Jump to content
Join the Unexplained Mysteries community today! It's free and setting up an account only takes a moment.
- Sign In or Create Account -

Skyeagle's UFO research and discussion


skyeagle409

Recommended Posts

I am trying to put it in context that the verified data does not depict conventional aircraft or spacecraft of mankind based on the demonstrated advanced technology and performance capabilities that have been examined scientifically by experts and I understand what the data evidence is saying. In other words, we don't have aircraft that can fly at supersonic and hypersonic speeds within the atmosphere and not create sonic booms and that is exactly what the data evidence shows. 

In addition, I posted a reference link to a FAA regulation that governs supersonic flights overland and NASA's X-59 in order to make my point that the advanced technology as recorded by airborne and ground-based radars, ATFLIR sensors that verified the airborne radar contacts, and satellites as they track UFOs approaching Earth from deep space.

And once again, we now have some members of Congress who have reviewed classified material and verified that what they saw cannot be attributed to anything of mankind, and that in addition to testimonies by military and intelligence officials, pilots and radar operators.

 

What Radar Tells About Flying Saucers - Keyhoe (nicap.org)

Edited by Saru
Edited to act as thread introduction.
  • Like 5
  • Thanks 1
  • Haha 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

They are sending an important message and basically speaking, much of what they are revealing is unclassified and can be backed up with available evidence the is currently available under the Freedom of Information Act (FOIA) and in many cases, obtained online directly from the FBI, CIA, NSA, DIA, and DoD, which I have posted reference links to their websites as well. Here are two examples. 

National Security Agency (NSA)

us_gov_iran_case.pdf (nsa.gov)

Defense Intelligence Agency (DIA)

dia.mil/FOIA/FOIA-Electronic-Reading-Room/FileId/161710/

I don't want anyone to think that I am an UFO fanatic who jumps at every opportunity whenever a UFO sighting is reported to declare that ET was involved. Remember, I am on the record for stating that the majority of UFO sightings can be explained down-to-earth without ET.

A question that I have is why have verified radar data evidence and documentation continued to be ignored that clearly paints the contacts interacting with aircraft, which has been confirmed visually and with optical sensors as structured craft?

Here's a video of Russian Mig-21s intercepting an object that is similar to the Tic Tac object that US Navy pilots reported. 

Russian Mig-21 Intercepts UFO | Military.com

Read the chilling details on what happened to a Cuban Mig-21 that tried to intercept a UFO.

The 1967 Cuban Jet Incident (nicap.org)

Now, look where we are today.

 

  • Like 3
  • Thanks 1
  • Haha 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

5 minutes ago, Saru said:

Note to add that this thread has been set up (using some of his earlier posts that seemed relevant as a general introduction) to provide a dedicated space for anything and everything to do with Skyeagle's own research, views and arguments.

Skyeagle has also agreed to post such content only in this thread, to avoid the same types of posts and arguments being repeated over and over across multiple threads.

Those who do not want to engage him in debate can simply avoid this thread and those that do will know where to go to do so.

Please keep the comments here civil and respectful - this applies to everyone.

Thank you.

Thank you Saru!

  • Like 6
  • Thanks 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

On 2/21/2024 at 11:21 PM, skyeagle409 said:

I am trying to put it in context that the verified data does not depict conventional aircraft or spacecraft of mankind based on the demonstrated advanced technology and performance capabilities that have been examined scientifically by experts and I understand what the data evidence is saying. In other words, we don't have aircraft that can fly at supersonic and hypersonic speeds within the atmosphere and not create sonic booms and that is exactly what the data evidence shows. 

In addition, I posted a reference link to a FAA regulation that governs supersonic flights overland and NASA's X-59 in order to make my point that the advanced technology as recorded by airborne and ground-based radars, ATFLIR sensors that verified the airborne radar contacts, and satellites as they track UFOs approaching Earth from deep space.

And once again, we now have some members of Congress who have reviewed classified material and verified that what they saw cannot be attributed to anything of mankind, and that in addition to testimonies by military and intelligence officials, pilots and radar operators.

 

What Radar Tells About Flying Saucers - Keyhoe (nicap.org)

I would love to believe you, or all statements made by other people, but my brain can't do that without any direct proof.  Yes, I've seen something about 25 years ago that was never revealed as a black project.  Does that mean it wasn't a black project?  I simply don't know.

Because of my ASD I'm having hard time trusting people in daily life.  Trusting such spectacular claims, true or not, without proof is nearly impossible.

  • Like 3
Link to comment
Share on other sites

10 hours ago, iAlrakis said:

I would love to believe you, or all statements made by other people, but my brain can't do that without any direct proof.  Yes, I've seen something about 25 years ago that was never revealed as a black project.  Does that mean it wasn't a black project?  I simply don't know.

Because of my ASD I'm having hard time trusting people in daily life.  Trusting such spectacular claims, true or not, without proof is nearly impossible.

It's very difficult to prove transient events and you if you are lucky to have a camera with you and record an identified aerial phenomenon then it gives more merits to your case. 

There are reliable and credible observers and less reliable and credible observers. I think everyone would agree that people who serve in the armed forces and the police have no reason to lie about these kind of encounters (for example). And there are many such encounters because the army and the police patrol many different areas. 

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

11 hours ago, iAlrakis said:

I would love to believe you, or all statements made by other people, but my brain can't do that without any direct proof.  Yes, I've seen something about 25 years ago that was never revealed as a black project.  Does that mean it wasn't a black project?  I simply don't know.

Because of my ASD I'm having hard time trusting people in daily life.  Trusting such spectacular claims, true or not, without proof is nearly impossible.

I understand what you are saying, and at one time, I was in the same boat, but I eventually became aware that there are objects flying in our skies that are not ours. However, I am on record for stating that the majority of UFO cases can be explained in down-to-earth terms, but the object I saw in 1968 over Vietnam, had passed at high speed and silently over my base as it approached my base from over the South China Sea.

Why Military Personnel Believe UFOs And Aliens Were Involved In The Vietnam War - Inquisitr 

The objects have nothing to do with black projects, which is why I tend to bring up reports of the 1950s of objects conducting right-angled maneuvers at hypersonic speeds as they interact with aircraft, which is what occurred over Washington D. C. in 1952. In addition, we still don't have aircraft capable of performing right-angled maneuvers at supersonic or hypersonic speeds and not produce sonic booms.

PROJECT 1947 - July 1952 Washington D.C. UFO Sightings

Case in point is where on December 6, 1952, a B-29 on a training flight UFOs zooming around at hypersonic speeds. Radar and visual reports, accurate details, double-checked; speeds computed showed a UFO making 9,000 m.p.h.

UFO Report (nicap.org)

That pretty much sums it up as to why those objects were not aircraft because we didn't have hypersonic aircraft capable of conducting right-angled maneuvers in the 1950s or even today.  In addition, this is a worldwide phenomenon and the way UFOs have interacted with commercial and military aircraft in controlled airspace and over cities around the world is not the way we conduct business with our classified assets. 

In this next link, look for the name of Dewey Fournet, retired Major, USAF, on the Board of Governors page, because he was the Air Force officer whose Motion Study concluded that UFOs were interplanetary spaceships, which was also the conclusion of the Air Force's 1948 EOTS, when Air Force analysts had reached its interplanetary conclusion as well.

THE NATIONAL INVESTIGATIONS COMMITTEE ON AERIAL PHENOMENA (NICAP) (cia.gov)

Conclusion UFOs Are Space Ships (nicap.org)

And, yes, UFOs have affected our nukes. Review the documents in the following link.

UFOs & Nukes (ufohastings.com)

 

 

Edited by skyeagle409
  • Like 3
Link to comment
Share on other sites

13 hours ago, skyeagle409 said:

Thank you Saru!

Good to see you have created this thread. 

I think that what we call 'disclosure' is a relatively slow process and what you have been discussing in general terms is part of this process. I am referring to your links above and the discussions in other threads. When thr Government and the Armed Forces are involved then you ve got something very important which wasn't even acknowledged a few decades ago. 

You know what I mean, swamp gas, hallucinations, the lighthouse(!), mass hysteria and paranoia, electromagnetic mysterious phenomena, and every other ridiculous explanation offered in the absence of any real evidence. And all this to avoid (deliberately of course) to deal with the phenomenon or let's say to discourage the public to give attention to the phenomenon. 

