Breaking BAASS, Assessing AATIP and Doubting Thomas ‘DeLonge’

a reply to: Ophiuchus1

Hmmm, we will see what the future brings!

originally posted by: mirageman


● No UFO reported, investigated, and evaluated by the Air Force was ever an indication of threat to our national security

● There was no evidence submitted to or discovered by the Air Force that sightings categorized as "unidentified" represented technological developments or principles beyond the range of modern scientific knowledge

● There was no evidence indicating that sightings categorized as "unidentified" were extraterrestrial vehicles

Kirkpatrick used the same words during the audition ...

a reply to: gippo888

Despite representing a mere 4% of the global population, America is home to nearly half of all reported UFO sightings in the world.


Source Hatch *U* UFO Database

Almost 80% of alien abductions are reported as occurring in the United States with a proportion of those reported elsewhere in the world coming from American citizens while abroad.


Source : Alien Abductions Global Survey

Maybe the aliens really fancy their chances against one of them most heavily armed populations as opposed to easy pickings elsewhere in the world? But I think it is more suggestive of cultural factors at play.

So there will always be a much larger volume of politicians and military folk in the USA than anywhere else who really believe these objects represent something extra-terrestrial.

So in a nation that leaks other information like a sieve, why does no hard proof of aliens ever leak?

a reply to: mirageman

But I think it is more suggestive of cultural factors at play.

I think this is the answer to your question ...
In the US there is a lot of attention, all the testimonies are collected
In Italy very few witnesses speak of UFO sightings but everyone speaks of Marian apparitions
If you say: "I saw a UFO" everyone smiles
If you say: "I saw the Madonna" everyone asks you where??

I'll give you an example.
in 2013 in various towns near Udine a creature (a real monster) about 3 meters tall was sighted by many witnesses, it was called the Creature of Mortegliano (the town of the first sighting).
The same creature had appeared in Warsaw (if I'm not mistaken) several years earlier.
If it had happened in the US we would have talked about an alien invasion.
Instead the CUN ridiculed the ufologist who investigated (ex CUN) and no one spoke again.
If it was a Marian apparition there would be a sanctuary in Mortegliano with many pilgrimages.
Here it is like this, if you see something strange you are an idiot, if you see the Madonna you are a saint.

I think the phenomenon is very deceptive
There is probably nothing real in the witness accounts
The Kirkpatrick spheres could be the real actor, or another hoax

Jeremy and George misleading folks over new UFO footage?

a reply to: karl 12

in this video guessing he calls it all a scam. No?

originally posted by: karl 12
Jeremy and George misleading folks over new UFO footage?

It's not the first time Jeremy Corbell has misled us.

In his Netflix documentary on Bob Lazar, he also misled us about the reason for the FBI raid pretending that they intercepted a conversation about element 115, but, documents clearly show that the raid was planned before that conversation ever took place. The deception didn't end there. To try to support his fake story, Corbell showed screenshots of the alleged conversation, but he didn't fix all the dates which shows they are faked. That's explained with proof in this video:

I don't recommend believing anything Corbell says, as shown here:


Evidence of Corbell's deception doesn't end with Greenewald's video and Corbell's documentary. In another video, Corbell interviews the pilot Chad Underwood who made the tictac video, and almost every time he asks the pilot a question, he misrepresents what the skeptics (like Mick West) say about the video. For example, Corbell says something like "skeptics claim that the reason the UFO appears to shoot off to the left is because your plane is banking". Which is far as I can tell is a complete lie, I never heard any skeptic say that, that's not what skeptics say. So again apparently intentional misrepresentation by Corbell, over and over again, in this 3rd video, and I'm sure there are more examples besides those three:


Mick West starts going over Corbell's misleading questions to Underwood starting at about 55 seconds in that video, so I'm seeing a pattern here with Corbell misleading people.

originally posted by: karl 12
Jeremy and George misleading folks over new UFO footage?

*monetise your curiosity..
Sorry i mean weaponise.

another gold star for Greenwald.
Been solid all the way through this IMO.

a reply to: karl 12

Sir Michael 'De Bunker' West has also made a quick video (which also credits JG). It's hard to disagree with both of them in this case.



Seems that the George & Jeremy Show has done all it can to discredit ufology by hyping this sort of stuff continually. They had two years to verify this. This isn't investigative journalism. Jeremy is a man forever bearing grifts. He has learned well from his masters.

If you look at the big picture of "disclosure" you have the likes of LMH, Knapp, Bigalow, Jeremy, Zondo, Kmuth, Noory, etc.

Lots of "stare at goats" military people. curious....

originally posted by: mirageman
a reply to: karl 12

This isn't investigative journalism.

