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.

 

33 Year Air Force General had a conversation with me about Secret Space Program

page: 14
210
<< 11  12  13    15  16  17 >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Sep, 1 2011 @ 01:07 PM
link   
tunsten rods in space big weapon, drain bramage its real.




posted on Sep, 1 2011 @ 01:10 PM
link   


I could keep going, but the truth is darpa's been heavily investing in space for quite some time and the majority of the stories don't break into the public. the cape is far from being our only (hell, far from being the best) launch site, despite being the best known. christ, what do you think the space command folk in the STRATCOM office do all day?


I can back you up on this. I can say with complete certainty that launches of Saturn V or any other heavy lift rockets could have been done in many secret places. Vandenberg too. With the current technology they likely have, it can be done from many more locations unabated.

I have attended a launch as a guest at Vandenberg CA, and observed and photographed night launches from sometimes hundreds of miles away. Vandenberg is so isolated, and on the coast of central California with only it's own town for many miles. At the time of the Apollo program, it was far easier to launch without anyone seeing anything at all.

There are launch facilities in Alaska, South America and many other locations too that offer very (off the radar) opportunities for operational space programs. One of my friends has worked at some of these bases as launch crew for Lockheed and other contractors. Many DOD orbital insertions have been done for satellites and other missions we never hear about. So anything is possible.

These are facts that show that such a space program is very plausible, and, very likely if you are educated in such matters.

ZG



posted on Sep, 1 2011 @ 01:17 PM
link   
lets face it..if true..and it might just be at certain levels..a part of the government working for the elites SPLIT off from America and typical defense budget and went dark

cia is probably involved at some level and drug profits are probably helping fund this too along with raping and pillaging smaller countries with imf/world bank terrorism


i can only imagine what else these scum got planned and why there doing it

are they literally hiding the tech so they can "get off the planet" when needed



posted on Sep, 1 2011 @ 01:17 PM
link   
reply to post by vincenz32
 


All I have to do is find you (which would be a piece of cake). Then I can find him.


Anyways, being that none of this information is new to most of us and your credibility cannot be verified it is just another story and just another paper to file away.

Not that I don't believe you. This is hardly unbelievable stuff. Nothing new here. But, I guess it does give a small remote amount of validation. Thanks for sharing this with us.

-Alien



posted on Sep, 1 2011 @ 01:20 PM
link   
even JFK seemed to know about the shadow government or programs back then

he gave a speech talking down on secret societies as well

jfk was shot to death perhaps FOR this

there is also that little issue about money printing



posted on Sep, 1 2011 @ 01:31 PM
link   
reply to post by SuperTripps
 


That's a good point on the black market drug money.....the CIA is so deep in that its not even funny.

Plus, almost impossible to trace....at least for some "commission"

edit on 1-9-2011 by dtrock78 because: (no reason given)



posted on Sep, 1 2011 @ 01:38 PM
link   
Opps....wrong thread!
edit on 2011/9/1 by Aeons because: (no reason given)



posted on Sep, 1 2011 @ 01:39 PM
link   
i don't see why its so hard to believe any of this..technology has advanced by leaps and bounds since the 60's and 70's so i can see how it is extremely plausible to launch a next gen space craft to a hidden base on the moon and from there launch to anywhere



posted on Sep, 1 2011 @ 01:40 PM
link   

Originally posted by ZackMorris



Lol, that old black and white picture should answer your question... The moon missions were around 1969? So even of they only had 30 years of scientists working tirelessly to develop new technologies that would give them till 1999... 12 years ago... In other words, its been over 40 years and you actually still believe they use this stone age crap??? Haha! You are simply TOO MUCH!
It's too obvious that you don't even believe your own b.s.


Well I think its quite possible to make less progress when the laws of physics are conspiring against you.



posted on Sep, 1 2011 @ 01:48 PM
link   
reply to post by johnnygamble
 


Very true.
X-15, still the fastest manned "plane" we know about, flew in '59 for the first time. And speaking of technology, Scramjets are still ahead of their time, even today (IMO). An interesting fact about the SR-71 is the faster it goes, the less fuel it uses.



posted on Sep, 1 2011 @ 01:51 PM
link   

Originally posted by ZeroGhost


I could keep going, but the truth is darpa's been heavily investing in space for quite some time and the majority of the stories don't break into the public. the cape is far from being our only (hell, far from being the best) launch site, despite being the best known. christ, what do you think the space command folk in the STRATCOM office do all day?


I can back you up on this. I can say with complete certainty that launches of Saturn V or any other heavy lift rockets could have been done in many secret places. Vandenberg too. With the current technology they likely have, it can be done from many more locations unabated.

