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.


- - - - -

G.Cooper encountered man-made flying saucers


  • Please log in to reply
573 replies to this topic

#181    booNyzarC

booNyzarC

    Forum Divinity

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

Posted 31 October 2012 - 05:35 AM

That's really &%$*($# well said my friend.  Apologies for the language filter, but it looks better than asterisks and frankly some things need the oomph that only profanity can provide.  :tu:


#182    TheMacGuffin

TheMacGuffin

    Government Agent

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

Posted 31 October 2012 - 06:05 AM

View Postpsyche101, on 31 October 2012 - 05:13 AM, said:

That really sounds like some people will cut of their nose to spite their face? To me Data is data.


No, I have never believed that.  That seems naive to an old intelligence officer like me, who is used to dealing with deceit.


#183    TheMacGuffin

TheMacGuffin

    Government Agent

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

Posted 31 October 2012 - 06:10 AM

View PostbooNyzarC, on 31 October 2012 - 04:52 AM, said:

I really hope you aren't falling for this BS psyche.  I'm confident that you aren't, but just the same I'd rather state it outright that I hope my suspicions are true and that you aren't falling for this absolute codswallop.

I can see that you are trying to keep on good relations with McG, and I'd like to as well,



Given our absolute differences in personality and worldviews, I cannot understand why you keep talking about "good relations".  That is meaningless under the circumstances and utterly impossible.  It's a complete mystery to me why you keep saying such obviously absurd things.  I don't understand it at all.  Never have.


#184    TheMacGuffin

TheMacGuffin

    Government Agent

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

Posted 31 October 2012 - 06:15 AM

View PostbooNyzarC, on 31 October 2012 - 01:06 AM, said:

How do you see it then?

The aliens have been here a long time and some of them are even based here.  We are dealing with a number of different groups--perhaps over 100--with many different agendas, and some of them are hostile.  The reason some of them are being seen so often is because they are already here or very close by.  In a nutshell, that's how i see it.  I have good reason to believe this.


#185    psyche101

psyche101

    Conspiracy Realist

  • Member
  • 30,759 posts
  • Joined:30 Nov 2005
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:Oz

  • If you stop to think, Remember to start again

Posted 31 October 2012 - 06:18 AM

View PostTheMacGuffin, on 31 October 2012 - 06:05 AM, said:

No, I have never believed that.  That seems naive to an old intelligence officer like me, who is used to dealing with deceit.


That seems very foreign to me. I live in a world of engineering where data is the last call every time. Reputations and personal views I tend to put aside where physical evidence is concerned. Sometimes I will just read a paper without looking who the author is, but the content often gives that away.

It strikes me as leaving oneself short to allow personal judgment to filter evidence?

Things are what they are. - Me Reality can't be debunked. That's the beauty of it. - Capeo 'If I have seen further it is by standing on the shoulders of giants.' - Sir Isaac Newton. "Let me repeat the lesson learned from the Sturrock scientific review panel: Pack up your old data and forget it. Ufology needs new data, new cases, new rigorous and scientific methodologies if it hopes ever to get out of its pit." Ed Stewart. Youtube is the last refuge of the ignorant and is more often used for disinformation than genuine research.  There is a REASON for PEER REVIEW... - Chrlzs. Nothing is inexplicable, just unexplained. - Sir Wearer of Hats.


#186    TheMacGuffin

TheMacGuffin

    Government Agent

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

Posted 31 October 2012 - 06:20 AM

View Postpsyche101, on 31 October 2012 - 04:03 AM, said:

That does seem to be the case, Whilst you have some genuine questions for Jim, so many seem to be happy to just bag him for the sake of it. Leslie Kean's rebuttal to his evaluation of her book is pitiful and does not touch fact, but appears to be outright slander. And most if it, from what I understand is just slander. I could not respect that.

