Tom DeLonge Anouncement: October 11th 9:00 AM PST/12:00 PM EST

originally posted by: thepixelpusher
a reply to: BASSPLYR

Yes, some has been given to corporations to reverse engineer, but the majority of the good stuff is still under lock and key in Utah despite your objections.

and you know this how other than via a suspect claim by elizondo et al.

also why do you keep claiming that black projects have been sent to Utah "the new area51!" where'd you get that notion? wait veteran ats members already know cause that claim comes from way back and is incorrect. what's the name of the place in Utah they are supposedly sent to. and furthermore name some of the places they likely would have actually been sent to (hint they aren't in utah)

finally why are you so adamant that humans are too stupid to figure this stuff out on their own without aliens as a scientific crutch.

a reply to: Sublant

you would find a lot more answers if you combed through old ats threads and posts than if you gobbled up ttsa "disclosure" narrative at face value. you have no idea who posts here on ats. certain forums here are watched by (and the members occasionally policed by ) three letter agencies for a reason.

use some logic of your own and see if you can spot the problems with this particular disclosure narrative and how it's been delivered. others can.

a reply to: BASSPLYR

damnit bass...now you've got me 'What if-ing' myself half to death...lol Always kinda assumed that to be the case tho.

a reply to: BASSPLYR

Maybe I would.

Or maybe not.

But Cmdr. Fravor didn't spend his time reading old discussion board threads. Instead he manned up, joined up and served. He rose through the ranks to command a strike fighter squadron and, while serving his country, had an extraordinary encounter. All his training, experience and knowledge led him to believe that what he encountered "was not of this earth".

You seem to imply he is either lying or mistaken. And if he is mistaken, he would've known how to correctly interpret the situation had he been reading ATS, with members from three letter agencies after all, instead of learning things like air-to-air combat, aerial recognition, aerodynamics etc.

So is he lying or mistaken? What do you base your allegation on?

I need to add that I have my doubts about the motives behind TTSA and esp. DeLonge. I'm starting to think Tom is at the same time a true believer, a willful idiot and suffers from delusions of grandeur. I honestly don't know what to make of his connection to Podesta and one world governmet/New Age angle.

That said, I'm glad the topic has gone mainstream and evidence and anecdotes are coming public. When they come, we need to look at them critically, but as I said, I'm glad they are coming out.

originally posted by: Sublant
a reply to: BASSPLYR

Maybe I would.

Or maybe not.

But Cmdr. Fravor didn't spend his time reading old discussion board threads. Instead he manned up, joined up and served. He rose through the ranks to command a strike fighter squadron and, while serving his country, had an extraordinary encounter. All his training, experience and knowledge led him to believe that what he encountered "was not of this earth".

You seem to imply he is either lying or mistaken. And if he is mistaken, he would've known how to correctly interpret the situation had he been reading ATS, with members from three letter agencies after all, instead of learning things like air-to-air combat, aerial recognition, aerodynamics etc.

So is he lying or mistaken? What do you base your allegation on?

His experience as a pilot if anything is not a plus for UFO observation according to one of the most prolific UFO researchers of all time, Dr. J Allen Hynek, who noted pilots are among the worst classes of observers of unidentified flying objects.

Case Studies In Pilot Misperceptions Of "UFOs"

Allen Hynek wrote: "Surprisingly, commercial and military pilots appear to make relatively poor witnesses..." The quote is from "The Hynek UFO Report", page 261 (Barnes and Noble reprint). (271 in original Dell, Dec 1977) He found that the best class of witnesses had a 50% misperception rate, but that pilots had a much higher rate: 88% for military pilots, 89% for commercial pilots. the worst of all categories listed.

Also the report posted on TTS says Fravor made a copy of his gun camera footage of the UFO (Which we've never seen yet, why not?) and yet his peers on the Nimitz were apparently mocking them for saying they saw something other-worldly. If he had this gun camera footage and it showed something other-worldly why didn't that convince his colleagues on the Nimitz who were making light of his claims? I'd like to see that gun camera video by the way.

coi.tothestarsacademy.com...

Source was furious colleagues on the ship were not taking the incident seriously...

