Apparently my NASA ufo clips have become a target because Oberg is attacking me and spamming all my space shuttle videos.
Here's one example ...
QuoteNASA UFO - STS 75 Close Up Examination
Jim Oberg
These weird-looking things turn out to be 'routine' because outer space is unearthly. I worked 22 years in Mission Control [including STS-48] and try to share what it's really like out there and what such videos are really showing -- sorry, not UFOs. See www.jamesoberg.com/ufo.html?
eeasynow
The truth is, the objects in this video have never been identified or where they came from (originated) and your trying to tell everyone it's just routine !! LOL
Seriously Jim, if your gonna keep spamming my videos with that link at least say something intelligent ; )
Jim Oberg
You afraid some of your target audience will catch on? Gotta protect their tender minds by deleting contrary arguments.
eeasynow
"Catch on" to what Jim ? The fact you can't (or won't) identify what the objects really are OR where they originated ?? I think you just want to sweep all this under the rug without actually knowing what the real facts are and really it's you that's afraid. : P
Also FYI, I haven't deleted any of your comments or banned you. When you post links in the comments, sometimes youtube automatically puts them in the spam folder. Really Jim you should do some research about this before showing up on my video and make accusations about me that are false.
Jim Oberg
I'm the only guy in this conversation actually producing facts about these videos and possible prosaic explanations, drop over and check them out. What 'facts' do you think you know? Can you even tell if the sts48 scene was daytime or nighttime? Was the sun out, or not??
eeasynow
That's funny stuff Jim, You can't (or won't) identify the objects in this STS-75 video so you have to dodge the questions by changing the conversation to another subject. lol FYI - those Jedi mind tricks might work on other people Jim but not me.
Also you might want to reconsider your viewpoints because "Producing possible explanations" without all the facts, makes you look foolish.
But thanks for the comment because you've confirmed my suspicions that discussing this topic with you is a waste of time. : P
Jim Oberg
Do you even know the simplest fact such as how LONG after the tether break this STS-75 video was made? A few minutes? An hour??
eeasynow
Jim your ignorance is astounding. That particular info was posted on my forum a long time ago and I am well aware of the times and dates. You might want to consider doing some research and educate yourself a little better before posting anymore comments to me and save yourself from any further embarrassement. ; )
Link - http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=lQEuq6khOiQ
Am I being too rough on the poor fella or no ?? ;D
Here's another example:
QuoteUFO Caught on Camera by NASA * STS-80 mission
Jim Oberg
Astronaut Tom Jones was a crewman on STS-80 and at his home page he explains why the "UFO story" is nonsense: http://skywalking1.wordpress.com/2011/04/18/did-ufos-visit-sts-80-columbia/
And here Astronaut Tom Jones talks about STS-80 UFO
SpaceTimeForum
Jim your comment was marked as spam (not by me) but I approved it so your post can appear here ... however, I think "Tom" is talking about "the disc" and "UFOs over Africa" segments ... not this particular clip of --> "The Sperm Object". ALSO you keep neglecting to tell everyone (Why?) that none of the Astronauts were looking out the window or saw any of these objects with their own eyes and nobody (including you) can produce a video showing anything similiar, which apparently debunks the claims being made by Musgrave, Jones and You. Have a nice day ; )
Jim Oberg
Thanks, STF. The issue is whether these videos show objects that require an extraordinary causation, and since such motion is commonly observed from ordinary shuttle-shed stuff, which both crewmembers and flight controllers [like me] have seen repeatedly, the need for UFO theories dissolves. Space is really weird and unearthly, it does require familiarity so as not to misinterpret stuff in irrelevant and obsolete earthside terms. That's why I wrote my "99 FAQs".
Jim Oberg
06/13/2008 - MSNBC.com: Why NASA watches out for true UFOs
http://today.msnbc.msn.com/id/25147760/
SpaceTimeForum
Your welcome Jim and thanks for the comments but your claim "such motion is commonly observed" is still unproven. Those are the facts ; )
Jim Oberg
STF, have you ever talked with anybody who worked in Mission Control about this? My STS-48 1999 Purdue presentation includes several by-name veterans describing this stuff, and I have too. Why is that so hard to believe??
Link - http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=S6XyjO_XTKw
Questions:
What does this really mean when Oberg attacks like this ?
Is this an attempt to discredit my channel and the video evidence ?
Is he trying to get me to ban him from my channel so he has a talking point to use later on ?
I'm just trying to figure out what's up with this and now wondering what I should do if anything ? If this was you what would you do ?
Any comments, thoughts or advice would be appreciated.
Thanks :)
Quote from: easynow on April 19, 2014, 08:16:35 PM
I'm just trying to figure out what's up with this and now wondering what I should do if anything ? If this was you what would you do ?
