UAP/UFO |OT|

mrbogus · Mar 8, 2024

So what exactly happens regarding David Grusch's testimony if they've come to this conclusion by investigating themselves and finding nothing? (haha) Are they going to prosecute him for lying or wasting their time?

TheBee · Mar 8, 2024

mrbogus said:
So what exactly happens regarding David Grusch's testimony if they've come to this conclusion by investigating themselves and finding nothing? (haha) Are they going to prosecute him for lying or wasting their time?

Nothing.

The other side will keep fighting regardless of this report and eventually they will win.

Forerunner · Mar 8, 2024

View: https://twitter.com/LueElizondo/status/1766231733236584545

View: https://twitter.com/ChrisKMellon/status/1766237834216624285

This new report is not going to satisfy anyone. To begin with, it is a case of the DoD and the IC investigating themselves without even the independence that Inspectors General enjoy. Obviously, there is a huge potential conflict of interest. Imagine a small office at the DoD trying to investigate the Iran-Contra affair. Congress did a great job with that inquiry, something that would have likely been a whitewash if the Executive had tried to investigate itself. Further, many witnesses did not trust AARO and would not meet with them. For example, one former senior USG official years ago not only told me the rumors are real, he also provided details including the name of the USAF "gatekeeper." But he refused to speak to AARO about this because he claimed he did not trust the process. Some of the witnesses who refused to meet with AARO did meet behind closed doors with members of Congress, however. That is why some in Congress take the issue so seriously.

What I also find concerning is the false conflation in some news coverage of the assertion "there is no recovered alien technology" with the notion that "we don't have evidence of craft doing things beyond our present understanding of science and technology." As we know, hundreds of credible military reports remain unexplained and are continuing to pour in. Even Dr. Kirkpatrick concedes there is no conventional explanation for the well-documented Nimitz case, and earlier this week, Ryan Graves demonstrated to me with pencil and paper why none of the proposed "debunking" explanations for the Gimbal video make sense. There is also the recent case in Florida involving a USAF fighter that pursued a UAP and suffered interference with its sensors. The list goes on and on. In sum, the public needs to understand it is imperative to continue aggressively investigating UAP, for both national security and scientific purposes, regardless of the accuracy of this report.

TheBee · Mar 8, 2024

View: https://www.instagram.com/reel/C4RZHP3tVfk/?igsh=cW1nbTNuZ2FqbmI2

JetmanJay · Mar 8, 2024

If nothing exists why block the bill forcing the Dept of Defense to reveal what they have on UAP?
Take whatever info Grusch has and release it from a special access program. Let him tell all, reveal names and locations, then laugh at him when it's shown how fake it is. That would be the only way to put all of this to bed for good. Instead they fight him, Congress, and the public looking for answers every step of the way.
The above release just looks like a headline to convince the public, who only reads headlines, that there is nothing to see here.

Forerunner · Mar 8, 2024

View: https://twitter.com/uncertainvector/status/1766275080751882656

As a former U.S. Navy fighter pilot who works with other advanced UAP witnesses, I am very discouraged and disappointed by the Pentagon's report. Once again, the Pentagon demonstrates it is more interested in discounting witnesses and whistleblowers than it is with actually identifying anomalous objects and phenomena in our airspace.

The bottom line is that this report raises more questions than it answers.

Here are the facts:

In the actual report, the Pentagon again acknowledges that there are anomalous objects in our airspace demonstrating concerning performance characteristics.

For example, the "UFO videos" - 2004 Nimitz incident, 2015 Gimbal and GoFast experienced by squadron remain completely unexplained and the Pentagon has no new update on this mystery.

The Pentagon is unable to determine whether or not these advanced UAP are foreign just as the former director of AARO is calling advanced UAP, "a potential national security crisis.

The Pentagon is dismissing UAP cases in this report without evidence while having previously said that they don't have the resources or the proper authorities to adequately investigate.

Here are my questions:

Why is the Pentagon trying to dismiss cases they can't explain?

If reported cases of UAP are entirely innocuous, why is AARO right now deploying advanced hyperspectral sensors to military bases and training ranges?

Is the Pentagon the right agency to investigate whistleblower claims or should Congress or the DOJ take a stronger role to ensure impartiality and justice?

Rather than address head on the 80 year UAP mystery, the Pentagon succeeded in further misdirecting the public, discouraging military pilots and whistleblowers from coming forward, and perpetuating the stigma surrounding this topic.

Forerunner · Mar 8, 2024

View: https://twitter.com/blackvaultcom/status/1766284993981260046

In June 2023, I began asking about what I feel is an over-reaching blanket of secrecy over most of AARO's files on UAP. They began exempting information, without explanation, on a wide variety of UAP-related information, under the (b)(7) "law enforcement" exemption. See link in next post for more information and a sampling of what they've exempted.

I felt this was a nail in the coffin for transparency, if this went unchecked, and unaddressed. So, I aimed to check it and address it. I asked the Pentagon for an explanation - but they won't give it.

After following up these past 9+ months or so, well into the double digits of times to get an explanation on what "law enforcement" agency and/or investigation and/or whatever applied; I have received nothing. There is zero evidence that any Inspector General (IG) investigation plays a role in this, given what has been denied thus far, so the question remains -- why are they hiding behind the blanket?

I lost my #FOIA appeal when I tried to fight it, but hate to say, I wasn't surprised. That exemption is tough to win on.

For something that the U.S. government wants to explain away like they did today, they have an overwhelming number of secrecy layers piled on top that has stomped all over any hope of transparency. At least, that's their goal.

That doesn't mean alien, but it does mean it's more than what they want us to believe.

So, some may be let down at this report today. And, there are some things to be let down about.

But rest assured, this is not the end. After researching government secrets for more than 27 years now, I can tell you the UFO topic is not as easily explained away as the government tried to do today. I have said for years we'd likely see Condon 2.0, and today, we did.

Sadly for them, I'm just not going anywhere.

Those within the U.S. government, and those who used to work for the U.S. government, continue to muddy the waters. Both sides provably obfuscate, distort the 'truth', hide things, change their stories, and want you to believe wildly different things on two oppose ends of the spectrum. It's truly bizarre.

I want to know why that is, and I won't stop until I can get every piece of the puzzle I can get my hands on.
I'll see you next week.

Forerunner · Mar 8, 2024

View: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=_CeM5zsaCIc

View: https://twitter.com/UAPJames/status/1766274544619172215

Forerunner · Mar 9, 2024

View: https://twitter.com/GallaudetTim/status/1766460458590941508

Forerunner · Mar 9, 2024

View: https://twitter.com/ChrisKMellon/status/1766641061613465996

I fully concur with Robert's comments regarding the ineptitude of the AARO historical report; it is pathetic. Anyone who has read even a few basic books about the history of UAP can see that. I believe it not only neglects critical events but also contains inaccuracies in other statements. For example, I am confident that many military personnel, such as the F-16 pilots in the famous Stephenville, TX, UAP case, have been compelled to sign NDAs concerning UAP. This report is prompting me and others to redouble our efforts to assist Congress and the public in learning the truth.

Forerunner · Mar 9, 2024

Media Engagement With Acting AARO Director Tim Phillips on the Historical Record Report Vo

Mr. Tim Phillips, Acting Director of the All-domain Anomaly Resolution Office, held a media engagement on the first volume of the historical record report directed by Congress in fiscal year '23.

www.defense.gov

Q: Thanks, Sue. Hi, I'm Brandi Vincent with DefenseScoop. Nice to meet you and thanks for doing this. I have one question and one follow up.

So to start, have you noticed a ramp-up more recently that your team assesses is related to the latest boom in U.S. and others experimentation with emerging and next generation technologies? Specifically, there's also been multiple reports on multi-domain — AARO — and shapeshifting craft. Have you resolved any of those reports? And what emerging tech field would those be aligned with?

MR. PHILLIPS: Okay, there's a compound question there. We — we do see an increase in resolved cases where we identified UAS technology. So we're starting to see more UASs out there being reported through operational channels. The fact that we know they're exists and we can adjust our sensors to detect them and identify them more rapidly. We're seeing an increase and that's single-digit increases.

In the last month, we closed about 122 cases that was reported to AARO. 68% of those cases we assess to be some form of what I call aero garbage, balloons, trash that's up there in the atmosphere at — that are advanced sensors, we're able to detect. And then since it was unknown, it was reported to us as a UAP. And we had to research the cases. As far as other advanced technologies, there's been some cases, but we can't discuss that here.

