Last man on Moon says Buzz Aldrin went to Mars

Originally posted by Tifozi
***snip***
What I dislike, is people NOT KNOWING MORE than what I KNOW and telling me that I'm a closed minded person just because I don't follow their dreams and dillusions.

While I do love to speculate, I also hate when people speculate and say "this must be the true, and you're an idiot".

Where are you getting this from? I know I havn't said anything like that, and I don't recal anyone else in this thread saying anything like that.

Dreams? dillusions? People saying "This must be true, and you're an idiot"?

In the words of Padme "You assume to much." You don't know what any of us are thinking.

Sorry we cant all know as much as you do.

Originally posted by Tifozi
Honestly, a lot of people in ATS should see this video about Neil deGrasse Tyson. Enough said.

Wow I'm impressed that as a pilot you posted that even though near the end he takes a "dig" at pilots and policemen and says they are not superhuman observers who can't make mistakes but have the same human frailties as the rest of us mere mortals

But seriously, that is one of the best explanations I've ever seen. If you see a UFO, it's unidentified, then how can you all of the sudden identify it to say it's an alien spaceship? If it's unidentified, it's unidentified. And yes I'll be sure to take a souvenir off the spaceship if I'm ever abducted.

Regarding the Russians ignoring a series of secret rocket launches, the official JDEC agreement that the USA made with Russia for mutual rocket launch notification was made in 2000 but I suspect the two countries were notifying each other about rocket launches well before the official agreement. World war 3 would be no joke folks, so Tifozi is right you just don't go making a secret rocket launch and cross your fingers hoping the other site won't misinterpret it and retaliate,

Originally posted by poet1b
How hard would it be to beef up a Minuteman to boost something bigger into orbit?

I'm not sure how one would "beef up" a minuteman missile as you put it, as it is a certain size and has a certain fuel capacity. The maximum payload would depend on the altitude you wish to reach, so the maximum payload for say satellite launches would be smaller for a high, geosynchronous Earth orbit at 36,000km altitude than for a low Earth orbit satellite at only 500km altitude,

Have been doing a bit a internet scanning to see if Cernan made any kind of retraction or qualification (it would be nice to have new information regarding this "slip" of the tongue); nothing so far there but found this snippet of an old CNN interview of James Garvin the chief scientist at NASA's Goddard Space Flight Center in Maryland (at that time I suppose).

(I havent figured out the quote functionality as yet so apologies)

"GARVIN: Absolutely. They shot that, but we're just showing you what they saw. The crater you see in that field of view is the crater Shorty. And we have that in the Hubble picture.

M. O'BRIEN: All right. So, net-net, this helps you, this is just part of the process of the next step. Once the shuttle's done, we go to the moon, and we start mining titanium?

GARVIN: We go to the moon, we learn to live off the land, and then we get ready to go back to Mars.

M. O'BRIEN: Jim Garvin, thank you for that excellent and pithy, I might add, trip to the moon. It's always good to take a trip to the moon with Jim Garvin. We'll see you soon.

GARVIN: See you, Miles."


transcripts.cnn.com...

(the interview is the last near the bottom)

This is a very similar thing that was said. Is is the same kind of bad wording as Cernan ? curious.

reply to post by fieryjaguarpaw

Not to mention you contradict yourself all over the place.

Then refute me. This is a forum.

You say you belive in aliens and have seen UFOs, you claim that you know about secret technology, but then say these things are impossible.

Don't put words in my mouth. I didn't said that black projects are impossible, most of the mention here are black projects like the SR-71 and the U-2, or the F-117, or the B-2.

What I did say was that a average looking aircraft couldn't do a trip to Mars. Totally different thing.

I enjoy speculation as well, and was about to continue throwing around ideas with you and posting links to stuff, but after that last post I'll just let it go.

It's the third time you don't refute any of my points. You simply get your posts shorter and shorter, and don't argue about any of the points raised.

Thanks for repeatedly calling us all stupid idiots over and over. Go on believing you know everything just because you fly an airplane.

I'm not calling you stupid. I tried to explain to you how it is impossible for an normal aircraft to go to Mars. You're the one calling me stupid just because you think there is some black project that works that way.

Plus, I never said I know everything. I just said I know how to separate based speculation from dreams and dillusions (and this is not an insult by any means).

If you think reason and logic is an insult, that's your problem.

reply to post by fieryjaguarpaw


Again, I don't see any refutal. And just because the direct words aren't there, doesn't mean that the idea isn't.

reply to post by Arbitrageur

Wow I'm impressed that as a pilot you posted that even though near the end he takes a "dig" at pilots and policemen and says they are not superhuman observers who can't make mistakes but have the same human frailties as the rest of us mere mortals

Of course. I'm the first to say, as a pilot, that mistake are made. Otherwise, there wouldn't be aircraft crashes due to human error.

