• 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!

January 7, 2018 — Col. John Alexander

What mother lode of information do you think they're sitting on?
First of all, how much do you know about the NRO? They design, build, and operate the reconnaissance satellites of the U.S. federal government, and provide satellite intelligence to several government agencies, particularly signals intelligence to the NSA, imagery intelligence to the National Geospatial-Intelligence Agency, and measurement and signature intelligence to the Defense Intelligence Agency. According to Ron Regehr (who worked on many of these systems, including the Defense Support Program (DSP) satellite network of several dozen spy satellites) every spy satellite system we have sent up since 1990 has an outward looking component. If that's the case, and we are truly dealing w/ off-planet craft, it stands to reason that the NRO has collected a substantial amount of data relating to UAP/AAO/UFOs.
 
) every spy satellite system we have sent up since 1990 has an outward looking component

I'd put money on this agency having a shipload of data.
What interests me is how high are the orbits of these sats?
Outward facing detectors in low orbit might be simply to detect other sats in high orbit. But if some of these are in very high orbit and still looking out.......

I'm reminded of S.I.D from the tv show.

http://ufoseries.wikia.com/wiki/S.I.D.
 
Last edited by a moderator:
I'd put money on this agency having a shipload of data.
What interests me is how high are the orbits of these sats?
Outward facing detectors in low orbit might be simply to detect other sats in high orbit. But if some of these are in very high orbit and still looking out.......

I'm reminded of S.I.D from the tv show.

http://ufoseries.wikia.com/wiki/S.I.D.

Almost 30 years of data... of which we'll never get a snippet. This reeks of a necessary breakaway civilization. I figure this happened in the mid -1970's before the end of the cold war. Ronald Reagan, before alzheimer's kicked in, gave us a few hints in the 1980's.

There's an obvious disconnect.
 
Your link is a dead end.

Very odd.

I'll post the contents instead

S.H.A.D.O. equipment, The UFO-SHADO War Book
S.I.D.


The Space Intruder Detector, or S.I.D., is an orbital satellite whose control computer has a sufficiently advanced artificial intelligence to communicate with the S.H.A.D.O. MoonBase in a synthesised voice. (BBC newscaster Neil Oxley provided that voice.)

latest


I figure this happened in the mid -1970's

Funnily enough UFO the series was 1970. It featured concepts like abduction that are still associated with the genre today. The plot also featured a military response to the Phenomena.
 
First of all, how much do you know about the NRO? They design, build, and operate the reconnaissance satellites of the U.S. federal government, and provide satellite intelligence to several government agencies, particularly signals intelligence to the NSA, imagery intelligence to the National Geospatial-Intelligence Agency, and measurement and signature intelligence to the Defense Intelligence Agency. According to Ron Regehr (who worked on many of these systems, including the Defense Support Program (DSP) satellite network of several dozen spy satellites) every spy satellite system we have sent up since 1990 has an outward looking component. If that's the case, and we are truly dealing w/ off-planet craft, it stands to reason that the NRO has collected a substantial amount of data relating to UAP/AAO/UFOs.
I get what you’re saying and I agree they could be sitting on a crapload of anomalous imagery.

Lets say they have clear images of blobby things coming in from outside earths orbit, landing, and leaving again.

Lets say we can even corroborate that with civilian eyewitnesses that see big eyed grey guys running around and jumping in their saucer and taking off.

That’s basically the perfect scenario right?

How is that going to play out?

Hardcore skeptics are going to say it’s misidentified something or another and people just hallucinating or whatever.

The DeLongs of the world would say they have the answer and so would the exopolitics folks.

And all we’d actually have is another mysterious video and eyewitness account.

What would we actually learn by that?
 
What would we actually learn by that?

Pure speculation on my part, but what if we were able to distinguish the between the different drive signatures of visiting craft. We could get a statistical data set from that.
If we also observed some of these craft engaging in hostile action against each other, we could make some inferences from that too.

