upcoming government report will detail 'difficult to explain' UFO sightings

[pax]

Some interesting ways to investigate on the civilian side of things since the Pentagon wouldnt declassify the data on even one of the 144 sightings, even the prosaic one :

[yt]lx128Ln6HsI[/yt]


https://ufodap.com

Ronald Olch:

Systems Engineer, Research and Development for the UFO Data Acquisition Project (UFODAP)

Developed complete mechanical, electronic and software design and documentation from proof-of-concept in 2014

BS, Engineering and Computer Science 1973 and MS, Computer Science 1978, UCLA

Thesis: Computer System Architecture for a Brain-Computer Interface

Founding member of the Los Angeles UFO Research Group which met monthly from 1973 to 2015 and currently by video conference

Member of the IEEE for 38 years. Senior Life Member as of 2017

Member, IEEE Computer Society

Opened the first microcomputer store in West LA. Consultant for scientific applications of microcomputers. Subsequently employed by Teledyne Controls (aerospace), Walt Disney Imagineering (theme parks) and AeroVironment (UAVs), retiring after more than 30 years of engineering experience in 2013

A named inventor in eight patents and a lifetime interest in designing, building and programming embedded electronic systems

More extensive details are available on Ron’s LinkedIn Profile which may be viewed at:

http://www.linkedin.com/pub/ronald-olch/1/8a1/5b

[Shapeshifter]

[Exposed]

The report as expected is just a reaffirmation of the preliminary report a month ago.

They don't know what they're looking at and there is zero evidence to suggest anything other. Assuming of course you take the report at face value and not a deliberate misinformation piece to indeed hide some kind of secret project (which they've done before).


In other words, no aliens from outer space. Or parallel civilizations. Or gnomes in flying cars. It's just that....unidentified aerial phenomenon . Key word unidentified. You can try now and figure out what it is but jumping straight to alien origin conclusions without merit (other than because you want to believe in them) is just fruitless speculation.

UFO's can be "real". Aliens visiting earth is fantasy.

[pax]

Dont care that much who is behind it just care about the amazing tech at this point.

So Kaku and now Weinstein maybe we'll grab Tyson by the end of next month who knows... If enough civilian scientists get onboard they can push for a public inquiry and not just a classified one.

Jeremy Corbell releasing new info on Tuesday. He did say he had more data than had been leaked so far. For those who dont know much of the leaks we have seen in the past few years has been done thru Corbell...

https://twitter.com/JeremyCorbell/st...82606653939713

[AllexxisF1]

This is just a preliminary report. The Senate Intelligence Committee has the full classified report. They will hold hearings behind closed doors, speak to witnesses and then move to unclassify as much as they can for the public.

Moreover, what always happens, is that some materials are going to leak to the press even before that happens. Elizondo has said multiple times in the past that there are better photos and videos of this phenomenon. The Senate has that right now. All it takes is one photograph - one insane video to change everything and spark a holy hell this is f-ing real response out of the public.

This was only the first step, and IT WAS HUGE.

Add to that, folks like Corbell (who've had these photographs and videos that were classified in the past) are poised to release more pictures we haven't seen before. Pictures that are more than likely in that classified report.

What JAWS was the summer of 1975, UFO's will be to the summer of 2021.

[Silent-Runner]

What JAWS was the summer of 1975, UFO's will be to the summer of 2021.

we get a fun movie with terrible successors?

[AllexxisF1]

we get a fun movie with terrible successors?

No, we get real-life fun until terrible things begin to happen.

Wait.

WAT.

[Meteor_of_War]

Just got the chance to sit down late last night and finally read the report. It is about what I expected. This UAP "task force" does not have the man power and/or expertise to analyze all the data from the 144 incidents over a 17 [year] period they cited to come up with good explanations. Nor do we have the proper sensors and reporting protocols to make for an easy analyzing process. Meaning, the sensors we do have that showed the data were not designed for these types of objects. Perhaps future sensor tech will be better for that.

