The recent sightings of strange lights over Texas has caused quite a stir, with plenty of MSM coverage. But now the U.S. Air Force has come forward saying they are to blame:
Maj. Karl Lewis, a spokesman for the 301st Fighter Wing at the Naval Air Station Fort Worth Joint Reserve Base, said in a news release that an "error was made regarding the reported training activity of military aircraft" and that "10 F-16s from the 457th Fighter Squadron were performing training operations in the Brownwood Military Operating Area."
Lewis had previously said there were no F-16s or other aircraft from the base in the area the night many of the sightings were reported.
I have to say I haven't followed the case closely enough to comment on this new revelation. Although, this about-face from the Air Force is not the first. There was that little shindig at Roswell to begin with (you know, the retracted news release about finding a UFO), and then the Phoenix Lights flare-dropping exercise. And they wonder why people start calling 'conspiracy'...
Swamp gas reflecting Venus
Witnesses are quite adamant that what they saw wasn't a conventional aircraft, or several aircraft creating an optical illusion. But it wouldn't be the first time the USAF has called people liars.
More and more sightings
That, and the witnesses did say that they saw F16 aircraft seeming to chase the craft later in the sighting. So all the Airforce is doing is confirming that the F16 craft that the people saw were up in the air around the time of the time they claimed to have seen them.
There's no doubt that what the people saw were not F16 jets. In providing a plausible non-UFO scenario, the Government may give people who do not yet want to believe that craft piloted by unknown pilots are roaming our skies, something else to believe. I find it interesting that they waited a few days before doing anything, almost as if they wanted to see what the reactions would be.
I also question what the most recent sightings really mean. If UFO’s have been visiting us for so long, clearly they don’t need to send massive “mother” ships over our cities in order to learn more about us. I think they must know everything they need to know by now. But if they wanted us to see them, if they wanted to start to get us to accept them as a reality without scaring the crap out of us, maybe they would pop in over Phoenix and let us digest that. Then pop in over O’Hare and let us digest that. Then pop in over…you get the idea.
And on a side note, if they wanted us to believe in them as Extraterrestrials, but they really weren’t and this was all a deception...then they would be doing one really amazing job at that too. Always keep an open mind and remember conclusions without definite facts are just attempts at guesses. :)
Learn about us
If that is the actual reason at all.
And, there may be several, even conflicting, agendas.
One question here:
Why would so many different races, identified as so many different technologies, be drawn here in particular, in general secrecy, although some of those do not seem to mind creating confusion?
Training?
1. How do you "make a mistake" about 10 of your jets?
2. As someone who has been around the U.S. Force all his life, I can tell you that having 10 fighter jets all involved in training at the same time is HIGHLY ununsual. In fact, I've only seen it during large scale exercises, certaintly not during routine training, and much less from a Reserve unit.
Indeed
I was gonna mention this myself, Anonymous. Glad to know we have something we can agree on other than Global Warming! ;-)
10 jets in a training excercise close to populated areas is highly unusual, and it also doesn't gel with what witnesses say. One witness is adamant that he saw two jets chasing the UFO. Unless it's some new USAF game of air-soccer using the latest anti-gravity ball from NASA/Nike, something is fishy with the official story.
Would seem like the obvious
As Anonymous said.
Plus, would not those jets make a tad more noise than reported?
And,
If these were reported as flying fast, hovering and so on, would not low altitude jets make lots of noise and high altitude jets not move so fast as seen from the ground?
Do jets even train at high altitude?
One sure thing though, by making this statement, they are acknowledging that there was something going on that night, whether or not they were involved.
Training
Most Air Force training areas require the jets to train at only medium and high altitudes. Environemntalists and bitchy civilians have stopped most low level training, even if there is no populated areas nearby (another issue for another day). It's possible that the low-level training is conducted at the Brownwood training area, which does include the County where the sightings occurred. But with a significant civilian population in the area, I find it unlikely.
The link below is by someone who monitors radio communications coming out of the training area. He states that the training is usually air-to-air combat, which would not be done at low level.
http://www.bensware.com/scandfw/301st.ht...
From suntimes.com:
The planes’ training area in the Brownwood Military Operating Area includes Stephenville’s Erath County, but Allen said it does not include the airspace where he saw the object. Also, Jan. 8 was not the only day sightings were reported.
