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.

 

To John Lear-Existence of the Dulce Facility

page: 12
17
<< 9  10  11    13  14  15 >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Feb, 28 2007 @ 10:56 AM
link   

Originally posted by Ghost01
B.T.W. Sandia is in a MARKED, RESTRICTED AREA! Like Groom Lake, there are signs on the border that say Restricted Area. Your contradicting yourself. Area 19/R-4806 is mark as restricted. Please get an Up-To-Date Flight chart!


Please let me know the type and date of the chart to which you are referring, Thanks.


(don't take my word for it, go out to the border of Nellis and look for yourself!)


I live 2 miles from Nellis. I have been right at the entrance. It says "Welcome to Nellis Air Force Base, Home of the Thunderbirds!"


It's your "Dulce" facility, that isn't marked, and probably non-existant! It's intresting that you seem to have stirred this discussing back to Sandia, since you Know I'll back you up on that.




posted on Feb, 28 2007 @ 10:58 AM
link   

Originally posted by PartChimp
Well, namely because of the interaction between c130's and the facility that numerous Malachite residents have witnessed; the actual plant is tucked in the valley of Big/Little Sheep. It's only roughly 80 miles away from Dulce at a straight shot, and Fort Garland falls almost in the middle of a linear path, which would allow for security or an additional port for loading/service. This place seems like perfect cover to me; it's out of the way, employees funneling in and out would draw practically no speculative attention, and most of us are aware of the fact that our government is a fan of saying a facility is being used for one purpose, and using it for something entirely different. Just a theory.
-partchimp


Cool information. I will look into further. Thanks for the tip.



posted on Feb, 28 2007 @ 11:02 AM
link   

Originally posted by Graham
Interesting thread here, i was wondering John if you are still in contact with Bob Lazar and if he was willing to participate here on ATS regarding Dulce. Cheers Graham




Bob lives in Sandia Park east of Albuquerque and runs his business UnitedNuclear (unitednuclear.com). He sells scientific equipment and supplies to schools, universities and other companies world wide. He does not have the time or interest to join us here on ATS.



posted on Feb, 28 2007 @ 11:06 AM
link   

Originally posted by Willard856

Seriously though, is this what it takes to be given the title of Conspiracy Master? If so, I might have to start a few threads where I tell people about these secret bases that I know all about (but don't know about, I'll be all mysterious and coy), then I'll have coffee with a few random posters who claim to also know stuff about these bases(well, I'll tell everyone I had coffee with them anyway), oh, and when people ask legitimate questions, I'll respond in a condescending manner that is contrary to the T&Cs of the website I post on. So, will this get me Conspiracy Master status?


I don't know, why don't you ask Springer?



posted on Feb, 28 2007 @ 11:22 AM
link   

Originally posted by Ghost01
John,


My origional Post about the "Missing Restricted Area" was in refrence to Dulce NM. Humor me, and stick to the question this time.

How can they enforce security at a base in New Mexico, that isn't even marked as military property. Anyone could litterly walk up to the door and knock. In Theory, Dulce is no more secure than my house. You are claiming the US Defense Department has a Top Secret research facility, with NO external security at all?


I believe that they have security, but not the kind of security that any of us would be familiar with.


John, that is unrealistic! I would expct you of all People to know better.


I'm really ashamed of myself Tim. Downright ashamed.



I come from a military family, I'm one of the only people in my family that has never served in uniform (I'm disabled).


I hadn't noticed.


I been around the DOD long enough to know how things work. I respect you, John, but please, don't sell me for a fool!



Sorry Tim. I wasn't planing to sell you at all.



posted on Mar, 2 2007 @ 04:40 PM
link   

Originally posted by johnlear
Please let me know the type and date of the chart to which you are referring, Thanks.


I'll do you one Better, John!

FLIGHT CHART

Click on the link and take a look for yourself. This is the Flight chart in question.

Tim



posted on Mar, 3 2007 @ 12:40 PM
link   

Originally posted by johnlear

I don't know of a real good photo of a bigfoot. As to UFO's photo's that weren't blurry and unrecognizeable I know that the Billy Meiers photos of UFO's are excellent but are considered by many to be fraudulent. I am not one of the 'many'. I believe that most if not all of the Billy Meiers photos were real UFO's. I admit that I am in the minority in this belief that the Bill Meiers photos are real but that is my opinion.



I´m a "believer" of the UFO phenomena, in some way.

But really Mr. Lear, look at this picture from Billy Meir own official site.

