Bigelow, UFOs, MUFON and ‘DeLonge’ Road to AATIP

originally posted by: pigsy2400
a reply to: Arouet

who are the supposed kings of ufology?
What are their names?

The only people that have really driven the narrative within Ufology over the last 50 years are either directly connected to TTSA or have loose connections to them. The others are within the IC its-self, that has openly admitted to spreading disinformation about little green men to use it as cover to protect USAF assets, such as the U2 and the stealth program which are only 2 examples.

They are the story tellers, the narrative pushers, the conference speakers, the book sellers, the merchandise sellers, the podcast hosts. We are simply people on an internet forum, who don't have any say in what goes on nor do we decide on the direction of the narrative that is being presented. All we can do is dissect the information that is presented, have a logical, adult debate around the "facts" and information that is presented.

If you are implying anyone here, bar a few, we are just people on an internet forum and with the greatest of respect, most people don't listen to people on internet forums, nor do we consider this "our turf"

The irony is, that you defend and spout TTSA PR as truth, when in fact the people within it and connected to are the story tellers that want to control the narrative.

I'm not going to give you a history of Ufology, you clearly have access to Google and YT. But in all main stories over the last 25-30 years, the same people come up time and time again. Guess what? Most of them are involved in TTSA as I stated previously or at worst loosely connected. This is not however an indication that they are "working towards the truth" or for the good of the people, most of these people have their own self agendas, interests; some of which are financial, others have had their occult/theosophical interests and funding cut and want more money for their hobby to continue.

huh?

wtf?

"The only people that have really driven the narrative within Ufology over the last 50 years are either directly connected to TTSA or have loose connections to them."

Are you scared of other people actually thinking for themselves instead of subscribing to the mass media and YouTube programming that you've fallen victim to?

Your disagreement is fine. Your disagreement is welcome. Your arguments, examples, data, and multi-colored rainbow text posts, however, have no logical legs to stand on.

Take a deep breath and think for a moment. Why are you posting this thread? Is it not to "get the word out?"

If you truly believe that the world is in peril, your goal should be to convince everyone that something is afoot, and that they need to take action. So far, all you have done is insult and harass the very people you need to convince. If you can make a well reasoned, compelling case, you can convince others of the situation and we, in turn, will spread the word. I have contacts in the worlds of both science and government, and would do everything in my power to make them aware of the situation if you can prove it is anything other than your own over-stimulated, fear driven imagination.

Now stop derailing your own thread and bring something to the table other than Elizondo's clothes, CIA mind-control topic woo-woo and attempting to connect dots...that don't exist.

Actually, some of us are partial to letting factual real data be known, all based in reality, information that can be checked and independently verified, where others can draw whatever conclusion they want, preferably leaving the wild fantasies behind where reasonable, logical debate based on actual real world facts without silly unsupported speculations, may then occur.

You, or anyone, including myself, are free to believe what we will.

We, you, myself, and anyone else on this thread, are also free to express those beliefs, whether they are based in reality, or, in your case not.

a reply to: vlawde

That has been attempted vlawde, but to no avail.

Debate and adult discussion seem to be absent from some people's personalities.

I've asked to back on topic a few times..but oh well.
When it rains it pours..

a reply to: Arouet

Please provide examples of where I have been "fearful" and examples of where I have subscribed to the mass media and YouTube. The history of UFOlogy is out there, just look for it.

Also, insults and harassment? Examples would be most welcome.

I see, so when people don't subscribe to your inferno of trolling this thread with posts that you do not allow discussion around and logical adult debate at all, you turn it down a notch to seem more pleasant and logical only to then try and then turn it on its head when it doesn't quite work out for you.

Nice try...

Have a great day..

originally posted by: Willtell
a reply to: Arouet


This thread was peaceful with adults disagreeing agreeably until you showed up with all your rancor.

Pardon me.

This thread turned into a Delonge/TTSA bashing, no discussion, on the very first page of the thread.

Let The Childishness Begin

You do realize where you are, yes? No?

