Roswell confession

[Shanet Clark]

good thread.

The UFO material is so difficult.

I want to believe the affadavits,

but I want to remain vigilant against

psychological operations which much

of the UFO material seems to be.......

[Evan Burton]

Peter, I'll edit your posts to make them fit into a standard window, easier for reading. No words will be removed or added.

Evan

[Evan Burton]

Shanet,

It's similar for me. Might be hard to understand but I do believe in UFOs (and not just the strict definition - unidentified). I think there is almost certain that there is intelligent life elsewhere in the universe, and I think there is a good chance that at least one of those has developed FTL travel in some form. I'm pretty sure that there have been at least a few real sightings of these ET craft - but I will freely admit that I have never seen conclusive evidence of either their existence or visitation by them.

I look forward to the day when there will be undeniable proof - but I haven't seen any as yet.

Everything I have seen so far has more mundane explanations or are cases of simple misidentification. I remember a photograph being touted as "Pelidian Beam Ship" or something; being the aircraft buff, I immediately recognised it as a blurred photograph of an X-29 (which was still very new at the time). That's why I said "good grief" about the linkage between the German advanced designs and so-called secret tests in the 50s / 60s. To me, the design history is very clear and no alien involvement is necessary.

[Guest David Guyatt]

Shanet,

It's similar for me. Might be hard to understand but I do believe in UFOs (and not just the strict definition - unidentified). I think there is almost certain that there is intelligent life elsewhere in the universe, and I think there is a good chance that at least one of those has developed FTL travel in some form. I'm pretty sure that there have been at least a few real sightings of these ET craft - but I will freely admit that I have never seen conclusive evidence of either their existence or visitation by them.

I look forward to the day when there will be undeniable proof - but I haven't seen any as yet.

Everything I have seen so far has more mundane explanations or are cases of simple misidentification. I remember a photograph being touted as "Pelidian Beam Ship" or something; being the aircraft buff, I immediately recognised it as a blurred photograph of an X-29 (which was still very new at the time). That's why I said "good grief" about the linkage between the German advanced designs and so-called secret tests in the 50s / 60s. To me, the design history is very clear and no alien involvement is necessary.

I totally understand both your positions (and numerous others two). I began investigating UFO's for both a British and a US based group when I was Fifteen years old -- and that is a looooonnnggg time ago. But I eventually gave up for the same reasons. No hard material evidence, whereas there was hard material evidence of women...

I also believe that other alien civilisations have developed but would also argue that belief in other alien and intelligent civilisations (and if they are intelligent they won't have developed MacDonald's burgers - that's the litmus test!) is not necessarily related to things we see flying around down here.

There are a number of interesting internet sites that have information on this that can be read objectively (i.e., usually the authors bias needs to be taken into consideration). But try Steven's "Hitlers Flying Saucers - A Guide to German Flying Discs of World War Two" (sorry I don't have a link handy but Google does). You might also want to run your eyes over this: http://www.world-war-2-planes.com/go-229-jet-aircraft.html

Meanwhile Evan, you know your aircraft I believe. One question that perplexes me about this aircraft:

The Horton Go229 bomber

And this aircraft:

The B2 bomber Flying Spirit

Is why it two five decades or so for the latter one to go into service? Curious eh.

David

Edited July 5, 2007 by David Guyatt

[Evan Burton]

David,

Not really. Northrop was also working on the same style designs. Jack Northrop was fascinated with them, and they promised greatly reduced drag and therefore increased range / efficiency.

The first was the N-9M, a scaled prototype for the XB-35 Flying Wing bomber. The N-9M first flew in 1942. The first XB-35 flight was in 1946. Both were powered by propellers. The programme had some success, and led to the YB-49 - a jet powered version of the B-35. The YB-49 first flew in 1948.

The big problem with them was stability and poor low-speed characteristics (important for takeoff and landing!).

The design, however, still held promise. When high speed digital systems began to transfer to aircraft, the ability to overcome the stability problems came about. It's like the X-29 with it's forward swept wing. The X-29 is actually aerodynamically unstable, so is practically impossible to fly without computer assistance. The instability, however, allows rapid and drastic changes in the flight path - exactly what you want in a nimble fighter.

The flying wing concept could overcome it's own stability problems (though it was not aerodynamically unstable) through the use of computers. Another reason for developing the concept was the low Radar Cross section (RCS) of the designs. Not really thought of when they were first developed in the 40s, but vitally important for a modern combat aircraft.

