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.

 

"China-Russia plan joint mission to Mars"

page: 3
0
<< 1  2    4 >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Sep, 11 2006 @ 08:58 PM
link   

Originally posted by StellarX

PhloydPhan
it causes me to question your rationality. Again, show me one iota of actual evidence to support this claim of "working anti grav technology" and we'll talk like adults.


Well if you were a 'adult' you would not need to assume ignorance on my side as the crux of your argument. Anti gravity technology and implementation is reality but it changes nothing as all this can be done with good old rocket tech circa 1970. If you do understand or know about anti gravity that is entirely YOUR problem and i am quite sick of assuming the burden of proof when it's you attacking and denying reality.

I'm gonna need some credible links to anti-gravity tech actually working. There are many theories and rumors...But as of yet, not one has proven itself under scrutiny.




posted on Sep, 13 2006 @ 04:05 PM
link   

Originally posted by Murcielago
I'm gonna need some credible links to anti-gravity tech actually working. There are many theories and rumors...But as of yet, not one has proven itself under scrutiny.


Why exactly should i provide you with links you could find yourself had you that intent? The burden of proof is not on me ( it's very much in the scientific literature) so why try shove it this way?

Stellar



posted on Sep, 13 2006 @ 05:35 PM
link   

Originally posted by StellarX

Originally posted by Murcielago
I'm gonna need some credible links to anti-gravity tech actually working. There are many theories and rumors...But as of yet, not one has proven itself under scrutiny.


Why exactly should i provide you with links you could find yourself had you that intent? The burden of proof is not on me ( it's very much in the scientific literature) so why try shove it this way?

Stellar


lol...I assume thats your was of saying: "I cant find ANY credible links on the net...So I'll just see if someone else can find one".


Its now very clear to me that you are a "conspiracy nut", and couldn't find a single source on the net to prove your outlandish claims.



posted on Sep, 14 2006 @ 04:45 PM
link   

Originally posted by Murcielago
lol...I assume thats your was of saying: "I cant find ANY credible links on the net...So I'll just see if someone else can find one".


It's my way of demanding that you establish your credibility here by showing you can discover at least the basic reality of anti gravity. Is it really that hard to consider that someone can be better informed than yourself?


Its now very clear to me that you are a "conspiracy nut", and couldn't find a single source on the net to prove your outlandish claims.


So even talking about anti gravity gets one branded a conspiracy nut these days! At this rate you will soon declare that Oswald did it all.
Get back to me when you have learned to even do something basic like 'google' as that is all you need in this case.

Stellar



posted on Sep, 14 2006 @ 04:51 PM
link   
Seems to me it's a very ambitious project. Hopefully their plan does not include risking lives above and beyond the technology currently available to achieve such goals. Or an attempt to prove something to the west at the risk of the star travelers?

Be interesting to read Mr Lear's thoughts on this, unless there already posted within your thread.

Dallas



posted on Sep, 14 2006 @ 06:54 PM
link   

Originally posted by StellarX

Originally posted by Murcielago
lol...I assume thats your was of saying: "I cant find ANY credible links on the net...So I'll just see if someone else can find one".


It's my way of demanding that you establish your credibility here by showing you can discover at least the basic reality of anti gravity. Is it really that hard to consider that someone can be better informed than yourself?

My credibility?!? I think I've established my credibility here, I've being a member of this site for over 2 years, and posted thousands of times...my credibility is not whats in question.

What is in question is that you have yet to point out ONE credible link on anti-grav.



posted on Sep, 15 2006 @ 04:15 PM
link   

Originally posted by Murcielago
My credibility?!? I think I've established my credibility here, I've being a member of this site for over 2 years, and posted thousands of times...my credibility is not whats in question.


Spamming may look good but it certainly does not establish credibility.
What does being here a few months longer than me prove for that matter?


What is in question is that you have yet to point out ONE credible link on anti-grav.


Your credibility is entirely in question when you consider discussions about anti gravity 'conspiracy theories' suited only for 'nut jobs'.
If you keep this up i will sooner or later be forced to show up your ignorance on this topic as you have clearly decided that what you don't know about or understand can clearly not have anything to do with reality. I take it then you believe that all the strange things we see in our skies are in fact from other planets and that humanity are stuck with rocket technology?

