Sun 17th Jan 2010 - John Carpenter on Leonard Stringfield

[Gene Steinberg]

Well there is no debate about the matter - Cooper told me exactly what happened over the phone and the subject has been covered on several other tv interviews. I have a private taped conversation which is not mine to release to the public where he covers the same ground. But its an honest msitake. I can see how anyone could make it. We always dont remember all the facts. Len Stringfield was one of my earlier "influences" - I remember reading his 3 O Blue book. Its available free on the web . Just google it if interested.

Thanks for the additional info, Tim.

 

[bluecat]

Hmm. An alien with four fingers and no thumbs.

Just for fun, hold your thumb against your palm and, just using four fingers, try to pick up a pencil or open a door.

BlueCat

 

[Decker]

Don't think your wrong. But I am not sure. I do remember reading a thread on the the Paracast forums about Coopers claims. Carpenter let us not forget said, towards the end of the show. That he had in his hands a signed document our statement from Cooper. Where Cooper claimed to have personally filmed the UFO landing in the desert. I wonder has he handed a copy over to Gene and David?

But there could be a problem. If Cooper said on the James fox documentary, that he was not a witness or had seen the UFO land. Cooper; I saw the film/pictures of the UFO when they where given to me. Then there will be more questions. Two different versions been given is problematic.

Hi all. For what it is worth, a number of years ago my wife and I visited Colonel Gordon Cooper at his offices in Van Nuys, CA. for about a 3 hour or so interview. This was not long after his book was released. I had read it prior to going over to see him and questioned him extensively about the Edwards landing case. Cooper told us that no, he did not witness the UFO landing but his men filmed it fly in, land on "legs" and when they approached the disc, it retracted the legs and flew off. While the film was being developed Cooper looked up what was to be done in case of something (UFO encounter?) like this, made calls and was ordered to have the film ready to be picked up by military courier. The film was brought back to Cooper (and he said he was ordered to NOT view it, and he didn't. However he said he did unwind some of it and look at a number of frames with the disc clearly visible. When the courier arrived Cooper hand carried it to him, the guy took it and flew right out. Cooper then said he never again heard another word about this incident.

Decker
<input id="gwProxy" type="hidden"><!--Session data--><input onclick="jsCall();" id="jsProxy" type="hidden">

 

[The Pair of Cats]

Hello,

I just got through the preamble, and stopped the "tape" to comment on David's negative remarks about last week's preamble. David, I thought last week's preamble was kind of funny. It's all good, brother. Don't sweat the details. I actually find it entertaining and refreshing to hear you and Gene chat in an open and honest manner, prior to bringing on the guests.

It's yet another element that sets your show apart from the other stuff out there. I mean, does anyone else agree with me that those droning, painfully boring 7-10 minute guest-background preambles that Binnall does on his show are annoying and useless as hell? I want to hear the guest, and if I need to research the guest, I can do that offline.

I'd much rather hear you guys shooting the shit in an intelligent, topical manner than waste my time hearing about how your guest went to university here, then worked here, then worked there, then won this award here, then wrote this book, then went to work here, then won anther award, then moved to this city where he wrote his latest book... oops. I'm asleep.

Haven't heard the show yet, Apocalypto, but having said that i too enjoy the preamble.

 

[Gareth]

Thanks Don and Tim. That's definitely what I've heard frm numerous sources.

I guess it will be interesting to see what Carpenter comes up with. It's likely he just remembered the document incorrectly.

 

[AdamI]

As far as the craft being larger on the inside, absolutely possible. It's completely, 100% feasible. Unless and until we get to truly understand even half of the details of some of these flying saucers, how can we begin to judge that something like that is not possible? How can we be so presumptuous as to speculate on the internal dimensionality of a craft that we don't understand, a craft coming from perhaps even another dimension, not necessarily even just from a physical location?

I wasn't denying that it's possible... at least not categorically. It is a stretcher though.

But what I was saying is that even if it is possible, it seems like the question to ask is: what happened when you loaded it onto a truck or a transport plane, sent it to a hangar, and started messing with it?

