Help ATS with a contribution via PayPal:
learn more

Dark Mission - The Secret History of NASA

page: 1
7
<<   2 >>

log in

join

posted on Oct, 20 2007 @ 08:42 PM
link   
i just wanted to make you guys aware of the new book Dark Mission - The Secret History of NASA which is now available for purchase! please do not interpret this as a promotion or advertisement of any kind... my real intention was just to cover the topic it deals with and to start a new discussion about it. have any of you maybe even read the book and can share their thoughts about it? thanks in advance for additional information regarding the facts which are presented in the book. a nice preview of the first pages can be found here: Excerpts.pdf


[edit on 20-10-2007 by EBE154]




posted on Oct, 20 2007 @ 11:07 PM
link   
www.youtube.com...

yeah, here is the interview



posted on Oct, 20 2007 @ 11:44 PM
link   
I think I read pretty much everything I needed to on the Excerpt's Page 3, where it said, "Written by Richard C. Hoagland."

From there, I can imagine the pages filled with blurry, headache-inducing photos, "imaginative" interpretation of images, unverifiable conjecture and fantasy, and much more.

Well, hey, Hoagland has car payments to make like everybody else, I guess. It's just unfortunate that so many people will consider it all gospel and clog up forums like this one for years to come parroting the stuff.



posted on Oct, 21 2007 @ 12:08 AM
link   
If anyone reads Dark Mission or has more information on "Data's Head" I would like to know more about that artifact. On the recent C to C interview I think Richard spoke about how the government got its hands on Data's Head and after a very long time managed to communicate with the robot which taught us about the ancient civilization that created it along with the civilization that was once there.

John Lear thinks there is a breathable atmosphere, vegetation, and mining operation currently going on the moon. Richard believes there are just ruins of an ancient civilization but nobody there now, I don’t know if he thinks there is or ever was an atmosphere. Does anyone else have a different take or opinion?

I find the whole subject very interesting but it’s still a very hard pill for me to swallow.



posted on Oct, 21 2007 @ 12:11 AM
link   

Originally posted by Nohup
I think I read pretty much everything I needed to on the Excerpt's Page 3, where it said, "Written by Richard C. Hoagland."

From there, I can imagine the pages filled with blurry, headache-inducing photos, "imaginative" interpretation of images, unverifiable conjecture and fantasy, and much more.

Well, hey, Hoagland has car payments to make like everybody else, I guess. It's just unfortunate that so many people will consider it all gospel and clog up forums like this one for years to come parroting the stuff.


You forgot to say "in my opinion". Not everyone feels the same about Hoagland as you do



posted on Oct, 21 2007 @ 07:19 AM
link   
exactly... if you only compare the ideas of richard c. hoagland whith those of john lear you'll see how different the believes are which exist about nasa the moon and what's probably going on there. nonetheless mr. hoagland was a consultant to nasa and he also writes about his longtime experience there in the book. and what is even more interesting (at least for me...) : imagine that there was really an ancient civilization in our solar system that was suddenly wiped out after an cataclystic event. there should be endless amounts of traces on other planets which would clearly indicate that there were once far advanced and intelligent beings on these planets. and now involve nasa in this whole picture. if they have found this 'truth' about our complete history and maybe were even able to answer the question of 'who' created us i think it would be very likely that they try everything to simply cover it up. such a new reality would change the course of history and people would rethink their lives over and over again. just think of all the stuff humanity would simply have to accept from one minute to another... yes... i believe in the theories of mr. hoagland that there were indeed highly advanced ancient civilizations in our solar system aeons of years ago...

and now ask yourself... why haven't we been to the moon for over 30 years now and WHY(!) does the president himself announce in 2004 that we will not return to the moon before 2020 which is an incredibly huge timespan?!... i think we all know the answer : sooner or later our own technology would make the discovery of this new reality inevitable and other nations who recently joined the space race are a contributing factor that probably threatens nasa's hidden agenda of cover-up...




