It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.

Please white-list or disable AboveTopSecret.com in your ad-blocking tool.

Thank you.

 

Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.

 

Best book or resource for UFOs in Space??

page: 3
3
<< 1  2    4 >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Oct, 25 2019 @ 07:41 PM
link   

originally posted by: JimOberg
"But one of the points is that those objects or whatever they are were in the frequency range of UV, so not to be seen by the naked eye."

The famous video is from the visible-light surveillance cameras in the payload bay, do you want a link to the Mission Control "User's Guide" that specifies this? And the dots also appeared on 70-mm handheld photos made by the crew through the overhead windows, which are deliberately opaque to UV in order to prevent the astronauts being blinded.

You're just making bull# up out of your imagination as you go along, it sure looks like.

You proposed a physical size of the objects as miles across. Do the simple math. How big compared to the full moon would such an object look like from 200 miles below? You may use your hand calculator.


I am not sure if they were UV or not, I cannot state that, still it not unusual to a UFO event to be registered by a group while others do not have access, that is too bad, but still there are too many cases that fit the description. To me that is a legit event, if people 300 miles below could not see it, that is too bad, I don't think I would be able to see it. That how it is, if you are not happy that is too bad, I don't care for your opinion. You didn't care about Kasher or Maccabee (who were right btw), why would you care for my opinion.




posted on Oct, 25 2019 @ 08:25 PM
link   
There have been a lot of positive comments on Richard Dolan's UFO research regarding this subset of UFO reports, here's my summary assessment of his work:

Dolan goes ‘full Hoagland”. Never go “full Hoagland”.


UFOs IN SPACE. What's Going on Up There? Richard Dolan Intelligent Disclosure.
youtu.be...
Streamed live on Apr 2, 2019 50,000 views



How do Dolan's claims about moon alien evidence get reconciled with this testimony:

Edgar Mitchell to UFO convention, at time 10:35 www.youtube.com... “I have had no first-hand experience even in the astronaut program, saw nothing on the moon -- no villages no structures etc, like have been claimed, and have had no UFO experiences myself …except for the fact of meeting all these fine research people, …"

Gordon Cooper didn't hide any NASA space secrets, and on this Russian interview about 60 min in, he describes how he looked over every inch of the Apollo film and saw no sign of any alien activity. www.youtube.com... or youtu.be...

DOLAN FALLS FOR A FAKE ‘MOON UFO’ STORY
Dolan transcript 16:02: “ so back in 2005 all right Buzz Aldrin made this crazy statement that the crew of the Apollo 11 mission had seen a UFO on their way to the moon. the next day or the day after that I don't even think it was Buzz I think he had like spokespeople saying oh no these words were taken out of context. Buzz Aldrin did not say such thing and what he actually said I just because if you do a search on Buzz Aldrin UFO Moon today alright you'll get like every single search result is the same the headline there like Washington Post and all the others know Buzz Aldrin didn't see a UFO on the way to the moon they're all like in unison and they often use the same language right so they're obviously yeah they take their up marching orders they get … “

REALITY CHECK” The Apollo-11 mid-flight UFO story is a classic that requires a lot of technical context to properly assess, here's my stab at it == and critical comments are welcome: www.jamesoberg.com...


DOLAN FALLS FOR A FAKE WHISTLEBLOWER

Dolan transcript 27:45 -- "Johnston is a very interesting guy he's out on this lecture circuit every now and then if you get to meet Ken. … He was manager of data and photo control at NASA, he was trained as an astronaut, there are pictures of him in his NASA spacesuits which we have seen , and it's very interesting that ken is willing to go on the record to say this. This is him being interviewed on one of the documentaries I assume this aired on the History Channel and he just talked about the Apollo 11 moon landing and said that you know we were monitored by extraterrestrials during those Apollo missions and he was very very upfront about he says while Neil and Buzz were on the lunar surface Neil switched to the medical Channel and spoke directly to the chief medical officer saying they're here they're parked on the side of the crater and they're watching us. I'll just mention once again I've mentioned this many times, Timothy Good [the UK British UFO ] has written about this. He had his own totally separate source for this exact same story .”

