Jump to content




Welcome to Unexplained Mysteries! Please sign in or create an account to start posting and to access a host of extra features.


* * * * - 4 votes

NASA Astronaut Confirms Apollo UFO Incident 2


  • Please log in to reply
1026 replies to this topic

#61    MID

MID

    Forum Divinity

  • Member
  • 14,490 posts
  • Joined:06 Aug 2005
  • Gender:Male

  • ...The greatest error is not to have tried and failed, but that in trying, we did not give it our best effort.

Posted 11 November 2011 - 01:03 AM

View PostTheMcGuffin, on 08 November 2011 - 10:56 PM, said:

You're right, I don't give a rat's ass about the S4B or the panels, which were at least 7,000 miles away.


Not possible, McG.
Where'd you come up with that number?


#62    MID

MID

    Forum Divinity

  • Member
  • 14,490 posts
  • Joined:06 Aug 2005
  • Gender:Male

  • ...The greatest error is not to have tried and failed, but that in trying, we did not give it our best effort.

Posted 11 November 2011 - 01:05 AM

View Postlost_shaman, on 09 November 2011 - 02:43 AM, said:

To be an SLA Panel, it would have to be much closer than 50-100 miles. About 13 miles actually.


Why's that lost?


#63    MID

MID

    Forum Divinity

  • Member
  • 14,490 posts
  • Joined:06 Aug 2005
  • Gender:Male

  • ...The greatest error is not to have tried and failed, but that in trying, we did not give it our best effort.

Posted 11 November 2011 - 01:09 AM

View Postlost_shaman, on 09 November 2011 - 04:55 AM, said:

That's correct. Therefore SLA Panels are the 'new' explaination.


No, not new.
TYhat explanation was proposed in 1969, and it has never been refuted.


#64    lost_shaman

lost_shaman

    Majestic 12 Operative

  • Member
  • 5,986 posts
  • Joined:11 Jul 2006
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:TEXAS

Posted 11 November 2011 - 01:30 AM

View PostMID, on 11 November 2011 - 01:09 AM, said:

No, not new.
TYhat explanation was proposed in 1969, and it has never been refuted.

As someone else here said, it's a 'force fit' explaination that doesn't work. To fit the description of being near the resolution limit of the eye, an SLA Panel would have to have been ~13 miles from LM. I've always maintained that there is no way an SLA panel ever got that close to the LM near the time of the sighting.

Whoever fights monsters should see to it that in the process he does not become a monster. And if you gaze long enough into an abyss, the abyss will gaze back into you. - Friedrich Nietzsche

#65    booNyzarC

booNyzarC

    Forum Divinity

  • Closed
  • 13,536 posts
  • Joined:18 Aug 2010
  • Gender:Not Selected

Posted 11 November 2011 - 01:41 AM

View Postlost_shaman, on 11 November 2011 - 01:30 AM, said:

As someone else here said, it's a 'force fit' explaination that doesn't work. To fit the description of being near the resolution limit of the eye, an SLA Panel would have to have been ~13 miles from LM. I've always maintained that there is no way an SLA panel ever got that close to the LM near the time of the sighting.
Are you sure that it would have to be that close?  Reflected light can be visible from a great distance, especially in the blackness of space.  Is it not possible that the reflected light caught their attention and then they saw more details by looking through the sextant @ 28x magnification as indicated by mcrom's earlier link?


#66    psyche101

psyche101

    The Customer.

  • Member
  • 38,390 posts
  • Joined:30 Nov 2005
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:Oz

  • If you stop to think, Remember to start again

Posted 11 November 2011 - 02:01 AM

View PostbooNyzarC, on 11 November 2011 - 01:41 AM, said:

Are you sure that it would have to be that close?  Reflected light can be visible from a great distance, especially in the blackness of space.  Is it not possible that the reflected light caught their attention and then they saw more details by looking through the sextant @ 28x magnification as indicated by mcrom's earlier link?


If I may interject

the problem LS pointed out with that is the original observation was made by eye

"Aldrin: The first unusual thing that we saw I guess was one day out or something pretty close to the moon. It had a sizable dimension to it, so we put the monocular on it.

