The Robertson Panel: UFOs and Ridicule.

page: 3
22
<< 1  2    4  5 >>

log in

join

posted on May, 29 2010 @ 09:24 AM
link   
The articles and documents provided on this thread are detailed and informative and I enjoyed reading them . Also the video content was interesting, but I cannot help but think that there is only ONE important messege to take away from this thread.
NEVER LET YOUR GOVERNMENT THINK FOR YOU !




posted on May, 29 2010 @ 07:43 PM
link   

Originally posted by TrueBrit
NEVER LET YOUR GOVERNMENT THINK FOR YOU !



TrueBrit, thanks for the reply - I'm sure many visitors to this website would agree that the principle applies to many other subjects as well.


Here's yet another interesting government document indicating the 'conclusions' of the Robertson panel were already arrived at one year before..




This memo to the Director of CIA indicates that what would be the recommendation of the Robertson Panel was already determined a year before: flying saucers cause to threats to the national security: one psychological threat (risks of mass panic may be exploited by the "enemy"), and the other an air security threat (neglect of UFO alerts may cause neglect of "enemy" air attacks.)

It also shows that CIA estimated current efforts of UFO research insufficient as far as national security is concerned and that the problem must be escalated to higher levels.





Link


Cheers.



posted on May, 30 2010 @ 05:58 AM
link   
reply to post by karl 12
 


Oh I love it. This document and the general attitude displayed toward UFO and thier possible crews lead me to the conclusion that the military had entirely the wrong angle on UFO.
The assumption that these craft were hostile, or enemies without any evidence of that, stronger than their presence in controled , or national airspace. Now I can understand how from a military or protectorate angle, this presence represents a grave problem. If it IS a craft sent by a recognised enemy (Russia during the cold war for instance) then allowing it easy access to thier airspace would a bad idea, and letting folks know it was around means they are less confident of the militaries ability to protect the land which falls under thier remit.
But after DECADES AND DECADES AND DECADES the secrecy is still a problem, new incidents occuring over military controled airspace are not going to be out of classified status for YEARS yet, and in general I bet that UFO are still refered to as having enemy or hostile status, even though there has never been any unprovoked damage done to a military aircraft by a UFO.



posted on May, 30 2010 @ 06:50 AM
link   

Originally posted by easynow
"standard responses to UFO public inquiries"

Inclosed are the UFO Fact Sheet and standard response to UFO public inquiries you requested.
I sincerely hope you are successful in preventing a reopening of UFO investigations.


Hi easynow, good find.


It would be very interesting to see what’s on that UFO Fact Sheet and list of standard responses don't you think?



Originally posted by karl 12
"High Tech Air Force UFO Explanation Chart"

Conclusions—“Flying saucers” pose two elements of danger which have national security implications.
The First involves mass psychological implications.
The Second concerns the vulnerability of the United States to air attack.


Hi karl 12, another good find.


Two very significant points aren’t they which are in my opinion two of the list of important reasons for the cover-up and non disclosure so far.

Thanks guys.



posted on May, 30 2010 @ 07:29 AM
link   
reply to post by TrueBrit
 


Hey bud, Timothy Good makes some very interesting comments in this E-book (page 174-178) about 'the destruction or disappearance of military aircraft during interceptions of UFOs' and there are some relevant statements below about military attitudes on the subject.





"Air Force interceptors still pursue UFOs as a matter of national security to this country and to determine technical aspects involved."
Major General Joe W. Kelly, 1957.




"We have stacks of reports about flying saucers.We take them seriously when you consider we have lost many men and planes trying to intercept them."
General Benjamin Chidlaw,
Air Defense Command.





"This can't be laughed off.We have over three hundred reports which haven't been publicized in the papers from very competent personnel,in many instances.
...We are running down every report.I can't tell you how much we would give to have one of those crash in an area so that we could recover whatever they are".
Colonel McCoy - March 17th 1948.
Air Force Scientific Advisory Board meeting at the Pentagon.





