NASA and UFOs

[

Originally posted by VtaUFO
People forget that these astronauts were the best of the best, our most trusted test pilots and technicians.

So when one of them comes back from the moon to promote an expedition to Mt. Ararat to find Noah's Ark, we should take that seriously?

Or retires to pimp for a series of bogus aviation industry investment scams, using his reputation to persuade investors to part with millions of dollars -- all of which was lost -- you would have trusted him and given him YOUR money too?

How seriously do you take the claim of a successful ESP experiment conducted on private time on a space flight? Have you ever read the actual report, or just the claims of the guy who did it?

These guys -- and gals -- did very special and hazardous tasks on behalf of NASA, and deserve respect and credibility in those areas of expertise. Beyond that,. seems to me, they're just as trustworthy -- or not -- as anybody else.

Originally posted by JimOberg

Originally posted by planetzog

I raised a valid point why NASA investigates a simple photo which you go on and on about. I'm saying NASA got it right with that photo that its not a UFO. And I'm asking why NASA do not publish their investigations into other sightings and images, which you have clearly ignored.

Now that is a good question.

Is the problem that NASA does not publish its findings, or that the UFO sites just don't report them?

Judging from a number of snarky posts on this thread, it seems that anything NASA posts won't be believed anyway, at least by UFO buffs -- so where's the value for the effort expended?

Now, we're totally in agreement on the issue -- I believe NASA should spend a little more time responding to wild stories of space UFO sightings, too. Even if most folks hereabouts are too closed-minded to accept any other point of view about what the signtings really involved.

I presume you haven't seen NASA's official position on the notorious 1991 STS-48 zig-zag UFO video. Why do you suppose you haven't been able to locate it?

How abnout Frank Borman's position on the 'space bogie' he's supposed to have reported on Gemini-7?

There is a lot of such information released -- it just doesn't seem to penetrate the filters protecting the UFO sites, except as an object of ridicule and insult.

Thanks for responding patiently and opening an avenue of common interest and joint work.

And thank you for your post.

NASA at least should dedicate a section on their website with regards to UFOs and sightings and explain as best as they can as to what each UFO sighting is or was or could be.

Many UFO sites exist because many believe NASA are withholding info regarding UFOs and alien life. Whether you agree or disagree with them, ex-NASA employees have come forward claiming NASA are withholding about UFOs and ETs. Which is why people like me believe NASA has no credibility when it comes to UFOs and ETs.

After all, NASA are a government agency funded by tax payer's money so you'd think they would be honest and not bite the hand that feeds them. So I am very grateful to all those UFO sites who try their best to keep people like you and me informed of UFO and ET sightings.

Originally posted by planetzog
Many UFO sites exist because many believe NASA are withholding info regarding UFOs and alien life. Whether you agree or disagree with them, ex-NASA employees have come forward claiming NASA are withholding about UFOs and ETs. Which is why people like me believe NASA has no credibility when it comes to UFOs and ETs.

After all, NASA are a government agency funded by tax payer's money so you'd think they would be honest and not bite the hand that feeds them. So I am very grateful to all those UFO sites who try their best to keep people like you and me informed of UFO and ET sightings.

I concur that NASA ought to make a greater effort to explain some genuinely puzzling video/image downlinks, and I agree that most people interested in them are young 'space enthusiasts' who genuinely want to understand what is being seen.

The problem i've run into is that once somebody decides to seek only evidence supporting their deeply-held beliefs -- of any spin or slant -- they get highly selective in what evidence they believe and what evil lurks in the hearts of men who have different views.

That's why I'm hoping that the work I've posted on my home page on the most famous of these stories helps inform the curious about the varieties of possible explanations, including the prosaic.

I base the research on a familiarity with the subject matter from personal experience in Mission Control, in working with astronauts on missions and long afterwards, and in general developing a track record of 'sleuthing space secrets' from all over -- and off -- the world.

In my experience in trying unsuccessfully to get NASA to make a greater effort in this topic, the counterargument I keep running into is that in the past, whenever they've tried, it's only made matters worse. It's hard to disagree with that pessimistic view. But in honor of the young 'space nut' and UFO buff I well remember I once was, and the like-minded folks out there these days, I've felt it was important to try, even if on my own.

Originally posted by JimOberg

Originally posted by planetzog
Many UFO sites exist because many believe NASA are withholding info regarding UFOs and alien life. Whether you agree or disagree with them, ex-NASA employees have come forward claiming NASA are withholding about UFOs and ETs. Which is why people like me believe NASA has no credibility when it comes to UFOs and ETs.

After all, NASA are a government agency funded by tax payer's money so you'd think they would be honest and not bite the hand that feeds them. So I am very grateful to all those UFO sites who try their best to keep people like you and me informed of UFO and ET sightings.

