Saturday, May 8, 2021

Some things I learnt, by reading the 30 April 2021 article in the "New Yorker."

The article

A lengthy piece by journalist Gideon Lewis-Kraus appeared in the 30 April 2021 digital version, and then on 10 May 2021, in the print version; of the "New Yorker"  which is a weekly magazine. As there has been a large volume of UAP related material generated of late, at the time the article appeared I quickly read it, and then filed it for later examination. The time has come for that review, in which I will draw out information that was new to me.

The article provides both a general overview of  a selected history of the phenomenon; and biographical pieces about a number of the key players in this topic. Featured in more detail, are the biographies, and views, of journalist Leslie Kean; 'debunker' Mike West; and Las Vegas businessman Robert Bigelow. 

Information new to me

So, what new information did the article provide to me?

1. I was not aware of many of the details about Leslie Kean's background, and the origin of her interest in the phenomenon. I was unaware, for example, that in June 2011 John Podesta, President Clinton's former Chief of Staff:

"...invited Kean to make a confidential presentation at a think tank founded by Podesta, namely the Center for American Progress." The audience is said to have included"...officials from NASA, the Pentagon, and the Department of Transportation, along with congressional staff and retired intelligence officials..."
Leslie Kean

 2. I had not heard of many biographical details of 'debunker' Mike West, which led him to examine UAP. I was particularly struck by the line, according to Lewis-Kraus' opinion of course, that:

"He seemed unable to envisage that someone might find solace in the decentering prospect that we are not alone in the universe, we ultimately know little about."

3. Bigelow Aerospace Advanced Space Studies (BAASS), as part of the Defense Intelligence Agency's Advanced Aerospace Weapon System Applications program (AAWSAP) contract, produced a 494 page "Ten month report." I hadn't heard before, that:

"As one former government official told me, "The report arrived here and I read the whole thing and immediately considered that releasing it would be a disaster." 

Readers will note that German based, U.S. citizen, researcher Tim McMillan reported being shown a copy of the whole document, and being given a limited time to make notes on its contents. A few other people have come forward claiming, that they too have seen this document. It has puzzled researchers that this document has not yet been publicly released. I note that several Freedom of Information Act requests to the Defense Intelligence Agency asking for a copy of this document, have not yet been responded to, even though they were submitted in 2018.

4. I was aware of the 4 October 2017 meeting between Leslie Kean and Luis Elizondo, to discuss the Advanced Aerospace Threat Identification Program (AATIP.) However, I do not recall hearing that other attendees at this meeting included Hal Puthoff and Jim Semivan, who later were involved with the To The Stars Academy of Arts & Science (TTSA.)

5. On the 2017 revelation as to the existence of the AATIP, by Kean et al.  The "New Yorker" article included the lines:

"...but a former Pentagon official recently suggested that the story was more complicated: the program she disclosed was of little consequence compared with the one she set in motion. Widespread fascination with the idea that the government cared about U.F.Os had inspired the government at last to care about U.F.Os."

6. We were aware that by late 2017 the AATIP portfolio had been reassigned to a "...civilian intelligence official with a rank equivalent to that of a two star general.'" However, the article reveals that:

"He channeled the cascade of media interest to argue that, without a process to handle uncategorizable observations, rigid bureaucracies would overlook anything that didn't follow a standard pattern."

"What we needed" the former Pentagon official said, "Was something like the post 9-11 fusion centers, where a D.O.D. guy can talk to an F.B.I guy, and an N.R.O guy."

7. On the 2004 Nimitz observations: 

"The Nimitz encounter didn't become subject to official investigation until years after the incident, when an errant file landed on the desk of someone who decided that it merited pursuit." 

This supports previous information that, although data was removed at the time of the event by someone, that there was no high-up investigation at the time. 

8. Discussing Mick West's views on the objects noted by the USS Princeton and by USN pilots in November 2004:

"The former Pentagon official assured me that West "Doesn't have the whole story. There's data he will never see - there's much more that I could include in a classified environment."

