{ "slug": "255-413270-ufo-s-and-defense-what-should-we-prepare-for", "title": "255 413270 UFO's and Defense What Should we Prepare For", "agency": "NARA / Historical", "year": null, "page_count": 94, "source_page": "https://wearenotalone.space/document/255-413270-ufo-s-and-defense-what-should-we-prepare-for/", "original_file": "https://wearenotalone.space/Season 01/Release_1/255_413270_UFO's_and_Defense_What_Should_we_Prepare_For.pdf", "license": "U.S. Government work — public domain. Text is machine OCR from the original scan; the page image is authoritative.", "pages": [ { "n": 1, "image": "https://wearenotalone.space/transcripts/255-413270-ufo-s-and-defense-what-should-we-prepare-for/p01.jpg", "text": "7/tt/- 45 ;Pt2-o/vftS£1)\n/\nJ./f3Re_.\n15 11-tc. riu:wCJ-1- Cb.H&-774 /('£pv.e.\"J['\n)lov Wll.t... IV~ '77-fc /£e8-!C6 oyl\ny~/2.. ro.l!.M~ Ca.JAi~~ A-.tVO ~\nL 1:;r Or ec,,,,unz-1lWTCe..s o4 /J5­\n::r ./0)>~Po1R..T 6'1-r­\n~\n~LIry A-vD ;'oJ3t;./2 N,4T[.);\n~ 771£ Wr~MJTs ./7/LL, .:z::­\n--rJ-hJK., /l£c..1r-1?-4e/lJJ:>.S.\ni r TlJ _;>ltt1.\n/f1c.Tjc L£:.S ~\n//VC-t-LlDJ:fP Foe\nYLJV.€.. ;J'~~~,::/L ~ o.,J f:4ZS DF\n1ltr£: ?AFey£; :bOC:..V.H&vT LA.)£ 679t/2\ny.ov\nt 5 A $u;...,H~f2j oY' me l2cra -:\nf At.LvJ:>t!.J>\nJi;N,.J (!A-JL/Htf+\",J'.s T/?\"77\" 7i:Jf'f'O/cTIAM- J:>Dc.u/\"'Ic,1.,721770,/\nI _:5, o ,,J p e,'7- . j;:;v1 of\"?.. -41.'2. r~,::;\nCbP71u,U-E.;( A-;- M~.x ~ -,-\"f ~~\nijOµftL ,41/2.~t>,eT,....£1',/~/~,J~ /c.(>LJ}\"f=Qc:.,\nI ~ O,U t! 10.S-\nf\"Le;A ~£= /le~ J;> rJt£\n~~\nf!N:.rta. S'Eaii>,,.J Flu>,,._, Pi,2\nD\n,\nFor Reservations Call 1-800-HOTELS I\n.I" }, { "n": 4, "image": "https://wearenotalone.space/transcripts/255-413270-ufo-s-and-defense-what-should-we-prepare-for/p04.jpg", "text": "-;;::- f!TLu.f~J 77-f/,,Jtc. 0,C l#JMl..e:r5\n1 ' 77fC;2_t3-' ,4-t2£ ,f,/JD/Ze --rH'JMfr.> 'Ttl.Jl >(_,,......\nr1ffel/&rJ /r/V.D ~\n77MJ,JMe­\n.D(V~A-Mf:3...D t:9r / ,/Vyl)vl'l $/;~!>O f-'H'/,\ntfz>~.,,, 0 ,. ,.\n'fH'A'rlk/ ,%;1'7~ \"Ft'fl- ~\nAI.G- v:5\nA-,,JD Ir 7Jrtf!Z£ 1trz£ !vvrf-5-77i> ,J,r­\n~\nCi'J..J,{2.Sf: eA-,_L\n-r).1,£ /?£r,);:11 $.$A~\nA--r q91 q '0 ll(u/ , 2-oz g'i9-f@~­\n~\nFor Reservations Call 1-800-HOTELS 1" }, { "n": 5, "image": "https://wearenotalone.space/transcripts/255-413270-ufo-s-and-defense-what-should-we-prepare-for/p05.jpg", "text": "I\nI\nI\nUFOs and Defense:\nI\n·What Should We Prepare For?\nI\nI\nI\n-An independent report on UFOs written by the French association\nCOMETA. This report details the results of a study by the Institute of\nI\nHigher Studies for National Defence.­\nI\nI\nI\nI\nI\nI\nI\nI\nI\nThis paper originally appeared in a special issue of the magazine VSD\npublished in France in July 1999.\nI\nI" }, { "n": 6, "image": "https://wearenotalone.space/transcripts/255-413270-ufo-s-and-defense-what-should-we-prepare-for/p06.jpg", "text": "I\nI\nI\nI\nI\nUFOs and Defense\nI\nI\n--The COMETA Report-­\nI\nI\nI\nI\nI\nI\nI\nI\nI\nI\nI\nI" }, { "n": 7, "image": "https://wearenotalone.space/transcripts/255-413270-ufo-s-and-defense-what-should-we-prepare-for/p07.jpg", "text": "r-\nI\nI\nI\nI\nI\nI\nI\nI\nI\nI\nI\nI\nI\nI\nI\nI\nI\nI\nI\n\"Stripping the UFO phenomenon ofits irralional layer\"\nForeword by Professor Andre Lebeau, Former chairman of the Centre National\nd'Etudes Spatiales\n(CNES) (French National Center for Space Studies]\nIt is not looked on highly in certain scientific circles to be preoccupied with phenomena\nthat are deemed to come under the heading of popular mythology or that are, at any rate,\noutside the realm ofscience. Such was the case with stones falling from the sky, which\nwas long considered in our country to be the stuffoffable. However, the day that a\nmeteorite shower over the town ofLaigle permitted a collective and indisputable\nobservation, it entered into the domain of science. One century later NASA, no doubt\nhastily, elevated these stones to proof ofthe existence of primitive life on Mars.\n_Phenomena ofthis type pose a preliminary problem for the scientific approach: does a\nscientific fact exist?\n•\nWhen the phenomenon is a matter ofexperimentation, the criterion to be used is simple~\nthe reproducibility of the experiment is the touchstone and furnishes the fact that must\nthen be interpreted. But the situation is more difficult when the phenomenon is not open\nto experimentation, when repeated observation is the only basis on which one can go, as is\nthe case in astronomy and for the most part in geophysics. However, when the fact, albeit\nrare, is collectively and indisputably visible, it is easy to elevate it to the status ofscientific\nobject. The existence ofeclipses, comets, and novas has been recognized_since ancient\ntimes,._even though their interpretation long contained - and sometimes still contains - a\nreligious dimension. Thus collective and simultaneous observation plays the same role as\nthe reproducibility ofexperiments.\nThis is not true when the event is not only rare but discrete as well, and when there is a\nvery small amount ofevidence at each occurrence, which opens the door to various\nsuspicions. Unidentified flying objects, or UFOs, fall into this category. One runs up\nagainst additional difficulties in the case of UFOs, firstly that of how many human\nactivities, especially since the beginning of the space age, have generated atmospheric\nphenomena the origin ofwhich is not immediately ascertainable by those who observe\nthem. In any case, UFOs, the origin ofwhich cannot be attributed to either a human\nsource or a natural mechanism that has been identified by science, are mixed in with a\nbackground noise the origin ofwhich, although difficult to identify, is not at all\nmysterious.\nMoreover, and above all, the existence ofunexplained manifestations, both in the\natmosphere and occasionally on the surface of the earth, inevitably gives rise to a\nfundamental question: are we alone in the universe? Could some ofthese phenomena be\nthe work ofextraterrestrial beings? This question gives the UFO issue a sociological,\nmedia-related, and even religious dimension in a domain that is not that ofscience and\nscientific methods. And it is the very existence ofthis dimension that elicits reactions of\nrejection in the scientific community.\nHowever, a dispassionate examination of the situation should lead those who believe in\nthe value ofscientific method to consider that the very existence ofa strong irrational\nenvironment is another reason to apply the precepts of this method to the issue ofUFOs.\nCOMET A has tried its luck at this in the report that it is presenting, supported, namely,\nby the work performed by GEPAN, which later became SEPRA. The significant place\ngranted to sightings, to testimonies, and to the analysis ofcases that have been explained\nshows the major role played here by the establishment offacts. But we also find in this" }, { "n": 8, "image": "https://wearenotalone.space/transcripts/255-413270-ufo-s-and-defense-what-should-we-prepare-for/p08.jpg", "text": "I\ndocument a reflection on the hypothesis ofextraterrestrial intelligence and of the\nimportance that it could have if studies came together to confirrn it.\nI\nThis report is useful in that it contributes toward stripping the phenomenon of UFOs of\nits irrational layer. When aJI is said and done, the question ofdetennining whether or not\nthose who created this report believe in the exi~tence ofextraterrestrial visitors, concealed\nI\nin a variety ofphenomena that are surprising in appearance but commonplace with respect\nto their cause, is of no real importance. What a scienti?t believes is important in the\nconducting of his research because this is what motivates and drives him. But his beliefis\nI\nnot important to the results of his research nor does it have any effect on those results if he\nis rigorous.\nTable of Contents\nPREFACE\nFOREWORD\nINTRODUCTION\nPART l\nFACTS AND TESTIMONIES\nChapter 1\nTestimonies ofFrench Pilots\nChapter 2\nAeronautical Cases Throughout the World\nChapter 3\nSightings from the Ground\nChapter 4\nClose Encounters in France\nChapter 5\nCounterexamples of Phenomena That Have Been Explained\nPART 2\nTHE EXTENT OF OUR KNOWLEDGE\nChapter 6\nOrganization ofthe Research in France\nPage 27\nChapter 7\nMethods and Results ofGEP AN/SEPRA\nChapter 8\nUFOs: Hypotheses, Modeling Attempts\nChapter 9\nOrganization ofthe Research Abroad\nPART3\nUFOs AND DEFENSE\nChapter 10 Strategic Planning\nChapter 11\nAeronautical Implications\nChapter 12 Scientific and Technical Implications\nChapter 13 Political and Religious Implications\nChapter 14 Media Implications\nCONCLUSION AND RECOMMENDATIONS\nAPPENDICES\nAppendix 1 Radar Detection in France\nAppendix 2 Astronomers' Sightings\nPage 74\nAppendix 3 Life in the Universe\nAppendix 4 Colonization ofSpace\nAppendix S The Roswell Affair - Disinforrnation\nI·\nI\n..\nPage 5\nPage 6\nPage 7\nI\n.· :·\nPage 9\nPage 12\nPage 17\nPage 20\n'\nI\nPage 24\ni\nPage 31\nI\nPage 35\nPage 42\nI\nPage 55\nPage 59\nI\nPage 62\nPage 64\nPage 69\nI\nPage 71\nI\nPage 74\nI\nPage 75\nPage 75\nPage 77\nI\nAppendix 6 The Long History of the UFO Phenomenon - Elements ofa\nI\nI" }, { "n": 9, "image": "https://wearenotalone.space/transcripts/255-413270-ufo-s-and-defense-what-should-we-prepare-for/p09.jpg", "text": "I\n,\nChronology\nPage 80\nAppendix 7 Reflections on Various Psychological, Sociological,\nI\nand Political Aspects ofthe UFO Phenomenon\nPage\n82\nI\nREFERENCES\nPage 87\nGLOSSARY\nPage 90\nI\nThe photo section from pages 43 to 50, as well as pages 2 and 91, were not part of\nthe initial report.\nI\nPublication of:\n[G.S. Presse Communication logo] 79-83, rue Baudin, 92309 Levallois-Perret Cedex.01\n55 21 00 50, fax: 01 55 21 00 55. Societe anonyme with FF 250,000 in capital, in business\nI\nfor 99 years. Sole Chief Executive Officer: Daniel Denis. Publication Director: Daniel\nI\nDenis. Art Director: Richard Y otis. Editorial Assistant: Jacques Peron. Illustrations and\nTechnical Consulting: Bernard Thouanel. Editorial Dept. 01 55 21 00 50. E-mail:\nvsd_hs@worldnet.fr. Public Relations Agent: Image7/Isabelle de Segonzac 01 44 15 93\n94. Sales and restocking: MEP, 01 42 56 12 26,\nI\nUFOs AND DEFENSE\nWhat should we prepare for?\nCOtviETA, an association governed by the Law ofJuly 1, 1901.\nI\nAll reproduction, in whole or in part, translation, and adaptation rights reserved for all\ncountries. Copyright 1999.\nI\nterminal ELL. Photoengraving: Key Graphic. Printing: Berger Levrault, 34, avenue du\nRoule, 92220 Neuily-sur-Seine. Joint Appeals Board No.: 59521. ISSN 1278-916 X.\nI\nCopyright deposit: July 1999.\n© G.S. Presse Communication. The editorial department is not responsible for the loss of\nor damage to texts or photos that are sent to it for consideration. Reproduction in whole\nor in part ofany material published in the magazine is prohibited.\nI\nCover:\nI\nPhoto taken on September 4, 1971, directly over the Tilaran range in Central America\nby an airplane from the National Geographic Institute ofCosta Rica (Bernard Thouanel\ncollection).\nI\n, ,\nI\nI\nI\nI" }, { "n": 10, "image": "https://wearenotalone.space/transcripts/255-413270-ufo-s-and-defense-what-should-we-prepare-for/p10.jpg", "text": "\"Concrete problems are raised that call for a response\nin terms ofaction\"\nby General Bernard Norlain,\nI\nFormer director of the lnstitut des Hautes Etudes de Defense\nNation ale\n(Institute for Advanced National Defense Studies\nI\n(IBEDN)]\nWhen General Letty visited me in March I995 at my office at IHEDN to explain to me\nhis project for creating a new committee for study of UFOs, I assured him ofmy interest\nand referred him to the management ofthe IHEDN Auditors Association (AA), which •\nI\ngave him its support. Knowing that some twenty years earlier the AA had produced and\npublished a preliminary report on the subject in its bulletin, it was but time to update it.\nDenis Letty seemed to me to be the perfect one to spearhead this task~ one month\nI\nearlier, in February, he had organized, within the framework ofthe Ecole de l' Air [Air\nForce Academy] Alumni Association, a conference on unidentified aerospace phenomena.\nBefore a large public, some ofour comrades, former pilots, spontaneously related their\nI\nencounters with UFOs. The person in charge ofstudying these phenomena at the CNES\nthen presented his results, and a well-known astronomer described a scientifically\nacceptable version ofthe extraterrestrial hypothesis.\nI\nThe fields ofknowledge affected by the UFO phenomenon are very diverse, and\nGeneral Letty was able to find within the AA, but on the outside as well, numerous\nI\nexperts whose efforts h~ coordinated. The list of high-level civilian and military degrees\nofthe members ofhis committee is very impressive: officers, engineers, and specialists in\nphysics, life sciences, and social sciences were able to deal with all aspects ofthe study.