28.06.2021
US security experts deeply concerned about the origin of UFOs
According to The Guardian, if the idea that we are being visited by aliens seems too much to contemplate, the thesis that the extraordinary-looking craft are the work of terrestrial adversaries seems only slightly less far-fetched – and at the same time, deeply troubling for US security experts.
In pressing for the Pentagon’s UFO report to be published, congressional leaders briefed on the intelligence have pointed to the urgent security threat implied by the “unexplained aerial phenomena”.
If there are objects flying over military installations that could pose a security threat … [it] needs to be declassified and revealed to American public,” the Democratic chair of the Senate foreign relations committee, Mark Warner, told Fox 8 television. “If there’s something out there, let’s seek it out, and it is probably a foreign power.”
The report, released Friday, found that while intelligence officials do not believe alien life is responsible for the dozens of reports of unidentified aerial phenomena (UAP), they cannot fully explain what is.
The report further said that most UAP incidents fall into five possible categories – “airborne clutter, natural atmospheric phenomena, USG or US industry developmental programs, foreign adversary systems, and a catchall “other’ bin” – and that UAP “may pose a challenge to US national security”.
It said there was no evidence that the objects were linked to another country such as Russia or China – but it did not rule out the possibility.
Marik Von Rennenkampff, who served at the Pentagon and as an analyst in the state department’s bureau of international security and nonproliferation, said that if a foreign power was behind the aircraft seen by US pilots and radar, they would have performed a breathtaking technological leap – and US intelligence would have had to have suffered an immense failure. He thought both were unlikely.
“China has well-documented issues with basic jet engines, they rely on espionage to develop their most advanced weapons systems. So, I struggle with China having developed this,” Von Rennenkampff said. “Russia has a defense budget that is a fraction of the United States, and much of its military infrastructure is crumbling so I struggle with that too.”
“So if it is China or Russia, then that’s extraordinary,” he added. “I don’t know how they did it, and it would be a monumental failure of intelligence collection on the part of the United States, orders of magnitude worse than 9/11.”
Jack Weinstein, an international security professor at Boston University and a former US air force lieutenant general, said: “If a foreign power had technology that could operate that fast, take turns that aerodynamically really shouldn’t be able to happen, that we would see that in operation during a conflict.”
“And if a foreign power was actually testing really hi-tech equipment, they would be testing hi-tech equipment in a protected area of their country that the United States or other foreign powers couldn’t see,” Weinstein added. “If you get something that secret that can work that well, you’re not going to show it to anybody until you absolutely need it.”
Another option is that a foreign power had developed unmanned aircraft that could spoof US radar and instruments into seeing the incredible speeds and changes of direction that have been reported.
Thomas Bania, a professor of astronomy at Boston University, said: “Without the range, then one simply cannot tell speed, acceleration, etc. So the interpretation of speeds and turns (ie accelerations) that our US technology cannot match is just bogus. No need for invoking a foreign power with superior – much superior – technology.”
“Were it me running their electronic warfare show, I would build small drones and stuff them with electronics that would monitor and record everything our military radars would send at them,” Bania said. “Then I would get busy reverse-engineering what our weaponry did. Then I would develop protocols to spoof radar locks back at us giving ranges that would imply these ridiculous motions.”
Quelle: The Yucatan Times
+++
The UFO Trail
UFOs? It's Complicated
Developing understandings about reported UFO phenomena requires more effort than clicking on a few links or watching the occasional news show that looks suspiciously like entertainment. It's not necessary that everyone gain such understandings, but it should be considered a minimal requirement for those who wish to have much more to say about UFO reports than they don't know their explanations. While the following circumstances certainly do not account for all cases, it should be more than apparent why a sincere and meaningful discussion should include consideration of such material.
Project Palladium was a mid 20th century multi-decade CIA operation that began by dropping aluminum strips from airplanes to confuse enemy radar. By the 1960's it evolved to include the ability to project "ghost aircraft" onto enemy radar with the appearance of any size, altitude, and flight pattern desired. According to CIA man Gene Poteat, every Palladium mission included a CIA team with its ghost aircraft system, an NSA team with communications intelligence and decryption equipment, and a military operational support team.
The teams were apparently subject to releasing "a timed series of balloon-borne metalized spheres of different sizes." The spheres were launched into the path of the ghost aircraft. In an example given by Poteat of an operation off the coast of Cuba, an American fighter plane was made to appear incoming from Key West. Cuban fighter planes were scrambled to intercept the perceived aircraft. On cue, a Navy submarine surfaced just long enough to release the balloons. The idea was for the ghost aircraft to alert Cuban defense systems, then Palladium personnel could eavesdrop on resulting communications in order to discern the sensitivity of the Soviet-made radar. This was done by discovering the smallest balloons detected. Suffice it to say plenty of confusion ensued for the Cubans as Poteat and his crew obtained the information they were after.
