Do Governments and Militaries Have UFOs?

[Pythagorean]

I notice that a lot of people associate UFO's with aliens. But these sighting need not be extraterrestrial.

Is there any evidence of the government or military experimenting with flying machines that would account for the plethora of sightings out there? If it isn't obvious, I never really studied UFO's before, so I may be stating the obvious.

 

[waht]

Neil Tyson has a nice take on the subject:

 

[Ivan Seeking]

I notice that a lot of people associate UFO's with aliens. But these sighting need not be extraterrestrial.

Is there any evidence of the government or military experimenting with flying machines that would account for the plethora of sightings out there? If it isn't obvious, I never really studied UFO's before, so I may be stating the obvious.

There is no doubt that everything from 747's to then classified B2 bombers and F117s account for many UFO reports.

Based on the results of studies like project Bluebook [USAF], perhaps 5% of all reports are apparent mysteries. That is also what drives the silliness to absurd levels, including esp many debunkings. It is easy to debunk the 90-95% that even ET-UFO advocates expect to be explainable in prosaic terms; or at least ignorable due to a lack of any compelling anecdotal evidence. The remaining 5% are what keep everyone interested [I would actually say it is more like 1%].

 

[zoobyshoe]

I notice that a lot of people associate UFO's with aliens. But these sighting need not be extraterrestrial.

Is there any evidence of the government or military experimenting with flying machines that would account for the plethora of sightings out there?

The legendary wreckage at Roswell was first claimed by the military to be a "flying saucer", but later they claimed that was a cover lie to hide the fact it was a high altitude balloon equipped with sensors to pick up Soviet Atom Bomb tests.

In recent times they have freely released footage of a big variety of unusual looking small drone aircraft which are designed mostly for surveillance.

If you were interested in researching it, Popular Science, or possibly Popular Mechanics had a cover story within the past ten years about a large, disk-shaped craft the government worked on for a while but then abandoned. It was nuclear powered and was designed to be able to get out of the atmosphere and into space. IIRC at least one working prototype was built and flown. I don't recall the specific problem they couldn't overcome, but it lead to the project being scrapped.

So, yes, there is some evidence of what you're asking about.

 

[MrHayman]

The US stopped building SR-71's, B-2, and F-117 or at least stopped developing them in the late 80's early 90's. However, the money has not stopped flowing into these departments or companies. So what are they building now?

Was not the recent UFO over Norway, finally admitted to be a Russian military experiment? How many failed experiments or otherwise, have not been admitted to?

 

[MrHayman]

I always found it humourous how the American people do not even know what their government is doing with billions of dollars of money, and yet they are one of the most indebted nations in the world.

The military just roles out a brand new B-2 one day and says, "We built this billion dollar stealth bomber, isn't it great. Sorry, we didn't tell you about it for the last 20 years."

 

[Ivan Seeking]

If you were interested in researching it, Popular Science, or possibly Popular Mechanics had a cover story within the past ten years about a large, disk-shaped craft the government worked on for a while but then abandoned. It was nuclear powered and was designed to be able to get out of the atmosphere and into space. IIRC at least one working prototype was built and flown. I don't recall the specific problem they couldn't overcome, but it lead to the project being scrapped..

No such craft was ever built or flown; at least there is no evidence supporting such a claim.

 

[MountieFan16]

Mr. Hayman makes an excellent observation in that there are billions of dollars spent by our government and American people really don't know what it's being spent on. Unfortunately, I'm not convinced the elected officials in D.C. know either.

 

[MotoH]

I always found it humourous how the American people do not even know what their government is doing with billions of dollars of money, and yet they are one of the most indebted nations in the world.

The military just roles out a brand new B-2 one day and says, "We built this billion dollar stealth bomber, isn't it great. Sorry, we didn't tell you about it for the last 20 years."

Because if the American people know what skunkworks is building, then the enemy knows. I for one feel extremely secure knowing that things are being worked on to maintain air superiority over competing nations.

 

[Ivan Seeking]

What I find most compelling are official military UFO reports that are more than twenty years old, which is about all that one can gain access to anyway. We likely know what the limits of technology were at the time of any event reported.

