Amazing interview heralds the beginning of disclosure? Whistleblower reveals.... + updates

Here is another take on Corey's revelations about portals in the most recent Cosmic Disclosure Episode:

Corey and David discuss the Cosmic Web and the naturally occurring portal systems in the universe. Stars and planets are connected via an electromagnetic web which is in turn connected to the Galaxy and the universe beyond. These connections can be used to travel the cosmos almost instantaneously, yet the skill required to do so is extensive.

There are natural portal systems that are a part of the known universe; we call it the Cosmic Web. Then there are ancient portal systems and current era portals systems, which exploit this natural Cosmic Web to travel from point to point. The ancient portal systems - and there are many of these - that were left behind by several groups on Earth. They vary in there sophistication, in that, some of them do very short point to point jumps with others doing longer range transports. For example, if you wanted to reach a planet or solar system that is in what we call 'hops' - where there is, lets say, 10 solar systems between the start and end point, then you have to make three or four 'hops', to get to your final destination.

There are some that are shaped like rings. But, the one that I saw looked like a ziggurat - or a step pyramid.

This is exactly what my contact Daniel has told me. In fact, he gave me the complete numerical address of Earth, as a series of three single digits, that could be anywhere from one to nine. Then there is a series of three digits between one and 99, with the last set from one to 999, depending on what you need it for. I never leaked the whole sequence, but I have said that the number for Earth is 606 and that Mars is 605. These are the last three digits of the address.

What I found so interesting is that David's insider Daniel revealed to him that the last three digits for Earths numerical address is exactly the same as what the Urantia book states as the numerical index for our world; 606. This could simply be a coincidence, but in my experience these types of correlations usually have a deeper meaning. There is a great deal of conceptual data discussed in the book which modern science and other philosophical works have similarly shared. This type of research is something I find most fascinating - as David said at the beginning, how different perspectives and views interweave with each other.

Source

originally posted by: PlanetXisHERE

originally posted by: AdmireTheDistance

originally posted by:
Corey has provided testimony (a legitimate type of evidence)

Absolutely incorrect, thus your other points are moot.

You may want to check your source of information.........if there is one

The testimony of a witness is the information and answers to questions given by a witness to the court as a whole. Testimony is considered to be a form of evidence, just as physical objects are considered to be evidence. Testimony thus depends upon the fact that the witness who is giving his or her own testimony has sworn to the testimony’s accuracy and truthfulness.

Source

How many tines must this be explained to you? Yes, in terms of legal proceedings, witness testimony is sometimes considered as viable evidence, depending on the circumstances. In scientific terms, however, it is not. Particularly when dealing with what would be the single biggest scientific discoveries in mankind's history.

Read that real slow, and see if it'll sink in this time, as it's at least the 5th time people have explained it to you in this thread alone.

a reply to: PlanetXisHERE

.........I do find it curious in spite of all that you have studied and written about on here; UFO sightings, crop circles, animal mutilations, and abductions - that you seem to avoid including an ET interaction with Earth as one reasonable explanation..........

It's not my attention to derail your thread with this rather long post. But seeing as you posed the question then I am sure you also want me to answer

When I was much younger and started reading about all this UFO stuff I was convinced there were too many reports of strange goings for there not to be aliens in spaceships. I grew up in the 1970s when exploration of the Solar System with unmanned probes was really kicking into gear. 'Close Encounters' was followed by 'Star Wars'. The WOW signal was news around that time. Plus we had some really odd cases in the UK during the late 1970s on into the early 1980s.The 1990s also seemed a particularly paranoid time. Possibly fuelled by the X-Files and Roswell's 50th anniversary build up and Millenium fever.

Back then you would read a book, magazine or news article but couldn't easily verify the information against another source. Same with TV and radio programs. But the sheer numbers of reports does not actually prove anything.

So to come back to your question about not including ET as a reasonable explanation in everything I've looked at.

Well I don't think it can be ruled out.

However there is now a plethora of information out there on the web. I can read old and new articles, watch video clips and listen to radio shows from all over the world. I can also find out about subjects I have no knowledge of in seconds. Something that would have been out of the question just two decades ago.

So I do try to take a balanced view of any topic. This means looking at the 'skeptical' response and considering that too.

