UFOs, The Bottom Line: My Honest Answers

Recently on the "Coast to Coast" radio talk show, I tried to answer some of the most frequently asked questions on the UFO phenomenon that are specifically addressed to me.

Here, then, are my straightforward, honest answers to some of those questions:

1) Is there a physical, underground U.S./Alien Joint Bio-Lab in Dulce, New Mexico?

My answer:

To the best of my knowledge, there is no hard, tangible, solid, irrefutable, physical, documentary evidence whatsoever that supports the allegation that there is a physical, underground U.S./alien Joint Bio-Lab in Dulce, New Mexico.
But my personal opinion is that there is "something" there. What that "something" is, I do not know. There is something "real" there, but we still do not know for sure what "real" is. What is "reality" to some people may not be "reality" to another person.

By the way, speaking of Dulce, most people have never heard that in 1967 the U.S. government had experimentally exploded an atomic bomb underground, just about 21 miles southwest of Dulce, New Mexico. It was part of a post-war program called "Plowshare". The U.S. government exploded a nuclear device about one and a half mile underground. That specific experiment was called Project Gasbuggy.
It was experimentally conducted to ease the flow of natural gas in that region. At least that was what the government had said.
Three years ago I had a unique chance to visit Ground Zero there, thanks to the kindness of a Jicarilla Apache resident of Dulce who took me there.
It is my opinion that initially there had been some minor radiation leaks in that area. Some ranchers even told me that the government may have been monitoring the radiation level found in some particular animals, such as certain cows in that region.
Also, I had heard about some recurrent problems in fertility among some women in the Dulce area.

These are questions that still need to be addressed and answered. It is still inconclusive.
Here is my crazy, wild hypothesis on Dulce:

www.youtube.com...

2) Is Area 51 in Nevada still active?

My answer:

Yes, definitely. Even today, if one goes to the large parking area of E.G. & G. Terminal at Las Vegas' McCarren Airport, every weekday it is still filled with vehicles of employees who report to work at Groom Lake, Nevada (Area 51). There are still anywhere from 7 to 8 flights daily going to and from Area 51, on unmarked 737 jets that arrive and depart from the E.G. & G. Terminal.

In the past three years, there has been sizeable additions, clearly visible, to the Area 51 complex. Two years ago, a new 155-foot triangular-sided bluish radar tower was constructed by the tarmac. More new buildings, water tanks, etc., have been added in the past 3 years.
Last year, they just finished the construction of a humongous, new hangar towards the south of the complex. This new hangar is close to 4 times the size of the H-18 Hangar, until then the largest one on the complex.

Also, as of two months ago, they just completed the paving of the Groom Lake Road, from the complex all the way to the East perimeter boundary. A new communication tower has also been constructed near the East Guard Shack, near the boundary line.
Most people have no idea that Area 51 today has anywhere from about 1800 to 2200 part-time and full-time employees, all working on diverse, separate projects of highly compartmentalized programs conducted by defense contractors such as Lockheed, Northrop Grumman, Boeing, Raytheon, General Atomics, TRW, etc. etc.
Some employees are assigned on a daily basis. Some stay at the base for a few days, a week, weeks, etc., depending on their assignments.
Both the Area 51 complex in Nevada and the Dugway Proving Grounds in Utah are definitely and actively pursuing diversified defense-related projects.

But what does this all have to do with UFOs?
Absolutely nothing.
To a segment of the population, Area 51 has become associated with "extraterrestrial technologies" only because of the allegation (i.e., from Robert Lazar) that there had been a back-engineering program conducted in secrecy at an allegedly, relatively small complex, allegedly hidden along the slope of Papoose Mountains, by Papoose Lake, about 10 miles south of Area 51.
There is no visible evidence of the existence of this S-4 site, as far as any detection by satellite photo is concerned.
The alleged S-4 site has become associated with Area 51 only because of its proximity to Area 51.
The bottom line to S-4 is that it is still an allegation only. That does not mean that it does not exist. It is inconclusive.

3) What is your take on the alleged crash of an alien spacecraft near Roswell in 1947?

