Moon-walker Dr Edgar Mitchell Claims Alien Contact Cover-up

[Rajiv]

On the face of it this seems quite incredible!

Moon-walker Dr Edgar Mitchell Claims Alien Contact Cover-up

"there has been visitation"
July 24, 2008 12:01am

FORMER NASA astronaut and moon-walker Dr Edgar Mitchell - a veteran of the Apollo 14 mission - has stunningly claimed aliens exist.

And he says extra-terrestrials have visited Earth on several occasions - but the alien contact has been repeatedly covered up by governments for six decades.

Dr Mitchell, 77, said during a radio interview that sources at the space agency who had had contact with aliens described the beings as 'little people who look strange to us.'

He said supposedly real-life ET's were similar to the traditional image of a small frame, large eyes and head.

Chillingly, he claimed our technology is "not nearly as sophisticated" as theirs and "had they been hostile", he warned "we would be been gone by now".

Audio/slides 9 min

[Guest]

Re: Moon-walker Dr Edgar Mitchell Claims Alien Contact Cover-up

Rajiv -

I watched it off Mega's link and found it entirely credible. I've never been saddled with preconceptions about this and have long concluded there was a perfectly good and quite rational possibility this could be real. Great interview. The interviewer is in fact the one that comes across as sounding flighty and silly, while Dr. Mitchell conveys an utter lack of nonsense.

Paradoxically, maybe if we really run to the edge of self-extinction via an oil-starved nuclear confrontation at some point in the first quarter of this century one of these benevolent groups might commit the huge departure from past norms of elusiveness, and actually attempt to intervene and "sort us out".

I suspect that truth can sometimes make it's appearance in deceptively banal forms - self-disguised - and if so, maybe when clothed in kitsche or cartoon stereotypes, some very large news for the entire world can emerge as a broad hint of a fundamentally altered outlook in future generations which we only get a glimpse of yet.

Notice how Dr. Mitchel describes the release of data on past logged incidents as a field that is now "opening up" in this decade? He's suggesting that the stalemate concerning the reality or falsehood of this material is not a static situation - in other words, we are heading into some "new developments".

I will look for further hints and news with interest and an open mind. The interviewer's heartily jolly reactions are a textbook example of everything one should attempt not to be.

[Guest]

Re: Moon-walker Dr Edgar Mitchell Claims Alien Contact Cover-up

Hey Rajiv - Just because I openly objected to the worthiness of citing anything written by Lyndon Larouche as viable reference material does not mean you need to outright boycott answering any of my posts mate!

[Nervous Drake]

Re: Moon-walker Dr Edgar Mitchell Claims Alien Contact Cover-up

.

[Guest]

Re: Moon-walker Dr Edgar Mitchell Claims Alien Contact Cover-up

Planet Earth to Rajiv. ... Come in Rajiv. ... ;)

[Rajiv]

Re: Moon-walker Dr Edgar Mitchell Claims Alien Contact Cover-up

For another view on this whole thing see Dave Emory's - FTR #639 The Aliens Are Coming! The Aliens Are Coming—NOT!

If we are willing to accept a pretty incredible thesis just proposed in this thread, shouldn't we be willing to give serious consideration to another more down to Earth - but perhaps even more disturbing thesis?

[media]http://mp3archives.wfmu.org/archive/kdb/mp3jump.mp3/0:5:42/0/DX/dx080722.mp3[/media]

Further developing a point of information introduced at the conclusion of FTR#638, the broadcast begins by noting that a scientist has designed a prototype of a sophisticated electrical flying saucer. As discussed in that program, there are firm indications that UFO’s are real, but do not come from “outer space” and are not piloted by “aliens.” UFO sightings continue to make the news, with a well-publicized incident in Texas garnering worldwide, mainstream press coverage. Next, the broadcast revisits the concern about the possibility of an “intergalactic war” expressed by former Canadian Minister of Defense and Deputy Prime Minister Paul Hellyer. The Japanese Defense Minister also is concerned about interplanetary warfare. The “mainstreaming” of belief in extraterrestrials is a phenomenon to be very carefully considered. Are we being psychologically prepared for some sort of “alien” appearance? The Vatican has also weighed in on Space Aliens and UFO’s, opining that belief in the existence of “extraterrestrials” is not inconsistent with Catholic dogma. A fascinating manifestation of “ET Belief” concerns an alleged race of tall, blond “aliens” who will save us in our time of peril! This belief in the existence of “good,” tall, blond aliens who will save us should be contrasted with material highlighted in FTR#170--recapitulated on the second side of this program. “Everybody is descended from space aliens, except for the black race.” The clear implication is that they are inferior!

