What's Your Beef With NASA?

reply to post by Arbitrageur

The Q&A doesn't say how long the mandated proprietary period is, so they didn't clarify that for you?

"a set period of time" are the exact words used, but how long was not specified.

I have no idea how long that will be. Regarding WHY they have such periods, I can offer you my guess, that it's probably got something to do with giving the people personally involved an opportunity to study the data and publish their research before the data is released to the public.

They are taking photos, how much study does it require to put them up on the net?
The Email was from a representative at the TYBRIN corporation, who were recently acquired by Jacobs Engineering, who have bought up lots of companies over the years.

At least that seems more likely to me than them trying to hide a fleet of alien invasion ships on its way to Earth that only shows up on infrared, or insert another alternative theory here!

I wasn't thinking alien invasion ships, but hey, ya never know! I was thinking more along the lines that they can see so much more stuff in IR that our present understanding of what's out there and how far away it is might be challenged. Anyway, it all just seems odd to me.

I did find some images from the KAO (Kuiper) project, but they are not from the main telescope, but ordinary cameras fastened to the main scope. Pretty good, but where are the telescope images? I'll keep looking.
www.musc.edu...

Originally posted by TheMalacoda
I mean, it's pretty clear that Nasa has seen some extraordinary things and covered them up.

Like THIS one... for example...







So NASA ... where are the rest of those photos?

Originally posted by ProudBird
Now......presuming this did occur, as suggested? SO what?

Silly lemming

The thread is about NASA covering up things and when I show you ONE example you say "So what?"

Typical skeptic :shk:

Hey Zorgon you never answered my question.

Was this image you posted of the Mars Polar Lander team after it appeared to have crashed or something?
www.abovetopsecret.com...

That was my best guess but I don't really know.

Originally posted by GaryN
They are taking photos, how much study does it require to put them up on the net?
The Email was from a representative at the TYBRIN corporation, who were recently acquired by Jacobs Engineering, who have bought up lots of companies over the years.

Obviously it doesn't take much time to put them on the net, but apparently they don't want you to see them and publish your paper about them before they publish theirs, or something like that, is my guess.

Originally posted by DJW001
And if your sources knew how to do their research properly, it would be possible to find out one way or the other. Since your sources either do not know how to do proper research, or do know how to do proper research and are deliberately trying impede such research, I consider them unreliable and the story almost certainly false.

I don't know if i should believe your claims, you could be lying, even lying to yourself, maybe not intentionally. Your claims are still based on your own speculation/opinion with nothing to back it up.
I told you that you have the opportunity to ask what the word 'anonymous' means. Let me give you a an example of another person who prefer to be anonymous like for example a certain General who told Steve Pieczenik that 911 was an inside job. If you listen to this interview with Steve Pieczenik (from about 8:50) then he says that a certain famous General told him that 911 was an inside job, and want to protect that general by not revealing General's name www.abovetopsecret.com... , untill the Grand Jury. Some might say that it would be easy to point that General out so CIA or another agency could interrogate him, but it wouldn't be that easy if the General keep his mouth shut, and there are more than just one General. And it's speculated that some 911 witnesses were murdered, so it wouldn't be surprising if this certain General prefer to be anonymous. And then i previously mentioned some researchers visiting Russia were a Ministry of Defense prefer to be anonymous when they interviewed that certain Ministry of Defense, were talked about Cosmonauts' UFO encounters in space, and astronauts' UFO sighting on the Moon. Do you know why some people prefer to be anonymous, 'DJW001' ?

At least now you're admitting that you don't know whether the story is true or not.

You don't know what i know.

Originally posted by zorgon

It looks like there is a jpeg error next to that can.

I will seek a better version.

reply to post by Anunaki10

I don't know if i should believe your claims, you could be lying, even lying to yourself, maybe not intentionally. Your claims are still based on your own speculation/opinion with nothing to back it up.
I told you that you have the opportunity to ask what the word 'anonymous' means.

I'm not the one making any claims, you are. Do you really think that you're making your case stronger by citing an example of an anonymous "Truther General?" Give me enough information, and I can confirm or refute the stories you're telling. If you can't provide me with any, I have no choice but to assume they are not true.

Originally posted by zorgon
Like THIS one... for example...

So NASA ... where are the rest of those photos?

Yeah, where are the rest of these photos? A certain astronaut James McDevitt reportedly said that the photo of a UFO put on public by NASA was not the UFO he saw. And about X-15 UFO sightings www.abovetopsecret.com...

We have the 3.5 sec VHS tape of Joseph Walker's X-15 Plane Aft Camera video footage of two disc shaped AKA UFOs flying by Joseph Walker's X-15 Plane.

