the great ufo limbo

the 180 day report is due soon, an individual is going around to all the intel agencies gathering up info on the ufos and try to explain it all to the congress and the american people, something that shouldve been done decades ago however its very understandable why it hasnt, this subject is large and complex and somewhat disturbing but totally fascinating as well, it can be done and needs to be done because the ufos aint going anywhere, its a part of our lives now and forever, might as well get to know them

the question is where do we go from here? i personally have been pushing for total disclosure of the alien reality that is currently present in our world but i understand how difficult it is to do that from our human perspective and the alien one, how do we properly introduce ourselves to each other? that definately will take more time but that will happen one day

our current impasse has to do with how do we prove this reality without going all the way? as i said i personally want to go all the way but it is difficult in the sense that our current disclosure is mainly heresay, testimony from govt officials is a great step forward but seeing is believing, not everybody is going to believe even if they see it but seeing is believing, we are in the trust me trust my words phase and everyone is tired of that garbage, its time to put up or shut up imho, the issue is were playing the game of yes these things are real and theyre not ours but we dont know who built them and where theyre from and what is their purpose etc., and we will release high quality video and photos and certain data for the data freaks out there and so on and so forth as soon as we blot out our technology info, so this all sounds great but then we have the other parts of the reality and that is do we show the "artifacts" that weve obtained over the years and what about the entity carcasses? etc. and what not?

so as u can see how far do we go? and that is up to u that is up to us we truth seekers uniting in the name of truth, can we handle it? i think so and nows the time we figure out what we want, the govt belongs to us, it is not their job to hide the truth from the public no matter how difficult a subject may be to talk about, so my question to u is if the subject of ufos is true as many of us believe, how far should we go? do u want to know the whole story? half of the story? part of the story? what do we all want? please discuss down below thanks

p.s. i dont care how much conscience u got u cant do what they do, u cant build no 40ft 7 ton machine that goes 5 miles in under a sec without their help js

This will get buried under the term National Defence. More BS to come, but no real info.

originally posted by: saskwatch
the 180 day report is due soon, an individual is going around to all the intel agencies gathering up info on the ufos and try to explain it all to the congress and the american people

Some documentation has already been released ahead of the deadline, which you can find at the Black Vault:

and that is up to u that is up to us we truth seekers uniting in the name of truth, can we handle it?

What if everything shown on that document was true, could you handle it?

u cant build no 40ft 7 ton machine that goes 5 miles in under a sec without their help

Have you got a video of that? Or are you just relying on word of mouth like reports from the 30 witnesses who saw this 4 football-fields long UFO hovering silently over their heads?

Don't expect much from this report.

a reply to: Arbitrageur

Abraham Lincoln's secret handler revealed as a time traveler?
The Infinite integral used by Civil war signals corps?

a reply to: saskwatch

What is the proof of “the alien reality?”

a reply to: Arbitrageur

On the documents already released, at The Black Vault: LOL 😂

On the 4-football field-long UFO in Canada in 1996- that graphic is way misleading and not at all what all of those witnesses described. It’s been very satisfactorily shown to be rocket re-entry and its interplay with the atmosphere and weather conditions that night.

a reply to: Arbitrageur


Am shaking with excitement re that document.

originally posted by: KansasGirl
a reply to: Arbitrageur

On the documents already released, at The Black Vault: LOL 😂

On the 4-football field-long UFO in Canada in 1996- that graphic is way misleading and not at all what all of those witnesses described.

Yes, that artist got a little carried away, but some of the actual witness drawings were impressive. Here's an artist's graphic closer to one of the witness drawings:

Yukon UFO "Mothership" Incident: December 11th, 1996

That's reasonably close to this witness drawing:

The reported size of the semi-spherical UFO is over a mile in diameter, or bigger than a football stadium. Again, there were over 30 witnesses(22 interviewed so far) to this unbelievable event which all concurred on the size of the craft, as well the shape, and all other important facts.

It’s been very satisfactorily shown to be rocket re-entry and its interplay with the atmosphere and weather conditions that night.

It would be difficult to guess that from the witness descriptions, like for example, the electromagnetic interference:

www.abovetopsecret.com...
Q: "1.What effect can be assumed for the dimming of lights and slowing down of the car radio of the witness,who described and if this was the only environmental effect."

