[bmk1245]

New answers from Bruce Maccabee.

*****************************

RESPONSE TO MORE QUESTIONS:

#17 In your opinion, is the material connected to either Wilmot's sighting or any of the proposed 'Site #2' (being the Plains of San Augustin, Mcknight Ranch or vicinity of Boy Scout Mountain)? If so, how do you draw the connection?

Don't know. Might be related to Wilmot or might not. As for the Plains of San Augustin, again not sure one way or the other. My opinion is based on the original Roswell
story independent of others. THere may have been two sites in the vicinity of the Corona-Roswell area.
Roswell is not a case I have personally investigated.

#18 Few questions in regards of JAL1628 event:

1) was there any attempt to simulate backscattering from contrails to explain crewmen sighting (two UFOs)?
2) could the "heat" (crew experienced) be caused by human psychology (I'm not implying they were "a little bit out of order", not by any means), and not by the actual heat release from UFOs (such amount of heat would drive US defence satellites "crazy")?
3) was there other flights, on the same route, in the period of few hours before the JAL1628?
4) don't you find a little bit strange, that UFOs appeared on the left side of JAL1628 only (coincidence?)?

1) not to my knowledge. But to attempt such a simulation would be expensive at least unless one were to luck out and happen to
be in an airplane cockpit when contrails were ahead of the airplane.
2) could heat be a psychological effect? Considering the circumstances (presumably sober air crew) it seems unlikely to me that
when the captain reported feeling heat on his face that he was actually reporting a "psychological effect" of seeing lighted objects
suddenly appear in front of his airplane.
3) not aware of other flights in the hours before that were coming from northeastern Alaska and flying southward (i.e.,
following a great circle route from Reykjavik to Anchorage).
4) How would I know how? I think( if I recall correctly) the captain speculated that they didn't want to present a silhouette against the slightly bright sky to the right
(skyglow after sunselt) And, by the way, the question is not correct: the UFOs were, for perhaps a dozen minutes,
directly in front of the plane

More related to (1) above: I don't know how contrails could simulate arrays of lights as indicated in the illustrations draw "immediately"
(within an hour or so) of the flight and then the more detailed drawings made over a month later.

#20 Dr Bruce Maccabee, (about the battle of LA) I find it interesting that only one "target" appears on radar before the shooting started. Most likely one of the balloons that appeared over the city. I think that the rest can be attributed to misinterpretation by untrained personnel and to fear and hysteria over the possibility of an attack by the Japanese.

Nothing in the search-lights, but smoke and clouds.

What do you think caused the "Battle of Los Angeles"?

I am puzzled by the fact that the powerful searchlight beams to not pass through the "convergence zone." I know that there is smoke and th
smoke can attenuate the beams, but I have a comparison picture of searchlights converging on a smoky volume of air and passing through.
I question the de-facto claim that there was enough smoke to completely "stop" the beams. Of course,a large, opaque object could
stop the beams. Maybe someone can provide a non-UFO photo of multiple searchlight beams being stopped by nothing but smoke, but
until I see that I will suggest that there was some large opaque object at the convergence.
I might point out that there has been a several year effort to locate witnesses and the locations of the searchlights and the location of the
cameraman. Witnesses have been located but that is all.

#22 how do i define the pictures that i captured from the sky are extra-terrestrials? as i know that they are not flying saucers, not life from earth or "standardUFOs". they are also invisible.
I don't know anything about the pictures that you captured from the sky. You say they are invisible. I don't know how you took pictures of invisible
"not flying saucers, not life from earth and not standard UFOs.)

#24 In 2003 I seen a black triangle hovering (aprox.2 min.) in the mid afternoon sky, I estimate that it was aprox. 3500-4000 ft, The thing made no noise that I could detect and it left at an incredible speed, Myquestion is have you investigated any of these black triangles that are being seen more freakently and worldwide and if you have what do you make of them? Or whats your thoughts about them?

My sighting was in mid Michighan,

I have not studied black triangle sightings. Did you report yours to MUFON (www.mufon.com)?

