1. Because NASA is essentially a military organization with info-classification being standard protocol when things 'fall' into national security. Thus secrecy is built into their mode of operation as per their charter.

2. Because several astronauts as well as other high level employees have gone public with the fact that they withhold vital information regarding ET/ETI.

__________________
Brett
Peters Creek, Alaska
─────────────────────────────────────────────
My moderation comments will appear in this color.
To report a post (even this one) to the moderation team, click the reporting icon in the upper-right corner of the post:
─────────────────────────────────────────────
◄ Rules For Posting To This Board ► ◄ Forum FAQs ► ◄ Conspiracy Theory Advice ► ◄ Alternate Theory Advice ►

Which astronauts and high-level employees?

__________________
"One does not require alien ruins in order to absorb a profound sense of wonder and mystery from the moon. That our civilization had actually visited it is miracle enough." Jason Roberts

Although NASA has flown military missions, it is a civilian organization.

It matters little what someone says, it matters a lot what they can prove.

So please elaborate...what are these "facts" you speak of?

__________________
"The facts gentlemen, and nothing but the facts, for careful eyes are narrowly watching." Isaac Asimov

Edgar Mitchell (longest moonwalk)
Gordon Cooper
Scott Carpenter
Clark McClelland
Maurice Chatelain
Norman Bergrun
Carl Wolf http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=R6QNzH4x1rY

NASA is only civilian in terms of their public side. If one reads their charter it is very clear as to their role when issues involve national security. You didn't think they'd set off into space without national security in mind did you?

Here are analyses of original NASA moon photos which clearly show artificial structures. One look is all it takes, there are hundreds:

http://www.lunomaly.com/

They are 100% on topic. Someone asked why NASA always gets suspected of withholding info etc...and I gave two extremely relevant reasons as to why.

Thanks for the welcome, glad to be here!

Oooh; I'd love to know how this works.

Please point me to where this is said.

Oh; and sorry to put restrictions on you, but I suspect it may be something that can apply to many non-military government organizations. So; tell me how the secrecy only applies as military.

__________________
Numbers are not case sensitive. (me)

Quoting from the original NASA Charter:

Sec. 305...(i)'NASA shall be considered a defense agency of the USA for the purpose of Chapter 17, title 35 of the United States Code'

Sec. 205...(d) No (NASA) information which has been classified for reasons of national security shall be included in any report made under this section...'

Title 35 deals with patents. Specifically: CHAPTER 17--SECRECY OF CERTAIN INVENTIONS AND FILING APPLICATIONS IN FOREIGN COUNTRY

Because they are considered a defense agency where patents and secrecy thereof (for national security reasons) are concerned, does not make them a military organization.

Your reference to § 205(d) appears incorrect and incomplete. Here's what I found for the National Aeronautics and Space Act of 1958 § 206 entitled, REPORTS TO CONGRESS:

(c) No information which has been classified for reasons of national security shall be included in any report made under this section, unless such information has been declassified by, or pursuant to authorization given by, the President.

This kind of provision has counterparts in many, many agencies, including mine. Putting classified information in a report without proper authorization and safeguards is a shortcut to the end of one's career.

__________________
Brett
Peters Creek, Alaska
─────────────────────────────────────────────
My moderation comments will appear in this color.
To report a post (even this one) to the moderation team, click the reporting icon in the upper-right corner of the post:
─────────────────────────────────────────────
◄ Rules For Posting To This Board ► ◄ Forum FAQs ► ◄ Conspiracy Theory Advice ► ◄ Alternate Theory Advice ►

1. Because NASA is essentially a military organization...

No, NASA is not "essentially" a military organization; it falls under defense protocols only when (1) using U.S. Dept. of Defense assets for the sake of convenience (e.g., high performance aircraft); or (2) when carrying out specific assignments regarding national defense in space. The latter role has been almost entirely subsumed by U.S. Space Command.

If it were "essentially" military it would resemble the military, not the dysfunctional public bureaucracy we see.

2. Because several astronauts as well as other high level employees have gone public with the fact that they withhold vital information...

Names, please.

We see this claim a lot. It boils down typically either to misquotations of astronauts, or to unofficial statements by people with only tangential association to NASA.

