"Fragments" and "implants" - Jacques Vallee

Catalogues

I recently published a 52 page document titled "A Preliminary Catalogue of Alleged 'Fragments' Reportedly Associated with Sightings of Unidentified Aerial Phenomena where Analysis(es) was/were Conducted."  I am currently working on a similar catalogue, but this time focusing on analyses of "implants." It was therefore of interest to me, to see that there are references to similar items in Jacques Vallee's latest book "Forbidden Science: Volume 4," which has been recently released, of which I was not previously aware. This blog post captures these pieces of data.

(Diary entry dated) 5 March 1990

"At the Perfect Recipe Ron Blackburn confirmed Major Ed Dames was arranging to meet us in New Mexico for a night drive to hunt for Aliens. I asked Ron about his involvement with  Roswell. He assured me he knew a man who did radiation tests on the crashed material: 'It was amazing. He had a piece as large as this room, and he could lift it with one hand! The fellow is afraid to talk about it!

'Where do you think that material is now?' Blackburn shrugged" 'It could be anywhere since the Iran-Contra affair the folks in Washington don't take any chances that a Congressional staffer might stumble on the truth. It's all been farmed out.'"

1 June 1990

Dinner with Whitley Strieber.

"An intelligence agent, a contact of Bill Moore, has assured Whitley that the crashes really happened: 'Why is their story always so bad?' Whitley asked me with humor. 'They've been telling the same stupid Roswell tale for so long they need to update it periodically!'

Yet when he asked Brigadier General Arthur Exon about his tenure at Wright Patterson, the old man confirmed the Air Force had indeed dragged in some material that had fallen from the sky over Roswell. 'It was titanium and some other metal they knew about, but the manufacturing process was completely different,' he said.

The other metal was nickel, forming an alloy called Nitinol, the first 'memory metal' developed at Battelle by the team of Howard Cross in the late 40's. Another general George Schulgen, who led Air Force Intelligence, penned a secret memo on October 30, 1947 about 'unusual formation methods to achieve extreme extreme lightweight.'"

17 October 1990

Scott Jones visited UFO groups in China.

"Chinese ufologists gave him some metal filings from an object, which turned out to be an aluminum alloy, like several of the samples I have recovered. They made no claims about bodies."

30 January 1991 

"New debunkers have appeared in Russia, while Scott Jones brings back physical samples of UFOs from the Soviet Union with great fan fare 'to have them analyzed by the CIA.'"

12 July 1992 

"Roger Remy came over today with Jean-Luc Combier...Remy also met Marcel Vogel of IBM...Vogel had been asked to examine bits of supposed Alien hardware and tissue samples 'by someone in Intelligence circles who didn't want to go to a university for such work.' It showed evidence of frittage, he told me, where molecules are squeezed, but not fused over large sections in a way reportedly impossible for the time...The frittage technique is used to meld certain structures with other materials."

My note:

In a diary entry dated 15 June 1991, Vallee writes "Now a friend of writer Jimmy Guieu named Roger Remy calls from Albuquerque, talking about advanced propulsion..."

3 September 1994 

With Marie-Therese de Brosses.

"She also told me about the 'Gateau Case.' This fellow saw a dark object take off from a field, after which he found some slag-like material at the spot. He was asked to give it all to CNES, but wisely kept one piece for himself. Velasco later told him it was ordinary slag, but Marie-Therese is having the last sample analyzed. (Note.)

(Note.) In the midst of much controversy I obtained fragments of that last sample in December 2017 and analyzed it in Silicon Valley.

My notes:

1. I searched my "fragments" catalogue and cannot find any details of Vallee's analysis results.

2. Please see the comments section, for a link to a Youtube video where Gateau is interviewed.

4 September 1994 

Dinner with French consultant Gilbert Payan.

"I asked him about the Gateau sample, which he remembered well. 'We did analyze it,' he said 'It turned out to be a combination of metals. The result of an odd series of heatings and coolings. But what good is a case like that? No piece of the actual propulsion system is available."

Note:

I searched the Internet and the GEIPAN database but couldn't find any reference to the "Gateau case." Can any blog readers assist with further information?

1 April 1996 

Meeting of the National Institute of Discovery Science (NIDS.)