Q: Because of operational security?

MR. PHILLIPS: Yes.

Q: And then my follow up is the report notes that on top of hoaxes and forgeries, mis- and disinformation is more prevalent and easier to generate and disseminate than ever before. In the process of this sort of assessment, did AARO see any indications that one or more than one foreign adversaries were trying to sow distrust in the American public online on the UAP topic? If so, who and how much of that is a concern for you right now, particularly in an election year?

MR. PHILLIPS: OK. I'm an Intel officer, I can't comment on, you know, politics or election year. What we're trying to do is increase domain awareness. We just can't afford to have an unidentified object, a UAP, operating in proximity to our operational forces, our military forces, or our critical infrastructure. The world is too dangerous of a place to have that happen. And our job is to detect it, identify it, and then help the department deal with it, you know, through the appropriate, you know, means. But —

Q: So foreign adversaries?

MR. PHILLIPS: I'm not going to comment on that at this forum today.

Q: Thank you.

Q: Oren Liebermann from CNN. I just want to follow up on one of the answers you told Brandi. You said 122 cases were closed last month. What is the total number of cases you've received? And can you give us a sense of the rate that you are receiving cases and closing cases at this point?

MR. PHILLIPS: I would say that it's over 1,200 cases that have been reported to us. So we worked with the Joint Staff. And we have an operating reporting requirement to the services and combatant commands. If they have a UAP incident, and that's defined in the GENADMIN message, what that is, they report back through operational channels to us.

So we've had about 1,200 cases that we've looked at. We approximately receive anywhere between 90 and a 100-110 a month*1 from the operating forces. And you'll see in our reporting, there's a real bias to the Department of Defense because they're out there flying. They tend to have the advanced sensors. And if you're clearing a range before you go hot, if you're looking for something, you might find it. We're starting to see an increase in civil aviation sightings, you know, from — through the FAA and through NASA. We're starting to get few or more cases in, and you'll see that reflected in our heat map on our website. You'll see, with the bright red, that tends to reflect where DOD is operating, where they have those detections.

I would say that we — we probably, on average, around 100 cases a month*1 we are clearing. And the ones that we can declassify, we'll publish to our website or we'll report back through official channels to the services and the organizations that reported those contacts.

Q: Just a quick follow up. Can you give us an update on the — the submission, the creation of a submission process for UAP reports? It was originally opened up for service members and — and government employees, but there was an effort to try to open it up wider than that, and eventually get a reporting process for the public, which was supposed to be in the works.

MR. PHILLIPS: That was a Phase 3 we're still in. We had the first phase, which was the secure reporting portal for those that had knowledge of the U.S. government — or working on advanced UAP technology that was not revealed to Congress. We're into, I would call, a Phase 2 right now, where we're trying to work out the command and control, the mechanisms on how other government entities can report UAP incidents to us.

We've received a number of reports from Department of Homeland Security and their aircraft reporting to us that we follow up on. So we're working within the government. And we're looking at how can we do it at scale, what is the appropriate way in the future to be able to communicate with the public these incidents.

So it's — it's on our, you know, our tasking. We just haven't got to it yet. And AARO's been around for about 18 months. And we just achieved initial operating capability, I would say, in October*2 of last year is when we actually were able to bring the staff on and start develop some of the sensors and the capabilities, the flyaway kits, so we could respond quickly when there's a UAP incident.

Q: Sir, I think AARO, all-domain is included in the name. To what extent are there anomalous phenomenon that are not in the air, but somewhere else?

MR. PHILLIPS: You're absolutely correct because the vast majority of the reporting tends to be in the atmosphere because that's where we're operating. We've received one report in the maritime domain. And we've received no reports in space. However, we do have working groups in space and in the maritime. And what we're trying to do is define what is a UAP incident and how that will be reported.

So there's some policy issues we need to work out. For example, there's a UAP in space, we've detected something we don't understand. A lot of times as orbits, you know, decay, they enter the atmosphere. Now, we've got a track management issue. So who's going to take it from the space domain into the atmosphere? And then if it continues and go into the ocean, now, we have three different domains that we have to work with on how we maintain that (inaudible) and who is responsible for the reporting and then investigation of that act?

I would love to tell you, we'd be more mature in space. I was amazed at the ability of the community of interest to be able to understand their domain. And what we found is, the more data that any domain has, the deeper understanding of these unknown phenomena that exist. So when we did talk to our partners who work in the space domain, they had very few things that they didn't understand in space.

Q: Hi. Thank you so much for doing this. I'm Luis Martinez with ABC News. And I just have a ton of questions, so if you could bear with me.

STAFF: You get one and a follow up and then we —

Q: Yes, let me just —

STAFF: — we still have somebody that hasn't had their question.

Q: Yes. I'll try to get the first one in. When you talk about it in the report, the numbered persons and the numbered individuals that were interviewed, there have been two high-profile individuals over the last couple of years, Luis Elizondo and David Grusch. Were they interviewed for this? I know probably for privacy, you can't tell us, but can you tell us whether they were a part for the overall look at this?

MR. PHILLIPS: As a practice, we do not disclose who came in and spoke to us. The individuals are free to share that with you, but I'm not going to talk about who we interviewed. But anybody with knowledge of UAPs or the government covert attempt to reverse engineer or to exploit these materials, we would love to talk to them. So, aaro.mil, you go online. I'd give my phone numbers, but I've been told I can't do that, but contact us. We want to talk to you. And I will tell you, you know, I'm a guy from Tucson, Arizona, and we treat people — we are government civil servants. We treat the citizens that come in with respect. We listen to their stories.

And if we can prove what they're telling us, we'll do everything we can to do so. You know, we don't have barriers. We aren't biased. We'll let the evidence take us where it takes us.

Q: So that will be my follow up. You kind of touched on this earlier in giving us the process of how wide of a scope this was. Is it safe to characterize this as the most comprehensive U.S. government effort yet to look at this? And how can you — can you explain how you were able to do that in such a short time span? And can you give us an idea of how many people were employed to do this? Or were you relying on these agencies, for example, the CIA, to come up with their own determinations, then you would review their work?

MR. PHILLIPS: All of the above. So I don't think there's ever been a government organization with the authorities and with the amount of funding that we receive from Congress. As the acting director, I work for the Deputy Director of Defense.*5 There's actually been — there's — trying to get information, we've actually had to solicit her personal assistance to open a door. I don't believe any previous government attempt to research UFOs, UAPs has ever had that type of top cover.

And I will tell you that Congress members and staffers all throughout the government, they took a personal interest in it. They empowered what we did. And I am sincere when I say, and I've only been there since 1 October, but nobody got in our way and said no. And when we had people were slow to agree, the door was eventually opened.

STAFF: We've got time for one more question. Dan?

Q: Thank you. Actually, I'd love to follow up for whatever detail you can provide on that deployable system. That's fascinating. What was the vision there? And particularly, deploying it in response to something, what do you hope to learn with those deployments?

MR. PHILLIPS: Well, if we have a national security site and there are objects being reported, okay, that within restricted airspace or within a maritime range, or in the proximity of one of our spaceships, we need to understand what that is. And so that's why we're developing sensor capability that we can deploy in reaction to reports.

Ideally, what we could do is actually have a minimum force protection level, have a spec. And then as we outfit these locations and these capabilities, we already have specified what type of sensors they need to be able to capture this in real-time, and then how that information would be relayed back to us and our mission partners. We could analyze it and help them mediate whatever that particular incident is.

Q: Can you speak to the size of that certain thing —

STAFF: OK. Dan, yes, —

Q: — (inaudible) a suit case or a platform or truck —

STAFF: — Dan, we're going to cut it off here. Thank you all very much. All right. Thanks very much, guys, for coming out.

Forerunner · Mar 10, 2024

View: https://twitter.com/Debriefmedia/status/1766835289094316217

Released on Friday, the report is the first installment in a two-volume series produced by the Defense Department's All-domain Anomaly Resolution Office (AARO) and explores the history of the U.S. government's involvement in investigations of UAP under a requirement established in the fiscal year (FY) 2023 National Defense Authorization Act (NDAA).

Citing investigations that revealed most sightings to result from the "misidentification of ordinary objects and phenomena," the report acknowledged that "many UAP reports remain unsolved," though adding that better data could lead to the resolution of some of the currently unresolved cases.