Sad.

Stellar



posted on Sep, 15 2006 @ 08:48 PM
link   
I dont spam.

And, I do believe in Aliens (I think if you dont, you are very close minded), and I'm sure there are plenty of alien craft buzzin around our little rock...and I wouldn't dispute that the US Gov does have some reverse engineered craft that can do much of what theres can. But I dont really discuss that because its pointless. Black aircraft will usually (hopefully) find there way into the limelight...But IF, the Gov does have "ufo's"...they will never be revealed.

There are so many stupid anti-grav sites out there, and they have no working prototype...nor are they building one to prove that their fancilful claims are indeed in the realm of reality.

an example is "AmericanAntiGrav"



posted on Sep, 16 2006 @ 12:22 AM
link   
back to topic?

Any interplanetary manned mission requires the resources of all space-faring nations and others too.
I seriously doubt we can see men on Mars soon unless there is a consolidated effort on the comparable to the ISS.
We have lots of capable space agencies out there and we need all to get to the moon and beyond esp since disjoint funding is a very cruial aspect for the sustainibility of any long term projects.
Once we can sort out the issues of tech-transfer, siphenig of tech for ulterior military motives etc etc. this can continue.
A joint Mission for anything, base on the moon/mars etc. will be much more efficient than a unilateral approach.
Along with disjoint funding, there are obv more minds working and simply more number of launch vehicles available.
Hope it is a joint mission. Humans would have been on the moon by the late 1950s if it was a consolidated effort.



posted on Sep, 18 2006 @ 04:29 PM
link   

Originally posted by Murcielago
I dont spam.


I'll take your word for it! I just tend to assume ( based on experience) that posting volume have absolutely nothing to do with quality and may in fact be inversely proportional on average.



And, I do believe in Aliens (I think if you dont, you are very close minded), and I'm sure there are plenty of alien craft buzzin around our little rock...


So their using Anti grav technology but we can not? Why assume aliens interested enough in a planet were so many ( you apparently included) still have issues with anti gravity? I know it's not a great argument but i sometimes wonder how average ignorant posters can so readily believe in aliens and the like when they so completely lack the scientific background to base their opinions on....


and I wouldn't dispute that the US Gov does have some reverse engineered craft that can do much of what theres can.


Why are we so backwards that all our technology must be reversed engineered? Did the wright brothers see alien spaceships and based their machines on that? I have not really explored the area of technology exchanges but i also do not see the need for it to explain what we have or apparently have. If we go back a HUNDRED YEARS we can see the basis of so many advanced technologies ( wireless communication&power distribution) that STILL have not reached the market place in their best forms or at all. We do NOT need aliens ( they might still be watching) to explain the strange things we see in our skies.


But I dont really discuss that because its pointless. Black aircraft will usually (hopefully) find there way into the limelight...But IF, the Gov does have "ufo's"...they will never be revealed.


Well they clearly do not want the information revealed as that would open a can of worms they will be hard pressed to contain. Once it's clear that we are not alone the whole religious control system will suffer a blow from which it might very well never recover. They control us trough artificially induced ignorance and isolating us from understanding our roots ( i believe we are not genetically 'pure' and not just the result of evolutionary mechanisms) and the cardinal principle there is to convince us that there is nothing 'out there' and that even if it is it's too far away to get here with enough to bother us with.


There are so many stupid anti-grav sites out there, and they have no working prototype...nor are they building one to prove that their fancilful claims are indeed in the realm of reality.


We have had patented working prototypes for at least a few decades now. I do not like the get involved in defending or arguments in favour of certain devices as i have not held it in my own hands yet. What i CAN do , and prove, is that the concepts and principles are very real and well known about in certain scientific circles.


an example is "AmericanAntiGrav"


They carry the work of scientist/inventors that have working devices and patents so i am not sure what your problem is with them.....

Stellar



posted on Sep, 18 2006 @ 04:57 PM
link   

Originally posted by Daedalus3
back to topic?
Any interplanetary manned mission requires the resources of all space-faring nations and others too.


It might be less of a burden on each but is that really the case? I think this is only true, to some marginal extent, if we are going there by old fashioned rocket...


I seriously doubt we can see men on Mars soon unless there is a consolidated effort on the comparable to the ISS.


