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.

 

inside dulce 5th level blood lab photo

page: 6
9
<< 3  4  5    7  8  9 >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Nov, 25 2006 @ 04:29 PM
link   
John, do you know where the entrance is exactly on the mesa or know of any hologram-camo that may be hiding said entrance? Seems like the only way anyone will get the proof they want is to see/experience it first hand. If you have anything more specific (then 2 1/2mi NW of town) Im sure a few of us will be curious enough to check it out.




posted on Nov, 25 2006 @ 07:14 PM
link   

Originally posted by HankMcCoy


Some ships need to be sunk, I think, and in this case, one of the big ones would be the factioning of religons based around supposed Aliens involvement.


Why? To convince you? Some ships need to be sunk coz you and other people like you can finally be happy and get rid off your scepticism? Don't think so. Whatever is being said about Dulce is known by everybody. Leave it or take it. Nobody is forcing you to accept it.


For myself I think John has been patient with some of the remarks and insults some of you have made. I believe he has a dry sense of humor and he quacks me up.

The only proof the skeptics here are going to accept (yes you have a right to be a skeptic) is a live visit up close and personnel contact, ain't gonna happen. Let me tell you it doesn't matter how open minded you think you are or how brave you think you are.... (if they come for you and they may just one day come for you)... you will see that maybe you aren't who you thought you were.

I have shared experiences here with you about the Grey's and you just think I'm a crazy old woman. Your mistake is not going with your gut and knowing and being able to sense truths, this is what is so nice about the net. The human race still does not trust in one another.

I know I have and I know others here have tried to share with you information but that isn't good enough you need the PROOF. From what I see there is a lot of proof but nothing is good enough for you and you come here and take out your frustrations on those of us whom try to make you aware.

For the skeptics here I will say you probably aren't going to get the proof you seek here so why waste you time. Those of us that "know" may just stop coming here and giving you information since it seems you are not satisfied with the way it is or isn't presented.

I have a suggestion which I am sure you will not take.

Evolve.

Sometimes to move forward you must take a step back. The answers are the simplest the ones you always overlook.

You must all have your own faith, hope, love within yourself and share and spread peace.

How do you want Earth to be? How do you want to live... then begin to do what is needed to make it that way.


Observe50 You have voted observe50 for the Way Above Top Secret award. You have two more votes this month. The most beautiful post in this thread. I wish we'd all be more capable for messages like that. Unfortunately is about bashing and scofing each other.



posted on Nov, 25 2006 @ 07:16 PM
link   
I believe John should at least be allowed to respond to our questions.
I understand Skeptic's intentions by denying his posting rights but this thread will go nowhere otherwise.
The lab photo to even the most untrained eye (mine for example) does not look
highly convincing and could have been taken from any number of b-movies i've seen in my time so I am highly suspicious of it, but simultaneously I have no idea what a lab in an underground base is supposed to look like so I cant prove / disprove this example.

I believe John Lear may well have some kind of undeniable proof in relation to Dulce, he may not want to disclose this information as he feels this may endanger the people from who he has obtained this info, if that is the case I respect that, however it also frustrating for those of us who would like a definite answer in relation to the possible existence of the base. (myself included)
If John cannot provide us with such proof then perhaps he could be about to point us in the direction of the truth but I believe it would be much healthier if he could answer our questions directly and let's see where this goes.



posted on Nov, 25 2006 @ 07:17 PM
link   
Back to the thread subject. Supposedly all the lighting in Dulce is magnetically induced and everywhere looks like natural sunlight. .....but in the picture it looks clear to me in the background the brighter light is most likely outside light, which wouldnt make it an underground picture.

Dango



posted on Nov, 25 2006 @ 07:29 PM
link   

Originally posted by Dango
Supposedly all the lighting in Dulce is magnetically induced and everywhere looks like natural sunlight.


Post a source or your spreading disinformation also.



posted on Nov, 25 2006 @ 07:45 PM
link   

Originally posted by Telos

Originally posted by HankMcCoy


Some ships need to be sunk, I think, and in this case, one of the big ones would be the factioning of religons based around supposed Aliens involvement.