Following the release of the report, Department of Defense spokesperson Sue Gough said in an email to The Debrief that "AARO reviewed all official USG investigatory efforts since 1945, researched classified and unclassified archives, conducted dozens of interviews and site visits, and partnered with the Intelligence Community and DoD officials responsible for special access program oversight."

"AARO created a secure process in partnership with the highest-level security officials within the DoD, IC, and other organizations to research and investigate these claims," Gough said. "AARO was granted full, unrestricted access by all organizations."

Friday's report was met with significant criticism online following its release, with many arguing that its findings were invalid, while others expressed skepticism over its assertions that no evidence of cover-ups involving crashed UAP retrieval programs had been found.

The report's findings appear to run in stark contrast to whistleblower allegations that first received widespread public attention last June, involving an official complaint filed with the Intelligence Community Inspector General by David Grusch, a former U.S. intelligence officer whose duties included participation in the U.S. government's investigations into UAP in recent years.

Following the release of AARO's report on Friday, amidst all the attention surrounding what AARO investigators did or did not find, and programs that were proposed but never came to fruition, few mainstream outlets discussed the numerous intriguing allusions to legitimate advanced capabilities the U.S. possesses that are peppered throughout the report—many of which, in likelihood, actually have contributed to UAP sightings over the years.

These seemingly went unnoticed, as well as several factual errors that appear throughout the new report that, for some, potentially undermine the level of rigor AARO appears to have applied in its investigations.

In yet another example, the AARO report repeatedly refers to a statistical analysis of sightings collected by the U.S. Air Force's Project Blue Book conducted by the Battelle Memorial Institute as "Project BEAR," which had, in fact, only been a nickname given to the program by Blue Book's original director, Edward J. Ruppelt. The project's actual name—one that has now been known publicly for decades—was Project STORK.

Powell also noted that the recent AARO report seemingly misstated the date of the Battelle project as having been issued in late 1954, whereas the date on the folder in the Air Force's Project Blue Book files indicates a date of May 5, 1955.

Beyond mere problems with dates, AARO's report makes further assertions that Battelle's study, the results of which were published in a report titled Project Blue Book Special Report #14, "concluded that all cases that had enough data were resolved and readily explainable." Quite the contrary, the study actually found that among the UFO sightings categorized within a reliability group of reports deemed "Excellent," only 4.2% had "insufficient info," whereas 33.3% of these cases remained "Unknown."

In a posting on X, Marik von Rennenkampf, an analyst who worked with the U.S. Department of State's Bureau of International Security and Nonproliferation, called the error "Blatantly, demonstrably false."

Despite the number of factual errors that appear throughout the final AARO report, there are nonetheless a handful of intriguing references in it that appear to describe advanced U.S. technologies, although again, few of these have received significant attention in mainstream coverage.

In one example, which describes an individual's account provided during an interview with AARO investigators, the report states that "AARO was able to correlate this account with an authentic USG program because the interviewee was able to provide a relatively precise time and location of the sighting which they observed exhibiting strange characteristics."

AARO concluded the technology mistaken for being an exotic UAP technology by the unnamed witness correlated with DoD tests "of a platform protected by a [Special Access Program]" occurring at roughly the same time. "The seemingly strange characteristics reported by the interviewee match closely with the platform's characteristics," the AARO report's authors state, "which was being tested at a military facility in the time frame the interviewee was there."

"This program is not related in any way to the exploitation of off-world technology," the report's authors emphasize, offering no further details on the technology that is believed to have been mistaken for a test involving an exotic craft.

The report's authors later add that "All the programs assessed to be authentic were or—if still active—continue to be, appropriately reported to either or both the congressional defense and intelligence committees."

The report also maintains AARO's past positions regarding the likelihood that prosaic explanations exist for the majority of UAP sightings, although its authors nonetheless acknowledge that there are still some cases the Pentagon's UAP investigative office has been unable to solve.

"A small percentage of cases have potentially anomalous characteristics or concerning characteristics," the report's authors write. "AARO has kept Congress fully and currently informed of its findings. AARO's research continues on these cases."

Although AARO does appear to have access to all the intelligence on UAP that it required, contrary to what was conveyed during last April's Senate hearing, the Pentagon nonetheless continues to face challenges in its collection and management of information about UAP.

Earlier this year, an unclassified summary of a DoD Inspector General report evaluating the Pentagon's activities related to UAP was released, which argued that the DoD lacks any comprehensive, coordinated means by which it can currently address UAP. The report further argued that the DoD's apparent lack of coordination on the UAP issue could pose a threat to U.S. military forces and, more broadly, to national security.

"We determined that the DoD has no overarching UAP policy," a portion of the DoD Inspector General report read, "and, as a result, it lacks assurance that national security and flight safety threats to the United States from UAP have been identified and mitigated."

In a statement on Friday following the new AARO historical report's release, Pentagon Press Secretary Major General Pat Ryder said the second volume of AARO's historical review will be forthcoming later this year.

"AARO will publish a second volume that will provide analysis of information acquired by AARO after Nov. 1, 2023, including information received via interviews with current and former U.S. government personnel who contacted AARO via the secure reporting mechanism on AARO's website," Ryder said.

"Analyzing and understanding the historical record on UAP is an ongoing collaborative effort involving many departments and agencies, and the department thanks the contributing departments and agencies, as well as the interviewees who came forward with information," Ryder added.

TheBee · Mar 11, 2024

View: https://youtu.be/_EIBtsag8Sc?si=ooZlqh5UfCqUrmXG

Forerunner · Mar 11, 2024

View: https://twitter.com/WIRED/status/1767249261236772991

In fact, while the report's conclusion surprised almost no one except the most ardent of believers—people who might not be all that inclined to believe the Pentagon's disavowal anyway—the report in its own way raises as many new questions as it answers, questions that could, with time, prove revolutionary to technology and science.

AARO investigators, for instance, dug through the claims of witnesses and whistleblowers and successfully traced back the underlying research projects, Special Access Programs (SAPs), and classified compartments. As the report says, "AARO investigated numerous named, and described, but unnamed programs alleged to involve UAP exploitation conveyed to AARO through official interviews," and ultimately, "conclude[d] many of these programs represent authentic, current and former sensitive, national security programs, but none of these programs have been involved with capturing, recovering, or reverse-engineering off-world technology or material."

But what, then, were those programs? Herein lies the most intriguing—and potentially ground-breaking—question that the Pentagon study leaves us wondering: What exactly are the secret compartmentalized programs that the whistleblowers and government witnesses misidentified as being related to UAP technology? What, exactly, are the Pentagon, intelligence community, or defense contractors working on that, from a concentric circle or two away inside the shadowy world of SAPs, looks and sounds like reverse-engineering out-of-this-world technology or even studying so-called "non-human biologics"?

There are at least four clear possibilities.

Secret Tech From Foreign Nations

First, what exotic technological possibilities have been recovered from unknown terrestrial sources? For example, if the government is working on reverse-engineering technologies, those technologies are likely from advanced adversary nation-states like China, Russia, and Iran, and perhaps even quasi-allies like Israel that may be more limited in their technology-sharing with the US. What have other countries mastered that we haven't?

A Question of 'Peculiar Characteristics'

Second, what technologies has the US mastered that the public doesn't know about? One of the common threads of UFO sightings across decades have been secret military aircraft and spacecraft in development or not yet publicly acknowledged. For example, the CIA estimated that the U-2 spy plane in the 1950s accounted for as much as half of reported UFO sightings. And the AARO report spends a half-dozen pages documenting how confusion over subsequent generations of secret US government aircraft appear to have also contributed to the great intergalactic game of telephone of UFO programs inside the government, including modern Predator, Reaper, and Global Hawk drones. AARO investigated one claim where a witness reported hearing a former US military service member had touched an extraterrestrial spacecraft, but when they tracked down the service member, he said that the conversation was likely a garbled version of the time he touched an F-117 Nighthawk stealth fighter at a secret facility.

There are surely other secret craft still in testing and development now, including the B-21 stealth bomber, which had its first test flight in November and is now in testing at Edwards Air Force Base in California, as well as others we don't know about. The government can still surprise us with unknown craft—like the until-then-unknown modified stealthy helicopter left behind on the Pakistan raid to kill Osama bin Laden. And some of these still-classified efforts are likely causing UFO confusion too: AARO untangled one witness's claim of spotting a UAP with "peculiar characteristics" at a specific time and place and were able to determine, "at the time the interviewee said he observed the event, the DOD was conducting tests of a platform protected by a SAP. The seemingly strange characteristics reported by the interviewee match closely with the platform's characteristics, which was being tested at a military facility in the time frame the interviewee was there." So what was that craft—and what were its "peculiar characteristics?"

