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

maybe I need more than two minutes as the folder has quite a bit in there from previous debate with Psyche.

However, I would just like to point out that the bottom line is Edgar still says 'he knows' there has been a cover up by the government...not that he believes or thinks he actually knows......how is he so convinced?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I may have to withdraw my Roswell comment. I cannot find the information that led me to that conclusion. Its quite possible it was this article by Kevin Randle (blogsport) that was implanted in my memory.

On Friday, July 25, Mitchell had the opportunity to clear up some of these misconceptions when he appeared on BlogTalkRadio’s ShapeShifting, hosted by Lisa Bonnice. He did say there was a cover up at Roswell, but also suggested that NASA knew nothing about it, or rather he had no information to suggest that NASA knew about it.

In response to one of Bonnice’s questions about Roswell, Mitchell said:

I was talking about the Roswell incident, the Roswell visitation primarily, but there have been many others that have been reported that I have no personal awareness of but that was the one that I was really talking about... and my information comes from what I call "the old timers," because I grew up in the Roswell area and when I went to the moon, some of the old timers from that period, some locals, and others military and intelligence people, who were under rather severe oaths to not reveal any of this and kind of wanted to get their conscience clear and off their chests before they passed on, selected me and said, independently - this wasn't a group effort - independently that maybe I might be a safe person to tell their story to. And all of them confirmed, and what I'm saying is they confirmed the Roswell incident was a real incident and they in some way had some part in it that they wanted to talk about.

Mitchell continued by saying:

Well, that the crash of an alien spacecraft in the Roswell area was a real event and much of the lore, I can't say all of the lore, but much of the fact that dead bodies were recovered and live ones were recovered, that they were not of this world, was the story. And of course it was reported in the Roswell Daily Record one day and promptly denied the next day and a cover story of a weather balloon, and that was pure nonsense. That was a cover-up.

Later, Mitchell told Irene Klotz from the Discovery Channel:

Subsequent to that, I did take my story to the Pentagon - not NASA, but the Pentagon - and asked for a meeting with the Intelligence Committee of the Joint Chiefs of Staff and got it. And told them my story and what I know and eventually had that confirmed by the admiral that I spoke with, that indeed what I was saying was true.

At first glance this actually supports my initial comment but there are some problems with this summary by Kevin which puts the case across with cherry picked elements of the interview, leaving context somewhat missed IMO.

I do think that Edgar has also made it clear that he believes the cover up is by a group of individuals as opposed to a collective organisational directive. I think it may be possible to establish if he considers some of these individuals to be within NASA as well as Goverment

2 people like this

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

However, I would just like to point out that the bottom line is Edgar still says 'he knows' there has been a cover up by the government...not that he believes or thinks he actually knows......how is he so convinced?

I think that Dr. Mitchell "knows" we have been visited by ET (and that NASA/the Government is covering it up) the same way the usual UFO buffs "knows" about stuff like that.

In the end though, we are simply talking about opinion and belief.

2 people like this

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I think that Dr. Mitchell "knows" we have been visited by ET (and that NASA/the Government is covering it up) the same way the usual UFO buffs "knows" about stuff like that.

In the end though, we are simply talking about opinion and belief.

hmmm, although I wouldnt call Dr Edgar Mitchell a UFO buff.....at least not how you imply. If you go through his transcripts of historical interviews and look carefully at the words he uses and what he says you may just realise that he would not confuse opinion and belief with 'knowing' as easily as you suggest.

Many a time he is clear as to what he does or doesnt know, or what he is or isnt opinion etc...

Do you think the Government covered up UFOs Hazz? (I am not saying UFOs were ET but lets say they were at least thought to be hence cover up....)

1 person likes this

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Folks, in my opinion you seem to be arguing for the sake of arguing. Please don't waste time accusing each other of knowingly or unknowingly posting falsehoods. That is not the purpose of this thread, which started off about discerning UFOs in film clips.

Everybody -- please drop personal issues, and present facts that are relevant.

Karlis -- mod team member

It's not just a personal issue with me, but if anyone doubts what I just posted then I refer hem back to the Gordon Cooper threads of a few weeks ago, which will prove what I just said.

My point was that Oberg and Friends set out to do a complete hatchet job on Gordon Cooper and it went on and on and on for days, as you can see here:

http://www.unexplain...r

Not a nice way of doing business.

