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.

 

Would Trump disclose information about UFOs and extra-terrestrials? [Poll]

page: 2
11
<< 1    3  4 >>

log in

join
share:

posted on May, 22 2016 @ 11:36 AM
link   

originally posted by: DBCowboy

originally posted by: Brotherman
What do you think there is to disclose?


A lot of truth in that question.

I don't think the government has a clue as to what is out there. But if people "think" that the government is keeping a secret, it gives the government a sense of control and power.

If you can successfully bluff at the poker table, you can run the whole game.


My point is if the gov said oh yeah aliens are real, the public will want proof. So by provding this evidence it will then also provide a means to identify experimental aircraft/space craft and weapons that may be vital to national security etc etc as well. I do not think this is the case but either way I do not see them saying much about anything more then they already have.




posted on May, 22 2016 @ 12:01 PM
link   
How do you build a wall around outer space?



posted on May, 22 2016 @ 12:14 PM
link   

originally posted by: tinner07
I was curious to know if he is elected, would he or any other candidate for that matter be automatically given top secret clearance?


Nope. Remember what happened to Lyndon Johnson.



posted on May, 22 2016 @ 12:28 PM
link   

originally posted by: Benicealways

Anyone who takes some time to research the phenomena can get to know the truth, if one isn't too blinded by cultural bias. And especially the POTUS can easily get to know way more than the American public.

Also, no deep access is needed to cause disclosure, the President of the United States could simply go on television and say:"Given the evidence we have, I think it is highly probable we are being visited by extra-terrestrial beings."


Nobody is going to tell Trump about UFOs, assuming there is anything to tell. People who "take time to research" do not always come to the conclusion you obviously favor; they come to places like ATS because normal people do not give a rip about UFOs. If Trump were to become POTUS he would be so busy with his agenda that he would not put UFOs on the front burner. It would do no earthly good at all for Trump to stand up and give such a completely lame statement, "Given the evidence we have..." People already say that all the time, and when you "take the time to research" what they have to say it turns out they are completely bogus, e.g. Steven Greer, or they really have no evidence at all, e.g. Stephen Bassett. The "Disclosure Movement" itself is nothing more than a Cargo Cult of wishful thinking, not all that much different from the idea that "Jesus will come again."



posted on May, 22 2016 @ 12:28 PM
link   

originally posted by: NewzNose
a reply to: tinner07

POTUS has Level 17 TSC. I understand there are 38 Levels of Top Secret Clearance.


Whew, thank goodness there aren't 33 levels. That would be difficult to explain. lol



posted on May, 22 2016 @ 12:41 PM
link   
a reply to: schuyler
Hundreds of declassified documents, multiple witness radar reports, physical trace cases. Literally hundreds of high ranked whistle blowers, mass sightings (sometimes with alien beings), analyzed implants, a very thoroughly researched abduction phenomena.

It takes a willingness to not belief.



posted on May, 22 2016 @ 01:02 PM
link   

originally posted by: Benicealways
a reply to: schuyler
Hundreds of declassified documents, multiple witness radar reports, physical trace cases. Literally hundreds of high ranked whistle blowers, mass sightings (sometimes with alien beings), analyzed implants, a very thoroughly researched abduction phenomena.

It takes a willingness to not belief.


Peel away the layers and you don't have much. Thousands of lights in the sky, to be sure. Yes, you have radar reports, blips on a screen. "High ranked whistle blowers"? Not really. For example, Greer's "Press Conference witnesses" are often brought out to show the high quality of witness reports. But have you actually analyzed what they say? Here's a breakdown:

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 other: 50 - 71
Total : 70 - 100%

Note: These include actual press club witnesses and the witnesses in Greer's accompanying book, Numbers are not additive because witnesses fit in several categories.

