It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.

Please white-list or disable AboveTopSecret.com in your ad-blocking tool.

Thank you.

 

Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.

 

What is with the trust of NASA?

page: 9
11
<< 6  7  8    10  11  12 >>

log in

join
share:

posted on May, 26 2010 @ 12:04 PM
link   

Originally posted by nonamoose7
If NASA are not lying, then they are just incompetently inept.

How many moon missions? and they missed the 'water and bacterial signatures'

...all that wasted money! thank goodness for the 'India' space programme

They actually found traces of water in the Moon Rocks in the early 1970s, but they could not conclusively prove that they were not contaminated with water after they were collected.

They again found signs of water in 1994 through the "Clementine Probe", but there were some scientist who found fault in the analysis. They again found traces of water in 1998 with the "Lunar Prospector" probe, although it was not 100% conclusive.

So, the idea of water on the Moon is not entirely new. I remember the news from the Clementine mission in 1994 that their TENTATIVE analysis found traces of water on the Moon, so it was not a surprise to me when they actually confirmed it last year.

It seems that Clementine's analysis 15 years earlier could have been right all along, but the scientific process means repeating an experiment to get confirmation of results.

[edit on 5/26/2010 by Soylent Green Is People]




posted on May, 26 2010 @ 12:11 PM
link   
reply to post by Soylent Green Is People
 
Or it was conclusive and they just didn't tell you...




posted on May, 26 2010 @ 12:19 PM
link   

Originally posted by NWOWILLFALL
reply to post by Soylent Green Is People
 
Or it was conclusive and they just didn't tell you...


If they didn't want us to know, then why bother publicly looking?



posted on May, 26 2010 @ 12:23 PM
link   
reply to post by Soylent Green Is People
 
What better way to hide something than right in plain sight?
It's the way this government as a whole has almost always operated...
Just like rock 84001



posted on May, 26 2010 @ 12:51 PM
link   

Originally posted by NWOWILLFALL
reply to post by Soylent Green Is People
 
What better way to hide something than right in plain sight?
It's the way this government as a whole has almost always operated...
Just like rock 84001


That's a fun theory...Do you have anything to back it up?

...Plus I don't understand what you mean by "hiding in plain sight". NASA wasn't hiding anything -- they were the ones who were claiming that water DOES exist. It was the older established scientist who said otherwise. All NASA had to do was agree with the establishment and no-one would be the wiser, but instead they pressed forward trying to prove the existence of water.

You do realize that just about everything we know about other worlds and the possibility of life on other worlds comes from NASA research. Here is a website for the NASA Astrobiology Institue: astrobiology.nasa.gov...
NASA scientists there mostly believe that life exists elsewhere

Here's a link to an article written by a NASA scientist who makes the case that Life could exist in the clouds of Venus (scroll down on that page for the pdf link): gltrs.grc.nasa.gov...

This is a cutting-edge article that attempts to show how -- against what conventional science says -- the possibility of life in the atmosphere of Venus. If NASA didn't this and similar articles in the first place, there would be nothing to hide. No one else would do this research.

...I understand the concept of "hiding in plain site", but NASA doesn't seem to be in plain site as much as doing all it could to call attention to their research. Hiding in plain site requires on to also not call much attention to one's self.

If NASA did not do this research, I doubt anyone would -- or it would be done very slowly. If it wasn't for NASA, there would be NOTHING to "hide in plain site".

I guess my question to you is this:
Please explain why "hiding the information in plain site" seems to be the most logical explanation to you.



[edit on 5/26/2010 by Soylent Green Is People]



posted on May, 26 2010 @ 01:07 PM
link   
Wow, a possibility of life in the Venetian atmosphere, cool! Nasa should send a 'golf club' and 'beach buggy' to check



posted on May, 26 2010 @ 01:13 PM
link   
reply to post by Soylent Green Is People
 
Again we are talking about the trust of NASA and the first link you send me...GUESS WHO! Yeah dude this argument is going nowhere with you...



posted on May, 26 2010 @ 02:02 PM
link   

Originally posted by NWOWILLFALL
reply to post by Soylent Green Is People
 
Again we are talking about the trust of NASA and the first link you send me...GUESS WHO! Yeah dude this argument is going nowhere with you...


I suppose the onus is on you to give REASONS why you think NASA lies about everything, with evidence to back up those claims.

Your argument is circular:
1. NASA is untrustworthy;
2. Since they are untrustworthy, what they say is lies;
3. Therefore, NASA is a liar.
4. Anyone that lies is untrustworthy;
5. Therefore, [back to 1]

All of your "evidence" for NASA's lies is debunkable, but your "reason" for not believing the debunking is that "NASA lies". Again, the argument is circular.

Here's our argument about the water:

Me: NASA discovered signs of water on the Moon in 1994, but could not confirm it.
You: They confirmed it, but just didn't say so, because they lied about it.
Me: Give me evidence that they lied about it.
You: Well, everyone knows that NASA is untrustworthy, so they must be lying.
Me: Give me proof that they are untrustworthy.
You: Well, they're liars, and liars are untrustworthy!



