Credible UFO Quotes by prominent individuals.

"Because few scientists have carefully studied the literature and conducted field investigations, most know pratically nothing about UFOs. Their ignorance of the subject has much to do with their attitudes towards it".
Dr David M Jacobs, Professor of History, Temple University - (UFO Congress paper, 1980).






"I saw such objects (UFOs). It was not a matter of stars or planets, but of mobile bodies with incredible speed and irregularity of movement".
Captain Luis Sanchez Moreno, Argentine Naval Intelligence (La Nacion, May 24th, 1962).






"There is no other conclusion I can reach but that for six hours on the morning of the 20th of July, 1952 there were at least ten unidentifiable objects moving above Washington....I can safely deduce that they performed gyrations which no known aircraft could perform. By this I mean that our scope showed that they could make right angle turrns and complete reversals of flight".
Senior Air Route Traffic Controller Harry Barnes.






"I saw several bright lights. I was at my maximum speed, but even the I had no closing speed...Later I chased a single bright light which I estimated about ten miles away. I lost visual contact with it at about two miles".
Lt William Patterson, F-94 Pilot who chased UFOs over Washington DC, 1952.






"We have no proof that intelligent beings exist elsewhere, but UFO reports have emphasized out innate curiosity... Some may have already achieved a higher level of social and technological culture than our own".
Major General Donald J. Keirn, Chief of Air Force Nuclear Engine Programme (Talk to Institute of Aeronautical Sciences, 1959).






"UFOs sometimes treated lightly by the press and referred to as 'flying saucers' must be rapidly and accurately identified as serious USAF business".
Major General Richard E. O'Keefe, USAF, Acting Inspector General of the Air Force (Air Force Inspector General's Brief, Dec 24th, 1959)






"These people have seen something - What it is I do not know and am not curious to know".
Albert Einstein, Institute for Advanced Study, Princeton, New Jersey (reply letter to Californian Minister, July 23rd, 1952).






"Taking all evidence which has come to the Subcommittee's attention into account, we find it difficult to ignore the small residue of well documented but unexplainable cases which form a hardcore of the UFO...a phenomenon which has such a high ratio of unexplained cases (about 30%) should arose scientific curiosity".
American Institute of Aeronautics and Astronautics (AIAA) Subcommittee, 1970.

Link

Major Donald Keyhoe's UFO Archives.

Statement and interview with the former Brazilian Minister of Aeronautics:

[atsimg]http://files.abovetopsecret.com/images/member/3682129e2f5d.jpg[/atsimg]

“Over decades the military have been reporting UFO activity within the Brazilian territory. However, due to the lack of a reasonable explanation, these reports are left aside awaiting for the time when their nature and the identity of their crew can be understood”

Former Brazilian minister of Aeronautics Brigadier Socrates Monteiro

Interview

Pilot statements taken from Ted Roe's technical report into 'under reporting bias' regarding pilot UFO/UAP sightings:

NARCAP receives reports from pilots and aviation professionals via email and other sources. During one week in the summer of 2001 NARCAP received reports from a number of current and former pilots, the majority of whom were commercial airmen. A review of some of the commentary from these pilots who have seen UAP includes the following:

Pilot Commentary:


"We didn't say anything. We figured nobody would believe us."
Charter Pilot



"Upon return to my domicile, JFK, I reported our sighting to the proper authorities. I was shortly visited by two federal investigators who evidently thought I was hallucinating for one of them stated he had seen spaceships while fishing in Great South Bay and was quite obviously trying to prove that I was a loony."
Captain, Pan Am (ret.)



"It must have been Huge! We were all due back at JFK about the same time two days later so I waited in the crew ready room to talk to them. None of them wanted to talk! They were afraid management would take them off of flying status and have them tested for booze and drugs. The story never came out!"
Flight Engineer, TWA (ret.)



"a group of lights in the air appeared at our 12o'clock position. I called departure control and asked them if they had any traffic in that area. When they came back and said NO, what do you see, I said no, just checking. For at that time when a pilot reported seeing a UFO he was in a lot of trouble."
Captain, Ozark Airlines (ret.)



"I, and Flight crew saw something (in broad daylight) that did things that no known aircraft could do without killing any living thing inside. I will only give sketchy details to protect the privacy of the rest of the crew. If you are interested, and all information (is) kept anonymous, contact me. I will not present myself for public ridicule."
Captain, NW (ret.)