\nI\nThis is not a purely academic study. Concrete problems are raised, and not only for\ncivilian and military pilots, that call for a response in tenns ofaction. The makeup of\nI\nCOMETA [Committee for In-Depth Studies], which is the name ofthe committee, took\nthese into account. Almost all ofits members have, or had during the course oftheir\ncareers, important responsibilities in defense, industry, teaching, research or various\nI\ncentral administrations.\nI express the wish that the recommendations ofCOMETA, which are inspired by good\nI\nsense, will be examined and implemented by the authorities ofour country. The first\nreport of the AA favored the creation within CNES of the only civilian government agency\nknown in the world dedicated to the study ofUFOs. May this new report, which is much\nmore in-depth, give new impetus to our national efforts and to indispensable international\ncooperation. IHEDN will then have well served the nation and, perhaps, humanity.\n\"Consider all oftile hypotheses\"\nI\nI\nI" }, { "n": 11, "image": "https://wearenotalone.space/transcripts/255-413270-ufo-s-and-defense-what-should-we-prepare-for/p11.jpg", "text": ",\nI\nby Denis Letty,\nAir Force General, 2nd Section, AA (35)\nI\nThe accumulation ofwell-documented sightings made by credible witnesses forces us\nto consider from now on all of the hypotheses regarding the origin ofunidentifiedflying\nobjects, or UFOs, and the extraterrestrial hypothesis, in particular. UFOs are now a part\nI\nofour media environment; the films, television broadcasts, books, advertisements, etc.,\ndealing with UFOs amply demonstrate this.\nAlthough no characterized threat has been perceived to date in France, it seemed\nI\nnecessary to the former auditors of the Institut des Hautes Etudes de Defense Nationale\n(IHEDN) to take stock ofthe subject. Along with qualified experts from extremely varied\nbackgrounds, they are grouped together to forrn a private in-depth fact-finding committee,\nwhich was christened COMETA.\nI\nThis committee was transformed into a COMETA association, which I chair. I would\nI\nlike to thank General Bernard Norlain, former director ofIHEDN, and Mr. Andre Lebeau,\nformer chairman ofthe Centre National d'Etudes Spatiales, without whom COMETA\nwould not have been born.\nI\nIn addition, I wish to acknowledge the various people who agreed to give their\ntestimony or to contribute to this study, and namely:\nJean-Jacques Velasco, Head ofSEPRA at CNES,\nFran~ois Louange, ChiefExecutive Officer ofFlex.image,\n,\nJean-Charles Duboc, Jean-Pierre Fartek, Rene Giraud, civilian and military\nI\npilots,\nEdmond Campagnac, former technical director ofAir France at Antananarivo,\nMichel Perrier, Squadron Commander, Gendannerie Nationale\nI\nM. Soun, ofthe Direction Generale de !'Aviation Civile [Civil Aviation Agency]\nJoseph Domange, Air Force General, Auditors Association delegate general.\nI\nI must also thank the commander ofthe Afr Force Air Operations Command Center for\nits participation during the investigation into flight AF 3532 on January 28, 1994.\nI\nAmong the members ofCOMETA who spared no effort for close to three years, it is\npossible for me to list:\nMichel Algrin, State Doctor ofPolitical Science, attorney-at-law, AA (35), (1)\nI\nPierre Bescond, Weapons Engineer General, 2nd Section, AA (48),\nDenis Blancher, Chief of Police, Police Nationale, Ministry ofthe Interior,\nJean Dunglas, Doctor of Engineering (Ret.), in Water and Foredtry Management AR\nI\n(48)\nBruno Le Moine, Air Force General, 2nd Section, AA (41 ),\nFran~oise Lepine, Fondation pour Jes Etudes de Defense [Foundation for Defense\nI\nStudies], AA (33),\nChristian Marchal, Chief Mining Engineer, Research Director at ONERA\nI\n(National Aerospace Study and Research Office),\nMarc Merlo, Admiral, 2nd Section, AA (35),\nAlain Orszag, Doctor ofPhysical Sciences, Weapons Engineer General, 2nd\nSection.\nI\nI" }, { "n": 12, "image": "https://wearenotalone.space/transcripts/255-413270-ufo-s-and-defense-what-should-we-prepare-for/p12.jpg", "text": ",~\n(/): AA or AR xx: auditor of national or regional promotion no. xx.\nI\nINTRODUCTION\nI\nIn 1976, a committee ofthe Institut des Hautes Etudes de Defense Nationale (IHEDN)\nchaired by General Blanchard1 ofthe Gendarmerie Nationale1 opened the unidentified\nflying objects file. The objective: to make proposals for organizing research and the\ncollection ofdata on these phenomena. The-goal was achieved, because the\nI\nrecommendations ofthis cornm.ittee were followed b,1 the creation of the Groupe d'Etude\ndes Phenomenes Aerospatiaux Non Identifies (GEPAN) [Unidentified Aerospace\nPhenomena Study Group], the precursor to the current Service d'Expertise des\nI\nPhenomenes de Rentree Atmospherique (SEPRA) [Atmospheric Reentry Phenomena\nConsulting Department], a division of the Centre National d'Etudes Spatiales (CNES),\n1.\nwhich is in charge ofthis file. Twenty years later, it seemed useful to us to take stock\nonce again ofthe knowledge regarding these sightings, which are becoming ofgreater and\ngreater interest to a large public that is often convinced ofthe extraterrestrial origin of\nUFOs. Just look at the number offilms or television broadcasts on this subject.\nI\nFor the sake ofconvenience with respect to language, we will use the term UFO\n(Unidentified Flying Object) generally1 instead ofthe more scientific term UAP\nI\n(Unidentified Aerospace Phenomenon).\nWithout a doubt, the phenomenon remains and the number ofsightings, which are\ncompletely unexplained despite the abundance and quality ofdata, is growing throughout\nI\nthe world. On the ground, some sightings, like the Trans-en-Provence sighting in 1981,\nhave been the subject ofin-depth studies proving that something did in fact land on the\nground and parked there. Civilian and military pilots have provided gripping visual\nI\ntestimonies, often corroborated by radar recordings, as was the case recently in France. In\nview ofthe lack ofirrefutable proofregarding the origin of these phenomena, the need for\nunderstanding persists.\ne\nWe will devote the first part ofthis report to several particularly remarkable French and\nforeign cases.\nIn the second part, after having recalled the current organization of the research on\nI\nthese phenomena in France and abroad, we will evaluate the work being done by scientists\nworldwide who are interested in UFOs and are proposing, as we will see, partial\nexplanations that are based on known laws ofphysics.\nI\nSome ofthese (propulsion systems, non lethal weapons, etc.) could become realities in\nthe short, medium and long term.\nWe will review the principal global explanations proposed, focusing on those that are in\nkeeping with the current scientific data, which range from secret weapons to\n-\nextraterrestrial manifestations.\nThe UFO phenomenon involves defense in the broad sense and calls for a certain\nnumber of measures, which we will examine in the last part:\n- [providing] civilian and military pilots with sufficient information to teach them an\nadapted conduct when faced with these phenomena and, more generally, [providing] the\npublic and decision-makers with information,\n- developing the actions ofSEPRA and promoting supplemental scientific monitoring,\nor even research, actions,\n- considering the strategic, political, and religious consequences ofa possible\nconfirmation ofthe extraterrestrial hypothesis, the bizarre connotation of which it is" }, { "n": 13, "image": "https://wearenotalone.space/transcripts/255-413270-ufo-s-and-defense-what-should-we-prepare-for/p13.jpg", "text": "advisable to eliminate here and now.\nPART I\nFacts and Testimonies\nI\nBefore going further, it seems worthwhile to us to present several facts and testimonies\nI\nthat in themselves justify the interest ofthe in-depth study that we are going to develop\nbelow:\n- three testimonies ofFrench civilian and military pilots who encountered UFOs in flight,\n- five major aeronautical cases in the world,\nI\n- three sightings frQm the ground,\n- four cases ofclose encounters in France.\nI\nThese few examples are among the hundreds ofremarkable, that is to say credible and\nwell-documented, cases observed around the world in recent decades. None ofthese\ncases has been explained, whereas the majority ohimes the investigations enable the origin\nI\nofthe phenomena observed by the witnesses to be determined; we will give two significant\nexamples of this.\nI\nChapter 1 - Testimonies of French Pilots\nThree French pilots who encountered UFOs in flight came to testify before the\ncommittee. Their testimonies are all the more interesting because they can be eva1uated\nI\nbetter than other aerial phenomena since they pertain to the aeronautic world.\nI\n1.1 M. Giraud, Mirage IV pilot (March 7, 1977).\nI\nThe sequence of events ofthis incident was reconstructed from radio exchanges\nbetween the pilot and the controller, which are routinely recorded and kept for a specific\nperiod oftime in accordance with the procedure in force at all control centers. The\nI\nincident occurred on March 7, 1977, at around 2100 hours local time during the Dijon\nflyover when the Mirage IV was returning, the automatic pilot engaged, to Luxeuil after a\nI\nnight mission. [The aircraft was] at an altitude of9600 m and flying at a speed of\"Mach\n0.9.\" The flight conditions were very good. The pilot (P), Herve Giraud, and his\nnavigator (N) observed a very bright glow at \"3 o'clock\" (time code) from their aircraft,\nI\nat the same altitude, coming on a collision course and approaching very rapidly. We will\ndesignate it \"assailant\" (A1) in the rest of the account. P queried the Contrexeville\nmilitary radar station that controlled them to ask whether they had a radar contact on the\nI\naircraft coming towards them. In fact, P and N thought that it was an air defense\ninterceptor, as is currently being used, that was seeking to intercept their aircraft to then\nidentify it with its identification beacon.\nI\nThe radar controller (C), who did not have a corresponding radar contact on his scope,\ngave a negative response and asked the pilots to check their oxygen. This request on the\npart ofthe controller is a standard emergency procedure; it shows that the controller is so\nI\nI" }, { "n": 14, "image": "https://wearenotalone.space/transcripts/255-413270-ufo-s-and-defense-what-should-we-prepare-for/p14.jpg", "text": "I\n~\nsurprised by the crew's question that he suspects an oxygen problem capable ofcausing a\n\"hallucination.\"\nI\n\"Assailant A I\" maintained its course towards the Mirage IV. P initiated a bank to the\nright toward A 1, a bank which he was forced to keep tightening (3 to 4 g) in order to try\nto maintain visual contact on A I and to keep it from positioning itself to the rear. Despite\nI\nthis maneuver, A I moved behind the Mirage IV at an estimated distance of 1500 m. At\nthis point P reversed his bank to regain visual contact on A 1 . He saw the glow move\naway to \"11 o'clock.\" He resumed course to Luxeuil. But 45 seconds after he resumed\nI\ncourse to Luxeuil, feeling like he was being \"watched\" according to his own words, P\ntold N, \"you wait and see, it's going to come back.\" And in fact, an identical glow,\nwhich we will call A2, appeared at \"3 o'clock.\"\nI\nP then initiated a very tight bank (6.5 g) to disengage his aircraft from what he now\nconsidered to be a real threat. The glow followed the Mirage !Y's maneuver in order to\nposition itselfto the rear at an estimated distance of2000 m. P reversed, as before, and\nI\n­\nonce again saw the glow disappear under the same conditions. C still did not have a radar\n. '\ncontact on \"assailant A2.\" P and N continued their flight and returned nonnally to the\nLuxeuil base.\nI\nThose are the facts. Two points should be emphasized:\n:!.\n- only a combat aircraft could have had performance comparable to that of A 1 and A2\n(speed, maneuverability). In this case, C would have had a radar contact on this aircraft,\nI\nespecially at that altitude, a contact that he would have seen all the better since there was\nno other traffic in the vicinity ofthe Mirage lY.\n• - given the apparent maneuvers of Al and A2, regardless ofwhether or not they were\nI\nthe same craft, their speed could only be supersonic, which, in the case ofcombat aircraft,\nwould be manifested on the ground by a very loud sonic boom due to the phenomenon of\nthe focusing of the shock wave generated by the bank. Th.is would have been noticed in\nI\nthe surrounding area, especially since it was nighttime. But no sound was heard in the\nregion.