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.

 

The reality of underground bases

page: 5
12
<< 2  3  4    6  7  8 >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Jan, 24 2011 @ 06:27 AM
link   

Originally posted by GirlGenius
I read a book recently that lays out all the evidence. It's called "Hidden in Plain Sight". At this point, I didn't even think it was questioned anymore.

Link


edit on 24-1-2011 by GirlGenius because: link


What exactly in that book makes you think secrets can be kept, since it was published in a book and you were able to read it?

The point is, "secret" underground bases probably exist, but matching the scale of the imagination of the people posting on this board....ugggggh, say the zombies. Doubtful.




posted on Jan, 24 2011 @ 06:37 AM
link   

Originally posted by zoso28
I would like to attempt to offer some brevity on the out of control proclaimations regarding secret undeground bases or D.U.M.B.'s. The claims of the existence of these facilities is thrown out ad nauseum here. It seems many believe there are hundreds of these bases, all over the US and elsewhere, and many are connected by vast tunnel systems with high speed shuttles to zip to and fro.

The amount of demolition, excavation, and construction required to build an underground facility is staggering. It took three years just to excavate the Cheyenne Mountain Bunker. Furthermore, thousands of contractors and laborers are required to do the work. Large, loud, attention getting blasts and equipment must run constantly.

We never hear about all the noise or equipment during the construction, but hear loud and often of the bases existence. Furthermore, to my knowledge, we have no credible eyewitness accounts from any of the thousands of men who build these phantom facilities.

We all know that humans cannot keep secrets, yet it would seem "the powers that be" have a knack for hiring the few who can.

So PROVE me wrong. Show me the video, photos, and the eyewitness accounts. Its time for some accountability here on our beloved ATS


So, do you reckon the following would qualify as a large scale underground construction smack in the middle of the Nevada Nuclear Test site ?

Lots of activity ... check
Lots of explosions ... check
Lots of equipment ... check
Possibility of 24/7 activity ... check
Isolated from general populace ... check





posted on Jan, 24 2011 @ 06:55 AM
link   

Originally posted by Terrormaster
I love it when people say "prove it doesn't exist". That's like those of religion challenging atheist and skeptics to prove their deity does NOT exist. Science doesn't work that way. You don't try to prove a negative because it leaves too many things open to individual interpretation of the facts. You prove the positive. You prove something exists based on facts not the other way around.

It's also the volume of evidence required. In order to prove that there are no underground bunkers (of the type claimed) you have to show what does exist below the ground EVERYWHERE!!!!!! This is clearly nonsense.

I believe bigfoot is an alien who speaks latin that lives on Venus and visits here occasionally. Now it is true until you (not you Terrormaster but you the believers) prove me wrong!................An extreme example of supidity to prove that proving negatives is the preserve of the ignorant so they can ignore facts.
edit on 24/1/11 by malcr because: (no reason given)



posted on Jan, 24 2011 @ 07:06 AM
link   

Originally posted by zoso28
I would like to attempt to offer some brevity on the out of control proclaimations regarding secret undeground bases or D.U.M.B.'s. The claims of the existence of these facilities is thrown out ad nauseum here. It seems many believe there are hundreds of these bases, all over the US and elsewhere, and many are connected by vast tunnel systems with high speed shuttles to zip to and fro.

The amount of demolition, excavation, and construction required to build an underground facility is staggering. It took three years just to excavate the Cheyenne Mountain Bunker. Furthermore, thousands of contractors and laborers are required to do the work. Large, loud, attention getting blasts and equipment must run constantly.

We never hear about all the noise or equipment during the construction, but hear loud and often of the bases existence. Furthermore, to my knowledge, we have no credible eyewitness accounts from any of the thousands of men who build these phantom facilities.

We all know that humans cannot keep secrets, yet it would seem "the powers that be" have a knack for hiring the few who can.

So PROVE me wrong. Show me the video, photos, and the eyewitness accounts. Its time for some accountability here on our beloved ATS


I can't show you a picture or a video of air either, but you just have to believe by the unseen vibe that it is there. As for D.U.M.B.s, that's the beauty of government, compartmentalization and government workers not willing to trade a huge salary for the "loose lips sink ships" theory. If one could show you underground bases, or photos and videos....#1...they wouldn't be secret now would they? #2.....This would require one walking past armed guards into the underground bases which would cost one their lives. There is enough evidence of witness accounts of retired government figures that claimed to build them, work in them and there are photos and videos all over the internet showing the entrances to these. Phil Schneider, Jesse Ventura (episode about the Colorado Airport Underground Base) , lots of Google Earth images.Your request is impossible without getting shot. Besides, if you think about the way government works, it seems actually more irresposible to have bases above ground. We have underground subways and things like that, what makes it so incredible that the government would tunnel out a base underground. that's not so far fetching. Even stupid ants can figure that out, why can't you?
edit on 24-1-2011 by Phenomium because: (no reason given)



posted on Jan, 24 2011 @ 07:21 AM
link   

Originally posted by clay2 baraka

Originally posted by peter_kandra
1. Construction. I hear people mention nuclear tunnel boring machines. Great concept. I haven't read any articles about these machines, but my initial thought is how would you get rid of the radioactive material? I'm also curious as to how these tunnels would remain intact with earthquakes, plate movements, etc.


