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.

 

Why Alien Disclosure Will Not Occur

page: 3
6
<< 1  2    4  5  6 >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Feb, 21 2016 @ 07:51 AM
link   
a reply to: WeRpeons




Imagination? Tell that to Sergeant Jim Penniston who actually touched the craft during the Rendlesham Forest Incident. Add to the fact the entire incident was recorded in real time on audio tape, there was physical indentations in the ground and marks on the trees, an official memo confirming the events written by a high-ranking USAF officer, and a report by local police officers who were called to the scene on two separate occasions. This type of evidence would hold up in a court of law, so how can anyone act like all these military personnel were making this up, or it just so happened it was all in their minds? If there was a murder investigation nobody would be questioning this kind of evidence.


Jeez. Why are there still people out there who believe Penniston's story?

According to his witness statement he got no closer than 50m to whatever it was he saw. He claimed, on TV some 13 years later, that he saw glyphs on the craft as it took off. It was another decade before he claimed he'd touched a landed craft and 2010 when he received his totally implausible binary download. Meanwhile John Burroughs and Ed Cabansag who were out there with him remember nothing but seeing lights in the distance.

None of this was recorded on audio tape. That happened two nights later when Colonel Halt went out, contravening the NATO Status of Forces Agreement (SOFA). There is only 18 minutes of tape recorded whilst the 'expedition' took something like 3 or 4 hours. The British Police reported that the holes in the ground looked like 'animal scratchings and there was nothing really to see.

So sorry Penniston's evidence would fall apart in a court of law as it is not consistent with other witnesses nor his own testimony over time. Halt would be questioned as to why he went off base in contravention of the SOFA regulations (without notifying the relevant authorities in the UK until more than 2 weeks later). More importantly if there was such a threat to his air bases (and the United Kingdom's airspace) he would be asked why he chose to do nothing more than stomp around the woods for a few hours without ever calling an alert. Rendlesham is an interesting mystery but nothing should be taken on face value.

As for 'disclosure' well it depends whether there really is anything to disclose. With Projects Grudge, Sign, Bluebook along with other studies by both military and civilian groups across the world we have confirmation that there are Unidentified Flying Objects in our skies. But the available evidence all points to governments and military not knowing what these phenomena really are.

And let's face it if these aliens really can teleport through walls, abduct people and wipe their memories then anyone who they suspect might disclose their presence would already have had their mind wiped!



edit on 21/2/16 by mirageman because: alien memory wipe





posted on Feb, 21 2016 @ 04:20 PM
link   
But then there is the other side of the story for the believers:

Britain's Roswell: the truth behind the Rendlesham Forest UFO incident




Did an extra-terrestrial craft land in a Suffolk forest during the winter of 1980? The maker of a new film, The Rendlesham UFO Incident, believes so
By Rupert Hawksley5:44PM GMT 16 Feb 2015
Dubbed “Britain’s Roswell”, the Rendlesham Forest incident, which took place over a series of nights in December 1980, continues to fascinate UFO enthusiasts and conspiracy theorists. It is easy to understand why. Consider the following three statements, for example:
1) “This was not some vague ‘lights in the sky’ sighting – the UFO actually landed.” – Nick Pope, a Ministry of Defence employee from 1985 to 2006.
2) “When I arrived [at the scene], it was going in and out through the trees and at one stage it was hovering.” – Sgt. Adrian Bustinza, a security police commander who investigated the incident at the time.
3) “Okay, we’re looking at the thing; we’re probably about two to three hundred yards away. It looks like an eye winking at you... And the flash is so bright to the starscope that it almost burns your eye.” – Taken from the Halt tape, recorded on December 27 1980 by United States Air Force lieutenant colonel Charles Halt.
Only last month, a dog walker uploaded fresh footage of unidentified lights in the sky above Rendlesham Forest, while a new film on the subject, produced by long-time Suffolk resident and Rendlesham Forest incident expert Daniel Simpson, has recently been released. There is even an official UFO trail for walkers to follow through Rendlesham Forest. But what actually happened? And, 35 years after the event, are we any closer to unravelling the mystery?

See whole article here:
www.telegraph.co.uk...

Of course and in any case this is only one incident - there are literally thousands more - though some are better and more indicative of aliens than others - And of course many are explainable - but too many are not easily explainable and when the government said they are no longeer investigating the phenomena because there is no apparent alien threat ??? - Maybe.

But they should have added, we are no longer investigating UFOs because we are not sure what they are and there is nothing we can do about them anyway, So, "What me Worry?"

But those screaming for 'disclosure' have a feeling, oftern based upon government insider whistleblowers, that the government[s] know a lot more than they are telling the public and for reasons, some of which may be valid, are hiding this information. I could see their point of view - Why scare the public when you have a bunch of aliens flying through the skys who can wipe out our world and we have no defense that could stop them ?

Complete disclosure no - But there is some disclosure for example:

Col. Charles Halt Reveals New Info On The Rendlesham Forest UFO Incident - BBC



DENY IGNORANCE !!!


edit on 21-2-2016 by AlienView because: (no reason given)



posted on Feb, 21 2016 @ 04:57 PM
link   
a reply to: AlienView

Here is a hypothesis;
well more like a prediction...

The existence of alien life will eventually be disclosed to the people of earth, and, it will be confirmed by the government.


There actually isn't another option. That alien life does in fact exist, even if not known at this time. Over time the probability of that life coming into contact with Terrestrial Humans becomes ever greater...disclosure is inevitable.


The only way there would not be a disclosure is IF Humans were the only life extant; that would make for a mathematically impossible barren Universe...



posted on Feb, 21 2016 @ 05:30 PM
link   
a reply to: AlienView

The Telegraph article doesn't really do more than skim over a few bits and pieces from the story. I already know about Halt's radar operators. Its nothing new. Ike Barker and Jim Carey had already gave statements years ago as has Nigel Kerr.

By the way Jim Penniston (currently) does not claim aliens were involved at Rendlesham.

Perhaps do a little more balanced investigation into the case before proclaiming about denying ignorance.



posted on Feb, 23 2016 @ 07:57 AM
link   
Penniston is a known fabricator.

Most probable explanation for Rendlesham Forest is a psy-op, or the troops were on some party substances, or it was hoaxed as part of a prank. (One officer said he hoaxed the lights with his patrol car).

If you search on Jim Penniston you'll find all kinds of articles about him mis-remembering or messing up the date.

See, that's the real problem with the study of non-terrestrials.

1. It's all conflated - there's really no evidence that 'lights in the sky' have anything to do with craft piloted by non-terrestrials. Even the Betty-Barney Hill event may have been a psy-op.
2. It's all 'stories'. Some of the most compelling turn out to be lies (the guy in England with the radiator cover burns on his stomach).
3. People love to hoax things.
4. Book authors love to sell books.
5. The public like lurid stories and some cultures are big on it, like in Russia.

You just can't separate the truly anomalous from hoaxes and lies and delusions.

People even go so far as to write books about it swearing things were real events (Ed Walters, Colonel Corso) all the while knowing they are lying.

You will never have a real, scientific study of non-terrestrials because everyone is overly-invested in their mythology.

edit on 23-2-2016 by Maverick7 because: (no reason given)



posted on Feb, 23 2016 @ 09:43 AM
link   
a reply to: AlienView

Why alien disclosure will not occur. It seems simple with a need-to-know-basis reason but then you could also say, "What alien race are we disclosing?" Then you'd have to explain the relationships. That could get messy. It could also be said that disclosure is a world issue or international matter.
edit on 23-2-2016 by Godhead because: (no reason given)



posted on Feb, 23 2016 @ 10:20 AM
link   

originally posted by: Maverick7
1. It's all conflated - there's really no evidence that 'lights in the sky' have anything to do with craft piloted by non-terrestrials. Even the Betty-Barney Hill event may have been a psy-op.
2. It's all 'stories'. Some of the most compelling turn out to be lies (the guy in England with the radiator cover burns on his stomach).

You just can't separate the truly anomalous from hoaxes and lies and delusions.

You will never have a real, scientific study of non-terrestrials because everyone is overly-invested in their mythology.


Just a few wee remarks...

1. " Betty-Barney Hill event may have been a psy-op." Not likely. An analysis of Betty's "Star map" reveals an object, a dataset if you will, that is statistically improbable, in the extreme (I can get you actual numbers if you want). Thus the Betty / Barney Hill incident is (probabilistically) real, as differentiated from your psy-op, or a hoax of any kind.

2. Yes, they are all stories...however Once can extract viable data from even a "story", that data can go a very long way to determining the truth and reality of the story.

3. Yes, real scientific data can be found in almost any of the UFO "reports"; it is just a matter of applying One's Self to the extraction, identification of such data.

To think / believe that these stories are valueless is the epitome of ignorance, and laziness. All things contain enough data to "verify" it's own reality...One simply has to apply themselves to the extraction and understanding of said data.



posted on Feb, 27 2016 @ 08:55 AM
link   

originally posted by: tanka418

Just a few wee remarks...

