Sunday, December 20, 2009

A contrail and a cut through the clouds

I've never seen a UFO. However, recently I saw something a bit odd. Actually, I saw the same phenomena twice in one week. I have no idea what caused it - there doesn't seem to be an obvious explanation. I wish I had a camera with me at the time [NOTE: the attached picture is simply a photo of contrails I found on the internet]. Perhaps I'll get another opportunity to take a picture. The following is a summary of what I saw during both occasions.

I saw a well defined contrail of a jet that made a straight line across the sky. I did not see the jet which created this contrail. Near the contrail was a cloud. The contrail did NOT intersect or touch the cloud. The cloud had a clear "cut" directly through it - the cut was aligned parallel to the contrail of the jet. The "cut" was perfectly straight, not very wide, and through it you could see blue sky. As I watched this cut for the next 3 or 4 minutes, it slowly dissipated - and was filled in by the surrounding cloud (via wind and natural motion of the air). The contrail of the jet remained in the sky, but appeared to be moving/dissipating at the same rate as the cloud. I do not see how the cut in the cloud could have possibly been formed by the jet. Like I said, the contrail did not intersect the cloud, and the breeze was shifting the contrail and the cloud at the same rate.

Has anyone seen a similar phenomena? I have no idea what caused it - but it reminds me of a few witness accounts of the O'Hare Airport UFO sighting in 2006. Witnesses claimed to see a UFO hovering above the airport - after a few minutes, the UFO sped up through the cloud layer and left a gaping hole. The hole then closed within a few minutes.

Maybe this is nothing at all. I just wanted to put it out there.

Information regarding the O'Hare Airport sighting:

Friday, December 18, 2009

A pyramid-shaped UFO seen over Moscow

I'm not sure what to make of this - but it's making quite a stir in Russia. A pyramid-shaped UFO was spotted over the Kremlin during the evening of December 9, 2009 (the same day as the sighting of the Norway Spiral). Nick Pope, who formerly ran the British Government's UFO Project, called it: "one of the most extraordinary UFO clips I've ever seen" and "At first I thought this was a reflection, but it appears to move behind a power line, ruling out this theory." Police are refusing to comment on the matter.

Although the video appears genuine, why haven't more witnesses come forward? I'm hoping this is not a clever hoax created to undermine the spectacular event seen in in Norway earlier that day. If it is a hoax, it's clear they spent a lot of talent, money and time on it. Thoughts?

Monday, December 14, 2009

Different photos of the Spiral are now emerging

[UPDATE: If you were to wikipedia "Bulava Missile" before December 14, 2009, the page gave specific dimensions for each stage of the missile. The third stage was listed as 2 meters in length. That information has since been removed. Coincidence?]

A new development. The above photo is the ORIGINAL picture that every news outlet put on their websites the morning of the Norway Spiral event (December 9). The photo, below, is the picture which all major news websites are now providing (December 14). Do you see any differences? This is incredible, and frightening to think such a strategy could be effective. In a few weeks people will begin arguing WHICH of these photos they think is the doctored one - the clean, crisp one (original), or the blurry unclear one.

At this point, I'm thinking that neither of these photos were doctored. Some witnesses reported that as the spiral was forming, it was moving across the sky laterally. Perhaps these pictures were taken at different times. The people orchestrating the coverup wouldn't be stupid enough to use a doctored photo, would they?

Know what else is disturbing? Try doing an image search for "Norway Spiral" on google and see what you find. [UPDATE: google image search now allows you to view the Norway Spiral. Google blocked image searches for "Norway Spiral" from December 9 - December 16]

I guarantee you this: this coverup will involve all tabloid websites to keep the original photos of the event (the crisp, clear pictures), while the reputable news outlets will provide the blurry ones. I guarantee it. A very smart move by whomever is in charge. Tabloids are a powerful tool. When people later compare the two photo's they will conclude that the 1st image, the clear one, MUST have been doctored because the center of the spiral shifted in the two photographs. They will say: "How could the center of the spiral move - it's a missile!" It's not a missile. But, which photo will the public believe more? The blurry one from a reputable news site, or the clear/crisp one from a tabloid?

Also - if you haven't already, please take the time to read my explanation as to why the spiral CANNOT be from a missile.

This new blurry photo is featured here:

A National Enquirer Conspiracy?

