Nasa doesn't photoshop??

originally posted by: crankyoldman
This topic is interesting. Folks come around to this question but often without seeing what has come before. There was a woman, can't remember her name, who came forth without provocation and stated clearly that she was employed within NASA to alter photos before they were released - this dates back about 15years. If I remember correctly she had a few examples and her level of alteration was low level to be sure. There have been others who have worked at NASA and have talked about having seen photos that were never released.

So. NASA employee states she herself altered images. So, which images have been altered and which ones not? If one image was done, logic dictates that ALL have been done since there is no way of know which were done and which ones not from our POV.

NASA withholds images. Since NASA has withheld images based on what is in the images, logic dictates NASA not only hides things, they have a very sophisticated system that determines what can be see and what cannot. So, NASA hides things and the reason is because you are not allowed to see everything, only what they want and what is that want criteria?

Lastly, a great poster here, again going way back, Zorgon, has/had done unreal verifiable research concerning they systems NASA uses to vet the photos they release. The net effect, if you see something from NASA - live feed (which is delayed) or other, they have decided through a very complicated system that you seeing it doesn't matter at all to them or, according to Zorgon research, systems run down the government food chain and through the vactican overlords.

There is long standing discussion, did we go to the moon or not? The problem is there is ONE, SINGULAR, ONE resource for that documentation and under the protective order of national and global security you are only allowed to see what several heavy hitters will allow you to see. Documentation is an odd thing, those who create the documentation have FULL and COMPLETE power over what you believe and in the case of NASA and who the NASA folks work for, you are not allowed to see any of the millions of gigabytes of data that have in their system because they say so.

Conclusion. NASA lies, so nothing can be seen as the truth since the bulk of what NASA has will never be shown. Ergo, nothing the say can really be believed without a true foundation, a foundation based on what those millions of gigabytes say...

What a load of rubbish, zorgon he was shot down in flames a few times on here and didn't like it he went to another site on the web that puts rubbish like this up.

This link shows the mentality you are dealing with.

They have this under Peekaboo class spaceship

I like to call it the pink sperm spaceship now if you think this shows a spaceship well

Pink Sperm Spaceship

This is typical of the join the dots mentality used to try and see factories,tanks,roads,bridges etc etc on the moon .

Great imaginations thats for sure.

It never seems to occur to people like you if Nasa wanted to hide something they wouldn't show it.

As for documentation plenty of that if you know where to look.

a reply to: wmd_2008

I know man , Ive argued until Im blue in the face with multiple YOTUBERS who have scores , legions of subscribers of people saying "WOW I cant believe what im looking at, its so obvious , space base, alien ufo , giant monster etc"

it's all just blurry pictures of natural geological formations etc

but no they are abandoned space stations and ancient cities etc

but all they do is speculate and claim 100% proof , then have the audacity to say that NASA photoshops stuff, when they make their entire life / gain peoples revenue from ads etc and traffic by blatantly lying about photos of the moon or mars!
people suck that # up like a yummy milkshake

they would rather believe its a moon base than a natural rock formation or lava obtrusion etc , all can be explained by scientific enquiry , but none is even shown , the very basic level of scientific analyses is not present ! and never is present.
but they still claim 100% truth . FACT , PROOF

absolute bull# , and when confronted and asked to provide evidence of their claims , they cant , because they are a looking at pictures "photoshopped" by NASA or ESA or JAXA , or CNSA , ROSCOSMOS etc
and so the odds are conveniently stacked against them from the jump.

I always say if they are photoshopped prove it , but they cant because the images arent edited the way they think they are.

Anyways Im with you all the way

originally posted by: wmd_2008

originally posted by: sean
Oh well off to the next one.

Obviously you have time to waste this subject has been done a million times on here but why dont you dive in here

Moon hoax theories debunked

672 pages of whack job theories re Nasa never going to the Moon, pictures being faked, shadow problem etc etc.

See you some time 2019

God remember that nightmare arguing with foos and Saynora Jupiter. Overtime they were shown they were wrong they would come up with another crack pot theory. I will say if you believe the moon landings fake somewhere in there your proof was probably mentioned and destroyed.

originally posted by: WeRpeons
a reply to: toysforadults

The day there's absolute proof the U.S. has a secret space program is a day the people of this country should be outraged. Our government works for the people not themselves. To use tax payer's dollars to finance a space program and keeping it secret from the public is abuse of government spending and not being accountable to the people in which they serve.

The budget is huge, the black budget is equally impressive I'm sure.
www.abovetopsecret.com...

a reply to: AdKiller

Im replying to you in response to the quote you posted

I dont see why that would be worse than say , using tax payers money to fly drugs and guns in and out of america and use drugs to flood communities and destabilise them in order to keep private prisons full

Or use tax payers money to fund illegal wars in foreign sovereign nations to over throw democratically elected officials
in order to stop the spread of a perceived ideology. Or use tax payers money to fly suspected terrorists to illegal detainee camps and torture them repeatedly with impunity
Or use tax payers money to spy on the populace after creating said illegal war in order to incrementally remove citizens constitutional rights !
Or use tax payers money to research and develop weapons of war which are illegal under the laws of war and then test them on unsuspecting civilians and troops in the theater or war , or have top secret tests on american citizens using strong pyschoactives without their prior knowledge or express permission and lie about it only later to have to admit the truth in public before a congressional hearing.

Oh no I really couldnt think of anything worse than , a secret space program!

a reply to: AdKiller

Thanks for the link to that thread!

Those emblem patches all have image meanings of secret black project operations. I can't imagine how many government projects have been kept secret from the American public. I also find it very coincidental how some of the current high tech research and technology, parallels with eye-witness abduction stories and back-engineered crashed UFO retrievals.

It just so happens we hear about current government research on "cloaking", anti-gravity, and mind control technology. I believe Night Vision, Hieroglyphics, Electromagnetic Bombs and advancements in human Gene Manipulation are a direct result of back-engineering and/or a secret program working working along-side extraterrestrials.

We also have eye-witness accounts of NASA airbrushing out moon photos before CGI was created!

originally posted by: WeRpeons
a reply to: AdKiller

It just so happens we hear about current government research on "cloaking", anti-gravity, and mind control technology. I believe Night Vision, Hieroglyphics, Electromagnetic Bombs and advancements in human Gene Manipulation are a direct result of back-engineering and/or a secret program working working along-side extraterrestrials.

We also have eye-witness accounts of NASA airbrushing out moon photos before CGI was created!

Can you show how night vision is back-engineered

originally posted by: WeRpeons
a reply to: AdKiller

I believe Night Vision, Hieroglyphics, Electromagnetic Bombs and advancements in human Gene Manipulation are a direct result of back-engineering and/or a secret program working working along-side extraterrestrials.

Well, thankfully we were clever enough to dump that alien hieroglyph system and develop our own more advanced alphabetic writing system that was far less limiting than hieroglyphs.

a reply to: wmd_2008

According to Phillip Caruso, a highly trusted intelligence officer and co-author of (The Day After Roswell), headed the U.S. Foreign Technology desk made this claim. I feel his credibility and background is worth believing. It's my opinion Lieutenant Colonel Corso, had very little reason to fabricate his story. It was published just a year before his death.

Corso does have inherent credibility, and that is a big part of the story. By all accounts, he served with distinction during World War II and the Korean War, was a member of the White House National Security Council under President Eisenhower, and then headed the Foreign Technology Desk at the U.S. Army's Research and Development Department, reporting to General Arthur Trudeau. When this man says he knows about Roswell, it makes sense to pay attention.

According to Corso, a covert government group was assembled under the leadership of the first Director of Central Intelligence, Adm. Roscoe H. Hillenkoetter (see Majestic 12). Among its tasks was to collect all information on off-planet technology.

Corso also claimed the reverse engineering of these artifacts indirectly led to the development of accelerated particle beam devices, fiber optics, lasers, integrated circuit chips and Kevlar material. He also said the Strategic Defense Initiative (SDI), or "Star Wars", was meant to achieve the destructive capacity of electronic guidance systems of incoming enemy warheads, as well as the disablement of enemy spacecraft, including those from extraterrestrial origin.

Corso claimed that different parts of the Roswell craft were sent to various defense companies, who reverse engineered their properties and that this engineering feat eventually led to a number of breakthroughs. Among them were integrated circuitry, night vision equipment, the laser, particle beams, and fibre optics.

I read his book years ago and if I recall correctly, Corso claims the lenses were recovered from the eyes of dead aliens from the Roswell crash. Many will question Corso's claim. Especially Phillip J. Klass who is a well known UFO skeptic.

Can you prove without a doubt night vision technology wasn't back engineered? According to Corso, a lot of the technology retrieved from crashed vehicles was back-engineered by our own corporations. These military industrial corporations all were briefed under the government's guise that the items recovered were from adversarial "earth based foreign country" technology.

a reply to: WeRpeons

Integrated circuits are just several components made in one piece, after having the capability of making solid state transistors, integrated circuits are nothing special. Although the first transistor was made in 1947 they were invented in the 1920s, but the technology to make them was not good enough.

Night vision equipments were invented in the 1930s and used during WWII.

Particle beams are subjective, a cathode ray tube emits particle beams and was invented in the last decade of the 19th century.

The idea behind fibre optics is also from the 19th century, but they used glass.

a reply to: WeRpeons


Corso's stories have been thoroughly debunked as imaginary.

Just in the area of space technology, my professional specialty, the claims are inconsistent with every contemporary record and researched history, as well as living memories of everybody else involved, as described here.

www.jamesoberg.com...

originally posted by: WeRpeons
a reply to: wmd_2008

According to Phillip Caruso, a highly trusted intelligence officer and co-author of (The Day After Roswell), headed the U.S. Foreign Technology desk made this claim. I feel his credibility and background is worth believing. It's my opinion Lieutenant Colonel Corso, had very little reason to fabricate his story. It was published just a year before his death.

