G.Cooper encountered man-made flying saucers

[JimOberg]

James McDonald interviewed the people who took the pictures, but Oberg and friends will NEVER tell you that. LOL

http://www.nicap.org...edwards_mcd.htm

Nobody is such a clumsy liar as this -- McG just must be totally delusional.

The full story has been in my original report on the case, written in 1984 [with several drafts sent to Cooper] and posted over the Internet since at least 1991-2.

McG claims he never reads my website -- so how can he claim I will never tell peoi\ple about things I wrote and posted literally decades ago. This isn't a matter of dishonesty, i'm afraid, it seems more to do with basic reasoning capacity.

[JimOberg]

Blue Book said that the Edwards UFOs were balloons, and you can believe that if it floats your boat. LOL

http://www.nicap.org...ards_report.htm

Blue Book does NOT stae that "the Edwards UFOs were balloons".

There was only one UFO.

Why does McG think -- and insist -- there were multiple UFOs?

[JimOberg]

Even those four pictures were very hard to get. Show some appreciation once in a while.

For what? Filing a FOIA request to the national archives, getting the entire photo set [you cannot order individual prints], and withholding most of them?

Where are the 'tripod' descriptions in the eyewitness testimony? In McDonald's report?

NOWHERE.

[badeskov]

<snip>

Why does McG think -- and insist -- there were multiple UFOs?

Because somewhere between his eyeballs and his brain there is an event amplifier and a fact suppressor.....?

Cheers,

Badeskov

[WhyDontYouBeliEveMe]

I m right behind you mr McG ! i believe you ..

[booNyzarC]

Do you expect me to just quietly sit by while you engage in character assassination?

Yes, you will do just that as long as the characters being assassinated oppose your "skeptical" views on UFOs.

Then how do you explain the fact that I stood up for and defended you when you were wrongfully accused of 'lying' about your sighting? This defense continued into zoser's TT thread, if you recall...

With all due respect McG, please try to remain objective. We don't need this character debate, there is plenty of material worthy of debate in itself. These attacks only serve to detract from the subject at hand.

[TheMacGuffin]

Where in the McDonald report does he say the object landed?

DID

HE

SAY

THE

OBJECT

LANDED?

How can you misunderstand this basic question?

Can you answer honestly?

I just stopped myself from saying something VERY impolite to this guy.

By Jesus, I almost did it.

[TheMacGuffin]

Here you go spouting lies again. Tell me McG, when will your character assassination attempts come to an end? James has been asking people to locate that throughout the thread and compare it to Cooper's account. Good of you to finally do what he asked, though poor form of you to take another unfounded and outright false jab at him in the process.

Oberg quoted the very same thing right here. He even contacted one of the witnesses, John ("Jack") Gettys himself. What did Gettys have to say about Cooper's involvement?

"I am amazed that Gordon Cooper said the object landed -- as far as I know, he never even saw it.... His story sounds kind of funny to me."

Hrmm... Yeah, I'd say Cooper's version doesn't match up.

I want everyone to know that I am struggling mightily to control my temper on this thread, but I am coming really close to just unloading on one of these people, which won't do me any good.

[TheMacGuffin]

Nobody is such a clumsy liar as this -- McG just must be totally delusional.

The full story has been in my original report on the case, written in 1984 [with several drafts sent to Cooper] and posted over the Internet since at least 1991-2.

McG claims he never reads my website -- so how can he claim I will never tell peoi\ple about things I wrote and posted literally decades ago. This isn't a matter of dishonesty, i'm afraid, it seems more to do with basic reasoning capacity.

I'm going to say nothing more to this guy tonight because I would probably get myself kicked off UM. That's the effect he has on me.

[booNyzarC]

Where in the McDonald report does he say the object landed?

DID

HE

SAY

THE

OBJECT

LANDED?

How can you misunderstand this basic question?

Can you answer honestly?

I just stopped myself from saying something VERY impolite to this guy.

By Jesus, I almost did it.

Why don't you just answer his questions?

We already know the answers because we've seen the reports and noted the discrepancies, but it would do you some good I think if you acknowledged the simple facts.

[badeskov]

I want everyone to know that I am struggling mightily to control my temper on this thread, but I am coming really close to just unloading on one of these people, which won't do me any good.

By all means of respect, but did you ever consider that you brought this upon yourself?

Cheers,

Badeskov

[TheMacGuffin]

Why don't you just answer his questions?

We already know the answers because we've seen the reports and noted the discrepancies, but it would do you some good I think if you acknowledged the simple facts.

It would be best if I said nothing at all at this moment, believe me. Good night.

