Leslie Kean: UFOs: Generals, Pilots and Government Officials Go On the Record (new book)

Originally posted by JimOberg
I've seen that photo before and thought I'd read that it was explained satisfactorilly as the tail wing of the airliner, viewed at a sharply oblique angle through the multi-paned window that distorted the higher-angle image. Anybody else hear that too?

Yes, as I explained in the thread I made on that film:

The Oldfield UFO Film - Evidence that some UFOs are mirages

Which many people in addition to perhaps Leslie Kean would like to forget because they apparently don't think we can learn from UFO reports which have been explained, but I do. I think it supports a couple of points you made in the excellent previous post you made:

Originally posted by JimOberg
4. Kean's book, in my view, suffers from major shortcomings and misunderstandings that render its conclusions -- "UFOs are real physical objects that deserve high-level government respect" -- invalid.

So is it a real physical object? It sure looks like one, and the answer I think is yes and no. The plane's tail that caused the image is a real physical object, and the light rays coming from into the camera are just as real as the light rays from another plane in the sky. What's NOT real is the illusion those light rays create, but I think too many people get confused between the words "delusion" and "illusion" (because they both end in -usion perhaps?), as apparently is the case in this post in the parallel thread running on Leslie Kean's book:

www.abovetopsecret.com...

Originally posted by BlasteR
So you mean to tell me that the millions and millions of these people, commercial pilots, military pilots, police officers, astronauts, cosmonauts, teachers, engineers, politicians, physicists and other military members from various backgrounds, are all either jumping to conclusions or suffering from some inexplicable form of mass delusion?

Nope, not a delusion I suspect, but something that's actually seen and misinterpreted or not fully understood in some cases (though perhaps not all).

Originally posted by JimOberg 22.
None of these arguments can prove that the reports Kean promotes cannot be genuinely unexplainable, even alien in nature. The only logical assertion a skeptical view can establish is that the reports don't HAVE to be caused by aliens or unknown phenomena.

One of the reasons I find that Oldfield film particularly compelling is that it's one of the only documented videos I'm aware of that actually seems to show the performance characteristics that witnesses sometimes describe that seems to rule out terrestrial explanations, like Leslie Kean's comment on the Colbert interview that:

"There are objects in the sky that fly around that demonstrate extraordinary capacities to do things we can't do here on Earth"-Leslie Kean, on Colbert show.

How many other films do we know of that document this type of behavior reported by witnesses? We were lucky enough to find the explanation for that motion on that film, but far too often this behavior is reported by witnesses, and the claim is repeated by people like Leslie Kean, without acknowledging other possible explanations. Like this example:

The witness (a pilot) says at 1 minute 45 seconds in the video, that the object "took off" when in fact it didn't take off. We happen to know that in this video, but videos like this where the witness says that the object "took off" and we can explain the sighting, aren't that common.

video.google.com...#

Google Video Link

I think we can learn from the solved UFO reports like this one, in addition to the unsolved ones. The pilot isn't delusional, he isn't lying, he's honestly reporting what he sees, or thinks he sees. Yet too many people will accept his testimony or other testimony like this at face value because he's a "trained pilot", when in fact, we should question everything, even non-hoaxed images captured on film like the Oldfield video.

[edit on 25-8-2010 by Arbitrageur]

Let's also not forget my list of faux-UFOs from
the 'Weinstein List', posted on this thread earlier, at
www.abovetopsecret.com...

Dear colleagues.
 
Leslie Kean was interviewed today at WPR (Wisconsin Public Radio). I have recorded audio, edited it without commercial and archived. Listeners were also able to call and ask the questions during the show.
 
Besides her book "UFOs: Generals, Pilots and Government Officials Go On the Record" some of the subjects that are also covered during the show were:
 
- Leslie's comments her appearance on The Colbert Report
- The COMETA Report
- Belgian UFO Wave 1989-1990
- O'Hare incident, FAA tapes & Air Safety issues 
- GEIPAN & CEFAA
- Cash-Landrum Incident
- Project Blue Book
- Ray Bowyer - Channel Islands Sighting
- Parviz Jafari - Iran UFO Incident - 1976
- National Press Club Conference on UFOs - November 12, 2007
etc...
 
Show is uploaded so you can download it here:
Download link:
www.adrive.com...
 
 
Best Wishes


[edit on 26-8-2010 by uforadio]

My MSNBC analysis of Kean book is on line

www.msnbc.msn.com...