It is much more the nature of the evidence presenter than the evidence itself which wins the day on an ATS discussion thread. If you see this tried and true concept as immaterial or unreal, and I suspect you do, at least you have been properly informed and can expect that the results of your further engagement, including this absurd idea of dictating evidentiary rules on a public forum, will continue to be make you feel swell but gurgle down the toilet of public evacuation.

originally posted by: Arouet
The response from the ufological community has been surprisingly petulant and hostile, imo. It's like they see this subject as "their turf," and they seem to feel threatened by TTSA and the AATIP story.

Apparently the majority of the people in the field see themselves as the gatekeepers of the truth, and this new organization has pilfered their megaphones, because TTSA is getting us actual, legitimate new information of extremely significant value....something that the ufologists who have made a home in this field for the last several decades, haven't been able to provide. Especially the ones in this thread, the "keyboard cynics".

Did you ever believe that a such convoluted, controversial, 'wild' topic would NOT attract cynicism? Especially after all these decades and lessons learned from a rogues gallery of shady individuals? There will always be cynics. You can either ignore them and stick passionately to your admirable defensive stance towards TTSA - which truly deserves its own advocate, just as anyone under suspicion - or attack them incessantly with an underlying, rather unpleasant aggressive stance not exhibited by anyone else here.

The latter stance is gathering pace, and it isn't pretty for anyone since you clearly disagree with the entire drive of the thread since its inception. As has been said, we are just people on the internet.

Here's an idea. Arouet - start a passionate, positive-leaning TTSA thread that details all the factors that convince you of Elizondo and Co's inherent worth - a counterpoint to Mirageman's take, if you will. It will be YOUR baby, your ship; you'll be the Captain at the helm, and I'll find it just as fascinating to read, wallow in, and discuss on a friendly basis. Even Zondo's attire can be entirely ignored into the bargain.

DO it. You know you want to. And I want you to, if that's worth anything from one person on the internet to another.

originally posted by: pigsy2400
a reply to: ctj83

I think their focus is really all about the biological effects of people interacting with the phenomena at close range and the effects that have been caused. Humans are data sets, nodes of information, we have biological readouts, UAP related injuries and other things that are measurable. I think this is the reason why they have so many biologists on-board, I cant think of any other reason why they would have them on-board otherwise!

You know, I've been thinking about this a lot. A lot. Yeah I can't shake it either.

My initial thought, and I'm still fiddling with a few of the finer *cough* kevprettybear *cough* details, is that they (Hoff et al) need the bio-phemon-psychic data, as I call it, the data sets of the nodes as you say (good way of putting it actually) to be able to build a schema (software devs know this term) of sorts that allows a 'kind' of technology to be able to bridge the 'gap' to THEM. The schema would detail the 'layering' so to speak that the tech would access and how. An occult API if you like.
Better way of thinking of this, in a simple practical way, is a particualr ST:Voyager episode where the character Chakotay has a device, which looks like a hand-sized dark pebble. He explains to the other character that his ancestors used to use substances to access the spirit world; but now we have this [points to the device.]

I think they're trying to prototype one of them or something close. It's bio-tech of the proper PKD style. It's bio-tech, but not as we know it Jim.

While we re nort on the subject...nyuk...

Jack Brewer doesn't know what he's talking about. An "ASA" could refer to any one of dozens of different types of airborne technologies:

www.designation-systems.net...

These include displays, like a radar display. Which is what the TTSA indicated on their Gimbal page:

“There is a whole fleet of them. Look on the ASA (radar display).”

coi.tothestarsacademy.com...

The pilot clearly says "There's a whole fleet of them. Look on the ASA." Obviously he's talking about a display, not a frickin' log book. If he was talking about a log book, he would've said "look in the ASA" or "look at the ASA." But he said "look on the ASA," so he's talking about some kind of display, which showed the pilot "a whole fleet of them," which is why he says "Gosh!" And since when does the military fly an entire fleet of drones? If I understand correctly, drones are flown on solo missions, not in fleets.

