New NARCAP Study... Spheres and Aviation Safety

HI All,

I am Ted Roe, Executive Director at NARCAP.org...

I just wanted to let the list know about our new study,

Spherical UAP and Aviation Safety: A Critical Review (aka Project Sphere)

www.narcap.org/ProjectSphere.htm

Would love to set up a thread and chat about it but I am relegated to this "introductions" page so.... it was a good idea but I guess it wasn't to be...

Take a look if you like, drop me a line at NARCAP if you have something to say...

all the best,

Ted Roe
Executive Director
NARCAP.org

admin edit: Ted didn't let me know he was posting this so there was some confusion, the thread is up and in the proper forum for discussion now.

[edit on 6-6-2010 by Springer]

reply to post by 1deepstar


hi, why have you waited over a year to introduce your self?

[edit on 6-6-2010 by Springer]

reply to post by 1deepstar


Thank You for posting this here Ted.

I learned back in 2007 (the O'Hare incident) that NARCAP is one of the FEW (if not the only) sources for genuine scientific research in the UAP (UFO) arena and we seek to support NARCAP anytime we can.

I strongly urge all of our members and visitors who are interested in "Ufology" to read this report, it will open a few eyes and confirm many theories of just what these "spheres" likely are, IMHO.

Springer...

In some cases it might be argued that spherical UAP demonstrate "intelligence". The author is at a loss as to how one might prove that the trajectories of a ball of light are indicative of "deliberate behaviour" or "inherent intelligence.

Right... so I guess flying in formations or tailing aircraft (which you mention in the report yourself) isn't indicative of "deliberate behaviour" or "intelligence"...?

Have you ever seen a weather ballon tail a plane?

I'm liking the attempted scientific approach (although it does seem you're trying a little too hard). Were the words "UFO" and "Extraterrestrial" banned from use?

Enjoyed the report, thanks for posting.

[edit on 6-6-2010 by FOXMULDER147]

reply to post by 1deepstar


Good Morning Ted

Thank you for your thread & the extremely interesting information therein.

May I ask a question?

I have a long-haul flight tomorrow & I'd very much like to read the doc thoroughly on my flight.

Can I down-load the complete doc so I can read it off-line?

I can't see where to do that.

Kind regards
Maybe...maybe not

Well this part from the beginning got my attention:

"Other details of how the flight crew dealt with this alleged event and how they were treated by Air Force officials upon landing will not be discussed here except to say that after they landed the entire flight crew was warned not to talk to anyone about the event and even to treat it as if it hadn't happened at all. Concerns were expressed that the B-52 might have been contaminated by radioactivity during the event. For instance, the pilot was commanded not to taxi the airplane near any buildings but leave it near the runway. Interestingly, there is no record of this event found in Project Blue Book files of the Air Force. If an official report was made, it must have been routed to another destination."

Should be an interesting read. Thanks OP - 1deepstar. S & F





[edit on 6-6-2010 by manta78]

I'm an admirer of NARCAP as an outpost of rationality and antidote to the occasional hysteria of the subject. The Brazilian incident is a compelling case and emotive. Souza's experience speaks of the genuine wonder of the situation. I had mild goosebumps reading it.

Don Ledger's work is always welcome. It's good to see the juxtaposition of two wholly different incidents.

I'll get to reading the rest later in the day. Thanks a lot for flagging it on ATS

@ Maybe, Maybe Not...right click save as (or save link as) and create a folder to put them in. They're locked, but printable.

Originally posted by Kandinsky
@ Maybe, Maybe Not...right click save as (or save link as) and create a folder to put them in. They're locked, but printable.

Kandinsky.....

I tried that, but I only get the front page & then it appears I have to save every section, one by one.

Is there a way around that?

