Discovery Launches at 11:38 EDT. Expects to Reach and Dock With ISS in 44 Hours!

I'm willing to accept that I don't really know what is on the Shuttle, just as I don't know how many satellites it really launches, or what technology the really use.


Ok, so it's a fantasy that secret satellites are launched from the Shuttle? No worries, thanks for that revelation.

Again, I guess that you must have a direct link to the real Mission Controllers who personally tell you what the payload is and the type of technology that it is fitted with?


Huh?

I agree, it's a fairly simple guess of your's to assume that's there nothing secret going on with some Shuttle missions. You make the guess without any real facts as to what payload the Shuttle really carries into orbit.

You win? Wow, were we playing a game? What's your prize? Maybe a personal phone call from Mission Control to thank you for believing everything that NASA.mil does is open and transparent? I'm sure that NASA.mil would love to see more people believing everything that they're told to believe.

Buddhasystem, this is a conspiracy website. Unless you are in complete possession of the facts about what NASA.mil REALLY does, which you are not, then taking your authorative stance makes you look like you might have an agenda to push.

[edit on 17-12-2007 by tezzajw]

Yup typical Skeptic tactics I post evidence that the Shuttle runs a secret shipment and you still want to play games... so that you can 'win'

Well guess what? This is only ONE proof... but proof it is non the less and no amount of stomping or pulling your hair out will make it go away...

The amateurs saw this one yes... because they didn't get it right yet... The articles clear show they had to fake an explosion to "Fool the Russian" but amateurs had them anyway... if they didn't we would not have this proof...

Now does anyone seriously think the Russians were "fooled" Hell they had a HAARP array operational 10 years before us...

Your tactics are faltering lately... and seem more like a grade school teacher that a PhD... which by the way we have taken your word on...

Man that poor Ken Johnston is being torn apart in that NASA scientist thread over his...

For those interested, here's the 1190 page Shuttle Crew Operations Manual, designed to give crew members overviews of the Shuttle systems. It's interesting reading.

Manual

Zorgon, we are not in a kindergarten anymore despite what you may think, and I'm not into "playing games" as much as I am into logic and scientific method (a couple of things that you continuously elect to eschew). Your choice of words is specious -- there was not "shipment" done by Shuttle, to some alleged space platform. They opened a hatch and tossed out a satellite. The fact that many satellites serve military purposes is plain, common knowledge (ask the Soviets). You brought in ZERO new knowledge to this topic, which is -- the shuttle is running moonshine missions switching between wildly incompatible oribits (impossible) all the while making such maneuvers invisible to terrestrial observers, which, as you indicated with your post about Misty-1, is hardly a possibility either.



Really? What tactics? Call your bluff and point out inconsistency? I think I'm doing that pretty well, thank you.

You are going to call that "evidence?" And you expect rationale people to believe that?


Wait, are you saying that this is all you can come up with to prove the shuttle has a secret agenda?



Hmm, are you sure they did not confuse it with one of the secret space stations?

As actual proof of a classified mission... yes at the moment it is the first one I found...

Just how many do I need to prove that the shuttle does have secret missions? I would thing most reasonable people would accept one as proof of principle...

But since you say you have 50 gigs of related files 'at work" maybe you could spend some constructive time in this thread and share some of them...



Besides I am not done yet

Did you seriously doubt, ever, that the Shuttle would so useful stuff for the military once in a while? Survey this, deploy that. That's pretty obvious. However, it does not mean that the Shuttle can change its inclination at will, cloak itself etc etc etc in order to reach some sort of secret platform. I'm not going to repeat the many arguments already given.



Wait, it's about the visits to the "secret space station". So please concentrate on that. If you find that the Shuttle was observed by amateurs or any kind of astronomers away from its published trajectory, I will consider this as a possibility. Deal?

The existence of classified shuttle missions has been known since the program was announced. Are you trying to tell us that you just happen to recently stumble across that fact?


Quality always wins over quantity.



Some of us are still waiting for you to start.

Launching 'classified' satellites does not mean that they are secret programs, especially when the public is informed that a classified satellite will be launched. The only secret involved is what the satellite does.

However, the public is not told how many satellites are launched in complete secrecy. There is a huge distinction between a classified, public space program, as opposed to a completely secret space program that the public knows nothing about.

COOL HAND, IF you were subject to a secrecy order surrounding your work, you wouldn't be telling the public anything that you knew, right? Although you might want to be a whistleblower or a deep-throat and give some very healthy tips to someone investigating what's really going on...

Secret programs, by their very definition are SECRET. They're not for public consumption AT ALL, hence the difficulty to obtain documentation that provides links and clues.

Click here for more information.

Tezza, it's up to you how you perceive the world we all live in. The name of Occam has surfaced a few times in this and other threads, and I personally liked his principle (you may not). It worked well so far for us trying to make sense of this Universe.

I've given this example a few times, and let me do it again: John Lear, for all I know, can be an android sent to us by space aliens (or, which is even more plausible, they didn't send anything but are just posting on this board using an advanced satellite downlink). Now, you don't know whether this is true or not, do you? But let me know, do you think this is indeed the case or not?

