Unacknowledged

[Larry Hancock]

Paul, actually the first documented government approach to downplay the concerns of 1952 (after several incidents over Washington DC) was an outreach to Disney studies. 

As to seeing secret technologies...in some instances yes but not the ones I address in Unidentified. For what its worth the CIA wanted the public to think the early, very high altitude balloons deployed for photo reconnaissance over Russia might be UFO's, later the same was true for the U-2 and SR-71. 

Its really important to fully understand the historical context, honestly all I can do is refer you to the book...but I can say that the degree of observed capabilities (station keeping, hovering, acceleration, maneuvers) was just as great in 1947 as in 2007 - that suggests to me that it is not secret military technology (well not American, Russian or Chinese that is). 

These days it might be harder to tell the difference but in 1947 it certainly was....if you want, drop me a note and I can refer you to a couple of contemporary incidents which demonstrate exactly how anomalous they were in terms of g forces, deceleration, acceleration and even materials science. 

 

[Joe Bauer]

19 hours ago, Douglas Caddy said:

The fact that Mr. Hellyer was Minister of Defence for 4 years many  decades ago is irrelevant.

"There is a serious possibility that we are being visited and have been visited for many years by people from outer space, from other civilizations….This should be the subject of rigorous scientific investigation and not the subject of ‘rubishing’ by tabloid newspapers. – Lord Admiral Hill-Norton, Former Chief of Defence Staff, 5 Star Admiral of the Royal Navy, Chairman of the NATO Military Committee."

Mr. Heller acquired knowledge of UFO's and the Alien Presence during his tenure as Minister of Defence many decades ago . Such knowledge is as timely today and it was then. Knowledge does not have a shelf life and then expires on such and such a date.

Doug, thank you for the post. It begs the question of credibility rating credibility when someone of Hill-Norton's station and background shares Hellyer's own views.

K. Davies. I am impressed by the high station of your friend. However, also with all due respect, I disagree that Hellyer's 4+ years as Canada's Minister Of Defence back 40 years ago deflates his credibility versus someone in this same position later on.

I would ask you to ask your high station friend if he thinks the "Shag Harbor" Nova Scotia UFO incident was nothing more than just another case of mistaken identification and exaggerated reporting?   My guess is your friend will shrug and chuckle and say the Shag Harbor story isn't even worth contemplating and commenting on.

Edited June 4, 2020 by Joe Bauer

[Cory Santos]

14 hours ago, Paul Brancato said:

Well that’s some news. The Lear family. It’s been a while, but if memory serves I was left quite puzzled by stories from that family. I may still have a book or two. I’m glad to know you have an open and inquisitive mind on the subject. I agree - the videos are showing us something, and unlike the earlier fakes they are by and large not fakes. I’ve come to believe that the lack of clear unmistakeable photos of alien craft indicates something about the technology behind them. Greer is interesting. I don’t think that one can smear him by pointing to his finances. He is in earnest. The point he makes about the peaceful intent of the visitors makes perfect sense.. if they are here, they mean no harm. He takes that to some ultimate conclusions about contact which are thought provoking, which is basically that it’s up to ordinary citizens to make contact because the military is not trustworthy, and according to Greer stand in the way of a new world. I’m only exploring this concept, don’t know first hand whether he is right. But I don’t think he is a con. Are you familiar with the testimony of Carol Rosin? She claims a close relationship with Werhner Von Braun in the last years of his life. I could not disprove her story using google. It is a pretty incredible tale. I’m not here to push it. I’d really like to know if anyone has evidence that she is a fraud. 

 

I think you should watch George Knapp's presentation on Skinwalker Ranch.  It is on youtube about two hours long.

Edited June 4, 2020 by Cory Santos

[Joe Bauer]

I recently re-viewed an interview of Travis Walton.

His story has always intrigued me.

The other witnesses ( 6 or 7!) who reported they saw the craft and Walton being hit by a bolt of electricity from it were a low wage manual labor income hardscrabble group.

None of them ever mentioned being personally close to Walton as a social friend except Mike Rogers the tree crew boss. One member of the crew actually hated Walton enough to try to fall a tree down on him.

Yet, in all the decades since the incident, not ONE of these rough edged eye witnesses ( even Walton's most hating co-worker ) has ever changed their first day testimony as to what they saw regards the craft and Walton being hit and thrown and knocked out by this blue bolt of energy.

At least one ( and probably others ) of these witnesses were offered good amounts of cash to "confess" the Walton story as they described it, was made up, false, exaggerated, etc. Almost all of these low wage manual labor eye witness men were in dire need of money most of their later lives. Yet, none of them has ever taken any nor changed their stories. For 50 years?

That totally united integrity of standing by their story is impressive imo.

Walton was asked in this interview why the Government has not and never will never acknowledge his abduction story as true.

He responded with an agreeing defense of the Government doing so.

That they must keep their knowledge of ET activity and presence from the public so our enemies cannot learn of the advanced technology we have discovered and to keep social order.

It sounded to me like Walton has been briefed and brought into this explanation, probably by the government themselves.

It's the number of eyewitnesses to this craft and it's interaction with Walton and their lifelong adherence to their original statements about it despite great temptation to offer new debunking ones that impresses me most of the story's validity.

Edited June 4, 2020 by Joe Bauer

[Ray Mitcham]

I found this series of Congressional hearings on UFOs to be very illuminating. Were all the witnesses, telling lies, imagining what they saw or just romancing? Decide for yourselves.