Anne Frazor, who owns a fabric store in Stephenville, about 70 miles southwest of Fort Worth, said many in town have seen military aircraft zoom overhead from time to time as part of training operations. But she said that wasn’t what she saw Jan. 8.
Reality Check
Year: 1984. Situation: Just out of the Royal Air Force. Location: Living 20 miles from a notified training range in the north of England. Time: 0830am.
Me and my family were having breakfast when the house nearly shook. Huge sound of droning outside. Whole family rushed out into the garden, where we were then entertained for nearly 20 minutes as we watched six A10 fighters constantly come in for practice straffing attacks.
They'd mistaken our village for the training range. And you can guarantee USAF would never admit it.
...
I'm fanatical about moderation
Anthony North
Well...
More like a Reality Anecdote. A rather far removed one from this situation. Still, while highly unlikely it's another possible scenario.
"And you can guarantee USAF would never admit it."
I can only guarantee that I wouldn't make such a guarantee. But I respect your certitude.
;)
Really?
Anonymous said:
'As someone who has been around the U.S. Force all his life, I can tell you that having 10 fighter jets all involved in training at the same time is HIGHLY ununsual. In fact, I've only seen it during large scale exercises, certaintly not during routine training, and much less from a Reserve unit.'
It is relevant when one person reading something like this has an experience of 6 jets, at low level, during routine training, and getting lost. Such experiences are not unusual.
I can recall, in the RAF, scrambles, during routine military exercises, when nearly a dozen jets have taken off almost at once.
All too often I hear mistaken assumptions about military aircraft activity when dealing with the UFO. Similarly, at high speed, noise of fighters does not always equate with what is seen, and vice versa.
...
I'm fanatical about moderation
Anthony North
Oranges
Six jets, in 1982, in England, belonging to the RAF, is a far cry from today's U.S. Air Force training guidelines in U.S. training areas. But if your cynicism towards the U.S. Military insists on taking you down that road...well, bon voyage. I did admit that it's possible. My point is that it's not anywhere near as probable as you seem to be insisting.
My theory:
It was not routine training. And it's unlikely that there were that many jets and pilots of the 457th Fighter Squadron (a Reserve unit) on standby to be scrambled in the middle of Texas without warning. I'm leaning towards a scheduled escort of, and/or joint training with, an experimental U.S. aircraft.
Reality Check 2
Anonymous said:
Six jets, in 1982, in England, belonging to the RAF, is a far cry from today's U.S. Air Force.'
Read my comment again. The year is 1984, not 1982. The RAF does not have A10s, and I never said they did. They were American, flying under NATO guidelines, which all NATO countries adhere to - don't they?
Two errors in such simple research, Anonymous. All you had to do was read a short post correctly.
People, please note.
...
I'm fanatical about moderation
Anthony North
Try, try again...
82. 84. Yeah, that makes all the difference. You never mentioned NATO or the US Air Force in your initial post. You did, however, mention the RAF. The A-10 is a ground support attack aircraft and does train at low levels. But again, it's extremely rare to find Nationl Guard or Reserve A-10 units training with more than 3 or 4 at a time. We have an A-10 squadron at the Air Guard airport two miles from where I sit right now and I have never seen or heard of more than four operating at the same time. Usually just two. You later stated that they were flying under NATO guidelines. Note that NATO guidelines are not followed in Texas, by the Texas Air National Guard or U.S. Air Force Reserves. (http://www.af.mil/factsheets/factsheet.a...). Also, the A-10 cannot be found within the 457th Fighter Squardon and has no relevance to this story or the training procedures of the F-16s that are a part of this squardon.
People, please note.
Reality check 3
From my original comment:
'And you can guarantee USAF would never admit it.'
So you are wrong to say that I never mentioned the US Air Force in my original post. And why would I say this if I wasn't talking about USAF aircraft?
As you said earlier that you've spent all your life around USAF, then I assumed you'd know that the RAF has no A10s. After all, they are the USAF's closest partners, and work constantly together.
In my nine years service I met and worked with lots of USAF personnel and they were all aware of the RAF's aircraft, and the RAF theirs.