Well, first of all, I think some of your responses to him are a little provocative and do not provide real facts, I think that with answers like that is easier for him not to respond as clearly as he should (and as he can, I have seen some clear answers from him, but they are not that frequent).
I think that's why, on the first example you provided, we can see that he is acting in a more aggressive way as in the second, because the answers he was getting were also more aggressive.
PS: this reminds me that I have to see if I can get more information about the video I think is really unexplained and for which he asked me if I had more information.
Easy, in my humble opinion Jim Oberg and Phage share the same underwear...
and both are on someone's payroll...
and need more fiber in their diet...
seeker
Quote from: the seeker on April 19, 2014, 09:38:22 PM
Easy, in my humble opinion Jim Oberg and Phage share the same underwear...
No Phage is just a nasty old skeptic who likely looks like Scrooge :P He will be against everything and go silent when he has no answer. He did once say something nice to me when he came in to my Navy Space Command thread in an attempt to debunk me :D He said in effect "Nice thread, Zorgon" and never bothered me again in that thread.
Perhaps ArMaP can find that post :D (Not sure if Russo copied that here
Quoteand both are on someone's payroll...
Jim Oberg has NEVER denied that he gets paid. He is after all the NBC go to guy when they need a debunker :D He is a self admitted (though not fully proven) ex NASA employee and he sells books and papers debunking stuff.
Funny how skeptics attack UFO writers for making money but ignore it when the debunkers make money debunking the UFO writers
::)
Quote from: ArMaP on April 19, 2014, 09:21:29 PM
I think that's why, on the first example you provided, we can see that he is acting in a more aggressive way as in the second, because the answers he was getting were also more aggressive.
Jim Oberg LOVES the fray... that is why he keeps coming back for more :D Its the same thing as Stanton Friedman attacking Bob Lazar every time he speaks. Without Bob Lazar, Stanton has NOTHING He has never seen a UFO and yet quit (didn't make it) as a Nuclear Scientist and took to making money on the UFO circuit. He knocks Bob to keep his audience.. he NEEDS Bob.
In the same way Jim Oberg would fade into obscurity if there weren't people like us pushing the UFO's :D
Phil lait is another one... but he is an outright asshole. Still though he gave (couldn't make it) a career in astronomy to become a paid debunker... and Discovery picked him up. I can't stand his know it all smugness and turned off Diccovery :P
Jim Oberg on ATS
I have long suspected that Jim Oberg's account on ATS was used by other people. I have come to recognize Jim's writing style and as a writer he is careful about typos. Yet on many posts I have seen totally diverent stles and many typos in some posts. One stlye the posts were written like prose... short lines like poetry That is NOT jim
Other times I made comments about previous convos we had and this "Jim' had no idea what I was talking about... so something is fishy.
The replies Easynow posted sound like the old Jim :D
No way to prove it but many others at ATS caught on to this. When you deal with someone for years you soon know when something is off
Quote from: easynow on April 19, 2014, 08:16:35 PM
Apparently my NASA ufo clips have become a target because Oberg is attacking me and spamming all my space shuttle videos.
Be thankful :D He is giving you exposure. Play smart do not fall into a trap that makes you look the fool. Be aware that it is a game he is playing...
Say hi from Zorgon to him... in fact invite him over here if he can take the punishment :D ( I am sure he can)
QuoteAm I being too rough on the poor fella or no ?? ;D
No but keep your cool... use joking tones... the viewers will sort it out. You are not going to change anyone's mind... but those that are new will better learn if you come across as being sure of your views
continued...
QuoteQuestions:
What does this really mean when Oberg attacks like this ?
1) That he has found someone else to play with that is his equal
2) That he REALLY wants to get asked the right question :D (see below)
QuoteIs this an attempt to discredit my channel and the video evidence ?
No because no believer will listen to a debunker and no skeptic will change his mind based on your work. What it does do is keep yout videos alive as it were. If you want something to go away... stay out of it and let it fade away. By stepping into the fray you keep the fire burning
QuoteIs he trying to get me to ban him from my channel so he has a talking point to use later on ?
No that would accomplish nothing other than to silence him. Who really visits his website? :D
QuoteI'm just trying to figure out what's up with this and now wondering what I should do if anything ? If this was you what would you do ?
Any comments, thoughts or advice would be appreciated.
Let me tell you a story... and maybe ArMaP can help find the posts ;)
Back in the huge STS 75 New Look thread Jim made a comment about his co workers thinking he was a closet UFO believer... I challenged him on that somewhere in that thread.
He replied directly to me... but not on THAt thread it was another one and he said "You are not wrong about me Zorgon"
In the STS75 thread he also sent me a link to a file at NASA It was on their NTRS server (NASA Technical Reports Server data.nasa.gov
Now when I checked the link NASA had moved the file... in fact it took me several hours to trace where the file went to.