  • Like 3
Link to comment
Share on other sites

10 hours ago, Zetorian said:

It's very difficult to prove transient events and you if you are lucky to have a camera with you and record an identified aerial phenomenon then it gives more merits to your case. 

There are reliable and credible observers and less reliable and credible observers. I think everyone would agree that people who serve in the armed forces and the police have no reason to lie about these kind of encounters (for example). And there are many such encounters because the army and the police patrol many different areas. 

To be clear.  I will never doubt that people have seen things.  It's just nearly impossible to judge whether what we see is possible with our tech because of all the black projects etc

What I'm having problems with is people expecting me to accept something as true because they heard it from someone in the know or that has seen something but the proof can't be shown to me because of whatever reason.

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Posted (edited)
18 hours ago, Zetorian said:

Good to see you have created this thread. 

I think that what we call 'disclosure' is a relatively slow process and what you have been discussing in general terms is part of this process. I am referring to your links above and the discussions in other threads. When thr Government and the Armed Forces are involved then you ve got something very important which wasn't even acknowledged a few decades ago. 

You know what I mean, swamp gas, hallucinations, the lighthouse(!), mass hysteria and paranoia, electromagnetic mysterious phenomena, and every other ridiculous explanation offered in the absence of any real evidence. And all this to avoid (deliberately of course) to deal with the phenomenon or let's say to discourage the public to give attention to the phenomenon. 

Thank you! 

J. Allen Hynek was the person who came up with the swamp gas explanation for the UFOs in Michigan. He was a UFO skeptic who said that "the whole subject seems utterly ridiculous," and described it as a fad that would soon pass. He also disagrees with Project Blue book and when asked what caused his change of opinion, Hynek responded, "Two things, really. One was the completely negative and unyielding attitude of the Air Force." They wouldn't give UFOs the chance of existing, even if they were flying up and down the street in broad daylight. Secondly, the caliber of the witnesses began to trouble me. Quite a few instances were reported by military pilots, for example, and I knew them to be fairly well-trained, so this is when I first began to think that, well, maybe there was something to all this."

J. Allen Hynek - Wikipedia

I have examined some of the conclusions of Project Blue and was appalled how Project Blue Book simply fabricated many of its conclusions in an attempted to convince people that its conclusions were accurate and true. One of its Blue Book conclusions that I am very familiar with was the RB-47 incident where a UFO interacted with a jet bomber. 

An Air Force RB-47, equipped with electronic countermeasures (ECM) gear and manned by six officers, was followed by an unidentified object for a distance of well over 700 miles, and for a time period of 1.5 hr., as it flew from Mississippi, through Louisiana and Texas and into Oklahoma. The object was, at various times, seen visually by the cockpit crew as an intensely luminous light, followed by ground-radar and detected on ECM monitoring gear aboard the RB-47 and yet, Blue Book claimed that the UFO that interacted with the jet bomber was an American Airlines propeller-driven DC-6 that was nowhere near the jet bomber at the time of the incident.

ProjectBlueBook-RB47-July17-1957.pdf (theblackvault.com)

 

RB-47 - DC-6 comparisons

RB-47 Performance

  • Cruise speed: 557 mph 
  • Service ceiling: 40,500 ft 
  • Rate of climb: 4,660 ft/min 

DC-6 Performance

  • Cruise speed: 311 mph 
  • Service ceiling: 25,000 ft. (DC-6B) 
  • Rate of climb: 1,070 ft/min 

What is interesting about the pilot of the RB-47, then, Major Lewis D. Chase, but later Lt. Col., he would later become involved in the Malmstrom AFB incident where a UFO disabled missiles of Oscar and Echo flights. 

Lt. Col. Lewis D. Chase

UFO Report (nicap.org)

In regard to the Rendlesham Forest case, I have posted a photo of the forest that proves that the lighthouse could not be seen from the East Gate and to further add, there was a light-blocking shield attached to the lighthouse that faced toward the base. And the lighthouse cannot explain Lt. Col. Charles Halt's memo or testimonies of air traffic controllers.

Halt Memorandum - Rendlesham Forest incident - Wikipedia

Rendlesham Forest UFO sighting 'new evidence' claim - BBC News

 

UFOs have gone from fringe to mainstream with additional professional pilots, radar controllers, intelligence and other government officials, worldwide.

