John Lear's Claims Of Civilizations on Most Planets

page: 11
10
<< 8  9  10    12  13  14 >>

log in

join

posted on Sep, 28 2007 @ 09:36 AM
link   

Originally posted by IgnoreTheFacts
John, it just strikes me as odd that, after "learning" things for 65 years (longer than some of us have been alive) that leads you to believe in such wild and outlandish ideas, that you have nothing to share, no facts, nothing to convince the average joe? I mean 65 years, and no evidence?!? This isn't religion, its little green men living on other planets, surely you have some sort of evidence you can share that will stand up to even the slightest bit of scrutiny after 65 YEARS?

Your not coming out of this looking too good, John.


what page are we on in this thread? I am in a few others that are a couple hundred pages long, too. What do you mean when you say:

'you have nothing to share, no facts, nothing to convince the average joe? I mean 65 years, and no evidence?!? This isn't religion, its little green men living on other planets, surely you have some sort of evidence you can share that will stand up to even the slightest bit of scrutiny after 65 YEARS?"

Assuming that you know how to read, my only other two options are that you either choose to ignore the hundreds of pages of "evidence" or just simply mismanage your comprehension (i can only presume that you do so willingly?).

I have read several dozen of your posts. I have yet to see you post anything that is not combative and insulting to someone, in someway. You claim to what to see some level of enlightenment or disclosure, or whatever it is that people have as a buzzword this year...have you ever tried working WITH people instead of AGAINST them? In business we have a metaphor: It is easier to pull the string than it is to push the string. Think on it.

Or, you can continue being rude (i see you got a warning) and contributing nothing to this forum outside of argumentative posts. But THAT will win you the first "iggy" button award that I have ever given.




posted on Sep, 28 2007 @ 10:12 AM
link   
So tell us all, Oh bigfatfurry one, do you believe John Lears claims of:

Trees and rivers on the far side of the moon?
Sufficient breathable air on the moon that breathing gear is not needed?
A 'fusion' reactor in Aristarchus Crater
Mines on the moon worked by people from earth
A Secret Space station
That every planet in our solar system is inhabitted.

(and thats only a few of his propositions)

I dont believe any of those ridiculous and unproveable claims, so just to let people know where you stand, which of the above (if any) do you believe. I mean REALLY believe, 100% ?

Thanks



posted on Sep, 28 2007 @ 10:37 AM
link   
Originally posted by Chorlton





I dont believe any of those ridiculous and unproveable claims, so just to let people know where you stand, which of the above (if any) do you believe. I mean REALLY believe, 100% ?

Thanks



Thanks for the post Chorlton. Just because my claims are unproveable doesn't mean they are ridiculous. There is nothing ridiculous about a breathable atmosphere on the moon, nor of cities, forests, rivers, lakes and huge artifacts on the farside. Its just information about which you have not been informed.

So I don't mind your use of the word unproveable, because for the time being they are not. But I would respectfully suggest that you not use the word 'ridiculous' when referring to my claims.

That is simply a request. Thanks.

Thanks for your post.



posted on Sep, 28 2007 @ 10:53 AM
link   
Personally, I think that John Lear's claims are, at the very least, highly unlikely.

Not impossible.....but highly unlikely.

As others have said......Outstanding claims require outstanding evidence to back up those claims......or at least SOMETHING concrete!!

In 65 years of learning and researching these things......not much more than your own opinions to sway us?


Come on, people.....I'm not being unreasonable here, am I??

But some of John's claims are on a par with claims made by the Raelians, for example.....just claims.....he said himself that is is only his own PERSONAL OPINION!

I mean, in this day and age, where the hubble space telescope can supposedly view galaxies at distances of about 78 billion light years??.........that's 78 BILLION LIGHT YEARS........and we don't even have high resolution pictures of a small body orbiting less than a quarter of a million miles from us?

Sorry, John....I highly respect you for your achievements in life. You have applied yourself in ways most people would never even consider, and achieved far greater things than the average man. For that I respect you.


But extraordingary claims require extraordinary proof.



Regards,

Stephen.



posted on Sep, 28 2007 @ 11:07 AM
link   

Originally posted by johnlear

Thanks for the post Chorlton. Just because my claims are unproveable doesn't mean they are ridiculous. There is nothing ridiculous about a breathable atmosphere on the moon, nor of cities, forests, rivers, lakes and huge artifacts on the farside. Its just information about which you have not been informed.