People from all walks of life have fabricated stories without any outwardly logical reason for fabricating stories.

Granted, I realize that "people have fabricated stories in the past" is not in itself evidence that Corso also fabricated this particualr story, but my point is that simply saying "he has very little reason to fabricate his story" is not solid evidence that it wasn't fabricated.

The reasons a person's mind sometimes has for fabricating stories may not be that...well, "reasonable" to you and me. The story itself -- divorced from who's telling the story -- needs to be able to stand on its own merits. And as Jim Oberg has indicated us in his post above, Mr. Corso's story does not stand very well on its own.

It also maybe goes back to some "wanting" to believe Corso's story so badly that they ignore the other people who's stories differ from his, even if there is more evidence supporting those differing stories than there is in support of Corso's.

originally posted by: WeRpeons
a reply to: wmd_2008

According to Phillip Caruso, a highly trusted intelligence officer and co-author of (The Day After Roswell), headed the U.S. Foreign Technology desk made this claim. I feel his credibility and background is worth believing. It's my opinion Lieutenant Colonel Corso, had very little reason to fabricate his story. It was published just a year before his death.

Corso does have inherent credibility, and that is a big part of the story. By all accounts, he served with distinction during World War II and the Korean War, was a member of the White House National Security Council under President Eisenhower, and then headed the Foreign Technology Desk at the U.S. Army's Research and Development Department, reporting to General Arthur Trudeau. When this man says he knows about Roswell, it makes sense to pay attention.

According to Corso, a covert government group was assembled under the leadership of the first Director of Central Intelligence, Adm. Roscoe H. Hillenkoetter (see Majestic 12). Among its tasks was to collect all information on off-planet technology.

Corso also claimed the reverse engineering of these artifacts indirectly led to the development of accelerated particle beam devices, fiber optics, lasers, integrated circuit chips and Kevlar material. He also said the Strategic Defense Initiative (SDI), or "Star Wars", was meant to achieve the destructive capacity of electronic guidance systems of incoming enemy warheads, as well as the disablement of enemy spacecraft, including those from extraterrestrial origin.

Corso claimed that different parts of the Roswell craft were sent to various defense companies, who reverse engineered their properties and that this engineering feat eventually led to a number of breakthroughs. Among them were integrated circuitry, night vision equipment, the laser, particle beams, and fibre optics.

I read his book years ago and if I recall correctly, Corso claims the lenses were recovered from the eyes of dead aliens from the Roswell crash. Many will question Corso's claim. Especially Phillip J. Klass who is a well known UFO skeptic.

Can you prove without a doubt night vision technology wasn't back engineered? According to Corso, a lot of the technology retrieved from crashed vehicles was back-engineered by our own corporations. These military industrial corporations all were briefed under the government's guise that the items recovered were from adversarial "earth based foreign country" technology.

The bulk of technological developments are done by universities & industry if you look at old very low res night vision equipment and compare it with modern camera sensors you can see how bad it was, you can see the history of transistor, ic, cpu and sensor development very easily as for death bed statements what do they have to lose.

originally posted by: wmd_2008
... as for death bed statements what do they have to lose.

My father knew of a man that, in his death bed, one of the last things he said was to distribute among his sons the lands of the biggest land owner in the area as if they were his.

Some people like to joke until the end.

Nobody really knows with any concrete evidence if some of the technology that has been developed has been influenced from recovered crashed extraterrestrial vehicles. Project Blue Book is a perfect example on how the government has cleverly engaged in disinformation to keep the public from knowing the truth related to the UFO phenomenon. There's been pressure and threats applied to the general public, credible eye-witnesses, military and commercial pilots. It's a legitimate question to wonder why the advancement of technology has moved at such a rapid pace starting in the early 80's.

To believe the ridiculous government cover-up stories surrounding the Roswell incident is also giving into the same type of disinformation. There's just way too many eye-witness and abduction reports that speak of the same technology they observed years before this technology was developed. I created a thread on this a few years ago on this basic fact. Some photos were deleted for some unknown reason. Some were replaced with a bogus photo, but the information in the thread is still intact.

Eyewitness accounts of ET technology...

a reply to: WeRpeons


We have a few members on here that claim regular visits even fancy light shows at one members house out in the wilderness yet when challenged to provide real evidence guess what they couldn't take pictures or video because their visitors would know and wouldn't come back

Who would have thought that would be the answer.

originally posted by: WeRpeons
It's a legitimate question to wonder why the advancement of technology has moved at such a rapid pace starting in the early 80's.

It's not when you know the history behind those advances.

Another thing: have you ever tried to reverse engineer any thing? It's not an easy task. In the case of reverse engineering something made in another planet we would need to understand what the machines do, how they do it and to reverse engineer the machines, the materials and the processes used to make them.

It's much easier to reach the results (the above mentioned technological advances) through already existing technology and knowledge than trying to reverse engineer a complex machine.

Now, if you are talking about something with no parallel in Earth's technology, then reverse engineering would be the only way of achieving it.