Help ATS with a contribution via PayPal:
learn more

Astronaunt Credibility: What do we believe?

page: 3
18
<< 1  2    4  5  6 >>

log in

join

posted on Oct, 17 2011 @ 12:50 AM
link   

Originally posted by JimOberg
Nobody's accusing Cooper or Mitchell of lying.
I never accused Mitchell of lying.

But Cooper did say he was in charge of a camera crew that photographed a UFO landing, right?

That was a lie, or whatever other euphemism you want to call it, wasn't it? He wasn't in charge of the camera crew, and they never filmed a UFO land.

However he did redeem his credibility by finally admitting that he never saw anything, so I guess you could say he came clean, after his lie, and we have to give him credit for that.




posted on Oct, 17 2011 @ 01:08 AM
link   

Originally posted by eroutt
well the only thing we can do is take there word for it! whether you believe or not is up to you.

it seems to me that there just giving what is ordered of them! don't give to much just a nudge and let there imagination go crazy! i could be wrong?


How about the testimony of all the OTHER witnesses? Do you believe them too,
or do you continue to close your mind to their recollections?

Do you wish that the testimony of the other witnesses by ignored, or suppressed --
or do you wish to accuse all of them of lying?



posted on Oct, 17 2011 @ 01:44 AM
link   

Originally posted by JimOberg

Originally posted by Human_Alien
If this is what you mean and meant, let me ask you, what advantage would Cooper have to make up these stories? And since when would a qualified astronauts need a witness to verify his word?


So you've swallowed the NASA codswollop about the super-human space heroes and their olympian perfection? Who are you accusing of being a dupe of 'NASA propaganda'? Seems like YOU'RE the brainwashed one.

How about this 'since when' -- anybody making an extraordinary claim must be checked up on, especially those whose stories fit existing belief systems apparently so perfectly.

Can you use the internet to find information about the cost to hundreds of space workers and space community organizations who in the 1980s invested millions of dollars in aerospace industry investment schemes endorsed by Cooper? They all lost all their money.

They, like you, took Cooper's word as the sole source of reliable information. Are you saying they were prudent to have done so?

Cooper claims in his autobiography to have saved the space shuttle program from a lethal design flaw by relaying a telepathic message from apparent space aliens. Would you object to anyone seeking corroborative evidence for this, or do you advocate that your audience believe the story and avoid checking on it?

Just asking.



I don't get it.
But more so, I don't understand what's it to you (all the time) unless you're on NASA payroll. Are you?


Is that your only excuse -- that any evidence that threatens your feel-good belief system must be fabricated by paid liars? Grow up.

Too bad you weren't around to invest your money in the Cooper-promoted bunko schemes. You might have received a costly lesson.





An astronaut, especially the more famous ones, the founding fathers of space.... are supposed to be honorable. It's not like they're down there with tabloid gossips from a movie star!

If their word is questionable then I have to worry about who NASA is choosing for these space flights because according to you (in a round about way) they are capable of cracking, lying and/or being delusional. I don't know if people like that are qualified to tell their bosses what REALLY is going on out there.

And c'mon Jim, I think you're old enough (but perhaps too old (fashion) which, might be the problem) to know there's plenty of evidence to support a reasonable assumption that alien life not only exists but they are here on/around Earth.
And if you're really an open-minded person, which most people are in the year 2011 and you're still denying this then the only thing left to consider is; you're a working for NASA in some covert capacity!



posted on Oct, 17 2011 @ 02:01 AM
link   
reply to post by JimOberg
 


Let me ask you this, why didn't NASA make a disclaimer by stating an official statement then disassociate themselves with this man (Cooper) and his ridiculous statements?
Surely they wouldn't want to endorse, support or affiliate with an astronaut who turned out to be a bold faced liar!
Say.....didn't they pay for his funeral? I do believe they did which is a funny way to treat a person who pretty much was raking them over the coals by calling NASA nothing less than a sack of liars.


You know, if Gordon was the only person (of clout) to ever say this then, I'd at least consider, there might be something askew with this man. But what Cooper did was verify what others have said all along which gives his 'story' more credence.

Give it up Jim. Go try blowing holes in other NASA-related threads instead.