But, the report does seem to open the door to working towards having those reporting and analyzing protocols, and proper sensors going forward in the future which is encouraging. Its really all we could hope for, that they are working to remove the stigma of it all so that all the different groups - be it the Navy, Air Force, FAA, etc all can start reporting these phenomena in a proper way so they can be investigated and identified. We need to be able to easily separate the mundane UAP from the really interesting ones, and then focus on those interesting ones to see if there's any there there.

I am overall hopeful, but it does seem we have a ways to go before we get any real answers. But we do appear to be heading that way in an official capacity for the first time in history.

[mizzer]

Just got the chance to sit down late last night and finally read the report. It is about what I expected. This UAP "task force" does not have the man power and/or expertise to analyze all the data from the 144 incidents over a 17 period they cited to come up with good explanations. Nor do we have the proper sensors and reporting protocols to make for an easy analyzing process. Meaning, the sensors we do have that showed the data were not designed for these types of objects. Perhaps future sensor tech will be better for that.

But, the report does seem to open the door to working towards having those reporting and analyzing protocols, and proper sensors going forward in the future which is encouraging. Its really all we could hope for, that they are working to remove the stigma of it all so that all the different groups - be it the Navy, Air Force, FAA, etc all can start reporting these phenomena in a proper way so they can be investigated and identified. We need to be able to easily separate the mundane UAP from the really interesting ones, and then focus on those interesting ones to see if there's any there there.

I am overall hopeful, but it does seem we have a ways to go before we get any real answers. But we do appear to be heading that way in an official capacity for the first time in history.

IMO, finding more evidence of UAP technology should be as important as space exploration yet presumably cheaper to roll out. It could also lead to advancements in optics, radar, weather prediction, etc.

[Shapeshifter]

https://edition.cnn.com/videos/tv/20...t-newsroom.cnn

[Exposed]

IMO, finding more evidence of UAP technology should be as important as space exploration yet presumably cheaper to roll out. It could also lead to advancements in optics, radar, weather prediction, etc.

It's important to realize the distinction between evidence of "something we can't identify" from evidence of "technological flying objects".

The problem with UAPs is that there are still observed aerial phenomenon and processes we don't understand. No alien technology needed, just plain old interactions between sensors and mother nature. And that could be the case here. Or not, could be another underlying terrestrial cause. We just don't know, and may never know.

[pax]

Has to be said the navy has tried to communicate and they dont answer back so either they dont want to or cant. So all we can do is keep our eyes on the prize and analyze the vehicles as best we can and not worry about who or what is behind them.

But we'd be stupid to just leave the task force as 2 guys working part time collecting reports on this. Tho seems that wont be the case much longer.

[AllexxisF1]

This UAP "task force" does not have the man power and/or expertise to analyze all the data from the 144 incidents over a 17 [year] period.

Almost all the 144 incidents were just in the last two years.

[Exposed]

Has to be said the navy has tried to communicate and they dont answer back so either they dont want to or cant. So all we can do is keep our eyes on the prize and analyze the vehicles as best we can and not worry about who or what is behind them.

But we'd be stupid to just leave the task force as 2 guys working part time collecting reports on this. Tho seems that wont be the case much longer.

Did I miss where we've identified something as vehicles from something that was declared unidentified? Where is this piece of evidence?

[pax]

Dude ufos are real, they may be drones but even then using the term flying vehicles is pretty much established by the report. They are real physical flying objects which to me is the same as a flying vehicle.

[Meteor_of_War]

Did I miss where we've identified something as vehicles from something that was declared unidentified? Where is this piece of evidence?

The 2004 Nimitz incident comes to mind. That object was mimicking the maneuvers of the F/A-18 Hornets.

Most of that evidence is eye-witness testimony. But to dismiss it would be to dismiss the sworn testimony of 4 corroborating highly trained pilot/co-pilots that all had eyes on the object, as well as radar data. Its an extremely compelling case simply due to the credibility of the witnesses.

[Exposed]

Dude ufos are real, they may be drones but even then using the term flying vehicles is pretty much established by the report. They are real physical flying objects which to me is the same as a flying vehicle.

Ah, so it is your interpretation that is giving your meaning. This is a flaw that should be tackled, because it fuels unnecessary conjecture (this and other topics). The report only suggests these could be physical objects, but there is no evidence. The distinction is important. And even if they are physical objects, the report also suggests flight characteristics that could potentially be observer error or spoofing.