I have attended a launch as a guest at Vandenberg CA, and observed and photographed night launches from sometimes hundreds of miles away. Vandenberg is so isolated, and on the coast of central California with only it's own town for many miles. At the time of the Apollo program, it was far easier to launch without anyone seeing anything at all.

There are launch facilities in Alaska, South America and many other locations too that offer very (off the radar) opportunities for operational space programs. One of my friends has worked at some of these bases as launch crew for Lockheed and other contractors. Many DOD orbital insertions have been done for satellites and other missions we never hear about. So anything is possible.

These are facts that show that such a space program is very plausible, and, very likely if you are educated in such matters.

ZG


I do not see why it would not be completly plausible for them to launch near the north or south pole. I mean it is the closest temperature to space as well as easy to hide I would think. Also this would hide a lot of people from seeing the launch. On top of that very few sattilites reach or view the poles. On top of all that wouldn't that be one of the best places to test and experiment on electro magnitism which I believe runs things in general. Also the poles have the least atmosphere. If I was to bet there is more secrets at our poles than anywhere else in the world. Not to mention I truly beleive there are many secrets laying under that ice that some scientists would love to be the first to unearth....not just oil. Sry to get off topic.



posted on Sep, 1 2011 @ 01:54 PM
link   
I think the problem the government and the press have made it a normal practice to ridicule any one who speaks up and judges them as just another crackpot trying to gain attention. Who knows what the truth really is, but until proof shows up right before our eyes we will continue to be mislead by those who make a business from hiding the facts.



posted on Sep, 1 2011 @ 02:01 PM
link   
reply to post by Frira
 
rockets---who needs rockets. sounds like somebody is way beyond rockets.



posted on Sep, 1 2011 @ 02:02 PM
link   
So this guy was on a need-to-know basis and was told about the "obelisk on Phobos"? And it was created by Americans, Russians and Chinese? Just because?

All of it was well-written though and is certainly believable

Either way thanks for a fascinating read! Beats the hell out of Elenin updates



posted on Sep, 1 2011 @ 02:09 PM
link   

Originally posted by dtrock78
reply to post by SuperTripps
 


That's a good point on the black market drug money.....the CIA is so deep in that its not even funny.

Plus, almost impossible to trace....at least for some "commission"

edit on 1-9-2011 by dtrock78 because: (no reason given)


exactly, the war on drugs started big time with reagan as a NEW LEVEL of defense spending/cold war stuff was going on

trillions in drug money made i bet and funneled to secret projects

whats pathetic is when you go to an airshow. we got 30 -50 year technology still flying around whether F16s, F14, etc

not a new innovative thing in so long as they potentially went BLACK



posted on Sep, 1 2011 @ 02:12 PM
link   

Originally posted by wutz4tom

Originally posted by wutz4tom
reply to post by ASC Nole
 


Sorry, but I do not believe if this were true that you would jeapordize your clearance by posting on here.Just my opinion.



I must admit I make mistakes and could be wrong...

Example: for years I thought the reason that they wouldn't admit that there were these flying objects in our skies was because.....* It would give the impression they were NOT in control of the situation..
Now I'm wondering if ....They Knew that Many of these ships were ours all along. Better to let the population think that they were outside visitors and keep the spotlight off themselves?


Unless time travel is a secret reality too (debatable), they cannot be responsible for the huge quantity of pre-20th century UFO and ET reports, and sightings.

Ufology didn't start in the 1940's...sightings go back thousands of years right up till the present day.

Some of the sightings? 100% our advanced and secret craft, absolutely true.

All of the sightings? Not a chance.



posted on Sep, 1 2011 @ 02:13 PM
link   

Originally posted by curtius
reply to post by Frira
 
rockets---who needs rockets. sounds like somebody is way beyond rockets.



Lol just what I though! IF they are as advanced as this guy suggests then rockets would be primitive.

just lift off from an aircraft carrier in the pacific then simply fly to mars. Why bother launching with rockets?



posted on Sep, 1 2011 @ 02:21 PM
link   
reply to post by lme7898354
 


Its not the government or media. Its normal people.

One day on this site someone will claim they know someone in the US navy that flies on armadas to jupiter then the next day someone will post they know someone that know people that rnt part of any group.

People live fantasy lives and people cry wolf. You can't blame anyone but humanity.



posted on Sep, 1 2011 @ 02:23 PM
link   
Thanks for posting. Whether people believe or not, you have opened the debate and actually encouraged others with their "I have a friend..." story - equally interesting. Eye witness accounts - even second hand are a type of evidence -which we readily believe when reading something like an alien abduction but it is fair to be scrutinised. Even if the general was flowering the story a little - it is still an impressive story.

