Nasa States They Have no idea what these Orbs Of Light UFO's Are!!!!!!

page: 12
94
<< 9  10  11   >>

log in

join

posted on Sep, 20 2011 @ 08:59 PM
link   
reply to post by JimOberg
 


Here in his own words. He wasn't worried about UFO believers, he was worried about an aborted mission. FACT.



Clearly its part of the mission equipment but from their perspective it did not look that way.

I consider myself skeptical but I don't have the position of being a religious debunker. So, I am open to the possibility that other countries have military assets in orbit whether or not NASA would like to admit it. I would also subscribe to the notion that some of the impossible UFO performance that is reported could be attributed to secret military aircraft. Can I dismiss the possibility of alien controlled craft visiting us? No, stranger things have already happened here on Earth.

Don't even bother posting about your position on the subject, your position is absolutely clear. You were recently part of a discussion on Michio Kaku's radio show as a religious debunker. They mention you near the end of the first segment. Maybe you should have a listen and educate yourself. There are things happening in our atmosphere that EXPERTs cannot explain.



So, I am pretty much done responding to you unless you have more to add about the incident in the OP. Thanks.




posted on Sep, 21 2011 @ 08:23 AM
link   
BIGPoJo, I listened to both your links and have concluded you have a serious problem comprehending and accurately reporting English. That does explain the amazing parade of fantastical imaginaria you have recently been posting here as 'fact'.


Originally posted by BIGPoJo
reply to post by JimOberg
 


Here in his own words. He wasn't worried about UFO believers, he was worried about an aborted mission. FACT.


Not a 'FACT' -- a gross misrepresentation. He was talking about UFO nuts, and said, “Who knows that somebody would have demanded we turn back because of aliens, or whatever the reason is…” The idea that their demand would be seriously considered was preposterous -- except, apparently, to you.


Don't even bother posting about your position on the subject, your position is absolutely clear.


Clearly you don't CARE what my position is or about the detailed investigations I have published -- that you don't want to read. Your imagination again trumps reality.


You were recently part of a discussion on Michio Kaku's radio show as a religious debunker. They mention you near the end of the first segment. Maybe you should have a listen and educate yourself. There are things happening in our atmosphere that EXPERTs cannot explain.


I listened to that segment and produced this transcript, in which I can find NO evidence whatsover that I was called a 'religious' debunker. Can anybody else find the evidence for that claim, or instead, is this evidence that you are a seriously fantasy-prone individual with minimal underpinnings to the real world?



Kaku: First of all let’s talk about the skeptics. They say, ‘Bah! Humbug!’ You have hoaxes, you have the planet Venus, weather balloons, swamp gas. Isn’t it true that most UFO sightings can be explained by natural phenomenon.

Keane: And the skeptics are right about that, absolutely. In fact, about 95% of all sightings that are reported of UFOs can be explained by the things you said – weather balloons, airplanes, birds, strange natural phenomenon, there’s a whole list of things they can be. And they usually are explained. But there’s that nugget, there’s that 5% of very well researched cases. Now we’re only talking about cases here for which there is so much data that we can eliminate the other possibilities. And there ARE some really extraordinary cases that fit that category, that have been officially investigated by governments, by militaries. And some of the people contributing to my book have talked about those cases, including five generals. So we have to look at THOSE cases. And I think the skeptics really don’t often study the data. I mean, they love to dismiss the whole thing but they’ve got to look closely at other cases.

Q: What has been the response by the skeptics? I imagine that quite a few of them are fuming about your book but what’s been the response?

A: Well, I have to say I’ve only heard from one so far who I don’t even think he defines himself as a skeptic. His name is James Oberg, people can look him up on the Internet, he used to be with NASA. And he doesn’t define himself as a skeptic so I’m not – you know, a debunker I guess is the word he doesn’t like. But -- he did write a piece on MSNBC last week stating that he doesn’t think pilots are good observers. Now some of the cases in my book are written by pilots, but not all of them, not all of them involve pilots, but he makes that point – I don’t happen to agree with him and lots of other experts don’t – and I did write a reply to that [end of tape]




So, I am pretty much done responding to you unless you have more to add about the incident in the OP. Thanks.


It is hard, I agree, when somebody asks you for evidence to back up your claims, and you don't have any. Not responding farther is the safest strategy, I agree.



posted on Sep, 21 2011 @ 10:34 AM
link   
reply to post by JimOberg
 


Its sad that you cannot admit you are wrong when I clearly produced a video where Buzz was worried about the mission being aborted, NOT about UFO nuts. Please, tell me one UFO nut that has the power to abort a moon mission.

