I personally found Titor more convincing than Lear. While I still wonder about Titor this hypothesis is crumbling like cake.

Originally posted by TheAnt

Originally posted by jra

Originally posted by TheAnt
Can you see past the gases? If you can, then you can talk all you want that he's wrong. But seeing how you can't, you really don't know whats past the gases and clouds and therefore your point is invalid.

What point is invalid? I was asking a question as to why a "real" photo of Saturn supposedly looks so different from what we know, but looking at the real thing through a telescope, it looks just like the Saturn we know. John never said anything about a photo taken on Saturn under the clouds and gasses, he said a "picture of Saturn". I take this to mean of the planet itself. Thus, why I asked him to elaborate.

Well, a "picture of saturn" can mean anything. Just like one could say there is a "picture of home" taken from inside the home and not outside. And as I said before, we know Saturn only by what it looks like outside, never have we seen the inner-ness of the planet.

I guess it was just a reaction on my part because of the skepticism in this thread.

Thank you TheAnt. While I am fairly new to this board, IMHO the skepticism is overboard. I understand people have their opinions, but alot of the forums on this website are based on things that are not 100% known. Just because you haven't seen it means it's not true? Well I guess there is no NWO or Secret Societies, no 9/11 coverup, no secret government projects, no lost civilizations, no god, no problem with the way the Katrina victims were dealt with, and last but certainly not least no extra-terrestrials. I understand everyone has a right to their opinion, I joined this place to get an alternative theory on things. I don't believe everything everyone writes, but i try to read everything i can. Maybe some people don't want to hear what JohnLear has to say but I DO. And it's not just this thread. It seems like every thread he's on somebody has something negative to say.

Thank you JohnLear for your posts

Originally posted by SearchEngine

Originally posted by TheAnt

Originally posted by jra

Originally posted by TheAnt
Can you see past the gases? If you can, then you can talk all you want that he's wrong. But seeing how you can't, you really don't know whats past the gases and clouds and therefore your point is invalid.

What point is invalid? I was asking a question as to why a "real" photo of Saturn supposedly looks so different from what we know, but looking at the real thing through a telescope, it looks just like the Saturn we know. John never said anything about a photo taken on Saturn under the clouds and gasses, he said a "picture of Saturn". I take this to mean of the planet itself. Thus, why I asked him to elaborate.

Well, a "picture of saturn" can mean anything. Just like one could say there is a "picture of home" taken from inside the home and not outside. And as I said before, we know Saturn only by what it looks like outside, never have we seen the inner-ness of the planet.

I guess it was just a reaction on my part because of the skepticism in this thread.

Thank you TheAnt. While I am fairly new to this board, IMHO the skepticism is overboard. I understand people have their opinions, but alot of the forums on this website are based on things that are not 100% known. Just because you haven't seen it means it's not true? Well I guess there is no NWO or Secret Societies, no 9/11 coverup, no secret government projects, no lost civilizations, no god, no problem with the way the Katrina victims were dealt with, and last but certainly not least no extra-terrestrials. I understand everyone has a right to their opinion, I joined this place to get an alternative theory on things. I don't believe everything everyone writes, but i try to read everything i can. Maybe some people don't want to hear what JohnLear has to say but I DO. And it's not just this thread. It seems like every thread he's on somebody has something negative to say.

Thank you JohnLear for your posts

That's exactly it man, skepticism at things they don't believe when there's no proof. But when it's somethhing they think is right, even if there isn't proof, then they're not skeptical at all... It's a bit of a hypocrisy if ya ask me.

Originally posted by ferretman2
I didn't realize that I was insulting him.......

Originally posted by ferretman2
I don't know how old a certain individual is here but they obviously need to see a head doctor.

Originally posted by Prote

Dr. Norman Bergrun is an alumnus of Ames Research Laboratory, NACA (National Advisory Committee for Aeronautics) predecessor of Ames Research Center, NASA where he worked twelve years as a research scientist. At Ames, he pioneered the setting of design criteria for airplane thermal ice-prevention and the developing of roll stability laws for airplanes, missiles and rockets.

He joined Lockheed Missiles and Space Company (now Lockheed Martin) where he was manager of the planning and analysis of flight tests for the Navy Polaris Underwater Launch Missile System. During his thirteen years at Lockheed, he also served as a senior scientist having responsible analysis cognizance of special space-satellite applications.

Bergrun holds a BSME degree from Cornell University, an LLB from LaSalle University Extension, a DSc (Hon) from World University and a California Professional Engineer (PE) License. He also has engaged in graduate aerospace studies at Stanford University. He is a founder of the California Society of Professional Engineers Education Foundation, is author of two books Tomorrow's Technology Today and Ringmakers of Saturn and has published over 100 papers. Two recent manuscripts, Lunar Life Forms: Revelations of Apollo 14 and Mars Puts on a Good Face: The Masquerade, have been registered with the Library of Congress, Washington, D. C. He has lectured in the United States, Canada, England and Europe.


