Jump to content
Join the Unexplained Mysteries community today! It's free and setting up an account only takes a moment.
- Sign In or Create Account -
Anomalocaris

Aliens tried to save America from nuclear war

289 posts in this topic

Recommended Posts

PrisonerX

So, you have nothing, or lack the courage to take a stand. Common sense is common sense. To label it anything else, or to twist the meaning of the phrase to suit your flaw perceptions is just plain silly.

So, again, you have nothing. And I am not surprised, as usual. I'll just give you the benefit of the doubt though...you backed yourself into a corner and can't find a way out. It happens when defending codswallop. I won't hold it against you.

Lol what are you even talking about? Courage? This is becoming laughable.

You called something nonsense, and you're entitled to make that judgment; it doesn't bother me in the least. I was interested in any evidence you had to support that claim. You haven't provided any, but somehow that has 'put me in a corner'? Lol, okay. Whatever you need to tell yourself.

Fact is, you nor I know for certain the truth of the matter, as it stands.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
White Unicorn

I must add that lower rank personnel also jump the gun in alien speculation and get the most media attention. I think the allied governments like that because it diverts attention from their R&D, while they investigate the other unknown alien as in not their countries' presence that was also watching their high tech craft in action. Was it Chinese or truly something else?

I doubt that we will know what happened in England and don't really know if we should.

It was a mystery that many wanted to discover the truth but they usually go on wild goose chases while the uppers with more clearance aren't talking for good reasons. Some of the only facts we have as clues is Reagan's star wars was born from these events.

Edited by White Unicorn

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
stereologist

Why were these nutjobs ever in such positions? I thought you had to be smart to be something like an astronaut, but then again, look at most of the people in high positions these days...

Just because someone attributes an incident to UFOs does not make them a nutjob. There are plenty of people that have odd ideas. For example, there have been Nobel prize winners that had unusual ideas about vitamin consumption. Odd ideas external to the main thrust of their work is okay. I'm sure these people were in the military in important jobs because their ideas about UFOs did not affect their work. If they assigned malfunctions to aliens all of the time they would not be able to complete their tasks. Unknown problems have been assigned to gremlins. That does not mean that gremlins actually exist, but these imaginary thingies get stuck with the blame.

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
stereologist

I went back to the origins of this discussion with PrisonerX and Thorovir. It seems that PrisonerX is simply betting on the credibility of a person without any evidence one way or the other. Thorovir states that regardless of the source "codswallop is codswallop". I agree with Thorovir. The evidence is what counts and not the source. And I agree with PrisonerX. Just because an astronaut is involved, the evidence does not change. When people rely on something like an astronaut said it, it means that the evidence is probably shaky or nonexistent. Otherwise, why bother with the source?

  • Like 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Watch Dog

Read further down in the article and see what Nick Pope says.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
NewAge1
I don't see that the military claims that UFOs are monitoring or whatever over military sites. There are people that have been in the military that make such statements. The people making the statements use the fact that they were in the military as some sort of appeal to authority. What matters is the evidence and that evidence is lacking.

I don't think I have said that. You got me wrong.

What we have is accounts by various military officers in the US, Britain and former Soviet Union who have worked on military sites and gone public with their experiences. That's it. Take it or leave it. To me that's intriguing and I have no reason to doubt their honesty. It doesn't mean that what they have witnessed is the result of an Alien intelligence but I cannot rule out that possiblity either. I am OK with not knowing as this point, pending more evidence if there is such.

Edited by Phenix20

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
NewAge1
It never really made sense to me as to why articles concerning people witnessing UFOs/ETs make references to the witness'/claimant's education. As far as I know, an aeronautical engineer's brain is still a human's brain, yes? So if this is the case then it is still susceptible to fallibility. When it comes to ET visitation/UFO sightings an aeronautical engineer's claims are no more fruitful than a plumber's claims.

