"Top questions and doubts about UFO whistleblower, Luis Elizondo "

[Thomas R Morrison]

I just watched some parts of that first Linda Moulton Howe video I linked above. It's actually just the first part of several videos, which are too long and too ridiculous to watch in full, but I think I saw enough.

She was telling about some anonymous guy who sent multiple samples allegedly taken by his grandfather from a UFO crash a year after Roswell and some ridiculous letters telling about alien survivors who spoke in perfect English and explained their mission etc. She was also talking about using both electrical current and was it 7 hertz or megahertz radiation or something, didn't listen long enough to find out if she talked about terahertz radiation as well.

She gave that speech last year and mentioned how she has worked with many scientists to analyze the material, one of them being Hal Puthoff. So it seems quite evident that DeLonge is just trying to repeat stuff he has heard from Moulton Howe or Puthoff, and has probably messed up the story somewhat in a similar way as when he tried to talk about physics he obviously doesn't understand.

This whole story has hoax written all over it, and not in alien hieroglyphs.

That’s one possible theory.

On the other hand, we know that the AATIP recovered materials and that Bob Bigelow stored them in a Las Vegas facility. Unless you’re saying that Sen. Reid and Bob Bigelow are “in on the hoax” even though they’re not part of the TTSA, which would make no sense.

We also know that the AATIP conducted scientific research in partnership with Bigelow and Puthoff, and probably others in the military as well.

So it’s hard to believe that DeLonge would be talking about a chunk of rubbish sent to Linda Moulton Howe back in 1996, when he’s working with a former Pentagon program director who had access to foreign materials and their scientific analyses, etc. I’m also having a hard time imagining Tom DeLonge convincing Steve Justice, the former Lockheed Skunk Works advanced programs director, to quit his sweet job at the forefront of global innovation to perform an experiment based on some Linda Moulton Howe lectures and a chunk of worthless industrial residue. Unless you’re saying that Steve Justice gave up engineering to pursue a career in con artistry, which I think would be an indefensible allegation.

Like I’ve said I think three times now, we have insufficient information. It’s an ink blot. You want to see a hoax, so you see a hoax. I see an ink blot: it could be a hoax, or it could be a pony, or it could be an honest misunderstanding.

So I’m just gonna wait and see what happens. I don’t know why patience is so unpopular these days. Sometimes it takes time for everything to sort itself out and reveal the clear compelling truth.

 

[Carl Grove]

It would be really interesting to see a debate between actual physicists and Moulton Howe and friends. But I think the scientific community has largely come to the conclusion that it's not worth it, since those who don't understand what they are saying wouldn't change their minds anyway, and would see the debate itself as an indication that the claims themselves are worthy of such debate. Creationists are a good example of that. That nutcase Ken Ham for example has himself stated that the debate he had (and factually of course lost) with Bill Nye gave the necessary publicity for successful fundraising for their hilarious Ark theme park. So it is highly questionable whether Nye should have done that.

What this subject matter really needs is finding the kind of middle ground where one group tries to avoid believing stuff without evidence and the other group tries to avoid ridiculing those possibilities that are actually plausible, and then it could be possible and worth it to sit down together and have meaningful discussions.

The Nimitz case for example seems to be the kind where the people who have been closely involved with it and visible in the media represent that kind of middle ground, where rational discussion together could be hugely beneficial for everybody. Are there any organizations that could be capable and willing to basically inviting the relevant persons to sit around a single table and talk about it on camera for an hour or so? Persons like David Fravor, Jim Slaight, Luis Elizondo, Neil deGrasse Tyson, Seth Shostak and Michio Kaku (and preferably one of those radar operators as a special surprise, if one can make a wish). Is that too much to ask?

Think for example the idea that we might actually live just inside some simulation (run by somebody in the future or an alien for exaare out these recent UFO cases, didn't just participate in such a debate, he hosted one, and argued that we probably do live inside a simulation:
Neil deGrasse Tyson says it's 'very likely' the universe is a simulation - ExtremeTech

So, wouldn't it be well worth if for serious people like those to try to figure it out together and to show to the world how they really feel about it if they actually sit face to face with those persons who they might easily dismiss in the media?

