The Pentagon and UAPs: A small but welcome paradigm shift.

Ok. It's been more than five years since I wrote my last post on this blog! Not sure where the time went but I did start a new permanent Government job back in 2017, so was very occupied with applications prior to that. This means I had to pretty much abandon this blog whilst my time turned to much more mundane public sector matters for a while. I'm now considering (almost permanent) retirement in the next year - so maybe I'll have more time to write about Unidentified Aerial Phenomena (UAP). Who knows?

I felt compelled to write now because of the unfolding events concerning the soon to be released report into 'UAPs' (Scientific American article) and the revelations around encounters in restricted US airspace by highly-trained US navy pilots, supported by video, radar and Forward-looking Infrared (FLIR) data

I'm sure those of you with a keen interest in this will have greedily digested what information you could online about this subject which I won't repeat here (I know I have!) - but I've included a couple of useful links below.

As we get closer to the formal report's publication, I've noticed that in the last couple of weeks or so there appears to be a bit of a backlash from those who maintain that the exposure about the released videos from the US navy and the soon to be published report are part of some larger 'Psy-ops' on the part of the US military or intelligence agencies, or at the very least, some attempt by certain agencies to secure greater defence and military funding.

Whilst this can't entirely be ruled out, such counter-arguments seem weak. If there is a concerted effort to deceive the public through some 'false-flag' operation, one has to ask simply "Why?" to get as many speculative explanations in response as there are for what's behind Unidentified Aerial Phenomena. And regarding the argument for securing additional funding, there is a long, published history of the military industrial complex spending trillions of taxpayer dollars on secret or 'black' projects without apparent authorisation from any US Administration or Congress. Why should that change now?

From my perspective the buzz surrounding the report will sort of reset the clock back about 70 years - but hopefully in a good way - before the debunking exercises that were Project Blue Book and the Condon Committee Report successfully made the subject taboo and something to be ridiculed. Many commentators have already said that this new report could allow the subject of UAP to become more mainstream and be considered more seriously. 

If so at least it would be a small - but very welcome in my view - paradigm shift. We'll have to see how this pans out...

Recommended links (for those who've been living under a saucer/triangle-shaped rock the last few months):-

The Guardian

The Phenomenon (trailer)

Sixty Minutes

Further Recommended Reading

It's been six months since my last post. Aside from other life distractions and wanting to take a break from writing this blog, I wanted to focus on finding my dream part-time job - something that has yet to happen unfortunately!

I've been keeping an eye on the relevant news sources over that time and - thankfully for me - nothing particularly earth-shattering seems to have happened on the UFO/UAP front which I might have missed an opportunity to write about (in any case, if it had, I'm sure all of you reading this would have found out about it from other sources).

However, I have been continuing to read extensively on the UFO/UAP phenomenon and would briefly like to share some of my recommended reading material with you.

This is further to my post of 8 April 2012 (is it really three years already?)

First up is...

...On the Trail of the Saucer Spies  
by Nick Redfern

Nick Redfern's introduction to his book makes clear that it does not speculate as to the exact nature of UFO sightings. The book does however cite cases suggesting how the (mainly US and UK) authorities and their respective agencies closely watch UFO witnesses and UFO focus groups.

Aside from the expected examples of paranoia-inducing cases concerning mysterious government spooks and men-in-black, there are those which give a fascinating insight into the whole field of 'PsyOps' and disinformation. The tragic case of Paul Bennewitz, for example, is covered in this book in some detail (it is also covered in the second of the two books below).

Another case, halfway through the book, concerns how the UK's Special Branch (now Counter Terrorist Command) took an interest in and dealt with a potentially dangerous ultra right-wing group which was using UFO bodies and meetings as a cover for its activity (something I would not have considered could happen before reading this book). It is a real eye-opener and perhaps a warning to anyone interested in the subject of UFOs to be especially cautious in their dealings with others if they decide to join any such interest group.

So - definitely worth a read in terms of offering another facet to the history of the UFO phenomenon.

Otherwise, I would highly recommend the two following weighty tomes.


UFOs and the National Security State: 
Chronology of a Cover-up 1941-1973 
and
UFOs and the National Security State: 
The Cover-up Exposed 1973-1991
both by Richard M. Dolan


Anyone with any interest at all in UFOs/UAP (in the UK at least) will no doubt have read one of UK author Timothy Good's books at some point. After having read UFOs and the National Security State volumes one and two, I would personally regard Richard M. Dolan as Timothy Good's equivalent in the U.S.

In the case of both authors - and irrespective of whether you subscribe to their views about 'what is really going on' or not - between them their books provide a massive

repository of information on UFOs across the decades since the start of the modern UFO phenomenon.

Richard M. Dolan's books are similar to Timothy Good's in terms of their methodical, straightforward and non-sensational writing style and have a depth and breadth of content not found in other publications on the subject.

Consequently they serve, in my view, as must-have reference material for anyone with a serious interest in the subject.

Dolan's books give the reader as thorough an overview as possible of the history of the modern phenomenon, particularly from a U.S. perspective, for fifty years starting from 1941. My understanding is that Dolan is now working on a third book to cover the last 25 years to date which, I for one, am very much looking forward to reading.

Disclaimer

None of the above authors are personally known to me and consequently none of them have asked me to endorse their books. I am promoting these of my own volition and purely out of wish to signpost interested parties to well-written material by (in my view) serious and credible authors.

First Antares, now Virgin Galactic

Hi folks. It's been an eventful summer for me with a period of illness through the latter part of it, so I haven't been able to post for a while.

I was sad and bitterly disappointed to see the tragic events unfold in the recent Virgin Galactic test flight killing one of the pilots but with a miraculous escape for the other. An up to the minute (at time of posting) Guardian article reports that initial assessment of the incident by crash investigators suggests premature deployment of a 'feathering system' to create 'drag' for re-entry - which led to the craft's disintegration.

Coupled with the failure and (controlled) explosion of the unmanned joint NASA/Orbital Sciences Corp Antares rocket last week, this will clearly be another setback for the commercial space industry and the sector as a whole. Expect further delays to these and similar such projects, prolonging even more the time since men first landed on the moon. Given our technological advances in areas of computing, energy and propulsion since then who'd have thought we would still be struggling to extend our reach beyond our own planet 45 years later?

The 'Superman of Macclesfield' or 'human UFO'

There has been the usual spate of UFO sightings over the last three months, mostly from the U.S. (see the Southern Colorado sightings below), but the homegrown 'Superman of Macclesfield' is not a headline I'd have ever been able to predict as one associated with UFOs or UAP.

