The purpose of this blog is the creation of an open, international, independent and free forum, where every UFO-researcher can publish the results of his/her research. The languagues, used for this blog, are Dutch, English and French.You can find the articles of a collegue by selecting his category. Each author stays resposable for the continue of his articles. As blogmaster I have the right to refuse an addition or an article, when it attacks other collegues or UFO-groupes.
Druk op onderstaande knop om te reageren in mijn forum
Zoeken in blog
Deze blog is opgedragen aan mijn overleden echtgenote Lucienne.
In 2012 verloor ze haar moedige strijd tegen kanker!
In 2011 startte ik deze blog, omdat ik niet mocht stoppen met mijn UFO-onderzoek.
BEDANKT!!!
Een interessant adres?
UFO'S of UAP'S, ASTRONOMIE, RUIMTEVAART, ARCHEOLOGIE, OUDHEIDKUNDE, SF-SNUFJES EN ANDERE ESOTERISCHE WETENSCHAPPEN - DE ALLERLAATSTE NIEUWTJES
UFO's of UAP'S in België en de rest van de wereld In België had je vooral BUFON of het Belgisch UFO-Netwerk, dat zich met UFO's bezighoudt. BEZOEK DUS ZEKER VOOR ALLE OBJECTIEVE INFORMATIE , enkel nog beschikbaar via Facebook en deze blog.
Verder heb je ook het Belgisch-Ufo-meldpunt en Caelestia, die prachtig, doch ZEER kritisch werk leveren, ja soms zelfs héél sceptisch...
Voor Nederland kan je de mooie site www.ufowijzer.nl bezoeken van Paul Harmans. Een mooie site met veel informatie en artikels.
MUFON of het Mutual UFO Network Inc is een Amerikaanse UFO-vereniging met afdelingen in alle USA-staten en diverse landen.
MUFON's mission is the analytical and scientific investigation of the UFO- Phenomenon for the benefit of humanity...
Je kan ook hun site bekijken onder www.mufon.com.
Ze geven een maandelijks tijdschrift uit, namelijk The MUFON UFO-Journal.
Since 02/01/2020 is Pieter ex-president (=voorzitter) of BUFON, but also ex-National Director MUFON / Flanders and the Netherlands. We work together with the French MUFON Reseau MUFON/EUROP.
ER IS EEN NIEUWE GROEPERING DIE ZICH BUFON NOEMT, MAAR DIE HEBBEN NIETS MET ONZE GROEP TE MAKEN. DEZE COLLEGA'S GEBRUIKEN DE NAAM BUFON VOOR HUN SITE... Ik wens hen veel succes met de verdere uitbouw van hun groep. Zij kunnen de naam BUFON wel geregistreerd hebben, maar het rijke verleden van BUFON kunnen ze niet wegnemen...
30-07-2024
SCIENTISTS PROPOSE CLEVER NEW STRATEGY FOR SPOTTING ALIEN WARP DRIVES THAT MAY BE LURKING IN THE COSMOS
(Pixabay)
SCIENTISTS PROPOSE CLEVER NEW STRATEGY FOR SPOTTING ALIEN WARP DRIVES THAT MAY BE LURKING IN THE COSMOS
Warp drives, hypothetical propulsion systems that move spacecraft by compressing or “warping” spacetime around them rather than producing thrust like conventional engines, have long been the subject of ongoing research in physics. Although the concept has its roots in science fiction, many researchers over the last several decades have contributed to a growing realization that such technologies could actually work, at least in theory.
Now, a new study takes a novel approach to the conceptual study of warp drives: what might happen if such a futuristic propulsion system broke down? More specifically, the team involved with the study aimed to simulate key signatures—gravitational waves in this case—that would result from what they call warp drive “containment failure.”
WARP DRIVES IN SCIENCE FICTION
Although the warp drive concept was arguably made famous by its appearances in Star Trek, the idea has its origins much earlier. One of the earliest known fiction works to feature warp drive propulsion was a 1931 novel by John W. Campbell, Islands in Space. However, the term “space-warp drive” would not appear until almost two decades later in Fredrick Brown’s 1949 story “Gateway to Darkness.” Decades after that, the idea would also become a mainstay of interstellar transportation in the fictional universes of Star Trek,Star Wars, and other science fiction franchises.
Hypothetically, warp drive propulsion could actually exist, although bringing the technology to fruition would first require overcoming hurdles that include finding exotic sources of energy to power it, as well as relativistic issues that arise from implementing travel under such conditions.
According to Dr. Katy Clough of Queen Mary University of London, the lead author of the recent study, warp drives still look good on paper despite such problems.
“Even though warp drives are purely theoretical, they have a well-defined description in Einstein’s theory of General Relativity,” Clough said in a recent statement, “and so numerical simulations allow us to explore the impact they might have on spacetime in the form of gravitational waves.”
Through collaboration with gravitational physicists at Queen Mary University of London, the University of Potsdam, the Max Planck Institute (MPI) for Gravitational Physics in Potsdam, and Cardiff University, the international team used numerical simulations to examine the consequences of a warp drive breakdown.
Specifically, the team sought to explore the generation of gravitational waves such a “containment failure” would produce and whether signatures from such an event might be registered by Earth-based gravitational wave detectors.
Dr. Sebastian Khan of Cardiff University’s School of Physics and Astronomy and one of the paper’s co-authors, said it was “only natural that we carry on the tradition of warp drive research in the era of gravitational wave astronomy,” noting the early work in 1994 by Miguel Alcubierre, who is credited with constructing the first mathematical solution for warp drive physics while working on his Ph.D. at Cardiff University, after which he also worked at the MPI in Potsdam.
WARP DRIVE COLLAPSE
According to the team, when a warp drive collapses, it should produce gravitational waves, a form of energy-carrying wave generated under conditions where large amounts of mass are accelerated or disturbed, normally associated with celestial events.
On Earth, physicists have been studying gravitational waves since the first one was officially detected in 2015. Current research generally focuses on targets that include mergers between neutron stars, supermassive black holes, and other cosmic phenomena. According to the research team in their new paper, the breakdown of a warp drive would produce a noticeably different signature from these celestial sources of gravitational waves, resulting in a high-frequency burst.
Unfortunately, this quick gravitational burst would not register on detectors currently in use. However, this raises the intriguing question of whether warp drive transportation might produce perturbations in spacetime that might generate detectable signatures fairly often, at least if it were already in use by any spacefaring civilizations traversing the cosmos.
While no detectors capable of spotting these specific signatures presently exist, the technology required to build them does. This means that scientists might potentially be able to detect warp drives in use by alien civilizations, even if we are still a long way from harnessing the technology ourselves.
Dr. Khan notes that while the team’s study paves the way toward the detection of such hypothetical signals, it does not offer guidance on how prospective warp drive detectors might be built.
The researchers also explored the energetic aspects of hypothetical warp drive failure, revealing that a wave of negative energy matter would be released, after which alternating positive and negative waves would follow. The resulting net energy increase, the team says, might also produce a detectable signature.
“For me, the most important aspect of the study is the novelty of accurately modeling the dynamics of negative energy spacetimes,” Dietrich said, adding that the prospect of detecting signatures such technologies would produce might have other real-world applications.
Apart from the detection of advanced alien propulsion systems, Dietrich says the team’s findings could at least “help us better understand the evolution and origin of our universe, or the avoidance of singularities at the center of black holes.”
However, the team admits that detecting gravitational wave signatures from alien warp drives, while a far-fetched possibility, is nonetheless worth investigating.
“Even though we are skeptical about the likelihood of seeing anything, I do think it is sufficiently interesting to be worth looking at,” Dr. Clough said in a statement.
The team’s new paper, “What no one has seen before: gravitational waveforms from warp drive collapse,” appeared in The Open Journal of Astrophysics on July 25, 2024, and can be read in its entirety at the arxiv.org website.
Footage went viral Monday of an alleged UFO flying through the skies over Ibiza.
Video shared on Twitter shows a group of people sitting on what appears to be a cliffside during a gorgeous sunset on the Mediterranean island off the coast ofSpain. A woman and whoever is filming then start running and pointing at the skies as a blurry white object flies over them.
The thing appears to hold still for a moment as it comes into focus … except, what you’re looking at isn’t a UFO. It’s the moon, shining brightly over the ocean. Things seem silly for a second. Then the reflection under the moon zooms off at speeds unknown in any type of human technologies.
I’ve seen my fair share of UFO videos in my life, but this one actually kind of freaked me out.
It’s the type of click-baity stuff they show at the start of a found footage horror film. A woman appears to yell “Look! Look! Look!” while pointing at something in the skies. The group gasps in unison as the thing zooms off into the atmosphere. The clip has everything in the horror story recipe book.
So this is either one of the best staged UFO encounters ever … or its real.
Some view Carl Jung as a UFO debunker, others as a UFO believer, but the truth is he was somewhere in the middle. Either way, it is certain that Jung was an avid UFO researcher and fascinated with the topic. He wrote a book about the psychological symbolism and the role the UFO mythos plays in the unconscious mind.Moreover, on several occasions Jung complained that his studies would have been much easier if the UFO phenomenon was not real.
Jung the Psychologist
Jung was born in Switzerland in 1875. His father was a pastor in the Swiss Reformed Protestant Church, and his mother was from a wealthy Swiss family. He was the Jungs’ fourth child, but was the only child who survived into his childhood. As such, he grew up as an only child. Later, he wrote that he remembered enjoying his solitude.
His first experience with neurosis was at the age of twelve when a fellow student shoved him, causing him to fall and hit his head on the ground very hard. He remembered associating this experience with schoolwork, and whenever he had to go to school or do schoolwork he would faint. Overhearing his parents’ concern that this condition would cause him to be unable to support himself as an adult, Jung fought to overcome the problem and eventually returned to academics.
Although Jung had a profound interest in spirituality, his experiences triggered an interest in psychology and he decided to pursue a career in medicine. It wasn’t long before he realized that studies in psychology would allow him to combine his interests in medicine and spirituality, and in 1902, he completed his doctoral dissertation, which was titled “On the Psychology and Pathology of So-Called Occult Phenomena.” He graduated with a medical degree from the University of Basel.
After graduating, Jung went to work with psychiatric patients at the University of Zurich asylum. He wrote a paper on word association that he sent to Sigmund Freud. Freud was impressed with Jung’s work, and they quickly became very close. Freud considered Jung his successor. However, after several years, Jung began to develop his own ideas beyond the work of Freud, and due to their disagreements, the relationship turned adversarial.
Freud’s work with the ego and unconscious served as a foundation for Jung’s work. They both felt that disconnects between the conscious and unconscious minds caused neurosis in people. They also both relied on dream interpretation to explore a person’s unconscious mind as a method for subsequently resolving neurosis. In fact, one story holds that Jung and Freud interpreted each other’s dreams and both completely disagreed with the other’s analysis, thus hastening the dissolution of their friendship.
A major area of disagreement between the two was that Jung did not believe a person’s unconscious was driven solely by sexual desires, as Freud did. Jung believed other strong emotions such as fear and aspiration were just as influential. He also conceived of a deeper level of the unconscious called the collective unconscious, which he believed is a part of our unconscious mind that holds ideas and concepts shared by all humankind. He believed these base ideas are then shaped by our cultural perceptions and personal experience. For example, we all have ideas around the notions of mothers, fathers, wise elders, etc. Jung called these shared notions archetypes. Jung felt that these archetypes not only would manifest in dreams, but could be seen in people’s creative works and behavior, including art, religion, and mythology.
Jung’s contributions to psychology are numerous. Even today his ideas of extraversion and introversion are a mainstay in personality psychology. He also came up with the idea of psychological complexes and synchronicities. All of these ideas and terms are commonly used in everyday conversation today, and all were made popular by Jung.
Jung and Alchemy
It is the idea of the archetype that brought Jung to have a particular interest in UFOs. When Jung interpreted psychological meaning he would search for archetypal figures. As mentioned earlier, such figures could be a mother or father.But, in a mythological story, the archetype may be the hero, a dragon, or even a planetary entity such as the sun. However, Jung also had an interested in alchemy.
Alchemy is typically connected to legends of ancient mystics attempting to unravel the secret of turning lead into gold. The work of alchemists is credited with the development of modern chemistry. However, another side of alchemy is spiritual in nature, relating to personal transformation. Jung had a passion for alchemy in this sense, and felt that the metal lead was a metaphor for an impure soul, whereas gold was a metaphor for a perfected soul. Jung’s interest in alchemy was thus as a method of purifying the soul.
Jung wrote a couple of books focused on interpreting alchemical symbolism and processes as different stages of personal growth that mirrored his ideas. He felt these symbols were archetypes that were unconsciously manifesting in the work of alchemists. Although he acknowledged the physical goals of alchemy (an attempt to transmute lead into gold), Jung did not give it much attention in his writing and focused on the non-physical aspects that related to his psychological theories. This is very similar to the way he approached the topic of UFOs.
Jung and UFOs
In 1951, Jung wrote to a friend in the United States: “I am puzzled to death about the phenomena, because I haven’t been able yet to make out with sufficient certainty whether the whole thing is a rumour with concomitant singular and mass hallucination, or a downright fact.”
Although Jung showed an interest in the mystery of the physical reality of the UFO phenomenon, professionally he stated, “As a psychologist, I am not qualified to contribute anything useful to the question of the physical reality of Ufos.” However, Jung could contribute by analyzing the unmistakable psychological side to the UFO phenomenon. In 1958, several of Jung’s papers regarding the psychology of UFOs were published in a book. It was originally published in German, but in 1959 it was translated to English under the title, Flying Saucers: A Modern Myth of Things Seen in the Skies.
In the book, Jung argued that although there may be a physical reality to UFOs, there is certainly a portion of the phenomenon that is fantasy. He examined the difficulty many have in accepting fantastical stories of UFOs, even when they come from pilots, and points out, “What is worse, most of the stories come from America, the land of superlatives and of science fiction.”
For the sake of argument, and to examine the psychological aspects of the phenomenon, Jung presumed that UFOs are fantasy. This is an important aspect that many critics overlook when they characterize Jung as dismissive of the phenomenon altogether. UFO researchers also tend not to appreciate the portions of Jung’s book in which he examined the UFO phenomenon in regards to archetypal imagery and alchemic symbolism. Jung himself assures his readers that although his work may appear to be “unbridled fantasy” to those unfamiliar with psychology, it is actually based on “thorough research into the history of symbols.”
In his book, Jung observed that most UFO sightings describe the objects as disc shaped, which is a symbol that is often seen in alchemy and existed in the mythology of other cultures. For example, the Hindu and Buddhist symbol of the mandala is a circular disc-shaped symbol. Jung believed that the mandala is a protective sphere, which is elicited in the unconscious in times of emotional tension. Jung noted that, around the time of many of the UFO sightings, the world was under a collective stress due to “Russian policies and their still unpredictable consequences.” In short, he felt that perhaps UFOs were appearing in visions at the time because of the world’s Cold War jitters, and that the UFOs were a manifestation of a need for protection and salvation.
