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.

 

Astronaut John Glenns Speech on Frasier

page: 4
30
<< 1  2  3    5 >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Aug, 9 2011 @ 06:05 PM
link   
It was just comedy yes. However, perhaps some are failing to realise that these are topics that other astronauts have spoken of with the same attitude and regard. Aldrin and Mitchell for instance. The latter believes "we are being visited" and the former talked of even when he and his crew sighted a UFO, they couldn't just start "blurting out all kinds of things".




posted on Aug, 9 2011 @ 07:42 PM
link   
reply to post by iksose7
 


wow disclosure from fictional comedies...getting a little desperate..are ya?



posted on Aug, 9 2011 @ 08:55 PM
link   

Originally posted by OldCorp
I have another mystery I'd like you to clear up if you wouldn't mind. You claim that McDevitt never touched the movie camera while he was on Gemini IV. Care to explain this?



I tried to find your argument there on your website. I did actually, but the link seems to be dead.

www.jamesoberg.com/ufo/gemini4.htm

Oops.


Oops


I wonder if you will get your answer


Nice find btw.

edit on 9-8-2011 by RUSSO because: (no reason given)



posted on Aug, 10 2011 @ 12:22 AM
link   

Originally posted by RUSSO

Originally posted by OldCorp
I have another mystery I'd like you to clear up if you wouldn't mind. You claim that McDevitt never touched the movie camera while he was on Gemini IV. Care to explain this?



I tried to find your argument there on your website. I did actually, but the link seems to be dead.

www.jamesoberg.com/ufo/gemini4.htm

Oops.


Oops


I wonder if you will get your answer


Nice find btw.

edit on 9-8-2011 by RUSSO because: (no reason given)


I don't expect him to return to this thread. When I found this little gem, and then discovered that he pulled the article he had written regarding it on his own website after learning he'd been been outed as a liar (by someone else using this document,) I knew I had him by the short curlies.

You'll never get the truth out of him, he toes the NASA line rigorously. He'll just move on to another thread and pretend like it didn't happen.



posted on Aug, 10 2011 @ 01:04 AM
link   
reply to post by OldCorp
 


The article with the McDivitt quote is here - www.debunker.com...

The page from the transcript that you posted was labeled and highlighted by me but LunaCognita is the one who was the first person to point out the discrepancy and bring it to everyones attention. You can see the post where he first mentioned it here.

In all fairness to Jim , when I confronted him with the issue he did admit there was a problem with it and you can see that post here.

I thought it might be a good idea to post this information and let you know Jim did acknowledge the "mistake" or whatever it was. Hope this helps


edit on 10-8-2011 by easynow because: typo



posted on Aug, 10 2011 @ 08:35 AM
link   
The interesting part about the alleged astronaut Buchli quote saying the UFO is still in view is how, when people who fell for the original hoax get defiantly defensive, they make up false facts to support their original victimization. Example -- the claim posted above that the hoaxer had to hack a secure NASA data link. Of course, that claim is false -- the comments were heard over a ham band retransmission of the NASA air-to-ground, accessible to hundreds of operators in the Greenbelt, Md, area.

All of that was fully explained in the original article in the MUFON journal. And the author of that article later reported hearing the same voice making similar comment on a subsequent shuttle flight, so he concluded it was a spoofer and withdrew his endorsement of the original assumption the message was by a real astronaut.

Odd, isn't it, that the original author's recantation has been 'lost' on the UFO websites? Covered up, perhaps?

The symmetry is that where there is a self-correcting process at work -- mistakes and retracted conclusions by any folks on any side of the issue, myself included -- those corrections never seem to reach the attention of those who need to see them. It seems to be a search engine blind spot, perhaps.

Sorry about the McDivitt camera error, based on interviews with the NASA custodian of space films, which anyhow remains a peripheral issue over the case itself. As to fevered fantasizing that I somehow 'withdrew' an article whose link is no longer working -- sorry, cholly, it's a home page error that needs fixing. Will do so.

Meanwhile, try this: www.jamesoberg.com...

Nice to see you all again.
edit on 10-8-2011 by JimOberg because: add link



posted on Aug, 10 2011 @ 08:48 AM
link   
I have never seen this before. Rather odd, I think, that this is what he would talk about. I am a Registered Nurse at the Cleveland Clinic and have personally taken care of John Glenn. Many times I wanted to ask him if he had witnessed anything strange while in orbit. Now, if ever given the chance to do so again, I will not hesitate.

Oh, to be able to have access to just a fraction of the secrets that astronauts must carry in their minds.



posted on Aug, 10 2011 @ 09:32 AM
link   

Originally posted by Explanation
reply to post by iksose7
 


wow disclosure from fictional comedies...getting a little desperate..are ya?


Please dont be so ignorant. I know you are new here but theres no need to be like that. All i am doing is sharing this with everybody to see what peoples thoughts are. Like i said, theres no way to tell whos right or wrong.

