Stunning New Video - Alien Reverse Engineered Vehicles (the Fluxliner!) and ZPE

Stephen Bassett's Paradigm Research Group released a link to this just recently along with Stephen's rather stunning appearance on the C2C show two nights ago alleging that the U.S. government has been silencing UFO and black project whistleblowers by way of weaponized cancer and poisoning. I can't give you a link for the C2C show but look for the Sunday night, 3/2/2014 show, first hour; Bassett's interview starts about 10 minutes in. It was obvious that Bassett was very hesitant to bring his fears out in the open and the discussion left me jaw-dropped; not that I didn't know this was going on (Judyth Vary Baker, Lee Harvey Oswald's mistress, reported that she was hired to work for government entities weaponizing cancer back in 1963).

James Allen, one of the men who was involved in the production of this very detailed and fascinating video died suddenly; his toxicology report indicates that he was poisoned with an odd array of heavy metals including uranium and thorium.

Link here: Paradigm Research Group

and here: Tox Report

reply to post by signalfire


WHY DOES VIDEO HAVE TO BE SO LONG!!!

I'm jumping back and forth between work and ATS, and I really don't have time to watch this. Looks cool though, I'm not sure whether I will like it or not thus I'm posting so I can find this later.

It's utter nonsense.

You can't reverse engineer alien vehicles. You must have the methods they used to produce the equipment and technology. Without it you have nothing.

Maverick7
It's utter nonsense.

You can't reverse engineer alien vehicles. You must have the methods they used to produce the equipment and technology. Without it you have nothing.

Not true.

You have a flux capacitor.

Do you have any idea how hard it is to reverse engineer technology that is on the same level? Just look up the Chinese 727.

Maverick7
It's utter nonsense.

You can't reverse engineer alien vehicles. You must have the methods they used to produce the equipment and technology. Without it you have nothing.

,

What if the technology is amazingly simple? I don't even believe in this stuff, but we "suppose" that FTL travel is almost impossible, but what if the aliens found a really simple way to do it, and we replicated it because it's simple? The wheel is a simple thing, yet it revolutionized everything, and has since it's inception. What if FTL travel is as simple as a wheel? How do we know for sure it isn't as simple as a wheel? (relatively speaking, vs what our minds conjure up regarding how complicated it MUST be, because it's FTLT)

Are there any physicists/engineers that can confirm/deny the explanations for the construction given around the 45 minute mark? I skipped ahead to that point and it was interesting, but I'm not a physicist/engineer.

A "stunning new video"? Really? Sorry, but the first ten minutes, at least, is from the 2001 Steven Greer "Disclosure Project" National Press Club meeting. Since I have seen that several times there is no need to see it again. If there is more AFTER this press club conference, perhaps it should have been marketed as such. Meanwhile, here's a statistical summary of what all these witnesses saw. It's part of a much larger paper I am writing on Greer & Co.

Note that tables don't translate well to the ATS system as columns are lost, so you must simply read sequentially. There are only TWO values in this table: Number (of witnesses) and the percentage of the total, So for the first item, the number of witnesses who were in the military was 43 which was 61% of the witnesses. 23 of them, or 33%, were enlisted and 20 of them, 28%, were officers.

Table X: Statistical Summary
Categories Number Percent
Witnesses in the Military 43 61
Enlisted 23 33
Officer 20 28
Press Club Speakers 19 27
Saw a physical UFO 22 31
Saw lights in the sky 12 17
Saw radar blips 17 24
Saw pictures or a movie 9 12
Saw message traffic 4 6
Were told stories by others 50 71
Total 70 100%
Table X-2 (Note: Numbers are not additive because witnesses are in several categories each)

Now, maybe there is more to it, but the point is that it looks like a re-hash of the same old stuff we've been hearing for decades. You CANNOT expect to put up a 90 minute video and simply proclaim that one ought to "watch it" then chastise them if they refuse. That's a lot of time to dedicate to a recommendation from a single individual to spend time watching something of dubious quality. If Isaac Koi came on here and said, "This is the best ever so you should watch it." I would because he has a reputation for fine work and I trust him.

But there's no particular incentive here to watch anything from Bassett, who is not particularly concerned about the credibility of witnesses he promotes. He's on record as saying:

“The problem is not about our opinions about who is a laughingstock. It’s all about the government. Don’t worry about the individual aspects of people in the field. I don’t care about your background. Credibility is not an issue in the Disclosure process. I just don’t care. It’s not my concern and I’m not in a position to sort it out. I don’t give a damn."

Source: The Paracast, March 1, 2009

In other words, he doesn't care about people telling the truth; it's all about moving his agenda forward.

reply to post by signalfire


That doesn't change the fact that technology levels that are similar are extremely hard to reverse engineer.

Maverick7
It's utter nonsense.

You can't reverse engineer alien vehicles. You must have the methods they used to produce the equipment and technology. Without it you have nothing.

True , it would be like walking into a 5th grade classroom with an LED tv and say ok kids make me one just like it by reverse engineering it ...not gonna happen

JHumm

Maverick7
It's utter nonsense.

You can't reverse engineer alien vehicles. You must have the methods they used to produce the equipment and technology. Without it you have nothing.

True , it would be like walking into a 5th grade classroom with an LED tv and say ok kids make me one just like it by reverse engineering it ...not gonna happen

Or like going to a high school science fair and learning that some kid designed and built a 'star in a jar'.