9. Continuing on about Elizondo's AATIP successor: 

"Elizondo never got to Mattis, but his successor managed to get briefings in front of Mark Esper, the Secretary of Defense, as well as the director of National intelligence, the Senate Select Committee on Intelligence; the Senate Armed Forces Committee and several members of the Joint Chiefs of Staff." 

On 8 September 2020, at a Japanese Defense press conference, there was mention that the topic of UAP had been talked about between Japan and the United States, when Secretary Esper was in Guam. Thus the briefing alluded to above, must have occurred before 8 September 2020.

Former Director National Intelligence, John Ratcliffe, served in that position between May 2020 and 20 January 2021. In an interview between himself and Maria Bartiromo of FOX TV, on 19 March 2021 he stated in part:

"I actually wanted to get this information out and declassified before I left office."
John Ratcliffe

 10. On the July 2020 article by Blumenthal and Kean, which mentioned a "a series of unclassified slides" re "off-world" and "vehicle crash retrievals."

"The former Pentagon official told me that he found Kean's evidence wanting. "There are terms in Leslie's slides that we don't use - stuff we would never say," he said. "It doesn't pass the smell test."

Wednesday, May 5, 2021

U.S. Department of Defense - Inspector General announces UAP Project

Inspector General announcement

On 3 May 2021, the United States' Department of Defense Office of Inspector General, announced a new project. "Evaluation of the DoD's Actions Regarding the Unidentified Aerial Phenomena (Project No. D2021-DEVOSN-0116.000)." I image the two page announcement document below.



Role of the Inspector General

According to the DoD OIG's website:

"The Department of Defense Office of Inspector General was established in 1982. The mission of the DoD OIG, as established by the Inspector General Act of 1978, as amended (5 U.S.C. Appendix); and implemented by DoD Directive 5106.01. "Inspector General of the Department of Defense," is to serve as an  independent and objective office in DoD to:

Conduct, supervise, monitor and initiate audits, evaluations, and investigations relating to programs and operations of the Department of Defense.

Provide leadership and coordination and recommend policies for activities designed to promote economy, efficiency, and effectiveness in the administration of, and to prevent and detect fraud and abuse in such programs and operations.

Provide a means for keeping the Secretary of Defense and the Congress fully and currently informed about problems and deficiencies relating to the administration of such programs and operations and the necessity for and progress of corrective action."

This specific project

The two page memorandum is addressed to a wide range of recipients, namely:

Secretaries of the Military Departments

Chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff

Under Secretary of Defense for Research and Engineering

Under Secretary of Defense for Intelligence and Security

Commander U.S. Central Command

Commander U.S. Northern Command

Commander U.S. Special Operations Command

Director, Defense Advanced Research Projects Agency

Director Defense Intelligence Agency

Director, Defense Threat Reduction Agency

Director, Missile Defense Agency

Director, National Geospatial-Intelligence Agency

Director, National Reconnaissance Office

Director, National Security Agency/Central Security Service

Director, Defense Technology Security Administration

Auditor General, Department of Navy

Auditor General, The Department of the Navy

Auditor General, Department of the Air Force.

The initial paragraph of the memorandum reads:

"We plan to begin the subject evaluation in May 2021. The objective of this evaluation is to determine the extent to which the DoD has taken actions regarding Unidentified Aerial Phenomena (UAP). We may revise the objective as the evaluation proceeds, and we will consider suggestions from from management for additional or revised objectives.

It then goes on to request a point of contact for each of the addresses within five days. 

The memorandum is signed by Randolph R. Stone, Assistant Inspector General for Evaluations, Space, Intelligence, Engineering and Oversight."

 Products

When a review is complete the DoD OIG produces a report which is available on their website. Recent examples are to be found here and here. It also provides a semiannual report to the Congress. 

A question

An obvious question arises; which is why has the DoD OIG decided to conduct an evaluation "...to determine the extent to which the DoD has taken actions regarding Unidentified Aerial Phenomena..."? At the moment, only time will tell. 

Acknowledgement:

Thank you to Boston based, UFO historian and researcher, Barry Greenwood for pointing out the existence of this announcement. 

