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.

 

Human Space Exploration: Broken Dreams or Secret Schemes?

page: 4
65
<< 1  2  3   >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Oct, 15 2012 @ 10:20 PM
link   

Originally posted by OccamAssassin
reply to post by mirageman
 


I'm very sorry if you thought I was calling you a moron .......I was reserving that for the people that put these theories forward.

I want to state very clearly for you .....I don't think your a moron .... I have another label for people like yourself ...."Those gullible enough to listen to morons".


Who is gullible and who is not is difficult to decide. Who is a moron and who is not is again difficult to decide. NO ONE knows what the truth is except for the select few. Even you don't. So calling people 'morons' is lame.

It's best to have an open mind. And then, even if 1% of all that has been said and told since the so called Roswell crash - in the last half a century - is true, then it means there is really something going on out there! And everything cannot be just fiction and a pack of lies. The truth is out there, but the tragedy is we don't know how to get hold of it. Will we ever? Only time will tell.




posted on Oct, 16 2012 @ 05:29 AM
link   
I hesitate to even post but I have a variety of reason to believe we do have interstellar technology.

I had sources confirm the existance of TR-3B Astra, when I asked one of my sources who was in USAF Space Command she confirmed it existed, while I could take what she said with a grain of salt, she has proven other things to me to make me believe she was speaking the truth.

My other source let's say worked deep within Boeing.

I have to go to work but if you guys are interested i'll post on it in more detail.



posted on Oct, 16 2012 @ 06:07 AM
link   
reply to post by GrOuNd_ZeRo
 


Interesting, where does this tech come from? Do your sources think its ET based or is there some truth to the nazi bell and the scientists that worked for the US in project paperclip. How long has this been going on?



posted on Oct, 16 2012 @ 01:44 PM
link   
will get there sometime



posted on Oct, 16 2012 @ 02:14 PM
link   
Very nice thread. Thank you for putting it together. While I would love nothing but to think there's a secret armada of high-tech space vehicles flying around up there and around the stars, I personally believe that not to be the case.

I think the explanation for the sudden "dying" of the space program in the 70's had more to do with the pressures of the MIC (military industrial complex) and where they made their money than anything else. They realized that war-profiteering was better for their bottom line than was space exploration or as I like to call it, the "advancement of the human race".

Funny how more than 4 decades after that time, nothing has really changed in that regard.



posted on Oct, 16 2012 @ 04:02 PM
link   

Originally posted by GrOuNd_ZeRo
I hesitate to even post but I have a variety of reason to believe we do have interstellar technology.

I had sources confirm the existance of TR-3B Astra, when I asked one of my sources who was in USAF Space Command she confirmed it existed, while I could take what she said with a grain of salt, she has proven other things to me to make me believe she was speaking the truth.

My other source let's say worked deep within Boeing.

I have to go to work but if you guys are interested i'll post on it in more detail.


That would be very interesting.



posted on Oct, 16 2012 @ 11:49 PM
link   
This thread makes a lot of sense and I believe every word. My take is a bit different.

1) I believe WE HAVE been exploring the galaxy(space & oceans) intently for decades. How long ago was our first space landing, 1960 something. Well our economies have been bad. Trillions of dollars disappearing and not coming back.

2) The governments of the world have leashes on the populations, now don't get me wrong I'm not wearing the proverbial tin foil hat, this is true. "The guards own the prison the Criminals run it" - So drugs and murders are going on under the radar & this would not trickle down to other parts of our society? I believe these acts are everywhere

3)Space chatter has been on a decline. Pixar, disney & FG have done videos on Alien abductions & they are comical. Small studios receive "quit orders" from lawyers. Why? Because they are honest?

youtu.be...

youtu.be...

I don't like to say nasty things or disrespect people although I do feel we are in the dark for a reason that is necessary.



posted on Oct, 17 2012 @ 08:17 AM
link   
I gave you a star. Nice and informative thread that I will read through later.



posted on Oct, 17 2012 @ 07:11 PM
link   

Originally posted by OccamAssassin
This thread is just BS.

