SUNlite 4-1 RB-47 case

General UFO stories

Moderators: ryguy, chrLz, Zep Tepi

Re: SUNlite 4-1 RB-47 case

Postby James Carlson » Thu Jan 05, 2012 8:12 pm

I think it's funny as Hell that he would actually wonder whether it's an American vs. Canadian thing -- you should publish the whole email catalogue he sent and let your readers decide for themselves what it means. No offense to you of course, but I'm sick of folks like him trying to step back from prior claims. After all, he came to you -- not the other way around. For at least half of the guys hanging out there making their little claims, it's a character issue and that's it. They may talk about facts and figures, but they don't understand them and won't take any time to learn. With Kimball, however, it's not even character -- he just wants to piss on someone's parade, so he complains that skeptics only look at easy cases, and when you look at a case he considers hard, as a result of his instigation, he's suddenly a shy little girl in the woods scared about pulling down her knickers too far. The bottom line is so much easier to see if you remember one little point: his top ten list has been whittled at by people who understand how to make a valid case work, even 50-60 years later and in the dark, which means both his old movie and his new movie are turning into little steaming piles of crap that he can't back away from fast enough. Director's cut my ass -- if he had an honest bone in his body, he'd admit everything outright; his problem is he wants the world to consider him a wise man with an open mind, but he wants to sell UFO cookies to all the rubes in Alabama at the same time (no offense to Alabama -- it's just a phrase). He ought to be ashamed of himself. At the end of the day, he's just another guy with his hand out, and a cheap product that's overpriced and a waste of time. It's best just to point out what he's said and done, shatter his little flying saucer dreams of that one incontestable case -- exactly as you've very ably done -- and then let him try to defend a point of view he never actually made. Next time, tell him to quit wasting everybody's time; maybe he'll shut up if you refuse to go after the cases that he considers to be easy or hard to prove, and just go after those he's trying to make a cheap buck off of. It would be interesting to see how honestly he can talk about these silly little flying saucers then.
User avatar
James Carlson
Clearly Discerns Reality
Clearly Discerns Reality
 
Posts: 783
Joined: Sat Mar 06, 2010 7:11 am
Location: Albuquerque, NM


Re: SUNlite 4-1 RB-47 case

Postby Tim Hebert » Thu Jan 05, 2012 10:36 pm

I'm developing a theory concerning ufology's reaction to the works of Tim P., maybe mine too, and others. Simply, its just too damn complicated to grasp the facts so I'll just go with the UFO thing...its a hell of a lot easier to understand...and forget rationality, that can come later.

Let someone else do the heavy lifting and then formulate pet theories and hypothesises off someone else's sweat equity. Personally, I can draw little to no other conclusion.

Tim H.
Tim Hebert
Focused on Reality
Focused on Reality
 
Posts: 491
Joined: Thu May 20, 2010 11:29 pm

Re: SUNlite 4-1 RB-47 case

Postby astrophotographer » Sat Jan 07, 2012 2:38 am

Well, I have received a response from a retired RB-47 navigator, whom I contacted about the 89th meridian theory. When I mentioned the 89th longitude (as well as the 32nd latitude) explanation, he seemed confused. According to him, they did not plan to fly along any lines of longitude or latitude on either operational or training missions in order to make it easier to calculate the positions of radar sites. He added that any such flight plan that flew along a longitude or latitude line would be a pure coincidence. The idea that they flew along on only round numbered longitudes/latitudes (and not fractional ones) was even more strange to him. This is a gentleman who had thousands of hours flight time as an RB-47 navigator so I consider him a reliable source.

The bottom line here is that the original conclusions I made in SUNlite 4-1 regarding where they crossed the coast along Mississippi is still accurate. Just to repeat myself on that section:

It will never be possible to determine where exactly they crossed the coast without the navigator’s log but to state they positively crossed at Gulfport and could not have crossed anyplace else, is just wishful speculation. The possibility the plane crossed east of Biloxi on a course due north to Meridian is not an unreasonable to consider and remains a distinct possibility.
User avatar
astrophotographer
Clearly Discerns Reality
Clearly Discerns Reality
 
Posts: 577
Joined: Mon Sep 21, 2009 5:46 pm

Re: SUNlite 4-1 RB-47 case

Postby lancemoody » Wed Jan 11, 2012 4:19 am

I notce that almost none of the dumb asses that call themselves Ufologists have even bothered to comment on your work, Tim. Don't take that as a bad sign, it simpy shows the state of their crappy beliefs.

I notice that the poseur, Paul Kimball, doesn't address even one point of your piece, instead hiding in his religion. He asked why no skeptic would address the "good" cases and then when someone does address one, he dismisses it with an impotent hand wave. So predictable.

I notice that he takes much solace in the fact that you honestly admitted that you can't say that your findings are absolutely unassailable. He isn't used to someone honestly admitting the limitations of research of this type. You will search on vain for even a HINT of introspection or fair play in his poorly researched film, Best Evidence.

These people are so limited.

