UFO Caught On Tape Over Santiago Air Base

[c4chaos]

for those following UFO news, here's the latest from Leslie Kean. Alex should really invite her to Skeptiko. it's her book that made theoretical physicist Michio Kaku and astronomer Derrick Pitts reconsider their positions on UFOs.

Leslie Kean: UFO Caught On Tape Over Santiago Air Base

[Bernardo]

Originally Posted by c4chaos

for those following UFO news, here's the latest from Leslie Kean. Alex should really invite her to Skeptiko. it's her book that made theoretical physicist Michio Kaku and astronomer Derrick Pitts reconsider their positions on UFOs.

Leslie Kean: UFO Caught On Tape Over Santiago Air Base

If it's true that seven different videos, taken by different people from different angles, are consistent across, then this is very powerful. Short of the possibility of coordinated, intentional fraud, this would be very intriguing to say the least.

What's funny, though, is the comment of the astronomer that the object flew in the same angle as human-made spacecraft re-enter the atmosphere. The object was at low altitude and already in the atmosphere, so that's utterly irrelevant. Moreover, the object made no sonic boom, which means it's immune to normal fluid dynamics and re-entry angles are, again, irrelevant. It goes to show how many people seem to be (perhaps unconsciously) willing to see patterns that reinforce the (perhaps unconscious) desired conclusion.

[Lizzie S]

Originally Posted by c4chaos

for those following UFO news, here's the latest from Leslie Kean. Alex should really invite her to Skeptiko. it's her book that made theoretical physicist Michio Kaku and astronomer Derrick Pitts reconsider their positions on UFOs.

Leslie Kean: UFO Caught On Tape Over Santiago Air Base

Excellent find - I cannot believe they haven't raised this as a thread in the ATS forum; usually a place to leap at the latest UFO footage straight off.

Not that I personally need any more "proof" to believe because I have done for years. But it certainly makes me wonder what could possibly withstand the g-forces at that speed and manoeuverability, unless they are manned by some form of artificial intelligence?

[anonymous]

Originally Posted by Lizzie S

Excellent find - I cannot believe they haven't raised this as a thread in the ATS forum; usually a place to leap at the latest UFO footage straight off.

Not that I personally need any more "proof" to believe because I have done for years. But it certainly makes me wonder what could possibly withstand the g-forces at that speed and manoeuverability, unless they are manned by some form of artificial intelligence?

The anti gravity drive that propels the craft provides a gravitational field within/around the craft that protects the craft and its occupants from g-forces.

[Bernardo]

Originally Posted by anonymous

The anti gravity drive that propels the craft provides a gravitational field within/around the craft that protects the craft and its occupants from g-forces.

How do you know all this?

[davidsmith73]

My first impression was a bird or insect relatively near the camera. There are supposedly 6 other videos of this thing so the bird/bug theory could be ruled out with this additional footage. Why hasn't the additional footage been released? Or at least, why doesn't the report mention the reasons why birds/bugs were ruled out? Don't journalists realise that loads of people are going to think this is just a bird or bug? Very frustrating report.

[anonymous]

Originally Posted by Bernardo

How do you know all this?

http://exopolitics.blogspot.com/2011...ays-draft.html

Engineer Bill Uhouse

A pretty clear cut case of Greys accelerating our secret aerospace programs is that of Bill Uhouse. Bill is now dead but there are video interviews and transcripts that tell his story of working with a Grey on flying disk simulators to train pilots to fly the donated and reverse engineered disks in the government’s possession. His testimony is very compelling and puts another critical node on the timeline to today’s Secret Space Program. I am very impressed by how consistent the testimony of so many whistleblowers is with the historical timeline to today’s Secret Space Program. Bill Uhouse released this statement to Steven Greer’s Disclosure Project that summaries his very detailed story of Grey – Earth human cooperation in the field of aerospace.

...


“I don’t think any flying disc simulators went into operation until the early 1960s – around 1962 or 1963. The reason why I am saying this is because the simulator wasn’t actually functional until around 1958. The simulator that they used was for the extraterrestrial craft they had, which is a 30-meter one that crashed in Kingman, Arizona, back in 1953 or 1952. That’s the first one that they took out to the test flight.”

