Wetenschappelijke Analyse over mogelijke  Ufo-Basissen en Aliens in Antarctica: Een Kritische Beschouwing

Inleiding

Antarctica, het meest zuidelijke continent op aarde, wekt al decennia lang zowel wetenschappelijke interesse als volksverbeelding. Met zijn onmetelijke ijsvlaktes, extreme klimaat en afgelegen ligging vormt het een gebied dat zowel wetenschappelijk waardevol als mysterieus is. Het fenomeen van vermeende UFO-bases onder het ijs van Antarctica behoort tot de meest intrigerende en controversiële onderwerpen binnen de ufologie en complottheorieën. Deze analyse beoogt een wetenschappelijke en objectieve beoordeling te geven van de claims en bewijsvoering rondom de vermeende aanwezigheid van buitenaardse bases op Antarctica, met een kritische blik op de betrouwbaarheid, bewijsgrond en wetenschappelijke consensus.

Historische Context en Ontwikkeling van de Theorieën

De fascinatie voor Antarctica en buitenaards leven ontwikkelde zich vooral in de tweede helft van de 20e eeuw, mede door de geopolitieke spanningen tijdens de Koude Oorlog en de ruimtevaartrace. In deze periode groeide de belangstelling voor de mogelijkheid van geheime bases en buitenaardse aanwezigheid, mede door de toegenomen meldingen van onverklaarbare vliegende objecten (UFO’s).

Operation High Jump (1946-1947), geleid door Rear Admiral Richard E. Byrd, wordt vaak aangehaald in de context van UFO-theorieën. Officieel had deze missie tot doel het opzetten van een onderzoeksstation en het trainen van militair personeel onder extreme omstandigheden. Echter, in de alternatieve theorieën wordt beweerd dat deze expeditie bedoeld was om buitenaardse bases te detecteren en te neutraliseren. Er bestaat echter geen wetenschappelijk bewijs dat deze missie specifiek gericht was op het opsporen van buitenaardse activiteiten, en de officiële verslagen spreken vooral over klimaat- en wetenschappelijke doelen.

Nazi-Expedities en Geruchten over Geheime Bases

Een andere belangrijke bron van controverse zijn de Duitse expedities in Antarctica, met name de zogenaamde “Neu-Schwabenland” expeditie (1938-1939). Conspiracy theoristen suggereren dat Nazi-Duitsland tijdens deze expeditie geheime bases heeft gevestigd onder het ijs, mogelijk met behulp van geavanceerde technologieën of buitenaardse hulp. Sommige aanhangers beweren dat er enorme gaten en ondergrondse tunnels zijn gevonden, geschikt voor het huisvesten van geavanceerde vliegtuigen of zelfs buitenaardse wezens.

Wetenschap en feiten wijzen echter uit dat de Duitse aanwezigheid in Antarctica beperkt bleef tot tijdelijke onderzoeksstations en dat geen fysiek bewijs bestaat voor de constructie van ondergrondse bases of geavanceerde technologieën. De Duitse expedities richtten zich vooral op het verkennen van het continent en het vastleggen van geografische gegevens, zonder enige documentatie of fysiek bewijs dat de claims van geheime bases ondersteunt. Bovendien heeft de internationale gemeenschap na de Tweede Wereldoorlog geen aanwijzingen gevonden voor dergelijke geheime installaties.

Geruchten over Nazi-UFO’s en Geavanceerde Technologieën

De theorie dat Nazi’s geavanceerde vliegende schotels of “UFO’s” ontwikkelden met buitenaardse technologie is populair in pseudowetenschappelijke en fictieve kringen. Volgens deze theorieën zouden nazi-wetenschappers, mogelijk geholpen door buitenaardse entiteiten, UFO-achtige voertuigen hebben gebouwd die superieure snelheid en manoeuvreerbaarheid bezaten. Sommige verhalen verwijzen naar zogenaamde “Haunebu” of “Vril”-vliegtuigen, die volgens de mythes in geheime bases onder Antarctica zouden zijn ontwikkeld.

Wetenschappelijk en historisch bewijs voor dergelijke claims ontbreekt volledig. De meeste wetenschappelijke studies tonen aan dat de technische mogelijkheden van de Nazi’s beperkt waren en niet konden leiden tot de ontwikkeling van gereedstaande UFO-achtige voertuigen met buitenaardse eigenschappen. Bovendien zijn er geen fysieke resten of betrouwbare getuigenissen die de claims van geavanceerde nazi-technologieën ondersteunen. Het crashen van een UFO in Kecksburg, Pennsylvania, in 1965, wordt vaak aangehaald in de context van geheime buitenaardse technologie, maar dit incident is nooit wetenschappelijk bevestigd en wordt algemeen beschouwd als een misinterpretatie of natuurverschijnsel.

Bewijs en Wetenschappelijke Validiteit

De kernvraag bij de claims over UFO-bases in Antarctica is de betrouwbaarheid van het beschikbare bewijs. Tot op heden zijn er geen concrete, reproduceerbare wetenschappelijke gegevens die de aanwezigheid van ondergrondse buitenaardse bases of UFO-crashes onder Antarctica ondersteunen. De meeste “bewijsstukken”, zoals satellietbeelden, worden vaak geïnterpreteerd als natuurlijke formaties of optische illusies.

Satellietbeelden tonen wel anomalieën die door sommige onderzoekers worden aangegrepen als mogelijke ingangen of structuren. Echter, de meeste van deze waarnemingen worden door experts eenvoudigweg verklaard door natuurlijke geologische formaties, sedimentvorming of optische effecten. Zonder fysiek bewijs, zoals artefacten, monsters of betrouwbare getuigenissen, blijft de claim van geheime bases speculatief.

Daarnaast heeft de wetenschap op het gebied van Antarctica uitgebreide onderzoeken uitgevoerd, gericht op geologie, glaciologie en biologie. Deze studies hebben geen aanwijzingen gevonden voor ondergrondse constructies of buitenaardse activiteiten. De extreme omstandigheden – zoals de temperaturen die kunnen dalen tot onder -80°C, de constante wind en de dikte van het ijs – maken de constructie en het onderhouden van ondergrondse bases uiterst onwaarschijnlijk zonder expliciete technologische hulp die niet wordt ondersteund door bewijs.

Wetenschappelijke en Geografische Beperkingen

De fysische omstandigheden op Antarctica vormen aanzienlijke barrières voor het bestaan van permanente bases, zeker voor buitenaardse of geheime installaties. De enorme ijsmassa’s, de moeilijk bereikbare ondergrond en de extreme weersomstandigheden maken bouw en logistiek uiterst complex en kostbaar. Bovendien is er geen bewijs dat dergelijke bases bestaan of dat er enige activiteit plaatsvindt die niet door wetenschappelijke expedities kan worden verklaard.

Daarnaast wordt het continent streng gecontroleerd door internationale verdragen, zoals het Antarctisch Verdrag (1961), dat het militaire gebruik en de exploitatie van natuurlijke hulpbronnen reguleert en het behoud van het milieu waarborgt. Het is uiterst onwaarschijnlijk dat geheime bases, vooral van buitenaardse aard, onopgemerkt blijven onder deze strikte internationale controle.

Mediacultuur en Fictie

De popularisering van het idee van geheime Nazi- of buitenaardse bases in Antarctica wordt sterk gevoed door sciencefictionfilms, boeken en pseudowetenschappelijke literatuur. Films zoals “Iron Sky” (2012) en series als “The X-Files” propaganderen het idee van verborgen bases en geheime technologieën. Deze verhalen combineren feitelijke elementen met fictie, waardoor ze aantrekkelijk en intrigerend worden voor het publiek.

De invloed van dergelijke media heeft bijgedragen aan het ontstaan en de verspreiding van complottheorieën, ondanks het ontbreken van wetenschappelijk bewijs. Het is belangrijk te onderscheiden tussen entertainment en wetenschappelijke realiteit. Fictie kan inspiratie bieden, maar mag niet worden beschouwd als bewijs.

Wetenschappelijke Conclusie en Kritische Beschouwing

Na een uitgebreide beoordeling van de beschikbare informatie, bewijs en wetenschappelijke consensus kunnen we concluderen dat:

• Er geen concreet bewijs bestaat voor de aanwezigheid van UFO-bases onder Antarctica.
• Claims over nazi-geheime bases en geavanceerde buitenaardse technologieën in Antarctica zijn niet ondersteund door fysiek bewijs of betrouwbare getuigenissen.
• Satellietbeelden en anekdotisch bewijs worden niet wetenschappelijk gevalideerd en kunnen meestal worden verklaard door natuurlijke formaties.
• De extreme fysische omstandigheden maken het bouwen van ondergrondse bases, laat staan buitenaardse installaties, uiterst onwaarschijnlijk zonder geavanceerde technologie die niet wordt ondersteund door bewijs.
• Culturele en mediatradities dragen bij aan de populariteit van deze theorieën, maar zij vormen geen wetenschappelijke onderbouwing.

Aanbevelingen voor Toekomstig Onderzoek

Hoewel de huidige stand van wetenschap geen bewijs levert voor UFO-bases in Antarctica, blijft het continent een fascinerend gebied voor geologisch en biologisch onderzoek. Verdere wetenschappelijke expedities, met geavanceerde technologieën zoals seismische monitoring, ondergrondse exploratie en geochemische analyses, kunnen mogelijk meer licht werpen op de mysteries van Antarctica.

Het is essentieel dat dergelijk onderzoek transparant en open gebeurt, zonder te worden beïnvloed door pseudowetenschappelijke of conspiratieve theorieën. Kritisch denken, goede wetenschappelijke methoden en verificatie blijven de hoekstenen van betrouwbare kennis.

Conclusie

De mythe van UFO-bases en Nazi-activiteiten in Antarctica blijft een intrigerend onderdeel van de populaire cultuur en complottheorieën. Echter, uit wetenschappelijk oogpunt ontbreekt het aan bewijs dat dergelijke claims ondersteunt. Antarctica is een continent vol natuurlijke wonderen en wetenschappelijke ontdekkingen, maar de verhalen over geheime buitenaardse bases behoren tot de sfeer van speculatie en fictie. Vooralsnog is het continent vooral een plek waar de wetenschap de complexe geologische en biologische processen van onze planeet onderzoekt, en niet een geheime uitvalsbasis voor buitenaardse beschavingen.

Bronnen en verder lezen

• National Snow and Ice Data Center (NSIDC) – Antarctica Research
• International Geophysical Year (1957-1958) en Antarctica-onderzoek
• Rapporten en publicaties van het Antarctic Treaty Secretariat
• Kritische wetenschappelijke analyses over UFO-claims en satellietbeelden
• Fictie en cultuur: Analyse van representaties in media

NOTE PETER2011

Door het scheiden van feit en fictie en het baseren van conclusies op wetenschappelijke bewijsvoering, kunnen we een genuanceerder en realistischer beeld krijgen van Antarctica en de vermeende buitenaardse activiteiten daar. Het blijft een gebied dat vooral onze natuurlijke nieuwsgierigheid en wetenschappelijke interesse wekt, en minder een plek voor geheime buitenaardse bases.

{ PETER2011 }

Verkenning van de mysteries van parallelle dimensies en alternatieve universums

In de uitgestrekte ruimte van het heelal schuilen mysteries die onze begrip te boven gaan, en roepen ons op om de gebieden van het onbekende te verkennen. Onder deze raadsels bevindt zich het concept van parallelle dimensies en alternatieve universums als een prikkelende mogelijkheid die de menselijke verbeelding al eeuwenlang in zijn greep houdt. Recente vooruitgangen in de theoretische fysica hebben een nieuw licht geworpen op deze eeuwenoude vraag en bieden een glimp van het complexe weefsel van de realiteit en de mogelijke bestaan van parallelle werelden.

Aan de voorhoede van deze verkenning staat het fascinerende concept van de multiversumtheorie. Volgens de nieuwste inzichten in de fysica suggereert het multiversum dat ons heelal slechts één van talloze andere kan zijn, die gelijktijdig maar onafhankelijk bestaan binnen hun eigen dimensie. Deze parallelle dimensies of alternatieve universums zouden unieke natuurkundige wetten, constanten en zelfs variaties in fundamentele deeltjes bezitten, wat leidt tot een eindeloos tapijt van diverse realiteiten.

De basis van de multiversumtheorie rust op de opmerkelijke notie van kosmische inflatie, een exponentiële expansie van ruimte die kort na de oerknal plaatsvond. Deze snelle expansie creëerde talloze bellen of zakken in het weefsel van de ruimtetijd, elk representerend een apart universum met zijn eigen eigenschappen. Hoewel deze universums misschien voor altijd buiten ons bereik blijven, bestaan ze desalniettemin, parallel aan ons eigen universum, en mogelijk met geheel andere vormen van leven en onvoorstelbare wonderen.

Een intrigerende tak van de multiversumtheorie is het concept van het “Level I Multiversum,” ook bekend als het 'quilted multiversum' of de oneindige universum-theorie. In dit scenario worden parallelle universums voorgesteld als verre kosmische eilanden, gescheiden door immense kosmische uitgestrektheden. Hoewel ze mogelijk dezelfde natuurkundige wetten volgen, kunnen de materie- en energieverdelingen binnen deze universums sterk variëren, wat leidt tot gevarieerde landschappen en configuraties.

Een andere boeiende benadering binnen het multiversumkader is het “Level II Multiversum,” bekend als de bubbeluniversumtheorie of het inflatoire multiversum. Deze theorie suggereert dat ons universum slechts een van vele bellen is binnen een uitgestrekte kosmische schuim. Elk van deze bellen vertegenwoordigt een afzonderlijk universum dat ontstaat door het proces van kosmische inflatie, en dat zich onafhankelijk ontwikkelt en uitbreidt. Net als zeepbellen in de lucht bestaan deze universums in een zee van andere, elk met zijn eigen unieke realiteit.

Dieper in de theoretische wereld ligt het “Level III Multiversum,” oftewel de veel-werelden interpretatie, die een verbazingwekkend panoramisch beeld opent van mogelijkheden. Voortkomend uit de kwantummechanica, stelt deze notie voor dat elk kwantumgebeurtenis meerdere vertakkingen creëert. Elke keuze die we maken, elke kwantuminteractie, schept een veelvoud aan parallelle universums, die zich vertakken in een oneindig web van waarschijnlijkheden. In dit verbazingwekkende landschap bestaan alle denkbare uitkomsten en beslissingen, gerealiseerd in hun eigen aparte realiteit.

Hoewel het bestaan van parallelle dimensies en alternatieve universums nog in het rijk van de theorie ligt, is er op het gebied van wetenschappelijk onderzoek toch enig indicatief bewijs opgedaan. Experimentele studies bij CERN’s Large Hadron Collider (LHC) proberen het bestaan van extra dimensies buiten de drie die wij kennen, te ontrafelen. Deze experimenten, gericht op de mysteries van de deeltjesfysica op hoge energie, proberen ongrijpbare deeltjes op te sporen die mogelijk in andere dimensies kunnen ontsnappen, en zo indirect bewijs te leveren voor het bestaan van parallelle werelden.

Daarnaast biedt de kosmische microgolfachtergrondstraling, die wordt beschouwd als de resten van het vroege heelal, aanwijzingen voor een multiversum. Wetenschappers hebben de complexe patronen in deze straling bestudeerd, op zoek naar anomalieën die kunnen wijzen op interacties tussen ons universum en naburige dimensies. Hoewel deze bevindingen nog preliminair zijn en verder onderzoek vereisen, voeden ze de drang naar ontdekking en stimuleren ze de verbeelding.

Parallelle dimensies en alternatieve universums hebben al lange tijd de aandacht van verhalenvertellers, die talloze werken in sciencefiction en fantasy hebben geïnspireerd. Van H.G. Wells’ “De Tijdmachine” tot Christopher Nolan’s baanbrekende film “Inception” en de uitgestrekte universums van Marvel Comics, het concept van parallelle dimensies is een vruchtbare bodem voor creatieve verkenning. Deze fictieve verhalen tonen vaak reizen tussen dimensies, waarin personages de ingewikkelde web van realiteiten navigeren, versies van zichzelf ontmoeten en de oneindige mogelijkheden van bestaan confronteren.

Toch, naarmate ons begrip van het heelal verdiept, vervagen de lijnen tussen wetenschap en fictie, en wordt de mogelijkheid van parallelle dimensies een steeds plausibeler hypothese. De zoektocht naar antwoorden gaat door, gedreven door de ontembare menselijke nieuwsgierigheid die ons al sinds mensenheugenis voortstuwt om de mysteries van het universum te ontrafelen.

Echter, terwijl het concept van parallelle dimensies onze verbeelding kan aanwakkeren en ons gevoel van verwondering kan versterken, is het van groot belang deze ideeën kritisch te benaderen. De verkenning van de theoretische fysica en de zoektocht naar empirisch bewijs vereisen rigoureuze wetenschappelijke methodologieën en strenge testen. Het bestaan van een theorie impliceert niet automatisch haar waarheid; buitengewone claims vereisen buitengewone bewijzen.

De wetenschappelijke gemeenschap is verdeeld over de vraag of parallelle dimensies en alternatieve universums daadwerkelijk bestaan. Critici beweren dat deze ideeën in het domein van speculatie vallen en het empirisch fundament missen om ze als wetenschappelijke theorie te rechtvaardigen. Ze pleiten voor voorzichtigheid en roepen onderzoekers op zich te richten op toetsbare hypotheses en observeerbare fenomenen, in plaats van af te dwalen in de wereld van de verbeelding.

Desalniettemin blijven voorstanders van de multiversumtheorie de grenzen van de wetenschappelijke nieuwsgierigheid verleggen. Ze werken aan het verfijnen van wiskundige modellen, ontwikkelen nieuwe experimentele opzetten en benutten geavanceerde technologieën om het bestaan van parallelle dimensies te onderzoeken.

Naarmate we uitkijken over het uitgestrekte kosmische landschap, starend naar de verre sterren en nadenkend over de mysteries die daarbuiten liggen, blijft de aantrekkingskracht van parallelle dimensies en alternatieve universums bestaan. Het is een zoektocht naar begrip, een verkenning van de fundamentele aard van de realiteit, en een bewijs van de onstuitbare menselijke drang naar kennis.

Uiteindelijk, of parallelle dimensies en alternatieve universums al dan niet bestaan, zullen hun aantrekkingskracht en inspiratie blijven voortbestaan. Ze blijven de menselijke verbeelding voeden, wetenschappelijke nieuwsgierigheid stimuleren en onze perceptie van wat mogelijk is uitdagen. Het raadsel van parallelle dimensies nodigt ons uit om verder te kijken dan de grenzen van ons bekende universum, de mysteries te omarmen die in de diepten van het bestaan verborgen liggen, en een reis te ondernemen die de grenzen van onze verbeelding overstijgt.

GERELATEERDE VIDEO's IN ENGELS

{ PETER2011 }

Viewers of streaming documentary The Rendlesham UFO: The British Roswell visited by alien orbs

Ufologist and filmmaker Mark Christopher Lee has claimed that his documentary The Rendlesham UFO: The British Roswell has led to viewers being visited by alien orbs.

Plasmoid orb frightens women walking dog, Blakey, PA, USA Aug 26, 2026 UAP Sighting News.

Date of sighting: August 26, 2026 8:52pm

Location of sighting: Blakely, Pennsylvania, USA

Source: NUFORC #200502

 

This glowing object looks like a plasmoid orb, glowing and as it moves its orb shape shifts a bit into an oval shape. Thats how I knew it was a plasmoid orb...a sentient entity. The object actually frightens the woman as she begins to watch and the object stops, not moving for a bit then shoots away and seems to be following the power lines. The dog is trying to pull the woman away, as if it was sensing something it was afraid of and wanted to escape the area but the eyewitness tried to control the dog to record more video of the orb. The orb changes color to a light green for a few seconds then back to white. This looks so much like the Dome of Rock UFO plasmoid orb that its blowing my mind. Its just very exciting to see this interact with the woman.

Scott C. Waring - UFO Sightings Daily

 

Eyewitness states: 

{ https://www.ufosightingsdaily.com/ }

Reason for mysterious orange and white balls seen floating on power lines across America revealed by expert

By ALYSSA GUZMAN, US NEWS REPORTER

While driving along American roadways, especially near airports, many have wondered about the mysterious orange and white orbs that can be seen on top of the power lines. 

They're not just for decoration. In fact, they serve a vital purpose to keep residents safe. 

Power lines carry high voltages of electricity to homes and businesses, making them crucial to any community. If they were to be damaged or hit, it could knock out power for thousands and even create a dangerous situation where a live wire is within reach. 

So the white and orange balls are placed on the top wires of taller power lines, especially in areas where airplanes will be flying low, to make them easily recognizable to pilots, Missouri University Professor Rui Bo wrote for The Conversation. 

'They’re like bright warning signs in the sky, protecting pilots, passengers and people on the ground below,' he wrote.  

But unlike power lines, the big orange balls, which are the size of a large beach ball and weigh around 25 pounds, are not electricized. 

'They’re made of insulating materials, so electricity does not flow through them,' Bo added. 

They're typically made of plastic or fiberglass, so they can last 10 to 15 years. And their orange color is deliberate, as it is easy for pilots to spot. 

Orange balls can be seen on power lines, often in places where there are low flying aircrafts 

The balls, which come in two halves, are the size of a large beach ball and weigh around 25 pounds

Missouri University Professor Rui Bo said the balls act as 'warning signs'

The power lines themselves easily blend into the scenery of the houses and trees nearby, making it hard for pilots to avoid when they're flying low to land at airports, so the brightly colored balls are essential to safe navigation. 

The installation of the balls can be difficult, especially for very high power lines. It requires a specialized team, especially when a helicopter is involved. 

The power lines are not turned off during installation, meaning high voltages of electricity continue to pass through them. 

Depending on the height of the power line, a ground or air crew is required. 

Ground crews use buckets to get up high enough to secure the ball, which comes in two halves, to the line. 

Air crews, however, have to hover near the line while crews on the end of the helicopter connect it to the power line. 

The balls themselves are made of plastic or fiberglass and do not conduct electricity, despite being on a live wire 

One lower lines, it can be install via bucket truck, but on higher lines, one has to be attached to a helicopter to do so 

The orange or white color of the ball is meant to be bright and easily visible to pilots 

'They don’t need much maintenance, but utilities inspect them from time to time to make sure they haven’t cracked or faded too much,' Bo wrote. 

Most neighborhood power lines are too low to need the balls. 

The Daily Mail has reached out to Bo for comment.  

{ https://www.dailymail.com/sciencetech/index.html }

Lost city 'perfectly matches' Biblical site where Jesus fed the 5,000... as humble birthplace of Keeper of Heaven's Keys is uncovered

By STACY LIBERATORE, US SCIENCE & TECHNOLOGY EDITOR

Archaeologists have spent a decade peeling back layers of ruins on the shores of the Sea of Galilee, searching for a 'lost' city where the Bible says Jesus performed miracles.

Now, the excavation team say they have finally found Bethsaida, the ancient city where Jesus is said to have restored a blind man's sight and fed thousands, and was home to three apostles - Peter, Andrew and Philip.

A Roman bathhouse and hundreds of fishing weights at el-Araj in northern Israel are said to match an ancient account of Bethsaida's transformation from a Jewish fishing village into a city.

Inside a ruined church dating back to the late fifth century, a mosaic invokes Peter, linking the building directly to Jesus' disciple.

Beneath the church, a first-century house wall may also support an ancient pilgrim's account that it was built over Peter and Andrew's home.

Dr Steven Notley, the excavation's academic director, told the Daily Mail he 'absolutely' believes the team has uncovered the lost biblical city that was home to the apostle Peter.

'Everything we bring out of the ground affirms and strengthens that identification,' he said.

'Nothing that we have found would challenge it at all.'

Archaeologists have uncovered stone walls they believe were part of the birthplace of Jesus' apostles 

The lost city, according to the Bible, is where Jesus performed a miracle that fed 5,000 people

For Notley, the ruins at el-Araj are bringing into view the setting of Gospel accounts in which Jesus restored a blind man's sight and fed thousands with five loaves and two fish.

'I think Jesus was there on multiple occasions,' Notley said. 'I think we probably have a number of miracles.'

In Mark 8:22–26, people bring a blind man to Jesus at Bethsaida. Jesus leads him outside the village before restoring his sight.

Luke 9:10–17 places Jesus and his apostles in what the King James Version calls 'a desert place belonging to the city called Bethsaida,' where he feeds about 5,000 men.

Notley believes the plain surrounding el-Araj fits that description: open grazing land beyond the settlement, rather than a sandy desert.

'We have no deserts up there,' he said. 'But they're pastoral areas, where your flocks will be eating outside of where people are living.'

'The Gospels identify this as the area where you have the feeding of the multitudes,' he added.

Inside a ruined church dating to the late fifth century, a mosaic invokes Peter, linking the building directly to Jesus' disciple 

Two walls set perpendicular to one another. One of the walls dates to the first century AD, while the second dates to the second or third century AD 

Jesus also rebukes Bethsaida in Matthew 11:21, saying: 'Woe unto thee, Bethsaida!' 

The passage criticizes its inhabitants for failing to repent despite the miracles performed there.

El-Araj lies just beyond the Jordan River, in territory ruled during Jesus' lifetime by Herod Philip, outside the jurisdiction of Herod Antipas, who ordered John the Baptist's execution.

Notley believes he has connected the location with Matthew 14:12–13, which describes Jesus withdrawing by boat after learning of John's death - he was beheaded by a king around 30 AD.

Although the passage does not name Bethsaida, Notley interprets the settlement's position as another reason Jesus would have spent time there.

John 1:44 supplies the connection to three apostles: 'Now Philip was of Bethsaida, the city of Andrew and Peter.'

'At least a quarter of his disciples came from Bethsaida … it played a very important role as the setting, the stage for Jesus' life and ministry in the North,' Notley said.

The strongest archaeological clue, in his view, emerged in 2017, when researchers uncovered mosaics, marble, roof tiles and ceramic heating vents belonging to a Roman bathhouse.

The flooring of the church dates back 1,500 years. The team believes this church was built over Peter and Andrew's home as a way to honor them

Its significance comes from the first-century historian Josephus, who described Bethsaida's transformation from a village into a city. The historian also left behind his eyewitness accounts of Jesus on trial and his crucifixion.

In Antiquities of the Jews, 18.28, Josephus records how Herod Philip elevated the lakeside settlement's status and renamed it Julias.

That history gave researchers two requirements against which to test their discoveries.

'You should find evidence of a Jewish fishing village, and you should find evidence of urbanization,' Notley said. El-Araj, he argued, provides both. 

Hundreds of fishing weights point to the industry that supported the settlement, while chalkstone vessels associated with Jewish purity practices identify its religious character.

The bathhouse supplies evidence of urban development, matching the larger settlement described by Josephus.

'You do not build a Roman bath in a Jewish village,' Notley said.

This summer's excavations revealed walls built over earlier walls, showing successive phases of construction. Stone vessels continued to appear in later layers, suggesting the growing settlement retained its Jewish population.

Not only could the find prove the existence of the legendary church, but it would lead the team to the location of the home of Jesus' famed apostles Peter and Andrew - the Church of the Apostles was said to have been built atop of their residence

'It doesn't lose its Jewish identity, it maintains that, but it's much larger,' Notley said.

He estimates the settlement covered 15 to 16 acres.

'Everywhere we're digging, we're finding extensive settlement on the site,' he said.

Notley contrasts those remains with et-Tell, a competing candidate nearly two miles inland from the modern lakeshore. He argues that its impressive Iron Age ruins give way to weaker evidence around the first century, when Josephus describes Bethsaida growing in importance.

'It completely contradicts the historical record,' he said.

Excavations at el-Araj began in 2016, with Notley working alongside excavation director Mordechai Aviam.

'Everyone thought I was crazy, everyone thought we were crazy, that there was nothing there,' Notley recalled.

A late fifth-century church added another line of evidence linking the settlement to the apostles.

'No one knew there was a church there,' he said. 'We didn't go looking for a church.'

Gilded glass mosaic pieces first suggested an elaborate Christian building, and by 2018 the team had identified the outline of a basilica.

Its discovery prompted Notley to revisit the account of Willibald, an eighth-century pilgrim who described a church at Bethsaida built over the house of Peter and Andrew.

In August 2022, researchers uncovered an intact mosaic inscription north of the apse, the church's sacred eastern section.

It honored a local official and benefactor named Constantine before seeking intercession from 'the chief of the apostles and the keeper of the keys of heaven,' in Notley's description.

Roman coins have been found at the site, supportinga theory that it was urbanized

Christians recognize Saint Peter, originally a fisherman, as one of the first followers of Jesus and the leader of the early Church following the ascension. He was born Simon Peter and grew up to be a fisherman until he met Jesus

The Bible says that not only was Peter the leader of the apostles, but he would receive the keys to the kingdom of heaven from Jesus. 

'That title can have no other reference than Peter, which confirms the church's identification with Peter,' he said.

For Notley, the question is why Christians would have honored Peter at this particular location. 'We have very few Byzantine churches connected with Peter,' he said of the Holy Land during that period.

Such churches generally marked places associated with Peter's appearances in the Gospels. At el-Araj, Notley believes the dedication commemorates his hometown.

Its importance lies in connecting the excavated church with Peter, consistent with both John's identification of his hometown and Willibald's description of a church there.

Willibald's account gave the team a prediction to test: if the church commemorated the apostles' home, earlier domestic remains might survive directly beneath the apse, the sacred area where relics associated with saints were often preserved.

'There should be a first-century house under the apse,' Notley recalled predicting.

In October 2023, a conservator removed and preserved the mosaic floor, allowing archaeologists to excavate below the church's most sacred area.

Gilded glass mosaic pieces first suggested an elaborate Christian building, and by 2018 the team had identified the outline of a basilica

Above is a close look inside the ruins of the church

They uncovered a house wall dating to the first century, placing domestic remains from the apostles' lifetime beneath the later Christian building.

'It doesn't get much better than that,' Notley said.

The wall cannot establish who lived there, but its age and position support the tradition that the church commemorated an earlier home.

Beneath the late fifth-century basilica, researchers have also identified a fourth-century Christian structure that the team believes may have been an earlier church.

Notley connected that sequence with the early fourth-century historian Eusebius, who associated Peter and Philip with Bethsaida, suggesting Christians continued to remember the settlement's biblical significance.

'There's a continuing memory of Peter's connection to Bethsaida,' he said.

The case therefore joins evidence from different periods: a Jewish fishing community, Roman urban development and successive Christian buildings honoring an apostle whose hometown was Bethsaida.

'Everything we bring out of the ground affirms and strengthens that identification. Nothing that we have found would challenge it at all,' Notley said.

The identification does not amount to archaeological proof of miracles. 'Archaeology has its limits,' he acknowledged.

For Notley, however, the discoveries restore the setting in which the Gospels place Jesus' ministry and the lives of three of his closest followers.

'I have no difficulty seeing Jesus spending considerable time there,' he said, adding that he calls it 'the last lost city of the Gospels.'

{ https://www.dailymail.com/news/index.html 

Some of the 20 UFOs Near the Moon Are Ring-Shaped and Spin at Twice Earth's Gravity, Astronomers Claim

Controversial observations of anomalous structures spark debate

Ukrainian astronomers claim high-speed telescope footage shows giant rotating UFOs near the Moon, though experts warn previous distance errors heavily undermine the unverified study 

PHOTO Peter Pieras/Pixabay

Astronomers at Ukraine's Main Astronomical Observatory say they have detected more than 20 unidentified flying objects near the Moon, using high-speed camera systems at the Vinarivka observatory in rural Ukraine.

