 |
 |
TRADUZIR |  |
 |
Phenomena likely of extra-terrestrial origin classified as three main types, in line with Martyn Stubbs' categories.
Video examples are linked in text or in the summaries below.
[Other smaller straight-line NASA traces and tracks have been temporarily put aside, as maybe space-junk or minor asteroids zipping past, although they probably aren't.]
BTW - although haven't got round to writing them up fully or identifying them all, recent sightings seem to say some of the `space phenomena' are now visiting Earth's surface - and being photographed.
1 - `Aerial Phenomena - which are seen down to near ground level in many accidental sightings and sometimes captured on camera. Most often metallic discs but occasionally triangles and spheres, often very large. There appears to be a much smaller `jitterer' type, also seen down to near ground level but with more varied motions.
2 - `Space Phenomena One' - which you'll mainly find on NASA satellite footage, most often apparently leaving or entering Earth's atmosphere, enroute to or from elsewhere. There's several types, most problematic are the distinctive `notched circles' seen in near-Earth space, whose appearance is so very unlikely.
3 - `Space Phenomena Two' - Ultra-fast moving so mostly only seen when tapes are carefully analyzed for very quick-moving shapes; sometimes only half a frame registers (i.e for 1/60th of a second). There's an interesting moment between 53 - 54 mins on the long version of the Smoking Gun video, as commented-on by Martyn Stubbs, when two astronauts catch a glimpse of what might be at least two, maybe three, very small `ultra-fast ones' scooting past them into their spacecraft (in which case they might've hitched a ride down to Earth's surface and maybe even to NASA Recovery HQ).
A mixed bunch, sometimes reported as triangular or spherical or other outlines, but more typically disk-shaped.
Close-up the disks can seem to have revolving rims (sometimes centers also) and, when not moving too speedily for obervation, often have a `falling-leaf' or rocking motion. Although they are clearly within the atmosphere, often well below cloud level, they don't seem to get any lift from it, even when moving fast enough.
The `revolving rims' might be a visual artifact caused by synchronized illumination / radiation (at night) or a similar movement of attachments or sensors by daylight.
Although it would be tempting to think of them as `aircraft' there are objections to that idea -
a - they don't "fly" but move in the manner of an `inertia-drive' (a sort of directed anti-gravity);
b - as with Space Phenomena, they can move or depart with lethal acceleration;
c - they are reported to have the weird ability to detect and react to the intent, observation and signalling of individual humans, although we know no way they could isolate one flashing light in a cityscape (& could anyone imagine any method of sensing `human intention' or `observation' alone?).
There are indications that some might be surrounded by a very strong electro-magnetic field, including occasional signs of hard radiation; ref-01 this would mean that humans within the field could have their perceptions altered / distorted. Catch-22: close observations are suspect.
Triangles and Spheres - want to consider large triangular and spherical craft here, since they are also appearing below the atmosphere, almost down to ground level.
Their special peculiarity is a tendency to vast size - for one reported large spherical craft try the Yukon Sightings video at www.youtube.com/watch?v=dfVsLUGsR9o (five 9 min shorts), while large triangular craft have been seen many places, here's links to observations over Belgium (9 min vid), England and Phoenix, Arizona (3 min vid) - and here's NIDS Triangle Report.
It's also worth noting that the large triangular and spherical objects seem to have very smooth, stable and silent motion. I.e - no `falling leaf' rocking.
So we might think there's at least one more propulsion method available for craft operating at low levels - unless the use of multiple drives, as maybe seems necessary for these huge objects, `flattens-out' or cancels the self-correcting rocking of a single (silent) inertia drive (see discussion below).
Jitterers are small `craft' or maybe `entities' ranging down to human-size and even smaller. (See Nellis video, & Analysis of Nellis Video) and here's Youtube version just in case.
They seem to appear in almost any shape, and can dramatically change that shape. They often have `pulsing' attributes, move at various speeds around and over terrain and are prone to sudden high-speed departures or changes of position / location. Inertia forbids such movements for human-piloted craft.
[Just now playing with the idea these `jittering' observations _might_ be our view of the ultra-fast types when they come down to Earth's surface? Also, given their shape-changing abilities, they might have a longer history of sightings than presently realized.]
These are large, possibly up to several miles across, usually spherical or circular or glob-like, and are filmed - from satellite or spacecraft - traveling in long and mostly straight trajectories to or from Earth's atmosphere.
They typically seem to `pulse' in a synchronized manner. That is, as their illumination pulses, their shape also seems to briefly change and there is also an apparent surge in velocity. However these perceptions might be caused by our (NASA's) viewing and filming methods. (See these short clips video 1, video 2, video 3, video 4. They are clearly not debris, nor are they `meteorites' - some make 100G accelerations; and here `acceleration' is used in a scientific sense, meaning a change of speed _or_ direction).
It's worth noting that although they generally seem to move at very high speeds in straight lines, they also seem capable of stopping instantly, or taking a sharp veer occasionally. At those apparent speeds, such maneuvers would be fatal for human occupants subject to the ordinary `laws' of inertia / momentum.
