Denial or Ignorance Amongst NASA Scientists?

<blockquote id="quote"><font size="2" face="Verdana, Arial, Helvetica" id="quote">quote:<hr height="1" noshade id="quote">Such speculations with no data to support them are not helpful because they are easily dismissed as "conspiracy thinking", and because they turn off everyone, friend and foe alike. There must be some credible evidence before calling apparently self-interested actions a conspiracy.<hr height="1" noshade id="quote"></blockquote id="quote"></font id="quote">

Tom, isn't this the same as saying that hypothetical "ultramundane corpuscles" with no data to support them are not helpful either? LaSage got this response too, yet it turns out he was correct.

My point is that speculation or hypotheticals are not always useless. Perhaps JPL's cover-up of the evidence for artificiality is driven only by financial self-interest. Perhaps also it is completely unconscious, in the sense that those doing the cover-up believe they are not actually covering up any *true* evidence for artificiality, but only "controversial" data that lends itself to such wild-but-obvioulsy-false claims of artificiality (for people have a tendency to believe that which is in their own economic interests, and to convince themselves they are not acting unethically); perhaps this is the case with JPL. Nonetheless, I find it hard to believe the Pentagon, NSA and other intelligence agencies would all simply ignore what could amount to the holy grail of new technology discovery. A secret space program may be a purely hypothetical postulate, but it fits with what we know of how these agencies operate. In fact, secrecy is a fundamental principal of intelligence operations. (And after all, you wouldn't want China getting to Mars first and discovering whatever might be there before we do. Keep in mind that public acknowledgment of artificial structures on Mars would clearly generate calls from all countries for a world-wide, cooperative effort to explore Cydonia and for all knowledge gained to be used for the benefit of humanity as a whole. The imperialists don't want this. They want all power for themselves).

And Bush *has* proposed a manned mission to Mars...

Emanuel

<blockquote id="quote"><font size="2" face="Verdana, Arial, Helvetica" id="quote">quote:<hr height="1" noshade id="quote"><i>Originally posted by emanuel</i>
<br />Tom, isn't this the same as saying that hypothetical "ultramundane corpuscles" with no data to support them are not helpful either?<hr height="1" noshade id="quote"></blockquote id="quote"></font id="quote">Scientific hypotheses need to be supported by observation, experiment, argumentation, and/or citation. There is now a book and a CD filled with this kind of evidence for "pushing gravity". I have not seen evidence in any of these categories to support the speculation that a secret international space agency exists. Claiming that or anything else without some demonstrable basis simply impunes the credibility of the messenger.

<blockquote id="quote"><font size="2" face="Verdana, Arial, Helvetica" id="quote">quote:<hr height="1" noshade id="quote">My point is that speculation or hypotheticals are not always useless.<hr height="1" noshade id="quote"></blockquote id="quote"></font id="quote">Useless, definitely not. But a basis for belief in them? Also definitely not. It should be at most a basis for forming hypotheses that can be tested by gathering some sort of credible evidence.

<blockquote id="quote"><font size="2" face="Verdana, Arial, Helvetica" id="quote">quote:<hr height="1" noshade id="quote">I find it hard to believe the Pentagon, NSA and other intelligence agencies would all simply ignore what could amount to the holy grail of new technology discovery.<hr height="1" noshade id="quote"></blockquote id="quote"></font id="quote">"Ignoring" strikes me as a proper response to any speculation lacking credible evidence. No one is paying these agencies to investiagte speculations for which no credible evidence exists.

As for ignoring hypotheses where credible evidence does exist, I can think of many good reasons for that, starting with it not being in the mission of intelligence agencies and most departments of the Pentagon. That means these agencies are not authorized to look into it.

This is similar to NASA saying recently that they are not authorized to do anything about a potential asteroid impact on Earth in 2036. Call it a ploy for more funding if you like. But high-level managers are fired for using more discretion than they are authorized to use.

