Forest Rangers & Pilots- Bf & Uap's

[Guest Darrell]

What type and what level of "Top Secret" security clearance?

I hold a TS from the DOD with access to SCI. I also hold the equivalent from the DOJ with NACI and with unrestricted access to Grand Jurry information.  Did that answer your question?

[Guest]

Are you an 1811?

[Guest Darrell]

^ No. I was 48 when I retired from the Army and of course couldnt make the age cutoff. 

[norseman]

Examples would include Paulides' claim that finding a missing person's clothes must be a sign of foul play, because people lost in the wilderness would never undress voluntarily. In fact, removing clothes is fairly common in hypothermia victims, especially advanced hypothermia. It's even got a name - paradoxical undressing, and it occurs in at least 1/4 of terminal hypothermia cases. See e.g. http://link.springer.com/article/10.1007%2FBF01245483.

Same goes for people being found in areas where searchers already checked. Hypothermia victims will also engage in what's called terminal burrowing, where they will either actively hide from rescuers, or crawl into a narrow crevice or other enclosed space that rescuers can easily miss:

Id. I do not recall Paulides making any effort to explain why those two symptoms do not explain the disappearances in his books.

Paulides also claimed that Rosemary Kunst must have been abducted by something. Let's look at the facts of Rosemary Kunst's case. She went missing from a new age spiritual retreat camp in 2000. She was 70 years old at the time and had lost her husband in a car accident about 18 months prior. She had been in the same accident and barely survived - . Kunst went hiking on her own in an attempt to "mingle with her husband's spirit," according to news reports. They found a few strands of hair on a bush about four miles away. The sheriff said that finding the hair wasn't unusual, despite what Paulides claims.

A 70-year-old in questionable health hiking alone in a remote area, seeking to "mingle" with her dead husband? Why is it mysterious that she didn't come back?

Those are just a few of the issues I have with the books.

What's incredible is that a large group of highly motivated very fit professionals could never locate her or her corpse.

Nothing mysterious about her not coming back..... No. But to only find a couple of strands of hair? An elderly woman not in good health? That's odd in my book.

[Guest]

All of the same principles Mr. Davis points out regarding serious scientific inquiry into UFO's would also apply to most Zoologists with regard to Bigfoot.

 

 

Eric Davis, Physicist, Explains Why Scientists Won't Discuss Their UFO Interests

 

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2013/07/20/physicist-eric-davis-mufon-symposium_n_3620126.html

 

 

For a very long time, the scientific community has been wary of studying UFOs, and the scientists themselves hesitate to talk about their beliefs of unexplained aerial phenomena. But that attitude is changing, and many scientists are joining the discussion without fear of ridicule.

 

"UFOs are real phenomena. They are artificial objects under intelligent control. They're definitely the craft of a supremely advanced technology," says physicist Eric

Davis, a researcher of light-speed travel.

 

Davis, a research physicist at the Institute for Advanced Studies in Austin, studies propulsion physics, which he hopes will one day allow humans to travel easily and quickly through our galactic neighborhood.

 

He's aware of the public perception -- mostly from skeptics and debunkers -- that no legitimate scientists would ever touch the subject of UFOs.

"They're wrong, naive, stubborn, narrow-minded, afraid and fearful. It's a dirty word and a forbidden topic. Science is about open-minded inquiry. You shouldn't be laughing off people. You should show more deference and respect to them ... Scientists need to get back to using the scientific method to study things that are unknown and unusual, and the UFO subject is one of them."

 

Davis is one of several scientists who are presenting their views this weekend on a variety of UFO-related topics at the 2013 MUFON Symposium in Las Vegas.

The physicist, who recently won an award from the American Institute of Aeronautics and Astronautics for his study, "Faster-Than-Light Space Warps, Status and Next Steps," knows many colleagues who quietly study UFOs.

 

"There are scientists who are aware of evidence and observational data that is not refutable. It is absolutely corroborated, using forensic techniques and methodology. But they won't come out and publicize that because they fear it. Not the subject -- they fear the backlash from their professional colleagues. The impact on their career might be detrimental and they'd get bad publicity.

 

"It's not an acceptable, funded line of research. The National Science Foundation does not accept UFOs as a subject for scientific study."

 

It may come as a surprise that many scientists have been interested in UFOs for decades.

 

You forgot this part of the article:

 

Davis believes that the domain for UFO investigations doesn't really belong in the hands of scientists.

"It's the domain of military intelligence," he suggests. "The fact that [unknown] craft are flying around Earth is not a subject for science -- it's a subject for intelligence-gathering, collection and analysis. That's because UFOs are not a natural phenomenon, and that's what science studies."

Edited August 16, 2013 by Jerrymanderer

[Guest]

Heck, didn't Teddy Roosevelt report a BF, that someone in his or another party in Yellowstone got ripped apart by one? That they could hear it at night? He was president at the time also?

[Cotter]

The Roosevelt account was him telling of a conversation he had with a mountain man type fella.  I don't think he or his group was ever directly involved.

[Guest LarryP]

You forgot this part of the article:

 

Davis believes that the domain for UFO investigations doesn't really belong in the hands of scientists.

"It's the domain of military intelligence," he suggests. "The fact that [unknown] craft are flying around Earth is not a subject for science -- it's a subject for intelligence-gathering, collection and analysis. That's because UFOs are not a natural phenomenon, and that's what science studies."

 

 

 

What point are you trying to make?

[Guest]

^^^^^That you're not showing the full story.

[Guest LarryP]

It was not done purposefully by me and I provided a link to the entire article, Jerry.

 

The irony is that military intelligence has made it their domain and as a result they have discouraged scientific inquiry on the subject.

[Guest]

Why should they? Just because its "unidentified" doesn't mean its extraterrestrial. There's already scientific inquiry on extraterrestrial life.

Edited August 17, 2013 by Jerrymanderer

[Guest LarryP]

Why should they?

 

 

 

Vastly superior technology.

 

Just because its "unidentified" doesn't mean its extraterrestrial.

 

 

 

Nor does it mean it isn't extraterrestrial.

 

Japan Airlines flight 1628 being a perfect example.

[Guest]

Given how poor the government is at keeping secrets, why would bigfoot be any different?

 

I think this assumption is entirely false.

 

The government is VERY good at keeping a secret when it wants too! If it weren't America would have been conquered by now.