UFOs: Generals, Pilots and Government Officials Go On the Record

[jreelawg]

I change my guess to "long exposure helicopter!"

I think you nailed it.

 

[alt]

Now all we got to do is work out why they would shut down the airport - if indeed that was the case. If it was, could it be because of some itinerant / new / inexperienced pilot getting lost / disorientated and presenting a hazard to air traffic ?

And why would the authority claim 'military exersises' ? To cover up the above stupidity, particularly if it was one of theirs ?

(I'm just taking some guesses here)

 

[FlexGunship]

Now all we got to do is work out why they would shut down the airport - if indeed that was the case. If it was, could it be because of some itinerant / new / inexperienced pilot getting lost / disorientated and presenting a hazard to air traffic ?

And why would the authority claim 'military exersises' ? To cover up the above stupidity, particularly if it was one of theirs ?

(I'm just taking some guesses here)

Well, China has a reputation for covering any "slip ups" not just catastrophic ones.

It's possible that the pilot of the helicopter was on government business, but simply didn't file a flight plan. Perhaps he suffered a fuel shortage and was forced to land prematurely. Or, maybe there was a crime and the suspect had evaded capture by Chinese officials (there seems to be a faint glow below the helicopter in the image suggesting a search light sweeping out a large arc).

Do what you need to do... everyone else be damned... then cover it up as thought there were no mistakes made. Here in the U.S. we have become accustomed to public employees being held accountable (usually), but the same is not true in most other nations. Step one is usually to establish the infallibility of the ruling government.

EDIT: After posting this, I actually did a search for admitted Chinese government mistakes. Even small slip ups. I can't find a record of any of them that have been openly admitted to. Oddly, the same was true of Iran, Libya, India, and the UAE. I'm not suggesting they have something in common, I'm just pointing it out.

EDIT PART 2: I have found Iran admitting that the US has made a mistake on many occasions. Israel is clean, they admitted to a mistake recently. An ex-ruler of Pakistan admitted to mistakes. Tiger Woods is clean. Pachauri admitted to a mistake on the IPCC report, and he's an Indian, but not a member of the ruling party.

 

[FlexGunship]

I don't usually like double-posts, but this doesn't really fit within the purview of my previous post above. I think we should all pull a really important piece of information.

This event was most likely a helicopter. Yet, individuals on the ground reported it (obviously) as NOT being a helicopter. Or at least there are no reports of a helicopter being photographed in China on the news.

Next time someone says in a UFO report: "It wasn't a helicopter, that's for sure." Let's all be skeptical of that claim. Even if he or she starts saying "it didn't make any noise... it had no marker lights... it didn't behave like a helicopter." Those are some of the same things that we've understood from this report. There was even a heavy handed government cover-up with radar confirmation, and everything!

But it was just a helicopter.

EDIT: Lastly, what would we be thinking about this UFO report, if we didn't have this picture? Did the increase in evidence point us more strongly to an otherworldly or secret military explanation? That seems to be a prevailing trend; the more information you have, the more mundane the event.

EDIT 2: Just fixing typos. Sorry.

 

[alt]

I don't usually like double-posts, but this doesn't really fit within the purview of my previous post above. I think we should all pull a really important piece of information.

This even was most likely a helicopter. Yet, individuals on the ground reported it (obviously) as NOT being a helicopter. Or at least there are no reports of a helicopter being photographed in China on the news.

Next time someone says in a UFO report: "It was a helicopter, that's for sure." Let's all be skeptical of that claim. Even if he or she starts saying "it didn't make any noise... it had no marker lights... it didn't behave like a helicopter." Those are some of the same things that we've understood from this report. There was even a heavy handed government cover-up with radar confirmation, and everything!

But it was just a helicopter.

EDIT: Lastly, what would we be thinking about this UFO report, if we didn't have this picture? Did the increase in evidence point us more strongly to an otherworldly or secret military explanation? That seems to be a prevailing trend; the more information you have, the more mundane the event.

In this case, the increase in evidence did quickly resolve the matter. And I agree with you on the prevailing trend.

