Found? Gordon Cooper's 1957 UFO film "sent...to...Washington...never to be seen again"

a reply to: Arbitrageur

It's good that you're learning about the sometimes dubious ethics of UFO promoters, and I'm not implying there aren't UFOs, just that there are plenty of people out there who will distort the truth to suit their own purposes and agenda. A lot of that goes on in the UFO field, and I can't hold you responsible for that...we've all been victims of such deception at some point and in your case I see someone wising up, while I see others who keep falling for the same deceptions and even defending them.

I think I may have stumbled into some Bizarro universe where everything is the exact opposite...

originally posted by: intrptr
The only thing I have to say is Gordon said 'film' and these plates in the OP are stills (plates?) from a reel of film, obviously.

So wheres this film?

Oh, its missing.

When I joined this thread I also had a problem with the mention of both film and photos, which one was it? So after reading Oberg's report I saw the name Askania and it sounded so esoteric and because I've had a ton of 35mm cameras since 1955 I wanted to learn about this whatever-it-was camera. I went to Google Images saw what the camera looks like except that there were various models and since Bittick and Gettys don't mention the camera's model I was lost. For this reply, though, I concentrated in models from the 1950s but especially from or near 1957. Below is a photo of one model and you can go look at the others.

per Cooper in "NEED TO KNOW: UFOs, the MILITARY, and INTELLIGENCE" by Timothy Good: "'On May 3, 1957,' Cooper reports, 'I was captain and had a crew our filming an Askania-camera precision landing system we had installed on the dry lake bed. The Askania automatic system took pictures - one frame per second ...'"

So the clatter from a camera on the job must have slightly jarring. A long-enough strip of such film played back at normal speed will look like a motion picture.


Askania AG 35 1955? camera 35mm (24 - 600 f.p.s.)

originally posted by: Scdfa
a reply to: JimOberg

To accept Cooper's claim about this 'film' against ALL other witnesses and records, it seems to me you would have to accept his similar far-out other claims, like the telepathic warning message from space aliens.

For a guy who has spent decades talking about UFOs, you haven't learned much, if you think telepathic alien contact is "far-out", Jim.

It has been reported thousands of times.
For over forty years.
By hundreds of researchers.
And thousands of witnesses.

You should know that, if you expect to be taken seriously when you speak on this subject.

It doesn't take a rocket scientist.

You are embarrassing yourself but at least you seem to be happy to have one (1) member!

originally posted by: Arbitrageur

originally posted by: jonnywhite
I know the blue book case number is 4715, but do not know how to search blue book for it. Here's blue book's site:
bluebookarchive.org/default.aspx

It's nice to see someone checking the facts of the case, but I'm not sure if you're reading the thread; it seems like you're not and you should because there's some useful information on these pages.. There's a search tab on your link so that's where you search, but you don't even have to because I already posted the search result related to the photos on page one and again in the second post on page 6 here.

As I've already said several times there are 41 photos in the bluebook case and I don't know why NICAP only has 4 plates, but from the description, all the photos were just small white dots either round or elliptical in shape so even if you found the other 37 plates you'd just see more very similar, which is what you see in the blue book case file.

Uggie: "And the camera recording a photo every second whatever the object was and "drifting" its size wouldn't change that much especially since they had to wait for permission to start taking photos. To call Baker, get permission, triggering the camera cost precious time and better closeup photos. If only they shot first and asked questions later! Maybe they had to wait for permission 'cause Baker may not have like precious film to be wasted although the cameramen were there to record balloons!"

snip

a reply to: jonnywhite

I don't know how to construct a GIF but this situation calls for one of the 19 and/or 41 photos just to see if movement can be detected. Anyone?

originally posted by: Scdfa
I think I may have stumbled into some Bizarro universe where everything is the exact opposite...

So in which world did the media say Gordon Cooper saw a UFO on his Mercury-9 mission, and Gordon Cooper says he didn't? The real world or the Bizarro opposite world? What did Cooper really see on that mission, in your opinion, and how did you come to your opinion? Was it based on something Cooper said? If so, please provide the quote.

originally posted by: Arbitrageur
a reply to: jonnywhite
Thanks again for your research and your additional links and comments, as this is the kind of discussion this thread was intended to generate.

snip

a reply to: Uggielicious
It's good that you're learning about the sometimes dubious ethics of UFO promoters, and I'm not implying there aren't UFOs, just that there are plenty of people out there who will distort the truth to suit their own purposes and agenda. A lot of that goes on in the UFO field, and I can't hold you responsible for that...we've all been victims of such deception at some point and in your case I see someone wising up, while I see others who keep falling for the same deceptions and even defending them.

