Why is some of the NASA footage so strange to some?

Why is it no one who believes this can answer a simple straight forward question? If I had a pound for every time I've asked this question without a reasonable logical common sense reply in return from those who believe there's a cover up etc, I'd have about, eeer, 14 pounds by now

seriously-- Here's the question:

if what we are really seeing in the footage in question really is that of something the authorities 'do not' want us to see (due to a cover up of immense magnitude as many feel is the case) then why is the footage made available for all to see?

peace.

dej...

reply to post by dejarmaX


So it can be officially denied.
Nuff said,

Because a lot of conspiracy theorists are incapable of logic and rationality. They just want a conspiracy.

They will say NASA is an unreliable source, but in the same breath will source a NASA photo as "proof," and point at an image artifact and claim it is a secret alien base or a UFO.

Very bizarre thought process.

reply to post by dejarmaX


The authorities doubt UFOs would fly across the camera. It's just a really unlikely thing to happen. And if viewers do see unknown entities on footage of live feeds from satellites for example, then they would try to dismiss it as being 'known entities' such as ice particles, glitches, asteroids etc.

But some of the UFO NASA footage that I've seen where the UFOs have gone such amazing speeds, turning suddenly, basically defying known physics, cannot be explained with those 'known entities'.

reply to post by paradox


Yea but how do you know everything that we see is everything that they see?
Maybe they only let us see what they want us to see to give the illusion that they arent hiding anything

Originally posted by NowanKenubi
reply to post by dejarmaX

 

So it can be officially denied.
Nuff said,

no, sorry all due respect but not 'Nuff said'! how does that work; explain

Not to mention nobody considers that a coverup...doesn't make sense. If there are aliens, i doubt they care to only talk to our leaders, or even know how to tell who's who. Not to mention there would be a massive language barrier, who knows if they would even use verbal communication? But alas, logic isn't important in ufo discussion.

How about the case of Martin Stubbs. I think NASA stopped the direct feeds from most people, yet he was still able to gather the information and compile quite a story. But, I guess I still saw it and NASA wanted me to see it.

I don't know, but I think the Stubbs footage is perhaps the most compelling for "oddities."

For those of you who never want to look at life the same way again, I present:



Actually, it's pretty dry stuff. But, if you are into this type of thing, then it should be right up your alley. It explains how he came about the footage.

Originally posted by paradox
Because a lot of conspiracy theorists are incapable of logic and rationality. They just want a conspiracy.

They will say NASA is an unreliable source, but in the same breath will source a NASA photo as "proof," and point at an image artifact and claim it is a secret alien base or a UFO.

Very bizarre thought process.

edit on 5-25-12 by paradox because: (no reason given)

perfectly put... good words

Part of the reason I'm on this site is to talk about and talk to other people around the world who have seen the crazy stuff I have seen. I have no idea why some of you people come here and just say "FAKE" to every single thing that is "off the record" or "unofficially real".

It's you people that can't bridge the gap from that tiny box of perception you've had all your lives, to a larger box (still a box) but filled with far more possibilities.

Black triangle craft are 1000% real. I have seen them from only a few 100 feet away, they are fast and they are silent for the most part. Spend more time outside at night, you'll see some eventually.

Originally posted by alyoshablue
It explains how he came about the footage.

'allegedly"" came about the footage I'm sure you mean

Originally posted by Juggernog
reply to post by paradox

 

Yea but how do you know everything that we see is everything that they see?
Maybe they only let us see what they want us to see to give the illusion that they arent hiding anything

They might be privy to information that we aren't aware of. I can't say that they aren't because none of us can know for sure.

But without any proof of that, or any proof of them ever lying, it's not logical to say they are unreliable and form a biased opinion against them. So I will stick with Occam's razor, and say that instead of huge top secret information being kept from almost 7 billion people on the planet, that conspiracy theorists are wishful thinkers and love a good story line.

You have to remember, we are all human. We all share the same desires in the long run. I'd say a person wasn't normal if they didn't hope that there was intelligent life outside of our planet. We don't want to be alone. We don't want to think that we're all there is to the universe. Ask yourself, would you be able to hide knowledge like that?

reply to post by dejarmaX


Ahh ... no. I remote viewed the whole thing afterwards. It's legit.

Got me there - allegedly. Thanks for pointing that out.

Originally posted by JibbyJedi


Black triangle craft are 1000% real. I have seen them from only a few 100 feet away, they are fast and they are silent for the most part. Spend more time outside at night, you'll see some eventually.

Yeah, doesn't mean to say they are alien in origin though, does it!? People witness strange things in life every day... They're only strange because those witnessing them don't know what it/ they are... Most people when presented for the first time an amazing trick stand back in amazement saying: 'wow, how the fek did you do that' !?!? If/when they finally find out how it's done the normal reaction is something like: 'geeese is that it?! So simple" ! The vast majority of people I know do not realize satellites are visible in the sky with the naked eye, as an example.. If you don't know this & see one then you'll get the normal human reaction: 'wow, what the feks that' !?

Sorry, I had to go put the kids in bed.

What I meant is that if its in your face, it can be officially denied. If its denied, its not "top secret"...
If its not top secret, its not worthy. And it works for the majority.

