Solar Warden

Oh I'm sorry, I didn't realize that:

So what I want to know, right now, and seriously is where and how do you sign up for the SPACE COMMAND. I see Army Airforce Navy and Marine recruitment posters and ads everywhere. No one doubts the Space Command exists. [Its at Cheyene Mountain too] But I see no posters to join. WHY???

actually means "I'm having a little bit of fun by saying this". Last time I checked "serious" meant it was a real question and not something you were joking about. I'll make a note of that in the future.

Originally posted by vorlanceWho says the Enterprise isn't real? She's just as real as Santa!

ROFL Yeah tell THAT to yer kids. "Star Trek is fake, BTW so is Santa Claus"

I find it truly amazing how people choose the lies they want to support and the truths they want/need to debunk.

How do you debunk speculation?

And another link to a forum that's engaged in similar discussions...

Solar Warden II

Originally posted by cmdrkeenkid

Originally posted by Implosion
Who am I more likely to listen to, someone who has hacked sensitive US government computers [can we take the fact that he's going to serve hard time as proof of this?], someone who can't do simple maths, or someone who can't spell "astronomers".

You can believe what you want to believe, that's the great thing about life. If you want to believe people who are using logic to come to their conclusions, despite making errors that come with being human, or some guy who was baked out of his mind and supposedly saw stuff about a secret space armada, that's your choice. Life is wonderful like that.

Originally posted by Implosion
Just as in my mind cmdrkeenkid loses all credibility because he either: Can't apply simple addition, or: Didn't bother to read the article on Gary Mckinnon in question

I explained how I came to my misunderstanding. So do not not have credibility because you must not have seen that? Or is it simply because you choose to believe someone that has no tangible proof for what he says is happening?

Regardless, this isn't the time or place for such a discussion. I recommend we end it now.

I have never stated I believe his story, I'm just intrigued by the factors that people are using to "prove" his credibility, or lack thereof. If there is one thing I know, it's that I don't know much.

If there is one thing I know, it's that I don't know much.

Hear! Here!

However, I will eventually...

Originally posted by cmdrkeenkid
And would you really be expected to believe an employee telling you nothing is going on?

Well no, that was exactly my point. But when an employee of such a base writes ME "out of the blue" and tells me there is nothing going on down here, then adds "Oh btw SG-1 is a name plate on a broom closet here" then I am a little interested. He may be pulling my leg or hinting at something, but he got my attention. I would never have though about it had he not mentioned it.

I thought this was a place to discuss and debate ideas even if they seem a little far fetched?...
I am willing to entertain info that proves what I say is wrong. If I didn't I would be a real hypocrite…
.AHHH THERE is that iggy button!…
But what I cannot tolerate is someone who calls my ideas ridiculous…

That was not directed at you, nor any one in particular, if you took it that way I apologize. And I did say I would "entertain" info that proves me wrong, not that I would accept it just because it was presented. Any more than you would be convinced my theory is correct unless I could beam you to the mothership. But I doubt even that would be enough for some people. ;p

I've been using simple logic and reasoning to prove your ideas wrong. As I've said already, and probably will again, the logistics behind something like this are just unbelievable and impossible to get by without notice or someone speaking out.

And if those "people" spoke out, would you believe them? Or apply your same logic and reasoning to "prove" they are lying? If that’s true you would never know if someone actually IS telling you what's going on.

Clarke's Three Laws state;

"When a distinguished but elderly scientist states that something is possible he is almost certainly right. When he states that something is impossible, he is very probably wrong."
"The only way of discovering the limits of the possible is to venture a little way past them into the impossible."
"Any sufficiently advanced technology is indistinguishable from magic."

Probably because it's run by the Air Force, which means that you would first have to join the USAF and then be transfered in

I guess you missed my tongue in cheek there. I know that. Nellis AFB ring a bell?

Originally posted by zorgon
Well no, that was exactly my point. But when an employee of such a base writes ME "out of the blue" and tells me there is nothing going on down here, then adds "Oh btw SG-1 is a name plate on a broom closet here" then I am a little interested. He may be pulling my leg or hinting at something, but he got my attention. I would never have though about it had he not mentioned it.

So someone wrote you "out of the blue?" You did nothing to initiate a contact with them? Was this in print form or email? Could you post it here on ATS, please? Feel free to remove your email, name, etc, but please leave the information of the person who contacted you.

And I did say I would "entertain" info that proves me wrong, not that I would accept it just because it was presented.

Well, that's fine and well. I don't believe in the teachings of Islam, but if someone wants to tell me about them I'll give a listen. Though by ignoring somebody you really wouldn't be entertaining anything, would you?

Any more than you would be convinced my theory is correct unless I could beam you to the mothership. But I doubt even that would be enough for some people. ;p

And if those "people" spoke out, would you believe them? Or apply your same logic and reasoning to "prove" they are lying? If that’s true you would never know if someone actually IS telling you what's going on.

If they provided some evidence when staking such claims, then I would be more inclined to believe them. Anyone can come out saying, "I saw this and that and those and you should believe me because I say so!" Now, if someone came out saying, "I saw this and here is my evidence for it," it would be more believable. Which would you believe?

I guess you missed my tongue in cheek there. I know that. Nellis AFB ring a bell?

I guess, like Zap, when someone says something to the tune of, "So what I want to know, right now, and seriously is where and how do you sign up for the SPACE COMMAND. I see Army Airforce Navy and Marine recruitment posters and ads everywhere. No one doubts the Space Command exists. [Its at Cheyene Mountain too] But I see no posters to join. WHY???" I would assume that they actually meant "right now, and seriously." And no, that's not my emphasis. That was yours.