In the old days, presumably, the classification of these documents occurred primarily because it was possible that we were seeing advanced Soviet, or later, Chinese technology. The documents are then declassified upon request, through the Freedom of Information Act, when no national security issues are known to exist. One of my objections to the conspiracy theories is that in spite of claims that the government is hiding information, some of the best evidence for real UFOs [whatever that means] comes from the Government! Names, places, addresses, and other personal information, are often blacked out; sometimes with many pages of black ink. But details pertaining to the UFO itself, as reported, are often intact.

 

[pallidin]

And to add to what Ivan said, the FOIA releases became of special interest to "conspiracy theorist' when some or large areas where "blacked-out"

Well, years ago I asked a friend who was once very close to such things. He told me that the reason for most of the FOIA black-outs had nothing to do with extraterrestrial UFO's. Rather, the reason was to protect classified flight data of special US experimental aircraft(or missions) and/or secret radar stations/personnel.
Made sense to me then and does now.

 

[MountieFan16]

Ladies and Gents,

Let me say at the beginning, I'm not wearing a hat made out of tinfoil. I find it interesting that the debunkers say there is no such thing as ET's; without even listening to what others have reported. Considering that some very intelligent and qualified individuals has said that we are being visited by other "beings" from other worlds. As an example the following astronauts have said that ET's are real. To wit:
- Buzz Aldrin
- Gordon Cooper
- Edgar Mitchell
- Neil Armstrong

The non-astronaut individuals that I personally respect are:
- Former Governor Simington of Arizona (the Phoenix Lights)
- Former President Jimmy Carter
- Former Canadian Defence Minister Paul Hellyer
- General Wil De Brouwer of the Belgian Air Force

And lastly read the newly declassified materials from the British MOD, Sweden, Mexico, Belgium, Brazil, and France. Check out COMETA, which was a study financed by the French government. All except our government - why you may ask? Go to YouTube and watch President Esinhower's farewell speech at the end of his term in office - where he warns about the military-industrial complex. Draw your own conclusions - AFTER you check out the materials I've identified above. If you remain a skeptic, God Bless you. (Oh, BTW, the Catholic Church as released a communication that we (they) have to accept the "probability" that ET's do exist. Check out "Fastwalkers" on the net and watch what the "Head Exorcist" from the Roman Catholic Church has to say about ET's.

Now, I plan on putting my tinfoil hat back on and go star/UFO gaze.


[/U]

 

[Ivan Seeking]

Your post is far too vague - no references, much less qualified references - and not all of the information is correct. For example, Buzz Aldrin specifically denies making any such statement. Nor did Armstrong ever said such a thing; at least not that I've ever seen in a good reference. Also, for the Catholic church to admit to the possiblity of ET is not the same as claiming that ET is flying UFOs. And even if they did, it wouldn't count as evidence for anything.

It does no good to argue for credibility while making bogus or marginal claims. If you wish to present evidence, even anecdotal evidence, a source is needed; and I don't mean some fringe UFO site. Also, appeals to authority have no value. Not only does a report from Jimmy Carter prove nothing, but the report was a UFO report, not an ET report. He has never said it was ET.

 

[Ivan Seeking]

And to add to what Ivan said, the FOIA releases became of special interest to "conspiracy theorist' when some or large areas where "blacked-out"

Well, years ago I asked a friend who was once very close to such things. He told me that the reason for most of the FOIA black-outs had nothing to do with extraterrestrial UFO's. Rather, the reason was to protect classified flight data of special US experimental aircraft(or missions) and/or secret radar stations/personnel.
Made sense to me then and does now.

There was a rather famous sighting of two flying saucers by the then powerful Senator Russell, back in the 1950's, while he was traveling through the old Soviet Union. For a number of years the official CIA report could be read, but Russell's name, dates, and references to the Soviet Union, were blacked out. Nothing was done to hide information about what he allegedly saw, rather the trip itself was a secret, so information about him was omitted. Later, it was possible to read the report entirely without the black ink.

The report is linked in the Napster. He claimed that two UFOs took off near the train, in clear view, while it was in transit.

 

[pallidin]

To paraphase, I once heard "...to dominate the air is to dominate the battlefield."

Given that, most of the so-called UFO's are actually various governmental(US and otherwise) experimental attack/reconnaissance aircraft.

 

[Garth]

There is no doubt that everything from 747's to then classified B2 bombers and F117s account for many UFO reports.

