The James Webb telescope found hundreds of 'little red dots' in the ancient universe. We still don't know what they are.

{ https://www.livescience.com/ }

14-09-2024 om 22:14 geschreven door peter  

Scientists Puzzled by Hundreds of Little Red Dots in James Webb Images of Distant Universe

What are they?

The universe is full of countless galaxies, and the Webb telescope has helped astronomers study some of them. 

(Image credit: NASA, ESA, CSA, STScI)

Red Era

Earlier this year, astronomers revealed one of the James Webb Space Telescope's most spectacular and intriguing discoveries yet — and that's saying something.

Lying in one of the most ancient regions of the observable universe, they found, were hundreds of galaxies that have come to be known as the "Little Red Dots."

These aren't ordinary galaxies. As Smithsonian Institution astrophysicist Fabio Pacucci explains in an essay for The Conversation, these compact red structures, which are only about two percent the size of the Milky Way, puzzle astronomers. The issue is that they can't determine what they are, because observing them through different mediums each points to them being a different kind of object.

Deepening the mystery, the Little Red Dots were only visible for a period of around one billion years, about 600 to 800 million years after the Big Bang. Now, they're nowhere to be found, and determining exactly what they are will be crucial to figuring out where they fit into the evolution of our universe.

Mystery of Interior

There are two leading hypotheses on the Little Red Dots.

One proposes that they're incredibly dense galaxies packed with up to 100 billion stars. That's as many as the Milky Way, despite being just a fraction of the size of our galaxy.

To put that into perspective, Pacucci says this would be like packing the population of China into a huge single room.

"These astrophysical objects may be the densest stellar environments in the entire universe," he wrote (whether that would even be physically possible is unclear.)

The other hypothesis proposes that this ludicrous density can be explained by a supermassive black hole at the center of the Little Red Dots.

Except that observations suggest that these would have to be "overmassive" — or too big for what should be possible based on the scale of the surrounding galaxy, with some being nearly as heavy as them.

Two-Faced

This leads us to one of the Little Red Dots' most puzzling attributes, according to Pacucci: they appear like different objects depending on how you examine them.

A vital indicator of the presence of supermassive black holes are telltale emission lines in light spectra, and when examined this way, the compact galaxies clearly appear to have them — if not be dominated by them.

But if they contain supermassive black holes, the Little Red Dots should also be blasting out x-rays. More recent research, however, has shown that these puzzling galaxies show no sign of such x-rays, favoring the "stars-only" hypothesis. So, black holes or no black holes — which is it?

Pacucci speculates that it's possible that the sheer density of material surrounding the Little Red Dots' black holes are blocking its x-ray emissions, or it could be that they're being emitted in a different spectrum than what we're used to.

In any case, the implications are fascinating. We could be looking at unprecedentedly dense star-filled galaxies, or evidence that "overmassive" black holes may have been the first ones in the universe.

More on James Webb discoveries: 

• James Webb Spots Distant Space Object With Jewel-Like Lights

{ https://futurism.com/the-byte }

14-09-2024 om 21:48 geschreven door peter  

NASA Activates Ancient Thrusters on Voyager 1, the Most Distant Human Object in Existence

It's incredible that it still has fuel left.

NASA engineers have pulled off an incredible feat, switching the agency's ancient Voyager 1 probe to a different set of thrusters.

Big Money Thrustas

NASA engineers have pulled off an incredible feat: switching the agency's ancient Voyager 1 probe — the farthest human-made object in existence — to a different set of thrusters.

Some of the 46-year-old spacecraft's thrusters started getting gunked up with silicon dioxide, the apparent result of a rubber diaphragm breaking down inside its fuel tank. The material reduced the thrusters' efficiency, forcing NASA to come up with a workaround.

Their solution: reactivate a different set of thrusters to keep it going.

The feat, successfully completed in late August, gives Voyager 1 yet another lease on life. The probe has been on life support for quite some time now — but it's still not giving up.

Dead Space

Voyager 1 has three sets of thrusters, which were designed to help it perform several planetary flybys. However, now that it's on a straight path away from the solar system, "its thruster needs are simpler, and either thruster branch can be used to point the spacecraft at Earth," according to NASA.

It's not the first time engineers have had to switch to a different set of thrusters. Both in 2002 and 2018, teams swapped the probe to a different branch due to similar material buildup.

The team's latest move was to swap to an attitude propulsion thruster branch, which had already been partially clogged, but to a lesser degree.

Complicating matters are power supply and temperature issues. Having "turned off all non-essential onboard systems, including some heaters" to conserve power, both Voyager 1 and its twin Voyager 2 have grown colder.

Consequently, engineers had to warm up the thrusters before bringing them back online to avoid any damage. However, turning on the heater could put too much stress on the spacecraft's dwindling power supplies.

Fortunately, the team confirmed on August 27 that their final plan — turning off one of the main heaters to free up power for the thruster heaters — had worked, allowing Voyager 1 to keep edging into interstellar space.

"All the decisions we will have to make going forward are going to require a lot more analysis and caution than they once did," said Voyager's project manager Suzanne Dodd in a statement.

Nobody knows how long Voyager 1 will hold on. The spacecraft has more than exceeded expectations, having fulfilled its original mission to explore Jupiter, Saturn, and Saturn's largest moon, Titan, decades ago.

But NASA remains optimistic.

"My motto for a long time was 50 years or bust," astronomer Stamatios Krimigis, who has worked on the Voyager 1 mission since the 1970s, told NPR in March, "but we're sort of approaching that."

More on Voyager 1: 

• NASA's Ingenious Hack Brings Dying Voyager Probe Back Online

 { https://futurism.com/the-byte }

14-09-2024 om 21:30 geschreven door peter  

In the remote wilderness of the Shoria Mountains in southern Siberia, a long-hidden secret has remained untouched for millennia. Far from the reach of modern civilization, a discovery was made that would challenge our understanding of ancient human history. 

In 2013, a team of 19 researchers, led by Georgy Sidorov, embarked on an expedition to explore this mysterious region. Their destination was Gora Shoria, a mountain towering 3,600 feet above sea level in a remote part of Russia. Intrigued by reports of strange megalithic structures, the team ventured into this secluded terrain. 

What they found was extraordinary: an immense super-megalith dating back roughly 100,000 years that defied conventional history. These massive stone blocks, later known as the Gornaya Shoria Megaliths, appeared to be made of granite, featuring flat surfaces and precise right angles. The most astounding detail was the weight of the stones, exceeding 3,000 tons—making them the largest megaliths ever discovered. 

The arrangement of these granite blocks suggested a deliberate design, far beyond what could be explained by natural formations. The blocks were carefully stacked, reaching a height of approximately 140 feet. This raised profound questions: how were such massive stones carved, transported, and assembled in this remote and rugged landscape? 

Some researchers have speculated about the existence of a pre-flood civilization, a sophisticated society wiped out by a cataclysmic event. 

Also a deep, narrow vertical shaft was uncovered. The shaft, lined with parallel stone slabs, appeared to be human-made. 

The walls of the shaft were straight and polished, descending 40 meters (around 130 feet) before opening into a vast underground hall, 36 meters (around 118 feet) high. These walls were constructed from large megalithic blocks, perfectly fitted with minimal gaps. Some of the stones resembled columns, reinforcing the idea of deliberate design. The full explored length of the shaft spanned over 100 meters (approximately 350 feet). 

The precision and scale of this structure left no doubt that it was an artificial creation of immense proportions. The polished walls and massive blocks bore a striking resemblance to the shafts within the Great Pyramid of Khufu in Egypt, suggesting a level of architectural sophistication that defies conventional explanations.  

Speculation abounds regarding the shaft’s original purpose. Some believe it served an advanced technological function or was part of a larger, undiscovered structure. The exploration team took over an hour to reach the bottom of the shaft, which required significant climbing expertise and endurance. It is believed that additional chambers and channels, still unexplored, may lie even deeper underground. 

How could these gigantic 200-ton stone blocks have been assembled with such accuracy, deep underground? What kind of technology was used to construct the shaft and underground chamber?  

Some researchers have speculated that it may have been part of an ancient factory, a seismological research device, or even an energy generator. Others believe it was the underground portion of a long-lost pyramid that once stood on the surface of the mountain. 

Despite differing theories, we may wonder what ancient forces or lost civilizations left their mark on this remote corner of the world?

  

{ https://ufosightingshotspot.blogspot.com/ }

14-09-2024 om 20:52 geschreven door peter  

“Insufficient Data” Does Not Mean “Identified” – It Means Insufficient to Identify a UAP Positively

How often is “insufficient data” actually a result of insufficient investigation? Sweeping investigatory failures under the carpet was a routine practice of AARO’s forerunner, the USAF Project Blue Book of the 1950s-60s. Blue Book’s standard trick as exposed by its own chief scientific consultant, Dr. J. Allen Hynek, was to make it appear the Air Force had disposed of 90-95% of its UFO caseload not with actual data, but by flooding its case files with 60% or more Insufficient Data cases and casually applying convenient but implausible and unsupported explanations. The Air Force has released or leaked to the press bogus UFO “explanations” such as stars that were not visible, moon-as-UFO when the moon had not even risen yet, the pilot was “possibly drunk,” etc (See Clark, “Debunking,” UFO Encyclopedia, 2018, pp. 379-400).

This happened time and time again, often leaving witnesses embarrassed or understandably angry. So much so that in one case in 1966, Rep. Gerald Ford blasted the Air Force and sought Congressional hearings after sightings by police of fast high-flying objects in the Dexter, Michigan, area were dismissed by the Air Force as “swamp gas.” A mismatch between proffered Air Force explanations and the data submitted by witnesses was a recurring issue.

It appears that some 60% of Blue Book’s cases were in reality Insufficient Data (not just Blue Book’s understated 20% category labeled “Insufficient Data”) – because there was simply not enough info to go beyond guessing at “possible” or “probable” explanations to achieve certainty. The remaining 40% of Sufficient Data cases broke down into approximately 10%—30%, identified—unidentified. The unidentified were therefore a surprising 70-75% Unexplained Unknowns in the total Sufficient Data cases (30/40 = 75%, all numbers here are rounded).

As indicated above, Blue Book went further and tried to conceal this statistical shell game by carving out a much smaller 20% category they called “Insufficient Data” – a misdirect that obscured the fact that Blue Book did not sufficiently investigate the other 40% of the total cases and that the total Insufficient Data should have been stated as about 60%. These Possible/Probables were treated as fully explained IFOs instead of as Insufficient-Data. (See Hynek UFO Report, 1977, p. 259, etc.)

AARO Tries to Gloss Over Sensor Tracking of UAP

AARO tries to brush aside sensor tracking of UAP on the flimsy grounds of sensor “aberrations” and “artifacts” (AAROR p. 12; media reports call them “glitches”; previous AARO reports call them sensor “errors”). This is untenable if multiple sensors track the same UAP, like infrared and radar such as in the ATFLIR sensor pod videos by the Navy F/A-18s that most everyone concerned with the UAP issue has seen by now (probably at least 50 million video views to date).

• 

See Also

Extraordinary Evidence Requires Extraordinary Funding: The Search for Extraterrestrial Technology

In fact, AARO seems to ignore its own data showing they have reduced the problem of “Ambiguous Sensor Contact” with UAP in its caseload from 23% to 9% from April to November 2023 – it’s on AARO’s website but not mentioned in AARO’s report. (The earlier AARO annual report did show a 5% Ambiguous Sensor Contact figure as of Aug. 2022 based mostly on the Navy UAP Task Force’s work, before the April 2023 worsening increase under AARO to 23%.)

That 9% “Ambiguous Sensor Contact” figure means the other 91% of AARO’s current case files of sensor trackings of UAP are good data and are not “ambiguous.” This would appear to undermine attempts at downplaying or dismissing sensor trackings of UAP as must be due to some sort of speculative sensor “artifacts.” Cases involving multiple sensors can overcome sensor error so that any sensor that has an error is corrected by the other sensors that do not. Sensors operating at different frequencies on different bands of the electromagnetic spectrum will not all be fooled by electronic spoofing at the same time.

AARO withholds its multiple-sensor case numbers – unlike its predecessor UAP Task Force that reported it had 56% of all cases as multiple-sensor cases including two or more sensors tracking the same UAP at the same time by “radar, infrared, electro-optical, weapon seekers, and visual observation” (UAPTF June 2021, pp. 3-4). No wonder UAPTF had 99.3% Unexplained cases – good data and no terrestrial explanations.

