info
Google Groups no longer supports new Usenet posts or subscriptions. Historical content remains viewable.
Dismiss
hunting the wumpus -- remote locations that correlate strongly with daily ufo sightings
11 views
Skip to first unread message
Kym Horsell
May 21, 2023, 11:52:27 AM5/21/23
to
This is a short note updating something I posted some time ago.
I'ved used daily sat data to make maps showing how strongly some remote locations seem to imprint their local weather on UFO sightings mostly seen across N America.
The latest batch of maps show very roughly where certain types of UFO's may be based or at least seem to fly habitually through. It's hard to imagine how daily sightings in the US could vary in synch with the weather at some point over (in this case) at least a decade without some connection between that point and the objects involved.
The maps for various categories of UFOs are plotted here:
<kym.massbus.org/UFO/MAPS>.
Among other things they may show where silver, gold, black and white UFO's "come from" or at least are based while visiting your area. Where Triangles live. Where those pesky objects that clutter up your morning or evening skywatching originate. And where the objects the US military appears to chase around the sky fly in from.
Also broken down by state seen, time seen, direction seen flying, and a few interesting misc categories that may be of interest. One final map shows the regions that seem to explain US daily covid deaths. No bid surprise they are almost exclusively across the Southern Ocean where the big virus reservoirs are beleived to operate -- at least the ones on Earth. Dont go jumping to conclusions if any of the UFO "maps" seem to correspond with these areas because as shown earlier "most" UFO's seem to be spreading COVID disinfectant -- only a couple types seem to be spreading some other junk.
As usual the verbage desribing the journey to here (for me) is written up at
<kym.massbus.org/UFO/Archive>.
The article list is in reverse order, meaning the latest conclusions (whether they contradict ealier ones or not :) appear at the top. For those people reading in date order, dont get confused when I change my mind about something at a later date. :)
--
The US government portrays itself as the world's preeminent
superpower, so to acknowledge that there are things in their
airspace, whatever they are, that are faster and more manoeuvrable
and run rings around fast jets doesn't play very well.
So there's the embarrassment factor, and maybe a little bit of
fear that either an adversary has made a quantum leap in
development, which has left the US in a poor second place, or, as
some believe, this really is extra terrestrial, in which case we're
not at the top of the food chain anymore.
-- Nick Pope, 02 May 2023
I'ved used daily sat data to make maps showing how strongly some remote locations seem to imprint their local weather on UFO sightings mostly seen across N America.
The latest batch of maps show very roughly where certain types of UFO's may be based or at least seem to fly habitually through. It's hard to imagine how daily sightings in the US could vary in synch with the weather at some point over (in this case) at least a decade without some connection between that point and the objects involved.
The maps for various categories of UFOs are plotted here:
<kym.massbus.org/UFO/MAPS>.
Among other things they may show where silver, gold, black and white UFO's "come from" or at least are based while visiting your area. Where Triangles live. Where those pesky objects that clutter up your morning or evening skywatching originate. And where the objects the US military appears to chase around the sky fly in from.
Also broken down by state seen, time seen, direction seen flying, and a few interesting misc categories that may be of interest. One final map shows the regions that seem to explain US daily covid deaths. No bid surprise they are almost exclusively across the Southern Ocean where the big virus reservoirs are beleived to operate -- at least the ones on Earth. Dont go jumping to conclusions if any of the UFO "maps" seem to correspond with these areas because as shown earlier "most" UFO's seem to be spreading COVID disinfectant -- only a couple types seem to be spreading some other junk.
As usual the verbage desribing the journey to here (for me) is written up at
<kym.massbus.org/UFO/Archive>.
The article list is in reverse order, meaning the latest conclusions (whether they contradict ealier ones or not :) appear at the top. For those people reading in date order, dont get confused when I change my mind about something at a later date. :)
--
The US government portrays itself as the world's preeminent
superpower, so to acknowledge that there are things in their
airspace, whatever they are, that are faster and more manoeuvrable
and run rings around fast jets doesn't play very well.
So there's the embarrassment factor, and maybe a little bit of
fear that either an adversary has made a quantum leap in
development, which has left the US in a poor second place, or, as
some believe, this really is extra terrestrial, in which case we're
not at the top of the food chain anymore.
-- Nick Pope, 02 May 2023
Kym Horsell
May 22, 2023, 8:29:54 PM5/22/23
to
Twitter and Youtube have some vids of Garry Nolan at a recent
conf talking about UFO's and aliens.
At the author of 400 scientific papers on a range of subjects
he's been called in by the Pentagon to look at "UFO evidence"
both "materials" and "human effects" of close encounters.
He also gets to talk to a lot of military insiders.
His own sightings (that I don't know too much about)
and research has convinced him 100% that not only have ETs
(or something close to that) visitied earth, they never left.
The Debrief covers Nolan's public comments and he also gives
a few choice quote you can pass on to people around the table at your next soirée:
<https://thedebrief.org/garry-nolan-a-stanford-professors-quest-to-resolve-unidentified-anomalous-phenomena/>
Meanwhile, my s/w has been creating more interesting maps.
The latest ones breaks down UFO sighting by time-of-day in GMT
and plots those places on earth that seem to strongly connect
with them. Putting in the lines of sunrise and sunset makes it
clear there are daily patterns of activity in certain locations
(e.g. the Devils Triangle, Alaska, Pine Island in Antarctica,
"Atlantis", etc). Some come alive at night, others are more
early risers.
There are also maps on a day-of-week basis that are less clear.
It seems some regions connected with UFO activity -- as observed
over mostly the US -- also operate mostly on certain days of the week.
It's unclear from the prelim sweep if they are really operating
on a 7d timetable (meaning they are either human or locked into
a cycle of activity that is synched up "for some reason"
with human civilization) or whether each region or "base"
operates on their own characteristic daily cycles -- something that might explain
why sightings activity seems to be so chaotic.
The plots are still uploading and may take a day or 2 to appear
on the website.
(Not only are we "recovering" from a major s/w upgrade
and an almost simultaneous move from local raid arrays
to cloud servers, but there are on-going problems caused
by FBI an local police raids on server farms in central
Germany -- looking for hackers involved in data theft and
extortion. Quite a few key IT companies have apparently gone
into hibernation waiting for court cases clear and that
could take months if not years).
For the hourly cycles:
<kym.massbus.org/UFO/MAPS/DOW/>
For the hourly cycles:
<kym.massbus.org/UFO/MAPS/Z/>
--
We are not afraid to entrust the American people with unpleasant facts,
foreign ideas, alien philosophies, and competitive values. For a nation that
is afraid to let its people judge the truth and falsehood in an open market
is a nation that is afraid of its people.
-- JFK
Most Sun-like stars formed billions of years before the Sun, a time lag
much longer than the time it takes chemical rockets to cross the Milky
Way disk. If only one out of the tens of billions of Earth-Sun systems
in the Milky Way galaxy gave rise to a peaceful, space-exploring
technological civilization over the past 10 billion years, and if that
civilization launched probes at an annual cost of 2 trillion dollars
for a million years, then there would be ten thousand objects from this
spectacular civilization within the solar system now.
-- Avi Loeb, "The Allegory of the Cave: An Interstellar Interpretation",
The Debrief, 15 Mar 2023
But what is true and I'm actually being serious here, is there are, there's
footage and records of objects in the skies that we don't know exactly what
they are, We can't explain how they moved, their trajectory. They did not
have an easily explainable pattern.
-- Pres Barack Obama, "The Late Show", 2021
"I think some of the phenomena we're going to be seeing continues to be
unexplained and might, in fact, be some type of phenomenon that is the
result of something that we don't yet understand."
--Ex-CIA Director John Brennan
"[F]or the few cases in all domains--space, air, and sea--that do
demonstrate potentially anomalous characteristics, AARO exists to help the
DOD, IC, and interagency resolve those anomalous cases. In doing so, AARO is
approaching these cases with the highest level of objectivity and analytic
rigor. This includes physically testing and employing modeling and
simulation to validate our analyses and underlying theories, and
peer-reviewing those results within the U.S. government, industry partners,
and appropriately cleared academic institutions before reaching any
conclusions."
-- Dr Sean Kirkpatrick, Senate Hearings on UFOs, 19 Apr 2023.
Unidentified aerial phenomena I. Observations of events
B.E. Zhilyaev, V. N. Petukhov, V. M. Reshetnyk
Main Astronomical Observatory, NAS of Ukraine,
Zabalotnoho 27, 03680, Kyiv, Ukraine
[...] We present a broad range of UAPs. We see them everywhere. We observe a
significant number of objects whose nature is not clear. Flights of single,
group and squadrons of the ships were detected, moving at speeds from 3 to
15 degrees per second. Some bright objects exhibit regular brightness
variability in the range of 10 - 20 Hz. Two-site observations of UAPs at a
base of 120 km with two synchronised cameras allowed the detection of
a variable object, at an altitude of 1170 km. It flashes for one hundredth
of a second at an average of 20 Hz. [...]
An object contrast makes it possible to estimate the distance using
colourimetric methods. [Objects with 0 albedo] are observed in the
troposphere at distances up to 10-12 km. We estimate their size from 3 to 12
meters and speeds up to 15 km/s. [...]
[Astronomers in Ukraine have undertaken their own independent survey
of objects they see flying over the Kyiv region at speeds around 15
km/sec. They are watching the daytime sky at the zenith and in front
of the moon. They see many objects -- some bright and some dark,
different sizes. They travel often singly but sometimes in large
groups. They report brightness is linked with speed. The spectrum
of bright objects is reportedly not reflected sunlight. Objects
have been spotted inside the atm upto ~10 km but also out to ~1000 km
above the earth, travelling up to ~1000 km/sec. They are not likely
anything sent by Russia or any other country].
conf talking about UFO's and aliens.
At the author of 400 scientific papers on a range of subjects
he's been called in by the Pentagon to look at "UFO evidence"
both "materials" and "human effects" of close encounters.
He also gets to talk to a lot of military insiders.
His own sightings (that I don't know too much about)
and research has convinced him 100% that not only have ETs
(or something close to that) visitied earth, they never left.
The Debrief covers Nolan's public comments and he also gives
a few choice quote you can pass on to people around the table at your next soirée:
<https://thedebrief.org/garry-nolan-a-stanford-professors-quest-to-resolve-unidentified-anomalous-phenomena/>
Meanwhile, my s/w has been creating more interesting maps.
The latest ones breaks down UFO sighting by time-of-day in GMT
and plots those places on earth that seem to strongly connect
with them. Putting in the lines of sunrise and sunset makes it
clear there are daily patterns of activity in certain locations
(e.g. the Devils Triangle, Alaska, Pine Island in Antarctica,
"Atlantis", etc). Some come alive at night, others are more
early risers.
There are also maps on a day-of-week basis that are less clear.
It seems some regions connected with UFO activity -- as observed
over mostly the US -- also operate mostly on certain days of the week.
It's unclear from the prelim sweep if they are really operating
on a 7d timetable (meaning they are either human or locked into
a cycle of activity that is synched up "for some reason"
with human civilization) or whether each region or "base"
operates on their own characteristic daily cycles -- something that might explain
why sightings activity seems to be so chaotic.
The plots are still uploading and may take a day or 2 to appear
on the website.
(Not only are we "recovering" from a major s/w upgrade
and an almost simultaneous move from local raid arrays
to cloud servers, but there are on-going problems caused
by FBI an local police raids on server farms in central
Germany -- looking for hackers involved in data theft and
extortion. Quite a few key IT companies have apparently gone
into hibernation waiting for court cases clear and that
could take months if not years).
For the hourly cycles:
<kym.massbus.org/UFO/MAPS/DOW/>
For the hourly cycles:
<kym.massbus.org/UFO/MAPS/Z/>
--
We are not afraid to entrust the American people with unpleasant facts,
foreign ideas, alien philosophies, and competitive values. For a nation that
is afraid to let its people judge the truth and falsehood in an open market
is a nation that is afraid of its people.
-- JFK
Most Sun-like stars formed billions of years before the Sun, a time lag
much longer than the time it takes chemical rockets to cross the Milky
Way disk. If only one out of the tens of billions of Earth-Sun systems
in the Milky Way galaxy gave rise to a peaceful, space-exploring
technological civilization over the past 10 billion years, and if that
civilization launched probes at an annual cost of 2 trillion dollars
for a million years, then there would be ten thousand objects from this
spectacular civilization within the solar system now.
-- Avi Loeb, "The Allegory of the Cave: An Interstellar Interpretation",
The Debrief, 15 Mar 2023
But what is true and I'm actually being serious here, is there are, there's
footage and records of objects in the skies that we don't know exactly what
they are, We can't explain how they moved, their trajectory. They did not
have an easily explainable pattern.
-- Pres Barack Obama, "The Late Show", 2021
"I think some of the phenomena we're going to be seeing continues to be
unexplained and might, in fact, be some type of phenomenon that is the
result of something that we don't yet understand."
--Ex-CIA Director John Brennan
"[F]or the few cases in all domains--space, air, and sea--that do
demonstrate potentially anomalous characteristics, AARO exists to help the
DOD, IC, and interagency resolve those anomalous cases. In doing so, AARO is
approaching these cases with the highest level of objectivity and analytic
rigor. This includes physically testing and employing modeling and
simulation to validate our analyses and underlying theories, and
peer-reviewing those results within the U.S. government, industry partners,
and appropriately cleared academic institutions before reaching any
conclusions."
-- Dr Sean Kirkpatrick, Senate Hearings on UFOs, 19 Apr 2023.