Program Highlights Include: The reported presence of military aircraft around the “UFO’s” sighted recently in Texas; review of the opinion that ET’s are real and that we may find ourselves in an intergalactic war-- expressed by the former head of the British Ministry of Defense’s UFO investigative body!

Also From Spitfire

Also two lectures by Dave Emory -- mp3s here

L-1 The Political Implications of the UFO Phenomenon and the "ET" Myth (Approx. 171 minutes) $16.00

A 1997 Gallup poll revealed that 42% of college graduates in the United States believed that the earth had been visited by extraterrestrials. This astounding statistic underscores the political importance of the UFO phenomenon, a subject generally regarded as the province of either fiction or psychopathology. This lecture addresses some of the salient political aspects of the subject. The concept of salvation from above by a superior power or entity is a powerful element of the mythology, folklore and belief systems of many cultures and religions. It is also a notion that can have particularly strong appeal in a time of dire social and political crisis. Central to the discussion is an analysis of the political philosophy espoused and practiced by some of the "UFO contactee" cults. Professing a variety of beliefs about aliens, these cults hold in common a belief in extraterrestrials, a belief in the intellectual and scienific superiority of those "ET's" and (in many cases) advocacy of the governing of human affairs on earth by "our brothers from space." These cults are infiltrated by the intelligence community, which devotes considerable attention to such groups. It is noteworthy that the system of government selected (presumably) by our space bretheren is essentially a totalitarian and fascistic one. The possibility of the political manipulation of the UFO phenomenon in order to bring about fascism is one that should not be too readily cast aside. It is significant in this context that the ET myth originates to a considerable extent from elements associated with the intelligence community and a milieu that includes prominent American fascists such as William Dudley Pelley. The human propensity to believe in UFO's as indicating the presence of ET's takes on an added significance when considered in light of the considerable evidence indicating that the "flying saucers" of popular imagination are real, but have a terrestrial origin. Mr. Emory presents evidence that the machines have their genesis in the closing phase of the Second World War, when the Germans developed disk-shaped, high-performance flying machines as anti-aircraft devices. The devices appear to have been improved upon by the United States and Britain in the post-war period. In 1955, the Secretary of the Airforce announced that the United States would soon begin testing and flying new types of aircraft that would resemble flying saucers. In the conclusion of the lecture, Mr. Emory warns that UFO's might be deployed in conjunction with other secret technologies such as mind-control and/or genetic-engineering. He describes a hypothetical scenario described as "a combination of Orson Welles' 'War of the Worlds' broadcast, the Miracle of Fatima and Pearl Harbor!"

Lecture Highlights Include: analysis of the famous Mantell case; veteran combat pilot Mantell's last transmission while chasing a huge UFO ("my God, there are men in it!"); the joint U.S. development of the AVRO-Car, a military flying disc; the famous story of the "Foo Fighters" seen by Allied Airmen over Germany during the closing months of World War II; the Luftwaffe development of the Feuerball and the Kugelblitz disc-shaped anti-aircraft devices; discussion of the Raelian cult of Claude Vorhillon and its fascistic philosophical overtones; Russia's 1994 marketing of an egg-shaped commercial airliner; William Dudley Pelley's Soulcraft organization and its connections to alleged ET contactees; the strange career of alleged ET contactee George Adamski, who claims he traveled on a U.S government passport. (See also: FTR #'s 66-68, 105, 156, 167.) (Recorded at Foothill College in October of 1992.)