Any time you attempt to fit people into pre-defined subjective categories you run into trouble. Some just don’t fit well. Many fit multiple categories. So if you set out to measure how many people saw radar blips in this sample, perhaps suggesting this isn’t really all that impressive, you need to account for the fact that some people saw a radar blip, AND they saw a physical definable craft as well, so in THEIR case it amounts to corroborating evidence. Maybe. Did they actually see both, or were they told there was a blip, but did not actually see it themselves? In many of the accounts, you just can’t tell. So, for the record, in this sample of 70 observers, six saw a radar blip and nothing else. Seventeen saw a radar blip and something else, perhaps at a completely different time. The difference is from less than ten percent to over twenty-five. So the bottom line is that you must be very cautious concluding anything from statistics. And, no, they don’t lie; people misinterpret them, often willfully.

At this stage we are working exclusively with the “Press Club Plus” witnesses. i.e.: All those who spoke at the Press Club plus all those interviewed for the book. One Press Club speaker did not make it into the book at all (Sheehan). If you ask Greer how many reports the Disclosure Project has on file, he will say hundreds. He said there were over 400 at the Press Conference itself, which happened over a decade ago. But once you get into triple digits patterns inevitably emerge. I maintain that the percentages of people seeing blips on screens and lights in the sky will remain fairly constant over time. There are many UFO databases that contain thousands of similar sightings. The issue is, how useful are they?

One thing is immediately apparent. This is not a random sample. Greer selected these witnesses, and he did so on purpose. The majority have military backgrounds. Why? First, because that’s where they had their experiences. Second, military witnesses are considered superior to civilian ones. It’s the same with pilots and police officers. It’s widely believed that they have superior observational skills than just normal folks. Is this attitude justified? Not really (We can discuss it elsewhere), but the fact is they are trusted more than the general populace, so they have been selected. The idea of this press conference was to present conservative, sober, “grown-up” witnesses to the public.

Secondly, the number of people who actually saw something tangible is relatively small. Twenty-two out of seventy people saw something they consider real. It wasn’t a blip on a radar screen or a light in the sky. They saw something that had tangible shape and definition. Not all of them can be termed “really excellent” sightings, but the fact is the number of people who saw them is less than a third of the sample size we have been given. The cynical amongst us would suggest we could throw out two-thirds of the witnesses right there and deal with what is left. Surely you could whittle the remaining down by half pretty readily, so we’re left with a baker’s dozen at best. Do these people have a clue as to what they saw at all? Eh, probably not.

What remains is that an overwhelming number of witnesses have been told stories: fifty out of seventy, which is 70%, and only a dozen of those have ONLY been told stories. In other words, their experiences have been supplemented by stories. By “stories” I mean someone else told the witness something tangible enough that he retold it. For example, McClandish missed his opportunity to attend an air show where he says he could have seen an “Alien Reproduction Vehicle,” yet he was told about it in such amazing detail that he could reproduce a drawing of it. Now everyone thinks he saw the vehicle. He did not. He was busy. He couldn’t go. It’s in the account.

Stories, by and large, are hearsay evidence. They have no legal standing. On the other hand, when someone who works at Project Grudge is told hundreds of stories, isn’t this more important than hearing a single story from a neighbor? Stories aren’t equal. When they get old, as Roswell is told, they amount to Folklore. As Albert Schweizer, who was a theologian as well as a doctor, said of the life of Jesus: Not only do we not know the facts of his life, we cannot know the facts of his life—ever. They are irretrievable to us the same way the true facts of Roswell, despite fine sifting by many, are fast slipping away from us.

That does not mean stories are not valuable. It just means there is a whole other level of meaning and definition to unravel. An attorney with a witness on the stand who hears him say, “I saw a UFO and there was a blip on the radar” would say, “Did you see the blip?” and when the witness said, “No, John told me it was there.” He would call John to the stand to see if he saw the blip. When you hear stories in this fashion such corroboration is often impossible. You are forced to take them at face value.

When you read some of these accounts in context a much different picture emerges. For example, who cannot be moved by Philip Corso, Jr.’s account of his father’s anguish over being misinterpreted, misquoted, and maligned after his book, “The Day After Roswell,” met critical reviews. He did not SAY he salted Intel with the integrated chip. He SAID they were already on the path and he just pushed them along. He did not SAY that he was ON the National Security Council. He SAID he was on the National Security Council STAFF, But Bill Birnes, the “co-author,” just hyped the book for sales, perhaps under his own time constraints. So people who know a tiny bit about the NSC come along and say, “That’s a gross exaggeration! He lies! He wasn’t on the NSC!”

