Society & Culture0 min ago
Aliens On The Moon? Why Have We Never Returned Back To The Moon?
253 Answers
There are many many videos and information on this theory and it really blow my mind it seems the more deeper I go the more I find and the more that compels me to keep digging.
I think that this the real "rabbit hole" and needs investigating/explaining.
Apparently there are many cover ups/lies and misinformation being spread by the main space body with 4 letters.
What are you thoughts on alien bases on the dark side of the moon/u.f.o's being sighted on/around the moon and various other things which point to the face that we are not alone and many on earth know the truth and do not want to share with us?
Answers
Best Answer
No best answer has yet been selected by Henrietta. Once a best answer has been selected, it will be shown here.
For more on marking an answer as the "Best Answer", please visit our FAQ.
Jom, //surely you mean a drawing that could be construed as a model aircraft…//
No, I don’t mean that and had you read his books you’d have known what I meant. I mean models of aircraft (of which there are many) like the example sandyRoe has given – which, incidentally, is aerodynamic and capable of flight without flapping its wings.
divebuddy, his history is irrelevant to this discussion. That’s already been said. We’re talking about his theory. Have you read his books?
Mikey, as always, according to you the only people who have any common sense at all are those who agree with you.
Beso, the nearest star, apart from our sun, is approximately 4.5 light years away – possibly not an insurmountable distance for those with the technology. Who can say where what we will be capable of a thousand years – or ten thousand years - hence?
No, I don’t mean that and had you read his books you’d have known what I meant. I mean models of aircraft (of which there are many) like the example sandyRoe has given – which, incidentally, is aerodynamic and capable of flight without flapping its wings.
divebuddy, his history is irrelevant to this discussion. That’s already been said. We’re talking about his theory. Have you read his books?
Mikey, as always, according to you the only people who have any common sense at all are those who agree with you.
Beso, the nearest star, apart from our sun, is approximately 4.5 light years away – possibly not an insurmountable distance for those with the technology. Who can say where what we will be capable of a thousand years – or ten thousand years - hence?
The problem I have always had with this subject is everybody seems to assume that the cave dwelling artist only depicted what he/she saw. Would there not have been an ancient form of modern art, are we saying the troglodyte had no imagination? This is a long way from aliens on the moon but a lot of theories are based around the premiss that the artist was only recording reality.
-- answer removed --
Naomi, I read one of his books many years ago( I didn't read any more on the strength or lack of his first 'opus') possibly too long to remember details so I had forgotten the 'model' of which Sandy provides a photo. As a teenager I had an interest in model aircraft and am fairly sure that the 'model' would 'fly' but little better than a brick.
Jom, that figures.
Vulcan, if ancient man created the drawings from his imagination, which I very much doubt, I find it extraordinary that he was also apparently capable of imagining the effect of gravity upon a human being travelling at speed – or of recording accurate descriptions of the earth as it appears from space at varying distances.
divebuddy, personal history has no bearing whatsoever on his theory. You say ‘generally accepted’. By whom? People who haven’t thoroughly researched the possibilities? Von Daniken has never claimed to have met aliens – that would be pretty silly considering he theorises that they came here thousands of years ago and were mistaken for gods - and the artefacts you say were made especially for him weren’t. They were made by local craftsmen and given the appearance of age. Von Daniken fully admits he was mistaken in taking them seriously. So it appears that you haven’t read his books either, but are nevertheless also eager to condemn. You too would rather read the critics.
For me, Von Daniken’s proposed explanation for the presence of gods upon earth in the ancient past makes rather more sense than the supernatural – and it’s entirely feasible. Ancient texts and legends from across the globe abound with similar stories so why more people aren’t curious enough to investigate the reason further is a mystery to me. I find it utterly intriguing. What a pity there is no discussion. It could have been far more pleasant than the conversation has been so far - and, who knows?, perhaps even enlightening.
Vulcan, if ancient man created the drawings from his imagination, which I very much doubt, I find it extraordinary that he was also apparently capable of imagining the effect of gravity upon a human being travelling at speed – or of recording accurate descriptions of the earth as it appears from space at varying distances.
divebuddy, personal history has no bearing whatsoever on his theory. You say ‘generally accepted’. By whom? People who haven’t thoroughly researched the possibilities? Von Daniken has never claimed to have met aliens – that would be pretty silly considering he theorises that they came here thousands of years ago and were mistaken for gods - and the artefacts you say were made especially for him weren’t. They were made by local craftsmen and given the appearance of age. Von Daniken fully admits he was mistaken in taking them seriously. So it appears that you haven’t read his books either, but are nevertheless also eager to condemn. You too would rather read the critics.
