BBC Focus Magazine

[The Saltshaker]

Hey just wondering what the forum members thoughts are on this Disclosure Project by Steven M Greer MD and all the content being displayed on the web, youtube, fox news, national press club interviews etc.

About the Disclosure Project
The Disclosure Project is a nonprofit research project working to fully disclose the facts about UFOs, extraterrestrial intelligence, and classified advanced energy and propulsion systems. We have over 400 government, military, and intelligence community witnesses testifying to their direct, personal, first hand experience with UFOs, ETs, ET technology, and the cover-up that keeps this information secret.

http://www.disclosureproject.org/background.shtml

Including your take on the increasing number of countries releasing their UFO files

http://www.disclosureproject.org/countries-releasing-ufo-files.shtml

To me it seems this stuff is heating up over the last few years as its taken root on the internet, there is so much content out now days, just looking for some members response to this.

[Shadowwolf]

Huh, nice that he has acquired sufficient funding to allow him to work at his hobby full time and it's probably best that he's not next nor near patients anymore given the apparent failure in reasoning; of course maybe that's too harsh, he might still be a good doctor and only falls down when it comes to this.

It's from my perspective unimpressive and rather unremarkable in comparison to most UFO stuff, alleging military cover-ups, government conspiracy and suppression of society transforming beneficial technology so as to maintain a status quo in which the military industrial complex hold power. These nefarious forces that have long known of extra terrestrial life that wants to be friends to all yet despite being able to cross the vast gulf of space are utterly incapable of seeing through the underhanded skull-duggery of the establishment or of just simply revealing their presence in an unambiguous manner.

Then there is this little excerpt from the home page,

Trudy Guyker is a housewife and grandmother residing in Chandler AZ. After attending a lecture and workshop at a Whole Life Expo in Santa Fe, NM in 1993, she realized that CSETI and its spiritual emphasis was how she could best utilize her own spiritual knowledge with her interest in the UFO phenomenon. She has attended over a year's worth of CSETI events and is a critical member of the core contact team. Her intuitive nature and ability to sense the ET presence in its many forms has helped the group immensely in its continuingly developing relationship with the ETs

(Emphasis mine)

Apparently these lot have had a long history of contact with our benevolent alien friends though I'm guessing it's all mind communication; the woo is indeed strong.

As for CSETI - also created by this Greer lad - by their own words,

...is especially interested in the ETI-Human relationship and in the peaceful furtherance of this relationship. A thorough review of existing data and documents concerning "UFO's" indicates that the Earth has been visited by ETI and Extraterrestrial Spacecraft (ETS) for decades, if not centuries, and that this contact has intensified since 1947.

Since 1947 eh, now that's familiar, oh since Roswell, they're setting Roswell as a paradigm changing event, an event which was thoroughly debunked as any form of alien crash. But I suppose as it's such an important part of the UFO theology one cannot just leave it out or risk alienating the believers.

CSETI also has a training event but I think it's too late to get in and was limited anyway, some highlights of the programme are: advanced techniques of Remote Viewing, Precognition and the Science of Consciousness, the Effects of the Sanskrit Puja as we make sacred the place for Contact using this ancient Vedic Ceremony and my favourite, a deep understanding of the next great cycle on Earth: One of Universal Peace, Free Energy, Abundance and Enlightenment through higher states of Consciousness; it only costs $2.5k - not including travel and lodging - a bargain I reckon.

Uhhh these folks are far out of touch with reality, they fantasise that just about anything is a sign of ET and delude themselves into thinking their communing with ETs as opposed to the reality that they are talking to themselves. Walk away from it lest one is burned by the napalm grade stupid sloshing about, they are utterly undependable as a source on anything without extensive back checking.

[Dark One]

Its all very obviously just a foil for people who find the established religions boring and decide that aliens can provide them with somekind of alternative. Look at all the new age guff they mix in with the stories of alien contact. In fact, a month ago i was shocked to see an advert in the back of our beloved focus for just such a course in fantasist nonsense. You can bet your life that if (when) contact is made with aliens, these cranks will find something else to construct thier delusions around, once the aliens rubbish all their ridiculous claims.