Buzz also says:

"Of course, we were seeing all sorts of little objects going by at the various dumps and then we happened to see this one brighter object going by. We couldn't think of anything else it could be other than the S-IVB. We looked at it through the monocular and it seemed to have a bit of an L shape to it."

and he then says:

"We thought it could have been a panel, but it didn't appear to have that shape (an 'open book') at all."

Which does not match what he said earlier at all. I think Buzz is a little confused here, and trying to make a mountain out of a molehill. My suspicion is that we must have miscalculated the distances, and the panel was either closer than thought, or your suggestion of an iridium flare situation.

Edited by psyche101, 11 November 2011 - 02:02 AM.

Things are what they are. - Me Reality can't be debunked. That's the beauty of it. - Capeo If I have seen further it is by standing on the shoulders of giants. - Sir Isaac Newton Let me repeat the lesson learned from the Sturrock scientific review panel: Pack up your old data and forget it. Ufology needs new data, new cases, new rigorous and scientific methodologies if it hopes ever to get out of its pit. - Ed Stewart Youtube is the last refuge of the ignorant and is more often used for disinformation than genuine research.  There is a REASON for PEER REVIEW... - Chrlzs Nothing is inexplicable, just unexplained. - Dr Who

#67    lost_shaman

lost_shaman

    Majestic 12 Operative

  • Member
  • 5,986 posts
  • Joined:11 Jul 2006
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:TEXAS

Posted 11 November 2011 - 02:11 AM

View PostbooNyzarC, on 11 November 2011 - 01:41 AM, said:

Are you sure that it would have to be that close?  Reflected light can be visible from a great distance, especially in the blackness of space.  Is it not possible that the reflected light caught their attention and then they saw more details by looking through the sextant @ 28x magnification as indicated by mcrom's earlier link?

They saw it first with the naked eye and then looked at in the Sextant. They said it was right at or near the resolution limit of the eye when they noticed it. Ok. so that is about 60 arc seconds. An SLA panel is a bit less than 22 ft at it's longest so let's just say 22 ft. So at 22 ft to be 6o arc seconds it would have to be 14.32 miles distant.

Where it further away it wouldn't fit the description, as it would be too small to resolve with the eye and would look like a 'flashing' star which isn't what they described.

Whoever fights monsters should see to it that in the process he does not become a monster. And if you gaze long enough into an abyss, the abyss will gaze back into you. - Friedrich Nietzsche

#68    booNyzarC

booNyzarC

    Forum Divinity

  • Closed
  • 13,536 posts
  • Joined:18 Aug 2010
  • Gender:Not Selected

Posted 11 November 2011 - 02:15 AM

Fair enough, I really haven't devoted much research at all to this one and the thought occurred to me to ask.


#69    psyche101

psyche101

    The Customer.

  • Member
  • 38,390 posts
  • Joined:30 Nov 2005
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:Oz

  • If you stop to think, Remember to start again

Posted 11 November 2011 - 03:15 AM

View PostbooNyzarC, on 11 November 2011 - 02:15 AM, said:

Fair enough, I really haven't devoted much research at all to this one and the thought occurred to me to ask.


It is still interesting that he changed his mind on the description. I do wonder if the distances are merely grossly underestimated.

Things are what they are. - Me Reality can't be debunked. That's the beauty of it. - Capeo If I have seen further it is by standing on the shoulders of giants. - Sir Isaac Newton Let me repeat the lesson learned from the Sturrock scientific review panel: Pack up your old data and forget it. Ufology needs new data, new cases, new rigorous and scientific methodologies if it hopes ever to get out of its pit. - Ed Stewart Youtube is the last refuge of the ignorant and is more often used for disinformation than genuine research.  There is a REASON for PEER REVIEW... - Chrlzs Nothing is inexplicable, just unexplained. - Dr Who

#70    TheMcGuffin

TheMcGuffin

    Government Agent

  • Member
  • 3,965 posts
  • Joined:05 Nov 2010
  • Gender:Male

Posted 11 November 2011 - 03:25 AM

View PostMID, on 11 November 2011 - 01:03 AM, said:

Not possible, McG.
Where'd you come up with that number?

