-
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
Thomas R Morrison
Paranormal Adept
Lol - no. I've been posting in this thread for weeks because this story interests me. Paranoid much?
I asked you an honest question: what do you get out of posting the most negative and cynical take possible on every ufo story that comes up here at a paranormal/ufo chat forum? I'm genuinely curious, because I can't figure it out.
Thomas R Morrison
Paranormal Adept
Why aren't you answering my question? It's not a difficult question.
Going to a ufo forum and bashing everything about ufos every day of the week, would be like going to a biology chat forum and making an endless stream of derisive posts against Darwinism featuring multiple links to creationist articles. I mean, you could do that. But who actually would, and why? Help me understand - I honestly don't get it.
But believers and disbelievers are two sides of the same coin - they start with an assumption and then go about trying to prove it. That's bad thinking, and improper methodology.
I'm agnostic about the FLIR footage because it proves nothing either way: we need more and better data.
But it's pretty obvious from the testimony of Cmdrs. Fravor and Slaight that they actually chased a physical object that dramatically outperformed their jet interceptors, and finally departed with a burst of acceleration that left their jet in the dust. That's not proof - verbal testimony can never really be proof of anything. But the only reason I can see to disbelieve them, is if you're starting with a foregone conclusion, i.e., "there are no ufos," which is neither an objective nor skeptical stance. That's the stance of an ardent disbeliever, which is just as nutty as the stance of an ardent believer. I don't think you understand that, because fanatics on both sides of the argument are incapable of being objective.
A lot of people seem to think that taking a position of denial/negativity about everything that remains unproven, is what intelligent people do. But it's not. That's just the safest position to take, because then you never have to stick your neck out about anything. So actually that's the cowardly position, not the intelligent position. Intelligent people aren't afraid to lurk in the middle until a clear picture emerges from the data. If you get the brightest minds in the aerospace industry or the theoretical physics community, alone in private, they're very intrigued with the ufo phenomenon. They just don't talk about it openly because people like you have made the entire subject toxic to their careers. That's the same effect that fundamentalist Christianity had upon the early scientists of the Age of Enlightenment, btw - that's not something to be proud of, imo.
Going to a ufo forum and bashing everything about ufos every day of the week, would be like going to a biology chat forum and making an endless stream of derisive posts against Darwinism featuring multiple links to creationist articles. I mean, you could do that. But who actually would, and why? Help me understand - I honestly don't get it.
Haha - wait a minnit. Did you just seriously claim that taking either side makes you more objective? You know that's not how it actually works, right? Skepticism means "not starting with a position but rather taking in all of the relevant data, scrutinizing it impartially, and then letting that data speak for itself."
But believers and disbelievers are two sides of the same coin - they start with an assumption and then go about trying to prove it. That's bad thinking, and improper methodology.
I'm agnostic about the FLIR footage because it proves nothing either way: we need more and better data.
But it's pretty obvious from the testimony of Cmdrs. Fravor and Slaight that they actually chased a physical object that dramatically outperformed their jet interceptors, and finally departed with a burst of acceleration that left their jet in the dust. That's not proof - verbal testimony can never really be proof of anything. But the only reason I can see to disbelieve them, is if you're starting with a foregone conclusion, i.e., "there are no ufos," which is neither an objective nor skeptical stance. That's the stance of an ardent disbeliever, which is just as nutty as the stance of an ardent believer. I don't think you understand that, because fanatics on both sides of the argument are incapable of being objective.
A lot of people seem to think that taking a position of denial/negativity about everything that remains unproven, is what intelligent people do. But it's not. That's just the safest position to take, because then you never have to stick your neck out about anything. So actually that's the cowardly position, not the intelligent position. Intelligent people aren't afraid to lurk in the middle until a clear picture emerges from the data. If you get the brightest minds in the aerospace industry or the theoretical physics community, alone in private, they're very intrigued with the ufo phenomenon. They just don't talk about it openly because people like you have made the entire subject toxic to their careers. That's the same effect that fundamentalist Christianity had upon the early scientists of the Age of Enlightenment, btw - that's not something to be proud of, imo.
