• Home

U.S. Spent $22 Million on Secret Project to Identify Threats in Space

by Adam Kredo                       January 17, 2019                        (freebeacon.com)

• In response to The Federation of American Scientists (FAS) filing of a Freedom of Information Act (FOIA) request, on January 16th the U.S. Defense Intelligence Agency (DIA) released to the FAS a list of 38 titles of research papers that had already been provided to Congress in January 2018. Only the list of titles were released, not the research papers themselves. (see the list of titles here)

• The research papers were generated as a part of a $22 million DIA program (the Advanced Aerospace Threat Identification Program which the NY Times reported in December 2017) that ran from 2007 to 2012 with the goal of combating possible threats from space, including those of an alien form.

• The underlying 38 research programs, “many of which are highly conjectural and well beyond the boundaries of current science, engineering, or military intelligence,” according FAS, have all been shut down. Titles of the research programs provided include, “Invisibility Cloaking,” “Traversable Wormholes,” “Antigravity Aerospace Applications,” and “Warp Drive, Dark Energy, and the Manipulation of Extra Dimensions.”

• The secret program “was apparently initiated at the behest of then-Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid, with most of the funding directed to a Nevada constituent of his,” FAS reported in its newsletter.

[Editor’s Note] It is significant that this list of ATIP research titles were released and officially acknowledged by the DIA because it confirms that they actually exist. Until now, the list was known as a leaked document with uncertain authenticity. This also confirms the authenticity of the two actual research papers that were leaked by Corey Goode in 2017. A DIA FOIA officer noted with some exasperation that yesterday’s release of the list of research papers will, in all likelihood, prompt a flood of new FOIA requests for each of the listed papers.  The question is, were these individual research programs actually shut down?  Or were they replaced by similar covert research projects under different names?

 

The U.S. Defense Intelligence Agency disclosed this week that, from 2007 to 2012, it spent $22 million on bizarre science projects aimed at tracking and identifying potential threats in space.

The DIA this week made public the names of 38 research projects “funded by the program, many of which are highly conjectural and well beyond the boundaries of current science, engineering—or military intelligence,” according to the Federation of American Scientists, or FAS, which filed freedom of information requests to unearth the information.

The programs—all of which have now been shutdown—range from the theoretically possible to the completely farfetched. Such titles include, “Invisibility Cloaking,” “Traversable Wormholes,” “Antigravity Aerospace Applications,” and “Warp Drive, Dark Energy, and the Manipulation of Extra Dimensions,” among others.

“The DIA list of research papers, marked for Official Use Only, was previously provided to Congress in January 2018. It was publicly released yesterday under the Freedom of Information Act,” according to FAS. The overall goal of the program was to combat possible threats from space, including those of an alien form.

The secret program “was apparently initiated at the behest of then-Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid, with most of the funding directed to a Nevada constituent of his,” FAS reported in its newsletter.

READ ORIGINAL ARTICLE

 

FAIR USE NOTICE: This page contains copyrighted material the use of which has not been specifically authorized by the copyright owner. ExoNews.org distributes this material for the purpose of news reporting, educational research, comment and criticism, constituting Fair Use under 17 U.S.C § 107. Please contact the Editor at ExoNews with any copyright issue.

Human Nature-Based Disclosure

 Unique aerospace vehicles coming out of the ocean in Puerto Rico. Photo by José Fernandez.

How can we as “disclosure activists” and as practitioners of “exopolitics” (and, in many cases, as contact experiencers) really assist society to accept and to adapt to the disclosure of an extraterrestrial, multi-dimensional presence? Should we simply allow a more classic, militaristic interpretive tendency (as within the effort of To the Stars Academy of Arts & Sciences) convince politicians and citizens worldwide and let that extension of our political biases take its course or should we try to find another way of doing things?