Unidentified aerial phenomena I. Observations of events
B.E. Zhilyaev, V. N. Petukhov, V. M. Reshetnyk
Main Astronomical Observatory, NAS of Ukraine,
Zabalotnoho 27, 03680, Kyiv, Ukraine
[...] We present a broad range of UAPs. We see them everywhere. We observe a
significant number of objects whose nature is not clear. Flights of single,
group and squadrons of the ships were detected, moving at speeds from 3 to
15 degrees per second. Some bright objects exhibit regular brightness
variability in the range of 10 - 20 Hz. Two-site observations of UAPs at a
base of 120 km with two synchronised cameras allowed the detection of
a variable object, at an altitude of 1170 km. It flashes for one hundredth
of a second at an average of 20 Hz. [...]
An object contrast makes it possible to estimate the distance using
colourimetric methods. [Objects with 0 albedo] are observed in the
troposphere at distances up to 10-12 km. We estimate their size from 3 to 12
meters and speeds up to 15 km/s. [...]
[Astronomers in Ukraine have undertaken their own independent survey
of objects they see flying over the Kyiv region at speeds around 15
km/sec. They are watching the daytime sky at the zenith and in front
of the moon. They see many objects -- some bright and some dark,
different sizes. They travel often singly but sometimes in large
groups. They report brightness is linked with speed. The spectrum
of bright objects is reportedly not reflected sunlight. Objects
have been spotted inside the atm upto ~10 km but also out to ~1000 km
above the earth, travelling up to ~1000 km/sec. They are not likely
anything sent by Russia or any other country].
Kym Horsell
May 24, 2023, 10:29:08 PM5/24/23
to
Just as a pre-introduction --
I note that a local "TV scientist" in AUS has been recently reported to have "solved" the Bermuda Triangle.
From the comments from "Dr Karl" I've read suggest he only says "you can't reject the null hypothesis" -- IOW there is not sufficient data to rule out that "nothing" might be happening and the disappearances in the Devils Triangle are just down to bad luck, ocean storms, and heavy traffic.
But, OTOH, if we look at the maps associating regions of the world with UFO activity, it does seem there is a big red blotch along one border of the Triangle.
And in the study posted here we find the appearance of so-called ghost ships is highly predictable from ocean conditions in remote locations and 100m deep near Bermuda, but is not predicable from ocean storms or any surface conditions between the Triangle and said remote points on earth.
Just like it involved some kind of craft that could fly and travel underwater or something.
Ghost Ships:
==========
EXECUTIVE SUMMARY
- We look at data on ocean and land weather around the world and try
to locate regions that robustly predict the dates of discovery of
so-called "ghost ships". Ships that turn up seemingly able to sail
with life boats still attached. But no crew.
- The AI software (plus bugfixes!) used in other studies finds only 3
regions seem to highly correlate with the dates of ghost ship
discovery. 2 of them are in the Arctic off the Russian coast.
Another relates to deep water around the Bermuda region. The AI's
were not told where the data came from. They "discovered" the
location themselves. It's one of their impressive tricks.
- Of the UFO types examined so far, none seem to closely correspond
with the regions found off Russia. But some UFO types are associated
with the SW border of the Bermuda Triangle. Not specifically
Bermuda.
- Crunching continues to identify more specific UFO types that might
be related. Up to this point the data suggest if UFOs are involved
at all only a select few might be responsible for the
disappearances. If UFO's have been a real thing all along -- as
seems increasingly likely as days go by and insiders spill more
beans -- they seemingly have "independent businesspeople" like
us. Previous work has already suggested there is a UFO military
and/or police force.
I know I probably have something broken inside. But I again found
myself watching the local "man channel" at the early hours of the
morning after watching some lights and light aircraft zooming around
the skies for 1/2 the night.
It was a ep from a repeat of one of those Bermuda Triangle things.
There have been a few of them over the years and even recently. I
like this particular take -- a bunch of ex Navy divers going out in
boats to see what they can see, with a few informal interviews thrown
in and a few off-beat experiments to try to judge how things might be.
Seem like a nice bunch of kids and the programs are generally
entertaining. This ep focused on the ghost ships seen in the Triangle
over the years and what might explain them. After 60 mins of talking to
people where it was revealed an up-tick of boats with missing crews
has taken a sharp up-tick since 2000 so much so that locals on one
island call the region of their coast a "parking lot" because so many
boats have been turning up there in the last few years seemingly left
out there on the ocean with no-one found on board, no signs of
struggle or distress, and even meals left on tables. But no people.
The up-shot of the ep was -- no explanation. While people jumping off
boats might have been eaten by the huge shark population in the
region, what was making them jump off their boats in the first place?
No-one really had a good explanation apart from "temporary insanity"
induced by unexplained special conditions in the region.
So -- natch -- my programs have taken a look at this in the past and
didn't seem to find too much. But I took another look at what they'd
been up to, and found a big error in part of the s/w that tries to
digest stuff of the Internet -- in this case a Wikipedia page about
ghost ships in general (i.e. not limited just to the Bermuda
Triangle). Correcting that bug and getting them to re-do their
analysis based on the *complete* data-set they could now get out of the
wiki pages they came up with a bunch of totally startling conclusions.
Again, the basic tool we're using here are correlations of some
phenomenon -- in this case the dates when each ghost ship as listed on
the wiki page was discovered -- and any other dataset the AI's can
dredge up from anywhere about anything. They are especially interested
in data that has a specific location attached to them. E.g. datasets
like bucket measurements of ocean temperatures. Over the past 100+
years vessels of all types travelling the world's oceans have thrown
buckets over the side at irregular intervals, measured the water temp
in the retrieved water and written the details down in logbooks that
have subsequently been digitized. Nowadays the water measurements are
mostly made automatically in the bilges of the larger ocean vessels.
But some other boats still drop buckets over the side and do it manually.
But that is only 1 dataset. The AIs have a growing list well into the
10s of 1000s now. And they can also go out and find anything the might
need just by using internet search engines and searching web pages
themselves. There are a couple of s/w components that just sit on my
Internet connection scanning for new stuff they figure might be useful
to the other AI components, or things the AI's have specifically put
in requests that they need for some part of their work. It's all very
much like an automated office. Except everyone can do sophisticated
statistics and has an IQ over 150. :)
So after chugging for (checking stopwatch) 12 hours they've come up
with a set of locations across the Earth where some property that has
been monitored at least since 1950 shows a very high correlation with
the dates ghost ships have been turning up. All the correlates are
checked several different ways to make absolutely sure they are real
and not some kind of quirk or error. But even so, I have the final say
over whether or not something is accepted as a valid data-point.
And that is important. Because very quickly (about 6 hrs back :) they
were pointing at a region off NE Russia where the water temperature
"somehow" predicted 70% of the ghost ships listed on wiki. 70%
sounded WAY too high. Considering the 2nd place they could find --
also along the Russian coast much further west -- "only" could
explain 20% of ghost ship occurrences.
I initially vetoed the 70% data and insisted the AI's just could that
as maybe a 21% explanation. I.e. just above the runner up location.
Not the 2:1 ratio they initially claimed. But after an hour of
checking it turns out the AI's might be right. They point out while
the No 1 area is only an isolated region -- suspiciously (I thought)
no adjoining area has anything like the same kind of correlation with
the ghost ship dataset -- it has more than 20,000 individual
measurements in it. It seems that part of the Russian coast has
accumulated a LOT of bucket measurements over the years. And the good
part about bucket readings are -- they are mostly all independent of
each other. It's not like a ship sits at the same place in the ocean
and throws a bucket over 10,000 times and measures the water temp each
time. The 1000s of measurements are all different ships at different
times travelling through the region. That kind of spread makes the
overall patterns more reliable. So whether incredible or not, the
result is likely to be "real" in some sense.
So I tossed the whole result data over to the plotting programs I
cooked up for the "flying saucer" maps I posted about recently. They
plotted out some color maps of the world and the strength of the
association of local weather -- mostly water temperatures (both
surface and going deeper thanks to those bucket measurements), but
also cloud measurements, different land-based temperature datasets from
around the world, and salinity and pH measurements of water in lakes
across Russia and the US.
And the plots are here: <kym.massbus.org/UFO/GHOSTSHIPS>.
The first plot shows the map of the whole world. We see -- mostly --
that 3 small areas seem to be lit up like Xmas. It seems the dates of
the ghost ships (the AI's were not given anything else -- they don't
know they are ships and don't know where they were found; just the
dates they were found) are closely predicted by water temps and other
local data at these key regions. The first ones the AIs found is way
off the coast of NE Russia, near the Bering St. The 2nd is again of N
Russia between some key offshore islands in the Kara Sea. And -- a
bit of a surprise given the AI's were not told what the data was -- a
big hit around Bermuda.
This is often the way with AI software. You give it some numbers with
no clue what they are. And it figures out where the numbers come from.
As I said, the biggest correlation comes from the area off NE Russia.
The other 2 regions have about 1/3 of the correlation the best region
has. The Bermuda hit is based on ocean water temps 100m down. So it's
not like it is talking about "ocean storms". If it found the
occurrence of ocean storms had anything to do with ghost ships it would
have said so. It has as much data on ocean storms as anything else.
But the "more proximal cause" was water temps 100m down around Bermuda.
Also you can see from the maps many other regions give a weak
response. If you look carefully you again see they hint at a list of
the "usual suspects" for paranormal happenings around the world. A
lot of (very slightly) pink regions also figure on those UFO maps I
posted a couple days back. If you riffle through the collection you
might even gen an idea which kind of UFO's are most likely associated
with each spot.
But the standout thing for the regions off Russia -- no UFO type,
shape or color, stand up as being associated with them. Either it's
an unusual UFO type that is not generally recognized as a thing, or the
areas nominated have something else going on there. It would
otherwise seem they are far too distant from the Bermuda triangle to
have an obvious weather like. How can weather from far E Russia
affect ships in the Bermuda Triangle when weather more locally doesn't
seem to figure at all. (I'm counting water temps 100m under the sea
around Bermuda as *also* nothing to do with local weather; the AI's
could have found ocean storms or surface temps in the region had more
to do with ghost ships than underwater temps, but they didn't).
So we are left with a tantalizing hint. Something about these ocean
areas has "a lot to do" with finding ships around the world (not
necessarily just in the Triangle) with no crew, no sign of struggle,
the life boats still attached, everything left as if ready to have a
meal. But the people have vanished.
The data is so good you might even be able to predict fairly
accurately when the next ghost ship will turn up somewhere. One of the
guys the boys on that program interviewed would be interested in
that. The guy that told them boats are "always" turning up empty in
the so-called "parking lot" also makes a living taking said empty
boats down to some place in Mexico and selling them for ready cash. A
pirate as one of the guys pointed out. But he had some important
information. So what are you gunna do?
--
The US government portrays itself as the world's preeminent
superpower, so to acknowledge that there are things in their
airspace, whatever they are, that are faster and more manoeuvrable
and run rings around fast jets doesn't play very well.
So there's the embarrassment factor, and maybe a little bit of
fear that either an adversary has made a quantum leap in
development, which has left the US in a poor second place, or, as
some believe, this really is extra terrestrial, in which case we're
not at the top of the food chain anymore.
-- Nick Pope, 02 May 2023
New footage emerges of suspected UFO sighting over California military base
New York Post, 23 May 2023 20:01Z
Two UFO experts are reviewing new footage of what appears to be a mass UFO
sighting over a military base. "Weaponized" ...
[Swamp Gas!]
Black 'half-football-field-sized' triangular UFO hovers over California
military base in video
Daily Mail, 23 May 2023 13:05Z
A black triangular shaped UFO with five red lights was seen hovering in the
night sky at Camp Wilson in California on April ...
Scientist studying pilots witnessing UFOs says 'aliens have been here for
long time'
The Mirror, 22 May 2023 22:26Z
An extensive report on UFO activity is due to be published in the summer,
according to Dr Sean Kirkpatrick, director of the ...
UFO mania sweeps academia: A fifth of scholars and scientists say they've
seen unidentified flying objects in the sky, study shows
Daily Mail, 23 May 2023 01:24Z
Academics report seeing UFOs 'shake' a house, and move 'rectilinear' in the
air 37% of profs said further UFO research was ...
Flying Saucers Are So 1947. This Is the New Shape of the Modern UFO
Popular Mechanics, 18 May 2023 05:18Z
Fifty-two percent of American military UFO sightings are described as white
or metallic spheres. So what are they?
[Silver objects seem to correlate with SST in the "far" W Ant.
Sphere's also correlate with the same general area but have their
best corr with SST in the a huge area in the mid S Atl between S Am and S Af].
I note that a local "TV scientist" in AUS has been recently reported to have "solved" the Bermuda Triangle.
From the comments from "Dr Karl" I've read suggest he only says "you can't reject the null hypothesis" -- IOW there is not sufficient data to rule out that "nothing" might be happening and the disappearances in the Devils Triangle are just down to bad luck, ocean storms, and heavy traffic.
But, OTOH, if we look at the maps associating regions of the world with UFO activity, it does seem there is a big red blotch along one border of the Triangle.
And in the study posted here we find the appearance of so-called ghost ships is highly predictable from ocean conditions in remote locations and 100m deep near Bermuda, but is not predicable from ocean storms or any surface conditions between the Triangle and said remote points on earth.
Just like it involved some kind of craft that could fly and travel underwater or something.
Ghost Ships:
==========
EXECUTIVE SUMMARY
- We look at data on ocean and land weather around the world and try
to locate regions that robustly predict the dates of discovery of
so-called "ghost ships". Ships that turn up seemingly able to sail
with life boats still attached. But no crew.
- The AI software (plus bugfixes!) used in other studies finds only 3
regions seem to highly correlate with the dates of ghost ship
discovery. 2 of them are in the Arctic off the Russian coast.
Another relates to deep water around the Bermuda region. The AI's
were not told where the data came from. They "discovered" the
location themselves. It's one of their impressive tricks.
- Of the UFO types examined so far, none seem to closely correspond
with the regions found off Russia. But some UFO types are associated
with the SW border of the Bermuda Triangle. Not specifically
Bermuda.