I concur that NASA ought to make a greater effort to explain some genuinely puzzling video/image downlinks, and I agree that most people interested in them are young 'space enthusiasts' who genuinely want to understand what is being seen.

The problem i've run into is that once somebody decides to seek only evidence supporting their deeply-held beliefs -- of any spin or slant -- they get highly selective in what evidence they believe and what evil lurks in the hearts of men who have different views.

That's why I'm hoping that the work I've posted on my home page on the most famous of these stories helps inform the curious about the varieties of possible explanations, including the prosaic.

I base the research on a familiarity with the subject matter from personal experience in Mission Control, in working with astronauts on missions and long afterwards, and in general developing a track record of 'sleuthing space secrets' from all over -- and off -- the world.

In my experience in trying unsuccessfully to get NASA to make a greater effort in this topic, the counterargument I keep running into is that in the past, whenever they've tried, it's only made matters worse. It's hard to disagree with that pessimistic view. But in honor of the young 'space nut' and UFO buff I well remember I once was, and the like-minded folks out there these days, I've felt it was important to try, even if on my own.

Many thanks for your post.

I'll have a look on your website.

I don't know if anyone here on ATS has asked you this and I am going to put you on the spot here.

From what you've said, you are an ex-NASA employee.

So, do you believe in ETs? And whatever your answer, why?

...upon the times there have been NASA and UFOs...

Originally posted by planetzog

From what you've said, you are an ex-NASA employee.

So, do you believe in ETs? And whatever your answer, why?

I worked as a contractor at Mission Control from 1975 to 1997.

I think there are "stimuli of interest" among the noise of UFO reports that are overwelmingly -- but not exclusively -- misperceptions. The richness and variation of human sensory, imaginative, and mnemonic processes are entirely adequate to produce an unending stream of 'UFO experiences' and reports even in the absence of ANY extraordinary stimuli, but such reports can also be convenient camouflage -- deliberate or opportunistic -- for deliberate activities whose players desire to evade recognition.

Evidence of ETI contact remains lacking but there's no reason that any genuine ETI presence would have to be detectable by us if it were occurring. The lack of any apparently artificial energy processes in the galaxy is puzzling if high-tech ET civilizations abound, but then energy-squandering might be a brief phase that such civilizations quickly pass through and we can't generalize from our own brief record -- so I don't find it definitive one way or the other.

The concept of alien visitors and 'gummint secrets' is such an exciting and attractive one, especially to folks without other sources of excitement, that I think special mental efforts are needed to avoid getting swept along in a cultural juggernaut.

But it is one of the most significant socio-cultural themes of the last half century and is utterly fascinating, if frustrating.

Originally posted by JimOberg

Originally posted by planetzog

From what you've said, you are an ex-NASA employee.

So, do you believe in ETs? And whatever your answer, why?

I worked as a contractor at Mission Control from 1975 to 1997.

I think there are "stimuli of interest" among the noise of UFO reports that are overwelmingly -- but not exclusively -- misperceptions. The richness and variation of human sensory, imaginative, and mnemonic processes are entirely adequate to produce an unending stream of 'UFO experiences' and reports even in the absence of ANY extraordinary stimuli, but such reports can also be convenient camouflage -- deliberate or opportunistic -- for deliberate activities whose players desire to evade recognition.

Evidence of ETI contact remains lacking but there's no reason that any genuine ETI presence would have to be detectable by us if it were occurring. The lack of any apparently artificial energy processes in the galaxy is puzzling if high-tech ET civilizations abound, but then energy-squandering might be a brief phase that such civilizations quickly pass through and we can't generalize from our own brief record -- so I don't find it definitive one way or the other.

The concept of alien visitors and 'gummint secrets' is such an exciting and attractive one, especially to folks without other sources of excitement, that I think special mental efforts are needed to avoid getting swept along in a cultural juggernaut.

But it is one of the most significant socio-cultural themes of the last half century and is utterly fascinating, if frustrating.

edit on 27-1-2011 by JimOberg because: elaboration

Many thanks for your reply I appreciate it and I agree with what you are saying.

I'm guessing you've been asked this before but do you have any interesting stories from your time at Mission Control??

And you make a very interesting point about ETI presence and whether they are detectable.

Originally posted by Kandinsky
Why do you keep posting that same black triangle as if it's a black project? The image is from NASA, it's hosted on NASA sites and has been identified as tile debris from the shuttle...

NASA Photo ID: STS61C-31-002 File Name: 10062623.jpg
Film Type: 70mm Date Taken: 01/12/86

Title: Piece of thermal insulation tile floats near the Shuttle Columbia
Description:
A small piece of thermal insulation tile floats in space near the Shuttle
Columbia. The cloudy surface of the earth is used as a background.

NASA source

Whether people see it as debris or 'secret black projects' is up to them. It was interesting enough for the guys to take the trouble to photograph it...