REALITY CHECK: To judge Johnston's stories you need to calibrate his checkable claims. They all fail that test. He was never manager of ANY Apollo office, he was an electrical technician [with a HS diploma] who worked on lunar module test articles [he wore a spacesuit to test getting into and out of the LM hatch] who was laid off BEFORE the moon landing, was never an 'astronaut' [the famous photo of him helmetless, smiling in the Apollo spacesuit, is a photoshop from the original official portrait of Mike Collins], he was never a pilot of any kind for NASA [he was a Navy flight school dropout], he never had a PhD... lots of other imaginary claims.
Evidence: why I think it’s imprudent to believe such claims without thorough investigation
www.jamesoberg.com...

DOLAN FALLS FOR A BOGUS MYSTERY:
Dolan makes a deep secret mystery about a well-documented, common phenomenon associated with Apollo missions, the visibility of booster components during the outbound leg as they drift along within a few hundred miles of the astronauts.
[video 33:23] This is a alleged transcript of Apollo 12, I don't know how one could ever confirm this unless you get into classified transcripts, I suppose, but this came through a researcher named Don Ratsch, and I don't know what he's up to these days but I know that he was a very active investigator researcher in the 80's and 90's and his specialty was to collect film footage from NASA space flight. So this is kind of what Jeff Challender did in the 90s and 2000's. Well Don Ratsch was doing this little earlier, and he talked about how in 1997 a friend of his arranged for him to meet with someone who said he had worked for NASA during the Apollo space missions. This man requested anonymity, that's not surprising, it is pretty typical, but this is what he told Don Ratsch. During the Apollo missions he was one of the people who sat in front of the consoles monitoring information and he wasn't exactly sure which mission but he thinks it was Apollo 12 … what he believes is he remembers is that one evening during one of the flights things were slow there were not a lot of people around and so he turned into the transmissions being broadcast from the spacecraft on the air-to-ground ground-to-air communication system. They were very [?Monday?] and he said until about 8:30 p.m. when this is what he heard: Apollo: “we have company.” Say again? “I say we have company.” A little bit of silence, and then Houston emphatically “You were told not to make transmissions such as that, put it on the flight recorder and we'll discuss it when you get back” So that's what Ratsch was told.

FACT CHECK: Apollo-12’s discussion of a sighting out the window on the way to the moon has been known about [and misinterpreted about in the UFO literature] since the actual event in November 1969. It is discussed in detail at www.jamesoberg.com...

[to be continued]



posted on Oct, 25 2019 @ 08:25 PM
link   
There have been a lot of positive comments on Richard Dolan's UFO research regarding this subset of UFO reports, here's my summary assessment of his work:

Dolan goes ‘full Hoagland”. Never go “full Hoagland”.


UFOs IN SPACE. What's Going on Up There? Richard Dolan Intelligent Disclosure.
youtu.be...
Streamed live on Apr 2, 2019 50,000 views



How do Dolan's claims about moon alien evidence get reconciled with this testimony:

Edgar Mitchell to UFO convention, at time 10:35 www.youtube.com... “I have had no first-hand experience even in the astronaut program, saw nothing on the moon -- no villages no structures etc, like have been claimed, and have had no UFO experiences myself …except for the fact of meeting all these fine research people, …"

Gordon Cooper didn't hide any NASA space secrets, and on this Russian interview about 60 min in, he describes how he looked over every inch of the Apollo film and saw no sign of any alien activity. www.youtube.com... or youtu.be...

DOLAN FALLS FOR A FAKE ‘MOON UFO’ STORY
Dolan transcript 16:02: “ so back in 2005 all right Buzz Aldrin made this crazy statement that the crew of the Apollo 11 mission had seen a UFO on their way to the moon. the next day or the day after that I don't even think it was Buzz I think he had like spokespeople saying oh no these words were taken out of context. Buzz Aldrin did not say such thing and what he actually said I just because if you do a search on Buzz Aldrin UFO Moon today alright you'll get like every single search result is the same the headline there like Washington Post and all the others know Buzz Aldrin didn't see a UFO on the way to the moon they're all like in unison and they often use the same language right so they're obviously yeah they take their up marching orders they get … “

REALITY CHECK” The Apollo-11 mid-flight UFO story is a classic that requires a lot of technical context to properly assess, here's my stab at it == and critical comments are welcome: www.jamesoberg.com...