Tuesday, April 20, 2021

Weather details for the 15 July 2019 U.S.S. Russell 'drone' event

4 March 2019 UAP photographs

In a previous article, I located weather details for the date/time and location of the 4 March 2019 UAP photograph, taken by a weapon systems officer in a U.S. Navy aircraft. I utilized data available from the Upper Atmospheric Soundings database of the University of Wyoming. 

July 2019 "drone swarm"

Later that year, in July2019, several U.S. Navy Destroyers, reported a number of observations of what they referred to as "drones," off the West coast of the U.S.A. As part of a 23 March 2021 article on The Drive's War Zone blog, authors Adam Kehoe and Marc Cecotti, determined that one of the ships involved, the U.S.S. Russell (DDG-059) had reported numerous observations of "drones" on the evening of 15 July 2019. They secured a copy of the Russell's deck log for the period 14-16 July 2019 via a Freedom of Information Act request.

I wondered what the weather had been like at the location of the U.S.S. Russell on that night? Could obtaining the weather details led to any conclusions about the nature of the objects involved? Marc Cecotti kindly forwarded me a copy of the Russell's deck log. The observations stretched from 2115hrs local time to 2351hrs, with all but one seen between 2115 and 2237hrs. 


I was particularly interested that at 2140hrs the log recorded that a "drone" was sighted at a bearing of 321 degrees T, at a height of 700 feet and a range of 2 nautical miles. A trigonometrical calculation indicates this was a mere 3 degree elevation, above the horizon. 

So, what was the weather like at the location of the Russell, given in the log as 32 degrees 43 minutes latitude North, and longitude 119 degrees 35 minutes West, at 2140hrs 15 July 2019? Given that this is a location at sea off the coast of California, the nearest land based Upper Atmospheric readings station was at San Diego. I considered this to be too far away to be accurate. I therefore turned to the National Data Buoy Center.  This Center is part of the National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration's National Weather Service, and operates a large number of data collecting buoys at sea. 


The nearest weather buoy to the Russell that night was station number 46047, located at latitude 32 degrees 24 minutes North and longitude 119 degrees 30 minutes West, at Tanner Bank, 121 nautical miles West of San Diego. 

The data for 2140hrs on 15 July 2019 is available in the buoy's historical records.


In summary, the relevant weather details from the buoy are that the wind at the time was from 324 degrees (roughly North West); at a speed of 6.3 metres per second (14 milers per hour); atmospheric pressure was 1013.2hPa; air temperature was 15.7 degrees C; and wave height was 1.63 metres. The visibility data is not available. The buoys do not record cloud details. 

As a comparison, I also accessed details from the buoy's records for 2140hrs 14 July 2019, the previous night, when other destroyers, including the U.S. S. Kidd reported multiple 'drone" observations. A summary is as follows. the wind was from 295 degrees; at 5.5 metres per second; the pressure was 1015.7hPa; temperature was 14.8 degrees C; wave height was 1.68 metres. No visibility data available.


Marc Cecotti advised me that from other relevant ships' logs; he noted that it had been foggy at the time. 

Position of "drones"

On the evening of the 15 Jul 2019 with the wind coming from 324 degrees (roughly North West) the Russell's log records the direction of observations as being from 030 degrees ( a single observation) through 252 degrees to 325 degrees (eight observations.) The 2140hrs observation was a bearing of 321 degrees T. The wind was blowing from almost exactly behind this "drone." 

A look at the U.S.S. Rafael Peralta's deck log shows: 2146hrs 15 Jul 2019 2 UAV at a bearing of 310 degrees T; and 2152hrs 4 UAV's bearing 320 degrees T. Again, close to the direction from which the wind was blowing. 

It seems to me, that it would be interesting to examine the bearings of "drone" observations made from all the ships involved; to see what relationship there is between the direction the wind was blowing; and the direction of observation of "drones."

In closing, I would like again to thank Marc Cecotti for sharing the Russell's deck log. It is this sharing of raw data, without withholding dates/times etc, which allows others to build on someone else's work. A most important aspect of networking. We are all in this together. 

Sunday, April 11, 2021

What do we know about the 4 March 2019 U.S. Navy UAP photographs?