Think about this for a moment - think of the only "news" agency out there which actually covers ufo's? Give up? The National Enquirer, and other tabloids. IF the whole ufo thing is true, and some ufo's are indeed spacecraft from another world - a perfect way to encourage people to reject them would be to associate ufo's with other crazy, ridiculous, paranormal type stuff. If they report on ufo's along with BATBOY, dirty stories about celebrities and trash subjects - wouldn't it be easier to dismiss the whole thing?

So is it a coincidence that the National Enquirer was purchased by Gene Pope in the 1950's? Gene Pope worked for the CIA's psychological warfare division... but ended that job for some unknown reason when he was 25. And somehow had loads of cash to purchase the New York Enquirer, and redistribute it as the National Enquirer.

A conspiracy theory for sure - but a very interesting one.,_Jr.

Sunday, December 13, 2009

A Logical Explanation for UFOs

Which of the following two scenarios do you think is more likely?

Scenario 1.

A) Alien space craft do not exist - the millions of people that think ET craft are real are delusional.

B) The government is telling the truth about UFOs - they have no evidence whatsoever of ET visitors.

C) The real UFOs people see are all top-secret government craft that do not make any sound, disappear and reappear. The government has been able to make these craft since at least WWII. The government has an enormous number of these craft and fly them throughout the world every day which explains why they are seen globally.

D) The thousands and thousands of people that claim they were abducted are all delusional. The combined 56 years of research and evaluation of nearly 1,000 abductees by Dr. David M. Jacobs at Temple University and Dr. John E. Mack, a Pulitzer Prize winner and Professor of Psychiatry at the Harvard Medical School is incorrect. The identical drawings of these creatures (which do not match the Hollywood proto-types) and the identical stories and procedures associated with the abductions is simply a coincidence. Instead of being abducted, these people are experiencing sleep paralysis. In the frequent occurrence where abductions occur during the day (while driving a car or otherwise), and when multiple people are abducted at the same time - these people are simply delusional and are making up stories. The similar physical marks on their skin (scoop marks, etc) are self-inflicted somehow, and are doing it just to make their story more believable. The Sightings of UFO's by neighbors associated with abduction events are simply a combination of C and D.

E) Cattle mutilations are done by a satanic cult that travels the world. These people take cows in the middle of the night, somehow drain the blood from them completely, then make precise cuts on the cattle bodies - surgically removing many pieces, sometimes even the heart, from very small holes in animals body. The cult then drops the cattle from a high elevation from a helicopter or something similar without making a sound. This explains why there are no foot prints around the cattle, the impact crater, and the cattle's broken bones. The instances where farmers report seeing strange lights or craft in the area (without sound) during the night of the mutilation is simply the Cult's silent helicopters or a combination of C and E.

F) ALL high level military and government workers that have come forward with 'evidence' about government's UFO coverup are lying.

G) All commercial airline pilots that report seeing football field sized craft, flying disks, and large cigar shaped objects are out of their mind. The fact that none of these pilots were fired following these sightings is a crime because it is clear they are not mentally fit to fly a commercial aircraft with hundreds of people on board.

H) The astronauts which have come forward with information regarding the existence of aliens are lying and cannot be trusted.

I) The Norway Spiral and all other unexplained phenomena are the result of the incredible combination of alignment, timing, and circumstances involving the sun, jets, missiles, swamp gas, weather balloons, and the like. These phenomena can not be reproduced, and have never been seen before, because of the highly unlikely circumstances and variables that were in place at the time of each of the events.


Scenario 2.

A) Some UFO's are actually spacecraft from another world AND a sector of our government is hiding this from us. We do not know HOW they travelled across the universe, but they did. They, for some reason, do not want to announce their presence here themselves for reasons we may not know or understand. We do not know the reasons behind the aliens actions on earth, but a small sector of our government might.

Which scenario is more logical?

Saturday, December 12, 2009

"It can't be; therefore it isn't"

The subject of UFO's is ridiculous. Bring UFOs up with a good friend, and see how long it takes for them to insert a "little green men" or "anal probing" joke. Personally, I don't blame them. I didn't take UFOs seriously for 28 years. It wasn't until the Stephenville, Texas "Lights" incident in January 2008 that it truly captured my attention. Despite its name, there was a substantial amount of evidence in addition to just "lights" in the Stephenville incident:

- There was witness testimony from over 50 people including policemen, pilots, and respected people in the society

- Witnesses saw an actual craft, not just lights

- Radar data indicated something very, very large was moving slow (20 mph) but sped up to over 1,000 mph in an instant.

