Medewerkers van het Belgische technologiebedrijf New Fusion krijgen volgende week een chip in de hand geplaatst.

Met de chip kunnen ze deuren openen, computers ontgrendelen of een visitekaartje afgeven.

“Als je met de chip een smartphone aanraakt, kun je contactloos je kaartje overhandigen aan de andere persoon,” zei woordvoerder Vincent Nys.

Dikke naald

De chip, die één centimeter groot is, wordt onderhuids ingebracht tussen duim en wijsvinger. Met een dikke naald wordt de chip in de handpalm geduwd.

Als mensen het bedrijf verlaten zal de chip worden gedeactiveerd. Wie wil kan de chip ook laten verwijderen via een kleine ingreep, maar dat is niet noodzakelijk.

De werknemers van het bedrijf worden niet verplicht om de chip te laten plaatsen.

Wantrouwig

“Vooral vrouwen staan er wantrouwig tegenover,” zei Nys. “Zij willen weten of het plaatsen van de chip pijnlijk is en voor littekens zorgt.”

“Het zijn voorlopig dus enkel mannelijke werknemers die een chip krijgen, maar misschien volgen de vrouwelijke collega’s nog,” voegde hij toe.

Het Belgische technologiebedrijf is niet het eerste dat met dit idee komt. Vorig jaar lieten in het Zweedse Stockholm medewerkers van een bedrijvencomplex al een chip plaatsen:

What Just Exploded Over Siberia And Norway? AMAZING VIDEO!! UFOlogist Stunned! Alien Craft? 12/8/2016 #1 Most Viewed UFO Youtube Channel Thirdphaseofmoon Shares Your Incredible UFO Videos To the World! Upload your UFO Video To Youtube, Then Copy Paste The Link To My Email! cousinsbrothersproductions@gmail.com Keep Your Eyes on the Skies! We are not Alone!

In special reports, this week’s files cover: Is earth at war – UFO s Suspected of Sabotage? Peru Fighter Fires on an Alien Craft and Illegal Voting

Unidentified Aerial Phenomena sightings were reported over California, Florida, Idaho, New Jersey, New York, Ohio, Oklahoma, Oregon, Pennsylvania, South Carolina, Texas, and Vermont.

Unidentified Aerial Phenomena sightings were reported over Australia, Canada, India, Italy, Jamaica, Serbia. Spain, and England and Scotland in the United Kingdom.

The Filer Research Institute feels the scientific study of UFOs is for the benefit of humankind and is an important endeavor. The US Air Force investigated UFOs publicly for more than twenty years under Project Blue Book; and I continue this advanced research. I believe the God of the universe has spread life throughout the cosmos and UFO’s are visiting us in ever-increasing numbers.

UFO STORE

Forward these files to your friends and neighbors.

George A. Filer III

New Jersey State Director

MUFON Eastern Region Director

Www.nationalUFOcenter.com. Now receiving 3 million hits a month

Special Projects

IS EARTH at War — UFOs Suspected of Sabotage?

Russian space station  cargo freighter lost on launch GCI

Five International Space Station resupply missions have been destroyed in recent weeks. At least one mission appears to have been destroyed by a UFO. In the past UFOs have been known to shoot down aircraft and possibly the space shuttle. …Astronauts aboard the International Space Station shouldn’t be unduly affected by the failure of Russia’s Progress 65 cargo mission on Dec. 1, 2016, NASA officials said.

The six astronauts living aboard the International Space Station (ISS) will be OK despite a Russian cargo ship’s failure and recent explosions of resupply missions

The uncrewed Progress 65 freighter fell back to Earth shortly after liftoff Thursday, apparently doomed by a problem with the third stage of its Soyuz rocket. The spacecraft and its 2.6 tons (2.36 metric tons) of food, equipment and other supplies burned up in the atmosphere over southern Russia, Russian space officials said. Russia’s unmanned Progress spacecraft are the workhorse delivery ships of the country’s space fleet. See how Russia’s Progress cargo vehicles work in this Space.com infographic.

