Skynet and Cyberdyne are real, and they equal trouble, page 3
Pages: <<  1    2    3  >>
ATS Members have flagged this thread 28 times


reply posted on 18-8-2009 @ 07:02 PM by spacemanLive
reply to post by autowrench




Google Video Link


IF YOU REALLY WANT TO KNOW WHY WE ARE WEAPONIZING SPACE WATCH THIS DOCUMENATRY. IT IS PROFOUND AND CONTAINS TESTIMONY FROM TOP OFFICIALS IN EVERY AREA OF THE GOVERNMENT ON WY WEAPONIZING SPACE IS SO IMPORTANT TO US.


reply posted on 19-8-2009 @ 12:53 AM by upgrayedd
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:

NASA:
www.nasa.gov...

RKA:
www.roscosmos.ru...
www.energia.ru...

ESA:
www.esa.int...

CSA:
www.asc-csa.gc.ca...

JAXA:
iss.jaxa.jp...

ASI:
www.asi.it...

AEB:
www.aeb.gov.br...

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.



reply posted on 12-10-2011 @ 11:02 AM by Brother Stormhammer
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 back...it looks good on paper, but has severe problems in implementation....you 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.
Pages: <<  1    2    3  >>    ^^TOP^^



F-22 Pilots Told Not to Talk
  Posted 19 days ago with 23 member flags
Eglin Air Force Base hangar Foam Party!
  Posted 11 days ago with 4 member flags
Space weapons / Anonymous / Afghan War plan
  Posted 4 days ago with 4 member flags
Reports of Rumbling in the Sky: Pulsejet Technology?
  Posted 14 days ago with 3 member flags