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

a reply to: ConfusedBrit

Well he is not likely to be a forgotten person, heck he is in every UFO programme in existence and the face of the subject in every paper out there. My real point is, he has carved a living from something that is seemingly not quite true.

What else is not true ?

originally posted by: Baablacksheep
a reply to: mirageman

But did he run the British government's UFO project?

There was no UFO project. It was an enquiry desk set up to respond to the public and the media. It was a public relations desk. It's there in black and white in the memo I posted.

....Mr Pope....was a junior desk officer in the Secretariat (Air Staff)section from 1991-1994 and was not in the charge of, or the head of any part of Secretariat (Air Staff).

It's a bit like a cashier in a supermarket claiming they ran one of the store's "Prime Retail Customer Point of Sale Transaction Environments".

a reply to: mirageman

I guess anything goes MM.

And nobody cares a hoot.

He certainly created a very successful career for himself.

At 10:40:

Kevin Day: “As soon as he [Fravor] got to the merge plot position, the object that he was intercepting dropped from 28000 feet down to 50 feet above the water in .78 seconds”

Navy event document (link), emphasis is mine:

FAST EAGLES 110/100 UPON TAKE OFF WERE VECTORED BY PRINCETON AND BANGER (1410L) TO INTERCEPT UNID CONTACT AT 160@40NM (N3050.8 W11746.9) (NIMITZ N3129.3 W11752.8).
PRINCETON INFORMED FAST EAGLES THAT THE CONTACT WAS MOVING AT 100 KTS @ 25KFT ASL.

FAST EAGLES (110/100) COULD NOT FIND UNID AIRBORNE CONTACT AT LOCATION GIVEN BY PRINCETON. WHILE SEARCHING FOR UNID AIR CONTACT, FAST EAGLES SPOTTED LARGE UNID OBJECT IN WATER AT 1430L. PILOTS SAW STEAM/ SMOKE/CHURNING AROUND OBJECT. PILOT DESCRIBES OBJECT INITIALLY AS RESEMBLING A DOWNED AIRLINER, ALSO STATED THAT IT WAS MUCH LARGER THAN A SUBMARINE.

WHILE DESCENDING FROM 24K FT TO GAIN A BETTER VIEW OF THE UNID CONTACT IN THE WATER, FAST EAGLE 110 SIGHTED AN AIRBORNE CONTACT WHICH APPEARED TO BE CAPSULE SHAPED (WINGLESS, MOBILE, WHITE, OBLONG PILL SHAPED, 25-30 FEET IN LENGTH, NO VISIBLE MARKINGS AND NO GLASS) 5NM WEST FROM POSITION OF UNID OBJECT IN WATER.

CAPSULE (ALT 4K FT AT COURSE 300) PASSED UNDER FAST EAGLE 110 (ALT 16KFT).

The sudden drop seen on radar by Kevin at the moment of merge plot is pretty consistent with the navy event log that states the object was initially at 25000 feet, but when Fravor arrived he could only see a large unidentified object in the water and a capsule shaped object passing underneath him at 4000 feet.

I never realized this consistency between Kevin’s memory and the Navy event log existed and do not remember anyone else pointing this out, so I decided to post it here.

a reply to: Guest101

Interesting point.

Considering that AATIP was claimed to be a huge success by Zondo and the Pentagon said it created "nothing but reams and reams of paperwork" you would think that they'd have something else and other cases.

But this almost single focus on a case that occurred 16 years ago is the bigger mystery to me. If it was such a threat then why are they still focused on it?

We can trace the history of at least one of the videos all the way back to this site in 2007. There is no doubt it was removed illegitimately and then stored on a German company's web servers. It was also claimed there was a powerpoint presentation out in the wild somewhere too. Which all makes me wonder.

a reply to: Guest101
I see a big flaw in the logic of Kevin Day and David Fravor and perhaps now you (not attacking you, I like your posts but just pointing out an obvious thing that I don't see why everyone keeps missing it).