None show any signs of significant interaction with atmosphere - their movements are not aerodynamic or even ballistic. That is, they seem to be able to choose their position and velocity in space with impunity, and are able to disregard the rules of human `flight' - which is dependent on directed thrust and/or lift.
Notched circles - You'll probably notice in the near-Earth NASA space videos that there's a variety, apparently the biggest, which, far as I can tell, always presents as a full-face notched circle, with a distinctive motion.
A perpetual full-face is so unlikely that there's a possibility it is our `view' of an extension into our three-dimensional space. Of what or from where - no idea.
These ultra-fast ones are totally mysterious just now (hope to try to find more footage and come back to this).
They can seem to be tubular but that might be an artifact caused by their speed.
They also seem to have a metallic sheen - n.b. have just re-looked at `Smoking Gun' and Martyn Stubbs there says his research makes him believe they are self-luminous and are `colored' - other than that, their actual material properties are vague at the moment (see `astronauts' glimpse' above).
The `Smoking Gun' video - Here's the whole 1 hr 29 mins version
video.google.com/videoplay?docid=-3611205436090721403
And here's the same thing in ten YouTube 9 min shorts, starting at Part 2 (closer to where Martyn gets to present his evidence) -
2 - www.youtube.com/watch?v=7Sn6pyjlzt8
3 - www.youtube.com/watch?v=R2UL-VmJwwc
4 - www.youtube.com/watch?v=D9mCn4fT5W8
5 - www.youtube.com/watch?v=s4sMwg8M0OY
Towards the end of Part 6 and into Part 7 is where the astronauts get that `glimpse' - as two, maybe three `things' entered the spacecraft (but did they leave?)
6 - www.youtube.com/watch?v=HUTF9iF7TCg
7 - www.youtube.com/watch?v=IDBpE0OaXg0
8 - www.youtube.com/watch?v=QRLl38p2YnU
Can someone maybe tell Jaime Maussan? (another request below) that some of his shots of spherical / circular UFOs over Popocatepetl volcano seem to match some of Martin Stubbs' `first space phenomena' - the `notched circle' type, seen in part 9 (after 07:10), passing infront and behind the `tether' (90 ~ 100 miles away), but which NASA claims are `debris' floating near the camera - (Ha! - Impossible!)
9 - www.youtube.com/watch?v=YK9Jz-KZJy0
10 - www.youtube.com/watch?v=OKr6ZUoPyak
---
Martyn Stubbs, who had to remain silent on various issues in `Smoking Gun', finally got permissions to speak out; now he also reveals weirder details that NASA seems intent on keeping from folk in the USA - in short video below
---
Just in case Google/Youtube come under pressure to delete or `lose' - here's the `Smoking Gun' series on Netherlands Video (It's only nine parts so the timing might be slightly different - and there's a (commercial?) delay before each one starts)
1 www.123video.nl/playvideos.asp?MovieID=13227
2 www.123video.nl/playvideos.asp?MovieID=13231
3 www.123video.nl/playvideos.asp?MovieID=13234
4 www.123video.nl/playvideos.asp?MovieID=13244
5 www.123video.nl/playvideos.asp?MovieID=13240
6 www.123video.nl/playvideos.asp?MovieID=13245
7 www.123video.nl/playvideos.asp?MovieID=13261
8 www.123video.nl/playvideos.asp?MovieID=13263
9 www.123video.nl/playvideos.asp?MovieID=13268
`The Secret NASA Transmissions 2'
Perhaps a more personally revealing follow-up to that `Smoking Gun'
This is where Martyn is finally released from some of his `vows of silence', and gets to make things clearer.
1 - http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=KuIuoHjHPs0
2 - http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=lX6gmONtxDQ
3 - http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=HwcixI2lGIs
4 - http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=lK5PROeYXzE
5 - http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=kAovX3KWtDs
6 - http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=9eB4ebPbBUs
In part 7 Martyn explains how NASA is now chopping-up its transmissions (very inefficiently and wastefully) just to stop you and me from seeing more of the real-life pictures he got for the `Smoking Gun' vid
7 - http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=T1L4XGuHX1g
You might want to compare that extra-ordinary Martyn Stubbs' `Smoking Gun' evidence with this 1976 classic `UFO's - It Has Begun (Rod Serling, Jacques Vallee)' in ten parts -
1 youtube.com/watch?v=1j4Nu-6T6NQ
2 youtube.com/watch?v=G8lVQfYlsUQ
3 youtube.com/watch?v=maqS2w7xB3g
In part 4 you'll notice that the `self-luminous' formations of many silver spheres seen in the unexplained 1952 Utah film (Wiki ref.) (shot by a Navy officer) are exactly like some recent mass sightings (short vid) around Mexico City (there presented by Santiago Garza & Jaime Maussan 2006 - Can someone tell Jaime? He's a busy man and might've missed that), and also exactly like those above the atmosphere, filmed from space - shown in part 7 of `Smoking Gun' (around 07:40 and referred to as a `fleet'), but rather lamely called `video fuzz' by NASA, then more deceitfully labeled `ice crystals' (by NASA) in part 8 of `Smoking Gun' (right at start)
4 youtube.com/watch?v=X8DFQe6tgmo
5 youtube.com/watch?v=LeCKBVV7Sjs
6 youtube.com/watch?v=fDBDEOjf790
7 youtube.com/watch?v=CwZPSXgqP5c
8 youtube.com/watch?v=2Q_DHhGaGe0
9 youtube.com/watch?v=gx8G7vHXfDw
10 youtube.com/watch?v=OFO7wwC-wdU
Notes -
If asked for one-word description of the motions of the (more easily visible) First Space Phenomena then would have to say `organic' or `biological'. Nearest equivalent would be the movements of microbiota in a liquid medium.
