NASA Major Announcement coming (Drip drip and bigger drip for Disclosure)

a reply to: Soylent Green Is People

Well, this isn't something hard to research on... Plenty of material out there, official documents, etc.

Sadly, even if they're credible sources, a skeptical fellow will always doubt, as I said above, you can't prove it even if you have "evidence". Someone will always find a way to discredit it.

But here's a cool list of a few names.

10 Government Officials Who Admitted The Existence Of Aliens

originally posted by: JackHill
Plenty of that, you just chose to ignore it. Irrelevant before the facts.

Give me just one. Pick your best.

originally posted by: vinifalou
a reply to: Soylent Green Is People

Well, this isn't something hard to research on... Plenty of material out there, official documents, etc.

Sadly, even if they're credible sources, a skeptical fellow will always doubt, as I said above, you can't prove it even if you have "evidence". Someone will always find a way to discredit it.

But here's a cool list of a few names.

10 Government Officials Who Admitted The Existence Of Aliens

It's as I thought. Nothing concrete.

#8, #6, and #2 are all speculative, especially the JFK and Eisenhower ones. It's easy to make the claim "JFK and Eisenhower both wanted to disclose secret government knowledge of alien visitation", but it's something totally different to prove that claim isn't anything more than just some person making crap up.

#10 (Podesta) and #4 (Mitchell) are simply two people who are just like any other people who have a personal belief in alien visitation. John Podesta does not claim to have any government secrets about alien visitation, and the late Dr. Mitchel had repeated explain that his belief is just his opinion, and it isn't based on any secrets he learned as an Apollo astronaut.

They are simply two people who hold the opinion that aliens are visiting Earth in spacecraft. Their professions do not make those opinions any more valid than if their professions were an accountant, a plumber, a lawyer, a bank teller, or a doctor.

#9 (Kucinich) and #7 (Illyumzhinov) again do not claim to have learned government secrets about alien visitation from their time in government. They are two people who happen to have abduction stories. Many people have abduction stories, but there is nothing to prove that they are anything other than stories -- and the fact that Kucinich and Illyumzhinov are former government officials does not add to the veracity.

"Who they are" does not make their accounts any more true than if they were two average non-government citizens. And I'm not implying the Kucinich or this Russian guy are telling conscious intentional lies in order to fool us. Sometimes these stories can be made-up by the subconscious. People are known to make things up, either consciously of unconsciously -- and Kucinich and Illyumzhinov are "people", too.

#3 is interesting, but it's simply one person telling a story. There is no independent confirmation that the story he is telling is true or made-up.

#5 was a guy making joke. #1 is simply about classified reports of UFO sightings. UFOs don't mean "aliens", and it is already common knowledge that many governments have collected classified reports of UFO sightings. So #1 is no big deal.

None of the 10 people you listed (except for #3, sort of -- and I'm not counting the JFKL and Eisenhower ones, since that is all hearsay) makes any claim that they learned of secret government knowledge of alien visitation while they were government officials.

I'm not saying nothing in that link is possibly true, but there is no reason to believe that are true, just because the person who said it happens to be a government official. I want actual proof, not some guy telling me that -- in his opinion -- the government has proof, no matter who that guy is.

a reply to: JackHill

It's amazing how you just can ignore it.

Just having fun.

I don't ignore it, but I don't accept it. I don't care what you believe, and I don't care to convince you otherwise either. But thanks for taking my troll bait, responding, and confirming my existence! I'm a real boy!

a reply to: privatepilotuk
I'm getting used to these announcements being a let down. I want them to announce they have found life on another planet, but pretty much am resigned to the fact that they're not going to do that. Even if they have discovered it.

Tomorrow's announcement will probably be:

- A planet in the goldilocks zone only 400 light years away

- A new crater called the purple hiss on Venus that they want to explore

- That the Mars rover is still going strong and beaming back images

Any other guesses?

originally posted by: 2012newstart
a reply to: tothetenthpower

that is the minimum they could say. Actually we already know of those oceans. The bacteria were already found on Mars so they could be potentially everywhere.

I like what NASA do, I don't like the slow pace.

Wait, what?? When was bacteria found on mars??

If an alien sat down at the microphone with NASA officials for a live press-conference, what would he/she/it have to do to make you believe the alien is REAL?

a reply to: carewemust

In general US citizens would require an official confirmation from a representative of the US government (and other governments in the G8) to announce visitation on a major news network. I don't even think an Alien is needed to get people to believe in their existence. This indicates to me two things primarily : 1) US citizens generally trust the government more than the word of peers and military witnesses and 2) people still need to see significant coverage on a major news network to actually believe something is true; as opposed to reading or watching a video online.

