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.

 

Most meteorites contain alien fossils.

page: 1
0
<<   2 >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Apr, 18 2011 @ 07:14 AM
link   
Numerous scientific evidences here prove most meteorites contain alien fossils:
ireport.cnn.com...

Experts pretend they didn't see the king was naked. You can debunk me or the experts.

Included: YouTube demonstration films,numerous micrographs




posted on Apr, 18 2011 @ 07:19 AM
link   
"Vetting explained

iReport is a user-generated section of CNN.com. The stories in this section are not edited, fact-checked or screened before they are posted.

What does the label "not vetted by CNN" mean?
The label “Not vetted by CNN” lets you know that this story hasn’t been both checked and cleared by a CNN editor."



posted on Apr, 18 2011 @ 07:19 AM
link   
Um, well.....no, sorry. Re-read your own link very closely, then do a few google searches and actually, maybe even, go out on a limb and email or phone one ot two of the names....you will find that no, most meteorites do not contain alien fossils. Seriously, do a little legwork and you will feel silly for saying what you did. We could all pitch in and do the legwork for you, but you would not appreciate the info we pass along as much as the info your own two hands can come up with in under 24 hours regarding this information.
edit on 18-4-2011 by MainLineThis because: (no reason given)



posted on Apr, 18 2011 @ 07:20 AM
link   

Originally posted by linliangtai
Numerous scientific evidences here prove most meteorites contain alien fossils:
ireport.cnn.com...

Experts pretend they didn't see the king was naked. You can debunk me or the experts.

Included: YouTube demonstration films,numerous micrographs


thats a very bold statement.. and i applaud you effort and research in making this thread.. must have taken you ages



posted on Apr, 18 2011 @ 07:22 AM
link   
reply to post by Misterlondon
 


Thank you for making my point, I could have done so with much less typing if I wasn't trying to get the OP to find out for themselves how useless the info they were passing to us was!

Cheers!!!!!!



posted on Apr, 18 2011 @ 08:02 AM
link   
Most meteorites contain squirrel's fossils. That's a fact.

I'm sorry, space as we know it is a really boring place. Life is hard to develop and survive, yes, there is life around the solar system, I have no doubt in that, extraterrestrial life i mean (d'ho!). But meteorites... no. Maybe, MAYBE some meteorites contain organic molecules, but that's something anyone can develop in a school's laboratory so it's not a sign of life as we consider it.



posted on Apr, 18 2011 @ 08:58 AM
link   
What is missing in this thread is the rest of the story.

There is a vehement bastion of scientists and other experts that will defend to their last breath that asteroids were not once part of a larger body--an actual living world--that somehow or another disintegrated. To admit to fossilized remains in any asteroid or meteor would be confirmation of that possibility and that they cannot abide.

They have no good reason for having that opinion, but that is merely the on-going belief in that science and they must stick with the dogma. They deny their ignorance and the data.
edit on 18-4-2011 by Aliensun because: (no reason given)



posted on Apr, 18 2011 @ 09:10 AM
link   

Originally posted by Aliensun
What is missing in this thread is the rest of the story.

There is a vehement bastion of scientists and other experts that will defend to their last breath that asteroids were not once part of a larger body--an actual living world--that somehow or another disintegrated. To admit to fossilized remains in any asteroid or meteor would be confirmation of that possibility and that they cannot abide.

They have no good reason for having that opinion, but that is merely the on-going belief in that science and they must stick with the dogma. They deny their ignorance and the data.
edit on 18-4-2011 by Aliensun because: (no reason given)


Nice sweeping assertion, but patently untrue.

www.cosmosmagazine.com...

nssdc.gsfc.nasa.gov...



posted on Apr, 18 2011 @ 11:10 AM
link   
reply to post by MainLineThis
 

I have re-read my article many times. You are in No position to disprove my claim.
All the king's men are dead. The king was naked:
wretchfossil.blogspot.com...



posted on Apr, 18 2011 @ 02:02 PM
link   
So you submitted an iReport to CNN that links to your own blog and posted it here as proof of your ridiculous claim?

Weak.



posted on Apr, 18 2011 @ 09:36 PM
link   
reply to post by draknoir2
 


No one can ever disprove my claim. Speculation is not proof or disproof. Just show show evidence for proof or disproof. Mud slinging is not science or ethics. It's a sin. Remember that.



posted on May, 4 2011 @ 02:29 AM
link   

Originally posted by draknoir2

Originally posted by Aliensun
What is missing in this thread is the rest of the story.

There is a vehement bastion of scientists and other experts that will defend to their last breath that asteroids were not once part of a larger body--an actual living world--that somehow or another disintegrated. To admit to fossilized remains in any asteroid or meteor would be confirmation of that possibility and that they cannot abide.