The file was a report from NASA addressing "Plasma phenomena that plaques NASA spaceships" The paper was dated in the late 50's (I will have to look in my files where I put it
Point is Jim Knows I believe the STS 75 and 80 "UFO's to be living plasma based CRITTERS that were feeding on the tether glow and the thunderstorn in STS80
So he send me a file from NASA on plasma phenomena? Hmmmmm
As to the actual footage that NASA has NEVER released... he says they have it but we have to know the EXACT time date stamp
Since this information wasn't recorded by Martyn Stubbs when he intercepted them ( and NASA added that info once they recieved the signal. we have NO WAY of giving Jim the requires info
He KNOWS this... he counts on this.
What we need to do is find a NASA insider and use the POIA to find the original recordings IF they haven't lost them or erased them like they did the Apollo files
So invite him over... tell him we won't tear him to shreds :D
::)
(http://i212.photobucket.com/albums/cc244/markcruiser64/animated%20GIFs/56.gif)
Thanks everyone for the replys :)
Need some time to think about all the specific points brought up and will reply later.
Quote from: zorgon on April 19, 2014, 11:55:43 PM
So invite him over... tell him we won't tear him to shreds :D
Done ;)
Quoteeeasynow
Jim if your up to the challenge this discussion has been posted over on the Pegasus forum. Here's the link - http://www.thelivingmoon.com/forum/index.php?topic=6636.msg92437#msg92437
Zorgon said "invite him over... tell him we won't tear him to shreds"
Hope to see you there Jim. : )?
Link - https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=lQEuq6khOiQ
:D
Amazing, isn't it, Z? I want to add Beamish to the list; I actually got him to admit in a long thread over at spookz that he was a paid spin doctor...
I noticed the different styles posting a la Oberg...
also noticed Phage pop multiple posts in different threads with pics and links in a matter of only a moment or so; so i do have to wonder how many it took to accomplish it...
seeker
easy -
Zorgon gave good advice.
Stick with debate points one by one and don't allow the debate to be pulled off track.
Respond to points raised one by one, and refuse to allow the debate to be pulled off tangent or out of order.
During my year or two on ATS, I took no prisoners and asked no quarter and left a trail of broken debunkers wherever I encountered them.
If you click on my nick over there you can read every post and thread I was ever involved in, and see my MO.
As an example, one thread I created, attracted a lot of rude debunkers claiming Venus as the culprit and myself as a liar.
Mexico City thread -
http://www.abovetopsecret.com/forum/thread683213/pg1&mem= (http://www.abovetopsecret.com/forum/thread683213/pg1&mem=)
Mexico City thread reboot -
http://www.abovetopsecret.com/forum/thread694321/pg1&mem= (http://www.abovetopsecret.com/forum/thread694321/pg1&mem=)
As you can see, I ended up using their own 'evidence' against them and gave them a lesson in manners as well.
So I say just discuss points raised in an orderly manner, and refuse to be pulled away from that order.
If they present six points, debate each in order, and don't allow jumping around.
Your primary goal is to demonstrate to readers the reasonable logic of your points and the fallacy of your opponents.
I became bored with the never ending game of whack-a-mole over there so after we started Peggy I stopped visiting until Pimander alerted me there was a thread in the Area 51 section having a big laugh about what a fool Bob Lazar was for not videotaping the saucer tests he claimed to have witnessed. :o
So of course I started a thread with his video in the OP.
Pim and I used that thread to good advantage demonstrating to readers the various methods used by debunker geriac to avoid and cloud the issues, and playing dumb to understanding questions when it was conveniant.
Since then I have seen nothing of interest to chime in on over there, and became bored with whack-a-mole long ago.
However it is good practice for sharpening your debate skills, as well as making sure your case is airtight.
Surprisingly, no debunkers dared ever set foot in my 'The Day Before Roswell' thread over there.
Eye-opening to 'see ourselves as others see us' and what imaginary speculations are sparked by such silly suppositions. I post to forums from several different keyboards and from time to time from widely scattered locations, I do realize that depending on screen size I type differently. To the best of my knowledge, nobody else has ever posted under my name on ATS.
I argue with conclusions and interpretations, I do my best not to 'attack' people, and solicit rebukes when I slip up, and I tend to avoid those thin-skinners who take offense at arguments of fact and interpretation as if their motives, intelligence, or sanity were being attacked. I find it particularly amusing to see whining about MY attacks when the all-too-common rhetoric is to accuse me of dishonesty and mercenary agenda-peddling.