Jung’s book also provided detail of the analysis of particular sightings and art. One of the significant contributions to ufology made by the book is a focus on two historical broadsheets, a type of ancient newspaper, that recorded mysterious apparitions that many have speculated to be UFO related. Although Jung asserted that these reports were in the UFO literature prior to the publication of his book, Jung clearly made them popular as potential ancient UFO sightings.
The first is referred to as the Basel Broadsheet, and it dates back to 1566. It was written by Samuel Coccius and is a report of “many large black globes” that were seen flying in front of the sun “with great speed.” The Basel Broadsheet notes, “Some of them became red and fiery and afterwards faded and went out.” Jung noted the similarity of this phenomenon to modern UFO accounts.
The second report is called the Nuremberg Broadsheet and dates back to 1561. This report chronicles a “very frightful spectacle” that was witnessed by several people. Again, “globes” were seen near the sun, “some three in a row, now and then four in a square, also some standing alone.” There were also “two great tubes.” Jung noted that in UFO literature large tubes are considered “motherships,” and have been reported to have smaller discs that appear to fly out of them.
The Physical Reality of UFOs
In his book, Jung also examined the possibility of the physical reality of UFOs. He noted that, “unfortunately,” UFOs cannot be dismissed as purely psychological in nature. He pointed to numerous sightings, some of which have been caught in photographs and on radar. Jung even poked fun at astronomer Donald Menzel, a UFO debunker, saying that he “has not succeeded, despite all his efforts, in offering a scientific explanation of even one authentic UFO report.”
Jung was well-versed on UFO research. He wrote, “since 1947 I have collected all of the books I could get a hold of on the subject.” He was also a member of the National Investigations Committee on Aerial Phenomena (NICAP), an early civilian UFO organization that included many credible members. In fact, in his book, Jung often referred to the work of Major Donald Keyhoe, a cofounder and director of NICAP.
Prior to releasing his book, Jung was considered by UFO researchers to be a proponent of the physical reality of UFOs. In 1955, he wrote an article on UFOs for a British journal called the Flying Saucer Review. In the article, Jung stated that he had never seen a UFO himself, but that “I can only say for certain: these things are not a mere rumour: something has been seen.”
He went on to argue that the U.S. Air Force “despite its contradictory statements,” considers the phenomenon to be real and they conduct official investigations. He warned that, by concealing information on the topic, the military is making it more likely that people will panic since the public is denied “an adequate picture of what is happening.”
Jung also stated that “the ‘disks’ (that is, the objects themselves) do not behave in accordance with physical laws, but as though without weight, and they show signs of intelligent guidance, by quasi human pilots, for their accelerations are such that no normal human could survive.”
Not much was made of Jung’s 1955 article until it was reprinted in 1958 by the Aerial Phenomena Research Organization (APRO) in the organization’s bulletin in July 1958. APRO posted the story as part of an announcement that Jung had agreed to become an official consultant for the organization. The New York Herald Tribune quickly picked up on the report and printed a story with the headline, “Dr. Jung Says ‘Flying Disks’ Suggest Quasi-Human Pilots.”
Jung was not happy with the implication that he believed UFOs represented a physical phenomenon and later wrote a letter to United Press International news agency clarifying his position. He wrote: “I expressly state that I cannot commit myself on the question to the physical reality or unreality of the UFOs since I do not possess sufficient evidence either for or against.” He then stated, “Something is seen, but it isn’t known what.” Jung later repeated this statement in his 1958 book and in several letters.
Although Jung was clearly embarrassed by the public perception that he conclusively believed flying saucers were physical in nature, he later reiterated his prior statements and earlier criticisms of the U.S. Air Force’s handling of the matter in very strong words. He wrote:
In spite of the fact that I hold my judgment concerning UFOs—temporarily let’s hope—in abeyance, I thought it worthwhile to throw a light upon the rich fantasy material which has accumulated round the peculiar observations in the skies. Any new experience has two aspects: (I) the pure fact and (2) the way one conceives of it. It is the latter I am concerned with. If it is true that the [American Air Force] or the Government withholds telltale facts, then one can only say that this is the most unpsychological and stupid policy one could invent. Nothing helps rumours and panics more than ignorance.
It is no wonder that many have been confused as to Jung’s official stance on UFOs. He seems to have believed the phenomenon and sightings to be real, but is uncertain whether UFOs are a physical reality or are limited to a psychological phenomenon. He stated that although “by all human standards it hardly seems possible to doubt this any longer,” in the decade or more he had been studying the topic, neither he nor anyone else seems to have learned much from the study of the physical aspect of UFOs. Jung said that this is precisely why he found it much more fruitful to study the psychological aspects of UFOs, an area in which he felt he had gained an abundance of knowledge.
Jung may be right. Concrete physical proof of UFOs continues to elude us to this day. Yet, Jung is another example of a luminary who garners a great amount of respect in his field of study, who also had the vision to seriously consider the UFO phenomenon. His UFO interest is a story that should not be forgotten, and his insights into the phenomenon may help guide us today, just as his insights into the human mind continue to be a part of the bedrock of modern psychological understanding.
A version of this article originally appeared in Open Minds UFO Magazine. Back issues can be found here.
A group of UFO researchers with backgrounds in science have come together to analyze an alleged UFO video they have confirmed comes from the Department of Homeland Security (DHS). The object in the video was captured by a thermal imaging camera on a DHS aircraft, and according to the researchers, it exhibits characteristics that cannot be explained by any known aircraft or natural phenomenon.
The video is overlaid with the sort of telemetry one would expect from a military or law enforcement thermal image video. It shows an object apparently moving very quickly over land and then into the ocean. It seems to be tumbling or changing shape. It moves over buildings, through trees, and eventually over the ocean. Then things get weird. The object appears to go in and out of the ocean without slowing down, and at the end of the video is either joined by another object or breaks in two.
All of the primary witnesses have requested anonymity. However, several communications from alleged DHS employees indicate that the video caused quite a stir on the base.
Research on the video began when an acquaintance to the pilot of the aircraft that captured the video contacted Daina Chaviano, a famous Cuban-born fantasy and science fiction author. She is also a volunteer with the Mutual UFO Network (MUFON) in Florida, where in her spare time she investigates UFO reports. She took the UFO case to her colleague, Morgan Beall, who runs the Florida MUFON chapter.
Chaviano and Beall were so impressed by what they saw they assembled a small group of skeptical researchers with backgrounds in various fields of science and technology. The pilot’s acquaintance requested strict control of the information provided and that knowledge of the investigation be limited to a very few people, so until now, the researchers have not shared any information regarding their investigation.
Today, the group released a 161-page report detailing their findings.
They are vague when it comes to the identity of Chaviano’s informant. They say this person and others who provided information wanted to remain anonymous “to ensure no issues arise with the source’s employers.”
However, the group says: “The source of this video evidence was vetted and identified.”
They say they are absolutely certain that the information comes from sources on board the DHS aircraft and the video is genuine. Their investigation also confirmed what they were told.
Their sources told them that the UFO incident began at about 9:20 pm on the evening of April 25, 2013 at the Rafael Hernandez Airport in Aguadilla, Puerto Rico. It involved the crew of a DHC-8 Turboprop aircraft from U.S. Customs and Border Protection (CBP), a division of DHS.
The DHC-8 took off on a routine flight and soon after takeoff they noticed “a pinkish to reddish light over the ocean that was in their vicinity and approaching toward the south.”
The crew was concerned the tower had not told them about the incoming traffic, so they called it in. The tower told them they also had a visual on the object, but they were unsure of its identity.
Once the object got close to land, its lights turned off, but at this time the DHC-8 was able to begin tracking and filming the object with their onboard thermal imaging system. The DHC-8 did not approach the object, but circled the area and filmed it.
The DHC-8 did not pick up the object on radar. However, their radar was looking downward to track ships on the ocean, not objects in the sky.
According to the source, a flight was delayed by the presence of the object. The research group was able to confirm from airport records that a FedEx flight scheduled to leave at 9:10 pm was delayed until 9:26 pm.
The researchers also confirmed the flight time and path of the DHC-8 via radar data they obtained from a Freedom of Information Act Request to the U.S. Air Force 84th Radar Evaluation Squadron (RADES) group. The radar data confirmed that the DHC-8 took off at approximately 9:16 pm and circled the airport twice before leaving the area about 10 minutes later.
The researchers note that there was an unknown object or objects tracked on radar a few minutes prior to the DHC-8’s take off, but it is not known for certain that this was the same object that was later caught on video. The unidentified radar strikes were just off the shore to the north and northwest of the airport and lasted about 16 minutes from 8:58 pm to 9:14 pm.
When reading the times, the radar data is presented in a different time zone than the local times. The researchers explained this on their website: “Aviation times reflect Zulu time which corresponds to Greenwich Mean Time (GMT). The video displays the Zulu time April 26th at 1:22 AM at the top left of the initial frames. Converting this Zulu time to Puerto Rico’s local time gives April 25th at 9:22 PM. Puerto Rico uses Atlantic Standard Time and does not use daylight savings time.”
The research group also thoroughly analyzed the video to determine the nature of the object in the film. They consulted thermal imaging experts to determine the capabilities of the system used for the filming, and broke the film down frame by frame to determine the object’s approximate size, speed, temperature and flight path.
The video (seen at the top of the story) is just under 4 minutes long, but the unknown object was tracked for about 2 1/2 of those minutes. Although it was difficult for the group to calculate the exact location of the object on the first half of its flight, they are confident of its position in the second half.
They have determined that the object came in from the ocean, from the north or northwest of the airport’s airstrip, and then flew over the airstrip, then turned back to the north and headed back out into the ocean.
During this time the DHC-8 was circling the airport. As can be seen in the map created by the researchers, the aircraft was moving along the shore, turning to the south, and eventually lost site of the object over the ocean as they continued south.
The report states: “The object was between three to five feet in length and its speed varied between approximately 40 mph to 120 mph. Its median speed was roughly 80 mph.”
The report goes on to note that an interesting characteristic at the end of the flight was when it apparently submerged into the ocean, traveled for over half a mile, and then flew back out.
According to the report: “Its speed through the water reached a high of 95 mph and average 82.8 mph.”
One suggestion has been that the object was merely a balloon. However, the researchers reject this idea for several reasons. They say the wind speeds at the time were 8 to 13 mph at ground level and 12 to 18 mph at 400 to 3200 feet. This means the object was moving too fast to be carried by wind currents. It also changed directions from heading south back to the north, and it went underwater with minimal loss of speed.
Another possibility is that the object was actually a bird. The object appears dark on the screen, and for this type of thermal imaging that would mean it was warmer than the ambient air. This is how a bird would appear. However, the researchers note that the object was moving much too fast to be a bird. They note that peregrine falcons, which do occasionally visit Puerto Rico, have an average horizontal speed of 40 to 56 mph, and a maximum of 65 to 69 mph.
The researchers also examined the possibility that the object was a drone. Their research did discover that the Navy is working on a drone that can fly through the air and dive into the ocean and become a submarine. It is called a “Flimmer.”
They found that current Flimmer drones have not been tested underwater and have an airspeed of 68 mph. They also noted that the fastest known underwater battery powered torpedo travels at 50 mph.
The researchers do acknowledge that it could be possible that the Navy is secretly testing a Flimmer drone that is much more advanced. However, they question why the military would so recklessly test it over a civilian area and airport runways.
In conclusion they state: “There is no explanation for an object capable of traveling under water at over 90 mph with minimal impact as it enters the water, through the air at 120 mph at low altitude through a residential area without navigational lights, and finally to be capable of splitting into two separate objects. No bird, no balloon, no aircraft, and no known drones have that capability.”
They do not profess to know what the object was, and they welcome “reasonable” suggestions.
However, as to be expected, there are those who have suggested that “they know” the object is extraterrestrial in nature, and at least one of those suggestions has come from an anonymous source who has intimate knowledge of this event.
An anonymous letter was sent to one of the researchers that is very similar to one that was sent to John Greenewald, owner of the website TheBlackVault.com. The only thing Greenewald knew about the video was related to a low resolution copy that was leaked to a Puerto Rican UFO researcher. Many assumed the video was taken from a helicopter.
The letter references the exact type of thermal system and aircraft that was used to capture the video. The message was accompanied by a high resolution version of the thermal video, which was then posted on YouTube by Greenewald. The anonymous letter states: “Alien technology is no doubt under the ocean near Puerto Rico!”
Is alien technology being demonstrated in this video? This careful report, which the researchers say took over 1000 man hours to complete, indicates that whatever took place, it is certainly unusual. The entire report is 161 pages long, and thoroughly explains their work, and how they came to the conclusions they did.
Even if the report had come to a mundane conclusion, the effort put into the investigation is remarkable. However, the fact that they could not determine what the object was, and have determined that it displayed characteristics that cannot be explained, makes the report remarkable.
Robert Powell, a retired engineer who worked in the semiconductor industry, who helped author the research paper, says although they have finally released their report, “work on this video will continue.”
Powell, Beall, Chaviano, and the rest of the researchers working on the report posted a high resolution version of the video, their report, and an animation of the radar data they obtained on a website called the Scientific Coalition for Ufology.
Powell says they have reached out to other scientific organizations that have shown an interest in the UFO phenomenon, including 3AF Sigma2, a group that is part of the French National Aeronautical and Astronautical Association. The French scientists have agreed to review their work and provide input.
Powell says, “We hope that this report will generate ideas and thoughts from other scientists that may provide more insight into the characteristics of the object seen in the video.”
To download the report, view the video, and find out more about the investigation, visit: ExploreSCU.org.
Hanging on the wall near the British government’s UFO Desk was what one of the men who occupied that desk called “the most spectacular UFO photo ever sent to the Ministry of Defence (MoD).” The photo has since disappeared, but the story of how the picture was obtained, and what it showed, has not.
Nick Pope ran the MoD’s UFO project from 1991 to 1994. When he was first assigned to the position, he was not excited about it. He felt the issue was ridiculous and he was not looking forward to having to deal with a bunch of UFO nuts. However, over the years, Pope found there were credible cases of incredible things, and began to see there was something truly mysterious about the phenomenon. One of the cases that lead him to this conclusion had to do with a photo that was made into a poster that he found hung in the office near his desk when he began working the UFO desk.
“I first came across this story in 1991, when I joined the UFO project,” writes Pope on his website. “A poster-sized enlargement of the best photo was prominently displayed on the office wall.”
“The X-Files first aired in the UK in 1994 and I acquired the same nickname (Spooky) as Fox Mulder, for obvious reasons,” Nick continues. “Mulder famously had his ‘I want to believe’ UFO poster on his office wall and though uncaptioned, I suppose this was my equivalent.”