That's the part I find unbelievable... either that or one of our underground nuclear tests wasn't really an underground nuclear test. :O

 

[Ezechiel]

I found a quote from John Mack which is very relevant to this thread:

http://www.pbs.org/wgbh/nova/aliens/johnmack.html

There is a—I believe, a gradation of experiences and that go from the most literal physical kinds of hurts, wounds, person removed, spacecraft that can be photographed, to experiences which are more psychological, spiritual, involve the extension of consciousness. The difficulty for our society and for our mentality is, we have a kind of either/or mentality. It's either, literally physical; or it's in the spiritual other realm, the unseen realm. What we seem to have no place for—or we have lost the place for—are phenomena that can begin in the unseen realm, and cross over and manifest and show up in our literal physical world.

So the simple answer would be: Yes, it's both. It's both literally, physically happening to a degree; and it's also some kind of psychological, spiritual experience occurring and originating perhaps in another dimension. And so the phenomenon stretches us, or it asks us to stretch to open to realities that are not simply the literal physical world, but to extend to the possibility that there are other unseen realities from which our consciousness, our, if you will, learning processes over the past several hundred years have closed us off.

 

[Ezechiel]

Hmm. An alien with four fingers and no thumbs.

Just for fun, hold your thumb against your palm and, just using four fingers, try to pick up a pencil or open a door.

BlueCat

The internal bone configuration for the hands could be wildly different. The way they pick up objects could use a different strategy. I wouldn't pass judgement without the input of an expert in skeletal mechanics and environmental adaptation. We evolved from apes that dangled from trees .... maybe their planet doesn't have trees LOL and don't forget that some human features are expected to disappear in the next 1000 years (useless small toe in the foot).

 

[Schuyler]

(useless small toe in the foot).

It's not useless. If you have a choice of which toes to amputate, don't cut off the big toe or the small toe. Cut one of them in the middle so you can still stand up.

 

[Will Penguin]

Hey, this is going off on a somewhat weird tangent, but... I would REALLY be interested to hear some thoughts from anyone here who wants to go back and listen carefully, with headphones, to the show at about 54:10, right after David says "He was a PR guy, right?"

I don't want to taint things by saying what I heard. But I would really like some people to give a listen.

 

[aNorthernSoul]

Yeah, I heard that. I think it was just compression creating a bit of an artifact to a usual breathe/moan like sound. There was a number of similar tiny strange noises throughout the show.

 

[Schuyler]

There was a short "Bzzzzt" kind of sound, low to high in frequency, probably a second or less. You think it's something special, like aliens listening in or something?

 

[Will Penguin]

There was a short "Bzzzzt" kind of sound, low to high in frequency, probably a second or less.

To be clear: I'm not an "EVP guy", or whatever; I never really even think about stuff like that when listening to anything. But the first time I listened to the show, it totally startled me, because it sounded like a weirdly-intonated. "Uh-huh". But it's clear, on repeated listening it's not a vocal sound made by the hosts or guest.

That it "answered" David weirded me out. I'm not audio engineer but it doesn't sound that much like other sound artifacts I've heard on podcasts.

I wanted to see if it sounded uncannilylike an "uh-huh" to anyone else. Eh, maybe it's just me.

*shrug*

 

[Ezechiel]

It's not useless. If you have a choice of which toes to amputate, don't cut off the big toe or the small toe. Cut one of them in the middle so you can still stand up.

