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.

 

Have we already been to Mars?

page: 2
1
<< 1    3 >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Dec, 14 2011 @ 02:48 PM
link   
Why would we send humans to Mars and hide it? There is no practical reason to send humans anywhere in space right now - not even low Earth orbit. The only reason anybody sends humans into space is to make a statement.

HOWEVER, if there was a national security reason, I'm sure the U.S. could already have secretly investigated Mars with robots better than anything NASA could buy. $2.5 billion for the Curiosity rover is nothing for the Defense Department. The U.S. could afford many spy satellites, but NASA had to scrimp and save to buy one telescope for science.
edit on 14-12-2011 by cloudyday because: (no reason given)

edit on 14-12-2011 by cloudyday because: (no reason given)




posted on Dec, 14 2011 @ 03:03 PM
link   
reply to post by Freelancer
 


There is nothing classified or even very special about the B-2's propulsion. The aircraft is powered by four General Electric F118-GE-100 turbofan engines internally mounted in the body of the wings.
The engines have an exhaust temperature control system to minimise thermal signature.

The General Electric F118 turbofan engine is a derivative of the GE F101, which was developed for the Advanced Manned Strategic Aircraft Program (the B-1 Lancer), they each have 19,000 pounds of thrust to propel the B2 to high subsonic cruse. It is not a supersonic jet. The engines do not have afterburners that would defeat their purpose of stealth.

Sorry but where I work we build parts for the B-1 and B-2 and F-117 as well as rebuild F-16 and F-15 engines among other 'lower' aircrafts.

If you want to learn about a truly remarkable aircraft engine look to the F-22's Pratt & Whitney F119 powerplant. We also collaborate with them in engine rebuilds.

If the governments had anti gravitation they would not have wasted 66 some billion developing the F-22, they would not have needed a 1.6 million pound external tank for the Space Shuttle, they wouldn't need kerosene and LOX to lift satellites into LEO on expendable rockets. You simply don't see that because it doesn't exist, if it did you would.



posted on Dec, 14 2011 @ 03:09 PM
link   
reply to post by cloudyday
 


reply to post by cloudyday
 


The Mars Science Laboratory is a NASA project, about 1/3rd of that 2.5 B is for mission support the project started over 10 years ago It has nothing to do with the DoD.



posted on Dec, 14 2011 @ 03:20 PM
link   
reply to post by mandroids
 


According to some, yes, in 1962, in fact. I point you here:
www.bibliotecapleyades.net...

I don't know if the film can still be seen on the internet, but I have seen it, and I'm not saying it is proof, but it leaves little doubt.
One of my contacts tell me there are a quarter million people up there right now. Can't prove that either.


edit on 12/14/11 by autowrench because: (no reason given)



posted on Dec, 14 2011 @ 04:00 PM
link   

Originally posted by Illustronic
reply to post by cloudyday
 


reply to post by cloudyday
 


The Mars Science Laboratory is a NASA project, about 1/3rd of that 2.5 B is for mission support the project started over 10 years ago It has nothing to do with the DoD.


I guess my point is that DoD has much more money and capability than NASA. My understanding is that the U.S. military space program essentially owns space in the same way that the Navy owns the oceans. I think the pyramids and faces on Mars are silly, but hypothetically if something was really there it would be secret - just like the black obelisk on 2001. DoD could build their own rover and use their own rockets to investigate something like that if they wanted to.



posted on Dec, 14 2011 @ 04:06 PM
link   
reply to post by Illustronic
 


I was confusing Phobos for Europa. There are a lot of names out there and gets to be very confusing for new comers. Thanks for not being too harsh on me.



posted on Dec, 14 2011 @ 09:02 PM
link   

Originally posted by dcmb1409
Where did they launch from and where did they land upon return? Haven't heard of other countries monitoring a vehicle return or an unknown heavy lift vehicle launching a mission without some kind of explanation, even spy satellite launches are mentioned most times.

Not a lot of RAO's or dishes out there reporting on unusual communication nor visual confirmation of a Martian mission.

Its a long mission just in travel and a small window of launch opportunities. Should be kind of easy to match any un named launches with a window of opportunity. With the technology involved to make a such long journey successful it must have been a fairly recent event so that would narrow a search even more.

Will research into those launches.
edit on 14-12-2011 by dcmb1409 because: (no reason given)


There you go, thinking like they want you to think. Who said anything about a conventional rocket lifter?



posted on Dec, 14 2011 @ 09:13 PM
link   
reply to post by autowrench
 


a quarter of a million people? i have never heard of any conspiracy theory regarding some type of human population on mars, or any of mars' moons. could you elaborate, i'm just curious. where and how.



posted on Dec, 14 2011 @ 09:35 PM
link   

Originally posted by autowrench
reply to post by mandroids
 


According to some, yes, in 1962, in fact. I point you here:
www.bibliotecapleyades.net...

I don't know if the film can still be seen on the internet, but I have seen it, and I'm not saying it is proof, but it leaves little doubt.
One of my contacts tell me there are a quarter million people up there right now. Can't prove that either.


edit on 12/14/11 by autowrench because: (no reason given)


Here is the link to the alleged "mars landing" clip you saw...
www.youtube.com...