A: "Electromagnetic effects would be the most likely culprit. This is a relatively common effect in some UFO encounters. It is likely either a side effect of the crafts propulsion system or a passive- defensive counter measure. This is assuming the UFOs are mechanical however, either way EM interference is the most likely reason."

I never would have guessed a rocket booster to cause that. Of course it didn't, not that I doubt that someone had a weak battery on December 11 in the Yukon winter where it's freakin cold and marginal batteries don't do so well. It just didn't have anything to do with the UFO but because it happened at the same time as they saw the UFO, they assumed it did.

Anyway I used this example to illustrate why I don't want to take someone's word for what happened, I want to see the video of the "40ft 7 ton machine that goes 5 miles in under a sec" saskwatch referred to. Just taking someone's word for what happened is, as this case illustrates, not very reliable. It's unfortunately not even reliable when the witness is a "trained observer" like pilot Chad Underwood who claims the "tic-tac" UFO he videoed appeared to defy the laws of physics (The "tic-tac" didn't even accelerate as Underwood claims, so his account ends up being extremely unreliable and in fact is contradicted by his own video):

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

originally posted by: Arbitrageur

...Or are you just relying on word of mouth like reports from the 30 witnesses who saw this 4 football-fields long UFO hovering silently over their heads?

Poor example. The 1996 Yukon event has been hyped far FAR beyond original reports and drawings, by excitable and imaginative investigators and enthusiasts. You're part of the problem, since your sentence is manifestly untrue -- thirty witnesses did NOT describe what you claim they describe, actually most reported simply a swarm of lights moving across the sky. Details -- including vital information usually omitted from UFO-promotional sources, are in the appendix of this report. pp. 219-237

www.astronautix.com...

originally posted by: JimOberg

originally posted by: Arbitrageur

...Or are you just relying on word of mouth like reports from the 30 witnesses who saw this 4 football-fields long UFO hovering silently over their heads?

Poor example. The 1996 Yukon event has been hyped far FAR beyond original reports and drawings, by excitable and imaginative investigators and enthusiasts. You're part of the problem, since your sentence is manifestly untrue

You're referring to this sentence? It's a question, not a statement:

"...Or are you just relying on word of mouth like reports from the 30 witnesses who saw this 4 football-fields long UFO hovering silently over their heads? "

Since it's not a statement, one cannot assess if it's a true or false statement. I'm asking essentially if he believes the over-hyped claims.

If someone watched an overhyped documentary like the one I referenced, then they could answer yes to that question, but more astute investigators such as yourself realize it's been overhyped and what we are told by the overhyped documentaries is not what actually happened.

The 1996 Yukon event has been hyped far FAR beyond original reports and drawings, by excitable and imaginative investigators and enthusiasts.

Yes it has and I'm disappointed it's still being promoted on youtube as a "UFO" even though it's been identified.

thirty witnesses did NOT describe what you claim they describe, actually most reported simply a swarm of lights moving across the sky. Details -- including vital information usually omitted from UFO-promotional sources, are in the appendix of this report. pp. 219-237

That's what the ATS thread and what the documentary claim. I only asked someone if they believe those claims, which I don't. So let's get away from the overhyped claim that "all 30 witnesses saw a mothership" to what your appendix shows is the actual testimony on page 229.

The first statement is the same example I gave of inferred electromagnetic effects that one would not normally associate with a rocket booster.

And the second statement, while not calling it a mothership, seems even more inconsistent with the behavior of a rocket booster, so in that example even the statement of a witness who didn't call it a mothership is not what I would call reliable, if it was really a rocket booster which I believe it was. Yes he refers to a "long row of lights" but this still doesn't sound like a rocket booster:

""It’s a UFO!" As he was walking his flashlight happened to point in the direction of the UFO. As if reacting to his flashlight, the UFO started speeding rapidly toward him. He instinctively cupped the end of his flashlight. As soon as he completed this gesture, the UFO stopped in its track. In a matter of less than a second, it was hovering an estimated 300 yards (275 metres) in front of him!"

From page 229 of your link:


So I don't think we can conclude that even the witnesses who didn't call it a mothership are necessarily reliable witnesses, unless you believe that the UFO started speeding rapidly toward that witness when he shined his dflashlight at the UFO, which I suspect you don't believe happened. Add to that he says the UFO was an estimated 300 yards away, and what was the distance to the rocket booster, about 145 miles away?