"We had contact with an unidentified flying object that had entered our air space. The order was given by Admiral Trane to get this object forced down out of the sky if at all possible, by whatever means possible….Two gentlemen began to question me about this event. They were being pretty rough. I remember literally putting my hands up and saying, “Wait a minute fellows. I’m on your side.” My logbook, I never did see that again."
US Navy Atlantic Command, Merle Shane McDow




"Here we had a number of object seen coming in across the North Sea on coastal radar. It looked like a Russian mistake. Jet aircraft were scrambled. The objects were travelling at quite impossible speeds like 4-5000 mph and then came to an abrupt halt near to one of these stations not very high up. Jet aircraft picked them up on aircraft radar. The objects then simply made rings round them."
"Inevitably this led to the sort of enquiry which you would put in hand if you had any military responsibilities. Had something gone wrong with ground radar or with aircraft radar? We experienced pilots going out of their minds? Were people having fantasies? We *had* to investigate cases of that kind. Over the years - although there were not an enormous number of such cases - there were a sufficient number to persuade me, and a number of air staff friends with whom I had to work, that something was going on, sporadically, in British airspace which we could not explain."
"But we did not particularly want to make public statements about that. Not for something that we had no explanation."
Ralph Noyes,Senior Official with British Air Ministry - retired as Under Secretary of State in 1977




"There was something definite in the sky...If it had proved to be hostile we would have destroyed it."
Major Gerald Smith, USAF--One of the F-106 pilots scrambled under orders from NORAD (North American Air Defense Command) to investigate a UFO over West Palm Beach, Florida on September 14, 1972. The UFO was viewed through binoculars by the FAA supervisor, George Morales, sighted by an Eastern Airlines captain, police and several civilians, as well as being tracked on radar by Miami International Airport and Homestead AFB.




"Army intelligence has recently said that "the matter of 'Unidentified Aircraft' or 'Unidentified Aerial Phenomena',otherwise known as 'Flying Discs','Flying Saucers', and 'Balls of fire' is considered top secret by intelligence officers of both the army and the air forces."
FBI issued memo on UFOs entitled "Protection of Vital Installations"
-Memo sent to the Office of Naval Intelligence and the Office of Special Investigations.





"The facts about saucers were long tracked down and results have long been known in top secret defense circles of more countries than one."
Dr. Harry Messel, Professor of Physics at Sydney University, Australia, in a 1965 statement.


Cheers.

[edit on 02/10/08 by karl 12]



posted on May, 30 2010 @ 02:25 PM
link   
reply to post by karl 12
 


Well now . I accept that men may have died, but I doubt thats because those men were trying to offer them a cup of coffee and a meal . I would have thought they would have had to be shooting at the UFO or attempting to interupt them . Theres no logic in trying to force a UFO down, its a foolish plan!

"Oh yes sir , Im absolutely ready to take down a craft we know nothing about, that may have crossed interstellar distances , and is therefore probably proof against any attacks I might throw at it , yes sir , Im really up for that ."

Lets face it , if I was floating around and all of a sudden along come to craft which clearly want to kill me, I would maul them, and therefore I could well understand a UFO wanting to protect itself.



posted on May, 30 2010 @ 04:15 PM
link   
Hi karl 12, I hope I did not make a mistake here, but I thought that this post made by you in your other thread may sorely not be lacking in this one, so I took the liberty to post it here.


Originally posted by karl 12
Dr James Mcdonald talks about 'scoffing and ridicule' within mainstream science.




Source;

reply to post by karl 12
 



posted on May, 30 2010 @ 07:38 PM
link   
reply to post by spacevisitor
 



Hi easynow, good find.

It would be very interesting to see what’s on that UFO Fact Sheet and list of standard responses don't you think?


thanks spacevisitor
and i agree it would be nice to see what the standard responses actually were, maybe Oberg can tell us something about it ? he joined NASA the same time as the guy who had the documents ( Lt. General Duward L. Crow, USAF) and Jim is known around the world for his "legendary" debunking ?!


James Oberg, a UFO skeptic, whose style of debunking is almost legendary

www.bibleufo.com...


i bet Jim has a copy of the UFO fact sheet and standard excuses next to his computer right now







for anyone interested, here's some fun quotes from a CIA article,


The panel met from 14 to 17 January 1953. It reviewed Air Force data on UFO case histories and, after spending 12 hours studying the phenomena, declared that reasonable explanations could be suggested for most, if not all, sightings




At the same time, Chadwell looked into British efforts in this area. He learned the British also were active in studying the UFO phenomena. An eminent British scientist, R. V. Jones, headed a standing committee created in June 1951 on flying saucers. Jones' and his committee's conclusions on UFOs were similar to those of Agency officials: the sightings were not enemy aircraft but misrepresentations of natural phenomena. The British noted, however, that during a recent air show RAF pilots and senior military officials had observed a "perfect flying saucer.




the panel recommended that the National Security Council debunk UFO reports and institute a policy of public education to reassure the public of the lack of evidence behind UFOs

www.cia.gov...




interesting that the Robertson Panel erroneously debunked the 1952 Tremonton, Utah UFO Fleet despite the fact that the film they looked at had been tampered with.


after spending 12 hours studying the phenomena, declared that reasonable explanations could be suggested for most, if not all, sightings. For example, after reviewing motion-picture film taken of a UFO sighting near Tremonton, Utah, on 2 July 1952 and one near Great Falls, Montana, on 15 August 1950, the panel concluded that the images on the Tremonton film were caused by sunlight reflecting off seagulls and that the images at Great Falls were sunlight reflecting off the surface of two Air Force interceptors.
www.cia.gov...