It is not a fait accompli, however, that they must all fit into this trend.

(Though granted, the vast majority are little more than fête champêtre .. lol ..)

 

[FlexGunship]

In this case, the increase in evidence did quickly resolve the matter. And I agree with you on the prevailing trend.

It is not a fait accompli, however, that they must all fit into this trend.

(Though granted, the vast majority are little more than fête champêtre .. lol ..)

[PLAIN]http://www.greaseweb.com/Pictures/Cast/frenchy.jpg

Points for anyone who gets the joke.

 

[mugaliens]

It's possible that the pilot of the helicopter was on government business, but simply didn't file a flight plan.

The lack of a flight plan always raises suspicions among the masses, but the simple fact is, pilots aren't required to file flight plans. It's always recommended for point A to point B trips, but all pattern work and most non-cross-country training work in general aviation occurs without a flight plan.

Most helicopter rides in and around major metropolitan areas occur VFR, beneath the inverted layer cake altitudes of Class B and C airspace, and without flight plans. Helos will file flight plans in IFR weather, and usually in VFR weather on cross-country trips. Otherwise, no.

 

[FlexGunship]

For those unaware:

[PLAIN]http://www.learntoflytoday.net/hebrew/images/briefing%20pics/airspace/airspace.gif

Like I said, the pilot may not have filed a flight plan. Therefore, encroaching on controlled airspace would be a serious concern. Certainly enough to stop departures and hold arrivals in a safe holding pattern.

Or am I misunderstanding you, Mug?

 

[mugaliens]

For those unaware:

[PLAIN]http://www.learntoflytoday.net/hebrew/images/briefing%20pics/airspace/airspace.gif

Like I said, the pilot may not have filed a flight plan. Therefore, encroaching on controlled airspace would be a serious concern. Certainly enough to stop departures and hold arrivals in a safe holding pattern.

Or am I misunderstanding you, Mug?

Thanks for the graphic, Flex. Flying for the Air Force, nearly all of our time other than low-level was IFR, although a couple of our routes did skirt beneath B and C airspace. At 300' AGL, however, it didn't matter. Just see and avoid.

Most of my general aviation hours were in Little Rock, AR, so I was intimately familiar with KLIT aka Adams Field in downtown Little Rock just south of the river.

As you can see from http://www.runwayfinder.com/?loc=LIT", North Little Rock, my primary field, is just outside the SFC/43 inner column of airspace associated with Adams Field, so we didn't need clearance to take off and land or do pattern work. Heading East we just kept it below 1500'; North below 2100'; and SW below 1800 ft. Our usual ingress/egress route for Southern trips was to head West below 2100', staying North of the river, before turning South just shy of the triple 2,200' towers.

All of which was done underneath the second layer of this Class B airspace, VFR, squawking 1200, with no issues of encroachment or any interference with routine flight ops at Adams Field. The only thing we were required to do was contact Little Rock Approach within 20 nm (and a bit further out in spots around outlaying airfields). They'd always give us a different squawk, of course, but provided we remained below the layers, they didn't redirect us. Just traffic advisories, none of which involved airline traffic (who ingressed within the layers, not below them).

Naturally, while flying IFR in the area, we were kept under positive control and within the layers at all times to deconflict with the VFR traffic below us and transient traffic above us (above 4300').

 

[FlexGunship]

The only thing we were required to do was contact Little Rock Approach within 20 nm (and a bit further out in spots around outlaying airfields).

That seems like an incredibly small amount of warning.

"Wait... wait... NOW! Little Rock Approach this is... <crash>"

EDIT: It's a joke, people!

 

[gravenewworld]

NORAD guy predicted UFO sightings over major cities on Oct. 13 almost a month ago. This was taken yesterday over NYC:

http://www.nydailynews.com/ny_local/2010/10/13/2010-10-13_mystery_shiny_objects_floating_over_manhattan_spark_ufo_frenzy.html
Spooky. I'm very skeptical when it comes to things like ghosts, angles, aliens, etc., but this is just weird.