I think that we (in fact, eventually, ALL of us and not just ‘experiencers’ who have been awakened to a vaster reality) must try to understand why we are as we are in terms of maintaining our personal identities, sense of meaning and moral politics. I think that our ability to see and our blindness impeding seeing how to “connect the dots” (in a healthy, healing, constructive way) is related to how consciousness itself is capable or not of embracing more aspects of reality in a coherent way. And some of the people speaking about this (although in less spiritual terms) are moral and developmental psychologists.  As boring as these studies might be (in contrast to cover-up revelations, for instance) they can serve as foundations based on empirical research to learn why we create dominance hierarchies and why we fight so much with each other, whether we are in the 0.1% elite group or in any other social strata.

In order to establish contact with healthy, benevolent interstellar beings on a par with their alleged lofty ideals and in a mutually beneficial fashion, with sovereignty as a species that can be sustained, we probably first need to be able to leave our”self-perpetuating wheel of unending conflict.”

What makes ‘sense’ to us is generally related to our intuitions of what is and is not. And this is an expression of the Principle of Identity. And the Principle of Identity (related to how we cognitively intuit what is and is not in our mental schemas and in relation to perception) is probably rooted in the equivalence of consciousness with being itself. It is rooted in the fact that we are (being) because we experience (cogito ergo sum). Thereafter, our interpretive experience is rooted in the self-evident fact that we first know that we are because we experience. It is an automatic part of our conscious awareness and even of our personal identity-based political operations in any “real world” we may be participating.

By extension, constructive “common cause” identity politics, and destructive, “common enemy” identity politics is based on that capacity of recognizing expressions of what is or of existence and being. We could summarize (according to some developmental psychologists like Kegan, Kohlberg, Peck, Cheryl, Gilligan, Fowler, Cook-Greuter, Baldwin, et al) our capacity to embrace and understand varies from person to person.

Levels of Ego Development according to one of the developmental psychologists, Suzanne Cook-Greuter. To face the challenge of DISCLOSURE we probably need a large percentage of the population and/or its cultural-political leaders in a Green (Pluralist), Teal or Turquoise stage of development. How could someone in a predominant “Amber” stage of ego development (the Diplomat- Conformist) act in the name of pluralist, world-centric values for the good of all humankind while willing to admit into his or her circle of care and concern non-human, extraterrestrial (or even intraterrestrial) beings?

It can be summarized as if the personal room for our consciousness and its degrees of possible embrace or identification with reality and interpretations were larger or smaller. It might also operate under a greater or lesser intensity of subjective walls or subdivisions in that inner conscious “space” or “room” and we would have biases possessing our conscious experience without us being aware of it, limiting how much and how we embrace what we disclose to ourselves in our experience.

The more we expand our consciousness as a permanent average trait the more we can embrace a “common emphasis” identity politics versus a “common enemy” identity politics. This issue related to how our CONSCIOUSNESS is freer and more inclusive or instead possessed by inner walls and biases that affect our interpersonal relationships, politics, ufology, disclosure. If we do not nourish a trusting environment we may not be ready for healthy social coordination after major UFO, experiencer revelations.

According to Ken Wilber (working with the information provided by some of those developmental psychologists) a large percentage of the population primarily functions in a premodern, mythic, authority-based level of development coloring their self-identities in which it is IMPOSSIBLE to feel, think, value and include multiple truths multilaterally, fact-based and pluralistically, or in a true modern democratic way, not to speak of the capacity to find a way to harmonize ideological differences via an integrative approach.

Dr. Jonathan Haidt emphasizes (conservative and liberal) moral TENDENCIES (rather than developmental levels) affecting self-identity and identity politics but his work is seriously related to this discourse and to how disclosure activists may effectively work in society beyond participating (even if based on reason) in the blame game.

In a world that needs to come together to process shared human problems: degradation of the oceans, climate change, nuclear warheads, terrorism across borders, artificial intelligence and job loss, information glut, and a long etc, the popularity of ethnic nationalism (now achieving power through democratic elections) is dismantling the international order that (at least in principle) promoted larger swaths of humanity to come together in cooperation with healthy democracies around a world of shared human rights using reason and facts to agree in applications.

How can a “post-truth” world order or a more disunited world made up of more dominating but competing for populist, nationalist polities welcome “the others”? (ETs). How can societies learn to deal in a constructive way and as part of a more unified global humanity if an “us vs them” mentality prevails?

