Hollywood Tomfortas
Paranormal Adept
Danke! As I like to say, quoting from the OSS Book of Remote Wisdom:
“Hal Puthoff is no put-on.”
-
NEW! LOWEST RATES EVER -- SUPPORT THE SHOW AND ENJOY THE VERY BEST PREMIUM PARACAST EXPERIENCE! Welcome to The Paracast+, eight years young! For a low subscription fee, you can download the ad-free version of The Paracast and the exclusive, member-only, After The Paracast bonus podcast, featuring color commentary, exclusive interviews, the continuation of interviews that began on the main episode of The Paracast. We also offer lifetime memberships! Flash! Take advantage of our lowest rates ever! Act now! It's easier than ever to susbcribe! You can sign up right here!
From The NY Times: The Pentagon's Secret UFO Program
- Thread starter IsaacKoi
- Start date
Free episodes:
Danke! As I like to say, quoting from the OSS Book of Remote Wisdom:
“Hal Puthoff is no put-on.”
More from this:
2018-02-07 - 60 Minutes with Luis Elizondo - former director of the AATIP) –
So first he cannot comment if they had any material, yet goes on explaining it was about such metamaterials? Which brings some flashbacks of that Linda Moulton Howe-Puthoff affair into my mind.
2018-02-07 - 60 Minutes with Luis Elizondo - former director of the AATIP) –
So first he cannot comment if they had any material, yet goes on explaining it was about such metamaterials? Which brings some flashbacks of that Linda Moulton Howe-Puthoff affair into my mind.
SRL+
Paranormal Adept
Slashdot Poll | How do you explain former pentagon ...
The poll was conducted before it was revealed the Gimbal UFO video is actually that of a jet aircraft heat signature, possibly effecting the poll’s outcome in a negative fashion for Mr. E.
The poll was conducted before it was revealed the Gimbal UFO video is actually that of a jet aircraft heat signature, possibly effecting the poll’s outcome in a negative fashion for Mr. E.
Last edited by a moderator:
I think it's still a bit early to call what it was, although that is certainly a plausible explanation. At the moment I would still maintain my original stance: it's an IR blob, it could be anything. Especially since the pilots talked about drones and there being many of them, and that's pretty much all the context we know so far (apart from the unconfirmed info that it happened off the coast of Florida in 2015). We don't even have any sort of "official" information whether the targets were actually identified or not. We don't even know if Elizondo knows anything else about it or just received the video alone.
As you have probably noticed, I have tried to investigate the Nimitz incident to quite minute detail, but I haven't really given much though for the video even in that case. I just don't see much value in those as long as the quality is what it is. And even though there's plenty of context in the Nimitz case, there's no guarantee that the object is the same Fravor saw. It just doesn't make or break the case.
But let's consider what it would mean if they actually have to admit it may have been just another jet or something similar (that is, if there's no other information that would make that unlikely).
If that would have happened a week ago or so, it would have been a major embarrassment for them, especially since they already made that party balloon blunder, and that clip has been given so much visibility in the media. It was also pretty stupid and a piece of bad journalism to call those temperature differences or whatever artifacts "glowing auras".
But if they have to admit it now, it would truly be a disaster, and another good example why they should have sticked to the known facts, instead of concentrating on baseless speculations. Elizondo has now explained how they are basing their spacecraft designs on the ideas they got from that Gimbal video, among others. He actually stated that Puthoff believes "Gimbal and Tic Tac craft can create their own space-time bubbles". It's of course no surprise aliens just happen to use the very ideas Puthoff has tried to sell for years... If that clip shows the tech they are after, they should then just buy a jet (although they haven't been able to collect anywhere near the kind of money one of those cost).
As they say, you only have one chance to make a first impression, and I think they have already managed to blow that more than once.
They messed it up pretty badly already in their announcement event, especially when it comes to the Nimitz case and that party balloon picture and the way they twisted the story. I mentioned earlier that they should have at least consulted Elizondo, who should have known better. But now we have heard from that recent interview how he actually doesn't seem to know much better. I mean, I shouldn't know the details better than him, I really shouldn't, but it seems to me I do. That really raises some questions on how much he and his team have actually investigated it.
Thomas R Morrison
Paranormal Adept
Yep - as I've pointed out before, FLIR footage alone is insufficient data to reach one conclusion or another. So the people who state that the Gimbal footage is proof of the jet exhaust hypothesis are just as delusional as those who say that it's proof of extraterrestrial craft. Until we have the context and all of the other supporting evidence like radar traces and eyewitness testimony etc., only a completely biased loon would say that it's settled one way or the other.