A320 and skydiver images from the Mirror Newpaper

In June (but reported in October) a human figure was seen to shoot past an Airbus 320 passenger plane at around 3,500 feet, startling the crew who were not clear what to report the incident in as. Although the event lasted only a matter of seconds, the crew (in clear skies) reported the human shape of the 'UFO' and the apparent absence of any canopy or parachute. Nothing was picked up by radar at local air traffic control.


Have a look at the Mirror's story for more details. From reading the various articles online, I think I would be more surprised if the mystery figure had flown horizontally and parallel with the plane for a few minutes or even seconds.  However, a figure falling through the sky will most likely turn out to be a thrill-seeking skydiver. Funnily enough, this is what has been suggested in the local Macclesfield Express in that the event could have been a practice run (or drop or flight?) by stuntman Gary Connery. Although he hasn't owned up to it being him so far, he did joke about how it might be him on Facebook after the official report on the event was made public.

The Southern Colorado UFOs

Meanwhile, the web's been buzzing with the reported sightings of strange luminescent discs or orbs hovering Southern Colorado for the last month. There are articles in The Huffington Post, The International Business Times and Open Minds to name but a few, about the more recent sightings and the general weirdness of past events in the area.

Witnesses still have no earthly explanation for the weird bright objects that have been appearing in the sky over this area since October but some claim that the San Luis Valley has for a long time been a UFO hotspot and therefore a popular destination for tourists and skywatchers who want to get a glimpse of UFOs or UAP.

The videos shown so far courtesy of the local 9News network - if genuine - certainly make for interesting viewing...

Here's one on YouTube courtesy of local Scott Stevens

Proof for a Moon Conspiracy?

I've been distracted by Government contract nonsense so apologies if it's been a while since my last post. Thankfully I've only got a few more days left to run on it before I get to enjoy what's left of the British Summer - which I hope will turn into an 'Indian Summer' too if you get my drift!

A faked image of a moon 'structure' from the web

Anyhow, in a slight departure from the usual UFO/UAP material, I notice that the Syfy channel are planning a special documentary about a Moon conspiracy theory that may (or may not) rattle a few cages if the evidence presented in it is compelling enough.

For further details have a look at the Open Minds article about this.

In short, proponents of this theory suggest that the Moon has been inhabited by extraterrestrials for a (very) long time and that these aliens have established 'bases' on the Moon, which continues to be used as a staging point for visits by ET to Earth.There is apparently photographic evidence of artificial constructs on the Moon (on it's far side of course, often incorrectly referred to as its 'dark side' - which we can't see from Earth) and testimony by some 'specialists' in the space industry which supports this.

This theory is not new and most likely was first given life shortly after the original Moon landing in 1969. A key story that probably kick-started this is that of the interception of restricted radio transmissions between the Apollo Astronauts and Mission Control which suggested that the astronauts were not only being 'watched' but effectively 'warned off' by the intimidating presence of several very large 'spaceships' hovering near their landing site. Further material has since come to light including photographs and witness testimony - all of which is practically impossible to confirm as genuine.

Like the UFO phenomenon, this Moon theory has been dogged by ridicule and hoaxers over the years but - unlike supposedly Earth or sky-bound UFOs - it could be argued to be far harder to prove or debunk.  This is because history currently tells us that only 12 human beings have actually set foot on the Moon (out of a total of 24 involved in the missions). This is provided you assume that they did, given there are also conspiracy theorists who would debate this as well - but that's another story in itself!

And - given our current known level of technology, most of us are not going to be seeing the surface of the Moon for ourselves anytime soon, so the theory still sits in that grey area of being 'unproven'. However, I've listed a few key arguments for and against the theory below that might give those largely unfamiliar with the whole subject food for thought.

Arguments against

1. NASA who ran the Apollo program [sic] from 1961 to 1972, categorically deny ever having found any artifacts or evidence of an ET presence on the Moon.

2. None of the Apollo astronauts have gone on record as stating that they encountered any ET presence on the Moon.

3. All photos of the Moon released by NASA and other space missions show no evidence of any alien presence on the Moon. Also thanks to modern satellite imaging technology and NASA archived images, the whole of Moon's surface including the far side or 'dark side', has effectively been photographed and mapped and can be viewed by anyone online. No artificial structures or objects are visible on the Moon's surface, other than the remnants of the Apollo Moon landings themselves.

4. It's been 45 years since the first Moon landing and no hard evidence has come to light in all that time.


Arguments for

1. NASA may not in fact be revealing everything they discovered during the Moon landings. It certainly wouldn't be the first time in history a quasi-official agency had deliberately withheld what could be highly sensitive information from the public.

2. If the previous point is true then the Apollo astronauts themselves could be sworn to secrecy with severe penalties for going public with any sensitive information. It's been suggested that various 'clandestine agencies' other than NASA were also closely involved in some if not all the Apollo missions. Moreover, proponents of the theory have suggested that NASA and these 'other agencies' already had a good idea of what they'd find prior to the first mission.

3. Again if the previous two points are true then any 'controversial' photos of the Moon could have been re-touched or simply not released into the public domain. Additionally there could be a strict control or clearance on the release of any Moon imagery by NASA and the 'other agencies'. This however would suggest, to be in anyway effective, a monumental effort by NASA and the other agencies and a heavy reliance on international cooperation i.e. with China and Russia and other countries with space technology.

4. The 45 years since the first Moon landing could be a moot point if the previous three points are true and there has been a concerted effort to conceal certain evidence from the public because of it's extreme sensitivity and supposedly very high security classification. By way of a comparison, details of many highly classified secrets from the Second World War (e.g. the work of the Bletchley Park Enigma code-breakers and the Manhattan Project to create the first atomic bomb) have only come to light in subsequent decades and in some cases are only just being revealed now.

As a footnote - it's probably worth being aware of the little known Clementine mission which took place in 1994 and was a joint operation between NASA and the military to take high definition images of the whole of the Moon's surface. The unmanned spacecraft was called 'Clementine' as it only carried enough fuel to complete its mission before being "lost and gone forever" as in the song "My darling Clementine". This mission supposedly took 1.8 million images of the Moon but - to date - apparently only 170,000 of these have been put in the public domain. This begs the question "why?" if there is nothing worth seeing in the mass of unreleased images.

The apparent official answer to date is that at least 1 million of these other images are just 'emission spectra' taken at wavelengths from the ultraviolet to the near infrared and wouldn't make particularly interesting viewing but are useful as raw data for scientists. That's an awful lot of merely raw scientific data...

