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.

 

Should NASA always tell the public the complete truth?

page: 2
7
<< 1    3  4  5 >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Dec, 17 2016 @ 06:51 PM
link   

originally posted by: FlatBastard
a reply to: LookingAtMars

Why do you think that?


It is not in another galaxy or even another solar system, Its is right next door, it is ours. Just as Luna is ours. If there are others out there I do not think expanding to the moon or Mars would upset them. "Raping" another solar system may though.




posted on Dec, 17 2016 @ 06:54 PM
link   

Should NASA always tell the public the complete truth?


Yes, since it concerns this planet and EVERYONE on it.
edit on 17-12-2016 by Kromlech because: (no reason given)



posted on Dec, 17 2016 @ 07:18 PM
link   
a reply to: gortex

"Yes , but there isn't , NASA aren't the only space agency up there. "

You mean the other space agencies that can't even enter the atmosphere without crashing?

ESA just crashed Schiaparelli, before that it was Beagle2. The Soviets crashed a lot trying to land on Mars. I think the Soviets had one partial success with MARS3 and it was on Mars transmitting data long enough to discover nothing, just take a few pics.

Who are these other space agencies that have explored on the surface of Mars? ESA, Japan and India have orbiters, but all are in partnership with NASA and do as they are told.



posted on Dec, 17 2016 @ 07:25 PM
link   
a reply to: schuyler

Can you post some more drivel about us not having a right to know the truth.



posted on Dec, 17 2016 @ 07:29 PM
link   
a reply to: LookingAtMars




You mean the other space agencies that can't even enter the atmosphere without crashing?

Beagle 2 didn't crash it landed as expected but suffered a problem with its solar panels.
ESA have the Mars Express and Mars Reconnaissance Orbiter missions in orbit.



posted on Dec, 17 2016 @ 07:31 PM
link   
a reply to: LookingAtMars

You seemed to imply that humans used to live on Mars. Why do you think that?



posted on Dec, 17 2016 @ 07:38 PM
link   

originally posted by: Kromlech
Yes, since it concerns this planet and EVERYONE on it.


That could be a reason to keep the secret. Would you think it best to let Russia and China know there is life on Mars at a time when it seems like the US can not even put a human into orbit? A new form of life could cause great harm to "this planet and EVERYONE on it".

If the US has found huge deposits of valuable minerals on Mars should the US tell the world even though they know at this point Russia and China could beat them to it and claim it as theirs?

If the US has found that the land on Mars is much more habitual than most think, should the US tell the world even though they know at this point Russia and China could beat them there and claim it as theirs?



posted on Dec, 17 2016 @ 07:40 PM
link   

originally posted by: FlatBastard
a reply to: LookingAtMars

You seemed to imply that humans used to live on Mars. Why do you think that?


No, I said it is next door, like the moon and that makes it our world IMHO.



posted on Dec, 17 2016 @ 07:43 PM
link   
a reply to: LookingAtMars

You said this,




I think Mars has always been our world, even before Earth was our world.


What do you mean then, before Earth was our world?



posted on Dec, 17 2016 @ 07:43 PM
link   
a reply to: schuyler

While I agree that, as written, our demands of NASA are fairly ignorant, I think they might benefit from a more "open" relationship with the public.

The truth is, competition is heating up, and they aren't the only (or one of the only) game(s) in town anymore. It's easy to make the argument that NASA is a crucial piece of any potential large-scale "joint venture" between 2 or more players in space, coalitions without us are possible, and as we move forward over the next few decades -- likely.

If NASA is looking for some free advice, I'd recommend a 5-year transition to full openness. Those who disagree can retire and bow out gracefully, while those who desire a transparent NASA can be positioned now to take more a larger role, going forward.

The positives are many:

1) -- "More transparent than the actual government" is a good slogan. Really "play up" the "will they actually bite the hand that funds them?" vs. the tech billionaires promise to do space bigger (for LESS!)" rivalry.

2) -- Allow departments within NASA to pitch their missions to the public directly, via Kickstarter. This builds social buzz, generates (minor) positive revenue.

3) 100% transparency costs benefits analysis upfront, results following. Set up a Kahn Academy-like website to bring interested members of the public ages 9-95 a 5th grade-level overview, explanation, demonstration of each result or conclusion. Offer links to professional/ academic analysis for anyone who wants or needs it for social /educational/ legitimate business purpose.

From here, the implications are easy to work out.

In fact, I'd suggest running the whole country this way, to be honest.