 

CHILEAN AIR FORCE RECOGNIZES UFOS AS FLYING MACHINES PILOTED BY ET INTELLIGENCE:

"The other top reason that explains Chile's recognition and openness about the UFO question is that General Ramon Vega, former Commander of FACh, the Chilean Air Force, has personnally observed UFOs on two occasions while in the air."

FORMER CHILEAN NAVAL CHIEF SAYS UFOs ARE REAL:

"The former Chilean Chief of Naval Operations, Admiral Jorge Martinez declared that "UFOs are real". The ex-CNO made the shocking statement during an interview with a Chilean television network. The interview was conducted by journalist Rodrigo Ugarte from Teletrece, in Chile. The retired admiral admitted that he personally witnessed the sighting of two UFOs at sea."

ufo - UFOs at close sight: Officials - Chili announces UFOs are for real, 2001 (patrickgross.org)

Alien encounter sparked Soviet missile crisis

https://www.heraldscotland.com/news/12318039.alien-encounter-sparked-soviet-missile-crisis/

 

And now, the government refusing to rule out aliens. 

Ruling out aliens? Senior U.S. general says not ruling out anything yet 

Ruling out aliens? Senior U.S. general says not ruling out anything yet | Reuters

AND

Group Calls for Disclosure of UFO Info
They're out there — and the government knows.

That's according to a group of about 20 former government workers, many of them military and security officials, who stepped forward on Wednesday to say they had witnessed evidence of aliens and unidentified flying objects and called for congressional hearings about such sightings.

http://abcnews.go.com/Technology/story?id=98572

AND

David Grusch testifying about alien retrievals under oath before members of Congress and whose testimony has been confirmed by other intelligence officials who are in positions to know.

 

Recovered Alien Technology

 Former defense official Christopher Mellon says the US has recovered technology that 'did not originate on this earth' | Daily Mail Online  

Intelligence Officials Say U.S. Has Retrieved Craft of Non-Human Origin - The Debrief

Which reminds me of what General Arthur E. Exon, the person who overflew the Roswell crash area, has said:

Brig. Gen. Arthur E. Exon
Former Commanding Officer, Wright-Patterson AFB, OH

"Roswell was the recovery of a craft from space."

Brig. General Arthur E. Exon (roswellproof.com)

We are now on the right road toward Disclosure.

 

Edited by skyeagle409
  • Like 4
  • Thanks 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Posted (edited)
9 hours ago, iAlrakis said:

To be clear.  I will never doubt that people have seen things.  It's just nearly impossible to judge whether what we see is possible with our tech because of all the black projects etc

What I'm having problems with is people expecting me to accept something as true because they heard it from someone in the know or that has seen something but the proof can't be shown to me because of whatever reason.

We didn't have aircraft capable of performing the maneuvers as depicted in the following report. 

Senior Chief Operations Specialist Kevin Day (RADAR) 

An important role of the USS Princeton is to act as air defense protection for the strike group. The Princeton was equipped with the SPY-1 radar system which provided situational awareness of the surrounding airspace. The main incident occurred on 14 November 2004, but several days earlier, radar operators on the USS Princeton were detecting UAPs appearing on radar at about 80,000+ feet altitude to the north of CSG11 in the vicinity of Santa Catalina and San Clemente Islands.

 Senior Chief Kevin Day informed us that the Ballistic Missile Defense (BMD) radar systems had detected the UAPs in low Earth orbit before they dropped down to 80,000 feet. The objects would arrive in groups of 10 to 20 and subsequently drop down to 28,000 feet with a several hundred foot variation, and track south at a speed of about 100 knots. Periodically, the UAPs would drop from 28,000 feet to sea level (estimated to be 50 feet), or under the surface, in 0.78 s. 

About ten o'clock one morning, a radar site near a fighter base picked up a UFO doing 700 mph. The UFO then slowed to 100 mph, and two F-86's were scrambled to intercept. Eventually one F-86 closed on the UFO at about 3,000 feet altitude.  The UFO began to accelerate away but the pilot still managed to get within 500 yards of the target for a short period of time.  It was definitely saucer-shaped.  When the range reached 1,000 yards, the pilot armed his guns and fired in an attempt to down the saucer.  He failed, and the UFO pulled away rapidly, vanishing in the distance.  