Aviation Safety in America: Under-Reporting Bias of Unidentified Aerial Phenomena and Recommended Solutions. Ted Roe

Dr Richard Haines:


[atsimg]http://files.abovetopsecret.com/images/member/edd005108c67.jpg[/atsimg]

“Although I do not yet have enough reliable information concerning the relevant characteristics of the UFO phenomenon with which to form a scientific judgment of its “core” identity, I do believe that the phenomenon is objectively real; i.e., I believe that the many thousands of eyewitnesses around the world are experiencing UFO phenomenon in a manner very similar to the way any other human with normal sensory capabilities would perceive it if they happened to be present.”

Dr. Richard Haines, Psychologist specializing in pilot and astronaut "human factors" research for the Ames NASA Research Center in California-Chief of the Space Human Factors Office

Interview

Statement made by Flight Captain involved in the Bariloche incident, Argentina, 1995.

"The first impression was shock from people inside the plane -the lights of the object were well defined - there was an orange light on top of it, green lights on the side and the solid part of the object was dark".

Flight Captain Jorge Polanco

UFOs over Argentina ~ The Bariloche Incident

Statement about the 1973 UFO wave from U.S. Rep. J. Edward Roush:

"The increased sightings nationally could lead to a state of panic and hysteria and we ought to be concerned about it."

U.S. Rep. J. Edward Roush (D-Ind.)
Columbus Citizen Journal
Oct. 18, 1973

Guest Blogger: John Lasker ‘The UFO invasion of October 1973

Cosmonaut UFO statement:

In 1980, the famous Soviet magazine Sputnik published a long report titled, “UFOs Through the Eyes of Cosmonauts.” It consisted on the statements of ten Soviet and two American astronauts (both Apollo-Soyuz crew members). Some cases that seemed initially puzzling were mentioned, only to be explained as waste containers, space boosters and the like. While most seemed open to the idea of extraterrestrial life in the universe, only one cosmonaut, Yevgeni Khrunov, who flew in the Soyuz-5 in 1969, was prepared to recognize publicly the existence of UFOs.“As regards UFOs,” said Khrunov, “their presence cannot be denied: thousands of people have seen them. It may be that their source is optical effects but some of their properties, for instance, their ability to change course by 90 degrees at great speed, simply stagger the imagination.”

link

Good thread, but citing Timothy Good does your case no good

Originally posted by karl 12

Schaden, Timothy Good makes some comments about the Ben Rich quote in this interview -he also makes some interesting remarks about how he thinks full disclosure would be 'disasterous' for society.

Timothy Good interview (Ben Rich statement at 39:39)

(video link removed; look back on pg 4 of thread for it)

I realize I am coming in late on this thread, but some do seem to have a life of their own.


Karl12 (OP),

Great topic for a thread. You did a lot of legwork and I find many of the quotes seemingly quite compelling. I say "seemingly" because even though some of these persons are bigwigs and likely in the know, one doesn't know on what basis they make their statements. What would make them more credible still would be citations of the original sources of these quotes -- not just the URL you pulled them from. I realize this would be a bit time/labor intensive, but it would also go to addressing the concerns skeptics on this thread have brought up. But the preponderance of such quotes by so many distinguished individuals as well those of apparently reputable lower-level military witnesses does make for a compelling argument in favor of ET UFOs.


That said,citing anything by Timothy Good undercuts your case. Amongst other things, he mis-characterizes Buz Aldrin's take on the supposed Apollo 11 UFO sightings (see link below regarding *). Talking up Reptilians and Grays and Gray-human hybrids is also very suspect talk. I've also not been very impressed by the three of his books that I have checked out.

*: debunking Apollo 11 UFO encounter

reply to post by karl 12


I collect quotes and you have everyone of em that I have.

And these are loony tunes or cracker jackers................these are credible people.

So as stated previously on this subject: Those that have a open mind and are willing to expand their comfort zone will see these quotes for what they are - proof we are not alone.

Those that are closed minded and just can't expand they're comfort zone will refuse to their last breath.

You can lead a horse to water, but you can't force em to drink it.

Originally posted by yeti101
reply to post by karl 12

 

Some of those quotes are really bad and taken out of context.

Stephen hawking for example also said this "We don't appear to have been visited by aliens. Why would they only appear to cranks and weirdoes?"

not such a champion of the cause after all. Copying and pasting is easy but its wise to do a bit of legwork on your sources.

