AmberRobot
Senior Member
The implication is that there are members of these companies who understand the technology used and the measurable effects of this technology on its environment. That implies more direct knowledge than simple observation.
House Oversight Hearing on UAPs - July 26, 2023
- Thread starter MonkeeSage
- Start date
jarlrmai
Senior Member.
Given Raytheon made the ATFLIR they can tell us what's most likely going on GIMBAL, of course it's all probably classified.
He didn't come forward, though. "Audience member" means he was a member of the audience... peanut gallery chipping in. Anonymous and just claiming extraordinary things without evidence. I could have been there and said whatever I felt like and it would have had just as much legitimacy as what "Audience member" said. At least Grusch gave his name, function and, well, that's about all he would give in a public setting..., but, he was not "Audience member" in the hearings.
Rationalman
Member
I Just came across some new and interesting Information and I couldn't find that it was posted already. It has to do with lightcraft and in reference to Gimbal.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Lightcraft. This chap has an interesting take on why the military could be testing these on it's own pilots as well.
Source: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=604BeZTf3bw
The gist of Lewis Doherty's take is that the Tic Tacs are plasma holographs, he has a video dealing with that issue also and the Gimbals are small conical craft powered by microwaves known as lightcraft used as military decoys being tested on our pilots by our military. Notice these things occur in areas the DoD and FAA have set aside for military training and weapons testing. The function of AARO is to provide a place for servicemen who see Black Budget Projects and are outside of the know a place to report the sightings to, so there isn't a repeat of the Roswell situation in which a spy balloon from Project Mogul was reported as an alien craft to the news services. When someone asks about a Black Project which they aren't allowed to know about, they are fed the space alien story as a hint to stop enquiring. If there was a real, transparent study done, it would be handled by the fully civilian FAA and NOAA, and not the entities, DoD and NASA who are designed to keep things hidden. Both the Wizard of Oz and space aliens are just humans with expensive equipment pretending to be something else.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Lightcraft. This chap has an interesting take on why the military could be testing these on it's own pilots as well.
Source: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=604BeZTf3bw
The gist of Lewis Doherty's take is that the Tic Tacs are plasma holographs, he has a video dealing with that issue also and the Gimbals are small conical craft powered by microwaves known as lightcraft used as military decoys being tested on our pilots by our military. Notice these things occur in areas the DoD and FAA have set aside for military training and weapons testing. The function of AARO is to provide a place for servicemen who see Black Budget Projects and are outside of the know a place to report the sightings to, so there isn't a repeat of the Roswell situation in which a spy balloon from Project Mogul was reported as an alien craft to the news services. When someone asks about a Black Project which they aren't allowed to know about, they are fed the space alien story as a hint to stop enquiring. If there was a real, transparent study done, it would be handled by the fully civilian FAA and NOAA, and not the entities, DoD and NASA who are designed to keep things hidden. Both the Wizard of Oz and space aliens are just humans with expensive equipment pretending to be something else.
Last edited:
deirdre
Senior Member.
tell us. or quote him with timestamps if possible. you cant just post a 5 minute video and say "watch this"
https://www.metabunk.org/threads/metabunks-link-policy.5158/
LilWabbit
Senior Member
This USAF Lightcraft 'program' deserves a thread of its own. Good stuff. Uncannily UFOesque looking military test hardware.
LilWabbit
Senior Member
It's a pretty short clip though and needs to be watched fully.
MonkeeSage
Senior Member
You should split this into a new thread as Mick asked for no new topics since this thread so long, and also it's pretty OT here. Also you should probably give an overview of the thesis of the video and some of the info and photos from wikipedia so people have an idea of topic without having to first click through or watch the whole video. They do look pretty bizarre though!
Mendel
Senior Member.
If you want to discuss this on metabunk, make a new post here: https://www.metabunk.org/forums/ufo-videos-and-reports-from-the-us-navy.60/ , since it deals with the GIMBAL video. A good title would be "GIMBAL lightcraft hypothesis".
Then, be specific. Show us the "new and interesting information" by using quotes and screenshots. We should pretty much know what you know before we even watch the video: what is the claim? what is all the evidence that supports it? It's a bit of work, but it ensures that your thread starts out right. It could get deleted otherwise.
Use this button for content quotes:
cptreynolds
Active Member
I'm pretty sure it's supposed to mean "inertial mass" by the way, not initial mass.
Curious George
Active Member
I think I have some new observations to add, but forgive me if it's been brought up, as I can't read all 22 pages.
Did filmmaker Jeremy Corbell or journalist George Knapp, who are on the believer end of the spectrum, influence Grusch in his whistleblower complaint? This is a subset of the claim that "the usual suspects" influenced Grusch into belief of some of his claims.
No.
Statement of Knapp and Corbell of when they met Grusch:
Have first-hand witnesses testified to the ICIG? Have they confirmed Grusch's claims?
Yes.
Did filmmaker Jeremy Corbell or journalist George Knapp, who are on the believer end of the spectrum, influence Grusch in his whistleblower complaint? This is a subset of the claim that "the usual suspects" influenced Grusch into belief of some of his claims.
No.
Grusch introduced himself to George Knapp for the first time at the SCU conference in 2022, which was held from June 3 - June 5.
Statement of Knapp and Corbell of when they met Grusch:
Date of SCU conference:
I would further argue to the larger claim, that the "usual suspects" do not add to a total of 40 witnesses as described by Grusch. I did see that this has been debated as a case of insiders being believers as much as the general population. I have nothing to add to that now.
Have first-hand witnesses testified to the ICIG? Have they confirmed Grusch's claims?
Yes.
The Debrief said:
Grusch said:
Mellon said:
Mellon said:
Shellenberger said:
Coulthart said:
Coulthart said:
James Fox said:
Coulthart said:
There's more - I believe Burchett and Rubio made statements that such claims have been made for the last 2 years.
Last edited:
Mendel
Senior Member.
That's really the wrong question.
What I'm wondering is this:
• how much have Elizondo and Mellon shaped Grusch's beliefs since 2017?
• how much have Corbell, Knapp and others helped extend Grusch's claims, compared to what he initially came forward with?
The first question is really about how much Grusch's beliefs are due to him having seen facts, and how much are they due to him having been proselytized by other UFO believers?
The second question is really about how much Grusch's claims are based on classified knowledge, and how much are they based on well-known debunked public UFO lore?
Both questions speak directly to Grusch's credibility, and unfortunately we have very little transparency about them.
LilWabbit
Senior Member
We don't know that. That's seemingly what Knapp lets on. If they had conspired on the initial complaint, Knapp and Corbell would know very well such a thing couldn't be openly admitted. So in either case, whether they had or hadn't influenced Grusch, the 'Usual Suspects' wouldn't acknowledge it. And none of this is relevant if, in any case, Grusch was a firm believer by the time of his initial complaint and if Elizondo was his main initial 'usual suspect' point of contact as is highly likely as they were both with the DoD in 2017 when Grusch became interested in the UAP investigations due to Kean's NYT article.
As I watched your clip further, it only confirms the (self-evident) fact that all of them are together pushing for disclosures. Knapp basically explains the usefulness of someone like Grusch in carrying forward that process.
As I was digging into the Wilson-Davis Memo on a related thread, a ufologist disinformation playbook began to emerge which may have also played out in case Grusch. At least for my part, I've ceased to believe 'sincere belief' in the government's secret alien programs precludes the ability to be dishonest and deceitful:
The playbook crudely put:
a. Find and recruit a true believer who works with the government.
b. Let them share and list their rumours about the government's secret UFO programs and alien contact.
c. Use their actual encounter at point in time x with a high-ranking government official of high clearance or an employee with alleged special access to create a false narrative of said privileged access individuals secretly confirming their rumours.
d. Tell the public through media that said named special access individuals are their sources that confirm UFO programs, or that the whistleblower knows the names of said persons. In the latter case plausible deniability is maintained.
Curious George
Active Member
Please be aware that I have added sources to further first-hand witnesses to the legacy program. These witnesses have variously spoken to the ICIG, congress committees, or AARO.
You can make the claim that Grusch was influenced by believers, but that breaks down when we talk about first-hand witnesses who have seen “credible” and “verifiable” evidence that the U.S. government, and U.S. military contractors, possess at least 12 or more alien space crafts.
Also note, that this isn't just about testimony. Grusch himself has submitted evidence which consists of "photos, official documents and oral testimony of 40 witnesses"
You can make the claim that Grusch was influenced by believers, but that breaks down when we talk about first-hand witnesses who have seen “credible” and “verifiable” evidence that the U.S. government, and U.S. military contractors, possess at least 12 or more alien space crafts.
Also note, that this isn't just about testimony. Grusch himself has submitted evidence which consists of "photos, official documents and oral testimony of 40 witnesses"
LilWabbit
Senior Member
And that breaks down if these 'witnesses' themselves aren't credible and verifiable as per my previous post.
Plus there are hundreds of thousands of believers of varying levels of belief working with the DoD if we go by general statistics.
Curious George
Active Member
Grusch may be a direct witness. He alluded to something he couldn't explain publicly, but as an analyst for NRO during the time frame of the following UAP sighting by two satellites and other assets, he would likely be aware and may even have personally analyzed it.
Curious George
Active Member
Please read my updated message again. Notice that the reference to "three or more decades each" already excludes Elizondo.
LilWabbit
Senior Member
Doesn't really change my response nor refute the overall playbook I characterized.
Curious George
Active Member
And what about the documentation evidence? And the response by the ICIG in July 2022 that the claims were "urgent and credible", and that it applies to all the claims, as reported by Coulthart?
LilWabbit
Senior Member
It would be helpful if you cited, and in context, exactly what ICIG said rather than what someone else whom you know the skeptics' are already skeptical about said the ICIG said.
I haven't seen ICIG say anything to the effect of confirming actual secret programs or testimonies by witnesses to such programs. Only that there's a credible whistleblower complaint in terms of the whistleblower having the right to make a complaint due to his perception that he's facing retaliations. That's a far cry from agreeing with the complaint.
Curious George
Active Member
Marco Rubio said:
Circumstantial evidence that a law enforcement entity, such as the Department of Defense Office of the Inspector General, is engaged in a broad, and possibly criminal, investigation of the U.S. government’s involvement with UFOs.
The Debrief said:
The Debrief said:
Was Grusch influenced by "the usual suspects" or a pre-existing interest in UFOs?
No.
Tim McMIllan said:
I'll add that Grusch started his investigation in 2019. That means he did not start in 2017 after the famous NYT article.
Grusch stated himself in his News Nation interview that he had no interest in the topic beforehand.
Last edited:
Curious George
Active Member
From the evidence I've provided, it's plausible that a criminal investigation into the DoD with respect to UAP started in 2021. It could be related to the claims of misappropriation of funds, harassment, and even murder. Further to the murder claim, whistleblower Air Force Master Sergeant Daniel Morris said the NRO recruited him for a harassment campaign. There were three teams. The first tried to gaslight the UFO witness. The second would threaten them, and the third would "end the problem, one way or another".
Then we have Kirby, Whitehouse spokesperson saying the President takes UFOs seriously.
Curious George
Active Member
I found the source of the quote from Daniel Morris. It mentioned a clearance level of Cosmic, which doesn't exist in US law. I believe this is not a reliable source.
Last edited:
LilWabbit
Senior Member
You're quoting Rubio, The Debrief and others that can be deemed as biased, including former UAPTF liaisons. However, I asked for full citations from the ICIG himself, preferably in the full textual context of the ICIG's own reports or interview transcripts and such.
You didn't provide such citation. And everything you provided matches the playbook I described rather than refuting it.
Mendel
Senior Member.
Most of your quotes are people's opinions and not actual evidence or testimony, and they're very indirect, @Curious George .
