Tom DeLonge Anouncement: October 11th 9:00 AM PST/12:00 PM EST

originally posted by: thepixelpusher
a reply to: Majic
a reply to: KansasGirl

Not sure why you are trashing on the posts here. We've posted the UFO video and interviews with the pilot. And, the govt. seems okay with releasing info from a pentagon study. Either we're witnessing disclosure, since this NEVER happened before, or a trick. I'd vote disclosure, but I sense an agenda, like the cat is out of the bag with other nations governments and the USA wants to keep ahead of someone else scooping them. You can laugh at those here that think this is significant. You'll be laughing at Mark Springer, one of the owners, that thinks this is significant. Along with George Knaap. These 2 guys are not fantasy prone and are pretty well plugged in to the govt. and UFO investigative community. What do you know that they don't!??

I'm not trashing on anyone's posts, and I'm not laughing at anyone (except perhaps Tom). I'm referring to the fact that, as inevitably happens in threads like these, some of us insist on insulting those with different opinions.

When you dismiss the views of others because you think they've been "trained to dismiss any new evidence", that they need to "break out of [their] mind control and review the evidence", or that they are "trolls", that's what you're doing. It's a form of ad hominem attack used to discredit opposition and poison the well.

This urge to belittle others for not sharing beliefs has some intriguing psychological underpinnings, but that's a subject in itself. My hope is that by being aware of it, we can resist the temptation to follow suit.

Like you, I'm skeptical as to whether Tom DeLonge's efforts are genuine or another in an extremely long and voluminous series of hoaxes. We can differ as to whether or not it's significant at this point, but that needn't involve laughing at anyone.

I'm certainly not laughing at Mark Allin ("Springer" is his ATS handle, not his last name) or George Knapp, and happen to hold utmost regard for both of them. That doesn't mean I necessarily agree with them about this subject or anything else, but I definitely respect their opinions.

I can understand why you would feel defensive, given your own experiences. There's no doubt that people tend to heckle those of us brave enough to report witnessing unexplained phenomena, and ATS exists to offer a place where we can discuss such things (ideally) without fear of ridicule or reprisal.

But being defensive can lead to misperception and self-isolation. Here are all my posts in this thread. Where am I laughing at people who think this is significant? Where am I trashing anyone's posts? I have strong criticism for Tom DeLonge's current modus operandi, but hold no personal animosity against him or anyone else. Like you, I just want the truth.

That's my point. I'm not out to attack you or anyone here, and want all of us to feel comfortable sharing our honest opinions about the topic, whatever they may be. That's why I object to the practice of poisoning the well, which is what my frustrated comments were about.

If we remember that good people can disagree about anything, we can discuss everything.

At least, that's what I believe. It's okay if you disagree.

a reply to: Arbitrageur

I don't know why we haven't seen the gun camera footage yet. If and when we do, I'll be very interested in it.

If there is a field I'm an expert in, it's underwater surveillance, detection and recognition. If there was an USO incident with witnesses and sensor data, I do make the claim I'd be a better interpreter of it than someone who has had keen interest in the field and has spent a lot of time discussing it. I maintain the same respect for experts in other fields also.

originally posted by: thepixelpusher
We've posted the UFO video and interviews with the pilot. And, the govt. seems okay with releasing info from a pentagon study.

Are you devoid of all UFO disclosure history?

What happened earlier in cases like these: ridicule, misinformation, lies, spying on UFO researchers, etc.

Exactly the fact that a person from a DoD program can just quit his job, and get a release of a video, withOUT any official DoD disclosure or affirmation (that I have been able to find), is quite odd, do you not think?

If they wanted disclosure, they would disclose.

Not use some "I've read all the UFO books" wide-eyed fan to build a cash-in platform for entertainment as a base to let ex-DoD project workers to talk on their own (and not in official DoD capacity).

Who from any government agency as a current employee with a verifiable title has come out with proof that is verifiable since this NYT disclosure?