"In the afternoon Dr Roger Leir came over. He had operated on the foot of a woman who had two implants and on the hand of a man who had one. Derryl Sims and Leir brought us the samples in question - tiny, wire-like objects - as well as half a dozen other samples removed from abductees. Our Board finds it hard to believe that the implants were anything but accidental bits of metal that had entered the victims' bodies..."

The main implants removed from the woman's foot turned out to be made of boron nitrite, a common industrial material."

My note:

For more on these samples click here.

1 June 1996

Another NIDS meeting.

"The implants from the last session have now been analyzed at Las Alamos. All five turned out to be made of common elements, aluminum and iron with calcium, copper and other components of the soil. 'Dirty metal wires' is the best way to characterize them, with nothing more than accidental transition through the body."

UAP research has been well funded in the past

Funding for UAP research

Three individuals provided funds for UAP research projects in the 1990's. These were Las Vegas businessman Robert Bigelow; American financier Laurance Rockefeller; and Prince Hans-Adam Liechtenstein. Between them, they funded projects running into the several of millions of dollars.

In a post dated 24 July 2017, I explored what I then knew about Prince Hans-Adam's interest in the phenomenon; which gave some insight into his well informed views.

With the recent publication of Jacques Vallee's fourth volume of "Forbidden Science" [2019. Documatica Research, LLC. San Francisco] more information has surfaced, relating to Hans-Adam's interests, within the decade 1990-1999. Here then, are relevant entries from Vallee's diaries for that time period, with commentary by myself.

Society for Scientific Exploration (SSE)

8 August 1990

"At the SSE I met again with sociologist David Swift and with Brendan O'Regan, who I hadn't seen in years. We discussed Lazar and Hans-Adam Leichtenstein. "I went to Vaduz and the Prince told me about your conversation," Brendan said: "I'm getting used to visiting the same places as you, trailing you by a few months..."

Rima Laibow told me a surprising anecdote. At the dinner following the first Abduction Trauma meeting, the Prince reportedly said that he'd been briefed by the KGB, the CIA and NATO Intelligence. They told him people were being "taken" from every country.

26 February 1991

"Yesterday, during the long drive from Ojai, psychologist and abduction researcher Maralyn Teare told me that Prince Hans-Adam and Robert Bigelow, a Las Vegas developer, had joined forces to provide Hopkins and Jacobs with a $200,000 grant to determine 'how many Americans have been abducted.' The result is chaotic, with the prospect of a bundle of dollars, anger rises among ufologists, egos are bruised, data gets corrupted or covered up."

My comment:

Maralyn Teare, MA, was on the board of directors of the Academy of Clinical Close Encounter Therapists. 

15 April 1991

"Janine phones me about a letter from Prince Hans-Adam, a clever restatement of the first order 'Alien visitation' hypothesis, in a style both relaxed and precise. He seems certain that the truth will soon be found. Yet I hear that Hopkins and Jacobs are over their heads in their survey. Unable to spend the funds given to them by the Prince and Robert Bigelow, they allocated $125,000 of that money to their pet projects, only $75,000 being allocated to the survey."

My comment:

This is the famous "Roper Poll."

22 May 1991

"Prince Hans-Adam funds Hal's energy research but when it comes time to invest another $1.25 million he stalled, telling Hal that he was afraid of the consequences. Is the earth a jail planet? Are extraterrestrials prepared to ruin anyone who helps humanity get into space? He believe Aliens will make sure we don't get out of line.

Mike Swords tells me that Bob Bigelow and Prince Hans-Adam funded John Mack's survey of abductions because they're certain it will sway intellectual opinion. The similarities among cases will be overwhelming, he assures me.

My comment:

The questions, "Is the earth a jail planet? Are extraterrestrials prepared to ruin anyone who helps humanity get into space?" seem very odd without some context.

In a conversation between Vallee and George Hathaway on 26 June 1989, quoted in Vallee's "Forbidden Science: Volume three," Hathaway provided Vallee with insight into Hathaway's and the Princes theory. They both held the view that "there is an extraterrestrial force that is monitoring and controlling men's drive into space: 'It's a question of how far we'll be allowed to go before some other entities put the lid on what we can do with our little rocket firecrackers..."

24 May 1992

"The largely biased Roper poll sponsored by Bigelow and Leichtenstein has been mailed to 86,000 psychologists."