DOLAN FALLS FOR A FAKE WHISTLEBLOWER

Dolan transcript 27:45 -- "Johnston is a very interesting guy he's out on this lecture circuit every now and then if you get to meet Ken. … He was manager of data and photo control at NASA, he was trained as an astronaut, there are pictures of him in his NASA spacesuits which we have seen , and it's very interesting that ken is willing to go on the record to say this. This is him being interviewed on one of the documentaries I assume this aired on the History Channel and he just talked about the Apollo 11 moon landing and said that you know we were monitored by extraterrestrials during those Apollo missions and he was very very upfront about he says while Neil and Buzz were on the lunar surface Neil switched to the medical Channel and spoke directly to the chief medical officer saying they're here they're parked on the side of the crater and they're watching us. I'll just mention once again I've mentioned this many times, Timothy Good [the UK British UFO ] has written about this. He had his own totally separate source for this exact same story .”

REALITY CHECK: To judge Johnston's stories you need to calibrate his checkable claims. They all fail that test. He was never manager of ANY Apollo office, he was an electrical technician [with a HS diploma] who worked on lunar module test articles [he wore a spacesuit to test getting into and out of the LM hatch] who was laid off BEFORE the moon landing, was never an 'astronaut' [the famous photo of him helmetless, smiling in the Apollo spacesuit, is a photoshop from the original official portrait of Mike Collins], he was never a pilot of any kind for NASA [he was a Navy flight school dropout], he never had a PhD... lots of other imaginary claims.
Evidence: why I think it’s imprudent to believe such claims without thorough investigation
www.jamesoberg.com...

DOLAN FALLS FOR A BOGUS MYSTERY:
Dolan makes a deep secret mystery about a well-documented, common phenomenon associated with Apollo missions, the visibility of booster components during the outbound leg as they drift along within a few hundred miles of the astronauts.
[video 33:23] This is a alleged transcript of Apollo 12, I don't know how one could ever confirm this unless you get into classified transcripts, I suppose, but this came through a researcher named Don Ratsch, and I don't know what he's up to these days but I know that he was a very active investigator researcher in the 80's and 90's and his specialty was to collect film footage from NASA space flight. So this is kind of what Jeff Challender did in the 90s and 2000's. Well Don Ratsch was doing this little earlier, and he talked about how in 1997 a friend of his arranged for him to meet with someone who said he had worked for NASA during the Apollo space missions. This man requested anonymity, that's not surprising, it is pretty typical, but this is what he told Don Ratsch. During the Apollo missions he was one of the people who sat in front of the consoles monitoring information and he wasn't exactly sure which mission but he thinks it was Apollo 12 … what he believes is he remembers is that one evening during one of the flights things were slow there were not a lot of people around and so he turned into the transmissions being broadcast from the spacecraft on the air-to-ground ground-to-air communication system. They were very [?Monday?] and he said until about 8:30 p.m. when this is what he heard: Apollo: “we have company.” Say again? “I say we have company.” A little bit of silence, and then Houston emphatically “You were told not to make transmissions such as that, put it on the flight recorder and we'll discuss it when you get back” So that's what Ratsch was told.

FACT CHECK: Apollo-12’s discussion of a sighting out the window on the way to the moon has been known about [and misinterpreted about in the UFO literature] since the actual event in November 1969. It is discussed in detail at www.jamesoberg.com...

[to be continued]



posted on Oct, 25 2019 @ 08:26 PM
link   
[continued]

FACT CHECK: Apollo-12’s discussion of a sighting out the window on the way to the moon has been known about [and misinterpreted about in the UFO literature] since the actual event in November 1969. It is discussed in detail at www.jamesoberg.com...

