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.

 

NASA is lying about Comet ISON.

page: 7
19
<< 4  5  6    8  9  10 >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Nov, 25 2013 @ 10:08 PM
link   

daryllyn
reply to post by Kr0nZ
 



umm what??? so basically you dont care about credibility?

If someone is known to post videos that are obvious hoaxes, then why should anyone even listen to his current postings?


How dare you bring logic into this thread. Shame on you... oh wait...

Obviously, credibility means nothing. Credentials mean nothing. And, youtube is the new reliable source.

If you don't agree with me, you are obviously close minded and probably a shill.


By your logic, having a title of astrophysicist means you could NEVER be wrong right? Wow...




posted on Nov, 25 2013 @ 10:14 PM
link   
reply to post by daryllyn
 


Yes, being that he does not work for NASA, that would make him an amateur. I am not sure what point you are trying to make here. Did you even look at his resume? He has a degree in astronomy. By your standards that should be enough credentials , no?

Forget the fact that Encke is not on the image, it doesn't matter. Even NASA themselves or a simple search will show you the current position of Encke. It's right by Mercury. There is no eyeballing required. We know the precise position of both Encke and ISON.



posted on Nov, 25 2013 @ 10:17 PM
link   
Welp its clear this thread is derailing itself so this will be my last post. Have fun guys.



posted on Nov, 25 2013 @ 10:22 PM
link   
reply to post by neobludragon
 


More to the point, its clear that select individuals forgot the point of this thread was to share information...and will say whatever it takes to justify their opinions.

Regardless of how frivolous and irrelevant it is. By going to any lengths to twist logic in their favor just to promote how "credible" something is, just shows how desperate our times and people are.



posted on Nov, 25 2013 @ 10:23 PM
link   

eyezenmaitreya
reply to post by roncoallstar
 


If you want to get technical, they did name it after Enki...they just changed the wording so most would be oblivious.

Then again most people have probably never heard of Enki anyway.


You can show some evidence for this?

When did they change the wording?



posted on Nov, 25 2013 @ 10:25 PM
link   
reply to post by DenyObfuscation
 


How about this? Enki or Encke...both sound the same but are differently spelled. Like i mentioned earlier, you can't name something differently unless you have heard of the original name first.



posted on Nov, 25 2013 @ 10:28 PM
link   
reply to post by roncoallstar
 


So you... with your untrained eye... can know precise positions of comets in relation to all of their surroundings... by simply looking at a picture... and honestly believe that you are disproving an astrophysicist by doing so?

With that... I am done...

On Bruce Gary:

Bruce Gary calls himself an amateur star geezer in this blog he guest wrote for guess who? My source. When I said amateur..... I didn't mean he didn't know anything, I was stating a fact.
edit on 25pmMon, 25 Nov 2013 22:29:27 -060013MondayMonday1311 by daryllyn because: (no reason given)



posted on Nov, 25 2013 @ 10:28 PM
link   
reply to post by eyezenmaitreya
 


That's not evidence.

What is your point? That the comet was NOT named for Encke who calculated its orbit?



posted on Nov, 25 2013 @ 10:29 PM
link   
reply to post by daryllyn
 



eyezenmaitreya
reply to post by neobludragon
 


More to the point, its clear that select individuals forgot the point of this thread was to share information...and will say whatever it takes to justify their opinions.

Regardless of how frivolous and irrelevant it is. By going to any lengths to twist logic in their favor just to promote how "credible" something is, just shows how desperate our times and people are.



posted on Nov, 25 2013 @ 10:31 PM
link   
Here is what appears to be a good projection:
stereo-ssc.nascom.nasa.gov...

According to this, late Jan we will know the final answer.

So what is the outcome for BPEarths if nothing happens?

What is the outcome of NASA is caught lying:



posted on Nov, 25 2013 @ 10:32 PM
link   
reply to post by DenyObfuscation
 


You're right its not evidence, its logic. Also, its what i meant when i said that statement you refer to. Besides i was saying its a lot more logical that he was named for Encke as an excuse, but they REALLY named it after Enki.



posted on Nov, 25 2013 @ 10:40 PM
link   
reply to post by eyezenmaitreya
 


That's a fascinating take on the situation.