Last edited:
It's not worth much, is it? Are all the members of the "Top Secret Writers" website uninformed hacks like this guy? @--Fin-- has already cited this piece of nonsense from your linked 'article', but it's worth repeating:
Short on logic and even shorter on information. Anyone who's spent a year in serious research into UFO history knows that the Blue Book project was anything but 'scientifically rigorous'. This is shabby stuff, @S.R.L.
and irrelevant.
SRL+
Paranormal Adept
I agree, as this just goes to show how little there is in respect to recent news articles of any type on the story.
If finding anything recent from any type of news source, post it.
SRL+
Paranormal Adept
I remember how you defended the Roswell slides to the end, irrespective of it's logical conclusion.
What you've been posting has generally been a waste of time. What you post from this worthless little website today is hardly a 'recent news article'. More news articles will follow when TTSA posts additional cases of anomalies encountered by military aircraft and perhaps ships, ATCs, etc. Try to sit still and exercise patience. What are you, fourteen years old?
Once the origin of the mummified being was known I didn't defend the slides as showing a Roswell-era or other extraterrestrial alien. I suggested that the mummified being shown in the slides might still represent a physical anomaly of scientific interest.
Imo you're a troll occupying yourself with continual efforts to sow a sense of futility here. If you don't like to hear that, select the ignore button.
Thomas R Morrison
Paranormal Adept
Who do you think you're kidding here? Anyone can read back through this thread and see for themselves that you've been ferociously denigrating this story and everyone involved with it since day one. If you're not making clueless and factless innuendos about some sinister conspiracy behind all of this (....a sinister plot to reveal a Pentagon program studying anomalous aerial vehicles...hmm...if that's you're definition of "sinister" then your entire worldview is upside-down). I don't think you've ever had a "good" word to say about any of this, it's all been "bad" and "ugly" - if I'm wrong, prove it: show us some links to posts where you've been favorable or even objective about this story. Go ahead, I'll wait.
You know how news works, right? They write articles when something new comes out - that's why it's called "news." But nothing new has been revealed in the last six weeks, so there's no news about it. Except a few hit pieces by Seth Shostak and his pals trying to sweep this story under the rug before their funding starts to dry up. But some people are publishing interesting editorials about this subject, like this one:
"UFOs: It’s Time to Reveal the Truth," Cheryl Costa, Syracuse New Times, 2/1/2018
And this came out a couple of weeks ago - former CIA Director John Brennan responded to a question about the Pentagon's Advanced Aerospace Threat Identification Program:
"I think over the past several decades there have been a number of phenomena that have been observed by pilots, both commercial pilots, both military pilots, that are basically unexplained. Maybe it’s the result of some type of atmospheric conditions or something else. And so I think the Pentagon rightly is trying to understand whether or not any of these phenomena have implications as far as national security is concerned. Some people refer to it as UFO, an unidentified flying object, it’s something that is observed but there is no determination about what its origin or provenance is.
During the course of my career, both in the CIA as well as the White House, I was aware that there were endeavors to try to discern what some of these phenomena are.” Me: What did you learn? “That most of them remain unexplained. But that shouldn’t mean that we don’t continue to pursue it. And try to apply the latest technologies and the latest science to understand what may be going on.
We know that a number of our adversaries continue to try to look for gaps and vulnerabilities in our national defense so anything that might take place in the air, in the atmosphere, is something that I think is rightly an area for pursuit on the part of our intelligence community and Defense Department.”
"Ex-CIA chief: Keep studying UFOs," Billy Cox, Herald Tribune, 1/22/18
There's more to come - that much is certain. Leslie Kean mentioned that we can expect another bombshell in the coming weeks, in her terrific interview with Howard Hughes on his podcast The Unexplained. I can hardly wait. This story was just the opening salvo in a long and fascinating series of revelations - I'd bet a bottle of good cognac on it.
Last edited:
SRL+
Paranormal Adept
IMHO, you're entitled to your HO.
SRL+
Paranormal Adept
That is what really sucks; you are absolutely 100% correct, as those who have been around for a while have seen this show before. Although, a potentially terrifying prospect, at least those who may have truly experienced something of high strangeness may be relieved to find out what they experienced was in fact, otherworldly. Within this thread, there are pages upon pages where I (among others) have strongly suggested why this disclosure event may not be as what it appears.
As a rule in not gambling: if Vegas gave odds on metals & material from extraterrestrial crafts being located around Las Vegas, I would wager there is none.
