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.

 

Help ATS via PayPal:
learn more

Tom De Longe with answers about UFOs, Life, the Universe and Everything...

page: 41
68
<< 38  39  40    42  43 >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Nov, 13 2016 @ 10:52 PM
link   
a reply to: mirageman



However my point was why would the UK MoD have commissioned such a report if they had any deeper knowledge of the UFO topic?


I've thought about that too. I think that the folks (faction?) that might have commissioned the report were completely in the dark otherwise why would they have never been briefed somehow on all of the redacted parts? Seems to me that if they had been, they wouldn't have needed the report.

We, the public, are the ones that see all of the "xxxx"s, but presumably the members of the report's target audience could and can see what's under there; Was Project Condign the first place that they had seen that information? That seems really strange to me: They had the right clearance to see it, but didn't see it coming?

So they must have been total outsiders trying to figure stuff out and smart enough to leverage their resources in such a way as to commission that report (?).





posted on Nov, 13 2016 @ 11:40 PM
link   
a reply to: TrueMessiah

They don't know it either, many of them. They are "magicians too".

Kev



posted on Nov, 13 2016 @ 11:44 PM
link   
a reply to: Dan00

Its the story of the blind men and the elephant..

I'd say that Springer had the perfect response a few pages back.

One can learn much just by reading ATS.

Mirageman, Isaac Koi, The Gut and others have "disclosed" quite a lot.

Kev



posted on Nov, 14 2016 @ 04:44 PM
link   
a reply to: KellyPrettyBear

The work of Shannon and Weaver belongs as much to the foundations of Cybernetics as it does Information Theory and indeed Communication Theory, the key difference is that Cybernetics isn't just a theoretical perspective but a practical methodological framework that can be applied, across disciplines, to understand complex systems and their behaviour. Someone like me, highly limited resources in all respects, including time, and also access to information, zero influence, can't ever expect to 'compete' with someone with Vallee's resources and indeed profits from his investigations from book sales, lots to put into 'getting to the bottom of it' once and for all, and I wouldn't dream of telling him how to do what he does, but I wonder if he knows, sufficiently, what he does when he does what he does...

I suspect that, perhaps, like you, he seems to be thinking of Information Technology rather than Information Theory. I'm not at all sure. I'm still rather confused. I think some of the difficulty extends from an over preoccupation with the messenger leading to a systemic failure to listen to the message.

In my honest opinion



posted on Nov, 14 2016 @ 05:30 PM
link   
a reply to: Anaana

Your observations are good.

A lot of IT people like JV and I are interested in all of these subjects, but, really concentrate on obscure little data patterns.

Kev



posted on Nov, 14 2016 @ 05:37 PM
link   
a reply to: KellyPrettyBear

That's probably why I have a hard time understanding them. General Systems Theory is what gets my toes toasty.



posted on Nov, 14 2016 @ 05:55 PM
link   
a reply to: Anaana

Have you posted on your favorite topic?



posted on Nov, 15 2016 @ 03:50 AM
link   
a reply to: KellyPrettyBear

What is my 'favourite topic'? I don't think I have one. I post on lots of topics, no particular favourite.

Hence, General Systems Theory. I like Whole Systems. So I literally 'like' everything under the Sun. If I had to narrow it down that is. Mysteries, conspiracies, which is why I come to ATS, I really 'like' those too, they cut across numerous topics, which again favours a Cybernetics response if you are to understand how such behaviour 'fits' into the system and what purpose it has to the functioning of that system, negative or positive or indeed, if any. Whether that system is a person, a website, or a multi-national corporation, or a system for maintaining secrecy or a minor conspiracy between two parties.

Cybernetics has the ability to reveal what is hidden, an invaluable tool for the belt of any conspiracy theorist.




posted on Nov, 15 2016 @ 05:29 PM
link   
a reply to: Dan00

Although this is taking the thread off at a tangent it does have some relevance to the issues being discussed.

Project Condign was, in all likelihood, compiled by an individual contractor to the UK MoD. Nick Pope makes some claim to getting this "UAP Study" commissioned although he played no part in the actual proect itself. It seems to have been a case of collating all the existing UFO reports going back a decade (in the period 1987 to 1997) on file into an MS Access database. Many of the redactions are to prevent private citizens names and details being leaked and also to conceal the strength of the UK and NATO air defence capabilities. Sometimes you find mistakes left in.


Given that no one expected 'Condign' to ever be made public then you have to conclude that the people you would expect to know didn't really know much at all about UFOs. All they knew is that they had reports on them but there seemed to be no overall analysis of the risk to national defence posed by UFOs. So they got someone to do the analysis.

