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.
I do think NASA would share findings, because I can't see a reason for them to hide it. They put a LOT of money in to what they do, I can't see anyone benefiting from them hiding things. I'm certain that they do have confidential information, but I think that anything this big would be made public.
Originally posted by SpearMint
Originally posted by Zarniwoop
There has been a lot of evidence for artificial structures on our moon. No "smoking guns" in my opinion.
However, the LROC pictures, and all other lunar photos, are hand-picked for public consumption.
My question is... If NASA did find, or ever will find a smoking gun, would they share it with the public?
My guess is "no".
I don't think it's outside the realm of possibility, if you think about how old that rock is, that some eye-openers could be up there.
I do think NASA would share findings, because I can't see a reason for them to hide it. They put a LOT of money in to what they do, I can't see anyone benefiting from them hiding things. I'm certain that they do have confidential information, but I think that anything this big would be made public.
Link
NASA's planned moon base announced last week could pave the way for deeper space exploration to Mars, but one of the biggest beneficiaries may be the terrestrial energy industry.
Originally posted by GiangyNY
reply to post by MarioOnTheFly
Funny how the coordinates of the alien spaceship of the alleged Apollo20 mission are not in high-def, while a little bit on its right we have a much clearer resolution...
Check lat:-17.3 Lon:117.62
Originally posted by PrimitiveWorld
reply to post by wmd_2008
The moon is artificial and its more obvious the more you know about it.
edit on 28-8-2012 by PrimitiveWorld because: (no reason given)
What's the big difference, meaning how would NASA's missions be different if they were looking for intelligent life, and more importantly, why would they do so when it seems unlikely?
Originally posted by Devino
Also keep in mind that it is NASA's directive to explore other worlds and the space around them, not look for intelligent life. There is a big difference between these two. Any directive looking for life is at best organic chemicals or microbiological.
They don't specify any intelligence level. In the 1950s intelligent life on Mars or Venus wasn't yet ruled out, but today it seems unlikely they would find intelligent life.
Goal 2: Explore for past or present habitable environments, prebiotic chemistry and signs of life elsewhere in our Solar System.
Determine any chemical precursors of life and any ancient habitable climates in the Solar System, and characterize any extinct life, potential habitats, and any extant life on Mars and in the outer Solar System.
Gotta agree that defense agencies like advanced tech and don't want to share it and give away the advantage or "gasp" fall behind.
Originally posted by inverslyproportional
2 what good would come from exposing tech originating outside earth? So the north koreans can use it to make a super weapon? Or maybe iran?...
Also I don't believe aliens have ever come to earth, as it is a long trip, and the requisite energy would be nearly infinite. That doesn't mean I am against all possible proof though either, a closed mind gets you.