L-2 The Future: Technology, Theocracy and the Thousand Year Reich (Approx. 118 minutes) $13.00

This lecture is (as the title implies) a look ahead. Mr. Emory outlines and explains the major features of future society as he both fears and expects it to be - a technologically-based, fascist theocracy. Mr. Emory sees the future as the realization of a global version of Mussolini's "Corporate State." (For extensive analysis of Mussolini's concept of the "corporate state," see Miscellaneous Archive Show M42.) First, the discussion focuses on the conflict between corporate profits and both substantial wages and benefits and strong environmental protection policy. This conflict results in an element of cognitive dissonance on the part of most people (who must work for a living.) In order to maximize profit, discomfort must be correspondingly maximized as well. Human behavior is dictated largely by two principles that psychologists call the pleasure principle and the reality principle. In a nutshell: people do what makes them feel good. When they feel bad, they must alter their environment in such a way as to remove the discomfort. They can either change their external environment or their internal environment. Political action, labor and environmental organizing would certainly bring change that would relieve social and environmental distress. That is not as profitable as holding down wages and profits. Profits can be maximized if people can be made to alter their internal environment in such a way as to endure or even enjoy discomfort (what Mr. Emory refers to as learning "to enjoy sitting on a tack.") There are a variety of ways of getting people to attempt this. If they are inebriated on drugs or alcohol, their pain will be attenuated (at least temporarily) and their will to resist blunted. In this context, opium would be the religion of the people. The real thing might be even better. The analysis centers on a society in which people would be made into "true believers," through a combination of totalitarian political control and technologically-reinforced fundamentalist religion. Denominational affiliation of subject nations and individuals may well remain diverse, but the foundation and fount of political power would be tremendously powerful, technologically sophisticated military weapons of mass destruction. Most importantly, the very existence of these weapons would be unknown to the vast majority of people. An administrative elite would exercise political power. This elite would be religious, political and military in nature - Mr. Emory characterizes them as "priest-spies." They would have at least limited knowledge of the prevailing military technology, as well as advanced tactical knowledge of its application. Their "parishioners," on the other hand, would see (and would be encouraged and obligated to see) the devastating application of the destructive technology as "miracles." Groups or individuals who deviated from the prescribed path would be punished with the technology and this, again, would be seen by a naive populace as retribution by some supernatural entity. (It should be noted that New Age religions are by no means immune to this kind of exploitation and seduction by fascist elements.) Weapons technology that might be involved would include genetically-engineered micro-organisms ("the plagues of Egypt"), Tesla technology to cause earthquakes or alter the weather ("God's punishment on the inequitous"), long distance mind-control techniques involving electromagnetic radiation ("the Voice of the Lord"). (Note: this lecture was given before information about Project HAARP became public.) In L-1 and the segments cited in the description above, evidence is presented that so-called "flying saucers" are real and do not come from outer space. They are advanced aeronautical devices, whose development began with prototypes flown by the Germans during the closing stages of World War II. They were further developed by the Western Allies in the years after the war. There is also substantial evidence of attempts by elements of the intelligence community to create belief in space aliens. With this in mind, Mr. Emory discusses the possible uses of "UFO's" and "aliens" in the fascist techno-theocracy described above. (See also: FTR #'s 5-7, 16, Miscellaneous Archive Shows M7, M14-17 and FTR #'s 1, 4, 16, 17, 19, 24, 30, 35, 55, 56, 62, 63, 66-69, 73, 76, 101, 105, 128, 132, 156, 165, 167.)(Recorded in January of 1995 in Santa Monica.)

[FRED]

Re: Moon-walker Dr Edgar Mitchell Claims Alien Contact Cover-up

Always taking a probabilistic view of the world, here is the official iTulip position on the existence of UFOs flown by alien beings.

A UFO is by definition a tautology: an object in the air that can only be so poorly photographed or video recorded that no one can tell what it is.

Go to YouTube and you'll see thousands of videos of the most improbable, low frequency events, yet even with millions of still and video cameras all over the world, no one is ever able to take one clear picture or video of a flying saucer.

We have an explanation for this: there aren't any.

Moved to rant and rave.

[Guest]

Re: Moon-walker Dr Edgar Mitchell Claims Alien Contact Cover-up

We have an explanation for this: there aren't any. ,,, Moved to rant and rave.