10 June 1992

"Among recent letters was an elegant one from Leichtenstein responding to my article critiquing abduction research..."

21 June 1992

"John Alexander called tonight...this led to a friendly chat about the recently concluded "MIT conference" organised by John Mack and paid for by Bigelow and Prince Hans-Adam...'You didn't miss much,' he said. 'There was zero independent thinking.'"

29 April 1993

"In the last few years UFO advocates and abduction researchers have had large sums at their disposal: Grants for digs at Roswell, funding by Mr Bigelow and Prince Hans-Adam for the Roper survey, financing of conferences, the meeting at Cambridge, and current abduction studies, reaching well over half a million dollars."

9 June 1993

"In the evening George Hathaway, consultant to Prince Hans-Adam, demonstrated his spectroscopic camera in the hotel garage. Thunderstorms cracked outside, shaking the hot Texas sky."

13 August 1994

"Fred Beckman tells me that Prince Hans-Adam has assured Fred Alzofon (who visited him recently in Vaduz) that Perez de Cuellar, now running for the presidency of Chile had been taken even before the notorious "Linda" case, based on documents received by Hopkins, who believes all this. The documents, of course, are anonymous."

My comments:

1. Dr Frederick Alzofon (1919-2012) was a physicist, who, among other things explored the control of gravity. His book, "Gravity Control with present technology" is available through Amazon Books.

2. For a summary of the famous New York "Linda" case investigated by Budd Hopkins which is said to have involved Perez de Cuellar, click here. 

11 December 1994

"SSE Council meeting. "Funding is in the hands of Bob Jahn, in touch with Rockefeller and Prince Hans-Adam, but I stressed that going through wealthy men would not necessarily open any doors among scientific institutions, it might have the opposite effect; political pressure is a double-edged sword."

11 July 1998

"Hal was just back from London where he'd met a mysterious VIP, possibly Prince Hans-Adam. Hal is increasingly involved in ufological research."

A Forensic Analysis - the SCU report on the events of November 2004 is now available

A Forensic Analysis

The Scientific Coalition for Ufology has just released a report titled "A Forensic Analysis of Navy Carrier Strike Group Eleven's Encounter with an Anomalous Aerial Vehicle." The authors are Robert Powell, Peter Reali, Tim Thompson, Morgan Beall, Doug Kimzey, Larry Cates, and Richard Hoffman.

The abstract of the report reads:

"On November 14th of 2004, the U.S. Navy's Carrier Strike Group Eleven (CSG 11), including the USS Nimitz nuclear aircraft carrier and the USS Princeton missile cruiser, were conducting a training exercise off the coast of southern California when the Navy's radar systems detected as many as 20 anomalous aerial vehicles (AAV). These AAV's were deemed a safety hazard to an upcoming air exercise and the Captain of the USS Princeton ordered an interception with two F/A-18F Navy jets. This paper examines the publicly available subset of those data: Eyewitness information from the pilots and radar operators; Freedom of Information Act releases of four Navy documents; and a Defense Intelligence Agency released video taken by an F/A-18 jet using an AN/ASQ-228 Advanced Targeting Forward Looking Infrared (ATFLIR). Analytical calculations based on radar notes, testimony from pilots, and the ATFLIR video are used to derive the velocity, acceleration and estimated power demonstrated by the AAV maneuvers. Calculated AAV accelerations ranged from 40 g-forces to hundreds of g-forces and estimated power based on a weight of one ton ranged from one to nine gigawatts. None of the navy witnesses reported ever previously seen military or civilian vehicles with these maneuvering abilities. Manned aircraft such as the F-22 and F-35 are limited to nine g-forces and the F-35 has maintained structural integrity up to 13.5 g-forces. Our results suggest that given the available information the AAV's capabilities are beyond any known technology. The public release of all navy records associated with this incident to enable a full, scientific and open investigation is strongly recommended."

Introduction - the data

The 270 page report, opens by providing a context for this paper. Military reports of unusual objects, and particularly military radar data, have been made for many years, e.g. July 1957 RB-47 incident; the November 1964 USS Gyatt event; and the October 1968 Minot AFB occurrence.

The military witnesses in the report, from the November 2004 CSG-11 incident, includes four interviewed primary witnesses; twenty secondary witnesses and four anonymous witnesses whose testimony supports that of other named individuals. The report notes the limitations on human memory when taking testimony from 2004.

