It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.

Please white-list or disable in your ad-blocking tool.

Thank you.


Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.


Project Camelot's NEW 4hr long interview with John Lear

page: 4
<< 1  2  3    5  6  7 >>

log in


posted on May, 5 2008 @ 10:47 AM

Originally posted by Springer
Bill asked you about it and you said you typed them, we couldn't find them in search so what else were to think? Our initial reaction was you thought better about it and removed them, after looking into it deeper (again I wasn't involved, this what I was told) it was discovered that Lear had taken them out of context.

I'm with you Springer, it has been a long while. It seems it was a search issue then. No sir, I didn't edit them in any way. Nor did David. I just wanted that clear.

Now that it's clear, I can relax and get back to work. Have a good day.

+1 more 
posted on May, 5 2008 @ 10:50 AM

Originally posted by h3akalee
Ohh dear me.

What the heck is going on here exaclty ?

UMMM im confused.

... or so it would seem.

posted on May, 5 2008 @ 11:00 AM
Yeah... it can be really tough when old issues that inspired our passion come back and become prominent again. Especially when there were/are multiple people involved, everyone tends to remember the tidbits that were most important to them, resulting in a hodge-podge of partial memories and potential misconceptions.

No staff (not even me) can edit posts without leaving an edit tag. Over the years, lots of ATS code has been optimized from the legacy of the old XMB PHP, and several "basic board settings" have been essentially hard-wired into the code to prevent the need to query the database for those "basic settings" each time a page is loaded. In the old XMB, an admin could indeed remove the edit tag policy... now, on ATS, it's a hard-wired feature.

We couldn't find many of the quotes John Lear attributed to Jeff, so we had initially assumed Jeff ultimately thought better and went back to make the edit (as evidenced by the edit tags, and I think I even related that assumption to John in a private email as we were trying to work things out). As it turned out, we had a more complicated scenario where the comments were mostly taking severely out of context, and were rhetorical in nature (not directed at John Lear).

Mark/Springer being out of town for a couple days, and only getting small pieces of the problem (mostly over the phone) as it was happening, recalled things a bit different as he wasn't completely involved in our behind-the-scenes staff discussion, he recalled the initial reaction of perhaps Jeff removed the comments.

We are all here because these topics inspire passion in us to one degree or another. The main reason we insist on our policy of decorum is precisely because of this, passions could (and do) spill-over and take our eye off the ball: the topics that inspire our passion. But even still, that passion can result in misconceptions and conclusion jumping as evidenced in this thread... but that's fine, it shows we care. As long as we resolve these problems so that we can refocus on forward momentum, all is well. Because even events like these are a learning process that are important steps toward understanding each other and how we can collaborate on the path to increased knowledge.

[edit on 5-5-2008 by SkepticOverlord]

[edit on 5-5-2008 by SkepticOverlord]

posted on May, 5 2008 @ 11:10 AM
reply to post by SkepticOverlord

perhaps something you should look into is that you can edit your post, then go back a while later, edit it again and remove the original 'edited by...' that shows in the post. i.e. you edit the post twice but can make it look like it was only edited once. it really should show each time an edit has been made to be on the safe side of argument.

posted on May, 5 2008 @ 11:23 AM
Thanks, Isaac, fo embedding the pirst part, it was about all I could stand.

I found it incredibly funny how, in the opening montage of clips, John mentions his pipe dream of renting a simulator and 'starting at 20 miles out at 7000 feet at 560 mph' and it being 'impossible' to hit the Towers in the 'minute and 50 seconds' one would have after releasing the sim from freeze. Two minutes is a surprisingly long time, of the sense that your aareness is heightened and your perspective of time seems to slow. What he forgets, and it is slightly disengenous of him, since he's a former pilot, is that an airplane accelerates not only from increasing thrust, but also as a function of gravity in a descent.