I was immensely impressed at the 1996 Farnborough International Air Show when for the first time a B-2 Spirit Stealth bomber was exhibited, the 'Spirit of Washington' made two flybys, giving the impression of a real leap in technology over other aircraft.

It had arrived a few minutes early and I saw it flying a circuit on the horizon before closing for the flypast. If I had not been expecting its arrival I could have sworn I had seen a UFO. (Literally as the U stands for 'unidentified'!)

Garth

 

[Ivan Seeking]

To paraphase, I once heard "...to dominate the air is to dominate the battlefield."

Given that, most of the so-called UFO's are actually various governmental(US and otherwise) experimental attack/reconnaissance aircraft.

Really? I see no evidence for that. Some UFOs are certainly experimental and even known aircrafts, but to say "most" UFOs are explained by this is pretty tough to defend. For starters, there are plenty of reports resulting from mundane objects such as balloons, flares, and lenticular clouds, not to mention things like ball lightning, earthlights, gaseous fireballs, and meteors. Beyond that, there is a class of reports that seem to be inexplicable, which is why the subject of UFOs attracts some serious people. Some of the most interesting, apparently credible reports [such as official military reports], would seem to suggest that there are still a few mysteries to be solved.

 

[Ivan Seeking]

Well, years ago I asked a friend who was once very close to such things. He told me that the reason for most of the FOIA black-outs had nothing to do with extraterrestrial UFO's. Rather, the reason was to protect classified flight data of special US experimental aircraft(or missions) and/or secret radar stations/personnel.
Made sense to me then and does now.

I didn't quite catch this before. Your friend's comments do not appear to be consistent with many reports. It could be true in some cases, and I can think of a few possible examples linked in the UFO napster, but in many other cases, there is plenty of information about the flight characteristics of the UFO. This is in fact what makes the reports interesting.

 

[Ivan Seeking]

This is one of my favorite reports to use as a leader; as an example of what I referenced above. It reads like something out of a sci-fi movie, yet it is very well sourced. Linked is the Joint Chiefs of Staff copy, directly from the files of the NSA.
http://www.nsa.gov/public_info/_files/ufo/joint_chiefs_staff_report.pdf

It is the first link in the UFO napster. What did we or anyone else have in 1976 that could account for this report? Note that at that time, the Iranian AF was an arm of the US, which is why US intelligence was involved and onsite. The best non-ET explanation that I've managed to conjure is that, rather than a craft, these pilots encountered some sort of highly energetic, unrecognized natural phenomenon. This idea is not entirely consistent with the report, but it seems more likely than the propositions that we or others have highly advanced technology that has been kept secret for over thirty years, or that ET is visiting.

 

[Ivan Seeking]

Personal theories are not allowed, so I have to be very careful here, but I wanted to convey one additional thought. About ten years ago, I read every declassified report that was available. This was no small challenge as there are many thousands of pages of print that is barely legible at times, but I wanted to explore the entire database of the most credible reports [expecting to solve this "UFO" mystery - a common mistake]. I have noticed one potential clue to some of these reports; including perhaps the Iran '76 report linked above. I want to be clear that I am offering an observation with a little extrapolation, not a theory. It is inteneded as a question, not an assertion. I am not qualified to make any such assertion.

In a few highly compelling reports, I noticed the specific claim repeated that, more or less, a bright ball of light in the sky responded to RADAR contact. What's more, as in the Iran case, the UFO seemed to run from the RADAR source. If indeed we are seeing credible reports of an unrecognized but natural phenomenon, is it possible that these anomalous objects are RADAR opaque, and virtually massless? If so, could that explain why they seem to run from the RADAR, as if acting evasively? Could it be that these airborn and ground-based RADAR signals are actually pushing the UFO phenomenon, or causing it to accelerate due to a secondary reaction to the energy of the RADAR? Imagine a pilot pushing one of these all over the sky with his RADAR, while thinking the UFO is acting intelligently and evasively. I found that to be an interesting option to consider. The specific common comments suggest that the UFOs were essentially idle until the moment they were hit by RADAR, at which time they immediately ran. I also noticed that they seem to run [approximately] away from the RADAR source, as in the Iranian encounter.

There is not enough information to address this question in formal terms, so please don't, but it might be worthy of consideration in studies relating to ball lightning and other atmospheric phenomena. The Iran report would seem to offer some specifics in terms of speed, distance, and the energy of the RADAR signal.

