NASA the CONSPIRACY generator - Page 6

Dfrank · #**151** (**permalink**) 20-August-2007, 05:11 PM

RAF

I can not concede what I believe. I can concede that I can not prove it.

01101001 · #**152** (**permalink**) 20-August-2007, 05:16 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Dfrank

Temperature data is available, looks like a max Temperature of +3c. On sol 80 I would say yes it would support liquid water.

Pressure? Windspeed? Humidity?

Dfrank · #**153** (**permalink**) 20-August-2007, 05:16 PM

Kelfazin,

My interpretation was wrong, my bad.

Dfrank

R.A.F. · #**154** (**permalink**) 20-August-2007, 05:17 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Dfrank

Depends on what you call sensible.

Sensible?...oh, you mean like this?...

Quote:

If you believe that there are religious people who would like for earth to be the only place life exist and that they influence a lot of the budget of NASA then yes.

You have absolutely NO EVIDENCE for what you say...you're just making "stuff" up.

Not "sensible" at all.

Jason Thompson · #**155** (**permalink**) 20-August-2007, 05:25 PM

[QUOTE=Dfrank;1053168]Temperature data is available, looks like a max Temperature of +3c. On sol 80 I would say yes it would support liquid water.

Even with the minimum being tens of degrees below freezing? WHat I was asking is do you have the actual pressure and temperature data for that particular location at that particular time? What was the temperature and pressure then? I'd say you do not. Is that correct?

Quote:

Visible data is all that is available, and my interpretation is all that it was based on.

Right. So why should your interpretation automatically be correct?

Quote:

Depends on what you call sensible. If you believe that there are religious people who would like for earth to be the only place life exist and that they influence a lot of the budget of NASA then yes. If you do not believe that then the answer would be no.

That makes no sense. NASA has published plenty of data about the flow of liquid water on Mars, and constantly talks about the search for water on the planet. If those people were influencing NASA and were trying to cover it up, why did they not prevent those images and stories getting out?

Once again, we are entering the realms of concocting hugely elaborate and incosistent scenarios in order to support your own pet theory. This is very familiar, believe me.

Dfrank · #**156** (**permalink**) 20-August-2007, 05:30 PM

Binary,

I have found no other weather data for that day. I do not believe the rovers are equipped with an anemometer.

Neverfly · #**157** (**permalink**) 20-August-2007, 05:33 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Dfrank

Jason Thompson,

“So, do you have temperature and pressure data for the location and time of the picture that supports the possibility of standing liquid water? I would say you do not. Is that correct?”

Temperature data is available, looks like a max Temperature of +3c. On sol 80 I would say yes it would support liquid water.

http://marsrovers.jpl.nasa.gov/spotlight/20070612.html

“Given that, do you have any other evidence that it might be liquid water, beyond your purely visual interpretation that it looks like it might be? I would guess not. Is that correct?”

Visible data is all that is available, and my interpretation is all that it was based on.

And given that NASA and ESA have not been shy of publishing evidence of past and current water flow on Mars, can you provide a sensible reason that they would deliberately ignore water in a rover picture, rather than simply moving on because they identified it as something other than water? I would guess not. Is that correct.

Depends on what you call sensible. If you believe that there are religious people who would like for earth to be the only place life exist and that they influence a lot of the budget of NASA then yes. If you do not believe that then the answer would be no.

Hit the QUOTE button at the bottom right of the persons post that you wish to quote and the quotes will automatically be formed for you Dfrank.

If religious people had financial control over NASA I doubt there would be any space program!

you have traveled from minor CT into the absurd!

DO not make a statement that has no basis.
This is NOT the forum for discussing could-be's, maybe's, what if's and "I think there's a cover up I canot or will not try to prove exists."

Speculation is pretty much pointless- so don't bother.

JayUtah · #**158** (**permalink**) 20-August-2007, 05:35 PM

My rationale was it looked like a target of interest...

According to your judgment.

...and should have been investigated.

According to your judgment.

You may not like my rationale, but it is what it is.

It's not a matter of liking it or disliking it. It's a matter of asking whether it's founded upon anything other than supposition. If you're going to accuse people of deception and call their judgment into question based on what you would have done, you have the burden of proof to show that your judgment is objectively reasonable. Apparently you can't.

Neverfly · #**159** (**permalink**) 20-August-2007, 05:38 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Jason Thompson

(SNIP)

Once again, we are entering the realms of concocting hugely elaborate and incosistent scenarios in order to support your own pet theory. This is very familiar, believe me.