How do we properly introduce ourselves to each other? that definately will take more time but that will happen one day

A strong legal system is a good start. The universe is a big place with lots going on. If we cannot handle our own conflicts in a civil way what chance do we have dealing with the galactic conflicts going on?

With the current election dramas, don't expect the full picture. Might get a clearer picture on some of the older stuff, a few more drips that is pretty much in line with everything else already out there. Might get a few more interested to take these issues seriously.

I have my doubts about what that report can actually do.
But lets remain optimistic until we see it. Something might actually come out in the end.

At least its a good sign that congress is asking the military about the subject.

a reply to: Arbitrageur

Yes it has and I'm disappointed it's still being promoted on youtube as a "UFO" even though it's been identified.

The search engines I tried this morning only matched internal tag criteria.
Appears to be the same UFO as JAL1628 reported back in the 1980's.
Really cool Polish cryptography link that would be nice to link but "they" usually groom that kind of stuff.

At about 5:51, the AARTCC requested that a military TO TEM flight in the area also fly toward the JAL plane for a look. During the next several minutes TOTEM viewed the JAL plane but couldn't see any other traffic. JAL1628 proceeded to Anchorage and landed at 6:20 PM.

phantomsandmonsters.wikifoundry.com...

a reply to: saskwatch

The Decades - Long UFO Taboo the Biden Administration Will Have To Face

"Damn the UFO taboo, Mr. President"

source:

www.thedebrief.org...

Well done OP just what I loved about ATS

Somehow if there are any huge beans to be spilled, I don't expect them to be spilled because of this administrative dog and pony show. National security is always the brick wall.

So after it happens (or doesn't), I expect us to go back to where we've been for the last 70+ years. Waiting for an undeniable event to happen that will make it impossible not to move forward from passive observing to active engagement. Bug aliens? Robot aliens? Aliens who look just like us? Humans grown in labs in space? Time travelers who pretend to be aliens? Jesus Christ an actual alien?

Whatever. As long as there is unimpeachable proof, it is what it is. But that has never happened. Nobody has ever presented that, and is unlikely to in the near future.

a reply to: Blue Shift

In Jim O'bergs link Stanton Friedman mentioned a 747 which is a pretty large bean.

From my link to the prior art UFO:

November 17, 1986 - over northeastern Alaska - It was a special Japan Air Lines 747 cargo flight to carry a load of French wine from Paris to Tokyo.

phantomsandmonsters.wikifoundry.com...

There is a you-tube video out there where you can get some math support, some of the explanations are UFO speak for example "Boulder" is an esoteric term that references the NIST atomic clock laboratories in Boulder Colorado.

www.nist.gov...

In the movie "Back to the future" the time on the clock face froze at precisely 10:04pm November 12, 1955.
(And that is about all the public declassification you are going to get from there)

And of course we heard the sad news that Stanton Friedman died of a heart attack at Toronto Pearson Airport in 2019.
Some of these people that were involved in classified work are reaching the age where they don't need a lot of excited new woked.

The Enchantment Under the Sea dance in (Back to the future) was a high school dance held at Hill Valley High so they couldn't use the Beatles "Octopus Garden" from 1969 without the Delorean.


The math will set you free.

originally posted by: Bordon81
a reply to: Blue Shift
The math will set you free.

Sorry. Not following you. Most of the math is based entirely on unverifiable estimates.

a reply to: Blue Shift

In the case of the atomic clock data, reverse engineering will date the technology.
There was a Cesium standard that had an accuracy of about 1 x 10-15 seconds.
Relativistic effects become more evident at finer clock resolutions.
The Yukon UFO sightings featured a larger older craft possibly dating back to the mid 1940's with the Foo fighter sightings.
We have Google Earth to locate terrestrial sites like Arecibo.

The JAL UFO report talked about a TOTEM reconnaissance flight.

Could be related to this later 1962 Canadian Satellite Alouette 1.

agupubs.onlinelibrary.wiley.com...

Strong resonances occurred in the ionosphere up to about the 10th local cyclotron harmonic, with prolonged ringing persisting for many periods after the end of the transmitter pulse.

As you say we need to find reports with some verifiable detail.

In the William Pawelec interview he talked about horses, but so did Linda Blair in 1973 when she played Regan in the Exorcist. They may have both been talking about the same math functions OR showing you how deep the rabbit hole goes..

The bridge is broken for most people.

wanford.com...