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.

 

Here's the proof we've all been waiting for !!!

page: 5
1
<< 2  3  4   >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Sep, 17 2005 @ 07:30 PM
link   
Meg, hang in here.


Perhaps you do not wish to share your email address with the rest of ATS by posting the header, which is understandable. Others might not see it that way.

"Burden of proof" means that someone suggesting a new theory or stating a claim must provide evidence to support it: it is not sufficient to say "you can't disprove this". Which is why you were being asked for the "evidence"




posted on Oct, 1 2005 @ 08:34 PM
link   

Originally posted by meshuggah1324
Their response:

"Groom Lake is full of hidden and underground facilities. Because of
satelitte photography, there is no other way."
[edit on 8-9-2005 by John bull 1]


"Because of satellite photography, there is no other way." - That sentence doesn't even make sense! There is no other way...... to what?!


What kind of "faciilities" do you think they have? I'm quite sure most, if not all, military/government buildings/bases go underground.



posted on Oct, 1 2005 @ 10:01 PM
link   
Again, it should be pointed out that, despite its official-sounding name, the Nevada Agency for Nuclear Projects is still just an anti-nuclear political action group. The members of the organization are no more likely to have inside information about Groom Lake than we are. In fact, they are probably less likely to know details about groom because it is outside their primary area of concern. Mainly, they have been fighting the Yucca Mountain Project.



posted on Oct, 1 2005 @ 11:49 PM
link   
If you read other of meshuggahs topics, alot of them are in the trashbin though, but you will see alot of his stuff is not very factual.


Admin Edit for swearing: Do not circumvent the censors.

[edit on 4-10-2005 by SimonGray]



posted on Oct, 2 2005 @ 04:10 AM
link   
Wouldn't it make sense for a secret government facility to have underground bunkers and complex? Considering there's only a load of hangars at Area-51, and to avoid it being blown up or attacked it makes perfect sense to have underground things. Hasn't anyone here played Perfect Dark or GTA:San Andreas? I thought it was standard thought that underground tunnels and what not existed before playing these two great games.



posted on Oct, 2 2005 @ 08:45 AM
link   
Mesh does legitimate research on these topics, he actually goes out of his way and emails/calls people/agencies that might know something about this topic.

Many mods have already applauded him on his efforts and many more members have voted him for WATS as well including my self.

To dismiss it as bogus is not quite fair and quite far from the truth.



posted on Oct, 2 2005 @ 01:03 PM
link   

Originally posted by GrOuNd_ZeRo
Mesh does legitimate research on these topics...


Maybe I missed something.
Could you cite some evidence of
"legitimate research" that mesh has done?


Sarge



posted on Oct, 3 2005 @ 05:45 PM
link   
Sure, here is some hardcore proof



"My email to them:

Are there underground facilities below the area of Groom Lake. What are they used for? Thanks...

Their response:

"Groom Lake is full of hidden and underground facilities. Because of
satelitte photography, there is no other way."

See there is some hardcore proof right there





I swear on my life I'm not making any of this up


Well, I guess since he swears on his life





Look I don't feel like I have to prove anything


Actually you do have to prove something. Prove that this isn't complete horse****

Face it this topic is like some of his other topics. Lets not forget the "I have the phone number to Area 51!" topic or the "A letter from my congressman on UFO's" or even "My e-mail from George Knapp". I suggest you read some of these. It will help you make up your mind on this matter.




posted on Oct, 4 2005 @ 05:43 AM
link   

Originally posted by SgtCamo
Could you cite some evidence of "legitimate research" that mesh has done?


Hey SgtCamo,

In all fairness, have you ever looked at my data summery from the Groom Lake Research Project? What we fould SUPPORTS many of mesh's conclusions. If you look, all of our sources are listed there. check some of the primary sources before you discredit all of the hard work and long hours that he puts into ATS.

I will admit that I have questioned the research of other people at times. However, I don't do this unless I have data to support my view. Earilier in this thread, I did raise the issue of the source of the data. the reason I did this, is because we have proof in the Archives that Groom Lake in part of a large block of land that is Federally owned!

If you have Question, please read the Research

If after reading the data, you are still confused, feel free to U2U me with any questions!

Tim



posted on Oct, 4 2005 @ 08:51 AM
link   
No offense dude, but if you take that one line email to the White House or the Supreme Court or the DoD and demand some answers, you'll see just how much value as "proof" it has...


The closest I've seen to proof was a District Court case by some environmentalist groups suing the state because they wouldn't admit to the toxic waste dumping they were doing at Area 51. The air force secretary basically said in open court what is contained in your email. Further, I believe the organization the email comes from were probably involved in that case, or at least sympathetic to the plaintiffs... go figure.

-koji K.

[edit on 4-10-2005 by koji_K]



posted on Oct, 4 2005 @ 10:08 AM
link   

Originally posted by meshuggah1324
The funny thing is that Navy guy with a top secret clearance who is based at some secret base in Georgia said the same thing about underground facilities at Area 51. So at this point I could care less if you guys believe me or not. I've emailed these folks a few times and they've always treated me with respect. I doubt they were lying.


Your missing an important piece of the puzzle here, meshuggah. Access to TS is on a "need to know" basis. Just because I hold a TS clearance doesn't mean I can access anything TS anywhere. Just because I have "White House" or SPECAT clearance doesn't mean I can walk into any facility I choose to visit. I have to demonstrate to the holder of the information, that I have a need to know the information in the first place.