And one big mistake about pilot sightings is that many pilots(especially the ones that were in air forces) think they know everything about what they see in the sky.

It's not like that. We are experts, but an expert can also make mistakes, and can also have no idea of what is presented.

World war 3 would be no joke folks, so Tifozi is right you just don't go making a secret rocket launch and cross your fingers hoping the other site won't misinterpret it and retaliate

Exactly. Red telephones in the Oval Office and in the Kremlin. Suitcases with codes for nuclear weapons... That all shows us that everyone was on their nervous edge.

Throwing things into air in secret wasn't an option, unless it was to damage something or someone.

[edit on 4/2/10 by Tifozi]

[edit on 4/2/10 by Tifozi]

reply to post by liquidself


It would be nice for Buzz to spearhead a space revival.
Be more active.
Who cares how many slip up.
People think there are secret programs and all such nonsence
just to grab peoples attention.
How many books are out the on secret space programs.
There must be quite a lot based on the enthusiasm for so
many unsubstantiated events.
It is at long last finally refreshing to have the official NASA story
so we can't go wrong.

reply to post by Tifozi


I have responded to most if not all of your points. Please try and pay attention.

I have not been convinced that we can monitor ever inch of the sky at all times. As I've already stated if you have information that proves we can then I would love to read it so please post a link. However as Arbitrageur
has pointed out, the specifics of this tech and our capabilities are probably classified. I agree with this and it would be iresponsible to not keep it secret. You wouldn't publish your exact capabilities, allowing other nations to know your weaknesses and blind spots. But again if you can provide proof that we can detect antthing and everything at all times and in all locations then please post.

poet1b makes a good point that I've been thinking about as well but have not yet said. You could send a classified "satellite" to space telling Russia in advance when and where you plan to launch. They could be compleatly aware of this launch and it would be in compleate compliance with the treatys mentioned in previous posts, but what it actually is would be unknown. This happens all the time. Classified payloads are not uncommon at all, and they never set off WWIII. Even the space shuttle has had classified payloads

I already explained that with a space plane you could send the parts of the craft to orbit and then assemble them in space. You keep talking about how a plane couldn't go to Mars. Brick wall. I'm not saying a plane could fly all the way to Mars. I'm saying it could take the commponents of the space ship into orbit and they could be assembeld there. You said "You know what does this? The Shuttle" You are correct. And? So what? You are all but helping prove my point that it would be possible. Who knows what some of those classified payloads were... Maybe they were components of a space ship destined for Mars.

I think you missed the point I was making about the U2. I wasn't saying that it was a space plane or that it could fly to Mars. I brought it up as an example of how if we think we can get away with something then we will. Just because we have a treaty, an agreement, or even a cold war won't stop us.

I'm not calling you stupid.

Really? Go back and read your post. In just that one post I count at least 7 times you call me or other people in this thread "stupid" or "idiots".


Did I miss anything?

The way I see it is, America bragged so much about getting to the Moon first, why in hell wouldn't they want to brag about going to MARS first? Why would there be a secret mission to Mars?

Originally posted by fieryjaguarpaw
***snip***
I have not been convinced that we can monitor ever inch of the sky at all times.
***snip***
But again if you can provide proof that we can detect antthing and everything at all times and in all locations then please post.
***snip***
Did I miss anything?

You miss the fact that just because we cannot monitor everything at all times this does not mean that we suddenly have to allow for secret missions to mars and alien craft soaring our skies.

And you miss the fact that Russia as well as other nations have capabilities to detect rocket launches and when they do they follow them closely.
It would be stretching it to think of a mission to Mars having gone un-detected.

Originally posted by fieryjaguarpaw
But again if you can provide proof that we can detect antthing and everything at all times and in all locations then please post.

Even back in 1966 the capabilities were very impressive. The NORAD combat operations Center tracked objects up to 100,000 feet and above 100,000 feet to 2000 miles the space tracking network took over and they could see a 1 square meter target at 2000 nautical miles, so obviously if the target was closer, they could track smaller objects. To get some idea of this and video inside the combat operations center, move the slider to 40 minutes and start playing there:

UFO: Friend, Foe Or Fantasy-1966

You get some small sense of the hair trigger cold war mentality from watching that. As a side off-topic note you can also see IBM commercials for mainframe computers costing tens of millions of dollars that won't do half of what your PC you're using to post here will do. So consider that computer advance, and extend that to the other technological advances in our ability to monitor and track objects as time progressed, and you will have some inkling about capabilities. You can be sure the Russians had their own version of lower atmosphere and space tracking networks.