From an outside view, it appears that Jim knows more than people want out, and this his inormation will break open the tales they have been telling. In this very instance, Bob Jacobs is intentionally witholding information, and selectively letting out partial transcripts. From downunder, it is very hard to see that as something other than a lie by way of omission  I cannot for the life of me understand why Jacobs would not provide the full transcript when Jim is all over the net saying he has his permission to do so, and here Jim informs us that he even sent Jacobs this information personally.

Put like that, and I cannot see how it would be seen differently, it appears quite blatantly that Jim is not the one who is perverting the truth here. Jacobs is, and I honestly fail to see how it could be taken any other way without Jacobs explaining himself which he seem reluctant to do so?

Do you know of any reason why Jacobs will not release the entire transcript as Jim suggested to him?



I don't think that Jacobs has ever withheld any information, but has always been very forthright about his UFO experience.  I think he is a very honest and courageous man for telling this story, as was his commanding officer for backing him up.

Frankly, I'm surprised that a story like that ever came out at all.  I knew about it--or something very similar--before it was ever discussed in public, long before the era of the Internet and the Disclosure Project.

As for not sharing information with Oberg and keeping him at arm's length, I regard that as a very wise policy.


#187    TheMacGuffin

TheMacGuffin

    Government Agent

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

Posted 31 October 2012 - 06:22 AM

View Postpsyche101, on 31 October 2012 - 06:18 AM, said:

That seems very foreign to me. I live in a world of engineering where data is the last call every time. Reputations and personal views I tend to put aside where physical evidence is concerned. Sometimes I will just read a paper without looking who the author is, but the content often gives that away.

It strikes me as leaving oneself short to allow personal judgment to filter evidence?

And I lived in a world of scumbags, crooks, fanatics, liars and sociopaths, one behind every tree in fact.  People who would sell their grandmothers for a nickel and deal in just about anything.  I've met a lot of people in this world in my lifetime in many different countries, and the majority of them I wish I hadn't.

I knew about Willard Milton Romney (his real name) in the 1980s when he was down in Central America looking for investors, and I can tell you that he'd deal with just about anybody, even the thugs who ran Panama, Guatemala and El Salvador.  I could also tell you about his connections with the folks who ran the old Howard Hughes empire in Las Vegas after old Howard had gone really daffy.

God help us if he is ever elected because he'll be as dirty as Richard Nixon.  Well, I've been in many countries that were basically run by mobsters and gangsters.  It's the nature of the world, and I know too much about it to ever have a happy or optimistic disposition again.

Edited by TheMacGuffin, 31 October 2012 - 06:40 AM.


#188    TheMacGuffin

TheMacGuffin

    Government Agent

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

Posted 31 October 2012 - 06:25 AM

And I'll tell you another thing I learned: the further up the ladder they go, the worse they are.

Edited by TheMacGuffin, 31 October 2012 - 06:25 AM.


#189    TheMacGuffin

TheMacGuffin

    Government Agent

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

Posted 31 October 2012 - 06:28 AM

View PostbooNyzarC, on 31 October 2012 - 04:52 AM, said:

I really hope you aren't falling for this BS psyche.  I'm confident that you aren't, but just the same I'd rather state it outright that I hope my suspicions are true and that

Stop with the character assassination already McG.  This is nothing less than a repulsive character attack.  When you say "he's not an honest actor" and things like that, all you are doing is exposing your willingness to sling mud at someone who doesn't agree with your point of view.  It's really pathetic and you should stop doing that if you truly want to be taken seriously.



I'm only telling you the truth about what many people think of our friend Oberg and why they will not deal with him.  He has often engaged in character assassination, by the way, although he's by no means the only one.


#190    bee

bee

    Forum Divinity

  • Member
  • 10,270 posts
  • Joined:24 Jan 2007
  • Gender:Female
  • Location:England

Posted 31 October 2012 - 07:55 AM

View Postpsyche101, on 31 October 2012 - 02:17 AM, said:


Do you feel Mitchell's statements put Cooper's claims in a dim light, or have you ever heard Mitchell advocate Coopers claims?


you directed this at TMG....but as I saw this video where Mitchell mentions Cooper, Edwards AFB and the pictures that 'disappeared'...


at 4:14





in the section that begins at 3:33....Edgar also talks about many Military aviators who had encounters with UFOs were debriefed

by intelligence people and then told to shut up and don't say anything...


