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.

 

George Knapp finally has a very well done website and it's a Must see

page: 5
130
<< 2  3  4   >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Nov, 18 2019 @ 10:15 PM
link   
a reply to: whereislogic

Just wait for it...
There is a huge piece on Condon in the archives...
May take a year or a month before it's up but it will get published.




posted on Nov, 19 2019 @ 03:48 AM
link   

originally posted by: Springer

There is a huge piece on Condon in the archives...


Look forward to that mate, don't know if you've seen it but there's some great archival research in this presentation showing how Condon, Low, Klass and Menzel (NSA) were all in cahoots.

Despite folks like Saunders, Harkins and Fuller warning the general public about Condon's complete lack of objectivity and Dr McDonald's severe criticism of 'specious argumentation' (and how the managed to omit some of the most puzzling UFO cases on record) it looks like the whitewash still stands.

Stanford's Peter Sturrock also did a good job exposing the 'huge disconnecton' between Condon’s conclusions and the actual scientific reports (and how many of his final summaries were 'variously misleading, false or inaccurate') and thought the AIAA's Ron Story also made an important point below.



"The opposite conclusion could have been drawn from The Condon Report's content, namely, that a phenomenon with such a high ratio of unexplained cases (about 30 percent) should arouse sufficient scientific curiosity to continue its study. 
From a scientific and engineering standpoint, it is unacceptable to simply ignore substantial numbers of unexplained observations..." 

Ronald D Story - American Institute of Aeronautics and Astronautics UFO Subcommittee -New York: Doubleday, 1980





posted on Nov, 19 2019 @ 11:26 AM
link   
a reply to: Springer

Now that I'm looking forward to.

As Karl mentions, there are questions, for lack of a better word, about that whitewash of a report.



posted on Nov, 19 2019 @ 07:38 PM
link   

originally posted by: karl 12
...
Despite folks like Saunders, Harkins and Fuller warning the general public about Condon's complete lack of objectivity and Dr McDonald's severe criticism of 'specious argumentation' (and how the managed to omit some of the most puzzling UFO cases on record) it looks like the whitewash still stands.

Ah yes, because the people you mentioned are so much more objective, having nothing to gain from keeping people's interest piqued, it's not like they're writing and selling books about the subject of UFO's and/or aliens and starting websites about it intended to generate traffic for financial gain, oh wait...

Good thing the 1st commandment of ATS isn't:

1. Thou shalt not make any mention of ATS' nr.1 cash-cow and traffic generator-subject. (or is it nr.2 after politics?)

I take it it's safe to say you don't like the conclusion of the Condon Report highlighted in my comment? Or any of the other things mentioned by Philip Klass, Terence Hines or Donald H. Menzel in my comment? I.e. it's not 'tickling your ears'? Much like seagull? You have other desires and preferences regarding what you want to hear about the subject.

2 Timothy 4:3,4

3 For there will be a period of time when they will not put up with the wholesome* [Or “healthful; beneficial.”] teaching, but according to their own desires, they will surround themselves with teachers to have their ears tickled.* [Or “to tell them what they want to hear.”] 4 They will turn away from listening to the truth and give attention to false stories.

From the quotations in my first comment you can see that some investigators are quite positive that they can identify all UFO’s as natural things or known phenomena. Others, however, present their own special theories with which they seem to want to make some kind of gain.

For example, a concept that has captured the interest of some investigators is that UFO’s are superior beings that inhabit a “parallel universe.” According to this theory, these beings may be “able to manipulate the electrical circuits of the human mind.” With this ability, they could presumably control human governments. Some say they may be connected with “intelligences [that involve] the world’s leading religious movements, miracles, angels, ghosts, fairies, poltergeists, and the like.”​—UFO and The Limits of Science, by Ronald D. Story.

Even more uncertainties developed from recent claims that in the past the United States and even other governments may have ignored or covered up some evidence of UFO’s. The author of a 1988 publication took advantage of the Freedom of Information Act, established in 1966 in the United States, together with sources in other countries, to gather information that according to him “proves beyond doubt that there has been a monumental cover-up of the UFO subject.”​—Above Top Secret, by Timothy Good.

