From The NY Times: The Pentagon's Secret UFO Program

[Hollywood Tomfortas]

If it was indeed a mylar balloon, then good, Metabunk did their job. I would hope "To the Stars Academy" would not use this image again. But to be clear, this image was not used in the NYT article nor does the Nimitz pilot describe what is seen in the image or anything like it in his interviews. The object he describe in the NYT article travelled from 80,000' to 50' in seconds. It also caused a visible disturbance in the ocean below. These are not qualities usually associated with mylar balloons.

OK, Kool, Kaktus! I had copied the “Nimitz UFO” from the metabunk headline. And of course you are right about what the pilot saw, etc. However, since I have been recently outed as a gov’t Disinformation Agent on this thread (good work, Thomas Morrison!) , let me explain a tenet of PsyOps “perception management” that is at play here.

Tom DeLonge has a long Internet history of making ludicrous claims and posting dubious and bogus photos and videos of various UFOs that are as easily debunked as this mylar balloon. Does this behavior remind you of anyone? Yes, indeed, Tom DeLonge is the Donald Trump of Disclosure.

What is Trump’s real power? To draw to himself the emotional energy of moral and intellectual superiority of those outside his tribal base. That projection of negative hateful energy down upon him is quite focused indeed, as coherent and focused as a laser beam. But such focus makes Trump into an “anchor point” of misdirection for anyone behind the scenes to operate without scrutiny.

In the case of Tom DeLonge and this whole TTS/AAS juggernaut,you want him to appear credulous, to appear like this whole thing is another tin-foil hat scam and con job. Why because that puts the negative focus on him, making him an “anchor point” to draw the attention and focus of all the scientific debunkers, let’s say Neil deGrasse Tyson, for example.

Once Tyson can see that this UFO is just a mylar balloon, he gets his ego validated, he ups his moral and intellectual superiority —- in essence you get him drunk on his own self-worth, his narcissism, if you will, and in his self-satisfaction and ego-validation, he will not see what is actually going on in front of him.

Thus you can hide things from him “in plain sight” because he has already debunked that area. That’s actually the subtle and important role that hoaxes play whether in UFOlogy, or gurus healing cancer, etc.

Hey, I’m starting to decohere and ramble, so I’ll cut off here. To summarize, as you correctly point out, the mylar balloon story has nothing to do with what the pilot saw, but that story serves to create an extra “dimension of debunkery” that is necessary for the real stuff to come out, and which will come out all the more because now it has more freedom — and more depth — to “be hidden in plain sight.”

 

[Hollywood Tomfortas]

That photo was just a stock photo used in Figthersweep article (what we would say in TV media - material and photos used just for the thematic coverage while narrator is speaking). In written media or press it can be sometimes confusing if there is no disclaimer about the source when the stock photo is used (unless it is obvious).

However, in the end decision depends upon the author or the editor. In most TV media features today, authors simply tend to put background stock recordings or photos that are describing thematic atmosphere which is a standard practice. Not a big deal. During the web conference they simply used material from the Fightersweep article which was the most prominent source at the time for the USS Nimitz incident. But for me it was clear what is happening there and would not say it was something sinister behind it. At least in his last post Mick is explaining that situation in the similar context where he is excluding sinister motive. Anyway, as I said not a big deal regarding the debate of the case itself.

Yes, I agree. But it does set up a strong gradient, a psychic semi-permeable membrane, as it were, to keep the cadre of cognitive elitists on the inside and the credulous rabble on the outside.

 

[KACTUS]

OK, Kool, Kaktus! I had copied the “Nimitz UFO” from the metabunk headline. And of course you are right about what the pilot saw, etc. However, since I have been recently outed as a gov’t Disinformation Agent on this thread (good work, Thomas Morrison!) , let me explain a tenet of PsyOps “perception management” that is at play here.

No you're not a government Disinformation Agent, because I trained all the DAs for this site and I don't recognize you.

 

[SRL+]

Tom DeLonge is the Donald Trump of Disclosure

I agree. Make the lie big enough and they’ll believe it. Not only that..., they’ll embrace it, irrespective of what it may be.

Recall when Trump stated that he could commit a murder in Times Square & his faithful followers would not care less?

 

[Randall]

That photo was just a stock photo used in Figthersweep article (what we would say in TV media - material and photos used just for the thematic coverage while narrator is speaking). In written media or press it can be sometimes confusing if there is no disclaimer about the source when the stock photo is used (unless it is obvious).

