It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.

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

Thank you.

 

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

 

Project Serpo: Postings by "Anonymous" -- Breaking news?

page: 43
29
<< 40  41  42    44  45  46 >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Dec, 26 2005 @ 02:01 AM
link   
People are wondering "Why mention this J-ROD"?

That message from The Anonymous (c.f. The Humongous
) was giving a list of EBEs on Earth. There were five, and they were listed in chronological order.

Apparently #4 was J-ROD and may have been mentioned as the only one with a "name" supposedly known to outsiders by "rumors on the Internets".

i.e., there is an innocent explanation: it was next on the list.




posted on Dec, 26 2005 @ 04:54 AM
link   
For your continued interest, I've posted several more consistencies on www.serpo.org/consistencies.html. It gets more and more interesting...

Some people have mistakenly concluded that I'm an unthinking apologist for the accuracy of the story. Rather, I seek to maintain a finely balanced perspective. As I hear more cries of "hoax" – which in my present opinion stem solely from an insufficiency of careful thought – I will endeavor to post more reasons to suspend disbelief.

My own advice to all is that we still need more information, specifically a better understanding of the context in which Anonymous is operating... Let's see what the New Year may bring.

Best wishes, Bill



posted on Dec, 26 2005 @ 12:08 PM
link   

Originally posted by Bill Ryan
For your continued interest, I've posted several more consistencies on [url=http://www.serpo.org/consistencies.html]
Some people have mistakenly concluded that I'm an unthinking apologist for the accuracy of the story. Rather, I seek to maintain a finely balanced perspective. As I hear more cries of "hoax" – which in my present opinion stem solely from an insufficiency of careful thought – I will endeavor to post more reasons to suspend disbelief.

My own advice to all is that we still need more information, specifically a better understanding of the context in which Anonymous is operating... Let's see what the New Year may bring.

Best wishes, Bill


You've contradicted yourself twice there, Bill. First you're not an apologist, then people who doubt the veracity of the claims on the stie lack careful thought, and finally, we're supposed to wait for more information about Anonymous' situation in order to know if this is true?

This is a fascinating story, no doubt about that. It's exactly that though, and nothing more at this point. A story. It lacks sufficient empirical evidence in order to make the claims true. We all have an open mind, skeptics and believers alike.

Believers will hang on every word trying to tie some sort of truth to it in their wanting this to come to fruition. Skeptics will doubt, rightfully so, due to a severe lack of sustantiated evidence. We aren't close-minded to the Serpo saga being true, just that it has no observations that can allow us to come to that conclusion at this time(as you've said). So it is not unreasonable to currently posit this as a hoax because the unsubstantiated Serpo claims are being put forth as true.

There is only one logical default position here. Just because one doesn't take the Serpo story as trurth, or part of a truth, due to insufficient evidence, doesn't mean that they won't in the future if such evidence comes to light. However, as I've stated almost too many times for my liking, there is not any empirical evidence in regards to Serpo.

-Obscure



posted on Dec, 26 2005 @ 12:39 PM
link   

So it is not unreasonable to currently posit this as a hoax because the unsubstantiated Serpo claims are being put forth as true.


Claims of truth are always an important part of a hoax.


There is only one logical default position here. Just because one doesn't take the Serpo story as trurth, or part of a truth, due to insufficient evidence, doesn't mean that they won't in the future if such evidence comes to light. However, as I've stated almost too many times for my liking, there is not any empirical evidence in regards to Serpo.


Indeed this is the null hypothesis- The story is not (in reality) true.

However, throwing out the validity of the entire "story" (aka Anon's "documented account") because it currently fails to provide sufficient quantitative evidence is itself a logical fallacy. There is quantitative as well as qualitative research, both of which are subject to the tenets of empiricism.

The evidence that we currently have available is qualitative in nature. We have alleged journal entries and confidential sources from supposed government agencies. It is important for us (as empirically-minded individuals) to continue evaluating this qualitative data. We are lucky in that there is an incredible amount of information supplied, which can be dissected to examine consistencies and inconsistencies.

I also hope that quantitative data is soon provided (such as the orbital calculations). Of course if this data is eventually released, our task as empirical scientists will be to cross-validate/invalidate the existing qualitative data.