But I have been informed John, Im not that far behind you in age at 57 and I was informed by my science teachers and tons upon tons of evidence, plus empirical evidence from those people that actually went to the moon. However, as I have stated previously, there is not ONE scrap of evidence backing up your claims, yet an awfull lot of evidence disproving it, hence the use of the word 'ridiculous' IS warranted.
So untill science proves me wrong and you right, I will continue to call those claims ridiculous, because they are. Im not calling you ridiculous John, merely some of your claims.
However If your claims are ever proven correct I will be the first to post a formal apology, but I dont think thats likely. do you?

Heres your own American Heritage Dictionary explanation which I think says it all
Ridiculous:
SYLLABICATION: ri·dic·u·lous
ADJECTIVE: Deserving or inspiring ridicule; absurd, preposterous, or silly.

I use the word with the intended meaning of absurd, preposterous or silly



[edit on 28/9/07 by Chorlton]

[edit on 28/9/07 by Chorlton]



posted on Sep, 28 2007 @ 11:53 AM
link   
reply to post by bigfatfurrytexan
 


Or, you can continue being rude (i see you got a warning) and contributing nothing to this forum outside of argumentative posts. But THAT will win you the first "iggy" button award that I have ever given.

Curious if you know why I got that warning? Didn't think so. It wasn't dude to rudeness, it was due to mentioning a certain website.

You can "iggy" me all you want, and spend time with people that will be nicer to you, but fill you full of crap, your choice.



posted on Sep, 28 2007 @ 01:16 PM
link   

Originally posted by Chorlton
So tell us all, Oh bigfatfurry one, do you believe John Lears claims of:

Trees and rivers on the far side of the moon? i don't know. Possible, but low probability unless they are being housed within another construction (greenhouse) or are designed to live in that environment, which would not make them trees at all. But since the farside is so well obscured by the body of the moon, i cannot see it and must therefore rely on what little information is released to me by the government who uses my dollars to get a better look. Perhaps it could all be layed to rest if NASA would release all their video and image files? That seems like a simple solution, and their hesitancy tells me all i need to know: trees and rivers or not, there is something there that i am not meant to see by the "powers that be". That alone tells me that, even if he has specifics incorrect, he is likely barking up a tree in the right forest.

Sufficient breathable air on the moon that breathing gear is not needed? once again possible. I don't know if it is probable, but given our lack of personal accounts there isn't much else to be said, other than eveything the astronauts say seems very fishy, very scripted. The whole "patent shoe leather" descrption of the sky is very, very odd

A 'fusion' reactor in Aristarchus Crater i am a proponent of the Plasma Cosmology view, and therefore believe Aristarchus to be some sort of plasma anomoly if natural, or some unknown plasma technology if artificial. Once again, if NASA would be so kind as to release all the information they have (since they are civillian) we can lay this whole matter to rest right now. It would seem to me that John is providing at least a possible solution to what could be going on there. The governments rely on the old Officer Barbrady tactic of "Nothing to see here, move along" when you ask them to explain why it is glowing bright blue. Do you want to toe that line?

Mines on the moon worked by people from earth of course not. they are mined by machines. humans just use the Heavy Lift Program, on loan from the DoD, to get it back to earth. Zorgon could tell you more than you will likely bother to hear on this subject.

A Secret Space station Have you ever watched "Contact"? There is aline in that move that sums up my thoughts on this: "Why build one for billions of dollars when you can build another secret one for twice the cost?" (ok, so i butchered the wording, but that is the concept presented). There is either a secret space station, or the technology is so far beyond that that a secret space station would be like having a hitching post outside a gas station.

That every planet in our solar system is inhabitted. this is a loaded question. No, i don't agree with John in this assertion. But, then again, i also realize that life is not necessary biological (the buddhist part of my soul, i guess). I cannot speak on what types of "personalities" or exotic lifeforms could be living in the clouds of Jupiter. This is one of those "probability/possibility" questions. I think it is both probable and possible, but like the ant, it could exist on a completely different scale than us and therefore be only marginally interested (if even at all) in interaction with us.

(and thats only a few of his propositions)

I dont believe any of those ridiculous and unproveable claims, so just to let people know where you stand, which of the above (if any) do you believe. I mean REALLY believe, 100% ?

Thanks





Perhaps that will clear it up. But keep in mind all of this is subject to change without notice, as knowledge is an ever evolving entity.



posted on Sep, 28 2007 @ 01:21 PM
link   

Originally posted by IgnoreTheFacts
You can "iggy" me all you want, and spend time with people that will be nicer to you, but fill you full of crap, your choice.