.


#191    JimOberg

JimOberg

    Psychic Spy

  • Member
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 1,811 posts
  • Joined:03 Sep 2007

Posted 31 October 2012 - 09:41 AM

I posted a list of specific stories from Cooper that CAN be checked, and I argued that this process reveals a pattern of significant embellishment of the original events, as later retold by Cooper. I thought that this approach to witness calibration was a constructive and reasonable methodology. But apparently those who wish to kneejerk believe everything the man wrote or said don't really want to double check him, and to preserve his purity, they want to make believe he did NOT say some of the truly weird things he DID write in his book [or somebody ELSE wrote them without his permission, yeah, right] or said on late-night talk shows.

Who's avoiding evidence now? Look at the title of this thread. Who's derailing it to prevent productive discussion?


#192    bmk1245

bmk1245

    puny village idiot

  • Member
  • 3,975 posts
  • Joined:16 Aug 2006
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:Vilnius, Lithuania

Posted 31 October 2012 - 04:55 PM

View PostTheMacGuffin, on 31 October 2012 - 04:29 AM, said:

I don't know anything about that, only that many people will not deal with Oberg at all.  He's not trusted, any more than Phil Klass was.

That's just the way it is, and nothing he says will change that.  He has a track record that many people find highly suspicious--he's not an honest actor.
No surprize, because JO deals with FACTS, concept most ETHers aren't familiar with.

Arguing with fool is like playing chess with pigeon: he will scatter pieces, peck King's crown, crap on bishop, and fly away bragging how he won the game... (heard once, author unknown).
Zhoom! What was that? That was your life, Mate! Oh, that was quick. Do I get another? Sorry, Mate. That's your lot. Basil Fawlty (John Cleese).

#193    TheMacGuffin

TheMacGuffin

    Government Agent

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

Posted 31 October 2012 - 05:02 PM

View Postbmk1245, on 31 October 2012 - 04:55 PM, said:

No surprize, because JO deals with FACTS, concept most ETHers aren't familiar with.

Yes, "facts" like the Russian "satellite" the Gemini 11 astronauts saw, except that it was nowhere near them at the time they reported their UFO.  

Of the "satellite" the Skylab astronauts saw which still has no name and no identity after 40 YEARS.

Those kinds of "facts" for the gullible and naive, who can't be bothered to check up on his statements.


#194    bmk1245

bmk1245

    puny village idiot

  • Member
  • 3,975 posts
  • Joined:16 Aug 2006
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:Vilnius, Lithuania

Posted 31 October 2012 - 05:41 PM

View PostTheMacGuffin, on 31 October 2012 - 05:02 PM, said:

Yes, "facts" like the Russian "satellite" the Gemini 11 astronauts saw, except that it was nowhere near them at the time they reported their UFO.  

Of the "satellite" the Skylab astronauts saw which still has no name and no identity after 40 YEARS.

Those kinds of "facts" for the gullible and naive, who can't be bothered to check up on his statements.
I'm sure you'll get answers, and I'm sure you'll cop out as if nothing happened.

Arguing with fool is like playing chess with pigeon: he will scatter pieces, peck King's crown, crap on bishop, and fly away bragging how he won the game... (heard once, author unknown).
Zhoom! What was that? That was your life, Mate! Oh, that was quick. Do I get another? Sorry, Mate. That's your lot. Basil Fawlty (John Cleese).

#195    TheMacGuffin

TheMacGuffin

    Government Agent

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

Posted 31 October 2012 - 05:43 PM

View Postbmk1245, on 31 October 2012 - 05:41 PM, said:

I'm sure you'll get answers, and I'm sure you'll cop out as if nothing happened.

Not for those events, because if no one has any "answers" after 40-50 years then there never will be any.





0 user(s) are reading this topic

0 members, 0 guests, 0 anonymous users