I'm not commenting on the actual case, as it is too early for me. I'm sitting back and seeing what happens. I'm simply commenting on your previous statement, which I think was misleading.
...
I'm fanatical about moderation
Anthony North
Alrighty then....
So the USAF comment was about the incident way back when in England, or about the incident in Texas, or some misty link between the two? Other than ignoring my salient and relevant points in order to press your irrelevant and meaningless ones, what's your overall point? Do you have one or is just being contentious the point?
You've gone out of your way to be confrontational, while you haven’t really contributed to this discussion in the least. You have yet to counter my basic argument that your story from 1984, from England, involving A-10s, flying under NATO guidelines, has absolutely no relevance to the issue at hand. More importantly, you have yet to describe how it is relevent to this recent Texas story. Somehow I think you just wanted to interject yourself and found an old story that you thought would suffice. Of course, it was used as an excuse to criticize the USAF rather than actually address the story at hand. Granted, the USAF changed their story and their involvment in the story is suspicious, but that's not a fault - it's their job. By definition, they are secretive about experimental aircraft. I don't think that's news to anyone.
BTW, RAF pilots (and Australian) have trained on the A-10. I've met them. They have also flown the (sometimes)exported version, the OA-10. So I don't think you can say, with certainty, that RAF pilots weren't flying those planes, even if they were actually USAF planes. But again, irrelevant. And for all I know, you got a breakfast call from the Base Commander giving you a full explanation and sincere aplogies for the awful racket.
I am not an expert on the aircraft the RAF have or have not flown since 1984. Just as I'm not an expert on aircraft Pakistan flew in the late sixties, which is equally irrelevant to this conversation.
But thanks for hijacking the thread.
Hijacked?
Good morning Anonymous,
In the interest of accuracy I decided to post a simple comment about an experience involving many jets. This was done simply to correct your assertion that:
'I can tell you that having 10 fighter jets all involved in training at the same time is HIGHLY ununsual. In fact, I've only seen it during large scale exercises, certaintly not during routine training ... '
In my experience, this comment is misleading. Thus, my comment was justified. It was not an attack on USAF. It was a criticism of your statement.
As for RAF pilots flyihg A-10s, certainly, on exchange tours, as USAF pilots fly RAF jets on exchange tours, but the RAF certainly did not have A-10s in 1984, and I doubt if they bought them subsequently.
You went on to say:
'I am not an expert on the aircraft the RAF have or have not flown since 1984 ... '
And you've been involved with USAF most of your life? You obviously missed aircraft recognition, given to all NATO air forces so that you don't shoot down the wrong planes. You're really beginning to scare me now!
And then you said something else:
'You've gone out of your way to be confrontational ... '
How come? I offered a single comment about an incident. The confrontation began after that.
But best of all, you said:
'But thanks for hijacking the thread.'
Oh dear, dear me, Anonymous. I want to thank you for that gem. Rarely have I come across such humour in a morning.
That one will keep me going all day :-)
Pathetic
This was done simply to correct your assertion that:
'I can tell you that having 10 fighter jets all involved in training at the same time is HIGHLY ununsual. In fact, I've only seen it during large scale exercises, certaintly not during routine training ... '
And as I pointed out, your single anecdote from 24 years ago did not "correct" anything. As I pointed out, your breakfast air show has exactly zero similiarities to what was seen in Texas. So you didn't try to correct anything. You merely wanted to interject yourself into the conversation. In that regard, mission accomplished.
In my experience, this comment is misleading.
That comment was my opinion. Other than the aforementioned irrelevent anacdote, you haven't done anything to prove anything I've said is "misleading".
It was not an attack on USAF.
You made a clear and generalized statement about the Air Force and not being able to trust what they say. Such a broad generality is an an attack on the USAF.
You obviously missed aircraft recognition
My speciality required Soviet and Warsaw Pact recognition (see my post to Rick MG). My interest in, and responsibilites, had zero to do with NATO forces. Not everyone in the military is tasked with recognizing NATO aircraft. You SHOULD know that.
And hijack the thread you did. Tell me, how much time in this thread have you spent talking about the sightings in Texas? That's what we were talking about until you showed up, not to add to the conversation, but to challenge something I said. And a pathetic challange it was.
