters much closer. It is irrelevant to mention the crater. They could have simply said it was at the Apollo 11 landing site. Do you get it? This is telling me the person who made up the story is trying to add complexity to make it seem more believable without taking into account the crazy distance from where exactly Apollo 11 even landed, and other simple factors such as the distance they were able to bring the camera. It's bunk.

I've said all I have to say...simple as that. I am tired of repeating myself.

edit on 23-2-2012 by m0rphine because: (no reason given)

This times a bout a million... Can a mod come here and explain why this isnt in the hoax bin after that????

Originally posted by ProudBird

Is this 12 minuttes of the Apollo 11 Moon walk the best you could present? You forget that the Astronauts reportedly spent a total of 2.5 hours walking on the lunar surface.

Originally posted by bknapple32

Originally posted by m0rphine

Originally posted by Anunaki10
If you really are done here, then that's your problem. It's really sad to see that you give up so easily. I think it would be best for you to stay and try to keep up a "constructive" debate, instead of giving up and run away so easily. Like i said, the report states "North of Moltke crater" and the report states the Apollo landing spot norheast of Moltke crater, but the report does NOT state how far the distance between the alleged socalled "incredible building" and the reported Apollo landing spot is. It could be anywhere from short, to less short, or maybe a little long distance, but it does NOT state HOW far that distance is...

edit on 23-2-2012 by Anunaki10 because: (no reason given)

Dude, we have been going back and forth for like 6 pages now or something. It's a waste of time because you do not listen to anything. Your mind is made up, and you think it is a picture the Chang'e 2 took. You think the picture is real even though the original image has been shown, and it was taken by Lunar Orbiter III in 1967. You deny this, so the debate can not go anywhere. I do not know how you can deny this unless you did not look at both of the images. It's not something that's deniable.

I know what you are saying. I understand, but you are not understanding me.
Since the Westinghouse lunar camera only had 100ft of cord, they would have literally had to land at the site of the 'building' for Armstrong to 'record' anything. The crater has nothing to do with it. It was 30 miles away, why does mentioning the crater even matter? There are many other craters on the moon, and there were other craters much closer. It is irrelevant to mention the crater. They could have simply said it was at the Apollo 11 landing site. Do you get it? This is telling me the person who made up the story is trying to add complexity to make it seem more believable without taking into account the crazy distance from where exactly Apollo 11 even landed, and other simple factors such as the distance they were able to bring the camera. It's bunk.

I've said all I have to say...simple as that. I am tired of repeating myself.

edit on 23-2-2012 by m0rphine because: (no reason given)

This times a bout a million... Can a mod come here and explain why this isnt in the hoax bin after that????

I've alerted them but they don't seem to really care I guess

Originally posted by Anunaki10

Originally posted by ProudBird

Is this 12 minuttes of the Apollo 11 Moon walk the best you could present? You forget that the Astronauts reportedly spent a total of 2.5 hours walking on the lunar surface.

I haven't downloaded it but this torrent says it has 130 minutes of Apollo 11 footage.

extratorrent.com...

Originally posted by m0rphine

Originally posted by bknapple32

Originally posted by m0rphine

Originally posted by Anunaki10
If you really are done here, then that's your problem. It's really sad to see that you give up so easily. I think it would be best for you to stay and try to keep up a "constructive" debate, instead of giving up and run away so easily. Like i said, the report states "North of Moltke crater" and the report states the Apollo landing spot norheast of Moltke crater, but the report does NOT state how far the distance between the alleged socalled "incredible building" and the reported Apollo landing spot is. It could be anywhere from short, to less short, or maybe a little long distance, but it does NOT state HOW far that distance is...

edit on 23-2-2012 by Anunaki10 because: (no reason given)

Dude, we have been going back and forth for like 6 pages now or something. It's a waste of time because you do not listen to anything. Your mind is made up, and you think it is a picture the Chang'e 2 took. You think the picture is real even though the original image has been shown, and it was taken by Lunar Orbiter III in 1967. You deny this, so the debate can not go anywhere. I do not know how you can deny this unless you did not look at both of the images. It's not something that's deniable.