Now I can't prove that there isn't a more clandestine authority looking into the topic. But there is a precedent of sort set back in the 1950s when Prime MInister Winston Churchill asked the question of his Air Ministry :


"What does all this stuff about flying saucers amount to? What can it mean? What is the truth?"





This was sent at the end of July 1952 and was almost certainly prompted by the UFO flights over DC in the same month.

However the "Flying Saucer Working Party" had already been formed in October 1950 at the the request of MoD, Chief Scientific Advisor Sir Henry Tizard who wanted a serious study of UFO reports and duly authorized a small team to look into the phenomenon. A response was provided to Churchill less than 2 weeks later ,based on a study in 1951, concluding that all reports were explainable as hoaxes, natural phenomenon or the delusions of the observer.

click to view

There is a lot to debate of course.

But my point here is that the Prime Minister of the UK (although he came to power a year after the Flying Saucer Working Party began their studies) was obviously unaware of the study and conclusions drawn by this group. And quite probably unaware they even existed to that point. Even though the study amounted to nothing. So it's entirely possible people in high places of government (even the POTUS) are left out of the loop at times.



posted on Nov, 15 2016 @ 08:01 PM
link   
a reply to: mirageman

I think your response was awesome and completely on topic.

If "strange stuff" doesn't interfere with governmental power, they would have little reason to worry about it. They would get further ahead (in their pursuit of power) by experimenting on their citizens and enlarging their militaries...which is exactly what they did.

The confusion and "cover" provided by misperceptions about UFOs and UAPs was just a free christmas present for them.

Now parts of private industry might be "strange chasers" due to trying to gain a leg up on others by cracking new arcane physics/neurology and exploiting it for profit, that would give them a stronger motive.

Kev



posted on Nov, 16 2016 @ 01:46 AM
link   
a reply to: mirageman

Your post reminded me of the RAF gremlins.


This concept of gremlins was popularized during World War II among airmen of the UK's RAF units,[7] in particular the men of the high-altitude Photographic Reconnaissance Units (PRU) of RAF Benson, RAF Wick and RAF St Eval. The flight crews blamed gremlins for otherwise inexplicable accidents which sometimes occurred during their flights. Gremlins were also thought at one point to have enemy sympathies, but investigations revealed that enemy aircraft had similar and equally inexplicable mechanical problems. As such, gremlins were portrayed as being equal opportunity tricksters, taking no sides in the conflict, and acting out their mischief from their own self-interest.[8] In reality, the gremlins were a form of "buck passing" or deflecting blame.[8]


en.wikipedia.org...

I don't suppose you know whether there is a report still in circulation from the 'investigations' that the above refers to?

I wonder how much of this is a process of reification.



posted on Nov, 16 2016 @ 10:30 AM
link   
a reply to: Anaana

Reification is a great word and quite germane to these kind of conversations.

Im always curious whether the rise of science and logic has reduced "actual" reification and left us with more imaginary reification. Of course science and logic are just a small part of human behavior.

Kev



posted on Nov, 16 2016 @ 01:32 PM
link   
Part II of the DeLonge Delusion up at MU, well worth a read, and going into UFO history with Bennewitz and Doty getting a mention.


Besides the possible goal of messing with the enemy’s mind, the DeLonge DeLusion is perhaps most sensibly viewed as but the latest example of the intelligence apparatus planting particular ideas into a close-knit subculture, sowing truth with fiction, and monitoring how this information is being received, interpreted, and spread. It takes us all the way back to the ‘Falcon.’ The names and the faces may change, but the game stays the same.


It seems very apt.



posted on Nov, 16 2016 @ 02:18 PM
link   
a reply to: cuckooold

It does seem apt


The thing that got me, was the use of language, 'pandering' to the 'young people', combined with using the hook of UFOs to reel them in to the new narrative. It's exactly what Ernst Zundel did.

Exactly.



posted on Nov, 16 2016 @ 03:25 PM
link   
a reply to: Anaana

Hello Anaana. Sorry I don't know of any official reports made on RAF 'gremlins'. To add a bit of synchronicity to the thread there is actually a neat article (also) on Mysterious Universe on the topic.

The Real Gremlins of WWII by Brent Swancer

It would probably make an interesting thread on here if someone wanted to dig deeper into the topic and take up the challenge!



posted on Nov, 16 2016 @ 03:44 PM
link   
a reply to: cuckooold

Yes Robbie Graham is very good at exposing the underlying layers of Hollywood movies and the like.

The problem is that the very people who are in a position to really know the truth are also the very people with the biggest incentive to lie about it.



posted on Nov, 16 2016 @ 04:37 PM
link   
a reply to: mirageman

Very interesting MU articles. I agree with everything about 'belief being weaponised'. They've had over 50 years to do something with this power, yet they are either still experimenting with this, or ufologists are worth this herculean effort? It's the same argument that if they've had 50 years of advanced UFOlike aircraft, why have we never seen any evidence of deployment.

