Apollo 16 Captures Photo of UFO near Moon

http://iwasabducted.com/ufogallery/ufo76.jpg

On Sun, 15 Aug 2004 22:10:46 +0000, Mad Scientist wrote:

http://iwasabducted.com/ufogallery/ufo76.jpg


Another "gem"! From another kook site. Keep up the good work.

Another fascist sociopath attempts to say something 'funny'.

Tom Randy wrote:

On Sun, 15 Aug 2004 22:10:46 +0000, Mad Scientist wrote:


http://iwasabducted.com/ufogallery/ufo76.jpg



Another "gem"! From another kook site. Keep up the good work.

My how fallen human intelligence never ceases to amaze.

anon wrote:

this isnt a NASA image. Its copyrighted to the website. It says so on the
image.


"Mad Scientist" wrote in message
et.cable.rogers.com...

http://iwasabducted.com/ufogallery/ufo76.jpg

this isnt a NASA image. Its copyrighted to the website. It says so on the
image.


"Mad Scientist" wrote in message
et.cable.rogers.com...
http://iwasabducted.com/ufogallery/ufo76.jpg

"Mad Scientist" wrote in message
et.cable.rogers.com...
| http://iwasabducted.com/ufogallery/ufo76.jpg
|

Ho hum.

http://ufocasebook.com/apollo16identified.html

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

MS,

I looked and the lighting is all wrong the light on the UFO is from
the botom of the frame and the light on the moon is from somewhere
behind the camera. How is that? Looks to me like a Photoshop job,
and a very poor one at that.

SB

On Sun, 15 Aug 2004 22:10:46 GMT, Mad Scientist
wrote:

http://iwasabducted.com/ufogallery/ufo76.jpg

SB wrote:

MS,

I looked and the lighting is all wrong the light on the UFO is from
the botom of the frame and the light on the moon is from somewhere
behind the camera. How is that? Looks to me like a Photoshop job,
and a very poor one at that.

Possibly. But that photo has been has been around for along time, way
before the internet or photoshop even existed.



SB

On Sun, 15 Aug 2004 22:10:46 GMT, Mad Scientist
wrote:


http://iwasabducted.com/ufogallery/ufo76.jpg

and it's been completely, thoroughly, and utterly debunked, right he

http://ufocasebook.com/apollo16identified.html

And this is even from a largely crackpot webpage. Even they are letting
this one go.

"Mad Scientist" wrote in message
et.cable.rogers.com...


SB wrote:

MS,

I looked and the lighting is all wrong the light on the UFO is from
the botom of the frame and the light on the moon is from somewhere
behind the camera. How is that? Looks to me like a Photoshop job,
and a very poor one at that.

Possibly. But that photo has been has been around for along time, way
before the internet or photoshop even existed.



SB

On Sun, 15 Aug 2004 22:10:46 GMT, Mad Scientist
wrote:


http://iwasabducted.com/ufogallery/ufo76.jpg

Jay Windley wrote:

"Mad Scientist" wrote in message
et.cable.rogers.com...
| http://iwasabducted.com/ufogallery/ufo76.jpg
|

Ho hum.

http://ufocasebook.com/apollo16identified.html

Ok, so what does that prove? A mistaken rod angle..even then the picture
doesn't easily conform to the rod outside of the capsule. In other
words the rod is not lit at all. But who knows. There are way more
conclusive proofs and since the moon program ended, UFO's have been
captured flying near the moon, across the moon's surface and hovering
nearby. Check out this testimony from Neil Armstrong:

"Rumors persist. NASA may well be a civilian agency, but many of its
programs are funded by the defense budget and most of the astronauts are
subject to military security regulations. Apart from the fact that the
National Security Agency screens all films and probably radio
communications as well. We have the statements by Otto Binder, Dr. Garry
Henderson and Maurice Chatelain that the astronauts were under strict
orders not to discuss their sightings. And Gordon Cooper has testified
to a United Nations committee that one of the astronauts actually
witnessed a UFO on the ground. If there is no secrecy, why has this
sighting not been made public?

A certain professor, who wished to remain anonymous, was engaged in a
discussion with Neil Armstrong during a NASA symposium.

Professor: What REALLY happened out there with Apollo 11?

Armstrong: It was incredible, of course we had always known there was a
possibility, the fact is, we were warned off!(by the Aliens). There was
never any question then of a space station or a moon city.

Professor: How do you mean "warned off"?

Armstrong: I can't go into details, except to say that their ships were
far superior to ours both in size and technology - Boy, were they
big!...and menacing! No, there is no question of a space station.

Professor: But NASA had other missions after Apollo 11?

Armstrong: Naturally - NASA was committed at that time, and couldn't
risk panic on Earth. But it really was a quick scoop and back again.

Armstrong confirmed that the story was true but refused to go into
further detail, beyond admitting that the CIA was behind the cover-up. "

Mo
http://www.ufocasebook.com/moon.html

And check out these:
http://www.lunaranomalies.com/

http://www.cyberspaceorbit.com/moonsaucer.html
http://www.cyberspaceorbit.com/beamufo.html

http://www.anomalous-images.com/moon.html

http://www.lunaranomalies.com/TLPpage.htm

http://www.anomalies.net/ufo/moon/ufoball.jpg
http://www.anomalies.net/ufo/moon/moonufo.jpg
http://www.anomalies.net/ufo/moon/ufoclus.jpg
http://www.anomalies.net/ufo/moon/ufocig.jpg
http://www.anomalies.net/ufo/moon/ufodot1.jpg
http://www.anomalies.net/ufo/moon/ufolig.jpg
http://www.anomalies.net/ufo/moon/ufomoon1.jpg
http://www.anomalies.net/ufo/moon/ufomoon4.jpg

http://www.keithlaney.com/ApolloOrbi...tal_images.htm