NSA Releases UFO Files Reveals “Alien Messages”

bdmay25
reply to post by SheopleNation

 

Stop bickering and read MY post.

Everyone read it. No one replied, because it's hard to do so tactfully. Do you seriously think there is a some kind of "hidden key" in the imperfectly OCRed bits of an old document, or are you satirizing the very people who think the document itself is anything other than an exercise and keep making new threads about it?

Propulsion
I thought the NSA were aliens...

Just some of them.

Here is a cipher frequency exercise I found in PDF on the net. Again, the code is in letters.

Caesar Cipher

In cryptography, a Caesar cipher, also known as Caesar's cipher, the shift cipher, Caesar's code or Caesar shift, is one of the simplest and most widely known encryption techniques. It is a type of substitution cipher in which each letter in the plaintext is replaced by a letter some fixed number of positions down the alphabet. For example, with a left shift of 3, D would be replaced by A, E would become B, and so on. The method is named after Julius Caesar, who used it in his private correspondence.

The encryption step performed by a Caesar cipher is often incorporated as part of more complex schemes, such as the Vigenère cipher, and still has modern application in the ROT13 system. As with all single alphabet substitution ciphers, the Caesar cipher is easily broken and in modern practice offers essentially no communication security.

Keyword Cipher

A keyword cipher is a form of monoalphabetic substitution. A keyword is used as the key, and it determines the letter matchings of the cipher alphabet to the plain alphabet. Repeats of letters in the word are removed, then the cipher alphabet is generated with the keyword matching to A,B,C etc. until the keyword is used up, whereupon the rest of the ciphertext letters are used in alphabetical order, excluding those already used in the key

The best ways to attack a keyword cipher without knowing the keyword are through known-plaintext attack, frequency analysis and discovery of the keyword (often a cryptanalist will combine all three techniques). Keyword discovery allows immediate decryption since the table can be made immediately.

Vigenere Cipher

The Vigenère cipher is a method of encrypting alphabetic text by using a series of different Caesar ciphers based on the letters of a keyword. It is a simple form of polyalphabetic substitution.

reply to post by bdmay25


Just quote where I have expressed any kind of anger towards you whatsoever. Try backing up your accusations at least if you're going to make them.

You replied to a poster and I's friendly discussion. You obviously have a reading comprehension problem, and you're trolling this thread while masquerading as if you're not. Just stay on topic.

There IS something to what Ive discovered although I dont really care to crack any codes but I firmly believe that I discovered the true key to this test.

If you don't care to crack any codes, what is your point then? You're not making any sense here. ~$heopleNation

reply to post by SheopleNation


Ill run it past your face one more time, I thought I found a "key" and wanted to share it. You dummy, finding a key and sharing is NOT the same as wanting to crack ANYTHING. Your ego seems quite inflated enough and I will not allow you to feed upon myself with your rudeness.
Why do you feel like I was talking to you in the first place? Looking through a few of your past posts and it seems you have the need to talk down to others or talk completely off topic instead of contributing anything of use. Seriously give youtube comments a try, you WILL fit right in. I will not fall victim to your troll bait.

Im not saying this is an actual alien communications document but Im not saying its a test either, I have NO way of really knowing what it really is but I KNOW what I see right in front of me and for some idiotic reason I thought there were people capable of appreciating what I had to say.

FurvusRexCaeli

bdmay25
reply to post by SheopleNation

 

Stop bickering and read MY post.

Everyone read it. No one replied, because it's hard to do so tactfully. Do you seriously think there is a some kind of "hidden key" in the imperfectly OCRed bits of an old document, or are you satirizing the very people who think the document itself is anything other than an exercise and keep making new threads about it?

YES I seriously think there is a hidden key. I took the time to screen shot my page, explain to others how to highlight it the way I did and typed out the first page message for others. I personally dont think the key would be written in plain sight the way some think it is as by highlighting it, ALL pages leave a more comprehensive key than the entire document combined. Im not satirizing anything here.