I'm rather sceptical about the value of televised debates, which usually degenerate into futile arguments and personality politics. Persons who have all got predetermined views about topics make for good TV but the genuinely open minded tend to get sidelined in the simplistic atmosphere of a studio confrontation.
Brian Whitworth, a New Zealand computer scientist, is at the moment writing an extraordinary book showing that every finding of physical science can be reinterpreted as a simulation. Anyone who has kept an eye on topics such as time or dimensional slips, the Mandela Effect, and the now widely accepted "Glitch in the Matrix" phenomenon, will see that there is a lot of evidence already indirectly supporting the simulation or virtual reality theory.

 

[marduk]

So it is your opinion that the Anunnaki found us as Homo Erectus (Habilis) because we learned how to bonfire? Isn't that the darnedest thing?

uh, what?

 

[Realm]

On the other hand, we know that the AATIP recovered materials and that Bob Bigelow stored them in a Las Vegas facility. Unless you’re saying that Sen. Reid and Bob Bigelow are “in on the hoax” even though they’re not part of the TTSA, which would make no sense.

We also know that the AATIP conducted scientific research in partnership with Bigelow and Puthoff, and probably others in the military as well.

Has DeLonge or anyone indicated that this particular bismuth-aluminum material is in any way linked to AATIP?

So it’s hard to believe that DeLonge would be talking about a chunk of rubbish sent to Linda Moulton Howe back in 1996, when he’s working with a former Pentagon program director who had access to foreign materials and their scientific analyses, etc.

He was talking about those quite obviously fake YouTube videos as well in that Joe Rogan interview, and there's no reason to believe they are in any way connected to AATIP either. So if he swallows those hook, line and sinker, why wouldn't he do the same to whatever Moulton Howe is feeding him?

I’m also having a hard time imagining Tom DeLonge convincing Steve Justice, the former Lockheed Skunk Works advanced programs director, to quit his sweet job at the forefront of global innovation to perform an experiment based on some Linda Moulton Howe lectures and a chunk of worthless industrial residue. Unless you’re saying that Steve Justice gave up engineering to pursue a career in con artistry, which I think would be an indefensible allegation.

Has it been said somewhere that Justice is involved in experimenting with that material (like Puthoff allegedly is)? As I have said before, I don't think all those guys have to share every belief and area of interest between each other. I'm guessing they actually don't, and that will likely lead to some internal tension in the longer run, and I wouldn't be surprised if at least one of them leaves the mothership before the end of the year.

I don’t know why patience is so unpopular these days. Sometimes it takes time for everything to sort itself out and reveal the clear compelling truth.

Patience isn't always a virtue, especially if it is easily interpreted as silent support for something that shouldn't have been taken seriously in the first place. DeLonge for example might think he is open-minded and patient by taking apparently pretty much anything seriously, whereas I see that as an indicator he has issues differentiating fact from obvious fiction and hence I don't take him seriously.

 

[Realm]

I'm rather sceptical about the value of televised debates, which usually degenerate into futile arguments and personality politics. Persons who have all got predetermined views about topics make for good TV but the genuinely open minded tend to get sidelined in the simplistic atmosphere of a studio confrontation.

I think that in this case those persons that I named are actually all more open-minded than they may seem towards the subject and I don't think any one of them would be able to sideline others in a setting like that. They all have to admit the possibility of aliens, so the conversation should be more about evalutating the probabilities of that happening and trying to explain what Fravor and others saw. And I don't think any of them would have the nerve to tell Fravor that he just saw the Venus or something stupid like that. So I think in this particular case, there would be quite a good chance for an open and interesting conversation.

Brian Whitworth, a New Zealand computer scientist, is at the moment writing an extraordinary book showing that every finding of physical science can be reinterpreted as a simulation. Anyone who has kept an eye on topics such as time or dimensional slips, the Mandela Effect, and the now widely accepted "Glitch in the Matrix" phenomenon, will see that there is a lot of evidence already indirectly supporting the simulation or virtual reality theory.

