is the govt coming clean about ufos?

originally posted by: karl 12
... Never (ever) explored the truly intriguing UFO incidents ..after 10 years of posting here.
Why not?

I concentrate on topics I have lifelong professional involvement with [spaceflight], and hope to provide unique insights into more likely prosaic explanations for 'truly intriguing' very famous cases. If you're not going to accept those explanations, or point out weaknesses in them needing strengthening, why venture beyond my expertise with no possible benefit? Who do you think I am, Bill Nye?

a reply to: JimOberg

If you consider glossing over the vast majority of the point/post and singling out one specific point on the list then sure.

Not very impressive though.

If, however, your goal was to divest from the idea that astronauts have indeed revealed and disclosed their own UFO/alien sightings then you have failed miserably.

cryptome.org...

originally posted by: JBurns
a reply to: Arbitrageur

Just keep glossing over 75% of the post to focus on 25%

Save that embarrassment for yourself.

Buh buh buh butt... but Gordon Cooper, Scott Carpenter, Edgar Mitchell?

You seem to have no clue about what Buzz Aldrin actually said, what Scott Carpenter actually said, or what Gordon Mitchell actually said, you have grossly misrepresented all three of those astronauts and not backed up any of your claims or explained Aldrin's 99.999 statement as it relates to "ultimately admits he had no idea". You haven't provided any truthful quotes from Carpenter or Mitchell that they actually saw a UFO (made up quotes and hoaxes don't count). Which leaves Cooper and his amazing UFO story...

originally posted by: karl 12
You two boys are relevant.

Lots of chuff.

Never (ever) explored the truly intriguing UFO incidents ..after 10 years of posting here.

Why not?

Gordon Cooper claimed whle he was stationed at Edwards Air Force Base, he supervised a film crew which filmed a UFO that landed, how is that claim not intriguing and compelling? Surely it would be one of the most astounding UFO events ever if the UFO landing was documented on motion picture film as Gordon Cooper claimed. Not only would the film itself be great evidence, but he wasn't a sole witness, there was his film crew, the people that developed the film, and other people who were aware of a UFO incident occurring.

Jim Oberg has a special interest in astronaut claims so he investigated that thoroughly. I cited his research prominently in my thread about that amazing claim.

Now Jburns is harping on Gordon Cooper and I don't think he has the slightest clue about the credibility of Gordon Cooper. If he had read Jim Oberg's research (and the research of others) mentioned in my thread on Gordon Cooper's UFO film claim, we wouldn't be off on this tangent, but I'm going to deny ignorance and post my thread link again. I can lead JBurns to it but I can't make him read the links and his behavior suggests he won't read them. Jim Oberg checked up on Cooper's story, and confirmed that indeed Cooper was at Edwards, and there was a UFO event, and that "film" was indeed sent to Washington, so this would seem to corroborate Cooper's story at a superficial level, wouldn't it? If you want to find out what Jim Oberg and other researchers found on this astounding case, read his article linked in my thread.

A question to people who have read Jim Oberg's article, is, how well did Cooper's claims check out and do you still find Gordon Cooper to be a credible source? By the way, there were two other researchers who looked into it, James McDonald, and Brad Sparks.

This is the video with Cooper which says the film was sent to Washington, never to be seen or heard of again (Spoiler alert, that's not what really happened):

Astronaut Gordon Cooper's UFO Experience:Reports Seeing Flying Saucer


That clip from a documentary contains a nice animation of what Cooper claims was filmed by the film crew he was in charge of, amazing animation. I'd love to see the film!



I think maybe I found images from the film, but it's not what I had hoped:
Found? Gordon Cooper's 1957 UFO film "sent...to...Washington...never to be seen again"

So J Burns, in conclusion, if you're not questioning Cooper's credibility, I don't think you've done your homework to see what the three researchers who investigated this event found. He's the only one of the four astronauts you mentioned with interesting unexplained personal UFO sightings, and this amazing claim of a landed flying disk turned out to be not what Cooper claimed, according to all three researchers.

originally posted by: Arbitrageur

originally posted by: JBurns
a reply to: Arbitrageur

Just keep glossing over 75% of the post to focus on 25%

Save that embarrassment for yourself.

Buh buh buh butt... but Gordon Cooper, Scott Carpenter, Edgar Mitchell?

You seem to have no clue about what Buzz Aldrin actually said, what Scott Carpenter actually said, or what Gordon Mitchell actually said, you have grossly misrepresented all three of those astronauts and not backed up any of your claims or explained Aldrin's 99.999 statement as it relates to "ultimately admits he had no idea". You haven't provided any truthful quotes from Carpenter or Mitchell that they actually saw a UFO (made up quotes and hoaxes don't count). Which leaves Cooper and his amazing UFO story...

originally posted by: karl 12
You two boys are relevant.

Lots of chuff.

Never (ever) explored the truly intriguing UFO incidents ..after 10 years of posting here.

Why not?

Gordon Cooper claimed whle he was stationed at Edwards Air Force Base, he supervised a film crew which filmed a UFO that landed, how is that claim not intriguing and compelling? Surely it would be one of the most astounding UFO events ever if the UFO landing was documented on motion picture film as Gordon Cooper claimed. Not only would the film itself be great evidence, but he wasn't a sole witness, there was his film crew, the people that developed the film, and other people who were aware of a UFO incident occurring.

Jim Oberg has a special interest in astronaut claims so he investigated that thoroughly. I cited his research prominently in my thread about that amazing claim.