'Alien Egg' that caused a scare at a school

On a separate note - and in keeping with my previous references to the slightly bizarre inclusion of 'UFO crash drills' at schools over the last few years - a recent project involving a giant 'alien egg' at the Holy Trinity Primary School in Halstead, Essex backfired a bit scaring some of the pupils.

Have a look at the Daily Mail article for details. I couldn't help a smile at the name of the fictitious National Museum of Strange Objects representative - Dr Violet Strangeways....

UFO near miss with Aussie plane - a case of the Oz factor?

In a case that bears some similarity to one I referred to in my article at the start of the year - New Year, New Close Encounters? - in March an Australian plane en route to Perth Airport apparently narrowly avoided a collision with a UFO. This incident has only just started getting net coverage given that the Australian Transportation Safety Bureau (ATSB) released a report this week on the investigation into the incident which, thus far, has not identified the object in question.

The West Australian newspaper briefly summarises this incident but the Open Minds article expands on this a little more, in particular on the point that if what the plane encountered was an 'unmanned aerial vehicle' or UAV (in other words a drone - either military or recreational) then it was operating in restricted airspace without the apparent knowledge of either civil or military aviation authorities.

Now I couldn't resist the use of the pun in the title of this post but there's a point to be made here in the context of Ufology in general. For those unfamiliar with the expression, the 'Oz factor' was first coined by our very own (by which I mean the UK's) Jenny Randles formerly of BUFORA.

The Wikipedia entry for Ms. Randles refers to the 'Oz factor' as:-

"...a term invented by Randles in 1983 to describe the strange, seemingly altered state of consciousness commonly claimed by some witnesses of unidentified flying objects and other similar paranormal events. Randles has noted the strange calmness and lack of panic described by the witnesses, relative to the bizarre circumstances that they described and says that they described and defined the Oz factor as "the sensation of being isolated, or transported from the real world into a different environmental framework...where reality is but slightly different, [as in] the fairy tale land of Oz." She has further noted that "the Oz factor certainly points to consciousness as the focal point of the UFO encounter..."

Now it would be supremely arrogant to say that all currently inexplicable UFO encounters might have a psychological explanation or be put down to an altered state of consciousness on the part of an observer or observers. In fact it would be quite a disturbing stretch to state this was the case for any given aerial encounter - as that would suggest psychological issues on the part of aviation personnel involved - including the pilots.

It could however be one explanation for some ground based 'abduction' or 'contact' cases allegedly involving extraterrestrials - a facet of the UFO subject I am still completely circumspect about.

Triangle UFO blasts Taliban?

My contract's been extended (they seem to like my work) which has meant l've been short on spare time to write. Thankfully I've now got some leave for a short while.

Whilst commuting I've still managed to find time to read Richard Dolan's excellent "The Cover-Up Exposed, 1973-1991" the 2nd volume in his planned 3 volume series, "UFOs and the National Security State," covering developments in the UFO phenomenon from the 1940s to the present day. Whilst the first book covered the post-war period - and arguably the start of the modern phenomenon - the second looks at the UFO events, politics, and research that occurred during the last two decades of the cold war.

I plan to review this and his previous book, as well as Nick Redfern's On the Trail of the Saucer Spies soon.

Triangle 'UFO' bombs Taliban

Meanwhile, a video has hit the net in the last few days, supposedly filmed by U.S. Marines and showing a triangular UFO attacking a Taliban camp. Personally I think it's nothing more than a half-decent CGI fake intended to go viral so - it wouldn't surprise me if there's some original footage of the explosion(s) shown around somewhere - minus the UFO.

Here's the video in question on YouTube

Another strange triangle UFO

More compelling is the imagery of the triangular 'aircraft' with a contrail, captured by an amateur wildlife photographer. What's particularly interesting is that the witness claims that, as well as making unusual 180 degree manoeuvres, the aircraft was 'absolutely silent'. KSN - which filmed this article - also spoke with nearby McConnell Air Force Base. Assuming they were being truthful, McConnell state that they were also unable to identify the craft. They suggested it may be a B-2 bomber ( i.e. the Northrop Grumman B-2 Spirit or 'Stealth Bomber'), however, they could not confirm it and added that if it is a B-2, it is not one of theirs. So if it was a B-2 whose was it? If it wasn't a B-2 what was it?

The full video article is on the Open Minds website

Flight MH370 - 5 days on and still a mystery...

Update 15 March 2014

An image of a Malaysia Airlines 777

This is looking more and more like a hijack/terrorist scenario given that communications on the plane may have been deliberately disabled and that the authorities are now looking at the crew/passenger manifest in more detail.

BBC Breakfast interviewed an 'expert' in the last hour who referred to the 'point of maximum confusion' during the plane's journey.

This would be the point at which communications with the plane would be handed over from one country or region's airspace control to another and during which a hostile takeover might possibly have taken place.

This may offer the hope (however faint) that the passengers and crew are still alive and that they - and the aircraft itself - are being held for a ransom at a secret location...

Main article

By now you may have heard about the 'disappearance' of the Malaysia Airlines flight MH370 five days ago.

Rather than repeat the story here, this BBC article covers developments so far in full.

The BBC have also posted an article about other mysterious airline incidents - some not resolved until many years later.

It remains to be seen what category of incident flight MH370 falls into. It would clearly be premature to even speculate at this stage about what might have happened but, of course, conspiracy theories - including those relating to UFOs - are already viral on the net.

What this most likely tragic story highlights however, is how the world's air travel infrastructure is still vulnerable in the 21st century, nearly a hundred years after the start of the first 'fixed wing' airline. It also shows that, despite all our modern technology which includes radar and satellite tracking systems, finding a large passenger aircraft (or potential wreckage thereof) with 239 people on board, in a search area recently expanded to 92,000 sq km, is an extremely challenging task.

Assuming the plane never made it to dry land, the ocean is a very big and very deep place to be looking through.

My thoughts go out to those relatives of the people on flight MH370 waiting for any news at this time.

A UFO flying across Kent’s skies?

Update 

This story also features in Newsshopper as well as Open Minds.

Main article

An article in the Kent News today features a UFO sighting by father and son - Les Burlington, 68 and son Andrew 38 - in the area of South London/Kent. This article also refers to the website UFO World sightings which they originally reported their sighting to.

Unfortunately, the picture in the article (also shown here) is only apparently a computer generated image created by son Andrew of what they believe the unidentified 'craft' looked like - a classic triangular UFO.

Nonetheless the description of their sighting is interesting. They rule out both the sceptics' recurring choice of Chinese lanterns and helicopters as an explanation.