Here are the actual comments:
Elapsed time 034:50:49, Pete Conrad: We think we have the S-IVB in sight. We've - had a - an object which is in the same place all the time and appears to be tumbling. We've had it ever since yesterday, and it just seems to be tagging along with us, so I guess that's the S-IVB
….. [an hour later]

036:12:07 Carr: Roger, Pete. That thing you saw off the hatch, at a roll of 35 degrees, we figured there's probably three possible answers. Number 1: it could be the S-IVB, or possibly a SLA panel, or it could be the backup crew flying trail on you. •
036:12:24 Conrad: Roger. Actually we have two objects out there. One's not anywhere near as bright as the other, so I think the real bright one's the S-IVB and the other one's probably a SLA panel. They're about 20 degrees apart. And as far as the backup crew goes, tell them we'll meet them on the back side of the moon.
[15 minutes later after long discussion on candidate explanations] ]
036:27:33 Gordon: Okay. We'll assume it's friendly anyway, okay?
Afterwards, when Pete Conrad was asked about the crew spotting a UFO, he explained: “They've been after me for years because we were followed by a UFO on the way to the moon. That, of course, was untrue. The guy who came up with it was going by our transcript where we saw debris from our own rocket and we were joking with the ground crew about it. He took this out of context... I called the ground and said, 'Hey, gang, we're being followed, there's some flashing object out there.' Some scandal sheet took that and made a helluva story out of it. But it was nothing like anything I was connected with.”

Booster and panels drifting along with the spacecraft were observed on many Apollo missions outbound, by the crews and by telescopes on Earth. There never was anything mysterious, or secret, about this.

DOLAN FALLS FOR A FAKE WHISTLEBLOWER AGAIN
Dolan cites a guy named Maurice Chatelain as a “NASA whistleblower” who revealed UFO secrets that he learned while being “chief of space communications”. Video at 31:46 “This is Maurice Chatelain and he was a manager at NASA was a communication systems, chief…. a man of definite qualifications. And he also stated, and on Apollo 11, Neil Armstrong and Buzz Aldrin reported two UFOs on the rim of a crater. And Maurice Chatelain, he says all Apollo and Gemini flights were followed both at a distance and sometimes quite closely by space vehicles of extraterrestrial origin. They inform Mission Control who then said you will not say a word about it. Let's see if I have a quote by Chatelain in here. Yes, he says the encounter of Apollo 11, he says, was common knowledge in NASA but nobody talked about it until now. “

REALITY CHECK: But Chatelain, supposedly 'chief of NASA Communications', was actually only a contractor radio technician in California who was fired years before the Apollo-11 mission, who never even set foot in Mission Control in Houston -- that's all just made-up claims from book-selling UFO authors. He’s most famous for his book on ‘Ancient Aliens’. The Apollo-11 UFO stories he told in later years can be traced back to already-published UFO newsletters and magazines – they are NOT ‘independent confirmation’ of them.

ULTIMATE REALITY CHECK: The very-widespread “UFOs on crater rim” story can be traced directly back to wild misinterpretations of an authentic Apollo-11 astronaut comment. This is a delicious example of delusional gossip attaining apparent ‘confirmation’ by imply being exaggerated and repeated by UFO buffs all over the world, as detailed here. www.jamesoberg.com...

IN CLOSING -- So just now examine the Dolan conclusion -- at 67:19 : "when you have astronaut after astronaut and one former NASA high-level insider after another after another after another saying the same thing you really have to ask yourself ok these are not just individual people making yet another unrelated mistake there's obviously something going on here and there is a culture where secrecy is ordered to those people who have access to this information and they're just not allowed to talk about it " REALITY CHECK: What you have instead looks more like story after story dreamed up and exaggerated year by year to sell tabloid newspaper and UFO club newsletters and books and website hits.... Stories aimed at a credulous eager-believer audience of enthusiasts who should have been more astute in verifying stuff that was too much fun to risk actually validating. And you have people retelling these stories with dramatic elaborations as well as strategic omissions - such as the X-15 story of the pilot seeing something thirty feet away WITHOUT mentioning he also described it as about the size of his hand, tumbling in the near-vacuum at the edge of space. Why do you suppose THAT particular item of eyewitness testimony was withheld from the target audience?

VERDICT: Dolan’s treatment of the ‘astronaut UFO stories’ is not consistent with his reputation for careful, trustworthy scholarship.