 

[alt]

NORAD guy predicted UFO sightings over major cities on Oct. 13 almost a month ago. This was taken yesterday over NYC:

http://www.nydailynews.com/ny_local/2010/10/13/2010-10-13_mystery_shiny_objects_floating_over_manhattan_spark_ufo_frenzy.html

And were there any more sightings over major cities ? Another 2 or 3 perhaps ? Also, on what basis did he make such a prediction ? Do you have a link to it ?

Spooky. I'm very skeptical when it comes to things like ghosts, angles, aliens, etc., but this is just weird.

Could be anything. But it looks trivial IMO - perhaps a balloon ? You would think if it was anything serious, there would have been a massive reaction from the air force, etc - considering 911 and all ..

 

[FlexGunship]

NORAD guy predicted UFO sightings over major cities on Oct. 13 almost a month ago. This was taken yesterday over NYC:

http://www.nydailynews.com/ny_local/2010/10/13/2010-10-13_mystery_shiny_objects_floating_over_manhattan_spark_ufo_frenzy.html

Spooky. I'm very skeptical when it comes to things like ghosts, angles, aliens, etc., but this is just weird.

FlexGunship predicts that there will be a UFO report on October 25th, as well as several ghost reports, and at least two reports of something else ridiculous.

If I'm right, will you give me the same respect you give this other guy?

He's probably trying to prove a point, that if you predict a UFO, people will find one. Or, given any random date, someone will report a UFO.

 

[Ivan Seeking]

This is the sort of nonsense that distracts interested parties from the truly interesting events.

 

[FlexGunship]

This is the sort of nonsense that distracts interested parties from the truly interesting events.

If I may... who decides when a UFO report (or prediction) is nonsense? It would seem that if we are to keep an "open mind" about such things, then applying filters is not a good way to start.

I'd like to hear them all... and (to the dismay of some) equally disregard them as confusion, illusion, delusion, hallucination, or hoax (in the absence of real evidence, of course!). In science you don't get to throw out your negative results, you have to keep them all. Here's a negative result. Keep track!

EDIT: Clarification.

 

[Physics-Learner]

That is a crackpot claim. Urging declassification of official documents does not constitute a conspiracy theory.

hi ivan,

does this book refer to many of the same generals, pilots, etc. that are surfacing on the disclosure project ?

i have listened to many of them, and they say there is all sorts of documents, etc. that have been kept hidden by the people who control our top-secret stuff.

the claim is that it is the real wealth of the planet, not our govt, per se.

there is no doubt in my mind that we, the average joes, don't have even a clue as to what really goes on.

greer makes claims as to himself briefing various presidents on the matter. i have heard him talking on talk stations, etc. no one seems to counter that he has not made these talks, so i assume that he has.

greer claims that president clinton, for example, told greer that he would end up like jfk, if he went too far stepping on the toes of the real wealthy.

greer claims that several of our presidents have been politely told that they had no need to see any such reports.

greer shows a clip of eisenhower warning people of the secret military power growing in the united states.

greer has several hundred of these generals and such, all stating stories that back this up.

the whole point of the disclosure project is to get all this stuff "disclosed" to us, since it is our tax dollars that have paid for it all.

seti just issued a document stating the protocols should any of their employees receive et contact.

i am open-minded enough that i would like to remove any "secrets", so that all of us could stop arguing with one another, and talk about what we may or may not have.

too many times in my life i have thought that something wasnt possible, based upon who i was at the time, only to find out that it is true.

so i try not to let my biases steer me away from the truth. this whole et business was something i had pretty much disregarded in the past, because most of what makes the news is some individual wanting some attention.

it simply is not logical to dismiss all these military people as all have seeing "illusions".

that leaves me with two options. they are either telling the truth, or they are lying because they have grouped together for some agenda that is as of yet unknown to us outside the group.

greer claims that we have actually captured aliens and their spacecraft .

greer claims that we have done reverse engineering and have craft of our own that are far superior to anything else on the planet. and that we have technology that we have been able to glean from this reverse engineering, to once in awhile being able to actually fire something at the craft to make them crash.

two points that send up red flags to me are :

1) commenting that they go faster than light. even if he was a physicist, how would we ever know this ? it is not like we have any tools to measure that speed, and to our knowledge, that is contrary to what we know about physics.

