Mars Had Life at One Time; May Have Life Now-Charles Bolden

NASA has everything to gain by finding life... Their budget would increase dramatically. They have no reason to hide or cover it up.

I swear I saw an exact same kind of post on ATS a few years ago, and the Search function proves me right:
www.abovetopsecret.com...
www.abovetopsecret.com...

Bolden has been overanalysed over his words even before that quote: www.abovetopsecret.com...

He's not saying anything that other optimistic and enthusiastic space scientists aren't saying.

originally posted by: Zcustosmorum
We'll get to the stage where it's accepted that life is abundant throughout the universe at some point, and NASA already knows more than they say.

But not abundant enough to actually be detected, apparently.

originally posted by: Orionx2
NASA has everything to gain by finding life... Their budget would increase dramatically. They have no reason to hide or cover it up.

Except it doesn't quite work that way in reality. The brass who guard top compartmentalized secrets don't just share all their stuff with every NASA official and very few have need to know, and some will just have very specific and limited need to know, so even though project managers and team leaders may have great aspirations that include the points you make, they don't get to call the shots and set policy in regards to being able to have any top secrets to set policy with in the first place..

So those who have no reason to cover up aren't even in the loop, and won't know anything, so cannot expand upon any goals based on any of that.

a reply to: NoCorruptionAllowed
That's some great ideas for a fiction book, but you have no proof that that's what's happening in real life, do you? You just make it up so it fits your preconceived ideas.

Tell me, why would NASA be launching the next Mars rover mission, which will look for signs of past life on Mars, if they don't want us to know there was/could be/is life on Mars?

originally posted by: Blue Shift

originally posted by: Zcustosmorum
We'll get to the stage where it's accepted that life is abundant throughout the universe at some point, and NASA already knows more than they say.

But not abundant enough to actually be detected, apparently.

How much of the universe have we actually explored? The phrase 'like a grain of sand' springs to mind

originally posted by: neveroddoreven99
a reply to: OneBigMonkeyToo But... but.. but... cover up? I like to say things like "mountains of mounting evidence," without actually knowing what that means! Can anyone quantify a mountain of evidence for me? From my understanding it's more like "a handful of findings that suggest life might have been possible once upon a time."
In a Galaxy Far Far Away

Fixed

originally posted by: wildespace
a reply to: NoCorruptionAllowed
That's some great ideas for a fiction book, but you have no proof that that's what's happening in real life, do you? You just make it up so it fits your preconceived ideas.

Tell me, why would NASA be launching the next Mars rover mission, which will look for signs of past life on Mars, if they don't want us to know there was/could be/is life on Mars?

Yeah I just made all that up. /sarc If you ever get yourself educated and learn even a tiny bit you would understand what I'm referring to. I find it hilarious you think I just made that all up. The mind boggles. Your question above explains to me the level of ignorance I am up against. And your aggressive tone undermines that even further for you. What I spoke of above is common knowledge to those who have worked on secret projects, and the mainstream even has known these being the basics and it isn't even complicated, except it appears it is for you, that's too bad, but I'm not here for you either, and what you do not know is not my responsibility to be teaching you. Get a clue pal.

PS If you want to learn why what I said is in fact true, just ask someone with a top secret clearance if the people they worked near to or in different departments, but with a need to work in the same buildings if they knew what everyone else was doing there. They will tell you how secret projects exist INSIDE of secret projects and no one knows what the other person is doing, nor are they allowed to talk to each other about what the other person does, and this is the same way it works everywhere including at NASA where top secret military based missions and projects are being run.

Mission control might be different where everyone in that department is there with a specific need to work and communicate together, and they don't all have TS clearances and above.

originally posted by: NoCorruptionAllowed

originally posted by: Orionx2
NASA has everything to gain by finding life... Their budget would increase dramatically. They have no reason to hide or cover it up.

Except it doesn't quite work that way in reality. The brass who guard top compartmentalized secrets don't just share all their stuff with every NASA official and very few have need to know, and some will just have very specific and limited need to know, so even though project managers and team leaders may have great aspirations that include the points you make, they don't get to call the shots and set policy in regards to being able to have any top secrets to set policy with in the first place..

So those who have no reason to cover up aren't even in the loop, and won't know anything, so cannot expand upon any goals based on any of that.

Right... So NASA finds some microorganisms off world and it will be a grand conspiracy to cover it up for... what again?

a reply to: Orionx2

What the hell are you talking about?

What does microorganisms have to do with anything being discussed so far? I didn't discuss anything about that. Or you just can't resist trolling?

You might want to lay of the stuff for awhile

originally posted by: NoCorruptionAllowed
a reply to: Orionx2

What the hell are you talking about?

What does microorganisms have to do with anything being discussed so far? I didn't discuss anything about that. Or you just can't resist trolling?