 

[zoobyshoe]

In a few highly compelling reports, I noticed the specific claim repeated that, more or less, a bright ball of light in the sky responded to RADAR contact. What's more, as in the Iran case, the UFO seemed to run from the RADAR source. If indeed we are seeing credible reports of an unrecognized but natural phenomenon, is it possible that these anomalous objects are RADAR opaque, and virtually massless? If so, could that explain why they seem to run from the RADAR, as if acting evasively? Could it be that these airborn and ground-based RADAR signals are actually pushing the UFO phenomenon, or causing it to accelerate due to a secondary reaction to the energy of the RADAR? Imagine a pilot pushing one of these all over the sky with his RADAR, while thinking the UFO is acting intelligently and evasively. I found that to be an interesting option to consider. The specific common comments suggest that the UFOs were essentially idle until the moment they were hit by RADAR, at which time they immediately ran. I also noticed that they seem to run [approximately] away from the RADAR source, as in the Iranian encounter.

It's an intriguing observation. I think you ought to compile a list of all the incidents you've read where this seems to be happening and then look for any other commonalities.

 

[Ivan Seeking]

It's an intriguing observation. I think you ought to compile a list of all the incidents you've read where this seems to be happening and then look for any other commonalities.

Unfortunately, that would be no small undertaking. It took me weeks to read through all of the files the first time. I do clearly remember one incident involving ground-based RADAR and visual contact. Upon RADAR contact, the UFO jumped to a very high altitude. There are at least a couple of other incidents that are more vague in my memory but have a similar flavor. But I have no idea if these reports were found in the NSA, DOD, USAF, the many reports from the Military Command center, a defense.mil link, or perhaps even in the CIA files. The only set that I can exclude with certainty are the FBI files as they would not apply [that actually helps a lot as the FBI files are extensive]. Looking back now, I wish I had taken better notes... anyway, I did take some notes but lost them long ago.

I might add that reading these files provides what I found to be a fascinating inside look at our national defenses, intelligence, and military operations. Many reports are clearly referencing military events and not ET. Some document sets go all the way back to the days just after WWII. I remember one very strange report of numerous unidentified black helicopters landing at a sensitive military site. Never did figure out what that was all about. With time, and esp by cross-referencing reports from different databases, one can sometimes piece together seemingly disparate accounts and reconstruct what happened. Absolutely fascinating at times, I had a blast reading this stuff!

 

[Ivan Seeking]

Since I've gone this far I will offer one other observation - not a theory.

IF we assume that a natural phenomenon is responsible for reports like the Iran report, and reports like this
http://www.dod.mil/pubs/foi/ufo/dep_ba1.pdf

then there is the strong implication that proximity to this phenomenon can cause severe disorientation, and perhaps even hallucinations. This might explain some of the more exotic elements of similar, well-sourced reports. People involved have sometimes reported severe disorientation, and even loss of consciousness, while in close proximity to the UFO. For example, severe disorientation and loss of motor function was reported by the security officer [not the Col.] involved in the incident at Woodbridge/Bentwaters AFB, linked above. However, he also reports that he saw a craft on the ground, so it gets pretty strange.

I know there are people like Persinger who suggest that strong EM could account for effects like this, but I don't know what if any of his conjecture has passed the test of the formal publication process.

Also interesting: Information found in the files at the Ministry of Defense, in the UK, suggest that the vegetation in close proximity to the alleged landing site showed higher than background levels of radiation. I seem to recall some debate about whether the difference was signficant, but I don't know if that was ever resolved. One can read the original reports directly.

 

[MountieFan16]

"Ivan Seeking" does make some valid points. I should not have generalized on some of the individuals that I listed; like Buzz Aldrin. He did not say that ET exist. He did say that during the trip to the moon in '69 that he and the crew noticed an object moving with their craft againt the star background. He said, and I quote, "If you take the definition literally, then that object was a UFO." This was taken from an interview with a reporter from Forbes. Upon noticing the "object" a call was placed to Houston asking where the last stage of their rocket (SIV-B) was located. A few minutes later Houston came back to the Apollo 11 crew and said the SIV-B was approximately 6,000 miles away. Thus, the "object" was well within visual range. The crew decided not to push the point; as they were afraid to say any more as they felt that Houston would cancel the mission.