“An H-II Transfer Vehicle (HTV)-6 from the Japan Aerospace Exploration Agency (JAXA) is scheduled to launch to the space station on Friday, Dec. 9,” he added, referring to another of the four robotic cargo ships that currently ferry supplies to the ISS. (The other two freighters are the Dragon and Cygnus spacecraft, which are built by the American companies SpaceX and Orbital ATK, respectively.)

“Among the U.S. supplies on board were spare parts for the station’s environmental control and life support system, research hardware, crew supplies and crew clothing, all of which are replaceable,” NASA officials wrote in an update Thursday.

The six crewmembers aboard the ISS are NASA astronauts Shane Kimbrough (the Expedition 50 commander) and Peggy Whitson; cosmonauts Oleg Novitskiy, Andrei Borisenko and Sergey Ryzhikov; and Frenchman Thomas Pesquet.

ISS crews have weathered cargo-mission failures before. A Cygnus was lost shortly after liftoff in October 2014 when its Antares rocket exploded, for example, and the Progress 59 vehicle didn’t make it to the ISS after its April 2015 launch. And a SpaceX Falcon 9 rocket broke apart less than 3 minutes after launch in June 2015, scuttling a Dragon resupply run.

Published on Space.com.

A private Orbital Sciences-built cargo launch to the International Space Station ended in fiery explosion just seconds after liftoff Tuesday night (Oct. 28).

Orbital’s unmanned Antares rocket exploded in a brilliant fireball shortly after launching from NASA’s Wallops Flight Facility in Virginia at 6:22 p.m. EDT on Oct. 28th, 2014, crashing back down to the launch pad in a flaming heap.

The Antares was carrying Orbital’s unmanned Cygnus spacecraft, which was toting 5,000 pounds (2,268 kilograms) of food, scientific experiments and other supplies on this flight — the third cargo mission to the space station under a $1.9 billion contract the company holds with NASA. You can see photos of the Antares rocket explosion here.

The Dragon spacecraft cargo run to the International Space Station blasted off from the Cape Canaveral Air Force Station in Florida on June 28th, 2015 and exploded during flight. SpaceX wanted to attempt to land the first stage of the Falcon 9 rocket on a ocean bare.

Space X CRS-7 mission ends in disaster on June 28, 2015, when the latest Dragon spacecraft cargo run to the ISS. The Dragon blasted off from Cape Canaveral Air Force Station in Florida. Following a nominal liftoff, Falcon 9 experienced an overpressure event in the upper stage liquid oxygen tank 139 seconds into flight, resulting in loss of mission.

Prior to the mishap, the first stage of the vehicle, including all nine Merlin 1D engines, operated nominally; the first stage actually continued to power through the overpressure event on the second stage for several seconds following the mishap.  In addition, the Dragon spacecraft not only survived the second stage event, but also continued to communicate until the vehicle dropped below the horizon and out of range.

SpaceX has led the investigation efforts with oversight from the FAA and participation from NASA and the U.S. Air Force. Preliminary analysis suggests the overpressure event in the upper stage liquid oxygen tank was initiated by a flawed piece of support hardware (a “strut”) inside the second stage.  Several hundred struts fly on every Falcon 9 vehicle with no previous failures. The strut that we believe failed was designed and material certified to handle 10,000 lbs of force, but failed at 2,000 lbs, a five-fold difference. Detailed close-out photos of stage construction show no visible flaws or damage of any kind.

Dramatic Video Shows Huge Scale of SpaceX Rocket Explosion

Mike Wall, Space.com Writer reports: The explosion of SpaceX’s Falcon 9 rocket this morning September 1, 2016, was caught on video, and viewing it is quite an experience. An unidentified flying object possibly two was seen moving near the rocket just prior to and during the explosion.