Of course, Corso was on his deathbed at the time. And he got blamed. I’ve come away from this account thinking I’ve maligned Corso in the past on just these issues, and though I’m not completely convinced, still, he may have been unfairly accused. I have a bit more sympathy for the man having read Corso, Jr.’s account.

continued next post



posted on May, 22 2016 @ 01:04 PM
link   
But the stories, the stories continue to amaze, and even if there is no disk at the end of them, even if the entire issue is completely nonsense, you still have the consistency of the stories of intelligence compartmentalization that leave you to wonder, what is the point? Is this secrecy for its own sake? Once someone invokes the “security’ button, who can turn it off? It appears no one can. As Gordon Cooper said when asked where the film he saw went,

“How would I keep in touch with anybody? There is no way in the military or within the government of keeping track of something that is classified unless you are directly involved in it and I was not. I had no way of knowing what happened.” (p.228)

So, like the Ark of the Covenant in Indiana Jones, artifacts are filed away in a large warehouse somewhere unknown, and eventually forgotten by even the people who put them there.

The Hynek Analysis

Although the classification scheme above is useful for our purposes, it isn’t exactly a standard, but the Hynek classification scheme is. The table below essentially reassesses the witness experiences using the Hynek system. The classifications we will use are as follows. This is directly from the Wikipedia entry :

NL - Nocturnal Lights. Lights that exhibit strange characteristics that do not lend themselves to immediate identification as known aeronautical, astronomical, or meteorological sources.

DD - Daylight Disks. Distant UFO's sighted in daylight, These often are witnessed exhibiting unusual flight characteristics, size, shape, luminosity, or other physical attributes.

RV - Radar-Visual. UFO's simultaneously seen by human observers and tracked on radar. Or when sightings are collaborated via subsequent radar evidence.

CE1 - Close Encounters of the First Kind. A UFO seen from very close range.

CE2 - Close Encounters of the Second Kind. A UFO sighting accompanied by physical evidence and/or physical effects on things/people/animals in the immediate area.

CE3 - Close Encounters of the Third Kind. Either a CE1 or CE2 where physical occupants are seen by the observer.

NL: 4
DD: 5
RadarV: 4
CE-1: 13
CE-2: 1
CE-3: 4
Rep: 3

The Hynek Classification system is inherently more strict than the first classification we used. Here we cut to the chase and examine how many people actually saw something. We allow three “reported stories” in this section simply because they are “too good to be true” and have extensive corroborating evidence.

There are some judgment calls in assessing the witnesses in this (or any) matter. Did someone here see a Daylight Disk of have a CE-1 contact? The difference is in the level of detail and it is often difficult to tell from the testimony of the witness who saw it, or if he was relating a story. For example, did Gordon Cooper SEE the daylight disks traveling in formation, or was he relating the generally accepted story. You can’t tell. He did “see” a craft on the ground by holding some film up to a window, but did he actually see the craft? No. He saw a picture of one.

However, on a similar note, Callahan didn’t see anything himself and readily admits it. How can we recount his observation positively? Because it so good! His team was able to recreate the Radar-Visual observations, complete with tapes of the audio transmission coupled with radar sighting and the testimony of the JAL pilot. If we were being really strict about this, we could not count Callahan’s non-sighting, but given the evidence surrounding it, we did.

Besides, what we are not trying to assess the veracity of every single sighting here. We are trying to get a statistical idea of how many of these sightings were reported by individuals who actually saw them versus how many were hearsay stories. And quite frankly, those hearsay stories are a lot less valuable. Using those sorts of stories as witness accounts severely dilutes the strength of the overall presentation.