The tape was received from a women in Denver Colorado May 2009. She claims to be the daughter of a TV producer in Los Angeles who, during 1980, assisted in producing a TV program that AIRED on KTLA Channel 5 Titled 'UFOs'. At the end of this program was video play of these two disc shaped objects approximately 100 yards from the X-15 Plane. Very close up images of the fly by with earth atmosphere background. The two disc shaped objects appeared to be SPINNING and banking down toward lower atmosphere and away from the X-15 Plane. Color was METALLIC. Sun reflections were noticeable and in plane sight. The footage lasted 3.5 sec on edit board. Entry from left screen to right downward and fade to black by original editing producer. The fly by was shown four times, twice in slow motion for viewers.

www.abovetopsecret.com...

UFOs filmed

During a design altitude flight on April 30, 1962, two disk-shaped objects overlook the X-15 at an altitude of approximately 200,000 feet, while at a speed of approximately 3,400 mph. The X-15 had been launched from the vicinity of Mud Lake, Nevada, with Joseph A. Walker, NASA, at the controls. At the time of the sighting he was climbing at a pitch angle of approximately 30 degrees.

Walker sighted the two aircrafts passing overhead and reported to the NASA FRC Control Room at Edwards, >>Two UFOs just passed overhead!

Originally posted by RSF77
Did NASA put up any sort of a fight when the space shuttle was decommissioned?
What were their thoughts about this?

Good point

Maybe they didn't fight it because they had something better?





Or they were told they can't play anymore

Originally posted by Arbitrageur
Was this image you posted of the Mars Polar Lander team after it appeared to have crashed or something?
www.abovetopsecret.com...

That was my best guess but I don't really know.

Sorry didn't see a question to me... that post was to furbs

Well that photo of the not so smart NASA staff... When I got it it came with that pepsi can added. Jim Oberg told me where that one came from... might have been the Polar Lander...

The photo above is a group of NASA scientists wondering why the Mars Rover failed to operate properly. The problem is obvious to me. This photo of the Mars Rover scientists appeared with the story in a major news magazine a few years ago. I printed the picture, added my comments, and sent it to Coca Cola headquarters in Atlanta. In a short time I received a letter expressing their delight and stating that my submission now adorned one of the bulletin boards at the corporate offices. Enclosed were coupons for a couple of cases of Coke.
- by Ronn Wood

So the point was that Coca Cola thought it was cute They sure don't look like rocket scientists

Originally posted by Razimus
now we've been downgraded due to the budget to be forced to pay Russia as a taxi service.

Yeah and Russia is going into assembly line mode to meet that demand ESA, Bigelow... all using Russian ships





Sundancer Bigelow Aerospace

Serviced by the Russians... modules launched by the Russians because NASA told Bigelow "NO!" So now Bigelow says "NASA = No Access to Space for Americans"

Pizza Hut, Radio Shack, LEGO, Radio Shack all paying millions to the Russian space program... and as you said tourists spending 20 million for 10 days on ISS... NASA says "NO!"


ESA Expedition 9 arriving in a Russian ship and two Russian ships already docked at ISS Picture taken from Atlanta

So ya want a beef with NASA that doesn't involve UFO's or Aliens?

How about they are selling us out to the Russians?

Well if they were SMART they would hire Buzz Aldrin to do the job... but he is already working with China on antigravity and gravity waves so maybe he will sell THEM his Starbooster

OH and Mircorp is offering private space stations for sale :S

MirCorp Reaches Agreement for Development of the World's First Private Space Station; New Commercial Orbital Facility to Accommodate Up to Three Visitors for 20-day Stays

www.thelivingmoon.com...

Originally posted by DJW001
reply to post by assspeaker

 

Using the national debt clock at www.usdebtclock.org... and looking at our total assets/vs liabilities, I see us as broke. Once again, if we liquidate our assets, we will be broken and broke.
Please explain your logic and provide some kind of source backing it up. Please.

I already have, but I can see that I need to lay out a folksy metaphor to counter your Tea Party rhetoric. The United States still has a limitless line of credit. It has not used that credit line wisely in the past, and now it's out of a job.

First, I do not get my ideals from the Tea Party.

Second, Thank you for proving MY point.
We have ruined the US housing market due to CREDIT.

Third, what NASA does for us is not all bad at all.
BUT we, can't afford to send 2 billion dollar probes to mars when people are starving here on our soil, not to mention how much that money could have helped those countries without these kind of assets to blow.

Fourth, I'm done with this thread. Logic not found.

Originally posted by DJW001
I'm not the one making any claims, you are.

Wrong. I didn't make any claim whether the conversation between Neil Armstrong and the 'anonymous' professor is true or not, but you're the one who claim it's not true with nothing to prove it, and again, i don't know if i should believe your claims, you could be lying, even lying to yourself, maybe not intentionally. Your claims are still based on YOUR OWN speculation/opinion with nothing to back it up...