Hey S.R.I. - if you're so sure that your views on this story and Mr. Elizondo etc. are correct, then why don't you give us your real name so you can take credit down the line, and everyone can admire you for "seeing the truth" of it all before the rest of us caught up? Put your money where your mouth is, man.
Or are you worried that after the next couple of dozen AATIP videos get through the declassification process, and some of those technical reports and other supporting evidence get released as well, that everyone is going to laugh in your face for being so wrong about everything and everybody all of the time, and sounding so sure of yourself every single step of the way? Honestly I'm already laughing, after your paranoid suspicions about Dr. Robinson blew up in your face, and I can hardly wait for the rest to come to light
Han
piscator ψ
Call me Ishmael....
You will have to work out who is Ahab, and what the whale is.
Moby Dick (1956) - Coins in Movies
You will have to work out who is Ahab, and what the whale is.
Moby Dick (1956) - Coins in Movies
SRL+
Paranormal Adept
Thank you for the insight Han/Ishmael, and while speaking of insight you may find Mick West along with igoddard insightful as well.
NYT: GIMBAL Video of U.S. Navy Jet Encounter with Unknown Object
NYT: GIMBAL Video of U.S. Navy Jet Encounter with Unknown Object
Last edited by a moderator:
Randall
J. Randall Murphy
So they bring on a skeptic x-pilot who maintains that because the FLIR camera can track the object and the aircraft is in a turn, the object the camera is tracking isn't actually moving. If that's the quality of skepticism brought to bear then they're in rather serious trouble. From the pilot transcript:
"CAPSULE (ALT 4K FT AT COURSE 300) PASSED UNDER FAST EAGLE 110 (ALT 16KFT). FAST EAGLE 110 BEGAN TURN TO ACQUIRE CAPSULE. WHILE 110 WAS DESCENDING AND TURNING, CAPSULE BEGAN CLIMBING AND TURNED INSIDE OF FAST EAGLE’S TURN RADIUS. PILOT ESTIMATED THAT CAPSULE ACHIEVED 600-700 KTS."
Really? The object wasn't moving? Uh. Okay Mr. Skeptic Piltot James McGaha. And just how did you manage to pass flight school again with those critical thinking skills?
Oh yes the favorite skeptic ploy: "U in UFO means Unidentified" and therefore according to skeptics it could be anything. That's simply nonsense. And like I say, even people in the ufology community get that wrong. Here's what it really means according to official USAF investigative procedure from Project Blue Book.
"A sighting is considered unidentified when a report apparently contains all pertinent data necessary to suggest a valid hypothesis concerning the cause or explanation of the report but the description of the object or its motion cannot be correlated with any known object or phenomena."
Obviously the official definition is a far cry from saying "The object could be anything". In fact it's saying it doesn't match "any known object or phenomena". If that's the case, the only thing that is left is something alien.
So true. And of course you could also hear their carefully rehearsed chuckles under their breath to impart that air of nonsense to what they were talking about. But it wasn't quite so easy this time. Anyone with critical listening skills can pick that bias out rather quickly.
Last edited:
DROBNJAK
Paranormal Adept
All this discussion is bit silly. Elizondo clearly said that all the data was from multiple sensors: radar, FLIR and 4 trained observers. So it was cross-confirmed. For whatever reason he wasn't able to show radar data, but he had signed statements from pilots.
How can possibly somebody who wasn't at a scene of events be a better judge that people who were there?
Are we saying that second and third degrees of separation guesses are better than on-the-scene trained F-18 fighter pilots. These pilots, by the way cost more than $5M to train and had passed all manner of health, aptitude, psyho etc. tests.
If pilots and said that it wasn't airliner jet exhaust, than it wasn't. Are people here saying that pilots made a judgement error?
Last edited:
Hollywood Tomfortas
Paranormal Adept
Hold on to your Poynting Vector, Brother @Thomas R Morrison !!! I have some exciting thrill-packed breaking news for you from the metamaterial front! Please go to the 33:00 mark of this video by Grant Cameron where he describes an email from Jack Sarfatti announcing what could be called a Magical Mystery Metamaterials Tour starting its Holy Grailish or Arkish of the Covenant pilgrimage, as it were, from the Buffalo Bob Bigelow Big Top Emporium in Las Vegas to the very Blackish Hole center of the Grandmother of all Western Illuminati Conspiracy secret cabal brotherhoods in Northern California, the very Bohemian Grove!!!!
Now Thomas, you will notice that the audio is strangely garbled from the 33:35 to 33:57 interval where Grant mentions the meeting. But, nonetheless, it is clear that Jack Sarfatti indicates that this magical mystical metamaterial is the very same magical mystical metamaterial that Tom DeLonge has been bragging about.
