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.

 

Did Corso give us all the answers already?

page: 1
0
<<   2 >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Jul, 2 2007 @ 04:33 PM
link   
So much of what Corso has stated, is coming true, and is being proven to be accurate.
At least from my point of view. But, I would like to see if I am backing the wrong horse.
Please, all opinions are welcome. What do you people think of him, and what he said?




posted on Jul, 2 2007 @ 04:37 PM
link   
Corso did the ufo circuit with frank kauffman. When together Corso would always bow to kauffmans "superior knowledge" if their stories conflicted. After kauffman died 3 ufologists were granted access to his personal papers by his wife.

They found forged documents & letters- kauffman was a fraud. How come Corso never called him out on it? surely he would have known if kauffman was telling whoppers? After all Corso was there? right?

Seems to me a case of a fraud backing another fraud up.



posted on Jul, 2 2007 @ 04:51 PM
link   
I don't know, I read Corso this weekend. I've been thinking the very same thing as the OP.

I couldn't quit thinking about the controversy that's coming up around depleted uranium. Did you see all the cooperation he got with the government and Bell Labs and others writing this book?

And do you remember what Corso said about the government disclosing but not disclosing? It kind of seems like he (and possibly they) have spilled the beans on everything.

One thing that he didn't prove very well to me was that ETs are agressive. He kept giving proof where ETs were being shot down by us, but no evidence of ETs shooting us down, only buzzing us. But he did depict very accurately the military's mindset on ETs.



posted on Jul, 2 2007 @ 05:15 PM
link   

Originally posted by yeti101
They found forged documents & letters- kauffman was a fraud. How come Corso never called him out on it? surely he would have known if kauffman was telling whoppers? After all Corso was there? right?


Wow. That's a shame. Corso's book was 'co-authored' by William J. Birnes. It sounds very much to me that Birnes wrote the book by interviewing Corso. Where is the documentation on Kauffmann. I;d like to read up on it. Thanks.



posted on Jul, 2 2007 @ 05:50 PM
link   
heres the report in full from one of the ufologists who visited kaufmans wife www.cufos.org...

Kevin Randle gives the original kaufman story which he believed and printed in his book, It was a certain Walter Haut that directed Randle to kaufman, Haut said anything kaufman told him was "golden" . Maybe that affidavit isnt looking too good after all?

summary



Given all this evidence of counterfeit documents, we can have no confidence in any details of Kaufmann’s testimony, even though he certainly was in Roswell in 1947 and worked at the base (though in the personnel office, not intelligence). We can speculate on his motives and why he deceived investigators, but that will probably be of little use today. The critical point is that we have determined the validity of Kaufmann’s testimony, and can now discard it as we seek to establish what exactly did, and did not, occur at Roswell in July 1947.



[edit on 2-7-2007 by yeti101]



posted on Jul, 2 2007 @ 06:10 PM
link   
Well, I am not going to argue for the honor of Kauffman. But, I will say the following:

1. UFO folks, investigating other UFO folks, without a true, neutral specialist to examine the docs, scares me a bit.

2. Even if Kauffman was a fraud, and even if Corso did bend the knee to him from time to time, that does not make Corso a fraud as well.

3. Kevin Randle claims that Walter Haut vouched for Kauffman as well. Does that mean that Haut is a fraud?

Anyway, back to Corso and his claims... Let's just try to stick to the information surrounding him, and the statements he made.

It's scary stuff!



posted on Jul, 2 2007 @ 06:18 PM
link   
horrificus, yes the implication is that hauts testimony is very dubious. Kevin Randle did a peice in his blog about the repurcussions of the kaufman exposure. Corso, Haut,kaufman,Easley and more are implicated.

alot of the roswell myth came crashing down with the kaufman testimony.

[edit on 2-7-2007 by yeti101]



posted on Jul, 2 2007 @ 06:20 PM
link   
I recall Linda Moulton Howe and a guest or two on C2C describing examples of many dozens [I have in mind several hundred but I'll put it] many dozens of USA pilots being shot down in the late 40's and 1950's when we were still trying to send planes up to intercept and shoot the discs down.

The mentality was relatively slow to change given what was so ROUTINELY happening to our pilots. If they locked onto the UFO to fire at it--either they were shot down or their electronics went suddenly bad--as in 100% nonfunctional etc.

There were also cases of the planes being on radar closing on the LARGE UFO one second and totally engulfed or just simply disappeared the next microsecond--with no debris ever being found anywhere.