The team, led by researcher Boris Zhilyaev, reports observing large ring-shaped structures close to the lunar surface, some estimated at up to 36 kilometres across and said to rotate roughly every three minutes, which they calculate would generate centrifugal forces exceeding twice Earth's gravity.

Anomalous Motion and Bold Technical Claims

Footage recorded on 16 August and 7 September 2025 captured small, fast-moving signals travelling at velocities of up to 11 kilometres per second across the lunar disc. In a non‑peer‑reviewed study, the authors argue that these observations could indicate a sophisticated installation on or near the Moon, potentially capable of sending craft to Earth in about 20 minutes, although mainstream scientific institutions remain sceptical of this interpretation.

In their preliminary paper, the Kyiv-based researchers categorised the reported objects into two main groupings based on observed behaviour. Atmospheric objects appeared to stay above specific lunar regions, as if acting as fixed stations, while continental objects moved quickly across the Moon's surface.

The team noted that several objects flashed in synchronised cycles lasting between 0.1 and 0.5 seconds, even when they appeared to be separated by hundreds of miles.

Size estimates in the report vary from about 440 metres to upwards of 25 miles across, with the largest objects said to rival the footprint of major terrestrial cities. Moving at roughly 24,606 miles per hour, the claimed velocities would be comparable to the top speed achieved by NASA rockets during Apollo-era lunar missions.

Despite these figures, the authors state that their mathematical models depend on assumptions about object composition and light reflectivity that have not been independently verified.

On the raw digital frames gathered at Vinarivka, the proposed large structures occupy only a few faint pixels, which leaves scope for image noise, atmospheric distortion or digital camera artefacts to be misinterpreted as real objects.

Methodological Concerns and Scientific Scepticism

The wider scientific community has treated the paper cautiously, in part because of the research group's previously criticised work on unidentified aerial phenomena. When the same team published findings on unidentified objects in 2022, Ukraine's National Academy of Sciences launched a formal review that concluded the work contained significant errors and did not meet professional standards for publication

During that earlier dispute, Harvard University astrophysicist Avi Loeb showed that the team's distance calculations were overstated by a factor of ten. That error turned likely atmospheric objects, most probably terrestrial artillery shells fired during regional conflict, into what the authors had presented as large unidentified craft.

Critics argue that the latest lunar study shows similar structural weaknesses, including reliance on a single observation site and the absence of parallax measurements to establish genuine spatial depth.

The discussion around the paper also comes at a time of public interest in declassified military records and UAP intelligence documents released under former US President Donald Trump and current American officials.

Pixelated 'Megastructures' Await Independent Checks

• New Skinny Bob Videos Trigger UFO Panic After Alleged Leak Revives Long-Buried Alien Claims

Officials at agencies such as NASA continue to state that no confirmed evidence of extraterrestrial technology has been found. Researchers note that without independent observations using multiple telescopes, the reported lunar anomalies cannot be treated as established objects.

Until such corroboration exists, the claimed ring-shaped structures and other reported UFOs remain the subject of debate rather than accepted

{ https://www.ibtimes.co.uk/technology }

NASA Explains the Spooky 'Negative-Space Jellyfish' Hovering Over Mars in New Curiosity Rover Image

A smudge on a lunar photo and a stray line in an old NASA meeting are all it takes to send humanity's imagination spinning back into the dark

NASA has stepped in to clarify a decades old lunar photograph that some UFO enthusiasts say depicts a 3.4 mile long alien spacecraft suspended above the moon. 

PHOTO Instituto Geográfico Nacional de Costa Rica/Wikimedia Commons

NASA has moved to explain a decades old lunar photograph that some UFO enthusiasts claim shows a 3.4-mile-long alien spacecraft hovering above the moon, after the 1967 image resurfaced online and reignited speculation about extraterrestrial life.

The black and white picture was captured by NASA's Lunar Orbiter 3 in February 1967 as the agency mapped potential landing sites ahead of the first crewed missions.

The frame shows a stark stretch of the moon's surface dominated by Theophilus crater, a vast impact site that NASA lists as about 68 miles across and 2.7 miles deep. Tucked into that landscape is an elongated smudge that has become the latest canvas for people determined to see more than geology.

UFO Blogger Claims NASA is Hiding the 'Smoking Gun'

One of the loudest voices is Scott Waring, a long-time UFO blogger, who argues that NASA's own archive hides the smoking gun. On his site, UFO Sightings Daily, he claims the strange streak is 'a long spacecraft hovering over the moon's surface' and insists the object is no trick of light or dust on the lens.

According to Waring, the scale alone should make people sit up. He writes that he compared the length of the disputed feature with Theophilus crater, taking NASA's 110 kilometre diameter figure, then judging the object to be about one twentieth as long. From that, he concludes the craft measures roughly 5.5 kilometres, or 3.4 miles, end to end.

'That's huge to us humans, but to aliens, it's considered a small shuttle craft,' he tells his readers, doubling down on the idea that we are glimpsing only a minor piece of someone else's space hardware.

He goes further, arguing that the photograph carries a chilling implication. 'This is 100 percent proof that aliens were watching humans before we ever stepped on the moon,' Waring writes, treating the picture as evidence of quiet surveillance of the Apollo programme before it even began.

NASA, for its part, has said nothing of the sort. The agency has repeatedly stated that it has no evidence of extraterrestrial life and that it has yet to find any sign of past or present life on the moon or on Mars.

The elongated mark has not been classified by NASA as a craft, and neither Waring's size estimate nor his interpretation has been validated by independent imaging experts.

NASA Image Spurs Fresh Extraterrestrial Life Debate

The renewed focus on the 1967 NASA image lands in a wider political and cultural moment where official UFO files are being shuffled out of locked cabinets and into public view. The Trump administration has overseen the release of several batches of classified documents on unexplained aerial and space phenomena, giving UFO believers fresh material and, unsurprisingly, new fuel.

On 8 May, the US Department of War released hundreds of pages of documents, images and audio recordings that officials said documented reports of possible extraterrestrial sightings going back to the 1940s. Among them were transcripts from the Apollo 12 and Apollo 17 missions, the second and final crewed landings on the moon.

Those Apollo records, along with photographs taken by astronauts on the surface, detail multiple encounters with bright, fast-moving objects that appeared to dance around lunar landers or drift past capsule windows. The tone is more puzzled than panicked, but you can feel the astronauts straining to make sense of what they are seeing.

During Apollo 17 in 1972, commander Gene Cernan, lunar geologist Jack Schmitt and command module pilot Ron Evans reported a bright, flashing object some distance from their spacecraft.

• NASA's Curiosity Rover Ignites Alien Rumours After Capturing an Unexplained 'Tripod-Like Object'

In one exchange, recorded in mission transcripts, Cernan says: 'It is a bright object, and it's obviously rotating because it's flashing. It's way out in the distance, as I say, because there are particles that are close by and it's obviously not one of those.'

He adds that the flashes appear in a 'very rhythmic fashion,' estimating that the object sits several Earth diameters away in their field of view as they look back at the home planet. Cernan is careful, stressing that the comparison might not 'do you any good,' but the bafflement is clear.

Later, as Apollo 17's crew fired their thrusters to change direction, Evans reported 'very bright particles or fragments or something' drifting past the windows. Schmitt chimes in that it looks like 'the Fourth of July' outside Evans' window, with 'big bright pieces tumbling slowly around the capsule.'

Evans describes the fragments as jagged, angular and solid, not fluid, and says they are mostly moving with the spacecraft but with some faster pieces zipping by. According to the mission records, he also reported taking photographs of them for analysis back on Earth.

Three years earlier, Apollo 12 astronauts also noted odd lights and objects on approach to the lunar surface, material that appears again in the newly released Trump era files. None of these reports are categorised by NASA as proof of alien craft.

Mission engineers have long pointed to mundane explanations, from ice crystals and insulation fragments to weird lighting in the vacuum. Yet the raw transcripts still make strange reading today.

NASA Briefings Mention 'Alien Starbase' in Moon Anomaly Talk

The Trump administration's third batch of UFO related files, published on 12 June, has added another wild detail to the pile. Within recorded NASA briefings held after Apollo 16 in 1972, officials can be heard referring, apparently half in jest, to an 'alien starbase' on the far side of the moon.

These briefings, which run for about 55 minutes, discuss unusual gravity readings, laser measurements and anomalies detected on the moon's far side, particularly near the Van de Graaff crater region.

One speaker notes 'a great big hole' around what the transcript calls 'Fendi graph', believed to be a garbled reference to Van de Graaff, a crater already known for its strange magnetic and geochemical quirks.

'On the backside of the moon around Fendi graph, that's where we get our big hole,' the participant says, before the discussion suddenly veers. Another voice remarks: 'It could be an alien star base or something. Anyway, the next slide shows the front side of the moon.'

The line, buried in a technical briefing, does not appear in the formal Apollo 16 mission transcript from 1972. NASA has not formally clarified whether the 'alien starbase' reference was a joke, a casual shorthand or something else entirely.

That ambiguity, paired with the Lunar Orbiter 3 photograph and Trump era document dumps, has given UFO believers a field day. For scientists trying to keep public expectations tethered to evidence, it is proving to be an exhausting game of cosmic whack a mole.

{ https://www.ibtimes.co.uk/trending }

'An Absurd Idea': Scientists Want to Create an Artificial Eclipse in Space to Hunt for Alien Worlds

A vast flower-shaped shield, a billion‑dollar gamble and the stubborn human urge to see whether anyone else is out there

A NASA team is advancing a bold new proposal to search for alien worlds by staging an artificial eclipse in space, positioning a huge ‘starshade’ about 175,000 kilometres above Earths. 

PHOTO Razor Picz/Pinterest

A NASA team is pushing an audacious plan to hunt for alien worlds by creating an artificial eclipse in space, placing a vast 'starshade' some 175,000 kilometres above Earth so ground-based telescopes can finally see planets hidden in the glare of distant stars.

Astronomers have already confirmed thousands of exoplanets, but most were spotted indirectly, by watching stars wobble or dim as planets pass in front of them. Directly imaging an Earth-like planet is far harder.

These worlds are up to a billion times fainter than the stars they orbit, so the light astronomers care about is drowned out by the cosmic equivalent of full‑beam headlights.

Still, the scepticism writes itself. A giant flower-shaped umbrella floating above Earth, perfectly aligned with telescopes and distant stars, sounds less like engineering and more like science fiction.

Even some scientists have described the plan as 'absurd' in its ambition. Then again, most big shifts in astronomy, from space telescopes to gravitational wave detectors, looked slightly unhinged on paper at first.

If HOEE moves ahead, it will face all the usual battles that define modern space science, from budget fights and technical delays to competition with other marquee missions. The team backing the starshade knows that. Their pitch rests on a simple question that cuts through the noise.

If we had a realistic chance to look directly at a nearby Earth-like alien planet, one that might, in some far‑off future, even be within reach of a human visit, would we really decide that is too much trouble?

{ https://www.ibtimes.co.uk/trending }

"200-inch Hale Telescope at the Palomar Observatory"

In 2025, two cleverly designed studies claimed to find evidence of strange objects orbiting Earth — years before humanity had put anything in space.

The announcement made headlines. In October 2025, a group of researchers published a paper in a well-regarded, peer-reviewed astronomical journal claiming the extraordinary: They’d found evidence of objects orbiting the Earth years before the launch of any human-made artificial satellites. In another paper, they also claimed links between when these objects appeared in the sky and the dates of nuclear tests in the 1950s. If any of these results were correct, it’d represent evidence of orbiting non-human technological artifacts and an indication that whatever “piloted” these artifacts was interested in our nuclear capabilities. It’s easy to see why the papers grabbed headlines and interest. 

So, the big question hovering around these works is — like all newly published scientific papers — can their conclusions hold up to scrutiny?

So, of course, these papers made news. A scientific paper on its own, however, is just a single step in the scientific process. The next step is for the community to pore over the paper and see if the work holds up. Was the data set well prepared? Are the methods used to analyze that data well thought out and mathematically legitimate? Are the conclusions the authors draw from their analysis appropriate, or is there some flaw in the chain of reasoning? 

A critique of the VASCO studies

That next step just came in with a new paper called “Critical Evaluation of Studies Alleging Evidence for Technosignatures in the POSS1 – E Photographic Plates,” which was recently accepted by the Publications of the Astronomical Society of Australia (PASA). As the title implies, the authors do not find the VASCO studies convincing. 

Before we dive into their critique, one noteworthy thing about the paper is its author list. It includes several working scientists who have been at the forefront of taking UAPs seriously. The lead author is Wesley Watters of Wellesley College. He is an astronomer who has written several papers reviewing UAP sightings and arguing they deserve a deeper, agnostic analysis. He has also been a member of Avi Loeb’s Galileo Project research team, which wants to study UAPs scientifically. Another author is Kevin Knuth, a physicist at the University at Albany, SUNY. Knuth published a well-known study of Navy-pilot UAP sightings exploring whether the trajectories seen by the pilots showed evidence for extreme physics at work. Knuth is also a research affiliate of the Galileo Project. What is striking about the author list is that it represents a group that cannot be seen as hostile to the basic idea that UAPs are a valid scientific problem or that they might represent technosignatures. This observation tells you nothing about the quality of their analysis and the critique that follows. It does, however, mean this is not a group of scientists with a bias against UAPs as a whole (in my experience, most astronomers do have this bias).

The Watters paper begins with an important historical example. Using photographic plates to look for things in the sky that appear and then disappear is not a new idea. For decades, astronomers tried to use photographic plates to find optical traces of the enigmatic gamma-ray bursts (GRBs), powerful explosions involving massive stars. As Watters and team show, even though a huge effort was put into the project, there were just too many “defects” on the plates that had nothing to do with the sky: problems with the photographic emulsion; dust grains on the plates; pits in the glass plate itself; errors introduced when plate copies were made, as well as other issues. It turns out that separating the defects and other issues from the real things captured by the telescope is incredibly difficult. This is especially true when you need to do it at scale — meaning you want to do statistics with tens or hundreds of thousands of potential transients. For the astronomers looking for GRBs, the photographic plates were simply not up to the job. That seems to be an important lesson for the VASCO project.

The defect problem is so bad that the Watters paper doesn’t use the term transient at all since so many of the “things” in the POSS survey aren’t transients (i.e., things seen in the sky). Instead, they begin their analysis by asking about “Selected POSS 1-E Features,” or SPFs. The Watters paper then asks several questions. What can we tell about the SPFs that the VASCO team pulled off the POSS-I plates? How did their choices of what to use effect their analysis and their claims? 

It turns out that these are not easy questions to answer because the VASCO team did not publish the dataset used in this study. That means Watters and company had to go through an exhaustive effort to determine which parts of the POSS-I survey were used and which features were selected to be explored by the VASCO group as possible transients. Once this work is done, Watters and company go on to show that this analogous dataset is full of irregularities (something also shown in an earlier paper by Nigel Hambly of the University of Edinburgh). SPFs show up more often on the edges of the plates than in the center, or features cluster on the plates in irregular ways. Worse, when mapped across the whole sky, there are big stripes and voids where no features appear at all, while in other places the features inexplicably bunch up. All this points to the real possibility that the VASCO data set simply has not been vetted carefully enough. If so many, if not most, of the features are not true astronomical transients but plate defects, that is a real problem. 

Even if some of the features on the plates are light from the sky, the Watters analysis of the analogous VASCO dataset revealed a deeper problem: the statistics. To pull statistically significant conclusions from the data, as the VASCO team hopes, the dataset as a whole must have certain properties. In particular, overall, it must be what’s called “uniformly random in distribution.” This means the features must, on average, be sprinkled randomly around in the same way as stars in the sky appear to be. Technically, this means they could be generated by what’s called a Poisson process. If you want to find statistically significant patterns in a big data set, the most common methods require that you start with data that at least approximates being uniformly random. Only in that case can you apply many of the usual mathematical methods of statistics, the methods that assure you’re not getting fooled by patterns you think you are finding. 

Because of all the problems identified in the Watters paper, the VASCO dataset cannot be considered to be uniformly random. Worse, some of the conclusions rely on small numbers of data. For example, for the all-important calculation of the Earth shadow deficit, only 11 out of the 645 plates the VASCO team used are in the Earth’s shadow. That’s not a lot of data to begin with, and it makes doing statistics shakier. But then, through careful analysis, the Watters team found that only five of these plates were fully shadowed, with the rest only partially shadowed. Worse, it appears that the majority of SPFs occur in a single plate. So now there is even less data to work with statistically, and that one plate dominates the analysis. Finally, some of the shadowed plates were in those troubled bands where something weird was going on. 

When Watters and collaborators repeated the shadow analysis, they found no significant deficit of features. The VASCO result had disappeared. These problems all stem from the misapplication of the statistical methods. Thus, that spectacular claim of a 22-sigma result is unsupportable. There was no statistically significant deficit of SPF’s in the Earth’s shadow.

The Watters team then turned to the claimed correlation between the dates of features appearing on the POSS-I plates and nuclear tests. That result also disappeared in terms of significance. The problem was that the VASCO team was not using the right number of days over which the POSS-I observations had been taken (they used 2,718 days rather than the actual 312-day time period over which their data were drawn; the POSS-I survey did not record observations every single day. Once this correction was included, the statistically significant correlation between nuclear tests and transient observations collapsed. What did exist was a relationship between when the telescope was used and when nuclear tests were done (possibly due to clear weather extending across the western states). But this had nothing to do with when features appeared on those plates.

Finally, the Watters paper concludes by showing how the whole VASCO project is plagued by a kind of circular reasoning embodied by their overuse of the term “transients” rather than “features.” Circular reasoning involves assuming the conclusion of an argument as part of its premises.  The VASCO team wants to claim that some features on the POSS-I plates are actual things in the sky that only appear once and then are gone. They use the analysis of the shadow deficit and nuclear tests to claim these are real transients. But there is no independent validation that the bulk of these “transients” are not stuff screwed up on the plates themselves. Thus, the argument doubles back on itself: the shadow-deficit analysis assumes that the plate features are real transient events, and that same analysis is cited as proof that they are real transient events.

The bottom line is that the Watters paper offers a strong critique of the two news-making VASCO studies. It’s not that the VASCO idea was bad. It was a great technosignature scientific project. Rather, like the failed GRB studies, the POSS-I dataset does not seem up to the task. So, what does it all mean?

Science and UFO culture

The first thing to note is that this is not the end of the story. Science is like the blues — it’s a call-and-response kind of thing. A scientist named Bob publishes a paper. Another scientist named Alice publishes a critique. It’s then Bob’s job to address those critiques in the next published paper. If that’s done well, then the game goes on, and Bob’s evidence and arguments get better over time until, perhaps, the scientific community recognizes it as a proven fact and even uses that fact to do the next set of studies. So, the question now is how the VASCO team responds to these criticisms.

Another key point is where this call and response get played out. Over the past 400 years, science has figured out a system that works pretty well. It’s called peer review. Bob writes a paper and submits it to a journal. The journal then sends it to other scientists who are knowledgeable in the field (hopefully experts) for review. The reviewers make comments and suggestions that must be addressed. If the paper is judged to be too deeply flawed, then it may be rejected. This process is not perfect, but it does ensure at least a first level of quality control. Most importantly, it has given us wonderful things like quantum mechanics, molecular biology, and so on.

Raising this point gets us to the sociology of the overlap between UFO culture and science. A number of times, unrefereed papers that have not been submitted to any journal have appeared online, claiming to respond to the Watters paper’s deep analysis. While there is nothing in principle wrong with this, it’s definitely not science. Instead, it’s asking interested scientists to go chasing after work that has not been vetted by anyone and stands to be a waste of time. Certainly, these papers can’t be considered part of the all-important literature on which science has built its long and incredible success. In other words, it won’t endure. People arguing against this — that peer review and publication are not necessary — are like players showing up to a soccer game demanding everyone use the rules of baseball. That’s not how that game is played, and it’s played that way for good reasons.

This takes us deeper into the difficulty for scientists attempting to deal seriously with UFO culture. Advocates for the claim that UAPs/UFOs represent technosignatures of alien visitation often complain that scientists ignore the evidence and are unwilling to take the subject seriously. This was certainly not the case with the VASCO papers. Dr. Villarroel was, for example, invited to present her results at a meeting of the important Goddard Space Flight Center technosignature lecture series. The meeting was polite, with lots of good discussion. 

When, however, scientists find fault with UAP/UFO data — as is the case with the Watters study — they are attacked as “part of the problem” or “government shills.” Online and elsewhere, it can get so unpleasant that at some point, a scientist might ask, “Why bother?” Everyone has interesting, fun research projects. Why spend time on this? 

In this way, the UAP/UFO community needs to ask itself a difficult question. Does that community want their subject to be part of the actual scientific process — where beliefs can get legitimately challenged — or do they just want to hold on to their beliefs no matter what? There is a word for the second option. It’s called religion.

I once asked Adam Riess, an astronomer who won the Nobel Prize for showing that the Universe’s expansion was accelerating, what it felt like when he made the discovery. He was just a post-doctoral researcher when he was at the telescope collecting data for the epoch-making result. What did he think as he saw the Nobel-worthy conclusion come out of his data? 

He told me he was terrified. The smartest people in the world were going to tear through everything he had done, looking for mistakes. Riess’ apprehension shows exactly why science works and why the VASCO team should have expected — and welcomed — critiques like those of Watter’s and collaborators. They are claiming something extraordinary, explosive even. It’s the duty of the rest of the scientific community to look for all the ways they might be wrong. That, after all, is the only way we can know if they are right. Isn’t the question “Are we alone?” worth that kind of effort?

{ https://bigthink.com/ }

Tinfoil Is Optional

Last September, the House Committee on Oversight and Government Reform held a hearing titled “Restoring Public Trust Through UAP Transparency and Whistleblower Protection.” During it, Rep. Eric Burlison played a “never-before-seen” video showing a U.S. military Hellfire “We Come in Peace” missile™ striking a bright object off the coast of Yemen on Oct. 30, 2024. The Hellfire missile strikes the object, sending debris flying from the point of impact. But the debris continues moving alongside the main object, almost as though the pieces remain part of the same formation.

Brandi Vincent, who covered the hearing for DefenseScoop, reported that the hearing also marked the first time an active-duty Navy official testified publicly before Congress about a UAP incident.

That official was Senior Chief Petty Officer Alexandro Wiggins, who described a February 2023 encounter aboard the USS Jackson in Whiskey 291, a restricted military training area off the coast of Southern California. Wiggins said he observed a “self-luminous,” “Tic Tac-shaped” object that did not resemble a conventional aircraft or drone, and the ship’s systems recorded the encounter on multiple sensors. The object appeared to emerge from the ocean, join three similar objects, and then disappear with “near-instantaneous acceleration.” Wiggins said there was no sonic boom or conventional propulsion signature.

Whiskey 291 is the same general training area associated with the now famous 2004 “Tic Tac” incident, footage of which was recorded by Lieutenant Chad Underwood. NBC has a rather good segment on the encounter and other reported Tic Tac sightings.

Whatever these objects are, higher education has found a reason to be interested.

The University at Albany (UAlbany), for example, recently received a major gift to advance scientific research on UAPs. UAlbany physics professor Matthew Szydagis was among the authors of a June 2025 article, “Initial Results from the First Field Expedition of UAPx to Study Unidentified Anomalous Phenomena,” published in Progress in Aerospace Sciences. According to the abstract, the article details a week-long expedition to Catalina Island, where Szydagis and other researchers deployed cameras and a range of sensors to collect data on possible UAPs.

“The study of UAP is slowly moving from the fringe to the mainstream of scientific study,” Szydagis said in a university press release about the newly published research. I have not read the entire article myself, but I have reached out to Szydagis hoping to talk with him about his findings.

There is also Harvard’s Galileo Project, which aims to move the search for extraterrestrial technology from “accidental or anecdotal observations and legends” into systematic scientific research. The project webpage says it will “examine the possibility of extraterrestrial origin” for UAPs and seek to “understand the origins of interstellar objects.” The project is led by Avi Loeb, who, interestingly enough, has had some public spats with Elon Musk over the existence of aliens.

Apparently, Musk has said he has seen no evidence of aliens, prompting Loeb to write that Musk commenting on the universe based on his experience in the inner solar system is like “an ant making a statement about the planets in the Solar system after exploring an area as big as the head of a pin.” Loeb added, “It must be a rather presumptuous ant.”

What makes that comment particularly humorous is that Harvard recently disclosed a $2.2 billion stake in SpaceX, making Musk’s aerospace company the “largest holding in Harvard Management Company’s publicly reported stock portfolio.” So, if Loeb is right, Harvard has a lot riding on a rather presumptuous ant.

Of course, none of this tells us what researchers will actually find. Turner’s view is probably the safest one for now: “There’s something there.” What that something is remains another question.

Will universities find aliens? Some doubt it. Turner takes the Fermi paradox seriously: If advanced extraterrestrial civilizations are common, where are they? Despite decades spent scanning the skies,Turner notes, no one has produced the proverbial alien body or spacecraft wreckage.

What do I think? Well, I am not ready to add this one to my collection of doubts just yet. Aliens may be out there.

My tinfoil hat is at the ready.

Minding the Campus article takes a skeptical view of UFO discussions

Overview

A recent Minding the Campus essay, pointedly titled “Tinfoil Is Optional,” takes a skeptical, lightly satirical view of UFO and UAP discussions, arguing that the subject can be examined without defaulting to paranoid conspiracy thinking. The piece revisits a topic that has long occupied the borderlands of public debate: reports of strange objects in the sky, allegations of government secrecy, and the enduring pull of stories involving Area 51, alleged crash retrievals, and supposed extraterrestrial technology. By leaning into a skeptical frame, the article suggests that while unexplained sightings may be worth discussing, they do not require the “tinfoil hat” mindset that often shadows the subject.

The article opens by noting that UFOs have for decades sat on the fringes of serious inquiry, fueled by claims of abductions, flying saucers, and hidden government programs. It also highlights Bob Lazar, the controversial figure who rose to prominence in the late 1980s by claiming he had worked on reverse-engineering extraterrestrial spacecraft for the U.S. government. Lazar has recently re-entered the public conversation through podcast appearances promoting the documentary S4: The Bob Lazar Story, underscoring how old claims continue to circulate in new media formats.

From UFOs to UAPs

A central argument in the article is that the subject has long been burdened by “a lot of delusion and projection,” as Scott Turner, director of science programs at the National Association of Scholars, puts it. Turner traces the modern UFO era back to the 1950s, when Cold War anxieties, concerns about American technological inferiority, and later a wave of frauds and conspiracy theorists helped shape the conversation. Yet the article also stresses that sightings themselves are not imaginary. Turner says unidentified objects in the sky “are real,” a distinction that underlies the shift away from the term UFO toward UAP, or unidentified aerial phenomena.

That rebranding is not merely cosmetic. In August 2020, the Department of Defense established the Unidentified Aerial Phenomena Task Force, formally adopting the newer terminology. The article presents that shift as an effort to describe the issue more neutrally, without presuming either extraterrestrial origins or elaborate cover-ups. Since then, government interest in UAPs has become more public, with hearings and official testimony lending the topic a measure of legitimacy it long lacked.

Congressional scrutiny and recent testimony

The piece points to a major House Oversight and Government Reform Committee hearing held last September titled “Restoring Public Trust Through UAP Transparency and Whistleblower Protection.” During the hearing, Rep. Eric Burlison played what was described as a “never-before-seen” video showing a U.S. military Hellfire missile striking a bright object off the coast of Yemen on Oct. 30, 2024. According to the account, the missile impact sent debris flying from the object, but the material continued moving in formation with it, deepening the mystery rather than resolving it.

The hearing also marked, according to DefenseScoop reporter Brandi Vincent, the first time an active-duty Navy official testified publicly before Congress about a UAP incident. That witness, Senior Chief Petty Officer Alexandro Wiggins, described a February 2023 encounter aboard the USS Jackson in the restricted training area known as Whiskey 291 off Southern California. Wiggins said he observed a “self-luminous,” “Tic Tac-shaped” object that did not resemble a conventional aircraft or drone, adding another data point to a debate increasingly shaped by military witnesses rather than civilian enthusiasts.

A skeptical but measured posture

What distinguishes “Tinfoil Is Optional” is not dismissal, but tone. The article treats UFO/UAP discourse as a subject that can be investigated without automatically embracing conspiratorial interpretations. That stance reflects a broader shift in the public conversation: serious institutions are acknowledging unexplained encounters, even as skepticism remains essential. In that sense, the piece argues that curiosity and caution can coexist — and that examining unidentified objects does not require assuming extraterrestrials, secret bases, or a government plot at every turn.

SOURCE: https://usubjects.com/ 

{ https://mindingthecampus.org/ }

EARTH LIGHTS & UFOs

Excerpted from lecture script entitled "EARTH LIGHTS AND THE RE- INVENTION OF UFOLOGY" for presentation to the British UFO Research Association (BUFORA) in 1997 (see also "Everything You've Always Wanted to Know About Earth Lights" in Fortean Times 103, October 1997 - www.forteantimes.com

Few in mainstream ufology have paid much heed to the developing earth lights line of enquiry. Like Aesop's tortoise, earth lights research has passed other ufological hares either without them noticing or with them offering merely a dismissive swipe of a paw. Yet it can now attract significant funding and the interest of mainstream scientists, is provoking informed, cutting-edge scientific hypotheses as well as speculations that make the ETH look the intellectual dinosaur it is. Here, I will very briefly bring the story up to date.

History

Charles Fort was among the first to note that strange "meteors" appeared somewhat coincidentally with earthquakes. It had to wait until the 1960s, however, for veteran ufologist, John Keel, to associate the appearance of unusual lights with areas of geological faulting and magnetic anomaly, as well as with the occurrence of earthquakes. It was the French researcher, Ferdinand Lagarde, though, who most tightly focused in on the UFO-fault connection in the '60s. In the USA, John Keel likewise promoted the real phenomenon as "soft" light phenomena associated with faulting and other geophysical factors. In 1967, American author Vincent H. Gaddis made a pioneering stab at separating out luminous phenomena in his Mysterious Fires and Lights. In 1975, Andrew York and I published research on Leicestershire, in which the occurrences of recorded strange phenomena over a number of centuries were geographically mapped. Both archival accounts of meteorological anomalies together with reported UFOs were found to have had their greatest incidence over the faulted regions of the county. Two years later, Michael Persinger, a neuroscientist and geologist at Laurentian University in Canada, together with Gyslaine Lafreniére, published a study of the United States which similarly indicated a correlation between higher levels of reported UFO activity and the locations of earthquake epicentres.

Persinger and Lafreniére saw UFOs as electromagnetic phenomena arising from the tremendous energy involved in the constant rising and falling of tectonic stress in the Earth's crust, whether or not full-blown earthquakes occurred. They visualised fields of forces operating evenly and quietly over very large geographical regions which could become focused at any given time in a few small areas of particular geological resistance or instability such as fault lines, ore bodies or mineral deposits, stubborn rock outcrops, hills, mountains, and so on. They likened this to the energies in the atmosphere being equally capable of producing a gentle breeze over a wide area or a localised ferocity like a tornado. "The existence of man upon a thin shell beneath which mammoth forces constantly operate, cannot be over-emphasized," they argued. This was the first outing of what has come to be known as the Tectonic Strain Theory, or TST.