...

The disc simulator didn’t have a reactor, [but] we had a space in it that looked like the reactor that wasn’t the device we operated the simulator with. We operated it with six large capacitors that were charged with a million volts each, so there were six million volts in those capacitors. They were the largest capacitors ever built. These particular capacitors, they’d last for 30 minutes, so you could get in there and actually work the controls and do what you had to – to get the simulator, the disc to operate.”

“So, it wasn’t that simple, because we only had 30 minutes. Okay? But, in the simulator you’ll notice that there are no seat belts. Right? It was the same thing with the actual craft – no seat belts. You don’t need seat belts, because when you fly one of these things upside down, there is no upside down like in a regular aircraft – you just don’t feel it. There’s a simple explanation for that: you have your own gravitational field right inside the craft, so if you are flying upside down – to you – you are right side up. I mean, it’s just really simple, if people would look at it. I was inside the actual alien craft for a start-up.”

...

“The design is so exacting, that you can’t add anything – it’s got to be just right. There’s a big problem in the design of where things are put. Say, where the center of the aircraft is, and that type of thing. Even the fact that we raised it three feet so the taller guys could get in – the actual ship was extended back to its original configuration, but it has to be raised.”

[OC68]

Thanks for the heads up but I'm not that impressed.

[anonymous]

Originally Posted by Bernardo

How do you know all this?

The book excerpted below explains a lot about observed UFO flight characteristics. It was written by a NASA scientist. The blurb below says he built a flying platform, - that simulator used conventional technology not anti gravity technology but it was used to study the characteristics of a craft propelled by thrust from below.

UFO's often showed flight characteristics like tilting to turn and a falling leaf side to side descent and these were confirmed by his experiments. How could witnesses who were hoaxing or hallucinating invent strange maneuvers that only made sense to a NASA scientist?

The book also explains why there are no sonic booms made by UFO's.

Below are excerpts describing the author and also from chapter XV "High-Acceleration Loading on Occupants".

In a conventional vehicle like a car, the seat pushes on your body and that propels you forward. I think what the author here is saying is that the UFO does not propel the occupants the way a car propels passengers, but with a UFO the same force that accelerates the craft also accelerates the occupants so they don't feel g-forces. When you are in free fall you don't feel gravity even though you are accelerating. If a force acts on every point of your body at the same time there is no compression, tension, skew, or torque applied to your body.

I scanned the chapter and ran it through ocr so there are probably some typeos...

PAUL R. HILL

UNCONVENTIONAL
FLYING
OBJECTS

a
scienticic
analysis

HAMPTON Roads
PUBLISHING Company Inc

“Paul Hill has done a masterful job ferreting out the
basic science and technology behind the elusive UFO
characteristics and demonstrating they are just advanced
and exotic extensions of our own technologies. Perhaps
this book will help bring solid consideration for making
all that is known about extraterrestrial craft publicly
available.”

—Edgar Mitchell, Sc.D.,
Apollo 14 Astronaut

Paul Hill was a well-respected NASA scientist when, in
the early l950s, he had a UFO sighting. Soon after, he built the
first flying platform and was able to duplicate the UFO’s tilt-to-
control maneuvers. Official policy, however, prevented him from
proclaiming his findings. “I was destined,” says Hill, “to remain as
unidentified as the flying objects.”

For the next twenty-five years, Hill acted as an unofficial
clearing house at NASA, collecting and analyzing sightings’
reports for physical properties, propulsion possibilities, dynamics,
etc. To refute claims that UFOs defy the laws of physics, he had to
make “technological sense. ..of the unconventional object.”

After his retirement from NASA, Hill finally completed
his remarkable analysis. In Unconventional Flying Objects,
published posthumously, he presents his findings that UFOs
“obey, not defy, the laws of physics.” Vindicating his own sighting
and thousands of others, he proves that UFO technology is not
only explainable, but attainable.

...

Section XV
High-Acceleration Loading
On Occupants

A. The Problem

It is often claimed, usually by doubters, that UFO
occupants would never be able to stand the crushing
accelerations they are subjected to by the UFO maneu-
vers.

