Hey... NASA More UFOs!

Originally posted by Majorion
I think that our resident InfaRedMan would beg to differ.

I was not talking about IRM. He has yet to participate in this discussion; I am talking about the comments contained within this thread.

Originally posted by SaviorComplex

Originally posted by branty
and your point is...
2nd line

The point is explicit in my post. If you have trouble understanding it, there is no amount of further explanation that will help you.

The reason I replied that way was another Phauge YES MAN had stated the same things , no need for you to repeat it

Originally posted by branty
The reason I replied that way was another Phauge YES MAN had stated the same things , no need for you to repeat it

Cute.

Very cute, coming from people who are doing nothing but parroting what Maussen tells them to. Why are you here if you are just going to post the same unthinking comments as every other believer? No need to repeat it, right?

Originally posted by SaviorComplex
The responses to Phage are amazing. No other way to put it. He is dismissed, ridiculed and condescended to for suggesting there might be another explanation,

Hmm...sounds like the same treatment the believers get from the skeptics.

Originally posted by SaviorComplex
when Maussen himself provides no evidence. He makes shows what amount to blurry photos, which he has to "interpret" for his audience, then makes claims he has no evidence for. He simply throws out the claim and it is accepted whole-cloth, without a single bit of critical thought.

I would say the guy throws out his own opinion. Does he say anywhere in his publications that you must believe his analysis?

The pictures and videos are there to make your own conclusions. The opinions and claims Maussen makes is nothing more than caption text, added as a reference so that anyone examining the video or photo can make their own conclusion...which obviously that is the case. Otherwise everyone would be agreeing with Maussen.

I have only seen a little of his work so I wont jump to any conclusions about the guy himself. But for this case and with this particular video, which contains actual NASA footage, that pretty much tells me the guy is publishing as it is for what it is no matter what his opinion is.


Cheers!!!!

reply to post by SaviorComplex


I think my comments have been my own, i could do what you do. I could piggyback, and just agree with RF Burns who is respected on this site, I did thank the OP for nice find, I'lljudge them myself , not wait for someone to tell me how to think,

[edit on 7-3-2009 by branty]

reply to post by alyosha1981


Exellent find s&f for you matey, it .looks like they are checking up on there little experiment.

Originally posted by RFBurns
What does that matter? Are you saying that there are no skeptical researchers of UFO's; have not earned a single penny from their publications?

Erm...no. You're saying that.

What I am saying is that Maussan has repeated affiliations with elements of the UFO crowd that have been proven to be con artists.

How many reformed con men do you know?

Originally posted by RFBurns
Well not to ruffle your feathers but they have

So funny. Someone's feather's are obviously getting ruffled. Not mine though. Please don't second guess me. You know nothing about my beliefs or leanings, so please don't start getting defensive.
By the way, I have already starred two of your posts in this thread, so if your labelling me a rabid debunker or as one other poster chorteled, a "YesMan", just because I think Phage is right, then you're not only showing immaturity, but a lack of perception as well.

Originally posted by branty
The reason I replied that way was another Phauge YES MAN had stated the same things , no need for you to repeat it

The insecurity of some people gives me a chuckle.

So if I had agreed with you, would you be calling me a "YES MAN"?

Good video, I guess NASA forgot to blur the camera. I'm glad people defend Maussan, he seems to have only good intentions. According to skeptics everything is birds, ice particles and chinese lanterns..Oh I forgot balloons.

Originally posted by RFBurns
I doubt very seriously the guy could alter any of it without it being immediately detected.

Show me where I mentioned anything about altered NASA vids?

What I said was that anything associated with Maussan will be perceived by some as tainted, because of his track record.

I personally found the NASA vids very interesting. No conclusion to what they are, but certainly interesting.

Originally posted by watchZEITGEISTnow
reply to post by alyosha1981

 

Another nice find.

Oh hell these things are seriously playing with them. I guess it at least shows ETs have a sense of humor.

Que for debunkers - ice cubes - camera flares - swamp gas... you know the deal...

wZn

i believe that we are being visited...but one has to take into consideration that there are thousands of satellites circling the globe at different speeds, heights, and paths of orbit. i think one has to be able to show detail of some kind, and the ability to change direction to even be a plausible alien craft. logic dictates some scrutiny, and those that question such sightings shouldn't automatically be called "debunkers". remember, we that believe, need to be taken seriously, and we can't be, if we don't seperate the "wheat from the chaff" so to speak.

