Advertisement
If you have a new account but are having problems posting or verifying your account, please email us on hello@boards.ie for help. Thanks :)
Hello all! Please ensure that you are posting a new thread or question in the appropriate forum. The Feedback forum is overwhelmed with questions that are having to be moved elsewhere. If you need help to verify your account contact hello@boards.ie
Hi all! We have been experiencing an issue on site where threads have been missing the latest postings. The platform host Vanilla are working on this issue. A workaround that has been used by some is to navigate back from 1 to 10+ pages to re-sync the thread and this will then show the latest posts. Thanks, Mike.
Hi there,
There is an issue with role permissions that is being worked on at the moment.
If you are having trouble with access or permissions on regional forums please post here to get access: https://www.boards.ie/discussion/2058365403/you-do-not-have-permission-for-that#latest

Intelligent life cover-up!?.[ET/UFO]

13»

Comments

  • #102
    Mahatma coat
    Banned (with Prison Access) Posts: 6,869 ✭✭✭Mahatma coat


    you believe, ET was here, but no contact.
    King Mob wrote: »
    Because kernel seemingly is taking Buzz's testimony about seeing an object during the mission as fact.
    If that is the case, why is Buzz Aldrin's testimony about walking on the moon not as trustworthy?

    In fairness Kernel, he has ya here :P

    there are a lot of lies in the space program there were shedloads of things coverd up, there may even be an overarching conspiracy behind it that we havent even begun to comprehend yet, but you seem to be hung up on what I myself would consider might have been a 'disinfo' campaign started for some reason in the seventies.

    you should ask questions about the space program, some of your questions are bang on the money, some are miles off.

    I believe that Armstrong and Aldrin were the first, to land on the moon and return safely using a majority of human invented technology

    there were other missions both public and Top Secret.

    you are lookin in the wrong areas for the coverup.

    check out the radio transmissions.


  • #103
    jonbravo
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 635 ✭✭✭jonbravo


    you want to believe!?
    Blue_Lagoon wrote: »
    If this was a credible observation, then:
    • Why do many scholarly journal articles from NASA funded research projects specify "limitations" of the research, or areas that need further study?
    • Why do Ph.D. dissertations with astrophysics or related space exploration research topics originating from the California Institute of Technology's Jet Propulsion Labs (JPL is funded by NASA), normally have a "limitations of the research" in their data analysis or results chapters, as well as a suggestions for future research section in their concluding chapter?
    • Why do college textbooks that explore topics related to space exploration often mention what is not known, in addition to what is suggested from research as factual? A lot of what has been accepted as known has come from NASA funded research, as well as mentioning future projects NASA intends to conduct about the unknown.
    • Why? Because the science of discovery is typically a collaborative effort over time in that it gradually builds on the shoulders of those who proceeded them. That's why literature reviews are typically required briefly in scholarly journal articles, and entire chapters of literature review in dissertations. Things missing are often disclosed in the literature reviews, which in turn justify the new research and funding.
    • Why? Because many graduate students who seek a research topic will begin with a literature search of both dissertations and scholarly journals to find where suggestions for future research have been published. These suggestions cover what is not known, encouraging research that will someday reveal, describe, explain, and predict phenomena.
    • Why does Nova, Nature, National Geographic, and other science-based programmes mention frequently to the public what is not known, many of these unknowns based upon NASA findings?
    • Why don't you visit a science library at a major university to see that what is not known about space exploration or life on other planets are openly discussed, and not being hidden from any members of the public who can read at a college level?
    Where did you get this 50% statistic? Source? Link? Secondly, who is "THEY?" I hear about "THEY" all the time on this forum, but I really don't know who "THEY" are.

    Well, I can remember my cousin (who has been a NASA funded scientist at Cal Tech's JPL for decades), often stating that he and his colleagues on "The Hill"* believe that someday life forms will be discovered on other planets. This is something that really excites them. The sending of NASA funded probes to other planets (which they have been doing for years) and discovering life is one of the reasons he pursues his career in space exploration at JPL.

