Is NASA really full of disinfo, lies, and bumbling nonsense?

Simple question (title). I keep seeing around the net NASA as Never A Straight Answer, Never A Sensible Answer, etc etc...

But I typically see this in comments on misidentified satellites, camera artifacts, etc...so far, I don't really see how NASA is not giving straight answers, or sensible, or scientific...I just see a bunch of people that want ET to be real so badly that they will ultimately close their eyes and stick fingers in their ears in order not to know any actual science or understanding of our cosmos.

So, I could be wrong here. Why not explain why NASA is a disinfo agency..don't go with some random picture of how nasa classified a dot light in the sky as venus (when it very well could have been) as proof...pretend you were at court and were presenting evidence. also pretend that someones life was on the line..if you prove your case, nasa gets executed, but if you don't prove your case, you become executed...aka, put forth the most compelling case you got against nasa, don't waste your time just assuming and cracking some poorly written joke...give me evidence.

So far, the only thing that has made me cock an eyebrow is not even NASA, but the british "hacker"'s account. Gary Mckinnon, whom said he sort of seen a part of a tip of a object in space before being disconnected. Not overly compelling to show nasa covering anything up, and not to bash his credibility much, but he is quite literally crazy (doctors words, and his, not mine)...so its not like he is a highly prestigious person reporting on this. Otherwise...I just see endless dreamwishers wanting nasa to not exist because they kill santa clause.

This thread is not to argue with me, its for posterity for lurkers and first time ATS/conspiracy types. Present to them (keep in mind, many are skeptical and with critical minds) your best reasons and evidence as to why NASA cannot be trusted and should be ultimately defunded and abolished...

because ultimately that is what you lot are trying to do...destroy the only real organization that allows us to somewhat explore a bit of space..

Is NASA really full of disinfo, lies, and bumbling nonsense?

Nope, but neither are they perfect by any means.

Unfortunately, by some.....NASA=Imperfect=Conspiracy

By the same token.....My old ford must be part of some conspiracy theory.

Originally posted by OccamAssassin

Is NASA really full of disinfo, lies, and bumbling nonsense?

Nope, but neither are they perfect by any means.

Unfortunately, by some.....NASA=Imperfect=Conspiracy

By the same token.....My old ford must be part of some conspiracy theory.

Agreed, it is not the most innovative or well functioning agency..I think thats because there are too many suits interfering with the science though..kick out the bureaucrats and fund them properly with strong fiscal oversight and who knows, we might get some really great things accomplished in short time.

Originally posted by burntoast

Of course NASA wasn't even created until 1958.

what i want to know is...

if nasa arent sending rockets into space now, what the hell is it still doing?

shut it down i say.

I tend to agree with you, but one thing that always sticks with me is the proof that they have manipulated images. Software that was not available only years ago has made identifying these images possible. There has even been personal testimony from former NASA employees who attest to this manipulation.

I cannot say "what" exactly they were taking out or adding to the images, but I see no need to modify something if there is no need to. At the very, very least NASA would be guilty of covering up what certain things outside of the Earth actually "look like." I see no need for this, unless in fact there IS some type of conspiracy going on. I am not saying that is the case, but it would explain this particular phenomenon/practice that has been uncovered.

Nasa has never released any very hi-res images, they promote the moon as a dead nothing, but just recently finally admitted to water being present there. They may have admitted to this a long time ago also.. Now they also admit it has a slight atmosphere.. But they knew all of these facts before the apollo missions and kept the public dumbed down.

It is an interesting coincidence that the very best commercially available telescopes have too low of resolution to see up close objects on the moon, but the worlds greatest observatory telescopes do,and have taken many super high res images of the moon, but none have ever been released to the public. The apollo missions bragged in the media that they were learning insane amounts of continuing data about the moon, but the only data given to the public was that it is a cold colorless and lifeless dead thing. What we know now about the moon is just a little more than we knew in the late '50's before the apollo missions. Nasa surely knows much, much more.

Nasa released a catalogue of anomalies recorded by amateur astronomers, but only the ones that were recorded using consumer 8 inch or less models not too long ago... They cherry picked these so to control the information released, and not release anything "good" Out of the much larger pool of anomalies recorded over many decades using better telescopes and some recorded by large observatories, but of course none of those were ever released to the public.

Nasa has used disinfo and information management to keep people completely uninterested in the moon for decades...

Sure they have done a lot of great things for America and even the world through science in many areas, but kept people in the dark about many things too, so I see it as a fact that the adjectives in this thread's title are quite accurate about NASA...

McKinon is not crazy. Aspergers does not make you a crazy person. Usualy it makes you a bit obsesive about subjects, hence his ability to hack.

He saw a bit more than the tip of a craft. he saw a whole craft. He also saw a list of Off world officers. He also saw a lot of other hackers inside the network too

reply to post by alienreality

Now they also admit it has a slight atmosphere..