- Crunching continues to identify more specific UFO types that might
be related. Up to this point the data suggest if UFOs are involved
at all only a select few might be responsible for the
disappearances. If UFO's have been a real thing all along -- as
seems increasingly likely as days go by and insiders spill more
beans -- they seemingly have "independent businesspeople" like
us. Previous work has already suggested there is a UFO military
and/or police force.
I know I probably have something broken inside. But I again found
myself watching the local "man channel" at the early hours of the
morning after watching some lights and light aircraft zooming around
the skies for 1/2 the night.
It was a ep from a repeat of one of those Bermuda Triangle things.
There have been a few of them over the years and even recently. I
like this particular take -- a bunch of ex Navy divers going out in
boats to see what they can see, with a few informal interviews thrown
in and a few off-beat experiments to try to judge how things might be.
Seem like a nice bunch of kids and the programs are generally
entertaining. This ep focused on the ghost ships seen in the Triangle
over the years and what might explain them. After 60 mins of talking to
people where it was revealed an up-tick of boats with missing crews
has taken a sharp up-tick since 2000 so much so that locals on one
island call the region of their coast a "parking lot" because so many
boats have been turning up there in the last few years seemingly left
out there on the ocean with no-one found on board, no signs of
struggle or distress, and even meals left on tables. But no people.
The up-shot of the ep was -- no explanation. While people jumping off
boats might have been eaten by the huge shark population in the
region, what was making them jump off their boats in the first place?
No-one really had a good explanation apart from "temporary insanity"
induced by unexplained special conditions in the region.
So -- natch -- my programs have taken a look at this in the past and
didn't seem to find too much. But I took another look at what they'd
been up to, and found a big error in part of the s/w that tries to
digest stuff of the Internet -- in this case a Wikipedia page about
ghost ships in general (i.e. not limited just to the Bermuda
Triangle). Correcting that bug and getting them to re-do their
analysis based on the *complete* data-set they could now get out of the
wiki pages they came up with a bunch of totally startling conclusions.
Again, the basic tool we're using here are correlations of some
phenomenon -- in this case the dates when each ghost ship as listed on
the wiki page was discovered -- and any other dataset the AI's can
dredge up from anywhere about anything. They are especially interested
in data that has a specific location attached to them. E.g. datasets
like bucket measurements of ocean temperatures. Over the past 100+
years vessels of all types travelling the world's oceans have thrown
buckets over the side at irregular intervals, measured the water temp
in the retrieved water and written the details down in logbooks that
have subsequently been digitized. Nowadays the water measurements are
mostly made automatically in the bilges of the larger ocean vessels.
But some other boats still drop buckets over the side and do it manually.
But that is only 1 dataset. The AIs have a growing list well into the
10s of 1000s now. And they can also go out and find anything the might
need just by using internet search engines and searching web pages
themselves. There are a couple of s/w components that just sit on my
Internet connection scanning for new stuff they figure might be useful
to the other AI components, or things the AI's have specifically put
in requests that they need for some part of their work. It's all very
much like an automated office. Except everyone can do sophisticated
statistics and has an IQ over 150. :)
So after chugging for (checking stopwatch) 12 hours they've come up
with a set of locations across the Earth where some property that has
been monitored at least since 1950 shows a very high correlation with
the dates ghost ships have been turning up. All the correlates are
checked several different ways to make absolutely sure they are real
and not some kind of quirk or error. But even so, I have the final say
over whether or not something is accepted as a valid data-point.
And that is important. Because very quickly (about 6 hrs back :) they
were pointing at a region off NE Russia where the water temperature
"somehow" predicted 70% of the ghost ships listed on wiki. 70%
sounded WAY too high. Considering the 2nd place they could find --
also along the Russian coast much further west -- "only" could
explain 20% of ghost ship occurrences.
I initially vetoed the 70% data and insisted the AI's just could that
as maybe a 21% explanation. I.e. just above the runner up location.
Not the 2:1 ratio they initially claimed. But after an hour of
checking it turns out the AI's might be right. They point out while
the No 1 area is only an isolated region -- suspiciously (I thought)
no adjoining area has anything like the same kind of correlation with
the ghost ship dataset -- it has more than 20,000 individual
measurements in it. It seems that part of the Russian coast has
accumulated a LOT of bucket measurements over the years. And the good
part about bucket readings are -- they are mostly all independent of
each other. It's not like a ship sits at the same place in the ocean
and throws a bucket over 10,000 times and measures the water temp each
time. The 1000s of measurements are all different ships at different
times travelling through the region. That kind of spread makes the
overall patterns more reliable. So whether incredible or not, the
result is likely to be "real" in some sense.
So I tossed the whole result data over to the plotting programs I
cooked up for the "flying saucer" maps I posted about recently. They
plotted out some color maps of the world and the strength of the
association of local weather -- mostly water temperatures (both
surface and going deeper thanks to those bucket measurements), but
also cloud measurements, different land-based temperature datasets from
around the world, and salinity and pH measurements of water in lakes
across Russia and the US.
And the plots are here: <kym.massbus.org/UFO/GHOSTSHIPS>.
The first plot shows the map of the whole world. We see -- mostly --
that 3 small areas seem to be lit up like Xmas. It seems the dates of
the ghost ships (the AI's were not given anything else -- they don't
know they are ships and don't know where they were found; just the
dates they were found) are closely predicted by water temps and other
local data at these key regions. The first ones the AIs found is way
off the coast of NE Russia, near the Bering St. The 2nd is again of N
Russia between some key offshore islands in the Kara Sea. And -- a
bit of a surprise given the AI's were not told what the data was -- a
big hit around Bermuda.
This is often the way with AI software. You give it some numbers with
no clue what they are. And it figures out where the numbers come from.
As I said, the biggest correlation comes from the area off NE Russia.
The other 2 regions have about 1/3 of the correlation the best region
has. The Bermuda hit is based on ocean water temps 100m down. So it's
not like it is talking about "ocean storms". If it found the
occurrence of ocean storms had anything to do with ghost ships it would
have said so. It has as much data on ocean storms as anything else.
But the "more proximal cause" was water temps 100m down around Bermuda.
Also you can see from the maps many other regions give a weak
response. If you look carefully you again see they hint at a list of
the "usual suspects" for paranormal happenings around the world. A
lot of (very slightly) pink regions also figure on those UFO maps I
posted a couple days back. If you riffle through the collection you
might even gen an idea which kind of UFO's are most likely associated
with each spot.
But the standout thing for the regions off Russia -- no UFO type,
shape or color, stand up as being associated with them. Either it's
an unusual UFO type that is not generally recognized as a thing, or the
areas nominated have something else going on there. It would
otherwise seem they are far too distant from the Bermuda triangle to
have an obvious weather like. How can weather from far E Russia
affect ships in the Bermuda Triangle when weather more locally doesn't
seem to figure at all. (I'm counting water temps 100m under the sea
around Bermuda as *also* nothing to do with local weather; the AI's
could have found ocean storms or surface temps in the region had more
to do with ghost ships than underwater temps, but they didn't).
So we are left with a tantalizing hint. Something about these ocean
areas has "a lot to do" with finding ships around the world (not
necessarily just in the Triangle) with no crew, no sign of struggle,
the life boats still attached, everything left as if ready to have a
meal. But the people have vanished.
The data is so good you might even be able to predict fairly
accurately when the next ghost ship will turn up somewhere. One of the
guys the boys on that program interviewed would be interested in
that. The guy that told them boats are "always" turning up empty in
the so-called "parking lot" also makes a living taking said empty
boats down to some place in Mexico and selling them for ready cash. A
pirate as one of the guys pointed out. But he had some important
information. So what are you gunna do?
--
The US government portrays itself as the world's preeminent
superpower, so to acknowledge that there are things in their
airspace, whatever they are, that are faster and more manoeuvrable
and run rings around fast jets doesn't play very well.
So there's the embarrassment factor, and maybe a little bit of
fear that either an adversary has made a quantum leap in
development, which has left the US in a poor second place, or, as
some believe, this really is extra terrestrial, in which case we're
not at the top of the food chain anymore.
-- Nick Pope, 02 May 2023
New York Post, 23 May 2023 20:01Z
Two UFO experts are reviewing new footage of what appears to be a mass UFO
sighting over a military base. "Weaponized" ...
[Swamp Gas!]
Black 'half-football-field-sized' triangular UFO hovers over California
military base in video
Daily Mail, 23 May 2023 13:05Z
A black triangular shaped UFO with five red lights was seen hovering in the
night sky at Camp Wilson in California on April ...
Scientist studying pilots witnessing UFOs says 'aliens have been here for
long time'
The Mirror, 22 May 2023 22:26Z
An extensive report on UFO activity is due to be published in the summer,
according to Dr Sean Kirkpatrick, director of the ...
UFO mania sweeps academia: A fifth of scholars and scientists say they've
seen unidentified flying objects in the sky, study shows
Daily Mail, 23 May 2023 01:24Z
Academics report seeing UFOs 'shake' a house, and move 'rectilinear' in the
air 37% of profs said further UFO research was ...
Flying Saucers Are So 1947. This Is the New Shape of the Modern UFO
Popular Mechanics, 18 May 2023 05:18Z
Fifty-two percent of American military UFO sightings are described as white
or metallic spheres. So what are they?
[Silver objects seem to correlate with SST in the "far" W Ant.
Sphere's also correlate with the same general area but have their
best corr with SST in the a huge area in the mid S Atl between S Am and S Af].
Kym Horsell
May 25, 2023, 11:55:18 AM5/25/23
to
An email from someone that maintains a paranormal site got me thinking
about the old phantom airship phenomenon.
Back before flying disks
were a thing there were a couple of "flaps" where people across the
US, Europe and even New Zealand reported what was usually described as
"airships" flying over their cities. As reported in newspapers it was
even claimed the airships were typically manned by people. In some
extreme cases the airships supposedly tied up to local buildings and
pilots came down, asking to borrow buckets of water. They sometimes
supposedly claimed to be from Mars. And a whole fantasy array of
other things were reported to have been seen by witnesses up to and
including perspiring men powering the machines using pedal power.
Some researchers have written the whole thing off as total fabrication
by the newspapers of the time. One theory goes that reporters of the
1890s wrote a bunch of rubbish to fill the pages on the understanding
with the readership that most of what they read was for entertainment
only, and didn't pretend to make sense.
But some paranormal researchers are not so sure. Maybe under all the yellow journalism "airship" was
just the mental model people in the late 19th cent had for unusual
things flying around the sky in much the same way as people in the
1940s talked about "phantom rockets" crashing into lakes in
Scandinavia.
Or maybe it's all a big jolly joke perpetrated by person or non-persons
currently unknown to science.
Or maybe it's a big test. Can organised
science handle complex things they can't drag back to a lab and stick
in a hard vacuum and prod and poke at will? Can scientists have enough
faith in what the mass of the population says it's seeing to actually
look seriously at whatever it is? Well, of course, we know the answer
to that one. :)
Well my contact sent me some data and I promised to throw it to the
AI programs to see what they made of it. I was pretty much
suspecting the data would be too little and too noisy to get anything
out of. "Noisy" is a technical term for what they publish in
newspapers even now. Maybe moreso in the 1890s.
The data I have looks like:
Year Mon Day #sightings
1890 1 22 1
1890 8 21 1
1890 11 24 1
1891 9 5 1
1891 9 6 1
1891 9 7 2
1891 9 8 1
1891 9 9 3
1891 9 10 1
1891 9 11 1
1891 9 12 1
1891 9 19 1
1891 11 26 1
1892 1 18 1
1892 3 4 1
1892 3 26 4
1892 3 28 2
1892 3 31 2
1892 5 18 1
1892 6 10 1
1892 9 10 1
1893 7 3 1
1893 12 31 1
1894 9 29 1
1895 9 4 1
1895 9 6 3
1895 9 7 1
1895 9 10 1
1895 11 16 1
1896 11 18 1
1896 11 19 1
1896 11 22 1
1896 11 29 1
1897 2 2 1
1897 4 10 1
1897 4 13 1
1897 4 16 1
1897 4 19 2
Fresh off the production line the AI's say the data has exactly the
same hallmarks as modern UFO data. From the numbers supplied -- from
newspaper and magazine reports from various countries in the 1890s --
they find predictive models based on the position of key planets at
least predict a good chunk of them month to month. The number of
sightings in any given month in the 1890s is predicted to within +-.4
given the stddev of the sightings is almost +-.6 per month. I.e. the
prediction is "skillful". (Below we multiply the per month rates by
12 to get per annum rates that are in a better range for some s/w to
manipulate).
Moreover, they can come up with a planet that is "most likely" linked
to the airship phenomenon, and we know it well from prev posts --
Neptune. While all the outer planets are linked in some way to the
rise and fall of "airship" sightings over the period 1890-1900,
Neptune predicts the data the best. Pretty much just like modern UFO
activity.
The demonstration is long and probably boring, but an outline goes like this.
For the given dataset create predictive models based on the numbers for
each planet in turn. In this exercise only 2 types of data were looked
at -- the distance of the planet from the sun and the speed it was
moving with respect to the sun for each month between 1890 and 1900.
To build the predictive model we use a validation technique.
I.e. part of the data is used to estimate model parameters (here we
build mostly linear models like "y=a+b*x" where x is a planetary number
and y is the monthly airship sightings count -- so the parameters are
"a" and "b"). Later we use the "withheld" part of the data to
calculate the error that model predicts without having see those
numbers before. We try some different combinations of factors to try
to push the model building program to its limits to see if it will
break. Given it doesn't fall we can -- at the end -- assemble all the
successful models and decide e.g. which planet best estimated the
airship counts in the months it was not allowed to see when it was
building the models.
It all sounds incredibly tedious, right? Yea. Well I'm a data
scientist and that's my mother you're talking about!
But the summary data shows for each planet and all combination of
factors how well the "average model" involving just that planet was
able to estimate the airship activity for the "unseen" part of the
data.
