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.

 

United States Major General Blows The Whistle On What They Really Found On Mars

page: 8
95
<< 5  6  7    9  10  11 >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Oct, 3 2015 @ 12:40 AM
link   
a reply to: Telos

Right YOUR title of thread is very misleading and inaccurate.

This so called General DID NOT blow the lid off anything. He gave no details just another BS wild story.

Hey, but you got your STARS from these "lap anything up type people"

Credibility = Nothing regardless of job or wealth.....SHOW US DAMN PROOF...damn liars




edit on 3-10-2015 by projectbane because: (no reason given)




posted on Oct, 3 2015 @ 12:42 AM
link   
a reply to: vethumanbeing

I share your sentiments totally.... but is NASA at fault? Think pyramid & payroll...



posted on Oct, 3 2015 @ 01:31 AM
link   

originally posted by: Rextiberius
a reply to: vethumanbeing

I share your sentiments totally.... but is NASA at fault? Think pyramid & payroll...

NASA is funded by taxpayer dollars (that means you). It is interesting that the private sector is becoming more involved in the idea of space exploration and totally ignoring or bypassing any perceived .gov claim on this territory (unless paying for the use of existing launch pads). Hurray for human ingenuity (we can profit if the idea of transporting humans into the stratosphere and back is safe and sound and sells).
edit on 3-10-2015 by vethumanbeing because: (no reason given)



posted on Oct, 3 2015 @ 01:52 AM
link   

originally posted by: NoCorruptionAllowed

originally posted by: SyxPak
a reply to: NoCorruptionAllowed

Please share wwith Me as well?! I am very interested in seeing those pix! Please U2U them to me as soon as you are able!???

I have some pix from the moon that were ridiculed here to death...Alas, such feeble minds that try to convince us that they are rocks, eh?! LMAO!!!


I do have a couple on my ATS images page I forgot about, although I can only present them here as simply "images:" I can't know for certain they are actually what they look like they are. But on Earth, not many would question it.
Notice the perfect right angles on the cooling vents and the geometry

The electric motor...
Keep in mind NASA will airbrush things to give them more "deniability" or Rockefy them. They have to do this based on current military law and classified information laws which is what defines everything they are allowed to say to the public, or foreign countries. That has been in place since 1958.
This one is a dead body which looks mummified ( I don't know if it actually is one, but it sure looks funny laying there looking at the Curiosity rover's camera


It looks like it is grinning.. right leg bone goes into what looks like a boot
How did Butch Cassidy wind up on Mars anyway?


This image you point out it's fully debated in this thread Mechanical object spotted on Mars Sol 790 and the Mars curiosity rover did a closeup driveby of this object , nice to point out someone else's work...



posted on Oct, 3 2015 @ 01:54 AM
link   

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.


I love how this guy begins with a jab at Wikipedia, quite frankly a ridiculous stance since most articles have plenty of sourced references (basically his entire first post here is about as off topic as you can get), then he backpedals HARD and cries about how responses to his post are "off topic".

Essentially, you don't want anyone to reply to your silly post that is critical of Wikipedia, because we'll make you look foolish about it. Very hypocritical.

You can't complain about my post, either. Discussion progresses, and in this instance it was you yourself that took it to criticism of Wikipedia, in your very own thread no less.

And insulting the Wiki contributors? Really? All they do is provide information that was taken from accredited sources, and anything that isn't sourced is quite clearly noted as such. Perhaps you're confused by this? If you have an issue with an article, you're free to contribute a source yourself.



posted on Oct, 3 2015 @ 01:57 AM
link   
So wouldnt it be nice if we were able to easily travel to mars and meet our space brothers without big brother hording all the technology for himself?



posted on Oct, 3 2015 @ 02:07 AM
link   
well,

1) night vision can be traced back to pre ww II US military with the use of " night glasses" all the way to its technical progression of present day where night vision goggles are available to the general public.

2) fiber optics can be traced back to 1842 with image transmission through fiber optics as far back as 1920.

I'm all for disclosure but Corso and the General stated in the OP just do not have any hard evidence. No matter a man's pedigree, when it comes to the "greatest discovery in the HISTORY of mankind" I need more than a man's word or uncorroborated novel.



posted on Oct, 3 2015 @ 02:19 AM
link   
Think you could see the big bang with rv?

