• Quick note - the problem with Youtube videos not embedding on the forum appears to have been fixed, thanks to ZiprHead. If you do still see problems let me know.

Happy 70th UFO Anniversary!

Exactly this.

All of SkyEagle's alleged "evidence' is apocryphal, all of it. Its consists entirely of hearsay and third hand accounts.


Let's just say that it is reality. Now, once again, the challenge is for you to refute my claim with facts. I have said the data is evidence of ET visitation and I have provided details. So go ahead, prove me wrong.

Simply saying that you don't believe it doesn't cut it!

.
 
Last edited:
Ron not only confirmed that his DSP satellites have been tracking UFOs in space, but he went so far as to described the shape of one of those UFOs, which told me that another surveillance asset other than a DSP was used to identity the object.

Yes, he's a UFO believer. We know that. You telling us about what he told you still doesn't count as valid evidence.

US government was not telling the pubic the truth

Nothing gets past ol' Eagle-eyes, does it? Mr. "I've never misidentified anything in my life". Can't believe you quoted the typo with a straight face. What were John Jones and others saying about credibility?
 
I say the evidence of an ET vehicle is clearly depicted in that data.

How do you determine that ETs are behind the vehicle, or even that there was a vehicle? ETs are not proven to exist, and there must be loads of other explanations to be explored before we should resort to ETs and technology that is against the laws of nature.

I also wonder why you constantly refer to "the
Airforce". I am sure that the Airforce is not a monolithic entity, and there are as many people there as everywhere else that would be quick to abandon reason and posit supernatural technologies and ET whenever there is something they do not understand.
 
I also wonder why you constantly refer to "the
Airforce". I am sure that the Airforce is not a monolithic entity, and there are as many people there as everywhere else that would be quick to abandon reason and posit supernatural technologies and ET whenever there is something they do not understand.

It isn't.

Having spent 20 years of my life in our Air Force, and having spent a reasonable portion of that time stationed with US Forces in various parts of the world (US Navy with VXE6 - Antarctic Devron Six, Moffat NAS, 48th TFW at Lakenheath, England and as I mentioned earier, Travis AFB) I can offer this....

While I didn't spend a lot of time with these units, I was there long enough to know that any pilot who keeps seeing and reporting UFOs would be considered a security risk and would be stood down from flying duties. The enlisted guys would be a little more harsh. They would consider such a pilot a nutter.
 
While I didn't spend a lot of time with these units, I was there long enough to know that any pilot who keeps seeing and reporting UFOs would be considered a security risk and would be stood down from flying duties. The enlisted guys would be a little more harsh. They would consider such a pilot a nutter.
I am sure you are right.

What about the guys who write the papers that SkyEagle attributes to "the Airforce"? We can be sure that they have weighted every possible explanation within the limits of nature before they settle on the magic of extraterrestrial technology?

I wonder how they can conclude that something can be from interplanetary spaceships when we have never investigated any. I wonder if they could not have fallen prey to reading too much science fiction?

To me, the idea that every government on Earth can collude on keeping all of this under wraps, is ludicrous. We know that countries can hardly agree on anything else, and at least in democracies, governments can change policies radically, and yet we are to believe that no new government has ever decided to expose what their predecessors tried to hide?
 
Last edited:
Now, once again, the challenge is for you to refute my claim with facts..

No, the one making the claim has the burden of proof. That's you. You've already stated that there are confirmed alien spaceships, you've just never shown that you were being truthful about it. You may now show those confirmed alien spaceships.

That's the actual challenge.
 
If the world's governments have somehow colluded to keep alien encounters secret for 70 years, why are they planning to release this knowledge in the future?

On the other hand, it's hardly a secret since every fragment of 'evidence', real or fake, is eagerly trumpeted from the rooftops by convinced UFO fans. So why would the world's governments bother to keep back the really juicy stuff that we're invited to imagine they possess?

Furthermore, how come all the juicy bits of evidence somehow fall into the concealing hands of this conspiracy of all world governments in the first place?

It's beyond ludicrous.
 
If the world's governments have somehow colluded to keep alien encounters secret for 70 years, why are they planning to release this knowledge in the future?

On the other hand, it's hardly a secret since every fragment of 'evidence', real or fake, is eagerly trumpeted from the rooftops by convinced UFO fans. So why would the world's governments bother to keep back the really juicy stuff that we're invited to imagine they possess?

Furthermore, how come all the juicy bits of evidence somehow fall into the concealing hands of this conspiracy of all world governments in the first place?

It's beyond ludicrous.

Cue "Let's just say..." in 5...4...3...2...
 
skyeagle, you are going to continue to have trouble here. You will be used to posting on crank forums where what you say will be blindly accepted as truth, without question. This is not how things work on skeptical forums such as this one

You wont get your claims accepted without substantiating them

You wont get away with trying to shift the burden of proof away from yourself; the regulars here are wise to that old CT trick.