CLOSNG EXAMPLE: Dolan: “I think that Wally Schirra, he was an astronaut aboard Mercury 8, was the first of the astronauts to use the code Santa Claus to indicate the presence of flying saucers next to space capsules. So again, very interesting stuff.”

FACT CHECK: Twice, during spaceflights in the Christmas season, playful and exultant astronauts made Christmas references. On Gemini-6 in December 1965, notorious jokester Wally Schirra pranked Mission Control with a transmission that the Gemini was being approached by a mystery object in polar orbit that was trying to signal them – and then the two astronauts broke into an impromptu instrumental [harmonica and bells] rendition of ‘jingle bells’. To try to portray that as a deliberate code-talk about a UFO sighting is just silly. On Christmas Eve in 1968, the Apollo-8 crew had just completed the do-or-die rocket maneuver to return to Earth [and not slowly die, stranded in lunar orbit] and as they came round the back side and restored radio communications, Jim Lovell exultantly announced, “Be advised there IS a Santa Claus.” To try to portray that as secretly announcing a UFO sighting is even more silly.



posted on Oct, 25 2019 @ 08:28 PM
link   

originally posted by: flamengo
I am not sure if they were UV or not, I cannot state that, ...


So why DID you state "But one of the points is that those objects or whatever they are were in the frequency range of UV, so not to be seen by the naked eye."



posted on Oct, 25 2019 @ 08:32 PM
link   

originally posted by: flamengo

originally posted by: JimOberg

originally posted by: flamengo
… But there are many more crazy like that such as STS-80. Beautiful scene that one.


Tom Jones was on that mission, he has a blog for open discussion on why he thinks those dots were small nearby stuff. Here it is:
skywalking1.wordpress.com...

Story Musgrave was on STS-80 also, here's his assessment of the dots:

www.jamesoberg.com...


At a normal situation I would pay attention to what they have to say, still as they may be under oath not to disclose sensitive information because of national security reasons, I have reasons not to trust any of their statements.


Always the escape hatch for inconvenient direct-eyewitness testimony: "They could have been forced to lie." On an imagination-based evidence-free supposition, you say "I have reasons not to trust any of their statements". Can't you see how ridiculous this makes you sound?



posted on Oct, 25 2019 @ 08:48 PM
link   
Sometimes there ARE reasons not to trust somebody's statements, but the reasons have to b established not by supposition of imaginary motives but by item-by-item documentation of untrue claims.



In this image from Dolan's video on space UFOs, he makes several factual claims which can be proven to be untrue:

Ken Johnston is NOT a "Dr.", he bought a mail-order certificate from a post office box in Denver from a bogus 'seminary'.

Ken Johnston was never 'Director' of anything [especially control over moon image archives] during the Apollo program], he served honorably in electronics technician duties and later as a shipping clerk.

Dolan said "he was trained as an astronaut," when he wasn't even a pilot, he was a flight school DROP-OUT.

Dolan said "there are pictures of him in his NASA spacesuits which we have seen", but the more recent one where he is recognizable is actually a photoshop of his head on a photo of Mike Collins in his real spacesuit [want proof of that?].

With that record of false claims, how would you judge Dolan's reliability compared to that of an NASA astronaut?



posted on Oct, 26 2019 @ 07:18 AM
link   
a reply to: JimOberg

DEAR JIM OBERG THERE IS A FALLACY HERE, I DIDN'T USE DOLAN ON THIS PART OF MY RESEARCH.
Dolan is an excellent researcher, be aware of that, but he is not focused on this part. He is right when he uses Chandeller, this guy is great. Ken Johnston may have some interesting material, but that is in an other discussion about photos from the Moon, not this discussion. Any researcher may get a few wrong informants, that is part of the thing, and we should accept that, one must be really naive that this type of information is 100% free of bias, but through these type of info, that so many things came to light. So one must be a real moron or full of bad will not to have nuance there.
So what the heck do I have to do with Dolan on this? Please be objective, you have thrown a fallacy right there.



posted on Oct, 26 2019 @ 07:23 AM
link   

originally posted by: JimOberg

originally posted by: flamengo

originally posted by: JimOberg

originally posted by: flamengo
… But there are many more crazy like that such as STS-80. Beautiful scene that one.