"Oh, and you claim that you don't really care to crack any codes, yet you claim that you did, and that you have "figured out the key to the test"? LMAO!!! Oh man, they "

Give it a rest sheeplenation, you state nothing but lies and petty attempts as making me sound like I'm contradicting myself. I'm not. This is a simple case of you projecting your thoughts and emotions towards a stranger and you honestly have no reason to.

reply to post by bdmay25


Calm down Jr. You know? Half the time It seems that you don't even know who you're responding to.

Don't come unhinged now, nobody is out to get you. Just stick to the topic, it's not about me or you no matter how much you like me.

You claim to have the key to the code, yet you can't open the door? = Epic Fail bro. ~$heopleNation

reply to post by SheopleNation


shove it up your donought hole you fat lonely old troll.

bdmay25
reply to post by SheopleNation

 

shove it up your donought hole you fat lonely old troll.

edit on 16-9-2013 by bdmay25 because: (no reason given)

edit on 16-9-2013 by bdmay25 because: (no reason given)

What is a donought hole?

whyamIhere
What is a donought hole?

That is what I was trying to figure out? All I asked him was to crack the code because he said he had the key to it.

Then he came completely unhinged about a simple discussion. His lid finally blew like a FNG pressure cooker, and twice for that matter! LMAO! Oh well, life goes on I guess. ~$heopleNation

SadistNocturne

MrInquisitive
That said, the article/paper cited is, I believe, the second or later in a series of journal articles by the same researcher, the point of which is how one would decipher messages from aliens from space, or even recognize that any given signals were actually messages. In other words, it is a theoretical article, and is not talking about actual messages received/observed.

Alright, I read the whole document.

That simply did not "feel" like something to be used as a training exercise.

It had no "SECRET" or "TOP SECRET" stamp on it, but it *was* classified nonetheless.

I feel that dismissing it as an exercise is myopic.

- SN

Did you go and look at the first article, which is cited in this paper? It is very clear that this was an exercise. From what I saw of the paper cited in this thread, this is the follow-up paper to the first one that is clearly an exercise. It is not worth my time to go back and find the earlier paper again for yours and others' edification. Like I said, I already did so once. It's not hard to do. If you want to believe this is exposing some super-duper-top-secret message from aliens that the NSA has kept secret until now, be my guest. I could care less.

As for calling me myopic for my having researched this once before and ascertaining that it was merely an academic exercise, well that's just true-believer tunnel vision.

Edit:

Here, out of pity for the people who are either too lazy or incapable of back-searching to find the original article, here is a link to it (it took me all of two minutes -- at most -- to find it via google):

Original article by Lambros D Callimahos, which is the basis of the later articles including the one cited in the OP

@SadistNocturne,

The fact that you didn't search this article out, and base your claims solely on the third-generation article cited here and called my comment "myopic", says everything that needs to be known about your intellectual rigorousness and critical thinking abilities.

impaired
reply to post by Cosmic911

 

The fact that this thread gets that many stars and blind believers is the main reason I don't even come here anymore.

No kidding. "Deny (one's) ignorance" is the working slogan here.

There's been past threads on this and the story has been debunked, but the wanna-believers just keep grasping at these debunked straws.

People see some article, and don't know how to analyze/comprehend it, yet they make some specious claim about it being evidence of E.T. contact. That is the problem with about 95% of the material posted here regarding at ATS regarding UFO's, ET's, etc.

MrInquisitive

impaired
reply to post by Cosmic911

 

The fact that this thread gets that many stars and blind believers is the main reason I don't even come here anymore.

No kidding. "Deny (one's) ignorance" is the working slogan here.

There's been past threads on this and the story has been debunked, but the wanna-believers just keep grasping at these debunked straws.

People see some article, and don't know how to analyze/comprehend it, yet they make some specious claim about it being evidence of E.T. contact. That is the problem with about 95% of the material posted here regarding at ATS regarding UFO's, ET's, etc.

edit on 17-9-2013 by MrInquisitive because: (no reason given)

I'm not quite sure any of the posters in this thread really believe these documents are evidence of extraterrestrial contact. People may not have understood the objective of the exercise, but more than likely they thought it was interesting nonetheless. While it's not evidence of anything E.T., they are unique and interesting to anyone interested in the UFO subject.

