UFO Research: Findings vs. Facts

For decades now, eyes and sky have met to witness the buzzing of our world by Unidentified Flying Objects, termed UFOs or simply flying saucers. Extraterrestrials have come a long way to purportedly share the friendly skies with us.

UFOs and alien visitors are part of our culture—a far-out phenomenon when judged against those "low life" wonders Bigfoot and the Loch Ness monster.

And after all those years, as the saying goes, UFOs remain a riddle inside a mystery wrapped in an enigma. Why so? For one, the field is fraught with hucksterism. It's also replete with blurry photos and awful video. But then there are also well-intentioned and puzzled witnesses [See Top 10 Alien Encounters Debunked].

There have been advances in the field of UFO research, said Ted Roe, Executive Director of the National Aviation Reporting Center on Anomalous Phenomena (NARCAP), based in Vallejo, California.

"The capture of optical spectra from mobile, unpredictable luminosities is one of those innovations. More work to be done here but [there are] some good results already."

NARCAP was established in 2000 and is dedicated to the advancement of aviation safety issues as they apply to, what they term Unidentified Aerial Phenomena (UAP).

Roe said that a decade from now, researchers should have even better instrumentation at their disposal and better data on UAP of several varieties. His forecast is that scientific rigor will prevail, demonstrating that there are "stable, mobile, unusual, poorly documented phenomena with quite unusual properties manifesting within our atmosphere," he told SPACE.com.

NARCAP has made the case that some of these phenomena have unusual electromagnetic properties. Therefore, they could disrupt microprocessors and adversely effect avionic systems, Roe explained, and that for those reasons and others UAP should be considered a hazard to safe aviation.

"It is likely that either conclusion will fly in the face of the general assertion that UAP are not real and that there are no undocumented phenomena in our atmosphere," Roe continued. That should open the door, he said, to the realization that there's no good reason to discard outright the possibility that extraterrestrial visitation has occurred and may be occurring.

"Physics is leading to new and potentially paradigm shifting understandings about the nature of our universe and its physical properties," Roe said. "These understandings may point the way towards an acceptance of the probability of interstellar travel and communication by spacefaring races."

As UFO debunker Robert Sheaffer's web site proclaims, he's "skeptical to the max." He is a fellow of the Committee for the Scientific Investigation of Claims of the Paranormal and a well-known writer on the UFO scene.

Being an equal-opportunity debunker, Sheaffer notes that he refutes whatever nonsense, in his judgment, "stands in the greatest need of refuting, no matter from what source it may come, no matter how privileged, esteemed, or sacrosanct … sacred cows, after all, make the best hamburger."

Sheaffer told SPACE.com, in regards to the cottage industry of UFO promoters, there's a reason there are still so many snake-oil sellers.

"It's because nobody, anywhere, has any actual facts concerning alleged UFOs, just claims. That allows con-men to thrive peddling their yarns," Sheaffer said. "UFO believers are convinced that the existence of UFOs will be revealed 'any day now'. But it's like Charlie Brown and the football: No matter how many times Lucy pulls the football away—or the promised 'disclosure' fails to happen—they're dead-certain that the next time will be their moment of glory."

"I would have to say that we're stuck in neutral," said Kevin Randle, a leading expert and writer on UFOs and is known as a dogged researcher of the phenomena. There's no real new research, he said, and that's "because we have to revisit the trash of the past."

Randle points to yesteryear stories, one stretching back in time to a supposed 1897 airship crash in Aurora, Texas, long proven to be a hoax by two con men—yet continues to surface in UFO circles.

Then there's the celebrated Thomas Mantell saga, a pilot that lost his life chasing a UFO in 1948. There are those that contend he was killed by a blue beam from a UFO, Randle said "even though we have known for years that the UFO was a balloon and he violated regulations by climbing above 14,000 feet without oxygen equipment. I mean, we know this, and yet there are those who believe that Mantell was killed by aliens."

Randle's advice is to the point: "We need to begin to apply rigorous standards of research … stop accepting what we wish to believe even when the evidence is poor, and begin thinking ahead."

"I've no doubt that UFOs are here to stay," said Seth Shostak, Senior Astronomer at the SETI Institute in Mountain View, California. "I'm just not convinced that alien craft are here to stay … or for that matter, even here for brief visits. "First, despite a torrent of sightings for more than a half-century, I can't think of a single, major science museum that has alien artifacts on display," Shostak said. "Contrast this paucity of physical evidence with what the American Indians could have shown you fifty years after Christopher Columbus first violated their sea-space. They could have shown you all sorts of stuff—including lots of smallpox-infested brethren—as proof that they were being 'visited,'" he said.

When it comes to extraterrestrial visitors in the 21st century, the evidence is anecdotal, ambiguous, or, in some cases, artifice, Shostak suggested.

Calling it "argument from ignorance", Shostak pointed to the claim that aliens must have careened out of control above the New Mexico desert simply because some classified government documents sport a bunch of blacked-out text. "How does the latter prove the former?"

Sure, the missing verbiage is consistent with a government cover-up of an alien crash landing, Shostak said. "But it's also consistent with an infinitude of other scenarios…not all of them involving sloppy alien pilots," he added.

Shostak said that it is not impossible that we could be visited. It doesn't violate physics to travel between the stars, although that's not easy to do.

"But really, if you're going to claim—or for that matter, believe—that extraterrestrials are strafing the cities, or occasionally assaulting the neighbors with an aggression inappropriate for a first date, then I urge you to find evidence that leaves little doubt among the professionally skeptical community known as the world of science."

Why is there precious little to show that world of science that UFOs merit attention?

"Obviously there is not a simple answer, but part of it is reluctance of the scientific community to support such research," explained Bruce Maccabee, regarded as a meticulous researcher and an optical physicist using those talents to study photographs and video of unexplained phenomena.

"In my humble opinion it is largely a result of 'tradition'…tradition set by the U.S. Air Force in the early years when they publicly stated that everything was under control, they were investigating…and finding nothing that couldn't be explained," Maccabee said.

"UFO studies will continue until all the old cases have either been explained or admitted to being unexplainable—meaning a residue of sightings that could be ET related—and/or until people stop seeing unexplainable UFO-like events throughout the world," Maccabee concluded.

