Beyond Bigelow & BAASS, After AATIP and on To the Stars...

a reply to: Sublant

At this point I am willing to believe that the NAVY did not identify the objects simply because they don't have enough data, or the data they have is not good enough to identify it. I mean, what do you do if all you've got are flir videos of a moving hot spot and (probably) radar data showing a moving spot not matching known signatures?

Fact is though, that the videos don't show anything extraordinary. So all you're left with is speculation. Which is of course great for the likes of TTSA, as they exploit this lack of information to spin their story.

originally posted by: 1ofthe9
I suspect Kaku was paid to drum this up.

Michio Kaku has always been open minded with regard to the UFO phenomenon. I guess he did not really study the detailed analysis of the videos by Metabunk. These studies invalidate the videos as proof of ‘otherworldly’ performance, but they do not necessarily invalidate the eye witness accounts. The identifications of these objects as a bird, balloon, or a jet by Metabunk are pure speculations. After all, we only see a ‘blob’ – there is no further information on the structure or the composition of the objects we see in the videos.

Michio Kaku’s comments do raise a question:

If ex-government employees bring eye witnesses into the public domain that tell stories about ‘other worldly’ objects with extreme performance – performance that was measured by radar - can the military simply stand by and do nothing?
If their sensor data really show performances that are far beyond humanity’s current capabilities, this data not only has military significance – it has important scientific significance and far reaching implications for humanity. Is it acceptable that the military does not provide this data for scientists to study?

I think Michio Kaku was trying to make a statement along these lines as well.

originally posted by: Sublant
That's just wrong. If the Navy was in this to get more money, to identify that China/Russia/other possibly hostile nation had tech. that could run circles around our defenses, would make the good old bomber gap seem like peanuts. They would be rolling in money to get to parity to that perceived threat level.

I don't see Chris Mellon's #1 party balloon running circles around anyone's defenses, in fact none of the three TTSA videos show anything running circles around anyone's defenses. There are some horribly inaccurate and flawed analyses of "acceleration" but a more careful analysis shows the apparent acceleration is just a change in the display zoom.

There is a gap, and it's seen here, so I think your imagining the opposite scenario is unsupported by this graph:



Getting people to think the alleged "threat" is not from this earth using "“Something not from the Earth" soundbites from Fravor might be easier than getting them to believe it's from one of the smaller bars on that graph, let alone the ones that didn't even make it on to the graph.

I doubt the Navy personnel even know about some of the secret aircraft developed at groom lake, so even if they wanted to identify such classified projects, they might not be able to do it. Fravor wouldn't know about them, in fact those are so compartmented that groom lake workers say they weren't even allowed to see the other projects in the other hangars there, only the project they were working on. But even if the Navy could identify some UAPs as groom lake secret projects, wouldn't lead to more funding, so it's better to play soundbites on mainstream media of Fravor saying "Something not from the Earth", if your goal is to get more funding. The aliens from outer space aren't on that graph so we could imagine their capabilities to be anything.

originally posted by: Sublant

originally posted by: Arbitrageur
Are we talking about the same Navy who might get additional funding if there is some unidentified threat it needs to defend us against, which is not the case if they identify it? So let me think about this and try to figure out how much incentive they have to say it's identified. Did they try as hard as Chris Mellon did to identify the UFO he said was "clearly not a US experimental aircraft"? Actually I think he's right, that one may not be from Groom Lake!

That's just wrong. If the Navy was in this to get more money, to identify that China/Russia/other possibly hostile nation had tech. that could run circles around our defenses, would make the good old bomber gap seem like peanuts. They would be rolling in money to get to parity to that perceived threat level.

Exactly!! Well said!!

Your favorite fighter pilot will be on Joe Rogan

a reply to: Arbitrageur

Recently published scientific article behind the vidoes..

"Estimating Flight Characteristics of Anomalous Unidentified Aerial Vehicles"

www.preprints.org...

A number of Unidentified Aerial Phenomena (UAP) encountered by military, commercial, and civilian aircraft have been reported to be structured craft that exhibit 'impossible' flight characteristics. We consider a handful of well-documented encounters, including the 2004 encounters with the Nimitz Carrier Group off the coast of California, and estimate lower bounds on the accelerations exhibited by the craft during the observed maneuvers. Estimated accelerations range from almost 100g to 1000s of g's with no observed air disturbance, no sonic booms, and no evidence of excessive heat commensurate with even the minimal estimated energies. In accordance with observations, the estimated parameters describing the behavior of these craft are both anomalous and surprising. The extreme estimated flight characteristics reveal that these observations are either fabricated or seriously in error, or that these craft exhibit technology far more advanced than any known craft on Earth. In many cases, the number and quality of witnesses, the variety of roles they played in the encounters, and the equipment used to track and record the craft favor the latter hypothesis that these are indeed technologically advanced craft. The observed flight characteristics of these craft are consistent with the flight characteristics required for interstellar travel. That is, if these observed accelerations were sustainable in space, then these craft could easily reach relativistic speeds within a matter of minutes to hours and cover interstellar distances in a matter of days to weeks, proper time

a reply to: Arbitrageur

BREAKING NEWS.......

