Something R-Frequency and E-Class this way comes!

reply to post by AMANNAMEDQUEST

I don't know why anyone pays any attention to Hoagland. Who knows, maybe it was him who came up with the tale. It is a pretty good one.

I haven't found any details about the Steins flyby and the OSIRIS safe mode, but the fault protection routines on Rosetta have been of concern from the get go. Apparently it's a touchy system. The entire spacecraft went into safe mode unexpectedly a few months ago and there were concerns about its flyby around Earth in 2007.

planetary.org...
www.esa.int...

This goes for everyone, not just Phage. When you take on facts from any source, official or no, without the filter of common sense and logical reasoning, you're opening yourself up to taking on a whole host of lies. You see, the more people think they'll be believed, the more creative they get with their lies.

I'm sorry Phage, you're not clever, you're just handy with google and copy and paste, and that's not smart, that's copying, and sometimes, you copy the wrong answers.

But you still manage to sound smart, so points there.

reply to post by TheIrvy

Please provide evidence of plagiarism on my part.
If you find it, alerting the staff would be appropriate.

Originally posted by wavemaker

Originally posted by Kali74
Why the Navy and not the Air Force or NASA? It doesn't make a lot of sense to me.

We don't know the whole story so just keep an open mind. But I have already read in many articles that the Navy have another division which they call the US Navy Space Command.

Just a thought here, but I recall seeing a program many years ago about training astronauts, and the thing that stuck out in my mind was the mention that being out in space was akin to being under water. The training was similar. It could be why it falls under the Navy and not the Air Force....there is no air in space...technically.

Did I say plagiarism? However, it is that kind of knee jerk response I'm talking about. It doesn't matter whether you accept David Icke's every utterance as gospel, or Stephen Hawking, you're still accepting conclusions without parsing it through your own brain, and that's how you open yourself up to being conned.

And it's not plagiarism, but really, all you do is look stuff up on the internet and post links, unless you're the biggest genius in the world, you didn't know the answer before you looked it up, and you don't retain them afterward, you're just pointing to Another conclusion that matches your own notion that everything "official" is true, and that things that remain undiscovered don't exist because there's no "proof". Gravity was a very real and present force before it was "proven" or explained, and even though our current explanations for it are likely going to be proven wrong once we learn more, it still works regardless.

In this case, we simply haven't poked our heads out far enough to have any answers about what's going on out in deep space, only notions and ideas that haven't yet been thoroughly disproven. All you have to do is look at how many discoveries come with a bit that just doesn't make sense when viewed through the lens of our scientific knowledge to realise that our scientific knowledge is only inches above believing that the fire was always in the wood waiting to be unleashed or that mice spontaneously generate out of old sacks left lying in barns.

This "whistleblower" may well be a fake, and in all probability, he likely is, but he's still pointing at established theories and existing puzzles. I found the rosetta mission stuff I read today very interesting, but then I lost all conceit and arrogance about "being right" long ago when I realised I was completely wrong about everything. You should try that sometimes, it's the greatest learning experience you've never had.

reply to post by TheIrvy

I'm sorry Phage, you're not clever, you're just handy with google and copy and paste, and that's not smart, that's copying, and sometimes, you copy the wrong answers.

When I paste I provide the source. When I "copy" I provide the source.

Here's a thought. If you have issues with the material (my own synthesis as well as direct sources) why not address it rather than me? Then maybe we can have a discussion of the topic rather than name calling.

Originally posted by TheIrvy
It doesn't matter whether you accept David Icke's every utterance as gospel, or Stephen Hawking, you're still accepting conclusions without parsing it through your own brain, and that's how you open yourself up to being conned.

Oh, that's right maybe I'll start listening to the homeless guy down the street I better parse that through my brain just in case he's right, gotta listen to everybody, I can't use common sense.

Guys!!

Please let's not derail the disscussion with another Phage bashing comments. I do not try to defend the guy, he's rather good at defending his comments, even though sometimes his tone may be annoying to some I tend to agree with his reasoning.

We should focus more on the research and backing up/debunking the OP's story. While I personally think it is some quite an elaborate (but not so much, really) hoax it really teases my conspiracy senses and having read some of the links provied by some in this thread I'm still on the fence.

Please leave personal issues aside and let's concentrate on pure debate. 16 goddamned pages in the thread and I still have no idea wheteher these HAM radios can receive such transmission or not. Some of you mentioned having seen /heard of mysterious aircrafts and still noone disscuss it. Back to the topic ladies and gentlemen!

Please?

reply to post by Phage


Phage can you enlighten us on why Hoagland is considered an untrustworthy source

I found his article on steins rather compelling
I assume without reading this whole thread you are referring to this article

www.bibliotecapleyades.net...

- an article which some would dismiss just because of the host URL I would imagine, however to be fair there are plenty of folks who would have the same estimation of an article posted on this site I would imagine


to quote from an extensive and somewhat hard to read circular on E class asteroids - and how they have analysed the limited data available
www.lpi.usra.edu...

"A major breakthrough is still pending in the observationally
challenging circular polarimetry of asteroids. It
could yield valuable information about an asteroid’s spin
state, shape, and microscopic physical properties beyond
photometry and linear polarimetry."

in other words, the science is more theory than fact, at this stage of human history

in other words, they don't know for sure what these objects are made of, however it seems they are metallic, and given that science is full of conjecture on this topic, I see no reason why we can't all play in the same sandpit and use our much loved ATS as a forum for further conjecture, against which there is no law

Yes, Phage can be rude and short. I seriously wonder if he's a robot or some kind of military A.I.. However, he's taught me a few things about astronomy and I think ATS needs him as much as everybody else. He can be the balance in a discussion. I do agree that he should keep personal attacks and snide comments to a minimum. They need to tweak his A.I. program for that I suppose. TheIrvy does make some points you could acknowledge at the very least Mr. Phage.

P.S.

Your signature doesn't do yourself any favors, and it rubs people the wrong way.

reply to post by Highlander64

Phage can you enlighten us on why Hoagland is considered an untrustworthy source

Just a few of his greatest hits:
The face on Mars.
Glass worms on Mars.
Glass domes on the Moon.
Data's Head.
His claim that he came up with the idea of life on Europa.

Since the article is on Hoagland's own site, it has nothing to do with bibliotecapleyades. It's the author I have a problem with. (Now he sees Horus in Steins!) But maybe that's just me.

Yes, that article is rather tough going but it is not about E-class asteroids. It is about asteroids in general and discusses backscattering effects in different classes of asteroids. It's really pretty dry stuff unless you're into asteroids. I don't see any reference to a metallic composition but we do know a lot of asteroids are high in metals because little pieces of them end up on Earth from time to time.

Reading something like that, although there is no proof another than the knowledge and word of the author, really makes you think.

The thought of something more really excites me.

Just my few pennies worth,
In around 99-2000 i was stood on brown street car park in salisbury, great view of the cathedral from there at night, whilst looking at the cathedral i saw a shuttle type craft, it was more like a low profile single or twin seater version delta winged, no bay on the back, fighter type profile, maybe one eight or one tenth scale, flying around 50 feet above the houses.
completely noiseless, visible for around five to ten seconds.
I know what i saw, there is in my opinion a force capable of operating in and around LEO and local space, if they are doing that who is to say they are not operating in a much wider context, this was 12-13 years ago now.

reply to post by Phage


Phage i worry about you, is your "debunking" persona so well entrenched in your psyche that if you ever did see anything out of the ordinary and was obviously something you do not believe was possible.
Do you think you would have a period of "Missing time" as your ego defends itself from the truth?.
just wondering, and, i honestly do worry about you.

Only Warning

Discuss the topic and not each other.

Further bickering posts will be removed.

weehaaa! finally some really interesting topic about elenin. i was getting truly sick of all of em doomsayers out there, the topic came right on the spot for some refreshment. it was about time. and the star and flag comes esp. for the

Originally posted by misfitofscience
You can include Nibiru and Planet X if you so wish But I do not believe in them.

part.

I/m up to page 7 and haven't seen this posted yet...
same fish, different name, and what does the names matter? As if they are going to share what they know with you.


"We will find ourselves caught off guard by changes in the political, economic, technological, strategic, and
operational environments. We will find ourselves surprised by the creativity and capability of our adversaries.
Our goal is not to eliminate surprise – that is impossible. Our goal is, by a careful consideration of the future,
to suggest the attributes of a joint force capable of adjusting with minimum difficulty when the surprise
inevitably comes. The true test of military effectiveness in the past has been the ability of a force to diagnose
the conditions it actually confronts and then quickly adapt. In the end, it will be our imagination and agility to
envision and prepare for the future, and then to adapt to surprises, that will determine how the Joint Force will
perform over the next twenty-five years. The ability to adapt to the reality of war, its political framework, and
its technical and industrial modes, and to the fact that the enemy also consists of adaptive human beings, has
been the key component in military effectiveness in the past and will continue to be so in the future"

" But a brief look at the past quarter
century, to say nothing of the past four thousand years, suggests the extent of changes that coming
decades will bring"

"
In thinking about the world’s trajectory, we have reason to believe that the next twenty-five years will
bring changes just as dramatic, drastic, and disruptive as those that have occurred in the past quarter
century. Indeed, the pace of technological and scientific change is increasing. Changes will occur
throughout the energy, financial, political, strategic, operational, and technological domains. How drastic,
how disruptive and how surprising these changes might be is at present not discernible and in some
cases their full impact will not be understood until they are upon us"

and finally...