[booNyzarC]

I want everyone to know that I am struggling mightily to control my temper on this thread, but I am coming really close to just unloading on one of these people, which won't do me any good.

By "one of these people" are you referring to me? I can only assume so considering that you made this statement while quoting one of my posts.

Come on McG, can't we just focus on the cases and the facts? Is there anything about the cases and the facts that has you so riled?

[TheMacGuffin]

By all means of respect, but did you ever consider that you brought this upon yourself?

It would be best if I said nothing at all at this moment. Good night.

[booNyzarC]

It would be best if I said nothing at all at this moment, believe me. Good night.

Good night McG. Hope you have a good sleep.

[badeskov]

It would be best if I said nothing at all at this moment. Good night.

Fair enough, sleep well!

Cheers,

Badeskov

[S2F]

It would be best if I said nothing at all at this moment. Good night.

Get some good rest Mac, a level head will serve you better tomorrow.

[TheMacGuffin]

By "one of these people" are you referring to me? I can only assume so considering that you made this statement while quoting one of my posts.

Come on McG, can't we just focus on the cases and the facts? Is there anything about the cases and the facts that has you so riled?

Let's just say that Oberg's style always has a tendency to rile me and let it go at that.

As for the 1957 UFO incident at Edwards, I have posted the pictures and documents that I know of, and will have to let it go at that. I have no more information about it, and those links to the NICAP site will tell people just about anything they need to know.

As far as I can tell, there were more pictures of it at one time and probably a film, but apart from the pictures Jan Aldrich found, these are not publicly available.

Edited October 29, 2012 by TheMacGuffin

[TheMacGuffin]

Here you go spouting lies again. Tell me McG, when will your character assassination attempts come to an end? James has been asking people to locate that throughout the thread and compare it to Cooper's account. Good of you to finally do what he asked, though poor form of you to take another unfounded and outright false jab at him in the process.

Oberg quoted the very same thing right here. He even contacted one of the witnesses, John ("Jack") Gettys himself. What did Gettys have to say about Cooper's involvement?

"I am amazed that Gordon Cooper said the object landed -- as far as I know, he never even saw it.... His story sounds kind of funny to me."

Hrmm... Yeah, I'd say Cooper's version doesn't match up.

All I know about that is what Cooper said himself, that he saw the pictures and films of the UFOs but not the objects themselves. He heard from some of the people who were out there by the dry lake bed taking pictures and then sent them on the Washington.

I don't recall that he ever mentioned seeing the actual UFOs.

[TheMacGuffin]

McG claims he never reads my website -- so how can he claim I will never tell peoi\ple about things I wrote and posted literally decades ago. This isn't a matter of dishonesty, i'm afraid, it seems more to do with basic reasoning capacity.

It's none of the above, Mr. Oberg, it's just that I have never looked at your damn website and I'm not about to start now. I wouldn't believe anything you wrote there, not even if you said "Mary had a little lamb".

[TheMacGuffin]

Because somewhere between his eyeballs and his brain there is an event amplifier and a fact suppressor.....?

Here again, you don't know what you're talking about, but I think it's because you know very little about this case to begin with. You just like to agree with Mr. Oberg, who is being very deceitful here--as usual.

[TheMacGuffin]

And I'm even aware that Brad Sparks was very critical of Cooper's statements in this case and said that he never even mentioned it at all until 1978.

http://www.nicap.org...ards_sparks.htm

"The case is in the Blue Book files. Moreover there is an analysis by a Col. Klein (Kline?) at Edwards AFB in the BB file that destroys the balloon explanation and rejects it based on the known tracking of the balloon.

Cooper was a nobody in 1957!!! His name wouldn't have meant beans to anyone then! He wasn't selected for the Mercury program until 1959 -- two years later.

The case was published a week after it happened, in the LA TIMES of May 9, 1957, (and in an INS wire service dispatch then) long before Cooper came along. Cooper did not reveal the case or blow the lid on any coverup. If anything Cooper has almost ruined the case.

The most likely explanation is a storytelling mentality of exaggerating roles and details, where no one can predict in advance how much alteration the story will get. Cooper probably did see the film and got a garbled story second or third or nth-handed and exaggerated it even more in his mind in the retelling to juice it up.

But there may be more to it than just embellishment. Cooper's exaggeration of a real case, falsely turning it into a filmed landing with landing gear retracting on takeoff, is very similar to the pattern of Air Force OSI fabrications of other real UFO cases with false landings and aliens using AF officers usually at about the rank of Colonel and designed to discredit the case (Bentwaters 1980 is the classic). Cooper was an AF officer and I think retired at rank of full Colonel. Cooper first came out with his phony story about 1978, exactly when AFOSI began a new wave of fabricated UFO stories in an effort to head off what was feared to be another massive UFO flap, this time triggered by the blockbuster CEIII movie.