[edit on 7-3-2009 by jimmyx]

Originally posted by SaviorComplex
The responses to Phage are amazing. No other way to put it. He is dismissed, ridiculed and condescended to for suggesting there might be another explanation, when Maussen himself provides no evidence. He makes shows what amount to blurry photos, which he has to "interpret" for his audience, then makes claims he has no evidence for. He simply throws out the claim and it is accepted whole-cloth, without a single bit of critical thought.

I agree. There is nothing in this video as far as I can see that demonstrates the objects shown are intelligently controlled.

If the objects had reversed direction, slowed down or sped up then there would definitely be something anomalous about them. However, all the objects merely move in one direction at a uniform pace.

Now I'm not saying that a real alien spaceship can never move in one direction at a uniform pace but that this behaviour is exactly what you would expect of debris, ice particles etc.

Until these objects demonstrate some kind of unexpected behaviour there's no reason for supposing that there's anything odd about them.

There are better NASA videos than this one that do show objects changing direction.

It's possible to be a 'believer' in UFOs without accepting uncritically every spurious piece of evidence that comes along.

[edit on 7/3/2009 by MarrsAttax]

Originally posted by SaviorComplex
The responses to Phage are amazing. No other way to put it.

Actually, there is another way to put it:

The response to anyone who dares to question anything related to the gospel of this post, is amazing.

I had to laugh. No stars for me, and the only stars you got were from me. And as for the......ahem, objective posters.....

Well, have a look for yourself. So many stars I was dazzled.

Nothing like a dispassionate, civil, discussion.

Huston,we have a problem.
The take over and thread throwers are now in orbit around here.

Originally posted by branty
reply to post by Phage

 

didnt a shuttle burn up because of ice debris hitting it and destroying its integrity , Maybe the Best and Brightest should ground themselves till they can build a ship that doesn't fall apart every few missions, I mean would be nice for the safty of the crew

I wouldn't go ridiculing a group of intelligent and proven individuals, if you can't even get the facts of your criticism right - not to mention your atrocious spelling.

Some great footage there for sure ty for posting it. It's too bad they included the spinning metalic debris at around 7:30 and the final clip of an fairly obvious bird at the end while the shuttle was landing. The others are pretty convincing and not as easily debunked as merely ice, or space debris.

Would have been a better presentation if they had been able to capture some of the objects moving multi directional or stopping and turning as some NASA footage shows - that kind of footage is truly harder to debunk or wave off as man made debris etc etc.

Wasn't that spinning object debunked already as on object that had come off the shuttle? (The one at 7:30 ) sorry if it has been mentioned already somewhere in here but I'm pretty certain it had a manmade origin that made total sense.

I had never seen most of these vids...very interesting and again thatnks for posting.

Even if Maussan isn't correct on 100% of the sightings, there were 2 that really caught my eye: the tornado/vortex thing with the ball of light on top, and the last image of the spinning metallic beam that the NASA guy sounded a bit shaky-of-voice about at the end. Earth isn't orbited by only humans, it very strongly appears.

Okay, I thought that the footage near the end, at about 7:20 (I think) was pretty darn good.

TBH, I don't like Jaime Maussan a whole lot either, but some of the footage in that vid was pretty impressive.

Nothing like seeing NASA get caught with their pants down

I wouldn't go ridiculing a group of intelligent and proven individuals, if you can't even get the facts of your criticism right - not to mention your atrocious spelling.

In no way, shape or form did I critic RF Burns, being as he's the only one fitting YOUR description. My spelling, ..... ya got me, my thoughts run ahead of my 2 fingers,

Originally posted by branty
reply to post by SaviorComplex

 

I think my comments have been my own, i could do what you do. I could piggyback, and just agree with RF Burns who is respected on this site, I did thank the OP for nice find, I'lljudge them myself , not wait for someone to tell me how to think,

[edit on 7-3-2009 by branty]

So if we're in agreeance with something you disagree with, we're 'yes men' and piggy-backing? What a novel approach to a debate!

S & F OP. Great video, thanks. Pity the off topic and irrelevant posts attempting to discredit the messenger rather than dealing with the evidence in the message had to waste so much thread space. But, oh well, this IS ATS after all, uber-debunker central. Par for the course.

PS. Any chance of ATS upping the limit on the ignore function?