Those who promote unsubstantiated UFO claims or UFO “artifacts”

THOSE WHO PROMOTE UNSUBSTANTIATED UFO CLAIMS OR UFO “ARTIFACTS”.

-from Robert Sheaffer:

(QUOTE)

“In 2013, there was a UFO discussion panel held at the The National Atomic Testing Museum in Las Vegas.

They had a special exhibit on “Area 51.”

During the question and answer session, Las Vegas skeptic John Whiteside asked about the supposed “authentic alien artifact” in the Area 51 exhibit.

The moderator referred the question to reporter George Knapp, in the audience, who  (scandalously)  was the source of that “artifact.”

Knapp, a debonair raconteur, has made a career out of reporting on weird stuff like alleged saucers at Area 51  (peddling the unsubstantiated claims of Bob Lazar),  Robert Bigelow’s Haunted Ranch in Utah, etc.

Who had verified that supposed artifact?

The Russians, and others?  Who exactly?  No answer.

The moderator encouraged the two to take the discussion off-line afterwards.

Immediately after the close of the questions, Whiteside says he was approached by Jim Brown who identified himself as the Acting Director of the Museum.

Brown berated him for asking such a question, claiming that it threatened their funding.

If a Museum’s funding is threatened by asking a legitimate question, the fault lies not with the questioner, but with the Museum.

Whiteside went looking for George Knapp after this, no more than five minutes later, to find that he had quietly slipped out the door.

I’m thinking it’s very likely that this was one of the same “UFO artifacts” that Robert Bigelow had.  If so, one would scarcely need to modify any buildings to house it.”

(UNQUOTE)

Thanks, once again, to Robert Sheaffer.

As I stated elsewhere many many times, I am a realist who believe that the UFO phenomenon itself seems to be real.

But to me, UFOs do not constitute conclusive evidence of physical extraterrestrial visitations by physical extraterrestrial, biological entities in physical extraterrestrial spacecraft of any kind.

There may be more to this phenomenon than physical ET hypothesis.

I am also highly skeptical of the existence of authentic UFO artifacts.

………

Norio Hayakawa’s CIVILIAN INTELLIGENCE NEWS SERVICE

E-mail = noriohayakawa@gmail.com

Facebook = http://www.facebook.com/fernandon.hayakawa

Norio Hayakawa’s YouTube Channel

Five reasons to be skeptical about that New York Times UFO story – – December 20, 2017

“In a shameless attempt to help Tom DeLonge’s money for his music company called TO THE STARS ACADEMY, the New York Times released this so-called UFO video.  It’s being paraded by UFO “elites” like George Tsukalous, George Knapp and Nick Pope.  They’re claiming it’s evidence of aliens.” – – Tim Doyle, UFO SEEKERS, December 21, 2017

by Stephen Pope, FLYING  MAGAZINE – – December 20, 2017

https://www.flyingmag.com/five-reasons-to-be-skeptical-about-that-new-york-times-ufo-story

(QUOTE)

That New York Times story about a secret government UFO program and close encounters between Navy airmen and unexplained flying objects over the vast Pacific Ocean reads like a science fiction story.

Which was how the paper wanted it.

Scratch beneath the veneer of the borderline-sensationalist reporting and we’re left with many more head-scratching questions than answers.

The eyewitness account of former F/A-18 Super Hornet pilot David Fravor is certainly intriguing  – – and yet he wasn’t even a part of the original Times story, which focused on the money trail behind the UFO hunting effort and interviews with those who are “absolutely convinced” that aliens exist and that UFOs have visited Earth.

The Times story touched off a flurry of breathless reporting by media outlets around the world, most of which seem to have failed to notice that the Times’ original reporting has some major problems with it.

(According to the GODDARDS JOURNAL, many major media are falsely associating this footage — the Gimbal footage — with the witness account of pilot David Fravor, involved in a different case known as the USS Nimitz case. [1,2] 

There is no supplementary testimony from the pilots heard in this video.

According to the NY Times, the date and location of this footage has not been revealed by the DoD.

In contrast, the date and location of the Nimitz case in which pilot Fravor was involved is well known.