"
Engage people with what they expect; it is what they are able to discern and confirms their projection.
It settles them into predictable patterns of response, occupying their minds while you wait for the
extraordinary moment—that which they cannot anticipate.
12
-Sun Tz"

Thanks and recognition to

www.abovetopsecret.com...

for bringing this to our attention.
Read more people...speak less.
Does wonders.

I'll respond without quoting because I don't feel like going back and finding the posts.
Don't worry about the cyanide issue. cyanide is easily destroyed by two means.
1. oxidation
2. heat

I don't think that ORP would come into play but if by some freak occurence the comets debris would enter the atmosphere, heat would surely negate the cyanide. That is, of course, if I am correct in assuming that excessive heat would be generated by entry into our atmosphere. It doesn't take extreme heat either.

reply to post by wavemaker


The airforce defends OUR airspace, but in our military history, when we WENT TO THE ENEMY it was the navy and marines. SO, it would stand to reason that the Navy would be a perfect military arm to hide a space program light years ahead of what we know. When you want to reach out to the unknown, you send the best you've got, especially when it involves changing our lives as we know it.

reply to post by misfitofscience


This thread is positively embarrassing. The OP cites a post on another BBS that is confusingly written. It would seem to be a series of questions directed at someone claiming to be a Navy space pilot, and the alleged pilot's answers. Unfortunately, it is so poorly formatted and transcribed that it is often difficult to tell who made which statement. This in itself argues for a degree of immaturity in the person who transcribed this to GLP.

Now if we can deconstruct this individuals claims we may get some answers that we are looking for:

Ideally, we would get to the truth of the matter, which is not necessarily the same as the answers we are looking for! First, an observation. By revealing the existence of a secret military program, the alleged pilot would be committing treason. In order to risk the consequences of this, the information he has to relate must be of the utmost importance and urgency. The alleged pilot's style seems remarkably relaxed and vague, given these circumstances. Another note regarding style: for a member of an elite secret military operation, his vocabulary is notably free of MilSpeak: NAVSEC, SPAWAR, ELINT, RECON...

Due to all the internet hype the Navy actually sent a recon mission to Elenin. Let's just say it won't cause the excitement some think. But it may present a few surprises that no one expected.
I'll be here for about 20 minutes to answer questions and then I'm off. Just trying to be nice because I know there is a lot of buzz about it.

Is the United States military in the habit of planning its operations around internet gossip? Surely they have sophisticated sources of their own. In any event, all of this "internet hype" is coming from apocalyptic cultists and UFO bloggers. NASA, the IAU and other bodies engaged in actual space observations are paying very little attention to this comet. NAVSEC read ELINT on GLP and tasked SPAWAR SOLSYS to RECON C/2010X-1? Really? That would explain that platoon of SEALS combing British Columbia for Bigfoot.

It certainly is nice of this star pilot to take twenty minutes of his valuable top secret operations time to commit a casual act of treason.

[Q]How long does it take to get there?

[A]From the moment the crew steps in the craft, preps, clears port, about 60 minutes. Actual travel time, about 20.

What does the crew do in the craft for forty minutes? Don't they have a ground crew to prepare all the systems? How long does it take a pilot on an aircraft carrier to prepare his jet once he gets in? Three quarters of an hour?

Assuming that the Navy sent this mission while the comet was 2 AU away, the trip would have taken 1000 seconds at the speed of light (1AU~499 light seconds). This is about 17 minutes, so he's in the right ball park. We will set aside the difficulties of navigating at relativistic speeds for the moment.

[Q]Go into detail about a few of these surprises

[A]No doom from elenin. its not a comet, or not totally just a comet.

For someone risking his security clearance, livelihood and possibly life in order to impart important information, he is not being very specific.