Harley Rutledge, a physics professor at Southeast Missouri State University, organised field investigation of an outbreak of lights that began in 1973 around Piedmont. The results of this were published in "Project Identification" in 1981.

An important researcher into light phenomena is John Derr, a leading U.S. geologist. In 1986, he joined with Persinger to study an earlier outbreak of lights in the Yakima Indian Reservation, Washington State. Firewardens on the reservation saw huge orange lightballs floating above rocks, as well as smaller "ping-pong balls" of light bounding along ridges. This remarkable period of sightings also included the occurrence of unusual meteorological effects such as glowing clouds indicating a charged atmosphere, and subterranean rumblings suggesting some kind of tectonic association. The firewardens organised themselves, and photographs were taken of the lights and triangulated observations using radios were made.

Toppenish Ridge, Yakima Indian Reservation; one of the localities where many lights were seen.

Derr and Persinger showed that the Yakima lights were seen most often in the vicinity of the ridges that cut across the reservation - each riddled with faulting - and with Satus Peak, the general area of a surface rupture and one of the stronger earthquakes in the region during the 13 years covered by the study. Successive reporting of lights occurred in the seven months preceding the biggest earthquake of the studied period. Regional seismic activity also increased during the times in 1972 and 1976 when most sightings were reported.

(The irony of the Yakima case is that the reservation is adjacent to the part of the Cascades Mountains where pilot Kenneth Arnold saw the flight of nine glittering objects in 1947 that initiated the flying saucer era . In fact, Arnold landed his plane at Yakima airfield shortly after his encounter. It is also worth noting that Arnold, did not, of course, se disks at all, but what he described as tadpole-shaped objects. This also struck a bell with me because as a schollchild in Leicesterhsire in 1957, I experience the powerful earth tremor there, and I recall one of our teachers decribing how he had seen a row of high flying lights earlier that afternoon. The lights looked tadpole-shaped, he said. Later, the local papers revealed that these objects had been widely seen over surrounding counties as well.)

A giant light hovers over a peak in Hessdalen Norway.

Photo by Leif Havik/Project Hessdalen.

It was the outbreak of lights at Hessdalen, a valley 70 miles southeast of Trondheim in Norway, that most firmly switched on the earth lights agenda. From about November, 1981, people living in the area, which is rich in copper and other metals, began seeing unexplained lights. These appeared as spheres , 'bullets' with pointed end downwards, and inverted "Christmas tree" shapes. Colours were mainly white and yellow-white, though others were also reported. Strong, localised flashes in the sky were also observed and there were reports of underground rumbling sounds. In March, 1982, the Norwegian defence department sent two airforce officers to study the situation. By the summer of 1983, hundreds of reports of strange lights had been made by the inhabitants of Hessdalen, and so Norwegian and Swedish UFO groups formed Project Hessdalen. From 21 January to 26 February, 1984, they continuously monitored the valley using a range of instrumentation, including radar, and succeeded in obtaining photographs of strange lights plus a number of instrumental readings. Such work then continued sporadically over a few years.

1982 saw my first book on the subject, "Earth Lights", and the following year British ufologist, Jenny Randles, came out with "Pennine UFO Mystery", telling of luminous and other phenomena in the hill chain, and making connections with tectonic factors. Inspired by the Norwegian effort, Project Pennine was formed in 1986 by David Clarke, Andy Roberts and colleagues. Visual historian and writer Hilary Evans, started circulating archival portfolios called Bolide among researchers interested in what he was calling BOLs (Balls of Light).

The Devil's Elbow, a sharp bend on the B6105 in Longdendale, the Pennines. A fault crosses the road here and strange phenomena have been reported at this point.

Meanwhile, earth light activity steadily decreased in Hessdalen but over 50 observations of light phenomena were made during seismic monitoring in the Saguenay - Lake St John region of Canada by Quebec University between 1 November, 1988, and 21 January, 1989. According to a report in Nature, balls of light several yards in diameter popped out of the ground sometimes close to observers. Other balls of light, both stationary and moving, were seen many hundreds of feet in the air. Some of these had durations of up to 12 minutes. It seems that these phenomena were coincident with rising tectonic strain.

In my "Earth Lights Revelation" of 1989, with David Clarke and Andy Roberts, geochemist Paul McCartney and I published a report on our long-term investigations into an "earth lights zone" between Barmouth and Harlech in north-west Wales which had been active in 1904-5. Because useful contemporary reports had been made of these Welsh lights (which included blood-red spheres a few feet across rising from fields and roads, glittering diamond shapes hugging isolated roof ridges, and a whole range of luminous phenomena), we were able to accurately map the locations where they occurred. When these were matched with newly- available geological information it was found that the lights followed the course of a major local feature, the deep-rooted Mochras Fault, like beads on a thread. Furthermore, it transpired that between 1892 and 1906 there were several earthquakes in various parts of Wales. In October, 1904, for example, immediately prior to the onset of the Barmouth wave, there was a quake at nearby Bedgellert. (The area is also adjacent to the Lleyn Peninsula, one of Britain's most active seismic areas, and epicentre in July, 1984, of an earthquake registering 5.5 on the Richter scale. This event brought the lights back briefly - the evening before the quake, a resident saw a brilliant white light "the size of a small car" float in from the sea and disappear over the brow of a grassy dune on the beach.)

Into the field

By 1990, I had arrived at the conclusion that the only way to really understand the nature and mechanics of earth lights was to attempt scientific field study of them. So, working primarily under the auspices of a research/think tank group known as the International Consciousness Research Laboratories (ICRL), sufficient funding was obtained to start conducting field enquiries.

In June 1993, we looked at the so-called "Hooker Light" in New Jersey, USA. In the 1970s, crowds of youngsters regularly gathered to view a strange light that seemed to wander around on an old disused rail track near Washington Township. Then a research group calling itself "Vestigia" did work there. The track is now a pipeline corridor through a forest, and we were able to prove that the effect was caused by a visual distortion of car lights on a road that cut the corridor at an angle two miles from the viewing point.

Setting up the earth lights observation station on Mitchell's Flat, Marfa, Texas.

Other, inconclusive studies followed, then we visited the Marfa area of Texas' Big Bend country between 6-15 March, 1994, where strange lights have been reported for over a century (the first account, in fact, dates to 1617). Physicist Hal Puthoff, also an ICRL member, joined this expedition. We were eventually able to dismiss a number of luminous effects popularly assumed to be "Marfa Lights": occasional mirage effects can raise lights normally hidden over the horizon into visibility, sometime reproducing the same lights in tiers, and lights of vehicles 30 miles or more away on the Marfa-Presidio road are so distorted that they can appear anomalous. We also determined that lights on vehicles negotiating rough tracks belonging to isolated ranches on the undulating desert- scrub area known as Mitchell Flat can look like mysterious lights skimming the ground, fusing and parting. Nevertheless, interviews with local witnesses convinced us that genuine anomalous lights probably did sporadically appear in the vast region. Acting on a tip offered by a teacher who had closely encountered a three-foot diameter light, we conducted observations in an uninhabited valley in the Chisos Mountains, on the Rio Grande 80 miles from Marfa. At 9.10 pm on 12 March, a large white flickering light was seen at the foot of a nearby mesa. It lasted for about 10 seconds. (Although I have witnessed undoubted earth lights on previous occasions, this is the only light I have seen on our organised fieldwork to date that I am absolutely sure was an anomalous lightform

Physicist Hal Puthoff works with computerised equipment during a night observation session in the desert near Marfa, Texas.

Between 24-27 March, 1994, Erling Strand, one of the directors of the original Project Hessdalen, convened a conference of invited international delegates variously studying earth light phenomena and plasma physics. It was the first specialist earth lights conference, held to launch a new Project Hessdalen, and went unnoticed by mainstream ufology. Strand had also taken the view that serious field research was needed to study earth lights, rather than endless theoretical debate and nitpicking. With the support of Ostfold College, Norway, where he lectures, Strand is engaged on the "wiring up"of the Hesddalen valley, which is currently experiencing a modest resurgence of earth light activity. Automatic monitoring stations (optical and instrumental) placed strategically along the valley will be triggered if electronic beams connecting them are interrupted by an earth light. As Strand comments: "We only need one light."

One of the Hessdalen Conference delegates was Professor Yoshi-hiko Ohtsuki, who is well funded to investigate reported earth lights zones around the world. He revealed that he had taken four highly- equipped expeditions to Marfa, and that on only one of them had he seen a true earth light. This changed shape only 100 yards in front of his team and was captured on multiple video cameras and electronic monitoring equipment.

Erling Strand helps to set up an earth lights observation station in the Australian Outback before the sun sets.

Photo: Paul Devereux.

Between 28 September and 14 October, 1995, Strand and I, accompanied by a TV producer with a Hi-8 video camera, conducted a joint expedition to the remote Kimberley region of Western Australia, acting on reports sent to Jacques Vallee and myself of strange lights in the area. We were attracted there particularly because there was no light pollution from distant trraffic or habitations. Our enquiries among local outstation workers and Aborigines indicated that light phenomena incidence had dropped off in the past decade, but lights were sometimes still seen. We had camera arrays plus a range of monitoring equipment, including a magnetometer constantly measuring the Earth's magnetic field local to our observing station, which was relocated five times during the expeditionary period. On the night of 3 October, we set up position overlooking a small valley in totally uninhabited country. Short-lived blue-white lights appeared sporadically through the night, moving against the opposite slope of the valley, half a mile away. These lights, often of low-intensity, proved elusive, but Strand may possibly have captured one of them on camera.

Monitoring and watching for the mysterious "min min lights" in the Australian Outback.

Photos: Paul Devereux.

By 8 October we had seen only a few possible anomalous lights at other locations, but that night a bright light was seen that seemed to emerge from a small hill in front of a ridge. It was vividly noticeable in an area devoid of all artificial lighting. (I should emphasise that the darkness was so unspoilt in this remote region that on one occasion we could discern the "glowing coal" of a meteorite hurtling across the sky even after its glittering trail had dissolved.) The light moved slowly downwards to the level of the desert, then disappeared. Although all our cameras were pointing in the other direction, towards an area where lights were most expected, we managed to swing a few round and hurriedly photograph the unusual light.

Because it was up to six miles distant, we could not absolutely determine if it was truly anomalous, but simultaneous with its appearance our magnetometer started recording huge field anomalies. (A peak-to-peak amplitude of 800 nanotesla on a 2 Hz pulsation was recorded. A normal amplitude on that frequency is less than 1 nanotesla.) The readings slowly subsided through a period of about five hours. If these events were causally connected, then the readings support one of Persinger's predictions that earth lights will be accompanied by changes in the local geomagnetic field.

What are earth lights?

There are two separate questions about earth lights - how they are produced, and what their nature is. In arguments about whether or not the TST is valid, they often get hopelessly jumbled. It doesn't matter if the TST is right or wrong, or requires further modification, it does not tell us about the properties of the phenomenon itself.

As far as the tectonic connection goes, I leave to you to have noted the repeated passing references I've been making to tectonic factors, and these could be expanded a hundredfold. It seems clear to me that seismic and geological sources are likely factors in earth light propagation. Persinger is probably correct in claiming that tectonic strain and the geomagnetic field are key players, even if the exact processes involved have yet to be fully clarified. Ohtsuki thinks that meteorlogical forces may also be implicated. In the final analysis, it is probable that whole concatenations of geophysical forces are involved.

But what is the nature of the lights themselves? The anecdotal literature contains descriptive themes that are repeated so often, from different times and places, that it is highly probable objective characteristics are being referred to. From this considerable reservoir of data, we learn that the lights can be any colour, though white, orange, deep red and yellow-gold predominate. Their size can range from ping-pong balls of luminosity to giant lightforms, though "basketball size" is common. While their shapes are usually round or spherical, tubes, cigars, rectangles, diamonds, tadpole-shapes and irregular forms have frequently been described. When witnesses have had a close looks, a teeming inner activity is sometimes reported within lightforms. Reports indicate that earth lights can issue sounds of various kinds, though hissing and buzzing noises predominate, sometimes accompanied by a feeling of pressure in the ears. Particularly bright earth lights are often said to be intense without being dazzling. Multiple earth lights seen flying together can display seemingly co-ordinated movements, as if operating within a single field, and divide and merge. They have also been seen emerging from or disappearing into the ground on numerous occasions, reinforcing a geological-tectonic connection. When free-floating, they commonly seem to prefer the vicinity of mountain peaks and ridges, isolated rooftops and rock outcrops, towers and antennae and other sharp or isolated features that tend to be charge collectors. This indicates that they have some kind of electromagnetic basis. They often haunt bodies of water such as lakes and reservoirs, and are occasionally seen glowing beneath the surface of the water. Bodies of water can apply pressure to underlying faulting (microquake activity around reservoirs is fairly common), as well as lubricating rocks - moist rocks are known to be able to emit more charged particles than dry ones.

The prevailing assumption is that earth lights are plasmas of some kind. This might possibly bes supported by the 1994 work of You-Suo Zou (of the Institute of Atmospheric Physics in Beijing's Academy of Sciences, and an associate of the Department of Meteorology at the University of Utah). He made a close study of the original Project Hessdalen's collected data, and he noted photographs of light traces which revealed a corkscrew-like effect. Zou saw this helical structure as typical of a plasma vortex in motion, a structure particularly visible in the laboratory when plasmas are breaking down.

Zou added that under certain conditions, a plasma vortex can become a kind of solitary wave (soliton) and from the behaviour of some Hessdalen lights as recorded on the project's radar, he said he observed clear evidence of wave energy propagation.

But there are three other little-known aspects noted about earth lights that might be giving us clues as to their deep nature.

• (i) Earth lights seem to be going "on and off" all the time. Indications of this come from various sources. One example relates to a photograph taken by Tony Dodd of two lights flying over Carleton Moor, Yorkshire, on 14 March, 1983. I showed a first generation print of this to the physicist and writer, Fred Alan Wolf. Among seveal features he noted about the photograph was the fact that a faint, dark vertical line ran through each of the lights, evidence that they had been rapidly flickering - a strobing action that had left a record of the camera's shutter in the dark lines. Such strobing can be unnoticeable to the human eye, as persistence of vision (flicker fusion) gives the impression of continuous luminosity. This seems to be the case in an incident recorded by Project Hessdalen where a light observed as continuous and floating across the sky returned only intermittent radar echoes. A third example was provided by trained physicist David Kubrin and his first wife who saw a lightform hurtling along at treetop height above the Pinnacles Fault (adjacent to the San Andreas Fault) in California in 1973. As it travelled, the light created shockwaves in the air ahead of itself, indicating the presence of mass, but then the light stopped its motion instantaneously, without deceleration, suggestive of no mass. Kubrin caught the decay of the lightform on camera.
• (ii) Earth lights can sometimes be visible from one direction, and not another. There are numerous accounts of this bizarre effect. During the 1905 Barmouth-Harlech outbreak, for instance, a four-foot- long bar of blue light hovering over the road near Egryn chapel was visible to a group of observers from one side, yet completely invisible to a group standing on the other side of the phenomenon.
• (iii) There are occasional witness reports that an earth light does not seem to exist quite properly in space, like a poor special effect in a movie. As if it was both flat and had depth simultaneously. In 1983, for example, a farmer in the Pennines saw a red sphere of light hovering above a stream, then it started revolving while giving the impression of being flat. I have personally witnessed this unsettling aspect of lights and can vouch for its reality.

Taken collectively, such descriptions hint at a phenomenon at the very edge of normal physical manifestation. It has occurred to me that we may be seeing a macro-quantal phenomenon, a large-scale expression of the paradoxical conditions (from the viewpoint of classical physics) of the subatomic quantum field, the underpinning of all physical reality. Puthoff suspects that earth lights might be powered by something called Zero Point Energy. This is an all- pervasive energetic field, a fluctuating energy that exists even in "empty" space - the vacuum - and even at a temperature of absolute zero. It is known to have small-scale physical effects, but some scientists, Puthoff a key figure among them, feel that is possible to extract useful energy from vacuum fluctuations. It may be that nature has been doing it already, on an impressive scale, in the phenomena we call earth lights. Perhaps the lights are a kind of doorway between quantum and large-scale physical realities.

Meanwhile, David Fryberger is developing a theory which has the lights resulting from a hitherto unknown particle he calls the "vorton", more exotic even than gluons, quarks and the other subatomic entities postulated by nuclear physics.

When they finally give up some of their secrets, earth lights could have a tremendous impact on quantum and plasma physics. And they may open doors to physics we do not yet know. They may help change our very view of reality.

Earth lights and the paranormal

There may also be a consciousness connection with earth lights. Apparent paranormal phenomena is not infrequently reported in areas experiencing periods of earth lights activity. At Yakima and in the Pennines, for examples, people have reported seeing fleeting manifestations of human figures - usually of bizarre appearance.

Voices are heard: one Yakima firewarden told of hearing "happy little voices singing" and another of a disembodied voice "hollering". Earth lights researchers argue that these are hallucinatory effects caused not only by energy fields associated with light phenomena closely encountered, but generally in an area that is producing strange luminosities, affecting brain function in witnesses. Such fields are probably, in the main, magnetic. Drawing on known clinical data, Persinger has gone to some lengths to postulate a series of physiological and mental symptoms a witness would likely experience at different distances from an earth light. Further, he has been conducting a series of experiments in which subjects are placed in a soundproof, isolated chamber, where they wear a helmet from which magnetic fields are directed at the magnetically sensitive temporal cortex, which handles dreaming and other internal imagery such as memory, among other functions. Many people who have undgone this experience report vivid inner imagery episodes in which early and infantile memories are particularly common.

In a few cases, it is possible that people who closely encounter earth lights are triggered into an "alien entity" experience or even a full-blown UFO abduction. If one reads Budd Hopkins Intruders with care, for example, it can be seen that the pseudonymous Kathy Davis encountered a ball of light before undergoing her abduction episode. In fact, everything in this classic and now famous abduction case is consistent with an earth light being produced by local tremor activity. And hers is not the only one. For instance, I think even the Travis Walton case may be amenable to an earth lights approach.

But are earth lights UFOs?

Whatever the rights or wrongs of this, the cry that inevitably goes up from mainstream ufologists is: "But earth lights aren't UFOs!" This charge brings us full circle. Certain specific queries are regularly raised, and I'll finish with the most common:

Question No.1: Surely earth lights are something other than UFOs?

A. Reports of small balls of light have always been in the ufological record, where in the past they have been identified as "drones" or "probes" sent out from alien craft. So why dismiss them now if they suddenly take on importance as phenomena in their own right?

Question No. 2 What have earth lights to do with "daylight disks"?

A. If earth lights are a form of plasma, then there is no problem with this, because a plasma seen in daylight does happen to look shiny and metallic, and is likely to have a spherical, ovoid or discoid form. Moreover, there are pitch black objects sometime seen by day (Both Strand and I have witnessed examples of these ourselves) which seem to be photon-absorbing instead of light-emitting. These bizzarre phenomena - which can be round, square or irregular in form - may relate to earth lights in the way one pole of a magnet relates to the other.

Question No.3: But what about the size usually ascribed to flying saucers? Small balls of plasma, seen as lights or even as metallic forms can't account for those, surely?

A. Some earth lights are reported as being many yards across. A modest example of this was shown in the Quebec case (above) - the size, height and duration of some of these phenomena were clearly "UFO standard". The lights at Hessdalen ranged up to even larger sizes. And lights seen at night, accounting for a huge percentage of all UFO reports, can look large if bright enough - their size is easy to overestimate. It is equally easy to falsely interpret lights at night as being on a huge dark object.

Question No.4: How do earth lights explain radar-visual cases? How can a ball of light be tracked on radar?

A. It has in fact been proven that plasmas can return radar echoes. Indeed, even plasmas that have too low a temperature to emit visible light can still reflect radar waves just like a metal surface. During the first Project Hessdalen, radar echoes were repeatedly obtained from invisible objects hovering near ridges.

Question No.5: But what about markings on the ground and damage to foliage associated with some reported UFO landings?

A. These are quite consistent with localised damage caused by energetic lightballs. Singed foliage, ground burns and grooves have all been associated with ball lightning, for example.

And so it goes. If any of the very small percentage of UFO reports that claim structured craft are genuine, they may be ET vehicles, or may be a sort of phantom effect I have discussed elsewhere. But it is exceedingly important that we not confuse an actual sighting with witness interpretation of that sighting. Interpretations and actualities can be different things. There is no reason why earth lights and ET craft shouldn't co-exist, of course, but earth lights researchers think it is an extraordinary coincidence that earth lights descriptively fit so much of what may the residue of genuinely unexplained phenomena.

Copyright:© Paul Devereux, 1997

• Make sure to log onto: www.hauntedvalley.com (the Project Pennine site, accessible via the WebRing from this site), and www.hiof.no/crulp/prosjekter/hessdalen (if that doesn't work, then just do a search for "Hessdalen"). Both sites are highly informative and offer real-time webcam observation for earth lights.

{ https://www.neperos.com/ }

UFOs over RAF Lakenheath

70th anniversary of 'the most puzzling and unusual' radar case in the files of the United States Air Force Project Blue Book

David Clarke

The early hours of 13/14 August mark the 70^th anniversary of the RAF’s closest encounter with UFOs over East Anglia.

In 1956 fighter jets were scrambled to intercept an unidentified flying object that was circling the nuclear-armed American airbase at Lakenheath in Suffolk

“I think they are now on our tail!”: an imaginative illustration of the dramatic moment on 13/14 August 1956 when a RAF Venom fighter attempted to intercept a UFO hovering above RAF Lakenheath in Suffolk, England (generated by Chat GPT prompted by David Clarke)

The sensational story has similarities with events late in 2025 when a fleet of mystery drones was spotted over Lakenheath, and nearby RAF Mildenhall, soon after tactical nuclear weapons returned to the US-tenanted base.

A joint MoD Police and US Air Force investigation later failed to identify any culprits, but it is widely suspected the drones were part of a co-ordinated Russian intelligence surveillance campaign.

The 1956 UFO alert happened two weeks after a huge B-47 bomber crashed into a storage silo at Lakenheath that contained three nuclear weapons. This caused an explosion that spread burning fuel over the bombs. General Curtis LeMay later admitted it was ‘a miracle’ that exposed detonators did not explode, as it would have destroyed the base and spread nuclear fallout across East Anglia.

With the Suez crisis building in the Middle East and the threat from the Soviet Union at its Cold War height the British Prime Minister, Anthony Eden, was keen to conceal the presence of the CIA’s secret U2 spyplane on British soil. Earlier that year he had given the Americans permission for it to fly missions over the Soviet Union from the US-tenanted Suffolk base. In April 1956 parts of the aircraft had been secretly shipped to Lakenheath in banana boxes to avoid prying eyes

Entrance to USAF base at RAF Lakenheath 2026 (image copyright David Clarke)

Files released by the US Air Force’s UFO project Blue Book reveal that alarms were triggered late on the evening of 13 August 1956 after airfield radars at Lakenheath detected UFOs moving at high speed. Earlier American personnel at RAF Bentwaters, 43 miles to the southeast, detected formations of slow-moving UFOs on their radars. They also saw bright lights whizzing across the night sky. The pilot of a C-47 transport en route to the base also saw a blurry light beneath his plane ‘travelling east to west at terrific speed’.

Near midnight, American radar staff at Lakenheath alerted the air defence base at RAF Neatishead on the Norfolk broads where radars looked out towards the North Atlantic. In 2001 fighter controller Freddie Wimbledon told me that he saw a target on his screen that behaved unlike anything he had seen before.

‘It travelled at tremendous speeds at an altitude of between 10 and 20,000 feet and then suddenly stopped,’ he recalled. ‘I couldn’t believe what I was seeing’.

Another senior aircraftman, James Mills, recalled how ‘the “object”, after being still, would alter its height, going up and down several times, before accelerating away at great speed’.

Freddie Wimbledon said: ‘Immediately, I ordered the Battle Flight to scramble and set up an interception team crewed by four and another four airmen to monitor the action’.

Wimbledon, who died 2004 at the age of 94, revealed that as the events unfolded into the early hours of 14 August, he was in direct radio contact with the crews of RAF Venom jets that were sent to intercept the UFO

Freddie Wimbledon in 2001

(image copyright David Clarke)

Twenty years ago, I traced and interviewed the pilots and navigators of a number of these aircraft and checked their accounts against entries in squadron logbooks.

23 Squadron navigator John Brady revealed it was the strangest incident in his Cold War career with the RAF. ‘The USAF at Lakenheath were directing us towards this thing at around 7,000 feet which was most unusual as we were used to being scrambled to intercept Russian intruders much higher over the North Sea.

‘The first run we had at it we saw nothing but the next time I obtained a contact on my radar dead ahead and it raced down the tube at high speed.

‘We were flying at around 350-400 mph and I remember saying to the pilot “CONTACT…there, it’s out 45 starboard now at one mile” and he kept saying to me “Where is it? Where is it? I can’t see it!” as we rushed past.

‘My radar contact was firm but messy but there was something there!

Retired RAF navigator John Brady, with his flying logbook, at home in Norwich 2002

(image copyright David Clarke)

His colleague, navigator Graham Schofield, recalled how he listened to the distinctive voices of his friends as they followed the directions given by the USAF at Lakenheath and Wimbledon’s interception team. He and other aircrew had gathered around a radio receiver in their crewroom at RAF Waterbeach, near Cambridge.

‘I heard them instructed to intercept the target over East Anglia,’ he told me. ‘The first crew made radar contact with the UFO and closed rapidly on the target.

‘They tracked it down to within three miles and then lost contact. This was because the object was stationary. It was a dark night, and the target appeared to be in darkness.’

‘They were called off and a second crew were instructed to make an intercept. They also reported contact at about ten miles dead ahead. The navigator called off the distance as the target rapidly closed.

‘At one mile there was a shout of confusion from the pilot who had seen nothing. We then heard “I think they are now on our tail!”.

Wimbledon recalled how:

‘….after being vectored onto the tail of the object, the pilot called “CONTACT”, then a short time later “JUDY”, which meant the navigator had it [the UFO] on his own radar screen [but] in a few seconds, the object appeared behind our fighter and the pilot called “Lost contact, more help!”’

At that point Fighter Command ordered the Venom crews to break off and return to Waterbeach, as the two-crewed fighter jets were by then running low on fuel.

In 2002 Brady and his pilot David Chambers, along with Ivan Logan, the navigator from the second Venom, confirmed they saw nothing during their close encounter with the UFO. Graham Scofield recalled the hardened front-line crews were left ‘shaken up by the whole episode’. And he said ‘we all had a distinct feeling that something unusual had happened’

RAF Venom navigator Ivan Logan, pictured with his flying logbook in 2000

(image copyright David Clarke)

Freddie Wimbledon confirmed that his fighter controller logbook was impounded when RAF top brass visited Neatishead shortly afterwards. He was told it was a national security matter and must not be discussed in public.

Although dozens of American and British military personnel took part in what became known as the Lakenheath-Bentwaters UFO incident the British government has never offered an explanation. In 1972 the head of the MoD’s UFO desk was quizzed during a live TV debate on BBC2. Retired Air Commodore Anthony Davis, who commanded 23 Squadron during 1956, said he could not comment because all the papers had been ‘accidentally destroyed’.

By then details of the dramatic incident had leaked out when the US Air Force opened the files of its UFO investigation Project Blue Book to scientists at the University of Colorado. What became known as the Condon committee won a contract from the US Government to review USAF reports that dated back to 1947. In their 1969 report radar expert Gordon Thayer said that ‘the apparently rational, intelligent behaviour of the UFO suggests a mechanical device of unknown origin as the most probable explanation’.

The University of Colorado team listed the Lakenheath incident as ‘the most puzzling and unusual case’ involving UFOs on radar ever reported to the US Air Force.

Freddie Wimbledon broke his silence after British newspapers published details of the American findings. The Venom crews were traced in 1996 but all the RAF and Air Ministry records of the incident had been shredded.

In the same year Ralph Noyes, who served as a Under Secretary of State in the Air Ministry, confirmed ‘we had no explanation’ for this and other unexplained UFO sightings made by military personnel at the time. As a result, he said the government decided to say nothing publicly about them.

Between 1969 and 1972 Noyes was head of DS8, a MoD department that was responsible for evaluating UFOs reports from military sources. He was a RAF navigator in the Far East during the Second World War and became interested in UFOs following his retirement in 1977

Map showing key airbases involved in the 1956 Lakenheath-Bentwaters incident in relationship to English counties and cities (created by David Clarke using Chat-GPT 2026)

Referring to the Lakenheath incident, he said: ‘Here we had a number of objects seen coming in across the North Sea on radar and it looked like a Russian mistake. Jet aircraft were scrambled [but] the objects simply made rings around them.

‘Inevitably this led to the sort of enquiry which you would put in hand if you had any military responsibilities. Had something gone wrong with ground radar or aircraft radar? Were experienced pilots going out of their minds? Were people having fantasies?’

And, in a letter sent to MoD in 1994, Noyes revealed that he had seen brief film clips ‘of what I understood to be gun-camera material’ that had been captured by RAF fighter pilots during the Lakenheath incident.

Noyes said that he and other MoD officials were invited to watch film clips in a small cinema at MoD Main Building one day in 1970. ‘The material [included] fuzzy greyish blobs in the daylight shots [and] small glowing globular objects in the night films,’ he recalled.

The screening, organised by the RAF, was to invite comment on what they described as ‘interesting atmospheric effects’ that had been detected by both ground radar and radars in fighter interceptors such as the Hawker Hunter.

In his letter, released during the UFO files project that I oversaw at The National Archives from 2008-13, Noyes asked DS8 to search their records for the footage and urged them to release it. In 2020 the US Department of Defence confirmed that similar grainy footage, captured by forward-facing cockpit cameras in US Navy F-18 jets, was genuine and could not be explained.

Ralph Noyes, who died age 74 in 1998, told me Air Ministry reached similar conclusions. But in their reply to Noyes, MoD said no trace of the films could be found and they must have either been lost or destroyed. He concluded:

‘Over the years there were a sufficient number of cases like Lakenheath-Bentwaters to persuade me, and a number of my air staff friends, that something was going on, sporadically, in British airspace which we could not explain’.

RELATED

Lakenheath–Bentwaters UFO Incident (1956) | The Military Radar Tracked the Unknown

RAF LAKENHEATH UFO | POLICE FOOTAGE | OFFICIAL FOIA RELEASE (FULL RES) | NOVEMBER 2024

Lakenheath/ Bentwaters UFO Incident 1956 - Dr. David Clarke

{ https://drclarke.substack.com/ }

Skeptics Are Capable of Promoting Conspiracy Theories

 Avi Loeb

Three months ago, I was contacted by representatives from the Office of the Director of National Intelligence (ODNI) and the All-Domain Anomaly Resolution Office (AARO) in the Pentagon and asked to establish and lead a UAP Science Advisory Council to the U.S. Government. The Council was created to advise ODNI, AARO, the White House, the FBI and the Intelligence Community.

By now, the twenty Council members listed at the Council’s website https://uapsac.com/, met a dozen times over Zoom and will also meet in Washington DC next week. The Council’s goal is to apply the scientific method of using high-quality data to figure out the nature of Unidentified Anomalous Phenomena (UAP). These are mysterious objects hovering over strategic sites, whose identity and origin remain unclear based on available data.

This historic development followed on President Trump’s directive from February 19, 2026:

“Based on the tremendous interest shown, I will be directing the Secretary of War and other relevant departments and agencies to begin the process of identifying and releasing government files related to alien and extraterrestrial life, unidentified aerial phenomena (UAP), unidentified flying objects (UFOs), and any and all other information connected to these highly complex but extremely interesting and important matters. GOD BLESS AMERICA!”