<blockquote id="quote"><font size="2" face="Verdana, Arial, Helvetica" id="quote">quote:<hr height="1" noshade id="quote">A secret space program may be a purely hypothetical postulate, but it fits with what we know of how these agencies operate. In fact, secrecy is a fundamental principal of intelligence operations.<hr height="1" noshade id="quote"></blockquote id="quote"></font id="quote">I don't see this "fit". What fits is that people at all levels have a strong desire to avoid "poison" projects, and researching UFOs or secret space programs cannot be good for the career of anyone doing this at his/her own initiative.

<blockquote id="quote"><font size="2" face="Verdana, Arial, Helvetica" id="quote">quote:<hr height="1" noshade id="quote">And after all, you wouldn't want China getting to Mars first and discovering whatever might be there before we do.<hr height="1" noshade id="quote"></blockquote id="quote"></font id="quote">I want answers in my lifetime, and I'm not feeling too particular about who supplies them.

<blockquote id="quote"><font size="2" face="Verdana, Arial, Helvetica" id="quote">quote:<hr height="1" noshade id="quote">Keep in mind that public acknowledgment of artificial structures on Mars would clearly generate calls from all countries for a world-wide, cooperative effort to explore Cydonia and for all knowledge gained to be used for the benefit of humanity as a whole.<hr height="1" noshade id="quote"></blockquote id="quote"></font id="quote">Sort of like the way that the theory of evolution has generated so much accord and international cooperation?

<blockquote id="quote"><font size="2" face="Verdana, Arial, Helvetica" id="quote">quote:<hr height="1" noshade id="quote">The imperialists don't want this. They want all power for themselves).<hr height="1" noshade id="quote"></blockquote id="quote"></font id="quote">And the grinch stole Christmas. But I've never met the grinch or an imperialist, or even seen one interviewed. From what I see, a lot of the new multi-millionaires and billionaires from the tech revolution spend lots of their money maintaining their privacy. The few who try to influence politics seem mostly interested in getting contracts or tax breaks for their own companies.

I'm not saying there are no conspiracies. But most competent conspiracists surely are motivated to be careful enough that the public remains totally unaware of their activities. And their most successful tactic in keeping their secrets is apparently planting lots of internet rumors to keep the gullible busy chasing imaginary conspiracies.

The key to finding truth, as always, is focusing on solid, credible evidence and ignoring the vast number of potential distractions from the core facts. A plausible yarn is no proper basis for forming a belief. -|Tom|-

<blockquote id="quote"><font size="2" face="Verdana, Arial, Helvetica" id="quote">quote:<hr height="1" noshade id="quote">I have not seen evidence in any of these categories to support the speculation that a secret international space agency exists. Claiming that or anything else without some demonstrable basis simply impunes the credibility of the messenger.<hr height="1" noshade id="quote"></blockquote id="quote"></font id="quote">

To be honest, I didn't read this whole thread before responding to your earlier remark. Clearly there's lots of useless speculations being thrown around. Nonetheless, I was never hypothesizing about a "secret international space agency," but simply the possibility of a Military/Intelligence *program* to investigate Mars' artificial structures, one that employs NASA and/or JPL staff members under strict secrecy. If true, today it would likely consist simply of photo analysis (perhaps many more that have not been publically released), and team development. This is neither outlandish nor out of character nor out of jurisdiction of these agencies, whose stated jurisdiction is "national security." (China, after all, just announced publically they are going to be sending astronauts to the moon. A cold-war style space-race to Mars between china and the US could very well be just a matter of ego, but that's a lot of money they are talking about spending just to plant an American flag on the surface of a planet... and don't even suggest they would spend that amount in the interest of pure science)

<blockquote id="quote"><font size="2" face="Verdana, Arial, Helvetica" id="quote">quote:<hr height="1" noshade id="quote">"Ignoring" strikes me as a proper response to any speculation lacking credible evidence. No one is paying these agencies to investiagte speculations for which no credible evidence exists.<hr height="1" noshade id="quote"></blockquote id="quote"></font id="quote">

The MGS photos are indeed credible evidence that a much more technologically advanced civilization had colonized Mars.