It's been EX-Senator Harry Reid, EX-DoD worker Elizondo, EX-pilot David Fravor , etc. Do you see the recurring pattern?

If any branch of the government, in any official form, wanted to disclose, they would:

- release any of the thousands of redacted/blacked out UFO documents (see The Black Vault)
- release all the footage, not drip-drip-drip
- make an official statement through their own press channels, using an existing, employed person of a high enough rank

Either we're witnessing disclosure, since this NEVER happened before, or a trick.

I vote for a very elaborate trick. I'm afraid history is on that side probabilistically.

Along with George Knaap. These 2 guys are not fantasy prone and are pretty well plugged in to the govt. and UFO investigative community. What do you know that they don't!??

That's the thing isn't it? Also Knapp and John B. Alexander, and many other UFOlogy big names have stated they know secrets they can't and will not reveal.

Why do you trust people like that?

What are they not telling you now, and why?

We have no way of knowing their agenda, motivations or such.

We can only speculate.

I've met John himself and he is a very likeable person, very astute observer and highly analytical.

But he keeps secrets and he says so.

One thing I believe (and it is a belief, I don't know if it is a fact) him on, is when he says:

Nothing will come out of this. A few more videos, some people will make a huge deal about it. Within a year or two it's all forgotten. The world doesn't care, it just moves on to the next thing.

Effective 'disclosure' has already happened through many channels, unofficially, in soft form, throughout the decades, but the US government's branches didn't do it on purpose and officially. All they did, was feed us lies upon lies upon lies, decade after decade. Even after they got caught lying repeatedly (the changed Roswell explanations throughout the decades, anyone?), they just kept on lying by changing the story.

Why would this time be any different.

I'm sorry, but until there's official, tangible proof available for scrutiny and not some fuzzy old videos (with no chain of custody, no originals, no official verification) that can be denied or explained away (later on), I don't buy it.

In highly likely probability it's just a script, that people are watching unfold, believing it's real. Like reality-tv, all fake, but with a lot of make-believe.

Again, I could be wrong, but I think people are letting their enthusiasm take over their critical thinking skills while forgetting 70+ years of history on this.

People so desperately want to believe this is it.

a reply to: Pathaka

I understand your skepticism. Disclosure requires proof. If that proof manifests in full I'll believe it through careful 3rd party validation. I don't require any proof other than my own UFO sighting to realize that there is other life in the universe and it has come here. Believe what you will, but I've already been furnished with evidence.

a reply to: SacredLore

Who would you trust to evaluate this? An experienced combat pilot who was there or some chair jockey saying the UFO is a jet?

a reply to: Iridomyrmex

You forget that both pilots had the thing in visual sight in addition to the gimbal video. Also ground radar too. It was not a lens flare. LOL!

I'm curious as to why multiple people, supposedly 'in the know', all say they can't talk about it.

I doubt all have signed NDA's. I asked Ryan Skinner (who has written several books on Skinwalker Ranch and investigates the perimeter semi regularly) if he was under an NDA, after he said he knew some stuff but couldn't talk about it. He said he wasn't.

So we have a fair amount of people that 'know stuff' but they refuse to reveal anything. Why?

a reply to: vlawde

Likely it is stuff that is considered outside the norm and they don't want to be labeled as kooks. Kind of like the trenchcoat smoking dogs on the side of the road that was left out of the Knaap Skinwalker ranch book.

Could be that imagery is implanted into our minds to make us dismiss things. Maybe it was aliens at the side of the road and a screen image was introduced to hide the identity and have the person dismiss it as tricks of their mind. My friend once saw a 4 foot tall owl in the middle of the nighttime highway as he drove by. He knew this because of how high the head was to his car as he drove by it. Unless we have mega giant owls in Wisconsin, it might have been a screen for something else?

a reply to: thepixelpusher

I think we have to differentiate between the two videos: Do we have a (non-anonymous) pilot's statement for the Gimbal video? I cannot remember one.
Personally I find the Gimbal video not very compelling: Like the majority of people I am not familiar with this type of equipment and therefore I cannot dismiss a mundane explanation. Something just does not feel right about the rotational movement of the UFO. Yes, it would help if the US military would publish an official evaluation of this video.

