More NASA UFO's?

[zoser]

Well, Zoser, I see you failed to produce link where I called astronauts/cosmonauts liars. That makes you... "L" word (in capital) comes in mind.

Another BS story (link):

When G.M.Grechko asked V.P.Savinykh about it, he got reply: "Its malarkey. Nothing of that sort happened." (

, G.M.Grechko's words at 05:50).

Edit: spelling.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=pCporOzoFXc&feature=related

[zoser]

I'll give it a shot.

Just provide the basics to allow starting an investigation:

date, time

names of witnesses

any competent ufo investigator knows these data are essential

Otherwise, of course you realize, you are deliberately sabotaging the investigation from the beginning.

Lots of footage out there Jim. I'm just bringing it to your attention. See me as a sort of 'honest broker'.

[zoser]

Here's one of my favourites:

[JimOberg]

[media=]

[/media]

Uh, where/when in the video do you think you're hearing Aldrin say they were watched by aliens on the lunar surface, which your Bolivian ufo-guru told you about?

How long have you been listening to English conversations? Do you frequently find yourself not following the gist of the discussions?

add -- here's a link to where Aldrin is given enough time to explain what he saw

http://www.abovetopsecret.com/forum/thread554120/pg19

and his words aren't edited by a producer pandering to ufo buffs.

as a bonus -- i am taken to task over a mistake and admit to it.

Edited October 28, 2012 by JimOberg

[JimOberg]

Here's one of my favourites:

time/date/witnesses?

just to check it isn't AGI

as if you'd care

[zoser]

Another classic; this time from STS 123; another object suddenly changes direction at a rate that no terrestrially made object could achieve.

[zoser]

I'll just show you one more then I have to go for a while. This time STS-48. I have already posted some footage on this, but this clip is enhanced to show an object changing direction (vector).

[zoser]

time/date/witnesses?

just to check it isn't AGI

as if you'd care

The point is that NASA has done a great deal albeit inadvertently to draw people's attention to the phenomena. Some of the footage is unexplainable in ordinary terms and I'm sure you are now coming to that conclusion intuitively.

[JimOberg]

The point is that NASA has done a great deal albeit inadvertently to draw people's attention to the phenomena. Some of the footage is unexplainable in ordinary terms and I'm sure you are now coming to that conclusion intuitively.

the point is, none of the evidence you have offered as backup for your wild allegations actually show people saying what yoiu claim they said.

and none of your youtube postings contain even the most elementary data vital to any competent investigation.

your imagination rules your mind with no link at all to verifiable evidence

you are the poster child for the perfect 'UFO believer'

in the end, you're just boosting your own ego by sliming all the people who disagree, or won't actually testify the way you imagine they should, as liars

look at evidence, don't run away from it

a dozen examples have been cited here, a dozen opportunities for you to act rationally and actually do work to determine levels of authenticity of claims.

every time, you've run away.

every time.

Edited October 28, 2012 by JimOberg

[Sabbath]

Are there "UFO's" in that video? Yes. Are they aliens? Fat chance.

[TheMacGuffin]

I've made a career out of clear writing that is difficult to misunderstand, but McGuf has beaten me at the game -- he had found ways to misunderstand, anyway. To misunderstand, and then to misquote -- such as cutting off a sentence in the middle [putting a period after the cut and not the honest '...']

The only thing Oberg has made a career out of is lying and smearing people in the UFO field. He is a lying hack with a mission.

This time he was just trying to smear Gordon Cooper because he dared to disagree with the party line on UFOs all those years, and even tried to go to the UN about it. So now Oberg and his little clones got on here to do a hatchet job on Cooper.

Well, you can all see very clearly how these boys operate if you didn't know that already. I'm not afraid to call them out on it, either, and this time it looks like I hit a soft spot. Good.

[TheMacGuffin]

It's all a distraction from the sad reality of a brave, clever man -- 'Gordo' -- sinking into his own bitterness and unmet need for somebody -- ANYbody, even if it's only the UFO magazines and conventions -- paying him the adoration he once rightfully enjoyed from everyone [see the 1963 photo of him as the hero with his fans, including a very young me, on my home page], and then lost through his own shortcomings. There's no joy in that image, however justifiable was the fearsome fall.

Oberg is talking about himself here, and his sad, pathetic, silly little career of UFO debunkery. We he talks about how to annoy, divert, deflect and misquote, he's really talking about himself.

He tried to get away with saying that Cooper was fired from NASA for being a crook, although he had trouble recalling the year, and then he said it was because he just didn't care about the program any more.

In this latest attack, it sounds like Cooper ended up some kind of depressed alcoholic who had faded into obscurity.

I tell you the real motivation of Oberg and other disinformers like him, and that is to tear down and destroy everyone who doesn't follow the party line in UFOs. That's what they do to every single important witness and UFO researcher, and you have just seen yet another example of how they really operate.

[booNyzarC]

All you have is slander McG, and it's really quite disgusting that you are willing to slander people like this.

All too frequently with you it seems to be about attacking the poster and not the post. Attacking the messenger and not the message.

It always seems to devolve into a character debate with you, but sadly that is a debate you are going to lose every time because you have repeatedly demonstrated a complete lack of integrity. Through this dishonest approach you've chosen, all of your bitterness is exposed; and it is ugly.

[zoser]

the point is, none of the evidence you have offered as backup for your wild allegations actually show people saying what yoiu claim they said.

and none of your youtube postings contain even the most elementary data vital to any competent investigation.

your imagination rules your mind with no link at all to verifiable evidence

you are the poster child for the perfect 'UFO believer'

in the end, you're just boosting your own ego by sliming all the people who disagree, or won't actually testify the way you imagine they should, as liars

look at evidence, don't run away from it

a dozen examples have been cited here, a dozen opportunities for you to act rationally and actually do work to determine levels of authenticity of claims.

every time, you've run away.

every time.