Here is the full original "Alternative 3" documentary...
www.1channel.ch...




posted on Dec, 14 2011 @ 11:02 PM
link   
reply to post by mandroids
 


Yes. It is time for this:



I would have had it played at my wedding if I had only known.

...and I wonder if she'll bring me somethin' home.



posted on Dec, 15 2011 @ 02:34 AM
link   
reply to post by autowrench
 


Didn't your contacts also tell you of an intergalactic war that had gone on for hundreds if not thousands of years? I still want to know how they don't know how long that war has been raging.

Anyways, if we were there we would be talking about it, that would be huge bragging rights. If we aren't holding it over someones head we didn't do it yet. My 2c.



posted on Dec, 15 2011 @ 04:30 AM
link   

Originally posted by Illustronic
reply to post by Freelancer
 


If the governments had anti gravitation they would not have wasted 66 some billion developing the F-22, they would not have needed a 1.6 million pound external tank for the Space Shuttle, they wouldn't need kerosene and LOX to lift satellites into LEO on expendable rockets. You simply don't see that because it doesn't exist, if it did you would.


Ah I see now, if we dont see this kind of technology in use it cant exist, hence why we still use conventional technology. Unless your the CEO of where you work and also in the loop of such developments, I doubt they would let you be privy to such exotic technology & research, but that does not mean it doesn't exist. It makes no difference to me if you consider the possibility or dismiss it outright that this exotic technology was demonstrated many times as working and viable for further research using 1950's technology.



posted on Dec, 15 2011 @ 04:44 AM
link   
for those who like to watch without opening a new screen




edit on 01/18/2011 by camouflaged because: (no reason given)



posted on Dec, 15 2011 @ 04:50 AM
link   

Originally posted by Freelancer

Originally posted by Illustronic
reply to post by Freelancer
 


If the governments had anti gravitation they would not have wasted 66 some billion developing the F-22, they would not have needed a 1.6 million pound external tank for the Space Shuttle, they wouldn't need kerosene and LOX to lift satellites into LEO on expendable rockets. You simply don't see that because it doesn't exist, if it did you would.


Ah I see now, if we dont see this kind of technology in use it cant exist, hence why we still use conventional technology. Unless your the CEO of where you work and also in the loop of such developments, I doubt they would let you be privy to such exotic technology & research, but that does not mean it doesn't exist. It makes no difference to me if you consider the possibility or dismiss it outright that this exotic technology was demonstrated many times as working and viable for further research using 1950's technology.






I quite agree. hidden doesnt mean not in use or real. I say weve been there already.



posted on Dec, 15 2011 @ 04:52 AM
link   
I always loved this video. Don't know if it has been debunked or not.




posted on Dec, 15 2011 @ 05:02 AM
link   

Originally posted by Illustronic

Originally posted by mandroids

Originally posted by Illustronic
reply to post by jeenyus2008
 


Saturn has a moon named Phoebe, that may be what caused some confusion.


AWWW, very friendly of you....

And your opinion on the thread question?


Absolutely not! A year and a half of travel with marginal radiation shielding means its not technologically survivable as yet. This is one of the primary functions of the ISS, to research and study radiation shielding in the relatively safe confines of LEO. We don't yet have the technology to make that trip, and nobody is 'hiding' it either. We went to the moon because it was at most a two week mission(s), not a two year mission.


Just curios how you know nobody is hiding tech from us? Do you have any links to confirm this statement because as far as i can see, it would be highly ignorant to say that the governments of the world share all advances in tech with the human population/MSM...

If i were a betting man i'd say there is a very real chance we have been to Mars already...just a hunch though



posted on Dec, 15 2011 @ 05:04 AM
link   
reply to post by DutchBigBoy
 


I have seen that vid before...not sure what to make of it...but what the he*l is that at the end of the vid? A Martian Mole?



posted on Dec, 15 2011 @ 06:25 AM
link   
reply to post by jrmcleod
 


The burden of proof is on those who make extraordinary claims, not those that see no signs of the tech. Moving a tabletop model and scaling up a prototype are two extremes. You have to check the credibility of the sources of these extraordinary claims. You see we don't use steam powered cars because the internal combustion engine proves to be more efficient, less cumbersome, and provides much better performance per energy use. You guys realize Sci-Fi is fiction, right? So is the whole Alternative 3 hoax.



posted on Dec, 15 2011 @ 06:34 AM
link   

Originally posted by jrmcleod

Just curios how you know nobody is hiding tech from us?


You're using an informal logic fallacy, one can't prove a negative, or also known as argument from ignorance. Appeals to ignorance are sometimes used to shift the burden of proof.



posted on Dec, 15 2011 @ 08:37 AM
link   

Originally posted by DutchBigBoy
I always loved this video. Don't know if it has been debunked or not.


I doubt Stanley Kubrick's 2001: A space Odyssey has been debunked, either.

Among other non-debunked (un-bunked?) films:
* War of the Worlds
* Star Wars
* I, Robot
* Starship Troopers

You get the idea.




top topics



 
1
<< 1    3 >>

log in

join