It does strike to me a number of things taking this on face value:

1] If such brilliant space technology existed, this would invalidate Branson [Virgin] and his chums in trying to become the first commercial venture into space [their technology is old hat].

2] As posted elsewhere, the SR71 was borne in the the 1970s, brilliant technology then but we have not really seen a replacement - even though stealth, fly by wire has not really moved on

3] The part of the story where the general claims that the aircraft can make incredible turns at high speed - suggests that the craft is unmanned as the G Force would be too great for a pilot to take



posted on Sep, 1 2011 @ 02:26 PM
link   

Originally posted by notionfreely

Originally posted by Frira

Great, your so smart-- then answer the logistics questions I posed.

I noticed no one has. Give it try, smart guy. Impress me with your blinding brilliance.

since your response to me had relatively little to do with what I had pointed out I'll field this one.


Sorry, I think I owe you an apology. My "you're so smart" and "smart guy" comments were because I believed I was responding to a user listed as "smarter than you." It kind of begged my snarky response. Mea culpa.

Here is what I am finding consistent in reply to my original response way back on page one:

I replied to the impossibility of Apollo 18, 19 and 20.

To that the replies have been about more recent technology with a smattering of misdirection (budget arguments-- which I did not claim) and impossible scenarios (launch sites in the Antarctic) and then anachronistic theories (some forgetting Apollo was 1960's and 1970's).

I can, but chose not to, argue against current or recent missions to the moon; but wrote in the very beginning that it was the claim of Apollo missions that I refuted.

It is getting old, especially the LOL's against me-- I clearly know my subject, and I know I know it and when in doubt-- I look it up before I post.

Anyway...

All of your examples were incapable of launching manned flights to the moon in the early 1970's and you should know that-- at least reason out why that concept is improbable.

Lompoc's ability to launch secretly had already been forever compromised by then-- and not just on manned flights. I know. I was there. Manned space flight was not even funded or building begun until 1974 at the earliest.

Then you shifted to this and the recent decades-- Apollos do not have that kind of shelf-life. The statement in the OP made by his source was that Apollo 18, 19 and 20 were used. I am not commenting on arguments about warp drives and transporters. I am writing about the claim of Apollos being used-- that is what I know about.

Funny, the rockets for the upcoming Orion crew vehicle are trying hard to match Apollo's Saturn V-- engineers are beating their heads against wall, cursing the Shuttle program, because they are now having to reinvent the wheel.

We would have no manned spaceflight gap as we have now.



as for your question about a 'flashy thing' the loss of livelihood is a fairly decent threat.


I am lost as to meaning. I was referring to the memory wiping device used in the movie Men in Black.



as far as your itemized list of tech, those capabilities are housed on the bases that accommodate said launches. a few examples:


No. They are not. I provided a specific list of assembly plants, and you replied with small warehouse sized sub-assemblies. Guess why I mentioned only the huge plants required? Can't guess? Really? I bet you can! It was so that a reply would have to address that, specific, logistics problem. That is what I asked the readers of this thread to consider. Now, go consider it.

Provide some foundation for your claim-- because I can and have done so for mine -- on this thread. May I suggest Google for good Wikipedia articles?



the x37 was tested from the mojave space port, later moved to vanderberg air force base with edwards as alternate.
reconnaissance satellite tac-sat3 was launched from the mid-atlantic regional spaceport in Chincoteague virginia.
JawSat was launched from vanderberg in 2001, as well as mighty sat, II, XSS-11, STP-R1, and COSMIC--all by way of rocket.


So what?

None can put a command module, lunar module and men into Trans Lunar Injection-- "deep space."




...and you are more than welcome to google contract awards.


You make me grin with that diatribe. My name is on some of the Wikipedia articles in the editor sections-- I don't write there (on Wikipedia) much, but I often provide source documents when found missing in the footnotes and in particular on articles surrounding manned space flight! I know what the sources are and where to find them-- because I have READ them! Not the "Bolt A goes into Nut B" stuff, but the readily available publications. Call it a hobby. I have forgotten more than most learn because I have been reading technical papers since most my age did not know the vocabulary. I'm odd that way. I blame my Dad-- and love him for it.



pretty handy system, when you need to build something,


Yeah, yeah, yeah... But we are not talking about building a guidance system on a single circuit board in a small warehouse somewhere in the Midwest, are we? We are talking about huge assemblies as well.

Well. I have had enough of the "LOLs" for today from persons who so desperately want to believe what they believe. My experience trumps their speculation-- and always will because that is reasonable.



new topics

top topics



 
210
<< 11  12  13    15  16  17 >>

log in

join