You're right again ... except for the standing up part My information was dated

http://en.allexperts.com/q/Anthropology-2291/little-toe-adaptive.htm

If a genetically-programmed trait is neither advantageous nor maladaptive, i.e., if it is "neutral" it will not disappear. A basic principle of evolution is that when you relax selection, you get increased variability. So, for example, visual acuity. Among our ancestors, the ability to see a lion hiding in tall grass had very definite fitness consequences. Early humans with genetic programming for poor eyesight probaby ended up as lion food more often than ones with better eyesight. Nowadays, in most parts of the world, there are no lions and there are technological fixes for poor eyesight (glasses, lasic surgury). Consequently, there is a wide range of variability in visual acuity. Similarly, shoes compensate for much of the variation in small toe morphology that we see among humans today.
The small toe is not disappearing. It's been relatively small since Pliocene times (>1.7-5 Million years ago), when the foot was re-shaped under the influence of selective factors relating to bipedalism. It is vestigal, though, it really doesn't play much of a role in locomotion. (When I was young I knew a fellow who lost his small toe to a lawnmower, and he nevertheless went on to become a varsity sprinter and hurdle jumper.)
You are exactly correct, that for the little toe to disappear, there would have to be selection against it, -people lacking it would have to have a reproductive advantage over those who do.
I hope this helps.
Cheers
John Shea

 

[Schuyler]

I wanted to see if it sounded uncannilylike an "uh-huh" to anyone else. Eh, maybe it's just me.

I suppose you could put it on a scope to see. I couldn't hear the Uh Huh myself. It sounded like a continuous tone, low to high. But a scope would show the variation.

Something similar: Armstrong is often mis-quoted as saying, "That's one small step for man, one giant leap for mankind," which makes absolutely no sense because 'man' has the same definition as 'mankind' in this context. What he said was "a man" which makes sense because he's reasoning from the specific to the general and also reflects some humility. He slurred the two together when he said it, but recently, a digital analysis of the recording proved he said "a man." Of course, he was under some pressure and it's to his credit he was able to say anything. If it were me, I would have been tempted to say,

"Fuck! I'm on the fucking moon!"

 

[David Biedny]

"Fuck! I'm on the fucking moon!"

OMG, I almost shot hot tea out of my nostrils when I read that. LOL!

dB

 

[EQ42]

To be clear: I'm not an "EVP guy", or whatever; I never really even think about stuff like that when listening to anything. But the first time I listened to the show, it totally startled me, because it sounded like a weirdly-intonated. "Uh-huh". But it's clear, on repeated listening it's not a vocal sound made by the hosts or guest.

That it "answered" David weirded me out. I'm not audio engineer but it doesn't sound that much like other sound artifacts I've heard on podcasts.

I wanted to see if it sounded uncannilylike an "uh-huh" to anyone else. Eh, maybe it's just me.

*shrug*

Yeah, I heard it to. Thought it was kind of odd.

 

[Gareth]

I just listened to that particular section of the show in reverse. I got a reverse speech message.

 

[skunkape]

If it were me, I would have been tempted to say,

"Fuck! I'm on the fucking moon!"

I wonder if they were instructed by NASA to make no comments on the status of their space-diapers. I would have probably been more like, "Holy Chao...I'm on the moon...and I'm crapping in my diaper."
<input id="gwProxy" type="hidden"><!--Session data--><input onclick="jsCall();" id="jsProxy" type="hidden">

 

[Schuyler]

OK. Just finished with the entire episode. I think this is one of those cases here a person with a certain interest and a certain expertise gets to thinking he knows everything about a subject when he really has a very narrow base of knowledge. The thing about Cooper filming the craft landing is just a load of crap and shows Carpenter's hubris. He's not going to be able to prove that and e have Cooper on film stating exactly what happened and stating for the record that he saw the film, looked at a few frames via the window light, and passed it on.

Another thing struck me as strange. In describing the C-64 cargo plane encounter he said the left engine feathered and began streaming oil as it lost 2500 feet of attitude. Then, when the three craft disappeared, the engine started right up again and they proceeded to a smooth landing at Iwo Jima. BTW, that plane could run on one engine. Losing 2500 feet doesn't sound right either.

That makes no sense at all. If an engine begins streaming oil into the atmosphere, that means a physical malfunction. The engine didn't just turn off for lack of electricity to the spark plugs; it was broken. To have it start up again as if nothing had happened is incongruous. An engine without oil would seize up in a manner of seconds. Unless the aliens gave the engine a lube & oil change before they left, this sounds like a made up story.

Sorry, but I have major credibility problems with this guy.