• 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!

    Subscribe to The Paracast Newsletter!

A Troubling Observation About UFO Reality


Forums New posts
Gene Steinberg

Gene Steinberg

Forum Super Hero
Staff member
We live in a society of mass surveillance, from cameras installed in ATMs, in stores and in parking lots to rampant selfies and other efforts at capturing our activities.

You can easily install one or more web cams in your home to guard against home invaders.

As UFO researcher Kevin D. Randle states in a new post on his "Different Perspective" blog, "Big Brother is now watching us all."

But where are the images of UFOs?

We do have lots of UFO photos and videos — and almost all appear to be fake! Why aren't UFOs showing up — well somewhere?

A Different Perspective: Big Brother and UFOs

But remember that surveillance cameras are pointed straight ahead or downward. They do not show the skies, nor are they present on long stretches of highways, country roads or the woods that surround them. In other words, they are not likely to capture much or any UFO activity even when it's happening.

Smartphone owners look down at their gadgets, rather than point them to the skies. Even then, their little cameras, even when capable of high resolution photos and 4K videos, aren't apt to deliver good results at night when pointed at distant objects in the sky.
 
well i guess the thing to do would be to get big brother concerned about UFOs and then perhaps things will be different.

there may be a number of good reasons to argue against the existence of UFOs , i've never been keen on this one.
 
What I find more troubling is that Randle seems to think "UFOs" and "alien craft" are interchangeable terms.

If you're still approaching the phenomenon with nuts and bolts ETH glasses on then you should find a lot of it puzzling because it seems, at least to me, incredibly lacking as a theory.
 
There are a number of photos out there that show something that isn't immediately identifiable either way and admittedly don't prove anything and yet he's troubled by the lack of CCTV captured images ? What would he expect or rather see ? if form follows a uncertain glowing colorful blob will show up on CCTV someday that will capture the imagination of some and the contempt for others and it could be Tinkerbell for all we know but it sort of seems that days of cylindrical craft on tripods landing and being inspected by beings in long robes or silvery jumpsuits are gone so why fuss about the lack of CCTV captured "evidence"?
 
Good post Gene,
Yes harder to today to tell which is robotic devices controlled by humans and saw high speeding last night a red and green flashing UMV extremely ? or aircraft at a long distance last night tumbling action across the sky.
 
Last edited:
Two things to consider: First, the phenomenon never wanted to be openly exposed and second, it appears to be far more capable than our technology. If we were dealing with a natural phenomenon, this would be a serious issue indeed but I don't think we are...I saw that thread and noticed some good comments by Rudiak and others.
 
This discussion makes me think of two topics: Disclosure and Secret Technology. When disclosure comes up, it is always from the human viewpoint. Let's make the government tell us what they really know. It is never from the opposite viewpoint. Whoever or whatever is behind the ufo phenomena, they don't wish to reveal themselves. Until that happens, all disclosure talk is so much hot air, in my opinion.

Governments will never reveal their secret techologies. What if we have traveled off planet and have established bases on the Moon or elsewhere? Also, what if we are using something other than fossil fuels to power these secret craft? No government is willing to reveal those types of technologies to their enemies or even to their citizenry.

Those are topics that would need to be addressed. Better to keep everyone fat, happy and stupid.
 
DaveM said:
Whoever or whatever is behind the ufo phenomena, they don't wish to reveal themselves. Until that happens, all disclosure talk is so much hot air, in my opinion.
Click to expand...

Well I dunnoo...it could be they're unwilling to disclosure because, still behind the phenomenon, they can't offer much reassurance should its motives be other than benign. At some future date they may feel more confident.

Governments will never reveal their secret techologies.
Click to expand...

New secret technologies eventually become antiquated.

What if we have traveled off planet and have established bases on the Moon or elsewhere?
Click to expand...

I doubt it. That's bound to be awful expensive; the "black budget" could hardly be concealed.


Also, what if we are using something other than fossil fuels to power these secret craft? No government is willing to reveal those types of technologies to their enemies or even to their citizenry.
Click to expand...

If something other than fossil fuels was really feasible now, or for some time, why import so much from OPEC nations? Why allow fracking with its potential environmental drawbacks? Are why has the US been so involved with the Persian gulf area since 1990?
 
Ron Away said:
Puzzling is the word.I got interested in the subject because of what I saw clear as day.Be it E.T, secret terrestrial aircraft,interdimensional or whatever.None of us know. If what I saw is man made then wow,we are really,really being kept in the dark about our own technology.
Click to expand...

This exactly how I feel after my experience, what I witnessed was mind blowing but I still wouldn't rule out man made. It would mean though that there is technology on this planet this is far beyond what most people (including ufologists, actually espeacially ufologists) believe we are capable of.
 
Trajanus said:
Well I dunnoo...it could be they're unwilling to disclosure because, still behind the phenomenon, they can't offer much reassurance should its motives be other than benign. At some future date they may feel more confident.

As you said, 'I dunnoo'.

New secret technologies eventually become antiquated.

How do we know they are 'antiquated' if we don't know they exist in the first place?

I doubt it. That's bound to be awful expensive; the "black budget" could hardly be concealed.

'Black budgets' are concealed. We haven't a clue what is spent or what the budgets are being spent on.


If something other than fossil fuels was really feasible now, or for some time, why import so much from OPEC nations? Why allow fracking with its potential environmental drawbacks? Are why has the US been so involved with the Persian gulf area since 1990?
Click to expand...
$$$$. The oil companies have a vested interest in having the populace using oil and gas. That seems simple enough.
 
