Jump to content
Join the Unexplained Mysteries community today! It's free and setting up an account only takes a moment.
- Sign In or Create Account -

Declassified files reveal AATIP's 'out there' research


UM-Bot
 Share

Recommended Posts

1 hour ago, Nnicolette said:

No, it was announced as a missile launched and crashed into the moon. Eventually explained as a test to see how much water was inside. doesnt anyone ever read the news?

Rockets are not missiles. That's why they called it a rocket.

  • Like 4
Link to comment
Share on other sites

 
4 hours ago, Nnicolette said:

No, it was announced as a missile launched and crashed into the moon. Eventually explained as a test to see how much water was inside. doesnt anyone ever read the news?

It wasn’t a missile. It was a rocket stage. 
 

Cheers,

Badeskov

  • Like 3
Link to comment
Share on other sites

4 hours ago, Nnicolette said:

No, it was announced as a missile launched and crashed into the moon. Eventually explained as a test to see how much water was inside. doesnt anyone ever read the news?

Where and when was it announced as a missle?

  • Like 3
Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 hours ago, onlookerofmayhem said:

Where and when was it announced as a missle?

Yeah, well, a missile only works within Earth’s atmosphere as it is using the oxygen from it. A rocket, on the other hand, brings its own oxygen along with the propellant. Big difference. 
 

Cheers,

Badeskov

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

4 hours ago, onlookerofmayhem said:

Where and when was it announced as a missle?

Well it was their fault after all as they did suggested initially they are going to sent rockets to bomb the moon. 

I see they admitted a little having mislead the population in this article https://www.csmonitor.com/Technology/Horizons/2009/1009/nasa-moon-bombing-did-nasa-really-drop-a-bomb-on-the-moon

 

To those people who may may have been misled by the overuse of the word "bomb" -- at The Monitor and elsewhere -- to describe NASA's LCROSS mission

Link to comment
Share on other sites

19 minutes ago, qxcontinuum said:

Well it was their fault after all as they did suggested initially they are going to sent rockets to bomb the moon. 

I see they admitted a little having mislead the population in this article https://www.csmonitor.com/Technology/Horizons/2009/1009/nasa-moon-bombing-did-nasa-really-drop-a-bomb-on-the-moon

 

To those people who may may have been misled by the overuse of the word "bomb" -- at The Monitor and elsewhere -- to describe NASA's LCROSS mission

So the Christian Science Monitor incorrectly used the term "bomb" when reporting on the LCROSS mission. I can't find any actual NASA or governmental reports or descriptions using that term. Though it seems many outlets, hyperbolically and more click baitedly, described it as such. I did find a few other corrective articles from sites that described it as a "bomb" or "a mission to bomb the moon".

So it wasn't a bomb or a nuclear device as you and @Nnicolette have claimed, correct?

  • Like 3
  • Thanks 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

29 minutes ago, onlookerofmayhem said:

So the Christian Science Monitor incorrectly used the term "bomb" when reporting on the LCROSS mission. I can't find any actual NASA or governmental reports or descriptions using that term. Though it seems many outlets, hyperbolically and more click baitedly, described it as such. I did find a few other corrective articles from sites that described it as a "bomb" or "a mission to bomb the moon".

So it wasn't a bomb or a nuclear device as you and @Nnicolette have claimed, correct?

Nah, it wasn’t a bomb. It was an inert big chunk of metal they happened to use to get some measurements of ejecta. 
 

Cheers,

Badeskov

Edited by badeskov
  • Like 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 minute ago, badeskov said:

Nah, it wasn’t a bomb. It was an inert big chunk of metal they happened to use to get some measurements of ejecta. 
 

Cheers,

Badeskov

I'm well aware.

I was hoping that the parties, who earlier in the thread claimed it was a bomb and/or a nuke, were going to rescind there claims and admit their error.

  • Like 4
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Someone claims that nukes were used n the Moon and then one of them asks whether we bother to read about science.