Some piccies:

Northrop N-9M

XB-35

YB-49

Edited to add:

Here is a good site with the history of the Northrop flying wing designs, and some good off-site reference material links:

http://www.yourzagi.com/history.htm

Edited July 5, 2007 by Evan Burton
Added link to flying wing site

[Guest David Guyatt]

Thanks Evan. Always good to listen to someone who knows their subject. But I am right, aren't I, in thinking that Jack Northrup's experience in flying wings was inspired by the Horton brothers aren't I -- or is that another myth that has circulated?

Also, didn't Northrop look at the Horton design when setting out to design the B2? I seem to remember reading that somewhere (or was it a TV doco -- can't really remember now). I also was under the impression that the B2 design was based to some unfathomable extent on the Horton flying wing concept because of the stealth qualities this construction offered. I also understand that stealth technology was being worked on by the Nazis and fell into US hands via Operation Paperclip. What I don't know is if there was a concomitant allied research project into stealth (I suspect there must have been though)?

In his book The Hunt for Zero Point, Nick Cook makes the point that circular aircraft designed by the nazis might not only have been antigravity propulsion prototypes but may have been the forerunner of today's stealth aircraft (albeit with a number of understandable caveats).

It's all far too technical for me but the general picture of nazi aircraft remains fascinating. And the sudden disappearance of General Kammler at war's end (never to be seen or heard of again - well, barely anyway) speaks volumes for Paperclip's effective wrap of secrecy.

David

Edited July 5, 2007 by David Guyatt

[Evan Burton]

But I am right, aren't I, in thinking that Jack Northrup's experience in flying wings was inspired by the Horton brothers aren't I -- or is that another myth that has circulated?

I'm pretty sure he was inspired by a Horton glider, so I'd say it is not a myth.

Also, didn't Northrop look at the Horton design when setting out to design the B2? I seem to remember reading that somewhere (or was it a TV doco -- can't really remember now). I also was under the impression that the B2 design was based to some unfathomable extent on the Horton flying wing concept because of the stealth qualities this construction offered. I also understand that stealth technology was being worked on by the Nazis and fell into US hands via Operation Paperclip. What I don't know is if there was a concomitant allied research project into stealth (I suspect there must have been though)?

I don't know how much they looked at their designs for the B-2, but they certainly looked at them for the YB-49. I'll see what I can find out.

[Evan Burton]

Don't forget that the Brits were experimenting with tailless designs, notably the DH.108 Swallow which IIRC Geoffery deHavilland lost his life in.

ETA:

Yep - he was killed in it. Details here:

http://www.century-of-flight.freeola.com/A...ngs/britain.htm

Edited July 5, 2007 by Evan Burton

[Evan Burton]

A small reference here:

American researchers would eventually come back to study the Go 229 flying wing in later years, leading up to the development of the B-2 Spirit stealth bomber which, in essence, became the Go 229 dream realized decades before.

http://www.militaryfactory.com/aircraft/de...aircraft_id=105

and a fantastic site about the Ho229 and other designs:

http://greyfalcon.us/The%20Horten%20Ho%20229.htm

[Guest David Guyatt]

Thanks for all of theat Evan, it's appreciated.

Have you ever come across designs/prototypes of a "flying submarine"? I was impressed by a Sky documentary I watched a while back about one of these.

Because I am person who could never get his sums right at school, and doubtless suffer from the same malady now, I always think of an American/Russian flying submarine when I consider the remarkable Shag Harbour UFO incident.

And because I was - and am - so bad at sums, I even ponder wild youthful thoughts that maybe, just maybe, there really is a flying submarine and real flying saucers (etc) in service that have never ever been revealed.

Then I wake up.

And just when I'm sure it's all been a dream and that Freddy really is dead, you go and post a link with this on it:

The Horton Ho229 and the B2 Flying Wing superimposed together.

That really was unfair.

Freddy lives!

David

[Evan Burton]

I remember the 'flying sub' from the TV series "Voyage to the bottom of the sea" - it was so cool. Reminded me of a manta ray, which I think inspired the Irwin Allen design.

Haven't heard of any real-world projects, though. Missile & subs, aircraft & subs - yes, but a flying sub? Nope.

[Guest David Guyatt]

I remember the 'flying sub' from the TV series "Voyage to the bottom of the sea" - it was so cool. Reminded me of a manta ray, which I think inspired the Irwin Allen design.

Haven't heard of any real-world projects, though. Missile & subs, aircraft & subs - yes, but a flying sub? Nope.

