More Soft Disclosure by the MSM?

[BlueGem]

These two articles caught my eye yesterday. They allude to what many here on the forum either know, or speculate about. If I am correct about these, then these articles are a great example of seeding ideas into the general public, making them think more about things that are taken for granted.

http://www.dailymail.co.uk/sciencetech/article-2121135/So-DID-moon-Moon-rocks-evidence-space-rock-supposed-knocked-bits-Earth.html

"A huge space rock called Theia smashed into our planet more than four billion years ago, knocking a clump of material into space, creating the moon - at least that's the theory.
There's just one problem: there's no evidence that Theia was there at all.
A new study has found no trace of Theia in rocks from the moon - leaving scientists to puzzle over how our satellite got there without a Mars-sized object slamming into the young Earth."

And also:

http://www.dailymail.co.uk/sciencetech/article-2121102/Ringside-seat-Big.html

"Two huge new planets spotted by a telescopes in Chile are the oldest planets detected outside our solar system - and have been there since before the Milky Way was fully formed.
Dr Johny Setiawan, whose team found the planets orbiting the star HIP 11952 said: 'If there was once intelligent civilisation there, it would have watched how the Universe started expanding after the Big Bang and how galaxies and the first stars formed.'
The planets are thought to be three times as old as Earth, and were formed 12.8 billion years ago."

I know the Daily Mail is not the most reputable paper ever, but I thought it strange that these two articles would appear on the same day. The mere mention of possible life elsewhere in the universe is not something the MSM is fond of doing. Hopefully this speaks for itself.

BlueGem

[math330]

Nice one, thank you! I find it strange that the Mail even ran these stories.. on the same day as well, that's something

and more soft disclosure here? They always said life outside of Earth couldn't exist with water present, and now they've found a water planet (http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/science-environment-17117030) which is 'like no planet we know of' :)
And then, today, there are billions of super Earths in our Galaxy, (http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/science-environment-17117030) in habitable zones with liquid water.

[BlueGem]

Thanks for the input Math330. It's interesting to track the progression of articles like these.It is usually a slow trickle of true information sandwiched between two lies, so maybe this is a sign of more fluid disclosure as we progress through this year?

[jcocks]

http://www.nydailynews.com/news/world/billions-potentially-habitable-planets-discovered-milky-article-1.1053118

This story has been making the rounds on many newspapers the last day or so...

Now they're saying TENS OF BILLIONS of "super earths" with liquid water on them could exist in our galaxy alone.

We're definitely being softened up for the "discovery" of extraterrestrial life. Byt the time disclosure occurs we'll be just about expecting it - or at least the sceptics will be a lot less sceptical.

[BlueGem]

here is another article designed for helping people think for themselves. It's an open-minded overview of Area-51, not biased in anyway.

"Few places in the world are surrounded by a similar amount of intrigue than Nevada's Area 51. Sifting through all the hundreds of theories would be nearly impossible, but here are five of the biggest controversies surrounding the base."

http://www.buzzfeed.com/factorfaked/the-biggest-mysteries-of-area-51

Can anyone else add more to this list of "soft disclosure"? Cheers.

[BlueGem]

Getting the public used to the idea of terraforming? Perhaps this article is innocent enough, although I think there's more to it.

"The thin atmosphere of Mars means that the planet is blasted with 250 times more radiation than Earth - so life on the surface is unlikely.
Subterranean tubes, protected from the deadly rays, could provide a 'haven' for life - particularly if water was present."

http://www.dailymail.co.uk/sciencetech/article-2125980/Volcanic-pits-detected-Mars-offer-save-haven-life-scientists-believe--a.html#ixzz1rITYhULA

Is this an example of a long-known truth sandwiched between "current" mainstream information? This article reminds me of these 'tubes' snapped on the surface of Mars that are apparently formed by cyclical sedimentary action:

http://farm3.static.flickr.com/2176/1933816887_82231f4f8c.jpg

[BlueGem]

This one alludes to reptilian life on other planets. The comments below the article are quite interesting too:

http://www.dailymail.co.uk/sciencetech/article-2128650/Welcome-new-lizard-overlords-New-study-suggests-alien-worlds-super-intelligent-dinosaurs.html

[Hermeticus]

These two articles caught my eye yesterday. They allude to what many here on the forum either know, or speculate about. If I am correct about these, then these articles are a great example of seeding ideas into the general public, making them think more about things that are taken for granted.

http://www.dailymail.co.uk/sciencetech/article-2121135/So-DID-moon-Moon-rocks-evidence-space-rock-supposed-knocked-bits-Earth.html

"A huge space rock called Theia smashed into our planet more than four billion years ago, knocking a clump of material into space, creating the moon - at least that's the theory.
There's just one problem: there's no evidence that Theia was there at all.
A new study has found no trace of Theia in rocks from the moon - leaving scientists to puzzle over how our satellite got there without a Mars-sized object slamming into the young Earth."

And also:

http://www.dailymail.co.uk/sciencetech/article-2121102/Ringside-seat-Big.html

BlueGem

There's an interesting book I heard about while listening to Coast to Coast AM called Who Built the Moon? (http://www.amazon.com/Who-Built-Moon-Christopher-Knight/dp/1842931636). It explains all the astronomically (pun intended) impossible coincidences about the nature and ephemera (word choice?) of the moon.

[BlueGem]

Thanks Hermeticus.

Yet another Daily mail article here alludes to what you are saying. There are a whole host of people who have been saying the moon is an artificial satellite for so long now. This article highlights some very interesting questions:

http://www.dailymail.co.uk/sciencetech/article-2121135/So-DID-moon-Moon-rocks-evidence-space-rock-supposed-knocked-bits-Earth.html