\nI\n1.2 Testimony ofa Fighter Pilot (March 3, 1976)\nI\nSince this pilot (P) wanted to preserve his anonymity, the following lines are extracted\nfrom the written deposition that he wished to send to us (he revealed his name\nsubsequently~ he is Colonel Claude Bose). On March 3, 1976, P, then a student pilot at\nI\nthe Combat Flight School at Tours, was making a solo night flight in a T-33 training\naircraft. The mission consisted of navigating at an altitude of6000 m following a Rennes­\nNantes-Poitiers itinerary, then landing at Tours. Several aircraft were following the same\nI\nitinerary at 5-minute intervals. The night was dark but cloudless, and the towns could be\ndetected very clearly at the flight altitude in question. Visibility was greater than 100 km.\nWhile he was flying stabilized at an altitude of6000 m, at a speed of460 km/h, P first saw\nI\nstraight ahead, very far off in the distance (at the detection limit oflights on the ground)\nwhat he at first thought was the launching ofa green signaling flare.\nIn 1 to 2 seconds, this flare exceeded the altitude ofhis aircraft by 1500 m and seemed\nI\nto level offin space before descending in his direction. It approached at a dizzying speed\non a collision course with the aircraft and filled the entire front windshield of the cockpit.\nTh.inking that impact was inevitable, P let go of the joystick and crossed his arms in front\nI\nof his face in a reflex protection gesture. The aircraft was completely enveloped in a very\nbright and phosphorescent green light. P saw a sphere (S) that avoided his aircraft at the\nI\nI" }, { "n": 15, "image": "https://wearenotalone.space/transcripts/255-413270-ufo-s-and-defense-what-should-we-prepare-for/p15.jpg", "text": "I\nr\nI\nvery last moment and passed over his right wing grazing it, all within a fraction ofa\nsecond. P retained the following memory ofthis incident:\n- S was not very large ( l to 2 m in diameter),\nI\n- S was extended by a tail, which was comparable to that on a comet, that was also a\nfluorescent green color,\n- the center ofS consisted ofa very bright white light (magnesium-fire type),\n- the sighting lasted a total ofless than 5 seconds.\nP, who was very shocked by this phenomenon, informed the radar controller (-)\nI\n!I\nensuring the control of the mission on the ground; the controller had not detected anything\non his radar scope. Upon return, two other pilots who had followed the same itinerary as\nP stated that they had seen the phenomenon, but from a distance.\nI\n1.3 Air France Flight AF 3532 (January 28, 1994)\nJean-Charles Duboc (P), captain ofAir France flight AF 3532, was assisted by Copilot\nValerie Chauffour (CP) in making the Nice-London connection on January 28, 1994. At\nI\n1314 hours, while they were cruising at an altitude of 11,900 m in the vicinity of\nI\nCoulommiers in Seine-et-Mame [Department] under excellent meteorological conditions,\nthe chief steward, who was present in the cockpit at the time, pointed out a phenomenon\nthat appeared to him to be a weather balloon. His sighting was immediately confinned by\nI\nthe copilot. P, who in tum saw it, first thought that it was an aircraft banking at a 45°\nangle. Very quickly, however, all three agreed that what they were seeing did not\nresemble anything that they knew of The excellent visibility and the presence of\naltocumulus clouds permitted P to estimate that the phenomenon was at an altitude of\nl 0,500 m and at a distance ofapproximately 50 km. Taking into account its apparent\nI\ndiameter, they deduced that the craft was large. They were struck by the changes in the\nI\nshape ofthe craft, which first appeared in the form ofa brown bell before transforrning\ninto a chestnut brown lens shape, then disappearing almost instantaneously on the left side\nofthe aircraft, as ifit had suddenly become invisible. P reported to the Reims Air\nI\nNavigation Control Center, which had no information on any mobile air presence in the\nvicinity. However, following the existing procedure, Reims informed the Tavemy Air\nDefense Operations Center (CODA) ofthe sighting made by the crew and asked P to\nI\nfollow the \"Airmiss\" procedure upon landing.\nCODA did in fact record a radar track initiated by the Cinq-Mars-la-Pile control center\nat the same time that corresponded in location and time to the phenomenon observed.\nI\nThis radar track, which was recorded for 50 seconds, did cross the trajectory offlight AF\n3532 and did not correspond to any flight plan filed. It should be noted that the\nphenomenon disappeared from the view ofthe crew and the radar scopes at the same\nI\ninstant. The investigations conducted by CODA enabled both the hypothesis ofa weather\nballoon to be ruled out and the precise crossing distance ofthe two trajectories to be\ndetermined, consequently bringing the approximate length ofthe craft to 250 min length.\nI\nIt should be noted that the Northern Regional Air Navigation Center (CRNA), which\nhandles 3000 movements per day, has investigated only three cases over the last seven\nyears, one ofwhich was that offlight AF 3532.\nI\nChapter 2 - Aeronautic Cases Throughout the World\nI\nI" }, { "n": 16, "image": "https://wearenotalone.space/transcripts/255-413270-ufo-s-and-defense-what-should-we-prepare-for/p16.jpg", "text": ".,\nI\nIt is appropriate to specify that those cases that have been sighted from aircraft are\nconsidered to be aeronautic cases. This chapter describes five significant cases that\noccurred in different parts of the world and which were the subject ofan investigation by\nI\nthe authorities ofthe countries in question. In four cases, the objects were detected both\nvisually and by radar. In the fifth case, they were observed by a number ofindependent\n.,\nwitnesses.\n2.1 Lakenheath (United Kingdom) (August 13-14, 1956)\nI\nThe joint USAF - U.S. Air Force - and RAF [Royal Air Force] military bases of\nLakenheath and Bentwaters are located 30 km northeast ofCambridge with respect to the\nI\nfirst and near the coast to the east ofthis city with respect to the second. Unknown aerial\nI\n\"\nobjects followed by their radars during the night ofAugust 13 to 14, 1956, were judged\n··11nide111ified'' by the report published in 1969 by the Condon Commission tasked with\n,:,\nevaluating the research ofthe U.S. Air Force on UFOs (cf Chapter 9). In September\n1971, the magazine Astronautics andAeronautics published a study of the case by Thayer,\nthe radar expert on the Condon Commission, which was based in part on a study\npresented in 1969 by Professor MacDonald, an atmospheric physicist. For the record, we\n~\npoint out that on several occasions, and namely in 1976, Philippe Klass, editor ofthe\njournal Aviation Week and Space Technology, attempted to criticize this work and to\nI\nreduce the case to a series of ordinary events (meteorites, radar propagation anomalies,\netc.). The incidents began at the Bentwaters base, preceded, between 2100 and 2200\nhours, by unusual sightings ofthe approach control radar [center], which we will not go\nI\ninto in further detail. They took place as follows:\n- At 2255 hours, the radar detected an unidentified object moving east to west passing\nover the base, always almost into the wind at an apparent speed of2000 to 4000 miles per\nI\nhour (mph), or 3200 to 6400 km/h. No sonic boom was mentioned. The personnel ofthe\nBentwaters control tower said they saw a bright light flying over the ground from east to\nwest \"at an incredible speed\" at an altitude ofapproximately 1200 m. At the same time,\nI\nthe pilot ofa military transport plane flying over Bentwaters at an altitude of 1200 m\nstated that a bright light passed under his plane tearing east to west \"at an incredible\nspeed. \" The two visual sightings confirmed the radar detection.\nI.\n- The Bentwaters radar operator reported these concurring radar and visual sightings to\nthe shift supervisor at the Lakenheath [air] traffic radar control center, an American\nnoncommissioned officer to whom we are indebted for a quite detailed report ofthese\nI\nsightings and those that follow. The report, which was sent to the Condon Commission in\n1968 by the then retired NCO, is coherent and does not contradict the documents in the\nUSAF [Project] Blue Book file except in a few minor points; among these documents, the\nI\nregulation telex sent by Lakenheath to the Blue Book team on the day ofthe incident and\nthe report forwarded two weeks later to that same team by American Captain Holt, an\nintelligence officer at Bentwaters.\nI\n- The shift supervisor at the Lakenheath base alerted his radar operators. One ofthem\ndetected a stationary object approximately 40 km southwest ofthe base, almost in the axis\nof the trajectory of the supersonic object seen at 2255 hours. The shift supervisor called\nI\nthe Lakenheath approach radar [center], which confirmed the sighting. The radar\ntechnicians at the air traffic control center suddenly saw the object immediately go from\nimmobility to a speed of600 to 950 km/h. The shift supervisor notified the base\nI\ncommander.\n·I\nI" }, { "n": 17, "image": "https://wearenotalone.space/transcripts/255-413270-ufo-s-and-defense-what-should-we-prepare-for/p17.jpg", "text": "I\nThe object changed direction several times, describing line segments ranging from 13 to\nI\n30 km, separated by abrupt stops for 3 to 6 minutes; the speed always went from a value\nI\nofzero to a value of some 950 km/h without any transition.\nVisual sightings were made from the ground and confirmed the high speed and\nastounding accelerations. The regulation telex sent by Lakenheath concluded: ''The.fact\nI\nthat radar and ground visual observations were made on its rapid acceleration and abntpt stop\ncertainly lend credence to the report.\"\n- After 30 to 45 minutes, the RAF sent a night fighter, a Venom two-seater, in pursuit\nI\nofthe object. The Lakenheath air traffic radar control center guided it in the direction of\nthe object 1 0 km east ofthe center. The pilot acquired the target visually and on radar,\nthen lost it. The center then directed the plane 16 km to the east ofLakenheath; the pilot\nI\nagain acquired the target and said, \"my machine guns are locked onto him. \" A short time\nafterward, he once again lost his target; but the target was followed by the radar operators\nat the center. They informed the pilot that the object had made a rapid movement to\nposition itself behind him and was following him at a short distance. The pilot confirmed\n(this]. Watched by the radar technicians, the pilot tried every maneuver for about I0\nI\nminutes in order to move back behind the object (steep climbs, dives, sustained turns), but\nhe didn't succeed: the UFO followed him at a constant distance according to the ground\nradar stations. Finally, low on fuel, he returned to base, asking that someone tell him\nI\nwhether the object continued to follow him. The UFO did, in fact, follow him for a short\ndistance, then came to a standstill. The radar technicians then saw the object make several\nshort moves, then leave in a northerly direction at about 950 km/h and disappear from\nI\nradar range at 0330 hours.\n- A Venom sent to replace the first had to quickly return to base due to mechanical\nproblems before having been able to establish contact with the object.\nI\nThayer concluded his article in the journal Astronautics and Aeronautics in this manner:\nI\n\"taking into consideration the high credibility ofinformation and cohesiveness and continuity\nofaccount. combined with a high degree of'strangeness', it is also certainly one ofthe most\ndisturbing UFO incidents known today.\"\nI\n2.2 The RB-47 Aircraft in the United States (July 17, 1957)\nI\nThis case, which appears as \"unidentified\" in the Condon report, has been cited and\nstudied extensively for 40 years. Physicist James MacDonald published the results of his\ninvestigation in 1971 in the journal Astronautics and Aeronautics. Phillip Klass, the\nI\naforementioned journalist, then endeavored in 1976 to trivialize the facts, which was\nhighly contestable from the outset. The bulk ofthis interpretation was refuted at the end\nof 1997, upon completion ofan in-depth investigation contained in a memorandum from\nI\nthe aerospace technology researcher Brad Sparks.\nWe will summarize here the important sequences of events ofthe case, which show a\nluminous unidentified flying object detected at night not only by sight and on radar, but\nI\nalso by pulsed microwave emissions coming from its direction:\nThe RB-4 7 was a bomber the bomb bays ofwhich had been converted to hold three\nI\nofficers each equipped with means enabling emissions from ground radar~ to be detected\nand their azimuth direction, but not their distance or the nature ofthe signals, to be\nspecified. In the south central region of the United States, where the aircraft was making\na training flight that day, numerous radar stations were emitting signals the frequencies of\nwhich were close to 3000 MHz and the pulses ofwhich lasted 1 microsecond and\nI\nI" }, { "n": 18, "image": "https://wearenotalone.space/transcripts/255-413270-ufo-s-and-defense-what-should-we-prepare-for/p18.jpg", "text": "I\noccurred every 600 microseconds. The radar~ scanned the horizon four times per minute.