They have no good reason for having that opinion, but that is merely the on-going belief in that science and they must stick with the dogma. They deny their ignorance and the data.
edit on 18-4-2011 by Aliensun because: (no reason given)


Nice sweeping assertion, but patently untrue.

www.cosmosmagazine.com...

nssdc.gsfc.nasa.gov...


You said it was patently untrue, but let me say it was true as shown in the following sentence, which I quoted from the first link you provided: Quote:

"Because meteorites represent leftover materials from the formation of the solar system, the key components of life – including nucleobases – could be widespread in the cosmos," said co-author Mark Sephton, also at Imperial College, London.
Unquote.
Abvoe quote is clear evidenc that the co-author of that article and mainstream scientists did not believe meteorites were once part of a larger body--an actual living world--



posted on May, 5 2011 @ 02:10 AM
link   
You are just plain wrong, OP, sorry. Go take a course in meteoritics and chemistry.

The only meteorite known to 'possibly" contain fossil remnants (and that of bacteria) , and of the millions kept in museums, university and public collections, was really a piece of crustal rock broken off of Mars.

Almost all meteorites have an origin in asteroids and comets. They range from chondritics to irons with thousands of variations in between. Almost all have been through a metamorphosis that includes melting, remelting, disintegration and re-integration of their respective materials. They represent the surface, mantle and cores of these larger structures, and that is a proven by science. Some chondrites, mostly achondrites and carbonaceous chondrites have shown to contain basic building blocks of life like amino acids, methane and water. but NO FOSSILS.



posted on May, 5 2011 @ 05:16 AM
link   
reply to post by charlyv
 


What you said was known to me long ago. Mainstream scientists said that. But they are wrong, period.
I have repeatedly proven they are wrong. Do not cling to the wrong ideas. See my proof in my website and disprove me rather than just tow the party line.



posted on May, 5 2011 @ 05:26 AM
link   
You haven't actually proven anything though have you?
It's just an idea, by circling various things and calling them blood vessels does not equate to proof. You are telling us what you are seeing without any actual evidence. It's based on your misguided interpretation.



posted on May, 5 2011 @ 05:49 AM
link   
reply to post by pazcat
 

You cannot understand my proof unless you have an open mind and really read my stuff.



posted on May, 8 2011 @ 01:42 AM
link   


What you said was known to me long ago. Mainstream scientists said that. But they are wrong, period.
I have repeatedly proven they are wrong. Do not cling to the wrong ideas. See my proof in my website and disprove me rather than just tow the party line.

reply to post by linliangtai
 


Your "Proof" is laughable. I disprove you based upon my own research as well.
I have hundreds of meteorites, and I have been studying meteoritics for years. I know their nature extremely better than any real or valid research you have conducted , and your conclusions based on whatever that is, are quite frankly delusional.

Oh, and incidentally, "Mainstream Science" is responsible for most anything you use or do today. According to you, its all wrong, so we must all be living in a dream.



posted on May, 8 2011 @ 03:31 AM
link   
reply to post by charlyv
 


Where is your disproof against any of my posts on my website at wretchfossil.blogspot.com... ?



posted on May, 10 2011 @ 05:46 AM
link   
First rule of science, a theory can not be proven, only dis proven... you can give supporting evidence, but someone can always come along with new evidence at a later stage to disprove it, so science never uses the word prove.. i was taught this in high school science on day one.

Science proves ideas. Journalists often write about "scientific proof" and some scientists talk about it, but in fact, the concept of proof — real, absolute proof — is not particularly scientific. Science is based on the principle that any idea, no matter how widely accepted today, could be overturned tomorrow if the evidence warranted it. Science accepts or rejects ideas based on the evidence; it does not prove or disprove them

undsci.berkeley.edu...
projectshum.org...
www.trans4mind.com...



posted on May, 10 2011 @ 07:54 AM
link   

Originally posted by linliangtai
reply to post by draknoir2
 


No one can ever disprove my claim. Speculation is not proof or disproof. Just show show evidence for proof or disproof. Mud slinging is not science or ethics. It's a sin. Remember that.


There is an invisible elf in my backyard that only I can see. No one can ever disprove my claim.

The above statement is as idiotic as your entire argument. Your internet attention seeking which seems to be currently focused on ATS membership is pathetic and very transparent. Unfortunately for you, you will find (as you no doubt have) that this board is by and far a little more advanced than the usual boards you spam. As you see, in all of the info you have posted on this board so far it has been met with common sense and reason, two things that you can't stand up to in your position.



new topics

top topics



 
0
<<   2 >>

log in

join