Please refrain from insults
Anonymous please refrain from personal attacks and overt aggressiveness. Anthony posted a very valid point. You may not agree with it, but calling Anthony's post "pathetic" is not on.
I don't agree with Anthony that the Stephenville UFO was just 10 F-16s on training excercises -- multiple witnesses describe a flying object a mile long and half a mile wide, that moved up to 3000mph (this blog sums up the official explanation). However, Anthony still has a valid point -- aggressive insults and boorish behaviour won't win you any favours.
This has been an enlightening and thought-provoking discussion that I hope can continue in a positive and courteous way. It's obvious you have a lot of experience and knowledge to share, as does Anthony. Agree to disagree, politely, and leave it at that. Thanks.
Gee
It's all me. Go figure.
Escorts
I'm leaning towards a scheduled escort of, and/or joint training with, an experimental U.S. aircraft.
I think it is a very good theory. But would that many fighters be necessary? Wouldn't it be best to escort the experimental aircraft with more... stealthier vessels? I'm thinking of silent choppers, in case the experimental aircraft suffers a malfunction and they need to stay on site to retrieve the pilots or something (like that famous case that ALSO happened in Texas in the 80s, with those women and the little child that saw a diamond-shaped object that glowed and threw fire from the bottom). I do not know the flight capabilities if an F-16, but I do know they are MUCH faster than a chopper, so if they were escorting a prototype of some sort, then such aircraft must also be capable of high speeds; something that I think might exclude a blimp or a lighter-than-air platform as some people have suggested.
Anon, you know more about these sort of things better than most of us. How much does it cost to deploy one of these F-16s in a routine exercise? If they needed 10 of these birds in the air, it should be for a very good reason, right?
-----
It's not the depth of the rabbit hole that bugs me...
It's all the rabbit SH*T you stumble over on your way down!!!
Red Pill Junkie
Good Question
But would that many fighters be necessary?
No. Unless it was a highly unusual type of training and/or such a rare experience they wanted to take full advantage of the opportunity. But if it was an escort mission, the number of jets could be an indication of planes from two different squardons: a Nevada squadron passing off escort duties to the Texas squadron for example. Also, if there were more than one experimental aircraft involved, each one may have had it's own escort compliment.
But then again, maybe they were scrambled to intercept an alien spacecraft. Or maybe to deal with some American flyboys from England taking their A-10s on a joy ride.
Who knows. Anything is possible. Even Anthony's theory. Though I have no idea what that might be. LOL
Intelligence
You worked in Military Intelligence at Ft Meade, Anonymous. Surely some of your former colleagues and friends can confirm what happened in Texas?
I'd Love That!
But as I'm sure you're aware, my security clearance went null and void the second my exit papers were signed. The friends I still keep in contact with are retired and wouldn't know anything. And even if they did, we are all still bound, legally and ethically, to certain requirements.
C'mon, you know something.
C'mon, you know something. Divulging it won't put you in the same basket as Dennis Kucinich. ;-)
Dennis
Good ol' Dennis. I miss him already.
I don't think anything other than maybe an anal probe would put me, or anyone, in Dennis's "basket". LOL
Credentials
How exactly have you been around the USAF, Anonymous? Please list your credentials. Or do you read a lot of Janes? Nothing personal, I'm simply asking because you're presenting yourself as an expert with absolute certitude.
Nope
An expert I never claimed to be. In fact, I clearly stated I was giving my opinions. I threw out several scenarios. That being said, I would go so far as to say no one else here has demonstrated any working knowledge of Air Force matters; no one has contridicted my assertions about military tactics and training procedures or other statements with any credibility *; coming after me personally seems to be what's left.
* Anthony was in the RAF and apparently has seen some planes flying around while eating breakast a couple of decades ago.