    *Most of JPL's NASA funded labs are located on what they nick named "The Hill" in a city nearby to Pasadena called La Canada, California, only about 50 miles from where I currently live. I've visited JPL and Cal Tech several times, and hung-out in Cal Tech's Pasadena libraries freely snooping through science journals, dissertations, and books of interest, and no one representing "THEY" has ever tried to limit or censor what I read. Cal Tech in Pasadena is an open campus, meaning that the public can just wander onto campus and into their libraries.
    Why try dis-credit my opinion becuse it is just that [my opinion]!?

    Dont get me wrong im not pointing a finger at NASA and saying its THERE fault their is a cover-up, we will never find the answer to **** intelligent life outside earth**** without NASA.
    And as i've also pointed out i don't believe NASA hold the power to tell the world about extraterrestrial life, even if THEY did find life.

    the reason i believe that is.....
    A]There would be a painstaking process of checking and verification.

    B]It would certainly be the greatest discovery of all time, eclipsing the findings of newton ,darwin and einstein combined.[caution would be used or AKA a cover-up].

    C]The knowledge that we are not alone would affect people's psyche and totally transform our world view.

    D]Once proven intelligent[ET], scientists top priority would be to interpret the being or [ET].the impact on our society would depend upon its correct interpretation and its intention [We would not be dealing with moon dust or rocks]........

    Now the statistic come's from.......google book...
    The book's name ; Looking for life, searching the solar system by paul clancy,andre brack,G*****? Horneck.
    Chapter; After discovery/life as a cosmic phenomenon. page 133...

    i didn't just make it up as you can see!, thats not to say paul clancy and co... didn't:D.


  • #104
    jonbravo
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 635 ✭✭✭jonbravo


    you want to believe!?
    King Mob wrote: »
    What do you mean by that? Why would any scientist be hostile?
    It would be the single greatest discovery ever.
    sorry king mob i forgot to answer your question....
    hostile to the fact that there could ever be intelligent life other then us human being's.[if we did find ET].


  • #105
    King Mob
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 25,323 ✭✭✭✭King Mob


    jonbravo wrote: »
    sorry king mob i forgot to answer your question....
    hostile to the fact that there could ever be intelligent life other then us human being's.[if we did find ET].

    And why would they be hostile?
    Would they just go mad and start rioting?


  • #106
    Undergod
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 2,858 ✭✭✭Undergod


    jonbravo wrote: »
    [caution would be used or AKA a cover-up].

    caution does not equal cover-up.


  • #107
    King Mob
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 25,323 ✭✭✭✭King Mob


    Mahatma coat wrote: »
    I believe that Armstrong and Aldrin were the first, to land on the moon and return safely using a majority of human invented technology
    And which parts of the Apollo spacecraft weren't human invented technology exactly?
    ANd how do you know they weren't human invented?


  • #108
    jonbravo
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 635 ✭✭✭jonbravo


    you want to believe!?
    King Mob wrote: »
    And why would they be hostile?
    Would they just go mad and start rioting?
    i have already addressed that question. take what you will from it...again i didnt make it up thats what i read.


  • #109
    jonbravo
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 635 ✭✭✭jonbravo


    you want to believe!?
    Undergod wrote: »
    caution does not equal cover-up.
    its not like i said it did equal a cover-up........again, take what you will from it!


  • #110
    Undergod
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 2,858 ✭✭✭Undergod


    jonbravo wrote: »
    its not like i said it did equal a cover-up........again, take what you will from it!

    What? Yes it is.
    jonbravo wrote:
    [caution would be used or AKA a cover-up].

    AKA means "Also Known As". Caution would be used or also known as a cover-up. That's what you said.


  • #111
    jonbravo
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 635 ✭✭✭jonbravo


    you want to believe!?
    Undergod wrote: »
    caution does not equal cover-up.
    this is what you think i meant ............. this is not what i meant when i wrote it ..... we differ in our thinking.. what more can i say!?
    i'm not going to discuss this any more for i don't see a reason for it.


  • Advertisement
  • #112
    King Mob
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 25,323 ✭✭✭✭King Mob


    jonbravo wrote: »
    i have already addressed that question. take what you will from it...again i didnt make it up thats what i read.

    No you haven't.
    You have not explained what you mean by "Hostile" or explained a single reason why they would be "hostile" or shown anything to support the claim that anyone would be "hostile".