We might also get some propulsion physics data from such observations

Observational learning - Wikipedia
 
Pure speculation on my part, but what if we were able to distinguish the between the different drive signatures of visiting craft. We could get a statistical data set from that.
If we also observed some of these craft engaging in hostile action against each other, we could make some inferences from that too.

We might also get some propulsion physics data from such observations

Observational learning - Wikipedia

My point is that the NRO isn’t set up to do that. They’re set up to do things like detect missle launches and submarine movements.

The only thing I’m aware of that would achieve these objectives is Chris’ project and Stanford’s Starlight.

I’m not saying this data wouldn’t provide value, I just don’t think it should be the focus of this field.

The best it’s going to do is cause questions to be asked.

The best that Chris’ project is going to do is cause questions to be answered. Because of triangulation, magnetic and gravitometric measurements, because it’s controlled.

And that’s where I’d put my focus.
 
This information is pedestrian and readily available on their website. Right now I'd be willing to bet that they are very focused on North Korea and any number of other hotspots right now and for good reason. This is perfectly consistent with their mission statement and with the historical mission of all surveillance agencies. As for being satellites focused outward - OK - I have no insider knowledge but at first blush it seems a bit incredible. One retired aerospace engineer does not speak for an industry or any agency any more than a retired Army colonel speaks for the entire US military. After listening to Dr.Alexander - which was supposed to be the topic on this thread and not the potential secrets of the NRO - I found that when he speaks of defense projects being driven by uninteresting administrative concerns, budgets, infighting and oversight those concerns do sound completely credible to me.

Could be he's a disinformation agent bent on disseminating bad information to .... uhhh.... podacst subscribers..who reports directly to the Smoking Man, or he might just be telling the truth as he sees it and it's too boring to be acceptable.
 
This information is pedestrian and readily available on their website. Right now I'd be willing to bet that they are very focused on North Korea and any number of other hotspots right now and for good reason. This is perfectly consistent with their mission statement and with the historical mission of all surveillance agencies. As for being satellites focused outward - OK - I have no insider knowledge but at first blush it seems a bit incredible. One retired aerospace engineer does not speak for an industry or any agency any more than a retired Army colonel speaks for the entire US military. After listening to Dr.Alexander - which was supposed to be the topic on this thread and not the potential secrets of the NRO - I found that when he speaks of defense projects being driven by uninteresting administrative concerns, budgets, infighting and oversight those concerns do sound completely credible to me.

Could be he's a disinformation agent bent on disseminating bad information to .... uhhh.... podacst subscribers..who reports directly to the Smoking Man, or he might just be telling the truth as he sees it and it's too boring to be acceptable.
I don't think he's a disinformation agent.

I think he's exactly what he appears to be: a disgruntled former employee that's pissed off his program (and employment) got cancelled. Because "see how important it is!?!?!"

Assuming we're talking about Elizondo here.

But Mr. Elizondo said the only thing that had ended was the effort’s government funding, which dried up in 2012. From then on, Mr. Elizondo said in an interview, he worked with officials from the Navy and the C.I.A. He continued to work out of his Pentagon office until this past October, when he resigned to protest what he characterized as excessive secrecy and internal opposition.

That reads a lot like sour grapes and "got retired" to me.
 
Notice how the subject was immediately changed and my question about the lack of any conversations about the role of the National Reconnaissance Office (NRO) was completely ignored. The rarely mentioned NRO is never cited in any article about this latest supposed "bombshell" story, not does Alexander ever mention this shadowy agency that is obviously sitting on the motherlode of UAP/AAO/UFO data.
According to the reporting procedure manual published by the Air Force, Instruction 10-206 directs military personnel to forward all unidentified aircraft reports to North American Aerospace Defense Command (NORAD) at Peterson Air Force Base - which is, conveniently for them, exempt from the FOIA. Here’s John Greenwald talking about this (at 25:31 - the forum softwware is deleting my timestamp, darnit):
 
Last edited:
I think he's exactly what he appears to be: a disgruntled former employee that's pissed off his program (and employment) got cancelled. Because "see how important it is!?!?!"