#26 In regards of 1984 DSP event, I have few questions:
1) did trajectory estimation was made from DSP-7 satellite's data only, or there was other data (from ground tracking system);
2) did curved line was "drawn" from intensity changes on DSP detectors, or from angular (in plane of view) movement of object?
3) what is your opinion about oscillatory behaviour of the object's intensity (Page 8, Figure 1)?


First of alll let me point out that I read the Aerospace(?) report on the incident back in 1984 or 85, i.e., 25 years ago. I recall seeing the
drawing of the trajectory, said drawing having been leaked by someone. However, I do not recall details of the report.
1) I don't know
2) I think angular motion but I don't recall the details (If I recall correctly, a star tracker first detected the object, but I could be wrong on this))
3) I don't recall any details of intensity. Oscillatory brightness is usually attributed to rotation of a non-reflectivly symmetric object, and that
might be the explanation in this case.

#28 Did I miss something? Who`s On First,And Dr.B.Mccabee He`s on Third right?
Where are His answers to Life and The Universe and Everything?
We all know its 42 right.
But Does he ever respond to questions like TFF `s and Hazzard`s Exibit-A ?
Or my question Are we really alone?

Yeah, I'm on Third. Who's now the pitcher and when Whoever gets a hit I'm hightailing it to home plate.
The answer to life, the universe and very thing is 3 sheets to the wind (42 is only a approximation).
Don't know what TFF's questions are. Hazzard will have to search for his own Exhibit A. THe trick is
not to give up prematurely (you never know what might happen next!).

#29 RELATED TO JESSE MARCEL AND WALTER HAUT AND THE INITIAL PRESS RELEASE.
Would this not release the military from responsibility for the initial press release, therefore making the famed correction the military's first official communiqué with the associated press?
I find that most sources cite the high ranking military as the source of the release, but it appears to not be the case. eg. "The Army Air Force has announced that a flying saucer has been found" or popularly, "The following day an extraordinary press release was put out on the orders of Colonel Blanchard, RAAF's base commander:"
Whom in your opinion let the "cat out of the bag" so to speak?

I think Haut was correct in saying he was directed to issue the press release and Jesse did not recall perfectly that Haut
had been directed.

[psyche101]

bmk1245, on 01 February 2010 - 10:43 AM, said:

#29 RELATED TO JESSE MARCEL AND WALTER HAUT AND THE INITIAL PRESS RELEASE.
Would this not release the military from responsibility for the initial press release, therefore making the famed correction the military's first official communiqué with the associated press?
I find that most sources cite the high ranking military as the source of the release, but it appears to not be the case. eg. "The Army Air Force has announced that a flying saucer has been found" or popularly, "The following day an extraordinary press release was put out on the orders of Colonel Blanchard, RAAF's base commander:"
Whom in your opinion let the "cat out of the bag" so to speak?

I think Haut was correct in saying he was directed to issue the press release and Jesse did not recall perfectly that Haut
had been directed.

Dr. Maccabee.

Thank you very much for your opinion.

[Star Man]

Hi, Dr Maccabee
In the year 2005, after I captured a video from the airport that showed two big invisible UFO objects I started to have an interest to taking these kinds of photos. later on, I took a few pictures of visible ufo light balls that appeared on top of my roof. then I also found some pictures that I capured above my house on another day & night which showed many invisible colorful objects. they are the popular shaped ufos and many even had a face, eyes and body. I still capture them sometime today. Recently I made 10 claims to MUFON, all under case 18817 file (long term visitation). they are posted (with pictures) on my blog: http://ufo-spacelife...t-to-mufon.html http://ufo-spacelife.blogspot.com/
they are a black triangle, boomerang, saucer…..etc, most of them are invisible. I contacted you with some of those pictures in year 2005 and 2007. May be you can’t remember me. I live in New Zealand. Because recently a researcher, after seeing many of my ufo and no physical life’s pictures, he asked me: why do you call them ETs. I said they have eyes and face, and that they do not belong to this world. So he ask: why do you say those are eyes and faces? That is why I ask you the question: how do i define that the pictures that i captured from the sky are extra-terrestrials?