But since you would rather make it about me, fine. I grew up on USAF bases where my father worked on fighters, from the Vietnam era through the early eighties. He ended his career working on an experimental aircraft for the USAF (under the supervision of the Ratheon Corp), which later entered active service. I spent hours in hangars watching as fighters went through phase and scrambled in alerts when Soviet Bear bombers flew into Alaskan air space. (As a reward for attaingin Eagle Scout, my father and his C.O. assisted me in "piloting" an F-4 around the ramp of Eielson AFB one lazy summer afternoon.) After college, I served 8 years in the US Army as a Russian linguist in Military Intelligence. I served in the Far East, Europe and NSA headquarters at Ft. Meade. I specialized in Soviet and Warsaw Pact Order of Battle, communications systems and a few unmentionable tasks. After active duty Army time I served another 8 years in a similar capacity for the Army Rerserves, where I spent most of my time on Air Force bases such as Vandenberg and Eglin. To this day, I still spend time with my brother when he drills with the Air National Guard, where he a crew chiefs for KC-135 tankers. Which are parked just down the ramp from a squadron of A-10s.
Feel better?
Большое
Большое спасибо за информацию.
Никакая Проблема
пожалуйста
Вы радушны
Вы радушны. ;-)
Clarification
I'll answer Anonymous here. First off, I didn't criticize USAF - are you saying they SHOULD let the public know about their operations?
USAF has a big presence in Europe, where most Soviet contacts came. Are you saying USAF has no interest in all those jets from the little, friendly countries inbetween? That's a frightening prospect, and I know it certainly wasn't true.
I said there were many routine incidents where a number of jets congregate, giving just one definite example. Others include airfield evacuation scrambles; stacking due to u/s runway; flight formation training.
Even a simple interception exercise can include two combatants, their wingmen and often an observer. That's five. A double engagement would increase it to nine. You mention the KC-135. How many jets can congregate for 'drinkies' when it's on station?
Reasons for anomalous atmospheric phenomena. Reheat from afterburn; fuel venting; flare or chaff discharge.
Experience: tours of duty on two air defence bases, including fighter squadron support. Veteran of nearly 100 exercises, from AD co-ordination, to ground defence, to command centre duties. Worked and socialised with USAF personnel often during Europe reinforcement exercises. And over twenty years research of all matters military.
Experience with Anonymous: I have never - ever - attacked you in the first instance (baring one ill-judged post which I removed myself within minutes of posting). Always, I have simply made a valid criticism, offering my opinion to yours. It is then, from your aggressive replies, and inability to take criticism, that any trouble has come.
I suggest you learn to chill out.
...
I'm fanatical about moderation
Anthony North
Uh huh
I have never - ever - attacked you in the first instance
Sure. You stick with that.
Other possible reasons for visitation
I still can't figure out alien visitation. I have some theories. It's obviously not just for scientific analysis as was put fourth long ago. What seem to be the facts are:
- Been around at least since man has been around
- Only intervened when man was very primitive (bible, myths of creation), now only watches and if intervenes, does much to hide the process (abductions usually memory blocked)
- Abductions today don’t make sense unless they are/have been constantly monitoring our genetics or biology
- Direct encounters for some reason include bizarre confusing sexual content which could be memory confusion placed there by aliens or something else
- Other paranormal events seem to surround UFO encounters
- Sightings before seemed to be localized mostly to individuals and now big motherships are showing up near cities
Our explanations seem to change with our culture. We used to think it must be scientific gathering because that was what we would have done if we had encountered a planet with life. We were thinking way too small because our perspective was too small. Even what seems like paranormal events to us today may have logical explanations if we had a perspective that included things that we can’t even imagine today. Say if we knew of ESP or psi type events as a normal scientific function or if we scientifically knew of additional dimensional realities which had entry points into our own.
But one thing I have decided is that by flying their big motherships over habitated areas and by flying one of their smaller ones in the middle of O’Hare airport, they are specifically sending a subtle signal to the people of Earth that they are here. That’s the message. Why else do it? They must know we would see it and they must know it would cause us to stand up and take more notice. Maybe they are just are trying to force the government’s hand to tell us they are here. But either way, it was a SHOW. There is no other reason for it that I can see.
Reasons for visitation
Lots of facts which by themselves cannot be extrapolated into valid explanations, I agree.
Personally, I do not believe they do scientific analysis the way we may be thinking of. Science at earthly levels is based on deductions, but from the moment a civilization would have attained a science of what we are still struggling with the very concept of its reality, namely the invisible, the paranormal, all of that stuff, then science must take into consideration these other aspects of energy from the basis of the laws that underpin those realities.