After that 5 minute piece, they roll into the Smithsonian astrophysical observatory piece about a network of cameras constantly taking pictures of the sky, which is interesting, though slightly less on-topic.

poet1b makes a good point that I've been thinking about as well but have not yet said. You could send a classified "satellite" to space telling Russia in advance when and where you plan to launch. They could be compleatly aware of this launch and it would be in compleate compliance with the treatys mentioned in previous posts, but what it actually is would be unknown. This happens all the time. Classified payloads are not uncommon at all, and they never set off WWIII. Even the space shuttle has had classified payloads

Yes this would make more sense than a secret launch, but again the payloads are relatively small, you would need a lot of launches just to carry one shuttle payload would be my guess. And even using the shuttle, quite a few payloads would be needed to get mars mission supplies in space, so the sheer number of equivalent missile launches would he pretty high for that project. Which then raises the question, why bother keeping it a secret? It's not like having a man on Mars is a threat to some other nation that we need to keep secret!

reply to post by Tifozi


Dude, I have been playing you for several posts now. I knew when I posted the "that's how they did it" line you would go all bananas, and I have been laughing at you ever since.

If you were half as intelligent as you think you are, you wouldn't have been such an easy mark.

As I stated in one of my first posts on this thread, I seriously doubt we ever sent men to Mars.

reply to post by Arbitrageur


Strap booster rockets to the first stage, and increase the size of the other stages, like they did with the Titan, which was eventually used to put large payloads into orbit.

Fudge the specs a little to cover up their capabilities.

As long as we weren't launching anything in the direction of Russia, I doubt that they would have launched a nuclear attack.

reply to post by Loki Lyesmyth


Good post, I think you are right, the second time he says, "I'm not the one to go back to the moon, or on to Mars".

Great catch

It was still fun speculating.

reply to post by fieryjaguarpaw

I have responded to most if not all of your points. Please try and pay attention.

I'm sorry, but you haven't.

Point me where you have refuted the technical details and whatnot. Maybe you're right and I missed it...

But again if you can provide proof that we can detect antthing and everything at all times and in all locations then please post.

Now you're the one distracted. I never said that they could only knew everything up in the air.

What I did say (in one of the points you didn't answer) is the logistics of such project. The USSR may not even detect the crafts and the assembly in orbit, but they WOULD detect the major activity going on with that project.

One thing is to build a black project in an hangar, and fly it fast and away from others eyes. Another completely different is to have a huge project that involves rocket launches or SEVERAL (many) trips to orbit.

Again, the example of the cuban crisis... the US detected nuclear missiles going to Cuba. And those are "simple" missiles going in a cargo ship, covered with plastics like ordinary cargo. don't think a major operation like a mission to Mars would raise some eyebrows in Russia?

They could be compleatly aware of this launch and it would be in compleate compliance with the treatys mentioned in previous posts, but what it actually is would be unknown. This happens all the time. Classified payloads are not uncommon at all, and they never set off WWIII. Even the space shuttle has had classified payloads

You're right, my friend. They are very common.

What is missing in that argument, is the fact that the Russians would not think "Oh, we know about the launch, forget about it". They wouldn't ignore it just because they knew about it.

Even if the americans notified and say "we are going to put a Hello Kitty sattelite in orbit", the Russians would still try to learn the max they could about it.

And if the US says "we are making a launch, but we are not telling you what it is", don't you think that would make the Russians more aware of it? Even I would be more curious about it being classified, and I'm not handling national security.

I already explained that with a space plane you could send the parts of the craft to orbit and then assemble them in space. You keep talking about how a plane couldn't go to Mars. Brick wall. I'm not saying a plane could fly all the way to Mars. I'm saying it could take the commponents of the space ship into orbit and they could be assembeld there.

My friend, what you consistenly fail to understand, is not that I'm not saying "they don't have a space craft that goes to orbit". I've seen a black project flying, and I honestly believe that it can do everything you talk about.

I also agree with you when we don't know what they got in hangars in secret bases.

I also agree with you that the technology to low-orbit flight is fairly simple to achieve (like with the U-2).

What I've stated, SEVERAL TIMES now, is that NO ORDINARY LOOKING AIRCRAFT can do that. Period.

You either need huge wingspan, or a huge engine, or something wild, like you see in the SR-71, the U-2, or the Space Shuttle itself.

Another close point to that, is the activity. One travel to orbit...fine, goes unnotice (although I don't think so). Two....okay, the russians have too much vodka.

But consistant trips to orbit to make a project like that, would raise too much attention. Even considering the space aircraft as possible.

Who knows what some of those classified payloads were... Maybe they were components of a space ship destined for Mars.

Some years ago, I loved to watch the MIR up in the sky. Now sometimes I look to the ISS.