For example -- published info on: who a law impacts and in what way? What are the actual projected costs of administering said law at the federal or state level over X period of time? What are the benefits to the stakeholders of this law or regulation? Who profits from this? Who tends to lose most of we make this a requirement/ law? and so on.

As a citizen, I'd love to see an annual report of the programs, regulations, laws and actions my government engages on my behalf. I wouldn't accept an offer of employment or relationship with no guarantee of accountability on the far side of the contract. It is no less unacceptable when we speak of nationhood vs. citizenship.

Side note: openness is good for business. It's great for mental health and stability. It's also novel, and novelty is the best chance we have as a nation to work our way forward, IMO.



posted on Dec, 17 2016 @ 07:54 PM
link   

originally posted by: gortex
a reply to: LookingAtMars




You mean the other space agencies that can't even enter the atmosphere without crashing?

Beagle 2 didn't crash it landed as expected but suffered a problem with its solar panels.
ESA have the Mars Express and Mars Reconnaissance Orbiter missions in orbit.



You have a point with Beagle 2, but it was still a fail, no data collected. Ground truth is needed for many discoveries. MRO is not ESA's orbiter it is NASA's. As I said above ESA (MEX) and India (MOM) do as NASA says when it comes to Mars exploration or they get no more help from NASA, and if you want to explore Mars you need NASA. Only the Soviets seem to have been able to make it to Mars without NASA's help and they have not been back to Mars for a long time.



posted on Dec, 17 2016 @ 08:03 PM
link   

originally posted by: FlatBastard
a reply to: schuyler

Can you post some more drivel about us not having a right to know the truth.


I thought that was where you were coming from.
Where does it say anywhere that you have the "right to know the truth"? The Constitution? Common Law? Your opinion? Where does it say that a government does NOT have the right to "keep secrets" from the populace? What gives you the "right" to know everything NASA has discovered, for example? And further, how do you know that NASA has not disclosed everything they know? Do you have some independent verification?

And congrats for being here two whole days. I'm sure that makes you an instant expert.



posted on Dec, 17 2016 @ 08:07 PM
link   

originally posted by: NightSkyeB4Dawn
a reply to: LookingAtMars

If one of the hypothetical questions above were true and NASA let the world know, it would start a space race / land grab / gold rush like never before in history. Should the US let China, Russia, etc. know what the US has spent trillions of dollars and decades of work to uncover, before the US is poised to exploit what it has spent time and treasure to discover/b]?

I say they had better tell the whole world so they can be prepared for the recompense and can of whoop ass that will be unleashed on us, when members of other planets see that we think that it is fine and dandy to go around raping and exploiting other planets. I am sure this will place us firmly within the bullseye.

Don't we do enough damage to our own planet? Do we need to take our evil destructive ways to other worlds? I am willing to bet if there is life on other planets, this is the quickest way to have them come a calling, and I don't think the results will be pretty.
We have filled space with TONS of junk already, and if it has pissed any potential e.t.'s or other entities off it is not common knowledge. Seems the Solar System is ours as of now. They should only keep secrets of impending doom or legit security issues, never for greed and power. If a massive asteroid will strike in March 2017, avoid the senseless chaos and let nature do its thing. If our Moon is a hollow artificial base for evil beings, what good could come from us knowing? Main point is many people agree with the disclosure we deserve, and guessing between the lines with the little we get is futile. It is often too open for interpretation and therefore misinterpretation. I haven't lost all hope for Trump yet but he will have to answer to a greater power also. Putin seems like he holds some Aces in the disclosure field and uses them for bargaining chips, but how legit is that info and how many would believe him? We should keep prying and keep the pressure on NASA and the Govt, but don't expect much unless it becomes beyond obvious (uh oh) or in their best greedy power hungry interest. My 2 cents here. Power to the people, knowledge.



posted on Dec, 17 2016 @ 08:12 PM
link   

originally posted by: 0zzymand0s
a reply to: schuyler

While I agree that, as written, our demands of NASA are fairly ignorant, I think they might benefit from a more "open" relationship with the public.


I absolutely agree with you, including your specific reasons. It may be in NASA's best interests to be more open. One of the problems I have with the overall concept is the fact they haven't told us, for example, that they have found "life on Mars," just as an example, does not automatically mean they are hiding that so-called "fact" from us. Invoking one's "rights" here does not mean there is anything to disclose. Basically what is happening here is that a fairly conservative government agency is pitted against people whose flights of fancy have aliens peeking out of every closet intent on abductions. It's really a conflict of world views and has nothing to do with reality. And claims that all human beings own Mars and everything on or in it are really quite laughable. (The Martians likely disagree!)



posted on Dec, 17 2016 @ 08:15 PM
link   

originally posted by: schuyler

originally posted by: FlatBastard
a reply to: schuyler

Can you post some more drivel about us not having a right to know the truth.


