Live data from Hacker News

NSA UFO Documents Index

nsa.gov

141–150 of 167 posts

Re: NSA UFO Documents Index

#141
post #96

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I don't think these are dumb questions at all They're not, but they're also somewhat orthogonal to "UFO culture." You're describing a philosophical/sociopolitical discussion that isn't really informed by a blip on a grainy video frame. The question that's more relevant to UFOs, in my opinion, is "Why would these aliens, with their unimaginably superior technology, travel all the way here and reveal themselves in such…

Your last point is a good one, but there are a many ways that you could be wrong. To name one: The Von Neumann probe is a compelling model and it is more likely that we would see something fitting that description rather than the original form of an extraterrestrial intelligence. We have no good reason to think that such an advanced civilization would have mastered faster than light communication either. So the behav…

But haven't we almost mastered faster than light communication with quantum entangled radios?

Re: NSA UFO Documents Index

#142
post #104

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> I just don't see it. I fully believe that, if there were aliens out there with such capabilities, and they came to earth, they would either conceal themselves fully or reveal themselves intentionally (and not just to a handful of people in a remote area). After having read Roadside Picnic, I'm inclined to disagree. If sufficiently advanced aliens ever happened upon us they might treat us as we treat ants in our bac…

I’m not familiar with the book, but 1) I don’t think the analogy of ambling around our backyards holds for space travel. Space is vast and largely empty, it would be astronomically unlikely for anyone to casually wander over to earth from another star or galaxy. 2) We only treat ants that way because we already know about them. People have noticed them and studied them at great length. A person who doesn’t know that…

We think space is empty, but we don't really have evidence that it is... It could be teeming with life or ships that our current sensor tech simply doesn't pick up from here.

Maybe if we inhabited space significantly we would find there's a lot going on between the stars

Re: NSA UFO Documents Index

#143
post #124
post #96

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I don't think these are dumb questions at all They're not, but they're also somewhat orthogonal to "UFO culture." You're describing a philosophical/sociopolitical discussion that isn't really informed by a blip on a grainy video frame. The question that's more relevant to UFOs, in my opinion, is "Why would these aliens, with their unimaginably superior technology, travel all the way here and reveal themselves in such…

I’ve been looking through these ufo threads and haven’t seen anyone address the third explanation. I’m somewhat impulsively replying to you as your might receive this well. Most of the credible ufo phenomenon is likely a psyop. I won’t get into why the cia or other would put forth such efforts beyond reciting the quote “We’ll know our disinformation program is complete when everything the American public believes is…

Sure but in regards to remote viewing it is in fact a real thing, so there's a degree to which the existence of disinformation is not a confirmation of nonexistence of some underlying reality.

Btw, i think you may have meant to put credible in quotes, otherwise it's an oxymoron... as, in "Credible ufos are actually psyops."

I'm confident a lot of information is disinformation I think that your hypothesis that most or all is is probably false and maybe you can see they too if you examine the range of documents in the CIA FOIA reading room, the testimony of people, the work required to create all of these different documents in different formats with all of this different information about people's names and departments from the correct historical time period the correspond to you know correct historical designations and departments, it just seems way too much work for it to make sense. What are they getting from this? I think you need a credible explanation of the payoff to justify such an enormous investment of manpower and time.

From another view, if you have the standard where way you claim that the ROI of remote viewing programs was so low there was no point to them (when in fact there's declassified documentation of them being a reliable intelligence source commensurate with other sources, as well as it easily observable reality of various subreddits dedicated to people practicing this and getting results) then it seems doubly true that you know the return on investment of such a massive disinfo program, where there is no documentation of payoff and there's no obvious payoff, is unimaginably low.

it's basically a sort of insane elaboration that doesn't pass the Occam's razor test the simplest explanation is that these are simply reports of real things that happened. so definitely there will be disinformation because that makes sense from a narrative management point of view but I think it's becoming crazier and crazier to deny the simple and obvious explanation that all of this documentation describes something real.

However....One thing I do wonder about though, and I think is a bit odd is why is all of this so-called UFO and disclosure information promoted by mostly white American men. Where are the women where are the black people (besides Billy Carson) where are the Asian people where are the Chinese coming out with their disclosure information...that seems weird to me but I think if you wanted a credible program you would probably you know enlist people from other countries just like you know regular you know counterintelligence disinformation campaigns do. So it's weird to me that it's so heterogeneous. if there is a secret space program where are all the female whistleblowers coming forward.

Re: NSA UFO Documents Index

#144

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> Second, if you do intervene ... Bear in mind that intervention doesn't have to be obvious. In our current networked world, there's a lot which a more-advanced-than-us group or civilisation could do without needing to reveal themselves as such. ;)

how many of us have met a congressmen, senator, media personality in person? How hard would it be for a super advanced society to insert a media network that's all basically ai-generated people? We already have deep fakes, imagine the tech they might have that's deep fakes after 50 generations... They could control us from a small satellite without needing to come anywhere near us,just by controlling what we see, thi…

Holy shit, that's mind-blowing. as a humorous aside I'm sure that sort of total information control program (but run by a terrestrial government siding another territory) has been specked up in some elaborate document in a think tank or intelligence agency somewhere, as an alternative to "world of atoms" occupation.

Re: NSA UFO Documents Index

#145

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> Second, if you do intervene ... Bear in mind that intervention doesn't have to be obvious. In our current networked world, there's a lot which a more-advanced-than-us group or civilisation could do without needing to reveal themselves as such. ;)

how many of us have met a congressmen, senator, media personality in person? How hard would it be for a super advanced society to insert a media network that's all basically ai-generated people? We already have deep fakes, imagine the tech they might have that's deep fakes after 50 generations... They could control us from a small satellite without needing to come anywhere near us,just by controlling what we see, thi…

> ... just by controlling what we see, think, or hear on the television.

