It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.
Please white-list or disable AboveTopSecret.com in your ad-blocking tool.
Thank you.
Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.
1985 HBO documentary, "UFOs: What's Going On", Cash claimed she was treated for cancer after being exposed to the "radioactive UFO". The Landrums' health was somewhat better, though reportedly both suffered from lingering weakness, skin sores and hair loss. Cash later developed breast cancer and Landrum severe cataracts.[6][unreliable source?] A radiologist who examined the witnesses' medical records for MUFON wrote, "We have strong evidence that these patients have suffered secondary damage to ionizing radiation. It is also possible that there was an infrared component as well." (quoted in Clark, 176) However, Brad Sparks contends that, although the symptoms were somewhat similar to those caused by ionizing radiation, the rapidity of onset was only consistent with a massive dose that would have meant certain death in a few days. Since all of the victims lived for years after the incident, Sparks suggests the cause of the symptoms was some kind of chemical contamination, presumably by an aerosol.
What a nothing burger….sheeesh
originally posted by: mirageman
So are these claims spurious? Were they ignored for the sake of the report? Or is there more to all of this.
I appreciate this is only a tiny part of the report. But it's an important one. Part of UFO lore is detecting 'radiation' in the vicinity of strange craft. And here we have a prime example.
originally posted by: Ophiuchus1
What a nothing burger….sheeesh
The government ain’t giving up squat.
👽
I've been collecting and analyzing heaps of high-strangeness and UAP encounters, all of which feature adverse physical after-effects comparable to those brought on by microwave radiation and the like.
originally posted by: Ophiuchus1
a reply to: imitator
What’s devoid in this report are any metrics dealing with Civilian reports.
It’s all Military…..and always will be such.
👽
“The well-reported Rendlesham Forest/Bentwaters is an example where it might be postulated that several observers were probably exposed to UAP radiation for longer than normal UAP sightings period.”
In the absence of being able to resolve what something is, we assume that it may be hostile," DOD official warns
Since August 2021, U.S. intelligence agencies have collected more than 500 new accounts of unidentified aerial phenomena, according to the latest report from the Pentagon. An increase in surveillance drones and weather balloons accounts for the majority of the reported UFO sightings — but 171 witness reports remain a mystery to officials. Meanwhile, a new amendment in the latest Defense budget aims to answer renewed calls for an investigation of UFO-related incidents surrounding the 1945 Trinity nuclear test site.
But the truth is out there: If 100% of explained events don’t involve aliens, what is the assumed rate of alien involvement in the unexplained events? If thousands of incidents are examined over decades and none yield proof of alien visitation, what should we assume about the background incidence of alien visitation?
One puzzle remains: why the U.S. government for so long seemed pleased by its role in propagating the UFO frenzy, before turning on a dime a year ago—a shift paralleled by the overnight shift from credulous to skeptical of its chief stenographer, the New York Times.