|
>Wow this is going to be fun.<
If you like looking foolish.
>Jimbo.. the entirety of your response is a bunch of jargon and unexplained non-sequitors without
substance or stated point. <
Possibly my words were to complicated. I will try and simplify.
>I will hit the major points in your discusson and ignore what you wrote that is unintelligable and meant to be so in an attempt to elevate your ..treatise.<
Actually you seemed to ignore the points that you couldn't deal with.
>You missed the major point here.<
Not at all. It now is in writing that the pres. can do these things. Under martial law and emergency state, it was done in the past. Many times. It is now documented. In any case, just what do you think this means and how when will it affect anyone? You WERE one of the Y2K screamers weren't you.
>NASA and the Moon Wonderful! You have reviewed all the footage of NASA's moon landings downlink. I don't suppose you got any sort of subpoena for all materials and recordings of the moon landings? <
It wasn't required. All downlinks were Unencrypted. The news media was often and still sometime is offered only a delayed version. This was primarily due to the shuttle disaster and potentials like this. However the media often does monitor the downlinks real time. They however want to stay on NASA's good side for future releases of info so they do don't televise them (USUALLY).
NASA downlinks are still NOT "encrypted" They do however, use protocols that they don't publicize. However they are hardly secret and many techies, (and you can bet other nations) do monitor them. DES standards are NOT used in shuttle downlinks.
>Dont you find it curious that we can land men on the moon, and yet all our news agencies couldn't get a direct link coupling to broadcast the landings on the moon and instead had to film a MONITOR at the time?<
100% Bull! They had a direct feed. AND could have easily monitored with their own equipment had they the facilities.
>What you have viewed is what you and all were intended to view!<
You really need to get out more. NASA is FULL of private contractors. Far more than full NASA employees. MOST ALL of the equipment and programs
were written by civilian employees. (including my staff at the time) There are no SECRET frequencies used. (Since there is no such thing.) DES are ONLY used on some senstive military related missions and then it is only used infrequently.
>You justify your own postion with garbage information which is intended to only allow that postion and again.. no respearch.<
I worked developing the downlink multiplexors, spent some time in RF protocol and even a few months with the on board shuttle processor interconnects. I had several employees in other areas. Your research is what? Looking at images?
>I myself have seen a stack of still images in a gentleman's vault of those same moon missions..glossies.. This gentleman was high level in G.E. involved in the design of the navigation systems aboard both the LM and command module and was gifted this images by a close friend at NASA. They show things which even your own untrained eye would recognize as non-natural.<
Names? I bet you loved the STS-48 video then also, right? Did you also watch that video as when mapped to the burn times? I did.
>You say only that this stunning image of 3 astronauts on the moon surface is "so obvious yet NASA released it any way". .yet you offer no further comment.<
PLEASE! Do some research of your own. The facts on this one are too old to even comment on.
>Have you no means to explain this image's existance and make it reasonable in your paradigms,..<
I am always suspect of people who use the term paradigm. It is a "God Sent" for those who overworked "closed minded".
> however i have to say that the symmetry of features even in the newer imagery shows things that in great likelihood..artificial.<
This statement in itself show your total lack of understanding of randomness, infinite and the pattern arranging desire of the mind. "Great likelihood"? Please provide some statistical points.
>I am not alone in this belief either: i have a growing legion of geologists and engineers who I have shown the imagery and they are stunned and
believers.<
Yes, there are a few. As there will always be. This is not surprising at all. "Legion"?
>I suggest you have a serious look at the images i provide further up on this bulletin board..and also check out my web site.<
I have also seen them several times. These are also not new.
>You reference your education and credentials
I suggest at this point that you are suffering from an apriori prejudice resulting from over reliance on what your education has told you "must be" and have failed to do due dilligence and examine information with an open mind, allowing the salient details to lead you where they may.<
I have spent my vocational life breaking "paradigms" (as you would say ) "No way could you achieve 1mb/s transfers on RF", no way would the 850-950 band be consumer useful", etc. etc. In my field I had to have an open mind. But I never let my brains fall out.
>All the education in the world is useless if you are not familiar with thinking on your own.<
Yep. But evidence and pure fantasy need to be separated. That is what logic is for.
>such as the stepped pyramid off of Japan found under 30 fathoms of water a few years ago, older than the Great Pyramid of Giza<
Sorry, I have not gotten off my "arse" to research this, so I won't comment on it. But don't let that stop you.
>and yet it never made it into any Archeologic publications.<
Obviously a government cover-up.
>or the images of flying craft carved in the
beams of the 3,000 year old Temple of Abydos (seen below).. It is time we looked further into these
things.<
May I suggest you get off your "arse" as I did and get some "hands on" involvement, instead of reading web pages and books by those whose only motive is to sell books?
>We are not alone.. and the imagery on mars is hard proof and provided to the public by our
recognized space institution -- NASA.<
We MAY not be alone, but what you have is very lacking in any PROOF.
>If you need further imagery from Mars posted here, I'd be glad to provide it; the artificial constructs on Mars are not hard to find.<
If you have a good imagination and lack an understanding of imagery and bit manipulation/averaging errors, randomness and simple physical sciences.
No, not if you have the same old "gears", "pillboxes", and "trailer parks" that all the other "believers" have on their web sites.
Look, winning this argument can't happen on either side. It is one of religion. You have "faith", I look for evidence. Let's just wait. I am sure the PROOF of these aliens will come any day now, right? Of course, that is the claim now for the last 1/2 century.
A vast international conspiracy to hide the truth from the ignorant populace. The cry of the paranoid.
BTW, I know it is usually considered improper netiquette to correct spelling errors. But with your pompous chest pounding of "research" it amazes me that your spelling is so atrocious. (At least for someone so full of wisdom (or himself). )
So lets just wait for the "landing" and then you can have the last laugh. Until then you have nothing except Hoagland, Cseti, Greer, etc.
|
