Goverment UAP report is here.

a reply to: Arbitrageur

I missed that previously.

So TTSA paid $35k for some bits of metal from their own CEO.

How much of the $22M went on the cardboard box needed to store it.

Are US taxpayers now paying for research into how Bigelow intends to achieve immortality.

a reply to: Adonsa

The US is far behind in UFO/UAP disclosure.

Here's the list of countries that have disclosed the existance of UFOs and ET encounters:
1. Argentina
2. Australia
3. Brazil
4. Canada
5. Chile
6. China
7. Denmark
8. Finland
9. France
10. Germany
11. India
12. Ireland
13. Japan
14. Mexico
15. New Zealand (Additional Report)
16. Peru
17. Russia
18. Spain
19. Sweden
20. Ukraine (not in English)
21. United Nations
22. United Kingdom
23. Uruguay
24. Vatican City

The link to France points to a useless yahoo website. Here's the best
found so far, from search engine searches,
France Opens Up its UFO Files

European partial disclosure is discussed here.

It might be necessary to go to The Dark Web to get the declassified French Report, or
it may be elsewhere on this ATS website, I'll continue to try to locate it.

Recommendation: Rely, for now, on reports from countries listed above, given the conspicuous failures of the US report,

FAILED --- No annexes of each government agencies' input
FAILED --- No mention or input from the Magestic-12 (MJ-12) government agency
FAILED --- No input from the Department of Energy

a reply to: Adonsa

The US is far behind in UFO/UAP disclosure. Here's the list of countries that have disclosed the existance [sic] of UFOs and ET encounters....

They've released UFO files, yes. But the US has also released UFO files too. From various letter agencies, plus Air Force Projects Sign, Grudge and Blue Book.

I don't believe any of the list of countries have disclosed the existence of ET encounters.

I don't believe any of the list of countries have disclosed the existence of ET encounters.

a reply to: mirageman

No they haven't.

Back to my popcorn tub , need a lot of it these days MM.

a reply to: Adonsa


Suppose a lot of folks suspect it's just window dressing but regarding the declassification release of official UFO reports from governmental files then there's a relevant file from Vicente-Juan Ballester Olmos below.

File:

State-of-the-Art in UFO Disclosure Worldwide - Vicente-Juan Ballester Olmos (pdf)



Preface:

The field of aerial phenomena research has long been plagued by half-truths and poor information. The media have contributed to this misinformation either by ignoring important facts or by trumpeting the "release of secret files" that were never secret in the first place.

It is refreshing to see a complete statement of the state of official information on an international scale. This is a "work in progress," since many files that remain in the custody of military authorities in major countries have yet to be brought to light, but Sr. Ballester-Olmos has patiently assembled a document that provides an important baseline for future research.

Dr. Jacques Vallee

Also a good presentation here on official investigations from different countries and more here on organisations such as CRIDOVNI, GEIPAN, CEFAA, OIFAA etc..

Cheers.

Yo Karl - Here's the New York Times link to the Pentagon's UAP report news analysis, for June 26, 2021:

www.nytimes.com...

Do any of you watch Gaia? They share so much information and you'll learn a lot more about what's going on right now. I highly recommend Cosmic Disclosure. Its all current.

www.gaia.com...[]=en

So am I correct in assuming that any fiery-balled UAP sightings will be filed by the UAPTF in the "other" category. And if I'm not mistaken...why didn't the DNI release any "other" category reports (if any) to the public on June 25, 2021?

originally posted by: Adonsa
a reply to: Adonsa

The US is far behind in UFO/UAP disclosure.

Here's the list of countries that have disclosed the existance of UFOs and ET encounters:
1. Argentina
2. Australia
3. Brazil
4. Canada
5. Chile
6. China
7. Denmark
8. Finland
9. France
10. Germany
11. India
12. Ireland
13. Japan
14. Mexico
15. New Zealand (Additional Report)
16. Peru
17. Russia
18. Spain
19. Sweden
20. Ukraine (not in English)
21. United Nations
22. United Kingdom
23. Uruguay
24. Vatican City

The link to France points to a useless yahoo website. Here's the best
found so far, from search engine searches,
France Opens Up its UFO Files

European partial disclosure is discussed here.