In another interview with C-Span, Buzz said that on the small moon that circles Mars, there is a monolith on the surface. He said when "people" ask, where did it come from, maybe the answer is the "Universe" or for others "God" put it there - we need to go where no-one has gone before - he was pushing for exploration.

In Physics, I'm aware of the "Gato" factor. Michio Kaku, whom you may have heard of, did a very nice job of explaining why we haven't been in touch with civilizations other than ours. You can see this treatsie on YouTube. It's only a little over 9 minutes in length and worth the time spent.

All of the people I listed in my original posting are on YouTube. But, as I expected, the nay sayers, want to dismiss out of hand; without so much as listening to what some very credible individuals has witnessed and said. All of the documents I noted are available on the net. If you dare, type "COMETA" into Google and take a look at this document; which was done by some of the top scientists and military leaders in France.

While I've never shaken hands with a ET, I did have a personal experience that changed my views on the possibility of visitation from other civilizations. My father was a radio operator on B-29's in WWII. Thus, as a child, wanting to know what my Dad did in the war, I took a very strong interest in flying and planes; and without bragging, I'm still fairly astute on aircraft. In the fall of 1967, I was driving near Huntington, West Virginia. The road was desolate and I pulled off to "relieve" myself. As I stood in the cool fall air, I looked towards the heavens and remember noting that it was a beautiful night, warm and cloudless. As I stood there movement caught my eye and directly above me was a slow moving triangular object directly over my head. As I didn't know the size, I couldn'g ascertain it's altitude. But if it were the size of a jet liner, it was only 200 to 300' above me. I watched it for approximately 15 to 20 seconds, and sat back into my car; but didn't close the door. I thought, that's strange, if that "object" was that close, I didn't hear any noise. Also, all of the lights on the "object" were red and none were flashing. I stepped back out of my car and looked up - nothing but the stars were in view. The point where my car was parked allowed a view of at least 3 miles and probably 5 miles distant. The "object" was gone. Now, what did I see, a secret Military plane? Well, even military planes use the same light pattern as civilian aircraft. This thing didn't have flashing lights. How do I feel confident that what I saw was not an aircraft (or swamp gas, or a flock of geese, or a weather balloon, or some bad gin)? Well, I spent almost 8 years in the Air Force where I worked only with flying personnel. I had a Top Secret clearance, which let me work with pilots that flew everything from helicopters to U-2 spy planes - yes Virginia the U-2 did exist (though it is not listed in AF inventory, and existence is still denied by our government.

The week after I witnessed the "object", I visited family that lived approximately 80 air miles away from Huntington. Without mentioning my "sighting", the person I visited told me of a sighting they had the same evening that I had my experience, and they had seen a "triangular" shaped object with red lights near Charleston, West Virginia. The object was at first almost stationary, but it moved across the Kanahwa valley (4 to 6 miles wide) in the blink of the eye. Now, I realize that these observations don't prove anything; at least not to anyone besides me and the others in my family that had basically the same experience; but my life was changed by this experience.

I'm not trying to convince anyone that ET's exist. But, I ask that before you dismiss my observations, take a look at the information available on the topic. And I'm not talking about some of the sensationalist UFO sites; I talking about CNN, Fox News, C-Span, etc. Make up your own mind - but look into it with an open mind.

 

[Ivan Seeking]

"Ivan Seeking" does make some valid points. I should not have generalized on some of the individuals that I listed; like Buzz Aldrin. He did not say that ET exist. He did say that during the trip to the moon in '69 that he and the crew noticed an object moving with their craft againt the star background. He said, and I quote, "If you take the definition literally, then that object was a UFO." This was taken from an interview with a reporter from Forbes. Upon noticing the "object" a call was placed to Houston asking where the last stage of their rocket (SIV-B) was located. A few minutes later Houston came back to the Apollo 11 crew and said the SIV-B was approximately 6,000 miles away. Thus, the "object" was well within visual range. The crew decided not to push the point; as they were afraid to say any more as they felt that Houston would cancel the mission.

Aldrin stated publically that he is confident that was explained.

Last night on Larry King, Buzz Aldrin addressed this publically.