So out of seventy witnesses we have four who saw a Nocturnal Light, five who saw a Daylight Disk, and four who saw a Radar-confirmed visual sighting (normally a Daylight Disk). We have a whopping thirteen who had a CE-1 contact, i.e.; a sighting of a UFO that was close enough to discern some detail more than one could for a Daylight Disk.

We have one person who had a CE-2, with physical evidence, and three who had an actual CE-3, where they reported an object and also humanoid occupants. Here we have 42% of the witnesses who actually saw something. 58% personally saw nothing that can be classified by the Hynek System. What are we to make of this?

The major take-away from this result is that most UFO observations are actually second hand. That’s not to say they are not valuable, but they amount to stories. It’s just like a classroom where you first ask the question, “How many of you believe in UFOs?” and lots of hands go up. “How many of you have seen told stories about them?” and a few hands go down. “How many have actually seen one?” and here a LOT of hands go down. “How many have seen something useful?” and more hands go down. Out of seventy witnesses, three have seen humanoid occupants, potential aliens, i.e.: about 5% of witnesses.

The witness pool, of course, is not a random sample. In fact, it is the opposite. It consists of people who at the very least have a story to tell. Nor is it claimed this is a scientifically valid statistical analysis; we’re just showing trends. There are any number of ways to parse the data here. After all, a handful of witnesses are talking about energy, not alien craft. Shouldn’t we take these out?

Be my guest and make it as complicated as you want. My conclusion is simply that the witness pool is fairly shallow and that the actual observations people have made are somewhat less than the first impression you have of them. That’s the conclusion you need to challenge here if you are going to argue that witness X did not actually see a Nocturnal Light, but actually had a CE-1 experience. The question is, how would that change the overall conclusions here?

The last two posts are a result of my own research on Greer's press conference, a small segment of a much larger research project. The point of all this is that you don't have as much as you think you do.

edit on 5/22/2016 by schuyler because: (no reason given)



posted on May, 22 2016 @ 01:29 PM
link   

originally posted by: JackHill

originally posted by: Brotherman
What do you think there is to disclose?


- The presence if technological advanced alien beings operating on Earth.
- Hybridization agenda, abducting human beings against their will.
- Infiltration using human-looking hybrid beings, that are capable of mind control.

Boom. Say good bye to the status quo, chaos ensured.

Yeah but first aliens would have to exist,which I've yet to see any concrete proof of in over 30 years. If aliens do exist what reason would they have for coming here of all places when there plenty of other planets in just this Galaxy?
If aliens were coming to Earth there would be photos and videos of them all over the net not just photos of distant things flying in the sky shot from low resolution cameras.



posted on May, 22 2016 @ 01:32 PM
link   
a reply to: VashTheStampede

There are a plethora of good videos and pictures, and it shouldn't be a surprise most of them are 'grainy', as we are dealing with objects that are far away and generally moving.

Try to take a picture with your Iphone or even a better camera with a plane and see what you get.



posted on May, 22 2016 @ 01:34 PM
link   
a reply to: Benicealways

I voted probably, caveat being he wasn't warned off of it before hand.



posted on May, 22 2016 @ 01:47 PM
link   

originally posted by: Benicealways
a reply to: VashTheStampede

There are a plethora of good videos and pictures


Please show me a single picture of an alien spacecraft. Just one...



posted on May, 22 2016 @ 01:53 PM
link   
Trump? Somehow if he wanted to tackle the disclosure question I think he would already have spoken out.

I imagine it would have gone something like this.






..These aliens are criminals. They invade our airspace! They're thieves! They steal and mutilate our cattle. They have no respect for property and draw silly pictures in our crops. They abduct us in the night and they make our butts hurt from the primitive probing they carry out because of their socialist health care......

I am gonna build a force field around the planet and those little grey guys can pay for that damned force field.


edit on 22/5/16 by mirageman because: typo



posted on May, 22 2016 @ 01:55 PM
link   

originally posted by: VashTheStampede

originally posted by: JackHill

originally posted by: Brotherman
What do you think there is to disclose?


- The presence if technological advanced alien beings operating on Earth.
- Hybridization agenda, abducting human beings against their will.
- Infiltration using human-looking hybrid beings, that are capable of mind control.