I know what you are saying. I understand, but you are not understanding me.
Since the Westinghouse lunar camera only had 100ft of cord, they would have literally had to land at the site of the 'building' for Armstrong to 'record' anything. The crater has nothing to do with it. It was 30 miles away, why does mentioning the crater even matter? There are many other craters on the moon, and there were other craters much closer. It is irrelevant to mention the crater. They could have simply said it was at the Apollo 11 landing site. Do you get it? This is telling me the person who made up the story is trying to add complexity to make it seem more believable without taking into account the crazy distance from where exactly Apollo 11 even landed, and other simple factors such as the distance they were able to bring the camera. It's bunk.

I've said all I have to say...simple as that. I am tired of repeating myself.

edit on 23-2-2012 by m0rphine because: (no reason given)

This times a bout a million... Can a mod come here and explain why this isnt in the hoax bin after that????

I've alerted them but they don't seem to really care I guess

But god forbid someone accidentally mention a sports score or something off topic in a thread, and itll go bye bye in minutes.. But a thread that has been repeatedly proven to be a hoax remains. Its, like , not even really much of a debate at this point I think even most logical cters would agree on this one specific topic... All thats happening is people are coming on to this thread because of the size and perhaps believing this nonsense. Certainly anyone who has read this page for page will conclude this is nothing but a hoax.

Originally posted by bknapple32


But god forbid someone accidentally mention a sports score or something off topic in a thread, and itll go bye bye in minutes.. But a thread that has been repeatedly proven to be a hoax remains.

lmao that's so true.

Ah well. Can't win em all I guess. The thread is pretty much dead besides the whole argument with Anunaki
Maybe we should just do the honors and lay it to rest

The main picture here is no different than pictures i've seen plenty of on Mars.

Just as there are buildings on mars there are buildings on the moon. But booth have that incredible nasa fuzzy look that so many ATSers know so well.
Reminds me of the Tithonia mars pic I've seen at ATS and other places.

www.disclose.tv...

Though we are continually not receiving verification, the photo evidence keeps adding up.

Time truly will tell.

Originally posted by m0rphine
I haven't downloaded it but this torrent says it has 130 minutes of Apollo 11 footage.

Then there is still "missing" 20 minuttes. And are these 130 minuttes film footage for Moon walk only? www.youtube.com... Or are these 130 minuttes about the entire Apollo mission from take off from the Earth, the Moon walk, and Return journey?

The Astronauts walked on Lunar surface for two and a half hours. One hour is the same as 60 minuttes, and two hours is the same as 120 minuttes, and two and a half hours is the same as 150 minuttes.

We have three options:

1) These 130 minuttes footage is about the whole official Apollo 11 program, from Astronauts' training, to Take Off with the Rocket, the way to the Moon, the Moon walk, the Journey home, or

2) These 130 minuttes film footage is about the whole Apollo 11 mission, from Astronauts' training, to Take Off with the Rocket, the way to the Moon were they allegedly filmed a what seems to be a "UFO" on their way to the Moon, then the Moon landing were they allegedly also witnessed some huge UFOs while they walked on the Moon >>God, what is that out there?... What the h... is that???... But this is unbelievable!...

reply to post by Anunaki10


Sad:

Is this 12 minuttes of the Apollo 11 Moon walk the best you could present? You forget that the Astronauts reportedly spent a total of 2.5 hours walking on the lunar surface.

IF you had properly read and absorbed all of the information in the links, you would then have understood that the video is of the FILM taken by the Maurer Data Acquisition Camera.....a 16 mm film camera that was set to run at only ONE frame per second, during the EVA.

This compared to the normal film running rate of 30 frames per second. Get it??

The DAC had limited-sized film magazines, and could be set to operate at various frame rates, in order to conserve the film and make it last longer.

ONCE again, from my earlier link.....I already included this comment before:

On Apollo 11, it was also used to take stop motion photography out the LMP's window of almost the entire EVA at the setting of 1 frame per second (fps).

Article, with photos (again)


Please NOTE that the entire point I was making was: There was no other moving-picture camera carried to the Lunar surface on Apollo 11 besides this one (which remained INSIDE the LM the entire time), or the Westinghouse video camera, which was broadcasting live back to Earth, where the signals were recorded by ground stations....AND it was required to be attached to a cable, for power and for the signal transmission.