[edit on 21-10-2007 by EBE154]



posted on Oct, 21 2007 @ 09:39 AM
link   

Originally posted by jojoKnowsBest
If anyone reads Dark Mission or has more information on "Data's Head" I would like to know more about that artifact. On the recent C to C interview I think Richard spoke about how the government got its hands on Data's Head and after a very long time managed to communicate with the robot which taught us about the ancient civilization that created it along with the civilization that was once there.

John Lear thinks there is a breathable atmosphere, vegetation, and mining operation currently going on the moon. Richard believes there are just ruins of an ancient civilization but nobody there now, I don’t know if he thinks there is or ever was an atmosphere. Does anyone else have a different take or opinion?



yeah, more links......

Moon Secrets Revealed : John Lear & Richard Hoagland Pt.1

www.youtube.com...



posted on Oct, 21 2007 @ 09:54 AM
link   
well besides the youtoube interviews (which are really great) there are also some other links you should definitely have a look at!


Dark Mission

Enterprise Mission

Lunar Anomalis

right now i honestly hope that china wins the new space race and shows the world what NASA has covered up since decades... when was their lunar probe supposed to launch by the way? any information on that?


[edit on 21-10-2007 by EBE154]



posted on Oct, 22 2007 @ 04:55 AM
link   
reply to post by EBE154
 


ohhh....and some more links.....lol....i just keep finding them......

Missing Apollo 11 Tapes
Richard C. Hoagland is a former space science museum curator; a former NASA consultant, and during the historic Apollo Missions to the Moon, was science advisor to Walter Cronkite and CBS News. For over 20 years, Hoagland has been leading an outside scientific team in a critically acclaimed independent analysis of possible intelligently-designed artifacts on Mars. Richard and his team's investigations have been quietly extended to include over 30 years of previously hidden data from NASA, Soviet, and Pentagon missions to the Moon.

Hoagland reported on the nearly 700 boxes of missing Apollo 11 data and videotapes. "Someone has stolen our heritage," he declared. These recordings were made using slow scan TV (SSTV) and were of higher quality than what was seen on network broadcasts of the moon landing.

Hoagland pointed towards lunar images he's labeled as 'The Tower' and 'The Shard,' as the reason why these boxes may have disappeared. 'The Tower,' described as a glass ruin 10-15 miles high, is an artifact of an ancient civilization that was once on the moon, he believes.

www.youtube.com...



posted on Oct, 22 2007 @ 11:02 AM
link   


Hoagland pointed towards lunar images he's labeled as 'The Tower' and 'The Shard,' as the reason why these boxes may have disappeared. 'The Tower,' described as a glass ruin 10-15 miles high, is an artifact of an ancient civilization that was once on the moon, he believes.


this would change everything we know today (history / religion / science -especially evolution-) in a matter of seconds... we just never really found out about it... until now...


but the final question is still unanswered. how can we 'the people' get the knowledge this agency obtains?
?

[...]



posted on Oct, 22 2007 @ 11:17 AM
link   

Originally posted by nightmare_david
You forgot to say "in my opinion". Not everyone feels the same about Hoagland as you do


Well, in my opinion, those people are essentially science fiction fans, since Hoagland's stuff amounts to basically the same thing. His alien/space "theories" are roughly equivalent to the "DaVinci Code" notions. Long on conjecture, long on making A plus B equal D, woefully short on verifiable facts.

I guess he finally figured out that nobody's buying that "Face on Mars" tune any more, that he played to the bitter end, and now he's come up with something new to sell. Go ahead buy it. Like I said, he's got car payments like anybody else. Me, I think I'll pass.



posted on Oct, 22 2007 @ 11:24 AM
link   
i certainly understand your point but can you for example prove that the face on mars is not an artificial construction? do you have any verifiable facts? can you debunk his 'theories' when it comes to certain numbers and the possible importance of maths for our 'ancient creators' who once used to live in our solar system? no you can't either... of course the whole story sounds like sci-fi and pure imagination but if you consider a person to be honest and trustful you have to believe what he says / claims. i personally cannot believe that someone would spend so much time of his life in order to sell us things that he himself does not truely believe in... but again... that's just my opinion...