The Nimitz video is better because it is accompanied by the interview with Commander David Fravor. But then again, the video on its own will hardly convince the average person on the street that this is an object with "out of this world" flying characteristics (zooming in really happens at a very inconvenient moment). We are simply not familiar with this type of video and have to rely on the interpretation of experts. In this case this is Mr. Fravor and I see no reason why he cannot be believed. But tons of reliable and credible people have given their testimony (including you), but people will never accept this as proof.

So the question remains: Will we get 100% irrefutible, overwhelming evidence or only carefully selected material that can be debunked in the end?

I am 100% convinced that UFOs are real and that some of them are at least linked to non-human life forms. I have no objective proof for this, but there are too many testimonies throughout the history of man to be ignored.

Irrefutible proof of the existence of "out of this world" technology or craft would change our civilization. For our survival, I very much wish this happens, but I understand that the groups who benefit from the status quo are opposing it. Where my thinking is different to that of some ATS members is that I believe in the good in mankind. Sooner or later a rebellious soul will incarnate in the Rockefeller or Rothschild families and give them a headache. This may already have have happened.

a reply to: Pathaka

Are you devoid of all UFO disclosure history?

Hmm, not all, but there certainly are gaps.

But help has arrived!
I would like to point everybody to a great new thread by mirageman that provides a lot of background.
We have to know history in order to fully understand the present.
Mandatory reading!

Bigelow, UFOs, MUFON and ‘DeLonge’ Road to AATIP

originally posted by: thepixelpusher
a reply to: vlawde

Likely it is stuff that is considered outside the norm and they don't want to be labeled as kooks. Kind of like the trenchcoat smoking dogs on the side of the road that was left out of the Knaap Skinwalker ranch book.

Could be that imagery is implanted into our minds to make us dismiss things. Maybe it was aliens at the side of the road and a screen image was introduced to hide the identity and have the person dismiss it as tricks of their mind. My friend once saw a 4 foot tall owl in the middle of the nighttime highway as he drove by. He knew this because of how high the head was to his car as he drove by it. Unless we have mega giant owls in Wisconsin, it might have been a screen for something else?

I think we should keep in mind that we don't look out at the world, but rather the world is only being represented in our mind through our senses. If we can often or sometimes imagine or mistake credible things all on our own, I think we should assume it should be very easy to force us to imagine or mistake incredible things as well. I am not claiming to know that these are screen memories or sights, but rather just pointing out that we have no reason to believe that they aren't.

If I see a trench coat wearing dog smoking a cigarette on the side of the road, whether through manipulation from a 3rd party or because I am not capable of processing or imaging the data being collected, it amounts to the same result. I am certainly interested in whether the first is possible, because I and we already know the second is, but I don't know that it gets us any further.

Not trying to argue anything, just making an observation based on your contribution.

originally posted by: thepixelpusher
a reply to: Majic
a reply to: KansasGirl

Not sure why you are trashing on the posts here. We've posted the UFO video and interviews with the pilot. And, the govt. seems okay with releasing info from a pentagon study. Either we're witnessing disclosure, since this NEVER happened before, or a trick. I'd vote disclosure, but I sense an agenda, like the cat is out of the bag with other nations governments and the USA wants to keep ahead of someone else scooping them. You can laugh at those here that think this is significant. You'll be laughing at Mark Springer, one of the owners, that thinks this is significant. Along with George Knaap. These 2 guys are not fantasy prone and are pretty well plugged in to the govt. and UFO investigative community. What do you know that they don't!??

No one is laughing at those who believe this is "Disclosure." And here you go again, name-dropping and speaking for others again on what they believe this whole thing is. I'm going to posit that you are putting words in their mouth and possibly misrepresenting what they have actually said.