You might want to lay of the stuff for awhile

Ummm..... Then what is being discussed? I see nothing to indicate inelegant life being discussed? There is a youtube vid that anyone with any real critical thinking skills can clearly tell has been twisted to make it look like the guy was talking about intelligent life but he clearly wasn't... Wait you a re not Tyler Glockner are you? lol

originally posted by: Zcustosmorum
We'll get to the stage where it's accepted that life is abundant throughout the universe at some point, and NASA already knows more than they say.

originally posted by: Zcustosmorum
How much of the universe have we actually explored? The phrase 'like a grain of sand' springs to mind

Which is it? Does NASA already know about life elsewhere, or is the universe so big that NASA has only explored an amount of the universe equal to "a grain of sand".

For the record, I think life does exist elsewhere, and so do most scientists personally feel that way, and most NASA scientists that I have heard speak about life elsewhere also seem to think that life is probably abundant in the universe.

However, even if most scientists feel life is most likely abundant, being proper scientists they would not say it is a fact until they find proof positive of life elsewhere -- and NASA has not found that proof positive yet.

originally posted by: NoCorruptionAllowed
a reply to: Orionx2

What the hell are you talking about?

What does microorganisms have to do with anything being discussed so far? I didn't discuss anything about that. Or you just can't resist trolling?

You might want to lay of the stuff for awhile

It seems to me that when Bolden said "Mars may have life now", he wasn't talking about green men living in buildings. He is talking about the possibility that sub-surface microbial life may still exist in the wet underground on Mars as a hold-over from a time when the surface of Mars was wetter and more habitable for life.

a reply to: Soylent Green Is People

Which is it? Does NASA already know about life elsewhere, or is the universe so big that NASA has only explored an amount of the universe equal to "a grain of sand".

In my opinion, both

and NASA has not found that proof positive yet.

That is what they say.

originally posted by: Orionx2
I see nothing to indicate inelegant life being discussed?

That's the truth of it - NASA found life and are covering it up because they have no class and they wouldn't want to be seen out with them.

originally posted by: NoCorruptionAllowed
PS If you want to learn why what I said is in fact true, just ask someone with a top secret clearance if the people they worked near to or in different departments, but with a need to work in the same buildings if they knew what everyone else was doing there.

Planetary scientists need a top secret clearance to conduct and publish their work, and keep it secret from anyone else working with them?

Keep making stuff up, mate, it's entertaining.

I find it funny how nobody considers all the credible, around-the-world, verified by governments, likely ET UFO encounters as a sign of ET life.

Listen, NASA and others have already announced that they found life on mars in the form of worm-like fossils. Only a few confusion-spreading scientists speculated that those may have come from contamination as those rocks sat on the Earth. But in truth they can probably determine whether those fossils were from Earth contamination by seeing where those fossils sat within the rock.

originally posted by: nOraKat
I find it funny how nobody considers all the credible, around-the-world, verified by governments, likely ET UFO encounters as a sign of ET life.

Because there aren't any.

Listen, NASA and others have already announced that they found life on mars in the form of worm-like fossils. Only a few confusion-spreading scientists speculated that those may have come from contamination as those rocks sat on the Earth. But in truth they can probably determine whether those fossils were from Earth contamination by seeing where those fossils sat within the rock.

So people trust NASA when they announce things they like, but not when they don't?

What they found were things they believed might have been evidence of biological activity, turned out they jumped the gun. Even if it were the case, finding worm like fossils is not the same as ET popping over to say hi.

originally posted by: OneBigMonkeyToo

originally posted by: nOraKat
I find it funny how nobody considers all the credible, around-the-world, verified by governments, likely ET UFO encounters as a sign of ET life.

Because there aren't any.

I think the strongest cases are when they fly over or close to military bases. In these cases they are often recorded on both ground and air radar with visual confirmations from both the ground and in the air.

Listen, NASA and others have already announced that they found life on mars in the form of worm-like fossils. Only a few confusion-spreading scientists speculated that those may have come from contamination as those rocks sat on the Earth. But in truth they can probably determine whether those fossils were from Earth contamination by seeing where those fossils sat within the rock.

So people trust NASA when they announce things they like, but not when they don't?

What they found were things they believed might have been evidence of biological activity, turned out they jumped the gun. Even if it were the case, finding worm like fossils is not the same as ET popping over to say hi.

Wow, but that is saying a lot. You should be amazed that life was found on Mars, especially if you don't believe in ET UFO.

Also methane has been confirmed on Mars..

a reply to: nOraKat

Except life wasn't found on Mars, read what I put again. they found mineral structures that appeared to some to be evidence of possible biological activity. They were wrong.

Methane is not necessarily biological in origin.