It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.

Please white-list or disable in your ad-blocking tool.

Thank you.


Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.


Beyond Bigelow & BAASS, After AATIP and on To the Stars...

page: 234
<< 231  232  233    235  236  237 >>

log in


posted on Sep, 23 2019 @ 07:07 PM

originally posted by: pigsy2400
a reply to: celltypespecific

No, that quote is NOT from any of those that you doesnt originate from any of the crew.

Well don't keep me in suspense...where is it from?

posted on Sep, 23 2019 @ 07:14 PM
Anyway.... Moving on, back to BAASS of all things, it just seems like some people can't keep their emails in their inbox;

edit on p15709192400 by pigsy2400 because: (no reason given)

posted on Sep, 23 2019 @ 07:19 PM
a reply to: celltypespecific

So the thought...

Something is seriously off about the Navy coming out and declaring that UAPs are "Real".
I don't buy Zondo's explanation when Beck asked him "Why now after two years is the DOD coming clean?"

This question is very important.... this was a significant change as it impacts policy, downstream bureaucratic paper work that we are not aware of. After 70 years of denial... to suddenly change a longstanding policy of high significance one must have a very good reason.

My hypothesis is "get ahead of the story" approach. It could be that a major story is about to break....the DOD was given forewarning (maybe even comments were requested). They maybe were given the opportunity to get ahead of a major breaking story by the NYT or Washington Post.

Additionally, you have to ask yourself why did the DOD give two ACTIVE DUTY pilots Lt. Graves and Accoin permission to discuss the events of the Gimbal incident in such a public manner (New York Times article and TV appearances).
The DOD is slowly prepping the ground work for FULL DISCLOSURE.....
This should be obvious...

posted on Sep, 23 2019 @ 07:24 PM

edit on 23-9-2019 by celltypespecific because: (no reason given)

posted on Sep, 23 2019 @ 07:40 PM
a reply to: celltypespecific

No-one would be interested in BAASS?

Talk of using satellite systems to track and observe ufos? I thought you would find that very interesting to your disclosure cause..

posted on Sep, 23 2019 @ 07:52 PM

originally posted by: pigsy2400
Anyway.... Moving on, back to BAASS of all things, it just seems like some people can't keep their emails in their inbox;

What I find interesting is that the email includes Colm and putoff :

The composition of TTSA's board is really strange...
Generally try to stay away from anything related to Kit Green, Eric Davis, Puthoff, Skinwalker, BAASS... my red flags go off
something slimy about that crew...not exactly sure what.

posted on Sep, 23 2019 @ 08:10 PM
a reply to: pigsy2400

uh is the circled bit a brother blue reference or is that just me

posted on Sep, 23 2019 @ 10:58 PM
a reply to: pigsy2400

this is MEDEA
edit on 12019f3011America/Chicago9 by 1ofthe9 because: (no reason given)

posted on Sep, 23 2019 @ 11:01 PM
a reply to: spiritualarchitect

I don’t desire legal problems for them. I doubt if anyone does, they’re merely mentioning that to say they are likely government-connected and protected.

We here desire sincerity, honesty, above-board transparency.

Our gripe with TTSA, if you’ve been reading this thread, is certain of their member's association with past hoaxes. Their deceptive words, and overall dishonesty in many areas.

There are many believers on ATS in the Ufo/alien theory. I have a very open mind regarding that on the level of the Jaques Vallee type believer.

Though not one where the government and aliens are in cahoots to cover up anything.

The proof of that isn’t there IMO.

But anything Is possible.

posted on Sep, 23 2019 @ 11:58 PM
a reply to: mirageman
That was an interesting link, thanks.
Sounds like the spies are on top of each other, there are so many!

originally posted by: celltypespecific
The most noteworthy scene from seaon 1 "Unidentified"

The aeronautical engineer may know aeronautical things, but the gimbal mechanism is apparently not a component he was taught about and his apparent failure to understand the gimbal mechanism even though the video is named "gimbal" is embarrassing for him. However, some ignorant folks may take him seriously as if he knows something about gimbals, even though he apparently doesn't understand what he's looking at in the gimbal video.

