CNN Anderson Cooper UFO Program TONIGHT

Originally posted by Postal76
Well, I'm glad I didn't watch it from what you all are saying. I find it really strange that they didn't talk about O'Hare, yet they talked about far more obscure and explainable sightings with less witnesses. What the hell was the point? Is laughing at UFO sightings a good way to boost ratings?

[edit on 7-2-2007 by Postal76]

It is a good way to keep a person a puppet which is the goal of cnn.

Did mention Chicago for about 5 seconds.

Definitely a short piece and much of it could be viewed as "make it sound like all is explainable, natural occurring stuff".

[edit on 7-2-2007 by bonaire]

I'd say unbelievable, but there really isnt a history of this being taken seriously in the media. I knew it was going to be a fluff piece when the intro was from star trek. For christs sake. . cant they come up with something original??

I also happen to know Gary Tuchman personally. I'll give him a call tomorrow and see what happened to the unaired footage, and get his thoughts on the whole ufo flap of late.

I'll post what I learn as soon as I talk to him.

Yeah that was a great disinformation piece.

Very slanted journalism. They gave all the air time to some hack astronomer at a no name observatory and the skeptical idiot. Why not give Stanton Friedman a 5 minute rebuttal ? Do they really have to let people who've already made up their minds talk for the whole segment ? i.e. the guy who said he won't believe in them until they land on the White House lawn.

The Hawaii UFO was weak. That did look like an airplane contrail. Why not show the O'Hare pictures or interview some of those witnesses ? That's the gameplan though. Show some easily debunked footage and imply all UFO cases are just simple misidentification.

The picture from Carolina was interesting, although it doesn't help the guy's credibility he wouldn't show his face. It certainly didn't look like a meteor to me. They must think the public is really dumb.

I guess it's pointless to get upset. If I ever see AC Cooper in real life, I'll let him know what a corporate tool he is.

Yeah, I only saw part of this CNN segment.

Are we like in a time of increasing sightings? What is happening?

Troy

Originally posted by selfless
Honestly guys, I hope you didn't expect more from cnn...

Well, I'll tell you, yes, I expected a lot more. CNN's Gary Tuchman and Michael Heard and their camera and sound crew were working this story for a couple of weeks even before the NC and Hawaii sightings.

I'm told that they interviewed a number of people in Chicago, including a pilot who photographed the O'Hare UFO — the pilot was supposed to be an anonymous silhouette interview, just like the guy in Charlotte, NC, that they featured. Somehow, none of the Chicago O'Hare interview made it to air.

There was supposed to be another interview with a doctor in Charlotte, NC, who actually painted a picture of what he saw. I know, not great evidence, but possibly a credible witness who they just discarded. In all, I'd say that AC360 scrapped the great bulk of their total work on the project in favor of a chuckling, 8-minute "Oh, THAT'S What It Was!" segment.

I noticed something else in the segment that didn't make sense. In their silhouette interview with Charles Miller, the guy who shot that incredible blue disk picture in North Carolina, he plainly stated that he saw the thing coming in from the Southeast, and that it crossed the full sky (presumably to the Northwest) in about 45 seconds. Long enough duration for him to go grab a camera, anyway.

But other Charlotte witnesses said the thing was going East, that it was only 10 or 15 seconds duration, max, and that it had a long, fiery tail.

Folks, this sounds like two different sightings in the Charlotte area on the night of Jan 24. One headed North for 45 seconds with no tail (with a friggin' photo), and one headed East for maybe 15 seconds with a fiery tail that broke up and disintegrated. Multiple fireballs? Same parent meteoric mass? Traveling perpendicular to each other, one North and one East? Nobody with CNN asked the obvious questions.

Instead, they plugged in a canned response from the Skeptical Enquirer mouthpiece, Joe Nichols, and an astronomer in North Carolina, neither of whom personally SAW the occurrence, and who could only opine in their formidable wisdom as to what it probably was.

Hell, yes, I expected a LOT more from CNN.

— Doc Velocity

[edit on 2/7/2007 by Doc Velocity]

Right on Doc.

I hate to say this, but the damn FOX news UFO coverage was better than this one, at least they had Sereda on to debate, even though they cut him off.

I would expect CNN to have done much better than that, shameful. Censored, dumbed-down media crap.

The history channel does better than them. At least they'll show UFO documentaries that aren't always totally one-sided and don't completely 'debunk' every sighting with some bullcrap insulting, snide remark and narry an actual attempt to research or be unbiased.

I think we need to get a media outlet for real UFO talk and video like Steven Greer suggests. When I win the lottery....