2) if aliens had this sort of technology, i can see their craft crashing. but it would seem to me that they would have means of rescuing their comrades beyond our capability to hold onto them.

but this is all just speculation. i would like to know just exactly what we do or do not know, such that none of these "documents" stay secret.

i still don't put much credence in videos that i see with sparkling lights, etc. as stated, that sort of visual contact can be very misleading. we don't often see what we think we see. heck, i experience that in every day life.

these are simply not the same caliber of sightings that these military guys are claiming to have seen.

and when there are hundreds of said military people saying the same thing - like i said it goes beyond the realm of reasonable probability to assume that they are all seeing illusions.

while i am on the fence as to all of this, i simply would like to know one way or the other - does some group on this planet really have said knowledge, or don't they ?

 

[Ivan Seeking]

While I do listen to the people in Greer's group who claim first-hand observations and knowledge, I personally denounce Greer and anything he says. I think Greer has either gone over the edge in his beliefs, or he is a simple con man.

This is the thing to understand about military UFO documents. At last count, there were something like a billion classified documents [all subjects, not just UFOs] that could be declassified if requested, but far too many to simply declassify arbitrarily. It is a problem of time and cost, not State secrets or proof of ET. So while there are allegedly many interesting UFO documents still awaiting release, in no way does this imply there is any sort of conspiracy; nor does the request to release UFO documents constitute a belief in conspiracies.

 

[Physics-Learner]

thank you ivan,

you seem to be an unbiased person, with no axe to grind, so i take your thoughts seriously.

while i wish we had this technology so that we could help people on this planet, i will stay "agnostic" until proven otherwise.

so i guess i will just wait and see if anything comes of it.

 

[Evo]

hi ivan,

does this book refer to many of the same generals, pilots, etc. that are surfacing on the disclosure project ?i have listened to many of them, and they say there is all sorts of documents, etc. that have been kept hidden by the people who control our top-secret stuff.

the claim is that it is the real wealth of the planet, not our govt, per se.

there is no doubt in my mind that we, the average joes, don't have even a clue as to what really goes on.

And you don't think it is odd that this is just the US? If this was known to the governments all around the world, you don't think this would have come out years ago? Or do you think knowledge of ETs is exclusive to the US?

 

[Ivan Seeking]

If I may... who decides when a UFO report (or prediction) is nonsense? It would seem that if we are to keep an "open mind" about such things, then applying filters is not a good way to start.

I'd like to hear them all... and (to the dismay of some) equally disregard them as confusion, illusion, delusion, hallucination, or hoax (in the absence of real evidence, of course!). In science you don't get to throw out your negative results, you have to keep them all. Here's a negative result. Keep track!

EDIT: Clarification.

You can't tell the difference between the story you were discussing, and something like the Iran report?

As I have said a number of times, we have no proof or scientific evidence for visting ETs. You give zero credibility to all other forms of evidence regardless of the source, so why should I waste my time? Your position is illogical and your mind was made up long ago. I have posted many pages in the UFO Napster, so have a blast. At least that will allow you to learn a bit about the facts.

If you ever reach a point where you can discuss this without simply denying any evidence that you don't like, let me know. We agree that we can always imagine ways to explain away any case - that is an elementary argument - but I don't find these imagined explanations to be compelling in all cases: They often ignore key elements of the reports considered, they are used as robo-explanations without due consideration, they assume that all eyewitness testimony is equal and worthless regardless of context, and the denial of evidence is arbitrary and subjective. Also, I find your position and posture to be unreasonable. "Just say no" is a position of faith.

 

[Physics-Learner]

hi evo,

assuming this conspiracy exists, this is not about govts, but the wealth behind govts.

again, according to greer, no one in congress or the president is in the in - that makes sense, because they are elected guys that come and go every 4 years. and certainly not in the real wealth.

at this point, i plan to stay out of the discussions, unless something really new surfaces. this includes any sort of research on my part.

at least i am aware of what has been said in the past, and what is being said today - such that if something really concrete arrives, i will find out about it.

thanks for the various replies.