Online media is marginalized as "fake news", and major networks are characterized as ethical and honest organizations. I hope you see the irony in this ... generally though the world is being led to believe that the existence of life outside our planet is possible, starting with the discovery of ice, then water, then microbes, and so on and so forth. We are watching alien themed films twice a year and being spoon fed imagery to lessen the shock of disclosure. That being said, government disclosure is not likely to come in any of our lifetimes. The best explanation is that the establishment would have too much to lose from disclosure and this goes beyond just governments and permeates to powerful elements that exist globally. Certain truths do exist and these are being hidden from us actively for the benefit of a small group. Also, I agree with someone's comments that the world in general is not prepared for this type of discourse and they lead simpler lives that would be fractured by disclosure. Older people who have a stable framework would be be in disarray and perhaps breakdown. Even when I think about the experience of an alien meeting, it is terrifying! Even despite my intellectual acceptance that aliens have been here longer than we have and are likely why we skipped a few rungs on the evolutionary ladder.

Last time when they announced Trappist system, it was leaked in the media before. Now the media openly talks of oceans on the moons of Jupiter and Saturn. And in fact it is nothing new for the scientific community, it is new for the common people who have no idea that water, and possibly life, is already proven to exist elsewhere.

So, will NASA announce That, or just satisfy itself and the vast majority of people with saying there are oceans under the ice of those moons, with possible microbial life forms? I appreciate what NASA is doing, but may be it is too little too late.

originally posted by: 2012newstart

So, will NASA announce That, or just satisfy itself and the vast majority of people with saying there are oceans under the ice of those moons, with possible microbial life forms? I appreciate what NASA is doing, but may be it is too little too late.

They most likely have some new findings about the ocean under Enceladus.

Considering one of the panelist is the scientist is the team leader for Cassini's Ion and Neutral Mass Spectrometer, I'd say they will be talking about how they use Cassini's Mass Spectrometer to analyze the water being ejected into space that shoots up from Enceladus' ocean in the form of a plume or geyser, and new findings about that ocean.

They may have some new or refined information gleamed from the data from the previous fly-bys that took Cassini through those plumes in order to sample that water. The original findings from the previous fly-throughs of that water indicated organic molecules (not life, but the building blocks of life).


They also will most likely discuss the new discovery that Enceladus' ocean is relatively warm and near the surface, making it a potential habitat for life as we know it, as this NASA article from last month (13 March, 2017) describes:

Cassini Sees Heat Below the Icy Surface of Enceladus



NASA's agenda for this press briefing also includes a discussion about the upcoming (in 2020) Europa Clipper Mission. I think that may be the main point of this briefing, and they want to use the Cassini investigation of the plumes of Enceladus as a segue to talk about the Europa Clipper.

Similar to Enceladus, Europa's sub-surface ocean also ejects material into space via plumes -- plumes of material that could be sampled and analyzed from space. The Europa Clipper mission will be able to analyze this water, but it will have better instruments for doing so than Cassini had for Enceladus. The geysers of Enceladus were not known at the time the Cassini spacecraft was made and launched (Cassini is what discovered Enceladus' geysers), so it did not have specifically the best instruments on board to collect and analyze the water -- however, the spectrometer it does have was used to the best of it's ability to give them some information.

The Europa Clipper will have more targeted instruments for this purpose. I bet this is one of the things they will discuss, using Enceladus/Cassini as a backdrop for that discussion.

originally posted by: Blue Shift

originally posted by: JackHill
Plenty of that, you just chose to ignore it. Irrelevant before the facts.

Give me just one. Pick your best.

Thousands of people claiming the same events during times where internet didn't ever existed, where there were not books or any real information on the subject, people phisically disappearing to later return, multiple abductees missing time at the same moment and later remembering similar things, abductees' children describing the same visitors even when the parents never told them anything about their experiences, physical marks and fully formed scars from day day to another matching memories, and we could continue over and over forever.

You just chose to ignore these facts and troll the forum. Plus, now you're in the "I'm gona antagonize you despite whatever thing you say because my ego" phase. Typical.

originally posted by: VekTorVik
a reply to: JackHill

It's amazing how you just can ignore it.

Just having fun.

I don't ignore it, but I don't accept it. I don't care what you believe, and I don't care to convince you otherwise either. But thanks for taking my troll bait, responding, and confirming my existence! I'm a real boy!

It's not a matter of beliefs, sigh. Read the information, inform yourself properly on the different cases, study the early investigations on the subject, see the patterns repeting over and over. It's just impossible to deny. You're just uninformed, chose to ignore or just don't care. Accepting the reality of this phenomena is an automatic process once you're on it. No alternative 'ordinary' explanation has been offered ever to fully cover the complexity and reality on the abductions.

originally posted by: JackHill

originally posted by: VekTorVik
a reply to: JackHill

It's amazing how you just can ignore it.

Just having fun.

I don't ignore it, but I don't accept it. I don't care what you believe, and I don't care to convince you otherwise either. But thanks for taking my troll bait, responding, and confirming my existence! I'm a real boy!

It's not a matter of beliefs, sigh. Read the information, inform yourself properly on the different cases, study the early investigations on the subject, see the patterns repeting over and over.

