UFO UpDates
A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena
'Its All Here In Black & White'
Location: UFOUpDatesList.Com > 2002 > Nov > Nov 8

Re: Black Projects Come Out

From: Tim Matthews <TMMatthews99.nul>
Date: Fri, 8 Nov 2002 04:58:34 EST
Archived: Fri, 08 Nov 2002 13:36:53 -0500
Subject: Re: Black Projects Come Out



>From: Steven Kaeser <steve.nul>
>To: <ufoupdates.nul>
>Date: Wed, 6 Nov 2002 14:31:09 -0500
>Subject: Re: Black Projects Come Out

>>From: Tim Mathtews <TMMatthews99.nul>
>>To: updates.nul
>>Date: Wed, 6 Nov 2002 03:41:59 EST
>>Subject: Black Projects Come Out

>>Dear All,

>>Below, an article for the New Scientist by David Windle who
>>assisted me in researching my book, UFO Revelation, published by
>>Cassell in 1999. The article demonstrates what the few people
>>like me have been saying all along. That many of the better UFO
>>sightings are, indeed, black projects aircraft at various stages
>>of production.

>>We were right all along... and this is but one example that has
>>seen the light of day.....

>Tim-

>I don't think there's any question that some unidentified flying
>objects were mis-identified experimental aircraft (black project
>or otherwise), but do you contend that a majority of such
>sightings were really "Black Project" related?

A majority of which sightings? In any case, we're very happy
with the conclusion that FTs and Flying discs were of
terrestrial design. The majority of "UFO" cases relate to
natural phenomena; earth lights and so on. That's what we think
the "zig zag" video footage mentioned more than likely
represents.

Could some UFOs be alien? Possibly. But not FTs and discs. What
is happening here is that evidence of man made projects is
ignored consistently. Stan simply continues to proselytise that
discs "couldn't" be man made and tends to cite sightings by
witnesses as evidence that the technology is "beyond" the
capacity of humans. Yes, Blue Book had its unknowns but was a
badly funded and organised effort. Where really good cases of
structured UFOs exist, like the Henderson, NV, case mentioned in
Hynek's UFO Report (1957), where a disc was seen by a USAF
Officer, the thing was debunked as "psychological". We are sure
we know why. A bit too near Groom Lake/Papoose for comfort!

But then the vast majority of sightings are flawed and the tiny
fragment of credible evidence we have tends to indicate the
existence of structured objects whose flightpaths coincide with
the location of military facilities. Take, for instance, the
fairly recent NIDS report that supported our conclusion that FTs
operated from several military facilities. Stanton would have us
believe that these craft are "checking out military bases", or
some similar argument. This doesn't hold water and I'm sure the
CIA and co and happy with his 40 years of promoting the remnants
of their 1950s 'Aliens in UFOs' agenda!

From the Boeing 360 to the jet-powered pancakes, the Navy disc
projects at China Lake, the AVRO effort, those at Papoose Lake
and elsewhere, comes significant evidence that discs, and later
FTs, were, and are, terrestrial. Of course we are rarely
afforded either the chance to debate with people like Stanton,
the chance to write about this in journals or magazines or to
present these apparently shocking ideas to conference attenders.
TV programme makers don't want to hear it either, as seven years
in this game have shown me.

Shame, really, because if we had the amounts of money made
available to Ufology to "prove" the alien case we'd be so much
further advanced. In the meantime, I'm happy to accept the
testimony of Frank Carlson (who worked at Papoose Lake from
1960-62), Thomas Smith (Chance Vought 1944-46), Jack Pickett
(McDill 1960s) and others who tell us that we are right and that
everything else is belief driven.

I don't intend to get into a ding dong debate on this because
very few are even interested in changing their minds or
admitting that they could be wrong. In my view, and that of my
many colleagues, Ufology is pretty much an alien believer cult
hardened against contrary evidence. It's not that we're against
the idea that UFOs could be alien, only that there is much
better evidence that aliens were promoted from the 1950s onwards
to cover the activity of US-made flying discs and, latterly,
FTs.

So it's not simply a debate about "aliens or not", rather an
argument about the best evidence that the few cases where
structured craft (rather than anomalous lights that zip around
the sky and look great on video tape) are fairly certain to have
been seen are of human design and operation.

Although I have my suspicions about the role of the CIA I'm
afraid we'll have to see what else emerges from the vaults
before going further on that one!


Thanks Steve and friends,

Tim M.


[ Next Message | Previous Message | This Day's Messages ]
This Month's Index |

UFO UpDates Main Index

UFO UpDates - Toronto - Operated by Errol Bruce-Knapp


Archive programming by Glenn Campbell at Glenn-Campbell.com