... investigative journalism (not reportage or sensationlisation) should make them more money than "UFO-logy".
Knapp CAN investigate non UFO stories adequately (it seems)- and JC does put together "watchable" media (although the rhetorical content is invariably crapola).

Who is the richest (income derived) UFO-logist- possibly Greer or Vallee?...and they are hardly ballin'.

Who could blame anyone for suspecting "sponsorship" - @Olaru12 too.

LMH is easily "triggered" when interviewed outside her comfy circle of sychophants and will go into a 10-15 monologue reciting her whole career when asked awkward questions. Hasn't really had a proper job since 1980ish either has she? But also has a few thousand followers of low intellect that she can monetize on her website and with videos of her cats.

Knapp claims he was recruited by "bartenders" to go to Vegas in 1979 from Berkeley. Where he has had basically the same job for over 40 years in his desert home. Except for a short time promoting the Yucca nuclear waste dump. Then went back to the same TV job again. One of Uncle Sam's favoured nephews? Or just a man who knows his audience and how to grift?

Bigelow - It's a real mystery how a man of such limited intellect made so much money under the shadow of the mob in 70s Vegas. But he has since worked closely with the spooks of the South West that led to AAWSAP.

Jeremy is a drifting grifter who has not only a non-existent degree in "Quantum Studies" but has experimented in careers such as balletic self-defence. He went on to collect trash from old demolished buildings. Passing it off as "art" and has held various exhibitions, including one of Sharon Tate's clothing. Finally becoming an amateur filmmaker, specializing in stories featuring himself, his kitchen and his tattoos. Sometimes sprinkled with cameo appearances by people like Bob Lazar. He recently purchased a $1.8m piece of property in Bajav, CA. Not bad work if you can get it.

The others are all more pawns in the game.

It seems strange that those promoting "disclosure" are not held accountable themselves when the present false information though, doesn't it?

a reply to: mirageman

Yes mate lots of seemingly 'positioned' folks these days (some who appeared the scene a few years back 'fully formed' despite no one ever having heard of them before) - these individuals also seem to receive far more than their fair share of attention from the Mockingbird corporate media.

Never really been impressed by any of the recently hyped content (perhaps that's the point) and would suggest that certain CIA 'Non Official Covers' are setting them up just so other CIA NCOs can knock them down - that's certainly what I would do if I wanted to bring the subject into further disrepute.

Probably no accident either that the recent Congressional hearings (Condon / Robertson 2.0) are wilfully ignoring all historical cases and aspects.

a reply to: mirageman

Agreed.
Caught a clip from TM z yesterday - (that show is good for seeing what ever agenda of the day is being promoted) and guess who was being interviewed about "the lights" but Corbell. It was a long-ish segment for that show - and heavy hype on the mystery of the latest set of lights in the sky .. J & Harvey hyped the "mystery" behind them... could there be aliens?
It was pathetic and hilarious at the same time.
Harvey said Fox did a doc w/Corbell and Knapp (think it was Knapp).
If anything it revealed to me fully the BS is getting really uh... smelly.

originally posted by: mirageman
LMH is easily "triggered" when interviewed outside her comfy circle of sychophants and will go into a 10-15 monologue reciting her whole career when asked awkward questions. Hasn't really had a proper job since 1980ish either has she? But also has a few thousand followers of low intellect that she can monetize on her website and with videos of her cats.

I think her channel earns around 700-900 dollars monthly. ( socialblade.com... )
She's very cunning, she often re-posts old videos to gain views. On youtube you can only earn with "followers of low intellect".
Her information is very confusing, maybe there is something interesting in her investigation but, I think, she didn't understand it.

Bigelow - It's a real mystery how a man of such limited intellect made so much money under the shadow of the mob in 70s Vegas. But he has since worked closely with the spooks of the South West that led to AAWSAP.

I agree, sometimes cunning and luck are more important than intelligence. The money allowed him to have a lot of contacts and a lot of informations. Difficult to figure out what he knows (or what he thinks to know) but I'd like to find out.

Jeremy is a drifting grifter who has not only a non-existent degree in "Quantum Studies" but has experimented in careers such as balletic self-defence. He went on to collect trash from old demolished buildings. Passing it off as "art" and has held various exhibitions, including one of Sharon Tate's clothing. Finally becoming an amateur filmmaker, specializing in stories featuring himself, his kitchen and his tattoos. Sometimes sprinkled with cameo appearances by people like Bob Lazar. He recently purchased a $1.8m piece of property in Bajav, CA. Not bad work if you can get it.

