UFO's on Apollo photographs?

I did a quick search, and couldn't find anything on this topic, but if anyone is aware of this being posted already, please add the details to this thread.

I was looking at something on the Daily Telegraph website, and discovered this little article discussing "UFO's" captured in the images of Apollo photographs.

At first I thought it was perhaps an April Fool's prank, but I'm just not sure.

Anyone got any better ideas?

The page can be found here.

reply to post by dampnickers


Another point to note, is that the majority of the images appear to be from Apollo missions 14, 15 and 16...

I would love to say that these are hoaxed, but are they? If they aren't, I can't imagine why I haven't come across them before (I'm quite interested in Apollo and the theories people come up with for/against men being on the moon).

Fascinating to say the least.

Originally posted by dampnickers
At first I thought it was perhaps an April Fool's prank, but I'm just not sure.

Anyone got any better ideas?

Interesting find.
At first I too thought the Telegragh was having a laugh but I'm not sure either.

I've only seen one of these photos before, but the rest are new to me.

The Telegraph: Moon landing anniversary: UFOs photographed by Apollo:






- Lee

One of the discs in the picture is the earth over exposed. So it looks white.

The one with the UFO flying out of the mountain is just another mountain behind it with a shadow on it that perfectly matches the other mountains.look at the shadows.

The one with the white blob has been confirmed to be a part of the spacecraft.

The blue disk one is obvious film defect.

Not sure about the rest

Originally posted by dampnickers
I did a quick search, and couldn't find anything on this topic, but if anyone is aware of this being posted already, please add the details to this thread.

I was looking at something on the Daily Telegraph website, and discovered this little article discussing "UFO's" captured in the images of Apollo photographs.

At first I thought it was perhaps an April Fool's prank, but I'm just not sure.

Anyone got any better ideas?

The page can be found here.

I was coming in hot and hard prepared to say HOAX, FAKE, but after taking a good look at the pics... im puzzled....

Would like to see the originals...

Andro

reply to post by lee anoma


Thanks for embedding the pictures. I've never managed to do that myself - yet.

It's certainly something I'm glad I spotted, and decided to post about.

I instantly think of the Skylab 3 incident, ton of interesting things about that case.

And as with all the NASA photographs, as with UFO footage as a whole, whole lot of fakes but some in there are the real deal

Originally posted by WP4YT
One of the discs in the picture is the earth over exposed. So it looks white.

The one with the UFO flying out of the mountain is just another mountain behind it with a shadow on it that perfectly matches the other mountains.look at the shadows.

The one with the white blob has been confirmed to be a part of the spacecraft.

The blue disk one is obvious film defect.

Not sure about the rest

edit on 30-12-2012 by WP4YT because: (no reason given)

Okay, I'll agree with you on the UFO coming out of the mountain. It could very well be another mountain that's just in shadow, and only partly illuminated.

The 'over exposed earth'... I'm not sure I agree. How can Earth be over exposed, but nothing else in the photograph is? I'm no photographic expert, so I don't know. Hopefully someone can explain this.

The one with the white blob - it could be anything, so lets roll with "part of the spacecraft".

The blue disc. I don't understand how it can be a film defect. It doesn't appear to be a single disc. Rather it's two discs, one on top of the other. There also appears to be a "hue" around the object, and both discs are similar in size, if not, they're the same size. I don't think it's a film defect at all.

Just my opinions, but I'd really love to hear more from what people have to think, or say, or what they might know that could shed some light on these photographs.

Does anyone know of any more pictures like this? If so, please post them here, so we can discuss.

Here is my interpretation:

Image 1 - A smudge on the film because the object shows no detail.

Image 2 - Clearly a lens flare caused by a relection of the Sun on the camera lens. The hexagonal spot left of center is part of the flare effect.

Image 3 - A reflection on the window caused by lights inside the spacecraft.

Image 4 - A hill in the background partially occluded by a shadow cast by the hill in the foreground.