Since I do not believe that these realities and our sensory perceptions are absolutely divided but do interpenetrate,
then their science has to be more predictive than deductive.
I know that human science likes to think that it must be predictive in nature, but the flaw is that those predictions are based on assumptions that the deductions must have been right if the results concord with the predictions, whereas in reality human science is only based on mathematical descriptions that fit observations and that can only be partial as they do not include the cause, which to me is tucked away in the invisible.
I agree with you, we anthropomorphize what we don’t know and therefore believe that alien scientific basis would be the same as ours, that they must have a psychology as we do, that they come here visit to explore as we would, because they otherwise would not know as we would not, and so on. This anthropomorphizing has been responsible for the concept of god to describe the infinity of the laws of energy and its intelligent organization.
Our perspective is small indeed.
So long as our science will be based on theory, we will be short changed scientifically. A theory of everything, as we call it, must include the laws of the invisible, and for that the invisible must be visited. Quantum mechanics and standard mechanics to be united must take into consideration that those sets cannot be united to fit but must be united as a cause and effect system. For that the scientist consciousness must be allowed to deal with those realities directly, because so long as they are not, they will assume that all there is is contained within the limits of what their consciousness can address, so that the laws must conform to their memories.
So, obviously, the whole anthropomorphizing bit is based with consciousness using its memory as a yardstick and refusing to realize that the impossible is real, while the possible is a limit.
I say that there is a big experiment happening here, and that has been happening for thousands of years now. And as for any experiment, the experimental conditions must be confined strictly to avoid contamination. Not simple material contamination but mental, psychical, psychological contamination.
Many races come because on an experimental planet many experiments are done in parallel. This would even explain the anomalous biodiversity.
Likewise, you can think of an experiment as a cattle range - new genre. Raise them, fortify them genetically, breed them, and when they are optimally developed, as the human race is optimally developed now, reap the fruits of your labor.
But when the experiment is nearing its end, the isolation must also come to an end, but without damage. And we know how fragile the human mind remains in its current state. Just consider post-trauma syndromes and you get the picture.
Very interesting
We are definitely constrained by our scientific principles, and most scientists are shockingly constrained by the status quo. You would think that philosophy would somehow have gotten better integrated into science in modern times, but it has been pretty well sandblasted away from science and relegated as an interesting thing to think about sometimes. So as a result, and historically speaking, science misses really big obvious things when scientists even point them out because we would rather keep everything in a nice neat scientific box where we can comprehend it, than use all this crazy mumbo jumbo philosophic concepts that could make things confusing again…and possibly solve the puzzle exactly. I wonder why we do that. I guess it’s because in the wild, when chasing deer or buffalo, we needed quick answers right away, not really long drawn out thoughts about the concept of deer hunting.
I totally agree that a grand experiment would definitely explain everything that I can think of that has happened over the years and that is referenced in history books. The strange behaviors that we’ve perceived of these aliens could easily be stimulus to either move us in a direction or to see what direction we might move in as a result. If it is an experiment, then who knows what the future might bring. This might not be the end of the experiment, only a shift in phases because we’ve achieved a certain level of intelligence.
It could also be that they really do believe the thing to do is propagate intelligent creatures across the universe and we are just an example of one of their “gardens”. That situation also fits nicely into the limited facts we have. In that case, we would almost be their children, well hopefully at least like a litter of puppies to what would have to be a much greater intelligence than our own. We'd better start looking cute. :)
And finally there is the possibility that the Gnostic concepts are actually accurate and what we think are extraterrestrials are actually creatures that have been with our solar system since it began and not human, and don’t hold us with much regard. If that’s the case, then based on the writings (well some of them), their expertise is deception and boy wouldn’t it be just the right ruse at the right time.
Just a few points I would make
Interesting comments RonB.
Just a few points though.
I do not believe that people are intelligent the ways we imagine it but rather say that they have access to intelligence.
Saying this, if these space puppies refrain from contact, because of experimental conditions, we can say that the planet is under quarrantine.
Unfortunately, we may anthropomorphize the concept of quarrantine as much as any other concept and believe that this only apply to the material barrier of space and time.
