reply to post by JimOberg
1.) Desire to please can be powerful
Thank you for the clarification. I think I assimilated some of your other previous comments I read here on ATS which resulted in a misinterpretation
of your point. I read the links in the order you presented them and the overall tone of the first link didn't seem commensurate with your intent.
Your summary of point 1 was mostly flattering with a nice dose of reality sprinkled in. I didn't get the same impression from the 1st link (regarding
his business failure). Perhaps it was inevitable since his business failure was the main topic of our discussion.
2.) 1 out of 3 isn't bad I guess
please explain how which of my words led you to think it was my intent to do so
I went through www.jamesoberg.com/wsj_1997
in detail scrutinizing your language. I was expecting to
find a list of at least 10 words. To my surprise I didn't find any. I realized the problem. Oringinally I was upset with the notion of putting an
American icon under the lens. It happened as soon as I read the WSJ title "...Trouble Making Business Fly".
After reading it a second time it still seemed like a (minor) attack. I was struggling to find the balance. Each paragraph focused on mistakes he
made throughout his career. I left the article wondering "what were his successes?". In particular, your narrative about Dalton Smith was the most
troubling to me. I could see where you attempted to make him the villain but, in my opinion, it just made Cooper look even more foolish in the moment
you attempted to shift the blame over to Smith. I originally felt like this was intentional and was well executed.
I'm surprised you don't see some elements of an attack against him. I got the impression you had an axe to grind as you were picking apart statements
in his book. Is it possible that some of your passion to use Cooper as a cautionary tale for ufologists was integrated into your writing and is
partially clouding your opinion of what you have written?
Frankly, I feel hypocritical because I am constantly guilty of picking things apart and generating friction. And I certainly do it far less
eloquently than you.
and it is that DOCUMENTED TRACK RECORD that provides guidance to accepting the authenticity of his stories
This is exactly what I would classify under "character". If you do a search on the following terms:
character witness track record
I hope you might see my point. In my opinion, this is precisely the opposite of what we should be investigating for the Edwards AFB incident.
Shouldn't it be about what we can establish factually about the event and not drawing conclusions from other aspects of his life? If we have to draw
on other events, establish patterns, and create a track record isn't that just a way of using credibility to deny the due diligence required for
establishing what happened?
The letter you received is very interesting and so is McDonald's account. However, I wouldn't accept any of it at as fact any more than I would
Cooper's stories. I personally wouldn't accept it as fact without a detailed review of the investigation. In the end, neither side can absolutely
prove their point without some doubt. I don't buy into Occam's razor. We are left with personal opinion and credibility. So, this is all about his
credibility to me.
The fact that he said something at all is enough to pique my interest and lead me down a rabbit hole or cause me to lose 2% of my capital.
I hope my honest feedback is helpful in some way.
edit on 3-10-2013 by compressedFusion because: removed a repeat word