UFOSeek Forum

Community for discussion of UFO, Paranormal and mysterious topics
It is currently Wed Nov 14, 2018 4:23 am

All times are UTC [ DST ]




Post new topic Reply to topic  [ 52 posts ]  Go to page Previous  1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6  Next
Author Message
PostPosted: Fri Feb 01, 2008 6:14 am 
Offline
Moderator
User avatar

Joined: Wed Jan 09, 2008 7:50 pm
Posts: 4426
Location: Near Toronto, Ontario Canada
Very interesting David. As far as the accelerated growth goes, is there any connection, scientifically or otherwise to the neutrino experiments in Sudbury, and/or the saplings that grew several times their normal rate of growth in short periods of time. Maybe there is just more than one way to produce the same results?

Also the moon base. I know that it is apparently not feasible, but my opinion is that it is not feasible because of money, it surely cannot be because they cannot build it. Two things come to mind. One is the very detailed written accounts of original plans, carried out over several years by NASA and NASA's selected contractors involving modular buildings. Each section was a different phase, and when all connected, it would include a modular station which would support (I think) up to 12 people for extended periods of time. The details in Corso's book did not seem to be there for entertainment or whimsical value. These plans seemed very real. With the advent of newer and more sophisticated technology that sees astronauts in space for extended periods of time now, why would we not naturally assume the same technology can put a moon base in operation. (If it isn't already).

Secondly, there is evidence of structures on Mars. There was a recent posting here on part of a photo taken by NASA, in which a tiny portion had not been airbrushed, and, which clearly showed a skyline with an assortment of buildings/structures. Why is it such a stretch to think that since the decades of space missions, that we have not produced our own structures. I think it would be more likely that we have than we haven't. The advantanges just in military purposes would be very valuable.

Any thoughts on this?

Tim

_________________
I have absolutely nothing clever to say......but I'm workin' on it.


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Fri Feb 01, 2008 10:39 am 
Offline
Moderator

Joined: Wed Jan 02, 2008 11:59 am
Posts: 1853
Location: Canada
Buildings are one thing........human occupation is quite another.

You get accelerated growth of plants underground so that part is not too difficult, but you cannot do it in a greenhouse at surface.

There is a basic difference in the dynamics inherent to the earth and any other body in space, such as the moon and Mars etc. So this difference creates a very real problem.

You see we are missing most of the picture........most of the information is not public.

We are being given a false sense of the way it is. And if it was as simple as they make it sound we would already have a base on the moon and money has nothing to do with it, because the money is actually worthless anyway.

Space at the present time is simply a distraction, while we are losing our home planet.

For example, cell phones are one of the biggest industries in the world, yet they are doing more damage to the environment than the oil industry has done in over 100 years, but our lack of knowledge concerning the basic dynamics of the planet blind us to the dangers involved.

There is no problem they say, oh my what a lie that is..........take two cell phones and turn them on.......call from one to the other and leave the line open. Place each phone on either side of an egg cup with a raw egg in it and wait 60 minutes...........it is now hardboiled or the equivalent there of, but don't eat the egg. Of course its only an egg, but put some human blood in there instead of an egg and it will change the blood chemistry........oops.

No we do not know what is going on or what we are doing.........a very frustrating situation.

An orbiting space station is quite different from conditions on the moon, but again half of the picture is missing........low orbit space stations are not the same at all.

The differences in dynamics is so slight to make little difference over the duration of their existence, which is why all satellites eventually become unstable and fall to earth while the moon continues to slowly move away from the earth.


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Fri Feb 01, 2008 10:58 am 
Offline
Moderator

Joined: Wed Jan 02, 2008 11:59 am
Posts: 1853
Location: Canada
Timbit, you are not seeing the obvious flaw in the wall.........most of it is misinformation created to hide the fact that we lack the capability to do what we claim to have already done.

It was recently stated by a leading aircraft firm, contracted to build the lander for the moon base mission, that they did not know how to do it. They have no functional lander, that can actually deliver a crew to the moon, never mind bring them home again. This has to mean something.

None of it makes any sense.......the whole moon deal is just too full of holes.

The Russians brought back about 5 pounds of lunar material via robotics, but the Americans brought back almost 200 pounds via hand picked samples.

Either there were two crews for each mission or we did not land on the moon. You cannot expose mission crew to direct contact with lunar dust without some ill effects.

They are not hiding the original science for no reason........its a suicide mission.


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Fri Feb 01, 2008 12:10 pm 
Offline
Member

Joined: Wed Jan 02, 2008 11:59 am
Posts: 63
None of it makes any sense.......the whole moon deal is just too full of holes.


This re-constitutes the question of if we ever went there then?
brings back the fake pictures question, the fluttering flag and shadows falling in different directions,the pictures with the cross hairs on the lense, which actually went behind one of the figures and the lack of a landing booster crater under the LEM etc.
yet we have the samples?
So the lunar lander then? did it, or did it not LAND.
never did fully understand how on the later missions such a small craft could carry and store such a large lunar "buggie."(even in a kit form)? the base of the craft would have to hold the legs, fuel and a car.........no way jose'

_________________
ufo incidents are like politicians affairs, you know they happen but they won't admit it.


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Fri Feb 01, 2008 1:36 pm 
Offline
Member

Joined: Wed Jan 02, 2008 11:59 am
Posts: 63
re the life in space issue I just posted something on the science thread, which sort of adds to what were talking about. The effects in space and the fact that its from a russian source makes for an interesting topic
kev

_________________
ufo incidents are like politicians affairs, you know they happen but they won't admit it.


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Fri Feb 01, 2008 6:28 pm 
Offline
Moderator
User avatar

Joined: Wed Jan 09, 2008 7:50 pm
Posts: 4426
Location: Near Toronto, Ontario Canada
That is very much a possibility, both your points of view. If they have never landed, then that pretty much rules out everything after that because it would indeed be misinformation.

