Let’s see how popular (or not) this program will be!
In this video I will lay out four scenarios that I believe we should look at to understand this UFO Balloon hype that we are hearing about. Spoiler alert: it ain’t real UFOs. 🙂
Lots of visuals and media quotes for this one. I hope you enjoy.
What are you talking about. If you were to make this episode, it would be excellent. I don’t know what the purpose of this post is but please expand upon this.
It’s been hard for me to wrap my head around the sheer enormity-of-the-silliness of the Project Blue Beam/false flag invasion premise. It seems especially prevalent with folks younger than me (and I’m not that old) and it… it just…. it just makes my spirit sink. Lots of well-meaning people who, at a crucial juncture, have just poorly thought through the dynamics of the UFO situation of the past 70 years. Ah well. Maybe someday it’ll happen and we’ll have to eat crow, and the twenty-five year olds across the street can say “dude… we told you so.” But i doubt it.
I think the Blue Beam narrative has had a pernicious influence on the UFO field. It trivializes the genuine reality of false flags as well as the genuine reality of UFO deception.
Good job on your presentation! We took notice and liked that you kept yourself on screen, minimized, during the graphics. It provided a nice humanizing continuity.
What do you make of the use of the term “UFO” in so many recent balloon-gate stories? Why UFO … when they made a such concerted effort to abandon that term and switch the narrative to “UAP” in the very recent past? Let’s not forget they even pulled out the Hillary card on the talk-show circuit to get their point across that UAP was the new term. And now we’re peppered with “UFO” — what gives? We find it hard to believe that they would just shrug, give up, and say, “Ok, general public, you win.” We recall a time when even you yourself made a video presentation declaring that no matter how hard they tried to push “UAP,” you were going to continue trying to link UAP to UFO so that the term UFO and its rich history did not die.
Julie and Steve
Well, I did try to address that issue toward the end of my presentation — why keep calling these things UFOs? I wondered: laziness or yet further rebranding? I can’t say for sure but I do think “both” is probably right.
I just want to share a very important Press Release from Christopher Mellon. I am really impressed by the very direct on point statements in this. I have waited half my life to hear anyone who at least used to be a high level US Government official, talk seriously about UFOs, UAPs, what they might mean, and Roswell as a starting point for getting the Truth out, as well as Amnesty. At least somebody said it; I can dream, can’t I?
It may well be that the Pentagon is using these other balloons as way of saying ” Yes, we scrambled a jet and took out a few errant balloons at $400,000 a missile. Nothing to see here, folks, except a waste of taxpayer’s money” It is just a way of trivializing UFOs and fixing the idea that whatever the public sees in the sky is probably…..just a balloon.
The Chinese balloon is a different story, though. We should not let their balloons fly over our airspace. I’m interested in how a balloon can be steered remotely to a specific point and then stay there for a while and then proceed to the next waypoint. I’m sure that on those balloons, there is a GPS or GLONASS receiver which can relay the coordinates of the balloon to a Chinese satellite or their space station. These balloons might have listening photographic devices, but they might also be monitoring the frequencies associated with the HAARP facility in Alaska to try to determine if we are using it to alter the weather, as a great many people suspect. like you and other people, I’m suspicious of the timing of these sightings because the war in Ukraine is not going well for the US and NATO.
I agreed with most of what you had to say up to, and including, the 4 scenarios you had listed at 11 minutes and 40 seconds into this podcast. With that said, I have always appreciated the fact that you have always used what I believe to be a very high degree of objectivity and open-mindedness in your discourse (and communications) about the UFO subject, and have so graciously indulged us with regards to our own opinions on the matter–which I will forever be appreciative. I also believe that you have, for the most part, kept your geopolitical opinions and commentaries separate from those regarding UFO matters, which I always felt was a wise thing to do. Unfortunately, that belief came to a screeching halt at 12 minutes and 20 seconds into your talk.
I was debating on whether or not to comment on your geopolitical opinions, and your decision to use this particular subject as a convenient opportunity to assert them, but decided discretion is the better part of valor. This is your site, and my opinions on such matters, after all, mean absolutely nothing. I have always despised getting involved in polemics about anything related to religion, family, or politics, due the the level of passion they foment; and have always tried to avoid such interactions at all costs simply because people see what they want to see, hear what they want to hear, and believe what they want to believe regardless of the facts, and irrespective of the truth; these immutable facts–coupled with the fact that there is only one thing more difficult than disabusing a simpleton of a faulty belief, and that is disabusing an intellect of one–has always made me shy away from such discussions.
Though one should not necessarily try to avoid engaging in rational debates over matters involving disparate opinions; that’s not how debates on political or religious subject matters typically end up, and that’s not why I joined your website in the first place. Having discussions and debates on matters that we disagree with regarding UFOs is one thing, but this is another matter altogether. Up to this point, I have successfully avoided these topics by just ignoring them and going on to the next UFO subject, but unfortunately for me the two worlds collided at 12:20 into this podcast. Sorry, but notwithstanding how correct you may or may not be with respect to your geopolitical beliefs, this type of rhetoric only poisons the well for me because in my opinion it negatively impacts your objectivity about the UFO phenomenon. And the fact that you brought up the notion that your geopolitical viewpoints might anger some of us who follow you, tells me you are not only willing to take on that risk, but also take on the risk of alienating some of your followers as well as possibly even losing a small level of credibility in the eyes of those followers, simply to promote what is clearly a separate agenda involving another passion of yours that is unrelated to the subject of UFOs. Of course, your willingness to take on those risks is a business decision you have absolutely every right to make, and one I have no right to criticize, but in the end, is it the right one?