Loss of Falcon vehicle during propellant fills operation originated around upper-stage oxygen tank. Cause is still unknown. SpaceX founder and CEO Elon Musk said yesterday via his Twitter account, @elonmusk.

 Another report claims the two-stage Falcon 9 and its payload, a communications satellite called Amos-6, were destroyed during an engine test Thursday, which was part of the standard protocol to prepare for a planned Saturday (Sept. 3) launch from Florida’s Cape Canaveral Air Force Station.

 “The anomaly originated around the upper-stage oxygen tank and occurred during propellant loading of the vehicle,” The rocket’s upper stage exploded at 9:07 a.m. EDT (1307 GMT), setting off a dramatic, fiery cascade captured on video by U.S. Launch Report, a nonprofit that helps disabled veterans experience launches. (The explosion occurs at the 1-minute, 11-second mark in the video.)

The initial fireball quickly fills the entire left half of the video’s field of view; a few seconds later, Amos-6 falls to the ground, setting off another series of explosions. Progress spacecraft have flown most of the unmanned missions to the ISS. More than 150 flights have been launched, all except Progress M-12M, Progress M-27M and Progress MS-04/65P^[1] have reached their destinations, with no injuries or loss of life after launch;  Some ninety missions have been flow successfully to the ISS but now a series of unsuccessful missions have occurred. The failures may be caused by a series of accidents or by intervention.

On Feb. 1, 2003, space shuttle Columbia broke up as it returned to Earth, killing the seven astronauts on board. NASA suspended space shuttle flights for more than two years as it investigated the disaster.

An investigation board determined that a large piece of foam fell from the shuttle’s external tank and fatally breached the spacecraft wing. This problem with foam had been known for years.  About 82 seconds after Columbia left the ground, a piece of foam fell from a “bipod ramp” that was part of a structure that attached the external tank to the shuttle.

The piece of external tank foam from an area just in front of and under the left nose of Columbia would hit the left attachment point of the nose Bipod and was nowhere near Columbia’s left wing The impact of the foam was hidden by the left wing along with the Bipod, so you can’t see the impact, only the powdered foam after the impact. No foam or debris hit Columbia’s left wing. Especially not when Columbia was moving at supersonic speed through the very thin atmosphere near outer space.

At the time of the accident I received reports of a UFO near the Columbia. The Space Shuttle Columbia disintegrated in flames over Texas on February 1, 2003, after it was hit by a mysterious purple/green streak or object that is shown hitting the Columbia.

DID A MSTERIOUS FLASH CAUSE THE SHUTTLE DISASTER?

TEXAS — The Space Shuttle Columbia disintegrated in flames over Texas on February 1, 2003, after it was hit by a mysterious purple/green streak or object that is shown hitting the Columbia.  NASA claims a couple of pounds of foam insulation that broke off the shuttle booster tank may have damaged the left wing. It seems the light weight of the insulation would make any damage to the shuttle minimal since they are moving at the same speed in the final phase of entering space. Video that I have seen shows a powerful electrical plasma or lightning-like strike that causes significant damage to the left wing and the tail of the Shuttle.

Drawing of witness testimony

We do not know what caused the electrical plasma strike, but this has happened before on several occasions.  UFOs have been filmed launching similar electrical strikes at US missiles and destroying them. The electrical charge may be caused by unknown high level electrical phenomenon that caused an imbalance between the earth’s electrosphere and the Shuttle.

