It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.
Please white-list or disable AboveTopSecret.com in your ad-blocking tool.
Thank you.
Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.
Originally posted by pmexplorer
I believe John should at least be allowed to respond to our questions.
I believe John Lear may well have some kind of undeniable proof in relation to Dulce, he may not want to disclose this information as he feels this may endanger the people from who he has obtained this info, if that is the case I respect that, however it also frustrating for those of us who would like a definite answer in relation to the possible existence of the base. (myself included)
Originally posted by Omega85
ladies and gentlemen .
I omega have found the secret location of the base!!!
HEHEHEHEHE
it really IS underground
Omega
Originally posted by MystikMushroom
I can't belive I read all four pages of this "crap".
This thread went from "lets try and compile some evidence", into a "John Lear Bash-A-Thon"
The correct title for this thread ought to be:
"What constitutes as PROOF for the masses?"
IMO, if someone can dream up somthing via the imagination, then in some alternate/parallel universe it *does* exist as a reality.
Yes, that's right...somewhere in a galaxy far, far away...really is/does/has/will exist...
What we need to ascertain here and now (with this topic) is whether or not we have been able to compille enough eye-witness accounts, second hand knowledge, blurry photos and whatnot to "entertain" the idea that Dulce is real.
We are never going to have a 100% proof-positive answer for ANY question--get over it and deal with it people.
Oh, everyone grow up and stop the bickering please--this phoney, pseudo-intelectual ranting about "proof, agenda, dis-info and respect" needs to stop. This isn't why I come to ATS.
Originally posted by Prote
What IS the equipment though? Surely, it can be identified and listed, go from there.
Originally posted by ignorant_ape
surely we must have enough students , labtechs , process workers etc on ats to have at least a stab at an inventory of what can be seen ??
Originally posted by MystikMushroom
Originally posted by MystikMushroom
I can't belive I read all four pages of this "crap".
We are never going to have a 100% proof-positive answer for ANY question--get over it and deal with it people.
Oh, everyone grow up and stop the bickering please--this phoney, pseudo-intelectual ranting about "proof, agenda, dis-info and respect" needs to stop. This isn't why I come to ATS.
I love the narcisistic nature of the other members here, and how my posts go ignored ... why are we still trying to undermine Lear's credibility?
*sigh*
Originally posted by SteveR
Originally posted by ignorant_ape
surely we must have enough students , labtechs , process workers etc on ats to have at least a stab at an inventory of what can be seen ??
Do you have anything better to do?
Originally posted by spookymulder
im doing some research on the VATS in the foregorund of the photo and im trying to find out what they are used for. however the poor qaulity of the photo is making it slow, but i will inform you if i find anything i am not a scientist or anything so i have no idea what to look for any help would be much appreicated thnks.
Also, I have found some kind of lab footage that reminded me of that resent lab picture:
www.youtube.com...
The unknown skull in the video is quite interesting.
Originally posted by Airyphyla
Also, I have found some kind of lab footage that reminded me of that resent lab picture:
www.youtube.com...
The unknown skull in the video is quite interesting.
Hrmm, the video had a clear quality, im just sceptical about it being black and white and that it doesnt have any audio in it. I would expect that from such video.
Also the skull, it looks metal like, but i can be wrong... afterall it is black and white.
Its definatly not linked to Dulce.
Originally posted by cheepnis
There are no underground secret bases at Dulce.
There is no real evidence to support the Dulce myth just as there is no solid evidence to support any 'Moon' lunacy.