It still all boils down to "we don't know what we're looking at" and there's no evidence or reason to invoke extraordinary scenarios. The report also suggests there's more than one UAP types observed and thus would necessitate different explanations. That's enough to suggest to me what we're looking at is likely something terrestrially mundane.

Overall it's interesting how one can interpret this released PDF. On one hand it's used by the "UFO alien origins" community to somehow give credence to their beliefs, while those in the scientific community responded with basically pretty much what was expected. No evidence of anything.

[Meteor_of_War]

Overall it's interesting how one can interpret this released PDF. On one hand it's used by the "UFO alien origins" community to somehow give credence to their beliefs, while those in the scientific community responded with basically pretty much what was expected. No evidence of anything.

Agree with this, and could have been the intention.

I do find it kind of disappointing though that they couldn't just release all the data they have on the 144 cases and let the scientific community go HAM on it. I assume they are concerned about giving away vulnerabilities of our sensor tech, among other classified things, etc. Maybe I'm a little naive but I really don't think its that big of a deal.

Heading into conspiracy theory territory, I still doubt they are telling the public everything. If anything, to protect any secret black project interests. So in the end we'll never know for sure if we are getting the full monty.

[Exposed]

The 2004 Nimitz incident comes to mind. That object was mimicking the maneuvers of the F/A-18 Hornets.

Most of that evidence is eye-witness testimony. But to dismiss it would be to dismiss the sworn testimony of 4 corroborating highly trained pilot/co-pilots that all had eyes on the object, as well as radar data. Its an extremely compelling case simply due to the credibility of the witnesses.

Observed anomalies aren't "evidence". Evidence means you've removed the "unidentified" portion of UAP. Visual and radar data have been foiled before to suggest something faster than what it actually was, due to misreprentation of size and angle for example. Not saying that's the case here, but saying there isn't any "evidence" here to suggest something other than "unidentified".

[Exposed]

Agree with this, and could have been the intention.

I do find it kind of disappointing though that they couldn't just release all the data they have on the 144 cases and let the scientific community go HAM on it. I assume they are concerned about giving away vulnerabilities of our sensor tech, among other classified things, etc. Maybe I'm a little naive but I really don't think its that big of a deal.

Heading into conspiracy theory territory, I still doubt they are telling the public everything. If anything, to protect any secret black project interests. So in the end we'll never know for sure if we are getting the full monty.

Well, you know my thoughts on this. Drones are the next technical advancement that will determine future wars. Whoever excels here first will have an upper hand in any battlefield.

I have no way to prove this however, but I do know from history Uncle Sam likes to involve the UFO/UAP community to keep whatever they're working on a secret and people guessing. Even when the Pentagon tells you "no we're not working on anything secret".

This is affirmed by the utter reliance on government reports by the UFO community.

Any "legitimate" UFO (from outer space) would have the attention of the global astronomical community. They will be the first line for any true extraterrestrial object of origin and this is a tight mesh to penetrate through considering the sheer number of organizations, technology, and people involved. The "government" has no monopoly on space. The fact these "UFO's" like to congregrate in the airspace around military compounds pretty much tells you what you need to know.

[AllexxisF1]

Observed anomalies aren't "evidence". Evidence means you've removed the "unidentified" portion of UAP. .

Wut?

An F-18's radar and FLIR targeting data is evidence.

A cruiser's HOLY OFF-THE-WALL radar data is evidence.

The four highly trained pilots' visual account is evidence.

Evidence that this thing is real. Not an aberration in the atmosphere. Not swamp gas or some hologram.

It's real. As in you can walk up dry rub your peeper on it.

We don't know the make and model, or who's piloting or controlling it, but it exists. There's evidence that it exists.

So let's go from there, shall we?

[Meteor_of_War]

Wut?

An F-18's radar and FLIR targeting data is evidence.

A cruiser's HOLY OFF-THE-WALL radar data is evidence.

The four highly trained pilots' visual account is evidence.

Evidence that this thing is real. Not an aberration in the atmosphere. Not swamp gas or some hologram.