MrInquisitive
Did you go and look at the first article, which is cited in this paper? It is very clear that this was an exercise. From what I saw of the paper cited in this thread, this is the follow-up paper to the first one that is clearly an exercise. It is not worth my time to go back and find the earlier paper again for yours and others' edification. Like I said, I already did so once. It's not hard to do. If you want to believe this is exposing some super-duper-top-secret message from aliens that the NSA has kept secret until now, be my guest. I could care less.

As for calling me myopic for my having researched this once before and ascertaining that it was merely an academic exercise, well that's just true-believer tunnel vision.

Edit:

Here, out of pity for the people who are either too lazy or incapable of back-searching to find the original article, here is a link to it (it took me all of two minutes -- at most -- to find it via google):

Original article by Lambros D Callimahos, which is the basis of the later articles including the one cited in the OP

@SadistNocturne,

The fact that you didn't search this article out, and base your claims solely on the third-generation article cited here and called my comment "myopic", says everything that needs to be known about your intellectual rigorousness and critical thinking abilities.

edit on 17-9-2013 by MrInquisitive because: (no reason given)

M Y O P I C much ?

Get over yourself, pal...I didn't direct that comment specifically at you.


- SN

SadistNocturne


M Y O P I C much ?

Get over yourself, pal...I didn't direct that comment specifically at you.

- SN

Oh, is that why you quoted my comment about this article being an exercise and then wrote this:

Alright, I read the whole document.

That simply did not "feel" like something to be used as a training exercise.

It had no "SECRET" or "TOP SECRET" stamp on it, but it *was* classified nonetheless.

I feel that dismissing it as an exercise is myopic.

- SN

How silly of me to assume you were addressing me just because you quoted what I wrote and then responded to it in your post. I pointed out that the primary article being discussed here is one of an ongoing series of ones about an academic exercise, and you then write that dismissing it as an exercise is myopic. Then when I provide the sources to the earlier articles that validate what I said, and I take you to task for calling my point myopic, you then regurgitate your MYOPIC ad hominem attack. Well played, pal.

MrInquisitive

SadistNocturne


M Y O P I C much ?

Get over yourself, pal...I didn't direct that comment specifically at you.

- SN

Oh, is that why you quoted my comment about this article being an exercise and then wrote this:

Alright, I read the whole document.

That simply did not "feel" like something to be used as a training exercise.

It had no "SECRET" or "TOP SECRET" stamp on it, but it *was* classified nonetheless.

I feel that dismissing it as an exercise is myopic.

- SN

How silly of me to assume you were addressing me just because you quoted what I wrote and then responded to it in your post. I pointed out that the primary article being discussed here is one of an ongoing series of ones about an academic exercise, and you then write that dismissing it as an exercise is myopic. Then when I provide the sources to the earlier articles that validate what I said, and I take you to task for calling my point myopic, you then regurgitate your MYOPIC ad hominem attack. Well played, pal.

Wow, you...ahem...*got me*...you figured out my entire plan. STAND DOWN, I repeat STAND DOWN...

Don't worry, no further harm will come to your psyche!


- SN

reply to post by nucleardoom


I'll do it. I'm already likely known to them.

See: www.abovetopsecret.com...

whyamIhere
I'm confused...That doc. Is unreadble at best and laughable at worst.

There are people here that could possibly make some sense out of it.

I was hoping for a real message, boy am I dumb.

Doc is appears to be the use of a decryption key applied to an extraterrestrial message received via radio. What is not known is whether this message was an elaborate decryption exercise or a real message.

I tend to lean on the idea of this being an exercise since nothing regarding the signals place of origin (other than "outer space") is specified nor are there any technical details provided as to the nature of the receiver or reception site.

If a signal arrived from somewhere in space then there would have to be various ground stations handing off the monitoring of it so as to have 24/7 coverage. Any gaps in this coverage might cause them to miss a key part of the message unless it was repeating.

There's nothing that refers to ground station handoff here.

Still could be genuine but we need more evidence that this wasn't a code breaking exercise.

reply to post by SheopleNation


You are delusional and nothing more than a digital manifestation of your ego and pain body.
I hope your real self is not the same as it can cause a very unhappy life.