The site of the group (TO THE STARS) that is promoting the footage in this video as evidence of extraterrestrials clearly distinguishes it from the 2004 Nimitz case.

About the UFO footage in this video, The New York Times says: “Defense officials declined to release the location and date of the incident.”

In contrast, the location and date of the USS Nimitz case pilot David Fravor was involved in is known. [2] So the target seen in this video cannot be from the same case about which Fravor testifies.

[1] http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/USS_Nimitz_UFO_incident

[2] http://www.nytimes.com/2017/12/16/us/politics/unidentified-flying-object-navy.html)

(CLICK TO ENLARGE ABOVE PHOTOS, courtesy of Mick West, METABUNK. ORG – – “To me the Nimitz footage seems consistent with (>50 miles away) plane flying away from the camera.  It looks very similar to the proven example of the same thing as previously explained Chilean Navy UFO video footage)

Now back to the New York Times erroneous news article:

HERE ARE FIVE OF THE MOST GLARING:

  1. The Pentagon didn’t release those UFO videos, an official connected to a Las Vegas company who resigned in October did.  (Senator Harry Reid of Nevada, as well as Luis Elizondo, supporter of Tom DeLonge’s TO THE STARS ACADEMY OF THE ARTS AND SCIENCES)

The New York Times story makes it seem as though the release of the videos came from high-level government officials, glossing over the information that the disclosures were actually spearheaded by an official who led the Pentagon’s relatively small UFO hunting program and who has since resigned to join a Las Vegas company called  TO THE STARS ACADEMY OF THE ARTS AND SCIENCES  that is seeking private funding for more UFO research.  That’s a major distinction that most in the media appear to be ignoring since the original Times report appeared.

  1. The Pentagon UFO program’s prime contractor  (Bigelow Aerospace) claims to possess mysterious metal alloys that exhibit mystical powers — but won’t show them to anyone.

Bigelow Aerospace, Nevada-based company, which received most of the Pentagon funding for the UFO research project, reportedly collected mysterious alloys from UFOs that physically affected people who interacted with them.  Never mind there are obvious conflicts of interest between Bigelow Aerospace’s billionaire founder Robert Bigelow and his friend, former Nevada Sen. Harry Reid, who pushed for the $22 million in funding for the government’s UFO program in the first place – –  what we want to know is, why all the continued secrecy surrounding these alloys and other UFO findings?

(for more on Robert Bigelow, click the following about:  Eccentric billionaire executive Robert Bigelow claims “Aliens are here on Earth”)

  1. One of the authors of the Times article wrote a book about UFOs and doesn’t even work for the paper.

After its UFO story appeared in its Sunday edition, the Times divulged that one of the bylined authors wasn’t an employee of the paper but rather is a UFO hunter named Leslie Kean who has written a book on the subject with a forward by John Podesta, another well-known UFO conspiracy theorist who used to throw “X Files” viewing parties in the White House when he worked there during the Clinton years.  In fact, not only did Kean help write the article, she was the one who pitched the story to the Times in the first place.  At best, shouldn’t she merely have been interviewed for the story?  Why was she permitted to be a part of the writing and vetting process?

  1. In one of the videos, a Navy airman says “That’s a [bleeping] drone.” Why are we doubting him?

In the only UFO video released with pilot audio accompanying it, a Navy airman describes the object he is following as a “drone.”:

(CLICK TO ENLARGE ABOVE SEGMENT)

The object does not appear to do anything particularly unusual in this video.  Nobody claims that the object did anything unusual.   The Pentagon won’t even say where and when the video was shot.  Was it a drone?

(It could have been anything, with no conclusive evidence of anything.)

  1. There are plausible explanations for these videos and eyewitness accounts.  Where is the rest of the evidence?

Far from proving that our planet has been visited by aliens in aerodynamically advanced space craft, the videos and eyewitness accounts that emerged in the Times story and elsewhere merely provide a starting point for further investigation and inevitably lead to more questions.  That’s what makes all of the secrecy and intrigue still surrounding this story so frustrating for the public.  The New York Times has dangled this carrot in front of the world, and now leaves us all wondering if the people who claim to know more will ever divulge that information, or merely continue to direct us to the “Donate Here” buttons on their websites.