It is, also, remotely possible that terrorists have obtained the Physics International electrical beam weapons.  The Air Force reports picking up an unknown flying object moving away from the Shuttle as it disintegrated over Texas.  Six Americans and Israel’s first astronaut lost their lives.  People reported hearing “a big bang” at about 9 AM, as the Shuttle reentered the atmosphere and was operating normally at an altitude of 207,000 feet traveling at 12,500 mph. High-resolution images taken from a ground-based Air Force tracking camera in southwestern US show serious structural damage to the inboard leading edge of Columbia’s left wing, as the crippled Shuttle flew overhead about 60 seconds. before the vehicle broke up.  The images, under analysis at the Johnson Space Center in Houston, show a jagged edge on the left inboard wing structure near where the wing begins to intersect the fuselage. They also show the Shuttle’s right aft yaw thrusters firing, trying to correct the vehicle’s attitude that was being adversely affected by the left wing damage. Columbia’s fuselage and right wing appear normal. NASA is now considering the Red Sprite or Blue Jets phenomena that generally travel up from thunder clouds into space.  However, no bad weather was reported over the Western US. “In the shuttle’s final eight minutes, the morning of Feb. 1, temperatures surged in the left landing gear compartment, and the brake lines began overheating one by one. Sensors began showing overheating across other areas of the left wing and adjoining fuselage. Then Mission Control lost all contact.

 ATKINS, TEXAS — The Director of NUFORC, Peter Davenport spoke with an eyewitness to the Shuttle disaster, who reports that both he and his grandchildren had witnessed a green, self-luminous object move toward the Space Shuttle very quickly, seemingly from the southwest, as the Shuttle streaked across the Texas sky. The witness estimated that they first noticed the object an estimated two seconds after they had first witnessed the Shuttle in the sky to the northwest and just prior to the shuttle’s explosion. He was there with his grandchildren watching for Columbia’s re-entry and watched as it crossed from horizon to horizon and I can’t imagine having a better overall vantage point than the spot where we stood.  I saw…green light, explosion, sonic boom, etc.

The witness writes, “On May 23’rd, 1959 I had a very “up close and personal” encounter with two UFOs.” Which brings me to the green light and the Shuttle? We now know that pieces of tile were being ripped off Columbia over the west coast, and of course that would be most people’s explanation for the green light. I wish I could rationalize the light away with the tile theory. I’ve tried. But I can’t get my mind around this thing for several reasons. Why was it at such a great distance from Columbia? Why was it closing the gap between itself and the shuttle? What could have come off Columbia at that point that would burn such a bright, unremitting green? And most importantly, why wasn’t the green object leaving a smoke trail? My eight year old grandson said it all when he asked, “Grandpa what’s that green light following the shuttle?  thCNN and radio (700 WLW) reports that, “The US Space Command reported tracking an “object” moving alongside Columbia while the shuttle was still in space. They said it “may” have been a piece of the shuttle, but they don’t know yet. During the first few hours of the coverage of the disaster released video showed an object following the Shuttle about an estimated thousand feet behind the Shuttle that seemed to launch a bolt of lightning like plasma toward the Shuttle.

David Perlman of The San Francisco Chronicle viewed the photos later that night, and the Chronicle reported an electrified discharge seen around the track of the shuttle’s passage.  “They clearly record an electrical discharge like a lightning bolt flashing past,” said the photographer. NASA dispatched former shuttle astronaut Tammy Jernigan to acquire the camera. A Chronicle reporter was present when Jernigan arrived. “It certainly appears very anomalous,” she said. “We sure will be very interested in taking a very hard look at this.” In the critical shot, a glowing purple rope of light corkscrews down toward the plasma trail, appears to pass behind it, then cuts sharply toward it from below. As it merges with the plasma trail, the streak itself brightens for a distance, and then fades.  The pictures, taken with a Nikon-880 digital camera on a tripod, reveal what appear to be bright electrical phenomena flashing around the track of the shuttle’s passage. Thanks to: SAN FRANCISCO (Chronicle) – 02-Feb-03  Photos show odd images near shuttle.  http://www.sfgate.com/cgi-bin/article.cgi?  f=/c/a/2003/02/02/MN221641.DTL (Unable to locate this photo)

“We Have Lost Many Men and Planes Trying To

Intercept UFOs”