Gary Kinder, in his book Light Years, raises questions as to what proof is needed to convince the authorities of the existence of UFO’s. He notes that one observer asks: “What constitutes proof [of UFO’s]? Does a UFO have to land at the River Entrance to the Pentagon, near the Joint Chiefs of Staff Offices? Or is it proof when a ground radar station detects a UFO, sends a jet to intercept it, the jet pilot sees it, and locks on with his radar, only to have the UFO streak away at phenomenal speed?”

On the other hand, Professor Hines argues that the 997 pages of documents released, covering the period from 1949 to 1979, do not reveal an attempt at a government cover-up. He states: “An examination of the secret CIA papers and documents on UFOs reveals an agency mildly interested in the phenomenon but skeptical of the extraterrestrial hypothesis. These documents . . . also contradict the oft-repeated claims of a government cover-up of the ‘truth’ about UFOs.”

One of the foremost reasons for the lack of proof is that no UFO has ever been publicly exhibited, nor have any extraterrestrial beings officially presented themselves for public recognition. Furthermore, alleges Professor Hines, “there is no UFO photo that can be considered genuine showing anything other than vague shapes or blobs of light.” Time and again, experts have identified UFO’s as misinterpreted sightings of Venus or of other celestial bodies. It is evident that no solution to the UFO problem has been satisfactory to all.

At the time that the Condon Report was in the news, an Awake! contributor discussed privately some of the results with one of the associated scientists working at Boulder, Colorado. The scientist seemed to think that in the unexplained cases, the UFO experiences involved “mental perceptions” of some kind. Thus, although many UFO sightings can be explained scientifically as physical things or wrong identifications, some may involve mental or psychological experiences or perceptions.

Is there an occult influence? When reviewing the mental or psychological experiences of some who have reported contacts with UFO’s, it is also possible to recognize similarities with spiritistic or other paranormal phenomena. One example of this is the testimony of John H. Andrews in his book The Extraterrestrials and Their Reality. In his acknowledgments of help in producing the book, he states: “Great appreciation also goes to the four space people [“ET’s in physical human bodies who circulate unnoticed among us”] who told me their stories and who wished to remain unnamed, to the numerous psychics and channels who assisted me with my many experiments, to the extraterrestrials for their many informative messages.” Regarding these “space people,” he states: “They were all quite intelligent; all were channels for invisible entities.”​—Compare 1 Samuel 28:7, 8; Ephesians 6:12.

Andrews also claims to have received messages from extraterrestrials. He lists some of these as: “There is no such thing as death. . . . There is no such thing as good or evil. [Compare Genesis 3:3, 4.] . . . Creation, evolution, and reincarnation are valid processes at work in the Universe. . . . We (the ET’s) are not here to control or rule you, but to guide you. . . . The Earth will soon undergo tremendous, cataclysmic changes. When these changes are completed, less than 1/1,000 of the present population will still be alive!”

The Bible also speaks of extraterrestrials, spirit creatures, such as obedient angels and disobedient, rebellious angels who became demons. Down through Bible history, God on many occasions used faithful angels to communicate with men. (Genesis 22:9-18; Isaiah 6:1-7) Satan still uses his demon followers to mislead mankind with all kinds of philosophies, fads, messages, communications, and cults that distract from the message that God’s Kingdom, his heavenly government, will soon rule over a restored earth.​—Compare Luke 4:33, 34; James 2:19; Revelation 12:9; 21:1-4.

The Christian apostle Paul gave due warning of demon influence in the last days when he wrote: “The inspired utterance says definitely that in later periods of time some will fall away from the faith, paying attention to misleading inspired utterances and teachings of demons.”​—1 Timothy 4:1.
edit on 19-11-2019 by whereislogic because: (no reason given)



posted on Nov, 19 2019 @ 08:37 PM
link   
a reply to: karl 12
Some more quotations about the subject that probably won't tickle your ears:

“Astronomy and UFOs are related: if people knew more about astronomy, there would be far fewer UFO sightings.”​—Astronomy, December 1988.