That's why I don't play on fields that are pre-arranged with titles involving semantic gimmickry and terminology, like this one, and have therefore started a new thread with a neutral title for discussions here -- and by all means, start others with more specific topics under those same conditions.
Quote from: A51Watcher on April 20, 2014, 03:34:24 AM
easy -
Zorgon gave good advice.
Yes I agree it's good advice and everyone's comments and thoughts are much appreciated. Believe it or not I have to go to work tomorrow morning and it's already past my bedtime so responding to everything posted tonight isn't possible but I will eventually return. Might be Monday+ before I have time.
I did notice Jim signed on and posted so that's certainly an interesting development indeed. :D
Hey Jim, welcome and glad to see you decided to accept the invitation.
Only have time for a quick question ...
Would you agree some people might find it a bit strange that you have an article titled 99 FAQs with 4 or more entries incomplete ?? :o
Quote25 Q: How can ordinary people obtain videos from past missions?
A: TBS details
27Q TBD
70Q: What other special instruments have flown?
TBS
80 Q: tbs
Link - http://www.jamesoberg.com/99faq.html
;D
Quote from: the seeker on April 20, 2014, 03:30:55 AM
also noticed Phage pop multiple posts in different threads with pics and links in a matter of only a moment or so; so i do have to wonder how many it took to accomplish it...
I said this on a different thread, about something completely different, but when you know exactly what to do things are done faster. :)
Quote from: easynow on April 20, 2014, 06:38:04 AM
Would you agree some people might find it a bit strange that you have an article titled 99 FAQs with 4 or more entries incomplete ?? :o
And two "24"s:
Quote24 Q: Isn't there a duplicate Mission Control Center operating behind a wall of secrecy?
24 Q How can people monitor audio and video from space?
Two "41"s:
Quote41 Q: What sorts of visible things are shed by a space vehicle?
41 Q: Was the space shuttle, or the Soyuz, really so rickety that pieces were always falling off? That sounds dangerous.
Two "70"s, including one of the incompletes:
Quote70 Q: How did the years-long NASA study of lightning sprites contribute to the body of videos of 'space UFOs'?
70Q: What other special instruments have flown?
Considering all those, I think they are only 98 questions, but who's counting? ;)
Quote from: ArMaP on April 19, 2014, 09:21:29 PM
Well, first of all, I think some of your responses to him are a little provocative and do not provide real facts, I think that with answers like that is easier for him not to respond as clearly as he should (and as he can, I have seen some clear answers from him, but they are not that frequent).
I've learned from past discussions with Jim, when replying to a spin-zone pro, it's best to be a couple steps ahead of the game. I've noticed when Jim is asked specific questions, the tough questions, he usually avoids answering by changing the subject or invokes the legendary personal attacks.
Those are facts and can be easily proven.
Also, I find it interesting you say my opinions "do not provide real facts" but are willing to believe Obergs-99-opinions are facts.
And fyi, Wether you like it or not or disagree, My initial comment is factual ...
"The truth is, the objects in this video have never been identified or where they came from (originated) and your trying to tell everyone it's just routine !! LOLQuotePS: this reminds me that I have to see if I can get more information about the video I think is really unexplained and for which he asked me if I had more information.
Can you be more specific ?
QuoteConsidering all those, I think they are only 98 questions, but who's counting?
Sorry ArMaP but it doesn't work that way, Questions are not facts.
The article is titled "99 FAQs" and formatted with 99 segments and at least four entries are incomplete so as of right now it's really only 95.
Here's the math ...
99
- 4
----
= 95
Of course I'm still studying Obergs article and I see many problems with it already so you never know, the title might have to be changed to 99 or 95 Pinocchio's ;)
Quote from: the seeker on April 19, 2014, 09:38:22 PMEasy, in my humble opinion Jim Oberg and Phage share the same underwear...
and both are on someone's payroll...
and need more fiber in their diet...
seeker thanks for posting and yeah that's certainly a possibility.
I believe Jim has potential but Page is undoubtedly from spooksville. :-X
Quote from: zorgon on April 19, 2014, 11:55:43 PM
Be thankful :D He is giving you exposure. Play smart do not fall into a trap that makes you look the fool. Be aware that it is a game he is playing...
Good advice thanks but the playing games part is getting a bit old.
QuoteQuoteIs he trying to get me to ban him from my channel so he has a talking point to use later on ?
No that would accomplish nothing other than to silence him. Who really visits his website?
Really, I asked this question because I've seen him do that to other folks. He was banned from their Youtube channel so he used it as part of a discrediting game.