If the classical liberal institutions and classical liberal people’s values in the world are in disarray as we tend to hold on to limited answers, how are we going to add the cultural challenge of verifying an extraterrestrial presence? The “rooms” or “spaces” in our consciousnesses need to expand.

I propose that as “disclosure activists” we also need to understand our own human psychology and what motivates us in order to engage in a more intelligent disclosure discourse and activism. Are most of us liberals (in the liberals vs conservative sense)? How can we value and speak with conservatives (both recognized by Wilber and Haidt as necessary)?

I definitely think that we need to study the work of moral psychologists like Johnathan Haidt and also the works of integrative philosopher Ken Wilber (who emphasizes developmental psychology). One emphasizes tendencies and, the other, capacities. And we need to understand both if we are to become aware of why we are how we are and why we become so invested in our beliefs.

If we are to overcome what may be the greatest challenge of all (probably challenging human nature as we normally experience it) we need to rise beyond opinions about each other. It must even go beyond the genuine and fantastic critiques of what an elite may be doing to us to retain control of us.

In order to be politically and exopolitically responsible we must really focus on understanding our tendencies and that of others (in regular citizens as well as elites and, simply, those in positions of leadership), tendencies naturally bearing on the degree of openness, personal biases and/or various specific interests toward the complex issue of disclosure. Simultaneously, we also need to understand why (sometimes, due to developmental level incapacity) many cannot rise to the challenge of disclosure because they – quite simply – they cannot rise above standard belief systems and cohere explanations discovering what they have in common and – from this platform – inform, share, educate.

The greatest transformative challenge humanity faces would be so deeply transformative that it cannot simply be based on simplistic belief system solutions. Revealing the degree of mischievousness with which an elite controls the cover-up or if a handful of contactees communicating with “space brothers” were – after all – correct in what, otherwise, looked like airy-fairy recommendations and narratives would be probably remain superficial, cosmetic solutions prone to produce more interpersonal conflict unless ‘we’ who care about truth, evolution and disclosure (at least as many of us as possible) come to value understanding why we are as we are, what can we really become and how to go about educating and transforming our current manifestations of “human nature.” This is why we need to expand our sphere of interest into Social Psychology, Behavioral Genetics, Biosociology, and other sources of information that shed light upon our “human nature.”

Thus far, the “UFO community” has made some contributions to society at large (albeit mostly preaching to the choir) but has not been able to provide a basis to come to basic agreements or to integrate the best information. We are also divided by our tendencies, often to the point of not recognizing each others’ contributions. So, we have also shown to the world how we subdivide ourselves as any other social group with a political message.

Do we simply need to become more conscious through more validated or grounded revelations, information, and through spiritual practices or do we need to re-engineer our tendencies and our developmental capacities by re-engineering our genes or simply becoming aware of why we are as we are (and to change our behavior and attitudes accordingly) is the key to become politically and exopolitically successful “citizens” in a complex, multi-dimensional cosmos?

A person to keep in mind to deepen this necessary conversation is Dr. Sean Esbjörn-Hargens who (probably in 2019) will be exploring (from an Integral Meta-Theory perspective) the issue of extraterrestrial contacts, Ufology, society, exopolitics.

 

 

 

 

Sources

Wilber, K. (2007). Integral Spirituality. Boston: Integral Books

47 pages from the DIA: Why Should We Care?

Dr. Robert M. Wood – Reprinted from December 2017 MUFON Journal

In June of 2017 Heather Wade received a low legibility copy of 47 pages of text by email (see footnote) from a source yet to be identified. Because of the lack of provenance, together with the presence of some grammar and spelling errors, several well-known UFO researchers rejected this document as just another way for hoaxers to confuse serious UFO students and waste our time. Furthermore, the document was difficult to read in some spots. On the other hand, neither well-known Stan Friedman nor myself, both of whom have some credibility in document authentication, have yet to comment.