Besides, the 'barber pole' (max airspeed) at 7000 is 340KIAS (about 392 MPH). These are 'indicated' airspeeds, True airspeed, and thusly ground speed, will be slightly higher....but we're talking firstly about controlling the airplane, into a controlled crash into an immovable object.

Point to consider regarding the 'barber pole' is, when exceeded there is a very loud and distracting warning, the 'overspeed warning' is a hi-low siren. So, if you only have one shot at it, you line up from, say, fifteen miles out at a reasonable speed, and accelerate, both by pushing the nose down until you reach about 600 or 700 feet, and shoving the throttles forward, since the intent is as much kinetic energy as you can muster, all while maintaining your aim at the target. Then it's just a matter of steering.

Look, I've flown simulators under 'bridges' and into 'buildings' often, when there's the occasional slack in the traiing always want the motion to be off for this, since when it's on and the computer senses a 'crash' it will instantly freeze.

So, to say it's 'impossible' is just pure bunk!!

posted on May, 5 2008 @ 11:34 AM
I have only listened to the part about ATS at this point, but what stood out in my mind was the fact J.L. kept on 'forgetting' the Three Amigo's names...
Chess anyone?

posted on May, 5 2008 @ 11:38 AM
reply to post by SkepticOverlord

None of you or the staff have anything to defend.

He has not placed you in the corner.

This thread and his interview was necessary, now lets all let it go.

You have stated all it would take is an email from him, so lets not allow him to be the martyr.

posted on May, 5 2008 @ 11:43 AM
If this is about a small argument between two conspiracy masters... John Lear has lost all credibility (whatever he had remaining).

For him to claim CIA involvment when all he needs to do is leave the issue alone is childish.

I say don't just ban him, but make a John Lear reference guide so that anyone who may possibly follow his work can see how he acts in public.

posted on May, 5 2008 @ 11:43 AM
Here is the question that we should be asking ourselves:

"Who the heck cares?"

jl never came through on any of his claims. Never coughed up any real evidence, and never proved his access to any kind of super-duper secret information.

If folks really want to hear him rant and ramble, just go to his own forum. He doesn't to worry about such pesky things as telling the truth, or providing evidence for his claims. There he is the king.

posted on May, 5 2008 @ 11:46 AM
IT all makes me sick all of you think how many of ANY of these people who are visible would you trust out of the 15 that are visible to me (prominent in this movement ) I think only 2 are telling mostly truth and the rest are traitors scum or have there tickets now to the underground bases
will the real truthers please stand up or join these crap artists
I AM SO ANGRY what was the point of our history (whatever it was) if this is how it ends .

posted on May, 5 2008 @ 12:12 PM
reply to post by Terrapop

I'm not sure what to make of this guy. Out of all the video footage I've seen, this is by far the most...eccentric. Never the less, it was an interesting watch, and as always, information is good to have regardless of whether it is true or false.

As far as ATS being CIA...too many damn letter groups out there! This sh-t gets kind of confusing throwing around letters like this. To you guys at'd better not be disinformationists...

posted on May, 5 2008 @ 12:36 PM
Thanks for sharing these videos..

i like how he throws out some half truths and mixes a little bs in there,but most of it is real good info imo....thanks again

i wish i could get a job on one of those secret bases and be able to research all that stuff.

take care dudes

posted on May, 5 2008 @ 12:37 PM
reply to post by Springer

I apologize if I'm a little behind on this Soap Opera. I didn't even know John was banned until reading this thread.

I find it rather sad.

May I ask, what has become of JRitzmann? After all, it sounds as if this incident was initiated by this individual.

I can't say that I'd act any different (as far as not "airing the dirty laundry") than John is acting. After all, the injustice was done to him. Now, he's allowed to come back and post as long as he doesn't bring up the injustice that was done?

As you stated ... it would seem to be a conspiracy, though one very small and personal conspiracy, a conspiracy none the less. Isn't this what ATS is all about?