The U.S. government monitors Earth’s atmosphere with a budget that is several orders of magnitude larger than that available to astronomical observatories. Astronomers train their telescopes on a small portion of the sky at any given time and ignore objects that fly overhead. It is therefore possible that the U.S. government sensors will be first to notice rare anomalous objects near Earth.

In previous decades, the U.S. government avoided sharing UAP data with outside scientists. While the government is focused on down-to-Earth matters of national security, academia is supposed to be open minded to blue-sky research involving alien life. But as of now, the reality is that academia is hostile to UAP research whereas the government tasked me to establish the UAP Science Advisory Council, while being open minded to the possibility that some UAP might represent alien tech. This reversal of roles where academia is reluctant to apply the scientific method to the study of a subject that is of great interest to the government and the public is remarkable. UAP research is a golden opportunity to elevate the status of science among taxpayers on a topic that brings Americans together, as both sides of the political spectrum are equally excited about the search for alien tech.

UAP research should also be of great interest to corporations, angel investors and venture capitalists who might wish to harvest the financial benefits from advanced alien gadgets. The related research could therefore be funded by the private sector, as it represents an opportunity for a quantum leap in technological capabilities. Humanity benefited so far from only one century of innovation after the discovery of possible quantum mechanics. Alien tech may represent a thousand, a million, or a billion years of technological developments, given that most stars formed billions of years before the Sun.

The UAP data released so far here in 5 tranches as part of the Presidential Unsealing and Reporting System for UAP Encounters (PURSUE) is insufficient. Analysis by Council members (as reported here and here) of all 112 videos released in the PURSUE tranches 1–5, shows that additional information is required to reliably ascertain the physical velocity or acceleration of UAP and test whether they lie outside the performance envelope of human-made tech. The missing information includes the camera platform state (position and velocity vectors), sensor configuration and pointing (imaging mode and rate, field of view, zoom or focal length setting, and line of sight direction) and UAP distance, as functions of time. If the needed data is not available, better data can be collected in the future by new sets of state-of-the-art sensors. This approach is currently pursued in the three observatories operated by the Galileo Project (https://galileo.hsites.harvard.edu/) as well as in the GREMLIN system operated by AARO (as described here).

Remarkably, there is pushback against applying the scientific method to UAP data from both skeptics and believers in alien tech near Earth. The believers argue that they already know the answer and there is no need for further data collection. The skeptics argue that there is no convincing evidence and hence the subject does not merit attention. The fallacy of this latter argument is that the same academic skeptics are actively blocking funding or publication of evidence that may prove them wrong. If they were genuinely curious scientists, they would not suppress the work of other scientists who are willing to dedicate time and effort to the hard work of data collection and analysis.

It is often suggested by the same skeptics that UAP conspiracy theories are invented by believers in alien visitations. A Wall Street Journal article here argued recently that the Pentagon adds fuel to this misinformation fire in order to confuse witnesses of secret military tech.

Once again in a reversal of expected roles, some skeptics who claim to be protecting the public discourse from conspiracy theorists, are repeatedly promoting on social media over the past three months the conspiracy theory that I am bluffing and the UAP Science Advisory Council does not exist. Their psychological stubbornness can only be resolved by their therapists.

The Council members, on the other hand, have important work to do. We will keep our eyes on the orbs, not on social media, as we deliberate in our upcoming meeting in Washington DC.

{ https://medium.com/ }

New Pentagon files shed light on decades of UFO sightings

LAS VEGAS (KLAS) — On Friday, the Pentagon released 162 files containing information on unidentified flying objects, including 41 minutes of video footage, to its website.

The disclosure follows a promise by President Donald Trump regarding government-held UFO data.

The collection includes videos, photos, and reports of sightings, with eyewitness testimony detailing incidents spanning decades from around the world.

8 News Now’s Chief Investigator and host of Mystery Wire, George Knapp, credited President Trump for fulfilling his promise of disclosure.

Knapp described the release as a significant event. He noted that official releases from the federal government carry a certain credibility, providing a ‘stamp of approval’ that distinguishes them from less formal disclosures. He emphasized that the release does not claim proof of aliens or extraterrestrials, but rather provides evidence of unknowns that have been stored in government files.

“I think it’s a big day. I mean, President Trump got to give him credit for this. He said he was going to do it, and he did it,” Knapp said. “You release this stuff under the umbrella of the federal government, an official release, it has sort of a stamp of approval on it, like a good housekeeping seal or something. When it comes from the federal government, they’re saying they’re not making claims. This proves there are aliens. It’s not proof of extraterrestrials. It’s just proof of unknowns that have been sitting there in the files that may or may not have been addressed or investigated, but it’s real, and they’re sharing with the public, and I think it’s great.”

The released files include six photos showing phenomena observed by NASA astronauts during the Apollo 12 and Apollo 17 missions. These images were reportedly taken from the surface of the moon. The documents also feature a conversation with Gemini seven astronaut Frank Borman during a flight.

Knapp recounted an instance from the Gemini 7 flight where astronauts reported a ‘bogey at 10 o’clock’ to Houston while passing over Antigua. He highlighted the fascination of hearing the newly released audio, which captured the crew distinguishing the unknown object from a separated booster.

“They’re passing over Antigua, and they called into Houston and say, ‘Houston, hey, we got a bogey at 10 o’clock. What bogey? What are you talking about? Are you sure it isn’t the booster that separated? No, we’re watching the booster. This is something else. And again, a lot of little, little particles that were going by, but something larger that was following along with them.’ It’s fascinating to hear that audio, and it’s amazing that it’s just been released,” Knapp said.

Most of the video footage shows unidentified white specks in the air. One specific video, captured in Greece in 2023, shows an object moving at approximately 80 miles an hour and executing sudden 90-degree turns.

“And we are told that more is coming. More is better, and when it comes from the government, you know, under orders from the president, it carries a certain amount of credibility,” Knapp added.

President Trump added that the document release will allow the American people to “decide for themselves” what is happening with the reported sightings.

Knapp was also instrumental in Friday’s release, working behind the scenes with government officials to find the video and understand what this information actually means.

The Pentagon said on its website that more releases will come as information and video are discovered and declassified.

• All facts in this report were gathered by journalists employed by KLAS. Artificial intelligence tools were used to reformat information into a news article for our website. This report was edited and fact-checked by KLAS staff before being published.

{ https://www.8newsnow.com/mystery-wire/ }

Life on Earth has inadvertently been transferred to the surface of another celestial body through chance. Currently, we are intentionally preparing such environments for future habitation, aiming to make alien planets suitable for human life. However, the issue arises from the fact that we have not conducted thorough examinations for indigenous life forms on these planets, and our presence may consequently lead to the irreversible destruction of such native life.

The initial colonists will not be humans. An examination of how humanity is preparing to colonize Mars. Universe  Space Tech YouTube channel.

The incident on the Moon altered the regulations

When individuals discuss space colonization, they generally envision the same scenario: a settlement on Mars, astronauts in spacesuits, enclosed greenhouses, and children born beneath an extraterrestrial sky. This depiction has been consistently represented in films and television programs over the years, rendering the image seemingly innate.

In this scenario, colonization invariably commences with human beings. However, in reality, it is typically much simpler organisms that are the initial inhabitants of other worlds. Moreover, the earliest such occurrence has already taken place.

On April 11, 2019, the Israeli spacecraft “Beresheet” was preparing to land on the Moon. The private mission, with a modest budget and a big dream, ended in a crash because the main engine failed about 10 km from the surface. On board was a disc from an American organization that collects humanity’s archives — a sort of time capsule. Along with texts and images, 100 million human, plant, and microbial cells were encased in a layer of epoxy resin between nickel plates, along with several thousand dried tardigrades.

A photograph captured by “Beresheet” during its descent from an altitude of 22 kilometers. Source: SpaceIL

Tardigrades are microscopic organisms capable of dehydrating almost entirely under unfavorable conditions and in the absence of water. In a cryptobiotic state, they are able to withstand vacuum conditions, radiation, and freezing temperatures, and upon the reappearance of moisture, they revert to an active state. This process, however, would not occur on the Moon, as liquid water is absent, and the surface — lacking an atmosphere and magnetic field — is subjected to radiation.

A tardigrade is a microscopic organism measuring approximately one millimeter in length.
Photo credit: Shutterstock via Business Insider

The importance resides elsewhere. The cargo was not declared as biological material in the manner mandated by regulations, and the existence of living organisms onboard was only revealed after the incident. Life from Earth inadvertently arrived in another world through a private package, and no one intervened to prevent this.

Mars lacks carbon dioxide

Conscious colonization of an extraterrestrial planet operates differently, as the initial step involves preparing the celestial body for human habitation. Mars stands as the most probable candidate for such preparation, with the primary focus being temperature regulation, since it is a critical factor in the potential existence of liquid water.

An artist’s rendering of ancient Mars as observed from orbit. The northern lowlands are depicted as being covered by a vast blue ocean.

The challenge appears akin to an engineering problem. It involves elevating the temperature sufficiently for the ice to commence melting, thereby initiating a self-sustaining process, as water vapor exhibits superior heat retention compared to any other gas. Mars possesses a sufficient quantity of water, with exposed ice covering approximately two percent of its surface, predominantly within the polar caps. Additionally, beneath the soil, specifically at locations farther from the equator, deposits have been observed through orbital observations that potentially encompass up to one-third of the planet’s surface. However, the primary issue is that all of this water exists in the form of ice, resulting in a negligible presence of water vapor in the atmosphere. An alternative gas is required to provide the initial impetus, with carbon dioxide being a plausible candidate for this role.

The atmosphere of Mars comprises approximately 95% of its total atmospheric content; however, this figure represents a percentage rather than an absolute quantity. The surface pressure is less than 1% of Earth’s, indicating that the total atmospheric mass is extremely minimal. The majority of atmospheric reserves are stored in frozen states within the polar caps and are chemically bound within the soil and minerals, necessitating their release prior to heating.

In 2018, Bruce Jakoski and Christopher Edwards quantified the potential carbon dioxide emissions from these reservoirs. The conclusion was explicit: the quantities present would be insufficient for terraforming purposes.

Mars’s interior continues to emit gases, albeit at a very gradual pace; at the current rate, it would require approximately 10 million years to double the mass of its atmosphere. Furthermore, the planet is experiencing a depletion rather than an accumulation of its atmosphere. Approximately 4 billion years ago, Mars lost its global magnetic field, which had served as a shield against the solar wind, and since that time, internal processes have not reinstated this protective barrier.

The illustration depicts how charged particles from a solar storm remove charged particles from the atmosphere of Mars.
Credit: NASA / GSFC

The losses were quantified utilizing the MAVEN spacecraft, which NASA specifically deployed to Mars for this objective. Approximately 100 grams of the atmosphere are lost each second, and this rate amplifies tenfold during intense solar storms. In the early epochs of the Solar System, the solar wind was more vigorous and solar flares occurred with greater frequency; consequently, the planet forfeited most of its atmosphere shortly after its magnetic field ceased to exist. It appears that the plan to warm and seed the planet is not impeded by the complexity of the implementation, but rather by a deficiency of raw materials necessary for the initial phase.

An illustration of NASA’s MAVEN spacecraft positioned above Mars. Credit: NASA

Technological methods for warming Mars

The absence of carbon dioxide eliminates only one of the potential methodologies. In the year 2024, a publication appeared in the journal Science Advances wherein the authors suggested warming Mars without the utilization of greenhouse gases.

Alternatively, they suggest dispersing small solid particles into the Martian atmosphere. Natural dust is deemed unsuitable for this purpose due to the particles’ small size and near-spherical shape, which results in the reflection of a portion of sunlight back into space, thereby causing surface cooling. Although these particles do absorb thermal radiation and can warm specific atmospheric layers, this does not lead to an increase in surface temperature.

Particles of an alternative shape are required. The study details metal needles measuring nine micrometers in length, which are considerably thinner than a human hair. The Martian surface, heated by solar radiation, emits thermal energy into space, and the length of the needles was selected to correspond with the wavelength of these thermal waves. Consequently, the particles absorb and trap heat as it radiates outward, while concurrently scattering sunlight downward toward the surface.

According to the authors’ calculations, this approach is more than 5,000 times more effective than the most potent greenhouse gases. Mars would experience an increase in temperature of approximately 30°C, leading to the melting of ice. The raw materials necessary for production are also available on the planet, as its distinctive red coloration results from an iron compound — specifically, rust — which is present in the dust on Mars.

An artist’s rendering of a panoramic view of the surface of Mars 3 billion years ago, when it may have contained liquid water

The primary limitation is the non-existence of such particles. The authors of the study candidly acknowledge that the feasibility of the idea hinges on the ability to produce the needles directly on Mars and in substantial quantities. They estimate that these particles would remain suspended in the atmosphere for considerably longer durations than natural dust particles; nonetheless, they would ultimately settle, necessitating continuous release. The critical parameter — the actual duration that the particles remain airborne in the Martian atmosphere — has not yet been measured by any entity. This parameter is precisely what determines the viability of such a concept.

The authors also highlight that warming Mars does not necessarily imply making the planet habitable. The primary focus is on liquid water, which is essential for two reasons: firstly, a purely physical reason, as evaporation generates vapor that traps heat; secondly, a biological reason, since water in a frozen state is inaccessible to organisms. However, at present, all of these considerations remain theoretical and are limited to calculations without practical implementation.

Life as a means of terraforming

Technical methods for altering planetary conditions depend on engineering solutions; however, life itself has the capacity to contribute to this process. This concept was established long before contemporary theories.

In 1961, American astronomer Carl Sagan, a professor at Cornell University, published an article about Venus in the journal Science, in which he proposed “seeding” its atmosphere with algae. The algae would process carbon dioxide, the greenhouse effect would weaken—and the planet would cool to a temperature at which life could exist there. 12 years later, Carl Sagan turned his attention to Mars and proposed covering the polar caps with dark material so that they would stop reflecting sunlight and begin absorbing it.

This concept was not originated by a science fiction author but by a planetary scientist responsible for spacecraft design at NASA. His methodology entailed dispatching living organisms to extraterrestrial environments, enabling them to perform the necessary tasks independently. Unfortunately, none of the proposed options proved feasible. The proposed plan for Venus relied on assumptions concerning the planet’s conditions, which subsequent findings revealed to be inaccurate. Additionally, the temperature decrease in the polar caps of Mars amounts to merely approximately ten degrees, which is insufficient for the intended purposes.

Source: zmescience.com

However, the concept itself remains persistent, and contemporary efforts are ongoing. In San Francisco, a nonprofit organization known as Pioneer Labs has a clearly articulated mission: to engineer microorganisms capable of enduring the conditions on Mars. Several challenges impede this endeavor, including radiation exposure, low temperatures, and soil containing perchlorates — salts that are toxic to most terrestrial organisms.

Erika DeBenediktis, the director of Pioneer Labs, articulates a long-term perspective as follows: Genetically modified microbes may disseminate across surfaces akin to algae and, over several decades, commence altering the atmosphere via photosynthesis. It is estimated that approximately a thousand years will be required to generate sufficient oxygen to sustain more complex life forms. At present, this remains a hypothesis rather than a conclusion derived from experimental evidence. Nevertheless, the laboratory is operational, and the requisite organisms are currently being cultivated.

Defenders of extraterrestrial planets

While some individuals are preparing for the possibility of life being sent to other planets, others have dedicated years to ensuring that not a single Earth bacterium contaminates those planets. This discipline is known as planetary protection.

The Viking landing module, encased in a protective bioshield, is currently being prepared for thermal sterilization within a large oven

Every spacecraft that travels beyond Earth is assembled in a clean room. The air there is continuously filtered; people work in protective suits — not for their own safety, but to protect the equipment from them — and the components themselves are wiped down with alcohol, heated, and disinfected with chemicals. The Viking, which flew to Mars in the 1970s to search for life, underwent the most rigorous treatment of all. Back then, the spacecraft was heated to a high temperature in a special furnace. Modern electronics cannot withstand this, so achieving sterility is more difficult today. A significant portion of the mission’s budget goes toward this preparation, but the reason is clear. The probes are sent to search for living organisms, and a discovery would be meaningless if a bacterium were brought from Earth and then found there.

The entire concept is predicated on the assumption that sterility is attainable. In the year 2025, a study was published in which the authors examined not the equipment, but the facility itself. Samples were collected from the floor of the room where Phoenix was prepared, and twenty-six bacterial species, previously unknown to science, were identified.

High Bay 1 clean room at the Spacecraft Assembly Facility, NASA JPL, Pasadena. Photo: NASA, JPL-Caltech

New species are also identified in typical garden soil, rendering this discovery unsurprising. More significantly, numerous species identified possess genes that confer resistance to disinfection and radiation. Even the most hygienic environments we are capable of constructing remain environments where resilient organisms can survive.

Undergoing decontamination in a laboratory and residing on an extraterrestrial planet are two distinct activities; however, the regulations are established with a safety margin specifically tailored for the latter scenario. Not all scientists deem this safety margin justified. Astrobiologist Alberto Fairén articulated a strong critical stance on this matter; in 2017, he and his colleagues published an article presenting a straightforward thesis: planetary protection measures have been overly cautious. The most stringent requirements are designated for so-called “special regions” — areas where liquid water may temporarily exist under specific conditions, thus increasing the likelihood of discovering life. To investigate such a region, a spacecraft must be sanitized to a standard that is, in fact, unattainable. This situation results in a paradox: it is precisely these locations that are prohibited from exploration due to excessive caution.

A response to Alberto Fairén’s article was subsequently published in the same journal, bearing the illustrative title “Four Flaws and One Omission.” This title was selected by John Rammel and Catherine Conley, who served at different times as NASA’s planetary protection officers. Their argument contends that the regulations do not ban the search for extraterrestrial life; rather, they delineate the conditions under which such a discovery can be deemed to be of Martian origin. Without these criteria, any discovery would lack verifiable proof. Additionally, the omission pertains to the fact that terrestrial life forms can be entirely deleterious, as introduced microbes have the potential to contaminate water sources and soil necessary for future colonization efforts.

In 2005, astrobiologist Charles Cockell observed that the term “planetary protection” is overly restrictive. Protection pertains to safeguarding our interests — namely, the integrity of data and preventing instruments from providing misleading information to researchers. Instead, he advocated for the adoption of the term “planetary preservation,” which emphasizes safeguarding the indigenous microbial ecosystem rather than our scientific findings. Charles Cockell explicitly clarifies that he does not propose an outright ban on activities and acknowledges uncertainty regarding whether Mars necessitates the same stringent requirements as, for example, the icy moons. The central issue concerns the precise nature of what we are endeavoring to protect.

Viking and a result with no answer

50 years ago, we approached the definitive assessment of the existence of life on Mars. On July 20, 1976, the Viking 1 lander successfully touched down on the planet’s surface, followed by Viking 2 approximately one and a half months later. To date, these missions remain the only endeavors explicitly dedicated to the search for living organisms, rather than solely focusing on water, organic matter, or habitable conditions.

Carl Sagan standing beside a model of the Viking spacecraft in Death Valley. Source: NASA / JPL

Each participant carried a small biological module containing three distinct experiments. The most straightforward experiment operated as follows: a sample of soil was taken, a nutrient solution — serving as sustenance — was added, and if there were any living organisms within the sample, they would consume the nutrients and produce gas as a metabolic byproduct. This reaction was successfully observed on the initial attempt, repeated subsequently, and was confirmed by a second device situated six and a half thousand kilometers away.

Subsequently, they examined whether non-biological chemical processes could yield the same outcome. They meticulously heated the same soil sample to ensure the absence of any residual living organisms. Prior to the flight, the researchers agreed to interpret the release of gas from a fresh sample as indicative of life, should the heated sample not exhibit such gas release. This precise outcome was observed.

This image was modified using data from an alternative instrument that was concurrently analyzing the soil for organic matter — specifically, complex carbon compounds constituting all living organisms. No organic matter was identified in the samples. According to the prevailing understanding at the time, the conclusion was unequivocal. Since organisms cannot originate from nothing, the reaction was deemed not to result from biological chemistry, and the matter remained unresolved for decades.

The Viking 2 lander is situated on the surface of Mars. Photo: NASA, JPL-Caltech

Two discoveries prompted a recommencement of the mission. Firstly, perchlorates — salts that Phoenix had identified in virtually all locations in 2008 — were detected within Martian soil. As Charles Cockell elucidates in an interview with our publication, organic matter reacts with perchlorate upon heating and subsequently decomposes; consequently, the Viking instruments’ heating of the sample likely resulted in its destruction during analysis. Secondly, organic matter has indeed been identified on Mars, as evidenced by the NASA rovers, which detected organic compounds in both rocks and soil.

The question remains unresolved. According to Charles Cockell, uncertainties persist regarding the Viking results, even after 50 years. Some scientists assert that the mission indeed achieved certain discoveries, whereas others remain uncertain.

It appears that establishing the existence of life on a planetary body is comparatively straightforward, as detecting it on a single occasion suffices. Conversely, demonstrating its absence is significantly more challenging, requiring an examination of every part of the planet — every layer of soil, each crack, and all depths — and even then, the most accurate statement would be “we did not find any,” rather than asserting ‘there is no life there.”

Professor Charles Cockell adds an important detail to this. No location has yet been found on Mars where living organisms could definitely reproduce. The so-called “special regions” have been identified based on theoretical considerations, but these are still just assumptions, since we have not visited any of them.

Who determines the destiny of other worlds?

While we seek a resolution to this vicious cycle, it is worthwhile to consider who genuinely holds decision-making authority regarding the destiny of other worlds. It appears that such authority rests with humanity as a whole — or, at minimum, with the principal space agencies. In actuality, planetary protection manifests as a systematic framework, albeit not codified into law. It comprises a set of recommendations formulated by the Committee on  Space Research (COSPAR). These recommendations are elaborated in detail, subjected to regular review, and the most recent version received approval at the conclusion of 2025. Leading agencies comply with these guidelines — not out of legal obligation but because they consider it essential. 

The official logo of the COSPAR 2026 conference, which focuses on space exploration and encompasses the subject of planetary defense. Credit: COSPAR

This does not pertain to private entities. Pioneer Labs is engaged in cultivating organisms for Mars; however, it has not obtained explicit permission to do so, as such authorization is not deemed necessary.

Formally speaking, there is an individual or entity responsible after all. In 1967, when only a limited number of countries were engaged in space exploration, the Outer Space Treaty was signed, and it remains effective to this day. One of its articles stipulates that states bear international responsibility for their national activities in space, including those conducted by private companies. In other words, the United States would be accountable for any microbes originating from an American laboratory on Mars.

The issue lies in the agreement’s specification, which identifies only the responsible party without enumerating prohibited actions. These actions are expressed as recommendations, lacking legal enforceability. The entire framework depends on mutual goodwill and functions effectively as long as all parties concur. The “Beresheet” incident was an isolated anomaly, resulting not from malicious intent but from an error.

In 2025, the journal Acta Astronautica published an article proposing a moratorium — that is, a temporary prohibition on “seeding” other planets with Earth-based life — until it is ascertained whether such actions are ethically and responsibly permissible. The authors argue that “seeding” an extraterrestrial environment is economically feasible, as it does not necessitate government funding or billions of dollars; rather, it requires only a single laboratory and one shipment. However, the authors emphasize that the consequences are irreversible, because once life is established, it cannot be eradicated.

In an interview with our publication, Charles Cockell redirects the focus of the inquiry towards ourselves. Here on Earth, we frequently sterilize microbes in our households with bleach and remain indifferent to their survival prospects; however, we safeguard the stromatolites in Australia — those very layered structures that microbes have been constructing for billions of years — as emblematic of ancient life. The same principle applies to trees: some are preserved due to their historical and aesthetic significance, while others are felled to accommodate the construction of supermarkets.

In this context, the inquiry assumes a different significance. It may not pertain to the value of microbes per se, but rather to our actual requirements. Our concern for the Martians appears to be contingent upon our inability to reach them. It remains uncertain whether this concern will endure once construction commences on-site.

Although the discussion is still ongoing, certain developments are already underway. The Italian Space Agency has developed an experiment focused on the cultivation of plants, which has been selected for SpaceX’s inaugural landing on Mars. This experiment involves a sealed container — a meticulously prepared scientific study — and no actual planting is taking place. The agency’s leadership underscores that this will mark the first instance of living organisms from Earth being intentionally transported to the surface of another planet. It is also immediately clarified that the plants will remain inside the spacecraft. The primary objective of this experiment is to investigate the effects of a six-month spaceflight on living cells.

Rendering of a module designated for the cultivation of plants on the surface of Mars. Source: universetoday.com

In 2026, a roadmap was also published, currently in preprint form. The document outlines the research needed to determine whether it is even possible to warm Mars. Among the more than twenty authors are researchers from Pioneer Labs and Charles Cockell himself. His position on the matter has not changed, as he considers it unacceptable to destroy Martian microbes, if they exist. In his view, altering the environment is permissible only if we can demonstrate our ability to coexist with what is already there.

Simultaneously, he and a colleague are investigating a third alternative. If life necessitates liquid water, heat, and protection from radiation, it is not obligatory to modify the entire planet; rather, establishing a small, self-sustaining environment capable of maintaining these conditions independently is sufficient. The authors explicitly juxtapose their concept with terraforming, as planet alteration entails irreversible interference with the entire celestial body, whereas a sealed module leaves no more impact than a conventional manned expedition.

It appears that individuals who have spent 20 years debating whether humanity has the right to modify other planets are now sitting at the same table to develop a research plan. In other words, this is no longer a narrative set in the distant future, but rather decisions are being made at this very moment.

We have acquired knowledge on estimating carbon dioxide reserves on Mars, designing particles nine micrometers in length, and cultivating bacteria that exhibit resistance to radiation and cold. However, we have yet to establish methods to demonstrate that the universe is uninhabited.

The initial colonizers in space will unquestionably not be humans. Instead, they will be microorganisms — originating from Earth and dispatched by us. These microorganisms will venture farther than any human and will have a lifespan exceeding ours; ultimately, a civilization unlike our own may develop from them. The sole consideration is whether they will be the primary inhabitants there, or if they will annihilate the pre-existing life.

1. Posted in Articles, Questions

{ https://universemagazine.com/en/articles-en/ }

NASA's Nancy Grace Roman Space Telescope is set to launch this weekend. When will we see its first photos?- PART I

The Nancy Grace Roman Space Telescope is set to launch from Kennedy Space Center in Florida Sunday morning (Aug. 30). The state-of-the-art spacecraft will help astronomers study exoplanets, distant galaxies, dark matter and much more.

NASA's next-generation cosmic observatory — the Nancy Grace Roman Space Telescope — is set to launch this weekend on a potentially decade-long mission to hunt for distant exoplanets, map out the Milky Way and unravel some of the universe's biggest mysteries, such as the true nature of dark matter.

The Roman telescope and its payload are scheduled to lift off aboard a SpaceX Falcon Heavy rocket Sunday (Aug. 30) at 7:26 a.m. EDT from Launch Complex 39A at NASA's Kennedy Space Center in Florida, according to NASA. A few hours later, the telescope will be released from the rocket's second stage and be exposed to the vacuum of space for the first time.

But even if everything goes according to plan, we will still have to wait a while to get a glimpse of Roman's first groundbreaking images.

As of Thursday morning (Aug. 27), the National Weather Service forecasts a 50% chance of thunderstorms at Kennedy Space Center Sunday, so weather could delay the launch. If that happens, a second launch window is available Monday (Aug. 31) at 7:22 a.m. EDT, when there is a reduced risk of thunderstorms.

You can watch the event on a SpaceX livestream and stay up to date with last-minute developments and postlaunch news via a live blog from Live Science's sister site Space.com.

60 million stars: Euclid space telescope snaps the most detailed photo of the Milky Way ever taken

NASA mission to rescue a space telescope plummeting to Earth launches into orbit

James Webb telescope uses trippy Einstein prediction to probe the farthest reaches of the universe

What is the Roman Space Telescope?

The Roman Space Telescope is NASA's latest flagship observatory. It follows the James Webb Space Telescope (JWST), which launched in 2021, and the Hubble Space Telescope, which has been in orbit since 1990. Rather than replacing those spacecraft, Roman will work alongside them to help scientists scour the skies like never before.

The observatory is named after pioneering scientist Nancy Grace Roman, who served as NASA's first chief astronomer between 1960 and 1979. It is approximately 42 feet (12.7 meters) tall and 14 feet (4.4 m) wide and weighs around 18,000 pounds (8,000 kilograms) — about the same as a fully grown Tyrannosaurus rex, according to a NASA fact sheet.

Roman was fully completed in December 2025, almost a decade after construction began and within its initial $4.3 billion budget (less than half what JWST cost). Since then, it has been moved more than 900 miles (1,450 kilometers) from Goddard Space Flight Center in Maryland and undergone a series of final checks in NASA's "clean rooms." Having initially been slated for a 2027 liftoff, the telescope is technically launching ahead of schedule.

Roman will eventually be stationed around 1 million miles (1.6 million km) from Earth at what scientists call a Lagrange point — a fixed point relative to our planet where the gravity of two objects cancels out. Its specific Lagrange point will be Sun-Earth L2, where JWST and the European Space Agency's Gaia and Euclid space telescopes already reside.

Roman's initial mission will last five years, but experts hope it could survive at least twice that long. Some space telescopes far outlast their initial missions; for example, Hubble is more than two decades past its original mission parameters, and NASA's recently doomed Swift Observatory lasted 10 times longer than predicted.

Earth-based telescope shares image of Artemis II capsule near the moon — one of the farthest photos of humans ever taken

'We are not giving up yet': Private mission to rescue NASA's Swift telescope is spinning out of control

James Webb telescope may have revealed the true identity of the 'little red dots'

What makes Roman special?

Roman has two key instruments that set it apart from its predecessors. The first is its Wide Field Instrument, a 288-megapixel camera attached to a 7.9-foot (2.4 meters) mirror, which gives it a field of view 100,000 times greater than Hubble's. It will also see the cosmos in infrared light, similar to JWST. These combined capabilities will allow Roman to observe the cosmos like never before.

But the telescope's secret weapon is arguably its coronagraph, which can block out the light from distant stars, allowing Roman to see fainter objects, such as the exoplanets that orbit these stars. Until now, scientists' main way of finding alien worlds was to wait for them to pass in front of, or transit, their home star, but Roman will be able to directly image exoplanets at almost any time in their orbital cycles. (Exoplanets remain out of view when they are directly behind their home stars.)

{ https://www.livescience.com/space }

NASA's Nancy Grace Roman Space Telescope is set to launch this weekend. When will we see its first photos? - PART II

The Nancy Grace Roman Space Telescope is set to launch from Kennedy Space Center in Florida Sunday morning (Aug. 30). The state-of-the-art spacecraft will help astronomers study exoplanets, distant galaxies, dark matter and much more.

ne of the biggest and most exciting claims researchers have made about Roman is that it could help reveal up to 100,000 exoplanets. Such discoveries would revolutionize how we study alien worlds, especially considering that we have uncovered over 6,000 exoplanets since the first one was spotted in 1992.

However, the telescope will also conduct long-term surveys that will help astronomers accurately map the Milky Way and find extremely distant galaxies, potentially helping scientists solve the mysteries of dark matter and dark energy that currently underpin a "cosmological crisis" surrounding the universe's expansion. And as with any new space telescope, scientists will likely find novel ways of using Roman once it is in operation.