Do you really think that you're making your case stronger by citing an example of an anonymous "Truther General?"

I showed you some examples, so let me repeat it to you: I told you that you have the opportunity to ask what the word 'anonymous' means. Let me show you an example of another person who prefer to be anonymous like for example a certain General who told Steve Pieczenik that 911 was an inside job. If you listen to that interview with Steve Pieczenik (from about 8:50 as previously provided), then he says that a certain famous General told him that 911 was an inside job, and want to protect that General by not revealing his name, untill the Grand Jury. Some might say that it would be easy to point that General out so the CIA or another agency could interrogate him, but it wouldn't be that easy if the General keep his mouth shut, and there are more than just one General. And it's speculated that some 911 witnesses were murdered, so it wouldn't be surprising if this certain General prefer to be anonymous. And then i previously mentioned that some researchers were visiting Russia were a Ministry of Defense prefer to be anonymous when they interviewed that certain Ministry of Defense, were they talked about Cosmonauts' UFO encounters in space, and the astronauts' UFO sighting on the Moon.

I'm gonna ask you again, do you know why some people prefer to be anonymous?

Let me give you a hint, in this conference former NASA employee Donna Hare explained that the astronauts were ordered NOT to speak openly about the UFOs they encountered on the Moon

reply to post by assspeaker

First, I do not get my ideals from the Tea Party.

All you kept saying was "We're broke! We're broke!" I must admit I have no idea what your ideals are based on that.

Second, Thank you for proving MY point.
We have ruined the US housing market due to CREDIT.

What exactly was your point then? In each of my posts I pointed out how credit could be used wisely or foolishly. The housing market was ruined because it was a bubble caused by the misuse of credit, aided and abetted by a financial industry that was willing to take outrageous risks in the hope of outrageous profits, knowing that their losses would be placed on others. None of this has anything to do with NASA.

Third, what NASA does for us is not all bad at all.
BUT we, can't afford to send 2 billion dollar probes to mars when people are starving here on our soil, not to mention how much that money could have helped those countries without these kind of assets to blow.

People are not starving because NASA is sending a probe to Mars. People are starving due to societal indifference. In the meantime, those billions of dollars are keeping trained personnel employed. Hopefully, they will spend their paychecks on American made products.

Fourth, I'm done with this thread. Logic not found.

When you do find logic, please come back and continue the discussion.

reply to post by Anunaki10

I'm gonna ask you again, do you know why some people prefer to be anonymous?

Hmmm... my handle here is DJW001. Do you think that is my given name? There are many legitimate reasons why someone might wish to remain anonymous. On the other hand, by attributing a story to an "anonymous" source, a fabricator can block any attempt to verify it. Which seems more likely in this case? At the very least, the person circulating this story could have named a specific NASA symposium. This would make it possible to confirm that Armstrong was present without revealing the identity of the source. The story doesn't even have this going for it, so it can only be regarded as weak.

Let me give you a hint, in this conference former NASA employee Donna Hare explained that the astronauts were ordered NOT to speak openly about the UFOs they encountered on the Moon

Discussed at length here:

www.abovetopsecret.com...

Did the Disclosure Project sell T-shirts and DVDs at this conference?

Originally posted by DJW001
Hmmm... my handle here is DJW001. Do you think that is my given name?

Hmmm... Could 'D' be the First Letter for your First name? Could 'J' be the First Letter for your Middle name? Could 'W' be the First Letter for your Last name? Could '001' be the year you was born, born in the year 2001?

There are many legitimate reasons why someone might wish to remain anonymous.

That's right, there are good reasons why some want to be anonymous. For example Cliff Stone and Bob Dean claim to be threatened in order to keep them silent, and Cliff Stone told that a "Shadow Government"-agent looking dude pointed a gun at his head saying >>Look, we can make it look like a training accident if you don't keep your mouth shut!What are you gonna say in there?>I'M GONNA SAY A LOT!!!

reply to post by Anunaki10

Maybe the source forgot to mention the specific NASA symposium? It could be possible. Or could it be possible that the source didn't want to reveal the specific symposium, because the source is afraid it would cause all professors to be interrogated by CIA or other intelligence agencies, interrogate professors who participated in that specific symposium? Maybe possible. We can always speculate why the source didn't mention the specific symposium.

And yet the anonymous source that revealed that Joseph Walker said that looking for UFOs was one of his missions while flying the X-15 mentioned the conference at which he supposedly made that statement. To the best of my knowledge, there were no reprisals. Walker made the statement at the Second Conference on the Peaceful Uses of Space in Seattle Washington, 1962. We know that there was such a conference, and that Walker was in attendance:

www.scribd.com...

Although the paper submitted by the X-15 pilots makes no mention of UFOs, it is at least possible that, during a question and answer period, Walker may have made such a statement. In fact, given that in 1961 UFOs were still considered to be an actual security risk, the statement may have been true! If NASA had rocket planes operating at the edge of space, perhaps the Soviets did, too.