The Russkies tried to develop one during WWII. Based on the design specifications, it would've flown at 150 knots in the air and 3 knots 'neath the waves. But the design never got off the drawing board. From a Sky doco I saw, I think it was because funding was pulled from it -- but may be confusing that with another project. You might want to bone up about the "Reid Flying Sub RFS-1" that was built and put into service by US defense contractor Don Reid. Then back in 1965, General Dynamics/Convair put together a proposal for the US Navy:

Artists impression of the proposed Convair Flying Sub

But apart from the report on this by AP and in the world famous Wilmington (Delaware) Morning News on March 11, 1965, nothing more was heard. At least, I've been unable to find anything more which obviously, is not entirely the same thing.

The Shag Harbour "UFO" incident took place on 4th October 1967... 18 months later. Quite curious timing wise, I would suggest. Lots of US navy surface vessels raced to the area to cordon it off from Soviet vessels that were sad to be steaming towards the area to investigate. The UFO came to rest on the seabed right off a Canadian-US sonar/submarine listening base. There's a lot of curious symmetry involved it seems to me.

Cold war disinformation because the Soviets had undusted their WWII design and were playing with it? Or Uncle had taken the Convair design and played with it? Who knows.

David

Edited July 6, 2007 by David Guyatt

[Evan Burton]

Sometimes I think that some people don't really think through the value of 'black' programmes.

There are some aspects which can (should?) be kept secret, and continue to provide value. The SR-71 was secret for many years yet gave the US valuable intelligence. Perhaps there is the Aurora, which is today providing surveillance data to the US - who knows?

On the other hand, designs which are meant for combat have little value if they are kept secret. They have to be employed. If they are employed, you risk far greater risk of disclosure. Therefore the value of keeping the system 'secret' is outweighed by the benefits of employing the system.

I can accept a military surveillance system being kept secret for many years; I find it much harder to believe in a combat system not being revealed for a variety of reasons.

[Ron Ecker]

One argument against UFOs being "real" is the prohibitive distances involved for interstellar space travel. However, a new report from the National Academy of Sciences suggests that we may be looking for alien life in the wrong places.

Date: July 6, 2007

Contacts: Paul Jackson

Michelle Strikowsky

Office of News and Public Information

202-334-2138; e-mail <news@nas.edu>

FOR IMMEDIATE RELEASE

LIFE ELSEWHERE IN SOLAR SYSTEM COULD BE DIFFERENT FROM LIFE AS WE KNOW IT

WASHINGTON -- The search for life elsewhere in the solar system and beyond should include efforts to detect what scientists sometimes refer to as "weird" life -- that is, life with an alternative biochemistry to that of life on Earth -- says a new report from the National Research Council. The committee that wrote the report found that the fundamental requirements for life as we generally know it -- a liquid water biosolvent, carbon-based metabolism, molecular system capable of evolution, and the ability to exchange energy with the environment -- are not the only ways to support phenomena recognized as life. "Our investigation made clear that life is possible in forms different than those on Earth," said committee chair John Baross, professor of oceanography at the University of Washington, Seattle.

The report emphasizes that "no discovery that we can make in our exploration of the solar system would have greater impact on our view of our position in the cosmos, or be more inspiring, than the discovery of an alien life form, even a primitive one. At the same time, it is clear that nothing would be more tragic in the American exploration of space than to encounter alien life without recognizing it."

The tacit assumption that alien life would utilize the same biochemical architecture as life on Earth does means that scientists have artificially limited the scope of their thinking as to where extraterrestrial life might be found, the report says. The assumption that life requires water, for example, has limited thinking about likely habitats on Mars to those places where liquid water is thought to be present or have once flowed, such as the deep subsurface. However, according to the committee, liquids such as ammonia or formamide could also work as biosolvents -- liquids that dissolve substances within an organism -- albeit through a different biochemistry. The recent evidence that liquid water-ammonia mixtures may exist in the interior of Saturn's moon Titan suggests that increased priority be given to a follow-on mission to probe Titan, a locale the committee considers the solar system's most likely home for weird life.

"It is critical to know what to look for in the search for life in the solar system," said Baross. "The search so far has focused on Earth-like life because that's all we know, but life that may have originated elsewhere could be unrecognizable compared with life here. Advances throughout the last decade in biology and biochemistry show that the basic requirements for life might not be as concrete as we thought."