(UNQUOTE)

And finally, if you would like to see an in-depth discussion on all this, please go to:

Mick West, METABUNK:

“To me, this Nimitz footage seems consistent with (>50 miles away) plane flying away from the camera.  It looks VERY similar to the proven example of the same thing as a previously explained Chilean Navy UFO video footages”:

https://www.metabunk.org/2004-uss-nimitz-tic-tac-ufo-flir-footage.t9190/

……..

Norio Hayakawa’s CIVILIAN INTELLIGENCE NEWS SERVICE

E-mail = noriohayakawa@gmail.com

Facebook = http://www.facebook.com/fernandon.hayakawa

Norio Hayakawa’s YouTube Channel

Those who promote unsubstantiated UFO “artififacts”

(ABOVE, Lee Spiegel’s photo of the supposed “Authentic Alien Artifact” in the Area 51 exhibit of the National Atomic Testing Museum in Las Vegas, Nevada – 2013)

December 24, 2017 – courtesy of Robert Sheaffer: http://badufos.blogspot.com

(QUOTE):

In the days since that New York Times story  (of December 16, 2017)  burst on the scene, attention is starting to turn to the following puzzling lines in that story:

By now, everybody knows that contracts obtained by The Times show a congressional appropriation of just under $22 million beginning in late 2008 through 2011.  The money was used for management of the program, research and assessments of the threat posed by the objects.

The funding went to Robert Bigelow’s company, Bigelow Aerospace, which hired subcontractors and solicited research for the program.

But, according to the New York Times story, under Mr. Bigelow’s direction, the company modified buildings in Las Vegas for the storage of metal alloys and other materials that Mr. Elizondo and program contractors said had been recovered from unidentified aerial phenomena.

Bigelow’s company modified buildings in Las Vegas for the storage of artifacts gathered from UFOs? 

That does not seem to be possible, but that is exactly what the Times story says.

How many tons of alleged UFO artifacts must Bigelow have to need to modify buildings to store it?

– – – – –

By the way, in 2013, there was a UFO discussion panel held at the The National Atomic Testing Museum in Las Vegas. They had a special exhibit on “Area 51.”

During the question and answer session, Las Vegas skeptic John Whiteside asked about the supposed “authentic alien artifact” in the Area 51 exhibit.

The moderator referred the question to reporter George Knapp, in the audience, who (scandalously)  was the source of that “artifact.”

Knapp has made a career out of reporting on weird stuff like alleged saucers at Area 51, Robert Bigelow’s Haunted Ranch in Utah, etc.

Who had verified that supposed artifact?

The Russians, and others.  Who exactly?  No answer.

The moderator encouraged the two to take the discussion off-line afterwards.

Immediately after the close of the questions, Whiteside says he was approached by Jim Brown who identified himself as the Acting Director of the Museum.

Brown berated him for asking such a question, claiming that it threatened their funding.

If a Museum’s funding is threatened by asking a legitimate question, the fault lies not with the questioner, but with the Museum.  Whiteside went looking for George Knapp after this, no more than five minutes later, to find that he had quietly slipped out the door.

I’m thinking it’s very likely that this was one of the same “UFO artifacts” that Bigelow had.  If so, one would scarcely need to modify any buildings to house it.

(UNQUOTE)

Thanks, once again, to Robert Sheaffer.

As I stated elsewhere many many times, I am a realist who believe that the UFO phenomenon itself seems to be real.   But to me, UFOs do not represent conclusive evidence of physical extraterrestrial visitations by physical extraterrestrial, biological entities in physical extraterrestrial spacecraft of any kind.  There is more to this phenomenon than the ET hypothesis.  I am also highly skeptical of the existence of authentic UFO artifacts.

……..

Norio Hayakawa’s CIVILIAN INTELLIGENCE NEWS SERVICE

E-mail = noriohayakawa@gmail.com

Facebook = http://www.facebook.com/fernandon.hayakawa

Pentagon’s unjustified UFO research “funding” revealed – – a total waste of our hard-earned tax dollars

This is what I call a total waste of our hard-earned tax-dollars.
Most of the $22 million  (our hard-earned tax dollars)  spent on this program went to an aerospace research company run by Harry Reid’s friend, eccentric billionaire Robert Bigelow.