This is a good parallel example (by analogy) of the difference between agnosticism and atheism. The one view aspires to certitude, the other takes a more cautious stance as to what it can fully ascertain. Reminds me a little bit of how Peak Oil was so thoroughly deunked here two years ago at the earliest outset of focused iTulip "polemics" on that topic. Few qualified assertions. Many more absolute assertions. As to Rajiv's cited article, pardon me for the slightly naughty characterization Rajiv, but having grown up in Italy I was exposed to the quintessentially Italian Marxist intelligentsia fostered by the Italian University system, and this has all the hallmarks of the "trappings" of their application of a determined sort of putative rationalism applied to such topics, which are subtly mischaracterized as "dreamy" opiates for the masses.

The commingling of the percived neo-fascist overtones, corporate fascism, and the hoodwinking of the working class and sheeple generally about this topic, together with murky aspersions to intelligence services actively colluding and the slightly comical suggestion that the "flying saucer technology" was an offshoot of German and later American experimentation is, at least to my view., not the most robust set of talking points with which to rebut this topic. Quite apart from the fact that on any factual / material basis the rebuttals are arguably a good deal more ephemeral than some of the carefully logged assertions. And the collection of those "assertions" today are accumulating into some truly daunting lists, bristling with corollary detail and multiple viewers in disparate locations corroborating each other with startling closeness - all of which is increasingly causing headaches to the more determined "serial debunkers".

A) The large and growing quantity of reports emanating from groups of people with credentials so unimpeachably sober and senior in aviation as to make some of us grow genuinely curious as to when the determined facade of "permanent skepticism" of the serial debunkers may begin to suffer from "metal-fatigue" all on it's own. Many, many reports, carefully and exhaustively logged by entire groups of 1) aviators with dauntingly exemplary 30 year flying records, 2) police crew, scattered in three to four different counties or states (UK / US) all calling in consecutively in the space of a few hours and reporting exactly the same phenomena, along with dozens of civilians, such that a reconstruction later evidences highly coherent flight paths across large geographic areas, 3) really broad scale sightings, where hundreds of people observe (and photograph - e.g. Mexico City) events which render their subsequent "explanation as mass delusions" if anything more strained in terms of plausibility than the mass visual reports themselves. Etc. Etc.

B) Flight physics. The one common denominator of all these reports is regarding movements which involve implied G-forces that defy all known science, both actual and even theoretical known to the entirety of 20th Century technology or physics. Objects reported by 30 year veteran pilots, moving from stationary hover to percieved exit speeds roughly calculated to Mach 30, or Mach 50, without even the trace of a sonic boom on their transit? There are dozens of such reports from airline and military pilots with 20-30 years of exemplary flight duty, who have never ventured into such "flights of fancy" before and have only professional ridicule to face by doing so. They are heavily "dis-incentivized" to make such reports, risking their livelihoods and careers for venturing forward to speak up. The flight physics observed in these sightings render the suggestion that this is "secret" government technology a clunky, creaking parody of any real forensic analysis of the reports, at least to my view.

I read read such conclusions, and my suggestion to every reader is that they recognise this sort of reply has all the classic hallmarks of "inquiry" which is in fact hobbled by an overlay of clunkily mechanical explanations which are a parody of the real sort of "rationalism", which is always intensely curious and requires debunk theories to be plausible, at least in excess of the percieved implausibility of that which is debunked. It's just my own view, but I think all the arguments debunking this notion due to "poor quality photos" and the "plausibility these are instead government experimental flying contraptions" seems to me to have all the suppleness of investigative approach of a rusty door-hinge. A door-hinge folded to the "shut" position.

The "permanent atheists" should recognise the one universally consistent characteristic of their approach to this topic - an a-priori conclusion at the outset. That is a large tell-tale about viable methodology for any inquiry because a methodology must first of all set about defining it's own method. If your "method" consists of flatly calling an airline pilot's testimony a "fantasy" while summarily voiding his 30 years of credibility as a null factor, the "method" betrays a surprising degree of preference for one conclusion at it's outset. For my money, the agnostic / curious" approach is the correct approach, and displays the best characterisitics of intellectual curiosity. The reports originate from many, many aviation professionals and law enforcement professionals whose entire training has centered on the antithesis of this kind of fanciful extrapolation - the observed movement characteristics render suggestions this is human technology an exceedingly creaky rebuttal. To claim all these Military / Police / Aviation crew, are the deluded parties, and that the atheist has the probing vision here is an approach whose primary characteristic is it's assumption that the people (in this case Aviators) who are doing that reporting are more stupid / gullible than oneself.

