Saturday, June 08, 2019

Unidentified - It was Raining UFOs

The second installment of Unidentified suffered from the same problems as the first which were repeated bits of video, repeated statements by the witnesses, and a seemingly ignorance of the history of UFOs.

But before we get into that, let’s look at the good. I have said for years that the best UFO cases need multiple chains of evidence. In this case there are the video clips from the attempted intercepts of the UFOs. Although what we have seen is rather limited, there are hints that more exists, it’s just not in the hands of those of us in the civilian world. More video might provide the identity of the objects, or it might complicate things because it shows something that is truly unidentified.

The second chain are the witness testimonies. Here there are highly qualified Navy pilots whose job, and whose lives, depend upon their ability to identify craft at a distance. In a combat environment there isn’t much time to determine if the oncoming craft is friend or foe. They must identify that craft quickly and here they got a good look at the object, or objects, and were unable to identify them. This tends to support the suggestion that the object is not anything conventional. The eyewitnesses add to the conclusion that what was seen was not something that was manufactured on Earth.

This idea was later underscored by the appearance of another member of Luis Elizondo’s team. He was a man who had worked at the famous Skunk Works, and who was familiar with what was being developed in the way of the next generation of military aircraft. According to him, there was nothing being planned, let alone that was operational in the sense of being tested in 2004, that could account for the sightings from the Nimitz battle group.

So, we have witness testimony that is backed up by the limited video that has been released. But we are then told of a third chain of evidence, that is, radar sightings. Now, one of the sailors, a man well versed in the capabilities of the radar, an expert in its operation, tells us that he had tracked these same objects on radar. He was able to watch them as they paraded over his radarscope, flying at very high altitudes at speeds that were so slow that they seemed to rule out conventional aircraft. It even resulted in the ship’s captain suggesting that the objects be intercepted and that resulted in the visual sightings and the video footage and a new estimate of the speed. The “tic tac” dived out of the sky at such speed that it would have ripped any conventional aircraft into pieces.

There are now three distinct chains of evidence, that when combined, created a persuasive picture of the events around the USS Nimitz. If we had access to all of the additional evidence, there might be terrestrial answer buried in there… or more likely there might be the best evidence to date of something truly extraterrestrial is flying around in our atmosphere. But there is a problem.

Those data seem to be missing. The recordings from the radar and the airborne conversations has supposedly disappeared. According to the witness, when he was putting together an after-action report, he attempted to retrieve the data but found all the recordings had disappeared. He found that highly suspicious.

A secondary back up would be the ship’s deck logs, But Christopher Mellon said that they too, were missing. Not the whole deck log, but those for the relevant days. They should have been at the National Archives, but were not.

This means, unfortunately, that important parts of the corroborative evidence are missing. According to one witness, a mystery helicopter had arrived at his ship. The records apparently disappeared with the passengers of that helicopter as they departed.

And, just as I mentioned last week, this has happened before. During the Washington National sightings of July 1952, there were radar sightings, there were attempted intercepts, and there were visual sightings by commercial airline crews. But there was no reliable photographic evidence of the sightings.

The Air Force dismissed everything then as the result of a temperature inversion that was claimed to have been over the city at the time. However, those in the radar room on those consecutive Saturday nights said that the objects being tracked on radar were not weather related. I spoke with two of those men, Major Dewey Fournet and Al Chop, and they said that the images on the radar were not caused by weather. So did the radar operators and the Navy radar expert who was there with Fournet and Chop. Both of Fournet and Chop told me that one of the intercepts that got a little “hairy.” That told me that there was something real going on that did not involve temperature inversions and illusions.

The “hairy” incident involved one of the pilots in one of the fighters who found his plane surrounded by glowing objects. Other pilots, in commercial planes, when asked to look for the objects, reported that they did see them. In other words, as in the case of the USS Nimitz, there were blips on the radars and visual sightings by pilots. A wonderful combination of information that was ignored in the race to find an explanation that would appease the public.