Honestly, I've never followed it, I can listen to it for a maximum of 5 minutes.
I think it's boring, unnecessarily verbose ...
However I thought he was an authoritative person for Americans

The others are all more pawns in the game.
It seems strange that those promoting "disclosure" are not held accountable themselves when the present false information though, doesn't it?

Difficult to understand who is really reliable, we can only count on sensations. I think Stephen Bassett is a sincere person but even honest people can make mistakes... unintentionally.
Maybe Jeremy and LMH aren't so sincere ...
I am very disappointed but is it only a problem of ufology?
Politics, science, military and intelligence… what can we really rely on?
Covid has shown how science is not totally reliable, it acts by trial and error
No, it's not a ufology problem... it's a human problem

originally posted by: gippo888
Difficult to understand who is really reliable, we can only count on sensations.

Sensations? Nope, see below.

I am very disappointed but is it only a problem of ufology?

Ufology is a huge problem, and other pseudoscience.

Read Jim Oberg's award winning essay from 1979, almost 44 years ago on specific issues with UFOlogy, and very little has changed in the last 44 years (except perhaps for the latest attempt by the Navy and probably the IC community to erase the history of UFOs by flooding the topic with analyses of more modern fuzzy military blobs, often promoted by the aforementioned grifters like Knapp and Corbell)

The failure of the 'science' of UFOlogy

The suspicion with which modern "establishment science" regards the UFO movement appears to be more closely connected with some disturbing characteristics of "ufology" itself. Although many negative feelings have, no doubt, been aroused by the crackpot aura with which the flying saucer movement has long been associated -- despite the best efforts of a few serious ufologists -- other criticism has been leveled at the very philosophical foundations of ufology. The inability of ufological theorists to come to grips with these objections represents the most serious roadblock to the acceptance of ufology as a legitimate branch of modern science.

The criticisms are essentially these: ufology allegedly refuses to play by the rules of scientific thought, demanding instead special exemptions from time-tested procedures of data verification, theory testing, and the burden of proof. Ufologists assert the existence of some extraordinary stimulus behind a small fraction of the tens of thousands of UFO reports on fil e. The cornerstone of the alleged proof is the undisputed observation that a small residue of such reports cannot at present be explained in terms of prosaic (if rare) phenomena. Yet this claim is invalid: it is clearly not logical to base the existence o f a positive ("true UFOs exist") on the grounds of a hypothetical negative ("no matter what the effort, some UFO reports cannot be explained").

He even gets into misinformation which I think might be a fair representation of Corbell's latest promotion of the "triangle" UFO that he spent 2 years researching, which if he really had spent that long researching it, he would have known it's 5 military flares and not 5 lights attached to a UFO half the size of a football field:

At the same time, most of what is commonly published about ufology is undeniably nonsense. UFO proponents such as Hynek are as adamant in the criticism of the media exploitation of UFO stories as any skeptic could be. For the publishing industry and the news media, UFO stories are good business; they combine human interest, comic relief, scary stories, and swipes at government cover-ups and know-it-all scientists. It is based on such misinformation (and not a little disinformation) that the vast majority of the public has formed its attitudes about UFOs. To say, then, that "most Americans believe in UFOs" is to testify not to the scientific credentials of ufology but to the effectiveness of the media mythmakers.

Few choose to look behind the myths.

There are a handful of people who genuinely look behind the myths, but instead of their truth-seeking being welcomed by supposed "UFO researchers", they are disparaged, called names, and not welcomed at all for suggesting they have explanations for some UFO topics. There are some big examples out there, like the Roswell Slides...a group of researchers exposed that scam and this kind of thing is sort of unique to UFOlogy.

The more recent example in the news is the "triangle UFO" promoted by Corbell and Knapp mentioned a few posts earlier. Mick West is not always right, he's human and makes mistakes like the rest of us, but his analyses are generally very good and he's willing to correct his mistakes if someone can point them out...so he's one of the few honestly trying to look behind the myths, and he gets called lots of names by UFOlogy. John Greenewald Jr is another researcher who meticulously collects documentation, and analyses it, which is a good starting point for getting to the truth. Again he's not right 100% of the time either, nobody is, but again he's generally looking for the truth. So if you want to know who to trust if you're seeking truth, those two researchers come to mind and they look into many current topics. If you wanted a bigger list of people that don't necessarily stay on top of every current topic, it would include people in the Roswell slides group and similar truth-seeking coalitions. But it's obvious by this latest episode that Corbell and Knapp are not seeking any kind of truth, they are promoting stories for entertainment purposes and to the extent the truth would kill or devalue their story, they avoid it like the plague.

Politics, science, military and intelligence… what can we really rely on?