By the way if you had read Jim Oberg's question very carefully between the lines, he was sort of hinting that not everything we hear in the media may be as it seems to be, and that's probably not truer anywhere than with astronauts and UFOs.

I wish I could say that I'm learning but at 77 and having my introduction to UFOs in 1957 while stationed at Sidi Slimane AFB, Morocco, by a Captain puts me in a different category than learning, perhaps "experienced" is better since my UFO life has been extensive and full of fantastic memories. The captain loamed me a book "FLYING SAUCERS HAVE LANDED" by George Adamski. UFOs became my hobby. When you are a skeptic such as myself, promoters stick out like the proverbial "finger" 'cause you learn right away that some people are just in it for the money the gullible are happy to shell out. The more made-up details the better. A lot of authors and others fattened their bank accounts with non-events such as Roswell, Phoenix, etc. Oberg loves to use the phrase "UFO promoters" but he doesn't always used properly such as referring to the naysayers of STS-48!

originally posted by: Scdfa
a reply to: FireMoon

Meanwhile in his batcave, I have little doubt that, Mr Oberg will be planning his next thread about some incident, the vast majority of people already have decided wasn't a UFO and already has a perfectly acceptable prosaic explanation. At the same time Mr Oberg will not be appearing on any thread where there is substantial evidence something genuinely strange happened. That's perfectly in keeping with his media appearances, which are all carefully orchestrated so that, he never crops up in shows that don't tow his party line.

...If one were to be truly conspiratorial then, one might even point out, the increasing number of "non threads" posted on this section of ATS about incidents that virtually no-one thinks was a UFO

...Want an utterly pointless thread about an incident no-one really cares about, their your man, ready present and willing to tell the majority of people that, they already know. The truly hilarious part of it all is that, they are really that naive, they probably don't think others have noted their pattern of behaviour.

Firemoon, I'm encouraged to see another real person posting honestly and frankly in here.

You're right, of course. All the way around.
And the time involved, the professional dedication, it's staggering. It's obvious to me there is a pattern that emerges, and that makes me question, and makes me doubt.

I have noticed the overwhelming volume of NOISE for every bit of SIGNAL that gets through.
Now, I am speaking in general terms, I'm not accusing anyone of anything, I can only form a conclusion based on what people write.
It's almost as if there was an intent to drown out serious discussion of alien contact under page after page of distraction. I'm reminded of old cold war days when the Eastern Bloc used to jam the signals of America Free Radio, because they didn't want any outside reality to get through to people that might make them question the party line.

Anyone else find it odd that I am the only person defending heroic astronauts, while there are a dozen or more posters attacking them? Does that sound proportionate to anyone?
I find it odd. I find it obvious.

I agree.

Idk about you but this whole thing bothers me because Gordon Cooper has been gone a long time. He died over a decade ago. He cannot object or set the record straight, etc. But people like Oberg can say and post whatever they please, unfortunately. RIP Mr. Cooper.

I find it quite disgusting that anyone would try to tarnish his reputation by basically painting him as a sort-of kook in order to possibly satisfy their agenda.

IMHO, it seems to be an agenda that is as close minded as that Kim Davis woman in Ashland, KY and that makes me wonder where it comes from...And why.

Because of that, whenever I see Mr. Oberg has graced us mere mortals with his all knowing presence here on ATS, I take it with a grain of salt. It's always the same thing...Always a "simple" explanation for anything and everything anomalous. And, if you're one of those individuals who do not agree with his explanation or theories? Well, you are basically deemed too stupid to breathe.

Sorry, but I'll take Gordon Cooper's word for what HE saw that day. He was an actual ASTRONAUT for crying out loud. Cooper has actually been "up there." Unlike so many others.

Maybe that's the issue? I don't know but the same old same old in this forum anymore is just getting...old.

