'Flying saucer' filmed in Turkey

“Best investigative reporting on the planet. But go ahead, read the New York Times if you want. They get lucky sometimes.”

For many years, this 44-year-old female appeared to be having strange dreams involving visitations of creatures and other representative associations with the abduction phenomena. She was able to draw quite accurately a figure she saw in her bedroom that woke her out of a deep sleep by choking her. She asked him why he was doing what he did and he simply stated, “I’m just trying to wake you up.” The Being she illustrated in her drawing was what we have come to know as a “Preying Mantis Being”. She stated she could see him quite clearly and described him in her drawing with much detail.

What's so mysterious about this? We are a symbolic animal, and especially so, because of our higher language abilities. Everyone dreams vividly, whether they can remember it or not. I once had a dream that I can describe with great detail: I was going to get on a small plane, and it was painted John Deere green and it had their logo on it. (The wings were above the fuselage).

There also was a history of her association with other Beings. In addition a strong history of other characteristics associated with the phenomena such as strange body markings, fears of Bears, a strong dislike of circuses and clowns, desire for salty foods, aversion to strong lights in a medical setting such as the light above a dental chair and the necessity for her dentist to use large amounts of anesthesia to accomplish his task.

There's nothing profound here either. Every Freeper has a history of association with other "Beings". (What's with the capitalization?) There's many here that don't like clowns. There's many here that don't like liberals. There's many here that like salty foods, as witnessed by desire for popcorn during ZOT threads. As for strong lights, people who like war movies or film noir's might have an aversion to bright examination lights because it subconsciously reminds them of interrogation scenes.

And now we delve into the hearsay aspects. Note that there's no names of the dentist(s) given, or the lab techs that read the x-ray's, etc.

Next, she explained she had a strange metallic object somewhere in her mouth. Brenda told us she had numerous x-rays taken by her dentist and was questioned about the object. She told him she knew nothing about its origin or how it could have gotten inside her mouth. They were uncertain as to the exact location of the object due to the dental views taken. I asked her to send the films for evaluation and she complied.

We then used dental consultants on our panel of specialists to review the films and give us an opinion. What seemed to me initially to be a very simple diagnostic assignment became more complex because they were not able to determine the exact location of the object.

In one view it would appear to be in the gum area and in other views it appeared to be in the soft tissue of the lining of the mouth. I then asked Brenda to have more x-ray views taken according to the wishes of our dental experts. She complied without hesitation or argument. Finally she was requested to have a CAT scan performed.

Again, no details. Where was the CAT scan performed? What are the names of those who read the scans?

When this data arrived the dental consults agreed the object was in her cheek. At that point all the reports and films were taken to out radiological expert. He determined the object was about 6mm in length and about 1mm in thickness, located superficial to one of the facial muscles and relatively close to the skin of the right cheek.

Once this information was in our hands, the case was fully evaluated by our scientific panel. We then agreed to perform the surgery for removal of the object. It should be noted, as with the other surgeries we have performed, Brenda had never undergone regressive hypnosis to advance her memories. We have come to believe, if the process of abduction goes according to plan, then the victim is to have no memory of the event or events whatsoever.

What panel? What are their credentials?

In many instances the surgical patient determines he or she would like to have this procedure performed and so we try and help by arranging a hypnotic regression at sometime following the surgical extraction. In Brenda’s case, we called Budd Hopkins, who in turn conversed with her at length on the telephone. He agreed to arrange a session with her after the surgery was performed, sometime in January of 2004.

For those who don't know, Budd hopkins is a typical scam artist, an unlicensed quack, and one who should be brought before the medical boards of the various states he's practiced his "hypnosis".

We will continue to share pertinent information with Budd during the time in-between the surgery and his regression Brenda arrived in California a couple of days before the day of the surgery so that we could evaluate her laboratory tests and perform other tests necessary to better understand the object contained within her cheek. A gauss meter was used to determine if there was an electromagnetic field surrounding the object.

We physically took the patient out into a parking lot, away from any electromagnetic sources and determined there was a field surrounding the object of 2.5 mill gauss. In addition, with the use of a Radio Frequency Detector, we determined there were emanations coming from her cheek that registered at 92.7 and 102.9 megahertz. Also, using a small compact instrument, which measures density, we were able to pin point the exact location of the object.