The Freedom of Information Act was used to submit 26 requests to the U.S. Navy, U.S.Marines, NORAD and the Defense Intelligence Agency. Requests were made for "radar data, written logs, communications logs, videos and intelligence reports." 

A 76-second ATFLIR video, the subject of which matched the visual observations of two pilots, is available for analysis. It is understood that this released video is of lower quality and of shorter duration that the original; and the original is not available to the authors, although seen by many military witnesses.

In addition, much more military data was captured at the time, which also is not available to the authors. Military witnesses have advised that "representatives of a U.S. government agency took control of the data that was on the USS Princeton."

Chronological Occurrence of Events

The report then sets out a chronology of the events, which commenced on 10 November 2004, and culminated with an air intercept on 14 November 2004. This chronology is crucial to understanding the sequence of events.

Basically, Princeton's radar; radar of the Nimitz; and radar on an airborne early warning aircraft, picked up AAVs, thus suggesting little possibility of a mundane cause. The AAVs descended from 80,000+ feet to various altitudes in short periods of time. Authorisation was given, by Captain Smith of the Princeton, for an air intercept. 

Ahead of that intercept, Marine Lt Col Douglas Kurth, in the air at the time "saw a disturbance on the calm and glassy ocean surface."

The details of the air intercept have been published in numerous places since December 2017, so I will not repeat them here. Suffice to say, this forensic report provides a very detailed account of the events derived from first hand military witness testimony from two of the air crew involved in the intercept, and witnesses on board the Princeton. Following the engagement, which lasted some 5-7 minutes, the two jets returned to the Nimitz, the radar targets from near the ocean surface, rose to an altitude of 80,000+ feet in "less than one second" and tracked south at 100 knots. 

A follow up aircraft took a ATFLIR video of what, the air intercept crew stated, was the same "Tic-Tac" shaped object which they observed. The report's authors state that "In addition to the witnesses in the CIC, the authors have identified 18 of the crew that saw the IR video."

Missing data

The report notes that "During this time, as reported by three witnesses interviewed by our team, the communication logs, the radar data, and other associated electronic information was removed from the USS Princeton and a copy of the video from the USS Nimitz." The absence of this data meant that the SCU team were unable to provide as detailed a forensic examination of the characteristics of the AAVs, as they would have liked.

Analysis

Despite the absence of some crucial data, there was sufficient information for the SCU to undertake an analysis of the performance characteristics of the AAVs. "Speed, acceleration, and power characteristics can be calculated based on statements from two navy personnel who observed the radar tracks of the "Tic-Tacs" in real time."  The report states that these "yield a maximum velocity of 104,895 mph at the midway point and an acceleration of 12,250 g-forces." Needless to say, these figures exceed anything our current technology is capable of producing.

Visual observations of pilots, were also used to determine AAV performance characteristics, which again indicated high velocities and g-forces, beyond our current technology.

Information contained within the ATFLIR video was also used to gain a third estimate of AAV performance, which again suggests extraordinary performance.

The authors conclude "We have no reasonable explanation for the accelerations demonstrated by the object." There was also no sonic boom, or intense fireball that might result from something travelling at these speeds, in the atmosphere. 

Appendices

The majority of the report's pages consist of appendices. These include "FOIA Requests and Replies;" "Video Provenance;" "Acceleration, Speed, and Power Calculations;" and "Witness and Associated Information." Some are very technical, and will require attention to detail by the reader.

My observations

Despite the limitations clearly stated by the authors, this is an excellent report and analysis of the publicly available data in an outstanding example of an AAV.

This style of report; factual, evidence based, citing sources, peer reviewed, and complete with factors which need to be taken into account, e.g. the capacity for human memory to be less than perfect over time, sets a standard we should all aim for in terms of publication.

Here is data, which can be cross checked, discussed, debated and tested. Naturally, the SCU will expect us to do so. Names of military witnesses are given, with their consent, and I, like other researchers, have been in touch with some of them to fact check for myself. In this way, transparency of detail is to be found.

There is more to be done, as the authors note "More information likely exists but it will likely require a forceful inquiry such as from a congressional subcommittee investigation in order to pry loose radar data, communication logs, Navy Intelligence reports, and other information on this case."

