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.

 

Did the Space Shuttle dock at the Secret Space Station tonight?

page: 25
39
<< 22  23  24    26  27  28 >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Oct, 1 2007 @ 04:06 AM
link   
reply to post by zorgon
 



Well, seeing some of the stuff you post its quite apt, its so laughable,
it
makes people think "why bother", though "grabbing at straws for any evidence" is more so.



[edit on 1/10/07 by Chorlton]




posted on Oct, 1 2007 @ 09:23 AM
link   

Originally posted by Chorlton
reply to post by bigfatfurrytexan
 


Your comments on my 'aspirations for the British Empire are laughable.
Considering the US is attempting to create an American Empire at this very moment.

I was going to post a list of your spectacular failures of rocket launches of which there are many many but there are so many I will leave it up to you.

We dont need to make our own rockets any more, we just pay others to do it for us. We proved we could do it with a far more reliable and far cheaper rocket than those posessed by the rest of the world at the time. Then someone asked the question "Why bother" and indeed I agree with them.



Nice punt.

Don't make offers of evidence that you do not intend to share.

Your less than artful dodge is duly noted.



posted on Oct, 1 2007 @ 09:42 AM
link   


Considering the US is attempting to create an American Empire at this very moment.


You mean a British Empire, doncha ?

Most of the banks over here are brit-owned. Silly Chorlton.



posted on Oct, 1 2007 @ 11:55 AM
link   

Originally posted by Chorlton
Well, seeing some of the stuff you post its quite apt, its so laughable, it makes people think "why bother", though "grabbing at straws for any evidence" is more so.


Well in France they hire a person to 'make funny noise' to 'distract the crowd' They are called 'buffoons'... I wonder what the British equivalent is?



Seriously though, I don't know why you bother to be here, or why I should bother to even respond to you



posted on Oct, 1 2007 @ 12:02 PM
link   
So no interest in those Mini MIR space stations huh? The ones where the Progress and Soyuz stop by


You know if we all kick in a few bucks we could have Pegasus 1

I kinda like the sound of that...



posted on Oct, 1 2007 @ 01:11 PM
link   
reply to post by zorgon
 


Hi Zorgon,

My point in regards to the 500kg was more in line with the following thought. The Progress supply ship carries 2500kg, leaves 2000kg at the ISS, then there's 500kg left/trip "unaccounted" for. Now if the ISS receives 2 tons for 3 people at regular intervals, how much can be accomplished with 500kg/trip for the other station(s), whether they are mini stations or the real secret bigger one?

Also, taking the amount of time and money, associated dangers and major logistics required of a chemical rocket launch, then one would assume that they would ask themselves "Hey, let's use our zero gravity space craft from the South Pole, where no one can see us taking off and landing, have a faster turnaround time between trips, cheaper and less dangerous, with higher capacity dedicated to the secret space station(s), instead of trying to wing it through the regular smoke and mirror stuff that could be traced by suspicious people" type of thing


I remember the mini stations by the Russians, before Mir was de-orbited. Did MirCorp announce that they actually got them mini stations up there? I was under the impression those mini stations were in fact for space tourists when they first announced them, kinda like Bigelow Aerospace. A secret space station would certainly come from government(s). And what interest would manned mini stations have to any governments? Unless for space based weapons or biological weapon developments and experiments? What other use could there be for any government?



posted on Oct, 1 2007 @ 02:01 PM
link   
reply to post by bigfatfurrytexan
 


Artfull dodge?

It was incredibly skillfull seeing as JL an Z usually ignore anything they dont like



posted on Oct, 1 2007 @ 02:10 PM
link   

Originally posted by zorgon

Originally posted by Chorlton
Well, seeing some of the stuff you post its quite apt, its so laughable, it makes people think "why bother", though "grabbing at straws for any evidence" is more so.


Well in France they hire a person to 'make funny noise' to 'distract the crowd' They are called 'buffoons'... I wonder what the British equivalent is?


Dont know dear, but I know what the US equivalent its



Seriously though, I don't know why you bother to be here, or why I should bother to even respond to you


Its a discussion thread. But both you and JL have been posting stuff and insinuating it is fact, or as close to fact as you can prove. Myself and others have the right to refute those claims.
However from where Im sitting you have dismally failed to even get close to providing the slimmest of evidence of any shuttle docking at any secret space station. Maybe its that fact that you dont like.

I have some ideas about many things, but untill I come up with sufficient proof that leaves no doubt in my mind or others, I wont even bother.

Anyone posting statements and claims that yourself, JL and others have done, bear the responsibility of providing the burden of proof for those claims, and not get annoyed when people either dont believe it or bow down to you.
So far you have shown no overwhelming evidence to support your claim.