I would rather spend time with people who can say what they have to say without coming across as rude and snide. I appreciate your support in the iggy button usage.

Worry not, no one fills me "full of crap". I am pretty smart and have good judgement. Belief is a funny thing. Some people believe without fail. That is not me. I believe until something better comes along. This is what knowledge is all about.

I come from a part of the world where couresty is the primary ingredient in interpersonal relations. i do apologize if my local traditions are foreign to you. I had assumed that common courtesy was truly common everywhere...but apparently not.

I would caution against trying to save the world from idiots, however, as terms like idiot, quack, "woowoo", whatever, are very subjective and one never knows when he may find necessity in saving the world from himself.



posted on Sep, 28 2007 @ 01:24 PM
link   

Originally posted by Old Man

But extraordingary claims require extraordinary proof.



Regards,

Stephen.


The only issue with this is that it isn't John who is not forthcoming with this "proof".

The same people you rely on for your information is the same people who are holding out. Start filing FOIA papers and writing to NASA en masse. There are hours of video that belong to Americans that NASA claims to have lost. If they did, then they are inept and need to be replaced worse than FEMA. Otherwise, release the tapes and photo's.

If this were to happen, possibly we could argue about it. Until then, the defense is not sharing evidence with the prosecution and it seems to be headed for a mistrial.



posted on Sep, 29 2007 @ 04:04 AM
link   
If there is advanced civilizations on Jupiter why do you think they allowed Comet Shoemaker-Levy 9 to crash into it in 1994?








posted on Sep, 29 2007 @ 06:18 AM
link   

Originally posted by johnlear
There is nothing ridiculous about a breathable atmosphere on the moon,


well actually there is: a dense atmosphere on the Moon would be clearly visible from Earth - whenever the moon occludes a star, for example. Anyone can see that no such dense atmosphere exists.

Therefore we're left with the possibility of a very thin, yet still breathable, atmosphere. But how can a thin atmosphere be breathable? A thin atmosphere on Earth isn't (ask any climber). And if it were a pure oxygen atmosphere there'd be rather a nasty fire hazard ....

Thus without going to the Moon, it's possible to conclude that a breathable atmosphere on the Moon is highly improbable if not impossible. So I'd say claiming otherwise is ridiculous


(Of course, I am assuming breathable to humans here
)



posted on Sep, 29 2007 @ 07:22 AM
link   
Now now...shame on you. Brining in your common sense, reason and logic here. When people are making the most ridiculous assertions based on bits and pieces of things they cut to fit their dreams and desires....well there is no room for that king of reasonable thinking.

Shame on you


[\sarcasm]

[edit on 29-9-2007 by IgnoreTheFacts]



posted on Oct, 1 2007 @ 09:01 PM
link   
What if Jupiter is not a gas giant with myriad surface storms as claimed but we are in fact looking at a higher level of existance?

The surreal view of Jupiter is due to the fact you are looking at a reality above our own.

You could crash an atomic bomb the size of a jumbo jet and not hurt one of those Jupiter inhabitants.



posted on Oct, 2 2007 @ 12:45 AM
link   

Originally posted by denythestatusquo
What if Jupiter is not a gas giant with myriad surface storms as claimed but we are in fact looking at a higher level of existance?

The surreal view of Jupiter is due to the fact you are looking at a reality above our own.

You could crash an atomic bomb the size of a jumbo jet and not hurt one of those Jupiter inhabitants.



Wow, you gonna share whatever that is you are smoking? LOL

Seriously...I have considered something similar. That there is existence stacked on top of existence, or nestled deep within the curls of interlocking dimensions.

Jupiter looks less surreal to me and more like a 2dimensional construct in 3D (think about the whirls around the surface of a soap bubble).

Has anyone considered that the "gas giants" are less gas giants, and more like they are surrounded by an "atrium". The same type of atrium that some believe surrounded Earth ages ago before Noah's big flood. Perhaps what we are seeing is cloud cover surrounding a rocky core?

Or, maybe it really is a core of metallic hydrogen like science currently believes. it would be interesting to see metallic hydrogen, honestly.



posted on Oct, 4 2007 @ 12:38 PM
link   
Over 210 replies to this thread, and still not one shred of evidence worthy of serious contemplation has been presented. Didn't see that one coming, lol..........



posted on Oct, 4 2007 @ 07:26 PM
link   

Originally posted by Essan

Originally posted by johnlear
There is nothing ridiculous about a breathable atmosphere on the moon,


well actually there is: a dense atmosphere on the Moon would be clearly visible from Earth



Ummm so why does everyone assume "dense" being the same as "breathable"



Never once heard John say 'dense"

Top of Himalaya Mountains air is thin yet breathable


Now John has also said "breathable for a short time" so maybe we need to start with just how thin an atmosphere can be and still be just breathable...

