Jump to content




Welcome to Unexplained Mysteries! Please sign in or create an account to start posting and to access a host of extra features.


* * * - - 4 votes

More NASA UFO's?

ufo nasa

  • Please log in to reply
1528 replies to this topic

Poll: Are these UFO's? (51 member(s) have cast votes)

Do these videos contain images of UFO's?

  1. Yes (22 votes [43.14%] - View)

    Percentage of vote: 43.14%

  2. No (29 votes [56.86%] - View)

    Percentage of vote: 56.86%

Vote Guests cannot vote

#1216    TheMacGuffin

TheMacGuffin

    Government Agent

  • Member
  • 4,159 posts
  • Joined:30 Jun 2012

Posted 19 November 2012 - 05:31 PM

View PostJimOberg, on 19 November 2012 - 05:26 PM, said:

What a fanatic believer sees as a 'hatchet job' is what a researcher sees as a 'credibility check'. And the evidence that in later years the wilder stories from Cooper were utterly unworthy of belief is so overwhelming, the only recourse is to make the investigation of claims [and independent confirmation or refutation of them] look like a personal attack on character. Which is false.


I am not a "fanatic believer" in anything, if that's what you mean to imply, nor are you some kind of neutral, objective, independent researcher, at least not to anyone who knows your record.


#1217    JimOberg

JimOberg

    Psychic Spy

  • Member
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 1,780 posts
  • Joined:03 Sep 2007

Posted 19 November 2012 - 05:31 PM

View PostTheMacGuffin, on 19 November 2012 - 05:22 PM, said:

I told ya so?  Didn't I tell ya so?

No, you told us Mitchell said NASA was involved in a coverup.

At one point, he says he thinks some people 'involved with the moon landing' may have 'known' about UFOs.

Big difference, at least in my mind -- but clearly, not in yours.


#1218    quillius

quillius

    451168443513224154

  • Member
  • 4,743 posts
  • Joined:04 Aug 2010
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:LONDON

  • A man should look for what is, and not for what he thinks should be.
    Albert Einstein

Posted 19 November 2012 - 05:36 PM

View Postmcrom901, on 19 November 2012 - 05:23 PM, said:

why couldn't mitchell be involved in some psyops?

:alien:

please do elaborate Mr M


#1219    quillius

quillius

    451168443513224154

  • Member
  • 4,743 posts
  • Joined:04 Aug 2010
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:LONDON

  • A man should look for what is, and not for what he thinks should be.
    Albert Einstein

Posted 19 November 2012 - 05:40 PM

View PostbooNyzarC, on 19 November 2012 - 05:28 PM, said:

Without him having direct evidence I don't see how it can be honestly interpreted any other way.  We've been over this many times.

He believes what he has been told by people that he has a high degree of trust in and respect for.  That isn't knowledge, it is belief.  Very very strong belief, but belief nonetheless.

although he does suggest 'having SEEN direct evidence' does he not? at very least he was shown photos, so lets not debate whether photos are evidence or not...

dont you find it strange Boon that someone of Dr Edgars intelligence and scientific methodology would be so easily fooled?

anyway I prob wont be back until tomorrow, I will have dug up some of my previous research into Edgar.....

looking forward to some of Psyche's input a little later......


#1220    mcrom901

mcrom901

    plasmoid ninja

  • Member
  • 5,547 posts
  • Joined:29 Jan 2009
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:multiverse

  • space debris, decided to evolve and become us!

Posted 19 November 2012 - 05:40 PM

View Postmcrom901, on 19 November 2012 - 05:23 PM, said:

why couldn't mitchell be involved in some psyops?

'he can't implicate nasa due to his nda.... but he's allowed to blow the whistle on the government'

:whistle:


#1221    quillius

quillius

    451168443513224154

  • Member
  • 4,743 posts
  • Joined:04 Aug 2010
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:LONDON

  • A man should look for what is, and not for what he thinks should be.
    Albert Einstein

Posted 19 November 2012 - 05:41 PM

View Postmcrom901, on 19 November 2012 - 05:40 PM, said:

'he can't implicate nasa due to his nda.... but he's allowed to blow the whistle on the government'

:whistle:

:w00t: :gun:


#1222    quillius

quillius

    451168443513224154

  • Member
  • 4,743 posts
  • Joined:04 Aug 2010
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:LONDON

  • A man should look for what is, and not for what he thinks should be.
    Albert Einstein

Posted 19 November 2012 - 05:43 PM

View PostJimOberg, on 19 November 2012 - 05:31 PM, said:

No, you told us Mitchell said NASA was involved in a coverup.

At one point, he says he thinks some people 'involved with the moon landing' may have 'known' about UFOs.

Big difference, at least in my mind -- but clearly, not in yours.

