It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.

Please white-list or disable AboveTopSecret.com in your ad-blocking tool.

Thank you.

 

Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.

 

UFOs & the Cold War: Project Palladium

page: 5
119
<< 2  3  4    6  7  8 >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Jan, 25 2015 @ 10:47 PM
link   
a reply to: ZetaRediculian

Have you read all the posts? At least one quite boisterous member is more than hinting at it. Interesting that the thread is near 90 flags, but only a handful of members have commented. The OP is half the first page with several supporting links to read. 90 people read all that, flagged, then buggered off without comment? Ok, then.

Again, I think the whole theory is comical.




posted on Jan, 25 2015 @ 10:57 PM
link   

originally posted by: Urantia1111
a reply to: ZetaRediculian

Have you read all the posts? At least one quite boisterous member is more than hinting at it. Interesting that the thread is near 90 flags, but only a handful of members have commented. The OP is half the first page with several supporting links to read. 90 people read all that, flagged, then buggered off without comment? Ok, then.

Again, I think the whole theory is comical.


This post is comical.
...and thanks for the reminder, I forgot to star and flag it.
edit on 25-1-2015 by ZetaRediculian because: (no reason given)



posted on Jan, 25 2015 @ 11:14 PM
link   
a reply to: ZetaRediculian

Sincere apologies for peeing in the face of this absurd and insulting group effort at weakening the entire modern history of UFO research. At least that's my take on it. If you're loving it, knock yourself out mate.



posted on Jan, 25 2015 @ 11:20 PM
link   
a reply to: Urantia1111



...the entire modern history of UFO research.


What books would you say best represent the literary corpus of American and or European UFOlogy of the past 75 years? Say the "Top 3" in that category.

Thanks in advance,






edit on 25-1-2015 by Bybyots because: . : .



posted on Jan, 25 2015 @ 11:35 PM
link   
a reply to: Bybyots

Communion
One of the Roswell books
and...the one about the Generals and pilots.
If he says "the threat", my head might explode.



posted on Jan, 25 2015 @ 11:43 PM
link   
a reply to: ZetaRediculian

"Messenger's of Deception"
"Operation Trojan Horse"
""The Fall: The Insanity of the Ego in Human History and the Dawning of A New Era" "

This last one is not a UFO book, but it explains how the pagan (beautiful & wise)
world was destroyed and replaced by a terrible mind virus, which convinced
suckers that good/evil and all sorts of nonsense actually existed, which has polluted
not just 'spirituality' but UFOlogy as well. It's my number one book period.



posted on Jan, 25 2015 @ 11:52 PM
link   
a reply to: Bybyots

Start with Richard Dolan's 'UFOs & The National Security State' vol. 1-3. Then check out Leslie Kean's 'UFOs - Generals, Pilots and Government Officials Go on the Record'. Then if you still think UFOs are mostly CIA electronic phantoms, read 'The Missing Times' by Terry Hansen.

Let me know when you're all caught up and I'll happily assign more.



posted on Jan, 25 2015 @ 11:55 PM
link   
a reply to: KellyPrettyBear

That looks like a good list and I might check that last one out. My list was a prediction of what the history of modern UFO research might look like.

Doh! I was going to say Dolan!
edit on 25-1-2015 by ZetaRediculian because: (no reason given)



posted on Jan, 26 2015 @ 12:09 AM
link   
a reply to: Bybyots

My recommendation would not be a "book" at all... While it's beyond self serving I think it's apropos.

Dig through the last 15 years of the ATS A/UFO forum, it's ALL there/here.



posted on Jan, 26 2015 @ 02:26 AM
link   
Really nice thread! As far as explaining aerial phenomena, it goes a long way...


originally posted by: Bedlam
a reply to: KellyPrettyBear

Then we noticed that the sound quality was weird, not open desert area but more muffled like inside a building. Someone commented on it, then one guy said 'where did the moon and stars go', and we all looked up at this flat black area right overhead, and that's when the lights came on. And it went up slowly until you could sort of see the outline of it against the stars, and it went thataway, zip! No sonic boom, nothing. We went back in, and everyone was looking at us and grinning before we said anything. Nothing was mentioned about it at all, though. Contractor harassment, I tell ya.