That's what Buzz Adrin and the others said--it was about 6,000 nautical miles behind them.

"The stuff that dreams are made of"

#71    TheMcGuffin

TheMcGuffin

    Government Agent

  • Member
  • 3,965 posts
  • Joined:05 Nov 2010
  • Gender:Male

Posted 11 November 2011 - 03:28 AM

View PostDBunker, on 10 November 2011 - 06:01 PM, said:

All you need is watching Seven Greers disclosure project on youtube, or, reading
Stanton Friedmans book about Roswell. :lol:


That's so far off-base with me that it means you have not really paid attention to anything I've ever said.

"The stuff that dreams are made of"

#72    booNyzarC

booNyzarC

    Forum Divinity

  • Closed
  • 13,536 posts
  • Joined:18 Aug 2010
  • Gender:Not Selected

Posted 11 November 2011 - 04:48 AM

View Postpsyche101, on 11 November 2011 - 03:15 AM, said:

It is still interesting that he changed his mind on the description. I do wonder if the distances are merely grossly underestimated.
It may not be possible at this point to know one way or the other.  Like so many other supposedly monumental UFO sightings from antiquity, this one is likely to never be resolved to everyone's satisfaction.  Tis the nature of the beast I'm afraid.


#73    MID

MID

    Forum Divinity

  • Member
  • 14,490 posts
  • Joined:06 Aug 2005
  • Gender:Male

  • ...The greatest error is not to have tried and failed, but that in trying, we did not give it our best effort.

Posted 11 November 2011 - 10:09 PM

View PostTheMcGuffin, on 11 November 2011 - 03:25 AM, said:

That's what Buzz Adrin and the others said--it was about 6,000 nautical miles behind them.


No, that was the SIV-B, McG.
The 4 panels traveled outbound with them, as they were separated from the SIV-B prior to the SIV-B's manever.
They traveled with an outward velocity estimated to be between 10-15 FPS.  They had been doing so for ~ 53 hours +/-.
That means somewhere in the 300-400 mile range.


This thing most assuredly was a highly reflective SLA panel, ~ 15 feet by 30 feet or so, white on one side, silver on the other. It ooked like a rhytmically flashing star in the distance, which is perfectly logical.

There's no real mystery about this, save this:


What is the point of the discussion about it?
What else would it possibly have been?

Edited by MID, 11 November 2011 - 10:17 PM.


#74    Lilly

Lilly

    Forum Divinity

  • 19,274 posts
  • Joined:16 Apr 2004
  • Gender:Female

  • "To thine own self be true" William Shakespeare

Posted 11 November 2011 - 10:31 PM

View PostMID, on 11 November 2011 - 10:09 PM, said:

...What is the point of the discussion about it?
What else would it possibly have been?

Psst...I suspect some people were hoping it might have been ET. I wish it was, but I'm convinced it was the SLA panel.

"Ignorance is ignorance. It is a state of mind, not an opinion." ~MID~

Posted Image

#75    MID

MID

    Forum Divinity

  • Member
  • 14,490 posts
  • Joined:06 Aug 2005
  • Gender:Male

  • ...The greatest error is not to have tried and failed, but that in trying, we did not give it our best effort.

Posted 11 November 2011 - 11:28 PM

View PostLilly, on 11 November 2011 - 10:31 PM, said:

Psst...I suspect some people were hoping it might have been ET. I wish it was, but I'm convinced it was the SLA panel.


Pssst....Yea, I know, Lil. ;)


I was just hoping to get through the rather silly argument that's developing about something old and fleshed out before, and get to the point .  We are in the UFO thread.

I'd rather hear people attempt to prove that this big, spinning hunk of metal was ET!

i'M EVIL THAT WAY, YA KNOW!!! :rofl:





0 user(s) are reading this topic

0 members, 0 guests, 0 anonymous users