'Digital representation' of the UFO in Kent News

I know exactly what they're talking about with their reference to helicopter sightings, as I regularly see police helicopters circling in the South London/Kent area. You always know they're around as they're very noisy - unlike the 'craft' in this apparent sighting. And if what they witnessed was at relatively close range - to prevent too much sound distortion - then one could also rule out a VTOL (vertical take off and landing) or vector thrust aircraft given the noise that is made by such vehicles.

I have seen Chinese lanterns in this area too. Whilst these are silent, they're readily easy to identify (at close range - less so at a distance) and rarely last for any significant duration.

If the timing of the sighting was at 8:45pm as suggested, then this also rules out
sun-dogs - and whilst most familiar celestial bodies slowly move across the sky (no idea whether it was a clear sky or not that night) - what they claimed to witness apparently 'circled' as well...

It is conceivable however, that what they saw might possibly have been an airship or blimp, or a remote-controlled drone/aircraft.

Message to Les/Andrew

 

If you're reading this post - especially given that this has apparently taken place not far from where I live - I would very much like you to get in touch about your sighting.

You can reach me at ufoscrutiny@gmail.com.

Thanks,

Jonathan aka MIB.

The (Hoax) Alien Invasion is coming...

Ok Folks,

I admit I've been a bit remiss with my postings again - especially as my last post has been out of date for some time (as the Open Minds website is now up and running fine again).
My apologies - it was down to another run of (tiring and tedious) Govt contract work which finishes at the end of March and which has been taking up quite a bit of my time.

So this post offers three relatively hot news items for one. Enjoy.

Hoax 'Alien Invasion'

A typical camera drone

Anyway, be warned that according to these OpenMinds and Yahoo News articles there is a hoax 'alien invasion' on the horizon.

No it's nothing to do with the laughable 'Project Blue Beam', this appears to be a planned large-scale prank orchestrated by supposed UFO fans who will fly large numbers of remote controlled drones, complete with eerie flashing lights, into the skies on 5th April. Apparently 1st April would be too obvious a date hence the 5th to catch the uninformed unawares.

It will be interesting to see whether this generates any flurry of activity on the web or whether - given some the event's thunder might have been stolen by these articles and others - it just ends up being another '...and finally' item on local news networks. All a bit of fun I guess. And who knows? Maybe the news of the 'fake invasion' is itself just as fake - a social experiment in media manipulation. Guess we'll just have to wait and see.

Are We Alone? - This coming week

It's good to see some elements of the mainstream media giving some extended and sober coverage to one of the great mysteries as the American Science Channel launches it's Are We Alone themed week from tomorrow. Full details on the Science Channel Website

Bruce Dickinson and the 'flying bum'!

Now what have the former Iron Maiden front-man and a 'flying bum' got in common?

Daily Mail picture of the Hybrid Air Vehicle

Well the recent BBC News article and other articles such as this one in the Daily Mail will show you.

Bruce Dickinson - now a successful businessman and pilot, has - along with other investors - re-acquired (from the US military) an advanced 'airship' designed in Britain which, according to the Daily Mail resembles nothing less than a 'flying bum'.

It's a rather crass description for a huge and elegant piece of British hybrid airplane/airship engineering called the HAV (Hybrid Air Vehicle) 304, which I'm sure might get mistaken by some unobservant people for a 'UFO'. Anyway check out the articles for more details.

Open Minds TV site down again?

Okay so for a few days I have been unable to access the Open Minds TV website. Apparently 'the server where this site is located isn't responding.'

Whether I use Firefox or Safari the browser just freezes up on this site only. Other sites no problem.

Disabling internet security has no effect. Perhaps this is just something affecting those of us on this side of the the pond.

I can see search engine results still showing live/recent news articles - and I'd expect a holding page to at least be accessible if the site was down for some new year maintenance.

Is anyone else having the same issue accessing this site?

New Year, New Close Encounters?

Hello Folks,

A Happy New Year to you and I hope you all enjoyed the festive break.

For me the run up and the main event was quite busy hence my absence from posting since November.

Anyhow, the year has started with two interesting UK cases which have apparently only just hit the press, although technically the timing of the events seem to have been July and December of 2013 respectively.

The first (this event appears to have been July 2013 but has only been reported in the Sunday Telegraph on 5 January) was a dramatic near miss between a passenger plane and a 'rugby ball shaped' UFO near Heathrow Airport. The jury's still out on what the object was but the UK's Aviation Airprox investigations unit has been looking into the incident which has been reported by an (understandably) unnamed pilot for an unnamed airline. The Full Telegraph article can be found here.

The Wakefield Express reports a resident in Ossett (a market town within the metropolitan district of the City of Wakefield, West Yorkshire) having filmed a rectangular-shaped UFO hovering over the area on 29 December 2013. Have a look at the brief Express article.

Elsewhere, there has been an intriguing report of a UFO tracked on radar as well as seen by witnesses, which disrupted traffic at Bremen Airport in Germany - a country out of which - interestingly in itself - few UFO reports tend to emanate. See the Huffington Post's article here. According to accounts by air traffic control and local eyewitnesses, the UFO's description includes the apparent airframe and navigation lights of an plane. However, the aerial object in question was seemingly operating without authorisation in German airspace.

Could the mystery 'plane' in fact be:-

a) a huge oversight on the part of Bremen air traffic control (unlikely in my view);

b) evidence of a secret military/intelligence operation for example the continuing practice of extraordinary rendition (more likely although the timing and frequency of the event seems strange for this explanation to hold weight); or

c) something far stranger?

Could we all be carrying alien DNA?

*UPDATE*

 

Having subsequently examined this story more closely, the Kazakhstani scientists would appear to be earnest in their theory concerning 'alien code' being hidden in human DNA - and when one starts to look at what they have to say in detail, it does start to make a strange kind of sense.

To see what I mean, have a look at the following video I've added in here from Paul Davies. Writing in New Scientist, Professor Paul Davies, from the Australian Centre for Astrobiology at Macquarie University in Sydney, also suggests - amongst other theories - that a cosmic greeting card could have been left in the so-called ‘junk DNA’ contained in every human cell.

If you can't view the video on your mobile device try clicking here.

According to an article in the Australian Courier (which in turn links to a six month old Discovery article) scientists in Kazakhstan - of all places - supposedly believe that humanity has alien code written into its DNA and that we might have been created by something 'non-terrestrial', much in the way 'the engineers' created humanity in the recent Ridley Scott movie Prometheus.  

Conspiracy theorists shouldn't start punching the air just yet however.

Still of an 'Engineer' from the Ridley Scott movie Prometheus

No hard evidence in support of this appears to have been submitted yet nor does there appear to have been any scrutiny by the rest of the world's scientific community thus far.