...ALDRIN: We saw one of the four panels, the 99.999. And these are three guys who have flown in space twice and have looked out at the stars and all sorts of things...

http://transcripts.cnn.com/TRANSCRIPTS/0707/13/lkl.02.html

The context was that in the end, they were 99.999% confident that they saw one of the panels.

https://www.physicsforums.com/showthread.php?t=120369

In another interview with C-Span, Buzz said that on the small moon that circles Mars, there is a monolith on the surface. He said when "people" ask, where did it come from, maybe the answer is the "Universe" or for others "God" put it there - we need to go where no-one has gone before - he was pushing for exploration.

We need a credible link with the text or audio in order to provide some context.

In Physics, I'm aware of the "Gato" factor. Michio Kaku, whom you may have heard of, did a very nice job of explaining why we haven't been in touch with civilizations other than ours. You can see this treatsie on YouTube. It's only a little over 9 minutes in length and worth the time spent.

All of the people I listed in my original posting are on YouTube. But, as I expected, the nay sayers, want to dismiss out of hand; without so much as listening to what some very credible individuals has witnessed and said. All of the documents I noted are available on the net. If you dare, type "COMETA" into Google and take a look at this document; which was done by some of the top scientists and military leaders in France.

First of all, if you review our UFO napster, you will see that we have an extensive review of the subject with the best links avaiable. We are way ahead of you.

As for the rest, you are welcome to share personal experiences and those of friends and family members.

It is most productive if, to the greatest extent possible, one avoids interpretations of that seen or experienced, and try to stick only to the facts. Please note also that personal theories are absolutely disallowed.

 

[Ivan Seeking]

It's an intriguing observation. I think you ought to compile a list of all the incidents you've read where this seems to be happening and then look for any other commonalities.

I should note that some reported objects obviously do reflect RADAR signals - they are tracked, as in the Iran case. Distance, the RADAR signal strenth at the source, and the return signal strength might provide some information wrt to energy transferred or lost. What I don't know is if this information could be applied to existing models for ball lightning or other anomalies. I remember SelfAdjoint commenting in this context that some model for soliton waves appears to be opaque at RADAR frequencies, but that's the end of the road for me. I'm not an expert on high-energy plasmas, assuming that is what's involved. Nor do we have a good model for ball lighting.

 

[zoobyshoe]

I might add that reading these files provides what I found to be a fascinating inside look at our national defenses, intelligence, and military operations. Many reports are clearly referencing military events and not ET. Some document sets go all the way back to the days just after WWII. I remember one very strange report of numerous unidentified black helicopters landing at a sensitive military site. Never did figure out what that was all about. With time, and esp by cross-referencing reports from different databases, one can sometimes piece together seemingly disparate accounts and reconstruct what happened. Absolutely fascinating at times, I had a blast reading this stuff!

A couple weeks ago I read Jarhead and am currently reading How to break a Terrorist, written by one of the interrogators who worked in Iraq trying to ferret their way up the chain of command of various Al Quaida branches. From both books it's clear that any given person in the military is kept as ignorant as possible about everything that's going on except for their individual task at hand.

What that would mean is that the pilots of those black helicopters would know nothing about them except how to operate them. They would not know why they were designed (the intended ultimate purpose of that design), they wouldn't have been informed they were to fly to that base until the last minute, and they wouldn't know why they were there. Nor would the average person at the base know those helicopters were coming, where they came from, and why they had arrived.

All that serves obvious security purposes, but makes it pretty much impossible to figure out the significance of any given event: so few people involved know the big picture. It's entirely possible that the only people who ever know why a particular thing is being done is the general who gave the order and, perhaps, his immediate circle of advisors.

 

[Ivan Seeking]

I wouldn't say it makes things impossible to figure out. It depends on the circumstances. In some cases, we can never know what a particular operation might be, especially the little stuff, but other information is well-documented and eventually made public. For example, we all know the story of the first atomic bomb - who built it; when; where; how; for what purpose, and the details of the deployment. At the time, that was the most classified project in history.

One can watch military history shows ad infinitum. They are chock-full with previously classified information; the details of military operations as well as intelligence operations.

 

[zoobyshoe]

I wouldn't say it makes things impossible to figure out. It depends on the circumstances. In some cases, we can never know what a particular operation might be, especially the little stuff, but other information is well-documented and eventually made public. For example, we all know the story of the first atomic bomb - who built it; when; where; how; for what purpose, and the details of the deployment. At the time, that was the most classified project in history.

