Did the Space Shuttle dock at the Secret Space Station tonight?, page 37

Pages: << 34 35 36 37 38 39 >>
ATS Members have flagged this thread 37 times

reply posted on 22-11-2007 @ 10:51 AM by buddhasystem

Originally posted by johnlear
Originally posted by buddhasystem
Would it be asking too much for you to take that giant chip off your shoulder just for today?

Are you talking about my shoulder or Mr.Undo's?

happy thnxgvg

reply posted on 22-11-2007 @ 01:06 PM by bigfatfurrytexan

reply to post by buddhasystem

Undo is female. A brilliant female, at that.

reply posted on 22-11-2007 @ 02:11 PM by buddhasystem

Originally posted by bigfatfurrytexan
Undo is female. A brilliant female, at that.

I'll have to think hard about the semantics of that,
but in any case, my apologies to Mrs.Undo for incorrect
form of address I used in my previous missives to her.

reply posted on 22-11-2007 @ 07:16 PM by Matyas

I have a suggestion

Anyone who hasn't given LoneWeasel a star yet should do so now.

reply posted on 22-11-2007 @ 08:31 PM by undo

Happy Turkey Day!
I'd like to take this opportunity to Thank God for my family, friends, acquaintances and the ATS venue.
Thanks to
the people who work in civil service jobs, that keep the country functioning, safe,
and keep the hospitals, food markets, roads, etc, open, so we can keep on, keepin' on

Happy Thanksgiving!

[edit on 22-11-2007 by undo]

reply posted on 27-11-2007 @ 06:44 AM by IgnoreTheFacts

Originally posted by Matyas
I have a suggestion

Anyone who hasn't given LoneWeasel a star yet should do so now.

I would imagine that most people don't need to be prodded into giving someone a star. If it was a good post, then it would not need someone out there pimping it for accolades.

Back on topic: Some funny secret space station links thanks to google:

Deep Space

My ex-NSA informant revealed that there has been a manned "deep space platform" in orbit above Earth for over thirty years! "It [has] had three-man [American] crews as well as Russians 'on' since '68!" He further states that since 1973, the space station received additional extremely-high technology, "and has had upgrades since." His disclosure confirms reports I had heard previously from former military officers about a secret space platform in orbit. This disclosure makes clear that the Cape Canaveral Space Shuttles launches, and the "first" American space station being assembled by NASA', are just government "cover" programs. Such programs have served to deflect the public from becoming aware before now of the existence of a black- project military space station, and of classified military craft which can go well past orbit into deep space.

Got to love those "ex-Nasa" informants, lol.

Space Station history

The next space station was a secret one called Cosmos 557. Its main job was to provide spy photos of the ground as it flew overhead. But before a crew got there, it too went out of control. It burned up in May of 1973. [Ref. 1] The Soviets then designed more reliable engines.

Secret Space

There has been a claim made that a secret U.S. space system had been developed, deployed and finally put in moth balls, all without the knowledge of the Congress of the United States or the people. The system was known as the Blackstar orbiter. When the system was retired it was stored at the infamous area 51, at least this is according to an article in Aviation Week & Space Technology.

[edit on 27-11-2007 by IgnoreTheFacts]

reply posted on 27-11-2007 @ 08:27 AM by Paul the seeker

Hey John,

i think i'm with the same opinion as you by really being astonished how much eford they are putting into this "show program".

reply posted on 29-11-2007 @ 02:23 PM by musikman

Well... as with most forum threads on the internet these days, here's another example of a very interesting thread falling victim to back and forth corrections, name calling and deviation (some may even say hijacking).

Granted, I'm new to this forum and many of you may think I have no right making a comment such as the one above, however, the fact that I've spent the past two days reading every single post in this thread I think grants me permission to at least speak my mind on this one.

I have to say that I've been on the fence about everything that has been discussed on this thread thus far.

On one hand you have people like Mr. Lear and Zorgon who are basically stating what they believe in, backed up by what they consider to be substancial evidence to back up their theories, while on the other hand you have people like defcon5 and JRA who rely on more "solid" evidence in order to be convinced of such things like "secret space stations" and "lunar mining".

I think the bottom line is that Mr. Lear and Zorgon have presented to us what they have noticed or come accross in the form of either documentation, research or beliefs. I think it's up to each individual to believe what they want IF they want. With all due respect to those of you who aren't convinced in their findings, I think there are many different, more civil ways of raising questions about their findings or statements without the need of objecting every single piece of "evidence" they have provided us with.

