X-15 Rocket Plane - UFO Encounters on the Edge of Space

page: 4
23
<< 1  2  3    5  6 >>

log in

join

posted on May, 9 2011 @ 09:12 PM
link   
This brings up something that ive been interested in. Im curious how many Alien craft NASA has discovered hovering/flying just outside of Earths atmosphere. The giant kind of ships, the motherships that cannot enter Earths atmosphere.




posted on May, 10 2011 @ 02:52 AM
link   

Originally posted by JimOberg
Point. Game. Match. Bye.

Point game match bye, already? Are you giving up so easily? You disappoint me. Oh come on, will you please keep fighting for your cases. I'm just asking you. It's of course up to you if you want to keep fighting for your cases or not.

Let's talk about White's controversial UFO sighting from the X-15. IF the public is supposed to believe the version of White's transcript put online, it's not clear what he saw. So don't you think it's wrong to conclude it was ice flake he saw? I think we need to see some Top Secret NASA documents and see what he actually saw, don't you think?

Among other photos put on by NASA, astronaut James McDevitt confirm that NASA's official photo is NOT what he saw in space (as previously presented). And you're right, it seems NASA 'airbrush' photos, which Donna Hare also confirm.

Do you finally admit that NASA is LYING, Mr. Oberg?

www.americanchronicle.com...


PUBLIC INFORMATION, DISINFORMATION

The Caretaker: "In order to protect all this information and the fact that the United States Government has evidence of our planet being visited by extraterrestrials, we developed over the years a very effective program to safeguard the information. We call it 'Project DOVE.' It is a complex series of operations by our military intelligence agencies to disinform the public."

www.bibliotecapleyades.net...


In a letter from Colonel CHARLES SENN, Chief of the Air Force Community Relations Division, to Lieutenant General Duward Crow of NASA, dated 1 September 1977, Colonel Senn made the following ASTONISHING statement:

"I sincerely HOPE that you are SUCCESFULD in PREVENTING a re-opening of UFO investigations."

www.olive-drab.com...


This photo was taken at the NASA Flight Research Center at Edwards Air Force Base, California on 6 May 1960 as part of an elaborate effort by the CIA to cover-up the true nature of the U-2 spy plane program. On 1 May 1960 CIA pilot Francis Gary Powers was shot down over the Soviet Union during a spy flight. Cooperating with the CIA, NASA issued a press release with a cover story about a U-2 conducting weather research that may have strayed off course after the pilot "reported difficulties with his oxygen equipment." This photo shows a U-2 that was quickly painted in NASA markings, with a fictitious NASA serial number, and put on display for the news media at the Edwards NASA facility.

In reality, up to that time no U-2 was ever used by NASA. Unfortunately, Powers was captured by the Soviet Union and espionage equipment was recovered from the wreckage. Soviet Premier Nikita Khruschev exposed the cover-up and made much propaganda use of the American deception.

The upper section of this image is the black & white photo while the lower section has NASA logos in color and the wording: "Dryden Flight Center E-5442 Photographed 6MAY1960 / U-2 with fictitious NASA markings to support cover story for CIA / pilot Gary Powers, shot down over Soviet Union May 1 (NASA Photo)". In the photo, the sign on the building says "National Aeronautics and Space Administration Flight Research Center".
edit on 10-5-2011 by Anunaki10 because: (no reason given)



posted on May, 10 2011 @ 12:17 PM
link   
reply to post by Anunaki10
 


well seeing as you keep posting the same info over and over again , i will repeat my message to you before the Mods step in (hopefully )......

well all i can say is i feel sorry fro FlyingFish , the OP........
his thread has been hijacked into a head-banging match between someone who should have a little more manners and courtesy when addressing other members , (esp long-term members who are well known on this site as "knowing" their subjects VERY well. (Shadowhawk as an example. ). the level of your rudeness has been quite shocking , yet you expect people to keep contributing to this thread.

thanks OP and thanks Jim and Shadowhawk and to all who others whom have added real info and actual knowledge to this thread..

snoopyuk
edit on 10-5-2011 by snoopyuk because: more info



posted on May, 11 2011 @ 09:58 AM
link   

Originally posted by snoopyuk
Well all i can say is i feel sorry fro FlyingFish , the OP........
his thread has been hijacked into a head-banging match between someone who should have a little more manners and courtesy when addressing other members , (esp long-term members who are well known on this site as "knowing" their subjects VERY well. (Shadowhawk as an example. ). the level of your rudeness has been quite shocking , yet you expect people to keep contributing to this thread.

thanks OP and thanks Jim and Shadowhawk and to all who others whom have added real info and actual knowledge to this thread..

