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.
All civilizations that inhabit planetary systems must eventually deal with the asteroid threat, or they will go the way of the dinosaurs. We need to predict in advance when impacts are going to occur and, if necessary, shift the orbits of threatening asteroids. In effect, we must change the evolution of the solar system.
www.scientificamerican.com...
www.cbsnews.com...
Originally posted by Razimus
What he said is common sense, not any type of disclosure.
Originally posted by 1AnunnakiBastard
Originally posted by Razimus
What he said is common sense, not any type of disclosure.
Common sense among NASA astronauts, would be if he had said "A civilization that inhabits a planetary system". And he sounded more like implying than disclosing.
Originally posted by 1AnunnakiBastard
Common sense among NASA astronauts, would be if he had said "A civilization that inhabits a planetary system". And he sounded more like implying than disclosing.
Funny though, that Scientific American article, had it been posted here by a member, and in the same form would have had certain people protesting it as scaremongering.
Originally posted by Razimus
What he said is common sense, not any type of disclosure.
Originally posted by DJW001
reply to post by smurfy
Funny though, that Scientific American article, had it been posted here by a member, and in the same form would have had certain people protesting it as scaremongering.
Only if the headline were: "Bible predicts giant asteroid Planet X/Nibiru to crash into Earth on 11/12/13!!!! 100% PROOF!!!"
His language isn't pointing towards a hypothetical assumption, rather the opposite actually.
Originally posted by DJW001
All unicorns have one horn. Work that one out.
Originally posted by spikey
reply to post by Razimus
Not at all.
His language isn't pointing towards a hypothetical assumption, rather the opposite actually.
If he was simply generalizing, it would have been more appropriate to have said:
"ANY (as opposed to ALL) civilizations, that MAY inhabit (as opposed to THAT inhabit) planetary systems WOULD eventually (as opposed to MUST eventually) have to deal with the asteroid threat, or they WOULD (as opposed to WILL) go the way of the Dinosaurs."
It's all in the language. See how innocent it sounds written the way it is above? Compare the two, and the difference is obvious.
The question is though, was he attempting to be sensationalist in his choice of words to garner support for his Asteroid busting agenda? Or did he reveal more than he was 'authorized' to reveal?