Moderators: Elvis, DrVolin, Jeff
by justdrew » Wed Nov 21, 2012 3:57 am
Fred Astaire wrote:Dr. Greer, and Dr. John Mack, got a lot of funding from Laurance Rockefeller. What does that tell you?
by Luther Blissett » Wed Nov 21, 2012 11:58 am
justdrew wrote:Fred Astaire wrote:Dr. Greer, and Dr. John Mack, got a lot of funding from Laurance Rockefeller. What does that tell you?
not really sure why Laurance Rockefeller should be a bogyman. What's the problem? Yeah, he was rich, well educated and in positions of power, but I don't see what he did with it that was particularly bad. I'm no expert on the guy though.
by slimmouse » Wed Nov 21, 2012 6:03 pm
by Wombaticus Rex » Sun Nov 25, 2012 1:48 pm
Wombaticus Rex wrote:chump wrote:
Ed Zachary.
John Boyd made a name for himself off the core insight that the slowest part of any given aviation system is the human being in the pilot seat. His solution, operating from a 1950's brainpan with a broader horizon than most, was to analyze the cognition behind combat. A cleaner solution, from our modern Automata Era, is to remove the pilot altogether - take the exquisite, nearly pilotless feedback loops of the F-35 control system and just use the computers.
The speeds indicate an object that literally cannot crash. The location indicates that this technology has been iterated and crash tested enough for brass to sign off on routine demonstrations over densely urban areas.
After all, "too fast" for a human pilot means that the visual/spatial picture is updating faster than the human processor can handle. It's worth considering that, not only could a system of networked microprocessors handle a vastly higher "frame rate" than even the most modafinil-ized human, but it could also take really nice, clean, high-resolution photos the whole time.'City-Sized' Surveillance
Predator-class drones are today's spy tools of choice; the military and CIA have hundreds of them keeping watch over Pakistan, Libya, Yemen, Mexico, and elsewhere. But the Predators and the larger Reapers are imperfect eyes in the sky. They rely on cameras that offer, as the military cliche goes, a "soda straw" view of the battlefield -- maybe a square kilometer, depending on how high the drone flies.
Tomorrow's sensors, on the other hand, will be able to monitor an area 10 times larger with twice the resolution. The Autonomous Real-time Ground Ubiquitous Surveillance Imaging System ("Argus, for short) is a collection of 92 five-megapixel cameras. In a single day, it collects six petabytes of video — the equivalent of 79.8 years' worth of HD video.
Argus and other "Wide Area Airborne Surveillance" systems have their limitations. Right now, the military doesn't have the bandwidth to pull all that video off a drone in real time. Nor it does it have the analysts to watch all the footage; they're barely keeping up with the soda straws. Plus, the camera bundles have had some problems sharing data with some of the military's other spy systems.
But interest in the Wide Area Airborne Surveillance systems is growing -- and not just among those looking to spy overseas. The Department of Homeland Security recently put out a call for a camera array that could keep tabs on 10 square kilometers at once, and tested out another WAAS sensor along the border. Meanwhile, Sierra Nevada Corporation, a well-traveled intelligence contractor, is marketing its so-called "Vigilant Stare" sensor (.pdf), which it says will watch "city-sized fields of regard" for domestic "counter-narcotics" and "civil unrest" missions. Keep your eyes peeled.
— Noah Shachtman
The disconnect, it should be noted, between the high-tech toys of SOF teams vs. the Russian-style crap that your average GI spends their career dealing with....worlds apart. Field commanders are still trying to get into basic intel loops and still being told that troops are just not a priority for this Modern Army.
Of course, another way to deal with the problem of crashing into the ground at thousands of miles per hour would be some Hessdalen / plasma style transient matter that barely exists in any conventional sense to begin with...
elfismiles wrote:I'm all for discussion of possible alternative theories for ufos, tulpas and projections of the collective unconcious, dimensional beings etc.
However, when I look at those videos being discussed they remind me of the insects video'd and called "rods" which took the ufo / para world by storm several years ago.
Am I certain of that? No. So HCE and all, I don't consider my reaction "dismissive". I'm just offerring my perspective on how I see the video.
Certainly, it could also be some new drone tech but I also don't buy that personally as we've been following the drone tech pretty closely and it doesn't seem to be within the realm of what we know.
Ok, so perhaps it is some new super hi-tech version. Cool! Let's keep investigating.
My comments on this video aren't meant to detract from the personal sightings of 82_28 or chump etal. In their cases they claim to have seen something with their naked eyes whereas in the case of the video footage in question they say the whatsits were not visible to the nake eye - only discerned on the camera footage after the fact.
by streeb » Sun Nov 25, 2012 3:19 pm
It is both intriguing and puzzling that the two scientists disagreed about the most crucial question in this case: Did the same unidentified aerial phenomenon, or UAP, appear on two separate cameras? If the exact same UAP was filmed by the two cameras 20 to 30 feet apart simultaneously, then we would know the object was large, distant and not a bug. Haines concluded that the two cameras captured the same UAP in one sequence, while Maccabee concluded they did not.
by elfismiles » Mon Nov 26, 2012 7:46 pm
by elfismiles » Tue Nov 27, 2012 10:28 am
by elfismiles » Wed Nov 28, 2012 4:17 pm
by elfismiles » Thu Nov 29, 2012 4:24 pm
by The Consul » Thu Nov 29, 2012 5:10 pm
by elfismiles » Fri Nov 30, 2012 12:34 pm
The Consul wrote:elfismiles wrote:From wacko John Hutchison's youtube channel ... no idea if he shot this or just uploaded it. No way of determining size so I'll go with drone.
It's an X-47B derivative- wings in, though it's trim seems a bit heavy.
by Six Hits of Sunshine » Mon Dec 03, 2012 2:57 pm
An unsettling first-person talk on UFO contact
This is an audio recording of a presentation by a man using the pen-name John Clark. I read the book and it is extremely strange and unsettling.
You can hear the shaky quality to his voice during this presentation. He seems fragile and uneasy. In the middle of this talk he sort of awkwardly says: "... and then I tried to end it all, and I found myself in a hospital." This dramatic remark says a lot about the intensity of his set of experiences.
I met John at the UFO conference where he made this unnerving presentation in 2008. My heart went out to the guy, he seemed deeply troubled by what had intersected with his life...
The book is out of print and there is almost zero on-line reference to his book or his experiences.
by Crow » Mon Dec 03, 2012 9:24 pm
by Crow » Mon Dec 03, 2012 9:25 pm
by Wombaticus Rex » Thu Dec 13, 2012 11:31 am
In 2011, two Chinese nationals were convicted in federal court on charges of conspiring to violate the Arms Control Export Act after attempting to buy thousands of radiation-hardened microchips and sell them to China. The day the pair were sentenced to two years in prison for the plot, the U.S. Attorney for the Eastern District of Virginia, Neil MacBride, called it an example of how “the line between traditional espionage, export violations and economic espionage has become increasingly blurred.”
It’s also an example of the increasing number of military and space technology espionage cases being uncovered in the U.S. each year, according to a new report from the Defense Security Service, which acts as the Pentagon’s industrial security oversight agency. According to the report, first noted by InsideDefense.com, industrial espionage has grown “more persistent, pervasive and insidious” (.pdf) and that “regions with active or maturing space programs” are some of the most persistent “collectors” of sensitive radiation-hardened, or “rad-hard” microchips, an important component for satellites. And now with North Korea having successfully launched its first satellite, it’s worth taking a close look.
Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 7 guests
