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

#1306    TheMacGuffin

TheMacGuffin

    Government Agent

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

Posted 20 November 2012 - 05:26 PM

View Postquillius, on 20 November 2012 - 02:26 PM, said:

why did NASA decide to comment on the back of the Kerrang interview......

could this be why


Kerrang! Radio reported at its website:
“Producer Alex contacted NASA to confirm Dr. Mitchell's story, this was their reply:

‘Dear Alex,
NASA does not track UFOs.
NASA is not involved in any sort of cover-up about alien life on this planet or anywhere in the universe.
Dr Mitchell is a great American, but we do not share his opinion on this issue.
Thanks for the opportunity to comment.’

http://www.thewhiten...82&forum_id=196



although I have seen this phrase banded about also:


A rep for NASA told CNN: "NASA does not track UFOs. NASA is not involved in any sort of cover-up about alien life on this planet or anywhere else - period."



NASA was even lying about that because they have indeed tacked UFOs in the past and gotten plenty of reports about them, even though they do not like to admit anything to the public at all.


#1307    JimOberg

JimOberg

    Psychic Spy

  • Member
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 1,832 posts
  • Joined:03 Sep 2007

Posted 20 November 2012 - 05:28 PM

View PostTheMacGuffin, on 20 November 2012 - 05:26 PM, said:

NASA was even lying about that because they have indeed tacked UFOs in the past and gotten plenty of reports about them, even though they do not like to admit anything to the public at all.

Like on Apollo-14, such as your recent post claimed? Where is the slightest evidence that there was a UFO incident on that mission -- with Ed Mitchell, who seems to have not noticed it.


#1308    TheMacGuffin

TheMacGuffin

    Government Agent

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

Posted 20 November 2012 - 05:31 PM

View Postmcrom901, on 20 November 2012 - 05:06 PM, said:

telescopes for surveillance; spy missions? i'm confused... at what resolving power?


That's one of the most interesting posts I've ever seen on here.

In fact, I am VERY interested in that whole subject of the military space program.


#1309    TheMacGuffin

TheMacGuffin

    Government Agent

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

Posted 20 November 2012 - 05:33 PM

View PostJimOberg, on 20 November 2012 - 05:28 PM, said:

Like on Apollo-14, such as your recent post claimed? Where is the slightest evidence that there was a UFO incident on that mission -- with Ed Mitchell, who seems to have not noticed it.


You're right, and I said that even before you did.  Remember?

Mitchell never mentioned any UFO incident on Apollo 14, although those "blue light" pictures have been publicly known for quite a while.

I find that very interesting too, but have no more information about it than what I already posted.

Edited by TheMacGuffin, 20 November 2012 - 05:34 PM.


#1310    quillius

quillius

    52.0839 N, 1.4328 E

  • Member
  • 5,051 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 20 November 2012 - 05:34 PM

View PostJimOberg, on 20 November 2012 - 05:28 PM, said:

Like on Apollo-14, such as your recent post claimed? Where is the slightest evidence that there was a UFO incident on that mission -- with Ed Mitchell, who seems to have not noticed it.

do you agree that NASA do not track UFO's? and /or never have done?


ps: I am off home now so will catch up tomorrow.....I have a feeling this debate could turn rather interesting tonight :)

Edited by quillius, 20 November 2012 - 05:36 PM.


#1311    TheMacGuffin

TheMacGuffin

    Government Agent

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

Posted 20 November 2012 - 05:37 PM

View PostJimOberg, on 20 November 2012 - 02:55 PM, said:

Apollo=14? That's Mitchell's mission.

What earthly reason -- or unearhtly reason -- can you possibly have to claim there's some 'unexplained' UFO event on Mitchell.s flight when he's explicitly stated he has NO personal experience with UFOs.?

How defiantly counter-fact [or deliberately ignorant of available explanations] do you insist on being?


I have already posted quote a few things about the "blue light" pictures from that mission, and I already said that I was aware of no UFO reports from Apollo 14.