There is a video of the Gimbal after it rotates it accelerates instantly to supersonic speeds.

So will TTSA do something useful and get the longer video released? Or it's already out there? Where?

originally posted by: celltypespecific
For those interested in rigors intellectual debate...and well coiffed beards:

Did you watch the video?

Any comments on the actual debate or you were mostly interested in the beard?

Mick West and QED didn't agree about everything, but at least they could agree that Mick West's research on the Gimbal was convincing and it's research others can duplicate, so nobody needs to believe Mick West, watch his tests and duplicate them yourself and prove it to yourself, don't take anybody's word for it.

By the way that was also Mick West's response to his critic who provided him with some evidence but interpreted it differently. Mick's response was he's looking at the evidence, and evaluating that, not what some "expert" says about it. So look at the evidence yourself, interpret it yourself. Some of this stuff is not rocket science. They also agreed that the "Gofast" video does not show anything going fast, and Mick West pointed out that was simple trig used for that proof, and again no need to take his word for it, if you can do high school trig, you can do the math yourself.

I think some of the people attacking Mick West don't even know how to do trig and can't do the calculations for themselves, so they just call him names or make stupid memes to try to discredit him.

originally posted by: Willtell
I’m going to have to get my dead horse images out if I see that Gimbal video one more time

I'd be interested to see the full video in higher quality, but apparently all we've seen so far is a low resolution clip from the full video, or so they say. If TTSA really went through proper channels to get the video released, I don't know why they didn't release the full video in the first place, though it's debatable if they really went through proper channels since there's no signature on the release forms.

originally posted by: celltypespecific
This should not detract from the glorious news that UFOs are indeed real (as confirmed by the greatest Navy in the world) and we are living in the new Post-Disclosure world!! Isn't it marvelous!
I'm not sure how UFOs are any more "real" now than in 1947 when Kenneth Arnold saw his flying saucers. The Air Force already admitted UFOs exist when it couldn't explain some portion of the UFOs studied in Project blue book (and other UFO studies), so this "UFOs are real" hype seems ridiculous.

edit on 2019924 by Arbitrageur because: clarification

posted on Sep, 24 2019 @ 02:14 AM
a reply to: Arbitrageur

UFOs are real" hype seems ridiculous. 

But it is fun to watch just how ridiculous it is.

posted on Sep, 24 2019 @ 03:32 AM
a reply to: Baablacksheep

Ad hoc, ad hoc and quid pro quo ... so little time, so MUCH to know

posted on Sep, 24 2019 @ 03:38 AM

originally posted by: mirageman
a reply to: celltypespecific

Well that's interesting.

As there is still no confirmed clearance for any of the videos to be shown to the general public then TTSA are in breach of national security.

In breach of national security? No.

What we officially know, is that these videos aren't classified. To talk about something on a non-classified video, is not "breach of national security", whatever you think that means.

posted on Sep, 24 2019 @ 04:33 AM
a reply to: pigsy2400

Yes Pigs😉

posted on Sep, 24 2019 @ 06:08 AM
a reply to: Sublant

I specifically meant a video that is longer in length. It is not one of the 3 TTSA promoted videos (that we still haven't seen any official clearance for public release for).

But given your expert position on this matter.

■ Do you know this longer video is not classified? If so how?

■ With regard to the existing videos placed in the public domain. How is it legal for a private company such as TTSA to place their own corporate logos onto US DoD videos?

edit on 24/9/2019 by mirageman because: ...

posted on Sep, 24 2019 @ 08:27 AM
Someone earlier in the thread asked about determining what the earnings per share are for investors. I've gone back 6 pages but can't find it now, my apologies to whomever asked the question.