“Venus is the brightest of all the planets in the night sky and is responsible for more UFO reports than any other single object. . . .

“Modern airport radars now automatically identify all aircraft in their area . . . As radars have become more sophisticated at correctly identifying aircraft and filtering out sources of error, the number of radar UFO reports has dropped almost to zero. Of course, if UFOs were real, one would expect . . . modern radar to increase the number of UFOs seen on radar. . . .

“In nearly forty years of investigation, not one authentic photo of a UFO has been taken and not one piece of genuine debris or other physical evidence has been found. Impressive-sounding sightings are reported year after year and, year after year, when carefully examined, they disappear into the mists of misperceptions, misidentifications, and hoaxes.”​—Pseudoscience and the Paranormal, by Terence Hines.

“Much of the trouble arises from the fact that the sky presents an almost endless variety of peculiar sights and objects, only a few of which are likely to be encountered by one person in a lifetime. And when this does happen, he may be misled into thinking that he has seen something extraordinary​—instead of merely unfamiliar. . . .

“Seldom has any subject been so invested with fraud, hysteria, credulity, religious mania, incompetence, and most of the other unflattering human characteristics.”​—The Promise of Space, by Arthur C. Clarke.

“I should like to see these profound words inscribed on the threshold of all the temples of science: ‘The greatest derangement of the mind is to believe in something because one wishes it to be so.’”​—Louis Pasteur, 19th-century French scientist.



posted on Nov, 21 2019 @ 11:42 AM
link   

originally posted by: seagull
a reply to: Springer

Now that I'm looking forward to.

As Karl mentions, there are questions, for lack of a better word, about that whitewash of a report.


Yes lots and lots of very important unanswered questions anigo - also the close connections to Klass and Menzel deserve a gander.

Did you ever see Dolan's breakdown on Dr McDonald's take on the report - classic stuff






posted on Nov, 27 2019 @ 12:18 AM
link   
a reply to: karl 12

Good response karl. I've always liked that analysis.



posted on Nov, 27 2019 @ 04:51 PM
link   

originally posted by: whereislogic
Ah yes, because the people you mentioned are so much more objective, having nothing to gain from keeping people's interest piqued, it's not like they're writing and selling books about the subject of UFO's and/or aliens and starting websites about it intended to generate traffic for financial gain, oh wait...


That's an extraordinary couple of posts you have presented, which will not please many people, but we all know it needs to be said, especially concerning financial gain... and not forgetting simple notoriety. Indeed, I'm constantly amazed how some can never fathom why a person would want 'infamy' without a sack of cash attached to it; that isn't how human nature works - social media can attest to that.

However - we all love "however"s - there is a danger of that baby being lost in the filthy bathwater. I find the sheer number of UFO sightings over 70 years quite depressing for that very reason. I cannot believe that genuine alien visitations could be so ubiquitous even after wittling down 98% of them to natural phenomena. Or even 99%. I'd imagine a real incident would be extremely rare so as to be easily lost in the incessant noise and BS.

As is often said, only ONE case is required to satisfy the ET hypothesis. Taking a random example (and ufology can be pretty random), does the Bob Taylor case in an innocuous corner of Scotland in 1979 provide us with best evidence? His 'assault by persons unknown' remains an unsolved police matter, and the incident defies explanation to this day.

Is Bob the key? Hell, why not? Although nothing in his case can definitively prove an extraterrestrial intervention, maybe all the Arnolds, Marcels, Adamskis, Hills, Zamoras, Meiers, Hicksons, Waltons, Lazars, Striebers and Fravors of the world can fall to one side and make way for Bob... because what if...




Moreover, I suspect most of us don't want ET to land on the proverbial White House lawn - that's far too easy... and it robs us of our prime source of interest: MYSTERY. And I don't just mean for financial gain. Mystery is our addiction, not easy answers.

So George Knapp's 'Mystery Wire' has it all in the title.



edit on 27-11-2019 by ConfusedBrit because: (no reason given)




top topics



 
130
<< 2  3  4   >>

log in

join