How vague can you get about a "radio frequency detector"? Around my neck of the woods, we call it a radio, or a scanner. 92.7 and 102.9 megahertz is the usual American FM broadcast band. Perhaps the woman got the idea from gilligan's Island to have one of her fillings act like a radio.

What does all this mean? To be quite frank, I would have to say we do not know. It is data that will have to be evaluated down the line and then compared to the findings from other patients. We have had several other cases in which there were electromagnetic fields surrounding the object but have never had the opportunity to look for radio frequencies.

But of course they don't know. For things to be strange and mysterious is what the scam is all about, and you'll lose readers, and book sales, and hits to your web sites, if the chumps figure it out for themselves.

After evaluating all the laboratory data it was determined that Brenda was in satisfactory physical health and the surgery could go forward. On December the 5th, her surgery was performed. If it were not for the fact we had use of a sophisticated and new Fluoroscan Unit, we would have never been able to remove the object.

Wow. Sounds special, doesn't it? How about a make and model number?

The surgeon placed an instrument into the wound and we observed the object along with the metallic instrument on a television screen. We all stood dumbfounded as we watched the small metallic object simply turn and dance away from the instrument. For almost an hour a very frustrated and patient surgical team painstakingly sought to grasp this illusive metallic rod.

[Quix: This is a frequent experience when trying to remove such things. There's never been any kind of functionally plausible explanation about the mechanics of such. It IS, however, a common phenomena.]

No, and there's never been a functionally plausible explanation for two like poles of magnets pushing away from each other. Not that it's what happened here. Such a sharp piece of wire as what's in the picture would surely gouge the innards of her cheek if it really moved away from the instrument. But suddenly, the elusive alien technology (snort) simply gave up the ghost:

Suddenly there it was, between the teeth of the instrument and came to the surface easily, seemingly attached to nothing. What is the explanation for all the illusive movement? Was it simply due to the object’s magnetic field or was there some other reason we do not understand?

Looks like a piece of #18 or #20 solid doorbell wire, doesn't it? But I am blasphemous, of course. We must reverentially call it The Object.

I removed the object from the surgical sponge and placed it in the solution of blood serum for safekeeping and transportation. When this was done I noted the stainless steel instrument I had just used to transfer the object had been magnetized. This again is strange because these instruments are made to reduce the possibility of this occurring.

The patient is recovering nicely from the procedure and has gone home to her family. We have just sent the soft tissue surrounding the object to the laboratory for analysis. The metallic object is about 6mm in length and is about 1mm in diameter. It is bronze in color and seems to have thickened and beveled ends. It is very lightweight and highly magnetic.

"To the laboratory", he said. What laboratory? Why are the UFO scammers always so vague on details?

Once close up photographs have been performed with such equipment as the atomic force microscope, the object will go for its first internal test of scanning electron microscopy. The full results of these examinations will be available in the Mufon Journal at a later date.

The atomic force microscope?!?!? Ooooooooh, sounds really really cool. Is that like the "dictorobiter" from Plan 9 from Outer Space? All the Trekkie types swoon and orgasm over such invented technobabble, the same as liberals swoon and orgasm over such invented words as homophobe.

So . . .

when in doubt . . .

BELIEVE THE MSM on the topic??????????????????

And still think of yourself as a conservative?????

And I’m the illogical, irrational one??????

LOL.

“BELIEVE THE MSM on the topic??????????????????”

Good logic. If the MSM doesn’t cover it, it must exist. I don’t believe in Bigfoot, pots of gold at the end of the rainbow, tooth fairies, or any other fantasies.
In any case, if it defies the laws of physics, as flying saucers do, then I know it isn’t real.

Conservative believe what they see. Liberals see what they believe. You are a liberal.

“Best investigative reporting on the planet.”

If they are touting the idea of implants in humans placed there by aliens then it isn’t investigative reporting, it’s just plain stupid.

Never been close to a liberal mentality in any shred of a degree or way.

Not even as a teen.

Sounds like you’re 100% convinced that you 100% understand all there is to understand about life, reality, physics, etc.

I’m sure God’s impressed. How often does he phone you for advice?

Clearly the perspective of

Extreme Ignorance On The Topic

has spoken again.

And all the acolytes are cheering mindlessly.

If they are touting the idea of implants in humans placed there by aliens then it isn’t investigative reporting, it’s just plain stupid.

Agreed. The quote was from the movie, Men in Black. The reference was to the tabloids.