There were no other video or film cameras on Apollo 11.

Get it??

Originally posted by Anunaki10

Originally posted by m0rphine
The website says this North of Moltke crater, Armstrong and Aldrin filmed an incredible construction. The film was never released 14 minutes by NASA

Here is the translation :

Before dying, Blackbird Red gave me a warning: "If you publish this information, you could suffer an accident that would endanger your life".

The information in this work comes from a senior U.S. official, whose identity I can not reveal. He is part of a story, a dark story that surely will not believe ... But my job is that, to sow doubt.

Since time immemorial, human history has recorded mysterious phenomena on the moon.

In the 1950s, Soviets and Americans embarked on a mad arms race, a period known as the Cold War. A dangerous stage in which thousands of bombs were produced ...

And suddenly, Soviet and American experienced a sudden change. From overnight, USSR surprised the world by launching the first artificial satellite: Sputnik (4 oct. 1957). U.S. also engaged in the space race. The world was wondering what happened?. Why so much interest in harnessing space, particularly the moon?. The Soviets and Americans continued their releases without explaining the true interests ...

According Blackbird Red, it all started in the 1940s. At that time were recorded UFO intense waves in the world, who put on alert to Soviet military and allies. To them it was clear: those objects, those ships were not human. They conceived the need to strengthen defense systems and to give absolute priority to space. For a decade were confirming what we already knew. In total, not counting the images of the USSR, NASA received 230,000 photographs of the Moon. Many of the images showed "walls" or "road" side of kilometers long.

The Apollo XI was released in Florida on July 16, 1969. Astronauts Neil Armstrong, Edwin E. Aldrin and Michael Collins. Already in the outward journey, the astronauts saw a number of "anomalies" that were hidden to the world press. Once perched on the moon, Armstrong, recorded a sharp rise in heart rate (up to 150 beats per minute) ... The frequency of Aldrin could not be detected because his suit was not connected to the console of biomedical information ... According to Red Blackbird, were watching several ships and loved very high and tight white suits. When they wanted to film, craft and beings disappeared.

Some of these incidents were leaked to the public, by amateurs who managed to capture the conversation between Armstrong, Aldrin and Houston. NASA as expected, denied everything calling it ridiculous.

Then came the moment of truth, the secret reason I went to the moon ... This was the only real secret. North of Moltke crater, Armstrong and Aldrin FILMED AN INCREDIBLE CONSTRUCTION. The film was never released 14 minutes by NASA. Blackbird Red was one of the few Americans who had access to it. Later in new missions to the Moon, followed by recording the buildings in ruins, after the military objective completed, these buildings were destroyed. The military did not allow the presence of these ruins, could wreak havoc on Earth. That said ...

How does it feel being caught on lying again, 'm0rphine' ? Gotcha...

edit on 22-2-2012 by Anunaki10 because: (no reason given)

Sorry to burst your bubble Anunaki10. I would love to believe this I really would, but I just don't trust anything thats supposed to be official when it is written with bad grammar (extremely bad grammar)

reply to post by Anunaki10


You dare to play that ridiculous Spanish-language horse crap YouTube video, and expect to be taken seriously??:

....allegedly also witnessed some huge UFOs while they walked on the Moon >>God, what is that out there?... What the h... is that???... But this is unbelievable!...

reply to post by DARREN1976


Just to be clear, DARREN1976, the English-language version you quoted above is a 'translation' from what was originally a Portuguese-language website. (I think it was Portuguese....might have been Spanish).

So, the grammatical errors are the result only of the translation matrix used...probably Google....because it looked like that when I translated the same web page into English.

Originally posted by ProudBird
reply to post by DARREN1976

 

Just to be clear, DARREN1976, the English-language version you quoted above is a 'translation' from what was originally a Portuguese-language website. (I think it was Portuguese....might have been Spanish).

So, the grammatical errors are the result only of the translation matrix used...probably Google....because it looked like that when I translated the same web page into English.

Okey-dokey, thanks for that mate...
2nd...