[dazdillinjah]

Hi Dr Maccabee

I sincerely wish to find out

are you able to find out any more information regarding UFO's than what actual witnesses post onto the internet and that what is available by the release of official information ?

[dazdillinjah]

dazdillinjah, on 02 February 2010 - 06:03 AM, said:

Hi Dr Maccabee

I sincerely wish to find out

are you able to find out any more information regarding UFO's than what actual witnesses post onto the internet and that what is available by the release of official information ?

My apologies .needed to re=phrase that, tried but could not edit

I mean (posting on internet) other than photos or vids do we have much in way of physical evidences such as the Bob White object and aside from information officially released are there any compelling information that has leaked or otherwise been obtained via official sources ?

[Hazzard]

Speaking of the Bob White object.... What do you think is the best physical evidence of alien visitation?

And, have you ever read a report by a scientist, claiming ET visitation as fact, that passed peer review?

This post has been edited by Hazzard: 03 February 2010 - 09:04 AM

[kbeet]

i think it was 1975. if you remember that tv news story about trips to eternity in a ufo where people sold there homes and gave there kids to relitives to go
this was rea;ly in the news---no joke
anyway i started wondering if those ufo what ever they are can read my mind so i pictured my location and my town and my address in my mind. like a road map for them.. then i saw it it was like a big light with what looked like claws at its edges crawling on the sky.. i ran down the stairs and to the police station to report it. after they started jokeing with me i went home..
but i dont remember running down the stairs..
i only assumed i had to and is what i did
can you tell me whats up with this

This post has been edited by kbeet: 03 February 2010 - 08:20 PM

[dazdillinjah]

kbeet, on 03 February 2010 - 08:18 PM, said:

i think it was 1975. if you remember that tv news story about trips to eternity in a ufo where people sold there homes and gave there kids to relitives to go
this was rea;ly in the news---no joke
anyway i started wondering if those ufo what ever they are can read my mind so i pictured my location and my town and my address in my mind. like a road map for them.. then i saw it it was like a big light with what looked like claws at its edges crawling on the sky.. i ran down the stairs and to the police station to report it. after they started jokeing with me i went home..
but i dont remember running down the stairs..
i only assumed i had to and is what i did
can you tell me whats up with this

I dont think Dr Maccabee can help you but I have a gut feeling that you were making this whole thing up for attention

take your ritulin as directed next time

[bmk1245]

Question in regards of JAL1628 event.
What you meant by "strong" in your answer

Quote

The airplane radar did detect a strong target for a while at the left side

Strong return on radar display would be of different color than green. Was it the shape of the "blip" that copilot was refering to as similar to airplane? Or something else?

[bmk1245]

New answers from B.Maccabee

Quote

?>Hi, Dr Maccabee
In the year 2005, after I captured a video from the airport that showed
two big invisible UFO objects I started to have an interest to taking
these kinds of photos. later on, I took a few pictures of visible ufo
light balls that appeared on top of my roof. then I also found some
pictures that I capured above my house on another day & night which
showed many invisible colorful objects. they are the popular shaped
ufos and many even had a face, eyes and body. I still capture them
sometime today. Recently I made 10 claims to MUFON, all under case
18817 file (long term visitation). they are posted (with pictures) on
my blog: http://ufo-spacelife...t-to-mufon.html
http://ufo-spacelife.blogspot.com/
they are a black triangle, boomerang, saucer…..etc, most of them are
invisible. I contacted you with some of those pictures in year 2005 and
2007. May be you can’t remember me. I live in New Zealand. Because
recently a researcher, after seeing many of my ufo and no physical
life’s pictures, he asked me: why do you call them ETs. I said they
have eyes and face, and that they do not belong to this world. So he
ask: why do you say those are eyes and faces? That is why I ask you the
question: how do i define that the pictures that i captured from the
sky are extra-terrestrials?
<

You have to be careful with interpreting variations in brightness in
the image of a light source such as a "flash orb" or distance lights
slightly out of focus or moving.
This is especially problematical if the images or objects are
invisible! Diffraction and lens aberrations can create brightness
variations which, when magnified greatly,
can appear to be "faces' but actually they are random variations. They
become a Rohrshak test (ink blot test) for the observer.
I don't know how you prove that the pictures are of extra-terrestrials,
especially if they could be images distorted by diffraction and
aberrations.