Kind regards
Maybe...maybe not

reply to post by Maybe...maybe not
Nope. Gotta do one by one. They are certainly worth it and it's not that much effort! Less effort than typing a post. Shame....Maybe...shame lol

(jokes)

Originally posted by Kandinsky
reply to post by Maybe...maybe not

 

Nope. Gotta do one by one. They are certainly worth it and it's not that much effort! Less effort than typing a post. Shame....Maybe...shame lol

(jokes)

Groan...... OK......

"Right click save"

"Right click save"

"Right click save"

I love this!!!!

reply to post by Maybe...maybe not


Good practice to keep your fingers limber for quickly attaching a gas mask when a chemtrail is spotted.

The Brazil Incident 1986 involved multiple jets, radar contacts, visual sightings and immediate public disclosure by the Brazilian authorities. Objects drew the attention of military and civilian Air Traffic Control, Air Force pilots were summoned and jets scrambled.

They followed directions from the radar operators and came across bright objects that moved differently to meteors, ship lights or marine reflections.

"We asked if the contact was on their radar and the answer was positive. The controller told us that, “... the position of the unknowns was, at that moment, at the 11 o’clock position relative to our own aircraft and he asked if we could see it. It was at this position that I saw it. A very strong light shone, a white light. The emotion that I have even until today I get confused with the certainty that he (the object) was listening in to our conversation over the radio. At the same moment that the ground control asked us if we were seeing the traffic and I answered, the object blinked, so to speak (to say): I am "here!”

NARCAP report

More information on the incident is here...Jets chase UFOs over Brazil in 1986. Also NICAP have a couple of files...Brazil Aircraft / UFO Encounter - R/V and this FOIA request that shows how the US kept some files classified...FREEDOM OF INFORMATION ACT DOCUMENT FILES

Great work can be found at NARCAP's site. I've been reading through the research to see if there is any information about the "missile" reports from California and other reports from around the world this year. Also I was curious to see if they had announcements for their next project.

Ted, if your lurking, could you log-in and let us know about your next project? Thank you in advance.

reply to post by SunshineLaws
Ted Roe is a very interesting man and dedicated to researching the phenomena of the UFO enigma. The best thing, in my opinion, is that he and the guys at NARCAP are low-key and discreet about it.

You asked about his next project?

Currently, Ted Roe and associates are investigating a place where they've seen unusual activity. Lights and apparently structured craft. All in all, it's early days yet and hopefully something will come out of it in the near future.

reply to post by Kandinsky


That's exciting news. Thanks Kandinsky.

Originally posted by 1deepstar
HI All,

I am Ted Roe, Executive Director at NARCAP.org...

I just wanted to let the list know about our new study,

Spherical UAP and Aviation Safety: A Critical Review (aka Project Sphere)

www.narcap.org/ProjectSphere.htm

Would love to set up a thread and chat about it but I am relegated to this "introductions" page so.... it was a good idea but I guess it wasn't to be...

Take a look if you like, drop me a line at NARCAP if you have something to say...

all the best,

Ted Roe
Executive Director
NARCAP.org

admin edit: Ted didn't let me know he was posting this so there was some confusion, the thread is up and in the proper forum for discussion now.

[edit on 6-6-2010 by Springer]

Hi Ted: glad to see you here, finally, with a very interesting take on a puzzling subject. I went to read Mr Haines many-paged report but I'm going to have to do that at another time.

While "spheres" or UAPs are treated as UFOs, I have not read anywhere that they pose a thread to aviation. They're videographed near airplanes (but not as near as the telescopic compression seems to indicate) and I haven't seen any human craft take evasive action to avoid these "spheres" plus the other shapes we see frequently particularly over Mexico.

So I can understand the concern, I do not see a reason for it. I doubt very much if a "sphere" will allow any human craft to approach them and our craft don't seem to be able to do so anyway.

Additionally, as the UFO phenomena defies human explanation, I think that "spheres" will also suffer from an acceptable explantion.

Originally posted by FOXMULDER147
I'm liking the attempted scientific approach (although it does seem you're trying a little too hard). Were the words "UFO" and "Extraterrestrial" banned from use?