Credited with numerous awards and citations including the California Society of Professional Engineers Archimedes Engineering Achievement Award, and Special Service Citations for contributions to the AIAA National Public Policy and to the Regional Sections Activity Committees, he is listed in Marquis "Who's Who in the World", "Who's Who in America", "Who's Who in Science and Engineering", and other reference works.

Now that's a high credibility factor of Dr. Norman Bergrun. A very highly qualified scientist, engineer and author.

So he couldn't be talking through his hat in his book, Ringmakers of Saturn. There's got to be some truth in it.

And what of the pics that many members have posted on this thread? The objects look mysterious enough to invite debate and not get debunked at the outset which would be the case if they were easily recognizable moonlets, debris. and so on.

The truth is out there!

Sorry for not replying sooner, ive been workin 14hr days and tryin to switch apartments back to the newly rebuilt burned out shell of a building i had once before. had to run my own cable, but got net and tv back up and runnin...woohoo

To all the posters who think i asked you to believe Mr.Lear. I did no such thing. I suggested you stop with the name calling and ridicule of a member of this board, which is against the T&C and get back to the discussion at hand. Intelligent conversation can be had without suggestion someone go see a head doctor or calling someone a loon or questioning the age of a poster. Mr.Lear is privy to and friends with some very hi level "in the know" people, and has always answered questions about his information with class and a level head. If he knows he will tell you or give his opinion, if he doesnt he will let you know also. Unlike some who either run away, abandon or try to defame other posters when questioned. I was just directing the large amount of questions to the specialty thread created for Mr.Lear so this discussion could continue about the topic at hand and not stray off in other directions.

With that said, continue with the civil discussion gang. Saturns rings has been an interesting read so far. Good thread mikesingh, thumbs up.

it's been an interesting read until these peeps started arguing over John Lear... get over it already or start another topic to continue, sheesh...

[edit on 23 9Sep 06 by m3rlz]

Originally posted by m3rlz
it's been an interesting read until these peeps started arguing over John Lear... get over it already or start another topic to continue, sheesh...
[edit on 23 9Sep 06 by m3rlz]

Well, this is what's so frustrating. You will notice that John has abandoned this thread now so I will add my final 2 cents on this issue to all who wish to demand proof (when they KNOW it isn't there) and ridicule a member.

1. Anyone who reads these type of claims, theories etc you are NOT asked, told or requested to believe what you are reading, simply consider it.

2. If you wish to add that you think it is far fetched, by all means do so but explain why and do it civilly. Asking WHY something thinks something is perfectly OK

3. Anyone you suspect of believing said story, you do not have any responsibility whatsoever to save me or anyone who may believe it and neither do they WANT to be saved.


We humans need to realise that we don't know anything. We think we know things about space, our solar system and the universe but for ALL of this information, we are reliant on others. We have to trust those others to provide us with the correct information. Unfortunately, who we all rely on for this information is not to be trusted so for those that have lost any faith in what govt and media tell us, we listen to all theories (however bizarre) and reserve belief or judgement on it's truth until there is enough to constitue the personal proof we all seek for ourselves and each of us will have different proof requirements.

I don't have a problem with Mr. Lear.........

The problem I have are when claims are made you are told to buy a book.

If it is not true that there are large spaceships floating around or that other humans on everyother planet have chosen to ignore us......

then people are being scamed. I did not think selling a product was allowed on this site by submitters.

I do not know how/if Mr. Lear is involved with the book (monetarily), but if he was, I view it as someone who could be taking advantage of others.

To be told to buy a book to read about the 'claims' he made is wrong.

If he was true and wanted people to view this 'extrodinary infromation' he would post the book on-line. After all what he says is vastly more important than money.

Now that's a high credibility factor of Dr. Norman Bergrun. A very highly qualified scientist, engineer and author.

So he couldn't be talking through his hat in his book, Ringmakers of Saturn. There's got to be some truth in it.

And what of the pics that many members have posted on this thread? The objects look mysterious enough to invite debate and not get debunked at the outset which would be the case if they were easily recognizable moonlets, debris. and so on.

The truth is out there!

Here's the thing..

There are many, many, more qualified scientists that would disagree with Dr. Bergrun. Are we to ignore THEM (And massive amounts of evidence to the contrary) because of something one other scientist claims to be true?

That's exactly it man, skepticism at things they don't believe when there's no proof. But when it's somethhing they think is right, even if there isn't proof, then they're not skeptical at all... It's a bit of a hypocrisy if ya ask me.