Should be easy with all the 'space scientists' we have here



posted on Oct, 4 2007 @ 07:29 PM
link   

Originally posted by zorgon
Top of Himalaya Mountains air is thin yet breathable


And our atmosphere is visible at that extreme altitude.



posted on Oct, 5 2007 @ 11:38 PM
link   

Originally posted by Access Denied

Whatever’s “going on” it’s a natural phenomena. Who cares?

(besides planetary scientists and amateur astronomers)

There is no “Secret Space Agency” or Aliens living on Earth or Humans on the Moon or another planets…

AD

admin edit: removed childish name calling and applied a 3 day post ban to the previously banned member who just doesn't seem to get it that ATS is a place of TOPICAL FOCUS not personality focus...


[edit on 9-16-2007 by Springer]

Thanks for the wake up call Springer and editing out that momentary lapse of reason for me.


Sorry JL and Z… no more personal attacks from me. My problem is with the “evidence” you guys present not with you personally.

Let that be a lesson to us all.



Originally posted by zorgon
Well I would have thought it obvious that WE care... and many in the threads

I guess the obvious just escapes some people, huh?

But hey seems we have reached a milestone here Access Denied finally admits "something" is going on at Aristarchus, he just doesn't care

Thanks for the input and the confirmation


Umm… you’re welcome??? I seem to remember giving you this link last year when you (or was it JL?) first brought up this “Aristarchus is a nuclear reactor” theory…

Association Of Lunar & Planetary Observers
Lunar Transient Phenomena
www.alpo-astronomy.org...


The definition of Lunar Transient Phenomena (L.T.P.) is a short lived phenomenon observed on the Moon. This can consist of red glows, flashes, obscuration, and abnormal albedo and shadow effects. There have been over 2000 reports of L.T.P. going as far back as A.D. 557. We now know for some of the reports of flashes seen on the Moon that these may have been due to meteorite impact flashes. Other L.T.P. reports remain a mystery as to what surface physical processes could create these?

If this was such a “big secret” then why would NASA cooperate with civilian scientists and amateur astronomers interested in studying the phenomena?


The goals of the L.T.P. sub-section [of ALPO] are as follows:

1) To re-observe lunar features at the same illumination conditions (to within +/-0.5 deg) or illumination and libration conditions (to within +/-1 deg) of the original L.T.P. report. The purpose of this is to determine the normal appearance of these features for comparison with the original report, and help eliminate obvious misinterpretations of surface features that may have occurred in the past.

[snip]

6) To co-operate with Lunar missions as was during the 1994 mission to the Moon by the Clementine spacecraft. The Association of Lunar & Planetary Observers (ALPO) had the opportunity to participate with this mission by conducting ground based observations on specific lunar formations as the spacecraft passed over them.


[shrug]

By the way, why do you still keep telling everybody Clementine was strictly a DoD mission after I also pointed this out to you last year…

nssdc.gsfc.nasa.gov...


Clementine was a joint project between the Strategic Defense Initiative Organization and NASA

There are no “classified” Clementine images of the Moon as you and many others claim... that was NASA’s gig... but of course images and data of Earth acquired by the many different experiments onboard may be a different story.
Clementine was unfortunately plagued by transmission problems and a LOT of Moon images were simply lost… yeah I know, must be a conspiracy.


[What do you expect from a piggyback mission on a shoestring budget?]



posted on Oct, 6 2007 @ 12:31 AM
link   
I have a thread I started today about a video I saw when I was younger, though it may not absolute proof, it's a pretty good start.


www.abovetopsecret.com...'



posted on Oct, 6 2007 @ 01:43 AM
link   

Originally posted by zorgon

Top of Himalaya Mountains air is thin yet breathable


Now John has also said "breathable for a short time" so maybe we need to start with just how thin an atmosphere can be and still be just breathable...

Should be easy with all the 'space scientists' we have here


The mountaineers here will tell you that you need to be extremely fit to survive more than a few hours without an oxygen tank above 25,000ft - and even the best will succumb after a few days. And our atmosphere extends out a lot further than that.





top topics
 
10
<< 8  9  10    12  13  14 >>

log in

join