Discovery Launches at 11:38 EDT. Expects to Reach and Dock With ISS in 44 Hours!, page 20
Pages: <<  17    18    19    20    21    22    23  >>
ATS Members have flagged this thread 11 times


reply posted on 14-11-2007 @ 03:25 PM by Havalon
reply to post by weedwhacker



I certainly agree with the weedwacker here, nobody is forcing you to read or believe what is written on these boards, you are allowed to make up your own mind about them and move on.

If you are going to constantly reply or comment with sarcasm, then that is your choice but a discussion is a two way street. The constant requests for proof positive of the SSS is healthy, but what positive proof can you put forward that they are not there?

If 'they' do not want you to 'see' it because it is 'secret' then you have no chance.
What the Iraqi airforce thought was a flight of birds on their radar in '92 turned out to be a lot more deadly.

A little common courtesy will go a long way here at ATS. Dissing somebody will only get you ignored or warned.

By all means 'smack' the theory, but not the theorist.

My 2c




reply posted on 14-11-2007 @ 03:28 PM by buddhasystem
reply to post by weedwhacker



Dear Weedwhacker,

for the benefit of the participants, how do you think we should conduct this discussion? Seriously. Let's say, John is saying something that doesn't match the verifiable facts. Could you give us a template of a statement that tells him about that without seemingly being "mean" (which I don't think I am, but just making sure).


reply posted on 14-11-2007 @ 03:42 PM by 1553B
Originally posted by Havalon
I certainly agree with the weedwacker here, nobody is forcing you to read or believe what is written on these boards, you are allowed to make up your own mind about them and move on.


A few of us on here have asked for easily verifiable proof, and we got a cock & bull reply. Surely a man who makes such fantastic claims and who has the opportunity to prove them should jump at the chance right? If you don't see his excuses and inaction as damming of not only this theory, but all his theories, then you need to go back to school.

I think you're better than that, right?

Originally posted by Havalon
If you are going to constantly reply or comment with sarcasm, then that is your choice but a discussion is a two way street. The constant requests for proof positive of the SSS is healthy, but what positive proof can you put forward that they are not there?


"Ridicule is the only weapon which can be used against unintelligible propositions. Ideas must be distinct before reason can act upon them" - Thomas Jefferson

The burden of proof lies with those who make the fantastic claim, not those who discount it. As far as I can telll, this is the only one of his outlandish claims which can be tested, and proven, from your own backyard. It is up to "expert" John Lear to put up, or shut up. Period.

You might think that's mean but most people call that the scientific process.

Originally posted by Havalon
A little common courtesy will go a long way here at ATS.

Consider it retribution for insulting our collective intelligence with his bogus theories.


reply posted on 14-11-2007 @ 03:54 PM by weedwhacker
reply to post by buddhasystem



Hello...I'm not defending Capt Lear, nor am I advocating being dismissive of his claims outright. I suppose it's because I feel some affinity for him as a fellow aviator. I spent 35 years flying airplanes. Perhaps I was too sensitive, sorry. Maybe someday I'll fly out to Las Vegas and take him out for a beer.

Regarding real science? That's what I personally believe in. I just like to keep reading about new discoveries...


reply posted on 14-11-2007 @ 04:14 PM by Havalon
Originally posted by 1553B


Thank you for your post 1553B

A few of us on here have asked for easily verifiable proof, and we got a cock & bull reply. Surely a man who makes such fantastic claims and who has the opportunity to prove them should jump at the chance right? If you don't see his excuses and inaction as damming of not only this theory, but all his theories, then you need to go back to school.


I think he has attempted to show what proof he has, but if it is supposed to be secret then a perfect high quality high-res shot of the blinkin' thing is going to be a bit difficult to produce. I agree with you some of Johns theories are a bit 'out there', but the US is capable of having the technology and the wherewithall to create a covert platform in space.
Intelligence gathering has always been a well funded and high priority with the Executive branch of the US government.

I think you're better than that, right?


I keep an open mind until verification of the facts has been established. So far it has not, to my satisfaction, so I continue with the open mind.



"Ridicule is the only weapon which can be used against unintelligible propositions. Ideas must be distinct before reason can act upon them" - Thomas Jefferson


One mans opinion - I respect him for saying that - but I do not agree with him. Some of the greatest inventions were by accident, not by distinctive reasoning. Without theory we remain closeted with closed minds.

The burden of proof lies with those who make the fantastic claim, not those who discount it. As far as I can telll, this is the only one of his outlandish claims which can be tested, and proven, from your own backyard. It is up to "expert" John Lear to put up, or shut up. Period.


I believe he has provided all the evidence that he has on this, as mentioned, to get a decent hi-res shot would be difficult if htey do not want you to see it. Work is still being done on that (or so I understand)

You might think that's mean but most people call that the scientific process.


