Join the Unexplained Mysteries community today! It's free and setting up an account only takes a moment.
- Sign In or Create Account -
Sign in to follow this  
Followers 7
Alisdair.MacDonald

More NASA UFO's?

Are these UFO's?   51 members have voted

  1. 1. Do these videos contain images of UFO's?


Please sign in or register to vote in this poll.

1,529 posts in this topic

I can't believe you are referencing Blue Book. ...Blue Book credibility = ZERO

The English of which is no, you're not going to bother your pretty head with reading it.

Deliberately keeping yourself in ignorance of ALL angles on an event is no path to insight and wisdom.

Would you like to hear from the AF officer who did the initial investigation? He's still alive. But no, it might be dangerous to your delusions to actually get close to an original story. Better just to trust the Internet and Youtube.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Popovich was well aquainted with aerial phenomena.

He wasn't some janitor emptying ashtrays at Star City.

The English of whbich is, no, you don't know the time/date/location of the sighting and nobody else does.

But you're saying that some people's stories don't NEED to be verified or checked -- in fact, it's far better NOT to check and risk losing a valuable propaganda asset.

I take it, then, that you have no problem believing Jim Irwin's accounts of discovering proof of Noah's Ark? Or Gordon Cooper's story that he saved the space shuttle program from a lethal design flaw by relaying to NASA a telepathic warning from space aliens?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

The English of which is no, you're not going to bother your pretty head with reading it.

Deliberately keeping yourself in ignorance of ALL angles on an event is no path to insight and wisdom.

Would you like to hear from the AF officer who did the initial investigation? He's still alive. But no, it might be dangerous to your delusions to actually get close to an original story. Better just to trust the Internet and Youtube.

I've been researching this subject for 35 years. I was aquainted with Blue Book long before the internet or Youtube were ever thought of.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

The English of whbich is, no, you don't know the time/date/location of the sighting and nobody else does.

But you're saying that some people's stories don't NEED to be verified or checked -- in fact, it's far better NOT to check and risk losing a valuable propaganda asset.o an i

I take it, then, that you have no problem believing Jim Irwin's accounts of discovering proof of Noah's Ark? Or Gordon Cooper's story that he saved the space shuttle program from a lethal design flaw by relaying to NASA a telepathic warning from space aliens?

JIm there are simply too many of them. Do an in depth investigation into any one of you wish and try to find a rational explanation. Then there are 50 more. Then another 50.

Good luck.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I've been researching this subject for 35 years. I was aquainted with Blue Book long before the internet or Youtube were ever thought of.

If you still haven't seen any other reports on the so-called "Cooper Edwards incident", I'd advise not to brag about how long you've been researching the phenomenon fruitlessly. Go look in McDonald's 1968 congressional testimony. He describes the incident there.

1 person likes this

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

JIm there are simply too many of them. Do an in depth investigation into any one of you wish and try to find a rational explanation. Then there are 50 more. Then another 50. Good luck.

That's a common fallacy. No single case has to be any good at all -- just pile up bad cases and you get a good conclusion.

Enough fairy and leprechaun stories, and the critters must be real? Human levitation? Messages from dead people? Mass quantity substitutes for quality?

Are you too intransigent to even admit ANY case is 'less than good'? That's sad.

Open your mind a little.

1 person likes this

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

If you still haven't seen any other reports on the so-called "Cooper Edwards incident", I'd advise not to brag about how long you've been researching the phenomenon fruitlessly. Go look in McDonald's 1968 congressional testimony. He describes the incident there.

I can assure you my search has not been "fruitless" :tu:

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Enough fairy and leprechaun stories, and the critters must be real? Human levitation? Messages from dead people? Mass quantity substitutes for quality?

You are making a sweeping generalization that the ETH belongs is the same category as the nonsense you have listed there.

That's a whole different ballgame and I don't play it.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Read McDonald's 1968 report and compare it to the story Cooper later was telling. Report back.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

That's a common fallacy. No single case has to be any good at all -- just pile up bad cases and you get a good conclusion.