The bomb wasn't figured out, though. The government made the bomb public by using it. The original target of the secrecy was the Soviet Union, of course, and once they got the bomb there was no point in keeping the story of it's development secret.


Is there a chance we could figure out black helicopters? One might interview enough people to figure out, for example, that a special passenger or piece of cargo was transported to or from that base on the black helicopters, yes, but, unless their full capability is demonstrated in an operation with so many witnesses it can't be hidden (assuming they have some special capability), the complete black helicopter story just can't be pieced together: the military fixes it so that no one at that base, even the base commander, would know anything but the barest minimum they need to know about them.

 

[Ivan Seeking]

Much of the information about UFOs was only released because someone involved, or someone investigating a story, knew what to request through the Freedom of Information Act. From this information, one can sometimes make sense of things. As you may recall, for example, you and I were able to debunk the claim that Hoover was denied access to the "Roswell disk". This was accomplished by you digging for details, and me reviewing the FBI files. In the end we deteremined that he was talking about a disk known to be about a foot in diameter, and found in Louisiana. It also turns out that Macabbee had already debunked this in 2000, in his book, UFO-FBI connection, but, nonetheless, I think it shows that one can sometimes make sense of these things; or at least help to put things into perspective. Btw, to this day, the bogus claim about Hoover is made on TV programs. [See the UFO Napster for details and FBI links]

This is the tricky part about chasing the facts on a UFO, or in this case, a rogue helicopters report: In order to file a FOIA request, you have to know what you are requesting. From a cold start like this, one may have no idea what to request. What's more, if information in any existing reports or documents is still sensitive, that part will be blacked out.

If, for example, we knew to request all documents related to project X, we might find out all about the details of what happened.

 

[Ivan Seeking]

Funny thing about the Iran report. I read that some years before I found the document myself [at the NSA] as a part of my search. Before that, I had assumed almost without a second thought that the document was bogus. It was just too much to believe. No real report read like that, I thought. Before the internet came along and these databases were made available online, the effort required to confirm something like this was too much for most people to bother. In many if not most cases, one had to go to the National Archives, in Washington DC, and view the microfische directly.

 

[zoobyshoe]

I believe the Freedom Of Information Act only applies to the FBI, and that's because they create files on private citizens who have a right to see what's in their file. You can't petition the Air Force or Navy for info about secret projects currently in development.

Also, the way the FBI is set up, if an agent knows anything about a case he is likely to know a lot about that case. It's more like the police than the military.

 

[Ivan Seeking]

I believe the Freedom Of Information Act only applies to the FBI

No. This is how many military UFO files were released. It applies to documents controlled by the US [Federal] government.

This is elementary stuff. You might refrain from making comments until you learn a little more about it.

You can't petition the Air Force or Navy for info about secret projects currently in development.

As already indicated, sensitive information is still controlled. That is partly my point about the UFO reports. Clearly this is not considered to be sensitive information.

 

[baywax]

You guys got all hot and bothered about the Canadian Avro Aero back in the 50s. But we gave in and gave it to you. Must have been a scary development in those days, to have to request we stop building it. What's a high performance aircraft between friends?!

 

[zoobyshoe]

No. This is how many military UFO files were released. It applies to documents controlled by the US [Federal] government.

This is elementary stuff. You might refrain from making comments until you learn a little more about it.

Or, I might not, since I'm not aware of what I'm ignorant of till someone points it out.

As already indicated, sensitive information is still controlled. That is partly my point about the UFO reports. Clearly this is not considered to be sensitive information.

Yes, but documented reports of military personnel reporting unexplained phenomena are what require explanations, they aren't the explanations. To the extent any of these phenomena are sensitive military projects (Government/Military UFO's), you won't be able to get a report explaining them, nor will you be able to piece together what they are from talking to military personnel who've seen them because no one is told anything more than they need to know to do the task at hand.

Observing that luminous phenomena seem, in some cases, to be pushed by radar is intriguing because it suggests one might eventually be able to figure out what that phenomenon is without having to be told by the military.

 

[baywax]

Observing that luminous phenomena seem, in some cases, to be pushed by radar is intriguing because it suggests one might eventually be able to figure out what that phenomenon is without having to be told by the military.

Or, we could just do away with hybrids, electric vehicles and everything else and develop the technology for our own transportation.