By the way, did I tell you, I'm an experiencer? So you are defending an undeniable and un-defendable topic. Another words, you're preaching to the actual choir!
edit on 17-10-2011 by Human_Alien because: typos



posted on Oct, 17 2011 @ 02:11 AM
link   
All astronauts have a duty of care.
They have a duty of care to themselves, their team, their employers, their country and to us, the people of this world.
I'm positive they don't take this duty of care lightly.
Their words have been chewed on for decades now. Their public life and professional lives have been investigated by many and still no concrete evidence of anything.
Radar does pick out anomalies, plane crews whom have the same duty of care, are reporting
and documenting these events.
Unfortunately the spoken word does not bear evidence in a clear visual factual way.
How dearly the modern world would like answers and a universal unity in all things extraterrestrial. This phenomenon has been recorded throughout history. Who? Who? will prove it to be true?



posted on Oct, 17 2011 @ 04:03 AM
link   
just one point on accepting astronauts testiomony :

why do people insist they are lying about the acheivements of the apollo program ?



posted on Oct, 17 2011 @ 06:35 AM
link   
OK, the consensus seems to be gelling:

1. Everything an astronaut says should be accepted at face value and never doubted.

2. Any witness testimony or documentation that disagrees with what an astronaut says should be supressed and censored and ignored.

3. Any argument or question that disputes this view should be ignored.

4. Anybody who thinks differently from this dogma is a paid liar and should be ignored.

5. Things we are personally certain of are close enough to adamantine reality, they don't need checking and are to be free from doubting. Things we can't imagine to be true are ipso facto NOT true.

6. This shows how open-minded and intellectually advanced we are, despite the snickers from our family and friends.

Enjoy yourselves. See ya.

edit on 17-10-2011 by JimOberg because: add 5 & 6



posted on Oct, 17 2011 @ 06:43 AM
link   
reply to post by Cosmic911
 


Easy, we believe because we want to. We want to believe that there is alien life out there. We want to believe that we have been visited. So because these men are astonauts, MIT's and whatnot for some reason people find them more credible then others.

They forget tho then when they came out, they where all retired so had nothing else to lose in terms of jobs. I stopped believing in 'stories' all together. Because they all claim to seen stuff starting 60 years ago, yet not one piece of hard proof or even confirmation by any autority is given.

People believe that they actually saw what they claimed to see, yet a majority of those people also believe we did not go to the moon. Uhm......

So why believe they saw UFO's in outerspace but don't believe we went to the moon?
edit on 17-10-2011 by Required01 because: (no reason given)



posted on Oct, 17 2011 @ 08:51 AM
link   
Thing is, until these events impact business as usual nobody is going to change their lives about this kind of news. The media will black it out and there testimonies just don't appear important. Its not that they're not credible sources, its more like the average joe really doesn't care what goes on outside of the box.



posted on Oct, 17 2011 @ 09:44 AM
link   

Originally posted by JimOberg
OK, the consensus seems to be gelling:

1. Everything an astronaut says should be accepted at face value and never doubted.





We were to believe them when they were reporting back to Mission Control whilst on the Moon so, "yes!" We are to believe them until proven otherwise.
Their WHOLE mission and purpose was to be the eyes for the people and go where no (modern) man has gone before and report back to us. They were explorers! So their word is and was EVERYTHING Mr Oberg!

It's like you doubting Jacques Cousteau if he said he saw USOs in his underwater explorations. It's almost disrespectful which I realize.... is your profession after all. You are paid to debunk everything paranormal. Who thinks like that? You set out to write for a magazine; Skeptical Inquirer, and challenge everyone who claims something, unusual and paranormal (mostly UFO-related). Pardon me but now I have to challenge YOUR motives!!

Why didn't you interview Cooper while he was alive? In fact, why don't you conduct an interview with one of the remaining UFO-seeing astronauts? Seems you're picking on the only one who can't defend himself. That's not only being a bully that's also being an opportunist!
edit on 17-10-2011 by Human_Alien because: spelling



posted on Oct, 17 2011 @ 10:27 AM
link   
Sorry for bringing up 'pics or it didnt happen' thing, but imo there is only so much that words can do to convince people these days. Im not saying I dont believe the astronauts, they are very credible witnesses and I believe they did see something. But what we really need is a clear undeniable video, was there not one of these astronauts who took a video and it then got confiscated by the government?



posted on Oct, 17 2011 @ 10:44 AM
link   
UFOs Are Real (1979) -- McDivitt, Cooper, Carter




Now let's see Oberg rip up Cooper's 'opinions' now. For those not familiar with debunking 101, here's how it usually works: It typically starts with some sort of condescending, rude and a self-assured attitude.