INTRODUCTORY SPACE SCIENCE (cufon.org)

 

The UFO phenomenon is worldwide and here's one example of many.

Argentinean Military's Role in UFO Research

ufo - UFOs at close sight: the Argentinean Military's role in UFO Research (patrickgross.org)

 

 

Edited by skyeagle409
  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

21 hours ago, iAlrakis said:

What I'm having problems with is people expecting me to accept something as true because they heard it from someone in the know or that has seen something but the proof can't be shown to me because of whatever reason.

No one expects you to accept anything. Until you've witnessed something - everything can be dismissed by those who haven't had experiences quite easily, as I'm sure you see here. The proof can't be shown because anything can be faked now and the interweb isn't conducive to providing proof of this stuff and never will be.

  • Like 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Posted (edited)
12 hours ago, Zebra3 said:

No one expects you to accept anything. Until you've witnessed something - everything can be dismissed by those who haven't had experiences quite easily, as I'm sure you see here. The proof can't be shown because anything can be faked now and the interweb isn't conducive to providing proof of this stuff and never will be.

Those who have seen classified UFO materials that are not releasable to the public have stated for the record that the objects they saw cannot be attributed to anything of mankind.

Rep. Anna Paulina Luna 'absolutely believes' UFOs are not man-made 

Rep. Anna Paulina Luna 'absolutely believes' UFOs are not man-made | Unexplained Mysteries (unexplained-mysteries.com)

There are UFO believers who have designed advanced classified aircraft, such as the U-2, A-12 Oxcart, YF-12A, and the SR-71 who became UFO believers based on what they saw and became aware of.  The A-12 was flown by the CIA and was smaller than the SR-71, which was flown by the Air Force. 

How It Began

Clarence Leonard “Kelly” Johnson, Lockheed’s aviation genius, is credited with creating the OXCART and Blackbird.

OXCART vs Blackbird: Do You Know the Difference? - CIA

 

Notice the name of Clarence Leonard "Kelly" Johnson. He and his wife saw a UFO that opened his eyes to a flying craft that could outperform even his most advanced classified aircraft. Here is an account on his UFO sighting and notice that a team of his engineers had witnessed the UFO at the same location and time from their aircraft. 

The Lockheed UFO Case

The UFO Incident - The Lockheed Case (nicap.org)

 

Edited by skyeagle409
Link to comment
Share on other sites

21 hours ago, Zebra3 said:

No one expects you to accept anything. Until you've witnessed something - everything can be dismissed by those who haven't had experiences quite easily, as I'm sure you see here. The proof can't be shown because anything can be faked now and the interweb isn't conducive to providing proof of this stuff and never will be.

Fair enough.  What I actually was referring to are people like David Grusch.  He might be telling the truth but I would like to get at least some form of evidence.  I can't remember the exact way he put it but he was referring to something non-human.  If that's the case I'm certain there must be DNA samples.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Posted (edited)
On 2/21/2024 at 2:21 PM, skyeagle409 said:

The Air Force's Roswell Report: Fact vs. Fiction in the New Mexico Desert is proof that the Air Force has been hiding it's Project Mogul balloon flight #4 cover story in plain sight because the proof that there was no such thing as Project Mogul balloon flight #4 can be found in the Air Force's own Roswell Report publication.  

Since the report is extremely extensive and certain important information was conveniently buried within the report, which I might add would be like looking for a needle in haystack for anyone not familiar with the report.

 

Roswell Report: Fact vs. Fiction in the New Mexico Desert

Table VII, labeled, “Summary 0f NYU Constant-Level Balloon Flights 

Jun 4 Wed. Out to Tularosa Range and fired charges between 00 and 06 this am. No balloon flights again on account of clouds. Flew regular sonobuoy up in cluster of balloons and had good luck on receiver on ground but poor on plane. Out with Thompson pm. Shot charges from 1800 to 2400.     

                                                                          https://www.afhra.af.mil/Portals/16/documents/AFD-101201-038.pdf                                

In the report, there are no entries for balloon flights' #3 or # 4 listed in Table VII, "Summary of NYU Constant-Level Balloon Flights." Record show that only a service flight was launched that carried only a single sonobuoy and no weather balloon rawin devices were attached according to the balloon records.  Balloon records also show that balloon #3 flight was cancelled June 3, and flight #4 was cancelled on June 4, both due to clouds as in agreement with the CAA.