Boom. Say good bye to the status quo, chaos ensured.

Yeah but first aliens would have to exist,which I've yet to see any concrete proof of in over 30 years. If aliens do exist what reason would they have for coming here of all places when there plenty of other planets in just this Galaxy?
If aliens were coming to Earth there would be photos and videos of them all over the net not just photos of distant things flying in the sky shot from low resolution cameras.


Sigh... seriously? Why would be 'photos and videos of them all over the net'? You know nothing Jon Snow. They love secrecy and working on the shadows, they know very well that a public undeniable incident could threaten their goals, do you think they're stupid? They have invested enormous amount of time, resources and energy this.

Oh and yeah, sadly they exist and have been operating for some quite time now. Why would be coming here? Who cares! That's not the right question, the question that really matters is 'Are they already here?' And that one was already answered several times.



posted on May, 22 2016 @ 01:59 PM
link   

edit on 22-5-2016 by icewater because: need to reference a previous post.



posted on May, 22 2016 @ 02:03 PM
link   
I just watched a program on this very subject and it comes down to "the need to know". A lot of ordinary people "want" to know but the President has no need to know unless it concerns an immediate threat to the nation.
Jimmy Carter was told "your curiosity is not a need". You can read into that what you want.



posted on May, 22 2016 @ 02:09 PM
link   

originally posted by: MyHappyDogShiner
Reason for Trump to promise to disclose things, like he has been doing: To garner votes....

Reason Trump won't reveal anything new if he gets elected: He doesn't really know anything....

Reason Trump would even be elected: Because the american public is kinda clueless....



True since they already elected a corrupt communist Maoist, Marxist leaning and chronic lying liberty killing dirt bag twice in a row.


edit on 22-5-2016 by NoCorruptionAllowed because: (no reason given)



posted on May, 22 2016 @ 02:17 PM
link   

originally posted by: Benicealways
a reply to: VashTheStampede

There are a plethora of good videos and pictures, and it shouldn't be a surprise most of them are 'grainy', as we are dealing with objects that are far away and generally moving.


That statement contradicts itself. If the pictures are grainy and of far away objects, then they aren't very good. They amount to the lowest kinds of sightings on the Hynek scale: Nocturnal Lights and Daylight Disks--hardly proof of alien visitation.

You're speaking in hyperbole and unable to come up with the examples you insist exist. Who are the "hundreds of high-ranking whistleblowers," for example? If there are indeed "hundreds," can you name, say, a few dozen? If there are hundreds to your knowledge, surely you can name a handful. How about that "plethora of good videos and pictures"? Where are they?

The overall problem here is that we are told stories third-hand, then embellish and repeat them, assuming it's all proven. That's not so, as my extensive posts above should show you. Those posts above are part of extensive "research," which you have suggested people do, with the clear implication that you have and skeptics have not. What looks like "proof" is in fact weak and insubstantial. I would suggest you have done NO research yourself, so admonishing others that they have not is a) untrue, and b) deceptive. If you can come up with some serious proof, we can sure take a look at it, but so far you have actually offered nothing.



posted on May, 22 2016 @ 02:26 PM
link   
a reply to: schuyler

Yes, here you go bestufoevidence.weebly.com/government-officials.html



posted on May, 22 2016 @ 02:27 PM
link   


Why would be 'photos and videos of them all over the net'?

Because now for a good few years we've had these handy little computer and camera devices in our pockets called smart phones.



They love secrecy and working on the shadows, they know very well that a public undeniable incident could threaten their goals, do you think they're stupid? They have invested enormous amount of time, resources and energy this.

Really,if they are about secrecy as much as you say they are then why do they fly in such an easily identified aircraft and make any appearances at all then? Just being seen once or twice kinda ruins the whole secrecy thing.



Oh and yeah, sadly they exist and have been operating for some quite time now. Why would be coming here?And that one was already answered several times.

What proof do you have of this other than the show ancient aliens and other fabrications and stories told by others.



new topics

top topics



 
11
<< 1    3  4 >>

log in

join