My answer:

Again, the bottom line is that there is no hard, tangible, solid, physical, irrefutable, documentary evidence for that.
It is difficult for me to conceive in my mind that any such highly advanced extraterrestrial civilization, traversing through this vast space and arriving at our earth would even "crash".
The concept of something "crashing" is a typical human concept. It is part of a limited, human thought, bound by a limited, linear, "empirical" thought.
Any highly advanced civilization (that could even penetrate our dimensional barrier in a non-linear fashion) would never have such accidents, in my opinion.

If there were indeed such a "crash" near Roswell in 1947, the only way it could have been a "crash" would have been if it were purposely "staged".
My belief is that the Roswell incident (the "crash") was staged by the "entities" themselves or through an elitist group within the shadow government, in collusion with those "entities", for a purpose yet unknown.

and, finally,

4) Do you believe that there are actual, physical extraterrestrial craft being piloted or maneuvered by actual, physical extraterrestrial entities from outer space?

My answer:

No.
The UFO phenomenon is definitely real, no question about it.
However, so far I see no actual, physical, solid, tangible, irrefutable evidence that there are actual, phyiscal extraterrestrial entities piloting or maneuvering actual, physical extraterrestrial craft.
But, then, what about the UFO phenomenon?
It is still a mystery.

Here is my take on the entire UFO phenomenon.
I owe everything to Dr. Jacques Vallee:

www.youtube.com...

In my opinion, the so-called abduction phenomenon is a real phenomenon, "real" to the "abducteees".
It is "real".
However, we still do not know for sure what "real" is.
My opinion is that there are many levels of "reality".
What is "real" to one person may not necessarily be "real" to another person.
This is the greatest challenge in ufology.
This may be a crazy thing to say, but maybe this life here itself may not really be "real".
This is why I say that real "reality" can be experienced only after our physical death.

Norio Hayakawa
www.myspace.com...

noriohayakawa2012.blogspot.com...

Nice summary, thanks.


One of my biggest "peeves" with the whole Alien and UFO phenomenon is Area 51.

I agree absolutely no aliens or UFO's there. Well, maybe some UFO's but nothing alien or E.T. about them. Simply top secret aircraft projects that our government is working on. Frankly, the public doesn't need to know about them either, IMO.

[edit on 22-3-2010 by elevatedone]

I think others who look at all this long enough will come to similar conclusions. Ive been many years reading this site and have arrived at similar.

Nice summary, thanks.

Interesting stuff.

1) Is there a physical, underground U.S./Alien Joint Bio-Lab in Dulce, New Mexico?

My answer:

To the best of my knowledge, there is no hard, tangible, solid, irrefutable, physical, documentary evidence whatsoever that supports the allegation that there is a physical, underground U.S./alien Joint Bio-Lab in Dulce, New Mexico.
But my personal opinion is that there is "something" there. What that "something" is, I do not know. There is something "real" there, but we still do not know for sure what "real" is. What is "reality" to some people may not be "reality" to another person.

How does one go about building a base of questionable ontological status? What tools are capable of laying the foundation for a building which doesn't take up any physical space? How does one take advantage of such a base? Can things of a more definite existential nature be stored there? Does it need guards? If I stumbled upon the entrance, would I even know?

It seems like we have to admit that the notion of a quasi-existant base doesn't really make sense. Bases are real, physical, things. If you don't have any "real" reason to believe that something exists, then you don't have any reason at all to believe that it exists. Describing something incomprehensibly vague is just about the same as not saying anything at all.

I think the same position can be adopted towards any similar ideas about UFOs. Real things exist. Isn't that self evident? Hallucinations are often real to the hallucinator, as are dreams to the dreamer. When we say "real" we are usually refering to a "real world," "out there," independent of us( for those who would reject this notion by proudly displaying the measurement problem of quantum mechanics, I would remind you that you are still taking measure of something that was "out there" to take measure of before you came along). The tree that falls in the forest when there is no one around makes a "real" sound. The Tim Learys of the world who just initiated their first experiment see elves which aren't "real."
The conversation about abductions which most people are interested in having is more to do with reports of abductions corresponding( or not) with some event which took place in phyical reality. I have trouble finding any rational motivation for giving dreams and fantasies more than their fair share of existence. If it's just in your head, it's just in your head. If it's "out there," it's real.

