It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.
Please white-list or disable AboveTopSecret.com in your ad-blocking tool.
Thank you.
Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.
“There are structures on the surface of Mars. I will tell you for the record that there are structures underneath the surface of Mars that cannot be seen by the Voyager cameras that went by in 1976. I will also tell you that there are machines on the surface of Mars and there are machines under the surface of Mars that you can look at, you can find out in detail, you can see what they are, where they are, who they are and a lot of detail about them
originally posted by: Xeven
When I remote view I see women, usually not wearing anything. I know I am just weird.
Sigh...got any blurry pictures to share?
I have found things in mars images for a long time, and shown them to people by printing them on paper, and not telling them the images are from mars, and they always identify the object in the image for exactly what it is.
Stubblebine was convinced of the reality of a wide variety of psychic phenomena. He required that all of his battalion commanders learn how to bend spoons in the manner of celebrity psychic Uri Geller, and he himself attempted several psychic feats, in addition to walking through walls, such as levitation and dispersing distant clouds with his mind.
After some controversy involving the experiments with psychic phenomena, including alleged security violations from uncleared civilian psychics working in Sensitive Compartmented Information Facilities (SCIFs), Stubblebine took "early retirement" from the Army in 1984.
originally posted by: Telos
originally posted by: Xeven
When I remote view I see women, usually not wearing anything. I know I am just weird.
Sigh...got any blurry pictures to share?
"Thanks" for making this lame comment in such a thread. I would have applaud if it was funny but along with the repulsive feeling for the stupidity that contains, I also feel the need to point out that the thread is so much not for funny things.
originally posted by: DupontDeux
a reply to: Telos
Well.. I am not sure how credible I find him..
en.wikipedia.org...
originally posted by: Telos
originally posted by: DupontDeux
a reply to: Telos
Well.. I am not sure how credible I find him..
en.wikipedia.org...
I stopped taking Wikipedia references as a source long ago. I'm not here to advocate his life work, nor the veracity of remote viewing.
originally posted by: Telos
originally posted by: DupontDeux
a reply to: Telos
Well.. I am not sure how credible I find him..
en.wikipedia.org...
I stopped taking Wikipedia references as a source long ago. I'm not here to advocate his life work, nor the veracity of remote viewing.
However the claim coming from someone as credible as Major General Albert Stubblebine who was also the Commanding General of the U.S. Army Intelligence and Security Command (INSCOM),
originally posted by: Xeven
I don't believe remote viewing is real... This thread subject matter is what is lame if you want to cut to the chase =).
originally posted by: opethPA
So you stopped taking Wikipedia as a valid source but are okay with using people's opinions as a valid source..
How does that work?
originally posted by: Telos
originally posted by: DupontDeux
a reply to: Telos
Well.. I am not sure how credible I find him..
en.wikipedia.org...
I stopped taking Wikipedia references as a source long ago. I'm not here to advocate his life work, nor the veracity of remote viewing.
originally posted by: DupontDeux
originally posted by: Telos
originally posted by: DupontDeux
a reply to: Telos
Well.. I am not sure how credible I find him..
en.wikipedia.org...
I stopped taking Wikipedia references as a source long ago. I'm not here to advocate his life work, nor the veracity of remote viewing.
That is an odd stance. It is an encyclopedia. It is not supposed to be the only place you gather information to get an informed opinion. It is supposed the starting point.
See, the really cool thing about Wikipedia is that the good articles are sourced - unlike traditional encyclopedias. You can go look up there reference used there. It is really easy and rally awesome.
If you happen come across an article without sources, then you KNOW that have to be cautious. Again, unlike traditional encyclopedia.
Oh, yeah, and in this case it is just so much more convenient. Since the article itself gives 12 sources I can site just the article, leaving most satisfied, and anyone else can go look at the named sources.
It really IS awesome!