[The Saltshaker]

Yeah my perception of The Disclosure Project was that it was tapping into the whole web conspiracy market to further their own personal agenda's, whether that be fame or fortune (selling books or vids etc, I wasnt aware they had courses LOL!). Sorta like one of those anti-aging mobs you see on home shopping networks with their expert testimonials, and or celebrity endorsements to lull in and attract those who want to believe.

What i was finding interesting though was some of the other content out there such as:
- the Pheonix Lights, with the ex-governer coming out years later on Fox news saying it was definately a large UFO,

- the French saying last year that UFO are definately real, and possibly extra terrestrial

- a top Chinese astrophysist who made the claims UFO's are real (which I find interesting as anything that comes out of China is heavily censored so it has to be authorised by government first)

- The British Ministry of Defence releasing their files which mention Churchill wanted a 50yr classified/cover up of an incident

- the ex Canadian Defence Ministers talk about US covering up UFO's and need to release UFO case files now....

Then the stranger comical stuff -
Vatican talking about blessing aliens (WTF? hahaha)
The UN announce special envoy (later to be denied)

There really is a lot of content in the last few years being circulated with what I'd deem reliable sources, from the many military personal, fighter pilots contacts with unidentified craft, astronauts seeing objects on Apollo missions (is Buzz Aldrin on crack now, lost his marbles or trying to generate public interest for space/NASA funding?)

it cant all be cash cowing can it???

[Dark One]

I think probably more hedge betting. Especially in the case of the Vatican, who have very cleverly realised that if contact is made this century (as a lot of people are obviously starting to expect), and they denied the existance of aliens, they're entire system would come crashing down around them. Having a special envoy is probably a good idea, although he'd have to be somekind of maths genius seeing as that's probably the only way we'd be able to communicate with an ETs.

[Shadowwolf]

It's more than mashing up conspiracies, substantial dollop of new age mysticism mixed in there as well.

- the Pheonix Lights, with the ex-governer coming out years later on Fox news saying it was definately a large UFO,

Remarkably uninformed lad then, those lights were flares dropped by USAF planes - A10s if I recall right - on a training exercise, they all disappeared as they fell behind the mountains in perfect sync with the skyline. Plus if it's on Fox then it's probably wrong, I believe intelligent thought has long abandoned that place.

- the French saying last year that UFO are definately real, and possibly extra terrestrial

Well the first is correct the other unsubstantiated speculation but just what French folks were saying this?

- a top Chinese astrophysist who made the claims UFO's are real (which I find interesting as anything that comes out of China is heavily censored so it has to be authorised by government first)

Well technically any object unidentifiable to an observer is a UFO but that's where it ends. The lads occupation is not that relevant as they can still hold false views, for instance Stanton Friedman is a physicist or Peter Davenport who studied genetics and they are also mistaken; oh and if it has nothing to do with security or political matters then the Chinese Gov probably don't care. Wang Sichao is however not a top anything and spends more time on UFOs than anything else apparently.

- The British Ministry of Defence releasing their files which mention Churchill wanted a 50yr classified/cover up of an incident

There are many classified documents so that's not particularly noteworthy really.

- the ex Canadian Defence Ministers talk about US covering up UFO's and need to release UFO case files now....

That's not significant, politicians like anyone else are as susceptible to poor thinking and judgment as the rest of us are, typically for adherents he seems rather light on evidence or critical thinking.

As for the Vatican, what they think or do is often of no consequence.

There really is a lot of content in the last few years being circulated with what I'd deem reliable sources, from the many military personal, fighter pilots contacts with unidentified craft, astronauts seeing objects on Apollo missions (is Buzz Aldrin on crack now, lost his marbles or trying to generate public interest for space/NASA funding?)