\nThree other officers (pilot, copilot, navigator) were in the cockpit and, as a result,\nI\ncould themselves see out ofthe aircraft. The six officers were questioned by MacDonald\nin 1969. They related that:\n- The first incident took place above Mississippi, probably at around 09302 (0330 local\n1·\ntime}, when the aircraft, going back to the north from the GulfofMexico, was\napproaching the coast a little to the east ofthe Mississippi delta, flying at Mach 0. 75.\nCaptain MacClure detected on his screen a blip corresponding to a pulsed microwave\nI\nsource located behind and to the right ofthe RB-47 (at \"S o'clock\") that rapidly passed\nthe aircraft and turned around it, departing again on its left in the other direction (between\n\"6 o'clock and 9 o'clock\"). The source was therefore airborne and supersonic. MacClure\n1·\nnoted the characteristics ofthe signal: they were those ofthe aforementioned ground radar\nstations, with the exception ofthe length ofthe pulses, which were 2 microseconds. He\ndid not report this incident immediately, thinking that it was perhaps·a malfunction ofthe\nI\nelectronics. As Klass writes, at the time there were no supersonic aircraft either in the\nUnited States or in the USSR large enough to transport a radar, the signal from which\npossessed the characteristics that were observed.\n- The following incident occurred at 101OZ in Louisiana, when Commander Chase,\npilot, and Captain MacCoyd, copilot, saw an intense bluish-white light aim at the aircraft\nfrom \" 11 o'clock,\" then jump from their left to their right and disappear while it was at \"2\no'clock.\" Klass showed that this object was perhaps a meteorite the trajectory of which\ncaused an optical illusion, but, at the time, Chase and MacCoyd wondered whether it\nwasn't a UFO. Hearing them, MacClure remembered his prior detection and looked for a\nsignal ofthe same type.\n- He found this signal at 10302, which was identical to the previous one and, perhaps\nby coincidence, came from \"2 o'clock.\" This signal was confirmed by Captain\n1·\nProvenzano, whose detector was itself also able to operate at around 3000 MHz. It could\nnot have been the signal from a fixed radar, because its ''2 o' clock\" direction remained\nunchanged when the aircraft followed its route to the west for several minutes. The\nI\naircraft entered Texas, then came within range of the \"Utah\" radar [center] located near\nDallas. The crew reported to Utah, which detected both the aircraft and an object\nmaintaining a constant distance of 18 km from it.\nI\n- At 10392, still in Texas, Commander Chase perceived a large red light, which he\nestimated was moving 1500 m below the aircraft at approximately \"2 o'clock.\" The\naircraft was flying at an altitude of 10,500 m, and the weather was perfectly clear.\nt\nAlthough the commander was not able to determine either the shape or the size ofthe\nobject, he had the distinct impression that the light was emanating from the top of the\nobject.\nI\nAt 10402, he received authorization to pursue this object and notified Utah. He\nslowed down, then accelerated; Utah informed him that the object was mirroring his\nmovements, all the while maintaining a constant distance of 18 km.\nI\n- At 10422, Chase accelerated and saw the red object tum to the right in the direction\nofDallas; this was confirmed by MacClure.\n- At around 10502, a little to the west ofDallas, the object stopped and simultaneously\nI\ndisappeared from the view of the radar(~) (Utah and the onboard radar that had just\ndetected the object when the RB-47 had approached it) and from MacClure's screen (the\ndisappearance ofan object from a radar screen is less surprising nowadays; it calls to mind\nI\nthe active stealth technologies currently in development ifnot in operation). The aircraft\nthen banked to the left. MacClure picked up a signal that was perhaps the one from Utah.\nI\nI" }, { "n": 19, "image": "https://wearenotalone.space/transcripts/255-413270-ufo-s-and-defense-what-should-we-prepare-for/p19.jpg", "text": "I\nI\nVisual and radar contact were regained.\nAt 10522, Chase saw the object drop to around 4500 m. He had the RB-47 make a\ndive from 10,500 to 6000 m. The object then disappeared from his view, from the\nUtah radar, and from MacClure' s screen simultaneously.\n- At 10572, still near Dallas, the object reappeared on MacClure's screen, and\nI\nUtah indicated\nthat it had prepared a \"CIRVIS\" (Communications Instructions for Reporting Vital\nIntelligence Sightings) report, a secret urgent radio report sent to the Air Defense\nCommand, which is mandatory in the event ofa sighting by the Air Force of an\nunidentified aerial object. At 1058Z, the pilot regained visual contact at ''2 o'clock.\" A\nfew minutes later, seeing his fuel reserves drop, he decided to return and headed roughly\nI\nnorth toward Oklahoma City. The object then positioned itself behind the aircraft at a\ndistance of 18 km, as reported by Utah, which tried to send fighter jets in pursuit ofthe\nunknown [object]. The object, flowing lower than the RB-47 and behind it, could not be\nseen from the cockpit, but it was detected on MacClure' s screen until Oklahoma City, well\noutside the range ofthe Utah radar. Then it suddenly disappeared from the screen at\nI\n11402.\nI\n2.3 Tehran (September 18 to 19, 1976)\nI\nThis incident took place during the night of September 18 to 19, 1976. Different\nnewspapers worldwide reported it more or less accurately: for example, France-Soir in\nthe September 21st issue. An American citizen took laborious steps with the U.S.\nI\nauthorities to obtain a report, invoking the freedom of information act. He finally obtained\nit from the Defense Intelligence Agency (DIA). Other U.S. documents have been obtained\nI\nsince then.\nInterviews with generals and the Iranian air [traffic] controller involved in this affair\nenabled the DIA report to be confirmed and supplemented a bit, namely with the mention\nI,\nofproper names. The following summary resulted from a reading ofthe all the\ninformation:\n- At around 11:00 p.m. on September 18, the Tehran airport control tower received\nI\nseveral calls reporting a strange immobile luminous object in the sky above the Shemiran\nresidential district in the northern part ofthe capital. The person in charge ofthe night\nshift, Hossain Perouzi, went out to look at the object with binoculars. He testified that he\nI\nsaw a rectangle, probably corresponding to a cylindrical object, the ends ofwhich pulsed\nbluish-white lights. In the middle ofthe object, a small red light described a circle.\nPerouzi reported this strange sighting to the Imperial Air Force Command, which alerted\nI\nGeneral Youssefi, the third in command ofthis air force. He went out on his balcony and\nsaw an object similar to a star, but much bigger and brighter~ he ordered a Phantom F-4\nreaction aircraft, the mission ofwhich he directed through Perouzi as intermediary.\nWhen the F-4 came to 45 km from the object, its flight instruments and all its means of\ncommunication (radio and intercom) suddenly stopped working. The pilot aborted the\nI\ninterception and headed for his base. The crew then regained use oftheir instruments and\nmeans of communication.\n- A second F-4 was sent by General Youssefi. The UFO's echo on its screen was\nI\nsimilar to that of a Boeing 707. The F-4 approached the UFO at a relative speed of280\nkm/h. When it came to 45 km from it, the UFO accelerated and maintained a constant\ndistance of45 km from the F-4. The crew was not able to determine the size ofthe object\nI\nI" }, { "n": 20, "image": "https://wearenotalone.space/transcripts/255-413270-ufo-s-and-defense-what-should-we-prepare-for/p20.jpg", "text": "I\nbecause it shone so intensely. Its brightness came from lights arranged in a rectangle,\nchanging rapidly from glue to green, to red, and to orange.\n- Suddenly a bright object with an apparent diameter one half or one third of that ofthe\nI\nmoon exited the UFO and headed rapidly for the F-4. The pilot tried to shoot a\nSidewinder missile at the object, but at the same instant his fire control console and his\nI\nmeans ofcommunication (radio and intercom) became inoperable. He promptly initiated a\nbank and a dive, but the object changed direction and pursued the aircraft at a distance of\napproximately 6 km. Finally, the object moved inside the F-4's bank and departed in order\nI\nto reenter the UFO from which it had exited.\n- A short time afterwards, an object again exited the UFO and rapidly headed straight\ndown to the ground. The F-4 crew waited to see it explode, but the object seemed to\nI\ntouch down gently and shine a very bright light over an area 2 to 3 km in diameter. The\ncrew, momentarily blinded, orbited long enough to recover their night vision before\nlanding at the Tehran airfield. It noted that it lost communications (radio and intercom)\nI\nwhenever their aircraft crossed a certain zone. It should be pointed out that a civilian\naircraft also lost communications when it crossed that zone. The next day, the crew was\ntaken by helicopter to the place where the object had apparently landed, a dried up lake,\nI·\nbut it didn't find any trace [of the object].\nAn attached note from DIA was just as astonishing as the report itself; it indicated that\nthe information had been confirmed-by other sources and ended with this assessment:\nI\n\"An outstanding report. This case is a classic which meets all the criteria necessary for a valid\nstudy ofthe UFO phenomenon. \"\n!!:. The obiect was seen by multiple witnesses from different locations ... ,\n!!.:. The credibility ofmany ofthe witnesses was high (an Air Force General, qualified aircrews, and\nI\nexperienced radar operators),\ns Visual sightings were confirmed br radar,\n4.. Similar electromagnetic effects (EME) were reported by three separate aircraft,\nI\n~ There were physiological effects on some crew members (i.e. loss of night vision due to the\nbrightness o[the obiect),\n.f An inordinate amount ofmaneuverability was displayedby the UFOs.\"\n·1\nThe attempt by KJass to trivialize this case shows how solid it is.\n2.4 Russia (March 21, 1990)\nI\nThis case took place at night in the Pereslavl-Zalesski region east ofMoscow. It was\nreported in an article by Aviation General Igor Maltsev, Air Defense Forces commander,\nI\nwhich appeared in the newspaper Rabochaya Tribzma (\"Workers' Tribune\") on April 19,\n1990, entitled \"UFOs on Air Defense Radars\" (cf the book by Marie Galbraith\nreferenced in Chapter 9. 1 ).\n,I\nThe article mentions the dispatch ofcombat aircraft on a mission to intercept the UFOs\ndetected. General Maltsev, who summarized over one hundred visual sightings coHected\nby unit commanders, stated:\nI\n\"I am not a specialist in UFOs, and therefore I can only correlate the data and express mv own\nsupposition. According to the evidence o[these eyewitnesses, the UFO is a disk with a diameter from\nJOO to 200 meters /320 to 650 (eets/. Two pulsating lights were positioned on its sides ... Moreover, the\n·1\nobject rotated around its axis and performed an 'S-turn' flight both in the vertical and horitontal\nplanes. Next the UFO hovered above the ground and then flew with a speed exceeding that ofthe\nmodern iet fighter bv two or three times .. The obiects flew at altitudes ranging from JOO to 7000 m.\n(300 to 24,000 feet/. The movement o[the UFOs was not accompanied by sound o(anr kind and was\nI\ndistinguished by its startling maneuverability. It seemed the UFOs were completelv devoid o[inertia.\nIn other words, they had somehow 'come to terms' with gravity. At the present time, terrestrial\nI\nI" }, { "n": 21, "image": "https://wearenotalone.space/transcripts/255-413270-ufo-s-and-defense-what-should-we-prepare-for/p21.jpg", "text": "machines could hardh· have such capabilities. \"\nI\n2.5 San Carlos de Bariloche (July 31, 1995)\nI\nSource SEPRA\nAerolineas Argentinas flight AR 674, a Boeing 727 en route from Buenos Aires, was\n140 km from San Carlos de Bariloche, a tourist resort in the central Andes where it was\nI\npreparing to land.\nI\nAt that precise instant, a power outage plunged the town into darkness, and the pilot\nreceived the order to stay on standby for a few minutes before making his final approach.\nWhen he began his approach, the pilot noticed a strange star. At the same time, the\nI\ncontrol center put a second airplane that had arrived in the sector on standby. Flight AR\n674 continued its approach, but when it had completed its tum and was in the ax.is ofthe\nrunway, an object resembling a large aircraft appeared on its right side and flew parallel to\nI\nit! This object had three lights, one ofwhich was red, in the middle ofit. The airport\nlights failed again, and the runway and approach ramp lights also went out. The airplane\non standby observed the same phenomenon from its position.