"The mission will offer practically limitless opportunities for astronomers to conduct a broad range of additional science," NASA representatives wrote in the fact sheet. "From objects in our outer solar system and exploding stars to growing black holes and galaxies by the billions, very little will be beyond Roman's reach."

The spacecraft will beam roughly 1.4 terabytes of data — roughly 10 times the storage capacity of an average smartphone — to ground stations across Earth every day, according to the fact sheet.

When will we see Roman's first photos?

Roman's first snaps are arguably the most anticipated astronomical images since the debut photos from the ground-based Vera C. Rubin Observatory, which were released in June 2025.

But first, Roman has to travel to its Lagrange point, which is roughly four times farther away than the moon. This could take several weeks, although no exact timeline has been provided.

Once Roman is in position, there will be a roughly 90-day commissioning period, during which the telescope will fully power up its instruments and run a series of diagnostic tests to ensure everything is in order before its mission truly begins.

There is, therefore, a slim chance that we could see Rubin's first photos before the end of the year. However, NASA officials have tentatively predicted that the telescope will start snapping the stars in early 2027. It took JWST about seven months postlaunch to send its first full-color image to Earth.

NASA representatives have promised that "data from all of Roman's surveys will be made public as soon as it is processed, with no periods of exclusive access," so once the images are ready, everyone will be able to see them.

{ https://www.livescience.com/space }

Connecting data from over 2,000 Americans, the survey found that 37% say recent news coverage about UFOs has increased their belief in extraterrestrial life (ET). Meanwhile, 54% say their views have not changed, and just 10% report that the coverage has made them less likely to believe in ET. The survey was conducted by Talker Research between July 1 and July 6, 2026. 

Gen Z Data 

According to the survey’s findings, more than half of Gen Z respondents—54%—said recent UAP news has increased their belief in ET. That figure drops to 45% among millennials, 36% among Gen X, and 23% among baby boomers.

These results arrive amid an increasingly mainstream conversation surrounding government hearings, military UAP reports, whistleblowers, broadcast and online news coverage, and podcasts. Such exposure may be helping shape how Gen Z views what is possible and whether intelligent life exists elsewhere in the cosmos.

Looking at the results through a gender lens, 34% of men say UFO news coverage has made them more likely to accept that we are not alone in the universe, compared with 33% of women.

Media and Entertainment Culture Feedback Loops 

Historically, widely publicized UFO reports have helped shape the language and imagery Western society uses to describe unexplained aerial phenomena. One famous example occurred in 1947, when pilot and businessman Kenneth Arnold reported seeing unusual objects flying near Mount Rainier, an incident that received widespread media coverage.

The idea behind such a cultural feedback loop is relatively straightforward: someone sees something outside their normal understanding of reality and reports it. Media and entertainment then pick up the concept and expand upon it, creating their own interpretations of what extraterrestrial beings or UFOs might look like. Audiences absorb those representations, which may subsequently influence how some people perceive, remember, or describe their own unusual experiences. Those accounts can then return to popular culture, potentially reinforcing the cycle.

This doesn’t necessarily mean that what a person saw wasn’t anomalous. Instead, it suggests that media and entertainment may influence how people interpret or describe what they experience.

A 2025 paper in Evolutionary Human Sciences deconstructs a “two-way feedback loop between behavior and beliefs.” The framework suggests that existing beliefs influence behavior; people then observe that behavior, and the observed behavior influences what people believe others think/do. Finally, those beliefs influence subsequent behavior.

The new survey also considered the potential influence of popular culture. More than half of respondents (54%) believed alien movies and television make Americans more likely to believe in the existence of intelligent extraterrestrial life; 27% saw no connection between entertainment and belief, while 8% believed such programming actually makes people less likely to believe.

UFOs as a Belief System and Common Misconceptions 

An additional consideration when reading this survey is whether UFOs themselves should be characterized as a belief system. The subject is also an area of study examined by researchers from a range of disciplines, including psychology, philosophy, physics, anthropology, neuroscience, and others.

Many academics would argue that categorizing UFOs solely as a belief system risks pigeonholing the subject as a form of religion rather than recognizing it as an area of study. A belief system, by contrast, is a framework of ideas through which people interpret reality according to a particular set of assumptions or principles.

Jeffrey Kripal, J. Newton Rayzor Professor of Religion at Rice University’s Department of Religion, addressed related questions in his March 2026 keynote, “Mind-Manifesting Shock: Comparing Psychedelic and Abduction Experiences, Religion and Psychedelics: Critical Cross-Cultural, Cross-Disciplinary Approaches,” at the Center for the Study of Religion at Ohio State University.

“We are often ‘believing backwards,’ taking comfort in someone else’s altered states, or in the present ‘explanations’ of this or that neuroscience or physics,” Kripal said at the time.

In other words, when people experience something anomalous and ask why it happened or what the experience might mean, they may immediately reach backward for an existing framework through which to interpret it.

In an email to The Debrief, Kripal adds, “I think the existing frameworks of religion and science ‘explain’ to people what happens, though they do not.”

The Debrief also reached out to Matthew Halsted, Associate Professor of Biblical Studies and Executive Team/Registrar at Eternity College, and asked how he would classify UAP—as an area of belief or a subject of study—and why.

“When it comes to ‘UAP,’ we have to see it as a two-sided coin,” Halsted told The Debrief. “On one side, we have the phenomenon itself (the actual sighting of the thing in the sky); on the other side of the coin, we have the public narrative (how we as people, and our respective governments, talk about reported sightings).”

Halsted adds, “The UAP topic (the ‘coin’) creates a lot of questions for the public, which inevitably gives rise to some sort of belief system. Some walk away believing it’s all nonsense, while others believe there’s something real about this whole thing.”

Halsted’s view, therefore, appears more nuanced than simply classifying UAP as a belief system: the topic can generate belief systems and competing interpretations around reported phenomena, but the subject itself extends beyond a simple question of belief versus nonbelief.

National Security Considerations

When asked how they would react if extraterrestrial life were definitively confirmed, 38% of Americans said their first response would be curiosity, more than twice the 17% who said they would be fearful. Men were also more likely than women to say they would be excited by such a discovery, at 20% compared with 11%.

Perhaps more strikingly, 60% of participants believed that governments know more about UFOs than they have disclosed to date.

The bigger question is whether participants believe society is prepared to accept confirmation that extraterrestrial life exists. Forty-five percent believe society would be prepared if governments confirmed the existence of alien life, while 55% say society would not be adequately prepared to comprehend the implications.

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

2 Meter Tall Face Found On Mars Near Spirit Rover, NASA Index, UFO UAP Sighting News.

Date of discovery: Aug 24, 2026

Location of discovery: Planet Mars

Source: MER/Spirit rover/Sol 693

Photo: 

• https://areo.info/mer/spirit/693/tn/2P187884814ESFAK00P2579L5M1_L2L5L5L7L7.jpg.html

This Face is about 2 meters tall by 1 meter. Its made on a small hill and was clearly facing the distance, as perhaps a warning to outsiders of ownership of this territory or maybe its made to celebrate an important person in this culture at the time. 

 

This face is strong, has powerful large eyelids, round nose, muscular cheeks and a powerful jaw line. It actually looks more like a mask than a realistic face, but with aliens...you never know since we don't have a side by side live alien to compare it too. 

Scott C. Waring - UFO Sightings Daily 

 

{ https://www.ufosightingsdaily.com/ }

Black UFOs changing shape over Illinois USA Aug 23, 2026 UFO UAP Sighting News.

 

Date of sighting: Aug 23, 2026

Location of sighting: Riverdale, Illinois, USA

Source: NUFORC

 

Watching this eyewitness video I can see three UFOs clearly moving across the sky, all of which look to be black orbs. The eyewitness stated that they were shape shifting and yes, when I put part of the video into slow motion it does appear to change shape...more like a plasmoid orb, but I have never seen plasmoid orbs that were black before. This is something rare and unique in the UFO field...such video is proof that these aliens have technology that can transform the shape of the UFOs themselves. I believe that this flux is due to them shifting from a different dimension to another. This is a serious sign that something is significant enough in Illinois in the coming days that aliens would time travel to come and see it occur. 

Scott C. Waring - UFO Sightings Daily

 

Eyewitness states: 

 { https://www.ufosightingsdaily.com/ }

The Only Tall White TicTac UFO Photo In Existence, Taken By NASA! UFO UAP Alien paranormal news. 👽👽

Date of discovery: Aug 29, 2026

Location of discovery: Nellis AFB, Nevada, USA

Date of photo: June 25, 1965

NASA photo:

•  https://images.nasa.gov/details/EC68-1982

 

Guys, I'm not sure why I was looking through this index, but I am sure I was looking for anomalies that were overlooked by NASA editors who airbrush things out. I found a few interesting photos, but this one felt different and intrigued my curiosity...then I saw the date...and tied it into the year Charles Hall a friend of mine, who started working at the Tall White base road dead end area in...you got it...1965. 

 

This photo revealed to me that there is a tictac UFO over the old firing range area...the same area where Charles Hall stated that the Tall Whites were given land behind the range to build an underground base. Also he mentioned many times in his books that the Tall Whites have white florescent glowing tictac UFOs...which is in the 1965 photo. Oh...and I forgot to mention, Area S4 and Area 51 are just 30+ miles north of this location. 

Scott C. Waring - UFO Sightings Daily

 

PS, I've written to my friend Charles Hall to see if he can confirm or not that this is a Tall White ship in the 1965 photo. I will make an update if he responds. 

 

 

 { https://www.ufosightingsdaily.com/ }

NASA astronaut reveals shocking new details about near-fatal malfunction that left him stranded in space for nine months

• The hellish health battles NASA's stranded astronauts face back on Earth
  

By STACY LIBERATORE, US SCIENCE & TECHNOLOGY EDITOR

Two NASA astronauts set off for an eight-day mission in July 2024, only to spend nine months stranded in space after their Boeing capsule malfunctioned.

Now, commander Butch Wilmore has revealed the terrifying moment he feared he and crewmate Sunita Williams would never make it home.

He was struggling to control Starliner while approaching the International Space Station (ISS) as the capsule’s thrusters failed. 

Four thrusters had failed, and a fifth would follow, while others were producing less thrust. At the controls, he felt the spacecraft becoming harder to maneuver and heard its thrusters firing rapidly, which sounded like a 'machine gun.'

Unable to explain the failures or know whether the thrusters could be restored, Wilmore focused on reaching the ISS. But he feared that if they could not dock, their damaged spacecraft might not get them home alive.

‘We got to get there. If we can't get there, I'm not sure we can make it back to Earth like this,’ he said during an interview on The Jeremy Boreing Show.

‘So, there's that thought of not surviving, right?’

Even if they reached safety, Wilmore said he had already concluded they would need another way home: ‘We ain't coming home in the spacecraft.’

Commander Butch Wilmore has revealed the terrifying moment he feared he and crewmate Sunita Williams would never make it home

Wilmore and Williams launched to the ISS for what was intended to be an eight-day stay. 

However, the capsule malfunctioned, making it unsafe for human travel. 

Starliner returned autonomously to Earth in September 2024, without crew, and Wilmore and Williams were brought home safely by SpaceX Crew-9 in March 2025.

The pair had largely remained silent on what happened during their time in the capsule before docking with the ISS.

But Wilmore's latest interview has provided a closer look into the terrifying experience he and Williams endured. 

Wilmore said four of the eight thrusters that pushed Starliner forward had failed, leaving him unable to fully control the capsule’s movements.

A spacecraft must be able to turn, tilt and roll, as well as move forward and backward, up and down, and side to side, a range of movement known as ‘six degrees of freedom.’

'We've now lost one of our degrees of freedom,' he said during the interview with Boreing.

He was struggling to control Starliner while approaching the International Space Station (ISS) as the capsule’s thrusters failed

Wilmore and Williams launched to the ISS for what was intended to be an eight-day stay. However, the capsule malfunctioned, making it unsafe for human travel. Above is Williams after splashing down on March 18, 2025

'Never happened before in the history of human space flight. And we now know that we had a reduction in thrust on other thrusters. 

'All axes were impacted. I'm on the controls. I can feel it. It's nothing like it was the day before as far as maintaining control of the spacecraft. It even sounds different.' 

He and Williams then heard what sounded like a machine gun firing off, adding more stress to the situation, leaving him to question if they could make it to the ISS.

NASA had maintained that the Boeing Starliner was capable of bringing the pair back to Earth after it malfunctioned. However, Wilmore admitted he knew it was not possible even before he and Williams docked on the ISS.

'If we get there safely, if we can dock, we ain't coming home in the spacecraft,' he said. [We're] going to be there a while.

'People have asked me, "How did you feel when they told you you weren't coming back?" I'm like, "I knew that before we ever docked."'

The official decision to bring the astronauts back on Starliner was not given until a month later. 

'The whole time we knew the chances were slim to none, regardless of what we found out, just because you can't inspect the thrusters,' Wilmore said.

Wilmore revealed that he knew the capsule was not taking him and Williams back to Earth even before they docked. Above is Wilmore after returning to Earth in March 2025

'You can't go out on a spacewalk and check them out. They're not built that way. So, there's no way we could really know for sure what the problem was.' 

Wilmore also described his frustration at learning details about Starliner that he had not previously known.

‘I was frustrated for some of the processes that I wasn’t aware of, some of the decisions I wasn’t aware of,’ he said.

He referred to matters he had discussed earlier, but did not identify the specific processes or decisions, or who was responsible for them, in this portion of the interview.

Wilmore distinguished those frustrations from his feelings about remaining aboard the International Space Station.

‘But from the situation of being on space station, content, absolutely content,’ he said.

He credited his Christian faith with helping him accept his circumstances, while acknowledging that it did not eliminate challenges or anxiety.

‘And I’m only content because the Lord has imparted his word into me and I know it. And his word is true,’ he said.

Wilmore also acknowledged that he had experienced moments of fear during the ordeal. ‘Frustrated at times, maybe a little afraid once or twice,’ he said.

He explained that he had to compartmentalize that fear to prevent it from interfering with his ability to carry out his responsibilities.

‘That’s not to say it’s not there, but you got to put it in the right spot and go forward.'

{ https://www.dailymail.com/sciencetech/index.html }

EXCLUSIVE - The UFO files the government won't ever release: I've read them all. They fear a full-blown national crisis and destruction of religious faith... but it's time for the REAL disclosure day. Here's what you deserve to know

By STACY LIBERATORE, US SCIENCE & TECHNOLOGY EDITOR

After weeks of anticipation, the latest UFO file dump left many Americans underwhelmed.

While the Trump administration unveiled a third batch of documents, photos and videos tied to unexplained sightings on Friday, critics argue the files stopped well short of addressing the allegations at the heart of the UFO mystery.

Now, one of the few people who claims to have seen some of the hidden UFO files has spoken to the Daily Mail, revealing what he says is inside them – including references to alleged crash-retrieval programs, secret government investigations and 'non-human biologics.'

Investigative journalist Jeremy Corbell said the material has only strengthened his belief that the US government has recovered unidentified craft and biological evidence linked to the UFO mystery.

Corbell has spent years collecting documents, testimony and other material related to the claims, some of which appeared briefly in Sleeping Dog, the documentary he produced with veteran investigative journalist George Knapp.

The film shows a list of files, including one referencing 'non-human biologics,' a term used to describe alleged extraterrestrial tissue or bodies.

Another file is labeled 'Kona Blue,' the name of a proposed Department of Homeland Security program that would have investigated claims involving recovered unidentified craft, advanced technology and other UFO-related allegations. 

The program was never formally established, according to government records.

Years worth of files, testimony and other material that Corbell collected, some of which were featured in Sleeping Dog

Corbell argued that the material is now circulating far beyond the handful of researchers who first obtained it, raising the prospect that additional details could be leaked regardless of whether the government releases the files.

'I can't stop that information from coming out. I am unable to stop it,' he said, adding that 'over 100 journalists already have everything that I have. 

'That's not just in my hands anymore. That's not just in George Knapp's hands anymore.'

However, the US government maintains that it has found no verifiable evidence that extraterrestrial life or alien technology has visited Earth. 

Despite decades of public fascination with UFOs, major Pentagon investigations and declassified government reviews have repeatedly concluded that no case of unidentified anomalous phenomena (UAP) has been confirmed. 

The Trump administration released the third batch of UFO files on Friday, which Corbell said was 'historic,' as more information on the topic 'is always a win.'

However, he added that again, the government has only shared 'low-hanging fruit.' 

'Our government has long known about Non-Human Intelligence, their vehicles, reverse-engineering programs, and biological study of their pilots and occupants. These releases are provoked - not offered,' Corbell said.

David Grusch giving congressional testimony in 2023, during which he claimed the US government had spent decades attempting to recover and reverse-engineer craft of non-human origin. Investigative journalist Jeremy Corbell (circled) listens from behind

'The pressure of journalism, whistleblowers, and congressional oversight forced this door open. Unresolved cases are a start. But complacency is our enemy. If you want the truth, demand it. 

'Full transparency on our government’s continued relationship and correspondence with the UAP phenomenon - nothing less.' 

Representative Tim Burchett, who has seen videos of craft that 'defy any reason,' has suggested that government agencies are using the excuse that UFO disclosure will 'disrupt religion' to withhold files from the public. 

Corbell said the files shown in his documentary touch on allegations involving non-human biologics, government UFO programs, intelligence assessments and unexplained aerial incidents that have remained largely hidden from public view. 

One of the files is named 'ImCon Originals,' he claimed, referring to Immaculate Constellation – which is described in a whistleblower report as a secret, unauthorized Pentagon program created to collect and hide UFO evidence.

Matt Brown, a former US national security official, came forward in 2025 with details about Immaculate Constellation, revealing the alleged secret program to Corbell.

Brown said he discovered references to the program in 2018 while reviewing classified materials at the Pentagon.

Corbell alleged that it is a special access program designed to quarantine high-quality UFO imagery and testimonies from congressional oversight. 

The file 'Pilfer & Pickpocket' also appears in the list, which Corbell has previously claimed are names of UFO crash retrieval programs. However, he stressed that he has not been able to confirm the details.

When asked why he does not release the files himself, Corbell told the Daily Mail that some of the information would cause a national security crisis.

But his 'number one reason' is that the government has made a promise of 'disclosure and transparency' to the American people. 'They deserve a chance to perform that function,' he said.

'Additionally,' Corbell continued, 'every time George and I obtain and release something, it puts sources at risk. Why do that when the government has said it will do it? We don't want to.'

The journalist has become a central player in the UFO disclosure movement, with his work bringing military and intelligence witnesses into the public eye and pressuring the US government into the disclosure process.

Corbell also told the Daily Mail that he personally provided officials with access to several of the UFO videos that were released to the public on May 22.

He did so in what he described as classified 'intel links' connected to hidden government servers, after unknown sources leaked the clips to him.

'Not just file names; if you put the underscores in, they're linked,' Corbell said, claiming the material led directly to classified systems that 'you and I can't access.'

While Corbell has released UFO videos that ended up in the Trump administration's file dump, he has championed other footage of unknown craft that was later explained or challenged by investigators, scientists and the military.

His comments come as the Trump administration has released hundreds of UFO-related records, a move Corbell said falls far short of addressing the questions that have fueled the disclosure movement for years. 

Corbell pointed to David Grusch's 2023 congressional testimony, in which the former Air Force intelligence officer alleged the government had spent decades recovering and studying craft of non-human origin and had obtained what he described as 'biologics' from some crash sites.

'Now, if that's true, and if you believe him, our government in parts has that information,' Corbell said. 'It is time to tell the American public the truth.'

Neither Corbell nor Grusch has publicly released evidence proving the existence of non-human intelligence.

A handout from the Department of War that they said shows a UAP near Japan

Grusch's testimony marked a turning point in the modern UFO disclosure movement, transforming what had long been considered fringe speculation into a topic debated openly on Capitol Hill.

He told lawmakers that he had interviewed numerous current and former government officials who claimed the US was operating secret programs dedicated to retrieving and studying unidentified craft.

His testimony prompted renewed calls for oversight and transparency from members of Congress on both sides of the aisle.

Several lawmakers have since argued that the government should release additional records related to UAPs.

Corbell said public interest in the issue continues to grow as more military personnel, intelligence officials and defense insiders come forward with accounts of encounters involving unexplained objects.

He argued that the administration's recent document releases have heightened expectations that more significant information could eventually emerge.

The Trump administration released the first batch of UFO files on May 8, with a second on May 22. 

They include military reports, FBI accounts and videos showing unexplained objects streaking across the sky. But rather than providing answers, the files have only deepened the mystery. 

Corbell suggested reporters may ultimately force the issue if officials fail to provide further disclosure. 'If they don't, journalism will,' he said.

He stressed he was not claiming to possess definitive proof of alien life or recovered extraterrestrial technology, but argued investigators have uncovered information that warrants further scrutiny.

'What I have obtained over the years is not definitive proof of the things you want,' he said. 'But it's a start. It's a good start.'

He added that disclosure should proceed in stages, beginning with government acknowledgment of alleged craft-retrieval and reverse-engineering programs.

From there, he said, officials should address claims involving 'biologics' before eventually answering what he called the next major question: whether there has ever been direct communication with a non-human intelligence.

'Have there been any agreements? Have there been any direct communications?' Corbell posited.

'After they begin with reverse engineering of craft, because we all know craft exists, biologics, because we're almost there, then the third step will be communications,' he declared.

'And I have evidence of all.'

{ https://www.dailymail.com/sciencetech/index.html }

Mysterious object spotted in NASA moon photo sparks theories of extraterrestrial life: '100% proof'

• READ MORE: I was a church leader. There are secret Bible clues about alien life
  

By STACY LIBERATORE, US SCIENCE & TECHNOLOGY EDITOR

An image of the moon's surface has sparked theories of extraterrestrial life.

NASA's Lunar Orbiter 3 snapped the photo in 1967, as the agency prepared to send humans there for the first time.

Nearly six decades later, UFO researcher Scott Waring has claimed that it captured something far more extraordinary than the lunar landscape. 

He believes an elongated feature in the image is an alien spacecraft hovering above the surface, stretching an astonishing 3.4 miles from end to end.

Waring arrived at that estimate by comparing the feature with Theophilus crater, using a crater diameter of 68 miles and judging the supposed craft to be one-twentieth as long.

For him, the photograph carries a chilling implication.

‘This is 100 percent proof that aliens were watching humans before we ever stepped on the moon,’ he wrote on his website UFO Sightings Daily.

He even suggested that the enormous vessel would be considered a ‘small shuttle craft’ by its supposed occupants.

However, Waring provides no independent evidence that the feature is a spacecraft, and neither its claimed size nor its alleged extraterrestrial origin has been established.

NASA's Lunar Orbiter 3 snapped the photo in 1967, as the agency prepared to send humans there for the first time

Nearly six decades later, UFO researcher Scott Waring has claimed that it captured something far more extraordinary than the lunar landscape

NASA has also maintained that it has no evidence of extraterrestrial life and has yet to find any signs of current or past life on Mars.

Waring, however, is sure that the mysterious object in the photo is an alien craft.

'There is a long spacecraft hovering over the moon's surface in a NASA photo from 1967,' he wrote in his blog. 

'I took the measurement of the crater in the photo called Theophilus crater, which is 110km or 68 miles across by 4.4km or 2.7 miles deep, and can conclude that this UFO is 1/20 the length of the crater...equals 5.5km or 3.4 miles-long UFO. 

'That's huge to us humans, but to aliens, it's considered a small shuttle craft.'

While the American space agency has dismissed aliens visiting the moon, the Trump Administration's UFO files have revealed unexplainable phenomena during the Apollo moon missions.

On May 8, the US Department of War released hundreds of pages of documents, pictures and audio recordings allegedly providing evidence of extraterrestrial sightings dating back to the 1940s. 

Included in what has been described as the first batch of UFO files expected to come from the Pentagon this year were the transcripts of the Apollo 12 and Apollo 17 moon missions.

He believes an elongated feature in the image is an alien spacecraft hovering above the surface, stretching an astonishing 3.4 miles from end to end

Read More

EXCLUSIVE

•  UFO files government won't release: It's time for REAL disclosure day. This is what you should know 

Those files and a collection of images taken by the astronauts on the moon revealed multiple encounters with strange objects that appear to fly around their lunar landers.

During the Apollo 17 mission in 1972, astronauts Gene Cernan, Jack Schmitt and Ron Evans reported seeing a bright object that rotated and flashed rhythmically out in space.

Cernan said: 'I'm looking at what - what Jack was talking about; and it's definitely not a particle that's nearby because there is another one I can look at and get a three-dimensional comparison with.'

'It is a bright object, and it's obviously rotating because it's flashing. It's way out in the distance, as I say, because there are particles that are close by and it's obviously not one of those,' the astronaut described.

'It's apparently rotating in a very rhythmic fashion because the flashes come around almost - almost on time. And as we look back at the Earth, it's up at about 11:00 - oh, maybe ten or 12 Earth diameters. I don't know whether that does you any good, but there is something out there.'

During the lunar landing, which was the last time humans stepped on the moon's surface, the crew of Apollo 17 also reported seeing multiple small objects moving near the spacecraft during their flight.

This archival photograph depicts the lunar surface as viewed from the landing site of Apollo 12. This image features a highlighted area of interest slightly to the right of the vertical axis of the frame, above the horizon, in which unidentified phenomena are visible

'Now we've got a few very bright particles or fragments or something that go drifting by as we maneuver,' Evans told the command center on Earth.

'Roger. Understand,' the center replied. 'There's a whole [bunch] of big ones on my window down there - just bright. It looks like the Fourth of July out of Ron's window,' Schmitt added.

Evans reported: 'Yes. Now you can see some of them in shape. They're very jagged, angular fragments that are tumbling.'

The astronauts revealed that right after they fired their thrusters to change direction, the crew began to see the bright particles and jagged, angular fragments drifting past the windows.

Jack says it looks like the 'Fourth of July' out Evans' window, with big bright pieces tumbling slowly around the capsule.

The astronauts were also recorded describing the strange objects as pieces of something solid, not fluid, very bright, and mostly moving with the spacecraft but with occasional faster ones zipping by. Evans reported taking pictures of them.

This archival photograph depicts the lunar surface as viewed from the landing site of Apollo 12. This image features highlighted areas above the horizon in which unidentified phenomena are visible

Three years earlier, the Apollo 12 moon mission also reported strange sightings as they neared the lunar surface.

The Trump administration's third batch of UFO files, released on June 12, included recorded NASA briefings after Apollo 16, which referred to an 'alien starbase' on the dark side of the moon. 

The comments were not included in the official transcript from the 1972 mission.

Apollo 16 flew from April 16 to April 27, 1972, and saw astronauts John Young and Charles Duke become the first humans to explore the moon's rugged highlands while Thomas 'Ken' Mattingly remained in lunar orbit.

Buried within the 55-minute discussion is a brief exchange about unusual gravity readings, laser measurements and unexplained anomalies detected on the moon's far side.

The speakers focus on what one participant describes as a 'great big hole' near the Van de Graaff crater, a distinctive lunar formation known for unusual magnetic and geochemical characteristics.

'On the backside of the moon around Fendi graph, that's where we get our big hole,' one speaker says.

The discussion then takes an unexpected turn.

'It could be an alien star base or something. Anyway, the next slide shows the front side of the moon.'

The remark appears amid a broader technical discussion of lunar data and anomalies, although the context of the comment remains unclear from the audio alone.

{ https://www.dailymail.com/sciencetech/index.html }

240,000 Miles From Earth, The Moon’s First Spaceport Prepares For A New Era Of Space Travel

Engineers have created a traffic management framework to help future spacecraft safely operate around NASA’s lunar Gateway.

Written by Kouceila Rekik

© Credit: NASA

At nearly 240,000 miles from Earth, engineers have designed a new orbital traffic framework that could shape the future of lunar exploration. A research team from Texas A&M University, NASA’s Johnson Space Center and Purdue University developed mathematical strategies to coordinate spacecraft around NASA’s Gateway lunar station.

A Lunar Airport Without Runways or Control Towers

The planned Gateway station will not resemble an airport on Earth, yet its operations will require a similar level of coordination. Instead of aircraft following visible taxiways, spacecraft will move through invisible pathways shaped by the gravitational forces of the Earth, the moon and deep space. Future missions could include Orion crew capsules, robotic cargo vehicles and large lunar landers arriving at different times while sharing the same orbital environment. Engineers must determine where visiting spacecraft can safely wait before docking or beginning their next maneuver. The research focuses on creating predictable patterns for vehicles operating near the station.

The study introduces operational strategies for spacecraft that need to remain nearby without immediately approaching the station. These techniques are designed to reduce uncertainty during busy mission periods when several vehicles may be active around Gateway. The researchers compared different positioning methods through thousands of computer simulations that included navigation errors, small propulsion variations and realistic mission disturbances. Their results showed that carefully planned orbital spacing can improve safety while limiting additional fuel consumption. The goal is to create a reliable system before lunar activity reaches a scale where uncontrolled traffic becomes a serious operational challenge.

“The future of lunar exploration depends as much on the traffic management as it does on the rocket science,” said Dr. Diane Davis, associate professor of space engineering at the Texas A&M University College of Engineering, and an author of the study.

At nearly 240,000 miles from Earth, the moon is getting its first spaceport, Gateway — and engineers developed the mathematical flight manual and orbital “rules of the road” for multiple spacecraft to safely share one of the most challenging environments ever considered for human exploration.
Credit: Texas A&M University College of Engineering/Dr. Diane C. Davis

The Unusual Orbit Shaping Lunar Operations

The traffic challenge comes from the unique path chosen for Gateway. The station will operate in a Near Rectilinear Halo Orbit (NRHO), a highly elongated trajectory around the moon that takes advantage of gravitational interactions between Earth and the moon. The orbit passes close to the lunar north pole before extending far beyond the south pole region. This path offers communication advantages and reduces the amount of propulsion needed to maintain the station’s position.

“The Gateway NRHO is a nearly stable and highly elongated orbit around the moon that provides an uninterrupted line of sight for communications to Earth and requires little propellant to maintain,” Davis said.

The same characteristics that make the orbit useful also create operational difficulties. Spacecraft traveling through the NRHO are constantly influenced by changing gravitational forces, meaning that small differences in timing and position can become significant over time. A single spacecraft can perform occasional corrections, but multiple vehicles arriving during the same mission window require coordinated planning. The research published in Acta Astronautica examines how future missions can maintain safe distances while keeping vehicles close enough for efficient operations.

The team describes the challenge as a balance between safety and efficiency. Spacecraft cannot simply stop in place like aircraft at an airport gate. Instead, they must follow carefully calculated trajectories while waiting for docking opportunities. The researchers explored ways to create predictable spacecraft formations that could support regular lunar transportation.

Gateway and space vehicles will travel along a celestial highway called a Near Rectilinear Halo Orbit; an egg-shaped orbit swooping within 1,000 miles of the moon’s north pole, before swinging back out again nearly 40,000 miles beyond its south pole.

Credit: NASA

Spacecraft Waiting in a “String of Pearls” Formation

A central concept in the study is spacecraft loitering, a method that allows vehicles to remain positioned near a target orbit while waiting for their next operation. This could become a key part of future lunar logistics, where missions may need to arrive at different times and coordinate complex transfers.

“Loitering in space means maintaining a spacecraft relative to a specific orbit or trajectory without executing an immediate maneuver,” Davis said.

The researchers compare this idea to aircraft waiting patterns, where planes maintain safe positions until they receive permission to land. Around the moon, the process is far more complex because every spacecraft continues moving along its trajectory. The team developed strategies that allow vehicles to remain close to Gateway while reducing the risk of dangerous approaches.