Me --> Google.
Time taken to search: 2 minutes.

www.freepatentsonline.com...


Me --> response.
Thanks. I'm not questioning the potential existance or use of nuclear boring machines. I asked about getting rid of the radioactive material and how the tunnels would remain intact from earthquakes, plate movements, soil liquifaction, etc. Your link doesn't address those topics.



posted on Jan, 24 2011 @ 07:22 AM
link   
They are just there, unless you are a government figure of our highest elite or a warrior to protect them, you will no be entering or even getting any closer to these underground bukers than you would to Area 51, who many (including the government) claimed didn't exist either, even looking straight at it, they would tell you that it didn't exist. This is just standard government protocol. There are conspiracies and hidden truths within government and this is not even really a debate. I suspect this OP is a government figure himself debunking underground bunkers so that we won't go looking for them when someting bad happens soon. Spot tha Fed.



posted on Jan, 24 2011 @ 07:26 AM
link   
reply to post by zoso28
 


Not sure if this link is going to work for you... if not, just Bing up some images using the words LASER TUNNEL BORING. If that doesn't convince you, then nothing can. My apologies if someone has already suggested this... as I've yet to read the entire thread.

LASER TUNNEL BORING...

Yucca Mountain - Geotimes...


Here's the grabber...

Winograd says. “The real question is whether it’s safer to put this waste in one isolated, monitored site or to keep it spread among 121 sites throughout the country.”

edit on 24-1-2011 by 1088no5 because: to add a link



posted on Jan, 24 2011 @ 08:07 AM
link   
a lot of the pics that are seen also come from other facilities such as dusel projects, warehousing sites, post war era shelters and such, not to say that the modern version of dumbs do not exist or that some of these others could not provide shelter or become converted for the masses as refuge, though considering the suposed secrecy behind building any military bunkers for a once only survival scenario, would have to be held with the strictest measures in place to counter all non essential personel any known access or public knowledge in reguards to the purpose or whereabouts of such sites.



posted on Jan, 24 2011 @ 09:03 AM
link   
Anyone else notice the O.P. isnt commenting? The proof is in the links, photos and publications.



posted on Jan, 24 2011 @ 10:17 AM
link   
More on the Chicago "Deep Tunnel"
www.tunnelingonline.com...
Two year old link.

500 feet per day thru limestone Dolomite rock using conventional tunnel boring machines ain't too shabby.
Look's like some fed TARP money's comin' thru for more Chicago tunnels.



posted on Jan, 24 2011 @ 10:48 AM
link   

Originally posted by uscrusader
More on the Chicago "Deep Tunnel"
www.tunnelingonline.com...
Two year old link.

500 feet per day thru limestone Dolomite rock using conventional tunnel boring machines ain't too shabby.
Look's like some fed TARP money's comin' thru for more Chicago tunnels.



I agree with the above.

Now if I can just get you fired for hacking an abandoned account.



posted on Jan, 24 2011 @ 07:34 PM
link   
reply to post by 1088no5
 


You're kidding right, you do realize that the lasers are used where traditional plumb lines wouldn't work? they guide the TBM to where it needs to dig. There has never been any proof of a nuclear, thermal or laser powered boring machine. ever.

As I stated earlier, and to which no one is able to reply.. how would such a device survive the enormous energy involved based on standard TBM engineering, which is all I can see in every single photo posted here.

Once again, A genuinely good topic has started to distill into a crapfest.. This whole proof is the burden of the beholder, i believe it so it's true, holier than thou type crap just doesn't cut it anymore. ATS mods should be able to recognize when a thread is just basically treading water in the idiot sea and close them before more intellectual damage is done. Instead of looking at the facts stated here which some people have put a decent amount of their personal time in to for you to just troll up and suggest that you're the one who's right, with no evidence, and expect everyone else to conform is a joke.

Please save us.



posted on Jan, 24 2011 @ 07:50 PM
link   

Originally posted by mysterioustranger
Anyone else notice the O.P. isnt commenting? The proof is in the links, photos and publications.


Sorry, the OP has a job. I really like whats been presented so far, and the replies as well. Looking over it all now and finding some good stuff amidst all the junk. Keep it comin



posted on Jan, 24 2011 @ 08:44 PM
link   

Originally posted by peter_kandra

Originally posted by clay2 baraka

Originally posted by peter_kandra
1. Construction. I hear people mention nuclear tunnel boring machines. Great concept. I haven't read any articles about these machines, but my initial thought is how would you get rid of the radioactive material? I'm also curious as to how these tunnels would remain intact with earthquakes, plate movements, etc.


Me --> Google.
Time taken to search: 2 minutes.

www.freepatentsonline.com...


Me --> response.
Thanks. I'm not questioning the potential existance or use of nuclear boring machines. I asked about getting rid of the radioactive material and how the tunnels would remain intact from earthquakes, plate movements, soil liquifaction, etc. Your link doesn't address those topics.