...

At this point it must be made perfectly clear that,
while UFO fields have been called force fields because
of their effect on mass, UFO fields are actually acceler-
ation fields. This is directly analogous to gravity fields
which cause weight because they are acceleration fields.
To be specific, the inverse-square force field term K/r2
is force per unit mass, which must have units of accel-
eration.

—219—
B. The Superposition of Fields

Acceleration field strengths, like all other field
strengths, can be added algebraically (added or sub-
tracted), or, better stated, they can be added vectorially.
This is called the principle of superposition. This princi-
ple, together with the equivalence (interchangeability) of
acceleration and gravitation, is one of the foundations of
general relativity. What we do is perfectly analogous; we
note the equivalence of vehicle acceleration and force
field acceleration and that they can be added vectorially.
What it means, practically, is that if the occupants of an
accelerating vehicle can be properly located relative to a
UFO acceleration field (force field), the effect of UFO-
maneuver acceleration on the occupants can be neutral-
ized. Since we have emphasized the use of repulsive
force fields, this can be taken to mean that the field
centers would be behind the occupant in a UFO with
forward acceleration, although in principle there would
be nothing wrong with a negative field centered ahead
of the occupant. The repulsive field used to neutralize
the effect of vehicle acceleration on the passenger can
also be a leakage component of the propulsive field.
From a practical standpoint, it may be desirable to
adjust the neutralizing field to neutralize most, but not
all, of the vehicle acceleration. Then the operators would
know by the feel approximately what was going on
when not looking at the accelerometers or speedometer.
If the vehicle accelerates in a straight line, the vehicle
acceleration is spacewise constant. Since the neutralizing
fields have an acceleration which is a space variable
there may be some feel to the acceleration in any case.

C. An Example: The Dirigible-Shaped UFO

To crystalize ideas, consider the following hypothetical
schematic of a dirigible-shaped spacecraft:




— 220 —
Assume this vehicle is accelerating at 100 g, and that
most of the propulsive field generated is directed as
shown to provide propulsion. Let the remainder leak
forward toward the cockpit seating area as a 3-dimen-
sional diverging field. Because of the inverse-square field
strength, the seating can be located at a distance from
the field generators where the forward acceleration of the
leakage field is 100 g or 99 g. This cancels the 100 g
“field” of the vehicle acceleration, or leaves one percent
for “feel.” At other vehicle accelerations, the field leakage
is a constant percent. Then at a 10 g vehicle acceleration,
for example, the seating area will receive a 10 g or 9.9
g forward acceleration, canceling all or most of the ve-
hicle 10 g. Therefore, the same seating location is suitable
for any vehicle acceleration. The seated occupants feel
the acceleration only to the extent that they choose; to
feel more or less of the vehicle g they have only to
adjust their seats in a fore and aft direction.

....

A key point in this discussion is that when the vehi-
cle tilts to maneuver, except for the relatively minute
accelerations due to the insignificant aerodynamic forces,
the only acceleration the vehicle occupants can feel is
directed parallel to the axis of symmetry. They never feel
a component of earth gravity directed perpendicular to
the axis of symmetry, no matter how much the vehicle
is tilted. It follows that directing the short-range acceler-
ation-neutralizing field in the direction of the vehicle axis
of symmetry does a nearly perfect job. This amounts to
a great simplification as the counter-field equipment can
be fixed in orientation relative to the vehicle. Thus the
field needed to neutralize the vehicle acceleration during
a steep bank-to-turn or during a horizontal linear accel-
eration is the same as that required to make a high-g
vertical takeoff.

...


The reason that

— 223 —
earth g is not felt on board is, again, that the principle
of superposition of fields is in effect. Except for the
thrust or external forces, if any, the vehicle is properly
considered to be in a state of free-fall with the falling
acceleration canceling out the earth gravity field.
The total result is that the theory of acceleration neu-
tralization is both simple and accurate, even for those
unconventional vehicles whose maneuvers are the most
varied.

[Paul C. Anagnostopoulos]

Sigh.

~~ Paul