1528 replies to this topic

[psyche101]

booNyzarC, on 16 November 2012 - 01:44 AM, said:

Can't you tell psyche?  NASA is trying to trick us into thinking its just an emulsion of some kind by dripping little green dots along the edge...

But even so, it's quite clear what this is...

Spoiler

The entire bloody fleet is here!

JimOberg, on 16 November 2012 - 02:50 AM, said:

I'm not aware of ANY 'official' NASA explanation of the greenies on some of the photos. can anybody claiming there IS one please cite some NASA official making the assertion the images are photo flaws?

Here's the view of the guy who TOOK the photos, Walt Cunningham, an old friend of mine:

> From: Walter Cunningham
> To: 'James E Oberg'
> Sent: Sunday, July 22, 2012 4:50 PM
> Subject: RE: UFO Green Fireballs from Apollo-7 photography
>
> Jim, as you know, I took a majority of the pictures on Apollo 7. My original copy of the 440 pictures that we took have been sitting on top of my file cabinet since November 1968. While I laughed at the suggestion of “green fireballs,” I nevertheless took the time to look at the originals, which of course, are devoid  of anything like the so-called fireballs. The marks on the posted copies have artifacts, obviously from the processing. No, we weren’t being followed by little green men.  
>
> Walt Cunningham
>
>
>

That clears that up.

Thank you Jim, nothing like the horses mouth.

[TheMacGuffin]

Or maybe it was just "Santa Claus" after all.  

http://www.google.co...1FRjJB3DT4gTCdw

[TheMacGuffin]

Not all of the Apollo 7 pictures seem to have those green "artifacts", however, but I can't claim to have looked at every one of them.

[TheMacGuffin]

I suppose one would have to look through every roll of film just to see how many had the little green guys.

http://www.google.co...29,r:3,s:0,i:83

[psyche101]

TheMacGuffin, on 16 November 2012 - 06:08 AM, said:

Or maybe it was just "Santa Claus" after all.  

http://www.google.co...1FRjJB3DT4gTCdw

NORAD has a good handle on Santa

Before I saw the email, I figured the green parts must be artefacts because they appear in the borders of the photo as well, and quite prolifically, and match the others. It is an amazing co-incidence I admit, but it does appear to be just that.

We also see Green fireballs in nature, this is a nice picture of comet Hartley

[Colonel Rhuairidh]

TheMacGuffin, on 16 November 2012 - 12:50 AM, said:

This is the original AS07-6-1700 that was taken over Iran.

Iran? Well, there's your answer, isn't it. It's obviously one of those Saucers they're developing.

[bee]

747400, on 16 November 2012 - 09:12 AM, said:

Iran? Well, there's your answer, isn't it. It's obviously one of those Saucers they're developing.

I think you've got your timelines in a muddle, 747......


.

[Hazzard]

On the topic of DEBUNKED green UFOs in the atmosphere,... II remember back in the days, when that fanatic believer Ra was posting the red UFO in the atmosphere report,  tracked by radar engaged and shot down, as proof of ET visitation.

English was not his first language.


http://www.freerepub...s/1546530/posts


As silly as it gets around here these days, I miss that guy.

Edited by Hazzard, 16 November 2012 - 09:30 AM.

[bee]

Hazzard, on 16 November 2012 - 09:27 AM, said:

On the topic of DEBUNKED green UFOs in the atmosphere,...

hearsay about an unverifiable email does not constitute a debunking....

.

[JimOberg]

Question remains unresponded to. Is it fair to presume
the reason is, no such evidence for an 'official'
explanation exists, it was just a rhetorical device?

JimOberg, on 16 November 2012 - 02:50 AM, said:

I'm not aware of ANY 'official' NASA explanation of the greenies on
some of the photos. can anybody claiming there IS one please cite
some NASA official making the assertion the images are photo flaws?

[Hazzard]

bee, on 16 November 2012 - 09:37 AM, said:

hearsay about an unverifiable email does not constitute a debunking....

If that is your position, then nothing posted here at UM constitutes proof of ET either,... Not the eye-witness testimonys or the youtube clips.

[JimOberg]

bee, on 16 November 2012 - 09:37 AM, said:

hearsay about an unverifiable email does not constitute a debunking...

I'm not following you.

Are you saying that direct eyewitness testimony is 'hearsay' and you won't believe it?

Feel free to write to Cunningham yourself to ask him to confirm the email.

With so many legions of eager-believers on my case fo so many years, trying
to dig out any and all inconsistencies and lapses, do you think I'd take the chance
at getting exposed at falsifying somebody else's quotations? Especially ones so
easy to check?

And when did you ever doubt any anonymously provided alleged pro-UFO 'expert
quote'? Even ONCE? No, those you swallowed like mother's milk. Chatelain,
Afanasyev, MxcClelland -- all seem to have easily passed your test for credibility.

[bee]

Hazzard, on 16 November 2012 - 03:07 PM, said:

If that is your position, then nothing posted here at UM constitutes proof of ET either,... Not the eye-witness testimonys or the youtube clips.

and the reverse of that 'logic'...is that if you believe one email that someone told you about constitutes a debunking

YOU  should believe all the evidence of eye-witness testimony and YouTube clips....   (or something like that... )

JimOberg, on 16 November 2012 - 03:13 PM, said:

I'm not following you.

I'm not following you either....

Quote

Are you saying that direct eyewitness testimony is 'hearsay' and you won't believe it?

the hearsay bit refered to you...

Quote

And when did you ever doubt any anonymously provided alleged pro-UFO 'expert
quote'? Even ONCE? No, those you swallowed like mother's milk. Chatelain,
Afanasyev, MxcClelland -- all seem to have easily passed your test for credibility.

Have they?.......that's news to me...lol


I don't know what the big deal is about the 'green fireballs'....but judging from the way this discussion has gone,

they are a big deal in some way, for some reason.....that is all I can say about it really.


.

[bmk1245]

bee, on 16 November 2012 - 09:37 AM, said:

hearsay about an unverifiable email does not constitute a debunking....

Priceless!!!

[bee]

.

except to say.... that on the image that psyche posted earlier...

http://eol.jsc.nasa....AS07-5-1613.JPG


it's the trail that is green and the other bit looks white...

(you can use the magnifier on the pic)


.