Alien Invasion: The New CT?

[Corsair 115]

One of the witnesses, it's a woman who happened to work at NASA. And one of her statements is that there are entire buildings dedicated at blurring, photoshopping, UFO out of space photography. Just so they don't have to deal with them.
She says she was shown pictures where you could see the shadow of a large spacecraft on the moon, and she says these pictures were about to be "blurred".

I'd like to ask why her statements should be given more weight and be considered more credible than the all the many, many others who have worked at NASA and have never indicated in any way that such a department exists.

I would also point out that "UFO" does NOT automatically mean spaceship with aliens aboard. I would bet virtually all of the apparent UFO objects in any photos probably have completely ordinary explanations.

 

[Dr Adequate]

One of the witnesses, it's a woman who happened to work at NASA. And one of her statements is that there are entire buildings dedicated at blurring, photoshopping, UFO out of space photography. Just so they don't have to deal with them.
She says she was shown pictures where you could see the shadow of a large spacecraft on the moon, and she says these pictures were about to be "blurred".

If they want to supress these photographs, why not, y'know, destroy them?

 

[gumboot]

Another guy, who has nothing to do with the disclosur eproject, hacked into NAsa and did find pictures of UFOs and other techonology.

I told NASA they shouldn't network their data bank of sooper seekrit alien photos, or at least keep it on their isolated secure network. But no, they just had to store them at nasa.com didn't they?

-Gumboot

 

[Travis]

Once again NASA accused of doing something that wouldn't really benefit NASA in any way.

I pointed out in another thread that I actually visited Roswell, NM once. Talk about middle of nowhere. That pretty much sums up my involvment in UFO issues.

 

[fromdownunder]

If we may return to the original broadcast of War of the Worlds for a moment, my understanding was that there were a number of disclaimers broadcast throughout the original that it was "just a fictional show" (or words along those lines). Does this not put the CT to bed? Or have they got a "that's just what they want us to think they said" response to this?

I wonder what CTists make of the World Wrestling Entertainment?

Norm

 

[Disbelief]

Now you understand my sig line, eh?



You rang?

To be perfectly honest, I'd never heard of these folks before. This won't surprise you, but just like real structural engineers don't spend their coffee breaks arguing whether it was C4-coated rebar or Thermite that brought down the WTC, real NASA folks don't even think about UFO nuts or Moon hoaxers, unless we happen to run afoul of one driving past the homeless shelter.

I looked at their website, and I can't even figure out what it is they're claiming. So they're hocking DVDs of testimony from unnamed figures -- big deal! Other than that, what's the point?

How can I be a "gatekeeper" if I don't even know what I'm supposed to be censoring, I ask? Man, kids are lazy these days...

But if we PM you, will you send us some of these neat pictures NASA has? Please!!!?

 

[Hourglassmemory]

I'd like to ask why her statements should be given more weight and be considered more credible than the all the many, many others who have worked at NASA and have never indicated in any way that such a department exists.

I would also point out that "UFO" does NOT automatically mean spaceship with aliens aboard. I would bet virtually all of the apparent UFO objects in any photos probably have completely ordinary explanations.

And I agree with you. Just because you can't identifiy it, it doesn't mean it's from an extraterrestrial civilization.
But she, being in a tiny room meeting secretly with a man who has been working at NASA for quite a long time and he tells her that they have been blurring pictures. She just concluded it must be true. I mean, in the "heat of the moment" you do tilt towards the "WOW!!!!"

 

[Hourglassmemory]

If they want to supress these photographs, why not, y'know, destroy them?

Well the pictures that she was shown were those that are all put together to form a map of the moon. If you destroy the ones with "weird things" you'll end up with little black squares spread around the map. Why not just blurr them and still put them to look complete, but with no alien factories?
They say there are towers and all of that.

And why would they want to destroy it? Why destroy evidence of extraterrestrial life, if you secretly are dealing with them. Why destroy what you're working on?

I'm just imagining all of this, I'm not syaing I believe in their statements. I'm just puttin gon the table what I still can't find an explanation for, thus I put them here for you guys to help me.

I'm a fence sitter on this matter.

 

[Hourglassmemory]

I told NASA they shouldn't network their data bank of sooper seekrit alien photos, or at least keep it on their isolated secure network. But no, they just had to store them at nasa.com didn't they?

-Gumboot

I know his claim seem a little bit....extreme but, somehow they corroborate with the claims in the disclosure project. Yes the guy had been reading stuff about the disclosure project, which I think was the motivation to why he hacked NASA. Perhaps he went in with the Disc. Proj., and this ultimately altered his conclusion.

 

[ComsatAngel2017]

I may still have a taped copy of Welles WotW, which was given away free with Empire magazine a few years ago. I shall trawl the tape locker tonight!

 

[Horatius]

Does this not put the CT to bed? Or have they got a "that's just what they want us to think they said" response to this?

I wonder what CTists make of the World Wrestling Entertainment?

Norm

Nothing puts CTs to bed.

That's part of why I wanted to post this, as it's the latest step in Quest trying to prove that the videos of the plane crashes on 9/11 could have been faked. Every time someone challenges him on how these vids could be faked, he backs up another step, to an earlier "faked" event, to try to support his claim that this event was faked.

So we have Fake 9/11 > Fake Moon landing > Fake WotW broadcast. What I'm wondering is, what's next? You have suggested some evidence to counter the "Faked WotW broadcast", so now he'll go back futher. Faked radio distress calls from the Titanic? Faked telegraph messages in the US Civil War? Faked messenger at Marathon?

It's not about the particular CT, although this one is amusing, it's about the psychology of the CTist. How far will he go before he admits it's all pretty weak? Is there some limit, beyond which, it's so insane, he simply cannot admit it's insane, because he'll look foolish? Is there an "event horizon" of CT, such that no one ever comes out, once they've reached that point?

 

[Corsair 115]

I pointed out in another thread that I actually visited Roswell, NM once. Talk about middle of nowhere. That pretty much sums up my involvment in UFO issues.

Roswell, NM, does have one interesting, if rather distant, connnection with the space program: it's where Robert Goddard conducted much of his rocketry experimentation from 1930-1942.

And I agree with you. Just because you can't identifiy it, it doesn't mean it's from an extraterrestrial civilization.
But she, being in a tiny room meeting secretly with a man who has been working at NASA for quite a long time and he tells her that they have been blurring pictures. She just concluded it must be true. I mean, in the "heat of the moment" you do tilt towards the "WOW!!!!"

Excpet that you missed the part where I was asking what criteria should be used for determining whether her statements are credible or not.

 

[Travis]

I wanted to go by White Sands while I was in New Mexico but didn't get to as I stayed an extra day at Carlsbad Caverns because it was so darn interesting. Of course I used to go Spelunking when I was in the Boy Scouts so my interest in caves probably exceeds that of most people.

 

[Hourglassmemory]

Roswell, NM, does have one interesting, if rather distant, connnection with the space program: it's where Robert Goddard conducted much of his rocketry experimentation from 1930-1942.


Excpet that you missed the part where I was asking what criteria should be used for determining whether her statements are credible or not.

Yes you do mention it. My bad.

 

[Corsair 115]

Yes you do mention it. My bad.

No problem.

The question of how to judge the legitmacy of someone's statements is an interesting one to consider. Just what criteria should be used when determining the credibility of a witness to some event?

 

[NoZed Avenger]

No problem.

The question of how to judge the legitmacy of someone's statements is an interesting one to consider. Just what criteria should be used when determining the credibility of a witness to some event?

"Do they agree with my preconceived notions?"