    You mightn't have made it up, but it looks like someone did.


  • #113
    Mahatma coat
    Banned (with Prison Access) Posts: 6,869 ✭✭✭Mahatma coat


    you believe, ET was here, but no contact.
    Mobby, mobby, Mob.

    you have played yerself right into their hands

    How would we know that the 'Scientific Community' Would be hostile

    Well you consider yerself a member of the 'Scientific Community' and I think you have just demonstrated the level of Hostility that exists towards the mere concept.

    could you imagine how you would feel if Someone were to come out with definitive proof that you were wrong and we were right, do you think that you would deal wit this revalation in a calm and sane manner as everything you ever believed was proven wrong in a single moment, and not only that but proven wrong by those you and others had labeled as Crackpot Kooks and poured scorn and derision on.


    as for thwe Apollo missions, if I knew which bits specifically I would have said which bits.
    mostly its the technology itself, the advanced leaps we made in technology in the 50's & 60's this it is theorised was as a result of reverse engineering alien technology.


  • #114
    King Mob
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 25,323 ✭✭✭✭King Mob


    Mahatma coat wrote: »
    Mobby, mobby, Mob.

    you have played yerself right into their hands

    How would we know that the 'Scientific Community' Would be hostile

    Well you consider yerself a member of the 'Scientific Community' and I think you have just demonstrated the level of Hostility that exists towards the mere concept.
    I don't consider myself part of the scientific community.

    But by hostile you mean asking for verifiable scientific proof?
    If that is what he means then yes, I do think the scientific community would ask for that.

    Mahatma coat wrote: »
    could you imagine how you would feel if Someone were to come out with definitive proof that you were wrong and we were right, do you think that you would deal wit this revalation in a calm and sane manner as everything you ever believed was proven wrong in a single moment, and not only that but proven wrong by those you and others had labeled as Crackpot Kooks and poured scorn and derision on.
    Your kinda mischaracterising me here. I never once said I believe aliens don't exist. If there is solid verifiable evidence then I'll be wrong. But it's never been shown here.

    And even if there was solid evidence shown that aliens exist everything I believe would not be proven wrong.
    Aliens existing doesn't prove the government did 9/11.

    And even then I have no idea how I'd react and neither do you.
    Personally I think aliens existing and being in contact with us would be the most amazing thing, well, ever.

    Mahatma coat wrote: »
    as for thwe Apollo missions, if I knew which bits specifically I would have said which bits.
    mostly its the technology itself, the advanced leaps we made in technology in the 50's & 60's this it is theorised was as a result of reverse engineering alien technology.
    And which technologies would they be exactly?
    And how do you know they were reversed engineered?

    There has been huge leaps in in commercially available harddrives in the last few years. There are 1TB hard drives available that are half the price and half the size of one I brought last year.
    Therefore the only explanation is that it was aliens.


  • #115
    ilivetolearn
    Closed Accounts Posts: 214 ✭✭ilivetolearn


    you believe, ET was here, but no contact.
    King Mob wrote: »
    There are 1TB hard drives available that are half the price and half the size of one I brought last year.
    Therefore the only explanation is that it was aliens.

    Funnily enough there exists an American hardware company that goes by the name of alienware (subsidiary of Dell):

    alienware_logo.jpg

    What's even funnier is that they were responsible for the world’s first consumer one terabyte hard drive according to this article:

    http://www.physorg.com/news93018024.html

    No, I'm not seriously implying that the storage device was reverse engineered from alien technology. It's just an ironic correlation that King Mob wasn't aware of.