That everything can be reinterpreted to support something is really the biggest problem for theories like that, and that applies to aliens as well. If we don't know what we can expect, simulation or aliens can explain anything, which basically means we can't use most observations as positive evidence and instead have to evaluate the probability of the other options that can't explain anything. If everything else fails, then the catch-all theory can be regarded as being probably the right one. When there are several such overlapping theories, we can't really do that either.

 

[Realm]

I’m also having a hard time imagining Tom DeLonge convincing Steve Justice, the former Lockheed Skunk Works advanced programs director, to quit his sweet job

Now I remember reading somewhere that he actually retired instead of just quitting his job to join TTSA. Was that so?

 

[SRL+]

So it is your opinion that the Anunnaki found us as Homo Erectus (Habilis) because we learned how to bonfire? Isn't that the darnedest thing?

Storyteller, Michael Tellinger, would like you to believe & buy his creation entitled: Slave Species of the Gods: The Secret History of The Anunnaki.

Within those sacred pages, you would discover the Anunnaki actually created humans to muck about for their gold, here on Earth.

While disparaging humans further, Tellinger suggests that upon their departure from Earth, the Anunnaki dumbed down humans by screwing around with their DNA, which may go a long way in explaining the behavior of some humans today.

Although, on a practical level the narrative sucks, you would be simply astonished by just how many starry-eyed followers Tellinger actually has.

 

[SRL+]

I did find his book compelling

Compelling, in what sense?

 

[marduk]

Now I remember reading somewhere that he actually retired instead of just quitting his job to join TTSA. Was that so?

Yup.

 

[SRL+]

Which book? Hidden Origins or one of the African Temples series?

This one ... Slave Species of the Gods: The Secret History of The Anunnaki.

 

[marduk]

Lee Ann said: ↑
So it is your opinion that the Anunnaki found us as Homo Erectus (Habilis) because we learned how to bonfire? Isn't that the darnedest thing?



Oh! My bad. I would have thought this forum understood the pre-Sumer history. You of all people!

I'm actually something of a Sumerian/Akkadian historian.

Actually wrote some papers on translating cuneiform, and somewhere there's some code running around that I was involved with on doing that with optical character recognition.

I've read the Enuma Elis in neo-Assyrian (admittedly not from the original fragmented cuneiform but the phonetic translations from the Library of Ashurbanipal). Part of my interest came from wanting to understand where civilization came from, part of it was actually a poetry class I took as a first year student (that included the Epic), part of it was the fascinating way they used math and accounting. I annoyed some of my math profs by doing some proofs using math in cuneiform (which is pretty hard since they didn't have a zero). That only was heightened when Neal Stephenson released Snow Crash.

And all of that is to say that I have no freaking idea what you're talking about, and Stitchin can't translate Sumerian full stop if you're going to go all 12th planet on me.

 

[marduk]

Anyone who has kept an eye on topics such as time or dimensional slips, the Mandela Effect, and the now widely accepted "Glitch in the Matrix" phenomenon, will see that there is a lot of evidence already indirectly supporting the simulation or virtual reality theory.

What evidence?

All evidence that's been tested so far says that reality is not in fact a simulation that I've seen.

Physicists find we’re not living in a computer simulation | Cosmos

Physicists Prove That Reality Is Not — Repeat, Not — a Computer Simulation

 

[Thomas R Morrison]

Has DeLonge or anyone indicated that this particular bismuth-aluminum material is in any way linked to AATIP?

In the Joe Rogan interview that I linked to earlier he said that it was recovered from a 1948 crash, and he said that it’s not the same material that Linda Howe has talked about. For whatever that’s worth. We’ve been over this and now we’re going in circles.

He was talking about those quite obviously fake YouTube videos as well in that Joe Rogan interview, and there's no reason to believe they are in any way connected to AATIP either. So if he swallows those hook, line and sinker, why wouldn't he do the same to whatever Moulton Howe is feeding him?

It’s one thing to be credulous, it’s another thing to be a liar. And you’re assuming a connection between LMH and Tom DeLonge which may or may not exist.

Has it been said somewhere that Justice is involved in experimenting with that material (like Puthoff allegedly is)?