 

[Ivan Seeking]

And you don't think it is odd that this is just the US? If this was known to the governments all around the world, you don't think this would have come out years ago? Or do you think knowledge of ETs is exclusive to the US?

Many governments have already released their documents.

 

[Ivan Seeking]

Oh yes, some of the people in Greer's group are discussed in the book. Truthfully, I am already familiar with the cases discussed, work was too busy, taxes were due, and I had to delay my reading for a time. Allegedly, Kean makes a nice argument at the end of the book, so I'll pass along my opinion about the book after I finish.

I can say that, imo, she gives too much leeway to Dr. Haines. Haines does good work to a point, but he is now a true-believer and he spends too much time in the pulpit.

 

[Je m'appelle]

Many governments have already released their documents.

But I still haven't seen any substantial content in any of them. Most of these documents are simply the outcome of investigations on Unidentified Flying Objects due to reports of sights by pilots and civilians, some of them have a conclusive answer to the spotting such as light anomalies, stars, planes, weather balloons, optical illusions due to meteorological phenomena, hoaxes and so on, and other remain inconclusive due to lack of evidence for a reasonable investigation.

None of them have proved or disproved anything concerning the existence of aliens, sincerely I don't see much importance on these documents for Ufologists, the way I see what the government is doing is as an attempt to show the population that "nothing is being hidden", this is how I interpret it, whether or not this is true is not up to me to state, as at least I, do not have enough knowledge to either affirm or deny this.

Honestly, I don't see why "flying saucers" or similar aircrafts are unlikely to exist, actually it is very likely that such a technology has already been mastered or is at least being very intensely researched, there's evidence of "flying saucers" being projected and researched since the 1940s. What I believe to be very unlikely is "flying saucers" operated by aliens rather than humans.

It is interesting to note that the Lockheed F-117 Nighthawk aircraft begun to operate in the beginning of the 80s under top secrecy, and was only publicly revealed in the end of the 80s and beginning of the 90s (specially during the Gulf War). I've heard about many sightings of unusual black triangular-like shaped aircrafts during this period of secrecy that later resembled the F-117 Nighthawk, so, well, anything is possible. I'm open to anything new that comes up, to some extent of course.

 

[mugaliens]

That seems like an incredibly small amount of warning.

For IFR traffic, of which commercial (airliner and air freight) traffic constitutes most, are in radio and radar contact throughout their flight, so there are no surprises, there. And they're given a handoff to approach control when the time comes.

As for the VFR traffic, the rule is to contact approach control before you hit the twenty-mile limit. You're squawking VFR, and contact them on the frequency listed for your sector of approach.

I always started about 25 miles out, and it goes something like this:

Me: "Little Rock Approach, Cessna 2922 Juliet, request (might take a couple of tries between traffic)."

LR App Cont: "2922 Juliet, say request."

Me: "2922 Juliet, 25 miles south, level at 2,500, heading 010, requesting vectors to ILS, 22 right."

LR App Cont: "2922 Juliet, squawk 2763, and ident."

Me: "2922 Juliet, squawking 2763, ident."

LR App Cont: "2922 Juliet radar contact, 24 miles south, level at 2,450 feet. Proceed direct to..."

And that's it. 25 to 24, possibly 23 miles. Thirty to sixty seconds, and at 120 kts, that's two miles (10%) max to dial things in. We're not doing Mach 3 up there... Even flying heavies, at 250 kts (instead of 115) 20 nm was more than enough time, although we'd usually have things wired by 30 nm out.

"Wait... wait... NOW! Little Rock Approach this is... <crash>"

Yeah, ok, I got the joke. Just wanted to make sure that others understand it doesn't take ten minutes to make things happen. More like two. The procedures and roadmaps are well defined, and the players are usually very experienced. There are a few times when things get hairy, almost always involving weather and heavy traffic.