Indeed, the former manager of the Advanced Aerospace Threat Identification Program, Mr Luis Elizondo, at the March 2019 SCU conference at Huntsville, in reply to a question: "Since AATIP was selected to collect information on any threats, why wouldn't they have the radar data from the 2004 event?" Elizondo's response was "I didn't know we didn't," which in my opinion, appears to confirm that radar data from the 2004 event is held. 

As readers of my blog will be well aware, I thrive on original documentation. It is therefore good to be able to read the full text of SCU's FOIA requests; and that the SCU was able, for example, to obtain "an un-redacted copy of the Executive Summary and have verified to our satisfaction that the report is a legitimate document that is based on the actual interviews of the pilots and sailors involved." The Nimitz deck log was also obtained, which I also, had previously been able to examine. Interestingly, the Navy stated that they could not locate the corresponding deck log for the Princeton. 

I understand from the SCU, that copies of the report have already been provided to select members of the US Congress, with the hope that it might stimulate some members to call for a subcommittee hearing on AAVs. Blog readers will be aware that there have been other AAVs sighted by U S military personnel, since 2004, particularly off the East coast of the US in 2015. So, it is not just the 2004 event which would benefit from such hearings.

In summary, this report is essential reading, and deserves widespread and prolonged discussion. The SCU team are to be congratulated for all their hard work.

A small after note

The To The Stars Academy of Arts and Science, which has access to all of the data which the SCU team had, plus more, given the involvement of Dr Hal Puthoff; Dr Eric Davis; and Luis Elizondo in the AASWAP/AATIP, should have long ago produced a report of the depth and quality which the SCU has just done. Although I have the greatest respect for the TTSA team, they have so far failed to produce good, scientific data and analysis. Instead, we are promised a commercial television series, which will reveal their results.

Links to posts dealing with AATIP/AAWSAP plus BAASS and Bigelow

Introduction

Amazingly, since April 2018, when I began my initial research into the Advanced Aerospace Threat Identification Program (AATIP), I have now produced a total of 61 blog posts on this, and related topics. Even I, have difficulty remembering where I can find information about, say the question " How did the Department of Defense acknowledge the existence of the AATIP?" or "What did the people at Bigelow Aerospace Advanced Space Studies do?" So, this blog post is aimed to provide the titles of these 61 blog posts, the date they were published, with a clickable link to that individual blog post. I hope you find it useful.

The posts

AATIP and that mysterious "metal" sample (metal alloys mentioned in the 16 Dec 2017 New York Time's piece.) 26 April 2018.

AATIP or AAWSA? (what was the name of the program?) 1 May 2018.

One scientist's work on the AAWSAP (details from his LinkedIn profile.) 3 May 2018.

Third Advanced AAWSAP document surfaces (Defense Intelligence Reference Document.) 6 May 2018.

The contract process for AAWSAP 7 May 2018.

The DIA's AAWSAP - I find the original calls for tender document 8 May 2018.

Bigelow Aerospace advert for AAWSAP jobs found 10 May 2018.

Fuller version of the DIA AAWSAP "solicitation" found 12 May 2018.

Dr Colm Kelleher and the AAWSAP 14 May 2018.

Did the AAWSAP/AATIP really start in 2007? 16 May 2018.

Federal Sources In may already have a copy of the DIA AAWSAP contract 17 May 2018.

The tale of three BAASS field investigations (The MUFON/BAASS relationship.) 18 May 2018.

The BAASS team -some of their roles and some of their names 24 May 2018.

When did BAASS start and where is the AAWSAP contract? 27 May 2018.

Those Defense Intelligence Reference Documents 2 Jun 2018.

Dr Hal Puthoff's speech at the Society for Scientific Exploration (program began Jun 2007; Soviet Union "Thread-3 document; bismuth/magnesium sample.) 14 Jun 2018.

Dr Hal Puthoff and the Soviet project "Thread-3" 17 Jun 2018.

AATIP and Project Prato (The Brazilian Air Force's study.) 22 Jun 2018.

New Congressional hearings on UFOs? 28 Jun 2018.

Unusual isotopic ratios in alleged UFO samples 29 Jun 2018.

The 2009 AATIP letter from the then US Senator Harry Reid 30 Jun 2018.

Another AATIP DIRD author? 22 Jul 2018.

The 2009 Senator Harry Reid letter revisited 29 Jul 2018.

