|
Post by bonehead on Jun 14, 2019 0:49:23 GMT
I have not had time to check the Dolan video or the sources, but nothing here is above and beyond things I have already known for decades. Dolan says the same, although he measures his knowledge in years, not decades. Here is Devoid's (Billy Cox) article:
devoid.blogs.heraldtribune.com/15832/the-ufo-leak-of-the-century/
Here is Dolan's video about the "leak" :
I have known since the early 1990s that Lockheed Skunk Works (under the aegis of the late Ben Rich) was working on "foreign technology", presumably from UFOs in the possession of the U.S. As Rich cryptically remarked at the time: "We have the technology to send ET home." and, "We have things flying in the desert that are 50 years beyond anything you can imagine".
As head of the Lockheed Skunk Works, Rich was in a position to know. As for keeping government types "out" of the knowledge loop (what this story mostly seems to be about), that is nothing new either as the infamous Barry Goldwater story has also been around for decades. Apparently Tom DeLonge and his buddies at "To the Stars Academy" are having a cow over having been "scooped" by anonymous sources. I have to say that, though they have gotten people (and the mainstream media) talking about UFOs again, they have not pulled any earth shattering rabbits out of hats. So far, Delonge has mostly been a disappointment. All filler, no killer.....
It is an interesting story. We will see where it goes......
Bonehead
|
|
drwu
Full Member
Posts: 209
|
Post by drwu on Jun 14, 2019 15:56:26 GMT
Hello Bonehead, I didn't watch the whole video but none of what I did hear sounds 'new ' regarding the ufo arena....and alleged disclosure and insiders. Also...I have always wondered ...how do we know that Ben Rich actually said those quotes? Did he ever verify publically that he did....now that he's dead ,how does one verify his comments? So many things get attributed to people yet conveniently they are either dead or won't comment . This seems to be endemic in the ufo area as well as with conspiracy themes.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Jun 15, 2019 0:20:16 GMT
I do not see this as another Roswell that's for sure....What I am saying is simply that I don't see this as some kind of major leak. It's major because it's military involved I think..Be interesting to see what Delonge and Elizondo cook up tonight on the third installment of "Unidentified"....I like Richard Dolan always have but he got his start in ufology by reading Tim Goode's book "Above Top Secret"...
|
|
|
Post by bonehead on Jun 21, 2019 1:31:38 GMT
Hello Bonehead, I didn't watch the whole video but none of what I did hear sounds 'new ' regarding the ufo arena....and alleged disclosure and insiders. Also...I have always wondered ...how do we know that Ben Rich actually said those quotes? Did he ever verify publically that he did....now that he's dead ,how does one verify his comments? So many things get attributed to people yet conveniently they are either dead or won't comment . This seems to be endemic in the ufo area as well as with conspiracy themes. Hey Wu, What's up?
I have now watched the entire video. Very interesting. But the only thing new here is a patina of legitimacy imbued by "Big Names" and more contemporary players.
As for the Ben Rich stuff, he DID say those things. Some quotes are from speeches he gave to aerospace industry folks while others are from private communications. The first quote I gave was from one of his industry speeches. The second came from a private conversation that Rich had with aviation historian James Goodall. I heard that one directly from Goodall himself. Here is another of his quotes: My former boss, John Andrews (who had a longtime correspondence with Ben Rich via mail and phone calls) asked Rich about man-made UFOs and extraterrestrial UFOs, Rich's reply was: "I'm a believer in both categories. I feel everything is possible. Many of our man made UFOs are Un Funded Opportunities." ( the words "Un Funded Opportunities" were underlined by Rich on the original) Here is a transcript of the letter:
www.abovetopsecret.com/forum/thread505012/pg1
I know this because I worked with Andrews and held this letter in my hands. It was handwritten in Andrews' typical block printing and answered by Rich handwritten in ballpoint pen on the original letter that Andrews sent to him. It is little known that toward the end of his life, Rich expressed a desire to talk about some of the stuff he had been so cagey and cryptic about for years. He had agreed to a meeting with Goodall to spill the beans - or discuss whatever he was comfortable with. Unfortunately, Rich died weeks before the scheduled meeting. Whatever secrets he was willing to share, he took them with him to the grave.
As far as I am concerned, I am convinced that Rich had direct knowledge of captured UFOs. Another thing he said to Andrews was that the physics for UFO technology differ from the physics taught in aviation technology schools. This is another idea I have seen expressed by others over the many years I have been interested in this subject. You can believe whatever you like. My belief is that this is for real. Andrews shared the conversations he had with Rich over the speaker phone at work, where my desk was right next to his. I heard many things from Rich's own mouth as well as info in a similar vein from others.