We have to agree to disagree, pixel. I don't think this whole Tom Delonge thing/Luis Elizando video is "Disclosure." You seem to continue to get OFFENDED when someone disagrees with you. Just because someone disagrees with you, it doesn't mean they are laughing.

You seem pretty invested in this whole thing really being "Disclosure." I want to know the truth too...I would like to believe that officialdom is telling us that ET's exist. But they most certainly have NOT.

originally posted by: Majic

originally posted by: thepixelpusher
a reply to: Majic
a reply to: KansasGirl

Not sure why you are trashing on the posts here. We've posted the UFO video and interviews with the pilot. And, the govt. seems okay with releasing info from a pentagon study. Either we're witnessing disclosure, since this NEVER happened before, or a trick. I'd vote disclosure, but I sense an agenda, like the cat is out of the bag with other nations governments and the USA wants to keep ahead of someone else scooping them. You can laugh at those here that think this is significant. You'll be laughing at Mark Springer, one of the owners, that thinks this is significant. Along with George Knaap. These 2 guys are not fantasy prone and are pretty well plugged in to the govt. and UFO investigative community. What do you know that they don't!??

When you dismiss the views of others because you think they've been "trained to dismiss any new evidence", that they need to "break out of [their] mind control and review the evidence", or that they are "trolls", that's what you're doing. It's a form of ad hominem attack used to discredit opposition and poison the well.

This urge to belittle others for not sharing beliefs

This is so well-said I just felt like seeing it posted again.

I have stopped posting in most of the threads on this particular subject, because I'm tired of being passive-aggressively insulted and condescended to, being told I just "can't handle the truth" and other ideas along that line. I've also been called a troll a few times. So it's a bit humorous that I've stopped speaking up because of this...because that's one of the goals of a troll. To shut someone up. So it's ironic.

Let's just share our differing thoughts without assuming that the other person holds ill-will for us or looks down on us. We can do that, can't we? I mean we all want the same thing: the truth. I think we can get that more effectively by working together. Our differing thoughts on the matter can ENRICH our search- they don't have to compete with each other, these differing ideas.

a reply to: SacredLore

I agree with you totally. There has to be some tangible proof to break the barrier of disbelief for all to understand what is happening. The level of evidence needs to be extraordinary. I hope DeLonge can deliver that or it will go the way of those before him. Like you, my personal belief based upon my UFO sighting is that there already is proof enough. At least the sighting sealed it for me. I hope the govt. isn't toying with us again. This time it feels like something more than before, as the previous dupes never had the high profile level of media coverage as DeLonge and his team. Something seems to be driving this. maybe the revelation is known by China and Russia and there is a race to understand the technology and motivations of the races visiting here.

a reply to: KansasGirl

Not at all. I have no idea if this goes to the level of Disclosure, which would require far more evidence. I'm not invested in this at all. As far as I'm concerned Disclosure is irrelevant because I've already seen the fantastical evidence of machines visiting our planet or dimension.

a reply to: KansasGirl

Great thoughts. I understand the skepticism until the full evidence is there.

originally posted by: thepixelpusher
a reply to: KansasGirl

As far as I'm concerned Disclosure is irrelevant because I've already seen the fantastical evidence of machines visiting our planet or dimension.

how do you know they were visiting from elsewhere.

a reply to: thepixelpusher

Can you post your evidence?

a reply to: Phantom423

I posted a recreation of what I saw and some details here: UFO or Military?

What I personally experienced past what I presented, I'm not willing to share. I'm not fond of the ridicule. Seeing what DeLonge has gotten here for far less here makes me convinced sharing more is only inviting unwanted negative attention. I'm not seeking attention or a moneymaking deal. But, the truth is definitely out there...way out there.

There are people on this planet using off world technology already. That's the last I'll say of that.

a reply to: BASSPLYR

Some are local, yes. But ask yourself if we discovered this tech by ourselves.