NASA Scientist Fired - Promises Disclosure

page: 3
164
<< 1  2    4  5  6 >>

log in

join

posted on Nov, 1 2007 @ 01:34 PM
link   
edit**Is it possible to get back on track again please? I know it is tempting guys but lets get to the story at hand.

Hi guys, just found this. Dark Mission is being discussed in a couple other threads also.

I would first like to point out that Ken Johnston does not have his name on this book. He only provided the pictures to Hoagland and Bara. So unless they payed him for the pictures, then he really has no stake in this other then the truth.

That being said. I am over half way through the book as of right now. Let me say there are some astonishing things in here. The problem is that the pictures alone for the most part are not that profound. However when you put the data and the research with the pictures, you have some mind blowing stuff. There is some new material here also, as far as I know. There are atleast 3 structures that I have never before seen photographs of. These include the proposed huge glass dome complete with a giant spiral topped by a cube structure. There is also a picture of a 1.5 mile high "shard" tower like structure that is pretty amazing. A castle looking structure is also evident that is more convincing than any other Moon/Mars anomoly I have ever seen.

I urge you all to get this book, and actually read the research and not just wait for that 1 defining picture to be posted. Seriously guys, this is good stuff. Anyone else reading the book please chime in here.

[edit on 1-11-2007 by sputniksteve]




posted on Nov, 1 2007 @ 01:35 PM
link   

Originally posted by johnlear
Originally posted by MrPenny



Uh.....no. The tidal forces exerted by the Earth would haul whatever thin atmosphere there is on the moon to the side facing the Earth. Just like the Moon's tidal force raises the ocean level and atmospheric depth, right here on good ol' Earth.



Thanks for the post MrPenny. My opinion is that tidal forces/tidal lock are imaginary forces that were fabricated to account for the moons rotational lock.

It is pure speculation whether or not the moon by itself causes earths tides.

In fact, since the moon is probably a space ship it may be something inside the moon that is causing earths tides. Or something else altogether.

But thanks for the post, everybody has an opinion.


like i said earlier, johnlear seems to believe many things lol

tidal forces arise out of the differential force of gravity experienced at opposing parts of a large body, the result is a "bulge", or force.... probably better explained at wikipedia:
en.wikipedia.org...



posted on Nov, 1 2007 @ 01:35 PM
link   
I wish enough people with the drive, desire, vision, as well as deep pockets could get together to create a truely civilian space agency. It is so strange, the US populous isn't allowed the truth, yet it isn't like we've roped off the moon from China and the like...



posted on Nov, 1 2007 @ 01:36 PM
link   
an on-going discussion about the book which was mentioned
=> " Dark Mission - The Secret History of NASA "
can be found here: www.abovetopsecret.com...'


i really hope that we're up to 'absolute disclosure' right now because it would (without doubt) change the course of history / religion / science and mankind
in general...


great find! (keep this thread up2date)


[edit on 1-11-2007 by EBE154]



posted on Nov, 1 2007 @ 01:38 PM
link   
reply to post by johnlear
 


Complete consternation.

This is supposed to be the home of "intelligent discussion" about alternative theories. Shame on you John....it's impossible to live up to that value based on the content of some of your posts. All I can do is shake my head and wonder what the point is.....

Thank you for your contribution though.....



posted on Nov, 1 2007 @ 01:38 PM
link   
My post just got lost in a jumble of John Lear stuff. Please get back on track guys and scroll up to see my assessment of the book. Thanks.



posted on Nov, 1 2007 @ 01:40 PM
link   
Profit and truth aren't always necessarily mutually exclusive. It is entirely possible to profit from disclosing truth that really is the...well, truth

(honestly, who wouldn't try?)

But this whole press conference thing...has left a really bad taste in my mouth.

I wasted my entire day (and night, coast to coast am anyone?) scouring for *anything* that came from this conference.

I woke up the next day, found the story removed from press.com, and now online at pravda.ru. I immediately felt like a child who had stayed up all night glued to the chimney on Christmas Eve.

However, having said this, I did find a lot of interesting stuff (similar to what other posters are saying in this thread) over at the Associated Press website.

Particularly this story:

www.ap.org...

It's very boring and dry - except for the 2nd to last paragraph - which is what I found particularly interesting.

I guess the whole point of this post is to identify the fact that NASA isn't exactly as forthcoming (proven mind you - not just CT) as it claims it is.

I don't want to get into circular logic here, but, if they can withhold legal reports on safety - the stuff we know about - it lets the imagination really wander to what's withheld that we do NOT know about.

which I guess...after preview my post now...um..isn't really news...I'll try to post more meaningful things in the future...sorry.



posted on Nov, 1 2007 @ 01:40 PM
link   

Originally posted by Aelita

Originally posted by Eddy_Jordan
Partly right, the forces would pull the atmosphere (made up of however many different gases) towards Earth and indeed many of those particles would reach the escape velocity, resulting in a thinner atmosphere on the Earth facing side of the moon.