Could it be that someone in Kazakhstan is trying to raise the country's profile on the world map for being associated with something other than Borat?

Or could it just be an old April fool's joke - just look at the date of the original Discovery article...

UFOs over the UK both real(?) and staged

Still here folks. Just currently diverting more of my energy to searching for a decent part-time job or contract at the moment.

Real?

Anyway, you might have noticed a recent spate of sightings across the UK in recent weeks, including a ball of scintillating light captured on video over Cumbria; a vaguely 'disc-shaped' object photographed by a motorist in West Yorkshire (possibly a tax-disc holder as suggested by some keen-eyed observers!) and a green ball of light witnessed and photographed over Gloucestershire.

One incident that particularly struck me however, is the image captured by a former Royal Navy Aeronautical Engineer - see the Open Minds article. What's compelling to me is the calibre of the witness and the very interesting close up of one of the images captured - quite obviously a 'disc'.

Interesting too to note that none of the above sightings really correlate in any way, in that the phenomena - which may yet be revealed to have earthly explanations - are all visually different.

Staged

Finally - wouldn't you know it - yet another crashed 'UFO' is discovered in a school playground.

This time the event staged by North Harringay Primary School for its pupils, managed to feature in a national newspaper - The Independent (article here). More evidence, if needed, that the Department of Education appears to be endorsing a curriculum that includes a rather strangely-themed series of managed events in schools around the country...

Professional Pilots' Rumour Network - Compare and contrast

Whilst conducting internet research for another post I plan to publish, I came across some (now quite old) posts on the following forum - Professional Pilots Rumour Network (PPRUNE) - a site that hosts anonymous online chatter between current and former civil/commercial aviation pilots and other aviation personnel.

A number of these posts can be said to be typical of the ridicule that anyone interested in the UFO/UAP subject attracts from those claiming to represent the 'voice of reason' in the aviation community. One classic example is this post where the mere utterance of the dreaded acronym 'UFO' leads to very toxic responses. I personally find the level of arrogance displayed and cavalier attitude demonstrated on this forum, towards the subject and those merely discussing it, to be of some concern - but not unexpected.

That's because, if one was to conduct an opinion poll in the UK today on whether regular air travellers would feel safe sitting in a plane known to be piloted by someone who claimed to have seen a UFO (despite the initials standing for Unidentified Flying Object - the 'alien' stigma attached to these letters remains), then I imagine at the very least 50 per cent of those polled would say 'no'. Coupled with the point that all pilots and civil aviation personnel generally would know their career would quickly be over if they publicly insisted on having seen a UFO (whether it had an earthly explanation or not), it's not really surprising to see why this general attitude persists to this day.

What's really interesting however, is this very rare post which demonstrates that there are pilots out there who have had some strange experiences and - quite boldly in my view - are prepared to discuss this to a limited extent on the very same forum.

Another poster in this chain does, however, offer a very valid word of caution which I have quoted below:

"...Of all the witnesses, two west country policeman are perhaps the most memorable: they had become quite famous after spending most of an evening chasing a mystery object that hovered in front of their patrol car, darting from side to side and sometimes approaching very close as they hurtled along at 90mph. I remember them being distinctly disenchanted when shown astronomical tables that placed Venus right in front of them on the straight bits of road.  

These fine officers, and most other witnesses had fallen foul of two properties of the human eye: 

Firstly, it's extreme sensitivity - the ability to easily see a 3W torch bulb suspended on a hill top 6 mi away for instance. Unfortunately, the eye is not calibrated, and a pin point source has an apparent brightness linked to the surrounding environment. That is how Venus can be described by witnesses as 'dazzling' and so on.

Secondly, once denied normal visual cues in low light situations, the eye can begin rapid involuntary movements. This makes distant light sources (eg stars, planets, satellites and aircraft) appear to 'dart' about the sky.

Just note how many UFO stories involve 'dazzling' objects that 'dart' about!
I am not suggesting that all sightings can be explained in this way. But very many can. And there are important lessons for professional observers like Pilots and Policemen. The eye can certainly deceive and the more 'expert' the witness, the more extreme the mis-interpretation of visual cues can become. That's just because we all share the same physiology and no amount of training can change that, whatever any given individual might think. 

PS
I never really gave up on the UFO idea. The astonishing and continuing discovery of hundreds of extra-solar planets in the last few years gives the whole subject new momentum. But 'investigating' the anecdotes of witnesses is a hard road that rapidly becomes impassible if any kind of objective test is applied to the data. The subject was IMHO best discussed many years ago by Prof RV Jones, the man who 'discovered' the V2 rocket. His account is here"

[the link referred to at the end of this quote seems to have changed so interested parties will need to search for "Prof RV Jones"] 


These last comments give me pause for thought about my own recent sighting described in my previous post - in that it is possible that what I saw could also have been an exceptionally bright daytime celestial object - but I guess I'll never know for sure.


Should by any remote chance, any of those pilots have read this post (the latter and earnest ones only please - captain-flashheart-and-his-laugh-I-nearly-did crew of online abusers need not apply!), I would very much be interested in hearing their full accounts - anonymously of course.

Please email: Jonathan Niven at ufoscrutiny@gmail.com

As far as I'm aware, it's a shame that non-U.S. aviation personnel probably can't contact NARCAP to record their accounts.

The role and function of NARCAP can be found on its website and is self-explanatory. But this site is U.S. in origin and (tellingly) there is no such equivalent body or site in the UK for example, which means BUFORA would be the next best place for such reports in this country. 

A recent UFO sighting of my own...

I hope those of my readers in the UK enjoyed the exceptionally good weather we had this Summer (makes a change from recent years!). Aside from enhancing my visits to relatives and in-laws in different parts of the UK, the long sunny days allowed me to digest much more reading material in my back garden on the subject of UFOs, which I shall summarise in a future post.

In the meantime, I would like to share with you an interesting 'sighting' I had whilst recently walking through the area I live.

I should point out that although I am now in my mid-forties, I am very fortunate to still have very good eyesight and have yet to need glasses for any activity.

The sighting

The date was Wednesday 28 August 2013. I can remember the time of the sighting as I was walking on my way to see a matinee screening of the film 'Elysium' at my local Odeon cinema which was at 13:15pm. The sighting itself started at approximately 12:45pm. I was on my own (my wife being at work) and was in a quiet residential back street in the South London area where I live.

