I saw a very strange thing last night on the moon

[Phil Fargaze]

Actually I must admit that the footage here:-

makes me conclude that I saw a satellite pass in front of the moon.

Kiratgurunig:- that youtube vid link does appear like a bird in front of the moon.

[Grunthos]

I think India is about 7hours in front of UK at the moment, so this doesn't tie in... (I manage a team out in Mumbia)

FYI, India is 5.5 hours ahead of UTC

[neil phillips]

What is strange is that I had a very similar experience. There is another thread started about this which is here:-

http://stargazerslounge.com/observing-lunar-solar/183101-saw-something-pass-moon-last-night.html

and that is where I reported my observation.

The object I saw was circular, jet black, too large to be a satellite, moving at a constant velocity.

I was looking at the moon through the telescope when I saw it.

The other strange thing is that there are observations from different dates and times.

I have been an amateur astronomer for 37 years so I am quite used to seeing strange objects and then putting an explanation to them.

By sharing our experiences and observatations we might be able to come to an explanation.

Yes, and almost always there is a explanation which is rather mundane. But sometimes we are left with a plain dont know. Or a multitude of possbilities.

But i cant but help wonder about some reports that seem to completely defy explanation, the problem i see over and over, is when a report has come from credible witnesses, and the report is highly strange, like the larry coyne one i mention ( theres plenty of others ) i often see responses from many who upon not really having any answer, tend to trot out a million reasons as to why the report can not be what it appears to be from the testimony ? Thats not investigation thats a belief system.

From its impossible to have intersteller travel, to they was lieing. Or drinking.

Einstein has proved it.

Which seems a little short sighted because it assumes we know everything there is to know about physics, and that there will not be major breakthroughs that completely change what we currently belive is, or is not possible, as far as intersteller travel is concerned.

But this kind of arrogance fails even more when one considers other possible shortcomings in our current understanding of the universe time, and dimesnsions

Im not saying Einstein was wrong, not in the slightest, just that hes information might be incomplete.

Recently the idea about extra dimensions seems to have become very popular with the current deep thinkers in the scientific community.

So even this idea about interstellar travel in a quick time frame being impossible, is rather a incomplete question, based on incomplete physics at our current understanding.

Extra dimensional travel, adds a question that im not even sure Einstein contemplated.

And even if he did, hes understanding of extra dimensional travel may have been so incomplete, that any certainty of, it is, or is not possible, Would also be rather limeted and incomplete to even begin to answer some of those big questions.

Those questions will keep being asked as long as human beings are alive on this planet. One other thing that i would like to leave everyone here with

The file released by the MOD about Milton Torres, Dr david Clark suggests that he may have been unwitingly part of a test to see if false radar returns could be aimed at aircraft.

Why such a test had to have a witness not in on the act, as suggested by David is not clear, and surely those files pertaining to such experiments including those performed on Milton, are long overdue for release themselves, but to date no such files have been released. David suggests the files have been destroyed. But those involved might still be alive to give comments.

If this technology suggested by David was being developed in the 50s,but from what we know may not have been untill the 60s. I have no way of knowing if thats correct, so is only a suggestion

A more interesting question might be, would this dupeing be absolutely nessecery to determine the technology was actually working well enough ?

So we can not say for sure Milton Torres was indeed ordered to fire a missle at what was apparently a unknown. Though files that have been allowed to be released say thats what happened ?

We can also not be sure it was just a test of radar fooling technology.

I personally dont belive such a test would have been needed. There would have been many ways to determine if that technology was working.

Without having to dupe one if its pilots to prove the technology was Sound.

If it was determined the technology was actually working, Then it seems pretty obviouse to me that yes Milton would have been fooled, any pilot would have been fooled.

And that such a test really just wasnt needed to know that kind of information?

Just random testing of blips on any tradar scope be it airborne or not would easily have determined the technolgy was working well enough to fool pilots.

I just dont see how fooling one of there own, was really nessecery to determine its effectiveness ?

US airman Milton Torres told to shoot down

Ive said it before and i will say it again, if a ufo landed outside the whitehouse in broad daylight, some kind of mirage imaging technology would be found to explain that away.

As such no amount of evidence will ever really be accepted by everyone.

Even 100 scientists handling a alien artifact. could be explained away by some means, we wanted to see if the world could be fooled by the testimony of 100 of our top scientists, asked to go along with such a important discovery, to see how gullable the russians really were.

you get the point. its not that hard to find alternative explanations, even when the evidence seems overwhelming. Like this current topic ( and many others )

Of course i could be wrong and accept that, but this is the pattern i see time after time, after a while i start thinking something doesnt feel right about these attempts to downplay the information that is being officially released in millatary files. and circles ?

I have no way of knowing what these reports really mean, but i am also not gullable enough to accept that all these reports are explainable. Just as i am not gullable enough to belive or know for certain, they all, or some of them are proof of Alien craft. We just can not be certain either way, and as such its about time the joking, and arrogance on both sides of this interesting subject stop. Untill then believers non believers or just the plain curiouse, will never know the truth. But there may well be people who do. whos to say ? Thats it from me unless i get any sensible feedback. first sign of arrogance and its silence,.