Ravensfee said:
What I find more troubling is that Randle seems to think "UFOs" and "alien craft" are interchangeable terms.

If you're still approaching the phenomenon with nuts and bolts ETH glasses on then you should find a lot of it puzzling because it seems, at least to me, incredibly lacking as a theory.
Click to expand...
Associating UFOs with alien visitation is technically correct. Other Unidentified Aerial Phenomena fall under the general umbrella term UAP ( Unidentified Aerial Phenomena ) developed by NARCAP which is includes UFOs but is more of a catchall term for as of yet unknown natural objects or phenomena. For a more in-depth look at this issue, you might be interested in the "What Are UFOs" link in my signature line below. There you will find an in-depth look at the word history and the reasons why the word UFO is meant to convey the idea of alien craft.
 
Last edited:
In "The UFO Experience," Hynek says that the lack of photographic and video evidence is a part of the phenomenon and not a reason for its dismissal. If UFOs are to be deemed a real phenomenon, this argument is indispensable.

If UFOs are real (I no longer think that they are), then due to the lack of photographic and video evidence they somehow know when cameras are ready, and somehow they take actions to forestall documentation. How? No idea. Speculate. I wont.

Of course, a more likely argument is that there is a lack of good photographic and video evidence because there are no UFOs. There are only stories of others having seen them. I have read many books on the subject and have always been troubled with how even the best cases leave room for plausible deniability.

Take the Malmstrom missile base case, for example. The main witness, the man who has published a book on the event, the man who has been on television and radio to talk about it, never saw the craft. He is only reporting what others on the base claimed to have seen. In the end, there is no reason to believe that this case was anything less than a psyop, and that poor Robert Sallas was a patsy who was used to disseminate disinformation. And why not? They might intentionally have leaked this information to the Soviets to stir curiosity. Maybe they wanted to find out who was looking for the information and root that person out as a spy.

I used to be impressed with the JAPAN airlines case from 1986. I'd use this case as my strongest argument against UFO debunkers and skeptics. But what have we there, in the end? One eye-witness who may or may not be embellishing the scope of the object, some radar tracking data, and John Callagan claiming that the military was interested in the sighting. This does not constitute proof. So far as evidence goes, it is interesting but certainly not enough to warrant spending shittons of taxpayer money to investigate.

The photographs and videos of all sightings I have read about are all, without exception, unimpressive. The stories are just that: stories. The radar tracking data is useless without solid photographs from multiple angles to support the assertion that the data was caused by flying saucers.
 
Last edited:
Going on the Panama Papers tax evasion schemes which we all know most likely the tip of the iceberg. Secret technology would be in the same game and keep a get out of here card if their agenda fails to keep the mass on blue screen addiction. Why would the UFO cover up be any different? Great place to hide any so called top secret gear would be the Moon if they had the knowledge and long stay.
 
DaveM said:
$$$$. The oil companies have a vested interest in having the populace using oil and gas. That seems simple enough.
Click to expand...


New technologies could be just as profitable and there are also pressing issues of energy security and the environment. I just don't believe oil company power is so great they can forestall vitally needed progress. If oil companies had really had their way, the US would've dumped Israel decades again in exchange for crude at preferential rates. If they can't even stand up to AIPAC I doubt they're as dominant as some people think.
 
Chuckleberryfinn said:
Of course, a more likely argument is that there is a lack of good photographic and video evidence because there are no UFOs.
Click to expand...

Dunno how you define "good" photographic evidence but the McMinnville pics, to cite one example, have never been debunked in the 3/4 of a century since they were taken.

Take the Malmstrom missile base case, for example. The main witness, the man who has published a book on the event, the man who has been on television and radio to talk about it, never saw the craft. He is only reporting what others on the base claimed to have seen.
Click to expand...

What else is new? Not everybody is a gifted writer capable of writing a book.

In the end, there is no reason to believe that this case was anything less than a psyop, and that poor Robert Sallas was a patsy who was used to disseminate disinformation. And why not? They might intentionally have leaked this information to the Soviets to stir curiosity. Maybe they wanted to find out who was looking for the information and root that person out as a spy.
Click to expand...

If memory serves, it happened in '67 but wasn't publicized until two decades or so later--the denouement of the USSR. And it's odd to use UFOs for a disinfo scheme of this kind--why not just say some unknown saboteur was behind it? Inasmuch as UFOs still aren't "mainstream" there would be credibility issues.
 
The McMinnville picture is fascinating but cannot function as any kind of real evidence, and maybe even that is Randall's point in his blog post. We'd need more pictures from independent witnesses for these pictures to warrant the claims that have been made about them. This pattern of consistently leaving only suspect evidence means either the UFOs somehow know when it is safe to appear and when it is not (it is a part of the phenomenon), or that the alleged pattern of the UFO experience is imaginary (there are no real UFOs).
 
Trajanus said:
Dunno how you define "good" photographic evidence but the McMinnville pics, to cite one example, have never been debunked in the 3/4 of a century since they were taken.
Click to expand...

I don't want to debate McMinnville on this thread, but, at the very least, Joel Carpenter's work and the IPACO Report has raised serious questions about them. At this point, almost 66 years after Trent took his photos we still don't know much more than we did back then.

Unless a project like UFOTOG can turn up more definitive photographic evidence (backed by other data), it is a matter of belief rather than anything else. Anything can be advanced as truth; anything can be questioned.

All I know is that without the help of various apps, my ufo pictures would be far harder to produce.
 
Back
Top