That picture is a bad joke. It´s just something hanging in front of the camera.The object is out of focus. The object doesnt proyect any kind of shadow, no shadow in the car or the ground. It doesnt seem to alter the sorroundings, as a ship of that size and so close to the ground, woud.

Its is so clear and undeniable. You have to agree with me...

Sorry for my english.



posted on Mar, 3 2007 @ 01:12 PM
link   

Originally posted by Orion437
I´m a "believer" of the UFO phenomena, in some way.
But really Mr. Lear, look at this picture from Billy Meir own official site.
That picture is a bad joke. It´s just something hanging in front of the camera.The object is out of focus. The object doesnt proyect any kind of shadow, no shadow in the car or the ground. It doesnt seem to alter the sorroundings, as a ship of that size and so close to the ground, woud.
Its is so clear and undeniable. You have to agree with me...
Sorry for my english.




The picture looks fine to me. I don't think it is a bad joke and I don't think it is hanging in front of the camera. The fact that it doesn't cast a shadow isn't relevant when we are talking about flying saucers because they act in ways that we don't understand. I don't know what kind of alterations you would expect in the surroundings so I can't comment. I agree with you that the picture is clear and undeniable but I don't agree with the rest of statements however contradictory they may be. Thanks for your post.



posted on Mar, 4 2007 @ 07:06 AM
link   

Originally posted by johnlear
AlanP is still around. He and his wife came over the other night. He has some great stories about the area around Dulce but nothing that would cut it with this group.

AlanP is a very successful business man and enjoys his work. I thinks he regrets having started this thread but he has never said that to me.

I would share some of his stories but they are stories that would only be interesting to those who already know that Dulce exits. Not to those who are looking for proof.


Hi John If I said I knew the underground facility at Dulce existed Id be lying, but I would like to think it does so please can you share ALANP's stories right from the top

this is a direct attempt to try and get some information from you before I unsubscribe from this thread because it seems like when direct questions are asked they are ignored far too often so please do share as I am very interested in this subject and have been for many years.

It is frustrating as there seems to be the same old stories floating about here at ATS with no new developments

thanking you in advance John

cheers
KG



posted on Mar, 4 2007 @ 06:04 PM
link   
I agree with g60kg, i would like to hear the story too.
Even if there are some facts that we already know.
There must be something new, could you please share that with us John?

greetings,

Tim



posted on Mar, 4 2007 @ 10:10 PM
link   
i wouldn't trust anything from Billy Meir, only after he took those pictures of the two women off of the tv.
i would love to believe in him though, its funny that people skip all of billy's junk evidence and go str8 for the "meat and potatoes".
that picture is actually a model, you can look around the net for meir model pictures.
i think he is one of those people that makes conspiracy theorists sound stupid.


[edit on 4-3-2007 by jetflock]



posted on Mar, 5 2007 @ 05:26 AM
link   

Originally posted by johnlear
The fact that it doesn't cast a shadow isn't relevant when we are talking about flying saucers because they act in ways that we don't understand.


Thanks for your post!

However, I can't follow your logic here. Acoording to Bob Lazar, Flying Saucers use anti-gravity propulsion. This would account for some of their really odd flight characteristics. Unfortanatly, I fail to see how it explains the missing shadow. As far as I know, we are discussing two very different aspects of physics.

Shadows exist for one Reason: there is something blocking the light. The fact that something blocks the passage of light, is also why we can see it. Things that do Not block light appear clear, like a window or a glass.

I considered the possibility of using gravity to bend the light around the body of the disk. However, based on my knowedge of basic physics, I came to the conclusion that an object possessing this ability should be Invisible to observer as well. However, in the case of the flying saucer, it's clearly visible, or we would see it to begin with.

Flying Saucers are extreemly advanced Technologically, I would never argue that. However, how can technology overcome basic laws of Physics?


Tim

[edit on 3/5/2007 by Ghost01]



posted on Mar, 5 2007 @ 09:02 AM
link   
Hi John have you any response to my post above I am still waiting eagerly

thanks

KG



posted on Mar, 5 2007 @ 12:15 PM
link   

Originally posted by Ghost01
Thanks for your post!

However, I can't follow your logic here. However, how can technology overcome basic laws of Physics?




I would respectfully suggest that you consider replacing the word 'physcis' with 'kown physics' unless you are sure that our scientific community has learned, beyond all doubt, all the secrets of the universe.



posted on Mar, 5 2007 @ 01:00 PM
link   

Originally posted by johnlear
I would respectfully suggest that you consider replacing the word 'physcis' with 'kown physics' unless you are sure that our scientific community has learned, beyond all doubt, all the secrets of the universe.