I have no doubt about the authenticity of this story. I do not know if this story will carry much weight with others. Many people are inclined to believe whatever they want without knowing sources. In this case I do know some sources. I do not need convincing. But it may be that others will think calling it the "Leak of the Century" to be a bit hyperbolic. I know I do....
Cheers!!
Bonehead
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Jun 21, 2019 10:35:40 GMT
Above Top Secret! Seriously! Like this is some kind of absolute wild disclosure...I figured this would bring the extreme CT'ers out of their crevices in the walls...You know what they are doing? They are admitting UFO's to a point. What they are not doing is claiming they are aliens from another planet....
|
|
|
Post by gus on Jun 22, 2019 0:47:18 GMT
I can see why Dolan is excited, it's very rare to get blow by blow discussions on the UFO topic from within the Pentagon. Discussions like these are historical and help us understand the culture and layers of secrets. Also keep in mind this was just one department of Reverse Engineering UFOs.
This discussion happened during the Phoenix lights as a background note. The only way of working out what these Grey Aliens want was by listening to Abductees. Abductees don't paint a pretty picture.
|
|
drwu
Full Member
Posts: 209
|
Post by drwu on Jun 24, 2019 21:55:18 GMT
Hello Bonehead, I didn't watch the whole video but none of what I did hear sounds 'new ' regarding the ufo arena....and alleged disclosure and insiders. Also...I have always wondered ...how do we know that Ben Rich actually said those quotes? Did he ever verify publically that he did....now that he's dead ,how does one verify his comments? So many things get attributed to people yet conveniently they are either dead or won't comment . This seems to be endemic in the ufo area as well as with conspiracy themes. Hey Wu, What's up?
I have now watched the entire video. Very interesting. But the only thing new here is a patina of legitimacy imbued by "Big Names" and more contemporary players.
As for the Ben Rich stuff, he DID say those things. Some quotes are from speeches he gave to aerospace industry folks while others are from private communications. The first quote I gave was from one of his industry speeches. The second came from a private conversation that Rich had with aviation historian James Goodall. I heard that one directly from Goodall himself. Here is another of his quotes: My former boss, John Andrews (who had a longtime correspondence with Ben Rich via mail and phone calls) asked Rich about man-made UFOs and extraterrestrial UFOs, Rich's reply was: "I'm a believer in both categories. I feel everything is possible. Many of our man made UFOs are Un Funded Opportunities." ( the words "Un Funded Opportunities" were underlined by Rich on the original) Here is a transcript of the letter:
www.abovetopsecret.com/forum/thread505012/pg1
I know this because I worked with Andrews and held this letter in my hands. It was handwritten in Andrews' typical block printing and answered by Rich handwritten in ballpoint pen on the original letter that Andrews sent to him. It is little known that toward the end of his life, Rich expressed a desire to talk about some of the stuff he had been so cagey and cryptic about for years. He had agreed to a meeting with Goodall to spill the beans - or discuss whatever he was comfortable with. Unfortunately, Rich died weeks before the scheduled meeting. Whatever secrets he was willing to share, he took them with him to the grave.
As far as I am concerned, I am convinced that Rich had direct knowledge of captured UFOs. Another thing he said to Andrews was that the physics for UFO technology differ from the physics taught in aviation technology schools. This is another idea I have seen expressed by others over the many years I have been interested in this subject. You can believe whatever you like. My belief is that this is for real. Andrews shared the conversations he had with Rich over the speaker phone at work, where my desk was right next to his. I heard many things from Rich's own mouth as well as info in a similar vein from others.
I have no doubt about the authenticity of this story. I do not know if this story will carry much weight with others. Many people are inclined to believe whatever they want without knowing sources. In this case I do know some sources. I do not need convincing. But it may be that others will think calling it the "Leak of the Century" to be a bit hyperbolic. I know I do....
Cheers!!
BoneheadHello there... Thanks for the interesting post... You worked with these folks (apparently) so you have an advantage over the rest of us regarding accepting comments about 'aliens' from various sources. I personally remain skeptical about the gubbermint having alien bodies ,crashed ufo parts, or that we have alien technology. I do believe that many strange events in the skies and witness experiences have happened over the last 50 years and that the govt is well aware of these events. I am not convinced they are outer space aliens, but I keep an open mind. I find it very hard to believe that after all this time nothing of any real substance has ever found it's way into the public domain by an insider or whistleblower that proved once and for all we have 'alien stuff'. Humans are very bad at keeping secrets. IMHO..something concrete would have come forward by now yet we still have nothing of any significance. That...bothers me, and makes me really wonder if this is all just some elaborate charade designed for other reasons or simply that the govt doesn't want the public to know that 'they don't even know what's really going on ' and that's the big secret. At any rate it's always fun to talk about it with someone who thinks deeply. Cheers back at ya...
|
|
|
Post by HAL on Jun 25, 2019 15:25:28 GMT
Bonehead,
I had come to believe, from your earlier postings over the years, that you did not accept the physical ufo hypothesis.
Why have you (apparently) changed your point of view ?
HAL.
|
|
drwu
Full Member
Posts: 209
|
Post by drwu on Jun 25, 2019 20:31:31 GMT
Yes..I thought the same thing...what's up Bonehead..?
|
|
|
Post by bonehead on Jun 29, 2019 17:15:57 GMT
Bonehead, I had come to believe, from your earlier postings over the years, that you did not accept the physical ufo hypothesis. Why have you (apparently) changed your point of view ? HAL. I have not changed my point of view on these things anytime in the last 30 years. You both (Hal and Wu) know my view on the Roswell case. If that actually happened, then we are talking about material evidence. Anybody that has had science in school can understand the UFO question as expressed by folks like Stan Friedman and Kevin Randle. Neither have been able to get beyond material explanations for UFOs. I do not need to explain that.
But the immaterial needs some explaining for most folks. That is expressed so well by this quote by quantum physicist Niels Bohr: "everything we call real is made up of things that cannot be considered real". For folks weaned on material explanations, that is harder to wrap you head around. Being a curmudgeon/iconoclast, I see it as my duty to express alternative points of view. I have long believed that material explanations like those expressed by Friedman and Randle do not cover all reports. Skepticism requires keeping an open mind in order to cover all possibilities. But I think the immaterial needs explaining for many people. So that is why I discuss it more.
Like the above Ben Rich quote, I believe in both categories. I do not believe that either explanation covers all reports. So, I sit firmly on the fence. Different cases can have different explanations. It is a wild and crazy universe out there and I want to cover my bases. I hope that explains my point of view.
Cheers!!
Bonehead
|
|
|
Post by HAL on Jun 29, 2019 18:30:08 GMT
.. "everything we call real is made up of things that cannot be considered real"...
That includes physicists like Bohr.
So it would seem that, say, an aircraft carrier can would fit into this carrier. But we choose to say it is real. While accepting it is made up of very small squiggly bits of energy.
So why could an apparently solid ufo not be made from the same squiggly bits and thus appear 'real' to us ?
HAL.
|
|
|
Post by bonehead on Jun 30, 2019 17:10:20 GMT
.. " everything we call real is made up of things that cannot be considered real"... That includes physicists like Bohr. Bohr was not just blowing smoke. He arrived at his conclusion after much study. The ancient Hindu Vedas said that reality was an illusion. So they arrived at the same conclusion as Bohr thousands of years ago. It is science that is slow on the uptake here. It is understandable, since quantum experiments have demonstrated that some of the most basic tenets of science are not borne out by the results of quantum experiments. If science were truly honest and only going where the evidence leads them then this stuff would already be taught in grade school and you would not be questioning it at all....
HAL said:So it would seem that, say, an aircraft carrier can would fit into this carrier. But we choose to say it is real. While accepting it is made up of very small squiggly bits of energy. The carrier is only made up of very small squiggly bits of energy when it is being observed. Otherwise, it is only a "potential" aircraft carrier. Its reality is not objective, but subjective. It is only there if you are present to observe it. Yeah, hard to wrap your head around if you follow the tenets of science which say that matter is primary and objective. It is neither one of those things and that explains why science is so reluctant to accept the results of quantum science.
And there is the problem. The term "Real" is in desperate need of redefining.
You said:
So why could an apparently solid ufo not be made from the same squiggly bits and thus appear 'real' to us ? Well, you said it: it only appears real to us. If all matter is an illusion then what does the word 'real' actually mean? In a quantum reality, your question is null and void.
But, to get back to the point: some UFOs seem to be actual material things. They leave radar signatures and, if the lore is to be believed, occasionally crash to the ground where they can be picked up by military folks. If we are talking matter, then they clearly fit into that category. With others, the stories do not seem so cut and dried - they do not act like material "flying objects". If something is not a material object in the way we define that, then what is it?
Hell if I know. I think the Roswell crash was something from beyond this world that ended up on terra firma as a material thing that could be picked up and handled - as many witnesses say they did. It may not have always been that, but that is what folks found out in the desert. Other UFO encounters are not so clearly "real" if that is the word you prefer. What about UFO abductions? Many of those seem something other than "real" material encounters. They seem to exist somewhere in the space between our ears or who knows where.
For those examples, I maintain an extra-material category. I do not think you need "wiggly bits" to have an experience. But I think those 'non-wiggly bit' experiences are every bit as "real" as a 'potential' aircraft carrier. I do not know that that means exactly, but those are the kind of UFO encounters that Friedman once famously said he was not interested in. Like I said, his theory does not cover all categories. And the fact that he discounts those "other" categories indicates that he was not so much interested in finding out what UFOs actually are, but only in confirming his a-priori beliefs about what he believed UFOs to be.
That is not science. That is religion.
Cheers!!
Bonehead
|
|
|
Post by HAL on Jun 30, 2019 19:24:07 GMT
....The carrier is only made up of very small squiggly bits of energy when it is being observed. Otherwise, it is only a "potential" aircraft carrier. Its reality is not objective, but subjective. It is only there if you are present to observe it. ...
So if I can't see the Moon it isn't there ?
HAL.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Jun 30, 2019 20:49:49 GMT
.. " everything we call real is made up of things that cannot be considered real"... That includes physicists like Bohr. Bohr was not just blowing smoke. He arrived at his conclusion after much study. The ancient Hindu Vedas said that reality was an illusion. So they arrived at the same conclusion as Bohr thousands of years ago. It is science that is slow on the uptake here. It is understandable, since quantum experiments have demonstrated that some of the most basic tenets of science are not borne out by the results of quantum experiments. If science were truly honest and only going where the evidence leads them then this stuff would already be taught in grade school and you would not be questioning it at all....
HAL said:So it would seem that, say, an aircraft carrier can would fit into this carrier. But we choose to say it is real. While accepting it is made up of very small squiggly bits of energy. The carrier is only made up of very small squiggly bits of energy when it is being observed. Otherwise, it is only a "potential" aircraft carrier. Its reality is not objective, but subjective. It is only there if you are present to observe it. Yeah, hard to wrap your head around if you follow the tenets of science which say that matter is primary and objective. It is neither one of those things and that explains why science is so reluctant to accept the results of quantum science.
And there is the problem. The term "Real" is in desperate need of redefining.
You said:
So why could an apparently solid ufo not be made from the same squiggly bits and thus appear 'real' to us ? Well, you said it: it only appears real to us. If all matter is an illusion then what does the word 'real' actually mean? In a quantum reality, your question is null and void.
But, to get back to the point: some UFOs seem to be actual material things. They leave radar signatures and, if the lore is to be believed, occasionally crash to the ground where they can be picked up by military folks. If we are talking matter, then they clearly fit into that category. With others, the stories do not seem so cut and dried - they do not act like material "flying objects". If something is not a material object in the way we define that, then what is it?
Hell if I know. I think the Roswell crash was something from beyond this world that ended up on terra firma as a material thing that could be picked up and handled - as many witnesses say they did. It may not have always been that, but that is what folks found out in the desert. Other UFO encounters are not so clearly "real" if that is the word you prefer. What about UFO abductions? Many of those seem something other than "real" material encounters. They seem to exist somewhere in the space between our ears or who knows where.
For those examples, I maintain an extra-material category. I do not think you need "wiggly bits" to have an experience. But I think those 'non-wiggly bit' experiences are every bit as "real" as a 'potential' aircraft carrier. I do not know that that means exactly, but those are the kind of UFO encounters that Friedman once famously said he was not interested in. Like I said, his theory does not cover all categories. And the fact that he discounts those "other" categories indicates that he was not so much interested in finding out what UFOs actually are, but only in confirming his a-priori beliefs about what he believed UFOs to be.
That is not science. That is religion.
Cheers!!
Bonehead
So if I touch a fire and get the shit burned out of me and it hurts like hell its not real.....
|
|
drwu
Full Member
Posts: 209
|
Post by drwu on Jul 1, 2019 16:52:58 GMT
Regarding the whole ufo area...I haevn't read an interesting book in years....the last ones I felt were relevant were Dr Vallee's trilogy: Dimensions, Confrontations and Revelations. Bonehead....if you have one to recommend please do so.
|
|