Lance
lancemoody
 
Posts: 15
Joined: Sun Mar 07, 2010 8:50 pm

Re: SUNlite 4-1 RB-47 case

Postby astrophotographer » Wed Jan 11, 2012 3:53 pm

Lance,

To be fair it has only been ten days since the piece was made available. I would want to think that UFOlogists would take their time to carefully evaluate what I wrote. The fact that there is no rabid response is good because it indicates they are going to take their time evaluating it (assuming they are reading it). If only that had done the same with some of Sparks erroneous claims in his original piece before blinding accepting it and his claim to being the RB47 expert. They also could be ignoring it. I find that hard to fathom because it demonstrates some serious issues with their "best case". They are going to respond and I am sure it will be some mammoth piece written by Sparks where he calls me incompetent or something like that. Nothing like hurling insults to make your argument sound correct but that has been par for the course in most of UFOlogy.

I already commented about Kimball. IMO, he is not really interested in evaluating the evidence until certain UFOlogists tell him what to think. He also misunderstands what I mean when I state the case is still "unidentified". Yes, it is still "unidentified" simply because we don't have all the records that can be analyzed. I told him that from the beginning. However, what I wrote indicates there are far more likley possibilities than the one he is promoting.
User avatar
astrophotographer
Clearly Discerns Reality
Clearly Discerns Reality
 
Posts: 577
Joined: Mon Sep 21, 2009 5:46 pm

Re: SUNlite 4-1 RB-47 case

Postby James Carlson » Thu Jan 12, 2012 2:24 am

Tim Hebert wrote:Simply, its just too damn complicated to grasp the facts so I'll just go with the UFO thing...its a hell of a lot easier to understand...and forget rationality, that can come later..

Well, you'll be happy to know that my Dad agrees with you on that point. I just got an email from him that says (see last sentence):

We did not have either Olympic Plays or Buckskin Rider in my day, therefore, neither could have effected Salas' missiles which, of course, did not shut down. Salas, for whatever the reason, dreamed up his missile shutdown and is now stuck with defending it, which he will do to the bitter end. In fact, by this time, he probably believes it. The folks out there who believe his UFO story will also defend him to the end. The bottom line is that the truth will change nothing. It is a case of "don't confuse me with the facts."

From my point-of-view, the effects of presenting the truth aren't the point -- telling the truth is its own reward. Interesting, though, that Col. Figel and Col. Meiwald have both stressed this argument, trying (at various levels of participation) to justify their silence. I can't say I agree with it, but I can certainly understand it. I blame that kind of reaction completely on the UFO pros; their instituted unwillingness to even consider such alternative views is insulting and weak-minded. To some extent, they act as if the famous stat rating establishing the explainable and ordinary character of most UFO reports being typical 95% of the time has been flipped. Today, 95% of UFO reports are now conclusively assessed as alien craft. If you take even one such case and suggest that it's not a flying saucer, the price for doing so is years of insult, accusations of conspiracy, and continuous slanders intended to force your retreat. If they can't attack the case you've built, they'll just attack the author. I don't know many people who would stand for it without saying, "screw you -- I'm outta here", which is exactly what they want. Many of these critics adopt this aggressive and ultimately alienating strategy without even bothering to examine the case materials (case in point being Lehmberg's recent reactions to my attempts to defend a point of view that he hasn't even bothered to address). Any refusals to get involved in order to avoid either (1) insults, slander, and various accusations of paranoid origin, or (2) having your name forever associated with a crowd of fruitcakes on a crusade presenting more lies and ridiculous assessments, must make the ignore-option pretty attractive.
User avatar
James Carlson
Clearly Discerns Reality
Clearly Discerns Reality
 
Posts: 783
Joined: Sat Mar 06, 2010 7:11 am
Location: Albuquerque, NM

Re: SUNlite 4-1 RB-47 case

Postby astrophotographer » Fri Jan 13, 2012 12:32 am

I received an aeronautical chart today from 1957. I was able to purchase the sectional that includes Biloxi and Gulfport (not expensive since it was from a used book store). The reason I did this was to see if there was an air route that went towards Meridian that might be on the map. There isn't one. The only thing of interest is a Radio range transmitter that was NNE of Keesler AFB. There are some crude airways but they mostly go from Mobile to New Orleans. There is nothing that goes up the 89th meridian or anywhere else. It is very large and scanning it is going to take some time. If anyone is interested, just contact me and I can send you a copy.
User avatar
astrophotographer
Clearly Discerns Reality
Clearly Discerns Reality
 
Posts: 577
Joined: Mon Sep 21, 2009 5:46 pm

Re: SUNlite 4-1 RB-47 case

Postby Frank Stalter » Fri Jan 13, 2012 4:40 am

I read the RB-47 case over and Tim Printy did a nice job as did Tim Hebert over at his site about the Malmstrom case. =D> =D>
Frank Stalter
 
Posts: 44
Joined: Sat Aug 21, 2010 12:37 am

Re: SUNlite 4-1 RB-47 case

Postby Tim Hebert » Fri Jan 13, 2012 5:15 am

Frank Stalter wrote:I read the RB-47 case over and Tim Printy did a nice job as did Tim Hebert over at his site about the Malmstrom case.


Thanks Frank for taking the time to look things over. I read your piece on Drake and Fermi and found it very enlightening and revealing in details that the general public never delves into.

Tim
Tim Hebert
Focused on Reality
Focused on Reality
 
Posts: 491
Joined: Thu May 20, 2010 11:29 pm

Previous

Google

Return to UFOs

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: Exabot [Bot] and 15 guests