The Tweet I posted earlier indicates that the experiment is a TTSA project, and Steve Justice is their chief engineer, so he must be involved.

As I have said before, I don't think all those guys have to share every belief and area of interest between each other. I'm guessing they actually don't, and that will likely lead to some internal tension in the longer run, and I wouldn't be surprised if at least one of them leaves the mothership before the end of the year.

I try to leave all of my prognosticating needs to Miss Cleo.

Patience isn't always a virtue, especially if it is easily interpreted as silent support for something that shouldn't have been taken seriously in the first place.

First of all, “silent support” is a dubious concept at best. Secondly, I don’t know or care what you believe “shouldn't have been taken seriously in the first place.” But if you’re talking about TTSA, then we disagree. A former Pentagon director charged with investigating UAPs, a top Skunk Works projects director, and a theoretical physicist focused on metric engineering, have joined together to pursue advancements in gravitational field propulsion technology. And a couple of months after founding their organization, they somehow managed to get the mainstream media to take this subject seriously for the first time in my life.

So yes I take all of this very seriously, and I don’t care if you or anyone else disapproves. I'm skeptical about the metal material itself (I'm a "show me" kinda guy), but I 100% support their research objectives.

DeLonge for example might think he is open-minded and patient by taking apparently pretty much anything seriously, whereas I see that as an indicator he has issues differentiating fact from obvious fiction and hence I don't take him seriously.

You’re awkwardly conflating credulity with patience; they're not even remotely related. Yes Tom DeLonge is credulous, and he has a lot of wild ideas. But he’s also brought together a fascinating group of minds, and apparently he was the prime mover in getting Luis Elizondo to come forward about the AATIP that we knew nothing about previously, and, they’ve got the press seriously discussing UAPs.

So Tom DeLonge's character is not a simple black-and-white issue, it’s murky and grey. DeLonge may be credulous/unscientific, but I don’t think he’s a liar – there’s vast gulf of difference between those two character traits. I could be wrong, however, so I’m going to wait for actual evidence that he’s lying about this material, before jumping to any conclusions. Maybe he got his facts mixed up, or maybe he’s told the truth to the best of his ability.

I have no idea, and neither do you. But I’m willing to admit it, and wait for more facts to emerge, before joining the crucifixion posse.

Now I remember reading somewhere that he actually retired instead of just quitting his job to join TTSA. Was that so?

There's no difference. He quit/retired from Lockheed 45 days before joined TTSA, similarly Luis Elizondo quit/retired from his job at the Pentagon a week before they launched TTSA.

 

[SRL+]

But is this nice play beheading this thread, I don't think so I'll stop.

Don't you worry, as we are all one big happy family around here.

 

[mike]

So it is your opinion that the Anunnaki found us as Homo Erectus (Habilis) because we learned how to bonfire? Isn't that the darnedest thing?

Can you quote where i said Anunnaki ?

What i said was.......

A species that creates and uses external energy sources, would naturally notice another species that does.(SETI is attempting to do just that)
Tools dont fit the bill since tool use isnt anything special.
Tool use by animals - Wikipedia

The creation and use of external energy sources sets us apart here on earth. If an ET species were visiting they also would be creating and using external energy sources to propel their vehicles.

 

[marduk]

So yes I take all of this very seriously, and I don’t care if you or anyone else disapproves. I'm skeptical about the metal material itself (I'm a "show me" kinda guy), but I 100% support their research objectives.

K. You know their mandate lists "entertainment and novelty items" co-equal with "research," right?

There's no difference. Lockheed has no mandated retirement age.

Around these parts, there's two different "retirements." One is one triggered by the employee - which typically is planned a year or more in advance. It's a happy time where the person basically checks out with a pension.

The other is when you're given one envelope that includes a severance package + pension if you go voluntarily, the other includes a smaller severance package and no pension if you won't. This is functionally equivalent to being fired.

He could be an interested guy who checked out, or he could have been someone who got fired and is now mad about it.

Time will tell.

 

[Realm]

What evidence?

All evidence that's been tested so far says that reality is not in fact a simulation that I've seen.