\nI\nSince the pilot could not land, he pulled up and turned again in order to reposition\nhimself in the ax.is ofthe runway. At that moment, the object, which had become\nluminous, moved behind the airplane, stopped, ascended vertically, and once again\nstopped. It moved back in front ofthe airplane before finally disappearing in the direction\nofthe Andes Cordillera. The crew and passengers offlight AR 674, those on the other\nI\nairplane, the airport controllers, and some ofthe inhabitants of San Carlos watched this\nunusual aerial ballet dumbfounded.\nI\n-\nThis case is interesting in more than one respect:\n·1\nthe sighting was corroborated by multiple independent observers both in flight and on\nthe ground,\n- the phenomenon lasted several minutes,\nI\n- there were different trajectories, some ofwhich closely followed those ofthe airplane,\n- there was an observation ofan electromagnetic phenomenon (the lights ofth~ town\nand the airport went out) directly related to the presence of the object.\nI\nChapter 3 - Sightings from the Ground\nI\nThis chapter deals with sightings from the ground, two ofwhich were reported to the\ncommittee by direct witnesses ofthe phenomena observed. Here agai~ their testimonies\nare all the more interesting since they pertain to the aeronautic world and the phenomena\nwere observed during the day.\nI\nI\n3.1 Phenomenon Observed by Numerous Witnesses at Antananarivo (August 16,\n1954)\nTestimony before the commitlee\nEdmond Campagnac (C), a fonner artillery officer and former chief of technical\nI\nservices for Air France in Madagascar who is now retired, came to testify before the\ncommittee. The phenomenon described below occurred on August 16, 1954, in\nI\nI" }, { "n": 22, "image": "https://wearenotalone.space/transcripts/255-413270-ufo-s-and-defense-what-should-we-prepare-for/p22.jpg", "text": "I\nAntananarivo. It was seen by several hundred witnesses.\nAt 1700 hours, when the personnel ofthe Air France office were waiting for the mail to\nI\nanive, someone spotted a \"large ·· green \"ball\" in the sky moving at high speed. The first\nthought ofthe witnesses was that it was a meteorite. The phenomenon disappeared\nbehind a hill, and they thought that the green ball was going to crash into the ground and\n,\n,\nthat they were going to feel the impact.\nHowever, it reappeared after a minute. In passing directly over the observers, it\nrevealed itselfto be \"a sort ofmetal rugby hall preceded by a clearly detachedgreen\nI\nlens/-shapedportion] with sparks issuingfrom the rear.\" In the estimation ofthe\nwitnesses, the \"ball\" was the length ofa DC4 airplane, or some forty meters long. The\ngreen lens[-shaped portion] separated itself [ and remained] a little less than 40 m out in\nI\nfront, with fairly long sparks [ coming out] in the rear. The craft flew over Antananarivo at\nan estimated height of50 to 100 meters, an estimation that was made possible by\ncomparison with the height ofa nearby hill. When the craft was moving, shop lights went\nI\nout, and animals exhibited a real anxiety.\ne\nAfter having flown over Antananarivo, the craft departed in a westerly direction. When\nit flew over the zebu park in the town, the craft caused a violent fright reaction among\nthem. This is a surprising detail, since normally these animals do not show any agitation\nwhen Air France planes pass by. Two or three minutes later, an identical craft was\nobserved 150 km from there above a farm school. There, too, the herds were overcome\n\"I\nwith panic. Ifthe craft sighted was the same one as the one in Antananarivo, its speed\nwould have had to be on the order of3000 km/h. According to C's account, General\nFleurquin, Commander-in-Chief in Madagascar, assembled a \"scientific commission\" to\nI\nconduct an investigation into these phenomena. No trace ofthis investigation could be\nfound in the Air Force archives; however, GEPA (Groupe d'Etudes des Phenomenes\nAerospatiaux [Aerospace Phenomena Study Group]) bulletin no. 6 ofthe 2nd half of 1964\nI\ndescribed this sighting.\n3.2 Sighting by a Pilot ofa Saucer Close to the Ground (December 9, 1979)\nI\nGEPANISEPRA investigation and testimony before the committee\nAt the time ofthe incident, former Air Force Lieutenant-Colonel Jean-Pierre Fartek (F)\nI\nwas a Mirage III pilot in the 2nd fighter squadron at Dijon. F is currently a pilot for a\nprivate company. F was living, and still lives, in the same village near Dijon. His house is\nlocated at the end ofa housing development looking out onto fields. Approximately 250\nI\nm away is a grove oftrees with an average height of 15 mat maximum. On December 9,\n1979, at around 9: 15 a.m., F and his wife saw an unusual object (hereinafter called M) in\nthe field near their house. The weather and visibility were excellent. M, the dimensions of\nI\nwhich they estimated to be 20 m in diameter by 7 m thick, was hovering approximately 3\nm above the g round in front of the grove of trees, which partially concealed it. In\ncomplete agreement with his wife, witness F described it as:\nI\n- having the shape oftwo superposed saucers with very distinct contours inverted one\non top of the other and not exhibiting any portholes or lights,\n- being metallic gray on the upper portion and darker (bluish) on the lower portion,\nI\nwith a perfectly delimited separation between the upper side and the underside ofthe craft.\nTh.is color difference could not be due to a difference in lighting given the position of the\nsun,\ni\n- in constant motion as a result of~ slight oscillations, the frequency of which was\nnot very rapid, like something trying to balance,\nI\nI" }, { "n": 23, "image": "https://wearenotalone.space/transcripts/255-413270-ufo-s-and-defense-what-should-we-prepare-for/p23.jpg", "text": "I\n- not making any noise,\nI\n-\n- not causing any turbulence on the ground either when it hovered or when it departed,\nI\nnot having left any trace on the ground.\nAfter observing it for a period of time which was hard· for him to determine, F saw M\noscillate faster; he had the impression that M tilted slightly forward (as a helicopter does\nafter lift-off when it begins level flight). F saw M leave in a horizontal direction at a very\nlow altitude without making any noise, without leaving any trail, and at a very high speed\nI\nand disappear on the horizon in a few seconds. F reported [the incident] to the\nGendarmerie de l'Air at the Dijon air base. He thought that other people had seen the\nphenomenon but had not dared to go report it, namely, his neighbors and their cruldren,\nI\nwho reportedly made the same sighting.\nThis sighting by a pilot professionally well informed ofaeronautical phenomena was\nnever explained.\nI\n3.3 A Case of Multiple Witnesses at a Russian Missile Base (July 28-29, 1989)\nI\nHeading the UFO reports declassified by the KGB in 1991 is a file relating to an army\nmissile base near Kapustin Yar in the region ofAstrakhan, wruch was related in Marie\nGalbraith's book (cf. Chapter 9.1). The English-speaking public learned ofit through the\nI\nMuscovite journal A URA-Z ofMarch 1993. Military personnel from two centers on the\nbase prepared written depositions of their visual sightings, wruch were made under good\nvisibility conditions. The file, which is incomplete, does not mention any possible radar\nI\ndetections. It begins with a brief summary ofthe case, the author ofwhich was an\nI\nanonymous KGB officer, followed by an account of seven written testimonies:\n- Five testimonies from the first center were provided by Lieutenant Klimenko, two\ncorporals, and two soldiers. On the night ofJuly 28 to 29, these military personnel sighted\nI\nUFOs between 2215 and 2355 hours at a distance of3 to 5 km. Up to three objects were\nseen simultaneously. One object silently made jerky movements, with very abrupt starts\nand stops, and periods of immobility. All ofthe witnesses saw a fighter jet attempt to\napproach one UFO, wruch escaped at lightning speed, \"giving the impression that the\naircraft was hovering. \" Only the noise from the aircraft was heard, whereas the UFO\nI\nmust have reached supersonic speed.\n- Two other testimonies from a center near the first one concern the sighting of a UFO\nfrom 2330 to 0130 hours at a distance ranging from a few kilometers to 300 m. This UFO\nI\nwas described by Second Lieutenant Volochine as a disk 4-5 min diameter, surmounted\nby a brightly lit hemispherical dome. The second lieutenant attached a sketch ofthe\nsaucer torus deposition. The saucer sometimes moved abruptly, but soundlessly, and\nI\nsometimes remained immobile 20-60 m above the ground. In the company ofsoldier\nTichaev, Volocrune saw it emitting a phosphorescent green light, hovering 300 m from\nthem and some 20 m above a missile depot; it illuminated this depot for several seconds\nwith a moving beam oflight.\n,\n,\nIn a report that was consistent with the report of his superior, soldier Tichaev stressed\nthe lack of noise made by the object, even when a short distance away, which prevented\nI\nhim from confusing it with a helicopter. The two witnesses, who were joined after some\n:I\ntime by the guard team, had watched the maneuvers of the object above the center and the\nsurrounding area for two hours.\nChapter 4 - Close Encounters in France\nI\nI" }, { "n": 24, "image": "https://wearenotalone.space/transcripts/255-413270-ufo-s-and-defense-what-should-we-prepare-for/p24.jpg", "text": "I\n4.1 Valensole, Alpes-de-Haute-Provence (Department] (July 1, 1965)\nI\nIn-depth investigation by the Gendarmerie Nationale\nAt Valensole on July 1, 1965, Maurice Masse, who left his home at 5:00 a.m., headed\nI\nfor his lavender fields located on the plateau near the village. Before starting his tractor at\naround 6:00 a.m., he lit a cigarette and at that moment heard a hissing sound that attracted\nhis attention. Emerging from behind a pile of stones, he saw an object resting in his field\nI\napproximately 90 m from him. Its shape was reminiscent ofthat ofa \"Dauphine\"\nautomobile standing on six legs with a central pivot. He approached it with caution, at a\ndistance often meters or so, thinking he might surprise people about to steal his lavender\nI\nfrom him. He then saw two small beings, one ofwhom, who was turned in his direction,\nreportedly pointed a tube at him that he took from a sort of bag hanging on his left side.\nMaurice Masse indicated that he was totally immobilized in place, numbed and paralyzed,\nI\nbut completely aware ofthe events that were unfolding before his eyes. The two beings\n. J\nthen got back in their craft. He watched them while they were behind a sort ofdome, and\nhe heard a heavy noise when the object lifted up offthe ground. He also remarked that\nI\nthe tube that was under the object, touching the ground, began to tum, as well as the six\n·.A\nlegs, which retracted under the machine. The object then ascended in a vertical direction\nbefore tilting diagonally and disappearing more rapidly than a jet. Maurice Masse\nI\nremained immobilized in this manner for about 15 minutes before coming to, then\nresuming his work and going to tell his story in the village, where the gendarmes, having\nlearned ofthe incident, questioned him during the day.\nI\nThe Valensole gendarmerie force, then the Digne investigations squad, investigated this\ncase for several days. The investigations ofthe gendarmerie established the existence, at\nthe spot indicated by Maurice Masse, ofa depression impressed into the ground, which\nI\nhad been soaked in that place. In the center ofit was a cylindrical hole 18 cm in diameter\nand 40 cm deep with smooth walls. At the bottom ofthe hole were three other bent holes\n6 cm in diameter. Along the object's axis offlight, over some one hundred meters, the\nI\nlavender beds were dried up. This phenomenon lasted for several years, during which time\nthe witness tried in vain to replant the plants within a radius ofseveral meters around the\ntracks.\nI\nDespite a few contradictory elements in Maurice Masse's account, the data collected by\nthe two gendarme brigades confirmed the plausibility ofthe facts, particularly the effect on\nthe environment and on the witness himself, who slept twelve to fifteen hours a night,\nI\nfollowed by the paralysis ofwhich he had been a victim, for several months. The\ninvestigation into the witness's character did not turn up any specific information that\nwould permit one to suspect him ofmythomaniac behavior or ofstaging a hoax.