In the event you're wondering what Poteat's team ultimately did with the ghost aircraft during the mission, they made it vanish. He reported they had no trouble keeping the phantom plane out of reach of those in pursuit. When a time came they were finished with the exercise and a Cuban pilot was preparing to fire on the target, they simply turned off the Palladium system and voila, a disappearing aircraft, gone without a trace.
 |
| USS Nimitz |
In its ongoing coverage of what has come to be known as the more current UAP situation, The War Zone reported on the evolution of such technology and the military applications. Enter NEMESIS, the Netted Emulation of Multi-Element Signature against Integrated Sensors.
"When it comes to the U.S. Navy," Tyler Rogoway wrote, "it is using swarms of lower-end networked drones, submarines, ships, unmanned underwater vehicles, and more, to convince the enemy to think they are seeing ghost fleets and aerial armadas that aren't really there."
Rogoway reports NEMESIS represents a quantum leap in electronic warfare. "Yet none of its components are all that exquisite," he continues, "it's just the networking of them together and being able to combine their effects cooperatively with highly agile computing and software that is. Swarming drones working together to decoy, jam, and distract the enemy? That is not a high-end capability. Unifying those effects with ships, other aircraft, submarines, and more in real-time to make multiple enemy sensors in disparate locations see the same thing? That is revolutionary."
It is also not necessarily a monopoly. Rogoway goes on to suggest adversaries may be applying similar technology during interactions with U.S. warships and military aircraft.
He further suggests reported balloon-like objects and menacing drones may be designed to obtain valuable signals intelligence with low risk to reward returns. It is noted the locations of such reported incursions include the nation's most active military training corridors, what Rogoway refers to as "the most advanced air defense sensor and networking technology on planet earth all operating in one region." Targeting the areas seems a given, the means may be the primary issue.
This might account for why, as many ask, American forces do not simply fire upon or confiscate such reported intrusive drones and UAP. Electronic silence might be more advisable if the stalkers are swallowing up information; the devices may be relatively inexpensive and expendable, are subject to have replacements come back anyway, and the less data collected about responses and communications, the better. Cuban forces would have been better strategically served to ignore Poteat's crew than allow him to record their resulting activities and the capabilities of their Soviet radar systems.
Tim Binnall and I discussed the implications on a recent episode of Binnall of America. No matter how well any pilot may know their aircraft, they are at a decided disadvantage when interpreting any given encounter if they lack a thorough understanding of a project such as NEMESIS and how their instrumentation might respond to such targeted deception. Moreover, omitting such circumstances from discussion could be considered disingenuous while proclamations are made that reported craft cannot be manmade. We might similarly consider reported balloon-like objects may have more functions than readily apparent to many of us, as well as the fact occurrences described as happening nearly every day for two years could not very well be thought of as, by definition, extraordinary.
 |
| Google Loon Balloon |
Writer and researcher Adam Kehoe takes a look at what can be established about American-engineered high-tech balloons known to be aloft off the coasts of the U.S. in his recent submission to The War Zone. The balloons can be steered, remain in flight for long periods of time, and carry cutting-edge payloads. Some, Kehoe reports, can cruise as high as 92,000 feet. Certain types may stay in the air as long as 30 days.
For several years we were expecting UFO reports to go sideways as the diversity of airborne objects increased. That time is well upon us. There is a large variety of exotic devices and classified aircraft populating our skies. Adding to the complexity are cutting-edge technologies designed to limit and confuse abilities to monitor and accurately interpret those objects.
It's not necessary to gain a deep understanding of the subject matter to be interested in UFO reports. It is necessary, however, to include the material in the discussions if any further assertions are made than an explanation is not readily available.
Quelle: Jack Brewer, http://ufotrail.blogspot.com/2021/05/ufos-its-complicated.html
----
Update: 29.06.2021
.
Neil DeGrasse Tyson Thinks We Should Have Better Pictures of Aliens by Now
The astrophysicist is questioning why we still know so little about UFOs after a new Pentagon report
The Pentagon released its long-awaited report on UFOs last Friday, but the contents left many people — including astrophysicist and “Cosmos” host Neil deGrasse Tyson — wanting more.
In essence, the report released by the Office of the Director of National Intelligence on June 25 summarized years of alien research that was previously unavailable to the public. It examined 143 reports of “unexplained aerial phenomena” (or UAP) since 2004, but no causes were ultimately determined for any of those reports.