It's real. As in you can walk up dry rub your peeper on it.

We don't know the make and model, or who's piloting or controlling it, but it exists. There's evidence that it exists.

So let's go from there, shall we?

Yeah I tend to be more in line with this thinking. It is "evidence" when all those different sensors are recording data of something that is behaving like an intelligently controlled craft. At the very least its evidence enough of something that needs to be better investigated and that's all I'm saying.

[pax]

We dont know if they only congregate on military training areas. Its just where we have a concentration of equipment and observers able to detect them. If the FAA and airforce would cooperate as well as the navy has we might find otherwise. All agencies at this point should be as forthcoming.

And until we get make, model and technology used I find unidentified still applies.

[Exposed]

Wut?

An F-18's radar and FLIR targeting data is evidence.

A cruiser's HOLY OFF-THE-WALL radar data is evidence.

The four highly trained pilots' visual account is evidence.

Evidence that this thing is real. Not an aberration in the atmosphere. Not swamp gas or some hologram.

It's real. As in you can walk up dry rub your peeper on it.

We don't know the make and model, or who's piloting or controlling it, but it exists. There's evidence that it exists.

So let's go from there, shall we?

And what is this "evidence" of exactly?

[AllexxisF1]

Are you new here?

That's what we're trying to find out.

*Gestures at everything.

[Exposed]

Are you new here?

That's what we're trying to find out.

*Gestures at everything.

So in other words, you don't know?

[AllexxisF1]

When has anyone said anything definitively about what these things are, in this forum?

We're all just speculating Dude.

[Exposed]

When has anyone said anything definitively about what these things are, in this forum?

We're all just speculating Dude.

I'm not trying to be a hardass (really!). But the only point I'm trying to say is that the radar and visual data isn't evidence of anything other than an unidentified anomaly, because both can be misinterpretations of something more mundane. And the report just released acknowledges this. It may not even be physically real, because that requires physical evidence which so far does not exist. So when you say you have some evidence of a physical vehicle or craft, then you need more than what we have so far.

That's all I'm saying. And I'm fine with this being "physically real" while not knowing what it is. My main issue is jumping to far reaching conclusions without any sort of evidence whatsoever. Like aliens from outer space, when it could be just something much simpler (and far likelier) like some kind of parallax effect, iceballs caught in vortex, or even just plain old classified testing.

[Meteor_of_War]

My main issue is jumping to far reaching conclusions without any sort of evidence whatsoever. Like aliens from outer space, when it could be just something much simpler (and far likelier)

OK, you keep saying this over and over, but I don't think anyone here is really jumping to that conclusion. Sure, the ET theory has been speculated upon in these discussions at times but I really don't think anyone here in their right mind ever immediately goes to that extreme explanation as their first.

[pax]

If we can say we all accept the report summary that a significant percentage of the sightings exhibit physical presence and amazing maneuverability, including being stationary at altitude against high winds we can establish that some of the 144 sightings are some sort of vehicles.

[Exposed]

OK, you keep saying this over and over, but I don't think anyone here is really jumping to that conclusion. Sure, the ET theory has been speculated upon in these discussions at times but I really don't think anyone here in their right mind ever immediately goes to that extreme explanation as their first.

Hey I agree. But I think you may have hurt some feelings!

[AllexxisF1]

And I'm fine with this being "physically real" while not knowing what it is.

Great.

Progress.

Now that we can stand on a wobbly table of ok, these are real physical things, where do we go from here?

All the sensors the military has deployed are designed to identify and track military targets. What's curious to me, is that this phenomenon is decades old, therefore wouldn't the U.S. Government put treasure and resources into sensor systems specifically designed to study them?

If not, then why now? Is it because there is an alarming number of these interdictions into military space now than in the past. It's not mentioned in this report, but do you guys get the vibe that there trying to say that there are lots of these things in the sky now, and it's got the Navy spooked? Enough that there like Ok, let's go public and get some serious funding for this?

[Exposed]

Great.

Progress.

Now that we can stand on a wobbly table of ok, these are real physical things, where do we go from here?