You don’t need to reply–I was just letting you know how I feel, so take it for what it is worth. I also want to sincerely thank you for all the insightful interviews and commentary you have provided on the UFO subject over the last couple of years, and for taking the time to read, and graciously reply, to most of my comments on UFOs. It’s been a blast. Thank you.
I DA, it’s okay, you’ve never said anything that I felt was less than professional and insightful. My attitude about that is that in this case the story IS a geopolitical and a UFO story. It’s both. Moreover, I do believe that the current debacle in Eastern Europe is the essential flavoring and backdrop to this current balloon gate. That’s why I said what I did. Probably could have said what I did more efficiently and in less time, but I did what I felt was appropriate. It wasn’t about supporting one side or another. To me, this war is an unmitigated disaster for the West, and it will be coming home to roost this year, pretty much affecting everything. But anyway, thank you for your comment.
This balloon circus, indeed; amazing how the mainstream media saluted and immediately ran with it.
The intelligence community looks for opportunities to make carefully calculated plays that are multi-faceted, like as in a game of Pool, trying to sink multiple balls and set-up your next opportunity with one shot. Calling these objects “ufos” can meet the needs of the propagandists not only serving as a distraction for Ukraine and avoiding acknowledgment of the Seymour Hersh article but also by stirring the pot of fear by mentioning (without there ever being any definitive clarification) both Unidentified Aerial Phenomenon as well as China as suspects – not just a “two-fer” but rather a “four-fer.” 😀
Agreed – I’d like Clayton Morris to have you do some guest spots on Redacted (I’ve shared my request via e-mail, perhaps to no avail). He apparently feels that he has enough background to adequately address the topic.
Thanks for your timely analysis!
Thank you for providing common sense to this phenomenon! I became so frustrated when all these ufo podcasts started referring to these objects (balloons) as UFOs. These kind of responses are what cause credibility of the field to go right out the window. Oh, by the way, spy vs spy was awesome.
Thank you SO MUCH for addressing this Richard. I opt for “balloons have been everywhere and anywhere, forever”, someone or something is using this for “whatever” agenda – not UFOs (flying saucers). And yeah, what a load of horseshit media wise ….I had to turn off the news, even as limited as I have it on at all … in lieu of body-slamming my actual television set into next week.
Appreciate the coverage.
As far as the media is concerned. I grew up in the when Walter Cronkite said something was so, it was so. Today, I bear these things in mind:
1. Assume that the media people view their job as “shaping perceptions”, but don’t call them propagandists. That is so ugly.
2. Shaping perceptions can be accomplished best by omitting facts or not telling the whole story or not covering a story. Telling flat out lies allows the opposition to fact check them, but a lot of people won’t bother.
3. They Stay on message. They don’t deviate. They don’t admit they are wrong, they just move on to another subject.
Living with my stepmother because she is infirm, I have to listen to MSNBC a lot. The above points apply especially to MSNBC, but I think they are generally true of today’s media. I get my news off the internet.
It is all so cringe….
Now…based on what I’ve seen the last 2 years; I am confident, the current group of sociopathic criminals would stage a fake UFO invasion before they would ever give up or admit their crimes.
I also think they have the tech and ability to pull it off, to the extent they have pulled off the covid hoax. If we fall for one we would fall for both. I think the jury is still out on covid…give it a year or two.
I really think they just had the media start talking UFO smack to keep the masses busy. They really think we are that stupid.
I believe our current social and political circus will end with a combination of them underestimating us and us overestimating them. Until that happens…it aint a circus without balloons..right?
Thank you for another superb, thought-provoking program. I know my replacement as MUFON State Director recommended your Balloon analysis to all the membership, and the response is very favorable. The answer in any situation is usually multi-faceted. I am reminded of the statement in DUNE by Fran Herbert, where Paul Atreides is cautioned to watch for “the feint within the feint.” We must stay vigilant to watch the other hand while we are being misdirected. You reminded me today that the Neo-Con problem cuts across Party Lines. This leads me to a previous conclusion that the American People would have lost the 2016 election no matter which Party’s candidate won.
At 71 and having survived two near fatal cardiac events, I spend time on the elliptical trainer – Your Podcasts on YouTube help mind and body to be dedicated to trying to find the Deeper Truth. Please keep up the great work! Your friend and fan in the Pacific NW. -UFO Detective
Apparently I am pretty much alone in thinking that shooting at unknown objects is dangerous. I am unconvinced by the reasoning that if they are “real” UFO’s they can’t be shot down so “no problem.” Not only is that not a provable claim but it seems to rely on the notion that if it is a “real” UFO the occupants or owners will simply evade the attack and keep their sense of humor. Maybe I have missed something but I don’t recall many encounters where the aliens had a pronounced sense of humor.
