The reason this whole thing has reignited is because when Donald Trump was in power, he agreed to force the Pentagon to publish their findings after lobbying by certain groups.
@Evenharmonics
The exasperating part is that the post I made that he’s referring to was actually a post that, if anything, is against the extra-terrestrial hypothesis.
He’s got it 180° backwards. Is anybody gonna tell him?
The exasperating part is that the post I made that he’s referring to was actually a post that, if anything, is against the extra-terrestrial hypothesis.
He’s got it 180° backwards. Is anybody gonna tell him?
This is demonstrably incorrect.
It was a New York Times article published on December 16, 2017 disclosing Obama administration era “UAP” research programs that got the ball rolling. There were further articles on the topic, including statements from officials in government alphabet agencies that paved the way for Rubio to introduce legislation creating the UAP task force. The task force was tasked with generating the report, of which 9 pages was for public dissemination. It came out a week ago.
This is an interesting point for me personally because it was while researching this precise topic (government interest/knowledge of UFOs) that I really became disillusioned at aligning myself as a part of skeptic culture. Simply put, I found 1940s-era military documentation released through FOIA requests persuasive enough to no longer consider it a “conspiracy theory”.
I can’t read the article because it’s behind a paywall, so why did you reference it? Are you a NYT subscriber and have you actually read the article?
Nevertheless, I stick by my initial claim but acknowledge it may have had its roots in an earlier administration. Whatever, it’s all nonsense.
I didn’t realize it was behind a paywall, much like JAES papers.
I guess that paywall didn’t manage to keep you from forming an opinion after all.
You don't seriously think, that after keeping whatever they may know hidden for 75 years, through Truman, Eisenhower, Kennedy, Johnson, Nixon, Ford, Carter, Reagan, Bush Sr., Clinton, Bush Jr., and Obama, that Donald Trump, an unpopular and incurious first term President, intimidated the Pentagon in to finally revealing what they know, do you?
Last edited:
Yes, the significance of the NYT article from December 2017 was the public disclosure of the existence of AATIP. The existence of AATIP signaled a reversal from the government’s public stance on the UFO phenomenon last issued in 1969 with the kangaroo court findings of the Condon Committee, which ruled that despite a few instances, UFO sightings were likely misidentifications and even when they weren’t, there was no reason to believe they posed a threat to national security. The Condon Committee was ostensibly setup to put an end to Project Blue Book which was becoming a nuisance. With Blue Book ended, the government was no longer in the business of receiving UFO reports and the public were directed to report UFO events to their local police department.
With no public government interest in UFOs, there was no money in academic research on the topic. Thus UFOlogy was relegated to the domain of hobbyists.
With no public government interest in UFOs, there was no money in academic research on the topic. Thus UFOlogy was relegated to the domain of hobbyists.
Member
Joined 2009
Paid Member
Well, forget uranium, it’s nasty, expensive etc. and as far as I can see it would not have been the first choice for a power generation fuel had not the US military poured money into it for weapons use, for the development of tools and processes needed to make bombs. Today, Thorium would be a preferred fuel for nuclear power. The Chinese are investing heavily, India have programs too.
Interesting.
When I was in college towards a EET certificate there were more than a few wind power companies that would buy a pizza for us if we watched their PowerPoint presentation. Turns out the “wind corridors” where the windmills are generate very little jobs, the windmills themselves are built in the EU and the vast majority of growth was in their admin HQ based in Atlanta, far from any wind corridor. Seemed massively inefficient.
Anyway, that’s when I started reconsidering nuclear power. We got to “juice the grid” and drive the cost of energy down to make electric cars a reality and not just a status symbol that occasionally burns its passengers alive.
When I was in college towards a EET certificate there were more than a few wind power companies that would buy a pizza for us if we watched their PowerPoint presentation. Turns out the “wind corridors” where the windmills are generate very little jobs, the windmills themselves are built in the EU and the vast majority of growth was in their admin HQ based in Atlanta, far from any wind corridor. Seemed massively inefficient.
Anyway, that’s when I started reconsidering nuclear power. We got to “juice the grid” and drive the cost of energy down to make electric cars a reality and not just a status symbol that occasionally burns its passengers alive.