If you had taken time to read the patent, you would have noticed that the heat source is a "nuclear reactor," much like we find all of the time on naval vessels. . They dispose of that waste all of the time.

Once the rock is is melted by a nuclear or flame-jet boring machine, you would have a very solid, stable structure. Impossible! Not really. There are naturally formed lava tubes all around the world that are quite stable and have been around for millions of years:
www.goodearthgraphics.com...
en.wikipedia.org...



posted on Jan, 24 2011 @ 09:05 PM
link   
reply to post by clay2 baraka
 


Great, maybe you can finally answer me.

Explain the engineering involved in sustaining such a device with the output of energy required to melt rock?

Otherwise, stop posting the same sh*t over and over again.

Has a cloud of aerosol vapor or something swept over continental U.S. in the last 24 hours or something.. people seem a) ignorant and b) high as a kite.



posted on Jan, 24 2011 @ 09:35 PM
link   
Dont know about stateside. How ever there is a DUMB beneath scammonden dam, on the top of the Penines. As you drive along the M62 its beneath your wheels. Below the road and right back to the far side of the dam. This was built in 1972, my father worked on it. Highest man made dam in europe I think. Water would make a good shield I guess. There is also a lot of ufo or strange sights, reported there abouts arround Huddersfield. I have a photo but im sure if you google the dam you will see it.
edit on 24-1-2011 by illuminnaughty because: (no reason given)



posted on Jan, 25 2011 @ 12:18 AM
link   

Originally posted by zoso28
reply to post by Nebulous1973
 


Are you serious? You and those of your ilk are why this site is going downhill, but thats another topic for another time.

I have been here for 5 plus years. I have frequented this particular forum. I have seen no credible evidence to support any of the claims of secret underground bases here. And "irrefutable" or "undeniable" evidence does not come for "some guy who used to work there."

"Prove me wrong" is a typical response from someone who has no proof. It is an ignorant statement. One cannot prove a negative.


Amen. The burden of proof lies with someone claiming something exists. In a reasonable debate, you can't possibly prove that something doesn't exist, it's up to those claiming that something DOES exist to prove it. Instead this site is littered with nitwits who think by being confrontational and arrogant, it somehow justifies the fact that they CAN'T prove their points. Pathetic.



posted on Jan, 25 2011 @ 12:37 AM
link   
reply to post by zoso28
 


Suppose there was an astroid or something heaed for the earth........World leaders have 3 choices.

1. do nothing and go down with the ship.
2. get in a spacecraft and go above the earths atmosphere.
3. Go underground.

Now in all honesty which do you think most world leaders are prepared to do???



posted on Jan, 25 2011 @ 01:02 AM
link   
reply to post by tauristercus
 


There are many seismic monitoring stations near the NTS run by the USGS, University of Nevada, etc. You can't fart on the NTS without a sensor picking it up. The caverns created by underground nukes are hot. So that leaves the tunnels. Nobody denies there are tunnels on the NTS. You can have tunnels anywhere.



posted on Jan, 25 2011 @ 03:18 AM
link   

Originally posted by malcr

Originally posted by Terrormaster
I love it when people say "prove it doesn't exist". That's like those of religion challenging atheist and skeptics to prove their deity does NOT exist. Science doesn't work that way. You don't try to prove a negative because it leaves too many things open to individual interpretation of the facts. You prove the positive. You prove something exists based on facts not the other way around.

It's also the volume of evidence required. In order to prove that there are no underground bunkers (of the type claimed) you have to show what does exist below the ground EVERYWHERE!!!!!! This is clearly nonsense.

I believe bigfoot is an alien who speaks latin that lives on Venus and visits here occasionally. Now it is true until you (not you Terrormaster but you the believers) prove me wrong!................An extreme example of supidity to prove that proving negatives is the preserve of the ignorant so they can ignore facts.
edit on 24/1/11 by malcr because: (no reason given)


Some good points made just like the one above and the other one by plexus.

ATS has involved to become an incredibly unique forum. It is a reasonably level playing field with virtually no stratification or hierachy. What also makes it unique is that high percentage of thread discussions involve debate and commentary that is of a scientific nature. These two ingredients make for quite a cesspool of thread content.

One thing that amazes me is that some contributors engage in these topics with a tone consistent with a level of authority such as an expert, or mentor. I believe this is a side effect of extensive thread contribution over many many years. Some contributers rack up 10000+ posts. Its only natural that some will progress to a style that is inappropriately authoritative, particularly if the substance of the threads history lack integrity. This is made worse by the fact that many threads have no closure. There is no way to check the back of the book to see if the answer was right or wrong.

To ask someone to "prove the negative" with authority is to me incredible!The only basis upon which someone could request this with authority is someone that has experience or a track record of proving the negative and can support that request with some sort of methodology. Usually the said person would guide the "student" through that journey if needed. Is this the case here in this thread?



new topics

top topics



 
12
<< 2  3  4    6  7  8 >>

log in

join