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.


- - - - -

Edgar Mitchell says a lot.......


  • Please log in to reply
248 replies to this topic

#16    Valdemar the Great

Valdemar the Great

    Unsuitable for large vehicles

  • Member
  • 24,845 posts
  • Joined:09 May 2005
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:there

  • Vampires are people too.

Posted 07 March 2013 - 04:56 PM

Is there an oath they hve to swear to not directly contradict official Information?

Life is a hideous business, and from the background behind what we know of it peer daemoniacal hints of truth which make it sometimes a thousandfold more hideous.

H. P. Lovecraft.


Posted Image


#17    hacktorp

hacktorp

    Remote Viewer

  • Member
  • PipPipPipPip
  • 588 posts
  • Joined:11 Dec 2010

Posted 07 March 2013 - 05:01 PM

View PostLord Vetinari, on 07 March 2013 - 04:56 PM, said:

Is there an oath they hve to swear to not directly contradict official Information?

lol...not as far as you know


#18    JimOberg

JimOberg

    Psychic Spy

  • Member
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 1,827 posts
  • Joined:03 Sep 2007

Posted 07 March 2013 - 05:05 PM

View Postquillius, on 07 March 2013 - 03:18 PM, said:

So do you put no value in Mitchells belief? Do you not think Mitchell is an intelligent man who is not one to just buy any anecdote given to him and claim it as truth?

I think Mitchell is a very intelligent and innovative man. And he believes what he says, and is not playing games with 'secret information' he possesses but is somehow forbidden to reveal.

When he makes assertions that can be checked -- such as his claims for a successful private ESP experiment during a moon flight -- I actually READ the paper and assess whether his methodology supports his conclusions.

Have you ever read Mitchell's Apollo-14 ESP experiment paper? Or do you just accept second-hand hypes of it?

Which of us do you suppose has a more realistic appreciation of Mitchell's credibility in his interpretive claims? The guy who checked, or the guy who never bothered to?


#19    JimOberg

JimOberg

    Psychic Spy

  • Member
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 1,827 posts
  • Joined:03 Sep 2007

Posted 07 March 2013 - 05:08 PM

View PostLord Vetinari, on 07 March 2013 - 04:56 PM, said:

Is there an oath they hve to swear to not directly contradict official Information?

Only among current Obama Administration flunkies.

I've dealt with classified materials in the DoD. You may take an oath not to reveal things you were responsible for, that had been classified. I've never seen any oath requiring you to lie to the public.

When Mitchell states that Apollo was flown exactly as was publicized, and neither he nor any astronaut he knew had ever had any space UFO encounters, what is it in your own head that insists on believing he is a liar? Isn't that the ultimate in reality-denying closed-mindedness?


#20    Hazzard

Hazzard

    Stellar Black Hole

  • Member
  • 11,757 posts
  • Joined:25 Aug 2005
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:Inside Voyager 1.

  • Being skeptical of the paranormal is a good thing.

Posted 07 March 2013 - 05:14 PM

View PostZeta Reticulum, on 07 March 2013 - 03:58 PM, said:

Wouldn't matter if he could.... you would debunk it and say it was false anyhow.

That depends,... No matter what I think and believe reality is hard (if not impossible) to debunk.

It all comes down to the evidence. What is offered by the UFO community doesnt even come close.

I still await the compelling Exhibit A.

------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
*The only thing necessary for the triumph of evil is for good men to do nothing. -Edmund Burke

#21    Valdemar the Great

Valdemar the Great

    Unsuitable for large vehicles

  • Member
  • 24,845 posts
  • Joined:09 May 2005
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:there

  • Vampires are people too.

Posted 07 March 2013 - 08:39 PM

View PostJimOberg, on 07 March 2013 - 05:08 PM, said:

Only among current Obama Administration flunkies.

I've dealt with classified materials in the DoD. You may take an oath not to reveal things you were responsible for, that had been classified. I've never seen any oath requiring you to lie to the public.

When Mitchell states that Apollo was flown exactly as was publicized, and neither he nor any astronaut he knew had ever had any space UFO encounters, what is it in your own head that insists on believing he is a liar? Isn't that the ultimate in reality-denying closed-mindedness?
I don't think my own head insists on that; I can't vouch for others' heads, and what they might feel about it, mind.

Life is a hideous business, and from the background behind what we know of it peer daemoniacal hints of truth which make it sometimes a thousandfold more hideous.

H. P. Lovecraft.


Posted Image


#22    psyche101

psyche101

    Conspiracy Realist

  • Member
  • 31,576 posts
  • Joined:30 Nov 2005
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:Oz

  • If you stop to think, Remember to start again

Posted 08 March 2013 - 12:33 AM

View Posthacktorp, on 07 March 2013 - 04:46 PM, said:

So Mitchell is walking the fine line between keeping his oath to NASA (to not directly contradict official information) while still trying to shed light on the 'other things' he knows about?

