NASA’s Study

By | September 14, 2023

Hi Everyone, 

I have a short breakdown of the NASA press conference and report, both of which are linked here:

Press Conference: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=zjwrzHJA3PI

[NOTE 11/21/23: The NASA UAP Report was initially downloadable as a PDF at a certain location but that link is broken. I assume it remains available somewhere)

There was lots on methodology, transparency, data collection, and science. That’s all good. We want good data. But I noticed in the report as well as from at least two of the presenters that the big problem with UAP is a lack of good data. I just roll my eyes. Yes, the phenomenon is elusive, absolutely. It’s difficult, agreed. But no good data? Seriously? 

Just now I tweeted “NASA dismisses decades of data on UFO phenomena, advocating for a fresh start. 80 years of records from government, military, and contractors overlooked. It’s as if they’re saying ‘nothing to see here’. “

And that summarizes my attitude at the moment. You can see the entire history of this phenomenon, 80 years, just being pushed aside. I am not blaming NASA for this, not really. It’s just the structure of the entire study, the entire way this is being done. No need to ask the Pentagon or CIA or DOE for answers. Who needs to spoil the party? 

Richard 

19 thoughts on “NASA’s Study

  1. Ted2

    Pretty close to what I was expecting though I thought it would be about an investigation where NASA finds that UAPs aren’t alien, just unknown phenomena. The title of a web piece from the New Scientist “NASA’s UFO task force has released its final report – it’s not aliens”. Without really pushing things too hard, NASA seems to have got its message out.
    To me, that sets the tenor for future NASA UAP research. More “we got to study this further” stuff. They will push things down the road for an eternity without finding anything earth-shattering.
    I didn’t/won’t expect them to say that they have definitely proved UAPs are of alien origin. Based on NASA’s behavior in the past, it is likely that they could have but that ain’t happening. As for NASA’s transparency moving forward, they have appointed a UAP research director but won’t reveal who that is.

    1. Bob Levey

      Well You were right Richard they actually released the bosses name later but during the session they said they wouldn’t.
      My Apologies, LoL, I should never tangle with the best of the best!!!
      Blessings

  2. Bob Levey

    Sorry Richard. No, we will not be told who the head guy is. Because they don’t want to expose him to ridicule!!! What a joke.
    Then at the end the last question was right to the point. what will you actually reveal ,lol! What a joke when it was all said and done.
    So, they’ll speak on unclassified data, hence they still will be controlling the info, the info we want!!
    They will not divulge the real deep truth!!! Once again these people really think they are so smart and we are so dumb so drinking their koolaid. They are nincompoops putting mildly.
    Oh and Nelson talked about Gurusch like he was Junior High student talking with a bunch of friends.

  3. Andromeda107

    If Bill Nelson truly wants to be transparent and want to have some type of understanding about the ufo phenomenon he needs to talk to Donna Hare. Although if he is taking his orders from the DOD this all for show. This so-called report is all for show.

  4. SeeingDots

    I took notes as I watched the press conference to post here but I see now that you already noticed one of my observations. Still, here are my notes. I haven’t read the actual report yet (why bother?).

    My referenced time stamps are from NASA’s own YouTube video on their channel:

    https://youtu.be/TQcqOW39ksk?si=WVXnzC5SLzi7qRhc

    Reconcile the two prepared statements below from NASA administrator Bill Nelson. Notice how he goes out of his way to state “This is the first time NASA has taken concrete action to seriously look into UAP” (4:10 in video). Why would he make such an embarrassing admission when he immediately follows the remark with the acknowledgement that “NASA has a statutory authority to seriously look into UAP”(4:27 in video)?

    Note that NASA was founded July 29, 1958 and yet they claim this is the first time they’ve decided to look into UAPs despite their statutory authority to do so. Could they be making such an awkward claim in order to hide any data that they have previously collected?

    Yes. In fact, David Spergel, President of Simons Foundation and chair of NASA’s UAP independent study team piggy-backs Bill’s comments when he begins commenting on the newly-released study (16:22 in video, quote below). In one rhetorical fell swoop, he eliminates all prior NASA data from their study with the claim that it does not have adequate “resolution”. Instead, NASA will be limited to providing “data on environmental conditions.” What in the world are “environmental conditions” in this context – the weather?

    16:22 “We looked at NASA’s assets. While they provide a comprehensive picture of the ocean, the Earth’s surface, and the atmosphere for studying our evolving planet, they typically do not have the resolution needed for UAP events. However, by providing data on environmental conditions, they can complement other data on UAP.”

    38:40 “NASA’s data are free and publicly accessible for the entire world to download.” This isn’t true. Also, much of the data they do choose to release is verifiably altered.

    57:37 NASA admits to not including classified material in their study. Anything UAP/extraterrestrial related would obviously be classified, so this study was absolutely pointless. It was designed from the get-go to reveal nothing.

    Lastly, NASA repeatedly states they are transparent and yet they:

    – Refuse to disclose the name of the new Director of UAP Research (22:13 in video) and claim it is due to the fact that some people on social media are trolls and “science must be free” (33:30 in video).
    – Refuse to disclose the funding allocation for the UAP Research program (22:13 in video)
    – Disabled comments on the YouTube video

  5. AineEithne

    Thank you, Richard – You’re amazing!
    I watched about 5 minutes of their malarkey, sighed as Loudly as possible, and shut it off… they just bring out the petulant 5 year old in me, so let’s have some fun with this, shall we?
    Let’s see… NASA stands for:
    1) NASA – Never A Straight Answer😂
    2) NASA – No Astronauts (to) Space Anymore 😬
    3) NASA – Need Another Senseless Apology 😪
    4) NASA – Not Another Suppressed Answer 🤐
    5) NASA – Not A Setbank Again ?!?! 🫨
    Regards with a smile – a sense of humor will see us through🤩.