Why? To convince you? Some ships need to be sunk coz you and other people like you can finally be happy and get rid off your scepticism? Don't think so. Whatever is being said about Dulce is known by everybody. Leave it or take it. Nobody is forcing you to accept it.



No, if you read the entire conversation arch, you will understand that the 'ships' in this case are false truths. His information might sink a lot of the false truths of religon and economy. Skepticism has nothing to do with it. I am a firm believer in a lot of 'unusual' theories, my beef is being told that someone has information they are holding back and I should just take his word for it and deal with it.

You don't seem to have followed much of the point. Reread what johnlear said when I asked him about his opinion vs. a fact. Me being a skeptic has NOTHING to do with me pointing out that when someone makes a claim that they say is FACT, they need something to back it up. We are not the ones that asked for the proof, johnlear is the one who told us that he had it. We called his bluff and he got a little miffed.

Whatever johnlear says he knows is obviously NOT known by everyone, or else his posts about having information we dont is inacurate, and if that is inacurate, what else that he has said is inacurate?



posted on Nov, 25 2006 @ 07:59 PM
link   
Its pretty clear that people have the right to come here to discuss the subject, whether they are skeptical or overly credulous or already convinced. HankMcCoy has every bit as much right as John Lear to discuss the subject. Lets all try to get back on subject, lets focus on this photo and it provenance.


dango
in the picture it looks clear to me in the background the brighter light is most likely outside light

Why do you beleive this?

i85.photobucket.com...

I don't think there is enough information to be able to say its natural lighting. The photo is just terrible. The brightness wouldn't indicate if its bright outdoor lighting, it could be that the photo was exposed poorly.

Here's a good example, from :

www.naturespic.com... - Exposure Control
By Rob L. Suisted




Both photos are taken at the same time under the same conditions, but exposed differently. The effect is dramatic. You definitly can't tell from the brightness of the photo if it was a light by light coming through a window or indoor artificial lighting.
With colour film at least, indoor lighting, often, produces a colour shift, thats why your pictures from indoors, if you don't use a flash, look different on the photo than to your eye, the film has slightly different sensitivities to light than the eye. I don't think that there's anyway to tell if thats the case here, since its black and white.

[edit on 25-11-2006 by Nygdan]



posted on Nov, 25 2006 @ 08:19 PM
link   

Originally posted by spookymulder
my post of that picture was mearly to get it debunked and now john lear is post banned not my intention at all. so i suggest we got back onto the picture discussion before that happens to anyone else.
plus i dont really want this thread being locked yet becuase of an argument until we have debunked that picture because i thnk its real.


How do you want this debunked? the photo could have been taken anywhere. Unless one of the members of this site works in that lab at dulce or happens to work in that room where the pic was taken there is no way on earth to prove it is real or not. It is totally pointless to try as there will never be an answer. The photo shows absolutely nothing of interest. This is not a go at the OP but at the photo.

The reason this thread turned the way it did was the picture itself was so underwhelming that it is impossible to stay on topic.

PS no one asked John to reveal names we just wanted the info.

PSS Maybe these people who did go against there terms of employment and speak about confidential information should think more carefully next time about divulging it to someone who is known to post on the internet about such matters and appear on Coast to Coast etc.


TK



posted on Nov, 25 2006 @ 08:34 PM
link   

Originally posted by HankMcCoy


No, if you read the entire conversation arch, you will understand that the 'ships' in this case are false truths. His information might sink a lot of the false truths of religon and economy. Skepticism has nothing to do with it. I am a firm believer in a lot of 'unusual' theories, my beef is being told that someone has information they are holding back and I should just take his word for it and deal with it.

You don't seem to have followed much of the point. Reread what johnlear said when I asked him about his opinion vs. a fact. Me being a skeptic has NOTHING to do with me pointing out that when someone makes a claim that they say is FACT, they need something to back it up. We are not the ones that asked for the proof, johnlear is the one who told us that he had it. We called his bluff and he got a little miffed.

Whatever johnlear says he knows is obviously NOT known by everyone, or else his posts about having information we dont is inacurate, and if that is inacurate, what else that he has said is inacurate?


I agree, I must have misunderstood your post. I apologise



posted on Nov, 25 2006 @ 08:42 PM
link   
I would like to know where the U.S> Government got the authority to place an underground base ON TRIBAL LANDS?