__________________
"Facts are stubborn things." --John Adams
Clavius Moon Base

For a time, the U.S. maintained separate military and civilian space operations. After Apollo, at the dawn of the Space Shuttle era, it was decreed that the U.S. would have only one space program that would serve both military and civilian purposes. Hence NASA, when acting under those auspices, had to respect military secrecy where appropriate. However beginning in the 1990s and continuing to this day, the U.S. government has recognized the need to have separate space programs and has dissected their roles: NASA handles the scientific and exploratory missions; the Air Force handles military operations.

__________________
"Facts are stubborn things." --John Adams
Clavius Moon Base

__________________
Brett
Peters Creek, Alaska
─────────────────────────────────────────────
My moderation comments will appear in this color.
To report a post (even this one) to the moderation team, click the reporting icon in the upper-right corner of the post:
─────────────────────────────────────────────
◄ Rules For Posting To This Board ► ◄ Forum FAQs ► ◄ Conspiracy Theory Advice ► ◄ Alternate Theory Advice ►

I'm sorry, but that is simply not true...although I'm sure Ed appreciates the thought.

__________________
"The facts gentlemen, and nothing but the facts, for careful eyes are narrowly watching." Isaac Asimov

Mitchell took part in two moon walks. During both of them he left the LM after Shepard and returned to it before Shepard. This makes it decidedly difficult for Mitchell to have walked on the moon longer than Shepard.

I would think that someone proclaiming to be an expert on NASA would know some basic information like this.

Actually it does take more than "one look".

Looking at that website, I noticed it was endorsed by a few familiar names...notably, John Lear, Mike Bara, and Keith Laney.

These people are NOT scientists...they do not "do" science. They see "anomalies" where none exist. If you are interested in the actual truth of the matter, then these people are the last you should turn to for evidence.

__________________
"The facts gentlemen, and nothing but the facts, for careful eyes are narrowly watching." Isaac Asimov

A list of names, what about them? (I cut the youtube link, if you have some evidence tell us here or provide links to a primary source if possible.

__________________
All Moderation in Purple
To report a post (even this one) to the moderation team, click the reporting icon in the upper-right corner of the post:
─────────────────────────────────────────────
◄Rules For Posting To This Board ► ◄Forum FAQs ► ◄ Conspiracy Theory Advice ► ◄ Alternate Theory Advice ►

Edgar Mitchell (longest moonwalk)

No, not the longest moonwalk. Further, Mitchell has no firsthand knowledge of any concealment. He only claimed that others had it. When Mitchell finally revealed his sources, they were consulted and said that Mitchell had misunderstood them.

Gordon Cooper
Scott Carpenter

The two astronauts whose statements are most commonly co-opted to suggest some sort of NASA agenda to conceal aliens. Each of these men worked for NASA. Each of these men mentioned something about UFOs at different points in their career. Unfortunately for the UFO fanatics, the two sets of circumstances do not coincide.

Clark McClelland

Disgruntled former employee; seems to have a habit of suing NASA. He makes lots of claims, but presents no verifiable evidence. Since he obviously has an axe to grind against NASA, his unfounded claims lack credibility.

Maurice Chatelain

A low-level former contractor who managed to convince people he was a high-ranking NASA administrator. Since UFO fanatics rarely check the credentials of their sources, the Chatelain story persists even years after he was exposed.

Norman Bergrun

The typical anomaly-hunter. His "inside" knowledge is simply his personal interpretation of publicly available information. While he once worked for NASA, none of his current activity relies on information or practice he incurred while working there.

Carl Wolf

Already discussed on this forum. Karl Wolf?

You didn't think they'd set off into space without national security in mind did you?

Since NASA plays with toys that can be used as weapons against the U.S., there are indeed certain obligations of secrecy. That is no different than many other industries. It does not mean they're keeping the secrets you believe they are.

Here are analyses of original NASA moon photos which clearly show artificial structures.

And what is your training and experience in photographic interpretation and analysis?

__________________
"Facts are stubborn things." --John Adams
Clavius Moon Base

Which ET?

__________________
Ach, mein Sinn, wo willst du endlich hin, wo soll ich mich erquicken? Bleib' ich hier, oder wünsch' ich mir Berg und Hügel auf den Rücken?
Bei der Welt ist gar kein Rat, und im Herzen steh'n die Schmerzen meiner Missetat, weil der Knecht den Herrn verleugnet hat.