I bet you would feel a right ASS if it turned out he was describing things that had happened to him, wouldnt ya!?



posted on Aug, 10 2011 @ 12:13 PM
link   

Originally posted by iksose7

Originally posted by Explanation
reply to post by iksose7
 


wow disclosure from fictional comedies...getting a little desperate..are ya?


Please dont be so ignorant. I know you are new here but theres no need to be like that. All i am doing is sharing this with everybody to see what peoples thoughts are. Like i said, theres no way to tell whos right or wrong.

I bet you would feel a right ASS if it turned out he was describing things that had happened to him, wouldnt ya!?


no not really...Cause it didn't happen.
If anything happened he would not go go to a fictional comedy Tv show.

If believers are to the point that they are trying to get "hints of disclosure" or "clues" from astronauts making guest appearances on Fictional shows, then the believers are obviously reaching. It means they are desperate in this subject that has revealed absolutely no proof of alien life coming anywhere near earth. Other then Fuzzy lights in the sky, Bias TV shows on the history channel, Bias books from money hungry authors.



posted on Aug, 10 2011 @ 12:54 PM
link   

Originally posted by Explanation

Originally posted by iksose7

Originally posted by Explanation
reply to post by iksose7
 


wow disclosure from fictional comedies...getting a little desperate..are ya?


Please dont be so ignorant. I know you are new here but theres no need to be like that. All i am doing is sharing this with everybody to see what peoples thoughts are. Like i said, theres no way to tell whos right or wrong.

I bet you would feel a right ASS if it turned out he was describing things that had happened to him, wouldnt ya!?


no not really...Cause it didn't happen.
If anything happened he would not go go to a fictional comedy Tv show.

If believers are to the point that they are trying to get "hints of disclosure" or "clues" from astronauts making guest appearances on Fictional shows, then the believers are obviously reaching. It means they are desperate in this subject that has revealed absolutely no proof of alien life coming anywhere near earth. Other then Fuzzy lights in the sky, Bias TV shows on the history channel, Bias books from money hungry authors.




Actually, that is a fair statement however, what about all the pilot reports, radar reports, astronaut reports, navy reports, memos, other reports, the cometa report, I'm all reported out



posted on Aug, 10 2011 @ 03:16 PM
link   
reply to post by JimOberg
 


I see. The transmission was a fake because someone else said so. Makes perfect sense to me. You wouldn't happen to have a link to the MUFON article that makes this claim would you?

Also, the link you provided is still not working.



Actually I guess the link is, but the .pdf file itself is what isn't working.

I still have a BIG problem with your condescending attitude and rude remarks Jim. Maybe if you weren't such an a-hole folks would be more inclined to give you the benefit of the doubt.



posted on Aug, 10 2011 @ 03:21 PM
link   
reply to post by easynow
 


It's kind of hard not to acknowledge a "mistake" when the proof of your error is staring you right in the face. And like you said, the information has been out there for decades; one would think the "mistake" woud have been acknowledged many years ago.

So is that your website where I found the transcript? It's a pretty cool site from what I've seen. I'll have to go back and see what else you have to offer.

Cheers.



posted on Aug, 10 2011 @ 03:27 PM
link   

Originally posted by OldCorp

Originally posted by JimOberg

Originally posted by OldCorp

There have been a couple of slip ups during communications between the shuttles and mission control where an astronaut claims to be watching alien spacecraft. This one is my favorite:

NASA Astronaut Col. James F. Buchli: "Houston, this is Discovery. We still have the alien spacecraft under observance." ]


You're coming to the party a little late. That allegation has long been exposed as a prank by some amateur radio operator, presumably motivated by the desire to show how open-minded UFO nuts have had their brains fall out years ago. They had you in mind when they pulled off the hoax. You've been played for a fool and played your part well, making you an accessory after the fact to fraud,. And you probably will defend your deceivers robustly -- it's the old lamentable pattern of the deceived defending their deceivers.

There's still time. Grow up, get aware, resist cruel hoaxers, learn about real mysteries worthy of wonder.


Exposed by who Jim? Where? Do you have a link to anything but your own blog? You've done nothing in this entire thread but throw out insults and make statements about what you purport to be true, yet you don't back any of it up with links to relevant information. Jim Oberg is not the final word on these matters no matter what he would like people to believe.

......

What I'd like you to do is prove to me that a ham radio operator spoofed what should have been a secure NASA channel. If what you say is true, that person would have been charged criminally and had his ham license revoked. There must be a record of it somewhere; a newspaper article, an arrest report, something. You're pretty good at obfuscation and avoiding serious questions, but this one time I'd like you to put your money where your mouth is and back up your claim. "Because I said so" doesn't cut it with me.


Who are you madder at, me for trying to set you straight, or the original hoaxer who so easily conned you and made you make yourself look like a drooling fool in front of all your buddies?

Donald Ratsch was the originator of the story, and he later determined to his satisfaction it was a prank, and he retracted his endorsement of its authenticity.

