Dit is ons nieuw hondje Kira, een kruising van een waterhond en een Podenko. Ze is sinds 7 februari 2024 bij ons en druk bezig ons hart te veroveren. Het is een lief, aanhankelijk hondje, dat zich op een week snel aan ons heeft aangepast. Ze is heel vinnig en nieuwsgierig, een heel ander hondje dan Noleke.
This is our new dog Kira, a cross between a water dog and a Podenko. She has been with us since February 7, 2024 and is busy winning our hearts. She is a sweet, affectionate dog who quickly adapted to us within a week. She is very quick and curious, a very different dog than Noleke.
DEAR VISITOR,
MY BLOG EXISTS ALREADY 12 YEARS AND 10 MONTHS.
ON 06/04/2024 MORE THAN 1.951.050
VISITORS FROM 134 DIFFERENT NATIONS ALREADY FOUND THEIR WAY TO MY BLOG.
THAT IS AN AVERAGE OF 400GUESTS PER DAY.
THANK YOU FOR VISITING MY BLOG AND HOPE YOU ENJOY EACH TIME.
The purpose of this blog is the creation of an open, international, independent and free forum, where every UFO-researcher can publish the results of his/her research. The languagues, used for this blog, are Dutch, English and French.You can find the articles of a collegue by selecting his category. Each author stays resposable for the continue of his articles. As blogmaster I have the right to refuse an addition or an article, when it attacks other collegues or UFO-groupes.
Druk op onderstaande knop om te reageren in mijn forum
Zoeken in blog
Deze blog is opgedragen aan mijn overleden echtgenote Lucienne.
In 2012 verloor ze haar moedige strijd tegen kanker!
In 2011 startte ik deze blog, omdat ik niet mocht stoppen met mijn UFO-onderzoek.
BEDANKT!!!
Een interessant adres?
UFO'S of UAP'S, ASTRONOMIE, RUIMTEVAART, ARCHEOLOGIE, OUDHEIDKUNDE, SF-SNUFJES EN ANDERE ESOTERISCHE WETENSCHAPPEN - DE ALLERLAATSTE NIEUWTJES
UFO's of UAP'S in België en de rest van de wereld In België had je vooral BUFON of het Belgisch UFO-Netwerk, dat zich met UFO's bezighoudt. BEZOEK DUS ZEKER VOOR ALLE OBJECTIEVE INFORMATIE , enkel nog beschikbaar via Facebook en deze blog.
Verder heb je ook het Belgisch-Ufo-meldpunt en Caelestia, die prachtig, doch ZEER kritisch werk leveren, ja soms zelfs héél sceptisch...
Voor Nederland kan je de mooie site www.ufowijzer.nl bezoeken van Paul Harmans. Een mooie site met veel informatie en artikels.
MUFON of het Mutual UFO Network Inc is een Amerikaanse UFO-vereniging met afdelingen in alle USA-staten en diverse landen.
MUFON's mission is the analytical and scientific investigation of the UFO- Phenomenon for the benefit of humanity...
Je kan ook hun site bekijken onder www.mufon.com.
Ze geven een maandelijks tijdschrift uit, namelijk The MUFON UFO-Journal.
Since 02/01/2020 is Pieter ex-president (=voorzitter) of BUFON, but also ex-National Director MUFON / Flanders and the Netherlands. We work together with the French MUFON Reseau MUFON/EUROP.
ER IS EEN NIEUWE GROEPERING DIE ZICH BUFON NOEMT, MAAR DIE HEBBEN NIETS MET ONZE GROEP TE MAKEN. DEZE COLLEGA'S GEBRUIKEN DE NAAM BUFON VOOR HUN SITE... Ik wens hen veel succes met de verdere uitbouw van hun groep. Zij kunnen de naam BUFON wel geregistreerd hebben, maar het rijke verleden van BUFON kunnen ze niet wegnemen...
16-03-2024
Antikythera Mechanism Found On Mars, Alien Tech Revealed! NASA Source, UFO Sighting News.
Antikythera Mechanism Found On Mars, Alien Tech Revealed! NASA Source, UFO Sighting News.
Space Force budget (secret space programs are integrated) exceeds NASA
Space Force budget (secret space programs are integrated) exceeds NASA
Dr Michael Salla discusses the following topics:
US Congress cuts funding to NASA while corporations are funding more space missions.
Detailed breakdown of UAP historical report cites glaring deficiencies. Article proclaims Pentagon is heading for disaster due to AARO UAP report – catastrophic disclosure more likely.
AARO Report: Lies, flawed, unresponsive, clueless, and knavish analyzed by Robert Powell (A must read).
Webinar Trailer released- Ancient Alien Experiments and Crypto Terrestrials.
Space Force budget exceeds NASA but will surge as elements of secret space programs are integrated.
UFO Disclosure Project Attorney Danny Sheehan recounts his encounter with secret Project Blue Book files in 1977 that contained photos of retrieved flying saucer craft.
Could Romanian President entering race for NATO leadership be a reward for him suppressing news of the discovery of an ancient Hall of Records under Bucegi Mountains in 2003?
President Eisenhower’s role in agreements reached with Aliens revealed by Great Granddaughter in New Book.
New JP video highlights ETs monitoring humanity’s consciousness and the importance of the love ethic.
The wise Reptilian entity depicted in Japanese art is similar to Naga beings in Vedic art and literature.
Analysis of AARO historical report discussing July 1952 shootdown attempt against a flying saucer involved in Washington flyover.
Four primary goals in AARO historical report point to a coming false flag UFO event.
Mysterious Triangular UFO Spotted in the Skies of Bratislava
Mysterious Triangular UFO Spotted in the Skies of Bratislava
In an extraordinary event that has captured the attention of UFO enthusiasts and skeptics alike, a remarkable sighting occurred in the night sky over Ru¸inov, a bustling borough of Bratislava, Slovakia, on March 14, 2024. This incident has swiftly climbed the ranks in the annals ofUFO sightings, stirring a whirlwind of speculation and intrigue.
The Sighting in Detail
Just before the clock struck 11 pm on that fateful evening, a resident and amateur UFO enthusiast known online as “ufoslovakia” managed to capture jaw-dropping footage of an unidentified flying object. But this was no ordinary sighting. The footage reveals a distinct triangular-shaped craft, looming ominously above. What makes this sighting particularly fascinating is the suggestion from the footage that we might be looking at a single, massive object rather than three separate entities.
The Eyewitness and the Video
“ufoslovakia,” known for his passion for filming and sharing aerial anomalies, could hardly believe his eyes. Through his lens, he witnessed what could very well be one of the most definitive pieces of visual evidence of UFO activity in recent history. The clarity and detail of the footage have left viewers in awe, prompting debates and discussions across various platforms.
What Makes This Sighting Unique?
Triangular UFO sightings have been reported globally, but the Bratislava incident stands out for several reasons. First, the quality of the footage is unusually high, providing a clear view of the object’s shape and movements. Secondly, the size of the craft, as suggested by the footage, indicates that this could be an unusually large object, distinguishing it from more common reports of smaller, drone-like objects.
Skeptics and Believers Alike Are Intrigued
While some skeptics propose explanations ranging from advanced military aircraft to atmospheric phenomena, the distinct characteristics observed in the Bratislava sighting challenge conventional understandings. Enthusiasts point to the lack of sound, the steady flight pattern, and the uniformity of the object’s lights as indicators that this sighting cannot be easily dismissed.
This remarkable sighting in Bratislava has added a fascinating chapter to the ongoing narrative of UFO sightings. Whether you’re a staunch believer in extraterrestrial visitors, a curious skeptic, or simply someone fascinated by the unknown, this incident invites you to explore the endless possibilities that our universe holds.
Aliens and the Origins of Human Life: Insights from David Grusch on The Joe Rogan Experience
Aliens and the Origins of Human Life: Insights from David Grusch on The Joe Rogan Experience
In an enthralling episode of The Joe Rogan Experience, David Grusch joined Joe Rogan to delve into the enigmatic possibility of extraterrestrial influence on the development of human life. This thought-provoking discussion explored various aspects of alien life, the hypothesis of extraterrestrial seeding of life on Earth, and the implications of such interventions.
The Hypothesis of Extraterrestrial Seeding
David Grusch presented a captivating hypothesis that extraterrestrial beings could have played a pivotal role in the genesis or acceleration of life on Earth. This theory suggests that aliens, through genetic intervention, could have fast-tracked the evolution of emerging intelligent life forms on our planet. The underlying idea is that such interventions would not only boost the natural progression of evolution but also imbue these life forms with an innate drive for innovation, control, and the expansion of influence.
Beyond Biological Limitations
A significant portion of the discussion was dedicated to the concept that advanced extraterrestrial entities might have evolved beyond the biological constraints known to human beings. Grusch and Rogan speculated about the existence of beings that operate in realms undetectable to us, free from the limitations of physical space and the conventional life-death cycle. This advanced state would allow them to engage in and influence processes in ways that are currently beyond human comprehension.
Technological Evolution and Communication
Reflecting on the rapid evolution of human communication technologies, from face-to-face interaction to instant global connectivity, the conversation touched upon the potential for future advancements. This led to discussions about the possibility of instant physical presence across vast distances, drawing parallels between human technological progress and the speculated capabilities of advanced extraterrestrial beings.
Theoretical Frameworks and Cosmic Perspectives
The dialogue ventured into discussions on theoretical frameworks that could potentially explain the universe’s complexities, including Eric Weinstein’s Geometric Unity. The notion that the universe itself could be considered a creator or a form of god was explored, suggesting a meta-perspective on the origins and nature of creation. This perspective invites contemplation on the universe’s ability to generate complex systems, potentially including other universes.
Exploring Existential Questions
The conversation between Grusch and Rogan raised profound existential questions regarding the nature of the universe, the origin of life, and the concept of a cyclical universe that undergoes endless cycles of expansion and contraction. They discussed the limitations of human understanding and the exciting potential for discoveries that lie beyond our current observations of the cosmos.
David Grusch’s appearance on The Joe Rogan Experience provided a fascinating exploration of the hypothesis that extraterrestrial life forms might have contributed to the creation or acceleration of human life. This discussion spanned the potential for biological and technological advancements beyond our current understanding, theoretical frameworks for comprehending the universe, and the deep existential questions these ideas evoke. The possibility of alien influence on human evolution invites us to reconsider our place in the cosmos and the untapped mysteries of the universe.
The Enigma of Scotland’s UFO Encounter: Unraveling the Mystery with Physical Evidence
The Enigma of Scotland’s UFO Encounter: Unraveling the Mystery with Physical Evidence
In the captivating landscape of Scotland, nestled within the enigmatic expanse known as the Falkirk Triangle, an incident unfolded that would forever etch its name in the annals of UFO research. The event centers around Bob Taylor, a forest service supervisor, whose ordinary day transformed into an extraordinary encounter, presenting what many believe to be undeniable evidence of an extraterrestrial presence.
The Unforgettable Encounter
On a day like any other, Bob Taylor ventured down a wooded path, only to be greeted by a sight that defied explanation—a massive, hovering object, with a distinctive disc-like shape, adorned with peculiar propellers. This was not merely a fleeting vision; it was a tangible entity that marked its presence in the physical world. Taylor’s attempt to approach the object led to an unforeseen altercation, culminating in him being forcibly drawn towards this mysterious craft, an experience that left him staggered and bewildered.