Relatedly, the US military has a classified spaceship, the X-37B, that has regularly orbited around the Earth since its first mission in 2010—it just blasted off on its seventh and most recent mission in December—and its previous, sixth, mission lasted a record-breaking 908 days in orbit. The Pentagon has said remarkably little about what it does up there for years at a time. What secret space-related or aviation-related programs is the government running that outsiders confuse as alien spacecraft?

A Material Matter

The third likely area of tech development that might appear to outsiders to be UFO-related is more speculative basic research and development: What propulsion systems or material-science breakthroughs are defense contractors at work on right now that could transform our collective future? Again, AARO found such confusion taking place: After one witness reported hearing that "aliens" had observed one secret government test, AARO traced the allegation back to find "the conversation likely referenced a test and evaluation unit that had a nickname with 'alien' connotations at the specific installation mentioned. The nature of the test described by the interviewee closely matched the description of a specific materials test conveyed to AARO investigators." So what materials were being tested there?

There are some puzzling materials-science breadcrumbs wrapped throughout the AARO report. It found one instance where "a private sector organization claimed to have in its possession material from an extraterrestrial craft recovered from a crash at an unknown location from the 1940s or 1950s. The organization claimed that the material had the potential to act as a THz frequency waveguide, and therefore, could exhibit 'anti-gravity' and 'mass reduction' properties under the appropriate conditions." Ultimately, though, the new report concluded, "AARO and a leading science laboratory concluded that the material is a metallic alloy, terrestrial in nature, and possibly of USAF [US Air Force] origin, based on its materials characterization."

A Knowledge Limit

Fourth and lastly is the category of the truly weird: Scientists at the forefront of physics point out that we should be humble about how little of the universe we truly understand; as Harvard astronomy chair Avi Loeb explains, effectively all that we've learned about relativity and quantum physics has unfolded in the span of a single human lifespan, and astounding new discoveries continue to amaze scientists. Just last summer, scientists announced they'd detected for the first time gravitational waves criss-crossing the universe that rippled through space-time, and astrophysicists continue to suspect that the universe is far weirder than we think. (Italian astrophysicist Carlo Rovelli last year posited the existence of "white holes" that would be related to black holes, which, he pointed out, were still a mystery just 25 years ago when he was starting his career.)

Answers here could be almost unfathomably weird—think parallel dimensions or the ability to travel at a fraction of the speed of light. And one of the most intriguing questions left by the UAP "game of telephone" is whether there are truly astounding advances in physics that government scientists, defense contractors, or research laboratories or centers could be feeling around that could also appear from the outside to be UFO-related.

Indeed, the AARO report references that at least some chunk of the "alien confusion" inside government may have grown out of a now well-known but then-secret effort in the late 2000s and early 2010s by Nevada entrepreneur Robert Bigelow's aerospace company to study UAPs and paranormal activity by the Defense Intelligence Agency, through $22 million in funding secured by then-Senate majority leader Harry Reid. That effort, known as the Advanced Aerospace Weapons System Application Program (AAWSAP), included digging—without official authorization—into paranormal activity at a ranch out west, among other activities. Not much came out of that effort—and the AARO report dismissively notes that AAWSAP's "scientific papers were never thoroughly peer-reviewed." But people in and around the world of "ufology" have long noted that one of those papers intriguingly studied "Warp Drive, Dark Energy, and the Manipulation of Extra Dimensions." Did the Pentagon know more about the outer boundaries of physics than it let on?

While other physicists who have reviewed that speculative 34-page AAWSAP report have said it had little real-world utility, it hints at how our modern understanding of the world around us may still be transformed by the unknown and future discoveries.

After reading thousands of pages of government studies, extraterrestrial research, and scientific papers related to the possibility of intelligent life elsewhere in the universe, I've come to believe that in some ways aliens might be the least interesting answer to the questions around UAPs and UFOs. Similarly, the AARO report may one day be seen as closing the door on alien spacecraft while opening the door to something even more fantastical.

TheBee · Mar 12, 2024

View: https://youtu.be/UVPs-2DfN_o?si=k6kCZc4QLxkwVfNm

TheBee · Mar 12, 2024

View: https://www.instagram.com/reel/C4YH_jLtOHu/?igsh=aG54ZmNnOWJpeTB5

Forerunner · Mar 12, 2024

View: https://x.com/FGuerreiroMEP/status/1767599351470424106?s=20

Forerunner · Mar 12, 2024

View: https://twitter.com/blackvaultcom/status/1767589677090115832

The Black Vault attempted to get a CIA document that has been shrouded in secrecy for decades further declassified. Although no redactions were lifted in the process, it revealed that even more information by the CIA is withheld on a UFO case that suggests a technology beyond known human capability at the time.

The document, identified as REPORT NO. 00-B-93674, details an intriguing account from a source in Hungary, who in the winter of 1955 received a letter mentioning the mysterious "flying saucers". These objects, described as "very fast speeding flyers," were estimated to be traveling at a speed of "12,000 kilometers per hour," or in excess of 7,400 miles per hour.

Although the MDR was unsuccessful getting any previous redactions lifted, the case did reveal that there was more information than previously known. It brought to light the existence of two additional pages, and those were redacted in full. The deletions were made on the basis of Sections 3.3(h)(2) and 6.2(d) of Executive Order 13526. Section 3.3(h)(2) of Executive Order 13526 establishes procedures for the automatic declassification of information that is more than 25 years old, unless it falls under specific exemptions outlined in the order. Section 6.2(d) concerns the protection of information that, if disclosed, could reasonably be expected to cause identifiable or describable damage to national security or foreign relations. It allows for the continued classification of such information to prevent harm to the national security interests of the United States.

The revelation of these additional pages adds a new layer of mystery to the case. It raises questions about what further information might be contained within and why it is deemed so sensitive that it warrants complete redaction.

To put the reported speed of the flying objects into perspective, it is worth noting that the fastest aircraft in the world in November 1955 was the North American F-100C Super Sabre, which set a record on August 20, 1955, of 1,323 kilometers per hour, or 822.1 miles per hour.

The speed of 12,000 kilometers per hour (7,400+ miles per hour) mentioned in the CIA record far exceeds that, suggesting that the flying objects were of an extraordinary nature for the time they were seen. However, maybe they were not aircraft at all.

The CIA document did mention "rockets", but it is unclear if the parenthetical was an attempt at an alternate translation by a CIA analyst, or if the word was truly relayed by the CIA's source. However, to address the possibility these objects were, in fact, rockets; historical context is needed.

By the end of the 1950s, rockets were capable of reaching speeds that far exceeded those of any aircraft, laying the groundwork for the exploration of space and the eventual moon landing. While the reported speed of 12,000 kilometers per hour (approximately 7,456 miles per hour) for the unidentified flying objects in the CIA document was extraordinary for its time, it foreshadowed the incredible velocities that rockets would achieve in the years to come.

But is there a connection? The Redstone rocket, believed to be one of the faster rockets around the same time, still fell thousands of miles per hour short of the speed mentioned in the CIA document.

Was the source and information available in the report wrong or grossly exaggerated? If so, why is there a need for such excessive secrecy nearly 70 years after the event?

dryz · Mar 13, 2024

So I see Coulthart and Sheenan are now hard at work promoting courses at some UFO university for 15k, lol. How can anyone take those grifters seriously?

Forerunner · Mar 13, 2024

Will Law · Mar 14, 2024

dryz said:
So I see Coulthart and Sheenan are now hard at work promoting courses at some UFO university for 15k, lol. How can anyone take those grifters seriously?

You laugh but do you know how many job opportunities will open up with a PhD in extraterrestrial studies?

Forerunner · Mar 14, 2024

View: https://x.com/MickWest/status/1768358611217220067?s=20

Forerunner · Mar 15, 2024

Is something out there? Americans aren't sure, but most say the government isn’t open about UFOs | YouGov

More than 60% of Americans believe the U.S. government is concealing information about UFOs. But Americans are divided about whether unidentified flying objects are actually aliens or have earthly explanations.

today.yougov.com

More than 60% of Americans believe the U.S. government is concealing information about Unidentified Flying Objects (UFOs), despite a recent Pentagon report claiming no signs of alien life.

Only 11% of Americans say the U.S. government has told the public everything it knows about UFOs.