The critics

Respected investigative reporter Linda Moulton Howe sought the opinion of a classification expert, who claimed numerous instances of inconsistency with known procedures of the era. Also, my occasional colleague and superb writer Nick Redfern offered multiple arguments against authenticity in two releases in June 2017. He claimed these pages were “not the real thing” because of numerous typographical errors “typically, you don’t see in government records”; because of inconsistency with the Eisenhower Briefing Document; and because of his incredulity of the EBE remarks. His second release offered four more anti-authenticity themes:  (1) they’re not real because of errors in the Roswell debris recovery (true) and that the alleged Flat Rock genuine UFO base was actually first-named in the Crichton’s great fiction work, The Andromeda Strain. (2) they’re “suggestive of disinformation campaigns that had tales of crashed UFOs at their heart”; (3) they are a hoax, citing examples of prior hoaxes; (4) they are an experiment, by “a UFO skeptic, someone who is looking to see the major figures in the Roswell field endorse the papers, and as a result, come crashing down.”

However, at essentially the same time, Michael Salla offered two releases on his website www.exopolitics.org (which can still be found under Exopolitics Comments 395 and 396 there) and noted that both Dr. Wood and Stanton Friedman had stated they saw no evidence of forgery.  He also noted the document’s content as dealing with US diplomatic relations with ETs, the possible role of Nikola Tesla, and the apparent interviews with an EBE recovered during the Aztec crash. His second release placed emphasis on the exceptional correlation of the questioned document (10 pages of 47) with the story details told in the historic UFO best seller, Behind the Flying Saucers, by Frank Scully, thereby implying that there was leak from the genuine crash investigation described in superb detail. Dr. Salla recommended further study of the 47 pages. I have done this.

It is not my plan in this article to argue pro or con these early releases by respected ufologists, but to tell the reader what I did that is new.

Reconstruction of the document

Because the 47 pages were very hard to read, I took the initiative to retype the document initially to understand what the words were. It became immediately apparent that this was originally typed on a typewriter because the character spacing was consistent with Elite typewriter font of 12 characters per inch. This knowledge also permitted the identification of “hard-to-read” words. Furthermore, it then became possible to clarify the exact errors in spelling and grammar and to create a table that identified each of them. It was also apparent that there were very likely two typists involved because for the first two sections, there were three spaces at the beginning of a new paragraph, and the last three sections had four spaces. It is commonly accepted that typists have their personalized preferences on how many spaces to use to begin a paragraph, thereby strongly suggesting two typists. This could be deemed important because it seems unlikely that someone hoaxing such a document would farm the work out to two different people, although this could be argued.

Everyone reading these pages has immediately noticed minor errors, and the retyping, together with an excellent knowledge of English and ufology, with the assistance of longtime skeptical researcher Steve Gill of MUFON Orange County, permitted the identification of 80 errors. These are shown in the adjacent columns. The nature of the errors is given in a summary table nearby. However, see the detailed table also nearby. If one contemplates why there were so many errors made in a document officially recorded on a microfilm, and you pronounce the word or phrase on the left and look at the correct one on the right, usually they sound essentially the same. This would be consistent with the document having been created as a result of taking dictation and having two different typists implement the words on paper. Furthermore, all the 15 errors for “its” are done by the typist who liked four spaces to start a paragraph. The other typist was asked to type “its” only three times and did them correctly each time. This is a reaffirmation that there were two typists, both dealing with dictated words, to create this document. This would be consistent with MJ-12 (stated in this case to be individual MJ-1) having dictated a one-time entry-level summary for the new person, since one apparently was not available from prior written records at the time of the alleged briefing.

Scope of the 47 pages

This MUFON Journal article will not attempt to hit all the fascinating highlights of the 47 pages in question. Each reader should order an easy-to-read copy rather than try to get the poor legibility download. See Journal ad on inside back cover. Basically, there are five parts of intellectual content: (1) objective, history and organization of MJ-12; (2) details of the 1947 Roswell crash recovery; (3) details of the 1948 Aztec crash recovery; (4) condensed conversations with the Aztec EBE; and (5) issue of the national security or the risk of cultural upheaval, together with diplomatic and cultural exchanges during the 70s and 80s visiting some of EBE’s worlds. Each of these, if factually correct, is a fascinating read, especially if you think of it as what was being told to a distinguished scientist as he was being formally briefed.

