Join the Unexplained Mysteries community today! It's free and setting up an account only takes a moment.
- Sign In or Create Account -
Sign in to follow this  
Followers 7
Alisdair.MacDonald

More NASA UFO's?

Are these UFO's?   51 members have voted

  1. 1. Do these videos contain images of UFO's?


Please sign in or register to vote in this poll.

1,529 posts in this topic

Agreed.

HoagCNN2.jpg

Hoagwash.

I can't believe CNN would give him airtime.

Same guy who provides proof of massive structures built within the rings of Saturn.

People take this man seriously!

[media=]

[/media] Edited by synchronomy
2 people like this

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

That's what got me involved in checking up on the guy's claims, since I knew and worked with Thornton Page, Mike Duke, and other astronomers and geologists at JSC for many years. More dedicated scientists and truth-tellers are not to be found on this planet. For some guy to smear them as liars and falsifiers, to boost his own prestige, is offensive to me.

One has to admit, that seems a very reasonable position. It would prompt most people to do the same I would think.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

is that the silicone skyscraper or the plasma plume from an invisible et craft?

I'm going to keep looking but it seems to me that Johnston's main assertion is that these lights, flares and blobs are mostly structures on the moon rather than UFOs.

Edited by TheMacGuffin

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Thank you, but while Peri was posting that comment I was also looking up that picture as requested and have posted the exact same thing below--well, actually it's above now.

I only have two hands, Boon, and can't answer every single question at once.

Okay?

I wasn't really talking about Peri's correction there. I was more talking about your line of posts in general this evening. Between your blatant, rude, and downright petty personal attacks against Jim and your clinging to an obvious fraud (Ken Johnston), I don't see any better descriptive for it.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Agreed.

There was once an interesting X-Files episode about the "Face of Mars", but I never gave it much thought beyond that.

1 person likes this

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Johnston was in the Marines, just as he said.

Johnston states he 'learned to fly' in the Marines, and Hoagwash/Bara describe him as a jet fighter pilot in Vietnam.

Johnston describes himself as a 'test pilot' for Grumman during the LM development.

His military records show NO pilot certificates or school completions, Zero.

Grumman Public Affairs Office confirms to me -- and they will to anyone else who asks -- that there is no record of a 'Ken Johnston' as a LM test pilot or any other pilot related job.

Go check yourself.

You know people have already done so, hoping to catch me wrong. And you can guess why they have withheld what they found, since they would have found my statements were accurate.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I wasn't really talking about Peri's correction there. I was more talking about your line of posts in general this evening. Between your blatant, rude, and downright petty personal attacks against Jim and your clinging to an obvious fraud (Ken Johnston), I don't see any better descriptive for it.

I don't give a damn about "Jim". Period.

As for the rest, I said earlier that I was going to look up information about Ken Johnston and that's what I'm going to do, come hell or high water.

This is a subject that was unfamiliar to me so I wanted to find out more about it. Is that all right with you?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Yes, well I noticed that too at the same time, but it doesn't seen to count in my case. Naturally not.

Not a problem as far as I'm concerned. Glad you sorted it out.

1 person likes this

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I don't give a damn about "Jim". Period.

All evidence to the contrary.

As for the rest, I said earlier that I was going to look up information about Ken Johnston and that's what I'm going to do, come hell or high water.

This is a subject that was unfamiliar to me so I wanted to find out more about it. Is that all right with you?

So this was just you sharing information that you found and not you saying that you support the conclusions that were reached? Feel free, but you may want to make the distinction in the future lest you unintentionally represent yourself as agreeing with the information that you are sharing.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Ok, I listened to that interview. He's talking about this image:

If this blue light is a reflection off of a massive crystal structure, why isn't it there a few seconds later in frame 9302?

And what about these images that we've already discussed where the blue flares show up on top of foreground objects?

All of these blue flares look similar to each other. Do you really honestly believe that they're reflections off of some nearly-invisible massive crystal structure? Or are they just simple photo defects?

All right, I listened to it as well and looked up a great deal of information about Ken Johnston, just as I said I was going to do.

Do I agree with him that these are pictures of giant "structures" on the moon?

No, I do not. That's my honest conclusion. It just took me time to arrive at that conclusion, but I made up my mind that I was going to look into this as much as I needed to and that's what I did.

No, I don't agree with his theory about these various Apollo pictures.

Edited by TheMacGuffin
4 people like this

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Hoagwash.

I can't believe CNN would give him airtime.

Same guy who provides proof of massive structures built within the rings of Saturn.

People take this man seriously!

Stephen Greer and Roger Lier are physicians.

Figure that one out! :w00t:

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

All evidence to the contrary.

So this was just you sharing information that you found and not you saying that you support the conclusions that were reached? Feel free, but you may want to make the distinction in the future lest you unintentionally represent yourself as agreeing with the information that you are sharing.

I told Peri what my conclusions were and I do not agree with Ken Johnston about the Apollo missions taking pictures of giant "structures" on the moon.

That I can say for sure, after carefully weighing all the evidence I could locate today. I think I was very thorough about it before arriving at a conclusion, but first I had to understand just what he was trying to say.

1 person likes this

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Let's look at the pattern here.

I get accused of 'attacking' people trying to 'out' NASA's UFO secrets, but I think a more accurate accusation would be that I check their own claims for credentials and professional status, and find them inconsistent with existing records and with recollections of contemporaries, as well as contradictory to known physical limits [such as how good a photo can be, of Earth's surface. taken from space]

The pattern is -- people who have been shown to present falsified vitae and experiences are the ones making the claims of whistle-blowing on NASA 'UFO secrets'. They are consistently imaginatyive and creative in their descriptions of both their own careers, and their UFO 'insider knowledge'.