Dolan and Nexus magazine should ring alarm bells to those who have been around this subject for more than a few years.

Nexus magazine is just a snake-oil publication run by a scammer out of Queensland in Australia.....It's all about dollars to Duncan.


As for the topic .....do the morons who put this garbage forward actually research the subject?

Every time the space shuttle would have a mission....my wife (and sometimes the kids) and I would leave my scanner on to listen in to the SW transmissions of the shuttle missions. These transmissions are picked up by people like myself and rebroadcast in the UHF band for anyone with an appropriate receiver.

Let me repeat myself for clarity.......ALL NASA MISSIONS ARE BROADCAST IN SUCH A WAY THAT ANYONE CAN LISTEN IN ON THE CONVERSATION.......No encryption......just a nice analog signal that anyone can tune in to.

Seems rather counter-intuitive for an agency to be conducting "secret schemes"(
) to broadcast their communications on an open channel.

But I suppose logic gets thrown out the door when dealing with conspiracy theorists.


It never occurred to you that NASA could easily have another channel, a non-public encrypted one, that they can use to communicate with if they needed to? How in the world did you become so trusting of NASA or the government to believe that they would keep ALL their communication wide-open to the public?

You sound like so many others I've heard who still believe and trust the government, but will ridicule people who don't and call them "conspiracy theorists". You likely spew insults and accusations out to most whistleblowers out there who are trying to get truth out to the people.

edit on 17-10-2012 by Ryker because: (no reason given)



posted on Oct, 24 2012 @ 01:46 PM
link   

Originally posted by OccamAssassin
This thread is just BS.

Dolan and Nexus magazine should ring alarm bells to those who have been around this subject for more than a few years.

Nexus magazine is just a snake-oil publication run by a scammer out of Queensland in Australia.....It's all about dollars to Duncan.


As for the topic .....do the morons who put this garbage forward actually research the subject?

Every time the space shuttle would have a mission....my wife (and sometimes the kids) and I would leave my scanner on to listen in to the SW transmissions of the shuttle missions. These transmissions are picked up by people like myself and rebroadcast in the UHF band for anyone with an appropriate receiver.

Let me repeat myself for clarity.......ALL NASA MISSIONS ARE BROADCAST IN SUCH A WAY THAT ANYONE CAN LISTEN IN ON THE CONVERSATION.......No encryption......just a nice analog signal that anyone can tune in to.

Seems rather counter-intuitive for an agency to be conducting "secret schemes"(
) to broadcast their communications on an open channel.

But I suppose logic gets thrown out the door when dealing with conspiracy theorists.



Well, there you go! That solves everything! Because it would be impossible for them to switch to a private channel when needed, or pre-record what a normal flight would sound like and play it during launch all while communicating for real on a private channel while the recording plays for you and your kids.

Well there's two possibilities that blasted huge holes in your alleged "checkmate" argument that I just thought of in a few milliseconds... But I guess that's just waaay too complicated for your weak, flouridated, mind, crippled from the effects of stagnation, to understand???

That box you live in is a prison. Try thinking outside it once in a while. Then maybe you can think of a better argumen. I'm not saying there is definitely a NASA scheme, (after all, it is not in a humans nature to decieve his fellow man, right? Humans who have knowledge or power over other humans are especially unlikely to do such a thing, right!?), but your argument suuucks... I almost have to wonder if you are trying to convince people that there IS a moon base! That's how bad you suck.



posted on Oct, 25 2012 @ 09:04 PM
link   

Originally posted by Enlightenme1111

Originally posted by OccamAssassin

Let me repeat myself for clarity.......ALL NASA MISSIONS ARE BROADCAST IN SUCH A WAY THAT ANYONE CAN LISTEN IN ON THE CONVERSATION.......No encryption......just a nice analog signal that anyone can tune in to.

Seems rather counter-intuitive for an agency to be conducting "secret schemes"(
) to broadcast their communications on an open channel.