Not hard to fathom since his pension surely depends on keeping that oath.  He is still taking quite a risk, though...that should tell us much about the importance he places on those 'other things'.

Edgar Mitchell should not be so quickly dismissed, despite what the gaffers around here keep trying to peddle.

I do not dismiss the marvellous achievements of Apollo 14. In fact, I think I am the only one to actually quote him other than the OP. But it is plainly obvious that he was always a wee bit eccentric. There is a thread here delving into Edgars "sources" which include Bob Lazar, Stephen Greer and some cattle ranchers. If you feel some of his claim bear closer inspection, please note which one and why. I'd be more than happy to discuss any claim that you think bears mentioning.

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. - Dr Who

#23    psyche101

psyche101

    Conspiracy Realist

  • Member
  • 31,576 posts
  • Joined:30 Nov 2005
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:Oz

  • If you stop to think, Remember to start again

Posted 08 March 2013 - 01:40 AM

View Postquillius, on 07 March 2013 - 03:18 PM, said:

So do you put no value in Mitchells belief?

Do you not think Mitchell is an intelligent man who is not one to just buy any anecdote given to him and claim it as truth?

Hi Q

You did not ask me, but I know you will accomodate me :D

I do not put value in his belief, no, he also believes in ESP and remote viewing, and he is rather religious, I do not subscribe to any one of those. But I would give my eyeteeth to swap places with him on Apollo.

Cheers.

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. - Dr Who

#24    DBunker

DBunker

    Government Agent

  • Member
  • 3,485 posts
  • Joined:26 Aug 2005
  • Gender:Male

  • I prefer to know, not just to believe.

Posted 08 March 2013 - 02:32 AM

View Postpsyche101, on 08 March 2013 - 01:40 AM, said:

eyeteeth


:unsure2:

Edited by DBunker, 08 March 2013 - 02:32 AM.

Now that communications technology has made it possible to give global reach to the bizarre and archive it forever, it is essential for men and women of reason resolutely to counter the delusions of the fringe element. James S. Robbins

#25    psyche101

psyche101

    Conspiracy Realist

  • Member
  • 31,576 posts
  • Joined:30 Nov 2005
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:Oz

  • If you stop to think, Remember to start again

Posted 08 March 2013 - 02:45 AM

View Postbee, on 07 March 2013 - 11:59 AM, said:

.


Edgar Mitchell was in a position to hear and know a lot more than your average citizen....his contacts with the military and intelligence community for example.

The way he expresses what he has heard and knows...in public...is naturally tempered with his obligations to legally binding National Security Oaths.

The naysayers try and brush away what he says as pure personel opinion.

But why would he go to all that trouble if he was not  sure of his facts...?

He is a clever man who obviously knows the difference between personel opinion and information given by reliable sources....

What security Oaths? Did you just make some up? And if he is bound by one, why does he not say, "I cannot say, I am bound by oath"? That's not a breach. But if Edgar had some insight, it would be a good way of doing what he advocates.

What trouble? How many times has he said people seek him out? The papers are lapping up having another Astronaut besides Cooper to give them juicy stories. They encourage and misinterpret most of what Edgar has to say, which is why he had that interview with Lisa Bonnice -  to clear the air. Even in that interview, Dr Mitchell himself stated that he had no idea how things had managed to get so out of proportion.

The only naysayers are those who claim more than he has to tell. They refuse to accept Dr Mitchell at his own words, those being:

I, nor any crew I was on (I was on three Apollo crews), received any briefing before or after flights on UFO events, saw anything in space suggesting UFOs or structures on the moon, etc. We did it just like we said in official reports. My only claim to knowledge of these events is from the individuals, mostly of yesteryear, who were in government, intelligence, or military; were there, saw what they saw, and now believe it should be made public. But I claim no first hand knowledge, nor have any. Pass it on to the rest of the net, if you will.
--Edgar Mitchell

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. - Dr Who

#26    psyche101

psyche101

    Conspiracy Realist

  • Member
  • 31,576 posts
  • Joined:30 Nov 2005
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:Oz

  • If you stop to think, Remember to start again

Posted 08 March 2013 - 02:47 AM

View PostDBunker, on 08 March 2013 - 02:32 AM, said:

:unsure2:

Old saying ;) An eyetooth is a canine.

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. - Dr Who

#27    psyche101

psyche101

    Conspiracy Realist

  • Member
  • 31,576 posts
  • Joined:30 Nov 2005
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:Oz

  • If you stop to think, Remember to start again

Posted 08 March 2013 - 02:58 AM

View PostZeta Reticulum, on 07 March 2013 - 03:58 PM, said:

Wouldn't matter if he could.... you would debunk it and say it was false anyhow.

Like using his own words you mean. Funny how the ETH'ers are over every facet of the made up stuff, but know little of Dr Mitchell's actual real world accomplishments or his actual statements. You know, I do not think that is a good thing.

Absolute codswallop. Edgar comes from an Institution the critical thinkers trust but ETH'ers do not. Yes NASA has made mistakes, Apollo 1, Challenger, Columbia, and these things may well happen again. These men go into this knowing that risk, and they go further to accomplish things we can only dream about.