If you do your own investigation -- please do so, and report back -- you'll see how you introduced additional falsehoods into your account in order to make the story seem 'truer'. Best example -- claiming it was a 'secure NASA link'. Even the author, Ratsch, never said that. Your saying it makes you an accesory after the fact to fraud.

Since you won't believe me, go check out Ratsch's original story and his subsequent recantation.]



posted on Aug, 10 2011 @ 03:30 PM
link   

Originally posted by OldCorp
I still have a BIG problem with your condescending attitude and rude remarks Jim. Maybe if you weren't such an a-hole folks would be more inclined to give you the benefit of the doubt.


It's a teaching technique, to show you what a sucker you have been for smooth talking ego-stroking con men selling you ufo-baloney. Reality is always a slap in the face, sometimes a kick in the groin. Otherwise you'll be a sucker all your life. Man up, especially if that gun in your avatar is real.

.



posted on Aug, 10 2011 @ 03:36 PM
link   

Originally posted by Zcustosmorum
...., what about all the pilot reports, radar reports, astronaut reports, navy reports, memos, other reports, the cometa report, I'm all reported out


The area of my personal expertise as a Mission Control operator for 20+ years is the "astronaut reports", and aside from a few accounts of stuff that later turned out to be within the raqnge of 'ordinary' for the unearthly environment of space, the rest of the stories circulating on the internet are bogus -- falsified quotations, falsified stories, deliberately omitted explanatory evidence, entirely fictional tales. I've tried to get specific with original research and eyewitness testimony on my home page. If you enjoy believing this myth and impressing your family and friends with these kinds of stories, stay away from the site.



posted on Aug, 10 2011 @ 04:30 PM
link   
reply to post by OldCorp
 



It's kind of hard not to acknowledge a "mistake" when the proof of your error is staring you right in the face. And like you said, the information has been out there for decades; one would think the "mistake" woud have been acknowledged many years ago.


True that and what surprised me the most was nobody had noticed it for 30 years !

My only wish is that Jim would make somekind of an attempt to have the document edited so people who read that article aren't misled by the erroneous information. I'm sure he's busy with other things but that's not really much of an excuse. idunno.



So is that your website where I found the transcript? It's a pretty cool site from what I've seen. I'll have to go back and see what else you have to offer.
Cheers.


I'm assuming this is the blog you found it on ? - portlandmagic.blogspot.com...

That's not my web page and the person who owns that site mentioned he copied the info from my blog. (which is now under construction and not currently viewable)

"I copied and pasted this entire post from Easynow's Moon Blog"

Thanks for the reply



posted on Aug, 11 2011 @ 04:22 AM
link   
reply to post by Explanation
 


Dude you have no idea how stupid you sound right now. When did you start researching this stuff? Yesterday?

Thats the sort of comment i would expect from someone who has absolutely no idea what they are talking about and has not spent enough time looking into the phenomena.

There is tonnes of evidence. And if only one piece of it is true, then guess what that means? Yeah thats right, we are being visited. UFOs exist wether you want to believe in them or not. Its no longer a debatable subject. End of story.



posted on Aug, 11 2011 @ 04:43 AM
link   

Originally posted by gortex
I saw this when it aired here in the UK , but I saw it for what it was .....Comedy , Glenns Speech see's him spilling his guts on the NASA coverup while Frasier and Roz are too busy arguing and miss it , Irony at its best


Of course. How can somebody so thoroughly miss the joke here? There's even a bloody punchline when he comes back in to ask Ros to keep what he said to herself.

It's sit com at it's best and eh, guess what, Glenn obviously has a sense of humour and is good fun, shame Hoagland can't understand that but I kind of think Hoagland probably doesn't have a sense of humour and isn't good fun.



posted on Aug, 11 2011 @ 05:41 PM
link   
Interesting. I believe that there is much more to this story. Think about it? What better arena to tell what you know without being taken seriously than a comedy show? You gotta read between the lies my friends. ~SheopleNation



posted on Aug, 11 2011 @ 09:33 PM
link   

Originally posted by easynow

My only wish is that Jim would make somekind of an attempt to have the document edited so people who read that article aren't misled by the erroneous information. I'm sure he's busy with other things but that's not really much of an excuse. idunno.:


Some sort of updates of corrected facts or changed conclusions sure seems like a good idea.

But I would balk at editing a pdf of an old article -- to hide any mistakes made at the time it was written.

Some sort of 'errata' page might do. Would that seem enough?

Folks who have followed the entire thread will recall the recent predictions that the revelation of a factual error in a 35-year-old article of mine would cause me to run away and refuse to admit the problem. Note that I had already acknowledged the error, and did not run away. At the same time, some UFO buffs posted patently fabricated and falsified stories about some alleged 'astronaut UFO sightings', and when I provided evidence the entire stories [not a peripheral minor fact or so] were bogus, they seem to have -- is 'run away' too extreme a term? Could be too early to be that extreme -- they should be given more time to respond constructively.




top topics



 
30
<< 1  2  3    5 >>

log in

join