So is he lying or mistaken? What do you base your allegation on?

That's a false dichotomy. From a logical perspective if you think he's not lying or mistaken, then you might conclude that his train of thought goes something like this:

"I saw an object I couldn't identify with performance characteristics beyond my experience so therefore I've identified the unidentified object as an alien space ship."

That's not the way logic works. If it's unidentified, it's unidentified and he didn't really identify it.

Source believed it was a flight safety issue at a minimum, especially if they were deliberately vectored to a testing location of a blue-force weapon system

So that alludes to the possibility of a blue-force weapon system by the source of the report, one of the 4 original eyewitnesses including Fravor. Blue-force weapon system does not imply something other worldly, though perhaps it could include advanced technology not in the public consciousness and with which the pilots may not be familiar.

originally posted by: thepixelpusher
a reply to: Arbitrageur
Simple. People have been programmed to deride the UFO topic so long that when real info comes along it gets laughed at.

How does one determine which of Ben Rich's jokes are "Real Info"?
Is the joke about Martians refusing to help him "real info"?
Is the joke about taking ET home "real info"?

Follow the money and you'll usually find the answers. The SEC submission documentation, although voluminous, is worth reading. For those of you who believe in "disclosure", I'm sorry to rain on your parade, but you might have a wake up call coming. This is an entertainment company, pure and simple. Revenues generated are through licensing of Mr. DeLonge's property and the development of mass social media campaigns. The notion that it's a "scientific endeavor" should be wiped clean from your minds once you read the full document.

Link to SEC documents: www.sec.gov...

A few salient points:

1. The company is organized as a "public benefit" company. That means it can use the crowd funding schemes to sell its stock. The stock has already been diluted (which is not unusual for a new company) but in their statement they said that further dilution was possible (in other words, expect the value of your stock to continue to go down).

2. Although the company says it intends to engage in "scientific and aerospace" research blah, blah, blah. The facts are:

(from SEC documentation)

Science

There is no currently identifiable market for the type of scientific exploration in which TTS AAS plans to engage (e.g., niche physics and consciousness). Our short-term approach is to invest in a theoretical and experimental laboratory to facilitate the company’s research projects, including Human Ultra-Experience Database, Engineering Space-Time Metrics, Brain-Computer Interface, and Telepathy. Until the company has identified the specific areas of Aerospace and Science in which it intends to invest, it is difficult to identify the target market. We anticipate an older demographic than that of the current TTS customer, with a U.S. focus and interest in space, technology, defense, unexplored phenomena, citizen science, and science fiction. We cannot predict what the size of that market will be, but we will develop psychographic segmentation of the new business to be able to target as specifically as we currently do for TTS’s existing customers. TTS AAS will be responsive to standards within each industry, as well as maintain a similar level of the social media interaction TTS currently employs with its current customers. Brand visibility TTS has high brand visibility. Combined social media followings for TTS, Tom DeLonge, Angels and Airwaves, and other original brands are as follows: · Facebook – 1.52 million · Twitter – 805,000

and

Market

While our Entertainment Division is established, our Aerospace and Science Divisions are yet to be developed. We intend to use a data-driven approach to reach existing and new audiences with engaging original content and expand our use of the following for both the existing and proposed business: expanded use of social media advertising and use of analytics, native retargeting, and influencer marketing. We will also pursue advertising strategy appropriate for the new products and services that we develop in future, which may deviate from our current plans. We intend to operate in diverse business sectors by way of vertical integration, for which there is currently no parallel marketplace. The Aerospace, Science and Entertainment Divisions each have their own market factors: Entertainment Globally, entertainment and media revenues are expected, according to PwC Annual Global Entertainment and Media Outlook 2016-2017, www.prnewswire.com, June 8, 2016, to rise from $1.7 trillion in 2015 to $2.1 trillion in 2020. In the United States during that same period, entertainment and media spending is expected to reach $720 billion, from $603 billion in 2015. Despite continued widespread industry disruption and intense competition for consumer attention, we believe that growth opportunities abound in the new media environment, especially with regards to mobile media as a content delivery mechanism. Estimated at $244 billion of current U.S. buying power, we anticipate that the entertainment and media market will see an increase in both influence and purchasing power. Anticipated growth in industries relevant to our current and proposed business plans by 2020 include, according to PwC's Entertainment & Media Outlook Forecasts: · TV & Video – 0.5% · Cinema – 1.2% · Book Publishing – 2.9% · Music – 3.5% Live experiences, consumers interacting in real time with mobile media, are also on the rise. We will continue TTS’s trend of engaging consumers where they live – online and on their mobile devices. TTS’s current consumers are based in the coastal regions of the United States, with a 75/25 male to female ratio, ages 18-34, with interests in music, entertainment, comedy, and comic books, and are fans of the bands Blink 182 and AVA. We will aim to attract these consumers through the following: · Our socially responsible business mission (public benefit corporation status) · Creating engaging content and sharing it through social media channels