There is too much information out there that, if taken seriously and not immediately debunked/buried/written off as fiction or manipulation, proves that there very well may be something else going on. But that's just my silly little opinion...

originally posted by: lovebeck

originally posted by: Scdfa
a reply to: FireMoon

snip

I agree.

Idk about you but this whole thing bothers me because Gordon Cooper has been gone a long time. He died over a decade ago. He cannot object or set the record straight, etc. But people like Oberg can say and post whatever they please, unfortunately. RIP Mr. Cooper.

I find it quite disgusting that anyone would try to tarnish his reputation by basically painting him as a sort-of kook in order to possibly satisfy their agenda.

IMHO, it seems to be an agenda that is as close minded as that Kim Davis woman in Ashland, KY and that makes me wonder where it comes from...And why.

Because of that, whenever I see Mr. Oberg has graced us mere mortals with his all knowing presence here on ATS, I take it with a grain of salt. It's always the same thing...Always a "simple" explanation for anything and everything anomalous. And, if you're one of those individuals who do not agree with his explanation or theories? Well, you are basically deemed to stupid to breathe.

Sorry, but I'll take Gordon Cooper's word for what HE saw that day. He was an actual ASTRONAUT for crying out loud. Cooper has actually been "up there." Unlike so many others.

Maybe that's the issue? I don't know but the same old same old in this forum anymore is just getting...old.

There is too much information out there that, if taken seriously and not immediately debunked/buried/written off as fiction or manipulation, proves that there very well may be something else going on. But that's just my silly little opinion...

You haven't learned a thing from this thread and remain close-minded. This thread is post-Cooper, no doubt. But it's the record that is being discussed and the record says that Cooper made up his involvement with the Edwards AFB 1957 event. The available evidence does not include Cooper. Individuals such as the OP, Oberg, Gortex, your humble servants and other fact-minded members have brought to light certain recorded details that contradict your erroenous way of thinking.

You say: "I'll take Gordon Cooper's word for what HE saw that day." Well, we don't know what all he saw that day but it didn't include his involvement with anything connected with what was reported by the 3 main individuals. What Cooper did admit, in essence, is that he wasn't there. Why doesn't that sink in?

a reply to: JimOberg

Doesn't the required cast of intimidated lifetime liars get excessively large at some point?

Ah yes,... the standard "there are too many people involved" argument...

The answer to your question is: yes, the pile of liars is getting very large... and yes we live in the golden age of thieves...

Tom Brady is being congratulated for getting away with cheating...this is the world we live in and you find it hard to believe that people will sustain lies their whole life for money or because they are being threatened?

Wake up...

a reply to: lovebeck

Idk about you but this whole thing bothers me because Gordon Cooper has been gone a long time. He died over a decade ago. He cannot object or set the record straight, etc. But people like Oberg can say and post whatever they please, unfortunately. RIP Mr. Cooper.

I find it quite disgusting that anyone would try to tarnish his reputation by basically painting him as a sort-of kook in order to possibly satisfy their agenda.

I couldn't agree more, it is indeed deeply unsettling.
And the funny thing is, the rest of his "supporters" howl in mock outrage if you defend these astronauts.
It would be comical if it wasn't so clearly fake.

Because of that, whenever I see Mr. Oberg has graced us mere mortals with his all knowing presence here on ATS, I take it with a grain of salt. It's always the same thing...Always a "simple" explanation for anything and everything anomalous. And, if you're one of those individuals who do not agree with his explanation or theories? Well, you are basically deemed to stupid to breathe.

Exactly. I was surprised to see several people call him on it this week.

Sorry, but I'll take Gordon Cooper's word for what HE saw that day. He was an actual ASTRONAUT for crying out loud. Cooper has actually been "up there." Unlike so many others.

Darn right. I don't question his character nearly as much as the character of those attacking his reputation.
And the lockstep unison with which they support each other, it tells you all you need to know. It's no accident.

Suddenly, it becomes a two-point attack, then a three-point attack, all patting each other on the back for picking the bones of manufactured inconsistencies.
Anyone find it odd that all these people have invested the time to pore over the tiniest details of Cooper's life, checking every sentence to see if it disagrees with other people - who are never doubted, by the way - and if they disagree with Col. Cooper, then Cooper must be lying, right?