I shall endeavor now to contact Jack Sarfatti himself and ask him about this astounding pilgrimage of the magical mystery metamaterials. Mamma Mia!! (Jack is an Italian Jew; hence my Italian exclamation. Otherwise I’d say: Heilige Scheisse!).
But wait, there’s more, Brother Thomas! Do you realize that Jack Sarfatti’s e-mail handle is “adastra”? Do you know what that means? Of course you do! “Ad astra” is Latin for “TO THE STARS!!!”
That means that Jack Sarfatti is one of the Chosen Few of TTSA! Just like you, Brother Thomas, and you’re not even Jewish!
Last edited:
Thomas R Morrison
Paranormal Adept
We know that all of those arguments are true in the Nimitz case, and I think that we have every reason to presume that they apply to the Gimbal footage as well. Mr. Elizondo, a clearly very intelligent man who successfully ran the AATIP at the Pentagon for a decade, probably released the Gimbal footage because there's additional compelling evidence that supports an anomalous finding, which we haven't seen yet.
I'd really like to hear from the pilots in the Gimbal incident, and it would be nice if the government would finally get around to releasing the radar trace evidence from cases like these - after all, we paid for it. Mask out the classified technical specs or whatever, and let's have it. And let's have a look at those three-dozen technical reports too. If all that stuff gets declassified and released, it's going to be like Christmas in Ufoville.
Remember that the video doesn't show those events and the log doesn't even mention that the video was taken (some time after those above events, most likely by one of these jets mentioned in the log next: 105/106, 204/200). Available sources don't reveal if it was tracked on radar between those events, so there's no guarantee the object on video is even the same one (although it probably is).
For me, UFO=possibly aliens, basically. That's what most of us think anyway upon hearing that word, and I'm tired of seeing all those attempts to avoid saying so.
I'm pretty sure SETI scientists would love to see solid evidence of aliens, and they also stated something along those lines there. I believe the reason they are so eager to dismiss anything UFO related is because of, let's say, complicated relationship between SETI and ufology, and the resulting implications on their funding.
Astronomer Jason Wright has recently written a couple of pieces that I believe to be quite illustrative of the feelings and issues SETI scientists are facing in relation to UFOs. I have mentioned this older one before about being misquoted by the yellow press and so on:
SETI is Not About Getting Attention | AstroWright
Now he has written another piece on Scientific American, trying to argue how SETI should be part of astrobiology efforts, and how it shouldn't be conflated to ufology:
NASA Should Start Funding SETI Again
SETI is definitely a long shot, especially with the tools we currently have, as we probably wouldn't even detect a clone of Earth if it circled the closest star. But nevertheless, it's serious science and done by serious scientists, who are quick to denounce any nonsense, frauds or pseudoscience that tries to infiltrate their field. Ufology in general is not like that, so it's easy to see why they would like to have a clean break with it. It quite obviously hurts their credibility, and they care about that. From that perspective, it's easy to understand why Shostak and others handle the situation like they do.
At the same time, it would be easier to argue investigation of UFOs should be part of SETI. After all, he just said how "intelligent, spacefaring life might spread throughout the galaxy, and therefore be far more ubiquitous than planets that have only microbes. Life might be much easier to find than the NASA strategy assumes". So what then is the minimum acceptable distance for SETI targets? Is it okay to search signs of aliens traveling between the planets of the closest couple of stars, but not to ours?
He hasn't said anything clearly about the Gimbal case. We have a video and that's it. For all that we actually know about it at the moment, it could be pretty much anything. The rest is basically just guessing. We don't even know what else Elizondo himself knows about it.
It also looks probable that they will take yet another hit on their credibility if they fail to reveal some supporting details for that case soon. Those guys at Metabunk seem to be already planning to get their findings to the media:
As I already mentioned before, calling those infrared color differences "auras" was a stupid move, whoever invented that.
If others have also wondered what sort of people are actually investing to the TTSA, here's one example:
He says he has invested $1400 so far and might invest up to $3000-5000. I wonder how much there are those who have actually invested multiple times. Listening to his seriously flawed rationalizations and how he actually believes that is a sensible investment (his $1400 is basically worth less than a dollar now), the whole thing really feels like shamelessly scamming the gullible.
He states near the end that:
One life lesson coming up...
He says he has invested $1400 so far and might invest up to $3000-5000. I wonder how much there are those who have actually invested multiple times. Listening to his seriously flawed rationalizations and how he actually believes that is a sensible investment (his $1400 is basically worth less than a dollar now), the whole thing really feels like shamelessly scamming the gullible.
He states near the end that:
One life lesson coming up...