We’ll start off with a
little more about the recent legislation proposed by Congress addressing UFOs,
or what they now call UAPs. The legislative package tells us, “Teams of
Pentagon and intelligence community experts would rapidly respond to military
UFO sightings and conduct field investigations under newly unveiled defense
legislation set to pass by Congress.”
For those of you
keeping score at home, this specifically requires response to military
sightings… this suggests that sightings made by civilians and even law
enforcement officers would be ignored. Even more frightening is that these
would be military sightings and the veil of national security would drop,
leaving us in the dark, once again.
This seems to be a
response directed at the Pentagon. Apparently, those in Congress didn’t believe
the Pentagon response to their concerns was adequate. They are telling the
military that they expected something more.
In fact, taking this a
little farther, Representative Ruben Gallego, said, “Protecting our national
security interests means knowing who and what are flying in U.S. airspace.”
I’ll note here when the
University of Colorado Study, known as the Condon Committee, was operating,
they were denied access to UFO information because of national security issues.
It is an umbrella that covers a number of sins and keeps us from learning what
is going on, even when it affects all of us.
 |
| The late Edward Condon |
They were also
concerned with reports that UFOs (okay, UAPs) had been reported, frequently,
over nuclear facilities and weapons stockpiles. Although they might have been
aware of it, in 1967, a missile flight was knocked off line while a UFO hovered
over the launch facility. The Condon Committee investigator, who was on the
site in Belt, Montana, was told that this couldn’t be discussed because of
national security. You can learn more about that here:
http://kevinrandle.blogspot.com/search?q=Belt%2C+Montana
(Scroll down through
the articles because there is more about UFOs and their observation of the
weapons facilities, and the government claims of national security.)
You can listen to my
interview with a former Air Force officer who had some experience with these
UFO sightings in and around the missile fields near Warren Air Force Base,
Cheyenne, Wyoming, here:
https://www.spreaker.com/episode/22706890
And as just a couple of
examples of the UFO sightings that would be ignored under this new legislation
is one from Edmonds, Washington on October 30, last year. The witnesses
reported they had been out to observe the Aurora Borealis, when they spotted a
triangular object with lights on the bottom. The lights were dim but bright
enough so that the witnesses could see the shape of the craft.
A MUFON State Section
Director investigated. He learned that the object was large, it was solid,
flying straight and level and silently. There were lights along two sides but
none on the rear. It disappeared after about 30 seconds due to the distance.
There was no evidence
of any military or civilian aircraft in the area at the time. There were no
military drones flying and it was too large to be a drone. His conclusion was
that the sighting was of an Unknown Aerial Vehicle.
On January 3, of this
year, the crew of an Airbus A320 flying over Georgia, recorded an apparently
stationary object at about 39,000 feet. The witness, who wishes to remain
anonymous, made the video on an iPhone 13 Pro Max. The video shows the orange,
green and bright silver lights. Neither the Captain nor the witness made any
official report, which means that the sighting would not be of interest to the
new investigation. A report was filed with MUFON. At the moment, it remains
unidentified but the investigation has not been completed. I will note that
some believe this is a reflection. You can see the video here:
Another
triangular-shaped UFO was seen over Hudson, Maine, on December 14, 2021. The
witness said the craft was moving slowly over the road. There were three white
lights uniformly spaced and two smaller red lights under the middle white
light. The UFO was backlit by the nearly full moon so the triangular shape was
obvious. The witness tried to take a video said it came out as a photo and was
“all messed up.”
I’ll note a couple of
observations here. First is that neither of these recent sightings would be of
interest to this new investigation because there were no military personnel
involved. Two of the sightings involved triangular craft, which is something
that it becoming much more common and makes me wonder if there isn’t a
terrestrial explanation for the sightings, though none have been suggested. And
finally, as I mentioned before, many people try to take video with their
phones, but the videos are either less than adequate or there is some sort of
failure. All this suggests avenues for additional investigation.
Just looks like the reflection of ceiling lights on the window.
ReplyDeleteHello
ReplyDeleteI've been taking a break from UFOs until recently, but come back into things to look at all these developments that have been going on.
Overall, I tend to agree with your realistically cautious assessment of the prospects for much useful to come out of AOIMSWG (if I've remembered that correctly!). DoD has its role and that is national security, but that needs to be seen within a politcal context. It seems reasonable to suggest their focus will be on enabling rapid positive identification of UFO / UAPs. Given AAPTF only managed to identify one out of 140 cases, there would seem to be considerable potential for progress in improving sensors and software to help them rapidly identify all the various things that can cause these misidentifications...perhaps putting their pilots through a course with MUFON would be a start (joke!).
It seems likely that their reports to Congress will therefore focus on the safe territory of an increasing percentage of identifications. At some point they will end up with a residue of cases that look very much like technology but nothing at all like any plausible US or Chinese technology and that may very well divide opinion as to what to do with that residue of cases.
As there is no clear way of positively confirming the origin of such cases (in the absence of crash recovered debris or a clear hypothesis of what the diagnostic signature of an alien spaceship would be) the safe approach would be to not open that Pandora's box and write them off as insufficient information.
This all sounds very much like the Blue Book process, with fancier technology, doesn't it?
If the quality of the work is anything like the absolute disgrace that was AAWSAP then we could easily see some group of scientists brought in to review it, let them throw up their hands in horror and get the whole thing shut down, but I still hope AATIP and AAPTF might have been a bit more sensible in their approach and actually have some data rather than a load of ghost stories to work with. On a more optimistic note, the change in tone of the public debate is significant and might offer opportunities for a serious privately funded genuinely scientific study. Archival data, in a small number of cases such as Fukuoka 1947, USS Gyatt 1964, Trans en Provence 1981 etc., could provide a starting point, together with cutting edge modern sensor technology and data mining.
Regards
Anthony