Physicists find we’re not living in a computer simulation | Cosmos

Physicists Prove That Reality Is Not — Repeat, Not — a Computer Simulation

Apparently they proved it's not simulated with classical computers:

Sorry, Scientists Didn't Prove We're Not Living in a Simulation

So we might be simulated by quantum computers or in a (base) universe that doesn't have similar laws of physics or something else. But as I said before, since anything can be explained by being a simulation, such theories hardly lead us anywhere.

 

[marduk]

Apparently they proved it's not simulated with classical computers:

Sorry, Scientists Didn't Prove We're Not Living in a Simulation

So we might be simulated by quantum computers or in a (base) universe that doesn't have similar laws of physics or something else. But as I said before, since anything can be explained by being a simulation, such theories hardly lead us anywhere.

Ya, that's why I said "probably."

It's nothing more than a sci-fi fantasy at this point. We could exist in some QM neo-PC video game.

We could also exist as little dolls on a playing board used by Olympian gods like in the 1981 version of "Clash of the Titans."

But, as fun as it is to think about, there's zero reason to think it's true.

 

[mike]

I think Vallee was certainly aware that an advanced technology would appear magical, indeed it was his friend Aime Michel's pet theory. But he was I think well ahead of the game, like John Keel, in sensing that many UFO related phenomena do have an other-dimensional aspect. This might mean that the entities we see in close encounter cases are (1) from other dimensions rather than other planets; (2) mental projections employed by a higher intelligence to present a plausible stimulus to human witnesses (just as we might make, say, duck models to attract real ducks); (3) genuine ET beings who have advanced mental capabilities and are capable of manipulating witness's minds directly. And I'm sure you can think of other even more exotic possibilities. Technological advance and mental evolution would obviously be correlated.

Oh he was,

Vallée proposes that there is a genuine UFO phenomenon, partly associated with a form of non-human consciousness that manipulates space and time

And that, they operate by

means of unknown, highly advanced methods.

By 1969, Vallée's conclusions had changed, and he publicly stated that the ETH was too narrow and ignored too much data. Vallée began exploring the commonalities between UFOs, cults, religious movements, demons, angels, ghosts, cryptid sightings, and psychic phenomena.

But his problems with matching the data to the phenomena can just as easily be resolved by technology that's simply beyond our understanding.

Its a favorite trope to use the iPhone taken back 200 years ago to demonstrate the unlikelihood of being able to reverse engineer advanced technology. But it can also illustrate my point. In that same scenario the technology would also be sufficiently advanced as to appear as magic (which it isn't). A variation of this scenario was explored in the TV show Catweazle

Catweazle mistakes all modern technology for powerful magic (an example of Clarke's third law), particularly "elec-trickery" (electricity) and the "telling bone" (telephone).

We dont need to invoke supernatural explanations.

Indeed such explanations are defined as simplistic and fallacious answers to questions to complex for us to answer within our own context of knowledge.

"Who made the universe ?" God did
"What causes sickness ?" Evil spirits
"Where do babies come from ?" Woman have special magic in their belly's


So lets look at his objections

1. unexplained close encounters are far more numerous than required for any physical survey of the earth;

(we haven't yet cataloged all life on earth, and we live here)

1. the humanoid body structure of the alleged "aliens" is not likely to have originated on another planet and is not biologically adapted to space travel;

(Maybe they are biological waldo's, Von Neuman probes built to operate on this planet from biological templates lifted from the target location)

1. the reported behavior in thousands of abduction reports contradicts the hypothesis of genetic or scientific experimentation on humans by an advanced race;

(Genes can also be used to store huge amounts of information. We could be a very large library/repository for information )

1. the extension of the phenomenon throughout recorded human history demonstrates that UFOs are not a contemporary phenomenon

(Also potentially true in the ET'sH scenario)

1. the apparent ability of UFOs to manipulate space and time suggests radically different and richer alternatives.

(Or sufficiently advanced ET technology to appear as such)


And that's just one example per objection, there are lots more.

 

[mike]

press a button and gravity and inertia go away

An inertial dampening field in a designed vehicle would only be useful for the internal part of the craft. The external control surfaces would naturally provide functional stability as part of the overall design.