This is the first scientific research organization which will conduct its business through Facebook! What a concept! Hell, this might be a new way for grad students to get funding!

Mr. DeLonge comes out smelling like of rose (of course):

We are required to pay a minimum royalty guarantee of $100,000 each calendar year. Under a Licensing Agreement, we are required to pay royalty payments to Tom DeLonge, Mr. Handsome, LLC, and Good In Bed Music, ASCAP (see “Intellectual Property”, “Liquidity and Capital Resources”, and “Interest of Management and Others in Certain Transactions”). If total royalty payments in any given calendar year are less than $100,000, we have agreed to pay any shortfall such that the annual minimum royalty paid under the Licensing Agreement will be $100,000. This means that we will have to pay this amount even when we have limited revenues, and this could materially reduce our earnings in any year. Failure to pay the minimum royalty guarantee could lead to termination of the Licensing Agreement, and termination of the Licensing Agreement could result in legal and financial harm to the company.

Just a side note: The entire proceeds collected through stock sales, which is approximately $900,000 to date, are allocated to Mr. DeLonge already by nature of the agreements contained in the SEC documents.

To be con't (follow the money)

Now for the numbers:



I wasn't able to enlarge the jpg or pick it up from the documentation in format - but you can find it in the documentation.

It essentially says that the company issued $26M in paper, then took it as a write off, or a loss, with a net cash balance of only $70,784. The stock is essentially a "benefit" to the principles of the company who will be able to exercise options. This is all in the documentation.

There is nothing illegal about how the company is organized. From what I understand, this is how entertainment companies are organized. The organization and documentation for TTSA was carried out by a law firm who specializes in online fund raising and the entertainment industry - www.khlklaw.com... You can read through their website to see who their clients are.

Believers will forever be believers. But facts will always be facts. TTSA is an entertainment enterprise marketing T-shirts, videos, social media etc.
One very important note is that NOWHERE in the documentation is ANYTHING mentioned about disclosure, UFOs, distribution of secret government documentation or anything regarding the current media campaign. They included all the bells and whistles, names, faces, interviews - you name it. But it is all under the umbrella of an ENTERTAINMENT COMPANY.

Get over it. You are being entertained. And for many, that's worthwhile in and of itself. As for the articles (BTW, the article in the NYT was NOT written by a NYT writer - it was a reprint from another publication), videos and whatever, believe what you want. Just remember that Mr. DeLonge has a 7 year contract which guarantees him $100,000 a year plus royalties regardless of sales - so I wouldn't expect "disclosure" any time soon.

a reply to: Arbitrageur

Performance characteritics of an observed object cannot be effectively judged by any fighter pilot unless he tries to imitate the performance of the object while going in the same direction of the object. This is the reason why pilots observations are below par

originally posted by: SacredLore
a reply to: BASSPLYR

Just because some authority somewhere made a claim does not make it true for me. If there are verifiable facts (not just statements by people, however important they may be), PLEASE let me know!

Make up your mind. Several posts prior to the one I am responding to here, you said: "If you don't even believe it when it is on MSNBC then honestly I don't know what will do for you. Tsk, tsk."

originally posted by: Majic

originally posted by: Sublant
I don't think some of you know how logic works.

Here's a good place to start: Logic

Conspicuously absent from logic are believing people because they are authorities and denigrating others for not sharing beliefs.