What I've found is that a lot of UFO cases are not entirely robust as they first seem. Roswell starts with descriptions of the debris made out of rubber, sticks and tape. There are 4 photographs of the debris and almost everything else is nothing but hearsay and anecdotal. Plus if it really was debris from a spaceship they took away then how small was the spaceship to fit it all on a Superfortress? Even recently we had that 'Roswell slides' fiasco when there wasn't even the remotest of proof to even hint it was anything more than a mummified child.

I recently gained the absolute proof that this photograph (and it's many cropped hybrids) used by thousands of magazines, books, websites and TV programs and passed off as genuine UFOs over the Capitol in 1952 wasn't taken until after 1965. (It's also just lens flares but a lot of people do not understand the principles around that).


The architect of the Capitol Building confirmed in a letter that the photo was of the building post-1965 due to some work conducted on it that was clear in the hi-res version of the photo.

The famous Battle of LA photo is not as well defined as we thought and was 'enhanced' for use in the newspaper. The negative was found to not have been one taken from the LA Times stock. So the originator of the photo is also unknown.



I could go on but will stop there and say this.

If you choose to go down the path worn by the popular ufology crowd then that is your prerogative. But remember their livelihood often relies on perpetuating a myth rather than seeking the real truth. Some have no interest in proving a UFO story was something mundane (except occasionally to make it look like they are being objective). What have they ever really given us as solid evidence of ET? Anecdotal stories and paranoia about a massive government cover-up.

These people cannot be trusted any more than the 'government' to tell you the truth.

So you have to try as best as you can to stay entirely neutral. Weigh up the evidence and do not jump to the conclusion that if I can't explain it then it's gotta be aliens. These stories are entertaining but they are not proof.

The reason I look into UFOs because I think there is something to it all and it only takes one case with verifiable proof to change everything. But the more I dig the more it becomes apparent that that case is probably something very rare or perhaps hasn't even happened yet.

originally posted by: AdmireTheDistance

originally posted by: PlanetXisHERE

originally posted by: AdmireTheDistance

originally posted by:
Corey has provided testimony (a legitimate type of evidence)

Absolutely incorrect, thus your other points are moot.

You may want to check your source of information.........if there is one

The testimony of a witness is the information and answers to questions given by a witness to the court as a whole. Testimony is considered to be a form of evidence, just as physical objects are considered to be evidence. Testimony thus depends upon the fact that the witness who is giving his or her own testimony has sworn to the testimony’s accuracy and truthfulness.

Source

How many tines must this be explained to you? Yes, in terms of legal proceedings, witness testimony is sometimes considered as viable evidence, depending on the circumstances. In scientific terms, however, it is not. Particularly when dealing with what would be the single biggest scientific discoveries in mankind's history.

Read that real slow, and see if it'll sink in this time, as it's at least the 5th time people have explained it to you in this thread alone.

So if a scientist observes something that for some reason cannot be repeated he/she is not to be believed?

Also, I'm not sure about your understanding of basic science. Hundreds of thousands of UFO sightings, thousands of crop circles, abductions and animal mutilations, reported from around the world going back decades and sometimes even centuries would be considered by unbiased scientists to be an anomaly deserving of investigation. There has never been a legitimate investigation and Project Bluebook and the Condon report have both shown to be frauds.

Legitimate science would create hypotheses for these anomalies, one of which would obviously be an ongoing ET interaction with Earth. However you seem to want to rule this out without legitimate investigation.

Can you admit there is even a small possibility of an ET interaction with Earth?

a reply to: mirageman

Thanks, I enjoy reading your opinions, your post is certainly related to the topic at hand.

I guess I was the opposite of you. Having several degrees, lived overseas in Asia for a few years, ran my own successful business, traveled over the world extensively - I guess I had thought I had seen it all or at least most of it at a certain point in my life.

If you had asked me about ET's ten years ago I would have said they may exist somewhere in the Universe, but weren't interacting with Earth, and I can admit I thought people who believed in them had some psychological issues. I can look back now and realize I had been socially conditioned my whole life.