Planet Avg error in unseen part of data
neptune 5.05608
jupiter 5.10431
pluto 5.9523
saturn 6.099
uranus 6.21247
For comparison, the stderr for airships sightings for the period was
around 7. I.e. if we just use the "average number of sightings" to
guess how many sightings will happen next month then we would be out
on average around 7 sightings + or -. But the average model using
Neptune's position and speed with respect to the sun is only out +-5
per month -- a considerable improvement on using the average (aka
"just guessing").
This simple evidence is enough to convince us -- OK, some of us :) --
that Neptune was "most likely" involved in 19th cent "phantom airship"
sightings and that in many cases (when not actual fabrications by the
newspapers or "witnesses") actually corresponded to what people
would call UFO's now.
--
We are not afraid to entrust the American people with unpleasant facts,
foreign ideas, alien philosophies, and competitive values. For a nation that
is afraid to let its people judge the truth and falsehood in an open market
is a nation that is afraid of its people.
-- JFK
Physics Thinktank Proposes Method for Detecting Extraterrestrial Spacecraft
Using Gravitational Waves
The Debrief, 16 Dec 2022
An international team of scientists has written a paper showing how to
detect extraterrestrial spacecraft using gravitational waves.
[The reason LIGO hasn't been looking for "warp signatures"?
Nobody thought of it].
Historic press event on UAP/UFO disclosure in Washington, DC
PR Newswire, 24 May 2023 21:40Z
The Disclosure intelligence UFO archive, consisting of over 5 terabytes of
government documents, whistleblower testimony and specific...
[The full archive is available at ht[REDACTED]].
New footage emerges of suspected UFO sighting over California military base
New York Post, 23 May 2023 20:01Z
Two UFO experts are reviewing new footage of what appears to be a mass UFO
sighting over a military base. "Weaponized" ...
[Swamp Gas!]
Black 'half-football-field-sized' triangular UFO hovers over California
military base in video
Daily Mail, 23 May 2023 13:05Z
A black triangular shaped UFO with five red lights was seen hovering in the
night sky at Camp Wilson in California on April ...
Scientist studying pilots witnessing UFOs says 'aliens have been here for
long time'
The Mirror, 22 May 2023 22:26Z
An extensive report on UFO activity is due to be published in the summer,
according to Dr Sean Kirkpatrick, director of the ...
UFO mania sweeps academia: A fifth of scholars and scientists say they've
seen unidentified flying objects in the sky, study shows
Daily Mail, 23 May 2023 01:24Z
Academics report seeing UFOs 'shake' a house, and move 'rectilinear' in the
air 37% of profs said further UFO research was ...
[The group running the survey was surprised only 4% of the people
contacted bothered to reply. But that number -- around 1500 academics in
total -- is the largest number anyone ever managed to get an answer
about UFO's out of until now. So the "1/5" applies to only a small
proportion of college faculty; typically those where they or a family
member has actually seen weird sh*t flying over their house.
From other data we know that US states with higher levels of education
are generally those reporting more UFO activity. Your brain apparently
needs to be in gear to see anuthing that isnt just average].
about the old phantom airship phenomenon.
Back before flying disks
were a thing there were a couple of "flaps" where people across the
US, Europe and even New Zealand reported what was usually described as
"airships" flying over their cities. As reported in newspapers it was
even claimed the airships were typically manned by people. In some
extreme cases the airships supposedly tied up to local buildings and
pilots came down, asking to borrow buckets of water. They sometimes
supposedly claimed to be from Mars. And a whole fantasy array of
other things were reported to have been seen by witnesses up to and
including perspiring men powering the machines using pedal power.
Some researchers have written the whole thing off as total fabrication
by the newspapers of the time. One theory goes that reporters of the
1890s wrote a bunch of rubbish to fill the pages on the understanding
with the readership that most of what they read was for entertainment
only, and didn't pretend to make sense.
But some paranormal researchers are not so sure. Maybe under all the yellow journalism "airship" was
just the mental model people in the late 19th cent had for unusual
things flying around the sky in much the same way as people in the
1940s talked about "phantom rockets" crashing into lakes in
Scandinavia.
Or maybe it's all a big jolly joke perpetrated by person or non-persons
currently unknown to science.
Or maybe it's a big test. Can organised
science handle complex things they can't drag back to a lab and stick
in a hard vacuum and prod and poke at will? Can scientists have enough
faith in what the mass of the population says it's seeing to actually
look seriously at whatever it is? Well, of course, we know the answer
to that one. :)
Well my contact sent me some data and I promised to throw it to the
AI programs to see what they made of it. I was pretty much
suspecting the data would be too little and too noisy to get anything
out of. "Noisy" is a technical term for what they publish in
newspapers even now. Maybe moreso in the 1890s.
The data I have looks like:
Year Mon Day #sightings
1890 1 22 1
1890 8 21 1
1890 11 24 1
1891 9 5 1
1891 9 6 1
1891 9 7 2
1891 9 8 1
1891 9 9 3
1891 9 10 1
1891 9 11 1
1891 9 12 1
1891 9 19 1
1891 11 26 1
1892 1 18 1
1892 3 4 1
1892 3 26 4
1892 3 28 2
1892 3 31 2
1892 5 18 1
1892 6 10 1
1892 9 10 1
1893 7 3 1
1893 12 31 1
1894 9 29 1
1895 9 4 1
1895 9 6 3
1895 9 7 1
1895 9 10 1
1895 11 16 1
1896 11 18 1
1896 11 19 1
1896 11 22 1
1896 11 29 1
1897 2 2 1
1897 4 10 1
1897 4 13 1
1897 4 16 1
1897 4 19 2
Fresh off the production line the AI's say the data has exactly the
same hallmarks as modern UFO data. From the numbers supplied -- from
newspaper and magazine reports from various countries in the 1890s --
they find predictive models based on the position of key planets at
least predict a good chunk of them month to month. The number of
sightings in any given month in the 1890s is predicted to within +-.4
given the stddev of the sightings is almost +-.6 per month. I.e. the
prediction is "skillful". (Below we multiply the per month rates by
12 to get per annum rates that are in a better range for some s/w to
manipulate).
Moreover, they can come up with a planet that is "most likely" linked
to the airship phenomenon, and we know it well from prev posts --
Neptune. While all the outer planets are linked in some way to the
rise and fall of "airship" sightings over the period 1890-1900,
Neptune predicts the data the best. Pretty much just like modern UFO
activity.
The demonstration is long and probably boring, but an outline goes like this.
For the given dataset create predictive models based on the numbers for
each planet in turn. In this exercise only 2 types of data were looked
at -- the distance of the planet from the sun and the speed it was
moving with respect to the sun for each month between 1890 and 1900.
To build the predictive model we use a validation technique.
I.e. part of the data is used to estimate model parameters (here we
build mostly linear models like "y=a+b*x" where x is a planetary number
and y is the monthly airship sightings count -- so the parameters are
"a" and "b"). Later we use the "withheld" part of the data to
calculate the error that model predicts without having see those
numbers before. We try some different combinations of factors to try
to push the model building program to its limits to see if it will
break. Given it doesn't fall we can -- at the end -- assemble all the
successful models and decide e.g. which planet best estimated the
airship counts in the months it was not allowed to see when it was
building the models.
It all sounds incredibly tedious, right? Yea. Well I'm a data
scientist and that's my mother you're talking about!
But the summary data shows for each planet and all combination of
factors how well the "average model" involving just that planet was
able to estimate the airship activity for the "unseen" part of the
data.
Planet Avg error in unseen part of data
neptune 5.05608
jupiter 5.10431
pluto 5.9523
saturn 6.099
uranus 6.21247
For comparison, the stderr for airships sightings for the period was
around 7. I.e. if we just use the "average number of sightings" to
guess how many sightings will happen next month then we would be out
on average around 7 sightings + or -. But the average model using
Neptune's position and speed with respect to the sun is only out +-5
per month -- a considerable improvement on using the average (aka
"just guessing").
This simple evidence is enough to convince us -- OK, some of us :) --
that Neptune was "most likely" involved in 19th cent "phantom airship"
sightings and that in many cases (when not actual fabrications by the
newspapers or "witnesses") actually corresponded to what people
would call UFO's now.
--
We are not afraid to entrust the American people with unpleasant facts,
foreign ideas, alien philosophies, and competitive values. For a nation that
is afraid to let its people judge the truth and falsehood in an open market
is a nation that is afraid of its people.
-- JFK
Using Gravitational Waves
The Debrief, 16 Dec 2022
An international team of scientists has written a paper showing how to
detect extraterrestrial spacecraft using gravitational waves.
[The reason LIGO hasn't been looking for "warp signatures"?
Nobody thought of it].
Historic press event on UAP/UFO disclosure in Washington, DC
PR Newswire, 24 May 2023 21:40Z
The Disclosure intelligence UFO archive, consisting of over 5 terabytes of
government documents, whistleblower testimony and specific...
[The full archive is available at ht[REDACTED]].
New footage emerges of suspected UFO sighting over California military base
New York Post, 23 May 2023 20:01Z
Two UFO experts are reviewing new footage of what appears to be a mass UFO
sighting over a military base. "Weaponized" ...
[Swamp Gas!]
Black 'half-football-field-sized' triangular UFO hovers over California
military base in video
Daily Mail, 23 May 2023 13:05Z
A black triangular shaped UFO with five red lights was seen hovering in the
night sky at Camp Wilson in California on April ...
Scientist studying pilots witnessing UFOs says 'aliens have been here for
long time'
The Mirror, 22 May 2023 22:26Z
An extensive report on UFO activity is due to be published in the summer,
according to Dr Sean Kirkpatrick, director of the ...
UFO mania sweeps academia: A fifth of scholars and scientists say they've
seen unidentified flying objects in the sky, study shows
Daily Mail, 23 May 2023 01:24Z
Academics report seeing UFOs 'shake' a house, and move 'rectilinear' in the
air 37% of profs said further UFO research was ...
contacted bothered to reply. But that number -- around 1500 academics in
total -- is the largest number anyone ever managed to get an answer
about UFO's out of until now. So the "1/5" applies to only a small
proportion of college faculty; typically those where they or a family
member has actually seen weird sh*t flying over their house.
From other data we know that US states with higher levels of education
are generally those reporting more UFO activity. Your brain apparently
needs to be in gear to see anuthing that isnt just average].
Kym Horsell
Jun 10, 2023, 8:16:22 AM6/10/23
to
EXECUTIVE SUMMARY
- We follow up on patterns of activity seemingly predicted in advance
by certain web accesses. We are searching for techno-signatures in
cyberspace. And, apparently, finding them.
- We find most UFO activity is predicted at least moderately well by
models robustly trained on web access data. Some models seem very
accurate. At least until (whoever) reads this. Maybe.
- Breaking down activity by type we seemingly get some vague picture
of what certain types of access predict next week. Perhaps topics of
interest to relevant parties. We speculate we maybe are intended to
discover this.
- We speculate that if some UFO activity is related machines
reverse-engineered by certain countries then we might be able to
(eventually) spot a specific "nationality" in such data. Of course,
if it is as widespread as some recent whistle-blowers claim, then
nothing specific might stand out.
- While we found in a prev post crop circles may convey information
about "where you can find us" (on Planet Dirt), or maybe "where the
best fishing is", the patterns we find here list certain topics as
important to (someone) for (some reason). Are the relevant "topics"
something they are trying to tell us? It's hard to imagine it's an
"accident" if (whoever) are as advanced as it otherwise seems.
Another day. More things rattling around that have to come out
on... er... paper.
After looking at this stuff seriously for a couple years I think there
are some things that are tending to stand out. While the available
data is noisy (kinda a tautology) there are some interesting
components in there. Some of these components suggest some very odd
connections for UFO activity as proxied by NUFORC reports with
patterns in other data. E.g. planetary movements and weather
conditions in several key regions seem to be historically associated
with odd goings-on and some other stuff.
Whatever has been going on didn't start in 2020 or whenever certain
studies or agencies seem to try to suggest "the activity" started up.
It's been around a while. Some patterns in old "mystery airship" data
seem to have many of the same patterns and affinities as modern UFO
reports. Which suggests underneath a layer of yellow journalism there
may be some similar activity, just expressed in journalese or common
parlance of the times. And looking back over some of the science data
we are starting to collect we can start to see similar patterns
cropping up in numbers we can now follow back a million years or so.
So if, as I've speculated before, something interesting has been going
on in the background or under the noses of scientists and historians
"for some time" then it might stand to reason that "whatever" might be
somehow meddling in human affairs to some extent. This might be for a
variety of reasons ranging from pure scientific research to trying to
prevent humanity screwing up the local environment or exporting its --
let's face facts -- significant mental and emotional problems to the
rest of the solar system or further.
To that end, let us further speculate, it may be that "someone" is
twiddling with the Internet. Stands to reason if some nice corporate
entity puts a lot of what we are pleased to call "human knowledge" on
some medium and tries to keep it up to date then you might as well
look at it, right? Just needs a couple wires plugged into the right
holes and -- voila -- your AI's can keep tabs on their AI's and
probably via simple modelling their military or militaries, or
anything else that might strike your fancy as "important", as well.
Nothing is secret if you are prepared to do the data analysis. Every
bit of data eventually imprints itself on every other bit of data.
And the only way you can stop it is essentially cordon off something
from the rest of the universe. And if you do that even YOU can't get
access to it, so we presume no-one really does that even if it were
technically feasible.
So we might envision some box somewhere going out and and around on
daily patrol, sniffing for information. While some groups are looking
for "techno-signatures" in terms of physical objects -- boxes, waste
heat, exhaust gases or other stuff -- floating around the solar system
or in LEO, some *other* people might be able to spot something just
looking around the Internet. To see who is looking for what at times
that seem to correlate highly with other stuff. Stuff that indicates
they know something.