Originally posted by zorgon

Originally posted by Pimander
Does it look like an 'insulating tile' in resolution that high? (referring to a print Zorgon has)

No and the 'insulating tile' story was added within the last few months...

It did not have that excuse when I ordered the print

If you believe everything NASA says then it's a tile. I'm a suspicious type and question what they say. I'm not convinced either way yet. Would love to see the print (but too tight to shell out for it).

reply to post by zorgon


"Big fan of his, eh?"

Um, zorgon, with all due respect - fan is not the correct word. Also, one mentioning of Santiago in a comment where I basically told the OP he was sharing much regurgitated garbage - and then felt bad and added a little statement about Garza taping NEW shuttle footage - is hardly evidence that I am some fanatic.

Like I say - every time there is a shuttle mission, Garza tapes the live NASA feed, in the same way that a few others have done in the past. And he is sharing all of the newest videos every year at the UFO Congress. I don't judge anyone by their specific worldviews, if that's what you're getting at, I just see what they have to offer. Maussan and Garza collect thousands of UFO videos and share most of them. You're not going to get direct video of that STS-116 sighting from NASA or anyone else - unless some other random person was taping hundreds of hours of the live feed and managed to catch this random event caught at three in the morning. Some of Garza and Maussan's alien stories might be ridiculous, but that doesn't discredit all of the NASA footage etc.

I am starting to get the impression that UFOlogy really is a collection of competing belief systems and in-fighting. In other words, the same lunacy that the general public thinks of UFO believers and conspiracy theorists is pretty much validated.

Originally posted by JimOberg
[

Originally posted by VtaUFO
People forget that these astronauts were the best of the best, our most trusted test pilots and technicians.

So when one of them comes back from the moon to promote an expedition to Mt. Ararat to find Noah's Ark, we should take that seriously?

Or retires to pimp for a series of bogus aviation industry investment scams, using his reputation to persuade investors to part with millions of dollars -- all of which was lost -- you would have trusted him and given him YOUR money too?

How seriously do you take the claim of a successful ESP experiment conducted on private time on a space flight? Have you ever read the actual report, or just the claims of the guy who did it?

These guys -- and gals -- did very special and hazardous tasks on behalf of NASA, and deserve respect and credibility in those areas of expertise. Beyond that,. seems to me, they're just as trustworthy -- or not -- as anybody else.

I don't understand that viewpoint in part Jim, The OP's link is about a discussion of a video, by other than the astronauts themselves. Everything else mentioned, is from your own standpoint. If you know certain things to be true, or not true for that matter, you should say so.

Originally posted by corsair00
... You're not going to get direct video of that STS-116 sighting from NASA or anyone else - unless some other random person was taping hundreds of hours of the live feed and managed to catch this random event caught at three in the morning. ....

Sure you are -- you specify the date and time you want, and they can make a DVD or VHS tape of that interval. If you ask them to put a time tag on it, they will do that too.

Why do you claim nobody can get this? Have you ever tried and been denied? Or were you just imagining it 'must be true'?

Originally posted by smurfy

Originally posted by JimOberg
[

Originally posted by VtaUFO
People forget that these astronauts were the best of the best, our most trusted test pilots and technicians.

...These guys -- and gals -- did very special and hazardous tasks on behalf of NASA, and deserve respect and credibility in those areas of expertise. Beyond that,. seems to me, they're just as trustworthy -- or not -- as anybody else.

I don't understand that viewpoint in part Jim, The OP's link is about a discussion of a video, by other than the astronauts themselves. Everything else mentioned, is from your own standpoint. If you know certain things to be true, or not true for that matter, you should say so.

I think I was also letting myself get derailed by off-topic posting. Again, for a variety of astronaut-UFO-related stories, I urge folks to visit the linked section of my home page.

reply to post by JimOberg

Why do you claim nobody can get this? Have you ever tried and been denied? Or were you just imagining it 'must be true'?

There is a third option that you overlooked. It is that I had no idea that you could do that. Thanks for the heads up! I will try to contact Yturria and get more info on a few specific videos I am interested in.

Originally posted by planetzog
I don't know about you and I would like your thoughts on this but the line 'UFOs aren't necessarily alien spacecraft. And some purported UFOs aren't UFOs at all' is a strange thing to say. To me this sounds like an admission that they know some UFOs are alien spacecraft or, they're not too sure themselves whether UFOs are alien spacecraft.

The problem is that you are reading "UFO" as meaning alien space ships rather than Unidentified Flying Objects. UFO's aren't necessarily alien because they could be any number of other objects. The sentence: Some UFO's aren't UFO's at all, to me, means they are actually completely identifiable, just misidentified at the time as "alien spacecraft".

I suppose when Virgin gets that space flight vacation up and running, some more well-to-do members can go up and see for themselves. Me? I just think there are too many variables to know one way or the other. I suspect life is out there, but if and when it can be proven seems dubious at best.