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

Jeremy C's interview with Chad Underwood here:


Got distracted by what seemed a rough audio edit in the bit where Chad presumably confirmed he didn't get "eyes on" as reported here

The confirmation of sensor jamming shortly before a sensor only (i.e none eyeball) observation of anomalous activity lends itself to the Nemesis theory if anything.

www.rollingstone.com...

Paul Oakenfeld? You're twistin' my melon man.

a reply to: coursecatalog


That article was a rather tongue in cheek at times. Probably enough to annoy the hardcore dimwits who believe Jeremy Corbell is a good researcher. How dare they not take him seriously!!

But how much longer can a bunch of Twits tweet to each other pretending something is happening while TTSA continue to announce forthcoming announcements about the future whilst never delivering on anything?

Where are those meta-materials? Results are overdue by nearly two years now?

Probably in that non-existent warehouse that Bigelow built to store them in.

I was looking at Zondo on Twitter.

Damn that Twitter is a strange place!

I noted he mentions John Burroughs.

mobile.twitter.com...

Looks like the Navy are backtracking, playing hardball and being just as evasive as TTSA.

Evidence of U.S. Navy Involvement in UFO Program May Have Been Destroyed

a reply to: Jukiodone

Cornell can be a bit much at times but the weapons operator who filmed this seemed pretty damn convincing to me.

You have a $6million Camera with FLIR tracking capability specifically built to track flying objects ( commercial/ military planes etc) and he is saying that everything about this flying object met none of the usual conventional flying objects ( even birds etc)

Then it jams his radar and then breaks FLIR tracking and totally disappears even from the Princeton radar capabilities.



Kind of Fkn scary if you ask me.

More questions and questionable answers from the Pentagon....

1) What is the difference between the newly established UAP Task Force and the previous running task force investigating Unidentified Aerial Phenomena?

Since the majority of recent reporting about UAP observations have come from naval aviators, since approximately 2018, the Department of the Navy has been leading assessments of UAP incursion into DOD training ranges and designated airspace. Over the last year, DOD undertook efforts to formalize the good work done by the Navy for DOD. This effort was an informal task force that I referenced to you earlier. Deputy Secretary Norquist approved the formal establishment of the UAPTF on Aug. 4, 2020.

2) Why did the OSD/OUSD decide to establish a new UAP Task Force superseding the previous task force investigating Unidentified Aerial Phenomena?

The task force was established to meet congressional guidance, including the report directed by the Senate Select Committee on Intelligence. Over the last year, DOD undertook efforts to formalize the good work done by the Navy for DOD in leading assessments of UAP incursions into DOD training ranges and designated airspace. Deputy Secretary Norquist approved the establishment of the UAPTF on Aug. 4, 2020.

3) As the OUSD(I) was also the cognizant authority for the previous UAP interagency task force, was this the task force that former OUSD(I) employee Mr. Luis Elizondo was providing coordination and professional connections/liaison for?

No. Luis Elizondo departed DOD in 2017.

4) What was the name of the previous Task Force investigating Unidentified Aerial Phenomena?

There was no previous formal task force.
........

See the full article: www.blueblurrylines.com...

originally posted by: Paddyofurniture
Kind of Fkn scary if you ask me.

Or just a bad glitch in the system.

a reply to: mirageman

Thorough examinations of any incursion into our training ranges or designated airspace often involves assessments from across the department, and, as appropriate, consultation with other U.S. government departments and agencies. To maintain operations security and to avoid disclosing information that may be useful to our adversaries, DOD does not discuss publicly the details of either the observations or the examination of reported incursions into our training ranges or designated airspace, including those incursions initially designated as UAP.

I highlighted these comments on purpose, as I believe that people are going to be hearing quite a few variations of the same thing in the coming months/year. If the DoD isn't going to release any of that information now - why people think that they will do so in a different official form: puzzles me quite frankly.

I don't see how the formation of an "Official Task Force" - is going to make any difference in the language or disclosure of information to the public on the topic itself from any official office. I can see any comments that are made - will not deviate too much away from the messaging that has come from the Pentagon / DoD itself already.

To be quite honest, there are plenty of other departments within the US Military that monitor the skies, space and seas that already have this covered. NASIC being just one that could and probably does cover this...

Also:

initially designated

It sure would be interesting to see what was initially designated as UAP and what it was recategorised to afterwards, unless I am reading too much into that statement.

originally posted by: Jukiodone
Jeremy C's interview with Chad Underwood here:

Got distracted by what seemed a rough audio edit in the bit where Chad presumably confirmed he didn't get "eyes on" as reported here

The confirmation of sensor jamming shortly before a sensor only (i.e none eyeball) observation of anomalous activity lends itself to the Nemesis theory if anything.

So if the sensor jamming was an act of war, what was the outcome? I didn't hear Underwood say whether or not he was debriefed; Fravor specifically said he wasn't debriefed.

