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

a reply to: beetee

a reply to: celltypespecific Sure, go right ahead.

Below is somewhat of a response....I am sure he read my tweet...he addresses some aspects of your comment Beetee:

a reply to: celltypespecific

Yeah, that's pretty vague.

Having a hypothesis you cannot prove yet is distinct from claiming to have said proof (as is done in the Unidentified documentary) but being unable/unwilling to present it for review. Yet, we are asked to accept there is a threat without proof?

This has, as Nolan well knows, nothing to do with science, but is the hallmark of cults and frauds.

Calling people "children" for wanting to see the evidence is as cringeworthy as it is desperate.

If the good doctor had any bones he would be the one asking for the evidence. The documentation. The "ice cream", but maybe he doesn't like ice cream very much.

Double

Its a live interview with Diana

a reply to: celltypespecific

I have no idea what the point of her is.

a reply to: celltypespecific

The long con.

Mick West's latest conclusions about the Gimbal video after downloading a higher quality version from the NYT's. I couldn't see it posted in thread.

Higher quality footage from the New York Times helps demonstrate that the Gimbal UFO is not actually rotating, and that it's not actually a flying saucer.
Is the Gimbal UFO actually rotating? It looks like it is, but it also looks like a rotating glare. .... I downloaded it and used it to pull out details in the background that show conclusively that something in the camera system is rotating, and that this rotation exactly matches the rotation of the "UFO". Hence, this proves the rotating flying saucer is just an optically rotating glare off something hot, like a jet engine.

originally posted by: zazzafrazz
Mick West's latest conclusions about the Gimbal video after downloading a higher quality version from the NYT's. I couldn't see it posted in thread.

Higher quality footage from the New York Times helps demonstrate that the Gimbal UFO is not actually rotating, and that it's not actually a flying saucer.
Is the Gimbal UFO actually rotating? It looks like it is, but it also looks like a rotating glare. .... I downloaded it and used it to pull out details in the background that show conclusively that something in the camera system is rotating, and that this rotation exactly matches the rotation of the "UFO". Hence, this proves the rotating flying saucer is just an optically rotating glare off something hot, like a jet engine.

The problem with his theory that the rotation of the camera is what is causing the object to appear to rotate is that the background (clouds) do not rotate even remotely close to the same number of degrees as the object rotates. For his theory to be true we would see an exact match in degrees rotating of the clouds as we do the object and it simply is not the case.

There is no doubt the camera rotates but only slightly where as the object significantly rotates.

a reply to: beetee

Calling people "children" for wanting to see the evidence is as cringeworthy as it is desperate. 

Its not worth typing time. Lets simply say am sure his comment will be chalked up for future reference.

a reply to: mirageman

Her brother is an experiencer apparently....

I wonder if he was in the military and in an experiencer group...hmmm...

a reply to: pigsy2400

No clue?

While am here Grant has gone full on Doty. Its wild. Tread with caution if you have not seen already.

a reply to: pigsy2400

Maybe her brother is an experiencer. But I don't think she's ever mentioned it.

All I ever seem to get are the buzz words "Religion, Technology, UFOs". A story with no conclusion or point to make.

She spent the last 5 or so years moving out of Catholic Academia, to going on a Silicon Vallée tour, to going jet setting with Stephen Tyler, to reading some old manuscripts in the Vatican and then got blindfolded in the desert so she could pick up a piece of old space junk.

Is it wrong to wish on space hardware?
I wish, I wish, I wish I cared.

Another Senator Briefed on UFOs/UAPs

"We have been briefed," said Shaheen. "It was a classified briefing so I'm not allowed to talk about it. But if you were to ask me personally do I believe there are UFOs, I think that there are events that have happened that have not been explained adequately.

Shaheen says she was given classified UFO briefing

Look, there are ufos up there...keep looking...

Whilst we engineer good old fashioned human tech derived off weird beliefs based on scientology sprinkled with the finest occult teachings.

Multiple objectives here, the kooky fooky spooks want to talk to thier "thetans" or ancient masters from long ago and even quite possibly "bring them here" and the military guys want to do what they always want to do, weaponise and deploy for strategic military advantage.

Neuroscience, biotechnology and synthetic biology. All wrapped up in a nice little bundle whilst there is also the opportunity to drop in a few social memes into fringe populations and see how far their competiting ideas will go. Parsing ATS data didn't someone say once?

The whole thing about programs funding being pulled due to people thinking the work was "demonic", well yeah probably, from thier point of view at least. They probably looked at the rota of staff and thought..."what the hell are we still funding these occult/scientology obcessed weirdos for!"

If that was the case, good on em..

a reply to: 1point92AU

Excellent point 1point92AU!!

This is amusing below is Tyler's protocol on how to connect with the ET's:

Tyler's Protocol

Whats the frequency Kennett?

Whats the frequency Kennett?

🤣 😂