AARO then complains about the lack of data regarding “speed, altitude, and size of reported UAP” (AAROR, p. 27), even though many of its cases have measurement data from multiple sensors (e.g., radar-infrared-optical F/A-18 cases). The complaint harkens back to Air Force Project Blue Book’s similarly unsupported complaint over the alleged lack of measured “speed, altitude, size” data on UFOs (The Report on Unidentified Flying Objects, the ex-Blue Book Chief Ruppelt’s 1956 book, pp. 116-7, 149, 201, 212, 224, etc.). Meanwhile, Blue Book buried any mention of tracking data resident in Blue Book files from missile tracking cameras, radar-visual cases, and from an Army UAP tracking network specially set up around the top secret “Site B” nuclear weapons stockpile depot at Killeen Base, Camp Hood, Texas (see section, below, with sample chart illustrating some of the Army UAP tracking).

In AARO’s boasted “thorough” and “complete” reporting of past UAP investigations (AAROR p. 12), there is no mention of the existence of the AF’s special AF-Army-Navy/Marine multiple-sensor UFO tracking networks set up at multiple sites in South Vietnam during the Vietnam War in 1968-70. Declassified military histories reveal over 500 “UFO” trackings on radar, optical, laser-ranging, nightscope, telescope, and infrared sensor systems, with 99% Unexplained (Declassified military histories: “Sensor Networks to Track UFOs in the Vietnam War,” UFO Encyclopedia, 2018, pp. 1050-1054).

AARO’s highly selective treatment of the Condon Report also from the AF’s UFO contract study at the University of Colorado, managed to studiously avoid the widely reported criticism that the Condon Report’s negative conclusions were contradicted by the embarrassing unmentioned fact that 34% of its own UAP cases remained Unexplained after investigation – as numerous scientists have pointed out in criticism of the Condon Report’s anti-UFO conclusions. (Someone in effect slipped up and put an easy list of the “Sightings, Unexplained” in the back Index of the published Condon Report, in 1969, where about 26 such Unexplained cases are listed, in addition to listing another 4 radar cases, 1 airglow photometer case, 3 numbered cases missed, and an uncertain number–about two–of the 14 unexplained Prairie Network-confirmed cases not overlapping with the preceding, totaling some 36 out of a grand total of about 106, or about 34%. Different tallies of the obfuscated Condon Report case numbers come up with slightly different numbers. See for example: W. Smith, Journal of UFO Studies, CUFOS, 1996). AARO fails to mention that 14 of the Condon study’s Unexplained UFO cases were backed up by photos taken by the astronomical meteor-tracking cameras of the Smithsonian’s Prairie Network system, an unprecedented scientific development.

There is also no mention of Dr. Condon’s obvious, non-scientific bias, which may have been the reason he was selected by the Air Force to chair the eponymous Commission. In late January 1967, while the Condon Committee’s investigation was ongoing, Dr. Condon tipped his hand, telling an audience at a lecture that UFOs are “nonsense” but “I’m not supposed to reach that conclusion for another year.” Once again, serious issues well-known to any UAP researcher are not included in the AARO report.

Likewise, AARO seems unaware of the new Over the Horizon – Forward Scatter (OTH-FS) radars turned over to NORAD for operational duty in March 1968 which immediately began tracking UAP. This was revealed in the House Science & Astronautics UFO Symposium hearings on July 29, 1968, and published, but despite being open source history it never made it into AARO’s “complete” and “thorough” history (“NORAD” in Clark, UFO Encyclopedia, 2018, p. 811b).

No Mention of the Scientist Sightings of UAP or Instrumentation Cases

No mention is made by AARO that many scientists, including government scientists, astronomers, physicists, and others have personally seen UFOs, some obtaining instrument data and photos. AARO never mentions unclassified instrument tracking of UAP in the Blue Book files and other Air Force declassified records (AARO can’t claim that released sensor data is “classified”).

No mention that 14 Unexplained UFO cases in the hostile Air Force University of Colorado “scientific study of UFOs” were photographed and confirmed by the Smithsonian Prairie Network scientific meteor-tracking cameras (another 6 caught on meteor cameras were IFOs). The Colorado study tried to bury it in its infamous Condon Report, but it’s identifiable if one looks at and studies the summary data table with skewed and misleading definitions.

It appears AARO didn’t look. Another scientist UAP instrument detection by airglow scanning photometer is also an Unexplained UFO in the Condon Report, which concealed the fact that an embarrassing 34% of its cases ended up Unexplained (as mentioned above).

The Air Force set up UAP tracking networks in South Vietnam with multiple sensor systems during the war in 1968-70, as revealed in many declassified military histories (mentioned before). But AARO seems ignorant of it.

Does AARO Admit Some “Non-Empirical” Evidence of Extraterrestrials?

AARO’s two key conclusions, as presented at the top of its report’s Executive Summary, state:

AARO found no evidence that any USG investigation, academic-sponsored research, or official review panel has confirmed that any sighting of a UAP represented extraterrestrial technology.

…

AARO has found no empirical evidence for claims that the USG and private companies have been reverse-engineering extraterrestrial technology.

(AAROR Exec Summary p. 7, underlining added.)

If there is not a blanket AARO denial saying “no evidence” of extraterrestrial UAP sightings, but only a more limited, qualified denial stating “no empirical evidence” (physical evidence) of reverse-engineering extraterrestrial tech, then what non-empirical evidence does AARO have? Empirical means physical evidence and reality of objects and events, not human records of such, which records are presumably non-empirical evidence.

Is this an innocent ambiguity or an inadvertent admission that AARO has non-empirical evidence, such as documentary records or witness testimony, of reverse-engineering efforts on recovered extraterrestrial technology?

Interestingly, AARO claims to have “conducted approximately 30 interviews” of “approximately 30 people” (pp. 6, 11), and quite specifically “As of September 17, 2023, AARO interviewed approximately 30 individuals” who claimed knowledge of hidden government extraterrestrial technology and evidence (AAROR, p. 28). Don’t they know exactly how many people they interviewed, was it 30 or not?

AARO is quick to stress that “It is important to note that none of the interviewees had firsthand knowledge of these programs” (p. 9).

But this seems to be contradicted later when AARO explains that “Priority is given to those interviewees who claimed first-hand knowledge… Interviewees relaying second or third-hand knowledge are lower in priority, but AARO has and will continue to schedule interviews with them, nonetheless.” (AAROR, p. 28) AARO thus makes it seem they are reluctant to “continue to schedule interviews” with “secondhand or thirdhand” witnesses because they are so occupied with high-priority firsthand witnesses.

AARO Fails to Define What Evidence it Would Accept for Extraterrestrial UAP

AARO also fails to define what evidence is required to establish extraterrestrial intelligence visiting Earth. Would multiple sensors tracking an object from high altitude or space that stops and starts with accelerations of >1000 g’s be at least a starting definition of evidence for non-human or extraterrestrial intelligence? (See Robert Powell/SCU critique of AAROR.) Likewise, AARO complains more broadly that it needs “Sufficient Data” in UAP cases, then never explains exactly what is considered “sufficient” (AARO Cons Report Oct 2023, p. 8).

Does it require direct communication with extraterrestrial intelligence to satisfy AARO’s unstated but seemingly shifting definition of “evidence” (see below)? What if the ETs simply refuse to communicate; do we just pretend to ignore them until they do? Is that a responsible operational defense posture or intelligence collection and analysis policy?

What radio signals have been received from UAP in the reports AARO has collected? AARO’s briefing slides to Congress and on its website state that it has cases of UAP-transmitted radio signals in the 1-3 and 8-12 GHz frequency bands (completely separate and different from UAP radar beams at 1-8 GHz, also listed). This has been briefed to Congress and listed in AARO Reporting Trends slides of “Typically-Reported UAP Characteristics” – but is never mentioned in the AARO Report.

Are these UAP Radio Signals a communication? What analysis of these signals has been undertaken? Has Congress been informed of the findings? The AARO Report also ignores a long history back to 1950 of UAP transmitting radio signals and radar beams and even replying to IFF (Identification, Friend or Foe) interrogation signals transmitted to the UAP by ground-based US radar stations (see “UFO IFF” and “NORAD National Alert” articles in Clark’s UFO Encyclopedia, 2018, pp. 814-824, 1155-6).

Does extraterrestrial evidence require beyond-terrestrial technological capabilities (the “extra” in “extraterrestrial”)? Does sensor data suffice or must physical samples be obtained? What about AARO’s October 2023 Consolidated Annual UAP Report which mentions “some cases” of UAP with “high-speed travel and unusual maneuverability” (p.2), and “very small percentage” with “high-speed travel and unusual morphologies” (p. 8), none of which are mentioned in AARO’s current historical report (unless it’s in the classified version).

The earlier UAP Task Force reported that 15% of its reports were of “unusual UAP movement patterns or flight characteristics” including “demonstrating UAP acceleration or a degree of signature management” (the latter meaning the UAP’s apparent use of electromagnetic signature reduction as a means of “camouflage” for purposes of lowering detectability, effectively a form of stealth) in mid-flight. Taken together, these terms evidently convey, at minimum, the UAP’s ability to “remain stationary in winds aloft, move against the wind, maneuver abruptly, or move at considerable speed, without discernable means of propulsion” (UAPTF June 2021, p. 5).

In October 2023 the AARO then-director Sean Kirkpatrick told CNN that about 2% to 4% of his cases were “truly anomalous” – possibly referring to his just-released report’s reference to “unknown morphologies” (meaning “unknown shapes”) and “interesting signatures” not otherwise defined in the report.

These are tantalizing and provocative admissions by AARO and its predecessor, but what do they mean in terms of meeting AARO’s unspoken requirements for “evidence”?

AARO’s report displays a constant shifting of ill-defined goalposts for what it deems to be “evidence,” etc. First, there is plain “evidence” then “empirical evidence,” then there is “convincing evidence” (is “empirical evidence” not quite “convincing”?). AARO refers to “verifiable information” as if to contrast it with “empirical evidence” (AAROR, p. 35) thus raising the question, is “empirical evidence” not empirically “verifiable information” by itself? And AARO speaks of “actionable data” as conveniently undefined and not distinguished from other types of data or “evidence.” And beyond that, there are “actionable, researchable data.”

The common denominator in these shifting vague pseudo-definitions of what is required for UAP evidence is that they seem intended to ensure genuine anomalies are minimized in favor of prosaic explanations, no matter how implausible.

Nothing by AARO on the Government “Stigma” Put on the UAP Subject; No Discussion, No History, Despite its Critical Importance

AARO does not even mention the word “stigma” anywhere in this report, except buried in a passing reference to the UAP Task Force helping “destigmatize” reporting of UAP though not the subject of UAP (AAROR, p. 24).

This is despite the historical importance of the “stigma” deliberately attached to the UFO subject by the US government – principally by the Air Force – that is widely cited by the media and witnesses testifying before Congress. The critical importance of stigma and the problems it has created in hampering and crippling UAP research and investigation are undeniable.

As AARO’s predecessor UAP Task Force stated in its “Preliminary Report to Congress” submitted in June of 2021 (p. 4):

“Narratives from aviators in the operational community and analysts from the military and IC describe disparagement associated with observing UAP, reporting it, or attempting to discuss it with colleagues…. [T]hese stigmas have … reputational risk [that] may keep many observers silent, complicating scientific pursuit of the [UAP] topic.”

The “stigma” attached to the UFO topic as applied by the government appears to have included abuses that AARO was legally required to investigate in its Historical Report – but did not. Specifically, the Historical Report was required to:

“(ii) include a compilation and itemization of the key historical record of the involvement of the intelligence community with unidentified anomalous phenomena [UAP], including— …

“(III) any efforts to obfuscate, manipulate public opinion, hide, or otherwise provide incorrect unclassified or classified information about unidentified anomalous phenomena [UAP] or related activities.” [NDAA FY23 Sec. 6802(j)(1)(B); 50 U.S. Code § 3373(j)(1)(B)]

As mentioned above, AARO failed to compile, itemize, and report on US intelligence agency abuses of UAP witnesses and others. The one tiny item dismissive of vague public perceptions of the Air Force’s UFO “debunker” abuse (AAROR, p. 38) does not document its long history as was required by law in NDAA FY23 and 50 U.S. Code § 3373 cited above.

AARO made no effort to compile the history of the Intelligence Community’s efforts to “obfuscate” or “hide” UAP information through excessive secrecy, as noted before.

Air Force Intelligence “efforts to … obfuscate [and] manipulate public opinion” on UFOs since the 1950s are primarily what caused the harsh stigma attached to the entire UFO subject in society. But this anti-UFO stigma is not investigated or historically documented by AARO – or even mentioned – contrary to its legal obligation.