Let us agree to disagree on that, I still admire civility as one of mans best traits.

Consider it retribution for insulting our collective intelligence with his bogus theories.


I chose to ignore that comment, it has the word 'retribution' in it. not very civil in my opinion.

Thanks again.




[edit on 14-11-2007 by Havalon]

[edit on 14-11-2007 by Havalon]


reply posted on 14-11-2007 @ 05:11 PM by zorgon
Originally posted by StudioGuy
If there are people who are screaming that the shuttle is docking at a secret space station (or multiple stations), then it should be their MISSION to do just that.


No one is 'screaming' merely studying possibilities... and why should it be my mission? I already take up more time than I should just showing what I do...

However I am getting more input daily that tells me I am on the right track... and some of this data even comes from a skeptic When I have it together, trust me I won't hesitate to show it...


They should organize themselves and take turns tracking and photographing the shuttle and/or ISS on every orbit for its entire mission. It should also be a goal to have people on all sides of the planet doing the same thing so as not to have any times when the shuttle isn't being observed.


Again... WHY should 'we' do this? You seem to be under the impression we are on a mission to prove to everyone... well me personally, I am here to find out for myself and share what I know... so others can find it for themselves...

Maybe if there was a way to get rich off this quest (as many have already accused us of) then I might consider a world wide organization to do as you wish. But my pocket is not very deep so I will have to put that Mission on hold.


Of course, after that yields no results, which is inevitible, the SSS crowd will just claim they're only docked on the light side of the earth when a ground observer can't see them.


AH! So you have already predicted the outcome... I guess I can scrap the mission plans then... you already have the results it seems...

On that 'light side' thing... thanks for the tip! Might come in handy

But I do know one thing... we are sure ruffling a lot of feathers lately


reply posted on 14-11-2007 @ 05:31 PM by 1553B
Originally posted by zorgon
No one is 'screaming' merely studying possibilities... and why should it be my mission? I already take up more time than I should just showing what I do...

What DO you do? Look at blurry pictures on the internet? I'll ask you the same thing I asked John lear - why not take the pictures yourself!?

Oh now I remember... cloaking devices! Funny how those cloaking devices still let your friends take blurry pictures...

Originally posted by zorgon
However I am getting more input daily that tells me I am on the right track... and some of this data even comes from a skeptic When I have it together, trust me I won't hesitate to show it...

More blurry pictures does not data make.

Originally posted by zorgon
Again... WHY should 'we' do this? You seem to be under the impression we are on a mission to prove to everyone... well me personally, I am here to find out for myself and share what I know... so others can find it for themselves...

Because you make the claims, why not make it undeniable? It would be SO EASY!

Instead, you hide behind touchy feally B.S. rather than prove to you, me, and the world that you're right.

Originally posted by zorgon
Maybe if there was a way to get rich off this quest (as many have already accused us of) then I might consider a world wide organization to do as you wish. But my pocket is not very deep so I will have to put that Mission on hold.

Aha, another "I don't have the money to prove my theory correct" excuse. You don't even need money, or a worldwide organization. You just need your eyes, a clear night, and a clue as to where to look.


reply posted on 14-11-2007 @ 05:40 PM by 1553B
Originally posted by zorgon
Well when we even make it sound like we KNOW rather than "its just our opinion' you skeptics call us to task...

So I respectfully ask that we play by the same rules... I would like you to explain and back up your statement "I KNOW there aren't."

I'm a stargazer. At every opportunity I go out and watch the ISS and shuttle go overhead. I've seen it with my own eyes; The ISS flies overhead on it's 51.6 degree path. The shuttle launches from Florida on a 51.6 degree inclination trajectory. they're the only two things in the sky at that inclination. That's it. You can even seen the shuttle approach the ISS and depart the ISS. keep in mind, this is with the naked eye - no fancy equipment required.

I've tested your theory, and mine, and yours is bunk. You've tested neither, and for no good reason. Why don't you?

Originally posted by zorgon
Either that or retract it and modify it to say "I BELIEVE there aren't."

I know there aren't SSS' like I know there aren't fairies and leprechauns - there's not a shred of evidence for any of them, and that works for me.

Originally posted by zorgon
You CAN if you have an anti grav drive... I am pretty sure the shuttle doesn't LOL but but if it did...

The shuttle does have anti-gravity capability - it's called two boosters and three main engines.

Awesome. So on top of the cloaking device you have to have anti-gravity drive as well. Are they any other things you'd like to make up to make your theory even remotely plausible? Like I keep saying. You needn't make up stuff. Go outside on a clear night and watch.

[edit on 14-11-2007 by 1553B]
Pages: <<  17    18    19    20    21    22    23  >>    ^^TOP^^