It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.

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

Thank you.

 

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

 

Did NASA pull the "Original" Story?

page: 1
0

log in

join
share:

posted on May, 15 2008 @ 12:23 AM
link   
I am starting to think that something is very fishy, or at the very least I am lacking crucial information. Which I do admit is a possibility.
That said, I thought I did my research.


But does anyone else find it strange that NASA was off on two very critical details concerning it's "Big Announcement?"

I do realize this is a conspiracy board, and yada yada, but to me this is interesting. Take a look...



NASA to Announce Success of Long Galactic Hunt


WASHINGTON -- NASA has scheduled a media teleconference Wednesday, May 14, at 1 p.m. EDT, to announce the discovery of an object in our Galaxy astronomers have been hunting for more than 50 years. This finding was made by combining data from NASA's Chandra X-ray Observatory with ground-based observations.


Two Points of Curiosity: 1). Object 2). 50 years

Now the use of the word 'object' can be argued successfully in the eyes of the pessimistic, I agree. But the 50 years original assertion was a pretty direct claim. To be off by more than a decade is suspect in itself. And remember, they say more than 50 years.

CNN

But they found a 160 year old baby super nova. Now i do find that cool, but to me, it's not an object, and 1985 is not "more than 50 years ago."


Green and others have been tracking the remnant of this supernova since 1985 via the National Science Foundation's Very Large Array, a radio astronomy observatory. But it wasn't until last year that a team led by North Carolina State University physicist Stephen Reynolds found with help from Chandra how much the remnant had expanded.


Could NASA have been forced to pull the real story?

AAC


[edit on 15-5-2008 by AnAbsoluteCreation]




posted on May, 15 2008 @ 12:43 AM
link   
Well, when you take the way the media presents things, it seems more likely that some things were... spun to make a more interesting story.
Personally, I thinkl a lot of the disapointment here is from the unwarranted desire people put into the announcement hoping it'd be something grand. I
Is a hundred fifty or so year old supernova important? Yeah, and it is an object, keep in mind stars, galaxys, comets, meteors, ect. can be listed as objects warranting study.
So for scientists, "object" is a fairly broad term.
NAsa makes announcements fairly often, why this got so much hype I'm not sure, but maybe they managed some good PR and tried to draw some attention their way.



posted on May, 15 2008 @ 03:54 AM
link   
I think it may be possible that the media 'accidentally' misheard the word fifteen for fifty; it IS more than fifteen years that they have been looking for the 'object'...
But ofcourse it is possible that they pulled the story about an approaching comet like 'planet X' or something...
Will we ever know for sure?



posted on May, 15 2008 @ 04:06 AM
link   
I think it got all the hype as we had all those UFO disclosure Story's, Vatican saying its ok to believe and the UK's MoD releasing its old X-files

I must admit i thought they might say something like they found some small form of life out there



posted on Jun, 20 2008 @ 04:59 PM
link   
I would like to add to this thread some pictures. The picture NASA released is wild. Flames? Should we not be rethinking fire needs oxygen? Or am I that naive as to how space and fire works. Source




G1.9+0.3
Some say its not getting bigger but getting closer. But I don't see that, the size of the planet is the same just the glow is bigger.



Source




Edit to remove wacky video.

[edit on 20/6/08 by Rhain]

[edit on 20/6/08 by Rhain]

[edit on 20/6/08 by Rhain]



new topics

top topics
 
0

log in

join