It might be necessary to go to The Dark Web to get the declassified French Report, or
it may be elsewhere on this ATS website, I'll continue to try to locate it.

Recommendation: Rely, for now, on reports from countries listed above, given the conspicuous failures of the US report,

FAILED --- No annexes of each government agencies' input
FAILED --- No mention or input from the Magestic-12 (MJ-12) government agency
FAILED --- No input from the Department of Energy

As a Swede, I can give some insight into the Swedish governments public attitude to UFOs/UAPs.

It is a non-issue here. The government and major news media have no clue about the history of Ufology or what is going on with the recent UAP report.
I have never seen or heard any comments on the TicTac videos or anything else from the Swedish government.

Maybe if a flying saucer would land on the white house lawn, there would be some media coverage.
Until then, it will remain outside of the mental horizon of the Swedish politicians.

a reply to: djz3ro
You're on your own with that one. I admit seeing a match with the Batman balloon but I think you're seeing what you want to see.

The only similarity I see is that there's a white bit along the bottom (now you've rotated the image) it's too tall, too narrow and really not very much like the balloon at all.

It's been suggested that this object looked like a shark mylar balloon. I never saw it until I saw the pic at the different angle. I then turned the pic and found a shark balloon put it beside it and there is a resemblance. The overall coloring, bright sun highlights on the tips of pectoral and rear fin look similar.

It's too tall, too narrow...

 
Rotate the balloon in your mind to fit the basic orientation of the object. I can only do so much image editing before it would become distorted. The object could be partially deflated and floating on its side or carried by a gust of wind. In other words, a man-made object not a spacecraft of some sort. I've yet to see any convincing evidence of a craft.

a reply to: LSU2018
I think you guys are really underestimating this report by far. At last the US government is acknowledging the UFO/UAP phenomenon and you guys are still not satisfied?

My take and impression from reading this report is they want to correct their bad track record about transparency. All of a sudden the media is reporting about it without ridicule (!). I think they understood this is not the right way to go for studying this phenomena. Why? Watch Fran Blanche's video here, she explains why this culture of ridicule even kept pilots from reporting sightings so they can't collect more data.

www.youtube.com...

Maybe even the government simply doesn't know what this phenomenon is all about and you guys are giving them wayyy too much credit.

This is exactly what we should have expected from a government agency being asked to create a report on anything... "We know too little... It's possibly a threat... We need more funding to properly assess it".

We will never learn the truth, at least, if we do, these departments will not be the source.

It's officially a bust.

Not so much as new and better footage.

I'm hearing there's a "CLASSFIED" version for Congress.

Maybe someone will leak it to the public.

a reply to: Monty79

I think you guys are really underestimating this report by far. At last the US government is acknowledging the UFO/UAP phenomenon and you guys are still not satisfied?

Not sure what you think is being acknowledged. The US government has never said UFOs don't exist. They are by definition "Unidentified".

From 1947 to 1969, the Air Force investigated Unidentified Flying Objects under Project Blue Book. The project, headquartered at Wright-Patterson Air Force Base, Ohio, was terminated Dec. 17, 1969. Of a total of 12,618 sightings reported to Project Blue Book, 701 remained "unidentified."

...As a result of these investigations, studies and experience gained from investigating UFO reports since 1948, the conclusions of Project Blue Book were:

No UFO reported, investigated and evaluated by the Air Force was ever an indication of threat to our national security;

There was no evidence submitted to or discovered by the Air Force that sightings categorized as "unidentified" represented technological developments or principles beyond the range of modern scientific knowledge; and

There was no evidence indicating that sightings categorized as "unidentified" were extraterrestrial vehicles....

Conclusions of Project Blue Book

Project Blue Book, whether you agree or disagree with its conclusions, acknowledged the existence UFOs. It even confirmed a small percentage remained unidentified. But dismissed them as not being a threat or being ET.

My take and impression from reading this report is they want to correct their bad track record about transparency. All of a sudden the media is reporting about it without ridicule (!). I think they understood this is not the right way to go for studying this phenomena. ...