Enough fairy and leprechaun stories, and the critters must be real? Human levitation? Messages from dead people? Mass quantity substitutes for quality?

Are you too intransigent to even admit ANY case is 'less than good'? That's sad.

Open your mind a little.

I just listen to what the thousands and thousands of people are telling me. As Stan Friedman says he knows that there are loads of isotopes which are non-fissionable. These are not interesting. It's the ones that are fissionable that he's interested in.

In other words even if 90% of the tens of thousands are hoaxes or misidentifications that still leaves a lot at are not.

But let's not kid ourselves; this is not Mr and Mrs Brown telling stories; it's trained astronauts. Think about that.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Read McDonald's 1968 report and compare it to the story Cooper later was telling. Report back.

Coopers lying? Really? Why? What happened to the footage? Why was it never offered to debunk Cooper's story? Would have been an easy thing to do surely? Same with Robert Jacob's story.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

JIm there are simply too many of them.[...]

Too many of whoom? S#!t makers like "Sightings"?

[...] Do an in depth investigation into any one of you wish and try to find a rational explanation.[...]

Have you done any of in depth investigation? You simply put whatever crap you find on the net... Yeah, thats investigation nowadays... Spare me...

[...] Then there are 50 more. Then another 50.

[...]

And another 50, and another 50, and another 50000. Can you bring list of all those 50 and another 50, plus another 50000 you may come up with?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

"Self-luminous" is YOUR guess, and would require you to show tghey were NOT illuminated by the sun. That would require you to determine the lighting conditions of the time of the sighting, as well as where in the field of view the shuttle's own shadow is lying out, leaving nearby objects dark.

I don't think you've EVER done that for a single case [counter-example welcome] . You're just guessing, guided by the answer you WANT to get. Hopeless.

Ditto your assertion the dots are moving "at a much faster velocity relative to the space station or the shuttles" -- when all you can actually measure is the angular velocity, and for objects close to the camera -- a few meters or so -- even small absolute drift creates a high relative angle rate. Without knowing the actual range to an object you are not justified in claiming an absolute velocity for it -- but that hasn't stopped you, either.

Step back and consider: your 'assumptions' already contain the conclusions you THINK you are 'proving' with real evidence.

As we'd say in Mission Control, a classic 'self-eating watermelon' [Chuck Shaw's phrase].

Like I would ever take your word for anything.

You've spent years doing hatchet jobs on people, including Robert Emenegger and just today on Gordon Cooper. Those are just the ones that I have called you out on, but I will give you credit for persistence.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Like I would ever take your word for anything.

You've spent years doing hatchet jobs on people, including Robert Emenegger and just today on Gordon Cooper. Those are just the ones that I have called you out on, but I will give you credit for persistence.

Made me chuckle... Please, proceed...

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

But let's not kid ourselves; this is not Mr and Mrs Brown telling stories; it's trained astronauts. Think about that.

How many of the alleged 'astronaut stories' do you think could be outright hoaxes by writers?

How many are typical pilot stories?

How many - if any - are real SPACE events?

I've worked with astronauts for 35 years so hero-worship isn't a viable mindset -- professional respect and admiration will do fine.

But just which stories impress you most?

1 person likes this

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Coopers lying? Really? Why? What happened to the footage? Why was it never offered to debunk Cooper's story? Would have been an easy thing to do surely? Same with Robert Jacob's story.

Man, you're fiercely competing for the T-shirt saying "I don't KNOW stuff and that makes me SURE" , aren't you?

Just joking.

But you really are trying to say you haven't read the accounts by Robert Jacobs commander at 'Big Sur'?

Eyes closed, mind closed, and proud OF it, is that your mantra?

And back off -- right NOW -- from accusing me of accusing any astronaut of LYING. That's a vicious misrepresentation and it destroys any chance of a rational discussion.

Now, read

McDonald's

1968

congressional

testimony

about the

may 1957

Edwards AFB

incident, and

compare to

Cooper's version.