The sky was a brilliant cornflower blue with virtually no clouds. I just happened to look up in a northwesterly direction and noted the positions of at least two airplanes, both cruising at completely different altitudes, with one really high up (I couldn't hazard a guess at the specific altitude I'm afraid) and the other probably at base cloud level (had there been any significant cloud cover on the day).

What particularly caught my eye was a very bright object in-between these planes (in terms of guessed altitude). It seemed as bright, if not brighter, than the star Sirius would be at night-time, except this was in a clear early afternoon sky. The light was intense, white and occasionally fluctuated, but did not 'twinkle' like a night-time star would. Also of interest was its long, near-stationary position relative to other points of reference, such as the rooftops of houses over which I could see it and one of the airplanes I had first noticed. My impression was that the light source was artificial and not a natural phenomenon. There was no - even distant - accompanying jet engine or rotor noise that I would expect to hear from either a plane or helicopter. Remember I was on a quiet residential street with little or no ambient noise.

I also remember being annoyed for two reasons: that I hadn't got my binoculars with me (which though fairly portable, I only generally carry around with me when in more rural surroundings); and that the duration of the sighting was in danger of making me miss the start of the film I was going to see - in that it lasted almost 15 minutes.

Just to make sure I wasn't the only person who could see this, I asked a lady who was passing by if she could see it too (which probably unnerved her a bit and I can't say I blame her!). She had to physically cross the street to look over the rooftops from roughly where I was standing but she did indeed confirm that she could see the object too and that 'no. I wasn't going mad'. The lady then rather matter-of-factly carried on as if seeing a very bright stationary object in the daytime sky was no big deal!

I continued watching the bright object, whilst the planes disappeared on their respective flightpaths and others came into view, concerned that I would need to tear myself away soon if I wanted to see the film, as I was still some five minutes walk away from the cinema.

Then, almost as if to allay my concerns, at around 13:00pm the object very slowly appeared to descend. I say 'appeared to descend' because it could have been moving straight away from me relative to my position (in other words further northwest) which would also give the impression of descent. As it was I found myself slowly walking further and further back to keep it in sight above the rooftops until I almost banged into a tree on the kerbside.

Conventional explanation?

Now here's a list of the things, I personally believe this object couldn't have been which make the sighting interesting:-

• An airplane because I could initially see at least two of those in the sky at the same time which did not resemble this object in any way and the object 'hovered' or remained stationary for at least 10-15 minutes. Incidentally there was no vapour-trail from or near the object;

• A Chinese lantern, hot-air balloon or party balloon as the object remained stationary for a lot longer than any of those would;

• The Moon - because I saw the Moon quite clearly in another part of the daytime sky and nowhere near as bright as this object;

• Venus, Mars, Jupiter, Sirius, Arcturus or another similar such celestial body because having read up on this aspect of astronomy, it is extremely rare for these to be seen with such luminous intensity in the daytime - and they do not move across the sky in as short a time-frame as this object did at the sighting's conclusion.

• A 'sun-dog' or rainbow effect as there were no clouds near the object, which these phenomena are usually caused by and the object was only one apparent colour - a very intense white;

• A bird as most birds - as far as I'm aware - rarely hover for fifteen minutes and aren't luminous or emit intense (even reflected) light!; and

• A firework or laser show given that both of those would be more transitory, more obvious to even the casual observer and almost always take place at night.

I should also point out that, although it was a late Summer's day there were, as far as I am aware, no thunderstorms or associated atmospheric electrical phenomena in London that day.


Now it is possible that, given the objects 'flight characteristics' what I saw could have been:-

• A helicopter, (real or model) or a camera drone; or

• An airship.

However, for it to have been any of these, it would have to have had:-

• a highly polished reflective surface to reflect sunlight with such intensity, for such a duration and at just the right angle for me to see it for nearly quarter of an hour; or

• very bright searchlights pointed in my direction for nearly fifteen minutes - but why would either an airship or helicopter being using searchlights in the daytime?

Supporting evidence?

In view of the above, it is a source of intense frustration to me that I didn't have my binoculars or any other means of getting a closer view of the object. Also a video or image on my iPhone camera wouldn't have done it justice given the limitations of digital zooms - something analogue or optical zooms are much better for in these circumstances.

So no images or video to back up my sighting I'm afraid and no way for me to discern what the actual shape of the object was from such a distance. I have however found a recent UK video online (made incidentally the day after my sighting) which shows an object closely resembling what I saw. The video was posted on Youtube under the poster's heading "ufo (saucer) Derby Uk 29/08/2013". I cannot vouch for this video's authenticity however.

Conclusion

To me at least, my sighting currently sits within the pure definition of an Unidentified Flying Object, and I hasten to add - not necessarily with any of the E.T. connotations many automatically assume with such a sighting.

Given the above, I would be interested to hear from anyone who saw something similar on or around that time in the skies above South London, or indeed any other part of London which may help to 'triangulate' the sighting or even throw more 'light' (no pun intended) onto what this object was or might have been.

David Clarke and Nick Pope - For heaven's sake make up!

I see that there's been an exchange of fire between two of Britain's 'UFO experts' recently, especially coming on the heels of the final release of the MOD's UFO Files.

The Huffington Post article by Lee Speigel gives a good summary so far of these two having come to blows.

Whilst, I tend to favour Pope's view - and those of others such as Timothy Good - that these are not all the files that the relevant UK authorities possess concerning UFOs (note I'm not specifically concerned with just MOD's files here), I do wish these two would try and settle their differences.

One of the most recent salvos in this exchange was by Pope seemingly and indirectly referring to Clarke as a 'useful idiot' (which was in both the Reuters and UFOs and Nukes articles I referred to in my last post), which I thought was unkind given Clarke's work to have the MOD files released. Pope now appears to have offered an apology for his remark. It also doesn't help matters that - if certain claims being made about him are true - Pope might not have been the UFO sceptic he maintained he was before working for the MOD (the HuffPost article by Lee Speigel gives details).

As Lee says in his article:-

"If there are any losers here, it must be the public, for the confusion this has brought up. After tens of thousands of pages of UFO files have been released by the U.K., who are we supposed to believe about how significant (or not) those documents really are?"

The two protagonists - like many others in the UFO community - seem more concerned with attacking each other (and perhaps protecting their own reputations) than making a collective effort to continue to search for answers.

Despite the arguments put forward by both supporters and sceptics generally, the phenomenon of UFOs and UAP persists. Of those cases that come to light, there are still a significant number that cannot be put down to chinese lanterns, balloons, experimental aircraft, drones, meteorological or astronomical phenomena, the mental state of observers etc.