1. " Betty-Barney Hill event may have been a psy-op." Not likely. An analysis of Betty's "Star map" reveals an object, a dataset if you will, that is statistically improbable, in the extreme (I can get you actual numbers if you want). Thus the Betty / Barney Hill incident is (probabilistically) real, as differentiated from your psy-op, or a hoax of any kind.

2. Yes, they are all stories...however Once can extract viable data from even a "story", that data can go a very long way to determining the truth and reality of the story.

3. Yes, real scientific data can be found in almost any of the UFO "reports"; it is just a matter of applying One's Self to the extraction, identification of such data.

To think / believe that these stories are valueless is the epitome of ignorance, and laziness. All things contain enough data to "verify" it's own reality...One simply has to apply themselves to the extraction and understanding of said data.


Analyze the Betty-Barney Hill event from the point of view of a psy-op. There are a lot of coincidences. The 'star map' has been roundly debunked and could have been 'given' to Betty by a member of the psy-op group.

All of the stories have 'cracks', but again I'm not saying every story is worthless, I'm saying it contaminates all the potential 'real events' to the point where you can never analyze the data. It's too 'dirty'.

People love to hoax, people love to believe, people are not aware of how perception can be distorted.

Not only that, we now have the technology to simulate or hoax anything, including using holographic projection. And we might have the motivation ("control", initiating martial law, etc.)

It's too bad, because there might be something interesting now and then.
edit on 27-2-2016 by Maverick7 because: (no reason given)



posted on Feb, 27 2016 @ 10:13 AM
link   

originally posted by: Maverick7
Analyze the Betty-Barney Hill event from the point of view of a psy-op. There are a lot of coincidences. The 'star map' has been roundly debunked and could have been 'given' to Betty by a member of the psy-op group.



Sorry, but I actually have analyzed the Hill star map...in great detail...

1. The map has never been "debunked", anyone who thinks so should actually look at the data for themselves!

2. No, sorry, no one from Earth could have given the map to Betty; there are elements in that map that were not known at the time. Like the existence of Zeta Reticuli as a binary star system. So, no, the map was not given to Betty by a psy-op group.

Did you know that every important star in the map is of the correct class to support Earth-like life, and that the stars are all of appropriate age? Prolly not...

How about the fact that the stars, as they are laid out on the map, are in the correct order to support progressive exploration?

Or that all of the "debunks" have been proven false by more modern science and investigation?

The only thing we don't have yet is confirmation of exoplanets...I'd take a look, but Zeta Reticuli is typically below the horizon for me...However, the class, age, and positions of the stars is very telling, and when combined with modern star data, astronomy, and mathematics; provides an almost certainty of the reality of the map, and thus its providers.



posted on Feb, 27 2016 @ 12:11 PM
link   
What is gained by not disclosing?



posted on Feb, 27 2016 @ 02:38 PM
link   

originally posted by: BrianDunning
What is gained by not disclosing?


That is the big question - And it could also be asked what is lost by disclosing.

Some conspiracy theorists beiieve that some super secret government agency like "MJ 12" ["Majestic 12 (also known as Majic 12, Majestic Trust, M12, MJ 12, MJ XII or Majority 12) is the purported code name of a secret committee of scientists, military leaders, and government officials, supposedly formed in 1947 by an executive order of U.S. President Harry S. Truman.], not only have knowledge of the existence of ET but are in fact doing business with aliens - This however has never been proven and all evidence is anecdotal.

But if there are certain powers inside of government dealing with aliens who are giving them more power and control over the planet you could see why they would want to keep it secret





The history of science shows that theories are perishable. With every new truth that is revealed
we get a better understanding of Nature and our conceptions and views are modified.
- Nikola Tesla









"SCIENCEFICTIONALISM the Religion of the FUTURE"
universalspacealienpeoplesassociation.blogspot.com...



posted on Feb, 27 2016 @ 05:29 PM
link   
a reply to: tanka418




Sorry, but I actually have analyzed the Hill star map...in great detail...


Then you know that the 2-dimensional drawing of the 3-dimensional map is useless for trying to find a location in space. Betty Hill randomly identified it with Zeta Reticuli because there was a map of that area of the sky published in a newspaper. The match was no better than random chance.



posted on Feb, 27 2016 @ 07:29 PM
link   
First of all, I don't even know why some members here, that are 99% certain there have been NO extraterrestrial visitations ever in the history of our planet, are even posting on this forum. You guys are either trolling here cuz you got nothing better to do, or are just simply blind to the evidence. I don't get it.

