No, You Don't, Kevin!

MJ-12: Stanton Friedman Fires Back; The Disputation with Kevin Randle Continues ...

     I have always had a grudging admiration for Kevin's ability to write fiction. Anybody who can write many dozens of novels deserves respect. I guess I can accept a smart computer that somehow says the opposite of the truth about the CT Memo. At least we both agree it is not signed and there is no /s/. But why not note that the absence of signature is a sign of genuineness? We didn't know until well after the memo was discovered that Cutler was out of the country at that time. Why didn't the supposed (mythical) hoaxer merely add one or the other?? He is accused of adding Truman's signature. Why accuse me of saying the latter was an exact match to the one on the Bush letter? It was Kevin not me that said "exact" match. I have accepted the official findings of forensic document examiner Black as stated to Dr. Robert M. Wood that it was appended because of the feathering. Ike might well have preferred documents with signatures. Even Karl Pflock agreed that the CIA could have copied the signature.

Yes, let us talk about provenance.
What is the basis for the claim that all leaked documents have a provenance? In this case the Provider of the EBD was guilty of a crime. A hoaxer wasn’t. As Kevin knows full well photographing and distributing a TOP SECRET Restricted document to somebody without an appropriate security clearance and need-to-know is a violation of the law. Hoaxing generally is not. Why not just say "gotcha?!"
Suppose the CTM was taken by one of the declassifers (all of whom had high level clearance) and put in a jacket pocket and then later placed in Box 189? Two step process. Nobody would tell me their names.

Yes, let's not argue about the distance to the crash site. We have a highly classified preliminary briefing about an extraordinarily important event which happened 5 years earlier. The approximate distance really doesn't matter. Which route was taken?

How did the (mythical) hoaxer know that, contrary to the official claims made, that TOP SECRET RESTRICTED was in use?? Psychic I guess. How did he know that Donald Menzel would pass muster as having a very high security clearance and a very long connection with the NSA … psychic I guess.

I never talk about Willingham. What is meant by "we believed"? As Tonto said to the Lone Ranger: what do you mean "we", white man? Why is it the fatal flaw? I know that I do not have access to classified files at Sandia or elsewhere and so far as I know, Kevin doesn't either. That he didn't find anything about an "El Indio- Guerrero" crash in the unclassified world means nothing. Any information about a crashed saucer recovered on December 6, 1950, and taken to Sandia would have been highly classified just as was any analysis of the Roswell, Plains of San Agustin, or Aztec crashes. December 6, 1950, was the date of a major security alert involving motion of an object(s) in the sky. Roswell and Kenneth Arnold were highly publicized events. The Plains and Aztec were not. I strongly recommend the outstanding and comprehensive research about Aztec done by Scott and Suzanne Ramsey as reported in "The Aztec Incident"... Bruce Maccabee and Grant Cameron have written about the Dec.6, 1950 national security alert.

I don't think Kevin has provided some sort of statement that this preliminary briefing would provide a listing and details of all saucer crashes. The first one provides the basic data saying Man is not alone... an incredibly important statement. The Briefing of Ike at the Pentagon on November 18, 1952, only lasted under 50 minutes. As stated "It should be regarded as introductory to a full operations briefing intended to follow." Introductory surely doesn't mean comprehensive.

I certainly am not impressed by a kind of guilt by association with Richard Doty and the Aquarius documents. Let us look at the EBD, CT, and TF. No, I don't want to get into the false testimony of Frank Kaufmann and others. At least he admitted he had lied about taking Blanchard and Marcel to the Debris field. I still would like to know from those who say the 3 documents are phony and why they make that claim. How did anybody know the details that unexpectedly turned out to be true???

Gotcha, Stan!

MJ-12: Kevin Randle Rails Against Stanton Friedman's Rebuttal

     Really? This is the best you can do? I produce a long analysis of the MJ-12 mythology, complete with documentation and the best you can do is point out a mistake that is the result of a misplaced phrase and a computer glitch.* Of course I knew that Cutler had not signed the memo. You said so in your book. This is trivia.
Instead, let’s discuss the lack of provenance. In every other leak of classified material into the public arena, there is a provenance. The reporter, researcher,
recipient of the material knows the source who is available to them for questions and authentication. With MJ-12 none of those factors are in evidence and in the world of leaked and questioned documents, this is a huge red flag.
You are unable to provide the name of the source or a repository of the information that can be used to verify the authenticity. Without that, you have a work of fiction.
In fact, that could well be the genesis of MJ-12. Bill Moore, Bob Pratt, and probably Richard Doty collaborated on a novel that had the working title MAJIK – 12, but Moore changed the name to The Aquarius Project. It is the blueprint for MJ-12 and was written two YEARS before the film allegedly arrived at Jaime Shandera’s house. When MJ-12 was revealed to the world, Bob Pratt thought it time to “dust off” the novel and see if they could sell it. Isn’t that an interesting coincidence?
And you must remember that Bill Moore talked to you about creating a “Roswell” document in the hopes it would suggest to some witnesses it was now legal for them to talk about the classified research. Yes, you have denied this in the past, but Moore mentioned it to others so it is not from a single source, it is the genesis of MJ-12.
Let’s talk about Project Aquarius, which you ignore.
This is, in fact, the original program that evolved into MJ-12. The first mention of MJ-12 is in a document that also mentions Project Aquarius, which it turns out, is a hoax. Isn’t it interesting that this initial appearance of MJ-12 is a hoax? And I haven’t even mentioned the MJ-5 fiasco.
And don’t forget that you have said repeatedly that the Cutler/Twining memo was planted in the National Archives. We just disagree on who placed it there. You fail to mention that the carbon copy was folded as it would have been if mailed (and which makes it easier to conceal in the inside pocket of a suit jacket), but there is no reason to fold it because it would have been filed flat. To me it was planted to provide a provenance for an MJ-12 document as a way to blunt that argument. It failed in that respect.
I don’t really care to argue about the trivia of the distances to the debris field but will say this. It would seem that in a document that includes a section of maps (unavailable to us) it would have the distances calculated precisely, especially from a military organization that contains a couple of dozen trained navigators. Their jobs were critical in combat, so they would have been able to provide precise distances and locations (grid coordinates) which should have been reflected in the body of the EBD but are not.

But the fatal flaw is the Robert Willingham nonsense. Here is something that reflects the state of UFO research in the mid-1980s. Many of us believed in the 1980s that Willingham’s tale of seeing a crashed flying saucer was true when his affidavit appeared. We believed him because he was a high-ranking Air Force officer telling a tale that seemed to be plausible. We believed that Todd Zechel had verified Willingham’s credentials, and now, in the EBD, there was further evidence that his story was true.
But the first version of Willingham’s tale took place in 1948 and involved three objects, one of which crashed. This version was published in 1968 in Skylook and told us Willingham was a CAP officer as opposed to an Air Force officer. To make it worse, he claims to have been flying a fighter that wasn’t operational in 1948.
In the version that appears in the MJ-12 document, the crash took place on December 6, 1950. This can be traced to Zechel and Moore and suggests the UFO was “incinerated” upon impact. Willingham tacitly agreed with that date, but later changed it so that he could tell his ridiculous story about flying fighters in Korea in December 1950.
In the last version, Willingham said that the events took place in 1954 or 1955. If true, then the tale couldn’t appear in a document created in 1952. And further research proved that Willingham had not been an Air Force officer nor was he a fighter pilot. His tale was invention and shouldn’t appear in a document created at the highest levels for the president. They would have known it wasn’t true if it had been told prior to the creation of the EBD, unless, of course, the EBD was created in the 1980s by those who weren’t on the inside and believed the tale at the time.
There is absolutely no evidence of a crash in the El Indio - Guerrero area of Mexico. And before we have to hear that “absence of evidence isn’t evidence of absence” I should point out that I have searched everywhere for evidence of this event. Friends and colleagues have searched for anything related to this published in the right time frame or witnessed in the right time frame at the locations mentioned and have failed. There is nothing to suggest a UFO crash on December 6, 1950. At this point, given the situation, those advocating the authenticity of MJ-12 must present something other than the MJ-12 document as evidence that this crash happened and if unable to do so, should then reevaluate their opinion on MJ-12. Or, to put a point on it, absence of evidence is evidence of absence in this case.

In fact, let’s take it a step farther, if you are advocating a crash on the Plains of San Agustin in July 1947, then you must explain why that is not mentioned in the MJ-12 document.
These two points seem to be mutually exclusive. If MJ-12 is real, then this crash must not have happened. If there was such a crash, then MJ-12 must be in error. There would be no reason to withhold this information from a document prepared for the president. Both can’t be authentic and I suspect both are fraudulent.
Or, if you believe there was a crash in Aztec, NM in March 1948, then why wasn’t it mentioned in the MJ-12 document? Doesn’t its absence argue against the authenticity of the Aztec crash? Conversely, if Aztec is a real event, then doesn’t that argue against the authenticity of MJ-12?

What we have in the MJ-12 document is the situation as it existed in the mid-1980s. At that time, those who faked the document didn’t believe in Aztec or the Plains crash but did in the Willingham tale. They attempted to create a document that seemed to have been written in 1952, but these elements have helped us date it. Willingham’s UFO crash tale is the real fatal flaw in MJ-12.
But rather than talk about these points critical to MJ-12, we delve into minutia of it with little regard to the overall picture. We engage in “gotcha” argument rather than something of substance that actually helps us resolve this dilemma. So there is a minor error in my analysis? Does that negate the overall challenge to MJ-12? No, these arguments about it just obscure the truth.
I could drag in aspects of this in which you have made mistakes, including your belief that the signature on the Truman memo is an exact match until you learned that no two signatures are an exact match. Then you changed your tune, but overlooked the minor alteration to the stroke crossing the “T” in Truman. The reason was Truman’s signature habitually touched the text and it was necessary to carefully remove the evidence of where it bushed those letters.
And, I expect to hear about how Phil Klass paid you one thousand dollars because you provided samples of pica type on White House letters.
But if we wish to understand this MJ-12 mess, then it is necessary to understand the major issues arguing against authenticity rather than minor problems with the analysis. Let’s resolve the major issues before we begin with the minor and irrelevant ones.

*For those who have corresponded with me on a regular basis, you know that my computer regularly launches emails in the middle of sentences. It has to do with the way the touch pad is laid into the lap top. I’m not sure what causes it… but this same flaw also will highlight text and delete as I type. I usually catch it and can recover it, but sometimes I don’t see this happening. I catch it on proofreading because there are usually two sentences or two paragraphs jammed together that have no transition. In this case, it took out several paragraphs in which I was discussing, as you did, the sample from Cutler’s office that had been signed.
The flow seemed natural and I didn’t catch the change which says that Cutler  had signed the memo. Of course he hadn’t and I knew that.

You can take it
from there. I have no desire to prolong the agony.

Contestant N°1 … Good Luck!

MJ-12: Alejandro Rojas Accepts Stanton Friedman's Debate Challenge

    I cannot speak for others, but I certainly accept the challenge. All of the information I provided came from viable sources, and tells the FULL story. I do not understand how any complete analysis of the MJ-12 documents could not include the circumstances behind how they were brought to the public. These facts cannot be swept under the rug.
I highly respect Stanton and his work, and I included Stanton's comments in my story, but with all due respect, although Menzel's background is interesting, it is completely circumstantial and proves no connection to extraterrestrials. Just because the facts related to Doty, Moore, Shandera, and Bennewitz are complicated and difficult to understand and cast doubt on the veracity of the documents, they are still very pertinent. Using the uranium atoms analogy, the credibility of the scientists and the reputation of the labs where scientific tests are
conducted are certainly weighed heavily when it comes to the veracity and accuracy of scientific claims.
It is too late to add such a debate to the roster of the 2015 International UFO Congress. We schedule that out many months in advance, and if you go to the event's website you will see the line-up has been set. The only TBAs are people we are in the final process of confirming and have not yet announced their names. We certainly can look to holding such a debate in 2016. However, I propose that we debate this matter on Open Minds UFO Radio in the near future.

One Yeasayer Against A Bunch Of Naysayers

MJ-12: Renowned Ufologist, Stanton Friedman Issues Debate Challenge To Naysayers

MJ-12: Renowned Ufologist, Stanton Friedman Issues Debate Challenge To Naysayers

By Stanton Friedman The UFO Chronicles © 9-21-14

     I would hereby like to Publicly challenge Kevin and/or Robert Hastings, and/or Barry Greenwood, and/or Alejandro Rojas or all together to a debate about the legitimacy of the the Cutler Twining Memo, The Truman Forrestal memo, the Eisenhower Briefing Document. I have long acknowledged that there are a large number of phony documents out there. The question is whether those three are legitimate as I have demonstrated. I think an appropriate site would be during the IUFOC in February in Arizona.The debate I had 2 years ago there with John Alexander was very well attended.I have no idea why people think it is more important to talk about the machinations of Richard Doty, Bill Moore, Jaime Shandera, Paul Bennewitz etc than about all the facts that I noted which were not known to be true until after the documents were received.How did a hoaxer know those facts?As a nuclear guy I long ago leaned to focus on what is relevant. That 99.3% of uranium atoms in nature are not fissionable, tellls us nothing about the 0.3% that are. I would say let all sell their books What say you all?

fsphys@bellaliant.net

Allah & Buddha Are More Open To ET Than God

Believe in aliens? Then you're probably an atheist or Muslim: Study reveals how religion affects your likelihood of believing in ET

• Astronomer David Weintraub at Vanderbilt University in
  Tennessee has written a book discussing which faiths are likely to embrace
  aliens
• A study in it reveals that 55 per cent of Atheists believe aliens exist, while 44 per cent of Muslims and 37 per cent of Jews think that life is out there
• Around 32 per cent of Christians believe in aliens as well as divine beings
• Professor Weintraub thinks that Asian religions would have the least difficulty in accepting the discovery of extraterrestrial life

By Sarah Griffiths for MailOnline

Published: 10:57 GMT, 1 October 2014 | Updated: 13:30 GMT, 1
October 2014

With around third of Americans admitting to believing in aliens, and more exoplanets being discovered that could harbour life, it is no longer unusual to believe in the existence of ET.

Now an astronomer has claimed that a person's belief in extraterrestrial life varies according to whether they also believe in a God and even specifically which religion they identify with.

In the new book he reveals that atheists are the most likely group of people to believe in extra-terrestrials, at 55 per cent, followed by Muslims.

Scroll down for video

A new book (pictured left) by astronomy professor David Weintraub (pictured right) reveals that Atheists are the most likely group of people to believe in extra-terrestrials, followed by Muslims and Jews

It summarises what religious leaders and theologians from over 24 major religions say about alien life, including Judaism, Roman Catholicism, the Church of England, Hinduism and Buddhism.

Astronomy professor David Weintraub, of Vanderbilt University in Nashville, Tennessee, said: ‘When I did a library search, I found only half a dozen books and they were all written about the question of extraterrestrial life and Christianity, and mostly about Roman Catholicism, so I decided to take a broader look.’

‘Very few among us have spent much time thinking hard about what actual knowledge about extraterrestrial life, whether viruses or single-celled creatures or bipeds piloting intergalactic spaceships, might mean for our personal beliefs [and] our relationships with the divine.’

His book, Religious and Extraterrestrial Life, includes the results of a poll that found 55 per cent of Atheists believe aliens exist, while 44 per cent of Muslims and 37 per cent of Jews think that life is out there in the universe.

Around 36 per cent of Hindus and 32 per cent of Christians believe in aliens as well as divine beings.

Of the Christians, the Eastern Orthodox faithful were the most likely to believe in aliens (41 per cent) while Baptists were the most sceptical at 29 per cent.

Of the Christians, the Eastern Orthodox faithful were the most likely to believe in aliens (41 per cent) while Baptists were the most sceptical at 29 per cent.

Are the world's religions ready for E.T.?

Catholic leaders have been debating about the possibility of life on other worlds for a thousand years.  The crux of the debate is whether intelligent aliens would suffer from original sin, because they are not descended from Adam and Eve (illustrated) and if they do, did Christ visit them and was he resurrected on other planets?

PERCENTAGE PEOPLE BY FAITH WHO BELEIVE IN ALIENS                

• 55 per cent of Athiests
• 44 per cent of Muslims
• 37 per cent of Jews
• 36 per cent of Hindus
• 32 per cent of Christians

Read more: http://www.dailymail.co.uk/sciencetech/article-2776196/Believe-aliens-Then-probably-Atheist-Muslim-Study-reveals-religion-affects-likelihood-believing-ET.html#ixzz3FAtqulFk
Follow us: @MailOnline on Twitter | DailyMail on Facebook

Professor Weintraub thinks that Asian religions would have the least difficulty in accepting the discovery of extraterrestrial life, because Hindu thinkers have speculated that humans may be reincarnated as aliens, and vice versa, while Buddhist cosmology includes thousands of inhabited worlds.

He found passages in the Qur’an that appear to support the idea that spiritual beings exist on other planets, but notes that these beings may not practice Islam as it is practiced on Earth.

However, Professor Weintraub found very little in Judaic scriptures or rabbinical writings hinting at the existence of aliens.

The few Talmudic and Kabbalistic commentaries on the subject do assert that space is infinite and contains a potentially infinite number of worlds and that nothing can deny the existence of extraterrestrial life.

He says that Jews don’t believe the discovery of extraterrestrial intelligence would have much effect on them, quoting a Jewish anthropologist and scholar who concluded that the relationship between Jews and God would not be affected in the slightest by ‘the existence of other life forms, newly discovered scientific realities or pan-human behavioural changes.’ 

If the rate of discovery keeps up its current pace, astronomers will have identified more than a million exoplanets by the year 2045 and some of them may harbour alien life (a 'traditional' representation of an alien is pictured) leading more religious leaders to question the impact extraterrestrials may have on their beliefs

Professor Weintraub said that Roman Catholics have given the possibility of extraterrestrial life the most thought among Christian religions.

Catholic leaders have been having an on-off debate about the possibility of life on other worlds for a thousand years, he said.

The crux of the debate is whether intelligent aliens would suffer from original sin, because they are not descended from Adam and Eve, and if they do, did Christ visit them and was he resurrected on other planets?

‘From a Roman Catholic perspective, if sentient extraterrestrials exist some but perhaps not all such species may suffer original sin and will require redemption,’ according to Professor Weintraub.

The debate may increasingly come to the fore, because astronomers are detecting exoplanets - some of which could harbour life - at a rate faster than ever before.

In 2000, astronomers had detected 50 planets orbiting other stars, while today that number has grown to more than 1,000.

Professor Weintraub believes Asian religions would have the least difficulty in accepting the discovery of extraterrestrial life, because Hindu thinkers have speculated that humans may be reincarnated as aliens, while Buddhist cosmology includes thousands of inhabited worlds.  A praying Buddhist monk is pictured

If the rate of discovery keeps up its current pace, astronomers will have identified more than a million exoplanets by the year 2045.

While there are many conflicting views in the Protestant faith, he said that Lutheran theologian Paul Tillich’s view are probably largely representative – that the ‘saving power’ of God must be everywhere. However, God’s plan for human life may not be the same as his plan for aliens.

Professor Weintraub thinks that Evangelical and fundamental Christians may struggle the most to accept any discovery of alien life, because most of their leaders assert that extraterrestrial life does not exist.

However, Mormonism and Seventh-day Adventism are two Christian faiths that embrace aliens.

In Mormonism, God helps exalt lesser souls so they can achieve immortality and live as gods on other worlds.

SHARE THIS ARTICLE

Any Flying Saucers In Your Inventory?

Five innovative Air Force aircraft that you’ve probably never heard of -

By Staff Sgt. Antonio Gonzalez
Air Force Public Affairs Agency

The history of the Air Force is rooted in finding new ways to solve problems. It’s one of creating out-of-the-box solutions and achieving greater possibilities. Drone technology, stealth aircraft and space vehicles were merely science fiction until we made them reality. The aircraft you are about to discover brought upon revolutionary new abilities for today’s Air Force and will continue to have an impact on technology in the future.

CHANCE-VOUGHT/LTV XC-142A

The tilt-wing XC-142A was an experimental aircraft designed to test the operational benefits of vertical/short takeoff and landing transports. Such an aircraft would permit rapid movement of troops and supplies into unprepared areas under all-weather conditions. An XC-142A first flew conventionally on Sept. 29, 1964, and on Jan. 11, 1965, it completed its first transitional flight by taking off vertically, changing to forward flight and finally landing vertically.

Tilting the wing and engines skyward permitted vertical takeoff like a helicopter and then the wing and engines were gradually tilted forward to provide the greater speed of a fixed-wing aircraft in forward flight. The engines were linked together so that a single engine could turn all four propellers and the tail rotor. In tests, the XC-142A was flown from airspeeds of 35 mph backwards to 400 mph forward. XC-142As were tested extensively by the Army, Navy, Air Force and NASA.

LOCKHEED D-21B

The Lockheed D-21 is an unmanned or “drone” aircraft designed to carry out high-speed, high-altitude strategic reconnaissance missions over hostile territory. It is a product of the Lockheed “Skunk Works” program that developed the A-12, YF-12A and SR-71 “Blackbird” manned aircraft in the 1960s.

Originally, the D-21 was designed to be launched from the back of a modified A-12 (redesignated M-12) carrier aircraft. The first flight of the D-21/M-12 combination took place on Dec. 22, 1964, but the first D-21 release from an M-12 did not occur until March 5, 1966. Two more launches were successful, but on July 30, 1966, a D-21 collided with the M-12 after release, destroying both aircraft and resulting in the death of one of the M-12′s crew members. No further “piggyback” launches were attempted.

A new launch system was developed using modified B-52H aircraft as carriers.
The new D-21 configuration (designated D-21B) had dorsal mounting hooks for carriage under the B-52′s wing and a solid rocket booster for the initial acceleration required to start the ramjet engine. The first launch from a B-52 took place on Nov. 6, 1967, but the D-21 crashed. Several flights followed in 1968 with mixed success.

The first operational launch was on Nov. 9, 1969, but the D-21B was lost.
Several successful operational missions were flown over the next two years, but
the D-21 program was highly classified and details have not been released. The program was canceled in 1971, and the D-21s were placed in storage.

NORTHROP TACIT BLUE

The Tacit Blue (Whale) aircraft was built to test the advances in stealth technology. The USAF, the Defense Advanced Research Projects Agency, and the Northrop Corp. worked together from 1978 to 1985 to demonstrate that curved surfaces on an aircraft result in a low radar return signal from ground radar.
With such a low radar return signal, Tacit Blue demonstrated that such an aircraft could operate close to the battlefield forward line without fear of being discovered by enemy radar. It could continuously monitor enemy forces behind the battlefield and provide targeting information to a ground command center.

The aircraft made its first flight in February 1982, and by the conclusion of the program in 1985, had flown 135 times. It had a digital fly-by-wire flight control system to help stabilize the aircraft. Tacit Blue had a single flush inlet on the top of the fuselage to provide air to its two engines.

BOEING X-40A

The unmanned Boeing X-40A was the first-phase flight test vehicle for the U.S. Air Force’s Space Maneuver Vehicle (SMV) program that began in the late 1990s. The SMV program aimed at developing a new generation of small, reusable, highly maneuverable space vehicles for deploying satellites, surveillance, and logistics missions.

Designed and built by the Boeing Company in partnership with the Air Force Research Laboratory, the X-40A was produced at Boeing’s Phantom Works facility at Seal Beach, California. This test aircraft was a 90 percent scale version of what would later be designated the X-37 space plane.

On Aug. 11, 1998, the X-40A made its first successful flight at Holloman Air Force Base, New Mexico. Lifted to an altitude of about 10,000 feet by a helicopter, the X-40A was released, and it made an unpowered flight to demonstrate high-speed guidance, navigation, and control capabilities.

Following that single flight, the USAF loaned the X-40 to the National Aeronautics and Space Administration (NASA) to test the shape, guidance, and other systems of the X-37. After captive-carry flights to practice release procedures and test equipment, the X-40A made its first flight for NASA on March 28, 2001. Carried aloft by a U.S. Army helicopter to 15,000 feet before being released, the X-40A flew itself, guided by onboard systems, to a gentle landing at Edwards AFB, California. The X-40A made a total of seven successful flights in support of the X-37 program.

SCALED COMPOSITES LONG-EZ “BOREALIS”

On Jan. 31, 2008, the modified Scaled Composites Long-EZ completed the first manned flight of an aircraft powered by a pulsed detonation engine (PDE). The flight was the result of five years of innovation and cooperative effort between the Air Force Research Laboratory (AFRL) and Innovative Scientific Solutions Inc. (ISSI). The project used the popular Long-EZ designed by Burt Rutan as a platform.

Engines normally burn fuel and air at subsonic speeds to provide propulsion. PDEs detonate the fuel-air mixture into repeated, controlled explosions. The resulting supersonic shockwaves create thrust. In this engine, the thrust is expelled through four tubes out the back of the aircraft. Remarkably, the PDE in this aircraft was made partially from off-the-shelf automotive parts.

Pulsed detonation engines are still in their infancy, but this technology may become common as it matures. PDEs are much less complicated and promise to be less expensive to operate than jet engines. Moreover, they offer a fuel savings of between 5-20 percent over traditional turbojet engines.

It’s easy to see how these experimental aircraft helped develop technologies present in our current inventory. What future technology do you think will be in our next test aircraft?

http://airforcelive.dodlive.mil/2014/09/five-innovative-air-force-aircraft-that-youve-probably-never-heard-of/#more-8773

Blame It On Hollywood? Let's Get Real!

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=7zzE_Hs5FIg

or

source - YOUTUBE

Indeed, Dr. Dick, They Are Physical And Real! BTW, I'll Let You In On A Historical Fact: It's More Than 3 Or 4 % …

It Seems You Fell Hook, Line & Sinker For Donald Quarles ... Will ET Be Here Soon? NASA Brings Scientists, Theologians Together To Prepare

Looking for extraterrestrial life is akin to a search for a cosmic needle-in-a-haystack, as evidenced by the above incredible Hubble Space Telescope image showing approximately 10,000 galaxies.

In large part, thanks to NASA's Kepler spacecraft, more than 1,400 planets have been identified beyond Earth.

A few days ago, NASA tried closing the gap between life on Earth and the possibilities of life elsewhere. The space agency and the Library of Congress (image below left) brought together scientists, historians, philosophers and theologians from around the world for a two-day symposium, "Preparing For Discovery." Their agenda: To explore how we prepare for the inevitable discovery of extraterrestrial life, be it simple microbial organisms or intelligent beings.

"We're looking at all scenarios about finding life. If you find microbes, that's one thing. If you find intelligence, it's another. And if they communicate, it's something else, and depending on what they say, it's something else!" said astronomer, symposium organizer and former chief NASA historian, Steven J. Dick.

"The idea is not to wait until we make a discovery, but to try and prepare the public for what the implications might be when such a discovery is made," Dick told The Huffington Post. "I think the reason that NASA is backing this is because of all the recent activity in the discovery of exoplanets and the advances in astrobiology in general.

"People just consider it much more likely now that we're going to find something -- probably microbes first and maybe intelligence later," he added. "The driving force behind this is from a scientific point of view that it seems much more likely now that we are going to find life at some point in the future."

Among the many speakers at last week's astrobiology symposium, one has raised a few international eyebrows in recent years.

"I believe [alien life exists], but I have no evidence. I would be really excited and it would make my understanding of my religion deeper and richer in ways that I can't even predict yet, which is why it would be so exciting," Brother Guy Consolmagno, a Jesuit priest, astronomer and Vatican planetary scientist told HuffPost senior science editor David Freeman.

Consolmagno has publicly stated his belief that "any entity -- no matter how many tentacles it has -- has a soul," and he's suggested that he would be happy to baptize any ETs, as long as they requested it.

"There has to be freedom to do science. Being a good scientist means admitting we never have the whole truth -- there's always more to learn." Consolmagno also doesn't think the public would panic when or if it's revealed that alien life has been found.

"I really think it would be a three-day wonder and then we'd go back to worrying about reality TV or the crazy things going on in Washington -- that's the way human beings are. Because I think most people are like me: we expect it's out there. And our reaction would be, 'Wow, thank heavens. It's about time."

Earth is no longer the center of the universe, nor is it flat -- at least that's the currently accepted thinking among most scientists. And we now know, conclusively, that there are a lot more planets than the ones in our own solar system.

"The number of habitable worlds in our galaxy is certainly in the tens of billions, minimum, and we haven't even talked about the moons. And the number of galaxies we can see, other than our own, is about 100 billion," Seth Shostak, senior astronomer at California's SETI Institute told HuffPost.

Watch this video zooming and panning through the night sky to show 10,000 galaxies photographed by the Hubble Space Telescope.

At the NASA/Library of Congress symposium, Shostak gave out some startling numbers about how many stars there are in the part of the universe that we can see. "It's a big number: 10,000 billion, billion. And we know that most of those stars have planets -- 70 or 80 percent. If all of those planets are sterile, and you're the only interesting thing happening in the cosmos, then you are a miracle. That would be exceptional in the extreme. So, the middle-of-the-road approach is to say, 'You're not a miracle, you're just another duck in a row of ducks.'"

"The bottom line of this," Shostak said, "is something like one in five of all stars may have an analog to Earth. That's a lot of habitable worlds, and, indeed, the number of Earths in our own galaxy might be on the order of 50 billion."

Those are big numbers to ponder.

The D.C. conference included a great deal of discussion about the upcoming mission of the Hubble's long-anticipated successor: the James Webb Space Telescope. As large as a tennis court, this deep space observatory is scheduled for a 2018 launch and will orbit beyond our moon. The Webb telescope will focus on new planetary discoveries and collect data from the atmospheres of those planets, looking for certain things that might point to what we would consider possible indicators of life.

HuffPost asked Dick, an astrobiologist, for his opinion on the continuing output of UFO reports around the world.

"I try to keep an open mind on this. Ninety-some percent can be explained by natural phenomena, etc. The question is what to do with the other 3 or 4 percent," Dick said. "My opinion is that they should be studied further, on the one hand. By definition, they're something that we don't know what they are. They could be some physical, psychological or social phenomena that we don't know about. But I think it's jumping to a conclusion that they're extraterrestrial. I don't see that evidence.

"I haven't looked at the evidence close enough to say that there's intelligence behind it. But I've seen enough to know that there are unexplained things that we should look at more, and right now, the U.S. government is not doing that."

Rendlesham UFO incident: Sculpture to be installed at forest site

The UFO model has been built using galvanised steel and painted black

A 'UFO' has been built to mark the spot where an alleged landing took place in one of the UK's biggest UFO mysteries.

In December 1980, there were reports of phenomena in Rendlesham Forest, Suffolk near a United States Air Force base.

The Forestry Commission has created a metal interpretation of a UFO to add to its trail which commemorates the alleged sightings.

The commission said the sculpture was "impartial" and did not seek to answer the mystery.

Olivia English and Nigel Turner visited RAF Woodbridge's East Gate where reported sightings were made

Three logs currently mark the spot of the alleged
landing site in Rendlesham Forest

Olivia English said the symbols on the model were "no
secret code - it's art"

The 'Rendlesham Incident' took place over three nights starting in the early hours of 26 December 1980.

Two US servicemen claimed to have seen lights outside the perimeter fence at RAF Woodbridge.

Since then, many books and internet sites have been filled with conflicting theories about whether it was an alien visitation, a military aircraft, the beam from Orfordness Lighthouse or natural phenomena.

The Forestry Commission opened a UFO Trail in 2005 and placed three logs in a clearing where witnesses claimed a craft had landed and disappeared.

The new UFO will be placed in the same clearing.

The Forestry Commission's UFO Trail leaflet has a
disclaimer about reported UFO sightings

Nigel Turner, recreation manager at Rendlesham Forest, said: "Clearly something happened - there's a party who believe it was something military, there are people who believe it was extraterrestrial activity and we respect all opinions.

"We think it will fit in well, because it offers a goal for people completing the trail and also give an insight into our timber-growing and conservation work."

Olivia English designed the UFO sculpture and said it was based on one of the servicemen's sketches and other descriptions of sightings in the forest.

She said: "The design is really about trying to find a middle ground and remaining impartial and creating an interpretation.

"The symbols on the side of the UFO were originally part of the trail, but we've recycled them to add another dimension. There's no secret code - it's art."