It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.

Please white-list or disable in your ad-blocking tool.

Thank you.


Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.


Confessions of a NASA Airbrusher

page: 1

log in


posted on May, 29 2006 @ 09:55 AM

Read the interview for yourselves. Is it any wonder the face on Mars suddenly changed and the features had no definition as the first time the pics were taken?

This should put an end to the "realiable NASA pictures" once and for all.

They are not real. They have all been airbrushed.

Keith Morgan: Stan, what she said was that she was in the photo lab at NASA and that she was looking at some photos and one showed an elliptical object, white object that was casting a shadow on the ground above some trees and the technician in there, she asked him if it was a UFO? He said I can't tell you. She said what are you going to do with this kind of information? He said well that is the kind of stuff that we airbrush out.

Here's another source

[edit on 29-5-2006 by dgtempe]

posted on May, 29 2006 @ 10:06 AM
Thanks for dragging that out!

Like any of us NEEDED this to have our suspicions confirmed.

No, really... What was your first clue golem?

Well, it's like this...

A REAL national space agency would provide a feed/release of ALL of it's video coverage REAL TIME.

Will the real NASA please stand up?

Thanks DGTempe.

posted on May, 29 2006 @ 10:22 AM
Happy Holiday to you!

Well, you see, there are still many posts and debate on whether NASA covers up or not.
There are still threads analyzing the "FACE"

I just wanted to do my part
and in keeping with my desire to deliver TRUTH...Here it is!

Look no further.

Thanks for the nibble.

posted on May, 29 2006 @ 11:02 AM
Excellent info!!! This is just another example of the facade of reality that is fed to us. Thanks


posted on May, 29 2006 @ 11:09 AM
I read the article and Donna Tietze was a technical illustrator who NASA contracted for 15 years. The heading is a tad misleading as the lady in question didnt work as an airbrusher but drew illustrations for manuals and whathave you. When she talks about the buring of photos, I swear Ive read that before too!

posted on May, 29 2006 @ 11:32 AM
I made a thread a while ago with information about that.


posted on May, 29 2006 @ 04:03 PM
I just don't get it.
I mean, I get it...
But, I just don't understand why we are told one thing while the complete opposite is going on (I know it sounds vague, but you follow me.)
All this stuff about mars faces and ufos and then we're told it's all crackpot conspiracy stuff, and then, people come forward and tell us that's a lie too.
Then information comes forward discrediting those people.
And even more people come forward.
It's like a never ending cycle to take our attention off what's really important (and I'm not even sure what that is).
I mean, I've seen some wierd stuff in my life (black helicoptors, honest-to-goodness ufos, rods and some other stuff that I'm sure I've forgotten), but what's the point in telling someone if noone is going to believe you anyway?

So there's a face on mars.
But what does that mean for us now?
And seriously, who benefits from covering that up and why?
Don't get me wrong, I believe it's real (no doubt), but what good does it do us?
Now, if there was a tourist spot near the face of mars, that would benefit us

But seriously, who stands to gain from hiding that information?
And most importantly, what is to gain?

posted on May, 29 2006 @ 04:48 PM
Interesting thoughts.

"You have voted wu kung for the Way Above Top Secret award. You have two more votes this month."

posted on May, 29 2006 @ 11:23 PM
That's quite the nice thread you had going back in 05 there SteveR.

What really makes it is that supposed photo of the Moon taken by Foxe. Using a $600 'home' telescope. Just excellent!

I would have to go back and see if those are the same 'structures' involved in the gas venting short film clip.

As an aside, it shoots some pretty big holes in the Moon Hoax thread... Don't tell them. They start acting like terrorists if you even seem to suggest their info/reality context is suspect. What makes it scary is half those nut jobs are moderators.

Talk about emotionally vested.

But I digress...

You've really got to wonder EXACTLY what you could see with the 100 inch Hooker... Or the 200 inch Palomar telescopes.

new topics

top topics


log in