In summary, I am arguing to suspend judgment either way on the validity of the Serpo hypothesis. I am arguing to continue testing multiple hypotheses based on existing qualitative data. Even if photographs are released, I would still be inclined to categorize them as qualitative in nature.

MK

[edit on 26-12-2005 by MKULTRA]



posted on Dec, 26 2005 @ 01:13 PM
link   
MK,

Sounds overly agnostic, so to speak, to me. You seem to have some value of logic, at least.

Continuing testing various hypothesis on this story is what is expected by us all. To say that something is between known and unknown is false. There is no such thing. It either is true or it is not true. Anonymous is making the claim that this whole thing is the truth. Having failed to provide us any sort of imformation that would allow a rational thinking human being to logically conclude it as truth is all the analysis one needs to posit this as not true.

Yes, the data present is abundant. The quality of it, however, is the main question we all have. As I'm sure you are well aware, they attempting to posit anything above a base level of what is known(ie: provable with logic, deduction, induction, etc) means the burdern of proof is upon the other party, not us. We are not making the initial claim, therefore we are not the ones who must prove or disprove.

Nothing is 100% certain with a scientific process but the results garner us far more knowledge than a mere belief.


Ram

posted on Dec, 26 2005 @ 02:02 PM
link   
True or false...
How big are the Universe? One of those questions...


How big is a mountain?... Some people want to climb them...

Mount Everest... Is it big enough for you..?. Or is there anything bigger?

The Biggest Secret of Mankind - Have anyone any idea how big it is?
hehe...
It's like a big Mountain is'nt it?... We are all climbing the walls.
Way up there in the Fog... We know there must be a "top of the Mountain"... But we cannot see it for it's kinda foggy up there..
We setup a camp.. And sleep for the night.. A Blizzard is comming our way...

We wait... And hope we are prepared.. Tighten the ropes!...We don't want to fall down again...


Would he make such a story up?... And why...?

I have been thinking about the Dairy..Of the Team commander...
Was it originally a small book... With emty pages? Or was it the IBM-TypeWriter?

Can anyone find the IBM Type WRITER - on the net - I want to see a picture of one of those old IBM-Type-Writers...
Which one on this Page could it be????



From Serpo.org: Other training which is still considered extremely highly classified even after 40 years [1965 - 2005].


[edit on 26-12-2005 by Ram]



posted on Dec, 26 2005 @ 03:13 PM
link   
Just on the Serpo website there it states on the front page

"I printed all the information... and provided [the retired USAF Colonel] a copy... I watched his eyes and facial expressions. After he was finished, he stated, "Oh my God, who on this Earth would release such classified material?" I then asked him if all this information was real. His simple answer was, 'Yes, all real'."

Air Force Lieutenant Colonel, currently assigned to the Pentagon – name supplied


is That from Bill Ryan at all?can anyone clarify

cheers

Graham

[edit on 26-12-2005 by Graham]



posted on Dec, 26 2005 @ 04:07 PM
link   

Originally posted by Graham
Just on the Serpo website there it states on the front page

"I printed all the information... and provided [the retired USAF Colonel] a copy... I watched his eyes and facial expressions. After he was finished, he stated, "Oh my God, who on this Earth would release such classified material?" I then asked him if all this information was real. His simple answer was, 'Yes, all real'."

Air Force Lieutenant Colonel, currently assigned to the Pentagon – name supplied

Is that from Bill Ryan at all? Can anyone clarify>

cheers

Graham

[edit on 26-12-2005 by Graham]


Hi, Graham – the whole story is at www.serpo.org/comments#1:

*******
[This information, reported verbatim below, was supplied to Bill Ryan personally by an active duty Air Force Lieutenant Colonel assigned to the Pentagon. I (BR) have been in correspondence with him on a number of topics and have found him to be measured, intelligent, thorough, reliable and honest, as well as being a most pleasant and decent man. He wishes his name to be withheld but would like this new information to be made known.

The correspondent's friend, referred to below, is a retired Air Force Colonel, who worked in Air Force Intelligence for 33 years (a later correction of the estimated figure of 30 years as originally stated).]