[Q]Ok, what exactly is it

[A]check into the properties of E-type asteroids. very similar. however if you connect the dots you 'll know that E types are codeword for something more interesting

E-type asteroids are rocky asteroids that lack chrondrules (inclusions of other material, suggesting accretion in space.) They appear to be basaltic and have relatively high albedos. Current thinking is they have notable crystalline structure. So what? What's to piece together? This "hint" was simply to get the readers to look up "E-class asteroid." When it turns out that there are such things, the star pilot's story will be "confirmed" in the eyes of the reader. The problem is, of course, that this technical expression is in no way related to the story; it is just an irrelevant detail added to suggest veracity. I believe this is his source for the information:

Star Fleet Planetary Classification Scheme

It will become clear why I believe this is his source presently. Why doesn't he simply tell us what "E-type" is code for? To exercise the reader's imagination. He knows you'll get to ELE!

[Q]What effect does this elenin have on our earth, and what risks does it pose for us?

[A]it won't have any effects on earth. But it may be of interest to ham radio operators

Why? Could he give us a hint what frequency to listen to? Is he implying that there will be artificial transmissions? Again, he is simply exercising the imagination of the reader.

(Incidentally, comets do emit radio and other frequency waves. When the ions in the coma and tail fall back to their ground state, they release the extra energy in the form of photons. Most of this radiation is from hydrogen and hydroxyl radicals. Hydroxyl radio emissions are at 1612, 1665, 1667 and 1720 MHz in the 18cm wavelength band. Source. These are not frequencies Ham radio operators generally frequent. In any event, comets are not very "loud.")

[Q]op what can you tell us about the program besides the fact that you went to elenin?

[A]that they know they gotta tell everyone soon, because the gap between what we have and what we admit is increasing to a point that they can't keep it all a secret forever. think 50 lightyears for a one or two day trip is easy.

It is at this point that he explicitly states that the craft travel faster than light. Setting aside the visual effects that occur at near light speed, the problems of superluminal navigation are insuperable. Because you are traveling faster than light, you would collide with any object in your path before the light from it could reach your eyes! Further, although space is virtually a vacuum at low speeds, as you travel faster, to traverse greater distances and the flux dramatically increases. Moving faster than light, intterstellar space would seem to be packed with dust!

[Q]I'd say one would have to be one bad mofo to drive one of those. Can they see me watching them? Are their eye pieces able to see the fly I swat?

[A]actually its easier than flying a jet. most of it is automated. but they still pick the elite of the elite for this stuff. and yes they can see the fly you are swatting, your facial expression, and who exactly you are via facial recognition.

They can see your face from directly overhead? Not just the top of your head?

Did you go to flight school in Corpus Christi or Pensacola?

[A]i understand your curiosity. i don't want to talk about personal stuff though.

The pilot didn't want to answer because he sensed a trick question. He was correct:

All flight training begins at either NAS Pensacola, Florida, the "Cradle of Naval Aviation", or at Vance Air Force Base, as part of a joint USN-USAF training effort. ... Primary teaches the SNA the basics of flying. For Navy and Marine Corps SNAs, there are three choices for Primary. The Navy offers training at either Naval Air Station Whiting Field in Milton, FL, Naval Air Station Corpus Christi in Corpus Christi, TX, or Joint Training with the Air Force at Vance AFB in Oklahoma.

www.globalsecurity.org...

Busted. You would think that a naval aviator would know that primary is always at Pensecola or Vance, not Corpus Christi!

[Q]OP can you say what the furthest distance from earth you've traveled is? Another star system?

[A]about 250 ly, others much much further, and still heading out

If the Navy has explored an area with a radius of 250 light years, it has potentially explored a volume of 6.5 million cubic light years. Since the stellar density in the solar neighborhood is about 1 star per cubic parsec, they have potentially explored 1.9 million stars! (Source) And they're still heading out! It makes you wonder how much information they can gather with these trips.

[Q]Have you observed other civilized planets?

yes, city lights from space, very similar if not identical in some cases to our cities

City lights? That's it? You didn't try making radio contact? Not a very thorough survey, but I guess you had another 1.9 million stars to get to that afternoon.

[A]but i will share this small tidbit. there are those that create their own sort of wave and ride it like a surfer.
think about Einstein, when they drop a ball in a sheet to demonstrate how timespace gets warped by matter.
they jokingly say we have front wheel drive. we are pushed not pulled and it certainly feels that way even though they say the inertia is canceled i swear i feel the 'pull'
that's all i will say on this. sorry to be vague.

This should all sound rather familiar:

La Forge then cuts in suggesting that the Enterprise could clear the rift without using the warp engines by "surfing" the distortion waves – by phase-matching the deflector shields with the EM variance of the distortion wave they would be pulled along in the wave.

memory-alpha.org...(episode)

If no one can find any points in favor of this not being a hoax, I hereby formally move that this be moved to [HOAX].

Note: I have taken most of the quotations from this site, and added bracketed Qs and As to help clarify the dialog.