On 3 December 2020, an article authored by The Debrief's Tim McMillan revealed the existence of a UAP photograph taken from a United States military aircraft. The photograph was reportedly taken in the air by a weapon systems operator in an F/A-18 military jet aircraft, somewhere off the East coast of the U.S. McMillan reported having been told that the photograph had appeared in a 2018 intelligence report issued by the U.S. UAP Task Force (UAPTF.)

A check by me, of the metadata of the image shown by McMillan, indicated that this particular image was created on 4/03/2019, and not in 2018. I reached out to McMillan to point this out, and he advised that his understanding was that the image shown was a re-photograph of the original photograph. In other words, the metadata attached to the published photograph was not the original metadata. However, like me, a number of other commentators on the Internet felt that this was not a photo of a photo, but an original photograph taken on 4/3/2019. The earliest known appearance of the photograph within the UAP community, was traced back to February 2020.

In December 2020, detective work by Swedish based researcher, Roger Glassel, suggested that the reflection on the cockpit window was due to it being a reflection of the pilot's helmet. Glassel then deduced, that the aircraft was a U.S. Navy plane, belonging to Strike Squadron VFA-32. This squadron's home base was Naval Air Station Oceana, Virginia Beach, Virginia, U.S.A. 

So, the best information at that point, was that the photograph was taken on 4 March 2019, off the east coast of the USA in a training area used by the VFA-32. 

George Knapp

In an article dated 6 April 2021, Las Vegas journalist George Knapp revealed the existence of at least three UAP photographs taken on the same day, namely 4 March 2019. All by the same weapons system operator in an F/A-18 U.S. Navy aircraft; in the same geographic area, off the East coast of the U.S.A., and using nothing more sophisticated than an iPhone. These were:

1. At 2.44p.m. a photograph of an object referred to as a "Sphere."

2. At 3.02p.m. a photograph of an object referred to as the "Acorn." This shaped object featured in the original The Debrief article. Thus, confirming that the original The Debrief photograph had indeed been taken on 4 March 2019 and not in 2018, as McMillan reported having been told. 

3. At 3.14p.m. a photograph referred to as a "Metallic blimp," which appeared to have a  number of appendages. 

Interestingly, another article on the unidentified-net, has the times of the photographs as 2.44; 3.02 and 3.16pm. and provides some metadata from all three photos, which I image below:


As the images provided by Knapp did not have any available attached metadata; I wondered where the unidentified website had gained the above three pieces of metadata?  A possible explanation lies in the unidentified website article, where the author writes that their understanding comes "...from a very informed source who actively had access to all photos and data..." Combined with Knapp's source of the photographs, it would appear that the UAPTF is leaking badly.

Authenticity

Initially, some researchers suspected that the photographs may not have been authentic. However, this was soon put to rest by U.S. researcher John Greenewald, who contacted the Pentagon.  The response, by Pentagon UAP spokesperson, Susan Gough, included the statement:

"I can confirm that the referenced photos...were taken by Navy personnel. The UAPTF included these incidents in their ongoing examinations."

Weather at the time

Each of the three UAP photographs in the Knapp article show blue sky with some cloud and appear taken from an altitude of perhaps 30,000 feet (9,100 metres.)   I checked the University of Wyoming's upper atmospheric soundings database for details. I image the information for the time nearest the UAP photographs, from station number 72402, situated at Wallops island, Virginia; and station 72403 situated at Stirling, Virginia. 


This indicates that at the time, at an altitude of 9,100m the outside temperature was -45.7 degrees Celsius, pressure was 300.0hPa; relative humidity 17%; the wind was from 240 degrees at a speed of 82 knots. 


Here the outside temperature at 9,040m was -47.3 degrees Celsius; pressure was 300.0hPa; relative humidity 24%; wind from 250 degrees at a speed of 82 knots. 

The above figures provided the best estimate of weather details at the location where the photographs were taken. I was particularly interested in the wind speed at that altitude, as there had been some mention that the "Acorn" object had been stationary at the time the photograph was taken; which on the available wind speed data above, meant that the object was holding position in an 82 knot wind from roughly the west ( which is 270 degrees.)