The Investigation Unfolds
What sets the Bob Taylor incident apart is not just the encounter itself, but the aftermath. Disturbed and disheveled, Taylor managed to return home, promptly alerting the authorities. Thus began one of the few UFO cases to be officially investigated as a criminal matter. The scrutiny it attracted was not limited to law enforcement; young UFO researchers Malcolm Robinson and Andrew Collins, alongside researcher Hugh Newman, took it upon themselves to delve deeper, seeking answers to a mystery that had lingered for over four decades.
Physical Evidence: A Tangible Proof
The investigation into Taylor’s encounter is distinguished by the compelling physical evidence it amassed. The site of the encounter bore witness to peculiar ground markings, arranged in a circular pattern, defying conventional explanations. These were not mere anomalies; they were physical imprints of an otherworldly visitor. Further corroborating Taylor’s account was the condition of his trousers, torn in such a unique fashion that it suggested a struggle with an unseen force, a testament to the physical reality of his experience.
VIDEO:
Ancient Aliens: Scottish UFO Landing PROVED By Physical Evidence (Season 29)
The Bob Taylor incident offers a rare glimpse into the potential for extraterrestrial encounters, bolstered by tangible evidence and an official investigation. It challenges us to reconsider our understanding of the unknown, urging a more open-minded and rigorous exploration of unexplained phenomena. As we continue to ponder the mysteries of the cosmos, cases like Taylor’s serve as a beacon, guiding us through the uncharted territories of our universe in search of the truth.
Craig Muir discovers a monolith on a hillside in Wales this week.
(Craig Muir via Storyful)
"When I first saw it, I was a bit taken aback as it looked like some sort of a UFO," Muir told the Press Association.
"It didn't seem like it was chucked in there, instead it has been accurately put in the ground," he added. "However, there were no obvious tracks around it and one would think that there would be a lot of mess around it, but there wasn't."
The unusual discovery comes after similar monoliths have been found in locations such as the U.S., Belgium, Romania and the Isle of Wight – an island in the English Channel.
In November 2020, one of the monoliths, estimated at between 10 feet and 12 feet high, was found by Utah state wildlife employees who were counting sheep from a helicopter.
Craig Muir found the monolith near Hay-on-Wye on Tuesday, March 12.
(Craig Muir via Storyful)
Bret Hutchings, the helicopter pilot, said it was "about the strangest thing that I’ve come across out there in all my years of flying," according to Salt Lake City's KSL-TV.
Authorities said at the time that the mysterious object was installed in the ground in a remote area with "no obvious indication" of who might have put it there, according to a press release from the Utah Department of Public Safety.
Then a week later, another monolith was discovered in Atascadero, California, which is north of Los Angeles.
It’s unclear who is behind the placement of the monoliths. A New Mexico artist collective claimed responsibility years ago.
One of the monoliths was found by state wildlife officials in Utah in November 2020.
Tom Dunford, who discovered one of the monoliths in the Isle of Wight in 2020, told Sky News "The person who put it there knows what they're doing. It's really reflective. It's someone playing a practical joke, I don't believe in any of these conspiracy theories."
Why are bizarre metal pillars popping up in the British countryside? From the work of UFOs to mystery collectives planting the monoliths by helicopter in the dead of night and Banksy rumours... all the theories explained
Why are bizarre metal pillars popping up in the British countryside? From the work of UFOs to mystery collectives planting the monoliths by helicopter in the dead of night and Banksy rumours... all the theories explained
Humans have long been obsessed with the idea that we are not alone in the universe - which is why the appearance of random metal pillars in the British countryside have sparked fresh theories over whether a third kind truly does exist.
Last weekend, yet another mysterious shiny silver structure was spotted by walkers on Hay Bluff, near the town of Hay-on-Wye.
It was the latest in a series of bizarre structures to crop up, with pillars also spotted on a beach in the Isle of Wight, at the top of Glastonbury Tor, in the middle of Merry Maidens stone circle in Cornwall and on the fields at Dartmoor National Park.
The appearances that range from 2020 to last weekend have led to much speculation over who has put them there and why, with some even pondering whether or not the objects could be of extra-terrestrial origin.
Local builder Craig Muir, who discovered the 10ft monolith sticking up out of the mud, said he assumed it was 'some sort of a UFO' while out walking.
The latest sighting remains shrouded in mystery as no-one has come forward to claim responsibility for the Welsh metal pillar which bears striking similarities to the one featured in the Stanley Kubrick film 2001: A Space Odyssey.
The pillars have turned up in the UK following a spate of monoliths appearing around the world in 2020, including in Romania and the Utah desert.
Last weekend, yet another mysterious shiny silver structure was spotted by walkers on Hay Bluff, near the town of Hay-on-Wye
While some speculated that the structure could be the work of aliens or a sign of life on Mars, others said it was an elaborate piece of artwork
The latest sighting remains shrouded in mystery as no-one has come forward to claim responsibility for the Welsh metal pillar which bears striking similarities to the one featured in the Stanley Kubrick film 2001: A Space Odyssey (pictured)
Conspiracy theorists believe that aliens are behind the structures but others have speculated that helicopters could be dropping them off in the dead of night.
Since there is no way to drive up to the top of the hill, Mr Muir suggested it could have been taken by a group of people or dropped off by the chopper on its spot.
'It didn't seem like it was chucked in there, instead it has been accurately put in the ground,' he said.
'However, there were no obvious tracks around it and one would think that there would be a lot of mess around it, but there wasn't.'
The latest discovery is similar to the structure found on Compton Bay on the Isle of Wight four years ago.
A number of photos from various different angles suggested that the monolith was buried in the sand and offers out a perfect reflection.
How the object ended up on the beach was unclear, as it is only accessible via a footpath.
Locals were quick to question whether images of the monolith posted on social media had been 'photoshopped' or if it was 'just a late April Fool's joke'.
On December 12 2020, local resident Luke Brown stumbled across another imposing monolith in Cornwall and captured a video of the metallic object
But photographer Alice Williams insisted it was real, sharing snaps of the eight-foot-tall structure at sunset in a local Facebook group.
Elsewhere, on December 12 2020, resident Luke Brown stumbled across another imposing monolith in Cornwall and captured a video of the metallic object.
He said: 'I was left in shock and awe earlier at finding a monolith at the centre of the Merry Maidens stone circle near sunset, the one time I left my camera at home.
'It was a thing of beauty but I can't help thinking of the damage that may have been done at this beautiful protected natural heritage site.'
The Merry Maidens also known as Dawn's Men - a likely corruption of the Cornish Dans Maen Stone Dance - is a late neolithic stone circle.
Just one day prior to the monolith being captured in Cornwall, another pillar was also spotted in Dartmoor National Park, Devon.
The structure was spotted on Dartmoor by photographer Sarah Clarke, who captured a shot of the monolith, before posting to X, formerly Twitter.
Dartmoor National Park swiftly removed the monolith after a picture of it was posted by photographer Sarah Clarke, with the body saying that the moorland is protected
Only 48 hours prior to the sighting of a monolith in Dartmoor National Park, another similar structure was seen on top of a hill in Glastonbury with 'Not Banksy' etched on it
She reassured her followers that the image was not made using photoshop software, stating: 'So, a very exciting morning - it's a real thing. 'Anyone who knows me, knows I just can't do Photoshop so, take it from me.'
Mark Bullock, who went to look at the pillar himself, said its vantage point on the hill made it appear like 'something was wrong with the sky'. He added: 'It was a bit surreal.'
Dartmoor National Park swiftly removed the monolith after Ms Clarke's post, saying that the moorland is protected.
Just 48 hours prior to the Dartmoor sighting, another similar monolith was seen on top of a hill in Glastonbury with 'Not Banksy' etched on it.
Walkers discovered the large silver structure at Glastonbury Tor - an ancient hill linked to King Arthur and Celtic mythology.
It is believed the monolith was placed there overnight before it was felled by a gust of wind.
Monolith found on beach at Compton in Isle Of Wight
On December 6 2020, another monolith was found by beachgoers at Compton Bay on the Isle of Wight
The shiny triangular pillar features a stencil drawing of a rat, similar to the style used by street artist Banksy.
Michelle Cowbourne spotted the metal structure at the National Trust site while on her regular morning walk.
'I walked up the long slope side and this was on the other side and when I saw it I couldn't believe my eyes,' she said. 'I just thought what on earth is that.
'There were two big metal bolts but they hadn't been fixed to the ground properly.
'It's a big chunk of metal and it was really heavy,' Ms Cowbourne added.
The first pillar in Utah was originally spotted in 2020 by state wildlife officials who were helping to count bighorn sheep from a helicopter. When the structure suddenly vanished, many thought it was the work of aliens.
However, a photographer revealed later that he had seen four men remove the pillar from the remote area of red rock in Spanish Valley, Utah.
Two weeks after the Utah pillar was discovered, another mysterious monolith, this one 13ft tall, appeared on Batca Doamnei Hill in Romania.
It is not known where there monuments are coming from but some have guesses it is a tribute to 2001: A Space Odyssey.
In the book by Arthur C Clarke, a monolith appears on Earth and gives wisdom to a group of apes.
Mars Drives Deep-Ocean Circulation in Earth’s Oceans, Study Suggests
Mars Drives Deep-Ocean Circulation in Earth’s Oceans, Study Suggests
Geoscientists from Australia and France have used the geological record of Earth’s deep oceans to discover a connection between the orbits of our home planet and Mars. They’ve discovered a surprising 2.4-million-year cycle where deep currents wax and wane which, in turn, is linked to periods of increased solar energy and a warmer climate.
This image from Mars Express’ High Resolution Stereo Camera shows the globe of Mars set against a dark background. The disk of the planet features yellow, orange, blue and green patches, all with an overall muted grey hue, representing the varying composition of the surface.
Image credit: ESA / DLR / FU Berlin / G. Michael / CC BY-SA 3.0 IGO.
“In 1976, scientists demonstrated for the first time the presence of 10,000 – 100,000-year astronomical cycles in Pleistocene deep-sea sediments, confirming Milutin Milankovitch’s theory that Earth’s climate is modulated by periodicities in perturbations of Earth’s orbit around the Sun and Earth’s spin axis,” said University of Sydney researcher Adriana Dutkiewicz and her colleagues.
“Apart from the well-known astronomical cycles with periods of 19,000, 23,000, 41,000, 100,000, and 400,000 years that pace Earth’s climate, the geological record also contains signals of much longer-period grand cycles, which are predicted by astronomical theory.”
“These grand cycles include orbitally-forced periodicities of millions and even tens of millions of years that are similarly linked to changes in incoming solar energy and paleoclimate.”
In their new research, the authors used the deep-sea sediment record to check for links between sedimentary shifts and changes in the Earth’s orbit.
They found that the vigor of deep-sea currents shifts in 2.4-million-year cycles.
“We were surprised to find these 2.4-million-year cycles in our deep-sea sedimentary data,” Dr. Dutkiewicz said.
“There is only one way to explain them: they are linked to cycles in the interactions of Mars and Earth orbiting the Sun.”
“The gravity fields of the planets in the solar system interfere with each other and this interaction, called a resonance, changes planetary eccentricity, a measure of how close to circular their orbits are.”
“For the Earth it means periods of higher incoming solar radiation and warmer climate in cycles of 2.4 million years.”
The researchers found that the warmer cycles correlate with an increased occurrence of breaks in the deep-sea record, related to more vigorous deep ocean circulation.
They identified that deep eddies were an important component of earlier warming seas.