In fact, these sightings resulted in the creation of a CIA sponsored panel to investigate the reports in particular and UFOs in general. Known as the Robertson Panel, their conclusion was that there was nothing to the UFO reports and that interest in flying saucers should be challenged in such a way as to dissuade the public from interest in them. Interestingly, Dan Wright, who appeared on A Different Perspective just a few days ago, had found CIA documents that suggested the CIA do everything to convince people that there was no CIA interest in UFOs. You can listen to that interview here:

Once we wade through all the repetition on Unidentified (Yes, we heard the witness say it was “Raining UFOs,” about 96 times), the number of witnesses is increasing, they had multiple tasks and multiple roles, and the eyewitness nature of the sightings, coupled to the video and radar images, suggests something more than a mistake on the parts of those involved. It is difficult to ignore those witnesses and the information they gathered.

The big worry is the lack of recordings and other written records. Not that the recordings and records suggest something different, but that the records have disappeared. Without those records it is difficult to support the case, but then, it is also difficult to reject it. Those missing records would supply some important answers. If the Navy didn’t want that corroboration, they could have made the records disappear…

I’m waiting for the next show, to see what they can present in the way of new evidence. They seem to be building to that point by dribbling out the information. It will be interesting to see what the end game is.


edithkeeler said...

After the success of Project Blue Book and after somewhat of a hiatus from shows like UFO Hunters, History is giving it another whirl with Tom DeLonge's group. The format is just like their treasure-hunting shows. Stretch 15 minutes of new information into an hour, and an hour's worth of new information into a season.

Richard B said...

Not impressed with the show at all. Given the two high quality articles in the NYT, would have preferred a HBO special where all of the principles, including senator Reid, were interviewed and cross examined at length.

Unknown said...

I am starting to think this is a prank that has gotten out of control. If you go back over the stories they appear to differ over time, and the backgrounds of some of the characters appear to be changing. Not unlike Roswell.

And finally, why can someone taken a video off a navy ship and upload it to the internet with no consequences. In the past, a naval person happens to take a photo from a submarine, and uploads it to the internet and they are charged by the military. Yet, with the Tic Tac UFO it doesn’t result in charges for uploading the video.

Why would the US military disclose the Tic Tac UFO, and yet keep secret the new experimental military aircrafts?

And finally, I believe the reason we can’t find intelligent life elsewhere is the difference in intelligence between them and us is greater than the 2 percent between man, and ape.

SamCalvin said...

I think it was the Robertson panel, not Roberts.

Brian B said...

TTSA and AATIP certainly has most of the UFO community a-buzz about supposed “disclosure”, but I’m not certain what we’re seeing is actually happening.

Most here think me a skeptic, but I really could care less if UFOs turn out to be ET or not. I do agree the <5% of unexplained encounters are real, it’s just that we don’t agree on the same conclusions as to what these objects are.

We should all follow the premise that the best science is done when as many opinions are considered as possible, preferably in the open and subject to peer review.

Observations and Opinions:

— As Kevin noted the Washington Post, New York Times, Fox News, and New York Magazine (here forward called the ‘Media’), all recently published articles (last week) updating us on the 2004 radar-visual encounter with the Nimitz Carrier Task Force.

— Note the Media published these updates with emphasis on the May 1, 2019 announcement that the USN had changed protocol for pilots reporting UFOs (now called UAPs).

— Media articles published 1-2 days preceding the first episode of History’s UNIDENTIFIED series featured the TTSA team discussing the Nimitz encounter.

— TTSA has stated the Dec. 2017 IR release was coordinated through the very same Media writers who had sway with their editors concerning “disclosure”.

— It’s been established that DeLong and TTSA offered public sale of investor stock without SEC approval, netting a few million $$ but were never challenged by the SEC.

— The TTSA core consists of people who previously held high jobs in classified aerospace and military intelligence who surprisingly “quit” their powerful positions to push for disclosure. Several still hold their security clearances and emeritus status in the Pentagon.

— Former Senator Harry Reid who sponsored AATIP has stated they have publicly available records proving the existence of UAPs and yet AATIP only discusses the Nimitz case.

— History, with reputation for sloppy UFO programming, creates a revenue generating UFO series that is supposedly the vehicle for worldwide “disclosure”.

What are we seeing here?

There’s a good chance what is happening is NOT “disclosure” but an orchestrated plan of shifting the conversation to one that favors the Pentagon’s deep black projects.

Notice the UAPs are called “threats” and the TTSA team wants to drive public awareness of these objects so that the public will “accept” rather than reject them with all the past baggage and stigma (hence the change from UFO to UAP).

It’s possible DeLong (a perfect patsy) and friends are being used by the intelligence community to help push their deep black SAPs even deeper with public consent while gaining taxpayer support for more Congressionally approved funding . All to keep the military-government contractor-complex financially fueled for the next two decades.

Nothing here seems logical. “Disclosure doesn’t come from a History TV series.

Unknown said...

It is interesting that the X-43 was flight testing in the Pacific Ocean on November 16, 2004. Now, would you test an experiment plane where there were UFOs reported two days before?

If the X-43 was to hit the Tic Tac UFO at plus Mach 10 in November 2004 would that be an act of war on the Tic Tac nation. Would the US risk alienating the Tic Tac nation undertaking a test?

TheUFOGuy said...

Since the Pentagon is saying that Luis 'never' worked for that program, and there is no real chain of command on those video's, I am still wondering if this is just a new version of the Doty diversion. Who is lying here??? Why, with all of the excellent daytime gun camera and other footage, do we still get poor IR video with almost no data. I smell a rat...

andycher said...

Still puzzled about how David Fravor got the nickname 'Sex' and why it would appear in an official document.


KRandle said...

The UFO Guy -

What is your source on this idea that Luis never worked for that program. I have seen John Greenewald's story, and I have heard what George Knapp said, but I haven't seen anything that is conclusion on this point. For me the jury is still out.

TheUFOGuy said...

Hi Kevin. I believe it started here, but more Pentagon people have said publically that he had nothing to do with ATIP.
In my hunble opinion, this is another rabbit hole created to help ufology stray from the path to some kind of truth.

TheUFOGuy said...

"Yes, AATIP existed, and it “did pursue research and investigation into unidentified aerial phenomena,” Pentagon spokesperson Christopher Sherwood told me. However, he added: “Mr. Elizondo had no responsibilities with regard to the AATIP program while he worked in OUSDI [the Office of Under Secretary of Defense for Intelligence], up until the time he resigned effective 10/4/2017.”

That directly contradicts an email sent by a spokesperson for To The Stars Academy of Arts & Science, a UFO research and entertainment company that Elizondo joined after he left the Defense Department."

Brian B said...

TIC TAC UAPs in the Persian Gulf?

An excerpt from an article in Mysterious Universe (link below) that I agree with regarding TTSA and UNIDENTIFIED on History.

“I’m far from alone in sensing that TTSA and/or the defense industrial complex probably have ulterior motives other than disclosure and aren’t telling us everything they know about these encounters or these objects. I still suspect that all of this is likely just a lead-up to a new arms race, recruiting propaganda for the Space Force, or the Navy prepping the public for a reveal of new paradigm-changing technologies; after all, much of the UFO waves of the mid-20th century are now regarded to have been a cover story for tests of formerly classified aerospace technologies like the first jet fighters, stealth aircraft, unmanned aerial vehicles, and ultra-fast reconnaissance planes like the A-12 and SR-71.”

— AND —

“All of this recent UFO news could very well be a means of obfuscating what’s really buzzing around in sensitive military airspace. If U.S. military personnel have seen and tracked these objects, chances are high that other nations’ militaries have as well. Maybe this is all the Department of Defense trying to muddy the waters surrounding what other nations know or think they know about these objects. Do we really trust “former” counterintelligence officers and former DoD “spooks” to tell us the truth on cable TV?”

Jay / Edith said...
This comment has been removed by a blog administrator.
TheUFOGuy said...

And more on who ran what...

TheUFOGuy said...

By John Greenewald, Jr., The Black Vault
Nearly two weeks ago, The Intercept published a Pentagon denial about the involvement of Mr. Luis Elizondo, and his wide-spread claims about heading a “secret Pentagon UFO program” known as the Advanced Aerospace Threat Identification Program or AATIP. Now, newly received statements from the Pentagon issued to The Black Vault specifically address a 2009 Harry Reid memo that is being offered by some supporters as proof of Mr. Elizondo’s alleged leadership of the program. Yet, it is now revealed that the existence of this document does not alter the Pentagon’s original position about his claims.

Pentagon spokesperson Susan Gough stated, “I can confirm that the memo you’re referring to is authentic… It makes no change to previous statements. Mr. Elizondo had no assigned responsibilities for AATIP while he was in OUSD(I) [the Office of Under Secretary of Defense for Intelligence].”