Originally posted by JimOberg
So you've swallowed the NASA codswollop about the super-human space heroes and their olympian perfection? Who are you accusing of being a dupe of 'NASA propaganda'? Seems like YOU'RE the brainwashed one.



Check!



And then they use dismissive and/or suggestive terms such as 'absurd', 'ridiculous', 'trivial', 'self-serving' or 'propaganda' to make the UFO experiencer (Cooper in this case) seem ignorant, unreliable, money-motivated and/or gullible.




Originally posted by JimOberg
But if you believe NASA hero-worship propaganda I guess all those sad events -- including his being denied promotion from backup to prime crew for an Apollo lunar landing based on inadequate competence in training, leading to his angry resignation from the space program -- never happened, or if they did happen, you want them covered up. Just asking.



It's a shame some people still rely on others and/or the media to help them draw conclusions. I say, stop reading other people's opinions (mine included) and just exercise your own free and critical thinking. And once that's applied I can't image too many giving professional debunkers the time of day. Their profession is nearly as out-dated as the carnival barker!



posted on Oct, 17 2011 @ 10:52 AM
link   

Originally posted by Idonthaveabeard
Sorry for bringing up 'pics or it didnt happen' thing, but imo there is only so much that words can do to convince people these days. Im not saying I dont believe the astronauts, they are very credible witnesses and I believe they did see something. But what we really need is a clear undeniable video, was there not one of these astronauts who took a video and it then got confiscated by the government?



We have them only they get played down as something else.

What we need is a captured UFO that bears the insignia "Made in Andromeda" with some sort of metal that's foreign to us because everything else (as far as proof) has been experienced and exhausted.
We have photos
We have videos
We have trace evidence
We have material
We have testimony
We have people passing lie-detector tests

What's left?

Oh yeah, some are waiting for either the POTUS (has to be American or British PM one because those South American leaders are all wacky!) or the Pope to 'give the official word'

Hope you're all enjoying your serfdom status!



posted on Oct, 17 2011 @ 11:25 AM
link   
reply to post by Cosmic911
 


For me it is who do they/have they worked for in the past? I believe that they probably believe what they are saying, but who knows how they are / have been manipulated , they are a means to an end, pawns in the game, like the rest of us.

We will all find out eventually one way or the other.



posted on Oct, 17 2011 @ 11:31 AM
link   

Originally posted by Human_Alien
What we need is a captured UFO that bears the insignia "Made in Andromeda" with some sort of metal that's foreign to us because everything else (as far as proof) has been experienced and exhausted.
We have photos
We have videos
We have trace evidence
We have material
We have testimony
We have people passing lie-detector tests
An alien body dead or alive would be proof, but the alien autopsy video, along with every other photo or video of aliens I've ever seen all look fake.

But the alien object with isotopes that don't occur on Earth is sort of what Neil Tyson suggested you need to get the next time you're abducted (he mentions that maybe 3/4 of the way through or so):

Dr. Neil deGrasse Tyson on UFOs

He mentions what he'd like to see for evidence, like maybe an ashtray you stole from the alien ship. And he discusses why your word, or my word, isn't good enough.

I don't know what you mean by material, are you talking about the balloon debris found at Roswell? An intergalactic spaceship made out of balsa wood, tin foil, and scotch tape? Yes we found material!


99% of people realize the contactees are likely to be lying or delusional, especially the ones reporting contact with humanoids from Venus where it's hot enough to melt lead. Most other people just saw a UFO, meaning they don't know what they saw. There's no reason to assume it's alien. It might be, but we need extraordinary evidence, not speculation. By the way, those are the exact words Buzz Aldrin used, "extraordinary evidence", and he said we don't have it. And he's right. So it's totally ironic the OP would cite Buzz Aldrin with such a bizarre claim that's contrary to what Aldrin actually said.



posted on Oct, 17 2011 @ 11:57 AM
link   
reply to post by Arbitrageur
 


Unfortunately, as he has already shown many times...all disagreeing with this guy will get you is "you're a paid shill". He wishes to wallow in his own ignorance and will only believe what supports his own viewpoint.

I can understand and appreciate that he may have had his own experience that he lacks evidence for, but leaves him without a doubt about ET visitation, but he goes after this so vehemently that he'll back just about anything that supports this view.

Personally, from today alone, I've grown a bit sick of his insulting rants against anyone who would actually like proof to be genuine and not just something that was misinterpreted.