But what is the meaning of the space race then, if it isn't to build military installations to launch weapons. And, if 'we' haven't been there, who has. What am I missing here.

A ' moon landing' hoax to show the world (at the time Russia in particular) that we now have superiority from space, and a story that has stood as fact for decades. Did that just buy time in order to have a shadow landing or moonbase later on that is now secret? Maybe it was necessary at the time to keep a military trump card, whereas now, there could be cooperation with former foes? How do we know what they couldn't do then, they can do now.

The science of the travel itself and what we have learned about that- is it not logical to presume that they have either built upon earlier successes, or have new ones we are not aware of? If it is the purpose of military, how would any of us know fact from fiction.

I'm as confused as ever about the authenticity of the original moon landing and keep coming back to the many factors (ie radiation belts) that at the time would have prevented such a feat. Yet, who knows what the real deal is. Nobody can prove a thing really.

Enquiring minds need to know!

Tim

_________________
I have absolutely nothing clever to say......but I'm workin' on it.


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Sat Feb 02, 2008 6:32 am 
Offline
Moderator

Joined: Wed Jan 02, 2008 11:59 am
Posts: 1853
Location: Canada
One last point to emphasize about the lunar samples, they did come from the moon, which is something all the geologists agree on............also the samples were not radioactive beyond normal background levels, which means they are not radioactive.

Okay, try this one on for size...........there was no cold war, arms race or space race, it was all a sham........very well dramatized with U2 spy planes and the whole ten yards, spies and double agents etc.

It allowed for the experimental process to be justified, which would eventually lead to the one world government and the hell that follows.

Secrets were created on the basis of the cold war initiative.....lots of secrets.

Sounds insane because it is insane.....total madness prevailed, just look at McCarthy playing down the Nazi war crimes and then screaming bloody murder about commie spies in every closet.

Look how effective he was at mudding the water to the extent that the public bought it hook line and sinker......and they killed Ethel Rosenberg......for what? It gave the myth life and Ethel death.

Look at what I am doing and consider that not one newspaper or magazine, not even Pravda will print one of the biggest crime stories of the last hundred years..........dead children........abductions, torture and murder and no one even blinks. Fear prevails...........so strong is that fear that no one will touch it. Now that's scary.

http://www.lincolnparkmkultra.blogspot.com

Did we land anyone on the moon at any time? We got some rocks, but those may have been gotten the same way the Russians got theirs, via robotics.

Timbit, the rover was strapped to the side of the lander, folded up like a deck chair, it was electric and ran on a battery. The only footage of a test flight of the lander is the lander crashing and burning. But after that it worked perfectly for all of the missions.....really?

If we knew the whole truth.......I think we would all run to the bathroom and upchuck and then we would get very scared.

Is any of this Serpo stuff real........no, its total bs.........mud in the water.


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Sat Feb 02, 2008 6:46 am 
Offline
Moderator

Joined: Wed Jan 02, 2008 11:59 am
Posts: 1853
Location: Canada
Timbit,

The science you speak of............I would dare to speculate that they don't have it, cannot wrap their PhD minds around it.

If they had it there would be tell tale signs somewhere and I have searched high and low for even a sniff of it.


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Sat Feb 02, 2008 1:51 pm 
Offline
Member

Joined: Wed Jan 02, 2008 11:59 am
Posts: 63
there was no cold war, arms race or space race, it was all a sham........very well dramatized with U2 spy planes and the whole ten yards, spies and double agents etc.

Dear God,
that puts everything in question? the cuban missile crisis...the whole nine yards?
we know it happened we saw the ships.. but was it an elaborate hoax too? a show to put all others to shame in order to hide the truth.
indeed once you create a story you must continue to build that story but if all this was part of some master plan that IS SCAREY.

kev

_________________
ufo incidents are like politicians affairs, you know they happen but they won't admit it.


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Sat Feb 09, 2008 5:47 pm 
Offline
Moderator
User avatar

Joined: Wed Jan 09, 2008 7:50 pm
Posts: 4426
Location: Near Toronto, Ontario Canada
I came across this website on Area51, which has a 'memo' that was sent during the Area 51 crash/recovery. I haven't seen this one before.

http://www.lasvegasnow.com/Global/Link.asp?L=253295

The original memo is difficult to read, but is explained if you click on the David Rudiack link just above the original memo.

Tim

_________________
I have absolutely nothing clever to say......but I'm workin' on it.


Top
 Profile  
 
Display posts from previous:  Sort by  
Post new topic Reply to topic  [ 52 posts ]  Go to page Previous  1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6  Next

All times are UTC [ DST ]


Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 1 guest


You cannot post new topics in this forum
You cannot reply to topics in this forum
You cannot edit your posts in this forum
You cannot delete your posts in this forum
You cannot post attachments in this forum

cron
Powered by phpBB