What doesn't make sense to me is that these advanced life forms, capable of traveling many many many many light years to get here.... Why would they come all this way to hover over some corn, usually in an unpopulated area, and then leave again?

Unless you are the type to think they came for cow genitals... In which case, I'd still ask why.
= = = = =

These questions persistently amuse to mystify me. I've never lacked for . . . imagination coming up with quite a range of possibilities.

I've never lacked for speculations from various sources.

1. There are evidently 3-4 DIFFERENT ways around the speed of light issue--(A) one of them technologically bending space or time/space such that the ends of the horseshoe are closer across the gap than along the length of the horseshoe.

(B) Traversing from or through other dimensions, other multi-verses would appear to 'violate' Einstein's supposed limit re the speed of light.

3. Who says they go away after the crop circles? Some sources assert as many as 70 and some even as high as 200 DIFFERENT ET races dinking around with/observing earth.

And why not? IF as some of us assert based on solid evidence, THIS little 'insignificant' globe . . . the site of God the Son dying for man and for all creation to be restored to The Father . . . to also be the site of the culmination of all things pertaining to THE RESTORATION of Peace, Perfection etc . . . regarding which "ALL CREATION GROANS EXPECTANTLY, WAITING EAGERLY, YEARNING IN ANGUISH FOR THE MANIFESTATION OF THE SONS OF GOD" . . . evidently to be thereby delivered or delivered at the same time as that manifestation--from the corruption, pollution brought by man's rebellion against God . . .

IF as 100's of millions of people are convinced--THIS is THAT DRAMATIC STAGE . . . why WOULDN'T a great number of races be dinking around with, watching the closing drama that affected them and their future so much?

or, if one prefers another facet to the END TIMES scenarios . . .

IF as some of us assert, satan has been scheming and planning since the fall of Adam to harrass, degrade, test, beseige, slaughter, mangle, as many of God's precious Believers in the End Times as he can; as Christ asserted to set up a GREAT DECEPTION so great that WERE IT POSSIBLE even the earnest believers would be deceived (thankfully, it won't be possible) . . .

AND given a lot of parallels vis a vis demonic possession incidents and UFO abductions . . .

given my own assessment that at least the bulk of the more well known races of ET's are AT LEAST in cahoots with satan toward setting up the global government . . .

Some sources assert that at least some of the greys are essentially bioengineered shells housing demons . . .

The ET's are currently cast in a good cop/bad cop squeeze play. The puppet masters have helped set them up to scare the world's citizens into a one world government to fight the ET's

and/or

to realize at a critical point involving perhaps WW III more overtly etc. . . . that 'our dear space brothers' are here to save us from ourselves and bring us into a wonderful world government of peace and harmony--WITHOUT THE CHRISTIANS, OF COURSE, WHO ARE HINDERING THE WORLD EVOLVING INTO IT'S DESTINED, NEW AGE. . . .

These are all more than plausible factors . . . some would insist solid facts.

Some ask for reasons. The above are but a few. I wouldn't expect a dyed-in-the-wool skeptic to believe anything but their own dogma--which usually pretends to be some variation of a humanist, objectivist doctrine of the religion of science/humanism/atheism etc. though there are certainly other sorts of skeptics, too.

As to the mutilations . . . Those WELL DOCUMENTED FACTS have gotten a lot of people in trouble. Particularly when researchers get into the hyper sensitive area of many people being abducted and mutilated just like the cattle--evidently alive as long as they can hold out while their eyes, jaws, genitals etc. are being laser excised with incredible precision which somehow seems to cut between adjacent cell walls without rupturing cells . . . which also involves every drop of blood being drained . . . which also involves critters avoiding carcasses for months . . . etc. etc.

and . . . which may have resulted in a US NM SENATOR investigating it through the watch dog accounting branch of the government . . . may have resulted in that Senator being infected deliberately with cancer [my own speculation] . . . his investigation's results were muffled and shuffled under the rug essentially . . . imho . . .

We have FREEPERS in the mountain states who have ranches which have experienced mutilations. I hope folks avoid calling them liars.

As to the reasons for the mutilations . . . some assert that SOME mutilations (NOT ALL) are government black ops studying eh spread of anything from radiation influences to pollution influences to mad cow disease.

Others assert that the ET's are doing genetic studies. That one race of ET's is dying out due to over much cloning reproduction and that they need their race reinvigorated.

Others assert that along with biological studies the ET's are interested in, there's a particular chemical which humans produce in their brain and/or blood when terrified which acts as a thrilling drug abuse drug for some ET's.

Some assert that humans were seeded or at least bioengineered by ET's [not in my reality or Bible] who are now returning or continuing a millenia long observation and shaping, tinkering with their 'creation.'

Some assert that ET's are us from our future returned to try and help prevent some awful catastrophes biologically and otherwise in the future if nothing is dramatically changed.

Soooooooooooooooooo, I personally don't lack for explanations. But given the amount of disinformation abroad in the field, one must collect puzzle pieces and hold them loosely . . . awaiting God's confirmation of what's really true.

We shall see.

I don't think that dismissive attitudes are likely to find out much and certainly not sooner than a more open minded attitude will.

Another interesting doc from:

http://frankwarren.blogspot.com/2006_02_01_frankwarren_archive.html
= = =

Lovekin's Military Credentials in Question - No Longer!
- Part Four -

By Frank Warren
2-27-06

The attraction to Stephen Lovekin as a possible "insider witness" to a UFO/ET event involving a President and or the White House etc., is most certainly "enhanced" by being "packaged" as a "high ranking military official." What is on the table (at present) is a declaration from an individual, an anecdote if you will. In a court of law, it would be considered "eye witness testimony."

Obviously, the "character" of the witness can add or take away from the "credibility" of a respective account. Certainly, it is far more "impressive" and more apt to be believed coming from a "Brigadier General" then a layperson etc. Sagan said, (and what I have come to call "Sagan's Law") "Extraordinary claims require extraordinary evidence."

Kevin Randle wrote in part:

"This is important stuff, if it could be confirmed. A general officer, one who had once held the ear of the president and who could report on the president’s interest in UFOs, would make an impressive witness, especially if he could talk of a UFO crash and recovered debris. It should be relatively simple to verify Lovekin’s credentials as a general."