\nI\n4.2 Cussac, Cantal (Department] (August 29, 1967)\nI\nGEPAN/SEP RA investigation\nThe Cussac incident has occupied a special place among the UFO cases, since a second\nI\ninquiry was conducted in 1978, as an example, at the request ofthe GEP AN scientific\ncouncil. On August 29, 1967, at around 10:30 a.m., during a beautiful sunny morning on\nthe high plateaus in the center ofFrance, two young children were watching the family's\nI\nherd. The dog that accompanied them alerted them that a cow was getting ready to jump\nI\nI" }, { "n": 25, "image": "https://wearenotalone.space/transcripts/255-413270-ufo-s-and-defense-what-should-we-prepare-for/p25.jpg", "text": "I\nI\nover the low wall ofthe enclosure. The boy, who was 13 years old at the time, got up to\nmake the cow come back, when he spotted four children whom he did not recognize on\nI\nthe other side ofthe road.\nSurprised by what he saw, he called his sister, when he noticed an extremely bright sphere\nback behind the unknown children. They then realized that these were not children but\nI\nsmall black beings whose height did not exceed 1.20 m. Two ofthem were standing next\nto the sphere, another was kneeling before it, and the fourth, who was standing, held in its\nhand a sort ofmirror that blinded the children. The boy tried to call out to them, but the\nsmall beings then hurriedly returned to the sphere. The children saw them rise from the\nground and penetrate the ball from the top, diving in head first. The sphere took off with\nI\na hissing sound, then rose into the sky describing a continuous spiral movement at high\nspeed. The dog barked, the cows started to moo, and a very strong odor ofsulfur filled\nthe air. The second inquiry began in 1978 with a team ofinvestigators from GEP AN and\nI\nqualified outside advisors, one ofwhom was a former examining magistrate.\nThe highlights ofthis second inquiry did not have to do with the facts or the account, but\nwith new elements such as secondary witnesses found at the site who provided\nI\nsupplemental information and strengthened the credibility ofthe case. In particular, a\ngendarme who arrived on the scene immediately following the incident found tracks on the\nground at the place indicated by the children and noted the very strong odor ofsulfur.\nI\nLikewise, another witness also came forward who admitted being in a granary close to the\nsite and clearly remembered a hissing sound very different from that ofa helicopter ofthe\ntime.\nI\nThe reconstruction at the site in the presence ofthe two main witnesses confirmed both\nthe descriptive accounts and the circumstances that followed the sighting. At the time the\nchildren gave offa strong odor ofsulfur, but, above all, they suffered from physiological\nI\ndisorders, and their eyes ran for several days. These facts were certified by the family\ndoctor and confirmed by their father, who was mayor ofthe village at the time. In the\nconclusion ofthis_, second inquirythe judge gave his opinion on the witnesses and their\nI\ntestimony: \"There is noflaw or inconsistency in these various elements that permit us to\ndoubt the sincerity ofthe witnesses or to reasonably suspect an invention, hoax, or\nhallucination. Under these circumstances, despite the young age ofthe principal\nI\nwitnesses, andas extraordinary as the facts that they have related seem to be, I think\nthat they actually observed them. \"\nI\n4.3 Trans-en-Provence, Var [Department] (January 8, 1981)\nI\nGEPANISEPRA investigation\nI\nIn Trans-en-Provence on January 8, 198 1, at around 5: 00 p. m., a man who was\nbuilding a small shed for a water pump in his garden reportedly was witness to what is\nperhaps one ofthe most unusual cases ever observed and studied in France. A reflection\nofthe sun on something moving in the sky supposedly attracted his attention, allowing him\nto observe the descent, then the abrupt landing on a platform ofearth located below his\nI\nhouse, ofa silent metal object. The object, which was ovoid in shape, did not exhibit any\napparent projections, wings, control surfaces, or engine that would permit one to liken it\nto some type ofaircraft. The object rested on the platform ofearth for a few short\nI\nseconds, still without emitting any noise, then it took offand disappeared at high speed in\nthe azure blue sky. The account could stop at this simple visual sighting if there hadn't\nbeen visible mechanical tracks and imprints in the shape ofa crown, which pushed the case\nI\nI" }, { "n": 26, "image": "https://wearenotalone.space/transcripts/255-413270-ufo-s-and-defense-what-should-we-prepare-for/p26.jpg", "text": "I\ninto the domain ofthe unexplained.\nThe gendarmerie and then GEPAN conducted an in-depth investigation including\nnumerous interviews with the witness and his neighbors. The expert's appraisals ofthe\nI\nground - the talcing ofsoil and plant samples followed by analyses - showed unequivocally\nthat it really was a case ofan unidentified heavy metal object that had actually landed on\nI\nthe platform ofearth. The analyses of plant samples taken at the site indicated that they\nwere not dealing with any type of [known] aircraft, or even a helicopter or military drone,\nwhich were hypotheses that were considered and analyzed.\nI\nThe vegetation at the landing site - a sort ofwild alfalfa - had been profoundly marked\nand affected by an external agent that considerably altered the photosynthesis apparatus.\nIn fact, the chlorophyll, as well as certain amino acids ofthe plants, exhibited significant\nI\nvariations in concentration, variations which decreased with the distance [ ofthe plants]\nfrom the center ofthe mechanical track. These effects disappeared completely two years\nlater, thus revealing a specific and particular type oftraum·a. According to Professor\nI\nMichel Bounias ofthe ecology and plant toxicology laboratory oflNRA [National\nInstitute for Agronomic Research] who performed the analyses, the cause ofthe profound\ndisturbances suffered by the vegetation present in that ecosystem could likely be a\nI\npowerful pulsed electromagnetic field in the high frequency (microwave) range. Studies\nand research are still being conducted in regard to this case and numerous leads have been\nexplored. None ofthese leads has-been able to satisfy all ofthe conditions that would\nI\nenable the object that landed in Trans-en-Provence on January 8, 1981, to be identified\nwith certainty, and this is all the more true with respect to the detennination ofits origin.\nI­\n4.4 Nancy, Meurthe-et-Moselle [Department], the so-called \"Amaranth\" Case\n(October 21, 1982)\nI\nGEPANISEPRA investigation\nThe \"Amaranth\" Case concerns the sighting during the day by a witness, a cellular\nbiology researcher, ofan object that hovered above his garden for 20 minutes. The\nI\ntestimony recorded by the gendarmerie less than 5 hours after the sighting is summarized\nas follows:\n- The witness was in his garden in front of his house at around 12:35 a.m. after work\nI\non October 21, 1982; he saw a flying craft, which he first took for an airplane, come from\nthe southeast. He saw a shiny craft. He indicated that there were no clouds, that the sun\nwas not in his eyes, and that visibility was excellent. The craft's speed ofdescent was not\nI\nvery great, and he thought that it was going to pass over his house. Once he realized that\nthe trajectory ofthe craft was bringing it toward him, he backed up 3 to 4 meters. This\ncraft, which was oval in shape, stopped approximately one meter from the ground and\nI\nremained hovering at this height for about 20 minutes.\n- The witness stated that since he had looked at his watch, he was absolutely certain\nabout the length oftime the craft hovered. He described the craft as follows: ovoid in\nI\nshape, approximately I min diameter, 80 cm thick, the bottom halfmetallic in appearance\nlike polished beryllium and the upper half the blue-green color of the inner depths ofa\nI\nlagoon. The craft did not emit any noise, nor did it seem to emit any heat, cold, radiation,\nmagnetism, or electromagnetism. After 20 minutes, the craft suddenly rose straight up, a\ntrajectory which it maintained until it was out ofsight. The craft' s departure was very\nI\nfast, as if it were under the effect ofstrong suction. The witness indicated, finally, that\nthere were no tracks or marks on the ground and the grass was not charred or flattened,\nI\nI" }, { "n": 27, "image": "https://wearenotalone.space/transcripts/255-413270-ufo-s-and-defense-what-should-we-prepare-for/p27.jpg", "text": "I\nbut he did remark that when the craft departed, the grass stood straight up, then returned\nI\nto its normal position.\nThe interest ofthis sighting, apart from its strangeness, lies in the visible traces left on\nthe vegetation and, namely, on an amaranth bush, the tips of whose leaves, which had\nI\ncompletely dried up, led one to think that they had been subjected to intense electrical\nfields. However, despite short time delays before intervention, the sampling conditions\nI\nand then the storage ofthe sample did not permit this hypothesis to be verified definitively.\nBased on an earlier study on the behavior of plants subjected to electrical fields, it\nI\n-\nemerged that:\n- the electrical field, which was what probably caused the blades ofgrass to lift up, had\nto have exceeded 30 kV/m,\nthe effects on the amaranth that were observed were probably due to an electrical\nfield that had to have far exceeded 200 kV/mat the level of the plant.\nI\nChapter 5 - Counterexamples of Phenomena That Have Been Explained\nThe cases reported in the preceding chapters have remained unexplained, despite the\nrichness oftheir data. Such cases are in the minority. Many sightings of aerial phenomena\nmade in France that the witnesses could not understand and reported to the gendarmerie\nhave been explained after a short investigation by the gendarmerie and/or\nGEPAN/SEP RA: the causes ofthese have been the moon, planets, aircraft, weather\nballoons, reflections from automobile headlights on clouds; etc., and, very rarely, hoaxes.\nSometimes the investigation yielded more unusual explanations. We will give two\nexamples.\nI\n5.1 A Strange Object Crosses a Highway (September 29, 1988)\nI\nGEPANISEPRA investigation\nAn auto mechanic driving on the Paris-Lille freeway saw an enormous red ball cross the\nroad a few dozen meters away from him and roll down below the road. Casting •\nI\nreflections oflight and enveloped in dense smoke, it finally came to a halt in a field.\nI\nTroubled by this disturbing observation, the auto mechanic apparently reported it to the\nhighway gendarmes. On the chiefs orders, the gendarmerie then sealed offthe freeway\nand a zone several kilometers around the object. The principal witness and his family were\nI\ntaken to the hospital, where they underwent a series of examinations. Civilian and military\nsecurity officers went to the site of the incident, equipped primarily with Geiger counters.\nAt that time, in fact, they were waiting for the Soviet satellite Cosmos 1900, which was\nI\nequipped with a nuclear power generator, to fall, and precise instructions had been given.\nWhen consulted, CNES very quickly informed them that Cosmos 1900 was overflying_the\nIndian Ocean at that very moment. Did the red ball come from space? Advancing with\nI\ncaution, monitoring their nuclear radiation detectors, the security specialists drew near a\nsphere approximately 1.50 min diameter. Under the bright light from the searchlights,\nthey saw that it bore no sign of the considerable heat build-up or mechanical effects that\nI\natmospheric reentry would have produced. It appeared to be intact, and small mirrors\ncovered its surface. No smoke or radioactivity were detected near it.\nIt was later learned that this sphere, which was intended to serve as a decoration at a\nJean-Michel Jarre concert, had fallen from the truck that was carrying it to London. The\nI\nI" }, { "n": 28, "image": "https://wearenotalone.space/transcripts/255-413270-ufo-s-and-defense-what-should-we-prepare-for/p28.jpg", "text": "I\nsmall mirrors stuck to its polystyrene casing were for reflecting the show' s lighting\neffects ...\nI\n5.2 A Bright Glow in a Village in the Dombes Region (March 10, 1979)\nI\nGEPANISEPRA investigation\nOn March 13, 1979, the local [gendarrnerie] force ofa small village in the Dombes\nregion was alerted by an inhabitant who said he had seen an unidentified flying object over\nI\nthe town during the night of March IO to 11 . In the course ofits investigation, the\n[gendarmerie] force recorded a total offour testimonies, three of which were totally\nindependent ofone another. The first witness, a restaurateur in the village, described the\nI\nphenomenon as a bluish and purplish luminous mass slightly oval in shape and around 15\nmeters in length. The light was so bright that the village square was lit up as ifit were\nbroad daylight, to such a degree that the public lighting, which goes on automatically,\nI\nwent out. Two other witnesses, who were in a car close to the village, reported that this\nluminous mass preceded their vehicle on the road about 2 m ahead ofthem. They\ninformed the gendarmes that this light went out suddenly after an orange-colored light\nI\nappeared on each side ofthe glow.