Some of these incidents you talk about are incredible! Such as the "Battle of LA" and the Washington 1952 UFO flap. Forget about the pictures, there were thousands of witnesses in each case! Why aren't these cases talked about today like we discuss Pearl Harbor or the Battle of the Bulge? Simple, there has been a huge cover-up. I'm in my late forties and just heard about these cases over the last two years! Its incredible to me that I, someone who is educated and interested in history could go so long and not hear about these and many other cases! Obviously the info has been suppressed by the MSM - you have to ask yourself why.

Battle of Los Angeles - the object was witnessed for over an hour and almost 1500 anti-aircraft rounds fired at it! Thousands witnessed it! However the disinfo specialists will just have you believe it was war jitters......

Roswell - a major comes out one day and says a disc with bodies had been discovered. The next day it is a weather balloon???? Please, how could an air force major who is also a pilot make such a huge mistake???? Was he crazy, on drugs??? But he kept his job.......

Washington UFO incidents - you yourself wrote multiple pilots and air-controllers saw the radar images AND the actual objects, leading one to conclude there was something actually there - again with hundreds if not thousands of witnesses....it turns out this was possibly a Nazi breakaway civilization - what do you think about that?

originally posted by: PlanetXisHERE

originally posted by: AdmireTheDistance

originally posted by: PlanetXisHERE

originally posted by: AdmireTheDistance

originally posted by:
Corey has provided testimony (a legitimate type of evidence)

Absolutely incorrect, thus your other points are moot.

You may want to check your source of information.........if there is one

The testimony of a witness is the information and answers to questions given by a witness to the court as a whole. Testimony is considered to be a form of evidence, just as physical objects are considered to be evidence. Testimony thus depends upon the fact that the witness who is giving his or her own testimony has sworn to the testimony’s accuracy and truthfulness.

Source

How many tines must this be explained to you? Yes, in terms of legal proceedings, witness testimony is sometimes considered as viable evidence, depending on the circumstances. In scientific terms, however, it is not. Particularly when dealing with what would be the single biggest scientific discoveries in mankind's history.

Read that real slow, and see if it'll sink in this time, as it's at least the 5th time people have explained it to you in this thread alone.

So if a scientist observes something that for some reason cannot be repeated he/she is not to be believed?

Not at all. Such a thing would be noted as an interesting anecdote, and may possibly lead to the formation of a hypothesis or further study/experimentation. It would not, however be considered as any form of evidence.

Also, I'm not sure about your understanding of basic science. Hundreds of thousands of UFO sightings, thousands of crop circles, abductions and animal mutilations, reported from around the world going back decades and sometimes even centuries would be considered by unbiased scientists to be an anomaly deserving of investigation.

Please name some of these unbiased scientists, and provide links to their statements on the matter.

Legitimate science would create hypotheses for these anomalies, one of which would obviously be an ongoing ET interaction with Earth. However you seem to want to rule this out without legitimate investigation.

Why do you think the most outlandish, unlikely conclusion would "obviously" be given consideration?

Can you admit there is even a small possibility of an ET interaction with Earth?

Of course it's a possibility (though quite a small one). Without any evidence, however, it remains nothing more than an unlikely idea.

originally posted by: AdmireTheDistance
Please name some of these unbiased scientists, and provide links to their statements on the matter.

Well, there are many, all you have to do is google "scientists who believe in extraterrestrials" or something along those lines. Stephen Hawking counts as one of many.

Here is a list of scientists, military and civilian officials who were part of the famous "Cometa" report from France, entitled "UFO's and Defense - what must we be prepared for?" And I don't think they were referring to space junk, stars, satellites or Chinese lanterns.




Source

originally posted by: AdmireTheDistance
Of course it's a possibility (though quite a small one). Without any evidence, however, it remains nothing more than an unlikely idea.

There is much evidence, you just choose to ignore it or buy into the MSM explanation, just a few examples out of hundreds of thousands:

a reply to: PlanetXisHERE

Some of these incidents you talk about are incredible! Such as the "Battle of LA" and the Washington 1952 UFO flap.

I have posted about both incidents.

As regards the Battle of LA. The issue with that story is that NO ONE considered it a UFO story until the late 1980s when the MJ12 documents appeared (and considered even by Ufologists to have been faked). So it's origins as a UFO story are not built on the best of foundations.

