Help ATS with a contribution via PayPal:
learn more

NASA "Moon Bombing" mission -- DISAPPEARS

page: 5
71
<< 2  3  4    6  7  8 >>

log in

join

posted on Oct, 9 2009 @ 12:18 PM
link   

Originally posted by gortex
reply to post by Soylent Green Is People
 


you say there is evidence that it did hit , can you post that evidence for us to see please , or are you saying that there is evidence because NASA say there is.


I'm saying there is evidence because NASA says there is -- and has shown some of the data and IR images.

I suppose I believe them for the same reason I believe that the Moon has water in the first place -- because NASA said it did back in 1994. I guess if I want to doubt everything NASA says, then perhaps I should doubt the possible existence of this water ice to begin with.

Heck, for that matter, perhaps I should doubt the existence of water on Mars. Perhaps Mars is just as dry as much of the Moon, and NASA has only lied to us about the existence of water there.

Perhaps Titan doesn't have liquid methane lakes. Maybe NASA lied to us about that, too, and Titan is a big boring rock. Perhaps NASA has lied about Europa's oceans -- or the Enceladus' water-ice geysers.

Perhaps Venus' atmosphere has no chance of supporting microbes, and the speculation by NASA scientists that life is possible in the clouds of Venus is just ONE BIG NASA LIE.

Gosh -- if I don't trust NASA to tell me some basic science facts about the solar system, then possibly the solar system is a much more boring place than NASA lets on.

...By the way, am I to believe that the impact didn't occur only because you personally could not see it?


[edit on 10/9/2009 by Soylent Green Is People]




posted on Oct, 9 2009 @ 12:22 PM
link   

Originally posted by fieryjaguarpaw
It's quite humorous to me that some of you guys keep talking as though a compleate failure of the mission is somehow still great science and well worth the time and money.


You are blinded by the flashy, dramatic part of the experiment. While things may not have gone exactly as planned, there is no such thing as a failure in science. While you may not get the results you want or expected you are still able to learn something.

[edit on 9-10-2009 by DoomsdayRex]



posted on Oct, 9 2009 @ 12:23 PM
link   
Helium 3 is the prize on the Moon , very rare on the Earth but supposed to be abundant on the moon , Will be needed for future power generation .
Thats what is fueling the race to the Moon.



posted on Oct, 9 2009 @ 12:25 PM
link   

Originally posted by Xtraeme
Really the best thing the NASA LCROSS team could do is release information as quickly as possible to dispel notions of tampering.


That would not have mattered one bit to the anti-NASA crowd. To them that would prove a cover-up just as much as a delay would. There is nothing NASA can do to satisfy them.



posted on Oct, 9 2009 @ 12:29 PM
link   

Originally posted by jiLmtown
...The thing about SCIENCE is that you must analyze the data that are there. Not the data you expect. Not the data you want. Not the data you imagine coming from a hollow moon filled with colonies...

Amen.

So the plume wasn't as large (or perahps only not as high up) as expected. Oh well -- that's not the first time a science experiment had different-than-expected results.

The funny thing is that a lot of great scientific discoveries were made based on unexpected results or unexpected data. An unexpected data could mean that there is something else going on the hasn't been thought of yet...

...and most scientists would say that finding out what that "something" is is the most rewarding part of doing science.

As you said, scientist analyze the data they get, not the data they want.


EDIT TO ADD:
By the way, it seems to me that getting unexpected results makes it more likely that they are telling the truth about the data collected. If they were going to make the whole thing up, wouldn't they have simply followed the script? -- Or possibly write the script differently in the first place to match the results?

If they knew all along that here wasn't going to be a big plume, why tell people to watch for a big plume? Wouldn't it be less of a headache for NASA to not even bring up that part of their "Lie".

[edit on 10/9/2009 by Soylent Green Is People]



posted on Oct, 9 2009 @ 12:32 PM
link   
You guys are so stupid...

...you understood everything wrong.

They didn't send a object the size of a bus... They sent a bus!

It didn't make a huge impact because they hitted the brakes upon impact!


My secret info agent sent me the pictures of the object:

files.abovetopsecret.com...




[IT'S JUST A JOKE! just chill
]



posted on Oct, 9 2009 @ 12:32 PM
link   

Originally posted by DoomsdayRex

Originally posted by fieryjaguarpaw
It's quite humorous to me that some of you guys keep talking as though a compleate failure of the mission is somehow still great science and well worth the time and money.


You are blinded by the flashy, dramatic part of the experiment. While things may not have gone exactly as plan, there is no such thing as a failure in science. While you may not get the results you want or expected you are still able to learn something.


It wasn't the flashy dramatic part of the mission, it WAS the mission.

And yes there is such a thing as failure. Mars polar lander never landed so it was 100% a failure. Unless you think learning that it didn't work was some how worth it all.

Same with this. I'm waiting to see the results just like you are, but it's hard to ignore the facts.



posted on Oct, 9 2009 @ 12:36 PM
link   

Originally posted by fieryjaguarpaw

Originally posted by DoomsdayRex

Originally posted by fieryjaguarpaw
It's quite humorous to me that some of you guys keep talking as though a compleate failure of the mission is somehow still great science and well worth the time and money.