Also, a pilot's log book, from what I can gather, is used by the pilot to document details about their own flights. It doesn't provide a list of other aircraft in the vicinity, as Mr. Brewer is wildly and evidently incorrectly guessing here.

I'm not an F-18A Superhornet fighter jock, so I don't know exactly what an ASA is. But clearly Jack Brewer is wrong: they're not talking about a log book, they're looking at some kind of display which visually showed them a fleet of objects in the sky.

Maybe the other pilot was right, and it was some kind of drone. Perhaps an alien drone, for example. In the Nimitz case, for example, the radar operators have testified that entire fleets of a dozen or more anomalous targets appeared on their radar all at the same time - and when approached, these devices would drop from 28,000ft to 50ft above the ocean in .78 second. But it sounds to me like the other pilot in this case was simply guessing out loud when he said "it's a drone, dude." We don't know what that object in the video is. Need more info instead of the usual disengaged banter from pseudo-celebrities like Brewer who is best known for his "stunning research" on the Gene Steinberg Begging Affairs train wreck.



Rather than bad guesses, like "ASA = flight log."

originally posted by: mirageman

originally posted by: ctj83
a reply to: mirageman

"Rerecord not fadeaway" proved to be true I guess.

Excellent analysis. Literally the skeletons in my closet (storage facilities). They will be buried the longest too.

Scotch is highly recommended. Ring any Bells?

Man bringing back memories of the old collection. Quite agree Scotch were the best make.

The format that should've made it was V2000. Tapes like TDK for music; 4 hours one side, eject and flip like your fave mix tape. Plus - at least matching the pic quality of the betas.

Even my VCR remote had rank. It was after all a Sony Commander. [dial jog, flip top, ton of buttons like a mini flight deck]
Ah good times.

Hiding UFOs In Las Vegs

"Sara Seager, an astrophysicist at M.I.T., cautioned that not knowing the origin of an object does not mean that it is from another planet or galaxy. “When people claim to observe truly unusual phenomena, sometimes it’s worth investigating seriously,” she said. But, she added, “what people sometimes don’t get about science is that we often have phenomena that remain unexplained.” James E. Oberg, a former NASA space shuttle engineer and the author of 10 books on spaceflight who often debunks U.F.O. sightings, was also doubtful. “There are plenty of prosaic events and human perceptual traits that can account for these stories,” Mr. Oberg said. “Lots of people are active in the air and don’t want others to know about it. They are happy to lurk unrecognized in the noise, or even to stir it up as camouflage.”

Ever notice how these mainstream corporate news media articles always reserve the last word for authoritative skeptics who aren't involved with the story and who don't seem to be familiar with the key facts? Seager and Oberg, for example, don't even seem to be aware of the USS Nimtiz CSG case, or the findings of the Pentagon's AATIP, and yet their generalized boiler-plate comments appear at the conclusion of the article.

If "lots of people" have aerial devices that can suddenly drop from 28,000ft to a dead stop 50ft above the ocean in .78 second, Mr. Oberg, then we'd have to be dramatically far behind our geopolitical adversaries in the area of aersospace technology.

Obviously such devices do not originate from any terrestrial inventory.

originally posted by: pigsy2400
a reply to: Arouet

But in all main stories over the last 25-30 years, the same people come up time and time again. Guess what? Most of them are involved in TTSA as I stated previously or at worst loosely connected. This is not however an indication that they are "working towards the truth" or for the good of the people, most of these people have their own self agendas, interests; some of which are financial, others have had their occult/theosophical interests and funding cut and want more money for their hobby to continue.

Thought I'd join in the discussion here. I've been following this thread since the beginning, and what pigsy2400 said here is something everyone should keep in mind.

Every one of the TTSA guys, minus Zondo and TDL, have been orbiting UFOlogy for a long time. That in itself is enough to warrant the skepticism.

That doesn't mean there isn't hope though, I myself still remain optimistic that they will produce something of substance. I don't think the material investigation will go anywhere, but I hope they will release official documents relating to the Nimitz incident soon.