An analysis of that list of AASWAP/AATIP DIRDs 1 Aug 2018.

A search for Congressional AAWSAP/AATIP documents 9 Aug 2018.

AATIP documents found on US website 9 Aug 2018.

A reference to the AATIP found in a 2018 issue of the "Congressional Record." 15 Aug 2018.

The To The Stars Academy and "Ed's" metal sample 19 Aug 2018.

"Patient died 2 weeks later" - EarthTech and Kit Green 25 Aug 2018.

A "...closed Congressional briefing in Washington" 28 Aug 2018.

Details of "contracts" between TTSA and EarthTech 30 Sep 2018.

When did AATIP/AAWSAP start? 4 Oct 2018.

Presentation before US Congressional sub-committee (By Chase Kloetzke.) 21 Oct 2018.

Some new information from the 27 Oct 2018 Centro Ufologico Nationale talk by Luis Elizondo 31 Oct 2018.

Dr James T Lacatski, AAWSAP Program manager's career "ruined" 3 Nov 2018.

BAASS and the University of Nevada, Las Vegas (Analysis of materials for BAASS - 2010.) 6 Nov 2018.

A catalogue of UAP related "fragments" which have been analyzed 17 Nov 2018.

The Bigelow Foundation and Angela Thompson Smith 22 Nov 2018.

The work of EarthTech International, Kit Green and Garry P Nolan 13 Dec 2018.

George D Hathaway - his work and research findings 16 Dec 2018.

AATIP/AAWSAP - the publicly available documentation on these programs 27 Dec 2018.

How the US Department of Defense acknowledged the existence of AATIP 29 Dec 2018.

More on how the US Department of Defense acknowledged the existence of AATIP 30 Dec 2018.

New information - the 2004 Nimitz encounters latest information from Dave Fravor (The fighterpilot podcast.) 3 Jan 2019.

Did someone remove data about the 2004 Nimitz encounter? 5 Jan 2019.

Two AATIP related conferences in March 8 Jan 2019.

"Antennas" and Dr Viola Petit Neal 13 Jan 2019.

Back to those 38 DIRDs 17 Jan 2019.

Images of briefing papers for the AATIP revisited 20 Jan 2019.

Implant to be analyzed by TTSA 24 Jan 2019.

Implants which have been analyzed 25 Jan 2019.

Hal Puthoff talked about AATIP at MIT on 23 Jan 2019 27 Jan 2019.

Robert Bigelow and "implant" research 8 Feb 2019.

Was there a US $5 million AATIP style DoD study group between 1983-1985? (Howard Blum's book 'Out There.' 9 Feb 2019.

The DIA and the AATIP (Roger Glassel's email exchange with the DIA.) 13 Feb 2019.

Douglas S Kurth and the BAASS/MUFON relationship 16 Feb 2019.

What did the people who worked at BAASS do? 18 Feb 2019.

Former Senator Harry Reid reveals more about the AAWSAP 28 Feb 2019.

The 2015 AATIP incidents 1 Mar 2019.

Further information on the 2019 plans of the TTSA 3 Mar 2019.

Robert Bigelow and research into consciousness 8 Mar 2019.

Robert Bigelow's other "UFO" ranch 12 Mar 2019.

The TTSA and "quantum communication" 18 Mar 2019.

Diana Pasulka, "American Cosmic" - on television production companies and UAP

Upsurge

Recently, there has been an upsurge of programs on US and other countries' television, featuring UAP themes. Pre-advertising tells us that there are more on the way. It seems that many television production companies are seizing the opportunity afforded by a re-newed interest in the topic amongst the general public. Even in remote and isolated Australia, today I received an email from a producer from a US "Science Channel project that involves an episode that looks at the Nimitz incident." I declined to participate.

Dr Diana Walsh Pasulka

Religious scholar, D W Pasulka, also comments along similar lines in her recent book "American Cosmic: UFOs, Religion, Technology," (Oxford University Press, New York, 2019. ISBN 9780190693497.)  On page 127 she states:

Image courtesy of Amazon Books

"UFO related programming is increasing too, especially within settings that ostensibly offer information about real events, like the National Geographic Channel and the History Channel. Increasingly, this fictionalized programming about UFOs is being interspersed with production about historical and real events. Brad Dancer, National Geographic's senior vice president for audience and business development, recently acknowledged that companies like his might play a role in bolstering UFO belief."