    one-tb-dell-alienware.jpg


  • #116
    Black Swan
    Moderators, Category Moderators, Science, Health & Environment Moderators, Society & Culture Moderators Posts: 47,335 CMod ✭✭✭✭Black Swan


    the evidence of a government cover-up of ET life does not appear plausible
    jonbravo wrote: »
    A]There would be a painstaking process of checking and verification.
    Agree. Validity and reliability checks would be conducted in accordance with the scientific method. But the second that these methods "suggested" a new life form, there would be a rush to announce the discovery to the national news media by the principal investigator or the director of the exploration project (before someone else tried to steal the credit with the first announcement). Researchers and scholars are very competitive, and would want their name tied to the discovery. We are talking days, maybe weeks, but not months or years before the news hit the airwaves.
    jonbravo wrote: »
    B]It would certainly be the greatest discovery of all time, eclipsing the findings of newton ,darwin and einstein combined.[caution would be used or AKA a cover-up].
    Agree that caution would be exercised before announcing the discovery, but only to ensure that it was in fact a new life form and not an error in data collection, analysis, or interpretation. If you had something like the sci-fi film "ET" character walking about and trying to communicate, the confirmation would be obviously quicker, than some microscopic organism that would require a great deal of study to ensure that it represented a new life form.

    But "AKA cover-up?" Why? I still don't see a compelling motive in this thread to justify a cover-up of the discovery of a new life form from today's NASA funded space explorations. The public of today is not going to go rushing off a cliff like a group of lemmings when they hear the news. If anything it will be the greatest public relations splash for NASA in the USA, used to justify not only next year's fiscal budget, but to ask for more monies.

    Plus Obama and supporters will be thumping their chests in public announcements that this tremendous discovery occurred under their Democratic party administration, so the public should reelect them in 4 years rather than their Republican party rivals. There will be no cover-up... Just the opposite, with the Democrats blowing their publicity horns for the world to hear that the USA once again exhibits major scientific discovery under their leadership (and not the former inept Republican Bush-Cheney administration).
    jonbravo wrote: »
    C]The knowledge that we are not alone would affect people's psyche and totally transform our world view.
    I think this is a very optimistic view of how transformative such a discovery will be in terms of people's day-to-day lives. Certainly the scientists and intellectuals will grapple with the meaning of the discovery, as may some religious leaders... But in the developed countries people will still have to go to work the next day, pay the mortgage or rent, buy food, etc., etc. After all the sensation of the discovery has been exploited to the fullest by the news media, people will get bored, and go back to their normal hum-drum existence, except for new fictional novels, telly shows, or films informed by the discovery, including a few Jay Leno jokes about the new life form every now-and-then.
    jonbravo wrote: »
    D]Once proven intelligent[ET], scientists top priority would be to interpret the being
    Correction. Science does not "prove" anything, only "suggests" in the light of existent, reformulated, or new theory, methods, analysis, and findings. You only have "proofs" in such disciplines as logic, law, math, but not in science. If the evidence was compelling that a new life form existed and was intelligent by some conceptual definition and measurement, it would be reported accordingly, but not "proven."

    To clarify, I do believe there are such things as government conspiracies, like the misinformation and lies that the Bush-Cheney administration used to scare the US American Congress and public into the 2nd Gulf War (Iraq War II's non-existent weapons of mass destruction, etc.). But I fail to see any compelling evidence in this thread that would suggest today's NASA would cover-up the discovery of a new life form here on Earth or should one of their space probes discover one. Quite the opposite, for reasons given earlier in this post.


  • #117
    ilivetolearn
    Closed Accounts Posts: 214 ✭✭ilivetolearn


    you believe, ET was here, but no contact.
    Interesting post Blue Lagoon (I concur that egocentricism may negate their silence).

    Here are a few interesting perspectives held by the scientific community:

    Physicist Enrico Fermi is famous for his quip: "Where are they?" in relation to extraterrestrial civilizations. Fermi's Paradox as simple as it is challenges most schools of thought. His beliefs are motivated by the absence of evidence.

    Astrophysicist Bernard Haisch:
    We are in the curious situation today that our best modern physics and astrophysics theories predict that we should be experiencing extraterrestrial visitation, yet any possible evidence of such lurking in the UFO phenomenon is scoffed at within our scientific community

    I'd reccomend reading his document on Inflation-Theory Implications for Extraterrestrial Visitation

    In relation to current sitings he maintains:
    Most of the observations are probably misinterpretations, delusions and hoaxes. I have seen people get confused by Venus or even Sirius when it is flashing colors low in the sky under the right conditions. Having been turned off by this, most scientists never bother to look any further, and so are simply blissfully ignorant that there may be more to it

    This is one example of a member of the scientific community who is not hostile towards the existence of alien civilization but at the same time discredits various popular conventional claims.