Given the fact that there are still many people prejudicing UFO witnesses as but drug addicts, hipsters and mentally unstable I think it's useful to know that there are actually individuals from all walks of life who report these exeperiences, including high-achieving such as politicians, scientists, military officers, pilots ect.

Now that doesn't mean they are exempt from faillibility. Far from that. But there very much exist misconceptions about what constitute a UFO witness.

Edited by Phenix20

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
PrisonerX

I went back to the origins of this discussion with PrisonerX and Thorovir. It seems that PrisonerX is simply betting on the credibility of a person without any evidence one way or the other. Thorovir states that regardless of the source "codswallop is codswallop". I agree with Thorovir. The evidence is what counts and not the source. And I agree with PrisonerX. Just because an astronaut is involved, the evidence does not change. When people rely on something like an astronaut said it, it means that the evidence is probably shaky or nonexistent. Otherwise, why bother with the source?

I don't even necessarily disagree with Thor. It may very well be nonsense. It may be a half-truth. It may entirely be true. I don't know.

What I do know is that this man, due to his position as an astronaut, has a higher degree of reliability when speaking of things that allegedly come from outer space. It should be noted and his word should be analyzed with more attention than some random person with no high level experience in related matters. Outright dismissal of the claim, to me, seems unjustifiable without knowing more than what is provided in this article.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
PersonFromPorlock

Codswallop is codswallop, no matter the source.

A wonderfully robust old English word, best not examined too closely.

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Dumbledore the Awesome

Read further down in the article and see what Nick Pope says.

he's baffled?
  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Leo Krupe
I don't even necessarily disagree with Thor. It may very well be nonsense. It may be a half-truth. It may entirely be true. I don't know.

What I do know is that this man, due to his position as an astronaut, has a higher degree of reliability when speaking of things that allegedly come from outer space. It should be noted and his word should be analyzed with more attention than some random person with no high level experience in related matters. Outright dismissal of the claim, to me, seems unjustifiable without knowing more than what is provided in this article.

That's a fallacy known as appeal to authority (or argument from authority), and can be seen in this link:

http://www.nizkor.org/features/fallacies/appeal-to-authority.html

An Appeal to Authority is a fallacy with the following form:

  1. Person A is (claimed to be) an authority on subject S.
  2. Person A makes claim C about subject S.
  3. Therefore, C is true.

This fallacy is committed when the person in question is not a legitimate authority on the subject. More formally, if person A is not qualified to make reliable claims in subject S, then the argument will be fallacious.

This sort of reasoning is fallacious when the person in question is not an expert. In such cases the reasoning is flawed because the fact that an unqualified person makes a claim does not provide any justification for the claim. The claim could be true, but the fact that an unqualified person made the claim does not provide any rational reason to accept the claim as true.

Edgar Mitchell is not a qualified expert in the field of exobiology. No one is, since we have no proof of extraterrestrial life. There are scientists who study the possibility of exobiology, and theorize about it, but even they aren't qualified as authorities, since there's nothing to actually study.

For all of Mitchell's accomplishments, being an expert in extraterrestrial life is not one of them.

  • Like 3

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Nuclear Wessel

Given the fact that there are still many people prejudicing UFO witnesses as but drug addicts, hipsters and mentally unstable I think it's useful to know that there are actually individuals from all walks of life who report these exeperiences, including high-achieving such as politicians, scientists, military officers, pilots ect.

Provide evidence from these sightings and there will be no claims of being mentally unstable, hipsters, or druggies... I can assure you...

  • Like 3

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Sir Wearer of Hats

I don't even necessarily disagree with Thor. It may very well be nonsense. It may be a half-truth. It may entirely be true. I don't know.

What I do know is that this man, due to his position as an astronaut, has a higher degree of reliability when speaking of things that allegedly come from outer space. It should be noted and his word should be analyzed with more attention than some random person with no high level experience in related matters. Outright dismissal of the claim, to me, seems unjustifiable without knowing more than what is provided in this article.