Timothy Good writes, “The destruction or disappearance of military aircraft during interceptions of UFOs continued apace.” As General Benjamin Chidlaw, former commanding general of Air (later Aerospace) Defense Command told Robert C. Gardener (ex USAF) in 1953: “We have stack of reports of flying saucers. We take them seriously, when you consider we have lost many men and planes trying to intercept them.” Leonard Stringfield, the former Air Force intelligence officer was told by a reliable source in the 1950s that the “Air Force was losing about a plane a day to the UFOs.” Stringfield was reliably informed. According to US Defense Department figures, from 1952 until the end of October 1956, there were 18,662 major accidents of military aircraft, broken down as follows:

                     Year Air Force – Navy Losses

1952    2,274     2,086

1953     2,075     2,325

1954    1,873     1,911

1955    1,664     1,566

1956    1,530     1,358

Of this astonishing accident total, most involved fast new jets (such as those scrambled in UFO interceptions), of which 56.2 per cent were found to be caused by pilot error; 8.1 per cent by ground-crew or other personnel failure; 23.4 per cent by failure of parts and equipment in the aircraft; 2.8 per cent by various ‘unsafe conditions’, and –9.5 per cent (1,773) were due to ‘unknown factors’. Thanks to Timothy Good’ book, “Need to Know” P.172

Editor’s Comments: When I chased a UFO we exceeded the red lined aircraft air speed by 20 knots. In the excitement of the chase it is easy to exceed aircraft capabilities and often some part of the aircraft may fail. Many stories are told of firing missiles and making direct hits on the UFOs that were unharmed only to have them return the fire and destroy the interceptor.

In October 1947, Chidlaw he became deputy commanding general of Air Materiel Command, with rank of lieutenant general, and full commander on September 1, 1949. General Chidlaw was given the task to evaluate UFO sightings and his group agreed the phenomena was real and viable and should be researched. It is likely his team attempted to develop their own flying discs using the Roswell crash debris that were stored here at Wright Field. On July 29, 1951, he received his fourth star and the command of Air Defense Command at Ent Air Force Base, Colorado. Most fighter interceptors were under his command and launched to engage the UFOs

PERU FIGHTER FIRES ON AN ALIEN CRAFT

LA JOYA AIRFORCE BASE — New information has been released by Oscar Santa Maria Huertas, a commander of the Peruvian Air Force, regarding the incident that took place at 07:15 hours on 11 April, 1980, when he was orderd to fly his aircraft – a Sukhoi SU-22, the most technologically advanced fighter at the time – to knock a UFO out of the sky. It was “a completely spherical object, its upper section resembled a cream-colored porcelain, with a round, broad, metallic-grey base, like that of an ashtray.” The anomalous flying object flew at “great speed and was 10 meters in diameter, making it a very easy target to bring down.” This was recorded due to the fact that the flying object was passing over the La Joya military base in Arequipa. Peru had acquired the most advanced military technology from the Soviet Union, and was keeping it secret. Peru thought it was about to go to war against Chile at any moment to recover lost territory.  That morning, Santa María boarded a Sukhoi SU-22 loaded with 140 rounds to fire against the strange flying object. He pursued it and fired 64 rounds, creating a huge wall of fire. He was startled to see that the object had not suffered any damage whatsoever.

 Oscar Santa María said that the effect produced by this weaponry was devastating, and there was no chance of the object emerging unscathed, but the UFO had not been damaged. It seemed to have acquired an intelligence that allowed it to move freely and escape. At some point during the pursuit, which lasted around 25 minutes, he felt the UFO somehow “knew” the maneuvers the warplane would engage in. “It was an odd sensation. When I reached a certain altitude to get it in my sights and fire, the object disrupted the operation and settled at the same altitude and right beside my plane.” Upon being asked why he had been chosen, he said “he was the best among the combat pilots” and his superior, of course, wanted the object blown out of the sky as soon as possible and efficiently. Oscar says he came within 100 meters of the object. “I didn’t notice that it was spinning. It didn’t have windows or rivets, either. What startled me most is that it had no means of propulsion like any other aircraft.” Santa María says the military radar units could pick up his jet, but not the UFO. However, ground personnel could see it from the ground, looking like a large luminous object in the sky. Nearly 460 crewmen were ordered to their stations to repel the mysterious object. Nearly thirteen hundred people were on hand, all of them watching the maneuvers between the interceptor and the UFO. A total of 1800 people at the base witnessed the incident. Lacking fuel to continue pursuit, Oscar returned to base. The department in charge of investigating the subject of UFOs in Peru, a division of the Aerospace Interest Office, classified it as case 0007 in its new stage of investigation.  NOTE: The above image is CGI. Ken Pfeifer MUFON NJ www.worldufophotos.org and thanks to http://inexplicata.blogspot.com