It is possible these could partly mitigate ocean stagnation some have predicted could follow a faltering AMOC (Atlantic meridional overturning circulation) that drives the Gulf Stream and maintains temperate climates in Europe.
“We know there are at least two separate mechanisms that contribute to the vigor of deep-water mixing in the oceans,” Professor Müller said.
“AMOC is one of them, but deep ocean eddies seem to play an important role in warm climates for keeping the ocean ventilated.”
“Of course, this would not have the same effect as AMOC in terms of transporting water masses from low to high latitudes and vice-versa.”
“These eddies are like giant whirlpools and often reach the abyssal seafloor, resulting in seafloor erosion and large sediment accumulations called contourites, akin to snowdrifts.”
“Our deep-sea data spanning 65 million years suggest that warmer oceans have more vigorous deep circulation,” Dr. Dutkiewicz said.
“This will potentially keep the ocean from becoming stagnant even if AMOC slows or stops altogether.”
The study was published in the journal Nature Communications.
A. Dutkiewicz et al. 2024. Deep-sea hiatus record reveals orbital pacing by 2.4 Myr eccentricity grand cycles. Nat Commun 15, 1998; doi: 10.1038/s41467-024-46171-5
Casually having a conversation with a robot butler might not be as far out as we thought.
Figure, an AI robotics company that’s attracted the financial backing of Microsoft and Nvidia, showed off why it deserves that investment money. In its latest demo, its Figure 01 is seen having a full-on conversation with another human, even completing tasks and requests.
The eerily conversational robot is a result of Figure’s robotic design and OpenAI’s intelligence on the backend. It may not be able to backflip off a skateboard, but the demo shows Figure 01 handing over an apple and putting away dishes. That’s not incredibly groundbreaking, but with how fast ChatGPT and other large language models are advancing, Figure 01 could see advancements quickly.
LAPPING THE COMPETITION
It’s impressive to see Figure 01 smoothly navigate anormal conversation with a human, all while responding to requests and handling simple tasks. Of course, putting away dishes isn’t the most complex task, but it’s a promising start considering how Figure 01 can already identify what’s in front of it and respond accordingly in real-time.
It’s a big difference compared to the demos we saw with Tesla’s Optimus bot. While Tesla has come out with a second-generation model already, Optimus has yet to show us the same fluidity and responsiveness we’re seeing with the Figure 01 demo.
Figure says the goal is to make a “fully electromechanical humanoid” robot to handle all the physical tasks that humans have to do. So far, the Figure 01 stands 5’6”, weighs more than 132 lbs, can handle payloads up to around 44 lbs, and tops out a brisk 1.2 m/s. Figure also says there’s a runtime of five hours, so it’s not quite meant to cater to your needs 24/7.
Figure debuted its 01 humanoid robot back in October.
FIGURE / X
NO RELEASE DATE YET
With Figure 01, it does feel like we’re inching towards a future of at-home robots. Still, we don’t have a release date for Figure’s robot yet, but the company’s founder and CEO Brett Adcock has already said that the company wants to produce its robots at “exceptionally high volume.”
Figure hasn’t detailed any prices for its robot yet, either, but Adcock expressed optimism for trying to bring the costs down to “affordable levels.” Considering how nascent this technology is, it’s tough to determine what’s affordable or not. For reference, Tesla’s CEO Elon Musk previously said that the Optimus robot is targeting a price of around $20,000.
Voyager 1 might be getting better after its recent bout of aphasia.
Since November, NASA’s Voyager 1 spacecraft has been speaking in electronic gibberish. NASA still hasn’t pinpointed the cause of the problem, but a likely culprit is a cosmic ray that corrupted a single bit of data in part of the spacecraft’s Flight Data System; specifically, the part that converts information about the spacecraft's status and data into binary code to send back to Earth. Instead of coherent lines of code, Voyager has been sending home random strings of 0s and 1s that don’t mean anything.
But over the last couple of weeks, Voyager 1’s issues seem to be improving. It’s putting its 0s and 1s together in patterns, not just random sequences. However, these patterns are more like baby babble than language.
“They're not exactly what we would expect, but they do look like something that can show us that the FDS is at least partially working.” Voyager program manager Suzanne Dodd tells Pasadena Star-News.
An artistic rendering of the interplanetary space probe Voyager II as it flies by Jupiter.
HISTORICAL/CORBIS HISTORICAL/GETTY IMAGES
Dodd recently told the press that it would take a miracle for Voyager 1 to pull through, but the hardy little spacecraft and its twin sister Voyager 2 have survived a lot over the 46 years of their joint mission. And their engineering teams have found creative ways to keep the aging sister spaceships flying — and most importantly, to keep them sending new data home. Inverse talked with a Voyager engineer about what the team has learned from those years of jury-rigging solutions and how it might help other missions.
“In the last decade, I have learned from Voyager that there is (almost) always a way around a problem, no matter how dire it is,” Voyager mission assurance manager Bruce Waggoner tells Inverse. “You just have to think ‘outside the box’ when people tell you not to do so.”
Voyager 1 and Voyager 2 are on different trajectories out of the Solar System.
The team of engineers running the twin Voyager spacecraft have had to get increasingly creative over the last 46 years, as aging parts and systems have started to develop glitches and the power supply has begun to dwindle. Most of the people who designed the Voyagers and worked on the spacecraft in the early years of their mission have long since retired (and several have died), and they would probably be surprised by the ways today’s Voyager team has kept the pair of space probes running.
“Recently, the team found a way to keep the instruments powered for an additional 2 to 4 years by operating the spacecraft with an unregulated voltage,” says Waggoner. “This is a first as far as I know: operating the power system in a completely different way than the designers intended.”
The Voyagers’ designers built a safety mechanism to protect the instruments from sudden changes in the flow of electricity. If that happens, a regulator allows the spacecraft to access a small reserve of power, which is supposed to help it ride out the voltage fluctuation. But recently, Voyager engineers decided that after 45 years of the electrical systems working smoothly, Voyager 2 needed the extra power more than it needed the safety feature — because the alternative was shutting off one of Voyager 2’s instruments. (Voyager 1 is already down an instrument due to a hardware failure earlier in the mission, but its payloads will eventually face the chopping block, too.)
That kind of off-script improvisation has been the Voyager team’s standard operating procedure for decades.
“I would say that 100 percent of it has been figured out along the way,” Dodd told Inverse last year. “Absolutely nothing was known about flying for 45 years at 175 AU from us here on Earth, and we're into our 46th year now.”
And it’s been mostly trial and error. When something goes wrong with one of the Mars rovers, for instance, engineers can try out their solutions on a testbed: a replica of the spacecraft here on Earth kept on hand for exactly that purpose. But there is no Voyager testbed.
The goal is for each spacecraft to reach 19 billion miles away from the Sun with at least one instrument still running and communicating with Earth. Waggoner says the team has a 120-page book of ideas on how to keep the aging Voyagers working. Along the way, they’ve learned some tricks that may help extend the lives of future space missions.
An artist's impression of the Voyager 1 space probe flying past Saturn in the outer solar system, circa 1980.
SPACE FRONTIERS/ARCHIVE PHOTOS/GETTY IMAGES
KEEP THE SPACECRAFT SIMPLE
“Hopefully, people will look back at the lessons of Voyager and apply them,” says Waggoner. I work on many missions, and I use ideas from Voyager all the time, especially to think outside the box.”
Another key lesson is that it’s easier for a space mission’s engineering team to be flexible if the spacecraft itself is simple, study, and has backups for most of its hardware. The Flight Data System that’s currently on the fritz, for example, is Voyager 1’s backup; it's original one failed in 1981, and without redundancy, scientists would have missed 33 years of exploring the outer fringes of our Solar System.
Compared with more recent spacecraft, the Voyagers’ hardware is pretty bare-bones, its software is programmed in languages most modern engineers don’t even learn, and it sports about 64 kilobytes of memory (about 240,000 times less than the smartphone you’re probably reading this article on). But as strange as it sounds, that antique simplicity is actually one of Voyager’s biggest assets because it makes troubleshooting easier.
“I like the simpler code on Voyager because people can understand what the system will do, in most cases without simulation,” says Waggoner. That especially helps when trying to fix a pair of spacecraft with no testbeds here on Earth “just by thinking through the problems,” as Waggoner puts it.
Dodd, speaking to Inverse last year, compares operating the Voyagers to repairing an older-model car, compared with a more modern version with more complex systems and electronics.
“The simplicity of Voyager helps if you want to change things over time as the spacecraft gets older and the mission lasts longer,” says Dodd. “It's kind of like having an old car, and you can look under the hood and know what the key pieces are. When you have a new car, it's all driven by software and it's really hard to just go in there and tweak the carburetor and have it still run.”
Waggoner has a story about that, too. The Voyagers’ thrusters, which keep the distant spacecraft’s antennas pointed toward Earth, are slowly clogging with silicon dioxide. Last summer, it looked like the clogged thrusters could doom the missions within the next couple of years.
“Again, the team found workarounds by changing the way the thrusters are fired and pointing is managed,” says [source]. “Once the worst [clogged] thrusters fail, there may even be a way to allow the spacecraft to roll and return data.”
Of course, for Voyager 1, that depends on whether the spacecraft ever learns to speak again.
During the summer of 1952, the United States was on high alert as UFO sightings over the nation’s capitalwere making frequent headlines. Buried amid the otherworldly clamor occupying the minds of Americans around that time, an obscure report conveyed that one of the objects—a small, glowing disc—was pursued and shot at by a military aircraft, blasting off a fragment that fell into a field near Washington D.C., which a naval officer later retrieved.
More than a decade later, an official government-funded scientific inquiry into UFOs—or what the United States government now calls unidentified anomalous phenomena (UAP)—would investigate the incident, ultimately determining claims involving the 1952 UFO incident were unlikely to be true.
Without question, the notion that a fragment might have been recovered after a shoot-out with a flying saucer in the 1950s offers a textbook example of what most would call a dubious claim. Yet a deeper look into this Cold War-era rumor reveals, surprisingly, that there could potentially be more to this odd story than past assessments would seem to indicate.
However, you would never have gleaned that from reading the latest report issued by the U.S. Defense Department’s official UAP investigative office.
Last week, the All-domain Anomaly Resolution Office (AARO) released a long-awaited historical report on its findings involving the United States government’s involvement with UAP and related programs since the end of World War II.
In the report, AARO investigators maintained the U.S. federal government’s longstanding position that it has never found any convincing evidence of extraterrestrial technologies operating near Earth, nor of any secret programs involving the acquisition or reverse engineering of crashed exotic technologies that have remained hidden from Congress.
The report was met with heavy criticism following its publication, partly due to a number of errors it was revealed to contain. Despite this, there were also a few intriguing inclusions made by AARO’s investigators, based on their relevance to the question of whether UAP materials have ever crashed on Earth and been studied.
One of these appears in a section of the AARO report that discusses the University of Colorado UFO Project, more commonly called the Condon Committee, a U.S. Air Force-funded evaluation of cases that were collected under its long-running Project Blue Book investigations that studied UFOs during the 1950s and 1960s.
According to AARO’s recent report, the Colorado scientific panel, led by American physicist Edward U. Condon, “investigated a claim made by radio broadcaster Frank Edwards in a 1966 book that a piece of a UFO was recovered near Washington, D.C. in the summer of 1952 during the spike in UFO sightings over the U.S. Capitol in July and August.”
