- rexdutchman
- 07-28-2020, 11:25 AM
Joeys hidin in the mother ship
- dilbert firestorm
- 07-29-2020, 05:22 AM
https://www.nytimes.com/2020/07/23/u...reid-navy.html
No Longer in Shadows, Pentagon’s U.F.O. Unit Will Make Some Findings Public
For over a decade, the program, now tucked inside the Office of Naval Intelligence, has discussed mysterious events in classified briefings.
By Ralph Blumenthal and Leslie Kean
July 23, 2020
Despite Pentagon statements that it disbanded a once-covert program to investigate unidentified flying objects, the effort remains underway — renamed and tucked inside the Office of Naval Intelligence, where officials continue to study mystifying encounters between military pilots and unidentified aerial vehicles.
Pentagon officials will not discuss the program, which is not classified but deals with classified matters. Yet it appeared last month in a Senate committee report outlining spending on the nation’s intelligence agencies for the coming year. The report said the program, the Unidentified Aerial Phenomenon Task Force, was “to standardize collection and reporting” on sightings of unexplained aerial vehicles, and was to report at least some of its findings to the public within 180 days after passage of the intelligence authorization act.
While retired officials involved with the effort — including Harry Reid, the former Senate majority leader — hope the program will seek evidence of vehicles from other worlds, its main focus is on discovering whether another nation, especially any potential adversary, is using breakout aviation technology that could threaten the United States.
Senator Marco Rubio, the Florida Republican who is the acting chairman of the Senate Select Committee on Intelligence, told a CBS affiliate in Miami this month that he was primarily concerned about reports of unidentified aircraft over American military bases — and that it was in the government’s interest to find out who was responsible.
He expressed concerns that China or Russia or some other adversary had made “some technological leap” that “allows them to conduct this sort of activity.”
Mr. Rubio said some of the unidentified aerial vehicles over U.S. bases possibly exhibited technologies not in the American arsenal. But he also noted: “Maybe there is a completely, sort of, boring explanation for it. But we need to find out.”
In 2017, The New York Times disclosed the existence of a predecessor unit, called the Advanced Aerospace Threat Identification Program. Defense Department officials said at the time that the unit and its $22 million in funding had lapsed after 2012.
People working with the program, however, said it was still in operation in 2017 and beyond, statements later confirmed by the Defense Department.
The program was begun in 2007 under the Defense Intelligence Agency and was then placed within the office of the undersecretary of defense for intelligence, which remains responsible for its oversight. But its coordination with the intelligence community will be carried out by the Office of Naval Intelligence, as described in the Senate budget bill. The program never lapsed in those years, but little was disclosed about the post-2017 operations.
The Pentagon program’s previous director, Luis Elizondo, a former military intelligence official who resigned in October 2017 after 10 years with the program, confirmed that the new task force evolved from the advanced aerospace program.
Luis Elizondo, a former military intelligence official, was the director of the Pentagon’s previous program on unidentified aerial vehicles.
Credit...Roger Kisby for The New York Times
“It no longer has to hide in the shadows,” Mr. Elizondo said. “It will have a new transparency.”
Mr. Elizondo is among a small group of former government officials and scientists with security clearances who, without presenting physical proof, say they are convinced that objects of undetermined origin have crashed on earth with materials retrieved for study.
For more than a decade, the Pentagon program has been conducting classified briefings for congressional committees, aerospace company executives and other government officials, according to interviews with program participants and unclassified briefing documents.
In some cases, earthly explanations have been found for previously unexplained incidents. Even lacking a plausible terrestrial explanation does not make an extraterrestrial one the most likely, astrophysicists say.
Mr. Reid, the former Democratic senator from Nevada who pushed for funding the earlier U.F.O. program when he was the majority leader, said he believed that crashes of objects of unknown origin may have occurred and that retrieved materials should be studied.
“After looking into this, I came to the conclusion that there were reports — some were substantive, some not so substantive — that there were actual materials that the government and the private sector had in their possession,” Mr. Reid said in an interview.
No crash artifacts have been publicly produced for independent verification. Some retrieved objects, such as unusual metallic fragments, were later identified from laboratory studies as man-made.