I've rowed a canoe, does that give me a higher degree of reliability when speaking about fish?

I teach science, does that give me a higher degree of reliability when talking about quantum physics?

No it doesn't because what I have an experience in connects only in the vaguest sense to what I'm commenting upon.

He has a higher degree of reliability when discussing walking on the moon. He has a higher degree of reliability when talking about the workings of NASA during the period he was there. That is all. When talking about aliens disabling nukes, or Roswell or whatever else Ed decides to venture an opinion on, he is no more or no less reliable then you, me or him over there *points* (unless him over there happens to be Skyeagle, who WAS actually there).

  • Like 6

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Thorvir

A wonderfully robust old English word, best not examined too closely.

It's a fun one I use a lot around here. Woo is a good alternative.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Thorvir

I don't even necessarily disagree with Thor. It may very well be nonsense. It may be a half-truth. It may entirely be true. I don't know.

Then do some critical thinking about it. You will know then.

What I do know is that this man, due to his position as an astronaut, has a higher degree of reliability when speaking of things that allegedly come from outer space. It should be noted and his word should be analyzed with more attention than some random person with no high level experience in related matters. Outright dismissal of the claim, to me, seems unjustifiable without knowing more than what is provided in this article.

BS. An astronaut can be just as wrong as a lunatic tin-foil hatter. The fact that you relate credibility to profession is incredibly naive.

  • Like 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Thorvir

...it doesn't bother me in the least...

If that were anywhere near the truth, you wouldn't have worried about it in the first place and not pestered me with your desire for attention. So, it either bothers you or it doesn't, you can't have it both ways.

I was interested in any evidence you had to support that claim. You haven't provided any, but somehow that has 'put me in a corner'? Lol, okay. Whatever you need to tell yourself.

What claim did I make exactly? Codswallop is codswallop, no matter the source. That's my exact phrase. That's not a claim, that's a statement of fact. Just because you don't like it doesn't mean you have to make a fool of yourself over it. An astronaut can be just as wrong, just as loony, as any other person on the planet. They are not superior human beings just because of their profession.

  • Like 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Sweetpumper

Everyone gonna be okay in here?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Hawken

It would seem that the FAA is taking action on hobbyist who fly Drones near aircraft and airports but when it comes to Unknown Anomalies buzzing planes and airports then it seems of no importance. One would think after 9/11, air safety in the skies would be taken more seriously whether if the object was identified or not.

http://www.msnbc.com/weekends-with-alex-witt/watch/close-calls-with-drones-spike-concern-506269251703

Edited by Hawkin

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Thorvir

Everyone gonna be okay in here?

Never!

Wait...I mean, SOON!

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Paranomali

I would love to believe him, he's obviously an intelligent man, but i need some proof, dammit!!! Why can't anybody 'in the know' somehow get their hands on a decent video or tangible, unquestionable evidence!

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Anomalocaris

I would love to believe him, he's obviously an intelligent man, but i need some proof, dammit!!! Why can't anybody 'in the know' somehow get their hands on a decent video or tangible, unquestionable evidence!

Maybe because such evidence doesn't exist?

  • Like 3

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
psyche101

There are some fascinating accounts of UFOs (believed to be 'Aliens') who have allegedly desactivated US and British Nuclear missiles.

Aliens Have Deactivated British And US Nuclear Missiles, Say US Military Pilots:

''The unlikely claims were compiled by six former US airmen and another member of the military who interviewed or researched the evidence of 120 ex-military personnel.''

[...]

Capt Salas continued: "I was on duty when an object came over and hovered directly over the site.

"The missiles shut down - 10 Minuteman missiles. And the same thing happened at another site a week later. There's a strong interest in our missiles by these objects, wherever they come from. I personally think they're not from planet Earth."

Source: http://www.telegraph...ary-pilots.html

I do not believe a single thing Robert Salas says, he cannot even remember which facility he was at when questioned on the Echo/Oscar incidents!!