[edit on 22-10-2007 by EBE154]



posted on Oct, 22 2007 @ 11:25 AM
link   
I am glad you started this thread actually. I ordered the book last week or the week before. I am going to try and pick it up today and I am sure it will be a quick read. I will give my input once I'm done.

I think Mr. Hoagland's theories are amazing. If you have the chance, listen to Richard and Mike Barra on C2C, they did an interview concerning the release of the book this month. It is pretty entertaining, it is really hard to believe that these guys are just out to make a buck. Personally i think they will find something eventually.

***Oh yeah, don't forget that they are presenting their information to the "International Press Corp." later this month also. Not the first time he has done this, but at least it gives a lot more credibility then just going on fringe programs and websites. Know anyone else in the field that has the balls to do what Mr. Hoagland does?



posted on Oct, 22 2007 @ 11:26 AM
link   

Originally posted by EBE154
why haven't we been to the moon for over 30 years now and WHY(!) does the president himself announce in 2004 that we will not return to the moon before 2020 which is an incredibly huge timespan?!


Because there's no money in it, that's why. It was ridiculously expensive for the amount of science that it generated. The original moon program was a big publicity contest with the Soviet Union, pushed by JFK, who was a huge hawk, and once the U.S. public felt that it had established its dominance of space there was no reason to continue it. Richard Nixon in particular didn't feel like continuing that espensive legacy from Kennedy (who he despised), with the economy in turmoil and people howling at him to stop the Vietnam war and finance more social programs.

The only mystery here is why people can't see how simple and obvious it is, and instead want to spin some kind of alien conspiracy fiction. It has to do with money, folks. Money. Not aliens.



posted on Oct, 22 2007 @ 11:31 AM
link   

Originally posted by EBE154
i certainly understand your point but can you for example prove that the face on mars is not an artificial construction?


No, because no one can prove a negative. It's up to Hoagland and his supporters like yourself to supply positive evidence of your claims that stand up to reasonable, rational analysis.

And if you don't understand that basic notion, there's really no point in continuing this discussion.



posted on Oct, 22 2007 @ 11:34 AM
link   

Originally posted by sputniksteve
I am glad you started this thread actually. I ordered the book last week or the week before. I am going to try and pick it up today and I am sure it will be a quick read. I will give my input once I'm done.

I think Mr. Hoagland's theories are amazing. If you have the chance, listen to Richard and Mike Barra on C2C, they did an interview concerning the release of the book this month. It is pretty entertaining, it is really hard to believe that these guys are just out to make a buck. Personally i think they will find something eventually.

***Oh yeah, don't forget that they are presenting their information to the "International Press Corp." later this month also. Not the first time he has done this, but at least it gives a lot more credibility then just going on fringe programs and websites. Know anyone else in the field that has the balls to do what Mr. Hoagland does?


thanks for your post! i appreciate it a lot and i'm already looking forward to an interesting discussion with you about the content and especially the 'illustrations / pictures' this new book will include. i actually didn't know that hoagland and bara are going to present their information to the "IPC". that's again another step that proves how important this topic is for them and how much time they spent in order to 'inform' us about what they believe is the truth. unfortunately i personally have to wait until the 15th of november due to european shipment via amazon ('im from germany) but as soon as i have it i will certainly read it as fast as possible! over and over again...


edit to nohup:


And if you don't understand that basic notion, there's really no point in continuing this discussion.


i understand that basic notion very well...
and yes... you're probably right... nonetheless it's 'in dubio pro reo' [...] we have a theory that you don't share because of your beloved logic. (i guess...) [...] and even a 'face on mars' (artificial or not) needs a serious investigation! (at least!)

and to your post before... if you take a look at how much the nasa budget was cut after the successful moonlanding / the end of the apollo mission it raises some serious questions... i think this will go a bit far off but i'll try to explain it anyway... have you ever heard of nasa spin-offs? (=> technology that was developed / even discovered through space exploration and then used on earth by huge companies ( Intel for example ) who than made enormous profits... now just think of the possible money they could have made if they would have extended their programs and space exploration in general. the moon also offers some very interesting resources (like helium3) which will be essential in future. sry but i just don't buy your explanation... and also look at the new spacecraft ('CEV') they have build... it's the same design (or very similar at least) that was used for the apollo missions and it's not really a new invention or a technological leap forward... that's what makes me wonder and there are probably tons of other things that don't add up for me instead(!) of money as the only reasonable explanation for this...