Not sure how many people visit the site but imo the UFO section is totally biased and is the exact polar opposite of the commonly used
blind believer accusations. (just saying)
QuoteAs to the actual footage that NASA has NEVER released... he says they have it but we have to know the EXACT time date stamp
Since this information wasn't recorded by Martyn Stubbs when he intercepted them ( and NASA added that info once they recieved the signal. we have NO WAY of giving Jim the requires info
Don't let him fool ya, Jim already knows the information needed and admitted he already had a copy of the footage. When I pressured him to share it with us, I was in a round about way asked to back-off or take it easy on him.
QuoteHe replied directly to me... but not on THAt thread it was another one and he said "You are not wrong about me Zorgon"
Yes I remember reading that post and is one reason I believe Jim does know or suspects, amongst all the noise there's in fact a real signal.
Just my opinion ;)
Quote from: A51Watcher on April 20, 2014, 03:34:24 AMeasy -
Zorgon gave good advice.
Agreed and thanks, your advice is also much appreciated.
Will check out the Mexico topics and yeah I remember the "The Day Before Roswell' thread, that is indeed an excellent post and seeing all? the reports in one place was fascinating. 8)
Quote from: JimO on April 20, 2014, 05:20:22 AM
That's why I don't play on fields that are pre-arranged with titles involving semantic gimmickry and terminology, like this one, and have therefore started a new thread with a neutral title for discussions here -- and by all means, start others with more specific topics under those same conditions.
As expected, when Oberg attacks and then gets backed-into a corner he runs away !
::)
"...invokes the legendary personal attacks."
"Mythical" would be a better term. If you're not going to argue like a grown-up, I'm outa here.
Quote from: JimO on April 21, 2014, 06:48:28 PM
"...invokes the legendary personal attacks."
"Mythical" would be a better term. If you're not going to argue like a grown-up, I'm outa here.
Stick around.. I for one want to see what you can prove to me at least.
.. Lots of jibber jabber over here lately ???
Quote from: JimO on April 21, 2014, 06:48:28 PM
"...invokes the legendary personal attacks."
"Mythical" would be a better term. If you're not going to argue like a grown-up, I'm outa here.
Please hang around. Too many at this site just pat each other on the back and agree with everything. It would be nice to see some honest debate.
Quote from: JimO on April 20, 2014, 05:20:22 AM
Eye-opening to 'see ourselves as others see us' and what imaginary speculations are sparked by such silly suppositions. I post to forums from several different keyboards and from time to time from widely scattered locations, I do realize that depending on screen size I type differently. To the best of my knowledge, nobody else has ever posted under my name on ATS.
I will take some time and find the posts that made me go 'huh?' We figured you were either someone else or were 'under the influence' :P You do have both JimO and JimOberg at ATS
My assessment? The evidence is overwhelming that the probability that We do NOT deal with extraterrestrial Beings on this planet is, statistically speaking, nil. And by a fair margin.
I always ponder Those who give fair effort to debate the issue. [shrug]
The problem as I see it is having any public work that cannot be monitored by the public. We should not be able to produce 99 (or even 98) questions about the specifics that some One is answering. Just sayin'.
And if We take the profit out of war, what need of "national security" would there be to hide stuff that is used by Ones with power (money) to any use They want?
Anyway, welcome, Jim. Nothing personal. [smile]
I'm not even gonna try to 'prove' we are NOT under observation by ETI, and I wouldn't at all be surprised if we were -- and we would notice them to the exact degree THEY decided we could. One of the unmentioned delicious ironies of this apparent paradox is that there are even human-comprehensible reasons to culturally quarantine our planet, but then the observers must be wondering what it is that we think we're seeing, because they know it isn't them. Poachers? Claim jumpers? Ghosts?
The specific sub-topic of spaceflight is where I claim special insights, which are not easy to acquire except through experience, directly or from people who've been there and later talk all night one-on-one about the wonders they've experienced, and also close-at-hand by operating in Mission Control with live screen TV and voice links day after day after year after year. It's fundamentally alien, out there, to our billion year biological sensor development and our lifetimes of fine-tuning interpretive wetware to identify visual input fast enough to keep us from being eaten, or run over.
And then there's the unique chance to actually map out known space/missile related sky spectacles and see how significantly some witnesses -- the smarter they are, the MORE likely -- will 'fill in' fragmentary data with familiar memories. I would NEVER have believed how dynamic and creative this process can be, unless I'd studied and mapped out a large number of such phenomena and consequent perceptions. But it's an approach that's been anathema to those who want to a priori proclaim levels of witness reliability based on actually irrelevent factors. Those are the lessons I've wanted to share.
Quote from: JimO on April 21, 2014, 09:09:33 PM
I'm not even gonna try to 'prove' we are NOT under observation by ETI, and I wouldn't at all be surprised if we were... ....
Would the real Jim Oberg please stand up?:p I never thought I would hear something like this come out of your mouth. This small community might see a whole new level of Jim Oberg hehe.