Kevin Day didn't say there was one UFO, he said there were a bunch of them. In this animated account based apparently at least partly on Kevin Days account, it shows 9 UFOs:




So when they say things like it disappeared from one place and showed up somewhere else, the implied assumption is that there is only one UFO involved. Why assume that if you've seen 9 UFOs on radar? Hence flawed logic. I also wouldn't make any assumptions about the altitude change, especially since there is no mention in the log you posted of the UFO descending.

The way it reads to me, the Princeton had something like 9 UFOs on their display, the nearest one at 25k feet, which Fravor couldn't find. But importantly according to the video above, it's not just Fravor who couldn't find the UFO, the E2 radar plane with the powerful 24 foot radar antenna also could not verify the UFO at 25000 feet that showed up on Kevin Day's display, even before Fravor arrived at the Merge plot point. I think this is very important (if true), that the E2 apparently never confirmed the UFO at 25,000 feet that showed up on Day's display.

When Fravor got to the merge plot point, he saw a disturbance in the water, perhaps one of the other 9 UFOs, or perhaps an electronic or plasma target spoofing operation as some including me, have speculated as a possibility, in which case any number of targets could be generated or spoofed at various positions and altitudes limited only by the physics of the spoofing apparatus, and be turned on or off at such positions or altitudes without actually "descending". I think the ability of the UFO at 25,000 feet Fravor was being directed toward to show up on the Princeton radar but not the powerful radar of the E2 does raise questions about the validity of the contact and whether it was actually some kind of electronic or plasma spoofed target.

originally posted by: mirageman
a reply to: Guest101
But this almost single focus on a case that occurred 16 years ago is the bigger mystery to me. If it was such a threat then why are they still focused on it?

I'm not sure if I get your point here, if it was a threat, why wouldn't they focus on it?

But I seem to remember you previously making the point that they had just upgraded the radar systems and the UFO targets had been showing up for days and they weren't sure if they were glitches or not so they spent time checking out the systems rather than scrambling aircraft to intercept initially, so while they were still checking out the systems instead of scrambling aircraft they didn't necessarily see it as a threat. The UFO radar contacts had apparently been going on for some days when Fravor and his wingman (wingwoman?) were eventually scrambled to intercept a mysterious target that anomalously only showed up on the Princeton's radar but not on the powerful radar of the E2; look at the massive radar antenna on this E2 radar plane and a similar E2 with 24 foot radar antenna didn't see any radar return for the UFO Fravor was chasing at 25,000 feet?


I can see why the E2 might pick up a target that Fravor's plane couldn't detect on radar, but a target that the E2 couldn't detect? As far as I can tell there was no confirmation of a target at 25,000 feet, by the E2 or by Fravor, and people are jumping to unwarranted and undocumented conclusions by making the assumptions about a descent. I see zero evidence for a descent, but I do see a re-created radar screen showing not one but 9 UFO targets on it, and am not assuming there was only one UFO or one target on that basis.

Another lovely gift for my UK friends will be arriving soon

www.theblackvault.com...

a reply to: mirageman

If you did not lose a balloon in July 1947 it helps to move the date back to a time when you did lose one. If you still read real books instead of getting all your info off of the internet you might remember that. Instead you and your confused side continue to promote the July 9th story as if it was correct, even though it was shown decades ago to be wrong.

Why would you trust anything the military/government says when it comes to UFO’s? Why would you distrust people with nothing to hide who want answers? Because they get paid? Everyone gets paid. Getting paid is not a crime, it is a living. Is it a crime if you are getting paid?

You spread disinformation and then blame it on others. You, like a typical disinfo agent spread the military tag line, refusing to give any credence to those that supply you info regarding the ongoing cover-up. Just because you do not believe it does not make it a lie. Just because you read something on Wiki does not mean it is real. You know that the military does not want to let out secret technology. You know that they want to keep it to themselves and that covering up that technology is the best way to do it. Deny it exist and hide it from the populace.

We have been told that we have the proof, but it is being hidden from us. Yet you only believe in the people that tell you that man has the technology to do all these things – even though those saying it have no proof either. There is no proof that man can make anything fly like what the people witnessed in the 1940’s. After over 73 years the military and the government have NO proof that those unidentified objects are man-made technology. And of course that is because they are not man-made technology.