But on closer inspection they tend to be much less reliable. Take these military folks, pilots, police or astronauts, what makes them more reliable? They're often no better than the rest of us or maybe even less so, like pilots who are not investigators preferred witness in air accidents because they over analyse based on their own knowledge, and start assuming what the other guys were doing. Pilots, police, doctors, it's all just an assumed credibility because they spent some time on specific training, utilised to insinuate without any good reason that what they say must be real. But specific training does not necessarily grant you skills in critical thinking, freedom from bias or wishful thinking.

As for Buzz Aldrin, Buzz only initially saw a UFO, he is confident he knows exactly what he saw and I watched the very man relate exactly what had transpired and that what he saw was likely a detached panel from an earlier stage; an explanation that an unscrupulous docu maker edited out.

[The Saltshaker]

It's more than mashing up conspiracies, substantial dollop of new age mysticism mixed in there as well.

No I wasnt mashing up conspiracies - my point about 2012 wasnt about all that Mayan/Sumerian world is gonna end rubbish you see everywhere - I was saying that all the hype about 2011 being the year of disclosure/reaching critical mass etc that it will be funny to see them change all their vids/youtube posts to 2012 the year of disclosure when nothing happens as they predict.

Remarkably uninformed lad then, those lights were flares dropped by USAF planes - A10s if I recall right - on a training exercise, they all disappeared as they fell behind the mountains in perfect sync with the skyline. Plus if it's on Fox then it's probably wrong, I believe intelligent thought has long abandoned that place.

Hahaha yeah I was going to make and ammendment to that once I'd mentioned Fox News hahaha and no not uninformed. I had read that was the Airforces claim that this was the case. I think even that Arizona governer took that line himself originally and then changed his story. He's prob got a book coming out too hahaha...you never can tell. I just found it interesting he changed his story...

[The Saltshaker]

Well the first is correct the other unsubstantiated speculation but just what French folks were saying this?

Here I'll post the article/summarise (see below)

A new French report released on May 31, 2010 concluded that UFOs are definitely real and possibly of extraterrestrial origin. While not an official government study, the Progress Report of the Sigma/3AF Commission comes from a highly credible source, the Aeronautical & Astronomical Association of France, known as the 3AF, which established a Commission on Unidentified Aerial Phenomena back in May 2008 -

The Sigma/3AF is not a final report but just a work in progress document; nevertheless, it provides good background material on the history of official UFO research in France, a balance of Sigma’s work during the last two years, a brief description of the most significant French cases, and some comments and conclusions. The report begins with a brief history of French official UFO research, which is quite extensive: “France is the only country where the collection of Unidentified Aerospace Phenomena (PAN in French) and its scientific study have been assigned since 1977 to a civilian official organization, the CNES (National Center for Space Studies, the French space agency) through the GEPAN study group.” After a short description of this unit, now known as GEIPAN (Study and Information Group on Aerospace Unidentified Phenomena), the report outlines other official or quasi-official French studies, including the famous COMETA (Committee for In-Depth Studies) Report of 1999, issued by a group of high-ranking retired French military and intelligence officers, which concluded that UFOs were real and probably extraterrestrial.

In the Comments section, the Sigma/3AF report uses unambiguous language, for instance: “No natural phenomenon can account for the majority of observation reports accompanied by electromagnetic detections made by one or several radars. Both the defense services and air traffic control have been confronted a number of times around the world with unknown aerial intrusions or artificially induced phenomena.” Later on, the report goes on to say, “The behavior of these devices during encounters with fighter jets or interceptors – some have participated in real swirling battles in the U.S. – suggests they are controlled, guided or led by particularly sophisticated automation.” And then again, “the air superiority of the craft concerned, if they are indeed crafts, is such that none of the many interceptions which have been made against them, in the United States for example, have been able to overcome one of these devices.”

After outlining a number of characteristics exhibited by UFOs, such as “remarkable accelerations of the craft right after a stationary mode,” the report indicates: “We feel that we must reject the thesis of a terrestrial origin for all the observations made since World War Two. Indeed, if a nation of the world had been able to secretly develop such an armada of exotic craft, like those observed for more than half a century, the means of analysis and strategic logistics available would have permitted their rapid identification. The illegal overflights which they have been guilty of conducting could constitute a casus belli [cause for war].” The Sigma/3AF experts go on to state that, “the above features suggest that in many cases the devices detected, far from being unidentified, are easily recognizable by the aerial defense agencies as part of a technology far ahead of ours.” And later: “We have been unable to get any serious indication as to the origin of the aerospace phenomena that is the subject of our research. The technological elements that we selected… allow us to draw some assumptions about the aircraft in question, which do not seem to belong to an identifiable terrestrial technology at the times when they were observed.”

The Sigma/3AF report finally agrees with COMETA’s conclusion that we are probably facing an ET presence. That conclusion was quite controversial for a semi-official study like COMETA back in 1999 and was criticized by many in the French press. Yet the Sigma/3AF Commission found no quarrel with it. “Thus, the central hypothesis proposed by the COMETA report still cannot be rejected up to this day and remains perfectly credible,” they wrote. “Many documents and materials examined by the authors of this report confirm it. We have therefore retained, among some others but only as a working hypothesis, the possibility that most of the craft observed can have a non-terrestrial origin.”

Well technically any object unidentifiable to an observer is a UFO but that's where it ends. The lads occupation is not that relevant as they can still hold false views, for instance Stanton Friedman is a physicist or Peter Davenport who studied genetics and they are also mistaken; oh and if it has nothing to do with security or political matters then the Chinese Gov probably don't care. Wang Sichao is however not a top anything and spends more time on UFOs than anything else apparently.

Fair enough i dont know the bloke, he's obviously a dill then?? I just thought it interesting in a state controlled communist country with such heavy sensorship the ammount of leniency.

- The British Ministry of Defence releasing their files which mention Churchill wanted a 50yr classified/cover up of an incident

There are many classified documents so that's not particularly noteworthy really.

I found it interesting that this info was released by the British MOD - thats what im talking about, not some farmer in Nebraska, but what I would deem credible sources. The MOD, the wartime prime minister... a famous one.

[The Saltshaker]

Re: Canadian Defence Minister calls for US to release UFO files, renewable energy technologies acquired from ET's

That's not significant, politicians like anyone else are as susceptible to poor thinking and judgment as the rest of us are, typically for adherents he seems rather light on evidence or critical thinking.

Yeah I watched his vid, he was light on evidence, however I dont think that was the tone of the speech. Rather he believes they US have ET technologies, cheap renewable energy sources that need to be shared - from where? Rosswell or whatever...he seemed rather assured of this. I find this interesting, and yes based on his previous position as Canada's MOD chief.

As for the Vatican, what they think or do is often of no consequence.

Hahaha agreed! Just found it comical - and a rather bizarre story to come out of the Vats of all places!

But on closer inspection they tend to be much less reliable. Take these military folks, pilots, police or astronauts, what makes them more reliable? They're often no better than the rest of us or maybe even less so, like pilots who are not investigators preferred witness in air accidents because they over analyse based on their own knowledge, and start assuming what the other guys were doing. Pilots, police, doctors, it's all just an assumed credibility because they spent some time on specific training, utilised to insinuate without any good reason that what they say must be real. But specific training does not necessarily grant you skills in critical thinking, freedom from bias or wishful thinking.

You can only go by what they believe, their belief structure based on observance with the eye. Science itself deals with controlled experiments under observation to record results. The interpretation yes may not be accurate or explainable however it is interestng none the less, considering aircraft personell deal with identifying enemy craft and technology in their jobs all the time. Police, doctors sure i get your point they are not trained to understand such things so open to interpretation and human error. However you cannot discount their credentials. If I want an affidavit you dont ask ya uncle Bob or the bloke at the Fish n Chip shop do you? So I think their testimony in anythng should be of interest not gospel. I mean where do you draw the line. On one hand you say pilots etc are untrustworrthy yand no better than the rest of us. If I came out and said what I saw no one would believe me on the basis that I am a nobody. So you do need some form of credentials in cases like these to at least lessen the specualtion/skeptism derived from any such UFO claim. On the other hand the military/airforce come out and say they were flares we dropped - they are automatically credible? Im no conspiracy theorist at all Shads - but surely this is an irony?

[The Saltshaker]

As for Buzz Aldrin, Buzz only initially saw a UFO, he is confident he knows exactly what he saw and I watched the very man relate exactly what had transpired and that what he saw was likely a detached panel from an earlier stage; an explanation that an unscrupulous docu maker edited out.

Oh ok...coolio...wasnt aware...i thought that strange eh...as i saw another one where he's talking about a monolith on Phobos - not being man made??? he seems a little loose or maybe just enjoying the attention from such speculations?

[Shadowwolf]

No I wasnt mashing up conspiracies...

Indeed not, I was referring to the Disclosure Project folks who mash up conspiracy with new age mysticism.

Regards the Phoenix Lights, I don't wish to get into exhaustive UFO debunking as it's not really what we're about but I'll briefly go over it again. First, the USAF is not claiming it was flares as though that's their best guess, they said there were planes there and that's what they were doing and that's what the footage shows. A group of lights appear in series, not immediately now but one after another exactly like flares dropped from a fast jet would appear. They seem to hang there but bear in mind that they are far off tiny lights in the dark against no visible and useful backdrop, lacking a proper frame of reference it is not possible to discern their descent; then they flicker and disappear. Daytime footage was taken from the same location and the visible mountain line during daylight is superimposed on the other footage. The lights vanish as they descend below the mountain line, flares dropped by A10s on a training exercise and the UFO becomes an IFO.

On the other hand the military/airforce come out and say they were flares we dropped - they are automatically credible? Im no conspiracy theorist at all Shads - but surely this is an irony?

No, because their explanation stems from the inside knowledge of what they were doing and not idle speculation about unknown lights in the sky they witnessed and are now trying to explain. Their credibility stems from them as said, knowing what it is they are actually doing, that such exercises are plausible everyday military activities and because the footage shows flares behaving like flares.

[Shadowwolf]

A new French report released on May 31, 2010 concluded that UFOs are definitely real and possibly of extraterrestrial origin. While not an official government study, the Progress Report of the Sigma/3AF Commission comes from a highly credible source, the Aeronautical & Astronomical Association of France,

So it's not an official stance it's the work of interested parties and it's not finished so it could drastically change, why is it credible? The people creating it could be believers who already believe ET is here and hence predisposed to interpret anything as validating their belief whilst ignoring anything that clearly does not. It's not credible just because of who they are, for instance were Dawkins to profess belief in alien visitation citing abduction stories and bad footage as his reason, well he might be an otherwise credible person but that would not make his thinking correct.

To be honest the summary appears to be just more of the same unreasonable declarations, poor thinking and lack of evidence or reference for most of the sensational claims - like air battles in the US - that's par for the course.

The MOD, the wartime prime minister... a famous one.

But what I'm saying is that classified events are par for the course in these circles, it's not unusual but just what was classified?

I find this interesting, and yes based on his previous position as Canada's MOD chief.

Actually all his UFO leanings stem from after his tenure in the MOD, created from watching a docu on ABC and talking to an unidentified - as far as I know - retired air force general. He would not be the first military person to either willfully make stuff up, believe without question the story from some other source or misinterpret the snippets of info he was privy to as viewed through the lens of prior belief.

As for Buzz again, he's talking about a geological formation in the context of instilling a desire for space travel to acquire proper funding, done on C-Span the government channel. He indicates it was put there by the universe where everything comes from or - for the benefit of the many religious in America - if you would rather believe, god. No mention of aliens or alien tech, that's just been read into his words by those who want to believe in aliens that have an active interest and presence in our system.