I thought that was where you were coming from.
Where does it say anywhere that you have the "right to know the truth"? The Constitution? Common Law? Your opinion? Where does it say that a government does NOT have the right to "keep secrets" from the populace? What gives you the "right" to know everything NASA has discovered, for example? And further, how do you know that NASA has not disclosed everything they know? Do you have some independent verification?

And congrats for being here two whole days. I'm sure that makes you an instant expert.
I often love your genuine and fiesty insight Schuyler. The fact that NASA works with the Vatican on an obvious level makes me think they aren't real sure about something possibly big for humanity, and the Vatican, who generally frowns on astrology, watches the sky like hawks waiting for something... Have you anything to add on this note?



posted on Dec, 17 2016 @ 08:17 PM
link   
a reply to: schuyler

The problem is that you think that the right to know the truth is something given to you by a government. Like I said, you are a good boy.




And congrats for being here two whole days. I'm sure that makes you an instant expert.


What because longer time on ATS = expert? Amusing to see you using this as an argument, old timer.



posted on Dec, 17 2016 @ 08:20 PM
link   
a reply to: schuyler

The first to plant a flag there and claim it own it. If the Martians have laser guns and can fight us off they get to keep it.



posted on Dec, 17 2016 @ 08:42 PM
link   

originally posted by: FlatBastard
a reply to: schuyler

The problem is that you think that the right to know the truth is something given to you by a government. Like I said, you are a good boy.



Please start another flat earth thread, I could use a few good laughs tonight



posted on Dec, 17 2016 @ 08:45 PM
link   

originally posted by: Illumimasontruth

originally posted by: schuyler

originally posted by: FlatBastard
a reply to: schuyler

Can you post some more drivel about us not having a right to know the truth.


I thought that was where you were coming from.
Where does it say anywhere that you have the "right to know the truth"? The Constitution? Common Law? Your opinion? Where does it say that a government does NOT have the right to "keep secrets" from the populace? What gives you the "right" to know everything NASA has discovered, for example? And further, how do you know that NASA has not disclosed everything they know? Do you have some independent verification?

And congrats for being here two whole days. I'm sure that makes you an instant expert.
I often love your genuine and fiesty insight Schuyler. The fact that NASA works with the Vatican on an obvious level makes me think they aren't real sure about something possibly big for humanity, and the Vatican, who generally frowns on astrology, watches the sky like hawks waiting for something... Have you anything to add on this note?


Oh wow. BIG subject! Not sure I can do it justice. My friend BO XIAN (I met him earlier this year), who is usually quite adamant, but unfortunately absent from these discussions, though you may remember him, has a lot to say on this subject. He turned me on to the book, Exo-Vaticana. I cannot find myself in agreement with these sorts of conclusions, but it is obvious the Vatican is interested. After all, they have their own observatory in Arizona. Also, the Vatican is responsible for the Gregorian Calendar. Vatican astronomers were the ones who figured out the precession of the equinoxes was throwing the calendar off. They're the ones who fixed it, so I think they often get a bad rap. They knew Galileo was right and just didn't want to advertise it. AND they are ostensibly quite open to the idea of extra-terrestrial life. In other words, if it happened, it wouldn't "destroy the faith" at all, which I think, is another argument for openness. Few people would freak out, despite what the Rand Corporation thinks.

But like Hitler said, "How many divisions does the Pope have?" The Vatican can keep looking up. I think their role in this issue is basically to keep everyone on Earth a little calmer than they would be otherwise, should something momentous like life be found. And frankly, where's the beef? Does anyone seriously think there is NOT life elsewhere? If NASA came out and said, "We found life in the form microbes on Mars." would you honestly be surprised? I fully expect microbes, lichens, amoebas, fish skeletons, etc. on Mars and the only thing that would be more amazing is if they found nothing at all.



posted on Dec, 17 2016 @ 08:52 PM
link   
a reply to: schuyler



But like Hitler said, "How many divisions does the Pope have?"


I think that was Stalin, Schuyler.
As I recall it was during a conversation with Churchill

edit on 17-12-2016 by imwilliam because: clarification



new topics

top topics



 
7
<< 1    3  4  5 >>

log in

join