However, in the end decision depends upon the author or the editor. In most TV media features today, authors simply tend to put background stock recordings or photos that are describing thematic atmosphere which is a standard practice. Not a big deal. During the web conference they simply used material from the Fightersweep article which was the most prominent source at the time for the USS Nimitz incident. But for me it was clear what is happening there and would not say it was something sinister behind it. At least in his last post Mick is explaining that situation in the similar context where he is excluding sinister motive. Anyway, as I said not a big deal regarding the debate of the case itself.

Thanks for that clarification. So the skeptics are interpreting the thematic stock image as being promoted as an actual video frame capture from the Nimitz event. Either that or they're capitalizing on the confusion created by this sort of presentational style to leverage their position, which makes them either incompetent or deceitful. Proof it pays to reserve judgement on these things rather than jumping on either bandwagon.

 

[SRL+]

Thanks for that clarification. So the skeptics are interpreting the thematic stock image as being promoted as an actual video frame capture from the Nimitz event. Either that or they're capitalizing on the confusion created by this sort of presentational style to leverage their position, which makes them either incompetent or deceitful. Proof it pays to reserve judgement on these things rather than jumping on either bandwagon.

That analogy is worth posting @ their website, as I'm curious to what their response might be.

Besides, after diving into the middle of James Randi’s mosh pit this would be child’s play.

Do it, and I promise to buy you one share of Delonge's stock.
To The Stars Academy

 

[Hollywood Tomfortas]

Thanks for that clarification. So the skeptics are interpreting the thematic stock image as being promoted as an actual video frame capture from the Nimitz event. Either that or they're capitalizing on the confusion created by this sort of presentational style to leverage their position, which makes them either incompetent or deceitful. Proof it pays to reserve judgement on these things rather than jumping on either bandwagon.

OK, but what you and uforadio are discussing as using stock footage, etc., is a hypothetical. Tom DeLonge himself believes it is real. For example, check out his belief in the reality of the
TR-3B Triangle craft (from a month or so ago on the Joe Rogan podcast.). It’s not stock footage to Tom!
TOM DeLONGE LEAKS: Watch 'leaked' video of US secret spy craft triangle UFO TR-3B

 

[Randall]

OK, but what you and uforadio are discussing as using stock footage, etc., is a hypothetical. Tom DeLonge himself believes it is real. For example, check out his belief in the reality of the TR-3B Triangle craft (from a month or so ago on the Joe Rogan podcast.). It’s not stock footage to Tom! TOM DeLONGE LEAKS: Watch 'leaked' video of US secret spy craft triangle UFO TR-3B

OK that's all tabloid stuff. I don't know exactly what DeLonge believes or why he believes it. What I do know is that those in the spotlight aren't necessarily always the most well informed. That doesn't necessarily mean they're trying to deceive us. They might just believe it and not have all the facts. I hadn't seen that particular video, or a number of others that were linked to from your post. I know some triangles have been identified as home made drones. Others are probably GGI. Others might be real aircraft. I'm not sure what your point is. Are we just keeping score on what Delonge gets right? Maybe he could benefit from an actual serious ufologist on his team ( conspicuously missing ). Maybe someone should ask him why.

 

[uforadio]

OK, but what you and uforadio are discussing as using stock footage, etc., is a hypothetical. Tom DeLonge himself believes it is real. For example, check out his belief in the reality of the
TR-3B Triangle craft (from a month or so ago on the Joe Rogan podcast.). It’s not stock footage to Tom!
TOM DeLONGE LEAKS: Watch 'leaked' video of US secret spy craft triangle UFO TR-3B

Again, Fightersweep - or to be more precise - Paco Chierici is using that stock photo for his USS Nimitz article. Some photos in his article are signed, some or not. However, all of them are stock photos. For example, another unsigned stock photo is a photo from the Mexico 2004 FLIR UFO Incident which is also placed within the article.

Enter October 2017 and To the Stars Conference. During Mellon's speech, they used the same photo as they were referring to the most prominent reference at the time. So we could have 3 possible theories:

1.) They are using the same photo from the figthersweep article without any double checking, thinking that it could represent actual photo since Paco already used it his article.

2.) They are using the same photo also for the same stock purposes since Paco already used it so it is easier to show the same reference in that stage.

3.) They are intentionally using it with a sinister motive trying to sell it as a real deal.

Anyway, from my perspective this is not a big deal and I would exclude theory 3 (since in that case they could go with a set of false background photos and videos that would be more explicit).

From the perspective of the USS Nimitz debate, in the end this detail is just a footnote exhibition.