Extreme Ignorance On The Topic

I'm curious as to why, if you're so sure of all this stuff, that you never rebut anyone's rebuttals, but instead go on the defensive.

Smells like the usual

thread farting brigade has been at it again! LOL.

Thread farting? You mean, as in True Believers who invariably hijack a thread and post scores of unrelated items to inject noise and confusion? This thread was originally about a UFO in Turkey.

It could be fun to speculate on what triggers the delusion.

. . . the delusion that some perspectives are evidently construed by those holding them . . .

. . . to be worth more than the tissue wiping the standard indiscreet and usually quite uncomfortable probe . . .

Alas, the best guess is the usual outrageous arrogance fostered by gross insecurity fostered by a terminal degree of REACTIVE ATTACHMENT DISORDER in their early years.

Though I suppose chronic and persistently galactic levels of cluelessness could arise from being genetically out of their depth.

Or maybe a genetically altered wasp stung them in their egos triggering a very troubling cell division gone wild in key synapse centers.

Or maybe some sort of strange contamination occurred from an unfortunate series of falls face down in slug slime from slugs from some secret biological nuke experiments. I hear that stuff can take over sinuses horrifically . . . and progress rapidly and voraciously from there.

Some cowboys insist that a similar delusion seems to arise from greenhorns arrogantly running and jumping on their horses without being sufficiently careful to remove some very tough and sharp pine cones first. I’m not quite clear about that one but it supposedly has something to do with resulting pains capturing so much brain processing time and resources that coherent thought is not a frequent event for a good deal of time taken for healing.

Then there’s the allegation that some ET’s keep a stable of frequently visited naysayers quite stocked up in their blood levels of a perverse hallucinogenic that convinces the hapless victims that THEY are uniquely in possession of the sacred secrets of the hidden structure of reality. I hear it’s basically a huge galactic put-on for the amusement of the ET’s watching the hapless humans make persistent fools of themselves. Kind of like some Chinese merchants feigning ignorance of English and good sense all the while taking the hapless customer to the cleaners price-wise . . . Then guffawing to the max with all the relatives in the back room.

God alone knows, the truth, of course.

It is occasionally amusing to see them dance their compulsive dances bouncing to and fro upside down on their pointed heads.

Bravo!

Late night recreational silliness.

Thanks for your kind response.

I’m not quite clear about that one but it supposedly has something to do with resulting pains capturing so much brain processing time and resources that coherent thought is not a frequent event for a good deal of time taken for healing.

Does that mean you're not going to address why The Object™ was broadcasting in the FM band?

From: http://www.abovetopsecret.com/forum/thread366796/pg1 Source: http://www.relativitychallenge.com/approach.htm posted on 27/6/2008 @ 05:09 single this post "quote"REPLY TO: Scientists Challenge Einstein's Theory! Faster Than Light Travel Possible! In 1905, Einstein established the Theory of Special Relativity that has defined space and time for a century. Scientists and researchers have been unable to definitively find anything wrong with it. Now they have! One scientist has even pointed that quotations from the 1905 document and Einstein’s contemporaries as well as interpretations of the Relativity equations clearly and concisely describe a confused and obviously erroneous theory. Every year millions of students are taught this theory without a critical analysis of Relativity. So what exactly is this theory of Special Relativity? And what is the confusion all about? For starters, the special theory of relativity, deals with the relative motions of objects and describes the motion of particles moving at close to the speed of light. Theoretical Basis for Special Relativity Einstein's theory of special relativity results from two statements -- the two basic postulates of special relativity: > The speed of light is the same for all observers, no matter what their relative speeds. It will be seen to be the same relative to any observer, independent of the motion of the observer -- is the crucial idea that led Einstein to formulate his theory. It means we can define a quantity c, the speed of light, which is a fundamental constant of nature. > The laws of physics are the same in any inertial (that is, non-accelerated) frame of reference. This means that the laws of physics observed by a hypothetical observer traveling with a relativistic particle must be the same as those observed by an observer who is stationary in the laboratory. Peculiar Relativistic Effects • Time dilation – the time lapse between two events does not vary from one observer to another, but is dependent on the relative speeds of the observers' reference frames. For e.g., the twin paradox, where a twin who in a spaceship traveling near the speed of light, returns to find his sibling has aged much more. • Relativity of simultaneity – two events happening in two different locations that occur simultaneously to one observer, may occur at different times to another observer. • Lorentz contraction – the dimensions of an object as measured by one observer may be smaller than the results of measurements of the same object made by another observer. • Composition of velocities – velocities (and speeds) do not simply 'add', for example if a rocket is moving at ⅔ the speed of light relative to an observer, and the rocket fires a bullet at ⅔ of the speed of light relative to the rocket, the bullet does not exceed the speed of light relative to the observer. • Inertia and momentum – as an object's speed approaches the speed of light from an observer's point of view, its mass appears to increase thereby making it more and more difficult to accelerate it from within the observer's frame of reference. • Equivalence of mass and energy, E = mc2 – The energy content of an object at rest with mass m equals mc2. Special relativity reveals that c is not just the velocity of a certain phenomenon, namely the propagation of electromagnetic radiation (light)—but rather a fundamental feature of the way space and time are unified as spacetime. A consequence of this is that it is impossible for any particle that has mass to be accelerated to the speed of light. Fallacy Of The Theory Of Special Relativity Having said that, take a look at the fallacy of the above effects. The diagram shows the approach to the CICS. Click on the link below to view the details in each box: The Relativity Challenge. . . . continued at source and ATS thread

Interesting scalar motor claims:

http://www.abovetopsecret.com/forum/thread405949/pg1

Guess I forgot to preview.

ATS thread link

http://www.abovetopsecret.com/forum/thread366796/pg1

Source:

http://www.relativitychallenge.com/approach.htm

posted on 27/6/2008 @ 05:09 single this post “quote”

Scientists Challenge Einstein’s Theory! Faster Than Light Travel Possible!

In 1905, Einstein established the Theory of Special Relativity that has defined space and time for a century. Scientists and researchers have been unable to definitively find anything wrong with it.

Now they have! One scientist has even pointed that quotations from the 1905 document and Einstein’s contemporaries as well as interpretations of the Relativity equations clearly and concisely describe a confused and obviously erroneous theory. Every year millions of students are taught this theory without a critical analysis of Relativity.

So what exactly is this theory of Special Relativity? And what is the confusion all about?

For starters, the special theory of relativity, deals with the relative motions of objects and describes the motion of particles moving at close to the speed of light.

Theoretical Basis for Special Relativity Einstein’s theory of special relativity results from two statements—the two basic postulates of special relativity:

The speed of light is the same for all observers, no matter what their relative speeds. It will be seen to be the same relative to any observer, independent of the motion of the observer—is the crucial idea that led Einstein to formulate his theory.

It means we can define a quantity c, the speed of light, which is a fundamental constant of nature.

The laws of physics are the same in any inertial (that is, non-accelerated) frame of reference.

This means that the laws of physics observed by a hypothetical observer traveling with a relativistic particle must be the same as those observed by an observer who is stationary in the laboratory.

Peculiar Relativistic Effects

—Time dilation – the time lapse between two events does not vary from one observer to another, but is dependent on the relative speeds of the observers’ reference frames.

For e.g., the twin paradox, where a twin who in a spaceship traveling near the speed of light, returns to find his sibling has aged much more.

—Relativity of simultaneity – two events happening in two different locations that occur simultaneously to one observer, may occur at different times to another observer.

—Lorentz contraction – the dimensions of an object as measured by one observer may be smaller than the results of measurements of the same object made by another observer.

—Composition of velocities – velocities (and speeds) do not simply ‘add’, for example if a rocket is moving at 3/4 the speed of light relative to an observer, and the rocket fires a bullet at 3/4 of the speed of light relative to the rocket, the bullet does not exceed the speed of light relative to the observer.

—Inertia and momentum – as an object’s speed approaches the speed of light from an observer’s point of view, its mass appears to increase thereby making it more and more difficult to accelerate it from within the observer’s frame of reference.

—Equivalence of mass and energy, E = mc2 – The energy content of an object at rest with mass m equals mc2. Special relativity reveals that c is not just the velocity of a certain phenomenon, namely the propagation of electromagnetic radiation (light)—but rather a fundamental feature of the way space and time are unified as spacetime.

A consequence of this is that it is impossible for any particle that has mass to be accelerated to the speed of light.

Fallacy Of The Theory Of Special Relativity

Having said that, take a look at the fallacy of the above effects. The diagram shows the approach to the CICS. Click on the link below to view the details in each box: The Relativity Challenge.

. . . continued at source and ATS & source

Martian invasion!