Skip to search.

Breaking News Visit Yahoo! News for the latest.

×Close this window

forcefieldpropulsionphysics · forcefield propulsion

The Yahoo! Groups Product Blog

Check it out!

Group Information

  • Members: 118
  • Category: Physics
  • Founded: Dec 9, 1999
  • Language: English
? Already a member? Sign in to Yahoo!

Yahoo! Groups Tips

Did you know...
Message search is now enhanced, find messages faster. Take it for a spin.

Messages

Advanced
Messages Help
Messages 1971 - 2000 of 2363   Oldest  |  < Older  |  Newer >  |  Newest
Messages: Show Message Summaries Sort by Date ^  
#1971 From: cyrano@...
Date: Fri May 4, 2001 12:16 am
Subject: Editorial notice concerning the event of the 9th of May about Flying Saucers
cyrano@...
Send Email Send Email
 


Important Editorial Notice

Beginning in 1993, I started an effort that was designed to identify firsthand military and government witnesses to UFO events and projects, as well as other evidence to be used in a public disclosure.  From 1993, we spent considerable time and resources briefing the Clinton Administration, including CIA Director James Woolsey, senior military officials at the Pentagon, and select members of Congress, among others.  In April of 1997, more than a dozen such government and military witnesses were assembled in Washington DC for briefings with Congressmen, Pentagon officials and others.  There, we specifically requested open Congressional Hearings on the subject.  None were forthcoming
     In 1998, we set out to “privatize” the disclosure process by raising the funds to videotape, edit, and organize over 100 military and government witnesses to UFO events and projects.  We had estimated that between $2 million and $4 million would be needed to do this on a worldwide basis.  By August of 2000 only about 5% of this amount had been raised but we decided to proceed since further delay was deemed imprudent given the serious issues involved here.  So beginning in August we began creating the Witness Archive Project and we set about the task of traveling all over the world to interview these witnesses in broadcast quality digital video format.  Due to the severe limitation of funds, this effort was predominantly prepared by myself and a few other volunteers roughly from August 2000 through December 2000. 
Beginning in late December 2000, I began editing over 120 hours of raw digital video testimony at home using a dual-G4 Macintosh with 90 Gigabytes of storage and a digital video deck.  I should note that I am a medical doctor and not an editor.  Nevertheless, from late December 2000 until late February 2001 the 120 hours  were reduced first to 33 hours of select testimony and then 18 hours of super-select testimony.  The 33 hours of select testimony were dubbed to audiotape and transcribed resulting in approximately 1200 pages of testimony transcript.  In March and early April, 2001 I edited these transcripts into a readable form, which appear herein. 
I must emphasize that this has been done under the most severe time and funding constraints, working 7 days a week and mostly 18 hours a day.  And I thought the Emergency Department was tough! 
I share this only so the reader will understand that these transcripts and other materials are very likely to contain errors. These include likely errors in proper names arising from the phonetic spelling of such names directly from transcribed audio tapes of testimony.  I apologize in advance for these.
The transcripts (that appear in the Briefing Document) have only been altered to correct for a) length and b) grammar and readability.  I have assiduously avoided changing the meaning of testimony at all times.  Statements in brackets [  ] are for clarification.  Statements in italics and brackets [  ] reflect commentary on my part and are followed by my initials, SG.
These materials are, as you can now discern, only the tip of the iceberg of what we have recorded on digital videotape.  That is, from over 120 hours of testimony by over 100 witnesses we transcribed only 33 hours and then further edited materials down to a fraction of that amount.  Moreover, the full archive represents the testimony of only 100 witnesses of the more than 400 identified to date.  The edited testimony will be appearing in book form.  A portion of it appears in The Disclosure Project Briefing Document and only small excerpts and summary bios of testimony appear in this Executive summary.  We hope in the future to secure funding for a 5-6 part broadcast quality video documentary series to be made from the videotaped testimony we have as the impact of hearing and seeing these witnesses speak is very moving.
As you read this testimony remember that it is indeed only the beginning.  The rest is up to you: Call and demand that Congress and the President and the leaders of other countries hold hearings into this subject without delay.  These witnesses welcome a subpoena so that they may officially testify under oath to what they have experienced and said here.  Indeed, the most revealing testimony waits to be seen since the deepest sources are refusing to come forward until protected through official Congressional hearings. 
This then brings me to my last point: The witnesses who have given testimony to date are extraordinarily brave men and women-heroes in my eyes-who have taken great personal risks in coming forward.  Some have been threatened and intimidated.  All are risking the ever-present ridicule that attends this subject.  Not a single one of them has been paid for his or her testimony: It has been given freely and without reservation for the good of humanity.  I wish to personally thank them here and extend to them my personal, highest respect and gratitude. 
Please, I implore you not to let this effort and their sacrifice be in vain.  Help us place this matter in front of the public, the media, and our elected representatives so that the full truth may be disclosed, so that those earth-saving technologies now classified may be released, and so humanity may enter a new chapter in its evolution as one of many people in the cosmos. 

This summary is focusing on the testimony of important first-hand witnesses.  We have thousands of government documents, hundreds of photographs, trace landing cases and more, but it is impossible to include them in a summary of this length.  These materials will be made available for any serious scientific or Congressional inquiry.

Steven M. Greer, M.D.
5 April 2001



Disclosure: Implications for the Environment, World Peace, World Poverty and the Human Future

A Brief Summary

Copyright Steven M. Greer, M.D. - March 2001

 For most people, the question of whether or not we are alone in the universe is a mere philosophical musing-something of academic interest but of no practical importance. Even evidence that we are currently being visited by non-human advanced life forms seems to many to be an irrelevancy in a world of global warming, crushing poverty and the threat of war.  In the face of real challenges to the long-term human future, the question of UFOs, extraterrestrials and secret government projects is a mere sideshow, right? Wrong-catastrophically wrong.
The evidence and testimony presented in the following pages establishes the following:
?       That we are indeed being visited by advanced extraterrestrial civilizations and have been for some time;
?       That this is the most classified, compartmented program within the US and many other countries;
?       That those projects have, as warned in 1961 by President Eisenhower, escaped legal oversight and control in the US, the UK and elsewhere;
?       That advanced spacecraft of extraterrestrial origin, called extraterrestrial vehicles (ETVs) by some intelligence agencies, have been downed, retrieved and studied since at least the 1940s and possibly as early as the 1930s;
?       That significant technological breakthroughs in energy generation and propulsion have resulted from the study of these objects (and from related human innovations dating as far back as the time of Nicola Tesla) and that these technologies utilize a new physics not requiring the burning of fossil fuels or ionizing radiating to generate vast amounts of energy;
?       That classified, above top-secret projects possess fully operational anti-gravity propulsion devices and new energy generation systems that, if declassified and put to peaceful uses, would empower a new human civilization without want, poverty or environmental damage.

Those who doubt these assertions should carefully read the testimony of dozens of military and government witnesses whose testimony clearly establishes these facts. Given the vast and profound implications of these statements, whether one accepts or seriously doubts these assertions, all must demand that Congressional hearings be convened to get to the truth of this matter.  For nothing less that the human future hangs in the balance.

Implications for the Environment:

We have identified insiders and scientists who can prove, in open Congressional hearings, that we do in fact possess classified energy generation and anti-gravity propulsion systems capable of completely and permanently replacing all forms of currently used energy generation and transportation systems.  These devices access the ambient electromagnetic and so-called zero point energy state to produce vast amounts of energy without any pollution.  Such systems essentially generate energy by tapping into the ever-present quantum vacuum energy state-the baseline energy from which all energy and matter is fluxing.  All matter and energy is supported by this baseline energy state and it can be tapped through unique electromagnetic circuits and configurations to generate huge amounts of energy from space/time all around us.  These are NOT perpetual motion machines nor do they violate the laws of thermodynamics-they merely tap an ambient energy field all around us to generate energy. 
This means that such systems do not require fuel to burn or atoms to split or fuse. They do no require central power plants, transmission lines and the related multi-trillion dollar infrastructure required to electrify and power remote areas of India, China, Africa and Latin America.  These systems are site-specific: they can be set up at any place and generate needed energy. Essentially, this constitutes the definitive solution to the vast majority of environmental problems facing our world.
The environmental benefits of such a discovery can hardly be overstated, but a brief list include:
?       The elimination of oil, coal and gas as sources of energy generation, thus the elimination of air and water pollution related to the transport and use of these fuels. Oil spills, global warming, illnesses from air pollution, acid rain etc can and must be ended within 10-20 years;
?       Resource depletion and geo-political tensions arising from competition for fossil fuel resources will end;
?       Technologies already exist to scrub manufacturing effluent to zero or near zero emissions for both air and water-but they use a great deal of energy and thus are considered too costly to fully utilize. Moreover, since they are energy intensive, and our energy systems today create most of the air pollution in the world, a point of diminishing return for the environment is reached quickly. That equation is dramatically changed when industries are able to tap vast amounts of free energy (there is no fuel to pay for-only the device, which is no more costly than other generators) and those systems create no pollution.
?       Energy-intensive recycling efforts will be able to reach full application since the energy needed to process solid waste will, again, be free and abundant.
?       Agriculture, which is currently very energy dependent and polluting, can be transformed to use clean, non-polluting sources of energy.
?       Desertification can be reversed and world agriculture empowered by utilizing desalinization plants, which are now very energy intensive and expensive, but will become cost-efficient once able to use these new, non-polluting energy systems.
?       Air travel, trucking and inter-city transportation systems will be replaced with new energy and propulsion technologies (anti-gravity systems allow for silent above surface movement). No pollution will be generated and costs will decrease substantially since the energy expenses will be negligible. Additionally, mass transportation in urban areas can utilize these systems to provide silent, efficient intra-city movement.  
?       Noise pollution from jets, trucks and other modes of transportation will be eliminated by the use of these silent devices.
?       Public utilities will not be needed since each home, office and factory will have a device to generate whatever energy is needed. This means ugly transmission lines that are subject to storm damage and power interruption will be a thing of the past. Underground gas pipelines, which not infrequently rupture or leak and damage earth and water resources, will not be needed at all.
?       Nuclear power plants will be decommissioned and the technologies needed to clean such sites will be available.  Classified technologies do exist to neutralize nuclear waste.

Utopia? No, because human society will always be imperfect-but perhaps not as dysfunctional as it is today.  These technologies are real-I  have seen them. Anti-gravity is a reality and so is free energy generation. This is not a fantasy or a hoax. Do not believe those who say that this is not possible: they are the intellectual descendants of those who said the Wright brothers would never fly.
 Current human civilization has reached the point of being able to commit planeticide: the killing of an entire world. We can and we must do better.  These technologies exist and every single person who is concerned about the environment and the human future should call for urgent hearings to allow these technologies to be disclosed, declassified and safely applied.

Implications for Society and World Poverty:

From the above, it is obvious that these technologies that are currently classified would enable human civilization to achieve sustainability.  Of course, in the near term, we are talking about the greatest social, economic and technological revolution in human history-bar none.  I will not minimize the world-encompassing changes that would inevitably attend such disclosures.  Having dealt with this issue for much of my adult life, I am acutely aware of how immense these changes will be.
Aside from the singular realization that homo sapiens are not the only-or most advanced-creatures in the universe, this disclosure will cause humanity to be faced with the greatest risks and opportunities in known history.  If we do nothing, our civilization will collapse environmentally, economically, geo-politically and socially. In 10 - 20 years, fossil fuel and oil demand will outstrip supply significantly-and then it is the Mad Max scenario where everyone is warring over the last barrel of oil.  It is likely that this geo-political and social collapse will precede any environmental catastrophe.
The disclosure of these new technologies will give us a new, sustainable civilization.  World poverty will be eliminated within our life times. With the advent of these new energy and propulsion systems, no place on earth will need to suffer from want. Even the deserts will bloom…
Once abundant and nearly free energy is available in impoverished areas for agriculture, transportation, construction, manufacturing and electrification, there is no limit to what humanity can achieve.  It is ridiculous-obscene even-that mind-boggling poverty and famine exists in the world while we sit on classified technologies that could completely reverse this situation.   So why not release these technologies? Because the social, economic and geo-political order of the world would be greatly altered.  Every deep insider with whom I have met has emphasized that this would be the greatest change in known human history. The matter is so highly classified not because it is so silly, but because its implications are so profound and far reaching.  By nature, those who control such projects do not like change. And here we are talking about the biggest economic, technological, social and geo-political change in known human history. Hence, the status quo is maintained, even as our civilization hurtles towards oblivion.
But by this argument, we would have never had the industrial revolution and the Ludites would have reigned supreme to this day. 
An international effort to minimize disruption to the economy and to ease the transition to this new social and economic reality will be needed. We can do this and we must. Special interests in certain oil, energy and economic sectors need to be reigned in and at the same time treated compassionately: Nobody likes to see their power and empire crumble. Nations very dependent on the sale of oil and gas will need help diversifying, stabilizing and transitioning to a new economic order. 
The United States, Europe and Japan will need to adjust to a new geo-political reality as well: As currently poor but populous countries dramatically develop technologically and economically, they will demand-and will get-a  meaningful seat at the international table. And this is as it should be.  But the international community will need to put in place safeguards to prevent such potential geo-political rapprochement between the first and third world from devolving into bellicose and disruptive behavior on the part of the newly empowered. 
The US in particular will need to lead through strength-but avoid the current trend towards domination.  Leadership and domination are not the same, and the sooner we learn the difference the better off the world will be. There can be international leadership without domination and hegemony, and the US needs to realize these distinctions if it is to provide much-needed leadership on this issue.
These technologies, because they will decentralize power-literally and figuratively-will enable the billions living in misery and poverty to enter a world of new abundance. And with economic and technological development, education will rise and birth rates will fall.  It is well known that as societies become more educated, prosperous and technologically advanced-and women take an increasingly equal role in society-the birth rate falls and population stabilizes.  This is a good thing for world civilization and the future of humanity.
With each village cleanly electrified, agriculture empowered with clean and free energy and transportation costs lowered, poverty will dramatically fall in the world. If we act now, by 2030 we will be able to effectively eliminate all poverty in the world, as we know it today.  We only need the courage to accept these changes and the wisdom to steer humanity safely and peacefully into a new time.

Implications for World Peace and Security

A few years ago I was discussing this subject with the former Chairman of the Senate Foreign Relations Committee, Senator Claiborne Pell.  He explained to me that he had been in Congress since the 1950s but had never been briefed on this subject.  I told him that the nature of these black projects has resulted in most of our leaders being left out of any decision making on this subject, and what a shame this is. I said, “Senator Pell, all that time you were Chairman of Foreign Relations, you were deprived of the opportunity to deal with the ultimate foreign relations challenge…” and   I pointed to the stars above our heads. He said, “ You know Dr. Greer, I am afraid that you are right…”
It is true that our great diplomats and wise elders, such as Senator Pell, President Jimmy Carter and other international leaders have been specifically and deliberately prevented from having access to or control over this subject.  This is a direct threat to world peace. In the vacuum of secrecy, operations supervised by neither the people, the people’s representatives, the UN nor any other legitimate entity have taken actions that directly threaten world peace.
Testimony, corroborated by multiple military witnesses who do not know each other and who have had no opportunity for collusion, will show that the US and other countries have engaged these ETVs in armed attack, in some cases leading to the downing of these vehicles.  As I said to Mrs. Boutros Ghali , wife of the  then Secretary General of the UN, if there is even a 10% chance that this is true, then this constitutes the gravest threat to world peace in human history
Having personally interviewed numerous credible military and aerospace officials with direct knowledge of such actions, I am certain that we have done this. Why? Because these unknown vehicles have been in our airspace without our permission and because we wanted to acquire their technology.  Nobody has asserted that there is an actual threat to humanity from these objects: Obviously, any civilization capable of routine interstellar travel could terminate our civilization in a nanosecond, if that was their intent.  That we are still breathing the free air of Earth is abundant testimony to the non-hostile nature of these ET civilizations.
We have also been informed that the so-called Star Wars (or National Missile Defense System) effort has really been a cover for black project deployment of weapon systems to track, target and destroy ETVs as they approach earth or enter Earth’s atmosphere.  No less a figure than Werner Von Braun warned on his death-bed of both the reality and the madness of such a scheme, apparently to no avail (see the Testimony of BB, former spokesperson for Werner Von Braun).
Well, unless we change directions we are likely to end up where we are going.
With the types of weapons currently in the covert arsenal-weapons more fearsome even than thermonuclear devices-there is no possibility of a survivable conflict.  Yet in the darkness of secrecy, actions have been taken on behalf of every human that may endanger our future.  Only a full, honest disclosure will correct this situation.  It is not possible for me to convey in words the urgency of this.
For 10 years I worked as an emergency doctor and saw how every possible object can be used as a weapon. Every technology, unless guided by wisdom and a desire for that good and peaceful future - the only future possible-will be used for conflict. Super-secret projects that answer to no legally constituted body- not the UN, not the US Congress, not the British Parliament-must not be allowed to continue to act in this way on behalf of humanity.
One of the greatest dangers of extreme secrecy is that it creates a hermetically sealed, closed system impervious to the free and open exchange of ideas.  In such an environment, it is easy to see how grave mistakes can be made.  For instance, the testimony here will show that these ETVs  became very prominent after we developed the first nuclear weapons-and began to go into space.  There were multiple events-corroborated here by numerous credible military officials-of these objects hovering over and even neutralizing ICBMs (Intercontinental Ballistic Missiles). 
A closed, military view of this might be to take offense, engage in counter-measures and attempt to down such objects. In fact, this would be the normal response. But what if these ET civilizations were saying, “Please do not destroy your beautiful world-and know this: we will not let you go into space with such madness and threaten others…” An event showing concern and even a larger cosmic wisdom could be construed over and over again as an act of aggression.  Such misunderstandings and myopia are the stuff wars are made of.

Whatever our perceptions of these visitors, there is no chance that misunderstandings can be resolved through violent engagement. To contemplate such madness is to contemplate the termination of human civilization.
It is time for our wise elders and our levelheaded diplomats, like Sen. Pell, to be put in charge of these weighty matters. To leave this in the hands of a clique of un-elected, self-appointed and unaccountable covert operations is the greatest threat to US national security and world security in history.  Eisenhower was right, but nobody was listening.
In light of testimony showing that covert actions have been taken that involved violent engagement of these visitors, it is imperative that the international community in general and the US Congress and President in particular do the following:
?       Convene hearings to assess the risks to national and international security posed by the current covert management of the subject;
?       Enforce an immediate ban on weapons in space and specifically ban the targeting of any extraterrestrial objects since such actions are unwarranted and could endanger the whole of humanity;
?       Develop a special diplomatic unit to interface with these extraterrestrial civilizations, foster communication and peaceful relations;
?       Develop a suitably empowered and open international oversight group to manage human-extraterrestrial relations and ensure peaceful and mutually beneficial interactions;
?       Support international institutions that can ensure the peaceful use of those new technologies related to advanced energy and propulsion systems (see below).

In addition to the above, a less obvious-put  perhaps equally pressing-threat to world peace arises from the fact that the covert control of this subject has resulted in the world being deprived of the new energy and propulsion technologies discussed earlier.
World poverty and a widening gap between rich and poor are serious threats to world peace that would be corrected by the disclosure and peaceful application of these technologies (see above).  The real threat of war over a shrinking supply of fossil fuels in the next 10-20 years further underscores the need for this disclosure. What happens when the 4 billion people living in poverty want cars, electricity and other modern conveniences-all of which depend on fossil fuels? To any thinking person, it is obvious that we must transition quickly to the use of these now classified technologies-they are powerful solutions already sitting on a shelf.
Of course, a number of insiders have pointed out that these technologies are not your grandfather’s Oldsmobile: They are technological advances, like any other, that could be put to violent uses by terrorists, bellicose nations and madmen. But here we enter a catch 22: If these technologies are not forthcoming soon, we will face a certain meltdown in human civilization and the environment; if they are disclosed, immensely powerful new technologies will be out there for possible destructive uses.
In the near future, it is prudent to view humanity as likely to use any new technology violently.  This means that international agencies must be created to ensure-and enforce-the exclusive peaceful use of such devices.  The technologies exist today to link every such device to a GPS (Global Positioning System) monitor that could disable or render useless any device tampered with or used for anything put peaceful power generation and propulsion. These technologies should be regulated and monitored. And the international community must mature to a level of competence to ensure their exclusive peaceful use.
Any other use should be met with overwhelming resistance by every other nation on earth. 
Such a pact is the necessary next step. Maybe someday, humanity will live in peace without the need for such controls. But for now, the situation is like that of chained dogs-some strong leashes are warranted and are essential. 
But such concerns cannot be a rationale for further delaying the disclosure of these technologies. We have the knowledge and means to ensure their safe and peaceful use-and these must be applied soon if we are to avoid further degradation of the environment and an escalation of world poverty and conflict.
In the final analysis, then, we are faced with a social and spiritual crisis that transcends any technological or scientific challenge. The technological solutions exit-but do we possess the will, wisdom and courage to apply them for the common good?  The more one contemplates this matter the more it is obvious that we have one possible future: Peace. Peace on earth and peace in space-a universal Peace, wisely enforced; for every other path leads to ruin
This then is the greatest challenge of the current era. Can our spiritual and social resources rise to this challenge?  Nothing less than the destiny of the human race hangs in the balance.



Understanding UFO Secrecy

Introduction
Over the past few years I have had the responsibility of briefing senior government and scientific leaders both in the US and abroad on the UFO/Extraterrestrial subject.
The evidence regarding this subject is clear and overwhelming: It has not been difficult to make a compelling case for the reality of UFOs per se. What is a greater challenge is elucidating the architecture of secrecy related to UFOs (see the exposition of this matter contained in the paper entitled “Unacknowledged” by this author). But the greatest challenge is explaining the “why.” Why all the secrecy? Why a “black” or unacknowledged government within the government? Why hide the UFO/ET subject from public view?
     The “what” or evidence is complex but manageable. The “how” or nature of the secret programs is more difficult, much more complex and Byzantine. But the “why”-the reason behind the secrecy-is the most challenging problem of all. There is not a single answer to this question, but rather numerous inter-related reasons for such extraordinary secrecy. Our investigations and interviews with dozens of top-secret witnesses who have been within such programs have enabled us to understand the reasons behind this secrecy. They range from the fairly obvious and straightforward to the really bizarre. Here, I wish to share some key points regarding this secrecy, why it has been imposed and why it is so difficult for the controlling interests within covert programs to reverse policy and allow disclosure.

In The Beginning
     In the early days of the ET/UFO phenomena, military, intelligence and industrial interests had concerns regarding the nature of the phenomena, whether it originated from our human adversaries and once it was determined to be extraterrestrial, how the public would react.
     In the 1930s and 1940s this was no small matter: If these UFOs were of terrestrial origin, they would be evidence of an earthly adversary with technological devices far in advance of US aircraft. And once it was determined to be extraterrestrial (some quarters knew this prior to the end of WWII) there were many more questions than answers. To wit: why were the ETs here? What are their intentions? How do the devices travel at such fantastic speeds and through the vastness of space? How might these technologies be applied to the human situation-both in war and in peace? How would the public react to this knowledge? What effect would the disclosure of these facts have on human belief systems? Political and social systems?

     From the late 1940s through the early 1950s, a concerted effort was made to figure out the basic science and technologies behind these spacecraft, primarily through the direct study and reverse-engineering of the retrieved extraterrestrial objects from New Mexico and elsewhere. It was immediately recognized that these objects were using laws of physics and applied technologies far in advance of internal combustion engines, vacuum tubes and the like. In the climate of the Cold War and in a world where a relatively minor advantage technologically could tilt the balance of power in the nuclear arms race, this was no small matter.
     Indeed, the theme of human geo-political dysfunction appears as a recurring feature of the secrecy related to UFOs-up to the present hour. More on this later.
     From the Wilbursmith top secret Canadian government document of 1950, we know that this subject was held in greater secrecy than even the development of the hydrogen bomb There was a tremendous effort underway by the late 1940s to study extraterrestrial hardware, figure out how it operated and see what human applications might be made from such discoveries.  Even then, the project dealing with this subject was extraordinarily covert.
     It became much more so by the early 1950s when substantial progress was made on some of the basic physics behind the ET craft energy and propulsion systems. The best we can estimate, it was then that the entire project became increasingly “black” or unacknowledged.
     The compartmentalization of the project dealing with UFOs was exponentially increased by the early 1950s when it was realized what it was that these covert projects actually had: Devices displaying physics and energy systems which-if disclosed-would forever alter life on earth.
By the Eisenhower era, the UFO/ET projects were increasingly compartmented away from legal, constitutional chain-of-command oversight and control. This means that-while we know from witness testimony that Eisenhower knew of the ET craft-the president (and similar leaders in the UK and elsewhere) were increasingly left out of the loop. Such senior elected and appointed leaders were confronted with (as Eisenhower called it) a sophisticated military-industrial complex with labyrinthine compartmented projects which were more and more out of their control and oversight. From direct witness testimony we know that Eisenhower, Kennedy, Carter and Clinton were frustrated in their attempts to penetrate such projects.
This is also true of senior congressional leaders and investigators, foreign leaders and UN leadership.  This is indeed an equal opportunity exclusion project-it does not matter how high your rank or office, if you are not deemed necessary to the project, you are not going to know about it. Period.
Contrary to popular myth, since the 1960s concern over some type of public panic when faced with the fact that we are not alone in the universe has not been a major reason for the secrecy. Those in the know-notwithstanding the fantastic tales spun in UFO circles and on the X-Files-understand that fear of hostile ETs has also not been a significant factor. While there has been continued confusion in some covert circles over the ultimate purpose behind the ET phenomena, we know of no knowledgeable insiders who regard the ETs as a hostile threat.

 By the 1960s-and certainly by the 1990s-the world was very familiar with the concept of space travel and the popular science-fiction industry had thoroughly indoctrinated the masses with the idea of ETs from far away being a possibility.  So why the continued secrecy?
The Cold War is over. People would hardly be shocked to find out that we are not alone in the universe (the majority of people already believe this-in fact most people believe the UFOs are real).  Besides, what could be more shocking than to live through the latter half of the 20th century with thousands of hydrogen bombs aimed at every major city in the world? If we can handle that, surely we can handle the idea that ETs are real.
The facile explanations of fear, panic, shock and the like do not suffice to justify a level of secrecy so deep that even the President and his CIA Director could be denied access to the information.

A Current Estimate
Continued secrecy on the UFO subject must be related, then, to on-going anxiety related to the essential power dynamics of the world and how such a disclosure would impact these.
That is, the knowledge related to UFOs/ET phenomena must have such great potential for changing the status quo that its continued suppression is deemed essential, at all costs.
Going back to the early 1950s, we have found that the basic technology and physics behind these ET spacecraft were discovered through very intensive reverse-engineering projects. It was precisely at this point that the decision was made to increase the secrecy to an unprecedented level-one which essentially took the matter out of ordinary government chain of command control as we know it. Why?
Aside from the possible use of such knowledge by US/UK adversaries during the Cold War, it was immediately recognized that these devices were not your dad’s Oldsmobile. The basic physics behind the energy generation and propulsion systems were such that they could easily replace all existing energy generation and propulsion systems on the earth. And with them, the entire geo-political and economic order.
In the 1950s, there was no great concern over global warming, eco-system collapse, ozone depletion, rain forest loss, bio-diversity degradation, etc. In the wake of WW II, what was needed was stability, not a new convulsion of the world economic, technological and geo-political order. Remember: those in control like to stay in control. They are risk-averse, do not like significant change and do not give up control and power easily.
The disclosure of the existence of ETs, with the inevitable disclosure related to these new technologies soon to follow, would change the world forever-and they knew it. This was to be avoided at all costs. Besides, that was the era of  “what is good for GM is good for America,” and the same would be true of big oil, big coal and the like. 
The inescapable fact is this: The disclosure of the ET presence would bring with it the certain release of these technologies-and that release would sweep away the entire technological infrastructure of the planet. The changes would be immense-and sudden.
Fifty years later this is more true now than then. Why? Because avoiding the problem in the 1950s-while convenient at the time-means that the situation is more tenuous now. For example, world dependence on oil and internal combustion technology is greater now than in 1955. And the world economy is larger by orders of magnitude now, so any change would be exponentially greater-and potentially more chaotic.
And so this is the conundrum: Each decade and generation has passed this problem on to the next, only to find any path but continued secrecy more destabilizing than it would have been a decade earlier. In a maddening circle of secrecy, delay of disclosure and increasing world complexity and dependence on out-dated energy systems, each generation has found itself in a greater squeeze than the one before. As difficult as disclosure would have been in the 1950s, disclosure now is even more difficult. And potentially earth shaking in its consequences.
The technological discoveries of the 1950s resulting from the reverse-engineering of extraterrestrial craft could have enabled us to completely transform the world economic, social, technological and environmental situation. That such advancements have been withheld from the public is related to the change-averse nature of the controlling hierarchy at the time-and to this day.
And make no mistake; the changes would be immense.
Consider: A technology which enables energy generation from the so-called zero point field and which enables every home, business, factory and vehicle to have its own source of power-without an external fuel source. Ever. No need for oil, gas, coal, nuclear plants or the internal combustion engine. And no pollution. Period.
Consider: A technology using electro-gravitic devices which allows for above surface transportation-no more roadways to cover fertile farmland since transportation could take place totally above the surface.
Sounds great. But in the 1950s, oil was plentiful, nobody worried too much about pollution, global warming was not the faintest concern and the powers that be just wanted stability. The status quo. And besides, why risk the tectonic changes related to such a disclosure? Let a later generation take care of it.
But now, we are that later generation. And 2001 is not 1949. The earth is straining under the burden of a growing population-now 6 billion people-all of whom want cars, electricity, TV s and the like. Everyone knows that we do not have 50 more years of oil-and even if we did, the earth’s ecosystem could not withstand 50 more years of such abuse. The risks of disclosure are now much less than the risks of secrecy: If secrecy continues much longer, the earth’s ecosystem will collapse. Talk about a big change and global instability...
Many people will consider the technological and economic impact of such a disclosure as the central justification of continued secrecy. After all, we are talking about a multi-trillion dollar per year change in the economy. The entire energy and transportation sectors of the economy would be revolutionized. And the energy sector-the part where non-renewable fuels are purchased and burned and have to be replenished - will utterly vanish. And while other industries will flourish, only a fool would dismiss the impact of such a multi-trillion dollar segment of the economy disappearing.
Certainly the “vested interests” involved in the global industrial infrastructure related to oil, gas, coal and internal combustion engines and public utilities is no small force in the world.
But to understand UFO secrecy you must consider what all that money represents at its core. Power. Massive geo-political power.

One must consider what will happen when every village in India (or Africa or South America or China) has devices that can generate large amounts of power without pollution and without spending huge sums of energy on fuel. The entire world will be able to develop in an unprecedented fashion-without pollution and without billions spent on power plants, transmission lines and combustible fuels.  The have-nots will have.
This would widely be considered a good thing: after all, much of world instability, warfare and the like is related to mind-numbing poverty and economic depravity in a world of great wealth. Social injustice and extreme economic disparity breeds much chaos and suffering in the world. These decentralized, non-polluting technologies would change that permanently. Even the deserts will bloom...
But it must be remembered that geo-political power flows from technological and economic prowess. India has over 1 billion people and the US about one-fourth of that, but who has the greater geo-political power? 
As these new energy systems proliferate, the so-called third world will rapidly reach parity with the industrialized world of Europe, the US and Japan. This will cause a massive shift in geo-political power. And the industrialized world will find that it must then actually share power with the now downtrodden third world. 
Those in the cat-bird seat currently (and in 1950) have no interest in doing any such thing. We can hardly even support and share power in the United Nations.  
The release of information on the UFO/ET subject will lead to the global proliferation of new energy systems which will rapidly result in an equalization of power in the world. The US and Europe have around 600 million people. That is only 10% of the world’s population. Once the other 90% rise in technological and economic standing, it is clear to see that the geo-political power will shift-or equalize-to the rest of the world.  Power will have to be shared. Real global collective security will be inevitable.  It is the end of the world, as we know it.
When you combine the economic and technological impact with the geo-political impact, it becomes obvious that the changes related to ending secrecy are truly tectonic-massive, world-encircling and transformative.  It is not to be regarded lightly.
But 50 years after the world could have had these new technologies-and 50 long years of ecological degradation, social and economic chaos and disparity-we find that we are the last generation in the long line of passing the cosmic hot potato known as the UFO secrecy problem.
And here we stand, holding this hot potato, but what shall we do about it?
To end the secrecy means vast and profound changes in virtually every aspect of human existence-economic, social, technological, philosophical, geo-political and so forth. But to continue the secrecy and the suppression of these new energy and propulsion technologies means something far more destabilizing: the collapse of the earth’s ecosystem and the certain depletion of the fossil fuels on which we depend. And the growing anger of the have-nots, who are needlessly being deprived of a full and dignified life. There are no more generations to which we can pass this cosmic hot potato: we must deal with it and do what should have been done in 1950.

The Webs We Weave
As if the foregoing was not enough to justify secrecy, recall that extraordinary things have been done to maintain this secrecy. The infrastructure needed to maintain and expand the level of secrecy which can deceive presidents and CIA Directors and senior congressional leaders and European Prime Ministers and the like is substantial-and illegal. Let me be clear, the entity which controls the UFO matter and its related technologies has more power than any single government in the world or any single identified world leader.
That such a situation could arise was forewarned by President Eisenhower when, in January 1961, he cautioned us regarding the growing “military-industrial complex.”  This was his last speech to the world as president-and he was warning us directly of a frightening situation about which he had personal knowledge. For Eisenhower had seen the ET craft and deceased ET bodies. He knew of the covert programs dealing with the situation. But he also knew that he had lost control of these projects and that they were lying to him about the extent and full nature of their research and development activities.
Indeed, the current state-of-the-art in secrecy is a hybrid, quasi-government, quasi privatized operation which is international-and functions outside of the purview of any single agency or any single government. “The Government”-as you and I and Thomas Jefferson may think of it-is really quite outside the loop. Rather, a select, tightly controlled and compartmentalized ‘black’ or unacknowledged project controls these matters.  Access is by inclusion alone and if you are not included, it does not matter if you are CIA Director, President, Chairman of Senate Foreign Relations or UN Secretary General, you simply will not know about or have access to these projects.
Indeed the situation is so dire that senior Joint Chiefs of Staff leaders in the Pentagon who I have briefed have no more access to such projects than any other civilian-unless they are on the “inside” for some reason. But this is rare.
To acquire and maintain such power all types of things have been done. We are reminded of that Robert Frost poem in which he describes “the webs we weave...” But how does such an entity extract itself from such a web of secrecy, deceit, lies and insubordination?
To be specific, this group has usurped power and rights not legally granted to it. It is extra-constitutional, both in the US and in the UK and other countries around the world.
I will grant the possibility that, at least initially, this covert undertaking was designed to maintain secrecy and avoid instability. But the risks of inadvertent leaks - or a national or world leader deciding legally that it was time for disclosure-made it essential to weave a web of greater and greater secrecy and of illegal operations. And now the web has closed in on the operation itself.
That is, the complexity of the compartmentalized projects, the degree of unconstitutional and unauthorized activity, the “privatization” (or theft) by corporate partners (the “industrial” part of the military-industrial complex) of advanced technologies, the continued lying to legally elected and appointed leaders and to the public-all of these and more have contributed to a psychology of continued secrecy-because disclosure would expose the greatest scandal in recorded history.
For example, how would the public react to the fact that the degradation of the entire earth’s ecosystem and the irretrievable loss of thousands of species of plants and animals now extinct due to pollution, has been utterly unnecessary-and could have been avoided if only an honest release of this information had occurred in the 1950s?

How would society react to the knowledge that trillions of dollars have been spent on unauthorized, unconstitutional projects over the years? And that these tax-payer dollars have been used by corporate partners in this secrecy to develop spin - off technologies based on the study of ET objects which were later patented and used in highly profitable technologies? Not only have the taxpayers been defrauded, they have then been made to pay a premium for such breakthroughs which were the result of research paid for by them! And this does not address the intellectual property theft of such technologies from the ETs. While the basic energy generation and propulsion technologies have been withheld, these corporate partners have profited wildly from other breakthroughs and benefits in electronics, miniaturization and related areas. Such covert technology transfers constitutes a multi-trillion dollar theft of technologies which really should be public domain since taxpayers have paid for it.
And how would the public react to the fact that the multi-billion dollar space program, using internal combustion rockets and the like, has been a primitive and unnecessary experiment since much more advanced technologies and propulsion systems were in existence before we ever went to the moon? NASA and related agencies have, for the most part, been as much a victim of this secrecy as has the rest of the government and the public. Only a small, very compartmentalized fraction of NASA people know of the real ET technologies hidden away in these projects. Certainly my uncle, who helped design the lunar module which took Neil Armstrong to the moon, was as much a victim an anyone insofar as he was denied access to these technological breakthroughs. He had to rely on the old physics and the old internal combustion jet thruster technologies just like everyone else. What a shame.
The inescapable reality is this: This secret project, no matter how well intentioned initially, got carried away with its own secret power. It abused this power. It has hijacked our future for fifty years.
In fact, the quiet coup d’etat of the late 1940s and early 1950s, once exposed, could result in real instability today. 
But the situation is actually much worse than this. All that is written above is dwarfed by a larger problem: The covert group running these UFO related black projects have also had exclusive sway over the early days of an embryonic extraterrestrial-human relationship.  And it was been tragically mismanaged-nearly to the point of genuine global catastrophe.
    For what happens when an unelected, unappointed, self-selecting, militarily oriented group alone has to deal with inter-species relations between humans and ETs? Well, as in most areas, if you wear rose-colored glasses the entire world looks red. And if you are wearing military glasses, every new and uncontrolled development will be seen as a potential or real military threat.
The nature of such a group-which is inordinately controlled and incestuous-is that it is homogenous in world-view and mind-set. Power and control are preeminent qualities. Such extreme secrecy creates a very dangerous milieu in which checks and balances, give and take, are utterly lacking. And in such an environment, very dangerous decisions can be made with inadequate feedback, discussion or insight from needed perspectives which are, per force, excluded.

 In such an environment of extreme secrecy, militarism and paranoia, we have found that immensely dangerous actions have been taken against the ETs. Indeed, we have multiple inside sources who have described to us the use of increasingly advanced technologies to track, target and destroy extraterrestrial assets.  If there is even a 10% chance that this is true (I am convinced it is 100% accurate) we are dealing with a global diplomatic and social crisis which is utterly out of our control but which puts the entire planet at risk.
Remember, covert reverse-engineering projects have resulted in huge quantum leaps forward in technologies that, once applied to military systems, could be a real threat to ETs, which may be here peacefully.  The attempts to rapidly militarize space are likely a result of a myopic, militaristic and paranoid view of extraterrestrial projects and intentions. If left unchecked, it can only result in catastrophe.
Indeed this group, no matter how well-intentioned, is in urgent need of exposure so that global statesmen with a new perspective can intercede in this situation. While we see no evidence that the ET civilizations are at all hostile, it is also clear that it is unlikely that they will allow unfettered and growing interference with their operations. Self-defense is likely a universal quality. And while tremendous restraint has been shown by the ETs thus far, might there be a “cosmic trip wire” if human covert technologies begin to reach parity and we are using such advanced technologies in a bellicose fashion? The prospect is sobering.
We need our Jimmy Carters and Dalai Lammas and other international statesmen involved with so vast a problem. But if access is denied -and the subject remains undisclosed and off the global radar screen-we are left with the unelected few to decide our fate and act on our behalf. This must change, and soon.
In the final analysis, while the changes attendant such a disclosure related to UFOs and ETs would be massive and profoundly impact virtually every aspect of life on earth, it is still the right thing to do. Secrecy has taken on a life of its own-it is a growing cancer which needs to be cured before it destroys the life of earth and all who dwell on her. 
The reasons for secrecy are clear: global power, economic and technological control, geo-political status quo, the fear of scandal surrounding the exposure of such projects and their behavior and so forth.
But the one thing more dangerous than disclosure is continued secrecy. The earth is dying because we are killing her. The top 250 people and families in the world have the net worth of 2.5 billion of our poorest citizens.  The promising relationship between humanity and people from other planets is being militarized and strained by failed thinking and failed programs run completely in secret.
As daunting as disclosure may be, with all its potential for short-term instability and change, continued secrecy means that we will destroy the earth through our folly and greed. The future of humanity, which has been delayed and hijacked for the past 50 years, cannot be hijacked for 50 more. For we do not have 50 more years-the earth’s ecosystem will collapse before then.
There are no easy choices. But there is one right one. Will you help us make it?



Testimony that Explains the Secrecy

Brigadier General  Y: Army National Guard Reserves

“But what happened was that Eisenhower got sold out.  Without him knowing it, he lost control of what was going on with the entire UFO situation. In his last address to the nation, I think he was telling us that the Military Industrial Complex would stick you in the back if you were not totally vigilant.  And, I think that he felt like he had not been vigilant.  I think he felt like he trusted too many people.  And, Eisenhower was a trusting man.  He was a good man.  And I think that he realized that all of a sudden this matter is going into the control of corporations that could very well act to the detriment of this country. 
“This frustration, from what I can remember, went on for months.  He realized that he was losing control of the UFO subject.  He realized that the phenomenon or whatever it was that we were faced with was not going to be in the best hands.  As far as I can remember, that was the expression that was used, ‘It is not going to be in the best hands.’ That was a real concern. And so it has turned out to be…
“It had been discussed with me on numerous occasions what could happen to me militarily if I discussed this. I would say that the government has done as good a job enforcing secrecy through the installation of abject fear as they have done with anything within the memory of modern man.  I really believe they have done a job. 
“One older officer discussed with me what possibly could happen if there was a revelation. He was talking about being erased and I said, ‘Man, what do you mean erased?’  And, he said, ‘Yes, you will be erased-disappear.’  And I said, ‘How do you know all this?’  And he said, ‘I know.  Those threats have been made and carried out.  Those threats started way back in 1947. The Army Air Force was given absolute control over how to handle this.  This being the biggest security situation that this country has ever dealt with and there have been some erasures…’
 “I don’t care what kind of a person you are.  I don’t care how strong or courageous you are.  It would be a very fearful situation because from what Matt [this older officer] said, ‘They will go after not only you.  They will go after your family.’  Those were his words.  And, so I can only say that the reason that they have managed to keep it under wraps for so long is through fear.  They are very selective about how they pull someone out to make an example of.  And I know that that has been done.”

Z: US Navy Atlantic Command

“These two gentlemen began to question me about this event.  They were being pretty rough about it, to be honest with you.  I remember literally putting my hands up and saying, ‘Wait a minute fellows.  I am on your side.  Just a minute.’  Because they were not really nice.  They were very intimidating and made it quite clear to the point that nothing that was seen, heard, or witnessed, that transpired was to leave this building.  ‘You are not to say a word about it to your co-workers.  And off base, you just forget everything that you may have seen or heard concerning this.  It didn’t happen…’”

Lt. Col. AA: US Air Force (Retired)

“It is sort of strange but we send people to prison, we send people to their death because of eyewitness accounts of crimes.  Our legal system is based on that to a large degree.  Yet in my following of unusual aerial phenomena for the past 50 years, there seems to be some reason to discredit very viable and very reputable witnesses when they say something is unidentified…
“I do know that there are agencies of our Government that can manipulate data.  And you can create or recreate [whatever you want].  Craft, intelligently operated craft, have basically violated our laws of physics on this planet.  And they have done that for a long time.  The fact that the Government at this point-I know we have been investigating since 1947-has not come up with an answer, to me indicates that there is something seriously wrong.  Are we this incompetent in science?  I don’t think so.  Are we this incompetent in intelligence?  I know we are not this incompetent in intelligence.  Now, Project Blue Book, when it was closed by Dr. Condon’s group, I have every reason to believe that this was a total deliberate whitewash….
“UFOs have been investigated for an extended period of time and the general public is not being made aware, fully aware-but are given only bits and pieces, programmed responses and things like that.”

“Dr. B”:

“I know that some people I worked with did disappear on certain programs and were never heard from again.  They just disappeared.  There has been evidence of that all through my work.  You know, that people go out on projects [and disappear]. But [to protect myself from this] I wouldn’t go any further on a project because I could see something strange coming.  So, a lot of people have disappeared you know, that are higher up.”

DD: US Marine Corps

“’You weren’t supposed to be there.’  ‘You are not supposed to see this.’  ‘You are going to be dangerous if we let you go.’  I thought that they were going to kill me, really…
“They had a Lieutenant Colonel from the Air Force and he did not identify himself.  And he told me, ‘If we just took you out in the jungle, they would never find you out there.’  I didn’t want to test him to see if he would really do that so I just said, ‘Yeah.’  And, he said, ‘You have got to sign these papers.  You never saw this.’  I “don’t exist” and “this situation never happened.”  And if you tell anybody, you will just come up missing…’
“They are yelling at me and hollering and cursing.  ‘You didn’t see anything.  We will do you and your whole goddamn family.’
“It was basically that for about eight or nine hours…  ‘We are going to take you off in a helicopter and we are going to kick your ass out in the jungle and we are going to end you…’
“These different agencies are on their own.  They don’t obey the law.  They are rogue.  Do I think that this is a project that goes up through the government and everyone has a piece in it?  No.  I think these guys operate on their own and no one knows what they do.  It is so easy to do today.   And there is no oversight, no control.  They just do whatever they want…
“Lethal, deadly force has been used.  For those of you who don’t know, I know marine snipers and I have heard other guys talk about it and I’ve heard that these guys go on the streets and they stalk people and they kill them.  I know that the Army Airborne snipers do the same thing.  They use Delta Force to go grab these people and silence them by killing them.”




EE: US Air Force (ret.)

“At times I used to carry nuclear weapons.  In other words, I was mentally fit to carry nuclear weapons, but I’m not mentally fit if I see a UFO.  This criticism and this ridicule have done more to keep the story coming out than almost anything else.”

FF: British Ministry of Defense Official

        “I believe that governments and the military, and indeed private researchers, politicians- whoever- should place everything in the public domain on this issue.  Governments can't, I think, have it both ways.  You cannot say on the one hand, as the party line often goes, that UFOs are of no defense significance, and then on the other keep back some of the data. 
“You simply can't do that.  You have to have it one way or the other.  And if, as governments consistently say when the politicians probe on this issue or when the media inquire, that there's really nothing to worry about, then okay, let's see all the data.”

GG: US Air Force, Security Officer

“We were gone over with a Geiger counter and there was one return on one of the guys, and something was taken out of his pocket.  This guy was removed very quickly.  And, I will swear on my life, I never saw him again.  He was removed.  This happened to a lot of people.  It led to a suicide that the Air Force is responsible for.  This is a real person with a real name…
“We were brought in and there were sheets on top of the law enforcement desk.  There were about 10 of us.  And there were one, two, three, four, five, six, seven stacks of documents, pre-typed.  One was a pre-typed statement, all generic, of what we saw-which was not what we saw.  It said we were off-duty and saw only unknown lights flipping amongst the trees. I clearly remember that.  I said, what if we don’t sign this, Major Zigler?  And, he says, you have no choice.  And, he says, I have no choice but to ask you to do this…
“Two people came up behind each of us, and I do remember someone heading toward him, and I heard the sound of what sounded like an aerosol.  And, I went black.  My nose ran profusely and my chest got tight.  I, obviously, was not getting into the car properly, so I was beaten, literally hit in the ribs and pushed…  Anyway, I have 20 minutes of recall and I’m gone for a day.  And, it’s established with other people.  People said I was on emergency leave or on leave or off the base.  But I was just under the base.  And, there were other personnel down there.
“…I had marks, by the way, from an IV, or something, when I came out of there.  I had the bruise and I had a bandage.  I will admit that.  That’s for real.  I had it.  I’m terrified to know or think of what might have happened…
 “The only reason I have my records is because I was advised to steal some of them, by an Air Force Colonel, because he said they would vaporize you.  He said, they are going to fireproof you. I was looked at, almost like a Frank Serpico kind of guy.  I was not a team player because I was talking to everyone…
“Unfortunately, my friend, Alabama, went AWOL trying to get back home. At O’Hare Airport, he was captured by the FBI and returned to duty immediately.  All he wanted to do was go home.  But he was put back on flight duty.  I was riding with the senior master Sergeant on vehicle patrol, just totally depressed with everything, when Alabama called in-this is a real person-and said he was going to kill himself if he couldn’t go home.  And, this guy turned the pick-up truck quick and was heading toward the post.  He said, you stay on the goddamn radio...  I saw all the units across the flight line responding and everything.  Anyway, Alabama had a short M16, and he put it in his mouth, and took the top of his head off.  This was the first time I ever saw death, violent death, at 19. We were as different as night and day, me and this kid.  You know, he was the south, I was the north.  He was very religious.  I respect that, but we had nothing in common.  He was a nice guy.  And, they did not do anything to help us…”

II
: US Army

“During the discussion of UFOs, the question, ultimately, is going to come up, can any government keep secrets, let alone the U.S. Government?  And the answer to that is unequivocally yes.  But one of the greatest weapons the intelligence community has at their disposal is a predisposition by the American people, the American politicians and the debunkers-people who wish to try to debunk UFO information.  They immediately come out and say, oh, we can’t keep secrets, we can’t keep secrets.  Well, the truth is, yes, we can. 
“The National Recognizance Office remained secret for many, many years.  The mere existence of the NSA remained secret.  The development of the atomic weapon remained secret until once you exploded one you eventually had to tell some people what was going on. 
“And we are conditioned by our own paradigms not to accept the possibility or probability of a highly advanced intelligent civilization coming here to visit us.  You have evidence in the form of highly credible reports of objects being seen, of the entities inside these objects being seen.  Yet, we look for a prosaic explanation and we throw out the bits and pieces of the evidence that doesn't meet our paradigm.  So it is a self-keeping secret.  You can conceal it in plain sight. It is political suicide to go and start hitting up intelligence agencies to get this information released.  So, most of your members of Congress, and I know I’ve worked with a lot of them along that line, will balk and try not to do it.  I can name you three members of Congress that were point blank asked to have a congressional inquiry on what happened here at Roswell…
“We have got to get the documentation as it exists in the Government files.  We have got to get it released before it ultimately is destroyed.  A good example is the Blue Fly and Moon Dust files.  I had classified documents the Air Force acknowledged.  When I got members of Congress to help me open up more files, they were immediately destroyed and I can prove this. 
“Somewhere along the line, they may see that material and realize there is some very highly sensitive information that would have a damning effect upon the national security of United States should it become compromised.  It needs to be further protected, to insure that there is only a limited access to that information to a small number of people.  So small you can put them on a list of paper, on a piece of paper, and list them by name.  Thus, you have the special access programs.  The controls that were supposed to be put on the special access programs are not there.  When Congress did their review of the way we protect documents, and the way we go ahead and implement our secrecy programs, they found that you had special access programs within special access programs-that is was essentially impossible to keep control of them all by Congress.  And, I’m telling you right now; it is essentially impossible to keep control of them all. 
“When it comes to UFOs, the same criteria applies. Therefore, only a small nucleus within the intelligence community, numbering less than a hundred-no, I’d suggest less than 50-control all that information.  It is not subject to congressional review or oversight at all.  So, Congress needs to go ahead and ask the hard questions and convene a hearing.”

Master Sgt. PPP: US Air Force, NRO Operative

“I became part of a group that would investigate, gather the information, and in the beginning it was still under the Blue Book, Snowbird and different covert programs.  I would go interview people who claimed they had seen something and try to convince them they hadn’t seen something or that they were hallucinating.  Well, if that didn’t work, another team would come in and give all the threats.  And threaten them and their family and so on and so forth.  And they would be in charge of discrediting them, making them look foolish and so on and so forth.  Now if that didn’t work, then there was another team that put an end to that problem, one way or another.”




OO: Boeing Aerospace Employee

“A CNN reporter in Washington, D.C., the second time that Gorbachov came to America, was able to interview Gorbachov and his wife.  When they got out on the street they drove the security detail up the wall.  And a CNN reporter asked Gorbachov ‘Do you think we should get rid of all our nuclear weapons?’  And his wife stepped in and she said, ‘No, I don’t think we should get rid of all our nuclear weapons because of alien spacecraft.’ 
“Now CNN put this story on for the half hour, on CNN headline news; I heard this and I jumped up and put a blank tape in to record the next half-hour.  Well, that story disappeared and you know who intercepted that. It was the CIA that got involved with that, because I know that they were monitoring CNN and all international headlines at that time.  They squashed that, but I heard it.  And this tells me that my information is correct about Ronald Reagan, from my NSA source. The secrecy is just total overkill as far as I’m concerned.  And the Congress needs to know about this information…
“He said that we’re trying to get a lid on this to try to minimize the sightings and quell the news media and the witnesses that are reporting these sightings to the news media. The Air Force wanted to push this thing under the rug and continue to research it and just get a handle on it. He confirmed that the Air Force wanted to steer the news media off on some crazy idea that these sightings were created by college pranks and balloons and meteorological problems…
“What he told me regarding the security ramifications were that if their military personnel talked about this they could be court marshaled or at least threatened to be court marshaled to get him to back down.  Other intimidations would be to hold their paychecks back, transfer them to other bases where a lot of people would not want to go to, like Alaska…
 “Basically, these projects were controlled by the Majestic 12 group, which is no longer called MJ12.  I’m trying to find out the new name of this group.  My contact that worked at Area 51 knows the name of the group, but he’s refusing to tell me the name. Basically it’s an oversight group intermingled with the National Security Council and the National Security Planning Group in Washington, D.C. There is a group called the National Security Planning Group that overseas everything.  And Majestic 12 is intermingled with these people, the National Security Planning Group. 
“They have full control.  They alert the President of what’s taking place and he either authorizes or just says, hey, you guys go at it.  They have full control.  They have no Congressional oversight whatsoever.  They answer to nobody, except for the President of the United States.  But they are trying to push even that aside, away from the President, from what I understand. 
“The Presidents no longer have that much control over these groups anymore.  It’s like a separate entity.”

Officer PP: British Police

“I was absolutely amazed at what happened after that.  My life just turned upside down in an instant.  From being a happy go lucky chap, within a space of six months I was put through hell and turned into one of the most horrible persons you could ever imagine coming across.  Purely through harassment, stress, victimization, you name it, I had it.”


Sgt. QQ: US Air Force

 “I didn't want to look at it any longer than that, because I felt that my life was in jeopardy.  Do you understand what I'm saying?  I would have loved to have looked at it longer, I would have loved to have had copies.  I would love to have said more about it, discussed it more, but I knew I couldn't.  I knew the young fellow who was sharing this was really, really overstepping his bounds at that point. 
“I felt that he just needed somebody to talk to.  He hadn't discussed it, couldn't discuss it, and he wasn't doing it for any ulterior motive other than the fact that I think he had the weight of this thing on him and it was distressing to him…
“I knew that I couldn't go anyplace for at least five years without telling the State Department where I was, after I left the military. Any time I traveled I had to notify and get permission, even in the United States.  They had to know where I was all the time. As an example, if we went to Vietnam there was always someone there with us, with a gun, ready to annihilate us basically if we should fall into the hands of the enemy.  They didn't want the enemy to get us; we would be killed instead. 
“So we knew we were operating under these sort of conditions.  Your life was in jeopardy all the time, should you fall into the wrong hands.  So we were aware of that.  I was told when I left that I would be investigated on a regular basis to make sure that I wasn't involved in any peculiar activities that didn't suit the government's needs.”

Ms. RR: NASA Employee

        “There was a point in time when I had some people come out and tell me I shouldn’t talk about this.  They didn’t threaten to kill me but I got the message I shouldn’t talk about it.  But I’d already talked about it so much it didn’t really matter anymore.  And like I said at the [1997] congressional briefings, I really started feeling like this topic was like sex.  You know, everybody knew about it but nobody talked about in mixed company.  I’m waiting to tell more whenever there’s a congressional hearing where I could be protected.  I trust Dr. Greer.  I feel he’s done everything he said he would do as far as protection, secrecy of what I give him, for now.  I want it to come out when it’s necessary and proper and can do some good.  I don’t want people going around that are trying to get rid of these people or hurting them or challenging them or making them so frightened they move away-like this one particular man I know of who has just disappeared off the face of the Earth.  This one man, he has disappeared.  I just don’t want that.”

Mr. SS: DIA Official

“Of corporations involved in this matter, Atlantic Research Corporation is one of the big ones.  So it’s not very often heard about.  It’s an insider beltway bandit, if you want to call it that very low profile, mostly has all of its work done within Intelligence.  TRW, Johnson Controls, Honeywell:  All of them at some point or another became involved with the Intelligence field.  Certain works, activities were contracted out to them.  Atlantic Research was one of them-way back.  These are entities that were created out of people in the Pentagon to become a ‘beltway bandit’-received projects, grants, and monies to do certain projects that were so highly classified and compartmentalized that you know only about four people would know what was going on.  So it was that tightly controlled.”


Dr. UU: McDonnell Douglas Aerospace Engineer

“As you may know, when you get cleared for one of these classified programs you wear your special badge and you know you can talk to anybody who's in the room with a lot of candor and it feels like that's ones psychological group--there's a lot of camaraderie that builds up.  And you had access to special libraries.  So one of the things that we could do is go up to the library that the Air Force ran and sort of paw through top-secret material.  Since I was interested in UFOs, when I had some usual business to take care of, I'd also look in their library to see what they had on UFOs.  And for about a year I was getting quite a few hits on the subject about various reports.  Then all of a sudden, the whole subject material vanished.  The entire classification for the subject just vanished.  The librarian in our group that I was working with said he'd been in that vault for twenty years and knew exactly how things were normally done.  He said, this is remarkable.  He said, I've never seen that before, you just don't have a whole subject vanish out from under you.  He said, I think there is something there that you hit on…
“In the meantime, there was one other thing that came about as a result of my association with Jim McDonald.  I liked the guy; he was really an energetic physicist and wouldn't let any grass grow under his feet.  When he got a case he would dig his teeth into it and present an overwhelmingly convincing story to professional societies.  He would talk to the American Institute of Aeronautics and Astronautics and the American Physical Society, and I happened to be members of both.  So whenever he was in town I would pick him up, escort him, made sure he felt welcome. 
“So once when I was traveling through Tucson, where he lived, I stopped- I had a two-hour layover to catch an airplane-and he came out to the airport to have a beer with me.  I said, ‘What's new, Jim?’  He said, ‘I think I’ve got it.’  I said, ‘What do you think you got?’  He said, ‘I think I got the answer.’  I said, ‘What is it?’  He said, ‘I can't tell you yet.  I have got to be sure.’  It was six weeks after that that he tried to shoot himself.  A couple months after that he finally died. 
“Knowing what I think I now suspect about the skills of our counterintelligence people, I think we had the capacity to convince him to do it himself.  I think that's what happened…
  “Clearly in order to have effective control of this subject, you have to control it at all levels and the most obvious level is the media.  So you have to look at all the kinds of media there are, the movies, the magazines, and of course in the early days that's all it is, newspapers and movies and magazines.  Now we have the Internet and video and all those other sorts of things.  But as the technology has blossomed in these other avenues, the people worrying about this control have also just moved into those avenues right along with them.  So every time a new avenue comes up they have a new counterpoint.”

ZZ: NM UFO Crash Witness

“One of the MPs took me aside and he just said, look mister, you don’t go and start anything.  Nothing happened down here.  And he said, if you do you know there’d be real serious problems.  The way my character was at that time, I just said, I’m a civilian and you can go to hell.  And that’s when he said, you may be the one going to hell.  He said, somebody would be picking my bones out of the sand if I talked.”

Sgt. BBB: US Air Force

“In the military they do ridicule you and I was ridiculed a few times about these UFO events.  I was told that I would never make Master Sergeant if I brought this crap up again.  My superior said, ‘If you keep this crap up you will never make Master Sergeant.  You will get orders for Tech but you will never make Master Sergeant.  They will force you out of the military.’”

Dr. DDD: Italian UFO expert

        “Probably there are, in every part of the world, invisible links with a definite invisible college that is keeping this secret.  They are dealing with this subject from the standpoint of research secretly in order to have gains and technologies to be applied in a various ways. The UFO problem is not only a scientific problem, it is also an intelligence problem. 
“This is the second important face of the UFO reality.  When we begin to understand this we may understand a lot of things, because all this has to do with power.  Power everywhere, in every country, with every government, with every situation.”

Dr. FFF: McDonnell Douglas Career Engineer

“The black budget world is like trying to describe Casper the friendly ghost.  You might see a cartoon of him but you don't know how big he is, you don't know where his funding comes from, you don't know how many there are because of the compartmentalization and the oath that people have to take.  I know people today that worked on one of the things that I worked on, and if you asked them about it-even if it is being discussed on the Internet-they would say no, I have no idea what you're talking about.  They're in their seventies now, but they still absolutely would never admit that they even know what you're talking about. You have no idea, but it's probably larger than you think.”





Astronaut A

“But it has been the subject of disinformation in order to deflect attention and to create confusion so the truth doesn’t come out. Disinformation is simply another method of stonewalling.  And that’s been used consistently for the last 50 years or so: Weather balloons over Roswell as opposed to a crashed craft of some sort.  That is disinformation.  We’ve seen that for 50 years.  And it’s the best way to hide something…
  “Whatever activity is going on, to the extent that it is a clandestine group, a quasi-Government group, a quasi-private group, it is without any type, as far as I can tell, of high level Government oversight.  And that is a great concern.”

C: FAA Head of Accidents and Investigations

“…When they got done, they actually swore all these other guys in there that this never took place.  We never had this meeting.  And this was never recorded…
This was one of the guys from the CIA.  Okay?  That they were never there and this never happened.  At the time I said, well I don’t know why you are saying this.  I mean, there was something there and if it’s not the stealth bomber, then you know, it’s a UFO.  And if it’s a UFO, why wouldn’t you want the people to know?  Oh, they got all excited over that.  You don’t even want to say those words.  He said this is the first time they ever had 30 minutes of radar data on a UFO.  And they are all itching to get their hands onto the data and to find out what it is and what really goes on.  He says if they come out and told the American public that they ran into a UFO out there, it would cause panic across the country.  So therefore, you can’t talk about it.  And they are going to take all this data…
“Well when they read the reports that came through the FAA decided it had to protect themselves-you can’t say you saw a target, even though this is what he said.  So they made him change his report to say ‘position symbols,’ which makes it sound like it wasn’t really a target.  Well if it’s not a target then a lot of the other position symbols that we are separating [on radar] aren’t targets either.  And when I read that, I thought oh, there is something fishy here, that somebody is worried about something or other and they are trying to cover up. 
“When the CIA told us that this never happened and we never had this meeting, I believe it was because they didn’t want the public to know that this was going on.  Normally we would put out some type of a news release that such and such happened…
“Well, I’ve been involved in a lot of cover-ups with the FAA.  When we gave the presentation to the Reagan staff I was behind the group that was there.  And when they were speaking to the people in the room, they had all those people swear that this never happened.  But they never had me swear it never happened.  And it always bothered me that we have these things going on and when you see something or you hear something on the radio or TV, the news, that it’s put down as it’s not there.  I have a hard time saying nothing…
“NORAD [North American Air Defense Command] knows about it.  They had called NORAD.  The senior NCO pulled me to the side and said that NORAD knows about it-that’s the only people we notify.  We don’t talk about this.  We don’t tell anybody about this.  The people that know know.  We just watch, see what happens, and that’s it.  That’s our job I insisted there has to be a report filed or something filed, you know?  And he said that there is a report that you can file-it’s about an inch thick, and the first two pages are about the sighting.  The rest of it is basically a psychological profile of you, your family, your bloodlines, everything. 
“When the Air Force goes through it, they can discredit you completely by either saying that [you were] on drugs, or your mother was a communist, or anything to discredit you.  You’d never get a promotion, and [you’d] spend the next three and one-half years up at the North Pole, living in a tent, checking the weather balloons.  You know-no hope for promotion.  So, the message was pretty loud and clear:  You just shut-up and don’t say anything to anybody…
“Another experience I had, happened on third shift.  I was on the radar, and NORAD called me and informed me that there was a UFO coming up the California coast and it would be in my area pretty soon. 
“I said what do you want me to do?  And they said, ‘Nothing, just watch it, don’t write it down.’  We have a log book in which we are supposed to keep track of anything out of the ordinary.  But they said, ‘Don’t log it or anything, just watch it.  We are just letting you know-heads up.’  NORAD was well aware, obviously, that these UFOs were around, and the action of the people when I first saw the UFO on radar was as if it happens quite often.”

E: US Air Force Radar Controller

“The government, they cover up.  They don’t want anybody talking about it. But this is such remarkable technology.  These people come from who knows where.  I would think you’d want everybody to know… 
“On a personal note, after the first event happened in Oregon, I came home on leave and told my Dad about it.  He was red, white, and blue through and through-an old WWII hero and all that, and very patriotic.  I was explaining to him about these UFOs that we routinely see out there, and he said, ‘No, the Government says that there are no UFOs.’  I’m saying, Dad, I’ve seen these on radar with my own eyes.  And he says, come on, the Government would never lie to him.  You know?  But here’s his son; I would never lie to him. 
“So, he just didn’t know what to do.  It wasn’t until years later, until after Watergate, that he said, ‘Hey, sit down and tell me about this.  The Government is lying to me about a little thing like Watergate, so obviously they are out lying about something big.’
“It’s a Government cover-up that doesn’t need to be here any more.  There is no more Cold War.  I believe the same thing Dr. Greer does, that the technology they have could enable us to stop burning our fossil fuels and stop the damage to the ozone, etc. These people have technologies-they must have something.  And the Government knows about it.  They have these aliens, they have these spacecraft, they have this technology, all this.  There’s a lot of back-engineered technology, that’s pretty obvious.  Who are they to cover this up when other Governments are coming forward, admitting, and showing their files-why isn’t our Government?”

I:  US Navy Radar Technician

“They didn’t want anybody to know anything about what we were seeing.  And I think that started the cover-up.  And then it got out of hand. 
“But I know that the only people that they are keeping it secret from today are the Americans.  Everybody else knows about it and accepts it.  And all of the other Governments in the world except England and the U.S. primarily, are accepting it. 
“It’s very irritating to me personally, to see that go on.”

J: United Airlines Pilot

“In the past pilots that had seen things and had talked about it were let go.  Some were released from their flying and treated as nutcases and things like that.  So that was the last I said of it for many, many years.”

Lt. L: US Navy Pilot

“There is a publication called JANAP 146 E that had a section that says you will not reveal any information regarding the UFO phenomenon under penalty of $10,000.00 fine and ten years in jail.  So they were quite adamant that whatever experiences you had you were not to go public with it without their permission…
“The subject never came up with Air Traffic Control.  In any event I would never have opened my mouth.  There was a Captain, Pete Killian, who was written about in some of the UFO books.  He was a Captain with American Airlines back in the ‘50’s that evidently had a sighting and testified before the Senate committees.  And then there was another captain that actually took a photograph of a UFO off his wings.  And of course they were subject to ridicule.  I didn’t want to go that direction.  So, I never reported anything to FAA or the military.  A lot of pilots just did not want to get involved in this because of peer pressure and ridicule.  So the secret has been kept…
  “I have a very personal friend that was a B-24 pilot during W.W.II that got into [the] O.S.S.  And he was one of the first people into Japan after the atomic bomb was dropped on Hiroshima, Nagasaki.  He ended up on Project Bluebook, Section 13, which I believe was the top-secret portion of that investigation.  At the time he was a captain in the Air Force.  He’s in his late ‘70’s now and he is still being carried on active duty as a captain.  I don’t know if he’s being paid but if he’s on active duty he should be a three star general with time and rank and he should be paid.  And the whole reason that they have kept him on active duty is to keep his national security oath active because of what he knows.  There are certain things that he will not talk to me about because of that security oath even though I had a top secret clearance with the Navy and we are both very interested in the same thing. 
“For whatever reason the Government, or those agencies of Government, deem necessary to protect their agendas, which obviously now, aren’t our agendas.  I think it is time for us to act, to end this charade.  And to take whatever steps are necessary to insure that the human race evolves properly and enjoys the fruits of that evolution.”

Lt. Col. P: US Air Force, SAC Launch Controller

 “I wrote up a report about this incident; it was in my log and I turned it in.  When we got to the base we had to report to our squadron commander right away.  And in that room with my squadron commander was a fellow from AFOSI (we had an Air Force Office of Special Investigations on the base).  He was there in the office with the commander.  He asked for my logs and he wanted a quick briefing although it seemed to me he knew pretty much what had happened already.  But we gave him a quick briefing and then he asked us both to sign a non-disclosure agreement saying this was classified information-we were not to release this to anybody, and that was it.  We couldn’t talk; he told us we could not talk about this to anyone, including any of the other crews, our spouses, our family, even amongst each other…
“Bob Kominski headed up the organization to look at all aspects of these [UFO related ICBM] shutdowns.  Kominski relates to me in writing that at some point he was told by his boss that the Air Force said, ‘Stop the investigation; do no more on this and in addition do not write a final report.’  Again, this is very unusual especially in light of the fact that CINC-SAC headquarters was stating that this was of extreme importance to find out exactly what happened here.  And yet, the head of the investigative team was told during the investigation to stop the investigation and not write a final report.”


Prof. R: US Air Force

    “After an article [came out about the incident], the shit hit the fan!  I started being harassed at work.  I started getting odd telephone calls that would come during the day.  At night, at my house I would get telephone calls-all night long sometimes-3:00 in the morning, 4:00 in the morning, midnight, 10:00.  People would call and start screaming at me.  You are going down motherfucker!  You are going down motherfucker!  And that’s all they would say.  And they’d keep screaming that until I finally hung up the phone. 
“One night somebody blew up my mail box by putting a big load of skyrockets in it.  The mailbox went up in flames.  And that night at 1:00 in the morning the phone rang.  I picked it up and somebody said, skyrockets in your box at night, oh what a beautiful sight, motherfucker! 
        “And things like that have happened on and off since 1982…
“I believe this nutty fringe around UFOs is part of a concerted effort to keep serious study of it down.  Anytime anybody tries to study this subject seriously, we are subject to ridicule.  I’m a full professor at a relatively major university.  And I’m certain that my colleagues at the university laugh at me and hoot and holler behind my back when they hear that I have an interest in studying unidentified flying objects-and that’s just one of the things that we have to live with…
        “What happened to the film is an interesting story in itself as Major Mansmann related to me and other people.  Some time after I had gone, the guys in civilian clothes-I thought it was the CIA but he said no, it wasn’t the CIA, it was somebody else- took the film and they spooled off the part that had the UFO on it and they took a pair of scissors and cut it off.  They put that on a separate reel.  They put it in their briefcase.  They handed Major Mansmann back the rest of the film and said here, I don’t need to remind you Major of the severity of a security breach; we’ll consider this incident closed.  And they walked off with the film.  Major Mansmann never saw it again”

T: US Navy

        “A Lieutenant Commander whom I didn’t know very well came over and he asked, you know, ‘What’s up T?  What have you got in your log?’  And he says, ‘You don’t need to put that in there.’  Now to me that was highly irregular, highly irregular to say that particularly on a ship’s logs.  I did have the contact logged in there.  And I started writing in UFO.”

U: US Navy Crypto Communications

        “A few days later the Commanding Officer and the Executive Officer came on the closed circuit television system that we had on board.  It was the only way that they could address the crew of 5,000.  He [the Commanding Officer] looked at the camera-and I will never forget this-and he said, ‘I would like to remind the crew that certain events that take place on board a major naval combative vessel are considered classified and should not be discussed with anyone without a need to know.’  And that was all he said.”





Witness Testimony

Overview


Astronaut A:  May 1998

In February 1971 Astronaut A flew on Apollo 14 and was the 6
th man to walk on the moon. In his testimony, he acknowledges the fact that there have been ET visitations here on Earth as well as crashed craft and recovered materials and bodies.  He also speaks of the concealment that has been prevalent surrounding this subject for over 50 years and the lack of oversight and visible Government control.  He is concerned over our stewardship of this Earth and sees our growing environmental crisis as real.


Monsignor B:  September 2000    

B is a Vatican theologian and an insider close to the Pope.  He has been featured on national Italian television numerous times to express that extraterrestrial contact is a real phenomenon and “not due to psychological impairment.”  In this testimony he explains that not only the general populous but also highly credible, cultured, and educated people of high status are recognizing more and more that this is a real phenomenon.  He goes on to speak about the extraterrestrial people as part of God’s creation and that they are not angels nor are they devils.  However they are probably more spiritually evolved.



Radar and Pilot Cases

Introduction

(Transcribed and edited from an oral presentation by Dr. Greer)

This area of testimony deals specifically with pilot encounters, radar cases and related cases.  It should be pointed out that for decades, people who have been skeptical of the UFO subject have asserted that if these objects were real, they would have been tracked on radar.  We have no fewer than 20 witnesses from the Air Force, the Marines, the Navy, the Army, and civilian authorities in the United States and abroad who are qualified air traffic controllers and pilots who have seen and tracked these objects on radar.  Please note that these people state emphatically that these objects have not been weather balloons; they have not been air inversions; they have not been “swamp gas.”  They have been structured craft often traveling at thousands of miles per hour, then suddenly stopping, hovering or moving in a nonlinear fashion.  These objects have been tracked going from one spot to hundreds of miles away or further within one radar sweep.  These are solid objects.  They are metallic and they give strong and unambiguous radar returns.
This is not a situation any more where we just have one or two witnesses, and one must consider this very seriously as you evaluate the evidence:  To have more than a dozen of these witnesses on tape testifying that these objects have been tracked on radar, and at times as many as a dozen radars tracking at the same time, means that we are dealing with an actual, real, physical and technological craft-not something that is imaginary, not something that is a mass hallucination, and not something that can be written off as some kind of anomaly.  As Air Force Colonel AA pointed out, the Air Force Project Grudge, as far back as 1950, had radar confirmation of these objects by ground radar, ground visual, airborne radar, and airborne visual-and, “It does not get any better than that.”  Many of these witnesses have also observed these objects returning on multiple nights to similar areas and have checked out their equipment rigorously to be sure that there were no technical glitches in either the software or the hardware. 
This of course is explosive.  The testimony of these witnesses forever puts to rest the argument that these objects don't exist because we have, in addition to their testimony, the radar tracings; we have documentation of these events; and we have people who have been on the inside of such events ranging from the 1940s all the way up into the 1990s. 

FAA Division Chief C: October 2000     

For 6 years Mr. C was the Division Chief of the Accidents and Investigations Branch of the FAA in Washington DC.  In his testimony he tells about a 1986 Japanese Airlines 747 flight that was followed by a UFO for 31 minutes over the Alaskan skies.  The UFO also trailed a United Airlines flight until the flight landed.  There was visual confirmation as well as air-based and ground-based radar confirmation.  This event was significant enough for the then FAA Administrator, Admiral Engen, to hold a briefing the next day where the FBI, CIA, President Reagan’s Scientific Study Team, as well as others attended.  Videotape radar evidence, air traffic voice communications and paper reports were compiled and presented.  At the conclusion of this meeting, the attending CIA members instructed everyone present that ‘”the meeting never took place” and that “this incident was never recorded.”  Not realizing that there was additional evidence, they confiscated just the evidence presented, but Mr. C was able to secure videotape and audio evidence of the event.


C:  Chief C             SG:  Dr. Steven Greer

C: …Now in the 747 they have radar in the nose that picks up the weather outside there.  So his radar is picking up a target.  He sees this target with his eyes.  And the target, the way he described it, was a huge ball with lights running around it.  And I think he said it was like four times as big as a 747! 

And the military man said something like, yeah, I see him 35 miles north of Anchorage…

The UFO was bouncing around the 747 here.  And when he would say that, the military guy would cut in and say, he’s now at 2:00 or 3:00 and he would confirm the position.  The military controller has, what they call, height-finding radar, and they have long-range radar and short-range radar.  So if they don’t catch it on one of their systems they catch it on the other.  And if you listen to the military man, at one time he said, I have it on the height radar, or my range radar, which indicated that they had a target on his system.  Well they ran through for the best part of 31 minutes…

Then the next day I got a call from someone with the Scientific Study Group [for President Reagan], or the CIA, I’m not sure who it was, the first call.  And they had some questions about the incident.  And I had said, I don’t know what you are talking about, you probably want to call the Admiral [FAA Administrator Engen]. 
Well a few minutes later the Admiral calls down and says, I have set up a briefing tomorrow morning at 9:00 am in the round room.  Bring all the stuff you have.  Bring everybody up there and give them whatever they want.  We want to get out of it.  Just let them do whatever they want.  So I brought all the people from the Tech Center.  We had all kinds of boxes of data that we had them print out; it filled up the room.  They brought in three people from the FBI, three people from the CIA, and three people from Reagan’s Scientific Study team-I don’t know who the rest of the people were but they were all excited…

When they got done, they actually swore all these other guys in there that this never took place.  We never had this meeting.  And this was never recorded. 

SG:  Who said that?  Who was saying that? 

C:  This was one of the guys from the CIA.  Okay?  That they were never there and this never happened.  At the time I said, well I don’t know why you are saying this.  I mean, there was something there and if it’s not the stealth bomber, then you know, it’s a UFO.  And if it’s a UFO, why wouldn’t you want the people to know?  Oh, they got all excited over that.  You don’t even want to say those words.  He said this is the first time they ever had 30 minutes of radar data on a UFO.  And they are all itching to get their hands onto the data and to find out what it is and what really goes on.  He says if they come out and told the American public that they ran into a UFO out there, it would cause panic across the country.  So therefore, you can’t talk about it.  And they are going to take all this data…

Well when they read the reports that came through the FAA decided it had to protect themselves-you can’t say you saw a target, even though this is what he said.  So they made him change his report to say “position symbols,” which makes it sound like it wasn’t really a target.  Well if it’s not a target then a lot of the other position symbols that we are separating [on radar] aren’t targets either.  And when I read that, I thought oh, there is something fishy here, that somebody is worried about something or other and they are trying to cover up. 

When the CIA told us that this never happened and we never had this meeting, I believe it was because they didn’t want the public to know that this was going on.  Normally we would put out some type of a news release that such and such happened…

The only ones that see a UFO in the TV programs are the rednecks out in the country that are going coon hunting or alligator hunting at night.  You don’t find anybody with any kind of smarts or some professional individual saying hey, last night let me tell you what I saw.  They don’t display that in the United States.  So if you talk about seeing a UFO, you are putting yourself in a funny kind of category.  That’s probably one of the reasons why you don’t hear about it anymore.  But as far as I’m concerned, I saw a UFO chase a Japanese 747 across the sky for over half an hour on radar.  And it’s faster than anything that I know of in our Government. 

Well, I’ve been involved in a lot of cover-ups with the FAA.  When we gave the presentation to the Reagan staff I was behind the group that was there.  And when they were speaking to the people in the room, they had all those people swear that this never happened.  But they never had me swear it never happened.  And it always bothered me that we have these things going on and when you see something or you hear something on the radio or TV, the news, that it’s put down as it’s not there.  I have a hard time saying nothing. 

It still bothers me that I’ve seen all this, I know all this, and I’m walking around with the answer, and nobody wants to ask the question to get the answer.  And it kind of irritates me a little bit.  And I don’t believe our Government should be set up that way.  I think when we have something like this, that you can probably find out more about what’s going on in the world [by not covering it up].  If they [the UFOs] can travel that far, that distance with that type of machinery, who knows what they could do here for the health of the nation, the people, the food they could give them, the cancers we could cure.  They have to know more than us to be able to travel at that speed. 

For those people that say that if these UFOs existed, they would some day be on radar and that there’d be professionals who would see it, then I can tell them that back in 1986 there were enough professional people that saw it.  It was brought down to headquarters, FAA headquarters, Washington D.C.  The Administrator saw the tape of it.  The people that we were debriefing, they’ve all seen.  Reagan’s Scientific Study team, three of those professors, doctors, they’ve seen it.  As far as I was concerned they were the ones that verified my own thoughts about it.  They were very, very excited about the data.  They had said that this was the only time a UFO was ever recorded on radar for any length of time where it is 30 some minutes.  And they have all this data to look at…

What I can tell you is what I’ve seen with my own eyes.  I’ve got a videotape.  I’ve got the voice tape.  I’ve got the reports that were filed that will confirm what I’ve been telling you.  And I’m one of those, what you would call the high Government officials in the FAA.  I was a Division Chief.  I was only three or four down from the Admiral…

D: US Air Force (ret.), December 2000  

D is a career Air Force military man who was at Edwards Air Force Base in 1965 when not one, but at least seven UFOs appeared over Edwards Air Force Base airspace, moving in extraordinary fashion at enormous speeds, making right-hand turns and other maneuvers which no known aircraft was capable of at the time.  They appeared on multiple radars, were seen visually by several people, and a special UFO officer scrambled and authorized a jet to intercept these objects.  This event lasted for five or six hours.  An edited transcript of the audiotape of the event follows his testimony.

E:  US Air Force,  November 2000        

E was an Air Traffic Controller with the Air Force in Oregon and, subsequently, in Michigan.  At both of these facilities he and others witnessed UFOs tracked on radar and moving at extraordinary speeds.  He also confirms that personnel were expected to maintain secrecy concerning these observations, and that NORAD, the North American Air Defense Command, was fully apprised of these events.  In fact, in one event in Michigan, NORAD was fully engaged, and steered B-52s returning to base around these UFOs.

 F:  US Navy (ret.), November 2000

F is a retired Navy commander pilot with a top-secret clearance.  He was a VIP Plane Commander who flew most of the high-ranking officers and civilians from Washington D.C.  In his testimony he explains how he was flying a group of VIP’s and other pilots into Argentia, Newfoundland when they all witnessed a 300 foot UFO that traveled 10,000 feet straight up in a fraction of a second toward their plane and was on radar. He has documented the event extensively.

Mr. G: Senior Air Traffic Controller, October 2000

Mr. G is a senior Air Traffic Controller at Mexico City International Airport.  In his testimony he speaks about the frequent UFO sightings seen at the airport visually and on radar.  They are clocked at tremendous speeds and making almost instantaneous hairpin turns.  Of the 140 air traffic controllers at the airport, he estimates that over 50 have seen this phenomenon.  During one sighting, 32 controllers visually saw the same red and white lights simultaneously moving around a conventional landing aircraft.  There have been reports from all four air traffic control centers in Mexico of these UFOs.

H: November 2000                

Dr. H has been a NASA research scientist since the mid 1960’s.  He has worked on the Gemini, Apollo, and Skylab programs as well as several others.    Over the past 30 years, Dr. H has compiled over 3,000 cases of unusual visual and radar sightings of unexplained aerial phenomena.  He notes that numerous foreign cases also appear in the literature and are very similar in nature to the American reports.  In one case here in America, a B-52 captain told him that he and his crew had five round spheres appear just off of each wingtip, behind their aircraft, above the aircraft, and below and they kept up with the plane at cruise altitude and speed.  The captain tried to shake the spheres with evasive maneuvers but each sphere kept exact position.  There are other cases where pilots look into the transparent cupola of some UFOs and detail can be seen inside.

Mr. I: US Navy, December 2000   

Mr.I was trained as an electronic radar technician in the Navy in the 50’s and 60’s.  He tells of an incident where he witnessed a clear, unambiguous radar contact speeding along at 3,400 miles an hour.  There were other radar operators as well who, at various times in 1957 and 1958, also witnessed these unusually fast moving objects.  At the time, the fastest human aircraft clocked in at 1,100 miles and hour.  In one case an Air Force operator tracked one of these UFOs 300 to 400 miles out in space.  When these reports repeatedly kept coming in to General Electric who manufactured the radar, their technicians came in and modified the electronics so that the radar would limit it’s reporting to 12 to 15 miles out into space.

J: Airline Pilot, November 2000         

Mr. J is a pilot with over 30,000 hours of flight time spanning 59 years.  He entered the Air Force and became a B-17 pilot surviving 29 combat missions.  After leaving the Air Force he worked for United Airlines for 35 years.  He tells about the time in March of 1977 when he was flying a commercial flight from San Francisco to Boston.  The plane was on autopilot when by itself it began to bank left.  He looked out the window and noticed a brilliant bright light.  The first and second officers both saw it also.  They were perplexed because all three compasses reported different readings.


K: (ret.), August 2000  

Mr.K is a retired military man with a top-secret clearance.  He worked transporting nuclear weapons all over the world. He personally witnessed a UFO maneuvering in the clear nights sky at an incredible speed straight up.  Another time he and a civilian 747 both saw on their radar screens an object travel an estimated 10,000 miles an hour directly at them.

Lieutenant L: US Navy (ret.), September 2000    

L was in the Navy in the 60’s flying attack planes.  He had a top-secret clearance and served in Vietnam.  He is a retired pilot of 33 years with American Airlines.  In his testimony, he reveals that there is a publication called JANAP 146 E that has a section which states that no one is to share any information regarding the UFO phenomenon under penalty of $10,000 fine and 10 years in prison.  During one incident in late 1964, while flying an A4 Skyhawk, he says that all of a sudden a darkened saucer shaped object about 30 feet in diameter appeared on his left side.  There were many other events over the course of his career where he observed saucer shaped and cigar shaped UFOs over military installations as well as one time seeing two red lights traversing the night’s sky from horizon to horizon in three seconds.  He was afraid to bring up these events to others due to the inherent ridicule in the subject.


Captain M: September 2000               

Captain M is a senior 747 captain for Alitalia.  He relates an event where when flying from Rome to Sao Paolo in July of 1999 he witnessed a glowing green halo soaring past just 500 feet below his 747.  The aircraft experienced a sudden jump when this UFO passed underneath.  Very noisy static came through his headphones during this experience.  At another time while flying over Turin Italy in 1992, he saw a distant elliptical sphere maintaining a very steady position relative to the clouds as if stationary.  He saw this UFO through a spotting scope.  After looking away to briefly speak to his co-pilot, he looked back and it was gone


Lt. N:  US Army, September 2000         

Lieutenant N was a 2
nd lieutenant in the Army.  After World War II at a NASA (then NACA) open house he saw a 30-foot saucer-shaped craft which had been brought back from Germany for study.  On another occasion he was piloting an aircraft for a TV station when a disc shaped object came in from the west.  He had his camera and climbed to 12,000 feet to take some photos of it.  After landing, he immediately had the pictures developed and enlarged.  The object turned out to be a football shaped silver object with points at each end. His film was subsequently taken from him under unusual circumstances.  In his testimony he also speaks of a time when he happened into a diner late at night near Ft. Campbell in Kentucky and overheard conversations from MPs about how a flying saucer had landed next to a nearby farmhouse and the MP’s were there cordoning off the area.  Creatures were present and were shot at by the frightened farmhouse owner.

Mr. O: US Army, September 2000 

Mr. O was a Launch Area Electronics Technician for the US Army. He was also trained as a systems analyst and worked on Nike Hercules missiles.  For two years he worked for Honeywell making nuclear tipped torpedoes.  Mr. O heard numerous first hand accounts from various radar operators that they were seeing extremely fast targets moving at 3500 miles an hour.  Some of these were making impossibly small-radius turns.  At one time he witnessed an attempted to shoot one down with an air defense missile near Mount Vernon, WA.




SAC/Nuke

Introduction

(Transcribed and edited from an oral presentation by Dr. Greer)

This section deals with the Strategic Air Command and UFO events involving nuclear facilities.  I wish to emphasize again that the witnesses we have here are diverse.  They range from the Atomic Energy Commission to people who have been at Strategic Air Command facilities and at missile launch control facilities throughout the United States and Canada.  These witnesses give unmistakably clear testimony about the fact that these extraterrestrial vehicles appear to be quite concerned with our weapons of mass destruction.  And in fact, more than one of these witnesses have stated to me that they believe that these extraterrestrial vehicles were there because they were very concerned that we might blow ourselves up- or that we might begin to go into space and be a threat someday to other civilizations. 
I believe this is very important because, while none of these witnesses has stated that there ever was any hostile action taken by these objects, it is quite clear that they are concerned about what we may do with weapons of mass destruction.  And this speaks to something very profound:  That we have reached the point where the only possible future is one that is peaceful.  The weapons are too powerful and the stakes are too high to advance any further and contemplate the use of such weapons.  We must advance forward into space without using these vast weapons within our arsenal against any life form.  The extraterrestrial civilizations, which appear to be monitoring our activity and have been doing so for decades, may indeed have this as one of their chief concerns.  And it is very likely that entry into inter-planetary society has as its primary requirement the ability for a people to advance into space peacefully.  For we are not talking now of muskets and canons and swords but of thermonuclear weapons, pulsed laser weapons, and exotic technologies which can rip the fabric of time-space.  It must be clear to all that the only survivable future is a peaceful one.  This peace is the hallmark of the maturation of the human race. 
It is also possible that people within the national military command structure, as well as the national security apparatus of the United States and other countries, have misinterpreted some of the actions from these extraterrestrial vehicles as a violation of our airspace or our sovereignty.  I think we must take a wider look at this and consider the fact that if we were to come across a planet which, within a hundred years, had gone from an agrarian civilization to one capable of the early stages of space flight and which had thousands of thermonuclear devices capable of destroying worlds, that perhaps we would be concerned as well.  I think that we have to begin to look in the mirror as a people and ask ourselves what we should be doing to ensure a peaceful future for our planet and also to guarantee that we keep these weapons out of space forever. 
In discussing this issue about the Strategic Air Command facilities and nuclear events, you will learn that on some occasions these objects, which have hovered over control launch facilities or missile silos, have been able to take these devices off-line:  That is, they have been able to render inert intercontinental ballistic missiles.  I do not believe that this is a sign of any hostility on their part but their way of saying, "Please don't destroy this beautiful planet; and know this: we will not let you destroy ours."  I think it's very important for people to understand that such actions however, may have been misinterpreted by certain authorities within the vacuum of secrecy and this is something we must look at very carefully as a civilization.  What happens within the darkness of secrecy?  Secrecy grows on itself, and it creates an information and perspective vacuum where there's not enough give and take with people of differing views or from different walks of life.  In that milieu, it's very easy for paranoia and misinterpretation to set in and that is one of the great inherent risks of obsessive secrecy-the kind of secrecy which President Eisenhower warned us about in January of 1961. 


Lieutenant Colonel  P: December 2000    

Colonel P graduated from the Air Force Academy and spent seven years in active duty from 1964 to 1971.  He also held positions at Martin Marietta and Rockwell and spent 21 years at the FAA.  In the Air Force, he was an air traffic controller and a missile launch officer as well as an engineer on the Titan 3 missiles.  He testifies about a UFO incident on the morning of March 16, 1967 where 16 nuclear missiles simultaneously became non-operational at two different launch facilities immediately after guards saw UFOs hovering above.  The guards could not identify these objects even though they were only about 30 feet away.  The Air Force did an extensive investigation of the incidents and could not find a probable cause.  At a debriefing about the incident, an officer from the Air Force Office of Special Investigations required him to sign a non-disclosure form and told him that he was not to talk about the event to anyone including his family or other military staff.  At a time during the Cold War when minor technical anomalies were openly communicated amongst the staff, this incident was not and to this day Colonel P thinks this to be very unusual.

… The UFO incident happened on the morning of March 16, 1967.  I was on duty along with my commander Fred Mywald.  We were both on duty at Oscar Flight as part of the 490th strategic missile squad and there are five launch control facilities assigned to that particular squadron.  We were at Oscar Flight. 

It was still dark out and we’re sixty feet underground [at the ICBM launch control facility].  It was early in the morning and I received a call from my topside security guard who’s the flight security controller and he said that he and some of the guards had been observing some strange lights flying around the site around the launch control facility.  He said they were acting very unusual just flying around, and I said, “You mean UFO?  He said, well, he didn’t know what they were but they were lights and were flying around.  They were not airplanes; they weren’t making any noise.  They were not helicopters; they were making some very strange maneuvers and he couldn’t explain it…

It wasn’t more than a few minutes- maybe a half hour later- and he calls back and this time he’s very frightened; I can tell by the tone of his voice he’s very shook up.  He says, “Sir, there’s a glowing red object hovering right outside the front gate-I’m looking at it right now.  I’ve got all the men out here with their weapons drawn…”

I immediately went over to my commander who was taking a nap-we have a little cot down there for rest periods-and I was telling him about the telephone call we just received.  As I was relating this to him our missiles started shutting down one by one.  By shutting down, I mean they went into a “no-go” condition meaning they could not be launched.  So we get bells and whistles-a red light no-go condition…

These weapons were Minuteman One missiles and were of course nuclear-tipped warhead missiles. 

As they started shutting down, immediately he gets up and we both start querying the status board.  We’ve got the ability to query and determine what the cause of the shutdowns was.  As I recall, most of them were guidance and control system failures.  And then he started reporting to the command post.  In the meantime I called upstairs to find out what the status was of this object and the guard said, well, the object has left-it just left at high speed…

The Air Force did an extensive investigation of the entire incident and was not able to come up with a probable cause for the shutdowns.  And I’ve got quite a few witnesses that will testify to that-we’ve got a couple of people who worked on the investigative team-and I’ve got correspondence from the man who actually organized the investigative team.  There was no viable explanation for this [shutdown of multiple ICBMs].  Each missile is basically self-supporting.  Most of them are powered by commercial power but each missile has its own power generator…

At our site anywhere from six to eight went down but they went down in rapid succession which again is an extremely rare happening.  We rarely had more than one missile go down for any reason at all…

After I talked to my guard upstairs, my commander talked to the command post.  When he finished talking to the command post he turned to me and said, “The same thing occurred at ECHO Flight.”  ECHO Flight is another squadron, I’d say probably 50 - 60 miles away from our location but they had the same sort of thing happen.  They had UFOs that were hovering, not at the launch control facility but at the actual launch facilities where the missiles are located.  They had some maintenance and security people out there at the time and they observed the UFOs at those sites.  Now they lost all ten of their weapons-all ten…

It was the same morning.  So that morning we lost anywhere from between 16 to 18 ICBMs at the same time UFOs were in the area and were observed by airmen.  Those missiles were down the entire day because we’ve got testimony from Colonel Don Crawford, who relieved the crew at ECHO Flight and he was there when the missiles were being brought up to alert status and he said it took the whole day.  So I’m assuming it took our missiles all day to be brought back up also…

I wrote up a report about this incident; it was in my log and I turned it in.  When we got to the base we had to report to our squadron commander right away.  And in that room with my squadron commander was a fellow from AFOSI (we had an Air Force Office of Special Investigations on the base).  He was there in the office with the commander.  He asked for my logs and he wanted a quick briefing although it seemed to me he knew pretty much what had happened already.  But we gave him a quick briefing and then he asked us both to sign a non-disclosure agreement saying this was classified information- we were not to release this to anybody, and that was it.  We couldn’t talk; he told us we could not talk about this to anyone, including any of the other crews, our spouses, our family, even amongst each other…

I’ve got a copy of a telex which we received under FOIA coming from SAC headquarters and coming to Malstrom and other bases right after the morning that happened saying that this incident was of extreme concern to SAC headquarters because they couldn’t explain it.  Nobody could explain what happened.  And yet we never got de-briefed.  And we were cleared for very high classification because these are nuclear weapons we’re dealing with. 

We did get the security incursion alarms at those sites when the missile went down.  That is unusual because usually when a missile went down for something like guidance failure, we wouldn’t get security incursion alarms, which means a perimeter is breached, an object crossed the fence, or something broke the security alarm system that we had on the perimeter of the launch facility.  I did sent out guards to a couple of those facilities to investigate that. 

The reason I think this story is very significant is because, going back to August of 1966 at Minot, ND, a very similar thing happened at one of the launch control facilities at Minot Air Force Base.  They had the same kind of weapon system that we had-they had M-1 missiles.  This [UFO] was observed on radar, there was some communication failure and the object was observed over the launch control facility. 

That happened in August 1966 and that’s a well-documented incident.  About a week prior to my incident, in March 1967, I’ve got a record of a call from one of the security guards who was out roaming looking at the launch facilities and saw an object very similar to what I just described over the launch facility…

Bob Kominski headed up the organization to look at all aspects of these shutdowns.  Kominski relates to me in writing that at some point he was told by his boss that the Air Force said, “Stop the investigation; do no more on this and in addition do not write a final report.”  Again, this is very unusual especially in light of the fact that CINC-SAC headquarters was stating that this was of extreme importance to find out exactly what happened here.  And yet, the head of the investigative team was told during the investigation to stop the investigation and not write a final report…




Professor R:  Lt. US Air Force, November 2000
Professor R is a respected professor at a major US university.  In the 1960’s he was in the Air Force. He was the officer in charge of optical instrumentation and his job was to film ballistic missile tests launched from Vandenberg Air Force base in California.  In 1964, during a test of the first missile they filmed, they caught on film a UFO traveling right next to the missile.  He says it looked like two saucers cupped together with a round ping-pong ball like surface on top.  The film showed that from the ball a beam of light was directed at the missile.  This happened four times, from four different angles, as the missile was about 60 miles up and traveling at 11,000 to 14,000 miles an hour.  The missile tumbled out of space and the UFO left.  The next day he was shown the film by his commanding officer and was told to never speak of this again.  He said, if it ever comes up you are to say that it was laser strikes from the UFO.  Professor R thought this unusual because in 1964 lasers were in their infancy in the labs but he never the less agreed and hasn’t talked about it for 18 years.  Years later, after an article came out about the film, professor R started receiving harassing phone calls at early hours in the morning.  His mailbox was even blown up out in front of his house.

We sent the film back down to the base and- I don’t know exactly how long it was after the event, it might have been a day or two-I was called into Major Mansmann’s office at the First Strategic Aerospace Division Headquarters.  I walked into his office and they had a screen and a 16mm projector set up.  There was a couch and Major Mansmann said sit down.  And there were two guys in gray suits, civilian clothes, which was fairly unusual.  Major Mansmann said watch this and turned on the film projector.  I watched the screen and there was the launch from the day or two before…

We watched the third stage burnout.  And then on that telescope we could see the dummy warhead.  It’s flying along and into the frame came something else.  It flew into the frame like and it shot a beam of light at the warhead. 

Now remember, all this stuff is flying at several thousand miles an hour.  So this thing [UFO] fires a beam of light at the warhead, hits it and then it [the UFO] moves to the other side and fires another beam of light, then moves again and fires another beam of light, then goes down and fires another beam of light, and then flies out the way it came in.  And the warhead tumbles out of space.  The object, the points of light that we saw, the warhead and so forth, were traveling through subspace about 60 miles straight up.  And they were going somewhere in the neighborhood of 11,000 to 14,000 miles an hour when this UFO caught up to them, flew in, flew around them, and flew back out. 

Now, I saw that!  I don’t give a Goddamn what anybody else says about it.  I saw that on film!  I was there! 
Now when the lights came on, Major Mansmann turned around looked at me and said, “Were you guys screwing around up there?”  And I said, “No, sir.”  And he said, “What was that?”  And I said, “It looks to me like we got a UFO.”  Now the thing that we saw, this object that flew in, was circular, was shaped like two saucers cupped together with a ping-pong ball on top.  The beam of light came out of the ping-pong ball.  That’s what I saw on film. 

Now Major Mansmann said to me after some discussion about it, you are never to speak of this again.  As far as you are concerned, this never happened.  And he said, “I don’t need to emphasize the dire consequences of a security breach, do I?”  I said, “No, sir.”  And he said, “Fine.  This never happened.”  As I started for the door, he said, “Wait a minute.”  He said, “Years from now if you are ever forced by someone to talk about this, you are to tell them it was laser strikes, laser tracking strikes…”

It’s not a secondhand story.  This happened to me.  And I was a part of a United States Air Force cover-up for 18 years. 

After an article [came out about the incident], the shit hit the fan!  I started being harassed at work.  I started getting odd telephone calls that would come during the day.  At night, at my house I would get telephone calls-all night long sometimes 3:00 in the morning, 4:00 in the morning, midnight, 10:00, people would call and start screaming at me.  You are going down motherfucker!  You are going down motherfucker!  And that’s all they would say.  And they’d keep screaming that until I finally hung up the phone. 

One night somebody blew up my mail box by putting a big load of skyrockets in it.  The mailbox went up in flames.  And that night at 1:00 in the morning the phone rang.  I picked it up and somebody said, “Skyrockets in your box at night, oh what a beautiful sight, motherfucker!”

And things like that have happened on and off since 1982…

I believe this nutty fringe around UFOs is part of a concerted effort to keep serious study of it down.  Anytime anybody tries to study this subject seriously, we are subject to ridicule.  I’m a full professor at a relatively major university.  And I’m certain that my colleagues at the university laugh at me and hoot and holler behind my back when they hear that I have an interest in studying unidentified flying objects-and that’s just one of the things that we have to live with…

What happened to the film is an interesting story in itself as Major Mansmann related to me and other people.  Some time after I had gone, the guys in civilian clothes-I thought it was the CIA but he said no, it wasn’t the CIA, it was somebody else-took the film and they spooled off the part that had the UFO on it and they took a pair of scissors and cut it off.  They put that on a separate reel.  They put it in their briefcase.  They handed Major Mansmann back the rest of the film and said, “Here, I don’t need to remind you Major of the severity of a security breach; we’ll consider this incident closed.”  And they walked off with the film.  Major Mansmann never saw it again…

So there were two of us who were Air Force Officers at the time and we saw something and we both corroborated with each other that we saw it.  And what I have to ask skeptics or people who disbelieve what I’m saying is why would I make this up?  Why would Major (and Doctor) Mansmann make it up?  What have we to gain?  I’ve got nothing but pain and suffering out of it, out of talking about it.  I’ve been harassed at my home.  This was used against me, partially in losing a job once in teaching.  I’ve had a hell of a time after I’ve told this story but I continue to tell the story because I think it is important for people to understand that this sort of shit goes on in the Government.  That the Government covers up information that we are entitled to know about as citizens of this country.  That’s why I tell my story.  That’s why I’m telling it to you…

The thing that’s important to me about this whole operation is very simply this: the biggest event in the history of humankind is the discovery that we are not alone, that there are other living entities-intelligent entities-in this universe and that we aren’t here alone.  That’s a huge, enormous discovery.  It’s the discovery of the lifetime of humankind, isn’t it, to find out that we’re not here alone?  That’s why I think it is important to talk about these things…

Because what I saw that day was something shooting down a dummy nuclear warhead.  What message would I interpret from that?  Don’t mess with nuclear warheads.  That’s probably the message I would interpret from that.  Maybe somebody doesn’t want us annihilating Moscow; maybe we should stop doing that. 

Ronald Reagan one night went on television and did a most astonishing thing:  He stood up in front of America and said we are going to build a defensive shield, we are going to call it SDI, the strategic defense initiative, and its mission is going to be to protect us, to protect all of us.  Ronald Reagan said we are going to share this with everybody.  We are going to share it with the Russians-our enemies, the guys that only a few years ago we were pretending to annihilate.  Now suddenly we are going to protect them with a shield.  From whom are we going to protect them? 

Perhaps that was the first shot across the bow, the first warning shot from somebody saying, knock this off kids it’s time to grow-up.  You don’t want to annihilate this planet, do you?  Could be… 

The information I’ve just given you about my take on what happened there is based on not only my own speculation but having read other things and talked to other people over the intervening years.  Perhaps our paranoia is unfounded and if we encounter beings with superior technologies maybe we should embrace them and be nice to them because they might be showing us how to survive. 



Lt. Colonel Q:  US Air Force (ret.), September 2000             

Lt. Col. Q spent 26 years in the USAF.  He had an above top-secret SCI-TK (Special Compartmented Tango Kilo) clearance.  He worked as a computer systems analyst for Boeing and was the Director of Logistics at Wright-Patterson AFB At one point he was the cryptography officer for the entire Ramstein AFB in Germany and while there one day he received a classified message that said that a UFO had crashed in Spitsbergen Norway.  While at Malmstrom AFB in Montana he again saw a message that said that a metallic circular UFO was seen hovering near the missile silos and that all the missiles went off-line so that they could not be launched. 

        

Colonel S: US Air Force/AEC (ret.), September 2000

Colonel S is a retired Colonel from the USAF.  He went to Stanford business school where he studied management.  Back in the 1950’s part of his responsibilities included maintaining the inventory of the nuclear weapon stockpile for the AEC and accompanying security teams checking out the security of the weapons.  Many reports kept coming in that UFOs were seen at various nuclear storage facilities and some of the manufacturing plants.  He has seen them himself many times and was present when the famous fly-over over the Capital happened in July of 1952.  At that incident he recalls seeing nine illuminated disc-type craft.  He also tells of at least two occasions where extraterrestrials destroyed nuclear weapons headed out to space, one heading to the moon to be detonated for tests.  It was destroyed because “nuclear weapons in space … were not acceptable to the extraterrestrials…”

T:  US Navy, November 2000

Mr. T spent 6 and a half years in the US Navy and was a radar operator on the USS Roosevelt in 1962.  Trained in operations intelligence, he has a classified clearance and also worked in electronic countermeasures.  He testifies that as a radar operator on the Roosevelt, he had a radar contact with a huge object above 65,000 feet traveling at about 1,000 knots. The Captain launched two Phantom-2 aircraft to investigate.  As the Phantoms approached the UFO, it disappeared and about half an hour later it re-appeared but this time closer to the ship.  He described the intimidation that followed the event.  He later found out that in the prior year the Roosevelt had a huge UFO event that was photographed where people saw a saucer descend from the clouds.  This happened more frequently after the Roosevelt took on nuclear weapons.  Many years after Mr. T was discharged from the Navy, he says that he was listening in on his HAM radio to the Space Shuttle STS 48 communications when he heard them speaking about seeing an alien spacecraft. He describes the harassment that followed after it was known what he had heard.

Mr. U: US Navy/ National Security Agency, October 2000

Mr. U joined the Navy in 1969 and worked in communications part of the time on the USS JFK, which was carrying nuclear weapons.  He worked for the NSA from 1980 till 1997.  In his testimony he tells how in the summer of 1979 all the electronics and communications on board the USS JFK stopped functioning when a huge glowing orange-yellow UFO hovered above.  He personally saw this pulsating UFO, as did a number of others.  All eight teletype machines were printing randomly and the ship went to battle-station alert for two hours.  A radar operator friend of his told him that the radar screens were glowing and then went black-they couldn’t detect anything. A few days after this incident the Commanding Officer and Executive Officer came on the ship-wide closed circuit TV system and reminded the crew that certain events that take place on board the ship are considered classified and should not be discussed with anyone.  When the ship finally returned to Norfolk, VA, men in suits arrived to interview various crewmembers.

Lieutenant Colonel V: US Air Force, October 2000

Lt. Colonel V spent 20 years in the Air Force and retired in 1988.  He spent most of his time with Strategic Air Command and Tactical Air Command.  He tells of a night in April of 1969 while stationed at Loring AFB in Maine when he and his flight instructor both saw three very bright lights in a perfect equilateral triangle silently moving across the sky.  They estimated that this UFO was lower than 3,000 feet.  He discovered the next morning when he reported for duty that for six hours, a UFO was seen hovering over a group of B-52’s containing nuclear weapons.  Every time a plane drew near to the lights, they would part and move in ways that were very unconventional.  When the planes left, the lights came together again and focused on the group of B-52’s. Many years later Lt. Col. V attended a lecture given by SG and saw a photograph of a UFO that was the exact configuration that he had seen years earlier.

Staff Sergeant W: US Air Force, October 1999

Sergeant W entered the Air Force in 1966.  In the summer of 1967 he was guarding a B-52 at a SAC AFB in Oklahoma when suddenly, directly over one of the B-52’s, a huge bluish haze appeared.  It was in the form of a boomerang wing and was glittery and not solid.  It was picked up on radar and seen by numerous people.




Government Insiders/ NASA/ Deep Insiders

Introduction

(From an oral presentation by Dr. Greer)

In this section you will hear from people who have been involved in events where objects of extraterrestrial origin have landed or have crashed or been forced down and which have been retrieved.  This is, of course, explosive testimony.  It establishes the reality of the phenomenon and also of the fact that we have been studying this phenomenon for years.  Many people might believe that this is limited to the so-called "Roswell event" of the 1940s; this could not be further from the truth.  In fact there have been multiple events, at least a couple of dozen, where objects of extraterrestrial origin have been downed, acquired, and studied. 
We believe that this is something which is of extreme importance because one cannot consider that covert programs-having spent hundreds of billions of dollars over the decades on research and development, so-called "reverse engineering" or "back engineering" extraterrestrial technologies-have not had significant breakthroughs.  The testimony will show that in fact we have:  That we have had breakthroughs that have trickled out to our society in the form of certain advances in electronics, materials, and sciences.  However, the central breakthrough dealing with the physics of the quantum vacuum space-the so-called "zero-point energy" phenomenon, as well as antigravity and electrogravitic propulsion-has been withheld from our society.  In addition, programs studying extraterrestrial technologies and extraterrestrial life forms are projects that are on going to this day. 
This is something that would be of great importance to the world and the scientific community, but more importantly it is of great importance to our public officials who, we know, have not been briefed adequately on this subject. 

Astronaut X: 1999               

X was one of the original Mercury Seven astronauts and the last American to fly into space alone.  In his testimony he recounts how he observed UFOs flying in the same formation as his fighter group over the skies of Germany These UFOs made maneuvers that could not be done by conventional fighters. He felt they must have been under intelligent control to communicate with one another due to the type of maneuvers they were mimicking.  At another time, while filming conventional aircraft performing precision landings, a saucer flew directly overhead and landed ahead of them on a dry lakebed.  The entire event was filmed including detailed close-ups.  The film was sent back to Washington and was never returned.


Brigadier General Y: Army National Guard Reserve, October 2000

Brigadier General Y entered the military in 1958. In 1959 he joined the White House Army Signaling Agency and served under President Eisenhower and then under President Kennedy with an above top secret clearance. He was familiar with Project Blue Book and related how that project documented highly scientific and specific UFO cases from very reliable sources.  They reviewed photos taken from Air Force pilots, Marine Air Corps pilots, and some foreign pilots and multiple reports of radar lock-ons.   He was also shown a piece of metallic debris taken from the Roswell crash. While working under President Eisenhower, he discovered that Eisenhower had a keen interest in UFOs, but that Eisenhower came to realize that he had lost control of the subject.

…What they were trying to say was, “Look, we have this physical evidence to go along with what you have seen in Bluebook; we have now been able to get our hands on and show you this material” and that is what he did.  He went on to further explain that this was the material that had come from a New Mexico crash in 1947 of an extraterrestrial craft and that was discussed at length…  He did not describe what the bodies looked like, although they did discuss the fact that there were bodies, extraterrestrial bodies…

If you wanted to ruin your career, it was explained to us, the thing that would do this the fastest was to talk about UFOs…

We saw a lot of pictures of UFOs.  Some pictures that I saw I think were maybe a little bit better than the ones you see today.  These pictures of UFOs were taken by Air Force pilots…

I would estimate that there probably were between two and three hundred cases of radar lock on.  That is why those cases were in there-because they were authentic…

But what happened was that Eisenhower got sold out.  Without him knowing it, he lost control of what was going on with the entire UFO situation. In his last address to the nation, I think he was telling us that the Military Industrial Complex would stick you in the back if you were not totally vigilant.  And, I think that he felt like he had not been vigilant.  I think he felt like he trusted too many people.  And, Eisenhower was a trusting man.  He was a good man.  And I think that he realized that all of a sudden this matter is going into the control of corporations that could very well act to the detriment of this country. 

This frustration, from what I can remember, went on for months.  He realized that he was losing control of the UFO subject.  He realized that the phenomenon or whatever it was that we were faced with was not going to be in the best hands.  As far as I can remember, that was the expression that was used, “It is not going to be in the best hands.” That was a real concern. And so it has turned out to be. 

It had been discussed with me on numerous occasions what could happen to me militarily if I discussed this. I would say that the government has done as good a job enforcing secrecy through the installation of abject fear as they have done with anything within the memory of modern man.  I really believe they have done a job. 

One older officer discussed with me what possibly could happen if there was a revelation. He was talking about being erased and I said, “Man, what do you mean erased?”  And, he said, “Yes, you will be erased-disappear.”  And I said, “How do you know all this?”  And he said, “I know.  Those threats have been made and carried out.  Those threats started way back in 1947. The Army Air Force was given absolute control over how to handle this.  This being the biggest security situation that this country has ever dealt with and there have been some erasures…”

I don’t care what kind of a person you are.  I don’t care how strong or courageous you are.  It would be a very fearful situation because from what Matt [this older officer] said, “They will go after not only you.  They will go after your family.”  Those were his words.  And, so I can only say that the reason that they have managed to keep it under wraps for so long is through fear.  They are very selective about how they pull someone out to make an example of.  And I know that that has been done…

As I see it, when you propagate a lie and propagate a fear of the truth, you put yourself in a very vulnerable position…

And you can’t create anything positive through fear.  Fear only degenerates the human soul and the human psyche, the human mind if you will. 

I think secrecy has been enforced because what would be revealed would totally destroy an economy that was designed by certain capitalists in this country a long, long time ago to maintain them and their corporations from here to eternity.  I think oil has a special interest in seeing that it maintains its position where it is, regardless of what kind of pollution or disastrous side effects may have occurred and continue to occur. 

I think that what we are dealing with is certain electromagnetic devices that are powered by sources that we just don’t quite understand as of yet -well, we are certainly not advertising them anyway.  But, these devices would generate free power.  And free power would be something that corporations panic about.  I think this government panics about it…

But, at some point in time we are going to have to share this information that would allow us to have free energy. The government knows about this.  It is foolish for them to try to make the rest of us look like imbeciles and say that this can’t happen.  Well, it can happen. 

The question was, “Did I hear that we had ever picked up signals which could not be identified or, if they could be identified, were they coming in from strange craft that, perhaps, had put us under surveillance?”  Yes, I did hear that.  I heard that from at least five or six reports that wound up in Bluebook.  In fact, several of the reports had come in through pilots’ radios…

Z:  US Navy Atlantic Command, October 2000

Mr. Z entered the Navy in 1978 and gained a top-secret, Special Compartmented Intelligence (SCI) clearance with a Zebra Stripes.  He was assigned to the Atlantic Operational Support Facility, Atlantic Command, then under Admiral Trane.  Mr. Z was present when a UFO was tracked by radar and seen by pilots visually moving at high speed up and down the Atlantic coast. The Command Center was put on Zebra alert and Admiral Trane gave the order to force down the UFO.  Mr. Z discusses the threats, intimidation and confiscation of logbooks that occurred after the event.

…And the early warning system-I believe it came in from an Air Force base in Greenland or Nova Scotia at that time-said that we had contact with an unidentified flying object that had entered our air space. …

And within minutes Admiral Trane was rushed into the Command Center into his viewing booth that he had right under the Mezzanine there and the first thing that Admiral Trane wanted to know was how many contacts we had, where they were, which direction were they going and were the Soviets responding.  Because we knew that it wasn’t the Soviets that had entered our airspace.  That was verified from the get go, from the start. 

At that point, when Admiral Trane found out that it wasn’t the Soviets and that he wanted to know were the Soviets responding to this threat also, that was the moment that he gave authorization to put two planes up to go see what this thing was.  And that was when the chasing up and down the eastern seaboard began.  We launched planes from as far north as Greenland to NAS (Naval Air Station), Oceania.  This object, we had it on radar-this event lasted almost an hour.  You could hear the pilots live voice transmissions being piped into the Command Center. And they had visual confirmation of the object and made descriptions of the object.  Pilots were able to close a couple of times and were able to see that the object was not an aircraft that we were familiar with-it was nothing that we had and nothing that the Soviets had.  That was determined very quickly.  This vehicle or whatever it was that they were chasing showed very erratic flight up and down the coast, quick flight…

One minute it was here and the next minute bam, it was down several hundred miles down the coast, just playing tag…

The photographs that we did get back in the Command Center later on came from the first encounters that the planes had with it off of the northern North American coast.  They did get close enough to get some photographs taken that were later brought over to the Command Center…

What was really bugging Admiral Trane, what was really driving him nuts, was this thing absolutely had complete control of the situation and could be anywhere that it wanted to be in a matter of seconds.  One minute we were closing on it off the coast of Maine, and the next minute it is in Norfolk heading south towards Florida.  And it is all that we can do to get the early warning radar up and down the coast to watch for this thing as it just had it’s day with us. 

Admiral Trane and his staff were quite concerned about it to say the least.  They were quite concerned especially once they found out that it wasn’t the Russians and it wasn’t us and he wasn’t aware of anyone else who had the technology to build such a craft that could move about so easily and so quickly.  I remember distinctly looking over the rail of the mezzanine and just watching complete chaos break out because of their inability to keep an eye on this thing, whatever it was. 

The UFO was moving around so erratically and so quickly up and down the coast…  They were trying to notify as many commands as they could up and down the coast to track this thing or get a plane up. Admiral Trane was scrambling and authorizing planes just left and right, up and down the whole eastern seaboard to try and cut this thing off and to get some planes from the north and south to literally track it and to force it down.  It was clear that they wanted to recover it, to force it down, by whatever means possible. 

The order was given by Admiral Trane to try and get this object forced down out of the sky, if at all possible, by whatever means possible…

When this event, as I refer to it, ended, the object that we had been chasing up and down the seaboard headed out over the Atlantic, over the Azores.  I do remember them saying that it had pulled up at a 66 degree angle as it approached the Azores like this, and it just pulled up at a 66 degree angle, without slowing down or anything, and left the atmosphere and was gone into space.  It just took off into space and was gone like that [snaps fingers].  I mean it just absolutely left.  You are talking about something that covered thousands of miles in a blink of an eye and it was just gone and it just left everyone sitting around scratching their heads.  “Gee whiz, I wonder what that was.”

It was comical in a way to see how the vast military might of the United States was put on its knees by something they had no idea what it was, where it came from, where it was going or anything. The only thing that they knew for sure was that it wasn’t the Soviets and they were very adamant about finding that out…

“These two gentlemen began to question me about this event.  They were being pretty rough about it, to be honest with you.  I remember literally putting my hands up and saying, “Wait a minute fellows.  I am on your side.  Just a minute.”  Because they were not really nice.  They were very intimidating and made it quite clear to the point that nothing that was seen, heard, or witnessed, that transpired was to leave this building.  “You are not to say a word about it to your co-workers.  And off base, you just forget everything that you may have seen or heard concerning this.  It didn’t happen …”

You got the impression that they would do bodily harm to you otherwise, without really coming out and threatening you.  You could just tell by their tone of voice when someone is saying, “Hey buddy, do what I say or else.”

If this object had been hostile and wanted to drop weapons or shoot missiles at us or whatever, it would have been very easy for them to do that. There was no question about that.  We didn’t have anything at that time that could hold a candle to whatever this was.  And it just had its own free run of our airspace and could do anything it wanted as far as traveling.  We did not pose any threat to it whatsoever.  That was painfully obvious; very much so. I do believe that Admiral Trane knew that too and was quite afraid.  Just in a word I would say that that old boy was just plain scared…

I would say that the facilities that actually had this UFO on radar-there were five that I am sure of and that is from Greenland all the way to Florida, and there may be some others that I don’t know. I know this because Admiral Trane was giving orders to NAS Oceania, “Let’s get some planes up from there, scramble some fighters.” He did make a call for them to alert Dover Air Force Base, Patuxent River, Maryland, Cecil Field down in Florida…
 
Lieutenant Colonel AA: US Air Force (ret.), October  2000

After returning from WW II an Air Force hero, Col AA worked in the Air Force Office of Special Investigations.  He was assigned to work on Project Grudge where he was responsible for investigating UFOs and came to recognize that on some cases there were no viable conventional explanations.  He later came to believe that Bluebook was a deliberate whitewash to the public. Among others he was privy to reports of cases where four independent radars were tracking objects that were traveling 5000 miles an hour. 

Dr. BB: December 2000

Dr. BB was the first woman corporate manager of Fairchild Industries. and was spokesperson for Werner Von Braun in the last years of his life.  She founded the Institute for Security and cooperation in Outer Space in Washington DC and has testified before Congress on many occasions about space based weapons.  Von Braun revealed to Dr. BB a plan to justify weapons in spaced based on hoaxing an extraterrestrial threat.   She was also present at meetings in the ‘70s when the scenario for the Gulf War of the ‘90s was planned.

 “CC”: December  2000

“CC” is a scientist and engineer who has worked on top-secret projects almost all his life.  Over the years he has directly worked on or had involvement with such projects involving anti-gravity, chemical warfare, secure telemetry and communications, extremely high-energy space based laser systems, and electromagnetic pulse technology.  “CC” has direct knowledge of the fact that certain groups have used these space-based systems to successfully shoot down extraterrestrial spacecraft and their occupants.  On at least one occasion he has seen extraterrestrial spacecraft in person.

Lance Corporal DD: U.S. Marine Corps, October  2000

Lance Corporal DD enlisted in the Marine Corp in 1994.  Stationed in Peru to provide perimeter security to a supposed drug-traffic radar installation, one night he and two other Sergeants were told to secure a possible crash site in the forest.  When they arrived they saw a 20-meter egg-shaped UFO buried in the side of a gorge.  He was called back from the craft. arrested, handcuffed and threatened and abusively interrogated. One of the men told him that the interrogators basically did what they wanted and that they were not under Constitutional law.  DD believes that this UFO was shot down by a HAWK missile.

Major EE: U.S.  Air Force, November 2000

Major  EE was an Air Force Intelligence Officer who not only had an extraordinary encounter with a massive UFO on radar over the United Kingdom, but later, in the 1970s while he was at McGuire Air Force Base in New Jersey, found out that an extraterrestrial biological entity had been shot at Fort Dix. The Extraterrestrial fled to adjacent McGuire Air Force Base, where it died on the tarmac. He testifies that this life form was then picked up and taken to Wright-Patterson Air Force Base.  Afterwards, many of the key personnel on the base who had a connection with this event, were quickly transferred.  Major EE also points out that the ridicule factor has been very effective at silencing people who have seen ETs or UFOs, and has helped to maintain secrecy.        

Mr. FF: British Ministry Of Defense, September 2000

FF is a British Ministry of Defense official, still currently employed at the Ministry of Defense, who headed up the Ministry’s office for research and investigation of the UFO phenomenon for a number of years in the 1990s. In his testimony, we will learn of incontrovertible evidence in several events with massive objects moving at extraordinary speeds, witnessed by military personnel with impeccable credentials, and tracked on radar-objects which are not manufactured on this earth.  He will also confirm the Bentwaters case and other cases within the United Kingdom, and acknowledge the existence of extensive government files on the UFO phenomenon.  FF supports total openness and honesty on the UFO issue, and believes that there should be a full disclosure of all information on UFOs, held by governments all around the world. 

QQQ: Five-Star Admiral, Former Head of the British Ministry of Defense, July 2000

QQQ is a five-star Admiral and the former Head of the British Ministry of Defense who was kept in the dark about the UFO subject during his official capacities.  In this short interview, he states that this subject has great significance and should no longer be denied and kept secret.  He emphatically states, “…that there is a serious possibility that we are being visited-and have been visited for many years-by people from outer space, from other civilizations; that it behooves us to find out who they are, where they come from, and what they want.  This should be the subject of rigorous scientific investigation, and not the subject of rubbishing by tabloid newspapers.”

Security Officer GG:  United States Air Force, September 2000

GG was a security officer at Bentwaters Air Force Base in the United Kingdom.  He was present during an event in 1980 when an extraterrestrial vehicle landed, hovered, and interacted with Air Force personnel on base.  Afterwards, the many personnel who had witnessed the events were intimidated, debriefed, and forced to sign documents telling a false version of the story.  GG’s testimony is corroborated by multiple other military witnesses who have been identified.  There are official documents related to this event; there is a photograph related to the event; and there is physical landing-trace evidence. This entire event is also corroborated by Ministry of Defense official FF, and five-star Admiral, Sea Lord, former Ministry of Defense head QQQ, and Sergeant II.


HH: October 2000

HH was stationed at the 81
st Security Police Squadron at RAF Bentwaters in England during the UFO events that occurred in December 1980.  She and a colleague were on duty late that night, when they saw in the distance an object they thought was a plane landing on the runway-coming in from the direction of the North Sea.  They also saw it silently explode, split into three parts, and speed across the runway; then it went straight up and disappeared. 

Sergeant II: United States Army, September 2000

Sergent II tells an amazing story about the history of UFOs and extraterrestrials dating back to the early 40’s and probably before.  General Douglas MacArthur organized a group called the Interplanetary Phenomena Research Unit back in 1943 to study this issue and it continues to this day.  Their purpose is to recover objects of unknown origin particularly those that are of non-Earthly origin.  They obtain field intelligence information and pass it on to those who are the “keepers of this information.”  II says that even Project Bluebook had an elite investigation unit, which was outside of Bluebook.  This unit was thought to be working in conjunction with Bluebook but in fact was not.   II has seen living and dead extraterrestrials in his official duties on an army team that retrieved crashed ET crafts.  He thinks that the extraterrestrials will not permit us to explore the depths of outer space until we’ve learned to grow spiritually and that they will make themselves known soon if we don’t first acknowledge their presence. 

JJ: Russian Air Force, March 1997

JJ, of the Space Communications Center in Russia, is considered one of the most knowledgeable Russian Generals.  He states that if extraterrestrials are capable of traversing vast distances, then they are probably from a higher level of civilization.  And if this is true then they must be concerned with normal development of relations between people-constructive progress, not destructive.  He says that if we look at our Earth history, we will see a tale of self-destruction, murder and death of entire peoples.  He believes that advanced civilizations would not tolerate such behavior because their life would have a different meaning and be understood in a larger context.

JJ knows of many eyewitness reports of unusual craft documented in specific Soviet papers.  Various departments within the Government began investigating this phenomena including the Defense Ministry and the Academy of Sciences.  They have many reports of UFOs seen over locations containing high concentrations of advanced science like nuclear facilities.  In some cases they have learned how to create situations where they could deliberately provoke the appearance of UFOs, and in these “contacts” for example, they would point their arms in various directions and the UFOs would respond by flattening their spheres in the same direction.  There was a case just outside Moscow where a warrant officer found himself at the site of a UFO landing and the extraterrestrials made contact with him telepathically and asked him if he would like to visit inside the craft. 

Master Sergeant PPP:  US Air Force/ NRO Operative (ret.), September 2000
PPP is a retired Air Force career Master Sergeant who was involved in the extraterrestrial projects for many years.  After leaving the Air Force, he was recruited into the super-secret National Reconnaissance Organization, or NRO, during which time he worked specifically on extraterrestrial-connected operations.  He had a cosmic top-secret clearance (38 levels above top secret) which, he states, no U.S. president, to his knowledge, has ever held.  In his testimony, he talks of assassinations committed by the NSA; he tells how our military deliberately caused the 1947 ET craft crashes near Roswell, and captured one of the ETs, which they kept at Los Alamos for 3 years, until he died.  He talks about the intelligence teams that were charged with intimidating, discrediting, and even eliminating witnesses to ET/UFO events.  He talks about Germany’s re-engineering of UFOs, even prior to WWII.  He talks about our current energy crisis-and the fact that we haven’t needed fossil fuels since the 1940s, when free energy technologies were developed-but have been kept from humanity.  This is the real reason for the secrecy of the ET/UFO subject.  “What the people in power right now don’t want us to know is that this free energy is available to everybody.”  In conclusion, he warns against the weaponization of space and the shooting down of ET craft-this could force them to retaliate, and that would be our destruction.

Mr. KK:  Lockheed Skunkworks, USAF, and CIA Contractor, December 2000
KK was in the Air Force at Las Vegas Air Force Base during an event when UFOs were seemoving at enormous speeds near Mt. Charleston, northwest of Las Vegas.  In addition, he worked with Kelly Johnson at the Lockheed Skunkworks-on design and construction of the U-2 and the SR-71 Blackbird.  He testifies that we not only have these extraterrestrial devices, but have also achieved tremendous technological advances from their study.  He states that in the 1950s and 1960s, NATO did research into the origin of ET races, and disseminated reports to the leaders of various countries. Mr.KK further states that there are records and filmed documentation of meetings in California in 1954 between ETs and leaders of the USA.  He lists a few of the technologies we were able to develop because of the ETs:  computer chips, lasers, night vision, bulletproof vests, and concludes, “Are these ET people hostile? Well, if they were hostile, with their weaponry they could have destroyed us a long time ago-or could have done some damage.”  Mr.KK now develops technologies that can help eliminate environmental pollutants and reduce the need for fossil fuels, such as energy generation systems that use natural energies from planet Earth. 

Captain LL: US Marine Corps (ret.), October 2000

LL served 10 years in the Marine Corps as a fighter pilot, and four years with the Air Force at Wright-Patterson AFB as a civilian doing flight-testing of exotic experimental aircraft.  Later, for the next 30 years, he worked for defense contractors as an engineer of antigravity propulsion systems: on flight simulators for exotic aircraft-and on actual flying discs.  He testifies that that the first disc they tested was the re-engineered ET craft that crashed in Kingman, Arizona in 1958.  He further testifies that the ET’s presented a craft to the US government; this craft was taken to Area 51, which was just being constructed at the time, and the four ET’s that accompanied the craft were taken to Los Alamos.  Mr. LL’s specialty was the flight deck and the instruments on the flight deck-he understood the gravitational field and what it took to get people trained to experience antigravity.  He actually met several times with an ET that helped the physicists and engineers with the engineering of the craft.

Lieutenant Colonel MM: US Air Force (ret.), September 2000

Colonel MM entered the Air Force in 1964 and became a rescue helicopter pilot in Vietnam.  He has an electrical engineering degree and was in charge of all the construction projects for the Military Air Command.  During his time in the military he knew that there was a facility inside of Norton Air Force Base in California that no one was to know about.  He heard that there was a UFO craft stored there and that people such as certain Senators including Bob Dole had visited the facility.  Colonel MM also relates another story that his father told him: One time attending a dinner party he had a conversation with a high-level RAND official who told him that the government was spending more money on antigravity devices than any other project in the history of this country.

Mr. NN: December 2000

Mr. NN was putting himself through college working at Century Graphics in 1971/72.  Part of his job was to run blueprints through a large printing machine.  Century Graphics used to get jobs from various military electronics firms such as Lockheed, Litton, Hughes and RCA.  While he had a low clearance, there were times when his assistance was needed on top-secret documents.  In one case he was working on a lithograph negative of the routes for all the American and Russian subs.  In his testimony he states that he also worked on a huge electronic diagram from Hughes-Suma Corporation.  In the center of the diagram in a large rectangle it said “antigravity chamber.”  When he completed his work he turned to the man training him showing him the verbiage.  This man told him that he was not supposed to be working on that and for him to put it back and forget about it.

OO:  Boeing Aerospace, December 2000

OO has gained significant information from inside the UFO extraterrestrial groups within our government, military, and civilian companies.  He has friends at the NSA, CIA, NASA, JPL, ONI, NRO, Area 51, the Air Force, Northrup, Boeing, and others.  He used to work at Boeing as a surface technician.  He was introduced to four-star General Curtis Lemay and one day went to his house in Newport Beach, CA and spoke with him about this subject.  Lemay confirmed the ETC crash at Roswell. OO NSA contact told him that Henry Kissinger, George Bush as well as Ronald Reagan and Mikhail Gorbachov were all aware of the ET subject.  His CIA contact told him that the USAF had shot down some of these spacecraft.  A friend of OO who worked at Boeing was part of crash recovery and personally saw and carried ET bodies.  OO says that a group in the FBI discovered that radar testing was causing interference with some of the ETV’s and that this was what was causing so many crashes.  He also says that there are underground bases testing and maintaining extraterrestrial technology in Utah (reachable only by air), Enzo California, Lancaster/Palmdale California, Edwards AFB in California, March AFB, Eglan AFB in Florida, London England, and many other locations. 


British Police Officer RRR:  September 2000

Officer RRR is a retired police officer who served in the West Yorkshire Metropolitan Police in England from 1975 to 1984.  On November 28
th 1980, he and five other officers witnessed a UFO.  He saw a diamond shaped object about 75 feet away hovering just five feet above the ground and he estimates it to be about 20 feet wide and about 14 feet tall.  The bottom half appeared to be rotating and the top was stationary and it did not make any noise.  Months after reporting this incident, he started being harassed.  He was transferred 50 miles away and was eventually barred from entering his own police station.  Contraband drugs were placed in his locker.

Mr. PP: Former British Foreign Service Official, September 2000

Mr. PP spent many years in the British Foreign Service.  He spent 10 years in China and in 1941 he saw a UFO while at the Embassy.  In broad daylight he saw a disc-shaped, silent UFO with a blue white light on top flying very fast.  In 1953 he spent some time with the Military Defense in Whitehall and worked on the floor underneath a department, Air Technical, dealing with UFOs.  He says that a UFO landed on the estate of Lord Mountbatten in the south of England near Southampton. 

Sergeant QQ: US Air Force, September 2000
QQ was in the Air Force for 41/2 years beginning in January 1964.  He had a top secret  crypto clearance and worked with the tactical air command at Langley AFB in Virginia.  While working at a NSA facility he was shown photographs taken by the Lunar Orbiter of the moon that showed detailed artificial structures.  These photos were taken prior to the Apollo landing in 1969.

RR: Former NASA Employee, November 2000

RR had a secret clearance while working for NASA contractor, Philco Ford.  She testifies that she was shown a photo of a picture with a distinct UFO.  Her colleague explained that it was his job to airbrush such evidence of UFOs out of photographs before they were released to the public. She also heard information from other Johnson Space Center employees that some astronauts had seen extraterrestrial craft and that when some of them wanted to speak out about this they were threatened.

Mr. SS: Defense Intelligence Agency (ret.), October 2000

SS was a military intelligence analyst for the Defense Intelligence Agency.  In the course of his 21 year career he saw evidence of the military’s interest in UFOs in a variety of ways: electronic communications which did not originate from earth; military photos of UFOs. While at the DIA, he became familiar with the compartmentalization process of maintaining secrecy.  He saw spy plane photos with clear UFOs in them

Mr. TT: US Army, August 2000

Mr. TT has been involved in working on classified projects with several Government agencies including NASA and the DOE.  He has a BS-EE degree and extensive training in nuclear engineering.  Mr. TT recounts a story of personally witnessing a UFO crash at a Nike Ajax Missile Facility in Maryland and viewing a group of UFOs on radar take off at a calculated 17,000 miles an hour after having hovered on the ground.  He also speaks of a 1967/68 incident where he overheard a conversation between Houston Control and astronauts in flight talk about avoiding a collision with a UFO spacecraft and our astronauts actually seeing living beings moving about through portals on the UFO.

Dr. UU: McDonnell Douglas Aerospace Engineer, September 2000

Dr. UU worked in a senior capacity as an aerospace engineer at McDonald Douglas for his entire 43-year career.  In his testimony, he states that he was involved in a specific project at McDonald Douglas to study the propulsion systems of UFOs.  In addition, he confirms the existence of other projects within the aerospace industry, and gives his assessment of the fact that this subject is not only real, but is of extraterrestrial nature. He also confirms the extreme secrecy surrounding the subject.

Dr. VV: Senior Policy Analyst Stanford Research Institute, August 2000

Dr. VV holds  BS and law degrees from Yale and a Masters of Education in Counseling from the University of Texas.  He was a Senior Policy Analyst at the Center for the Study of Social Policy at Stanford Research Institute.  In 1977 he worked on the Carter White House Extraterrestrial Communication Project through SRI. Its purpose was to gain knowledge on the subject then make policy recommendations.  NASA director James Fletcher and the National Science Foundation were involved. The project was prematurely and illegally terminated by the Pentagon soon after it began even though it had already been approved within the Domestic Policy Staff of the White House.

WW: Former SAIC employee, March  2001

Ms. WW was employed by SAIC (Science Applications International Corporation) in San Diego, a large defense contractor.  In the course of her work, she realized that there were millions upon millions of dollars in contracts awarded to SAIC and in almost all cases none of these contracts appeared to have any activity associated with them.  She elucidates how “black” budget monies are hidden in seemingly legitimate projects.  A pattern of sexual harassment began after she brought this issue before a supervisor.

Mr. XX: 2000

XX talks about his father XX who worked as a high-level engineer in Area 51 and had a “Q” clearance.  His father had always claimed that he was an Optical Engineer working in Area 51 but on a meeting outside the US he told his son that he was actually  working on a new kind of energy source. This testimony is included, in part, to show the devastating effects of secrecy on individuals and their families. 

Colonel YY: US Army (ret.)

Colonel YY was an Army intelligence officer who served on Eisenhower’s National Security Council.  After his 21 year military career he served as a military analyst.  Colonel YY personally saw deceased extraterrestrials from the Roswell crash in 1947 and a UFO craft at an airbase.  He had also seen UFOs travel at 4,000 miles an hour on radar.  When he worked in R&D he was given fragments of extraterrestrial technologies from various crashes and his job was to seed industry with these technologies telling them they were from earthly foreign sources.

Mr. ZZ: September  2000

Mr. ZZ was a mortician in Roswell, NM.  In July 1947, the time of the famous Roswell crash, the mortuary officer from the Roswell Army Airfield called him asking for hermetically sealed infant caskets but never explained why.  Later that day when at the Airfield for an emergency he saw debris of unknown origin.  A nurse, whom he knew, described to him the bodies of extraterrestrials she had just handled at the base.

Lieutenant AAA: US Navy, September 2000

First Lieutenant AAA was the Public Information Officer at the Roswell Army Air Base in Roswell NM when an extraterrestrial vehicle crashed in nearby Corona.  He was the individual who put out the original story that a flying disc had crashed there.  That story was retracted the next day. 

Buck Sergeant BBB: US Air Force, November 2000

Buck Sergeant BBB was trained in communications and served at Hickham Field in Hawaii.  In the early 1950s at an outdoor theater with over 250 people present nine silver disks were seen by everyone randomly moving over the entrance to Pearl Harbor. The event lasted  for about 10 minutes.  At another time he explains that he befriended one of General Douglas MacArthur’s personal security guards who told him that MacArthur had seen the craft and extraterrestrial bodies from the Roswell crash.

Mr. CCC: US Navy, March  2001

Mr. CCC was in the Navy from 1968 to 1971 with a top-secret crypto level-14 security clearance.  Later, he worked for 13 years at the Naval Electronic Communication Engineering Center in San Diego.  He tells of a time when he received a most unusual communications from a merchant marine ship near the Alaskan coast.  The message said that there was a reddish-orange glowing elliptical object about 70 feet in diameter that came out of the ocean and shot off into space.  It was tracked on radar going 7,000 miles an hour.  Many years later, Mr. CCC related this story to someone he knew who had previously worked at NORAD.  He said that there were occasions where objects would be tracked on NORAD radar going so fast that they were off the scale, and once when this happened one of his older supervisors causally told him that, “It was just a visit from one of our little friends.”

Dr. DDD: September 2000

In his testimony, Mr. DDD speaks about the 215 inexplicable UFO events in the Italian Air Force files.  He obtained official Italian documents that date back to the 30’s, specifically 1936 where the then Fascist Government was handling and documenting UFO sightings.  Mussolini was very concerned about these unexplained craft because of the effect they might have on the Italian Air Force.  The documents talk about elongated craft expelling smaller flying-saucer type UFOs.  One sighting happened over the sky’s of Venice.  The Air Force attempted to intercept these craft but could not as they were too fast.  Recently the Chief of the Intelligence Office of the Italian Air Force, General Olivero, spoke about this subject saying that the problem of UFOs exists and that the Air Force has been dealing with it since 1978.  There were even two landing traces in Campagna near Naples where the soil was bombarded with high intensity, high frequency microwaves.  There was another important event documented by Air Force General Salvatore Marcholetti in 1976 where, in Lechi, he was flying and came across a huge green object that appeared over his plane.  Soon the UFO took off at tremendous speed. 




Technology/Science

Introduction

The ultimate national security issue is intimately linked to the pressing environmental crisis facing the world today: This issue is the question of whether humanity can continue as a technologically advanced civilization.  Fossil fuels and the internal combustion engine are non-sustainable both environmentally and economically-and a replacement for both already exists.
If such technologies were announced today, it would take at least 10 - 20 years for their widespread application to be effected.  This is approximately how much time we have before global economic chaos begins due to demand far exceeding the supply of oil and environmental decay becomes exponential and catastrophic.
These technologies fall into the following broad categories:
·       Quantum vacuum/zero point field energy access systems and related advances in electromagnetic theory and applications;
·       Electrogravitic and magnetogravitic energy and propulsion;
·       Room temperature nuclear effects;
·       Electrochemical and related advances to internal combustion systems that achieve near zero emissions and a very high efficiency.
A number of practical applications using such technologies have been developed over the past several decades, but such breakthroughs have been either ignored due to their unconventional nature-or have been classified and suppressed due to national security, military interests and “special” interests.
Indeed, the great danger is ignorance by our leaders of these scientific breakthroughs-and ignorance of how to manage their disclosure.  The advanced countries of the world must be prepared to put systems in place to assure the exclusive peaceful use of such energy and propulsion advances.  Economic and industrial interests should be prepared so that those aspects of our economy that will be adversely affected (commodities, oil, gas, coal, public utilities, engine manufacturing, etc.) can be cushioned from sudden reversals and be economically “hedged” by investing in and supporting the new energy infrastructure.
A creative view of the future-not fear and suppression of such technologies-is required.  And it is needed immediately.  If we wait 10 - 20 more years, it will be too late to make the needed changes before world oil shortages, exorbitant costs and geopolitical competition for resources causes a melt-down in the world’s economy and political structures.
Let us be clear: the question is not whether such systems exist and can be viable replacements for fossil fuels.  The question is whether we have the courage to allow such a transformation in world society to occur.



Mr. EEE: US Air Force, December 2000
EEE is an accomplished aerospace illustrator and has worked for many of the top aerospace corporations in the United States.  His colleague, Brad Sorenson, with whom he studied, has been inside a facility at Norton Air Force Base, where he witnessed alien reproduction vehicles, or ARVs, that were fully operational and hovering.  In his testimony, you will learn that the US not only has operational antigravity propulsion devices, but we have had them for many, many years, and they have been developed through the study, in part, of extraterrestrial vehicles over the past fifty years.  In addition, we have the drawing from aerospace inventor Brad Sorenson of the devices that he saw, as well as a schematic of one of these alien reproduction vehicles-in some remarkable detail.

Professor FFF: November 2000

Dr. FFF is a Professor of Aeronautical Engineering at Parks College in St. Louis.  He spent 8 years in the Air Force at Wright-Patterson Air Force Base, and another 30 years working for McDonnell-Douglas in the field of exotic technologies.  While at Wright-Patterson Air Force Base, he was involved in tracking UFOs over Missouri, Ohio, and Michigan.  These UFOs were seen my many people: military, local police, and civilians, and were clocked at speeds around 20,000 MPH as they performed unusual, silent maneuvers.  Dr. FFF spent more than half his career at McDonnell-Douglas working on classified and compartmentalized projects, and testifies to the processes involved in maintaining secrecy on these projects.  He warns against the human tendency to make every new technology into a weapon, pointing out that our weaponization of space does not address the threat of earth terrorists, and the idea of using these weapons against extraterrestrial targets would be suicidal.

Dr. GGG: November 2000

Dr. GGG, a theoretical and experimental physicist, is a graduate of Stanford University.  He has published over forty technical papers in the areas of electron-beam devices, lasers, and quantum zero-point energy effects, and holds patents in the laser, communications, and energy fields.  Dr. GGG's professional background spans more than thirty years of research at General Electric, Sperry, the National Security Agency, Stanford University, SRI International, and, since 1985, as Director of the Institute for Advanced Studies at Austin, Texas, and President of EarthTech International, Inc.  In his testimony, Dr. GGG points out that as we uncover the technologies that make space travel possible, we must consider the possibility that there are other civilizations who have been down this track ahead of us.  This opens up the possibility of ET visitation.  Considering that our electromagnetic technology is a century old, we must realize that there could be advanced civilizations out there that are millennia beyond us, and their technologies could be well beyond our imagination; therefore, the ET/UFO topic deserves to be taken seriously by modern scientists.

HHH: Department of Energy, October 2000

HHH works for the Department of Energy in the area of new generation power systems.  He explains that we have nearly exhausted the world’s supply of fossil fuels, just at the time when Asia and China are undergoing an “industrial revolution” and are positioning to become bigger consumers of these fuels than the “first world” countries already are. In order to alleviate the current earth crises of environmental pollution, global warming, etc. and advance as a sustainable technological society, we must develop technologies that don’t fit into the old paradigm.


Lieutenant Colonel III: US Army (ret), October 2000

Colonel III is a leading conceptualist in alternate energy technologies,  electromagnetic bio-effects,  unified field theory concepts, and other related areas.  He is a retired Lieutenant Colonel of the U.S. Army and holds a Ph.D. and an M.S. in Nuclear Engineering from the Georgia Institute of Technology.  He is currently CEO of CTEC, Inc., Director of the Association of Distinguished American Scientists, and Fellow Emeritus of the Alpha Foundation's Institute for Advanced Study.  In Colonel III’s testimony he speaks extensively about how it is possible to derive useable energy from the vacuum without violating any currently known laws of physics.  He and others have built electromechanical devices which actually demonstrate this technology.  He also explains how certain powers would rather keep this technology from becoming widely known outside of small esoteric circles.  Time is running out however because our Earth does not have enough oil and coal reserves to last even for this generation.  He explains how our top minds and scientists must first recognize then rally around an effort to solve this energy problem before 2004.

Dr. KKK: October 2000
Dr. KKK is currently the Editor-In-Chief of the magazine Infinite Energy and Director of the New Energy Research Laboratory in New Hampshire.  He holds two MIT degrees in Aeronautical-Astronautical Engineering and a Harvard Doctorate in Environmental Health Sciences (Air Pollution Control Engineering).  He has broad experience in high-technology engineering at companies including Hughes Research Labs, TASC (The Analytic Science Corporation), and MIT Lincoln Laboratory.  Dr. KKK was the Chief Science Writer at MIT when the cold fusion story broke in March 1989, and he resigned in 1991 after his requested investigation into the fudged cold fusion data at MIT (which helped to discredit the whole subject) was not properly done.  The marginalization by the scientific establishment of the cold fusion topic bears strong resemblance to the similar marginalization of the ET/UFO topic: both have been ridiculed and defamed because they break established paradigms.  As Dr. KKK states in this interview,  “There is nothing worse…than suggesting to academic physicists in particular, and academics in general, that they are not only wrong; they are disastrously wrong, catastrophically wrong.”  In his magazine, Dr. KKK has advised us to remember the sentiments of Michael Faraday: “Nothing is too wonderful to be true.”

Dr. LLL: October 2000
Dr. LLL has written four books and has published many original papers in physics, astronomy, climatology, systems theory, and psychology.  He received his BA in physics from Johns Hopkins, his MBA from the University of Chicago, and PhD from Portland State University, and is currently president of the Starburst Foundation, an interdisciplinary scientific research institute.  He is the developer of subquantum kinetics, a novel approach to microphysics that accounts for electric, magnetic, gravitational, and nuclear forces in a unified manner and resolves many long-standing physics problems.  Based on the predictions of this theory, he developed an alternative cosmology that effectively replaces the big bang theory.  Dr. LLL has also developed a new theory of gravity that replaces the deeply flawed theory of general relativity.  Predicted from subquantum kinetics, it accounts for the electrogravitic coupling phenomenon discovered by Townsend Brown and may explain the advanced aerospace propulsion technology utilized in the B-2 bomber.  In addition to his understanding of UFO and black budget craft propulsion systems, including materialization and dematerialization, he has deep knowledge of the inner workings of the U.S. Patent Office.  He states in this interview that, currently, if an invention doesn’t fit into the accepted physics paradigm, the patent examiners immediately reject it thinking it violates the paradigm and must be a mistake.  In effect, new energy technologies are the underdog:  They don’t fit the paradigm so they are left out of the needed funding, or their patents are denied-even to the point that the Patent Office is breaking the law.  In order to alleviate the current Earth crises of environmental pollution, global warming, etc. and advance as a technological society, we need technologies that don’t fit into the old paradigm.

Mr. NNN: Royal Canadian Air Force, September 2000

Mr. NNN was a communications instructor in the Royal Canadian Air Force at RCAF Station Toronto in 1953, when he witnessed an experiment involving the successful dematerialization and re-materialization of an object.  Because of his top clearance, he was also able to check out from the base library, original films of gun camera footage from WWII planes.  Many times, while watching these films, he noticed UFOs in the footage-different positions, different shapes, but, definitely UFOs.  He has also himself seen UFOs maneuvering in the sky.

Dr. MMM: October 2000

Dr. MMM is a respected scientist and oceanography professor at the University of New Hampshire.  After learning from his cousin, Brigadier General Y, that the ET/UFO subject is not only real but is the key to technologies that could preserve our earth’s environment while advancing humanity into a sustainable planetary society, he has become an outspoken advocate for ending the secrecy surrounding this subject.  During the past four years, he has experienced his own interactions with ET craft as a member of CSETI field research teams and he has worked to introduce students, other scientists, and legislators to the fact that humans are not alone in the universe and peaceful interaction with ETs is necessary to the survival of our planet and our people.




Summary of Recommended Actions by Public, Private and Governmental Stakeholders

Recommended Press and Public Actions
The role of the press in this disclosure effort is critical to its success and the acceptance of the facts by the American public and academic institutions in a non-threatening, but intelligent and interested manner.  It usually becomes obvious to anyone studying this field that the American press has played an important role over the last half century in helping spread disinformation and shaping the public’s views on UFO/ET issues.  The press has often been an unknowing partner in the distribution of misinformation/disinformation or a knowing partner in the refusal to report real events.  It is exceedingly rare that major sightings are reported at the national level.  When reports are made, they often done in a condescending, slanted, “add the giggle factor” manner that leaves the audience confused and turned off.  Two recent exceptions were the report of the Phoenix Lights story in USA Today by Richard Price and the Boston Globe report on the French COMETA report by Leslie Kean.  Both articles were well researched and presented in a balanced, non-judgmental manner.

We recommend the press take the following actions:
1.      We recommend that reporters writing on this topic familiarize themselves with the evidence and the implications of this topic.  It is felt by many who have studied the UFO/ET issue that it is the most important issue facing the world today.  This importance should be conveyed to the readers in a responsible serious manner;
2.      We recommend that media organizations assign these issues to senior, well-respected, nationally-recognized journalists and reporters.  These issues should no longer be confined to filler articles assigned to junior staff or relegated to entertainment programming;
3.      We recommend that the present clichés of reporting on these issues, which maybe intended to “dumb down” the topic by conveying a non-serious and silly tone to the reporting, be eliminated.  These include the use of opening statements such as “little green men” and the filming of interviewees with weird camera angles, colored lights, fog generators and the like.  All of these techniques, which have been successfully used for decades to “spin” the topic, must be eliminated if the public is to believe the seriousness of your reporting.

We recommend the public take the following actions:
1.      We recommend that the public open their minds to UFO/ET issues by thoughtfully investigating the issues themselves;     
2.      We recommend that the public, once recognizing the implications of a disclosure, encourage the press and public officials to research and report responsibly on them and further to take part in a dialogue addressing a dramatically transformed view of humans on this planet and their future place as part of a larger group of intelligent beings;         
3.      We recommend that the public write the President and ask that he issue an executive order permitting witnesses to safely come forward (see section on Presidential actions) and write their senators and representatives requesting that they sponsor open hearings where these witnesses may testify;
4.      We recommend that former government, military or corporate persons with knowledge about this subject and willingness to be witnesses, contact the Disclosure Project to help make their knowledge public in an honorable and patriotic manner.  We have protective measures in place, and the more witnesses we have, the stronger the case-and the greater the margin of safety for all concerned;     
5.      Ultimately, if the people will lead, the leaders will follow.  Courage, vision and perseverance are needed to transform this situation, and create a time of openness and trust.  If our leaders currently lack this courage and vision, then we must manifest it for them since ultimately the public will help drive the disclosure effort.

Recommended Congressional Actions
Considering the incredible importance and implications of this subject, Congress has played an almost negligible role over the past four to five decades.  In fact only two formal hearings have been held during that time period.  The first was held by the House Armed Services Committee on April 5, 1966 because of strong editorial and public criticism of the Air Force Project Blue Book UFO program.  Then Representative Gerald Ford of Michigan was a strong supporter of the hearings, in part as a result of major sightings that had occurred during March of that year in his state and seen by hundreds of people and reported widely in the press.  The result of the hearings was the recommendation for an independent scientific investigation of UFOs, which became the University of Colorado “Scientific Study of UFOs” directed by Dr. Edward Condon. 
Then in 1968, the House Science and Astronautics Committee held a “Symposium on Unidentified Flying Objects” to review the scientific evidence for UFOs.  Of the six scientists who testified, five opinioned that there was a valid scientific anomaly that should be studied further.  In fact, one of the scientists, Dr. James McDonald, a senior physicist and professor at the University of Arizona, concluded that, ”My own study of the UFO problem has convinced me that we must rapidly escalate serious scientific attention to this extra-ordinarily intriguing puzzle.”  A year later the Condon Committee concluded that there was no convincing scientific evidence for UFOs and recommended that Project Blue Book be terminated, which happened later that year on December 17.  This surprising conclusion was reached in spite of the fact that about 30% of the cases investigated by the committee had remained unexplained.  In the 1990s, the refusal of the Air Force to even comment on the growing evidence of a crash near Roswell, NM lead then Representative Steven Schiff (R-NM) to request that the General Accounting Office conduct a search for related documents.  In 1995 the GAO released a report stating that they could not find documents related to the crash as documents from Roswell Army Base from that time period had been improperly destroyed.
Then in early April 1997 the CSETI organization held a closed briefing for members of congress and civilian witnesses in the hopes that someone in Congress would have the courage to hold hearings on this topic.  No one then nor until today has had the courage to call for hearings on this topic, even though the statement made by Rep Gerald Ford in 1966 that “We owe it to the people to establish credibility regarding UFOs,” is as true today as it was then.  It is interesting to note that the members of the Senate have never held any hearings on this subject although privately individuals have expressed significant interest in the subject.

We recommend that Congress take the following actions to pursue this matter:
1.      Make directed inquiries to contacts and chairmen of the House and Senate Intelligence Committees;
2.      Pursue other contacts known to the Congress, which may be able to assist in identifying points of control for these operations;
3.      Pursue this matter further by convening Congressional Hearings whereby direct witnesses to these projects may testify.  We believe more than one member of Congress should be located to co-sponsor such an inquiry;
4.      Pass a Congressional ban on weapons in space and encourage our allies and the UN to do the same.

Note that once issues concerning the validity of National Security oaths and amnesty are resolved by congress and/or presidential order, there are hundreds of potential witnesses who are willing to testify on the reality of the UFO/ET issues and their implications for our country’s future.
It is only through the medium of open and public congressional hearings that an understanding of the complexity of these issues may be achieved and our country can move forward.
Because of the interconnections between the UFO issue and the world’s energy status and technology, it will also be necessary to also hold Congressional Hearings on these energy issues as well, as a pursuant, but somewhat parallel process.
Once the reality of the UFO issues are accepted by Congress, then we recommend that Congress:
1.      Thoroughly investigate these new technologies both from current civilian sources as well as compartmented projects within military, intelligence and corporate contracting areas;
2.      Authorize the declassification and release of information held within compartmented projects related to this subject;
3.      Specifically prohibit the seizing or suppression of such technologies;
4.      Authorize substantial funding for basic research and development by civilian scientists and technologists making this research available to the public and mainstream scientists;
5.      Develop plans for dealing with disclosing such technologies and for the transition to a non-fossil fuel economy. These plans should include among others: military and national security planning; strategic economic planning and preparation; private sector support and cooperation; geopolitical planning, especially as it pertains to OPEC countries and regions whose economies are very dependent on oil exports and the price of oil; international cooperation and security.
The Disclosure Project stands ready to assist the Congress in any way possible to facilitate use of these new energy sources.  We can recommend a number of individuals who can be subpoenaed to provide testimony on such technologies, as well as people who have information on unacknowledged special access projects within covert government operations that are already working with these issues.

Recommended Military Actions
Since the early 1990s, the Director and members of the Disclosure Project have briefed various high level military officials including the Head of Intelligence Joint Staff (J-2), the Director of the Defense Intelligence Agency (DIA), Director of Central Intelligence, Wright Patterson Director of National Air Intelligence Center and others.  It has become obvious to us during these briefings that senior officers have not been informed on this subject.  This constitutes a serious threat to the national security and to military readiness.
To quote Admiral Roscoe Hillenkoetter, “I urge immediate congressional action to reduce the dangers from secrecy about Unidentified Flying Objects.”  Note that here he is emphasizing the dangers from secrecy, not danger arising from UFOs.

We recommend senior military and national security leaders take the following actions:
1.      Receive a thorough briefing on the subject by the Disclosure Project leadership and military/civilian witnesses;
2.      Fully brief CINCS (Commander in Chiefs), and develop special ROEs (Rules of Engagement) for ETI/UFO encounters;
3.      Independently investigate the subject and penetrate USAP (Unacknowledged Special Access Projects, see section 3.4) operations related to the subject;
4.      Become fully involved in covert projects related to the subject to ensure that such projects are adequately supervised and are under the direct and continuous control of the constitutional chain of command;
5.      Correct and/or restrain any USAP’s covert misuse of advanced technologies or weapon systems related to UFOs;
6.      Attempt peaceful, cooperative engagement of these life forms and assiduously avoid violent military engagement;
7.      Carefully reconsider the deployment of space-based military assets in light of the above information and avoid actions that might be viewed as bellicose or hostile by extraterrestrial life forms.

Recommended Scientific Community Actions
As observations of the UFO phenomena reported by many thousands of witnesses are validated, a new set of scientific paradigms will need to be researched to explain what is being observed.  Twentieth century scientific theories have barely touched the surface in explaining what numerous scientific, military and civilian witnesses have observed and reported.  However, in some cases, covert military research programs appear to have advanced much further in understanding the observed phenomena and than have our academic and public scientists.  Recent findings, such as the demonstration of possible faster than speed of light phenomenon, suggest that indeed there will be a whole new class of scientific phenomena that 21
st scientists will investigate to explain what has been declared as “impossible” by scientists of the last century.
There is still a major acceptance problem about UFO/ET issues with most scientists.  Dr. Peter Sturrock, a highly respected solar physicist and now an emeritus professor at Stanford University, summarized the problem as follows:
 The definite resolution of the UFO enigma will not come about unless and until the problem is subjected to open and extensive scientific study by the normal procedures of established science.  This requires a change in attitude primarily on the part of scientists and administrators in universities.

A further view by Dr. Sturrock on the role of scientists and scientific journals is quoted in section 3.2.1.  Surprising though it may seem to the layperson, scientists often have trouble changing their understanding of processes and natural phenomena when faced with evidence that their theories may not be correct.  The history of science is replete with examples of scientists proclaiming such and such is impossible, only to be shown later that their assumptions were incorrect.  This normal human tendency is certainly not limited to scientists.  (For example, for a number of years after the Wright brother’s planes had been observed flying by thousands of people, there were still popular articles proclaiming that flying is impossible.)  Furthermore, most scientific research in the United States, especially in colleges and universities, is colleague-driven through the peer review process for promotion and tenure as well as for grants and journal publications.  Stepping outside the bounds of peer accepted research often spells difficulty for the scientist, even if they are well established in more conventionally accepted scientific areas.  Consequently, the vast majority of academics are not willing to take such a risk, since it is safer to remain with the accepted views of the day.
Over the last century, scientists have played both an active and passive role, often unknowingly, in shaping the attitudes of the “trusting” public on the UFO issue through promulgation of misinformation and disinformation.  Since the 1950s, scientists have been used to persuade the public that there is “no scientific evidence” of UFO phenomena.  High profile scientists are still playing that role today, as did one of the leaders in the SETI program who stated in a recent public guest lecture at Harvard University that “there is no scientific evidence of the existence of UFOs.”  There are several possible explanations for this statement.  Either she was unaware of the depth of evidence on the subject, in which case she could have qualified her authoritative pronouncement, or she knew that the subject was real but there were motivations which inadvertently mislead the public in order to gain more support to expand SETI research.  Either way, scientists need to be more honest with the public, who for the most part still trust them and their pronouncements.
In summary, without investigation and research, there can be no intelligent informed statement on the phenomena.  This need was also recommended by a panel of scientists in the Sturrock/Rockefeller report and by scientists and military personnel in the French COMETA report summarized in section 8.0.
We recommend scientists take the following actions:
1.  Scientists must open their minds to the possibility of the UFO/ET phenomenon and stop prejudging others who are researching this area.  This will require each to do their own “research” into the matter;
2.  Scientists who know the UFO/ET issues are real (such as those who participate in covert research projects) should share the reality and their understanding with scientific colleagues to start to bring them up to speed.  There will be a lot of catching up to do and it will be difficult because of reputations and funding issues;
3.  Academic scientists should share this knowledge with their students and the public, for it is the next generation of students and graduate students that will help make the breakthroughs in research to explain what has been observed for several generations;
4.  It is critical that scientists help make the study of UFO/ET issues a supported and encouraged area of scientific investigation for these future graduate students and young professional scientists;
5.  Scientist/managers who run our federally funded academic research programs should set aside a small percentage of their budgets for “outside-the-box” research into the UFO/ET arena, helping to make it a legitimate area of research.
6.  Finally, scientists should realize that advances in science and technology that could come from an understanding of the UFO/ET phenomenon will have far ranging effects on the future of the people and the environment of our planet.  The opportunities for new “breakthrough” research have never been better (as well as the opportunity to rewrite many textbooks).
Recommended Actions for the President of the United States
Although Presidents since World War II have known about the reality of the UFO/ET issues, in recent decades their knowledge and ability to affect the issues have become limited.  It is time for the president to take a proactive role in the disclosure process, because should significant disclosures occur without any presidential role, the president would be viewed by the American public and the world in one of two perhaps equally damaging ways.
1.  If the President and the executive branch of the U.S. government maintain that they did not know anything about a subject this important, presidential stature and credibility would be significantly damaged.
2.  If the President and the executive branch maintain after “unsanctioned” disclosures that they knew of the subject and its incredible national significance, but were not connected to the disclosure, the President might be accused of supporting the cover-up, even though this may be unfair in light of the actual facts of how this subject has been covertly handled.

Either way it behooves the President to begin the disclosure process with the following steps or one of the above damaging options may become the prevailing view.

We recommend the following actions for the President of the United States:
1.      We recommend that the President set forth an Executive Order releasing witnesses from national security oaths on this subject since a critical issue for witnesses willing to testify is their security oaths, even though they may have been illegally obtained (see section 4.7 on security oaths);
2.      We recommend that the President convene an independent, fair and open commission to investigate the subject, USAPs connected to the subject, and technologies that are currently clarified and could benefit humanity if released;
3.      We recommend at the same time that the Executive Order support the declassification of government documents related to the UFO/ET subject, a process that has already begun through the Freedom of Information Act (FOIA);
4.      We also recommend, as the disclosure process proceeds, that the President issue an Executive Order providing amnesty for members of the suspected group and its personnel that control the UFO/ET issues, provided that there is cooperation and non-interference by that group;
5.      We recommend that the President present a nationally televised talk on the issues and the process to start to restore public faith in the government and democratic principles;
6.      Finally, we recommend that the President create by Executive Order, a new scientific research organization to develop covert technologies that can be used to address our energy problems and start to integrate these technologies into our mainstream academic institutions.
These Executive Orders would fully utilize the powers of the presidency to help terminate certain “black projects” activities that appear to be operating outside the constitutional chain of command.  While certain aspects of extraterrestrial technology (and other matters) may not be fully accessed through this EO process, it would enable definite witness testimony to be disclosed.  This would start the process of neutralizing the present efforts by the covert groups to keep the President and the Executive branch, Congress, the press, and the taxpayers out of the loop.



#1972 From: cyrano@...
Date: Fri May 11, 2001 12:55 pm
Subject: http://www.connectlive.com/events/disclosureproject/disclosurep roject-050901-28k-2.ram
cyrano@...
Send Email Send Email
 
Anybody watched this?

#1973 From: "c.h.thompson" <c.h.thompson@...>
Date: Fri May 18, 2001 7:58 pm
Subject: Re: Cosmological drag?
c.h.thompson@...
Send Email Send Email
 
Dear Tom

I've been doing some hard thinking today, possibly related to a subject that
Henry Lindner and I were discussing a few months ago when you had to go off
on some other expedition.

There are several points, and I'm not sure where to start.   The thing is
that "forces", especially "pull forces", may be quite unlike light.  Light
itself may have ambiguities: it may exhibit aberration when detected in one
way, and not when its direction is assessed by a different method.  What
with one thing and another, there is no experimental evidence that does not
need to be re-assessed!

First, let's consider whether or not it is reasonable to contemplate the
idea that the motion of the Earth in the Sun's gravitational field could
cause a FORWARDS acceleration.  I say NO!  Think of motion of an aircraft in
the Earth's gravitational field.  Is there any remote possibility that its
motion might cause gravity to have a forwards component, thus tending to
suck the aircraft along?  If we want an example with higher speeds, think of
a proton in a particle accelerator.  Is this sucked along by gravity?  No,
quite the reverse: its momentum appears to INCREASE as its speed increases,
so that the rate of acceleration for the same applied force decreases.

In other words, if there is any aberration then it produces a RETARDING
force, not an acceleration!

In other words, the pull of gravity MUST be regarded as a push from the rest
of space, and if there is aberration this push comes from slightly ahead!

Thus there is no possibility of the mere fact that the Earth is in motion
relative to the Sun causing an accelerating force to appear, though my
original idea still stands.  The fact that the Sun itself moves a little
WILL cause the direction of gravity to be towards the retarded position,
which will on average cause a little acceleration.

But will there be aberration at all?

When we detect light, it is evident that we use systems that are sensitive
to aberration, but are ALL systems sensitive?  If you could detect the
orientation of the wave front, would this show the same aberration?

Think of a large cloud emitting rain, but emitting it in neat periodic
bursts, vertically downwards.  Think of yourself in an open car, travelling
fairly fast.  The rain will hit you from the front, aberrated as per text
books.  The waves of rain, though, will form fronts that remain horizontal.
This can be seen from the fact that the waves will wet front and back and
you in the middle all at the same time.

To return to gravity:

(a) I think it is a balance of push and pull forces, all carried in the
aether, probably at speed c.

(b) Possibly when we react to gravity it is the direction of the wave fronts
that matter, so that there is NO aberration.

I have had one other bright idea today, and had better put it in writing
before I forget: re possible aether drag.   I gather that Pioneer spacecraft
are not behaving quite according to plan, and one possible explanation is
that they suffer from a tiny aether drag force.  The planets, on the other
hand, do not seem to experience any such force.

Suppose the planets are shielded by their magnetospheres from the waves that
would cause drag?  In my phi-wave theory (see web site), the waves are
basically any arrangement of phi-waves and they are blue-shifted ahead of
any moving body.  If a blue-shifted wave hits a suitable medium it can be
converted into electrons instead of causing a push.  This may sound
far-fetched, but I think I can find experimental evidence to support the
general idea.

I'm sorry I haven't answered your specific points, but I feel that the above
upsets the whole applecart!

Re Miller's work, I remain to be convinced by the GPS experiment (I have
just read Wolf, Peter and Gérard Petit, "Satellite test of special
relativity using the global positioning system", Physical Review A 56, 4405
(1997)).  Despite all their care, it is possible that adjustments made
cancelled the effects they were looking for.  I wonder, incidentally, why
they were looking mainly for the effect of the Earth's orbital motion and
not the greater motion approximately orthogonal to this?   Whilst on the
subject, the remark I made above about what happens at the magnetosphere may
also be relevant to Miller's observations: it may explain why the drift he
detected was more than an order of magnitude smaller than expected.

Caroline
c.h.thompson@...
http://www.aber.ac.uk/~cat


Original message, TVF to list, 18:05:01:

> This appears to be an ad hoc list that has drafted
> a number of involuntary recipients. I trust we will
> all respect the wishes of anyone who asks to be
> left off. That will shortly include me, because I am
> facing way too many short term deadlines and a
> major expedition to continue for more than a
> round or two.
>
> Caroline Thompson writes:
>
> > I think the hypothesis of cosmological drag is very
> > much more "natural" than the assumption of an almost
> > infinite speed to gravity.
>
> Hypothetical cosmological drag forces are a function of the
> mass (or at least the cross-sectional area) of the orbiting
> body, whereas acceleration due to propagation delay is not.
> There is therefore no possibility of such forces
> "canceling".
>
> The speed of gravity is experimentally determined to be
> very much faster than light, but is still infinitely far
> from being "almost infinite". A very fast speed for
> gravitation raises eyebrows only for those who accept the
> Big Bang's finite universe as a reasonable model of reality.
> Given all the evidence against the Big Bang, including
> evidence that the universe is not even expanding (see
> <metaresearch.org>, "Cosmology" tab), I do not share such an
> opinion. And in the most reasonable alternative, an infinite
> universe, a high speed for gravity does not stretch
> plausibility in the least.
>
> > As I see it, Tom Van Flandern made a couple of
> > mistakes (copied from others?) in his treatment of
> > the solar system. I have not checked properly
> > but suspect that he used the assumption of Special
> > Relativity that implies that the aberration due to the
> > relative motion of the Sun and Earth is the one
> > expected if the Sun really did move across the sky
> > at its apparent speed.
>
> IMO, special relativity is now falsified in favor of
> Lorentzian relativity. See "The speed of gravity - Repeal of
> the speed limit", preprint at <http://metaresearch.org>,
> "cosmology" tab, "gravity" sub-tab. See also "What the
> Global Positioning System tells us about relativity", in
> "Open Questions in Relativistic Physics", F. Selleri, ed.,
> Apeiron, Montreal, pp. 81-90 (1998); also available at
> <http://metaresearch.org>, "cosmology" tab, "gravity"
> sub-tab. The Lorentzian preferred frame can be identified
> with the local gravity field for every experiment to date.
>
> The "aberration" of the Sun as seen from Earth is
> proportional to the propagation delay of light (or gravity,
> or arrows, or anything) traveling from Sun to Earth.
> Aberration in radians is just the ratio of Earth's orbital
> speed to the speed of propagation of light (or gravity, or
> arrows, etc.). As such, it is a theory-independent quantity.
> So the above "suspicion" is not possible without redefining
> the meaning of the words used.
>
> The concept of aberration most definitely requires no
> assumption that the Sun is moving. And only four of the
> eight experiments setting faster-than-light bounds on the
> speed of gravity have anything to do with aberration anyway.
>
> > This does not allow for the existence of a preferred
> frame.
>
> Because aberration is just geometry, it is theory
> independent, and the claim just quoted is false. So it is
> irrelevant here to note that, IMO, observations do support
> preferred-frame models over SR's "all inertial frames are
> equivalent". So I would hardly fail to allow for that if it
> did matter. But it doesn't.
>
> > Anyway, the result is that the only aberration that
> > need be taken into account is the small one due to
> > the Sun's real motion.
>
> Only Earth's orbital motion relative to the Sun matters for
> the aberration we observe. Or else, what exactly does cause
> the large aberration of the Sun's light that we so easily
> observe?
>
> > I see no problem in assuming that this small
> > forwards component to gravity can be balanced
> > by a small cosmological drag.
>
> Again, one depends on the mass of the Earth and the other
> does not. Moreover, the motion of the Sun around the solar
> system barycenter is large enough to produce observable
> aberration, but not large enough to produce observable
> cosmological drag. Those two effects therefore cannot
> cancel, whatever the motion of the Sun relative to the
> "aether". The wish expressed in the above statement
> therefore cannot be fulfilled.
>
> > There is no knowing how small, as we don't know
> > if the aether is moving.  It could be tending to circle
> > the Sun.
>
> If the aether circles with the planets, there would be no
> drag on those planets. But we observe aberration. Also, what
> about asteroids on highly elliptical orbits that show
> aberration but no drag? There is no way to make this work.
>
> > Tom produces some other arguments in favour of an
> > infinite speed.  The one I have thought about a little
> > is the one about timing of optical and gravitational
> > eclipses. I belong to the Gravitational Anomalies
> > egroup, and within this group information
> > circulating suggests that there is great uncertainty.
> > We do not know how to define the gravitational
> > maximum unambiguously.
>
> We have a complete analytic theory for the orbital motions
> of Earth, Moon, and planets. It is easy to remove the small
> effects of the planets and other minor perturbations, and to
> arrive at a pure test of gravitational alignment of the same
> type that is used in the development of those analytical
> theories. I gave some details of that development in my
> original "speed of gravity" paper.
>
> In reality, we can calculate the time of gravitational
> maximum to within a small fraction of a second, but observe
> the time of maximum alignment to within +/- 2 seconds. That
> is still good enough for a 20 sigma experiment that the
> speed of gravity must exceed the speed of light.
>
> > The main argument I have against an infinite
> > speed, though, is simply that I believe ALL
> > forces to be essentially the same.  We have an
> > aether and only one kind of wave propagates in it.
> > Different patterns built of a basic wave
> > carry all forces, all radiation, all information, which
> > are merely different intensities and degrees of
> > organisation of the same general phenomenon.
>
> I continue to think that the greatest challenge we all face
> is to subordinate our most strongly held beliefs to
> experimental and observational evidence. In my book "Dark
> Matter, Missing Planets and New Comets", I gave some reasons
> why the gravitational medium and the light-carrying medium
> cannot possibly be one and the same medium.
>
> Consider that sound waves travel through air (not the
> co-located aether) because the "light-carrying" aether must
> consist of much, much tinier entities than air molecules.
> Analogously, the gravitational medium no doubt co-exists
> with the optical one, but consists of much, much tinier and
> faster entities. That is a statement based on experimental
> bounds for the behavior of the respective phenomena, not on
> faith or belief about how the universe must be.
>
> In a nutshell, the problem Caroline must face is that, if a
> graviton, a photon, and an arrow start out from the Sun at
> the same instant, heading toward the Earth's orbit along
> identical paths, and traveling with identical speeds, then
> they must all arrive simultaneously. That means identical
> propagation delays (e.g., 500 seconds for light), and
> therefore identical aberration (ratio of Earth speed to
> propagation speed). Conversely, the fact that the arrow's
> observed aberration will be much larger than the photon's
> implies that the arrow's propagation speed must be much
> smaller than the photon's. (Nothing else can vary in this
> simple example.)
>
> And finally, the fact that gravity's aberration is much
> smaller than a photon's implies that gravity propagates much
> faster than photons -- again because there is nothing else
> in the example that can vary to explain the difference in
> observed behavior for entities starting out together and
> traveling the same path, except their respective speeds.
>
> > If the speed were indeed infinite, one would
> > sacrifice causality.  Is this acceptable?
>
> Here we have a point where we are in complete agreement.
> Infinite speed is not acceptable because it would violate
> causality. But surely we are not going to repeat the mistake
> made so many times before when something newly measured is
> "unimaginably large"? When the first stellar parallax was
> measured, it implied that the nearest stars were
> "unimaginably far". When Galileo and his assistant on a
> mountain 26 miles away exchanged light signals, and they
> appeared to arrive instantly, that implied that the speed of
> light must be "unimaginably fast". The universe is
> "unimaginably huge", and the number of stars in it
> "unimaginably numerous". Nonetheless, in each case, it was
> the humans who had to recalibrate their imaginations because
> nature knew no such bounds.
>
> I suggest that gravity may at first appear "unimaginably
> fast", but only until we recalibrate again.
>
> > Incidentally, are other members of this list aware of
> > the work of Dayton Miller?  This, to my mind,
> > established the existence of an aether.
>
> Miller's results are contradicted by Global Positioning
> System results that have 1000 times greater precision. (See
> my GPS paper cited above.) Miller very likely was the victim
> of an atmospheric pressure effect, for which he had no
> controls. I'm sure the man would prefer if we let him rest
> in peace. Best wishes. -|Tom|-
>

#1974 From: "c.h.thompson" <c.h.thompson@...>
Date: Sat May 19, 2001 10:44 pm
Subject: Re: Cosmological drag?
c.h.thompson@...
Send Email Send Email
 
Dear Tom

> > The thing is that "forces", especially "pull forces",
> > may be quite unlike light.

I've done more thinking, and stand by this.  Do have another look at my car
and rain idea.

BTW, the car is a 2-D one: I'm only interested in what happens to the top
surface, which is flat.

First, the original idea, with rain falling in definite waves.  It is
falling vertically.  Each wave hits the whole ground and the car all at
once, regardless of how fast the car is travelling.  This is what I mean by
the wavefronts remaining horizontal, unaffected by speed, unaffected by
aberration.  But, of course, the individual drops of rain arrive at an angle
relative to the car.   They appear to have come from a point somewhere
ahead.

Incidentally, though the calculation for the direction in which a projectile
needs to be aimed and "aberration" are the same, they are logically
different.

To return to the car.  Forget now about the rain coming in waves.  Let it
simply rain cats and dogs, but let's now erect a gigantic umbrella over part
of our route.  We suddenly drive into a dry zone.  What do we see?  Do the
walls of rain to front and rear look vertical or sloping?  Answer: vertical!
We look up and see the umbrella in its true position.  There is now no rain
in the problem, so no speed to enter into our aberration formula even if we
thought there should be some!

This is very relevant to the matter of whether gravity could ever cause
forwards acceleration.  I'm afraid your argument doesn't work: the "photons"
that are not there are like the effect of the umbrella.  The "shadow" of the
sun comes from it true position, not the aberrated one.  Go back to the car
and rain model if you're not sure -- or let me know if I'm really wrong, as
it's getting late ...

> How can it be possible for something that propagates to
> fail to exhibit aberration?

The rain falls vertically, but the drops come from ahead, so there is a
discrepancy between the orientation of the wave front and the direction of
impact.  I can imagine situations in which this leads to experimental
ambiguities with light.  For instance we have a coherent laser beam with
good lateral coherence, falling on a moving surface.  Although the radiation
pressure is increased because the speed of arrival is increased, the
frequency should remain the same (?)  Hmm ...

> As for forces being different from light in regard to
> aberration, experiments say otherwise. The radiation
> pressure force of sunlight (as it affects the orbits of
> balloon satellites of the Earth, for example) has the same
> aberration as the observed photons themselves. But how could
> it be otherwise? The photons carry the force.

Yes, but I argue that the absent photons that represent gravity don't get
aberrated.

> ... failing to counter a push is the
> equivalent of a pull,

Not quite, not when it comes to aberration!  Suppose the car received rain
from both above and below, and think now about what happens as it drives
into the half-dry area under the umbrella.  The rain from below produced a
retarding force, but there is now no force at all from above.

> Or not. Allow me to prove that the waves
> suffer aberration too, and therefore do not wet
> the whole car equally. ...

Sorry.  I should have specified that this was a 2-D car!

> > I gather that Pioneer spacecraft are not behaving
> > quite according to plan, and one possible explanation
> > is that they suffer from a tiny aether drag force. The
> > planets, on the other hand, do not seem to experience
> > any such force.
>
> Neither do moons, comets, asteroids, or many spacecraft
> experience any such force. Only four spacecraft, two inside
> or near Jupiter's orbit and two far from the Sun, all having
> waste heat dump problems, show this so-called "anomaly".

You could be right, Tom.  I concede this point.

> > I'm sorry I haven't answered your specific points,
> > but I feel that the above upsets the whole applecart!
>
> However, as you see, nothing was upset.

I think it was, ruling out any argument concerned with aberration.

> > Re Miller's work, I remain to be convinced by the
> > GPS experiment (I have just read Wolf, Peter and
> > Gérard Petit, "Satellite test of special relativity using
> > the global positioning system", Physical Review A
> > 56, 4405 (1997)).  Despite all their care, it is possible
> > that adjustments made cancelled the effects they
> > were looking for.
>
> If one experiment is ambiguous and another is not,
> you are not free to cite just the ambiguous one to
> claim that the result is ambiguous.

I'm sorry, Tom.  I did not know about your own analysis.  Where can I find
details?

> The analysis by Alley and myself used two-way Air
> Force monitor station data with atomic clocks at both
> ends, not GPS receiver data (where the only clocks
> are aboard the satellites). Our data shows without
> ambiguity that the one-way transit speed of signals
> from ground to satellite, and also from satellite to
> ground, for all satellites and all ground stations at
> all times of day and seasons of the year, is the same
> to within 12 meters/second, which is 1000
> times better accuracy than the effect Miller thought
> he saw in relatively crude experiments of 70 years ago.

[skip]

> I understand the general concern about overlooked ways to
> hide a signal. But this experiment is as sharp and clean as
> one could hope to devise. Distance traveled divided by time
> interval elapsed during travel equals speed of travel. Where
> is the wiggle room in that? -|Tom|-

It may be as you say, but it is hard to believe that you know the distance
that accurately.  If you really do know times for both directions
independently then this may compensate, but I cannot tell without details.

Cheers
Caroline
c.h.thompson@...
http://www.aber.ac.uk/~cat

#1975 From: "c.h.thompson" <c.h.thompson@...>
Date: Sun May 20, 2001 9:04 am
Subject: Re: Cosmological drag?
c.h.thompson@...
Send Email Send Email
 
Dear Tom

Eureka!  You are partly right: after a good night's sleep I can see what you
mean: there IS a sense in which aberration of a "pull" force ought to cause
REDUCED RETARDATION, but this is just as well, since we have a problem!

Aberration ought to cause universal cosmological drag, but this is reduced
near other bodies due to a shadowing effect.  I have always thought of this
drag as due to a blue shift of the radiation from ahead.  Probably the same
thing?

So the important problem is why the universe doesn't grind to a halt, and,
in particular, why the planets don't slow down and crash into the Sun.  Part
of the answer is that in addition to the aberration you are talking about,
there is this real ordinary change in direction of the "force" (the shadow)
caused by the real motion of the Sun.  For our own system this may not be
important, but we have to think out explanations for all cases in which
there seems to be perpetual motion despite retarding forces.

The real motion of the gravitational sources is probably critical for
binaries, and maybe also for our Moon.  For Earth, I think we have to think
seriously about the interaction between incoming radiation and the
magnetosphere.  As you so rightly say, conventional theory would say that if
there is interaction there it will later be transfered to ourselves.  This
is where my phi-wave ideas may be needed!  You assume that radiation
pressure is a definite thing, always positive.  Look at how lasers and atoms
interact, though.  When laser and atom are in resonance it is possible for
the atom to stay still, or be caused to rotate.  Look at the Moessbauer
Effect, in which the atom does not appear to rebound.  I think it possible
that there are situations in which radiation gets converted to electricity
and all the forward momentum is converted to helical motion of the current.

In other words, sorry folks but I'm challenging the universal applicability
of the law of conservation of linear momentum!  I'm not just trying to be
awkward, ignoring experimental evidence.  This is not just an exteme
reaction to my aversion to the idea of gravity going much faster than light.
It's where my other ideas about how the universe actually works are leading
me.

Caroline
c.h.thompson@...
http://www.aber.ac.uk/~cat

#1976 From: "c.h.thompson" <c.h.thompson@...>
Date: Mon May 21, 2001 10:32 am
Subject: Re: Cosmological drag?
c.h.thompson@...
Send Email Send Email
 
Dear Tom

I'm sorry you have to go away just at this juncture.  Once again, we've made
a start but have a long way to go.

Some of your points re my car in rain analogy are good ones, though on one I
must disagree: no amount of speed on my part is going to make a solid
vertical wall of rain look anything other than solid and vertical UNLESS I
start to focus on a particular drop!  But never mind, the analogy has served
its purpose.  It has shown that if gravity is a push force then what we've
got is a reduction in drag when in orbit as compared to when in open space,
and this is all to the good if we want stable orbits.

But if we want to reach agreement we need to sort out this matter of
wavefronts, and I think we need to  return to an analogy I was using in our
last round of discussions:  a boat emitting sound under water in a flowing
river.  The sound in fact travels in a straight line (assuming uniform flow)
from boat to receiver, but the wave fronts are bent by the flow.  If you
used two receivers and tried to judge the position of the boat by comparing
exact times of reception of a particular signal and assuming the wave front
had been perpendicular to the direction of travel you'd get a different
answer from a direct "sighting" method!

We need to sort this out before we can start talking about reception of
radio signals etc.  When we look at phenomena other than gravity -- eclipses
etc -- we have many more factors to take into account.  All the objects are
moving and the light medium as well.

Skipping to your work investigating possible aether drift using GPS
satellites:

> > I did not know about your own [GPS] analysis.
> > Where can I find details?
>
> The results are in "What the Global Positioning System
> tells us about relativity", in "Open Questions in
> Relativistic Physics", F. Selleri, ed., Apeiron, Montreal,
> pp. 81-90 (1998).

Yes, I have a copy.  (I was at the conference in 1997, remember?)

> The technical details behind the results are in a
> lengthy white paper by Alley and me, privately circulated
> among people working in the field. A copy is available on
> request;

If you could spare one I'd be interested to see it.

> > It may be as you say, but it is hard to believe
> > that you know the distance [between ground
> > stations and GPS satellites] that accurately.
>
> Laser ranging to the satellites from the same ground
> stations gives the distance to a few centimeters. The
> orbital period of each satellite also implies its mean
> orbital height through its period of revolution by using
> Kepler's law.

Laser ranging will be affected by aether drift, and, unfortunately, I think
it possible that the entire orbits could be slightly displaced without
contradicting Kepler's law.

> For purposes of measuring changes in the signal
> speed between ground and orbit, it is not important
> to know the size of the orbit accurately, but only
> to know that it doesn't vary much over time.

I would not expect the orbit to change much, but the distances may not be
what you think.

> It is generally impossible to prove a negative. But the
> finding of a case where universal aberration does not apply
> would be big news in physics.

My car in rain model suggests strongly to me that gravity will have
different behaviour from light, but I do not think we can put the difference
down simply to "aberration".  It looks to me as if a large number of
different factors (motion of source, motion of receptor, motion of medium,
not to mention sizes and possible consequent varying behaviours of different
rain drops!) may be being wrongly treated under one cover.

> It would produce a result
> indistinguishable from propagation at infinite speed,

I don't think so, Tom.  I think by looking carefully at wavefronts we could
find out what is really happening.

Incidentally, I have received ONE message of support!  I am told that laser
experiments "support my thoughts" (which?) and that there is some evidence
that my ideas on shadowing are correct for electricity and magnetism.  I'd
better leave the author anonymous in case there was good reason why he did
not write direct to you.

Since you are away, I shall not reply now to the other message except to ask
if you could send me a copy of the paper you mention, "Possible New
Properties of Gravity", Astrophys.&SpaceSci. 244, 249-261 (1996).

Yours sincerely
Caroline
c.h.thompson@...
http://www.aber.ac.uk/~cat

#1977 From: "Jack Martinelli" <jack@...>
Date: Wed May 23, 2001 4:38 am
Subject: Scientific Integrity
jack@...
Send Email Send Email
 
Your responsibility and mine.  Please read:
 
 
Regards
 
Jack Martinelli
 

#1978 From: "c.h.thompson" <c.h.thompson@...>
Date: Wed May 23, 2001 10:23 am
Subject: Re: Cosmological drag?
c.h.thompson@...
Send Email Send Email
 
Dear Tom

I'll put down some points now just for the record.  Perhaps we can take this
up again in July?

> Regarding aberration,

I've worn my brain out on this for the present!  I don't think we have real
disagreements so long as we don't try and generalise too much.  One needs to
know what is supposed to be moving and also, possibly, how one is doing the
"detecting".

Re evidence for aether drift:

[CHT]
> > Laser ranging will be affected by aether drift, and,
> > unfortunately, I think it possible that the entire
> > orbits could be slightly displaced
> > without contradicting Kepler's law.
>
> The proof that aether drift is not occurring is that the
> one-way signal travel time is the same whether the
> signal goes up or down. That seems foolproof against
> missing any real aether effect.

Yes, maybe, but I'm yet to be convinced that you do know the one-way travel
times!  At the end of the day, you only know or think you know where the
satellites are by use of light signals.  You can only really rely on knowing
differences between times measured by the same clock (and even that is
slightly theory-dependent, if the clock may have changed its speed or its
gravitational potential).  But the big unknown is the "offsets" between the
satellite clocks and the earth ones.

> However, the point I made about Kepler's law was
> apparently missed. Basically, the law is a rigorous
> relation between orbital period and mean distance.

But you can have eccentric orbits with the same mean distance.  This is what
I think we may really have!  Unless you have such an hypothesis and go all
out to search for it you are most unlikely to know just how eccentric your
orbit is.  You'd need some independent way of knowing the altitudes.

> Because we know the
> orbital period without doubt (the time interval to complete
> a full revolution), we likewise know the distance quite
> exactly.

Yes, we know the mean distance (or does this too depend on theory -- on
absence of gravitational anomalies?)

> The fact that it closely agrees with the distance
> measured by laser ranging again proves there is no aether
> wind effect. Small discrepancies do exist, but are of the
> size and type expected from ionospheric delay, and are now
> well-modeled in that way.

Yes, but it cannot be denied that there are lots of "corrections" needed,
and some of these may be secretly introducing quite large biases if they are
being done on the assumption that all of Einstein's ideas were right and
ignoring the possibility of aether drift.

> These delays are just a handful of
> nanoseconds, corresponding to a few meters, so in any case
> could not support Miller's results even if the ionospheric
> interpretation were in error. However, that interpretation
> is independently confirmed by other types of ionospheric
> density measurements.

I think they do some work on this at my own local university, Aberystwyth
...

> > I would not expect the orbit to change much, but the
> > the distances may not be what you think.
>
> Suppose, hypothetically, that we got the orbit size wrong.

(Not the size so much as the eccentricity ...)

> Then we would get the inferred signal speed wrong
>  -- but by the same amount for both the uplink and
> downlink,

But you don't really know the unlink and downlink times separately as there
are these "offsets" ... I drew myself a little diagram.  It came out as a
parallelogram that could be squashed to give a variety of interpretations .

> So this would produce no *variation* in the observed
> speed. Aether drift would produce a variation with
> direction of travel that does not exist. So even if the
> distance to the GPS satellites were uncertain (which
> it is not), we can still rule out any aether drift at the
> same level of precision --
> nothing bigger than 12 m/s is possible.

Maybe, Tom!  But would it not be natural to expect an aether drift?  You
accept that the aether relative motion is resposible for the Sagnac Effect,
don't you?  I think we need to repeat Miller's experiments, just as he did
them only in a wider context and with a bit of automation!

Caroline
c.h.thompson@...
http://www.aber.ac.uk/~cat

#1979 From: "Jack Martinelli" <jack@...>
Date: Thu May 24, 2001 5:06 am
Subject: Re: Re: Cosmological drag?
jack@...
Send Email Send Email
 
----- Original Message -----
Sent: Sunday, May 20, 2001 2:04 AM
Subject: [forcefieldpropulsionphysics] Re: Cosmological drag?

In other words, sorry folks but I'm challenging the universal applicability
of the law of conservation of linear momentum!
 
Here's a simple question, that, if addressed, may lead you to the
law of conservation of momentum.  The question is this:
 
"Can the universe -- all of existence -- have a net,
non-zero, velocity (or momentum)?"
 
Regards
 
Jack Martinelli
 

#1980 From: "c.h.thompson" <c.h.thompson@...>
Date: Sat May 26, 2001 11:04 pm
Subject: Re: Cosmological drag?
c.h.thompson@...
Send Email Send Email
 
Dear Aleksandr

>        The nonlinearity of deep space in relation to
> propagation of electromagnetic waves is the reason " of red
> displacement " and other changes of frequency.

Yes, I agree.

>   Space and boundary areas (nonlinearity) between units of space
>
>    The universe, observed by us,
> is derivated by infinite hierarchies of planetary
> systems of a various physical nature. Each of stationary (planetary)
> system generates the its own unit of space. The hierarchies of these
> units of space generate space of the Universe. Between units of space
> there are boundary areas ...

Yes, I too have found a limited need to think about these boundary areas.  I
was trying to account for the fact that Dayton Miller detected an aether
drift of only about 10 km/s instead of the 300 km/s that might have been
expected due to the motion of the Solar system.  I think there can be fairly
sudden changes in aether velocity at boundaries such as the heliopause.

>             The red shift
>
>      1. One from properties of boundary area between gravitational
> stationary (planetary) systems is the transformation of frequency
> of an incident electromagnetic wave (analog of Raman's effect for
> gravitational systems).

Could you possibly remind me what the Raman effect is?  I have no text books
here.

> ... for far systems we do not know theirs true positions
> in space.

Agreed!  We know really very little.  Even the red shift itself could be
partly an experimental artifact (for example if the velocity of very very
weak, very incoherent, light in glass if not the same as that in laboratory
conditions), or the result of biased "corrections" to the data.

>  There are others otherwise-minded conceptual approaches:
>
> http://www.dipmat.unipg.it/~bartocci/ep3-17.htm

I found this just what I wanted!  I have recently read a biography of Hubble
and it told me nothing compared to this essay.  It did point out that Hubble
tried always to say "apparent velocity" when talking of the red shift, but
it did not tell me that it was Einstein and his followers who actively
distorted history, attributing the whole expanding universe idea to him!

> http://www.dipmat.unipg.it/~bartocci/ep4th2.htm

Yes, we should assume that the aether is moving in ways that we don't know
because ever since Einstein and Shankland rubbished Miller's results we have
not been looking!

See www.aber.ac.uk/~cat/History/forgotten.htm

Caroline
c.h.thompson@...
http://www.aber.ac.uk/~cat

#1981 From: cyrano@...
Date: Tue May 29, 2001 10:18 pm
Subject: Fwd:KJ FORUM TA32 C34 Haselhurst&Muller : DESCRIBING REALITY, C35 McCormick to Jarvilehto : SUBJECTS, OBJECTS, SOCIETY
cyrano@...
Send Email Send Email
 
"The experience comes first, scientific physiological and physical
explanations as objective
methods come later.  The science is a specialization (involving
structure formations and uses) within experience, not vice
versa, and that is why neither you, nor anyone else, can
explain experience, and not only of red." :

>Return-Path: <hmller@...>
>Date: Tue, 29 May 2001 10:20:20 -0400
>From: Dr Herbert FJ Muller <hmller@...>
>Reply-To: hmller@...
>To: Herbert FJ Muller <hmller@...>
>Subject: KJ FORUM TA32 C34 Haselhurst&Muller : DESCRIBING REALITY, C35
McCormick  to
> Jarvilehto : SUBJECTS, OBJECTS, SOCIETY
>X-MIMETrack: Itemize by SMTP Server on CH06DOUG00002/DHD(Release 5.0.7
|March 21, 2001) at
> 2001/05/29 10:20:23 AM,
> MIME-CD by Notes Server on CH06DOUG00002/DHD(Release 5.0.7 |March 21, 2001) at
> 2001/05/29 10:20:24 AM,
> MIME-CD complete at 2001/05/29 10:20:24 AM,
> Serialize by Router on CH06DOUG00002/DHD(Release 5.0.7 |March 21, 2001) at
> 2001/05/29 10:24:00 AM
>
>
>
>
>KARL  JASPERS  FORUM
>TA32 (Muller)
>
>Commentary 34
>
>( ON DESCRIBING REALITY )
>by Geoff Haselhurst
>23 May 2001, posted 29 May 2001
>
>[ The following is an introduction to a treatise by GH on the
>"Metaphysic of Space and Motion", a long paper, not posted
>here but available from the author.  Paragraph numbers in
><brackets> are added by me.  I also include my reply at the
>end.  -  HFJM ]
>
>----------------------------
>
><1>
>This is a first draft, though it is the result of five years work,
>and several years of writing! (Because email is large (about
>40 pages) I send it to several people at a time, my following
>introductory comments are largely directed to Dr Muller, but
>they are important and I should include them somewhere in
>this work.)
>
><2>
>This Treatise claims to truly describe Reality.  An
>extraordinary claim! that is almost impossible to believe.  Yet
>I am quite certain that you are now reading about what you
>actually are as a Human in the Universe!  I know you shall be
>skeptical, but I also know this theory's extraordinary logical
>power combined with a good dose of common sense - that
>obviously something exists for us to exist in and have
>thoughts.
>
><3>
>Let us briefly consider this claim to the discovery of Reality
>for it can be taken in two important ways.
>
>1. Idealistically like Kant, that Space Time and the Causal
>Motion of Matter in Space are our own mind constructions.
>Kant still agrees that there is a physical reality, but it is
>always separate from our ideas of it. Einstein was similar, and
>mathematically represented matter as a changing (time)
>spherical field (both force and ellipsoidal shape change) with
>motion and near other matter in Space.  Einstein believed in a
>rigid fundamental Space (the spherical shape of matter gives
>space its three dimensions) and that matter was a structure
>of Space.  He was correct other than he used the wrong
>language (of electromagnetic force fields) rather than
>spherical standing waves in Space.  As this Treatise explains,
>the Wave-Center obviously creates the point-like / particle
>effect of matter, and once you understand the theory you will
>realise that a change in velocity of the Spherical In-Waves, as
>they interact with other wave structures, causes the
>acceleration of the particle/wave-center.  This, most
>profoundly, explains Newton's Fundamental Law of Inertia
>F=m.a and thus explains the 'Necessary Connexion' between
>'What Exists' .
>
><4>
>This is the fundamental cause of the force field which misled
>Einstein.  And as you shall see, then solves all his problems,
>unites relativity with Quantum Theory (obviously explains
>particle/wave duality), Wolff deduces both QT's de Broglie
>Wavelength and Einstein's Relativistic Mass increase, both are
>phenomena of relative MOTION.  BOTH deduced from the
>ONE wave equation - absolutely remarkable to do this if this
>language were not true.  Further, the same logic applied to
>Cosmology solves ALL their major problems also - absolutely
>remarkable.
>
><5>
>So firstly, you can read this treatise and determine for
>yourselves - does this language of Matter existing as
>Spherical Standing Waves in Space logically deduce what we
>sense in the motion of matter in the Space around us.  I can
>answer as a Philosopher and Scientist that it explains most
>things perfectly (but that there are still many things to explain
>- similar to how I view Darwinian Evolution, but with more
>precise mathematical logic to support it, and it explains more
>things with less things).
>
><6>
>But at this stage we are still purely idealistic - both our senses
>and our logical language exist in the mind.  Nonetheless - the
>discovery of the correct language for describing reality within
>our mind would be a remarkable and profound human
>achievement, and would in itself radically change our world
>view - please think on this.
>
><7>
>Let us turn now to the second very interesting question of
>Reality
>
>2. Does this Language of Spherical Standing Waves in Space
>merely exist in our mind, and Reality is something separate
>that we represent with our mind.
>Or
>Does this Language of Spherical Standing Waves in Space
>actually describe what physically exists, not as a
>representation but as a direct description.
>
><8>
>I am quite certain that Space does actually exist, and is
>spherically vibrating like I say, and that I exist in this Space
>as a Structure of many trillions of Wave-Centers all trapped in
>complex interconnected 'orbits/oscillating wave functions'
>about one another that have evolved my enormous
>complexity.  This is sensible and logical to me for the
>following reasons;
>
><9>
>1. We all agree something must exist
>2. We all agree that human mind and ideas require human
>bodies and brains to exist.
>3. We all agree there must be some necessary connection
>between the matter of our brain and body and other matter
>in the universe (for us to be able to see it, move it around)
>4. We all agree that our Representation of Reality is not direct
>from our senses, but is constructed by the mind (and this is
>limited to sensing only a tiny fraction of 'What Exists'.  So for
>example we only see a half moon (we are deceived it is still a
>whole moon) because we only sense a tiny 'visible' frequency
>of light (resonant coupling) compared with the many other
>possible frequencies that our technology uses. Thus an Infra-
>red telescope would still see the whole moon)
>
><10>
>Now I argue that the Wave Structure of matter in Space
>agrees with all of this.  We do represent the world, a red
>apple is not really a red apple, it is a structure of many
>trillions of Spherical Standing Waves the size of the universe,
>whose wave-centers have evolved into this complex structure
>that has electrons/wave-centers trapped in particular
>frequency 'orbits' that resonantly couple with electrons in my
>eye due to oscillating interactions of their In and Out Waves.
>This particular frequency is represented to my mind as red.  I
>cannot explain this representation, but I can explain the
>Cause of the Representation.  This is important, and I would
>like you to directly address this point - for me to BE ABLE TO
>represent this apple, requires points 1 to 3 above - which I
>explain quite perfectly with the Metaphysics of Space and
>Motion and the Wave Structure of Matter.
>
><11>
>Thus we see that the Metaphysic of Space and Motion agrees
>that our mind represents the real world of which we have
>limited senses.  But what I stress, is that neither Space, nor
>(Wave) Motion are Representations, but are in fact What
>Exists such that you can exist and have a mind that
>'represents' these spherical standing wave motions in Space.
>
>I look forward to your reply and I will continue to think about
>this and develop these ideas, for it is a most intriguing form
>of skepticism that the idealist poses.  But I believe in the
>power of truth to explain all things....
>
><12>
>PS
>On Mind Independent Reality  -  Before humans existed,
>there still existed reality. Thus in this sense, mind
>independent reality exists.  I argue that Space has always
>existed and been spherically vibrating - this is completely
>reasonable and logical.
>
>On Mind Independent from Reality  -  The mind must exist as
>a structure of Reality (the relative motions of trillions of
>Wave-centers, both internal and external to the body) thus
>the mind depends upon reality for its existence
>
>Your comments?
>
>-------------------------------------
>
>Geoff Haselhurst
>     e-mail <geoffh@...>
>
>-------------------------------------
>
>[13]
>REPLY
>by Herbert FJ Müller
>
>In this reply, I will only answer to your introduction.  I have
>not yet had the time to go through your treatise.  But it
>seems that some of the most central questions, namely your
>underlying assumptions, appear here.   I hope you don't mind
>if I am somewhat repetitive at times.
>
>As you will no doubt have expected, I have a problem with
>your endorsement of mind-independently pre-structured
>reality (MIR, ontology, is-ness) belief.  Although <in 9
>above> point 1 "We all agree that something must exist"
>there is no clarification of the meaning of "exist", in <6> you
>write that "The mind must exist as a structure of reality ?
>thus the mind depends on reality for its existence".  And in
><7> "2. Does this Language of Spherical Standing Waves in
>Space merely exist in our mind, and Reality is something
>separate that we represent with our mind.   Or   Does this
>Language of Spherical Standing Waves in Space actually
>describe what physically exists, not as a representation but as
>a direct description".  Both alternatives you mention in this
>statement imply MIR-belief.  But the premise "we all agree"
>which you present as justification for MIR is not correct.   I
>vote for a third alternative :  that we build reality from
>scratch inside our ongoing mind-nature experience.
>
>[14]
>I do not agree with MIR-belief, because it turns things on
>their head :  reality depends on subjective experience ("the
>mind") for its existence, and not vice versa.  Piaget and
>others showed that reality is our construction :  the self
>(mind), others, and the world, and particularly also the split
>between them, are our doing, and as experiencing subjects
>we are and remain a constituent component of all structures,
>which means that they are not mind-independent (see also
>TA17 by E von Glasersfeld).   We need structures indeed, but
>they are not "given" to us in a pre-assembled (ontological)
>form, which could possibly be re-presented or described, they
>are built from no given structure (zero-derivation, 0-D).  This
>position does not imply ontological solipsism, since (a) its
>basis is mind-nature experience as a whole rather than only
>the subject, and (b) it therefore does not permit (neither
>MIR- nor subject-) ontology which would be based on the
>assumption of a primary (ontological) subject-object split.
>
>[15]
>Thus in response to "This Treatise claims to truly describe
>Reality" <2> :  you can structure experience (or perhaps if
>you prefer you "structure reality", though this formulation
>introduces an ambiguity), but you cannot describe a fictional
>MIR-nature.  Kant <3> went beyond his well known views in
>his later writings (opus postumum; see TA28 C13), though
>Einstein remained an ontologist.  Working reality and truth
>result from structure-building within subjective experience; or
>more specifically, and in answer to your second point in <7>
>:  from investing belief and trust in the "merely" created
>structures (money is a particularly clear example :  man-
>made, accepted, believed in, and used; it would be difficult to
>argue that it is not real).  That "something must exist" then
>changes to mean that :  we need mental tools for thinking,
>and to believe in.  We should not become passive victims of
>word-concept-dynamics (see TAs 24 & 32).  And further, we
>like certainty, the absence of doubt, because it makes us feel
>safe.  But doubt should not be abandoned (at least not in
>principle, though it may be so in practice) :  not in favor of
>internally- nor of supposedly-externally-warranted certainties.
>Call it creative doubt, perhaps, or conscience; static certainty
>can be counter-productive.
>
>[16]
>Thus when you say that you are describing a mind-
>independent reality, I would reply that this is the traditional
>error of static metaphysics.  For instance, you would have to
>explain by what means you propose to describe such a reality
>which is both fictional and inaccessible to our mind.  What
>you are doing is, rather :  work out new procedures for
>dealing with experience.  <12> "Reality existed before
>humans" - you have to say something like that, if your basis
>is a static-objective (MIR) frame of thinking.  However, this
>frame is our doing to start with, and uses backward
>extrapolation, starting from present-experience-structures,
>first created inside ongoing experience.  The past keeps
>changing like the present and the future :  who did what last
>week, where did what kind of humans come from, and maybe
>the big bang was not and should be replaced by floating no-
>bang-11-dimensional-space-membranes (Science 292, p.189-
>191, 13 April 2001).  An accomplished (unchanging) past
>reality is an aspect of a static-MIR-phantasy.
>
>[17]
>All this implies nothing about the usefulness of the theoretical
>structures, ideas, or language <6> you describe.  Whether
>they are more, or less, helpful than other working-structure
>proposals, for dealing with physics or with other aspects of
>experience has to be decided by trying them out.  This is of
>course what happens in practice :  when accepted beliefs and
>other techniques are found to be insufficient or counter-
>productive, new ones are elaborated.  Why else would you
>want to develop a new metaphysic ?  From here follows,
>among many other things, that the notion of one ultimate
>static structure is illusory (nor would it actually be desirable,
>because it would be yet another exclusive truth-claim,
>aspiring to displace not only other physical theories but most
>likely also other systems of belief).  On the other hand,
>theory building is compatible with a far-reaching convergence
>of methods.
>
>[18]
>" <8>  I am quite certain that Space does actually exist, and
>is spherically vibrating like I say ? "  This is fine as your
>belief, but one can probably also maintain a working belief in
>vibrating space without making it MIR-absolute.  I prefer to
>think of such structures (or better :  of beliefs in existence of
>such structures) as possible (non-or-pre-Cartesian) mind-
>nature tools or instruments.  This view makes them more
>flexible.  "Space" is then an instrument for dealing with the
>extension aspect of experience, and the relevant
>mathematical tools, including (spatial) "dimension", help with
>that.  Animals experience extension too, without having word-
>or number-concepts of space.  Similar considerations apply to
>"time", to deal with the flow of experience, and "numbers", to
>deal with iteration.  My question here is whether you might
>see such a functional or working (as opposed to static) notion
>of time, space, dimensions, and mathematics as desirable -
>but it would interfere with your idea of space as fundamental.
>Concepts and ideas in general, as for instance in "idealism"
><3,11>, are such mind-nature tools as well.
>
>[19]
>"<10> ? This particular frequency is represented to my mind
>as red.  I cannot explain this representation, but I can explain
>the Cause of the Representation.  This is important, and I
>would like you to directly address this point - for me to BE
>ABLE TO represent this apple, requires points 1 to 3 above -
>which I explain quite perfectly with the Metaphysics of Space
>and Motion and the Wave Structure of Matter. "
>
>[20]
>Subjective experience (SE) differs from objective explanations
>:  SE is not a re-presentation of a pre-existing MIR-apple-
>structure or of an MIR-frequency.  Instead it involves building
>and using mental entities (including not only spatially formed
>structures, but also qualia such as color or pain) inside that
>experience.  We (and animals too) experience red also
>without knowing or speculating about brains, electromagnetic
>frequencies, or standing waves.  The experience comes first,
>scientific physiological and physical explanations as objective
>methods come later.  The science is a specialization (involving
>structure formations and uses) within experience, not vice
>versa, and that is why neither you, nor anyone else, can
>explain experience, and not only of red.  The necessary
>conditions ("causes") for seeing an apple are many.  For
>instance that it has grown on a tree, that you have your eyes
>open, that there is some light, that it has not yet been eaten,
>etc.  Also the market forces, which made it come to your
>table, and (if you like) that God created it plus you, and made
>you think about standing waves and red apples.  The
>sequence depends on what you take for fundamental.  In my
>opinion, the unformed experience is the first condition.
>
>[21]
>The strongest argument for traditional MIR-belief is probably
>that everyone sees a red apple as a red apple.  For concrete
>objects the experience may support only one or a few
>structures (in contrast to some more ambiguous social
>situations, for instance).  But (a) this does not eliminate the
>requirement of 0-D structure-building in individual subjective
>experience.  Also (b) the MIR is not permanent, this red apple
>was not last year, although others were, and if you eat it now
>it is no longer, though you can still think about it, and if you
>took its picture you can continue to look at that.  And (c) the
>apple can be mistaken for another object, and vice versa.
>Etc.  Despite its inherent limitations, MIR is a practical way of
>talking about object-experiences (which is why you use it),
>but I suggest that in principle an as-if-MIR-with-0-D provision
>is still better, because it outlines the conditions of the MIR-
>assumption.
>
>[22]
>Experience does not require MIR  (points 1 to 3 in <9>),
>quite the opposite [14], but physiology and physics do -
>though as mentioned I suggest that working metaphysics (as-
>if-MIR) is more helpful here than MIR.  (Static MIR may be
>understood as a special case of as-if-MIR, for the situations
>where one can get away with it, such as in many exclusively
>objective studies.)  The "as-if" does not make reality unreal
>but maintains us subjects and our doubt inside the
>experience.  I do not want to suggest that doubt (or
>skepticism) is particularly pleasant, but, like pain, it is
>important for survival.  If you abolish pain, as during
>anaesthesia, someone (or something) else has to take charge
>and responsibility, and the situation is analogous in the case
>of doubt-free certainty which is supposedly guaranteed by
>fictitious outside agents.  But it is probably more appropriate
>to compare doubt to conscience.  The practical requirement is
>a seasoned balance between doubts and auxiliary (essentially
>temporary even if of long duration) certainties.
>
>[23]
>"<11> ? I believe in the power of truth to explain all things
>...."  Go forth and develop better tools, and more power to
>you !  You may come up with some universal instrument,
>perhaps, which can handle much of physical experience in a
>contradiction-free way.  But as mentioned, I don't think you
>will "explain" subjective experience by reduction to something
>objective.  And as for the power of reasoning, let us not
>forget Paul Feyerabend's ocean of irrationality (whence 0-D
>starts, and on which we therefore are, together with, and
>perched on, our floating islands of rationality).  PF was here
>talking not about Freud's unconscious but about scientific
>theory.
>
>-------------------------------------
>
>Herbert FJ Muller
>     e-mail <hmller@...>
>
>
>KARL  JASPERS  FORUM
>TA32 (Muller)
>
>Commentary 35 (to C32 by Jarvilehto)
>
>( SUBJECTS, OBJECTS, AND SOCIETY )
>by Brad McCormick
>16 May 2001, posted 29 May 2001
>
>
>( NOTE :  Quotations from Jarvilehto's C32 are in "quotation
>marks", responses to them by McCormick are in [brackets].  The
><paragraph numbers> are those from C32.  -  HFJM )
>
>I wish to reply to the following item, which I found interesting
>because it seems to "capture" succinctly how difficult it is in our
>society to escape "metaphysics" in the form of scientific (or
>scientistic) reification of human existence, etc.  I argue this has
>global practical implications for the whole shape of our life, as well
>as being "a philosophical issue".
>
>" <1>  I share many basic ideas developed by Herbert Muller in his
>target article, especially in respect to criticism of MIR beliefs, or to
>the search for consciousness in the brain. <2>  However, the main
>problem with radical constructivism (which Muller seems to
>represent in the target article) is that it absolutizes the subjective
>experience, and in this way represents only an opposite position to
>physicalism or objectivism. Or, to be more exact, physicalism and
>radical constructivism are only variants of the same position (which
>may also explain why they are such enemies) of starting with the
>basic separation of the organism and environment.  Physicalism
>sets the origin of thoughts, etc., into the environment, radical
>constructivism into a subject separated from all his relations. "
>
>[ My "background" is Husserl et al.  It seems to me that <2> above
>does not distinguish between "a subject" as part of an empirical
>universe, and "a subject" as the event of a world in which an
>empirical universe finds its place.  The empirical (what Husserl
>called: psychologistic) self is indeed just part of the universe, but
>both that self and that universe are part of the event of there being
>a world with a universe in it (I am aware that this is awkward, but
>the word "consciousness" seems to be politically incorrect these
>days...). ]
>
>" <3> I agree with Muller that the mainstream of the studies on
>the neural basis of thinking or consciousness is flawed in taking a
>priori the brain as the basis of consciousness.  In its stead, one
>should see that it is consciousness which makes possible the
>concept of the brain:  "Thinking does not come from the brain, but
>the brain comes from thinking" [Muller, TA32 [2]].  Thus, the
>mainstream studies take the condition created by consciousness as
>a determinative of consciousness itself.  This circularity will
>certainly prevent all progress in the study of consciousness, and
>leads to an endless amount of empirical studies which cannot be
>properly interpreted. "
>
>[ <3> seems to me to be "right on the mark".  Indeed, it is stated
>better than I have been able to do myself.  *However*:  I propose
>that <3> is not consistent with <2> or, more precisely, with <4>.]
>
>" <4> But does this mean that the reality is only our construct
>within the subjective experience?  No, because neither
>consciousness nor physical reality are in some sense primary.
>When thinking about the world we start, of course, with our
>subjective experience. "
>
>[ This is ambiguous:  In thinking about the world (or is it in
>thinking about the universe?), "we start with our subjective
>experience".  I take this to mean that we start by imagining
>ourselves as localized lumps of stuff situated in an infinite
>geometrical, i.e., object, space.  But this is not the same as
>endeavoring rigorously [like, e.g., Husserl...] to think about the
>event of thinking in its wholeness (both the knowing and the
>known -- see <3>).  The latter is very difficult for those of us who
>were child-reared into objectivistic reification, as I think most of us
>in our society have been. ]
>
>" However, this experience is not existing as such, but it is possible,
>because it has a long evolutionary history. "
>
>[ Here is where I see a direct contradiction to <3>: "evolutionary
>history" seems to me to be just as much object-stuff as "the brain",
>and therefore to be just as much a target of the incisive critique in
><3>!  Perhaps the author means by "evolutionary history" a
>hermeneutical exegesis of the history of science and
>historiography, and, if that is the case, I apologize for imputing
>objectivism where it is not present -- but then the exposition surely
>could have been clearer, especially since the danger of
>misunderstanding is so great in a culture where "Darwin" has
>largely replaced G-d. ]
>
>" We have subjective experience, because we are parts of the
>human species and human communities, "
>
>[ Once again, isn't "species" a construct of the event of signifying
>(AKA "consciousness")? "Human communities" is, I think, more
>interesting, as I hope to show forthwith .... ]
>
>" and it is this context, in which the subjective experience is
>possible.  This point was well formulated by Bruce Kirchoff: "Rather
>they [consciousness and the brain] exist as intrinsic parts of a
>system with a community of people who credit the type of
>consciousness that is sustained by the physical reality that this
>consciousness is creates" (Kirchoff, 1999). "
>
>[ What does "system" mean, if not some object-constellation?
>Unless "system" means the event of signification, which Husserl
>called (after Kant, et al.) "transcendental [inter]subjectivity".
>Again, perhaps it is too easy to misread the text here? ]
>
>" <5> This idea could perhaps be expressed also by saying that
>consciousness and matter cannot be separate or in a causal
>relation, because they belong to the same system.  On one hand,
>matter may not be separated into some kind of basic substance
>with absolute existence, the properties of which would exist also
>without any living being. "
>
>[ "The properties of which would exist without any living being."
>What can this mean except for some kind of "object"-in-itself,
>which, of course, cannot be any kind of ob-ject, since an ob-ject is
>precisely an object-of/in-consciousness (as Kant argued, although,
>perhaps it goes back as far as Heraclitus, with his assertion that the
>limits of the Logos are so vast that no matter how far you travel,
>you will never reach its limits?). ]
>
>" On the other hand, consciousness does not produce matter as a
>some kind of  "subjective construction", because the properties of
>matter are not something "fictional" or an outcome of negotiation
>(cf. social constructivists), but real properties of the world which
>are concretized by living beings, giving by their actions to these
>aspects of the "stuff" of the universe their significance and meaning
>in a community of organisms. "
>
>[ It does seem, lamentably, to be the case that we *are* objects in
>the world *as well as* being the subjects of/for/... the world.
>People die and some people make this happen to other people by
>putting bullets into their skull cavities, etc.
>
>(But, as Sartre said: "We die only for others.")
>
>These are mysteries for understanding and hermeneutics (etc.), but
>philosophy is a luxury for times when we can afford to reflect on
>experience rather than trying [however philosophically naively!] to
>"save our necks".  On the other hand, perhaps Buddhist
>"enlightenment" is an ultimate carrying through of what Husserl
>called "reduction" -- perhaps the enlightened sage is able to
>differentiate the event of meaning (AKA "consciousness", etc.) from
>its object-content even while he is being roasted in the
>Phylarian(sp?) bull?
>
>" It is consciousness and the sharing of the world that makes
>possible the existence of material objects, and the description of
>the properties of matter, but only from the point of the human
>beings. "
>
>[ Here is where I think the most radical and difficult break is
>needed to escape from the category mistakes which pervade our
>society, including, apparently, the world of scientists as well as "the
>man in the street".  There are two kinds of "community": (1)
>denumerable aggregations of person-lumps (AKA "citizens",
>"people", "human resources", etc.).  There is also: (2) the
>community of enumerators -- as, for example, exists in the event of
>two or more teachers discussing the disposition of one or more
>student-lumps.
>
>I would argue (following Husserl et al.) that human existence in an
>emphatic or normative sense is the event of conversation, which,
>from the perspective of objectivity, is *pre-personal*.  In a real
>conversation, what "I" say and what "you" say is a vital unity of
>meaning in which "who said what" is not relevant, but rather the
>object being discussed is the "object pole" of what we might call
>loosely and easily mis-interpretably(!) a "we subject".
>
>The objects which enter into this event of meaning as things-meant
>are not human, even if they are taxonomically classifiable as
>"anthropoid bipeds".  This sounds bizarre, but I propose the
>evidence for it is painfully close at hand:  Just imagine the
>difference between participating in a juridical proceeding as (1) the
>defendant vs as (2) "a member of" the jury.  To borrow a
>Heidegger term (apart from his use of it...), I  would argue there is
>an "ontological difference".  The phrase "alienated labor" is also
>helpful for illuminating this.
>
>The pediatrician/psychoanalyst Donald Winnicott beautifully
>described how the infant constructs *both* self and other,
>"together", out of pre-personal experience (yes, even Winnicott's
>descriptions are all too easily subject to objectivistic
>misinterpretation as describing the adventures of object-of-
>consciousness-lumps AKA "infants"!).  Husserl said that
>"transcendental subjectivity is intersubjectivity", by which I
>understand he meant that the event of meaning (AKA
>"consciousness" as having a world, etc.) is intrinsically *universal*,
>and that attributions of "self" and "other" are empirical constructs,
>just like billiard balls and quarks, etc.
>
>The event of meaning is apodictically given, but that "I said this"
>whereas "you said that" (etc.) are empirical hypotheses about
>"consciousness" as an empirical or psychologistic construct.
>
>There is a "practical payoff" from all this, which, mythologically, is
>expressed in such Biblical statements as: "When two or three are
>gathered together in my name, then I am among them", or the
>words from an Episcopal hymn: "God's whole will will not be done,
>till all mankind is one".  In a *real* democracy, as opposed to the
>objectivism of voting, there is a living and "unified" event of
>conversation, not an aggregation of voter-lumps which are
>arithmetical objects [for the, in that case, real community: the
>community of *vote counting*]. ]
>
>" <6> In conclusion, the main problem with Muller's approach is
>his neglecting of the contribution of other human beings to the
>subjective experience of the individual. "
>
>[ "the subjective experience of the individual" can be understood in
>an objectivistic way, and then the above statement is a true
>sociologistical statement about such object.  But if "the individual"
>is understood as the event of meaning, then "other human beings",
>like every-thing else, is a meaning structure "constituted in
>consciousness", but not "my" i.e.: "Bradford McCormick, SSN XXX-
>XX-XXXX"'s consciousness (<3>, again!), whereas the event of
>meaning is "wherein" that meaning structure ('"Bradford
>McCormick, SSN XXX-XX-XXXX"'s consciousness', i.e.), like every
>meaning structure, has its place. ]
>
>" No concept may be created by the individual alone, but
>presupposes a community and a culture, in which relations
>between the individuals and the world may be abstracted by the
>help of the concepts.  The existence of concepts themselves, is
>precisely a strong support for the idea that we do not live in the
>solipsistic prisons of our subjective experiences, but in a shared
>world which is shaped according to the action possibilities of the
>human beings. "
>
>[ It seems to me that the problem of "solipsism" is addressed by
>observing that "consciousness" is implicitly *universal*.  Even if
>there was no other empirical "being" in the universe, even if "I"
>was empirically alone in the whole world, "my thoughts" would be
>structurally even though (obviously!) not empirically *universal* --
>and one part of the evidence for this is that we often worry "that
>somebody else might read our thoughts", etc.  [Psychoanalysts
>speak of "introjects", etc.]  Empirical "self" and "other" are
>empirical articulations of the living event of meaning ? articulations
>which, presumably, the infant starts making to "explain" why "my
>hands" behave differently than "the other person's" hands, etc. and
>thereby keep from going mad.  In a world without "frustration",
>perhaps there would be no reason to differentiate "self" from
>"other"?
>
>These issues seem to me to be very difficult.  I would hope the
>reader would think about the text on which I have commented
>(and which I have included in toto for the reader's reference), and
>ask him or herself if part of it does not speak against ("contra-dict")
>the rest of it. ]
>
>---------------------------------
>
>[ I acknowledge that there are *both*: (1) ways in which we are in
>the world, and also (2) ways in which the world is in us.  Only
>when the dead are raised will the project of "consciousness" be
>fulfilled (and I'm not betting on that...).
>
>Aristotle spoke of "that condition the god is in always but man is in
>only sometimes".  Jean de Coras, the Inquisitor of Martin Guerre,
>anticipated Husserl by almost 400 years, when he said:
>
>    For the spirit alone lives; all else dies. ]
>
>"Yours in discourse...."
>Respectfully,
>brad mccormick
>
>--------------------------------------
>
>  Let your light so shine before men,
>              that they may see your good works.... (Matt 5:16)
>
>  Prove all things; hold fast that which is good. (1 Thes 5:21)
>
>Visit my website ==> http://www.users.cloud9.net/~bradmcc/
><![%THINK;[SGML+APL]]>
>
>---------------------------------------
>
>Brad McCormick, Ed.D. /
>     e-mail <bradmcc@...>
>     914.238.0788
>     27 Poillon Rd, Chappaqua NY 10514-3403 USA
>
>
>KARL JASPERS FORUM FOR TARGET ARTICLES
>
>The texts of the Forum are available from the table
>of contents at the following web site
>   http://www.mcgill.ca/douglas/fdg/kjf
>by hypertext transfer from the table of contents.
>
>Also available is a statement of purpose for
>the Forum
>   http://www.mcgill.ca/douglas/fdg/kjf/0-purpos.htm
>
>and guidelines for contributors are at
>   http://www.mcgill.ca/douglas/fdg/kjf/0-KJINST.htm
>
>Abbreviations and Conventions (recommended):
>     TA  Target Article;
>     C   Commentary;
>     R   Response;
>     N   Short Note;
>   Numbers in brackets  refer to paragraphs :
>   square brackets [1] in articles and responses,
>   pointed brackets <1> in  commentaries and notes;
>   round brackets (1) point to the list of  references.
>Authors may use other formalities if they prefer;
>in that case please define them at the beginning of
>your text.
>
>All texts remain available for comments.
>
>Please avoid ad hominem arguments and abusive
>language in all communications.
>
>Participants receive weekly updates (no fees are
>involved).  For this and for all other
>correspondence please address the editor,
>
>Herbert F J Muller
>     <hmller@...>
>
>
>
>
>



Une injustice faite à un seul est une menace faite à tous

                Montesquieu (1689-1755)

#1982 From: "c.h.thompson" <c.h.thompson@...>
Date: Thu May 31, 2001 10:44 am
Subject: Address change
c.h.thompson@...
Send Email Send Email
 
Dear All

I'm having to change address at very short notice.   From tomorrow I shall
be with Powergen, I think at:

c.h.thompson@...

If this doesn't work, try my web site, where I hope to put my new address
shortly!

http://www.aber.ac.uk/~cat

Cheers
Caroline

#1983 From: Stefan Hartmann <cyrano@...> (by way of cyrano@...)
Date: Sat Jun 2, 2001 11:36 am
Subject: [jlnlabs] Switzerland free energy congress !
cyrano@...
Send Email Send Email
 
New Hydrogen Technologies and Space Drives
Saturday, June 23, and Sunday, June 24, 2001
Congress Center Thurgauerhof, CH-8570 Weinfelden/Switzerland

Organizer:
Institute for New Energy Technologies (INET), Jupiter-Publishers and
German Association for Space Energy  (GASE)


12:00 Welcome address:   Adolf and Inge Schneider (INET)
		 Prof.Dr.Dr.Dr.h.c. Josef Gruber (GASE)
12:30 	 Free Sources of Clean Energy
		 Meetings with Inventers and Investigations of Revolutionary Inventions
		 Jeane Manning, Journalist and Book Author, Vancouver / Canada
13:30 	 Advanced Concepts for Wireless Energy Transfer
		 Highly Efficient  Power Engineering with Scalar Waves
		 Prof. Dr.-Eng. Konstantin Meyl, Transfer Centre of the
Steinbeis-Foundation
for Economic Assistance, TZA, St. Georgen/Black Forest, Germany
14:30 	 Low-Temperature Nuclear Reactions with Excess Energy
		 Successful Experiments with Magnetic Field assisted Low Energy Fusion
Prof. J. P. Vigier, Editor Physics Letter A (ret.), Paris / France
15:30  Foundations of a Space Time Energy Pump
		 Concepts for the Engineering of Quantum Spacetime Gravitational
Fields
Prof. Dr. A.A. Nassikas, Technical Education Institute of Larissa,
Greece

16:30  Interval for coffee, tee and demonstrations

17:00  Generator with Energy Conversion and Anti-Gravity-Effects
		 An Experimental Investigation of the Physical Effects in a Dynamic
Magnetic System
		 V.V. Roschin and S.M. Godin, Institute for High Temperatures,
Russian Academy of Science, Moscow, Russia
18:00  New Methods for Energy Generation and Gravity Control
		 Electrogravitic Phenomena based on the Subquantum Kinetics Theory
		 Dr. Paul LaViolette, President of the Starburst Foundation,
Alexandria, VA /USA

19:00  Break for Dinner and Discussions

20:30  The Searl Effect Generator and the Levity Disc
		 Energy Generation and Gravity Control for Space Flight Systems
		 John R.R. Searl, President SISRC, London / Great Britain








Sunday, June 24, 2001

09:30  A New Future with Non-Conventional Energy Technologies
		 New Localized Energy Sources for Heat, Electricity and Transportation
		 Thomas Valone, M.A., P.E., President of the "Integrity Research
Institute"
and Organizer of the Congress on Future Energy, Washington / DC, USA
10:20  The Dynamics of Space Technologies
		 Strategies for the Marketing of New Energy Products
Adolf and Inge Schneider, TransAltec Inc., Egerkingen, Switzerland
11:00  Resonance Principle and the Physics of Oliver Crane
 		 Reflections  on the dynamic Background of Life and Energy
Dr. rer.nat. Dietrich Schuster, Prien, Germany

12:00 	 Lunch break

13:30  Space-Quanta-Generator with Magnetic Resonant Coupling
		 Energy Transfer from Vacuum via Magnetic Nuclei Stimulation
Dr. Hans Weber, PhD nat.sc., Scientific Director of SQR, Switzerland
14:15  Water as a new Source of Energy
Theory and Experiments with a Highly Efficient Plasma-Electrolytic
Reactor
Prof. Ph. M. Kanarev, Kuban State Agrarian University, Krasnodar, Russia

15:00 New Highly Efficient Water-Splitting System
Theory and Experiments with "On board" Hydrogen Generation
Adolf Schneider, Dipl.-Ing., TransAltec Inc., Switzerland

15:45  Coffee break

16:45  Decentral Energy Plants with Quanta-Electro-Stations
		 The Heat Generator  "Yusmar" and the Quanta Motor of Prof. J.S.
Potapov
Wilfried Fittkau, Dipl.-Eng., Black Scorpion® Marketing, Magdeburg,
Germany
17.45  Vision for an enjoyable Future
		 Concepts for the Harmony in Engineering, Science and Society
		 Dr. iur. Hansjörg Landolt, Brione, Switzerland
18.30  Closing address of the organizers




Presentation and Demonstration of Models
Appropriate literature is available on book tables, inventors show their
exposition models and products which are referred to in their lectures,
and they welcome questions of the public.

Working Language:
The conference will be conducted in English and German with
translations.

Check-In, Registration, Welcome Drink: June 23th, beginning at 11:00
a.m.
Congress Organization and Pre-Registration:
INET / Jupiter Publishers,  P.O.Box, CH 4622 Egerkingen,
Phone/Fax. 062 38898 50/1  email: adolf.schneider@...

Congress fees
All-inclusive price incl. Congress papers, Saturday-
Dinner, Sunday-Lunch, 2 Coffee Breaks, Mineral-
Water, incl. accommodation for  1 night  USD 220.- / SFr 390.- / DM
490.- / OES 3'500.-

Students with ID, Unemployed, Retired:  USD 170.- / SFr 290.- / DM 370.-
/ OES 2'600.-

Reduction without room:  USD 30.- / SFr 50.- / DM 65.- /OES 450.-

Single day participation:  50% discount


Registration, Remittance:
Each participant shall receive an information package after
registration. The payment can be done via:
- Germany: Post Banc Muenchen, Acc. No. 12 10 26 - 802, D 80317
Muenchen, BLZ 700 100 80
- Switzerland: Postfinance, Acc. No. 34-3240-1, CH 3040 Bern (no BLZ
No.)
- Austria: via cheque or postal transfer
- Other countries: via cheque or postal transfer

Important  Notice concerning All-inclusive Price:
There is only a certain contingent of rooms in the congress-hotel. The
price of this rooms is included in the all-inclusice price. It is
therefore recommended to book as soon as possible. When all congress
rooms are blocked the participants are obliged to book rooms in nearby
hotels in other cities which is more expensive. The organizer will
provide all necessary informations about other hotels but the
participants have to book themselves.

Cancellation:
If it becomes necessary to cancel a registration, please contact the
following address:
Jupiter Publishers / INET, P.O.Box, CH 4622 Egerkingen, Tel. +41 (0)62
388 98 50, Fax: 51

Before 1 June 2001 90% Refund
Between 1 June and 14 June 50% Refund
20 June 2001 onwards No refund

Congress Address:
Hotel & Congress Center Thurgauer Hof, Thomas-Bornhauser-Str. 10,
CH-8570 Weinfelden,
Phone 0041 (0)71 626 33 33, Fax: 0041 (0) 71 626 34 34,
www.thurgauerhof.com


--

Best regards, Stefan Hartmann.
--
Hartmann Multimedia Service,
Dipl. Ing. Stefan Hartmann, Keplerstr. 11 B, 10589 Berlin, Germany
Tel: +49 30 345 00 497, FAX: +49 30 345 00 498
email: harti@...  WEB: www.harti.com  www.overunity.com
Better getting paid to surf the WEB:
http://www.cashfiesta.com/php/join.php?ref=sonne
http://194.221.66.26/asp/signon.asp?REF=GLBBBG880N
http://www.cash-machine.de/de/anmelden.cfm?ref=353576
Lassen Sie sich doch lieber fuers Surfen bezahlen !
--


Messages archives at :

http://www.egroups.com/group/jlnlabs/

To unsubscribe, send a blank email to jlnlabs-unsubscribe@egroups.com

JLN Labs web site at: http://go.to/jlnlabs

Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to http://docs.yahoo.com/info/terms/

#1984 From: Daniel Lapadatu <cyrano@...> (by way of cyrano@...)
Date: Sat Jun 16, 2001 1:56 am
Subject: Why I don't believe in Ross' model
cyrano@...
Send Email Send Email
 
Dear Claude,

This is briefly why I don't believe in Ross' model:

Wave physics indicate that what is physically relevant is the phase
DIFFERENCE between waves, and not the phase itself.

Phase, like the potential energy levels, can be chosen arbitrarily. They
have no physical meaning by themselves. Just the differences (or the
gradients) have the meaning.

This "indiference" to phase (symmetry to translation in phase)is reflected
by the law of electrical charge conservation. Since no one doubts this law,
no one should doubt the fact that phase is irelevant.

Now, if electrons, neutrinos, positrons and antineutrinos are the same
thing, but phase shifted, one should expect to get the same physics between
objects that are in phase (phase difference equal to zero):

1. electron-electron interaction;
2. neutrino-neutrino interaction;
3. positron-positron interaction;
4. antineutrino-antineutrino interaction.

Well, it turns out that while 1 indeed matches 3 and 2 matches 4, these two
different matching sets do not match each other. Therefore, they the
neutrino is not just an electron shifted by 90 degrees! It must be something
else!

You can try other compounds, like the helium atom: one neutron plus one
proton in a nucleus and two electrons around. This compound should've been
behaving in the same way as the following compound (since the phase
differences are the same): antiproton plus neutron in a nucleus and two
neutrinos around!!! No one has seen such a compound, which should be pretty
stable and as likely as the helium atom.

Ross' model is not phase-invariant!!!


Cheers,
Daniel

#1985 From: cyrano@...
Date: Sat Jun 16, 2001 3:52 pm
Subject: Ross Tessien answers to Neil
cyrano@...
Send Email Send Email
 
>Return-Path: <rtessien@...>
>X-Sender: rtessien@...
>Date: Sat, 16 Jun 2001 08:41:37 -0700
>To: cyrano@...
>From: Ross Tessien <rtessien@...>
>Subject: Re:
>X-Loop-Detect: 1
>
>At 10:56 AM 6/16/01 +0900, you wrote:
>>Ross.,
>>
>>How do you explain that protons can pass through one another:
>>
>>Good question!!!
>>
>>But, for example, it is already well known
>>that two protons spinning in anti-parallel
>>on a collision course, will pass clean through
>>each other without interacting!
>
>To my knowledge, this is incorrect and does not happen.  Protons neutrons
>etc collide.  The question is how often and how large their cross sections
>are.  A proton can pass clean through **atoms**, but not through another
>proton.  Atoms, are nearly all empty space.  Diameter of nucleus to
>diameter of atoms is a ratio of 10,000.
>
>So, it isn't observed or possible according to present experiments and theory.
>
>In wave mechanics, the wave energy far from the focus can easily pass
>through one another, and does as two protons pass nearby.  That they could
>continue in spite of a direct collision would be conceivable in the sense
>that the focus would be destroyed as they passed through.........it would
>be a jumbled mess...............then, after passing
>through,.........because the majority of the wave energy isn't at the focal
>point the protons would be re formed again.
>
>Go to the bath tub, and fill and drain the water.  Spin the water as it is
>draining and form a strong vortex.  Once formed, with your hand, wipe the
>water and vortex around the drain away........quickly......... and then
>remove your hand and watch as the vortex forms again.
>
>Same thing.  If you are confused by a particle "not interacting" what
>really had to happen was an interaction and reformation.
>
>But, I am not saying that this happens as I think you are incorrect in
>asserting that this happens in the laboratory.  It sounds like an error
>that someone in the weird groups made that is being propagated, rather than
>fact.
>
>
>
>
>>How is that possible?
>>
>>Yet, it happens...
>>
>>And you missed my comment at the bottom.
>>I thought you'd like it!
>
>Cute.  I'll avoid making any glass of the earth.
>
>rt
>
>
>NOTE my new Email address: rtessien@...
>
>

#1986 From: Ross Tessien <cyrano@...> (by way of cyrano@...)
Date: Sat Jun 16, 2001 4:00 pm
Subject: Re: Why I don't believe in Ross' model
cyrano@...
Send Email Send Email
 
At 10:56 AM 6/16/01 +0900, you wrote:
> >Return-Path: <daniel.lapadatu@...>
> >From: Daniel Lapadatu <daniel.lapadatu@...>
> >To: "Claude (E-mail)" <cyrano@...>
> >Subject: Why I don't believe in Ross' model
> >Date: Fri, 15 Jun 2001 15:59:31 +0200
> >
> >Dear Claude,
> >
> >This is briefly why I don't believe in Ross' model:
> >
> >Wave physics indicate that what is physically relevant is the phase
> >DIFFERENCE between waves, and not the phase itself.

If you use a structure of waves to replace, "Spacetime", then you can speak
in terms of absolute phase.  But really what you are talking about is the
phase of one wave relative to spacetime here, the phase between spacetime
here and spacetime there, and the phase relation of the resonance over
there relative to spacetime.  Because spacetime is fully locked in
step.........ie like a long series of Josephson's junctions or coupled
oscillators, they all resonant in step with one another globally and you
can just use that as a reference "clock" of sorts.

Thus, you can speak of phase once you make some assignment as to what "0"
degrees of phase angle means.

I assign the wave resonance we call "positive" charge to be that which is
coupled to spacetime at what I arbitrarily assign to be the 0 degree
phase.  With that assignment, you can now speak of phase absolute.


> >
> >Phase, like the potential energy levels, can be chosen arbitrarily. They
> >have no physical meaning by themselves. Just the differences (or the
> >gradients) have the meaning.
> >
> >This "indiference" to phase (symmetry to translation in phase)is reflected
> >by the law of electrical charge conservation. Since no one doubts this law,
> >no one should doubt the fact that phase is irelevant.
> >
> >Now, if electrons, neutrinos, positrons and antineutrinos are the same
> >thing, but phase shifted, one should expect to get the same physics between
> >objects that are in phase (phase difference equal to zero):
> >
> >1. electron-electron interaction;
> >2. neutrino-neutrino interaction;
> >3. positron-positron interaction;
> >4. antineutrino-antineutrino interaction.
> >
> >Well, it turns out that while 1 indeed matches 3 and 2 matches 4, these two
> >different matching sets do not match each other. Therefore, they the
> >neutrino is not just an electron shifted by 90 degrees! It must be something
> >else!

Who ever did neutrino-neutrino collisions in the laboratory?   It may be
that theory says these interactions are different, but, is there proof?

In my model, I am not satisfied that a neutrino is simply an
electron.  There is another resonance geometry they could satisfy and I
have not been able to rule out one or the other.  The electron resonance is
a massive one with aether condensate at the core......ie, focal point of
the spherical resonance.  A neutrino could either be a phase rotated one of
these, or, they could be a hole in the aether.  In this case, they would be
a hole that is spherically resonant sort of like an electron hole in
electronics theory.  That is applied to a notion where there is a deficit
of electrons that propagates forward like an electron, but it is a deficit
of electon that is moving and not a positron.

That said, it seems likely that neutrinos ARE phase rotated electrons due
to the weak nuclear force which can then be treated as an exchange of one
resonance phase angle for another which leads to a change in the "charge"
of the nucleon.



> >
> >You can try other compounds, like the helium atom: one neutron plus one
> >proton in a nucleus and two electrons around. This compound should've been
> >behaving in the same way as the following compound (since the phase
> >differences are the same): antiproton plus neutron in a nucleus and two
> >neutrinos around!!! No one has seen such a compound, which should be pretty
> >stable and as likely as the helium atom.
> >
> >Ross' model is not phase-invariant!!!

Oh, I thought this was from someone new at first but I see now it is from
Daniel.

First, helium4 is two protons and two neutrons, helium 3 is two protons and
1 neutron, so I'm not certain what he means.

Second, anti hydrogen, an anti proton and a positron has been formed
stably, but both will be destroyed if they meet any normal matter
components due to phase opposition which leads to their being driven into
each other.

One neutron plus one proton is deuterium, and would have one
electron..........it exists and is stable and the fuel we will use in our
fusion reactors for that matter!!!!!!  Also, it isn't clear that nuclei
**don't** have neutrinos that are with them in addition to their
electrons.  We don't have means of determining if there are neutrinos
around because we don't have the ability to produce orthogonal charged
plates to accelerate and experiment with neutrinos.

Anyway, again, these assertions that the model is incorrect are based on
not understanding the model or the physics they apply to.

rt



> >
> >
> >Cheers,
> >Daniel
>
>
>" Si tu te fais ver de terre, ne te surprend pas si on t'écrase avec le
>pied. "
>
>  KANT

NOTE my new Email address: rtessien@...

#1987 From: cyrano@...
Date: Mon Jun 18, 2001 12:31 pm
Subject: Fwd:General relativity equations are surprisingly similar to the equations used to compute stress and deformations in the solid bodies. This suggests the fact that spacetime may have a CRYSTALLINE structure
cyrano@...
Send Email Send Email
 
Dear Ross,

I would like, if possible and you have time for it, to clarify something.
To get an idea where I am standing.

You say that electrons and neutrinos are phases of the same wave
(let's call it lepton-wave), and that the
phase is measured with respect to some sort of wave embeded in the
spacetime (let's call it reference-wave).

Now, consider the following systems of leptons interacting each other:

a) two electrons;
b) two neutrinos;
c) one electron and one neutrino.

a) and c) are rather well known experimentally and directly.
b) is also well known, but indirectly (so you can question this knowledge).

1. If all that matters is the two interacting lepton-waves, then two
interacting
electrons and two interacting neutrinos must behave in the same way (both
have a
zero relative phase with respect to each other). But we know that this is
not true.
A pair of electrons interact a lot stronger than a pair of neutrinos.

2. Interaction between two leptons is actually mediated by the reference
wave:
The electron couples to the reference wave stronger (is in phase) than the
neutrino (which is at 90 degrees). This approach seems to give the desired
results (compatibility with experiments).

However, the latter approach is nothing else than the Standard Model (SM)
approach: the reference-wave is the FIELD, the lepton-wave is the particle.
For the moment there are four different fields (or three if you take weak
and electromagnetism together), yet people hope to unify all within a single
field. Therefore the approach is not new.

Yet, there is a MAJOR difference: in the SM the field is the extended
object, while the particle is LOCALISED (some people would love to see it as
point-like, others string-like, others membrane-like and so on). The field
is wave-like, the particle is corpuscule-like.
So, separated particles interact with each other via the field to which they
couple.
(However, one always have the particle and the field together, therefore the
duality.)

In your model you have just waves: the leptonic waves and the
reference-wave. My question is what's the role of the reference-wave in your
model? The lepton-wave are overlapped already and they should be interacting
directly, without any mediator. But if this would be the case you run into
problems with the phase difference between two neutrinos (zero) and two
electrons (again zero), which give different physics.

You see, why experiments and a sort of logic (in which we might've become
prisoners) conducted to this idea of interaction: Particles are localised,
they couple (interact) locally with the field, the field is extended (and
allegedly created by the sum of all localised particles)?

Precisely because people have seen that two electrons do not interact in the
same way as two neutrinos or an electron-neutrino pair. The same with other
particles from the same family. If particles would've been waves only such a
scenario is not possible. I don't know how to say it more clear.

The SM gives very good predictions, which means that the model described
above is at least mathematically correct (may be wrong, but the mathematical
formulation is correct; there are plenty of examples of different
systems/models which are described by the same set of mathematical
equations). The big unanswered question is the following: why particles
couple differently to the field? Where those masses are coming from? Where
all those various properties are coming from?

If they are point-like they should all be identical (a point is a point and
has no other features). Therefore point-like particles are in a way already
ruled out as a possibility.
But string-like have also been ruled out for other reasons. So people are
trying now membrane-like objects, which I am 100% confident they will fail
too :-).

Both extremes: corpuscules only and wave only objects seem not to fit the
reality properly. I strongly believe that particles are in between: they
have a wave like structure AND a corpuscule-like structure.

General relativity equations are surprisingly similar to the equations used
to compute stress and deformations in the solid bodies. This suggests the
fact that spacetime may have a CRYSTALLINE structure (the fact that
torsional/shear stress-like terms appear in gravity is from the start a sign
that spacetime cannot be fluid-like). Particles may be either oscillations
modes of this structure (in which case they are bosons, associated thus with
fields), or defects in the crystalline lattice (in which case they are
fermions, associated thus with localised particles). This view fits Pauli's
exclusion principle (you can overlap bosons/fields, but you can't overlap
fermions) and with other quantum laws.

>From the arguments listed above, I give more credit to those models in which
the vacuum is modelled like a solid (see Finkelstein model), rather then
those in which the vacuum is modelled as a fluid (which are incompatible
with GRT).

So, although I am not satisfied with the Standard Model, I see no point in
replacing it with another model which is as unsatisfactory or even less.

This is a sort of personal statement (to explain my behaviour/way of
thinking and so on) and should not be interpreted in an offensive way, or
lack of respect way and things like this. Or like I don't give a dime on
such models/ideas. And above all, no one is fully qualified to decissively
rule what is true and what is wrong.

Yours,

Daniel

#1988 From: Daniel Lapadatu <cyrano@...> (by way of cyrano@...)
Date: Tue Jun 19, 2001 12:02 pm
Subject: RE: neutrinos : one can see that at 30 degrees phase the electrical charge is +2/3, and at 60 degrees is +1/3. These resemble the bquarks... You also get the right number of quarks (considering the spin too).
cyrano@...
Send Email Send Email
 
Ross wrote:

> The mass issue for neutrinos is calculated via the loss of
> energy from beta
> type reactions, not from any actual interaction with the
> particle that
> could really measure it's mass.

Something like that indeed. The mass of the neutrinos is known just as a
domain in which it can take values. There are several sources to evaluate
the
upper limits of the neutrino mass. For instance, from cosmological
considerations
neutrinos cannot have a mass higher than 65 eV. Note that mass here is not
measured based on inertia or gravity, but rather from the energy
conservation and momentum conservation laws and their relativistic
relationship. Therefore, what actually is measured is the square of the
mass. That means when people say that muon neutrino is heavier than the
electronic neutrino, one should consider this with caution, because all mass
differences are also squared and the relationship may be actually the other
way round.

> neutrinos with 90 / 270 phase angle charge, we cannot use 0

Let's clarify this too: 270 phase neutrino is what is called antineutrino.
Or not? Logically, if you take electron and positron as being 180 degrees
apart, it follows that neutrino 90 and neutrino 270 are the particle and
antiparticle.

> 0 I assign to be positive, and 180 is negative, so 90 and 270
> are both neutral phases).

What you say is equivalent with: draw a circle of radius 1 in the xOy plane.
Start counting the phase from the point (1,0) (located on axis Ox),
anticlockwise.
Then at point (1,0) is the electron, at point (0,1) is the neutrino, at
point (-1,0) is the positron and at point (0,-1) is the antineutrino. The
axis Ox defines the electrical charge, while the axis Oy defines the
neutrino-charge (or whatever name). The neutrinos have both zero electrical
charge and the electrons have both zero neutrino-charge. That's at least how
I pictured this.

Then you can start wondering: what's at 30 degrees phase? At 60 degrees? and
so on.
With the assumptions from above, one can see that at 30 degrees phase the
electrical charge is +2/3, and at 60 degrees is +1/3. These reasamble the
quarks... You also get the right number of quarks (considering the spin
too).

I went through this sort of deduction, but sincerely I am not quite
satisfied. It does not give new answers and some other things are turning
out wrongly. I don't exclude a mistake on my side either.

> be the cause of nuclear beta decay.  Further, it could
> reasonably be that
> we are bathed in a sea of neutrinos that really are just like
> electrons and

Yes. That's what I believe too, but from different reasons.

> The neutrino issue is far more complicated than others know,
> and far from solved.

Quite true. And it is a pity that efforts are not focussed on neutrinos.
Thousands of people study the heavy quarks, when these have little if no
impact at all in the going of the Universe. While with the neutrinos is a
totally different story: they play a major role in cosmology.

Cheers,
Daniel

#1989 From: Ross Tessien <cyrano@...> (by way of cyrano@...)
Date: Wed Jun 20, 2001 10:33 pm
Subject: gravity as filtering
cyrano@...
Send Email Send Email
 
At 02:04 PM 6/20/01 +0200, Daniel Lapadatu wrote:

>Dear Ross and Claude,
>
>Claude mentioned something about gravity seen as filtering (within Ross'
>model).
>I haven't heard anything about this, so what I will be saying here may be
>off the wall.
>
>The only way I see right now one can emulate the curved spacetime by
>employing waves is to emulate the behaviour of the electromagnetic waves
>in a gravitational field:

You use the term, "field" as do all physicists today.  This term is
meaningless.  What is a field?  What shape is it?  What causes it,
fundamentally?  The answers you might dream up or put forward out of
familiarity, if you really think about them, are just words without form or
structure at the Planck scale.

Now, you begin below to go into how wave geometry might be altered, and
that is excellent and what must be done to understand this stuff.  You can
discard the notion, "field" and speak in terms of wavelengths and
frequencies and geometries and how the nodes and anti nodes are varied in
space and in time.

To begin understanding gravity, start with just two particles in the
universe, plus, spacetime where spacetime is a structure of standing waves
permeating the entire universe and the structure of waves to which the
"particles" are under damped resonances.

If the two particles (remember the name particle is used, but what is
always meant is "standing wave" or "spherical resonance", and not a
particle in the sense of a rock or dust grain that just sits there doing
nothing.)

If the two particles are alone in the universe, they will interact via
their waves which pass through each other.  If the waves interfere at 180
phase, they will move toward one another or, "attract".  If the waves
interfere at 90 or 270 phase, they will be neutral to each other and won't
accelerate relative to one another.  If their waves interfere at 0 phase,
they will repulse.  This was known back in the 1880's by Thomson, Bjerknes
and everyone working with aether theories, so read history texts to get
this aspect.

Now, let's add a bunch of random, frequency shifted wave energy coming
inward from all distances throughout the rest of the universe (from other
resonances far away and moving away so that they are red shifted in
frequency).  That wave energy will not interfere with the two we are
dealing with via a phase interference because they are at different
frequencies.  That energy is like noise, literally.

If you sit two people on a chair on a frictionless ice rink, stationary,
and then you turn on a bunch of loud speakers around the rink, they will be
pushed toward one another because their bodies will filter out some of that
noise and it will be quieter in between them.

The same thing happens and we call it gravity.  The wave energy that drives
gravity comes from the rest of the universe.  The funny thing is, the power
is about the same no matter how far away the noise is coming from because
while the intensity is falling off by 1/R^2, the number of galaxies is
rising by R^2, and the two multiplied together is just 1.

So, galaxies billions of light years away play as important a role in
gravity as do galaxies a few million light years away.  Spacetime is the
local time keeper of wave energy, and it has as it's frequency, the Planck
scale frequency where the majority of the power is, nearby.

However, this is just showing how to think of the aspects of gravity that
you already know about.

if you really want to learn about what is wrong with GR, then you must
study how gravity also has an effect that repulses objects away from one
another due to exothermy and the formation of new spacetime.  This happens
in stars due to fusion and mass to space conversion.  This is what is wrong
with GR and QM, ...........ie, they fail to acknowledge this aspect of how
the universe really works.

rt




>The wavelengths of the wave increases as the wave proceeds against the field.
>
>If one considere the distance between two successive crests of the wave as
>the length etalon, is it also easy to visualise why space is bend around a
>massive body: make a circle around the body and use a wave to measure its
>length. Since the wave is in a constant field, its wavelength will stay
>fixed (OK, you can't do this with light, because it flies to fast, but you
>can use mirrors or a slower wave). Lets say that the wave crests count is NP.
>
>Now, you measure the radius of the circle. Because of the gravity, you
>will get a count NR which is MORE than NP/2Pi (which will be the answer in
>flat space).
>
>That's the space curvature (remember: we can measure the space only with
>material objects!).
>
>Now, let's assume that the spacetime is flat and some filtering of the
>waves occurs around massive bodies for some reasons. This means that from
>a wave-packet containing high frequencies waves some of the high frequency
>waves are absorbed. What is left are the low frequancy ones. So, this
>process is equivalent with observing an increase in the wavelength of a
>wave as it moves against the field. Which means it is a possible way to
>emulate gravity,
>
>because in the end, taking into acound how we measure distances and times
>- by using waves, this is equivalent of having bent spacetime around a
>massive body.
>
>Einstein's GRT tells us how much matter bends spacetime and how matter
>moves through spacetime, but does not give an answer to **why** matter
>bends spacetime. A filtering of the waves appears, at least at a quick
>glance, to provide such a mechanism (however, it has to have the right
>features as to generate the same equations as GRT).
>
>Cheers,
>Daniel

#1990 From: cyrano@...
Date: Wed Jun 20, 2001 10:52 pm
Subject: gravity as filtering: this process is equivalent with observing an increase in the wavelength of a wave as it moves against the field. Which means it is a possible way to emulate gravity
cyrano@...
Send Email Send Email
 
Fwd:

Claude mentioned something about gravity seen as filtering (within Ross'
model).
I haven't heard anything about this, so what I will be saying here may be
off the wall.

The only way I see right now one can emulate the curved spacetime by
employing waves is to emulate the behaviour of the electromagnetic waves in
a gravitational field:

The wavelengths of the wave increases as the wave proceeds against the
field.

If one considere the distance between two successive crests of the wave as
the length etalon, is it also easy to visualise why space is bend around a
massive body: make a circle around the body and use a wave to measure its
length. Since the wave is in a constant field, its wavelength will stay
fixed (OK, you can't do this with light, because it flies to fast, but you
can use mirrors or a slower wave). Lets say that the wave crests count is
NP.
Now, you measure the radius of the circle. Because of the gravity, you will
get a count NR which is MORE than NP/2Pi (which will be the answer in flat
space).
That's the space curvature (remember: we can measure the space only with
material objects!).

Now, let's assume that the spacetime is flat and some filtering of the waves
occurs around massive bodies for some reasons. This means that from a
wave-packet containing high frequencies waves some of the high frequency
waves are absorbed. What is left are the low frequancy ones. So, this
process is equivalent with observing an increase in the wavelength of a wave
as it moves against the field. Which means it is a possible way to emulate
gravity,
because in the end, taking into acound how we measure distances and times -
by using waves, this is equivalent of having bent spacetime around a massive
body.

Einstein's GRT tells us how much matter bends spacetime and how matter moves
through spacetime, but does not give an answer to **why** matter bends
spacetime. A filtering of the waves appears, at least at a quick glance, to
provide such a mechanism (however, it has to have the right features as to
generate the same equations as GRT).
C’est comme en escrime, "l’adversaire avance, vous le laissez avancer et
c’est lui qui s’embroche"

Dumas

Si tu te fais ver de terre, ne te surprend pas si on t'écrase avec le pied !

Kant

#1991 From: cyrano@...
Date: Thu Jun 21, 2001 3:56 am
Subject: gravity is caused by wave filtering
cyrano@...
Send Email Send Email
 
Monomorphie du psychisme male et polymorphie du psychisme
feminin: la gravite en tant que filtrage frequentiel

Daniel et Ross ont ecrit ce qui suit:

>Dear Ross and Claude,
>
>Claude mentioned something about gravity seen as filtering (within
Ross' model). I haven't heard anything about this,

[Claude]

Tessien a toujours dit que la gravite etait due a ce phenomene!

[Daniel]

so what I will be saying here may be off the wall.
The only way I see right now one can emulate the curved spacetime by
employing waves is to emulate the behaviour of the electromagnetic
waves in a gravitational field:

[Tessien]

You use the term, "field" as do all physicists today.  This term is
meaningless.  What is a field?  What shape is it?  What causes it,
fundamentally?  The answers you might dream up or put forward out of
familiarity, if you really think about them, are just words without form
or structure at the Planck scale.

[Claude]

Je suis d'accord.Ceux qui se sont trop specialises en mathematiques
sont persuades que la realite doit se reduire a des
mathematiques,meme si cela contredit tous les NIVEAUX
D'ORGANISATION pour lesquels les mathematiques n'ont aucun sens
**reel** mais ne sont qu'un outil technique pour transformer ce reel en
techniques appliquees.

L'invention,par exemple,de "dimensions" supplementaires aux 4 me
parait une elucubration delirante,tout comme le voyage physique dans
le temps.

Idem pour la vision invraisemblable actuelle des "particules" et des
"probabilites" en physique mathemathique.

Je ne comprends pas comment les mathematiciens sont si bouches
qu'ils ne peuvent pas se rendre compte qu'un monde reel,fait d'Espace
et d'ondes dans cet Espace,est raisonnable CAR il s'accorde et
S'EMBOITE,parfaitement,avec tous les NIVEAUX D'ORGANISATION
superieurs du Reel.

C'est l'usage excessif des mathematiques qui a mis la physique dans
un cul de sac intellectuel en creant des elephants roses
mathematiques.

C'est,AUSSI,une consequence inconsciente du PSYCHISME DE
L'HOMME male qui prefere les assertions monomorphes
mathematiques aux assertions polymorphes des formes.

Si la physique avait ete elaboree,exclusivement,par des FEMMES elle
serait,je pense,bien differente....

Quand,par exemple,Daniel et Caroline en viennent a se battre en eux
c'est en raison du differentiel de leur psychisme qui leur fait aborder
les problemes de facon differente et inconciliables.

Tessien a plus un psychisme de femme qu'un psychisme
d'homme,d'ou,d'ailleurs,sa creativite en physique.

[Tessien]

Now, you begin below to go into how wave geometry might be altered,
and that is excellent and what must be done to understand this stuff.
You can discard the notion, "field" and speak in terms of wavelengths
and frequencies and geometries and how the nodes and anti nodes are
varied in space and in time.

[Claude]

Voila quelque chose de rationnel et qui SATISFAIT a la regle des
emboitements des Niveaux d'Organisation et a celle des formes.

[Tessien]

To begin understanding gravity, start with just two particles in the
universe, plus, spacetime where spacetime is a structure of standing
waves permeating the entire universe and the structure of waves to
which the "particles" are under damped resonances.

[Claude]

Voila qui est toujours parfaitement logique

[Tessien]

If the two particles (remember the name particle is used, but what is
always meant is "standing wave" or "spherical resonance", and not a
particle in the sense of a rock or dust grain that just sits there doing
nothing.)

If the two particles are alone in the universe, they will interact via
their waves which pass through each other.  If the waves interfere at
180 phase, they will move toward one another or, "attract".  If the
waves interfere at 90 or 270 phase, they will be neutral to each other
and won't accelerate relative to one another.  If their terference
because they are at different frequencies.  That energy is like noise,
literally.

[Tessien]

Toujours tres logique car integre avec les niveaux d'organisations
superieurs.C'est une explication parfaitement coherente de la notion
de "charge" et de celle de "gravite".

[Tessien]

If you sit two people on a chair on a frictionless ice rink, stationary,
and then you turn on a bunch of loud speakers around the rink, they
will be pushed toward one another because their bodies will filter out
some of that noise and it will be quieter in between them.

[Claude]

L'emploi de metaphores est une caracteristique des gens createurs car
ces metaphores expriment des homologies de formes entre
phenomenes.
C'est dans ce sens restrictif qu'il faut voir le terme de "poussee".Il
existe une "poussee" parce qu'il existe un filtrage frequentiel.
Les masses sont des filtres frequentiels,cela me parait indubitable.

[Tessien]

The same thing happens and we call it gravity.  The wave energy that
drives gravity comes from the rest of the universe.

[Claude]

On ne peut etre plus morpho-logique.La pensee de Tessien est
**ordonnee**,par formes,contrairement a la pensee des
"numerologues mathematiques" qui font du bricolage incoherent avec
une pense desordonee morpho-logiquement. Un exemple est celui du
procede de la renormalisation ou l'on utilise des infinis pour aboutir a
un resultat qui colle avec la realite.C'est grotesque.
Un autre c'est le remplacement du reel par des "probabilites"! Les
probabilites sont un artifice mathematique mais non pas des realites
concretes.

Il faut se mefier absolument des abstractions qui n'ont aucune
correspondance avec des **geometries**.

[Tessien]

The funny thing is, the power is about the same no matter how far
away the noise is coming from because while the intensity is falling off
by 1/R^2, the number of galaxies is rising by R^2, and the two
multiplied together is just 1.

So, galaxies billions of light years away play as important a role in
gravity as do galaxies a few million light years away.  Spacetime is the
local time keeper of wave energy, and it has as it's frequency, the
Planck scale frequency where the majority of the power is, nearby.

However, this is just showing how to think of the aspects of gravity that
you already know about.

if you really want to learn about what is wrong with GR, then you must
study how gravity also has an effect that repulses objects away from
one another due to exothermy and the formation of new spacetime.
This happens in stars due to fusion and mass to space conversion.
This is what is wrong
with GR and QM, ...........ie, they fail to acknowledge this aspect of how
the universe really works.

[Claude]

Morpho-logique

R.T



[Daniel]

>The wavelengths of the wave increases as the wave proceeds against
the field.If one considere the distance between two successive crests
of the wave as the length etalon, is it also easy to visualise why space
is bend around a massive body: make a circle around the body and use
a wave to measure its length. Since the wave is in a constant field, its
wavelength will stay fixed (OK, you can't do this with light, because it
flies to fast, but you can use mirrors or a slower wave). Lets say that
the wave crests count is NP.
>
>Now, you measure the radius of the circle. Because of the gravity, you
>will get a count NR which is MORE than NP/2Pi (which will be the
answer in flat space).
>
>That's the space curvature (remember: we can measure the space
only with material objects!).

[Claude]

Pourquoi ce terme de "courbure" et pas un autre?

[Daniel]

>Now, let's assume that the spacetime is flat and some filtering of the
>waves occurs around massive bodies for some reasons.

[Claude]

N'est-ce pas mieux de dire que l'Espace est isotrope ou anisotrope?

[Daniel]

  This means that from a wave-packet containing high frequencies
waves some of the high frequency waves are absorbed. What is left are
the low frequancy ones. So, this process is equivalent with observing
an increase in the wavelength of a wave as it moves against the field.

Which means it is a possible way to emulate gravity,

[Claude]

De quelle facon,par exemple? Vous avez la possibilite d'inventer
l'antigravitation!!!

[Daniel]

because in the end, taking into acound how we measure distances and
times - by using waves, this is equivalent of having bent spacetime
around a massive body.

[Claude]

Donc que proposez-vous du point de vue technique?

[Daniel]

Einstein's GRT tells us how much matter bends spacetime and how
matter moves through spacetime, but does not give an answer to
**why** matter bends spacetime. A filtering of the waves appears, at
least at a quick glance, to provide such a mechanism (however, it has
to have the right features as to generate the same equations as GRT).


[Claude]

Aaaah! On commence,enfin,a etre un peu d'accord!!!

Continuons cette passionnante discussion car je suis quasi sur que
Tessien a vraiment trouve comment creer "l'antigravite"...

Tessien est un polylomorphologicien,vous etes un logicien.La
combinaison de Tessien + Lapadatu pourrait donner de la dynamite
creative!!

N'est-ce pas intellectuellement interessant?
C’est comme en escrime, "l’adversaire avance, vous le laissez avancer et
c’est lui qui s’embroche"

Dumas

Si tu te fais ver de terre, ne te surprend pas si on t'écrase avec le pied !

Kant

#1992 From: cyrano@...
Date: Thu Jun 21, 2001 11:19 pm
Subject: Puthoff, at the conference in Brighton last January, agreed that "mass" corresponded to "amount of aether"
cyrano@...
Send Email Send Email
 
>Return-Path: <rtessien@...>
>X-Sender: rtessien@...
>Date: Thu, 21 Jun 2001 10:02:51 -0700
>To: cyrano@..., daniel.lapadatu@...
>From: Ross Tessien <rtessien@...>
>Subject: Re:Ross VIII
>Cc: "milo wolff" <milo.wolff@...>
>X-Loop-Detect: 1
>
>Puthoff, at the conference in Brighton last January, agreed that "mass"
>corresponded to "amount of aether".  And as such, he tentatively agreed
>that fusion should lead to emission of aether, and by extension, emission
>of space.  I doubt he has worked on the concept, but, at the conference
>when I posed the question to him in front of everyone, he agreed that
>quantity of aether was a good way to think of mass.
>
>Once you make that assertion, you are stuck with all of the rest of the
>expectations that space is flowing out of stars.
>
>rt




C’est comme en escrime, "l’adversaire avance, vous le laissez avancer et
c’est lui qui s’embroche"

Dumas

Si tu te fais ver de terre, ne te surprend pas si on t'écrase avec le pied !

Kant

#1993 From: cyrano@...
Date: Thu Jun 21, 2001 11:34 pm
Subject: Fwd:Re: Puthoff, at the conference in Brighton last January, agreed that "mass" corresponded to "amount of aether"
cyrano@...
Send Email Send Email
 
>Return-Path: <Puthoff@...>
>From: Puthoff@...
>Date: Thu, 21 Jun 2001 19:04:53 EDT
>Subject: Re: Puthoff, at the conference in Brighton last January, agreed
that "mass" corresponded to "amount of aether"
>To: cyrano@...
>
>
>In a message dated 6/21/01 12:18:44 PM, cyrano@... writes:
>
><< So what is your opinion now about this topic?
>
> >>
>
>I think it is an interesting concept and should be followed up, but I have
>not pursued it in any detail myself.
>
>Best regards,
>Hal
>
>

#1994 From: cyrano@...
Date: Sun Jun 24, 2001 12:19 am
Subject: Test Proves Concept of Negative Field Mass
cyrano@...
Send Email Send Email
 
Associates in Electrogravitation - http://www.electrogravity.com


Dear Associates in Electrogravitation and All:
I have just completed a new series of tests using a 10 ft. long 18 inch wide
variable impedance vertically tapered transmission line driven by a high
voltage pulse. The device is mounted on a wooden balance beam and the
movement is monitored by a laser diode projected on a wall 10 feet away. The
test results indicate that reactive currents in the shorted end of the
transmission line provide a negative mass effect.

See the test and comments at:
http://www.electrogravity.com/index16.html

Also see attached drawing of the basic test configuration. This test may be
viewed on video tape. Write me if you want a copy.

Respectfully,
Jerry E. Bayles
email: quark137@...
URL: http://www.electrogravity.com



______________________________________________________________________
To unsubscribe, write to
electrogravity-unsubscribe@...<HTML>Associates in Electrogravitation
- http://www.electrogravity.com

<P>
<HR><CENTER><STRONG>ListBot Sponsor</STRONG></CENTER>Get a low APR NextCard
Visa in 30 seconds!<BR>
      1.  Fill in the brief application<BR>
      2.  Receive approval decision within 30 seconds<BR>
      3.  Get rates as low as 2.99% Intro or 9.99% Ongoing APR and no annual
fee!<BR>
Apply NOW!<BR><A
HREF="http://www.bcentral.com/listbot/NextCard">http://www.bcentral.com/list
bot/NextCard</A><BR><HR><P><FONT FACE=arial,helvetica><FONT  SIZE=2>Dear
Associates in Electrogravitation and All:
<BR>I have just completed a new series of tests using a 10 ft. long 18 inch
wide
<BR>variable impedance vertically tapered transmission line driven by a high
<BR>voltage pulse. The device is mounted on a wooden balance beam and the
<BR>movement is monitored by a laser diode projected on a wall 10 feet away.
The
<BR>test results indicate that reactive currents in the shorted end of the
<BR>transmission line provide a negative mass effect.
<BR>
<BR>See the test and comments at:
<BR>http://www.electrogravity.com/index16.html
<BR>
<BR>Also see attached drawing of the basic test configuration. This test may be
<BR>viewed on video tape. Write me if you want a copy.
<BR>
<BR>Respectfully,
<BR>Jerry E. Bayles
<BR>email: quark137@...
<BR>URL: http://www.electrogravity.com</FONT>

<hr>
To unsubscribe, write to electrogravity-unsubscribe@...<br>
</HTML>

#1995 From: cyrano@...
Date: Sun Jun 24, 2001 12:23 am
Subject: Quarter-waves...
cyrano@...
Send Email Send Email
 
Fwd:

Quarter-Wave Negative Field Mass Proves That Standing Waves Can Be Used To
Nullify The Gravitational Field.


Quarter-Wave Negative Field Mass Proves That Standing Waves Can Be Used To
Nullify The Gravitational Field.

A recent test by myself has provided proof of my theory that reactive
current derived from the
shorted end of a tuned quarter wave transmission line provides negative
field mass at the shorted
end. See the drawing below for an overview of the test performed.

TEST


The tapered copper transmission line is shorted on the right side and the
reactive field current is
maximum at the short. The tapered line has the property of decreasing
characteristic impedance as
the energy moves from left to right along the line. The current is maximum
in the short when the
characteristic impedance that feeds the short is as low as possible. Note
that the shape is like a
section cut from a UFO where the left side is the center and the right side
is the edge of the craft.
The left side is the voltage maximum and the right side is the current maximum.

The adjustable spark gap matches the input to the pulse forming coaxial line
to the spark gap at
the input to the quarter wave transmission line which then provides the very
fast rise time and
powerful spark that feeds the input of the line. This is an ideal input
since a pulse is capable of
providing a nearly unlimited number of odd harmonics into the frequency
domain. Then a large
number of points along the transmission line are quarter waves to the short
where the quarter
waves closer to the short have the greatest current capability. The negative
field mass generated in
the short is proportional to the square of the reactive current.

The tapered transmission line is placed on a wooden balance beam that is
carefully balanced just
above the transmission line center of gravity. The balance beam is set into
a small periodic motion
by hand and then the spark gap is energized according the which direction
(up or down) we wish
to influence the balance beam swing. The swing is monitored by projecting a
laser diode beam at a
target on the far wall. This is about 10 feet in distance from the laser
diode to the target. The
deflection maximum was about a centimeter on the target.

If the spark gap is energized when the right side is going up, we find that
the oscillation will build
to some point and can be maintained indefinitely as long as we keep
supplying the spark energy
only when the right side is going up. This is expected since a sudden loss
of mass on the right side
would cause the left side to go down and the right side to go up.

Conversely, if  the line is energized only when the right side is going
down, the balance beam will
come to rest rather quickly. This proves that the field mass is negative and
reduces the force of
gravity on the right side of the balance beam only. The above test was
repeated many times with
the same results. Also, different input lead geometry was used with the same
results. Finally, since
we are dealing with high frequency r. f., neither the magnetic or electric
field of the Earth can be
expected to have any bearing on the test.

The entire test has been documented on video tape and I will provide a copy
to those who wish to
see the actual test performed as well as see the actual build details if
they wish to replicate the test.
I will be happy to provide help to any and all who wish to replicate the
above test for themselves.
The video is about 13 1/2 minutes long and I ask a small donation of $10.00
to cover the cost of
the video copy and mailing. Please contact me via email:

quark137@....


Disclaimer:
Dangerous high voltage which can supply lethal current through the human
body is used in the
above test. I am not responsible for accidents or injury caused by the
implementation of the
device as described above. -- Jerry E. Bayles.

--------------------------------

Remember what I write about 1/4 waves?

Claude

#1996 From: cyrano@...
Date: Thu Jun 28, 2001 9:32 am
Subject: Phrase cruciale de Ross dans la construction de Spationefs
cyrano@...
Send Email Send Email
 
Ross ecrit:

If a region of spacetime (remember the gridwork now)
is exposed to a change in the flow rate of aether, the
grid work is curved.

Eh bien nous avons,ici,la formule de fabrication des
Soucoupes Volantes!

En faisant couler l'Espace (synonymise "ether")A
TRAVERS un objet nous le "courbons",au sens
einsteinien du terme.

Un objet dans lequel coule un flot directionnel
d'ether
voit tous ses atomes bipolarises en frequences par
rapport a un referentiel en mouvement uniforme.

Cet objet accelere dans le sens de la polarisation ou
se trouve la baisse frequentielle.

Imaginons que notre Spationef a la forme d'une
Soucoupe
et qu'elle fait couler l'ether du haut de son dome
vers le bas.

Cela donnera lieu a une "courbure" de la Soucoupe par
rapport aux objets materiels ne subissant pas
d'ecoulement d'ether.

Cette Soucoupe "courbee" donnera lieu a une force
gravitomimetique attractive au-dessus du dome et
repulsive en dessous.

Maintenant,il s'agit de trouver les moyens de faire
COULER,directionnellement,l'Espace.

Le Soleil fait deja couler l'Espace dans toutes les
directions.

Claude

3)      Curved spacetime acts upon matter we can
observe.

4)      The above notions can be tested


Consider as many phenomena as you can where the flow
rate of aether should change, and what that should do
to the spacetime curvature around the star, and what
that should do to the matter.  With that, make
predictions as to what we should be able to observe
the matter doing.

this is the key to all of this work.  You must use
matter surrounding stars and galaxies as your "guinea
pigs" to  test what the local spacetime is
doing as a result of some stellar or galactic or black
hole behavior.  fortunately, the matter gives off
photons we can observe, and it exists in lots of
places we want to test what is happening.  There are
dozens of predictions you could make if you are clever
at applying the above concepts, and in Lesson 6 I'll
give you a few more.


To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to:
Soucoupes-Volantes-unsubscribe@egroups.com



L'utilisation de Yahoo! Groups est soumise aux
http://docs.yahoo.com/info/terms/

#1997 From: telemale@...
Date: Tue Jul 10, 2001 1:01 am
Subject: Latest from SLAC on Matter/Antimatter
telemale@...
Send Email Send Email
 
Stanford Report, July 6, 2001
Physicists find a new, striking difference between matter and
antimatter
BY MICHAEL RIORDAN

An international collaboration of physicists conducting experiments
at the Department of Energy's Stanford Linear Accelerator Center
(SLAC) has discovered a second fundamental difference between the
behavior of matter and that of antimatter. They observed this
intriguing phenomenon -- known as charge-parity (CP) violation and
first seen decades ago in experiments with another particle -- in
disintegrations of heavy, short-lived subatomic particles called B
mesons. The collaboration reported its result in a paper submitted
July 5 for publication in Physical Review Letters, a leading
scientific journal.

"After 37 years of searching for further examples of CP violation,
physicists now know that there are at least two kinds of subatomic
particles that exhibit this puzzling phenomenon, thought to be
responsible for the great preponderance of matter in the Universe,"
said Princeton University physicist Stewart Smith, spokesman of the
collaboration. "We are poised for further discoveries that should
open up new directions for particle physics."

The international collaboration includes more than 600 scientists and
engineers from 73 institutions in Canada, China, France, Germany,
Great Britain, Italy, Norway, Russia and the United States. They
built and have been operating the sophisticated 1,200-ton detector,
named BABAR, which was used to make the discovery.

The detector records subtle distinctions between decays of B mesons
and those of their antimatter counterparts, called anti-B mesons.
Both are more than five times heavier than protons and survive just
over a trillionth of a second. Physicists employed the detector to
observe an unmistakable difference, or asymmetry, between the rates
at which B and anti-B mesons decay into a special set of specific
final states.

From these measurements, they calculated a parameter called sin 2b
(sine two beta), which expresses the degree of asymmetry between
matter and antimatter. A non-zero value of this parameter is clear
evidence for CP violation among B mesons.

In the paper just submitted, the BABAR collaboration reported
measuring a value of sin 2b = 0.59 ± 0.14, which is substantially
different from zero. There are now fewer than 3 chances in 100,000
that the actual, physical asymmetry could be consistent with zero.

This BABAR result is easily the most precise measurement of sin 2b
reported to date. Earlier measurements made at Fermi National
Accelerator Laboratory, the Japanese National Laboratory for High-
Energy Accelerator Research (KEK), and at SLAC by the BABAR
collaboration are consistent with the present result but not as
accurate. The value just reported agrees with expectations based on
the Standard Model, today's dominant theory of particle physics.

The precision of the BABAR result was made possible by the
outstanding performance of the PEP-II B Factory at SLAC. Built in
collaboration with the Energy Department's Lawrence Berkeley and
Lawrence Livermore National Laboratories, this pair of 2.2-kilometer
storage rings collides unequal-energy beams of electrons and their
antimatter counterparts, called positrons. Piermaria Oddone, now
deputy director of the Berkeley lab, first proposed this innovative
experimental approach, which greatly enhances the accuracy of many B
meson measurements.

"The B Factory has performed beyond expectations, permitting the
BABAR collaboration to make the world-class measurements on B
mesons," said SLAC Director Jonathan Dorfan, who played a pivotal
role in designing and building this particle collider. Since it began
operating in June 1999, the B Factory has produced more than 32
million pairs of B mesons, from which data the present BABAR result
was extracted.

The mysterious phenomenon of CP violation was first discovered in a
1964 experiment led by James Cronin and Val Fitch at the Brookhaven
National Laboratory. Their group observed this behavior in decays of
subatomic particles called K mesons, which are about one tenth as
heavy as B mesons and live much longer; the two physicists shared a
Nobel Prize for the discovery.

Several observations of CP violation have since occurred in
experiments with K mesons. But until the recent BABAR discovery, no
other subatomic particles had clearly exhibited this exceedingly rare
phenomenon. Having this second striking example of CP violation
should aid theorists trying to understand what causes it.

Scientists are interested in this puzzling behavior because it can
help explain the abundance of matter in the Universe. In 1967,
Russian theorist Andrei Sakharov used CP violation to suggest how the
present matter-dominated Universe could have emerged from one that
contained exactly equal amounts of matter and antimatter during the
earliest moments of the Big Bang.

The Stanford Linear Accelerator Center is a national laboratory for
high-energy physics and synchrotron-radiation research operated by
Stanford University on behalf of the U.S. Department of Energy. The
Department's Office of Science funded the construction of the B
Factory at $177 million and contributed about 60 percent of the cost
of the BABAR detector, with the remainder coming from foreign
sources. "The foreign contributions to this experiment, both monetary
and scientific, have been absolutely crucial to its success," noted
former BABAR spokesman David Hitlin of the California Institute of
Technology.


http://www.stanford.edu/dept/news/report/news/july11/slac-711.html

#1998 From: John Schnurer <herman@...>
Date: Tue Jul 10, 2001 3:03 am
Subject: No! Realllyyy?????
herman@...
Send Email Send Email
 
Physicists find a new, striking difference between matter and
  antimatter
  BY MICHAEL RIORDAN



	 This is REALLY NEWS!

#1999 From: "adrian" <afme@...>
Date: Tue Jul 10, 2001 3:37 am
Subject: Re: No! Realllyyy?????
afme@...
Send Email Send Email
 
Hi,

Confirms one thing for me. For years I've not belived that our formula
should balance out to zero. It's one of the major errors of the material
theses which assumes that what we see is all there is to it. And if a whole
is greater than the parts no set of parts cn sum top zero, ever, by whatever
the margin may be. In short: how solid is a fence?

Adrian.


>  Physicists find a new, striking difference between matter and
>  antimatter
>  BY MICHAEL RIORDAN
>
>
>
> This is REALLY NEWS!
>
>
> To Post a message, send it to:   forcefieldpropulsionphysics@eGroups.com
>
> To Unsubscribe, send a blank message to:
forcefieldpropulsionphysics-unsubscribe@eGroups.com
>
> Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to http://docs.yahoo.com/info/terms/
>
>
>

#2000 From: cyrano@...
Date: Tue Jul 10, 2001 9:01 am
Subject: Fwd: Unable to deliver your message
cyrano@...
Send Email Send Email
 
>Return-Path: <>
>Date: 10 Jul 2001 08:59:18 -0000
>To: cyrano@...
>From: Yahoo! Groups <notify@yahoogroups.com>
>Subject: Unable to deliver your message
>
>
>We are unable to deliver the message from <cyrano@...>
>to <greenglow@egroups.com>.
>
>You are not allowed to send email to this group. There are two possible
>reasons for this:
>
>1. This group may only accept postings from moderators.
>2. The moderator of this group may have removed your ability to post to
>   this group.
>
>To contact the group moderator, send mail to greenglow-owner@yahoogroups.com
>
>For further assistance, please email support@yahoogroups.com
>or visit http://help.yahoo.com/help/us/groups/
>Received: (qmail 83289 invoked from network); 10 Jul 2001 08:59:18 -0000
>Received: from unknown (10.1.10.26)
>  by l9.egroups.com with QMQP; 10 Jul 2001 08:59:18 -0000
>Received: from unknown (HELO aqua.ocn.ne.jp) (203.139.160.206)
>  by mta1 with SMTP; 10 Jul 2001 08:59:17 -0000
>Received: from x25miyem (p49-dn06urasirohat.saitama.ocn.ne.jp
[210.225.248.242])
> by aqua.ocn.ne.jp (8.9.1a/OCN/) with SMTP id RAA21551
> for <greenglow@egroups.com>; Tue, 10 Jul 2001 17:59:14 +0900 (JST)
>Message-Id: <1.5.4.32.20010710085946.006da320@...>
>X-Sender: cyrano@... (Unverified)
>X-Mailer: Windows Eudora Light Version 1.5.4 (32)
>Mime-Version: 1.0
>Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"
>Date: Tue, 10 Jul 2001 17:59:46 +0900
>To: greenglow@egroups.com (antigrav)
>From: cyrano@...
>Subject: Free cd on "Extraterrestrials"...
>
>Fwd:
>
>>Date: Sun, 8 Jul 2001
>>Subject: Why Our Planet is Failing
>>From: art b Rosenblum <artr@...>
>>
>>REVERSING FAILURE - Learning from Success
>>
>>I did not learn to fly by studying crashes ! This is presently a failed
>>planet and though humans have worked thousands of years trying to put
>>things right, improvement seems tenuous at best. Many believe things are
>>getting worse !
>>
>>I've been researching a positive future for this planet for well over 30
>>years and most of what we've come to is only partially successful, in other
>>words a failure. I've seen many communal lifestyles based on love but none
>>are really what they should be.   That is entirely unacceptable. It is time
>>to stop studying the "crashes" and learn from the really successful
>>cultures that have solved the problems we've been struggling with so long.
>>Clearly successful cultures are out there and have been for decades (at
>>least) visiting us by travel faster than light !
>>
>>But this has been covered up for over 50 years by corporations and their
>>government/military buddies. Whenever some of the truth leaks out, as it
>>must, they have PR types insert lies and distortions to make it appear
>>ridiculous so that few competent scientists will even take a good look.
>>
>>But now that is changing. Many people working directly with UFO's and their
>>ET crews, whose lives have been threatened if they ever breathe a word of
>>it, are getting old. They have ceased to fear the threats and are speaking
>>out. Younger ones see that and are speaking out also. I recently (May 9)
>>attended a press conference in D.C. where 22 of them came forward and
>>risked all to tell the truth. Four hundred more are waiting to testify
>>before congress.
>>
>>There were over 100 reporters present with about 25 big cameras. They were
>>given a computer CD containing a 500 page briefing book with the facts and
>>a 100 page summary to make it easier to search. I got one also. So what did
>>the media do ?
>>
>>They almost entirely ignored it !
>>
>>Monica Lewinski (Clinton's pet) got lots of publicity for weeks and when
>>she held a press conference it was viewed live on the Internet by 25,000, a
>>record. This May 9th press conference by CSETI was viewed live by 250,000
>>in spite of attempts to jam it, and no pre-publicity.
>>
>>I'm sending out computer CD's with all the information CSETI put out plus
>>the full audio of that press conference plus the personal experiences of
>>Prof. John Salter and his son (23) who spent over an hour with a group of
>>ET's. I've talked with Prof. Salter many times.
>>
>>There is no charge for the CD. I can send it to you free and you can send a
>>donation after you get it. We don't worry about the money. Just email a
>>postal address with the Subject: ART CD and you will get it by air (with
>>instructions).
>>
>>It's now time to smash the barriers that are preventing us from knowing
>>about free energy and really successful cultures so that this earth can
>>become a happy, successful place for all. I'm also too old (though in
>>excellent health) to feel threatened by any who would try to contain the
>>truth, so I'm going all out to break through the swindles and get us a
>>truly loving planet. That's my full time work.
>>
>>We need help from networkers and PR experts or any others who can get this
>>moving ahead fast. Many lives, including your own may depend on it !
>>
>>Peace and love, Art Rosenblum, mailto:artr@...
>
>

Messages 1971 - 2000 of 2363   Oldest  |  < Older  |  Newer >  |  Newest
Add to My Yahoo!      XML What's This?

Copyright © 2010 Yahoo! Inc. All rights reserved.
Privacy Policy - Terms of Service - Guidelines NEW - Help