This is despite the public admission by former USAF OSI officer Richard Doty that his official assignments included spying on US civilian UAP researchers and breaking into a private home, spreading disinformation about UAP, misinforming two US Senators, and spreading fake UFO documents including some so-called “MJ-12” documents that turned out to be a hoax (Doty radio interview Feb. 27, 2005; see Rojas, “Open Letter,” posting May 6, 2014, OpenMinds). Much more evidence could be cited of similar stigma-inducing covert government actions besides the public debunking and shaming of innocent UAP witnesses and civilian investigators (see “Debunking and Debunkery,” Clark, UFO Encyclopedia, 2018, pp. 379-400).

AARO’s Non-Disclosure of Non-Disclosure Agreements (NDAs)

The AARO report states that it asked DoD and IC organizations to review their files for any NDAs related to UAP and none were reported (AAROR, pp. 7, 30). Had AARO actually reviewed AFOSI NDAs themselves, rather than delegating the task, they might have reached a different conclusion.

For example, I was informed by a former member of the Advanced Aerospace Threat Investigation Program (AATIP / AAWSAP) that when he requested the opportunity to interview the two F-16 pilots involved in the famous Stephenville, TX, 2008 UAP case, both pilots replied that they could not discuss the matter because they had signed USAF NDAs. It ought to be possible to run this to the ground either by contacting the pilots or searching AFOSI records.

In another instance, a former USAF Air Traffic controller told me she and her colleagues signed OSI NDAs after reporting a black triangular UAP hovering over a nuclear weapons storage facility at Barksdale AFB. Subsequently, AFOSI officers asked them to sign NDAs, explaining that they had seen a highly classified US weapons system they were not cleared for (the secret weapons program ruse again). The witnesses assumed that was a cover story, as they could not imagine a test aircraft being sent to hover over a nuclear weapons storage facility, but they felt compelled to sign the NDAs for fear of retaliation if they did not. This case also suggests that in searching for pertinent USAF NDAs, it may be necessary to review NDAs of the type alleging uncleared military personnel had been exposed to US advanced technology programs outside their clearance level or access authorization and not merely search for some sort of “UAP NDA.”

In the Bentwaters, Rendlesham Forest, UK, case in December 1980-January 1981, there are indications that secondary witnesses and civilian investigators were pressured to sign secrecy agreements (see Col. Charles Halt’s 2016 book, pp, 400, 439).

Is AARO a Science Project or an Intelligence Organization?

Why is AARO, a component of the Intelligence Community and the Department of Defense (DoD), suddenly changing the rules of the game and importing purely academic, scientific standards for the interpretation of intelligence data? Is it because this allows the government to ignore important and valid but inconvenient information?

ARO claims its “methodology applies both the scientific method and intelligence analysis tradecraft” (AAROR, p. 6). But it seems the scientific methodology is set off against the intelligence methodology to discredit any observation of UAP that exceeds present-day scientific understanding, on the tacit grounds that observations by military personnel on this issue, and seemingly this issue alone, are not credible. Meanwhile, the intelligence tradecraft that would investigate a foreign adversary’s possible futuristic development of science seems to be shunted aside. Thus AARO uses a limited academic form of today’s science to deny as “not credible” the observed and measured UAP performance that may represent an advanced technology, possibly extraterrestrial, although we know 21st century science will inevitably be followed by a 31st century science. Neither the law enforcement nor intelligence communities have the luxury of limiting themselves to dismissing human reporting in favor of purely scientific standards of evidence.

It sometimes feels as though AARO is approaching the old unscientific Air Force Project Blue Book policy, long ago exposed by Blue Book scientific consultant Dr. Hynek, of declaring “It Can’t Be: Therefore it Isn’t” when dealing with tough unexplainable UFO cases (The Hynek UFO Report, 1977, ch. 3).

Hence, AARO’s Dr. Kirkpatrick claims there is no “credible” information of craft demonstrating capabilities that defy our current scientific understanding: “AARO has found no credible evidence thus far of extraterrestrial activity, off-world technology, or objects that defy the known laws of physics” (DoD News Briefing, Apr. 19, 2023). This, despite the testimony of Navy squadron Cmdr. Dave Fravor and his colleagues were involved in the Nimitz incident, backed by dramatic radar-infrared-electro-optical data recordings. AARO does not even mention the Nimitz case or its investigation anywhere in its “complete”, “thorough”, and “accurate” Historical UAP Report.

Cmdr. Fravor and his wingman and their crew all saw and reported the same wingless white “Tic Tac” shaped craft in conditions of ideal visibility and their accounts of its mind-boggling capabilities were corroborated by radar operators serving on two different platforms

Later that day another F/A-18 witnessed and filmed the UAP, yet it seems as if AARO is denying this undeniable event, suggesting it did not even happen just because it exceeds today’s academic scientific understanding. Multiple accounts by all three pilots and their weapons systems operators, and multiple radar operators and technicians agree that craft they observed demonstrated almost-instantaneous high g acceleration; achieved hypersonic speed without a sonic boom; showed no evidence of friction or plasma or obvious propulsion, despite the extreme velocities it achieved (estimated peak 90,000 mph in 12 miles going from 0 to 90,000 mph to 0, all in 0.78 seconds, at 5,000 g’s acceleration). The estimated 47-foot wingless white “Tic Tac” shaped craft also thus seemed to survive g forces far greater than any aircraft, rocket, or missile of that size built by man. The tough Navy squadron commander of the Black Aces could not find a terrestrial explanation for what he and his colleagues observed and he has made that clear in sworn testimony to Congress. Is this not relevant?

What aspect of this case should be thrown out as “not credible” and why? Why are we even bothering to ask pilots to report UAP if we do not deem them credible? Why is this case not viewed as compelling, albeit not absolutely conclusive, evidence of the presence in Earth’s atmosphere of vehicles that are so far advanced we cannot understand or replicate their performance? What evidence would AARO accept – and is AARO going to employ an unspoken rule of today’s academic science that does not see a science of tomorrow, and therefore arbitrarily says it must not have happened, because we don’t understand what was reported?

Aside from not liking the implications, is there any reason to doubt the fully consistent account of so many accomplished aviators and sailors operating with high-tech sensors? Our military could not function as effectively as it does if its personnel were not competent and reliable. When assessing the UAP issue, senior policymakers deserve candid views of intelligence and military personnel, not views limited by unrealistically high scientific standards imported from Academia. After all, AARO is a joint IC/DoD operation, not a science project.

Conclusion

As documented above, AARO has not complied with statutory orders from Congress for a detailed history of UAP sightings as recorded in USG’s historical records, instead providing a limited history of flawed US Government investigations of UAP.

There was no examination of the impact of “stigma” on the UFO subject, witnesses, and persons interested in it, aggressively implemented by the Air Force and supported by the AF-instigated CIA Robertson Panel, despite the legal requirement for AARO to document the history of intelligence agency manipulation of public opinion and other abuses.

Yet, as AARO itself acknowledged in its first report to Congress the “stigma” surrounding this topic has been a central problem in terms of getting government personnel or scientists to report or study UAP. (AARO Jan. 2023, p. 2) To summarize:

• • The AARO report is beset with basic errors of fact and science (for instance, despite AARO insinuations, Apollo moon landings cannot be seen by the naked eye from Earth, Manhattan Project buildings cannot fly in the air as UFOs, etc.).
  • The report makes unsupported claims about secret government projects causing civilian UAP sightings while ignoring the military’s own sightings of UAP that the military knew were not our own.
  • AARO never defines what evidence they would accept for extraterrestrial visitation or even UAP existence, to help avoid repeating past failures of UAP investigations. It seems AARO’s unstated definition of “evidence” is a fluid goalpost.
  • There are massive gaps in AARO’s review of important US government documents, records, and programs, and patterns of excessive UAP secrecy. The report focuses on prior government UAP investigations without even acknowledging they were more of an effort to delegitimize the topic than investigate it.
  • The powerful effects of the stigma that resulted are never discussed, despite universal recognition of the primary role stigma has played in preventing objective government or scientific UAP research. By failing to do so, this AARO report is more likely to reinforce this dangerous and dysfunctional stigma rather than mitigate it.

As skeptic journalist Tyler Rogoway said, and bears repeating (emphasis added): “The gross inaction and the stigma surrounding Unexplained Aerial Phenomena as a whole has led to what appears to be the paralyzation of the systems designed to protect us and our most critical military technologies, pointing to a massive failure in U.S. military intelligence.”

Finally, AARO has unaccountably imported the limited approaches to evidence used in academia that are not an appropriate basis for intelligence assessments of national security issues. Why ask pilots to report UAP if we are going to then discard these reports because they do not meet some strict but narrow-visioned academic and scientific standards? Why is it that the human mind and intellect can contribute to intelligence assessments of any other topic but UAP?

What about future scientific developments and the scientifically unpredictable intentions of foreign adversaries? In sum, this limited approach to analysis, uniquely applied to the subject of UAP within the Intelligence Community, deprives policymakers of judgments based on information that is important, valid and compelling, even if it is not at present scientifically conclusive.

I hope this report will help Congress, the press, and the public understand just how far short AARO’s historical UAP report is from being “thorough”, “accurate” and “complete.” I also hope AARO will find some of these observations helpful in preparing Volume 2. There is no reason this taxpayer-funded organization cannot be more clear, transparent, and accurate regarding its UAP analysis and reporting.

• Acknowledgments: This article was only possible due to the diligent research and extraordinary contributions of quite a few UAP experts and researchers, who shall remain nameless here but who freely contributed their time and expertise. Their astute analysis and expertise form the backbone of this article. It took substantial effort on their part, but I know they will be satisfied if this helps Congress and the public understand how much work remains to be done to create a “complete” and “accurate” history of UAP and the US government.

• Christopher Mellon spent nearly 20 years in the U.S. Intelligence Community, including serving as the Minority Staff Director of the Senate Intelligence Committee and the Deputy Assistant Secretary of Defense for Intelligence. He actively participates in Harvard’s Galileo Project and, in his free time, works to raise awareness regarding the UAP issue and its implications for national security. Follow him online at his official website and on X: @ChrisKMellon.
• Editor’s Note: This article was updated on April 15, 2024, with additions to further illustrate the issues presented by AARO’s claim that U-2 reconnaissance aircraft could account for numerous early UAP observations, further commentary regarding incorrect details in AARO’s report involving the CIA Special Group that convened in the 1950s, and the inclusion of an additional table and commentary regarding the U.S. Air Force IFO cases provided to the CIA’s Robertson Panel. 

Resources

• Christopher Mellon, “How government over-classification may hide UFO videos and harm security,” The Hill, March 6, 2022.

Note: The author does not necessarily endorse every point expressed in the resources linked below.

• Robert Powell/SCU (Scientific Coalition for UAP Studies), “AARO Report: Flawed, Unresponsive, Clueless, and Knavish,” March 9, 2024, X/Twitter (See below):
• Micah Hanks, “2022 Annual Report on UAP: Four Significant Takeaways You Probably Missed,” The Debrief, Jan. 19 2023.
• Barry Greenwood, “2024 AARO Report,” CUFOS (Hynek Center for UFO Studies).
• John Greenewald / Black Vault, “What’s NOT in AARO’s recent “Historical Record” UAP Report?” X/Twitter post, March 31, 2024.
• John Greenewald / Black Vault, “Breaking Down The Recent UAP “Historical Record” Volume I Report,” YouTube post, March 30, 2024.
• Marik von Rennenkampff, “Pentagon’s flawed UFO report demands congressional action,” The Hill, March 15, 2024

14-09-2024 om 00:37 geschreven door peter  

14-09-2024 om 00:31 geschreven door peter  

Another irregularity worth noting is the fact that before its release, Department of Defense (DoD) Public Affairs sponsored a closed-door pre-brief on the report’s findings for a select group of press outlets on an invitation-only basis. Outlets like The Debrief, which closely follow the UAP issue, were excluded. Following the report’s release, most of the news agencies that had participated in the pre-brief went on to publish articles that uncritically parroted the report’s findings. Moreover, they seem to have done so without consulting any of the scholars or experts who have studied and written extensively on this topic as would normally be the case in another field.

What about consulting the famous scientist, author, venture capitalist, and UAP expert Dr. Jacques Vallee, who worked with Air Force astronomer Dr. J. Allen Hynek on Project Blue Book and lived much of the history this UAP report purports to cover? Neither AARO nor the press bothered to speak with him. How about Robert Powell, Director of the Scientific Coalition for UAP Studies and author of the outstanding new book UFOs: A Scientist Explains What We Know (and Don’t Know)? Or professor Alexander Wendt at the Ohio State University? I’m sure these and many other authors and scholars would have been happy to assist AARO or the press, had they been contacted.