Who was being briefed?

There is a page with a signature on it, showing at the bottom left and replicated here. Shown for comparison are two signatures of distinguished professor Philip Morrison, one upon receiving his doctorate, and one at the bottom when he was at Cornell University. I am still seeking an example signature from MIT when he was older. Philip Morrison was a very distinguished professor, who was a protégé of Oppenheimer and very likely was “in the know” on security issues, although I have no evidence of this. There is evidence, however, that he was very collegial with Carl Sagan during his career, helping to arrange a symposium at the conclusion of the Colorado study in Boston. This event included Allen Hynek and James McDonald as speakers. Yours truly was also present, and I had the opportunity to shake Professor Morrison’s hand on that occasion, since I hadn’t seen him since he signed off on giving me my PhD at Cornell in 1953. Philip Morrison was the reviewer asked by the Scientific American magazine to write a book review about once a month, and I recall reading the exceptionally sophisticated evaluations of worthwhile literature.

Signature analysis

This is the only signature on the document, and the first question might be whether it was the entry level person being briefed or the briefer. It seems much more reasonable that it was the person being briefed. The first three letters of the signature are in caps, PHI without completing the rest of the first name. If this indeed was Philip Morrison signing, he might have been told as he was signing that he couldn’t use block letters – they needed his real signature – and so he continued with his last name in script. Overall, what is the probability that the first three letters of a first name and the first four letters of a last name match a random name? This low probability is, I believe, strong indication that the person being briefed was Philip Morrison. Many have speculated that Carl Sagan, good friend and colleague of Philip Morrison, may have been the replacement for Don Menzel, the astronomer who was named originally as MJ-10 in the Eisenhower Briefing Document.

Another surprise: 30 patents based on the Aztec recovery?

While the 47 pages are filled with exceptional detail on many aspects of what MJ-12 wanted to tell the entry level person, some of these details had never been revealed, such as the specific names of those scientists who were involved in the crash recovery and how their specialties might relate. One of those was Horace Van Valkenburgh, whose name was misspelled Valkenberg in the document (remember: dictation?) and was identified as Director of the School of Metallurgy at the University of Colorado, an expert in analytical chemistry. It also stated that he was the holder of over 30 patents “based on research he began after his analysis of the structural materials of the disc-craft.” This seemed to be something that could be checked out, so I stopped by the UC Boulder library during a visit and found out that I needed to check with the archives. I usually have dinner with my half brother David when I’m in town, and I told him a bit about Van Valkenburgh and he remembered that our father used to be friends with a Professor Van Valkenburgh at the Boulder Rotary Club. He personally thought he remembered meeting his son or grandson, “Skip.” David mentioned this to our sister Phoebe Jane who immediately sent me an address and phone for Skip Van Valkenburgh. So, I called him, and he answered the phone. I asked him if he knew of a Van Valkenburgh who might have been at the University of Colorado in 1948, and he immediately said that would be his Grandfather, Horace B. Van Valkenburgh II. He said his grandfather moved to Arizona after retirement in 1951 and lived until 1961. Skip seemed to be quite interested in this story and I subsequently emailed him the paragraph that described his apparent grandfather. He asked some more questions  and found that allegedly there had been a Van Valkenburgh who published an article in the Saucerian magazine, edited by Gray Barker that was a technical article about a crash recovery. The reference is Van Valkenburgh, H.B. UFO PROPULSION: ENGINES AND FUELS, ELECTRIC GENERATORS, HEAT GENERATORS, CHEAP ELECTRICITY. Clarksburg, W.Va.: Saucerian, 1981. 32p. I am attempting to get a copy of this article from the Clarksburg West Virginia library. Old copies of the Saucerian are selling on Amazon for hundreds of dollars.

Search for the patents

It would be exceptionally interesting if there have been patents issued to Van Valkenburgh II. (VVII). His son was VVIII and was a patent attorney so there are several entries with that name. However, assuming that the patent office does not make errors of II vs III in name suffixes, a search of patents has yielded no patents for Horace B. Van Valkenburgh II.  It is established that VVII was a professor at the University of Colorado at that time, but he was a professor of chemistry, specializing in inorganics. There was no Department of Metallurgy.