One defining attribute of this sort of determinedly atheist (my analogy) purported "spirit of inquiry" also seems that it has never been the viewpoint by means of which humanity has made any big discoveries throughout history. Also, to suggest that people who keep an open mind to this as does former astronaut and aviator Dr. Mitchell may be susceptible to some unhealthy festering delusions of science commingled with theology verges on the comical - the error of this conclusion is that it projects upon someone like Dr. Mitchell a degree of innate stupidity which he clearly does not merit. To overlook that point in the course of a rebuttal is to overlook important hints that one's rebuttal is proceeding primarily informed by a-priori conclusions. I've found over the years that arguments which need to implicitly or explicitly impute innate stupidity upon the other sideare generally arguments still in search of a deeper, more supple logic upon which to draw. It is they which are in fact flawed in methodology, which is ironic, given that their core position is the value of skepticism.

Think about it without the hidebound required a-priori conclusions for just a moment - You have many different airline and military pilots or myriad incidents of police on the ground, and the pilots with 30 years of flawless incident-free flying history, in multiple aircraft, calling in reports of ojects moving at Mach 30-50 without a sound, and your elementary "curiosity switch" seems firmly set to the "off" position. It's just a very rough and inadequate analogy, but I suggest, as with the "Absurdity of Peak Oil" which was an immensely popular debunk around here two to three years ago, that the old "insatiable spirit of probing inquiry" is once again bumping blindly into the confines of it's shoe-box again.

[c1ue]

Re: Moon-walker Dr Edgar Mitchell Claims Alien Contact Cover-up

#1: Why saucers?

If you have antigravity - you don't need centrifugal force to simulate g's.

For space, aerodynamics are irrelevant.

So, the saucer is not an optimal shape for either an atmospheric flyer or an interplanetary one.

Nor is it very good on shielding - the flat and thin aspect makes those pesky space ions and radiation hard to avoid.

A cylinder is a far better shape, with extendable control surfaces should atmosphere and antigravity/anti-inertia be lacking.

#2 Why are UFO sightings so similar?

Again, there is a curious consistency to them. From Hellboy:

TV HOST
As the head of your division, you --
You have seen dozens of pictures
like this!!!

MANNING
Exactly -- so, why is it that they're
all out of focus? C'mon!! God knows,
people manage to get good pictures
at a wedding!!

Then there's the crop circles.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Crop_ci...f_crop_circles

In 1991, two men from Southampton, England announced that they had conceived the idea as a prank at a pub near Winchester, Hampshire during an evening in 1976. Inspired by the 1966 Tully Saucer Nests,^[18] Doug Bower and Dave Chorley made their crop circles using planks, rope, hats and wire as their only tools: using a four-foot-long plank attached to a rope, they easily created circles eight feet in diameter. The two men were able to make a 40-foot (12 m) circle in 15 minutes.
The pair became frustrated when their work did not receive significant publicity, so in 1981 they created a circle in Matterley Bowl, a natural amphitheatre just outside Winchester, Hampshire - an area surrounded by roads from which a clear view of the field is available to drivers passing by. Their designs were at first simple circles. When newspapers claimed that the circles could easily be explained by natural phenomena, Bower and Chorley made more complex patterns. A simple wire with a loop, hanging down from a cap - the loop positioned over one eye - could be used to focus on a landmark to aid in the creation of straight lines. Later designs of crop circles became increasingly complicated.
Bower's wife had become suspicious of him, noticing high levels of mileage in their car. Eventually, fearing that his wife suspected him of adultery, Bower confessed to her and subsequently he and Chorley informed a British national newspaper. Chorley died in 1996, and Doug Bower has made crop circles as recently as 2004. Bower has said that, had it not been for his wife's suspicions, he would have taken the secret to his deathbed, never revealing that it was a hoax.^[19]

A hoax, but not only are crop circles now part of the 'UFO lore', but friggin' Mel Gibson/Shyamalan movies have them in there along with aliens.

Ugh.