That America’s leading press outlets missed the problems and issues identified below and failed to present an alternative perspective, is itself typical of the stigmatized history of UAP press coverage since WWII. Those interested in the role of the press on the UAP topic may want to read Terry Hansen’s provocative book, The Missing Times.

The disappointing lack of critical press coverage of this important report prompted me to begin compiling the insights of UAP scholars and experts who have studied the history of UAP and the US government. I hope the observations below will prove helpful to members of Congress and the public seeking to understand the history of the US government’s involvement with UAP. Perhaps, when AARO publishes Volume II of its report, some effort will be made by the mainstream press to consult UAP subject-matter experts before rushing their articles into print.

One of the other concerns I have about press coverage of this report is the tendency to conflate the UAP topic generally with allegations the government has recovered off-world technology. The UAP issue is distinct and critically important regardless of the truth about allegations of recovered extraterrestrial, nonhuman technology. Asking AARO to investigate that allegation was unfortunate since a subordinate DoD or IC office finding its superiors innocent was never going to satisfy the critics anyway.

Moreover, a disruptive secret of that colossal magnitude affecting every person on the planet would never be revealed in a report to Congress from a mid-level official or organization. Only the President, or an independent Congressional investigation, could reasonably be expected to reveal such a profound and transformative issue. If Congress wants to be confident it knows the truth, it needs to conduct its own independent investigation.

In the meantime, Congress and the public deserve a great deal more transparency and clarity regarding US government data on the UAP issue. Too many well-documented incidents are occurring at too many locations, a problem greatly exacerbated by the rise of sophisticated drone technologies. If you don’t think this is a serious issue, consider that just a few months ago fighter aircraft were transferred from Langley Air Force Base in Virginia to Naval Air Station (NAS) Oceana after weeks of intrusions by unidentified drone-like craft. The Air Force seemed powerless to capture or deter these intruders and has still not been able to identify them. Similar incidents have been afflicting Navy warships and other bases around the country.

If the Air Force can’t defend its own bases, how can it defend the rest of the country? Don’t we need to get on top of this sooner rather than later? As journalist Tyler Rogoway (incidentally a skeptic of ET theories) said in one of his many superb articles at The War Zone (emphasis added here and elsewhere below): “The gross inaction and the stigma surrounding Unexplained Aerial Phenomena as a whole has led to what appears to be the paralyzation of the systems designed to protect us and our most critical military technologies, pointing to a massive failure in U.S. military intelligence.”

In sum, the number of UAP reports and the number of intrusions into US military airspace are both increasing, so we need to embrace the full range of UAP and drone issues and pursue them vigorously, rather than trying to diminish or trivialize the topic the way AARO’s historical report seeks to do.

Hopefully, Volume II of AARO’s history of UAP will be far more accurate and informative, and will also garner more serious, informed, and independent press coverage.

Missing the Target

The new UAP investigative agency of the U.S. Government is currently called the All-domain Anomaly Resolution Office (AARO). It reports jointly to the leaders of DoD and the Intelligence Community (IC). AARO recently sent the classified version of its first historical report, Vol. I, to Congress. Ostensibly, it covers the period from 1945 to October 31, 2023. The administrative cover date is February 2024. Volume II is due on about June 15, 2024.

“(ii) include a compilation and itemization of the key historical record of the involvement of the intelligence community with unidentified anomalous phenomena [UAP], including— …

“(III) any efforts to obfuscate, manipulate public opinion, hide, or otherwise provide incorrect unclassified or classified information about unidentified anomalous phenomena [UAP] or related activities.” [NDAA FY23 Sec. 6802(j)(1)(B); 50 U.S. Code § 3373(j)(1)(B)]

Contrary to Congressional direction, AARO completely omits entire agencies – NORAD, NSA, DIA (prior to 2009), CBP, etc. – agencies with known investigations or activities relating to UAP, and also omits any discussion of “any efforts to obfuscate, [or]… hide … unclassified or classified information about unidentified anomalous phenomena [UAP] or related activities.” AARO omits these agencies even when there are unclassified documents available on those agencies’ records and investigations of UAP (for example, see the approximate 100 pages of CBP Customs & Border Protection agency internal memos of Records on UAP, plus 10 videos, released in August, 2023, but unmentioned by AARO; Also see McMillan, Hanks, Plain, “Incursions at the Border,” The Debrief, May 27, 2022).

Excessive Secrecy

In the past, extreme and excessive secrecy has been displayed in efforts to “hide … unclassified or classified” UAP-related information, illustrated by the AARO predecessor’s UAP Security Classification Guide, first distributed internally on April 16, 2020 (see graphic below) which is itself heavily redacted, removing most indications of the type of UAP report content requiring classification. This is a binding secrecy regulation – don’t be fooled by the word “guide,” it is absolutely mandatory. The secrecy regulation specifically states that only a general statement of an increase in UAP sightings can be released to the public, and “without [releasing] any further information regarding when [or] where” a UAP “sighting [has] been reported” as that is classified. Additionally, the “times and places” of UAP detections are classified and are required to be “unspecified” and can’t be released; it is not “U” (Unclassified) (p. 6, subparagraphs. 4.1b-c).

How can this be, when DoD itself confirmed, prior to the creation of this (excessive) classification guide, that the three famous Navy UAP videos I provided the New York Times and Washington Post were unclassified, and their release would not damage national security? In fact, by bringing a major intelligence failure occurring in US airspace to the attention of policymakers, the public release of those videos clearly advanced national security. The bureaucratic fiasco of this classification guide occurred despite a broad consensus in government, including among our military and intelligence officials and members of Congress, that over-classification is a major problem that needs to be addressed. As Avril Haines, the Director of National Intelligence (DNI) said in a letter to Congress in 2022, “Over-classification of government secrets both undermines national security by blocking the intelligence community’s ability to share critical information and erodes the basic trust that our citizens have in their government.”

Air Force intelligence agency “efforts to … manipulate public opinion” on UAP since the 1950s are what caused the harsh stigma attached to the entire UFO subject in society. But this powerful anti-UAP stigma is not investigated or historically documented by AARO – or even mentioned – contrary to its legal obligation (more on this below). In addition to the AF-instigated Robertson Panel of 1953, and all that followed after it, there are even admissions by a retired USAF OSI officer of allegedly spying on civilian UFO researchers and spreading disinformation on behalf of the Air Force.

The unclassified version of the historical AARO Report (AAROR) was released on March 8, 2024. But prior to that, AARO quietly released the report 2 days in advance to several friendly media outlets to cultivate favorable media coverage. These outlets, including the New York Times and Washington Post, faithfully carried the government’s message forward, apparently without consulting any of the scholars and researchers who could have helped them understand the report’s numerous errors, omissions, and shortcomings to provide a more balanced assessment. More objective reporting would have uncovered numerous major problems and serious errors in the AARO Report.

What follows are only a select few of the many issues and questions raised by the AARO Historical Report.

The AARO Report is Filled with Hundreds of Errors

The AARO report (AAROR) is pervaded by hundreds of unfortunate errors and absurdities involving the history, science, and facts presented in its 63 pages, with dozens–or more–errors on some pages (see graphic below of 14 errors alone just on the first page of the Table of Contents).

The report is replete with so many mistakes and misunderstandings that, page for page, it appears to be the greatest single repository of UAP errors, arguably surpassing even the Air Force’s Project Blue Book. Call AARO the New Blue Book. Speaking of which, the report utterly fails to convey any of the fundamental flaws or national controversies that dogged Project Blue Book, including the admission by its own chief scientist that Blue Book was a deeply flawed Air Force public relations effort to dispel public and Congressional concerns, rather than an objective inquiry.

To begin with, AARO asserts the Kenneth Arnold sighting that launched the whole UAP era occurred on June 23, 1947 (AAROR, p. 14).

Simple Googling would have gotten the correct June 24 date and the correct shape (it wasn’t actually “circular,” and neither was the Flying Flapjack which they call the “Flying Pancake” to erroneously emphasize its circularity even more). Arnold insisted the press’s label “flying saucers” for his sighting was a misnomer. Significantly, it is the important watershed event that launched the entire modern age of UAP. It’s not a typo in a minor detail that can just be brushed off.

There are unbelievable statements and insinuations in the AARO report such as the peculiar claim that the Manhattan Project that built the first atomic bomb somehow caused “sightings” and “erroneous UAP reporting” (AAROR pp. 4, 39-40) and did so even after it terminated on December 31, 1946 (a date they omit because it would not explain the sightings that began the modern UAP era in June 1947). That is a bit like saying trailer parks cause tornadoes. Since the Manhattan Project did not launch special aerial vehicles of any kind that could be “misidentified” as UAP, did the Project’s buildings fly up in the air and cause “sightings” and “erroneous UAP reporting”? This incredible claim is not explained by AARO.

Indeed, the truth is precisely the opposite of what AARO suggests. Not only is there no evidence of outside civilians mistaking the Manhattan Project and successor operations for UAP, but we know that personnel working inside the US nuclear weapons program were sighting UAP, reporting them, and thereafter collecting hundreds of their own authentic UAP reports. The senior AFOSI (Air Force Office of Special Investigations) officer responsible for Los Alamos Scientific Laboratory compiled a detailed catalog of 209 recent “Unknown Aerial Phenomena” sightings and instrument tracking incidents in the Los Alamos area and surrounding regions (see sample p. 38 below). He sent the catalog with a classified memo to his superior, the agency director in Washington DC, General Joseph P. Carroll, on May 25, 1950, stating that security officials agreed:

“… the frequency of unexplained aerial phenomenon in the New Mexico area was such that an organized plan of reporting these observations should be undertaken…”

Other documents explain this “organized plan” included instrumented UFO / UAP tracking stations and networks that were set up by scientists and security officials in the Los Alamos Lab, Sandia Lab, Kirtland AFB, and Holloman AFB–White Sands areas, and put on base-wide alert, consisting of missile-tracking telescopic cameras, radars, nuclear radiation detectors, radio communication networks, aircraft for interception, etc. Yet, no AARO discussion of this.

“The observers of these phenomena include scientists, Special Agents of the Office of Special Investigations (IG), USAF, airline pilots, military pilots, Los Alamos Security Inspectors, military personnel, and many other persons of various occupations whose reliability is not questioned.”

Many of the UAPs reported by scientists and military personnel were described as either “green fireball phenomena” or flying “disks” (or “variation”). AARO has completely misrepresented the situation: The Manhattan Project and subsequent nuclear weapons activities were not causing spurious UAP sightings by civilians awed by “new technologies” they did not understand – the government scientists and military personnel themselves were actually seeing UAP and recording hundreds of UAP in authentic and well-documented reports.

These sightings officially reported by US Government personnel were consistent with what the external “unknowing” civilians (as AARO calls them) were reporting at the time – sometimes the government personnel and civilians sighted the same UAP at the same time, confirming each other.

Seemingly AARO is confusing secrecy-bred lurid rumors of aliens with a careful sighting of a UAP, up in the air, at an exact date, time, and location, having unexplainable motions and appearance, and backed up with scientifically valuable directional data involving speed, size, altitude, sensor data, radar tracking, etc. Yet AARO suggests that many of these documented sightings are just rumors or mistaken reports based on unwitting civilian observations of “new technologies” in classified US military activities.

AARO claims the first US satellite, Explorer 1 in 1958, and even the Apollo moon landings (pp. 41-42) caused UAP sighting misidentifications and were “formerly classified and sensitive … national security programs” (AAROR, pp. 39-40) – which they were not, and Apollo was just civilian NASA. AARO insinuates that the Apollo missions were “classified and sensitive”, and yet, apart from a limited number of contingency missions later revealed to have had classified components, the vast majority of NASA’s objectives with the missions were fully known to the public, with the moon landing broadcast to the entire planet on live television.

AARO states (pp. 10-11, 36):

“AARO assesses that some portion of [UAP] sightings since the 1940s have represented misidentification of never-before-seen experimental and operational space, rocket, and air systems… From the 1940s to the 1960s especially, the United States witnessed a boom in experimental technologies… Many of these technologies fit the description of a stereotypical Unidentified Flying Object (UFO). It is understandable how observers unfamiliar with these programs could mistake sightings of these new technologies as something extraordinary, even other-worldly.”