It was funny.. my wife is really only very vaguely interested in UFOs (because I am..), but has put a radio by her computer, and was listening to the Coast to Coast show. It caught her interest, and she heard about the book and ordered it for me in secret. She had no idea if it was any good, or anything about it at all.

Was surprised to get it. Been reading it though.. they need more books like this. Books like this are very solid for the ufo community and non-believers alike.

Source: ufosontherecord.com...

Leslie Kean on Fox's "Happening Now"...

So MSNBC hired you (Oberg) to debunk UFOs? Great...

I think the book was great. She didn't claim to know what UFOs are, but rather provided proof that they simply exist. The U.S. Government would rather deny they exist at all...

Leslie Kean's book is now on the 29th place in the New York Times Bestseller list:

www.nytimes.com...

ufosontherecord.com...

Also Leslie has confirmed during her appearance on August 31st on the Kevin Smith Show that she is preparing rebutall article mentioned above.

Best Wishes.

Originally posted by ufo reality
So MSNBC hired you (Oberg) to debunk UFOs? Great...

So... you keep fantasizing faux-facts for your own amusement?
Great... ;-)

Kean will be on MSNBC Saturday AM, tune in to see her.

Did anyone record her on MSNBC this morning?

Originally posted by ufo reality
Did anyone record her on MSNBC this morning?

I am also interested in more info on this. There is nothing in the MSNBC archive and Leslie haven't annouced that one, though, if it happened.

Still the most compelling thing out of all the information presented in Leslie Kean's new book for me is this:

www.youtube.com...

files.abovetopsecret.com...

files.abovetopsecret.com...

files.abovetopsecret.com...

I personally know James Penniston and I also know several of the people who worked with him at the time of the incident in 1980. He is a stand up guy, and I believe him 100%. Witness testimony from police holds a lot of weight in court, but for skeptics when it comes to UFOs it doesn't?

[edit on 6-9-2010 by ufo reality]

I wouldn't be surprised to find out this Leslie Kean once worked for the CIA or Department of Naval Intelligence like John Lear and Hal Puthoff...

I find that story in the Original Post interesting as well. Let's pretend these unidentified flying objects are actually super technologies hidden from the general population AND the bulk of the American military by the American government for close to half a century.

Do you think it is possible that the Government has engineered all American aircraft with somekind of fail safe system to allow them to remotely shutdown the missile lock systems they use so they can't be fired on by their own people?

reply to post by ufo reality


Ufo reality....

At last.....

My copy of the book as ordered from Amazon has finally arrived!

On the one hand.....

I am looking forward to reviewing Kean's approach to this subject matter more broadly & the cases therein more specifically.

On the other hand.....

I am wondering if Kean will simply offer repetitive commentary pertaining to already known cases.

I will let you know what I think when I've finished the book.

Kind regards
Maybe...maybe not

Originally posted by uforadio
Leslie Kean's book is now on the 29th place in the New York Times Bestseller list:

www.nytimes.com...

ufosontherecord.com...

Also Leslie has confirmed during her appearance on August 31st on the Kevin Smith Show that she is preparing rebutall article mentioned above.

Best Wishes.

And as I mentioned in my previous before here is Leslie's reply to James Oberg's previous article:

Source: www.msnbc.msn.com...
 
Skeptic misses point behind UFO book
Solid sightings cited in ‘UFOs’; serious investigation needed
 
By Leslie Kean
 
When I wrote my book about officially documented UFO reports, I fully expected the skeptics to react. That’s why I was careful to focus only on the very best evidence from the most credible sources in "UFOs: Generals, Pilots and Government Officials Go on the Record." Since 95 percent of all sightings are eventually identified, the book is concerned only with the remaining 5 percent — those UFO events that have been thoroughly investigated, involve multiple witnesses and ample data, but still cannot be explained.

That didn’t stop James Oberg, a space analyst for NBC News, from complaining that the book was based on a “questionable foundation.”
In the biographical note appended to his commentary, he notes that he spent 22 years at NASA’s Mission Control and has written books about space policy and exploration. But he neglects to inform readers of something UFO researchers already know all too well: that he is a founding fellow of the Committee for Skeptical Inquiry (CSI, formerly CSICOP), a group whose aim is to debunk UFOs and any other unexplained phenomena that challenge our familiar ways of thinking.