All the sensors the military has deployed are designed to identify and track military targets. What's curious to me, is that this phenomenon is decades old, therefore wouldn't the U.S. Government put treasure and resources into sensor systems specifically designed to study them?

If not, then why now? Is it because there is an alarming number of these interdictions into military space now than in the past. It's not mentioned in this report, but do you guys get the vibe that there trying to say that there are lots of these things in the sky now, and it's got the Navy spooked? Enough that there like Ok, let's go public and get some serious funding for this?

UAPs of the past doesn't mean they're the same UAP's of the present. For example, the "foo fighters" UAPs only lasted during the WW2 planes, which highly suggests that phenomenon was specific to that technology of the time. And that might be the case here.

The report acknowledges this as well, many observed UAPs had no relation to others, and thus would require different explanations.

All of this just continues to reaffirm to me, and many of those in the scientific community, that the causes and explanations (if found) will be more on the mundane side than the exciting side.

What I'm curious about is the withheld data on observations that would fit like a glove for a potential secret project. I've read some of the observations could be accounted for by classified X series propulsion testing by one of the aerospace contractors or NASA itself. In this case there would be enough information given to the public, while keeping everything else under wraps.

[Meteor_of_War]

If not, then why now? Is it because there is an alarming number of these interdictions into military space now than in the past. It's not mentioned in this report, but do you guys get the vibe that there trying to say that there are lots of these things in the sky now, and it's got the Navy spooked? Enough that there like Ok, let's go public and get some serious funding for this?

I think a big part of why this is finally happening is due to the efforts of this guy, among a few others:



Getting consistently stonewalled while working in the AATIP program forced his hand to leave and take his work to the private sector to try to get more of these reports unclassified to the public, in attempt to get them taken more seriously because of national security implications.

[AllexxisF1]

The report has made it clear, these crafts are not ours. You must understand, the ODNI cannot lie to the Senate Intelligence Committee. Moreover, if any one agency knows the full breadth and scope of all our dark projects it's the ODNI.

So when ODNI says it isn't ours, IT ISN'T OURS.

Also, if this was one of our dark projects, we wouldn't fly it anywhere near populated areas, much less a section off military training space loaded with sensors. They would never do that.

So, we know as a fact, that they're not ours and even if they were they would never continuously engage day after day with our military.

What's really disconcerting, if it isn't ours, then it cannot be one of our adversaries, unless they've somehow got A.I. and developed these things with it.

Honestly, that scares me more than aliens.

[mizzer]

What's really disconcerting, if it isn't ours, then it cannot be one of our adversaries, unless they've somehow got A.I. and developed these things with it.

Honestly, that scares me more than aliens.

Bingo!

Whether it's tech that spoofs our military tech or something else, the national security implications are serious. They might be innocuous but let's find out, eh?

[Hapatingjaky]

Bingo!

Whether it's tech that spoofs our military tech or something else, the national security implications are serious. They might be innocuous but let's find out, eh?

Its the Nazi's from the Southpole and Moon.

[Meteor_of_War]

Whether it's tech that spoofs our military tech or something else, the national security implications are serious. They might be innocuous but let's find out, eh?

Yep, pretty much my stance on the entire thing.

[Shapeshifter]

The report has made it clear, these crafts are not ours. You must understand, the ODNI cannot lie to the Senate Intelligence Committee. Moreover, if any one agency knows the full breadth and scope of all our dark projects it's the ODNI.

So when ODNI says it isn't ours, IT ISN'T OURS.

Also, if this was one of our dark projects, we wouldn't fly it anywhere near populated areas, much less a section off military training space loaded with sensors. They would never do that.

So, we know as a fact, that they're not ours and even if they were they would never continuously engage day after day with our military.

What's really disconcerting, if it isn't ours, then it cannot be one of our adversaries, unless they've somehow got A.I. and developed these things with it.

Honestly, that scares me more than aliens.

Yea they wouldn't test a top secret vehicle against their own troops. At least not without informing them like a training exercise with a mock dog fight. If you are testing it in secret against them this is a great great way to have a blue on blue and someone ends up dying and a multi billion dollar prototype is a flaming hunk of twisted metal.

[mizzer]

Its the Nazi's from the Southpole and Moon.

I knew it!