Do you understand how "slight" the "atmosphere" is?? It is still what we would consider a vacuum. A better vacuum than can be produced here, on Earth.

It is an interesting coincidence that the very best commercially available telescopes have too low of resolution to see up close objects on the moon, but the worlds greatest observatory telescopes do,and have taken many super high res images of the moon, but none have ever been released to the public.

This is completely untrue.

Where do people get this stuff?

reply to post by jazzguy


they still build rockets n probably weapons that they sell to the military

of even still take photos which cost thousands...

nasa does plenty of things...

Without NASA, you would have no content to criticize. Most still continue to bash the messenger. If there is anything that gets filtered, sequestered or dis-info'ed, it is not NASA doing it, it would be the government that they work for.

That "Never a Straight Answer" line is just plain juvenile, and to me it says that you really do not care about the pursuit of real science, no matter where it comes from, and you do not understand the global conflict of interest that exists between science and politics.

The OP, has a very good and mature point of view on this.

reply to post by ProudBird


LOL, do you really think large observatory telescopes using very high grade filtering techniques would NEVER take any good images of the moon? Many of them have.. They did this very much before the apollo missions to learn about the best landing sites there for their purposes.

You are living in a fantasy world my friend...

HELL yeah!!

reply to post by alienreality

It is an interesting coincidence that the very best commercially available telescopes have too low of resolution to see up close objects on the moon, but the worlds greatest observatory telescopes do,and have taken many super high res images of the moon, but none have ever been released to the public.

Do you realise that you can go to an observatory and check it out for yourself?

Observatories are usually open to the public a few nights a week (and sometimes during the day as well for Solar study) and only require a few dollars and a clear night.

reply to post by alienreality


You twist my words:

LOL, do you really think large observatory telescopes using very high grade filtering techniques would NEVER take any good images of the moon? Many of them have.. They did this very much before the apollo missions to learn about the best landing sites there for their purposes.

Did you, or did you not, imply that Earth-based telescopes should be able to image the Apollo landing sites? Because, that was my take-away as to the intent of your comment about the telescopes, here.

There is not yet one built that can image to the resolution necessary to discern the Apollo artifacts, in situ.

And, your claim that "none" of the "hi-res" (up to what they can manage, so far) have been released to the public?

Utterly untrue.

This thread is about NASA --- not independent Observatories. Or, do you perhaps think that NASA somehow has "control" and "authority" over every observatory on Earth?

If so, now who's living in fantasy?

NASA is a "disinfo agency" because without the smokescreen of going into space and filtering what is seen when they go out there UFO reports would be taken more seriously.

Giving the illusion that we're alone and ignoring all UFO reports and evidence creates a reality for the U.S. government to which they can refer to when questioned on what they know.

The 1969 Condon Report's findings that ignore around a quarter of their own material to come to the conclusion to ignore the subject of UFOs is similar to what we're witnessing with NASA. Although in the case of NASA its a bit more direct rather than just scientists reading a bunch of reports they personally bore no witness to.

reply to post by ProudBird


My entire point is how Nasa uses information management to continue the fallacy that the moon is uninteresting, lifeless and dead.. nothing to see there.. (this is in response to the Op title)

If you can get your hands on some high resolution moon images taken with any observatory telescope at 500X or better, you be sure to let someone here know..

You will not find them..

reply to post by alienreality


Its aout time they pointed Hubble at it, that would give us a very good look.

Originally posted by SaturnFX Why not explain why NASA is a disinfo agency...Gary Mckinnon,.... he is quite literally crazy (doctors words, and his, not mine)

there are too numerous examples of wrong info to go on and on about...

why don't you try looking in the vortex of budget records of Nasa..

what they actually produce for the public & tell me how that pans out..

Nasa CAFR

thats the third section of one state.. with so much cash its ridicules...

they have "lost" the original video of the crowning achievement of landing men on the moon?

now they do not even go into space?

can't get a plan going until 20 whatever? B$..

plenty of people would jump at the chance to fly 1960's technology to the moon this very day.. but they CAN"T? not won't, big difference...

and as far as Mckinnon he was able to tour with the hackers club 2600 and saw far more than the tip of a UFO thats for sure..

and i wouldn't put to much into a doctor saying he is crazy.. they NEED him to be..

and as far as him saying it.. being the first non American extradited under the homeland security act would freak anyone out.. not to mention seeing things very few people have every ween in the world.. or even understand to exist..

Bill Cooper used to say there was a light atmosphere on the moon & water.. he was crazy . .. now Nasa admits it themselves..

once people start figuring things out they have to cave a little bit..

but is that what Nasas mission is?

to hide information gathered and only release it when absolutely necessary to save face?

with a global position & endless money..

they have made it an Us against Them scenario....

just my 2 cents..