“AARO assesses that the incidents of UAP sightings reported to USG organizations … most likely are the result of a range of cultural, political, and technological factors. AARO bases this conclusion on the aggregate findings of all USG investigations to date [and] the misinterpretation of all reported named sensitive programs…”

What “new technology” let alone “many” was ever flown that “fit the description of a stereotypical … UFO” (e.g., a flying saucer)? Yet just before “naming” the Manhattan Project and Apollo as supposed “examples,” AARO reiterates the unsubstantiated point, claiming that many:

“… UAP sightings … were the result of misidentifications … of new technologies that [civilian] observers would have understandably reported as UFOs…. [O]bservers unknowingly … witnessed … and report[ed] as UFOs … classified and sensitive programs that involved … rocket launches … which AARO assess [sic] most likely were the cause of many UAP reports. AARO assesses that this common and understandable occurrence—the misidentification of new technologies for UAP— is present today [and] are reported as UAP.” (AAROR, p. 39)

Subsequently, AARO lists the Apollo program as one of 28 alleged examples (pp. 40, 42).

But no such UAP or “stereotypical UFO” sightings of a “misidentified” Apollo are known or cited by AARO and frankly, it is baffling to suggest anyone on Earth could see the Apollo moon landings with their eyes from 240,000 miles away or Apollo anywhere along the flight trajectory. AARO makes a point of stating that there were in the Apollo program “12 astronauts walking on the moon” without explaining how that is relevant or giving a single UAP sighting they seem to insinuate was caused by that. Are there any actual, serious UAP sightings misidentifying Apollo launches to the moon as UAP?

Scientific errors by AARO thus abound in its secret-project-inflated report, including those pointed out above regarding the miraculous feats of human vision sighting Apollo moon landings and Explorer 1 from outer space – besides insinuating apparent errors of logic and physics and injecting a non-issue of misleading irrelevancies (non-secret “secret” projects that did not and could not actually cause UAP sightings).

Did AARO Miss 64,000 Pages of Air Force Blue Book UAP Files?

AARO may have “partnered” with the National Archives in retrieving old Air Force Project Blue Book files but AARO seems to think there are only 65,778 pages of Blue Book files (within some 7,000 larger digital files), instead of the actual total of some 130,000 pages.

Did AARO somehow miss half of Blue Book’s files–some 64,000 pages–in its supposedly “thorough”, “complete”, and “accurate” history (AAROR, p. 12)? Did someone lose 64,000 pages of Blue Book UFO files? Did AARO investigate where these apparently missing Blue Book files disappeared or how the accounting error arose if it is just that?

Even aside from missing half of Blue Book’s files, which therefore could not be reviewed for history, AARO’s review of Air Force Blue Book history is so cursory that AARO seems to merely rehash old Blue Book press releases (see AAROR, pp. 18-19).

AARO claims it established 6 Lines of Effort (“LOEs” they call them) to prepare a “complete” and “accurate” history of the UAP “record” of government investigations (just not of UAP sightings as Congress also wanted): (1) open source, (2) classified, (3) personal interviewing, (4) National Archives, (5) private companies, and (6) intelligence/nat sec agencies (AAROR, pp. 22-13).

But obviously, AARO’s Six Lines of Effort were unmindful of 64,000 missing pages of Blue Book UFO files that only they at AARO were missing – while the rest of the world has, and has had, access to the pages through the Fold3 website since 2007 or by going to the microfilms at the National Archives or buying copies (all available since 1976). Additionally, as will be explained further below, AARO seems completely unaware of the existence of numerous important US government UAP investigation programs, activities, sightings, and radar/sensor-tracking incidents.

{ https://thedebrief.org/category/uap/ }

13-09-2024 om 23:36 geschreven door peter  

Martian ‘Spiders’ Re-Created in Lab for First Time

 by Natali Anderson

Martian ‘spiders’ are small, dark, spider-shaped features up to 1 km (0.6 miles) across. The leading theory is that they form when spring sunshine falls on layers of carbon dioxide deposited over the dark winter months. Thanks to new experiments, a team of scientists at NASA has, for the first time, re-created those formation processes in simulated Martian temperatures and air pressure.

Examples of the ‘Kieffer zoo’ features proposed to be formed by seasonal carbon dioxide sublimation dynamics on Mars: (a) ‘thin’ spiders within the south polar layered deposits; (b) dark spots on top of a layer of translucent carbon dioxide slab ice covering a cluster of ‘fat’ spiders at Martian ‘Inca City;’ (c) ‘fried eggs’ showing rings of dark dust surrounded by bright halos; (d) patterned ground within the high south polar latitudes with dark oriented fans indicative of wind direction and some bright, white fans; (e) bright halos surrounding Swiss cheese depressions; (f) ‘lace terrain,’ a type of patterned ground suggested to be polygonally patterned ground later scoured and eroded by surface-flowing carbon dioxide gas from the Kieffer model.

Image credit: HiRISE / NASA’s Jet Propulsion Laboratory / University of Arizona.

Present-day Mars is a dynamic planet, rich with surface change despite its tenuous atmosphere and cold climate.

In winter, a significant portion of Mars’ primarily carbon dioxide-atmosphere accumulates onto the surface as frost.

In the spring, it sublimes, revealing some morphologies that are unlike anything seen on Earth.

These include dark dalmatian spots and oriented fans, ‘fried eggs,’ gullies sometimes accompanied by dark digitate flows and bright ‘halos’ in spring, dendritic ‘spiders’, sand furrows on active dunes, and growing dendritic troughs.

These features have been detected on loose material around the south pole and on interdune material toward the south polar midlatitudes. However, some minor phenomena have been detected in the north.

Araneiform features on the surface of Mars, as imaged by the Mars Reconnaissance Orbiter in 2009. 

(NASA/JPL-Caltech/University of Arizona)

Many of these features compose the so-called ‘Kieffer zoo,’ a collection of surface expressions first described in 2003 and proposed to be created by the solid-state greenhouse effect.

“In the Kieffer model, sunlight penetrates translucent slab ice in spring and thermal-wavelength radiation gets trapped, heating the regolith beneath the ice and causing the impermeable ice slab to sublimate from its base,” explained Dr. Lauren Mc Keown of NASA’s Jet Propulsion Laboratory and colleagues.

“Through this process, spiders are proposed to be eroded via high-velocity gas scouring the sub-slab regolith, while fans and variations of spots are strewn on the ice surface, deposited by a plume of dust and gas.”

The study authors were able to create the full cycle of the Kieffer model in a lab and confirm the formation of several types of Kieffer zoo features.

“The hardest part of conducting the experiments was re-creating conditions found on the Martian polar surface: extremely low air pressure and temperatures as low as minus 185 degrees Celsius (minus 301 degrees Fahrenheit),” they said.

“To do that, we used a liquid-nitrogen-cooled test chamber: the Dirty Under-vacuum Simulation Testbed for Icy Environments (DUSTIE).”

“For the experiments, we chilled Martian soil simulant in a container submerged within a liquid nitrogen bath.”

“We placed it in the DUSTIE chamber, where the air pressure was reduced to be similar to that of Mars’ southern hemisphere.”

“Carbon dioxide gas then flowed into the chamber and condensed from gas to ice over the course of three to five hours.”

“It took many tries before we found just the right conditions for the ice to become thick and translucent enough for the experiments to work.”

Araneiform features imaged by HiRISE in 2009.

(NASA/JPL-Caltech/University of Arizona)

“Once we got ice with the right properties, we placed a heater inside the chamber below the simulant to warm it up and crack the ice.”

“We were ecstatic when we finally saw a plume of carbon dioxide gas erupting from within the powdery simulant.”

• A paper describing these experiments appears in the Planetary Science Journal.

• Lauren E. Mc Keown et al. 2024. A Lab-scale Investigation of the Mars Kieffer Model. Planet. Sci. J 5, 195; doi: 10.3847/PSJ/ad67c8

VIDEOS

NASA reveals how spiders growing on Mars | Oneindia News

New NASA Image Shows Spiders Crawling Over Mars Surface | TIME

NASA reveals how spiders growing on Mars | Oneindia News

{ https://www.sci.news/ }

13-09-2024 om 22:16 geschreven door peter  

{ https://www.nasa.gov/ }

13-09-2024 om 21:29 geschreven door peter  

De James Webb-telescoop heeft een enorm vraagteken in de ruimte gevonden: wat betekent het?

door Janine

NASA

Vergeleken met een paar decennia geleden weten we nu veel meer over het heelal en zijn samenstelling, geschiedenis en toekomst. Maar ondanks de antwoorden die zijn gevonden dankzij de voortdurende ontdekkingen van wetenschappers en de beelden van telescopen, blijven er nog veel vraagtekens bestaan. Letterlijk, soms. In feite is de ontdekking van een vraagteken in de ruimte, gefotografeerd door de James Webb Space Telescope, recent. Wat is het precies? En probeert het universum ons echt iets te vertellen? Laten we het samen ontdekken!

Een ongelooflijke zwaartekrachtlens

Als je naar de foto kijkt die door de JWST is gemaakt, lijkt het echt op een enorm vraagteken in de ruimte. Probeert het universum ook met ons te communiceren? Nou, ja en nee, want het vraagteken dat we zien is in werkelijkheid een geval van pareidolia, dat wil zeggen een illusie die ons ertoe brengt bekende objecten in willekeurige vormen te zien. En in feite bestaat het vreemde kosmische object uit drie sterrenstelsels die dit visuele effect bieden dankzij een zwaartekrachtlens.

Een zwaartekrachtlens, een effect dat al door Einstein werd voorspeld, is een verschijnsel dat optreedt wanneer het pad van licht van een object dat ver van ons vandaan is, wordt vervormd als gevolg van de vervorming van de ruimtetijd. Als licht een enorme massa passeert, buigt de ruimtetijd en dus ook het licht, waardoor gekromde sterrenstelsels, vreemde visuele effecten... en vraagtekens in de ruimte ontstaan.

Drie sterrenstelsels voor een vraag

NASA, ESA, CSA, STScI, V. Estrada-Carpenter (Saint Mary's University)

De foto die is gemaakt door de James Webb Space Telescope laat drie sterrenstelsels zien die in onze ogen een vraagteken in de ruimte vormen. Twee daarvan vormen de bovenkant van het bijzondere symbool: de eerste zit vol kosmisch stof en is rood van kleur, terwijl de tweede een wit spiraalvormig sterrenstelsel is. Tot slot is er de stip die wordt gevormd door een derde sterrenstelsel dat perfect is uitgelijnd met de telescoop. Jaren geleden had zelfs de Hubble dezelfde scène gefotografeerd, maar het detailniveau daarvan was veel lager dan dat van de JWST, waardoor het sommige details die we nu kunnen zien, niet kon vastleggen.

Bovendien zijn de eerste twee sterrenstelsels ongeveer 7 miljard lichtjaar van ons verwijderd, dus wat wij zien is wat er ongeveer 7 miljard jaar geleden is gebeurd. Het is heel goed mogelijk dat die twee sterrenstelsels vandaag zijn gefuseerd of al ver weg zijn, maar dat kunnen we niet weten. Nog niet, tenminste.

Voorbij het kosmische vraagteken

De ontdekking van een vraagteken in de ruimte is, afgezien van simpele humor of een subtiele metafoor, buitengewoon. Allereerst laat het opnieuw dat ongelooflijke instrument zien dat de JWST is, zelfs vergeleken met de Hubble-telescoop die ook de hemel blijft afspeuren. Ten tweede is het observeren van een zwaartekrachtlens altijd een kans voor astronomen en astrofysici, omdat het hen in staat stelt verder te kijken dan onoverkomelijke sterrenstelsels en te bestuderen wat daarachter ligt.

Kortom, deze ontdekking lijkt misschien eenvoudig en banaal: het was tenslotte gewoon een kwestie van het analyseren en inkleuren van enkele beelden verkregen op het infraroodspectrum, en het bekijken van de verschillende delen. Maar in werkelijkheid is de reikwijdte ervan veel breder: het toont opnieuw aan dat het vandaag de dag mogelijk is om het universum als nooit tevoren te zien en misschien enkele van de meest ondoorgrondelijke mysteries ervan te beantwoorden. Beginnend met de juiste vraagtekens.

 { https://www.curioctopus.nl/ }

13-09-2024 om 21:06 geschreven door peter  

Mysterious UFO Encounter: Deputy Sheriff Val Johnson’s Unforgettable Experience

On August 27, 1979, a seemingly routine night for Deputy Sheriff Val Johnson of Marshall County, Minnesota, turned into one of the most puzzling and widely discussed UFO encounters in history. What began as a standard patrol near the town of Stephen took a mysterious turn when Johnson experienced an inexplicable encounter with a bright beam of light. This incident has remained one of the most credible and well-documented UFO cases, leaving both investigators and skeptics baffled.

The Mysterious Encounter

In the early hours of the morning, Johnson was patrolling a rural road in northern Minnesota when he noticed an unusual light shining down on the highway ahead of him. Initially, he thought it might be a plane or possibly smugglers dropping cargo, as drug trafficking was not uncommon in the area at the time. But as Johnson drove closer, the beam of light suddenly grew brighter and engulfed his vehicle, blinding him.