The photo showed a picture of a large diamond shaped craft with a jet in the background. When he asked about the photo, Pope was told that they had officially determined the image was real. They estimated the craft to have been 25 meters (over 80 feet) in diameter.
However, if asked, they were instructed to answer, “no definite conclusion had been reached regarding the large diamond-shaped object.”
Pope learned that the object had been photographed on August 4, 1990. Two people had been walking near the town of Calvine in Scotland when they spotted the large diamond-shaped object. They described the object as looking metallic. It sat in one position, hovering silently for several minutes before taking off vertically at, as Pope writes, “a massive speed.”
During the sighting, the witnesses also saw a military aircraft that they thought might be a harrier jet, but they were unsure whether the jet was escorting the craft, chasing it, or whether the jet pilot was even aware of the diamond-shaped UFO.
The witnesses had taken several photographs and sent them to the Scottish Daily Record newspaper. The paper contacted the MoD, and the MoD was somehow able to convince the paper to hand over the photographs along with the negatives.
” The photos were then sent to the Defence Intelligence Staff (DIS) who then sent them on to imagery analysts at JARIC (Joint Air Reconnaissance Intelligence Centre). Yet at the time, MoD hadn’t even publicly acknowledged that there was any intelligence interest in UFOs at all,” Pope explains.
“We implied and sometimes stated that we didn’t ‘investigate’ UFOs, but merely ‘examined sightings to see if anything reported was of any defence interest’ – as if the two were somehow different!”
Pope say the MoD was actually very interested in these cases, but often less interested in where the craft came from than what they could learn from it. They had hoped to identify some sort of technology they would be able to appropriate.
Either way, the Calvine UFO photos impressed the UFO desk investigators enough that they hung the poster in the office.
“At one particularly surreal briefing on the UFO phenomenon my DIS opposite number indicated the photo and pointed his finger to the right: ‘It’s not the Americans’, he said, before pointing to the left and saying ‘and it’s not the Russians.’ There was a pause, before he concluded ‘and that only leaves …’ – his voice trailed off and he didn’t complete the sentence, but his finger was pointing directly upwards,” recalls Pope.
The office where the UFO desk was located also housed other non-UFO related projects.
Pope says the reaction of some colleagues who came to visit unaware of the UFO program had amusing reactions to the poster.
Pope writes, “You’d have this surreal moment when they’d stop mid-sentence, stare at it, point and say ‘what the hell’s that?’ – this wasn’t the archetypal distant, blurred UFO photo. This was up close and personal, reach out and you can touch it stuff. ‘I don’t know what it is, but it’s not one of ours’ was our stock answer to the inevitable question.”
Eventually, around 1994, Pope says his superior determined the craft was a secret American aircraft or drone. Pope says they had already asked the U.S. if the craft or something similar of theirs was being tested over the UK, and were told they were not. Pope believes his boss had decided to support a potential cover-up by the Americans and the MoD and removed the poster. It was never to be seen again.
Although Pope has discussed these photographs in the media and has posted an article on his website, no one has come forward to claim they took the photos. Nor has anyone at the Scottish Daily Record come forth to discuss any involvement. The case remains a mystery.
AI Sharpened Image of Purple UFO! May 18, 2004 - Provo Canyon, Utah, USA, UAP Sighting News.
AI Sharpened Image of Purple UFO! May 18, 2004 - Provo Canyon, Utah, USA, UAP Sighting News.
Hey all, I wanted to check out this UFO photo from back in 2004 in Utah, because so many people tried to claim that it's a bird. So much disinformation trying to confuse the public and distract them from the truth out there. So...I used ai to correct the photo and sharpen it and it's clearly a purple triangle UFO over the mountains of Provo, Utah. In this video below...I debunk the debunkers. This is 100% proof that it's not a bird, it's a UFO.
Of je het nu vindt op een strand, in de woestijn of als onderdeel van de regen, zand is enorm wijdverspreid in onze wereld. Maar ondanks het feit dat het veel gebruikt wordt en aanwezig is in onze samenleving, weten maar weinig mensen wat zand eigenlijk is en waar het van gemaakt is. Kortom: wat is er nog meer dan de zeer bijzondere consistentie en korreligheid ervan? En is dat echt zand in de regen? Laten we het samen ontdekken!
Wat is zand?
Zand is niets meer dan een sedimentair gesteente, dat wil zeggen gevormd door erosie van verschillende soorten gesteente en de resulterende korrels. Het is een lang en continu proces dat leidt tot het ontstaan van zand in verschillende soorten en kleuren. Om te begrijpen wat zand is, moeten we beginnen met hoe het wordt gevormd:
Erosie van gesteenten en mineralen. Dankzij de werking van regen en wind worden de rotsen van een specifieke plaats na verloop van tijd geërodeerd en vallen ze uiteen. De minerale fragmenten die uit dit proces voortkomen, vormen het zand dat we kennen
Ophoping van riviersedimenten. Rivieren transporteren mineralen, organische resten, puin, enzovoort naar de zee. Al deze materialen worden onderweg geërodeerd en blijven dat ook, zelfs als ze eenmaal door zeestromingen langs de kusten worden verspreid.
Hypersaline neerslag.Naast erosie en de ophoping van sedimenten kan er ook zand ontstaan door een hoge concentratie aan ionen en sterke verdamping, wat leidt tot het ontstaan van hypersaline regen waarbij het zand op de grond “neerslaat”.
Zoals je kunt zien, zijn er verschillende processen die leiden tot de vorming van zand. Gedeeltelijk verklaren ze al waarom niet al het zand hetzelfde is, uitgaande van de kleur: er is bijvoorbeeld zwart vulkanisch zand en wit atolzand. Maar waar bestaat zand uit?
Waar bestaat zand uit?
Unsplash
Gewoon zand bestaat grotendeels uit silicium, in de vorm van mineralen zoals kwarts en graniet. Daarnaast zijn veldspaat, die een groot deel van de terrestrische en oceanische korst uitmaken, ook wijdverspreid in licht zand. In het donkere zand zijn echter ook grote hoeveelheden hematiet, granaat en magnetiet te vinden. Met name dit laatste mineraal is verantwoordelijk voor het “magnetische” zand dat vaak door regen wordt meegebracht.
Op basis van wat we hebben gezien, kunnen we daarom zeggen dat zand een verzameling mineralen van verschillende aard is in zeer kleine korrels, tussen 0,06 en 2 millimeter. Het is echter niet zeker dat alle mineralen waaruit het zand bestaat uit stenen afkomstig zijn: het witte zand van de Caribische eilanden bestaat ook uit microscopisch kleine resten die zijn verkregen door de erosie van schelpen en andere mariene organismen. Hun samenstelling bevat mineralen, die vervolgens bijdragen aan de vorming van dit specifieke zand.
Hoe is de samenstelling van zand in regen?
Zoals we al zeiden, kan zand ook bestaan uit de minerale overblijfselen van sommige mariene organismen, waardoor het zijn karakteristieke witte kleur krijgt. Toch kunnen we ook iets soortgelijks zeggen over het zand van de Sahara, oftewel hetzelfde zand dat in sommige mediterrane landen na regen vaak op auto's blijft liggen. Het is slechts gedeeltelijk zand zoals we het tot nu toe hebben begrepen, omdat het in werkelijkheid is samengesteld uit de fossielen van vele microalgen die duizenden jaren geleden in een Afrikaans meer leefden.
Misschien weet niet iedereen dat de Sahara nog maar een paar duizend jaar een woestijn is, en dat het daarvoor de kenmerken had van prairies en savanne. In een van de meren in het gebied bevonden zich eencellige algen, diatomeeën genaamd: zodra ze gefossiliseerd waren na de vorming van de woestijn, vormden ze diatomeeënstof dat door de wind wordt getransporteerd en in de regen terechtkomt.
Zand is immers een overkoepelende term die we aan veel verschillende materialen geven en, specifieker, aan een heel specifieke korrel. Of het nu gemaakt is van kwarts of magnetiet, schelpen of gefossiliseerde algen, het is een fundamenteel materiaal voor onze hedendaagse samenleving. En niet alleen op het strand.
Do Biological UFOs Come from Other Dimensions or Parallel Realities?
Do Biological UFOs Come from Other Dimensions or Parallel Realities?
In an article posted on January 27, 2018, we discussed Biological UFOs, showcasing many images of different types of biological entities such as zeroids, archons, ebani and flying rods.
Image s some of the biological UFOs taken from our 2018 article
Now, the theory that some UFOs may be biological entities, which may populate the recesses of free space, possibly originating from another dimension, is not a new one.
Video on Youtube: Astronauts report squid-like entity floating in space
Jacques Vallée, a renowned computer scientist and ufologist, proposed a theory that UFOs and related phenomena might be manifestations of beings from other dimensions or parallel realities existing at different frequencies from our own.
These entities, according to Vallée, may not necessarily be extraterrestrial but could belong to a reality operating under different physical laws. This hypothesis suggests that the phenomenon of alien visitors might originate not from our physical reality or outer space but from alternate realities or parallel universes.
Video on Youtube: Possible biological UFO filmed from passenger plane
Possible biological UFO seen over Iraq
Analyst Bob Spearing of MUFON recently spilled the beans to Daily Mail about these mysterious aerial objects. MUFON has studied drawings and photographs dating back to the 1970s of "squid-like objects" floating in the sky
Image left: squid like entity spotted in Russia 1977 (credit MUFON)
Image right: squid like entity spotted in Denmark 1975 (credit MUFON)
These bioforms, living beings, are not only floating in our sky but also for example orbiting the moon, potentially populating the recesses of free space and the cosmic void, remain a mystery.
Pilot’s Shocking Encounter: UFO Follows Plane in Mid-Air Drama
Pilot’s Shocking Encounter: UFO Follows Plane in Mid-Air Drama
In a captivating and mysterious incident, a former pilot vividly describes witnessing a UFO following his plane, adding a new dimension to the ongoing exploration of unidentified aerial phenomena. This account is part of a broader investigation into UFO sightings, with significant findings reported in both Carneiro, Kansas, and Bariloche, Argentina.
The Encounter in Bariloche, Argentina
Captain Jorge Polanco, a seasoned pilot with years of experience, recounted an extraordinary encounter while landing a Boeing 737 filled with passengers at Bariloche Airport in 1995. As he approached the airport, Polanco noticed a very bright light in the sky. Upon closer inspection, he realized it was a saucer-shaped object, an unidentified flying object (UFO), which began to follow his aircraft.
The proximity of the UFO was alarming. At one point, Polanco estimated it was only 100 meters away from his plane. This was not just a fleeting glimpse; the UFO seemed to be mirroring his movements. As Polanco attempted to land, the power at the airport suddenly went out, forcing him to abort the landing and circle back up to 10,000 feet. Astonishingly, the UFO seemed to anticipate his actions, maintaining its position at the same altitude.
“It was as if the UFO was always one step ahead,” Polanco explained. The eerie intelligence and precision of the object left him and his crew in awe and fear. This was not merely an unidentified object but a highly advanced craft demonstrating capabilities beyond known human technology.
Broader Implications and Investigations
Polanco’s encounter was not an isolated incident. His sighting coincided with an electrical blackout at Bariloche Airport and burn marks on the ground, which appeared at the exact time of the sighting. Multiple pilots reported similar experiences, adding weight to the argument that these were not mere hallucinations or atmospheric anomalies but real, tangible events.
In an effort to understand these phenomena, Space Marine Intelligence Officer Nick Carnezzi and astrophysicist Sarah Cruttis embarked on an investigation in Carneiro, Kansas, a known UFO hotspot. Utilizing advanced drone technology, they conducted an aerial survey of a three-mile area where a cluster of UFO sightings had been reported. The drone’s findings revealed an anomaly – a circular concrete pad in the middle of nowhere, suggesting a possible landing site.
Linking the Dots
The connection between these two regions, separated by thousands of miles, is compelling. In both instances, there were sightings of low-hovering objects, unexplained physical evidence on the ground, and multiple eyewitness accounts, including those of trained pilots. These parallels raise questions about the nature and origin of these objects.
The investigations in Kansas and Argentina illustrate the importance of using technology to validate eyewitness accounts. The drones in Kansas and the aviation maps in Argentina provided crucial data, turning wild stories into credible reports with physical evidence.
VIDEO:
Pilot Witnesses UFO FOLLOWING His Plane | Alien Contact
Captain Jorge Polanco’s harrowing experience adds a personal, human element to the study of UFOs. His detailed account, combined with the corroborating evidence from other pilots and the advanced technological investigations, underscores the reality of these unexplained phenomena. As we continue to explore these mysteries, such firsthand experiences are invaluable, reminding us of the vast unknown that still awaits discovery in our skies.
The convergence of multiple credible sightings, physical evidence, and advanced technological analysis makes it increasingly difficult to dismiss these events as mere coincidences or fabrications. Whether these phenomena are of extraterrestrial origin or something yet to be understood, the testimony of pilots like Polanco is crucial in unraveling the enigma of UFOs.
NASA's Perseverance rover has discovered a rock on Mars that contains what scientists believe may be signs of ancient life.
The rock, dubbed "Cheyava Falls" by the rover's science team, exhibits intriguing characteristics that suggest it may have hosted life billions of years ago.
Analysis conducted by Perseverance's onboard instruments indicates that a core sample contains chemical signatures and structures potentially formed by life when the area was rich with flowing water.
While these features could indicate ancient microbial life, alternative explanations are still being considered, and further research is essential to confirm this hypothesis.
Nicola Fox, associate administrator of the Science Mission Directorate at NASA Headquarters, remarked on the significance of the find, "This trip through the Neretva Vallis riverbed paid off as we found something we've never seen before, which will give our scientists so much to study."
Ken Farley, Perseverance project scientist at Caltech, highlighted the rock's potential importance: "Cheyava Falls is the most puzzling, complex, and potentially important rock yet investigated by Perseverance. We have our first compelling detection of organic material and evidence that water once passed through the rock. However, we still need to determine exactly how the rock formed."
Related video:
Mars Rock May Hold Ancient Alien Life Trace Says NASA After 'Big Surprise' (Newsweek)
Named after a Grand Canyon waterfall, Cheyava Falls measures 3.2 feet by 2 feet. The rock's white calcium sulfate veins and reddish bands suggest the presence of hematite, a mineral that contributes to Mars's distinctive rusty hue. Closer inspection revealed millimetre-sized off-white splotches surrounded by black material, akin to leopard spots. These black halos contain both iron and phosphate, as determined by the rover's PIXL (Planetary Instrument for X-ray Lithochemistry) instrument.
David Flannery, an astrobiologist from Queensland University of Technology and a member of the Perseverance science team, explained, "On Earth, these types of features in rocks are often associated with the fossilized record of microbes living in the subsurface."
Copyright 2024 Cover Media. Distributed by Tribune Content Agency, LLC.