How much effort did the rest of the world really put into the ISS? If we want to go we could go within mere years if that long.


We have lots of capable space agencies out there and we need all to get to the moon and beyond esp since disjoint funding is a very cruial aspect for the sustainibility of any long term projects.


Once again assuming the use of rockets and a concerted effort to stick to them when we have so many other more effective working technologies.


Once we can sort out the issues of tech-transfer, siphenig of tech for ulterior military motives etc etc. this can continue.
A joint Mission for anything, base on the moon/mars etc. will be much more efficient than a unilateral approach.


Joint missions are notorious for the wastage ( look at European and Asian efforts for joint fighter design) as so many players wants so many different things at different times with changing political themes just for good measure.


Along with disjoint funding, there are obv more minds working and simply more number of launch vehicles available.
Hope it is a joint mission. Humans would have been on the moon by the late 1950s if it was a consolidated effort.


Humans could have been on the moon by the early 60's had American agencies wanted to work together or were for that mattered forced to do so and it really has nothing to do with 'outsourcing' as there were no immensely complex issues to resolve compared to what was invested in nuclear weaponry and energy.

Stellar



posted on Sep, 18 2006 @ 06:56 PM
link   

Originally posted by StellarX
So their using Anti grav technology but we can not? Why assume aliens interested enough in a planet were so many ( you apparently included) still have issues with anti gravity? I know it's not a great argument but i sometimes wonder how average ignorant posters can so readily believe in aliens and the like when they so completely lack the scientific background to base their opinions on....

Alien species could be millions of years ahead of us (technologicaly speaking)...And if thats the case...then they would have FAR FAR better tech. Would you not agree?
I dont think there interested in us because of our anti-grav tech...I think there watching us in much the same way that we would watch an ant farm.



Why are we so backwards that all our technology must be reversed engineered? Did the wright brothers see alien spaceships and based their machines on that?

of course the Wright brothers didn't copy an alien design, and I think as a civilization were pretty smart, and can overcome any task.
But I think Anti-grav is out of are reach...for the moment. And I will likely think that until they show off a fuel-less spacecraft. Or until I have a lot of proof to sway my decision.
I think we came up with props, jet engines, scram jets,& PDE's, And I think the best hope we (the average joe) have of being able to go into space is by using a space elevator, Hopefully one will be functional with in 2 decades.



Once it's clear that we are not alone the whole religious control system will suffer a blow from which it might very well never recover. They control us through artificially induced ignorance and isolating us from understanding our roots ( i believe we are not genetically 'pure' and not just the result of evolutionary mechanisms) and the cardinal principle there is to convince us that there is nothing 'out there' and that even if it is it's too far away to get here with enough to bother us with.

Just for the record, I'm an Atheist.
Much of the chaos in the world to day is because of religion. (I'm mainly referring to terrorist, where their Islam religion tells them to die for it, and they will get 72 virgins waiting for them......Which...BTW, is the stupidest thing I've ever heard. But these wacko's believe it and go drive a car rigged with explosives into a market to kill as many as possible.
The world would be a better place if there were no religions.



We have had patented working prototypes for at least a few decades now.

links please? and I would like the links to be linked to the US patent Office site, to the exact patents your referring to.



posted on Sep, 18 2006 @ 07:53 PM
link   
SORRY FOR THE OFFTOPIC POST, OP.



(I'm mainly referring to terrorist, where their Islam religion tells them to die for it, and they will get 72 virgins waiting for them......Which...BTW, is the stupidest thing I've ever heard. But these wacko's believe it and go drive a car rigged with explosives into a market to kill as many as possible.


It's all in the interpretation. Christians misinterpret the Bible as well, with sometimes extremely bloody results(it's just in a Christian dominited nation, you're unlikely to hear about in the MSM).

Compare the Quran with the Bible in this link.

www.skepticsannotatedbible.com...

There are actually over 500 more references dealing with Cruety and Intolerance in the Bible then in the Quran.

Cruelty in the Quran

Cruelty in the Bible

[edit on 18-9-2006 by sardion2000]



posted on Sep, 19 2006 @ 04:54 AM
link   

Originally posted by StellarX

It might be less of a burden on each but is that really the case? I think this is only true, to some marginal extent, if we are going there by old fashioned rocket...