The account in question appeared in Edward’s book Flying Saucers: Serious Business, of which AARO’s investigators recount that Edwards “claimed that a USN jet fired on a two-foot diameter glowing disc and dislodged a one-pound fragment that was recovered by a ground team.” At the time of their study, the Condon Committee’s investigators inquired about the incident with Project Blue Book, who told the University of Colorado team that they were unaware of the purported 1952 incident.
Above: Excerpt from Frank Edwards’ 1966 book, Flying Saucers: Serious Business, where the author discussed the alleged 1952 UFO incident.
“The USAF and USN found no incident report of weapons engagement with a UFO that summer, no USN aircraft were present, and the retired officer who was the original source of the claim had retired before the summer of 1952, when the event allegedly occurred,” the AARO report’s summary reads.
The report then attributes another claim to Edwards, this time involving fragments from a UFO that were loaned by the United States to the Canadian government. “It is not clear if this claim was linked to the alleged Washington, D.C. incident,” the AARO report’s authors state, adding that “The Condon panel determined that these claims most likely were false.”
The reason any connections between the 1952 UFO incident and Frank Edwards’ claims of a flying saucer fragment being loaned to the Canadian government remained unclear to AARO’s investigators is probably very simple. In likelihood, their investigation of these claims took them no further than the Condon Committee’s report (as evidenced by the relevant source citations found at the end of AARO’s document). Indeed, the two events are connected, as a deeper examination of the literature regarding this alleged 1952 incident readily reveals.
Additionally, much like other assertions that appeared in the recent AARO report, some of the facts about this case have been misrepresented. However, this may not be entirely the fault of AARO’s team in this instance; a closer look at this case also reveals how much of the confusion arises from the Condon Committee’s original investigation, and problems involving their main source for the claims.
THE CONDON COMMITTEE’S CONFUSION
In the late 1960s, under contract No. 44620-67-C-0035 with the United States Air Force, the University of Colorado conducted an extensive analysis of UAP incidents collected by Project Blue Book, which resulted in the publication of its findings in a lengthy report titled Scientific Study of Unidentified Flying Objects.
Despite the title of the Condon Committee’s report, many viewed it as being anything but a truly scientific evaluation of existing data on aerial mysteries. As British physicist Peter Sturrock later noted in his analysis of the Condon Committee’s findings, “most case studies were conducted by junior staff, the senior staff took little part, and the director took no part, in these investigations.” Additionally, after concerns were raised by some of the Committee’s members over apparent biases and other issues they identified with its leadership, several either resigned or were dismissed, resulting in the final report being partly assembled by staff who had only joined the project as it neared completion.
Above: Original title from John G. Fuller’s article, “Flying Saucer Fiasco,” published in Look Magazine, May 14, 1968
(Credit: CIA CREST/Public Domain/Fair Use).
The saga of the 1952 UFO shoot-down over Washington was addressed in a section of the Condon Committee’s final report titled “Parts of UFOs, or UFO Equipment,” where the Colorado team’s investigators wrote that “Representatives of Air Force Project Blue Book claimed no knowledge of the disc fragment discussed by Edwards, who claimed the successful search for this fragment was confirmed by Lt. Cdr. Frank Thompson of the U.S. Navy.”
“The fragment, said to have been dislodged by gunfire from a Navy jet, reportedly fell to the ground, where it was found, still glowing, an hour later by U.S. military ground search crews,” the Committee’s report states. “Reports of UFO events over Washington, D.C., in 1952 contain no reference to such a gunfire incident,” they add, though noting that had the fragment ever really existed “and was classified ‘Secret’ as was claimed, its existence and whereabouts would not necessarily be revealed to this project.”
On the outside chance that such an incident might have occurred, the Committee’s members reached out to U.S. Air Force headquarters for clarification. A response came from J.W. Clinton “by direction of the Chief of Information, Department of the Navy,” who indicated that a search of all Navy records revealed no documentation related to the purported incident, nor could they find any records involving the retrieval of fragments at any time that were believed to have come from a UFO.
That wasn’t the only damning revelation that came from a search of the Navy’s records. “Perhaps more significant, however, were the facts that Navy records of the year 1952 carried only one Frank Thompson, an individual who had retired from active duty several years before 1952 with the rank of lieutenant, not lieutenant commander,” the Condon Committee’s report states. In addition to this, the Committee’s investigators were told that it was unlikely that U.S. Navy aircraft would have participated in any shoot downs of objects over the nation’s capital, since in doing so they “would have been usurping an Air Force function if they had been present over Washington, D. C., as interceptors.”
“The incident is not beyond the realm of possibility,” Clinton nonetheless conceded to the Colorado team, though ultimately concluding that the incident was “very highly unlikely” given the jurisdictional issues limiting any Navy aircraft’s involvement.
Although Clinton had admitted that the incident reported by Edwards might at least have been possible, the fact that there had been no evidence of a “Frank Thompson” with the rank of lieutenant commander in active service at the time seemed to pour cold water on Edwards’ claims.
However, a closer look at Edwards’ sources for this account reveals something that may help to clarify the matter, since it turns out the name of the Lieutenant Commander in question was not “Frank Thompson” at all.
In the relevant chapter of Flying Saucers: Serious Business, Edwards states that one of his sources regarding the 1952 affair had been an earlier book from 1955 by Major Donald E. Keyhoe, titled The Flying Saucer Conspiracy. In Edwards’ book, he even provides the page number (272) for Keyhoe’s account of the incident, a review of which helps to shed some light on the situation.
“I also listed a recent report given me by Lieutenant Commander Frank Thomas,” Keyhoe wrote in his brief account of the 1952 incident, immediately revealing that the “Frank Thompson” Edwards had been referencing was, in fact, instead a Lieutenant Commander Frank Thomas.
Above: Excerpt from Donald Keyhoe’s 1955 book, later cited by Frank Edwards, where the actual name of Keyhoe’s source is shown as “Frank Thomas.” Edwards mistakenly wrote this individual’s name as “Frank Thompson” in his 1966 book.
“According to Thomas, a peculiar object had fallen near Washington during the mass saucer sightings in 1952,” Keyhoe writes. “Retrieved by a naval officer, it was later analyzed by the Bureau of Standards.”
Keyhoe goes on to describe the object, noting that “one side of it was flat with odd markings, as if it had been milled. During tests the unknown substance proved to be fire-resistant. But the analysis, Thomas said, had failed to determine whether it was an artificially constructed object or a fragment of some unknown type of meteorite.”
Keyhoe concluded the brief account by adding that “Afterward the object had been sent to W. B. Smith at Ottawa for further analysis by Project Magnet engineers.”
One must wonder whether the Condon Committee might have had better success locating the Lieutenant Commander in question if onlythey had asked the Navy to search for Frank Thomas, rather than Frank Thompson, as Edwards later mistakenly spelled the individual’s name.
However, further adding to the confusion is the fact that nowhere in the original account written by Keyhoe is it stated that the fragment was dislodged from the UAP during the purported 1952 incident by fire from an aircraft. In Keyhoe’s account, the author only conveys that “a peculiar object had fallen near Washington during the mass saucer sightings in 1952,” though adding that it was “Retrieved by a naval officer.”
Although Edwards initially only referred to a “military jet” in his retelling of the account in 1966, later in the same chapter he makes passing references to “the fragment collected by gunfire from that Navy jet.” It seems likely that Edwards had merely inferred that a Navy jet had been involved; confusion that may have stemmed from his misreading, again, of Keyhoe’s original account involving a “naval officer” who retrieved the fragment, as well as his primary source, a USN lieutenant commander.
Based on this, it would appear the insinuation that a Navy jet had been involved was another error made by Edwards, which ultimately the Condon Committee’s investigators relied on without attempting to validate the author’s sources. Add to this the fact that they had the wrong name of the alleged lieutenant commander they were looking for, and it becomes quite clear why the Navy was unable to corroborate any of the details in Edwards’ 1966 account.
THE WILBERT SMITH INTERVIEW
Although the recent AARO historical report only provides a cursory summary of the alleged 1952 incident based primarily on the Condon Committee’s findings (which, as demonstrated above, were doomed to fail from the outset based on inaccuracies in Frank Edwards’ account), there is still more to this bizarre story of alleged UAP debris. Much of this involves the Canadian engineer and UFO researcher Wilbert Smith, who eventually received the alleged flying saucer fragment according to Keyhoe’s original 1955 narrative.
A Canadian Department of Transport engineer, Smith ran Project Magnet, a UFO investigative effort that formally ran out of the Canadian government from December 1950 until mid-1954, although Smith’s informal studies involving UFOs continued for many years after the project ended.
“Smith assessed that UFOs were of extraterrestrial origin and that they flew by magnetism,” the recent AARO historical report states in a summary of Project Magnet that appears in a section addressing Foreign and Academic Investigatory Efforts. “Smith believed he was in personal contact with extraterrestrial beings through telepathy and ‘tensor beams’,” AARO’s investigators add, noting that in a 1961 interview Smith had “claimed that in 1952, the USAF lent him a piece of a UFO to study. He also claimed it was composed of magnesium orthosilicate.”
A rather revealing transcript of this interview with Smith appeared in Edwards’ 1966 book, based on a recording supplied to the author by Ohio-based researchers C.W. Fitch and George Popovitch, who conducted the 1961 interview. At one point while speaking with Smith, Fitch asked Smith about his association with the retired U.S. Navy Admiral Herbert B. Knowles, to whom Smith had reportedly shown the fragment of the saucer that the U.S. government had loaned him:
FITCH: You’re a friend of Admiral Knowles, Mr. Smith? [Rear Admiral H. B. Knowles, U.S. Navy, Retired.]
SMITH: Oh, yes. Admiral Knowles and I have been very good friends for many years.
FITCH: I have been told by a mutual friend that in 1952 you showed Admiral Knowles a piece of a flying saucer. Is that statement correct, sir?
SMITH: Yes. It is correct. I visited with Admiral Knowles and I had with me a piece which had been shot from a small flying saucer near Washington in July of that year—1952. I showed it to the Admiral. It was a piece of metal about twice the size of your thumb which had been loaned to me for a very short time by your Air Force.
FITCH: Is this the only piece you have handled which definitely had been part of a UFO, Mr. Smith?
SMITH: No. I’ve handled several of these pieces of hardware.
FITCH: In what way, if any, do they differ from materials with which we are familiar?
SMITH: As a general thing they differ only in that they are much harder than our materials.
FITCH: What about this particular piece from that UFO near Washington . . . did it differ from conventional materials? Was there anything unusual about it, sir?
SMITH: Well, the story behind it is this: The pilot was chasing a glowing disc about two feet in diameter—
FITCH: Pardon me, sir. But did you say two feet . . . ?
SMITH: That is correct. I was informed that the disc was glowing and was about two feet in diameter. A glowing chunk flew off and the pilot saw it glowing all the way to the ground. He radioed his report and a ground party hurried to the scene. The thing was still glowing when they found it an hour later. The entire piece weighed about a pound. The segment that was loaned to me was about one third of that. It had been sawed off.
FITCH: What did the analysis show?
SMITH: There was iron rust—the thing was in reality a matrix of magnesium orthosilicate. The matrix had great numbers—thousands—of I5-micron spheres scattered through it.
Fitch then questioned Smith about the whereabouts of the sample the U.S. Air Force had loaned him, to which he responded by providing the following very intriguing remarks:
FITCH: You say that you had to return it—did you return it to the Air Force, Mr. Smith?
SMITH: Not the Air Force. Much higher than that.
FITCH: The Central Intelligence Agency?
