Thursday, May 22, 2014

Digging To The Core, three.


Part three of these "distant object" selections. One of the things which has happened here is that, since I'm posting these thumbnails roughly in yearly order, we are now past the infamous Robertson Panel by over a year and it has had time to permeate its "dumb-down UFOs" message through the many military services locations. The good solid military cases become scarcer [there will still be some now and then which slip out, but the Robertson Panel has changed the game.]

Well, here are the next set:




Much to contemplate there, but before making my usual few brief comments, I thought that some of you might like to see the original art [in color] from the Homer, NY case. I showed this on the blog some time ago, but other than that almost no one has seen the colored originals, so we can share a secret wonder moment.







.... would that all our witnesses were artists.

Well, to the cases....

It's pretty obvious that for at least my files, and specifically my "distant object" files, that the emphasis has shifted away from the United States. This is due, in my opinion, to two main factors: a). The aforementioned Robertson Panel influence, and b). the rising in several non-US nations of excellent researchers [of whom I could get enough information upon to trust.] As we will see if I can continue these postings, there will be MANY more good non-UFO cases, and could be far more so if I could read foreign languages --- the French and the Scandinavians, and the modern Italians have been loaded with fine investigators. This language barrier, by the way, is a major deficit in almost all US researchers, and frankly we could always, and even now, have used good translators.

The next thing that this set of cases seems hinting to me is that the time has come for more "strangeness." There was always strangeness aplenty as I said last time, but it was mainly a subtle technologically-hip sort of strangeness --- i.e. you had to think a bit about what you were seeing with these things do to get the Wow impact. But now, the Wow is beginning to hit you smack in the face.

We're getting displays of impossible dancing in the skies, and programmed activities with several disks. We're getting wild non-inertial showing off, uninterpretable color effects, and one particularly intriguing possibility: instant vanishment.

Unless we get the UFOs under extremely good instrumental observation, we're never going to be able to say that any one of them actually instantaneously vanished. You're one of the more sophisticated audiences on the Internet. You know that the human brain doesn't get continuous flow input, but rather a rapid set of "snapshots" taken by the eye's mechanism, which our cortex pieces together mysteriously to create the motion picture of consciousness. If any change in the external world takes place in, say, less than a sixth or an eighth of a second, our consciousness will register that change as "instantaneous." In plain English, anything moving out of sight quicker than that will not be seen to have moved but just disappeared.

Note however that any technology able to disappear from "frame" in less than a sixth of a second should be quite "advanced-ly alien" for anyone. Maybe not absolutely "non-inertial" but "close enough for government work. "

But it is the possibility that the technology REALLY DID vanish that is the big deal here. We can't claim that this happened, but if it did.... there---right there---is the shadow of the hyperspatial entry/exit technology which would change the entire game about deepspace travel. All of a sudden, maybe, Tau Ceti is just a blink away.

Much to meditate upon...

I'll try to get to more --- one more D-objects type posting, and later digging into the other categories in their turns. Till then, peace, and a bit of fun in this great Creation.


3 comments:

  1. Yes, "...a bit of fun...". A basic problem for most homo sapiens, and especially students of phenomenology, is "taking ourselves too seriously".
    Hay, gang - lighten up. Have some FUN with this stuff. Yea, we are probably wrong in all our assumptions, but so what? It is still FUN, if we let it be.

    ReplyDelete
  2. what do you think of this case prof ? its a single witness case who saw UFO while on NATO flight over atlantic..

    http://www.ufoevidence.org/cases/case139.htm

    A Gigantic "Cigar" Over the Atlantic in 1963.

    "I was at the time working for NATO as an English language secretary, and based in Paris. On the day in question I was one
    of a party of 50 NATO personnel who were en route to Canada for the NATO Ministerial Meetings in Ottawa. Our plane, an Air
    Canada DC-8 took off from Orly Airport, Paris, some time after 10.00 A.m., and we were told that the flight to Ottawa would take
    about seven hours. As there were only 50 of us, the plane was relatively empty. I took a window seat on the port side (left) near the wing. The other two seats in my row remained empty.

    "The weather was beautiful, and the Captain announced that we would fly at 36,000 (or maybe 38,000 - I do not recall clearly) feet. After lunch had been served, I sat enjoying the view of the vast expanse of sky above the clouds. The windows of the DC-8 were very large, the largest I seem to recall having seen on an aircraft, and came down quite low beside the passenger.

    "I was just reaching down to take a book from my hold-all, and was astonished to glimpse below the 'plane something dark and
    absolutely tremendous that stood out in vivid contrast to the brightness all around. I could not believe my eyes. I pressed close to the window in unbelief and there, almost beneath the DC-8, was a gigantic dark grey 'torpedo'. It seemed menacing and frightening, and I had the impression that it was stationary. It was utterly unlike anything that I had ever seen in my whole life. It looked as though made of steel. No portholes or windows were visible. No wings or projections. Nothing but the long perfect torpedo form, with its bullet- shaped head, and the rear end which was cut off sharply and squarely. (1) The monster - and I emphasise that it was this terrifying size that impressed me - was well below us. I thought maybe 2,000 metres or so below us, but of course I had no way of being able to gauge this or to estimate the size of the thing.

    "After my glimpse of the monster 'torpedo,' I sat there brooding on it for half an hour or so, as I recall, when suddenly the DC- 8 started to shudder and pitch up and down violently, nosing steeply upwards, then steeply downwards, and this went on for a long, long time. I might explain that I had often encountered turbulence and 'air-pockets' when travelling by aeroplane, but
    it had never been anything remotely like this. This was as though we were in a gigantic lift that was shooting up and down madly. And, as though that was not enough, there now came a succession of reports like cannon-fire or thunder, filling the cabin. Meanwhile the plane continued to shudder and 'buck' violently, and each time it came down I had the sensation that it was going to break in half. "Throughout all this, everybody in the passengers' cabin sat there petrified, absolutely silent, white-faced.

    "Did anyone else aboard the DC-8 see the 'torpedo'? That is the
    key question. Given the position of the 'torpedo' in relation
    to the passenger cabin, only a passenger looking out and
    downwards at that precise moment would have caught a brief
    glimpse of the object and, as I have said, I found no evidence
    that any other passenger did see it.

    "As for the plane's crew, there was only the one stewardess who seemed upset. What is certain is that the pilots up in the nacelle certainly would have had abundant time in which to see the 'cigar,' as it cut slightly diagonally across their route from their port side and well below them. No explanation or comment whatsoever about the 'cigar' was given by the Captain or any other crew member, and no statement was made by the authorities when we landed in Canada.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Case has mediocre provenance --- this is a individual who very briefly saw this object go beneath an airplane in which she was a passenger, and she remained unnamed by the editors of Flying Saucer Review. No formal report exists anywhere to my knowledge. The later comments about the effects of what could be Clear Air Turbulence need have nothing to do with UFOs. The descriptions here, while interesting, are pretty close to "take it or leave it" right now for me.

      I am not, by the way, going to continue to look up lots of cases just to give an opinion --- that is asking a lot. If someone has any case which seems like a possible UFOlogical anchor case, then they should not only mention it but clearly say why they think so. The same thing goes for any case that I've mentioned for which there seems to someone to be good reason to be doubted. As in all productive conversations, parties need to "bring something to the table."

      Delete

Followers