Help ATS with a contribution via PayPal:
learn more

NASA Scientist Fired - Promises Disclosure

page: 52
164
<< 49  50  51    53  54  55 >>

log in

join

posted on Dec, 27 2007 @ 01:18 PM
link   

Originally posted by JimO
Zorgon, I have no trouble at all with encouraging sales of the book.


And I have no trouble buying books, even from the 'wrong side of the fence'


It's easier to get a point of view without all the 'background noise'





posted on Dec, 27 2007 @ 02:07 PM
link   

Originally posted by JimO
Is there any word in this title that is NOT a lie?

"NASA" -- nope
"scientist" -- nope
"fired" - nope
"Promises" -- nope
"Disclosure" -- nope.

This is an amazing record and sets a standard nobody can hope to beat.
A five word title, and every single word is a lie.
My hat's off to you!


TAKEN FROM PAGE ONE

"NASA"
...former manager of the Data and Photo Control Department at NASA’s Lunar Receiving Laboratory ....

"Scientist"
...U.S. scientists unveil NASA’s secrets about cities on the Moon and microbes on Mars...

"fired"

...Ferrari apparently decided to remove him arbitrarily from the SSA Program this week without cause.....

...was abruptly terminated Tuesday morning, October 23rd,...

...I have nothing to lose. I have quarreled with NASA and I got fired,” Ken Johnston said....

I said: NASA Dismisses Former Apollo Photo and Data Manager from JPL Educational Program...

"Promises"

...Dr. Johnstonwill present documentation of his claims, credentials and key role at NASA October 30th.

...Enterprise Mission to Hold Press Briefing on Possible Connection Between Next Space Shuttle Discovery Mission and Classified NASA Findings, at the National Press Club on Tuesday, Oct. 30

I call an announcement for a press release a 'promise'

"Disclosure"

...well you know its funny how EVERYONE has completely overlooked the issue with NASA withholding and attempting to delete the airplane safety study as was also mentioned on page one as part of the disclosure.

www.earthtimes.org...


Last week, NASA ordered the contractor that conducted the survey to purge all related data from its computers. Congress intervened Monday, saying it will launch a formal investigation and instruct NASA to keep all its data. Griffin said he already was ordering that all survey data be preserved.


NASA mum on plane data that might scare you - CNN.com
www.cnn.com...

So it would seem that every word in the title of this post is taken from the original source... so I do not understand how you can call the title a lie... I am sure that your client/employer NBC has on occasion picked titles to 'draw in the crowd' I mean look at CNN's title above...

Whether or not the reports can be verified... well that was the purpose of starting a DISCUSSION thread

Now if that is all you can come up with "The title is a lie.."
I must say I am disappointed...

And to everyone else in the thread... The fact that NASA covered up and attempted to delete a report on airplane safety to the point that congress had to step in and put a stop to it...

If that doesn't prove NASA is not working with your best interests at heart... and if suppressing a report that effects anyone who flies doesn't make you mad as hell...

Well then I doubt there will ever be any disclosure because nothing gets through the rhetoric...

I can't believe that this part, something that has main stream media on top of it and is documented, was completely dropped and ignored in favor of personal vendetta's

Happy New Year... (if we make it that far
)


[edit on 27-12-2007 by zorgon]



posted on Dec, 27 2007 @ 02:15 PM
link   
Z,

the Ken in this thread was not a scientist. He was a clerk handling photo materials, for a relatively short period of time. He was not fired from NASA in the sense that his contract with NASA, as an employee, was recently terminated. The title of the thread is an innuendo at best and in any case a dubious attempt at sensationalism. By the BFFT standrards, this is squarely a lie.

You knownlingly deviated even from the PRAVDA source (which is already a tabloid) to further the sensationalist notes in the OP. I call it a fabrication.


[edit on 27-12-2007 by buddhasystem]



posted on Dec, 31 2007 @ 07:04 AM
link   

Originally posted by Blaine91555
reply to post by Nohup
 


I just did a search. You can get a Doctorate in Meta-Physics from any number of on-line courses. Just not from a credible or accredited School. Pony up the money and you too can call yourself Dr.


He should hide that fact if this fellow wants to be taken seriously.


Enroll Today
Begin Studying Toward Your Degree in Metaphysics Today.
Now for as low as $35.31 per month.

Source


Come on, he holds three BS degress and have worked for NASA for 17 years, part of the time as a test pilot (check the rigorous tests you have to endure for that sort of job). What more credentials do you need, really, is credible disclosure exclusive to Phd's in Mathematics, Physics, Astrophysics (the more combinations the better?) from MIT, Oxford, Berkeley and other top Universities only?


[edit on 31-12-2007 by tangent45]



posted on Dec, 31 2007 @ 08:40 AM
link   

Originally posted by tangent45
Come on, he holds three BS degress and have worked for NASA for 17 years, part of the time as a test pilot


Tangent45, from what I've learned on these threads, he was never a test pilot for NASA and his verifiable credentials end at pre-flight training. Just a reality check.