As for the weather at surface level, I found a site which provided the following data for Virginia Beach, Virginia. At 3p.m. the surface temperature was 45 degrees Fahrenheit; wind speed was 8 mph from the North. There was no precipitation. Cloud percentage was not given. 

Saturday, March 20, 2021

Former Director of National Intelligence, John Ratcliffe, speaks out

John Ratcliffe



John Ratcliffe was the United States Director of National Intelligence, between May 2020 and 20 January 2021, under the Trump administration. On 19 March 2021, he was interviewed by Maria Bartiromo, on FOX News Primetime. The following is a transcript of that segment, prepared by myself from a full length version, kindly supplied by Giuliano Marinkovic. This version is longer than the version being circulated on such social media sites as Twitter. 

Transcript

MB - Joining me right now, is the former Director of National Intelligence, John Ratcliffe. John it is great to see you tonight. Thank you such much for being here.

JR - You bet, Maria.

MB - John, you have seen, in your role, the most intelligence that anybody has seen other than the President, as the Director of National Intelligence. I have been wanting to ask you this next question for a while. I want to ask you about UFOs - Unidentified Flying Objects. The Pentagon is going to come out with a report by June 1st, and in the $2.3 trillion dollar omnibus appropriations legislation passed in January, it includes the Intelligence Authorization Act; money for the Pentagon to continue investigating UFOs. John, we are going to get this report June 1st, Can you tell us, have Unidentified Flying Objects been seen?

JR - Well sure. We have lots of reports about what we call Unidentified Aerial Phenomenon and this actually is a program that's been in place for a few years in terms of a task force that has been there under the National Defense Authorization Act, but as you correctly point out Maria, there's now a report that will be issued by the Pentagon, by the Secretary of Defense and the Director of National Intelligence. (KB - See comment 1 below.)

I actually wanted to get this information out and declassified (comment 2) before I left office, but we weren't able to get it down into an unclassified format that we could talk about quickly enough, but frankly there are a lot more sightings than have been made public. (comment 3.)

Some of those have been declassified. When we talk about sightings we're talking about objects that have been seen by Navy or Air Force pilots, or have been picked up by satellite imagery (comment 4) that, frankly, engage in actions that are difficult to explain; movements that are hard to replicate, that we don't have the technology for, or traveling at speeds that you know exceed the sound barrier without a sonic boom.

So, in short, things that we are observing that are difficult to explain. And so, you know, there's actually quite a few of those, and I think that that information is being gathered and will be put out in a way that the American people can see.

We always, when we see these things, Maria, we always look for a plausible explanation. Weather can cause disturbances - visual disturbances. Sometimes, we wonder whether or not our adversaries have technologies that are a little bit further down the road than we thought, or that we realized, but there are instances where we don't have good explanations for some of the things that we've seen. And, you know, when that information becomes declassified I'll be able to talk a little bit more about that.

MB - Can you tell us where it was seen?

JR - Actually all over the world. There have been sightings all over the world, and when we talk about sightings, the other thing I will tell you is, it's not just a pilot, or just a satellite or some intelligence collection. Usually we have multiple sensors that are picking up these things (comment 5.) And so, again, some of, they are, just, they're unexplained phenomenon and there's actually quite a few more than has been made public.

I think it will be healthy for as much of this information to get out as possible, so that the American people can see some of the things we have been dealing with.

MB - OK. Wow, that is pretty extraordinary. We so appreciate that, that you're talking to us about this. Can this year get any weirder. Pandemic, shutdown, UFOs. John Ratcliffe it's great to see you. Thank you so much ...

Comments

1. The report will be submitted by the Director of National Intelligence. Thus, Ratcliffe, had he still been in office would have been the individual submitting the report. As he was the DNI between May 2020 and 20 January 2021, you can reasonable state that he would have been briefed on the subject of UAP. The new Director of National Intelligence, under the Biden administration is Avril Haines.

2. "declassified before I left office..." This implies that some, if not all, of this information is currently/was previously, classified. Please take a look at my previous blog post where I discussed security classifications levels of UAP information. 

3. "lot more sightings than have been made public" Most of us would have believed this statement to be true, even before Ratcliffe made it.