Harry Reid pushed for funding the earlier U.F.O. program when he was the Senate majority leader.
Credit...Joe Buglewicz for The New York Times
Eric W. Davis, an astrophysicist who worked as a subcontractor and then a consultant for the Pentagon U.F.O. program since 2007, said that, in some cases, examination of the materials had so far failed to determine their source and led him to conclude, “We couldn’t make it ourselves.”
The constraints on discussing classified programs — and the ambiguity of information cited in unclassified slides from the briefings — have put officials who have studied U.F.O.s in the position of stating their views without presenting any hard evidence.
Mr. Davis, who now works for Aerospace Corporation, a defense contractor, said he gave a classified briefing to a Defense Department agency as recently as March about retrievals from “off-world vehicles not made on this earth.”
Mr. Davis said he also gave classified briefings on retrievals of unexplained objects to staff members of the Senate Armed Services Committee on Oct. 21, 2019, and to staff members of the Senate Intelligence Committee two days later.
Committee staff members did not respond to requests for comment on the issue.
Public fascination with the topic of U.F.O.s has drawn in President Trump, who told his son Donald Trump Jr. in a June interview that he knew “very interesting” things about Roswell — a city in New Mexico that is central to speculation about the existence of U.F.O.s. The president demurred when asked if he would declassify any information on Roswell. “I’ll have to think about that one,” he said.
Either way, Mr. Reid said, more should be made public to clarify what is known and what is not. “It is extremely important that information about the discovery of physical materials or retrieved craft come out,” he said.
Correction: July 24, 2020
An earlier version of this article inaccurately rendered remarks attributed to Harry Reid, the retired Senate majority leader from Nevada. Mr. Reid said he believed that crashes of objects of unknown origin may have occurred and that retrieved materials should be studied; he did not say that crashes had occurred and that retrieved materials had been studied secretly for decades. An earlier version also misstated the frequency with which the director of national intelligence is supposed to report on unidentified aerial phenomena. It is 180 days after enactment of the intelligence authorization act, not every six months.
A version of this article appears in print on July 24, 2020, Section A, Page 17 of the New York edition with the headline: U.F.O. Unit At Pentagon Will Publish Its Findings.
No Longer in Shadows, Pentagon’s U.F.O. Unit Will Make Some Findings Public
For over a decade, the program, now tucked inside the Office of Naval Intelligence, has discussed mysterious events in classified briefings.
By Ralph Blumenthal and Leslie Kean
July 23, 2020
Despite Pentagon statements that it disbanded a once-covert program to investigate unidentified flying objects, the effort remains underway — renamed and tucked inside the Office of Naval Intelligence, where officials continue to study mystifying encounters between military pilots and unidentified aerial vehicles.
Pentagon officials will not discuss the program, which is not classified but deals with classified matters. Yet it appeared last month in a Senate committee report outlining spending on the nation’s intelligence agencies for the coming year. The report said the program, the Unidentified Aerial Phenomenon Task Force, was “to standardize collection and reporting” on sightings of unexplained aerial vehicles, and was to report at least some of its findings to the public within 180 days after passage of the intelligence authorization act.
While retired officials involved with the effort — including Harry Reid, the former Senate majority leader — hope the program will seek evidence of vehicles from other worlds, its main focus is on discovering whether another nation, especially any potential adversary, is using breakout aviation technology that could threaten the United States.
Senator Marco Rubio, the Florida Republican who is the acting chairman of the Senate Select Committee on Intelligence, told a CBS affiliate in Miami this month that he was primarily concerned about reports of unidentified aircraft over American military bases — and that it was in the government’s interest to find out who was responsible.
He expressed concerns that China or Russia or some other adversary had made “some technological leap” that “allows them to conduct this sort of activity.”
Mr. Rubio said some of the unidentified aerial vehicles over U.S. bases possibly exhibited technologies not in the American arsenal. But he also noted: “Maybe there is a completely, sort of, boring explanation for it. But we need to find out.”