Well, rockets are quite the fashion today..lets not just discard our primary means for space flight just yet.


I seriously doubt we can see men on Mars soon unless there is a consolidated effort on the comparable to the ISS.


How much effort did the rest of the world really put into the ISS? If we want to go we could go within mere years if that long.


Quite a bit considering the earlier skepticism of it being an all American thing.
Spaceflights to the ISS were totally non american for a period of 2 years. Another good practical example of disjoint launch vehicle programs.


Once again assuming the use of rockets and a concerted effort to stick to them when we have so many other more effective working technologies.


Like?
Anti-gravity? Seems the debate is already on
Ion drives? very low-mass payloads..
Pardon my ignorance but could you share/explain these new alternative methods?And hence reluctance to involve other countries?



Joint missions are notorious for the wastage ( look at European and Asian efforts for joint fighter design) as so many players wants so many different things at different times with changing political themes just for good measure.


On the contrary a joint mission with multiple govts ensures longevity of the program as mission objectives aren't continuously plagued by the whims and fancies of changing govts. A commitment at the international level spans individual sessions in political office.
The European efforts for a joint space program are evident.
Its shrewd to ignore that and concentrate on the fighter program.




Along with disjoint funding, there are obv more minds working and simply more number of launch vehicles available.
Hope it is a joint mission. Humans would have been on the moon by the late 1950s if it was a consolidated effort.


Humans could have been on the moon by the early 60's had American agencies wanted to work together or were for that mattered forced to do so and it really has nothing to do with 'outsourcing' as there were no immensely complex issues to resolve compared to what was invested in nuclear weaponry and energy.

Stellar


Still they would've been there before that if it was a consolidated effort nonetheless.
The requirement of the infrastructural facilities to setup a efficienct control and command structure(including deep space rescue) for a interplanetary manned mission would need the involvement of many parties contributing at the same time.
Lets not forget the millions of ways the Apollo program cold have gone wrong and didn't because of the hurried and pressurised environment of a space race.
We don't want that on a manned Mars mission.

[edit on 19-9-2006 by Daedalus3]



posted on Sep, 19 2006 @ 02:01 PM
link   

Originally posted by Daedalus3
Well, rockets are quite the fashion today..lets not just discard our primary means for space flight just yet.


True enough but lets not kid ourselves that it's the best way to go about doing things.


Quite a bit considering the earlier skepticism of it being an all American thing.
Spaceflights to the ISS were totally non american for a period of 2 years. Another good practical example of disjoint launch vehicle programs.


As i remember not all that much happened in the first two years and much of what did was sent there by Russian rocket? I think this has much to do with the fact that the ISS ( if it's doing what they tell us it is ) is a pretty dumb idea that most involve realise this full well.


Like?
Anti-gravity? Seems the debate is already on
Ion drives? very low-mass payloads..
Pardon my ignorance but could you share/explain these new alternative methods?And hence reluctance to involve other countries?


Nuclear/anti grav/mag lev type payload launches and probably a few more I'm not even considering. Fact is we need nothing more than a civilian space program based on anti gravity but once again anti grav transport would destroy so much of their control mechanisms ( GM destroyed the electric car infrastructure they built up just because they did not break down fast enough to bring in money) of humanity. Imagine how the world would change when the cost of transportation falls by a factor of ten right from the start....


On the contrary a joint mission with multiple govts ensures longevity of the program as mission objectives aren't continuously plagued by the whims and fancies of changing govts.


Even one government can not seem to keep it's mind strait for a 4 year period ( well on issues the public consider important anyways) so it's pretty obvious to me that joint programs do not normally work well and certainly not when the people of various countries actually want it.


A commitment at the international level spans individual sessions in political office.
The European efforts for a joint space program are evident.
Its shrewd to ignore that and concentrate on the fighter program.


Sure they work together well when it suits their one world government aims ( CFR/TC/Bilderberg etc etc) but when it comes to what the actual people want such programs will be hurt by extra national cooperation as they will always have other countries to blame for the hold ups.


Still they would've been there before that if it was a consolidated effort nonetheless.