Sure, $22 million may be a small amount to some folks, but to us regular tax-paying citizens, $22 million is still $22 million.  The government owes us more detailed explanation than this.

(No one can say that the UFO phenomenon itself is not real.   In fact, I believe that the phenomenon seems to be real.  But the way to get to the bottom of this mystery has not been really efficient.)

Harry Reid initiated the program, which ultimately spent more than $20 million, through an earmark after he was persuaded in part by eccentric aerospace titan and hotel chain founder Robert Bigelow, a friend and fellow Nevadan who owns Bigelow Aerospace, a space technology company and government contractor.  Bigelow, whose company received the bulk of the research contracts, was also a regular contributor to Reid’s reelection campaigns, campaign finance records show, at least $10,000 from 1998 to 2008.  Bigelow has spoken openly in recent years about his views that extraterrestrial visitors frequently travel to Earth.  He also purchased the Skinwalker Ranch in Utah, the subject of intense interest among believers in UFOs.  Reid and Bigelow did not respond to multiple requests for comment.”  – Bryan Bender, POLITICO MAGAZINE, December 16, 2017.

A bad picture – – after spending $22 million of our hard-earned tax dollars, all we get is another “vintage” fuzzy video of a fuzzy object  (which could have been anything),  with no conclusive evidence of anything.  In a shameless attempt to help Tom DeLonge’s TO THE STARS ACADEMY, the New York Times released this meaningless video.  It’s being paraded by UFO “elites” like George Tsukalous, George Knapp and Nick Pope.  They’re all claiming it’s evidence of aliens.  We should call it a theft of our hard-earned tax dollars, giving our money to a private firm run by eccentric billionaire and UFO believer, Robert Bigelow:

By the way, the Pentagon didn’t release those UFO videos, an official connected to a Las Vegas company who resigned in October did.  (Senator Harry Reid of Nevada, as well as Luis Elizondo, supporter of Tom DeLonge’s TO THE STARS ACADEMY OF THE ARTS AND SCIENCES)

(According to the GODDARDS JOURNAL, many major media are falsely associating this footage — the Gimbal footage — with the witness account of pilot David Fravor, involved in a different case known as the USS Nimitz case. [1,2] 

There is no supplementary testimony from the pilots heard in this video.

According to the NY Times, the date and location of this footage has not been revealed by the DoD.

In contrast, the date and location of the Nimitz case in which pilot Fravor was involved is well known.

The site of the group (TO THE STARS) that is promoting the footage in this video as evidence of extraterrestrials clearly distinguishes it from the 2004 Nimitz case.

About the UFO footage in this video, The New York Times says: “Defense officials declined to release the location and date of the incident.”

In contrast, the location and date of the USS Nimitz case pilot David Fravor was involved in is known. [2] So the target seen in this video cannot be from the same case about which Fravor testifies.

[1] http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/USS_Nimitz_UFO_incident

[2] http://www.nytimes.com/2017/12/16/us/politics/unidentified-flying-object-navy.html)

(CLICK TO ENLARGE ABOVE PHOTOS, courtesy of Mick West, METABUNK. ORG – – “To me the Nimitz footage seems consistent with (>50 miles away) plane flying away from the camera.  It looks very similar to the proven example of the same thing as previously explained Chilean Navy UFO video footage)

As far as the TO THE STARS Gimbal footages are concerned, it could have been anything:

It could have been anything, with no conclusive evidence of anything.

———-

by Laura Italiano, NEW YORK POST – – December 16, 2017:  https://nypost.com/2017/12/16/pentagons-search-for-ufos-revealed/

(QUOTE)

For five years, from 2007 to 2012, the Pentagon ran a $22 million program that investigated reports of UFOs.

The “Advanced Aviation Threat Identification Program” was the brainchild of Sen. Harry Reid, (D-Nevada) who was then the Senate majority leader, according to Politico and the New York Times, which broke the news of the program Saturday, December 16, 2017.