Anywho, i'm gonna re visit Zorgon's navy space command thread and see what your stance was on the matter ( for future reference hehe ). I'm really looking forward to see more of your new ' mild ' side.
Quote from: easynow on April 21, 2014, 06:04:06 PM
Also, I find it interesting you say my opinions "do not provide real facts" but are willing to believe Obergs-99-opinions are facts.
I said "some", and if they are opinions then they are not facts, right? ;)
And where did I say that I believe the 99 (or 98) responses to the questions are facts?
QuoteCan you be more specific ?
Yes. :)
I don't remember which thread it was that I posted my favourite unexplained video, one that shows some white spots moving from the right to the centre of the screen, with a thunderstorm on Earth in the background, and in which many people see the white spots making a circle but ignore what looks like a large balloon-like object going down in the direction of the thunderstorm and getting apparently "squashed" on the upper layers of the atmosphere above the thunderstorm.
Jim asked if I could find any date/time reference for that video, but I haven't had the time (for that and much more :( ).
QuoteSorry ArMaP but it doesn't work that way, Questions are not facts.
I never said they were, I don't know where did you get that idea. ???
QuoteThe article is titled "99 FAQs" and formatted with 99 segments and at least four entries are incomplete so as of right now it's really only 95.
Here's the math ...
99
- 4
----
= 95
You ignore the repeated numbers that I posted. ::)
99 - 4 = 95
95 + 3 (the three repeated numbers) = 98
I'm not even gonna try to 'prove' we are NOT under observation by ETI, and I wouldn't at all be surprised if we were -- and we would notice them to the exact degree THEY decided we could. One of the unmentioned delicious ironies of this apparent paradox is that there are even human-comprehensible reasons to culturally quarantine our planet, but then the observers must be wondering what it is that we think we're seeing, because they know it isn't them. Poachers? Claim jumpers? Ghosts?
The specific sub-topic of spaceflight is where I claim special insights, which are not easy to acquire except through experience, directly or from people who've been there and later talk all night one-on-one about the wonders they've experienced, and also close-at-hand by operating in Mission Control with live screen TV and voice links day after day after year after year. It's fundamentally alien, out there, to our billion year biological sensor development and our lifetimes of fine-tuning interpretive wetware to identify visual input fast enough to keep us from being eaten, or run over.
And then there's the unique chance to actually map out known space/missile related sky spectacles and see how significantly some witnesses -- the smarter they are, the MORE likely -- will 'fill in' fragmentary data with familiar memories. I would NEVER have believed how dynamic and creative this process can be, unless I'd studied and mapped out a large number of such phenomena and consequent perceptions. But it's an approach that's been anathema to those who want to a priori proclaim levels of witness reliability based on actually irrelevent factors. Those are the lessons I've wanted to share.
Dear Jim..if i may call you that.. ;D
i know your name but not your fame as these guys were gushing about..pro and con
and was just staying in observer mode...
but dang i like that post..it says alot..
i have never been able to identify anything i have been witness to
Poachers? Claim jumpers? Ghosts?
i will have to add those when i question what is happening..funny never gave that list a consideration ;)
and as i tell these guys, that me being low tech
i just remain a very skeptic observer...i said skeptic - not stupid
when you say
The specific sub-topic of spaceflight is where I claim special insights
are you staying with what the public has been told or more speific personal eye witness stuff?
personal participatioin in?
what kind of passport do you need to leave the planet?..have you got one? and even more on point..have you used it?
fine-tuning interpretive keep us from being eaten, or run over
now that sounds like a great topic..how close have we come?
and what do you think our chances really are as a general populace and not a specific group?
obviously i'm not to smart in the witness area cause i only wind up with more questions than can be answered ..especially after that old pat on the head...so i mostly stay in observation mode
and look for fragmented clues that may get dropped now and then...
Those are the lessons I've wanted to share. PLEASE DO..;D
so if you have lessons/personal observations / hints as to what to pay attention to
to share along those lines..i will stay tuned
somebody said that you like a good argument..wellllll perhaps some pointed questions as we go ;D
tossin coins at cha
Quote from: JimO on April 21, 2014, 09:09:33 PM
I'm not even gonna try to 'prove' we are NOT under observation by ETI, and I wouldn't at all be surprised if we were -- and we would notice them to the exact degree THEY decided we could. One of the unmentioned delicious ironies of this apparent paradox is that there are even human-comprehensible reasons to culturally quarantine our planet, but then the observers must be wondering what it is that we think we're seeing, because they know it isn't them. Poachers? Claim jumpers? Ghosts?