Your evidence has been, and continues to be worthless without documentary provenance (a shapeless blob in a scan of a photocopy of a document of unsubstantiated origin is not evidence)


ETA: BTW, you still have not answered my question about what hangs on wall of the foyer (the right hand side as you enter) in the O Club at Travis AFB (you won't be able to Google it)

I guess than means you were never an officer at Travis, so your claim of being a pilot there is looking very shaky at this time.
 
Last edited:
Yes, he's a UFO believer. We know that. You telling us about what he told you still doesn't count as valid evidence.


You must understand that no matter what you think, it will not change reality.


Nothing gets past ol' Eagle-eyes, does it? Mr. "I've never misidentified anything in my life". Can't believe you quoted the typo with a straight face. What were John Jones and others saying about credibility?


Let me make it much clearer. I have never misidentified celestial bodies, weather balloons, aircraft lights or clouds as flying saucers while flying.
 
It isn't.

Having spent 20 years of my life in our Air Force, and having spent a reasonable portion of that time stationed with US Forces in various parts of the world (US Navy with VXE6 - Antarctic Devron Six, Moffat NAS, 48th TFW at Lakenheath, England and as I mentioned earier, Travis AFB) I can offer this....

While I didn't spend a lot of time with these units, I was there long enough to know that any pilot who keeps seeing and reporting UFOs would be considered a security risk and would be stood down from flying duties. The enlisted guys would be a little more harsh. They would consider such a pilot a nutter.


I've noticed that you mentioned Travis AFB. Well, that is in my part of town and where I spent the rest of my Air Force career as an ART. Did you know that Travis AFB has had its share of UFO sightings that had nothing to do with aircraft?

In the C-17 photo, I am one of the guys standing in the background.

Investigation of UFO over Travis Air Force Base among unidentified

Among the cases listed as unidentified in Project Blue Book, there are many that left investigators baffled, and this is one of them. Originally investigated by Project Sign, which eventually turned into Project Blue Book, this sighting took place on December 3, 1948 at Fairfield-Suisun Air Force Base in California, now named Travis Air Force Base.

At approximately 8:15 p.m., the base control tower was manned by two airmen, a sergeant and a private first class. The private noticed an object about 2 miles north of the control tower. It was flying at an estimated 500 to 1000 feet and climbing slowly. It was moving fast. He estimated it to be 400 miles per hour. The private rushed to the side of the tower closest to the object. The object then slowed to about half its previous speed. The private estimated at this point it was at an altitude of about 1500 feet. He says the object also began to slightly undulate in a “bouncing” motion.

The object then suddenly began to climb nearly straight up until it reached an estimated 3000 feet and leveled off. By now the sergeant was also watching the object. He asked the private to call the Airborne Air Control Operations Officer while he continued to observe the object.

The sergeant says soon after the private went to make the call, the object shot up quickly to the south-southeast until it reached about 20,000 feet. He then lost sight of it.

http://www.openminds.tv/investigation-ufo-travis-air-force-base-among-unidentified/31796


I also noticed that you mentioned Lakenheath, England, so let's take a look here.

Lakenheath and Bentwaters RAF/USAF Radar/Visual Case, 1956

Brief summary: Observations of unidentified objects by USAF and RAF personnel, extending over 5 hours, and involving ground-radar, airborne-radar, ground visual and airborne-visual sightings of high-speed unconventionally maneuvering obJects in the vicinity of two RAF stations at night. It is Case 2 in the Condon Report and is there conceded to be unexplained.