Signs of Ancient Life on Mars? Here’s What We See in This Intriguing Rock #Shorts
NASA’s Perseverance rover has made very compelling observations in a Martian rock that, with further study, could prove that life was present on Mars in the distant past – but how can we determine that from a rock, and what do we need to do to confirm it?
Morgan Cable, a scientist on the Perseverance team, takes a closer look.
Recent observations of Venus have yielded new evidence of a compound in its atmosphere that could indicate the presence of life, according to findings that potentially lend weight to controversial past discoveries.
Phosphine, a toxic gas that astrobiologists have proposed could be associated with the presence of life on rocky planets, was initially detected in Venus’s atmosphere in a surprise discovery four years ago. Now, new observations potentially strengthen those past findings, hinting at the presence of biosignatures that, if confirmed, could mean life forms are able to thrive in the planet’s harsh environment.
A CONTROVERSIAL DISCOVERY ON VENUS
The initial detection of phosphine in Venus’s oxidized atmosphere was reported in September 2020, when a team of scientists led by Jane Greaves of Cardiff University said they had found evidence of the toxic molecule. The discovery initially led to debate over the possibility that life could exist on Venus, since phosphine is normally associated with organisms that thrive in low-oxygen environments.
The team’s announcement received considerable media attention, and also led to controversy that culminated in rebukes from some in the scientific community. Arguably, the sharpest criticism was leveled by the organizing committee of the International Astronomical Union (IAU) Commission F3 on Astrobiology, who even questioned the ethics of Greaves and her team over the manner in which the discovery was revealed.
“It is an ethical duty for any scientist to communicate with the media and the public with great scientific rigour and to be careful not to overstate any interpretation which will be irretrievably picked up by the press,” the commission wrote in an official statement released at the time.
The commission added it “would like to remind the relevant researchers that we need to understand how the press and the media behave before communicating with them.”
Initial follow-up attempts to detect the compound again were unsuccessful. However, last year, Greaves and her team succeeded in detecting phosphine in deeper portions of the planet’s atmosphere during observations made with the James Clark Maxwell Telescope (JCMT) at Mauna Kea Observatory, Hawaii. Additional detections with NASA’s Stratospheric Observatory for Infrared Astronomy (SOFIA) also suggested the presence of phosphine, which may originate either within or from below the clouds on Venus.
Craters seen in false color on the surface of Venus, where the presence of phosphine and ammonia could potentially point to the existence of life forms that may thrive in the planet’s inhospitable climate
(Credit: NASA).
Intriguingly, a separate research effort led by Rakesh Mogul with California State Polytechnic University reanalyzed data obtained by NASA’s Pioneer Venus Large Probe in 1978, revealing additional support for the presence of phosphine in the planet’s atmosphere that appeared to match the earlier findings.
“To date, our analyses remain unchallenged in the literature,” Mogul said of his team’s findings, which he characterized as being “in sharp contrast to the telescopic observations” made by Greaves and her colleagues, which Mogul said “remain controversial.”
NEW FINDINGS STILL WARRANT CAUTION
With the aid of a new receiver installed on the James Clerk Maxwell Telescope, Greaves and her colleagues now say they have collected as much as 140 times more data than previous observations yielded, which include additional detections of phosphine. The new findings were revealed in a pair of presentations by Greaves and David Clements, a researcher at Imperial College London who was involved with the discovery, on July 17 during a meeting of the Royal Astronomical Society.
However, of even greater potential interest in the search for possible life forms on Venus is evidence that ammonia is present in its atmosphere, which Clements has called “more significant than the discovery of phosphine.” Notably, the 2021 study by Mogul and his colleagues also determined that ammonia could potentially exist in Venus’s atmosphere.
Despite the potential significance of the discovery, during Greaves’s talk at the Society’s meeting earlier this month, a slide in her presentation emphasized that there are “many significant unknowns about the Venusian surface and atmosphere,” adding that “even a ‘gold standard’ discovery of two bio-associated molecules is not evidence that life is extant!”
Similarly, Clements told CNN that it would be premature to speculate that these gases point to the existence of life on Venus, although he conceded that the presence of ammonia along with phosphine certainly strengthens that possibility.
PROMISING PRELIMINARY FINDINGS
While cautioning against premature conclusions, Greaves explained during her presentation this month that there is at least a possibility that any organisms present on Venus could produce ammonia to help reduce the environment’s acidity and thereby make it more habitable. If this were the case, Greaves and her colleagues speculate that the gas could have potentially risen into the atmosphere, allowing its detection.
“The ammonia was detected in the upper clouds, where temperatures are -15°C or less and it is likely too cold for life to exist,” read a posting on the official X account of the Royal Astronomical Society summarizing Greave’s presentation.
“Researchers want to see if the molecule is also present deeper in Venus’s clouds, where it is much warmer,” it added.
Going forward, additional corroboration will be required, which might be obtained in one of several ways. One possibility includes data that could be collected by NASA’s Deep Atmosphere Venus Investigation of Noble gases, Chemistry, and Imaging (DAVINCI) mission, which will dispatch a probe into Venus’s harsh environment to measure its atmosphere in 2029.
Another potential chance to take measurements of the planet’s atmosphere could be afforded by the European Space Agency’s Jupiter Icy Moons Explorer, which will pass close to Venus next year and is equipped with instruments that could potentially obtain useful data that may complement the findings by Greaves and her colleagues.
Until that data is obtained, however, the new findings remain inconclusive, albeit promising.
“Again, it’s important to stress these are preliminary findings,” the Society said in its posting on X.
5 Alleged Alien Artifacts That Were Actually Rocks, Spark Plugs, and Dolls
5 Alleged Alien Artifacts That Were Actually Rocks, Spark Plugs, and Dolls
From strangely spherical orbs to ancient aircraft, the list of supposedly out-of-this-world objects keeps growing. Learn more about five of the most famous fake alien artifacts.
The bodies of two supposed aliens were presented to the Mexican Congress in September 2023. With their spindly bodies and bulbous domes, the specimens are the spitting image of the quintessential alien.
(Credit: Octavio Hoyos/Shutterstock)
We seem to have entered something of an alien renaissance. Public interest in extraterrestrial speculation soared this summer, as former intelligence officials testified to Congress that the U.S. government is in possession of materials from a spacecraft of “non-human origin.”
For all its mystery and intrigue, though, this moment is only the latest surge in a century of extraterrestrial hype, and of claims to the existence of alien artifacts. So far none have held up to scrutiny, and it remains to be seen whether the Pentagon is hiding the real deal. But there’s a long list of fascinating (and decidedly not authentic) objects that people have taken to be of alien origin.
Found outside Olancha, a community near California's Coso Range, the “Coso artifcat” looked like a geode at first glance. Yet, its core of what appeared to be white porcelain and metal fostered rumors about its alien origins.
(Credit: Diane079F/Getty Images)
One winter morning in 1961, the three owners of a rock shop in eastern California went hunting for geodes. Later that day, when they brought their haul back to the shop and started slicing them open, the trio discovered something inexplicable: At the center of one “geode,” where they expected to find an array of sparkling crystals, they saw instead a circular piece of what appeared to be white porcelain surrounding a shaft of metal.
They were baffled. The object seemed man-made, but one of the discoverers claimed to have spoken with a geologist who said the surrounding rock would’ve taken 500,000 years to form. However, as noted in an analysis by Pacific Northwest Skeptics founder Pierre Stromberg and Louisiana State University geologist Paul Heinrich, “very little is known about the initial physical inspections.”
The True Origins of the Coso Artifact
After decades of speculation, Stromberg and Heinrich closed the case with help from a surprisingly niche group of experts — the Spark Plug Collectors of America. Several of its members concurred that the so-called Coso artifact is simply a Champion spark plug from the 1920s, potentially used in a 20th-century mining operation. Nevertheless, it still routinely shows up on lists of “out-of-place artifacts” (OOPArts) as possible evidence of aliens.
Some of the “Ottosdal objects” of South Africa are adorned with strange grooves, as a result of natural geologic processes. The same sort of grooves mark the “Moqui Marbles” of the Navajo Sandstone in southern Utah.
(Credit: Sumikophoto/Shutterstock)
Similar to the Coso find,several stone spheres, also known as Ottosdal objects, have been found in 3 billion-year-old geological deposits in Ottosdal, South Africa, just outside of Klerksdorp. A 1979 article in the National Enquirer described them as “so perfectly made that they look as though they were cast from a mould,” and ever since, creationists and ancient astronaut theorists have interpreted them as the artificial products of an advanced civilization.
The True Origins of the Klerksdorp Spheres
Their name, however, is a misnomer. “A careful examination of the Ottosdal objects demonstrates the imaginary nature of the ‘perfectly spherical’ descriptions given by various authors,” states an analysis, also by Heinrich. In reality, the objects come in many shapes and sizes and are mostly asymmetrical. They’re just good old-fashioned carbonate concretions.
Some of the objects feature a series grooves around their circumference. The grooves, Heinrich explains, are merely the result of the sediment layers in which the objects formed: In fine-grained layers they grew more slowly, leaving what seem to be etched rings. The same process can be seen at work in the “Moqui Marbles” of southern Utah.
None of this, of course, prevents vague assertions that the objects may be “connected in some way” to Iapetus, a moon of Saturn that happens to have a similar ridge around its equator. Or that they are “so delicately balanced that, even with modern technology, they would need to have been made in zero gravity.”
This semi-spherical helmet, adorned with a female figure, was among the artifacts of the famed “Quimbaya Treasure.” Also included in the collection were several small figurines, whose stylized appearance is sometimes said to look like ancient aircraft.
(Credit: WH_Pics/Shutterstock)
The “Quimbaya Treasure” is an assortment of gold objects created by the Quimbaya culture, which reached its peak in what is now Colombia between 500 B.C.E. and 600 C.E. But of the 135 artifacts in the collection — which include everything from containers and pendants to human and animal figurines — a handful have been singled out as evidence of ancient aircraft (and, by extension, aliens).
The producers of the pseudoscientific TV series Ancient Aliens call them the Tolima jets. They’re shaped a little like birds or insects or fish, but (the producers argue) the anatomy doesn’t add up: Many have what appear to be wings, as well as vertical tails, a perplexing combo. What does have both? Modern fighter jets. Ergo pre-Columbian people must have achieved flight, millennia before Orville and Wilbur Wright, with help from extraterrestrials.
In 1994, two German men even built (substantially altered) model airplanes based on the artifacts to prove that, scaled and motorized, they could have flown. On Ancient Aliens, the producers claim the men “did not add an inch or remove an inch, they just essentially blew the thing into a larger size.” But again, a quick comparison shows the models to be far more aerodynamic than the originals.
The True Origins of the Quimbaya Artifacts
Chris White, who directed the film Ancient Aliens Debunked, notes that most of the Quimbaya artifacts are simply stylized animals. “Because of that,” he writes, “and the fact that the few objects in question also have teeth and eyes, it seems more likely that these were also depicting animals.” It takes little effort to see them as representations of fish, like the sucker-mouth catfish, which Quimbaya natives would’ve been familiar with.
The fine craftsmanship of the crystal skulls supposedly taken from the pre-Colombian Aztec or Maya civilizations is sometimes interpreted as a sign of alien interference in ancient affairs.
(Credit: Mistervlad/Shutterstock)
An assemblage of quartz crystals, carved in the likeness of human skulls and allegedly dating to pre-Columbian Mesoamerica, is another favorite of the Ancient Aliens crew. They started turning up left and right in the late 1800s, and museum curators, eager for exotic curiosities, ate them up. But none came from official archaeological excavations, and none had substantiated backstories.
Perhaps the most famous is the “Skull of Doom,” which Anna Mitchell-Hedges, the adopted daughter of British adventurer Frederick Arthur Mitchell-Hedges, claimed to have found while exploring a ruined temple in Belize with her father in 1924. If that were the skull’s true origin, it would be much too finely crafted for the era — the sort of thing the Aztec and Maya civilizations might’ve had otherworldly assistance for.
The True Origins of the Crystal Skulls
When Smithsonian anthropologist Jane MacLaren Walsh examined it in 2007, however, she concluded the technology used in its creation was “decidedly 20th century” (that is, high-speed, diamond-coated rotary tools).
In her book The Man Who Invented Aztec Crystal Skulls, Walsh traces many of the fakes to a single Frenchman named Eugène Boban, who, as a recognized expert on Mexican archaeology, was able to pass them off as genuine artifacts. Still, it’s unclear where they ultimately came from, so, you know, aliens — with equipment strikingly like that of today’s human jewelers.
The bodies of two supposed aliens were presented to the Mexican Congress in September 2023. With their spindly bodies and bulbous domes, the specimens are the spitting image of the quintessential alien.
(Credit: Octavio Hoyos/Shutterstock)
Lest you think the fountain of phony artifacts has gone dry, here’s a contemporary example, and one of the boldest yet.
For a brief moment in September 2023, Mexico’s Congress became the showroom for a spectacle the likes of which doesn’t often appear in government proceedings: mummified alien remains, and earnest testimony from the controversial, self-proclaimed ufologist who brought them.
Jaime Maussan, a Mexican journalist, presented two tiny, shriveled bodies, which he said had been found in a remote part of Peru in 2017 and dated to about 1,000 years ago. With oblong heads, three-fingered hands, and an eerily humanoid form, they resembled the classic grey aliens, or “greys,” common in extraterrestrial encounter claims (a bit on the nose, as such hoaxes go).
It may come as a surprise to see supposedly alien specimens taken seriously in the halls of legislature, but it’s a testament to our enduring extraterrestrial obsession.
The True Origins of the Congressional Aliens
As with each of the previous hoaxes, the mainstream scientific community scoffed at the proceedings. After all, when Maussan made similar claims in the past, the bodies turned out to be “recently manufactured dolls, which have been covered with a mixture of paper and synthetic glue to stimulate the presence of skin.” If we want an authentic alien artifact, we’ll have to keep waiting.
0
1
2
3
4
5
- Gemiddelde waardering: 0/5 - (0 Stemmen) Categorie:ALIEN LIFE, UFO- CRASHES, ABDUCTIONS, MEN IN BLACK, ed ( FR. , NL; E )
What the UAP Disclosure Act of 2024 Means For UFO Sightings
What the UAP Disclosure Act of 2024 Means For UFO Sightings
In July 2023, military veterans testified about UFO sightings before Congress, sparking debates and investigations into Unidentified Anomalous Phenomena.
In July 2023,three military veteranstestified before the U.S. Congress about their experiences with UFOs. A navy fighter pilot described seeing a dark, cube-like spacecraft near the coast of Virginia in 2014. The pilot was flying an F-18 in hurricane-force winds and was stunned to see the dark object hovering, unbothered by the gusts.
Another navy pilot reported how he saw an aircraft near San Diego that resembled a Tic Tac. The apparent UFO was smooth, without wings or rotors. And when the navy pilot tried to get close, the other aircraft zipped from sight.