It does seem to be mostly valid in most of the cases that we showed hostility first. But not in 100% of the cases. Occasionally, the UFO showed hostility first.



posted on Jul, 2 2007 @ 06:21 PM
link   
Wow!
I wouldn't have thought that a group of guys like this would all be lying. Working together.
It would seem to dangerous.
But, I am definitely not going to pretend I am an expert in this material. Just reading, browsing, getting interested.
I just thought there was a feel of truth in Corso's book. It felt different from other things I have read.



posted on Jul, 2 2007 @ 06:22 PM
link   
I don't think Haut can be dismissed so glibly and easily.

Kaufman and his antics could be explained a number of different ways.

It's quite plausible that Kaufman was a disinformation stooge of the government. Perhaps Haut expected Kaufman to be real with Randell.

In any case, I think Haut's final affidavit is at least more truth than fiction. I find it exceedingly plausible on all his points.



posted on Jul, 2 2007 @ 06:24 PM
link   
horrificus, its more of an unwritten rule than a concious collaboration. These people just backed each other up to keep the ball rolling. Like other roswell story tellers.

Edit bo xian : haut affidavit plausible? this was supposedly signed like 5 years ago, he probbaly didnt even know what he was signing- its radically diffirent from his previous accounts, and he already altered the deceased Marcels testimony. Not good at all.

btw i dont believe an alien spaceship crashed in 1947.


[edit on 2-7-2007 by yeti101]



posted on Jul, 2 2007 @ 06:37 PM
link   
Checkout the comments on Amazon.com about Corso by the various reviewers.

Reading between the lines, I think you can get a good idea what Corso was about.

I've posted about this in detail in one of the other Corso threads, so scan through those if you want anything in depth.



posted on Jul, 2 2007 @ 06:57 PM
link   

Originally posted by Horrificus
2. Even if Kauffman was a fraud, and even if Corso did bend the knee to him from time to time, that does not make Corso a fraud as well.

3. Kevin Randle claims that Walter Haut vouched for Kauffman as well. Does that mean that Haut is a fraud?


What happens is these guy sit around telling stories and things happen. There's a thing that John Lear calls 'UFO disease', in which people on the lecture circuit have to embellish or even 'invent' things to keep their presentation fresh.

It may be that some 'researchers' are in it with less than pure motives. They see the 'field' essentially as a carnival and the audience as 'marks'. So for them the idea of 'embellishing' really isn't an issue, because they know their audience is eating it up and asking for more. They're performing a service, LOL.

I think Corso suffered from a need to be 'important', almost to the point of self-delusion. How much this affects his 'story' I don't know. I suspect there might have been an 'event' in his history where he sort of 'hyper-imagined' that he was working on a secret project and got the germ of the idea for his book.

Then Corso, an inveterate story-teller starts relating the tale to his ghost writer (William J. Birnes) and the next thing you know you have a fantastic tale. It probably gets bigger with each revision.

In addition, as I'm sure you know, the book had a foreword from Strom Thurmond and had to remove it, since, according to his staff, the book was represented to him as a different title (I Walked With Giants).

However, I found a compelling interview with Mr Birnes that is quite interesting:

www.ufomind.com...


Mr Birnes:Senator Thurmond agreed to write the new foreword -- which he did -- and sent it to Corso. I have copies of both forewords as well as Thurmond's signed release to use his new foreword in "The Day After Roswell."



posted on Jul, 2 2007 @ 08:42 PM
link   
I have read Corso's book, I have also read and seen documentaries on people’s opinions about Corso's claims.

What really interests me the most was the part where the US took the technology from the UFO and back engineered it to make technology that was befitting of our time, then I saw how people claim this is false and his claims are only taking away from the people who invented this technology.

Here’s a thought, is it possible these people who back engineered the UFO do not want to loose their Nobel Prize? If it is found that their Nobel Prize was won under false pretenses then that would really hurt the scientist’s credibility and any chance of them winning another Nobel Prize.

Another thought and this is from a documentary I saw on TV and said by Stanton Friedman, Major Jesse Marcel and William Blanchard were no dummies, they had to know the difference between a weather balloon and a strange craft not of this world.

I totally agree with that. With the tension between the US and Russia there is no way officers of the US government would have made such a horrific error as that.



posted on Jul, 18 2007 @ 10:12 AM
link   

Originally posted by BO XIAN
I recall Linda Moulton Howe and a guest or two on C2C describing examples of many dozens [I have in mind several hundred but I'll put it] many dozens of USA pilots being shot down in the late 40's and 1950's when we were still trying to send planes up to intercept and shoot the discs down.