In fact, they have separate channels they broadcast on. There is an open channel for the peasants, such as yourself, and there are also closed and encrypted channels for people with higher pay grades.



And you know this is true how? Richard Hoagland told you?

Or some astronaut or Mission Control worker -- now THAT would be interesting.

Please share your source of this assertion.



posted on Oct, 25 2012 @ 09:19 PM
link   

Originally posted by flashtrum
. It's WELL DOCUMENTED that there are encrypted channels in use for space communication. Several of the shuttle missions carried "top secret" payloads and some of those deployments had conversations that were never broadcast on an open channel where you could hear them.


All orbital voice com is encoded digitally for clarity but it means amateur receivers can't pick up ANY of it, UHF is used as secondary voice during launch/landing and EVAs, and most PAO-released audio is rebroadcast in the ham bands by various radio clubs, not NASA. So unless somebody in Mission Control decides to allow it, conversations on topics from medical issues to morale to crew mishaps do not get out to the public.


There are also SEVERAL cases of in-progress communication between the space station and NASA where the Astronaut was ordered to switch to an encrypted channel - sometimes after witnessing a UFO incident or an in-progress UFO sighting.


I don't believe this interpretation of such alleged conversations. Not a single one of the many wide, wild internet UFO folklore. Would you cite one or two you find convincing?

I spent more that 20 years working in Mission Control, including DoD missions.



posted on Oct, 30 2012 @ 01:12 PM
link   

Originally posted by gaurdian2012
I would like to ask you a serious question. do you think the world government leaders are being 100% truthful on the ET question?


All I know that in the past they have not been truthful about the UFO question, as anyone visiting the UK national archives can easily see today (link to the declassified UFO documents on UK government site).

However, the claim that the UFO or extraterrestrial life topic has never been publicly discussed since is simply not true. From the same UK national archives you can download 15-page summary (link) which states as follows:


The last time the Government made a full public statement on its policy was in January 1979 when UFOs were the subject of a lengthy debate in the House of Lords. This was initiated by Lord Clancarty (Brinsley le Poer Trench), the author of several books on UFOs and related subjects. Clancarty believed the MoD had evidence that UFOs were of extraterrestrial origin and was convinced they were concealing „the truth‟ from the public.

In the summer of 1978 he tabled a motion that called on the Government to set up an inquiry and for the Defence Minister to make a televised statement on UFOs. In the Lords, the Government's response was delivered by a retired Royal Navy officer and Labour peer, Lord Strabolgi (David Kenworthy).

His closing remarks were: „…as for telling the public the truth about UFOs, the truth is simple. There really are many strange phenomena in the sky, and these are invariably reported by rational people. But there is a wide range of natural explanations to account for such phenomena. There is nothing to suggest to Her Majesty‟s Government that such phenomena are alien spacecraft‟


Maybe I am too trusting - and as much as I would love to believe governments know more about the subject (not to mention how such claims always makes your imagination going) - I am afraid that they are speaking the truth.

In the end those public instances got things that serve higher priority (like social services, health care, unemployment or education to name a few) that the topic of something unusual occasionally hovering in the skies is not their first and foremost concern - especially as mentioned have shown not to pose any threat.



posted on Oct, 30 2012 @ 03:28 PM
link   
reply to post by SCITK
 


I do suspect that most politicians are unconcerned with the UFO issue because they have real problems and issues down here to deal with that demand their attention and focus. The really interesting unexplainable cases are very rare but probably of defence significance. Any investigations into these cases are probably "official" secrets and will never be released into the public domain. Margaret Thatcher told Georgina Bruni in 1997: "UFOs! You must get your facts right and you can't tell the people".

As for whether there really is any secret 'human' space program then you would have to assume that there really is not just a global, but a Cosmic Illuminati of some sort. The Earth being a sort of North Korea, cut off from a bigger galactic community by manipulation and control of information from these "elites". With the same galactic community either unwilling or unable to break that control down.

It's not something I see any particularly strong evidence of but others will beg to differ.



new topics

top topics



 
65
<< 1  2  3   >>

log in

join