It's not enough for a testimony to be credible, it must also check out as true. Investigations must be initiated because of suspicions, but they too must turn out to be true.
And mixing together sources of varying reliability doesn't imply they're all reliable.
The questions I've posed in my previous message remain open.
It's not enough for a testimony to be credible, it must also check out as true. Investigations must be initiated because of suspicions, but they too must turn out to be true.
And mixing together sources of varying reliability doesn't imply they're all reliable.
The questions I've posed in my previous message remain open.
1) UFO believers have infiltrated the highest levels of the US government and successfully run their own psyop campaign against the most powerful military intelligence apparatus in the world
2) The US military & intelligence agencies are coordinating a massive psyop / disinformation campaign against their own military, the US population, and the world for x, y, z reasons
3) Grusch et al. have uncovered a massive corruption & fraud operation and are using UAPs as a means to bring it to the attention of congress
4) This is the self-inflicted blowback of a psyop campaign the US military ran against UFO believers back in the 70s, a highly powerful memeplex that is self sustaining and growing.
5) The US military industrial complex has kept a multi generation leap in technology hidden for decades and a faction is fighting for this to be disclosed to the public for x, y, z reasons
6) UAPs & NHIs are real and the US military industrial complex has kept this secret from the world since for decades.
7) China (lets be honest its not Russia) has developed capabilities far beyond that of the US and its allies that has significant ramifications for the world order.
8) It's all birds, balloons, and other prosaic explanations, and there have been multiple failures up the entire chain that failed to catch this.
I have to say 8 is becoming harder to believe given the scale and scope of the claims but still seems like the simplest explanation. The rest are disturbing, with 1) and 4) relying simply on memetic explanations. I'd be curious to see where people stand, or if i'm missing some other possible explanation for what is happening.
2) The US military & intelligence agencies are coordinating a massive psyop / disinformation campaign against their own military, the US population, and the world for x, y, z reasons
3) Grusch et al. have uncovered a massive corruption & fraud operation and are using UAPs as a means to bring it to the attention of congress
4) This is the self-inflicted blowback of a psyop campaign the US military ran against UFO believers back in the 70s, a highly powerful memeplex that is self sustaining and growing.
5) The US military industrial complex has kept a multi generation leap in technology hidden for decades and a faction is fighting for this to be disclosed to the public for x, y, z reasons
6) UAPs & NHIs are real and the US military industrial complex has kept this secret from the world since for decades.
7) China (lets be honest its not Russia) has developed capabilities far beyond that of the US and its allies that has significant ramifications for the world order.
8) It's all birds, balloons, and other prosaic explanations, and there have been multiple failures up the entire chain that failed to catch this.
I have to say 8 is becoming harder to believe given the scale and scope of the claims but still seems like the simplest explanation. The rest are disturbing, with 1) and 4) relying simply on memetic explanations. I'd be curious to see where people stand, or if i'm missing some other possible explanation for what is happening.
LilWabbit
Senior Member
(9) The resurgent UFO flap, including the very existence of publicly funded UAP investigation entities, is a unique example of:
(9.1) The inherent vulnerability of a certain democratic government to the influence of able political lobby groups consisting of relatively few leading individuals;
(9.2) Supported by a large number of ideologically committed believers both inside and outside the government;
(9.3) Drawing variously on entertainment-based sci-fi folklore, lack of purpose, lack of belonging, need for attention, need to feel special, and sometimes involving grifters manipulating the foregoing for personal gain;
(9.4) Sustained by the impressionability of the generality of people;
(9.5) Also sustained by a vast number of sincere eyewitness reports from the general public, whereby the power of human imagination together with the brain's visual perception functions, further informed by cultural fiction and myth, fills observational information gaps;
(9.6) Also sustained by a small number of sincere reports of encounter experiences with aliens (including detailed stories of abductions, physical contact, crafts, etc.), whereby psychotic, hallucinatory or autosuggestive episodes, informed by cultural fiction and myth, are sincerely believed and remembered as real encounters;
(9.7) Also sustained by continuously emerging unidentifiable low-information sensor data (including photographs and video footage) of mundane airborne objects which are bound to invite UFO speculation. Even the most cutting-edge sensors of the future will have their capability limits at which they will generate low-information sensor data;
(9.8) As a belief system, the UFO ideology consists of many semi-canonized faith-based tenets that precede evidence, looks for whatever evidentiary support it can find, and thrives in the low information zone (anecdotes and low-information physical records) in the absence of scientifically more compelling evidence.