Even if we make the completely arbitrary decision to accept the existence of a mystical/interdimensional/hyperspacial realm laid over/under our own, how do we verify our beliefs about this realm? It seems like this is a hopeless endeavour because we won't be able to find anything resembling evidence. No evidence = no reason to believe.

"In my opinion, the so-called abduction phenomenon is a real phenomenon, "real" to the "abducteees".
It is "real".
However, we still do not know for sure what "real" is.
My opinion is that there are many levels of "reality".
What is "real" to one person may not necessarily be "real" to another person.
This is the greatest challenge in ufology.
This may be a crazy thing to say, but maybe this life here itself may not really be "real".
This is why I say that real "reality" can be experienced only after our physical death."

How you have put this is exactly how I see and feel the 'abduction' phenomenon! I have had experiences and I hesitate to use the term abductions to describe them, as it is not as clear cut as that. However the experiences and their impact on day to day living are undeniably valid. I have experienced what is really, real. There is no way to explain it to those who haven't been there, it's like waking up from a dream, with our five sense reality as the dream/nightmare. It's like trying to describe a red London bus to an amazonian tribesman who has never been out of his forest, it's just impossible because most people have no frame of reference for what you are saying.

When you say "reality" can be experienced only after our physical death.", I would have to respectfully disagree. It is possible to access "reality" whilst still living, most people would call it an out of body experience, near death or something similar. I completely agree in that we don't know and can't actually define what 'real' is.

I have no idea about your background or who you are. I just had to reply on this point as it resonated so much, I will now be taking a look at your blog and other links.

Originally posted by elevatedone
Nice summary, thanks.

One of my biggest "peeves" with the whole Alien and UFO phenomenon is Area 51.

I agree absolutely no aliens or UFO's there. Well, maybe some UFO's but nothing alien or E.T. about them. Simply top secret aircraft projects that our government is working on. Frankly, the public doesn't need to know about them either, IMO.

[edit on 22-3-2010 by elevatedone]

So you are saying , in effect, I don't care that, Our governments use this high tech capability for nothing more than military purposes and denies it's use in the everyday world, in a world running short of just about every natural resource?

reply to post by Norio Hayakawa


Hmm.nice read, i always wondered if there was any "proof" of any large scale dirt moving trucks or equipment documented back in the 50's? 60's? to prove that an underground base was being built there...just wondering(Dulce)

Originally posted by FireMoon

Originally posted by elevatedone
Nice summary, thanks.

One of my biggest "peeves" with the whole Alien and UFO phenomenon is Area 51.
I agree absolutely no aliens or UFO's there. Well, maybe some UFO's but nothing alien or E.T. about them. Simply top secret aircraft projects that our government is working on. Frankly, the public doesn't need to know about them either, IMO.

So you are saying , in effect, I don't care that, Our governments use this high tech capability for nothing more than military purposes and denies it's use in the everyday world, in a world running short of just about every natural resource?

Just look at the things we know of that came out of area 51, like the SR-71 and the F-117. Cool stuff but what good is that technology in the commercial world? The commercial world already had the supersonic concorde and even that couldn't survive, the technology of the SR-71 may be faster but it's probably worse for commercial applications.

And why not have secret defense projects? If you give away all your military secrets it's hard to maintain an advantage.

reply to post by Norio Hayakawa
Thanks for sharing your thoughts.

Your Roswell, Area 51 and alien UFO comments make sense to me, at least we don't have any proof UFOs are alien even though there's a lot of speculation about that. So I'm not sure why we can't apply the same logic to Dulce, there may be some speculation but as you say, no proof. And at least you say Dulce is inconclusive as opposed to being firmly convinced of something. All the descriptions I've heard of cattle mutilations never seem to rule out vultures to me, and of course they go after the tastiest and easiest to get to bits first which are always the parts reported missing in cattle mutilations. The other observations like "no blood" etc don't seem strange to me.