[Guest]

Re: Moon-walker Dr Edgar Mitchell Claims Alien Contact Cover-up

Clue - I am not "all agog" on this topic. I merely find the spirit of "agnosticism" a good deal more supple than this creaky brand of "atheism" which in fact finds a fine example in your "rebuttal" above. Of course reality is always festooned with the barnacles of popular culture. That's a given. The subtle trick is to be able to spot faulty debunking when you see it, and your exposition as to why this must all be rejected out of hand is swiss cheese. No, our governments have not developed wonderful antigravity devices beyond the nano-scale yet, and are probably fifty to one hundred years from every decoding that, if ever. And no, I don't wish to enter into a long "debate" about this.

Here is the real point. It's not about UFO's. I'm much more disagreeing with hidebound thinking than I am with any argument about UFO's. The arguments such as yours why this is "all nonsense" (calling in Hollywood kitsch and "crop circles" as a purportedly devastating expose' for example) have all the robustness of wet cardboard.

Sorry, no more discussion on this topic from me.

[metalman]

Re: Moon-walker Dr Edgar Mitchell Claims Alien Contact Cover-up

This is a good parallel example (by analogy) of the difference between agnosticism and atheism. The one view aspires to certitude, the other takes a more cautious stance as to what it can fully ascertain. Reminds me a little bit of how Peak Oil was so thoroughly deunked here two years ago at the earliest outset of focused iTulip "polemics" on that topic. Few qualified assertions. Many more absolute assertions. As to Rajiv's cited article, pardon me for the slightly naughty characterization Rajiv, but having grown up in Italy I was exposed to the quintessentially Italian Marxist intelligentsia fostered by the Italian University system, and this has all the hallmarks of the "trappings" of their application of a determined sort of putative rationalism applied to such topics, which are subtly mischaracterized as "dreamy" opiates for the masses.

The commingling of the percived neo-fascist overtones, corporate fascism, and the hoodwinking of the working class and sheeple generally about this topic, together with murky aspersions to intelligence services actively colluding and the slightly comical suggestion that the "flying saucer technology" was an offshoot of German and later American experimentation is, at least to my view., not the most robust set of talking points with which to rebut this topic. Quite apart from the fact that on any factual / material basis the rebuttals are arguably a good deal more ephemeral than some of the carefully logged assertions. And the collection of those "assertions" today are accumulating into some truly daunting lists, bristling with corollary detail and multiple viewers in disparate locations corroborating each other with startling closeness - all of which is increasingly causing headaches to the more determined "serial debunkers".

A) The large and growing quantity of reports emanating from groups of people with credentials so unimpeachably sober and senior in aviation as to make some of us grow genuinely curious as to when the determined facade of "permanent skepticism" of the serial debunkers may begin to suffer from "metal-fatigue" all on it's own. Many, many reports, carefully and exhaustively logged by entire groups of 1) aviators with dauntingly exemplary 30 year flying records, 2) police crew, scattered in three to four different counties or states (UK / US) all calling in consecutively in the space of a few hours and reporting exactly the same phenomena, along with dozens of civilians, such that a reconstruction later evidences highly coherent flight paths across large geographic areas, 3) really broad scale sightings, where hundreds of people observe (and photograph - e.g. Mexico City) events which render their subsequent "explanation as mass delusions" if anything more strained in terms of plausibility than the mass visual reports themselves. Etc. Etc.

B) Flight physics. The one common denominator of all these reports is regarding movements which involve implied G-forces that defy all known science, both actual and even theoretical known to the entirety of 20th Century technology or physics. Objects reported by 30 year veteran pilots, moving from stationary hover to percieved exit speeds roughly calculated to Mach 30, or Mach 50, without even the trace of a sonic boom on their transit? There are dozens of such reports from airline and military pilots with 20-30 years of exemplary flight duty, who have never ventured into such "flights of fancy" before and have only professional ridicule to face by doing so. They are heavily "dis-incentivized" to make such reports, risking their livelihoods and careers for venturing forward to speak up. The flight physics observed in these sightings render the suggestion that this is "secret" government technology a clunky, creaking parody of any real forensic analysis of the reports, at least to my view.