"Patterns repeating" could just be the result of people's perceptions, misperceptions, and potential false memories being influenced by pre-existing reports of UFOs and abductions.

originally posted by: Soylent Green Is People

originally posted by: JackHill

originally posted by: VekTorVik
a reply to: JackHill

It's amazing how you just can ignore it.

Just having fun.

I don't ignore it, but I don't accept it. I don't care what you believe, and I don't care to convince you otherwise either. But thanks for taking my troll bait, responding, and confirming my existence! I'm a real boy!

It's not a matter of beliefs, sigh. Read the information, inform yourself properly on the different cases, study the early investigations on the subject, see the patterns repeting over and over.

"Patterns repeating" could just be the result of peoples' perceptions and misperceptions being influenced by pre-existing reports of UFOs and abductions.

Massive abduction reports on the media on the 60s, 70s? Try again.

People physically disappear, sometimes even many at the same moment sharing the experience. What about the children describing the same visitors, despite their parents never told them a word about their own experiences?

Many times the patterns were released to the public knowledge when they were found by the investigators, not the other way around.

You can do better than this. The "media influence" theory is stupid, as best. These are real people, real families, not brain-dead puppets.

originally posted by: JackHill
originally posted by: Soylent Green Is People

People physically disappear, sometimes even many at the same moment sharing the experience. What about the children describing the same visitors, despite their parents never told them a word about their own experiences?

I can't respond to a general claim like this. Please provide a link to the specific case(s) where children describe the same visitor so I can better respond in a specific manner. Otherwise, I don't know to what "children's descriptions of a visitor" that you are referring.

You can do better than this. The "media influence" theory is stupid, as best. These are real people, real families, not brain-dead puppets.

I'm not sure where you got the idea that I think they are brain-dead puppets. I think they are human, and just like all humans (including me), they are susceptible to misperception and false memories based on a multitude of influences, including cultural influences and basic human instinctive responses.

I know my own brain is capable of creating misperceptions and false memories due to these influences and the hard-wiring of my animal instinct brain, but I don't consider myself to be a "brain-dead puppet". I consider myself to be a normal human.

originally posted by: Soylent Green Is People
Otherwise, I don't know to what "children's descriptions of a visitor" that you are referring.

...

I'm not sure where you got the idea that I think they are brain-dead puppets.

In other words, you're uninformed on the subject. If not, you couldn't possibly say "I don't know to what "children's descriptions of a visitor". Do your homework, don't be affraid of the internet...

You're basically saying that a lot of people is somehow "confused" by the media, so for some reason they believe they're being abducted by aliens. Yeah, well...

originally posted by: JackHill

originally posted by: Soylent Green Is People
Otherwise, I don't know to what "children's descriptions of a visitor" that you are referring.

...

I'm not sure where you got the idea that I think they are brain-dead puppets.

In other words, you're uninformed on the subject. If not, you couldn't possibly say "I don't know to what "children's descriptions of a visitor". Do your homework, don't be affraid of the internet...

Well , yeah. I think ATS is a great place to become informed, and that's one of the reasons I became a member.

You're basically saying that a lot of people is somehow "confused" by the media, so for some reason they believe they're being abducted by aliens. Yeah, well...

I'm saying that the human brain can create false perceptions and false memories. My brain, your brain, virtually everyone's brains.

So, yes -- I suppose I am saying that the human brain can be confused. Not necessarily by the media (that was your word, not mine) but by the influences all around us, not limited to only the media, but also cultural influences, past experiences, and our hard-wired instincts.

Take the phenomenon of Pareidolia, for example. The human brain already has it hard-wired into it to try recognize visual input as known patterns. Humans don't need to learn this, nor is it something that happens due to media influences -- it is simply an instinct we are born with. It may be there because our ancestors needed to be able to spot the face of a hungry predator hiding in the tall grass.

That might be the same reason most people have an instinctive aversion to snakes, and might be the reason our brains connote the image of a snake-reptile with danger; it's been ingrained into our mammalian brains for millions of years.

Our brains are always working to make us aware of danger, even when danger might not actually be around. That could be one reason people have common dreams that stretch across cultural boundaries, because the images in those dreams are hard-wired into out human brains. That might also be a potential reason that people have common abduction stories...

...Or possibly their abduction stories are true.

I don't know the answer as to whether or not there is any truth in alien abduction stories, but I don't think there is enough evidence to say that they ARE IN FACT true just because the stories have aspects in common.

www.nasa.gov...

The stream.

Hydrogen discovered in water plumes from Enceladus indicating Hydrothermal vents.
This could be a big discovery for life existing on Enceladus.

originally posted by: JackHill
You just chose to ignore these facts and troll the forum.

You and I have a different definition of "facts."

Plus, now you're in the "I'm gona antagonize you despite whatever thing you say because my ego" phase. Typical.

Sorry you feel so picked on. It might help if you were trying to defend a point of view that had something other than hearsay and conjecture with which to back it up.