The specific sub-topic of spaceflight is where I claim special insights, which are not easy to acquire except through experience, directly or from people who've been there and later talk all night one-on-one about the wonders they've experienced, and also close-at-hand by operating in Mission Control with live screen TV and voice links day after day after year after year. It's fundamentally alien, out there, to our billion year biological sensor development and our lifetimes of fine-tuning interpretive wetware to identify visual input fast enough to keep us from being eaten, or run over.
And then there's the unique chance to actually map out known space/missile related sky spectacles and see how significantly some witnesses -- the smarter they are, the MORE likely -- will 'fill in' fragmentary data with familiar memories. I would NEVER have believed how dynamic and creative this process can be, unless I'd studied and mapped out a large number of such phenomena and consequent perceptions. But it's an approach that's been anathema to those who want to a priori proclaim levels of witness reliability based on actually irrelevent factors. Those are the lessons I've wanted to share.
My point is that many "debunkers" work on the principle that if there is ANY possibility that a non-ET explanation exists, that a priori dismisses any possibility of the explanation having an ET origin.
I suggest that probabilities be discussed rather than the black/white IS ET/ISN'T ET stance be taken. What are the probabilities in each case? Debate on that might prove more productive.
Quote from: Amaterasu on April 21, 2014, 10:10:15 PM
My point is that many "debunkers" work on the principle that if there is ANY possibility that a non-ET explanation exists, that a priori dismisses any possibility of the explanation having an ET origin.
Many do, and you and I probably have the same list of un-favorites, some of them with three-letter last names beginning in 'N' and ending in 'E', but not otherwise to be singled out.
On the other hand, I've explicitly spelled out the kinds of 'informational evidence' that I would find very compelling indicators of ETI contact, and discussed several 'close calls' along those lines, on my home page -- let me get the link.
ADD: http://www.jamesoberg.com/1998quest_ufo.html
I think it's a fair question to ask ANY proponent of any interpretation, to spell out the kind of evidence that would REFUTE their assessment. I wish more people would try it, even as a mental exercise.
Quote from: Amaterasu on April 21, 2014, 10:10:15 PM
My point is that many "debunkers" work on the principle that if there is ANY possibility that a non-ET explanation exists, that a priori dismisses any possibility of the explanation having an ET origin.
I suggest that probabilities be discussed rather than the black/white IS ET/ISN'T ET stance be taken. What are the probabilities in each case? Debate on that might prove more productive.
I like this post, and Jims.
Both raise pertitnent points which directly reflect what's been on my mind.
It's been 4 years since I had my personal encounter with the intelligent UFO.
The fact that it intentionally interacted with me has always fuelled my search for answers. Not only have I undergone a scientifoc and political roller coaster, but a spiritual one also.. I've encountered and contemplated things that I would never before have percieved. As it stands at the moment, I've worked my way through a lot of the crap, and thus I can look forward to a more discerning and knowledgable future.. CurrentIy can only remain dumb-founded at the possility that we are home to our own 'supernatural' reality, and can only assume the rest of the universe is also home to a 'supernatural' reality. By 'supernatural', I mean limitless things beyond our 5 sense perception. If the universe is infinate, we can never truly know, but only ever grow.
... I was taking this somewhere.. But I'll thread it in a more appropriate place..
Quote from: JimO on April 21, 2014, 10:58:29 PM
Many do, and you and I probably have the same list of un-favorites, some of them with three-letter last names beginning in 'N' and ending in 'E', but not otherwise to be singled out.
On the other hand, I've explicitly spelled out the kinds of 'informational evidence' that I would find very compelling indicators of ETI contact, and discussed several 'close calls' along those lines, on my home page -- let me get the link.
ADD: http://www.jamesoberg.com/1998quest_ufo.html
I think it's a fair question to ask ANY proponent of any interpretation, to spell out the kind of evidence that would REFUTE their assessment. I wish more people would try it, even as a mental exercise.
Just checked out your link, and what you might suggest as 'evidence'.
In each example you requested that an alien species provide specific information, ever predictive or scientific.
The problem with that is, we have no idea in what form ETI would come, nor how they 'view' us.
What if actual aliens made contact and did make predictions about world events.. There's that much of that 'going on' that we'd probably miss it anyway.
What about the instances such as the Meier predictions, is it not true that some of them are an enigma? Hatonn of the Phoenix Journals made many predictions that came true.. Does this mean we have proof of ETI.. ?
Then there is their perception of us, and what we are to them. Why would alien beings be pivvy to scientific questioning by us? Or you?
Maybe we are on a prison planet, maybe 'they' have a 'prime directive' not to pass on such information?
Possibilities are endless.
And thus, I'd like to see other examples from yourself as to what constitutes as 'proof'.
Do UAP's contitute as evidence toward anything?