This isn't a conversation, folks. This is an operation.
If I was the conspiratorial type, which I'm not, of course, I could almost picture people all sitting in cubicles in the same office, working off scripted talking points, clacking away until five o'clock.

originally posted by: lovebeck
Sorry, but I'll take Gordon Cooper's word for what HE saw that day. He was an actual ASTRONAUT for crying out loud. Cooper has actually been "up there." Unlike so many others.

Cooper said he didn't see anything personally at Edwards, and I don't think Jim Oberg has any disagreement with that statement, so if you take Cooper's word for that, you're agreeing with Jim Oberg on that point as far as I can tell.

originally posted by: lovebeck

originally posted by: Scdfa

a reply to: FireMoon

Meanwhile in his batcave, I have little doubt that, Mr Oberg will be planning his next thread about some incident, the vast majority of people already have decided wasn't a UFO and already has a perfectly acceptable prosaic explanation. At the same time Mr Oberg will not be appearing on any thread where there is substantial evidence something genuinely strange happened. That's perfectly in keeping with his media appearances, which are all carefully orchestrated so that, he never crops up in shows that don't tow his party line.



...If one were to be truly conspiratorial then, one might even point out, the increasing number of "non threads" posted on this section of ATS about incidents that virtually no-one thinks was a UFO



...Want an utterly pointless thread about an incident no-one really cares about, their your man, ready present and willing to tell the majority of people that, they already know. The truly hilarious part of it all is that, they are really that naive, they probably don't think others have noted their pattern of behaviour.

Firemoon, I'm encouraged to see another real person posting honestly and frankly in here.



You're right, of course. All the way around.

And the time involved, the professional dedication, it's staggering. It's obvious to me there is a pattern that emerges, and that makes me question, and makes me doubt.



I have noticed the overwhelming volume of NOISE for every bit of SIGNAL that gets through.

Now, I am speaking in general terms, I'm not accusing anyone of anything, I can only form a conclusion based on what people write.

It's almost as if there was an intent to drown out serious discussion of alien contact under page after page of distraction. I'm reminded of old cold war days when the Eastern Bloc used to jam the signals of America Free Radio, because they didn't want any outside reality to get through to people that might make them question the party line.



Anyone else find it odd that I am the only person defending heroic astronauts, while there are a dozen or more posters attacking them? Does that sound proportionate to anyone?

I find it odd. I find it obvious.

I agree.



Idk about you but this whole thing bothers me because Gordon Cooper has been gone a long time. He died over a decade ago. He cannot object or set the record straight, etc. But people like Oberg can say and post whatever they please, unfortunately. RIP Mr. Cooper.

I find it quite disgusting that anyone would try to tarnish his reputation by basically painting him as a sort-of kook in order to possibly satisfy their agenda.

As often stated earlier, my main report was published twenty years BEFORE Cooper's death, he had a copy [I mailed him one], he quoted material from it in his own autobiography, and clearly decided not to respond in numerous TV interviews after getting the report.

originally posted by: lovebeck
....
Sorry, but I'll take Gordon Cooper's word for what HE saw that day. He was an actual ASTRONAUT for crying out loud. Cooper has actually been "up there." Unlike so many others.

What is your opinion of the story of Cooper's UFO sighting on Mercury-9 in May 1963?

He was certainly there. Did he see a UFO or not on THAT day?

The presumption of veracity is usually reasonable 'going in', but once the track record of cooper's late-in-life stories to UFO conventions and all-night talk radio is examined in detail, a new pattern -- and new presumption -- is compelling.

Here's another:

In Cooper’s autobiography he describes in detail how he visited the ranch of a maverick inventor named Wendell Welling in Utah in 1978 to inspect a ‘flying saucer’ he had invented. Welling had died but family members hosted his visit. During the visit Cooper describes in vivid detail how he used a control panel to command a test model to rise up and fly around the interior of a barn, on a power tether.

Years later, when some of his other stories were being discussed on line, a person claiming to be Welling’s daughter logged on, provided details of the event that authenticated her identity, and then never returned to the discussion group.

The critical item that she testified to was that by the time Cooper visited, none of the equipment was flying. The dramatic aerial maneuvers that Cooper describes having personally witnessed, she writes, never happened, and never COULD have happened.