SMITH: [Chuckles] I’m sorry, gentlemen, but I don’t care to go beyond that point. I can say to you that it went to the hands of a highly classified group. You will have to solve that problem—their identity—for yourselves.
Smith’s insinuations about “a highly classified group” within the United States government that the alleged UFO fragment had been returned to is certainly intriguing, although for more reasons than merely those which are immediately obvious. Another has to do with a memorandum dated November 21, 1950, addressed to the Canadian Controller of Telecommunications, in which Smith discussed inquiries he made at the Canadian Embassy in Washington shortly after acquiring a copy of author Frank Scully’s book Behind the Flying Saucers, an early book on UFOs that recounted a dubious story involving the alleged crash of a flying saucer near Aztec, New Mexico (the incident was later deemed to have been a hoax).
Smith’s 1950 memo included a series of intriguing remarks that eventually became widely discussed in UFO circles, following the rediscovery of the memorandum in the Canadian National Archives decades later. Specifically, Smith stated that:
I made discreet enquiries [sic] through the Canadian Embassy staff in Washington who were able to obtain for me the following information:
The reference to Vannevar Bush in the 1950 memorandum is noteworthy, particularly because Bush’s name would later appear in an infamous series of documents sent to filmmaker Jaime Shandera in 1984, which consisted of briefing papers describing “Operation Majestic 12,” an alleged secret U.S. investigation into UFOs and extraterrestrials that began in the aftermath of the supposed crash said to have occurred at Roswell, New Mexico, in 1947. The Majestic 12 documents, as they have since become known, also later appeared in British researcher Timothy Good’s book Above Top Secret.
Despite a few intriguing references from over the years like the one in the Smith memorandum, no evidence verifying the existence of “Operation Majestic 12” has ever surfaced. The documents were deemed to be hoaxes in a series of separate investigations, including one conducted by the Federal Bureau of Investigation, which concluded the documents were “completely bogus.”
A page from the FBI’s copies of the alleged Majestic 12 documents, which they deemed to have been faked(Credit: FBI).
It is worth noting that in the recent AARO report’s summary of the Condon Committee’s findings regarding the alleged 1952 saucer fragment affair, the AARO authors state that Frank Edwards “claimed that Dr. Vannevar Bush, a prominent inventor, defense industry scientist, and founder of the National Science Foundation, led the effort to study the fragment.” The citation given for this in the AARO report, number 49, lists “The Condon Report” (Scientific Study of Unidentified Flying Objects) as the source for this, although a search of both the PDF linked to by the AARO report’s authors, as well as an online text version of the Condon Report, reveals no references to Vannevar Bush. This could represent another error on the part of AARO’s investigators, who may have mistakenly attributed Wilbert Smith’s alleged knowledge that a “concentrated effort is being made by a small group headed by Doctor Vannevar Bush,” as stated in the 1950 memorandum, with details in the Condon Committee’s final report.
THE LETTER FROM REAR ADMIRAL KNOWLES
There is a final addendum to the story of the 1952 Washington saucer fragment, which involves testimony from the man who was allegedly shown the sample of the object while it was in Smith’s possession. As conveyed earlier in the transcript of C.W. Fitch and George Popovitch’s interview with Wilbert Smith, the latter had confirmed his friendship with U.S. Navy Rear Admiral Herbert B. Knowles, an individual with whom Fitch also corresponded about the alleged 1952 UFO incident.
In the March 1986 edition of Just Cause, the newsletter of the FOIA activist group Citizens Against UFO Secrecy (CAUS), a letter provided to the editor, Barry Greenwood, from none other than C.W. Fitch lent additional corroboration to the story of the saucer sample Wilbert Smith claimed the U.S. Air Force had loaned him in the 1950s.
“We must thank long-time UFO investigator C. Wesley Fitch for the following information, which CAUS regards as of great historical interest to our subject,” an entry at the end of the newsletter stated. “Fitch is one of a shrinking group of researchers who knew many of the pioneers of UFOlogy. We regard ourselves as fortunate that he chose to give this impressive little tid-bit to us.”
The item in question had been a series of then-25-year-old correspondences shared with CAUS, revealing “that former Navy Rear Admiral Herbert B. Knowles was involved in the examination of fragments of a UFO shot at over Washington, D.C. in 1952.” As it turned out, in addition to recording the interview where Wilbert Smith acknowledged his friendship with Admiral Knowles, Fitch had also corresponded with Knowles about the saucer fragment Smith claimed to have shown him while on loan from the United States.
As explained in the CAUS newsletter, Fitch, a member of the National Investigations Committee on Aerial Phenomena (NICAP) had been told by one of the organization’s board members, the Reverend Albert Baller, about a visit he received from Admiral Knowles (also a board member of NICAP at the time) during which the two men discussed UFOs. Throughout their discussion at Baller’s home, Knowles recounted how he was allowed to examine the purported UFO fragment in Smith’s possession, which he said had been shot off a small glowing disk in 1952.
Fitch managed to track down Admiral Knowles, who at the time (1961) had been living in Eliot, Maine, and wrote to him asking for confirmation as to whether he had indeed examined the alleged saucer fragment. In a response dated August 27, 1961, Knowles wrote back to Fitch, divulging the following intriguing account of his recollections about the visit with Smith:
Yes, I have had a piece of a small disc in my hands. It was shown me by Mr. Wilbert Smith (address given- Ed.). At that time (1952), Mr. Smith was heading the “Flying Saucer” research of the Canadian government and working in very close cooperation with our authorities in Washington, D.C. He is still very much interested in this matter and does independent research. The Canadian Govt. has “officially” abandoned the project.
To the best of my recollection the object was shot down by a plane and seen to fall in the yard of a farmer across the river in Virginia. Upon searching the area several pieces were found, one of which was turned over to Mr . Smith for independent research. In one of his trips down to see me he brought the piece along for my inspection.
It was a chunk of amorphous metal-like structure, brownish in color where broken, with a curved edge indicating the whole thing to have been not over 2′ in diam. The edge was rounded in cross section, perhaps a quarter inch thick and obviously swelled to a considerably greater thickness at the center. The outer surface was smooth but not polished, and at the broken sections there were obviously iron particles and even evidence of iron rust. I would say that the weight was somewhat lighter than if of solid iron, but it was not extremely light.
Mr. Smith told me that a chemical test had been made of the piece at hand, that iron had been found in it but little if anything else could be identified.
Concluding his account, the retired Admiral then asserted his belief that the fragment he examined had belonged to a “remotely-controlled observation disc,” the likes of which have been “seen many times, most often in the vicinity of defense installations.”
A follow-up letter from Knowles, dated October 11, 1961, included a sketch of the alleged UFO fragment, a version of which was redrawn and included in the CAUS newsletter based on faded originals provided to Fitch (see below).
Above: Reconstructed drawing which appeared in the March 1986 CAUS newsletter (Credit: Barry Greenwood/Fair Use).
CONCLUSIONS
As a deeper analysis into this alleged 1952 incident has revealed, the DoD’s recent investigations into the matter amounted to little more than a rehashing of the flawed conclusions of the Condon Committee from decades ago, whose investigators, as we have now seen, relied on incorrect data provided in a popular book on UFOs from the 1960s as the basis for their investigations.
Thus, to briefly summarize:
AARO’s recent historical report features a short entry on the University of Colorado UFO Project (i.e., the Condon Committee) and its findings, including its investigation into claims made in a 1966 book by Frank Edwards involving a fragment allegedly shot off a UFO by a U.S. Navy aircraft near Washington, D.C., in 1952.
While the Condon Committee determined the incident had likely never occurred, the information used as the basis for its investigations had been incorrect details from Edwards’ book, resulting from his probable misreading of information in an earlier 1955 book by author Donald Keyhoe. The Condon Committee’s investigators seemingly did not scrutinize this information before providing it to the U.S. Navy, which, understandably, was unable to verify the erroneous claims.
AARO’s report attributes unverified claims involving American defense industry scientist Dr. Vannevar Bush to statements from Frank Edwards in 1966, although his book published that year makes no references to Bush, nor does the Condon Committee’s final report, which AARO cites as its source for this assertion in its recent report. It seems likely that a possible origin for the claims involving Bush may have been a 1950 memorandum attributed to Wilbert Smith, who was allegedly loaned a portion of the UFO fragment by the U.S. Air Force two years later.
A recording of a 1961 interview the Ohio-based researcher C.W. Fitch conducted with Smith, partially transcribed in Edwards’ 1966 book, details Smith’s recollections about the purported UFO fragment he was loaned and insinuated that it was returned to a “highly classified group” within the United States government. Additional correspondences between Fitch and Rear Admiral Herbert B. Knowles from 1961, and later supplied to the activist organization CAUS, confirmed that Knowles had been shown the object during a meeting with Smith in 1952, corroborating Smith’s claims of having once had the fragment in his possession.
If the AARO report had indeed conducted an “exhaustive analysis” of U.S. government records associated with UAP, one would expect they would have also easily spotted errors in the publicly accessible resources like the Condon Committee report, as well as Frank Edwards’ 1966 account involving the alleged UFO fragment from 1952.
Instead, as indicated by AARO’s contention that “it is not clear” whether the alleged 1952 incident had been associated with claims that the Canadian government was loaned a sample from a UFO, it is hard to see past the fact that the AARO’s investigators performed little more than a cursory examination of the 1952 UFO case… just like the Condon Committee had done decades ago. Thus, one wonders: what else might they have overlooked?
This all may seem inconsequential to some, especially since the present analysis alone cannot “prove” that a fragment was indeed blasted off a small, drone-like UFO near Washington in 1952. However, what this analysis does help to illustrate, taken alongside the numerous other factual errors within AARO’s recent report, is that questions regarding the merit of AARO’s broader historical investigations are indeed warranted. It is also not impossible that, if such problems as those addressed here were taken into further consideration by AARO in advance of the publication of Volume II of its historical report, perhaps they may be better equipped to satisfactorily resolve some of these lingering questions.
Altogether, maybe these decades-old claims about a fragment shot off of a flying saucer, which past studies (and more recent ones) have claimed “were most likely false,” should warrant further attention after all.
And if nothing else, perhaps, given such considerations, we can better understand why many Americans remain skeptical about their government’s latest proclamations regarding the long-reviled subject of UFOs.
Watch this amazing raw footage of a UFO creating another UFO over a river in Wyoming last week. The orange craft has the shape of a classic disk with a hump on its top center area. The craft has a glow around it and a rhythmic pattern of moving forward and back that is perfectly timed. Very unusual and looks 100% alien. With aliens coming closer and closer and the publics evidence getting more and more clear, more and more indisputable...it wont be long before the world all agrees on one thing...that intelligent aliens exist.
The Pentagon Introduces a New Surveillance System for UFO Investigations
The Pentagon Introduces a New Surveillance System for UFO Investigations
In a groundbreaking development, the Pentagon has announced the deployment of a sophisticated surveillance system specifically designed to monitor and investigate reports of Unidentified Flying Objects (UFOs). This new initiative, known as the “gremlin system,” marks a significant step forward in the way the military approaches the phenomenon of unidentified objects.
Overview of the Gremlin System
The gremlin system is described as a deployable surveillance tool equipped with a suite of configurable sensors. These sensors can be quickly dispatched in response to UFO sightings, capturing detailed information about the encountered objects. Whether the sightings occur in the air, outer space, or underwater, the gremlin system’s versatility allows it to gather critical data from virtually any environment.