And as I indicated in a recent post, it seems certain accesses just to
my own web-site(s) (TLDR :) seems to indicate certain kinds of web
activity are highly predictive of some real-world events a few days
later. How can this be? How can the number of searches for X (I take
those that impinge on my website as just a proxy for the "global
activity" of such web searches) at time T somehow reliably predict
certain activity T+7 days layer? How?
By "predict" I mean a reasonably robust form of predicting the future.
IOW some mathematical model is tuned up based on SOME of the available
data, then it is tested to see whether it works for other similar type
of data (e.g. later or earlier in time from the training data). If it
does then it is thought therefore to be "predictive". The math model
somehow captures something about the world and, in particular,
characterises or generalises to some extent some real-world phenomena.
So if this has been seen to be true, then why?
While there are no doubt an infinitude of complex theories that might
explain it. But at least a simple and obvious one is -- "they" are
listening and poking around for certain topics. Keeping abreast of
what is going on. Maybe it's all part of being a good wildlife park ranger. :)
So to push this barrow a bit further I've dug back into some recent
archives and got the programs to cook up some "robust predictive
models" that might give us a taste of who is interested in what. We
already suspect "the phenomenon" has a lot of moving parts; let's try
to characterise some of the possible groups and see what they are
keeping tabs on. Maybe they are actually trying to send us a subtle
message. If they are as clever at everything else as they are at
hiding out (which -- let us be clear -- is probably abundantly helped
by the previously-mentioned "mental problems") then surely what we see
is not a "mistake" but something foreseen by at least their AI's or
whatever passes for that (wherever).
So using the data for just the past 6m we can check for correlations
with certain types of objects sighted over N Am and reported to the
NUFORC Jan-May 2023 and find which keywords in various web queries I
have in my access log robustly predict the relevant activity 7 days in
the future (a number chosen more or less at random).
You might think there could be SOME patterns that are robust in this way.
But -- SURPRISE -- a lot of them are. It seems (whoever) is
interested in a lot of things and certain types of (whoever) are
interested in some special things all of their own. It might even be
possible to track down whether any particular nation might be hinted
at, given recent claims there is a worldwide reverse engineering
operation underway that has examined dozens of captured non-human
machines and maybe has been operating its own aircraft based on that
reverse engineering perhaps over the past 80y if not longer.
Let's have a look at the patterns. We'll look at what they might
"mean" at some later time. :)
The types of objects I will look at here -- again somewhat chosen at
random but also suggested by what seems to be most-often reported --
include:
ALL Triangle Light Disk Egg Other Circle Fireball Sphere
Formation red yellow orange black grey white gold silver
Some of these keywords refer to object "shape" as listed in relevant
NUFORC reports. Some refer to colours or qualities mentioned in the
body of the relevant reports. And "ALL" is simply the some total of
all reports, including all the keywords listed plus many others not listed.
The keywords I'll use from my web logs that, again, are chosen
somewhat at random but also informed by relative frequency I see from
said web logs over time, include:
(ALL) AI ALIFE Chess DATA.COUNTRY DATA.DAILY DATA.STATES DATA.YM
DATABASE DIARY KEPLER QUANTUM RADAR TESS UFO UFO.Archive WISE
anti.nuke chernobyl radiation supercomp
Again "(ALL)" refers to the totality of web accesses I've seen to
various machines I run web servers on, regardless of who or what did
the accessing or whether or not it met with "success", was "blocked" by
security robots or "didn't ever exist". The keywords containing "."
mean match the surrounding words separated by any single char inside
the relevant line of web log. Typically this is used to search out
certain sub-directories in my chaotic web-page structure. :) Note that
in some cases I was interested in the relevant hierarchy. E.g. "UFO"
as well as "UFO.Archive" is present. At one point there were several
visible sub-pages of my UFO web page and Archive was given one of
them. I want to see whether the "Archive" (mostly USENET posting about
my musings and possible findings) is of interest to (whatever) or
other topics at least at one time findable under the main UFO web page.
As I say each UFO activity does seem to be predicted 7d in the future
either moderately and sometimes quite well based on patterns of
accesses I find on my web pages. Given the method these predictive
models are built up it's hard to escape the conclusion that
"someone/thing who/that knows something" is at the base of the causal
chain that resulted in the relevant web queries.
First off let's look at how good these predictive models are. I
reduced most relevant things into numbers between 0 and 1 so we can
judge what fraction of the relevant activity is predicted by the best
models found. It breaks down like this:
ActivityType ModelError
yellow 0.0268105
gold 0.0304602
black 0.0543007
Fireball 0.065395
silver 0.0672847
Light 0.0714177
white 0.0854594
ALL 0.0959764
Circle 0.097217
Other 0.102522
red 0.1213
Sphere 0.131986
grey 0.132336
Formation 0.132544
orange 0.133803
Egg 0.14265
Triangle 0.146084
Disk 0.200639
In the table the models are ordered by accuracy. The "ModelError" is
the fraction of activity that is NOT predicted by the relevant
robustly-trained model. E.g. for "yellow" UFO reports a model based on
web activity in 7 days predicts the number of reports that will
eventually filter in for that date within +- 3% or so. IOW a fairly
good model. Again, to underline, this fraction is not just how well
the model curve fits the data. It is based on predicting data the
model never saw when it was trained. It was trained up on data for
the first 1/2 of the dataset, then tested on the 2nd 1/2 of the
dataset. Somehow, web activity predicts 7d in advance "yellow" objects
in data that was not available to the model when it was trained
up. The back 1/2 of the elephant predicting the trunk again.
The "worst" model is for Disks. These days, not as numerous in
absolute terms as many other types of activity. But the error rate for
predictions based on web activity is just +-20%. It gets 80%
right. More or less. :)
As I've warned above, this does not say Our Friends (TM; maybe not
friendly) are creates of dull habit. If they can foresee someone might
be able to see this in the data then it must either be intentional the
pattern is found or it may be a "don't care". There seemingly are a lot
of "don't care" patterns that seem to crop up in this kind of research.
My mental model is along the lines of -- does the zoo-keeper worry that
a lemur behaves slightly differently if the day or sunny or overcast?
Don't care!
As usual with even this relatively small collection of models that
presumably encapsulate a lot of detail about what these things are and
maybe what they are interested in, it's hard to just list it all with a
big brain dump. This is often that way with AI-backed research. Not
only are the results hard for hoomins to get a handle on -- since they
often have the subtlety and myriad connections only appreciated by a
savant -- but the sheer volume of information means it takes a long to
to get anything out of it.
So despite possibly losing a lot in translation, let's do a
simple-minded dive into the numbers. What form of web access did each
type of activity end up being best predicted by as the models were
built up. In the s/w I'm using here a kind of "lasso" regression is
built up using a steepest descent algorithm. The "lasso" is based on
trying to find the minimum subset of variables that relate to a target
variable "as well as possible". We want (in this case) the best up to
8 variables out of a possible couple dozen that best explain the
relevant UFO activity. The s/w goes hunting in the order each
variable seems to associate with the target. The first variable picked
up is generally "the most important" or "best explanation". At least
it gives us a feel of what things are likely to best associate with
the relevant activity. Maybe. :)
So the "first variable" from each model looks like:
ALL DATA.DAILY
Triangle QUANTUM
red DATA.DAILY
yellow DATA.DAILY
orange QUANTUM
black QUANTUM
grey DATA.DAILY
white DATA.DAILY
gold supercomp
silver QUANTUM
Light DATA.DAILY
Disk DATA.DAILY
Egg ALIFE
Other DATA.DAILY
Circle DATA.DAILY
Fireball ALIFE
Sphere DATA.DAILY
Formation DATA.DAILY
Which seems to indicate the most important kind of data (whoever)
hunts up every day on that interweb thingy is -- datasets of daily
data. (Crickets). In my "DATA.DAILY" directory I list many of the
datasets I've collected for the past 30 years doing first informal and
then formal data science projects. I put these up originally -- maybe
a decade back -- just for the interest of other data scientists with
whom I interacted on linkedin and a couple industry blogs
(e.g. kaggle.com). But it seems (whoever) is also interested in that
kind of stuff.
Then we have the physicists. Some activity seems to be predicted by
queries for info about quantum physics. My quantum physics page --
mostly lost after one or other transitions between services over the
past 10-20 years :} -- used to list a bunch of fairly advanced and
esoteric subjects like quantum computing, quantum information science,
and such. In particular I put up a couple of s/w packages that could
simulate one or other aspect of quantum computing well enough to write
simple programs (e.g. playing tac-tac-toe) for then-future QC
hardware. And there were some advanced topics then on the bleeding
edge of quantum physics and probably still are. E.g. using various
types of wormholes for computation and simulating some of these on
"advanced" quantum computers. We wont go into that. It will really
blow your mind. Aliens are a simple subject. Deciding problems that
are proven to be undecidable, or talking with a future version of
yourself is nuts by comparison. But maybe (whoever) got a kick out of
some of it.
And, finally, ALIFE. Artificial life. I noticed "by hand" there seemed
to have been a LOT of accesses to my web pages about this just in the
past few years. Unfortunately, my ALIFE page -- that dated back to the
1990s when the topic was then real new -- has also gone the way of
what happens when you move around between data centres. But it still
seems to be a topic of intense interest for someone. Someone that
somehow knows which way certain types of UFO are going to jump next week.
--
"Nothing in life is to be feared, it is only to be understood.
Now is the time to understand more, so that we may fear less."
- Marie Curie
A vast array of our most sophisticated sensors, including space-based
platforms, have been utilized by different agencies, typically in
triplicate, to observe and accurately identify the out-of-this-world
nature, performance, and design of these anomalous machines, which are
then determined not to be of earthly origin.
-- Jonathan Grey, NASIC intel officer, Wright Patterson AFB, 06 Jun 2023
[Secret UFO recovery program blown open:]
I hope this revelation serves as an ontological shock sociologically
and provides a generally uniting issue for nations of the world to
re-assess their priorities.
-- David Grusch, 05 Jun 2023
[Talking to Les Kean et al for The Debrief, Grusch called for an end to
nearly a century of global UFO secrecy and warned that humanity needed to
prepare itself for "an unexpected, non-human intelligence contact scenario"].
[David Grusch's] assertion concerning the existence of a terrestrial arms
race occurring sub-rosa over the past eighty years focused on reverse
engineering technologies of unknown origin is fundamentally correct, as
is the indisputable realization that at least some of these technologies
of unknown origin derive from non-human intelligence.
-- Col Karl Nell (ret), 06 Jun 2023
The US government portrays itself as the world's preeminent
superpower, so to acknowledge that there are things in their
airspace, whatever they are, that are faster and more manoeuvrable
and run rings around fast jets doesn't play very well.
So there's the embarrassment factor, and maybe a little bit of
fear that either an adversary has made a quantum leap in
development, which has left the US in a poor second place, or, as
some believe, this really is extra terrestrial, in which case we're
not at the top of the food chain anymore.
-- Nick Pope, 02 May 2023
New Scientist, 26 June 2008
There's hardly a niche on Earth that hasn't been colonised. Life can be
found in scalding, acidic hot pools, in the driest deserts, and in ...
[Interestingly, if life is *not* found in the warm salty sub-surface
oceans of some of our system's moons it gives more weight to the idea
that life could not have formed spontaneously on Earth but came from
"outside" e.g. via meteorites aka Panspermia].
Section 8. Unidentified Flying Object (UFO) Reports
Persons wanting to report UFO/unexplained phenomena activity
should contact a ... data collection center, such as the National UFO
Reporting Center, etc.
-- www.faa.gov, as at 30 Nov 2022
- We follow up on patterns of activity seemingly predicted in advance
by certain web accesses. We are searching for techno-signatures in
cyberspace. And, apparently, finding them.
- We find most UFO activity is predicted at least moderately well by
models robustly trained on web access data. Some models seem very
accurate. At least until (whoever) reads this. Maybe.
- Breaking down activity by type we seemingly get some vague picture
of what certain types of access predict next week. Perhaps topics of
interest to relevant parties. We speculate we maybe are intended to
discover this.
- We speculate that if some UFO activity is related machines
reverse-engineered by certain countries then we might be able to
(eventually) spot a specific "nationality" in such data. Of course,
if it is as widespread as some recent whistle-blowers claim, then
nothing specific might stand out.
- While we found in a prev post crop circles may convey information
about "where you can find us" (on Planet Dirt), or maybe "where the
best fishing is", the patterns we find here list certain topics as
important to (someone) for (some reason). Are the relevant "topics"
something they are trying to tell us? It's hard to imagine it's an
"accident" if (whoever) are as advanced as it otherwise seems.
Another day. More things rattling around that have to come out
on... er... paper.
After looking at this stuff seriously for a couple years I think there
are some things that are tending to stand out. While the available
data is noisy (kinda a tautology) there are some interesting
components in there. Some of these components suggest some very odd
connections for UFO activity as proxied by NUFORC reports with
patterns in other data. E.g. planetary movements and weather
conditions in several key regions seem to be historically associated
with odd goings-on and some other stuff.
Whatever has been going on didn't start in 2020 or whenever certain
studies or agencies seem to try to suggest "the activity" started up.
It's been around a while. Some patterns in old "mystery airship" data
seem to have many of the same patterns and affinities as modern UFO
reports. Which suggests underneath a layer of yellow journalism there
may be some similar activity, just expressed in journalese or common
parlance of the times. And looking back over some of the science data
we are starting to collect we can start to see similar patterns
cropping up in numbers we can now follow back a million years or so.
So if, as I've speculated before, something interesting has been going
on in the background or under the noses of scientists and historians
"for some time" then it might stand to reason that "whatever" might be
somehow meddling in human affairs to some extent. This might be for a
variety of reasons ranging from pure scientific research to trying to
prevent humanity screwing up the local environment or exporting its --
let's face facts -- significant mental and emotional problems to the
rest of the solar system or further.