Just see me as the postman who delivers the information; no ego, no axe to grind, nothing. I present it, you review it. See what you think.

Any thoughts on how those objects change speed so rapidly? Do we have anything that could do that? Not a challenge, just an open question.

What are those circular objects that seem to materialise in the video? How are they appearing? What could they be? What do we know of that can appear, travel, hold itself stationary like that?

These are very good questions. imho.

[zoser]

Are there "UFO's" in that video? Yes. Are they aliens? Fat chance.

One thing at a time. First of all lets say what we know they cannot be. That's easy.

[TheMacGuffin]

All you have is slander McG, and it's really quite disgusting that you are willing to slander people like this.

All too frequently with you it seems to be about attacking the poster and not the post. Attacking the messenger and not the message.

It always seems to devolve into a character debate with you, but sadly that is a debate you are going to lose every time because you have repeatedly demonstrated a complete lack of integrity. Through this dishonest approach you've chosen, all of your bitterness is exposed; and it is ugly.

Look who's talking! LOL

[badeskov]

Oberg is talking about himself here, and his sad, pathetic, silly little career of UFO debunkery. We he talks about how to annoy, divert, deflect and misquote, he's really talking about himself.

I must agree with BooNy's assessment here, all you indeed have is slander and you are not even good at it.

He tried to get away with saying that Cooper was fired from NASA for being a crook,

No he didn't, as pointed out numerous times.

although he had trouble recalling the year,

No didn't. Jim was, as I read it, referring to the years Cooper was promoting shady business deals, no the year Cooper left NASA (unwillingly or not).

and then he said it was because he just didn't care about the program any more.

So?

In this latest attack, it sounds like Cooper ended up some kind of depressed alcoholic who had faded into obscurity.

What?!

I tell you the real motivation of Oberg and other disinformers like him, and that is to tear down and destroy everyone who doesn't follow the party line in UFOs. That's what they do to every single important witness and UFO researcher, and you have just seen yet another example of how they really operate.

What a pathetic argument. In fact, the only thing you really excel at is tearing yourself and your cases down. That you have indeed done very effectively. Instead of discussing the topic at hand you constantly diverge into ad homs and what have to deflect from the fact that you have nothing to support your case with - it is blatantly obvious, McG. Jim even tried to point out why you can't take a person's word for something, even an astronaut. But immediately you went into your attack spree, clouding up the whole topic. You are really a sad sight to see in a debate.

Cheers,

Badeskov

[TheMacGuffin]

I must agree with BooNy's assessment here, all you indeed have is slander and you are not even good at it.

What a pathetic argument. In fact, the only thing you really excel at is tearing yourself and your cases down. That you have indeed done very effectively. Instead of discussing the topic at hand you constantly diverge into ad homs and what have to deflect from the fact that you have nothing to support your case with - it is blatantly obvious, McG. Jim even tried to point out why you can't take a person's word for something, even an astronaut. But immediately you went into your attack spree, clouding up the whole topic. You are really a sad sight to see in a debate.

All people have to do is read what good old "Jim" was saying on here about Cooper, although you immediately went into protect mode to throw up a little smokescreen on his behalf.

Naturally he is backtracking now, after I pointed out that he didn't even mention the correct year that Cooper retired from NASA.

[TheMacGuffin]

Edited October 28, 2012 by TheMacGuffin

[zoser]

Come on guys we still need answers to what these objects are on the NASA clips.

We have:

• Spontaneous materialisation of circular objects.
  
• Objects appearing to be leaving orbit.
  
• Objects changing trajectory incredibly rapidly.
  

This needs analysis and study.

[TheMacGuffin]

[zoser]

[media=]

[/media]

Wow. Joe Walker was adamant that he saw something extra-ordinary.

Great footage and testimony.

[JimOberg]

Just see me as the postman who delivers the information; no ego, no axe to grind, nothing. I present it, you review it. See what you think.

Any thoughts on how those objects change speed so rapidly? Do we have anything that could do that? Not a challenge, just an open question.

What are those circular objects that seem to materialise in the video? How are they appearing? What could they be? What do we know of that can appear, travel, hold itself stationary like that?

These are very good questions. imho.

Agreed. So why did you decide to AVOID looking at my home page where I offer my answers, especially my "99 FAQs About Space UFO Videos".

www.jamesoberg.com/ufo.html

Come on guys we still need answers to what these objects are on the NASA clips.

We have:

• Spontaneous materialisation of circular objects.
  
• Objects appearing to be leaving orbit.
  
• Objects changing trajectory incredibly rapidly.
  

This needs analysis and study.

So what's wrong with the answers I've proposed over the past forty years? Or have you already chosen NOT to consider them?

Edited October 28, 2012 by JimOberg

[zoser]

[media=]

[/media]

Very compelling and very difficult to argue with. It's all there is someone were to sift through the evidence with an open mind.

It occurs to me that human beings were not born pre-programmed to report UFO's. They must actually be seeing them!

[zoser]

Agreed. So why did you decide to AVOID looking at my home page where I offer my answers, especially my "99 FAQs About Space UFO Videos".

www.jamesoberg.com/ufo.html

Your a little too biased for me, and you don't give others credit for what they say. Ufology for me is largely based on that; not the display on a pocket calculator, or spotting a finite error in someones testimony.

Those things should matter not in the overall conclusion of this phenomena. Nobody makes a perfect testimony, because we are only human. It's a matter of what it all collectively adds up to.