So I was hooked. What the hell WAS that thing? It WAS something, wasn't it?

My perception of UFOs has evolved over time: At the beginning I thought UFO's were all misidentified natural phenomena (meterological phenomena, strange lighting effects from jets, etc)... Then I began to think some UFO's were high-tech, top-secret government projects... Now I truly believe that some UFO's are visitors from another planet.

After two years of reading books on the topic, watching documentaries and engaging in debates, logic has forced me into the embarrassing position that I think extra terrestrials are visiting earth in space ships.

There is plenty of evidence. This includes millions of witnesses worldwide, physical evidence, photographs, videos, corroborative radar data, and testimony from hundreds of high level military and government establishments. We have every possible type of evidence in our hands except the UFO's themselves. We have far more evidence then what would be needed to win a case in court.

So, why do most people think intelligently controlled UFOs cannot exist?

A vast majority of people in the US think that life exists elsewhere in the universe. But why is it so hard to believe they have visited earth by now? Here's a rundown of the most common responses I've heard from skeptics.

"The earth is much too far away from any other solar system for travel between them to be possible."

Ok - You're right. If we ASSUME that ET's are traveling here with our means of transportation (car, truck, rocket, sailboat), then sure - traveling that distance would be impossible. If you were able to ask a similar skeptic 500 years ago whether they thought a human could journey across the Pacific Ocean in just a matter of hours, I think you would get a similar response.

What I don't think people understand is we don't need to explain HOW ET's got here - we just need to determine IF they are here. One hundred years ago the Wright Brothers built the first plane out of wood and cloth. 100 years ago! Just imagine what we could be capable of 100 years from now.

The second response I get is something like this:

"Well if aliens are here, why don't they just land their UFO, jump out and say - HERE WE ARE!"

This statement assumes they want us to know they are here. But, what if they do not want to announce their presence for reasons we may not know or understand? There have been times when western researchers have stumbled upon remote tribes that have had zero contact with the outside world. Did these researchers land their helicopters, whip out their iPhones and show the tribe their new App? I don't think so. Instead, its rather logical for these western researchers to have little IF ANY contact with this remote tribe in an attempt to preserve their culture, traditions, and way of life. However, what if the western researchers determined the collective actions of the tribe were leading to its own destruction? Would the western researchers interfere then? I have no idea, but it's interesting to think about.

[side note: here is an interesting clip on uncontacted tribes, lots of great parallels here: ]

What I have concluded, is that the only thing that makes us think the existence of UFOs is ridiculous is that our government says they do not exist AND there has been a enormous effort to hide this from the public.

So ask yourself - what would it take for you to believe UFOs existed? Would you have to see one, yourself? Would that even be enough? It's easy to see how little traction this subject gets with the public, because far more people never see UFOs than do. But if 99% of the population has never seen a UFO, does that mean they do not exist? I've never seen Moscow - but I know it exists.

Also ask yourself this - if UFOs were real, and you were the only person at the top whose decision it was to inform the public or not - would you tell the world the truth? Honestly, I'm not sure I would. Would it cause a mass hysteria? We've got enough problems as it is.

How could the government come forward with this information? What would they say? "We have an important announcement for the citizens of the US, and the world. Aliens exist, and have made contact. We do not quite know WHY they are here, WHAT they are doing, or any of their motives. We DO know that they are flying their spaceships all around the world and there is nothing we can do to stop them."

When I say the government is keeping this information a secret - I do not mean the government, as a whole. I am referring to a small sector of government that is top secret, and is keeping everyone else in the dark. Including the President.

All I know is that the more you look into the UFO phenomena, the more difficult it is to ignore the evidence. The purpose of this blog is to share what I think is the best collection of evidence available, and to argue that the existence of UFOs is far from ridiculous - in fact, it is logical.

Thanks for reading - and please share your thoughts and comments!

Proof that the Norway Spiral was not a missile

It's not rocket science.

If it was a missile that exploded over Norway on Wednesday, then I am Pope Benedict XVI. Everyone on this planet knows what a failed missile looks like - failed missiles and rockets have occurred thousands and thousands of times throughout history. In my world, when something fails catastrophically, it fails chaotically. There was nothing catastrophic or chaotic about the Norway spiral. Nothing about the Norway spiral looked anything like a "failure".