The technology behind the gremlin system is encapsulated in Pelican cases, making it not only highly portable but also ready for rapid deployment. This ensures that whenever reports of unidentified objects emerge, the system can be swiftly sent to the location to begin the investigative process.
Pentagon’s Commitment to Transparency
Despite past controversies surrounding the Pentagon’s handling of UFO information, this new development indicates a shift towards greater openness and diligence in investigating such reports. The introduction of the gremlin system is part of a broader effort to address the public’s curiosity and concerns about unidentified aerial phenomena with a more structured and scientific approach.
The system’s deployment underscores the Pentagon’s acknowledgment of the importance of thoroughly investigating reports of unidentified objects. By leveraging advanced technology, the military aims to demystify sightings and provide clear explanations for what are often perceived as mysterious occurrences.
Skepticism and Ongoing Debate
While the Pentagon’s report and the unveiling of the gremlin system suggest there is no concrete evidence of extraterrestrial life, the topic remains a hotbed of speculation and debate. Journalists and researchers who have dedicated their careers to studying UFO phenomena are skeptical of official denials of secret programs or encounters with alien life.
This skepticism is fueled by insider accounts and whistleblowers who challenge the official narrative, suggesting that there might be more to the story than what is publicly acknowledged. The debate continues, with many urging for more in-depth investigations and transparency from the government.
The Future of UFO Investigations
With the gremlin system now in play, the Pentagon has reaffirmed its commitment to investigating every report of unidentified flying objects. This commitment is critical, as the military receives over a hundred cases every month from various sources, including military branches and civilians.
VIDEO:
Pentagon has new surveillance system for UFO reports | NewsNation Now
The ongoing investigations, bolstered by the new technology, aim to shed light on the nature of these sightings, ensuring that the public receives accurate and comprehensive information. As the debate around UFOs persists, the gremlin system represents a crucial tool in the quest for clarity and understanding of these mysterious occurrences.
In conclusion, the Pentagon’s introduction of the gremlin system for UFO reports is a significant milestone in the ongoing investigation of unidentified aerial phenomena. By employing advanced surveillance technology, the military seeks to approach the subject with renewed rigor and transparency, hoping to demystify the sightings that have captivated public interest for decades.
A historical report issued by the Pentagon’s office tasked with the investigation of unidentified anomalous phenomena (UAP), commonly referred to as UFOs, says it found no evidence that sightings of mysterious aerial objects represent extraterrestrial technology, or that secret programs related to the recovery of crashed exotic vehicles have been hidden from Congress.
Released on Friday, the report is the first installment in a two-volume series produced by the Defense Department’s All-domain Anomaly Resolution Office (AARO) and explores the history of the U.S. government’s involvement in investigations of UAP under a requirement established in the fiscal year (FY) 2023 National Defense Authorization Act (NDAA).
“To date, AARO has not discovered any empirical evidence that any sighting of a UAP represented off-world technology or the existence a classified program that had not been properly reported to Congress,” the report said.
Citing investigations that revealed most sightings to result from the “misidentification of ordinary objects and phenomena,” the report acknowledged that “many UAP reports remain unsolved,” though adding that better data could lead to the resolution of some of the currently unresolved cases.
In advance of the report’s release, Tim Phillips, acting director of AARO on assignment from the Office of the Director of National Intelligence (ODNI), provided a briefing to a limited number of reporters on Wednesday, where he discussed the new report and revealed details about a new system called “Gremlin” designed to acquire real-time data on UAP. The Debrief did not participate in Wednesday’s media briefing.
Following the release of the report, Department of Defense spokesperson Sue Gough said in an email to The Debrief that “AARO reviewed all official USG investigatory efforts since 1945, researched classified and unclassified archives, conducted dozens of interviews and site visits, and partnered with the Intelligence Community and DoD officials responsible for special access program oversight.”
“AARO created a secure process in partnership with the highest-level security officials within the DoD, IC, and other organizations to research and investigate these claims,” Gough said. “AARO was granted full, unrestricted access by all organizations.”
Major Jesse Marcel poses with mysterious wreckage associated with the purported crash of a flying saucer near Roswell, New Mexico, in 1947. AARO’s recent historical report says the incident involved a once-secret U.S. covert operation called Project Mogul, as determined by the USAF in the 1990s
(Public Domain).
Although there were notable exceptions, most media coverage of the new AARO report focused almost entirely on the lack of evidence linking UAP sightings to extraterrestrial technologies, as well as the absence of classified programs involved in the recovery of crashed vehicles of non-human origin.
Also commanding media attention had been revelations involving the existence of a proposed program pitched to the Department of Homeland Security in the 2010s under the codename “Kona Blue,” which involved a prospective reverse engineering program for any extraterrestrial technologies acquired by the U.S. government.
According to the AARO report, Kona Blue had been proposed by former members of a DIA program called the Advanced Aerospace Weapons Systems Application Program (AAWSAP), whose personnel are identified in the report as some of the main proponents behind ongoing assertions involving secret U.S. government UAP programs.
The report says that AARO investigators found no evidence that extraterrestrial craft or their occupants had ever been acquired by the U.S. military and that Kona Blue was ultimately rejected by DHS leadership due to a lack of merit.
Friday’s report was met with significant criticism online following its release, with many arguing that its findings were invalid, while others expressed skepticism over its assertions that no evidence of cover-ups involving crashed UAP retrieval programs had been found.
The report’s findings appear to run in stark contrast to whistleblower allegations that first received widespread public attention last June, involving an official complaint filed with the Intelligence Community Inspector General by David Grusch, a former U.S. intelligence officer whose duties included participation in the U.S. government’s investigations into UAP in recent years.
In January, Inspector General of the Intelligence Community Thomas Monheim spoke with members of the House Oversight and Accountability Committee during a classified briefing on UAP, with some who attended claiming it left them with more questions than answers regarding ongoing claims of secret programs and exotic technologies.
Following the release of AARO’s report on Friday, amidst all the attention surrounding what AARO investigators did or did not find, and programs that were proposed but never came to fruition, few mainstream outlets discussed the numerous intriguing allusions to legitimate advanced capabilities the U.S. possesses that are peppered throughout the report—many of which, in likelihood, actually have contributed to UAP sightings over the years.
These seemingly went unnoticed, as well as several factual errors that appear throughout the new report that, for some, potentially undermine the level of rigor AARO appears to have applied in its investigations.
FACT-CHECKING AARO’S HISTORICAL REPORT
Among the many mistakes that appear in the new report, one of the most glaring appears in references to the late Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid and his involvement in helping acquire funding for a controversial UAP investigative effort run out of the Defense Intelligence Agency in the early 2000s. The report refers to the Democrat Senator’s home state as being New Mexico, whereas Reid was a U.S. Senator from Nevada.
In another instance, a famous sighting reported by pilot Kenneth Arnold near Mount Rainer, Washington in the summer of 1947 is described as having taken place on “June 23,” one day earlier than Arnold’s sighting occurred.
The report similarly claims Arnold described the objects he observed as being “saucer-like aircraft”, although this now-famous characterization was only later applied by members of the media who, at the time, were referencing Arnold’s description of their movement resembling “saucers” skipping across water.
In yet another example, the AARO report repeatedly refers to a statistical analysis of sightings collected by the U.S. Air Force’s Project Blue Book conducted by the Battelle Memorial Institute as “Project BEAR,” which had, in fact, only been a nickname given to the program by Blue Book’s original director, Edward J. Ruppelt. The project’s actual name—one that has now been known publicly for decades—was Project STORK.
“The name Project BEAR was an intentionally false name made by Edward Ruppelt,” wrote Robert Powell, an Executive Board Member with the Scientific Coalition for UAP Studies, in a posting on X, “so as not to reveal the true name of the project.”
Powell also noted that the recent AARO report seemingly misstated the date of the Battelle project as having been issued in late 1954, whereas the date on the folder in the Air Force’s Project Blue Book files indicates a date of May 5, 1955.
Beyond mere problems with dates, AARO’s report makes further assertions that Battelle’s study, the results of which were published in a report titled Project Blue Book Special Report #14, “concluded that all cases that had enough data were resolved and readily explainable.” Quite the contrary, the study actually found that among the UFO sightings categorized within a reliability group of reports deemed “Excellent,” only 4.2% had “insufficient info,” whereas 33.3% of these cases remained “Unknown.”
In a posting on X, Marik von Rennenkampf, an analyst who worked with the U.S. Department of State’s Bureau of International Security and Nonproliferation, called the error “Blatantly, demonstrably false.”
INTRIGUING ACCOUNTS AND UNSOLVED CASES
Despite the number of factual errors that appear throughout the final AARO report, there are nonetheless a handful of intriguing references in it that appear to describe advanced U.S. technologies, although again, few of these have received significant attention in mainstream coverage.
In one example, which describes an individual’s account provided during an interview with AARO investigators, the report states that “AARO was able to correlate this account with an authentic USG program because the interviewee was able to provide a relatively precise time and location of the sighting which they observed exhibiting strange characteristics.”
Test flight during the 1970s of Lockheed’s then-secret Have Blue, the code name for its stealth fighter
(Public Domain).
AARO concluded the technology mistaken for being an exotic UAP technology by the unnamed witness correlated with DoD tests “of a platform protected by a [Special Access Program]” occurring at roughly the same time. “The seemingly strange characteristics reported by the interviewee match closely with the platform’s characteristics,” the AARO report’s authors state, “which was being tested at a military facility in the time frame the interviewee was there.”
“This program is not related in any way to the exploitation of off-world technology,” the report’s authors emphasize, offering no further details on the technology that is believed to have been mistaken for a test involving an exotic craft.
The report’s authors later add that “All the programs assessed to be authentic were or—if still active—continue to be, appropriately reported to either or both the congressional defense and intelligence committees.”
In another instance, material believed to have been retrieved from a UAP was subjected to analysis by the U.S. Army, with subsequent analysis conducted by AARO and “a leading science laboratory,” concluding that “the material is a metallic alloy, terrestrial in nature, and possibly of USAF origin, based on its materials characterization.”
Although most of AARO’s reported findings dismissed any verifiable connections to exotic craft or genuine unexplained phenomena, linking them instead to known U.S. government programs, there are a handful of incidents AARO said it was still investigating, which included a series of widely discussed UAP events that occurred at U.S. strategic sites during the 1960s and 1970s.
“AARO is researching U.S. and adversarial activity related to these events,” the report states, “including any U.S. programs that tested defensive ballistic missile capabilities.”
The report also maintains AARO’s past positions regarding the likelihood that prosaic explanations exist for the majority of UAP sightings, although its authors nonetheless acknowledge that there are still some cases the Pentagon’s UAP investigative office has been unable to solve.
“A small percentage of cases have potentially anomalous characteristics or concerning characteristics,” the report’s authors write. “AARO has kept Congress fully and currently informed of its findings. AARO’s research continues on these cases.”
Historic image of an A-12 test flight at Area 51 in 1962
(Public Domain).
QUESTIONS OF ACCESS AND ONGOING PROBLEMS
Last April, during a Senate Subcommittee on Emerging Threats and Capabilities hearing led by U.S. Senator Kirsten Gillibrand, Dr. Sean Kirkpatrick, then-Director of AARO, agreed when asked about AARO’s Title 50 accessibility by Senator Gillibrand that “having additional authorities for collection, tasking, counterintelligence… those are all things that would be helpful, yes.”
In the U.S., most activities conducted by the Intelligence Community, including covert action missions, foreign espionage, and other activities best suited for combating unconventional external threats, operate under what is known as Title 50 authority.
Although Dr. Kirkpatrick emphasized having “good relations” with other agencies during last April’s hearing, his statements gave the distinct impression that AARO had been operating solely under Title 10 authority for the duration of its mission at that time, which would seemingly place limitations on its ability to acquire information related to the Intelligence Community’s involvement with UAP investigations, including but not limited to exchanges of data and tasking collection assets.
Responding to questions from The Debrief, Pentagon spokesperson Susan Gough clarified that AARO does have access to U.S. intelligence information that falls under Title 50 authority.
“There is no impediment to AARO receiving all UAP-related information, past or present, regardless of level or origin of classification,” Gough told The Debrief. “By law, AARO may receive all UAP-related information, at all levels of classification, regardless of whether the original classification authority for such information is within DoD or the Intelligence Community.”
Although AARO does appear to have access to all the intelligence on UAP that it required, contrary to what was conveyed during last April’s Senate hearing, the Pentagon nonetheless continues to face challenges in its collection and management of information about UAP.
Earlier this year, an unclassified summary of a DoD Inspector General report evaluating the Pentagon’s activities related to UAP was released, which argued that the DoD lacks any comprehensive, coordinated means by which it can currently address UAP. The report further argued that the DoD’s apparent lack of coordination on the UAP issue could pose a threat to U.S. military forces and, more broadly, to national security.
“We determined that the DoD has no overarching UAP policy,” a portion of the DoD Inspector General report read, “and, as a result, it lacks assurance that national security and flight safety threats to the United States from UAP have been identified and mitigated.”
In a statement on Friday following the new AARO historical report’s release, Pentagon Press Secretary Major General Pat Ryder said the second volume of AARO’s historical review will be forthcoming later this year.
“AARO will publish a second volume that will provide analysis of information acquired by AARO after Nov. 1, 2023, including information received via interviews with current and former U.S. government personnel who contacted AARO via the secure reporting mechanism on AARO’s website,” Ryder said.
“Analyzing and understanding the historical record on UAP is an ongoing collaborative effort involving many departments and agencies, and the department thanks the contributing departments and agencies, as well as the interviewees who came forward with information,” Ryder added.
A long-awaited Pentagon report says there is "no verifiable evidence" of the U.S. government encountering or concealing evidence of alien life.
The Pentagon, Washington DC, USA.
(Image credit: Glowimages via Getty Images)
The U.S. government is not hiding aliens or their spaceships — although it did once propose a program to reverse-engineer any hypothetical alien technology it found, a Department of Defense (DOD) report reveals.
The Pentagon report, a highly anticipated review of classified documents from 1945 to 2023 that was submitted to Congress Friday (March 8), found no evidence that the U.S. government has encountered aliens or covered up their existence.
Instead, the report blames UFO sightings in the 1960s on top-secret flights of prototype American spy planes and spacecraft. And while the U.S. government did consider a program to reverse-engineer any captured alien ships in the 2010s, no craft were ever found and the proposal was rejected for "lacking merit," according to the report.
There is "no verifiable evidence for claims that the U.S. government and private companies have access to or have been reverse-engineering extraterrestrial technology," Maj. Gen. Pat Ryder, the Pentagon press secretary, said in a statement after the report's release. The report also found "no evidence that any U.S. government investigation, academic-sponsored research, or official review panel has confirmed that any sighting of a UAP [unidentified aerial phenomenon] represented extraterrestrial technology."
"All investigative efforts, at all levels of classification, concluded that most sightings were ordinary objects and phenomena and the result of misidentification," Ryder added.
The 63-page review was made by the Pentagon's All-domain Anomaly Resolution Office (AARO), which was established in 2022 to investigate and manage reports of UFO sightings from the U.S. Army, Navy and Air Force. The review included classified and unclassified archical evidence, full access to all secretive government programs related to UFOs, and 30 interviews with intelligence personnel.
The U.S. government's renewed interest in UFOs came after a 2017 leak of three now-infamous video clips that appeared to show mysterious, wingless aircraft flying at hypersonic speeds past dumbfounded U.S. Navy pilots. In 2020, the U.S. Senate Select Committee on Intelligence called for an inquiry into UFOs, and in June 2021, the Pentagon released a report on more than 140 UFO sightings by Navy pilots. That report concluded there was no evidence of alien activity in any of the instances.
Despite those findings, the government's interest in UFOs drove news outlets and social media sites into frenzies of speculation. The conspiracy theories reached their apex when, in July 2023, David Grusch, a former U.S. intelligence official and whistleblower, claimed that the government had been secretly investigating crashed UFOs. In his congressional hearing, Grusch told the House Committee on Oversight and Reform that not only had spaceships been recovered but that "nonhuman" beings had been found inside.
Despite bluntly contradicting many of Grusch's claims, the report does mention a brief period when the Pentagon considered a program to reverse-engineer alien technology. Called Kona Blue, it was proposed to the Department of Homeland Security (DHS) by individuals who suspected the U.S. government was hiding crashed UFOs.
"This proposal gained some initial traction at DHS to the point where a 35 Prospective Special Access Program (PSAP) was officially requested to stand up this program, but it was eventually rejected by DHS leadership for lacking merit," the report said. "It is critical to note that no extraterrestrial craft or bodies were ever collected — this material was only assumed to exist by Kona Blue advocates and its anticipated contract performers."
The AARO said that later this year it will publish a second volume of the report covering sightings made between November 2023 and April 2024. The office also announced that the DOD is working on a portable sensor kit called the "Gremlin system" to investigate UFO sightings as they occur.
NASA Scientists Unveil Design for Europa Clipper’s ‘Golden Record’
NASA Scientists Unveil Design for Europa Clipper’s ‘Golden Record’
NASA’s Europa Clipper spacecraftwill carry a triangular metal plate with a special message when it launches in October 2024 and heads toward Jupiter’s moon Europa.
This side of a commemorative plate mounted on NASA’s Europa Clipper spacecraft features U.S. Poet Laureate Ada Limón’s handwritten In Praise of Mystery: A Poem for Europa.
Image credit: NASA / JPL-Caltech.
Made of the metal tantalum and about 18 by 28 cm (7 by 11 inches), Europa Clipper’s metal plate features graphic elements on both sides.
At its heart is an engraving of U.S. Poet Laureate Ada Limón’s handwritten In Praise of Mystery: A Poem for Europa, along with a silicon microchip stenciled with more than 2.6 million names submitted by the public.
The microchip will be the centerpiece of an illustration of a bottle amid the Jovian system — a reference to NASA’s Message in a Bottle campaign.
The outward-facing panel features art that highlights Earth’s connection to Europa.
Linguists collected recordings of the word ‘water’ spoken in 103 languages, from families of languages around the world.
The audio files were converted into waveforms (visual representations of sound waves) and etched into the plate.
The waveforms radiate out from a symbol representing the American Sign Language sign for ‘water.’
In the spirit of the Voyager spacecraft’s Golden Record, which carries sounds and images to convey the richness and diversity of life on Earth, the layered message on Europa Clipper aims to spark the imagination and offer a unifying vision.
“The content and design of Europa Clipper’s vault plate are swimming with meaning,” said Dr. Lori Glaze, director of the Planetary Science Division at NASA Headquarters.
“The plate combines the best humanity has to offer across the Universe — science, technology, education, art, and math.”
“The message of connection through water, essential for all forms of life as we know it, perfectly illustrates Earth’s tie to this mysterious ocean world we are setting out to explore.”
In 2030, after a 2.6-billion-km (1.6-billion-mile) journey, Europa Clipper will begin orbiting Jupiter, making 49 close flybys of Europa.
To determine if there are conditions that could support life, the spacecraft’s powerful suite of science instruments will gather data about the moon’s subsurface ocean, icy crust, thin atmosphere, and space environment.
The electronics for those instruments are housed in a massive metal vault designed to protect them from Jupiter’s punishing radiation. The commemorative plate will seal an opening in the vault.
Because searching for habitable conditions is central to the mission, the Drake Equation is etched onto the plate as well — on the inward-facing side.
Astronomer Frank Drake developed the mathematical formulation in 1961 to estimate the possibility of finding advanced civilizations beyond Earth.
The equation has inspired and guided research in astrobiology and related fields ever since.
In addition, artwork on the inward-facing side of the plate will include a reference to the radio frequencies considered plausible for interstellar communication, symbolizing how humanity uses this radio band to listen for messages from the cosmos.
These particular frequencies match the radio waves emitted in space by the components of water and are known by astronomers as the ‘water hole.’ On the plate, they are depicted as radio emission lines.
Finally, the plate includes a portrait of one of the founders of planetary science, Ron Greeley, whose early efforts to develop a Europa mission two decades ago laid the foundation for Europa Clipper.
“We’ve packed a lot of thought and inspiration into this plate design, as we have into this mission itself,” said Europa Clipper project scientist Robert Pappalardo, a researcher at NASA’s Jet Propulsion Laboratory.
“It’s been a decades-long journey, and we can’t wait to see what Europa Clipper shows us at this water world.”
The European Space Agency (ESA)’s next generation heavy lift rocket is just months away from its first flight, and its major components are now being assembled for launch at the Vehicle Assembly Building in Kourou, French Guiana.
The new rocket is Europe’s upgrade to the retired Ariane 5, which flew for the last time in 2023. With a large payload fairing and lift capacity, Ariane 6 will be able to carry seriously heavy satellites (or multiple smaller ones). The heavy lift capability of the Ariane 6 is achieved using Hydrolox engines on both the first and second stages, assisted by up to four solid rocket boosters, enabling it to bring up to 11,000kg to geostationary transfer orbit.
The Ariane 6’s upper stage features the capability to relight its engine multiple times, giving it plenty of flexibility in the types of missions it can carry out, and improving the precision of the orbits it can reach. That makes it useful for both interplanetary missions and for unique orbital requirements around Earth.
Part of the first Ariane 6 rocket inside the Vehicle Assembly Building, Kourou, French Guiana. Credit: ESA/CNES/Arianespace/Arianegroup.
What it won’t be is reusable.
Ariane 6 is an expendable rocket, bringing critics to wonder if it can keep up with notable competitors pursuing reusability like SpaceX. But Ariane 6 has different capabilities and caters to different launch parameters than SpaceX, giving it a market share that the Falcon Heavy isn’t tuned for. Perhaps more importantly, independent access to space is a priority for Europe, making Ariane 6 a strategic imperative as much as a technological or competitive advancement. Still, Ariane 6 may not remain ESA’s workhorse rocket long-term – they are already investigating reusable alternatives that should come onto the scene in the 2030s.
The rocket stages themselves aren’t the only place where ESA can make eco-and-budget-friendly innovations, and some changes are happening now. The support and logistics infrastructure for the Ariane 6, for example, includes shipping the rocket stages aboard the Canopée, a wind-assisted hybrid cargo ship that can cut emissions by more than 20% – up to 30% depending on its speed – compared to a conventionally powered ship.
the Canopée, arriving in French Guiana in February, carrying the first Ariane 6 rocket for launch later this summer. 7Credit: ESA/CNES/Arianespace/Arianegroup/Optique Vidéo du CSG – S. Martin.
The Canopée delivered the first Ariane 6 to Kourou last month, arriving at port after a 10-day, 7,000km journey from mainland Europe in February.
The rocket now being prepared for flight within the vehicle assembly building will go vertical on the pad in the coming months.
Ariane 6’s first flight is set for no earlier than June 15. It will carry out a rideshare mission bringing multiple small spacecraft into orbit.
After that, the vehicle will have a steady launch cadence, with a series of flights scheduled for 2025 to carry upgraded satellites for Europe’s Galileo constellation (an independent GPS system). There are also plans to launch several deep space missions in the next few years, including ESA’s exoplanet hunting telescope PLATO, components of the Mars Sample Return infrastructure, and ESA’s Comet Interceptor mission.
Satellite Measurements Show That Global Carbon Emissions are Still Rising
According to the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC) Sixth Assessment Report (AR6), human activities have significantly impacted the planet. As global greenhouse gas emissions (mainly carbon dioxide) have continued to increase, so too have global temperatures – with severe ecological consequences. Between 2011 and 2020, global surface temperatures rose by an estimated 1.07 °C (2.01 °F) above the average in 1850–1900. At this rate, temperatures could further increase by 1.5 to 2 °C (2.7 to 3.6 °F) in the coming decades, depending on whether we can achieve net zero by 2050.
Unfortunately, the data for the past year is not encouraging. According to the 2023 Global Carbon Budget (GCB), an annual assessment of Earth’s carbon cycle, emissions in 2023 continued to rise by 1.1 percent compared to the previous year. This placed the total fossil fuel emissions from anthropogenic sources at 36.8 billion metric tons (over 40 US tons) of carbon dioxide, with an additional 4.1 billion metric tons (4.5 US tons) added by deforestation, extreme wildfires, and other sources. This trend indicates we are moving away from our goals and that things will get worse before they get better!
Carbon budgets are essential for assessing humanity’s impact on the planet and implementing mitigation strategies. The budget quantifies how much carbon was added to the atmosphere from fossil fuel use, land-use change, and other factors relative to how much carbon was removed by the planet’s carbon cycle. This refers to how our planet and its ecosystems recycle carbon, which keeps carbon dioxide levels in our atmosphere within certain parameters and ensures temperatures remain stable over time.
Carbon dioxide in Earth’s atmosphere if half of global-warming emissions are not absorbed. Credit: NASA/JPL/GSFC
For eons, this balance was maintained by photosynthetic plants, organisms, and Earth’s oceans, which absorbed CO2 from the atmosphere. Meanwhile, geological forces (i.e., mantle convection) sequestered it in the Earth’s crust as carbonate rocks. Since the Industrial Revolution, fossil fuel consumption has sharply increased, which has become exponentially worse since the mid-20th century. In addition, the growth of global populations since the 19th century has also seen a commensurate increase in land clearance and ecological destruction.
In short, emissions increased rapidly while Earth’s natural sequestration mechanisms were simultaneously being disrupted. The Global Carbon Budget was established to analyze these trends and prepare reports that inform organizations and help guide climate policy development. This year’s report relied on several data sources, the most notable of which were inventories of emissions collected by governments and energy agencies. Satellite data was provided by NASA’s Orbiting Carbon Observatory-2 (OCO-2) instrument to estimate the flux of carbon between the land and atmosphere.
CO2 concentrations have increased from 278 parts per million (ppm) in 1750 to 420 ppm in 2023. In addition to carbon emissions from transportation, power generation, and manufacturing, major contributors this year included the extreme wildfire season in Canada. The data also indicates that the average global surface temperature in 2023 was 1.2 °C (2.1 °F) warmer than the average for NASA’s baseline period (1951-1980), making it the hottest year on record. This is part of a trend where the past ten years (2014-2023) were either the hottest year on record or tied with another year during that same period.
Based on climate modeling and data from the Goddard Earth Observing System (GEOS), researchers at NASA also create visualizations that illustrate how carbon dioxide is produced and stored every year. The visualization below is based on the most recent full year of available information (2021) and includes data on vegetation, human population density, infrastructure, and wildfires to depict how carbon dioxide was added and removed from the atmosphere. The carbon dioxide emissions are color-coded based on source to show the two main contributors and removal systems.
These include fossil fuel emissions (yellow), burning biomass (red), land ecosystems (green), and the ocean (blue). The Earth’s crust and its oceans are both carbon sinks, meaning they remove more carbon from the atmosphere (and store it) than they emit. However, as the visualization shows, they can also be sources under certain circumstances, depending on the time and place. Surprisingly, the proportion of carbon dioxide that remains in the atmosphere (the airborne fraction) has remained remarkably stable over the past 60 years, even with the continued increase in anthropogenic greenhouse gas emissions.
However, scientists question whether and for how long that stability will continue. Ben Poulter, a co-author of the report and scientist at NASA’s Goddard Space Flight Center, summarized in a recent NASA press release:
“Emissions are heading [in] the wrong direction that we need to limit global warming. Amazingly, the ocean and land continue to absorb about half of the carbon we emit. Only about 44 percent of emissions stay in the atmosphere each year, slowing the rate of climate change, but causing ocean acidification and altering how land ecosystems function.”
In 2023, a study led by the National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration (NOAA) analyzed carbon storage in the ocean over two decades. Titled “Decadal Trends in the Oceanic Storage of Anthropogenic Carbon From 1994 to 2014,” this study indicated that this crucial carbon sink could be losing some of its storage capacity. The authors concluded that the ocean has likely slowed its absorption because it has already accumulated substantial amounts of CO2 and that changes in global ocean circulation (due to temperature increases) may be reducing the amount transferred from subsurface waters to the ocean floor.
The chart below, taken from the 2023 GCB report, illustrates how the absorption rates of carbon sinks have changed over time. The report also emphasizes how carbon dioxide emissions are declining slightly in some regions, including Europe and the United States, but are still rising globally. The countries with the largest increase in emissions in 2023 were India and China, reflecting the ongoing “economic miracle” these nations have undergone in recent decades. Based on these latest numbers, there is doubt that world governments will meet their climate goals, as spelled out in the Paris Agreement.
Visualization of annual carbon emissions vs. storage worldwide. Credit: NASA Goddard
Signed in December 2015, delegates from the 196 signatory countries committed to keeping average global temperature increases “well below 2 degrees Celsius above pre-industrial levels” while “pursuing efforts to limit the temperature increase to 1.5 °C.” According to the GCB team, the current emissions level suggests that the planet’s current carbon budget for keeping temperatures within this range is running out. They also claim that, at present, “there is a 50 percent chance global warming will exceed 1.5°C consistently in about seven years.”
While it may not sound like a lot, this represents an average increase (both annually and globally), and the difference between these two scenarios is stark. As the IPCC explained in its A6 report, an increase of 1.5 °C would lead to more extreme weather (heavy rains and severe flooding), mass die-offs, and the extinction of many animal species. It would also mean that 8% of all farmland and 3 to 41% of fisheries worldwide would be lost due to increased famine and disruption to Earth’s oceans. These risks increase sharply with an average increase of 2 °C, with the projected extinction of up to 18% of all species on land.
Above all, it is important to note that this is not the worst-case scenario. According to the AR6 report, a temperature increase of 4 °C (7.2 °F) would result in irreversible damage to the planet and its species:
“[M]ass mortalities and extinctions are expected that will irreversibly alter globally important areas, including those that host exceptionally rich biodiversity such as tropical coral reefs and cold-water kelp forests and the world’s rainforests. Even at lower levels of warming of 2°C or less, polar fauna (including fish, penguins, seals, and polar bears), tropical coral reefs and mangroves will be under serious threat.”
Data collected by NASA and other federal agencies are now available through the recently launched U.S. Greenhouse Gas Center. This multi-agency effort consolidates information from observations and models to provide decision-makers with one location for data and analysis.
VIDEO – UFO Over Oklahoma City: Witness Describes Mysterious Smoky Circle
VIDEO – UFO Over Oklahoma City: Witness Describes Mysterious Smoky Circle
In a recent, captivating interview on “NewsNation Prime,” Steve Aragona shared his extraordinary experience of witnessing an unidentified aerial phenomenon (UAP) in the skies over Oklahoma City. This event, occurring on the evening of March 4, has added to the growing collection of UAP sightings that continue to intrigue both the public and researchers alike.
The Encounter
Steve, a Navy veteran, was enjoying a casual evening outside with his children and neighbors when their attention was abruptly drawn to the sky by an unexpected sight. A bright, stationary object appeared overhead, its brilliance and stillness in stark contrast to familiar aerial objects like aircraft or celestial bodies such as shooting stars and comets.
The object’s behavior became even more intriguing when it began to move, emitting what Steve described as a “smoky type circle.” This phenomenon defied the witnesses’ expectations, as conventional understanding suggests that any natural object, such as a meteor entering the Earth’s atmosphere, would move away from such a formation, not towards it.
Expert Insights
The sighting prompted discussions with experts who acknowledged that this event strongly aligns with numerous other UAP encounters reported not just in the United States but globally. These encounters often share a common thread of exhibiting behaviors and characteristics that challenge our current understanding of physics and aeronautics.
Speculation and Skepticism
The mention of a SpaceX launch earlier that day added a layer of complexity to the sighting. SpaceX clarified that if the launch were related to the observed phenomenon, it would have been visible in a completely different direction, thereby ruling out a direct connection. This detail further deepens the mystery, as it suggests that the sighting cannot be easily dismissed as a misidentified human-made object.
Broader Implications
Steve’s experience and subsequent reflection on the possibility of extraterrestrial life highlight a significant shift in the public discourse surrounding UAPs. Once a topic relegated to the fringes of serious conversation, the increasing number of credible witnesses and official investigations into UAPs has brought it into mainstream consideration.
VIDEO:
‘Smoky type circle’: Man describes seeing UAP over Oklahoma City | NewsNation Prime
The sighting over Oklahoma City underscores the need for continued research and open dialogue about UAPs. As we gather more evidence and testimonies, we inch closer to understanding the true nature of these phenomena. Whether they are natural, extraterrestrial, or something else entirely, stories like Steve Aragona’s play a crucial role in unraveling the mysteries that lie beyond our current comprehension.
Beste bezoeker, Heb je zelf al ooit een vreemde waarneming gedaan, laat dit dan even weten via email aan Frederick Delaere opwww.ufomeldpunt.be. Deze onderzoekers behandelen jouw melding in volledige anonimiteit en met alle respect voor jouw privacy. Ze zijn kritisch, objectief maar open minded aangelegd en zullen jou steeds een verklaring geven voor jouw waarneming! DUS AARZEL NIET, ALS JE EEN ANTWOORD OP JOUW VRAGEN WENST, CONTACTEER FREDERICK. BIJ VOORBAAT DANK...
Druk op onderstaande knop om je bestand , jouw artikel naar mij te verzenden. INDIEN HET DE MOEITE WAARD IS, PLAATS IK HET OP DE BLOG ONDER DIVERSEN MET JOUW NAAM...
Druk op onderstaande knop om een berichtje achter te laten in mijn gastenboek
Alvast bedankt voor al jouw bezoekjes en jouw reacties. Nog een prettige dag verder!!!
Over mijzelf
Ik ben Pieter, en gebruik soms ook wel de schuilnaam Peter2011.
Ik ben een man en woon in Linter (België) en mijn beroep is Ik ben op rust..
Ik ben geboren op 18/10/1950 en ben nu dus 73 jaar jong.
Mijn hobby's zijn: Ufologie en andere esoterische onderwerpen.
Op deze blog vind je onder artikels, werk van mezelf. Mijn dank gaat ook naar André, Ingrid, Oliver, Paul, Vincent, Georges Filer en MUFON voor de bijdragen voor de verschillende categorieën...
Veel leesplezier en geef je mening over deze blog.