So basically, after all that research, the government still has no idea what those encounters were, or if we have actually interacted with aliens — and it blames that ignorance on a so-called “lack of high-quality reporting” when incidents do happen.
In a veritable tweetstorm on Monday, Tyson made his thoughts on the report (and on aliens in general) known. In particular, Tyson was suspicious that we don’t have better images of UFOs, since there are billions of people worldwide with smart devices capable of capturing possible alien activity.
“The search for Aliens on Earth has been crowdsourced to three-billion internet-connected smartphones around the World. If our best evidence for visitors from another planet is monochromatic low-resolution, fuzzy video taken by the US Navy, then there’s more work to be done here,” Tyson said, adding a photo of an unidentified craft captured by Navy systems.
One especially alarming statistic from the Pentagon report was that there are at least 21 reports of encounters that very well might be technology from another world. These 21 reports “possibly demonstrate technological capabilities that are unknown to the United States: objects moving without observable propulsion or with rapid acceleration that is believed to be beyond the capabilities of Russia, China or other terrestrial nations,” the government noted.
Over the past couple days, Tyson has been on a roll posting a string of thoughts on UFOs — “alien tweets from the vault,” as he calls them — and offering up takes on how aliens might view our species. He noted that he thinks China will be the first country to hear from aliens, since it created the world’s largest telescope in 2018.
He also urged would-be alien abductees to take a souvenir home to prove they were actually taken aboard a ship, thereby avoiding any “Contact”-inspired situations where the person abducted can’t convince the general public they actually went anywhere.
Check out more of Tyson’s takes on extraterrestrials (and his dad jokes about aliens) below.
Quelle: The WRAP
----
Update: 30.06.2021
.
America’s rigorous report the right way to approach ‘UFOs’
The Pentagon on Friday released its eagerly awaited report on “unidentified aerial phenomena” (UAP), but with rather bland and unspectacular conclusions. It left UFO enthusiasts unhappy, if not fuming. Still, the report was a very interesting development. Let us review this.
First, why did the US Department of Defense need to release a report that relates, at least in most people’s minds, to UFOs? In the last few years, images, videos and testimonies from US Air Force pilots have emerged, showing intriguing visual “phenomena,” sometimes with strange motion. Furthermore, it turned out that the Pentagon had conducted a $22 million study of UFO events between 2007 and 2012, following earlier investigations, all justified by the possibility that foreign powers (the Soviet Union, then Russia, China and possibly others) may have developed threatening flying technologies. Thus, Congress ordered a report from the Office of the Director of National Intelligence.
Secondly, I must stress that the report does not even mention UFOs, but rather investigates UAP, which relate to the Air Force and intelligence matters. Moreover, the report is labeled “a preliminary assessment,” insisting that the data is insufficient to draw definitive conclusions on most cases, but stresses that “UAP clearly pose a safety of flight issue and may pose a challenge to US national security.”
The short report (six pages, plus two half-page appendices and a cover page) is rigorous and cautious. It acknowledges that some UAP images and videos may be due to glitches in the system, i.e., imperfect cameras, inaccurately calibrated sensors, slight tremors in the craft while it recorded the videos, etc. It also insists that cases of this kind — and many others that may come to light — will probably have a variety of explanations.
Indeed, the report proposed five categories of potential explanations for these UAP: “Airborne clutter” (drones, balloons, even birds); natural atmospheric phenomena (ice crystals and such); US government (possibly classified) or aerospace industry developmental programs; foreign adversary systems; and a general “other” category.
But the report also concludes that “most of the UAP reported probably do represent physical objects,” as 80 of the 144 cases that it documented were detected in multiple ways, including via “radar, infrared, electro-optical, weapon seekers, and visual observation.”
Finally, the report notes that UAP sightings have tended to “cluster around US training and testing grounds.” Furthermore, there were 18 incidents since 2004 where observers reported unusual movement patterns or flight characteristics: “Some UAP appeared to remain stationary in winds aloft, move against the wind, maneuver abruptly, or move at considerable speed, without discernible means of propulsion.” And in a few cases, military aircraft systems recorded radio waves associated with UAP.
However, the report hastens to stress that the data may be biased by the way that such UAP cases are observed and documented (by people, places and instruments) and that those “interesting” cases will be subjected to further analysis. In other words, UAP may or may not be just US Air Force events.
But is there no UFO possibility here (the public eagerly asks)? As mentioned above, the report does not refer to UFOs, and certainly not extraterrestrial or space alien possibilities. However, some officials close to the investigation have told US media outlets that UFOs and extraterrestrials have not been ruled out; it is just that the focus here was on the Air Force, military, intelligence, and technology aspects (“foreign threats”).
