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

Apparently the Go Fast footage was posted by Jeremy Corbell two years ago, although its being explained as some timestamping thing by Vimeo.

Very curious. Also note the stuff he says about the TicTac incident.

a reply to: 1ofthe9

Well they can hardly "front-line" with the fact they are intently curious about
people's mental illnesses, inflammation in the brain from military/BOL exposure,
and want to scan their "antenna".

They could NOT lead with that..

but they still need to attract loonies (ufo folks).. so they drag out this pathetic
stuff as BAIT.

That's my take on it.

a reply to: 1ofthe9

It is interesting that Mr Corbell seems to have seen the video a long time ago, and also claims that:

- the tic tac ufo had seams that the pilots saw (not mentioned by anyone or in any released report)
- they have footage of the tic tac docking with some kind of submerged object (uso)

How does he know this, one wonders...?

And why on earth do they not release this footage now?
All talk of birds and planes would fall silent. Birds are mostly not known for docking with submerged objects. Or for having seams.

Could they be setting up all sceptical voices for a fall when they release the rest. If they are sitting on it for maximum impact, and plan to squash opposition with it later, it is a dirty tactic.

Nasty even, if this is how it plays out.
Why do it like that.

a reply to: Willtell

I might add that the US government has done a splendid job of covering this up.

Yes, they have.

Science has validated the existence of several kinds of natural phenomena that are characterized by unusual aerial lighting displays. Some of these phenomena are not clearly understood and have been only recently documented. Additionally reliable observations from US government and official international sources include descriptions of airborne objects with uncommon characteristics. Some of these phenomena have electrical properties that can adversely effect safe aviation and appear to be very unusual to observers. Some of these phenomena represent a physical hazard that is documented in several US Government operated aviation incident - reporting systems. These poorly understood phenomena have not been given appropriate consideration for the potential hazards they may represent by the US aviation system. Though these observations and incidents do occur they are under reported. This under reporting bias is affecting aviation safety planning and mitigation with respect to unidentified aerial phenomena - UAP. The sources of this bias are found the unusual nature of UAP observations and incidents, the unfamiliarity of the US aviation system with unidentified aerial phenomena, and the efforts by the US military to resolve these events (see Appendix A). No official efforts to review these incidents and observations have been undertaken within the US aviation system. No steps have been taken to educate aviation professionals regarding these events. Information regarding these incidents and observations flows into the military and intelligence community and is not reviewed by safety administrators and aviation managers. There are no technical or procedural solutions in place or on the drawing board.

...

A review of 1300 reports in NARCAP Technical Report 4 UAP Eighty Years of Pilot Sightings reveals many incidents and observations that are very similar to this one including reports of large cylindrical objects and corresponding radar observations dating back to the 1940’s. The America West 564 case should be considered a “text book” example of this type of radar/visual incident, as is the Tehran, Iran incident described in Appendix A. Yet, after 80 years of these observations and incidents there are no reporting protocols and these events are still not being investigated as safety related.

In fact, these incidents aren’t officially investigated at all.

Aviation Safety in America:
Unidentified Aerial Phenomena
And
Under Reporting Bias(direct .pdf link)

originally posted by: beetee
a reply to: 1ofthe9

It is interesting that Mr Corbell seems to have seen the video a long time ago, and also claims that:

- the tic tac ufo had seams that the pilots saw (not mentioned by anyone or in any released report)
- they have footage of the tic tac docking with some kind of submerged object (uso)

How does he know this, one wonders...?

And why on earth do they not release this footage now?
All talk of birds and planes would fall silent. Birds are mostly not known for docking with submerged objects. Or for having seams.

Could they be setting up all sceptical voices for a fall when they release the rest. If they are sitting on it for maximum impact, and plan to squash opposition with it later, it is a dirty tactic.

Nasty even, if this is how it plays out.
Why do it like that.

Seams and...appendages...

...not sure what to make of that.

What’s interesting is the government may be putting out the very conspiracy theories they debunk. Why do they do that?

Likely to distract...

The unknown is out there.

All the crazy theories about aliens, ins't it strange they may actually be coming from the government. Oh, of course, there are the Corey Goods and Wilcock's, and Greer’s whom they love for helping them do their distractions.


Look for the truth in-between these varying theories. Just lessen their craziness.

Indeed there may be a mj12, but not as wild as they say.

Indeed, the government may be closer to knowing something but not as far out as Ike met the aliens and made a deal.

Everything is always twisted because humans beings are twisted.

Untwist some of this stuff and you may be on the road to some truth

This stuff they’re putting out now is garbage


They're utilizing the gravity of TDL’s supposed obsession with this to administer some meme altering misinformation.


Maybe their intent is decent; they don’t want to spread any more craziness-- aliens are in military basis peeling people alive.

Now its some kind of upgrade for what they hope is outside the UFO insular community to the more general populace.

Now that’s interesting. Indeed the interesting thing about all of this is the press so far is not debunking it as it was ordered to do in the past.

That’s why all the scientific jargon. They want to keep this misinformation clean for some reason. Clean disinformation.

And its disinformation because it’s not the truth. It’s maybe some half-truths, quarter-truths, some distorted meaningless truths but it’s not disclosure.

Why don’t some of these interviewers ask TDL and Elizondo about disclosure directly?

a reply to: jadedANDcynical

The usual response to this is that a person doesn't investigate something,
if they already know what it is.

but I don't buy that..