The crux of her message was, “gordon didn't hold any controls and fly a prototype around a warehouse for 10 min.” That never happened. I confirmed her identity as one of Welling’s daughters, named Gloria, and she provided further details in a direct email exchange in mid-2015. Neither Cooper, his ghost writer, or the publisher ever called back to verify Cooper’s story, which contained [according to Gloria] numerous other factual errors – for example, the model [six feet in diameter] used a balsam-based glue, but Cooper’s memory hiccupped and he reported it was MADE of ‘balsam wood’.

Gordon Cooper’s autobiography, ‘Leap of Faith’
Chapter 13 -- FLYING SAUCERS: MADE IN THE USA

=========
[pp. 201 ff] In 1978 I went to Utah to visit a man who had supposedly had a life-altering UFO experience years earlier. …Wendell Welling. I was told that he’d started building his own saucers and claimed to have a workable design. Given my own experiences chasing saucers, I was not about to discount the story….But no sooner had we scheduled the trip than we received bad news. Wendell Welling …. had dropped dead of a heart attack…. Wendell’s son-in-law [Scott Holmgren] wanted us to come to Utah anyway and see the saucer designs. I jumped at the chance.

[p. 207] I was invited to take the controls of the largest ‘flyable’ saucer in the barn and give it a whirl. Approximately twelve feet in diameter, the saucer was constructed of silk cloth stretched over balsam wood, making it very light….He chose to power his manmade saucer by an electrical generator that drove an on-board fan, which pushed cold air around for thrust. In addition to a heavy-duty electrical cord that ran from the generator to the fan unit, the saucer was tethered to the ground by a half-inch steel cable that looked to be about twenty feet long.

I sat at the control station about ten feet away. The sole ‘flight control’ was an airplane-type stick… The only noise in the room was the slight whir of the generator.

I applied gently backward pressure on the stick, and the saucer jumped off the test stand, soundlessly, and rose into the air effortlessly to ten feet or so. I was amazed by the ease with which the bird took flight. Up and down it went as I moved the stick forward and back… I was extremely impressed with the saucer’s lift capabilities. With very little power – the fan wasn’t even powerful enough to move air effectively through a large room on a hot day – this thing flat-out FLEW.

I flew the saucer for about ten minutes, and the experience really opened my eyes to what a vehicle of this configuration would do, specifically, the tremendous lift that could be developed from the saucer shape. BOY, I thought, WE’VE BEEN GOING THE WRONG WAY ALL THESE YEARS WITH WINGED AIRCRAFT….

I understand that my “test flight” was the first and only one of a Welling saucer after his death. According to his widow, Elsie, all those ‘round things are still around somewhere’.

Ever since that day in Utah, I have been convinced that saucers are the aircraft design of the future – both for this world and for travel beyond.


[p. 266] I’ve never forgotten what I saw in the skies over Europe – or in Wendell Welling’s barn.
==============

The story was universally accepted as legit [no checking required] in the UFO community:

italicsminecom.blogspot.com...

Wendell Wellings's models were as small as two feet in diameter and as large as the sixty footer he was working on when he died in 1978. Wellings's son-in-law, Scott Holmgren showed Cooper to the barn where the models were sitting and let him fly a twelve foot one made out of balsa wood and silk [hey, we could do that. Ed] It had an onboard electric fan powered by a remote generator and was tethered by the power cord and a half inch thick steel cable.

" ... but I didn't need to check the numbers. I could tell by the feel of the stick. I flew the saucer for about ten minutes, and the experience really opened my eyes to what a vehicle of this configuration would do: specifically, the tremendous lift that could be developed from the saucer shape."

It's an interesting observation from an Air Force Colonel who's flown everything, everywhere.

It's too bad some dot-com millionaire in the States isn't interested in this stuff. Apparently there's a barn full of made in the USA, functioning prototype flying saucers just sitting there waiting to take someone and us, to the next level. Steve Balmer or those Google guys could probably finance the effort out of couch change.

[end of italicsmine excerpt]
=======


Now, here is the way another person who had been there described it:
www.unexplained-mysteries.com...
“artsy”, Joined group 18-March 2013 , only made one post
on 18 March 2013 - 09:03 PM, “artsy” said:
well, I'm a little late to this site that is talking about my dad, wendell welling. and gordon cooper. somewhat interesting that grown men try to one up each other.
.
bless gordon's heart. he didn't write down his memories of northern utah quite soon enough, and got a few facts wrong. but he was excited and meant well, I think.