The House Committee on Oversight and Accountability also heard from a former member of the Pentagon’s task force on UFOs. He testified the government had extraterrestrial spacecraft in its possession, and he knew exactly where they were hidden.
So, what has happened since that bombshell testimony?
Government Reports on UFOs
The Department of Defense and other government agencies prefer the term Unidentified Anomalous Phenomena (UAP), and the 2023 testimony was part of an increasing interest from Congress to have intelligence agencies share what they know about UAPs.
In 2022, the Department of Defense established the All-Domain Anomaly Resolution Office (AARO)to serve as the go-to agency regarding extraterrestrials.
Since then, the office has received hundreds of reports of UFO sightings from the public. But this year, AARO has made it clear they haven’t been impressed.
Recent Developments of UAP Sightings
In late February, AARO released a report stating they saw no evidence of UAPs. The report is meant to be the first of two public investigations.
The report’s investigators say they reviewed all evidence collected since 1945, interviewed witnesses, and analyzed archives.
The following week, Major General Pat Ryder, the Pentagon press secretary, released a statement saying there had been “no verifiable evidence” that the UFO sightings were legit. The statement also denied there was any evidence that the government or private groups had access to “extraterrestrial technology” (AKA flying saucers), which they were able to study or even reverse-engineer.
Latest UAP Legislation
Government intelligence agencies might not give credence to UFO sightings, but some members of Congress still want transparency with the American public. In May, the Senate Select Committee on Intelligence passed the Intelligence Authorization Act, which included a section on UAPs.
Then in July, Senator Mike Rounds of South Dakota proposed to Congress the UAP Disclosure Act of 2024. If passed, the Act would establish oversight, a review board, and a public disclosure plan for the next seven years.
Like most bills introduced into Congress, The UAP Disclosure Act will be subject to debate, both among politicians and citizens with strong opinions. While some people don’t believe in extraterrestrial life, others not only believe in UFOs but they also say they have had some sort of encounter.
People who say they have seen a UFO have become of interest to scientists who want to know about these encounters as well as the personality traits believers might share.
Personality Traits of UFO Witnesses
In a March 2024 article in the Journal of Scientific Exploration, an international research team from the U.S. and U.K. sought to identify shared personality traits among people who say they have seen UFOs.
Of the 206 participants, half said they had seen a UFO. The participants took several questionnaires measuring their personality traits as well as their belief in ETs. Those who said they had seen UFOs also described their encounters. Most said they saw strange, undefined lights or orb-like spacecraft.
The study’s authors noted that while most people assume UFO witnesses are neurotic or odd, their study found that most witnesses fell into a personality category in which they scored high on openness, agreeableness, and extraversion. This group also scored lower on neuroticism and schizotypy traits.
Why Scientists Are Interested in UFO Sightings
The study's lead author, Daniel R. Stubbings, said the participants in his study had encounters similar to those of the Congressional hearing witnesses. Yet, he says many people aren’t taken seriously when they tell others about their experiences.
“The wider reason for the research is that the topic of UAP is being considered seriously at the highest levels of the USA government; that is an intriguing turn of events,” says Stubbings, a principal lecturer in clinical psychology at Cardiff Metropolitan University in Wales.
Stubbings says the current public interest in UFOs is a prime research opportunity. If the sightings are eventually disproven, there is an opportunity to study the event from a mass hysteria or misinformation perspective. And if the sightings are proven correct, then scientists also have out-of-this-world research possibilities.
“It is one of the few topics in science that is a win-win, but we need to collect the data and inspire other scientists to apply their skills, rather than add to the conjecture, speculation or belief,” Stubbings says.
Our writers at Discovermagazine.com use peer-reviewed studies and high-quality sources for our articles, and our editors review for scientific accuracy and editorial standards. Review the sources used below for this article:
Emilie Lucchesi has written for some of the country's largest newspapers, including The New York Times, Chicago Tribune and Los Angeles Times. She holds a bachelor's degree in journalism from the University of Missouri and an MA from DePaul University. She also holds a Ph.D. in communication from the University of Illinois-Chicago with an emphasis on media framing, message construction and stigma communication. Emilie has authored three nonfiction books. Her third, "A Light in the Dark: Surviving More Than Ted Bundy," releases October 3, 2023 from Chicago Review Press and is co-authored with survivor Kathy Kleiner Rubin.
Roswell alien autopsy: A summary of the truth behind the video that shocked the world
Roswell alien autopsy: A summary of the truth behind the video that shocked the world
It was 1993 when I was first contacted by London businessman Ray Santilli. It was l995 when Santilli’s controversial ‘Alien Autopsy Film’ was released around the world. I have covered events surrounding this film in many publications around the world and in my new book ‘ROSWELL ALIEN AUTOPSY – The Truth Behind the Film That Shocked the World’ so forgive me if I don’t cover old ground here. All the relevant details of my previous research can be located on my website at: www.beyondroswell.com.
On June 22nd 2007, I travelled by train to London to meet up with Ray Santilli and his business partner Gary Shoefield. We had a pleasant lunch together and Ray Santilli showed me some frames of film encased in a type of perspex material. Santilli claimed these were original vintage 1947 frames of film from the alien autopsy. As they came with no official seal of approval or had been authenticated by anyone they were useless.
Within a couple of days of this meeting my friend and colleague Russel Callaghan, editor of UFO DATA magazine, had a phone call from a man by the name of Spyros Melaris. This man claimed he had lead the team that faked the whole alien autopsy film. He was a magician and filmmaker and he was now ready to spill the beans. He gave Russel a run down of the who, what, why and where of the whole affair. Because of my involvement in this affair Russel was soon on the phone to me with the details. It wasn’t long before I spoke to Spyros Melaris myself and he was telling me things in great detail. During the next few weeks I had several telephone conversations with Spyros Melaris and also put him in contact with US TV producer Robert (Bob) Kiviat at his request. Spyros was considering the best way to go public with his story, he had a book planned and thought that a TV documentary might also be a good idea.
Along with my colleagues Russel Callaghan, Michael Buckley and Steve Johnston, I was one of the co-organisers of the UFO DATA annual conference. It just so happened, that the 2007 conference had a loose Roswell theme to commemorate the 60th anniversary of the Roswell Incident. My colleagues and I discussed the possibility of asking Spyros Melaris to make his first public statement on this whole thing at our conference and eventually he agreed. The conference itself was held over the weekend of October 20th & 21st 2007 in Pontefract, West Yorkshire. A packed audience saw Spyros take the stage on Sunday October 21st. I had met him in person for the first time the night before at the hotel and I made loose arrangements to formally interview him at his home later in the year. As promised, Spyros took to the stage and told of his involvement in the making of the alien autopsy film. A small few members of the audience were rather upset to hear this but the vast majority were fascinated by what he had to say.
I made arrangements to visit the home of Spyros Melaris on November 16th 2007 and I drove to his house in Hertfordshire with my partner Christine. Before the formal audio-taped interview began we had lunch with Spyros and his lovely wife Anne. Over lunch Spyros showed us some of the documentary evidence he has to support his claims. This included his diary from l995, hand drawn sketches of the alien, a full list of hand painted story board images of the whole alien autopsy film, original fax messages from Kodak in the USA providing copies of l947 fill canister labels, and a large portfolio of research material. This was mainly of vintage (l940’s) US military vehicles and some vintage US military medical photographs. The interview itself lasted around two hours and we only touched the tip of the iceberg. The full interview can be located online at: http://www.outtahear.com/beyond_updates/index.html (Alien Autopsy Information section). I would like to thank my colleague Steve Johnston for transcribing this interview in full. The following is based on that interview.
Who is Spyros Melaris?
As the name might give it away Spyros was originally born in Cyprus. As a boy he was taught a magic trick by his grandfather and his love of magic was born. The other passion as a boy growing up in the UK was film making. At school he told his careers officer that he wanted to be an actor but this was discouraged. A proper job was what he should have. So a proper job he took and after leaving school became an apprentice trained motor mechanic. However, his love of magic and film making eventually won over and he eventually became a magician and a filmmaker. He now owns his own TV studio in London and makes TV shows for all the major networks in the UK and independent production companies alike. In short, in his owns words, we make programmes for “anyone who books us.”
How He Met Ray Santilli
In January 1995 he was to attend the MIDEM music industry event in Cannes, France. He was taking a film crew there and had some spare time on his hands so he sent fax messages to 4 production companies picked at random from a media directory. He basically asked them if they wanted to hire him and his crew while in Cannes. One of these happened to be the Merlin Group owned by Ray Santilli. Spyros and Ray Santilli had a few telephone conversations but did not meet and arranged to meet in Cannes. By pure chance they bumped into each other at a restaurant in Cannes and it was here that Ray Santilli fist told Spyros Melaris that he had obtained film footage of an alien. Holding back a smirk Spyros asked Santilli if he was serious and he replied he was, not only that, he wanted Spyros to make a documentary from this footage. They eventually agreed to meet at Ray Santilli’s office back in London. A few days later Spyros kept his appointment with Santilli at his office in London. Here he met an almost distraught Ray Santilli who told him he’d bought this film but it had turned out to be very poor quality. Spyros was shown what has become known as the ‘tent footage’ and he immediately recognised it as been shot on video. The tape he was shown was on VHS format. Santilli seemed surprised that he had recognised it as being shot on video so quickly and he realised the game was up. Again in Spyros’s own words “If I can’t get it past this guy, I’m not going to get it past anyone else. He realised it was game up. That’s when the meeting ended. I thought the guy’s mad. He’s trying a fast one. I thought it was over at that point.”
So How Did The Idea of a Fake Film Come About?
Melaris met up with his friend and colleague John Humphreys. Humphreys is a Royal Academy trained sculptor whose work had sometimes overlapped into film and TV special effects. Melaris and Humphreys had known each other for a long time and had worked on a number of things together in the past. Melaris simply put the idea to Humphreys, “John, do you fancy sculpting an alien?” Melaris told Humphreys of his meeting with Santilli and basically came up with the idea of making it. They talked things over from a legal point of view and how it might help them break into other projects, even Hollywood. The idea was to make it, release it to the world, and then make a second programme shortly after showing how they did it. Humphreys agreed and Melaris pitched the idea to Santilli. Santilli looked like a man reborn and agreed. The budget put forward by Melaris was about £30,000 and it was Santilli’s business partner and friend Volker Spielberg who put up the money. The funding was in place, contracts and a confidentiality agreement were signed and the ball was rolling.
The Team Behind The Making of The Film
First off there was Spyros Melaris. He designed and directed the film, instructed and paid the rest of the team, made the autopsy table along with many of the other props, he also made the ‘contamination suits’ as well as obtain the props and cameras. The main researcher behind it all was Spyros’s then girlfriend Geraldine. She was the one who checked the medical books, spoke with surgeons and pathologists and she even played the part of the nurse in the film. Geraldine is not her real name as she wishes to remain anonymous. John Humphreys of course made the alien’s bodies. The mould was actually made from John’s ten year-old son who was quite tall. As a trained sculptor Humphreys had also studied anatomy so he was the man who played the surgeon in the film. Another friend of Spyros’s was Greg Simmons. He was seen occasionally in the film in one of the contamination suits and he also played the part of the soldier in the Debris Footage. Gareth Watson, a colleague of Santilli’s and Shoefield’s was the man in the surgical mask behind the glass, and finally Spyros’s brother Peter helped behind the scenes. The set was built in Geraldine’s house in Camden in London. The property was in the process of being converted into three flats (apartments) at the time and was therefore empty. The props were obtained from someone Spyros knew in the USA. She was not told what they were for and were all ordered separately and delivered to different addresses so as not to arouse suspicion. The camera’s were obtained by Spyros; one bought and one borrowed from a friend.
Why There Are Two Separate Autopsy Films
According to Spyros the first ‘Alien Autopsy’ film went pretty much as planned. However, upon completion Geraldine noticed that a few of the medical procedures were not correct. They therefore had to make another creature and film another one. Apparently Santilli was ready for packing it all in at this point as there was no more money in the budget to film it again. They persevered and made another one at Spyros’s cost the very next day. This too was not without problems. The foam latex used to fill the dummy had not worked right and an air bubble had left a hollow space in the creature’s leg. Humphreys was despatched to the local butchers by Spyros to get a leg joint of a sheep. This was inserted into the hollow part in the alien’s right leg, a few other things were added, the outside of the leg was gently burnt with a blowtorch and hey presto, the leg wound. Some of the inner organs were manufactured by Melaris, and animal organs were also used for the alien’s innards, although altered with a scalpel and coated with latex. The alien’s brain was actually made from three sheep’s brains and part of a pig’s brain cast in gelatine. This is how there came to be two separate autopsy films one of which was shown in its entirety, while the second one made, has only ever been released in part.
The Wreckage and I-beams
These were all designed by Spyros himself. At the October 2007 UFO DATA conference Spyros showed me how he had designed the ‘writing’ on them and what it said. The wreckage was then manufactured by John Humphreys, Spyros and his brother Peter. He told me that he based it on Greek lettering, a bit of ancient Egyptian stylising and some artistic license. On the main large beams, if translated correctly, reads ‘FREEDOM’. Spyros thought this a fitting name for an alien spacecraft. While designing the letters which spell the word ‘FREEDOM’, Spyros noticed that if the word is turned upside down, the word ‘VIDEO’ could be seen. He adjusted some of the letters to better facilitate this, so the piece would throw a little red herring into the mix. The translation of the smaller beam is being held back for Spyros’s book.
The Cameraman’s Home Video Interview
According to Melaris, Ray Santilli was put under a lot of pressure by various parties to arrange an interview with the fictitious cameraman he allegedly bought the film from. Of course, according to Melaris, there was no such person, so he came up with the idea of creating this aspect of the whole affair as well. The basic scenario is that Melaris flew to Los Angeles and met up with Santilli’s partner Gary Shoefield. Melaris wanted to find an eighty year old tramp on the streets of L.A., pay him a few hundred dollars, put him in front of a camera and ask him to read from a script. Santilli and Shoefield were nervous, and not sure this would work but Spyros was confident he could pull this off, and went ahead. He found an old guy living rough on the street, offered him $500 and a night in the hotel and he duly agreed. Again, by pure chance the chap had been an actor many years ago. Melaris took his name and the name of a movie he had appeared in. These details will be released in his book. He cleaned him up, gave him a shave, and added a bit of make up and a false prosthetic nose and chin and the job was done. The man himself did not know what he was reading or where it was going to be used. There was little chance that he would see the broadcast either. No one would recognise him in a thousand years. And they never did. This film was delivered in person in New York to US TV producer Bob Kiviat by Gary Shoefield and a man claiming to be the cameraman’s son. Eventually the film in question was broadcast on TV in Japan only and from there it was copied and distributed to UFO researchers around the world. The trick worked, no one has identified the man in question, and Melaris claims he is the only one who can do this.
