HM05_Me

This article highlights a history of UAP sightings at Pantex Nuclear facility ranging from the 1950s to as recently as 2015. These events help highlight the long history of UAP sightings around nuclear facilities.

“From the late 1950's to the mid 1960's UFO's were seen over Pantex Ordnance Plant near Amarillo TX. I lived three miles away to the east at the time. During this period there were about 100 sightings, but those of us that remember [sic] don't talk about it much.

The Airbase was still open and they would scramble Fighters to intercept. But it was always the same. When the jets closed to 2 miles the object would go up at high speed. The jets would circle a while [sic] then land. Then sometimes it would come back down to its spot.

This was repeated on many nights. Always the same type of object, that changed colors.”

It's good to hear that they're still working towards hearings and intend on bringing in new witnesses. The election is bound to shape the discussion this year, so I'm hoping that they can get a hearing established soon before it gets overshadowed.

I do wish Tim could back the full UAP amendment put forth by Schumer and recently Garcia. He gets fairly defeatist on whether any of these laws will have any impact, which is understandable. But, he puts too much faith in his own amendment which is too short to cover any of the technicalities needed to ensure Congress can actually obtain and review needed records.

And, there does seem to be a lot of momentum behind the scenes by various groups in Congress to continue passing legislation and keeping the topic in public spotlight. There may be some headbutting along the way, but the overall goal seems to be full disclosure. We're already on the way, since the National Archive should have UAP documents handed over by October. What power Congress has to review it and ensure that they did in fact receive all relevant records may be dependent on upcoming legislation. Regardless, there should be some more UAP info come to light by years end.

It definitely would depend on what disclosure entails. I believe just disclosing the existence of and government engagement with a non-human intelligence could be easy to embrace or shrug off for most. However, introducing details of their culture or beliefs would redefine a lot of people's ideologies. Collectively, humans never fare well with introducing new culture into their lives. And, if there comes a day that we publicly engage a non-human intelligence then we'll be facing a range of new social and psychological conflicts.

Regarding religious acceptance, I've always felt that the idea of extraterrestrial or non-human intelligence would mesh well with the major religions. I think a lot off devout people would morph the idea of non-human intelligence to match that of angels or messengers. You can already get hints of that from some of the Republicans pushing for disclosure. Whether or not they're right in their interpretation, the overall concept of NHI would be accepted by a lot of people.

The biggest part of a controlled disclosure is preventing political conflicts and keeping the economy stable. If there has been decades of UAP/NHI recovery and research, then it could create tension within and amongst countries. We're always seeing tension grow between Congress and the DoD over the issue and public disclosure would just fuel distrust.

Any reveal of research and the companies involved could make for major fluctuations in the stock market. On top of that, I'd imagine there would be an onslaught of lawsuits with those companies to make research and patents public.

I wouldn't expect a basic disclosure to be catastrophic to the public, but it would be to the government and contractors. The hold up at this point is likely those involved trying to cover their asses to limit the consequences for themselves.

The core idea is that there are legacy programs that have acquired and are covertly researching non-human technology and biologics. These are a combination of compartmentalized government groups from the DoD, DoE, CIA, etc. and private contract companies. The programs are sealed away by over classification that prevents oversight. Even if you have clearance to know about the programs you'd need to know where to find them and who to seek for the information. And, just because these groups fall under a larger group like the DoD doesn't mean the chain of command above them is in the know. They know that there are programs, they know just enough details about them, and that they're needed. Outside of that, there is deliberate ignorance to limit any direct liability and to obfuscate effort to look into them.

While some individuals in Congress would have had briefings on incidents and certain programs in the past, they were still in the dark of the programs as a whole. David Grusch and other individuals provided testimony to help connect the dots needed for them to pursue disclosure. What Congress currently knows is pure speculation to the public, but there had to have been some damning details emerge that it has become a bipartisan effort in both the House and Senate to seek disclosure.

Naturally, there has been opposition so far from the DoD and members of Congress whose primary donors are companies with military contracts. Thanks to some legislation that has passed and more that is in the works, it seems that a form of disclosure is on the horizon. What the disclosure will entail and whether it will truly reveal any form of non-human intelligence is yet to be seen. But, over the next few years there will be details on legacy programs come to light. Some details will remain classified, but there should at least be enough come forward for the public to have a gist of what's been going on and if there is indeed non-human intelligence involved.

Interesting note that "non-human" appears 25 times in the 47 page amendment. That wording, grouped with "unknown origin", is clearly casting a broad net to try to encompass anything that can't directly be tied to human origin. Whatever the believed origin of some UAP are, both Democratic and Republican lawmakers are putting a lot of effort into uncovering potential non-human technology.

Tim Gallaudet's paper: "Beneath the Surface: We May Learn More about UAP by Looking in the Ocean"

I always hope that videos provide enough in the scenes to estimate depth and distance. One of the tricky things with capturing objects in the sky is that there will always be a sacrifice in what you capture. If you zoom in to just the sky, then you lose trees and objects on the ground to establish some sense of distance and visual anchors to match the movement of the objects to. If you're zoomed out then you lose clarity of the object itself.

I do find the consistent rotation of the main object interesting. I've seen quite a few videos posted of objects that show tumbling movement, though it's usually hard to make out exactly what they are.

Public sightings are a hard numbers game to win. It really just comes down to chance that someone with a good enough camera spots something and captures enough details. There's a lot of open sky, time in the day, and not a ton of people actively watching the sky. But, enough videos like this can help categorize sightings to better determine what is anomalous.

Looks great! If you’d like an easy sauce, you could macerate the strawberries. Just sprinkle a little sugar over cut strawberries, cover, and let sit an hour or so until the juices start to draw out.

You should see what they do during the closed door hearings.

“Oh, I set her up. I asked about UFO within the Department of Energy. And they said, ‘Aliens don’t exist or spaceships,’ and after that: BOOM! Then everybody just lit her up,” Rep. Tim Burchett exclusively tells Ask a Pol. “Because they have a procedure in place and there were certain — and she said they've never had an incident of a nuclear facility, and there's literally documented incidents. I mean, that's weird.”

For reference, Burchett's questions for Sec. Granholm followed Luna's.

One more thing... It doesn't look like LLNL itself is a no-drone zone. I'm not sure the accuracy of this map, but it lists Sandia National Labs (located adjacent to LLNL) as a no drone zone. LLNL does seem to experiment with drones, but the reports in the prior article clearly weren't objects they were aware of.