In that vein IMHO Kevin proceeded with some investigative research to vet the witness using his skills as a researcher along with his own personal experience in the military; he posted his progress on his respective Blog; personally, I didn't take his expose as slander or being libelous, and most importantly definitive. I believe it's important to note that people have come forward in the past, that at the present time seemed very "credible" that later proved to be otherwise, and Kevin Randle has has had direct involvement/experience in these matters, henceforth his "righteous skepticism" is warranted.

Now all that said, what are we left with? In my view, having done some of my own research into Lovekin, with the exception of what was recently submitted to Greer for publication (in regards to Lovekin's military background) it is "unclear" what originated "from him." Most importantly is there anything to date, that "negatively" affects the "character" of the man making the claim? I think not! His credentials, and the question of his "Brigadier General" status are to be commended whether they're "regular military" or some sort of state militia. The "key point" from my perspective is "his tenure at WHASA," which he has provided documents in support thereof.

I have located "other members" of WHASA, and the common theme amongst them, is that they were "culled" from various "military schools" (at a very young age); they were vetted by the FBI; they were trained by the NSA; they held "top secret clearances; "rank was a non-issue," and they wore civvies; they worked with the Secret Service, and in close proximity to the President; they provided "crypto secure communications" and went everywhere it was needed, e.g., the White House basement, Camp David, Mt Weather etc.

Unfortunately, and is often the case, we "UFO folks" get into these "pissing matches" and that becomes the focus, rather then the important research that needs to be taken to task.

Might I suggest we take Kevin at his word, that he meant no malice towards Lovekin and get on with the "research of the evidence," i.e., a "credible witness" with a "incredible disclosure."

= = = =

Additional docs for study, research, including about Lovekin's credentials at the link . . .

http://frankwarren.blogspot.com/2006/02/lovekins-military-credentials-in.html

Wednesday, February 22, 2006
Lovekin's Military Credentials in Question - No Longer!
- Part One -
Greer Lays Lovekin's Cards on The Table

By Frank Warren
2-22-06

There has been much controversy as of late in regards to the "military credentials" of one "Stephen L. Lovekin." Lovekin a practicing attorney in North Carolina first came to light in Steven Greer's book, Extraterrestrial Contact, Granite Publishing LLC 1999 pg. 357 as "Witness K." Greer describes "Witness K" as:

"Major SL, a respected lawyer who was an Army cryptographer in the Pentagon from 1959-61. He he was shown samples of debris from the crash of an ET craft in New Mexico in the late 1940's, and it was demonstrated to him the extraordinary properties of the material. He saw the ET writing on the debris and was told it was being studied by Army cryptographers, but they had not (in 1959) broken the code. He also had confirmed to him then President Eisenhower's interest in the subject, that he knew of the subject, but that he was being left out of substantial information dealing with ET technology programs. Major SL [Lovekin] had a top-secret clearance and continues to possess a top secret clearance as an Army reserve today."
The most recent imputation came from Ufologist and well known author, "Kevin Randle"; in part he wrote:
" . . . Thanks to a book entitled Stolen Valor I’m now suspicious of most claims of military association, especially those who claim to have achieved high rank. It surprised me then and continues to surprise me that so many people will claim military service who have never worn a uniform and that so many of those who were actually in the military have embellished their careers. . .. "
Randle made attempts to validate Lovekin's military background to no avail; that with his (Randle) own military experience he concluded:
". . . This all suggests to me that the "whistle blower" testimony offered by Stephen L. Lovekin is of little use in developing any policies related to UFOs or extraterrestrial visitation. There is no corroboration of his many claims of military service as a high-ranking officer, no verification of his positions in the White House and little reason to believe he was witness to the things he claims. Like so many of the other whistle blowers, he should be removed from our lists."
Today Steven Greer wrote a scolding rebuttal to Randle's missive and he in part said:
"Many of you have read the recent attacks and defamation of a courageous Disclosure Project Witness, Brigadier (Brig.) General Stephen Lovekin, Esq., by one Kevin Randle.

Randle claims Brig. General Lovekin is not a Brigadier General and suggests he has falsified or concocted his credentials."
Greer goes on to further chastise Randle (to put it mildly) about what he describes as "ad hominem attacks" on Lovekin.

For those of you paying attention, in regards to Ufology, lines have been established for researchers in support of what has become known as "Exopolitics" and what I call "moderate Ufology." (This is a larger piece of this pie which we'll delve into at later date). Emotions often run high between the two groups, and sometimes a "civil debate" is hard to come by. Personally, I took Randle's missive as "his voice of skepticism" in regards to Lovekin's declaration as well as a "laundry list" of "investigative chores" he performed in order to validate "Stephen Lovekin's" military background.

Moreover, his piece wasn't "definitive," and his research was still ongoing; let's not forget that he also wrote:
". . . This is important stuff, if it could be confirmed. A general officer, one who had once held the ear of the president and who could report on the president’s interest in UFOs, would make an impressive witness, especially if he could talk of a UFO crash and recovered debris. . . .
Methinks most of us would agree with this ideology, and to that end, the evidence (various supportive documents) provided "by Greer" (recently posted on the "Disclosure" web-site - see below) from Lovekin is invaluable.

[It is understood that Stephen Lovekin has been experiencing serious health problems--we wish him a full and speedy recovery]

Lovekin docs at:

Thursday, February 23, 2006
Lovekin's Military Credentials in Question - No Longer!
- Part Two -
By Frank Warren
2-23-06

Yesterday Steven Greer wrote a "stinging missive" in partial rebuttal to Kevin Randle's piece on Stephen Lovekin, a labeled "whistleblower" by Greer and his "Disclosure Project." He wrote:

THE ENABLERS OF SECRECY

For over a decade, The Disclosure Project and CSETI have worked to identify reliable government and military witnesses to secret UFO/ET-related events and projects.

Without an office, staff or significant budget, we have identified hundreds of such whistle-blowers, who have come forward heroically and without compensation so that you, the public, may know the truth. It has been a costly and all-consuming effort to unravel the biggest secret in modern history, so that our civilization may reclaim its future and attain sustainability.

Alas, a steady drum-beat of slander, libel, defamation of character, and ad hominem attacks have continued to occur from certain quarters. For the most part, we have chosen to ignore such attacks, since generally they arise from either sour-grapes and jealous elements of the so-called UFO subculture or from paid disinformation hacks. We prefer to focus on constructive change and doing the real work of Disclosure.