But with the believers pushing Dr Mitchell's words to be recognised for something they are not, he may not be remembered for 14, or for being the 6th man on the moon. 9 hours on the Lunar surface, and he may only be remembered for loony claims that other created out of his words. If you read the Times Interview from 1998, Dr Mitchell states that he is 90% sure that some UFO's are visitors from other planets. Not 100%, like someone "in the know" would be.

The ETH'ers I fear are likely to overshadow Dr Mitchell's real accomplishments and have him remembered as a fringe kook. I honestly think that is something to be heartily ashamed of. Coops did it to himself, Dr Mitchell has been sought out and hounded, and we know why, so papers can say a spaceman believes in spaceships. Sells papers.

Edited by psyche101, 08 March 2013 - 03:02 AM.

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. - Dr Who

#28    bee

bee

    Forum Divinity

  • Member
  • 10,564 posts
  • Joined:24 Jan 2007
  • Gender:Female
  • Location:England

Posted 08 March 2013 - 02:04 PM

View Postpsyche101, on 08 March 2013 - 02:45 AM, said:

What security Oaths? Did you just make some up? And if he is bound by one, why does he not say, "I cannot say, I am bound by oath"? That's not a breach. But if Edgar had some insight, it would be a good way of doing what he advocates.

Actually....it could be seen as a breach to say that...IMO.



Quote

What trouble? How many times has he said people seek him out? The papers are lapping up having another Astronaut besides Cooper to give them juicy stories. They encourage and misinterpret most of what Edgar has to say, which is why he had that interview with Lisa Bonnice -  to clear the air. Even in that interview, Dr Mitchell himself stated that he had no idea how things had managed to get so out of proportion.


All the interviews he has done...all the conferences he has spoken at...I'd say he was and is more than happy to share what he has to say.

You try and make out that he was pushed into the limelight on these issues....kicking and screaming,

but it is obvious that he wanted to tell the public these things...



Quote

The only naysayers are those who claim more than he has to tell. They refuse to accept Dr Mitchell at his own words, those being:

I, nor any crew I was on (I was on three Apollo crews), received any briefing before or after flights on UFO events, saw anything in space suggesting UFOs or structures on the moon, etc. We did it just like we said in official reports. My only claim to knowledge of these events is from the individuals, mostly of yesteryear, who were in government, intelligence, or military; were there, saw what they saw, and now believe it should be made public. But I claim no first hand knowledge, nor have any. Pass it on to the rest of the net, if you will.
--Edgar Mitchell


Edgar Mitchell has said more than enough to satisfy...(under the circumstances)..regardless of how you try and downplay it......


Because of his historic position of being one of the few men who walked on the Moon, that's all the real naysayers can do...

downplay the message he is relaying to the public...



.

Edited by bee, 08 March 2013 - 02:08 PM.

Posted Image


#29    quillius

quillius

    52.0839 N, 1.4328 E

  • Member
  • 5,016 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 08 March 2013 - 02:27 PM

View PostJimOberg, on 07 March 2013 - 05:05 PM, said:

I think Mitchell is a very intelligent and innovative man. And he believes what he says, and is not playing games with 'secret information' he possesses but is somehow forbidden to reveal.

When he makes assertions that can be checked -- such as his claims for a successful private ESP experiment during a moon flight -- I actually READ the paper and assess whether his methodology supports his conclusions.

Have you ever read Mitchell's Apollo-14 ESP experiment paper? Or do you just accept second-hand hypes of it?

Which of us do you suppose has a more realistic appreciation of Mitchell's credibility in his interpretive claims? The guy who checked, or the guy who never bothered to?

I dont think I have read it but do recall reading various extracts from it. I do understand  your point.

So let me ask you why are we talking 'credibility' as opposed to 'ability'?
And also ask does only reading this paper allow one to form an accurate picture of a persons 'credibility' and/or 'methodology' and /or interpretation of data?


#30    quillius

quillius

    52.0839 N, 1.4328 E

  • Member
  • 5,016 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 08 March 2013 - 02:31 PM

View Postpsyche101, on 08 March 2013 - 01:40 AM, said:

Hi Q

You did not ask me, but I know you will accomodate me :D

I do not put value in his belief, no, he also believes in ESP and remote viewing, and he is rather religious, I do not subscribe to any one of those. But I would give my eyeteeth to swap places with him on Apollo.

Cheers.


always :yes:


So using that logic may I ask if you would find Zosers beliefs more 'credible' than Mitchells on the ETH simply based on the fact that Zoser also doesnt subscribe to any of the mentioned above areas?

(apologies for using you in this example Zoser, but I am using Psyches perception of you to show my point.....it is not a perception I personally agree with but thats neither here nor there....neither is whether you really belive in religion esp etc...at least not for the hypothetical posed)





1 user(s) are reading this topic

0 members, 1 guests, 0 anonymous users