Evaluating the two stories, it is easy to track one of them down and determine that it contains at least a grain of truth. The other is a bare faced assertion with absolutely no corroboration whatsoever; indeed, it seems to be intentionally vague to make fact checking impossible. You're welcome to believe it, but it is entirely a belief based on faith. It is at this point that someone usually offers to sell you a bridge.

So long as we're still on the subject of the X-15 and UFOs, you do realize that Walker's description in "Life Magazine" describes the object as being like a sheet of paper. Those must be some awfully short alien pilots. In retrospect, now that we have more experience in spacefaring, it is perfectly obvious that the mysterious white sheet is the frozen water condensation from the belly of the plane, caused by the extreme cold of the LOX tanks. As the spaceplane neared the apogee of its parabolic arc, the ice may have broken free and traveled parallel to the craft. Since an ice sheet has a larger surface area in relation to its mass, it would have had more air resistance than the streamlined plane, and been slowed more by the rarefied atmosphere at that altitude. This is consistent with the fact that in the photographs, the "objects" are falling away behind the craft. But you probably knew I was going to say that, didn't you?

Edit to add: Bear in mind that the X-15 was a joint project between NACA/NASA and the US military. There are many reasons why so much of the X-15 archives remain classified, none of them having to do with UFO. Much of the technology developed for the X-15 would eventually be incorporated into "Project Oxcart," now known as the SR-71 "Blackbird" spy plane. Nevertheless, if you know of a particular UFO sighting and can specify the flight, you can always make a FOIA request for the film.

reply to post by zorgon


While I maybe a "skeptic", I don't jump on to every NASA bash-fest just because all of the other lemmings are, too.

The thread is about NASA covering up things and when I show you ONE example you say "So what?"

Typical skeptic

There are literally thousands of things not "disclosed" at the time, that occurred during the Space Program. And, as I pointed out this Apollo 12 S-EVA story is actually rather old "news". Thing is, it is not all that significant. Interesting from a purely technical aspect, though of course.

If you only knew the sorts of things that go on "behind the scenes" at, say...just a commercial airline? Out of context, and outside one's area of expertise, they would seem "frightening", to the average layperson perhaps. But, in-context, and understood by professionals, there is an entirely different understanding.

Originally posted by Anunaki10
Cliff Stone and Bob Dean apparently are brave enough to come forward, brave like former Navy Seal Jesse Ventura who are brave enough to go against CIA and other intelligence agencies, while others don't wish to come forward and prefer to be anonymous.

wiki.answers.com...
Is Jesse Ventura a Navy Seal?

Answer:
Minnesota Governor Jesse Ventura was NOT, nor was he ever, a Navy SEAL; though part of Underwater Demolition Team 12, he left the Navy 8 years before they were combined with the SEAL Teams, and SEAL status was not retroactive. The 2 NEC's for each are different as well. Ventura, though on active duty during the Vietnam War, never saw any combat action.

Ventura's claim to be a former member of SEAL Team 1 was exposed as a lie by former Navy SEAL Commander Bill Salisbury in his article published in the San Diego Reader. The link to the text of the original article is below.

cursor.org...

Originally posted by JimOberg
[wiki.answers.com...
Is Jesse Ventura a Navy Seal?

Answer:
Minnesota Governor Jesse Ventura was NOT, nor was he ever, a Navy SEAL; though part of Underwater Demolition Team 12, he left the Navy 8 years before they were combined with the SEAL Teams, and SEAL status was not retroactive. The 2 NEC's for each are different as well. Ventura, though on active duty during the Vietnam War, never saw any combat action.

Ventura's claim to be a former member of SEAL Team 1 was exposed as a lie by former Navy SEAL Commander Bill Salisbury in his article published in the San Diego Reader. The link to the text of the original article is below.

cursor.org...

Good find. Question is, are these claims made in order to discredit Jesse Ventura? Good question.
Take a look at for example this JFK conspiracy theory TV program with Jesse Ventura were Jesse Ventura says >>Secrets, Cover-ups, Corruption. You think you know the whole story? Think again. I've been Governor, a Navy Seal, a Fighter, iv'e heard things that will blow your mind, and now i think it's time you get the whole storyYou were a Navy SEAL.>That’s right. I was water boarded, so I know — at SERE School, Survival Escape Resistance Evasion. It was a required school you had to go to prior to going into the combat zone, which in my era was Vietnam. All of us had to go there. We were all, in essence — every one of us was water boarded. It is torture.>What was it like?>It’s drowning. It gives you the complete sensation that you are drowning. It is no good, because you — I’ll put it to you this way, you give me a water board, Dick Cheney and one hour, and I’ll have him confess to the Sharon Tate murders.