The belief that the U.S. government knows more about UFOs than it's telling the public is common, including among Democrats, Independents, and Republicans, as well as among people with and without college degrees. Even Americans who are say there's no intelligent life on other planets are twice as likely to think the government is hiding UFO information than that it's been transparent.

The Pentagon report, which had been ordered by Congress, concluded that "most sightings were ordinary objects and phenomena and the result of misidentification."

Americans aren't so sure. Just one in three say they believe the Pentagon's report.

32% of U.S. adult citizens say UFOs are "always the result of human or natural activity from Earth," while another 32% say they "might sometimes be the result of alien spacecrafts visiting Earth."

But most Americans say they personally have not seen a UFO. Overall, 69% say they have not seen anything they thought was a UFO, while 18% say they have.

Forerunner · Mar 15, 2024

View: https://x.com/DoD_AARO/status/1768639687004971239?s=20

Forerunner · Mar 15, 2024

View: https://twitter.com/TheHillOpinion/status/1768619405263454222

Unfortunately, the report from the Pentagon's All-domain Anomaly Resolution Office (AARO) contains an array of striking omissions and one particularly egregious misrepresentation. The result is a misleading report which, like so much government UFO-related propaganda over seven decades, tells the reader just to move on, nothing to see here.

Lastly, AARO states that it found no "empirical evidence…that the [U.S. government] and private companies have been reverse-engineering extraterrestrial technology." But the report's categorical denials, alongside recent commentary from AARO's former director, place the agency in an awkward position. Christopher Mellon, the Pentagon's former top civilian intelligence official, recently stated that key UAP whistleblowers did not trust AARO and went instead to Congress or the inspector general of the intelligence community.

AARO appears to have conducted little investigation beyond superficial interviews, whereas the intelligence community inspector general is a law enforcement official with formal investigative authorities.

The result is a remarkable disconnect between AARO's report and what members of Congress revealed after the inspector general briefed them in January. Following the classified briefing of a bipartisan group of 16 members, five were quoted saying they found UAP whistleblower David Grusch or his allegations to be "credible," "legit," or to have "merit." Several members noted that the briefing gave them insights into specific locations and private defense contractors, seemingly aligning with Grusch's claims.

Senate Majority Leader Chuck Schumer (D-N.Y.), along with a bipartisan group of five other senators, sponsored extraordinary legislation largely mirroring Grusch's shocking allegations. In extraordinary comments on the Senate floor, Schumer stated that, according to "multiple credible sources," elements of the U.S. government have been withholding UFO-related information from Congress illegally.

Despite AARO's former director repeatedly characterizing allegations of illicit UFO retrieval and reverse-engineering efforts as baseless, the principal cosponsor of Schumer's UAP Disclosure Act, Sen. Mike Rounds (R-S.D.), indicated last week that the Senate will proceed with the legislation.

In short, there seems to be a classic conflict of interest in the executive branch investigating itself. Congress, a coequal branch of government does not suffer from this. And so in the wake of AARO's flawed report, a congressional select UAP committee, like the one requested by Rep. Eric Burlison (R-Mo.), should step forward to separate fact from fiction.

mrbogus · Mar 15, 2024

Forerunner said:
View: https://x.com/MickWest/status/1768358611217220067?s=20

Didn't former U.S. Navy pilot Ryan Graves whose squadron filmed the original "GIMBAL" video note that the public has only seen a portion of it? The complete video allegedly has 5 other smaller craft that flew around the larger object we have seen.

https://oversight.house.gov/wp-content/uploads/2023/07/Ryan-HOC-Testimony.pdf

My understanding is that all UAP videos since 2021 are classified Secret or above, which prevents the American people and even some Members of Congress from seeing UAP videos like the full GIMBAL video recorded by my squadron.

Forerunner · Mar 15, 2024

View: https://twitter.com/Aviation_Intel/status/1768783074639372594

Langley Air Force Base, located in one of the most strategic areas of the country, across the Chesapeake Bay from the sprawling Naval Station Norfolk and the open Atlantic, was at the epicenter of waves of mysterious drone incursions that occurred throughout December. The War Zone has been investigating these incidents and the response to them for months. We know that they were so troubling and persistent that they prompted bringing in advanced assets from around the U.S. government, including one of NASA's WB-57F high-flying research planes. Now the U.S. Air Force has confirmed to us that they did indeed occur and provided details on the timeframe and diversity of drones involved.

"The installation first observed UAS [uncrewed aerial systems] activities the evening of December 6 [2023] and experienced multiple incursions throughout the month of December. The number of UASs fluctuated and they ranged in size/configuration," a spokesperson for Langley Air Force Base told The War Zone in a statement earlier today. "None of the incursions appeared to exhibit hostile intent but anything flying in our restricted airspace can pose a threat to flight safety. The FAA was made aware of the UAS incursions."

"To protect operational security, we do not discuss impacts to operations," the statement added. "We don't discuss our specific force protection measures but retain the right to protect the installation. Langley continues to monitor our air space and work with local law enforcement and other federal agencies to ensure the safety of base personnel, facilities, and assets."

In response to queries from The War Zone, the shared public affairs office for NORAD and NORTHCOM said that the two commands were "aware" of the "issues" Gen. Guillot had referred to in his testimony, but directed us to contact the Office of the Secretary of Defense (OSD) and the U.S. Air Force for more information.

Langley Air Force Base is formally part of Joint Base Langley-Eustis, an amalgamation that also includes the U.S. Army's Fort Eustis. Both facilities are situated around Newport News and Hampton Roads in southeastern Virginia. Langley, one of a select few bases hosting F-22 Raptor stealth fighters, is particularly important for supporting NORAD and NORTHCOM's missions to defend the U.S. homeland, including protecting the nation's capital in Washington, D.C.

Online flight tracking software then showed one of NASA's WB-57F aircraft, with the U.S. civil registration number N927NA, flying circular orbits with Langley at the center the following week.

NASA's trio of WB-57Fs are specialized research aircraft that can be configured to carry a wide array of imaging and other sensors and equipment in their noses and other modular payload bays. In cooperation with NASA, the U.S. military has made use of these aircraft on various occasions in the past to support operational and test and evaluation-type missions.

"NASA's WB-57 aircraft fly missions across the United States in support of scientific research and remote imaging. They have flown at least 30 times in the past two months," a spokesperson for NASA's Langley Research Center in Virginia also told The War Zone in January in response to queries about N927NA's December flights. "The WB-57 with civil registration number N927NA was on the East Coast in December to fly in support of NASA's SpaceX CRS-29 commercial resupply services mission and image the spacecraft upon its return to Earth. While in the area, the aircraft provided additional imaging support in Virginia."

The War Zone had reached out back in December to NORAD and NORTHCOM, as well as NASA, for more about the flight activity in southeastern Virginia.

"NORAD has been conducting its routine mission of aerospace warning and aerospace control. ... [we] can confirm we conducted flight activities over Virginia various times over the past couple weeks," a spokesperson from the NORAD/NORTHCOM public affairs office told The War Zone at the time. "USNORTHCOM has been coordinating with [the] FBI, as is consistent with the combatant command's coordinating role, but I have to refer you to [the] FBI on the nature of that law enforcement issue."

The FBI declined to comment at that time. The Bureau did so again when The War Zone reached back out today.

All this is in addition to the strange encounters between U.S. Navy fighter aircraft and unidentified craft that have occurred persistently for years just off the coast of where Langley is located. Based on investigative reporting by The War Zone, some of these were directly identified as drones in pilot hazard reports obtained via FOIA.

Forerunner · Mar 17, 2024

View: https://twitter.com/ChrisKMellon/status/1769393498883506444?s=20

View: https://twitter.com/ChrisKMellon/status/1769402590855336383

All national security officials should read this article while keeping in mind the role drones are playing in Ukraine. The Chinese balloon threat is trivial compared to this ongoing activity over major US military facilities. It is not just Langley; other critical bases and facilities, as well as Navy ships at sea, are experiencing what appear to be the same strange, unaccountable intrusions. There was also a similar event involving swarms of unidentified drones in Western Nebraska and Northeast Colorado in 2020 that went on for months. Federal and state investigators failed to identify a source. Congress should hold hearings on these intrusions over Langley and the larger pattern of drone and UAP intrusions we have been experiencing. If this is Russia, or more likely China, we have a huge problem on our hands. I've been publicly and privately suggesting for years now that Congress dig more deeply into the US air defense threats and capabilities due to this ongoing pattern of activity, which unfortunately seems to be accelerating. I urge staff and members of Congress to please read this article. https://twz.com/air/mysterious-drones-swarmed-langley-afb-for-weeks

The recent events over Langley AFB are part of a long pattern of worrisome drone intrusions. This article describes a similar series of events over our most important Pacific military base west of Hawaii. Note that the unidentified drones went to the most sensitive part of Andersen AFB and were shining lights directly down on the recently installed THAAD missile defense system.

