Moon structures and UFOs

[WhiteLove]

I post this mostly because I find it is good production of sound and visuals. What is true and false in this video is up to you to decide, but I have seen some of these same objects on these images totally independently from this production (on Nasa's own web site), so in my opinion at least some of these images are presented without "additional hoaxing". But there might be some quite pro photo enhancements on some of these footages that make some of these objects a bit easier to see.

_ui_arHzbUQ

[Domp4547]

There is some good information in this video, but it's always hard for me to take anything from "secure team". They are not to be 100% trusted.
As far as structures and aliens on the moon that is without a doubt a FACT. Too many credible testimonials and video/photos evidence out there to say other wise. With that being said, I still follow Jay weidner's theory that the majority of public Apollo footage was done in a studio...(in the book "Dark Mission" author Richard Hoagland shows photo evidence of translucent craft but in reality Jay weidner states that the crafts are actually a reflection off of a green screen.)
I hope in my lifetime there is full disclosure regarding the moon, until then I'm still searching...hoping....waiting

[lucidity]

I love the way someone always walks up and says:

-- Oh Veteran's Today ... they are not to be trusted.
or
-- Oh Secure Team, ... they are not to be trusted
or
-- Oh rt.com ... they are not to be trusted
or
-- Oh Joseph P Farrell, he's not to be trusted.

There's no evidence of actual lies told.
It's just some random character comes in and says "not to be trusted"

We even had a whole thread devoted to suggesting that Veteran's Today was 'not to be trusted'
There was a queue of random characters... all suggesting variants of the same 'not to be trusted' theme.
No evidence of propaganda or inaccurate evidence / reporting was presented.

My prediction is... the next website that works to expose the whole Pizzagate scandal,
will be declared 'not be be trusted'... by random characters.

[guyres]

Arète moukate à li, there is right and wrong in all.

[Bill Ryan]

I still follow Jay weidner's theory that the majority of public Apollo footage was done in a studio

Good post. (And welcome to the forum! :star: ) I'd say that Jay Weidner's analysis is more than a 'theory' — it's a complete slam-dunk proven case.

For more on this, search anywhere for [Weidner + Kubrick + Apollo], or just start reading here:


http://jayweidner.com/kubricks-odyssey

[WhiteLove]

I still follow Jay weidner's theory that the majority of public Apollo footage was done in a studio

Good post. (And welcome to the forum! :star: ) I'd say that Jay Weidner's analysis is more than a 'theory' — it's a complete slam-dunk proven case.

For more on this, search anywhere for [Weidner + Kubrick + Apollo], or just start reading here:


http://jayweidner.com/kubricks-odyssey


The front cover of the video I posted looks incredibly faked, so this could be a faked image by Nasa.

I think they went there, because else people knowing they never went there would on their death bed say they never went and leak all kinds of stuff surrounding it. There were so many involved in that Apollo program, they must have gone all the way. BUT, I think what happened was that when they came there they were surprised about various activities and beings doing surveillance on them, so the people with certain access levels to ground control probably classified a lot of stuff and threw in faked imagery they had prepared as a means to cover up the truth. Those that were there probably was not some breakaway civilization from earth, it was probably someone else not from earth. And there could be other reasons for the cover up too besides that, for instance minerals, military related stuff (e.g., materials for weapons), learning from technologies over there and the prospect of privately doing mining operations there, they probably wanted it to look really boring and kept the valuable information to themselves and were silently mapping out a lot for future activities there... Then once they found out a lot of stuff they classified it to block and limit access to the information they had gained, ,e.g., that they were not alone there...

[mojo]

The front cover of the video I posted looks incredibly faked, so this could be a faked image by Nasa.


There's been many posts on the forum about secureteam, we can't go there for anything reliable. They continue to hoax so you can't even point blame at nasa although we know they can be blamed for a lot...;)

[skogvokter]

I still follow Jay weidner's theory that the majority of public Apollo footage was done in a studio

Good post. (And welcome to the forum! :star: ) I'd say that Jay Weidner's analysis is more than a 'theory' — it's a complete slam-dunk proven case.

For more on this, search anywhere for [Weidner + Kubrick + Apollo], or just start reading here:


http://jayweidner.com/kubricks-odyssey


Yeah I agree.
Couple of interviews with Weidner regarding this subject:

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=TTMCAQ7Ud4c


https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=_00nQHdOHuw&playnext=1&list=PL5D61BD74997D433B&feature=results_main

[RunningDeer]

This is a snapshot of one of the close ups,
with four different filter overlays applied, 3 seconds per frame.

http://avalonlibrary.net/paula/General/overlays2_zpsfc9dl8j3.GIF

Fourth frame in two layers, with 2 and 5 seconds per frame.

http://avalonlibrary.net/paula/General/fourth-frame_zpsvrtldrtx.GIF

*****

I sped up some of the footage from another video of the astronauts walking on the moon. It's not much different from excited kids on the beach.


lc3ZJg2BeSI

[abmqa]

I love the way someone always walks up and says:

-- Oh Veteran's Today ... they are not to be trusted.
or
-- Oh Secure Team, ... they are not to be trusted
or
-- Oh rt.com ... they are not to be trusted
or
-- Oh Joseph P Farrell, he's not to be trusted.