The Crash Site
There are a number of people who believe the alien autopsy film is authentic, not because of the film itself but because of the crash site. Ray Santilli released details, supposedly from his cameraman, as to where the incident took place in the desert. How did this come about? Well, according to Spyros this was quite simple. In l995, he flew to Roswell. Here he interviewed many local people including Loretta Proctor. Mrs. Proctor was the neighbour of rancher Mac Brazel and it was she who suggested that Mac take some of the UFO debris into town after he found it. Spyros also met and hired private pilot Rodney Corn. He asked corn to fly him over the UFO crash site, to which he replied “which one.” There are in fact at least three such sites. So, Spyros flew over all three of them, filming as he went. Rodney Corn was able to show Spyros a great deal from the air, far better than would have been possible on foot. This included small dirt roads and long forgotten landmarks. Before the interview took place Spyros also informed me that he obtained both old and new maps of the area. All of this information was handed to Ray Santilli and it was Santilli, not Spyros, who then put it all together to make a location for a nonexistent crash site.
The Grand Plan
I asked Spyros what was the grand plan. The research was done, the film was made, so what next. Apparently it was a rather simple plan. To release the film to a broadcaster, ask them to investigate and see what happens. They were confident that it would not be exposed as a fake. Then, after a few months the plan was to hold their hands up and tell all. The reason this didn’t happen was money. Spyros had signed a confidentiality agreement with Ray Santilli and Santilli was still adamant that he needed to recoup his initial investment allegedly paid for the tent footage. Santilli told Melaris that he had invested a lot of money on this film and he must recoup that before they were to go public. Santilli reminded Spyros that he was bound by the confidentiality agreement and he was not to say or do anything until Santilli said so. Apart from a cheque for about £10,000, which Spyros split with his team, no royalties were ever paid. Santilli told him that due to the fact that he had stated publicly that it was a military film, that it had simply been copied by third parties without permission and used without payment as the people who were using the film believed that the copyright was vested with the US Military and not with Santilli. Eventually time went on and Spyros just got on with life. He was constantly working on other projects with Santilli and earning a living and the alien autopsy film was all but forgotten.
Going Public
The one thing that I first asked Spyros was why was it that he had decided to go public with this information now. It was twelve years since the alien autopsy film hit the headlines. Melaris stuck to his confidentiality agreement. From a legal point of view if he broke it he could have been sued. However, in 2005 he was approached by Santilli and Shoefield to be involved in the movie version of this whole affair. He asked both if they would now tell the true story and reveal that it was all a fake but they said no, they were going to maintain that they really did have original film. Again, Santilli and Shoefield stated that there was no money in it and that they were doing it for “a bit of fun” when pressed they admitted that both Santilli and Shoefield would get paid a percentage of the profits, there was no such offer for Melaris. Melaris declined their offer. He left that meeting under the impression that the movie was not going to be made. However, the movie was made and distributed by Warner Bros and so Melaris felt that he was now able to speak as the story was now in the public domain.
The Doubters
To round off the interview I asked Spyros Melaris what he had to say to the doubters out there, those that believe the alien autopsy film is the genuine article. I’m not going to paraphrase this; instead I will use his words in full:
PM: Time’s against us, Spyros. I’ll ask one last question. There are those out there who believe in this film and Santilli 100% and they think that you’re some kind of pathological liar, playing devil’s advocate here, so please don’t be offended.
SM: No. Go ahead.
PM: What would you say if you could say one thing to the doubters out there? Is there any one thing that you can say that would say to them Spyros Melaris is who he says he is and has made this film?
SM: I don’t think that there’s any doubt that somebody made it today. That’s fair to say that somebody made the film and even Santilli said it’s a fake, but it was made from original film. I think that’s really the question. The question isn’t whether I made it because I can prove I made it. John Humphries will tell you I made it. Ray would probably tell you I made it! He couldn’t deny it. There’s too much evidence. The question is did I make it from original film? And the simple answer to that is no. There was never any original film other than the tent footage. I’ve never seen any other film. Ray maintains that he’s got original film. My question to Ray is how would that film marry with what I made? It can’t. I haven’t actually seen the film. Now you may say, “Maybe you’re lying and you did see the film and you made it.”
The story’s a bigger story if there was a real film. There would be more money in it. There wouldn’t be a reason for me and Ray to be parted. Why would we fall out? The common sense has got to come into the argument. I’m part of something as big as real film of a real alien. Why would I jeopardise being part of that and go off on my own? There’s no reason to. That’s the first thing.
The second thing. I promise you, something happened in Roswell. I’m not an easy person… I’m a sceptic. I’m not an easy person to convince. Thirty people that I talked to out there, clever people, doctors, lecturers, all sorts of people tell me they saw something. And I believe them. Something happened. A lot of ordinary people. Something happened. So, I don’t think there’s dispute about whether or not something happened in Roswell or other sightings or whether or not everything’s fake. No, I don’t think everything’s fake. I do know this is. I also know that if Ray had original film, he’d be jumping through hoops to let you test it. I’m sorry, but that’s what you would do. You would say, “Give me billions of pounds for this.” That’s what you would say. You would say, “I’ve got nothing to worry about. The cameraman doesn’t want to speak, but look at the film.” That’s what you’d do! That’s what you would do.
PM: Say no more.
[END OF INTERVIEW]
Once again I would like to reiterate that this is only part of what Spyros Melaris had to tell me. The full-unedited interview can be found in the alien autopsy section of our web site at: http://www.outtahear.com/beyond_updates/index.html.
Checking The Facts
So how do we check that what Spyros Melaris is telling us is correct? It is no easy task I can assure you. The documentary material shown to me by Spyros is intriguing but not proof positive. My colleague Mark Center in the USA checked the private pilot Rodney Corn for me and he does exist. Mark spoke to him on the phone but he has no recollection of being hired by Spyros Melaris. This could be because he was hired by Geraldine, and we are talking about an event which happened over 12 years ago.
At the UFO DATA conference in October 2007 was German researcher Michael Hesemann. Michael was also one of the speakers that weekend. Michael investigated the alien autopsy film from l995 through to l997 and believes it to be authentic. After the conference when Michael was back home in Germany he sent me an email that quite frankly left me stunned. He admitted for the first time that in l996 someone sent Michael an email telling him that Spyros Melaris was the hoaxer. Hesemann had never shared this information with anyone. I asked him what he did with it and he simply told me that he phoned Ray Santilli and asked him if he knew this man to which Santilli replied he did not. Michael told me he left it at that.
However, Spyros Melaris independently informed me that in l996 he had received a phone call from someone with a German accent asking him if he was the hoaxer and he of course denied it. He did not know who the caller was until he met Hesemann at our conference. I pressed Michael about this and eventually he admitted he did phone Spyros back in l996. Why Michael Hesemann never shared this information with anyone else is beyond me. In his defence, Michael has stated that there were others mentioned at the time and he did not want to spread false rumours, but these others names were circulated and eliminated. I have to be honest and say here and now that I cannot understand why Hesemann sat on this information and never told anyone. I leave it to you to make up your own mind.
A colleague of mine who is a veteran TV and movie special effects artist also took a look at the interview with Spyros. In his considered opinion the techniques and materials used by Melaris and his team to make the fake alien creature are 100% correct. There is no question in his mind that the dummies were made in the way described. He does have a few questions he’d like to ask, but these are purely little points of clarification and there is nothing wrong with what Melaris has had to say.
The other main person involved in all of this is of course US TV producer Bob Kiviat. Several years back my colleague Tim Mathews and I were tipped off about John Humphreys, Humphreys was part of the team and he made the dummies. Bob tried for years to get Humphreys on camera and make a TV documentary but all to no avail. Eventually, Bob did make a TV show for Channel 5 but without Humphreys in it. This was never broadcast. Both Humphreys and Melaris have spoken at length to Bob Kiviat about their involvement in this whole affair so I took the opportunity to ask Bob a few questions on December 4th 2007. This mini question and answer session is reproduced here in full:
Q: How many times did you speak with UK sculptor John Humphreys?
A: Once before the Ant & Dec movie came out. In approximately 2003. Once after that.
Q: Did Humphreys tell you on what he based the design for his alien creatures?
A: Yes, just on his own research, books and such. No other help.
Q: Did Humphreys ever see any original film, stills or otherwise?
A: No, never. He claimed it all came from his creative efforts and book research.
Q: During your conversations with Humphreys did he ever mention the name Spyros Melaris?
A: Yes. He said Spyros was the one who hired him for Santilli, who he met perhaps twice and came to the set once. All the money came through Spyros. Also, Spyros was the cameraman.
Q: Did Humphreys provide the names of anyone else involved. If yes what are those names?
A: No other names.
Q: Why was Humphreys looking to work with you on a documentary?
A: Yes, Humphreys wanted me to get him a network TV show based on his revelations that he made the autopsy footage, with Spyros acting as money man and cameraman, who he believed was working for Santilli.
Q: Was Humphreys going to tell all and sink the stories put out by Ray Santilli?
A: Yes, but until I got a commitment from a TV network and guaranteed money for his exclusive he kept much close to his chest.
Q: Did you speak to Humphreys agent/advisor?
A: Yes, his business manager was my main contact for all of 2003 and 2004, and it was he who informed me John was going to do the Ant & Dec movie, without giving me the details. There would also be a companion documentary “that would be my worst nightmare,” he said.
Q: If you did, what did he tell you about Humphreys involvement and reasons for wanting to spill the beans?
A: Instead of Humphreys spilling the beans to me, his manager clearly implied John had lost patience and saw a payday elsewhere – the movie, etc.
Q: You made a TV documentary for Channel 5 in 2006 in which I appeared, could you tell us why it was never broadcast?
Channel 5 was rushing instructions to my productions offices in L.A. from England telling me how the show needed to be styled, and they also wanted to move the airdate up to an almost impossible deadline. We were working around the clock already to appease the Channel 5 executive in charge when one of the top people at 5 actually listed the show in a TV guide of some sort. That’s when Gary Shoefield contacted 5 and falsely claimed Ray Santilli was involved in the ownership of my original Fox show, which the new 5 show was jumping off from. It was an outright fabrication, for my company has the only US copyright to the show AND THE ALIEN AUTOPSY FOOTAGE ITSELF!
While we were sorting through this false claim, we interviewed you. When the 5 executives saw you naming Humphreys as the guy who made the dummy and who was the key pro behind the footage, they wanted confirmation so they ILLEGALLY contacted Humphreys through a consulting producer. Humphreys freaked out, told them he wanted nothing to do with the 5 show and said he had to contact Warner Bros. Ultimately 5 reneged on their agreement with my distributor, my distributor did not fight for the airing, and this is how things were left. I’m still debating what course of action I can take to recover my substantial losses and damage!
Q: You have spoken on the telephone at length with Spyros Melaris. Are you convinced he is telling the truth?
A: For the most part, I can’t find any outlandish things that make his story unbelievable. But I do wonder how he could have been so naïve about the amount of money Santilli was making around the world. This part seems odd, as if he was playing dumb. On the contrary, he seems very bright. And if Ray gave him just enough work to keep him quiet afterward, I still wonder why he let all the other money go into Ray’s pocket without him demanding his share. This doesn’t add up, literally, pound for pound.
Q: You have been involved with the Alien Autopsy film since 1995, you have interviewed or spoken to most if not all the main players in it all, so what now is your conclusion?
A: I’m going to need more time to answer that question. Spryros’ actions or non actions in court will have a lot to do with this, and I’m looking into another intriguing angle that could impact my conclusions.
Robert Kiviat. End of interview.
It is clear from this brief interview with Bob Kiviat that there are slight differences between what John Humphreys says about his role in the faking of the film and what Melaris says. However, Humphreys does state quite clearly that it was Spyros Melaris who was the money man, it was Melaris who hired him on behalf of Santilli. Humphreys also confirms without any doubt that there never was any original film. It was a complete and utter fabrication.
I could go on but I think I’ve made my point. In l996, Spyros Melaris was outlined as the hoaxer to German researcher Michael Hesemann. In 2003, US TV producer Bob Kiviat spoke with UK sculptor John Humphreys who confirmed that Spyros was the man in charge and that there was no original film. In 2007, Spyros Melaris goes on the record for the first time and tells how it was all made. Well, perhaps not all. Spyros is holding back certain things for his book, which was supposed to be available in early 2008. And as for Ray Santilli, well he’s pretty quiet at the moment but I doubt if he will ever own up as he is quite simply in it too deep.
The long awaited book by Spyros Melaris ‘ALIEN AUTOPSY: The Myth Exposed’ comes with an accompanying DVD. It was originally scheduled to be released in 2008, but for a variety of reason it has been delayed with no firm date yet for its release.
ROSWELL ALIEN AUTOPSY – The Truth Behind the Film That Shocked the World is published by RoswellBooks.com where it can be purchased, and is avail via Amazon.com.
0
1
2
3
4
5
- Gemiddelde waardering: 0/5 - (0 Stemmen) Categorie:ALIEN LIFE, UFO- CRASHES, ABDUCTIONS, MEN IN BLACK, ed ( FR. , NL; E )
AI Focused "Clearest ever UFO photo chased by fighter jet" UAP Sighting News.
AI Focused "Clearest ever UFO photo chased by fighter jet" UAP Sighting News.
On August 4, 1990, two hikers in the Scottish Highlands witnessed a remarkable event involving an unidentified flying object (UFO) and a military jet. As they embarked on their walk near Calvine, Scotland, the hikers saw a large diamond-shaped craft hovering in the sky. Astonished by the sight, they quickly took photographs of the object. The UFO, which appeared to be metallic and structured, was soon joined by a fighter jet that seemed to be in pursuit of the mysterious craft. The incident became one of the most compelling UFO sightings in the United Kingdom, primarily because of the clear and detailed photographs captured by the hikers.
These images were reportedly handed over to the Ministry of Defence (MoD), but their release to the public was delayed for decades, leading to much speculation and debate among UFO enthusiasts and researchers. The MoD's handling of the case has fueled various conspiracy theories, with many believing that the government was attempting to conceal evidence of extraterrestrial life or advanced, undisclosed technology. Despite the long wait, the Calvine incident remains a significant and intriguing chapter in UFO lore, continuing to inspire investigations and discussions within the UFO community and beyond.
SpaceX returns to flight following Falcon 9 mishap investigation
SpaceX returns to flight following Falcon 9 mishap investigation
Story by Andrew Wulfeck
KENNEDY SPACE CENTER, Fla. – Two weeks after a leak doomed the deployment of Starlink satellites,SpaceXwas back in flight Saturday, with the release of nearly two dozen devices designed to expand broadband internet access around the world.
A SpaceX Falcon 9 rocket launches from Cape Canaveral Space Force station.
The Falcon 9 rocket took off from Launch Complex 39A at Florida’s Kennedy Space Center at 1:45 a.m. local time.
The launch was successful by all accounts, but space watchers were closely monitoring the moments surrounding payload deployment to see if the private space company would encounter issues similar to those of its July 11 mission.
