If You Knew UFOs were real
By Joseph Capp
hit the ground running
The Matter of NASA Photo Technician Donna Tietze
…well, I let her resume speak for itself…
Formerly of NASA, photographic slide technician, the recipient of numerous space awards including 1969 Apollo Achievement award from the National Aeronautics & Space Administration, 1973 Skylab award, a medallion for success on the Skylab-Suez Test project… And much more
Ms. Tietze includes in her statement to the Disclosure Project that she:
-Was shown by a friend at NASA lab a photo of a UFO --its shadow and that of a “pine trees” and that they airbrushed the UFOs out before selling them to the public.
-Was told by another employee she dated that “NASA astronauts were warned not to speak of UFOs.
-Were told that astronauts had been followed to the moon and had photographed [non-American, perhaps non-human founded] moon bases.
This is transcribed from the original recording, as clearly as they could get:
James Oberg, a science writer, is convinced Donna Tietze’s story about what she saw is impossible. Oberg raises objections to Donna Tietze’s data.
Oberg believes she couldn’t have witnessed the photo she claimed because: “From what I know of NASA space photography, I believe it was impossible then or now for NASA to produce Earth surface images with sufficient detail to show a tree and its shadow. A vigorous search by several UFO buffs recently for such pictures in NASA's archives (the photo was described as being prepared for public sale) failed to locate any. Oberg proves and has support from Veteran NASA earth photography specialist Paul Lowman that lanstat satellite couldn’t take photos with that detail and even last Skylab couldn’t produce below probably 30 meters. (See Note)
Then Lowman says --and here’s where the case get’s interesting--“Ms. Hare then retorted that of course NASA had such pictures: ‘We not only had the technology to see a number on a golf ball back then, we used it in the Bay of Pigs -- remember? -- to see Cuban/Russian missiles aimed at our country.’" (March 25, 1999) Aside from a confusion of the Bay of Pigs with the Cuban Missile Crisis, and the use at that time of U-2 spy planes, not satellites, the additional confusion of what super-secret military spy satellites could see and what NASA was interested in and had in its possession, gives me additional confidence that my disbelief in this story is logical.
Let me start off this by emphasizing that I am not a scientist. I thank the powers that be in this instance you don’t have to be. Just using common sense seems to suffice. I find it incredulous to believe either Oberg or Lowman could know all the secrets regarding satellites or Skylab. In fact they admit they don’t We find millions of documents still classified from the sixties.
Did Oberg or Lowman know they took pictures of Area 51 aboard Skylab before it was reveled? They agreed not to photograph Area 51. Not even the CIA knew it. There was a deal struck between the CIA and NASA. NASA agreed to run all the pictures they took of land through the CIA first. We don’t know all details of the deal.. Could NASA have been part of the sanitation process on U2 pictures? Did some of these close up images wind up on major contractor’s walls as a type of insider prize?
Oberg may say that is ridiculous. For me the missing Apollo tapes is more unbelievable then the industrial complex getting special treatment. It would look great in the seventies to have U2 close ups above your desk. Impressive.
Donna Tietze was in a restricted lab at NASA that did all kinds of work with photos; one section prepared photos for public sale. Remember this was only one part of what they did. “They did everything over there”. Let’s first listen to what Donna Tietze said:
“And while I was in there I was trying to learn new methods and new things about the whole organization and I was looking at the pictures and he directed my attention to one area, he said, "Look at that!" I looked and there was a round oval shaped, well it was very white circular shape of a dot and I, it was black & white photography, so I asked him if that was a spot on the emulsion and he said, ‘well I can't tell you but spots on the emulsion do not leave round circles of shadows’.” Next Donna looks closer: “I believe they were satellite pictures but I’m not sure.” She seems to expect a certain resolution, herself: “‘you know, pretty close to the ground what I saw but I didn't see an outline of the continent.” Donna Tietz expected to see the same thing Oberg would expect to see: the edge of a continent. Then she sees what he’s talking about: “Right, a round shadow! And I notice that there were pine trees, now I don't know where this area was or what, you know, pretty close to the ground what I saw but I didn't see outline of the continent. But I did notice that there was a shadow under this white dot and I also noticed that the trees were casting the shadow in the same direction as this shadow of the circle of this aerial phenomena because it was higher than the trees but not too much higher than the trees but it was close to the ground and it was spherical but slightly elongated, not very much but slightly. I then said, is it a UFO? And he said, ‘Well, I can't tell you’.” What he tells her next is heresay on his part, but because of what he shows her, she starts to believe it’s possible and pursues it. Oberg is right that they never found the photos (interesting he quotes UFO Buffs as the source). We are still left with the statement about the origins of the photo: “I don’t know.” I hope Oberg feels someday how it is to see something in great detail that shouldn’t be real. It tends to shake you. At this point, I take Donna Tietze’s word over James Oberg’s, or NASA’s and the CIA’s. But more about UFO photos. Donna goes on: “I also met a security guard that was forced to burn a lot of UFO pictures…I used to work out there. And one day some soldiers came in fatigues and had me burn pictures. He said that he was burning them and he was forced not to look at them. But he was tempted. He looked at one of them and it was a UFO on the ground.”
Possible answer to the missing photos? I want to know where the hell are those Apollo Tapes? Maybe we’re looking in the wrong place. Oberg tries to tarnish Donna Tietze’s credibility by citing her affiliation with “UFO Contact Center International” 1981. (UFOCCI), a non-profit organization set up in the early1980s to help those traumatized by UFO experiences through counseling and group support. These group included people who believed they were abducted by entities. Another primary objective was to help educate the public regarding the reality of UFOs.
Some of the group attendees were tested by “National Institute Of Discovery Science”(NIDS) to see if they were within the psychological normal range as compare to other goups. NIDS prepared questionnaires. Some of the attendees refused the remainder was tested. 35 took the test they fell into the normal range. By way of mudslinging, Oberg also mentions Tietze’s 1999 conference presentation about an experience she had in early childhood and possible abduction. NIDS site hard to read:http://www.nidsci.org/articles/abductees.php To best address this aspect of Donna Tietze’s testimony, I suggest the reader consider exercising a little extra understanding. Again and again in this UFO field, we’re finding that once you open the lid to this reality, the need to find meaning in it becomes a top priority. This to me is natural and a healthy reaction. I don’t know if Donna Tietze was abducted or somehow came to believe she was abducted. Oberg agrees she believed in what she says. Believing you have the answer that aliens exist can only be topped by believing you have found the meaning to life. Donna Tietze’s experiences later in her life, does not for me diminish one iota of my belief in her testimony. Her experiences at work in the NASA photo labs, and what colleagues, said to her. I believe her statements deserve serious consideration. If there is anyone out there who knows for sure, now is a good time to come forward. Our country is in shambles because there are just too many secrets. It takes a major disaster before the top become exposed. This disaster could end humanity.
Note: Did anyone ever wonder if Donna made a mistake regarding the type of trees (Pine)? We have some pretty tall trees in America. Big enough for, say, Skylab.
Take a look at just some of the witnesses. I guess it’s all a big “conspiracy.
Part Two “IS NASA Still Touching up Photos?