Absolutely!

Dfrank · #**160** (**permalink**) 20-August-2007, 05:38 PM

Jason,

Sensible is an openion.

JayUtah · #**161** (**permalink**) 20-August-2007, 05:41 PM

I think that is were the similarities end.

Hogwash. Galileo wrote extensively on his observations and used sound logic to prove that his proposal was objectively correct. You are nothing at all like Galileo, and you are not being unfairly persecuted.

Dfrank · #**162** (**permalink**) 20-August-2007, 05:44 PM

The things a human believes is personal. The external stimuli for these conclusions are just as varied as individuals themselves.

JayUtah · #**163** (**permalink**) 20-August-2007, 05:45 PM

If you believe that there are religious people who would like for earth to be the only place life exist and that they influence a lot of the budget of NASA then yes.

Are you claiming that this is why NASA did not follow up on your alleged "water anomalies?"

Fazor · #**164** (**permalink**) 20-August-2007, 05:46 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Dfrank

The things a human believes is personal. The external stimuli for these conclusions are just as varied as individuals themselves.

Okay, if these beliefs are personal and vary from human to human, then why do you say NASA was wrong because they didn't share your belief? (i.e., "they should have followd up and invistigated the area").

Or are you saying, it's okay if you believe something different than someone else, but they are suppose to believe everything you believe?

In other words, you can't have it both ways; and "belief" is no basis for scientific investigation.

JayUtah · #**165** (**permalink**) 20-August-2007, 05:48 PM

The external stimuli for these conclusions are just as varied as individuals themselves.

Hogwash. The truth is not different for you than it is for everyone else. What you choose to believe and why is your own business. Foisting your subjective beliefs off onto others and judging them for acting in a way that contradicts those beliefs is prejudiced, unfair, and irresponsible. If you are alleging that your beliefs are objectively true, then you have the burden to supply objective proof before expecting anyone to accept that allegation.

Dfrank · #**166** (**permalink**) 20-August-2007, 05:51 PM

JayUtah

Wow I just thought of something. The same force that stopped Galileo’s beliefs and sent him to his house could still be raining influence today. Nah, that’s too crazy. Similar though

Dfrank

Nicolas · #**167** (**permalink**) 20-August-2007, 05:52 PM

Quote:

The things a human believes is personal. The external stimuli for these conclusions are just as varied as individuals themselves.

That's why we ask a factual backup of your belief.

Dfrank · #**168** (**permalink**) 20-August-2007, 05:54 PM

JayUtah

It would seem I have a lot to learn. When does expressing an opinion end and forcing your beliefs began?

Dfrank

JayUtah · #**169** (**permalink**) 20-August-2007, 05:56 PM

When does expressing an opinion end and forcing your beliefs began?

When you accuse others of impropriety in failing to act according to your personal opinion.

And that is the true generator of conspiracy theories: people who cannot separate belief from fact and who prejudice themselves against people on that basis.

Dfrank · #**170** (**permalink**) 20-August-2007, 05:57 PM

Fazor,

NASA is not an individual

JayUtah · #**171** (**permalink**) 20-August-2007, 05:59 PM

The same force that stopped Galileo’s beliefs and sent him to his house could still be raining influence today. Nah, that’s too crazy.

Since you've insinuated this twice, I'm going to ask my direct question again: Do you believe NASA failed to follow up on your "water anomalies" because they are being inappropriately influenced by a religious organization or movement interested in suppressing evidence of life on other planets? Please explicitly state whether you are arguing this point or not.

Dfrank · #**172** (**permalink**) 20-August-2007, 06:05 PM

JayUtah,

And that is the true generator of conspiracy theories: people who cannot separate belief from fact and who prejudice themselves against people on that basis.

The battle between belief and fact has been around for a long time. The world was round started as a belief. If beliefs can become facts then how do you say someone with a different belief is wrong?

Waiting for that answer.

Dfrank

Dfrank · #**173** (**permalink**) 20-August-2007, 06:11 PM

JayUtah,

Do you believe NASA failed to follow up on your "water anomalies" because they are being inappropriately influenced by a religious organization or movement interested in suppressing evidence of life on other planets? Please explicitly state whether you are arguing this point or not.

That’s the way I feel JayUtah. There is no way to prove that. We are not allowed to discuss religion or politics, are we?