Originally posted by Schaden
Very slanted journalism. They gave all the air time to some hack astronomer at a no name observatory and the skeptical idiot. Why not give Stanton Friedman a 5 minute rebuttal ? Do they really have to let people who've already made up their minds talk for the whole segment ? i.e. the guy who said he won't believe in them until they land on the White House lawn.

In fairness, CNN did squeeze a quote out of MUFON mouthpiece George Lund regarding the NC sighting: "They think that they [UFOs] are coming into that area there to maybe feed off of the energy that the [nuclear power] plant is producing." With a straight face. They give the guy his 3.5 seconds of fame and the best he can say is "UFOs are feeding off of nuclear power plants"??? Oh, thanks a lot for lending your credibility, George. SHEESH!

Originally posted by Schaden
The Hawaii UFO was weak. That did look like an airplane contrail. Why not show the O'Hare pictures or interview some of those witnesses ? That's the gameplan though. Show some easily debunked footage and imply all UFO cases are just simple misidentification.

Well, CNN left out the most interesting details of the Hawaii sighting. That the "contrail" was actually 2 "contrails" of craft that didn't show up on NOAA or FAA radar, and that this pair of "contrails" were circling in the sky exactly one hour before a U.S. missile test off of Kauai.
www.nationalledger.com...

Originally posted by Schaden
The picture from Carolina was interesting, although it doesn't help the guy's credibility he wouldn't show his face. It certainly didn't look like a meteor to me. They must think the public is really dumb.

I'm told that the guy who took the North Carolina photo, Charles Miller, was getting bombarded with media contacts requesting interviews, and he turned everybody down except CNN, on condition. Apparently, he is not a believer in UFOs, and was intimidated with the media onslaught. Hey, I can appreciate that. Publicity has ruined lives for less.

And, if I was Anderson Cooper and I suspected what kind of hack job CNN was going to do on the story, I'd hide my face, too! I'm surprised Anderson Cooper didn't do his part in silhouette.

— Doc Velocity

[edit on 2/7/2007 by Doc Velocity]

CNN loves disasters. They thrived and grew from war coverage in '91 and cover things like Katrina well. So, we need a disaster "out of this world" from the aliens (ie. disk crash into the smithsonian) to get good coverage. And, so we wait.

The Big Picture....

They probably got the ratings they were looking for and didn't acknowledge UFO's as being anything more than make believe.

Now, in the event they get a big response from the show, good or bad, they will be able to do a follow up show to appease those of us who feel we got ripped off. Thus.... another show with high ratings.

This is total speculation, but with all the research someone had mentioned was done prior to the show airing, its sounds like they would have enough to drag out another show for the future.

Help their ratings, send em' a letter.

Originally posted by Doc Velocity
I'm in the wrong business, I need to become a professional skeptic. As a skeptic, you don't have to conduct any research, you don't even have to leave the house, you can sit on your butt in a room with no windows and simply explain everything going on in the world outside. And you're guaranteed the lion's share of airtime in any UFO news story. Hell, why work for a living when you can be a skeptic?

Well, if I'm going to be a skeptic, I guess I'd better grab a mirror and start practicing my smirks and sneers.

— Doc Velocity

Wow!

I can't beleive someone could be that ignorant as to what a skeptic is and what they do. No research? What the hell are you talking about? Isn't skepticism the opposite of that? Maybe you are referring to this one skeptic in particular. If so, maybe you have a point. I don't know as I didn't see the show and have no idea how this person acted during it.
But to bluntly generalize all skeptics like that is just plain idiotic. Should I just accept every piece of info thats given to me without questioning it? That is all skepticism is about. Its about questioning not neccesarily answering as you alluded to someone staying in their house coming up with answers all the time.

I am skeptical of your common sense and knowledge.

If you get everybody you know to flood them with emails about how biased and poorly presented the story was, and that you are never watching CNN again and will tell everyone you know to stop watching too, I think it might change their mind a little bit. Worth a try.

Originally posted by LuDaCrIs
I can't beleive someone could be that ignorant as to what a skeptic is and what they do. No research? What the hell are you talking about? Isn't skepticism the opposite of that? Maybe you are referring to this one skeptic in particular. If so, maybe you have a point. I don't know as I didn't see the show and have no idea how this person acted during it.

I am a skeptic, just an open-minded skeptic. I believe in research, going to a site and investigating and interviewing witnesses, and considering all sorts of natural phenomena and human activity in the area before rendering a verdict (opinion). Joe Nickell, of the Skeptical Enquirer, didn't research anything in preparation for denouncing it on CNN.