Those, are close enough to a ship that can go to Mars. If we can see that even in the naked eye (assuming you know how to ID her), how can a space ship go unnoticed?

reply to post by poet1b


Good for you.

Originally posted by Oxize

Originally posted by Damian-007
I would rather believe Einstein when he says that "Time Travel" isn't possible because "Faster than the Speed Of Light" travel is not possible. I do believe that Time and Space, could one day, be bent and manipulated to cover great distances with ease but, we are a long way off that ever becomming a reality in our time.

Then you should check watch Nassim Haramein his work about Unified Field theory. Verry interesting. He getting last years alot of support by other physicists.

Faster of light is possible in vacuum. Has already been proved serveral times that some energy's could go faster then light. Why does everyone stick to Einsteins theory's. In his model are made correction to fix his model. Nassim Haramein shows this also in his concept why this model isnt working at Field Equations

[edit on 3-2-2010 by Oxize]

Ok then. While I know that "Faster Than Light Travel" could exist in another Scenario, Vacuum/Quantum levels/whetever else. Human "Faster Than Light Travel" is So Far Out it's not worth thinking about for us mere mortals.
Scientists may be trying to work out if it's possible for a human but , will they have success? Not for a long, long time, if ever. I'm sure.

For a human to travel at the speed of light would take so much energy, we just can't develope at this time with our technology. Can a Human Being actually Survive Travel at the speed of light? NO.. A Human Couldn't. Period.

We have so much trouble with just trying to send someone to the moon let alone travelling at the speed of light or faster.

reply to post by impaired


this thread has spiraled into an argument over symantics

With that being said, he didnt say Buzz wants "us" to go back, he said Buzz wants to go back.

After all the fantastic things we have learned from this site, is it really so hard to believe that the public cant comprehend the actual level of technology the govt possesses? Just think of all the black ops projects.

reply to post by Damian-007


What is the velocity of the universe? Think about it and you will get some answers to what you presume to be impossible.

Best,

N

Originally posted by HolgerTheDane

Originally posted by fieryjaguarpaw
***snip***
I have not been convinced that we can monitor ever inch of the sky at all times.
***snip***
But again if you can provide proof that we can detect antthing and everything at all times and in all locations then please post.
***snip***
Did I miss anything?

You miss the fact that just because we cannot monitor everything at all times this does not mean that we suddenly have to allow for secret missions to mars and alien craft soaring our skies.

No, you are wrong. I didn't miss that at all.

What you are missing is that I'm not saying that we definately went to Mars. I'm saying that it's not compleatly impossible.

And you miss the fact that Russia as well as other nations have capabilities to detect rocket launches and when they do they follow them closely.

Yes, I missed that "fact" can you direct me to the link that I missed?

It would be stretching it to think of a mission to Mars having gone un-detected.

Stretching it? Maybe. But not impossible.

I think you also missed that when I said "Did I miss anything?" It was in response Tifozi saying that I didn't answer every single line of some of his posts.


And for further clarification... The reason I didn't respond to all the space shuttle stuff, is because it is irellivant. I know that the shuttle can't go to the Moon or Mars or anywhere beyond LEO. I wasn't trying to say that a space plane would fly out of the atmosphere and on to Mars and back again all by itself. I thought I made that clear, so like I said all of that stuff is irrelivant in my opinion.

What other technical details? Do you want me to give you the technical designs and blue prints for my own personal secret space plane!? Surely you jest. Those documents are the heart of my secret space program. I'm not just going to post them on the net, in order for you to build your own space plane using my design. At the very least that could start a nasty legal battle. [/sarcasm]

i know this has nothing to do with the thread but alot of whats been talked about in here i'm sure has at some point strayed away from it anyway so i'lll just say this everyone before they start being so skeptical of life on other planets read book of the law by crowley written in 1904 in there you will find a nebula that only the hubble can photograph in the book its called a house and its number is 418 which is also the name of the nebula also it talks about the popularity of the wireless.... wireless wasnt popular in 1904!

READ IT!!!!

I suppose it could come across that he was saying Buzz has already been to Mars.I heard it as more of an opinion on further Mars exploration, kinda like me saying. "I would like to see us return to Mars" as a follow up mission to the one prior unmaned landing

Originally posted by hippomchippo

Originally posted by seattletruth
Wow. Are you people really not able to realize that as a country, we have "gone to Mars"?

Just because we didn't send a human there doesn't mean we haven't gone there. We took some metal out of country, formed it into a space ship, put it inside a rocket, and sent it over there.

Yes, our country has been to Mars.

Buzz aldrin isn't a country though.

It's just human ego to say such a thing. no pun intended.

Buzz did represent your Nation alright! ;-)