Besides the possibility of alternative biosolvents, studies show that variations on some of the other basic tenets for life also might be able to support weird life. DNA on Earth works through the pairing of four chemical compounds called nucleotides, but experiments in synthetic biology have created structures with six or more nucleotides that can also encode genetic information and, potentially, support Darwinian evolution. Additionally, studies in chemistry show that an organism could utilize energy from alternative sources, such as through a reaction of sodium hydroxide and hydrochloric acid, meaning that such an organism could have an entirely non-carbon-based metabolism.

Researchers need to further explore variations of the requirements for life with particular emphasis on origin-of-life studies, which will help determine if life can exist without water or in environments where water is only present under extreme conditions, the report says. Most planets and moons in this solar system fall into one of these categories. Research should also focus on how organisms break down key elements, as even non-carbon-based life would need elements for energy, structure, and chemical reactions.

The report also stresses that the future search for alien life should not exclude additional research into terrestrial life. Through examination of extreme environments, such as deserts and deep under the oceans, studies have determined that life exists essentially anywhere water and a source of energy are found together on Earth. Field researchers should therefore seek out organisms with novel biochemistries and those that exist in areas where vital resources are scarce to better understand how life on Earth truly operates, the committee said. This improved understanding will contribute greatly toward seeking Earth-like life where the conditions necessary for its existence might be met, as in the case of subsurface Mars.

Space missions will need adjustment to increase the breadth of their search for life. Planned Mars missions, for example, should include instruments that detect components of light elements -- especially carbon, hydrogen, oxygen, phosphorous, and sulfur -- as well as simple organic functional groups and organic carbon. Recent evidence indicates that another moon of Saturn, Enceladus, has active water geysers, raising the prospect that habitable environments may exist there and greatly increasing the priority of additional studies of this body.

NASA sponsored the report. The National Academy of Sciences, National Academy of Engineering, Institute of Medicine, and National Research Council make up the National Academies. They are private, nonprofit institutions that provide science, technology, and health policy advice under a congressional charter. The Research Council is the principal operating agency of the National Academy of Sciences and the National Academy of Engineering. A committee roster follows.

http://www8.nationalacademies.org/onpinews...?RecordID=11919

[Guest David Guyatt]

It has struck me more than once that what Jacques Vallee said in his book, Passport to Magonia -- the inter-dimensionalality of these things is of great interest too.

Of course, we are getting on to sensitive ground here. This is only a stones throw from, say, the NASA occultist Jack Parsons and his sidekick L. Ron Hubbard and the magical summoning ceremony in the Mojave desert where they called forth the Consort of the Beast of the Apocalyse. Lots of folk, it seems, are partial to these sorts of interdimensional "happenings" and a lot of them are very powerful or well placed, too.

It would be politically incorrect of me to utter the words "neonazis" in the same breath as the above, so instead I'll just come straight out and shout it: NEONAZIS.

The pity about even shouting it, is that barely a handful of people outside of those who sit at the occult core of the fascist "NEONAZI" movement, will have the slightest interest, let alone an idea, of what I speak in this context. But the nazi "core", well, I think they know well enough what I'm getting at, as for them the occult is a living, breathing thing.

So, when we speak of "aliens" or "alien intelligences" we should consider the following:

Below is the classic picture of the so called "Grey" alien that was made famous by Whiteley Streiber in his book "Communion":

Nice looking fella, eh.

Those Brits who are old enough to remember the halcyon days of children's comics, namely the 1950's, and especially the boys own favourite the "Eagle" will recall the escapes of space hero Dan Dare and his courage in the face of the evil alien arch-enemy the "Mekon":

Evil looking swine, eh.

But all joking aside similarities can be seen. Comic writers of the day were so creative -- or maybe Streiber's classic was copied a teensy-weensy bit. Who knows.

And then again we can conjecture further by looking at occultist Aleister Crowley who liked to hype himself as the evil "Beast 666". In 1918, at a magical ceremony in a building in Central Park South, New York, Crowley claims to have opened a portal and brought into existence his new non-worldly "master" who was named Lam and whom he had sketched as a portrait from real life:

Striking similarities...

In the fraternity of the occult it is generally considered that the Crowley's operation, as briefly outlined above, opened up a time or "inter-dimensional" portal through which Lam and other intelligence could travel to this world. Or influence it anyway.

It is also believed in the same community that the 1946 so called "Babylon" rite held by Jack Parsons and L Ron Hubbard further enlarged this portal.

The almost inescapable conclusion to be drawn from the foregoing is that the spaceman alien made ever more popular over the years and decades is a myth. What we have here is an occult truth -- or, at the very least, a psychological truth that attaches itself to occultists -- not all of whom are neonazis. But those that relate to this story are. By and large anyway.