Out of all the quotes provided , you could only pick holes in one and then state that "some" of the quotes are bad and taken out of context ?
You are a joke

I think the OP can be forgiven for one misquote.

reply to post by tpg65


Hi tpg65

its not one misquote. Its a catalogue of out of context and in some cases completely fabricated statements.

This is the problem with ufo beleivers theyre not interested in the truth. This thread would be far better if he'd chosen maybe 10 really good ones and explored them. Instead he's done zero research on any of the quotes, copy & pasted from a pro ufo website and in the process discredited himself as a genuine researcher.

How do you know if any are genuine if you dont check them? Most ufo belivers dont check and are happy to accept these becuase it fits their belief system. It demonstrates the mentally of the typical "believer"

Originally posted by yeti101
reply to post by tpg65

 

Hi tpg65

its not one misquote. Its a catalogue of out of context and in some cases completely fabricated statements.

This is the problem with ufo beleivers theyre not interested in the truth. This thread would be far better if he'd chosen maybe 10 really good ones and explored them. Instead he's done zero research on any of the quotes, copy & pasted from a pro ufo website and in the process discredited himself as a genuine researcher.

How do you know if any are genuine if you dont check them? Most ufo belivers dont check and are happy to accept these becuase it fits their belief system. It demonstrates the mentally of the typical "believer"

edit on 7-7-2011 by yeti101 because: (no reason given)

Thank you , but I don't remember asking for your opinion .

While you are in such a benevolent mood , why don't you write the quotes that were misquoted and remember , no copy and pasting

reply to post by tpg65


i always think its better to encourage everyone to do their own research. so no

Originally posted by JimOberg
Among the quality quotes there's still garbage -- which apparently nobody here knows how to detect and eliminate, a bad sign.

Why can't this attributed quotation circumstance be accurate? Do more than cut-and-paste, or you remain vulnerable to brainwashing, as always.

Gee Jim,

Thanks for dismounting your high horse and passing judgement on all us lesser mortals that do not have the decades of experience you devoted to your chosen subject.

I really appreciate the disdain you hold us all in.

You assume everyone except you is vulnerable to brainwashing?

Great use of the scientific method Jim

Originally posted by Krusty the Klown

Originally posted by JimOberg
Among the quality quotes there's still garbage -- which apparently nobody here knows how to detect and eliminate, a bad sign.

Why can't this attributed quotation circumstance be accurate? Do more than cut-and-paste, or you remain vulnerable to brainwashing, as always.

Gee Jim,

Thanks for dismounting your high horse and passing judgement on all us lesser mortals that do not have the decades of experience you devoted to your chosen subject.

I really appreciate the disdain you hold us all in.

You assume everyone except you is vulnerable to brainwashing?

Great use of the scientific method Jim

edit on 7/7/1111 by Krusty the Klown because: Still Kan't do grammar....

Once ego-defense becomes the prime motive for argument, a better understanding of the actual subject is the first casualty. It's not 'rocket science' to attempt to verify quotations, and to search for alternate opinions about their authenticity. An awareness of the logical fallacies that can affect any and ALL of us [including those who are quoted] seems to me to be a reasonable basis for a potentially productive approach to this baffling phenomenon.

Originally posted by yeti101
reply to post by tpg65

 

I always think its better to encourage everyone to do their own research. so no.

Yet101,

This is a cop-out for an answer. To make your argument convincing that some of these quotes are taken out of context, it would be helpful to back that up with a couple of examples. Your saying a number of these quotes are taken out of context, but then not backing up your statement with some evidence there of, is shoddier than Karl12's cutting and pasting of quotes he has found.

I agree, a few of the quotes strike me as out of context, but the vast majority do not, in particular many of the eyewitness accounts by military personnel, pilots and police.

Sure, it is good to encourage all to do some of their own research, but don't have everyone reinventing the wheel. You could, at the very least, give some suggestions on how to pursue corroborating or searching for the extended/in-context quotes. As is, you're just displaying typical, haughty debunker (or extreme skeptic) behavior, and thereby not doing much to further your cause.

This applies to you, too, JimOberg.

Originally posted by JimOberg

Originally posted by Krusty the Klown

Originally posted by JimOberg
Among the quality quotes there's still garbage -- which apparently nobody here knows how to detect and eliminate, a bad sign.