You can go back in the thread and look for them if you want.  

No one responded to those posts at all, even though there were quite a few pictures in them.  I'm not going to keep posting the same things over and over again.


#1312    JimOberg

JimOberg

    Psychic Spy

  • Member
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 1,832 posts
  • Joined:03 Sep 2007

Posted 20 November 2012 - 05:42 PM

View Postquillius, on 20 November 2012 - 05:34 PM, said:

do you agree that NASA do not track UFO's? and /or never have done?

In my experience and research I've come to realize that NASA
ALWAYS
examines unusual visual phenomena outside their space vehicles.

Aside from scientific curiosity, the dominating motive is flight and crew safety.

What does that have to do with 'UFOs'?


#1313    TheMacGuffin

TheMacGuffin

    Government Agent

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

Posted 20 November 2012 - 05:43 PM

View Postbee, on 20 November 2012 - 01:11 PM, said:

@bmk...

IF Edgar Mitchell had got his info from a couple of girls you might have a point..... :P


Especially because those girls must be long gone by now.


#1314    TheMacGuffin

TheMacGuffin

    Government Agent

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

Posted 20 November 2012 - 05:48 PM

View Postquillius, on 20 November 2012 - 02:32 PM, said:

hey McG, could it be that one of these members of the group went on to assist in setting up NASA?

also what do you make of Hoaglands discussion with Edgar on NASA being there for National security as a main


Before there was NASA there was NACA, the National Advisory Committee for Aeronautics.  Started in 1915, it was always heavily military in orientation.  




#1315    TheMacGuffin

TheMacGuffin

    Government Agent

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

Posted 20 November 2012 - 05:53 PM

View Postsynchronomy, on 20 November 2012 - 05:07 PM, said:

Perhaps including NASA as a defence agency of the United States, was a just-in-case clause?  Just speculating here.  I'm sure when NASA was first created, no one could imagine the direction that the agency could be taking, regarding what discoveries and/or technology might be developed once space exploration had really taken hold.
I recall at least one shuttle mission (I'm sure there were others) which was cloaked in secrecy as it was (IIRC) deploying a military satellite.  Maybe including NASA as a defence agency is necessary in order to, if need be, implement executive orders to exempt portions of missions, or their entirety, from FOI requests?
Seems to me that the majority of NASA work is done quite openly and with a drive towards making discoveries and data available whenever possible.



At the time, its purpose was to take the lead over the Soviets or at least try to catch up to them in space, by landing the first men on the moon and so on.  It was basically created because of the Cold War, concern over the Sputnik launch in 1957 and so on.

Edited by TheMacGuffin, 20 November 2012 - 05:53 PM.


#1316    booNyzarC

booNyzarC

    Forum Divinity

  • Closed
  • 13,536 posts
  • Joined:18 Aug 2010
  • Gender:Not Selected

Posted 20 November 2012 - 06:01 PM

View PostTheMacGuffin, on 20 November 2012 - 05:37 PM, said:

I have already posted quote a few things about the "blue light" pictures from that mission, and I already said that I was aware of no UFO reports from Apollo 14.

You can go back in the thread and look for them if you want.  

No one responded to those posts at all, even though there were quite a few pictures in them.  I'm not going to keep posting the same things over and over again.

Didn't mcrom respond to those with links to the original images?  Weren't these "blue lights" conspicuously missing from the original images?

Or did I miss something?

If they weren't in the originals, what does that tell you MacG?


#1317    TheMacGuffin

TheMacGuffin

    Government Agent

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

Posted 20 November 2012 - 06:13 PM

When I think of blue light UFOs, I always recall the first UFO investigation in US history, when Congress looked into the blue lights seen off the coast of New England during the War of 1812.  At the time, it was thought that British spies and Loyalists were using blue lights to signal British ships.  

In fact, there was a pro-British group known as the Blue Lights, although the results of the Congressional investigation were inconclusive so far as I can recall.