The saying goes "scientists don't trust other scientists, they trust science". How does that make sense? Because scientists are people and people make mistakes, but the scientific process is one of review and trying to find mistakes though repeated experiments.

Covid has shown how science is not totally reliable, it acts by trial and error

That's medicine. It's a very complicated science because human health is not as repeatable as the behavior of more simple constructs, and there are a lot more variables. Eventually the truth can come out but there's a lot of money involved in big pharma which can bias motivations and results. So I don't agree that covid shows that science in general is flawed, it shows that medicine is complicated and has a lot of variables, and a bias for big pharma to pursue things that will make them big money.

No, it's not a ufology problem... it's a human problem

It's a problem with pseudoscience in general. UFOlogy is generally a pseudoscience. Even the organization called the Scientific Coalition for UFO Studies (SCU) is a pseudoscientific organization, because they ignore peer reviews showing the flaws in their flawed work. But again the article written 44 years ago about the lack of true science applied to UFOlogy mostly still applies today, the same problems exist in UFOlogy even though the cast of players has changed somewhat.

All these topics are problematic from a pseudoscientific perspective, but thank goodness for folks like Mick West, John Greenewald Jr, the Roswell Slides group, and similar who look past the myths and pseudoscience and try to do real research:

List of topics characterized as pseudoscience

a reply to: Arbitrageur

I agree with your analysis...
It is fair to say that science is a "process" and the conclusions of scientists can be wrong.
The important is to correct errors during the process
This is our way of evolving ...

However with ufology there are other problems ...
In science errors and scams are overcome. In ufology, errors and scams discredit everything.
Science studies inert subjects, who allow themselves to be studied.
Ufology studies an elusive phenomenon that appears deceptive, that demonstrates intelligence. Something that reacts to our attempt to understand.
Also it seems that intelligence is too interested in the UFO issue.
I think these problems have stopped the understanding process, we are stuck in the 40s.
Maybe we need to be a little more tolerant of mistakes but we certainly can't tolerate scammers.
Unfortunately in ufology even scammers could tell some truth.
But first we need to solve the "intelligence" problem. Intelligence must not hinder the search ...

Did not give me your opinion of Bassett ...
I'm Italian, I have bad English and I see everything from far away
My judgment of people is not thorough

originally posted by: gippo888
Did not give me your opinion of Bassett ...
I'm Italian, I have bad English and I see everything from far away
My judgment of people is not thorough

Bassett is a liar, if we are talking about the Bassett in this video:

ALIEN CHRONICLES (S1E10) - STEPHEN BASSETT - ALIEN AND UFO ENCOUNTERS

Here's what he says at 14 minutes in the video, which could be paraphrased slightly but it's very close:

I'm involved in the political resolution of what I prefer to call the "truth embargo" the government imposed on the facts regarding the extraterrestrial presence.
That presence has been established I think many times over by the citizen science research that's been going on since the '40s.

We are being engaged as a planet and as a species by other beings, possibly multiple species. This has been proven beyond any doubt at all.
Anyone who reads the research who isn't compromised by being an idiot or an employee of the govermnent management of the issue can only arrive at one conclusion.

By obvious implication you either agree with him that the evidence proves alien presence, or if not you are either an idiot or a government shill. I assure you I am not an idiot and not a government shill, and that I come to a different conclusion than him looking at the same evidence.

The evidence is overwhelming. Videotape, daylight disks, nighttime disks, photographs, direct pilot sightings by the thousands, direct testimony from direct government involvement, and of course you've got an entire contactee body of evidence that's now in the tens of thousands of reports.

The evidence is not overwhelming. If it was, there wouldn't be any debate about ET presence on Earth, everybody would know it. But, there are other explantions for the evidence.

To bring this discussion back on the topic of TTSA etc, TTSA kicked off their efforts by promoting a video called "TicTac" or "FLIR" made by pilot Chad Underwood, who later explained that the video shows a craft suddenly accelerating at the end, defying the laws of physics. Keep in mind that this is the kind of pilot testimony that apparently convinces Bassett of ET presence, among the other sources he mentions.

So no humans have tech that can accelelerate the way that video shows, so it must be ET, right? At least one might surmise this is the kind of unscientific reasoning used by Bassett and others who come to similar conclusions about ET presence.

First, even if the craft did make some "impossible acceleration", that doesn't mean it's alien. There is classified weapons research and we've had discussion here on ATS about possible tech that might create such impossible maneuvers, so it's not even necessarily beyond human capacity.