And what does Nellis AFB have anything to do with that...?

Originally posted by cmdrkeenkid You did nothing to initiate a contact with them?

True and its already posted way back on another thread

Though by ignoring somebody you really wouldn't be entertaining anything, would you?

Hmmm I am looking over the last few pages here. Ignoring you by answering your posts? That is a new one. I am soooo confused now...

No wait its not ME that's muddled here..

If they provided some evidence when staking such claims, then I would be more inclined to believe them. Anyone can come out saying

So people like Astronauts and pilots making personal statements of something they saw, talking within confines of the non-disclosure they are bound by, and not being able to steal the "top secret" file on the way out the door just to appease you, have nothing to say you would believe?

Well then... "Houston we have a problem....!"

I am here for fun and to explore possibilities, looking for as much evidence as I may find to support my belief, not to debate how one expresses themselves. Skeptics always play the same game.... "Show me proof...." then you present some piece of evidence... "well show me proof that this has proof...'' Never ends

I would assume that they actually meant "right now, and seriously."

First rule never assume anything... perhaps I did not express my self correctly, but then I don't claim to be a professor of languge... oh well

As to Nellis, its simply where I am right now

Bye Bye


[edit on 27-6-2006 by zorgon]

As to Nellis, its simply where I am right now

Bye Bye

[edit on 27-6-2006 by zorgon]

Tre cool Zorgon! Perhaps you can find out more about these things than you've imagined so far. Worth meditating on. There may be enlisted people there that will share things if it's the right place and time.

May Truth Find Success!

Originally posted by vorlance

Originally posted by Space

Originally posted by vorlance










[edit on 27-6-2006 by vorlance]

What's all this man?

You can’t be claiming these wallpapers mean something…

From the SAME website --->

I can't believe it...the USS Enterprise is real!!!

___

vorlance...

...your credibility...

When did I even make a peep about those pics being the real thing? Pardon me butt your assumptions are showing. Who says the Enterprise isn't real? She's just as real as Santa!

Has you can see I asked you "What's all this man?" I wanted to know what the relevance of the pics was…so I was trying not to assume.

BREAKING NEWS.............

U.S. prepares new space defense policy Aimed at guarding satellites,not ‘weaponizing space.....

WASHINGTON - The Bush administration is preparing a shift in U.S. space policy to allow for protection of satellites from attack but is not considering putting weapons into space, the White House said Wednesday.

snip [two paragraphs lower]

“The policy that we’re talking about is not looking at weaponizing space,” McClellan told reporters. “Now we do have space systems, obviously, and we want to make sure that those space systems are protected.”

MSNBC News

What "systems"??

Daryl Kimball, executive director of the Arms Control Association, said, “This is a military system that is unnecessary and provocative. It will lead other states to pursue military systems to knock out our space-based assets.

[edit on 27-6-2006 by zorgon]

Originally posted by zorgon
What "systems"??

I took that to mean satellites. Like spy satellites and communication satellites etc.

US Defense spending on space has grown from around $15 billion in 2000 to more than $22 billion today and is forecast to reach $28 billion by 2010, ...
www.defenseindustrydaily.com...

Originally posted by zorgon

US Defense spending on space has grown from around $15 billion in 2000 to more than $22 billion today and is forecast to reach $28 billion by 2010, ...
www.defenseindustrydaily.com...

Add a few trillion to the black budget and most idiots could surmise that all that $$$$$ doesn't just buy some honking satellites. Hehehe

So what is the real deal?? As a good taxpayer I want to know!

Originally posted by zorgon
BREAKING NEWS.............

www.msnbc.msn.com...

Breaking news??? This story is over a year old at the time of your posting...it’s from May 18, 2005!

From the article:

“White House spokesman Scott McClellan said the new policy was being developed by the Defense Department and other agencies and had not yet been sent to President Bush for approval or his top aides.”

[edit on 28-6-2006 by Space]

Here is The Video Interview with Gary Mckinnon !!! ---Arn't I kind :-)

www.youtube.com...




"You Belived in all your lies!...Diden't you! Diden't you!"

"Ruiner, The Downward Spiral"

Trent Reznor




[edit on 28-6-2006 by TrentReznor]

Originally posted by vorlance










[edit on 27-6-2006 by vorlance]

So vorlance...I must ask again...what is the relevance of the pics? I'm trying to understand.

Originally posted by TrentReznor
Here is The Video Interview with Gary Mckinnon !!! ---Arn't I kind :-)

www.youtube.com...

Thanks for the link to the video.

He states he has been going back into the "hacked" computer/s for years.

I would think that he could have come out with at least one picture or supporting file with all that time...years.

Many statements he makes sound like BS too.

Originally posted by Space

Originally posted by vorlance










[edit on 27-6-2006 by vorlance]

So vorlance...I must ask again...what is the relevance of the pics? I'm trying to understand.

Maybe the following image will buy you a vowel...


[edit on 28-6-2006 by vorlance]

The follow is a small exerpt of something I just located here...

www.globalsecurity.org...


"Aerospace Daily December 13, 2004

Senators' Comments Suggest Existence Of Secret Space Program
In-Depth Coverage By Rich Tuttle

Cryptic comments by two Democrats on the Senate floor about a major program in the fiscal year 2005 intelligence authorization conference report point to a secret space effort of some kind that has been under way for years, but which has been unknown to the public, analysts said."

Looks to me like these Sentors said it was "totally unjustified and very, very wasteful." The Senate has voted for years to kill it "only to be overruled in the appropriations conference"??

"Unjustified and stunningly expensive"??

I've been saying it! Haven't I been saying it?