Bedlam, just for the record, to see whether I got this straight: it were these AFB guys who were playing tricks on you?

This thread also rang a bell: someting written by Vallée regarding crop circles: that apart from the ones created by artists:



Conclusion: something was coupling energy into the plants in the form of heat (as one of the respondents to my first post actually stated). Therefore the idea of a beam weapon is indeed one of the scenarios to consider.

and


The crop circles are close to ancient megalithic sites, which excites the curiosity of New Age tourists from America, but they are even closer to the most highly classified military electronics labs in Britain. In fact the roads to some of the fields run between two high fences behind which defense companies are doing research, and Army helicopters routinely patrol the area.

source
more articles by Vallée

Kind of converges with Bedlam's explanations...
edit on 26-1-2015 by Agnost because: correction



posted on Jan, 26 2015 @ 05:03 AM
link   
a reply to: mirageman

In 1998 I was working as as an Air Traffic Controller at Minot AFB, ND on a mid shift and I noticed a large "primary only" target (no transponder) heading very fast toward the base. I turned all the altitude filters off as I thought it may be something above my airspace and no transponder information showed up. Then to my suprise when it arrived over the base I expected to see the target continue after passing over the Radar but nothing showed up on the other side. About a minute passed and the target appeared heading back the direction it had came at the same rate of speed.

About an hour later I got a phone call from a buddy of mine working at Airfield Management asking if I had worked any aircraft in the past hour or so. I told him no and asked why? He then told me that while he was out doing taxiway and runway lighting checks he was on the main parking ramp and a bright light appeared above his truck and essentially blinded him like it was spot lighting the truck and he got out of the truck and could see nothing but the light just above and ahead of his location where it remained for 1 minute and then disappeared. No sound or anything else.

I told him about the target that I saw around the same time and I just remember a very excited conversation about it for about 10 minutes.

Note: I was 20 years old at the time, and really had no where near the interest or knowledge of the UFO phenomenon that I do today.

While I find this post very informative and commend you on the content and research that went into it, I believe it does not solely explain off all Radar sitings nor does it provide any proof one way or the other that this project is the "explain all" for UFO sightings.

V/r,

-Atcgod
edit on 26-1-2015 by AtcGod because: (no reason given)

edit on 26-1-2015 by AtcGod because: (no reason given)



posted on Jan, 26 2015 @ 05:37 AM
link   

originally posted by: Urantia1111
a reply to: mirageman

So, what exactly is this? What's being said? That 70 years of carefully documented UFO sightings are nothing more than a bunch of radar tricks? Come on. I'm not even thinking about buying that.

What this looks like to me is a pathetic attempt to erase or explain away thousands and thousands of eyewitness (not simply radar) sightings.

Simply and absolutely:

No.


Agreed. Sorry but I can even begin to fathom how anyone who has done extensive research in this field could buy this. This thread is in the same vein as that thread about the CIA saying they were responsible for (was it like 95% or something) sightings throughout the 1940s - 1960s.

Oh and that flag count is mighty peculiar indeed, there are only a handful of participants in this thread.



posted on Jan, 26 2015 @ 06:42 AM
link   
to those suggesting the op is trying to explain away all ufos or ufo radar traces as intelligence manipulation, i'd recommend reading the posts again - there is a more subtle point being made

here's the closing paragraph for starters:




The present day CIA seems to want to take the credit for UFO sightings of the 1950s and 1960s by blaming them on the U2 and Oxcart programs. But were they really responsible for the DC Sightings in 1952, and later incidents over England before Project Palladium had officially began?

I have no doubt that CIA/military activity has probably accounted for ‘some’ UFO reports down the years. Yet there is also the issue of how eye witness sightings can be explained.

In the Revisiting the 1952 Washington DC UFO Flap thread I did discuss a theory that, in certain weather, radar also caused ‘plasma’ in the atmosphere. Perhaps the two things in conjunction were being harnessed to create ‘UFOs’?

However I think we have to consider that ‘Project Palladium’ appeared in the 1960s. I could not find a direct reference to any ability to create “visual” phenomenon to accompany these false radar signals. Nor is there any indication that ‘tests’ were made during the 1950s prior to Palladium being implemented, let alone over Washington in 1952.