In 2017, The New York Times disclosed the existence of a predecessor unit, called the Advanced Aerospace Threat Identification Program. Defense Department officials said at the time that the unit and its $22 million in funding had lapsed after 2012.
People working with the program, however, said it was still in operation in 2017 and beyond, statements later confirmed by the Defense Department.
The program was begun in 2007 under the Defense Intelligence Agency and was then placed within the office of the undersecretary of defense for intelligence, which remains responsible for its oversight. But its coordination with the intelligence community will be carried out by the Office of Naval Intelligence, as described in the Senate budget bill. The program never lapsed in those years, but little was disclosed about the post-2017 operations.
The Pentagon program’s previous director, Luis Elizondo, a former military intelligence official who resigned in October 2017 after 10 years with the program, confirmed that the new task force evolved from the advanced aerospace program.
Luis Elizondo, a former military intelligence official, was the director of the Pentagon’s previous program on unidentified aerial vehicles.
Credit...Roger Kisby for The New York Times
“It no longer has to hide in the shadows,” Mr. Elizondo said. “It will have a new transparency.”
Mr. Elizondo is among a small group of former government officials and scientists with security clearances who, without presenting physical proof, say they are convinced that objects of undetermined origin have crashed on earth with materials retrieved for study.
For more than a decade, the Pentagon program has been conducting classified briefings for congressional committees, aerospace company executives and other government officials, according to interviews with program participants and unclassified briefing documents.
In some cases, earthly explanations have been found for previously unexplained incidents. Even lacking a plausible terrestrial explanation does not make an extraterrestrial one the most likely, astrophysicists say.
Mr. Reid, the former Democratic senator from Nevada who pushed for funding the earlier U.F.O. program when he was the majority leader, said he believed that crashes of objects of unknown origin may have occurred and that retrieved materials should be studied.
“After looking into this, I came to the conclusion that there were reports — some were substantive, some not so substantive — that there were actual materials that the government and the private sector had in their possession,” Mr. Reid said in an interview.
No crash artifacts have been publicly produced for independent verification. Some retrieved objects, such as unusual metallic fragments, were later identified from laboratory studies as man-made.
Harry Reid pushed for funding the earlier U.F.O. program when he was the Senate majority leader.
Credit...Joe Buglewicz for The New York Times
Eric W. Davis, an astrophysicist who worked as a subcontractor and then a consultant for the Pentagon U.F.O. program since 2007, said that, in some cases, examination of the materials had so far failed to determine their source and led him to conclude, “We couldn’t make it ourselves.”
The constraints on discussing classified programs — and the ambiguity of information cited in unclassified slides from the briefings — have put officials who have studied U.F.O.s in the position of stating their views without presenting any hard evidence.
Mr. Davis, who now works for Aerospace Corporation, a defense contractor, said he gave a classified briefing to a Defense Department agency as recently as March about retrievals from “off-world vehicles not made on this earth.”
Mr. Davis said he also gave classified briefings on retrievals of unexplained objects to staff members of the Senate Armed Services Committee on Oct. 21, 2019, and to staff members of the Senate Intelligence Committee two days later.
Committee staff members did not respond to requests for comment on the issue.
Public fascination with the topic of U.F.O.s has drawn in President Trump, who told his son Donald Trump Jr. in a June interview that he knew “very interesting” things about Roswell — a city in New Mexico that is central to speculation about the existence of U.F.O.s. The president demurred when asked if he would declassify any information on Roswell. “I’ll have to think about that one,” he said.
Either way, Mr. Reid said, more should be made public to clarify what is known and what is not. “It is extremely important that information about the discovery of physical materials or retrieved craft come out,” he said.
Correction: July 24, 2020
An earlier version of this article inaccurately rendered remarks attributed to Harry Reid, the retired Senate majority leader from Nevada. Mr. Reid said he believed that crashes of objects of unknown origin may have occurred and that retrieved materials should be studied; he did not say that crashes had occurred and that retrieved materials had been studied secretly for decades. An earlier version also misstated the frequency with which the director of national intelligence is supposed to report on unidentified aerial phenomena. It is 180 days after enactment of the intelligence authorization act, not every six months.