Yesterday, I visited an old retired USAF Colonel. This Colonel had served 30 years in USAF Intelligence. I don't know his exact time frame but it was sometime around 1955 to 1985. I have been friends with this Colonel for about five years. His son, who is also my friend, serves in my unit. Because of his extensive intelligence time, I wanted to run all this past him to see if he might know something about the information being released by Victor. The Colonel doesn't have email so I printed all the information from Anonymous and provided him a copy. I watched him read the most current email, one with all the postings. I watched his eyes and facial expressions. After he was finished, he stated, "Oh my God, who on this Earth would release such classified material"? I then asked him if all this information was real. His simple answer was, "Yes, all real". I then asked the Colonel if he had been involved with this project. He said, yes, he was involved in the communications aspect of this operation from about 1961 until 1965. He was also on the debriefing team. He wouldn't provide too much information, saying that unless he saw that all information was declassified, he could not comment on details. I thanked him and left.

I was startled, to say the least. Wow, this is actually true. I always thought some of it was true but I had some doubts about details that have been released.

We may just be on the verge of a major release of information about the most important part of our history.
*******

My correspondent is no longer responding to messages... although he had previously been straight, as curious as anyone, helpful, and prompt in his responses. It may be assumed – although this of course cannot be proven – that his superiors have "leant" on him to be silent and not to respond to any further e-mails. As a serving career officer, it would have been understandable for him to comply. We are left to consider for ourselves why such an action may have been taken by the authorities.

Best wishes, Bill



posted on Dec, 26 2005 @ 04:13 PM
link   
Apologies: that should be www.serpo.org/comments.html#1

Best, Bill



posted on Dec, 26 2005 @ 04:13 PM
link   
Thanks Bill listening to your interview on c2c the now very interesting indeed.

thanks again

Graham



posted on Dec, 26 2005 @ 04:32 PM
link   

Originally posted by Obscure

Originally posted by Bill Ryan
For your continued interest, I've posted several more consistencies on [url=http://www.serpo.org/consistencies.html]
Some people have mistakenly concluded that I'm an unthinking apologist for the accuracy of the story. Rather, I seek to maintain a finely balanced perspective. As I hear more cries of "hoax" – which in my present opinion stem solely from an insufficiency of careful thought – I will endeavor to post more reasons to suspend disbelief.

My own advice to all is that we still need more information, specifically a better understanding of the context in which Anonymous is operating... Let's see what the New Year may bring.

Best wishes, Bill


You've contradicted yourself twice there, Bill. First you're not an apologist, then people who doubt the veracity of the claims on the stie lack careful thought, and finally, we're supposed to wait for more information about Anonymous' situation in order to know if this is true?


Hi, Obscure – many thanks.

No, an apologist is somebody who argues to defend or justify a particular doctrine or ideology. I'm not doing that. I don't have a fixed idea about exactly what is happening, though as I've said earlier on this Forum I do have a hypothesis which I'm keeping to myself for the moment, and which I believe to be testable.

But I am arguing against anyone who casually or lazily dismisses it all as a simple hoax. I stand for intelligent thought and will listen to anyone who presents cogent, well-considered arguments. (Why? Because I might realize something I've not thought of.) So I'm just presenting evidence on both sides of the debate – if you read the Comments page you'll see there's plenty there which argues against the veracity of the stated orbital data, for example.

The reason for the Consistencies page is that I know that some have jumped to a conclusion based on poor logic – not considering all the facts. This does not mean their conclusion is wrong; it just means that their logic is poor. To even things out and encourage careful thought, I want to present additional factors which are not immediately obvious and/or which may not be generally known. They're not proof, but constitute a kind of circumstantial evidence. My post above, for instance – and in particular the fact that my faithful correspondent has gone silent or been silenced – for me is highly significant and must be explained by anyone promoting the hypothesis that this is a hoax.

I hope I explained myself a little better that time – does this now make better sense?

Best wishes, Bill



posted on Dec, 26 2005 @ 04:33 PM
link   


It may be assumed – although this of course cannot be proven – that his superiors have "leant" on him to be silent and not to respond to any further e-mails. As a serving career officer, it would have been understandable for him to comply. We are left to consider for ourselves why such an action may have been taken by the authorities.


True, but I would be hesitant to read much into this. Imagine if the guy was a career officer in Naval Intelligence or some other area that doesn't have anything to do with anything even remotely related to Serpo. This guy's superior's may know nothing of Serpo and not want to have questions start coming their way, if the information being released is, in fact, true. My belief is that no one in the military really wants to draw attention to themselves in these matters, whether they know anything or not.