But it must be acknowledged that, left unaddressed, at times such attacks create a dynamic where secrecy is enabled and perpetuated. For if we, as a community, cannot defend these brave and heroic whistle-blowers, who will? And left undefended, a dynamic will evolve where a wet-blanket will be thrown on the willingness for these already-reluctant (and often threatened) witnesses to come forward.

Many of you have read the recent attacks and defamation of a courageous Disclosure Project Witness, Brigadier (Brig.) General Stephen Lovekin, Esq., by one Kevin Randle.

Randle claims Brig. General Lovekin is not a Brigadier General and suggests he has falsified or concocted his credentials. Nothing could be further from the truth. See www.DisclosureProject.org for a file of documents that establish Brig. General Lovekin's time in the White House as well as his status as a BG (Brig. General).

That Randle could not, with whatever investigative competence he may or may not possess, show that this fine and heroic witness was a Brig. General is not reason for his public defamation of this man.

While Brig. General Lovekin was hospitalized, literally fighting for his life, Randle has engaged in casting aspersions on his credibility, and by extension, on The Disclosure Project. Prior to publishing these baseless accusations, Randle never contacted me or Brig. General Lovekin to ascertain the facts of the matter.

This is typical of the so-called investigators within the hobbyist UFO subculture, who arrogate to themselves the role of police, judge and jury about such matters - all the while failing to engage in a modicum of due diligence or care.

Would it really have been so difficult to ask Brig. General Lovekin for documentation of his status? He is a well-regarded attorney in NC with a public listing. Instead, Randle chose to publish his libelous claims and besmirch a fine man's reputation.

Such events have happened throughout the history of UFO secrecy. Good and sincere people come forward, to disclose the truth or change the status quo, only to have countless rabid wolves set upon them, slandering them and defaming their reputations.

This behavior, altogether unchecked by the interested public that deserves to know the truth, serves to enable secrecy by discouraging further selfless and sincere best-faith efforts by professionals like Brig. Gen. Lovekin and indeed myself. I am a medical doctor, Lovekin is an attorney and his cousin, Dr. Ted Loder, is a PhD scientist and scientific advisor to the Disclosure Project. How can the UFO community
expect such professional people to step forward if we will not defend them from these vicious and baseless attacks?

For who would want to step forward, to disclose the truth and blow the whistle on the rogue and illegal secrecy surrounding UFOs, UFO-connected technologies and the like only to have the UFO community itself set upon them with one ugly attack after another?

Whether out of jealousy or shadowy ties to those who desire to perpetuate secrecy, the effect is the same: Such ad hominem attacks serve to dissuade others from coming forward.

Moreover, insofar as The Disclosure Project is providing important whistle-blower testimony and documents to government leaders in the US, Canada and other countries, these libelous assertions serve to discourage such government officials from looking further into the matter.

Enough is enough.

A Call to Action

- It is time for you, the concerned public, to hold such behavior accountable. We encourage you to contact Randle, and others who engage in similar baseless attacks, and demand that they behave responsibly and cease and desist from such attacks on courageous whistle-blowers.

- The Disclosure Project asks that you help us identify a top quality Attorney with experience in defamation, libel and slander cases to work with us in defending the rights and reputation of Disclosure Project witnesses.

- We ask that you write publications or organizations affiliated with those who engage in such attacks and demand that they take actions to stop such behavior.

- We ask that you help us identify further UFO military and government witnesses and support the Disclosure Project at www.DisclosureProject.org so that we may continue to provide the public with the truth.

<> We must not enable those who would enable secrecy. It is time that we hold such behavior accountable and defend the honor, reputation and testimony of such fine and heroic witnesses as Brig. General Stephen Lovekin.
Today in response Kevin Randle writes:
I would think, before you take off on a rant, you’d want to see what I have to say about “Brigadier General” Stephen Lovekin.

Might I suggest you read the information that I have posted at www.KevinRandle.blogspot.com. Then decide if the questions I raised were reasonable or if I have launched some kind of ad hominem attack on Lovekin.

Second, it would seem to me that those after the information they claim is hidden by the government would want to be sure that their whistle blowers were exactly who they said they were. Ask yourself this question: If a reporter found the information I did, would he or she be more inclined to accept or reject the testimony of Lovekin.

The solution is simple. Rather than imply Lovekin is a general in the National Guard Reserve (which doesn’t exist) and rather than suggest he has a long career in the Army, explain that he holds his commission in the State Guard of North Carolina
Association. Also explain that he was not a general while serving in the White House Army Signal Agency, but was, in reality, a rather low ranking enlisted man.

And finally, for those who wonder about my credentials, let me point out that I served in the Army in Vietnam, I was a member of the Iowa National Guard that was called to active duty and served for 14 months including a tour in Iraq, and I am being recalled for another tour in the Middle East. So, I have the right to ask questions about someone who says he is a general, but who is strangely left out of and off all the official sites and locations that could verify this. I am not a part of a volunteer, civilian organization like the State Guard of North Carolina Association.

Thanks for reading the above.

Kevin D. Randle
[It is understood that Stephen Lovekin has been experiencing serious health problems--we wish him a full and speedy recovery]

= = = =

From a different site for further research & study:

http://kevinrandle.blogspot.com/2006/02/lovekin-is-general-but.html

--with added responses to the research at that link

Thursday, February 23, 2006
Lovekin is a General... But...
Well, the answer is finally in. After writing to many people requesting information, after actually calling Stephen Lovekin at home (and learning to my horror that he was just out of the hospital), after emailing a relative who was defending him, I have learned the truth about Lovekin. It turns out that I was right… He was not a brigadier general on active duty with the Army, he was not a member and brigadier general in the North Carolina National Guard and he was not a brigadier general in the Army Reserve. He is, as I speculated, a brigadier general in the State Guard of North Carolina Association, a volunteer, civilian organization. For those wishing to the Disclosure Project evidence, click on the comments after the other Lovekin article for the links.

Yes, this seems to be splitting a fine hair here, but it is not. As I wrote, during World War II, when the National Guard in all states was activated, the states responded by creating the State Guard. It was an organization that took on the role of the National Guard while those soldiers were deployed. When the war ended and the National Guard soldiers were demobilized, these state guards were disbanded or allowed to disintegrate. Their charters, in many cases expired. In the 1990s, many of these organizations were revitalized, but often without the state recognition they once held.

With the information, supplied by Dr. Stephen Greer of the Disclosure Project, I learned about Lovekin’s military connection. I used Google to find the State Guard of North Carolina. It has a one page web site that explains in their mission statement, "The NCSGA (North Carolina State Guard Association) is deicated (sic) to provide an organized trained group of volunteers to help in times of emergency and as a manpower multiplier force for the CERT program in the State of North Carolina."

They also note, "We train to assist our local law enforcement, fire, and medicial (sic) teams. We have training with the Red Cross Emergency System, Mass Care, Housing, Comm First Aid, etc. We have volunteered and helped on the NC coast with hurricanes, in the mountains with floods and in our communities with search and rescue."

There is a link to another, more comprehensive web site for that organization. For those interested in more information Contact: Tom Griffith (Chief of Staff) 225 Edgeland Dr.PO Box 17171, Charlotte, NC 28277 Matthews, NC 28105 Phone: (704) 847-4855 Fax: Website: http://www.ncstateguard.org USAFreedom Corps: Citizen Corps.

This organization is somewhat similar to the Air Force’s Civil Air Patrol (CAP). All CAP members wear the Air Force uniform, but they are not members of the Air Force. The CAP is the official auxiliary and they perform a great service in search and rescue. But they are civilian volunteers who serve without pay and often with little recognition.

And so it is with the North Carolina State Guard Association. They perform service and are a benefit to the community, but they are an organization of civilian volunteers in a paramilitary organization who serve without pay.

So, the answer to the question in the original article, "Is Lovekin a Brigadier General," is yes. But it is a qualified yes, meaning that he holds a commission as a Brigadier General in an organization that has no official recognition.

If I was to complain about the way he is listed in the various articles and on various web sites, it would be about the claim of National Guard Reserve. As I have said, there is no such thing though both the National Guard and the Army Reserve are parts of the Reserve Component. In all official planning for the force structure the National Guard and the Army Reserve are featured. The North Carolina State Guard Association is not.

To correct the problem, all that needs to be done is to change the listing from National Guard Reserve to North Carolina State Guard Association. Those who wish to understand the significance of Lovekin’s commission can then find their way to the web sites. They will have the information necessary to understand what is going on.
But let’s go just a little bit further. I now understand why my search failed to find any reference to an officer named Lovekin in the Army Registry. When Lovekin said that he was assigned to the White House Signal Agency, he was not an officer. He was a specialist, meaning he was a low-ranking enlisted man. Given the timing, and Lovekin’s biography, it means he entered the Army shortly after he finished high school, served for a limited time, and then went to college. I wouldn’t be surprised to learn that he joined the Army for the GI Bill which would have helped pay for college.

Lest anyone think I am disparaging Lovekin’s course, let me point out that I served as a private on active duty, later as a specialist (E-5) before finishing flight school and receiving a promotion to Warrant Officer. One of my goals was to obtain the GI Bill to help pay for college. In fact, there are many who served in the military with the idea of receiving money for college. As I mentioned before, I have nothing against teenagers in the Army. I was one myself.

Where does that leave us? Well, Lovekin was a member of the White House Army Signal Agency, but as an enlisted man. He serves, or served, as a Brigadier General in North Carolina State Guard Association but has not held that rank in the Armed Forces of the United States. What this does is clarify his position and helps us understand and assign credibility to his claims of what he heard at the Eisenhower White House.

I’ll make one more quick comment. I laid out the information I have carefully. I showed that there were no official documents that showed Lovekin served as a general in any of the officially sanctioned military services. I suggested then that he might have been appointed a general in this loosely organized State Guard, which is the case. I had asked for help from those supporting Lovekin such as Dr. Michael Salla, who said he would find out and let me know. I wrote to Lovekin’s cousin, twice, asking for documentation and said I would post it immediately (I find that I don't have to do that because of the emails in the comments section... There are links there to the documentation). I received nothing. Instead, I’m attacked for wanting to get to the truth. This I knew would happen.

So, for those who want to believe, Lovekin is a general. For those who want the truth, the source of his commission is important. If the media were to check on this, what conclusion do you think they would draw? And it is those people who are disinterested that should drive the train, not the true believers or the hardcore debunkers.

I just stumbled across Stanton Friedman's posting of his presentation that Jocko and I listened to at the spring's Aztec UFO Conference. I love his humor in this one.

Found at:

http://frankwarren.blogspot.com/2006/06/drake-equation-by-stanton-t-friedman.html

and probably at his site:

www.stantonfriedman.com

= = = = = =

Wednesday, June 28, 2006
Drake Equation
By Stanton T. Friedman

5-2-06

On Saturday, March 25, 2006, I presented the final lecture of the day at the Aztec, New Mexico, Annual Crash Anniversary Conference The reality of the March, 1948, crash, about which I had initially been quite skeptical, has become more and more believable thanks primarily to the fine research by Scott Ramsey. I had spoken about Roswell and MJ-12 at some earlier Aztec UFO conferences, but this year the title of my program was “UFOs vs. SETI: Science vs. Pseudo-science.” In my lecture I contrasted the enormous amount of evidence indicating some UFOs are extraterrestrial spacecraft and the total absence of evidence provided by the SETI community to justify both their neglect of the UFO evidence and their strange reasoning that listening for radio signals from ET is somehow a scientific endeavor. A psychologist I once knew would probably explain their behavior as projection on to others of their own failure to provide evidence.

It is not that SETI Specialists don’t mention UFOs. It is that they just about always claim that there is no evidence or no convincing evidence or no physical evidence. One thing is for sure, they don’t reference the solid scientific studies in their books or papers or TV appearances. In Aztec I noted 5 large scale scientific studies which I normally discuss at the beginning of my “Flying Saucers ARE Real” college lectures. I usually ask, after showing a slide of each one and discussing its contents: “How many here have read this volume?”. On a good night I will get 1-2% who have read one of the five.. Once in Phoenix, Arizona, I was very pleased that Judy Varns, an active MUFON member and a civil engineer, had read all five. None of the SETI literature references these studies. Dr. Seth Shostak of the SETI Institute heard my lecture on board the Queen Elizabeth 2 during a cruise in 2003. He hadn’t raised his hand after any of the 5 and in a later debate on Coast to Coast Radio, it was clear that he had “forgotten” all 5. Surprisingly these academic types typically also ignore the dozen or so PhD Theses about UFOs that have been published and also ignore the many papers presented by professional scientists at the annual MUFON symposia and included in the Symposium Proceedings. There are literally hundreds of such papers.

The SS seem to take the approach that absence of evidence in their hands is evidence for absence of such evidence. I quoted a comment from Shostak in a recent article “It is a common canard that the SETI community’s skepticism is simply due to their failure to be open to the idea (UFOs). That’s wrong. Their skepticism is rooted in the lack of good evidence”. It is strange how neither Shostak nor any of the other SETI cultists ever discuss the evidence they say isn’t good.

I quoted Carl Sagan from the enormously successful COSMOS TV series seen by 600 million people in 60 countries. On the Encyclopedia Galactica segment (1980) he stated. “What counts is not what seems plausible, not what we would like to believe, not what one or two witnesses claim, but only what is supported by hard evidence. Extraordinary claims require extraordinary evidence”. Really?? So why was Carl’s next statement “There must be other civilizations far older and more advanced than ours.” None of the SETI cultists have provided any evidence, no less extraordinary evidence, of any such civilization. Certainly worldwide UFO reports provide evidence of more advanced civilizations. The SETI community ignores this evidence.

I defined cult as “a sect adhering to a common ideology or doctrine when such adherence or devotion is based on fanatical beliefs or dogmas”. Sounds right to me for SETI. Sagan, for example, in Scientific American, in 1984, gave this definition: “SETI is an attempt to use large radio telescopes, sophisticated receivers and modern data analysis to detect hypothetical signals sent our way by advanced civilizations on planets around other stars”. Notice this leaves out Optical SETI which is searching for brief, very powerful, laser signals from other stars. It leaves out evaluation of photographs of UFOs, physical trace cases including reports of beings associated with extraordinary vehicles sitting just above the ground., abductions. It ignores multiple witness visual and radar observations of manufactured objects behaving in ways that Earth-originated flying objects, observed by experts concerned with things flying within the atmosphere, cannot duplicate. It leaves out examination of wreckage from crashed alien saucers. Most astronomers are not well acquainted with evaluation of witness testimony, radar measurements, or pilot observations. Atmospheric Physicists such as the late James E McDonald are well acquainted with such phenomena. Note well: “Hypothetical” signals.

Carl compounded his false reasoning with this claim “the search for alien civilizations retains its importance despite the striking failure of the UFO evidence…. There are reliable sightings that are not interesting and interesting sightings that are not reliable, but no interesting and reliable sightings”. This is unequivocally false. In Project Blue Book Special Report 14 the quality distribution shows that, the greater the reliability of a particular case, the MORE likely to be unexplainable. 35% of the Excellent cases could not be identified. “Only” 18% of the poor cases couldn’t be identified. Obviously one saucer landing in the middle of the World Cup would do it. Carl talks of sightings. What about radar visual cases, photographs, physical trace cases that leave behind evidence that can be examined and tested later? .Furthermore, SETI is not the search for alien civilizations, according to Carl’s definition. It is a very restricted search for radio signals. The sending device could originate from a long dead civilization.

Along these same lines, I also noted Dr. Jill Tartar’s comment in February, 2006 “SETI is the only research program looking for life beyond the solar system. It is the way we are going to understand where we are coming from and how we are going to survive as a species.. the search could yield headlines within a few decades.” One expects cultists to have a strong sense of how important they are to the survival of the species. Does anybody really believe that detecting, and interpreting a signal from a distant civilization will help us survive here? Hardly, especially, as noted below, when they think there may be one signal sending civilization within 1000 light years? Descendants of SETI leaders will be asking for help and get an answer 2000 years later…

As if in response to my talk, there was an article by Dr. Shostak in the May issue of Discover Magazine entitled “Drake’s Brave Guess”. He waxed poetic about the Drake Equation, originated 45 years ago by radio astronomer Frank Drake (now co-director of the SETI Institute) which supposedly is a scientific approach to determining the number of civilizations in the galaxy capable of sending radio signals. The idea is that, if we just keep listening, we will make the great discovery that man is not alone in the galaxy. The reasoning is a great example of pseudo-science. The primary reason for the article was the fact that the new Allen Telescope Array with 42 dishes, each 20 feet in diameter, is just going on line at Hat Creek in Northern California.

Eventually there will be many more dishes. He really seems to believe the quaint notion that our best systems are on a par with alien civilizations’ best capabilities apparently assuming they would not have improved in what could easily be the billion years during which such systems have been around. I was using a slide rule 50 years ago. I don’t anymore. A laser printer is not just a better IBM Selectric Typewriter. Atomic bombs are not just bigger 10 ton block busters that were used earlier in WW 2.

Of course Shostak doesn’t mention that Hat Creek can’t tune into Southern sky alien radio transmitters,even assuming they are still transmitting using very old, for them, technology. In the “Zeta Reticuli Incident” by Terence Dickinson, which discusses Marjorie Fish’s very exciting research on the Betty Hill star map, it is noted that many sun like stars in the neighborhood can only be seen from below the equator.

Shostak presents the Sacred Drake equation and then plays dartboard physics to try to come up with values for such things as on what fraction of planets life develops; on what fraction of those intelligence develops; and on what fraction of those the ability to send radio signals develops and perhaps most important, the lifetime of a civilization.. Considering that we have data for some of these factors from one planet around one star in a galaxy of a few hundred Billion stars, one can see that this is just a mite of a stretch, a rather huge extrapolation. The galaxy may be 13 Billion years old and the sun is only about 4.5 billion years old. But Zeta 1 and Zeta 2 Reticuli, just 39 light years away, are a billion years older than the sun and just down the street.

Unlike us, they each have a neighboring sun-like star 1/8th of a light year away. What if a civilization colonizes a number of nearby planets and what if each of those, in turn colonizes others, and on and on?. No consideration of this possibility is taken into account. Shostak assumes 10,000 years for a lifetime. A dynamic colonizing group may last for millions of years.

Shostak reviews how our thoughts of several of the factors have changed. “When Drake and his compatriots plugged their best guesses into the equation, they came up with an answer in the Thousands- meaning that intelligent life is common enough that there should be a technological civilization within about 1000 light years”. I find it impossible to be excited by such false reasoning. This computation of course assumes uniform distribution which is a little like assuming that a 6 foot man can’t drown in a pool whose average depth is only 3’. He can, if he falls in the wrong end. The distribution of major cities in North America is hardly uniform. Shostak thinks Drake had it right in 1961. He does allow “When a technological civilization develops rockets, the colonization of nearby space will likely follow”. Sounds like he means within a solar system. He might have pointed out that nuclear fusion was discovered to be the source of the sun’s energy within a couple of years of the use of the first dish radio telescope. Fusion rockets can provide 10 million times as much energy per particle emitted as can be provided by a chemical rocket. Fusion is also used in H-bombs. But SETI never takes note of the fact that governments have a very strong interest in using the technology of flying saucers for military purposes and, therefore, in covering up what they have learned using our sophisticated tools here. He acts as though SETI people can speak for the planet!!

Nowhere in the article is it noted that within that 1000 light years there are over 5 million stars. Only one other advanced civilization? Surely makes us special, doesn’t it?

A quick thought as to why the opposition to UFOs is so strong in the SETI community. If aliens are visiting, than who needs radio telescopes? Buggy whips weren’t of much use once people started driving automobiles. Discover has a comic book style cartoon with a Jill Tartar saying “But Carl, we’ve been listening...and we don’t hear ANYTHING”. The cartoon Carl Sagan replies “Jill, there are BILLIONS and BILLIONS…”. I must agree with Carl. But they aren’t sending old fashioned radio signals. They are sending visitors. That is what the evidence shows.

www.stantonfriedman.com

This is one of the best writeup's I've read of such. From:

http://exopolitics.blogs.com/exopolitics/2006/05/a_toronto_press.html

- - - -

EXOPOLITICS: The Canadian National Newspaper | Main | Dr. John E. Mack: Global Mind Change - Deeper Causes: Exploring the Role of Consciousness in Terrorism »

Video of Hon. Paul Hellyer and Dr. Steven Greer's Toronto Exopolitics/Disclosure Press Conference - May 9, 2006
Windows Media Video (WMV - encoded for a 150kbps stream with a 320 x 240 viewing resolution).

Exopolitics/Disclosure Press Conference in Toronto (May-09-2006)

CLICK TO WATCH PRESS CONFERENCE:
http://stream.lastdigital.net/ep

If you wish to download and upload to your servers to help share the load, please download the file from here: http://stream.lastdigital.net:8080/exopolitics-may9-06.zip

PRESS RELEASE

Exopolitics Toronto and the Canadian Disclosure Initiative present an exclusive Press Conference on UFO Witness Testimony. A press screening of authentic military, corporate and government witness testimony will present compelling evidence attesting to the reality of an extraterrestrial presence and the 58 year old military/government cover-up of this issue. This historic press event will feature Dr. Steven M. Greer Director of the Disclosure Project and the Hon. Paul Hellyer former Minister of National Defense in Canada.

Toronto, Ontario (PRWEB) May 3, 2006 -– A major press conference will be held in Toronto to present military and corporate witness testimony by ranking senior officials about the presence, authenticity and geo-political policy implications of unidentified aerial phenomenon of non-Earth origin.

Exopolitics Toronto will screen a professionally produced Witness Testimony digital video film created by the Disclosure Project under the direction of Dr. Steven Greer on the theatre screen at the prestigious De La Salle Oaklands College in Toronto Ontario on Tuesday May 9th at 7 p.m.

The goal of this press conference is to present witness testimony by Brigadier Generals, Naval Photographic experts, military officers, ICBM Launch Commanders, an FAA Crash Site Senior Administrator, NORAD air traffic controllers and pilots that confirms authentic, first-hand encounters with intelligently controlled unidentified aerial craft of non-Earth origin.

Statements and remarks by Dr. Greer and the Hon. Paul Hellyer about the testimony’s policy and geo-political implications will follow the film’s screening. An open question period for the press will follow remarks by Dr. Greer and Mr. Hellyer.

For the first time in Canada, this provocative and unambiguous witness testimony provides all journalists an opportunity to study irrefutable, documented and shockingly compelling witness testimony about the presence of unidentified aerial phenomenon of non-Earth origin and the associated 58 year cover-up by military and government officials.

In fact, each witness has stated they are willing to testify, under oath, before Congress or Parliament as to the truth of their testimony; a bold personal and legal precedent set by these courageous military, government and corporate officials.

Understandably mainstream media has always been reluctant to approach this issue; dismissing it because of inconclusive evidence or skepticism. This is no longer the case.

Press now will have the right to unreservedly examine superior quality information assembled by researchers and experts in this field; information only accessible in the past to officials with the highest levels of security clearance.

This category of evidential material has been withheld from the press for over 58 years. Exopolitics Toronto’s disclosure press conference rectifies this situation; an event no journalist will want to overlook due to the gravity of the witness’ disclosures.

Abundant evidence and witness testimony also exists that establishes the existence of related covert projects that have developed advanced energy and propulsion technologies that could replace the need for oil, gas, coal and nuclear power.

These rogue, so-called "black" projects have hidden these energy breakthroughs from the public, to the detriment of national security, the environment and the economy, so that elite special interests can maintain the current status quo.

Press will also be able to view copies of original government documents and national security memoranda that confirm a co-ordinated involvement with and a high level of interest in global UFO activity by military and national security agencies.

Exopolitics Toronto will have on hand copies of original secret documents of NORAD Status and Events obtained under the Access to Information and Privacy Act – National Defense Headquarters showing the scrambling of two NORAD CF-18 jets in 2001 to intercept three unidentified craft tracked by an MEDEVAC LR-35 out of Anchorage Alaska.

Also on the agenda will be a special announcement concerning the documentary Dan Aykroyd Unplugged on UFOs. This documentary by Canadian David Sereda will be released in late May.

Press Conference Details

Date: Tuesday May 9th 7 p.m.
Location: De La Salle Oaklands College
131 Farnham Ave. Toronto Ontario
Auditorium – Entrance at south end of the building
Free Parking available. Doors open at 6:30 p.m.

For map directions to De La Salle Oaklands visit Google Map.

The entrance to De La Salle is located on the south side of Farnham Avenue – three streets south of St. Clair east of Avenue Rd. and west of Yonge St.

TTC Access
De La Salle Oaklands is also accessible by walking north to Farnham Ave on Yonge St. from the Summerhill subway stop or by taking the Avenue Rd. bus which stops in front of the college.

Admission Criteria

Press - valid press credentials.
General Public - $5.00
Television Camera Crews should arrive at 6:30 pm to position equipment
Radio and television journalists and print media – seating section – PRESS ONLY.

Agenda

-Introduction and Remarks – Victor Viggiani Director of Media Relations Exopolitics Toronto and Michael Bird Director Exopolitics Toronto
-Exclusive Witness Disclosure Testimony Presentation Digital Video
-Question Period - Dr. Steven Greer and the Hon. Paul Hellyer – Press will have an opportunity to question both featured guests concerning witness testimony and the policy questions surrounding an Extraterrestrial presence.
-Discussion of film documentary Dan Aykroyd Unplugged on UFOs

This Press Event is an initiative supported by the Canadian Disclosure Initiative - a coalition of three NGO agencies:

Exopolitics Toronto
Michael J. Bird Director and Victor Viggiani B.A. M.Ed. Director of Media Relations

The Disclosure Project
Washington, D.C.: Dr. Steven M. Greer,

ICIS -Institute for Cooperation in Space
Vancouver, Canada: Alfred Lambremont Webre, JD, MEd

Interview and Contact Information:

Michael Bird Director - Exopolitics Toronto
Victor Viggiani Director - Media Relations Exopolitics Toronto
Tel: 905 278 1238

ORIGINAL ARTICLE:
http://www.prweb.com/releases/2006/5/prweb379757.htm

URL OF THIS ARTICLE:

http://exopolitics.blogs.com/exopolitics/2006/05/a_toronto_press.html

Video courtesy of Ernest V.

Many of you, I pinged just to this post--you might be interested in some of the several just above this one, too.

THIS IS PART II of Stanton Friedman's articles on UFO propulsion--for study and research and comment.

I encourage you to go to the website for part I

Part II is here:

http://frankwarren.blogspot.com/2005/07/ufo-propulsion-systems-by-stanton-t_13.html

Wednesday, July 13, 2005
UFO Propulsion Systems By Stanton T. Friedman (Part Two)

Unfortunately, chemical rockets such as we have been using are by their very nature extremely limited in their abilities to provide high velocities in their limited operating times because of their great inefficiency.

Starship and Earth Excursion Module designers thus face two obvious questions:

1). How much acceleration can people stand for how long?

2). What method can provide more miles per hour then chemical rockets, either by operating for longer times or at higher accelerations?

The amount of acceleration a person can stand depends on many factors; the three most important depends on the duration of acceleration (the greater the force, the shorter the time it can be tolerated), the direction of the force in relation to the body (back to front acceleration is much easier to handle then head to foot acceleration, and for this reason Apollo astronauts have their backs perpendicular to the direction of the thrust, rather then along it as in an elevator), and body environment is important (a person immersed in fluid can withstand greater acceleration then one not so immersed).

Let’s consider some of the variables. A trained and highly motivated pilot can perform a tracking task while being accelerated at fourteen Gs (about three hundred mph every second) for two minutes. Starting from rest he would be moving at three hundred mph in one second, at three thousand mph in ten seconds, and at thirty-six thousand mph at the end of two minutes!

Obviously conventional propulsion systems such as airplanes, trains, buses and cars cannot provide fourteen Gs. A trained person properly trained can stand thirty Gs for one second without damage. This data suggests that much higher acceleration could be withstood for shorter times. Reports of EEM (Earth Excursion Module) flight often indicate that the high acceleration—as when making a near right angle turn or changing altitude—takes place in an extremely short period of time. In modern physics and technology, the primary method for providing very high forces for relatively short periods of time is the use of electromagnetic forces such as with lasers, magneto forming of the complex shapes, and the acceleration of the nuclear particles to velocities close to that of light.

In the mid 1960s an electromagnetic submarine designed by Dr. Stuart Way, [sic] who was on leave from Westinghouse Research Laboratory, was successfully tested. It made use of the fact that electric and magnetic fields at right angles to each other produce a (Lorentz) force at right angles to both. The force pushed against the surrounding electromagnetically conducting fluid (seawater), which pushes back and moves the submarine. It is possible to envision an airborne analog in which seawater is replaced by ionized electrically conducting air, and conventional electromagnetic fields are produced by super-conducting magnets, which need little space, very little power and weight, and generate very high magnetic fields. Substantial research, much of it classified, has been done showing that a electromagneto aerodynamic system would be capable of solving all the problems of high-speed flight by controlling lift, drag heating and sonic-boom production—all electromagnetically, rather then mechanically or chemically. The resulting system would be symmetric, highly maneuverable, and relatively silent, often have a glow around it, and be capable of sudden starts and stops. It could carry its own power supply, or be charged up on board its mother ship in much the same manner as a golf cart which carries only a storage battery.

The reason much of the research on MAD propulsion systems is classified is that the nose cones of ballistic missiles create an ionized air region around them as they reenter. Modifications of the nose cones can be used to vary the radar profile, lift, drag and light direction and other important parameters with out carrying along fuel or propellant, which normally would be required. It should be stressed that such systems work by interacting with their surroundings and by carrying along something that is thrown out the back end. A real benefit is derived from producing very high magnetic fields since a field ten times as great produces one hundred times as much force.

For the interstellar trip the obvious first choice, although undoubtedly not the ultimate choice, for replacing primitive chemical rockets is a nuclear rocket. Although most people are unaware of nuclear propulsion systems other then those the Navy built for submarines and surface ships, there have been several other programs for the development of airborne or space propulsion systems. Jet engines were successfully operated on nuclear power the “Aircraft Nuclear Propulsion Program”. A nuclear ramjet was successfully ground tested during the NERVA (Nuclear Engines For Rocket Vehicle Applications) program. Most of the work involved in these multi-dollar-a-year programs was classified and conducted by industrial contractors in conjunction with national laboratories under the direction of NASA, the Air Force, and or the old Atomic Energy Commission. All of the above systems utilize nuclear fission of the Uranium-235 nucleus to produce huge amounts of heat by conversion of a small amount of mass into a large amount of energy. Millions of times more energy can be produced in this way then by burning rocket fuel.

Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.