They seem to be the ones, and the only ones, providing such purported evidence.

Now Schuessler has the real credentials, and he tells interesting tales that are subject to analysis and debate -- and are worthy of the attention. But is there really anybody else who has BOTH genuine credentials, technical competence, AND interesting and suggestive UFO-related claims?

Not Clark McClelland.

Not Ken Johnston.

Not Donna Hare.

Not Maurice Chatelain.

Who else??

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

All right, I listened to it as well and looked up a great deal of information about Ken Johnston, just as I said i was going to do.

Do I agree with him that these are pictures of giant "structures" on the moon?

No, I do not. That's my honest conclusion. It just took me time to arrive at that conclusion, but I made up my mind that I was going to look into this as much as I needed to and that's what I did.

No, I don't agree with his theory about these various Apollo pictures.

You have no idea how comforting it is to see you say that.

Cheers.

1 person likes this

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I told Peri what my conclusions were and I do not agree with Ken Johnston about the Apollo missions taking pictures of giant "structures" on the moon.

That I can say for sure, after carefully weighing all the evidence I could locate today. I think I was very thorough about it before arriving at a conclusion, but first I had to understand just what he was trying to say.

Nobody can fault you for that Mac. :tu:

2 people like this

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

You have no idea how comforting it is to see you say that.

Cheers.

No, I don't believe every UFO story I'm told, but when I get interested I still want to look into things thoroughly before I make up my mind. I had seen those Apollo 14 pictures of "blue lights", but never had a chance to go into it in any depth before.

After doing so today, I'm satisfied that they are not UFOs or moon "structures" but probably some kind of defect on the film. Anyway, to me the explanation seems perfectly conventional and "down to earth"--so to speak.

4 people like this

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Nobody can fault you for that Mac. :tu:

I agree. I would go a step further and say that I salute his investigation and well reasoned results.

I'll add that I apologize for the misunderstanding, as I was under the incorrect impression that he was presenting this information as though he agreed with and supported it.

Sorry about that MacG.

2 people like this

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

So what the hell is Johnston trying to say here?

I think he's claiming that Apollo 12 and Apollo 14 were taking pictures of the same "structures"? Now I get it. It's not UFOs he's talking about at all, but "alien structures" on the moon.

AS12-48-7071.jpg

Yep, that's what he's claiming, at least as far as I understand it.

For reference, that 'artifact' on Pete Conrad's visor in the above image is just a dusty smudge, probably a glove print from touching the visor. The visors tended to get scratched and smudged with lunar dust as the astronauts worked. Here's a crop from an Apollo 17 image showing a closeup of the smudges and scratches on Gene Cernan's visor during their first EVA (click the image for full size):

AS17-134-20387 (cropped)

AS17-134-20387crop.jpg

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

No, I don't believe every UFO story I'm told, but when I get interested I still want to look into things thoroughly before I make up my mind. I had seen those Apollo 14 pictures of "blue lights", but never had a chance to go into it in any depth before.

After doing so today, I'm satisfied that they are not UFOs or moon "structures" but probably some kind of defect on the film. Anyway, to me the explanation seems perfectly conventional and "down to earth"--so to speak.

Glad we could sort this one out today. Thanks for being willing to dig into it!

P.

1 person likes this

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Yep, that's what he's claiming, at least as far as I understand it.

For reference, that 'artifact' on Pete Conrad's visor in the above image is just a dusty smudge, probably a glove print from touching the visor. The visors tended to get scratched and smudged with lunar dust as the astronauts worked. Here's a crop from an Apollo 17 image showing a closeup of the smudges and scratches on Gene Cernan's visor during their first EVA (click the image for full size):

AS17-134-20387 (cropped)

I definitely agree that it's not a UFO, a structure or anything even remotely like that, so Johnston was making much ado about nothing here.

As soon as I saw him claiming that two different Apollo mission had pictures of the same "structure" then I knew that none of it added up.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

This also means that Edgar Mitchell was telling the truth when he said that they saw no UFOs on Apollo 14.

My guess is that if someone were to look at all the TV footage from the mission, there would be none of the blue lights or blobs seen in the still pictures.

fakery2.jpg

Edited by TheMacGuffin
1 person likes this

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I definitely agree that it's not a UFO, a structure or anything even remotely like that, so Johnston was making much ado about nothing here.

As soon as I saw him claiming that two different Apollo mission had pictures of the same "structure" then I knew that none of it added up.

Yeah, this one really falls apart when you look into it in detail.

This also means that Edgar Mitchell was telling the truth when he said that they saw no UFOs on Apollo 14.

And I'd agree with you here, too.

On that note, I'm going to sign off for the night. Thanks, all, for the interesting conversation! It's nice to hear from everyone again.

P.

1 person likes this

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Come to think of it, I was actually watching Apollo 14 on TV at the time and remember the guy hitting golf balls on the moon, and I did not see any UFOs, blue lights, structures or anything like that.

As soon as I saw this picture, I remembered that I had seen it on TV back then.

628x471.jpg

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

LINK

Hrmmzzzzzz............................................

Qualifications aside, has the Reformed Baptist Seminary been found as yet?

Maybe he was hoping that people would think that an Advanced degree in Metaphysics was even more impressive than one in regular Physics.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

[....] You see much copy and paste on news websites these days, one wonders what reporters get paid for.

Ctrl^C / Ctrl^V is a very challenging mental and physical task.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!


Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.


Sign In Now
Sign in to follow this  
Followers 7

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    No registered users viewing this page.