UFO Secret - Youtube film

page: 2
17
<< 1    3  4 >>

log in

join

posted on Sep, 13 2012 @ 10:44 AM
link   

Originally posted by LoveisanArt
reply to post by Consequence
 


Whats the point of asking ats members? We are just as left in the dark as you.

Isnt it weird that the majority of US and Britiain rulers are related, the family tree goes back to King Arthur? Isnt it weird that in a modern society, we still have Queens, Princes, Princeesses and other royal 'statuses'??

Maybe that is a start to answer your question. OR those families who own 95% of the income, we call them the 1%. Rothchilds, Rockefella, Bildergerg group... these families have all the riches anyone could dream of. I dont think money really matters to them, it seems money was their creation, they are after something else. Maybe .. population control??

Which starts by making the populations belive an a false aspect of reality.. These families own the largest and richest corperations, oil companies, banks and so on..

Your on Ats, try to keep up


The story of King Arthur is folklore ,stories no real proof he really existed


So how can family trees be traced back to him




posted on Sep, 13 2012 @ 10:47 AM
link   
reply to post by Consequence
 


Are seriously going to belive that there is not a handful of rich and royal families in control of the general popluation through banking systems, military, food supply and so on?? This has nothing to do with the video in the OP..

I was simply raising the point that authoritve figures in the science community LIE to the population, and hold enlightening knowledge back. What we have been taught about the moon, the planets, and so forth might be a grain of truth compared to the actual reality of the matter.

You dont want to watch the video, please stop responding. Your wasting energy as I am right now ..



posted on Sep, 13 2012 @ 10:54 AM
link   

Originally posted by LoveisanArt
A list of 117 top scientists dead... "ahem"... assassinated so far (and rising)., page 1

I clicked on that and saw that a 65-year old professor passed away. The title was "*ahem* assassinated" for no apparent reason.
Aren't professors allowed to die like everyone else?

When it comes to the people working for the defense, I don't really care.




Dont forget popes and presidents

Wouldn't the killing of popes and presidents contradict with the "people with high positions are from a certain family and they are chosen by people in even higher positions"?
How about they got killed because of political hatred? "Like normal".



posted on Sep, 13 2012 @ 10:56 AM
link   

Originally posted by Consequence
Wouldn't the killing of popes and presidents contradict with the "people with high positions are from a certain family and they are chosen by people in even higher positions"?
How about they got killed because of political hatred? "Like normal".

When playing chess do you not sometimes sacrifice a knight in order to take out a queen or trap the king?



posted on Sep, 13 2012 @ 10:57 AM
link   

Originally posted by wmd_2008
The story of King Arthur is folklore ,stories no real proof he really existed


So how can family trees be traced back to him


They can't, but it makes a good story, therefore it's posted here.



posted on Sep, 13 2012 @ 11:00 AM
link   

Originally posted by ErgoTheConclusion
When playing chess do you not sometimes sacrifice a knight in order to take out a queen or trap the king?

Of course. Political hatred can come from one's own side as well.



posted on Sep, 13 2012 @ 11:04 AM
link   

Originally posted by Consequence

Originally posted by ErgoTheConclusion
When playing chess do you not sometimes sacrifice a knight in order to take out a queen or trap the king?

Of course. Political hatred can come from one's own side as well.

It's not hatred when it's strategy and the knight goes willingly because "it understands" the bigger game at play.



posted on Sep, 13 2012 @ 11:07 AM
link   

Originally posted by ErgoTheConclusion
The point is the "public" did not know about and were not versed in understanding what an atomic bomb was much less the implications until *after* they had already been created and used on living people.


I don't know in how many more ways I can say this. The scientific community IS public. Scientists are mere mortals, you can walk into any university and talk to professors, you can contact scientists, talk to them.
It's not my problem if the "public" isn't interested. The people who are interested (mostly scientists) do take part of the information that is shared.
I ask you again, who makes sure that the satellites orbiting around the moon are censored, regardless of the origin of the named satellites? Who are the photo-shoppers?



posted on Sep, 13 2012 @ 11:18 AM
link   

Originally posted by Consequence
I don't know in how many more ways I can say this. The scientific community IS public. Scientists are mere mortals, you can walk into any university and talk to professors, you can contact scientists, talk to them.
It's not my problem if the "public" isn't interested. The people who are interested (mostly scientists) do take part of the information that is shared.
I ask you again, who makes sure that the satellites orbiting around the moon are censored, regardless of the origin of the named satellites? Who are the photo-shoppers?

Who were the ones preventing every university in the US and the world from knowing about the development of nuclear bombs?

Come... on... you have right in front of you one of the most powerful scientific developments of the 20th century being more or less BRAGGED about how it was developed in secrecy and out of the eye of the public.

I can't give you the information on the modern concealment, I can only point to past concealment and ask if you really think the same thing isn't still going on.

Who hid the Tuskagee motives and data from the public, including the scientific public?


"For the most part, doctors and civil servants simply did their jobs. Some merely followed orders, others worked for the glory of science." -- Dr John Heller, Director of the Public Health Service's Division of Venereal Diseases

The glory of science... it's seductive. Bringing us back to the core issue in the OP if you think deeply enough about it.

You can try to pretend like there aren't people lying to you about what is really going on and possible NOW... but that is no different from a kid trying to reconcile the truth that their parents lied to them about Santa Claus. Eventually one stance has to give.
edit on 13-9-2012 by ErgoTheConclusion because: (no reason given)



posted on Sep, 13 2012 @ 11:19 AM
link   
reply to post by Consequence
 


If your a disinfo agent or some weirdo trying to derail this video.. Ill just make another thread with a better review about this particular video. You are wasting your time trying to go against everything.. if you want to perceive a reality where exrtaterrestrial beings with advanced space craft technology do not exist, a government and banking system which exists to help the people.. go ahead


But keep your argument and fight to yourself. You can lock that false perception and negative energy within your own being.. you dont need to distribute it through the internet.