Think about it as if you would approaching an unfamiliar interchange. You know you need to take exit B, so you peel off, pass the first right, taking the second for a 270 around and under the overpass. What? Thirty seconds, right? It's a little more complicated up there, and in 3D, but it's not that much more difficult.

 

[Physics-Learner]

thank you ivan,

you seem to be an unbiased person, with no axe to grind, so i take your thoughts seriously.

while i wish we had this technology so that we could help people on this planet, i will stay "agnostic" until proven otherwise.

so i guess i will just wait and see if anything comes of it.

i forgot to ask you - if you think that greer's group is being deceitful, do you have any ideas as to what their agenda is ? there are supposedly several hundred military-like people who are part of the group, all with very real claims.

they simply are not all having illusions.

 

[Ivan Seeking]

i forgot to ask you - if you think that greer's group is being deceitful, do you have any ideas as to what their agenda is ? there are supposedly several hundred military-like people who are part of the group, all with very real claims.

they simply are not all having illusions.

He has assembled a group of notable people who claim direct, first-hand knowledge of alleged UFO events, who wish to testify before Congress under oath. Okay, I'll accept that. Let them testify. From there, Greer goes off into never-never land. I have no idea what drives him. But it doesn't matter unless he can produce an anti-gravity engine or a free-energy device. When he does that, I'll pay attention to the rest of his claims.

Note that the aforementioned group of alleged witnesses may have little or nothing to do with the other claims made by Greer.

 

[jreelawg]

We already know that governments have, throughout this century, tested, and experimented, on people from all walks of life, in the name of science, defense, and warfare. If you wiki "human experimentation", you can read a long list of all kinds of factual instances of this sort.

We also know, that the military has experimented in ways to create artificial radar blips to throw the enemy off. IMO, it would be reasonable to assume that forms of deception in the field of aeronautics, may have been tested on unwitting subjects, either to see if it worked, or how they react. I would put a high likelihood, that at least some sightings, or anomalies, are a result of this.

Those who I have seen testify, for instance, at the recent national press conferences, seam to me, to believe they saw what they claim, and are attempting to be honest. This doesn't rule out the possibility that they were at the receiving end, of a test or experimentation in the field of aeronautical deception.

Personally though, having seen for myself, something which I have a very hard time explaining as anything but the result of aeronautical technology which is in line with other common reports, I am inclined to believe that their stories are most likely the result of something real and exotic.

In my case, it is IMO not possible I was a subject of a test of any sort. However, I could be an accidental witness to the testing of some kind tech which mimics UFO characteristics, without actually being a craft/flying object. I have entertained this idea, but I find it kind of hard to believe at this point.

I keep changing my mind about what I find most likely.

In terms of "flight" characteristics, I realize that a flying object needs not have a crew, so deadly G-forces need not apply. There may be some type of lighter than air technology combined with exotic propulsion making extreme acceleration possible. I find the no sound factor hard to explain, but then again, why would I know the limits in regards to quiet propulsion systems moving through air.

 

[mugaliens]

From there, Greer goes off into never-never land.

Ivan, aside from hard-nailed physics, you and I rarely seem to agree. No matter how I might slice or dice it on this issue, however, I agree with you six ways to Sunday.

 

[mugaliens]

We also know, that the military has experimented in ways to create artificial radar blips to throw the enemy off.

Oh, gosh, your tapdancing around this issue is PAINFUL.

It's called "electronic countermeasures," and has been in existence for more than half a century.

If there's anything you'd like to bring to the plate that's post WWII (60 years ago) please do so.

Thanks.

 

[Ivan Seeking]

Oh, gosh, your tapdancing around this issue is PAINFUL.

It's called "electronic countermeasures," and has been in existence for more than half a century.

If there's anything you'd like to bring to the plate that's post WWII (60 years ago) please do so.

Thanks.

It is my understanding that false RADAR images were first used in Gulf I. Do you have evidence it was used prior to this?