Regarding project Blue Beam, given all the other strange projects that were being worked on, I don't think we can rule out that was a legitimate idea for a project. But how far they got with it, beyond the concept stage, if at all, I don't know. I don't think any particular sighting makes Blue Beam a necessity to explain it. They had an idea for a moon base too and I doubt that ever got beyond the concept stage, so some ideas were thought of and just never went anywhere.

reply to post by Norio Hayakawa


Hi there,

Very nicely worded, honest post there. I also agree that Area 51 has nothing to do with ET's. Military Technology, thats it IMHO.

As for alien Abduction, I really have no idea at all. To be honest, most people i've seen on TV who claim to have been abducted look and sound crazier than a ****house rat.

I definatley think there are UFO's and I also believe there are ET's out there. As to how much they are involved down here on Earth, or how often they have visited, and in what numbers, then that's where everything becomes guesswork for me.

I refuse to believe that out of all the planets out there, we are the only intelligent beings anywhere.

Someone/something has it's eye on us and has for thousands of years, but why should they land on the Whitehouse lawn and introduce themselves now?

G.



[edit on 23-3-2010 by grantbeed]

Just to bring this to your attention: The Roswell Crash.

A theory that may intertwine with your Q&A is the one Dan Brown spoke about in one of his books. He goes on to explain how the military was testing a highly secretive aerial weapon of war when it crashed. Since the Government didn't want to let other countries in on their ideas they needed a way to cover it up.

The public, having no knowledge of how far advance Government technology was, and still is (12 years advance), and the materials used in the craft not being readily recognized. The public come up with its own theory. UFOs.

The Government still needed a cover story, so they went with it. Now every time someone captures a advanced flying craft they can relax knowing that it will simply be labelled as a UFO.

IMO, Just a theory to be considered.

reply to post by Norio Hayakawa


Well, I think everyone already knew that there's no unequivocable proof for extra-terrestrials piloting UFOs but thanks for starting this thread - attempting to arrive at honest answers should be what it's all about.

The comments you posted about the EDH by Jacques Vallee were very interesting and I wondered what your thoughts were on the USO subject - many unknown objects have been witnessed entering or emerging from the world's oceans; have been plotted on radar/sonar and have been known to cause electromagnetic interference effects on ships and planes - I'd be interested to know if you also believe these objects to be inter-dimensional -I'd also be interested to hear your thoughts about reports of these objects collecting water.


Related threads:

USO Research

Interview with Carl Feindt ~ the UFO/Water connection.

Unusual reports of UFOs 'taking on water'.

Cheers.

[edit on 02/10/08 by karl 12]

reply to post by Norio Hayakawa


Norio Hayakawa
www.dreamlandresort.com...
Hello,

Are you now or have you ever been associated or involved with anything at government level?

Thanks for your insight and time

reply to post by Arbitrageur


The evidence doesn't stack up though. Concorde was a direct development of the TSR2. The Tsr2 was years ahead of anything the Americans had in the 1960s and the American military were desperate to buy it. Due to internal political wrangling and outright bribery, it was scrapped, after pressure was put on the British Government. In terms of research into airframes and engines, both Britain and France was a decade ahead of the USA , in the 1960s. Ye the classic,t triangle shaped UFOs, were reported back then.

The F-1117 was developed by Lockheed at their Skunk Works, not Area 51 and let's be candid here. The F-1117, apart from its' stealth capabilities was not very good, as an aircraft. it was slow, cumbersome and horrifically expensive. In many ways it was actually, a step back not forward, in design.

Likewise, with the SR-071. it was as much as anything, nothing more than an exercise in *dick waving*, as much of its' capabilities were already covered by, already existent, satellite technology.

In fact in the world of aviation, if anything , the perception is that, we have stood still and in commercial terms, have gone backwards since Concorde was grounded, in the civilian world, when it comes to speed, endurance etc.

Designs for a HTOL passenger ship capable of travelling between London and Sydney , in 4 hours, were published, in public some 40 years ago over here. We are still waiting for them to be developed in the real world, even though the technology is known to be available.

Ergo to suggest that. That someone has developed an airframe that can. Crusoe at, anything from 0 knots to 3x the speed of sound, without a sonic boom. Accelerate by 100s of knots in less than 2 seconds, appear and disappear from site, almost at will and then kept it secret for half a century, seems, to me, to be as outlandish as saying they are Alien, in fact probably more so.