Even that's pretty overt. It should be entirely possible to change the course of political events by leaking damaging info at appropriate times.

... and good luck with the various governments who'd want to extradite and throw them in jail. ;)

Re: NSA UFO Documents Index

#146
post #124

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I’ve been looking through these ufo threads and haven’t seen anyone address the third explanation. I’m somewhat impulsively replying to you as your might receive this well. Most of the credible ufo phenomenon is likely a psyop. I won’t get into why the cia or other would put forth such efforts beyond reciting the quote “We’ll know our disinformation program is complete when everything the American public believes is…

Sure but in regards to remote viewing it is in fact a real thing, so there's a degree to which the existence of disinformation is not a confirmation of nonexistence of some underlying reality. Btw, i think you may have meant to put credible in quotes, otherwise it's an oxymoron... as, in "Credible ufos are actually psyops." I'm confident a lot of information is disinformation I think that your hypothesis that most or…

My reading skills may be lacking here, but are you claiming that remote viewing works?

Re: NSA UFO Documents Index

#147

Earlier quoted context omitted.

That's an excellent example. Thanks for finding it. I'd rather believe this was a combination of natural phenomenon and instrumentation failure than an alien visiting us from far far away. After reading the text that doubt is definitely still strong. It starts with conflicting reports from people on the ground. They are never able to identify what it was. And also the text reads as if it was written by a "believer" i…

> This whole report makes me question the sanity of everyone involved. It's very unlikely that a highly trained professional military pilot, which operates a incredibly sophisticated machine costing millions of dollars, suffers from mental issues.

You're implying that training will somehow negate mental issues?

What if this incident was the time they were revealed?

Dangerous assuming that just because someone has trained and has perfect eyesight they're mentally stable. Always expect the unexpected, or you will be sorry.

This was during the gulf war too. Who knows what horrors this person had lived through, or heard of. Also who knows the strength of their beliefs.

Would you say belief in a God and all the things in the bible are as strange as a belief in Aliens? Because a lot of trained military people believe in God.

Statistically any person could have a religious experience at any time.

That's how I view "alien encounters", a combination of belief, mass hysteria and external phenomenon. Our culture has sort of set us up for it.

Re: NSA UFO Documents Index

#148

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Sure but in regards to remote viewing it is in fact a real thing, so there's a degree to which the existence of disinformation is not a confirmation of nonexistence of some underlying reality. Btw, i think you may have meant to put credible in quotes, otherwise it's an oxymoron... as, in "Credible ufos are actually psyops." I'm confident a lot of information is disinformation I think that your hypothesis that most or…

My reading skills may be lacking here, but are you claiming that remote viewing works?

Unequivocally yes.

You can try it yourself, there's subreddits for it where you can learn much more.

For CIA documentation, search FOIA reading room for "PROJECT CENTER LANE"

Here's a quote from a special access program briefing transcript[1]:

Over 85% of our operational missions have produced accurate target information. Even more significant, approximately 50% of the 700 missions produced usable intelligence.

Note that 50% is not "no better than chance" because the data produced are not binary selections, but things that other intelligence sources give, such as structure layouts, facility purposes, machine blueprints, site and personnel locations.

The FOIA documentation is overwhelming in its confirmation of this as an intelligence sensor on par with other sources, which leads me to believe that the AIR report (which you can also search for online) was partially disinfo designed to soften the blow of releasing that this is possible, and I'm quite sure that government and corporate use of psi continues to this day. Perhaps the FOIA release was also part of a limited hangout designed to yield some control over the narrative and provide a pretext for dismissal to protect ongoing classified programs.

Here's a MS Strategic Intelligence thesis from the Defense Intelligence College that gives a good overview:

https://www.cia.gov/readingroom/docs/CIA-RDP96-00789R0026002...

[1]: https://www.cia.gov/readingroom/docs/CIA-RDP96-00788R0017003...

Re: NSA UFO Documents Index

#149

Earlier quoted context omitted.

My reading skills may be lacking here, but are you claiming that remote viewing works?

Unequivocally yes. You can try it yourself, there's subreddits for it where you can learn much more. For CIA documentation, search FOIA reading room for "PROJECT CENTER LANE" Here's a quote from a special access program briefing transcript[1]: Over 85% of our operational missions have produced accurate target information. Even more significant, approximately 50% of the 700 missions produced usable intelligence. Note…

The Wikipedia page on remote viewing gives the opposite impression. Wikipedia also tells me that "The Stargate Project was terminated and declassified in 1995 after a CIA report concluded that it was never useful in any intelligence operation. Information provided by the program was vague and included irrelevant and erroneous data, and there was reason to suspect that its project managers had changed the reports so they would fit background cues."

I'm not really qualified to read through CIA papers. People who are seem to not agree with you.

If remote viewing works, wouldn't all major companies have departments full of viewers spying on competitors?

I'll note that the James Randi prize has not been won.

Re: NSA UFO Documents Index

#150

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Unequivocally yes. You can try it yourself, there's subreddits for it where you can learn much more. For CIA documentation, search FOIA reading room for "PROJECT CENTER LANE" Here's a quote from a special access program briefing transcript[1]: Over 85% of our operational missions have produced accurate target information. Even more significant, approximately 50% of the 700 missions produced usable intelligence. Note…

The Wikipedia page on remote viewing gives the opposite impression. Wikipedia also tells me that "The Stargate Project was terminated and declassified in 1995 after a CIA report concluded that it was never useful in any intelligence operation. Information provided by the program was vague and included irrelevant and erroneous data, and there was reason to suspect that its project managers had changed the reports so t…

So...there's conflicting reports? What are you going to do? I guess you'll have to think and decide for yourself. That's not too much to ask is it?
Post reply on HN