"Sometimes a cigar...is just a cigar"...though I'm sure if I took a pic of a cigar I threw and blurred it up a bit, he'd defend it till his last breath that it was an alien strike craft and I was lucky to have survived, just because random-joe me told him so.

I can respect that he may just be looking for other stories to support his own experience, but he's gotta realize the majority of them out there are either blatant lies/pranks/misinterpreted data, or the very small minority aren't really provable one way or the other and must remain 'unknown'.
edit on 17-10-2011 by Dashdragon because: (no reason given)



posted on Oct, 17 2011 @ 12:07 PM
link   

Originally posted by Human_Alien

Originally posted by JimOberg
OK, the consensus seems to be gelling:

1. Everything an astronaut says should be accepted at face value and never doubted.


We were to believe them when they were reporting back to Mission Control whilst on the Moon so, "yes!" We are to believe them until proven otherwise. Their WHOLE mission and purpose was to be the eyes for the people and go where no (modern) man has gone before and report back to us. They were explorers! So their word is and was EVERYTHING Mr Oberg!


You've got it [and so much else] entirely backwards. I do believe what they reported from the moon. The diference between us is that YOU believe what a lot of charlatans and loonies CLAIM [falsely] the astronauts 'reported', when they didn't really.


. It's almost disrespectful which I realize.... is your profession after all. You are paid to debunk everything paranormal. Who thinks like that? You set out to write for a magazine; Skeptical Inquirer, and challenge everyone who claims something, unusual and paranormal (mostly UFO-related). Pardon me but now I have to challenge YOUR motives!!


You seem to be a typical fantasy-driven fool who thinks something MUST be true, so as to explain away inconvenient evidence, and then decide it MUST be true, because YOU are right and any contrary view is wrong. But given the chance on this thread, you haven't addressed a single item of evidence or other original research results.


Why didn't you interview Cooper while he was alive? In fact, why don't you conduct an interview with one of the remaining UFO-seeing astronauts?


Perfect example where you make up some lie -- well, no doubt you believe it's true, so it's better to call it a self-delusion -- and proclaim it as a fact to prove you've been right all along.

If you had even LOOKED at the links Arby posted earlier, you would have seen that indeed I was in contact with Colonel Cooper while he was still alive, and with dozens of his colleagues, friends, and family members -- and with many astronauts who have been to the moon and the Mission Control Center experts who guided them there and back, and the scientists who actually studied their photographs and other results. But you can't be bothered with facts, you cling instead to your self-made fantasies as the evidentiary basis for your beliefs.

You're right -- you are invulnerbale to my work or any other rational argument, so we don't need to waste each other's time on this.


Seems you're picking on the only one who can't defend himself. That's not only being a bully that's also being an opportunist!


Your delusional state is both amusing and pathetic -- but within your rights in a free country.



posted on Oct, 17 2011 @ 12:15 PM
link   
reply to post by Arbitrageur
 


First off, we're not friends, pal! Secondly, although you may present valid points, all your credibility hits the crapper with your inability to make your case without sounding ignorant by verbally attacking other ATS members. While I appreciate the need to quote reliable resources, just because something is on youtube, that means its not reputeable? So footage from CNN or Fox News that gets played on youtube is not reliable just because youtube played it? Ive finished my hand waving and moved onto finger-waving.



posted on Oct, 17 2011 @ 01:19 PM
link   
reply to post by Cosmic911
 

You bothered to write that reply, but where is the youtube video backing up your claim about Buzz Aldrin? I didn't say all youtube videos are false, I said i don't think you can find one to back up what you claimed about Aldrin, and you still haven't done it.

So ether produce the video, or some kind of evidence to back up your claim, or retract your claim about Aldrin that you made in the OP.

By the way, asking for evidence isn't an attack.
edit on 17-10-2011 by Arbitrageur because: clarification



posted on Oct, 17 2011 @ 01:52 PM
link   
I don't altogether think its fair to expect people like the astronaughts to give us anything other than the official line, simply because who is going to risk their government pension and healthcare, especially as they get older?

I watched an interesting programme which had English and French pilots saying what they had seen in the Channel when flying and this hadnot only been corroborated with the towers they were in contact with, but also passengers on board one of the planes.. A pilot on another plane who had advised the tower of a siting which he had shared with the English pilot would not come forward because of pressure from his employers. Again, he probably had to consider his job. These sitings are all in the 2000's so are quite recent.






top topics



 
18
<< 1  2    4  5  6 >>

log in

join