[edit on 22-10-2007 by EBE154]



posted on Oct, 22 2007 @ 11:45 AM
link   
I am not sure EBE154 if you are familiar with Coast2coastam or not but in case not it is a radio show here. You can listen to the last couple months shows on the Internet. It costs about 7 dollars a month to be a member but it is money well worth it in my opinion. If you do indeed know what I am talking about, and you either have/or will get the membership there I can supply you with the 2 show dates I am speaking of.

And Nohup. I am sorry my friend, but I flat out don't buy the money thing for the reason we are not going to the moon. Do you honestly believe the U.S.A. is going to "pass" on moon operations because of funding? Seriously? I have news for you, they are going to do what ever they want, regardless of whether they have the money. If we really wanted to be kicking it on the moon, we would be there yesterday.

*edit for those pesky their, there, they're

[edit on 22-10-2007 by sputniksteve]



posted on Oct, 22 2007 @ 12:01 PM
link   


I am not sure EBE154 if you are familiar with Coast2coastam or not but in case not it is a radio show here. You can listen to the last couple months shows on the Internet. It costs about 7 dollars a month to be a member but it is money well worth it in my opinion. If you do indeed know what I am talking about, and you either have/or will get the membership there I can supply you with the 2 show dates I am speaking of.


yes i'm familiar with it and i think i already know the 2 show dates that you are referring to. i actually don't have a membership there but i think it'll be up on youtube sooner or later. but thanks anyway for the hint! now i certainly won't miss it...



posted on Oct, 22 2007 @ 02:41 PM
link   
Ok I have picked up my book. From my first glances, the pictures are not as profound as I had hoped for. However there are a lot of pictures that I have never seen before, so that is a plus. I will let you know after some reading today.



posted on Oct, 22 2007 @ 03:57 PM
link   
okay thanks in advance! i think with 'not as profound as you hoped for' you probably mean that they cannot be taken as verifiable evidence to prove certain things right?! or did you maybe expect another quality? sorry for the on-going questions but i'm really curious about the book... besides you should have a look at this:

=>

Errata



All books contain some errors, and Dark Mission is no exception. The following is a list of known errors in “Dark Mission – The Secret History of NASA.” Please send notice of any other errors you find to mikebara@darkmission.net and we will post them here. All errors will be corrected in the revised edition of Dark Mission.



Introduction, PG. V - Text reads;

Because of these true NASA heroes, real space history as about to officially begin again.

Should Read;

Because of these true NASA heroes, real space history is about to officially begin again.



PG. 11 - Figures shown as "ν2, ν3, ν5" should be :√2, √3, √5."



PG. 30 - Bottom of page, "[Fig. 2-5]" should be "[Fig. 2-3]."



PG. 185 - Fig 4-15 is missing the caption. Should read: Apollo 10 frame AS-10-32-4819, showing different view of highly rectilinear “LA” features, located adjacent to Ukert Crater (frame center, far left).



PG. 330 - Fig 7-9 - "honeycomb structure" should be two words, not one.



Color figure 23 caption reads "Lane" instead of "Laney."



PG 504 - Fig. 12-11 has wrong caption. Should read: Composite of two video panned frames, showing TV camera view of Nansen from “up slope” (looking down on Valley, and north). The “shelf” is the ridge running through the center of the image. No publicly released Apollo views exist of the shadowed interior of Nansen -- in any orbital or surface Taurus-Littrow imagery (NASA).

=>

[...] obviously there are some minor mistakes in the first version of the book (which you probably have) so this should be quite helpful...


[edit on 22-10-2007 by EBE154]





new topics

top topics



 
7
<<   2 >>

log in

join