[edit on 5/26/2010 by Soylent Green Is People]



posted on May, 26 2010 @ 02:55 PM
link   
reply to post by Soylent Green Is People
 
Haha I said almost none of those thing...
You want the evidence look at it, again more important things are going on not the things that may or may not have happened a while ago...




posted on May, 26 2010 @ 02:56 PM
link   
I was going to edit my post above to add this point, but I think it deserves its own post...

I don't believe everything at face value. I like to check the facts and the logic first. However, what NASA says about the Moon landing passes the critical thinking test -- i.e. everything they say makes logical sense.

Hoax believers, on the other hand offer up "evidence" that does NOT pass critical thinking tests -- i.e., their arguments do NOT make logical sense and can be debunked using real-world knowledge and observations.

Therefore, it seems to me that people who keep believing the hoax evidence in lieu of the fact that logic says otherwise makes me think that the hoax believers are being close minded.

It seems THEY are the ones believing what they read (hoax evidence) at face value.


[edit on 5/26/2010 by Soylent Green Is People]



posted on May, 26 2010 @ 03:01 PM
link   

Originally posted by NWOWILLFALL
reply to post by Soylent Green Is People
 
Haha I said almost none of those thing...
You want the evidence look at it, again more important things are going on not the things that may or may not have happened a while ago...


OK, then what ARE you saying...what is your specific evidence that NASA had CONFIRMED (not simply suspected) water on the Moon for 15 years but was hiding that fact from the public. Are you saying the data they released to the scientific community is fraudulent or incomplete? If so, what data is fraudulent or incomplete?

When I link to a NASA website, you counter with a "consider the source" argument. Well, what do YOU know about the source (specifically) that should make me absolutely doubt them out-of-hand? What's wrong with the NASA Astrobiology Institute? Don't you believe what they say -- such as that Europa probably has an ocean? That Mars has water? That comets contain the building-blocks of life? That life may exist in Titan's methane lakes?

What other specific evidence from that Moon Hoax website can you point to and say "that's GOOD evidence of a hoax" (seeing that the previously mentioned "shadows" and "hills" is not hoax evidence at all)?

There may in fact be a few weird and unexplainable things about the Apollo missions, but the Moon and space in general is a weird place -- it's not exactly part of our human frame of reference. However, the existence of a few oddities does not necessarily = hoax.


[edit on 5/26/2010 by Soylent Green Is People]



posted on May, 26 2010 @ 05:37 PM
link   
reply to post by Soylent Green Is People
 
You continue on with "hoax believers" and "logical thinking" they have lied about the presence of extraterrestrials and traces of water on the moon...and the moon landing was absolutely filmed right here on earth...I'm not saying they never went but not when they "did"



and I don't know who is staring you but.....IDIOT ALERT



[edit on 26-5-2010 by NWOWILLFALL]



posted on May, 26 2010 @ 05:46 PM
link   
reply to post by NWOWILLFALL
 


Absolutely? Denying all the evidence to contrary?

Stunning. Simply. Stunning.


...and the moon landing was absolutely filmed right here on earth...


That is incredible.

Not ONE IOTA of any evidence supports that wacky claim. None. Zero.

EVERY attempt by hucksters to claim it? Blown away, each and every time.



posted on May, 26 2010 @ 05:50 PM
link   
reply to post by weedwhacker
 
Oh looksy I guess I've found one of the culprits...What evidence would you like me to submit because I'm seriously getting tired of both of you...



posted on May, 26 2010 @ 06:31 PM
link   

Originally posted by NWOWILLFALL
reply to post by weedwhacker
 
...What evidence would you like me to submit because I'm seriously getting tired of both of you...

I dunno -- why are you asking me? How would I know what evidence you have?

Why don't you start with what you consider to be your best evidence of the Moon hoax -- Although I will be busy with real life for a little while, so I may not be able to respond for a couple of days. However, someone else may respond.

[edit on 5/26/2010 by Soylent Green Is People]



posted on May, 26 2010 @ 11:00 PM
link   
Feast thine eyes upon:
google.com...
google.com...


jra

posted on May, 26 2010 @ 11:14 PM
link   
reply to post by sandwiches
 


What exactly is it that you're trying to show? Former Nazi scientists and engineers being employed in the US is no secret. The Russians got there hands on some of them as well.



posted on May, 26 2010 @ 11:45 PM
link   

Originally posted by jra
What exactly is it that you're trying to show? Former Nazi scientists and engineers being employed in the US is no secret. The Russians got there hands on some of them as well.

Aww, c'mon. NO-one trusts the NAZIs!! It might have something to do with the OP. Just sayin'.


Originally posted by Soylent Green is People
If NASA did not do this research, I doubt anyone would -- or it would be done very slowly. If it wasn't for NASA, there would be NOTHING to "hide in plain site".

There's some pretty amazing photos coming out of amateur astronomers these days. I was surprised! www.astronomycamerasblog.com... As for space-ships... yeah... NASA FTW



posted on May, 27 2010 @ 12:05 AM
link   
reply to post by sandwiches
 

Are you saying that you think there are Nazi's working at NASA? Wow, that's a hot scoop! Got any names?



posted on May, 27 2010 @ 05:19 AM
link   
reply to post by Phage
 
Prescott Bush, yeah that's right George Bush Sr. father funded the nazi's so that would not surprise me at all...



new topics

top topics



 
11
<< 6  7  8    10  11  12 >>

log in

join