[edit on 1/10/07 by Chorlton]

[edit on 1/10/07 by Chorlton]



posted on Oct, 1 2007 @ 02:22 PM
link   
Originally posted by Chorlton





So far you have shown no overwhelming evidence to support your claim.



"Overwhelming" evidence?"

"Overwhelming" evidence?

It used to be 'any' evidence. We must be making progress Zorgon!



posted on Oct, 1 2007 @ 02:34 PM
link   

Originally posted by johnlear
Originally posted by Chorlton

So far you have shown no overwhelming evidence to support your claim.

"Overwhelming" evidence?"
"Overwhelming" evidence?
It used to be 'any' evidence. We must be making progress Zorgon!



Sorry John you misunderstood. It could be the delayed effect of the Element 115?
Both yourself and Z have presented evidence. Unfortunately none of it it proves anything or even intimates anything.

To prove a point, there has to be overwhelming evidence. There has been no overwhelming evidence, notr anything close. Some anomalies, but this isnt a perfect world.

May I be the first to wish you and yours a Merry Christmas ?
I always get in early. That way I dont forget anyone



posted on Oct, 1 2007 @ 02:49 PM
link   

Originally posted by whatsthatthingy

My point in regards to the 500kg was more in line with the following thought. The Progress supply ship carries 2500kg, leaves 2000kg at the ISS, then there's 500kg left/trip "unaccounted" for. Now if the ISS receives 2 tons for 3 people at regular intervals, how much can be accomplished with 500kg/trip for the other station(s), whether they are mini stations or the real secret bigger one?


Well in our opinion there are other cargo transports and personnel carriers as well. Our point showing the differences at the ISS was mostly in regards to the quantiy of fruits. Considering NASA's own reports that they spoil within a couple of days... the fact that they deleted the page that had the only pictures of that pile of oranges and grapefruit... the fact that they hastily posted an article on 'preservation techniques' all within a few days of our 'discussion' is in our opinion very significant. Also the data doesn't match..

As you say if we allow they are dumping everything into the ocean, it still leaves extra stuff unaccounted for... And this is not including the stuff that comes up on the shuttle....

Yes we are also aware of the construction going on and some of the stuff on the shuttle is new parts... but that is accounted for...

The point is this...

IF there are secret space stations... (we have already established that there are secret satellites) then logic would dictate that there would be secret supply ships and secret personnel carriers...

It is also logical to assume that no one at the DoD, NASA or where ever is just going to hand us a pdf and say "here ya go... a list of all those secret flights"

So the only thing we can do is track inconsistencies. And with those, like in a court of law you create a 'circumstantial' case and to do that you need a wealth of evidence listing the inconsistencies and tracking a pattern.


Skeptics like Mr Penny and Chorlton state that we are showing readily available existing facts and 'twisting' them to our purpose.

Well those 'facts' are not 'readily available' without hours of searching and knowing what to search for. Sure once we post a link to a military site, or an official document... yeah then they are 'easy to find' But I have yet to see either one of them bring some of this 'easy to find' material to the table.

In another thread I found a document that I linked to at a military site... I posted the link and now everyone that just opens page 9 gets 'pinged' by Maxwell AFB. Why? Because the link was to a secure page...

Skeptics aside... there is so much data available 'hidden in plain site' the average viewer has neither the time, the patience or sometimes even the research skills to find this stuff. And in truth I have so much data still to process I can't even keep up...

LOL Skeptics use this as a 'dig' "Well if you have it you would post it..." but I saw the response from the "shopping mall" It takes time to assimilate that much material. I suppose they would be happy if I just throw the link out there all at once so they can bury it with rhetoric





Also, taking the amount of time and money, associated dangers and major logistics required of a chemical rocket launch, then one would assume that they would ask themselves "Hey, let's use our zero gravity space craft from the South Pole, where no one can see us taking off and landing, have a faster turnaround time between trips, cheaper and less dangerous, with higher capacity dedicated to the secret space station(s), instead of trying to wing it through the regular smoke and mirror stuff that could be traced by suspicious people" type of thing


I quite agree with you on that and we have and are doing extensive research along that line starting with Tesla, through the NAZI scientists, and the whole Antarctica connection... You can look at it if you like... but this has and is being covered in several treads here already. And Pegasus has several people studying anti gravity projects and are seriously working towards our own 'design' LOL we even went so far as to ask an 'insider' if we could get one of the older models
(He said he would get back to us in 72 hours :wow


www.thelivingmoon.com...
www.thelivingmoon.com...



A secret space station would certainly come from government(s). And what interest would manned mini stations have to any governments?