There are indications that these entities (maybe not `craft') can vary or even completely control their visibility, perhaps by virtue of a surrounding energy field (see below). Note the evidence of ultra-violet or infra-red photography - someone in Mexico had the bright idea of strapping a video-camera set to `night-view' alongside another camera set to `normal' and has captured some views of fairly low altitude spheres / lights.
In addition, a possibility exists that some could be non-baryonic in material nature. That is, not composed of ordinary `matter' like we are.
The `Second Space Phenomena' are mysterious - hope to have more on them shortly.
Coming round to USPs as a name for all of them, because they're clearly not `flying'; so total accuracy demands that we call them USP (unidentified space phenomena), as the evidence right now says the larger `Space Phenomena' types come from outside of Earth's atmosphere.
And maybe those big ones are carrying-in disks, spheres and triangles, plus those ultra-fast scouts?
OK - think it's done - and the last bits were done using same methods you'd use to track institutional corruption in authorities, police, gov't.
That's because we can assume (I think) that a certain amount is already known and kept secret, so the method is:
check the backgound history; get on top of the `mechanics' of whatever's in question; make some educated guesses and shout about them for a while, to find out -
a) where the real `destructive' opposition is coming from;
b) what subjects they're most sensitive about.
[ In fraud / local gov't corruption you get front men coming at you first - keep pressing and eventually associations with a fat man-in-a-suit, or some bent cops, becomes obvious. More or less same things happen here.]
So - coupled with the relatively short period of active suppression ref-02 of certain info (about 60 years), ref-03 it's now fairly obvious where the secret of UFO / UAP `technology' and propulsion lies.
And the same sort of signs pointing to that area of physical reality also show us that it's the area that's been most `over-mystified' by mainstream (gov't funded) science and mainstream (corporate funded) media for about the same period.
The secret is the `quantum field'.
Let's look at the first of the two sorts of `mechanics' they need:- incidentally both their needs are sort-of mentioned in that review above.
They've got some way of `shielding' the craft / its occupants from the effects of inertia - because unprotected humans accelerated at those rates (start _or_ stop) would immediately be raspberry jam on the back wall.
Inertia is caused by a field or force - we've known that for a while. ref-04 It's also been suspected, here at least, to be the same field or force that enables `light', quantum effects and `gravity'.
And that field is `instantaneous' over any distance - otherwise you couldn't ride a bicycle or expect a gyroscope to work Why? Because the inertial `stability' allowing a bike to stay upright - especially a unicycle say, acts immediately (ask any circus uni-cyclist), but it's supposed to originate in the `fixed stars'; by which the scientists mean the mass of the universe. ref-05
Well, that's a long way away - on average half the radius of the entire Universe. So the force is `instant' over huge distance.
When you can `shield' something from that force - then you can also use that force for propulsion. Anti-gravity.
It's the sort of anti-gravity produced by an inertial drive - which, by the way, will always give that `falling-leaf' effect visible at slower speeds. The craft is balancing arcs of repulsion from above and below, with minimum repulsion from below being in the center. That gives a constant, but self-correcting, rocking movement.
As the field can be reversed, you can use it just as well for `attraction' - so you could simply point a separate generator at the Moon and say "Let's go in that direction" - but carefully, maybe, because the potential power of the field is enormous compared to anything we humans are used to. Well, just think - it's responsible for all inertia / momentum in the Universe.
[Although the simple mode of operation is OK when near to a planet; it's likely that a second, slightly different method would be used inter-planetary and definitely for inter-stellar - like using a paddle-steamer rather than swimming.
The second method has the advantage of giving collision protection as well as inertial protection.
Also, with respect to that second note (review above), on non-baryonic possibilities for some High Pulsers - that might involve movement of both baryonic and non-baryonic matter through space: i.e carrying `cargo' and `passengers'.]
What's the second sort of `mechanics' they need?
Well, from lots of reports, slightly mentioned above, Aerial Phenomena sometimes behave as if they're instantly aware of things happening a long way away - and we'll include those accounts of them being sensitive to `intention' and even more sensitive to flashlights / radar txers being pointed at them.
That probably means they've found a way of focussing on local and distant events by `tuning in' to the field - which, as you might already know, enables `quantum entanglement' to act instantly over huge, maybe infinite, distance.
Maybe a bit more scary: that might imply some ability - while tuned-in at least - to `read minds', or at least intentions.
If so - it's obvious why the top-people would want to keep it secret. Their speeches wouldn't sound half so imposing if we could all read their thoughts as subtitles!
| [new window] |
|
|
|
|
|
|