"During the War of 1812, they were called "Blue Lights" because of the common belief and reports from the United States Navy that they would shine blue lights to alert the British blockading ships of escaping American ships, or to alert British ships to come ashore and carry out illegal trade. They supported the Hartford Convention's disaffection with the War of 1812 and proposed secession of New England. Some members of the Essex Junto were Timothy Pickering, George Cabot, Fisher Ames, Francis Dana, Nathan Dane, Benjamin Goodhue, Stephen Higginson, Jonathon Jackson, John Lowell, Israel Thorndike, Nathaniel Tracy, and Theophilus Parsons."


http://www.google.com/url?sa=t&rct=j&q=&esrc=s&source=web&cd=1&ved=0CDAQFjAA&url=http%3A%2F%2Fwww.truthcontrol.com%2Fessex-junto&ei=8carUMKpNJOs8ATGw4DgDA&usg=AFQjCNGGTdhMeeh-xfcbG-YdGRn--Qw1eQ&sig2=p0ZpIDGwZ_UvJ16NR4-aRw


#1318    Sweetpumper

Sweetpumper

    Heatseeker

  • Member
  • 10,637 posts
  • Joined:19 Dec 2003
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:Avengers Tower

Posted 20 November 2012 - 06:16 PM

View PostJimOberg, on 20 November 2012 - 05:42 PM, said:

In my experience and research I've come to realize that NASA
ALWAYS
examines unusual visual phenomena outside their space vehicles.

Aside from scientific curiosity, the dominating motive is flight and crew safety.

What does that have to do with 'UFOs'?

Well, they are UFOs until identified, right?  They wouldn't need to examine them if they knew what they were.

Edited by Sweetpumper, 20 November 2012 - 06:16 PM.

"At it's most basic level, science is supposed to represent the investigation of the unexplained, not the explanation of the uninvestigated." - Hunt for the Skinwalker

"The ultimate irony of the Disclosure movement is that it deeply distrusts officialdom, while simultaneously looking to officialdom for the truth." - Robbie Graham Silver Screen Saucers

#1319    booNyzarC

booNyzarC

    Forum Divinity

  • Closed
  • 13,536 posts
  • Joined:18 Aug 2010
  • Gender:Not Selected

Posted 20 November 2012 - 06:17 PM

Makes me think of this...

Posted Image


#1320    TheMacGuffin

TheMacGuffin

    Government Agent

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

Posted 20 November 2012 - 06:25 PM

At New London, Connecticut in 1813-14, Stephen Decatur reported that British spies and agents were using Blue Lights to signal enemy ships, and it became a big public scandal.


“Blue lights,” the term Decatur used in his damning letter to the Secretary of the Navy, dated December 20, 1813, are defined by the Oxford Companion to Ships and the Sea as “A pyrotechnical preparation … used at night, in conjunction with gunfire, to transmit orders of the admiral of a squadron or fleet. By counting the number of gunshots fired, and observing the blue lights shown, the captain of a man-of-war could interpret through his night signal book what order the admiral was making.”

To Decatur, the situation was clear: His squadron’s movement had been betrayed to the British. But not everyone supported his conclusion. In the US Congress, Connecticut representatives Lyman Law and Jonathan Moseley, members of the Federalist Party, pushed for a congressional investigation.

The Gazette’s account suggests that the two lawmakers were irked not only by reports that the “blue lights” episode had actually occurred but also by the implication that the citizens of New London might have been party to such an outrageous betrayal. They sought the probe mostly to salvage New London’s good name. In the end, despite a smattering of support from mid-Atlantic and southern congressmen, the motion to launch an inquiry was tabled. Congressman John C. Calhoun of South Carolina, one of the “War Hawks” who had agitated for what became the War of 1812, declared that it was much ado about nothing. “Too diminutive” were the words attributed to Calhoun in the newspaper account, but in New London, the “blue lights” controversy burned on.

http://connecticuthi...us-blue-lights/

Edited by TheMacGuffin, 20 November 2012 - 06:25 PM.





0 user(s) are reading this topic

0 members, 0 guests, 0 anonymous users