The mentality was relatively slow to change given what was so ROUTINELY happening to our pilots. If they locked onto the UFO to fire at it--either they were shot down or their electronics went suddenly bad--as in 100% nonfunctional etc.

There were also cases of the planes being on radar closing on the LARGE UFO one second and totally engulfed or just simply disappeared the next microsecond--with no debris ever being found anywhere.

It does seem to be mostly valid in most of the cases that we showed hostility first. But not in 100% of the cases. Occasionally, the UFO showed hostility first.


your statement


If they locked onto the UFO to fire at it--either they were shot down or their electronics went suddenly bad--as in 100% nonfunctional etc.


shows self defense on the part of the ETs. also, ETs can read intention of the pilot.

why else would a fighter plane approach a ufo?

if someone came running at me with a gun, I'd probably shoot them down myself.

why not just fly a Cessna up there? or an unarmed fighter?



posted on Jul, 18 2007 @ 10:32 AM
link   

Originally posted by Horrificus
So much of what Corso has stated, is coming true, and is being proven to be accurate.
At least from my point of view. But, I would like to see if I am backing the wrong horse.
Please, all opinions are welcome. What do you people think of him, and what he said?


I remember at the end of one of the documentary shows about Corso, his son says that his father told him that what he has revealed is only about 10% of the whole story, and that the rest is still classified.

Isn't THAT interesting from a number of perspectives?



posted on Jul, 18 2007 @ 10:34 AM
link   

Originally posted by Horrificus
So much of what Corso has stated, is coming true, and is being proven to be accurate.
At least from my point of view. But, I would like to see if I am backing the wrong horse.
Please, all opinions are welcome. What do you people think of him, and what he said?


Can you enumerate for us what non-obvious predictions Corso made vs. the current reality and how it could have been otherwise?



posted on Jul, 18 2007 @ 02:54 PM
link   

Originally posted by Thura

Originally posted by Horrificus
So much of what Corso has stated, is coming true, and is being proven to be accurate.
At least from my point of view. But, I would like to see if I am backing the wrong horse.
Please, all opinions are welcome. What do you people think of him, and what he said?


I remember at the end of one of the documentary shows about Corso, his son says that his father told him that what he has revealed is only about 10% of the whole story, and that the rest is still classified.

Isn't THAT interesting from a number of perspectives?


A few months back, Corso Jr. was making the UFO lecture rounds claiming that his dad gave him a much more detailed story about the Roswell crash, including that the Army had determined that the ship and occupants had actually come from some version of the future, and that we are currently living in an alternate timeline. I think there was also some implication that the time travelers were here to "repair" our timeline in some way, although supposedly the true timeline also had Nazi Germany either winning WWII or reaching some kind of truce with the Allies, allowing them to continue their advanced scientific research. Anyway, it all sounded like a lot of cobbled together science fiction, and Corso Jr. didn't really have anything in the way of concrete proof to back his story up.

So your guess is as good as mine. Maybe someday this entire existence we're living, and us with it, will simply vanish when the aliens fix our skewed timeline and it folds back into the true timeline. Oh, well. Easy come, easy go.



posted on Jul, 18 2007 @ 03:18 PM
link   
I believe Corso also said something in his book about the EBEs having spacesuits that almost seemed to be "spun" onto them, like a second skin.
I find this interesting:

www.space.com...

news.yahoo.com...;_ylt=AkmKoXNJ68.G5l0zTwTwTDMPLBIF



posted on Jul, 18 2007 @ 03:32 PM
link   

Originally posted by Stari
What really interests me the most was the part where the US took the technology from the UFO and back engineered it to make technology that was befitting of our time, then I saw how people claim this is false and his claims are only taking away from the people who invented this technology.

Here’s a thought, is it possible these people who back engineered the UFO do not want to loose their Nobel Prize? If it is found that their Nobel Prize was won under false pretenses then that would really hurt the scientist’s credibility and any chance of them winning another Nobel Prize.

That is an astute speculation Stari.


The deception appears to go even deeper.

The individual engineers who were helped and inspired by the reverse-engineering of confiscated Zetan spacecraft and equipment and who subsequently "invented" new products because of that, as well as the corporations they worked for, all wanted to avoid the stigma (from a public admittance) that extraterrestrials played a key role - if only indirectly - in the development of innovative technologies that significantly increased their profit margin, success, and credibility in general


Additionally, there is also the likelihood that facets of the government put pressure on said companies and their engineers so that they keep quiet on the alien role in the development of those new products and technologies - or else.





top topics



 
0
<<   2 >>

log in

join