Tom Jones was on that mission, he has a blog for open discussion on why he thinks those dots were small nearby stuff. Here it is:
skywalking1.wordpress.com...

Story Musgrave was on STS-80 also, here's his assessment of the dots:

www.jamesoberg.com...


At a normal situation I would pay attention to what they have to say, still as they may be under oath not to disclose sensitive information because of national security reasons, I have reasons not to trust any of their statements.


Always the escape hatch for inconvenient direct-eyewitness testimony: "They could have been forced to lie." On an imagination-based evidence-free supposition, you say "I have reasons not to trust any of their statements". Can't you see how ridiculous this makes you sound?



Talk as you may, been 100% honest here, there are people who JUST LOVE A LYING SEEKING FOR ATTENTION WHISTLE BLOWER. That is not the case of Dolan, he does not take many in. I didn't use this guy on this research, probably will use in a different research, he does not strike me as a liar. We will see, but for now there is no reason for this post. Still I agree on that Ken Johnson may be questionable, it is a legit concern, I agree on that, still on his case he may have credit, there are others out there, who FFS are a disgrace to the UFO research. So please be rational on that. Even if Dolan committed one mistake here and there, he does have a lot of credit and he deserves respect.



posted on Oct, 26 2019 @ 07:26 AM
link   
a reply to: flamengo
Dear Jim Oberg
If you want to discuss Dolan's merits then we can open a different thread, as he did influence me, but not on this particular topic, you just let me know and invite me, I can agree or disagree on your assessment.



posted on Oct, 26 2019 @ 10:28 AM
link   
a reply to: flamengo

Fair enough. How about your own assertion that the 'tether swarm' objects were only visible in UV, which you quickly back-pedaled on when challenged? And, you do accept the fact that the swarm video was made four full days after the tether first broke free?



posted on Oct, 26 2019 @ 10:30 AM
link   

originally posted by: flamengo
a reply to: flamengo
Dear Jim Oberg
If you want to discuss Dolan's merits then we can open a different thread, as he did influence me, but not on this particular topic, you just let me know and invite me, I can agree or disagree on your assessment.


I'm not interested in discussing Dolan's merits, but the merits of the evidence he presented, evidence which you seem to have fully accepted until yesterday. Where is there ANY other evidence for the Apollo-11 'UFOs on crater rim' story, or are you ready to abandon that too?



posted on Oct, 26 2019 @ 11:49 AM
link   

originally posted by: JimOberg

originally posted by: flamengo
a reply to: flamengo
Dear Jim Oberg
If you want to discuss Dolan's merits then we can open a different thread, as he did influence me, but not on this particular topic, you just let me know and invite me, I can agree or disagree on your assessment.


I'm not interested in discussing Dolan's merits, but the merits of the evidence he presented, evidence which you seem to have fully accepted until yesterday. Where is there ANY other evidence for the Apollo-11 'UFOs on crater rim' story, or are you ready to abandon that too?


I don't think you read the thread with attention, I DID NOT USE DOLAN AS MY MAIN SOURCE ON THIS PARTICULAR RESEARCH, having said that he is an outstanding researcher on the blue book cases, condon report, crash and retrieval, he is able to do a comprehensive and quasi systematic approach to the UFO phenomenon. I am trying to do an analyses of the patterns that the phenomenon generates. UFOs in space is part of the issue, as in the passage of the 70's to the 80's you will remember that some people were forcing a seemingly Jungian paranormal solution to the "problem", but they were ignoring a whole range of cases, including a deep analyses of the UFO in space, on this wave, the Bord couple were swallowing your debunking of these cases. But soon enough there was a push back. This discussion is really interesting and stimulating, but there is a very material side to the UFO phenomenon, it is not always stealth and immaterial.



posted on Oct, 26 2019 @ 02:07 PM
link   
By all means work on novel conceptual frameworks, I agree that more imagination [as well as more serious case-by-case investigation] is needed to assess this phenomenon. Room for contributions from all angles.

Meanwhile I'm relieved to see you find no factual/logical flaws in the specific case studies I've published.