I am certain that "Navy guy with a top secret clearance who is based at some secret base in Georgia" has TS, but honestly, he could tell you anything he wants and not really know. Now, if you told me that he was stationed at Area 51, and worked in the blah blah blah section, etc etc, I'd give it a little more tolerance, but still, he'd be taking an awful risk telling you something he shouldn't. Could he screw up and blab? Sure, but having held a TS for many years, I really truly doubt it.

In my opinion, you're being fooled.....sorry.



posted on Oct, 4 2005 @ 03:18 PM
link   

Originally posted by SgtCamo
Could you cite some evidence of "legitimate research" that mesh has done?



Originally posted by ghost
Hey SgtCamo,

In all fairness, have you ever looked at my data
summery from the Groom Lake Research Project?...

...we have proof in the Archives that Groom Lake in part
of a large block of land that is Federally owned!


I've read the discussions in that other thread you reference.
"large block of land that is Federally owned" hardly supports
anything. Same can be said of Lake Mead, Rocky Mtn Natl Park
or US Navy Base San Diego.

And I really didn't see any "proof" in that thread, although
I'd certainly stipulate that the entire Nellis/groom/NTS area
is indeed federally owned.

But dispite any of that as an arguement, how does that
support "the long hours" that mesh has put into ATS?
Just posting a bunch of wild ideas and not supporting
any of it by any kind of verifiable evidence is poor
reporting, poor research, regardless of how many
hours are spent on the project.

I'm not trying to dis mesh here, by any means. But
I really fail to see anything even remotely related to
hard facts or good research. Just a bunch of stuff that
"some guy told me that worked on a Navy base in
timbuktoo". That's not good reporting. That's National
Enquirer level stuff. Might make for a good fictional
novel, but that would be more appropriate in another
section of this forum.


Sarge



posted on Oct, 6 2005 @ 06:28 PM
link   

Originally posted by GrOuNd_ZeRo
Mesh does legitimate research on these topics, he actually goes out of his way and emails/calls people/agencies that might know something about this topic.

Many mods have already applauded him on his efforts and many more members have voted him for WATS as well including my self.

To dismiss it as bogus is not quite fair and quite far from the truth.


i definitely believe that he emailed that organization, and i believe that the answer he posted here is genuine...what i think people are dismissing as bogus is the VALIDITY of the group that gave him the answer..

nobody (at least not me) is calling mesh bogus...there could very well be underground facilites at groom lake. i question that the aformentioned agency knows that there is, however.



posted on Oct, 6 2005 @ 07:38 PM
link   

Originally posted by GrOuNd_ZeRo
This "Skepticism" has cost this board a lot of members that have never been proven to be hoaxers, liars or trolls, they often were just driven to the edge.


While I disagree with the rest of your post, the quoted part is true. NeedHelp pretty much got pushed away on the Alien's board. And she's still continuing her investigation, away from ATS.



posted on Oct, 6 2005 @ 08:21 PM
link   

Originally posted by GrOuNd_ZeRo
Mesh does legitimate research on these topics, he
actually goes out of his way and emails/calls
people/agencies that might know
something about this topic...

...To dismiss it as bogus is not quite fair
and quite far from the truth.


We have no way of knowing if the "research" that
mesh does is legit or not. There's no verifiable
info. No place to double check. Even if the stuff
that mesh posts were verified as coming from the
sources he claims, the sources themselves are
not in the least bit reliable. "Some guy at a Navy
Base or maybe Air Force" is hardly a reliable source.
Neither is an anti nuclear waste watchdog group.

Absolutely none of the info I've seen from mesh
is verifiable. "I swear on my life that it's true" is
not any kind of proof of anything.

To accept THAT as fact is not at all fair
and quite far from the truth.

It's not about being "fair" to mesh. It's about
verifiable facts. Mesh is welcome to do adult
research and post verifiable results. When he
does that, and others can doublecheck and
verify his info, then it can stand the test of
scepticism. That's what real research is
all about. It's not about being "nice" to
mesh and believing him just because he
says something.

He could be the nicest kid in the world.
But as a researcher, he needs to do a lot
more homework.


Sarge



posted on Oct, 8 2005 @ 12:24 AM
link   
From the beginning, I have simply been looking at the credibility issue as it realtates to Meshuggah's source. The Nevada Nuclear projects Agency, for all its official-sounding name, is not a credible source for this information.

Secondly, let's look at this logically. Why spend vast amounts of money and manpower to build subterranean facilities to hide from satellites when surface structures do the job just as well for a fraction of the cost. Also notice that surface structures (i.e. buildings and hangars) have increased in number at Groom over the past 20 years. The Arm/De-Arm Scoot-N-Hide shed (Hangar 19) has tripled in size within the last couple years and Hangar 24 has been added to the Southend complex.

Last of all, I just spent a week talking to dozens of people who actually worked at Groom (covering a period of time from 1955 to the present and representing various government agencies, military services and contractors). They said they knew of no underground facilities at Groom nor could they imagine a need for such. When the satellites were overhead, they kept their airplanes inside the hangar. Orbits were tracked and satellite coverage was known, just as it is today. That is one reason why none of the commercial satellite imagery in recent years has revealed any interesting aircraft on the ramp at Groom.



posted on Jan, 16 2008 @ 12:17 AM
link   
Of course they will be under ground it is common sence!they are clever u know!......



posted on Jan, 16 2008 @ 12:03 PM
link   
Good lord, this is a two-year old thread, the "agency" that was allegedly emailed was in no way related to Area 51, and the subject matter debunked. Closing this necro-thread.




top topics



 
1
<< 2  3  4   >>

log in

join