Of course without video we only believe they were shot down because that is what we are told. The object is gone and so far there is no wreckage. Apropos of nothing I noticed the story of the military helicopter that just crashed in Alabama leaving no survivors. I hope this is an isolated tragedy.
To make it clear what concerns me, I refer those readers who have access to Linda Moulton Howe’s Earthfiles.com website archives to two “Peculiar Phenomena” series in those archives. The first four part series begins on December 4, 2004 and continues through that month. The second more extensive series begins December 19, 2005 and continues in 20 parts through May 23, 2006. This is essential documented context surrounding the 1947 UFO events. I am not sure this has come to your attention. Linda’s site is invaluable and also seems to include all of Leonard Stringfield’s Crash Retrieval Reports.
Not really a fan of the Ukraine analysis.
I think the US is using this to inflict military and economic damage on Russia without putting US boots on the ground, to weaken China’s main ally.
China is going to outpace the US militarily and economically in the future which the US has already forseen as becoming some form of conflict. Its also giving China doubts about taking Taiwan, which China is watching carefully.
But I’m also somewhat close to Ukraine as my ex wife works for the Ukrainian government and my daughter lives there. I’ve been many times including during the war and listened in on heads of government departments video conference calls.
I guess we’ll see if I’m correct on thinking you are off the mark.
We will have to see viz. Russia and Ukraine. Not making a moral judgment here but I do not think the Russians are being harmed. Economic growth looks good. Military-industrial organization looks good. Troop deployments look good. Bakhmut about to fall into their hands … the most significant battle of the war. Ukraine economy on life support. European sanctions backfiring. US/NATO position looking very bad on all levels. But yes .. we shall see. The coming year will sort our various opinions out. If I may, I would offer this 30 minute analysis as a reality check. At least in my view it serves as one: https://youtu.be/30z7RWe9gg4
If one reads neutral opinions, by unallied military or news sources, such as Al Jazeera, one finds a different take than what you are offering on the war in Ukraine. Yes, the Russians have inflicted horrendous damage and casualties, but overall the war is not going well for them to this point. Over one million well educated Russians have fled the country doing significant damage to the economy and other areas. One thousand companies have left and if not for a lot of help from India and China the populace would be suffering to an extent that would pose a real problem. Putin gambled the west would suffer from a loss of his liquified natural gas, but a warm winter and other stepping in to make up for the deficit have left him holding the bag. He has little market for his oil and no pipelines to deliver it. He is losing billions in revenue. One only has to count the number of military and political figures that have jumped from windows to understand the turmoil behind the scenes. Putin has declared this a great patriotic war lately similar to the revolution and the defense of Russia in WWII. One wonders if the Russian people will buy it longterm. NATO was on the ropes due to Trump and some other factors, but Putin has singlehandely revived the alliance. Th e US economy has not suffered and oil is cheaper than before the war. Even on the battlefield the Ukranians have shown the myth of the Russian war machine to be way overblown. Most military observers give the war so far to Ukraine, if not by much.
Strong disagree here, but all I will say is … let time sort it out. It won’t be long. Serious ammo shortage in the West.
I don’t know what there is to disagree with, except you believe the Russians are winning. Everything I posted is from neutral observers and is factual. No doubt, if Putin goes all in and uses every military resource he has he can win. But, what is winning? There will still be armed resistance and bombings as in Iraq and other places where supposedly a war was won, but the populace was not subdued. Putin has lost more than he will ever win by destroying Ukraine.
Ok, now back to UFOs and other more interesting and fun subjects.
Wow. They were just from private owners or a company in u.s. LOL. I only heard a quite blurb, so i looked it up and don’t have time to read this now.
If the hot shots in DOD don’t know that they aren’t a threat, i can’t imagine how they discern anything about ufos. 🙂
As usual, most informative geopolitical analysis available. Thanks for this.
Richard and Friends – Isn’t it interesting that now the government has changed parameters on object size, speed and location, that it previously ignored because they already KNEW of the multitude of balloons and low and slow drones and objects that are perfectly mundane in our skies? Now they will track and report every small object, every slow object, including high school balloon 🎈 projects. (Sigh #1)
AARO is going to be awfully busy, having been flooded now with all of these mundane objects to sort out. They are, after all, the ‘resolution’ office. (Sigh #2)
Fast forward to the next report – how many objects will they have looked into (over a thousand?) And how many will have been resolved as balloons, drones, known tech, and just LOOK at how many AARO, who was specifically called out to look into all of these, will have resolved. (800 of 1000?)
NOW. With ALL of that – you can see our skies are filled with so many known and resolvable objects, then WHY are wasting taxpayer money on this? (Sigh… #3)
Meanwhile, there’s precious little time to look into the TRUE unknown and AARO gets its first black eye. Well played, DOD. Well played…
This is a very interesting point. You may well be right here, although one might hope that good algorithms could cut through this, but … will they?