The program investigated accounts by military personnel and commercial pilots who witnessed unidentified aircraft that appeared to move or hover without visible signs of propulsion or lift, the reports said.

One of the sightings investigated had been captured on videotape, released in August, showing a white oval object the size of a commercial plane as it was chased by a pair of Navy fighter jets off of San Diego in 2004, the Times said.

And while funding ended five years ago, officials who worked on the program and now have other positions in the Pentagon continue to investigate accounts of unexplained aircraft phenomenon brought to them by military service members, the Times said.

The reports did not say what, if anything, has come of the program’s investigations, beyond the drafting of classified documents describing the phenomenon.

“I’m not embarrassed or ashamed or sorry I got this thing going,” Reid, who retired from Congress this year, told the Times.

“I think it’s one of the good things I did in my congressional service. I’ve done something that no one has done before.”

Most of the $22 million spent on the program went to an aerospace research company run by Reid’s friend and fellow Nevadan, Robert Bigelow, the Times said.  Bigelow, a devout believer that aliens have visited Earth, is currently working with NASA on producing space modules for human use.

READ THE FOLLOWING ARTICLE:

Eccentric billionaire executive Robert Bigelow claims “Aliens are here on Earth”

And finally, if you would like to see an in-depth discussion on all this, please go to:

Mick West, METABUNK:

“To me, this Nimitz footage seems consistent with (>50 miles away) plane flying away from the camera.  It looks VERY similar to the proven example of the same thing as a previously explained Chilean Navy UFO video footages”:

https://www.metabunk.org/2004-uss-nimitz-tic-tac-ufo-flir-footage.t9190/

…….

Norio Hayakawa’s CIVILIAN INTELLIGENCE NEWS SERVICE

E-mail = noriohayakawa@gmail.com

Facebook = http://www.facebook.com/fernandon.hayakawa

Norio Hayakawa’s YouTube Channel

 

Amazing “lunarscape” areas near Rio Rancho, New Mexico

(CLICK ABOVE PHOTO FOR ENLARGEMENT – – going inside the “lunarscape” area, photo taken on December 13, 2017, 3 p.m., temperature 52 degrees F, 11 degrees C) 

New Mexico is truly a Land of Enchantment.

There are so many amazing wonderland of nature.

And you don’t have to drive too far from the city to get to these “hidden spots”.

Just about 20 miles northwest from the City Hall of Rio Rancho is a wonderland called the White Ridges, located between the Ojito Wilderness and White Mesa.   It is located inside the BLM/Zia Pueblo land.

Here are the directions to get to this area:

Go north on Unser Blvd. (passing the City Hall) and make a left on Hwy 550.

Just before you get to San Ysidro, make a left at Cabezon Road, a dirt road.

Take the left fork where it says White Ridges Bike Trail.  This dirt road is called the Cabezon Road.

Keep on going for a couple of miles or so.  Soon you will see a gravel parking lot on the left side.

You can park your vehicle here and simply start walking towards the fascinating formations towards the hills.

You also walk westward on the Cabezon dirt road.  Soon you will see other amazing formations on your right side:

(CLICK ABOVE PHOTO FOR ENLARGEMENT – – photo taken on December 13, 2017, 3 p.m., temperature 52 degrees F, 11 degrees C)

Or, you can just keep on driving for a half a mile or so and you will get to another gravel parking lot, this time  on the right side.

Park your vehicle and just start hiking upward on any biking/hiking trail and you will get there – – guaranteed.

(CLICK ABOVE SATELLITE IMAGES FOR ENLARGEMENT – – Google satellite images of the White Ridges area)

More photos:

(CLICK ABOVE FOR ENLARGEMENT – – photo taken on December 13, 2017)

(CLICK ABOVE FOR ENLARGEMENT – – photo taken on December 13, 2017)

(CLICK ABOVE FOR ENLARGEMENT – – photo taken on March 25, 2017 – – in the above, you can clearly see the deep canyon)

……….

Norio Hayakawa’s CIVILIAN INTELLIGENCE NEWS SERVICE

E-mail = noriohayakawa@gmail.com

Facebook = http://www.facebook.com/fernandon.hayakawa