[JB80]

I had something similar a while ago.

Never had an answer that reached consensus. CN seemed adamant it was a satellite but I don't buy that. Then again I think it's purely explainable.

http://stargazerslounge.com/imaging-lunar/155054-transit-sorts-maybe.html

[perrin6]

At 11.35-ish on Thursday night I saw a tiny black disc moving from west to east across the moon. It took about 5 seconds I think. Probably a balloon or chinese lantern I suppose.

[neil phillips]

It seems this is seen quite a lot, maybe thats to be expected, ive seen satellites for many years thousands of them, ive seen NOS on many ocassions, ive seen 4 satellites traveling as a small group, only they wasnt satellites. perplexed you bet.

I know what lanterns look like im not a fool, plus lanterns dont devide at high speed. Something thats difficult to talk about, as one feels stupid.

A question can satellites appear completely stationary ? for up to 40 seconds maybe slightly longer.

Getting gradually brighter, then slowly getting dimmer, to the point of a speck. Im not talking thinking it was stationary.

It was actually completely static.for quite some time, just for my own information im guessing there must be a class of satellite that appear to do this. Planes can do this, but mostly turn at some point, certainly the gradual brightening is a plane head on. but the regression without moving is not a plane in reverse. Hence the question. Just interested. There are many things that can fool a observer. Ten a penny, which breeds ridicule, as far as interesting reports go. And its easy to see why. A thousand newbies, starting with what did i see last night, after a while, one thinks oh not again. Which sets the stage for disbelief, and a ignoring disbelieving attitude. Thats not science. But understandable agreed.

And the fear of being wrong on this, drives many statements in the scientific community im sure, its become a battle of wills now hasnt it. We need to step away from this emoitional response, on both sides of the argument.

Exactly the worst type of situation to allow goverments to withhold information. If people want to make it easier for them. Go right ahead.

But dont be surprised if this argument doesnt stop. That has the hall marks of a real mystery, not a newbie starting with i didnt know stars can move.

complete difference.

Those that can not see that, or dont want to see that, will likely be getting rather annoyed, by my suggestion, that Hynek may not have been as gullable as they would like to think he was, for changing hes mind about this subject.

Thats not my fault, those that learn all the information, can make a better choice. If one doesnt research something and just goes along with the crowd because its fashionable. Then whos gullable ? To find something interesting, to want answers. to not accept blindly everything we are told by many sources, including the ufo brigade. is the sensible approach.

I refuse to make it easier for them, just to be part of the crowd. Thats not courage. I would rather lose my reputation, than become a sheep man. Just because its easier. Hynek struggled with that, no question. As does Edgar mitchell and gordon cooper. Brave men. who i would rather trust. But i guess my words might be falling on deaf ears. what a mess this planet is. Hynek suffered it. Anyone with courage will do too. Its such a mess.

[perrin6]

Wish I'd seen what you saw Neil - fascinating !

[Rattler]

I'm sure it's a fly. The video where it comes from right to left it looks like it flies in fast and then slows down suggesting it landed and started walking on the lens.

The second one looks like it has something swept back like wings when they are folded in.

[neil phillips]

Wish I'd seen what you saw Neil - fascinating !

you think that but it doesnt make for a popular perception.Ah well

Besides it may have appeared strange but theres no way of knowing that for sure. The story is a little more strange than that actually, as i waited for the release of the files around this time period, as it was investigated by the CAA and i know the MOD had a report, because the CAA told me they had to send a report to them as a matter of course. The files for that time period are exempt for release last time i looked. Which really is rather confusing. Ive tried to open up to those i want to trust, ive tried to start a small but tiny ripple of change through here. but i know im kidding myself, theres just to much face to lose. Including my own. I need to forget this conversation now. I hate that i want to share information. Only to cringe when i realize what others are likely thinking. Someone has to start some common sense. But i dont want it to be me. But im a coward if i dont try. ive tried again. i can live with that. im going to ignore these threads again. And especially the ridicule no matter how much i want to reach out and say plz just investigate more, and laugh a little less. Thanks for saying that though

[StevenG.]

It may have been simply a bird in flight. Possibly a fly, or a satellite.

When I observe the entire entire Moon, I don't see anything else but that. On the other hand, when I observe stars and what not, I tend to unexpectedly see satellites that whizz right by the field of view in the telescope.

[c3po]

just going to throw this out there, and i could be WAY off (as is most likely the case) but what about the 'GRAIL' twins NASA has orbiting the moon?

[Andrew*]

just going to throw this out there, and i could be WAY off (as is most likely the case) but what about the 'GRAIL' twins NASA has orbiting the moon?

Not way off, but they are too small and far away to resolve with an amateur scope

[AceShaw]

you never know man....look a second time you may see that Go'auld pyramid starship coming down

Lmao. Don't worry, Col. Jack O'neal and Tealk will take care of it!