About disclosure, I do agree that humanity as a whole, ISN'T ready. We have enough going on in society, tribal warfare being the main problem we have yet to evolve passed, for the American President to end a State of the Union address with "oh by the way, we have reason to believe that there's an alien presence that's been monitoring Earth. We don't know how long exactly, but evidence suggests it's been going on for a long, long time. We have no control over it, therefore you have no control over it, so the best we can do is cooperate. But enough of that, lets get back to oil prices."

The government knows that we have been visited, without a doubt, but as Dick Cheney once infamously said (paraphrasing), "If I had been briefed on UFO's, I'm sure that information was classified & I wouldn't be talking about it." Open your eyes, people.

The best we can hope for, is a mass sighting or event that will trigger a FORCED ACKNOWLEDGMENT of alien beings. Something that will literally be undeniable to anyone. This needs to be something extraordinary, such as a daylight sighting with multiple eyewitnesses & videotaped recordings, in a public area. Or a landing of a craft, close enough where we can IDENTIFY that it's a clear DISC with BIZARRE features, clear enough for the naked eye to see, videotaped amongst several eyewitnesses from several vantage points. Big enough to make international news. An event such as this absolutely cannot be hoaxed, no matter what any debunker here tries to say. What comes to mind, personally, is a modern-day, "Zimbabwe School Children Encounter" event for 2016. Only thing that was missing from that event was actual photos or video, otherwise that could've been the smoking gun. We need something similar to that, on TAPE.




posted on Feb, 27 2016 @ 07:56 PM
link   
a reply to: Crisis


The best we can hope for, is a mass sighting or event that will trigger a FORCED ACKNOWLEDGMENT of alien beings. Something that will literally be undeniable to anyone. This needs to be something extraordinary, such as a daylight sighting with multiple eyewitnesses & videotaped recordings, in a public area. Or a landing of a craft, close enough where we can IDENTIFY that it's a clear DISC with BIZARRE features, clear enough for the naked eye to see, videotaped amongst several eyewitnesses from several vantage points. Big enough to make international news. An event such as this absolutely cannot be hoaxed, no matter what any debunker here tries to say. What comes to mind, personally, is a modern-day, "Zimbabwe School Children Encounter" event for 2016. Only thing that was missing from that event was actual photos or video, otherwise that could've been the smoking gun. We need something similar to that, on TAPE.


This looks like a smoking gun to me - Of course the gov says it was only flares !!!

The Phoenix Lights Turn 17 With New Witnesses Coming Forth 3-14-14






edit on 27-2-2016 by AlienView because: (no reason given)



posted on Feb, 27 2016 @ 09:05 PM
link   

originally posted by: DJW001
a reply to: tanka418




Sorry, but I actually have analyzed the Hill star map...in great detail...


Then you know that the 2-dimensional drawing of the 3-dimensional map is useless for trying to find a location in space. Betty Hill randomly identified it with Zeta Reticuli because there was a map of that area of the sky published in a newspaper. The match was no better than random chance.


lol...

You will be needing to show just how this was random chance...I'm wondering; do you even have a realistic idea of the probability of random? Or how about a working knowledge of probability? Seriously man, but your statement is one of the most ridiculous I've heard this year. Real world probability is: 1 in 1.44e86 making random chance virtually impossible...

Betty didn't identify any of the elements in the map. Also, at the time Betty received the map, Zeta Reticuli wasn't known as a binary star, It wasn't until some years later it was discovered that Z.R. was binary.

The configuration of stars that became the map work just fine as a 2D image since we can use existing star charts and databases (like Hipparcos), and modern 3D modeling tools to construct 2D images of our own for comparision. We can also use the 2D image as a template for some advanced computer vision methods.

Doing these things; applying science and technology to the original "map" pretty much demonstrates that the map is real. The classes of star that constitute "paths" in the map further confirm the reality. Along with distances of these stars there can be little doubt.



posted on Feb, 27 2016 @ 11:22 PM
link   
a reply to: tanka418


You will be needing to show just how this was random chance...I'm wondering; do you even have a realistic idea of the probability of random? Or how about a working knowledge of probability? Seriously man, but your statement is one of the most ridiculous I've heard this year. Real world probability is: 1 in 1.44e86 making random chance virtually impossible...


Wow,1 :1.44e86 is such a specific number I am sure you will have no difficulty showing your calculations.


Betty didn't identify any of the elements in the map. Also, at the time Betty received the map, Zeta Reticuli wasn't known as a binary star, It wasn't until some years later it was discovered that Z.R. was binary.


Betty said that the map showed stars and planets. After years of scrutinizing a set up of beads strung up in an arbitrary 3-d configuration*, Marjory Fish later claimed that the stars matched up with those near Zeta Reticuli... if you moved them around a bit and ignored Betty's claim that they also showed planets.