\n~\nFinally, a fourth witness, a fish farmer, said he had been awakened that night by a dull\nnoise and had seen a bright bluish glow. The next day, all the fish in one ofhis fish\nI\n(-------) tanks, catfishes, were found dead. The presence ofa power line hanging over the\ntank enabled the gendarmes to focus their investigation on phenomena ofan electrical\nongm.\nI\nGEPAN/SEPRA did the same during the investigation that it conducted on the site a\nfew days later. It discovered very quickJy that the IO-kV power line hanging over the tank\nhad melted. The information provided by [the French electricity company] EDF enabled\nI\nthem to demonstrate that since this line was some thirty years old, it was very likely that\ncorrosion and oxidation of the aluminum wires had caused a power arc effect in the line,\nprobably in conjunction with a corona effect. This would explain, on the one hand, the\nI\nbluish glow and the noise heard by the witness and, on the other hand, the public lighting\ngoing out. The glow was, in fact, bright enough to trigger the photoelectric control cell,\nI I\nwhich was located close to the melted line.\nFinally, the fish died as a result ofbeing poisoned by drops ofaluminum that fell in the\ntank for several minutes.\nI\nPART2\nI\nThe Extent of Our Knowledge\nI\nChapter 6 - Organization of the Research in France\nI\nIn I 977, the Centre National d'Etudes Spatiales was tasked with the mission ofsetting\nup a permanent structure for the study of unidentified aerospace phenomena (UAP): the\nGroupe d'Etudes de Phenomenes Aerospatiaux Non Identifies (GEPAN). This\nI\nI\nI" }, { "n": 29, "image": "https://wearenotalone.space/transcripts/255-413270-ufo-s-and-defense-what-should-we-prepare-for/p29.jpg", "text": "I\nestablishment had within it the skills and resources appropriate to this mission, in\nparticular, engineers and personnel with high-level technical knowledge who were in close\ntouch with scientific circles. A scientific council chaired by Hubert Curien and composed\nof twelve members who were representative ofthe social and exact sciences guaranteed\nthat this complex and delicate subject would be handled with all the necessary precision.\nThis council had the job ofguiding, organizing, and reviewing the work ofGEPAN\nannually.\nI\nThree phases can be distinguished in the progression ofthe activity connected with the\nstudy of UFOs in France, which culminated in 1988 in the creation ofthe Service\nd'Expertise des Phenomenes de Rentree Atmospherique (SEPRA), which succeeded\nI\nGEPAN, still within CNES:\n- a phase that consisted ofsetting up the organization and defining the procedures for\nthe collection and processing ofdata, which is described in this chapter,\nI\n- a phase that consisted ofdefining the scientific method for studying cases,\n- a phase that consisted ofimplementing the previously defined methods and\nprocedures, the last two of which are discussed in the next chapter.\nI\nSEPRA plays a more limited role in the study ofUFOs than does GEPAN, the scientific\ncouncil ofwhich has ended its mission\nI\n6.1 The Setting Up the Organization Phase\nI\nGEPAN's first job was to form a partnership among the different public, civilian, and\nI\nmilitary agencies with a view to organizing the collection and analysis of reliable data.\nThe Gendarmerie Nationale, the civil and military aviation authorities, the National\nWeather Service, etc., were approached and brought together in this organization via\nI\nagreements and protocols established with GEP AN.\nThe first goal set was the rapid acquisition and provision ofdata collected at the sites\nwhere a phenomenon was sighted. To do this, in accordance with the directives ofthe\nI\nscientific council, GEP AN was tasked with the mission offorming teams ofspecialized\ninvestigators for the collection ofpsychological and physical data, such as, for example,\ntaking samples of tracks in the ground. In parallel to this organization, various civilian and\nI\nmilitary research laboratories were asked to participate in expert's appraisals and analyses\nofthe data collected in investigations, such as, for example, the processing of\nphotographic documents and radar recordings.\n6.2 Participation of the Gendarmerie Nationale\nI\nIt was in February 1974 that the first instructions were given tasking the Gendannerie\nNationale with the job ofcollecting and centralizing spontaneous testimonies on UFOs.\nI\nPreviously, these testimonies had been collected on an occasional basis in the regional\nI\n[gendarmerie] forces and rarely gave rise to the drafting of reports or to in-depth\ninvestigations (the Valensole case in [ 1965]). The administrative or technical authorities\ndid not process or use these documents.\nI\nBeginning in May 1977, one ofthe six copies ofthe report drafted by the regional\ngendarmerie forces was forwarded to GEPAN, which from then on became the recipient\nofall information collected on UFOs.\n6.2. t Role and Action of the Gendarmerie Nationale\nI\nI" }, { "n": 30, "image": "https://wearenotalone.space/transcripts/255-413270-ufo-s-and-defense-what-should-we-prepare-for/p30.jpg", "text": "I\nEach gendarmerie force possesses a manual, the \"gendarmerie handbook,\" which\ncontains all of the instructions on the procedures to be followed in the collection ofdata\nI\non unidentified aerospace phenomena. Depending on the degree ofcomplexity ofthe case\nreported, the level ofintervention may range from the simple transcript ofa testimony to\nan actual investigation, which may be conducted jointly with the GEP AN/SEPRA\nI\ndepartments at the locations ofsightings and often results in an in-depth report.\n6.2.2 Use of Data Collected by the Gendarmerie Nationale\nI\nOnce the information has been collected locally by the gendarmerie, it is forwarded in\nthe form ofa report to the Gendannerie Nationale headquarters in Paris, which issues a\nI\ncopy ofit to GEP AN/SEPRA. The latter processes it at two different levels:\n- at the first level, the report is analyzed, then entered into a database, and perhaps is\nprocessed statistically for the purpose ofestablishing classifications and typologies of\nI\nphenomena,\n- at the second level, which relates to more complex \"UAP D\" (category D unidentified\naerospace phenomena) cases, the investigation in the field generates a set of research\nI\nactivities with respect to elements for further processing that results in the drafting ofa\ndetailed, in-depth investigation report~ the report may be used for track interpretation\nstudies.\nI\n6.2.3.Assessment and Results of the Cooperation with the Gendarmerie Nationale\nI\nSince 1974, over 3,000 gendarmerie reports representing an average ofthree\nspontaneous testimonies per document have been collected and forwarded to\nGEP AN/SEPRA. Added to this are some one hundred investigations and interventions in\nI\nthe field, conducted jointly with the local [gendarmerie] forces. AU ofthese have\npermitted the characterization ofa set of rare, natural and artificial phenomena that have\noccurred with varying frequency which would not have been able to be identified without\nI\nthis type oforganization. Thanks to this collaboration, it has been possible to study UFO\ncases like the Trans-en-Provence and \"Amaranth\" cases (see Chapter 4) under excellent\nconditions, showing that there was a remnant ofevents the nature ofwhich had yet to be\nI\nidentified. A volume ofinformation describing the objectives sought by CNES in the\nstudy of UFOs was widely disseminated to all ofthe regional [gendarmerie] forces.\nSupplemental information and training, [ end ofline cut off] direction ofofficers and\nI\nlower-level gendarmes, is regularly provided by the Gendarmerie Nationale schools to\nsensitize the [gendarmerie] force commanders to this subject.\nI\nI\nThe results ofthis collaboration could be more effective. Regular updating ofthe data\ncollection procedures would be desirable, as well as shorter time delays before\nintervention for investigations between the time the local [gendarmerie] force learns of the\nI\ncase and the time when SEPRA intervenes. This reduction in the intervention time would\nconsiderably diminish the loss of information, particularly with respect to effects on the\nenvironment. It would also be important for the gendarmerie forces to be routinely\nI\ninformed ofthe results ofwork and investigations carried out by SEPRA. However, the\nI\nI" }, { "n": 31, "image": "https://wearenotalone.space/transcripts/255-413270-ufo-s-and-defense-what-should-we-prepare-for/p31.jpg", "text": "I\nI\nresources currently available in terms of personnel and budget allocations do not permit a\nresponse with the efficacy desired.\nI\n6.3 Participation ofthe Air Force\nI\nJust after World War II, the first reports ofFrench aeronautic UFO sightings were\ncollected and archived by the Air Force Chiefof Staff's Office ofPlanning and Studies\n(EMAAIBPE).\nI\nWhen GEP AN was created, a memorandum ofunderstanding defined the respective\nroles ofthe two agencies for the processing ofinformation relating to cases of military\naeronautic sightings. In principle, all UFO sightings must be reported to the military air\nI\n[traffic] control center in question, which forwards the information to the Air Operations\nCenter (CCOA) in Tavemy. The latter is responsible, in collaboration with the Air Force\nChief ofStaff's Space Office, for forwarding it to GEPAN/SEPRA. At the same time, all\nI\nradar information is recorded in the radar control centers and kept for a minimum ofone\nmonth and longer on request. This information is made available to investigators if\nI\nneeded.\nA protocol established with the Anny defines the conditions for the forwarding of\ninformation collected in flight by pilots ofthe Army Air Corps (ALAT).\nI\n6.4 Participation ofthe Civil Aviation Authority\nThe same type oforganization and procedures is used by the civil aviatiori authority to\ncollect and process the information relating to UFO sightings made by civilian pilots. A\nI\nprotocol signed between the Civil A via ti on Directorate (DGAC) and CNES permits\nGEPA.N/SEPRA to have access to UFO sighting reports drafted by national and foreign\nI\nairlines crews. To this end, a sighting report form prepared jointly by DGAC and\nGEPAN/SEPRA is made available to crews at the air [traffic] control centers of the civil\nI\naviation authority and airlines. In addition, the radio conversations between the crew and\nthe air [traffic] control [center] are routinely recorded and attached to the detailed sighting\nreport.\nI\nThere is also a regulation concerning flight incidents that could involve safety. In this\ncase, the flight captain must follow the \"Airrniss\" procedure, which routinely triggers an\ninvestigation by the DGAC.\nI\n6.5 Additional Research Resources\nI\nNumerous civilian (public or private) and military bodies contribute to the expert\nappraisals performed in investigations and work by GEPAN/SEPRA. This involvement\ntakes place at two levels, either in the collection ofdata in the field and the utilization of\nsighting reports or in the\nI\nanalysis ofdata after the expert's appraisal and the theoretical and experimental research\nthat are deemed necessary.\nI\nCooperation agreements have been established, particularly with various bodies that can\nbenefit in return from the results ofinvestigations of interest to their own area of study,\nI\nI" }, { "n": 32, "image": "https://wearenotalone.space/transcripts/255-413270-ufo-s-and-defense-what-should-we-prepare-for/p32.jpg", "text": "I\nfor example:\n- lightning (EDF, CEA [French Atomic Energy Commission], the National Weather\nI\nService, ONERA, CEAT [Toulouse Aeronautic Test Center]),\n- meteors (CNRS [National Center for Scientific Research], DGA [French General\nDelegation for Annaments]),\nI\n- line disturbances (EDF, France Telecom [French telecommunications company]),\n- group sociology and, in particular, sects (CNRS, universities),\n- photography, the study offilms, the processing ofsatellite imagery (Flex.image\nI\ncompany).\nThe following three applications should be emphasized:\nI\n6.5.1 Sample Analysis\nI\nGEP AN/SEPRA is supported by various civilian and military laboratories, including\nthose ofthe Etablissement Technique Central de l'Annement (ETCA), [Central Technical\nAnnaments Institution] for analyzing soil and plant samples collected during the course of\nI\ninvestigations.\nI\n6.5.2 Use of Photographs\nImage processing work was performed at ETCA between 1981 and 1988. This work\nI\nenabled the techniques and procedures, listed in GEP AN technical memorandum no. 18,\nfor studying supposed UFO photographs to be defined. Diffraction filters were_ issued to\neach gendannerie regional unit to permit on-site collection ofinformation over the light\nI\nspectrum emitted.