[edit on 26-12-2005 by Centrist]



posted on Dec, 26 2005 @ 05:14 PM
link   
Hi Bill. Thanks for the hard work you are putting in to this. I have a question. Do you have any plans to introduce and alert the mainstream media to the Serpo disclosures and if so when? If there are ever credible photos released then some newspapers and TV may be interested in reporting it. I think there is a danger that the media may try and do a hatchet job and present it in an immature and jokey "Elvis is alive and living on the moon" kind of a way. On the other hand if it is never reported in the mainstream press then the whole disclosure will have very little impact because only people that either read this site or have found the serpo website will know about it.

Also In my opinion it is not a good idea to have a link to abovetopsecret on the Serpo website. People in the mainstream media will have ammunition to attack and discredit annonymous's claims because they will look on this site and find the most extreme and silly post they can and then link it with the serpo disclosures. This is very cynical, corrupt and misleading journalism but they often do it this way to try and undermine the credibility of certain issues and causes that do not suit their agenda. I am not saying good research and corroboration (like the guy did working out the team members probable roles) should not be included on the serpo site. Just better not to say it came from this site.

I

[edit on 26-12-2005 by englishman100]

[edit on 26-12-2005 by englishman100]



posted on Dec, 26 2005 @ 05:56 PM
link   
Dear Friends:

I have just read and signed the new petition: "UNITED NATIONS DECADE OF
CONTACT": www.thepetitionsite.com/takeaction/529287855

The organizers include Alfred Webre, a former Director of the proposed Jimmy
Carter White House extraterrestrial communication study project initiated in
1977 through Stanford Research Institute, supported by a former Minister of
National Defense of Canada, Hon. Paul Hellyer, and others.

Mr. Webre is in telephone and letter communication with the President of the
UN General Assembly, HE Jan Eliasson in regards to this initiative, asking
the UN to focus and further study the UFO issue and move towards the
necessary steps to eventually establish diplomacy with ethical "off-planet
cultures" now visiting Earth.

Please take a moment to read and join us in signing the petition. It takes
just 30 seconds, but can truly make a difference. We can get 10,000
signatures if you, your friends and their contacts' contacts choose to sign here:
www.thepetitionsite.com/takeaction/529287855

The domino effect can be quite powerful!

Thank you!

Best wishes, Bill



posted on Dec, 26 2005 @ 06:13 PM
link   

Originally posted by englishman100
Hi Bill. Thanks for the hard work you are putting in to this. I have a question. Do you have any plans to introduce and alert the mainstream media to the Serpo disclosures and if so when? If there are ever credible photos released then some newspapers and TV may be interested in reporting it. I think there is a danger that the media may try and do a hatchet job and present it in an immature and jokey "Elvis is alive and living on the moon" kind of a way. On the other hand if it is never reported in the mainstream press then the whole disclosure will have very little impact because only people that either read this site or have found the serpo website will know about it.

Also In my opinion it is not a good idea to have a link to abovetopsecret on the Serpo website. People in the mainstream media will have ammunition to attack and discredit annonymous's claims because they will look on this site and find the most extreme and silly post they can and then link it with the serpo disclosures. This is very cynical, corrupt and misleading journalism but they often do it this way to try and undermine the credibility of certain issues and causes that do not suit their agenda. I am not saying good research and corroboration (like the guy did working out the team members probable roles) should not be included on the serpo site. Just better not to say it came from this site.


Thanks – it's a good question.

I have no plans to approach the press; in its current state the story would be crucified. It needs way stronger evidence than currently is available. Credible photos would be a start!

But after C2C with George Noory I've done a couple more long radio interviews and found myself warming to the opportunity. If invited, I'd be happy to do more, and TV is just radio with pictures (to a degree). But I'm comfortable speaking in public and have a little PR experience, so would not be fazed if the media beat a path to my door. I can also write pretty lucidly, build relationships well, and hold my own in debate if necessary.

