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.
OVER AND OVER AND OVER AGAIN.......THERE IS NO WAY THAT WE ARE BEING VISITED BY E.T. BECAUSE THE VAST DISTANCES BETWEEN STARS AND PLANETS SURROUNDING THEM ARE SO GREAT THAT EVEN AT THE SPEED OF LIGHT IT WOULD TAKE FOREVER SO....THEY WOULD HAVE TO BUILD GREAT PLANETQARY SPACESHIPS LIKE THE MOON AND HOLLOW THEM OUT SO AS TO HAVE ROOM FOR ALL THE GENERATIONS OF PEOPLE WHO WOULD LIVE AND DIE BEFORE THEY REACHED EARTH....AND BY THE WAY....THATS WHAT OUR MOON REALLY IS A GIANT HOLLOW SPACE SHIP!
YOU GUY'S ARE KILLING ME!
THATS WHAT OUR MOON REALLY IS A GIANT HOLLOW SPACE SHIP!
Originally posted by SplitInfinity
For the record....YOU GUY'S ARE KILLING ME!
E.T. craft are not going to travel in normal space/time....and even if they did say obtain a very close to light speed velocity.....it would take a centrury to accelerate slow enough not to kill anyone and a century just to slow down to not kill anyone....and that is traveling the distance between our planet and another within 5 to 10 lightyears only!
Well, that statement is incorrect, but first:
"All it takes is only ONE SINGLE ufo sighting or alien contact to be real in all of history in order to end the debate forever. The odds are stacked heavily against you."
If this↑ was true, then wouldn't that be that much more of a reason for them to stay far away from us?
OP is right though, too many people can't bring themselves to even entertain the fact that we as humans are way behind ETs technologically (and spiritually) who are thousands or millions of years older than us.
Originally posted by wirehead
So basically, what your post comes down to is that there's no conventional method that we know of that would allow interstellar travel.... so if interstellar travel is going to exist, it'll have to take the form of something that we know exactly nothing about, by definition. Not exactly a convincing argument for the reality of interstellar travel.
Originally posted by tetra50
reply to post by tetra50
But I dont have pics....
Sorry, just my lame attempt at humor, with pics or it didn't happen .....
Originally posted by wirehead
So basically, what your post comes down to is that there's no conventional method that we know of that would allow interstellar travel.... so if interstellar travel is going to exist, it'll have to take the form of something that we know exactly nothing about, by definition. Not exactly a convincing argument for the reality of interstellar travel.
Originally posted by Tearman
I don't hear anybody who is seriously interested in the subject of extraterrestrial intelligence suggest that the distance between stars is a barrier that would prohibit any interstellar travel.
There is no reason why conventional rocket or nuclear propulsion couldn't do the job. So it takes a few hundred or thousands of years? Well what if your civilization was capable of following through with extremely long term enterprises without ever getting bored or distracted?
And what about the astronauts dying before they arrive at their destination? If you absolutely need to arrive at your destination with living astronauts aboard (for some reason that I can't envision), why not just manufacture (or grow) them when you get there?
We don't even need to go into highly speculative means of propulsion.
I will not make the mistake of making statements that I know this form of drive exists because I cannot provide proof here. Howerer....I can provide a logical basis of observation by many over a long time that point to this being the method of drive for travel by E.T.
In a multitude of 50's and early 60's newspaper interviews of all types of military officials...various govermental leadership individuals...and even USAF pilots charged with the job of shooting the UFO's down that were periodicly buzzing the U.S. Capital and White House...all of their statements were consistent with a craft using a GRAVITIC DRIVE.
The specific tell tale observations were E.T. craft not only accelerating and traveling at speeds that would cause any matter to burn up in atmosphere...but also instantanious directional changes that would subject both the craft and anyone inside to unsurvivable g-forces.
Another big tell was a craft seemingly to be in several places simultaniously as well as changing visual shape. These type of observations are also consistent with a Gravitic drive. Split Infinity
edit on 8-10-2011 by Tearman because: (no reason given)
AND BY THE WAY....THATS WHAT OUR MOON REALLY IS A GIANT HOLLOW SPACE SHIP!
Existence and age of Moon rocks
A total of 382 kilograms (842 lb) of Moon rocks and dust were collected during the Apollo 11, 12, 14, 15, 16 and 17 missions. Some 10 kg (22 lb) of the Moon rocks have been destroyed during hundreds of experiments performed by both NASA researchers and planetary scientists at research institutions unaffiliated with NASA. These experiments have confirmed the age and origin of the rocks as lunar, and were used to identify lunar meteorites collected later from Antarctica. [color=gold]The oldest Moon rocks are up to 4.5 billion years old, making them 200 million years older than the oldest Earth rocks, which are from the Hadean eon and dated 3.8 to 4.3 billion years ago. The rocks returned by Apollo are very close in composition to the samples returned by the independent Soviet Luna programme. A rock brought back by Apollo 17 was accurately dated to be 4.417 billion years old, with a margin of error of plus or minus 6 million years. The test was done by a group of researchers headed by Alexander Nemchin at Curtin University of Technology in Bentley, Australia.
Originally posted by ProudBird
reply to post by SplitInfinity
Nonsense:
AND BY THE WAY....THATS WHAT OUR MOON REALLY IS A GIANT HOLLOW SPACE SHIP!
The Lunar samples returned by Apollo missions (and this is corroborated by the few grams that the Soviets Luna spacecraft managed to obtain robotically, around the same time) shows that the material the Moon is made of is roughly the same age as Earth's crust. Some Lunar samples read as "older", but that is only because the Moon is not tectonically active as on Earth. Earth has "recycled" most of the primordial rocks and materials, from tectonic subduction.
The analysis of the Lunar samples made the strongest case yet for the Moon's theory of formation....it was a part of the Earth, while the Earth was still accreting, forming and cooling. The chaotic early Solar System suffered many impacts of celestial bodies, and that is what devastated what would become Earth. The collision blew a chunk out, but not at a speed to give it escape velocity...it settled into orbit, both bodies (Earth being more massive dominated), and they both continued to accrete, and take the mostly spherical shapes due to gravitational forces that determine all such spheres' development.
So, the "original" Earth, if it had not been struck, might have turned out a bit more massive than it is today...however, the mitigating influence of the Moon's presence might have been instrumental in stabilizing the Earth's axis over these billions of years, and the reason it is teeming with life today.
Giant Impact Theory
Just one study of the Lunar material samples brought back by Apollo:
Third Party Evidence:
Existence and age of Moon rocks
A total of 382 kilograms (842 lb) of Moon rocks and dust were collected during the Apollo 11, 12, 14, 15, 16 and 17 missions. Some 10 kg (22 lb) of the Moon rocks have been destroyed during hundreds of experiments performed by both NASA researchers and planetary scientists at research institutions unaffiliated with NASA. These experiments have confirmed the age and origin of the rocks as lunar, and were used to identify lunar meteorites collected later from Antarctica. [color=gold]The oldest Moon rocks are up to 4.5 billion years old, making them 200 million years older than the oldest Earth rocks, which are from the Hadean eon and dated 3.8 to 4.3 billion years ago. The rocks returned by Apollo are very close in composition to the samples returned by the independent Soviet Luna programme. A rock brought back by Apollo 17 was accurately dated to be 4.417 billion years old, with a margin of error of plus or minus 6 million years. The test was done by a group of researchers headed by Alexander Nemchin at Curtin University of Technology in Bentley, Australia.
You didn't read the post correctly....I was stating that I was sick of reading posts about the Moon actually being a space ship. You are preaching to the choir. Split Infinity