Naar de inhoud

UFO'S of UAP'S, ASTRONOMIE, RUIMTEVAART, ARCHEOLOGIE, OUDHEIDKUNDE, SF-SNUFJES EN ANDERE ESOTERISCHE WETENSCHAPPEN - DE ALLERLAATSTE NIEUWTJES

UFO's of UAP'S in België en de rest van de wereld
akke.beakke.be
Ontdek de Fascinerende Wereld van UFO's en UAP's: Jouw Bron voor Onthullende Informatie! Ben jij ook gefascineerd door het onbekende? Wil je meer weten over UFO's en UAP's, niet alleen in België, maar over de hele wereld? Dan ben je op de juiste plek! België: Het Kloppend Hart van UFO-onderzoek In België is BUFON (Belgisch UFO-Netwerk) dé autoriteit op het gebied van UFO-onderzoek. Voor betrouwbare en objectieve informatie over deze intrigerende fenomenen, bezoek je zeker onze Facebook-pagina en deze blog. Maar dat is nog niet alles! Ontdek ook het Belgisch UFO-meldpunt en Caelestia, twee organisaties die diepgaand onderzoek verrichten, al zijn ze soms kritisch of sceptisch. Nederland: Een Schat aan Informatie Voor onze Nederlandse buren is er de schitterende website www.ufowijzer.nl, beheerd door Paul Harmans. Deze site biedt een schat aan informatie en artikelen die je niet wilt missen! Internationaal: MUFON - De Wereldwijde Autoriteit Neem ook een kijkje bij MUFON (Mutual UFO Network Inc.), een gerenommeerde Amerikaanse UFO-vereniging met afdelingen in de VS en wereldwijd. MUFON is toegewijd aan de wetenschappelijke en analytische studie van het UFO-fenomeen, en hun maandelijkse tijdschrift, The MUFON UFO-Journal, is een must-read voor elke UFO-enthousiasteling. Bezoek hun website op www.mufon.com voor meer informatie. Samenwerking en Toekomstvisie Sinds 1 februari 2020 is Pieter niet alleen ex-president van BUFON, maar ook de voormalige nationale directeur van MUFON in Vlaanderen en Nederland. Dit creëert een sterke samenwerking met de Franse MUFON Reseau MUFON/EUROP, wat ons in staat stelt om nog meer waardevolle inzichten te delen. Let op: Nepprofielen en Nieuwe Groeperingen Pas op voor een nieuwe groepering die zich ook BUFON noemt, maar geen enkele connectie heeft met onze gevestigde organisatie. Hoewel zij de naam geregistreerd hebben, kunnen ze het rijke verleden en de expertise van onze groep niet evenaren. We wensen hen veel succes, maar we blijven de autoriteit in UFO-onderzoek! Blijf Op De Hoogte! Wil jij de laatste nieuwtjes over UFO's, ruimtevaart, archeologie, en meer? Volg ons dan en duik samen met ons in de fascinerende wereld van het onbekende! Sluit je aan bij de gemeenschap van nieuwsgierige geesten die net als jij verlangen naar antwoorden en avonturen in de sterren! Heb je vragen of wil je meer weten? Aarzel dan niet om contact met ons op te nemen! Samen ontrafelen we het mysterie van de lucht en daarbuiten.

Archief

Flying-Saucer Propulsion: What Modern Physics Actually Allows.

Aliens.jpg

Flying-Saucer Propulsion: What Modern Physics Actually Allows.

For decades, witnesses have reported unidentified objects that appear to hover silently, accelerate rapidly, turn abruptly and move without wings, propellers, exhaust or other visible means of propulsion. Today these reports are often grouped under the term Unidentified Anomalous Phenomena, or UAP.

The descriptions are intriguing, but an important distinction must be made at the beginning: an unidentified observation is not proof of an advanced aircraft, and it is certainly not proof of extraterrestrial technology. NASA states that it has found no credible evidence that UAP are extraterrestrial. Its scientific study has emphasized the need for better-calibrated instruments, consistent reporting and higher-quality data before extraordinary conclusions can be drawn.

Nevertheless, the reported flight characteristics raise an interesting scientific question. If a vehicle really could perform such maneuvers, what type of propulsion—or manipulation of physics—would be required?

The answer is unlikely to be a single mysterious engine. Silent hovering, extreme acceleration, absence of sonic booms and abrupt changes of direction would present several separate problems involving thrust, inertia, atmospheric drag, structural strength and energy production. Any convincing theory must address all of them.

Why ordinary propulsion is not enough

Conventional aircraft move by exchanging momentum with their surroundings. Propellers and jet engines accelerate air backward. Rockets expel hot gas. Wings produce lift by redirecting airflow. These methods are extremely effective, but they remain subject to familiar physical limitations.

A vehicle accelerating rapidly must withstand enormous mechanical forces. Its occupants experience those forces as g-loads. A sudden turn at very high speed would be far more destructive than simply flying fast in a straight line. Atmospheric flight also produces drag, heating, turbulence and shock waves. A large object moving through dense air at several times the speed of sound should normally generate a powerful sonic boom.

That means the most difficult feature attributed to flying saucers is not merely their speed. It is their reported ability to change velocity without displaying the consequences normally associated with acceleration.

A conventional engine, regardless of its power, would not eliminate inertia. A more radical system would have to alter the motion of the vehicle, its occupants and perhaps the surrounding medium together.

Electroaerodynamic propulsion

One genuine technology sometimes associated with saucers is electroaerodynamic propulsion, commonly called ionic-wind propulsion. A high voltage between thin emitter wires and larger collecting electrodes ionizes nearby air. The ions accelerate through the electric field and collide with neutral air molecules, producing airflow and thrust.

This is real physics. In 2018, researchers demonstrated sustained flight of a lightweight fixed-wing aircraft propelled by an electroaerodynamic system with no conventional moving propulsion parts. The aircraft had a five-metre wingspan and flew successfully across an indoor test area.

This technology helps explain why high-voltage devices once presented as “electrogravitic” machines can lift themselves in air. Their thrust is produced by moving ionized air, not by cancelling gravity. Such systems can operate quietly and may create a faint glow, but their present thrust-to-weight performance is far below what would be needed for a fast, heavily loaded craft.

Electroaerodynamics therefore deserves a place in a discussion of unusual aircraft, but it should not be described as demonstrated antigravity.

Plasma and magnetohydrodynamic control

Another possibility is the use of plasma—the electrically charged state of matter created when gas becomes ionized. Electric and magnetic fields can accelerate plasma without turbines or propellers. Plasma thrusters are already used in space, although they provide low thrust and work by expelling reaction mass.

In an atmosphere, a sufficiently powerful system might ionize air around a vehicle and then influence that charged gas with electromagnetic fields. This concept is related to magnetohydrodynamics, which studies the motion of electrically conducting fluids and plasmas.

A plasma layer might conceivably affect airflow, heating, radar reflection or the formation of shock waves. Researchers have investigated plasma actuators for aerodynamic flow control, but nothing presently demonstrated can surround a large craft with a field that eliminates drag or permits silent hypersonic flight.

Magnetic interaction with Earth’s field is even less promising as a primary lifting mechanism. Earth’s magnetic field is weak, and practical magnetic levitation generally requires either strong nearby magnets, specially arranged conductors or a prepared guideway. A craft cannot simply repel Earth’s magnetic field with a coil and obtain unlimited lift.

Plasma and electromagnetic systems could become useful components of future aircraft, but they would still obey conservation of momentum. They do not provide inertia cancellation.

The spacetime approach

The most important modern change in advanced-propulsion thinking came from Mexican theoretical physicist Miguel Alcubierre. In 1994, Alcubierre described a mathematical solution to Einstein’s field equations in which a region of comparatively undisturbed spacetime is carried within a larger distortion. Space contracts ahead of the region and expands behind it. The craft itself does not locally race through space faster than light; instead, the surrounding geometry changes.

This became known as the Alcubierre warp drive.

The concept matters because general relativity treats gravity not simply as a force, but as the curvature of spacetime. Matter and energy influence that curvature, and objects follow paths through the resulting geometry. In principle, changing the geometry could change how a vehicle moves.

A craft enclosed within a suitable spacetime region might follow a nearly inertial path even while distant observers saw it undergo extraordinary motion. The vehicle and its occupants could move together rather than being pushed violently through space. This offers a theoretical way of discussing apparent acceleration without crushing internal g-forces.

However, the Alcubierre metric is not an engineering design. It begins by specifying a desired spacetime and then calculates the extraordinary distribution of energy needed to create it. The original solution requires regions of negative energy density—often described as exotic matter—and enormous total energy. It also faces serious problems involving the creation and control of the bubble, causal horizons, radiation and stability.

No known machine can generate or control such a spacetime distortion.

Newer warp-drive research

Researchers have continued examining whether the original idea can be modified. Alexey Bobrick and Gianni Martire developed a broader mathematical description of warp-drive geometries. They showed that subluminal warp regions can, under certain assumptions, be constructed using positive energy, although the shell would still require ordinary propulsion to move. Their work also suggested that flattened configurations could reduce some energy requirements. This is noteworthy when discussing disc-like geometries, but it does not demonstrate that flying saucers use warp propulsion.

Physicist Erik Lentz later proposed superluminal spacetime solitons that he argued could be supported by positive energy associated with electromagnetic fields and plasma. His work attracted attention because it appeared to avoid one of the greatest obstacles in Alcubierre’s model.

Those results remain disputed. Other physicists have argued that physically reasonable warp drives still violate fundamental energy conditions. A 2022 analysis concluded that positive energy seen by one particular class of observers does not prove that all observers measure acceptable energy densities. More recent work has also challenged the claim that the Lentz geometry entirely avoids negative energy.

The correct conclusion is therefore not that a practical positive-energy warp drive has been discovered. The research shows that warp metrics remain an active mathematical subject, while their physical realizability is unresolved and highly doubtful.

UFO-ChatGPT-Image-Jul-16-2026-11_10_45-AM.jpg

Would a saucer shape help?

A circular craft could be useful for reasons that do not require antigravity. A disc provides rotational symmetry, offers ample internal volume and could distribute antennas, electrodes, coils or plasma emitters around its rim. If a hypothetical field had to surround a craft evenly, a circular or flattened geometry might simplify its production.

Some warp-drive studies have also found that flattened spacetime configurations may be more energy-efficient than spherical ones. But this does not establish a direct link between mathematical warp bubbles and reported flying saucers. The resemblance is suggestive, not evidential.

A true spacetime vehicle might not need aerodynamic wings, yet it would still require an immense energy source, precise control of gravitational fields and some mechanism for creating, accelerating and stopping the distorted region. None of these capabilities exists today.

The most plausible conclusion

Modern science offers several real technologies that resemble limited aspects of reported saucer behavior. Electroaerodynamic systems can produce quiet thrust without propellers. Plasma and electromagnetic fields can control ionized gases. Advanced materials, computers and sensors can make aircraft more agile and less visible.

None, however, accounts for the full collection of extraordinary abilities sometimes attributed to UAP.

Spacetime engineering provides the most intellectually serious framework for discussing motion without conventional acceleration. Alcubierre’s contribution was important because it showed that Einstein’s equations permit geometries resembling a moving warp region. Later studies have refined, generalized and criticized that idea.

But mathematical permission is not the same as physical possibility.

At present, no verified experiment has produced a warp bubble, reduced inertia, shielded gravity or demonstrated a propulsion system capable of the reported flying-saucer maneuvers. Patents and declassified documents may show that people have considered such ideas; they do not prove that the technologies work.

The honest scientific position lies between dismissal and belief. Unusual observations should be investigated with good instruments and reliable data. At the same time, advanced propulsion concepts should be judged by experimental evidence, not by how closely they resemble reports of mysterious objects.

Flying saucers may continue to inspire speculation, but the most interesting question is no longer simply what type of engine they might contain. It is whether a sufficiently advanced technology could someday control the geometry of spacetime itself.

RELATED 


How Do Flying Saucers Fly? - Inside the Supernatural

How Fast Can Flying Saucers Move? - Inside the Supernatural

 { https://mysticsciences.com/ }

Hoe vind je dit bericht?
Geschreven door peter om 21:19 Stuur door

Crop Circle | Odstone Barn Nr Wayland’s Smithy Oxfordshire | 16/07/26 + Historical Landscapes

Crop Circle | Odstone Barn Nr Wayland’s Smithy Oxfordshire | 16/07/26 + Historical Landscapes

Crop-Circle-UK.png

DJI_20260716084034_0041_D.png

20260716084034_0041_D.png

DJI_20260716084034_0041_D-3.png

DJI_20260716083143_0012_D.png

DJI_20260716083339_0022_D.png

DJI_20260716083555_0030_D-P.png

IMAGES STONEHENGE DRONESCAPES PHOTOGRAPHY 

COPYRIGHT 2026

YouTube link:

Crop circle found near Wayland’s Smithy in Oxfordshire on 16 July 2026

Overview

A new crop circle formation was reported on 16 July 2026 near Odstone Barn, close to Wayland’s Smithy in Oxfordshire, adding another entry to a long-running tradition of mysterious agricultural formations in southern England. The report, published by VibeWire Magazine, was accompanied by video footage and imagery showing the design emerging in a field in a landscape already known for its prehistoric associations. While crop circles are often met with skepticism, each new sighting tends to attract renewed attention because of the location, the timing, and the enduring cultural fascination surrounding these patterns.

The publication described the formation as a newly discovered crop circle and linked it to a broader discussion of historical landscapes, suggesting that the field’s setting near one of Oxfordshire’s best-known ancient sites gives the event added significance. No formal survey or scientific assessment was included in the source material, and the report does not claim a definitive explanation for how the formation was made.

Key Details

According to the source, the crop circle was reported at Odstone Barn near Wayland’s Smithy on 16/07/26, with a video posted to YouTube alongside the magazine entry. The images provided show a geometric pattern flattened into standing crop, a visual style consistent with many modern crop circle reports from the UK. As with similar cases, the immediate questions are not only about authorship but also about scale, symmetry, and the speed with which the formation appeared.

That said, no evidence in the source material establishes whether the pattern was created by people, whether it had been formally documented by researchers, or whether any witnesses observed its formation. Crop circles in the UK are frequently linked to hoaxes, artistic interventions, or local folklore, and the report does not present new data that would settle those possibilities. Still, the location and presentation ensure the formation will likely be discussed by enthusiasts and skeptics alike.

Historical Landscape Context

The setting near Wayland’s Smithy is central to why the report drew interest. Wayland’s Smithy is a Neolithic long barrow in the Vale of White Horse, part of a wider ceremonial landscape that includes some of Britain’s most significant prehistoric monuments. Such places often appear in crop circle discussions because they sit within a terrain layered with archaeology, myth, and cultural memory. That history gives any new formation nearby a ready-made narrative, whether interpreted as coincidence, performance, or something more unusual.

In that sense, the crop circle is not simply being viewed as an isolated pattern in a field. It is being read against the backdrop of a landscape that has long invited speculation about ritual, alignment, and hidden meaning. Even for those who approach crop circles as man-made art, the choice of location can matter as much as the design itself. The proximity to Wayland’s Smithy inevitably amplifies the mystery.

Interpretation and Next Steps

For now, the formation remains a reported discovery rather than a verified anomaly. The most responsible reading is that it is an intriguing field pattern in a historically charged area, documented by a media outlet that covers UFO and unexplained phenomena. Further analysis would typically require on-site inspection, measurements, interviews, and crop damage assessment to determine whether the formation shows signs of human construction or something less straightforward.

Until then, the Oxfordshire discovery sits in the familiar space between folklore and investigation. It is a reminder that crop circles continue to occupy a unique niche in British public life: part rural puzzle, part media event, and part canvas for the enduring appeal of the unexplained.


Crop Circle, Avebury Stone Circle, Wiltshire, England - 14 July 2026 4K
RELATED

Miraculous Angel Wings appear in Crop Circle while people in it 2026🩵Interviews with eye witnesses🩵

Google's AI Analyzed Every Crop Circle Ever Recorded — The Pattern It Found Changes Everything

{ https://www.vibewire.com.au/ }

Hoe vind je dit bericht?
Geschreven door peter om 21:03 Stuur door

MUFON co-founder John Schuessler dies

MUFON co-founder John Schuessler dies ILLUSTRATIVE RECONSTRUCTION // NOT EVIDENCE

Overview

John Schuessler, the aerospace engineer and longtime UFO researcher who helped found the Mutual UFO Network, has died, according to a July 12 announcement from MUFON. Born in 1940, Schuessler was a defining figure in modern ufology for decades, known both for his technical background and for his willingness to challenge assumptions inside a field often divided between believers, skeptics, and independent investigators. His death prompted an immediate wave of tributes from the UFO research community, where he was widely regarded as one of the organization’s most consequential and uncompromising voices.

A Founding Figure in MUFON

Schuessler’s name is closely tied to the early growth of MUFON, which became one of the most prominent civilian organizations devoted to the study of unidentified aerial phenomena. As a co-founder, he helped shape the group’s emphasis on case documentation, investigator training, and evidence-based analysis at a time when UFO research was still largely informal and frequently dismissed by mainstream institutions. His background as an aerospace engineer gave him a level of technical credibility that set him apart from many contemporaries, and it also informed the careful, methodical approach he brought to high-profile cases.

Over the years, Schuessler developed a reputation as an investigator who could be both meticulous and contrarian. That combination made him influential in ufology, where agreement is rare and case interpretation often depends on competing theories. He did not simply amplify claims; he often pressed for documentation, consistency, and hard questions about what witnesses reported and what evidence could actually support. For supporters, that made him indispensable. For critics, it sometimes made him difficult. Either way, he left a lasting mark on the field.

Investigating the Cases That Defined an Era

Among Schuessler’s most notable contributions was his detailed work on the Cash-Landrum incident, one of the most discussed UFO cases in U.S. history. The case, involving two women and a child who reported an encounter with a mysterious glowing object in Texas in 1980, became a touchstone for discussions of alleged physical effects, military involvement, and the challenge of sorting fact from speculation. Schuessler’s interest in the case reflected his broader approach: focus on the evidence, examine the timeline, and avoid easy conclusions.

That commitment to deeper inquiry helped make Schuessler a respected figure even among people who disagreed about UFO origins or interpretations. His work arrived during a period when UFO research was still largely outside academic and governmental consensus, yet he consistently pushed the conversation toward more disciplined analysis. In that sense, his influence extended beyond any single case; he helped establish a standard for how serious civilian investigators could approach unexplained aerial reports.

Community Reaction and Legacy

The MUFON announcement marks the end of a long career that intersected with some of the most enduring questions in the field. While the organization’s statement did not provide extensive details, the response from researchers and longtime observers suggests Schuessler’s death is being felt as a significant loss. For many in the UFO community, he represented a generation of investigators who built the field through persistence, technical rigor, and a willingness to follow difficult evidence wherever it led.

His legacy is likely to endure through MUFON’s institutional history, the cases he helped shape, and the investigators he influenced. In a field often defined by uncertainty, Schuessler stood out for trying to bring order to ambiguity. That may be the clearest measure of his impact: not that he solved every mystery, but that he helped define how the mystery should be studied.

{ https://usubjects.com/  }

Hoe vind je dit bericht?
Geschreven door peter om 20:45 Stuur door

Ross Coulthart of NewsNation Reveals his Revelations on UFO/UAP Disclosure Journalism - the good & bad

UFO.png
Ross Coulthart of NewsNation Reveals his Revelations on UFO/UAP Disclosure Journalism - the good & bad

NewRealities:

Ok he didn't tell me everything. But he was very honest and upfront about his opinions and considerations on the Disclosure process. In one of his most candid Interviews UAP/UFO journalist Ross Coulthart holds nothing back as Alan Steinfeld turns the tables on the premier UFO/ UAP journalist of our time.


YouTube link: 

Overview

A recent VibeWire Magazine post has drawn attention to Ross Coulthart’s evolving role in UFO/UAP disclosure journalism, framing the NewsNation reporter as one of the most visible mainstream voices covering the subject. The article promotes a candid interview between Coulthart and Alan Steinfeld on New Realities, describing the discussion as one in which the journalist “holds nothing back” about the state of the disclosure effort. While the VibeWire item does not provide a full transcript or detailed quotes, it positions the conversation as a rare look at both the progress and the shortcomings of modern UAP reporting.

Coulthart has become a significant figure in the field because he sits at the intersection of investigative journalism and a subject long treated with skepticism by major media. His prominence reflects a broader shift: what was once a fringe topic is now appearing more often in congressional hearings, Pentagon-related reporting, and network television segments. That shift has created new opportunities for transparency, but it has also raised the stakes for journalists tasked with separating verified information from speculation.

The positive side of disclosure journalism

One of the clearest strengths of the current disclosure landscape is that UAP coverage is no longer confined to the margins. Journalists like Coulthart have helped normalize the idea that unexplained aerial phenomena are a legitimate subject for public scrutiny, not merely a pop-culture curiosity. That shift matters because it has encouraged more witnesses, former military personnel, and researchers to come forward, and it has pushed government agencies to respond more openly than they did in the past.

The VibeWire post suggests that Coulthart is candid about the disclosure process, and that candidness itself is part of the story. In a field often clouded by secrecy, ambiguity, and competing claims, reporters who ask hard questions while maintaining a disciplined standard of evidence can help create a more credible public conversation. The fact that UAP journalism is increasingly discussed on mainstream platforms also indicates that audiences are willing to engage with the topic in a more serious way than before.

The challenges and shortcomings

At the same time, the current media environment presents obvious risks. UAP reporting is vulnerable to exaggeration, rumor, and selective sourcing, especially when reporters rely on anonymous insiders or partial information from a slow-moving disclosure process. The gap between what can be publicly confirmed and what is alleged privately remains wide, and that gap can easily fuel frustration or unrealistic expectations among audiences hoping for dramatic revelations.

There is also the issue of polarization. Supporters of disclosure often believe the media is still too cautious, while critics argue that some UAP coverage can drift toward overstatement. Coulthart’s position as a high-profile journalist makes him both influential and vulnerable to criticism from both sides. For journalists in this space, the central challenge is maintaining credibility while covering a subject that is inherently resistant to quick answers.

Why Coulthart’s commentary matters

The significance of the VibeWire post lies less in any single revelation than in what it says about the current state of UAP journalism. The field is becoming more visible, more competitive, and more consequential. Reporters are no longer simply covering sightings; they are covering the political, bureaucratic, and cultural machinery surrounding disclosure itself. In that sense, Coulthart’s perspective serves as a marker of how far the conversation has moved from the fringes.

If the disclosure movement is to remain credible, journalism will have to continue doing what Coulthart and others have tried to model: reporting carefully, acknowledging uncertainty, and resisting the temptation to turn every development into a breakthrough. The growing audience for UAP coverage suggests that there is room for serious reporting—so long as the facts remain the focus.

RELATED 


Ross Coulthart Q&A: UFO document dumps and catastrophic disclosure | Reality Check

UAP Gerb Live - the State of Disclosure, Hanging with Ross Coulthart, Current Events & QnA

{ https://ufos-disclosure.blogspot.com/ }

Hoe vind je dit bericht?
Geschreven door peter om 20:33 Stuur door

Is There a Ruined Civilization on Mars? A Theoretical Physicist Runs the Numbers | Reality Check

Is There a Ruined Civilization on Mars? A Theoretical Physicist Runs the Numbers | Reality Check

Anomolies-on-Mars.png

In this episode of “Reality Check,” Ross Coulthart sits down with theoretical physicist and philosopher of physics Maaneli Derakhshani for a long look at the anomalous features cataloged across the moon, Phobos and the surface of Mars. The conversation opens with Lue Elizondo’s remarks on lunar anomalies, then works outward to the Phobos 2 spacecraft and the object NASA’s own mission literature once described as a monolith along with the reason SETI took that object seriously enough to study.

From there, Max walks Ross through the imagery that has drawn the most attention on Mars, from the so-called glass worm to the rectilinear formations near the Atlantis basin, applying the same fractal analysis that NASA and the Department of Defense use to separate natural terrain from engineered structures. Grounding the discussion in Carl Sagan’s own standards for searching for evidence of past life, Max makes the case that some of these features deserve to be treated as genuine open questions rather than tricks of light and shadow. The episode closes on the face on Mars and the geometric relationships between formations that, Max argues, may have been meant to be seen.

Chapters:

0:00 Intro
0:41 A Word from Our Sponsor
3:06 Elizondo, Lunar Anomalies, and What Might Be on the Moon
4:30 Artificial Ruins and the Clementine Mission
5:35 Turning to Mars, and the Phobos 2 Spacecraft
8:03 The Marina Popovich Photo
12:04 “Wouldn’t It Be Sad if Putin Disclosed First?”
12:53 Camera Glitch or Real Object? What Analysts Say Off the Record
16:21 The PRIME Mission and the Object NASA Called a Monolith
20:42 Buzz Aldrin on the Phobos Monolith
26:01 A Roscosmos Quote, and a Nature Study on a Craft That Was Hit
30:13 Rendering a Structure 35 to 40 Meters Tall
34:29 Why SETI Took Phobos Seriously, and Aldrin’s Observation Point
38:16 When Mars Had an Earth-Like Atmosphere, and Clarke’s “2001”
41:35 To the Surface, What Actually Looks Anomalous on Mars
45:55 The Glass Worm, the Sand-Dune Debunk, and Mike Bara’s Breakdown
52:38 The Space Act of 1958, and Who Controls Mars Imagery?
58:51 Aram Chaos, Run Through a Fractal Filter
60:09 So, Are They Artificial? Max Speculates
1:02:15 Three Anomalies, the Work of Jean Ward
1:05:33 Is Extrapolating Like This Legitimate? Sagan’s Standard
1:10:46 Is Any of This Just Pareidolia?
1:12:50 Right Angles Near the Atlantis Basin, and What NASA Calls Chaos Terrain
1:17:12 Cities, Villages, Civilization? Max Answers Plainly
1:19:07 The Algorithms, and Who Else Runs Them
1:25:13 Buried Structures in Renaudot Crater
1:30:42 The Face on Mars, Sagan’s Letter, and an Open Mind on “Cosmos”
1:37:01 Cydonia, How Big the Face Is, and Why NASA Landed Elsewhere
1:41:02 A Mimetolith, More Structures, and the Geometry Between Them
1:48:54 Wrapping Up, and an Invitation Back

Overview

A new episode of Reality Check on VibeWire Magazine has revived an old question in a more technical frame: could Mars preserve the ruins of an ancient civilization? In the discussion, host Ross Coulthart speaks with theoretical physicist and philosopher of physics Maaneli Derakhshani, who walks through a range of unusual lunar, Phobos, and Martian features that he argues deserve closer scrutiny. Rather than claiming proof of alien architecture, the conversation is presented as a theoretical examination of anomalies that some researchers believe have been prematurely dismissed. The episode begins on the Moon, touches on the Phobos 2 mission and an object once described in NASA literature as a monolith, and then shifts to the Martian surface, where formations such as the “glass worm,” rectilinear structures near the Atlantis basin, and the famous “face on Mars” are discussed as possible clues to something more than geology.

What the Physicist Examines

According to the source material, Derakhshani applies fractal analysis—a technique used in scientific and defense settings to help distinguish natural terrain from engineered forms—to imagery from Mars and Phobos. The aim, he suggests, is not to force a conclusion but to test whether some features are better explained by chance, erosion, or something intentionally structured. The episode revisits the Phobos 2 spacecraft, the “monolith” NASA-related mission references, and the reason SETI reportedly found the object worth studying. From there, the discussion broadens to surface features on Mars that have long fueled debate among anomaly hunters, including formations in Aram Chaos, the Atlantis basin, and Renaudot Crater. Derakhshani also invokes Carl Sagan’s standard for evidence of past life, arguing that extraordinary-looking structures should at least be treated as open questions rather than automatically dismissed as optical tricks or pareidolia.

The Broader Scientific and Historical Context

The episode’s framing matters because it places speculative interpretation alongside mainstream scientific caution. Mars has been examined for decades by orbiters, landers, and rovers, and the overwhelming scientific consensus remains that the planet’s surface features are the result of natural processes, not confirmed ruins. Still, the source highlights why these claims persist: certain images appear to show sharp angles, repeating geometry, or unusually human-like contours, and those impressions are often amplified by mission-era photo limitations, low-resolution datasets, and public fascination with the possibility of ancient life. The show also raises questions about who controls Mars imagery and how much data is publicly accessible, a concern that tends to resonate in fringe and independent research communities alike.

Caution, Curiosity, and the Limits of the Evidence

What makes the conversation notable is not that it proves a civilization existed on Mars, but that it attempts to formalize the debate using a scientific lens. Even so, the evidence described in the source remains interpretive: images, geometric comparisons, and pattern analysis do not amount to confirmation of artificial origin. The episode ends by asking whether any of the features could indicate cities, villages, or buried structures, but it stops short of a definitive answer. For now, the article’s central takeaway is more measured: Mars continues to inspire serious questions, and while most of its supposed anomalies may ultimately prove natural, some researchers believe they are still worth testing rather than ridiculing outright.

RELATED


Ancient Aliens: EVIDENCE OF LOST CIVILIZATIONS ON MARS (Season 14) | History

{ https://www.vibewire.com.au/ }

Hoe vind je dit bericht?
Geschreven door peter om 20:18 Stuur door

Claims that extraterrestrial contact has begun outside government oversight are discussed

Claims that extraterrestrial contact has begun outside government oversight are discussed ILLUSTRATIVE RECONSTRUCTION // NOT EVIDENCE

Overview

Claims that extraterrestrial contact has already begun outside government control are being circulated in UFO and disclosure circles following a recent community discussion centered on experiencers who say they have had direct encounters with non-human beings. The conversation, framed around Conscious Life Expo 2026, presents testimony from several individuals who describe meetings with entities identified as Arcturians, Pleiadians, blue light beings, and other intelligences. Supporters of such accounts argue they suggest a broader reality unfolding beyond official channels, while skeptics caution that the claims remain unverified and should be treated as personal testimony rather than evidence of contact.

Key Claims From the Discussion

According to the source material, the event featured seven experiencers who described a range of alleged interactions, including one account of being taken aboard what was described as a “children’s teaching craft.” The testimonies were presented as firsthand narratives, with speakers outlining what they believe to be repeated contact over time. One theme highlighted in the discussion was the idea that the beings involved are not hostile but instead are trying to encourage a shift in human awareness. The source also references a Navy skeptic whose views reportedly changed after a contact experience, a detail likely intended to underscore the argument that even skeptical observers can be persuaded by direct encounters.

A further claim raised in the discussion is the idea of MK Ultra-style memory suppression, suggesting that some experiencers believe their memories of contact have been blocked, distorted, or delayed by psychological means. That allegation is notable because it links contemporary UFO testimony with longstanding speculation about covert government programs, though no evidence was presented in the source to substantiate such a connection. As with many contact narratives, the accounts blend spiritual language, psychological interpretation, and paranormal claims in ways that can be compelling to believers but difficult to evaluate independently.

Disclosure, Government Oversight, and Public Awareness

The broader argument advanced by the article is that “the government isn’t in control” of the contact phenomenon. That framing reflects a recurring theme in UFO disclosure circles: the belief that if non-human intelligence is interacting with people, it may be doing so independently of military or intelligence oversight. For advocates of disclosure, such claims reinforce the idea that official institutions may be lagging behind events already unfolding in public and private settings. For critics, however, the lack of verifiable evidence makes it impossible to conclude that contact has begun in any meaningful, real-world sense.

What Remains Unclear

What is clear is that interest in UFOs and anomalous experiences continues to grow through conferences, podcasts, and online communities where firsthand accounts are given significant weight. What remains unclear is whether any of these stories point to a genuine external intelligence, a psychological phenomenon, misidentification, or some combination of factors. No independent corroboration, physical evidence, or official confirmation is provided in the source. Still, the discussion reflects an important moment in the disclosure conversation: a shift from asking whether contact is possible to asserting that it may already be happening, even if institutions have not publicly acknowledged it.


From 2025: Notable UFO testimony at House hearing on government transparency

{ https://usubjects.com/ }

Hoe vind je dit bericht?
Geschreven door peter om 18:35 Stuur door

‘Roswell of Brazil’: Doc director finds UFO crash tale credible

‘Roswell of Brazil’: Doc director finds UFO crash tale credible

Elizabeth Vargas

'Varginha: The Roswell of Brazil' Bought by 1091 Pictures - Variety

Overview

(NewsNation) — James Fox, who directed a 2022 documentary about the alleged 1996 crash of a UFO in Brazil, says an expanded version of his film includes recollections from a surgeon who claims to have seen an alien survivor at the hospital.

A recent NewsNation segment has brought fresh attention to the so-called “Roswell of Brazil,” the long-running claim that an unidentified flying object crashed in the Brazilian city of Varginha in the 1990s. The report centers on a documentary director who says he finds the crash narrative credible, adding a new layer of visibility to one of the most discussed UFO cases outside the United States.

The incident, often compared to Roswell, New Mexico, has remained a fixture in UFO circles for decades because of the persistent accounts surrounding it. Supporters of the story point to witness testimony and local recollections as evidence that something unusual happened. Skeptics, meanwhile, have continued to question whether the case reflects a genuine crash event, a mix of rumors, or a case of misidentification that grew over time.

Fox says Dr. Italo Venturelli was previously reluctant to discuss his experience but changed his mind after suffering a near-fatal heart attack.

“He was lying on his deathbed, staring at the ceiling of the ICU, and he thought, ‘If I get through this, I’m not taking this story to the grave,’” the filmmaker told “Elizabeth Vargas Reports” on Thursday.

Doc director finds UFO crash tale credible in Roswell of Brazil case

When Fox and his crew returned to Brazil, he said the brain surgeon brought everyone into the room where he said he had encountered a “captured, nonhuman sentient being” three decades ago.

“As soon as he looked in the eyes, he knew it was not of this Earth,” Fox said.

Witnesses have long said a cigar-shaped UFO crashed in Varginha, Brazil, in January 1996 and that at least one occupant of the craft survived or was taken into custody. The location in Southeast Brazil has become known as the “Roswell of Brazil” because of the incident’s similarities to an alleged UFO crash in New Mexico in 1947.

Fox says the information he has collected through his film project, “Moment of Contact,” should be enough to smoke out “real evidence” collected three decades ago. In variations of the Varginha narrative, the U.S. government takes custody of alien beings.

Earlier this week, Rep. Eric Burlison, R-Mo., said he sent letters to the CIA and FBI asking the agencies to release any information they may have on the Varginha crash.

Burlison, a member of the House Oversight Committee, suggested the FBI may even help launch an investigation into another component of the story — that a Brazilian soldier died from an infection after touching a UFO or alien.

Documentary Focus and Witness Claims

According to the NewsNation segment, the documentary director believes the alleged crash deserves serious consideration. That view is notable because it comes from someone actively producing a film about the case rather than from a casual observer. In UFO reporting, documentaries often serve as a vehicle for revisiting older claims, interviewing witnesses, and assembling archival material that may not have received mainstream attention when the story first emerged.

The renewed discussion also highlights the continuing importance of witness testimony in unresolved UFO cases. Over the years, the Varginha story has been shaped by accounts from residents, researchers, and others who say they saw or heard evidence of a strange event. While such testimony has helped keep the case alive, it has not produced definitive proof that would settle the matter conclusively. That tension — between compelling personal accounts and a lack of hard verification — remains central to the story’s longevity.

Why the Case Still Draws Attention

The enduring appeal of the “Roswell of Brazil” lies in its mix of local folklore, alleged government secrecy, and the broader public fascination with unexplained aerial phenomena. In many ways, it mirrors other high-profile UFO cases that continue to attract attention long after the initial reports fade from the news cycle. The difference in this case is its strong association with a specific Brazilian city and the way the story has become embedded in popular UFO culture.

For filmmakers and investigators, cases like Varginha offer both narrative momentum and documentary intrigue. They also arrive at a time when public interest in UFOs — now often referred to as UAPs, or unidentified anomalous phenomena — has increased amid congressional hearings, military disclosures, and renewed scrutiny of unexplained sightings. In that climate, older stories are being revisited with fresh eyes, even when the underlying evidence remains disputed.

What the Renewed Interest Means

The NewsNation segment underscores how unresolved UFO claims can resurface whenever a new documentary, interview, or witness account enters the conversation. The director’s endorsement of the crash story as credible does not resolve the case, but it does show how belief in the incident continues to be sustained by those who have spent years studying it.

At the same time, the story serves as a reminder that credibility is not the same as confirmation. Without publicly verified physical evidence or an official acknowledgment of a crash, the “Roswell of Brazil” remains an allegation rather than a settled historical event. Still, the renewed attention suggests the case is far from forgotten, and it may continue to generate debate as filmmakers and researchers revisit one of Brazil’s most famous UFO mysteries.


Brazil's Roswell: The Alien & UFO Crash Exposed

The Varginha UFO Incident: Brazil's Roswell That the Government Tried to Bury

{ https://www.newsnationnow.com/ }

Hoe vind je dit bericht?
Geschreven door peter om 18:26 Stuur door

Is Psychology Ignoring One of the Biggest Human Mysteries?

Is Psychology Ignoring One of the Biggest Human Mysteries?

The human story behind UAP deserves the attention of psychological science.

Key points

  • Every aspect of the UAP story involves the psychology of the human mind.
  • Psychologists are not immune to the very psychological issues they study.
  • Psychologists have both a scientific opportunity and an ethical responsibility to engage on the topic of UAPs.

AI-Generated / Open AI

Source: AI-Generated / Open AI

For more than a century, the field of psychology has sought to understand human thought, emotion, perception, belief, memory, and behavior. It has tackled some of humanity’s most complex questions, from consciousness and trauma to religion, spirituality, and extraordinary human experiences. Yet there is one area where, despite millions of reported experiences and increasing attention from governments and scientists, the field has remained remarkably quiet: unidentified anomalous phenomena (UAP).

Whether UAPs ultimately prove to represent misunderstood natural phenomena, advanced technology, non-human intelligence, or something else entirely is a question for many scientific disciplines to investigate. But there is another question that belongs squarely within the expertise of psychologists: What can these experiences teach us about the human mind?

Over the past several years, the conversation surrounding UAP has changed dramatically. Senior government officials, military personnel, intelligence officers, scientists, and members of Congress have publicly stated that some UAP reports cannot currently be explained by known technologies or conventional explanations. Governments around the world have expanded efforts to collect and analyze data. Regardless of where these investigations ultimately lead, the topic has moved well beyond the realm of popular culture.

Yet the field of psychology has largely remained on the sidelines.

That absence is difficult to understand.

If millions of people across cultures and throughout history report extraordinary experiences, psychologists should be interested. If those experiences influence people’s beliefs, identities, relationships, and mental health, psychologists should be interested. If the possibility of future disclosure has the potential to shape how individuals and societies think, feel, and adapt, psychologists should certainly be interested.

At the same time, if these reports prove to have conventional explanations, we would still be left with one of the most remarkable psychological questions of our time. How do millions of people, across different cultures and generations, come to report experiences that share striking similarities? What roles do perception, memory, expectation, belief, social influence, culture, or consciousness play? Understanding that phenomenon would itself represent a major scientific contribution.

Either possibility deserves serious investigation.

The field of psychology has never required certainty before asking important questions. Psychologists study uncertainty itself. We investigate perception without fully understanding consciousness, memory despite its imperfections, and human behavior despite its extraordinary complexity. Our responsibility is not to wait until every mystery has been solved. It is to better understand the human experience.

So why has the field of psychology remained largely absent? Part of the answer, I believe, is institutional stigma.

For decades, UAP has been associated with ridicule, sensationalism, and reputational risk. Researchers who expressed interest in the topic often found themselves defending the legitimacy of the subject before anyone evaluated the quality of their work. Over time, this stigma shaped funding decisions, publication opportunities, academic careers, and ultimately the willingness of many scientists to engage with the topic at all.

The field of psychology is not separate from the psychologists who comprise it. Like every scientific discipline, it is shaped by the questions we choose to ask, the topics we pursue, the research we fund, the papers we publish, and the conversations we are willing to have. When an important area of human experience receives little scientific attention, it is worth asking not only what we may have overlooked, but why.

Ironically, psychologists have spent decades studying the very processes that may have contributed to this silence.

Psychologists understand that stigma discourages disclosure, influences perception, alters behavior, and limits inquiry. We recognize that social pressures can determine which experiences people are willing to report and which questions researchers feel comfortable pursuing. We routinely study conformity, group norms, reputational concerns, and institutional influences on decision-making. It would be surprising if the field of psychology itself were somehow immune to these same psychological processes.

Recognizing the influence of stigma does not require abandoning scientific skepticism. In fact, it demands the opposite. Genuine neutral skepticism asks difficult questions, follows evidence wherever it leads, and resists allowing social pressures to determine which scientific questions deserve attention. The goal is not to validate extraordinary claims. The goal is to investigate extraordinary human experiences with rigor, intellectual humility, and methodological excellence.

The field of psychology has a unique contribution to make. Psychologists are uniquely qualified to investigate perception, cognition, memory, belief formation, identity, uncertainty, resilience, adaptation, and the psychological effects of worldview-changing information. If consciousness plays any role in how these experiences occur or are interpreted, psychologists should be among the scientists helping to investigate that possibility. If consciousness plays no role, psychologists are still essential to understanding how people perceive, interpret, remember, and integrate extraordinary experiences into their lives.

These questions matter regardless of what UAPs actually are.

This topic is about much more than just understanding UAP, it is about the future of the field of psychology. Scientific progress depends on our willingness to examine our own assumptions, confront institutional stigma, and ask difficult questions with curiosity and humility. If this phenomenon has the potential to deepen our understanding of perception, consciousness, belief, and human adaptation, then the field of psychology has both a scientific opportunity and an ethical responsibility to help investigate it.

RELATED VIDEOS


How AI & Physics Are Unlocking the Truth (Full Episode) | UFOs: Investigating the Unknown | Nat Geo

Why Humans Love Mysteries | The Psychology Behind Our

Why Humans are Obsessed with Unsolved Mysteries

UFO - The Dark Truth

{ https://www.psychologytoday.com/gb }

Hoe vind je dit bericht?
Geschreven door peter om 18:00 Stuur door

Ancient Abandoned Ship Found On Mars In Canyon, Measure over 11km long! UFO UAP Sighting News.

Ancient Abandoned Ship Found On Mars In Canyon, Measure over 11km long! UFO UAP Sighting News.

UFO_mars.png
Date of discovery: July 18, 2026
Location of discovery: Mars map
Source Map: 
 
I found this huge spaceship landed in a canyon on Mars in a NASA Mars map. The map has a ruler and it measured over 11 km across and 3 km wide. Both its right and left sides are perfectly similar like the right and left wing of a jet plane on Earth. Also down its center is a long dark area that I believe to be an open sky viewing are for people on board to view the outside. Its a massive ship and it looks long since abandoned on Mars...I say that because its semi brown...like its been covered in hundreds of years of dust storms. The concept of a alien ship this big is a bit difficult to comprehend, but thats because of our technology level being a bit low compared to aliens, in another hundred years, a ship that size might be common to see taking humans off Earth to other planets. Time will tell. 
Scott C. Waring - UFO Sightings Daily 
discovery_mars.png

found_on_mars.png

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

Hoe vind je dit bericht?
Geschreven door peter om 17:37 Stuur door

Cloaked UFO Seen When Fireworks Explodes, July 4, 2026, Harlem, Georgia, UAP sighting news

Cloaked UFO Seen When Fireworks Explodes, July 4, 2026, Harlem, Georgia, UAP sighting news

UFO_ring.png
Date of sighting: July 4, 2026
Location of sighting: Harlem, Georgia, USA
Source: NUFORC #199203
 
Watch closely and you will see a ring in the sky, this is caused by the outer hull of a UFO disk gathering smoke from the fireworks explosions. UFOs like anything that flies and fireworks does attract UFOs, as you can already see in the video. This one is watching, monitoring and even sensing the emotions as well as the thoughts of the people below. Fantastic catch and so close to the people too!
Scott C. Waring - UFO Sightings Daily
Eyewitness states: 
We saw a ring in the sky over us. I got a good video of it. It was higher than a cloud and it didn't move.
 

Cloaked UFO Seen When Fireworks Explodes, July 4, 2026, Harlem, Georgia, UAP Paranormal Alien News

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

Hoe vind je dit bericht?
Geschreven door peter om 17:30 Stuur door

Meer van UFO'S of UAP'S, ASTRONOMIE, RUIMTEVAART, ARCHEOLOGIE, OUDHEIDKUNDE, SF-SNUFJES EN ANDERE ESOTERISCHE WETENSCHAPPEN - DE ALLERLAATSTE NIEUWTJES

↑ Terug naar de berichten