Well, I have had a quick look and all I see so far are somewhat fuzzy (note: fuzzy and somewhat out of focus) black and white images where someone has added false colours to highlight some of the out of focus features. Not exactly an 'in depth analysis' in my book ..... but then maybe my book isn't the latest edition .....

__________________
The most exciting phrase to hear in science, the one that heralds new discoveries, is not Eureka! (I found it!) but rather, 'hmm.... that's funny...'
- Isaac Asimov

Are we alone in the Universe? Are we the only intelligent life? Who knows? But the universe is so BIG, it somehow seems such a waste of space if we are ....

Even -if- this was true, why would it be a problem? What would Nasa being Military have to do with anything?

I don't see one person ever makign a conspiracy that the miltary is prepared to blow up the world in 22 minutes flat...

And since when does the military ever keep secrets all that well anyway?

Remember the Iran-Contra scandal! (i was there)

The whole argument that the military is some how able to keep secrets when others cannot because of them being defense oriented, is about the most miss-informed and over used excuse conspriacies repeadely laud to the sky as if it it was some stroke of genius... when in actuality it's about as far from the truth as you could possibly get.

__________________
There is no problem that cannot be solved by a suitable application of high explosives - US Army Demolitions School

I just saw Hayley's comet, she waved, Said "why you always running in place? Even the man in the moon disappeared, Somewhere in the stratosphere" - Shinedown

http://worldsofothersuns.home.comcast.net/

If it's a female dominated humanoid race who are all extraordinarily beautiful, I demand full disclosure by our government now!!

No, that's Michael Jackson.

__________________
Spread the Love!

That site says, "Our mission is to stimulate conversation and debate in public and academic circles by publishing new photographic evidence of what are commonly referred to as "Structures on the Moon". We call these structures and other lunar anomalies "ULOs" (Unidentified Lunar Objects)." But you can't download most of their images unless you make a donation. I wonder why that might be.

__________________
"One does not require alien ruins in order to absorb a profound sense of wonder and mystery from the moon. That our civilization had actually visited it is miracle enough." Jason Roberts

It might be because he wants to get paid for all the hard and intense work it was to scour thousands of original NASA images.

You can donate as little as you want for the E-book.

NASA images, all of them- that's what they gave us.

Don't worry about anyone else.

All you have to do is look at the images yourself. It's all right there.

It might be because he wants to get paid for all the hard and intense work it was to scour thousands of original NASA images.

No. The kinds of "structures" being talked about here are merely artifacts of the brain's attempt to interpret abstract images. They occur in all such photos. It requires almost no effort to find them, republish them, and talk about them. There is no analysis or interpretation happening there.

Many of these sites have a clearly pecuniary motive.

__________________
"Facts are stubborn things." --John Adams
Clavius Moon Base

Don't worry about anyone else.

You don't understand. The people being quoted are simply other players in the "Moon anomalies for profit" game. These are the folks who hawk sensationalistic books and videos and make the circuit of fringe TV and radio shows trying to make names for themselves. Yet this site is referencing them as if they were some sort of relevant authority or expert. Real scientists and photo analysts don't pay any attention to this hogwash, not because there's an ideological obstacle but because there's no merit to the claims and methods.

All you have to do is look at the images yourself. It's all right there.

No, that's not how real image analysis and interpretation works. I have training in it. Imagining that you see "industrial complexes" and so forth in abstract patterns is nothing more than pareidolia. That's why real photographic analysts have methods and techniques for avoiding such interpretational pitfalls and instead discerning actual regularity and artificiality.

Your site has no more merit than seeing fluffy bunnies in clouds. Really, no more.

__________________
"Facts are stubborn things." --John Adams
Clavius Moon Base

Or I can go to a site like the ALSJ and look at thousands of NASA images without having to donate anything.

__________________
"One does not require alien ruins in order to absorb a profound sense of wonder and mystery from the moon. That our civilization had actually visited it is miracle enough." Jason Roberts

Just a quick comment. It was a race to supremacy. When Russia sent a man in space, the US tried to break the record. The only question is why Russia never sent any single Russian to step on the moon?

__________________
The search for the ultimate truth is man's greatest craving...