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 humphreysjim
An example of a conspiracy theorist's thought process:
CT: I don't trust NASA because they're always lying
SKEPTIC: What did they lie about?
CT: The moon landing was a hoax for a start
SKEPTIC: How do you know that was a hoax?
CT: It obviously was, you can't trust NASA because all they do is lie! Look at the whole Mars Curiosity nonsense, another obvious hoax
SKEPTIC: What makes you think that was a hoax???
CT: Oh come on, you don't believe lying NASA is telling the truth do you, you can't trust them and their lies. You're brainwashed, man. Do you work for lying NASA?edit on 7-8-2012 by humphreysjim because: (no reason given)
Originally posted by FoKiT
reply to post by chrisb9
NASA HAHA, Never A Straight Answer. Were the F is This.??
Originally posted by FoKiT
reply to post by humphreysjim
Omg look @ the freaking foto i posted. Even when you c the truth with your own eyes you wont believe it.
it provides scientist with a more detailed picture of Mars
Originally posted by Xaphan
People are going to scoff at what the OP is saying, but he does have a point. How do any of us KNOW for sure that what you saw was actually Mars? That could just be some remote landscape in the Arizona desert.
Originally posted by humphreysjim
Originally posted by g146541
reply to post by humphreysjim
You do press an excellent point.
I do have to say though, the most a buddy has ever asked me to loan him is a couple hundred bucks, which I gladly did without a second thought.
I have never been asked to loan or just GIVE anyone 2.5 billion however.
I don't get the point you're trying to make.
Are you suggesting that expenses are evidence against the Mars landing being legitimate? Because that would be an example of an invalid thought process.
Originally posted by Kaploink
Originally posted by Komodo
and flying to Mars to see a lifeless plantet we could have looked at thru our telescopes/Hubble.....
is productive??? How.. ?
it provides scientist with a more detailed picture of Mars. Think of it this way, during conflicts it's valuable to have people on the ground for intel. Satellites can only provide so much information. A satellite picture may show something that appears to be a weapons of mass destruction mobile unit, but a person on the ground might be able to provide information that it's actually an ice cream truck.
In the same manner, having something on the surface on Mars can clarify or disprove assumptions made using telescope/Hubble/orbiter photographs. It provides a deeper insight into the formation of our solar system and may discover evidence of past life or even currently active microbes.
Many may not see this as productive, but the problem solving required for space travel often leads to innovative products for consumer use.
edit on 7-8-2012 by Kaploink because: meh
Originally posted by g146541
reply to post by mikemck1976
Nice pic there!!!
Suppose we could get a pic of the flags on the moon?
Mars is farther away than the moon right?
We should have some good photos of the moon then.
Originally posted by Samuelis
Op is trying to illustrate the general untrustworthiness of your current government, and the very large amount of money numb-skulled taxpayers like yourself are more than glad to pay without a single grain of proof.