Need Kasher quotes for STS-48 article

[JimOberg]

For a larger project of mine on 'space secrets' that I've looked into over the years, I'm preparing a long narrative report on my investigation of the STS-48 'UFO video'. I have been unable to locate exact wordings of two important quotations by Dr. Jack Kasher, who has championed the 'unexplainability' of the video since it first came out.

My presentation on the subject at Purdue in 1999 is readable here:

http://www.jamesoberg.com/ufo_astronaut.html

In particular, this annotated set of slides:

03/31/1999 - Purdue University (speech): The STS-48 "Zig Zag UFO" -- A Prosaic Explanation

link http://www.jamesoberg.com/99purdue-48-speech.pdf

Unfortunately for easy comprehension, it is a set of viewgraphs with only a few explanatory notes.

The text in preparation will be much better.

The two sought quotations are from a video of a speech he gave to a UFO conference in the mid-1990s, in which he made these statements -- paraphrased, and in need of precise wording.

First, he said that for his research he deliberately did NOT seek NASA records of the event's context, such as telemetry data or control center logbooks, because he intended to show that pure analysis of the video alone was adequate to properly assess it.

Second, in discussing the concept of laminar versus turbulent flow, related to the plume field from a shuttle thruster, he gave an example in which he had a column of smoke rising from a cigarette, and as it swirled in the rising air it became turbulant. He then told the audience to imagine that same column of smoke rising in a vacuum, and it would NOT be turbulent. I saw no indication that anyone in his audience thought that the idea of buoyancy [hot air rising] in a vacuum was at all preposterous.

Thanks for the help -- I'm sure a lot of folks out there have seen these comments

Edited November 11, 2012 by JimOberg

[booNyzarC]

Good luck tracking that down Jim, though even if you can't find those quotes his analysis is a complete joke if you ask me.

[synchronomy]

Second, in discussing the concept of laminar versus turbulent flow, related to the plume field from a shuttle thruster, he gave an example in which he had a column of smoke rising from a cigarette, and as it swirled in the rising air it became turbulant. He then told the audience to imagine that same column of smoke rising in a vacuum, and it would NOT be turbulent. I saw no indication that anyone in his audience thought that the idea of buoyancy [hot air rising] in a vacuum was at all preposterous.

Thanks for the help -- I'm sure a lot of folks out there have seen these comments

You would think he would have put more thought into dreaming up an analogy than that. Most people have no clue what causes buoyancy so he duped them.

You'd think at least someone would have asked how the hell a cigarette would burn in a vacuum to begin with!

Here's a question to ask at cocktail party with average Joe's (not rocket scientists)...

If it were your birthday and you were onboard the ISS and the crew presented you with a cake with one candle...

What would the candle flame look like?

Edited November 12, 2012 by synchronomy

[mcrom901]

Here's a question to ask at cocktail party with average Joe's (not rocket scientists)...

If it were your birthday and you were onboard the ISS and the crew presented you with a cake with one candle...

What would the candle flame look like?

[synchronomy]

For a larger project of mine on 'space secrets' that I've looked into over the years, I'm preparing a long narrative report on my investigation of the STS-48 'UFO video'. I have been unable to locate exact wordings of two important quotations by Dr. Jack Kasher, who has championed the 'unexplainability' of the video since it first came out.

Thanks for the help -- I'm sure a lot of folks out there have seen these comments

Jim...

I wasn't too familiar with the "research" this fellow had done, having dismissed him long ago after hearing some of his claims, so being a believer in the ETH, I decided to do a bit of digging in hopes of learning something and at the same time maybe find some reference to the comments you are seeking.

I found an interview with John Kasher (PhD??) and John Foster on the subject...WOW!

IMHO, I can't believe anyone would give any credibility to their claims.

Clearly, many do, if you find it necessary to debunk it yourself.

Here's the title of the first part on Youtube.

I can see how some people say PhD stands for "Piled High and Deep." I respect other members viewpoints, however, this is a little too "out there" for me.

Search Youtube for:

UNO UFO TV part 1