NASA Astronaut Camarda Denies Bogus 'UFO Quotation"

Asking Dr Camarda a leading question is supposed to prove what? That all quotations repeated on the internet by NASA astronauts concerning their seeing UFOs are bogus misrepresentations? Tut! Tut! LOL! You would not make a good lawyer! All you provided is the OPINION of one man, invited through a leading question to give the answer you wanted. Do you really think (supposing that he did know of such astronauts) he would put on public record his confirmation that he had heard some of them talk about seeing UFOs/aliens, knowing that he would be getting himself into trouble by breaking his oath of secrecy with such revelations? So what is this silly e-mail suppose to prove? His OPINION is worthless because we can't be sure he is speaking the truth or merely maintaining the "never a straight answer" for which NASA is infamous. It's a typical example of the silly arguments and weak-as-toilet-tissue arguments used by debunkers of UFOs.

Originally posted by micpsi
So what is this silly e-mail suppose to prove?

I will answer your direct question while, I hope, skirting as close to the line as allowed by ATS standards.

Your reaction to it might just indicate that many [but fortunately by no means ALL] pro-UFO people are closed-minded reality-resistent dogmatic 'eager-believers' who have brought 'confirmation bias' to its extreme form [same goes for anti-UFO people]. Perhaps an unbiased observer would be prompted to reach the judgment that such sad examples of brain-abuse use self-serving fantasies conjured up from their obsession with 'superiority through secret knowledge' to live in a closed intellectual ghetto of the like-minded, united in an overt hatred of those offering inconvenient assertions.

Too many people of ALL opinions on this controversial subject have fallen into this trap, and all people of genuine curiosity need to struggle against indications of such behavior in themselves. And to accept advisories -- at ANY degree of politeness -- from others regarding detection of such hints. Personally, that's one of the most valued contributions by the legion of ATSers to my own thinking, and again, thank you all.

Originally posted by wemadetheworld
But I don't mean that in a skeptical way. I mean accept that these incursions do actually happen, for the purposes of argument, and then try and figure out what group of humans, and not aliens, could be in possession of such advanced technologies.

Both Earth humans as well as various groups of Extraterrestrials allegedly are in possession of such advanced technologies. www.bibliotecapleyades.net...

Q: Did our astronauts really go there?

AC: I know there has been a lot of talk about this. Many of the pictures that you have seen from the surface of the moon were faked, because the actual pictures showed that there was "stuff" all over the place. Yes, they did go, but there was manipulation of the result involved. Morenae has told me that the United States government has 53 of its own disks stationed on the moon.

According to several "abductees" around the world claim it is a group of Gray aliens that abduct Earth humans, and alien implants have been removed from some of these "abductees".

From around 0:20 to 1:30 into the above "Alex Collier Moon & Mars Lecture 1996, Part 6", Alex says >>Aryans by birth. They are also there with other Extraterrestrials, between the Moon and our Earth there are 18000 Greys here. There are only apparently 2000 real Greys left, all the rest are clones, they are "robots", they are organic robots, and micro pr... are grown in their head, they are controlled by some kind of radio frequency. Now, Greys and the Orions also have this technology to absolutely replicate and duplicate human being, and those of you who are familiar with the old D.... B... stuff before he was killed at a parking lot in Dallas, i would suggest you go back and reresearch that information, except he was told the Russians were doing it and they are not doing it, they say Extraterrestrials were doing it who are trying to undermine the free will of those of us of the surface of the planet, because this is our home.

reply to post by JimOberg


I cannot imagine the amount of patience it takes to deal with these people in a professional manner like you do, Jim.
I understand that sometimes you go a little overboard with the cutting remarks, but hell, so do I and many others.

@others:

If you people cannot see Jim as a genuine man looking to get to the truth of the UFO subject, you are blind. Skepticism is required in this field of study. His views are well regarded and invaluable. Grow up with the accusations. Please.

Originally posted by JayinAR
Grow up with the accusations.

There is no evidence to support Oberg's socalled "e-mail conversations with famous Camarda" story. That kind of story can't be trusted. Beside, Mr. Camarda is not here to defend himself.

And like i said on Page 3, what if we assume Mr. Camarda did respond to Oberg's socalled query? If we assume Mr. Oberg did write to Mr. Camarda, and Camarda responded the way as Oberg claim, then i think there might a good chance that Mr. Camarda is thinking that there may be a good chance that Mr. Oberg may be hired by NASA as a disinfo agent to discredit NASA employees or former NASA employees no matter what it takes, when it comes to UFOs, and or Mr. Camarda is thinking that Mr. Oberg may be hired by NASA as one of those to tell NASA employees to shut up about UFOs. If this is the case, and if we assume Camarda did respond to Oberg's socalled "query" the way as Oberg claim, then i think there may be a good chance that Camarda had to lie to Oberg, and don't want to share the true informations with Oberg, because Camarda maybe think that there might be a good chance that Camarda himself is risking to lose his job if Camarda continue to speak openly about UFOs outside NASA while Camarda still works for NASA.
Oh yes, there might be a good chance that Camarda would lie to Oberg and don't want to share the true informations with Oberg, just in case if we assume this e-mail conversation did take place. Beside, i doubt that socalled e-mail conversation ever took place.

Originally posted by Smirnov
There is no evidence to support Oberg's socalled "e-mail conversations with famous Camarda" story. That kind of story can't be trusted. Beside, Mr. Camarda is not here to defend himself.

Why... is he dead? That means James Oberg must have been channeling his denial from a higher vibrational plane, in which case you should be more than happy to accept it as the gospel truth. Unless you're one of those [shudders] "skeptics".

Originally posted by draknoir2
Why... is he dead?