Clear reasons why this was NOT a missile:

1.) The missile theory is that a submarine, the Dmitri Donskoy, launched the Bulava missile from the White Sea early that morning. The attached picture 1 was taken in Tromso, Norway. So the people that claim this is a missile want me to believe that if I were to follow the blue trail to its source (picture 1) it would be 700 miles away - in the White Sea? The atmosphere is about 30 miles thick, therefore, the missile traveled at an angle that put it 700 miles away, before it reached 30 miles up? Do you realize how shallow of an angle that is? If I were to look up details about missiles, I guarantee intercontinental ballistic missiles (ICBM) are not launched at those types of angles.

2.) Further, if the missile WAS launched from the White Sea, how is it that no one in Finland, Sweden or Russia saw this event?

3.) Why in the world would Russia launch an ICBM near the land mass of Norway merely hours before the President of the United States of America arrived in Oslo to accept the Nobel Peace Prize for his effort in the disarmament of nuclear weapons? Wouldn't this have the potential for some negative effects and reactions? Further, why was Norway NOT INFORMED that Russia was going to do so?

4.) If this was a missile, then why are there TWO planes of trajectories shown in the attached pictures? One trajectory is the blue trail, the second "trajectory" is the white spiral light. If the white spiral IS a trajectory, then it is nearly PERFECTLY lined up with the angle in which the attached pictures were taken. You can tell this by measuring the widths of each of the white spirals. They are nearly identical. So this missile defied physics and made a significant change in direction mid-flight?

5.) You'll quickly notice that EVERY picture taken of this event appears to be taken from an angle in which the white spiral "trajectory" is perfectly in line with the camera. These pictures were taken from all over the length of northern Norway. Strange. It would appear the reason for this is that the white spiral "trajectory" is SO FAR AWAY from us, that from all viewpoints the angle is the same. Well, if this is so far away from us - couldn't we make a calculation of the speed in which the "exhaust / fuel" is speeding away from the center of the spiral, and wouldn't that speed be UNIMAGINABLY fast. Further the SIZE of the thing rotating in the middle of the spiral must be INCREDIBLY large.

6.) The size of the Bulava Missile is 12 meters long.

7.) The spiral lasted for over 10 minutes.

8.) What is the white stuff forming the large spiral that takes up most of the sky?

A.) Exhaust? Well have you ever seen exhaust move away from its source at the speed shown in the youtube video? Even if there was no atmospheric drag on the exhaust the speed it is going is unbelievable. Maybe water could travel at such a speed - water has more mass. Exhaust does not have the mass for it to move like that for minutes after it was expended. Think of the trail behind a jet.

B.) Fuel? Well why is fuel shooting up and away from the forces of gravity - allowing a perfect circle to be formed. Gravity is clearly not playing a role in the Norway Spiral but it should be because the formation was not seen directly overhead. If this was fuel, we'd see the effects of gravity.

C.) Whatever that stuff is, it filled an ENORMOUS fraction of the sky. All this originated from a 12 meter missile?

This reeks of a cover-up story. The media came up with the excuses and cover story before the Russian military even did. The Russian military finally got onboard, taking the media's lead saying "yeah, actually we DID fire a missile around that area, kinda - yeah!" (chuckle, chuckle, shuffle of boots). What's important to note is that the Russians HAVE NOT declared a link between the spiral and any fired missile (in case this story backfires). In fact, I wouldn't be surprised if Russia never even launched a missile in the first place - but there's no way to prove that.

This cover-up story fell together so fast it nearly fell apart because people got in a hot panic to find an explanation for something they had no explanation for. Now the people at the top cannot fine tune the cover story to pass it off as something more believable because they were too quick to fuel the theory that the spiral was a failed rocket. Given enough time, and had no one panicked, then a better story could have been formulated.

Too late. Watch as more pictures and videos surface, and the missile theory completely falls apart. Unfortunately, by then most people will have written it off because all media outlets are reporting "mystery spiral solved". It's astonishing to me how people do not question these sorts of things.

THIS is the explanation that everyone is buying??? Really?

Anyways, I have no idea what that spiral was. No clue. But I'm 100 percent certain it was not a missile or a rocket.

What do you think?