This prevents intelligent discussions about said subject, or limits its possibilities.

An example of denying; it is the reflection of such planet on our atmosphere. Many will be satisfied with this.

And as long as its OK for the majority... the trick is applied.

Originally posted by NowanKenubi
Sorry, I had to go put the kids in bed.

What I meant is that if its in your face, it can be officially denied. If its denied, its not "top secret"...
If its not top secret, its not worthy. And it works for the majority.

This prevents intelligent discussions about said subject, or limits its possibilities.

An example of denying; it is the reflection of such planet on our atmosphere. Many will be satisfied with this.

And as long as its OK for the majority... the trick is applied.

If one has something to hide, the last thing you want is having attention drawn to the situation in any way shape or form.... It's like someone selling drugs; the last thing they would do is announce it to the world.. That would be stupid, wouldn't it!? If they did; how would denying it, when approached, be an advantage? Your rebuttal I've seen a thousand times before & still to this day baffles me! But to be honest I expect no more when I see (those who feel something strange is going on) trying to answer this question.. All due respect.

Peace.

dej...

Originally posted by alyoshablue
How about the case of Martin Stubbs. I think NASA stopped the direct feeds from most people, yet he was still able to gather the information and compile quite a story. But, I guess I still saw it and NASA wanted me to see it.

I don't know, but I think the Stubbs footage is perhaps the most compelling for "oddities."

For those of you who never want to look at life the same way again, I present:

Actually, it's pretty dry stuff. But, if you are into this type of thing, then it should be right up your alley. It explains how he came about the footage.

As far as I can determine, NASA never noticed Stubbs. He is convinced they performed all sorts of avoidance and coverup measures to foil him, but he brags he was too smart for them. He enjoys thinking that but his claims are silly -- NASA once switched commercial rebroadcast contracts, and to Stubbs, that was a secret shift a communications satellite aimed at avoiding HIM.. NASA released all the videos on a public-access satellite, and Stubbs calls the transmissions 'secret' -- why he lies about the security level, it's not for me to say.

And when he reposts the videos, note how he usually withholds the date/time the scenes occurred, so independent investigators are unable to check up on the context of the original scenes. Carelessness -- or coverup?

Originally posted by NowanKenubi
Sorry, I had to go put the kids in bed.

What I meant is that if its in your face, it can be officially denied. If its denied, its not "top secret"...
If its not top secret, its not worthy. And it works for the majority.

This prevents intelligent discussions about said subject, or limits its possibilities.

An example of denying; it is the reflection of such planet on our atmosphere. Many will be satisfied with this.

And as long as its OK for the majority... the trick is applied.

I've never heard anybody use the 'reflection of a planet on our atmosphere" excuse, not even the most rabid debunker.

You just imagined that as a satire, right?

You're not expecting anyone to believe it's true, are you?

So you're using mockery as an argumentative gimmick, eh?

How does that contribute to the discussion?

reply to post by dejarmaX


I never said aliens were driving those triangles. Skeptics always go to the "alien" aspect when eye witnesses tell their stories, why is that? I do believe we aren't alone, pretty obvious math there, but if I have tickled a belly of a giant triangle craft with anti-gravity abilities, then NASA sure as Hell knows they exist too.

That's my biggest problem with NASA. They are "withholding" knowledge of extremely valuable and important technology from us all.

Every time someone dies in a car accident, plane crash, train wreck, etc., I cringe with anger knowing those deaths could have been prevented IF these technologies were released for the public. Automobiles haven't changed much in 100 years, planes are being used until they die of old age, the companies that own the old technologies are benching the new until resources dry out. To me, that's the same as murder.

Originally posted by dejarmaX


Why is it no one who believes this can answer a simple straight forward question? If I had a pound for every time I've asked this question without a reasonable logical common sense reply in return from those who believe there's a cover up etc, I'd have about, eeer, 14 pounds by now

seriously-- Here's the question:

if what we are really seeing in the footage in question really is that of something the authorities 'do not' want us to see (due to a cover up of immense magnitude as many feel is the case) then why is the footage made available for all to see?

peace.

dej...

I don't think there is a straight answer to that basically because there are many things envolved.

Please let me try some thoughts here:

1. If Nasa (or others) is given the official position to 'deny' or 'corroborate' such a subject then NASA retains more ''power'. Public losing interest on this means less power for the agency. So I think it's their goal to keep it 'not to tight, not too loose'. Let's feed the cats but still keep then hungry..

2. Let's not forget this 'power' can save a president's mandate... Diverge the people's attention from a financial crisis and so on.. The NASA's strategy allows it to keep the cards ready to be open public whenever the situation calls for it.

3. Denying is 'simpler', very effective so far and very 'cheap'. It saves a lot on logistics and personnel to filter everything NASA produces. And...

4. The majority of employees at NASA surely don't know the whole picture, since they don't 'need to know', right? So it's an odd situation to ask a large group of people to sensor something that is officially denied and it's officially not happening... Official ridiculous explanations are a lot simpler...

5. What they don't really want us to see we are already 'not' seeing

6. Finally... Do they really care??