First radar sighting, 2130Z. Bentwaters GCA operator, A/2c ______ (I shall use a blank to indicate the names razor-bladed out of my copies of the case-file prior to release of the file items to me), reported picking up a target 25-30 miles ESE, which moved at very high speed on constant 295 degrees heading across his scope until he lost it 15-20 miles to the NW of Bentwaters. In the Bluebook file, A/2c _____ is reported as describing it as a strong radar echo, comparable to that of a typical aircraft, until it weakened near the end of its path across his scope. He is quoted as estimating a speed of the order of 4000 mph, but two other cited quantities suggest even higher speeds. A transit time of 30 seconds is given, and if one combines that with the reported range of distance traversed, 40-50 miles, a speed of about 5000- 6000 mph results. Finally, A/2c _____ stated that it covered about 5-6 miles per sweep of the AN/MPN-llA GCA radar he was using. The sweep-period for that set is given as 2 seconds (30 rpm), so this yields an even higher speed- estimate of about 9000 mph. (Internal discrepancies of this sort are quite typical of Bluebook case-files, I regret to say. My study of many such files during the past three years leaves me no conclusion but that Bluebook work has never represented high-caliber scientific work, but rather has operated as a perfunctory bookkeeping and filing operation during most of its life. Of the three speed figures just mentioned, the latter derives from the type of observation most likely to be reasonably accurate, in my opinion. The displacement of a series of successive radar blips on a surveillance radar such as the MPN-11A, can be estimated to perhaps a mile or so with little difficulty, when the operator has as large a number of successive blips to work with as is here involved. Nevertheless, it is necessary to regard the speed as quite uncertain here, though presumably in the range of several thousand miles per hour and hence not associable with any conventional aircraft, nor with still higher-speed meteors either.)
Second radar sighting, 2130-2155Z. A few minutes after the preceding event, T/Sgt _____ picked up on the same MPN-11A a group of 12-15 objects about 8 miles SW of Brentwaters. In the report to Bluebook, he pointed out that "these objects appeared as normal targets on the GCA scope and that normal checks made to determine possible malfunctions of the GCA radar failed to indicate anything was technically wrong." The dozen or so objects were moving together towards the NE at varying speeds, ranging between 80 and 125 mph, and "the 12 to 15 unidentified objects were preceded by 3 objects which were in a triangular formation with an estimated 1000 feet separating each object in this formation." The dozen objects to the rear "were scattered behind the lead formation of 3 at irregular intervals with the whole group simultaneously covering a 6 to 7 mile area," the official report notes.

Consistent radar returns came from this group during their 25-minute movement from the point at which they were first picked up, 8 mi. SW, to a point about 40 mi. NE of Bentwaters, their echoes decreasing in intensity as they moved off to the NE. When the group reached a point some 40 mi. NE, they all appeared to converge to form a single radar echo whose intensity is described as several times larger than a B-36 return under comparable conditions. Then motion ceased, while this single strong echo remained stationary for 10-15 minutes. Then it resumed motion to the NE for 5-6 miles, stopped again for 3-5 minutes, and finally moved northward and off the scope.

Third radar sighting, 2200Z. Five minutes after the foregoing formation moved off-scope, T/Sgt _____ detected an unidentified target about 30 mi. E of the Bentwaters GCA station, and tracked it in rapid westward motion to a point about 25 mi. W of the station, where the object "suddenly disappeared off the radar screen by rapidly moving out of the GCS radiation pattern," according to his interpretation of the event. Here, again, we get discordant speed information, for T/Sgt _____ gave the speed only as being "in excess of 4000 mph," whereas the time-duration of the tracking, given as 16 sec, implies a speed of 12,000 mph, for the roughly 55 mi. track-length reported. Nothing in the Bluebook files indicates that this discrepancy was investigated further or even noticed, so one can say only that the apparent speed lay far above that of conventional aircraft.

http://www.ufoevidence.org/documents/doc632.htm


The UFOs would eventually return in 1980.


Rendlesham Forest UFO sighting 'new evidence' claim

New evidence has been gathered to back up claims a UFO landed near a US airbase in Suffolk, a former deputy commander has claimed.

Col Charles Halt told the BBC he saw unidentified objects at Rendlesham Forest in December 1980.

He says he now has statements from radar operators at RAF Bentwaters and nearby Wattisham airfield that an unknown object was tracked at the time.

http://www.bbc.com/news/uk-england-suffolk-33447592
 
skyeagle, you are going to continue to have trouble here. You will be used to posting on crank forums where what you say will be blindly accepted as truth, without question. This is not how things work on skeptical forums such as this one

You wont get your claims accepted without substantiating them

You wont get away with trying to shift the burden of proof away from yourself; the regulars here are wise to that old CT trick.

Your evidence has been, and continues to be worthless without documentary provenance (a shapeless blob in a scan of a photocopy of a document of unsubstantiated origin is not evidence)


ETA: BTW, you still have not answered my question about what hangs on wall of the foyer (the right hand side as you enter) in the O Club at Travis AFB (you won't be able to Google it)

I guess than means you were never an officer at Travis, so your claim of being a pilot there is looking very shaky at this time.


Is that suppose to change reality! Think again. I can remember a picture of General Robert Travis and as you continue to walk through, there are offices to the right where I would take deposit checks to hold space at the club for my chapter's Fall Balls.

If you turn and go to left before entering the "O" side of the building from the south, you will enter one of two entrance ways to the west where you will see a tall wooden display cabinet on one side of the entrance way of the building and another office on the other side divided by a wall and I might add that there is a Travis Credit Union ATM machine on the west side of the central portion of the club and across from the men's rest room. The old Officer's club sits behind the new club, but the new club is shared by both officers and enlisted personnel.

May I suggest that you don't try to test me again because I can go to the club and take pictures inside and post them here for you if you still don't believe me. And once again, the challenge for you is to refute the data and documentation that I have provided and failing that, you have no case and it will be evident that no matter what you think, it won't change reality nor the validity of data and other evidence I have posted.
 
