Skynet and Cyberdyne are real, and they equal trouble

page: 3
<< 1  2   >>

log in


posted on Aug, 18 2009 @ 07:02 PM
reply to post by autowrench

Google Video Link


posted on Aug, 18 2009 @ 11:58 PM
nice fact finding on your part, but way to dam long.

to be brief, look at the movie "wag the dog"

i think the tag line is "if its fed to the media, it must be true"

my point is, take what they give you in these instances as a primer.

is this nonsense or a shadow of whats really goin on? to be blunt. things are often far more sinister then anything you can find in a official press release. but since people are often formed to believe but not to imagine. ones own ability to explore the possibility's is often stunted.

or maybe they really are just building a death star...

posted on Aug, 19 2009 @ 12:53 AM

Originally posted by autowrench
This is what NASA told us. Do you believe everything they say?

In the case of ISS, I do believe NASA because the entire program is well documented with NASA, Russian Space Agency (RKA), ESA, Canadian Space Agency (CSA), Japanese Space Agency (JAXA), Italian Space Agency (ASI) and the Brazilian Space Agency (AEB).

Since it's an honor to be a part of this program, each respective agency posts a plethora of data detailing the program and their contributions. Here are the links to each of the agency's web pages regarding ISS:








If it were just NASA and the US building and operating ISS, then I might be inclined to agree with you. Though in total, 16 countries are involved in this project. It's ludicrous to think that all of these very different countries have organized to cover-up a large beam weapon that they can all share. It would be even more ridiculous to think that the US has built a weapon into ISS and was able to hide this from all other countries involved in the program. And for the love of God, please don't argue that either of these cover-ups are possible because of the NWO.

The point is, there is so much data from all over the world regarding this program that it's amazing, and it all matches up. It has so much coverage that I think it's very improbable that there is a weapon on ISS. Also, based on everything I'm reading, from all of these websites, ISS didn't even exist in our atmosphere until November of 1998. So there is no way that ISS was responsible for the Oklahoma City Bombing. I also don't agree with ISS being responsible for 911 because we all know that it was controlled demolitions..erm..planes that took down the towers.

To me, if the US wanted an orbital weapon system, I think they would covertly integrate missile silos or beam weapons into an array of "communications" satellites to create a net of coverage around the earth. Personally I believe that something like this has been in existence for decades. Ronald Reagan was pretty adamant about creating the Star Wars program.

posted on Sep, 1 2009 @ 10:40 AM
i think that skynet and cyberdyne have been around longer then the movie that made them famous

here are some good links

posted on Sep, 1 2009 @ 11:06 AM
the people who start these companies have seen the same movies you do. That is where the names come from.

NASA was just brought under the military banner pretty much completely last year. Why it wasn't before baffles the hell out of me.

Weaponization of the upper atmosphere is probably not going to be stopped.

The group that can get up and weaponize first controls the In-And-Out privileges of the whole planet, and their access to the infinite resources thereof.

These plans are not ten year plans. These plans are thousand year plans.

While many will scream bloody murder at nations trying to do this, ask yourselves something important. Knowing that it will happen, would you prefer a coalition of groups forced to work together cooperatatively with some views to fairness.

Or would you prefer one of the groups that is distinctly and proudly biased to their own, and would gladly see everyone else perish or enslaved?

Knowing that it WILL happen - something that has been conceived of doesn't just go away because it isn't nice - which system do YOU prefer.

I know which one I do.

"The Meek Shall Inherit The Earth" is not a recommendation. It is a warning.

[edit on 2009/9/1 by Aeons]

posted on Jan, 13 2010 @ 03:17 PM
All in all, when I first saw the Terminator movies, I thought they would seem to be a sort of self-fulfilling prophecy...

Now, it's seeming even more so to be true.

Skynet... Cyberdyne... AI... Think about it... if a military AI were to gain access to the internet, it would only be a matter of time before it came across the premise of the Terminator movies (not to mention the Matrix series), Realizing just how horrible the human race is towards itself, and our own environment, and proceed to attempt to put these movies/ideas into play... Or at least the possibility is always there...


posted on Oct, 11 2011 @ 10:28 PM
Great post! You get my first S & F.

And by the way we are the Empire lol, so yea we are building the Death Star.

posted on Oct, 12 2011 @ 11:02 AM
I really hate to rain on a conspiratorial parade, particularly one that's been heavily researched...but the vast majority of the 'classified' Shuttle flights were nothing more than reconnaissance platforms or communications birds. I'm fairly certain that NASA and the military were being (relatively) truthful about that. Let's take a quick look at the exotic weapons that have been suggested.

For a directed-energy weapon (hereafter, 'beam weapon') the limiting factors are power and heat dissipation. The solar panels on satellites simply don't generate sufficient power to energize a beam weapon, and even if silicon panels did make good radiators (they don't), they aren't big enough to cope with the heat from a weapon if we assume that some other (presumably nuclear) power source is available. The ISS has even bigger problems, since it would not only need to hide a large power source (and some fairly big radiators over and above the ones needed for the habitat) from ground observers, but also from a crew whose members come from several countries.

As an aside in the 'beam weapon' department, the Oklahoma City bombing took place before the ISS was even under construction, so I think we can rule it out as a cause.

For a rail gun, you've got power and heat problems similar in magnitude to a beam weapon, with the added problem of physical strength (magnetic forces tend to put hideous twisting forces on a rail gun), the resulting high weight (always frowned upon in a space application) and the additional weight and complexity of a magazine...that rail gun has to have something to shoot, after all.

In short, I don't think we have a baby Death Star under construction..and if we do, it's not aboard the ISS, and it's not neatly tucked away in anything that would fit in a Space Shuttle or an X-37's cargo bay.

The "rods from God" idea dates 'way looks good on paper, but has severe problems in have to orbit a LOT of the things to make sure they're available when and where they're needed, and they're going to play merry hob with radio astronomy. If they were up there, somebody would notice.

As for the use of Trident in a precision global strike role, I have mixed feelings. On the one hand, I really, seriously, and sincerely consider the use of precision-guided conventional warheads a vast improvement over the use of thermonuclear devices....that's a point in favor of the Global Strike concept. On the other hand (and it's a *big* 'other hand'), how does the target country know that what's coming in on that Trident SLBM is a precision-guided conventional package, as opposed to a 475Kt express delivery of Instant Sunrise? Simple answer - they don't, and they'll probably assume the worst, and respond accordingly. Major downside to the concept.

new topics

top topics

<< 1  2   >>

log in