<blockquote id="quote"><font size="2" face="Verdana, Arial, Helvetica" id="quote">quote:<hr height="1" noshade id="quote">As for ignoring hypotheses where credible evidence does exist, I can think of many good reasons for that, starting with it not being in the mission of intelligence agencies and most departments of the Pentagon. That means these agencies are not authorized to look into it.<hr height="1" noshade id="quote"></blockquote id="quote"></font id="quote">

Again, I have to differ with you on this. "National Security" is the primary, "authorized," function of the Military and Intelligence community, and we know they define this very broadly... in service mostly of the corporations.

<blockquote id="quote"><font size="2" face="Verdana, Arial, Helvetica" id="quote">quote:<hr height="1" noshade id="quote">What fits is that people at all levels have a strong desire to avoid "poison" projects, and researching UFOs or secret space programs cannot be good for the career of anyone doing this at his/her own initiative.<hr height="1" noshade id="quote"></blockquote id="quote"></font id="quote">

I certainly was never suggesting you or anyone spend any amount of time investigating either of these things. Again, I merely think that the MGS photos warrant investigation, and that the Military and Intelligence community of the world's #1 "Superpower" are not so niave' as too miss the significance of them, nor to or ignore them. They did not become the Superpower they are by being stupid.

<blockquote id="quote"><font size="2" face="Verdana, Arial, Helvetica" id="quote">quote:<hr height="1" noshade id="quote">I want answers in my lifetime, and I'm not feeling too particular about who supplies them.<hr height="1" noshade id="quote"></blockquote id="quote"></font id="quote">

I agree, but this is not how the Military and Intelligence community thinks. They are not scientists like you, looking for truth. They are strategists looking to defeat their professed enemies and increase their power. This is what they are paid to do, in fact. This is a very sad thing, in my opinion, bcause I think the attitude is leading us to more war and suffering, and perhaps extinction, but nonetheless it's true.

<blockquote id="quote"><font size="2" face="Verdana, Arial, Helvetica" id="quote">quote:<hr height="1" noshade id="quote"><blockquote id="quote"><font size="2" face="Verdana, Arial, Helvetica" id="quote">quote:<hr height="1" noshade id="quote">Keep in mind that public acknowledgment of artificial structures on Mars would clearly generate calls from all countries for a world-wide, cooperative effort to explore Cydonia and for all knowledge gained to be used for the benefit of humanity as a whole.<hr height="1" noshade id="quote"></blockquote id="quote"></font id="quote">Sort of like the way that the theory of evolution has generated so much accord and international cooperation?<hr height="1" noshade id="quote"></blockquote id="quote"></font id="quote">

Artificial structures on Mars and the potential technology they may reveal from a manned mission to the planet certainly generate a potentially huge stake for all countries on the planet (a qualitatively different situation than the controvery over the theory of evolution). Short of getting their first, the only hope for weaker countries would be a public, cooperative effort.

<blockquote id="quote"><font size="2" face="Verdana, Arial, Helvetica" id="quote">quote:<hr height="1" noshade id="quote">And the grinch stole Christmas. But I've never met the grinch or an imperialist, or even seen one interviewed.<hr height="1" noshade id="quote"></blockquote id="quote"></font id="quote">

Have you heard of the Project for a New American Century. Google it and you will find self-identified imperialists. Rumsfeld, Wolfowitz, and many other members of the Bush Administration are members. Look up also their professed intellectual mentor, Leo Strauss, if you want to read a true imperialist. These are not fictional characters like the Grinch, Tom. Please try not to patronize.

<blockquote id="quote"><font size="2" face="Verdana, Arial, Helvetica" id="quote">quote:<hr height="1" noshade id="quote">I'm not saying there are no conspiracies. But most competent conspiracists surely are motivated to be careful enough that the public remains totally unaware of their activities. And their most successful tactic in keeping their secrets is apparently planting lots of internet rumors to keep the gullible busy chasing imaginary conspiracies.<hr height="1" noshade id="quote"></blockquote id="quote"></font id="quote">

You are most certianly correct here. We are in complete agreement. It took me a long time before I was even willing to read your work, because of the damage done to the issue by the disinfo elsewhere. I thought you were just another gullible conspiracist-type yourself when my friend first recommended you to me. Fortunately I caved in to my friend's pressure.

Emanuel