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.

 

James Carrion - "Announcing The Center for UFO Truth"

page: 5
22
<< 2  3  4    6  7 >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Jul, 4 2010 @ 10:21 PM
link   
reply to post by easynow
 


If Niccawhois wants to discuss the post with me then he's welcome to do so.

reply to post by spacevisitor
 




Therefore, it looks more to me as if James Carrion has changed his agenda dramatically, and that he has become a member of those who are doing their upmost best to let anyone believe for decades now that those UFO’s/UAP’s/Flying Dragons/Metallic Discs/Ezekiel's Wheel/glowing wheels/great silver shields, has definitely nothing to do or has no connection at all with “highly intelligent extraterrestrial non human beings” but that they are “purposely created by the United States and its allies as part of a cold war operation and perpetuated to this day for national security reasons".


Again, the UFO subject and UFO sightings are two different things. I think Carrion is asking some very important questions but sadly many people misinterpret (willfully?) what he's saying.



Speaking of buckets, it seems that some of the UFO blogs out there can’t understand why my research focuses on these three pivotal UFO cases and have suggested that I am discounting the reported sightings that have occurred before and after 1947. In other words, for them the entire spectrum of UFO data must be thrown into the same bucket from which some universal explanation must be extracted. Well that is the approach Ufology has used for the last 60 plus years and which has resulted in absolutely no conclusive proof of anything.



From Carrions latest blogging.

[edit on 4-7-2010 by cripmeister]




posted on Jul, 4 2010 @ 11:03 PM
link   
reply to post by cripmeister
 



If Niccawhois wants to discuss the post with me then he's welcome to do so.


i asked a question and if you don't want to answer it that's fine but if your not willing to discuss what you said in this thread with me or anyone else then perhaps you should have a private conversation with him via U2U.



posted on Jul, 4 2010 @ 11:53 PM
link   

sadly many people misinterpret


if it's anyones fault for misinterpreting what he wrote it's his


this is what he said...



was the UFO subject purposely created by the United States


he didn't say a fake counter intelligence ufo subject, he said "The UFO Subject"



posted on Jul, 5 2010 @ 01:01 AM
link   

Originally posted by easynow



sadly many people misinterpret


if it's anyones fault for misinterpreting what he wrote it's his


this is what he said...



was the UFO subject purposely created by the United States


he didn't say a fake counter intelligence ufo subject, he said "The UFO Subject"


Was there a UFO subject prior to Roswell?



posted on Jul, 5 2010 @ 01:07 AM
link   
in what sense, context or terms are you posing the question ? and how come i have to answer your question but you don't have to answer mine ?




Again, the UFO subject and UFO sightings are two different things.


are ufo sightings not part of the ufo subject ?




[edit on 5-7-2010 by easynow]



posted on Jul, 5 2010 @ 01:10 AM
link   
reply to post by easynow
 
Based on the 'mission statement' posted by IsaacKoi, it'd difficult to see exactly what new ground C.U.T. will cover.

*1* To research the UFO Subject through authenticated official United States government documents
*2* To research the UFO Subject through authenticated official documents of other world governments
*3* To prove the theory that UFOs originated as an intelligence operation by the United States and its allies during the Cold War and that intelligence agencies continue to promote the UFO myth for national security reasons.


They'll be looking at the same US Govt documents other UFO researchers have looked at. The same documents available, for the most part, on sites likeNICAP, Black Vault and Ufologie.. In fact, the same documents discussed in books by Friedman, Dolan, Good and Randle et al.

The documents from other govts is quite the same, but more pertinent to *3* in the mission statement. Many of us have read the available documents. I've got folders of UK, Canadian, French, New Zealand, Sweden and Brazilian official documents. Several members have many more.Flying Saucery discusses the Condign Reports.

It seems obvious that *3* is at least partially true. Some agencies have promoted a UFO myth.

However, Carrion's conclusion appears to be at odds with the history of official UFO investigations. What seems implausible is that so many agencies in the 50s and 60s were involved in investigating UFOs. Project Sign, Grudge, Blue Book and Robertson Panel etc. Even Hoover's CIA are on record as showing an interest. These reports actively sought to cast doubt on the existence of UFOs. In that sense, I fail to see the advantage of creating a myth, supporting it and then investigating it with a predefined conclusion that they don't exist. Further to that, they then tried to hide the evidence of the investigations from the public. Is that the same public that was supposed to be enticed and enchanted by the 'UFO myth?!'