For many years, Oberg, while retaining his stance as an objective student of the UFO phenomenon, has been a consistently vocal skeptic.  His long list of articles dealing with UFOs date from the 1970s and are posted on his website under the heading "space folklore,"  which accurately sums up his attitude towards the subject. He may be qualified to serve as an unbiased, expert consultant on Russian or Chinese missile systems, but not on UFOs.
His objection to my many varied cases has to do with his notion that pilots are poor observers. To buttress this idea, he quotes J. Allen Hynek referring to questionable statistics compiled in the 1960s by Project Blue Book.  He also cites Russian researchers describing two events in 1982 when pilot sightings were accurately identified as "military balloons" after the fact.

This is not surprising, since the vast majority of sightings can be explained, and this kind of identification is made all the time. However, such solved sightings — whether made by pilots or anyone else — have absolutely nothing to do with the cases presented in my book.
I wonder if Oberg gave "UFOs" a careful read. He spent many paragraphs quoting me concerning a report on aviation cases by French researcher Dominique Weinstein. The problem is, those are not my quotes. The chapter from which he extracted them was written by Jean-Jacques Velasco, head of the French government‘s UFO agency for over 20 years, as is obvious in his byline and narrative about French research.
 
Oberg gleefully proclaims that I have “faithfully vouched for” the cases in Weinstein's list, but actually, I have respectfully allowed Velasco to write his own chapter.  (About half the chapters in my book were written by highly credentialed authorities and expert witnesses.) If Oberg wants to discuss the Weinstein study, he'll have to contact Velasco.
Oberg’s fixation on the question of the reliability of pilots as witnesses is not raised by the generals and aviation experts I have interviewed — officials who have studied pilot cases and interviewed pilot witnesses for decades.  As described in "UFOs," French Air Force Maj. Gen. Denis Letty initiated an extensive study of UFO data because competent pilots he knew personally were confronted by the phenomenon. Chilean Gen. Ricardo Bermudez was instrumental in the founding of his country‘s official UFO investigative agency in 1997 because of inexplicable sightings involving pilots.
Richard Haines, who has written more than 70 papers in leading scientific journals and published more than 25 U.S. government reports for NASA, was formerly chief of the space agency's Space Human Factors Office and served for 21 years as a retired senior aerospace scientist at NASA's Ames Research Center. Having studied pilot sightings and related aviation safety issues for more than 30 years, and having personally interviewed hundreds of pilots during that time, Haines has concluded that pilots are indeed excellent witnesses, given their thorough training, expertise and hours of flying time.

Haines is now chief scientist for the National Aviation Reporting Center on Anomalous Phenomena. Sadly, most pilots never report their sightings, as he points out in "UFOs."

Most importantly, the aerial cases documented in "UFOs" — and many more on the record elsewhere — involve multiple factors such as:

• Sightings of long duration, allowing for accurate voice transmissions and the refinement of the initial identification.
• Multiple witnesses — co-pilot, crew, passengers, other aircraft in different locations, and occasionally observers from the ground.
• Onboard radar and ground radar recording the presence of a physical object, often corresponding exactly to the visual sighting.
• Direct physical effects on the aircraft, such as equipment malfunction.

As an example, Brig. Gen. Jose Periera of Brazil, commander of air force operations until 2005, reports on an "array of UFOs" observed over his country in 1986. Two pilots chased one of the objects for 30 minutes. Numerous other pilots saw the objects. Radar recorded them. Six jets were scrambled from two Brazilian air force bases to pursue them. Some of the pilots made visual contact corresponding to radar registrations. Both military and commercial pilots were involved. Onboard as well as ground radar systems confirmed the presence of the objects.

“We have the correlation of independent readings from different sources,” Periera writes. “These data have nothing to do with human eyes. When, along with the radar, a pilot‘s pair of eyes sees that same thing, and then another pilot‘s, and so on, the incident has real credibility and stands on a solid foundation.”

In 2007, airline captain Ray Bowyer saw two gigantic, bright yellow objects suspended over the English Channel, which he observed carefully for 15 minutes. His passengers saw them, another pilot on a second aircraft was also a witness, and an object was registered on radar.
In 1986, three Japan Airlines pilots watched a series of UFOs for 30 minutes, communicating with air traffic control while radar operators picked up the objects in corresponding locations.

I could go on with many more examples, presented in detail in the book.
Oberg says pilots may misinterpret visual phenomena when forced to make a split-second diagnosis before taking immediate action — very rare cases, I would assume — and no one would disagree with that. But, just as was the case with the solved Russian sightings I discussed earlier, this is entirely beside the point with respect to my book, because the cases presented do not involve such a scenario.