The configuration of stars that became the map work just fine as a 2D image since we can use existing star charts and databases (like Hipparcos), and modern 3D modeling tools to construct 2D images of our own for comparision. We can also use the 2D image as a template for some advanced computer vision methods.


As you can any other random series of dots.

* Fish did not explain why she chose the particular stars she did out of the Gliese catalogue. When someone else created a map that showed that Epsilon Eridani was a better fit, she rejected it on the grounds that Epsilon Eridani was less suitable for harboring life. In other words, her "research" was completely arbitrary.
edit on 27-2-2016 by DJW001 because: (no reason given)



posted on Feb, 27 2016 @ 11:32 PM
link   
I happen to believe they're already here.
What "they" are is the question I have a hard time trying to answer.
Aliens, angels, demons - whatever we chose to call them across all our cultures and religions.
Disclosure I think can never happen how we imagine it because we as a people would immediately
find a reason to kill them and hate them.
We as a people are always looking for a reason as to why we don't like other people...
They say some are hated for their freedom..
Other for their country or origin..
Others for the way they dress..
Could you imagine something like us but completely not and even at that something completely like us
now trying to stand in line waiting to be served at publix?? Not a chance...
Very few individuals know of them and even fewer communicate with them..
Their numbers and their motives a mystery but to an even smaller group..
That is at least what I believe.



posted on Feb, 28 2016 @ 12:11 AM
link   

originally posted by: DJW001
a reply to: tanka418

Wow,1 :1.44e86 is such a specific number I am sure you will have no difficulty showing your calculations.



Sure; first 17 terms of 117, 000 factorial. 117, 000 is an estimate of the number of records in the Hipparcos table.




Betty said that the map showed stars and planets. After years of scrutinizing a set up of beads strung up in an arbitrary 3-d configuration*, Marjory Fish later claimed that the stars matched up with those near Zeta Reticuli... if you moved them around a bit and ignored Betty's claim that they also showed planets.


There is nothing arbitrary in this. And, it is little more than a template matching exercise...


As you can any other random series of dots.


Well, in reality you can't match "just any random series of dots", it, quite simply, isn't possible. I'd challenge you do match a series of 17 dots with any accepted star table, but I know you will ignore the challenge; mostly because you too know it's not possible.



* Fish did not explain why she chose the particular stars she did out of the Gliese catalogue. When someone else created a map that showed that Epsilon Eridani was a better fit, she rejected it on the grounds that Epsilon Eridani was less suitable for harboring life. In other words, her "research" was completely arbitrary.


Actually; Epsilon Eridani isn't a better fit...and that is just the sort of statement One would expect from someone who hasn't done an analysis, or investigated very much...so the reality is that you quite simply; don't know, and wish it to be false...your bad!

edit on 28-2-2016 by tanka418 because: (no reason given)



posted on Feb, 28 2016 @ 06:18 AM
link   
a reply to: tanka418


Sure; first 17 terms of 117, 000 factorial. 117, 000 is an estimate of the number of records in the Hipparcos table.


What does that have to do with anything? You have to prove that all 117,000 other possible matches are worse fit.


There is nothing arbitrary in this. And, it is little more than a template matching exercise...


If you allow the number of degrees of freedom that M. Fish permitted herself, nearly any template can match nearly any other template.


Well, in reality you can't match "just any random series of dots", it, quite simply, isn't possible. I'd challenge you do match a series of 17 dots with any accepted star table, but I know you will ignore the challenge; mostly because you too know it's not possible.


Don't be ridiculous; of course I am going to take you up on your challenge. I have the next two days off... look for a dedicated thread.


Actually; Epsilon Eridani isn't a better fit.


I look forward to you explaining that in detail in the dedicated thread.



posted on Feb, 28 2016 @ 06:52 AM
link   
The aliens are here , they are us , we once were slaves ,our gods may have been little more than our zoo keepers and we more than likely chased them away or ate them .

Humans are not natural in this enviroment ,if we were really king of the jungle our offspring would hit the ground running and not be living in the basement for 30 years .

Could you tell the reptiled gened inbreed freaks of nature the truth


They could not handle the truth -period

We are being farmed by a spiecies that has a bigger life cycle than our own , we are the pigs in the pen , making all the noise .

Why do you think seti is so underfunded and no space defence programme for shooting down a rogue asteroid is out there yet we could destroy the Earth dozens of times over .

In God we trust - others pay cash




top topics



 
6
<< 1  2    4  5  6 >>

log in

join