“Newhouse said that the Air Force didn't send the originals back to him at any time. He wrote ATIC when a long time had elapsed, and what they did finally send back to him was a color print which he stressed was distinctly inferior to the original. Not only that, but he was positive that they had cut out the first 10 or 20 feet, which were shot when the objects were very much closer and appeared much sharper on the film



The Navy analysts didn't use the words "interplanetary spacecraft" when they told of their conclusions, but they did say that the UFO's were intelligently controlled vehicles and that they weren't airplanes or birds. They had arrived at this conclusion by making a frame-by-frame study of the motion of the lights and the changes in the lights' intensity.




The earliest analyses of the Utah Film, then classified Top Secret, were conducted by the United States Air Force and the U. S. Navy. After the films were declassified they were used in a UFO documentary in 1956 by Greene-Rouse. The analyses showed that there was the total absence of any evidence to indicate birds, such as fluttering.




This film could not be duplicated under simulated conditions.

The objects appear to be a light source rather than reflected light.

All the objects appear to be the same size and circular in shape.

At a distance of five miles, with the movement perpendicular to the line of sight, the average velocity is 653.5 mph. Likewise, at 2.5 miles the average speed is 326.75 mph.

The movement in flight appears to follow an elliptical or circular pattern, within the group.

While the objects are unidentified, the following possibilities have been eliminated:

1. Balloons
2. Aircraft
3. Birds

The image structure & maneuvers eliminates any type of aircraft.

Microscopic examinations show that the objects are in focus and 1/6th to 1/10 the size of the full moon with the naked eye.

Photogrammetric experiments have shown that the images cannot be associated with any type of bird observation at any distance.

www.ufologie.net...
www.abovetopsecret.com...






[edit on 31-5-2010 by easynow]



posted on May, 31 2010 @ 08:14 AM
link   

Originally posted by TrueBrit
Well now . I accept that men may have died, but I doubt thats because those men were trying to offer them a cup of coffee and a meal . I would have thought they would have had to be shooting at the UFO or attempting to interupt them . Theres no logic in trying to force a UFO down, its a foolish plan!



TrueBrit, thanks for the reply and I understand what you're saying there - I know you wrote the word 'unprovoked' in your post but there does seem to be instances where pilots have come away unscathed despite attempts to shoot down these objects - Milton Torres makes some very interesting comments in this interview and John Greenewald Junior talks about the Tehran case here. There's also this pretty freaky incident described in a U.S. Department of Defense document for the CIA concerning a Peruvian Air Force Commander opening fire on an object over La Joya Military Base in 1980:


Peruvian Air Force pilot shoots at UFO.


As for CIA attitudes on the subject - there's an interesting news article below which deals with government UFO documentation and makes mention of U.S. Embassies being used to gather UFO information which is then sent on to the CIA - the reading gets a bit difficult towards the end but it does make some very good points about how the CIA is lying when it says its 'closed its books' on UFOs.




CIA Papers Detail UFO Surveillance:






The C.I.A. has repeatedly said that it investigated and closed it's books on U.F.O.'s during 1952, according to Ground Saucer Watch, a nation-wide research organization of about 500 scientists, engineers and others who seek to scientifically prove or disprove the existence of U.f.O.'s, but 100 pages of documents obtained under a freedom of information suit, show "the Government has been lying to us all these years," it said.


Embassies Gather Information

Mr. Spaulding an aerospace engineer with Airesearch, one of the largest producers of aerospace components, said the documents show the United States embassies are used to help gather information on U.F.O. sightings and that the information "seems to be directed to the C.I.A., the White House and the National Security Agency."

Link


Cheers.