Good question FOXMULDER147, quite remarkable is it not?
I am convinced that that has all to do with this and it still works today.
It was posted by karl 12 here.

www.abovetopsecret.com...

Originally posted by karl 12

“Behind the scenes, high-ranking Air Force officers are soberly concerned about UFOs. But through official secrecy and ridicule, many citizens are led to believe that unknown flying objects are nonsense.”

Former CIA Director, Roscoe Hillenkoetter, public statement, 1960.

Interesting article about how the CIA sponsered Robertson Panel managed the 'public perception' of the UFO subject and concluded that it was 'in the best interest of the U.S. Government to suppress media coverage of UFO sightings'.

There's also some revealing comments about the use of ridicule and precision propaganda techniques so the subject would be portrayed in a negative light thereby making people reluctant to report their experiences.

Terry Hansen speaking about the Robertson Panel

Article from Hypernet

There are many reasons why your average professional scientist shuns away from studying UFO evidence or publicly admitting having an interest in the UFO subject. The primary reason is the implied threat to one's carreer, either directly via officialdom retributions or indirectly through the carefully cultivated public perception that the UFO subject is scientifically unrespectable. The latter was achieved by the psy-ops of the US Intelligence Establishment i.e. the officially sanctioned "debunking" and deception programme, euphemistically called "re-education of the public".

The anti-UFO propaganda has been waged upon the general populous since the 1950s, as outlined e.g. in declassified report of the Robertson Panel (commissioned by the CIA in Jan-1953). The panel was chaired by HP Robertson, physicist from California Institute of Technology. The other four members were Luis Alvarez, Nobel prize in physics; Lloyd Berkner, space scientist; Sam Goudsmit, nuclear physicist at Brookhaven National Laboratory and Thornton Page, astronomer. It suggested launching a "public relations campaign", using psychologists, astronomers and assorted celebrities to significantly reduce public interest in UFOs. It was also recommended that the mass media be used for the "debunking", including influential media giants like Walt Disney Corporation. Obviously the panel was simply to lend respectability to the proposals; these top scientists complied with what CIA had asked of them for:

"H.P. Robertson told us in the first private (no outsiders) session that our job was to reduce public concern, and show that UFO reports could be explained by conventional reasoning."

Dr. Thornton Page describing what the Robertson Panel was tasked with.

Article

Dr James Mcdonald talks about 'scoffing and ridicule' within mainstream science.

However, I must admit that because of what I know about the UFO/UAP/ET phenomenon today, I do understand why they still keep it secret.

4. Possible Explanations for Sighting Reports 4.1 Weather and Other Types of Balloons (Kim Efishoff) (.5mb) 4.2 Unmanned Aerial Vehicles (UAV) and Other Airborne Objects (Terry Osborn and R. Haines)(1.7mb) 4.3 Ball Lightning and Earthlights (R. Haines)(153kb)

source link; www.narcap.org...

So this is the ONLY possible explanations on offer here from the New NARCAP Study... Spheres and Aviation Safety source??? Why is there no possibility of ET airborne object even considered are we to believe that this ET possibility has been made redundant by the laws of POSSIBILITY and that the fact of this quote below;

"we do NOT know ALL there is to know about EVERYTHING and those that claim they do are usually proved wrong in the end".

reply to post by K-PAX-PROT
Hiya K-Pax. I recommend reading more of the NARCAP papers and have a look at what the associates have written on the subject of UAP. Massimo Teodarani, Don Ledger, Ted Roe and Dr Haines are objective in their reports and scientific in their approaches. Given the evidence, they have to rule out known phenomena and reserve judgement about what the remaining 'unknowns' represent. Their function is to highlight the risks to aviation safety posed by unidentified anomalous phenomena.

If they succeed in proving UAPs pose a risk to aviation safety, an open, official investigation would be the next step.