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

reply to post by SaturnFX


Having Aspergers syndrome does not make a petson crazy!
I hate when people say crap like this!

As for nasa covering up ufos. To be honest, the nasa ufo evidence
is very weak, so i have yet to see anything that would make me believe that
some of the nasa footage show something unexplained.


Saying that, would nsda hide evidence if they did have it? Of course
they would

reply to post by Jay-morris

Saying that, would nsda hide evidence if they did have it? Of course they would

Noooo. (assuming nsda is typo for NASA) ... the scientist would rally for a chance to publish, especially because it would be a career enhancing move , but the govy would by the entity hiding the evidence. Get it?

It's been said before, but, what stands out with NASA are the instances of what seem to be obvious image manipulation as well as testimony of witnesses claiming knowledge of purposeful image manipulation.

Additionally, losing footage of not only one of the most significant events in the agency's history, but in the world's history, seems a few degrees suspicious.

Further, more conjecture actually, but, any and every excuse put forward as to why we have not been back to the moon seems more like making excuses as opposed to listing legitimate obstacles that can't be overcome.

Lastly, while there have been some honest advancements in space technology, in looking at the record from the almost vertical learning curve shown in the early years of the space race up to the last of the manned moon missions, it seems that since then, that was the peak and we've done nothing but decline in endeavor since then, simply coasting and paying lip-service to the idea of space travel with a facade of manned missions to the ISS.

Looking at a time line of NASA achievement is like watching someone waste away suddenly in the prime of their youth from incurable cancer.
It just seems suspicious.

Originally posted by Druscilla

It's been said before, but, what stands out with NASA are the instances of what seem to be obvious image manipulation as well as testimony of witnesses claiming knowledge of purposeful image manipulation.

Additionally, losing footage of not only one of the most significant events in the agency's history, but in the world's history, seems a few degrees suspicious.

Further, more conjecture actually, but, any and every excuse put forward as to why we have not been back to the moon seems more like making excuses as opposed to listing legitimate obstacles that can't be overcome.

Lastly, while there have been some honest advancements in space technology, in looking at the record from the almost vertical learning curve shown in the early years of the space race up to the last of the manned moon missions, it seems that since then, that was the peak and we've done nothing but decline in endeavor since then, simply coasting and paying lip-service to the idea of space travel with a facade of manned missions to the ISS.

Looking at a time line of NASA achievement is like watching someone waste away suddenly in the prime of their youth from incurable cancer.
It just seems suspicious.

Wow , I get the opportunity to say it agan.
You seem like a very knowledgeable and smart person.
Read between the lines. Don't blame the messenger. The PTB knows so much more than the public because they are the gauntlet through which all government agencies have to pass scientific knowledge to the public. It is so obvious, yet people continue to blame the scientists that work 24/7 on this stuff, only to have their incredible breakthroughs and revelations snuffed out by a conflict of interest that is so monitored, that what does get out, suits their needs, and their needs only.

NASA has given us more information concerning the void outside our atmosphere
than all the"never-a-straight-answer" ding dongs put together.

reply to post by charlyv


I'm not blaming NASA or anyone working at NASA, or any space agency. I've quite a fair amount of respect for NASA, Roscosmos, and all the other space agencies.

I'm just saying there are a variety of factors that seem suspicious, for whatever reason they are suspicious.
NASA, for instance, could do well with a LOT more funding, but, they continue to get cut back, trimmed, and set back little by little.
Faults for many things may not lie directly with NASA, but, there are a degree of things that are suspicious.

Originally posted by Druscilla
reply to post by charlyv

 

I'm not blaming NASA or anyone working at NASA, or any space agency. I've quite a fair amount of respect for NASA, Roscosmos, and all the other space agencies.

I'm just saying there are a variety of factors that seem suspicious, for whatever reason they are suspicious.
NASA, for instance, could do well with a LOT more funding, but, they continue to get cut back, trimmed, and set back little by little.
Faults for many things may not lie directly with NASA, but, there are a degree of things that are suspicious.

Therein the conspiracy, if you will. Why would an agency like NASA get under-funded, especially with projects who's key focus would be on trying to prove the existence of life on other bodies of this solar system?

What does get funded, are projects that have a great deal of super scientific technology that focus on past geologic histories, cosmic origins, magnetic and radiometric data and internal dynamic forces... yet without equipment that is state of the art in the technology in life sciences,,,, where is the DNA and RNA lab? Where is the prime focus of discovering life, without some lesser analysis being done that would need this type of equipment sent later to prove it?