    I think its a healthy mix. Some views held in this thread are fairly polar in terms of the existence of alien civilization. Some blindly maintain that it's true in the absence of truth whereas others maintain that it can't be true due to the absence of truth.

    Personally I believe that the absence of proof doesn't negate the probability but each to their own.


  • #118
    Mahatma coat
    Banned (with Prison Access) Posts: 6,869 ✭✭✭Mahatma coat


    you believe, ET was here, but no contact.
    I'm editing this to add a caveat at the start
    This is not a Personal attack at mob, even though some people will decide it is simply because I posted it and dont like mr Mob all that much.

    if anything its a plea to Mob to come off the fence and take a stand, one way or the other just grow a set and actually declare what YOU believe in.

    At the moment all we get is that you dont believe US, but yet you have never offered an original thought of your own, so please consider this post carefully
    Well hows about before we continue you come Off the Fence and declare where you stand, rather than just waiting for other people to make their declarations and attempting to take a contrary position each time, lets put your cards on hte table and state what you Believe.

    also What are you studying currently? you have alluded to 2 different courses, one being Philosophy and one being Physics yet I see no depth of knowledge being demonstrated on either subject.

    and one final point

    If there was even the remotest posibility that you would read one of the books recomended to you with an open mind I would pay the 7.50 meself, so that is also a disengenuos proposition on your part IMO

    if someone says to you, the answers are in this book then the onus is on you to read the book and formulate your own opinion or Fvck off away from the debate til the next 'soft target' comes along


  • #119
    Black Swan
    Moderators, Category Moderators, Science, Health & Environment Moderators, Society & Culture Moderators Posts: 47,335 CMod ✭✭✭✭Black Swan


    the evidence of a government cover-up of ET life does not appear plausible
    ilivetolearn wrote: »
    Interesting post Blue Lagoon (I concur that egocentricism may negate their silence)...

    Personally I believe that the absence of proof doesn't negate the probability but each to their own.
    My posts on this thread have not challenged the notion that we may someday discover other life forms. Or, for that matter, be discovered by other life forms. Where I fail to see compelling evidence are in the data and justifications given by some posters (or their sources cited) for the existence of a government (or NASA) conspiracy to cover-up the discovery of other interplanetary life forms.

    To summarize, it would not be in NASA's best interests during the greatest economic meltdown in USA history since the Great Depression, with threatened budget cuts, to hide the discovery of interplanetary life that resulted from one of their multimillion dollar space probes (or other costly investigations into ET life). On the contrary, it would be in the best interests of the Democratic party, that now controls the presidency, US Senate, and US House to announce to the world the discovery of interplanetary life, thereby making it appear that scientific discoveries are being made under the Democrats, and only wars and economic recessions are attributed to the former Republican Bush-Cheney administration. Plus, the announcement of ET life would be so sensational as to distract the public from the screw-ups the Obama administration is starting to make.


  • #120
    6th
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 17,247 ✭✭✭✭6th


    you believe their is a cover-up of intelligent life.
    Mahatma coat wrote: »
    I'm editing this to add a caveat at the start
    This is not a Personal attack at mob, even though some people will decide it is simply because I posted it and dont like mr Mob all that much.

    if anything its a plea to Mob to come off the fence and take a stand, one way or the other just grow a set and actually declare what YOU believe in.

    At the moment all we get is that you dont believe US, but yet you have never offered an original thought of your own, so please consider this post carefully


    Stating something isnt personal abuse doesnt mean it ok to post. This is clearly aimed at the poster and not a post. I believe the following elements of the charter cover it:
    • Claims, Evidence, Proof
    If you are stating something as fact please post your sources or any relevant links/info. Doing so will strengthen your point. Where someone states something as their opinion it is just that, an opinion. Asking "why" they believe something if fine, demanding proof/evidence is not.

    • Flaming
    Posts containing personal attacks on another user will be edited/deleted. Attack the post, not the poster. Minor infringements will warrant a warning followed by a ban. Serious infringements and/or intentional flaming will receive an automatic ban.