A version of this article appears in print on July 24, 2020, Section A, Page 17 of the New York edition with the headline: U.F.O. Unit At Pentagon Will Publish Its Findings.
- dilbert firestorm
- 07-29-2020, 05:59 AM
https://www.nytimes.com/2020/07/28/i...reporting.html
Do We Believe in U.F.O.s? That’s the Wrong Question
Reporting on the Pentagon program that’s investigating unidentified flying objects is not about belief. It’s about a vigilant search for facts.
Video
https://nyti.ms/2Te0jc6
0:09/2:07
transcript
U.S. Navy Releases Videos of Unexplained Flying Objects
The U.S. Navy has officially published previously released videos showing unexplained objects.
Credit...Department of Defense, via Agence France-Presse — Getty Images
By Ralph Blumenthal and Leslie Kean
July 28, 2020
Times Insider explains who we are and what we do, and delivers behind-the-scenes insights into how our journalism comes together.
We were part of The New York Times’s team (with the Washington correspondent Helene Cooper) that broke the story of the Pentagon’s long-secret unit investigating unidentified flying objects, the Advanced Aerospace Threat Identification Program, in December 2017.
Since then, we have reported on Navy pilots’ close encounters with U.F.O.s, and last week, on the current revamped program, the Unidentified Aerial Phenomenon Task Force and its official briefings — ongoing for more than a decade — for intelligence officials, aerospace executives and Congressional staff on reported U.F.O. crashes and retrieved materials.
We’re often asked by well-meaning associates and readers, “Do you believe in U.F.O.s?” The question sets us aback as being inappropriately personal. Times reporters are particularly averse to revealing opinions that could imply possible reporting bias.
But in this case we have no problem responding, “No, we don’t believe in U.F.O.s.”
As we see it, their existence, or nonexistence, is not a matter of belief.
We admire what the great anthropologist Margaret Mead said when asked long ago whether she believed in U.F.O.s. She called it “a silly question,” writing in Redbook in 1974:
In our reporting, we’ve focused on how the Department of Defense, the Office of Naval Intelligence and members of two Senate committees are engaged with this topic. Current officials are now concerned about the potential threat represented by the very real, advanced technological objects: how close they can come to our fighter jets, sometimes causing a near miss, and the risk that our adversaries may acquire the technology demonstrated by the objects before we do.
So if U.F.O.s are no longer a matter of belief, what are they and how do they do what they do?
And if technology has been retrieved from downed objects, what better way to try to understand how they work?
Our previous stories were relatively easy to document with Department of Defense videos of U.F.O.s and pilot eyewitness accounts backed up by Navy hazard reports of close encounters with small speeding objects.
But our latest article provided a more daunting set of challenges, since we dealt with the possible existence of retrieved materials from U.F.O.s. Going from data on a distant object in the sky to the possession of a retrieved one on the ground makes a leap that many find hard to accept and that clearly demands extraordinary evidence.
Numerous associates of the Pentagon program, with high security clearances and decades of involvement with official U.F.O. investigations, told us they were convinced such crashes have occurred, based on their access to classified information. But the retrieved materials themselves, and any data about them, are completely off-limits to anyone without clearances and a need to know.
The Pentagon’s U.F.O. Program has been using unclassified slides like this to brief government officials on threats from Advanced Aerospace Vehicles — “including off-world” — and materials retrieved from crashes of unidentified phenomena. Credit...Leslie Kean
We were provided a series of unclassified slides showing that the program took this seriously enough to include it in numerous briefings. One slide says one of the program’s tasks was to “arrange for access to data/reports/materials from crash retrievals of A.A.V.’s,” or advanced aerospace vehicles.
Our sources told us that “A.A.V.” does not refer to vehicles made in any country — not Russian or Chinese — but is used to mean technology in the realm of the truly unexplained. They also assure us that their briefings are based on facts, not belief.
Ralph Blumenthal was a Times reporter from 1964 to 2009. Leslie Kean has written a book and articles on U.F.O.s.
A version of this article appears in print on July 28, 2020, Section A, Page 2 of the New York edition with the headline: Staying Grounded on U.F.O.s.