That does not make scientific, or certainly economic sense. They (those that fund and task NASA) know something we do not, and what they choose to send out into the solar system does not make sense in the context of what the public really wants to know, what is suspected and seeking answers to, but has no concrete knowledge about.

It is my guess that so much more knowledge would come out of releasing what is really known, than what we have enroute to planets and moons presently.

And the permission to release such data is not going to come from NASA, but instead by those that task it (with our funds) , and the PTB embedded in this government, that will officially approve the release of such discoveries, both present, and in the future. Do you see the conflict as I see it?

Supposedly if you were to read their glorified credo and press releases, NASA is using and even inventing science to investigate the nature of the Universe and bring those truths to the people.

Yet NASA’s founding priority should have been to solve the mystery of the UFOs that had so prominently appeared in the ten years proceeding its establishment. But its orders were not written that way, and it still does not take up that task. It did not fail the task, because the task was never assigned nor desired to be tackled in that fashion. NASA's goal was different.

The military had already done the legwork for discovering the nature of UFOs. It made some startling discoveries and deductions and saw the need to bury the whole affair as nearly as possible from the public eye as it did its natural work to learn more about the UFO incursions with its typically secret work of investigations, research and development. (As a result we have the triangles.)

NASA rose in 1958 as a two-pronged tool to keep the public's mind occupied in all things dealing with space. One prong was to educate and to enthrall the public with its work and to provide a good reason for supporting the military's appetite for large rockets and satellites. The second reason was to keep the public's eye on where they were throwing the ball and thinking that was the whole game. It was an incredibly successful of slight-of-hand and continues to this day. UFOs are continually discredited as valid while the public at large is marched closer and closer due to NASA’s work to an abrupt realization at some not too distant point that there IS other life out there.

Soon after, if not slightly before, that world-shattering announcement some wise person, such as Michio Kaku, will jump up as programmed and say, “Hey, maybe we need to consider that some of those UFOs are really the craft of visiting ETs!”

reply to post by charlyv

Why would an agency like NASA get under-funded, especially with projects who's key focus would be on trying to prove the existence of life on other bodies of this solar system?

NASA's budget is less than 0.5% of the US budget. Hardly a huge figure when you consider what other countries spend on space R&D.

In the grand scheme of things, you would think that people would be whining about military spending.

Where is NASA's creed that says their purpose is to find ET life?

People are always whipping up a storm about NASA - if they have an axe to grind with authority, science or 'PTB' then NASA gets a kicking.

Most of the folk doing the kicking haven't read further than a conspiracy-site and, even then, prefer their reading done for them by some anonymous character on a You Tube video. They often seem to think that only Apollo 11 ever got to the Moon...or didn't. They've often no apparent idea that NASA doesn't exist in a vacuum - they source their employees from all over the US and further afield.

This means that their employees are not hired goons or a one-size-fits-all army of mindless secret-keepers. Scientists (of all kinds), cleaners, radio operators, cooks, desk-jockeys, slackers, contractors and bean-counting nobodies. A whole lot of people to be keeping the secrets of alien-treaties, sound-studio moonscapes and Stargate-technologies all to themselves!

What about these guys too? Can't remember the last time they were accused of misbehaviour.

How many even read past the front-page? NASA have a lot - an incredible amount - of files available to the public. Transcripts, , image archives, ongoing projects and past missions. As part of the Kepler Mission , they've given the part of humanity that pays attention a sense of space increasingly cluttered with planets. That's pretty damn good!

You can read their budgets (past, present, future) and get an idea of how many areas they've been working in. Here's a quick snip of two areas of the proposed 2013 budget...


2013 NASA budget proposal

Education is liable to get slashed and that's a bad thing in my opinion. NASA has been a generator/ enabler of ideas from the grassroots of infant schools, through media releases and onto universities and PhD candidates.

For a bunch of supposed liars and disinfo merchants, they have one of the pinnacles of peaceful human endeavour up there...right this minute! Until the 1980s, the world was in a stubborn and absurd Cold War. At any moment, some psycho could have dropped the bomb. Not good. But since then, thanks to cross-border Science, we've got international scientists orbiting the Earth in the International Space Station. It'd be more fun if we could put our leaders up there...out of harm's way - so to speak lol.