One more thing that seems understated in CUT's mission statement...it's the familiar US-centric perspective that works on the assumption that the US or US Agencies are the single influence in the world. Were UFO reports across Soviet Russia created by US Agencies? China? Europe? South America? One document I have reports a UFO sighting by Idi Amin (Ugandan dictator)...a spherical object leaving a lake in Uganda. Have the US agencies engineered these events?

Anything new that Carrion/CUT discovers will be welcome as usual, but at first glance, he seems to have his cart before the horse.



posted on Jul, 5 2010 @ 05:45 AM
link   

Originally posted by cripmeister

Originally posted by easynow

sadly many people misinterpret

if it's anyones fault for misinterpreting what he wrote it's his this is what he said...

was the UFO subject purposely created by the United States

he didn't say a fake counter intelligence ufo subject, he said "The UFO Subject"

Was there a UFO subject prior to Roswell?


Cripmeister:



Was there a UFO subject prior to Roswell?


Yes:

- Arnold: June 1947

- Roswell: July 1947

Kind regards
Maybe...maybe not



posted on Jul, 5 2010 @ 06:16 AM
link   
reply to post by Kandinsky
 



They'll be looking at the same US Govt documents other UFO researchers have looked at.


thanks Kandinsky for the great post


i agree with everything you said and i don't know where Carrion thinks he is going to find ufo documents nobody else has seen yet and the fact he announced this adventure before looking was dumb and proves this wasn't the greatest idea he ever had



ps

i never got a reply back from APFU and i was wondering if you did ?

[edit on 5-7-2010 by easynow]



posted on Jul, 5 2010 @ 06:30 AM
link   
reply to post by Maybe...maybe not
 



Yes:- Arnold: June 1947- Roswell: July 1947


he's saying "the UFO subject and UFO sightings are two different things"






and the 1942 battle of L.A. ufo was wayyy before Roswell




brumac.8k.com...
www.rense.com...
en.wikipedia.org...



[edit on 5-7-2010 by easynow]



posted on Jul, 5 2010 @ 12:57 PM
link   

Originally posted by cripmeister
Again, the UFO subject and UFO sightings are two different things. I think Carrion is asking some very important questions but sadly many people misinterpret (willfully?) what he's saying.


In the link you provided he said the following.


My bucket list is really simple – I want to know the truth about three famous UFO cases – Maury Island, Kenneth Arnold’s sighting and Roswell, all occurring within the span of a single month in 1947. Why these three? Well because they all occurred around the same time that an allied top secret weapons project, on par with the atomic bomb, and possibly airborne was leaked to the news media.

Authenticated documents show that the two principal scientists involved in this alleged top secret project purposely used the media to spread disinformation about the project.


I am just curious, but do you know about what allied top secret weapons project he speaks here and where I can find those authenticated documents of it?



posted on Jul, 5 2010 @ 01:05 PM
link   
reply to post by Kandinsky
 


Thanks for this really clear and interesting post Kandinsky.
Strrd.



posted on Jul, 5 2010 @ 01:16 PM
link   
reply to post by spacevisitor
 
I wonder if the documents relate to Project Sign? It was subverted to support the idea that UFOs were without evidence. It later became Project Grudge in the following year and really set out to destroy the public's understanding of UFOs.

In terms of the 1947 secret weapons, the Trinity Tests began in 1945. Maybe a delivery system like ICBMs was being tested?

CUT and Carrion only have access to the same files as anyone else so I wonder why they don't provide their sources?



posted on Jul, 5 2010 @ 01:25 PM
link   


Subject

noun |ˈsəbjəkt|
1 a person or thing that is being discussed, described, or dealt with : I've said all there is to be said on the subject | he's the subject of a major new biography.
• a person or circumstance giving rise to a specified feeling, response, or action : the incident was the subject of international condemnation.
• Grammar a noun phrase functioning as one of the main components of a clause, being the element about which the rest of the clause is predicated.
• Logic the part of a proposition about which a statement is made.
• Music a theme of a fugue or of a piece in sonata form; a leading phrase or motif.
• a person who is the focus of scientific or medical attention or experiment.
2 a branch of knowledge studied or taught in a school, college, or university.
3 a citizen or member of a state other than its supreme ruler.
4 Philosophy a thinking or feeling entity; the conscious mind; the ego, esp. as opposed to anything external to the mind.
• the central substance or core of a thing as opposed to its attributes.


The UFO subject involves 1 and 2. Then there's the UFO discourse, the formalized way of thinking about the subject - how events are interpreted. These early cases basically set the discourse used in communicating the modern UFO myth. Take out the Arnold sighting and Roswell and the discourse would have been completely different - no crashed saucers, no Greys etc to build the discourse upon.