Mendel
Senior Member.
You've not mentioned the role of the UFO-believing public.
That's why you miss hypotheses like: the public, thrown in doubt by the rise of social media and the decline of traditional media, is now more credulous than ever, and among the various conspiracy theories that have come to the fore (who could've predicted anti-vaxx would rise that far), UFOlogy has gained such a large following that they now have enough political clout to affect the DoD. It's all birds, balloons, and other prosaic explanations, but nobody believes the DoD when they say that.
This isn't a new phenomenon, when I read the CIA documentation we discussed earlier on this subforum, I had a strong sense of deja vu. This was how project blue book and the Condon committee got instituted. Maybe it's just time for another fruitless round on the same carousel.
So I can believe there are evolutionary advantages for religion and that this is basically a collective failure in rationality and reasoning.
However the claims that first hand witnesses of said programs have testified to the ICIG seem specific enough to make me question this memetic explanation.
edit: I still think that this is the most plausible explanation given there is no actual evidence to the contrary yet.
However the claims that first hand witnesses of said programs have testified to the ICIG seem specific enough to make me question this memetic explanation.
edit: I still think that this is the most plausible explanation given there is no actual evidence to the contrary yet.
Mendel
Senior Member.
P.S. There is absolutely nothing new about the scale and scope of the claims, as @NorCal Dave demonstrated in https://www.metabunk.org/threads/the-congressional-uap-hearings-debrief.13077/ .These claims are not new, and none of them have ever panned out.
"Scale and scope" just indicates a gish gallop:
You know this is a gish gallop because it's all claims and no evidence given.Article: The Gish gallop /ˈɡɪʃ ˈɡæləp/ is a rhetorical technique in which a person in a debate attempts to overwhelm their opponent by providing an excessive number of arguments with no regard for the accuracy or strength of those arguments. Gish galloping prioritizes the quantity of the galloper's arguments at the expense of their quality.
LilWabbit
Senior Member
Star Wars and Lord of the Rings are also very specific. All of what you describe is plausible under 9. Plus, I'm still waiting for exact citations of the ICIG and in context. You only have anecdotes by believers, and anecdotes of anecdotes. That's not compelling. It's just a lot of verbiage. Whoever is compelled by that doesn't know squat about how proper investigations or science works.
Mendel
Senior Member.
There is nothing specific about this. We know nothing about the witnesses, their programs, or what these programs do. We do know that AARO was not able to corroborate the testimonies.
so what I meant by "scale and scope" is the number (scale) of witnesses cited (40), the involvement of congress members, journalists, and military personal that have come forward to the public, as well as the scope of the claims (12 UAPs, non-human biologics).
I just read through NorCal Dave's post and agree that these claims have been circulating for a while.
LilWabbit
Senior Member
Which is predictable in the context of a broader and organized community of believers with its own gurus, celebrities, strategists, 'scientists', politicians and billionaire sponsors. The part within the DoD is just a small slice of the entire community. But it's a strategically important part to utilize for pursuing the main cause of "disclosures", and has been for decades. This is not a new thing. The scale is just bigger ever since the leaked videos that were covered by Kean's NYT article.
It's a chronic and repeated mischaracterization to describe the 'whistleblower' affair as just some isolated invididuals such as Grusch or Elizondo, acting on their own, based on their isolated and independent observations, becoming believers impartially based on solid evidence and unbiased witnesses, and acting on their independent good conscience, without an intimate connection to a much broader college bent on getting more supporters especially from within the DoD, and keeping this folklore alive and kicking.
