Originally posted by nablator
Facts. And serious research.

Too vague... I was looking for something more singular
Don't be paranoid. I am not against you, on the contrary.

Moi? Paranoid? Ummmmmm Not
But is this really about one AGAINST another? I though it was a forum to exchange ideas... but your right... with all the drama going on last few
months you could be right...
I am not an expert of image analysis or lunar geology. I am not going to debunk your claims. You may be right for all I know. People who see nothing
but rocks on the moon are the majority, even on ATS.

I have no problem with debunking... if one takes the time to show with facts and serious research WHY I might be wrong... but just saying "They are
rocks ... you need a psychiatrist!" doesn't cut it

Doesn't necessarily change my opinion, but I am more apt to take that person seriously
They don't bother posting in this thread because they believe there is no serious point to discuss.

Well I don't know which side is in the majority... perhaps we ought to run a silent vote

I agree some may not post as they see no point, and that
is fine... but there are others who don't post because A) one liners like "Wow really cool" are not allowed; B) see the 'intimidation' meted out
to those who dare speak out with a 'way out there theory' and do not wish to be in the firing line; and C) They do not have the skills nor the time
to make useful contributions, so just remain spectators
I know this to be true because of the U2U's and emails I receive... and even some from skeptics...
But that is all really irrelevant. What is relevant is that its not all about pictures
You need to build a better argument.

Yes and we have tried... but it matters little what is presented... the result is the same... Do you know how many official military documents I have
posted in many threads that support what I say? Its like pulling teeth from a snail to even get people to follow the links let alone read them..
Yet Mike Singh's 'tabloid' approach nets amazing results.... go figure
I'm here to help, however small my contribution will be. Did you read my posts about the location of the "walled compound" and Daedalus?

Help is good... but I did just glance over your posts and filed the images to study when I have time... right now I have little time to work on images
or webpages... and don't have a staff yet
There is a basic misunderstanding there. The issue is with the method. I would like to see a well presented case, not half-baked attempts to discredit
NASA.

Well I don't really have anything against NASA... They are a front and they have three faces. I am more interested in the 'other' space program...
but no matter what you say... the majority of people use NASA as a catch all for anything Space...
Besides if NASA was SERIOUSLY worried about this there would have been actions taken... This might still happen with the internet 'crackdown' but I
doubt it...

You need skeptics to point out flaws in your logic, that you need to refute if you want to build a serious case.

Well this may surprise you but there are a few skeptics here I take very seriously. ArMaP is one... and he has been very helpful on occasion...

And
there is another who shall remain nameless who surprised the heck out of me by telling me he works on the very ships I am seeking... but holds me to a
bond to not tell...
How do I know he is not 'pulling my leg'? Believe me I know...
On your web site, you present interpretations before analysis.

Well at this point in time I am still in the info gathering stage... not the hard analysis stage... the reason is the overwhelming amount of
information that has been finding its way to my inbox... Pegasus has been around a little over a year, and despite your analysis of our "tabloid
style' you might be surprised at the list of names that take us very seriously and understand the presentation... perhaps one day when I know who you
are I might share some of the real stuff... but you would have to sign several hundreds oaths first
You and JL are shooting yourself in the foot with each claim "this is a tower/city/airport/dancing elephant".


The elephants were to
help others pinpoint a location... worked too...
If you're only interested in tabloid style, don't be surprised readers won't take you seriously. Don't jump at conclusions before considering at
least a few possible explanations.

Well at this point in time the opposite is true... I am actually surprised at the level of those who take us seriously...
But here we have a problem... and this is what REALLY SUCKS... many times you are given real solid info, but you cannot reveal your source. Now I know
skeptics pounce on this and cry 'foul' but that is the reality
Let me toss out an example... you find a certain patent that is in effect a 'cloaking device' (and a whole lot more.. ) The patent is available in
the public domain. So you track down the inventor and actually get a response...
So now you have the patent, and direct contact with the inventor... and then after telling you what he can... adds this...

Hi, Ron...Good Morning!
Thanks for the note and you certainly touch on points of similarity and interest (proving that great minds think alike!).
I am free to talk about any of my published US Patents which are in the public domain. I am, however, under an edict from DoD under the NSA to
'report any inquiries relative to the stealth patent'. I had a phone call from a person who identified himself as an 'Undersectetary of Defense'
and the person read a statement to me which I later found was excerpted from the National Security Act, as amended. I was 'ordered' to report any
inquiries of any kind, by anyone, to DoD relative to that case (patent). I've only had to do that one time in 20 years when a group of Isreali's,
based in Philly, contacted me relative to undertaking collaboration on some 'project' in Haifa. I reported this as instructed and the group
'disappeared' shortly thereafter.

There is a whole lot more to this...
What happened is I was looking for an answer to something space related, only to fall into a very deep rabbit hole and found much more than I
bargained for...
So therin lies the problem with making a 'serious presentation' John has been in this for decades, has CIA background and a Father that worked with
TT Brown on anti gravity for the DoD in the fifties (Project Winterhaven) So what to do?
You can 'spill the beans' and then the info stops, because the word will spread quickly that you cannot be trusted, or you can toss the info 'out
there" like fishing and see what comes back...
Even if you gave the name of a source, it would do no good without documentation... but the very possession of such documentation is a treasonable
offense...
So all you can do is use the info they supply you to track down hints and obscure references that are in the public domain
Perhaps I missed it LOL I claim sleep deprivation
But if ya want a 'secret' directory... I have one that has all the rover pictures in full living color... Shhh don't tell anyone cuz last time they
moved it