The impression now given is that the American military is actually stupid and incompetent and has wilfully ignored incursions into US airspace and over Naval vessels for fear of ridicule.

The Nimitz incident remaining ignored for 13 years. Until, we are led to believe, a pop-punkster and former intel agents joined forces to correct their ways. This would be like the West ignoring the launch of Sputnik in 1957 and waiting until after the 1969 moon landing until Jimi Hendrix has a word with the Pentagon.

Maybe even the government simply doesn't know what this phenomenon is all about and you guys are giving them wayyy too much credit.

Perhaps the objective is to wipe out the history of UFO sightings in the 20th century? Leaving whatever happened buried in the past.

misleading statement. No government has acknowledged the existence of ET or a presence on earth.

originally posted by: Adonsa
a reply to: Adonsa

The US is far behind in UFO/UAP disclosure.

Here's the list of countries that have disclosed the existance of UFOs and ET encounters:
1. Argentina
2. Australia
3. Brazil
4. Canada
5. Chile
6. China
7. Denmark
8. Finland
9. France
10. Germany
11. India
12. Ireland
13. Japan
14. Mexico
15. New Zealand (Additional Report)
16. Peru
17. Russia
18. Spain
19. Sweden
20. Ukraine (not in English)
21. United Nations
22. United Kingdom
23. Uruguay
24. Vatican City

The link to France points to a useless yahoo website. Here's the best
found so far, from search engine searches,
France Opens Up its UFO Files

European partial disclosure is discussed here.

It might be necessary to go to The Dark Web to get the declassified French Report, or
it may be elsewhere on this ATS website, I'll continue to try to locate it.

Recommendation: Rely, for now, on reports from countries listed above, given the conspicuous failures of the US report,

FAILED --- No annexes of each government agencies' input
FAILED --- No mention or input from the Magestic-12 (MJ-12) government agency
FAILED --- No input from the Department of Energy

a reply to: Ectoplasm8

I agree, there is no evidence of a craft either. I guess I sort of see it, the left image might be head on, instead of from the side like the actual Mylar balloon.

a reply to: Ectoplasm8
I don't know about that...but I thought this was strange. On startpage image search I searched something like silver mylar blimp party balloon

I got some returns I expected like miniature versions of the goodyear blimp, and some blimp balloons that looked silvery, without the goodyear logo. The strange part was a percentage of the image results were those shark balloons. I didn't search for shark balloons so I thought it was odd they showed up in the blimp balloon search.

originally posted by: djz3ro
a reply to: Arbitrageur

Do you think they might be forbidden from outright lying?

I don't even understand the question, forbidden by who or what? Anyway I don't automatically assume anything is truthful or a lie. If certain people or organizations seem to have a history of telling the truth, or of lying, that history may rightfully bias my expectations about new information from the same sources. People under oath are supposed to tell the truth, where the oath usually starts something like "do you swear to tell the truth, the whole truth....". In this report, it seems obvious the report could be some form of the truth, but not "the whole truth" seeing as the supporting classified annex is not released with the report, which probably has more of the truth, but even that may not have the whole truth.

Had they confirmed it was a Batman balloon, then it likely was, the fact they can't confirm it means it wasn't a balloon?

If I try to make sense out of the messy leak, some of the claims accompanying those leaked photos appeared to be something along the lines of the statement on page 5 of the report that "Some UAP appeared to remain stationary in winds aloft, move against the wind,...", so if an investigator takes that claim at face value, even though he sees what looks like a batman balloon, he might feel that he can't conclude it's a batman balloon which would be unable to "remain stationary in winds aloft" if that's what the photographer reported. However, what seems far more likely is that there is some kind of misperception on the part of the eyewitness who perceived the balloon was not behaving like a balloon. I've seen many examples of that on ATS where people see balloons and say balloons don't behave like that, but they were balloons and they do behave exactly like that sometimes. Eyewitnesses may also think something is flying against the wind when it's not. An eyewitness feels the wind blowing toward city, and sees a UFO moving away from the city. Does that rule out a balloon because it's blowing against the wind? NO!