    1. ACTIVEGUARDIAN

      I know them from FOIA work as NEVER A STRAIGHT ANSWER. They actually printed and distributed a little brochure (nothing official! or so they said) telling their folks how to frustrate FOIA requesters.

  6. Lauren2844

    I don’t think anyone buys Anything Nasa is saying.. A UFO crash could be confirmed by Congress and NASA would claim “No evidence that we could find” bla bla bla…. NASA has become Baghdad Bob at this point.

    The 1 video out of the 3 that shows a UFO tilting to the left. When it gets to the far left angle the video ends. The reason it ends is because that UFO accelerated at thousands of miles an hour instantly. Of course they never allowed that to be seen.

    2
  7. Tom McKibbin

    Bill Nelson’s (feigned?) ignorance on David Grusch’s claims was a particularly frustrating low point of the NASA Press Conference. Someone asked the panel about Grusch’s claims and Nelson says something along the lines of “Oh yeah, I heard about that on the nightly news, something about his friend told him there was a craft and an alien body in a warehouse somewhere.”

    I find it difficult to believe that that’s the true extent of his knowledge of Grusch’s claims and the Congressional Hearing, especially on a subject which he is apparently so interested in being transparent about. He’s either willfully trying to downplay Grusch’s claims in the public sphere, or he’s so ignorant of important developments in the field recently that his involvement in this endeavour ought to be scrutinised. Of course, no-one knows for sure if Grusch’s claims are real or valid or not, but they’re highly provocative and it seems unlikely that he wouldn’t have been alerted to them.

    The other alternative is that the media has done such a poor job of reporting Grusch’s claims and the Congressional Hearing that he legitimately didn’t hear about them. Sure enough, the BBC had the NASA story prominently featured on the home page here in the UK, whereas they did nothing on the original Debrief article/NewsNation report, and when the Hearings were taking place it wasn’t on the home page, and was buried low down in the US News page. Not even a top story.

    Finally, there’s the debacle of NASA wishing to be transparent and then refusing to name who their Director of UAP Research was, blaming it on abuse NASA folk received. They then backtrack and announce that it’s Mark McInerney, NASA’s liaison to the Department of Defense.

    I’m sure he’s going to be REAL transparent…

    The cover-up continues.

  8. Durkle

    It’s obvious to me that the government has zero interest in discussing the phenomena . Anything that threatens their control of the population is treated as the primary threat. I have given up any expectation that scientific curiosity exists beyond scientists like Gary Nolan, who have been shown to have open mind. Truly we live in an age of denial. It’s discouraging and potentially enormously dangerous to humanity.
    I have just one question for NASA ….Please share with us their explanation for the countless “fast walkers” that are known incidents.

    2
  9. ACTIVEGUARDIAN

    NASA– “Well, we carefully chose a sampling of reports and those reports don’t really tell us anything because we picked those reports ourselves, and to be honest, we really don’t WANT to know…….. er… that is… we really don’t want YOU to know.”

    Have I not said from early on that THEY will try to rewrite UFO history, mainly by memory-holing the vast bulk of it? I guess I don’t need to say it again. The only things that really count with these people are cherry-picked military incidents, and of course, not the GOOD ones that WE KNOW about.

    Elizondo was the spearhead, and now we have a full invasion of the field led by Grusch and other johnny-come-latelies groomed by Elizondo and McCollough, along with a lapdog UFO media, breathlessly saying things like “Oh, Mr. Grusch! Do you want to be thought of as a hero… or as a legend?” If some of these UFO talking heads would be any more gushing-like-a-schoolgirl fanboy, they’d be coming in their pants. These opinion-leaders have untold millions of noobs following and obeying them, people who think that UFOs are HOT! People who have never read a UFO book, or probably any other book in their very short adult lives. These people are KEY to the erasure of UFO history, and history in general.

      1. ACTIVEGUARDIAN

        We keep seeing McCollough, but no one really notices him. Grusch goes nowhere official without him. Grusch is like George Bush at the 9-11 hearings, Cheney was there with his hand up his sock puppet so he wouldn’t say anything uncontrolled. Now, we have the Grusch head snap– when Mr. G gets any question, his head snaps around to McCollough.

        A historical tidbit– Mr. Charles “Chuck” McCullough III has been the architect of more cover-ups than nearly anyone in contemporary times. He was the author of much of the intelligence portion of the Patriot Act along with his best friend Dick Cheney, the Dark Lord. As we know, it was written pre-9-11 and was all ready to go. McCullough handled the Snowden Crisis and lied out his ass to Congress. He handled Wikileaks, and as one of the Intelligence Community’s chief lawyers, no doubt weighed in on the “legality” of assassinating Julian Assange AND OTHERS.

        How is a man, Dick Cheney’s best friend and also good friend of Barack Obama, a man who had responsibility for fraud waste and abuse in the Secret Police world and never once in his whole career said “BOO!” about UFOS, going to get us anything?

        His bio is full of cover-ups and OPs to control public information and disinformation.

        Mr. Charles “Chuck” McCullough III is not someone we should trust.

    1. AineEithne

      I’m most concerned about the harm done to humanity by the ETs, but I see what you’re saying.
      People have died and been brutally silenced at the hands of other humans to silence them from talking about the ET existence here . But, if we need a Truth and Reconciliation Commission to get the truth out, so be it. Let’s get the truth out and we’ll find the true enemy is Them. Unless you’re saying that all would be forgiven and yet the truth of ETs harming humans intentionally would never come out? If not Elizondo and Grusch, who can we trust? Grusch HAS already spoken of the harm that has come to people at the hands of both the human silencers and the NHI. So let’s keep going with this. Why not? I don’t get your logic as to why not?

Leave a Reply