Second, and perhaps most importantly, the video that the pilot says shows an object accelerating suddenly shows that every eyewitness, no matter how apparently credible, can not be relied on to have accurate perceptions. While the video does show perhaps an "apparent" sudden acceleration, this is an illusion and in fact the object doesn't accelerate at all. What we have are highly qualified pilots with such advanced technology that they don't even understand the technology they are using sufficiently to interpret it properly as a careful analysis will show, as explained here by Mick West, who unlike the pilot, does interpret the video correctly:

So, this is just one example of a video promoted by TTSA that shows why we can't take what pilots say at face value, which is apparently what Steve Bassett does to claim the evidence of ET presence on Earth is "overwhelming".

In fact the scientific perspective is that all human observations and memories are subject to well researched flaws, which perhaps Bassett is blissfully unaware of if he places so much weight on testimony from humans. So we really need better evidence than a video showing something darting off, if we are going to claim it's alien (and it doesn't really even dart off in that video, the "darting off" is an illusion).

Steve Bassett mentions in that video that he and Michael Salla are proponents of exopolitics, which is really a very silly thing given we still have no convincing evidence of ET. According to the Rational Wiki, Salla invented the silly exopolitics thing and it's not exactly rational:

Michael Salla

Michael Emin Salla (1958–) is a pseudoscholar and ufologist who created the branch of wingnuttery known as exopolitics. According to this fantasy, extraterrestrial intelligence has been involved in human affairs since at least the 1950s, and various treaties exist governing human/alien relations.

Bassett didn't create that branch of "wingnuttery", but otherwise he says he's promoting that and so is Michael Salla.

If you want to have a scientist's understading of how to consider UFO evidence for ET, and why eyewitness testimony is not considered scientifically reliable, this video features Neil DeGrasse Tyson explaining these things:

Some key points in the video:

4:58 Tyson
All of what has been put forth as evidence for aliens to me is insufficient evidence to excite my interest, my research interest, to devote my time in finding it out. But it definitely has excited other people.

5:42 narrator
But we've seen the spark of interest in UFOs only in recent years, with the surge of countless UFO footage. It should be obvious that they are not sufficient evidence to state we've been visited by aliens.

5:59 Tyson explaining how scientific skepticism works and why eyewitnesses are not considered a source of reliable evidence.
-Argument from Ignorance (I don't know what it is, therefore it must be aliens)
-We know that the lowest form of evidence is eyewitness testimony
-We have high opinions of our human biology when in fact we should not (we are poor data taking devices)

So as Tyson says, maybe we ARE being visited by extraterrestrials. It's possible. But the evidence does not justify the conclusion Bassett makes that we defintely are being visited by ET.

a reply to: Arbitrageur
I understand your opinion but I think you are too strict.
I hope I can explain myself in English ...
Bassett, the Bassett in the video is the only one I know, dedicated his life to UFOs. Does that justify his lies? No but it depends on the lies.
Old ufologists like Bassett have fought a thousand battles (always lost) and know that you have to "exaggerate" to be heard.
He's not lying, he's just screaming to be heard, he's using arguments recognized by public opinion.
This is ufological politics, the habit of old ufologists ...
I think the statements, which you have shown, are to be regarded in this way. You should talk to him... mirageman should talk to Elizondo too.
I don't mean that we have to justify everything, for example the episode you have illustrated (Jeremy and George) is not justifiable.

I'll give you two examples of UFO politics

- In the 60s/70s/80s very few ufologist spoke of a UFO threat, in the newage era the aliens had to be good and beautiful otherwise no one would listen to you.

- Now Elizondo, Mellon, Delonge ... the TTSA talks about a "UFO threat" to gain political consensus and put pressure on the Pentagon. It worked !!!
Do you think that Elizondo and Mellon are convinced that we are facing an alien threat?? I do not think ...

a reply to: gippo888

Ufology studies an elusive phenomenon that appears deceptive, that demonstrates intelligence. Something that reacts to our attempt to understand.

I think the problem here is trying to explain everything that ufology has become as one single "phenomenon".

Ufology is the study of unidentified flying objects. If someone sees a bright circular object in the sky that they cannot identify it is a UFO until or unless it is identified. If further evidence shows that Venus was in the sky at that very same position at the time of the sighting, then you have pretty much solved the mystery. That does not mean every UFO sighting is the planet Venus.

But various fringe groups have seen ufology as a means to promote their own imaginative (or deluded) versions of reality. We have to entertain the magical thinkers, people promoting psychedelic drugs, new age religions, $cientology, metaphysics, LARPS, mentally ill people and outright charlatans. Add to that the machinations of intel agencies muddying the waters.

So In ufology we are dealing with a huge number of different 'phenomena' and one explanation cannot explain all.