[edit on 02/10/08 by karl 12]



posted on May, 31 2010 @ 08:22 AM
link   
Great thread Karl!...very informative and well researched..keep it up!



posted on May, 31 2010 @ 09:02 AM
link   

Originally posted by spacevisitor
Hi karl 12, I hope I did not make a mistake here, but I thought that this post made by you in your other thread may sorely not be lacking in this one, so I took the liberty to post it here.


Originally posted by karl 12
Dr James Mcdonald talks about 'scoffing and ridicule' within mainstream science.



Source:
post by karl 12



Spacevisitor, thanks for posting that video about Dr James Mcdonald (forgot about that one
)- as you say he was a very intelligent and courageous chap and it shows just how powerful the use of 'ridicule' can actualy be - I'd also be very interested to have a good look around the 29 boxes of his archived UFO material shown in this pic.


There does seem to be quite a lot of uncovered CIA documentation dealing with the UFO subject - here's yet another document from 1992 which mentions over 5000 unexplained Chinese UFO reports (400,000 worldwide) and describes how, in 1978, "the United Nations called on the governments of all countries to be on full alert for sightings and establish UFO investigation bodies."





Title: UFO RESEARCH CONFERENCE TO HOLD CONFERENCE IN BEIJING

Origin: CIA

Source: People's Republic of China

To: Numerous recipients including Wright-Patterson AFB

Date: April 16, 1992




Link


Cheers.

[edit on 02/10/08 by karl 12]



posted on May, 31 2010 @ 10:12 AM
link   

Originally posted by easynow
for anyone interested, here's some fun quotes from a CIA article,


At the same time, Chadwell looked into British efforts in this area. He learned the British also were active in studying the UFO phenomena. An eminent British scientist, R. V. Jones, headed a standing committee created in June 1951 on flying saucers. Jones' and his committee's conclusions on UFOs were similar to those of Agency officials: the sightings were not enemy aircraft but misrepresentations of natural phenomena. The British noted, however, that during a recent air show RAF pilots and senior military officials had observed a "perfect flying saucer.



Easynow, great post there mate and some of those debunking methods do seem pretty familiar (link).


There's a good article below which goes into more detail about American and British UFO concerns in the early 1950's and Dr David Clarke covers some of the incidents responsible for the MOD's reversal of policy in his book:

'The UFO Files - The Inside Story of Real Life Sightings' (3rd link down - quickview).




DSI/JTIC Report No 7:


In chapter 17 Ruppelt reveals that even after he had left Project Blue Book and the USAF, friends in RAF intelligence kept him informed about latest developments, on a private basis.

Another indication of the strong US influence on the Flying Saucer Working Party is the fact that their June 1951 final report was entitled Unidentified Flying Objects. This term had been devised by Ruppelt himself, early in 1951, but was not at the time in use outside US Government circles.

..The Flying Saucer Working Party had been dissolved in 1951 amidst a frenzy of scepticism that had clearly been fuelled by the Americans. The response that Churchill received to his 1952 enquiry showed that the sceptics still had the upper hand within the MOD. But this was soon to change.During the period 1952 to 1957 there were a series of UFO sightings involving the military, which forced the MOD to rethink and then reverse its policy. These included sightings during Operation Mainbrace in September 1952 (including those at RAF Topcliffe), the West Malling incident on 3 November 1953, Flight Lieutenant Salandin’s near-collision with a UFO on 14 October 1954, the Lakenheath/Bentwaters radar/visual sightings on 13 and 14 August 1956 and the RAF West Freugh incident on 4 April 1957.

High-profile sightings such as these, together with the increasing number of reports from the general public, pushed the sceptics within MOD onto the defensive. The Flying Saucer Working Party’s recommendation that UFO sightings should not be investigated was overturned and by the mid-Fifties two Air Ministry Divisions were actively involved in investigating UFO sightings. The divisions concerned were S6, a civilian secretariat division on the air staff, and DDI(Tech), a technical intelligence division. Their brief was to research and investigate the UFO phenomenon looking for evidence of any threat to the UK.


Link


Cheers.


[edit on 02/10/08 by karl 12]



posted on May, 31 2010 @ 10:51 AM
link   
reply to post by King Triad
 


King Triad, thanks for the reply and it certainly is an interesting subject (although at times can be a little frustrating).





Title: CIA UFO document relating to UFOs & the Soviet Union.

Origin: CIA.

To: Blacked out

Date: September 8, 1971

Length: 1 page.

Classification: Unknown





[url=http://www.ufologie.net/htm/foia52.htm]The most ridiculous ever declassified _/url]


Cheers.