Now Jburns is harping on Gordon Cooper and I don't think he has the slightest clue about the credibility of Gordon Cooper. If he had read Jim Oberg's research (and the research of others) mentioned in my thread on Gordon Cooper's UFO film claim, we wouldn't be off on this tangent, but I'm going to deny ignorance and post my thread link again. I can lead JBurns to it but I can't make him read the links and his behavior suggests he won't read them. Jim Oberg checked up on Cooper's story, and confirmed that indeed Cooper was at Edwards, and there was a UFO event, and that "film" was indeed sent to Washington, so this would seem to corroborate Cooper's story at a superficial level, wouldn't it? If you want to find out what Jim Oberg and other researchers found on this astounding case, read his article linked in my thread.

A question to people who have read Jim Oberg's article, is, how well did Cooper's claims check out and do you still find Gordon Cooper to be a credible source? By the way, there were two other researchers who looked into it, James McDonald, and Brad Sparks.

This is the video with Cooper which says the film was sent to Washington, never to be seen or heard of again (Spoiler alert, that's not what really happened):

Astronaut Gordon Cooper's UFO Experience:Reports Seeing Flying Saucer

That clip from a documentary contains a nice animation of what Cooper claims was filmed by the film crew he was in charge of, amazing animation. I'd love to see the film!

I think maybe I found images from the film, but it's not what I had hoped:
Found? Gordon Cooper's 1957 UFO film "sent...to...Washington...never to be seen again"

So J Burns, in conclusion, if you're not questioning Cooper's credibility, I don't think you've done your homework to see what the three researchers who investigated this event found. He's the only one of the four you mentioned with interesting claims, and this amazing claim of a landed flying disk turned out to be not what Cooper claimed.

Gordon Mitchell?

And I appreciate the rebuttal laid out. I will go ahead and look through the material now.

However, as I merely pointed out the premise of the OP was "Why haven't astronauts come forward with UFO stories/evidence/anecdotes" (not verbatim)

I'm very familiar with Mr. Oberg's work and your own research here on ATS. I only point out that you can't give someone the third degree simply because they make claims that don't match a particular expectation or idea XYZ person/group wants to push

Whether or not these astronauts (or singular astronaut, as you show here) claims are factual is immaterial with the bigger picture of UFOs. UFOs exist. They are real and they are out there. Although nobody can prove what they are, lets face it if they belong to any country it'd be the United States. And it just wouldn't make sense to be showing them off or operating them near active US military assets who could potentially shoot them down or worse yet expose them. Personally, from what I've seen to date, I suspect our species is unlikely to ever achieve this level of tech

I concede the point, to your finely produced reply. I never intended to prove the statement only that it was made which may seem a bit pointless by itself, but the argument is that UFOs are so prevalent and well documented that whether or not Col. Cooper's story checks out does not change the overarching reality that they are indeed real. UFOs are not the arena of tin foil hats and conspiracy theories, they are a factual phenomenon that needs to be taken seriously

a reply to: JBurns

However, as I merely pointed out the premise of the OP was "Why haven't astronauts come forward with UFO stories/evidence/anecdotes" (not verbatim)

The OP (opening post) does not mention astronauts at all. The word does not appear until Page 3. I'm not sure how you think that is the premise.

The premise of the thread is actually more like "disclosure coming soon."

a reply to: Phage

Well it seems it is my mistake then, I apparently got that turned around at some point or another

As to the OP, I suspect disclosure is indeed coming soon (for craven political gain only) unless the reality is so terrible as to required continued suppression

originally posted by: JBurns
a reply to: Phage

Well it seems it is my mistake then, I apparently got that turned around at some point or another

As to the OP, I suspect disclosure is indeed coming soon (for craven political gain only) unless the reality is so terrible as to required continued suppression

Do you also concede that your repeated explicit assertion that Ed Mitchell had reported seeing UFOs was counter-factual?

a reply to: JimOberg

Yes, thanks to the information provided

I still hold the UFO phenomenon is widespread, prevalent and inarguable (now who or what is operating them is another question all together!)

originally posted by: scrounger

originally posted by: Phage
a reply to: scrounger

your statement presumes they cant.

First, it's a question, not a statement.
Second, no it doesn't.

 

i am saying it is more than possible they can ..

i say its a reasonable probability.

What does "more than possible" mean? It sounds like it means that it's a certainty. Doesn't it? Isn't that different from "a reasonable probability"?

it means that while it may not be true what we do know (from our own history and statistics) that it is more than possible that advanced aliens exist , been here and government is hiding it than than they dont/havent been / government has zero.

not proof, not confirmed, but the odds more favor it is than is not.

scrounger

What makes you think any government is capable of covering life far more technically advanced than our own up? History proves they're incompetent glorified managers, not some super powerful force. If aliens were here the world would be powerless to cover it up.

originally posted by: JBurns
.....
Whether or not these astronauts (or singular astronaut, as you show here) claims are factual is immaterial with the bigger picture of UFOs. UFOs exist. They are real and they are out there......

These cases are central to the question of whether we can trust 'UFOLOGY' to properly filter reports and identify truly anomalous events potentially of importance. They provide a critical 'calibration test' of the competence and credibility of all other claims from the SAME source.

Agreed, the utter failure of ALL ufologists to accurately evaluate them -- and other famous spurious cases such as the Jimmy Carter sighting or the 2009 'Norway spiral' -- do not prove that the community was equally incompetent everywhere. But that's not where the burden of proof lies. That community needs to establish beyond doubt that it is skilled enough to avoid such 'false positives' or their entire body of work is suspect. Which would be tragic given the undeniable plausibility and importance of many of the theories offered to explain stuff that might not even NEED non-prosaic explanations.

Instead, we get the silly song and dance that "we only have to be right once" and if the skeptics can be wrong once, then you win.

[paragraph deleted after seeing your statement on your Mitchell claim being baseless]