The observable universe apparently stubbonly refuses to fit into the neat world-view of either hardened sceptics or avid supporters. In addition, whilst I favour 'cock-up' or 'WYSIWYG' (What-You-See-Is-What-You-Get) rather than 'conspiracy' to explain much Government activity, it would be foolish to think that any Government is entirely 'open' or 'transparent' on a topic such as this.

Still both Clarke and Pope - whatever flaws they might be considered by some to have (including each other) - are well-known and dare I say, respected names in the field and are bolder than I (and many like me), by publicly having just such an association with the UFO phenomenon, whilst I - through necessity - must remain anonymous.

That is why I think it is important that they acknowledge their differences in a mature, gentlemanly fashion and just try to get along.

Smoke and mirrors - the MOD's 'X-Files'

[Updated 11 July 2013 see below*]

The tenth and final batch of files on UFOs from the Ministry of Defence have now been released (groan). If you want to see them you can go to the relevant website here.

Screen capture of the site where the MOD files can be accessed

Whilst this may engage the interest of many a ufologist, I have learned not to expect too much from, what I view, as a diversionary exercise by the U.K. authorities, in much the same way that the now infamous Project Blue Book was used (more extensively) by the authorities in the U.S. over four decades ago. Whilst they sometimes make for an interesting read, I'm afraid any excitement I might have felt over these mislabelled UK 'X-files' files dissipated shortly after release of the first set some time ago. Funnily enough, I see that former MOD official Nick Pope apparently thinks the same according to one Reuters article I read today, which I was unaware of when I started writing this post.

*Since writing this post, I notice that Robert Hastings, author of the website UFOs and Nukes has written an interesting article concerning the latest MOD UFO files release, which also includes a definitive statement by Nick Pope (some of which is referenced in the former Reuters article). Readers might want to check out the relevant page of Mr Hastings's site here.

The same can be said generally with most material released under the UK's Freedom of Information (FOI) Act. Having contributed to responses to many a Freedom of Information case myself in two Government Departments, I know that our Government is, with a few exceptions, very careful not to put controversial material into the public domain and officials will obsesses over the tone of the covering response to FOI requesters, even with the relatively low or baseline security level cases I was involved in. My experience of FOI cases and processes is that these are mostly burdensome to Government Departments, using up significant amounts of officials' time and effort that could be usefully employed elsewhere, for the release of material that is effectively of little or no value.

This is, of course, one of the main reasons why the MOD set out to release 'all' the UFO files they have to the public - to reduce some of the increasing workload on an ever decreasing workforce of civil servants.

It should come as no surprise then that material of a significantly higher security level will never see the light of day. This is irrespective of the UK's blessed FOI Act because, the effort of releasing it (properly redacted) notwithstanding, it is deemed too sensitive to release in the interests of national and international security - largely with strong justification.

This leads me onto the recent Sky interview (below) of famous and long-standing ufologist Timothy Good - author of the fascinating "Need to Know" amongst other books, whose comments echo my own thoughts on the matter.

Whether you subscribe to Mr Good's theories or not, it would be truly naive to assume that the material released by the MOD is in any way a true reflection of the UK authorities' amassed files - whether definitive and revealing or not - on the subject of UFOs. As Mr Good suggests there are other players in the defence, intelligence and security community who will maintain records that will not reach the MOD, let alone reach the public domain. GCHQ, MI6 and Royal Naval Intelligence spring to mind for example and are referred to by Mr Good in the interview.

Now it may be that many such records might only be retained for 'horizon scanning', in that they are used to assess whether there is evidence of a technological or strategic advantage which our military and intelligence community needs to be aware of. This is likely to be in the context of assessing the capabilities of hostile foreign powers or organisations, and not necessarily because of some implied 'extraterrestrial' threat.

It's also interesting to note that this comes at a time when a certain whistleblower (a very foolhardy one at that) has compromised the security of some GCHQ and NSA activity, which would otherwise never have been revealed. Anything the authorities, especially those in defence and intelligence, deign to reveal to the public will only ever be a tiny piece of the true picture. And that's even excluding the subject of UFOs, which as Mr Good suggests, might have one of the highest orders of security clearance attached to it.

Douglas Trumbull's UFOTOG Resurrected?

Visual effects expert Doug Trumbull

In previous postings, you'll have seen my speculations about visual effects expert Douglas Trumbull and his supposedly shelved UFOTOG project. Mr Trumbull was kind enough to take the time out to update me on UFOTOG as it stood when I asked him about it.

My previous posts are below with the most recent first.

Douglas Trumbull's response on UFOTOG

Open email to Douglas Trumbull about UFOTOG

Still no news on UFOTOG

Well according to an interview that Open Minds (click link) was able to get with a colleague of Trumbull's, who - rather interestingly in itself - is a representative of Mutual UFO Network - Mark D’Antonio (a photo analyst for the MUFON), a new 'fictionalised' account concerning the use of the equipment featured in the UFOTOG project is soon to be released.

Whilst encouraging, this appears to be a new approach being taken with this project. It seems that rather than produce an actual documentary (yet) of Trumbull and his team's efforts to get verifiable data on intelligently controlled non-terrestrial objects; or conversely even come away with no verifiable data to support existence of the same; Trumbull is perhaps seeking to generate further interest and funding for UFOTOG by releasing this 'fictional' version of a documentary.

The UFOTOG Humvee in action

To paraphrase Mark D’Antonio from the Open Minds interview, the film will be 'A visual foray into what could be the potential reality of the project'.

I think that this is great news that the project is alive and well and that Mr Trumbull has some support in this.



It's also very interesting to see that Mr Trumbull is now apparently working with a well-known, long-standing and respected American UFO investigations body on this project.

This could be a smart way to engage more undecided hearts and minds (and potentially well-funded backers) for the project without the stigma of ridicule being attached.

We'll have to see whether this leads to an actual groundbreaking documentary in time...

Book review: "A.D. After Disclosure" by Richard M. Dolan and Bryce Zabel

Front Cover of the book

What can I say? Life got in the way of blogging again for a while so - sorry for the absence of posts since early April.

Anyway, whilst routing through one my local bookstores months ago I came across "A.D. After Disclosure" which was amongst the (frankly abysmally) tiny selection of books devoted to the UFO/UAP subject.

For my own reasons, and probably like millions of other people around the world, I'm still effectively at 'first base' when it comes to the subject. I believe the whole UFO/UAP subject deserves much more attention than it gets and less ridicule than it deserves - especially when thousands of professionals in the armed forces and other state services around the globe have been reporting inexplicable things in our skies for at least seventy years. Despite the hard line taken by debunkers and the ridicule the subject attracts, the phenomenon isn't about to go away and - like one well known UK skeptic and self-proclaimed 'expert' on the subject would otherwise like to suggest (whom I won't name here) - it seems a little arrogant to explain all of it away on just wish-fulfilment, mythology, cultural influence or some form of mass-hallucination.

