It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.

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

Thank you.


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


The 'Space Fireflies'

page: 1

log in


posted on Jun, 8 2008 @ 06:50 PM
I didn't want to mention Adamski's name in the title as many reject discussion of the man out of hand which I feel isn't fair.

I simply ask where anyone thinks he got the inspiration to describe perfectly the 'space fireflies' he observed from a craft he claims he was taken into space in.

Such fireflies were not 'officially' described until the first 'official' manned space missions, much later...

c'mon, how did he pull THAT one out of the hat, unless of course this was a real account.

My position is I think he was the real deal, but guilded the lilly a bit, and did so after his contacts ended, which damaged him. The Silver Springs footage remains to me, genuine and sensational. The leviathan 'mother ship' photos are to this day, stunning. I consider George Adamski the first man in space, and the first dimensional traveller -as he spoke of having his body matter 'frequency' changed to see the alien's homelands like Venus -but their Venus which was in a neighbouring dimension (or 'frequency as George best tried to describe it back then)

How sad his detracters couldn't even see the glaring references to dimensional travel, allowing them to show how George lied as we know 'our' Venus is a scalding hot hell-hole etc How bloody limited and arrogant. A race technically a million years ahead of us...and we think we can second guess and limit their abilities to what we can do only.

posted on Jun, 10 2008 @ 11:49 AM
Just to add to my thread, I also read that his space friends did not use chemical film in their 'cameras' but used "electromagnetic" storage.

I have to say again, how did George manage to mention electromagnetic film imagery almost 50 years before such things entered general use?

One other thing, you know those famous photos of the 'motherships' high in the sky, with little 'scout craft' entering or leaving the giant as they fly around it? Well on the best prints I have of these, there are definately dark spots where the 'port holes' are located on the more close-up (and much maligned) shots. To me, that is what I call 'detail redundancy' that a faker would not go to the bother of, as only a keen eye and good print can even see them (they are there I assure you).

I guess I'm just saying George Adamski deserves a second look. I know he did tell some tall tales in his time, but that doesn't make him a faker his visitor experiences and photos. And that dear old God-fearing lady Madeleine Rodeffer, who actually filmed the Silver Springs UFO footage in Adamski's presence, swears to this day that footage is genuine. I don't see any motivation to lie at her age, after all that time.

And did anyone come up with a suggestion for the 'warping' effect of that craft seen in the footage? I also saw a much cleaner (not YouTube degraded rubbish) version of that film, where I could see the actual colors of the craft were 'warping' too, going in-and-out of shades of blues and greens I have only seen something like that effect recently with the car-enthusiast fraternity who use that paint that 'changes color' as you walk around the car.

Any suggestion to the issues I ask of?

[edit on 10-6-2008 by LynUK]

posted on Jun, 21 2008 @ 02:28 PM
wow, all this time and no replies. I'm not 'bumping' this thread, I just wanted to mention I was listening to a guest on Coast To Coast the other night, and he was on about some aliens not being 'alien' to Earth as such, rather they are from different dimensions.

Interestingly to my thread here, he used the word 'frequencies' to describe dimensions...

posted on Jun, 21 2008 @ 03:57 PM
Hi i do not yet know of these,but it sound interesting and slightly familliar. could you post the photos and film you talk of?

posted on Jun, 21 2008 @ 04:52 PM
reply to post by LynUK

I have to say again, how did George manage to mention electromagnetic film imagery almost 50 years before such things entered general use

Well it may have not been in general use but the technology was certainly around form the very early 50's onwards.

The videotape recorder would become one of Sony's greatest successes, but it began as another example of the influence of Bing Crosby. John Mullin at Bing Crosby Enterprises demonstrated an experimental 12-head VTR at 100 ips in 1951. The Ampex team led by Charles Ginsburg began work on VTR in October 1951. Ray Dolby, 19, dropped out of school to join the project and helped the team demonstrate the first system Nov. 19, 1952, but with a poor picture. A second system in March 1953 used 4 heads rather than 3 but problems continued with "venetian blinds" effect due to discontinuous recording from one head to the next. By 1954, the Ampex team included with Charles E. Anderson, Shelby Henderson, Fred Pfost, and Alex Maxey. By Feb. 1955 Anderson designed an FM circuit; Ray Dolby rejoined the team after his stint in the Army and designed a multivibrator modulator by Feb. 25; Maxey discovered how to vary tape tension and Pfost developed a new sandwich-type magnetic head. The improved model was shown in Feb. 1956 to Bill Lodge of CBS and other TV people in preparation for the first public demonstration in April. The Mark IV went on public display April 16, 1956, at the Chicago convention of the National Association of Radio and Television Broadcasters, the same day that Ray Dolby demonstrated the older Mark III in Redwood City. The Mark IV, later renamed the VRX-1000, used 2-inch wide 3M tape at 15 ips over rotating head assembly recording at a slant on tape surface with AM sound. During the next 4 weeks, Ampex took orders worth $4.5 million, and took out a trademark on the name "videotape" for its recorder. CBS used a new Ampex VTR for the delayed broadcast of "Douglas Edwards and the News" Nov. 30, 1956. Color videotape was used to record the Nixon-Khrushchev Kitchen Debate in Moscow in 1959.