I think Pigfarmer was referring to Alexander (he will correct me if im wrong)

But if your reply was in regards to Elizondo that doesn't account for what the pilots saw, How do we factor their experience into the larger narrative ?.
 
But that doesn't account for what the pilots saw, How do we factor their experience into the larger narrative ?.
I'm not saying the events didn't happen. I think they probably did and sound intriguing.

But what they aren't is proof of anything except something interesting. Of which we have a mountain of those kinds of evidence already.

It's not that they have no value. It's just not what the scientific community will use as evidence of anything.

Look at the Bigfoot stuff - they have footprints and even Meldrum saying it's a bipedal hominid. And the rest of his community - of which he is a part - still shrug their shoulders and move on. Because any evidence that isn't a body or at least DNA with a good chain of evidence isn't going to be enough.

In this field, we need a body, or at least something that is replicable in the form of repeated data gathering with triangulation and secondary sensor data. With enough to form a hypothesis that is testable.

Then, maybe then we'll get somewhere.

Right now, there isn't much for science to get a toehold on.
 
Right now, there isn't much for science to get a toehold on.

I disagree, we have the sighting by multiple witness, and ships radar tracks. We have the testimony they could see and passively radar track it via the planes on-board systems. But then when an active radar lock was attempted it was jammed.

Fravor said: “It jammed the radar. You couldn’t lock it with a conventional radar. You could passively track it and see it, but if you tried to grab a lock it wouldn’t allow you to do that.

“When it takes off and goes to the side, that’s a significant amount of distance to travel in a very short period of time — we’re talking miles. That thing just goes poof and in about a second it’s off the side of the screen.

“You look at the video of it — there’s no exhaust flume, there’s no indication of how that thing is moving around. Having seen a lot of different aeroplanes, you can always at least (see) hot spots where the exhaust is coming out. I was close enough visually to go, ‘We don’t have anything like that.’

Its true there are no answers in the above, But there is plenty of data to consider. Plenty of information that can be assessed in the context of our own scientific knowledge.

And there was enough there for the pilots at least to form a hypothesis. (right or wrong)

“I honestly don’t think humans have that technology to do what that thing did. Nor could the human body withstand accelerations like that. It’s an incredible technology to be able to go up to space and back down and hang over the water.

“I know what I saw and the other three people that were there saw at the same time. I think you would be hard-pressed to question my credibility flying experience-wise. I’m totally sane, in good health, I don’t do drugs.

“We physically saw and chased it and are the only ones that have actually got close to one of these things.”

Fravor is now calling on British physicist and cosmologist Stephen Hawking to view the video and give his take on it.

He said: “They should be talking to Stephen Hawking. He’s a brilliant man — I would like to hear his thoughts on it. They said they’re talking to some other theoretical physicists like him about the possibilities.”

And in a stern warning to governments around the world he added: “We all need to take these seriously as a species, because right now we don’t know the intent of these things. If they’re like ET it’s great, if they’re like War Of The Worlds, not so much.

“You can ignore them and hope they’re just going to observe, or you can do something about it and try to understand what they’re doing and develop technology, in case they do have a bad intention.”

 
Last edited by a moderator:
I disagree, we have the sighting by multiple witness, and ships radar tracks. We have the testimony they could see and passively radar track it via the planes on-board systems. But then when an active radar lock was attempted it was jammed.

Fravor said: “It jammed the radar. You couldn’t lock it with a conventional radar. You could passively track it and see it, but if you tried to grab a lock it wouldn’t allow you to do that.

“When it takes off and goes to the side, that’s a significant amount of distance to travel in a very short period of time — we’re talking miles. That thing just goes poof and in about a second it’s off the side of the screen.

“You look at the video of it — there’s no exhaust flume, there’s no indication of how that thing is moving around. Having seen a lot of different aeroplanes, you can always at least (see) hot spots where the exhaust is coming out. I was close enough visually to go, ‘We don’t have anything like that.’