Psychokinesis may have more merit to it than some believe, however, the implications and effects...sometimes more frightening than the worst nightmare. Tread lightly.

Space is vast. They ARE out there...


edit on 3-10-2015 by OneGoal because: (no reason given)

edit on 3-10-2015 by OneGoal because: (no reason given)



posted on Oct, 3 2015 @ 02:38 AM
link   

originally posted by: OneGoal
Think you could see the big bang with rv?

Psychokinesis may have more merit to it than some believe, however, the implications and effects...sometimes more frightening than the worst nightmare. Tread lightly.

Space is vast. They ARE out there...



I am guessing you would need to seedown to the atomic level to percieve the big bang as it started the size of a particle.



posted on Oct, 3 2015 @ 04:29 AM
link   
I love this stuff but any reference to Wiki as a source just fall flat, any source that can be bastardised / contaminated by literally anyone are instant zero content as a credible source, yes I acknowledge that most contain decent info but when used as a credible source it would not stand up in a court of law.

As for remote viewing, its such a difficult subject, even if individuals in rare cases have some sort of ability to see beyond physical constraints it does not mean what they see is accurate. Personally I believe the viewer creates what he or she is being asked to see rather than seeing it, there is a difference, perhaps there are the odd person that may have got it right but where does chance come in to this and it begs the question that if it was working then why did all the countries who looked at it abandon it.

Either it had a use or not, I've seen talk of many 'ops' that are on going but I believe from memory I've not seen an ongoing RV op.

As said, I love this stuff but I have to look at it from a critical point of view and so far there's no actual proof other than talk and dare I say that the rather short video of Mr O'Leary is leading on to a DVD sale or paid talk?
edit on 3-10-2015 by Mclaneinc because: (no reason given)



posted on Oct, 3 2015 @ 04:29 AM
link   

originally posted by: Telos
a reply to: Agartha

Thanks for this info. I had a feeling it was from RV. As for the thread you provided the link, I already mentioned that in the OP. Also one little correction, when you say "your tittle" bear in mind that is not my tittle but that of the material.


You are welcome! A few years back I read lots about remote viewing, I was very interested (hence I remembered Stubblebine's statement immediately). Unfortunately there is no evidence to confirm what he claims he saw and that's the problem with remote viewing, it's just a psychic ability and psychics have failed too many times to prove they really have this extraordinary skill to see or perceive what others can't (if I remember correctly only one 1 in 65 psychic / remote viewing were proven to be correct).

I did read lots about the Stargate program and this is why it was terminated:



Star Gate was stopped because the government determined that even if there is some truth to the remote viewing claims, it is too unreliable to be of any military value. One important research finding was that “neither practice nor training consistently improved remote-viewing ability.
www.amazon.com...=0062515020/roberttoddcarrolA/


I would love to believe there are aliens out there, but I am yet to see evidence of it.




posted on Oct, 3 2015 @ 04:36 AM
link   

originally posted by: Agartha

I would love to believe there are aliens out there, but I am yet to see evidence of it.



Actually you and I are proof that aliens exist, the major thought of science is that Earth did not originate life but we the earth people arrived here via meteors etc etc ie we were alien to earth.

Yes I know its not the same as what you refer to but at least we can take a view that if it happened here there a chance it happened else where, its just a matter of time.



posted on Oct, 3 2015 @ 04:41 AM
link   
a reply to: Mclaneinc

Well.... panspermia is not what I meant by aliens! LOL

But I agree, if life happened here, there's a big chance of life happening or having happened in other parts of the universe.... who knows what we'll discover in the future.



posted on Oct, 3 2015 @ 04:48 AM
link   
a reply to: 0bserver1

Its my work my friend. I enhanced these images myself and if someone else found that motor, then that's coincidence.

I wouldn't lie about this. All my images including this motor were posted by me when I had a different account a long time ago, and I posted them in the older and very long Curiosity anomalies thread.
They are still in there with the date I first published them. Ill have to go page by page to find, but they are around page 120 or maybe after that

I used different programs that increase resolution and argued endlessly that the program did not add any design changes into the image like people were so ignorantly saying. I even put enhanced and not enhanced side by side and you could tell it was the same things only the one with artificially introduced higher resolution looked the same but just smoother.
edit on 3-10-2015 by NoCorruptionAllowed because: (no reason given)



posted on Oct, 3 2015 @ 05:05 AM
link   
a reply to: 0bserver1

My first post of that motor was well before yours in October 2014

Did you look at how smooth my image shows that motor? I didn't steal anyone's damn work either. The image I posted earlier in this current thread was done from the one at the NASA site. I saw it before your thread , and lots of people did. I just posted my image enhancement which is hardly using someone elses work. I never even got to see your thread on it until now and I'm checking it out..
When an interesting image pops up on the NASA site it can be in a thousand places within hours as you well know. OR should know.
You think you spotted this object before anyone else in the world?


edit on 3-10-2015 by NoCorruptionAllowed because: (no reason given)



posted on Oct, 3 2015 @ 05:29 AM
link   
a reply to: Telos

Erm, the Voyager probes didn't look at Mars. They went elsewhere. Oh wait, this is in the hoax section. Never mind!



posted on Oct, 3 2015 @ 06:10 AM
link   
a reply to: NoCorruptionAllowed

Awesome! Thanx for the share!
First Pic.: Very cool! Depending on the size of this, you know scale, it could also be a type of transport vehicle perhaps? or combination Transport and small Mining Machine with Central Hopper for Product? Just look at the right side where that guy in a white suit is standing on a platform with his left arm going up to the top to hold on?!? I see two feet there as well!! LOL! Wow man, my mind goes crazy with this stuff!! Oh just saw this. The right side of that 'Objest' seems to be cut off rather abruptly? Wonder what gives with that...? Where thare was maybe mnore of that objest, the ground seems ot a slightly different color? So something may have been covered up with a cloning of the ground, and it didn't quite match perfectly...?!

Second Pic.: Wow Man! Very dead body like! That was one ugly MoFro eh?! LOL!! Almost looks like a second smaller body to the dead Guy's left! Their feet are side by side so the second one is less than half the size of the larger one? Smaller skull and all that...

Very cool! For showing these I'll drop in one I have here of something on, well won't say for now... Looks like, well I won't say that either and let You mention what You think it is... Don't want to taint Your impression...


Thanx again for the Share Man! Very ATS of You!!



posted on Oct, 3 2015 @ 07:09 AM
link   

United States Major General Blows The Whistle On What They Really Found On Mars

"Blowing the whistle" involves some evidence, not just statements like in the OP video, "abundant evidence of torroidal disk magnets spinning in opposition generating anti gravity and small energy fields" to explain how oofos maneuver.

Of course he could show any of this 'abundant evidence' he speaks of (instead of hand gestures), since theres so much of it lying around.

I know they seemingly violate time space, I've seen a thingy do that once.



posted on Oct, 3 2015 @ 07:48 AM
link   

originally posted by: projectbane
a reply to: Telos

Right YOUR title of thread is very misleading and inaccurate.

This so called General DID NOT blow the lid off anything. He gave no details just another BS wild story.

Hey, but you got your STARS from these "lap anything up type people"

Credibility = Nothing regardless of job or wealth.....SHOW US DAMN PROOF...damn liars





Is not my title but that of the original material. I already mentioned that.

p.s. I can give you some of my stars, would you stop whining after that?



posted on Oct, 3 2015 @ 07:54 AM
link   

originally posted by: yourignoranceisbliss


I love how this guy begins with a jab at Wikipedia, quite frankly a ridiculous stance since most articles have plenty of sourced references (basically his entire first post here is about as off topic as you can get), then he backpedals HARD and cries about how responses to his post are "off topic".

Essentially, you don't want anyone to reply to your silly post that is critical of Wikipedia, because we'll make you look foolish about it. Very hypocritical.



You gonna make me look foolish? Really? Wikipedia might be perfect for people who have no education, no culture and no knowledge who think by quoting wiki they're being referential. That's my stance on it and it won't change because you think differently or because you're going to make me look foolish


p.s. btw, do they put anything in the water in US?



new topics

top topics



 
95
<< 5  6  7    9  10  11 >>

log in

join