    • Respect other posters
    Snide remarks and bitching will not be tolerated, nor will accusations thrown at other members of the Boards.ie community. Singling out a poster or posters, including stating things like "some posters on here" could land you in trouble.


  • Advertisement
  • #121
    King Mob
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 25,323 ✭✭✭✭King Mob


    Mahatma coat wrote: »
    I'm editing this to add a caveat at the start
    This is not a Personal attack at mob, even though some people will decide it is simply because I posted it and dont like mr Mob all that much.

    if anything its a plea to Mob to come off the fence and take a stand, one way or the other just grow a set and actually declare what YOU believe in.

    At the moment all we get is that you dont believe US, but yet you have never offered an original thought of your own, so please consider this post carefully

    I would have thought my position was pretty clear: there is not enough evidence to support a belief in it.
    But you see I'm technically on the fence because despite your insistence to the contrary, I'm open minded.

    If there's solid verifiable evidence I'll believe it. There has been none presented.

    But yea I should maybe stop asking so many questions and believe.


  • #122
    Mahatma coat
    Banned (with Prison Access) Posts: 6,869 ✭✭✭Mahatma coat


    you believe, ET was here, but no contact.
    you and others seem to miss the point of this forum, or maybe I'm misguided in my understanding of what this forum is about, as far as I se it this forum is for people who are interested in conspiracy theories, we discuss theories and , and this is the big one, WE RESEARCH theories, we look at all the info out there and we postulate theories to assist our understanding of events, we debate these theories, we ofer alternative theories, we diseminate the details of these theories.

    what annoys a lot of the regular posters here is the 'skeptics' who's only intent is to dispute the theories of others without offering anything of merit to back their position besides argument from incrediulity.


  • #123
    King Mob
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 25,323 ✭✭✭✭King Mob


    Mahatma coat wrote: »
    you and others seem to miss the point of this forum, or maybe I'm misguided in my understanding of what this forum is about, as far as I se it this forum is for people who are interested in conspiracy theories, we discuss theories and , and this is the big one, WE RESEARCH theories, we look at all the info out there and we postulate theories to assist our understanding of events, we debate these theories, we ofer alternative theories, we diseminate the details of these theories.

    what annoys a lot of the regular posters here is the 'skeptics' who's only intent is to dispute the theories of others without offering anything of merit to back their position besides argument from incrediulity.

    So whats the problem with asking relevant questions, pointing out gaps in the theories or showing when facts are wrong?
    If the theories are solid surely they'd stand up to scrutiny.

    So taking your example: if alien technology was used to build Apollo wouldn't you be able to distinguish it and point it out?


  • #124
    Undergod
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 2,858 ✭✭✭Undergod


    jonbravo wrote: »
    this is what you think i meant ............. this is not what i meant when i wrote it ..... we differ in our thinking.. what more can i say!?
    i'm not going to discuss this any more for i don't see a reason for it.


    Well you could explain what you do mean.


  • #125
    6th
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 17,247 ✭✭✭✭6th


    you believe their is a cover-up of intelligent life.
    Mahatma coat wrote: »
    you and others seem to miss the point of this forum, or maybe I'm misguided in my understanding of what this forum is about, as far as I se it this forum is for people who are interested in conspiracy theories, we discuss theories and , and this is the big one, WE RESEARCH theories, we look at all the info out there and we postulate theories to assist our understanding of events, we debate these theories, we ofer alternative theories, we diseminate the details of these theories.

    what annoys a lot of the regular posters here is the 'skeptics' who's only intent is to dispute the theories of others without offering anything of merit to back their position besides argument from incrediulity.

    You've already gotten 2 infractions in the last 24hrs. Now you are going off topic and trying to tell other people what the aim of this forum is. That is not for 1 person to define.

    24hr ban to give you a chance to calm down. Take that time to read the charter again.


  • #126
    6th
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 17,247 ✭✭✭✭6th


    you believe their is a cover-up of intelligent life.
    Stay on topic folks.

    King Mob, you were asked a question by Mahatma coat - it was off topic so I would suggest that if you wish to discuss it further you do so by PM.