The simulations showed that spacecraft could organize into a formation similar to a “string of pearls,” with vehicles positioned along the lunar orbit at carefully selected locations. This arrangement would allow mission planners to predict where each spacecraft should be and when it could approach the station. Such predictability could improve docking schedules, cargo transfers and crew operations during future Artemis missions.

“Collisions and serious damage could happen. To ensure crew safety and mission success, effective traffic management in the NRHO is needed,” Davis said.

“Every maneuver has a cost,” Davis said. “Just like air traffic control on Earth, spacecraft need predictable positions and paths to safely coordinate their movements.”

{ https://dailygalaxy.com/category/news/ }

4 Black Spheres Found 4 Miles Beneath the Pacific Contained Bizarre, Alien-Like Creatures Inside

These black spheres from nearly 4 miles beneath the Pacific conceal fragile creatures with biology scientists did not expect to find in the abyss.

 Written by Arezki Amiri

© Their Contents Set A New Record.

Credit: Shutterstock

At nearly 4 miles below the Pacific, even basic facts about animal life are difficult to establish. The seafloor is sampled rarely, and fragile animals may never survive the trip to the surface.

Now, direct evidence has come from a handful of black spherical capsules attached to rocks, showing that free-living flatworms reproduce at more than 6,000 meters deep. In a paper published in Biology Letters, researchers described cocoons recovered from the abyssal slope of the Kuril-Kamchatka Trench in the northwestern Pacific, at depths of 6,176 to 6,200 meters.

Against that background, marine biologist Sylvia Earle told EL PAÍS that “we know the surface of Mars better than our ocean floors.” Her point was broader than these worms, but it captures the difficulty researchers face when studying animals living thousands of meters below the surface.

Scientists opened four jet-black eggs from 6,200 meters down and found a creature never seen before

Four Capsules Survived the Trip

At first, most of the capsules were already damaged. Researchers found many dark spherical bodies on rock fragments, but most had been torn open and were empty. Only four intact cocoons were available for close examination.

On Sept. 21, 2023, the rocks were collected during a cruise of the research vessel Hakuho-maru. According to the peer-reviewed account, researchers used a beam trawl to recover the two rock fragments carrying the capsules. That detail matters because some later reports described the samples as having been retrieved by a remotely operated vehicle, an account that does not match the methods section of the paper.

Above are the egg capsules, or cocoons. (A) Egg capsules on rock fragment. (B) Partly opened egg capsule containing three spherical-stage flatworms. (C) Spherical-stage flatworm extracted from egg capsule. (D) Cracked egg capsule containing seven flatworms. (E) The same, half of egg capsule shell removed. (F) Flatworm extracted from egg capsule. Credit: Kakui and Tsuyuki/Biology Letters

At Hokkaido University, invertebrate researcher Keiichi Kakui, who helped examine the cocoons and embryos, did not initially recognize the objects. He told IFLScience, “I thought they may be protists or something.” Then he opened one: “I cut one of them, and a milky liquid-like thing leaked from it,” Kakui said.

Inside were pale, fragile flatworms.

Working with co-author Aoi Tsuyuki, Kakui found that, where measurements were available, the capsules measured about 3.1 to 3.3 millimeters and each held three to seven embryos; while some embryos were still roughly spherical, others were already shaped like worms, forms the researchers interpreted as earlier and later developmental stages.

What the researchers found inside

Back at Hokkaido University, researchers cracked open the intact capsules to see what was inside. What came out wasn't liquid or sediment. It was tiny, fragile white organisms, three to seven of them packed into each egg. Once the team looked closer, they realized these were developing flatworms, still at early embryonic stages.

Genetic testing on the embryos confirmed they belonged to the order Tricladida, a group of flatworms, but represented a previously undocumented species. Scientists say the closest known relatives of this species live in much shallower coastal waters, not the crushing depths of the abyssal zone.

That is what makes the discovery notable. Before this, the deepest confirmed record for a free-living flatworm sat at a little over 5,200 meters, and even that case had some doubt attached to it since the specimen had drifted down attached to sunken wood. This new find is the real deal: a flatworm living, laying eggs, and reproducing at depth on its own.

The surprising part: the flatworms changed little

You'd expect an animal thriving in one of the most extreme environments on the planet to look drastically different from its shallow-water cousins. That's not really what happened here.

Genetic analysis of the eggs showed that these deep-sea flatworms develop in a way that's strikingly similar to flatworms living in tide pools and coastal reefs just a few meters underwater. Same basic body plan, same general reproductive strategy, just relocated to a spot with none of the light, warmth, or oxygen levels those shallow-water relatives are used to.

Researchers involved in the study suggest these points to something interesting about evolution: sometimes survival in an extreme environment doesn't require reinventing the biological playbook. It just requires the existing one to be tough enough to handle new conditions.

DNA Narrowed the Identity

To work out what the animals were, the team extracted DNA from two specimens, one spherical and one worm-shaped. They compared sequences from genes commonly used to reconstruct evolutionary relationships and also prepared one specimen as microscopic sections just 7 micrometers thick.

In the genetic analysis, the worms fell within Maricola, a small group within the flatworm order Tricladida. The paper notes that Maricola contains about 80 described species and that nearly all comparable members represented in genetic databases came from freshwater, brackish or shallow marine habitats. From that pattern, the researchers suggested that the lineage may have expanded from coastal waters into the abyss

ML tree for triclad platyhelminths.

Credit: Kakui and Tsuyuki/Biology Letters

Using DNA, the team also connected the different-looking embryos. The sequences showed only minor variation consistent with members of the same species, supporting the conclusion that the spherical and worm-shaped specimens represented different points in development rather than different kinds of animal. The authors concluded that at least two adults had laid them. On the same rock, genetically distinct individuals appeared among the cocoons.

The Previous Record Was Far Shallower

Before the new specimens were analyzed, the deepest certain record cited for a free-living flatworm was Oligocladus voightae, collected at 3,232 meters. That’s a long way down. The species was described in a 2006 Zootaxa paper on deep-sea polyclad flatworms from the North Pacific.

Although researchers had reported a possible flatworm from sunken wood at more than 5,200 meters, that record was uncertain because the animal itself was not firmly established as a flatworm and the wood could have carried an organism downward after sinking.

Cocoons fixed to rocks at abyssal depth provide stronger evidence that the newly examined worms were actually reproducing there.

An Ordinary Start in Extreme Water

More unexpectedly, the embryos themselves showed “no obvious differences” from developmental stages already known in other triclads, the authors wrote, despite living under enormous pressure in permanent darkness.

From that comparison, Kakui and Tsuyuki proposed that adapting to the abyss may have involved physiological or ecological changes more than fundamental changes to early development. Their shallow-water relatives also enclose embryos in capsules attached to hard surfaces, and the deep-sea specimens appear to follow much the same basic plan.

As the sampling gear operated, video showed a muddy seabed scattered with rocks and gravel. The researchers suggested those hard surfaces could provide places for the flatworms to attach their cocoons, including the rock fragment that returned to the surface carrying seven late-stage embryos.

The next clues are likely to arrive the same way: attached to whatever researchers manage to bring back from the abyss.

Why does this actually matter to you

It's easy to see a headline like this and file it under "cool but irrelevant," but it's worth a second look.

Humans have mapped more of the surface of Mars than we have of our own ocean floor. However, the deep ocean remains one of the least explored environments on the planet, even though it's right here.

Each discovery like this expands what scientists think is possible for life under extreme depth, pressure, and cold. That has real implications beyond marine biology, too. NASA and other space agencies are increasingly interested in icy moons like Europa and Enceladus, which may hide oceans under their frozen surfaces. Understanding how life adapts, or doesn't need to adapt much at all, to darkness and pressure here on Earth gives scientists a better framework for what to look for out there.

The bottom line

Four small black eggs, pulled up almost by accident from one of the least explored corners of the planet, ended up rewriting what scientists thought they knew about how deep flatworms can live. According to the report of the research published in Phys. org, the discovery gives scientists their first real window into how these animals develop at extreme depth, and the early signs suggest life down there is more resilient and more familiar than expected.

The coverage says the eggs were first spotted by Yasunori Kano while he was piloting a remotely operated vehicle in the Kuril-Kamchatka Trench, then passed to Keiichi Kakui and Aoi Tsuyuki for closer study. Their follow-up work found each capsule held several flatworms and used genetic analysis to place them with shallow-water relatives, suggesting a surprisingly conservative body plan even at 6,200 meters.

{ https://dailygalaxy.com/category/science/ }

The World’s Oldest Monument Was Not in Egypt, It Was Hidden in an American Swamp for More Than 5,000 Years

For more than 5,000 years, this forgotten site remained concealed beneath the landscape. When researchers began uncovering its secrets, they found a story that changed the way we understand ancient builders.

Written by Melissa Ait Lounis

© Credit: Shutterstock

A 5,400-year-old monumental mound complex hidden in the wetlands of Louisiana has changed the way archaeologists view ancient construction. Watson Brake shows that hunter-gatherer communities created a monumental landscape nearly 2,000 years before the oldest pyramids of Egypt.

For decades, the earthworks remained almost invisible beneath trees, roots, and swamp vegetation in the Ouachita River Valley. The discovery revealed that communities without agriculture or permanent settlements could still organize large-scale construction projects.

The story of this monument began in 1981, when amateur archaeologist Reca Jones noticed that several exposed formations in the landscape appeared too structured to be natural. After logging activity cleared parts of the area, Jones identified eleven mounds connected by ridges and arranged in a circular pattern.

The discovery later drew the attention of archaeologist Joe Saunders, who studied the site while researching other ancient earthworks in Louisiana. At the time, Poverty Point was considered one of the region’s oldest major mound complexes, but Watson Brake revealed an even earlier chapter of human activity.

Dating Reveals A Lost Ancient Project

Research carried out during the 1990s transformed the understanding of Watson Brake. Radiocarbon dating showed that the complex was built around 3400 B.C.E. and developed over approximately four centuries. A 1997 study published in Science by Joe Saunders and soil scientist Thurman Allen reported that Watson Brake was older than other known mound complexes with earthen enclosures in North America by about 1,900 years.

The researchers also discovered that the soil beneath the mounds had been deliberately compacted, which helped preserve the structures over thousands of years. The layout of the site indicated careful organization, with builders aligning parts of the complex with the surrounding landscape before adding more mounds and connecting ridges.

_{Topographic map of the Watson Brake mound complex in Louisiana. Credit: Science}

The largest mound reached about 25 feet in height. Archaeologists estimate that the construction of the mounds and ridges required around 100,000 hours of labor, showing a significant level of cooperation among the people who built the site.

A Monument Built By Ancient Hunter-Gatherers

The builders of Watson Brake monument belonged to the Evans culture, a Paleoindian population that depended on seasonal movement, hunting, fishing, and gathering resources rather than farming. The archaeological evidence shows that the site was used by communities that collected aquatic resources and plant species. The research described inhabitants who gathered plants that later became among the first domesticated species in eastern North America.

Artifacts discovered at Watson Brake include projectile points, hunting tools, animal remains, shells, gravel used as cooking stones, charred seeds, and fired earth objects that may have served as early pottery.

Map of the Watson Brake mound complex in Louisiana.

Credit: American Antiquity

The site challenged the traditional idea that monumental architecture only emerged after agriculture created permanent settlements and social hierarchies. Watson Brake demonstrated that mobile communities could also coordinate major building efforts through collective action.

A Hidden Discovery From The Ancient World

Archaeologists believe the site functioned as a seasonal gathering place rather than a permanent settlement. The remains found at the site suggest that groups returned repeatedly to the area for shared activities. The construction does not appear to have been directed by a ruler or centralized authority. Instead, the evidence points to a large community effort involving many individuals working toward a common goal.

The significance of Watson Brake continued after its discovery encouraged further research into ancient landscapes across the region. In 2022, experts identified the Monte Sano mounds near Baton Rouge as even older, dating back around 7,000 years.

Still, Watson Brake remains a key archaeological site because it revealed that complex organization existed among ancient communities long before the development of farming societies. A landscape once hidden under forest and wetlands preserved evidence of one of North America’s earliest monumental construction projects.

RELATED VIDEOS

{ https://dailygalaxy.com/category/news/ }

On February 17, 1994, astronomer Ann Harch was examining photographs of the asteroid Ida captured in August 1993 by the Galileo spacecraft. In these images, she observed an unusual feature — specifically, that this celestial body possessed a moon. Consequently, a spacecraft that was not initially intended for asteroid exploration made one of the most significant discoveries of the late 20th century.

The asteroids Ida and Dactyl. Source: Wikipedia

The first moon of an asteroid

On August 28, 1993, the American spacecraft Galileo approached asteroid (243) Ida to a distance of 2,410 kilometers. This event marked only the second occasion on which a spacecraft had approached a small celestial body within the Solar System. The first instance occurred two years earlier, when the same probe visited asteroid Gaspra.

However, this flyby attained significant notoriety on February 17, 1994, when researcher Ann Garch observed a mysterious spot in the photographs captured by the spacecraft. It was subsequently identified as the first known moon of the asteroid.

Until that time, scientists could only debate whether such small objects could possess their own moons or whether their gravitational forces were insufficient to do so. The prevailing consensus was that they could not. However, the discovery of an asteroid measuring 1.6 km in diameter, named Dactyl, profoundly altered this perspective. Subsequently, scientists gradually realized that binary and triple asteroid systems are, in fact, quite common phenomena, and occasionally, they display configurations far more astonishing than those observed in the larger planets.

Galileo spacecraft. Source: Wikipedia

Galileo spacecraft

The most intriguing aspect of the Galileo spacecraft is that, initially, it was not designed for asteroid exploration. Its development commenced in 1959, prior to the inaugural human spaceflight, when American engineers initiated a program to explore Jupiter. This program comprised four phases: a mission to test the feasibility of deep-space travel, a close flyby of the planet, insertion of a spacecraft into Jupiter’s orbit, and a descent attempt into Jupiter’s depths utilizing a parachute.

In the early 1970s, subsequent to the successful flybys of the Solar System’s largest planet by the Pioneer 10 and Pioneer 11 spacecraft, it became evident that interplanetary missions were entirely feasible. Consequently, the necessity for a dedicated flyby mission equipped with advanced instrumentation was recognized. This responsibility was delegated to the Voyager 1 and Voyager 2 spacecraft.

Simultaneously, discussions commenced concerning the necessity of proceeding with the deployment of an orbital observer and an atmospheric probe. Moreover, it was promptly proposed that the two missions should be integrated into a single mission, given that this methodology had demonstrated success during the Mariner program. Specifically, after reaching orbit, the probe would detach from the spacecraft, enter the planet’s atmosphere, and descend via parachute.

Given that Jupiter lacks a solid surface, no plans were devised to land on it; rather, the spacecraft was intended to remain in orbit to accumulate scientific data for the longest feasible duration, despite being continually subjected to extreme temperatures and pressure.

The Galileo spacecraft is situated within the assembly hall. Source: Wikipedia.

It was immediately decided that the spacecraft would be constructed using the same Mariner platform, which had demonstrated its reliability effectively. However, in practice, the design process did not commence until the late 1970s, following the successful missions of Voyager 1 and Voyager 2 to Jupiter.

Subsequently, the construction of the probe commenced, and it was shortly thereafter named Galileo in recognition of the esteemed Italian astronomer Galileo Galilei. The spacecraft was notably substantial, standing 5 meters tall and weighing 2,223 kilograms, with 339 kilograms attributed to the atmospheric probe and 925 kilograms allocated for fuel.

Galileo was equipped with eleven scientific instruments, comprising a camera mounted to the telescope, infrared and ultraviolet spectrographs, a photopolarimeter, high-energy particle detectors, among others. All of these devices were designed for the inaugural investigation of a gas giant.

To deploy such a substantial object onto an interplanetary trajectory, a large booster known as the Inertial Upper Stage (IUS) was developed. Originally, it consisted of a three-stage rocket. Its distinctive feature was its capacity to be utilized not only as the upper stage of a heavy-lift rocket but also to be transported into orbit within the cargo bay of the Space Shuttle and subsequently installed manually for launch. This approach was designed to enhance the overall reliability of the operation. This was precisely the method intended for the launch of Galileo.

Design of the Galileo spacecraft. Source: Wikipedia

In accordance with the original plan, the spacecraft’s voyage to Jupiter was intended to be relatively swift. It was scheduled to arrive at Mars within a six-month timeframe, execute a gravity assist maneuver in its vicinity, then accelerate and proceed toward the gas giant.

Launch postponement

Initially, Galileo was scheduled to launch into space as early as 1982. However, shuttle launches did not occur as frequently as anticipated, and the three-stage configuration of the IUS was deemed excessively costly and large. Its practical application in conjunction with a reusable spaceplane could have introduced considerably more challenges than advantages.

Engineers commenced deliberations on potential replacements. The launch was delayed until 1984, and support for the project diminished. At one stage, experts favored maintaining the route via Mars but proposed launching the orbital and atmospheric probes separately, with a one-month interval.

A model of the Galileo spacecraft affixed to the Centaur module. Source: Wikipedia

Nevertheless, it was universally recognized that such a decision heightened the likelihood of an accident. Consequently, during the deliberations, they revisited the concept of launching via the Space Shuttle as a singular integrated mission, incorporating a gravity assist maneuver proximal to Mars, this time utilizing the Centaur booster. 

Nevertheless, the project persisted in facing scrutiny due to its substantial expenses, intricate design, and the limited scope of scientific findings available at that time. Consequently, the researchers proposed investigating one of the asteroids within the Main Belt during the spacecraft’s ongoing mission. This approach was considered particularly viable, as the onboard instrumentation was appropriately equipped to undertake the study.

Amphitrite was determined to be an asteroid, characterized by its substantial dimensions of 223 × 212 × 193 km. Its alternative options included Yi Qing and Britta. Nevertheless, despite the potential benefit of exploring two targets with Britta, precedence was assigned to a single, larger target.

The rationale behind this was that during the early 1980s, NASA maintained the belief that close flybys of asteroids ought to be avoided. Concerns existed regarding the presence of dust and small rocks in the vicinity, which could potentially damage the spacecraft.

Space Shuttle Atlantis. Source: Wikipedia

This is precisely the reason why the study plans for these objects during Galileo’s flyby presumed that the spacecraft would not approach closer than a few thousand kilometers. Consequently, for asteroids measuring only a few kilometers in diameter, it would be impossible to discern any details.

Taking all these factors into consideration, a revised plan was formulated, stipulating that Galileo was to be launched during the STS-61-G mission on May 20, 1986, aboard the Space Shuttle Atlantis. However, circumstances beyond control thwarted the realization of these plans. On January 28, another shuttle, the Challenger, tragically exploded during launch, leading to the suspension of the entire space shuttle program. 

The engineers thoroughly examined all potential safety protocols and determined that launching the Centaur-G module from the shuttle was excessively hazardous. It was the Centaur-G that was intended to propel Galileo toward Mars for subsequent arrival at Jupiter.

The launch of the shuttle carrying the Galileo spacecraft. Source: Wikipedia.

The developers once again commenced reevaluating methodologies to reach Jupiter. They revisited the concept of utilizing the IUS, which, by that time, was already deployed in space in its two-stage configuration. Its propulsion was insufficient to accelerate Galileo, leading NASA to revise its trajectory entirely. Instead of proceeding to Mars, the spacecraft was designated to fly to Venus, execute a gravity assist maneuver in its vicinity, as well as perform relatively close approaches to the Sun, before returning to Earth twice prior to proceeding towards Jupiter from that point.

All of this extended the flight duration to 6 years; however, it still permitted the spacecraft to safely accelerate to the necessary velocity. Nevertheless, its challenges during the journey to space did not cease there.

In the mid-1970s, during the initial phase of Galileo’s development, it was quite common to consider utilizing a radioisotope thermoelectric generator as its power source. However, in 1978, a Soviet satellite equipped with an identical device experienced a crash in Canada, resulting in widespread radiation contamination over a large area. The subsequent year, the Three Mile Island nuclear incident took place, and by the early 1980s, fears related to radiation began to intensify. This apprehension peaked following the Chernobyl Nuclear Power Plant disaster in April 1986, just three months subsequent to the Challenger catastrophe. Consequently, many individuals started to perceive Galileo not as a significant scientific milestone, but rather as a hazardous source of radiation.

Galileo is preparing to depart from the cargo bay of the shuttle Atlantis. Source: Wikipedia

The protests by environmental activists did not accelerate the launch into space. The space shuttle Atlantis, carrying the probe, was not launched until October 18, 1989. Subsequently, on October 19, the probe ignited its IUS main engine and commenced its journey to Venus.

On the way to the asteroids

On February 9, 1990, the Galileo spacecraft conducted a flyby of Venus at a distance of 16,106 kilometers. By that time, the planet had been relatively well examined by other spacecraft; however, the infrared cameras continued to be capable of discerning portions of the planet’s night side beneath a dense cloud cover, thereby facilitating the mapping of its terrain.

Furthermore, the spacecraft analyzed the shock wave generated in the direction of the planet’s orbital motion as a result of the interaction between its magnetic field and solar wind particles. The findings indicate that this shock wave is exceedingly weak, thereby permitting radiation to penetrate the planet’s gaseous envelope. Additionally, lightning discharges were observed within the atmosphere itself.

Venus, photographed by the Galileo spacecraft. Source: Wikipedia

Subsequently, on April 11, one of the mission’s most pivotal events was scheduled to occur — the deployment of the primary antenna. This substantial structure was engineered to guarantee data transmission at a rate of 134,000 bits per second, even over several astronomical units. However, it was originally designed at a time when it was anticipated that the spacecraft would pass by Mars.

However, when the trajectory was altered to enable a pass by Venus, it became essential to shield the spacecraft from intense solar radiation. To accomplish this, a small protective shield was employed, kept closed until the spacecraft had traversed Venus. Communication was managed via a minor lateral antenna, and during the initial days of the mission, a respectable data transmission rate of 1,200 bits per second was maintained. Subsequently, this rate declined to 40 bits per second.

The entire team was eagerly anticipating April 11; however, they were unable to deploy the main Galileo antenna at that time or subsequently. Consequently, communication was maintained through a backup antenna, which had an exceptionally slow data transmission rate, thereby impacting all subsequent research.

On December 8, 1990, Galileo executed a gravitational maneuver during its pass by Earth. Subsequently, it completed an orbit around the Sun and made another close approach to Earth on December 8, 1992, before entering a trajectory directed towards Jupiter.

Galileo’s flight path. Source: Wikipedia

During its close approaches, the spacecraft conducted scientific research, notably studying Earth’s magnetosphere and observing high-altitude mesospheric clouds, which indicated processes contributing to the depletion of the ozone layer. Furthermore, scientists verified and confirmed the capability to detect signs of life on Earth from a spacecraft passing the planet. Galileo documented the absorption of atmospheric gases that matched their absorption by terrestrial flora.

Gaspra

On October 29, 1991, Galileo arrived at the intermediate destination of its mission—the asteroid Gaspra. This celestial body, measuring 18.2 × 10.5 × 8.9 km, was discovered as early as 1916 and was named after a village in Crimea. Following a review of the spacecraft’s flight plan by American experts after 1986, Gaspra’s advantageous position and comparatively substantial size rendered it the first asteroid target selected for close-up exploration by the spacecraft.

Gaspra possesses an orbital period of 3.29 Earth years. The aphelion of its orbit is situated at a distance of 2.6 astronomical units (AU), while the perihelion is positioned at 1.82 AU from the Sun. This asteroid is classified as a silicate type.

Photographs of the asteroid Gaspra captured from multiple distances. Source: Wikipedia

In October 1991, Galileo approached within a minimum distance of 1,600 km. Overall, it was able to capture 57 photographs of Gaspra, which, considering the slow data transmission and a flight velocity of approximately 8 km/s, represented a commendable achievement. The highest resolution among these photographs featured a resolution of 54 meters per pixel.

Ida and Dactyl

Finally, on August 28, 1993 — almost two years after the Gaspra flyby and four years after launch — Galileo approached Ida. Experts were uncertain until the very last moment whether the spacecraft could execute this maneuver. It was not until August 26, after verifying sufficient fuel to proceed to Jupiter’s orbit, that the command was issued to correct the course, resulting in Galileo’s encounter with Ida.

Once Around Ida and Dactyl

The asteroid Ida 243 was discovered prior to Gaspra, in 1884. It was named after a nymph from Greek mythology. By the time Ida was designated as a target for the spacecraft’s mission, its dimensions were already established as 59.8 × 25.4 × 18.6 kilometers. In terms of the Main Asteroid Belt, it is not considered a particularly small object.

Ida orbits in a nearly circular trajectory with an aphelion of 2.98 AU and a perihelion of 2.74 AU. Its orbital period spans 1,767 days. Spectrographic analyses indicate that it is a silicate asteroid. Galileo approached it at a considerable relative velocity of 12.4 km/s. Nonetheless, scientists were well-prepared for this event, and imaging was conducted from a distance of 240,350 km until the point of closest approach. As a result, they were able to observe 95% of the asteroid’s surface with clarity.

Photos of Ida taken from various distances. Source: Wikipedia

For the first time, scientists had the opportunity to conduct geological studies of such a body and discovered that Ida’s chemical and mineralogical composition is extraordinarily similar to that of ordinary chondrite meteorites, which fall to Earth in substantial quantities. This confirmation supports the hypothesis that large and small rocky bodies in space originate from a shared source.

They also established the asteroid’s mean density and observed that it is enveloped by a layer of regolith — debris and dust akin to that covering the Moon. This regolith has arisen from numerous collisions with other celestial bodies.

Evidence of impacts was also observed on Ida’s surface. It has been identified as one of the most heavily cratered objects within the Solar System. The largest crater measures approximately 12 km in diameter.

Furthermore, it has been established by researchers that solar radiation influences the surface. The older regions of the surface are observed to be more reddish compared to other areas. Overall, the Galileo investigation demonstrated that asteroids possess a considerably more intriguing history than was previously assumed.

Owing to persistent issues with the antenna, the transmission of images from Ida proceeded at an extremely slow pace and was not finalized until February 1994. It was during this period that a significant discovery was made: a moon was identified orbiting Ida, subsequently named Dactyl, in honor of the mythical people from Greek mythology.

Possible orbits of Dactyl. Source: Wikipedia

Dactyl measures 1,200 × 1,400 × 1,600 meters. It closely resembles Ida in terms of albedo and coloration, and, similar to Ida, is extensively cratered. It is believed to have formed concurrently with Ida as a consequence of the disintegration of a substantial parent body.

However, the precise nature of Dactyl’s orbit remains unidentified. It is acknowledged that establishing this orbit necessitates numerous observations; however, scientists presently possess only a limited number of images. From these, they have been able to approximate that Dactyl’s radius is approximately 90 km.

The entire history of the Galileo mission encompasses two decades and consequently illustrates the progression of our comprehension of asteroids. Initially envisioned as a spacecraft intended to avoid these ostensibly unremarkable yet hazardous objects, the probe ultimately evolved into the instrument that enabled scientists to explore the realm of space rocks and appreciate their remarkable nature.

However, Galileo’s journey did not conclude there. After departing from the asteroids, it proceeded to its primary objective — Jupiter. The spacecraft successfully entered orbit, deployed a probe into the planet’s atmosphere, and collected a wealth of valuable data. However, that is a separate chapter in its mission history.

• Posted in Articles

{ https://universemagazine.com/en/articles-en/ }

Kevin Randle | Strange Visitors: UFO Crash & Alien Body Retrievals, Abductions & Evidence

{ https://podfollow.com/ }

Trump’s UFO advisor says aliens wouldn’t care who the president is

The Trump administration has released five batches of UFO files so far

Josh Marcus in San Francisco

President Trump has made a point of releasing UFO-related materials to the public, but if little green men ever visit Earth they’re unlikely to care much about our politics or who is in the White House, according to one of the president’s advisors on UFOs.

“If someone arrives from the vast expanses of interstellar space, recognizing how humans divided up territory on Earth is a very low priority for them,” Avi Loeb, who leads the administration’s Unidentified Anomalous Phenomena (UAP) Science Advisory Council, told AlterNet this week. “They wouldn't care about the United States, and they wouldn't care who its president is.”

At the same time, Loeb said, if aliens were discovered or contacted during the Trump administration, that would define the president’s legacy forever.

“Obviously, for a president, it would be a great boon if, during his term, we discovered we're not alone — that we have a neighbor in our cosmic environment,” Loeb, a Harvard University physicist, told the outlet. “That kind of discovery would be remembered millions of years into the future. It's not like a dispute with another nation, which in a century will likely be forgotten. This would be a major discovery that shapes the future of humanity.”

The advisory council, announced in June, is part of the Trump administration’s larger effort to disclose more information about UAPs.

So far, the Pentagon has released five tranches of information to the public, though the materials have not revealed any new, definitive evidence of extraterrestrial life or technology. Instead, the releases consist of records tied to a mix of recent and decades-old mysterious encounters.

The administration is also working on a process to encourage government whistleblowers with information about UAPs to come forward without fear of violating non-disclosure agreements or other secrecy obligations.

Loeb’s selection as leader of the UAP advisory effort was somewhat controversial.

Despite his lengthy tenure as a top physicist, he has faced criticism from other scientists who have argued he has made premature claims about the possibility of alien life.

"I don't know what's going to come of this, but we're not going to get any closer to answering these questions with him in charge," Steve Desch, an Arizona State University astrophysicist, told The Associated Press in June.

Loeb, whose team has requested that the Pentagon declassify various UAP-related materials, has said he’s starting from the assumption that UAPs encountered around Earth are man-made phenomena until proven otherwise.

RELATED

{ https://www.the-independent.com/news/}

The lost city of Atlantis could be hidden beneath an undisclosed stretch of the Atlantic Ocean, a retired US Navy admiral has claimed.

Tim Gallaudet said he is working with researchers who believe detailed maps of the seabed contain features matching the legendary civilization’s ancient description.

Atlantis was described by the Greek philosopher Plato more than 2,000 years ago as a wealthy island empire with a capital built around rings of land and water.

According to the legend, violent earthquakes and floods swallowed the island in a single day and night. Plato’s Timaeus

‘We believe we found the region in the Atlantic. We have some proprietary bathymetry [underwater topography], and it’s very high resolution,' Gallaudet told Jesse Michels on the American Alchemy podcast. 'There are a lot of features that correspond to exactly how Plato described it.'

He said a well-funded researcher with a ship and a remotely operated underwater vehicle had expressed interest in hearing the team’s proposal.

But the location remains secret, with Gallaudet citing a nondisclosure agreement that prevents him from revealing the site.

Gallaudet's account describes a possible search target, not a confirmed discovery of Atlantis. 

The former Navy admiral shared a scan he said likely shows the lost city of Atlantis

Plato first introduced Atlantis in his dialogues Timaeus and Critias, written around 360 BC.

He described it as a technologically advanced society that existed 9,000 years before his time, placing it over 11,000 years ago.

Most historians and scientists have concluded that Plato's account of the lost kingdom of Atlantis was fictional. 

Gallaudet previously led the Navy’s oceanography work and served as acting administrator of the National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration (NOAA), and testified before Congress in November 2024 about Unidentified Anomalous Phenomena (UAP).

He had hinted at an underwater investigation in an August 2025 appearance on the Danny Jones podcast, saying: ‘We actually have a special project I can’t talk about.’

He described plans to map an ancient underwater site, examine it with a remotely operated vehicle and try to date it, but did not identify the location. 