Regarding the Hawaii sighting, Joe dug deep into his research and said: "Eh, that looks like a contrail to me, if there are any other videos, I haven't seen them." Regarding the NC sightings, Joe wisely observed: "If what they saw in North Carolina was an extraterrestrial craft, the bad news is that it burned up on entry." However, Joe Nickell and the Skeptical Enquirer have not been on the ground in either North Carolina nor Hawaii to investigate these sightings. In typical Skeptical Enquirer fashion, Joe Nickell made a canned appearance in this segment to explain the uninvestigated, make a few quips, and sign off with a chuckle.

Now you're up to speed, Ludacris.

Originally posted by LuDaCrIs
But to bluntly generalize all skeptics like that is just plain idiotic. Should I just accept every piece of info thats given to me without questioning it? That is all skepticism is about. Its about questioning not neccesarily answering as you alluded to someone staying in their house coming up with answers all the time. I am skeptical of your common sense and knowledge.

And yet, Ludacris, you just stepped into your own trap, trying to come at me like a toothless bear when, in fact, you're totally lacking information about me or the reasons I made my earlier comment. So, you're attacking without knowing the facts, based only on earlier derisive remarks I made about skeptics. You need to do a little more research before committing yourself like that, Lude.

I would make some sort of comment about your knowledge and common sense, but I have no evidence at this point that you're in possession of those items — let me do a little investigating first and I'll get back to you.

— Doc Velocity

[edit on 2/7/2007 by Doc Velocity]

Damn, I missed this one...does anyone have a youtube link or something?

Well, I made a VHS of the travesty on CNN, but I'm not geared up to port it to the Web. Trust me, you didn't miss much. In fact, we've devoted about ten times the effort on this thread than they devoted to the AC360 segment.

Seriously, though, this thread gives a pretty thorough overview of last night's AC360 segment. However, I believe that the program is still cycling today on CNN, so if you have the patience, you might catch it before they start a new cycle at 10 pm tonight.

— Doc Velocity

To be pedantic, it's Joe Nickell, and to be fair to him, he's done some good work involving very deep digging into a variety of paranormal claims. I'm sure you're right about the shallow nature of his remarks on CNN, but keep in mind where the burden of proof lies....

Originally posted by disownedsky
To be pedantic, it's Joe Nickell, and to be fair to him, he's done some good work involving very deep digging into a variety of paranormal claims. I'm sure you're right about the shallow nature of his remarks on CNN, but keep in mind where the burden of proof lies....

In America, the burden of proof lies with the prosecution, i.e. the skeptics, to erode the defendant's case.

And proper spelling of Joe Nickell's name duly noted and corrected. Thanks.

— Doc Velocity

[edit on 2/7/2007 by Doc Velocity]

Originally posted by Doc Velocity


In America, the burden of proof lies with the prosecution, i.e. the skeptics, to erode the defendant's case.

And proper spelling of Joe Nickell's name duly noted and corrected. Thanks.

— Doc Velocity

[edit on 2/7/2007 by Doc Velocity]

I don't think I'd want to carry the legal analogy too far, but those making the claim are the prosecution. The defense theoretically don't have to do anything, but if they're smart, they'll attack the credibility of the prosecution's case.

In science, the burden of proof lies with those asserting the validity of a particular hypothesis. They can expect to have their case for their hypothesis sharply criticized by the rest of the community. This is healthy and normal and how science works.

For example, if your hypothesis is that the recent Hawaii "UFO" that looks just like a contrail is an anomalous phenomenon (good luck with that!) then the burden is on you to show that what was observed doesn't have a prosaic explanation.

*******

I suggest everyone who was dissapointed with the UFO segment on AC 360 send email feeback to the show. Let them know how bunk it was!

I hate to break it to you doc but obviously the government controls cnn and the government would not want anyone to know the truth for obvious reasons...

Like the reason that it would be an economic disaster.

Like the reason that it would wake some people up and some people would stop being slaves and puppets for the government or shadow government or whatever.

Like the reason that the government would have to admit that they have been lying all this time and might even uncover some crimes against humanity done by the government that would result in people overtrowing the concept of a government...

Many other reasons why they rather make a joke of it all while neurvously laughing, in their subconscience they are trembling with fear that soon they won't be able to control the masses much longer and it will be the end of their crooked delusional perception reality brain washing that only befenits the greedy rich mindless peices of meat....

Don't trust cnn, trust your self and your friends and people who actually have a motive to get the truth out for peacefull and pure reasons.

Be carefull when cnn tells the population the truth it won't be for the right purpose but rather another mind controling plan with a goal that will not be revealed to us directly.

Cnn should be closed down forever, do not trust cnn...


peace and love always.