So what does this mean? If Serpo went bigtime then I'd be happy to front the PR, and would not duck out of a situation that might legimately be a little scary for others. I went into this knowing what might (just possibly) happen, and felt I was a fairly reasonable frontman inasmuch as I have no reputation to risk (and none that has gone before!). I'm also not afraid of being wrong, as I've mentioned earlier – because I'm not trying to be right. But if this story is true – or contains enough truth to be seriously investigated – then I'm happy to help as best I can get this info out. It really is a matter of public duty for me. I mean, 58 years since Roswell... come on, you guys in high places, it has to be about time now, whatever your good reasons for secrecy may once have been.

Re the ATS link, I thought I was doing you a favour – I've been very favorably impressed with my experience on ATS and almost all of the posts I've seen are thoughtful, creative, intelligent, and good-humored. Maybe I've not witnessed the worst of it yet!

Best wishes, Bill



posted on Dec, 26 2005 @ 06:37 PM
link   
I think it might be a good idea to re-thread and sticky the petition so that we can get tons of siggies.

PM a mod for that though


On a note: Just because it's a petition and may get tons of signatures doesn't mean anything will happen (especially an internet petition).

Ten thousand people in the current world of today isn't really an insignificant number. But still, something is better than nothing.

Also, using a petition which requires you to sign in/make an account is kind of a bad idea since a lot of people are lazy.

[edit on 26-12-2005 by CidCaldensfey]



posted on Dec, 26 2005 @ 07:46 PM
link   


I am not saying good research and corroboration (like the guy did working out the team members probable roles) should not be included on the serpo site. Just better not to say it came from this site.


Regardless of whether it's a good idea or bad idea, it's the appropriate thing to do under the Creative Commons usage license for material appearing on this website.

That aside, it's the intellectually honest and appropriate thing to do. People should know the source of information and be able to weigh it against the credibility of the source. If we knew that Anonymous was, for example, General Brent Scowcroft, we would give the information being released a lot of credibility, wouldn't we? Not knowing who Anonymous is changes things a lot, right?

So, whenever possible, I am very hopeful that Bill will provide the source for any information posted on the Serpo site.



posted on Dec, 26 2005 @ 08:46 PM
link   
Originally posted by Centrist

People should know the source of information and be able to weigh it against the credibility of the source.


Maybe. But from the point of veiw of mainstream media and middle america this website is not a credible source. It would be a shame to give people the oppurtunity to discredit the Serpo material by assossiating it with some of the more wacky stuff on here. I am not suggesting that you or others on this thread are not credible. In many ways(and maybe you will agree with this) the reason the existance of ET'S is not treated as real is not because of a lack of evidence but because there is a kind of laughter curtain which causes the media not to treat the subject seriousley. All it takes is for a newspaper reporter to come on this site and see a post from someone saying "David Icke is great and the queen of England is a reptile" or something similar then it doesn't matter if annonymous is Brent Scowcroft because the information will be tarnished and treated as if it is fiction by the press and that is what the public will believe.

I agree with the other stuff you said though.

BILL: Thanks for the reply.



[edit on 26-12-2005 by englishman100]

[edit on 26-12-2005 by englishman100]



posted on Dec, 26 2005 @ 09:08 PM
link   
Hey Bill,
I know your just the messenger here so you probably don't have a say in how the photos (assuming they arrive) will be delivered, but in any case, if you can put in a word to your contact or if you get asked - ask them (unless they provide actual prints/negs) to scan them atleast 300dpi, provide them RAW from the scanner (as in no edits to the pictures colour, light balance etc, let us do that or provide the Raw version with an edited/corrected version) and to keep compression to an absolute minimum. Tell them not to worry about file size, there's no such thing as an image that is too large in this case!

It would be a shame to get the photos and just have little web resolution pics which can't really be exaimed properly. If they are going to the trouble to release these images and they stand behind them, they should atleast deliver press quality scans that can be run through software to be enhanced and detailed if needed. The images, regardless of what they actually depict, will be run through the gauntlet by all sides of belief, it will really help disclosure if there is public access to the original unedited hi-res scans - something that is rarely provided with UFO images.

If these images appear and they are real - there's a good chance your site could get taken down. It will be very important to make backups and more importantly, spread it on the internet right away so it has a snowball effect which can't be stopped. ATS type places will be a good start, make a post with a link to the files and tell us all to download them ASAP.