There's no evidence of actual lies told.
It's just some random character comes in and says "not to be trusted"

We even had a whole thread devoted to suggesting that Veteran's Today was 'not to be trusted'
There was a queue of random characters... all suggesting variants of the same 'not to be trusted' theme.
No evidence of propaganda or inaccurate evidence / reporting was presented.

My prediction is... the next website that works to expose the whole Pizzagate scandal,
will be declared 'not be be trusted'... by random characters.

Not trying to pick a fight, but I just want to point out the reason I "Thanked" Domp4547 for his post. I really appreciate those members who are conscientious enough to warn other members about information from a source that has consistently posted footage/info that has subsequently been proven untrue. However in this case the member did not entirely dismiss video, indeed, he highlighted key information that I suspect has many elements rooted in truth. If you are not aware of the numerous faked footage/info that has been consistently posted on Secureteam website you need only do a little research..

best regards

Best regards

[greybeard]

I love the way someone always walks up and says:

-- Oh Veteran's Today ... they are not to be trusted.
or
-- Oh Secure Team, ... they are not to be trusted
or
-- Oh rt.com ... they are not to be trusted
or
-- Oh Joseph P Farrell, he's not to be trusted.

There's no evidence of actual lies told.
It's just some random character comes in and says "not to be trusted"

We even had a whole thread devoted to suggesting that Veteran's Today was 'not to be trusted'
There was a queue of random characters... all suggesting variants of the same 'not to be trusted' theme.
No evidence of propaganda or inaccurate evidence / reporting was presented.

My prediction is... the next website that works to expose the whole Pizzagate scandal,
will be declared 'not be be trusted'... by random characters.


I am some where in the middle with this sentiment.
In general I think we can be too quick to dismiss and to quick to accept.

With me its a "May be so" till proven otherwise.
Chris

[RunningDeer]

These were a little after 11 minutes. Looks like part of the equipment was cropped out.

http://avalonlibrary.net/paula/General/equipment2_zpsjoyv9sa0.GIF

http://avalonlibrary.net/paula/General/equipment_zps5ijboxzy.GIF

[kirolak]

Then there's this supposed Nasa-censured video . . . I really don't know! Am sure there must be an English version, will try to find one in the meantime!

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ZMMjhTmN4Tw#

[RunningDeer]

Then there's this supposed Nasa-censured video . . . I really don't know! Am sure there must be an English version, will try to find one in the meantime!

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ZMMjhTmN4Tw#

I found couple without narration and dramatic music added, but I picked this one instead.

Huh? The astronaut looks transparent @ 2:51 (https://youtu.be/KcyE6XCJsz4?t=2m51s). http://avalonlibrary.net/paula/smilies/belly-laugh.gif Similar footage to your video begins @ 3:57 (https://youtu.be/KcyE6XCJsz4?t=3m57s).


Leaked Video Footage ''Neil Armstrong'' Filming Alien Structure On The Moon
KcyE6XCJsz4

[Selene]

I’m inclined to think that both circumstances are true, and there's even more to the story:

1. The Apollo astronauts did go to the moon and

2. Fake footage of them “on the moon” was shot in a studio as a backup.

Here’s my theory:

According to the remarkable witness William Tompkins - one of the few top-secret insiders still alive who worked at Douglas, TRW and other places in secret think tanks after WWII and who spearheaded the whole design of the incipient NASA Apollo program - NASA had sent several exploratory satellites ahead to the moon in the years before the astronauts were sent there in order to photograph the terrain and reconnoiter. They also photographed the back side of the moon extensively. Tomkins has seen these photos.

These satellite photos showed conclusively that there were structures and current activity on the dark side of the moon.

Without going into the fascinating detail of Tompkins’s testimony, the presence of other alien groups on the moon would surely have prompted caution and a belt-and-suspenders approach by NASA regarding any “live” broadcast of the first moon landing. If all did not go as planned and “someone else” came into frame, or if the astronauts were met with some hostility, it makes perfect sense to me that they would have prepared a “backup” to cut to during the broadcast. You know, “We’ve lost the image…please stand by….” And cut to the filmed version. :Angel:

Tompkins saw the actual Apollo moon landing, live feed, from a secret set of redundant cameras at a location offsite from NASA. In his book “Selected By Extraterrestrials” he describes – and provides an eyewitness sketch of – the six enormous extraterrestrial vehicles hovering on the edge of the Sea of Tranquility crater that awaited the Apollo astronauts.

If so, you can see why NASA quailed at an entirely live feed.

Cheers,

Selene

[elysian]

Hi,

I havent posted here since forever but I thought I have to share some thoughts in regards to Secureteam.

I have been following that channel for a long time and to say that they are fake or they are not to be trusted is a statement only from people that havent understood what the channel or Tyler who runs Secureteam is about.

Secureteams main function is to be a plattform for people to send their videos to. Of course there will be fake content sometimes but if you listen to Tyler and his message in his videos, He always ask his community to have their own opinion and he welcomes evidence to debunk any fraud. His main objective is to find the truth with the help of the Secureteam community.

Typical senario:
Someone sends him a video. (fake or real)
He puts it on his channel and asks his community what they think.

So to say that Secureteam is not to be trusted is like saying projectavalon is not to be trusted. Makes no sense.

Kind regards,
Michael