When did they name this comet Encke?

Would they have been aware of Enki at that time?



posted on Nov, 25 2013 @ 10:44 PM
link   
reply to post by DenyObfuscation
 


Obviously.



posted on Nov, 25 2013 @ 11:00 PM
link   

eyezenmaitreya
reply to post by DenyObfuscation
 


Obviously.


It's not obvious to me. What evidence do you have that the name Enki was even known at the time by the people who
named the comet Encke?

Considering the boldness of your assertion I would think that you have reasonable evidence. I don't think it's too much to ask for that evidence.



posted on Nov, 25 2013 @ 11:08 PM
link   
I keep reading that thepoint of this thread was to share information and the op is indignant at their treatment. But the thread was a disparaging commentary on nasa. It was intended to portray one persons opinion based 'evidence' as fact and then claim all else are lies.

Far from sharing info it is a run of the mill fud piece.

I ask again az i do with all anti nasa threads... what is the poibt of them lying? To what end?

Its simply because you want the truth to be a certain way and it is not. Therefore they lie. They must lie or things would be the way i want them to be..fistshakefingerpoint




posted on Nov, 25 2013 @ 11:09 PM
link   

DenyObfuscation

eyezenmaitreya
reply to post by DenyObfuscation
 


Obviously.


It's not obvious to me. What evidence do you have that the name Enki was even known at the time by the people who
named the comet Encke?

Considering the boldness of your assertion I would think that you have reasonable evidence. I don't think it's too much to ask for that evidence.


Well, according to wikipedia, it looks like it was named after the first person to calculate its orbit, Johann Franz Encke, in 1819.

No relation to Enki

en.wikipedia.org...



posted on Nov, 25 2013 @ 11:13 PM
link   
reply to post by DenyObfuscation
 


Well considering Enki is a name known from ancient Babylon. Babylon is the oldest known culture. According to wikipedia Enki has been recorded since the second century.

As for how long our government has known of the descriptions and had knowledge of the entity in question, i would say that is hard to tell. But its minimum early 1900's at least.

Perhaps you can find a time they acknowledged knowledge.

But that is only open to speculation from what i can tell...though its clear if its easily accessible and "out there" the government knows. With by how clear it is, you can tell its not old info.

I suggest you read the Atrahasis if you want to understand better. It has a lot more info thats helpful...especially if you compare it to other ancient texts.

en.wikipedia.org...



posted on Nov, 25 2013 @ 11:15 PM
link   
reply to post by Kr0nZ
 


Thanks. The problem is maitreya has been shown that already. Take a look at their "posts in thread".

Someone is being evasive. Might have something to do with the soapbox sermons about lying and such.

ETA: Now I see an actual attempt to address the questions has been made. Too late to research tonight.
edit on 25-11-2013 by DenyObfuscation because: (no reason given)



posted on Nov, 25 2013 @ 11:15 PM
link   

roncoallstar

What can I say without getting into another pointless debate with you? I understand that you think BP is a fraud and your astrophysicist is credible, even though I proved him 100% wrong about the location of ISON in regards to Stereo A. It's funny because Bruce Gary and crew probably have more credentials than your source and BP gets his hard data from Bruce's ISON website.


As far as I can see Bruce's ISON website makes no mention of the size of ISON, just the coma. It was a lot to cover, so let me know if I'm wrong on this. The only mention of Encke leads back to CIOC (NASA Comet ISON Observing Campaign) and Karl Battams. So, what hard data are you talking about?



posted on Nov, 25 2013 @ 11:20 PM
link   
reply to post by winofiend
 


It appears you misunderstand, the government is known to be untrustworthy...so are politicians. So why should we trust those affiliated with proven liars.

Its a neutral stance...I for one do not take what the "astrophysicist" says as fact...but nor do i take what BPEarthWatch says as fact either. However if one were to have reason to lie...it would be NASA.

Its not against NASA its a stance against those who defend NASA for baseless reasons. AKA This guy is an astrophysicist...he can't be wrong, or be paid/threatened to lie.

There is a difference between cognitive dissonance and lying. Personally, i think someone with an open mind should listen to neither.



new topics

top topics



 
19
<< 4  5  6    8  9  10 >>

log in

join