As a side note, according to the opening OP of this thread you dismissed some UFO's as *not* being ET, whilst also *not* identifying them your self... Do you refute that claim, or do you stick to it? And could you provide a brief explantion?
thanks for the link..will check it out as soon
sorry to ask questions on ground you feel to have already covered
Otter, this is a walkaround get-acquainted kind of anarchy, we'll focus better eventually.
I'm old, my mind has been shattered so I'm retired from the world, could someone tell me whats going on here ???
Quote from: Gigas on April 22, 2014, 01:36:01 AM
I'm old, my mind has been shattered so I'm retired from the world, could someone tell me whats going on here ???
I'm with you 'G'. I have know idea what's this grilling and strutting is all about?
Quote from: JimO on April 21, 2014, 09:09:33 PM
I'm not even gonna try to 'prove' we are NOT under observation by ETI, and I wouldn't at all be surprised if we were -- and we would notice them to the exact degree THEY decided we could.
Ah that is the closet UFOlogist talking :D But true enough IF they didn't want us to know, we wouldn't Kinda where we are right now. except when they crash one :P
QuoteOne of the unmentioned delicious ironies of this apparent paradox is that there are even human-comprehensible reasons to culturally quarantine our planet,
I can think of many reasons to quarantine this planet at least in the current time frame :D Back in the good old days they could pop in and out at will and play God :D
Quotebut then the observers must be wondering what it is that we think we're seeing, because they know it isn't them. Poachers? Claim jumpers? Ghosts?
I'll go with Plasma Critters" for now :D
QuoteThe specific sub-topic of spaceflight is where I claim special insights, which are not easy to acquire except through experience, directly or from people who've been there and later talk all night one-on-one about the wonders they've experienced, and also close-at-hand by operating in Mission Control with live screen TV and voice links day after day after year after year. It's fundamentally alien, out there, to our billion year biological sensor development and our lifetimes of fine-tuning interpretive wetware to identify visual input fast enough to keep us from being eaten, or run over.
I grant you that you have some insider experience, but considering how NASA operates, that doesn't help you prove you are NOT a debunker :D In fact working for "them" well you get the drift :P
Quote from: Senduko on April 21, 2014, 09:20:58 PM
Would the real Jim Oberg please stand up?:p I never thought I would hear something like this come out of your mouth. This small community might see a whole new level of Jim Oberg hehe.
Then you haven't been paying attention :D That is why I invited him here 8)
Poachers?
Interesting. First time I've heard that being used. So does anyone think we are a game reserve? So are we food or slaves to the poachers or do our heads get mounted on a wall like deer? Please continue.
Quote from: zorgon on April 22, 2014, 02:35:59 AM
...
I grant you that you have some insider experience, but considering how NASA operates, that doesn't help you prove you are NOT a debunker :D In fact working for "them" well you get the drift
Be afraid. Be very afraid. Some of your favorite stories are at risk, and perhaps against your personal preferences, you have an intellect averse to deliberate make-believe. If you like your UFO stories, you can keep your UFO stories -- so long as you can avoid being exposed to my explanations.
Just teasing. I've missed you.
Quote from: deuem on April 22, 2014, 02:48:39 AM
Poachers?
Interesting. First time I've heard that being used. So does anyone think we are a game reserve? ...
Well, Charles Fort did. And then there the stories Ray Palmer regaled me with far into the starry nights, at his farmhouse in rural Wisconsin when I was an intern on his spaceflight magazines.
Poachers? Claim jumpers? Ghosts?
or lions, and tigers and bears..OH MY
bwhahahahahahahah
Otter, this is a walkaround get-acquainted kind of anarchy, we'll focus better eventually.
ahhhhhhhhhh getting acquainted is always good..sometimes better when not in total focus..
i've kinda givin up on the anarchy though..just not organized enough for me.. ;)
seems you have some of the crew here in shock that you aren't who they thought you were...
now THAT is always great fun...so i'm pulling up a fence pillow to watch for now.. ;D
i don't have an opinion on it yet so i can be in total enjoyment of new stuff for my brain..
i do wish they would change the heading though.. attacks sets a not so good vision
it's suppopsted to rain here so i hope to catch up on the link reading..
Quote from: JimO on April 22, 2014, 04:29:33 AM
Well, Charles Fort did. And then there the stories Ray Palmer regaled me with far into the starry nights, at his farmhouse in rural Wisconsin when I was an intern on his spaceflight magazines.
Ok, If I researched the right 2 people Charles died in 1932 and Ray in 1977. I am hoping for something a little more current with maybe a questionable photo I can look into. I don't care which side of the coin you are on, My work is presented as is. If I can faind anything or nothing I'll let you know. Then we can chat on it.
Sky, got another pillow. Those pickets are tough on the butt. When you're ready.