Considering Dolan's reputation, how do you imagine he got so far into fantasy on THIS particular subset of stories?

Do you still think the Apollo-11 'UFOs on crater rim' story has the slightest credibility?



posted on Oct, 26 2019 @ 06:29 PM
link   

originally posted by: JimOberg


Do you still think the Apollo-11 'UFOs on crater rim' story has the slightest credibility?


I am not tempted to delve into the Rim myth, there is not enough data. Instead of that, there are a wealth of photos and films , and old images that resurfaced and now with photoshop we can examine and find anomalies there.
My point, and I made the thread with this in mind, is not a lack of cases but a wealth of testimonies, photos and videos. There are so many that a context is needed, that is what I am trying to do here.



posted on Oct, 26 2019 @ 06:36 PM
link   

originally posted by: JimOberg


Meanwhile I'm relieved to see you find no factual/logical flaws in the specific case studies I've published.



There is a general assumption on the work of skeptics that jeopardize most of their work. Let's take the case of the Tether for instance, as an example. In an chapter of UFO hunters a guy made emulated exactly your proposal. Still I am not convinced on this solution. Why??? Because of context. Such devices or whatever they are, appear in different circumstances, they have a "flight path", there are some pattern of behavior, it is just no a simple appearance, we register all this on our brain. Still somehow, skeptics don't register these patterns on their brains, or chose to ignore context. That was the same premise with the Condon study.



posted on Oct, 26 2019 @ 08:56 PM
link   
a reply to: flamengo

"My point ... is not a lack of cases but a wealth of testimonies,"

Testimonies of UFO encounters by astronauts in space, right?

What do you consider the most credible of them?



posted on Oct, 26 2019 @ 09:03 PM
link   

originally posted by: flamengo
There is a general assumption on the work of skeptics that jeopardize most of their work. Let's take the case of the Tether for instance, as an example.....


That's the case where you erroneously assumed the objects were emitting only in UV, yes?

What possible fact-based reason did you have for that mistake, or does 'context' give you free range to imagine anything that fits your preconceptions?

Speaking of context on the tether video, what is the context of that video in terms of illumination conditions? Was it day or night? Where was the sun relative to the camera-to-object line of sight, do you think? In evaluating a visual record, wouldn't that be a fundamental feature of any analysis?



posted on Oct, 27 2019 @ 07:28 AM
link   

originally posted by: JimOberg

originally posted by: flamengo
There is a general assumption on the work of skeptics that jeopardize most of their work. Let's take the case of the Tether for instance, as an example.....


That's the case where you erroneously assumed the objects were emitting only in UV, yes?

What possible fact-based reason did you have for that mistake, or does 'context' give you free range to imagine anything that fits your preconceptions?

Speaking of context on the tether video, what is the context of that video in terms of illumination conditions? Was it day or night? Where was the sun relative to the camera-to-object line of sight, do you think? In evaluating a visual record, wouldn't that be a fundamental feature of any analysis?


It was actually infrared I was told. No, I don't dominate the specifics, what I am saying, with confidence, is that there are more than 5 sightings of similar objects, so I don't even need to get too obsessed to understand it is a legit sighting. If was to write ONLY about this case, then the specifics would have to be clear in every specific detail, I had read the specifics of this case, long ago I must confess, but as I put, the flight path is not consistent as a natural occurrence, and I am very confident of that. Beside the point that you have insisted that EVERY SINGLE TIME, that any anomaly seen by the Shuttle cameras, they are always ice particles or debris seen at close range, sorry not convinced, and your insistence in overplaying this simple flawed explanation diminishes your credibility. I am playing the card that the view that NASA presents on these cases is quite accurate, that is all I have to go by, and I don't believe I should go crazy with optics to be right on this one.



posted on Oct, 27 2019 @ 11:57 AM
link   

originally posted by: flamengo
It was actually infrared I was told. ….


Well, THAT settles it!
[irony mode - OFF]

The shuttle cameras used to make those images were normal visible-light monitoring systems. How much documentation do you need -- or are you assuming the NASA specification documents are faked?




top topics



 
3
<< 1  2    4 >>

log in

join