The reservations are sovereign nations, run by the tribes, not the U.S. Government, so who gave them permission to place these installations there?

And if these "bases" exist under Tribal Land, why have Tribes not claimed ownership and removed the U.S. Government people from them, as would be their right.

I do not believe in these bases, as there has not been any concrete proof. Why not get permission from the Tribe who's land it is, and then take a large drilling rig, drill a 6" hole about 3000' feet deep, pack it with high explosives and detonate it? Sure would be interesting to see what happens, yes?



posted on Nov, 25 2006 @ 09:01 PM
link   

I agree, I must have misunderstood your post. I apologise


No worries, mate, anyone that is big enough to apologize is alright in my book.




There is no way to tell where this photo was taken, however, we might have a way to tell WHEN the photo was taken. Is the TAL added after the photo was taken, or at the time of the photo? What about the symbols under it?

Judging from what I have read on the internet, and the general shape of the photograph, I would like to put out the theory that this was taken by a polaroid camera. I am not an expert on polaroids, however, and I was wondering if they put letter on the photos like the one shown. I seem to remember a model that put little red letters/numbers in the bottom right corner.

Thats the best I got right now, I am also trying to identify the appliance in the middle, it looks like a large comercial grade mixer like you would find in a restaraunt.



posted on Nov, 26 2006 @ 03:01 AM
link   
I personally would try to concentrate on the "TAL", and the apparent copyright notice underneath it. It appears to me to be ©SS

I'm going to do some preliminary searching....



posted on Nov, 26 2006 @ 04:18 AM
link   

Originally posted by johnlear
You are going to have to get serious donk_316 and come up with something every single member on ATs will accept as iron clad proof that Dulce exists. Not only that but after I deliver what you ask for (approved by ever single single member of ATS) I want a "Hero of ATS" award for having met the challenge.


This is no simple task and very much relevant to this thread.

Now we have a picture eligibly from Dulce. But is it?

None of us really know. If Mr. Lear presented something from Dulce, the same process would happen all over.

What exactly would cut it? This thread clearly demonstates that a simple picture would not make 100% believers. As pointed out by Mr. Lear, medical reports or sworn affidavits would not cut it either. (as they can all be easily faked)

If he does have a source inside Dulce, (remember Lear never said he had the proof.) what exactly could his source grab that could serve as the ultimate proof that the area exist, and that what he took is really from there?

Dulce stationery? Element 115?

Betty Hill drew a nearly perfect Star Map (with 2 undiscovered G2-type stars!) back in 1961 and that’s not good enough for almost anyone…

What will it take? What would be undeniable proof?

If lives are at stake, what would be worth possibly sacrificing a life over?

A picture from within the base might get people killed, but it won’t prove anything.



[edit on 26/11/06 by ConspiracyNut23]



posted on Nov, 26 2006 @ 04:19 AM
link   

Originally posted by 2stepsfromtop
Why not get permission from the Tribe who's land it is, and then take a large drilling rig, drill a 6" hole about 3000' feet deep, pack it with high explosives and detonate it? Sure would be interesting to see what happens, yes?


IMHO a more rational approach would be to buy the oil rights from whoever has title to the surface - then start sinking 1000m test holes @ 100m intevals in a grid patern

all perfectly legal , and it robs anyone who wants to object of the " excuse " of ` you do not have an explosives permit `

i do not know that US law is , but here [ the UK ] digging / drilling of almost any scope on your own land is pretty much legal

the only serious restrictions i am aware of are in london - where they cite the presence of the underground rail tunnels and millions of miles of utility pipes , conduits and telecoms cables as just cause to require any excavations below a given depth to be licenced

given thet hundreds of sites / year are prospected - and have test bores sunk , all without problems or legal interference - it would certainly be interesting to see what happened - if it is claimed that " there is nothing down there " , what would be the legal basis for objections ?



posted on Nov, 26 2006 @ 04:49 AM
link   
ladies and gentlemen .
I omega have found the secret location of the base!!!