During the previous mission, launch cameras showed a buildup of ice around an engine that prevented the successful deployment of satellites into orbit.
During the less than two-week-long review, SpaceX engineers identified a line for a sensor that was cracked, which they said led to the failure.
"During the first burn of Falcon 9’s second stage engine, a liquid oxygen leak developed within the insulation around the upper stage engine," SpaceX said regarding its mishap report to the FAA. "The cause of the leak was identified as a crack in a sense line for a pressure sensor attached to the vehicle’s oxygen system. This line cracked due to fatigue caused by high loading from engine vibration and looseness in the clamp that normally constrains the line."
The results were satisfactory enough for the government agency to approve the private space company’s return to flight, and less than 48 hours later, a Falcon 9 rocket was back in the air.
SpaceX did not report any anomalies with Saturday’s launch, which was the 50th of the year devoted to the Starlink program.
The company has around 6,000 satellites in low-Earth orbit that provide customers with ground terminal receivers access to high-speed internet.
A standard service will cost a residential customer about $120 a month, but packages listed on the company’s website run upwards of $5,000.
The company has gained international recognition for donating terminals to victims in disaster zones, such as in Florida after Hurricane Ian and flooding in South America.
SpaceX has scheduled at least five additional rocket launches over the next two weeks to deploy more Starlink satellites.
The schedule is part of the runup for what could be the launch of Crew-9 from Florida’s Space Coast in late August or early September.
NASA recently held a news conference where managers stated that all systems were a go for a crew of three astronauts and one Russian cosmonaut to launch in a Dragon spacecraft to the International Space Station for what is expected to be a six-month mission.
The space agency has been closely monitoring the review of the Falcon 9 rocket but said that nothing has arisen to a level that would require delaying the Crew-9 mission beyond the upcoming launch window.
SpaceX launches Starlink 10-9 mission from Cape Canaveral in Florida
SpaceX Falcon 9 fleet returns to flight on Starlink 10-9 mission at 1:45 a.m. Saturday, July 27, from NASA's Kennedy Space Center in Florida.
Launch off a SpaceX Falcon 9 rocket on Starlink 10-9 mission to launch Starlink satellites. Rocket launched from Pad 39A at Kennedy Space Center at1:45 a.m. EDT Saturday, July 27th.Show less
The UAP Disclosure Act: The proposed Pentagon/AARO re-write of November 2023
The UAP Disclosure Act: The proposed Pentagon/AARO re-write of November 2023
Hi all:
The recent article below discusses the Pentagon's rewrite of the Senate-passed Unidentified Aerial Phenomena Disclosure Act (UAPDA) in November 2023. The author, Douglas Dean Johnson, releases a 33-page line-by-line rewrite of the UAPDA proposed by the Pentagon to congressional negotiators. This document, marked with strike-outs and underlines, shows the Pentagon's proposed changes to the Senate-passed bill.
The rewrite was presented as the "informal views" of the Office of the Under Secretary of Defense for Intelligence and Security (OUSD(I&S)), which urged consideration of the extensive revisions to the UAPDA. The document was transmitted to Capitol Hill negotiators in late November 2023, during the final stages of negotiations over the Fiscal Year 2024 National Defense Authorization Act (NDAA).
Dr. Sean Kirkpatrick, the former director of the Pentagon's All-domain Anomaly Resolution Office (AARO), stated in an interview that the Pentagon successfully opposed the original UAPDA. The final enacted language of the FY 2024 NDAA, signed into law on December 22, 2023, reflected the Department of Defense's basic viewpoint on major points, although not on every detail.
The original UAPDA, sponsored by Senate Majority Leader Chuck Schumer and Senator Mike Rounds, aimed to create a President-nominated, Senate-confirmed UAP Records Review Board with broad investigatory powers. However, in conference committee with the House of Representatives, the UAPDA was significantly stripped down, eliminating the proposed independent review board and most of the language implying the existence of tangible evidence of nonhuman visitation.
The final FY 2024 NDAA merely enhanced the National Archives and Records Administration's mission to gather UAP-related documentation, allowing agencies more authority to shield material from public disclosure, especially during the first 25 years after document creation.
My immediate thoughts on this piece after going through it were that the Pentagon's influence in revising the UAPDA suggests a conflict of interest, as it involves the executive branch altering a legislative initiative. This could be seen as encroaching on legislative powers and potentially violating the separation of powers principle. It raises concerns about the balance of power between the executive and legislative branches, as well as the transparency and independence of UAP investigations.
I got a reply from Douglas Johnson following my immediate observations:
"Well, of course officials within the Executive Branch seek to "influence" those within the Legislative Branch-- and vice versa. That is not a "conflict of interest," but part and parcel of the whole three-branch system."
"It would certainly be an absurd state of affairs if members of the Legislative Branch, when considering legislation on any given subject, could not receive advice, and even strongly worded recommendations, from officials within the Executive Branch who are responsible for implementing legislation on that same subject. For example, if Congress is considering a bill dealing with sales of arms to a certain nation, would you suggest that lawmakers should refuse to look at any advice from the State Department and the Defense Department about the proposal?"
"The lawmakers are free to give whatever weight they wish to advise from Executive Branch officials-- in many cases, they disregard it entirely."
"Of course, the head of the Executive Branch, the President, can move beyond mere persuasion when he deems it necessary, and veto legislation that departs from what his preferences on what he deems to be significant matters (thereby raising the margin necessary for passage to two-thirds in each house of Congress). The possibility or direct written threat of a veto is often used by presidents, and their lieutenants, as an often-effective means of "influencing" the actions of Congress. Again, this is not a "conflict of interest," but basic elements of the constitutional scheme. In proper understanding of the separation of powers principles, such push-and-pull is not only permissible but absolutely necessary.”
At first look, Johnson’s response seems to make sense. He presents a reasonable perspective at first glance because it highlights the normal and necessary interactions between the executive and legislative branches of government. In a functioning democracy, it is expected that these branches will engage with each other, with the executive providing advice and recommendations to the legislative branch, especially on matters where the executive is responsible for implementation. This back-and-forth is indeed part of the checks and balances system designed to prevent any one branch from gaining too much power.
However, looking more closely, there might be problems, more to think about, or different ways to see it. It doesn't diminish my justified worries at all. The key issue with his response, when applied to the context of the Pentagon's rewrite of the UAPDA, is that it may not fully capture the specific nature and extent of the executive's involvement in this case. The concern is not about the exchange of advice or recommendations per se, but rather about the degree of influence and the potential for conflict of interest when the executive branch significantly alters a legislative initiative, especially one that pertains to oversight and transparency of executive actions. Mind you, David Grusch and other whistleblowers have accused the DoD of covering up a secret crash-retrieval and backengineering program involving crashed off-world craft and bodies. The fact that the DoD, through AARO, is assigned to investigate these claims presents a potential conflict of interest, raising concerns about the independence and objectivity of the UAP investigations conducted by AARO.
Johnson's statement makes a valid point about the general dynamics between the executive and legislative branches. However, it may not fully address the specific concerns regarding the Pentagon's involvement in rewriting the UAPDA, which some might view as an overreach of traditional executive authority.
The top of the first page of a document submitted by the Office of the Under Secretary of Defense for Intelligence and Security to congressional negotiators on the UAP Disclosure Act, November 2023.
By Douglas Dean Johnson
@ddeanjohnson on X/Twitter
My gmail address is my full name
Original publication: July 24, 2024, 10:00 AM EDT. Any substantive revisions to the original article will be noted in a log found at the end of the article. Those reading this article in the e-mailed version may have to click on "view in browser" under my byline in order to access embedded documents such as PDF files.
In the light of recent statements by the former head of the Pentagon "UFO office," Dr. Sean Kirkpatrick, asserting that the Pentagon/AARO successfully derailed the Schumer-Rounds Unidentified Anomalous Phenomena Disclosure Act (UAPDA) in late 2023, I am releasing here a proposed 33-page line-by-line rewrite of the Senate-passed UAPDA that the Pentagon provided to congressional negotiators during end-stage negotiations in November 2023.
This is the first publication of this document anywhere.
Further down in this article, you'll find Kirkpatrick's answers to questions I addressed to him for this article, such as whether the National Security Advisor or any other higher authority ever tried to subdue his activity in opposition to the UAPDA, and why the proposed Pentagon re-write of the UAPDA would have retained provisions affirming the right of the federal government to take ownership (via the exercise of eminent domain) over "any and all recovered technologies of unknown origin and biological evidence of non-human intelligence that be be controlled by private persons or entities..."
Pentagon Nov 2023 proposed revisions to UAPDA
GUIDE TO INTERPRETATION OF THE DOCUMENT:In the embedded PDF document, the unmodified underlying text is the Senate-passed UAPDA. Strike-out marking through a paragraph or phrase indicates that the Office of the Under Secretary of Defense for Intelligence and Security ((OUSD(I&S)) wanted that language removed from the bill. All underlined words and phrases were OUSD(I&S) proposals for new language or replacement language to be inserted.
Thus, if the OUSD(I&S) text had been enacted in total (which is not exactly what occurred), the resulting law would have been the original text, plus the underlined additions, minus the extensive strikeouts. This type of legislative re-write document is sometimes called a "red line."
The nature of the document is explained in introductory paragraphs found on the top third of the first page, shown in the image above: It was presented as the "informal views" of the Office of the Under Secretary of Defense for Intelligence and Security, which stated that the Department of Defense "strongly urges consideration" of the proposed extensive rewriting of Division G of S. 2226, which was the Schumer-Rounds UAP Disclosure Act, part of the the FY 2024 National Defense Authorization Act (NDAA) that had been passed by the U.S. Senate on July 27, 2023. The introduction to the document says that the Department of Defense position was arrived at "after conferring with NARA/ISOO," referring respectively to the National Archives and Records Administration (NARA) and to theInformation Security Oversight Office.
The Under Secretary of Defense for Intelligence and Security is the top intelligence officer in the Department of Defense. [1] The Pentagon's All-domain Anomaly Resolution Office (AARO), the "UFO office," is attached to the OUSD(I&S) for administrative matters, although starting in 2023 the AARO director reports directly to a higher official, the Deputy Secretary of Defense, "on all operational and security matters." The Deputy Secretary, Kathleen Hicks, ranks directly under the Secretary of Defense.
Kirkpatrick served as AARO director from its formal inception in mid-2022 until December 1, 2023, which included the period that the 2023 UAPDA language was under consideration in Congress (mid-July to early December 2023).
Data associated with the original "informal views" file document (which I have sanitized) suggests that it was transmitted to negotiators on Capitol Hill in late November, 2023, during the final stages of negotiations over what UAP language would survive in the final FY 2024 NDAA. The final FY 2024 NDAA language became public on December 6, 2003, passed the Senate on December 13, passed the House of Representatives on December 14, and was signed into law on December 22, 2023 (Public Law 118-31).
Notwithstanding the designation of the OUSD((I&S) document as reflecting "informal" views, the Department's advice was conveyed emphatically ("strongly urges consideration") and in granular detail. The 33-page document proposed an extensive rewrite of the Schumer-Rounds proposal, removing most of the central elements of the Senate-approved language. Moreover, the Department's advice was largely heeded: The final enacted language reflected the Department's basic viewpoint on major points, although not on every detail.
In a 70-minute interview conducted by Marik von Rennenkampff on July 17, 2024 (viewable on YouTube here; rough transcript posted here), Kirkpatrick spoke openly about the Pentagon's 2023 opposition to the UAPDA– the first time that he has addressed that subject in detail in public, as far as I am aware. In this interview, Kirkpatrick presented opposition by the Department of Defense and AARO to the 2023 UAPDA as decisive, telling von Rennenkampff, "We convinced Congress last year not to go down that road..." [italics added for emphasis]
[Under End Note No. 2 below, I have posted an eight-minute clip from the 70-minute interview. I encourage interested readers to use the links above to review the entire 70-minute exchange, which included discussion of well-known IR videos taken by Navy pilots, and also Kirkpatrick's remarks about a recent report issued by AARO regarding analysis of a metallic sample, in addition to the extended discussion of the UAP Disclosure Act.]
The OUSD(I&S) document that I am posting here today does not spell out AARO's substantive objections to the UAPDA, as Kirkpatrick did in the July 17 interview, but it essentially incorporates those objections through its extensive proposed revisions to the UAPDA, which the Senate had already approved. In an email exchange on July 23, 2024, Kirkpatrick said he could not confirm (but neither did he dispute) the authenticity of the OUSD(I&S) document, adding, "However, the document does represent many of the objections I tried to articulate to Marik [von Rennenkampff, in the July 17, 2024 interview]."
THE BIRTH AND DEMISE OF THE ORIGINAL UAP DISCLOSURE ACT
The UAPDA was originally unveiled, with Senate Majority Leader Chuck Schumer (D-NY) as prime sponsor and Senator Mike Rounds (R-SD) as lead co-sponsor, on July 14, 2023. Four other senators co-sponsored the measure. After some modifications, it was added to the FY 2024 NDAA as part of a list of agreed-on amendments, without floor debate or a separate vote. The Senate passed its FY 2024 NDAA, including the UAPDA, on July 27, 2023.
As passed by the Senate, the UAPDA would have created a President-nominated, Senate-confirmed UAP Records Review Board– a temporary federal agency with full-time professional staff and broad investigatory powers to search out, gather, and release any UAP-related material from throughout the government, with the President making final decisions regarding delay or release of material deemed especially sensitive. The bill was modeled in most respects on the 1992 JFK Assassination Records Collection Act.
However, in conference committee with the House of Representatives, the UAPDA was greatly stripped down. The proposed independent review board was eliminated, as was most of the original language that had been widely read to imply that somewhere within the government's purview tangible evidence of nonhuman visitation was likely to be found. The final FY 2024 NDAA enacted on December 22, 2023 merely conferred on the National Archives and Records Administration a somewhat beefed-up mission to gather UAP-related documentation into a collection, but affording far more authority for agencies to shield material from public disclosure, especially during the first 25 years after creation of a document.
Throughout the period of July-December 2023, I reported extensively on the progress of the UAPDA, a measure that I supported. At the time, and since, I have repeatedly stated that the gutting of the bill was due not to any lobbying campaign by powerful defense contractors, as some imagined, but to opposition from the Pentagon/AARO, the objections of which were largely adopted by several of the very senior Republican lawmakers who were among the small group of lawmakers who resolved the final contentious issues on NDAA. [3]
The Pentagon's opposition to the Senate-passed UAPDA was far from a state secret even in late 2023. After the stripped-down final version emerged from behind closed doors in early December, even the New York Times reported that a "person familiar with the talks who insisted on anonymity to describe them noted that the Defense Department also had pushed back forcefully on wider measures." ("Congress Orders U.F.O. Records Released but Drops Bid for Broader Disclosure," by Kayla Guo, New York Times, December 14, 2023)
THE PENTAGON AND THE WHITE HOUSE
From the time that the UAPDA was unveiled on July 14, 2023, up until the issuance of the final NDAA conference report on December 6, 2023, certain social-media influencers claimed that the UAPDA had the backing of President Biden and his National Security Advisor, Jake Sullivan. At no point did I encounter any actual evidence of such interest or support by high-level decisionmakers in the Executive Branch, and as months passed after the Senate's July 27 passage of the NDAA/UAPDA, it became quite clear that the Biden Administration was not doing anything to help enact the UAPDA.
