It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.
Please white-list or disable AboveTopSecret.com in your ad-blocking tool.
Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.
Superficially the phenomenon is showing off its capabilities. I mean its like human scientists do collecting samples of this or that for some reason but on one level their showing off like a proud baseball player hitting massive home runs out of the ballpark in batting practice to impress the pretty girls in the stands.
They come like a thief in the night the only difference is we don’t know what their stealing but I think they're stealing something.
originally posted by: vlawde
a reply to: KellyPrettyBear
I'm not sure the phenomena is evil, I don't think of it in terms of black and white.
Any evil, IMO, comes from us, whether it's our perception of the phenomena, or the phenomena reflecting us
It is no surprise to me that the "phenomenon" behaves as it does.
originally posted by: Whatsthisthen
a reply to: MrRussell
An interesting observation there MrRussell
I wonder . . . .
Why blur out the sample?
Now this is just a "what if?" of mine.
Perhaps it is a matter of security?
In the practice of dowsing maps are sometimes used as a way of remotely "devining" a location. A skilled dowser can use a lock of hair, blood or a photograph. Dowsers even make "black boxes", instruments that can both receive and send information to and from a target via a "witness" (photo, blood, hair). More info: The History of Radionics
If one uses the black boxes long enough, eventually you don't need them anymore. I used to build them, not difficult.
We are familiar with DNA testing. A drop of blood or a single hair contains a LOT of information about the person. So do photographs.
Now it has been a while since I picked up one of those gadgets, that was before photos went digital. So I am not sure of analogue Vs digital, but I believe it would not make too big a difference, though film has silver in it to capture certain things.
The point of the matter is that a really good dowser can gain a lot of info from a photo. That alone could be a reason for blurring out (removing information) from a photograph.
In the world of the "phenomenon", the "phenomenon" knows this too. In a sense, the "phenomenon" can intentionally send information via a photo and make it's presence felt and known to someone who is aware.
Sometimes it is surprising what and who steps forward out of a photograph.
It follows from this line of thinking that someone like the TTSA would want to remove information from a photo such as the image of the actual debris.
1. To stop a dowser from discovering the "debris" is false.
2. To stop a dowser from discovering the "debris" is true.
If false the deception is plain to see.
If true, then information is available to third parties.
The basic question here is this; Are they this smart?
Let's go a bit further.
The consciousness of that which is photographed can, if it knows how, step out of a photograph. I won't watch The Hunt For Skinwalker for exactly that reason.
Consciousnesses step out of photos far too often for my comfort, though it is occasionally very interesting. Occasionally one makes a new friend.
Personally, I don't look for trouble, so I let the "phenomenon" alone. Sometimes it gets curious when a human ignores it and it will come and say "hello". Sometimes it wants something and then things get interesting and you learn.
On the surface, removing the debris from a photo is a security measure. But is the TTSA that smart?
If they are indeed that smart, then it can posibly be for two reasons.
To hide a deception, or, they actually have something and they don't want outsiders talking to their "debris".
(I wonder when they started blurring the photos.)
1. a fact or situation that is observed to exist or happen, especially one whose cause or explanation is in question.
2. the object of a person's perception.
originally posted by: Willtell
From June 24th, 1947, John the Baptists day until today....71years of programming has to amount to something.
A lot of things have started to make sense recently, especially how angry some of the narrative drivers have been in interviews and radio shows. There's the boys club in ufology and there's the boys club in the MIC. I believe it's the ones in the ufology that are pushing thier narrative, the over encompassing "phenomenon hypothesis". It's thier motivations for doing so that concern me.