Oh wait, that really happened.

signalfire
reply to post by schuyler

 

If you judge a movie by the first few minutes of it (where it's obviously setting up a context) then you may miss a lot.

I really don't care if you watch it or not. I posted it for those with some curiosity, not a judgmental point of view because of the various people who may speak for a few minutes in it.

What are you afraid of? That you may waste an hour and a half? Or that you may learn something?

I'm sure you waste far more than an hour and a half on a daily basis. Maybe come back when you get your PhD in quantum physics, so you can help explain the material presented after the first hour...

You Wow! easily. It's MY hour, not yours, and whether I "waste" time is simply your ignorant perception of what I do with my time, which, of course, you have no idea at all. As I stated earlier, I've seen all this stuff before. You are promoting a charlatan who is on record as saying he doesn't really care about the credibility of his witnesses. Not only that, your "startling new video" is from 2001. If it has more than that, why didn't you say so? Instead you just let us watch 2001 all over again. That shows a tremendous lack of effort on your part. You whip a video up in 30 seconds and then demand 90 minutes of our time? Phht!!

Now WHY should I invest time on a person like that? I mean, really: Clifford Stone? Carol Rosin? These people have been discussed for YEARS and yet you trot them out AGAIN???

And the reason I would listen to Isaac Koi is because he has a well-deserved reputation for presenting carefully-researched material. You, however, do not. Your information is of the same caliber as that of Steven Greer, Billy Meier, Kenneth Reed, and the Caret Drones.

Zaphod58
reply to post by signalfire

 

That doesn't change the fact that technology levels that are similar are extremely hard to reverse engineer.

No, but if the technology is incredibly simple, but based on physics the majority of us haven't discovered or perfected yet, it does change whether it would be simpler to reverse engineer though..right?

A lot of discoveries and innovations provoke a response like; What! That's bloody simple...why the hell didn't anyone think of that sooner! Or that kind of thing..i'm sure we've all said or thought it before at one time or another...maybe...just maybe, ET technology is like that...once we finish face-palming ourselves for missing the 'why didn't we see it before' physics and processes behind it all, building a version using familiar materials and construction techniques would be relatively straightforward...especially if we have had 7 or 8 decades to have a crack at it.

Thank you for posting the video OP, looks like my cup of tea.

Not watched it yet, but will later.

JHumm

True , it would be like walking into a 5th grade classroom with an LED tv and say ok kids make me one just like it by reverse engineering it ...not gonna happen

My uncle reverse engineered the human ear when he was 10. Now he contracts with the government working on very advanced electronics. Some of these you find on carriers these days(how fast can new defenses turn?) He's also building an airplane.. Some people are freaky smart.

Using voltage meters and high level magnification you can figure out what circuits are doing assuming they are there. Say they use fiberoptics... We don't have to also use that. We are all on the internet now, and all using differing technologies and solutions to the same problem. Once you have an example of an idea working other people knowing it's possible make much more progress than if they had not.

I saw a black triangle craft, so I know something like antigrav exists. Whether it was engineered or reverse engineered really doesn't concern me. There was no pressure under it, so I really have no idea how it could fly so slow 10-20mph, and low, but then faster than any thing I could imagine. It was also made of metal. I had that feeling you get when a thunderstorm is starting. The air seemed electric.

I've only watched the first 10 minutes but ill finish it later (now plus video time). I actually comment on topics presented, not boxed replies from past experiences. Even if the OP turns out to be wrong you still learn something, and even from the MOST wrong people you can learn. Call it thought experiments. How WOULD antigrav work? That is assuming you're not old and out of new tricks though.

reply to post by MysterX


7 or 8 decades, plus trillions of dollars and no civilian or congressional oversight...

Thank you for pointing out the obvious; and yes, for those who might be wondering if they should 'waste and hour and a half' the detail of discussion of how this craft works shows that it might indeed be very simple. So simple they might actually be pretty easy to build, given the funds.

And that many people have been threatened, jailed or worse for coming forward with the same ideas (based on Tesla's thoughts which are now over 100 years old).

The writer and director of this movie died of multiple heavy metal poisoning soon after this movie was completed and the main character Mark McCandlish, says he has lost his multiple decade career as an aerospace technology illustrator because of his involvement with this (he was told that his blueprint of it was the most dangerous drawing ever produced) and the end of the film details how he has been threatened, as well as the numerous people who have died mysteriously after doing like research.

If there's nothing to it and it's all the fantasies of a bunch of research physicists with extra time on their hands, what exactly is worth killing over?

reply to post by Maverick7

You are wrong to think that way . There is ample evidence of nations reverse engineering technology they know nothing about. From the Romans trying to reverse engineer Greek fire to the multitude of examples during the 1st and 2nd world wars to America getting examples of Russian MIGs. These are all examples of reverse engineering. Just because a craft might be extraterrestrial dose not make the manufacturing principles magic.

Great movie! I was curious, with so many replies to this post, why was it taken down so quickly from the live and recent topics?

reply to post by MysterX


If I handed you a piece of RAM and told yoy to build more how easy do you think it would be?

The problem is with actually building it. It isn't just a matter off "oh that's so easy" and you can just build it. You need tooling, and usually tooling to build the tooling. At some point you hit a wall we can't currently cross.