4. "or have been picked up by satellite imagery" A very interesting statement indeed. There have long been accounts given of such satellite detected UAP. As long ago as 1988, researcher Jacques Vallee (Forbidden Science: Volume 3) in a diary entry dated 28 June 1988, speaking about Hal Puthoff, wrote:

"Hal has seen a 2-inch thick file that details UFO observations by infra-red satellites: 'The objects arrive 3,000 miles above the Earth,' he told me. 'The satellites pick them up as they come near the surface and going away the same manner as they came in. Their infra-red signature shows a level of energy 15 times that of an aircraft carrier. But the data is so tightly classified nobody wants to talk about it.' "

5. "Usually we have multiple sensors that are picking up these things." Again, a confirmation of rumors or stories of which we are all aware.

What security classification level does the U.S. Department of Defense assign to information about UAP?

Christian Lambright

Blog readers may recall, that back in 2019 U.S. researcher Christian Lambright submitted a Freedom of Information Act (FOIA) request to the Office of Naval Intelligence (ONI) for documents relating to the November 2004 U.S.S. Nimitz incidents. Later that year, Christian received a final response from ONI, which in part read:

"We have discovered certain briefing slides that are classified TOP SECRET...We have also determined that ONI possesses a video classified SECRET that ONI is not the Original Classification Authority for. ONI has forwarded your request to Naval Air Systems Command to make a determination on releasability..."

So, at least in relation to the 2004 Nimitz incidents, certain briefing slides are classified TOP SECRET and one video is SECRET. Below are images of part of the ONI response letter. 



Unclassified

On 27 April 2020, the DoD released copies of three declassified videos, namely FLIR, Gimbal and Go Fast. The official DoD release, in part, read:

"The Department of Defense has authorized the release of three unclassified Navy videos, one taken in November 2004 and the other two in January 2015. The released videos can be found at the Naval Air Systems Command FOIA Reading Room."

Note 

In order to release these three videos the DoD would have looked at their previous security classification system and declassified them, to "unclassified." Note that the OCA is Naval Air Systems Command, the same location in the Navy specified in the 2019 ONI statement, where it stated that it had located a video classified SECRET relating to the U.S.S. Nimitiz 2004 incident. Could it be that this SECRET video is in fact one of either FLIR, Gimbal or Go Fast? Or is it yet another Navy video? We just don't know. 

Marc Cecotti's research 

In a 13 March 2021 blog post, French researcher Marc Cecotti revealed details of internal U.S. Department of Defense (DoD) emails concerning Freedom of Information Act (FOIA) requests about UAP.

In one email, dated 10 July 2020, from Joseph Gradisher, N2N6 Strategic Engagements U.S. Navy; to Jeffrey Jones COMNAVSAFECEN, Deputy Director for Safety Priorities; part of the email read:

"Additionally, there is now a Security Classification Guidance document (at the SECRET) level, that addresses the UAP issue and what may/may not be discussed publicly."

What is a Security Classification Guidance document?

On the Internet I located a PDF document titled "Security Classification Guidance, Student Guide" a course designed for this who need to write/know about these guides. I will cite relevant portions of this document.

"When an Original Classification Authority or OCA, determines that information must be classified, he or she must also develop security classification guidance to communicate that determination to others."

"Develop clear and precise security classification guidance is critical because it ensures that all users of the information treat it consistently and protect it properly."

"Security classification guidance is any instruction or source that sets out the classification of a system, plan, program, mission or project."

Documents you can read 

The U.S. DoD has DoD Instruction 5200.01"DoD Information Security Program and Protection of Sensitive Compartmented Information" or SCI which establishes the general framework and responsibilities for DoD implementers of national policy a on classified national security information.

DoD manual 5200.01 Volumes one through three "DoD Information Security Program" is authorized from the above instruction.

DoD Manual 5200.45 "Instructions for Developing Security Classification Guides" provides detailed information on how to develop Security Classification guidance.

Back to the student guide

"The original classification decision is communicated through a Security Classification Guide or SCG. The SCG covers the specific item requiring classification, the classification level assigned, reason for classification and declassification instructions."