This did not stop UFO enthusiasts and skeptics from picking up where the report left off and commenting at length about what this may imply. UFO advocates were outraged by the report not interviewing witnesses and not even acknowledging that alien origins are a possibility, at least for some of the cases. UFO skeptics, however, applauded the report’s rational and scientific approach of trying to find plausible earthly explanations to those “aerial phenomena” and just saying “we don’t know” when the data was insufficient to draw a conclusion. Witnesses are notoriously unreliable because they are unfamiliar with various events and phenomena (rocket launches, satellite passes, weather balloons, optical reflections, and more), and their minds and memories play all kinds of tricks on them.
So what makes this short and rather inconclusive report “a very interesting development,” as I stated at the outset? It was a pleasant surprise to note the clarity and rigor of the report. We scientists have been saying for ages: Do collect data and evidence on these events and phenomena; do analyze everything with an open mind; ignore conspiracy ideas; exhaustively look for earthly explanations; and do not jump to extraterrestrial conclusions. It is extremely pleasing to see this approach reflected in the report.
This latest episode will not end the saga of UFO debates; far from it. Those who are firm in their views on the topic will not be swayed either way. But perhaps those who have not made up their minds will find this report useful as to how the topic should be approached. If we learn to examine problems properly, our future will be rosier.
Quelle: Zawya
+++
Pentagon UFO Report TV-Beitrag von RTL Mittagsmagazin Punkt 12
Quelle: RTL
+++
In der SUN wurde gar von ALIEN-INVASION in der Headline aufgeführt, nur auf Grund der Aussage eines Piloten welcher den Ausfall seiner Bord-Instrumente meldete. Da aber im Pentagon Report auch diese Bord-Instrumente Ausfälle und Störungen auch als Grund für Meldungen aufgeführt wurden gehen wir von Letzteren aus. Hierzu passt auch die Meldung ebenfalls aus England zu den UFO Gegebenheiten vor Ort auf der Insel.
H.Köhler, CENAP
+++
UK has no plans for investigation into UFOs after Pentagon report
Peers are told there will be no UK investigation because there has been no indication of "the existence of any military threat".
The government has no plans to carry out its own investigation into unidentified flying objects (UFOs) and whether they pose a threat to the UK, a defence minister has told parliament.
Baroness Goldie fielded questions in the House of Lords on the UK's response to a Pentagon report which was released last week.
The long-awaited document said of the 144 sightings reported by military pilots since 2004, all but one remain unexplained and they "probably lack a single explanation".
It said that while there were "no clear indications that there is any non-terrestrial explanation" for the objects, this prospect was not ruled out.
"UAP (unidentified aerial phenomena) clearly pose a safety of flight issue and may pose a challenge to US national security," the report said.
Former Conservative Party treasurer Lord Sarfraz raised the issue in the Lords on Wednesday.
"For decades people who have been concerned with UFOs have been dismissed as fantasists," he said.
"But now the US director of national intelligence, who oversees 17 intelligence agencies, has published a report saying that data on UFOs is inconclusive.
"The report offers several possible explanations.
"It does not rule out that these could be military aircraft with very fast capabilities or even extraterrestrial phenomena.
"Either way can the minister reassure members of the public that the Ministry of Defence (MoD) takes reports of unidentified objects in our airspace very seriously?"
Baroness Goldie said in response that the MoD "holds no reports on unidentified aerial phenomena" but "constantly monitors UK airspace to identify and respond to any credible threat to its integrity, and is confident in the existing measures in place to protect it".
She added: "The MoD deals with actual threats substantiated by evidence. The government continues to take any potential threat to the UK seriously."
Lady Goldie told peers later in the debate: "The MoD has no plans to conduct its own report into UAP because in over 50 years no such reporting had indicated the existence of any military threat to the United Kingdom."
Tory peer Viscount Ridley said: "Unidentified does not mean suspicious. Does the minister recognise the US report referred to says there is no clear indication that there is any non-terrestrial explanation for the 144 sightings?
"The idea that in an era of mobile phone cameras, drones and frequent travel there could possibly be alien spaceships whizzing about undetected in our atmosphere on a regular basis is not I think very plausible.
"It's much more likely that these blurred images have boring explanations, alas."
Lady Goldie said in response: "The UK air defence community detect and monitor all flying air systems 24 hours a day to provide an identified air picture as part of the UK's national security posture and our commitment to the integrity of Nato airspace."
Quelle: sky news