  • Advertisement
  • #127
    jonbravo
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 635 ✭✭✭jonbravo


    you want to believe!?
    Blue_Lagoon wrote: »
    My posts on this thread have not challenged the notion that we may someday discover other life forms. Or, for that matter, be discovered by other life forms. Where I fail to see compelling evidence are in the data and justifications given by some posters (or their sources cited) for the existence of a government (or NASA) conspiracy to cover-up the discovery of other interplanetary life forms.

    To summarize, it would not be in NASA's best interests during the greatest economic meltdown in USA history since the Great Depression, with threatened budget cuts, to hide the discovery of interplanetary life that resulted from one of their multimillion dollar space probes (or other costly investigations into ET life). On the contrary, it would be in the best interests of the Democratic party, that now controls the presidency, US Senate, and US House to announce to the world the discovery of interplanetary life, thereby making it appear that scientific discoveries are being made under the Democrats, and only wars and economic recessions are attributed to the former Republican Bush-Cheney administration. Plus, the announcement of ET life would be so sensational as to distract the public from the screw-ups the Obama administration is starting to make.
    before we leave NASA to one side i,d like to know your views[blue lagoon]... on transmissions, picture's and video's surrounding the missions for;
    STS 80.
    STS 75. or STS 73.
    HUBBLE.
    [you can find lots of links anywhere to them missions on youtude etc...]
    And a reason why SETI is not under NASA's control any more!?

    some of the video's are interesting and the transmissions are sensational and can't be over looked.
    i have also just tonite seen a video of an ex-high rank NASA employee say;NASA store secret information which you need to **be cleared** to get your hands on files, is this ture!?

    i think roswell will be the more interesting discussion next......to summarize,so far, NASA have not found intelligent life...but has intelligent life found us!?


  • #128
    Black Swan
    Moderators, Category Moderators, Science, Health & Environment Moderators, Society & Culture Moderators Posts: 47,335 CMod ✭✭✭✭Black Swan


    the evidence of a government cover-up of ET life does not appear plausible
    jonbravo wrote: »
    before we leave NASA to one side i,d like to know your views[blue lagoon]...
    And a reason why SETI is not under NASA's control any more!?
    I am currently cramming for springs semester exams, so I don't have a lot discretionary time to research all your questions, but this one is easy and from one of NASA's web pages:

    "SETI researchers believe that the best way to discover other intelligent life in the galaxy is to look for evidence of technology developed by that life. In the belief that intelligent beings on other worlds would eventually develop radio technology, researchers have used large radio telescopes to search the sky. In 1960, the first SETI experiment unsuccessfully examined two stars at a single radio frequency. After several dozen additional searches, the National Aeronautics and Space Administration (NASA) in 1992 began a two-part project known as the High Resolution Microwave Survey. Researchers searched for weak microwave (short radio wave) signals originating near specific stars that are similar to the sun. They also started to scan the entire sky for strong microwave signals. In 1993, the United States Congress, in a budget-cutting measure, instructed NASA to end the project."

    To summarize, after 33 years of SETI investigations (1960-1993), the lack of significant results prompted the US Congress to cut NASA's SETI programme funding in 1993. No conspiracy, just a lack of results?

    Does anyone see the craic in NASA publicly stating on their web site that:
    • they are looking for ET
    • they go through annual public congressional hearings to get taxpayer money to look for ET
    • but according to ET conspiracy theorist Nick Cook, if they find ET, they will hide such knowledge from the public?
    • yet if they hide such knowledge from the public, it will appear to the public that they have achieved nothing significant with their tax dollars, and like SETI get their budget cut?


  • #129
    jonbravo
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 635 ✭✭✭jonbravo


    you want to believe!?
    Cover-ups by governments have possibly prompted ufologists to make exaggerated claims on occasions.Anxious to prove that ufos exist, they have often embroidered what was really seen, or ignored evidence conflicting with their version of the facts.
    But today more and more governments admit the existence of objects in the sky which come from somewhere beyond human control.Despite Americas policy of denying the possibility of ufos, its armed forces have drawn up procedures to deal with them.
    One thing is for sure, we're being observed from outer space.'Russia, Italy, Brazil and Argentina, having issued official reports of sightings, unequivocally accept the existence of ufos.
    The Greek cover-up...