I appreciate your gratitude to us ATS members who have contributed with knowledge and facts (including those i presented during this thread). Just because 'FlyingFish' provided sources (Rudiak) that challenge Oberg's unsupported Ice Flake theory, there is no reason to be paranoid and accuse anyone for hijacking this thread, and so far so good and unfortunately 'Shadowhawk' provided NO source to back up his claims, so if 'Shadowhawk' want to make himself just a little bit reliable then he have to show some source to back up his claims, otherwise he make himself look like unreliable when he doesn't provide any source to back up his claim.
I admit i asked him a 'funny' question, but i also said that i'm not going to ask that question again, afterwards.
Yes, then i also questioned his intensions, but that's me, it's not against the law to question that. And who is to blame 'Shadowhawk's LACK of any source provided to support his claims? Only himself.

Yes, 'FlyingFish' provided source (Rudiak) that challenge Oberg's unsupported Ice Flake theory, and Rudiak doesn't seem to be the only one who does that www.virtuallystrange.net...


What is a fanatic? According to Webster's New World Dictionary of American English, 3rd College Edition, A fanatic is: unreasonably enthusiastic, overly zealous, Also fanatical, a person whose extreme zeal, piety etcetera, goes beyond what is reasonable; a Zealot.

Recently on the UFO UpDates List, James Oberg decided to enlighten us about what Major Robert White actually saw on July 17, 1962 while test-flying an X-15 for NASA.

Now for those of you who do not know the story, Major White reported that while on a 58 mile high flight, he saw something that he could not identify flying beside him as he observed out the left side of his aircraft. Now Maj. White said in a statement that he noticed other little things flying past him that he presumed had come from his aircraft but this object was about the size of his hand when he saw it… and… it stayed in view… as opposed to flying past him and out of sighT as debris flying off the aircraft would be wont to do.

So, Mr. Oberg decided to enlighten all of us on the UFO UpDates List by first claiming that what Major White saw was nothing more than a piece of ice flying off the plane and offered some interesting scientific evidence to back-up his claim. That is… until some of the other members of the list challenged Mr. Oberg's scientific data and shown how it was… errr… incorrect - and I'm being kind by using that term.

But does that deter our brave Mr. Oberg? Of course not. He comes back with a reported phone coversation with someone who knew Maj. White stating that it was of course ice because that is what HE was told it was. (Umm…good proof…can you say hearsay?)

So, quick, let's drop the ice theory and concentrate on paint flying off the nose of the craft. Once again, somebody quickly points out that unless Paint flecks have changed the laws of physics lately, it is highly dubious that they would be floating beside the plane for any period of time.

Well, Mr. Oberg has decided to prove to all of us that this object must have some kind of rational explanation and like a pit-bull on a rare steak, he's not giving it up.

The next thing Mr. Oberg does is put forth an OMNI magazine article talking with another astronaut who saw Satellites during his flights and discussed how strange they looked when he saw them. Although he didn't quite say that Major White mistook a satellite for something he couldn't recognize, he most definitely intimated it.

Once again, when the list members had shot this one down along with every single point that James Oberg made, what does he do? He posts again saying that he enjoyed the discussion and that he liked it when he was able to make all the "Fanatics" come forward to defend the UFO sighting.
Wait a second, let me re-cap. James Oberg proclaims that he has solved the UFO sighting by Major White and presents his very faulty evidence…but when he gets shot down after 3 tries, he calls the listmembers who shot him down the fanatics?

I'm sorry, James, but it appears to me that the only obvious fanatic in this whole exercise was you… but that's just my take on it!