Do We Believe in U.F.O.s? That’s the Wrong Question
Reporting on the Pentagon program that’s investigating unidentified flying objects is not about belief. It’s about a vigilant search for facts.
Video
https://nyti.ms/2Te0jc6
0:09/2:07
transcript
U.S. Navy Releases Videos of Unexplained Flying Objects
The U.S. Navy has officially published previously released videos showing unexplained objects.
[radio transmission] “Whoa, got it — woo-hoo!” “Roger —” “What the [expletive] is that?” “Did you box a moving target?” “No, I took an auto track.” “Oh, OK.” “Oh my gosh, dude. Wow” “What is that man?” “There’s a whole screen of them. My gosh.” “They’re all going against the wind. The wind’s 120 knots from west.” “Dude.” “That’s not — is it?” “[inaudible]” “Look at that thing.”The U.S. Navy has officially published previously released videos showing unexplained objects.
Credit...Department of Defense, via Agence France-Presse — Getty Images
By Ralph Blumenthal and Leslie Kean
July 28, 2020
Times Insider explains who we are and what we do, and delivers behind-the-scenes insights into how our journalism comes together.
We were part of The New York Times’s team (with the Washington correspondent Helene Cooper) that broke the story of the Pentagon’s long-secret unit investigating unidentified flying objects, the Advanced Aerospace Threat Identification Program, in December 2017.
Since then, we have reported on Navy pilots’ close encounters with U.F.O.s, and last week, on the current revamped program, the Unidentified Aerial Phenomenon Task Force and its official briefings — ongoing for more than a decade — for intelligence officials, aerospace executives and Congressional staff on reported U.F.O. crashes and retrieved materials.
We’re often asked by well-meaning associates and readers, “Do you believe in U.F.O.s?” The question sets us aback as being inappropriately personal. Times reporters are particularly averse to revealing opinions that could imply possible reporting bias.
But in this case we have no problem responding, “No, we don’t believe in U.F.O.s.”
As we see it, their existence, or nonexistence, is not a matter of belief.
We admire what the great anthropologist Margaret Mead said when asked long ago whether she believed in U.F.O.s. She called it “a silly question,” writing in Redbook in 1974:
“Belief has to do with matters of faith; it has nothing to do with the kind of knowledge that is based on scientific inquiry. … Do people believe in the sun or the moon, or the changing seasons, or the chairs they’re sitting on? When we want to understand something strange, something previously unknown to anyone, we have to begin with an entirely different set of questions. What is it? How does it work?”That’s what the Pentagon U.F.O. program has been focusing on, making it eminently newsworthy. And to be clear: U.F.O.s don’t mean aliens. Unidentified means we don’t know what they are, only that they demonstrate capabilities that do not appear to be possible through currently available technology.
In our reporting, we’ve focused on how the Department of Defense, the Office of Naval Intelligence and members of two Senate committees are engaged with this topic. Current officials are now concerned about the potential threat represented by the very real, advanced technological objects: how close they can come to our fighter jets, sometimes causing a near miss, and the risk that our adversaries may acquire the technology demonstrated by the objects before we do.
So if U.F.O.s are no longer a matter of belief, what are they and how do they do what they do?
And if technology has been retrieved from downed objects, what better way to try to understand how they work?
Our previous stories were relatively easy to document with Department of Defense videos of U.F.O.s and pilot eyewitness accounts backed up by Navy hazard reports of close encounters with small speeding objects.
But our latest article provided a more daunting set of challenges, since we dealt with the possible existence of retrieved materials from U.F.O.s. Going from data on a distant object in the sky to the possession of a retrieved one on the ground makes a leap that many find hard to accept and that clearly demands extraordinary evidence.
Numerous associates of the Pentagon program, with high security clearances and decades of involvement with official U.F.O. investigations, told us they were convinced such crashes have occurred, based on their access to classified information. But the retrieved materials themselves, and any data about them, are completely off-limits to anyone without clearances and a need to know.