Scared to?

Edited by JimOberg

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Like I would ever take your word for anything.

You've spent years doing hatchet jobs on people, including Robert Emenegger and just today on Gordon Cooper. Those are just the ones that I have called you out on, but I will give you credit for persistence.

So you're not going to actually give any evidence -- you're just demanding we take YOUR word on it?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

So you're not going to actually give any evidence -- you're just demanding we take YOUR word on it?

I posted the videos and anyone is free to watch them, but I would strongly recommend that they bypass your interpretations of anything.

3 people like this

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I posted the videos and anyone is free to watch them, but I would strongly recommend that they bypass your interpretations of anything.

Wouldn't it be better to bravely (and perhaps even .. knowledgeably) refute his interpretations?

I for one, can't wait to see that..

1 person likes this

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Man, you're fiercely competing for the T-shirt saying "I don't KNOW stuff and that makes me SURE" , aren't you?

Just joking.

But you really are trying to say you haven't read the accounts by Robert Jacobs commander at 'Big Sur'?

Eyes closed, mind closed, and proud OF it, is that your mantra?

And back off -- right NOW -- from accusing me of accusing any astronaut of LYING. That's a vicious misrepresentation and it destroys any chance of a rational discussion.

Now, read

McDonald's

1968

congressional

testimony

about the

may 1957

Edwards AFB

incident, and

compare to

Cooper's version.

Scared to?

Gordon Cooper's testimony is absolutely genuine; God only knows how many times he has recounted this story to the media. Well done Cooper and well done Robert Jacobs for their excellent testimonies.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Gordon Cooper's testimony is absolutely genuine; God only knows how many times he has recounted this story to the media. Well done Cooper and well done Robert Jacobs for their excellent testimonies.

If by 'sincere', I have no reason to argue.

If by infallably accurate, how about you compare Cooper's versions over the years to EACH OTHER?

And does your faith extend to EVERY story told by Cooper, or just the Edwards case?

Because if you trust ALL of his stories, how about the one in his own autobiography about how he saved the shuttle program from a lethal design flaw by relaying a telepathic warning to NASA from space aliens?

Do you uttery believe that story is true?

Or do you just wish to pretend he never told the story, because you won't read his book?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

link to Afanasyev interview on 'Sightings'

It has been suggested here that the narrator's English verson of the cosmonaut's comments is bogus -- that the Russian's real story was about a 40-centimeter sheet of something observed coming off during thruster firings for a supply drone docking.

Zoser, you sponsored the link on this thread. Do you still believe the program's 'giant UFO' version, or the cosmonaut's original non-UFO story?

In other words, do you admit you were mistaken in posting this as evidence for a space UFO sighting?

Edited by JimOberg

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

It has been suggested here that the narrator's English verson of the cosmonaut's comments is bogus -- that the Russian's real story was about a 40-centimeter sheet of something observed coming off during thruster firings for a supply drone docking.

Zoser, you sponsored the link on this thread. Do you still believe the program's 'giant UFO' version, or the cosmonaut's original non-UFO story?

In other words, do you admit you were mistaken in posting this as evidence for a space UFO sighting?

James McDivitt's testimony begins on this clip at 53 minutes as he retells his experiences aboard Gemini 4.

Edited by zoser

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

James McDivitt's testimony begins on this clip at 53 minutes as he retells his experiences aboard Gemini 4.

So the battle cry of the self-described 'Warrior of Truth' is

Run Away!

Run Away!

Why should anyone be surprised?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

So the battle cry of the self-described 'Warrior of Truth' is

Run Away!

Run Away!

Why should anyone be surprised?

No ones running away Jim; I'm just rejecting totally your attempt at character assassination in an attempt to debunk Cooper's and others testimonies.

I refute it totally. In the meantime, have a paddle if you will in the cool refreshing pool of these tantalising testimonies.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!


Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.


Sign In Now
Sign in to follow this  
Followers 7

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    No registered users viewing this page.