To that end, let us further speculate, it may be that "someone" is
twiddling with the Internet. Stands to reason if some nice corporate
entity puts a lot of what we are pleased to call "human knowledge" on
some medium and tries to keep it up to date then you might as well
look at it, right? Just needs a couple wires plugged into the right
holes and -- voila -- your AI's can keep tabs on their AI's and
probably via simple modelling their military or militaries, or
anything else that might strike your fancy as "important", as well.
Nothing is secret if you are prepared to do the data analysis. Every
bit of data eventually imprints itself on every other bit of data.
And the only way you can stop it is essentially cordon off something
from the rest of the universe. And if you do that even YOU can't get
access to it, so we presume no-one really does that even if it were
technically feasible.
So we might envision some box somewhere going out and and around on
daily patrol, sniffing for information. While some groups are looking
for "techno-signatures" in terms of physical objects -- boxes, waste
heat, exhaust gases or other stuff -- floating around the solar system
or in LEO, some *other* people might be able to spot something just
looking around the Internet. To see who is looking for what at times
that seem to correlate highly with other stuff. Stuff that indicates
they know something.
And as I indicated in a recent post, it seems certain accesses just to
my own web-site(s) (TLDR :) seems to indicate certain kinds of web
activity are highly predictive of some real-world events a few days
later. How can this be? How can the number of searches for X (I take
those that impinge on my website as just a proxy for the "global
activity" of such web searches) at time T somehow reliably predict
certain activity T+7 days layer? How?
By "predict" I mean a reasonably robust form of predicting the future.
IOW some mathematical model is tuned up based on SOME of the available
data, then it is tested to see whether it works for other similar type
of data (e.g. later or earlier in time from the training data). If it
does then it is thought therefore to be "predictive". The math model
somehow captures something about the world and, in particular,
characterises or generalises to some extent some real-world phenomena.
So if this has been seen to be true, then why?
While there are no doubt an infinitude of complex theories that might
explain it. But at least a simple and obvious one is -- "they" are
listening and poking around for certain topics. Keeping abreast of
what is going on. Maybe it's all part of being a good wildlife park ranger. :)
So to push this barrow a bit further I've dug back into some recent
archives and got the programs to cook up some "robust predictive
models" that might give us a taste of who is interested in what. We
already suspect "the phenomenon" has a lot of moving parts; let's try
to characterise some of the possible groups and see what they are
keeping tabs on. Maybe they are actually trying to send us a subtle
message. If they are as clever at everything else as they are at
hiding out (which -- let us be clear -- is probably abundantly helped
by the previously-mentioned "mental problems") then surely what we see
is not a "mistake" but something foreseen by at least their AI's or
whatever passes for that (wherever).
So using the data for just the past 6m we can check for correlations
with certain types of objects sighted over N Am and reported to the
NUFORC Jan-May 2023 and find which keywords in various web queries I
have in my access log robustly predict the relevant activity 7 days in
the future (a number chosen more or less at random).
You might think there could be SOME patterns that are robust in this way.
But -- SURPRISE -- a lot of them are. It seems (whoever) is
interested in a lot of things and certain types of (whoever) are
interested in some special things all of their own. It might even be
possible to track down whether any particular nation might be hinted
at, given recent claims there is a worldwide reverse engineering
operation underway that has examined dozens of captured non-human
machines and maybe has been operating its own aircraft based on that
reverse engineering perhaps over the past 80y if not longer.
Let's have a look at the patterns. We'll look at what they might
"mean" at some later time. :)
The types of objects I will look at here -- again somewhat chosen at
random but also suggested by what seems to be most-often reported --
include:
ALL Triangle Light Disk Egg Other Circle Fireball Sphere
Formation red yellow orange black grey white gold silver
Some of these keywords refer to object "shape" as listed in relevant
NUFORC reports. Some refer to colours or qualities mentioned in the
body of the relevant reports. And "ALL" is simply the some total of
all reports, including all the keywords listed plus many others not listed.
The keywords I'll use from my web logs that, again, are chosen
somewhat at random but also informed by relative frequency I see from
said web logs over time, include:
(ALL) AI ALIFE Chess DATA.COUNTRY DATA.DAILY DATA.STATES DATA.YM
DATABASE DIARY KEPLER QUANTUM RADAR TESS UFO UFO.Archive WISE
anti.nuke chernobyl radiation supercomp
Again "(ALL)" refers to the totality of web accesses I've seen to
various machines I run web servers on, regardless of who or what did
the accessing or whether or not it met with "success", was "blocked" by
security robots or "didn't ever exist". The keywords containing "."
mean match the surrounding words separated by any single char inside
the relevant line of web log. Typically this is used to search out
certain sub-directories in my chaotic web-page structure. :) Note that
in some cases I was interested in the relevant hierarchy. E.g. "UFO"
as well as "UFO.Archive" is present. At one point there were several
visible sub-pages of my UFO web page and Archive was given one of
them. I want to see whether the "Archive" (mostly USENET posting about
my musings and possible findings) is of interest to (whatever) or
other topics at least at one time findable under the main UFO web page.
As I say each UFO activity does seem to be predicted 7d in the future
either moderately and sometimes quite well based on patterns of
accesses I find on my web pages. Given the method these predictive
models are built up it's hard to escape the conclusion that
"someone/thing who/that knows something" is at the base of the causal
chain that resulted in the relevant web queries.
First off let's look at how good these predictive models are. I
reduced most relevant things into numbers between 0 and 1 so we can
judge what fraction of the relevant activity is predicted by the best
models found. It breaks down like this:
ActivityType ModelError
yellow 0.0268105
gold 0.0304602
black 0.0543007
Fireball 0.065395
silver 0.0672847
Light 0.0714177
white 0.0854594
ALL 0.0959764
Circle 0.097217
Other 0.102522
red 0.1213
Sphere 0.131986
grey 0.132336
Formation 0.132544
orange 0.133803
Egg 0.14265
Triangle 0.146084
Disk 0.200639
In the table the models are ordered by accuracy. The "ModelError" is
the fraction of activity that is NOT predicted by the relevant
robustly-trained model. E.g. for "yellow" UFO reports a model based on
web activity in 7 days predicts the number of reports that will
eventually filter in for that date within +- 3% or so. IOW a fairly
good model. Again, to underline, this fraction is not just how well
the model curve fits the data. It is based on predicting data the
model never saw when it was trained. It was trained up on data for
the first 1/2 of the dataset, then tested on the 2nd 1/2 of the
dataset. Somehow, web activity predicts 7d in advance "yellow" objects
in data that was not available to the model when it was trained
up. The back 1/2 of the elephant predicting the trunk again.
The "worst" model is for Disks. These days, not as numerous in
absolute terms as many other types of activity. But the error rate for
predictions based on web activity is just +-20%. It gets 80%
right. More or less. :)
As I've warned above, this does not say Our Friends (TM; maybe not
friendly) are creates of dull habit. If they can foresee someone might
be able to see this in the data then it must either be intentional the
pattern is found or it may be a "don't care". There seemingly are a lot
of "don't care" patterns that seem to crop up in this kind of research.
My mental model is along the lines of -- does the zoo-keeper worry that
a lemur behaves slightly differently if the day or sunny or overcast?
Don't care!
As usual with even this relatively small collection of models that
presumably encapsulate a lot of detail about what these things are and
maybe what they are interested in, it's hard to just list it all with a
big brain dump. This is often that way with AI-backed research. Not
only are the results hard for hoomins to get a handle on -- since they
often have the subtlety and myriad connections only appreciated by a
savant -- but the sheer volume of information means it takes a long to
to get anything out of it.
So despite possibly losing a lot in translation, let's do a
simple-minded dive into the numbers. What form of web access did each
type of activity end up being best predicted by as the models were
built up. In the s/w I'm using here a kind of "lasso" regression is
built up using a steepest descent algorithm. The "lasso" is based on
trying to find the minimum subset of variables that relate to a target
variable "as well as possible". We want (in this case) the best up to
8 variables out of a possible couple dozen that best explain the
relevant UFO activity. The s/w goes hunting in the order each
variable seems to associate with the target. The first variable picked
up is generally "the most important" or "best explanation". At least
it gives us a feel of what things are likely to best associate with
the relevant activity. Maybe. :)
So the "first variable" from each model looks like:
ALL DATA.DAILY
Triangle QUANTUM
red DATA.DAILY
yellow DATA.DAILY
orange QUANTUM
black QUANTUM
grey DATA.DAILY
white DATA.DAILY
gold supercomp
silver QUANTUM
Light DATA.DAILY
Disk DATA.DAILY
Egg ALIFE
Other DATA.DAILY
Circle DATA.DAILY
Fireball ALIFE
Sphere DATA.DAILY
Formation DATA.DAILY
Which seems to indicate the most important kind of data (whoever)
hunts up every day on that interweb thingy is -- datasets of daily
data. (Crickets). In my "DATA.DAILY" directory I list many of the
datasets I've collected for the past 30 years doing first informal and
then formal data science projects. I put these up originally -- maybe
a decade back -- just for the interest of other data scientists with
whom I interacted on linkedin and a couple industry blogs
(e.g. kaggle.com). But it seems (whoever) is also interested in that
kind of stuff.
Then we have the physicists. Some activity seems to be predicted by
queries for info about quantum physics. My quantum physics page --
mostly lost after one or other transitions between services over the
past 10-20 years :} -- used to list a bunch of fairly advanced and
esoteric subjects like quantum computing, quantum information science,
and such. In particular I put up a couple of s/w packages that could
simulate one or other aspect of quantum computing well enough to write
simple programs (e.g. playing tac-tac-toe) for then-future QC
hardware. And there were some advanced topics then on the bleeding
edge of quantum physics and probably still are. E.g. using various
types of wormholes for computation and simulating some of these on
"advanced" quantum computers. We wont go into that. It will really
blow your mind. Aliens are a simple subject. Deciding problems that
are proven to be undecidable, or talking with a future version of
yourself is nuts by comparison. But maybe (whoever) got a kick out of
some of it.
And, finally, ALIFE. Artificial life. I noticed "by hand" there seemed
to have been a LOT of accesses to my web pages about this just in the
past few years. Unfortunately, my ALIFE page -- that dated back to the
1990s when the topic was then real new -- has also gone the way of
what happens when you move around between data centres. But it still
seems to be a topic of intense interest for someone. Someone that
somehow knows which way certain types of UFO are going to jump next week.
--
"Nothing in life is to be feared, it is only to be understood.
Now is the time to understand more, so that we may fear less."
- Marie Curie
A vast array of our most sophisticated sensors, including space-based
platforms, have been utilized by different agencies, typically in
triplicate, to observe and accurately identify the out-of-this-world
nature, performance, and design of these anomalous machines, which are
then determined not to be of earthly origin.
-- Jonathan Grey, NASIC intel officer, Wright Patterson AFB, 06 Jun 2023
[Secret UFO recovery program blown open:]
I hope this revelation serves as an ontological shock sociologically
and provides a generally uniting issue for nations of the world to
re-assess their priorities.
-- David Grusch, 05 Jun 2023
[Talking to Les Kean et al for The Debrief, Grusch called for an end to
nearly a century of global UFO secrecy and warned that humanity needed to
prepare itself for "an unexpected, non-human intelligence contact scenario"].
[David Grusch's] assertion concerning the existence of a terrestrial arms
race occurring sub-rosa over the past eighty years focused on reverse
engineering technologies of unknown origin is fundamentally correct, as
is the indisputable realization that at least some of these technologies
of unknown origin derive from non-human intelligence.
-- Col Karl Nell (ret), 06 Jun 2023
The US government portrays itself as the world's preeminent
superpower, so to acknowledge that there are things in their
airspace, whatever they are, that are faster and more manoeuvrable
and run rings around fast jets doesn't play very well.
So there's the embarrassment factor, and maybe a little bit of
fear that either an adversary has made a quantum leap in
development, which has left the US in a poor second place, or, as
some believe, this really is extra terrestrial, in which case we're
not at the top of the food chain anymore.
-- Nick Pope, 02 May 2023
We are not afraid to entrust the American people with unpleasant facts,
foreign ideas, alien philosophies, and competitive values. For a nation that
is afraid to let its people judge the truth and falsehood in an open market
is a nation that is afraid of its people.
-- JFK
foreign ideas, alien philosophies, and competitive values. For a nation that
is afraid to let its people judge the truth and falsehood in an open market
is a nation that is afraid of its people.
-- JFK
Physics Thinktank Proposes Method for Detecting Extraterrestrial Spacecraft
Using Gravitational Waves
The Debrief, 16 Dec 2022
An international team of scientists has written a paper showing how to
detect extraterrestrial spacecraft using gravitational waves.
[The reason LIGO hasn't been looking for "warp signatures"?
Nobody thought of it].
Using Gravitational Waves
The Debrief, 16 Dec 2022
An international team of scientists has written a paper showing how to
detect extraterrestrial spacecraft using gravitational waves.
[The reason LIGO hasn't been looking for "warp signatures"?
Nobody thought of it].
Most Sun-like stars formed billions of years before the Sun, a time lag
much longer than the time it takes chemical rockets to cross the Milky
Way disk. If only one out of the tens of billions of Earth-Sun systems
in the Milky Way galaxy gave rise to a peaceful, space-exploring
technological civilization over the past 10 billion years, and if that
civilization launched probes at an annual cost of 2 trillion dollars
for a million years, then there would be ten thousand objects from this
spectacular civilization within the solar system now.
-- Avi Loeb, "The Allegory of the Cave: An Interstellar Interpretation",
The Debrief, 15 Mar 2023
The most extreme life-forms in the universe
much longer than the time it takes chemical rockets to cross the Milky
Way disk. If only one out of the tens of billions of Earth-Sun systems
in the Milky Way galaxy gave rise to a peaceful, space-exploring
technological civilization over the past 10 billion years, and if that
civilization launched probes at an annual cost of 2 trillion dollars
for a million years, then there would be ten thousand objects from this
spectacular civilization within the solar system now.