Oberg does seem a little more hesitant to go after Edgar Mitchell in quite the same way. I'm not sure why but perhaps it's because Mitchell is still alive and would be able to defend himself in court if it came to that.

Edited by TheMacGuffin
2 people like this

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I think that Dr. Mitchell "knows" we have been visited by ET (and that NASA/the Government is covering it up) the same way the usual UFO buffs "knows" about stuff like that.

In the end though, we are simply talking about opinion and belief.

I agree Hazzard. We see people saying that they "know" about this and all kinds of other things, but it translates into "I so strongly believe this to be true that I can't imagine it not being true."

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

hmmm, although I wouldnt call Dr Edgar Mitchell a UFO buff.....at least not how you imply. If you go through his transcripts of historical interviews and look carefully at the words he uses and what he says you may just realise that he would not confuse opinion and belief with 'knowing' as easily as you suggest.

Many a time he is clear as to what he does or doesnt know, or what he is or isnt opinion etc...

Do you think the Government covered up UFOs Hazz? (I am not saying UFOs were ET but lets say they were at least thought to be hence cover up....)

Mitchell has been quite clear about his views on UFOs and ETs, so much so that I see no need to post anything more about it since it becomes very repetitive after a while.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I think it may be possible to establish if he considers some of these individuals to be within NASA as well as Goverment

It may be possible, sure -- when anybody finds quotations from Mitchell actually SAYING it.

So far, it's all 'he MUST have meant to say' excursions that jump off from him saying something entirely different.

What's actually been established on all these pages is that people are passionate about interpreting ambiguous or even unrelated comments as confirmatory of things they already believe.

This is a trait of sloppy human thought, and anybody can fall into it.

Special care is needed to minimize it -- it's hopeless to expect to eliminate it.

Discussions here may be a partial antidote. Thanks to all sides.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I agree Hazzard. We see people saying that they "know" about this and all kinds of other things, but it translates into "I so strongly believe this to be true that I can't imagine it not being true."

and do you think this is the case with Edgar?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

"Easily accessible" is a two-edged sword, since McG -- or YOU -- then should have been able to find the interview in which Mitchell explicitly said that the claim HE claimed NASA was involved in the coverup was distorted and untrue.

But you didn't.

It's why threads such as this one provide a worthwhile antidote, as adherents each search for the strongest material to support their arguments. Most definitely NOT a waste of time.

In the end of this particular dispute, after all the effort that McG has obviousl put into it, and all the false alarms about 'proof', he did find one quotation that mentioned how Mitchell believes that 'some' people involved in the moon landing "know" that UFOs are real.

I told ya so? Didn't I tell ya so?

I go to all that time and trouble only to be told that it was all just a bunch of "nothing".

As I said, I'm very bored with this and refuse to look up anything else about it. If Oberg wants to look up something about Edgar Mitchell he can do it himself. I have had enough of it.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

why couldn't mitchell be involved in some psyops?

:alien:

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

It may be possible, sure -- when anybody finds quotations from Mitchell actually SAYING it.

So far, it's all 'he MUST have meant to say' excursions that jump off from him saying something entirely different.

What's actually been established on all these pages is that people are passionate about interpreting ambiguous or even unrelated comments as confirmatory of things they already believe.

I told ya so, didn't I?

Enough of this. Mitchell said what he said and it's on tape and in print. I refuse to discuss it any more because I am tired of being made to jump though hoops only to be told that my efforts are of no value. Maybe Oberg is getting a good chuckle over this, but it won't happen again.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

It's not just a personal issue with me, but if anyone doubts what I just posted then I refer hem back to the Gordon Cooper threads of a few weeks ago, which will prove what I just said.

My point was that Oberg and Friends set out to do a complete hatchet job on Gordon Cooper and it went on and on and on for days, as you can see here:

http://www.unexplain...r

Not a nice way of doing business.

Oberg does seem a little more hesitant to go after Edgar Mitchell in quite the same way. I'm not sure why but perhaps it's because Mitchell is still alive and would be able to defend himself in court if it came to that.

What a fanatic believer sees as a 'hatchet job' is what a researcher sees as a 'credibility check'. And the evidence that in later years the wilder stories from Cooper were utterly unworthy of belief is so overwhelming, the only recourse is to make the investigation of claims [and independent confirmation or refutation of them] look like a personal attack on character. Which is false.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

and do you think this is the case with Edgar?

Without him having direct evidence I don't see how it can be honestly interpreted any other way. We've been over this many times.