Actually I think Carrion should have taken the discourse approach as it's more precise. IF one can find proof that these early events were staged by the U.S government (broadly speaking) to cover up whatever, then one can also safely say that it was key in creating the UFO discourse.

Then again reality is usually much more complex and the discourse is likely the product of many things. I still think Carrion is going in the right direction, back to the beginning.



posted on Jul, 5 2010 @ 01:36 PM
link   

Originally posted by easynow
and the 1942 battle of L.A. ufo was wayyy before Roswell







Hi easynow, did you read what he said about that.


As an example of how important it is to compartmentalize data as well as examine other events surrounding them, consider the 1942 Raid over Los Angeles that many Ufologists believe to be a UFO event.

Studying just what occurred on February 25, 1942 while ignoring the events that surround that day is inexcusable.

Ufologists gloss over the fact that the very first attack on US soil during World War 2 occurred two days before on February 23, 1942 when a Japanese sub shelled Ellwood Oil Field near Santa Barbara, California, causing Californians to believe that a Japanese invasion was imminent.

What makes more sense, an extraterrestrial craft flying over Los Angeles or unnerved gunners already expecting Japanese bombers, shooting at whatever was crossing the sky that night?

Unidentified? Yes. Extraterrestrial? Unlikely.

Critical minds will see the logic; believers will see what they want to see.


I think it’s obvious that he put himself into that critical minds group, and I have no problem with that of course.

I only wonder what his critical mind did say to him about the following.


Whatever it was, it was a sitting duck for the guns of the 37th. Photographs showed shells bursting all around it.
A Los Angeles Herald Express staffer said he was sure many shells hit it directly.
He was amazed it had not been shot down.

The object that triggered the air raid alarm had drawn 1430 rounds of ammunition from the coast artillery, to no effect.
When it moved at all, the object had proceeded at a leisurely pace over the coastal cities between Santa Monica and Long Beach, taking about 30 minutes of actual flight time to move 20 miles; then it disappeared from view.


www.ufoevidence.org...

If it was not extraterrestrial as he said, but what I as a believer think it was, what on Earth could survive such a hammering then?



[edit on 5/7/10 by spacevisitor]



posted on Jul, 5 2010 @ 01:43 PM
link   
reply to post by cripmeister
 



Then again reality is usually much more complex and the discourse is likely the product of many things. I still think Carrion is going in the right direction, back to the beginning.


You're right, the UFO subject is complex and then some. If Carrion begins in 1947, he's missing the start of the show. Flying Saucers...discs...were part of popular consciousness in the West for 20 years before Arnold. If we step aside from the saucers, large craft in the skies were documented (sort of reliably) from the 1880s.



posted on Jul, 5 2010 @ 01:58 PM
link   
reply to post by Kandinsky
 




You're right, the UFO subject is complex and then some. If Carrion begins in 1947, he's missing the start of the show. Flying Saucers...discs...were part of popular consciousness in the West for 20 years before Arnold. If we step aside from the saucers, large craft in the skies were documented (sort of reliably) from the 1880s.


But the discourse (the modern UFO myth) isn't built around those cases, it's built around Roswell no?

[edit on 5-7-2010 by cripmeister]



posted on Jul, 5 2010 @ 02:27 PM
link   
reply to post by cripmeister
 
Who's discourse?



posted on Jul, 5 2010 @ 03:03 PM
link   
reply to post by Kandinsky
 




Who's discourse?


The Roswell > crashed saucer > captured aliens > alien abductions bla bla bla discourse. Without it we wouldn't even be having this discussion.



posted on Jul, 5 2010 @ 03:04 PM
link   

Originally posted by easynow
reply to post by Maybe...maybe not
 



Yes:- Arnold: June 1947- Roswell: July 1947


he's saying "the UFO subject and UFO sightings are two different things"


Easynow.....

No worries.....I understood that context.


On the one hand.....

Arnold's sighting could be seen to have sparked some of the popular awareness of the topic & some of the vernacular.

On the other hand.....

I was being a little humurous in that it only happened 1 month prior to Roswell.

I agree that Roswell is / was the "Big Kahoona" that burned this topic into the psyche of so many, for better or for worse.

Regarding the battle of LA.....

Did you catch the extensive discussion on last weekend's ATS Live about that? Very interesting.....

Kind regards
Maybe...maybe not

[edit on 5-7-2010 by Maybe...maybe not]



posted on Jul, 5 2010 @ 03:07 PM
link   
reply to post by Kandinsky
 


Kandinsky.....

Thank you for your thoughtful, well expressed reply in this most interesting of threads.


Kind regards
Maybe...maybe not




top topics



 
22
<< 2  3  4    6  7 >>

log in

join