Edwards AFB like White Sands was a test range and not a 24/7 air defense base. Radars were turned on in the mornings for test range activities and turned off at the end of a work day, typically 8-5 operations, a work day, no reason to keep going after 5, everyone's tired and wanting to go home, and no reason to start up in the night either unless a special project required it. Hence there were probably no radars on at 6:55-7:20 AM. However if there was a jet interception attempted it was done visually and most likely it was done too late, and the object was gone. Again it was not an air defense base, no jets were fueled and ready on "strip alert," it would have taken time to get a jet ready and up in the air before the day's operations (had the incident taken place after jets were fueled and ready, in mid-day some time, then a faster jet response could have been undertaken, or a jet might have been in the air already, etc.).

Cooper's born-again ETH-belief seems to emerge out of nowhere about 1978."

Edited October 29, 2012 by TheMacGuffin

[TheMacGuffin]

It is true the Cooper first mentioned his UFO sightings on the Merv Griffin TV show, and that he first said the Edwards incident was in 1957 or 1958. He couldn't recall the exact date.

http://www.google.com/url?sa=t&rct=j&q=&esrc=s&source=web&cd=3&ved=0CCsQFjAC&url=http%3A%2F%2Fwww.ufocasebook.com%2Fgordoncooperufos.html&ei=_7SOUOTAOons8wTwj4DIAw&usg=AFQjCNH0tnx-ck_qzu80QHgMiY_8-l0vQQ&sig2=W3bJ_pppLDKNCCXGex4USA

[TheMacGuffin]

There was a discussion here between Jan Aldrich and Brad Sparks over whether there we at least two separate UFO sightings at Edwards that day, and more than one object. I say there was more than one sighting.

As you can see here, Cooper took a lot of flak for years from people like Oberg, but he isn't being honest when he discusses this case--or Cooper.

http://www.nicap.org...arksaldrich.htm

Aldrich found two military witnesses with a film camera who had seen a UFO landing at Edwards, and this may have been the film Cooper saw and sent on to Washington. I have always regarded Aldrich as a very honest guy and straight shooter, unlike Oberg.

Aldrich also says the Blue Book file is incomplete on this case and that important parts of it are missing, which would surprise me not at all.

Edited October 29, 2012 by TheMacGuffin

[TheMacGuffin]

Fran Ridge said that Cooper never saw the film, only the Askania theodolite photos, taken at one frame per second. It's an open question whether all this material went to Blue Book or to the more clasified investigation (i.e. the real one) but it probably was the latter in a case like this, if indeed Cooper sent the pictures and film directly to Washington.

"This is McDonald case #41 and BB case # 4715. The implications of what Cooper has said on camera is very compelling,if true (See YouTubes below). In 1957, when Cooper was 30 and a captain, he was assigned to Fighter Section of the Experimental Flight Test Engineering Division at Edwards Air Force Base in California. He acted as a test pilot and project manager. On May 2 of that year, he had a crew setting up an Askania cinetheodolite precision landing system on a dry lake bed. This cinetheodolite system would take pictures at one frame per second as an aircraft landed. The crew consisted of James Bittick and Jack Gettys who began work at the site just before 0800, using both still and motion picture cameras.

According to his accounts, later that morning they returned to report to Cooper that they saw a "strange-looking saucer" like aircraft that did not make a sound either on landing or take off. According to his accounts, Cooper realized that these men, who on a regular basis have seen experimental aircraft flying and landing around them as part of their job of filming those aircraft, were clearly worked up and unnerved. They explained how the saucer hovered over them, landed 50 yards away from them using three extended landing gears and then took off as they approached for a closer look. Being photographers with cameras in hand, they of course shot images with 35mm and 4-by-5 still cameras as well as motion film. There was a special Pentagon number to call to report incidents like this. He called and it immediately went up the chain of command until he was instructed by a general to have the film developed (but to make no prints of it) and send it right away in a locked courier pouch. As he had not been instructed to not look at the negatives before sending them, he did. He said the quality of the photography was excellent as would be expected from the experienced photographers who took them. What he saw was exactly what they had described to him. He did not see the movie film before everything was sent away. He expected that there would be a follow up investigation since an aircraft of unknown origin had landed in a highly classified military installation, but nothing was ever said of the incident again. He was never able to track down what happened to those photos. He assumed that they ended up going to the Air Force's official UFO investigation, Project Blue Book, which was based at WPAFB."

http://www.nicap.org/reports/570502edwards_continued.htm