Last edited:
From this weeks podcast with Luis Elizondo (not the exact words). Apparently the triangle shaped "vehicles" hover around or move slowly. Some observe lights at the corners that change colors and we assume it's some kind of doppler effect.
Doppler effect with little or no motion that would be interesting. As I mentioned his knowledge of how IR imaging works is also lacking, I hope the we he mentioned are not the Navy technical staff.
Doppler effect with little or no motion that would be interesting. As I mentioned his knowledge of how IR imaging works is also lacking, I hope the we he mentioned are not the Navy technical staff.
Member
Joined 2009
Paid Member
we should watch China to see which strategies work best as they are waaaaay ahead of North America in these areas and will be able to teach us what we should be doing
Yeah, I also watched that interview and cringed a bit at Elizondo's Doppler effect speculation. 😛
I've seen Luis speak a number of times, and he has always seemed more of an warrior type, than an engineer or technician. It appeared to me in that he was trying to sound a little more intellectual with his smart young host, who claims that his background includes the study of 'mathematical physics'.
Maybe because ... ummmm .... it is THE essential question?
Ok, then let´s discuss how many Angels can dance on the tip of a pin.
An interesting and equally baseless argument which also consumed much mental energy.
Guess anything is better than long boring Covid isolation.
"Anecdotal", "testify" and "reality" do not exactly mix well.
Notice they are not even using the word "UFO" any more ... any conclusions about that? 🙄
They autenthicated **the video** came from them, and nothing beyond.
They do NOT authenticate ANY hypothesis about the object itself, which is the key of the problem.
Who said that?
We ARE debating, over 700 posts by now, I even stated my position, which is >there is no proof alien (meaning extra Terrestrial) ships are visiting us<
Quite short and easy to understad.
I am amazed at the amount of deviations, quirks and subterfuges, let alone logical fallacies, some are posting instead of straight plain answers.
Last edited:
Member
Joined 2009
Paid Member
why are you amazed by that? I think you mean frustrated. The response to challenges to any belief is often as you describe since truth can not be proven either way, for the believers or the skeptics
I didn't refer to Puthoff because of his "fringe interests." I referred to him because of his "pathological science."
The reality, or not, of one mystery has nothing to do with the reality, or not, of another. However, who knows, maybe someone will eventually show you dancing Angels. In the meanwhile, you are free to engage in speculative debate with anyone who wishes to join you.
Really? Perhaps, you can explain for us, why not.
Yes, there two obvious reasons. One is the stigma that has become assocaited with the term, UFO. The other is that not all of what's been observed are readily describable as objects, in a flying saucer sense. Some are irregularly shaped, or organic looking. One of the Naval sightings was described, as I recall, as a two meter diameter transparent sphere, with an opaque cube inside it. Yeah, phenomena, better covers the scope of it
The key problem is, those who continue to falsely imply that anyone has claimed the Navy has stated an alien origin for the objects. What they HAVE done is explicitly state that they cannot rule out an alien origin. The inclusion of that possibility is nothing less than stunning. The Pentagon did not have to say that. They could have said nothing. That they chose to include an alien possibility tells me that they thought the public ought to hear that too, for some reason.
(Or, logical analysis) On that, we agree.
My theory about Vallee is pretty simple:
If you want to avoid/delegitimize the "UFO stigma," you:
- replace "UFO"
- use theoretical physics to formulate an inter-dimensional hypothesis to replace "little green men in space ships"
- it then can be explained with "the return of Buck Rogers from the 25th century" or virtually anything else
- create books, movies, streams, etc., without all that old stigma baggage
The beauty of the theory is it's strictly nonmathematical, aside from the receipts accounting.
If you want to avoid/delegitimize the "UFO stigma," you:
- replace "UFO"
- use theoretical physics to formulate an inter-dimensional hypothesis to replace "little green men in space ships"
- it then can be explained with "the return of Buck Rogers from the 25th century" or virtually anything else
- create books, movies, streams, etc., without all that old stigma baggage
The beauty of the theory is it's strictly nonmathematical, aside from the receipts accounting.
N-Rays: An Episode in the History and Psychology of Science on JSTOR
In case you missed it the first time around.
In case you missed it the first time around.