Last edited:
I am sure you are right.

What about the guys who write the papers that SkyEagle attributes to "the Airforce"? We can be sure that they have weighted every possible explanation within the limits of nature before they settle on the magic of extraterrestrial technology?

I wonder how they can conclude that something can be from interplanetary spaceships when we have never investigated any. I wonder if they could not have fallen prey to reading too much science fiction?

To me, the idea that every government on Earth can collude on keeping all of this under wraps, is ludicrous. We know that countries can hardly agree on anything else, and at least in democracies, governments can change policies radically, and yet we are to believe that no new government has ever decided to expose what their predecessors tried to hide?


Actually, governments around the world are now releasing their own UFO files in addition to the United States.


Chilean navy declassifies inexplicable UFO footage after 2yr investigation

Photo of the Object

https://img.rt.com/files/2017.01/original/586f9ca1c461888a7c8b462e.jpg
 
skyeagle, you are going to continue to have trouble here.


I can take that to mean that you cannot measure up to my challenge to refute my data, documentation and other evidence as provide, but I am not surprised at all. Perhaps, if I demand that you accept my challenge to refute what I have posted, that might get you started. I made the claim that ET visitation is a reality and you cannot even accept my challenge to prove me wrong. Data and other undeniable evidence pretty much says it all.
 
Last edited:
You must understand that no matter what you think, it will not change reality.





Let me make it much clearer. I have never misidentified celestial bodies, weather balloons, aircraft lights or clouds as flying saucers while flying.

If you put those two statements together, it's quite telling.

You have posted no credible evidence at all. You have yet to cite a source for the NYT quote. You continue to post about radar contacts that the FAA and the Belgians have disowned.
All you have left is anecdote, and your dogged insistence that you are the only pilot in the world who has never misidentified anything.
You must understand that no matter what you think, it will not change reality.
 
How many flying saucers have you identified while flying?


None. The object I saw from the ground had passed over my base in 1968 when I was stationed in Vietnam. The object headed west and disappeared behind a hill. It was never reported in the press.

After my assignment in Vietnam, I was assigned to Hill AFB, UT, which was involved in investigations where UFOs shutdown Minuteman missiles.

Lt. Col. Lewis D. Chase wrote a letter regarding one of the incidents.

DEPARTMENT OF THE AIR FORCE
HEADQUARTERS 341ST COMBAT SUPPORT GROUP (SAC)
MALMSTROM AIR FORCE BASE, MT 590402

REPLY TO
ATTN OF: BO 3 July 1967



SUBJECT: UFO Observations, Malmstrom AFB Area


to: Colonel James C. Manatt (lettered TDET/UFO)
HQ Foreign Technology Division (AFSC)
Wright-Patterson AFB, Ohio 45433

1. Reference TDET/UFO letter dated 30 June 1967 on above subject.

2. This office has no knowledge of equipment malfunctions and abnormalities in equipment during the period of reported UFO sightings. No validity can be established to the statement that a classified government experiment was in progress or that military and civilian personnel were requested not to discuss what they had seen.

3. A written report on the events that transpired during the alleged UFO reported landing on 24 March 1967, fully documents all findings by the investigating officer. A copy of this report was forwarded to your office on 3 April 1967.

4. If we can be of further assistance to you, please do not hesitate to write.

FOR THE COMMANDER

LEWIS D. CHASE, Lt Colonel, USAF
Chief, Operations Division


I might add that Lt. Col Lewis D. Chase was also involved in an incident where his RB-47jet bomber was chased by a UFO over multiple states. The ELINT systems aboard his aircraft tracked the UFO, which was also tracked by ground-based radar.



To show how the Air Force attempted to cover-up the incident, it said that the UFO that chased the jet bomber at cruise altitude over multiple states was an American Airlines, DC-6, which a propeller-driven aircraft and was nowhere near the bomber during the incident.
 
Last edited:
Other countries, in conjunction with the United States, have begun to release their own declassified UFO files, but my prediction is, official disclosure is still years away and that disclosure will be made at the United Nations, not the White House.

The US government, like other governments, are still worried about the consequences of official disclosure because once Pandora's box is opened, there can be no turning back the clock. I mean, like they cannot say that it was all a joke. Another way of putting it is that when disclosure is made, the world will never be the same again. I might add that there are hundreds of military and government workers, who are willing to testify to the reality of ET visitation before Congress, but they need the green light and I will be one of them.
Are you unaware of the number of failed states over the last 70 years, of total collapse of civil service and government? Yet no disclosures such as you claim governments know about. You do not seem to have, like many conspiracy theorists, an understanding of the scale of your claimed conspiracy and the supernatural powers that would be required to maintain it for the decades you claim it has been in existence.
 

Back
Top Bottom