Forerunner · Mar 18, 2024

View: https://twitter.com/ddeanjohnson/status/1769787984440627712

On May 19, 2023, the Joint Staff (J3, Operations; J36 Homeland Defense Division) of the Joint Chiefs of Staff disseminated to all unified military commands worldwide a set of uniform procedures to be followed for gathering data and reporting on contemporary military encounters with Unidentified Anomalous Phenomena (UAP), using a detailed standard reporting template.

I have now obtained a copy of that Pentagon message. I believe that its detailed contents are being made public here for the first time (if the GENADMIN message has previously been published, that publication has not come to my attention).

The message was designated as "GENADMIN Joint Staff J3 Washington DC 191452ZMAY23 Unidentified Anomalous Phenomena Reporting and Material Disposition." It was disseminated as "Controlled Unclassified Information," or "CUI."

Journalist @BrandiVincent_ referred in passing to the existence of this message in a DefenseScoop article dated August 30, 2023 ("Hicks takes direct oversight of Pentagon's UAP office; new reporting website to be launched"). I promptly asked Pentagon press officer Susan Gough to release a copy to me, but Gough replied, "I cannot provide a copy of the message to you, as it contains information that's not publicly releasable."

On August 31, 2023, I filed a FOIA request for the GENADMIN message. The Department of Defense Freedom of Information Division has now released the 9-page document to me (response letter dated March 15, 2024, received by me on March 18), with only minimal redactions. After redacting my personal information, I am now making the complete FOIA release available at the link below. (The image merely shows the first page of the document; click on the link to download the complete PDF.)

INITIAL OBSERVATIONS

Among the noteworthy aspects I see in the May 2023 Joint Staff communication:

-- An introductory paragraph states: "The U.S. government has observed UAP in or near the territory and/or operating areas of the United States, of its allies, and of its adversaries, and observing, identifying, and potentially mitigating UAP has become a growing priority for US policymakers, lawmakers, and warfighters. The potentially ubiquitous presence of UAP defines the national security implications of those anomalies, which range from operational hazards and threats to technological and intelligence surprise to adversaries' strategic miscalculations. It is imperative that DoD provide UAP incident, incursion, and engagement...reporting, data, and material for the Department's detection and mitigation of potential threats; exploitation of advanced technologies; and informing policymaker and warfighter decisions."

--Reports on UAP incidents are to be transmitted upwards with 96 hours, but any "UAP engagement reports" within 12 hours. A "UAP engagement is a kinetic or non-kinetic response to a UAP, intended to deny, disrupt, or destroy the phenomenon and/or its object(s)."

-- The ultimate nexus of collection and analysis of these reports is the All-domain Anomaly Resolution Office (AARO).

-- The reporting procedures in the Joint Staff message apply only to detections or encounters "that demonstrate behaviors not readily understood by sensors or observers...[that] include but are not limited to phenomena that demonstrate apparent capabilities or material that exceed known performance envelopes." The UAP reporting procedures described in this directive do NOT apply to "incidents, incursions, and engagements by identifiable, non-anomalous phenomena (e.g., sUAS and other capabilities or materials that do not exceed known or predicted performance envelopes);" such incidents will instead "continue to be reported through established processes and mechanisms."

-- The reporting matrix seeks 11 categories of information-- among these, any UAP-displayed "anomalous characteristics/behaviors (e.g., no apparent control surfaces, extreme acceleration/direction change, detection by certain sensors but not others)," and any "UAP effects on equipment (e.g., mechanical, electrical controls and weapons systems and whether persistent or transitory").

-- AARO will coordinate the handling of any UAP "objects and material of incidents, intrusions, and engagements," but "recovery and transfer of identifiable, non-anomalous items of foreign origin...continue to be managed by the DoD FMP [Foreign Material Program]."

-- The military commands are to "enable deployment of special sensors within the AoR [area of responsibility] for the detection, observation, and identification in sensitive areas, and during testing or deployment of special capabilities."

ADDITIONAL CONTEXT

On its website, AARO calls the military reporting system defined in the May 2023 GENADMIN "Current Operational UAP Reporting." In a briefing for selected journalists on March 6, 2024, AARO Acting Director Tim Phillips said that AARO is receiving "approximately...anywhere between 90 and a 100-110 a month" through such channels.

Phillips also told the journalists, "We're trying to work out the command and control, the mechanisms on how other government entities can report UAP incidents to us. We've received a number of reports from Department of Homeland Security and their aircraft reporting to us that we follow up on."

As for civilian pilots, the AARO website states, "AARO receives UAP-related Pilot Reports (PIREPs) from the Federal Aviation Administration."

The UAP reporting system for contemporary military-associated UAP events, as set forth in the May 2023 Joint Staff message, is separate and distinct from the AARO "secure reporting" system for receiving reports "from current or former U.S. Government employees, service members, or contractor personnel with direct knowledge of U.S. Government programs or activities related to UAP dating back to 1945," which is accessible through a portal on the AARO website.
AARO does not yet employ any system for receiving UAP observation reports from the general public.

Forerunner · Mar 18, 2024

View: https://twitter.com/GallaudetTim/status/1769751026913914924

Forerunner · Mar 19, 2024

View: https://twitter.com/uncertainvector/status/1770137112328683923

Forerunner · Mar 20, 2024

The Pentagon’s new historical review of UFOs picks and chooses its history

Despite citing Ruppelt more than any other individual, AARO’s report ignores the countless cases, that left Ruppelt and the Air Force thoroughly baffled.

thehill.com

The All-domain Anomaly Resolution Office's (AARO) report, a congressionally mandated historical review of U.S. government involvement with UAP, found no evidence of "extraterrestrial technology." While that may be technically accurate, the Pentagon's lengthy report deliberately obscures a critical fact: Official records and public reporting are littered with evidence of unknown craft exhibiting what appears to be extraordinary technology.

In addition to critical omissions and at least one major misrepresentation, AARO's report must be scrutinized for its treatment of Capt. Edward Ruppelt. Ruppelt was the first director of the Air Force's decades-long UAP analysis (and, later, debunking) effort known as Project Blue Book.

Despite citing Ruppelt more than any other individual, AARO's report ignores the countless cases, including many involving simultaneous radar and visual observations, that left Ruppelt and the Air Force thoroughly baffled.

Another July 1952 incident, according to Ruppelt, "was one of those that even the most ardent skeptic would have difficulty explaining. I've heard a lot of them try and I've heard them all fail."

As Ruppelt describes it, a ground radar station tracked a UFO "coming straight south across Saginaw Bay on Lake Huron at 625 miles an hour."

The pilot and radar operator aboard an F-94 fighter jet directed to intercept the object "saw that they were turning toward a large bluish-white light, 'many times larger than a star.'" Like the UAP in the preceding incident, the object soon "took on a reddish tinge."

Once again, "the radar operator in the back seat [of the fighter jet] got a good radar lock-on," stating, "It was just as solid a lock-on as you get from a B-36 [bomber]."

For 10 minutes, the jet pursued the UAP. "At times," Ruppelt recounts, "the unidentified target would slow down and the F-94 would start to close the gap."

"Just as the ground controller was telling the pilot that he was closing in," Ruppelt continues, "the light became brighter and the object pulled away." According to Ruppelt, "the target would put on a sudden burst of speed and pull away from the pursuing jet" at speeds up to "1,400 miles an hour."

It did not take long for the fighter to run low on fuel. As soon as it turned around to return to base, "the target slowed down to 200 to 300 miles an hour."

According to Ruppelt, many in the Air Force's intelligence division "were absolutely convinced this report was the key — the final proof. Even if all of the thousands of other UFO reports could be discarded on a technicality, this one couldn't be."

These analysts, in short, believed that "this report in itself was proof enough to officially accept the fact that UFO's were interplanetary spaceships."

In fact, Air Force intelligence analysts had come to the same extraordinary conclusion four years earlier.

As Ruppelt notes, the U.S. government's initial formal intelligence estimate of UFOs assessed that the objects were of "interplanetary" origin. This, naturally, is of significant relevance to any historical review of U.S. government involvement with UAP, yet is pointedly downplayed AARO's report.