Your not even responding to the OP or the topic at hand, so stop responding and get a life?

Peace



posted on Sep, 13 2012 @ 12:14 PM
link   

Originally posted by LoveisanArt
reply to post by Consequence
If your a disinfo agent or some weirdo trying to derail this video..

No, I was talking about why those claims are false. It's just that there's another character who brings up defense and medical programs with a hint of chess, and I'm just too polite to answer even though I agree it to be off-topic. Sorry about that.




You are wasting your time trying to go against everything..

Wait a minute... Criticizing your thread is a waste of time? Isn't this the unhealthy attitude that you just told me not to have? To just accept what people say? And especially THIS, the version without any evidence and the unexplained matter of astronomers around the world not seeing through this, or being mass-silenced by some unexplained way?



But keep your argument and fight to yourself. You can lock that false perception and negative energy within your own being.. you dont need to distribute it through the internet.

It is negative energy because I don't agree with you? Why do you post in a forum if you think debate is negative?
I'm sorry to "ruin your fun", but "fun" doesn't make it true.



Your not even responding to the OP or the topic at hand, so stop responding and get a life?

I'm trying, but I get explanations and answers in other areas that I need to respond to.



posted on Sep, 13 2012 @ 12:29 PM
link   
reply to post by Consequence
 


The topic is the video, which is about alien contact, UFOs, and the suppression of knowledge through the government and science community... so wtf are you talking about??


Just watch the video if you want proof or evidence. Otherwise yes, stop ruining the fun Dr.buzzkill.

Your on conspiracy site.. you want science explanaiton for everything, goto a science site.



posted on Sep, 13 2012 @ 04:19 PM
link   
reply to post by Consequence
 




Scientists can't lie to the "public", because science is public. It cannot function without being public.


I gave you a star by the intention but you got it a bit wrong. Scientists can lie to the public, for instance by falsifying information, experiences and observations or publishing fictitious work as factual finds, this all has been done and will continue to be done. That is why science needs verifiability and relies in repetition. Today we are witnessing an age where economic constrains and social priories have had an high impact in the verification process, this has ad an huge impact in scientific work quality. Science today is mostly dependent in apparent profitability, not curiosity or simple discovery.

The bit that was correct is that Science can not be easily falsified as long as it continues to be public and peer verified. This is the war that is been going on recently as to make papers as public as possible but maintain a good level of review quality, as both factors are important, the first takes primacy...
edit on 13-9-2012 by Panic2k11 because: (no reason given)



posted on Sep, 13 2012 @ 05:15 PM
link   
Though it is a small point, Desmond Leslie was a bit vague in the interview, he mentions Captain Mantell but the incident sounds more like the Kenneth Arnold sighting of flying 'discs' which there again were not really discs, but do describe as more like flying wings, and of those, there really were experimental flying wings. The flying flapjack was also real and was disc shaped, but did have a tailplane attached where the tailplane should be. At a given angle, a flapjack could just look like a disc with an antenna sticking out the top, as could a conventional jet give the same illusion at certain angles.

As for scientists lying, and even lying for their own research, that is done all the time. AGW is an example, when AGW was at its height, natural scientists who wanted funding for their research, would need to include some allusionary effect to AGW to get that funding, say for birds or bees, ants, squirrels blah blah, otherwise they would get Feck nothing, but ultimately adding clout to the reality of AGW in the debate, of which they had no interest in the first place.
edit on 13-9-2012 by smurfy because: Text.



posted on Sep, 13 2012 @ 08:47 PM
link   
Flagged for later.........thanks.



posted on Sep, 13 2012 @ 09:54 PM
link   
reply to post by CaptainBeno
 


star for favorite avatar on ats.... your welcome




posted on Sep, 13 2012 @ 10:16 PM
link   
reply to post by LoveisanArt
 


Thanks once again!



posted on Sep, 14 2012 @ 01:02 AM
link   
reply to post by LoveisanArt
 


The moon is visible from Earth, it is clear there is no water, or atmosphere. This can not possibly be kept hidden as you, or anyone else, is free to buy a telescope to verify it. This video is obvious garbage.



posted on Sep, 14 2012 @ 03:53 AM
link   

Originally posted by Panic2k11
reply to post by Consequence
 




Scientists can't lie to the "public", because science is public. It cannot function without being public.


I gave you a star by the intention but you got it a bit wrong. Scientists can lie to the public, for instance by falsifying information


I am sorry. You are absolutely correct. What I intended to say was that "science can't lie to the public", not "scientists".
I incorrectly said "scientists" because I was thinking about the spread of "science" (by scientists), that is, things that were already peer-reviewed, as it wouldn't be scientific information otherwise.



posted on Sep, 14 2012 @ 06:31 AM
link   
reply to post by Consequence
 




...things that were already peer-reviewed, as it wouldn't be scientific information otherwise.


Not my intention to offend you by correcting you again (some people could take offense but as a rule of thumb I treat others like I would others to treat me), and since this is a relevant clarification, here it goes...

Scientific information is not dependent of peer-reviewing, scientific facts are. Peer-review is simply a process o reevaluating the claims, tests and experiences. Note also that peer-reviews have their own issues, for instance if we look at medical trials, rarely is a repetition of the experience done, so peer-reviews have also a high degree of fragility and often depend on accreditation of the author and can be affected by group think. Papers that seem to conform with the perceived consensual view get less attention than those that are antagonistic to it.

edit on 14-9-2012 by Panic2k11 because: grammar





new topics
top topics
 
17
<< 1    3  4 >>

log in

join