[Shadowwolf]

You can only go by what they believe,

That tends to be why it's useless in this context, we're not living in their heads and we don't know what they saw so they are not dependable and that doesn't change because they have a profession we regard as being of import.

Try this, it covers some of the issues briefly http://www.skepdic.com/ufos_ets.html

[The Saltshaker]

Cheers for your posts Shads. Let me just clarify ive done a bit of research on both sides, not a great deal, a bit, and personally dont believe one way or the other. Im a sceptic at heart.

Rather just fascinated by the amount of content and as I say what I would deem credible sources. Until I get taken away and probed i believe in Fermi's Paradox - where the bloody hell are they?

[Shadowwolf]

...and personally dont believe one way or the other. Im a sceptic at heart.

I just go a little further, if there has been nothing to credibly support a position I go with until I am given reason otherwise I will assume that ET is not visiting.

[Healerman]

Take these military folks, pilots, police or astronauts, what makes them more reliable?

Just an observation, but having grown up in a military low-fly zone (enough to make any boy go plane crazy) and latterly taken an interest in astronomy, I'd say that question is awfully judgemental. I have often, in my limited experience, applied my knowledge as an observer to inform the curious that the UFO they are watching is in fact Venus/aircraft landing lights/a flying lantern/the ISS etc.

Pilots, as an example, are only human, but they are nevertheless somewhat expert in the matter of aerial phenomena. It goes with the territiory. They are in a better position than most to eliminate all manner of possibilities, so when they see something "odd", it is a much more discreet set of "odd" than that you might expect from the general public.
They are only human. and prone to error, but nevertheless I'd say they were more reliable than most, based upon experience and that they are generally trained to observe.

[Shadowwolf]

Some like pilots would certainly have more experience with aircraft, not denying that and I certainly won't take a layman's opinion on flying over a trained pilot but observing other phenomena is outside their expertise area I think. My point is that certain witnesses have their profession highlighted as though that makes their testimony unimpeachable, a pilot said it's no known aircraft therefore it's aliens or aliens left unspoken but the implication is there. As you note pilots are as prone to error - most accidents are down to that as best I recall - bias and filling in the blanks as the rest of us. We have no way of knowing what they saw or how accurate their interpretation is, there is no guarantee that because a pilot finds it odd it must have actually been genuinely odd. As these stories then get distilled through recall and post event analysis by the individual they suffer from the same memory issues that everyone else has, and I personally don't see what makes invoking their professional life necessary beyond making an appeal to authority - excluding those stories which happened on the flight deck where obviously there is a pilot.

Most however are not pilots they are public servants or authority figures like the military, doctors or police that get their profession highlighted.

[M Paul Lloyd]

In my day (which I admit was a while ago) the RAF had a policy of total denial over any unidentified flying object sightings (I know because I tried to report something and was told I was mistaken even though it turned out to have a perfectly rational explanation), but then again we were in the midst of the Cold War and the admission that any unidentied phenomina were present in our airspace would have been a serious embarressment.
This wall of silence inevitably lead to accusations of cencorship, collusion and of course conspiracy theories.

However as Mr.S points out just because something cannot be specifically identified doesn't automatically mean it is alien in origin.

[Healerman]

However as Mr.S points out just because something cannot be specifically identified doesn't automatically mean it is alien in origin.

Couldn't agree more. The "U" in UFO stands for "unidentified" but the moment you use the term UFO everyone translates that as ALIEN. I wish people could learn basic spelling.

[The Saltshaker]

However as Mr.S points out just because something cannot be specifically identified doesn't automatically mean it is alien in origin.

Couldn't agree more. The "U" in UFO stands for "unidentified" but the moment you use the term UFO everyone translates that as ALIEN. I wish people could learn basic spelling.

I think the context is there when witness/airforce accounts of tracking objects on radar recorded at such velocities no "known" terrestial craft/weaponry could achieve. So there is a basis for such speculation, but yes whether they are prone to human error and intepretation is another thing...