By David D. Furlotte

I'm sure if 'FlyingFish' discovered this link about David Furlotte, i would say he would likely to have brought this up as well as he did with Rudiak. That's what i think.

And this thread is NOT hijacked by anyone.
edit on 11-5-2011 by Anunaki10 because: (no reason given)



posted on May, 13 2011 @ 01:53 PM
link   
MUFON UFO Journal, No. 259, November 1989 (Page 6 - 7) www.scribd.com...


X-15 UFO sightings

The second arena i selected for this article relating to UFO basics involves NASA. In 1962, during test flights of the X-15 out of Edwards AFB, there were two known occastions when their flights encountered UFOs. On one, a camera recorded two discs near the X-15 at an altitude of 200,000 feet. The encounters, i believe, are significant in that they suggest a UFO interest, not only in our early experimental aircraft in general, but in our high-altitude test flights with an outer space connection in particular.
The encounters are also significant because they come from a firsthand, qualified source who had been involved with the X-15 program as a coordinator of the flights, and who also saw the movie in question.
While these encounters made only spotty news at the time and contained incorrect details in NICAP records, my source, who visited my home on several occations, has provided ample backup papers, such as the flight chart of the incident with camera, various memorenda over his signature, and a list of NASA pilots and other personnel in the base, many of them future astronauts, including Neil Armstrong.
The source of this is a graduate engineer and pilot with approximately 1,000 flying hours in command. He is presently cleared secret, Special Access on the B-2 program. At the time of the sightings, he was a test engineer on the X-15 program at Edwards AFB, and in this position had virtually unlimited access to the X-15 aircraft, the flight line, hangars, flight test data, and the X-15 Flight Test Control Room. He was in daily contact with the pilots and ground crews.
Following, then, is my source's account of the X-15 UFO encounters with drawings showing their relative positions.

UFOs filmed

During a design altitude flight on April 30, 1962, two disk-shaped objects overlook the X-15 at an altitude of approximately 200,000 feet, while at a speed of approximately 3,400 mph. The X-15 had been launched from the vicinity of Mud Lake, Nevada, with Joseph A. Walker, NASA, at the controls. At the time of the sighting he was climbing at a pitch angle of approximately 30 degrees.

Walker sighted the two aircrafts passing overhead and reported to the NASA FRC Control Room at Edwards, >>Two UFOs just passed overhead!



posted on May, 13 2011 @ 02:28 PM
link   

Originally posted by Anunaki10
MUFON UFO Journal, No. 259, November 1989 (Page 6 - 7)


X-15 UFO sightings

....During a world altitude record flight on July 17, 1962, Major Robert M. White, USAF, reported to NASA FRC Control that "several" UFOs were flying in formation with him and were "like the color of paper". ....



Good find. Interesting that the description by White of what he saw was falsified by the author.

Compare with:
TIME magazine, July 27, 1962, pp. 12-13, entitled 'SPACE: Inside the Sky'


As White later described one 'thing': 'It looked like a piece of paper the size of my hand tumbling slowly outside the plane. It was greyish in color, and about 30 to 40 feet away. I haven't any idea what it could be.'


Can't have MUFON UFO Journal subscribers learning that White described the objects as "the size of my hand" maybe 30-40 feet away. No sirree, that inconvenient testimony just had better get deleted.



posted on May, 13 2011 @ 04:15 PM
link   

Originally posted by JimOberg
Good find. Interesting that the description by White of what he saw was falsified by the author.

Compare with:
TIME magazine, July 27, 1962, pp. 12-13, entitled 'SPACE: Inside the Sky'


As White later described one 'thing': 'It looked like a piece of paper the size of my hand tumbling slowly outside the plane. It was greyish in color, and about 30 to 40 feet away. I haven't any idea what it could be.'


Can't have MUFON UFO Journal subscribers learning that White described the objects as "the size of my hand" maybe 30-40 feet away.

It seems that Major Robert M. White, USAF, reported to NASA FRC Control that "several" UFOs were flying in formation with him and were "like the color of paper".
Can you prove that was falsified by the author? Remember, the author says the info came from a serious source.