I'm not sure what the licensing deal would be with photos like this? spreading them on the net will be important so they don't get swallowed and hidden away but what would be the legal issue with press printing them? It would be great if they did but would any laws or copyrights be broken? How does it work from a publishing perspective when a secret photo that 'officially' doesn't exist is then released anonymously to the public?
Who would be the copyright owner or would they just be considered 'free use' photos? It might help working out a general usage license type thing in advance so if they do come, if they are press quality, then atleast it's clear that they can be reproduced without any consequence - unless your told otherwise by the provider i guess.

Anyway, i hope your making backups for your site and have some mirrors handy because if this heats up and turns out to start getting seriously undeniable, then serpo.org will be the first thing to go down if someone out there wants to stop it. At the moment there's still plenty of slack in the rope before 'they' would want to shut this down because it's still clouded in mystery and works for dis-info as much as it does for disclosure, hard evidence thou will change the scope of this instantly and really start receiving some serious attention.

Good luck with the rest of it, here's hoping it's not in vein but rather the begining of something that is desperately needed on this planet right now.



posted on Dec, 26 2005 @ 10:26 PM
link   

Originally posted by Bill Ryan


No, an apologist is somebody who argues to defend or justify a particular doctrine or ideology. I'm not doing that. I don't have a fixed idea about exactly what is happening, though as I've said earlier on this Forum I do have a hypothesis which I'm keeping to myself for the moment, and which I believe to be testable.

But I am arguing against anyone who casually or lazily dismisses it all as a simple hoax. I stand for intelligent thought and will listen to anyone who presents cogent, well-considered arguments. (Why? Because I might realize something I've not thought of.) So I'm just presenting evidence on both sides of the debate – if you read the Comments page you'll see there's plenty there which argues against the veracity of the stated orbital data, for example.

The reason for the Consistencies page is that I know that some have jumped to a conclusion based on poor logic – not considering all the facts. This does not mean their conclusion is wrong; it just means that their logic is poor. To even things out and encourage careful thought, I want to present additional factors which are not immediately obvious and/or which may not be generally known. They're not proof, but constitute a kind of circumstantial evidence. My post above, for instance – and in particular the fact that my faithful correspondent has gone silent or been silenced – for me is highly significant and must be explained by anyone promoting the hypothesis that this is a hoax.

I hope I explained myself a little better that time – does this now make better sense?

Best wishes, Bill


Bill,

I can appreciate your reasoning here but the notion that this isn't a hoax, as currently constituted, is ridiculous. After following this story for nearly a month, or more?, i've not seen a single thing that even begins to affirm the truth to this story. It's not up to us to prove it a hoax. At this point it is a hoax, by default, until it is empirically proven by the person(s) positing their claim as truth. Truth being the operative word in this whole matter and the amount of time given to prove such a truth. If this was simply floating out there as a story with no real emphasis on it taking place in reality, then that's a different matter. It has been generally implied that the purpose of this story is to show that these events did, indeed, take place; otherwise there wouldn't be all(or as much) of this excitement around Serpo.


It's a great read and I have been thoroughly entertained in following it. You do a great job in exploring all avenues and this isn't to take anything away from the time and effort you put into Serpo; it's simply worth noting that this can be safely established as a hoax. Can that change? Sure.

I'm not merely dismissing this with a casual glance over. I've done my fair share of researching this topic.

There are a couple of specific things that set it back further than the aforementioned premises. The association with Richard Doty, an admitted disinformation agent who has publically stated that he's discredited more than one persons in the ufology field. The mentioning of J-Rod which conjures up a connection with Dan Burisch, who over several years has been proven to be known for twisting the truth to his liking(and that's putting it lightly).

In regards to your friend in the military. I could say that the mechanic who works at the local garage read the bible and told me he was flabbergasted by the part about the talking donkey and swears he has seen a talking donkey. Though the two things sound completely different in content, the assessment of their truths come out the same. As crass as it sounds, you've got to name names if you expect anyone to make a valid observation on that specific claim.

It's just unfair to expect people to suspend disbelief and not accept it as truth due to insufficient evidence at the same time. A truth claim that hasn't been proven true is meaningless and bears no middle ground between true or unfrue. Such a thing is not possible.

Alas, you keep publishing whatever is sent your way and we'll keep reading. You do a fine job in presenting the data given to you.

-Obscure



new topics

top topics



 
29
<< 40  41  42    44  45  46 >>

log in

join