Why can't this attributed quotation circumstance be accurate? Do more than cut-and-paste, or you remain vulnerable to brainwashing, as always.

Gee Jim,

Thanks for dismounting your high horse and passing judgement on all us lesser mortals that do not have the decades of experience you devoted to your chosen subject.

I really appreciate the disdain you hold us all in.

You assume everyone except you is vulnerable to brainwashing?

Great use of the scientific method Jim

edit on 7/7/1111 by Krusty the Klown because: Still Kan't do grammar....

Once ego-defense becomes the prime motive for argument, a better understanding of the actual subject is the first casualty. It's not 'rocket science' to attempt to verify quotations, and to search for alternate opinions about their authenticity. An awareness of the logical fallacies that can affect any and ALL of us [including those who are quoted] seems to me to be a reasonable basis for a potentially productive approach to this baffling phenomenon.

LOL, thanks for proving my point exactly with that statement.

Once ego-defense becomes the prime motive for argument, a better understanding of the actual subject is the first casualty.

There you go again, assuming that I don't understand..... hilarious.

I wasn't defending my ego just commenting on yours!!!!!

Do you feel more comfortable back up on your high horse?

It's not 'rocket science' to attempt to verify quotations, and to search for alternate opinions about their authenticity.

Quite right, so why the need to look down on and denigrate people who know less than you do?

An awareness of the logical fallacies that can affect any and ALL of us [including those who are quoted] seems to me to be a reasonable basis for a potentially productive approach to this baffling phenomenon.

Including you???? Why didn't you just say this in the first place instead of judging everybody else?

Originally posted by Krusty the Klown
Including you???? Why didn't you just say this in the first place instead of judging everybody else?

K, I try to offer judgments on the opinions and research results of other people, NOT on their character, motivations, and personalities. Where I transgress this approach, by all means hold my feet to the fire. And be prepared to wrap your own feet in asbestos socks.

The bigger issue here is how can existing internet search engines provide a curious reader with balanced and even contrary opinions regarding claims such as these quotations. Once nearly ANY claim goes viral, current tools are swamped by the echoes and repetitions, and a balanced view is hard -- or impossible -- to obtain. I'm seriously interested in investigative approaches to this lamentable situation.

reply to post by MrInquisitive

Hi,

I'm not really interested in making a convincing argument in the aliens/ufo forum anymore infact I rarely post here and went a good while not even visiting this section of ATS. I used to visit/post here and in some cases went to a great deal of trouble providing info that a lot of members here hadn't heard about before on specific cases. You know the responses I got?

You’re a disinfo agent! , why are you here? Etc And also the fact that most responders were unable or unwilling to take onboard any information which contradicted their beliefs.

That’s when I became interested more in belief systems and what makes people believe in certain cases even in the face of evidence against their position. Now my position is "why should I bother?" been there done that doesn’t make a diffirence and quite frankly I don’t care. I've given info in this thread people who are interested in the truth will seek it out.

I don’t know how Jim Oberg keeps doing it LoL Hey Jim I downloaded an old bbc horizon documentary from 1982 about UFOs and your in it! I didn’t realise you've been on the case that long! You should get a long service award or something

Originally posted by yeti101
reply to post by MrInquisitive

 

I'm not really interested in making a convincing argument in the aliens/ufo forum anymore infact I rarely post here and went a good while not even visiting this section of ATS. I used to visit/post here and in some cases went to a great deal of trouble providing info that a lot of members here hadn't heard about before on specific cases. You know the responses I got?

You’re a disinfo agent! , why are you here? Etc And also the fact that most responders were unable or unwilling to take onboard any information which contradicted their beliefs.

Thank you for the reply. Admittedly, I'm not surprised by the responses you say you received, given what I've seen tossed at other skeptical posters here at ATS, for having the temerity to critically question even the shoddiest of UFO claims. None the less, if you are going to bother disputing these quotes aggregated by Karl12, it seems it would behoove you to provide a couple of rigorous examples that substantiate your point, but that's your call, of course.

One other question to you -- and to JimOberg if he is reading this: are there ANY credible UFO sighting cases to your mind, or do they all have credibility gaps in them when looked into more deeply/carefully? I ask because I don't take either of you for dogmatic debunkers (or government disinfo agents), but rather, extremely critical-thinking skeptics; and I would like to look in more detail at what are considered to be the most credible UFO sighting cases.