The Pentagon’s U.F.O. Program has been using unclassified slides like this to brief government officials on threats from Advanced Aerospace Vehicles — “including off-world” — and materials retrieved from crashes of unidentified phenomena. Credit...Leslie Kean
We were provided a series of unclassified slides showing that the program took this seriously enough to include it in numerous briefings. One slide says one of the program’s tasks was to “arrange for access to data/reports/materials from crash retrievals of A.A.V.’s,” or advanced aerospace vehicles.
Our sources told us that “A.A.V.” does not refer to vehicles made in any country — not Russian or Chinese — but is used to mean technology in the realm of the truly unexplained. They also assure us that their briefings are based on facts, not belief.
Ralph Blumenthal was a Times reporter from 1964 to 2009. Leslie Kean has written a book and articles on U.F.O.s.
A version of this article appears in print on July 28, 2020, Section A, Page 2 of the New York edition with the headline: Staying Grounded on U.F.O.s.
- rexdutchman
- 07-29-2020, 08:45 AM
Maybe Aliens will come save us from ourselves
- oeb11
- 07-29-2020, 10:06 AM
The Day the Earth Stood Still - 1951!
- dilbert firestorm
- 07-29-2020, 10:26 AM
new terminology added to our brain closet -- AAV (Advanced Aerospace Vehicle)
UFO - air force
UAP - Navy
AAV - who knows.... maybe the new Space Force?
UFO - air force
UAP - Navy
AAV - who knows.... maybe the new Space Force?
- rexdutchman
- 07-30-2020, 08:49 AM
Disinformation ,,,,, BUT if there's Alien life send HELP !!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
- Munchmasterman
- 08-04-2020, 04:21 PM
I just watched the "Contact" video.
Something very interesting was that when the pilot was describing the motions of the "tic tac", he said that the rate of acceleration would turn the occupants into mush.
No argument here.
Then he said something about what humans could take. His guess at the amount humans could take (and it was a very tentative guess) was 8 Gs.
F-15s supposedly can take around 11-15 Gs. He wouldn't have been in an F-15. It's just an example.
Some pilots can take more than others but it looked like 7 was the minimum and still pass. Looks of different info
What was very strange though was the pilot's lack of knowledge about his and his aircraft's G force constraints. He had been a fighter pilot and should have been familiar with the numbers.
Something very interesting was that when the pilot was describing the motions of the "tic tac", he said that the rate of acceleration would turn the occupants into mush.
No argument here.
Then he said something about what humans could take. His guess at the amount humans could take (and it was a very tentative guess) was 8 Gs.
F-15s supposedly can take around 11-15 Gs. He wouldn't have been in an F-15. It's just an example.
Some pilots can take more than others but it looked like 7 was the minimum and still pass. Looks of different info
What was very strange though was the pilot's lack of knowledge about his and his aircraft's G force constraints. He had been a fighter pilot and should have been familiar with the numbers.
Two possibilities exist: either we are alone in the Universe or we are not. Both are equally terrifying.
Arthur C. Clarke
i saw this article yesterday. source is the HuffyPoo
https://www.yahoo.com/huffpost/ufo-o...065525258.html
The Pentagon’s secretive UFO unit is going to make some of its findings public, The New York Times reported.
And one consultant to the agency has briefed Defense Department officials of some highly unusual discoveries ― including items retrieved from “off-world vehicles not made on this Earth,” the newspaper said.
The Pentagon has claimed it disbanded its UFO office, but it actually simply changed names and moved. A Senate committee report suggests it will be expected to make some information public every six months.
The main goal isn’t alien spaceships, but rather something much closer to home: to see if confounding sightings ― including some by the military ― are actually advanced technology from rival nations.
The Times report also hints at possible artifacts from UFO crashes, citing former Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid (D-Nev.).
“After looking into this, I came to the conclusion that there were reports — some were substantive, some not so substantive — that there were actual materials that the government and the private sector had in their possession,” Reid told the newspaper.
Astrophysicist Eric W. Davis, who has been a subcontractor and consultant for the Pentagon, told the Times he briefed the Defense Department in March about the “off-world vehicles not made on this Earth.” He said he has examined some of the materials and concluded “we couldn’t make it ourselves.”