Assuming that the DIA 47 pages are correct, and that 30 patents mentioned were based on the technical discoveries from the Aztec vehicle, either the patents were classified (USPO claims that all patents are public property, so the patent application is what would have been classified.) Therefore, one needs to find the original copies of the applications. I have spoken with the Arizona State University archives and they do not have any applications unfiled under the name Van Valkenburgh or Van Valkenberg. They thought that the U. of Arizona would be unlikely to have an archive containing patent applications. Therefore, the hunt for the alleged 30 + patents attributed to Van Valkenburgh remains alive.

Authenticity Summary

A careful reading of these 47 pages has led me to encapsulate the arguments for authenticity as follows:

  • The numerous spelling errors are consistent with two different typists working from dictated words for the narrative 37 pages that I retyped. The probability that a hoaxer would have two different people type the document and then not proofread it seems very small.
  • If it is not a hoax, it states that is was dictated by MJ-1, who would be a very busy executive and might not take the time to proofread it since it seems likely that all copies for the meeting would have been routinely destroyed, including for the one that was used by security to make the microfilm apparently required by DIA security, the apparent source of the document we now have.
  • Michael Crichton’s The Andromeda Strain was published in May 1969. It is quite reasonable that the “Digger Command” location name of Flat Rock would have been humorously selected after that time based on the secrecy in the novel, and conjecture thus favors authenticity.
  • The Eisenhower Briefing Document of 1952 states that the second crash occurred in 1960. This would be inconsistent with the Aztec crash following Roswell eight months later. The Aztec crash included the recovery of a live alien, and it is quite reasonable that Majestic Twelve did not want Ike to know this much. Keeping this secret from the President and the public would be logical and supports authenticity. The “White Hot” report contains redactions consistent with deleting all references to recovered aliens. See majesticdocuments.com.
  • The apparent signature of Philip Morrison would be very consistent with him being the entry-level person being briefed. His early relationship with Oppenheimer, his distinguished career at Cornell and MIT, and his relationship with Carl Sagan support that this briefing was given to an appropriate person.
  • The validation that Horace Van Valkenburgh II was the right person at the right time to have been deeply involved in the Aztec crash recovery. Although the search for 30 patents has yielded zero, it is possible that the patents were indeed never issued. The document stated that he was the holder of 30 patents, possibly alluding correctly to patent applications that are still classified.

Why should we care?

MUFON’s goal has always been to do the research to find the truth. It is well-known that Government policies have been consistent with concealing from the public those matters that would upset our society, and secrecy has been used to accomplish this. Therefore, the content of these 47 pages is consistent with what a newcomer to the classified UFO program should know about, as stated by Majestic Twelve.

However, because of the compartmentalization of classified material, it is possible that even Majestic Twelve did now know that the Navy was working on reverse engineering of a crashed UFO from the “Battle of L.A.” in 1942,* since MJ-12 was not formed until 1947. It is also possible that the scope of MJ-12 was limited. This document is a summary and is stated to be part of the Aquarius Project, just one of several.

Therefore, if our goal is to get the whole truth, we need to keep probing the edges of all links relentlessly, with these 47 pages being just one lucky leak that was not expected or controlled by any master plan. Dozens of Unacknowledged Special Access Programs (USAPs) have funded trillions of our dollars since the 1940’s.  These 47 pages describe  just a tiny portion of what has been done. More leaks like this may describe the truth about the reality of our reverse engineering achievements and the procedures used to interact with other ETs and achieve secret goals only dreamed of by most people.

—–

Footnote from beginning of article:  http://midnightinthedesert.com/exclusive-ultra-topsecret-assessment-situation-statement-position-ufos . This URL no longer opens properly [but is available on the internet archive].

*”Selected by Extraterrestrials: My life in the top secret world of UFOs, think-tanks and Nordic secretaries, William M. Tompkins, 2nd Printing 2016.

 

Copyright © 2018 Exopolitics Institute News Service. All Rights Reserved.