For me, Von Daniken’s proposed explanation for the presence of gods upon earth in the ancient past makes rather more sense than the supernatural – and it’s entirely feasible. Ancient texts and legends from across the globe abound with similar stories so why more people aren’t curious enough to investigate the reason further is a mystery to me. I find it utterly intriguing. What a pity there is no discussion. It could have been far more pleasant than the conversation has been so far - and, who knows?, perhaps even enlightening.
-- answer removed --
Henrietta has asked a perfectly reasonable question & I am appalled at some of the responses she has received, I was hoping to see some really good answers but as always we have had the usual crop of " it's a load of rubbish because I don't believe in it". All I can say is if you don't believe in a subject just don't bother to take part in the item being discussed. There is absolutely no need to be rude & abusive.
-- answer removed --
divebuddy, if google is your friend, perhaps you’ll have the courtesy to give me proper links to the claims you’re making.
//I know you want to believe what Daniken says, because it fits so nicely with other theories you have.//
No you don’t.
Ron, thank you. I’m convinced that some of the people here are so wrapped up in their own opinions - albeit unqualified opinions - that they completely fail to comprehend what anyone else says. They certainly appear to read far more into it than is actually there.
//I know you want to believe what Daniken says, because it fits so nicely with other theories you have.//
No you don’t.
Ron, thank you. I’m convinced that some of the people here are so wrapped up in their own opinions - albeit unqualified opinions - that they completely fail to comprehend what anyone else says. They certainly appear to read far more into it than is actually there.
Naomi, some of us have eyes and the power of reason.
Just a little example, I actually did watch the video to which Henrietta gave a link. Now when you see the 'tower' which the field of view crosses you will see that as the 'tower' moves from top to bottom of the view their is no parallax effect, ie. as the viewpoint moves over the tower you cannot see more behind it as you would if it was a 3 dimensional object. That is because the 'tower' is an optical illusion made up of 2 dimensional shapes on the lunar surface. Life is too short to go through every idiot posting on Youtube which is mostly just a playground for kids with video editing software. Have you accounted for the apparently crashed alien spacecraft having no shadow yet? Everything else in the picture has a shadow.
Just a little example, I actually did watch the video to which Henrietta gave a link. Now when you see the 'tower' which the field of view crosses you will see that as the 'tower' moves from top to bottom of the view their is no parallax effect, ie. as the viewpoint moves over the tower you cannot see more behind it as you would if it was a 3 dimensional object. That is because the 'tower' is an optical illusion made up of 2 dimensional shapes on the lunar surface. Life is too short to go through every idiot posting on Youtube which is mostly just a playground for kids with video editing software. Have you accounted for the apparently crashed alien spacecraft having no shadow yet? Everything else in the picture has a shadow.
Jom, I haven’t watched Henrietta’s video, but I will, although as I said yesterday, I set little store by such dramatisations. I do, however, possess eyes as well as the ability to reason, which is why I think Von Daniken’s fundamental theory that the gods of ancient times may in fact have been nothing of the sort, is viable.
Dive Buddy...here is an extract from the Wiki entry on this fraudster, from a real, proper scientist. Mr Sagan says it all :::
" That writing as careless as von Däniken's, whose principal thesis is that our ancestors were dummies, should be so popular is a sober commentary on the credulousness and despair of our times. I also hope for the continuing popularity of books like Chariots of the Gods? in high school and college logic courses, as object lessons in sloppy thinking. I know of no recent books so riddled with logical and factual errors as the works of von Däniken "
Carl Sagan, Foreword to The Space Gods Revealed
In a debate between the failed hotelier, and convicted fraudster, and the eminent scientist, I know who I would believe !
" That writing as careless as von Däniken's, whose principal thesis is that our ancestors were dummies, should be so popular is a sober commentary on the credulousness and despair of our times. I also hope for the continuing popularity of books like Chariots of the Gods? in high school and college logic courses, as object lessons in sloppy thinking. I know of no recent books so riddled with logical and factual errors as the works of von Däniken "
Carl Sagan, Foreword to The Space Gods Revealed
In a debate between the failed hotelier, and convicted fraudster, and the eminent scientist, I know who I would believe !
-- answer removed --
Related Questions
Sorry, we can't find any related questions. Try using the search bar at the top of the page to search for some keywords, or choose a topic and submit your own question.