Speaking about SCG's it goes on to say that:

"To maximize usability for the greatest number of individuals, the guide should be unclassified...For some programs, however, they may need to be classified..."

Note

Gradisher's email dated 10 July 2020 to Jeffrey Jones states "...there is now a Security Classification Guidance document (at the SECRET) level..." Thus it would appear that this particular SCG is not unclassified, and is in fact classified at the SECRET level.

The Black Vault

In an article on The Black Vault dated, 13 March 2021,  about this UAP SCG,  John Greenewald wrote:

"The other great revelation with the email is the admission that a "Security Classification Guide" or SCG exists for the UAP topic. On a hunch, The Black Vault filed for this very document back in January 2021, and requests for the SCG remain open to both the Navy and OSD."

I am aware of at least one other, non-American, researcher who has submitted an FOIA request for this SCG.

We await the results of the FOIA requests for a copy of the DoD SCG which relates to UAP. 

Monday, March 15, 2021

Jack Sarfatti - his ideas about the Tic Tac came from "a phone call from an alien"

 




For some time now, U.S. physicist Jack Sarfatti has been speaking out about his thoughts on the 2004 USS Nimitz encounters, with what has come to be known as the "Tic Tac" UAP. In short Sarfatti postulates that there is:

 "...evidence of extremely low power warp drive with time-travel-to-past capability in a meta-material fuselage controlled by a conscious AI post-quantum computer."

Who is Jack Sarfatti?

According to his LinkedIn page, Sarfatti was born 14 September 1939.  He received a BA in Physics from Cornell University (1956-1960); an M. S.  in Physics from University of California, San Diego (1965-1968); and a PhD in theoretical and mathematical physics from the University of California, Riverside (1968-1969.)

Career wise, the LinkedIn account tells us:

* Sep 1967 - Jun 1973, Assistant Professor of Physics, San Diego State

* Sep 1971 - Nov 1987, US Navy PACE -Instructor - teaching math to young sailors and marines onboard fighting ships at sea

* Jan 1980 - Dec 1986. Science advisor to Lawry Chickering Institute for Contemporary Studies - ISB. Helped formulate the Strategic Defense Initiative behind the scenes for Paul Nitze, Cap Weinberger and POTUS

* Jan 1996 - Present, CEO Sarfatti Group/ Internet Science Education Project.

His academic work

He has published numerous scientific articles, particularly in the areas of consciousness; quantum physics and astronomy. A sample of his work includes:

* "Toward a unified field theory of gravitation and strong interactions" Foundations of Physics, Vol. 5, 301-307. 1975

* "The Physical Roots of Consciousness" in Mishlove, J. "The Roots of Consciousness." Random House, 1975

* "Can the electroweak unified force be used to neutralize nuclear weapons?" Defense Analysis, Vol. 2 Issue 1. pp49-51. 1986

* "Dark Energy and Dark Matter from the same Vacuum condensate"  APS April Meeting 2003, B9. 012, 2003

* "Retro-Causal Holographic Dark Energy Coherent Vacuum Super-Solid Tetrad Emergent Gravity"  Cal Tech APS 10/30/10

* "Bohm Pilot Wave Post Quantum Theory" Retro causality workshop, The Embassy, 2017

Sarfatti has also published a number of books, including:

 * 1974 "Space Time and Beyond" by Bob Tober, in conversation with physicists Jack Sarfatti and Fred Alan Wolf.

* 2002. "Space Time and beyond 11"

* 2002. "Destiny Matrix"

* 2005 "Super Cosmos"

* 2020 "Sarfatti Lectures in Physics Volume One: The Principles of Metric Engineering Low Energy Low Speed Warp Drive"

Image courtesy Amazon Books

His personal website, features information on physics, cosmology, advanced propulsion, meta materials, quantum computing; a section headed "UFO sightings map;" and a weird desk area which provides information about Bigfoot, UFOs, sea monsters etc. His own blog includes pieces on a wide range of subjects including Robert Bigelow; quantum gravity, interviews with Luis Elizondo; much about UAP physics and his own theories;  

Where do his views originate?