I completely understand the point the mods are making about agreeing not to argue over points that have no correlation with this site, but to me, it would appear the argument that Mr. Lear is making has everything to do with what this site is based upon: Conspiracy. In this case a conspiracy (though it may involve one person [at one point it would have seems it involved more, but mistakenly]) against himself.

I guess the point I'm trying to make is I think that John Lear being asked to not speak about an injustice that resulted in him being banned is rather extreme.

I'm not here to make a case for Mr. Lear. I just wanted to put my two cents in that it seem that the mods are being just as childish as Mr. Lear is. Maybe sour grapes on both parts?

But that's just an opinion. As was what started this whole soap opera.

It may be that John is refusing to cease altercations with JRitzmann. If that's the case, then I understand. However, I think that if John agrees with this part that he should be allowed back on ... even if he opened a thread that addressed his banning.

[edit on 5-5-2008 by tyranny22]

posted on May, 5 2008 @ 12:58 PM
My two cents is probably neither wanted or needed, but that's never stopped me before.

When you consider the depth and bredth of material covered on this website, everything from serious UFOology to the thought that the local Dairy Queen is a Masonic front for world domination, we do NOT have it badly at all.

I haven't been here since day one, but I got here as quickly as I could when I heard about it. I've watched the growing pains, and occasionally been a pain, myself. However, Above Top Secret, is still one of the, if not the best website of this nature in existence. Things won't always go the way you want, and you may, on occasion, become extremely irritated about the way things are handled (ask me about the Fair Skepticdebacle), but all-in-all, it is even handed, and allows for a greater accuracy in skimming the cream from the milk.

The truly cool thing is we all have a voice here, and an opportunity to make claims, valid and ludicrous, and then have the chance to defend or define them. I don't even feel badly about my Fair Skeptic post, herein, which occurred several years ago.

The guys who own the place (you know who they are) and the moderators (you know some of them, doubtlessly) do an overall great job of handling things, even with all their human flaws and conditions.

John Lear will float to the surface somewhere else, or here, if he can get a mature handle on things. So, it's not like he was banned from ever posting anything here or elsewhere, ever again.

I don't care if I'm the last word, or not. I just want us all to stop and take a second and consider where we have been, where we are, and where we are going, and then get on with it.

Thanks to all involved in creating, growing, and running this ATS Critter. It wouldn't exist without your continuing efforts, and I, for one, enjoy it enough to say so.

Now... Back to those evil Dairy Queen Masons and their attempt to rule the world!

posted on May, 5 2008 @ 01:01 PM
The only problem i have is a lot of you wont let it drop, if he wants to rant them let him do it, we are allowed to rant when we want to, i know i do quite often, it matters not to me what his opinions where, or his theories, or claims, as in every thread we have on ATS people either comment or they don't, i'm damn sure they don't lose sleep over them, anyone is allowed to post an opinion on any subject that is our rights as members, John Lear had his rights and to be honest i cant blame him for flying off the handle because some members went out IMO and deliberately tried to provoke him into going off the deep end.

What does it matter if he thinks there is an atmosphere on the moon, im sure he believes that and will until someone takes him up there and offers to open the door for him unsuited, a lot of it was funny, some of it i agree with doesn't make me a nutcase, i have some pretty wild theories also, again if you wish to laugh im happy i cheered you up, i ve often sat here and wondered when ive seen some of the responses to his posts just what those who go out of their way to provoke him in all his threads where afraid of by the way they reacted, and some of them where very childish, and i can clearly see it is still having an effect on some.

I have to admire the man for what he has achieved in his life, a lot more than i ever could, as for his opinions i know and understand enough to either not comment and allow it to pass out of my mind and go onto the next thread, so please stop trying to kid people with what you supposedly knew back then, the man is not here to defend himself, have your say and let it be.