I think the best hope for TTSA, is to prove enough, that it generates interest for academics and scientists who have stayed away for fear of losing their jobs and the ridicule in the past. If they can do that, then the whole field moves forward towards the answers we all seek.

originally posted by: ConfusedBritDid you ever believe that a such convoluted, controversial, 'wild' topic would NOT attract cynicism? Especially after all these decades and lessons learned from a rogues gallery of shady individuals? There will always be cynics. You can either ignore them and stick passionately to your admirable defensive stance towards TTSA - which truly deserves its own advocate, just as anyone under suspicion - or attack them incessantly with an underlying, rather unpleasant aggressive stance not exhibited by anyone else here.

You confuse cynicism with skepticism. The former is what is constantly exhibited in this thread. If you're skeptical about an upcoming project, for e.g., it is because you don't have reasons to believe it is good, but I know it's an uninformed opinion. If you're cynical about it, you're assuming nothing good's going to come out of it. It is this cynicism which fuels the Elizondo clothes meme, the lies and distortions and continued attempts to distract from the nature of the TTSA directive.

The latter stance is gathering pace, and it isn't pretty for anyone since you clearly disagree with the entire drive of the thread since its inception.

Yes, I disagree that purposefully cynical trolling is repulsive.

Here's an idea. Arouet - start a passionate, positive-leaning TTSA thread that details all the factors that convince you of Elizondo and Co's inherent worth - a counterpoint to Mirageman's take, if you will. It will be YOUR baby, your ship; you'll be the Captain at the helm, and I'll find it just as fascinating to read, wallow in, and discuss on a friendly basis. Even Zondo's attire can be entirely ignored into the bargain.

DO it. You know you want to. And I want you to, if that's worth anything from one person on the internet to another.

Sir, I know you mean well but let me let you in on a little something.

Reading this thread was like pulling really thick, tangled butt knots out of my golden retriever. Hard to do, dull, and with little or no payoff.

I doubt that I will propagate it.

a reply to: MrRussell

Keep going Mr Russell.

originally posted by: Chronic_Blaze


Thought I'd join in the discussion here. I've been following this thread since the beginning, and what pigsy2400 said here is something everyone should keep in mind.

Every one of the TTSA guys, minus Zondo and TDL, have been orbiting UFOlogy for a long time. That in itself is enough to warrant the skepticism.

Every one?

That doesn't mean there isn't hope though, I myself still remain optimistic that they will produce something of substance. I don't think the material investigation will go anywhere, but I hope they will release official documents relating to the Nimitz incident soon.

I think the best hope for TTSA, is to prove enough, that it generates interest for academics and scientists who have stayed away for fear of losing their jobs and the ridicule in the past. If they can do that, then the whole field moves forward towards the answers we all seek.

Fair enough.

a reply to: Arouet

This will be my last reply to any of your posts, as it is clearly not worth discussing anything with you further as you have made this thread about you and not the subject at hand. It's my personal belief that this was your objective from the start.

So there are no examples, just resorting to insults. I think that states more about you, than it does me.

I hope you get the help you need..

Have a nice day,
Pigsy

a reply to: Arouet

People have a right and privilege to bash anybody on ATS who is in the public arena; there are no rules against that

But you insult people.

If you want to go there Ill is glad to meet you in the mud pit ANYTIME

AND WE'LL THROWDOWN


If Delonge or anyone else feels offended then they can come and defend themselves

originally posted by: pigsy2400
a reply to: Arouet

This will be my last reply to any of your posts, as it is clearly not worth discussing anything with you further as you have made this thread about you and not the subject at hand. It's my personal belief that this was your objective from the start.

You can believe any set of lies that you want but if you go back in this thread, what you will find is that I am one of the few that has consistently brought relevant, factualinformation, discussion, new articles, opinions and the like.

So blah balh balh

You can bet your buttons I have bookmarked this link/post and in hopes that you aren't lying again,

Bye