Well according to MIR they have contracted with the Netherlands in 2001 and it was to be commercially operational in 2004. Netherlands just finished launching Expedition 9 (that was the one that made record speed undocking from the ISS and landing in just 3.5 HOURS...

I guess Netherlands' pilots don't need to spend 2 to 3 days doing 'system checks'


I also don't recall saying they were secret, or government interests, merely another 'stop over'. It is just another piece in the puzzle of the 'missing time' of the other craft

Netherlands... isn't that the home of the Bilderberg Club?





[edit on 1-10-2007 by zorgon]



posted on Oct, 1 2007 @ 03:18 PM
link   

Originally posted by Chorlton
I have some ideas about many things, but untill I come up with sufficient proof that leaves no doubt in my mind or others, I wont even bother.


Well that is silly... if everyone took that line of reasoning, there would be no discussion board... as no one would have anything to discuss. That would defeat the whole purpose of a conspiracy discussion site

:shk:



So far you have shown no overwhelming evidence to support your claim.


"no overwhelming evidence"
That is fantastic news!! When we started skeptics where saying. "Show me just ONE piece..." ( And we did, even The Borg was 'assimilated'
)

So now you want "overwhelming evidence". I guess we must be getting somewhere


Well many in various threads have indeed been overwhelmed... and have said so in the threads and in U2U's and we have only just begun


But considering the fact that you have repeatedly admitted that you refuse to check our links and supporting data, I would have to ask you just what would YOU accept as proof?

I have a hunch even a saucer landing in your back yard wouldn't do it...


In the moon thread I just posted that SETI and other scientists share our search for structures on the Moon and on Mars... Even NASA has the "Inca City" and Malin says publicly that they used to think it was sand dunes but now since they discovered the 'circle they are not sure

So just for you when I get that letter from the President saying... "Ron you are right ..." we will just continue to overwhelm people with inconsistencies and circumstantial evidence....

To everyone Else... A Moment Off Topic

Just to stimulate participation in other threads


Inca City Malin Space Systems



And here is one of those Antarctica anti gravity ships testing a scalar energy beam weapon on the ice... You can see the black beam... you can see the snow being disturbed on the ice where the beam hits... and you can see the beam reflect back off the ice...

This one was taken in 1966 bt a British Exposition and published in Nexus Magazine...




"In 1975 I investigated a UFO/Strange Black Ray Cloud formation, taken by a Belfast member of the British Antarctic Survey. He gave me some images of a pulsing cloud formation firing a black ray into the ice, which bounced off and reflected further away from him. Who knows... maybe someone down there is using negative energy beam weapons? Or was... since the images were taken in 1966."


James Robert is a civil servant with an agency of the UK Ministry of Defense, as well as a World War II historian and writer. He has traveled extensively throughout North Africa and Europe to investigate mysteries of Britain's secret wars.

Source




So the scientists of SETI, NASA and MAILIN are studying Lunar and Martian Structures and Archeology

UK Ministry of Defense agent is studying scalar beam equiped 'saucers'

LOL seems your out numbered there Her Chorlton "P



posted on Oct, 1 2007 @ 03:25 PM
link   
reply to post by zorgon
 


Just a little correction, when posting a UK Government department please use the correct spelling
Its 'Department of Defence' there is no 's' in defence.

Zorgon said:
"LOL seems your out numbered there Her Chorlton "P"

Hold on here, in many of your posts you slam, decry and deny official government sources and ifnormation now you tell me I have to believe them
What duplicity !



posted on Oct, 1 2007 @ 03:34 PM
link   

Originally posted by Chorlton It could be the delayed effect of the Element 115?


LOL Well there is little of that to work with... but if I were you I would purchase stocks on Bismuth production...




posted on Oct, 1 2007 @ 03:35 PM
link   

Originally posted by Chorlton

To prove a point, there has to be overwhelming evidence. There has been no overwhelming evidence, notr anything close.


So some guy says that scenario A is not possible. He offers his argument for it but doesn't provide any tangible proof other than vague photographs and a description of how the environment in the photo works.

Another guy says that scenario A is really scenario B. He offers his argument for it, but doesn't provide any tangible proof other than vague photographs and a description of how the environment in the photo works.

Why is one, overwhelming evidence and the other not? If both are known examples of working systems, both should be taken into consideration.

Is overwhelming evidence a science textbook? And if so, why?



posted on Oct, 1 2007 @ 03:40 PM
link   

Originally posted by zorgon
(we have already established that there are secret satellites) then logic would dictate that there would be secret supply ships and secret personnel carriers...