PS i do however think new accounts created today for this thread is a cowards way, because i cant for the life of me think someone joining ATS today would be able to comment if they were not members to comment back then. ALL IMO of course.

posted on May, 5 2008 @ 01:11 PM
The moment Lear announced the debunkers/skeptics were being paid by whoever is running the "front" I couldn't stop laughing.

Have you guys ever thought that if you'd go out and invite Lear back to ATS he'd simple deny the invitation to keep up his new conspiracy against ATS? Why not try it out?

posted on May, 5 2008 @ 01:18 PM
Some people only get involved and comment when they feel a need to, or when theyve got something interesting to say. So maybe theyve been long time readers, first time posters - Like on the radio! "Hey, long time listener, first time caller! "

I watched the whole video last night, i thought it was really good... im not sure I believe half the stuff John Lear says, but the way he tells his stories its definitley good quality entertainment at the least. Its better than buying a novel! I don't think hes deliberatley lying, I do think he believes what he's telling us - to me thats the important bit.

As for ATS being a CIA run place - I doubt it As I mentioned earlier, ive seen ATS grow from a small website (I think at one point it didnt even have a forum!) into the amazing place it is today. All I see is a site where a bunch of people put in a lot of hard work and it became a success. Maybe if it had just popped up over night my impression would be different

I dont think theres a conspiracy going on here at ATS, but with the number of people here who love a good conspiracy - you cant blame people for trying to find out!

posted on May, 5 2008 @ 01:35 PM

Originally posted by IgnoreTheFacts
reply to post by gottago

Please tell me your not the same "gottigo" that this guy is talking about?

Youtube Gottago

I know your user name is spelled differently here, but some of us are curious. If it is you, then your opinion here would be slightly diminished, as your youtube page presents you in an unflattering light to those of us with common sense, reason and the ability to use logic.

Not to worry--or perhaps disappoint you--but that is definitely not from me--though interested, I rarely post on the UFO forum. And quite honestly, that should have been a U2U.

If the insinuation is that I'm crazy because I spoke up for John, perhaps you should look at the human element; I like John and see all his flaws very clearly, but as I said in my prior post, I think you have to judge everything yourself; he was a lightening rod, but I've read some amazing nonsense here, and also some remarkable things too, and on balance John was very little different than ATS itself.

As for me, I don't even have a YouTube account and I can assure you I've never made a video in my life. In fact, I still haven't mastered embedding them properly here yet.

Books yes--six so far, working on number seven (and none of them in the least CT related)--but not that. And unlike JL, my Wiki page is still there.

Are my posts that whacked out? Yikes...

[edit on 5-5-2008 by gottago]

posted on May, 5 2008 @ 01:55 PM
....stepping off the tracks for a moment...

If there are any Star Trek fans out here, there is a pretty good episode from the ST:TNG run (the one with Picard, the Enterprise-D, if that rings any bells) called 'The Drumhead'. You can find it in Season Four.

It's a great example of how some dis-connected events could be construed as being part of some 'larger' conspiracy....seems to be human nature to see 'ghosts' and 'spies' around every corner....

Can lead to madness......


posted on May, 5 2008 @ 02:45 PM

Originally posted by tyranny22
May I ask, what has become of JRitzmann? After all, it sounds as if this incident was initiated by this individual.

I'm here. No, actually I didn't initiate it, but it came out of a C2C episode where I provided George Knapp with my data about the Meier case. As I was mentioned on the show by the guest that night (Michael Horn) several times I think...I got asked here a lot about the information. Thats how it started. Lear came in and nilly-willy poo-pooed everything I said, and just kept reiterating his belief in the Meier case, and babbling about how Dave Biedny and I proved nothing.

Riiiight. Like I said, you don't get that much flak unless you're over the target. So, no, I didn't really initiate anything. I got pissed, no doubt there...who doesn't. But it was clear to me that John was just trying to poke at us. I still don't personally believe he buys into the Meier stuff.

But, whatever.

new topics

top topics

<< 1  2  3    5  6  7 >>

log in