I read read such conclusions, and my suggestion to every reader is that they recognise this sort of reply has all the classic hallmarks of "inquiry" which is in fact hobbled by an overlay of clunkily mechanical explanations which are a parody of the real sort of "rationalism", which is always intensely curious and requires debunk theories to be plausible, at least in excess of the percieved implausibility of that which is debunked. It's just my own view, but I think all the arguments debunking this notion due to "poor quality photos" and the "plausibility these are instead government experimental flying contraptions" seems to me to have all the suppleness of investigative approach of a rusty door-hinge. A door-hinge folded to the "shut" position.

The "permanent atheists" should recognise the one universally consistent characteristic of their approach to this topic - an a-priori conclusion at the outset. That is a large tell-tale about viable methodology for any inquiry because a methodology must first of all set about defining it's own method. If your "method" consists of flatly calling an airline pilot's testimony a "fantasy" while summarily voiding his 30 years of credibility as a null factor, the "method" betrays a surprising degree of preference for one conclusion at it's outset. For my money, the agnostic / curious" approach is the correct approach, and displays the best characterisitics of intellectual curiosity. The reports originate from many, many aviation professionals and law enforcement professionals whose entire training has centered on the antithesis of this kind of fanciful extrapolation - the observed movement characteristics render suggestions this is human technology an exceedingly creaky rebuttal. To claim all these Military / Police / Aviation crew, are the deluded parties, and that the atheist has the probing vision here is an approach whose primary characteristic is it's assumption that the people (in this case Aviators) who are doing that reporting are more stupid / gullible than oneself.

One defining attribute of this sort of determinedly atheist (my analogy) purported "spirit of inquiry" also seems that it has never been the viewpoint by means of which humanity has made any big discoveries throughout history. Also, to suggest that people who keep an open mind to this as does former astronaut and aviator Dr. Mitchell may be susceptible to some unhealthy festering delusions of science commingled with theology verges on the comical - the error of this conclusion is that it projects upon someone like Dr. Mitchell a degree of innate stupidity which he clearly does not merit. To overlook that point in the course of a rebuttal is to overlook important hints that one's rebuttal is proceeding primarily informed by a-priori conclusions. I've found over the years that arguments which need to implicitly or explicitly impute innate stupidity upon the other sideare generally arguments still in search of a deeper, more supple logic upon which to draw. It is they which are in fact flawed in methodology, which is ironic, given that their core position is the value of skepticism.

Think about it without the hidebound required a-priori conclusions for just a moment - You have many different airline and military pilots or myriad incidents of police on the ground, and the pilots with 30 years of flawless incident-free flying history, in multiple aircraft, calling in reports of ojects moving at Mach 30-50 without a sound, and your elementary "curiosity switch" seems firmly set to the "off" position. It's just a very rough and inadequate analogy, but I suggest, as with the "Absurdity of Peak Oil" which was an immensely popular debunk around here two to three years ago, that the old "insatiable spirit of probing inquiry" is once again bumping blindly into the confines of it's shoe-box again.

blah, blah, blah, blah, blah, blah, blah, blah, blah, blah, blah, blah, blah, blah, blah, blah, blah, blah, blah, blah, blah, blah, blah, blah, blah, blah, blah, blah, blah, blah = 'nope, you're right... not one clear pic or video of a single flying saucer, ever'.

seriously, what are the chances? zeeeeerrrrrroooooo.

as for the credible scientists and pilots? lost their minds and went off their meds, life and kids left and they're desperate for the phone to ring, went bankrupt and need to make some money, many possibilities.

[Guest]

Re: Moon-walker Dr Edgar Mitchell Claims Alien Contact Cover-up

blah, blah, blah, blah, blah, blah, blah, blah, blah, blah, blah, blah, blah, blah, blah, blah, blah, blah, blah, blah, blah, blah, blah, blah, blah, blah, blah, blah, blah, blah ... lost their minds and went off their meds ... need to make some money, many possibilities.