No zorgon, "we" did not establish that. Its entirely likely that if polled, a majority of reasonably informed persons would say, duh. The flaw here is that, one does not follow the other. Logic simply does not dictate what you have suggested.


Skeptics like Mr Penny and Chorlton state that we are showing readily available existing facts and 'twisting' them to our purpose.


No zorgon, again, not entirely true and a distortion of what is reality. My position is that your "facts" are a set of loosely related topics joined by assumption and wishes. In fact, I was very carefully leading a poster here in a detailed look at the actual cargoes and quantities hoisted into space. Odd that he dropped it like a chunk of hot charcoal once it got uncomfortably close to revealing some truth. Most of this collapses like a house of cards in a tempest when real, probing, detailed, and critical questions are asked and explored.

You have also employed some boorish 'gotcha' tactics in attempts to make points. Mine, or any other persons recognition of secret surveillance satellites is not cause for the "Ah ha!!" moment. I may as well get you to admit the existence of horses and then triumphantly crow that I have proven the existence of unicorns.



posted on Oct, 1 2007 @ 03:53 PM
link   

Originally posted by MrPennyIn fact, I was very carefully leading a poster here in a detailed look at the actual cargoes and quantities hoisted into space.


Ah so I take it then you have accurate cargo lists on all the flights? Cool, perhaps you could share them as we are having quite some difficulty getting that data
Apparently I must have missed where you posted these lists... I do apologize


Originally posted by MrPenny My position is that your "facts" are a set of loosely related topics joined by assumption and wishes.


Well at least you admit they are related even if you do qualify it with 'loosely" We are making progress to be sure.

What I don't understand though is that you claim my 'facts' are loose, yet you have repeatedly admitted that you won't look at the links... So it seems a waste of my time to even bother trying to show you anything.

But perhaps you have some suggestions on how I better post 'facts' that require breaching National security issues? All I can legally do is hint at or point people to 'seek for themselves' And even that comes at a price...

So if you have any suggestion on how to bypass this, I am all ears


Speaking about 'Horses'

Later tonight I will post the first section of

"The Black Russian's and the Black Horses"




[edit on 1-10-2007 by zorgon]



posted on Oct, 1 2007 @ 04:25 PM
link   

Originally posted by zorgon
Ah so I take it then you have accurate cargo lists on all the flights?


The same tactic, over and over again, gets stale.

I didn't say I had that information. I didn't even hint that I had that information. I didn't say we had any clear conclusion. I apologize if I didn't make it clear that it was a work in progress.

goosdawg did find this. That's pretty darned detailed. It might be typical. It might be the one utterly atypical load out. I don't know....that's why I characterize it as a work in progress.

goosdawg also found;

The arrival of Progress 20 delivered about 5,680 pounds (2,576 kilograms) of more cargo to the space station. Included on the manifest were 183 pounds (83 kilograms)of oxygen and air, 463 pounds (210 kilograms)of water and 1,940 pounds (879 kilograms)) of propellant for the station's thrusters. Progress 20 also delivered, 3,100 pounds (1,406 kilograms) of dry cargo, including food, experiment hardware, spare parts and holiday gifts for the ISS crew.

Source | Space.com | ISS Crew Welcomes Holiday Cargo Ship

I would like to know how often they deliver propellant in 1900 lb lots. If that load out is anywhere near typical....a lot of mystery seems to disappear.

Real in-depth questions, inquiry,.....I think its irrational to start from the proposition that "something is going on". I prefer to start with "is something going on". It may be a fine distinction to you....but to me its a huge difference in approach.



posted on Oct, 1 2007 @ 04:27 PM
link   

Originally posted by zorgon
But perhaps you have some suggestions on how I better post 'facts' that require breaching National security issues?


This is just off the top of my head, but.......you've just announced that you may have information that could compromise national security? Well now what do you have to fear?

The phone lines are abuzzing at the FBI and NSA I'm sure........hee hee.....

[edit on 1-10-2007 by MrPenny]



posted on Oct, 1 2007 @ 04:40 PM
link   
I honestly believe, as do most people, that what the government makes public knowledge is just the tip of the iceberg. I honestly do not believe they have made public everything they are doing in space. According to several DOD documents (stinet.dtic.mil... look them up.) America has a vast interest in securing space, and establishing control of this frontier. While I do not agree with everything John posts, I commend him for taking the time to look into these possibilites. Did the spaceshuttle supply the SSS? I doubt it. Is there a SSS? Without question. Military has too much of a vested interest in space to not have some base of operations there. Once again, while I don't agree with everything John Lear says...thank you John for looking into possibilities, and digging up a lot of government papers.



new topics

top topics



 
39
<< 22  23  24    26  27  28 >>

log in

join