I was well aware of the mission before it detected water on the Moon. Nukes and bombs on the Moon is a bad description of the LCROSS mission.

Can any of the two tell us which mission will next use an impactor?

  • Haha 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Post deleted.

Edited by badeskov
Wrong quote.
Link to comment
Share on other sites

15 hours ago, onlookerofmayhem said:

I'm well aware.

I was hoping that the parties, who earlier in the thread claimed it was a bomb and/or a nuke, were going to rescind there claims and admit their error.

I’m aware that you are aware - your last sentence in what I quoted kinda made that abundantly clear :P I was just agreeing with you.

Cheers,

Badeskov

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

On 4/21/2022 at 6:08 PM, badeskov said:

Hi Astro,

I would actually disagree. A lot of military projects actually yield something useful, albeit not always what they actually aimed for.

Cheers,

Badeskov

I agree. Funding gets pulled daily for projects in the military that are not producing.

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

 
14 hours ago, Nobu said:

I agree. Funding gets pulled daily for projects in the military that are not producing.

There is a long history of military projects that went years and years that had no hope of producing anything. The best example by far was the nuclear plane.

Can you tell me which military projects were cancelled yesterday since you know they get cancelled every day? How about the ones that were cancelled on Monday. I would love to know since Biden's proposed budget increases military spending.

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

On 4/28/2022 at 11:41 AM, astrobeing said:

There is a long history of military projects that went years and years that had no hope of producing anything. The best example by far was the nuclear plane.

Can you tell me which military projects were cancelled yesterday since you know they get cancelled every day? How about the ones that were cancelled on Monday. I would love to know since Biden's proposed budget increases military spending.

Oh my. I think you just confused me for the other user that has a similar user name: @NobuActuallyCaresAboutYourRequest

 

You can go to any defense website and see new programs that start and the ones being cut… for each year.

 

or not.

 

I don’t care.

  • Haha 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

18 hours ago, Nobu said:

Oh my. I think you just confused me for the other user that has a similar user name: @NobuActuallyCaresAboutYourRequest

You can go to any defense website and see new programs that start and the ones being cut… for each year.

or not.

I don’t care.

Yeah, I didn't think you knew.

  • Like 4
Link to comment
Share on other sites

On 4/28/2022 at 9:41 AM, astrobeing said:

There is a long history of military projects that went years and years that had no hope of producing anything. The best example by far was the nuclear plane.

Can you tell me which military projects were cancelled yesterday since you know they get cancelled every day? How about the ones that were cancelled on Monday. I would love to know since Biden's proposed budget increases military spending.

Hi Astro,

i have actually been part of military programs where funding was cut. Partly because of not meeting deadlines, but also because funds were reallocated. 
 

Obviously, these were not part of the high profile programs as which you correctly allude to go on and on. More some esoteric programs that the military had some rather outlandish ideas about, but I unfortunately I had no hands in writing the proposals for - I was just tasked with them after approval. 
 

Cheers,

Badeskov

  • Thanks 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 hours ago, badeskov said:

Obviously, these were not part of the high profile programs as which you correctly allude to go on and on. More some esoteric programs that the military had some rather outlandish ideas about, but I unfortunately I had no hands in writing the proposals for - I was just tasked with them after approval.

Where can I read about these?

Another good example happened after World War 2 when the Army was designing and not building many rocket designs. For years Army rocket scientists mostly sat around drawing up complicated and impractical designs for rockets and then arguing over whose design was least ridiculous. Some of the designs were much like giant Saturn V rockets which had no chance of actually being built at that time which seemed to be the intention. They were sure there was no rush to build anything because the Soviet Union was years behind... until they launched Sputnik. When that happened an investigation showed that there had been very little serious development in rocket design, and for years we had been paying a lot of smart people to just draw things on paper all day. When the time came to actually building these rockets it was clear the Army didn't have much practical experience.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now
 Share

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    • No registered users viewing this page.