A Different Perspective: Mogul Flight No. 4 - The End (kevinrandle.blogspot.com)

The first successful balloon flight listed in the report was balloon flight #5, which was launched on June 5. Note that the debris on the Foster Ranch wasn't discovered until a month later. In other words, there was no classified balloon launched on June 4, 1947. In addition, Project Mogul balloons were just research balloons, whose flights and missions were published in newspapers around the country. From the balloon report of A. P. Crary, look what happened to balloon #7.

Mogul Balloon Equipment Stolen


" Week of 30 June - 5 July '47 Alamogordo....worked on Tests 9 and 10, finishing all Balloon tests? 7, 8, 9, and 10 off this week."

"Test 7, slated for 1 July postponed until 2 July as equipment was not ready. 100 tanks Helium obtained from Amarillo Monday evening. Also, radiosonde receivers set up by NYU personnel Monday but were not operable."

"Test 7 at dawn on July 2 with pibal 1 hr. first following with theodolite. Winds were very light and balloons up between an air base and mountains most of time. Included cluster of met balloons. Followed by C-54 for several hours finally landed mountains near road to Cloudcroft. Before gear could be recovered, most of it had been stolen."

https://www.afhra.af.mil/Portals/16/documents/AFD-101201-038.pdf 

Project Mogul balloons were sometimes recovered by civilians for rewards.

 

Attached Questionnaire Attached To Mogul balloons

Please answer this and send to us so that we may pay you the Reward.

1. On what date and at what hour was the balloon discovered?
2. Where was it discovered? (Approximate distance and direction
from nearest town on map?)
3. Was it observed descending? If so, at what time?
4. Did it float down slowly or fall rapidly?
5. How much kerosene was there in the tank?

C. S. Schneider
Research Division
New York University
University Heights
Bronx 53. New York

 

ATTACHED REWARD NOTICE

This is special weather equipment Sent aloft on research by New York University
It is important that the equipment be recovered. The finder L requested to protect
the equipment from damage or theft. and to telegraph collect to: Mr. C. 5. Schneider.
York University. 18lst St. & University Heights, Box 12. New York City.
L.S.A. Phone: LUdlow 3.6310. REFER TO FLIGHT #-__________

A dollar ($ ) reward and reasonable reimbursement for recovery expense will be
paid if the above instruction* are followed before September 1949.

 

Mogul Balloon Recovery By Rancher Sid West

June 8.
Sun. Rancher, Sid West, found balloon train 25 mi south of High Rolls in mountains. Contacted him and made arrangements to recover equipment Monday. Got all recordings of balloon flights. Took Treland, Mears, Yinton, Olsen to Alamogordo to catch train this pm
June 9 Mon.
Bill Godbee and Do" Reynolds went out to Sid West's ranch south of High Rolls and brought back recovered balloons- clock, 2 radiosondes. sonobuoy and microphone and lower part of dribbler. Bill Edmond o" cleaning up hanger and sorting out equipment of NYU. Worked today on balloon records (GR8) f rom north hanger. No definite signals obtained. Took inventory.

https://www.afhra.af.mil/Portals/16/documents/AFD-101201-038.pdf 

 

Why was there no weather balloon cover story for the balloon train recovery by rancher Sid West?!  The balloon flights and their missions were published in newspapers around the country. In other words, the public was aware of those balloon flights since it is very clear those balloon flights were not classified at all. 

* New York Herald Tribune, July 13
28 Balloons Fail To Send Reports on Cosmic Rays
--Attain 20-Mile Altitude, but Equipment Does Not Give Nuclear Explosion Data


* Newark Evening News, July 14
Sky Experiment Apparatus Found
Flight in Stratosphere Fails to Show Nuclear Explosions Data

Princeton_July12 (homestead.com)

 

To sum it up, the Air Force mislead the public for decades that a weather balloon was recovered on the Foster Ranch, but decades later, discarded its weather balloon that never was in favor of a Project Mogul balloon flight #4 that records show was a balloon flight that never was.

Now, the important question to ask is why did the Air Force add alien bodies to its 1997 Roswell Report? Perhaps, that original newspaper headline on July 8, 1947, of a captured a flying saucer on a ranch may have had something to do with it while on that same day Muroc AAF was reporting flying saucers/discs over California.