Those that have nothing to cover-up have told us some of what has been hidden. You complaint is always that they make money doing it. Do you really think Everyone is making money? So what, everybody makes money and you should be thankful they are revealing things hidden from us. Instead of just saying they are all wrong.

So YOU think EVERYONE who says they have seen an alien being is liar.

Do YOU think EVERYONE who has seen a flying saucer is liar?

Do YOU think EVERY person in the military who describes UFO’s flying in a way that man-made machines cannot are liars?

Do YOU think EVERY whistle blower in the military who says that UFO’s are alien craft are liars?

Do YOU think EVERY piece of military and government paper exposing the existence of aliens is a lie?

Or do you just think EVERYONE IS WRONG?

originally posted by: spiritualarchitect
You have been caught out M&M - you are a poster who cannot be trusted.

I told the confused one that his trail of crumbs exposed him. Right after that he AND your black sheep sock puppy removed their posting history from public view, further linking them to you...

Like one of those criminals who return to the scene of their crime, it must be hard for you to keep your secret identities hidden. Maybe you thought no one would notice. Did you think no one was paying attention, that no one would notice that your sock puppy only post in your threads or threads that you were interested in? That your sock would never make its own threads but only support ones that you were involved with. That your puppy would post over 2, 300 times to only alien related threads that you were in. Did you really think that you would not be caught? Did you not know others were on to you before I ever mentioned it?

...Yet YOU, your puppy and the confused one... etc etc... [and other assorted insane drivel]

You need help. Seriously. (And I have never said that to anyone here before.)

Alternatively, step way from ufology altogether. You are an embarrassment to yourself and the forum in general.

Or simply GROW UP.

a reply to: ConfusedBrit
I am not the one constantly defending the term disinfo agent everytime it is brought up.

You have said before that you only believe David Fravors account and not the others. Yet you have also said you do not think the Tic Tac flies away at incredible speed. Yet Fravor says it does. Why is that?

Whom are we to believe, the confused internet poster or the fighter pilot who was there when his friend filmed the Tic Tac? The pilot who filmed the FLIR who ALSO says that the Tic Tac flew away at incredible speed.

a reply to: ConfusedBrit

I said goodbye to you a couple weeks ago. YOU responded to my post after that. I am fine with not *talking* to you or mentioning you at all. Stop referencing me and I will not reference you. Same goes with what's his name.

originally posted by: Arbitrageur
a reply to: Guest101
Kevin Day didn't say there was one UFO, he said there were a bunch of them.

From the video I posted above I get the impression that several more UFO's showed up only after Fravor had landed and other jets were airborne. According to Kevin, these jets started chasing the UFO's and in response the UFO's all started dropping to just above sea level.

originally posted by: Arbitrageur
a reply to: Guest101

But importantly according to the video above, it's not just Fravor who couldn't find the UFO, the E2 radar plane with the powerful 24 foot radar antenna also could not verify the UFO at 25000 feet that showed up on Kevin Day's display, even before Fravor arrived at the Merge plot point. I think this is very important (if true), that the E2 apparently never confirmed the UFO at 25,000 feet that showed up on Day's display.

To my knowledge the E2C did get a faint radar return but it was too faint to get a lock.

The SPY-1B radar of the Princeton operates in the S-band rather than the UHF band so it has a much shorter wavelength that makes it easier to detect objects with a small radar cross section. Also, the power radiated by the SPY-1B is much larger than that of the E2C radar. But of course the distances between the object and both radars are unknown and the directivity of each radar system is unknown so it is hard to say anything about the radiated power hitting the object from each radar system.

Anyhow, it does not sound impossible or improbable to me that the Princeton could get a lock on something solid but small/stealthy that the E2C (or the radar on board of the F18’s) could not.

originally posted by: Arbitrageur
a reply to: Guest101
I think the ability of the UFO at 25,000 feet Fravor was being directed toward to show up on the Princeton radar but not the powerful radar of the E2 does raise questions about the validity of the contact and whether it was actually some kind of electronic or plasma spoofed target.