I asked Kirkpatrick, "When you were the director of AARO, did you ever receive direction or heavy guidance from anybody in the White House, or the Executive Office of the President, or the National Security Council, or any other higher authority, indicating that you should soften or qualify your opposition to the UAPDA?"
Kirkpatrick replied:
The White House could have cared less about this issue. No one from the White House, EOP [Executive Office of the President], NSC [National Security Council], or any other 'higher authority' called me or my boss to put pressure on me to soften my position on the UAPDA. No one in Congress did either. (email, July 23, 2024)
As I was the first to report (on July 13, 2024), Senator Rounds re-introduced the UAPDA on July 11, 2024, as a possible amendment (SA 2610) to the FY 2025 National Defense Authorization Act (S. 4638), which the Senate will take up later this year. As filed by Rounds on July 11, Senate Majority Leader Schumer was listed as co-sponsor (no longer the prime or controlling sponsor).
Marik von Rennenkampff led off his July 17 interview with Kirkpatrick by noting that reintroduction of the UAPDA, to which Kirkpatrick responded: "Last year we convinced Congress last year not to go down that road..." Von Rennenkampff soon followed up: "Did you say that you or AARO pushed back on the Schumer-Rounds amendment when it was proposed last year? That seems to be a big mystery as to how it was, shall we say, watered down? Other people say 'gutted.'"
Kirkpatrick answered:
So let's be clear about how the process works in the United States government. Every year the NDAA is put together by proposals from both the Senate and the House side. Okay? Those proposals are socialized with the Department. The Department then gets an opportunity to write a reclaima [request for reconsideration] that goes back to the Hill that says, "Hey, this is not a good idea for these reasons," or, "This would be better if it was written this way," or, "Yeah, we just can't really support this because of these resource constraints," or whatever the case may be. And that is true for every piece of the NDAA– it gets farmed back to us and we or the Department get to look at that.
As AARO, the pieces of legislation that were written about AARO come to us, and we are allowed to write our thoughts and disclaimers. And so we wrote exactly that. "Look, this is duplicative of language you gave us in '22 [the NDAA enacted in December 2022, which mandated a "historical report" to be produced by AARO]. Let us finish the thing that you told us to do the first time, before you write additional legislation."
In the von Rennenkampff interview, Kirkpatrick stressed his view that creation of a UAP Records Review Board would duplicate a mission already assigned to AARO. But he also maintained that there was no evidence that would justify creation of a new agency to hunt for inter-government knowledge or possession of nonhuman technology.
Kirkpatrick said:
I mean, look, let me be clear: We found no evidence of any of these allegations. None. And I had access to everything there was to have access to. I went up and briefed and testified [to members of Congress] just as recently as a couple of months ago, with the SAPCO director and the CAPCO director from ODNI [officials who oversee special access programs], and all of us have gone through everything that we have, everything that witnesses have come forward and said, "Hey, this is this hidden program." And it turns out none of them are those hidden programs. None of them. All of them have turned out to be other things that have nothing to do with extraterrestrial reverse engineering. And all of them have been reported to Congress....
And [in the UAPDA] they're telling the commercial industry they have to turn over all of this stuff. Well, the commercial industry – and I talked to all of the commercial industry, and they're scratching their heads and they don't know what they're talking about [in the bill language].
The November 2023 OUSD(I&S) "informal views" draft was not adopted by the House-Senate conferees in total. But the final enacted language appears to have been largely consistent with OUSD(I&S)/AARO's core objectives. The proposed independent review board, with its professional staff and broad powers, was deleted. The final law, like the OUSD(I&S)/AARO draft, gives Executive Branch agencies broad discretion to prevent disclosure of specific records, although the enacted version contains a limited presumption for disclosure 25 years after creation of a UAP-related document.
PENTAGON'S PROPOSED 2023 UAPDA REWRITE RETAINED AN EMINENT DOMAIN PROVISION
One noteworthy aspect of the OUSD(I&S) draft is the way it proposed to rewrite Section 9010, "Disclosure of Recovered Technologies of Unknown Origin and Biological Evidence of Non-human Intelligence." In the Senate-passed UAPDA, this section empowered the Review Board to exercise eminent domain (i.e., assert government ownership) "over any and all recovered technologies of unknown origin and biological evidence of non-human intelligence that may be controlled by private persons or entities..."
The OUSD(I&S) draft proposed substantial weakening of the provision by replacing mandatory language ("The Federal Government shall exercise eminent domain over...) with non-binding hortatory language ("It is the sense of Congress that the Federal Government should exercise eminent domain appropriately over...)– but OUSD(I&S)/AARO did not propose deleting the objects to which such eminent domain "should" apply: "any and all recovered technologies of unknown origin and biological evidence of non-human intelligence that may be controlled by private persons or entities..."
Moreover, other OUSD(I&S) revisions would have required that any such exotic material be made available to AARO (rather than to an independent review board), and would have assigned to the President (rather than a review board) certain determinations regarding such material.
By email, I asked Sean Kirkpatrick, "What was the rationale for recommending retention of proposed new provisions of law that would have provided something of a legal foundation for AARO or other federal entities to assert control over hypothetical technologies of unknown origin or hypothetical evidence of non-human intelligence (at least, apparently, in such cases in which the President deemed it appropriate)? Was this a 'just in case' provision?"
Kirkpatrick replied:
At the time, the conspiracy frenzy was pushing this narrative of some prime contractor having this material, and there were these lingering allegations of AARO not having authorities, despite it being written into law previously. So a compromise was proposed to allow for the exercising of eminent domain under AARO’s authority to underscore that AARO could compel disclosure of anything, should anything exist. Since we know nothing exists, we didn’t feel it made our job harder, and felt this could close a gap in uninformed allegations. (email, July 23, 2024)
In the final enacted bill, however, the eminent domain section was entire absent. [4]
END NOTES
[1] In 2023 the Under Secretary of Defense for Intelligence and Security was Ronald Moultrie, who resigned effective February 29, 2024. President Biden has nominated as his successor Tonya Wilkerson, who is currently Deputy Director of the National Geospatial-Intelligence Agency (NGA). Wilkerson's nomination is currently pending before the Senate Armed Services Committee. For further information on that matter, see my article "Who is Tonya P. Wilkerson, and what does it have to do with UFOs?," May 21, 2024.
[2] I have embedded here a nine-minute excerpt from the 70-minute interview of Sean Kirkpatrick, conducted on July 17, 2024, by Marik von Rennenkampff. This clip runs from about the 8-minute point to about the 17-minute point in the original video.
Excerpt from July 17, 2024 interview of Sean Kirkpatrick by Marik von Rennenkampff, discussing AARO's 2023 activity in opposition to the original Schumer-Rounds UAP Disclosure Act. Fair Use under 17 U.S. Code § 107 for noncommercial purposes of investigative journalism, scientific research and debate, education, and commentary.
[3] In an exchange with Senator Rounds on the Senate floor on December 13, 2023, Senator Schumer said, "It is really an outrage that the House didn’t work with us on adopting our proposal for a review board, which, by definition, needs bipartisan consent. Now it means that declassification of UAP records will be largely up to the same entities that blocked and obfuscated their disclosure for decades." However, Schumer said nothing on that occasion (or any other occasion of which I am aware) to indicate that he viewed the opposition to the UAPDA as originating in whole or part from corporate entities. Rather, he expressed criticism of unspecified actors within the Executive Branch: "The U.S. Government has gathered a great deal of information about UAPs over many decades but has refused to share it with the American people. That is wrong, and, additionally, it breeds mistrust. We have also been notified by multiple credible sources that information on UAPs has also been withheld from Congress, which, if true, is a violation of the laws requiring full notification to the legislative branch, especially as it relates to the four congressional leaders, Defense Committees, and the Intelligence Committee."
An exchange on the U.S. Senate floor between the prime sponsor of the 2023 UAP Disclosure Act, Senate Majority Leader Chuck Schumer (D-NY), and the lead co-sponsor, Senator Mike Rounds (R-SD). This colloquy occurred on December 13, 2023, after the UAP Disclosure Act had been gutted in a House-Senate conference committee, and the Senate had passed the final FY 2024 NDAA.
[4] All of the UAP-related language that was included in the final Fiscal Year 2024 National Defense Authorization Act, enacted December 22, 2023 (Public Law 118-31), is included in the PDF file embedded below. The UAP Records Collection provision, which is what survived
What is this 2.5 mile object on Planet Mercury? UFO Sighting News. Video.
What is this 2.5 mile object on Planet Mercury? UFO Sighting News. Video.
Hey all, I found an interesting anomaly at the center of a crater on planet Mercury. The object measures 2.5 miles tall and 1.5 miles wide. It's super reflective as if it's made of a metallic alloy and it doesnt seem to fit into the surrounds. To me, this is proof of ancient aliens existing on Mercury. But for many, believing that aliens could exist...it's a horrifying thought...so much so that they will deny any possibility of it entering their mind.
Hey all, I found two huge structures on the moon Europa today. I made a video to show you all. The structures look metallic and stand half a mile tall and 20 miles long.
Public domain / ESA & MPS for OSIRIS Team MPS/UPD/LAM/IAA/RSSD/INTA/UPM/DASP/IDA/Wikimedia commons - CC BY-SA 3.0 igo
NASA's Perseverance rover zet zijn missie op Mars voort op zoek naar bewijs dat de oude aanwezigheid van buitenaards leven op de rode planeet zou kunnen onthullen: er komt een opzienbarende nieuwe ontdekking.
Perserverance vindt een pijlvormige rots op Mars
Een vreemde rots, waarvan de vorm lijkt op de punt van een pijl, heeft de aandacht getrokken van NASA's Perseverance rover, op een missie naar Mars om te zoeken naar tekenen van buitenaards leven. Hoewel het bestaan van marsmannetjes nog niet is aangetoond, zijn er wel elementen naar voren gekomen die hun aanwezigheid op de rode planeet miljarden jaren geleden zouden kunnen bewijzen.
De Amerikaanse ruimtevaartorganisatie maakte dit bekend nadat Perseverance een rots had ontdekt die bedekt was met vlekken en rijk was aan “aderen”. Wetenschappers hebben deze rots een speciale naam gegeven, Cheyava Falls, naar een van de watervallen van de Grand Canyon. Maar wat is er zo bijzonder aan en waarom zou het bewijs kunnen leveren van buitenaards leven op Mars, dat ooit bewoonbaar kan zijn geweest?
Gesteente op Mars bedekt met vlekken: mogelijke sporen van fossiel leven
Cheyava Falls lijkt organische verbindingen te bevatten en dit zou kunnen wijzen op sporen van microbieel leven uit de tijd dat er water was op Mars. Perseverance vond de rots in het noordelijke deel van de Neretva-vallei, waar in het verleden een rivier stroomde die uitmondde in de Jezero-krater. "Deze “luipaardvlekken” op een rots op Mars zijn aanwijzingen voor waarschijnlijk de beste tekenen van oeroud microbieel leven die we tot nu toe op Mars hebben gevonden. Om het zeker te weten, moeten we het gesteente bestuderen in laboratoria op aarde", staat te lezen in het X-profiel van NASA's Jet Propulsion Laboratory.
De route van de rover, zoals uitgelegd door de Associate Administrator voor het Directoraat Wetenschapsmissies, Nicola Fox, was ontworpen om ervoor te zorgen dat hij de gebieden van Mars kan bereiken waar zich vermoedelijk de meest interessante wetenschappelijke monsters bevinden. "Deze reis door de rivierbedding van de Neretva Vallis heeft zijn vruchten afgeworpen, omdat we iets hebben ontdekt dat we nog nooit eerder hadden gezien en dat onze wetenschappers veel te bestuderen zal geven."
Nieuw bewijs van leven op Mars: verzamelde monsters
Perseverance van zijn kant "verklaarde" op zijn X-profiel: "Ik kwam naar Mars met een taak om uit te voeren: het vinden en bemonsteren van de beste rotsen voor toekomstige studies in laboratoria op Aarde. Ik zal deze speciale rotskern, en de andere in mijn collectie, veilig bewaren totdat er een toekomstige missie komt om ze naar de Aarde te brengen voor verdere studie."
De rots, die 90 cm bij 60 cm meet, verschilt van andere roodgekleurde rotsen die op Mars zijn gevonden door de vele zwarte en witte vlekken die erop zitten. De zwarte delen bevatten fosfaat en ijzer, net als aardse gesteenten waarop gefossiliseerd microbieel leven is gevonden. Juist dit heeft de hoop van wetenschappers aangewakkerd om misschien het leven van microben op Mars te kunnen bevestigen, hoewel we voor een definitief antwoord zullen moeten wachten tot de monsters over een paar jaar naar onze planeet terugkeren.
Beste bezoeker, Heb je zelf al ooit een vreemde waarneming gedaan, laat dit dan even weten via email aan Frederick Delaere opwww.ufomeldpunt.be. Deze onderzoekers behandelen jouw melding in volledige anonimiteit en met alle respect voor jouw privacy. Ze zijn kritisch, objectief maar open minded aangelegd en zullen jou steeds een verklaring geven voor jouw waarneming! DUS AARZEL NIET, ALS JE EEN ANTWOORD OP JOUW VRAGEN WENST, CONTACTEER FREDERICK. BIJ VOORBAAT DANK...
Druk op onderstaande knop om je bestand , jouw artikel naar mij te verzenden. INDIEN HET DE MOEITE WAARD IS, PLAATS IK HET OP DE BLOG ONDER DIVERSEN MET JOUW NAAM...
Druk op onderstaande knop om een berichtje achter te laten in mijn gastenboek
Alvast bedankt voor al jouw bezoekjes en jouw reacties. Nog een prettige dag verder!!!
Over mijzelf
Ik ben Pieter, en gebruik soms ook wel de schuilnaam Peter2011.
Ik ben een man en woon in Linter (België) en mijn beroep is Ik ben op rust..
Ik ben geboren op 18/10/1950 en ben nu dus 74 jaar jong.
Mijn hobby's zijn: Ufologie en andere esoterische onderwerpen.
Op deze blog vind je onder artikels, werk van mezelf. Mijn dank gaat ook naar André, Ingrid, Oliver, Paul, Vincent, Georges Filer en MUFON voor de bijdragen voor de verschillende categorieën...
Veel leesplezier en geef je mening over deze blog.