Aliens On The Moon? Why Have We Never Returned Back To The Moon?

[Henrietta]

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?

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

[jomifl]

So Naomi, I have understood you only too well and the 'baying mob' is those that disagree with you...get used to it , it happens.

[RandyMarsh]

i follow darkskywatcher on youtube, he has a lot of stuff on this and lots of other theories.

[naomi24]

Jom, no, you haven’t. I’m very happy for people to disagree with me – but as yet, no one has taken the trouble to enter into a discussion on the subject. All you people have done is to make every effort to denigrate a writer – one of you claiming that “We [the ‘rationalists’] won!” If that isn’t an indication that a ‘baying mob’ is at work, I don’t know what it means. Odd though, because until that moment I wasn’t aware there was a battle raging.

Jim, .//Some of the evidence has been shown to be bogus.//

And what about the rest?

//The only argument is how much this matters for the central idea. Really it should matter more than you seem to allow.//

Why? If it transpires that only one piece of evidence proves valid, then the exercise will have been very worthwhile indeed.

divebuddy, your opinion of me matters not. This has very clearly gone right over your head too. It’s not about reliance upon what anyone says – it’s about one theory that I think is very worthy of examination.

[jim360]

If you build a case on lots of evidence on which some is utterly bogus it naturally casts doubt on the rest of it and in particular your interpretation. And for such a massive claim as this you need a lot of very solid evidence admitting no other interpretation. The idea may be interesting but it's not yet evencclose to compelling.

[jomifl]

Naomi, I suggest that you find that 'one piece of evidence' and present it to the world. Another suggestion, 'evidence' requires more verification than you will find in a popular work of fiction.

[naomi24]

Jim, I find it pretty compelling, but then, unlike you, I’ve had a good look at what is being offered as ‘evidence’.

Jom, sandyRoe presented you with a link that is worth thinking about, but from your subsequent post I got the impression that you didn’t bother to look at it.

[dustypuss]

Undisputable evidence :-)

http://bbsimg.ngfiles.com/1/22525000/ngbbs4d6f0f399f690.jpg

[jomifl]

Naomi, of course I looked at it, hence my remark about it's aerodynamic properties and the rash assumption that it was a model aircraft. The only thing it 'proves' is that at least one ancient society had metalworking skills.

[Khandro]

Klaatu: I'm worried about Gort. I'm afraid of what he might do if anything should happen to me.
Helen: Gort? But he's a robot. Without you, what could he do?
Klaatu: There's no limit to what he could do. He could destroy the Earth.

To be continued!

[naomi24]

Jom, not so. It proved that the thing was capable of flight without flapping its wings.

[jim360]

Well that's nice but whether or not you find it compelling is neither here nor there. On the rare occasions that you have shared evidence I have looked at it and wondered how you can take it seriously. Other interpretations exist that make far more sense. I've yet to be persuaded that it's worth looking in more detail, and expect the simpler explanation that Gods of the past were fanciful stories to be many times more plausible.

[jomifl]

Naomi, I don't think that a lump of gold can fly very efficiently with or without flappy wings. You are out of your depth on this one if you think that flapping or non flapping wings is relevant to the argument.

[jomifl]

Khandro, thanks for that, perhaps a bit of levity is needed here, though I am struggling to take the subject seriously.

[naomi24]

Jom, are you sure you watched that link? The lump of gold didn’t fly – and as for the flapping of wings, birds, which is what this has been categorised as, do that. Aircraft don’t.

Jim, your choice. I’m not about to try to persuade you, but if you’re that disinterested I don’t know why you’re bothering to post on this topic.

[naomi24]

Jom, if it's that difficult to take the subject seriously, why try? You're under no obligation.

[jomifl]

Naomi, you are not making sense. What is earth shattering about a model bird? I thought the implication was that it was a model alien flying vessel otherwise why mention it?

[naomi24]

Jom, //I thought the implication was that it was a model alien flying vessel...//

It is - watch sandyRoe's link.

[naomi24]

Correction, I should have said the implication is that modern technology existed on earth millennia ago. Whether it was alien technology is open to debate, but ancient texts suggest that it wasn't human technology.

[jomifl]

I watched it and nothing happened. I looked at it too, and still nothing happened.
What is your point?