Answers from the U.S. Navy ...

www.facebook.com...

Questions by Roger Glassel to the U.S. NAVY:

Swedish Magazine UFO-aktuellt Follow-Up Query - Responses 16 September 2019 5) Was the Navy involved in the Advanced Aerospace Threat Identification Program to study Unidentified Aerial Phenomena reported by U.S. Navy pilots or other credible sources? A5) The AATIP program involved offices from across the Department of Defense, including Navy. Details remain classified. For additional information, I would refer you to the Department of Defense.

6) Has any of the unidentified objects in the three videos released now been explained by the Navy or any other component in the U.S. Defense Department? A6) Neither has the Navy nor any other DoD component has publicly released characterizations, descriptions, hypothesis, or conclusions in regards to the objects contained in the referenced videos.


7) Was the new reporting guidelines updated due to pilots fear of ridicule for reporting sightings of Unidentified Aerial Phenomena and UFOs? A7) We have updated guidelines and simplified the process to facilitate reporting of unidentified aerial phenomena in order to support an objective, data-driven analysis of the range incursions. By providing updated guidelines and conducting more open discussion of our efforts, we are working to remove any stigmas associated with reporting anything unknown in the airspace. Initial, informal, revised reporting guidance has been provided to the fleet, through message traffic and briefings, with detailed steps for reporting each incident. More formal guidanceis in staffing and will be promulgated fleet-wide when completed.



8)Has the Navy, or any other component, come to the conclusion that some of the unidentified sightings reported is due to an aerial phenomena with technological features not currently known to mankind? A8) The Navy has not publicly released characterizations or descriptions, nor released any hypothesis or conclusions in reference to any reported sightings/observations. As the investigation of UAP sightings is ongoing, we will not discuss individual sighting reports/observations. However, all possible sources of information pertaining to any individual sighting reports/observations are considered in the respective investigations. The information obtained from each individual report of any suspected training range incursion will continue to be investigated in its own right. The information obtained in these reports will be catalogued and analyzed for the purpose ofidentifying any hazard to our aviators. This process could involve multiple Department of Defense and Intelligence Community organizations. Any report generated as a result of these investigations will, by necessity, include classified information on military operations. Therefore, no release of information to the general public is expected.



9) In the Navy’s effort to study reports of Unidentified Aerial Phenomena, was former DOD/OUSDI employee Luis Elizondo involved in such effort? A9) While he was a U.S. government employee, Mr. Elizondooccasionally provided coordination and professional connections/liaison within DoD and the Office of the Under Secretary of Defense for Intelligence.



10) What is the definition of Unidentified Aerial Phenomena used by the Navy and the U.S. Defense Department? A10) “Unidentified Aerial Phenomena (UAP)” is a term we borrowed from the UK – it’s any aerial phenomenon that cannot immediately be identified. The wide proliferation and availability of inexpensive unmanned aerial systems (UAS) isn’tcontradictory, it’s just when the UAS is *NOT* immediately identifiable we refer to it as UAP. A quadcopter is immediately identifiable. As we have previously acknowledged, the number of incursions into our ranges has increased with that wide proliferation and availability of inexpensive UAS. Additionally, we use the generic UAP term in communications so as not to pre-judge the results of any investigation. Any range incursion by unauthorized craft affects the safety of our aviators and/or the security of our operations. Our revised reporting guidance solicits reports of any unauthorized craft (UAP or UAS) observed within our ranges so that we may investigate that range incursion. Incursions/sightings since 2014 may be referred to as either UAS or UAP, depending on the circumstances surrounding the specific incident in question.

I was all set to enter this contest to see Tommy Boy and his band in San Diego and get a free copy of his new book and chat with him backstage about how I can call out to Jesus and stop evil aliens from anally probing me when I noticed it said "travel not included."

What the hell?! They can't spring for cheap red eye flight? What's the cash value of this contest? $50?

I was going to solicit you guys for questions. I'm sure it would have been awesome.

gleam.io...

Also I didn't think contests and investment offerings were legit bedfellows.

Also Silva just confirmed on Twitter that the comment on his blog was indeed from Delonge.

twitter.com...
So get ready for the world to blow (and not just from World War III breaking out in the Mideast)

a reply to: celltypespecific



sorry cell,i think i speak for all when i say our favorite pilot is this guy





as for joe,i m sure he will not ask any pressing questions,and will surely mention that chimps have started making their own version of pong

a reply to: celltypespecific

Am slow to the party.