Her statement comes amid a firestorm of controversy, when on June 1, 2019, as reported by Mr. Keith Kloor, the Pentagon had also said, in part, “Mr. Elizondo had no responsibilities with regard to the AATIP program while he worked in OUSDI, up until the time he resigned effective 10/4/2017.”

Mr. Elizondo did not respond to a request for comment.

This statement, received on June 13, 2019, goes against many claims written online that a “new Pentagon statement” would be forthcoming that would further clarify the Pentagon’s stance, and confirm Mr. Elizondo’s directorship of the program. Most notably, on June 2, 2019, Mr. Bryan Bender, defense editor for Politico who authored one of the main articles breaking the AATIP story in December 2017, tweeted, “I’d stay tuned for a much more definitive statement from the Pentagon this week. The Intercept’s assertions and innuendo (it never definitively reported anything) were wrong. And the issue should be settled once and for all. Though with this crowd I won’t count on it.”

TheUFOGuy said...

Original tweet by Mr. Bryan Bender, defense editor, Politico.

Mr. Bender has since deleted this tweet, some time after it was pointed out the Pentagon statement was not issued the week that he claimed.

Mr. Bender declined to comment on why he deleted the tweet.

Although no correction has been made by the Pentagon as hoped for by some, Dr. Puthoff, co-founder of To The Stars Academy of Arts & Science where Mr. Elizondo is now employed, offered his support to counter the Pentagon’s assertions. When asked for documented proof or any evidence to the contrary, Dr. Puthoff only issued the following statement to The Black Vault:

Dr. Hal Puthoff. Photo Credit: To The Stars Academy of Arts & Science

“I have been following all the buzz back ‘n forth concerning Elizondo’s role in AATIP, and recognize that there are a number of misunderstandings – for reasonable reasons – given that the public doesn’t have detailed access to daily activities in Pentagon projects/offices. Unfortunately for the public, those not directly connected, e.g., in the Public Affairs Office, are often themselves sketchy about details concerning highly-classified sensitive programs for which they have little-to-no access for security reasons. However, I have no problem asserting that as an AAWSAP [Advanced Aerospace Weapon System Applications Program]/AATIP Contractor & Senior Advisor I continued to attend meetings, provide briefings, gain access to videos, provide Proposed Program Plans, meet with staff, etc., all under the aegis of Elizondo’s leadership and responsibility for maintaining continuity of the Program effort and goals until he resigned.”

It is unclear how Dr. Puthoff could have worked under Mr. Elizondo’s leadership, since AAWSAP/AATIP contracted work began in 2008 at DIA and Mr. Elizondo’s alleged leadership began in 2010 at OUSDI when the program was transferred. When asked about the discrepancy, or to clarify that the contracted work by Bigelow Aerospace Advanced Space Studies, LLC. who initially won the contract, continued after two years (or after the 2012 date when funding was cut entirely); Dr. Puthoff did not return the message.

Knot ice said...

Did anyone else notice that when you watched the program about the F18 pilots and then radar operators that they use the word fleet of them? Because I remember watching a show that was showing what the international space station (ISS) Ouside camera’s picked up with those outside mounded cameras saw a few times in real time because they shut them down shortly after UFOS where spotted by those cameras. I’ve seen released footage of loôk like a fleet of something leaving are atmosphere and sometimes coming back in. That seems like it would correspond. Of course it wasn’t during the time of when the fleet was see them, but it does give

Marcos said...

Kevin what is your take on the recent articles in the War Zone that suggest that the Nimitz encounter (in part) and the subsequent incidents off the east coast could be explained by highly advanced 'fake-out' tech developed by our military to disrupt enemy radr systems. The explanation of the balloon radar detectors sound eerily like what the pilot described: to whit, a square inside a sphere

Marcos said...

In case this wasnt posted, i am curious about how everyone feels about the continuing posts at the WarZone. As the Devoid Blog pointed out months ago, the warzone has been independently posting on this topic. Recently, they discussed various US programs designed to confuse enemy radar using a combination of electronic and mechanical device based tech. This may have included new radar targets that sound a lot like what was reported by aviators off the US eastern coast. To whit, "squares within circles"

So, can we discuss this?