I don't see them as trying to convince us of anything... they're just simply "sharing" their information and beliefs with all of us. This thread and/or forum is not a court of law and so the notion of Right or Wrong, Truth or Lie doesn't apply, what does apply (in my opinion) is whether you believe in it or not, so I think that all the "proof, no proof" "factual or fictional" posts are irrelevant. It is what it is and you either believe in it or you don't.

Sorry for the long post folks, but I just had to get that off my chest.

reply posted on 29-11-2007 @ 02:28 PM by buddhasystem

Originally posted by musikman
the notion of Right or Wrong, Truth or Lie doesn't apply, what does apply (in my opinion) is whether you believe in it or not, so I think that all the "proof, no proof" "factual or fictional" posts are irrelevant. It is what it is and you either believe in it or you don't.

Dear Musikman,

could you please offer us your interpretation of the board's motto, "Deny Ignorance"?

reply posted on 29-11-2007 @ 02:32 PM by housegroove23

reply to post by musikman

Very well said musikman, I completely agree with you.

Welcome aboard, make yourself at home.

reply posted on 29-11-2007 @ 02:55 PM by musikman

Originally posted by housegroove23
reply to post by musikman

Very well said musikman, I completely agree with you.

Welcome aboard, make yourself at home.

Thanks for the warm welcome.

reply posted on 29-11-2007 @ 03:00 PM by weedwhacker

reply to post by musikman

Reply to musikman...

Very well thought out, very well written. My applause to your participation.

Cheers!

reply posted on 29-11-2007 @ 07:00 PM by bigfatfurrytexan

reply to post by buddhasystem

Do you believe that ignorance can be viewed and deemed subjectively, on a personal level? I do.

But thumbs up and a star for musikman!!

reply posted on 29-11-2007 @ 07:03 PM by buddhasystem

Originally posted by bigfatfurrytexan
Do you believe that ignorance can be viewed and deemed subjectively, on a personal level? I do.

I understand. It's easier to deal with is on a personal level.
People who are into voodoo and the occult are likely to share your opinion.

reply posted on 29-11-2007 @ 08:05 PM by bigfatfurrytexan

reply to post by buddhasystem

Don't think i believe in voodoo...i am more eastern than that in my thoughts.

But i DO bet that people who wish to make a living in science stay away from certain topics just out of fear of being labelled and disallowed meaningful employment.

This is a shame, and it makes much of the discipline a sham. I don't have issue with the scientific process or peer review process. I only take issue with the pathetic execution of these processes.

A gun in the hand of a peacemaker is a deterrant. A gun in the hand of a lunatic is a weapon. Same device, but when used differently it can have very malignant results.

reply posted on 30-11-2007 @ 01:13 AM by weedwhacker

reply to post by buddhasystem

buddhasystem,

I delve into the logic and....oh, that sounds silly...

My opinion is ... I stand close to science and physics, trying to keep them near me, like a security blanket. HOWEVER, haven't the boundaries of scientific knowledge been expanded over the centuries? Point is, maybe, just maybe, it's OK to contemplate alternative theories, however bizzare they may seem at first. Not taking any stance, pro or con, except to say, I've read a lot of speculative fiction (commonly cralled Science Fiction)...or also known by the abhorent moniker 'SciFi'...ugh! ... in my lifetime. I just like to be receptive to new ideas. Shouldn't we all?

reply posted on 30-11-2007 @ 07:41 PM by jmilla

IMO BS doesn't seem too receptive to new ideas. Along with the previous post, it might be noted that "science fiction" all to often become "science fact" over the course of years and after the disclosure of information not known in the past. I'm going to go ahead and make a prophecy: if we're all around when it comes to light that many of John Lear and Zorgon's beliefs are and were in fact, fact; BS will look like what I would call a "tool," or someone whose closed mind made him subject to the viewpoints the very people who keep these secrets want us to have.

My apologies in advance to BS, I'm not necessarily name calling, but it seems you spend a majority of your time trying to refute John Lear's claims, by doing the very thing that ATS frowns upon, which is remaining adamantly opposed to all the evidence he provides, or embracing ingorance, rather than denying it.

reply posted on 1-12-2007 @ 12:10 AM by zorgon