History is repeating itself. Of the more than 1,200 UAP reports that AARO has received to date, it has released just four videos and three "case resolution reports." This astounding lack of transparency puts the government's historical obfuscation on UFOs to shame.

Grunty · Mar 21, 2024

The AARO are full of crap. Don't believe anything they say. There's just too much evidence and too many witnesses spanning a crap ton of years that says otherwise. Not to mention they basically investigated themselves lol I don't know why that would even be allowed.

Forerunner · Mar 22, 2024

He quit heading the Pentagon’s UFO office. Now a report of his has shaken up ufology

Sean Kirkpatrick has faced threats for his work – and a new report concluding no evidence UAPs represented extraterrestrial tech has sent ufology into a tailspin

www.theguardian.com

Sean Kirkpatrick doesn't seem too thrilled to be chatting with me about UFOs. Since taking over the Pentagon's All-Domain Anomaly Resolution Office (AARO) in 2022 – government-speak for UFO hunting – Kirkpatrick has received violent threats, social-media smear campaigns, and even had to call the FBI after a UFO fanatic tried to break into his home.

"I've had people threaten my wife and daughter, and try to break into our online accounts," Kirkpatrick says. "I didn't have China and Russia trying to get on me as much as these people are."

Crucially, Grusch said he hadn't seen the spaceships and "biologics" with his own eyes; someone in the intelligence community told him the story.

Naturally, Kirkpatrick tried to talk to him. But although Grusch had dropped most of these bombshells months before on the cable channel NewsNation, when asked to discuss it with the one man in the US government who really needed to hear the yarn, he was a no-show. "We tried to reach out to him four or five times to get him to come in," Kirkpatrick says. "And as of the time that I left, he had refused to come for a variety of reasons."

The 21st century's UFO craze began on 16 December 2017 after the New York Times reported that the Pentagon had created something called the Advanced Aerospace Threat Identification Program (AATIP). This was supposedly a secret department investigating unidentified aerial phenomena or UAPs (the Department of Defense's preferred acronym for UFOs).

The Times piece also included three videos, the most compelling of which showed an object eerily similar to a flying saucer, moving with no apparent means of propulsion.

The story went viral and UFOs went mainstream. Serious people were now taking little green men and their spaceships very seriously. Barack Obama told The Late Late Show with James Corden that things were happening in our skies that the US government simply could not explain.

However, not everything in the Times' story was accurate. Yes, the Pentagon did have a UFO programme, but it was called the Advanced Aerospace Weapon System Applications Program (AAWSAP), not AATIP, and it had bizarre beginnings.

The Pentagon gave $22m to AAWSAP in 2007 – and AAWSAP gave the funds to none other than Bigelow and his company, Bigelow Aerospace, who used the money to chase UFOs and the paranormal at Skinwalker Ranch.

In 2012, the Pentagon got wind of what was really happening, and closed AAWSAP down. There's no evidence that AAWSAP found spaceships or aliens.

But the myth had taken root.

What about the leaked UFO videos, like the one in the New York Times? Kirkpatrick says there's not enough data to provide a definitive analysis of each one but insists that, like all the stories that came across his desk, they have mundane explanations that don't involve space aliens. The rotating object shaped like a flying saucer is probably glare from a distant heat source. "The source could be any number of things. Even a weather balloon will give off that kind of glare if it's got enough shiny metal on it, and the sun's just right," he says.

But evidence is not the point. Some will never be swayed. "There's the absolute true belief, which would suggest it is more akin to a religion than an actual factual thing," he says. "And those are the people that you're never going to convince, no matter what you put in front of them. I can lay out the pictures of the classified programmes that they mistook, and they still wouldn't believe it. They would say, 'No, that was derived from alien technology.'"

And what if the government does eventually get its hands on aliens and their flying saucers? "It's not their job [to keep it secret]," he says. "It would immediately get turned over to Nasa, and Nasa would immediately disclose it to everybody. That's their job."

Demon Lizardman · Mar 22, 2024

LMAO, they changed the headline

Forerunner · Mar 22, 2024

View: https://twitter.com/DoD_AARO/status/1771281203435393488

TheBee · Mar 22, 2024

Forerunner said:
He quit heading the Pentagon’s UFO office. Now a report of his has shaken up ufology

Sean Kirkpatrick has faced threats for his work – and a new report concluding no evidence UAPs represented extraterrestrial tech has sent ufology into a tailspin

www.theguardian.com

TheBee · Mar 23, 2024

Grunty · Mar 26, 2024

TheBee said:

That seems pretty significant. I'd believe him over anything Kirkpatrick says.

Forerunner · Mar 26, 2024

What UFO Cultists Can Teach Us About Political Paranoia

Arthur Goldwag explains "why some of us believe the unbelievable—and disbelieve what we cannot rationally deny."

time.com

As the psychologist Leon Festinger wrote in 1956, "A man with a conviction is a hard man to change. Tell him you disagree and he turns away. Show him facts or figures and he questions your sources. Appeal to logic and he fails to see your point." Why is that? Because, as Festinger explained in depth in A Theory of Cognitive Dissonance and other books, when a deeply held conviction comes into conflict with reality, its holder experiences a "cognitive dissonance" that is so uncomfortable that he or she is driven to reduce or resolve it, either by revising the belief to bring it into consonance with reality, or, if it is too deeply rooted to change, by editing their view of reality to conform with their conviction.

Cognitive dissonance avoidance accounts for why liberals prefer to watch MSNBC and conservatives Fox News, and why we prefer to socialize with people who share our biases. More broadly, it accounts for why some of us stubbornly believe the unbelievable—and disbelieve what we cannot rationally deny.

Festinger designed a number of ingenious laboratory experiments to demonstrate cognitive dissonance reduction and avoidance in action. But when the Seekers, a tiny Chicago-based UFO cult, announced that the world would end on December 21, 1954, Festinger saw an opportunity to carry out a natural experiment. The Seekers, he predicted, would handle the inevitable "disconfirmation" of their prophecy in three possible ways: The least-committed would either reject the new belief system they'd adopted and return to their lives, or alter it to accommodate its disconfirmation, concluding, perhaps, that they'd misinterpreted the prophecy. Maybe they'd gotten the date wrong, they'd say, or taken literally what they should have construed metaphorically. But the most zealous apostles, the ones who had invested the most in the movement, he predicted, would more than likely take a leap into the absurd and redouble their proselytizing in an attempt to create a community of believers that was large enough to cancel out the refutation of their belief. Because, as Festinger put it, "if everyone in the whole world believed something there would be no question at all as to the validity of this belief."

When Sananda told Martin that a flying saucer would pick them up at 4 p.m. on December 17th and transport them to a place of safety, the Seekers stripped all the metal off their clothes in preparation (for reasons that were not specified, metal and flying saucers were understood to be a fatal mix). The saucer didn't come that afternoon, and it didn't come that night, though they waited in the bitter cold in Martin's back yard until 3 a.m. the next morning.

Martin and the Seekers ultimately explained her prophecy's failure as the proof of its success: the announcement they made to the press the next day was not that she had been wrong, but that the Seekers' steadfastness had been rewarded with the divine decision to postpone the Day of Judgment.

True to Festinger's predictions, while the group's more casual members did drift back into their old lives, its core members doubled down on both their belief and their proselytizing. But only for a time; within a matter of weeks, as Festinger and his co-authors dryly put it, "an unfriendly world finally forced the small band of Lake City believers into diaspora." Still, they concluded, "It is interesting to speculate….on what they might have made of their opportunities had they been more effective apostles…. disconfirmation might have portended the beginning, not the end." Martin herself continued to channel otherworldly messages and write New Age books for the rest of her long life.

The need to reduce or avoid cognitive dissonance can't account for the contents of strange beliefs, whether they are in the realm of religion, flying saucers, or politics. But it goes a long way to explain their stickiness. Reasoning with a true believer—a Stalinist who continued to believe that Russia was a beacon of freedom and fairness even after the show trials, the purges, and the Gulags became widely known; a QAnon follower in the weeks and months after Biden's inauguration failed to bring about the cleansing storm that had been promised—can be exactly as useful as reasoning with someone who is in love with the wrong person.

There were only a few dozen Seekers, and QAnon is hardly in the political mainstream. But as our political culture grows ever more toxic and polarized, our deep need to deny and distort whatever clashes with what we choose to believe has come to play an even more vital role in our national psyche than ever before.