We should also consider that the mind, from the invisible, is quarrantine to control the intelligence to which people have access so that they develop an individual reality with time while cut off from their own intelligence.
So, if these 'visitors' are not cut off as we are, then they have access to intelligence, information, archives, access to which is refused and prevented to us.
This would explain why science and scientists seem to stick to old guns, but admittedly until enough evidence tips the balance, and why people in general are so keen on sticking to ideology.
I don't want to go to far in this here now, but at least I would want people to consider that we are not less intelligent than those being but are being manipulated into ignorance.
There is a definite distinction to be made between intelligence and ignorance, especially the ignorance of the true nature of the mind that may allow such manipulations to be done while the thinker believes he is the one thinking.
But I disgress a bit, but not that much.
Someone, somewhere knows
There are definitely several, conflicting agendas because there's a variety of extraterrestrial visiting our planet. Some good, some neutral, and some bad (to our interests). There may be some kind of Galactic Federation (remote viewers have mentioned this) and a Prime Directive ala Star Trek.
It's interesting that the UFO scenario really picked up circa WWII, when the USA developed the first atomic bomb. I have no doubts whatsoever that it isn't a coincidence.
Does splitting the atom cause some kind of damage to the universe we aren't aware of? Do one or more of the ET species have a vested interest in humanity, not wanting to see us destroy ourselves in a nuclear holocaus? Or are there good and neutral ETs here to make sure bad ETs don't get up to mischief?
I'd love to meet a good ET and ask them myself! I could ask a neutral ET, but I doubt I'd get a straight answer from them. Asking a bad ET is out of the question.
I'm sure someone, somewhere, knows. But they aren't telling us. There may be a program of gradual disclosure at the moment, but that is muddied by a program of disinformation, and official authorities and organisations refusing to divulge what they know (NASA's obfuscation regarding Leslie Kean's FOIA Kecksburg document lawsuit is proof that we're not getting the truth, even when the law says we have the right to).
The stuff of the invisible
I know it may sound off topic but I do not believe it is.
Science has not been able to harmonize quantum and standard models. Like it has not been able to realize the material-invisible relationship and like man today is wondering if the invisible exist and if aliens exist. Imagine how far we are.
So, the question is: what does an atomic blast do to the ethers? I know, the concept of ether has been scrapped by science long ago. So then, what does a nuclear blast do to the quantum unierse and to other universes that could support the quantum reality, like quantum reality supports material reality?
Its just another case of limited consciousness by which we allow ourselves to decree that nuclear is not a problem because our evaluation is limited to material considerations.
I suggest that there won't be a global disclosure until the experiment is over. Global disclosure would mean the end of this civilization, period. This civilization has not yet totally fulfilled its function, so it must be allowed to run its course.
Agenda wise, I would suggest that there are multiple causes for agendas. This means that the origin of individuals' consciousnesses is not the same.
Furthermore, that there are intelligences out there that absolutely want to limit man's access to their own intelligence so that they remain under control.
And man was made to be free one day, period.
Another reason for visitation...
Maybe to them Earth is nothing more than an inter-dimensional pumping station ;-)
Or *gulp* a drive thru 8-(
-----
It's not the depth of the rabbit hole that bugs me...
It's all the rabbit SH*T you stumble over on your way down!!!
Red Pill Junkie
not so funny.....
if you look at the statistics of people who disappear without a trace, you would consider your drive thru......
in western countries it is extremely difficult to just disappear, yet thousands do every year.
"Life can be whatever you want it to be, as long as you do what your told."
LRF.
I was partly being serious.
I sometimes think that UFOs (at least some) are seen by people when they are in the middle of crossing thorugh different "gateways" or passages between parallel universes.
Some ufologists like Aimè Michel found through the use of computerized registers that UFOs (in the cases reported by multiple separate witnesses) travel in straight lines, and many of these lines match with ancient pagan sacred grounds that later were covered by christian churches. This happens in Mexico too as Pedro Ferriz and Christian Siruguet found that UFOs fly over ancient precolombine sites, and also found many sites that belonged to different cultures that were apart not only in distance but also were not contemporary chronologically, nevertheless were aligned through the entire Mexican Republic.