As you said, the TIME Magazine says 'As White LATER described...', but that was AFTER the flight, it seems. And what make you think the version from TIME Magazine is true? Is the source, TIME Magazine used, trustworthy? Even IF that version is true, it's still after the flight.

Let's take a look at the author www.ufoevidence.org...


Brief Biography

Leonard Stringfield was born in 1920. He was director of CRIFO (Civilian Research, Interplanetary Flying Objects) - one of the world's largest research groups during the mid-5Os and publisher of its newsletter, ORBIT (1953-1957). He also worked in cooperation with the United States Air Force (1953-1957), investigating and reporting UFO activity, having been assigned a special code number to report by phone to the Air Defense Command in Columbus, Ohio. For over 30 years Stringfield served in several of the major UFO Organizations in a public relations capacity. From 1957 to 1970, he was public relations adviser with the National Investigations Committee on Aerial Phenomena. Later on it was director of public relations and board member of the Mutual UFO Network. He was also regional investigator for the Center for UFO Studies directed by Dr. J. Allen Hynek. Stringfield was an executive with DuBois Chemicals, an international manufacturer. Stringfield retired in 1981 as Director of Public Relations and Marketing Services for DuBois Chemicals, a division of Chemed, Corp, after 31 years service with the company. From 1967-1968 he served as an Early Warning Coordinator for the University of Colarado UFO Project, screening UFO reports for possible scientific study. Stringfield was also advisor to Sir Eric Gairy, former Prime Minister of Grenada, 1977-78, during his efforts to establish a UFO research agency within the framework of the United Nations. He passed away in 1994.

He seems serious enough. I think you made another wrong mistake, Mr. Oberg. I don't think he made it up.
And as MUFON UFO Journal points out, Leonard Stringfield is known for his research en.wikipedia.org...



posted on May, 13 2011 @ 04:24 PM
link   
When Stringfield made the report for MUFON but found an excuse NOT to add the details of White's testimony about the SMALL SIZE of the objects, he was falsifying -- deliberately or not -- the published version. How can you insist it was a fair and accurate -- and complete -- version?

Given the choice of the mutually inconsistent versions in the MUFON UFO Journal and by the professional aerospace editor at TIME -- in that period, my lifelong colleague and friend Jerry Hannifin -- I have to admit i'm not on the fence regarding my experience-based selection.

I'd like to follow up on the MUFON Journal report regarding the view from the aft camera and what the motion of the objects looked like. Let me try to find out the orientation and fields of view of the cameras and whether they really could see something 'overtaking' the aerospacecraft.

Again, good work on locating this citation. This is helpful, whereever it winds up.



posted on May, 13 2011 @ 05:01 PM
link   
I provided detailed quotes from Bob White in my earlier posts. All of my information comes from the original flight records and historical files held by NASA. There are files for every X-15 flight that include Flight Requests, tracking charts, mission transcripts, post-flight debriefs, and other information. None of this information is classified.

It's too bad that one troll has hijacked this thread, ignoring solid research data and insulting anyone who tries to present documented facts.



posted on May, 13 2011 @ 05:35 PM
link   

Originally posted by JimOberg
When Stringfield made the report for MUFON but found an excuse NOT to add the details of White's testimony about the SMALL SIZE of the objects, he was falsifying -- deliberately or not -- the published version. How can you insist it was a fair and accurate -- and complete -- version?

Wrong. You can't accuse Stringfield for finding an excuse for not to add the small sized objects reported in TIME Magazine, in case he didn't know about the report from TIME Magazine. IF he knew about the report from TIME Magazine, maybe he didn't buy into it, because he didn't trust that version? Good question. There could be a good chance that the source, TIME Magazine got their info from, might not be trustworthy.

Is there something you don't understand? Once again, the TIME Magazine says "As White LATER described...", and that means it was AFTER the flight.

You didn't answer my question. What make you think the version from TIME Magazine is true?

And remember, the TIME Magazine still says "As White LATER described...", and that still means it was still AFTER the flight.