 

 

Edited June 4, 2020 by Ray Mitcham

[Paul Brancato]

Clearly not. I think Jim D’s skepticism might have more to do with the possible intersection with the deaths of JFK or MM, and the disinformation that is so widespread in the UFO field. The evidence for visitation is overwhelming, as is the evidence that the US military is completely aware of their presence. Of course the military has been onto this since WW2, and the secrecy around that is disturbing. 

[Larry Hancock]

Certainly I agree with Jim in his areas of skepticism, but one of the problems with this subject receiving very high level official attention has not been with the military acknowledging anomalous aerial objects or even considering them as a problem (as of this year the Navy officially takes that position for a new class of incidents in its restricted test ranges and with its supercarrier groups). 

Its that at the incidents don't pass the litmus test for official commitment at the highest levels of government....an example being the national security council and the high level intel panels that advise it.

Their decisions are quite political and they want "backing" before issuing directives.  If they cannot get a group of high level scientists to confirm absolute anomalous characteristics (with no possible out in terms of mis-identification or natural phenomena as options) or the military to give them concrete examples that the objects have taken hostile action and constitute a standing threat - well then nobody is going out on a limb and adding them to the tasking list for national security.

That means they don't get assigned to above the services for high level, long term analysis as declared, standing threats - examples of such threats historically would have been the Soviet Union and the communist block nations, in contemporary times terrorist organizations, Iran, China, Russia etc. 

And there are always plenty of politically safe, officially tasked threats to consume budgets and intel resources...ones that nobody  look foolish for supporting.

[Paul Brancato]

Another question is why the mainstream media is usually so silent on a subject that would be of enormous interest and possibly impact. Add to that the sudden flurry of coverage a few years ago showing UAP - was that the earlier Nimitz story or a new one? How did that crack the surface? 
Larry - the military clearly does threat assessment, and if you are right it downplayed the subject because it doesn’t rise to the necessary level of threat. But is that the only thing we the people care about? If it’s not a threat militarily, how about the Defense Department sending the info on to civilian authorities so they can ask other questions, perhaps try to make contact? I know you’ve done a lot of work on this through the military angle, which makes perfect sense as far is it goes, since the military is in the best position to ascertain the reality of UAP. Their sightings are the most reliable for obvious reasons. Their complacency makes no sense. Again, the silence is deafening. 

Edited June 4, 2020 by Paul Brancato

[Larry Hancock]

The Nimitz story got a lot of mainstream coverage for a few weeks, as did the Navy's official acknowledgement that it was dealing with unidentified and anomalous objects in its air space - earlier there had been considerable main stream coverage of the news that for some period of time there had been an actual - if low level - inquire into UAPs at DIA.  But these days nothing has long legs in the media - heck, see if you can find any international news or if you do if it lasts more than a couple of days.  Russia sending squadrons of fighter and fighter bombers into Libya, are you seeing much on that story?  How about the Russian and Saudi war on American oil sands producers or the huge pain in the agriculture industry over monopolistic practices in the huge consolidated Ag distributors?  If you don't see ongoing coverage of those stories don't expect the UFO's to compete...

On your other question, on at least two occasions the Air Force did try to pass the subject onto the scientific community...in 1952 and in 1967......and the response was that they wanted nothing to do with it because it is way to much of a career risk.  One very prominent atmospheric scientist took it on in the sixties and seventies and had his career so trashed he ended up committing suicide.  I wouldn't call it complacency, I would call it the harsh reality of career academic as it exists today...and its not limited to UFO's that's for sure.

 

[Paul Brancato]

So perhaps Steven Greer is on to something when he says it’s up to citizens to make contact. 

[Larry Hancock]

Not sure that contact is in the cards for a variety of reasons but as far as actual hard science scientific study and soft science indications and intentions analysis,  its pretty much going to be left to citizen researchers who have no careers at risk in the process (not all that different from JFK criminology and forensics research - not many practicing professionals line up for that either;  you can talk to them about data until they realize the context and then they either just hang up or certainly don't allow themselves to be quoted).

[James DiEugenio]

Travis Walton:  note what the outside polygraph examiner said, clearest case of lying he saw in 20 years.

https://skeptoid.com/episodes/4094

[Paul Brancato]

No doubt Jim. 

[James DiEugenio]

Seamus encounters the MJ 12 Players for the first time, trying to find out the genesis of the documents: Part 1

William calls himself a ‘Doctor’, yet he earned this after apparently doing only three years of an undergraduate degree. Using his questionable Ph.D. status, Lester charges people to do a correspondence course via his website The American Institute of Metaphysics. In fact he runs a bunch of them. Unfortunately for Willie, I caught up with him on his aptly titled Game ‘Con’ Radio site which is dedicated to a niche of gamers and the paranormal community (and likely what ever game he’s running at any particular time). In fact I suggest anyone go have a chat with him about his dubious documents. You can see what happened when I did. (Scroll up)

[James DiEugenio]

More from Seamus on the MJ 12 BS

"Nick Redfern believes MJ-12 to be a hoax, and Friedman emailed me stating that he believes the ‘new MJ-12’ documents to also be fake. But the real reason for the sombreness is that in 2009 the person who brought forth the 1992 batch of documents, Timothy S. Cooper, denounced Friedman and the Woods. Claiming that the papers he peddled were likely frauds. This came amidst mounting suspicion by Bob Hastings that Cooper and others wittingly forged them. Thus, much like Miss Havisham, it appears the groomsman stood them up, and they’re still getting over it (http://www.rense.com/general85/m12.htm)".