It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.
Please white-list or disable AboveTopSecret.com in your ad-blocking tool.
Thank you.
Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.
Brian, 59, who alleges to be a former retired US Navy petty officer first class flight engineer in a squadron called Antarctic Development Squadron Six, claimed to have been part of a crew that flew through a “no fly zone” above Antarctica, and saw UFOs, aliens, and a giant entrance hole to an alien base.
Scientists have apparently broken the universe’s speed limit.
“This effect cannot be used to send information back in time,” said Lijun Wang, a researcher with the private NEC Institute. “However, our experiment does show that the generally held misconception that ‘nothing can travel faster than the speed of light’ is wrong.”
The achievement has no practical application right now, but experiments like this have generated considerable excitement in the small international community of theoretical and optical physicists.
originally posted by: schuyler
The phenomena does not "behave" in a manner consistent with our views of the structure of reality. We have no idea how to explain it, and the explanations we do get range from the religious to the outlandish to the completely naive. In short, it's a real mess and we may be being messed with.
We can't trust anyone, including the phenomena. I have been tracking the issue for the last fifty years myself, and I'm nowhere nearer a cogent explanation that when I started. We can read serious statements from credible people about how we should take the issue seriously, but after a certain point those statements add nothing of value to what we know. OK. I take it seriously. Now what?
originally posted by: shawmanfromny
Well done compilation! So many credible reports, from so many respectable sources, yet the sceptics still shrug it off as unverified information. Sightings from commercial and military pilots, are routinely dismissed as optical illusions, planets, or misidentified aircraft...
Nice work. I think that some of the answers are already known or there wouldn't be such a compilation available. If what has been seen and experienced by so many that is indicative of something being for real then it is logical that something does exist and likely to be to a greater extent than one imagines! We are not alone is no joke!! And those in the know covert the knowledge because they are afraid!
originally posted by: jeep3r
a reply to: mirageman
It's always nice to get such positive feedback, thanks a lot.
When talking about ufology turning into an entertainment industry, I think there have been quite a few rather recent initiatives to which that might apply. I believe it wouldn't be such a problem if the definitive nature of the phenomenon were better known, it would make it much easier to expose the dishonest or those who are only after the cash.
Regarding the origins, all options are indeed still on the table and we of course can't say whether these things are some sort of interdimensional manifestations or of extraterrestrial origin, or both... or even something entirely different. I try to keep an open mind but I'm sure we'll figure it out at some point, and I'm pretty confident that it won't take us another 50 years.
The phenomena does not "behave" in a manner consistent with our views of the structure of reality. We have no idea how to explain it, and the explanations we do get range from the religious to the outlandish to the completely naive. In short, it's a real mess and we may be being messed with. We can't trust anyone, including the phenomena.
That is why we aren't the UFO's, in part anyway!
originally posted by: Kandinsky
a reply to: jeep3r
Schuyler described the situation with great accuracy and a small word count:
The phenomena does not "behave" in a manner consistent with our views of the structure of reality. We have no idea how to explain it, and the explanations we do get range from the religious to the outlandish to the completely naive. In short, it's a real mess and we may be being messed with. We can't trust anyone, including the phenomena.
What I've noticed is how reflective the apparent phenomena are (or the phenomenon is) and how people cannot see past their own reference points. For example, the early NICAP board saw it as a military intelligence problem because that's what they did. Military pilots interpreted reports as flight technology and computer scientists (Vallee) treated it as an information science problem. Rocket scientists (Oberth, Paul Hill etc) saw it as a propulsion mystery and psychologists analysed it as a cognitive processing problem.
In that light, to study UFOs is to gaze at one's navel without realising.
In many ways, how we explain UFOs says more about us than it does about UFOs.