At that moment, Johnson lost consciousness. When he regained awareness, he found his patrol car had skidded off the road. His windshield was cracked, his car’s antenna was bent, and both the dashboard clock and his wristwatch were running 14 minutes behind. Johnson also sustained physical injuries, including eye damage resembling welder’s burns—a condition often associated with exposure to intense light.

Investigating the Aftermath

Once Johnson called for help, local authorities quickly arrived at the scene. His injuries and the damage to his patrol car sparked an immediate investigation. The cracks on the windshield and the bent antenna were analyzed by forensic experts and engineers, but no conclusive explanation could be provided for the damage. Moreover, the fact that both his wristwatch and the car’s clock were exactly 14 minutes behind pointed to an electromagnetic anomaly, as UFOs are often linked to disruptions in electronic devices.

This time discrepancy became one of the most puzzling aspects of the case, leading some investigators to speculate that Johnson may have experienced a form of time distortion—a phenomenon sometimes reported in UFO encounters. The detailed physical evidence, combined with the deputy’s injuries, elevated this case to national attention and made it difficult to dismiss as a mere fabrication or hallucination.

Theories and Explanations

Over the years, several theories have been proposed to explain what happened to Val Johnson that night. Some believe Johnson may have collided with a low-flying aircraft, despite there being no evidence of debris or other signs of such an impact. Others have suggested that he may have been struck by lightning, though no storms were reported in the area at the time.

UFO skeptics have tried to rationalize the incident as a misinterpretation of natural phenomena, but these explanations fall short due to the lack of weather anomalies and the unique nature of Johnson’s injuries and the clock discrepancies.

A Credible Witness

One of the key reasons why the Val Johnson UFO encounter has been taken so seriously is the credibility of the witness. As a deputy sheriff, Johnson was a respected figure in the community and known for his professionalism and reliability. His account of the incident remained consistent throughout the investigation, and he showed no signs of trying to gain publicity or financial benefit from the story.

Moreover, Johnson’s injuries were real and documented by medical professionals. His eyes showed symptoms consistent with exposure to a high-intensity light source, and he exhibited signs of physical trauma, including bruising and a concussion. These details make it harder to dismiss his account as a simple hallucination or misjudgment.

The Case That Still Baffles

Despite the extensive investigation into the Val Johnson encounter, no definitive explanation has ever been found. The case remains one of the most perplexing UFO incidents, largely due to the physical evidence and the credible testimony of a law enforcement officer. While some theories have been floated, none adequately account for all the strange phenomena that occurred that night.

Today, the Val Johnson incident stands as one of the most credible and well-documented UFO encounters in history. It is a case that continues to intrigue researchers, UFO enthusiasts, and skeptics alike, as it raises profound questions about what Johnson encountered that night on the lonely rural roads of Minnesota.

VIDEO:

• Shocking UFO Encounter: Deputy Sheriff Speaks Out | Close Encounters 104
• https://youtu.be/X5UgOV1t2QQ

The Val Johnson UFO encounter is a prime example of how some UFO sightings and experiences defy logical explanations. The combination of physical evidence, personal injuries, and a credible witness makes this case stand out in the long history of unexplained aerial phenomena. Even after decades of investigation, the encounter remains shrouded in mystery, reminding us of the complexities and unknowns that still exist in our world.

While no answers have been definitively provided, the incident continues to fuel discussions about the potential existence of extraterrestrial life and unexplained aerial encounters, making it a cornerstone in the annals of UFO research.

{ https://www.latest-ufo-sightings.net/ }

13-09-2024 om 18:51 geschreven door peter  

Summiting Greece’s towering Mount Olympus is an impressive feet for the 1-million-plus people who have accomplished the climb. But it would be even more impressive if they could do it underwater.

That’s impossible—for now. But oceanographers led by the Schmidt Ocean Institute exploring the depths of the Pacific Ocean just discovered a massive underwater mountain that at least presents the opportunity.

Regardless of climb-ability, the 3,109-meter seamount is a massive find. It’s one of many made during the oceanographers’ 28-day late-summer exploration in the research vessel Falkor (too), whimsically named for the famous luckdragon from The Neverending Story.

The team discovered the mountain along the Nazca Ridge, which is located about 900 miles west of the Chilean coast—a region that itself contains a chain of underwater mountains. But this particular peak was towering above the rest. The submerged mountain is about 200 meters taller from base to peak than Mount Olympus, and roughly four times the size of the tallest building in the world (Dubai’s Burj Khalifa), according to a press release from the institut

The Falkor (too) crew mapped the mountain and the surrounding area using a sonar system on the bottom of the vessel’s hull. “Sound waves go down and they bounce back off the surface, and we measure the time it takes to come back and get measured. From that we get a really good idea (of the seabed topography),” Jyotika Virmani, the institute’s executive director, told CNN.

The area plotted by the expedition is a drop in the ocean (pun intended), but every drop counts. Just under three-quarters of the Earth’s surface (about 71 percent) is ocean floor, but of that expanse, we’ve only mapped about 26 percent in high resolution—including this recent Nazca Ridge mission. The oceanographers also studied nine other features of the area, including a smaller, neighboring mountain’s sprawling coral garden that stretches the size of three tennis courts.

The rocky slopes on the Nazca Ridge mountains, and other mountains like them across the ocean, are perfect homes for ancient coral and sponge gardens in which some sea life can live largely undisturbed. In addition to mapping the mountains, the researchers used a robot to explore the region and made some pretty major wildlife discoveries. This includes the thePromachoteuthis squid, which is so rare that everything we previously knew about it came from the small handful of specimens that were collected as long ago as the late 1800s.

“The seamounts of the Southeastern Pacific host remarkable biological diversity,” Alex David Rogers, Science Director of Ocean Census, said in a press release from the Schmidt Ocean Institute.

The researchers also spotted a Caspar octopus—the first confirmed appearance of the cephalopod in the southern Pacific Ocean—and Bathyphysa siphonophores, which are more commonly and ridiculously known as “flying spaghetti monsters” (an apt description).

This was the institute’s third expedition of the year to that region of the ocean floor. During the previous two, researchers documented over 150 previously unknown species.

Scientists hope the results of these Nazca Ridge expeditions will help push forward policies to safeguard these areas of the natural world that—despite the fact that we don’t often see them—are no less worth protecting than what we can see.

“We’ve explored around 25 seamounts on the Nazca and Salas y Gómez Ridges,” Co-Chief Scientist and Schmidt Ocean Institute Marine Technician Tomer Ketter said in the press release. “Our findings highlight the remarkable diversity of these ecosystems, while simultaneously revealing the gaps in our understanding of how the seamount ecosystems are interconnected. We hope the data gathered from these expeditions will help inform future policies, safeguarding these pristine environments for future generations.”

VIDEOS

{ https://www.msn.com/en-us/feed? }

13-09-2024 om 18:28 geschreven door peter  

Story by Victor Tangermann

SpaceX Drains Air From Spacecraft While Astronauts Are Inside

One Small Step

SpaceX's all-civilian Polaris Dawn mission has pulled off an incredible feat: the first-ever commercial spacewalk.

After fully depressurizing their entire spacecraft, billionaire and mission commander Jared Isaacman and crewmate Sarah Gillis carefully clambered outside their Crew Dragon capsule early Thursday morning to have a once-in-a-lifetime peek at the Earth below.

Footage shows Isaacman standing up and stretching his arms while holding onto the spacecraft's "Skywalker" platform, a pool ladder-like structure to ensure he and Gillis could keep in constant contact with the capsule.

The stunt was performed at an altitude of 458 miles, almost twice the height of the International Space Station's usual orbit.

"SpaceX, back at home we have a lot of work to do, but from here it looks like a perfect world," Isaacman told mission control while getting an unparalleled view of Australia.

Giant Private Leap

Another video of the stunt shows a first-person perspective of Isaacman climbing out as SpaceX employees cheered him on at the company's headquarters. In total, Isaacman and Gillis spent roughly eight minutes outside the capsule.

Prior to venturing outside, the crew began slowly lowering the pressure inside the spacecraft to become accustomed to the thin air. Hours into their journey, the cabin pressure was lowered to 8.6 psi, which is just above the conditions at the base camp of Mount Everest. They also began to breathe pure oxygen through the connections of their spacesuits.

Related video: 

• SpaceX Completes 1st-Ever Spacewalk By A Commercial Company As Part Of Polaris Dawn Mission (Dailymotion)

SpaceX to launch Polaris Dawn mission featuring 1st commercial spacewalk

By the time Isaacman and Gillis ventured outside, the pressure inside their suits was a mere 5 psi, just below the summit of Mount Everest.

But even with SpaceX's newfangled extravehicular activities (EVA) suit, Isaacman and Gillis were still fully connected to their Dragon spacecraft via an umbilical, providing them with a steady supply of oxygen and thermal controls.

Isaacman and Gillis tested several mobility features of their new spacesuits, including hand and body movements, foot restraints, and the ability to hold tools during their short stints outside the spacecraft.

The mission isn't just historic as the first commercial spacewalk. Just hours into their mission, the Polaris Dawn crew reached an apogee of 869 miles — roughly three times the altitude of the space station — marking the farthest from Earth that any human has ventured since NASA's Apollo missions half a century ago.

The spacewalk is yet another major achievement for the Elon Musk-led SpaceX, setting the stage for similar missions to come.

And NASA is absolutely thrilled as well.

"Today’s success represents a giant leap forward for the commercial space industry and NASA's long-term goal to build a vibrant U.S. space economy," said NASA administrator Bill Nelson in a statement.

More on the mission: 

• SpaceX Astronauts Now Farther From Earth Than Any Other Human Since Apollo Moon Missions

The post SpaceX Drains Air From Spacecraft While Astronauts Are Inside appeared first on Futurism.

{https://futurism.com/ }

13-09-2024 om 17:25 geschreven door peter  

Artikel door businessam.be

 

apans ruimtevaartbedrijf ispace wil maanlanding herdefiniëren met Hakuto-R Missie 2

Key takeaways

• Tweede maanlandingsmissie, “Hakuto-R Missie 2”, voorlopig gepland voor december.
• Het ruimtevaartuig zal worden afgeleverd via een SpaceX Falcon 9 raket vanuit Florida en zal proberen de maan te raken na ongeveer vier tot vijf maanden ruimtevlucht.
• Het doel van de missie is om het goed te maken na de mislukte eerste poging in april 2023 door een misrekening van de hoogte.

Het Japanse ruimteverkenningsbedrijf ispace heeft plannen aangekondigd voor een tweede maanlandingsmissie, voorlopig gepland voor december. De “Hakuto-R Missie 2” zal bestaan uit het afleveren van een ruimtevaartuig via een SpaceX Falcon 9 raket vanuit Florida en een maanlanding proberen te maken na een ruimtevlucht van ongeveer vier tot vijf maanden.

Na de mislukte eerste poging in april 2023 als gevolg van een misrekening met de hoogte, is ispace erop gebrand om zichzelf te verlossen. Het bedrijf is gemotiveerd door het succes van Intuitive Machines, dat in februari ’s werelds eerste particuliere maanlanding realiseerde.

Achtergrond en motivatie

Ispace, opgericht in 2010, heeft ongeveer 300 mensen in dienst in Japan, de Verenigde Staten en Luxemburg. Net als andere landen onderzoekt Japan de maan op zoek naar water, brandstof en andere bronnen die het menselijk leven in de toekomst kunnen ondersteunen.

In de afgelopen jaren zijn verschillende landen, waaronder India, Japan en China, met succes op de maan geland. De Verenigde Staten plannen hun eerste maanlanding met astronauten sinds 1972 als onderdeel van het Artemis-programma, gepland voor 2026.

ispace HAKUTO-R Mission 1: Landing Live Stream

Why Japan's Moon Lander Crashed Due to An Unbelievable Computer Bug

{ https://www.msn.com/nl-be/feed? }

13-09-2024 om 17:07 geschreven door peter  

Scientist Reveals Two Terrifying Underwater UFO Encounters On Nuclear Submarine During Covert Operations

An unidentified object that was traveling under the ocean at a speed greater than the speed of sound came dangerously close to a nuclear submarine. This claim was made by a researcher who was working on a classified operation aboard the USS Hampton when he made the statement. For many years, Bob McGwier worked in clandestine intelligence. He disclosed two incidents about underwater UFOs or USOs, that he saw while performing covert operations. This claim was made several months after a video had been made public by the United States military, in which it appeared to show an unidentified flying object moving from the sky into the water in the year 2019.