Its true there are no answers in the above, But there is plenty of data to consider. Plenty of information that can be assessed in the context of our own scientific knowledge.

And there was enough there for the pilots at least to form a hypothesis. (right or wrong)

“I honestly don’t think humans have that technology to do what that thing did. Nor could the human body withstand accelerations like that. It’s an incredible technology to be able to go up to space and back down and hang over the water.

“I know what I saw and the other three people that were there saw at the same time. I think you would be hard-pressed to question my credibility flying experience-wise. I’m totally sane, in good health, I don’t do drugs.

“We physically saw and chased it and are the only ones that have actually got close to one of these things.”

Fravor is now calling on British physicist and cosmologist Stephen Hawking to view the video and give his take on it.

He said: “They should be talking to Stephen Hawking. He’s a brilliant man — I would like to hear his thoughts on it. They said they’re talking to some other theoretical physicists like him about the possibilities.”

And in a stern warning to governments around the world he added: “We all need to take these seriously as a species, because right now we don’t know the intent of these things. If they’re like ET it’s great, if they’re like War Of The Worlds, not so much.

“You can ignore them and hope they’re just going to observe, or you can do something about it and try to understand what they’re doing and develop technology, in case they do have a bad intention.”

Hawking is going to laugh and say it's anything but what it probably is. He's been derisive of this whole field for decades.

Science is based on testing a hypothesis. How do you form a hypothesis and test it with this data?

Science didn't even accept that rocks fall from the sky until 1795 - when one fell down and provided pretty much irrefutable evidence that it didn't come from the earth.

And literal tonnes of those things fall every day which leave craters. Eyewitness accounts were laughed off or given prosaic explanations like being the result of volcanoes or mass hysteria.

In 1794, Chladni published Über den Ursprung der von Pallas gefundenen und anderer ihr ähnlicher Eisenmassen und über einige damit in Verbindung stehende Naturerscheinungen ("On the Origin of the Iron Masses Found by Pallas and Others Similar to it, and on Some Associated Natural Phenomena") in which he proposed that meteorites have an extraterrestrial origin.[16][17] This was a controversial statement at the time,[18] since meteorites were thought to be of volcanic origin. This book made Chladni one of the founders of modern meteorite research.

Chladni was initially ridiculed for his claims, but his writings sparked a curiosity that eventually led more researchers supporting his theory. In 1795, a large stony meteorite was observed during its fall to Earth at a cottage near Wold Newton in Yorkshire, England and a piece of it, known as the Wold Cottage meteorite, was given to the British chemist Edward Howard who, along with French mineralogist Jacques de Bournon, carefully analyzed its composition and concluded that an extraterrestrial origin was likely.[19] In 1803, the physicist and astronomer Jean Baptiste Biot was commissioned by the French Minister of the Interior to investigate a meteor shower over L'Aigle in northern France that had peppered the town with thousands of meteorite fragments.[20][8][9] Unlike Chladni's book and the scientific publication by Howard and de Bournon, Biot's lively report became popular and persuaded more people to take Chladni's insights seriously.[17]
Ernst Chladni - Wikipedia
 
Hawking is going to laugh and say it's anything but what it probably is. He's been derisive of this whole field for decades.

He said as he grew older he became more convinced humans were not alone.


“After a lifetime of wondering, I am helping to lead a new global effort to find out,” he said.

Professor Stephen Hawking fears aliens could 'plunder, conquer and colonise' Earth if we contact them

“We believe that life arose spontaneously on Earth. So in an infinite universe there must be other occurrences of life.

Stephen Hawking: it is time to hunt for alien civilisations

Stephen Hawking confirms this 200,000mph cigar-object in space may be alien spacecraft

Asteroid investigated by Stephen Hawking is ‘ALIEN probe with broken engines’
 
Last edited by a moderator:
Science didn't even accept that rocks fall from the sky until 1795 - when one fell down and provided pretty much irrefutable evidence that it didn't come from the earth.

And i predict the ETsH will follow in the same way and for the exact same reasons.
 
Back
Top