    Eminent greek scientist paul santorini stunned members of his countrys astronautical society in february 1967 when he announced that there was a blanket of secrecy, about ufo activites and the authoritied did not want to admit the existence of forces against which earth had no possibility of defence.

    before i put forward my theory for discussion, i would like opinions regarding Helium3 and here's a docu on that topic........ http://video.google.com/videoplay?docid=3931004440707682179. [imagine if could travel to the stars we Would need to use some sort of material[ ... as would ET], as fuel for intersteller travel ,ALIEN to our planet But not alien to space.http://www.boards.ie/vbulletin/showthread.php?t=2055478964


  • #130
    Mahatma coat
    Banned (with Prison Access) Posts: 6,869 ✭✭✭Mahatma coat


    you believe, ET was here, but no contact.
    Eh Lads, just to back up here for a sec, Nazaca, intriguing, possible LZ for advanced tech??
    Human or Alien???

    Looks too much like a Runway system to be random IMO


  • #131
    Mahatma coat
    Banned (with Prison Access) Posts: 6,869 ✭✭✭Mahatma coat


    you believe, ET was here, but no contact.
    Also the inference to the ''Cargo Cult'' may explain the proliferation of a lot of the carvings.

    Thats something I have researched a bit First hand over in PNG and the Solomons


  • Advertisement
  • #132
    Black Swan
    Moderators, Category Moderators, Science, Health & Environment Moderators, Society & Culture Moderators Posts: 47,335 CMod ✭✭✭✭Black Swan


    the evidence of a government cover-up of ET life does not appear plausible
    The poll added to this thread is flawed in that it does not offer choices for those who may contend that:

    [X] there is a good scientific probability that ET life may exist

    [X] the evidence thus far presented that ET life has been discovered has not been compelling

    [X] the evidence of a government cover-up of ET life does not appear plausible


  • #133
    6th
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 17,247 ✭✭✭✭6th


    you believe their is a cover-up of intelligent life.
    Poll edited to include additional options.


  • #134
    jonbravo
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 635 ✭✭✭jonbravo


    you want to believe!?
    6th wrote: »
    Poll edited to include additional options.
    the subject on this thread isnt looking for a reason to believe or not to believe in ET intelligent life,
    its looking for the very possible cover-up[if you will]
    But include additional options as you see fit.:D[ all just a bit of fun anyway.]


  • #135
    Undergod
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 2,858 ✭✭✭Undergod


    Some of the poll options aren't mutually exclusive.

    you want to believe!?

    there is a good scientific probability that ET life may exist

    the evidence thus far presented that ET life has been discovered has not been compelling

    the evidence of a government cover-up of ET life does not appear plausible

    These could all apply.


  • #136
    jonbravo
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 635 ✭✭✭jonbravo


    you want to believe!?
    time for a video ...
    http://www.livevideo.com/video/D1A3BC638CCE48FE88EE70F10C904DB3/ufo-s-uncovered-1.aspx

    you will find in this some clips from STS missions !?


  • #137
    blackgold>>
    Closed Accounts Posts: 852 ✭✭✭blackgold>>


    King Mob wrote: »
    And the Nasca lines could have been done with the simpliest of technologies.
    Namely a length of rope and a log.
    Just look how easily people can do crop circles with just the same.

    Or see how one guy with a bit of cleverness and some rocks and a bit of wood can move huge stone slabs.
    http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=lRRDzFROMx0&eurl=http%3A%2F%2Fskeptoid.com%2Fepisodes%2F4149&feature=player_embedded

    Just because you can't imagine it doesn't mean someone else hasn't. And it certainly doesn't mean aliens did it.
    very good video he's a brilliant.
    nice one king mob


  • #138
    jonbravo
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 635 ✭✭✭jonbravo


    you want to believe!?
    jonbravo wrote: »
    before we leave NASA to one side i,d like to know your views[blue lagoon]... on transmissions, picture's and video's surrounding the missions for;
    STS 80.
    STS 75. or STS 73.
    HUBBLE.
    [you can find lots of links anywhere to them missions on youtude etc...]
    also we have the so called asteroid known as 1991 vg which is seen by many to be artificial ,by 2016 we will find out one way or the other.


Advertisement