Eddy, you imply that the gravitational constant on the surface of the moon changes significantly from one location to the other. This is an error on your part.


I'm not convinced that I am in error. The fact that the same face of the moon is towards the Earth at all times could lead to a difference, perhaps substantial, in gravitational potential. But since the gravitation force falls off at 1/the square of the distance, I will admit it is highly unlikely. At the formation of the atmosphere however this difference could have been enough.



posted on Nov, 1 2007 @ 01:40 PM
link   
Im sorry, but this topic is getting off track.

does enterprise mission have photos? Please post them



posted on Nov, 1 2007 @ 01:41 PM
link   
He will never live long enough to present his findings and "stolen" data. And if by some miracle he does get the info out he will be discredited and prosecuted for violating the non-disclosure agreement he signed.

Not to mention he stole the data he was ordered to destroy......that right there means federal prison for life.


On way or another he is dead....his info "lost" and the issue will be moot.






posted on Nov, 1 2007 @ 01:41 PM
link   
reply to post by sputniksteve
 



Alright.....it's a book. This entire thread is hyping a book published with the intent to be sold. As in commerce, money, profit.......

This message brought to you by........



posted on Nov, 1 2007 @ 01:41 PM
link   
OK, someone scan in and post the pictures that Johnston say prove coverup. They can be found in the book "Dark Mission". Let's cut thru the sensationalism and see if Johnston is telling the truth.



posted on Nov, 1 2007 @ 01:43 PM
link   
Uberarcanist....scroll up...I had an informative post about the subject that got flooded out by nonsense. It will answer your question.



posted on Nov, 1 2007 @ 01:43 PM
link   

Originally posted by sputniksteve
My post just got lost in a jumble of John Lear stuff. Please get back on track guys and scroll up to see my assessment of the book. Thanks.


i know that it's probably against the ©opyright but could you send me / us (pm or normal upload) some of the pictures you spoke about? as you know my book hasn't arrived yet and i would really like to see what you have already seen... thanks in advance!



posted on Nov, 1 2007 @ 01:44 PM
link   

Originally posted by sputniksteve
My post just got lost in a jumble of John Lear stuff. Please get back on track guys and scroll up to see my assessment of the book. Thanks.


You are welcome. First, you say yourself that the pics aren't convincing at all. Since they are the primary source of hypothesising, how can I take that seriously? I see martian faces on the surface of Spanish tile I put in my new spanking bathroom. I don't think that aliens were employed at the Spanish factory that manufactured the tiles, and rightly write it off as an optical illusion and a product of the constantly running image regognition process in my brain.


There is also a picture of a 1.5 mile high "shard" tower like structure that is pretty amazing.


A structure of that size would probably be visible from Earth with a good telescope, n'est ce pas?



posted on Nov, 1 2007 @ 01:45 PM
link   
reply to post by EBE154
 


Hi Aelita. You did not read my post correctly. I did not say that the pictures are not convincing at all. I said that the pictures are not profound. They are not an "OMG LOOK AT THAT". You need to take them into the context in which they are being presented. Do you understand what I am saying? It is silly to continue to discount this when you have not even seen the evidence...is it not?

Hi EBE! I will send them to you because I know you have ordered the book. Like I said in the post though it might not make your jaw drop. You really need to read the research that comes with it. Send me your email and I will send some pics. I will have to take with camera though, I dont have a scanner.


[edit on 1-11-2007 by sputniksteve]



posted on Nov, 1 2007 @ 01:46 PM
link   
They images can be found at enterprisemission.com



posted on Nov, 1 2007 @ 01:48 PM
link   

Originally posted by Eddy_Jordan
I'm not convinced that I am in error.


You will be if you do some back-of-the-envelope calculations at the level of freshman physics.


At the formation of the atmosphere however this difference could have been enough.


No. Atmosphere, if present, is in relative equilibrium. "At the formation" clause therefore is moot.



posted on Nov, 1 2007 @ 01:51 PM
link   

Originally posted by sputniksteve
I said that the pictures are not profound. They are not an "OMG LOOK AT THAT". You need to take them into the context in which they are being presented.


So somebody needs to explain how a rock you see on the left is actually a nuclear reactor erected by the aliens, and you go "I see now! It sure looks like a rock, but maybe it is a reactor, after all". It's about as real as martian faces on my bathroom tile.



posted on Nov, 1 2007 @ 01:54 PM
link   
reply to post by Aelita
 


i really don't know what kind of pictures you have seen but simple 'rocks' look different to me......





new topics

top topics



 
164
<< 1  2    4  5  6 >>

log in

join