Good Point John,

Science is still learning how things work. Also, I'm not a scientist by any means. Based on your sugestion, I'd like to ask again:

How does one fly a craft that defys Known Laws of Physics? Also, If the disks at S-4 where backengineered, how did the scientists work on a craft that was built using scientic principles that (as far as we know) have yet to be understood by mankind?

How would they have applied scientific concepts that Seem comletey foriegn to what we know of?

Tim



posted on Mar, 5 2007 @ 01:20 PM
link   

Originally posted by Ghost01
Good Point John,
Science is still learning how things work. Also, I'm not a scientist by any means. Based on your sugestion, I'd like to ask again:

How does one fly a craft that defys Known Laws of Physics?


Very carefully. Several were lost in accidents the most famous one being that crash in 1962 over eastern Nevada.


Also, If the disks at S-4 where backengineered, how did the scientists work on a craft that was built using scientic principles that (as far as we know) have yet to be understood by mankind?


If you had listened and watched the Bob Lazar video very carefully you would have known that they made no attempt to back engineer the disks. What they were attempted to do was back engineer the propulsion system.

Further, if you had listened and watched the Bob Lazar video or any of his other statements you would recall that he stated that they had no success whatsoever with this backengineering effort. And as far as your statement "scientific principles (as far as we know) have yet to be understood by mankind", apparently you didn't listen or absorb any of the information tht Bob Lazar said. He made it very clear that we knew and understood these principles, just that we couldn't duplicate the hardware they were based on.


How would they have applied scientific concepts that Seem comletey foriegn to what we know of?


Please read the above answer and if you have any further questions please don't hesitate to ask. Also please change the word 'foreign' to 'alien'. We already know all the foreign techonology.
Thanks.

Tim



posted on Mar, 6 2007 @ 08:17 AM
link   
Thanks John,

I think I'll dig out my video and do a bit of review before we continue this paticular discussion.


Tim



posted on Mar, 6 2007 @ 11:39 AM
link   

Originally posted by g60kg
Hi John have you any response to my post above I am still waiting eagerly

thanks

KG


This is my third attempt John, why are you choosing to ignore this??



posted on Mar, 6 2007 @ 03:35 PM
link   

Originally posted by g60kg

Hi John If I said I knew the underground facility at Dulce existed Id be lying, but I would like to think it does so please can you share ALANP's stories right from the top

this is a direct attempt to try and get some information from you before I unsubscribe from this thread because it seems like when direct questions are asked they are ignored far too often so please do share as I am very interested in this subject and have been for many years.

It is frustrating as there seems to be the same old stories floating about here at ATS with no new developments

thanking you in advance John




g60kg usually if I don't answer its because I have nothing constructive or important to say. Sorry. If you have a specific question and I have missed it over the past few pages please ask it again and accept my apologies for missing it. If however your question is something like "What's new at Dulce" or "Whats your best proof?" I am afraid that you are going to be happier unsubscribing to this thread. Thanks for sticking with it as long as you have. By the way, if you have any intention of any expeditions to Dulce please let me know as I would like to find out if you saw anything unusual. Thanks.



posted on Mar, 7 2007 @ 05:41 AM
link   

Originally posted by johnlear

Originally posted by g60kg

Hi John If I said I knew the underground facility at Dulce existed Id be lying, but I would like to think it does so please can you share ALANP's stories right from the top

this is a direct attempt to try and get some information from you before I unsubscribe from this thread because it seems like when direct questions are asked they are ignored far too often so please do share as I am very interested in this subject and have been for many years.

It is frustrating as there seems to be the same old stories floating about here at ATS with no new developments

thanking you in advance John




g60kg usually if I don't answer its because I have nothing constructive or important to say. Sorry. If you have a specific question and I have missed it over the past few pages please ask it again and accept my apologies for missing it. If however your question is something like "What's new at Dulce" or "Whats your best proof?" I am afraid that you are going to be happier unsubscribing to this thread. Thanks for sticking with it as long as you have. By the way, if you have any intention of any expeditions to Dulce please let me know as I would like to find out if you saw anything unusual. Thanks.



thanks for your response John I will copy and paste my original request from my quote above if you could share your knowledge thanks (please see original request below)



Hi John If I said I knew the underground facility at Dulce existed Id be lying, but I would like to think it does so please can you share ALANP's stories right from the top



new topics

top topics



 
17
<< 9  10  11    13  14  15 >>

log in

join