At 17 minutes, Underwood talks about what happens to a pilot who sees a classified project they shouldn't have...they are forced to sign an NDA and told to never speak of it again, and he said he had to do that in some other cases, but not for the FLIR video. But the stories circulating from other "tic-tac" related witnesses say that is exactly what happened to the E2 crew, that was forced to sign NDAs after the Tic-Tac incident. Mellon denies it and says the E-2 crew didn't sign any NDAs, but we haven't heard from the E-2 crew as far as I know, so did that really happen to the E-2 crew? I don't know, it's unresolved.

I don't know if Underwood is intentionally lying under some kind of orders to spread misinformation for some kind of patriotic purpose to help his country, or if he's not that bright, and just doesn't understand what the hell he's looking at despite all his bragging about his qualifications. He seems convinced his video shows acceleration at the end when it clearly doesn't. Mick West is right, Underwood is wrong; this is West's response after he watched Underwood's interview with Corbell:

Did the FLIR1 UFO actually make sudden moves? (No)

In an interview with Chad Underwood, the Navy pilot who filmed the "FLIR1" UFO video, Jeremy Corbell again asks the wrong questions, eliciting some correct answers (no the plane was not banking) that are irrelevant.

But Chad Underwood also thinks that he did not lose lock on the target until the end, and also thinks that particular loss of lock was due to a motion of the object. This is something that HIS OWN VIDEO disproves, as you can quite clearly see lock being lost multiple times due to camera movements, with lock being reacquired in all instances except the last one. And in all those cases, it moves to the left.

I have confirmed all this with an interview with an Avionics System Technician familiar with similar systems (transcript coming soon). However, you don't even need that. Just look at the video, and see where the bars widen.

If Underwood is not lying, I'm disappointed that he still hasn't figured out after 15-16 years what that video he made actually shows at the end, which is what Mick West says loss of target lock, followed by zoom change, not what Underwood says, acceleration of the UFO. Underwood is also wrong about not losing target lock earlier, his own video using his own criteria for lost target lock shows that, and West covers that in a special video segment at the end.

a reply to: Arbitrageur

I don't know if Underwood is intentionally lying under some kind of orders to spread misinformation for some kind of patriotic purpose to help his country...

I think if you look at the tale of how the tape was released into the wild and the fact that it was obviously edited first. Then the drama around the perpetrator being investigated and the Pentagon's total lack of ability to track them down. But ufologists did quite easily. There's something not right about it all.

At a superficial level there's the mainstream media being fed soundbites by Zondo, Mellon and the various military poster boys.

But for the so called "UFO community there's a constant stream of contradictory and confusing information from TTSA, so called witnesses and the Pentagon. All added to with the cheerleading from their team of social media twits. Then you have people like Eric Davis telling everyone about off-world tech and UFO crash retrievals. I'd say he's full of it because he'd be in jail if any of that was true.

What the end game might be? I can only guess at.

But I don't think this is about ET disclosure because I don't believe the United States woud have a monopoly on such information.

Rarely, In the span of decades, we are treated with a comedic trio who’s 15 minutes of fame ....figuratively speaking.... brings a short term cure for the stresses of life. Humor is medicinal for our well being, since laughter is the opposite of doom and gloom.

(My apologies if I left out other humorous comedic trios)

a reply to: mirageman

What it looks like to me is a few years ago they tried to release this NIMITZ material and it didn’t take because the fact is its not unique in UFO annals.

So they waited for a intel OP they ended up doing through TDL( and TTSA) and threw in the NIMITZ videos they couldn’t make popular on their own.

This is pretty clear to my thinking.

Its amazing how people fall for the government operations and seem to never just look at the clear evidence like this material was not new


And I still say TDL was shoped around the IC to see who wanted to exploit him.

He was deluded to think ( gee whiz the IC boys love me so much their chauffeuring me around in secret meetings) they really respected him. He's a government dupe.

a reply to: Ophiuchus1
Be careful.
The owners of this site have adopted the moniker "Three Amigos", on occasion.

a reply to: mirageman

Then you have people like Eric Davis telling everyone about off-world tech and UFO crash retrievals. I'd say he's full of it because he'd be in jail if any of that was true.

Agreed.


While am here what was the low down on old Eric and the "Polti.." he took it home or something? then what happened?

originally posted by: Baablacksheep
a reply to: mirageman


...While am here what was the low down on old Eric and the "Polti.." he took it home or something? then what happened?

How else do you get rid of spooks in your life?

Eat plenty of strawberry ice cream, never sleep and take plenty of 'exorcise'.

But as he was already a spook himself that wouldn't work.

How do you think someone like him gets paid $25k by the DoD for writing a junk science paper claiming "....moving yourself from location to location through mind powers, is "quite real and can be controlled.?"

It's a 'discrete' way of rewarding him for services rendered on behalf of the US National Security State. As long as he's spreading lies in the paranormal/UFO community to keep them believing in aliens and following trails that go nowhere then his masters are happy.

a reply to: mirageman

You are funny MM.😁

I listened to this about old Eric.


youtu.be...

As this the thread has now stretched to almost 400 pages it will be closed soon by the mods.

Please refer to the new thread for further commentary...

Breaking BAASS, Assessing AATIP and Doubting Thomas ‘DeLonge’

It's probably my last one on ATS.