Luis Elizondo sat down for a deep dive interview with George Knapp day before yesterday.

a reply to: JimOberg

Excellent analysis but it does not fit or apply to the Nimitz Encounters...eyewitness testimony...AATIP... Original FLIR1 video leaked on ATS in 2007. Etc..

a reply to: mirageman

As I said in my first post in this thread, there were events described in the Kelleher/Knapp book that corroborated my own experiences. I have met two skinwalkers, among other things.

I'm one person. No one will ever take me seriously. The government knows and uses this against contactees.

If you want to doubt, go ahead. I'm not stopping you.

BUT, I will be heard. Freedom of speech is the one thing they haven't been able to take away from us unless we are joined at the hip to an intelligence service.

In that case, we will hear nothing different from that quarter.

Frankly, I will take the word of the Utes on this subject before I give any credit to a government that has consistently lied to our faces for 75 years.

It's a matter of honor. Who do you think has more?

Is there a video that is just one part? Why is it broken up into small segments even as little as 2 min? Please don't tell me they are playing that "Impressions" game where they only care about how many impressions they can get ads for rather than caring about the information.

a reply to: Creep Thumper

You've sort of missed my point. Perhaps because I didn't explain all the details. The Ranch appears to have been used for human experimentation by certain people linked with government agencies .

It was even reported by George Knapp in a subtle way.

The agreement with DIA did not mention UFOs at all. It used more generic terms such as future threats and breakthrough technologies, and specified 12 focal points including, lift, propulsion, materials, versions of stealth as well as human interface and human effects, meaning Bigelow's team would study people who reported unusual experiences beyond seeing UFOs. A ranch in Utah, known for decades as the site of bizarre encounters, became a living lab for the study.

Source

Have you ever considered this as something relative your experiences? That the spooky happenings are something created and tested on humans who think they are something supernatural?

originally posted by: gortex
Here's the interview for we excluded Europeans.

Excellent ..I HIGHLY RECOMMEND WATCHING THE VIDEOS...
Lue is 100% genuine he is a Hero and Patriot !

a reply to: celltypespecific

Why don't you ask Springer if he supports Big Lue Cellty? Seeing as you claim he did so in another thread

I just wonder what agenda the TTSA/NIDS/C2C producers and crew are trying to achieve with such a clumsy presentation. It almost seems cheezy on purpose to keep the fans of silly woo entertained. Not even a feeble attempt at disclosure or contributing information. Typical softball questions answered with quasi military IC double speak to attempt to add an air of legitimacy; why can't they just answer the questions in plain English, instead of that phony, vague useless hot air.

"changing the paradigm" give me an Fuk*** break! Sounds like a bunch of college sophomores having a dorm room BS session.

I do believe there is more to this reality than what our feeble 6 senses are able to perceive however. I've seen things....

a reply to: mirageman

I didn't miss your point. I own the book and have read it a half-dozen times. I listen to the audio book while I'm cooking, cleaning, and driving.

What happened to me started in the 60's, well before I'd ever heard of Skinwalker Ranch. My GGF was the first to mention contact, which was stateside during WWII. My mother said he never laughed or smiled after that. He was a dead man walking.

My personal belief about reality is very complex. I would love to explain it to be well-understood, but this isn't the thread.

Are we getting f'ed with by the gov? Absolutely. They have unbelievable tech that we know nothing about. I guarantee it, and they will do any ruthless thing to protect it, including ruining people. They've done it many times.

Are you suggesting Uncle Sam time-travelled to the deep past, thereby generating stories of Native American encounters with tricksters?

How far down this rabbit hole are you willing to go?

originally posted by: celltypespecific
a reply to: JimOberg

Excellent analysis but it does not fit or apply to the Nimitz Encounters...eyewitness testimony...AATIP... Original FLIR1 video leaked on ATS in 2007. Etc..