 Muroc AAF, Incidents 

Muroc AAF, California
July 7, 8, 1947

According to Captain Edward Ruppelt, the top secret "Estimate of the Situation", which was that the UFOs were interplanetary, listed this very case as one which suggested that conclusion. 

Muroc Case Report Directory (nicap.org)

 

 

Edited by skyeagle409
  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

 

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

22 hours ago, iAlrakis said:

Fair enough.  What I actually was referring to are people like David Grusch.  He might be telling the truth but I would like to get at least some form of evidence.  I can't remember the exact way he put it but he was referring to something non-human.  If that's the case I'm certain there must be DNA samples.

"Non-human biologics" is the phrase. It could be anything really. Monkeys, dogs, aliens whatever. Basically, something biological that isn't human.

***NOTE*** Mr. Grusch has never stated or used the words 'alien' or 'extraterrestrial'.

  • Like 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

53 minutes ago, Trelane said:

"Non-human biologics" is the phrase. It could be anything really. Monkeys, dogs, aliens whatever. Basically, something biological that isn't human.

***NOTE*** Mr. Grusch has never stated or used the words 'alien' or 'extraterrestrial'.

Or indeed, a pork pie.   Or a leaf, insect or even just a bit of dirt. 

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

If UFOs are extraterrestrial drones or spacecraft, what motivation could the aliens have to show us their technology?

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

15 hours ago, Trelane said:

"Non-human biologics" is the phrase. It could be anything really. Monkeys, dogs, aliens whatever. Basically, something biological that isn't human.

***NOTE*** Mr. Grusch has never stated or used the words 'alien' or 'extraterrestrial'.

David Grusch

A former intelligence official turned whistleblower has given Congress and the Intelligence Community Inspector General extensive classified information about deeply covert programs that he says possess retrieved intact and partially intact craft of non-human origin.

Grusch said the recoveries of partial fragments through and up to intact vehicles have been made for decades through the present day by the government, its allies, and defense contractors. Analysis has determined that the objects retrieved are of exotic origin (non-human intelligence, whether extraterrestrial or unknown origin) based on the vehicle morphologies and material science testing and the possession of unique atomic arrangements and radiological signatures,” he said.

Intelligence Officials Say U.S. Has Retrieved Craft of Non-Human Origin - The Debrief

 

 

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

14 hours ago, Essan said:

Or indeed, a pork pie.   Or a leaf, insect or even just a bit of dirt. 

It is safe to assume that a leaf, insect or even a bit of dirt could not have built advanced craft that far outperformed even our most advanced jets flying in the skies today nor responsible for an incident that occurred in 1995 over Argentina.

 

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

13 hours ago, Theo Retical said:

If UFOs are extraterrestrial drones or spacecraft, what motivation could the aliens have to show us their technology?

I do not have a clear answer other than there is a special interest in our nukes. However, there are reports that date back for centuries.

The following was published by the Department of Physics - USAF,  INTRODUCTORY SPACE SCIENCE - VOLUME II 

33.6 CONCLUSION 

From available information, the UFO phenomenon appears to have been global in nature for almost 50,000 years. 

INTRODUCTORY SPACE SCIENCE (cufon.org)

 

 

 

.

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

21 hours ago, Theo Retical said:

If UFOs are extraterrestrial drones or spacecraft, what motivation could the aliens have to show us their technology?

We are sending tech to other planets.  I don't see what's so different.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

 

UFO Beams Green Light Onto Helicopter 

"When we got out, everything was green. I saw that thing and the helicopter." The witnesses agreed that the helicopter was green "because of the light from the thing up above....It was so bright that you couldn't see too far." 

UFO Beams Green Light Onto Helicopter - UFO Evidence

 

 

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

21 hours ago, iAlrakis said:

We are sending tech to other planets.  I don't see what's so different.

Take for example the USS Nimitz UFO incident. The UFO could have easily hidden beneath the surface of the ocean, but it didn't. Instead, it made a show for the crew memebers. The question isn't why extraterrestrials could have sent UFOs to Earth. The question is why they "play" with humans this way.

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • The topic was locked
  • The topic was unlocked

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now
  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    • No registered users viewing this page.