Jim, one final question or two for you if I may,.

1-- what do you make of Edgars insistance of visitation and government cover ups.

2-- do you not think there is an unkown phenomena at work with regards to some UFO reports, form what I read I think you are of the belief they all carry known prosaic explanations, am I wrong in this evaluation of your position?


#1223    mcrom901

mcrom901

    plasmoid ninja

  • Member
  • 5,547 posts
  • Joined:29 Jan 2009
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:multiverse

  • space debris, decided to evolve and become us!

Posted 19 November 2012 - 05:45 PM

View Postquillius, on 19 November 2012 - 05:36 PM, said:

please do elaborate Mr M

that he has been selected by the intelligence circles to perpetuate the myths which serve specific requirements?


#1224    JimOberg

JimOberg

    Psychic Spy

  • Member
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 1,780 posts
  • Joined:03 Sep 2007

Posted 19 November 2012 - 05:45 PM

So in the end, we revert to the impossible-to-disprove 'get-out-of-reality-free' card of the fanatic: anything Mitchell says that seems contrary to believing in the NASA coverup, is part of the NASA coverup.

Even when he says he is under no restriction about saying anything about UFOs he may have learned at NASA, it is really proof he IS under restriction and must lie about it.

Sigh.


#1225    JimOberg

JimOberg

    Psychic Spy

  • Member
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 1,780 posts
  • Joined:03 Sep 2007

Posted 19 November 2012 - 05:50 PM

View Postquillius, on 19 November 2012 - 05:43 PM, said:

Jim, one final question or two for you if I may,.

1-- what do you make of Edgars insistance of visitation and government cover ups.

It's an exciting thesis, emotionally rewarding, and consistent with 'forward-thinking' and optimism, and there IS a lot of testimony that seems to corroborate it. And the way he expresses it, it is deliberately non-refutable, which is the clue I detect that makes it worthy of more than a little skepticism.


Quote

2-- do you not think there is an unkown phenomena at work with regards to some UFO reports, form what I read I think you are of the belief they all carry known prosaic explanations, am I wrong in this evaluation of your position?

Could easily be true, but we'll never know for sure as we drown in 'noise' that masquerades any readable signal. There are identifiable stimuli very worthy of closer study, and there are intriguing stories that appear to be resistent to prosaic explanation. What they really prove, so far, is nothing -- but they have such a potential for advancing human knowledge that they deserve study, especially BETTER study than has so far been applied.


#1226    TheMacGuffin

TheMacGuffin

    Government Agent

  • Member
  • 4,159 posts
  • Joined:30 Jun 2012

Posted 19 November 2012 - 05:54 PM

John Schuessler is one of the genuine NASA whistleblowers, starting with the Gemini 4 UFO sightings.  

He also said that Oberg mocked astronaut James McDivitt and basically tried to put words in his mouth, which was definitely not appreciated.  McDivitt saw what he saw and NASA covered it up.  What's new?



"McDivitt said he saw this red object that went across his viewscreen and he took pictures of it but the pictures he got were not of an oblong object like he saw but of something else. I think he felt he was deceived slightly, I can’t put words in his mouth …

RT: like Roswell, people who saw the debris said that isn’t what we saw …

And other people put words in your mouth. Jim Oberg’s been really good at putting words in McDivitt’s mouth and even called him “a bleary-eyed astronaut” like he couldn’t see anything which was a bunch of baloney. He would not have been flying if he couldn’t see.

RT: ridicule is uniformly effective.

It really is. That’s one thing the media likes is those kind of things. They don’t have to be factual. Nobody cares.

RT: other astronauts reported sightings – Deke Slayton.

That’s correct. Yes, he described it as a disc. It’s in his book. And Gordon Cooper is very outspoken, very much so. I take it more or less at face value. I have a natural skepticism from working in the space business and I don’t accept everything anybody says. I don’t discard anything out of hand either. I think one of the biggest mistakes people make in this field is discarding things out of hand because it doesn’t fit your paradigm or it’s not pleasing or could be embarrassing. That’s a real mistake.  I think the debunkers have done a great service in this line – they’ve gotten UFOlogists trying to be debunkers first rather than investigators first. They want to beat them to the draw which is stupid."


http://www.google.co...AFnsHGBok-hw3Bw


#1227    TheMacGuffin

TheMacGuffin

    Government Agent

  • Member
  • 4,159 posts
  • Joined:30 Jun 2012

Posted 19 November 2012 - 06:06 PM

For those who are interested in what was really going on with NASA and UFO's, I recommend this radio interview with John Schuessler rather than just accepting Oberg's views on these maters.

There is indeed a UFO cover up at NASA, always has been, and Oberg has always been part of it.

