Armstrong, Collins and Aldrin Talk About Aliens on the Moon

http://www.ronrecord.com/astronauts/...ns-aldrin.html

On Sun, 05 Sep 2004 23:16:51 +0000, Happy Troll wrote:

http://www.ronrecord.com/astronauts/...ns-aldrin.html


There's a sucker born every minute.

You morons crack me up but you're pathetic.

On Sun, 05 Sep 2004 23:28:22 GMT, Fredrick Garvin
wrote:

On Sun, 05 Sep 2004 23:16:51 +0000, Happy Troll wrote:

http://www.ronrecord.com/astronauts/...ns-aldrin.html


There's a sucker born every minute.

I doubt Neil Armstrong would like hearing that.

You morons crack me up but you're pathetic.

What's more pathetic is NASA can't provide one shred of photographic
evidence that astronauts walked on the moon after the Apollo 11 mission.

Talk about a gullible public!

"Happy Troll" wrote in message
...
| http://www.ronrecord.com/astronauts/...ns-aldrin.html

First three photos are intentionally blurred to make them seem more
"mysterious" than they really are. The first photo is not even from Apollo
11. Apollo 11 landed on relatively flat terrain, not in the mountains.
That photo looks to be from Apollo 15. The spots are routine lens effects,
but the blurring makes them seem strange.

The first section is Timothy Good, the discredited author of "Above Top
Secret". Notice how none of his sources is named. The so-called Pepper
transcript is even debunked in this particular page. That is the only
alleged source for the Apollo 11 crew having seen an alien spacecraft.
Good's other sources include second-hand "testimony" from people who weren't
even there.

The next section discusses the astronauts' relatively well-known sighting of
a piece of equipment some distance from the spacecraft. They did not
identify it as an alien spacecraft, nor did this object attempt to make
contact with them, nor did this happen on the lunar surface. The only
attempt at identification was to see whether it could have been one of the
SLA panels.

There is another intentionally degraded photo purporting to be of Neil
Armstrong with a "ball of light" hovering over his head. Again, this is not
an Apollo 11 photograph. It's from Apollo 12, and the "fog" is sunstrike,
since the photo occurs near the end of roll 49. The previous frame and all
the subsequent frames are sunstruck.

There is another description of an object seen through the navigation
optics, which were out of focus and gave a poor view. Further, the crew was
not able to determine size or distance. There is no mention of the craft
being an alien spacecraft.

The final two photographs were not taken on Apollo 11 either. The first
includes an out-of-focus image of one of the interior aluminum struts in the
spacecraft. The second contains an object which appears only in this site's
degraded version.

--
|
The universe is not required to conform | Jay Windley
to the expectations of the ignorant. | webmaster @ clavius.org

"Happy Troll" wrote in message
...
On Sun, 05 Sep 2004 23:28:22 GMT, Fredrick Garvin
wrote:

On Sun, 05 Sep 2004 23:16:51 +0000, Happy Troll wrote:

http://www.ronrecord.com/astronauts/...ns-aldrin.html


There's a sucker born every minute.

I doubt Neil Armstrong would like hearing that.

You morons crack me up but you're pathetic.

What's more pathetic is NASA can't provide one shred of photographic
evidence that astronauts walked on the moon after the Apollo 11 mission.

Make up your mind. Are you now saying Apollo 11 DID land 2 astronauts on the
Moon?

You can't even keep your kookiness straight can you

On Sun, 5 Sep 2004 18:17:52 -0600, "Jay Windley"
wrote:

That's what I said about the NASA photos too.


"Happy Troll" wrote in message
.. .
| http://www.ronrecord.com/astronauts/...ns-aldrin.html

First three photos are intentionally blurred to make them seem more
"mysterious" than they really are. The first photo is not even from Apollo
11. Apollo 11 landed on relatively flat terrain, not in the mountains.
That photo looks to be from Apollo 15. The spots are routine lens effects,
but the blurring makes them seem strange.