[edit on 02/10/08 by karl 12]



posted on May, 31 2010 @ 11:39 AM
link   

Originally posted by karl 12
reply to post by King Triad
 


King Triad, thanks for the reply and it certainly is an interesting subject (although at times can be a little frustrating).





Title: CIA UFO document relating to UFOs & the Soviet Union.

Origin: CIA.

To: Blacked out

Date: September 8, 1971

Length: 1 page.

Classification: Unknown

[url=http://www.ufologie.net/htm/foia52.htm]The most ridiculous ever declassified _/url]



Hi karl 12, it sorely can be a little frustrating now and then, but this document example proofs very clear how black those UFO/ET projects in reality are, even their UFO documents are black.



posted on Jun, 2 2010 @ 04:44 AM
link   
reply to post by spacevisitor
 


Spacevisitor -good call!


The History Channel's 'UFO Files' also made some pretty good episodes about the subject - I think my favourite one was 'Black Box secrets' but there's an interesting one here dealing with the CIA and the Robertson panel.





Cheers



posted on Jun, 2 2010 @ 12:12 PM
link   

Originally posted by karl 12
reply to post by spacevisitor
 


Spacevisitor -good call!


The History Channel's 'UFO Files' also made some pretty good episodes about the subject -...


I hope you realize that TV networks fund such programs in order to sell time to advertisers looking for the most gullible, easily-deceived target audience they can reach.



posted on Jun, 2 2010 @ 12:15 PM
link   
It's not like we needed any confirmation for the governments intentions to censor/ridicule/outright lie about ufo and alien cases that deserve some credit.



posted on Jun, 2 2010 @ 01:27 PM
link   

Originally posted by JimOberg
I hope you realize that TV networks fund such programs in order to sell time to advertisers looking for the most gullible, easily-deceived target audience they can reach.



I'm sure many UFO cynics are also gullible and easily deceived - especialy when dealing with 'official' government UFO explanations like these:


USAF "force fit" debunks.


As for the 'UFO Files', some of their programmes did cover some very intriguing cases - the episode dealing with the Colares incident was very interesting and, as mentioned above, I also thought the 'Black Box Secrets' episode was quite a good one.


I don't know if you've ever bothered to look into reports concerning the USO subject but they also made a good programme below dealing with sightings from ships and aircraft encounters over Japan, this episode is also well worth a watch.





Continued


[edit on 02/10/08 by karl 12]



posted on Jun, 3 2010 @ 03:21 AM
link   
reply to post by karl 12
 


LOL ...this is priceless...


How To Debunk Just About Anything

www.bibleufo.com...



familiar is an understatement, it's bloody obvious


the eager non-believers are a funny bunch ain't they ?

thanks for the link to the "Commentary" article, that's good info and is more proof the shadow government that controlled the secrets was doing everything they could to maintain the cover up.

this is interesting...


“He went on to say, that following the lead given by the Americans on this subject, the Report should he thought, have as little publicity as possible and outside circulation should be confined to one copy to Sir Henry Tizard”.

We should point out that in this context the terms “publicity” and “outside circulation” refer to publicity and distribution of the report within the MOD. There was certainly no question of informing the public.



this must be the story about the "perfect flying saucer" ?!

good work on finding that, thanks


[edit on 3-6-2010 by easynow]



posted on Jun, 15 2010 @ 05:28 AM
link   

Originally posted by easynow

“He went on to say, that following the lead given by the Americans on this subject, the Report should he thought, have as little publicity as possible and outside circulation should be confined to one copy to Sir Henry Tizard”.

We should point out that in this context the terms “publicity” and “outside circulation” refer to publicity and distribution of the report within the MOD. There was certainly no question of informing the public.



this must be the story about the "perfect flying saucer" ?!

good work on finding that, thanks



Hey bud -it´s not surprising they suggested the incident should be given ´as little publicity as possible´-there were also serious questions raised about another British MOD ´saucer´ report which happened in the same year:




The Little Rissington UFO Incident - October, 1952.


The evidence suggests that in addition to the testimony of the two pilots, two separate radars had tracked an UFO and this resulted in the scramble of interceptor aircraft. How could the Air Ministry claim, so quickly after the events, that they had 'discounted any possibility' of extraterrestrial objects? Where are the records of the official investigation into this incident that were evidently seen both by Sir Peter Horsley and by Air Commodore Swiney as recently as the 1970s? If there was nothing to hide, then why was this incident kept secret for half a century?

Link



Cheers.





new topics
top topics
 
22
<< 1  2    4  5 >>

log in

join