Im not too sure if "The Times" is a big media outlet across the atlantic in the America's but in the UK and Ireland it is one of the most
circulated and trusted Newspapers.. And from personal experience, I have found that their political opinions are more factual and less bias than most.
I know it is sold in multiple countries, is also a major Business reporter and its online variation is HUGE.
Earlier today I spotted this on the front page of its .co.uk website, It has since been replaced by other headlines but is still in the main
section.
Link
Also, the TimesOnline.co.uk homepage also gets over two million views a day!!!!! That is a potential two million instant viewers today and the
possibility of an awful lot more over the next week... and that is just on the .co.uk URL.
Now, while the paper itself is not responsible for the original research, it has taken much of its information from research done by a NewScientist
consultant.
I firmly believe in microbial life of some description on Mars but that is not the point of this post, The story is basically pointing out that there
is no possible way NASA could be stupid enough to cause the problems it has with the hardware it has landed on Mars and is therefore covering up its
actual findings.
I think this is another big deal in the "Disclosure" stages.. simply because its become almost common place for people to read this type of
information from outlets they trust without blinking an eyelid.. and it has been happening more and more recently.
Wasn't that the supposed reason for the "cover up and slow disclosure" in the first place.. If there is such a "conspiracy"... In my opinion, if
this was actually taking place, it wouldn't be a conspiracy but for our own good.. As we all know, a person is intelligent but people are absolutely
stupid.
Anywho.. here's the thought provoking quote that grabbed my attention..
Some pesky scientists have just pointed out an appalling design error in NASA’s latest attempts to find life on Mars. This is beginning to look like
a conspiracy. Does someone not want us to find life on Mars?
NASA has tried looking for signs of life on Mars precisely once, in the 1976 Viking mission. The result was positive. The reason nobody says there is
life on Mars is that another experiment, part of the same mission, couldn’t find any carbon-based “organic” chemicals in Martian soil. This,
NASA decided, overruled the other result: with no carbon present, there could be no microbes living on or under the surface of Mars.
Last year, the Phoenix lander repeated the carbon search and failed to find organic molecules. The problem is, we know that there ought to be organic
molecules on Mars. Asteroid and comet impacts will have put them there. So what’s going on?
Hmmm?
[edit on 15/6/09 by Dermo]