I saw a similar surge, about three years ago, when even I, in Australia, received an invitation from a TV production company in Canada, which entailed an all expenses trip over there, to film episodes for the show. After undertaking some preliminary work with them, I decided not to proceed further.

Why do I say no to such invitations? Well, I have already been there and done that before. In my younger days, I was involved in working with a number of local and overseas TV production companies. Inevitably, I found that the finished product was merely for entertainment, never a serious look at the phenomenon. Plus, for the production company, there was always the lure of commercial success if the pilot episodes were taken up for a second or further series. I can honestly say that they had no other motives - simply, entertainment, and commercial profit.

Pasulka has something to say about this on page 83:

"From my own research, I knew that digital media and media of all forms are manipulated to produce a specific response that is desired by the producers for purely economic reasons."

My own experiences

Speaking of my own experience with TV production companies, I soon learnt to ask them if, instead of spending time making a re-creation of how they thought the UAP incident occurred according to the producer's needs; that they would fund me to undertake a re-investigation of the event, and then use that?

Their answer was always, no. That is not the way we work. So, from that time, whenever I receive an invitation from a TV production company that promises to faithfully re-produce the details of a UAP event; I simply ask them to fund a re-investigation of the event using original source material. I have yet to have one company take me up on this offer. To me, this confirms their motivation of entertainment and profit.

I have spoken to individuals in that industry who gave me the inside story of how TV production companies work. It only reinforced my decision not to become involved with them. Pasulka, on page 6, talking about the "players" she came across when conducting her research for the book, states:

"The second category consists of those who interpret, spin, produce and market the story of UFO events to the general public...members of the second category are very vocal about information they have received second, third or even fourth-hand. Often they even make up stories or derive their information from hoaxes."

Going back to my Canadian TV production company experience, I worked for hours with a very professional, polite, researcher engaged by that company to elicit details of an Australian close encounter case which I had investigated. I forwarded a complete set of my investigation notes on the case, and spent time on the telephone speaking to her. She drafted up a "script" for the company based on the information I provided her. After a while she came back to me and told me that the producers wanted a less documentary approach and she needed to rewrite her "script" in a quasi drama format. At this point, I declined to participate further. Needless, to say I was never invited to fly to Canada.

TV production company ethics

Pasulka, page 211, relates a media experience which happened to Rey Hernandez, the co-founder of the Dr Edgar Mitchell Foundation for Research into Extraterrestrial Encounters, who had numerous UAP and paranormal experiences. Hernandez reported his events to the Mutual UFO Network (MUFON.)

"One day Rey received an email from a friend who said that he had seen Ray's family's experience portrayed on the television program Hangar 1, produced by the History Channel. Rey was horrified to find that an entire episode was based on his family's experience, but that the events as represented on the show didn't resemble their experience. Disturbingly, the message it conveyed was the opposite of his own and his family's experience."

What were Pasulka's conclusion in this area? I found them on page 212:

"The use of a genre associated with truth, the documentary, produced by a company ostensibly related to veridical, historical accounts (in Rey's case the History Channel,) supports a central claim of this book - that what one sees on television, in the movies, and on the internet does not necessarily convey the actual stories of those who experience the events. Yet the mechanisms provide a convincing viewing framework. As viewers are entertained by the production, they are also forming opinions. biases, even memories that help them interpret and form meanings associated with UFOs."

I will close this post with a last quote from Pasulka. "The truth is potentially 'out there,' but its unlikely to be found in media productions."

The passing of Cynthia Kathleen Dickmann

Cynthia Kathleen Dickmann

Following so shortly after the passing of well known South Australian UAP researcher Ray Brooke, I am sad to advise that another South Australian colleague, Cynthia Kathleen Dickmann, has recently, and unexpectedly, passed away.

Many current Adelaide UAP researchers may not have heard of "Kathy" as she was known to her colleagues. She liked to work behind the scenes, keeping a low personal public profile. Kathy was a quiet achiever, in her life-long interest in the subject. From early childhood, her inquiring mind wanted to know all about the "big picture" of our existence. This interest continued throughout her life.