What more credentials do you need, really, is credible disclosure exclusive to Phd's in Mathematics, Physics, Astrophysics (the more combinations the better?) from MIT, Oxford, Berkeley and other top Universities only?


Look, we are dealing with a para-scientific claims here. I for one am sure that the "Meta physics" degree (for which he got a "deploma") was touted in the hope (not entirely unfounded, as is evident from your post) that people would somehow assume this has something to do with physics. Let's assume Ken had a degree in women's studies and his principal opus was "Emancipation of the Woman in the 1970s South Korea". It hardly precludes Ken from making a "disclosure" but it sure as hell doesn't add to his credibility in the subject matter. Let me extend this one bit further and invite you to imagine for a second that Ken was a chef at the NASA cafeteria for 5 years, and when passing the photo lab, he saw a few blurred pics that might have looked like alien ships. He made a xerox copy and brought it to Barra. Does his being a chef contribute to his credibility?

The "deploma" in "Meta Physics" from an obscure on-line sham was meant to bolster his credibility and you must be lying to yourself if you don't accepts this. Alas, it only painted him in a dubious light.



posted on Dec, 31 2007 @ 05:54 PM
link   

Originally posted by buddhasystem
Let's assume Ken had a degree in women's studies and his principal opus was "Emancipation of the Woman in the 1970s South Korea"... Let me extend this one bit further and invite you to imagine for a second that Ken was a chef at the NASA cafeteria for 5 years, and when passing the photo lab, he saw a few blurred pics that might have looked like alien ships. He made a xerox copy and brought it to Barra.

Why do you insist to include off-topic drivel into your posts, Buddhasystem?

Your above quote is based on false assumptions that has no relevance to this thread.

Stick to the facts, please.



posted on Dec, 31 2007 @ 05:58 PM
link   
reply to post by tezzajw
 


I believe that's a 10 yard penalty for debunking the debunker.

1st down Teezajw.

Becker



posted on Jan, 1 2008 @ 01:44 PM
link   
reply to post by johnlear
 


Do you agree with all the numbers (size, distance and density of the Sun and the Moon) used by Newton in those calculations about tides (if I didn't got your reference wrong this is what he was talking about in that proposition)?


Edit: sorry for being off-topic and late.


[edit on 1/1/2008 by ArMaP]



posted on Jan, 1 2008 @ 10:20 PM
link   

Originally posted by tangent45
Come on, he holds three BS degress and have worked for NASA for 17 years, part of the time as a test pilot (check the rigorous tests you have to endure for that sort of job). What more credentials do you need, really,..?
[edit on 31-12-2007 by tangent45]


As Buddha mentioned, there is nothing but his claims that he holds such degrees (the 'doctorate of metaphysics' certificate is not a 'PhD' by ANY academic standard) and was ever a pilot of ANY kind (a Marine Corps astronaut buddy of mine checked with the Pentagon, and they told him there is no record of ANY officer pilot named Ralph Kennedy 'Ken' Johnston in the 1960s or any other time). His CV as documented on his OWN bio statement shows NO time sufficient to even BECOME a pilot and serve a duty tour in F-4's, before he went to work for Grumman as a LM cockpit operator -- what the folks who do the work affectionately call 'switch monkey.' Yet he calls himself a 'test pilot' (a term NOT used in his official job description documentation) despite never having gotten even an INCH off the ground while at Grumman.

You appear over-eager to defend the con job you were a willing and cooperative victim to -- yet what do you bet, you're mad at me and Buddha, and not the deceivers, for your being deceived.



posted on Jan, 2 2008 @ 11:14 AM
link   

Originally posted by tezzajw
Your above quote is based on false assumptions that has no relevance to this thread.


Well, tezz, there is nothing "false" in what I said because I explicitely never stated that Ken was an expert in women's studies. My argument was directly relevant to this thread because Ken was falsely billed by Zorgon as a scientist and his credentials were defined as a "deploma" in "Meta physics". My contention, therefore, that Ken's so-called credentials are entirely irrelevant and in no way make him a scientist. What's more, that "firing" part was the further part of the whole innuendo (the title of the thread)... Which really reads like there was a brilliant scientist who discovered life on the Moon and it cost him his NASA career.


Stick to the facts, please.


That's what I've been talking about all the time.



posted on Jan, 2 2008 @ 03:44 PM
link   
reply to post by buddhasystem
 


Although I agree with you regarding the need to know if Ken Johnston ever was a NASA scientist I think you should avoid point the wrong spelling of diploma; it is irrelevant (in my point of view) because that spelling was not on the diploma, just on the filename, and that filename could have been created by anyone.



posted on Jan, 2 2008 @ 04:29 PM
link   

Originally posted by ArMaP
reply to post by buddhasystem
 


Although I agree with you regarding the need to know if Ken Johnston ever was a NASA scientist I think you should avoid point the wrong spelling of diploma; it is irrelevant (in my point of view) because that spelling was not on the diploma, just on the filename, and that filename could have been created by anyone.