The story grew around the highly dubious Marshall/Roosevelt Document

War jitters is not necessarily a poor explanation as the LA AA gunners were not highly experienced and radar was still a lot of guesswork in those days. The witnesses reported seeing anything from nothing at all to 200 enemy aircraft. But the fog of war and the fact that no one ever really piped up about it for nearly 50 years means there is no clarity about the incident.

The "The Army Air Forces in World War II report : Free pdf download link which was produced long before any talk of alien spacecraft says:

....A careful study of the evidence suggests that meteorological balloons — known to have been released over Los Angeles — may well have caused the initial alarm.

This theory is supported by the fact that anti-aircraft artillery units were officially criticized for having wasted ammunition on targets which moved too slowly to have been airplanes. .

Now maybe the military really knew (6 years before Roswell) that this was an alien spacecraft cruising over LA, unconcerned by the AA fire, and the cover up worked for decades. But you have to use your own logic on this one.

As for the Washington DC UFO flap being caused by the Nazis. Well that's highly unlikely.

It probably starts with the fallacy that Operation Highjump (a genuine military exercise) was all about fighting the Nazis in the Antarctic. That's pretty much been dismissed with the historical investigations in this document : HITLER’S ANTARCTIC BASE: THE MYTH AND THE REALITY

Roswell - a major comes out one day and says a disc with bodies had been discovered. The next day it is a weather balloon???? Please, how could an air force major who is also a pilot make such a huge mistake???? Was he crazy, on drugs??? But he kept his job.......

Which Major said a disc with bodies was discovered? Jesse Marcel never mentioned seeing alien bodies, nor was he a pilot. He was the base intelligence officer.

a reply to: PlanetXisHERE

Sigh....



I'll repeat what I said in another post. In the darker shots early in the video, if you take the object I pointed out with the yellow arrow and flip 180, resize, and place it next to the original object, it's almost an exact copy. Same basic color, same dark area on the right, same upsweep of the "tail." It's also in the foreground and appears translucent at times.

Looks like a reflection off the glass.

---------------------------------------------



Again, what I said in a post a few years ago- Those small circles pointed out in yellow are a result of human error. The creators of this circle obviously ran out of room with their calculations when it came to a couple of the 13th circles. Leaving them noticeably smaller than the others. You can see the pattern used starting in the center and working your way out to the circles and ultimately running out of room. This is not evidence of a higher intelligence creating this, it's evidence of miscalculation and human error.

---------------------------------------------


This has been gone over endlessly in another post. It's a mountain.


You continue to make a mockery of this phenomena by posting this nonsense.

a reply to: Ectoplasm8

Your reflection on the ISS window looks nothing like the docked spacecraft, your supposedly "squished" circles of the crop circle that appeared a couple of days before 911 mean absolutely nothing (can you show me a video of it being made? of course not), and yes I can tell the difference between a hill and a flying saucer even if NASA tells me that the emperor is wearing clothes. Just because NASA shows me a picture of another hill, does not mean this is a hill, do you believe everything the MSM tells you? Its funny how no one can use the original picture to claim the hill, I understand low resolution but do not understand how low resolution can make major portions of a hill disappear, and cause a shadow underneath a flying saucer, let alone create a flying saucer.













You are another interesting one who claims the info in this thread is fantasy yet continues to monitor the posts - do you always pay such close attention to what you consider delusional?

a reply to: [post=19830629]PlanetXisHERE[/post

dont be bothered by others opinions man,cause thats all they are afterall. I have an open mind,one...because I dont believe the govmnt,and two because we are lied to by them. I havnt seen a UFO or aliens,but that doesnt mean I dont believe.

originally posted by: PlanetXisHERE
a reply to: Ectoplasm8

(can you show me a video of it being made? of course not)

Can you?

originally posted by: PlanetXisHERE
You are another interesting one who claims the info in this thread is fantasy yet continues to monitor the posts - do you always pay such close attention to what you consider delusional?

And you're equally "interesting." You post topics in a discussion forum and then imply and/or outright accuse those who disagree with you of being egotists and disinfo agents.

a reply to: PlanetXisHERE

This is an excellent post. The Phoenix lights happened while I was in Rocky Point, Mexico. I wish I could have witnessed it.
I have talked to a witness of this event. The description was of a VERY LARGE boomerang with lights underneath. The guy that told me this lived in the Biltmore area. Rich and retired.