The MUFON Journal's report says "During a world altitude record flight on July 17, 1962, Major Robert M. White, USAF, reported to NASA FRC Control that "several" UFOs were flying in formation with him and were "like the color of paper". Again, the writer and 20 other Control Room personnel overheard the conversation, although no other details were given at that time. White was in level (Zero-G) flight at his peak altitude of 314,000 feet; his speed was approximately 3,800 mph.
And that means it was DURING the flight, White reportedly reported it to NASA FRC Control. And NOT AFTER the flight.

So that means the alleged debrief with White (TIME Magazine) occoured after the flight was over, while White's report to NASA FRC Control (MUFON Journal) occoured during his flight while he was still up there.

Are you still struggling? The debrief occoured AFTER the flight was over, while the report to the FRC Control occoured during his flight while he was still up there.
edit on 13-5-2011 by Anunaki10 because: (no reason given)



posted on May, 13 2011 @ 05:41 PM
link   

Originally posted by Shadowhawk

Is it really so difficult for you to provide any source to back up your claims? So far so good you have NOT provided any source to back up your claims, which make you look unreliable, unfortunately for you.
And remember, always blame yourself for that.

And there is no reason to be paranoid and accuse anyone for hijacking this thread.
edit on 13-5-2011 by Anunaki10 because: (no reason given)



posted on May, 13 2011 @ 08:19 PM
link   

Originally posted by Anunaki10
The MUFON Journal's report says "During a world altitude record flight on July 17, 1962, Major Robert M. White, USAF, reported to NASA FRC Control that "several" UFOs were flying in formation with him and were "like the color of paper". Again, the writer and 20 other Control Room personnel overheard the conversation, although no other details were given at that time.


And you know twenty people heard the conversation, how?

Because ONE person told somebody who told somebody who published it?

Are you a deliberate self-parody of a UFO nvestigator?



posted on May, 13 2011 @ 08:38 PM
link   

Originally posted by JimOberg

Originally posted by flyingfish
After noting White’s comment that the paper-sized object seemed too big to be frost, Rudiak wrote, “So why did Oberg claim this was ice? White realised it couldn’t be ice. Furthermore, remember Oberg’s song and dance about this was ice formed from the rearward liquid oxygen tank or fuel lines? Obviously even if ice had survived and then later dislodged, it can’t move forward, one of the major objections to the ice theory from the beginning by the gullible UFO believers.”


Why can't it move forward? Only "obviously" NOT to somebody with his own 'song and dance', but no real knowledge of spaceflight.

All kinds of stuff was being flaked off or ejected from various vents and sheltered areas.

Don't forget this was in the same era as Glenn's "fireflies", and the degree to which manned spacecraft would be shedding all kinds of stuff once in space hadn't been appreciated. Later, of course, NASA got interested in keeping track of stuff seen outside the windows because it might be an indicator of a spacecraft malfunction -- as it most spectacularly was on Skylab-3.



Yo Jim, we have met. Please recall a long ago meeting with a very talented, skilled, and brilliant pilot from ED AFB North.
So now the paper sized object from the rear LOX tank, is now from a vent or sheltered area? And when you talk about "moving forward", please explain how this can happen with the altitude, and speed changes, with the direction of travel.

To the OP, nice thread, SnF The B-52 that was used was number 008 and is the oldest B-52 currently flying. The last time I officially saw her was in 1990 at Dryden Flight Research Center, Edwards, California
edit on 13-5-2011 by Violater1 because: (no reason given)



posted on May, 13 2011 @ 09:52 PM
link   
reply to post by Anunaki10
 


How many times do I have to post my sources? I keep telling you I took the information directly from the original X-15 flight records. What is so hard to understand? I quoted Bob White's original comments from the post-flight debrief transcript. Are you dense or just willfully ignorant?



posted on May, 13 2011 @ 11:10 PM
link   
reply to post by Anunaki10
 


You sound like another UFO investigator who does all his/her investigating by reading blogs, UFO websites and other unreliable sources. You just parrot what they say like most UFO believers....and feel it is right without doing any of your own work to find out facts.


Good Luck with your delusions of superiority over skeptics.
edit on 13-5-2011 by kerazeesicko because: (no reason given)



posted on May, 14 2011 @ 03:48 AM
link   

Originally posted by JimOberg

Is it really so difficult for you to answer a very simple question? You didn't answer my question. Once again, what make you think the version from TIME Magazine is true?