 Illegal Voting

Californian Richard Anderson writes — Whether Democrat, Republican, or Independent, here’s something to think about: We hear a cacophony bleating from the media and the Hillary supporters that she won the popular vote and therefore she should be president, 60,839,497 to 60,265,847.  47.8% to 47,3% with the remaining 4.9% going to the other candidates.  But here is a more in-depth analysis: Trump won the popular vote in 31 states to her 19 and DC. Trump had 62% to her 19%.  Trump led in the total popular vote for all states except California.  She won California 5,860,714 to his 3,151,821.  61.6% to 33.1% exclusive of the other candidates.  Thus California gave Hillary the popular vote for all states as claimed by the Democrats and their media supporters.

But deduct her California vote from her national vote, it leaves her with 54,978,783, and deduct Trumps California vote from his national total, it leaves him with 57,113,976, he wins in a landslide in the total for the other 49 states, 51.3% to her 48.7%. winning the rest of the country by a substantial margin.  This exemplifies the wisdom of the Electoral College, to prevent the vote of any one populous state from overriding the vote of the others. With our voter registration available when getting a driver’s license combined with undocumented immigrants allowed driver’s licenses we have no controls in place to keep non-citizens from voting.

California’s L.A. County as the repository for the most provisional ballots—40%—cast in the country. The Election Integrity Project tells Independent Journal Review that ‘voter impersonation’ is easy and happens all the time. Now, retired ICE special agent Claude Arnold has the answer to the question of whether illegal aliens vote in elections. He told Fox News that he’s worked in six states, arrested at least 1,000 illegal immigrants during his career and found that most of them had voter registration cards.

The ‘Motor Voter’ law requires that all people receiving driver’s licenses be offered voter registration cards. The District of Columbia, California, Colorado, Connecticut, Illinois, Maryland, Nevada, New Mexico, Utah, Vermont and Washington allow those who are in the U.S. illegally to apply for a licenses and register to vote. Thanks to Richard Anderson

Onderzoekers van het Center for Quantum Dynamics van de Griffith University en de Universiteit van Californië zeggen dat tijdreizen mogelijk is.

De wetenschappers noemen hun theorie de ‘Many Interacting Worlds Theory’. Die naam doet denken aan de veel-werelden-interpretatie, oftewel de theorie van de parallelle universa.

Volgens de onderzoekers zijn er vele parallelle universa waarin iedere denkbare uitkomst plaatsvindt en is er een wisselwerking tussen al deze verschillende universa.

Andere tijdlijnen

Dat betekent dat je in theorie andere versies van jezelf en tijdlijnen kunt bezoeken, waarin je bijvoorbeeld president bent of misschien zelfs een universum waarin je nooit hebt bestaan.

De theoretici zeggen dat hun ideeën niet in strijd zijn met de natuurkundige wetten en dat ze de wetten van Isaac Newton hebben verenigd met de kwantummechanica.

Wormgaten

Uit eerder onderzoek bleek dat reizen via wormgaten de praktisch meest haalbare mogelijkheid lijkt om door de tijd te reizen.

De vraag is nu alleen waarom we nog nooit iemand hebben gezien die door de tijd reist. Zijn tijdreizigers gebonden aan een bepaalde gedragscode?