Time Herbert demystified his nonsensical ramblings. Tim is a former SAC missile crew commander and staff officer, and also a member here.

What is truly sad here is I am seeing just another victim of UFOLogy, used, chewed up and spat out. My real concern is Dr Mitchell may one day not be remembered as the 6th man who walked on the moon, but the funny old man who believed in Little Green Men here to save us from ourselves.

That is so sads it seems a crime.

Edited by psyche101

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
psyche101

I do remember the incident at malestrom air force base 1967 when the nuclear missiles were disabled...http://www.cufon.org/cufon/malmstrom/malm1.htm

They were disabled due to an electrical fault, which was not only found, but procedures put in place to prevent the same malfunction ever happening again.

And rumours of the UFO were disproved.

Storm in a B cup.

c27ea082397e.png

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
psyche101

An astronaut's credibility is nothing to the doubting thomas.

Credibility is earned, is anyone wanted to know what walking on the moon was like - he is your man, if you want to know about the Urban Myth of Roswell, he is your man too sadly. The two are not connected because space is a common factor here. If I have a Yellow car, it does not mean it is made from Bananas.

Walking on the moon does not enlighten one in any conceivable way about the possibility and intentions of Aliens. Dr Mitchell has always been somewhat left of centre, having performed remote viewing experiments with some crackpots back on earth while on his way to the moon. The Con Men that proliferate today's media are simply taking advantage of his open nature and the ravages of age.

He seems a rather cranky old man set in his ways, and not willing to discuss anything, it is "like the old timers from yesteryear told him" Or you hit the road. He sort of made himself look bad when he tried to debate Bill Bye, and pretty much said "it's my way and that's that" and was in fact IMHO rather rude to Mr Nye. He is convinced that the wild stories he has heard are true, and lets face it, after wasting a lifetime of investment in fringe, and coming up empty handed, this is no doubt his last straw grab. Papers make him important, and people listen to him because of the Astronaut Label, but it has nothing to do with Aliens. It has to do with what characters the media can sell to a rumour hungry public.

Not easy to step down from that pedestal, Buzz Aldrin release a book called "The Man Who Fell To Earth" about dropping from the limelight, and what depression that brings. Dr Mitchell maintains the limelight with wacky tales.

Anyone read the stuff in the link claimed by Dr John Brandenburg?

Dr Mitchell seems to STILL be getting associated with some of the nuttiest crackpots on the planet, they may not be working together, but just being listed with this whackjob cannot assist his credibility. Dr Mitchell is sliding into the UFOlogy pit, with Lazar, Meir, Friedman and Greer. Some of whom are Dr Mitchells "Sources" believe it or not.

Greer wa the start of Dr Mitchells demise.

Martian genocides now!! Crikey Moses!!

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
psyche101

I am not saying they wouldn't do the things you are suggesting, but maybe cautioning us of the danger serves as a preventive measure.

It all depends on how far they would be willing to go in their intervention to avoid extinction. As things stand, if Aliens exist, they seem quite intent on not interfering in an obvious and direct manner in the Earth's natural evolution and socioculturual developpment, so as to leave no doubt whatsoever of their existence.

Assuming that they are monitoring the Earth and doing the things over military sites that members of the US, British and Soviet military have been claiming, than yes I think it's safe to presume that they have some sort of interest about life on Earth, if not necessarily the human specie in itself. What that interest might be I couldn't tell by a long shot. We can only try to speculate on hypotheticals and aspects we have no way to know. But they are supposed to be Aliens after all.

It is a load of crap though. We even curbed ourselves due to the dangers. The Orion Nuclear Propulsion Project could be at Alpha Centauri right now, but we had to can the entire project due to fears of fallout as witnessed by the testing of Rainbow bombs - which were nuclear devices set of in the upper atmosphere and in space. We are regulating ourselves without these ridiculous claims of warnings from above.

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

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    No registered users viewing this page.