FYI, they were using you as an example when being skeptical goes overboard and becomes debunking. And they find humor in it.

The fact of the matter remains. NASA cannot definitively say what is posted in the OP video, to claim otherwise is just crazy. Clearly you are here on some crusade to ridicule people and even distort the truth, thats about the same crap I expect out of NASA.

Also, your assumptions that I have refused to read your reports are just baseless. Unless you can read minds... But if you could read my mind you would know that I have perused your reports in the past and found nothing bad about them. Where is your report on the incident listed in the OP, thats right you don't have one. Your point is mute.

The one thing that we will disagree on is your stance that pilots are not expert observers. That begs the question, who are the expert observers? You are no better an expert of observation than any other human being, in fact your total experience with space flight has been realized from a desk chair staring at a screen. According to you staring at a screen vicariously is not a good method for research (you might as well be watching YouTube Jim).

If Buzz Aldrin, Gordon Cooper, and Edgar Mitchell have concluded that there are UFOs that cant be explained, I will take their word over yours any day. They have been in space, you have not. I would consider them a better expert than you Jim.



posted on Sep, 21 2011 @ 11:52 AM
link   
Okay dudes. I've read this whole thread and i can't understand why you get so fuzzy about a YT clip, that has been cut and pasted out of a news report. It's all a matter of some pieces being released from the space shuttle's exterior and since after a security inspection of the shuttle NASA has no interest in those pieces, since they haven't been coming off of any critical point.

Get the whole news story.



posted on Sep, 22 2011 @ 07:52 AM
link   
Nasa knows exactly what they are there jus playing it down like they do every other time,oh its just a piece of debris thats all.YEAH sure it is all three pieces exactly the same distance apart from each other in a trianglular shape go pull the other one NASA...You make me laugh as do the government in america who seem to want to cover everything up all the time.We all know why u do because of money!bull bull bull...



posted on Sep, 27 2011 @ 12:05 PM
link   
reply to post by jademegjosh
 


Perhaps they only look the same distance away, in much the way that a constellation only resembles a pattern from a certain point of view. Can you prove that the NASA explanation is wrong, completely? Small particles hanging in a vacuum, bereft of Earth's gravity aren't going to fly about like dust in a beam of sunlight.

The onus is on you to prove your case, not just pick the occasional hole in what's been said.



posted on Sep, 28 2011 @ 02:00 PM
link   
reply to post by hotrice
 


fallen angels



posted on Sep, 29 2011 @ 04:15 AM
link   
reply to post by hotrice
 


Those are heat shield tiles.



posted on Sep, 29 2011 @ 04:16 AM
link   

Originally posted by dudeguyman
reply to post by hotrice
 


fallen angels


Exactly 527 fallen angles.



posted on Feb, 7 2013 @ 06:04 PM
link   
Sorry in advance, I have not read all the previous comments but just felt like saying this.
First, it's the first time I hear or see a NASA official openly talking about these "orbs". So for me it's already quite amazing and in itself is a proper shift into an other positioning.
People interested in the subject may have seen hours of mission films documenting these artefacts. I have always seen them out of context (often with a cheesy music) but never with any official comments on them (maybe rarely).
IMO there is no doubt NASA has studied these entities. The opposit would not make sense whatsoever. Even if the do not know exactly and precisely what it is, they must have a very good opinion on it. Just because it's their job to study space and they hove some degree of high tech equipement and hands on documentation available.
I think they have a precise opinion on this subject even if they probably know less than some "specialised governement agencies or US weapon dev contractors with funny fundings that have supposedly been actively developing a way to "agressively interact" with these things. Can't remember the source but remember reading testimony of a retired guy talking about decades of weapon (laser) testing on these entities.
All in all I personally think these little guys are the "plancton" of space. They just float around and are constituted of various primordial components (gases, pure energy, whatever magic the universe still has under the sleeve and we pretentious apes are too blind to grasp).

I got the feeling things are harder and harder to keep away from us. The World Wide Web is helping to expand our abilities to search for things and understand.

We are part of the big picture.

Best

Logi_ciel
edit on 7-2-2013 by Logiciel because: (no reason given)





top topics
 
94
<< 9  10  11   >>

log in

join