He believes what he has been told by people that he has a high degree of trust in and respect for. That isn't knowledge, it is belief. Very very strong belief, but belief nonetheless.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Oberg does seem a little more hesitant to go after Edgar Mitchell in quite the same way. I'm not sure why but perhaps it's because Mitchell is still alive and would be able to defend himself in court if it came to that.

It's more connected with the fact that I have no reason to doubt the accuracy of factual claims made by Mitchell. He probably WAS told these things by other people. How is that so hard to accept?

He has also explained his joking about 'visitors' on the moon, but here, it is believers who claim he is lying under duress from the dark forces. Who's attacking character now?

I have criticized his interpretations of his ESP experiment results while applauding his innovative actions to conduct the experiment.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

What a fanatic believer sees as a 'hatchet job' is what a researcher sees as a 'credibility check'. And the evidence that in later years the wilder stories from Cooper were utterly unworthy of belief is so overwhelming, the only recourse is to make the investigation of claims [and independent confirmation or refutation of them] look like a personal attack on character. Which is false.

I am not a "fanatic believer" in anything, if that's what you mean to imply, nor are you some kind of neutral, objective, independent researcher, at least not to anyone who knows your record.

1 person likes this

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I told ya so? Didn't I tell ya so?

No, you told us Mitchell said NASA was involved in a coverup.

At one point, he says he thinks some people 'involved with the moon landing' may have 'known' about UFOs.

Big difference, at least in my mind -- but clearly, not in yours.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

why couldn't mitchell be involved in some psyops?

:alien:

please do elaborate Mr M

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Without him having direct evidence I don't see how it can be honestly interpreted any other way. We've been over this many times.

He believes what he has been told by people that he has a high degree of trust in and respect for. That isn't knowledge, it is belief. Very very strong belief, but belief nonetheless.

although he does suggest 'having SEEN direct evidence' does he not? at very least he was shown photos, so lets not debate whether photos are evidence or not...

dont you find it strange Boon that someone of Dr Edgars intelligence and scientific methodology would be so easily fooled?

anyway I prob wont be back until tomorrow, I will have dug up some of my previous research into Edgar.....

looking forward to some of Psyche's input a little later......

1 person likes this

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

why couldn't mitchell be involved in some psyops?

'he can't implicate nasa due to his nda.... but he's allowed to blow the whistle on the government'

:whistle:

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

'he can't implicate nasa due to his nda.... but he's allowed to blow the whistle on the government'

:whistle:

:w00t::gun:

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

No, you told us Mitchell said NASA was involved in a coverup.

At one point, he says he thinks some people 'involved with the moon landing' may have 'known' about UFOs.

Big difference, at least in my mind -- but clearly, not in yours.

Jim, one final question or two for you if I may,.

1-- what do you make of Edgars insistance of visitation and government cover ups.

2-- do you not think there is an unkown phenomena at work with regards to some UFO reports, form what I read I think you are of the belief they all carry known prosaic explanations, am I wrong in this evaluation of your position?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

please do elaborate Mr M

that he has been selected by the intelligence circles to perpetuate the myths which serve specific requirements?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

So in the end, we revert to the impossible-to-disprove 'get-out-of-reality-free' card of the fanatic: anything Mitchell says that seems contrary to believing in the NASA coverup, is part of the NASA coverup.

Even when he says he is under no restriction about saying anything about UFOs he may have learned at NASA, it is really proof he IS under restriction and must lie about it.

Sigh.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Jim, one final question or two for you if I may,.

1-- what do you make of Edgars insistance of visitation and government cover ups.

It's an exciting thesis, emotionally rewarding, and consistent with 'forward-thinking' and optimism, and there IS a lot of testimony that seems to corroborate it. And the way he expresses it, it is deliberately non-refutable, which is the clue I detect that makes it worthy of more than a little skepticism.

2-- do you not think there is an unkown phenomena at work with regards to some UFO reports, form what I read I think you are of the belief they all carry known prosaic explanations, am I wrong in this evaluation of your position?

Could easily be true, but we'll never know for sure as we drown in 'noise' that masquerades any readable signal. There are identifiable stimuli very worthy of closer study, and there are intriguing stories that appear to be resistent to prosaic explanation. What they really prove, so far, is nothing -- but they have such a potential for advancing human knowledge that they deserve study, especially BETTER study than has so far been applied.

3 people like this

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.