Originally posted by charlyv
reply to post by Jay-morris

 

Saying that, would nsda hide evidence if they did have it? Of course they would

Noooo. (assuming nsda is typo for NASA) ... the scientist would rally for a chance to publish, especially because it would be a career enhancing move , but the govy would by the entity hiding the evidence. Get it?

edit on 6-5-2012 by charlyv because: (no reason given)

Sorry about the spelling mistakes. Im using my mobile to post and
the keyboard is a pain. While i understand what you are saying, you have
to look at the bigger picture. If nasa did find evidence of intelligent life, it
wouls make sense to hide it, esp how messed up the world is at the monent,
and how 90% of the world are completly brainwashed by their governments.
Why would the powers that be risk all, by admiting et is real. This would seriously
change everything about the way we look at everything.


There is a reason why the ufo subject is ridiculed and ignored, even with
militery sightings alone, the subject is still ignored, but is it? or do governments
want people to think that.

reply to post by alienreality


NASA sent dozens of missions to the moon before the Apollo missions to do just that, locate and map places to land and explore as well as learn as much as they could before sending people there...

This included The 9 Ranger missions, the 7 Surveyor missions and the 5 Orbiter missions. Then there were the Apollo missions.

reply to post by VoidHawk


Hubble is designed to look at distant galaxies, so the moon is too close.

It would be like trying to read a book with high powered binoculars....

Yep I read about this before seeing the thread, but forgot already

Even so, there was a ton of moon interest during those early days at Nasa and the world, so there were a lot of people watching and discovering things about the moon, and many books written by smart people, but a lot of certain things were "managed" away from public view as much as was possible to suit some other agendas of TPTB...(my opinion from reading different things)..

Clementine had very good cameras take tons of images of the far side in very high resolution, but I think not too many of those have made it to the public.. Clementine had at least the same power as some of earths military spy sats that can read a label from someones' tee-shirt, from what I remember reading about it..

reply to post by SaturnFX


To answer your question, Mr hypnotoad, sir...

The pretty pictures we get from NASA are just that, they're designed to make the average person go "ooh" and "ahh" and keep everyone happy...except for the UFO gang of course...

And this is where the irony comes to mind for me, because behind the pretty pictures would be terabytes and terabytes worth of data, telemetry and all sorts of other information that gets peer reviewed and torn to bits by non NASA people, an example of this is the announcement of the discovery of arsenic based lifeforms...it's been a theory for years but only just released once all the data was vetted and confirmed.

So you have to wonder why minds far more brilliant than yours or mine, have yet to come across the apparently obvious proof of extraterrestrial life...?

To summarize, if none of that makes sense, is that the real proof (if it exists) won't be found in publicly released images or videos.

And really, the simplest answer is that if NASA felt they need to cover up alien visitation, they wouldn't offer things like a live webcam on the ISS.

Interesting thread.

Personally I don't like the way they came out and basically tried to discredit this guy : www.abovetopsecret.com...

But on the other hand I like how they didn't come out and discredit these scientists : www.abovetopsecret.com...

Not much else to add apart from thinking there's something suspicious about the moon and the way there's so many conspiracy theories about it that seem to have decent arguments. I think if they were hassled less (they must get some type of hassle.) and funded more things would be better.

reply to post by alienreality


The LRO has the best resolution of any lunar satellites, with 0.5m per pixel resolution, Phage posted an image of what that looks like from an earth perspective in another thread, I'll try and find it if you like...

You can browse the images in Google earth format here:

target.lroc.asu.edu...

reply to post by Chadwickus
Howdy mate, a problem with your 'UFO gang' is wherever they don't find an explanation for UFOs - they find an elaborate conspiracy. Maybe the extent of that conspiracy is inversely proportional to their education and IQ? Grander the conspiracy...simpler the knowledge.

It annoys the hell out of me when ex-astronauts are accused of lying. Armstrong's silence is inferred to mean 'guilty secret' rather than a refusal to engage with people who assume he's a bloody liar. Same with Buzz and all the others.

If some guy tries to speak to me with contempt, I'm giving it back or ignoring them. Why would it be different for anyone else?

reply to post by Kandinsky


Exactly.

There's no real answer to the issue either, damned if you do. Damned if you don't.

Donna Hare is one worth listening too. Before anyone blasts me for The National Press Club if you can just put Greer to one side for just a minute and listen to what she has to say.

www.youtube.com...