UFO researcher and former fighter pilot Chris Lehto heard the story from Bob McGwire, who said that the submarine passed at incredible speed while “going deep and fast” in the late 1990s. McGwire stated that this encounter was corroborated by a member of the crew who was surprised by the speed of the Unidentified Submerged Object, also known as the USO. (Source)

“We were underway and all of a sudden I hear the sound it was really strange… it was moving so fast. I just cannot believe it because this submarine is limited in the speed it can go by the incompressibility of the water in front of it and this thing blew by us like we were standing still. I’m not going to throw anybody else under the bus here but I guarantee you the following happened: a person with knowledge of onboard systems came out and said ‘oh my God’ this goddamn thing is going faster than the speed of sound underwater but that’s faster than the speed of sound in air.”

Robert G. McGwier is the founder and Technical Advisor at Hawkeye 360. He serves as Technical Director of Federated Wireless, Inc. Dr. McGwier is the Director of Research for the Ted and Karyn Hume Center for National Security and Technology, and Research Professor in the Bradley Department of Electrical and Computer Engineering at Virginia Tech. At Virginia Tech, he leads the overall execution of the Center’s research mission and leads the university’s program development efforts in national security applications of wireless and space systems. His area of expertise is in radio frequency communications and digital signal processing.

McGwire had another USO encounter that took place onboard the USS Blue Ridge (LCC-19) in 2008 while it was in a violent Typhoon. “I wanted to look outside and see what I could see and I was on the bridge so I was right up there underneath the American flag looking out the windows. When I noticed that even though we were in a typhoon and it was raining like mad there was no rain hitting the ship and I’m going what the heck and I looked out the window and looked up and I could see a glow above us in the sky. It was not very bright but I could see it and whatever it was blocking off the rain from the entire ship stem to stern.”

McGwire continued: “I believe I was on the port side and the reason I say that is because I took a peek outside and I could do that because I was Leeward in other words the winds were from behind me and the bulkhead of the ship were blocking the winds. So, I could look up easily so anyway it suddenly grew brighter and took off straight up and the rain returned.”

Similar to McGwire’s second encounter, in 1991, USS Kirk FF108 USO Encounter took place off the west coast of South America. The witness stated that at that time, he was a Chief of Operations and Intelligence serving aboard the Knox-class escort destroyer USS Kirk FF1087 and that they were part of a drug interdiction force consisting of the USS Kirk and three other Navy ships. Their main task was to patrol using a network of radars to track and then intercept drug planes flying out of Colombia, Panama and Guatemala, as well as to seize any smuggling ships that they could find. (Source)

The witness said that his primary position was at the CIC Combat Information Center, which he and 22 other specialists maintained 24 hours a day, 7 days a week, rotating in two shifts of 11 people.

At 2 a.m. on December 16, he was on duty at CIC. The night was calm and nothing unusual happened. He said he used the break to go up to the bridge. At this time, the entire ship was in a status called “darkened ship,” when all external lights were turned off, as well as on the bridge, that is, everything around was dimly lit only by instrument panels. His friend was on deck duty that night, and they chatted when they had some free time. And suddenly, everything around was lit up in the red color:

“All of a sudden and out of nowhere, like a huge flash from a camera, emanating from the starboard bow sea level upward was a huge flash of red glowing light, which lit up our entire ship. It only lit up our ship, not the surrounding ocean, just our ship. It happened so fast, that the OOD, the navigator and I were speechless for about 5 seconds, at which time I looked at the OOD and asked him if he just saw that light. He stated yes in a sullen voice.

Read also:

• Ex-CIA Agent Deathbed Confession On UFOs: Visited Area-51 & Saw Living Aliens
• Evidence Suggests Bob Lazar Was Telling Truth About UFOs & Anti-Gravity Propulsion
• Italy Had UFO Crash & Recovered Alien Bodies Prior To Roswell: Is USA Holding Them?
• Ex-Apollo Astronaut Claimed Humans Are Ancient Aliens, Visited Earth From Space

I then asked the navigator and he replied yes. I then took the navigator’s sound powered headset, and asked the forward and aft look outs, if they had just seen the same red flash, to which the forward look out stated, “YES! WHAT THE HELL WAS THAT?”

After lookout said yes as well. I then immediately contacted CIC, and asked the CIC officer if we had any aircraft or surface ships in our vicinity, to which he replied clear as a whistle. I asked if we had any submarine activity in the area, to which he replied, no. At this point I looked at the OOD and asked him if we should wake up the captain or as we would call him, The Old Man. The OOD sat there stunned for a minute, as did I and everyone else.

What had just happened did not make any sense. The flash emanated from the sea, directly off of our starboard bow (like it was touching our bow), and ascended upwardly so rapidly, creating the effect of the bright red flash. The other weird aspect of this event was that only our ship was lit up within the red flash, not the surrounding sea, but our vessel only. The OOD elected not to wake the captain, and the entire incident was logged in our ship’s log as an unexplained phenomenon.

Up until this event, I did not believe in UFOss or USOss. I have no doubt that our ship, steaming along at 12 knots, came right up on a submerged unidentifiable aircraft. I don’t think the aircraft or USO had any idea we were sailing up to them. I think whatever it was, took off in a very unplanned and fast manner, and wanted to quickly identify us, thus the flash.”

In the end, after much deliberation, they decided not to wake the captain up, but simply to register it in the ship’s log as an “unexplained phenomenon.”

Many members of the United States Navy have reported fascinating sightings, and video showing UFOs entering water has even been made public. A video that was shot by the sailors of the USS Omaha in July 2019 off the coast of San Diego is one of the pieces of evidence that are being put up to support this claim. A spherical object is seen soaring over the ship and then plunging into the ocean in a video that was shared by UFO researcher and investigative director Jeremy Corbell. During this time, a member of the crew can be heard saying, “Wow, it splashed!”

The video generated considerable interest online, and when Corbell revealed that a Navy submarine had been dispatched to look for the object without success, things got even more intriguing. It is interesting to note that at around the same time, American submarines also spotted other mysterious anomalous objects that defied the laws of physics in the water nearby. The Navy has verified the authenticity of the video but claims to have no explanation for its existence.

More specifically, Luis Elizondo, a former director of the Pentagon’s Advanced Aerospace Threat Identification Program, said:

“Imagine a technology that can do 6-700 g-forces, which can fly at 13,000 miles per hour, which can evade radar and which can fly through air and water and eventually. in the space. And oh, by the way, has no obvious signs of propulsion, no wings, no control surfaces and yet can still defy the natural effects of Earth’s gravity. This is precisely what we are seeing.” (Source)

• https://youtu.be/K-2U-YX0_yQ

{ https://www.howandwhys.com/ }

12-09-2024 om 23:58 geschreven door peter  

Nuclear fusion reactor in South Korea runs at 100 million degrees C for a record-breaking 48 seconds

Related: 

• We've been 'close' to achieving fusion power for 50 years. When will it actually happen?

• https://youtu.be/DI2pTdyUbLo

But replicating the conditions found inside the hearts of stars is no simple task. The most common design for fusion reactors — the tokamak — works by superheating plasma (one of the four states of matter, consisting of positive ions and negatively charged free electrons) and trapping it inside a donut-shaped reactor chamber with powerful magnetic fields.

Keeping the turbulent and superheated coils of plasma in place long enough for nuclear fusion to happen, however, has been a painstaking process. Soviet scientist Natan Yavlinsky designed the first tokamak in 1958, but no one has ever managed to create a reactor that is able to put out more energy than it takes in.

One of the main stumbling blocks has been how to handle a plasma that's hot enough to fuse. Fusion reactors require very high temperatures — many times hotter than the sun — because they have to operate at much lower pressures than where fusion naturally takes place inside the cores of stars. The core of the actual sun, for example, reaches temperatures of around 27 million F (15 million C) but has pressures roughly equal to 340 billion times the air pressure at sea level on Earth.

Cooking plasma to these temperatures is the relatively easy part, but finding a way to corral it so that it doesn't burn through the reactor without also ruining the fusion process is technically tricky. This is usually done either with lasers or magnetic fields.

To extend their plasma's burning time from the previous record-breaking run, the scientists tweaked aspects of their reactor's design, including replacing carbon with tungsten to improve the efficiency of the tokamak’s "divertors," which extract heat and ash from the reactor.

"Despite being the first experiment run in the environment of the new tungsten divertors, thorough hardware testing and campaign preparation enabled us to achieve results surpassing those of previous KSTAR records in a short period," Si-Woo Yoon, the director of the KSTAR Research Center, said in a statement.

KSTAR scientists are aiming to push the reactor to sustain temperatures of 180 million F for 300 seconds by 2026.

The record joins others made by competing fusion reactors around the world, including one by the U.S. government-funded National Ignition Facility (NIF), which sparked headlines after the reactor core briefly put out more energy than was put into it.

• https://youtu.be/uQqh_Y4v0-c

"

{ https://www.space.com/ }

12-09-2024 om 23:39 geschreven door peter  

Bill Tompkins Was In Control Room When Neil Armstrong Met Moon Reptilians

Just two years before his death, William M. Tompkins had written “Selected by Extraterrestrials,” which induced sudden chaos in the UFO community with his incredible testimony about the US Navy’s secret development of space battle groups with the assistance of major aerospace companies beginning with Douglas Aircraft. He can be considered one of the most incredible whistleblowers to step forward and disclose the Secret Space Programs, E.T. Agendas, and hidden governments. He claimed to be part of an operation involving US Navy spies who stole UFO plans and antigravity technological secrets from the Nazis during World War II.

In July 2017, at a press conference, Tompkins made an unprecedented statement. He worked for the Douglas Aircraft Company alongside extraterrestrials (Nordic alien women). It had been 4-7 years before NASA appeared. He claimed about it in his book (mentioned above) that was published in 2015.

Additionally, he revealed that the Nazis had already had operational UFOs during the war, and because of the information that the US spies were able to obtain, the US later developed its fleet of UFOs – which then got siphoned off into the black military sphere under the control of Majestic 12, the ultra-secretive group that controlled and managed the UFO/alien issue in the 1940s.

During the time of World War, there were secret societies such as the Thule Society and the Vril Society. Famous British historian Nicholas Goodrick-Clark wrote a whole chapter about Maria Orsic in his book “Black Sun” published in 2001, where he connected her with Vril society.

The author mentioned that Orsic could communicate with alien civilizations and one of them was from the planet Aldebaran, which is located in the Taurus system.

According to Tompkins, the Nazis were in contact with Extraterrestrial Reptilians at the same time

According to Tompkins, Hitler allowed Orsic (and the Nordics with whom she was working) to continue to work on their UFO program because the Nazis were already in contact with the Reptilians, and because Hitler knew he could always take over Orsic’s project at any time.

Robert Wood, who was interviewed alongside William Tompkins by Search4TruthReality (source), claimed that the Nazis’ technology rapidly advanced due to their relationship with the Reptilians so that they got to the far side of the moon before the end of WW2.

Dr. Wood worked in research and development management in Douglas Aircraft and McDonnell Douglas from 1956 to 1993. Later he became a Board member of MUFON. He was given $500,000 to disseminate UFO documents and $250,000 to make a UFO documentary. Later, Robert and his son Ryan scanned hundreds of MJ-12 documents and made them available on their website MajesticDocuments.com.

According to William Tompkins, he was recruited at a young age by the Navy due to his precocious ability to build highly accurate model ships. After working at North American Aviation and Northrop, he was hired by Douglas Aircraft Company in 1950.

In interviews such as with Project Camelot and in his book “Selected by Extraterrestrials,” Tompkins revealed much of his story. He explained that MJ-12 began in 1942 with the senior Douglas (the man who started the company).

Tompkins stated that right after the Battle of LA in 1942, to handle the implications of UFOs openly showing themselves in the skies, Douglas pulled some key men into a group (or think tank) that later became MJ-12.

Dr. Wood stated that MJ-12 is mostly associated with the Air Force, not other branches of the US military. He explained that the US Navy started back-engineering Nazi UFO crafts in 1942 before MJ-12 came into existence. It took the Navy around a decade to produce functional UFO craft, but they did so eventually.

Tompkins stated that when the first astronauts went to the moon, they were shocked to discover it had already been occupied by Draco Reptilians. He said that the Reptilians, over 9 feet tall, were standing next to their advanced craft.

Bill Tompkins: They were parked around the side of the crater. Okay. They were not parked on it. They were floating above it. So there were hundreds of these nine-foot reptilian guys standing with their legs. Yeah. They were all the way across underneath their vehicles, standing on the crater.

Interviewer: And what do they look like?