"Associates who vouched for Grusch said his information was highly sensitive, providing evidence that materials from objects of non-human origin are in the possession of highly secret black programs. Although locations, program names, and other specific data remain classified, the Inspector General and intelligence committee staff were provided with these details. Several current members of the recovery program spoke to the Inspector General’s office and corroborated the information Grusch had provided for the classified complaint."
https://thedebrief.org/intelligence-officials-say-u-s-has-retrieved-non-human-craft/
"Marco Rubio, for one, agrees there is more information out there. The Florida senator told NewsNation this week that others in addition to Grusch in the intelligence community have come forward with “firsthand” accounts of UFO hardware. Rubio, a longtime advocate for transparency on the alien issue, claims several more intelligence whistleblowers with “high clearances” have shared similar allegations with the Senate Intelligence Committee."
https://nymag.com/intelligencer/202...ard-shocking-first-hand-accounts-of-ufos.html
I guess these two articles discuss what I referenced.
MrXopher
New Member
Having recently watched "The Phenomenon" an overwhelming impression that I took away was that the Roswell incident was indeed a military operation gone awry and that the original denial of official involvement was useful at the time in keeping 'the secret', by which time the media had spotted an opportunity to sensationalise the incident, which in turn fuelled the appetite of the public. Look up "The great moon hoax of 1835" for an early example of media fuelled public frenzy.
The many attempts thereafter by the authorities to close down investigations was then construed as further proof that there was, indeed, a cover up of some kind, with later investigations funded and initiated by monied individuals, the main culprits being Rockerfeller, and more recently, Bigelow, both of which had/have a vested interest due to having companies based around the aerospace industry.
Could this be a case where a little white lie, in order to conceal covert operations has just spiralled out of control?
Materials not of this world found at the crash sites are plausible, for instance, if i were to have stumbled across a heat resistant tile that fell off of an early shuttle test, I probably wouldn't have recognised it as from this earth.
Similarly witnessing a prototype stealth fighter flying night runs out of area 51 in the mid 80's, or the Harrier [jump jet] as far back as 1969, they would appear to defy all known laws of aerodynamics, and imo still do, particularly with maneuvers such as the cobra roll in modern day machines.
The hearings were predictable in their ambiguity, and under oath, anybody could appear to be telling the truth when the questions are preceded with "and do you beleive..."
Last edited:
LilWabbit
Senior Member
These are NOT citations from the ICIG! I'm trying not to get frustrated here in repeating myself. It's getting difficult. Anecdotes of what alleged witnesses to secret programs have said to ICIG are not evidence of the ICIG having seen evidence of aliens or agreeing with the 'witnesses' who claim to have seen said evidence.
LilWabbit
Senior Member
Why would you believe so naively in such claims when no proper investigator believes any claims on face value especially if it's part of a known belief-system?
Last edited:
I don't believe "naively" in such claims. I believe (as previously stated), and as seems to be the consensus here, in a memetic explanation for the events, that is, and has periodically, infected government, media, and the public at large. I referenced evolutionary arguments for religion that would support how these beliefs work.
However, I said, that such specific "claims" of first hand witnesses testifying to the ICIG are sufficient to make me question the most plausible hypothesis. Not that I believe 100% that these claims are real, only that its enough to make me sincerely question the consensus argument.
edit: to clarify there are 2 sets of claims. The 1st order claim - first hand accounts, and the 2nd order claim (that I must take faithfully) that Rubio has said people with 1st order claims have contacted the ICIG.
However, I said, that such specific "claims" of first hand witnesses testifying to the ICIG are sufficient to make me question the most plausible hypothesis. Not that I believe 100% that these claims are real, only that its enough to make me sincerely question the consensus argument.
edit: to clarify there are 2 sets of claims. The 1st order claim - first hand accounts, and the 2nd order claim (that I must take faithfully) that Rubio has said people with 1st order claims have contacted the ICIG.
Similar threads