Yes! Exactly. That IS hypocrisy, and that is what I was pointing out if you reread my posts. People think its okay to challege religous beliefs, because the general sentiment in this community is that religon is bad and flawed, however, when someone starts to talk about proof for some of the OTHER claims, not unlike Mr. Lear's claims, then the skeptics are the ones at fault.

The never ending cycle!

MY FANTASY IS MORE REAL THAN YOUR FANTASY!!

Ha ha

To be told to buy a book to read about the 'claims' he made is wrong.

That will be ignored as it was said by Mr. Lear and not a mere mortal.

Conspiracy?

I remember when I made my huge post how people laughed at it too and just couldn't comprehend that Earth is just a big prison planet, and that there are countless aliens out there some even looking just like us. I'm glad John has credibility where I did not (yet). Thanks John!

What better way to protect a sphere from outside objects, ... intelligent or otherwise.

Consider the thought of an orbit, and how much more difficult it is to maintain such an orbit without a collision with lets say, an orbit "filter" made of solids that circumvent the horizontal equator and basically make it near impossible to easily achieve any orbit with a large sphere.

I am wondering if this would also cause a gravity spike at the equator of this sphere that would in fact help to extend a portion of gravity from the sphere to the platter, due to the mass of the platter itself. A platter "filter" with a bit of borrowed gravity from its host sure would help pull in random cosmic debris as well as other objects, intelligent or otherwise. And the farther the platter extends is the farther away from a sphere one would have to orbit to be clear of collisions.

A "Hill platter" instead of a "Hill sphere" except with some similar properties, but borrowing gravity instead of having only it's own.



You think if we were to mine the moon and begin to crumble it up and place the "tailings" in a consistent ring pattern like Saturn has?, that we may in fact provide a little extra protection from outside objects from colliding with earth, or from something easily and quietly orbiting the earth in closer proximity?

And again... do you think this additional planetary extension of "surface area" may also assist in acting as an antenna or "collector" of cosmic space energies that otherwise would have just gone by a planet and just continued timelessly on its merry way thru space?



Dreams are just unrealized realities, are they not?

If you were to get rid of the earth there would be massive problems. One of the most important would be that the oceans would not have tides anymore. Tides enable weather patterns to form (one out o many), keeps the water airated. Without the tides the oceans would become stagnant, killing fish, which is a major food source for the world, let alone all the other 'items' we use from the sea.

If there is no sea then the people of the world will die.

Here is a beautiful photograph of Saturn taken by the Hubble telescope in ultraviolet light. It is assumed that the glowing, swirling material at Saturn's poles are 'Auroras' which are more than a thousand miles above the cloud tops. Scientists still aren't sure how exactly these may be formed. It's conjecture so far.


J.T. Trauger (Jet Propulsion Laboratory)

Or are these reflections of some 'alien activity' on the surface of Saturn?

If so, be prepared for another cover-up operation with NASA insisting that they're nothing but 'Auroras' produced by ionisation, Hydrogen molecules and blah blah..The NASA Spin Doctors to the fore!




[edit on 24-9-2006 by mikesingh]

Originally posted by mikesingh
Here is a beautiful photograph of Saturn taken by the Hubble telescope in ultraviolet light. It is assumed that the glowing, swirling material at Saturn's poles are 'Auroras' which are more than a thousand miles above the cloud tops. Scientists still aren't sure how exactly these may be formed. It's conjecture so far.


J.T. Trauger (Jet Propulsion Laboratory)

Or are these reflections of some 'alien activity' on the surface of Saturn?

If so, be prepared for another cover-up operation with NASA insisting that they're nothing but 'Auroras' produced by ionisation, Hydrogen molecules and blah blah..The NASA Spin Doctors to the fore!
[edit on 24-9-2006 by mikesingh]

Aren't auroras caused by ionisation of solar flares into an atmosphere? If so, I don't think that if solar flares get out that far they'd have that much power in them...

Originally posted by ferretman2
If you were to get rid of the moon there would be massive problems. One of the most important would be that the oceans would not have tides anymore. Tides enable weather patterns to form (one out o many), keeps the water airated. Without the tides the oceans would become stagnant, killing fish, which is a major food source for the world, let alone all the other 'items' we use from the sea.

If there is no sea then the people of the world will die.

(bold text corrected by smirkley)

I partially agree with you.

You are correct yes, if in fact the "local" life forms were evolved on that planet and/or completely dependent on an active ecosystem to support their life. Kinda like we here on earth can not yet survive without one. (Although we are very rapidly destroying ours as we speak.)

But just for the sake of conversation, lets say we are recent visitors here only and populating this planet for whatever purpose. Surely we would bring with us sustainable elements of survival in the event there was no pre-existing supporting ecosystem here already, or bring an ability to create a sustainable environment, or if there was only an ecosystem that did not serve our survival needs to provide one that supplements.

Some interesting contemplations indeed.