So the latest sky-watching 'situation awareness' instruments detected readings that look anomalous? Uh, hasn't that actually been the pattern for decades? New instrumentation comes on line, it detects strange stuff, but as familiarity with the behavior of the instrumentation accumulates, the anomalous readings fade away? Again and again with each new generation of sensors?

Perceptive observers of the UFO scene over the last two thirds of a century have noted a tell-tale feature of the evolution of reports – their nature has been changing, keeping uncanny pace with the progress in human observation and detection technologies. As with dragons and sea serpents of half a millennium ago, they always seem to lurk just at or beyond the limits of clear human vision, with ‘Here be dragons’ on the maps obediently retreating in synchronization to the inexorable advance of human knowledge.

These new ‘UFO reports’, still fragmentary and inadequately documented, nicely fit this time-tested pattern – some anomaly is detected at the limits of sight [that by all means needs to be understood] but isn’t clear enough to unambiguously establish its non-explainability. If the reports truly represent an authentic autonomous phenomenon, they would have been invisible to human observers until recently, just as the UFOs of the 1940s and 1950s, if they really were caused by actual phenomena, would today be exhaustively documented by the vastly improved observation capabilities of humankind.

But. They. Aren’t. Instead, year by year, the ‘old UFOs’ fade away just before the advent of new technologies [that would have unambiguously documented them] come on line, to be replaced by a new flavor of ‘anomalies’ that precisely match the limits of vision of new technologies.

This is a powerful indication that the phenomenon derives its existence NOT from some stand-alone phenomenon, but directly FROM being at the limits of human detection and recognition. As an observer-based rather than reality-based phenomenon, its apparent existence derives from the range – and limits – of human perception. That perception and its limits are real, but the apparent stand-alone stimulus does not have to be, and never did. Such a postulated stimulus [ETI technology] could well exist and be responsible, but may not be mandatory.

originally posted by: JimOberg

...and here we are.

Wow, I haven't heard that aspect put together to that degree, nor that well. You certainly expanded my thought process on the NatSec/CI angle. Thank you, Jim. I'm sure I'm not the only one that got a lot out of it.

I think we can make the assumption from your post that if pressed for an early guess you would lean towards the view that TTSA has at least tacit official approval? We can leave that a hypothetical if you'd rather not answer.

Hopefully, though, either here or somewhere down the road, we'll get to hear more of your thoughts about what we're seeing play out.

originally posted by: olaru12
It almost seems cheezy on purpose to keep the fans of silly woo entertained. Not even a feeble attempt at disclosure or contributing information.

Maybe the intended audience aren't deep thinkers. There's a fairly hardy argument to be made for that theory.

I do believe there is more to this reality than what our feeble 6 senses are able to perceive however. I've seen things....

I think most of us lean that way. I think a lot of us lose our bias along the way too. Or at least I hope so. I just want some answers and won't be--as I once would have been--disappointed if it's not Aliens.

a reply to: JimOberg

Now that right there is a meat and potato type of informational post!

Learned more in 1 minute of reading that post: Than the last 5 years of supposed people in the know!

S&F

a reply to: JimOberg

Good post Jim.
Where does TheFinalTheory fit into the observer premise?

I believe his original description right here on ATS in '07 was they looked like an old fashion genuine classic Flying Saucer.

Tic Tacs UFOs - shiny whites eggs - weren't even a thing then and by golly no one heard the term UAP back '04 or '07

No one seems to comment that the original leaker described seeing something different to how the counter intel and Brain scientist saturated crowd at TTSA have branded this 'object' via their watermarked 'we released this to the minions' video (that was loaded here in 07 but technicalities don't matter )

Anyhoo. Lou and TTSA are snoresville and going by their Twitter fan club that doesn't require any more 130 character thoughts we have seen the devolution of quality research on the subject since their 2017 mylar balloon conference

....but a influx of UAP sightings...hmmmm
All that peppered with a Cayenne level threat narrative from this lot. I guess they will eventually tell us what they are trying to sell us to save us from the scary UFO...err i mean EBE...I mean Alien....no wait UAP and IEH.