People who were interested would have known about this cutting edge technology through news and publications at the time.

posted on Jun, 21 2008 @ 04:56 PM
thx for the reply sherpa. Hope some replies come in suggesting how he knew about the fireflies and the other points mentioned above.

posted on Jun, 21 2008 @ 05:16 PM
I'm willing to give the guy a chance
I've never heard of him though, and even google is a bit vague on the subject. His official site isn't much better.

Does anyone care to elaborate?

posted on Jun, 22 2008 @ 02:24 PM
He was in his day the most famous person in the UFO 'contactee' movement. He was a very colourful character to say the least. It is sad that younger folks today don't know of him, so efficient has been the efforts to get Adamski ridiculed and hence self-censored away. But the establishment had to destroy his credibility, after all, the Silver Springs UFO footage is the clearest and finest ever released and could offer important, glaring clues as to at least one kind of 'UFO' propulsion methods.

At least it wasthe clearest; versions on YouTube and the like are multi-recoded, fuzzy and jerky bastardizations of what was once shockingly clear colour footage of a very smoothly moving, part-rotating, colour-AND shape-warping craft. I saw private cine footage as a teen of good quality, that simply made my jaw drop. I am convinced this demonstration by the craft occupants was primarily for our engineers and physicists to see.

Adamski, in his books, suggested the CIA screwed with the original film footage and took away the best frames and even altered the film-frame sequence as to make it look fake. Regardless, I submit the warping of the craft's colour could NOT be hoaxed in that era and I also feel the craft-warping effect was also beyond hoaxing back then. This warping effect is seen in many UFO stills, and is thought to be the light-bending effect of the craft manipulating gravity, or G-Field. Funny, the military are now talking of doing something like this now for 'cloaking' -how come they don't get the ridicule UFO film/photos got 50 or 60 years ago? -exactly, the arrogance we humans have that no technology can exist unless we use it first.

Bookwise, if you can find this very rare book, it tells you much about the private Adamski:

George Adamski: The Untold Story: Lou Zinsstag, Timothy Good.

Tim Good, a very respected author in the UFO field, feels that the important parts of Adamski's accounts are substantially true. Adamski did let a lot of his own sci-fi author and spiritual writings and beliefs get into his most famous books, but this is partly due to his enthusiasm and ego -which was huge by any standards. Many critics are too literal when they ridicule Adamski's transcripts of what the 'Space Brothers' told him. They omit that he was contacted telepathically which cannot have one-for-one English translation. And I have already explained that the beings spoke of their entire existence being within a different 'frequency' or dimension than ours, that required great effort to accommodate their trips to-and-fro.

Most of those amazing 'mothership' photos have to be seen, but sadly the images all seem to be copyrighted by a foundation, and proper reproduction in websites has been thwarted with legal threats. I am not sure of the need for these photos to be so restricted in their publications after all these years, and I do not mean to libel when I state it does stop new blood, (like you I presume) getting to know about the whole George Adamski story.

You should be able to collect some of his major books, Flying Saucers Have Landed by Desmond Leslie and George Adamski, and also Inside The Spaceships (a.k.a. Inside The Flying Saucers) by George Adamski. Both books offer access to the photographs I mentioned above. I have signed editions of both by Adamski which I treasure.

Please check out the books above, at the very least they are a real part of UFO history. You may even come to the same conclusions I have, all things weighed.

posted on Jun, 22 2008 @ 03:30 PM
Sorry, I forgot to include this book:

Looking for Orthon by Colin Bennett and John Michell

It also like Tim Good's book, is required reading for any study of George Adamski.

new topics

top topics


log in