My profession isn't finance but as a "retail" investor (joe public), I sometimes peruse balance sheets looking for disclosure-in-the-fine-print. The short answer is that it is extremely difficult to determine what the EPS is of a private company - mainly because such statements are only disclosed annually and even then the price is relative in comparison to public analogues (in TTSA's case, we would have to compare it to publicly traded media conglomerates).

From Investopedia: "Some common methods of valuation include comparing valuation ratios, discounted cash flow analysis (DCF), net tangible assets, internal rate of return (IRR) and many others."

There are some interesting things to be found though in the latest offering circular

From Page12, "Risk Factors" (emphasis is mine)

There is no current market for any of the company’s shares of stock. There is no formal marketplace for the resale of the Class A Common Stock. Investors should assume that they may not be able to liquidate their investment or be able to pledge their shares as collateral for some time.

Below is a snapshot taken from pg15, "Dilution":

The three columns along the right side denote the level of participation in the latest offering, Min/Mid/Max. Meaning: If the minimum number of shares offered are sold (200,000 shares), then current shareholder dilution is 98.5%. However if the full offering is sold (6 million), then current shareholders see a depreciation of 68%.

One thing I find interesting is that the book value of TTSA (assets-liabilities) is currently -$942,216. Uh-oh.

From attachment F4, "Shareholder Equity":

One thing to note is that figures in parenthesis are negative (deficit).

I know none of this succinctly answers your question and really only muddies the water more than it is, but it's another piece of the TTSA puzzle.

TL;DR: If you don't like burning money give it to TTSA and they'll do it for you. You might even get a t-shirt out of the deal.

posted on Sep, 24 2019 @ 08:57 AM
a reply to: celltypespecific

Very refreshing that main stream academics like myself are taking this subject seriously:

Physics professor shares importance of Navy confirming UFO videos

posted on Sep, 24 2019 @ 10:10 AM
a reply to: ParticleNode

Thank you. That was me that asked the question. Very interesting.

posted on Sep, 24 2019 @ 10:29 AM
a reply to: ParticleNode

Some of the TTSA crew are on deferred salaries which are paid in share future value aren't they?
Justice's real world salary in dollars must translate to millions of TTSA shares due TTSA shares being currently worthless.

If LM.... or somebody except Bigelow did pay 1 billion for the metamaterials of incalculable strategic value out of Hals locking safe....TTSA employee deferred incomes would be worth a pretty penny and all the small investors get cents back...or thats how it usually works in a Ponzi scheme.....

originally posted by: celltypespecific
a reply to: celltypespecific

Very refreshing that main stream academics like myself are taking this subject seriously:

edit on 24-9-2019 by Jukiodone because: (no reason given)

posted on Sep, 24 2019 @ 10:39 AM
Of course concerns about companies abusing Regulation A+ to raise money led to this comment from Ohio Congresswoman Joyce Beatty:

Another article, appearing in Barron's, studied the hundreds of
companies that have used Regulation A+ to raise funds, and I quote
them: ``We were supposed to get new jobs and new industries. Instead,
we've gotten GoFundMe-style websites hawking penny stocks and
professional wrestlers shilling shares on TV.''

They went on to highlight some of the companies and the products
availing themselves of the lightly regulated Regulation A+ offering,
which included companies trying to make cannabis paraphernalia, flying
cars, guns, and my personal favorite, the founder of a rock band
seeking to raise money to study UFOs and light-speed travel.

Now, I am not trying to persuade Members that all companies seeking
to raise money through Regulation A+ are Wolf of Wall Street or UFO
chasers, because back in my home district, a Scottish-based company
successfully used Regulation A+ to open their first brewery and
restaurant in the United States. That example is exactly what Congress
had in mind when it called for the creation of Regulation A+, and it is
precisely the type of opportunity for investors that the law was
intended to create.

This is why we need to ensure that we maintain the integrity of the
Regulation A+ offering and that we prevent bad actors from using it in
a way to rip off and scam all of our constituents.

Congressional Record

new topics

top topics

<< 231  232  233    235  236  237 >>

log in