It is unclear whether he was discussing the same site described to Michels.

In the interview on American Alchemy, Gallaudet said the team was using bathymetry, maps of underwater depths and terrain,  that he described as privately held and very high-resolution.

Gallaudet previously led the Navy’s oceanography work and  testified before Congress in November 2024 about Unidentified Anomalous Phenomena (UAP) 

He pointed to the dimensions of the canal system in Plato’s writings, saying features in the target area ‘correspond to exactly how Plato described it.’

However, he did not provide the measurements or identify the other features being compared.

In the earlier Jones interview, Gallaudet said he wanted to ‘see some data on Atlantis,’ adding: ‘I have a few leads.’

The current effort is being led by an emergency-room doctor who spent more than a decade gathering geological and archaeological information, Gallaudet said.

He did not name the doctor, but described how the researcher began reading Plato’s original dialogues in his spare time before bringing in specialist advisers.

Gallaudet said he also connected the researcher with physicist Max Derakhshani to explore using an algorithm that analyzes three-dimensional terrain data.

He believes the technique could help distinguish natural formations from artificial structures, although he did not report results establishing that the seabed features were man-made.

An expedition would allow the researchers to investigate the site directly, rather than relying on its appearance in maps.

Later in the interview, Gallaudet said deep-sea explorer Victor Vescovo had also heard the team’s presentation and expressed interest.

Plato first introduced Atlantis in his dialogues Timaeus and Critias, written around 360 BC

‘We gave him the presentation on Atlantis, and he said, “All right, I’m in,”’ Gallaudet recalled.

He did not announce a confirmed departure date for the proposed expedition.

Michels suggested the Azores as a possible location during the conversation, but Gallaudet did not confirm that the team’s target was there.

The Azores Plateau is a large, triangular underwater highland in the North Atlantic Ocean that supports the volcanic peaks of the Azores archipelago. 

Supporters of the Azores theory believe the islands are the surviving mountaintops of a vast landmass that sank beneath the Atlantic.

They point to the region’s position where three tectonic plates meet, the North American, Eurasian and African, as a possible connection to the catastrophic earthquakes described in Plato’s account.

Plato described it as a technologically advanced society that existed 9,000 years before his time, placing it over 11,000 years ago

Some also suggest that lower sea levels during the last ice age exposed a larger area of land that was later submerged, although this does not establish that the islands are the remains of Atlantis.

Gallaudet also argued that a rapid sinking of land could have submerged a city over years rather than millennia, although he did not disclose the geological mechanism behind that hypothesis.

The proposal rests on treating Plato’s account as a possible description of a real place, rather than simply a philosophical story.

RELATED

Lost City of Atlantis New Clues Revealed 2025 Discovery

The Lost City Of Atlantis Found Under the Ocean?! 🌊😱 #Shorts #history #mysteries #trending #atlantis

Atlantis Finally Found in the Middle of the Atlantic Ocean!?

{ https://www.dailymail.com/sciencetech/index.html }

Nepal's flood could just be the beginning: Maps reveal the glaciers around the world at risk of a similar disaster - with 15 million people in the danger zone

• READ MORE: Scientists blame climate change for Nepal's flash flood

By WILIAM HUNTER, SENIOR SCIENCE & TECHNOLOGY REPORTER

Hundreds of people have been killed, and more than 1,500 are still missing after devastating flash floods swept through the Nepal–Tibet border.

Scientists believe the disaster was triggered by the collapse of a glacier on the Langtang–Lirung mountain, which registered as a magnitude 5.2 earthquake.

Although it may take months of research to uncover the exact story, experts are already warning that this is 'not a one–off event'.

Dr Jonathan Carrivick, an expert on glacial flooding from the University of Leeds, told the Daily Mail: 'Climate change is warming the mountains, causing permafrost and glaciers to melt.'

According to the expert, this makes 'the likelihood of these sorts of events – possibly bigger – more frequent.'

Overall, researchers estimate that a whopping 15 million people worldwide are living in danger zones. 

While the Himalaya, Karakoram, Hindu Kush and neighbouring ranges in Asia are most at risk, people living in the US and Canada are also in danger.

'North America could experience something similar to what we see in Nepal today,' Dr Carrivick warned. 

As rescue efforts continue in the flood–hit regions of Nepal and Tibet, scientists have mapped which glaciers around the world could be at risk of a similar disaster. Pictured: Red regions show areas of high Glacial Lake Overflow Flood risk

High Mountain Asia is the most threatened region because it is rapidly warming, and hosts rapidly melting glaciers, growing meltwater lakes and some of the world's steepest mountains 

Hundreds of people have been killed, and more than 1,500 are still missing after devastating flash floods swept through the Nepal–Tibet border

Although scientists are still scrambling to understand the disaster, the current evidence suggests that Nepal's deadly floods are the consequence of glacial collapse.

Dr Carrivick says: 'This Nepal event appears to have been a massive rock failure that took a large part of the glacier with it.'

According to the research group Antarctic Glaciers, which combines the efforts of about 50 leading experts, initial analysis shows that there was a landslide and glacier collapse shortly before the flood.

This sent ice and rock cascading down the mountain, mixing with sediment left by previous floods, and temporarily blocking the Lhende Khola River.

That caused a large lake to temporarily form before it broke through in a devastating flood.

Deadly events exactly like this have happened in the past and are likely to keep happening with increasing regularity as climate change continues.

For example, in 2021, a massive rock and ice triggered a deadly debris flow that killed over 200 people and damaged two hydroelectric power plants.

Meanwhile, in Canada, a rockslide in 2020 saw 18 million cubic metres of stone cascade into a glacial lake, sending 100–metre–tall waves that scoured a 6–mile (10km) channel.

Outside of Asia, glaciers in the Alps are also putting many areas at high risk of Glacial Lake Outburst Floods 

The researchers note that the Andes is an area of risk that might have been greatly underappreciated in previous research

Scientists say that Nepal's flooding was not caused by a Glacial Lake Overflow Flood, but warn that this related risk is increasing all over the world. Pictured: Distribution of people at risk of glacial flooding 

What caused the flooding in Nepal and Tibet?

Scientists say that initial analysis the day after the flooding indicates a landslide and glacier collapse from the Langtang–Lirung mountain.

Ice and rock then cascaded down the mountain, mixing with further sediment and water as it travelled down–valley.

The landslide temporarily blocked the Lhende Khola River, causing a large lake to build before it broke through the dam and unleashed a massive flood.

Early reports suggested an earthquake was the trigger, but data now shows that a major rockfault leading to glacial collapse was the cause. 

Source: Antarctic Glaciers 

Scientists have also raised the alarm that mountainous regions are becoming increasingly at risk of a similar threat, known as a glacial lake outburst flood (GLOF).

This occurs when meltwater from a glacier forms a large lake at its base that is held back by a thin, unstable natural dam.

If the glacier collapses or the meltwater gets too high, that barrier can break, releasing a devastating cascade of water downhill.

Scientists do not currently believe that the deadly floods in Nepal and Tibet were caused by a GLOF, since satellite images do not show any major lakes forming in the area prior to the landslide.

However, glaciers around the world are now putting more people in danger of this form of flooding, which could prove just as, if not more, deadly than what has been seen in Nepal.

In their paper, published in Nature Communications, researchers used the latest modelling to map where this risk was highest.

They found that more than half of the 15 million people threatened by GLOFs live in just four countries: India, Pakistan, Peru, and China.

Populations in High Mountain Asia (HMA), which includes the Himalaya, Karakoram, Hindu Kush and neighbouring ranges, are most at risk.

Scientists currently believe that the floods were triggered by a rock slide that led to glacial collapse on the Langtang–Lirung mountain

Geological factors in the Himalayas lead to 'hazard cascades', chain reactions that release huge volumes of ice and water into populated areas – just like the recent disaster in Nepal

The countries most at risk of Glacial Lake Outburst Flooding

1. China
2. Pakistan
3. Peru
4. Canada
5. India
6. USA
7. Chile
8. Italy
9. Nepal
10. Columbia

Here, people are the most exposed on average and live closest to glacial lakes, with more than a million people living less than six miles (10km) from one.

This region is home to 62 per cent of all people exposed to GLOFs, with three million in India and two million in Pakistan.

Co–author Dr Matt Westoby, Associate Professor of Physical Geography at the University of Plymouth, told the Daily Mail: 'High Mountain Asia is one of the fastest warming regions globally.

'It hosts rapidly melting glaciers, growing meltwater lakes and some of the world’s steepest mountains.

'As the climate warms, shrinking glaciers and thawing frozen ground can destabilise mountain slopes, increasing the risk of rockfalls, landslides and avalanches.'

Dr Westoby adds that these can cause 'hazard cascades', chain reactions that release huge volumes of ice and water into populated areas – just like the recent disaster in Nepal.

However, the researchers note that the Andes is an area of risk that might have been greatly underappreciated in previous research.

The number of glacial lakes in this region has increased by 93 per cent since 1990, compared with just 37 per cent in HMA.

Peru ranks as the third most dangerous country globally, and two of the world's three most hazardous river basins are in the Andes: the Santa basin in Peru and the Beni basin in Bolivia.'

Co–author Professor Rachel Carr, a glaciologist from Newcastle University, told the Daily Mail: 'It is important to note that it’s not just rural populations at risk: major cities draw their water from Andean glaciers,' says Professor Carr.

But it isn't just these highly exposed regions that are at risk, as the researchers show that North America, particularly the Pacific Northwest and Canada, and the Alps are threatened by GLOFs.

Even though there is debate over whether GLOFs are becoming more frequent, it is certain that they are becoming more dangerous.

Read More

LIVE

•  Nepal flood LIVE: Fears of second tsunami as lake breaks its banks and locals run for high ground 

This is because the downstream populations are growing, putting more people and critical infrastructure at risk.

Part of what makes this so dangerous is that experts cannot say exactly where or when the next devastating flood will strike.

Professor Carr says: 'Usually, larger events are rarer and smaller events happen more frequently, but there is a random nature to them, especially when they are triggered by events such as landslides.

'Thus it’s likely one of a similar scale [to Nepal] will occur in the future, but when and where is much harder to say.'

NEW DETAILS: Glacial collapse triggers CATASTROPHIC floods near China-Nepal border

Nepal Flash Floods: Himalayas In Crisis, Melting Ice, Flash Floods And A Climate Warning

{https://www.dailymail.com/sciencetech/index.html }

UAP Disclosure | From Hype to Silence: What Happened?

popular

A wave of excitement once surrounded the Trump administration's initiative to reveal Unidentified Aerial Phenomena (UAP) information, yet only a few months later, the conversation has nearly vanished. The hype peaked with expectations for substantial revelations, but the reality is starkly different.

Initial Excitement

When the push for UAP disclosure began, many believed this could fundamentally change the understanding of UFOs. Hushed discussions about hidden truths promised a groundbreaking reveal. However, once the initial releases occurred, they failed to deliver the expected level of intrigue.

• Previously Known Material: Much of what was released consisted of information already available in other forms.

• Unresolved Cases: The released content did not clarify long-standing mysteries, leaving many disappointed.

• Lack of Compelling Evidence: Footage and documents shared failed to establish anything out of the ordinary.

The sentiment among people has soured significantly. One person remarked, ">> "They fed us a bunch of bull and people are disillusioned now." Indeed, perceptions shifted from hope to skepticism.

Disappointment Sets In

With a lack of groundbreaking evidence, some say expectations have been shattered. Skeptics are vocal, suggesting that the administration might not hold any verifiable information. "If what they’ve released is all they’ve been hiding, then there’s really nothing to disclose at all," shared a concerned commentator.

Furthermore, the frustrations didn't stop there.

People have expressed that the entire disclosure process seems like a distraction from more pressing issues. One user cynically pointed out:

">> "Disclosure was just another distraction from bigger problems."

Despite continued calls for transparency, many say it feels as if the movement is on life support.

Emerging Theories and Public Sentiment

The remaining discussion revolves around questions more than answers. A number of individuals speculate if an overarching narrative is being spun to confuse the public.

• Corporate Control?: Some comment on a "cabal" controlling the narrative, alluding to hidden motives behind the government’s reluctance to release substantial evidence.

• Expectation vs. Reality: There seems to be a divide between what enthusiasts hoped for and what has actually come to light. One individual mentioned,

">> "Expectations were met with mediocre dots no real confirmation."

Additionally, the shared experiences of military personnel encountering unexplained aerial phenomena, like sightings of orbs displaying unusual abilities, still evoke fascination, although they lack official acknowledgment or rigorous investigation.

Key Takeaways

• 📉 Declining Interest: Interest in UAP disclosure has plummeted due to underwhelming revelations and a lack of compelling evidence.

• 🔍 Continued Calls for Transparency: Despite ongoing demands for full disclosure, many feel the government downplays the matter.

• 🤔 Distrust in Processes: Heightened skepticism about the sincerity of the UAP disclosure movement persists, with crowds questioning the motives behind released information.

As the conversation dies down, it raises an important question: could such a pivotal movement die from stagnation when the truth remains obscured? With expectations unmet, many are left to wonder if the phenomena will ever get the serious treatment they believe is due.

Predictions on the Horizon

Moving forward, there’s a strong chance that interest in UAP disclosures will continue to decline as disillusioned people seek answers elsewhere. Experts estimate around 65% of individuals may shift their focus to other current events, leaving the UAP conversation largely unattended. However, a smaller cohort might remain dedicated to pressing for transparency, potentially leading to minor policy changes or new initiatives aimed at restoring credibility. The chance for grassroots movements or forums to organize around this topic might rise, but without compelling evidence, substantial reforms will likely remain elusive.

Echoes from the Past

Consider the slow unearthing of the Watergate scandal in the 1970s, which initially seemed mundane and straightforward, much like the early UAP disclosures. The public’s patience waned as early revelations fell flat, but as more substantive evidence surfaced, the situation morphed into a significant political upheaval. Today’s UAP narrative might require similar persistence from the public to press for the truth; even the most mundane beginnings can sometimes lead to the most transformative revelations. Just as a dam can hold back water until the pressure grows too great, the UAP disclosure movement might yet yield deeper truths if enough voices keep pushing for accountability.

RELATED

{ https://mysterylores.com/ }

A Brief Look at Angelology: The Study of Angels

by Steve Paslow

Angels have fascinated humanity for millennia, serving as powerful symbols of hope, protection, and divine intervention. Rooted in the spiritual traditions of numerous cultures and religions, angels are typically regarded as celestial beings who act as intermediaries between the divine and humanity. Angels are often sent to deliver divine messages, as seen in the Annunciation to Mary. Guardian angels are believed to watch over individuals, protecting them from harm. Angels offer spiritual guidance, helping individuals align with their higher purpose.  Archangel Michael is often depicted as a warrior leading the battle against evil.

In Judaism-Angels, or mal’akhim (messengers), are prominent in Jewish tradition. They serve as messengers, protectors, and executors of God’s will. Famous examples include: Michael, the archangel who leads God’s armies against evil. Raphael, associated with healing in the Book of Tobit. Gabriel, who interpreted visions for the prophet Daniel. Uriel, a very helpful angel who is often associated with guarding The Tree of Life with a flaming sword after Adam and Eve were expelled from Eden, inspecting the door of Egyptian homes for lamb’s blood over the Passover Plague, and providing guidance and enlightenment to individual like the prophet Ezra through visions and revelations.  The Jewish mysticism of the Kabbalah expands on angelic hierarchies, with ten orders, such as Seraphim, Cherubim, and Ophanim.

Christianity-Angels are deeply embedded in Christian theology, serving as God’s messengers and agents of divine will. The New Testament features angels prominently, such as Gabriel announcing the birth of Jesus to Mary and the angels who appeared at Christ’s resurrection. The Christian angelic hierarchy, outlined by Pseudo-Dionysius the Areopagite, includes nine choirs of angels divided into three spheres: First Sphere: Seraphim, Cherubim, Thrones. Second Sphere: Dominions, Virtues, Powers. Third Sphere: Principalities, Archangels, Angels.

Descriptions of Angels-Appearance: Angels are often described as radiant, winged beings with human-like forms. However, their depictions vary: The Seraphim are described as fiery beings with six wings. The Cherubim have multiple faces (human, lion, ox, and eagle) and are often associated with guarding sacred spaces. The Ophanim, or “wheels,” are mysterious beings described in Ezekiel’s vision as wheels within wheels covered with eyes. Symbolism: Wings symbolize their swiftness and connection to the heavens, while their light or radiance represents purity and divinity.

Archangel Gabriel: The Divine Messenger Archangel Gabriel, whose name means “God is my strength,” holds a revered place in religious traditions as a celestial messenger and herald of divine truth. As one of the most prominent archangels in Christian, and Jewish traditions, Gabriel is celebrated for playing pivotal roles in delivering important messages from the Divine to humanity. He is perhaps best known for announcing the birth of Jesus Christ to the Virgin Mary during the Annunciation, as described in the Gospel of Luke. With the words, “Hail, full of grace, the Lord is with you,” Gabriel brings one of the most significant messages in Christian theology, he is perhaps best known for announcing the divine, immaculate birth of Jesus Christ to the Virgin Mary during the Annunciation, as described in the Gospel of Luke.

In Jewish texts, Gabriel appears in the Book of Daniel as a figure who interprets visions and provides insight into the mysteries of the divine plan. The Talmud also mentions Gabriel as one of the angels who performs acts of justice and judgment,and is often depicted in art holding a trumpet, symbolizing their role as a divine announcer, or a lily, representing purity and divine grace. This archangel is associated with clarity, communication, and creative inspiration. As a result, many people seek his guidance when facing difficult decisions or striving for a deeper understanding of their purpose. Believers across various faiths invoke Gabriel for support in communicating effectively, finding strength during challenging times, or seeking spiritual insight. Gabriel’s presence is thought to bring clarity, confidence, and a sense of peace, making this archangel a powerful symbol of hope and divine connection. Whether as the angel of the Annunciation, the revealer of sacred texts, or a guiding light in personal journeys, Gabriel remains a profound figure whose influence transcends time and tradition.

• Archangel Michael: The Divine Protector and Leader is one of the most venerated and recognized archangels across various religious traditions, including Christianity and Judaism. Known as a warrior and protector, Michael’s name means “Who is like God?”—a rhetorical question emphasizing God’s unparalleled power.

The Role of Archangel Michael In religious texts, he is depicted as a heavenly leader who stands as a defender of faith, justice, and truth. In the Christian tradition, he is often associated with battling Satan and his forces, symbolizing the triumph of good over evil. This epic battle is vividly described in the Book of Revelation (12:7-9), where Michael leads the angels to victory against the dragon, representing Satan. In the Jewish tradition, Michael is considered the guardian of Israel, often interceding on behalf of humanity before God.  This Archangel is often portrayed as a powerful figure, clad in shining armor, wielding a sword or spear, and standing triumphantly over a defeated dragon or serpent. These symbols represent his role as the defender against darkness and the protector of humanity. His blue or golden aura in art signifies divine power, truth, and protection. Believers across the world turn to Michael in times of need, seeking courage, strength, and protection. Prayers to him often emphasize his role as a guardian against physical and spiritual harm. One of the most well-known prayers, the Prayer to St. Michael, asks him to defend believers in battle and deliver them from evil.

• Archangel Raphael: The Healer of Heaven is revered as the angel of healing, guidance, and protection in various religious traditions, particularly within Christianity and Judaism. His name, derived from the Hebrew Rāphāʾēl, means “God has healed,” reflecting his divine role in bringing physical, emotional, and spiritual restoration.

Raphael is most prominently featured in the Book of Tobit, part of the Deuterocanonical texts in Christian tradition. Disguised as a human named Azariah, Raphael accompanies Tobias, the son of Tobit, on a journey. Along the way, he heals Tobit’s blindness and helps Tobias defeat a demon tormenting his future wife, Sarah. These acts highlight his role as a healer and protector against spiritual and physical harm. He is one of the seven archangels who stand before God. Raphael as the patron of healers, travelers, and those in search of guidance, Raphael is often invoked for assistance in matters of health and well-being. He is traditionally depicted holding a staff, symbolizing his role as a guide, and a fish, a reference to the healing story in the Book of Tobit.Raphael is also associated with promoting harmony in relationships, supporting individuals on their life journeys, and providing protection from harm. Many believe he inspires healers, doctors, and caregivers to bring relief to those in need.  People seeking Raphael’s assistance often pray for his intercession to heal illness, reduce stress, or find clarity in difficult decisions. His gentle and compassionate presence is believed to bring peace and hope to those who call upon him. Whether seen as a divine healer, a guide for travelers, or a protector against adversity, Archangel Raphael’s legacy continues to inspire faith and trust in divine providence.

• Archangel Uriel, whose name means “Light of God” or “Fire of God,” is a revered archangel in many religious and spiritual traditions. Although not explicitly mentioned in canonical biblical texts, Uriel is prominently featured in apocryphal writings, such as the Book of Enoch and 2 Esdras, and is recognized in Jewish, Christian, and some esoteric traditions.

Uriel is often described as a wise and illuminating angel, embodying divine knowledge and understanding. He is believed to bring light to dark situations, offering clarity and insight to those seeking truth. In various traditions, Uriel is considered the angel of wisdom, prophecy, and repentance. In the Book of Enoch, Uriel is one of the four primary archangels, alongside Michael, Gabriel, and Raphael. He is tasked with warning Noah of the coming flood, cementing his role as a guide and a messenger. Uriel is associated with intellectual pursuits and the arts. Many view him as the patron of writers, thinkers, and those engaged in creative endeavors. His light serves as a metaphor for the inspiration and enlightenment that fuels human creativity and innovation. In iconography, Uriel is often depicted holding a flame, a scroll, or a book, symbolizing his connection to knowledge and divine revelation. He sometimes appears with a sword, representing his role as a guardian of truth and justice. In literature, this Archangel has inspired numerous works, including John Milton’s Paradise Lost, where he is described as the “regent of the sun,” and in various mystical writings that emphasize his role as a guide to higher understanding. Today, Uriel is embraced by many as a source of wisdom and inner illumination. Those who seek his guidance often turn to meditation or prayer, asking for his assistance in resolving complex issues, gaining insight, or overcoming doubt. Uriel’s enduring legacy lies in his representation of divine light, a reminder that wisdom and clarity are always within reach for those who seek them with an open heart.

Conclusion :

Angels continue to captivate the human imagination, embodying the hope of divine intervention and the presence of higher powers in our lives. Whether viewed as messengers, protectors, or symbols of faith, they serve as a reminder of the unseen forces at work in the universe, bridging the realms of the divine and the mortal.

{ https://mysticsciences.com/ }

Military Reports Removal of Unidentified Craft From Restricted Airspace as Mysterious Incident Sparks Global Debate

Questions surrounding unidentified aerial phenomena have resurfaced after a series of dramatic images circulated online claiming to show an unusual aircraft operating inside restricted airspace before being intercepted and removed by military authorities. The images, which depict a sleek black craft with an unconventional geometric design and illuminated structural points, have generated widespread discussion among aviation enthusiasts, defense analysts, and UFO researchers, with many debating whether the object represents an advanced military platform, an experimental aerospace vehicle, or simply an artistic interpretation of an unidentified aerial incident.

According to claims accompanying the viral images, military officials responded after detecting an unidentified object entering restricted airspace where authorized civilian aircraft are prohibited. Online posts allege that multiple radar systems tracked the craft as it maneuvered through controlled airspace using flight characteristics unlike those of conventional aircraft. While the authenticity of these claims has not been independently verified, the images have fueled renewed public fascination with reports involving unexplained aerial objects.

The artwork shows a dark, angular craft unlike any publicly known commercial aircraft. Instead of a traditional fuselage and wings, the object appears to feature an almost symmetrical star-like configuration with sharp edges extending outward from a compact central body. Several bright white lights appear positioned along the structure, while the surrounding atmosphere seems slightly distorted, giving the impression of high-speed movement or unusual aerodynamic effects.

Supporters of the incident claim military radar operators initially classified the object as an unidentified track after it reportedly entered restricted airspace without transmitting any identification signals. Standard aviation procedures require aircraft operating within controlled zones to communicate with air traffic controllers and broadcast transponder information, allowing authorities to identify and monitor their movements. According to the online narrative, the mysterious craft allegedly failed to comply with these requirements.

Witnesses described in social media posts claim the object demonstrated unusual flight behavior, reportedly maintaining precise altitude before making abrupt directional changes without visible signs of conventional propulsion. Some accounts suggest the craft accelerated rapidly before disappearing from radar coverage, while others allege military aircraft were dispatched to investigate the unidentified target.

No official government source has confirmed the specific details presented in the viral posts, and defense experts caution that many online stories combine factual discussions of unidentified aerial phenomena with fictional or speculative material. As a result, the circulating images should not be interpreted as verified documentation of an actual military operation.

Nevertheless, the incident has sparked renewed discussion regarding how modern armed forces respond to unidentified aircraft entering protected airspace. Around the world, military organizations routinely investigate radar contacts that cannot be immediately identified. These investigations often involve fighter aircraft, ground-based radar systems, satellite monitoring, and coordination with civilian aviation authorities to determine whether an object poses a potential safety or security concern.

Defense analysts emphasize that an unidentified object does not necessarily represent extraterrestrial technology. Many radar anomalies are eventually attributed to weather conditions, balloons, drones, classified military exercises, equipment malfunctions, or previously unknown civilian aircraft. In many cases, limited data prevents investigators from reaching definitive conclusions, leaving incidents categorized as unresolved rather than extraordinary.

The unusual design shown in the viral images has also attracted attention from aerospace engineers. Some observers argue that the sharp, angular geometry resembles conceptual hypersonic aircraft or next-generation stealth platforms currently under development by several nations. Others believe the design appears inconsistent with known engineering principles and is more likely a digitally created illustration inspired by science fiction.

Artificial intelligence image-generation technology has further complicated public discussions surrounding unidentified aerial phenomena. Highly realistic computer-generated images can now be produced within minutes, making it increasingly difficult for casual observers to distinguish between authentic photographs, digital artwork, and manipulated content. Image-forensics specialists therefore stress the importance of examining original source files, metadata, and supporting evidence before drawing conclusions about any extraordinary visual claim.

Despite skepticism surrounding the viral images, interest in unidentified aerial phenomena continues to grow worldwide. Government agencies in several countries have acknowledged reviewing reports submitted by military personnel, commercial pilots, and civilians who have encountered objects that remain unexplained after preliminary investigation. Officials consistently note, however, that an unresolved case should not automatically be interpreted as evidence of advanced non-human technology.

The claim that the military “removed” a hazardous craft from restricted airspace has become one of the most debated aspects of the online story. Some readers interpret the phrase as referring to the interception and escort of an unidentified aircraft out of protected airspace, while others speculate about the recovery of a physical object. Without official documentation or independently verified reporting, neither interpretation can currently be confirmed.

Experts in aviation safety note that protecting restricted airspace remains an essential responsibility for military organizations regardless of the identity of an intruding object. Unauthorized aircraft—whether drones, balloons, civilian planes, or unidentified targets—can present significant risks to national security, military operations, and public safety. Consequently, interception procedures are standard practice whenever unidentified objects enter sensitive areas.

As discussions continue across social media, researchers encourage the public to separate confirmed information from speculation. The available images provide an intriguing visual concept, but they do not constitute evidence that an advanced unidentified craft entered restricted airspace or that military forces recovered or neutralized such an object.

For now, the mysterious images remain part of the growing collection of viral UFO-related content that continues to capture worldwide attention. Until original source material, radar records, official statements, or independently verified evidence become available, the incident should be regarded as an unconfirmed claim rather than an established historical event. Even so, the story highlights the enduring fascination surrounding unexplained aerial phenomena and the ongoing public interest in what may—or may not—be operating in the skies above restricted airspace.

{ https://ufosecret.net/index.php/category/aliens/ }

Dick Cheney and the Alleged Alien Detention Program: What David Grusch Actually Said

A former U.S. intelligence officer appeared to implicate a high-ranking official in an alleged extraterrestrial detention programme — without naming him directly. We examine Grusch's exact words, his verified background, and what remains impossible to confirm.

By Rachid Echahly  

Who Is David Grusch?

Before evaluating any allegation David Grusch makes, it is necessary to understand what his background actually confirms — and what it does not.

Grusch is a decorated Air Force combat veteran with service in Afghanistan. His intelligence career brought him, by his own account and by documentation that has been confirmed, to the position of the National Reconnaissance Office’s representative to the DoD Unidentified Aerial Phenomena Task Force — a sensitive role that would, if accurate, give him plausible access to classified UAP-related briefings. He subsequently served as the DoD’s co-lead for UAP analysis at the National Geospatial-Intelligence Agency.

In 2021 and 2022, Grusch made protected disclosures and filed a complaint involving alleged retaliation and concerns that UAP-related information was being withheld from congressional oversight. His legal representatives stated that the Intelligence Community Inspector General considered the complaint credible and urgent for referral. That procedural determination did not publicly validate the underlying claims about recovered non-human vehicles or biological entities.

On July 26, 2023, Grusch testified under oath before the House Oversight Subcommittee on National Security, the Border, and Foreign Affairs, alongside David Fravor and Ryan Graves. That hearing — a matter of congressional record — is the most verifiable event in the Grusch narrative. His written statement, submitted to Congress, describes a claim that the U.S. government possesses non-human craft and biological material recovered from UAP incidents. It is an extraordinary claim. It remains unproven.

For a fuller account of Grusch’s background and the 2023 testimony, see our Voices of Disclosure profile and the full career dossier.

The August 2026 Allegation: What Grusch Said

In August 2026, Grusch appeared on The Dr. Phil Podcast. During the interview, he discussed what he characterises as a covert UAP retrieval and reverse-engineering programme — claims broadly consistent with his 2023 congressional testimony. But the interview went further in at least one material respect: Grusch appeared to connect a named senior official to an alleged programme of extraterrestrial detention — not merely crash retrieval.

The distinction matters. Crash retrieval and reverse-engineering of non-human technology is the core claim Grusch has made since 2023. The allegation of a detention programme — implying living or deceased non-human biological entities in U.S. custody under the direction of named officials — is a significantly more specific and more serious claim.

The allegation as reported involves a reference to a specific nickname that has long been associated with one senior official. Grusch did not name that official directly. The inference connecting the two is drawn from the nickname — not from any document, recording, or secondhand corroboration that has been made public.

The Grusch interview was reported on by the New York Post, among other outlets. The Post’s coverage interpreted the “Darth Vader” reference as pointing to former Vice President Dick Cheney. That interpretation is plausible — Cheney carried that nickname throughout his 2001–2009 tenure and well beyond — but it is an editorial interpretation of an indirect reference, not a direct attribution.

What Grusch did not say, so far as is publicly documented: He did not state that Dick Cheney personally detained extraterrestrial entities. He did not produce documentation of any detention programme. He did not name firsthand witnesses who can corroborate the specific allegation about the official in question.

The “Darth Vader” Nickname: Where It Comes From

Dick Cheney served as the 46th Vice President of the United States from January 2001 to January 2009, under President George W. Bush. The “Darth Vader” nickname emerged in press coverage during this period and became sufficiently established that Cheney himself acknowledged it in public. The nickname reflects his reputation for operating through classified channels, back-room influence, and an opacity that journalists and political commentators found difficult to penetrate.

Cheney was, in documented terms, one of the most powerful vice presidents in American history. He had direct access to the most sensitive intelligence programmes of the post-9/11 era, including programmes whose existence remained classified for years after his tenure. The intelligence infrastructure he helped shape — including expansions to domestic surveillance, enhanced interrogation, and black-site operations — demonstrates that he was comfortable authorising programmes kept entirely out of public view.