However, I wouldn't go as far as saying that extraterrestrials (in the traditional sense of intelligent species from other planets) are necessarily behind the most compelling of UFO/UAP cases either. So you can begin to see why the central core of this book requires a 'leap of faith' for me - and for many other people I would imagine - by reading it.

First impressions

 

Whilst I doubted the wisdom of having an endorsement by none other than Stan Lee* (of Marvel Comics fame) on the front cover, after having looked into the (quite impressive) credentials of the two authors Richard M. Dolan and Bryce Zabel, I decided to give the book a go - and can honestly say I was not disappointed.

[*Don't get me wrong - I've nothing against Stan Lee and Marvel Comics. I just don't think he's necessarily the best person to be cited endorsing something that appears to be a serious attempt to address the issue of 'Disclosure'.]

What first struck me was that, as far as I'm aware, nobody - outside the various works of science fiction - has made a serious and in-depth effort to tackle the questions arising from what would happen were it to be publicly proven beyond doubt that: a) intelligent extraterrestrials exist; and b) they have been engaging with humanity for some time albeit in apparent secrecy.

So the authors have set a publishing precedent in this at least - but I'm happy to be corrected if there is another similar such book out there that predates this one.

I mentioned making the 'leap of faith' above by reading this book and would point out that it is a necessary one in order to properly appreciate its content.

Re: its overall content, it makes for an accessible and engaging - if sometimes slightly cliched and overly dramatic - read but I can understand that such a writing style would be necessary to retain many readers' attention.

At its Core

 

The central aim of the book is to give informed speculation about the likely consequences of - and a suggested timeline of likely events - in the face of proven intelligent ET contact and this the book does really well. In my view, it effectively leaves no stone unturned in terms of how a significant event leading to Disclosure would affect, amongst other things:-

• initial Governments' responses to the event and how this would be managed; 

• the public's reaction and their subsequent treatment of those in authority especially if certain Governments were proven to be complicit in some sort of cover-up; 

• how this might to a lesser or greater extent lead to political or civil instability; 

• the collateral damage and unintended consequences as a result of such instability; 

• how the mainstream media would cover the developments; 

• how the world would re-examine the phenomenon of UFOs and its history and how this might impact on education; 

• how the entertainment industry might deal with developments; 

• how the economies and stock markets of the world might be affected and whether this might cause another financial crisis; 

• how legal systems might have to change to incorporate previously unforseen legal complexities (something I'd honestly never considered until I read this book); 

• how religions, their followers and leaders might react and how this might affect religious views; 

• how aspects of mainstream science might have to re-evaluate certain theories; 

• how advances in technology might be affected especially in terms of how the world's energy supplies and linked economies might potentially change;

• how different generations might react to such developments; and

• how this might all impact on daily life.

Each of the above (and some other elements I haven't listed) have separate passages devoted to each topic and make a good fist of suggesting what likely consequences might be. One I hadn't expected was in terms of religion (which is backed up by some actual research into public opinion on the question). I won't spoil things by saying why here - I would suggest one reads the book to find out - but suffice to say most people's expectations in this area may be turned on their head after reading this book.

The Breakaway Group

 

Another interesting thread running through the book is the theory concerning the 'Breakaway Group' which - the authors suggest - is a super secret organisation which has supposedly been coordinating events behind the scenes ever since apparent contact with intelligent non-humans in the post-war period.  The authors attempt to speculate why the Group came about, how it has been involved with many of the issues listed in the bullets above and how it would seek to manage developments following an unprecedented event which leads to Disclosure might bring.

Conspiracy theorists will of course lap up this aspect of the book. Throughout Ufology in general there are frequent references to 'Cabals' or secret societies trying to clandestinely impose a (mostly unwelcome) 'New World Order' on a largely unsuspecting world.

Thankfully the authors do not sink to regurgitating many of the extreme ideas espoused by many theorists on the web and elsewhere. They do however attempt to take a hard look at how such a body not only could have come into existence (with the possible emergence of the 'military industrial complex' warned about by President Eisenhower in his now famous farewell address) but also just how it might be operating across geographical and legal boundaries and with technological resources quite possibly at least 60 years ahead of that available in the public domain.

The authors readily cite examples of how such secrecy could be effectively maintained and how clever manipulation of the media and national security agencies - amongst other bodies - could confound any serious attempts to reveal such a Breakaway Group to the world.  Even more compelling is the authors' suggestion that such a Group might, given their possible advanced resources, have developed its own 'infrastructure' and society 'off the grid' as it were which is operating under the noses of the unsuspecting billions around the world.

Concerning this thread, one only has to look at bodies like the Bildeberg Group (featured in the press only this week for their clandestine 2013 meeting in Watford of all places!) to see real examples of secretive bodies dabbling in world affairs, and as the authors discuss, impressively large scale undertakings like the Manhattan Project, which apparently employed 130,000 people in total secrecy in its time and was effectively kept secret until necessity required that it be revealed to the world with the infamous (and horrific) bombing of the Japanese. Given that nearly 70 years have passed since that chapter in history, one can begin to understand how mind-boggling subsequent projects could be with greater funding and more advanced technology at their disposal.

The Others

 

Of course no such book would be complete without discussing the non-terrestrial intelligences (NTIs) that are the source of an event that leads to Disclosure. Rather than dwelling much on what such NTIs or ET might actually be (given there could be a number of possible explanations), the authors do examine what might be their likely motivations.
Whilst some interesting points are made, for me this tends to be the weakest element of the book. Whilst it can be an interesting thought experiment to ponder what moves such non-human entities to apparently only indirectly interact with humanity (until the Disclosure event described), one could argue that there is no direct evidence at all to draw on for this. Conversely, the human experience and human history provides a wealth of material for speculation in terms of the likely impact of Disclosure and the likelihood of the existence of a Breakaway Group, which I think this book does really well.

Conclusion

This is a thoroughly engaging, sometimes complex and thought-provoking book which examines - as far as I'm aware - a relatively unexplored territory (outside the realms of science fiction). I would encourage any serious reader to add this to their library. What would be truly fascinating would be to see how accurate some of the authors' predictions would be if the world did indeed one day suddenly find itself facing actual public Disclosure concerning ET contact...


Disclaimer

Neither of the authors of this book are personally known to me and I have not received any incentive from them, financial or otherwise, in writing this review.