>Posted 02 February 2010 - 06:03 AM
>Hi Dr Maccabee

I sincerely wish to find out
are you able to find out any more information regarding UFO's than what
actual witnesses post onto the internet and that what is available by
the release of official information ?
I mean (posting on internet) other than photos or vids do we have much
in way of physical evidences such as the Bob White object and aside
from information officially released are there any <compelling
information that has leaked or otherwise been obtained via official
sources ?

There are cases involving landing traces (about 5000 worldwide) and a
few cases involving electromagnetic effects. There is the
Ubatuba(Brazil) magnesium.
Some objects removed from people (implants removed from abductees) may
provide convincing evidence, but I don't know this for sure yet.
Clearly most of the available information is based on visual,
photographic/film/video and radar evidence. In the New Zealand case
of Dec. 31, 1978 we have a
rare case of a visually large bright light that was detected on
airplane radar and filmed (16 mm color movie film).
As far as leaked info is concerned it is clear that, privately, the AF
did treat this subject seriously whereas publically it pooh poohed the
saucer sightings.
But I find it hard to believe that in many sighting cases they didn't
see the "handwriting on the wall." There are two FBI documents from
1952 that indicate that
"some top AF officials" (generals) have "seriously considered" the
interplanetary theory.

> I require irrefutable scientific proof of the presence of paranormal
activity.
Lotsa Luck. (Better decide on what "irrefutable" means. Do you have
to be a witness - along with others? Rhetorical question.)

>Speaking of the Bob White object.... What do you think is the best
physical evidence of alien visitation?
I'm not familiar with all the physical evidence so I don't know what is
"best."

>And, have you ever read a report by a scientist, claiming ET
visitation as fact, that passed peer review?
No.
>I still await the compelling Exhibit A.
What really is important is what you do with the available evidence. If
you ignore or reject it, go do something other than "ufology."
If you think there "really is something going on" (as I do) then keep
looking. But don't throw out the baby with the bathwater.



>Posted 03 February 2010 - 08:18 PM
>i think it was 1975. if you remember that tv news story about trips to
eternity in a ufo where people sold there homes and gave there kids to
relitives to go
this was rea;ly in the news---no joke
anyway i started wondering if those ufo what ever they are can read my
mind so i pictured my location and my town and my address in my mind.
like a road map for them.. then i saw it it was like a big light with
what looked like claws at its edges crawling on the sky.. i ran down
the stairs and to the police station to report it. after they started
jokeing with me i went home..
but i dont remember running down the stairs..
i only assumed i had to and is what i did
>can you tell me whats up with this
No


>Posted 10 February 2010 - 11:43 AM
>Question in regards of JAL1628 event.
What you meant by "strong" in your answer

Quote
The airplane radar did detect a strong target for a while at the left
side

<Strong return on radar display would be of different color than green.
Was it the shape of the "blip" that copilot was refering to as similar
to airplane? Or something else?

You can read my paper at my web site.
http://www.brumac.8k...628/JL1628.html
There you will find the text given below along with a diagram of the
radar screen
drawn by the pilot.
..............................................................
FLIGHT engineer Tsukuba recalled seeing on the radar screen at
"about 10 miles" a "green
dot like, not exactly a dot. It was not a dot but stream like", i.e.,
elongated. He did "not
think it (the radar target) was the same lights as the one (sic) I saw
in front of us." Here
the flight engineer is referring to the visual difference between the
two bright "ships" which
had been nearly in front of the jet and the pale whitish light of the
"mothership." Tsukjuba
described this "second" light as "very difficult to see" and "vague,"
although he did indicate
that he saw it for "a total of 30 minutes." (10)

ACCORDING to Tsukuba (and also the pilot and copilot) there was
no problem with internal
cockpit lights reflecting off the windows since the internal lights had
all been turned off
(except the dim instrument lights). Tsukuba was sure that the
"mothership" light was indeed
outside the aircraft, but it was sufficiently indistinct and "hard to
see" from his seat on the
right side of the jet that he was "not certain whether it was lights of
a distant town or a
strange object." (10) He reported that the weather was clear and that
none of his instruments
showed any disturbances.