Bill Tompkins: They’re ugly-looking lizard, alligator-type people. They got the same skin as the lizards got. Okay. And terrible-looking faces. But then they have the ability to shift and look like a human. All of them do. Okay.

Interviewer. Do you think Von Braun was a reptilian?

Bill Tompkins: No. Your president. Yes.

Interviewer: Oh, which one?

Bill Tompkins: [George Bush senior] And Bill Clinton and this guy you just got rid. Yeah. They all were. Right. Okay. And they all have this ability to make themselves look like real good-looking people.

Interviewer: And you’re saying Trump isn’t one?

Bill Tompkins: No, he’s not. That’s a relief. And he knows more about this subject than people realize. But trying to get back to your earlier question, these groups of extraterrestrials who work together but are at war with other extraterrestrials, okay, have these vehicles that look like a planet, like our moon is a vehicle. It’s a command center for this arm. The easiest way to look at this is to put your arm out like this, and you be the center of the galaxy. (Source)

Read also:

• Project Stargate: CIA Top Secret Program To Track UFOs & Explore Mars
• Gray Alien Named ‘Sen’: Californian Woman Encounter Case By MUFON Researcher
• Aliens From Andromeda Told US Army Personnel That Humans Are Composite of 22 different E.T. races
• FBI 1947 Declassified Report: Giant Aliens Visit Earth From Another Dimension

According to both Tompkins and Dr. Wood, the Reptilians had already made a deal with the Nazis. Amazingly, Tompkins himself claimed he saw ancient structures on the far side of the moon and that he saw a floating building – 1.5 miles above the lunar surface.

According to Tompkins, many ET species are interacting with humanity currently, including Dracos/Reptilians and Nordics which have a great influence on the world.

In his Project Camelot interview, Tompkins prevented himself from disclosing more information about Reptilians as it was harmful to his credibility. Tompkins also described the US Military’s concerns about UFOs and alien beings and the Military’s rush to create advanced space-based weapons, which could be used to defend the planet Earth against an ET threat to our civilization.

He revealed US Navy has Battle Groups operating outside the Earth. He designed five spaceships and thirty support ships. Using the latest technology, he designed different spaceships for Northrop Aviation Company. Northrop started building the huge craft underground in Utah.

Tompkins claimed we are now building even better Battle Groups. The Apollo moon landings were also designed to build a base on the moon. We have had bases on the moon along with bases on Mars and Jupiter’s moons.

A month after the shocking conference, Tompkins passed away unexpectedly on August 21, 2017, in San Diego, California, at the age of 94.

• https://youtu.be/wg15hjP6mn4

• Reptilians on the Moon - William Tompkins

{ https://www.howandwhys.com/ }

12-09-2024 om 23:21 geschreven door peter  

What is the Advanced Composite Solar Sail System?

If humans are ever going to become a spacefaring species then we need to figure out a few more efficient ways to traverse the cosmos. That’s why NASA’s latest futuristic solar sail tech should be raising eyebrows.

Photo Credit: Wiki Commons By NASA/Marshall Space Flight Center, Public Domain

Photo Credit: Wiki Commons By Andrzej Mirecki, Own Work, CC BY-SA 3.0

It won’t be taking us to Mars anytime soon
Obviously, solar sails will not be able to take humans to other planets quite yet, but the technology could be used for a wide variety of missions in space. But how exactly does a sail work in the vacuum of space (a place with no wind)?

©Provided by Sports Unlimited News

Not like the sails back on Earth
Solar sails aren’t exactly like the sails on a boat here on Earth but the concept is quite similar according to Space.com. Just like how wind can guide a sailboat, solar energy (photons) can be harnessed to help guide vessels through space.

How does a solar sail work?
“It only takes a slight amount of sunlight to guide solar sails through space,” Space.com noted, adding that although “photons don't have mass, they can force momentum when they hit an object,” which is how solar sails can move objects in space.

Photo Credit: Wiki Commons By Scott Andrews, Public Domain

Launched into space in April 2024
On April 24th, the Advanced Composite Solar Sail System (ACS3) headed up to space with Rocket Lab's Electron vehicle, and on August 29th, the ACS3 spread its solar sails in space for the first time, and it was captured by cameras fixed to its sails.

Photo Credit: NASA

The solar sails are fully deployed
NASA published the first image from the ACS3’s sail deployment on September 5th, and it was a sight to see—even if its orientation was a bit confusing, something that NASA noted in its press release alongside the image.

Photo Credit: Wiki Commons By NASA Ames Research Center / NASA/Aero Animation/Ben Schweighart

The mission’s success is pretty awesome
“The success so far of this mission is pretty awesome because solar sail technology is an incredibly impressive concept both in practice and in theory,” reported Live Science’s Monisha Ravisetti. But now the real work has begun for NASA's ACS3 team.

Photo Credit: NASA/Aero Animation/Ben Schweighart

The ACS3 will be put to the test
NASA’s new solar sail system will be put to the test over the next few weeks according to Space.com’s Meredith Garofalo, who reported that the maneuverability of the system will be observed so that more can be learned about how to improve the system.

Photo Credit: Wiki Commons By NASA, Public Domain

Valuable information will be gathered
Raising and lowering the orbit of the Advanced Composite Solar Sail System spacecraft will provide valuable information that may help guide future concepts of operations and designs for solar sail-equipped science and exploration missions,” NASA noted.

Photo Credit: NASA/Bill Ingalls

Visible with the naked eye
“Now, with the sail fully extended, the Solar Sail System may be visible to some keen skywatchers on Earth who look up at the right time,” a NASA press release noted. So be sure to try and spot the spacecraft the next time you’re gazing up at the stars! It looks like a diamond according to NASA.

• Never miss a story! Click here to follow The Daily Digest.

{ https://www.msn.com/en-us/ }

12-09-2024 om 22:55 geschreven door peter  

What is the Advanced Composite Solar Sail System?

If humans are ever going to become a spacefaring species then we need to figure out a few more efficient ways to traverse the cosmos. That’s why NASA’s latest futuristic solar sail tech should be raising eyebrows.

Photo Credit: Wiki Commons By NASA/Marshall Space Flight Center, Public Domain

Photo Credit: Wiki Commons By Andrzej Mirecki, Own Work, CC BY-SA 3.0

It won’t be taking us to Mars anytime soon
Obviously, solar sails will not be able to take humans to other planets quite yet, but the technology could be used for a wide variety of missions in space. But how exactly does a sail work in the vacuum of space (a place with no wind)?

©Provided by Sports Unlimited News

Not like the sails back on Earth
Solar sails aren’t exactly like the sails on a boat here on Earth but the concept is quite similar according to Space.com. Just like how wind can guide a sailboat, solar energy (photons) can be harnessed to help guide vessels through space.

How does a solar sail work?
“It only takes a slight amount of sunlight to guide solar sails through space,” Space.com noted, adding that although “photons don't have mass, they can force momentum when they hit an object,” which is how solar sails can move objects in space.

Photo Credit: Wiki Commons By Scott Andrews, Public Domain

Launched into space in April 2024
On April 24th, the Advanced Composite Solar Sail System (ACS3) headed up to space with Rocket Lab's Electron vehicle, and on August 29th, the ACS3 spread its solar sails in space for the first time, and it was captured by cameras fixed to its sails.

Photo Credit: NASA

The solar sails are fully deployed
NASA published the first image from the ACS3’s sail deployment on September 5th, and it was a sight to see—even if its orientation was a bit confusing, something that NASA noted in its press release alongside the image.

Photo Credit: Wiki Commons By NASA Ames Research Center / NASA/Aero Animation/Ben Schweighart

The mission’s success is pretty awesome
“The success so far of this mission is pretty awesome because solar sail technology is an incredibly impressive concept both in practice and in theory,” reported Live Science’s Monisha Ravisetti. But now the real work has begun for NASA's ACS3 team.

{ 

12-09-2024 om 22:41 geschreven door peter  

Story by Joey Roulette

FILE PHOTO: Anna Menon, Scott Poteet, commander Jared Isaacman and Sarah Gillis, crew members of Polaris Dawn, a private human spaceflight mission, attend a press conference at the Kennedy Space Center in Cape Canaveral, Florida, U.S. August 19, 2024.

REUTERS/Joe Skipper/File Photo© Thomson Reuters

By Joey Roulette and Gerry Doyle

WASHINGTON (Reuters) - A crew of four aboard a SpaceX capsule embarked on the world's first private spacewalk on Thursday, as an astronaut eased out of the Crew Dragon spacecraft on a tether into the vacuum of space, hundreds of miles from Earth.

Billionaire Jared Isaacman, 41, exited first about 6:52 a.m. ET (1052 GMT). After he returned a few minutes later, SpaceX engineer Sarah Gillis, 30, was scheduled to take her turn in space, all their maneuvers streaming live on the company's website.

"Back at home we all have a lot of work to do, but from here, Earth sure looks like a perfect world," Isaacman said after emerging from the spacecraft, the planet glittering in half shadow below him.

Before the spacewalk began, the capsule was completely depressurized, with the whole crew relying on their slim, SpaceX-developed spacesuits for oxygen, provided via an umbilical connection to Crew Dragon.

The spacewalk was scheduled to last only about 30 minutes, but the procedures to prepare for it and to finish it safely last about two hours. It was meant to test the new spacesuit designs and procedures for the capsule, among other things.

Related video: 

• SpaceX Polaris Dawn crew set to begin first private spacewalk (France 24)

A still image from the video of the SpaceX Polaris Dawn mission shows crew member Jared Isaacman outside the capsule during the first-ever private spacewalk on September 12, 2024. 

© Polaris Program, AFP

Isaacman, Gillis, Scott Poteet, 50, a retired U.S. Air Force lieutenant colonel, and SpaceX engineer Anna Menon, 38, had been orbiting Earth aboard Crew Dragon since Tuesday's pre-dawn launch from Florida of the Polaris Dawn mission. Menon and Poteet remained inside the spacecraft during the spacewalk.

It is the Elon Musk-led company's latest and riskiest bid to push the boundaries of commercial spaceflight.

Isaacman, a pilot and the billionaire founder of electronic payments company Shift4, is bankrolling the Polaris mission, as he did his Inspiration4 flight with SpaceX in 2021.

He has declined to say how much he is paying, but the missions are likely to cost hundreds of millions of dollars, based on Crew Dragon's price of roughly $55 million a seat for other flights.

FARTHEST SINCE APOLLO

Throughout Wednesday, the craft circled Earth at least six times in an oval orbit as shallow as 190 km (118 miles) and stretching out as far as 1,400 km (870 miles), the farthest in space that humans have traveled since the last U.S. Apollo mission in 1972.

The gumdrop-shaped spacecraft then began to lower its orbit into a peak 700-km (435-mile) position and adjust cabin pressure to ready for the spacewalk, formally called Extravehicular Activity (EVA), the Polaris program said on social media on Wednesday.

"The crew also spent a few hours demonstrating the suit’s pressurized mobility, verifying positions and accessibility in microgravity along with preparing the cabin for the EVA," it said.

Only government astronauts with several years of training have done spacewalks in the past.

There have been roughly 270 on the International Space Station (ISS) since it was set up in 2000, and 16 by Chinese astronauts on Beijing's Tiangong space station.

The Polaris crew has spent 2-1/2 years training with SpaceX mission simulations and "experiential learning" in challenging, uncomfortable environments, said Poteet.

A record 19 astronauts are now in orbit, after Russia's Soyuz MS-26 mission ferried two cosmonauts and a U.S. astronaut to the International Space Station on Wednesday, taking its headcount to 12.

Three Chinese astronauts are aboard the Tiangong space station.

The first U.S. spacewalk in 1965, aboard a Gemini capsule, used a similar procedure to the one planned for Polaris Dawn: the capsule was depressurized, the hatch opened, and a spacesuited astronaut ventured outside on a tether.

Since 2001, Crew Dragon, the only U.S. vehicle capable of reliably putting humans in orbit and returning them to Earth, has flown more than a dozen astronaut missions, mainly for NASA.

The agency seeded development of the capsule under a program meant to establish commercial, privately-built U.S. vehicles capable of ferrying astronauts with the ISS.

Also developed under that program was Boeing's Starliner capsule, but it is farther behind.

Starliner launched its first astronauts to the ISS in June in a troubled test mission that ended this month with the capsule returning empty, leaving its crew on the space station for a Crew Dragon capsule to fetch next year.

• (Reporting by Joey Roulette and Gerry Doyle; Editing by Jamie Freed and Clarence Fernandez)

• https://youtu.be/qP8fbz_sVfU

{  www.msn.com/en-gb/news }

12-09-2024 om 22:24 geschreven door peter