They seem to understand that you don't want to mess with the bad ju ju,
that nothing good can come of it.. that you can't "catch it with a butterfly net",

but that doesn't mean that they really understand what it is.

a reply to: 1ofthe9

I know exactly what to make of it.

The huge-appearing BTUFO I saw had rivets.. it had seams.. guard rails..
an arc-light search light...

and with it presumably 3 miles away when I last saw it
(www.livescience.com...)

that means I could see the rivets as clearly, and of the same size as when
it was directly overhead; as when it was 3 miles away.

That proves it was not a physical craft.. or that at least if it was.. it was
hiding it's appearance and (CLUMSILY AND STUPIDLY) projecting an image
into my mind that did not vary with distance or perspective.

Now that also tells me that it was not "ours", or even a physical aliens
craft.

They wouldn't be that stupid.

This was a "leprechaun" type source I'd say.. like all those golden age UFOs
like the giant airship of the late 1800's to the maybe 1950's.

Now I'm not saying that I believe in "leprechauns".. but in a way if I don't,
I'm disregarding a very viable metaphor, at the least.

Why people want to be duped.. by believing in nuts and bolts craft, I can't
for the life of me imagine.

Kev

a reply to: KellyPrettyBear

And the 'Antenna ' is sure intetesting.

a reply to: beetee

Hey mate, change your avatar

a reply to: KellyPrettyBear

When Ben Rich allegedly Said: We have the tech to take ET home. He was jesting.
Some people use that comment to imagine all sorts of things.
You are correct. We dont have star trek

a reply to: Hyperboles

Hey mate, change your avatar

Okaaay , why exactly should I change it?

Is there something I'm not getting?

I admit it's not great, but not that bad either?

BT

a reply to: beetee

It's a fine avatar.

a reply to: Kandinsky

Hehe. Thanks :-)

BT

a reply to: beetee

At a quick glance this guy seems to be a documentary film maker. The fact that he's working with Bob Lazar on a movie. Should be noted.

I don't know where he's said he saw the video a long time ago, that the tic tac ufo had seams, nor there was footage of the tic tac docking with a submerged object. Do you have a link?

Could they be setting up all sceptical voices for a fall when they release the rest. If they are sitting on it for maximum impact, and plan to squash opposition with it later, it is a dirty tactic.

If you have any sense you go for maximum impact first time round. You may not get a 2nd or third chance. Is this 3rd video getting as much publicity as the first two in mainstream media?

Outside the UFO community, Blink182 fans and forums like this most people have paid little attention to the stories. The videos are underwhelming and the Pentagon hasn't admitted they've officially released anything. All they've said is that AATIP produced lots of paperwork and little in terms of results.

TTSA also used the Mylar birthday balloon photo in their project launch.

Clean white tic-tacs or dirty tactics?

a reply to: mirageman

Well, I cannot help feeling that something is off.

If they wanted to really convince, and had no morals to speak of, would they not just either create something (I'm sure they could manage it) or release the most stunning evidence right away?

The whole thing is just so half-rearended! Birthday balloons as a backdrop? Videos that are intriguing but curiously inconclusive? Lockheed engineers to build a revolutionary propulsion craft for a measly 5 million? Confirmed fakes in published materials? A rock star? The Aviary?

If you wanted to build a big fat target for sceptics and general ridicule, you could hardly do a better job if you tried... Is this the subtlety and cunning of the US intelligence apparatus at work? Really? The "masters of deception" working their art?

"Behold, the tic-tac blob (could be anything) but we promise it's an unknown but deliberately choose not to show you why we think that.

As to the seams and the rest of the footage, Mr Corbel said it on the reddit thread linked earlier.

I shall see if I can image it.
Here it is:





Peace be upon you :-)

BT

Here is the bit about the seams. Also on reddit from the same thread in /r/UFOs



Live long and prosper!

BT

a reply to: beetee

Well, I cannot help feeling that something is off.

Yes indeed.

If you are interested in building a spaceship do you go to an established aerospace consortium or Tom DeLonge with a startup venture? (Note: BIgelow has not joined this venture to build stuff for space).

If you wanted to get the truth out about UFOs would you align yourself with a new start-up company registered as a SERVICE - ALLIED TO MOTION PICTURE PRODUCTION?

This big disconnect between what TTS really is for is a massive problem to me.

'DeL Boy', 'Zondo' and now 'Big Mell' have all spoke about UFOs/UAPs to mainstream media and independent radio/podcasts.

But the company itself seem to be aimed at being an 'entertainment franchise' and makes no mention of these subjects in the financial documentation.

a reply to: mirageman

If you are interested in building a spaceship do you go to an established aerospace consortium

Yes. Exactly. And which established aerospace consortium is indeed heavily mixed up in this?

What if the spacecraft was built long ago? By the very aerospace consortium, and this is already pretty dated tech? Maybe others have it too, by now?

I thought someone might have decided it was time for the UFO subject to be taken seriously again so as to encourage reports of what might in fact be a Russian or Chinese piece of equipment swinging by?

But what they are doing is setting up the biggest, most juicy target for ridicule and debunking? Apart from the almost comical Delonge angle, there is the birthday balloon you mention. Metabunk, I think it was, has gone as far as claiming the gimbal video is the heat signature of another fighter jet. The tic tac is a bird apparently? And now an allegedly fast blob with no way to determine speed? The pelican already looms on the horizon.

I am, quite honestly, more baffled by the whole ttsa thing than by the actual phenomenon.

Which, of course, makes for great threads on ATS :-)

Have a good one,

BT