Baji Boxer · Mar 26, 2024

Grunty said:
That seems pretty significant. I'd believe him over anything Kirkpatrick says.

I absolutely would not trust Danny Sheehan. Dude has a history of exaggerating and telling half-truths about his legal record and role in some rather famous legal cases, along with botching cases chasing conspiracies to the detriment of gathering facts. Seen a few good posts summarizing his issues on Reddit, and I've heard him make some absurd claims in the past like silicon computer chips coming from reverse engineered alien tech.

Forerunner · Mar 26, 2024

View: https://twitter.com/AskaPol_UAPs/status/1772774016161394759

Ask a Pol asks:
Are you satisfied with the response you got to the UAPs around Langley from US Northern Command Commander Gen. Gregory Guillot and US Southern Command Commander Gen. Laura Richardson when they testified before the Senate Armed Services Committee on March 14th?

Kaine:
"Yeah, I mean in terms of full forthcoming information and a plan of action, yes, but I think there's a lot of work to be done," Kaine told Ask a Pol. "I think there's a lot of work to be done."

Follow-Up:
In a classified setting, did they at least tell you that they know what it was or is there still a mystery?

Kaine:
"I don't think I can get into that," Kaine replied. "I don't think I can get into that. I think what I can say is that, you know, we have pretty clear rules of engagement if someone were to try to fly a drone against US troops overseas — we would know what to do. But when you're on domestic soil and you've got, you know, houses nearby — and it's not like you're going to shoot something down on a base near a residential neighborhood. So the thought about how to do base protection against UAS [Unmanned Aircraft Systems] threats domestically is not as developed as it is in theaters of war…"

Forerunner · Mar 28, 2024

View: https://twitter.com/AskaPol_UAPs/status/1773177818001588475

Ask a Pol asks:
What's your relationship with Senate Intelligence Committee Vice-Chair Marco Rubio (R-FL), because we're curious if the Intel. Committee has been read in a little bit more than you all on the House UAP Caucus?

Moskowitz:
"It's good. I know, he's been — [Rubio's] way more read in than I am," Moskowitz exclusively tells Ask a Pol. "Think about it: Harry Reid, Chuck Schumer, Marco Rubio — these are not insignificant senators, right? — who have been following this issue. So — but I gotta go vote."

nilbog · Mar 28, 2024

View: https://x.com/ufosoldier_/status/1772830153585967188?s=46&t=dK-rJci-JpxQjNchsdkdiw

Orange Piccolo · Mar 28, 2024

nilbog said:
View: https://x.com/ufosoldier_/status/1772830153585967188?s=46&t=dK-rJci-JpxQjNchsdkdiw

What?

Is this actually legit?

Baji Boxer · Mar 28, 2024

Orange Piccolo said:
What?

Is this actually legit?

It's the word of one man from his unnamed source with zero evidence of any kind provided. So no, not shown to be legit in any way yet.

Forerunner · Mar 28, 2024

View: https://twitter.com/AskaPol_UAPs/status/1773362468988850376

Ask a Pol asks:
Did you see that Joint Chiefs of Staff letter last May — the one on UAPs that, kind of, is alerting?

Gillibrand:
"I don't remember what it said. I imagine I saw it, but I think what they're most worried about is safety for pilots and domain awareness around bases and around nuclear sites," Gillibrand exclusively tells Ask a Pol. "It's essential that we have full domain awareness in our most specialized, most top-secret locations. We don't want spying by adversaries. And so, we hadn't developed the technology or the ability to detect all these items, and there's been a couple of drone [incursions] that are concerning."

Forerunner · Mar 29, 2024

View: https://twitter.com/CFR_org/status/1773482248332796007

Unidentified flying objects (UFOs) are real. And the truth about them is often hidden from the public, for reasons related to national security. That secrecy has fed conspiracy theories about the possibility of alien life on Earth, creating a stigma around the legitimate scientific search for life on other planets. Why are UFOs considered a defense concern? And does a defense framing of UFOs inhibit scientific research?

Forerunner · Mar 29, 2024

View: https://twitter.com/AskaPol_UAPs/status/1773689415262482480

Ask a Pol asks:
With the Pentagon having a nearly trillion-dollar budget, how do they not address the persistent problem of UAPs flying over sensitive military and nuclear sites?

Rounds:
"Well, if it's ours, they may not want to address it," Rounds exclusively tells Ask a Pol.

"As near as I can tell based on everything I've been able to glean so far, the biggest concern that we should have is either our very sensitive programs being opened up or other countries' very sensitive programs being actively engaged. Both of which would be of concern to me," Rounds says. "So far it's a matter of, let's make sure that we don't disclose what we actually have capabilities for in our investigations. Second of all, if there are some items out there that are not ours, where are all those capabilities coming from? Which other country may very well have them, and what are we doing to counter them? Those are the — there's always the possibility that we haven't figured out where all of this stuff is coming from."

Forerunner · Mar 31, 2024

Former US Navy admiral leads search for underwater alien USOs

Hunt for clues to extraterrestrial life forms visiting Earth moves from skies to the seas

www.telegraph.co.uk

The former head of the US National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration (NOAA) is launching a probe into unidentified submersible objects (USOs) and, in particular, a strange anomaly seen on the seabed off the coast of California.

Timothy Gallaudet, a former rear admiral in the US Navy, has spent the past 18 months interviewing dozens of sailors, submariners, military personnel and members of the US Coastguard, all who say they have seen unidentified craft in the water.

Mr Gallaudet is planning to send a remote-controlled submarine to the spot to see if there are signs of what caused the phenomena.

"I cannot explain this feature and therefore want to use a ROV (remotely operated underwater vehicle) to dive from a ship and capture video of it," he told The Telegraph.

"That may allow us to identify its detailed characteristics and potentially determine what caused it.

"No one has agreed to provide a ship or ROV yet. A hypothesis is that it may have been formed by an interaction of an UAP (unidentified aerial phenomena) or USO with the seabed."

Mr Gallaudet believes that evidence for USOs may be present in the US Navy's acoustic data, but it is currently classified.

"I have not seen signatures on such data, but I have spoken to one former submarine officer who has," he added.

This week Mr Gallaudet launched a report into the phenomenon alongside the Sol Foundation, a group of academics, military and government officials committed to researching UFOs.

The group is calling for investigations into USOs to be made a national ocean research priority for the US government and argue that the underwater anomalies threaten maritime security.

Speaking at a recent Sol Foundation symposium, Mr Gallaudet said: "Just in the year-and-a-half or so now that I've become active and started interviewing people I have met dozens of people, commercial, military, Coast Guard, mariners and submariners who have had observations.

"I don't have any data yet. That's the next step. But this is several dozen people that have seen phenomena in our oceans, the tropical eastern and western Pacific, the Gulf of Mexico, the Caribbean, Mediterranean, and the Indian Ocean, and the North Atlantic and eastern seaboard.

"So this is happening, and I am trying to get a better understanding of it."

Mr Gallaudet said that when he was working as chief meteorologist for the US Navy in 2015 he received a classified email entitled 'Urgent safety of flight issue' with the famous Go Fast video attached, which showed Hornet pilots narrowly avoiding mid-air collisions with UFOs.

But he claims after the initial email, the Navy refused to talk about it, leaving pilots forced to come up with evasive manoeuvres on their own without guidance.

He said: "As represented by multiple credible military personnel, objects have been recorded by sonar moving at speeds underwater that are far beyond our best submarines or other hardware.

"Similarly, objects close to the surface have been observed by pilots in multiple flyovers. Objects have been observed rising from the ocean as seen from the decks of military or commercial ships.

"The appropriate stance to take at first is to try to explain these observations as mistaken or electronic glitches. The problem is that some of these events involve multiple simultaneous observations or sensor system measurements.

"Therefore, the chance of multiple coincidental glitches is unlikely and therefore it opens the question of whether these represent some kind of non-human intelligence at work."

UAP/UFO |OT|

Resetufologist

Resetufologist

Resetufologist

Resetufologist

Resetufologist

Resetufologist

Resetufologist

Resetufologist

Resetufologist

Resetufologist

Resetufologist

Resetufologist

Resetufologist

Resetufologist

Resetufologist

Resetufologist

Resetufologist

Resetufologist

Resetufologist

Resetufologist

Resetufologist

Resetufologist

Resetufologist

Resetufologist

Resetufologist

Chicken Chaser

Resetufologist

Resetufologist

Chicken Chaser

Resetufologist

Resetufologist

Resetufologist

Resetufologist