I don't know how he found out about my dad's prototype saucers, but by the time he found us, my dad was long gone....and yes my husband scott was trying to continue with the plans of the flying saucers, but didn't understand what wendell had in mind.

scott has since passed away also at an early age. the saucers have been divvied out to relatives, and though people ask to look at the plans, I don't think they are monumental or profound technology.

wendell and 3 others saw a flying saucer at close range in '59. wendell didn't believe in them until that moment! (his hired hand also saw one, later on, land on the wheat farm 10 miles to the north) he looked hard and long and said he didn't dare look away, because it blended in with the sky so much (not reflective) he was afraid he wouldn't be able to see it again if he did look away.

he studied every bit of it for the short amount of time it hovered within a block of the men in montpelier, idaho. He was 42 at the time and spent the rest of his short life trying to replicate it and convince others of the existence of UFOs.

his adult co-sighters denied the sighting, because not many believed in '59, and they were respected citizens. then later in their lives apologized to scott as scott found them, wanting to know their stories,.they were embarrassed that they were so chicken to admit it back in '59, and understood why wendell felt betrayed.

wendell was never a chicken, and got quite a reputation. when anyone in the area had a sighting, they'd run to our door because they knew my dad would believe them and their ghost white faces. when he died people came out of the woodwork saying how much they'd helped him with his prototypes (most of their 'help' was being awestruck & staring as my dad explained) and if anything came of the saucers, they wanted their share. another good reason not to pursue development.

so no, the plans were never sold to foreign countries, and no there's no gold mine of saucers in some northern utah shed. gordon didn't hold any controls and fly a prototype around a warehouse for 10 min. he did watch a large fiberglass prototype on a scale lifting 12 times it own weight when it was revved up....that's it.

oh, he also ate watermelon with us. then he didn't contact us to see if the story was right, or that he was publishing info on us. we found out about it quite by accident. …
==

JO: Another highly-imaginative, sincere-sounding tall tale by Cooper, it seems.

UPDATE: I tracked down the lady, Welling’s daughter Gloria, and got this gracious response on June 24, 2015, confirming her pseudonymous posting two years earlier. Inter alia, I had asked her if she had taken any photographs of Cooper at their home :

got your nice letter re: my post on the ‘unexplained mysteries’ website and discussion of gordon cooper. [snip details of contact method]

I am a photographer, but stayed home with the kids the day cooper came to call. and it didn't enter my mind to take a picture of him. I was trying to think of something to feed him. I didn't remember that he brought someone with him; I briefly met him in the front room. scott hadn't entertained many in regards to my dad's saucers/inventions, but my dad had people coming and calling all the time about one of his theories - which were many. he was definitely ahead of his time.

I could send you a photo of the two saucers on my back patio. these are the ones that were tested at belmont springs (it was not my dad's 600 acre wheat farm, that had been sold to make a resort, but that's another story). they are not even 6' in diameter (there was never a 12' one of balsa and silk covering. editor didn't do a very good job correcting 'balsam' which is a resin). he also made a couple of prototypes of a plane that somewhat resembled the concorde, but it was way before concorde. I could send you that picture too ... just for kicks. I also have the 3 pages of the account my dad typed on his old remington and some calculations on the 4th page that I give people who ask about the sighting. well, all this only if you're at all interested.

I've remarried so my name, and address are changed ... and now you have my email. nice talking to you,

How are we to imagine Cooper's actual experience there in the Welling barn in Utah?

He is given the joystick for the non-flying model, they turn on the fans, the model rattles in its cradle, Cooper rocks the joystick back and forth imagining the craft lifting up at his command, darting around the barn to his amazement.

He remembers it vividly, the ease and grace of the flight.

He praises the aviation breakthrough in his book.

But
it
never
happened.

Many aspects of the vanished images in the Edwards story are echoed in another space narrative from Cooper, discussed here, in an article published long before his death with plenty of time for response [none ever came].

www.jamesoberg.com...

originally posted by: JimOberg
How are we to imagine Cooper's actual experience there in the Welling barn in Utah?

He is given the joystick for the non-flying model, they turn on the fans, the model rattles in its cradle, Cooper rocks the joystick back and forth imagining the craft lifting up at his command, darting around the barn to his amazement.

He remembers it vividly, the ease and grace of the flight.