Read the full Times report here.
Sen. Marco Rubio (R-Fla.) also indicated that he was concerned that supposed UFOs could be advanced tech from foreign nations.
“We have things flying over our military bases and places where we’re conducting military exercises, and we don’t know what it is, and it isn’t ours,” Rubio, who is acting chair of the Senate Intelligence Committee, told CBS4 in Miami last week.
He added: “I would say that, frankly, that if it’s something from outside this planet, that might actually be better than the fact that we’ve seen some technological leap on behalf of the Chinese or the Russians or some other adversary that allows them to conduct this sort of activity.”
Objects in these sightings “exhibit, potentially, technologies that you don’t have at your own disposal,” making them a national security risk, Rubio said.
The military’s encounters with possible UFOs have come under intense interest since several videos were leaked in 2017 showing encounters with fast-moving objects including one given the nickname “Tic Tac” because it looked like one of the candies.
This object, still not publicly identified, dropped from 60,000 feet to just 50 feet in a matter of seconds:
“The part that drew our attention was how it wasn’t behaving within the normal laws of physics,” pilot Chad Underwood told New York magazine last year.
Underwood filmed the “Tic Tac” encounter.
The military has since confirmed that the footage is real, and formally declassified it in the spring, but has said little else about it.
The Navy told UFO researcher Christian Lambright in a Freedom of Information Act request that releasing more information “would cause exceptionally grave damage to the National Security of the United States.”
To The Stars Academy, a company co-founded by former Blink 182 frontman Tom DeLonge that has worked to reveal UFO information and helped expose the 2017 videos, celebrated the newest developments.
“TTSA welcomes the increase in transparency and is steadfast in our mission to educate policy makers and support continued interest and engagement on this topic,” the organization said via Facebook. Originally Posted by The_Waco_Kid
- oeb11
- 08-04-2020, 07:45 PM
is Blue Meanie an alien? - likely not that advanced a being - since it kowtows to the DPST narrative, NY Crimes, and Chairman Xi!
- Munchmasterman
- 08-04-2020, 10:42 PM
Shut the fuck up, douche-bag.
We know you have to say something stupid....when you talk.
You're one of the rats that are already abandoning the trumpy ship. And one of the best things is you will live in the world you describe. You will always feel people don't like you and that a black guy got your place in community college.
And you'll be right.
You're an asshole because of your actions, not your opinions. Don't seek help. We can't fuck with you like you fuck with you.
We know you have to say something stupid....when you talk.
You're one of the rats that are already abandoning the trumpy ship. And one of the best things is you will live in the world you describe. You will always feel people don't like you and that a black guy got your place in community college.
And you'll be right.
You're an asshole because of your actions, not your opinions. Don't seek help. We can't fuck with you like you fuck with you.
is Blue Meanie an alien? - likely not that advanced a being - since it kowtows to the DPST narrative, NY Crimes, and Chairman Xi! Originally Posted by oeb11
- dilbert firestorm
- 08-05-2020, 12:19 AM
I just watched the "Contact" video.
Something very interesting was that when the pilot was describing the motions of the "tic tac", he said that the rate of acceleration would turn the occupants into mush.
No argument here.
Then he said something about what humans could take. His guess at the amount humans could take (and it was a very tentative guess) was 8 Gs.
F-15s supposedly can take around 11-15 Gs. He wouldn't have been in an F-15. It's just an example.
Some pilots can take more than others but it looked like 7 was the minimum and still pass. Looks of different info
What was very strange though was the pilot's lack of knowledge about his and his aircraft's G force constraints. He had been a fighter pilot and should have been familiar with the numbers. Originally Posted by Munchmasterman
he'd be flying the F18. it prolly has a lower g-force threshold than the F-15, a much more powerful aircraft. f-18 is 9g aircraft.
- dilbert firestorm
- 08-05-2020, 12:21 AM
- rexdutchman
- 08-05-2020, 08:21 AM
Mil - drones just saying , fucking with unarmed f 14
- dilbert firestorm
- 08-05-2020, 10:11 AM