HEHEHEHEHE

it really IS underground


Omega



posted on Nov, 26 2006 @ 04:55 AM
link   
So let me get this right the zetans are man-eating aliens? I don't think they're even carnivores with mouths that size. They probably don't even have teeth! They're way too cute to be gobbling humans twice their size. Stop the hating.



posted on Nov, 26 2006 @ 05:01 AM
link   
All this bickering and finger-pointing is ridiculous.. thats what I was thinking as I read some of the posts. In JohnLear's posts, I never read that he had in his possesion any kind of evidence. The way I understood what he said, he had seen and/or has been shown "affidavits, documents, etc" by his contacts. Someone twisted Jogn's words to mean "I have evidence and I wont show it to you", which is absolutely not what he said. Also, what is this about "sinking ships"? Please...... like some have said already, John or anyone here is under no obligation to do anything. To demand that he possibly endager the lives of other people to satisfy (NOT) some people on the internet is stupid among many other things. I dont think John even has anything that can be called proof to present.



[edit on 26-11-2006 by Unplugged]



posted on Nov, 26 2006 @ 05:05 AM
link   
Interesting photo. Would like to see more information on it though. It's obviously to elaborate to be a KFC test kitchen, but identifying objects in it is difficult. What was described as Dulce base by Paul Bennewitz, fifteen - twenty years ago may not be the same base today. Perhaps the secret underground base no longer exists?

Perhaps localized war took place at the secret base between delta force and a group of EBEs. Bennewitz made a hand drawing of the base grounds and from the drawing their is nothing right out in the open, eg vents surrounded by brush - that sort of thing putting it mildly.

Yes there are a number of alleged underground facilities on or close to Indian Reverses. One theory is to keep media and outsiders away and money is changing hands for the use of land. It's great cover.

Dallas

edit - add link re Castello
www.think-aboutit.com...

edit - add link re Bennewitz
www.ufomind.com...

[edit on 26-11-2006 by Dallas]

[edit on 26-11-2006 by Dallas]



posted on Nov, 26 2006 @ 05:06 AM
link   
i think the photo is such bad quality becauase the guy who supposably took this (thomas castello) would have been shot on site of he was caught with a camera so it was probably a secret camera inbeded into a pair of glasses of summin (a bit james bond i know) but it woulsdnt have a flash which could explain the bad quality.
i dont have any evidence for this its just an idea i had.

[edit on 26/11/2006 by spookymulder]



posted on Nov, 26 2006 @ 06:00 AM
link   
SPOOKYMULDER :

the problem IMHO with your analysis of the fim quality is that :

1 - covert camera technology is of far higher quality than the crap picture offered as " evidence " - just watch any undercover reporters expose footage

2 - the claim that any camera could be smuggled in , then out again opens up the question why have none of these "moles" stolen a "smoking gun " unique artefact / biological speciemin ?

3 - the " risk vs reward " argument - if as claimed he riske being shot for taking that picture - why risk your life to take a crap picture ?

4 - privacy - there is no sign of anyone else in that lab - and the lights are on - if you have access to a lab and can # the door begind you ,

i am not claiming that they could use a tripod , pro lighting etc - but with a few seconds alone in a room - you can get good results .

a simple compact camera [ with auto fucus and exposure ] can be deployed , used and concealed again in a matter of 2 ~3 seconds

lastly , this is just my own opinion - but if i was going to attemot to covertly film inside a facility . where my life would be imperilled just for having a camera on me

then i would train , practice and experiment before attempting to infilrate with my camera - so that i knew what i was cabable of , and more important , bot cabable of

how to use it and conceal it again - in the fastest possible time - without anyone noticing .

how to take sharp , focused and correctly exposed pictures at various ranges - under various lighting conditions

in short - i would make sure that given a photo oportunity - my pictures would be of the highest quality possible - and i would know not to take pictures in certain conditions - because i would know in advance they would turn out crap - or have too high a risk of me being caugut

piss poor planning , leads to piss poor preformance



the best exaple of this sort of preperation was the training the appollo astronauts undertook befor thier missions

each was given extensive training , but military pritographers , the tech support people from kodak , hasselbald etc - and were given cameras of almost identical preformance to what they would use on the moon - to take home and use till they were experts - so that the pics they took on the moon were of the highest quality possible .




top topics



 
9
<< 3  4  5    7  8  9 >>

log in

join