 

[Hollywood Tomfortas]

3.) They are intentionally using it with a sinister motive trying to sell it as a real deal.

Anyway, from my perspective this is not a big deal and I would exclude theory 3 (since in that case they could go with a set of false background photos and videos that would be more explicit).

From the perspective of the USS Nimitz debate, in the end this detail is just a footnote exhibition.

OK, I’m glad you put up #3 here because that gives me a chance to explain myself and the whole point I’m making.

I ask you, Mr. Uforadio, can you loosen the rigid constraints you have on #3. Can you allow for this sentence to be true?

They (specifically Tom DeLonge) is intentionally using it with a sincere and honest motive trying to sell it as a real deal.

I see you bending over backwards NOT to attribute sinister motives to TdL and I say: “Great! Please don’t throw your back out because there is an alternative, or at least a spectrum involving intentionality, deceit and ill will.

And that is the spectrum of Lying——Confabulating.

Let me get more philosophical in the terminology since confabulaintg in a psychiatric term.

I quote the opening of the Wikipedia entry on Princeton Professor of Philosophy Harry Frankfurt and his famous essay “On Bullshit.”
On Bullshit - Wikipedia

On Bullshit" (2005), by philosopher Harry G. Frankfurt, is an essay that presents a theory of bullshit that defines the concept and analyzes the applications of bullshit in the contexts of communication. Frankfurt determines that bullshit is speech intended to persuade (a.k.a. rhetoric), without regard for truth. The liar cares about the truth and attempts to hide it; the bullshitter doesn't care if what they say is true or false, but rather only cares whether or not their listener is persuaded.[1]

This is why I see that Donald Trump is not a Liar but a consummate Bullshitter. And now I realize I am being unfair to Tom deLonge because I sense that Tom does care about the truth so he is not lying and not bullshitting, but rather confabulating.

Thus when he puts up these obviously hoaxed or CGI images and takes them for real, he is being honest and sincere and I find no sinister motivation in him at all despite the fact that his images are false and thus deceptive.

If I may quantify my observations as a summary:
Donald Trump is 10% lying and 90% confabulating. That makes him a Bullshitter
Tom deLonge is 100% confabulating. That makes him a Confabulator

 

[marduk]

On one hand, your point is perfectly valid, but there's also a flipside.To sort this out we first have to recognize that the Government is like a corporation. It's given a sort of collective status and persona, but it's not in and of itself an entity with it's own consciousness that "knows" anything. It's a vast conglomerate of individuals in segmented departments and agencies, the majority of which have no official involvement with the subject of UFOs. Also, those who have been involved haven't necessarily been in a position to observe real time events, but have been more involved in the analysis of reports.

That's part of my point. There's not likely to be a speed dial on government phones for UFO stuff, right?

So even if some bits of a government agency saw something or had some data, it just wouldn't go anywhere.

So in this situation, the argument from authority isn't really applicable because we're not dealing with an issue of authority as much as capability and access to information. Anyone with equivalent access and capability regardless of their authority could be considered equally accountable for disclosure.

How would this agency get any information to begin with? Where's the chain of information flow? Why would they be able to put the pieces together any better than we would?

For these reasons it's entirely reasonable to believe that certain people in key positions in certain agencies have been better equipped to do real time investigation and have been provided more access to information than people who are not in those positions. The more one thinks about it the more it becomes obvious that in this context, "the Government" must know a lot more than we've been told. But that doesn't necessarily mean elected politicians know any more than the average private citizen. So there you have the two sides to the coin.

Or they could be exactly what they appear to be: as confused and in the dark as we are.

 

[uforadio]

OK, I’m glad you put up #3 here because that gives me a chance to explain myself and the whole point I’m making.

I ask you, Mr. Uforadio, can you loosen the rigid constraints you have on #3. Can you allow for this sentence to be true?

Of course, hypothetically it is possible but less likely based on the whole chronology of events. As I said, if theory 3 would be correct they would use more explicit and doctored footage. Even Mick is not buying option 3.
That stock photo in this overall story is less important. However, if you would like to bet more on an option 3, in that case we can conclude that we disagree and we can move on I don't have a problem at all with that.
Best wishes.

 

[marduk]

Your reading comprehension skills leave much to be desired: I specifically stated that gravitational field propulsion is the leading explanatory model for the performance characteristics of this class of reports, not that it's a certainty.

Here's the problem I have with gravitational propulsion systems:

Even if one were able to create a localized superdense region of mass/energy above a craft to give it lift (somewhere on these forums I calculated it would take something on the order of godzilla's mass/energy compressed to a 1cm sphere 1cm above a F22 sized craft to lift it) - the combined gravitational field of the object would still exist to earth's gravitational field.