Same with not being able to confirm some sightings were their tech.

Again I don't necessarily attribute this to any kind of lying. We don't know how much SAP knowledge the investigators have in this case. It could be that someone in a hangar at area 51 knows exactly what one of these UAPs was, but that the information is so compartmented that nobody on the UAP task force is aware of it. But if you take the example of the batman balloon it's not part of any secret project so their claim they can't confirm that one is part of any secret project would be very true.

originally posted by: djz3ro
If it's relatively new Radar Tech and all these were tracked using it, could it be a glitch within the tech?

Certainly a possibility. Kevin Day in one of his interviews said he thought the UFOs he was tracking might be glitches. Maybe that's why nobody did anything about them for 9 days.

If it is new radar tech, would it be spoofed so easily?

Without knowing all the technical details, it's hard to say but I don't think new or upgraded radars are immune to spoofing. The report states:
"In a limited number of incidents, UAP reportedly appeared to exhibit unusual flight characteristics. These observations could be the result of sensor errors, spoofing, or observer misperception and require additional rigorous analysis." I have no reason to doubt that spoofing should correctly be on the list of possibilities, as the report states. Upgraded radar systems would not be an exception to that.

originally posted by: karl 12
Hasn't that been debunked as complete bollocks?

Link / Post

Regardless of the CIA telling implausible stories, if you listened to the John Greenewald video you posted, he said something similar without bringing up the CIA tall tales, that we just don't know how much access to the SAPs the UAP task force had so we shouldn't necessarily conclude that because they couldn't confirm it was a secret project, that it wasn't a secret project. That still leaves open the possibility that it was a secret project they didn't know about, I think was Greenewald's point and also what i was getting at in my post at the root of this line of thought, that Elizondo's interpretation of the report is not what it really says, it's a misinterpretation.

originally posted by: Borys
Small correction: whilst it sounds like he is saying AESA (Active Electronic Scanned Array), referring to the APG-73 (I think) radar, he is actually referring to the SA, or Situational Awareness display mode, which can combine sensor data from both the onboard radar, other aircraft and ships using LINK-16.

Actually the audio sounds like "ASA", not AESA or not SA. How do you know he is referring to SA and why does it sound like ASA? It's a lot easier to explain the dropped "E" than the extra A. This is the version released by TTSA where they added subtitles:

originally posted by: Arbitrageur


Post


Regardless of the CIA telling implausible stories

Yes mate that was a specific reply to a specific post promoting an often cited myth.

Have no problem with your other comments and truly struggle to believe that a bunch of Senators would get anywhere near quasi private domain, highly compartmentalised SAP/black projects.

It's estimated that even back in 2009 the black budget for the US DOD was around $50 billion - if Bill Sweetman's articles in Jane’s International Defence Review are to be believed then the security fraction of the total budget for these 'deep black' SAPs can approach 50%.

Even if they somehow managed to discover the existence of just one.. and actually gained access (all within 180 days) then they'd just be given the runaround courtesy tour before being told to GTFO.

100s (and 100s and 100s) of billions in covert spending for Black projects and their coordinators are just going to roll over and spill the beans to some Senators?

No way José.

This is following a familiar mindset.

"UFO's sound crazy!!! We need a name change!!"

"UAP's?" YEAH!! NAME CHANGE, NOW THIS NAME ISN'T NUTS!!

Fred..

a reply to: Arbitrageur

I think it's mis-transcribed: there is no "ASA" within the cockpit environment of an F-18.The exact quote is "There’s a whole fleet of them. Look on the ASA / AESA / SA". Could be an audio glitch, could be the pilot mis-spoke (quite common). The key thing is that he says there's a whole fleet of them. SOP of an F-18 is to use the Link-16 to gather as much information as possible from all sensor platforms in the area - other aircraft (other F-18s in formation, Hawkeyes AWACS etc) and any nearby ships. That is displayed via the Situational Awareness mode. Sure, the onboard AESA is a part of that and the AESA radar can indeed detect and track multiple objects whilst still searching, but the information from it is displayed on the SA screen.

You can get a better idea about this display from:

trace.tennessee.edu...