When?

a reply to: IMSAM

Unfortunately things rolled rapidly down hill after saving the Earth in ID4.

The sad strange saga of Randy Quaid

a reply to: coursecatalog

I would ask him if he makes videos to ensure he irritates deaf people?

But I see the Navy responses above seem to leave things in that fuzzy grey area we've been in for two years. Just enough to keep TTSA's space alien believing rabid fanbase excited and not enough to clarify exactly what is going on.

For example we know originally Zondo was called the Former Director of AATIP. But then a swift hand down the back of the Knapp sofa produced Harry Reid's letter stating he was a Special Agent. Since then TTSA changed their front page to say he was the Program Element Manager. Here the Navy are saying he

.........
9) In the Navy’s effort to study reports of Unidentified Aerial Phenomena, was former DOD/OUSDI employee Luis Elizondo involved in such effort?

A9) While he was a U.S. government employee, Mr. Elizondo occasionally provided coordination and professional connections/liaison within DoD and the Office of the Under Secretary of Defense for Intelligence.

Hmmm...so it was more a sort of hands off role than a hands on one. But still suitably vague. Just as TTSA with their own propaganda.

originally posted by: Baablacksheep
a reply to: celltypespecific

Am slow to the party.

When?

This link will surprisingly give you the answer

Good news is that Jermiah Rocky Mountain LockYer Daughterzup Doorbell will also be right by his side to shout and rant when required.

I hope this wasn't Tom's big announcement:


Delonge Divorce

According to docs obtained by TMZ ... DeLonge filed for divorce in San Diego County Superior Court after 18 years of marriage to Jennifer DeLonge. They've known each other since high school and got married on May 26, 2001 in San Diego. They have 2 kids together ... 17-year-old daughter Ava and 13-year-old son Jonas. As for why they're splitting up ... the founding Blink member cited "irreconcilable differences." They list December 29, 2017, as the date of separation. He's asking for joint legal and physical custody of their kids.

Interesting date of separation.

a reply to: coursecatalog

Very sad.

a reply to: coursecatalog

Yes that is rather sad. It doesn't say whether the split has anything to do with TTSA. Quite frankly it's none of our business. Personal life is personal. But obviously this has an impact on the whole family and it's a situation where no one really wins from it other than the lawyers involved.

a reply to: mirageman

Good shout MM, I'd seen the story but refrained from posting it. Let's focus on TTSA and his involvement in that rather than personal stuff.

Boy this Paper magazine interview from 2015 that has resurfaced makes TDL look a bit unhinged. Here is how he sums up the CIA's role in the UFO mythology:

At first I believed everything I read. Then I got to a point where I didn't believe anything I read. And then I came out of the back of it, saying to myself, "Half of it's real, half of it's not." What people have to understand is the basic history of the UFO is very simple. The phenomenon has been around forever. All the ancient religions were written down based on witnessing this phenomenon in various forms. Governments of the world watched the phenomenon and tried to replicate the technology, but they did in secret. So the governments are fighting each other with these pieces of technology. But within those little skirmishes, the phenomenon is still here, and it's much more advanced. So in order to hide what the governments are building in secret, they blame it on spaceships and aliens that eat your brains and all this weird stuff, but it's all in an effort to hide what we're really building, something that is real but is exotic and esoteric, and it's all part of a plan. And as we find out that the phenomenon is real, they're hoping it won't be as bad as we thought it was, because we were scared along the way. It's a really complex game that's been played, especially since the '80s. The CIA was very interested in the UFO civilian research groups, with the intention of being in control over all the research and the public awareness. It was a psychological operation. They were very scared of Americans being gullible and having Russia come in and repeat a War of the Worlds scenario. So the CIA said, "We better get in there and make everyone go crazy, but at least it's controlled, and when we're in charge we can slowly let people know the phenomenon is real, but, 'Don't worry -- we've been building something secret to help protect us.'" It's crazy thing but it's real.

201 5 Delonge Interview in Paper Magazine

originally posted by: pigsy2400
a reply to: mirageman

Good shout MM, I'd seen the story but refrained from posting it. Let's focus on TTSA and his involvement in that rather than personal stuff.

Well too much time has passed to delete the post. I thought it was relevant to the big picture. And the fact that it surfaced now.

a reply to: coursecatalog

Yeah that's cool, it wasn't a dig at you CC either. The timing in Dec of 2017 did catch my eye also, but as I said, let's focus on what his message and BS is with TTSA.

I dont have an issue with TDL or his family and that should be left out of any discussions as it's their personal/private business and its also the right thing to do.

I do however have an issue with the message and BS he promotes in ufology. I do believe to an extent he's actually sincere but more gullible and has an ego complex that makes him easy pickings, especially when you look who he has around him.

He did go off ranch back in 2016 as your previous post relates. His interviews back then are definitely worth a relisten. I did and comment and quoted on some of the odd statements he made then as well.