Anyway whatever their brain trust over there will sell us to will save us from the bad ET.
All those horrible things about to befall humanity that they discovered in the data collation.

No wait they said Russia or China might know...

a reply to: kingsquirel

Jim's website has exceptional commentary on a lot of related subjects for anyone seeking answers. I've learned a lot there in the past. His thought-provoking posts today remind me that I need to revisit and dig in again:

Jim's Website

Switching gears, in an earlier post I mentioned that I find the recent push of the "UAP" phenomena by the legacy media to be unprecedented. It doesn't, for a few good reasons, appear to be organic.

So who has the juice to get that much positive promotion from NYT, WaPo, et al? It might be a good time to note that these outlets have longterm relationships with the IC. For one, they depend on insider information and leaks. In addition we know that the IC develops resources in the media.

So as far as who has the juice to promote the phenomena at that unprecedented level---I'd say that just about the only answer would be Uncle Sam.

Here's yet another new article though not from a news titan. While it mostly covers ground we're already familiar with, I found some things in it that made it worth reading. Maybe because it's not from a legacy outlet heh.

The Year of UFOs: In 2019, our eyes were on the skies

a reply to: JimOberg


Trying to grasp what you're saying

You seem to be saying that our technology is always right behind this phenomenon just enough to be unable to rightly perceive it.


But,
Is it ONLY technology that keeps us in the dark?

originally posted by: Willtell
a reply to: JimOberg


Trying to grasp what you're saying

You seem to be saying that our technology is always right behind this phenomenon just enough to be unable to rightly perceive it.


But,
Is it ONLY technology that keeps us in the dark?

I don't know. Both the subject, and the stimuli that fuel it, remain elusive but tantalizing -- and well worthy of rigorous analysis. If there is ETI behind it, the traditional scientific method can't be relied on. The chance, however remote [open to debate], makes the topic genuinely interesting, perhaps even critically important. The 'noise' hiding the 'signal' is very high, either by accident or somebody's design. And all the 'noise' may not be accidental.

Thanks, all, for the kind and encouraging words. There are, I suspect real signals for something [or many somethings] amidst the noise [both incidental and deliberate], worth trying to isolate.

a reply to: The GUT

So who has the juice to get that much positive promotion from NYT, WaPo, et al? It might be a good time to note that these outlets have longterm relationships with the IC. For one, they depend on insider information and leaks. In addition we know that the IC develops resources in the media.

IMO, the net result of all of this new interest stirred up by TTSA and their government IC and MSM friends is soon going to be: Where’s the (ufo) beef?

Already, the bar has been lessened from TTSA from being supposedly a conduit for disclosure info to no, we’re just some kind of consortium.

People were excited about disclosure not what TTSA became.

People have accepted their subterfuge and hype so they maintain in light of their deceit some positive and often over-positive followers...Sign of the times.

So, the rubber hits the road and the only real phenomena that happen are heightened interest but no real disclosure or resolution.


That's one way to look at it

But who knows what their really trying to do. Maybe even a little magic(k) they're trying to stir up: Interest=phenomena.

a reply to: JimOberg

Thanks, all, for the kind and encouraging words. There are, I suspect real signals for something [or many somethings] amidst the noise [both incidental and deliberate], worth trying to isolate.

And thank you for your astute observations

a reply to: The GUT

I think we can make the assumption from your post that if pressed for an early guess you would lean towards the view that TTSA has at least tacit official approval? We can leave that a hypothetical if you'd rather not answer.

I can answer that for you....

YES

As literally more than half there advisor board/team is composed of ex CIA and DOD officials and the have a CRADA to study "meta-materials" with the US ARMY.

a reply to: gortex

Thank you.

I couldn't get the linked videos to play in New Mexico, either.

Much appreciated.