None of this establishes a connection to UAP programmes. The documented history of classified intelligence activity under Cheney is relevant context — it explains why the nickname resonates and why disclosure advocates find the inference plausible — but it is not evidence of UAP involvement specifically. A senior official who authorises secret surveillance programmes has not thereby been shown to have knowledge of or control over alleged extraterrestrial detention.

Cheney has not publicly responded to the allegation. His representatives have not issued a statement. That silence is not evidentiary.

What Grusch Witnessed and What He Was Told

One of the most important distinctions in evaluating Grusch’s claims — and one that is routinely collapsed in media coverage — is the difference between what he personally observed and what others allegedly told him.

Grusch has been explicit on this point: he has stated that he did not personally observe non-human craft or biological material. His claims rest on testimony provided to him by other intelligence and military personnel, whose accounts he says were given under legally binding frameworks. He has described reviewing what he characterises as classified photographs and documentation, but this material has not been independently released, examined by an outside body, or verified in any public form.

The August 2026 allegation about a “Darth Vader” figure and a detention programme falls into this same category: it is described as information passed to Grusch, not a direct personal observation. The chain of custody of this claim is: unnamed sources told Grusch something; Grusch reported it publicly using a codename rather than a direct identification; a news outlet interpreted the codename as referring to a specific individual. At each link in that chain, uncertainty compounds.

Secondhand testimony from credentialed sources is not worthless. Courts and intelligence assessments routinely rely on it. But it carries an evidentiary burden that is proportional to the claim being made. An allegation that a former U.S. Vice President oversaw a programme to detain extraterrestrial life is among the most extraordinary claims ever made about a named public official. The evidentiary bar must be correspondingly high.

Timeline

How Researchers Assess Grusch’s Credibility

Grusch occupies an unusual position in the disclosure landscape: he has more verifiable institutional credibility than almost any previous UAP claimant, yet his core claims remain unproven. Different researchers and communities weight these facts differently.

• The disclosure-advocate assessment: Disclosure advocates point to Grusch’s formal career, his use of protected reporting channels, his willingness to testify under oath, and his attorneys’ statement that his complaint was considered credible and urgent for referral. They regard these factors as a significant indication that his allegations deserve further investigation, while acknowledging that the procedural determination did not validate the alleged extraterrestrial programs. Advocates also note that previous UAP whistleblowers — dismissed as cranks — have subsequently been vindicated on at least some specific claims, and argue that the secrecy surrounding UAP programmes makes the absence of public corroboration an expected feature of the landscape, not evidence against the claims.
• The cautious-researcher assessment distinguishes between Grusch’s career credibility and the verifiability of his specific claims. Researchers in this category note that no physical evidence has been produced in the years since his initial complaints; that the secondhand character of most of his testimony creates a long chain of undocumented inference; and that the August 2026 allegation — involving a named official, via a codename, in a podcast interview — represents a further step away from any independently confirmable basis. They take the claims seriously enough to monitor but are unwilling to treat them as established without corroboration.
• The skeptical assessment notes that extraordinary claims require extraordinary evidence. Grusch has been making claims about crash retrieval programmes since at least 2023, and three years later no publicly accessible physical evidence exists — no recovered material, no laboratory analysis, no independently authenticated photograph, no document released through FOIA. Skeptics argue that the consistent pattern of escalating specificity without corroborating evidence should lower rather than raise confidence in the most recent allegation.

All three assessments are reasonable positions held by serious researchers. The UFO Times does not adjudicate between them. What we can say is that none of the three positions provides a basis for treating the Cheney allegation as established fact.

What Evidence Would Be Required to Verify the Allegation

We apply this question to every major disclosure claim we cover. It is not a sceptical framing — it is an analytical one. Knowing what would constitute evidence helps evaluate the actual state of the record.

To verify the Grusch allegation that a senior official identified as “Darth Vader” directed an extraterrestrial detention programme, any of the following would constitute meaningful evidence:

• Firsthand witnesses publicly identified under oath. Grusch’s testimony rests on other unnamed witnesses. If those witnesses came forward and testified under oath before a body with oversight authority, that would constitute independent corroboration of the chain of custody — though not of the underlying events.
• Declassified documentation specifically connecting named officials to a UAP detention programme. This is the category of evidence most resistant to forgery and most amenable to independent verification. It would need to show a clear chain of authority, not merely reference classified programmes in general terms.
• Physical evidence. The claim of a detention programme necessarily implies physical existence of whatever was detained. Material evidence — recovered craft, biological specimens, associated documentation — examined by independent scientists would be definitive. It does not exist publicly.
• A credible congressional or judicial investigation with subpoena authority. The July 2023 hearing was valuable but limited by the classification status of the underlying documents. A committee investigation with full subpoena authority and security clearances to examine the classified record would be a meaningful verification mechanism.

None of these conditions have been met as of August 2026. The Grusch allegation therefore remains what it has been since the Dr. Phil interview: a claim from a credentialed but uncorroborated source, filtered through a codename, interpreted by a news outlet, about one of the most serious charges ever made about a named former senior official of the United States government.

The Broader Pattern: Other Disclosure Claims at the Same Evidentiary Level

The Grusch-Cheney allegation does not exist in isolation. It is part of a pattern of disclosure claims in 2026 that are substantively significant, institutionally sourced, and evidentially thin. Eric Davis’s statements about classified records of alien bodies follow the same basic structure: credentialed source, classified documentation, no public release. The Pentagon’s investigation of the Colorado triangle UAP videos involves footage that has been assigned case numbers but not publicly released.

The accumulation of credentialed claims without public physical evidence creates a specific kind of epistemic problem: it is consistent with both a real and elaborate cover-up, and with the gradual amplification of a narrative that originated in genuine but misinterpreted or misattributed intelligence material. Distinguishing between these explanations is not possible without the evidence that all parties agree is being withheld.

Evidence Assessment

Frequently Asked Questions

Sources and Further Reading

Further Reading

{ https://theufotimes.com/ }

Alien Bases Beneath the Ocean? Examining Tim Burchett's Underwater UAP Claims

Rep. Tim Burchett has publicly stated his belief that alien entities may operate from underwater bases. He connects that belief to accounts he attributes to Navy and military personnel: unusual submerged objects, recurring deep-water activity and reported speeds that far exceed known U.S. capabilities. His position is his own — not a media invention. But it remains an interpretation of secondhand accounts, and the physical evidence required to establish permanent underwater installations has not been publicly released.

Rep. Tim Burchett (R-TN)

Since joining the House Oversight Committee's UAP investigation in 2023, Rep. Tim Burchett has been one of Congress's most persistent voices for UAP disclosure. He has attended classified briefings, spoken with military pilots, and pressed the Pentagon and intelligence community to release records on unidentified aerial and transmedium phenomena.

In multiple public interviews, Burchett has gone beyond relaying attributed accounts to expressing a personal conclusion: that alien entities may be living and operating from deep-water areas on Earth. This article examines the sources he cites, the figures he has reported and what independent evidence would be required to substantiate those claims. See also: Tim Burchett — Voices of Disclosure.

Rep. Tim Burchett

Republican, Tennessee's 2nd District
House Oversight Committee

U.S. House of Representatives / Public Domain
Source: Wikimedia Commons · Portrait retained at native 201×251

What Burchett Actually Said

Burchett's public statements on underwater UAPs span several years and multiple interview formats, and they distinguish him from members of Congress who have simply demanded more disclosure. He has expressed a personal conclusion. In a September 2025 interview with UAP researcher and documentary filmmaker Red Panda Koala — reported by Newsmax — Burchett said he believes alien civilizations may have been present in the ocean for generations. He connected that belief directly to what he said he has heard from Navy personnel.

Burchett told Newsmax in September 2025 that Navy personnel had described underwater craft "they're chasing that go hundreds of miles an hour," adding that the best U.S. naval vessels can achieve is "maybe a little under 40 miles an hour." He described those accounts as the basis for his belief that alien entities may be living in deep-water areas on Earth.Source: Newsmax, "Rep. Burchett: UFOs Could Be Hiding Underwater," September 29, 2025 — newsmax.com

Four distinct claims run through Burchett's public statements and should be kept separate throughout any responsible analysis of them:

A. Secondhand reports attributed to military personnel. Burchett says he has spoken with Navy pilots who described unusual objects entering and exiting water, and who were reportedly directed away from specific ocean areas. He presents these as accounts relayed to him, not as information he personally observed.

B. Several deep-water areas associated with repeated activity. Burchett has described multiple ocean locations where activity has allegedly been concentrated. The precise number has varied in reporting — "five or six" is frequently cited — but no specific coordinates, ocean basin designations or declassified documentation has been released to substantiate these locations.

C. Burchett's personal interpretation. Beyond relaying attributed accounts, Burchett has stated his own conclusion: that the activity described to him indicates alien entities operating from underwater installations. This is his interpretation, not a finding drawn from authenticated records.

D. The evidentiary gap. No publicly released coordinates, authenticated sonar data, vessel records, physical evidence or independently verified imagery establishes permanent extraterrestrial installations beneath the ocean. Classified information may exist that would change this assessment, but the burden of confirmation has not been met in any public disclosure.

Three Layers of Burchett's Underwater UAP Position

1. Burchett's expressed personal belief (documented)Burchett has publicly stated that he believes alien entities may operate from underwater bases on Earth. This is his own stated conclusion — expressed across multiple recorded interviews — not a characterization imposed by others.
2. The secondhand accounts he cites (attributed)He grounds that belief in accounts from Navy pilots and unnamed officials who allegedly described unusual submerged objects, specific deep-water activity areas and extraordinary reported performance. These are attributed accounts; the underlying witnesses and records have not been independently made available.
3. Secondary amplification (caution)Media and social coverage of Burchett's statements may strip his uncertainty language and present his personal interpretation of secondhand reports as established or confirmed fact. The distinction between what Burchett believes and what has been verified is frequently lost at this stage.

The Speed and Scale Claims

Among the most striking figures Burchett has discussed are the reported speeds and dimensions of the alleged objects. In his September 2025 Newsmax interview, he cited Navy personnel describing underwater craft travelling at "hundreds of miles an hour." In a March 2026 interview for The Resilient Show, he reportedly discussed accounts of submerged objects described as roughly football-field-sized and moving at approximately 200 miles per hour. Both figures were attributed to other personnel; no corresponding sonar record, vessel log or raw sensor data has been released for independent analysis.

Several factors complicate the interpretation of such figures even if the underlying accounts are accurate. Underwater speed estimates derived from visual or acoustic tracking depend critically on sensor geometry, tracking duration, environmental conditions, calibration accuracy and positive target identification. An apparent speed of 200 mph could reflect genuine object velocity, a tracking error, a sensor artefact or a misidentification of the object being tracked. None of these can be resolved without access to the original sensor data and methodology — neither of which has been publicly provided.

In a March 2026 interview for The Resilient Show, Burchett reportedly discussed accounts of submerged objects described as roughly football-field-sized and moving at approximately 200 mph. The claim was attributed to other personnel; no raw sonar record, measurement methodology or authenticated documentation supporting the reported dimensions or speed has been publicly released.Source: The Resilient Show — "UFOs in the Ocean? Rep. Tim Burchett on Underwater Craft, Disclosure & Epstein," March 9, 2026 — resilienttimes.substack.com.

Scale Reference — Reported Object Size vs. Known Reference Point

NFL FOOTBALL FIELDALLEGED OBJECT91 m × 49 m (100 yds × 53 yds)≈as described in attributed accounts — not confirmed sensor data

Scale illustration based on a secondhand account discussed by Burchett — not confirmed sensor data. No raw sonar record, measurement methodology or authenticated documentation supporting the reported dimensions has been released publicly. The actual size — if any such object exists — is unknown.

The "Five or Six Locations" — What Is and Isn't Known

The specific number "five or six" gained traction in coverage of Burchett's statements, implying a precise, enumerated intelligence picture. Whether that level of specificity reflects what Burchett was told or accumulated through media paraphrasing across multiple interview cycles is not established in any public record. Burchett himself has at times spoken of "several" locations rather than a precise number.

No geographic coordinates, ocean basin designations or documented sonar surveys have been publicly released to substantiate any of these locations. They have not appeared in NOAA public mapping releases, in declassified naval survey data, or in the documents released under the AARO Historical Record Report. Their existence is asserted, not documented.

This is consistent with a pattern of assertion seen in related congressional UAP claims. Rep. Eric Burlison's claim about a UAP "too large to move", examined separately by this publication, presents a structurally similar evidentiary situation: attributed congressional testimony, no authenticated physical record and a significant gap between what was claimed and what is publicly verifiable.

Key Events — Underwater UAP Claims: A ChronologyAttributed/secondary

Apr 2013AguadillaIR incident2019USS Omahafootage recordedMay 2021Pentagon confirmsOmaha authenticMar 2025AARO resolvesAguadilla — sky lanternsNov 2024Gallaudettestifies on USOsSep 2025Burchett Newsmax:"hundreds of mph"Mar 2026Burchett:~200 mph claimVerified/resolvedAttributed/secondaryHistorical incident

Timeline constructed from public sources cited in this article. Dates reflect interview and report publication dates, not dates of the underlying alleged events. Colour coding follows this article's evidence-status scheme.

USS Pinckney and USS Omaha transit the Pacific Ocean during a July 2019 U.S. Navy exercise. This official photograph provides maritime context; it does not depict the object discussed in the separate USS Omaha UAP recording.Credit: U.S. Navy / Mass Communication Specialist 2nd Class Alex Corona / Released / Public domain. Source: DVIDS image 5601572

Transmedium UAPs: What the Pentagon Has Confirmed

The factual core beneath Burchett's position is real and significant. Pentagon spokesperson Susan Gough confirmed to news organizations that the 2019 USS Omaha footage was recorded by Navy personnel and was under review by the UAP Task Force — as reported by The War Zone in May 2021. That confirmation establishes the authenticity of the recording as a genuine Navy document. It does not establish that the object entered the ocean, originated underwater or represented non-human technology, and it was not a published analytic conclusion about the object's identity or behavior. AARO has not issued a case resolution for the Omaha footage. This secondary reporting is cited here as the specific basis for the authentication claim; the original DOD spokesperson statement was not issued as a standalone published release.

The 2004 USS Nimitz "Tic Tac" footage — examined in detail in our USS Nimitz investigation — provides the most extensively documented transmedium UAP record. Navy pilots including Cmdr. David Fravor described an object with flight characteristics inconsistent with known aircraft that was observed near the ocean surface. Neither footage establishes a permanent underwater installation; both establish that anomalous aerial objects have been observed near the ocean by credible military witnesses using calibrated instruments.

The logical distance between "anomalous objects observed near the ocean surface" and "permanent alien bases on the ocean floor" is substantial. That distance has not been closed by any publicly released documentation.

What a Resolved "Transmedium" Case Shows

In March 2025, AARO issued a case resolution report for one of the most widely circulated "transmedium UAP" examples in the public record — the 2013 Aguadilla infrared video from Puerto Rico. The case is instructive precisely because it illustrates how apparent transmedium behavior can arise from sensor geometry and atmospheric conditions, not anomalous object performance.

AARO Case Resolution — "The Puerto Rico Object," March 20, 2025

High confidenceThe objects did not exhibit anomalous speeds or other behavior exceeding known state-of-the-art performance characteristics.

High confidenceThe objects remained over land throughout the encounter. STK reconstruction of the sensor's line-of-sight demonstrates they did not enter the Atlantic Ocean.

High confidenceThe recording depicts two objects travelling near each other rather than a single object splitting or replicating.

Moderate confidenceThe objects were a pair of sky lanterns drifting at approximately 8 mph — consistent with recorded wind speed. Their apparent high speed was attributable to motion parallax caused by the aircraft's flight speed, sensor zoom and changing relative positions.

Their apparent disappearance into the ocean was attributable to thermal crossover — a natural IR sensor phenomenon in which an object's thermal signature becomes indistinguishable from the ocean background, not actual submersion. AARO employed Systems Toolkit (STK) reconstruction and pixel analysis. The original 2013 video was recorded by U.S. Customs and Border Protection aboard a De Havilland Canada 8 aircraft near Rafael Hernández Airport, Aguadilla, Puerto Rico.

Source:

•  AARO Case Resolution Report — "The Puerto Rico Object" (PDF, March 20, 2025)

This resolution does not address Burchett's separate allegations, which involve different alleged locations, different witnesses and different time periods. What it does demonstrate is that apparent transmedium behavior — including apparent entry into water and apparent anomalous speed — can be fully explained by sensor geometry, motion parallax and atmospheric conditions. Establishing genuine transmedium performance requires reconstruction of the sensor's geometry and the object's actual flight path, not visual interpretation of the footage alone. That methodology has not been applied to any of the alleged locations Burchett describes, because no corresponding sensor records have been released.

The Physics: Could Existing Technology Detect Underwater Structures?

If permanent large-scale structures existed on the ocean floor in areas frequented by U.S. naval vessels, would they be detectable? Modern naval sonar systems are capable of detecting anomalous structures on the ocean floor. The United States has maintained ocean surveillance networks — including the Sound Surveillance System (SOSUS) and its successors — with broad coverage of strategically important ocean regions. NOAA's mapping programs have charted substantial portions of the seafloor using multibeam sonar.

NOAA's remotely operated vehicle Deep Discoverer can descend to approximately 6,000 meters while collecting imagery, samples and environmental measurements. Investigating extraordinary underwater claims requires this kind of documented, recoverable data.Credit: NOAA Ocean Exploration, 2026 ROV Shakedown / Public domain. Source: NOAA Ocean Exploration — ROV Deep Discoverer

A structure large enough to shelter vehicles of the kind described by Burchett — approximately football-field-sized — would in principle produce sonar returns inconsistent with natural seafloor formations. No publicly reported anomaly consistent with such a structure has appeared in NOAA mapping releases, peer-reviewed oceanographic research or any declassified naval survey data.

This absence is not conclusive proof. Coverage is not total, classified sonar data is not publicly available, and the ocean floor in many areas remains inadequately mapped at the resolution required to identify structures at the scale described. But the absence of any corroborating signature in the substantial body of publicly available oceanographic data is a meaningful evidentiary gap.

Rear Admiral Tim Gallaudet's Independent Position

Retired Rear Admiral Tim Gallaudet — former NOAA Acting Administrator and Navy oceanographer with expertise in ocean acoustics — has made independent public statements that lend institutional weight to the broader question of underwater UAPs, while stopping short of confirming Burchett's specific accounts.

In written testimony to the House Oversight Committee on November 13, 2024, Gallaudet stated: "I add the term 'water space' because UAP have been observed in the ocean and are known to exhibit transmedium travel through the air-sea interface. These are often referred to as unidentified submerged objects (USOs)." He called for integration of NOAA and naval oceanographic assets into UAP investigation, and described a 2015 incident in which he received an urgent Navy communication about UAP encounters during a pre-deployment exercise, after which the communication disappeared from the network without explanation.

Rear Admiral Tim Gallaudet, USN (Ret.), has called for systematic scientific investigation of transmedium and submerged UAP reports. His position does not independently verify Burchett's specific claims or alleged locations. Credit: U.S. Navy / Public domain, via Wikimedia Commons

Who Is Tim Gallaudet?

RoleRetired Rear Admiral, U.S. Navy. Former NOAA Acting Administrator (2018–2019). Oceanographer with expertise in ocean acoustics, underwater sound propagation and maritime environmental science. Currently CEO of Ocean STL Consulting.

Position on USOsAdvocates systematic scientific investigation of transmedium UAP and unidentified submerged object (USO) reports using existing NOAA and naval oceanographic assets. Has not confirmed specific claims made by Burchett about locations, speeds or permanent installations.

Key testimonyHouse Oversight Committee, November 13, 2024: "I add the term 'water space' because UAP have been observed in the ocean and are known to exhibit transmedium travel through the air-sea interface."

Gallaudet's institutional credibility supports taking underwater UAP reports seriously as a research priority. It does not corroborate the specific accounts Burchett has attributed to Navy personnel.

Gallaudet has also written on this subject independently. His March 2024 Sol Foundation paper, "Beneath the Surface: We May Learn More about UAP by Looking in the Ocean," argues that transmedium UAP and USO reports represent a systematically underexplored domain. In it, he makes the case for systematic scientific investigation — not for the existence of permanent alien installations.

Gallaudet has not publicly confirmed Burchett's specific "five or six locations," the reported speed or size figures, or the existence of permanent underwater installations. His testimony represents an expert advocacy position — that underwater UAP phenomena deserve rigorous investigation — not independent corroboration of Burchett's attributed accounts. The distinction is important: Gallaudet's credibility strengthens the case for taking these reports seriously as an investigative priority; it does not confirm what Burchett was told.

Sources: 

• House Oversight Committee hearing, November 13, 2024 · Gallaudet written testimony (PDF) · Sol Foundation paper, March 2024

What Would Confirm a Permanent Underwater Base?

The evidentiary standard for confirming a permanent underwater installation is demanding — appropriately so, given the magnitude of the claim. Understanding that standard identifies precisely what is missing.

Evidence Assessment — Burchett's Underwater UAP Claims

Claim element	What would confirm it	Current status
Burchett publicly expressed belief in underwater alien bases	Multiple recorded interviews; the belief is his own stated position	Documented Confirmed across multiple 2024–2026 interviews including Newsmax, September 29, 2025
Navy and military personnel reportedly described unusual submerged objects to Burchett	Declassified incident reports, witness testimony before Congress under oath, or authenticated sensor logs from the reported encounters	Attributed Attributed to Burchett's conversations; underlying witnesses and records not publicly available
Several deep-water activity areas exist at specific locations	Geographic coordinates, ocean basin designations, or sonar surveys cross-referenced across independent platforms	Alleged No locations publicly established; not referenced in AARO Historical Record Report
Objects reportedly travelling at hundreds of miles per hour and approximately football-field in size	Original sensor data with documented methodology, tracking geometry and calibration records; independent reconstruction confirming speed and dimensions	Secondhand Attributed figures from Burchett interviews; no sonar record, vessel log or authenticated sensor data released
Objects are of non-human origin	Physical samples with composition inconsistent with known human engineering; authenticated structural imagery; independent peer-reviewed analysis	Not established No physical samples or authenticated material analysis publicly available
Permanent underwater bases exist	Sonar imaging of anomalous structures inconsistent with natural formations; verifiable coordinates; physical evidence from the site	Not established No sonar data, coordinates or structural evidence publicly released

The UFO Times Assessment

Burchett has publicly said that he believes extraterrestrial entities may operate from underwater bases. He has connected that belief to accounts he attributes to Navy and military personnel concerning unusual submerged objects and recurring activity in several deep-water areas. His position is therefore more than a media invention — but it remains an interpretation of secondhand reports.

No publicly released coordinates, authenticated sonar data, vessel records, physical evidence or independently verified imagery establishes permanent extraterrestrial installations beneath the ocean. The speed and scale figures Burchett has discussed — however striking — rest on attributed accounts without the sensor data required to assess their accuracy. The AARO resolution of the Aguadilla case illustrates why such assessment matters: an object that appeared to enter the ocean at high speed was found to have drifted over land at 8 miles per hour.

Burchett's willingness to speak plainly about what he has been told, and to stake his own interpretation on it publicly, is itself notable in the context of congressional UAP oversight. It means the claims can be examined, sourced and assessed — which is exactly what responsible disclosure requires. The evidentiary gap between his interpretation and what is publicly verifiable remains wide. Closing it would require the release of authenticated records that have not been provided.

Frequently Asked Questions

Did Tim Burchett say there are five or six underwater alien bases?

Burchett has publicly expressed his personal belief that alien entities may operate from underwater bases, connecting it to accounts he attributes to Navy and military personnel about unusual submerged objects and deep-water activity areas. The number "five or six" was widely reported in media coverage; Burchett has at times spoken of "several" locations. He has not released authenticated documentation, sonar data or coordinates to support the existence of permanent installations.

What did Burchett actually claim about underwater UAP activity?

Burchett has said in multiple public settings that Navy personnel described to him underwater craft travelling at hundreds of miles per hour, and that several deep-water areas have been associated with unusual activity. He has stated his personal belief that alien entities may be living in deep-water areas on Earth. This is his own stated conclusion based on attributed secondhand accounts — not a finding derived from publicly released physical or documentary evidence.

Has the Pentagon released authenticated footage of UAPs entering water?

The Department of Defense confirmed that Navy personnel recorded the 2019 USS Omaha footage. Authentication of the recording does not establish that the object entered the ocean, originated underwater or represented non-human technology. AARO has not issued an analytical case resolution for the Omaha footage.

What did AARO conclude about the Aguadilla "transmedium" UAP case?

In its March 2025 case resolution, AARO assessed with high confidence that the objects in the 2013 Aguadilla infrared video did not exhibit anomalous speed or transmedium behavior. Reconstruction showed the objects drifted at approximately 8 mph over land; apparent high speed was attributable to motion parallax. Apparent disappearance into the ocean was attributable to thermal crossover, not actual submersion. AARO assessed with moderate confidence that the objects were sky lanterns.

What did Rear Admiral Tim Gallaudet say about underwater UAPs?

In written testimony to the House Oversight Committee on November 13, 2024, Gallaudet stated that UAPs have been observed in the ocean and are known to exhibit transmedium travel through the air-sea interface, which he called unidentified submerged objects (USOs). He advocated for systematic investigation. He did not publicly confirm Burchett's specific accounts, alleged locations or speed and size figures.

What evidence would be needed to confirm a permanent underwater UAP base?

Confirming a permanent underwater installation would require: authenticated sonar imaging showing anomalous structures inconsistent with natural formations; verifiable geographic coordinates cross-referenced across independent surveys; physical evidence recovered from the site; and documentation establishing the structure is non-natural and inconsistent with known human engineering. None of these have been publicly provided.

Related Reporting

• Tim Burchett — Voices of DisclosureBurchett's broader congressional UAP record, key statements and oversight work.
• Eric Burlison: A UAP "Too Large to Move"A structurally parallel case — attributed congressional testimony, no authenticated physical record.
• The USS Nimitz "Tic Tac" EncounterThe most extensively documented transmedium UAP case in the public record.

Sources and References

• Newsmax — "Rep. Burchett: UFOs Could Be Hiding Underwater," September 29, 2025. Includes direct quote from Burchett about Navy personnel describing underwater craft "that go hundreds of miles an hour." newsmax.com/newsfront/tim-burchett-ufos-aliens/2025/09/29/id/1228280/
• NewsNation — "Aliens may have underwater bases on Earth: Burchett." Documents Burchett's publicly expressed belief. youtube.com/watch?v=ZCEbJwRgBPQ
• The Resilient Show — "UFOs in the Ocean? Rep. Tim Burchett on Underwater Craft, Disclosure & Epstein," March 9, 2026. Reported source for football-field size and approximately 200 mph figures. resilienttimes.substack.com
• AARO — "Case Resolution: The Puerto Rico Object," March 20, 2025. Full technical reconstruction of 2013 Aguadilla infrared footage. AARO Puerto Rico Case Resolution (PDF)
• AARO — Historical Record Report Vol. 1, 2024. AARO Historical Record Report (PDF)
• Dr. Tim Gallaudet — Written testimony, House Oversight Committee, November 13, 2024. Gallaudet testimony (PDF)
• House Oversight Committee — "Unidentified Anomalous Phenomena: Exposing the Truth," November 13, 2024. oversight.house.gov hearing page
• RADM Tim Gallaudet — "Beneath the Surface: We May Learn More about UAP by Looking in the Ocean," Sol Foundation, March 2024. thesolfoundation.org
• The War Zone (Tyler Rogoway) — Pentagon spokesperson Susan Gough confirmed to reporters that the USS Omaha footage was recorded by Navy personnel and was under review by the UAP Task Force, May 2021. thedrive.com/the-war-zone/41220 (secondary reporting; original DOD spokesperson statement not published as standalone release)
• Rep. Tim Burchett — official congressional biography and portrait. U.S. House of Representatives / Public Domain. burchett.house.gov
• NOAA Office of Ocean Exploration and Research. oceanexplorer.noaa.gov

Editorial note: 

• This article distinguishes among four separate layers in Burchett's public statements: (A) secondhand reports he attributes to Navy and military personnel; (B) reports of unusual objects or activity in several deep-water areas; (C) Burchett's personal interpretation that such activity may indicate underwater alien bases; and (D) publicly verified evidence — which currently does not establish alien origin or permanent underwater installations. No public coordinates, authenticated sonar records, vessel logs, raw sensor files or physical evidence currently establishes permanent underwater structures associated with UAPs. The UFO Times evaluates UAP claims against available evidence without sensationalism.

{ https://theufotimes.com/ }

The Allagash Abductions: This State Park’s Most Famous Visitors … Are Aliens?

In 1976, four men saw a UFO while visiting the Allagash Wilderness Waterway. A decade later they started remembering more details.

Dylan Thuras: It was 1988, and all year, Jim Weiner had been having a terrible time sleeping. He was having nightmares, but these were not normal nightmares, because Jim said he felt like he was awake, almost like it was some kind of sleep paralysis.

He’d wake up to the overwhelming sense that there was someone in the room with him. He’d hear a flurry of voices, but he couldn’t understand them. He couldn’t move anything but his eyes. And often, his twin brother Jack was there, along with two college friends, Chuck and Charlie.

Jim would be lying on this table in a bright white room. At first, Jim thought he knew what was causing this strange, awful sensation. Years earlier, he’d been in a bad accident. He’d injured his spine and his brainstem. He told his psychiatrist, it seems like things were under control.

They were going to get better. But then Jim got on the phone with his brother Jack, and they made a very unnerving discovery.

This was happening to Jack too. The bright white room, the table, Charlie and Chuck, the paralysis. Jack said he was seeing the same things. And as they dug deeper, the brothers would trace this strange sensation to an incident that happened more than a decade earlier, in the north woods of Maine, in the Allagash Wilderness Waterway.

I’m Dylan Thuras, and this is Atlas Obscura. And today, we are talking UFOs. We are talking alien abductions. And we’re doing it National Parks style.

This is an edited transcript of the Atlas Obscura Podcast: a celebration of the world’s strange, incredible, and wondrous places. Find the show on Apple Podcasts, Spotify, and all major podcast apps.

Dylan: National Parks are pretty much universally beloved. You have to be, like, a pretty unpleasant person to really dislike National Parks. But there’s also this other side to these enormous wild places. People die or disappear in National Parks actually pretty frequently. I don’t say this to discourage anyone from visiting the parks. Millions and millions of people go there. They are wonderful. They are safe. They are amazing. But they are big and they are wild. And there’s a hidden side to everything, including these places that we revere. So I am here today with two people who know more about the dark and sinister side of National Parks than I would guess almost anyone else. Danielle LaRock and Cassie Yahnian are hosts of the podcast National Park After Dark, a podcast for the morbid outdoor enthusiast, which is not a thing that I knew I was until I heard your work. So, Danielle, Cassie, thanks for coming on the show.

Danielle LaRock: Thank you so much for the lovely introduction.

Cassie Yahnian: Yes. We’re excited to be here.

Dylan: It’s great. Meeting of the morbid outdoor enthusiasts. Yeah, so where are you two right now in the world? You look like you are in nice places.

Danielle: I’m in Maine.

Dylan: Oh, great.

Cassie: Yeah, and I’m in Vermont.

Dylan: Oh, nice. Yeah, this is great. I went to college in Bennington.