I tell you what, the source, TIME Magazine used is as much as trustworthy as this case magonia.haaan.com...


“Said heard of Gene May an X-15 pilot 5-8 years 15 min flight, yet came back 3 hours later. Said he was taken aboard UFO. Was examined by psychologist Edwards AFB Fellow at Vandenberg whom Bob knows, also knows Gene May. Douglas test pilot checking out X-15, 5-8 years [So I recounted Piccard. Urged he look for him….”

Wood was the Deputy Director for Research and Development at the Douglas Missile and Space Division at the time of the conversation. The source of the abduction story was a colleague who worked at Vandenberg AFB. Wood considered him to be “very reliable.” In Firestorm, Wood also said that his source knew May very well, who was described as having been involved with the X-15 program for several years. From the date of the conversation, and Wood’s account, the abduction supposedly took place between 1960 and 1963. Although McDonald made a note of the story for future reference, he apparently never followed up on the case of the vanishing X-15 pilot.

Initially, the X-15 abduction story was nothing more than an amusing anecdote. The flaws in the tale were apparent to anyone familiar with the X-15 program. I told several individuals the story. They all recognized the flaws, and were amused by the story. Then, during a conversation, I mentioned the tale to a retired X-15 engineer, and was surprised to learn that Wood’s account was not the first time this story of an X-15 pilot being taken aboard a UFO had been told.

edit on 14-5-2011 by Anunaki10 because: (no reason given)



posted on May, 14 2011 @ 03:51 AM
link   
Love the toxic chemtrails.



posted on May, 14 2011 @ 05:02 AM
link   

Originally posted by kerazeesicko
You sound like another UFO investigator who does all his/her investigating by reading blogs, UFO websites and other unreliable sources. You just parrot what they say like most UFO believers....and feel it is right without doing any of your own work to find out facts.

Good Luck with your delusions of superiority over skeptics.

You mean your paranoid delusions, right?
Seems you contribute with nothing more than just your paranoid delusionalized opinion. The sources i use are serious and reliable (except the X-15 UFO abduction story i showed to Oberg, but that was to show him an example of a case that is as much as trustworthy as the source used by TIME Magazine
), i not only use websites as sources, i sometimes contact serious and reliable sources who confirmed cases as very true, during other cases i researched.
edit on 14-5-2011 by Anunaki10 because: (no reason given)



posted on May, 14 2011 @ 09:06 AM
link   

Originally posted by Anunaki10

You mean your paranoid delusions, right?
Seems you contribute with nothing more than just your paranoid delusionalized opinion.


Huh..? My paranoid delusions...hmm never thought that came off as paranoid...but you would know...



The sources i use are serious and reliable (except the X-15 UFO abduction story i showed to Oberg, but that was to show him an example of a case that is as much as trustworthy as the source used by TIME Magazine
), i not only use websites as sources, i sometimes contact serious and reliable sources who confirmed cases as very true, during other cases i researched.
edit on 14-5-2011 by Anunaki10 because: (no reason given)


One freakin source....
..where are your other legitimate sources. I for one would like to know what types of people you contact...Scientists, Astronomers, Physicists or what?

I bet you it is people from youtube and other ridiculous things...



posted on May, 14 2011 @ 10:25 AM
link   

Originally posted by kerazeesicko
I for one would like to know what types of people you contact...Scientists, Astronomers, Physicists or what?

Not bad question you brought up (at least you seem to be a little bit serious this time, and not acting like a little child playing Dungeons and Dragons, with this one), yes, serious people who are known in their field, and yes, including some of those types you mentioned in your question


Did you notice that 'FlyingFish' posted source that challenge Oberg's unsupported Ice Flake theory?


A good advice, it's not a good idea to blindly accept unsupported (Fake) Ice Flake theories with zero proof
, unless you prefer to be one of the cheerleaders spelling the names of those who still support these unsupported theories with zero proof. I hope you don't fall into that, but the choice is of course yours...





top topics
 
23
<< 1  2  3    5  6 >>

log in

join