If these objects were plasma and nothing else, the odds would be reversed: The E2C radar would detect it more easily than the SPY-1B because plasma tends to reflect low frequency radiation better than high frequency radiation. Of course the radiated radar power also plays a role here but the SPY-1B would have a disadvantage over the E2C in case of pure plasma, while it would have an advantage over the E2C in case of a solid object with a small radar cross section.

a reply to: spiritualarchitect

Quit the patently ludicrous false accusations.

If you believe something that is not accepted fact then state it as your belief.

If you want to discuss Roswell I suggest you start your own thread.

Moving on....

a reply to: spiritualarchitect

We have been told that we have the proof, but it is being hidden from us. Yet you only believe in the people that tell you that man has the technology to do all these things – even though those saying it have no proof either.

To quote myself: at this point we'll need unlimited funds to make it happen, and we would very likely fail doing so due to the high probability of misinfo in those Navy patents. That or we could use a Quantum Messiah to explain why this is all Bollocks.

What is going on? No idea how you could gloss over a bunch of publications with studies for roughly $30 each. They would risk reputation and business if you had a point. You say we have a problem with corruption in academia? I could imagine a grand strategy at play here, why not? Make your point stick then?

However. I tend to hear voices screaming Skunk Works when I see people literally fighting for the prerogative of interpretation on this rather sensitive issue whilst ignoring this big, fat black elephant in the room. Just saying...

a reply to: Arbitrageur

originally posted by: mirageman
a reply to: Guest101
But this almost single focus on a case that occurred 16 years ago is the bigger mystery to me. If it was such a threat then why are they still focused on it?

I'm not sure if I get your point here, if it was a threat, why wouldn't they focus on it?

I will clarify in more detail Arby.

I don't understand what exactly the 'physical' threat could still be after 16 years. I think the case has been stage managed as TTSA's signature case for PR purposes. There are obviously a number of agendas that are being fulfilled by the company. But could one of the real "threats" be that the Navy fear more than just a short video was smuggled off of one their ships?

Again we come back to the length of time here and on the face of it the Navy look unconcerned. But remember how Gary Mckinnon's case case was pursued vigorously for a decade by US authorities. The John Walker Case of spying against the US Navy began in 1968. He was not actually tried until 1985.

I don't believe that this is the only agenda at play here. But ufology tends to focus on the ufos and witness stories. People ignore the wider story that often involves military matters.The origin of AATIP still remains one of confusion. The fact that TTSA has 'intelligence' experts on their board makes me wonder if they are still investigating a security breach that occurred back in 2004.

a reply to: Guest101

Have you seen Chris Lambright 20 page pdf?

Bigelow, BAASS, the Nimitz Encounters and TTSA

It points out some discrepancies with the timings of who and when the pilots were actually airborne and what they actually saw.

I highly recommend stepping away from this topic for several days/weeks as I have.

I now have a completely refreshed viewpoint and greater insights on this topic.

a reply to: mirageman

The origin of AATIP still remains one of confusion

To be fair, that seems to be another consistent problem with the Pentagon. And to make things even worse, they now have an administration with another national savior of a President, who keeps showing up at certain religious events from a rather prominent "Family"...
But. Still... I'd expect a certain amount of civil disobedience from alleged former staff with a big mouth. Hi there, King Luis!

“Our National Security apparatus is designed to detect, identify, and deter threats… and yet here we have something that we can only sometimes detect, barely identify, and have yet no clue how to deter it. Not a good spot to be in if you are the Navy or the Pentagon,” said Elizondo. “My recommendation is to keep asking the Pentagon the hard questions and why they continue to change their position. As for my question… where the heck is the Air Force in all this?”

3 words come to mind: United Air Pharce. "I'm in the UAP now!"



How are your NDA's doing today? Sometimes you have to lose it all in order to win it all, ya know...
Jokes aside... am I even joking? Weird. Here's another point: where are the people in all of this? How is this not another case of overreach from said apparatus? There's a good chance a few UAP's are actually ours, and those cannot pose a threat in case they operate according to the books. Actually, one might even say with treating this (rather persistent) presence as a threat the very conduct of the apparatus itself raises even bigger national security concerns, on an international level.

The kinda hard questions he was getting at, innit? We could file this under "cop-out's" or not - he has a point regardless. The perfect crime! Great, now off with his head!