In addition, "UFOs: General, Pilots and Government Officials Go on the Record" presents many other cases that do not involve pilots at all — but often military personnel and police officers — including:

• The famous 1980 incident near RAF Bentwaters in Britain, involving the landing of a UFO and objects sending beams of light to the ground.
• The 1981 "Trans-en-Provence" landing case in France, investigated by the official French agency GEPAN.
• Belgian Maj. Gen. Wilfried De Brouwer‘s report on the wave of sightings in Belgium in 1989-90, which includes a spectacular photograph.
• The 1993 "Cosford Incident" involving a UFO over two Air Force bases in Britain, investigated by the Ministry of Defense.
• The 1997 Phoenix Lights incident that former Arizona Gov. Fife Symington described.

These are just a few of a host of cases with abundant data that don't rely on pilot observations — and which are still unsolved. It‘s the aggregate of cases, the accumulation of evidence and the long-running but unsuccessful attempts of qualified experts to resolve them that establishes the reality of a yet-unexplained physical phenomenon with extraordinary capabilities.
Oberg says that "if investigators are unable to find the explanation for a particular UFO case, that doesn't constitute proof that the case is unexplainable.” Fair enough. Perhaps there is some prosaic explanation still to be discovered. There‘s always that possibility, no matter how small.
But we remain in a state of ignorance concerning UFOs, leaving us with the conclusion presented in the book: We need a systematic, scientific investigation of the skies that actively looks for these mysterious and elusive objects.  In the meantime, all I ask is that devout skeptics like Oberg read the entire book before raising objections that actually have no bearing on the matter at hand.

Investigative journalist Leslie Kean is the author of the New York Times bestseller "UFOs: General, Pilots and Government Officials Go on the Record" (Harmony/Crown).  Her work has appeared in many publications including The Nation, International Herald Tribune and the Boston Globe.  She is also the co-author of “Burma’s Revolution of the Spirit” and co-founder of the Coalition for Freedom of Information.
© 2010 MSNBC Interactive.  Reprints

New article about Kean-Oberg exchange:

www.livescience.com...

Best Wishes

Isn't it curious that when James Oberg writes about UFOs -- be it critiquing a book, a case or the whole subject -- he always neglects to mention he's a fellow in the Committee for Skeptical Inquiry (formerly CSICOP)?

He also fails to mention his credentials as a Captain in the Air Force. Oberg doesn't mention it because that would raise suspicions among those who are aware of the history of secrecy, cover-ups, disinformation and ridicule campaigns on part of the Air Force targeting the UFO subject and everyone who talks or writes about UFOs in a serious fashion.

Oberg was commissioned by NASA to debunk Moon landing conspiracy theories. He wrote a book for US Space Command about the importance for the United States to maintain military space dominance. For someone who thinks UFOs are unimportant prosaic objects or phenomena he spends a lot of time and effort trying to debunk it. Or maybe he was commissioned to do that as well?

James Oberg worked at Kirtland Air Force base in New Mexico on classified projects. He was a "security officer". Hey Jim did you meet Rick Doty?

Originally posted by uforadio
New article about Kean-Oberg exchange:

www.livescience.com...

Best Wishes

edit on 9-9-2010 by uforadio because: (no reason given)

geez, another idiot reporter. Especially liked his comments at the end about seeing a balloon, or bag or saran wrap and then claiming he saw a ufo. Or what ever tripe that was...

Kean showed true class in her response to O'Berg. Avoiding the ad hominem attacks and "holier-than-thou" attitude that always comes from O'berg....

Originally posted by KerbDune
Isn't it curious that when James Oberg writes about UFOs -- be it critiquing a book, a case or the whole subject -- he always neglects to mention he's a fellow in the Committee for Skeptical Inquiry (formerly CSICOP)?
.....

James Oberg worked at Kirtland Air Force base in New Mexico on classified projects. He was a "security officer". Hey Jim did you meet Rick Doty?

All this neat stuff you imply I'm trying to conceal -- where exactly did you learn about it?

How about -- from information posted on my home page www jamesoberg dot com?

Clever coverup technique, fer shoor.

reply to post by Toxicsurf


Toxicsurf.....

..geez, another idiot reporter.

Jim Oberg can be a little bit of a "straight shooter" at times, thereby ruffling just a few feathers here & there.

.....yeah.....just a couple, Jim! .....

However, if you have a good look at his work you will find he has brought some very useful information "onto the table".

I wouldn't simply label him as an "idiot reporter" because to do that & ignore his work is to exclude some very interesting & useful material.

Kind regards
Maybe...maybe not