I agree! Thanks or pointing that out, I really forgot how it got into this thread. Indeed, the "deploma" is never featured on the document granted by the baptist reform church in Colorado.



posted on Jan, 2 2008 @ 10:22 PM
link   
"I think you should avoid point the wrong spelling of diploma; it is irrelevant (in my point of view) because that spelling was not on the diploma, just on the filename, and that filename could have been created by anyone. "

Nonsense. The document was scanned either by Johnston himself, or by Hoagland's attack-gerbil, Mikey Bara. Can you name any other plausible candidate?

And Bara posted it on the official site. He knew the file name.

Hypothesis: the misspelling is deliberate because even Bara realizes it's not a 'real' diploma.



posted on Jan, 2 2008 @ 10:26 PM
link   

Originally posted by buddhasystem
Indeed, the "deploma" is never featured on the document granted by the baptist reform church in Colorado.


Careful!! The only thing we can state for sure is that the document was created by a company using the title of "The Colorado Reform Baptist Church, Incorporated".

There is no evidence that the company was, or owned, a church. Or had any Baptists as employees.

Its use of the name was arguably deceptive, so terminological precision is utterly necessary.

Can anybody with access to Colorado incorporation records in the 1980s obtain information on that company, including its officials?



posted on Jan, 4 2008 @ 02:55 AM
link   
It’s interesting that it always boils down to money and power. Mr. Hoagland has been banging on about openness and disclosure and NASA to reveal all and the moment he gets his hands on 'Something' its withheld and a book is produced. I'd been a fan of his for many years and used to enjoy his site a lot but the site in 2007 for instance wasn't updated for months. I went to a talk he, Robert Buval and Graham Hancock give here in the UK about 10years ago and you know what, all the hype of change and disclosure that they said (based on their sources inside NASA/Government) never happened.

This is nothing new and disclosures will NEVER happen because if half of what John Lear/Hoagland etc elude to be true? Then, the fallout would bring down everything that people hold onto as reality. Trying to get ‘normal’ open-minded people to accept that Fluoride in water/Toothpaste has nothing to do with protecting our teeth is a challenge to say the least, even with all the documented evidence to support the fraud. What challenges would there be to patriots who actually believe in their Governments/Media outlets, only to find that they have been lied to and manipulated to server a higher agenda that certainly has nothing to do with the masses?

You only have to go on the 911 Threads to see the pig-headedness of those that can’t see the event for what it really was i.e. a well planned/executed operation to allow another phase in this on-going global deception. Do you think that these people could or would accept a NASA disclosure?



posted on Jan, 4 2008 @ 10:15 AM
link   

Originally posted by mlmijyd
You only have to go on the 911 Threads to see the pig-headedness of those that can’t see the event for what it really was i.e. a well planned/executed operation to allow another phase in this on-going global deception. Do you think that these people could or would accept a NASA disclosure?


In you terminology, I may well be a pig-headed bastard. Fine. However, I would embrace any and all "disclosure" if the is an iota of real information in it, as opposed to a heap of speculations about what the various optical artifacts might be in these photos. If you are saying there is a pyramid on the moon, show it to us already.



posted on Jan, 4 2008 @ 08:10 PM
link   

Originally posted by buddhasystem

If you are saying there is a pyramid on the moon, show it to us already.


I did already! Please check out Mike Singh's thread '' Huge Tower-Like Structure Near Copernicus! '' the last post on page 1 dated 4 July 2007 @ 1154. I posted a link to the Hubble Space Telescope image of Copernicus crater.

Please take a look and see if there is anything you think that looks like a pyramid ( or geometric shape ) as viewed from above.



posted on Jan, 5 2008 @ 01:15 PM
link   
reply to post by pippadee
 


With all due respect, this is a classic case of pixellated blur being billed as an alien structure. Peace.



posted on Jan, 5 2008 @ 03:20 PM
link   
reply to post by buddhasystem
 


Thank you Buddha for your wisdom. I must drop NASA a line and tell them that their multi billion dollar space telescope, designed to photograph galaxies 14 billion light years from Earth, is suffering from 'pixellated blur' on it's shot of the Earth's moon 250k miles away.

And worse, this 'pixellated blur' seems to be a disease that is spreading because the pyramid/geometric structure visible on Hubble image of Copernicus ( whether alien, man made or natural ) can be clearly seen on the US Navy Clementine photo of Copernicus crater. Go to www.cmf.nrl.navy.mil/clementine/list and click on COPERNIC Copernicus crater (with center missing = just first month of data).

Will you agree that the same anomaly is clearly visible on both Hubble and Clementine images ?

Regards



posted on Jan, 5 2008 @ 04:35 PM
link   
reply to post by pippadee
 

It would help if you posted an image of what you are talking about instead of just using dubious words.





new topics

top topics



 
164
<< 49  50  51    53  54  55 >>

log in

join