Thomas R Morrison
Paranormal Adept
That's a perfectly fair point (about the materials, not the conspiracy-mongering that some of you have been peddling nonstop since this story broke - I see no basis in fact or logic for any of that frivolous and deeply cynical mudslinging).
Nothing I've seen or read at this point has indicated that the AATIP has ever been in the possession of a piece of alien technology - I assume that they're simply talking about trace evidence; perhaps soil samples or residue related to sighting events. It's impossible to say, because zero details have been released about that. People around the story have leapt to totally unsubstantiated conclusions - I think that one of the writers of the story subsequently implied in an interview that some of the AATIP material was "exotic" or something, and I've heard Heather Wade making even wilder leaps, habitually proclaiming that pieces of alien craft are being stored in the Las Vegas facility. But nothing even remotely like that has been claimed by the principles in this story; Luis Elizondo, Hal Puthoff, Bob Bigelow. People are just jumping to conclusions. It's frustrating, but understandable - people tend to fill in the blanks and hear what they want to hear.
Paul Scott Anderson
Paranormal Novice
It was unfortunate that they used that image during the presentation, but it must be noted also that it has nothing to do with the Nimitz video/incident itself. Some people may get confused now, just as some are about the two different videos.
SRL+
Paranormal Adept
NY Times UFO Identified
with disclaimer
"In anticipation of people accusing me of ignoring the testimony of Navy pilot David Fravor ... This footage I examine -- the Gimbal Video -- is not related to the incident Fravor was involved in. Fravor was involved in the USS Nimitz UFO case. In contrast, the gimbal video has no supplementary data and the pilots heard in it have made no public statements. Here's a famous UFO/ET promoter explaining this difference: youtu.be/wbs788Hv-iY ... The confusion was caused by CNN, FOX, et al showing the gimbal footage as Fravor spoke, misleading countless people about the facts in these cases."
with disclaimer
"In anticipation of people accusing me of ignoring the testimony of Navy pilot David Fravor ... This footage I examine -- the Gimbal Video -- is not related to the incident Fravor was involved in. Fravor was involved in the USS Nimitz UFO case. In contrast, the gimbal video has no supplementary data and the pilots heard in it have made no public statements. Here's a famous UFO/ET promoter explaining this difference: youtu.be/wbs788Hv-iY ... The confusion was caused by CNN, FOX, et al showing the gimbal footage as Fravor spoke, misleading countless people about the facts in these cases."
Last edited by a moderator:
Wow, so this is where it has come to, now you became the target of such personal attacks just for providing recent articles!?
As you already mentioned, those articles just show what the situation is. For the most part, the media isn't that interested anymore, and as I also pointed out before, these show how the credibility problems affect the news, and that is relevant. Right or wrong, like it or not, credibility matters, it affects media visibility, which in turn can be decisive for whether people like Fravor and Slaight share their stories.
There's no question that AATIP funding and how it was arranged was shady. There's no denying a subcontractor of AATIP and a member of TTSA has a history of being part of another project that actually wasted some $20 million of taxpayer's money. There's no question members of TTSA have promoted hoaxes and pseudoscience. Anyone who has actually read the TTSA Offering Circular should have noticed quite a lot of red flags. It's more than likely many TTSA investors don't really understand what happens to their money. There are a whole lot of justified concerns, and those need to be discussed publicly.
At the same time, we have hardly seen any actual results from that AATIP investigation. We have seen one solid case, but most of it was actually published years ago. We just got the confirmation that the earlier leaks were in fact accurate, and those pilots have now told their stories in the media. But even that hasn't really come from the AATIP and we haven't seen any official documents. We have seen talk about chain of custody, but that's it, no documents.
So why should it surprise anyone if there are articles that concentrate on the financials and the credibility of individuals that are involved, instead of actual results that we don't actually have? If they got results, but those are kept secret, isn't it still arguably waste of money for those who actually paid that, if they don't receive the results?
Those articles indicate how others see the situation, deal with it. That's where we are at the moment.
It's no surprise these personal attacks are once again launched by the same people who have e.g. defended old scams that have been already exposed, regardless of what the actual evidence is and what even common sense should tell. It seems some of us are interested to find out what the reality of matters is, others not so much.
Last edited: