What is with the trust of NASA?, page 1
Pages: <<  1    2    3    4  >>
ATS Members have flagged this thread 11 times


reply posted on 28-4-2010 @ 04:02 AM by Unknown Soldier
I agree with you. NASA really is not run by civilians for one and is just an extension of the military. Nasa started off as a legit organization i believe but later in time more and more corrupt people made it well up the ranks and it became a PR agency while the real space program was being built. It is no more different than the media today all propaganda and they give us a grain of salt of truth. I mean you could spend a lifetime exposing the lies and cover ups from air brushing photos to coercing or threatening astronauts to stay quiet. Well thos old dogs are talking now they were well on the way out and i think even Buzz might get to talking again about what he seen up there. I know cooper pretty much blew the lid and gordon too.


But for some reason that baffles me is some people insist even after admitting nasa lied to them they are like "so what" it's for our own good?


I guess that is ok if you don't mind being lied to. Usually in any relationship like ours with NASA when one starts to lie it is for the wrong reasons like a cheating spouse. What we don't know wont hurt us right?


When i learned Obama was cutting funding to nasa for the moon mission i was glad. It would be a huge waste of money for the simple fact we would be left in the dark no different than the last 40 years since Apollo.

I would like to see NASA get scrapped and start a new space agency or put the funding in the hands of contractors and we could have some kind of access to what we have been paying for. Usually when someone pays someone to do a job they do not have to wear a blind fold while the guys is mowing you're lawn if you get what im saying.


reply posted on 28-4-2010 @ 04:25 AM by Pr0t0
I have a similar issue with NASA, but as I've posted in another thread there isn't much can be done about it, short of hacking info for ourselves.

Recently I was appalled by some of the information given our on their 'ask an astrobiologist' section in which the author touted AGW as scientific fact. Now it's my understanding that the Co2 we emit as a race could not compare to the emissions mother Earth produces and that it's simply arrogance on our part to assume that climate is not cyclical which myself, along with many renowned universities with many respected scholars propose, and the evidence is overwhelming.

I would have thought it's not an area of concern for an astrobiologist to comment on Global Warming, so why were they so vehemently on their homepage? I raised the question via email and got a shockingly blunt 'you are confused - do you know how science works' response.

Needless to say, the argument could not be settled in this brief exchange and he no doubt had better things to do, but slightly offended as he had side-stepped a response in place of an attack, I held respectfully that he could be wrong as he has been wrong on other issues, and cited, again his own words, where he stated regarding planet rotation that it has not and could not ever happen to any planet, so why were we all so worried about 2012 (I don't think anything like this will happen and my response had nothing to do with 2012). I pointed him toward our neighbour Venus which has a retrograde rotation thought to have been caused by impact similar to the size of that which is thought to have created our moon. My point? It can and has happened, therefore if he is wrong about that, how can he in the face of masses of geological data, avidly promote the AGW theory?.

I didn't get a reply to that, and he still hasn't corrected any of his wording on the site.

This is of course a personal exchange and I'm not normally prompted to message anyone but I felt the dismissive responses were abhorrent and it has only further marred my opinion of the folks at NASA... I say that regretfully as there's so much we can learn from them, if they only choose to be factual.


reply posted on 28-4-2010 @ 05:30 AM by Pr0t0
reply to post by NWOWILLFALL



Actually, Myth Busters did an episode where they placed a flag in a vacuum and the kinetic energy transferred from the force of planting the flag allowed it to wave as though it were in a wind tunnel.

Not saying you're wrong, just that this argument has been addressed. For all we know everyone can be lying, including the show's producers, but I understand the principles behind how a flag can wave after being planted in a vacuum.

It's fair to say though that there are plentiful reasons to distrust not only NASA but the majority of government funded agencies.


reply posted on 28-4-2010 @ 05:37 AM by gortex
reply to post by DoomsdayRex



post by DoomsdayRex
So, either the evidence supports your beliefs or it is disinformation. That is a very arrogant and immature thought-process.

Why , because i don't tow the line you peddle
Looks like you forgot to take your chill pill today Rex




[edit on 28-4-2010 by gortex]


reply posted on 28-4-2010 @ 05:37 AM by Pr0t0
reply to post by NWOWILLFALL



Of course, most notably the Van Allen radiation belt would be my first concern. None of us have all the facts but certainly it was a great concern to the Russian Cosmonaut program and seemingly not an issue for NASA.


reply posted on 28-4-2010 @ 05:48 AM by DoomsdayRex
Originally posted by NWOWILLFALL
I said look up that space rocks are now classified...


What space rocks?

Are you talking about the
shift in military policy in 2009 where data from classified satellites would no longer be shared with astronomers, thereby robbing them of data when such satellites detect exploding meteors in the atmosphere?

Originally posted by NWOWILLFALL
the NEAT comet which we didn't hear about though they could see it clearly...


Which NEAT comet? There are a lot of comets with the designation NEAT.

Originally posted by NWOWILLFALL
near misses that we never hear about until an independent astrologer finds it and the media has to report so, what evidence? man don't insult my intelligence...


You're doing a good enough job of that yourself.

Originally posted by NWOWILLFALL
That's what you skeptics do, cry and howl all day about how your smarter than anyone else...


Again, instead of a cogent argument, you rely on an appeal-to-spite.

Originally posted by NWOWILLFALL
I really don't care but please don't tell me that I have no evidence because I have evidence to make that statement look foolish


Then by all means, let's see it.
Pages: <<  1    2    3    4  >>    ^^TOP^^