Based on what evidence? Do you really think that governments such as the USA and Russia would share the glory when they are in fact using their own citizens funds for it anyways? It's not like they pay for it so why share the glory and stature?


The requirement of the infrastructural facilities to setup a efficienct control and command structure(including deep space rescue) for a interplanetary manned mission would need the involvement of many parties contributing at the same time.


WHY? Where is the evidence? Deep space rescue!!!? You goto be kidding me!


Lets not forget the millions of ways the Apollo program cold have gone wrong and didn't because of the hurried and pressurised environment of a space race.


Plenty of people died anyways but it was still largely national efforts by two independent countries.


We don't want that on a manned Mars mission.

[edit on 19-9-2006 by Daedalus3]


Then we build two or three ships with different technologies to ensure success. If we could manage so few deaths and loss of equipment back in the 60's it really is not fair to suggest that we are hampered by technology or safety considerations imo. This is ALL politics and what they KNOW will be much harder to hide once we actually have humans there.

Stellar



posted on Sep, 22 2006 @ 02:22 PM
link   

Originally posted by SteveR
There will be no 4.0ghz till 2007


Actually there is a guy on the web(host yourself.com ) that overclocked well over 5.2 Ghz!

And I have been running my 3.4Ghz at 4. Ghz (940FSB 5:4) since 2004 air cooled.

Or do you mean from the manufacture?



posted on Sep, 22 2006 @ 05:33 PM
link   
Lol.... how did we get from China-Russia joint Mars Mission to aliens again??

Here is a new link involving NASA chiefs who will visit China and get a peak at their Aerospace program.

abcnews.go.com...


--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

As far as Anti-Gravity and UFOs go....

My understanding is that UFOs must use some type of Anti-Grav. Otherwise occupants aboard their ships would be killed by g forces. Unless the occupants are computers/androids. Or unless the occupants are biologically fundamentally much different than ourselves.

But then how do you explain their ability to fly at low altitudes and not burn up? Again it can be explained with an Anti-Grav device or perhaps advanced metallurgy?

But what of UFOs being seen coming out of bodies of water. Again can be explained by some sort of repulsive acceleration field which repels all matter.

I think that fundamentally we just don't have quite a good enough grip on reality to understand how they do that. Probably for good reason.... can you imagine invisible terrorists? Or terrorists with Anti-Grav?! Not a good thing. Socially we have a longer way to go before youd even want to see such exotic technologies.

Certainly, while aliens might regard us with a certain amount of curiousity.... the fact remains that we are far below their level. Still, I think we possess a level of consciousness that will allow us to someday figure much of reality out and be able to do things that seem impossible to present day science.




posted on Sep, 26 2006 @ 12:41 PM
link   

Originally posted by Scramjet76
Lol.... how did we get from China-Russia joint Mars Mission to aliens again??


I dont know! Thanks for the link.
It seems like it could turn out to be a China-Russia-US Mission?

AlBeMeT



posted on Sep, 27 2006 @ 12:13 AM
link   
I dunno about that.

It actually doesn't seem that way and I'm not sure why not...
I think US has something against China because they are commies (or because we are seriously in debt to China) but I can't figure it out.............We colaborate with Russia and they are commies also.
Maybe because we are so in-debt to the Chinese we don't want to give certain technologies to them and give them a further advantage.... I have no idea really. I'm sure they could offer something to the space program... even though they are definitely behind Russia and ourselves.

I'm sure there are ways for them to contribute. THe professor brings up a good point...


But Eligar Sadeh, a professor of space studies at the University of North Dakota, said there are always benefits from international cooperation and pointed to U.S.-Russia space cooperation as an example. During the 2 1/2 years that NASA's shuttle fleet was grounded after the Columbia disaster in 2003, the United States relied on the Russian Soyuz vehicle to ferry U.S. astronauts to the space station.



posted on Sep, 27 2006 @ 12:25 AM
link   
its all political.

Its not just cause there communists. Its all the factors...Like how Taiwan is a US ally, we think of it as a seperate country from China...But China doesn't, and many think tehre building up there military to "re-take" Taiwan. Then there North Korea...Which is a puppet and China is holding the strings.

And the US hasn't nor will ever completely except Russia...partialy because there communists.



new topics

top topics



 
0
<< 1  2    4 >>

log in

join