So once again we have the fingers of the intel boys firmly digging into another UFO pie and claiming ‘it was us!’. At other times the ET angle is encouraged, discouraged and debunked with equal measure.

So the Cold War has ended but it seems ‘the game’ continues..........




posted on Jan, 26 2015 @ 07:21 AM
link   
a reply to: aynock

Unfortunately subtlety is a foreign language on the internet. UFO reports could be many things all at once whilst some folk can only interpret them as either/or.

Mirageman is a member I respect for being able to consider several opposing ideas at once.

I'm reminded of valentich where we had prosaic explanations running alongside coincidences and simultaneous sightings. Complicated, nuanced stuff and frequently self-defeating. Rarely an either/or situation.



posted on Jan, 26 2015 @ 07:34 AM
link   
So the CIA is capable of producing certain aspects of the phenomenon? Wonder what the CIA were doing during the sightings of other parts of the globe..oh yeah..the CIA faked that in Mexico and Brazil too. Come on..lets cheer for the CIA bandwagon from here on!! The CIA also produced the loch ness monster, big foot sightings. They didn't want to miss any to make themselves look vulnerable. They mean it.



posted on Jan, 26 2015 @ 07:45 AM
link   
Great topic


Personally i also don't think, that this type of technology and the use of it (especially during the ColdWar period) would explain away all the different UFO sightings/reports. (The OP didn't say this, nor does it seem to be his opinion. Just pointing this out to adress some of the comments in here.)

Still it's definitely a good explaination for "some" cases, i assume. Especially those where only radar contact was reported but no visual confirmation could be made. But, also here you'd have to be careful not to just explain away all those cases. That such a technology existed already back in the 50s and that it was used doesn't necessarly mean, that it was actually the reason behind certain "Radar-Sighting-Only-Cases".

Btw, as for the Belgium wave i don't think, that the use of this tech was responsible for it. As far as i remember, there wasn't only the radar signals but also these objects were seen by hundrets, if not thousands of people.

It's an interesting thought, though, if the development of this technology maybe somehow was inspired by the aerial phenomena of UFOs.


edit on 26-1-2015 by Tichy because: (no reason given)



posted on Jan, 26 2015 @ 09:02 AM
link   
Now see, THIS is the sort of thread that lifts up this site. Structured, thought out, backed by research and facts, and fun to read. Thanks much, great stuff. I honestly did not know about this technology and think that just learning what was presented here has to affect my thoughts in going forward as to radar ever "proving" that a "UFO" was present. Thanks much for the time and effort, star and flag!



posted on Jan, 26 2015 @ 09:05 AM
link   

originally posted by: Agnost
Bedlam, just for the record, to see whether I got this straight: it were these AFB guys who were playing tricks on you?


I think the opportunity arose, we had been there a while working on something mundane but off the books and we had some camaraderie and were all cleared out the wazoo...so I think they took the opportunity to screw with us. It's not that unusual. Some services are worse about it than others.

Or it could have been totally off the cuff by the pilot who might have done something like that before.

When I was in, I occasionally played elaborate tricks on contractors and embeds myself, and have occasionally arranged for them TO be played on other people by active duty personnel even fairly recently. It depends on what you're doing and how bored you are, how you get along with said targets and what presents itself.



posted on Jan, 26 2015 @ 09:11 AM
link   
Back on topic, you guys DO know that there are just a WAD of things that cause false radar returns, right? Some of which YOU can see as well, although not a lot of them.

Palladium and other countermeasures (except for one or two types) don't cause visible phenomena though. So if someone SAW a target which then was spotted on radar at the same time and place, it's probably not ECM.



posted on Jan, 26 2015 @ 09:15 AM
link   

originally posted by: radkrish
So the CIA is capable of producing certain aspects of the phenomenon? Wonder what the CIA were doing during the sightings of other parts of the globe..oh yeah..the CIA faked that in Mexico and Brazil too. Come on..lets cheer for the CIA bandwagon from here on!! The CIA also produced the loch ness monster, big foot sightings. They didn't want to miss any to make themselves look vulnerable. They mean it.


No one said this explained every sighting everywhere. Instead of going all ad hominem, how about using this to narrow your research and focus by excluding certain incidents. That might help deny ignorance a bit. Just saying...



new topics

top topics



 
119
<< 2  3  4    6  7  8 >>

log in

join