I posit that there is not much difference, really, in terms of method and logic, between stating that John is an android (or that I am a mutated lab animal with Internet access) -- and stating that the shuttle runs resupply missions to a secret station (or stations). The recent effort to torpedo this point by saying "oh wow, they launched a classified payload form the shuttle" is just that, an effort to deflect.

As I have stated in other threads, Occam is a crock, especially when it relates to the motives of HUMANS.

Occam's Razor can not and does not take in to account the lengths and measures that humans will strive to deceive and lie to each other. It does not consider their egotistical driven motives to dominate and control.

When dealing with human motives, I prefer to think that the truth is often stranger than fiction. It lets me consider all possible motives, rather than just the plainly obvious that Occam would suggest.

I'm glad for you that you accept at face value what humans tell you to be true, because Occam's Razor implies that it is most likely to be true. I don't subscribe to that, when I know that humans lie and kep things secret... very secret in some circumstances.

You go ahead and believe that the Shuttle has never launched a secret satellite if it pleases you. I'll consider that maybe it has, so there is a reason to keep digging for any stray evidence. Afterall, the USAF keeps aliens under wraps, but I guess you wouldn't believe that either.

Mind you that I never quite banked on human motives in this discussion. I was referring to a reality that's fairly objective, such as shuttle observations by amateurs. There is not a shred of a hint of a whiff that the shuttle ever departed from the advertised orbit. Please note again that human motives aren't even at play here.



Will you pay a visit to John Lear and try to determine if he is an android from the galaxy? Aliens are pretty good at keeping secrets, too. Please answer. Do you think that I am an AI? Will you keep digging "stray evidence" of that?

It's funny that you declare your willingness to dig evidence in the thread which started based on no evidence whatsoever.

Of course they are.

Humans can conspire to launch secret payloads in secret, keeping the knowledge hidden from other humans. Secret payloads can't launch themselves without the input of human desires for doing so.


It's even funnier how we can sometimes stumble across evidence, when we least expect it. We never know which humans read these threads or the secret knowledge that they have. We never know how much of that is passed on in U2Us or friendly tips buried inside public posts.

Unless we keep searching for the evidence we seek, we'll never know anything more than we do. We might as well sit around sharpening Occam's Razor dismissing everything we read.

You haven't answered my JL question. Humans can conspire to replace the real JL with an android, in secret, keeping the knowledge hidden from other humans. Would you care to investigate the matter of Lear being an android? Or: Detroit companies might have conspired to build small antimatter generators into each SUV engine they produce (which explains the poor gas mileage). They then sell the antimatter to the greys, once they extract it from the engine during a scheduled engine check-up. Would you care to "dig" into that?

Huh? Could you break it down into eight parts for me? I have trouble reading garbled nonsense.

How can you compare launching secret satellites from the shuttle to a fantasy about John being an android? Your analogy has failed, Buddhasystem. It has contributed nothing to the discussion about secret uses for the shuttle.

I see! Absolutely factless suggestion that the Shuttle secretly does space acrobatics at imposssible angles is somehow a revelation, and the much more plausible theory that John is a cyborg is somehow "nonsense"? Open your mind!



Because both are baseless claims with a strong SciFi flavour.



Au contraire, mon ami. It showed really well that you are conditioned to accept anything, however improbable, if it comes from a person you perceive to be an authority, in this case JL. An equally ridiculous claim coming from a person without such credentials you dismiss as nonsense, whereas in reality ther is no difference whatsoever. So there.

I do agree that what you typed about John being an android is baseless and patently silly.

Launching secret satellites from the shuttle is baseless? It's absolutely not in the realms of possibility that the shuttle has EVER launched a satellite in secret, at all, never ever??? Ok, fine. Thanks for that revelation.

I guess if most people on Earth have the attitude that it is baseless, then the powers that be can continue to do whatever they like, without question, and continue to get away with it.


Now now, be mindful of the T&Cs, buddhasystem. You can't start attacking me or state what you think about me. There's no need to get personal. Attack my ideas however you like. Do your best to make me look foolish when I am open to the possibility that the shuttle may have launched satellites in secret. Don't assume anything more about me than you need to.

Just hold on a second. Are you honestly telling me that launching military-purpose satellites from the shuttle is in anyway correlated with performing incredible "aerobatics" in space in complete stealth, undetected, and expending tremendous amounts of energy all the while? What you are saying is equivalent to this: "urinary infections can be treated with antibiotics, hence they are probably effective against AIDS". They are not.



I have nothing personal against you and all I do is disagree with your idea of blind acceptance of what I consider a baseless claim from source A (which is considered cool), while rejecting an equally baseless claim from source B (which lacks such credentials).



Read the above. The satellite affair is so beside the point that I am astonished how you keep pushing it.



Oh, I don't presume too much. My "android test" yielded just right amount of information about your way of thinking. I'm trying to understand my interlocutor on the board, is all.



[edit on 19-12-2007 by buddhasystem]