PlanetXisHere, why are you doing this and spreading all this non-sense, I've seen posts by you on here, alien-UFOs, Facebook...etc, all describing already debunked and explained images and phenomenon as proof of aliens being among us? I'm a believer in the aliens and UFO phenomenon, but you're making us all look bad/crazy. I know David Chace already explained the "light beam" images as digital artifacts. When your "disclosure" does not come in the next few days/weeks, what will you say, than?

I can say there has been a method to the madness that is the history of human civilization on earth.
Million dollar question is what is the purpose and goal of this earth sphere we are currently on?
All things have a purpose what is the purpose of our earthly existance?

originally posted by: PlanetXisHERE
a reply to: Ectoplasm8

Your reflection on the ISS window looks nothing like the docked spacecraft,

Looks like a damn near perfect match to me.

your supposedly "squished" circles of the crop circle that appeared a couple of days before 911 mean absolutely nothing

Much like the crop circle images you posted.

(can you show me a video of it being made? of course not),

Can you?

and yes I can tell the difference between a hill and a flying saucer even if NASA tells me that the emperor is wearing clothes.

No, you've already made it quite clear (and continue to do so) that you're incapable of discerning the two.

Just because NASA shows me a picture of another hill, does not mean this is a hill,

The pictures are of the same hill, and guess what? It's still a hill.

do you believe everything the MSM tells you?

Not by a longshot. Do you believe everything random lunatics on YouTube who consort with known liars tell you?

Its funny how no one can use the original picture to claim the hill,

Sure they can, just like you can use it to claim "flyong saucers". It's a terrible quality image. Higher resolution images of the exact same area make it perfectly clear what we're looking at in the low-res image.

I understand low resolution but do not understand how low resolution can make major portions of a hill disappear, and cause a shadow underneath a flying saucer, let alone create a flying saucer.

Lucky for you, you won't have to attempt to understand it, because it does none of those things.

originally posted by: PlanetXisHERE


Some of these incidents you talk about are incredible! Such as the "Battle of LA" ......... Obviously the info has been suppressed by the MSM - you have to ask yourself why.

Suppressed?? While simultaneously the subject of major motion pictures? Unless you're claiming Columbia Pictures Universal Pictures and NBC aren't mainstream media. And that's not counting how many times the subject has been discussed on UFO TV documentary shows over the years, also on MSM channels.

en.wikipedia.org...:_Los_Angeles

en.wikipedia.org...

en.wikipedia.org...(film)

a reply to: mirageman

You bring up some good points and I need to do a bit of research to find info I have seen before that elaborates on this topic, so please bear with me for a few days.

Here is more analysis on the Cosmic Disclosure episode from last week on the portal/stargate system in the Universe, used for traveling. NASA has recently has discussed magnetic portals between the Sun and Earth and other planetary bodies, is this part of the soft disclosure?

Corey Goode, a secret space program insider and whistle blower recently discussed some of the hidden sciences used 'up-there'. Our planet is connected to the sun via solar filaments of magnetic connections, which during certain celestial alignments produce distortions in space-time facilitating the emergence of a star gate or portal.

Attempting to verify this claim by Goode, with mainstream science is difficult, yet when we consider the work of Dan Winter, Dieter Broers, Eric Dollard and observers like Ben Davidson there is a substantial backbone of evidence to support it.

According to Winter, electromagnetism is the 'bread and butter' of consciousness. Our emotions produce electromagnetic changes in the fields around our bodies, our brainwave patterns are frequencies based on the Schumann Resonances, and there are countless out of body and near death experiences wherein the continuity of consciousness continues without the physical body. All of these phenomena are governed by electromagnetic principles according to Winter, where the material meets the metaphysical mysteries of creation.

Interesting how supposedly this science could relate to consciousness as well.

Although mainstream science has not recognized the affects of these magnetic portals on consciousness, once that research has been considered, it seems all but obvious that the universe is designed to provide for intelligence civilizations exploration into the heavens using a naturally occurring portal system. And this Cosmic Web could also be the channel through which our consciousness passes as it moves from this life to the next.

NASA finds evidence of natural portals + Corey Goode on portal systems