-- Avi Loeb, "The Allegory of the Cave: An Interstellar Interpretation",
The Debrief, 15 Mar 2023
New Scientist, 26 June 2008
There's hardly a niche on Earth that hasn't been colonised. Life can be
found in scalding, acidic hot pools, in the driest deserts, and in ...
[Interestingly, if life is *not* found in the warm salty sub-surface
oceans of some of our system's moons it gives more weight to the idea
that life could not have formed spontaneously on Earth but came from
"outside" e.g. via meteorites aka Panspermia].
Section 8. Unidentified Flying Object (UFO) Reports
Persons wanting to report UFO/unexplained phenomena activity
should contact a ... data collection center, such as the National UFO
Reporting Center, etc.
-- www.faa.gov, as at 30 Nov 2022
Kym Horsell
Jun 12, 2023, 11:01:35 PM6/12/23
to
EXECUTIVE SUMMARY
- Space telescope images seem to be edited to remove "certain things"
from the view of scientists in the US and around the world.
- The editing follows 2 patterns -- the day before a UFO flap is
registered at e.g. NUFORC the number of images acked in public
databases is consistently smaller than usual. We suspect some
images have been removed. For those images remaining, in areas of
the sky and at times were "certain things" can be predicted to be
likely seen, images seem to be consistently blacked out. Leaving the
empty file in the database may be a method to avoid holes in the
database being observable to casual view. Only after uploading the
full-sized (in this case 30+ MB) file does the researcher find it is
blacked out apart from the information in the file header that
otherwise gives the meta info for the data that was once there.
- We find there is a statistically strong link between the number of
images listed in log files for at least one telescope and reported
UFO activity the following day. Images taken near the position of
Neptune (RA near 0 or 360 for most of the period the telescope has
been operating) on key dates also seem to be consistently "blacked out".
- The stats s/w finds the best match-up between UFO counts and
image counts shifts the UFO data back 1 day and takes logs. A log
model is consistent with the problem of N objects randomly allocated
to M images. The fraction of images without any of the objects in it
would tend to a function of log(N). So both the time-shift in the
model and the functional form is consistent with someone trying to
hide something related to contemporaneous UFO activity.
- We can't assign blame to NASA or govt scientists. It is perfectly
possible they all act in good faith and do not notice these patterns
in their everyday work. NASA administrators must be aware they
operate in an informal branch of the military and are directly
subject to national security concerns. They may even know that
certain steps are taken as a matter of course without being fully
aware what those steps might entail. But the effect of "invisible
changes" to public data may threaten to invalidate a growing amount
of research that relies on it. While scientists reaching certain
wrong conclusions is likely "part of the plan", the errors are not
contained to just that part of scientific work. No matter how
careful and planned the editing, an obvious and spreading bias has
been introduced. If this same methodology is used in all govt
science (for the same or even other reasons) that research can't be
regarded as totally reliable and the gobs of public money that go
into it are intentionally "partly wasted".
I mentioned some time back I'd found some evidence that images
available in key NASA databases seem to have been tampered with to
remove evidence of "certain things".
While NASA administrators maintain the organisation is a straight die
it may well be the case that some actions are undertaken with or
without its cooperation to remove "material of national security
significance" from NASA's public data. More interestingly, some of the
public involved are other science organisations around the world.
Whoever is doing what is also tampering with scientific research.
Removing evidence with "security implications" inevitably is biasing
the types of data scientists everywhere get to use to advance their
understanding of the universe. That understanding therefore becomes
more and more skewed from reality over time. The tampering is
producing arguable damage to society.
But before I fly off the handle and REALLY start frothing at the mouth, let's
look at the evidence. See if you find it as convincing as I do.
In researching the goings-on in the sky over N America and my own neck
of the woods I began looking at telescope data gathered by several
organisations and available via the web. Initially I looked at light
curves from individual stars. That work found that the average light
from stars in certain parts of the sky varied suspiciously like the
activity reported much closer to the ground in the sky over N America.
The patterns were so clear you could work up a predictive model that
would tell you to quite high certainty when and where such near-ground
activity would occur just by looking at the avg brightness of the
stars in certain parts of the sky over the course of hours before that
activity was due to happen.
Using a simple machine learning model my programs predicted from the
initial upoloadings of 1000s of light curves where and when and in
what direction you should be able to look to find even more
interesting things than just the odd bunch of stars suddenly going a
little dimmer over the course of a few hours and then going brighter
again. At that time -- and this is the way AI stuff works -- I had no
real simple mental model of what the machine learning algorithm had
found. It just told me get data about this part of the sky at this
time and you will see something interesting.
So I expanded my uploads to include actual full-frame images of
parts of the sky gathered by various space telescopes. The most
convenient for my monthly Internet bill were TESS images that came in
30 MB FITS files (FITS is a format beloved of astronomers to bundle up
all the information about some part of the sky and can include tables,
gobs of meta-information about the camera and telescope used, and even
tables of sub-images and graphs as well as the meat-in-the-sandwich
32-bit gray-scale detailed images of the part of the sky in question;
it's like the astronomers version of a ZIP file).
So I went about uploading modest numbers of these things from my
favourite space telescope archive and storing them on a big disk on my
local machine. To allow for possible 1000s or millions of images -- I
didn't know how many I would need -- I compressed all the FITS files
with a super compression algorithm. That algorithm took those FITS
files and reduced them by 50% or so. Pretty good performance given
FITS are already somewhat compressed.
But as the work progressed I suddenly found some of these compressed
files were amazingly small. With a normal compressed FITS was 25MB,
some of them were only 4KB long! What had happened?
After some checking it turned out those small FITS files were
"perfectly intact" -- all their heading information was correct and
all the internal checksums were right -- but the actual images in the
file were blank. All zeros. Equal to "perfect black".
Although I'd collected 100s of these images up to this point it
seemed I found a cluster where most of them got zapped somehow. Then
the correlation started to stick out. Only the FITS files
related to the most interesting areas as predicted by the AI programs
seemed to be affected.
I now know those initial files came from a part of the sky near
Neptune's then-current position. It seemed when the telescope pointed
near Neptune "something" went wrong with the machine and its output
got all screwed up.
Neptune, as I've pointed out in some prev posts, seems to highly
correlate with "certain activity". As the earth gets closer and
further away during the course of a normal year it seems UFO
sightings go up and down "in sympathy". And a little too exactly to be
due to just chance, according to various stats tests.
The AI's later told me there was another stunning coincidence. Given
the ups and downs of the numbers of UFO's reported day to day over N
America, it was an amazing co-incidence that on the day (in GMT time)
just before a day where the number was much higher than average the
number of images apparently taken (or, at least, the number available
for upload at the public web site) was always down. That finding also
passed a number of stats tests at high levels of significance.
I now have collected all the data published for TESS since 2018 and
can report these associations continue. Not only do images "go
missing" -- i.e. they do not appear in even the records although we
strongly suspect those images must have been taken and the telescope
was not just broken on that day -- but images that are left on the
website sometimes seem to be blacked out. The TESS telescope consists
of 4 cameras each with 4 sensors of around 2k by 2k pixels. It has an
overall aperture something like 5 by 20 degrees and takes in a good
chunk of the sky. On *some* days you can find images for SOME of these
cameras and SOME of their sensors; others "go missing" or are blacked
out. Seemingly a high proportion of this tampering happens "only"
when the telescope, or just those sensors of those cameras, are
pointing at a part of the sky on a day when certain things were
reported down here on Earth.
The pattern repeats over and over in the course of the telescope's
5+ years of operation. It's not just noise.
We can take the number of images logged for a particular camera/sensor
combination. These logs are provided as separate (large) files on the
relevant website. They're intended to be used to bulk download massive
numbers of images for any research group that wants them. They
*should* contain the designations of all images actually taken by the
telescope. But the number of images for each day/time goes up and down
quite a bit.
Here's a sample from the somewhat large summary file I gathered from
counting up how many times each day/time was mentioned in the names of
the FITS files that contain those images.
2018.631 48
2018.634 48
2018.637 31
2018.639 20
2019.631 48
2019.634 48
2019.637 48
2019.639 48
2020.631 144
2020.634 144
2020.637 144
2020.639 144
2021.631 10
2021.634 118
2021.637 144
2021.639 144
2022.631 144
2022.634 144
2022.637 144
2022.639 144
The date in col 1 is the year/day as a decimal number. I only
grabbed those entries in the file where the decimal part was ".63...",
just to get a sample for you. Col 2 is the number of images attributed
to sensor 1 of camera 1 -- designed on the website by "-1-1-"
appearing in the FITS filename.
The above is typical of the other 15 sensor/camera combinations.
We can see *some* days saw only 10 images "apparently" taken. While
the usual number seems to be 144. I.e. 1 image every 10 minutes during
a normal 24 hour day. So the camera is clicking quite a bit to grab
what we assume is normally 9.216 gigapixels of images per day.
Sure. Some days the thing might get a bit hot and have to be
feathered. But there is a consistent pattern to the "feathering" and
it doesn't seem to entirely relate to conditions out there between
Earth and Moon where TESS orbits every 2 wks.
For each day from 2018 we can look at the number of UFO reports at the
NUFORC. For the dates listed above we find (e.g.):
2018.631 9
2018.634 6
2018.637 4
2018.639 10
2019.631 9
2019.634 7
2019.637 8
2019.639 18
2020.631 27
2020.634 27
2020.637 10
2020.639 25
2021.631 5
2021.634 1
2021.637 5
2021.639 6
2022.631 12
2022.634 11
2022.637 18
2022.639 13
But now the magic happens. If we take the image counts and the UFO
counts we can ask a stats package if there is a statistically robust
association between them. We can allow the program to manipulate the
data a bit -- as long as we are careful about the stats so it just
doesn't MAKE something happen that really isn't there -- to increase
the association to make it obvious even to a blind man it finds the
best match involves taking the log of the number of UFOs, shifting it
back in time 1 day, and grouping like days together after taking into
account "serial correlation" that happens in most data involving time
we find:
Dates similar to: UFO count Image count Power law model
2021.467 1 144 187.058
2022.194 2.24 135.3 141.815
2020.956 3 104 128.281
2022.544 4.50679 136.652 111.553
2022.645 7.07508 131.778 95.5504*(model under-estimates)
2022.658 10.4476 99.1785 83.5816
2018.577 13 48 77.5388*
2022.656 14.4653 86.5891 74.747
2022.634 17.4138 74.6724 70.1346
2022.601 20.268 64.5361 66.5734
2019.768 23 48 63.7449
2022.590 23.6296 68 63.1566
2022.298 26.3684 61.5789 60.8228
2022.626 29.7647 69.4118 58.3446
2019.735 33 48 56.3138
2021.918 33.5714 73.7857 55.9829
2021.383 37 80.4 54.1447*(under)
2022.459 39.3333 112 53.0197**(under, a lot)
2020.333 42.4 48 51.6705
2020.284 45 48 50.6254
2020.295 47 48 49.8752
2020.328 50 48 48.8268
2020.320 55.6667 47 47.0598
2019.388 58 48 46.401
2020.503 62 48 45.3506
2020.314 65.6667 48 44.4647
2020.290 68 41.5 43.9349
2021.915 71.75 32.25 43.1325*(over)
2020.169 80 46 41.5505
2020.287 91 17 39.7527**(over, a lot)
Model:
y = 187.058 * x^-0.343336
beta in -0.343336 +- 0.0803521 (90% CI)
alpha in 5.23142 +- 0.270108
T-test: P(beta<0) = 1.000000
r2 = 0.65361507
calculated Spearman corr = -0.757063
Critical Spearman = 0.432000 2-sided at 1%; reject H0:not_connected
It seems there is a consistent pattern. On the day before a "UFO flap"
somehow the number of images available from TESS are less than usual.
We are forced to conclude that "some process" is involved that removes
images from the TESS database. Where this happens is unclear.
But we can also look at the pattern of "damaged TESS files" -- those
that seem to be blacked out without acknowledgement. Only AFTER you
download them and happen to notice (maybe) they have valid headers but
zero data it seems these also have a beyond-chance pattern. They
associate with times and parts of the sky where something can be
predicted to have happened.
Someone or something is "editing" the telescope database and acting to
remove images that apparently show something they don't want even
scientists to process, let alone maybe take a look at.
Since the patterns are so clear (to the stats programs) it seems such
tampering is creating false patterns in the remaining images that
scientists in the US and around the world rely on to validate their
theories. A growing amount of scientific speculation may be garbage
because of this tampering.
--
"Nothing in life is to be feared, it is only to be understood.
Now is the time to understand more, so that we may fear less."
- Marie Curie
- Space telescope images seem to be edited to remove "certain things"
from the view of scientists in the US and around the world.
- The editing follows 2 patterns -- the day before a UFO flap is
registered at e.g. NUFORC the number of images acked in public
databases is consistently smaller than usual. We suspect some
images have been removed. For those images remaining, in areas of
the sky and at times were "certain things" can be predicted to be
likely seen, images seem to be consistently blacked out. Leaving the
empty file in the database may be a method to avoid holes in the
database being observable to casual view. Only after uploading the
full-sized (in this case 30+ MB) file does the researcher find it is
blacked out apart from the information in the file header that
otherwise gives the meta info for the data that was once there.
- We find there is a statistically strong link between the number of
images listed in log files for at least one telescope and reported
UFO activity the following day. Images taken near the position of
Neptune (RA near 0 or 360 for most of the period the telescope has
been operating) on key dates also seem to be consistently "blacked out".
- The stats s/w finds the best match-up between UFO counts and
image counts shifts the UFO data back 1 day and takes logs. A log
model is consistent with the problem of N objects randomly allocated
to M images. The fraction of images without any of the objects in it
would tend to a function of log(N). So both the time-shift in the
model and the functional form is consistent with someone trying to
hide something related to contemporaneous UFO activity.