Selective acceptance of evidence is also foreign to logical thought.

If we were all to embrace logic, this would be a much shorter thread. Indeed, there would be a lot less to discuss in general.

Just wanted to see that post again.

a reply to: KansasGirl

Sorry, was running low on love. Someone scratched my Lambo, my dog bit me and my cam girl broke up with me.

a reply to: SacredLore

what!!??!! somebody scratched your Lambo!!??!! that's heinous! please don't tell me it was an Aventadore. coulda been worse. somebody coulda scratched your McLaren too.

a reply to: Majic
a reply to: KansasGirl

Not sure why you are trashing on the posts here. We've posted the UFO video and interviews with the pilot. And, the govt. seems okay with releasing info from a pentagon study. Either we're witnessing disclosure, since this NEVER happened before, or a trick. I'd vote disclosure, but I sense an agenda, like the cat is out of the bag with other nations governments and the USA wants to keep ahead of someone else scooping them. You can laugh at those here that think this is significant. You'll be laughing at Mark Springer, one of the owners, that thinks this is significant. Along with George Knaap. These 2 guys are not fantasy prone and are pretty well plugged in to the govt. and UFO investigative community. What do you know that they don't!??

originally posted by: thepixelpusher
a reply to: Majic
a reply to: KansasGirl
You can laugh at those here that think this is significant. You'll be laughing at Mark Springer, one of the owners, that thinks this is significant. Along with George Knaap. These 2 guys are not fantasy prone and are pretty well plugged in to the govt. and UFO investigative community. What do you know that they don't!??

They don't seem to know that a rotating lens flare is the likely explanation for the Gimbal video, and therefor casts huge doubt on the Nimitz video being anything but a an ambiguos blob drifting off screen as the camera moves away. The pilot of a different jet claims it's the same object and did otherworldly things which we never see in the video. We've heard nothing on these points from the celebrity UFO investigators or news reporters, while ordinary citizens are putting in the work themselves to analyze and unveil this sham.

All we've really got here is a pilot's testimony, which isn't much and certainly not any kind of credible proof of aliens. I don't care if the President of the United States, Donald Trump, tells me it might be.

originally posted by: Hyperboles
a reply to: Arbitrageur

Performance characteritics of an observed object cannot be effectively judged by any fighter pilot unless he tries to imitate the performance of the object while going in the same direction of the object. This is the reason why pilots observations are below par

And some ground pounder or key board expert who knows NOTHING about aircraft or what it feels like to pull 8 "Gs" should be listened to ?

If I need a heart operation I go to a heart specialist

If I need my race car to corner better I go to a suspension specialist

If I want to do a certain acrobatic maneuver I can read a book or go fly with someone who preforms the maneuver all the time. Both work as a learning tool...... however the heart specialist or the suspension specialist may have an opinion but their opinions are just useless as most opinions about aviation by those who have no experience and very little if any knowledge.

I would take a professional pilots word for what he saw and his opinion over any other expert you can name..

a reply to: BASSPLYR

Thank alien-god, the McLaren is safe. But I am seriously considering downgrading to the Porsche when I hang out in Monaco or St. Tropez. Them bicycling hippies just know no respect for a decent vehicle.

a reply to: Iridomyrmex

This is the type of criticism I can follow. The interview with the pilot gives the other video (Nimitz) some weight and perspective, but I agree: Even this is not conclusive and indisputable evidence for a phenomenon that cannot be explained with conventional knowledge (Nimitz video switches from 1x to 2x zoom at the very moment the object breaks away to the left). On the other hand, it is also not disproven and remains of great interest, I find.

originally posted by: thepixelpusher
Either we're witnessing disclosure, since this NEVER happened before, or a trick. I'd vote disclosure, but I sense an agenda, like the cat is out of the bag with other nations governments and the USA wants to keep ahead of someone else scooping them.

This sums it up well. Again, it will be an exercise in patience until we will hear more from TTSA (you've all ain't seen nothing yet...).

Let's just hope that it happens before we all, believers and non-believers alike, get farted out of existence by mother earth.

Good clarification about TWO videos (it seems 2 is already an overwhelming number) and deeper analysis of the Gimbal video: