Intelligence official say U.S. has retrieved craft of non-human origin

[Axxman300]

Here's the rundown of the hearing from The Warzone:

https://www.thedrive.com/the-war-zo...ed/Sales&utm_source=Sailthru&utm_medium=email

Some of it has been quoted and it's a rehash, but for those who haven't seen it all yet, this is good. For a whistle-blower he sure doesn't blow any whistles. Just blows.

And The Warzone published this article about a veteran air traffic controller's experience dealing with UFO/UAPs, and the process of reporting them to NEADS:

https://www.thedrive.com/the-war-zo...ed/Sales&utm_source=Sailthru&utm_medium=email

"The only other one we did have was a high-moving aircraft at 49,000 feet on a straight line passing over New York City doing about 900 knots,” Scoggins said. “We brought it up to the military three or four times and they just kept saying, 'Nope, we don’t see anything.' And I think it was definitely a [real radar] target. So my guess is that the military knew who it was, and they weren’t going to tell us."

Scoggins is confident in this assertion because, before 9/11, he said that the military shared the same radars that Boston Center used on the coast. He explained that if he was using the radar located in Riverhead out of Long Island, so was the military. If he was using Bucks Harbor radar up in Maine, the military was looking at the exact same thing.

The guy also worked the TWA-800 case, and helped rule out a missile. The article is a good overview of ATC, and how they deal with UFOs. At no time is any controller told not to report UFOs, and they are never threatened when they do report one. Which exhibit #522 of why the UAP hearing was BS.

 

[Darat]

He nails it most every time.

How is it that the Pentagon can't but pass these off as unidentifieds.



Oh. I already answered that. Natural born American "suckers born every minute."

Because after 70 years and undoubtedly hundreds of in depth investigation which all end up with a mundane answer there isn't any reason for them to spend any significant resources in pinning down yet another mundane event.

 

[P.J. Denyer]

YES! I was just thinking given the surface area of Russia they must have far more crashed UFOs than the US. Also the Alien FDAequiv seriously needs to do something about the number of crashes on Sol 3. Presumably the MiB recover the black boxes?

It never used to happen until they opened that late night bar on Venus, it's brought the whole so!ar system down.

 

[Foster Zygote]

Yes, it's the same person.

As said before, Grusch is unable to produce anything like evidence; his assertions are based on things that were told to him by other people.

One has to wonder if those other people are laughing their asses off watching him testify.

 

[theprestige]

Because after 70 years and undoubtedly hundreds of in depth investigation which all end up with a mundane answer there isn't any reason for them to spend any significant resources in pinning down yet another mundane event.

I sometimes wonder if there's ever actually been an in depth investigation. Or if there's ever even been a need for an in depth investigation.

I suspect it doesn't really take more than a cursory investigation to sort any UFO report into one of a few categories:

- not enough info to bother investigating further

- transient sensor anomaly; the manufacturer might be interested in figuring out how to mitigate or eliminate it, or they might not if the cost-benefit analysis doesn't pencil out to at least marginal profit

- obvious air traffic confusion; the FAA might want to look into it if it seems like it might be a big enough potential problem

- the military being cagey about the quality of their sensors, the nature of their experimental aircraft, or both

I'm convinced that hearings like this are just legislators showboating, and not part of any kind of "in depth investigation". I'm convinced that efforts like Project Bluebook are just government agencies going through the motions in support of showboating legislators.

I'm almost convinced that nobody is throwing serious resources at the proposal that we need to figure out if any UFO sightings might actually be alien spacecraft we didn't previously know about.

 

[Apathia]

Because after 70 years and undoubtedly hundreds of in depth investigation which all end up with a mundane answer there isn't any reason for them to spend any significant resources in pinning down yet another mundane event.

That's right. Flap madness after flap madness has yielded nothing. Why bother when you know its all going to be a fizzle again. Why present anything when the public and the media only want the sensational fantasy.

The current congressional circus will uncover nothing real, fade from attention, and be forgotten till the next wild hoax is pushed.

 

[Steve]

That's right. Flap madness after flap madness has yielded nothing. Why bother when you know its all going to be a fizzle again. Why present anything when the public and the media only want the sensational fantasy.

The current congressional circus will uncover nothing real, fade from attention, and be forgotten till the next wild hoax is pushed.

Keeps a few minor congress critters occupied and somewhat out of trouble for a little while. Probably a good place to occupy the time of the type of politician that takes this crap seriously. Can't do much damage here.

 

[angrysoba]

Mick West and Stephen Greenstreet discussion related to this hearing about to drop...

 

[Gord_in_Toronto]

I sometimes wonder if there's ever actually been an in depth investigation. Or if there's ever even been a need for an in depth investigation.

I suspect it doesn't really take more than a cursory investigation to sort any UFO report into one of a few categories:

- not enough info to bother investigating further

- transient sensor anomaly; the manufacturer might be interested in figuring out how to mitigate or eliminate it, or they might not if the cost-benefit analysis doesn't pencil out to at least marginal profit

- obvious air traffic confusion; the FAA might want to look into it if it seems like it might be a big enough potential problem

- the military being cagey about the quality of their sensors, the nature of their experimental aircraft, or both

I'm convinced that hearings like this are just legislators showboating, and not part of any kind of "in depth investigation". I'm convinced that efforts like Project Bluebook are just government agencies going through the motions in support of showboating legislators.

I'm almost convinced that nobody is throwing serious resources at the proposal that we need to figure out if any UFO sightings might actually be alien spacecraft we didn't previously know about.