I took a look back in the diaries of Jacques Vallee for the early history of where Sarfatti's ideas originated. There was an interesting diary entry in "Forbidden Science: Volume Three" (pp98-99) dated 27 July 1982:

"Walking through North Beach I passed Cafe Trieste where Jack Sarfatti was engaged in some passionate argument. He saw me and ran to catch me. So we ended up at Cafe Puccini, where I ordered a prosciutto sandwich and a cup of coffee , and listened to his theories.

Sarfatti's ideas are full of color, short on proofs. he 'confided' to me, as he does to everyone within earshot, that people close to Reagan, Meese and Caspar Weinberger support him; he hints he is close to Bechtel.

The wife of the American ambassador in Paris keeps calling him at Cafe Trieste and political pundit Bill Buckley listens to him. It is impossible to separate the real from the imaginary in all this.

Jack's life is a tapestry of stunning coincidences and romantic episodes. It is undeniable that he was a child prodigy. In 1953, age 15 (we are the same age) he was sitting in the Brooklyn library reading a math book on switching functions when he received a phone call from a mechanical voice that plunged him into a quasi hypnotic state. He only remembers one phone call but his mother states there was a series of them, always from the same bizarre voice.

The phone calls changed his life, he said. They led him to theorize about the energy of the vacuum and faster-than-light propulsion . He cites all the right authors, such as Coxeter, whose works I recently read. And he is certainly right when he says Einstein's theory is only a special case of a wider physics."

There are several other Vallee diary entries which speak of Sarfatti. In anotherr one, dated 22 September 1997, when alluding to the National Institute for Discovery Science (NIDS) Vallee writes:

"You chaps are obviously part of the Others predicted to me in 1952 by a sort of conscious computer and spacecraft from the future that we will now attempt to build."

FATE magazine article 

In an April 2006 article by Preston Dennett, in "FATE" magazine we learn:

"In 1952 and 1953, when I was about 12 or 13 years old, I received a phone call...in which a mechanical sounding voice said it was a computer on board a flying saucer. They wanted to teach me something and would I be willing? This was my free choice. Would I be willing to be taught - to communicate with them? I remember a shiver going up my spine, because i said, 'Hey man, this is real.' Of course, I was a kid...but I said yes."

Sarfatti was impressed. he ran and got his friends, and they gathered together in his bedroom, awaiting the upcoming promised contact. Unfortunately, nothing occurred, and Sarfatti assumed at first that it was just a clever practical joke.

At this point, his memory of the event strangely ends. But according to Sarfatti's mother, the first phone call was followed by a series of similar phone calls - each giving Sarftatti information that would leave him forever changed. Says Sarfatti, 'My mother remembers this experience very well. It turns out that I had forgotten most of it. This was really something that occurred over several weeks..."

Here is another take on this series of phone calls:

"I was reading a book on computer switching circuits at home when the phone rang. I answered it and heard a strange sequence of clunking mechanical sounds. Then a metallic sounding voice comes on the line. A cold mechanical voice is the only way I can describe it. It gives a long series of numbers that I did not understand and then calls me 'Jack' and says it's a 'conscious computer onboard a spacecraft.' It may have said it was from the future, but I am not sure. However, that was the implication of what it said. Anyway, it says I've been selected to be one of '400 young receptive minds' to be part of a special project but that I must make the choice myself. The voice on the phone told me that I would begin to meet the others I was to work with in twenty years. I was scared and everything in me screamed to say NO! and hang up. I felt a strong jolt of electricity go up my spine to the base of my skull and I heard myself say YES. I was terrified and fascinated. The voice said 'Good, go out on your fire escape and we will send a ship to pick you up in ten minutes.' When I hung up I ran like a bat out of hell and found my friend Winky, who is now a homicide detective in Brooklyn. We, and a few other kids, went back to my apartment to wait for the flying saucer but it never came."

This then, was the beginning of Sarfatti's introduction to the topic. 

Some things I learnt, by reading the 30 April 2021 article in the "New Yorker."

The article A lengthy piece by journalist Gideon Lewis-Kraus appeared in the 30 April 2021 digital version, and then on 10 May 2021, in the ...