You are blinded by the flashy, dramatic part of the experiment. While things may not have gone exactly as plan, there is no such thing as a failure in science. While you may not get the results you want or expected you are still able to learn something.


It wasn't the flashy dramatic part of the mission, it WAS the mission.

No -- that was only the experiment, not the mission. Experiments create data. Data must be analyzed. All of the stuff after the initial experiment is part of the mission.

There are people who will work on this mission for many months to come, analyzing the data. Don't tell those people the mission is over...for them it has only just begun.

[edit on 10/9/2009 by Soylent Green Is People]



posted on Oct, 9 2009 @ 12:38 PM
link   
reply to post by Soylent Green Is People
 


By the same logic the Solar system could be a far more exotic place and NASA is keeping it quite .
I Didnt see it , Nobody but Nasa saw it apparently .



posted on Oct, 9 2009 @ 12:39 PM
link   
Soilent - Nothing personal... I just am seriously disappointed in NASA and feel there may be more to the story.

And no... it does NOT have to include aliens but perhaps... maybe, another issue of inches vs. centimeters. Who knows?

As it stands right now, I feel like I paid a buck for a ten-cent PT Barnum show.



posted on Oct, 9 2009 @ 12:41 PM
link   
reply to post by gortex
 


The Solar System isn't the size of the representation that you have in a classroom.

For example, just a few days ago it was discovered by chance a huge wring around Saturn, that can only be seen with IR.

Source:

edition.cnn.com...

There are things that are "just there" that we haven't seen yet. Which, in my opinion, rulles out any theory that we are alone in the Universe, or that we know "a lot" about it.



posted on Oct, 9 2009 @ 12:44 PM
link   
It was the ALIENS! They don't want to get nuked!



posted on Oct, 9 2009 @ 12:45 PM
link   
reply to post by Soylent Green Is People
 



Seriously that made me laugh


Now you are just splitting hairs. Whatever. If you guys want to think that NASA can do no wrong and that a mission never goes wrong then more power to ya. I think the history speaks for itself though. NASA has a problem with almost every thing it ever does. Just a few days ago we got new pictures of Mercury and just at the moment it was to get the money shot it had a technical "hic-up". Problems are the rule with NASA not the exception. I don't understand why you guys can't fathom the possibility that something may have gone wrong.



posted on Oct, 9 2009 @ 12:46 PM
link   

Originally posted by atlasastro
Mark my words people, you may all laugh now.

But when it rains cheese tomorrow, you'll all know the truth.

Bring the rain, cheese rain.


I hope its Mozzarella cheese. I love that stuff.



posted on Oct, 9 2009 @ 12:46 PM
link   
how can u defend nasa when they are so shady about all this. they promise this they promise that , live tv coverage and what do you get? blank screens, no live pictures and no plume... at the very least nasa comes out looking like idiots for not know apparently what was going to happen when they are suppose to be the experts. conspiracy on...



posted on Oct, 9 2009 @ 12:48 PM
link   

Originally posted by gortex
reply to post by Soylent Green Is People
 


By the same logic the Solar system could be a far more exotic place and NASA is keeping it quite .


You're right -- that is entirely possible.

However, why (for example) would the even bother telling us about Europa's ocean or Enceledus' geysers in the first place? What not just tell us they are big boring rocks, just like they originally thought they were? Who would be the wiser? Why even tell the world they sent space probes there in the first place? If they can lie about the solar system, they can secretly send probes out there.


I Didnt see it , Nobody but Nasa saw it apparently .

The data from the Earth-based telescopes has not been fully analyzed yet. Nobody saw anything in "real time" at the time of impact, but what was seen in "real time" is not necessarily the end-all to the data set that was intended to be used.

In short, I'm saying that the observer can't trust what he saw (since he can't see everything at all wavelengths) -- he can only trust what the data later tells him after it's analyzed.

UPDATE:
Kitt Peak observatory saw the flash of the impact. Analysis of the flash indicates the presence of sodium -- which is consistent with the spectroscopic analysis from the shepherding spacecraft right after the Centaur impact.
www.newscientist.com...

[edit on 10/9/2009 by Soylent Green Is People]



posted on Oct, 9 2009 @ 12:52 PM
link   
I just thought of something. Why the acronym LCROSS? I can think of something that's an LCROSS




I don't think I am far off on that assumption.



posted on Oct, 9 2009 @ 12:57 PM
link   
reply to post by PenandSword
 


Here is something that I think is even closer.



I was suprised to not here them pronounce it this way.



posted on Oct, 9 2009 @ 12:59 PM
link   
reply to post by Soylent Green Is People
 



However, why (for example) would the even bother telling us about Europa's ocean or Enceledus' geysers in the first place

Why not , they have to release information to justify there huge budget from public funds , I am not saying they lie about everything , just that they have been and are economical with the truth .



posted on Oct, 9 2009 @ 01:04 PM
link   

Originally posted by genius/idoit
reply to post by emsed1
 


read the link


I did.

It's a fictional humor story written by a man who is also a Freemason.

Not weird.





new topics

top topics



 
71
<< 2  3  4    6  7  8 >>

log in

join