COPILOT Tamefuji recalled that the radar echo was "just like
other traffic, but, ah, I
thought a little bit large." He said the radar target image was green
and at a distance of 7 to
8 miles (nautical). He said he had "many experiences before in
checking oncoming aircrafts on a
radar" and in his opinion the radar echo was similar to a conventional
aircraft echo.

SEVERAL hours after the sighting the captain, who had the best
view of the radar screen,
drew a picture of the radar image. (7) His illustration, Figure 6,
shows a filled circle or



"dot" at the center of a thick arc that covered ten or so degrees of
arc. The image was roughly
the 60 degree to the left of straight ahead. (The radar screen was
marked with circles at
varying distance, 5 mi., 10 mi, 15 mi., etc., and the image of the
unknown was an arc lying
between the 5 and 10 mile circles.) In commenting on the radar image
the captain pointed out
that "normally it appears in red when an aircraft radar catches another
aircraft" whereas green
is usually the color of a weak weather target such as a cloud. The
fact that the echo was green
on the screen led him to ask whether or not the "metal used in the
spaceship is different from
ours."(2) One might also speculate on the use of radar signature
reduction techniques generally
calssified as "stealth." At any rate, the shape, size and color of the
radar target indicated
that the object was quite large and yet quite a weak reflector.

THE radar target remained on the screen for an undetermined
length of time, but probably
for no more than several minutes. "While we were communicating with
Anchorage Center," the
captain said, "the two pale white lights gradually moved to the left
side and to the left
diagonally back 30 degrees as if they understood our conversation and
then when they were beside
our aircraft (i.e., at about the 9 o'clock position or 90 degrees to
the left) they totally
disappeared from our radar." This is not surprising since the weather
radar as it scans back
and forth does not cover an arc greater than 90 degrees to the left or
right.

......................................................................

[Star Man]

Thank you very much for your advice, I will very careful to study those photos. Indeed I have no proof that pictures are of extra-terrestrials, because I do not know where they from, maybe they are not from another planet, Im only sure they are non physical life.

[Star Man]

Hi, Dr Maccabee
Here is a reply from a scientist referring to the photo which I sent him. that photo showed a very clear image of an object more than 2 meters tall appearing on the top of roof. it was only 10 meters from where I stood. I am sure that this object does not belong to our earth.

“I can see why you are worried. That is the most amazing photo of something unusual that I have ever seen, especially the way it was looking right at you. I cannot identify it, though I don't believe that there is anything to concern yourself with as these things just seem to visit & look at us & then depart back to wherever they dwell.”

I welcome MUFON for an investigation. I invited you come to see my photos too. they are related to the unsolved mystery of most UFOs. it is much more meaningful than just nuts & bolts.

[jholland]

bmk1245, on 13 February 2010 - 01:02 PM, said:

I require irrefutable scientific proof of the presence of paranormal
activity.

Lotsa Luck. (Better decide on what "irrefutable" means. Do you have
to be a witness - along with others? Rhetorical question.)

This made me smile.

[bmk1245]

Hey, UM members,

if there is no more questions, I think we can close this thread for a while (I will ask/consult with Saru about this). I hope you enjoyed answers, and I must thank again Dr Bruce Maccabee for his kindness to answer our questions.

bmk

[Saru]

Yes its been a good run but I think its time now for this thread to come to a close.

I'd like to thank Bruce Maccabee for answering these questions for us and also to bmk1245 for setting all of this up.

Thank you.