DoD Whistleblower Scientist Reports Baffling ‘Blue Plasma’ UFO Sighting

originally posted by: Skywatcher2011
a reply to: NoCorruptionAllowed

I would think that disclosing anything to do with ufo could be breaking policy of the defense especially if it were a top secret US aircraft. Why else would the government keep this subject secret?

Not all, the UFO's are secret US airframes, some of them are tripulated by non-human humanoids. In both cases, secrecy is a logical approach; to mantain the status quo (avoid social unrest, economic collapse, international conflicts), and to obtain a technological advantage/supremacy.

Bluish plasma and barbell shaped. I'd go for the explanation as airplane landing in hazy fog to see something like that.

I've seen reddish-orange spheres floating close to the ground with strange writing in the side. But that turned out to be the Orange blimp seen from the side

This is the best UFO interview in forever and it'll take years for folks to catch up to it.

I predict.

It will eventually be put in to perspective by some other occurrence and then will open up like a puzzle box.

It's an incredibly well done interview. Witness #2 is remarkable amongst UAP witnesses.

a reply to: Skywatcher2011

The description of the glow reminds me of this:

upload.wikimedia.org...

If there were some plasma or something with a frequency dependent index of refraction and some charged particle source....

I couldn't comment until I watched the video. I concur with Bybots that this is a remarkable find! Thank you for bringing it to ATS. Saw there was some initial commentary by folks who very obviously did NOT watch the video.

My first impression is the witness with the technical background was pure luck. I disagree he didn't come forward sooner due to nondisclosure or whatever inane reasons were given. I will propose instead he's been doing some private digging into electrical propulsion engines and may not have wanted to speak until he could firm up some of the the technicals of what he observed. This is a quite common sense approach.

Secondly what REALLY struck me was he had the presence of mind to not only go low tech with his rifle scope, but he used his camera to take video when he got back to camp to use as a CONTROL in conjunction with video taken previously in the day and at the time of the incident.

While it's true he got nadda film of the object he very correctly did get some evidence of an altered electrical field and
something is better than nothing. With the right diagnostics I will theorize there is valid info to be gleaned from this.

I did notice strangely in describing the exhaust from this craft he refrained from ever calling it energized particles, but called it everything but. In listening to him I would not have refrained from that description, so that REALLY sticks out to me.

Now being a total layperson with no specialized understanding of electrical propulsion drives, or much about plasma drives I'd be very interested in Zaphods take on this witness's descriptions.

SkyWatcher211 have you considered taking this one over to the Aircraft forum? You should.

The problem with science and scientists is of course that there is no such thing. It's just a convenient and frightfully imprecise term that is used to lump together a whole diverse body of different academical fields. Each with is own set of methods.

The is a huge difference between how a phycisist and say a historian or archaeologist do their studies. You cannot measure or record something that happened 3000 years ago. But, surely, nobody would claim we should quit studying our history, or prehistory, just because we cannot measure it?

You cannot just say "there is no physical proof" so this is not science. Where is the physical proof that Napoleon Bonaparte was present at the battle of Waterloo? Show me the physical proof that Julius Caesar was assasinated? Where is the proof that Christopher Columbus sailed to America?

This line of reasoning will get us nowhere when studying what people have experienced. There is no call to abandon the study of a field just because you cannot put it under a microscope.

And science is not only chemistry, biology and physics. We would be rather helpless to make sense of the world if we thought that.

BT