The actual interview starts at 30:00 minutes, when Schuessler starts the interview with the Gemini 4 story.  McDivitt was angry with the way that NASA handled his sighting and did not even release the actual pictures he took.



Edited by TheMacGuffin, 19 November 2012 - 06:13 PM.


#1228    TheMacGuffin

TheMacGuffin

    Government Agent

  • Member
  • 4,159 posts
  • Joined:30 Jun 2012

Posted 19 November 2012 - 06:22 PM

Schuessler said quite clearly that NASA told he astronauts not to talk about their UFO sightings, so most of them didn't.  And yes, I believe what he says far more than Oberg.


#1229    JimOberg

JimOberg

    Psychic Spy

  • Member
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 1,780 posts
  • Joined:03 Sep 2007

Posted 19 November 2012 - 06:25 PM

View PostTheMacGuffin, on 19 November 2012 - 05:54 PM, said:

John Schuessler is one of the genuine NASA whistleblowers, starting with the Gemini 4 UFO sightings.  He also said that Oberg mocked astronaut James McDivitt and basically tried to put words in his mouth, which was definitely not appreciated.  McDivitt saw what he saw and NASA covered it up.  What's new?

My original report was published more than 30 years ago, when memories were fresh and all witnesses still alive.

My home page link http://www.jamesober...ufo/gemini4.htm seems broken so here's the wayback link
http://web.archive.o...ufo/gemini4.htm

[From quarterly magazine UFO REPORT (Fall 1981)]
excerpt
At a news conference on June 11th, McDivitt gave more details about the object: "Near Hawaii... I saw a white object and it looked like it was cylindrical and it looked to me like there was a white arm sticking out of it . . . It looked a lot like an upper stage of a booster."

Speaking to Houston Post space reporter Jim Maloney late in 1975, McDivitt had given new details: "I never made a big deal out of it. It was something I definitely couldn't identify. I reported it to the ground . . . Ed was asleep and we were rotating at a pretty high rate in drifting flight. The windows were dirty, I recall . . . All of a sudden there was this white object out there. It looked like a beer can with a pencil sticking out of it at an angle. It had a definite cylinder shape, about three times as long as its diameter."
end excerpt

Schuessler says Mcdivitt saw a 'red' object? Who's putting words into whose mouth?


Quote

Schuessler: "And other people put words in your mouth. Jim Oberg’s been really good at putting words in McDivitt’s mouth and even called him “a bleary-eyed astronaut” like he couldn’t see anything which was a bunch of baloney. He would not have been flying if he couldn’t see."

Putting made-up words into quotation marks and attributing them falsely to somebody else is tacky, but that's what Schuessler has done here.

Here are more excerpts from my 1981 report, on the issue of 'seeing' in space.



The glare and contrasts of space can trick even an astronaut's eyesight, as illustrated by this sequence from the Gemini-4 voice tapes. Astronaut Edward White has just spotted an object out the window: "We've got an object out in front of us. It's not flashing like it's the booster. It appears that it's that type of an object unless it's picking up some glow from the sun. It appears a very bright, very bright object. (30-second pause) It was the booster. I can see the lights flashing on it now ... Just as it goes into darkness, the reflection of the sun on the booster causes a very bright image. That's the object I had seen earlier."


Was there anything which might have affected McDivitt's eyesight during this part of the flight? A space magazine reported two items of interest: "The 100 percent oxygen atmosphere created some red eyes during the first day or so of the flight..." Furthermore, "Operation of the waste collection systems was [sic] generally satisfactory, except for leakage of urine into the cabin . . . McDivitt at one point told the ground that 'I thought those fumes around 24 hours were bad. You ought to be up here now!' "


CAPCOM: Jim, the Flight Surgeon wonders if he can say anything about your eyes. Have you had any problems? Any drying or anything at all? McDivitt: Yes. Listen, I had a lot of trouble with my eyes at the end of the first day. I wasn't sure I was going to be able to hack it. But they have cleared up now.... CAPCOM: O.K. You don't have any problem at all now with them? McDivitt: No problem at all. Though I was really bad between about 18 hours and 36 hours. Readers note: As the transcripts show, the UFO was reported at 29 hours, 52 minutes.


So was Schuessler's fictional put-down rational, or deceptive? With the full comments, you be the judge.


#1230    TheMacGuffin

TheMacGuffin

    Government Agent

  • Member
  • 4,159 posts
  • Joined:30 Jun 2012

Posted 19 November 2012 - 06:32 PM

Oberg also said that McDivitt never used his movie camera to get pictures of the UFO, but this was false.

Posted Image


http://www.google.co...pWtIbkHIv0HPMGA





0 user(s) are reading this topic

0 members, 0 guests, 0 anonymous users