We know the ancients throughout the world built their sacred sites where there's a strong teluric & magnetic activity, and there are countless reports of people reporting strange things happening near these sites. So maybe UFOs make use of lines where the Earth's energy flow is stronger ("the lines of the dragon" I think the chinese called them) either to recharge themselves, or to help them pass through different levels of reality.
I don't know. Maybe I ended up to inffluenced by the reading of Strieber's 2012 :-)
And as far as the drive thru is concerned, well... it is a possibility that we cannot discard. We can't forget all the reports of Brazil from the 60s-70s of people attacked by UFOs that created a wave of hysteria throughout the entire state of Minas Gerais (the place where the famous "Varginha" case occurred in the 90s)
-----
It's not the depth of the rabbit hole that bugs me...
It's all the rabbit SH*T you stumble over on your way down!!!
Red Pill Junkie
Projections
Some are just projections to confuse and to test the ability to sustain the shock.
Its not always what meets the eyes.
I agree
One thing is what it is captured by the witnesses' senses, and other what they perceive/interpret based on their cultural/educational baggage. The shape of the multi-colored UFO and the gray dark-eyed aliens may be nothing more than the latest social attempt to give a description to something that may never be fully understood by human minds.
-----
It's not the depth of the rabbit hole that bugs me...
It's all the rabbit SH*T you stumble over on your way down!!!
Red Pill Junkie
Big Eyed, Skinny Aliens
I blame Steven Spielberg.
Spielberg
Mmmm, yes, CEIII was probably the first time the image of the contemporary gray (or at least a very cloe approximation) was shown in a mainstream media. Although there seemed to be several B-movies and sci-fy episodes who go pretty close to a gray before that in the 50s-60s I think.
But Spielberg consulted with Jacques Vallee, who I suppose based Steve-o's direction to the aliens' look on the reports he studied.
I agree with Greg Bishop that the early CEIII reports were much more interesting (and fun), with people describing all sorts of fantastic beings.
-----
It's not the depth of the rabbit hole that bugs me...
It's all the rabbit SH*T you stumble over on your way down!!!
Red Pill Junkie
Evacuation Ships?
The latest sighting (I forgot the name of the witness) of a massive ship in Dublin, Texas, looks more like an evacuation ship, not a mother ship. What with the human-size port holes at the bottom of the ship? They seem perfectly designed for quick entry by a lot of people over a huge area. Maybe the Christians are right about some sort of rapture taking place right before things start to get nasty on earth.
I have the feeling that we are being desensitized with numerous visitations and the many conflicting reports by witnesses. The goal is to generate the least amount of public concern when the actual evacuation takes place. Just a thought.
F-16's
Has any one ever heard 1 or 2 F-16's let alone 10, especially at low altitudes? Loud would be an understatement. Some witnesses plainly state that they saw the fighter jets as well as the UFO's, but apparently they were all hallucinating or saw swamp gas again. Nice.
New Cold War?
It's interesting that some of the biggest UFO flaps occurred at the height of the Cold War in the 1950s, 1960s and 1980s. Russia has been flexing its muscles in recent years, and is making a bid to return to its former Superpower status. Russia has claimed a third of the Arctic, criticised the US over its handling of Iraq and Iran, and just recently successfully tested a supersonic cruise missile.
Do the recent UFO sightings, from O'Hare to Stephenville, suggest extraterrestrials are concerned history is about to repeat itself?
It wasn't a training excercise -- the Bush Ranch
Has anyone looked at a map of Texas? Stephenville is VERY close to the restricted airspace over Dubya's ranch. UFO researcher Don Ledger provides a map and more details on Frank Warren's blog. Stephenville is just minutes away from the 20-mile restricted airspace.
The F-16s were not training. They were scrambled to protect the President's ranch. Or were they escorting the UFO?
Yet no one in the media mentioned Stephenville being right next to the restricted airspace over Dubya's ranch. Not Larry King, not MSNBC, NO ONE. Not even Anonymous, with his lifetime of military experience, picked up on it.
There's a reason
>>Has anyone looked at a map of Texas?
Yes.
There's a good reason why no one picked-up on that Rick. Observers said the craft traveled west. Crawford is 65-miles to the southeast of Stevenville.
Bill
************
Popular opinion is the greatest lie in the world.
Thomas Carlyle