- We can't assign blame to NASA or govt scientists. It is perfectly
possible they all act in good faith and do not notice these patterns
in their everyday work. NASA administrators must be aware they
operate in an informal branch of the military and are directly
subject to national security concerns. They may even know that
certain steps are taken as a matter of course without being fully
aware what those steps might entail. But the effect of "invisible
changes" to public data may threaten to invalidate a growing amount
of research that relies on it. While scientists reaching certain
wrong conclusions is likely "part of the plan", the errors are not
contained to just that part of scientific work. No matter how
careful and planned the editing, an obvious and spreading bias has
been introduced. If this same methodology is used in all govt
science (for the same or even other reasons) that research can't be
regarded as totally reliable and the gobs of public money that go
into it are intentionally "partly wasted".
I mentioned some time back I'd found some evidence that images
available in key NASA databases seem to have been tampered with to
remove evidence of "certain things".
While NASA administrators maintain the organisation is a straight die
it may well be the case that some actions are undertaken with or
without its cooperation to remove "material of national security
significance" from NASA's public data. More interestingly, some of the
public involved are other science organisations around the world.
Whoever is doing what is also tampering with scientific research.
Removing evidence with "security implications" inevitably is biasing
the types of data scientists everywhere get to use to advance their
understanding of the universe. That understanding therefore becomes
more and more skewed from reality over time. The tampering is
producing arguable damage to society.
But before I fly off the handle and REALLY start frothing at the mouth, let's
look at the evidence. See if you find it as convincing as I do.
In researching the goings-on in the sky over N America and my own neck
of the woods I began looking at telescope data gathered by several
organisations and available via the web. Initially I looked at light
curves from individual stars. That work found that the average light
from stars in certain parts of the sky varied suspiciously like the
activity reported much closer to the ground in the sky over N America.
The patterns were so clear you could work up a predictive model that
would tell you to quite high certainty when and where such near-ground
activity would occur just by looking at the avg brightness of the
stars in certain parts of the sky over the course of hours before that
activity was due to happen.
Using a simple machine learning model my programs predicted from the
initial upoloadings of 1000s of light curves where and when and in
what direction you should be able to look to find even more
interesting things than just the odd bunch of stars suddenly going a
little dimmer over the course of a few hours and then going brighter
again. At that time -- and this is the way AI stuff works -- I had no
real simple mental model of what the machine learning algorithm had
found. It just told me get data about this part of the sky at this
time and you will see something interesting.
So I expanded my uploads to include actual full-frame images of
parts of the sky gathered by various space telescopes. The most
convenient for my monthly Internet bill were TESS images that came in
30 MB FITS files (FITS is a format beloved of astronomers to bundle up
all the information about some part of the sky and can include tables,
gobs of meta-information about the camera and telescope used, and even
tables of sub-images and graphs as well as the meat-in-the-sandwich
32-bit gray-scale detailed images of the part of the sky in question;
it's like the astronomers version of a ZIP file).
So I went about uploading modest numbers of these things from my
favourite space telescope archive and storing them on a big disk on my
local machine. To allow for possible 1000s or millions of images -- I
didn't know how many I would need -- I compressed all the FITS files
with a super compression algorithm. That algorithm took those FITS
files and reduced them by 50% or so. Pretty good performance given
FITS are already somewhat compressed.
But as the work progressed I suddenly found some of these compressed
files were amazingly small. With a normal compressed FITS was 25MB,
some of them were only 4KB long! What had happened?
After some checking it turned out those small FITS files were
"perfectly intact" -- all their heading information was correct and
all the internal checksums were right -- but the actual images in the
file were blank. All zeros. Equal to "perfect black".
Although I'd collected 100s of these images up to this point it
seemed I found a cluster where most of them got zapped somehow. Then
the correlation started to stick out. Only the FITS files
related to the most interesting areas as predicted by the AI programs
seemed to be affected.
I now know those initial files came from a part of the sky near
Neptune's then-current position. It seemed when the telescope pointed
near Neptune "something" went wrong with the machine and its output
got all screwed up.
Neptune, as I've pointed out in some prev posts, seems to highly
correlate with "certain activity". As the earth gets closer and
further away during the course of a normal year it seems UFO
sightings go up and down "in sympathy". And a little too exactly to be
due to just chance, according to various stats tests.
The AI's later told me there was another stunning coincidence. Given
the ups and downs of the numbers of UFO's reported day to day over N
America, it was an amazing co-incidence that on the day (in GMT time)
just before a day where the number was much higher than average the
number of images apparently taken (or, at least, the number available
for upload at the public web site) was always down. That finding also
passed a number of stats tests at high levels of significance.
I now have collected all the data published for TESS since 2018 and
can report these associations continue. Not only do images "go
missing" -- i.e. they do not appear in even the records although we
strongly suspect those images must have been taken and the telescope
was not just broken on that day -- but images that are left on the
website sometimes seem to be blacked out. The TESS telescope consists
of 4 cameras each with 4 sensors of around 2k by 2k pixels. It has an
overall aperture something like 5 by 20 degrees and takes in a good
chunk of the sky. On *some* days you can find images for SOME of these
cameras and SOME of their sensors; others "go missing" or are blacked
out. Seemingly a high proportion of this tampering happens "only"
when the telescope, or just those sensors of those cameras, are
pointing at a part of the sky on a day when certain things were
reported down here on Earth.
The pattern repeats over and over in the course of the telescope's
5+ years of operation. It's not just noise.
We can take the number of images logged for a particular camera/sensor
combination. These logs are provided as separate (large) files on the
relevant website. They're intended to be used to bulk download massive
numbers of images for any research group that wants them. They
*should* contain the designations of all images actually taken by the
telescope. But the number of images for each day/time goes up and down
quite a bit.
Here's a sample from the somewhat large summary file I gathered from
counting up how many times each day/time was mentioned in the names of
the FITS files that contain those images.
2018.631 48
2018.634 48
2018.637 31
2018.639 20
2019.631 48
2019.634 48
2019.637 48
2019.639 48
2020.631 144
2020.634 144
2020.637 144
2020.639 144
2021.631 10
2021.634 118
2021.637 144
2021.639 144
2022.631 144
2022.634 144
2022.637 144
2022.639 144
The date in col 1 is the year/day as a decimal number. I only
grabbed those entries in the file where the decimal part was ".63...",
just to get a sample for you. Col 2 is the number of images attributed
to sensor 1 of camera 1 -- designed on the website by "-1-1-"
appearing in the FITS filename.
The above is typical of the other 15 sensor/camera combinations.
We can see *some* days saw only 10 images "apparently" taken. While
the usual number seems to be 144. I.e. 1 image every 10 minutes during
a normal 24 hour day. So the camera is clicking quite a bit to grab
what we assume is normally 9.216 gigapixels of images per day.
Sure. Some days the thing might get a bit hot and have to be
feathered. But there is a consistent pattern to the "feathering" and
it doesn't seem to entirely relate to conditions out there between
Earth and Moon where TESS orbits every 2 wks.
For each day from 2018 we can look at the number of UFO reports at the
NUFORC. For the dates listed above we find (e.g.):
2018.631 9
2018.634 6
2018.637 4
2018.639 10
2019.631 9
2019.634 7
2019.637 8
2019.639 18
2020.631 27
2020.634 27
2020.637 10
2020.639 25
2021.631 5
2021.634 1
2021.637 5
2021.639 6
2022.631 12
2022.634 11
2022.637 18
2022.639 13
But now the magic happens. If we take the image counts and the UFO
counts we can ask a stats package if there is a statistically robust
association between them. We can allow the program to manipulate the
data a bit -- as long as we are careful about the stats so it just
doesn't MAKE something happen that really isn't there -- to increase
the association to make it obvious even to a blind man it finds the
best match involves taking the log of the number of UFOs, shifting it
back in time 1 day, and grouping like days together after taking into
account "serial correlation" that happens in most data involving time
we find:
Dates similar to: UFO count Image count Power law model
2021.467 1 144 187.058
2022.194 2.24 135.3 141.815
2020.956 3 104 128.281
2022.544 4.50679 136.652 111.553
2022.645 7.07508 131.778 95.5504*(model under-estimates)
2022.658 10.4476 99.1785 83.5816
2018.577 13 48 77.5388*
2022.656 14.4653 86.5891 74.747
2022.634 17.4138 74.6724 70.1346
2022.601 20.268 64.5361 66.5734
2019.768 23 48 63.7449
2022.590 23.6296 68 63.1566
2022.298 26.3684 61.5789 60.8228
2022.626 29.7647 69.4118 58.3446
2019.735 33 48 56.3138
2021.918 33.5714 73.7857 55.9829
2021.383 37 80.4 54.1447*(under)
2022.459 39.3333 112 53.0197**(under, a lot)
2020.333 42.4 48 51.6705
2020.284 45 48 50.6254
2020.295 47 48 49.8752
2020.328 50 48 48.8268
2020.320 55.6667 47 47.0598
2019.388 58 48 46.401
2020.503 62 48 45.3506
2020.314 65.6667 48 44.4647
2020.290 68 41.5 43.9349
2021.915 71.75 32.25 43.1325*(over)
2020.169 80 46 41.5505
2020.287 91 17 39.7527**(over, a lot)
Model:
y = 187.058 * x^-0.343336
beta in -0.343336 +- 0.0803521 (90% CI)
alpha in 5.23142 +- 0.270108
T-test: P(beta<0) = 1.000000
r2 = 0.65361507
calculated Spearman corr = -0.757063
Critical Spearman = 0.432000 2-sided at 1%; reject H0:not_connected
It seems there is a consistent pattern. On the day before a "UFO flap"
somehow the number of images available from TESS are less than usual.
We are forced to conclude that "some process" is involved that removes
images from the TESS database. Where this happens is unclear.
But we can also look at the pattern of "damaged TESS files" -- those
that seem to be blacked out without acknowledgement. Only AFTER you
download them and happen to notice (maybe) they have valid headers but
zero data it seems these also have a beyond-chance pattern. They
associate with times and parts of the sky where something can be
predicted to have happened.
Someone or something is "editing" the telescope database and acting to
remove images that apparently show something they don't want even
scientists to process, let alone maybe take a look at.
Since the patterns are so clear (to the stats programs) it seems such
tampering is creating false patterns in the remaining images that
scientists in the US and around the world rely on to validate their
theories. A growing amount of scientific speculation may be garbage
because of this tampering.
--
"Nothing in life is to be feared, it is only to be understood.
Now is the time to understand more, so that we may fear less."
- Marie Curie
We are not afraid to entrust the American people with unpleasant facts,
foreign ideas, alien philosophies, and competitive values. For a nation that
is afraid to let its people judge the truth and falsehood in an open market
is a nation that is afraid of its people.
-- JFK
foreign ideas, alien philosophies, and competitive values. For a nation that
is afraid to let its people judge the truth and falsehood in an open market
is a nation that is afraid of its people.
-- JFK
A vast array of our most sophisticated sensors, including space-based
platforms, have been utilized by different agencies, typically in
triplicate, to observe and accurately identify the out-of-this-world
nature, performance, and design of these anomalous machines, which are
then determined not to be of earthly origin.
-- Jonathan Grey, NASIC intel officer, Wright Patterson AFB, 06 Jun 2023
[Secret UFO recovery program blown open:]
I hope this revelation serves as an ontological shock sociologically
and provides a generally uniting issue for nations of the world to
re-assess their priorities.
-- David Grusch, 05 Jun 2023
[Talking to Les Kean et al for The Debrief, Grusch called for an end to
nearly a century of global UFO secrecy and warned that humanity needed to
prepare itself for "an unexpected, non-human intelligence contact scenario"].
[David Grusch's] assertion concerning the existence of a terrestrial arms
race occurring sub-rosa over the past eighty years focused on reverse
engineering technologies of unknown origin is fundamentally correct, as
is the indisputable realization that at least some of these technologies
of unknown origin derive from non-human intelligence.
-- Col Karl Nell (ret), 06 Jun 2023
platforms, have been utilized by different agencies, typically in
triplicate, to observe and accurately identify the out-of-this-world
nature, performance, and design of these anomalous machines, which are
then determined not to be of earthly origin.
-- Jonathan Grey, NASIC intel officer, Wright Patterson AFB, 06 Jun 2023
[Secret UFO recovery program blown open:]
I hope this revelation serves as an ontological shock sociologically
and provides a generally uniting issue for nations of the world to
re-assess their priorities.
-- David Grusch, 05 Jun 2023
[Talking to Les Kean et al for The Debrief, Grusch called for an end to
nearly a century of global UFO secrecy and warned that humanity needed to
prepare itself for "an unexpected, non-human intelligence contact scenario"].
[David Grusch's] assertion concerning the existence of a terrestrial arms
race occurring sub-rosa over the past eighty years focused on reverse
engineering technologies of unknown origin is fundamentally correct, as
is the indisputable realization that at least some of these technologies
of unknown origin derive from non-human intelligence.
-- Col Karl Nell (ret), 06 Jun 2023
The US government portrays itself as the world's preeminent
superpower, so to acknowledge that there are things in their
airspace, whatever they are, that are faster and more manoeuvrable
and run rings around fast jets doesn't play very well.
So there's the embarrassment factor, and maybe a little bit of
fear that either an adversary has made a quantum leap in
development, which has left the US in a poor second place, or, as
some believe, this really is extra terrestrial, in which case we're
not at the top of the food chain anymore.
-- Nick Pope, 02 May 2023
superpower, so to acknowledge that there are things in their
airspace, whatever they are, that are faster and more manoeuvrable
and run rings around fast jets doesn't play very well.
So there's the embarrassment factor, and maybe a little bit of
fear that either an adversary has made a quantum leap in
development, which has left the US in a poor second place, or, as
some believe, this really is extra terrestrial, in which case we're
not at the top of the food chain anymore.
-- Nick Pope, 02 May 2023
0 new messages