Overseas conferences

For many years, Kathy attended numerous overseas UAP conferences, particularly in the USA and the United Kingdom, and she made extensive connections with UAP researchers in these, and other countries. At one stage, her published articles in the English "Flying Saucer Review" led to her being asked if she would take on the role of FSR's Editor. She declined.

When her husband Douglas travelled to a number of countries with his work, Kathy would take the opportunity to go along with him, and make local inquiries about the UAP subject. In this way, she became known to individuals in such diverse places as Cuba and Mongolia. Once, when on a transpacific air flight, she even got invited up into the cockpit of an airliner, and asked the crew if they had ever seen anomalous phenomena. They confirmed they had. On another occasion, Kathy rolled up to the front gate of Pine Gap, and asked to hand in a video she had with her. She recognized the individual who came out to the gate to speak to her. She had previously seen him at a UFO conference in Brisbane!

Funeral

I attended Kathy's funeral in Adelaide today, along with my wife Jane; and UAP colleagues Helen Danby, Debbie Payne; Mike Howley; and Colin Paule and his wife. We had all worked at some time with Kathy. on projects of various kinds; including the five year program of researching the Australian Government's UAP files. Another colleague, Roger Koch, was unable to attend, owing to ill health.

Besides her passion for the UAP subject, Kathy read widely on astronomy and space science; enjoyed her gardening; was an excellent cook; trained in Taekwondo; loved to help others in need; and enjoyed travelling to such places as Machu Picchu; Cuba; Mongolia; the UK and USA; and South America.

Kathy is survived by her husband Douglas; her son Anton; her daughter Astrid; and a multitude of other family members.

Her inquiring mind will be missed.

The To The Stars Academy and "quantum communication"

Luis Elizondo

Former manager of the US Department of Defense's Advanced Aerospace Threat Identification Program (AATIP), Luis Elizondo was the keynote speaker, at the recent Scientific Coalition for Ufology (SCU) conference, held in Huntsville, Alabama, in the USA.

According to one conference attendee, Theresa Tindal, who was live tweeting from the event, Elizondo made a comment:

""Beamed energy propulsion & quantum communication' - the first tech we can expect to see from these discoveries."

Does this indicate that the To The Stars Academy (TTSA) are working on projects about "beamed energy propulsion" and "quantum communication?

Securities and Exchange Commission

In a blog post dated 3 March 2019 I noted that there was a report filed by the TTSA with the US Securities and Exchange Commission (SEC). On the SEC website, part of the report stated that TTSA were looking at beamed energy propulsion launch systems. This is the concept of using ground based lasers to launch a small payload into orbit. No one has achieved this to date, although lots of information about the concept is to be found on the Internet, e.g.

In an earlier blog post, dated 30 September 2018, I noted that TTSA had contracted EarthTech International to define a program plan "for requirements, development, analysis, experimentation, risk reduction efforts, demonstration, operational system development,and initial fielding of a BELS cubesat launch system, development program." BELS here stood for Beamed Energy Launch System.

Other TTSA projects

The SEC website report stated that TTSA were examining other projects, namely "Space Time Metric Engineering" and "radiation shielding materials for space applications." However, nowhere is there any mention on the website of TTSA working on a project involving "quantum communication."

However, I recalled that a Twitter user "dregs" on 10 March 2019 had posted a piece about a US patent for a "communication system," filed by Dr Harold E Puthoff, co-founder of TTSA."Dregs" kindly posted a link to that patent application.

Dr H E Puthoff: source http://earthtech.org/team/

The applicant for a patent was EarthTech International, with the inventors shown as H E Puthoff and Christopher A Eusebi, and was filed on 31 August 2016. The patent number is US 201 800 627 65 A1. As at 17 March 2019 the status of the application is "pending."

The abstract for the patent application reads:

"A communication system using vector and scalar potential is disclosed. The system uses field-free potentials signaling for many applications where the absence of shielding effects in seawater, plasma or other dense media due to the fact that the absence of (E,B) fields eliminates the possibility of induced charge and current response in the media being transited."

Accompanying diagrams show images of submarines and superconductors.

TTSA projects

So, it appears that TTSA projects being evaluated in terms of which will most likely lead to commercial products includes:

* Advanced aerospace technologies

* Beamed energy propulsion launch systems

* Space time metric engineering

* Radiation shielding materials for space applications

*Quantum communication.

Has any reader come across further references to TTSA and "quantum communication"?