Image 5 - Strange blue spot could be anything. Not your typical lens flare but looks like an artifact of developing the fiim or a bad frame. Afterall, film rolls aren't perfect especially if the film has undergone extreme temperature changes.

Image 6 - Another lens flare.

Image 7 - Not sure about this one but I am inclined to agree with NASAs probe explanation.

Image 8 - Lens flare.

Image 9 - Blue dots are hard to see but looks like another artifact from developing the film or an non-pristine frame of film. Like I said earlier, film isn't perfect. Photographic film is just silver oxide coating on a plastic film and sometimes the film frames stick together when they are in a roll causing artifacts in photographs.

Not trying to take the mystery out of it, I am only justifying why these aren't UFOs rather than trying to prove that they are.

Originally posted by dampnickers
reply to post by dampnickers

 

Another point to note, is that the majority of the images appear to be from Apollo missions 14, 15 and 16...

I would love to say that these are hoaxed, but are they? If they aren't, I can't imagine why I haven't come across them before (I'm quite interested in Apollo and the theories people come up with for/against men being on the moon).

Fascinating to say the least.

The good point raised here is how somebody new to the topic could use search engines to locate the existing suggested explanations for these images, so as to offer alternatives, and also expose the false information in the captions. Image 6, for example, was not 'explained by NASA as part of the landing vehicle', it was conclusively shown by a NASA technician to be a view of the boom-mounted floodlight on the Apollo Service Module.

Bottom line -- such newspaper shenanigans are designed to tease and mislead the newbies, and the people who do so are very good at it. Resist their deceptions.

Regardless of what skeptics will, I think there has been real UFO objects spotted in space, and regardless of the many 'ice particles' or 'dust from the shuttle'

Originally posted by ImpactoR
Regardless of what skeptics will, I think there has been real UFO objects spotted in space, and regardless of the many 'ice particles' or 'dust from the shuttle'

A lot of people sincerely think so too. The question is, why is that opinion inversely correleated with the level of actual knowledge a person has about space flight? That is, the less one knows about real spaceflight, or the more incorrect myths and misinterpretations a person 'knows' about spaceflight, the more likely it is that they reach the 'UFO' explanation for anomalous youtube videos.

That may not be accidental -- it may be cause-and-effect. Think about it. And consider what you might be able to do about it -- or if you even want to.

Some of them are pretty convinving and i am having a hard time trying to explain them away.

Very nice find.

reply to post by Snoopie


Thanks.

I have had a hard time trying to explain them away too. It has been difficult trying to come up with plausible explanations to what should be easily explainable phenomena (assuming aliens do not exist).

Here's hoping that someday soon, someone comes up with the answers we are all seeking.

reply to post by JimOberg


Hello, skeptic Oberg.

Once the truth of them (military, politicians, part of NASA, companies working with the military) hiding technology and alien contact is revealed, you will see that some of the objects astronauts have found are intelligent controlled aircraft and that all is not 'ice particles' or shuttle waste. Unfortunately, things these secrets are kept too tight and it does not seem to happen any time soon.

I still refrain from thinking there are any bases on the Moon and Mars when what ATS members have shown me here are only craters, rocks that look like various figures.

interesting pics. i like the blue thing. could be a fault in the developing(?) possibly, or maybe some actual object.

If somebody deliberately set out to seek prosaic explanations for these kinds of videos, how could current internet search engines help find them? This is part of an even bigger problem in using smart searching to generate both pro and con citations. I really don't have any answers but really want to find them.

As far as explanations for space videos, the inability of somebody to think of a plausible prosaic cause has no evidentiary value, especially if they really don't have any familiarity with what's "normal" on spaceflight. So one get-well approach is to deliberately try to learn more, and not rest in unknowing.

Originally posted by JimOberg
So one get-well approach is to deliberately try to learn more, and not rest in unknowing.

An absolutely brilliant suggestion, and something I aspire to every day. I'm glad you put it so eloquently - I don't think I could have.