The first section is Timothy Good, the discredited author of "Above Top
Secret". Notice how none of his sources is named. The so-called Pepper
transcript is even debunked in this particular page. That is the only
alleged source for the Apollo 11 crew having seen an alien spacecraft.
Good's other sources include second-hand "testimony" from people who weren't
even there.

The next section discusses the astronauts' relatively well-known sighting of
a piece of equipment some distance from the spacecraft. They did not
identify it as an alien spacecraft, nor did this object attempt to make
contact with them, nor did this happen on the lunar surface. The only
attempt at identification was to see whether it could have been one of the
SLA panels.

There is another intentionally degraded photo purporting to be of Neil
Armstrong with a "ball of light" hovering over his head. Again, this is not
an Apollo 11 photograph. It's from Apollo 12, and the "fog" is sunstrike,
since the photo occurs near the end of roll 49. The previous frame and all
the subsequent frames are sunstruck.

There is another description of an object seen through the navigation
optics, which were out of focus and gave a poor view. Further, the crew was
not able to determine size or distance. There is no mention of the craft
being an alien spacecraft.

The final two photographs were not taken on Apollo 11 either. The first
includes an out-of-focus image of one of the interior aluminum struts in the
spacecraft. The second contains an object which appears only in this site's
degraded version.

"Happy Troll" wrote in message
...
| On Sun, 5 Sep 2004 18:17:52 -0600, "Jay Windley"
| wrote:
|
| That's what I said about the NASA photos too.

You misunderstand. The claims your site makes *about* the photos are
unsupportable. It misidentifies them. It misidentifies objects depicted.
And it intentionally degrades the quality of the photos to make
identification by the viewer all but impossible.

And you have missed the main problem: There is not a *single* Apollo 11
photograph on that site. All those photographs come from missions that you
say were faked; they are evidence you say does not exist.

--
|
The universe is not required to conform | Jay Windley
to the expectations of the ignorant. | webmaster @ clavius.org

On Mon, 06 Sep 2004 00:21:04 GMT, "Wally Anglesea"
wrote:


"Happy Troll" wrote in message
.. .
On Sun, 05 Sep 2004 23:28:22 GMT, Fredrick Garvin
wrote:

On Sun, 05 Sep 2004 23:16:51 +0000, Happy Troll wrote:

http://www.ronrecord.com/astronauts/...ns-aldrin.html


There's a sucker born every minute.

I doubt Neil Armstrong would like hearing that.

You morons crack me up but you're pathetic.

What's more pathetic is NASA can't provide one shred of photographic
evidence that astronauts walked on the moon after the Apollo 11 mission.

Make up your mind. Are you now saying Apollo 11 DID land 2 astronauts on the
Moon?

They did?

You can't even keep your kookiness straight can you

projection noted.

On Sun, 5 Sep 2004 18:37:07 -0600, "Jay Windley"
wrote:


"Happy Troll" wrote in message
.. .
| On Sun, 5 Sep 2004 18:17:52 -0600, "Jay Windley"
| wrote:
|
| That's what I said about the NASA photos too.

You misunderstand.

No not at all. The EXACT same thing you said is what *I* say about the NSAS
photos of Mars.

So we're even.

Nothing hypocritical about that, is there?

And please don't appeal to authority, because NASA's no authority on telling
the truth.

"Happy Troll" wrote in message
...
|
| No not at all. The EXACT same thing you said is what *I* say
| about the NSAS photos of Mars.
|
| So we're even.

Not at all. I made no statements about Mars. You're trying to distract
away from the inadequacy of your arguments by changing the subject.

You posted that site as evidence that Armstrong allegedly saw space aliens
on the moon. I have refuted your evidence. The analysis is entirely
ignorant of the source material.

| And please don't appeal to authority, because NASA's no authority
| on telling the truth.

Then you have no business demanding NASA-only sources.

--
|
The universe is not required to conform | Jay Windley
to the expectations of the ignorant. | webmaster @ clavius.org