 

[Physics-Learner]

He has assembled a group of notable people who claim direct, first-hand knowledge of alleged UFO events, who wish to testify before Congress under oath. Okay, I'll accept that. Let them testify. From there, Greer goes off into never-never land. I have no idea what drives him. But it doesn't matter unless he can produce an anti-gravity engine or a free-energy device. When he does that, I'll pay attention to the rest of his claims.

Note that the aforementioned group of alleged witnesses may have little or nothing to do with the other claims made by Greer.

hi ivan,

i did not see anything beyond your grin, when i originally read your post. i don't think the alleged witnesses would want to be part of his group, if they disagreed with greer to that degree. in other words, if what they are saying is true (regarding first hand contact), and what greer is saying beyond, is not true - i don't think you would get that many of them to be part of his group. they could still be willing to testify under oath to congress. but they are attending his conferences, etc. to me, that implies a tacit agreement with greer.

it is still puzzling to me.

i admit that the free-energy device and travel faster than light are pretty far out. if i could come up with a plausible agenda for the combination of greer and the military, i would have more of a gut feeling about it, myself.

 

[FlexGunship]

i forgot to ask you - if you think that greer's group is being deceitful

Perhaps they are being deceitful. However, we can forgive them for this because, before deceiving us, they have gone to great lengths to deceive themselves.

I also believe this to be the case with most "true believers." <--opinion

 

[Ivan Seeking]

hi ivan,

i did not see anything beyond your grin, when i originally read your post. i don't think the alleged witnesses would want to be part of his group, if they disagreed with greer to that degree. in other words, if what they are saying is true (regarding first hand contact), and what greer is saying beyond, is not true - i don't think you would get that many of them to be part of his group. they could still be willing to testify under oath to congress. but they are attending his conferences, etc. to me, that implies a tacit agreement with greer.

it is still puzzling to me.

i admit that the free-energy device and travel faster than light are pretty far out. if i could come up with a plausible agenda for the combination of greer and the military, i would have more of a gut feeling about it, myself.

Who is attending his conferences? How many of his witnesses are regulars?

Here is the problem as I see it [assuming only good motives for those involved - not an assumption that I make in practice]. If someone really believes they've seen ET, just about all points of reference for one's expectations go out the window. This leaves people vulnerable to highly exotic beliefs.

The idea of alleged abductees comes to mind. While I don't believe abduction stories, there is one logical inconsistency in the objections to these claims. People will point to the mental state of these alleged victims. As a number of people have commented in a variety of forms, "They don't seem very stable to me". To which I reply, "If you were abducted by ET and used as a lab rat, you probably wouldn't be very stable either!" Being a bit wacky helps their claim as much as it undermines it.

My personal suspicion is that Greer has lost all perspective, but he might just be a crook. He offers a format for people to tell their stories, so those folks may be dependent on Greer for the exposure they gain. If I saw an alien spacecraft , I would certainly want to tell the world about it!

Col Halt of the Rendlesham Forest [Bentwaters/RAF Woodbridge] case has been at Greer's conferences. But I spoke with Halt for over an hour by telephone once, and he doesn't even believe he saw ET! He specifically stated to me that whatever it was, he thinks it had terrestrial origins. He thinks it was very strange and exotic, even intelligent, but in all likelihood, terrestrial.

 

[Physics-Learner]

i have watched the videos, as presented. there may only be about 20 or so that have been presented on the videos, but that is still a pretty large number, for what we are talking about.

i recall that halt - i do not think he was saying that on the videos. these people are directly stating that these are ets, no ifs ands or buts.

a few have even claimed to have had direct contact with an alien that was held captive.

at this point, they don't need greer to testify before congress - so i simply don't buy that they could be simply using greer for a platform to tell their stories.

if it is not true, there is some sort of agenda. greer does charge like about $900 or so, if i recall, for joining in on the "contact an alien" sessions. but there are not that many people, nor is it done that often, that he is making lots of money, that i can see.

apparently, he walked away from a much better paying job as emergency doctor. so i don't see the "crook" angle of it, like the tv evangelists, who draw in big bucks.

i just really don't have any sort of gut idea about what is going on. i have had some direct emails with the greer group, and have seen some red flags, myself.