I'm not so dismissive about Project Blue Book^WP. I do think (based on my reading at the time and subsequent history) that it was an honest attempt to uncover the truth about UFOs. Even if you think that many sightings were explained away in contrived ways, no alien or alien space craft were identified. Everything since has been pretty much rinse and repeat.

There are current comments and statements from those with sufficient security clearance and a need to know who say there is nothing that we don't have an explanation for. There has been no tangible incidence produced by anyone to show this not to be true.

Alien visitation cannot be ruled out. It may have happened but it is unproven to date.

 

[theprestige]

I'm not so dismissive about Project Blue Book^WP. I do think (based on my reading at the time and subsequent history) that it was an honest attempt to uncover the truth about UFOs. Even if you think that many sightings were explained away in contrived ways, no alien or alien space craft were identified. Everything since has been pretty much rinse and repeat.

There are current comments and statements from those with sufficient security clearance and a need to know who say there is nothing that we don't have an explanation for. There has been no tangible incidence produced by anyone to show this not to be true.

Alien visitation cannot be ruled out. It may have happened but it is unproven to date.

You're right. I was thinking of some more recent survey of UFO reports and investigations, which may not have actually occurred.

 

[JayUtah]

- transient sensor anomaly; the manufacturer might be interested in figuring out how to mitigate or eliminate it, or they might not if the cost-benefit analysis doesn't pencil out to at least marginal profit

Speaking as a manufacturer, we won't chase down anything that can't be reproduced. That means it has to have occurred a number of times in the field with the same symptomology and enough collateral information to suggest something in our design. Or else we have to be able to reproduce it at will on the bench. Reports of the form, "Yeah, this thing happened this one time and we suspect your equipment," aren't really actionable.

That's the problem with any proposed investigation. No matter how good you get, there will always be a percentage of happenstance events that simply can't be explained because there's no way to collect data to test among the various hypotheses. That's inevitable. And therefore the desire among some to attribute those events to a supernatural or extraterrestrial cause is always inevitable.

 

[p0lka]

It's the idea of multiple crashes that gets me
Who taught the aliens to fly?
Or should I ask, who taught them to land?

The congressperson that made the billions of light years statement was asking that very point, they travel billions of light years but don't know how to land?

Mick West and Stephen Greenstreet discussion related to this hearing about to drop...

thx for the link.

 

[Checkmite]

One has to wonder if those other people are laughing their asses off watching him testify.

That would be funny - but the likely answer is not. I would lay odds that those other people are themselves very long-time UFO nuts who just happen to have (or previously have) positions in military intelligence and that they genuinely believe everything they told him; and all of their information comes not from any actual personal experience as intelligence officials, but just from reading and watching the exact same UFO paperbacks and TV schlockumentaries that the rest of the general public has been watching since the 90's.

I voraciously read about all of this stuff as a kid. I could likely tell you about some obscure UFO "incident" I read about once in a Charles Berlitz or Frank Edwards book, but it would be meaningless. If, however, I was a high-level Air Force administrative or intel officer and I told you about the exact same incident but just deliberately left it unstated that I read about it in a book at the library when I was a kid, it becomes a "disclosure" by an "intelligence official" and that framing allows believers to fill in the gaps with preferred assumptions about the nature and origin of the information I'm giving and how authoritative it is.

 

[Fidelio]

Wait.... what ....."non-human" ```BIOLOGICALS````

Most of what We live with is "non-human".

Yer grammas petunias better watch out.

 

[Delvo]

"Biologics" was a very strange word choice. All kinds of organisms on earth are "biologic", and so are some things that aren't even organisms at all, but just chemical residues or fumes. It's very strange for something so vague and grammatically odd to have gotten no follow-up questions about what it really meant or even why he put it so strangely.

 

[The Common Potato]

Deleted.

 

[Blue Mountain]

The congressperson that made the billions of light years statement was asking that very point, they travel billions of light years but don't know how to land?

Well, the Mars Climate Orbiter travelled some 480 million kilometres before landing on the surface of Mars. Unfortunately it wasn't intended to land; it was supposed to go into orbit.

 

[Puppycow]

Mick West and Stephen Greenstreet discussion related to this hearing about to drop...

I love how Grusch avoids answering any and all probing questions by claiming he can't speak about it in public because it's classified. What a clever dodge. I hope they call his bluff. I wish someone would flat-out say "I don't believe you. You haven't shown us a shred of evidence." I also think it's unlikely that any of this stuff is actually Top Secret. Because it doesn't exist. Something has to actually be real to be a secret.

 

[Gulliver Foyle]

I've never heard that there were supposed to have been multiple crashes; just the one near Roswell NM (which the government was not the first to get to) and a bunch of sightings of non-crashes.

The guy who's supposed to be a fighter pilot or former fighter pilot is an intriguing case. He says others at his base often saw these things too, and that they discussed them during flight briefings & debriefings. Why aren't we hearing from the rest of them?

Because the other pilots quickly realised that the "UFOs" were ducks or similar aquatic birds flying at a much lower altitude over the sea in the opposite direction. Nasa pretty much proved that in the released video the best explanation was a bird at eight thousand feet at c. 40mph. Given the rapid changes in field of view the pilot was experiencing, if he focused on a bird it would gain the illusion of travelling very fast.

 

[Fidelio]

Breaking news! USA Government hiding evidence of space alien life and President Trump does not use for self aggrandizement!

(edit to add: I had to look that word up. I used to have to look up conspiracy back when it was fun.)