Why should Camarda be dead? Mr. Oberg don't even dare try to invite Camarda in here... And why? Could it be because that Oberg might be afraid that Camarda should discover Oberg's socalled e-mail lie story?

reply to post by Smirnov
Obergs style is pathetic...of course astronauts deny all things UFO? And Mr. Jim has it in writing...so what...

Originally posted by JimOberg

Dear Charlie:

In my retirement I'm studying popular space myths, and what is behind them

Jim,

If you ever find the supposed video or the perpetrator of such nonsense please send him/her my way!

Why didn't you bother to post the supposed video? It's right here:

Who says there is any perpetrator, or such nonsense? There is no evidence of any perpetrator, and there is no evidence ot it as nonsense either. And there is no evidence of Camarda saying >>If you ever find the supposed video or the perpetrator of such nonsense please send him/her my way!>In my official status, I cannot comment on ET contact. However, personally, I can assure you, we are not alone!>In my official status, I cannot comment on ET contact. However, personally, I can assure you, we are not alone!

Originally posted by Smirnov

Originally posted by draknoir2
Why... is he dead?

Why should Camarda be dead? Mr. Oberg don't even dare try to invite Camarda in here... And why? Could it be because that Oberg might be afraid that Camarda should discover Oberg's socalled e-mail lie story?

You said he wasn't here to defend himself.

Well that changes everything... you can now contact Camarda yourself and verify what Oberg quoted him as saying.

On second thought, since the subject of this thread is deliberate misquotation to further a false narrative, you're probably unwilling to risk it.

Originally posted by draknoir2
you can now contact Camarda yourself and verify what Oberg quoted him as saying.

Mr. Oberg obviously don't have Camarda's e-mail adress, which means Oberg can't contact Camarda, and Camarda's e-mail adress is not available anywhere on the Internet, which means you can't contact Camarda.

Do you really still so blindly believe in Oberg's e-mail lie story?

Originally posted by buzzEmiller
Obergs style is pathetic...

I totally agree... Oberg don't even dare try to contact Camarda and try invite him in here. Is it because Oberg is sooo afraid that Camarda might discover Oberg's e-mail lie story? It could be very possible. And does Oberg have Camarda's e-mail adress? Very doubtful.

Originally posted by buzzEmiller
reply to post by Smirnov

 

Obergs style is pathetic...of course astronauts deny all things UFO? And Mr. Jim has it in writing...so what...

This response is pathetic, considering the source,

As the foremost authority of your own claims there is nobody more qualified to directly and completely answer the questions posed by the foremost authority [here at ATS] of NASA's operations. Ad Hominem and strawman responses diminish your own credibility, not Oberg's.

You had me nearly convinced in the 90's, before I knew anything about the technical aspects of what I was viewing. At that time I believe you were honest in your conclusions, but now it seems you are committed to a misinterpretation and, like Jose Escamilla, continue to push your dated interpretation for whatever reasons... money, pride, or personal belief. I'm willing to give you the benefit of a doubt and assume the latter.

Back and forth personal attacks are beneath you both and do a disservice to the rest of us "laymen" truth-seekers.

So what is more believable; some text typed into a YouTube video, or the words of someone who has worked with the person at NASA?

Using my brain for half a second I'd feel inclined to give more credence to Mr. Oberg (who appears sincere, whether you agree with his general opinions on UFOs and NASA), than text in a video.

I often find myself at odds with things Jim Oberg says, but unless there's something I've missed here, I have no reason to doubt.

reply to post by Smirnov


Why would Oberg need to invite him here??
This is the largest conspiracy/alternative media source on the web.
Camarda is NO DOUBT aware of the claims Oberg is discussing here.

5 SECONDS of research would lead him RIGHT HERE.

Considering the fact that it is well established that Oberg has worked with NASA, I think it is more than fair to assume he knows Camarda's email address. He also provided the resources for you to check up on this yourself.

Do you have ANY IDEA how ridiculous you sound right now???

All I see here is someone pissing and moaning because YET ANOTHER claim has been shot down that the blind believers accept as fact.

From around 20:50 into above "UFO Hunters - Nasa Files" TV documentary, a commentator from the UFO Hunters team says >>Footage that shows objects which some claim are moving under intelligent control. August 6, 2005, just before dawn over the Pacific water that separate Hawaii ( www.youtube.com... ) and the US mainland, a camera on spaceshuttle mission STS-114 "Discovery" photograph several unidentified lights in the sky (or is it in space he actually means? Looks like the footage is in space), one of them appears to come to a h... and then reverse direction. The video have been speed up ten times to more clearly show the change to trajectory. NASA gives no official explanation for what this object might be, but the most common explanation for sighting of this kind are ice crystals breaking off of the shuttle, in this case that explanation seems highly unlikelyIt's circling back aroundYou really have an object under intelligent control

No offense, but Bill Birnes says a lot of things... and I'm not convinced that he is under intelligent control when he does.

Originally posted by draknoir2
No offense, but Bill Birnes says a lot of things...

So what? It doesn't mean he is not right when he said >>Footage that shows objects which some claim are moving under intelligent control. August 6, 2005, just before dawn over the Pacific water that separate Hawaii and the US mainland, a camera on spaceshuttle mission STS-114 "Discovery" photograph several unidentified lights, one of them appears to come to a h... and then reverse direction.Footage that shows objects which some claim are moving under intelligent control.>You really have an object under intelligent control.I am an unidentified flying object that moves under intelligent control

After this public display of idiocy a rational person would doubt just about anything Bill Birnes might say.

Start at 1:45.



Typical of his many unsupported, off the deep end, and often contradictory claims.

Originally posted by Smirnov


Do you think you're under intelligent control yourself? I doubt that.

Good. You are sorely in need of a little healthy skepticism.