He praises the aviation breakthrough in his book.

But
it
never
happened.

I think Cooper missed his calling when he didn't use Hollywood to the best of his ability in creating stuff that could have been fleshed by industry specialists such as those who gave us "STAR WARS" and other epics that were the results of creative minds such as Cooper's with the difference being that to the specialists creating was a 9-5 job and to Cooper a full-time lifestyle.

Perhaps Cooper was disappointed when he found the equipment in the barn inopperative and went into a fantasy daydream and he liked it and since he might not have enjoyed giving a negative report about the barn he created his tale. How could such an intelligent and accomplished and famous man forget the source side which would have denied his experiences did not occur as he narrated?

Is there anything in the public record where someone approached Cooper about his confabulations or no one wanted to embarrass him?

You know, this whole Cooper thing reminds me of the situation Max Burns had with David Clarke about the "Sheffield Incident" in the 1990s. Clarke was all over Max in exactly the same manner as people are on Cooper and saying that. "He had misquoted witnesses and that witnesses never told Max that he claimed they had. In effect Clarke called Max a liar and said he was faking witness testimony to "sex a case up". The only problem was, Max had taped the evidence the witness Clarke said he he'd made up and then published said witness testimony online to prove that Clarke was actually the liar not Max.

Oh yes, the witness had changed their story since they had been contacted by Clarke however, their original testimony BEFORE Clarke had stuck his nose in was on tape for all to hear. So there you have it, in this country and I would assume it is similar in other countries, there is direct proof that witnesses are "leaned on" and those who seek to dismiss certain reports are happy to pedal totally false information.

Have you distanced yourself from Klass's opinions on any case he studied Jim? I ask as there is ample evidence, including Klass's own friends saying "He had an almost pathological hatred of UFOs" and we now know, he was happy to fake evidence to try and force an issue, see Travis Walton's own testimony on this site for the, "Fake cousin" that Klass invented. The incident over the Trent photo where Klass tried to force his "expert analyst" to give what amounted to , false testimony about their findings.

Is there any doubt with even the most believing of people that, Project Blue Book, either only told half the story or, more often than not, just missed the story out completely if it was "too difficult" to explain away with the usual sops. Don't misunderstand my personal position, I am annoyed as much by those who misquote and make evidence up to support their beliefs however, one thing I have learned from hard experience. Often the actual witness allowed to talk shows the following. Both sides are happily selective about what evidence they hilight and what evidence they twist. On the whole though, it is the sceptics who are the most common perpetrators of blatant intellectual dishonesty in their analysis and twisting eyewitness's testimony.

As an old wingco said to me over a few beers when I was in my youth. "I flew umpteen missions over enemy territory during the war (WW2), I've clocked thousands of hours, in all sorts of weather, in everything from props to the then, latest and fastest jets. So, when some desk flying jockey in civvies tells me; "I didn't see what I saw"; I take umbrage at that suggestion. What I saw was a solid object that had to have been under intelligent control to have performed the manoeuvres I witnessed. "

Just out of interest, since the release of the British UFO files, several people have contacted me to say that, their report was not made public and in a couple of cases, photographic evidence given freely to the MOD at the time, was never returned. Now, as I have said to them, it could well be that, those who took their reports and evidence for whatever reason, might never have passed it on up the chain so there's no official "paper trail", the chances are we will never know the true motivation. However, it does illustrate just how "lop sided" the quest for "truth" often is and how, the authorities have been only too happy to release the bumfluff and a few interesting cases which are already in the piblic sphere whilst, it would seem, either purposely ignoring many interesting cases or hiding the records elsewhere.

My experience is this, the look on a person's face, the timbre of their voice as they describe events that happened to them, often gives you all the clues you need to know about the veracity of a particular incident. It's for you to decide for yourself how you explain it however, deciding it's "aliens"despite what the evidence points to otherwise, is no more daft than telling a seasoned pilot that when an object, "Circled me three times then fell aft, to suddenly speed past me at more than 5000 knots", that what they saw was the planet Venus.

a reply to: FireMoon

Thanks for the thoughtful and well-written essay. It's probably well worth discussing on its own thread. Here, it's arguably a trick to change the subject and avoid discussing some of the most profound and original investigations of the Cooper stories ever. Your input on that theme could be valuable.