The bit about Torme is VERY interesting. It appears the producer was either threatened or scared by an alien story.



posted on Nov, 16 2016 @ 05:11 PM
link   
a reply to: ctj83

We've had nearly 70 years of UFOs but 'belief' was weaponized long ago. By the creators of 'God'' and even 'Father Christmas'.



posted on Nov, 16 2016 @ 06:10 PM
link   

originally posted by: ctj83
a reply to: mirageman

The bit about Torme is VERY interesting. It appears the producer was either threatened or scared by an alien story.


Yes, I wondered about why the producer Seligman was so paranoid. I've had a cursory search for info related to this, but it seems thin on the ground.

Back to DeLonge, I found this interesting article, also worth a read.

highstrangenessshow.com...


DeLonge’s big “inside info” reveal is basically the deFacto mantra of the military-industrial elite and the perfect reason why we need to carry on spending $650 billion a year of public taxpayer money into the largely private accounts of the military-industrial complex. Hell, with full on disclosure (or even just disclosing to policy makers or hinting at it over and over) maybe they can even multiply that by a ten or hundred? He’s their poster boy (“Lockheed Martin are AWESOME”) and he’s reaching the masses via the mainstream in a way that most UFO disclosure campaigners could only have dreamt of.

Here’s what Tom has to say about his work with these top-secret insiders.

"I wanted to reverse people’s cynical view of government, not politicians. But the government and what it’s doing. There are people doing really heroic work. When people hear this they’re going to be so relieved that it’s not some big, bad secret government. It will change the way people feel about our military and intelligence leadership”

“There won’t be any disinformation in my project”.


With all due respect Tom, how on Earth would you know?


Indeed, how would he know?
edit on 16-11-2016 by cuckooold because: (no reason given)

edit on 16-11-2016 by cuckooold because: (no reason given)



posted on Nov, 16 2016 @ 07:16 PM
link   
My abiding impression about this and much that comes from both sides of the debate is that, there is a total lack of humour and sense of real self awareness about it all. It's so , let's be honest drearily worthy. The one thing that has struck down the years about Ufology is this. Skeptic or believer Ufology hands you the rope and a most choose eventually to hang themselves by it.

People tend to end up sounding akin to some boringly worthy yogurt weaver or like some tedious lecturer who has forgotten that, the passing of knowledge is also about fun as well.

Iv'e thought this for ages now and I'm probably way off the nark however here goes, the greatest work of philosophy is probably , Douglas Adams Hitchhiker's Guide to the Galaxy, for the simple reason that. I doubt there was an ounce of intention in Adams to do that when he wrote it. Yet, it's all there, life in all its' grandeur and petty stupidities. Just like say, the first exo planets we discover are orbiting the last sort of star in the universe you'd expect to find them doing so. Deal with it you monkeys, this is the universe, it's truly vast in a way you can hardly imagine and it does everything and anything possible on both a macro and micro level. Why are you monkeys so surprised about that?

One thing missing from all the monotheistic religions is any sort of humour. At no point do their Gods ever seem to turn to those they choose to enlighten and say. "You weren't expecting that were you monkey man, lighten up you over sensitive ape, do you have any grasp of how tedious endless worthiness actually is?"

That would suggest to me that. if the intelligence behind the whole phenomenon has no sense of humour then it probably is derived wholly from machines that have wandered round the galaxy merely studying any sentient life forms they happen to come across. That any interaction is wholly based on observation pretty much for pure observation's sake. On the other hand, if it is a sentient intelligence in the sense we understand ht term, then half of what goes on can probably be catalogued under the, "Scream if you want to see the apes start another cult/religion".

After my own experience earlier this year, and catalogued on here for all to read about, one thing has stayed with me was the whole. This is incredible however, no-one's going to believe you are they come on? Furthermore, if you've managed to tape this on the best kit in the world, huge numbers are going to just say... "Ohh that's easily done with CGI, that's CGi that is".

To me, that shows a certain sense of humour and also that, the prefect stealth cover, is it appear as something so totally out there and daft, you can sail over a city of 360,000 souls on a Friday morning at 1 am and seemingly, only one of the apes actually notices you.

it ever strike people that, just maybe, there's someone in one of those "craft" saying to another.."Shall we turn the radar signature on of off? What are we tonight? Two football size stadiums big black triangle or the lil red orb thingy? How about some utterly bats*** mentalist shape, that will really have 'em, going"?"

So for me, Tom rates a fail on this particular test. The one thin g surely we do know about UFO's are, they are way more subtle than most ever imagine they are?
edit on 16-11-2016 by FireMoon because: (no reason given)







 
68
<< 38  39  40    42  43 >>

log in

join