Therefore, even though the craft would exhibit an upward lift due to gravity from the mass/energy region it created, the craft and the mass/energy field would still plummet towards the earth because nothing is holding the mass/energy field up.

It would be like trying to sail a boat by using a fan to push on the sail.

 

[marduk]

Gene you've been involved in this field for decades, yet you still seem to be completely unaware of the extreme levels of compartmentalization within our military intelligence apparatus. Mr. Elizondo has said on multiple occasions in the media recently that this problem, which he refers to as "silos and stovepipes" (i.e. "small groups of isolated personnel who don't share their finding with others" and "the vertical structure of information gathering within specific compartmentalized programs") is one of the biggest obstacles to the military's understanding of this phenomenon and the national security risk that it represents.

That's part of the problem though, right?

I mean if they're that compartmentalized (and I agree that they are), you have large information loss between compartments.

Let's look at it from a network topology perspective. You have a bunch of nodes connected by the ability to send and receive information. That's how the internet works. It's likely how your brain works.

Now imagine there's a node that receives information but never transmits it. It's dark. The response from the other nodes - mathematically - to keep the network up and running - is to route around the dark nodes.

The dark nodes stop getting information and sit there.

Corporations are the same way. Any organization I've been a part of has been the same way. It's part of the underlying mathematical structure of information flow.

So, if such a compartmentalized organization existed that had insider knowledge of what these things were, consumed information but never gave it out... soon it wouldn't get any. And it would sit there with it's proverbial thumb up it's anus, navel gazing.

It would be a dead node on the network, a bad sector on someone's hard disk, a failed CRC check. In short, it would be ignored and soon useless.

 

[marduk]

Long and short, it's highly unlikely this new program has taught us anything new about UFOs. Period.

Yes, I know about "need to know" and all that stuff. And mollifying a powerful US senator.

I think the only thing it's taught us is that someone wants to control the narrative of what is happening.

My guess is either to provide the illusion of transparency or to direct our attention away from something.

Providing the illusion of transparency makes sense from one perspective: nobody in the whole world trusts your government, least of all your citizens. Perhaps this is an attempt to endear those citizens to the military/industrial complex instead?

I mean, we saw Apple do that: you can't trust your government to protect your privacy, so we will do it in the corporate world instead.

 

[SRL+]

Briefly, Nick Redfern’s recent take on the current state of Ufological affairs.

About That U.S. Government UFO Program… | Mysterious Universe

 

[wwkirk]

From Facebook:
Bruce Maccabee
Yesterday at 12:13pm

Because of the recent revelation that the government supported research in alien technology, WE SHOULD INITIATE A Class Action Lawsuit against the Air Force and U.S.Government agencies that, for seventy years, lied about or covered up evidence of alien creatures/entities and technology with capabilities that far exceed our own.

The refusal to admit has put the American public 70 years behind where it would be in understanding these creatures if the government had admitted their existence at the outset (June, 1947) so that the study of the alien creatures and technologies would have been viewed as legitimate rather than the way it actually was viewed for many years, namely, as a subject studied by "kooks and nuts" or "crackpots."

This lawsuit would direct the government to immediately establish an "alien study agency" with the goal of understanding the relationship between "us" and "them." One activity of this agency would be to establish a data bank of sighting reports and associated government activities. The data bank thus acquired can be used for various studies of the "alien presence" to answer basic questions such as who, what, where, when, why. how, etc.

 

[marduk]

Briefly, Nick Redfern’s recent take on the current state of Ufological affairs.

About That U.S. Government UFO Program… | Mysterious Universe

Nick, if you're reading this, that article kicked ass.

 

[Gene Steinberg]

As I said. It was just an effort to mollify a U.S. Senator by throwing him a bone.

 

[KACTUS]

I think the only thing it's taught us is that someone wants to control the narrative of what is happening.

My guess is either to provide the illusion of transparency or to direct our attention away from something.

Providing the illusion of transparency makes sense from one perspective: nobody in the whole world trusts your government, least of all your citizens. Perhaps this is an attempt to endear those citizens to the military/industrial complex instead?

I mean, we saw Apple do that: you can't trust your government to protect your privacy, so we will do it in the corporate world instead.

the "government" is made up of a disparate and complex web of numerous depts, factions and interests. to assign The Government the capacity or will to propagate this elaborate shell-game to "direct our attention away from something" is unlikely. sometimes things are as they appear.