Metalman - I greatly enjoy almost all of your posts, and your many trenchant comments, but I have to call this particular "contribution" as seems glaringly evident to me, at least. The frivolity of your comment here is so thick in the air it's rendered nearly comical compared to the qualifications Dr. Mitchell has to offer comments on (any) flying objects. In your most sincere private thoughts, do you have some idea of how many hoops Dr. Mitchell jumped through to qualify as an astronaut for live moon missions? With a Phd. in Aeronautics from MIT? You consider such glib contributions a "weighty response" here? My suggestion - bolt your sneakers to the floor with some drywall screws, to keep from floating right off the ground with your blah blah. This one man alone has completed more certifications to get where he got professionally (AFTER the Aeronautics doctorate!) than you and I both, in a couple of lifetimes. I'm reading your response and imagining you getting flippant like this with a surgeon, while you were getting wheeled into the surgery room for open heart surgery (it's an analogy Metalguy, to illustrate a point - you have my very best wishes and I'm a big fan of yours). I venture to guess in that case you'd be counting that surgeon's professional qualifications in your head with reverence, like a set of devotional rosary beads.

Do you see the frivolity of recognising one of these two highly skilled technicians, for his acknowledged expertise, while so deriding the other with "blah blah"? Your "blah blah ... needs to make some money" is pure mush. It means nothing relative to this news story.

[metalman]

Re: Moon-walker Dr Edgar Mitchell Claims Alien Contact Cover-up

Metalman - I greatly enjoy almost all of your posts, and your many trenchant comments, but I have to call this particular "contribution" as seems glaringly evident to me, at least. The frivolity of your comment here is so thick in the air it's rendered nearly comical compared to the qualifications Dr. Mitchell has to offer comments on (any) flying objects. In your most sincere private thoughts, do you have some idea of how many hoops Dr. Mitchell jumped through to qualify as an astronaut for live moon missions? With a Phd. in Aeronautics from MIT? You consider such glib contributions a "weighty response" here? My suggestion - bolt your sneakers to the floor with some drywall screws, to keep from floating right off the ground with your blah blah. This one man alone has completed more certifications to get where he got professionally (AFTER the Aeronautics doctorate!) than you and I both, in a couple of lifetimes. I'm reading your response and imagining you getting flippant like this with a surgeon, while you were getting wheeled into the surgery room for open heart surgery (it's an analogy Metalguy, to illustrate a point - you have my very best wishes and I'm a big fan of yours). I venture to guess in that case you'd be counting that surgeon's professional qualifications in your head with reverence, like a set of devotional rosary beads.

Do you see the frivolity of recognising one of these two highly skilled technicians, for his acknowledged expertise, while so deriding the other with "blah blah"? Your "blah blah ... needs to make some money" is pure mush. It means nothing relative to this news story.

luke, anyone reading this site know you are an #1 grade A smart, good dude. really, i'm surprised you are not coming down hard on this ufo shit.

[c1ue]

Re: Moon-walker Dr Edgar Mitchell Claims Alien Contact Cover-up

The most unreliable testimony ever is the human eyeball account.

People have wonky memories.

They get tired, drunk, angry, sad, whatever.

Sure, aliens can exist.

But I have yet to see any credible evidence.

SETI hasn't come up with squat.

The giant star enclosing structures haven't been seen.

No space debris, no EM/light signals, no diddly squat but a bunch of blurry photos on this planet and 'eyewitness' accounts.

The Lukester style is to throw up (literally, like penguin vomit) the arguments of other people's expertise.

The crop circle example simply shows how something can start from literally nothing - because now the crop circles are well accepted by UFO-freaks along with abductions, cow mutilations, and other stupid crap.

In fact, this whole UFO business rhymes well with the 'religion' concept; rather than acknowledge the paucity of hard data, instead the focus is on why the explanation isn't quite yet complete.

[Guest]

Re: Moon-walker Dr Edgar Mitchell Claims Alien Contact Cover-up

The Lukester style is to throw up (literally, like penguin vomit) the arguments of other people's expertise.

Wow, that sounds really colorful C1ue. Poor Dr. Ed Mitchell has just had a bucketful of slops poured over his head. What a deluded twit, huh? He was okay at MIT, and reasonably okay getting bundled off to the Moon landings, and what-all. But then he started going right off the deep end with this insane stuff, so C1ue just had to put the kibosh on him. No arguing with C1ue's kibosh. Nighty-nite doctor, sleep well and don't let the bed-bugs bite, Dr. Mitchell! Did you remember to take your anti-psychotic meds before bedtime doctor?