Dfrank

JayUtah · #**174** (**permalink**) 20-August-2007, 06:13 PM

If beliefs can become facts then how do you say someone with a different belief is wrong?

Because not all beliefs become facts. I do not affirm that your belief is wrong, nor must I in order to dispute or disbelieve it. You have the burden to provide objective proof for your belief if you wish it to be established as fact. Until you are willing to do that, judging others for their disbelief in your statements is prejudicial.

Neverfly · #**175** (**permalink**) 20-August-2007, 06:16 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Dfrank

JayUtah,

And that is the true generator of conspiracy theories: people who cannot separate belief from fact and who prejudice themselves against people on that basis.

The battle between belief and fact has been around for a long time. The world was round started as a belief. If beliefs can become facts then how do you say someone with a different belief is wrong?

Waiting for that answer.

Dfrank

Because the belief was irrelevant to the fact the world is not and was not flat.

The point is not to just adopt or accept a belief based on what you want or what is popular. But on what is true and provable.

Neverfly · #**176** (**permalink**) 20-August-2007, 06:18 PM

JayUtah asked you to look into Quoting.

In a later post I told you how.
Im certain now Dfrank that you are not reading the posts people make.
Just skimming them and looking for something to refute at this point.

Dfrank · #**177** (**permalink**) 20-August-2007, 06:23 PM

I have been typing so fast and trying to answer all the questions. should we take a time out and let me try and fiquire this out?

Orion437 · #**178** (**permalink**) 20-August-2007, 06:23 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Dfrank

Visible data is all that is available, and my interpretation is all that it was based on.

And given that NASA and ESA have not been shy of publishing evidence of past and current water flow on Mars, can you provide a sensible reason that they would deliberately ignore water in a rover picture, rather than simply moving on because they identified it as something other than water? I would guess not. Is that correct.

Depends on what you call sensible. If you believe that there are religious people who would like for earth to be the only place life exist and that they influence a lot of the budget of NASA then yes. If you do not believe that then the answer would be no.

Technically, you should take this religious teory far beyond if you would like to make a point. Do you think that El Vaticano sends a letter to NASA asking to hide all proofs of possible water on mars? I think that "Da Vinci Code" type of thinking is baseless. Religions don´t have that much support these days.

Usually this "Religion" concept joins with Economics, Politics, Culture, War and , trying to demostrate how the visceral changes in those aspects could make an alien disclosue, a very dangerous one.

Lots of talking with little support on it.

JayUtah · #**179** (**permalink**) 20-August-2007, 06:24 PM

That’s the way I feel JayUtah.

Then why has it taken five pages for this prejudice to come to light?

There is no way to prove that.

Then it does not apply. I don't accept judgment based on imagination.

We are not allowed to discuss religion or politics, are we?

The moderators will advise us whether this discussion is disallowed under rule 12(C) or any other rule. In that there seems to be an exception for the impact of these contentious items on space programs and policy, I would say that a discussion of whether religion (organized or otherwise) inappropriately restricts NASA's exploration policy -- specifically in its search for extraterrestrial life -- is on-topic.

But as you've admitted you have no actual evidence, I see this new twist more as an attempt to steer a failing argument into the guardrail to avoid further embarrassment. At best it's disingenuous to have embarked on a debate that you knew all along was based in something that couldn't be discussed here.

So exactly what factual evidence do you have for anything you've claimed in this thread?

Neverfly · #**180** (**permalink**) 20-August-2007, 06:27 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Dfrank

I have been typing so fast and trying to answer all the questions. should we take a time out and let me try and fiquire this out?

excellent notion

You get to typing and defending and thinking about so many things at one time- you can get pretty scattered and looking at what you are trying to say is like looking through fractured glass.

Thread Tools
Show Printable Version Email this Page
Display Modes
Linear Mode Switch to Hybrid Mode Switch to Threaded Mode

Similar Threads
Thread	Thread Starter	Forum	Replies	Last Post
I Want My NASA TV!	Fraser	Universe Today Story Comments	5	17-November-2009 07:25 PM
More NASA Conspiracy	Faultline	Conspiracy Theories	4	28-August-2005 10:19 PM
A New Amazon Review	jrkeller	Conspiracy Theories	12	18-February-2004 10:52 PM
A laugh and a half	mbjvx	Conspiracy Theories	42	21-November-2003 07:23 PM