\nI\n6.5.3 Sky Surveillance System\nA system called \"ORION' was studied and partially deployed by [the Ministry of]\nDefense for the purpose ofmonitoring, identifying, and predicting the passage ofsatellites,\nI\nparticularly over national territory. It should meet, at least partially, the need for the\nsurveillance ofUFO-type light phenomena. The system consists of\nI\n- the current surveillance and tracking radar systems and listening antenna on the ship\nMonge,\n- two radar and optical surveillance systems and one optical imaging system:\nI\n• the \"GRAVES\" surveillance radar system, which will be capable ofdetecting\nobjects from I n12 [in size] at a distance of 1500 km,\n• the \"SPOC\" [Sky Observation Probe System] optical surveillance system, which\nI\nuses CCD cameras to detect and determine the trajectory oforbiting satellites or\nmagnitude 7 to 8 space debris (the installation ofequipment at two sites is currently under\nway),\nI\n- finally, the development ofthe 4 m diameter \"SOLSTICE'' telescope, which may be\nprovided with adaptive optics, for the observation ofobjects m geostationary orbit\n(36,000 km).\nI\nI\nI" }, { "n": 33, "image": "https://wearenotalone.space/transcripts/255-413270-ufo-s-and-defense-what-should-we-prepare-for/p33.jpg", "text": "I\nI\nChapter 7 - Method and Results of GEPAN/SEPRA\nI\n7.1 Method Developed by GEPAN\nI\nGEPAN developed an original method for studying rare, randomly occuning\nphenomena. Meteorites are among these phenomena. Scientists have long refused to\nconsider sightings ofstones that have fallen from the sky, which are generally reported by\nI\nrural inhabitants. Fortunately, in 1803, the physicist Jean-Baptiste Biot conducted an in­\ndepth investigation in the village ofLaigle in Orne [Department] about three weeks after_it\nwas reported_ that stones had fallen from the sky. Biot examined numerous stones and\nI\ncertain evidence (broken branches, perforated roofs, fires) and questioned many\nindependent witnesses. He prepared a convincing report that gave scientific ~xistence to\nmeteorites.\nI\nThe method developed by GEP AN was approved by its scientific council. It basically\nconsists ofidentifying initially unknown phenomena and perfonning a joint analysis offour\nI\ntypes ofdata concerning:\n- witnesses: physiology, psychology, etc.,\n- testimonies: accounts, reactions to questions, general behavior, etc.,\nI\n- the physical environment: weather, air traffic, photographs, radar data, traces left on\nthe environment, etc.,\n- the_psychosocial_environment: readings and beliefs ofwitnesses, possible influence of\nI\nthe media and various groups on these witnesses, etc.\nGendarmerie reports often contain sufficient data in order to be able to identify the\nphenomenon sighted. In many cases, the phenomenon turns out to be an airplane, a\nI\nplanet, a satellite, etc. In other cases, a fairly large supplemental investigation is\nconducted by GEPAN/SEPRA. An in-depth study can take up to two years. The analysis\nof traces left on the environment may result in specialized laooratories being called on for\nI\nassistance (see the Trans-en-Provence and \"Amaranth,, cases in Chapter 4).\nFinally research was conducted in collaboration with the universities in order to perfect\nthe investigation method. CNES, out ofa concern for scientific precision, adopted the\nterm \"UAP\" instead ofthe term UFO, which is more well known but more restrictive.\nGEPAN is the group that studies UAPs.\nI\n7.2 First Classification ofUAPs (Unidentified Aerospace Phenomena)\nI\nAfter a study is conducted, each case is classified by GEPAN/SEPRA into one ofthe\nI\nfollowing four categories, depending on the extent to which it has been identified:\n- Category A: completely identified phenomenon,\n- Category B: phenomenon that can probably be identified but which cannot be\nI\nidentified with certainty due to a lack ofevidence,\n- Category C: phenomenon that cannot be identified due to a lack ofdata,\n- Category D: phenomenon that cannot be identified despite the abundance and quality\nI\nofthe data.\nCategory D UAPs represent 4 to 5% ofthe cases and are called UAP Ds. They include\nsightings of phenomena, some of which were close to the ground1. within a few meters of\nthe witnesses. The strangest and most mysterious cases in this category are generally\nI\nI" }, { "n": 34, "image": "https://wearenotalone.space/transcripts/255-413270-ufo-s-and-defense-what-should-we-prepare-for/p34.jpg", "text": "I\nlabeled CE3s (close encounters ofthe third kind) according to the classification proposed\nby Professor A. Hynek, an astronomer and consultant to the USAF, within the context of\nI\nthe Blue Book Project (cf. Chapter 9.1 ).\n7.3 Typology of UAP Ds\nI\nThe detailed statistical analysis ofUAP Ds enables a precise determination ofthe\ndistribution oftheir physical characteristics: speed, acceleration, silence, shape, effects on\nthe environment. It is interesting to note that statistical studies in the USSR yielded\nI\ndistributions comparable to those determined by Claude Poher, the first head ofGEPAN,\nfrom some 200 French cases, or 1,000 cases worldwide. It would be desirable to be able\nto develop UAP D statistical studies in France.\nI\n7.4 Investigations ofRemarkable Cases\nI\nAround one hundred investigations have been conducted by GEP AN/SEPRA. Some of\nthem have highlighted rare physical atmospheric phenomena associated, for example, with\nI\nlightning~ others have revealed unusual psychological behavior ofwitnesses caused, for\nexample, by taking hallucinogenic drugs. Several very in-depth investigations based on\nanalyses ofevidence have demonstrated, in the end, the physical presence ofa\nI\nphenomenon the nature and origin ofwhich remain unknown. Two cases related in\nChapter 4 stand out in our minds, the Trans-en-Provence case ofJanuary 8, 1981, and the\n\"Amaranth\" case ofOctober 2 1, I 982. The investigations lead us to believe that double­\nI\nsaucer-shaped objects were close to the ground for some time, then departed toward the\nsky leaving traces on the vegetation and, in the Trans-en-Provence case, on the ground\nitself. They are detailed in GEP AN technical memoranda no. 16 and no. 17 (see the\nI\nreference list in Chapter 6).\nI\n7.5 Aeronautical Cases\n7.5.l Data on French Aeronautical Cases\nI\n- Twelve French aeronautical cases have been brought to the attention of\nGEPAN/SEPRA~ only three or four ofthese can be considered to fall into category D.\nI\n- The first UAP D case identified dates back to 1951. It involved Vampire military\nI\n.\naircraft in the Orange area. In two other very extraordinary sightings, which are presented\nin Chapter 1, military pilots reported the presence ofobjects with aeronautical\nperformances inconsistent with the maneuvers ofclassic aircraft over the region ofTours\nin 1976 and ofLuxeuil in 1977. However, not until January 28, 1994, was the crew ofa\nregularly scheduled Air France commercial airplane able to collect the first case ofa visual\nI\nsighting correlated with a radar detection over 50 seconds long (see Chapter 1.3).\n7.5.2 Aeronautical UAP D Cases Worldwide\nI\nThe aeronautical UAP D cases known since 1942 were initially enumerated in a\ndocument entitled Rencontres dans le cie/ {Encounters in the Sky], by Dominique\nI\nWeinstein, the French portion ofwhich SEPRA contributed to. The list ofsightings\nI\nI" }, { "n": 35, "image": "https://wearenotalone.space/transcripts/255-413270-ufo-s-and-defense-what-should-we-prepare-for/p35.jpg", "text": "I\nI\nworldwide includes the description of489 well-documented cases ofaeronautical UAP D\nsightings the sources of which were duly verified. Most of the infonnation on these\nI\naeronautical UAP Ds is drawn from official sources, government authorities, the Air\nForces ofdifferent States, or agencies like SEPRA.\nThis list offers a classification according to criteria with respect to the quality ofthe\nsighting. It ranges from simple visual sightings, describing the specific performances or\nmaneuvers of the phenomenon observed ( speed, acceleration, maneuverability, silence,\nI\netc.), to more elaborate sightings, mentioning environmental disturbances caused by the\naeronautical UAP Ds, such as radio interference or radar jamming, navigation instrument\nmalfunctions, or even physical effects on the crew (heat, blinding, etc.).\nI\nBetween 1947 and 1969, that is(-) during the time ofthe U.S. Air Force Blue Book\nProject on UFOs, 363 sightings were identified. 1952 is the year in which the greatest\nnumber ofsightings were recorded: 68. A total of63 countries are cited as having been\nI\nthe scene ofat least one aeronautical sighting.\n•\nI\n7.5.3 \"RadarN isual\" Cases Worldwide\nI\n-\n\"Radar/visual\" cases are those in which a visual sighting is associated with an onboard\nradar and/or ground radar detection. It is noted that:\nI\n-\nthe first sightings in Japan and the USSR date back to 1948,\n- 30 ofthe 68 countries cited in the list reported \"radar/visual\" cases,\n- ofthe 489 cases in the report, 101 were \"radar/visual\" cases (21%),\nI\nof the 363 cases in the Blue Book report, 76 were \"radar/visual\" cases (21%),\n- in 1952, I 6 out of68 cases were \"radar/visual\" cases (23 .52% ).\nIn conclusion, we can clearly establish that from 1942 to 1995, at least 500 well­\nI\ndocumented and recognized aeronautical UAP D sightings were identified throughout the\nworld, nearly 20% ofwhich were \"radar/visual\" cases. They furnish proof ofa physical\nreality of phenomena that exhibited paradoxical maneuvers.\nI\n7.6 The Physical Reality of UAP Ds\n7.6.1 An Initial Report as Early as September 1947 in the United States\nI\nWe have seen that the work ofGEPAN/SEPRA showed that there was an entire\nI\ncategory ofrare physical phenomena occurring at varying frequency that could not be\nclassified as known natural or artificial phenomena. These phenomena, UAP Ds, which\nwe have higWighted, both in the aeronautical sphere (military and civilian aeronautical\nI\ncases) and close to the ground ( cases ofclose encounters), support other cases ofwell­\ndocumented sightings that have been verified by official authorities throughout the world.\nIt is interesting to note that as early as November [sic] 1947, right at the start ofthe very\nI\nfirst wave of modem UFO sightings, in the United States, General Twining, head ofthe\nAir Material Command, drafted a report on \"flying disks, \" the conclusions ofwhich are\nvery explicit:\nI. The phenomenon reported is something real~ .and not visionary or fictitious\nI\n2. Disk-shaped objects the size ofwhich is comparable to that ofour aircraft do exist.\n3. It is possible that some sightings correspond to natural phenomena.\n4. The very high rate-of-climb observed, rhe maneuverability. and the escape\nI\nI" }, { "n": 36, "image": "https://wearenotalone.space/transcripts/255-413270-ufo-s-and-defense-what-should-we-prepare-for/p36.jpg", "text": "I\nmaneuvers when the disks are detected lead one to assume that they are pilotedor\noperated by remote control.\n, ,\n5. Most witnesses describe objects with a metalsurface that are circular or elliptical\nin shape, the upper portion ofwhich is dome shaped, flying without making any\nnoise in a fonnation ofthree to nine objects ...\nI\n7.6.2 GEPAN/SEPRA's Work\nI\nWe do not have irrefutable tangible proof in the forrn of material, either whole or in\nfragments, that confirm the physical nature ofUAP Ds and their artifact character.\nI\nNevertheless, the collection and expert appraisal work carried out at GEP AN/SEP RA for\nover 20 years confinns the statements Genera] Twining made in 1947.\nI\n7.6.3 French Aeronautical Cases\nI\nThe study ofFrench military aeronautical UAP D [sightings] (Orange in 1951, Tours in\n1976, Luxeuil in 1977) supports General Twining's conclusions, namely the fourth one.\nThe testimonies ofthe pilots do in fact lead one to assume that the objects were \"either\nI\npilotedor operated by remote control\": all ofthe pilots reported that it was \"the object\"\nthat appeared to be moving toward them and not the other way around. Moreover, all of\nthem considered the maneuvering abilities of the object to be far superior to those that\nI\nthey were familiar with.\nI\n7.6.4 Cases ofClose-Up UAP D Sightings in France\nFor their part, the cases ofclose-up UAP D sightings in France are very much in\nI\nkeeping with Twining's conclusions 4 and 5. In Trans-en-Provence (Chapter 4), the\nexpert appraisals made at the site support the local testimony and show that the object\nwith a metallic appearance and circular shape landed, then took offsilently within a very\nI\nshort space of time not very far from a wall 2.5 min height. No modem aircraft is capable\nofthese silent maneuvers, nor ofthis degree of precision when landing. It is hard not to\nimagine a piloted or remote-controlled flying machine, or else one having highly advanced\nI\ncybernetics.\nThe other French cases ofclose encounters described in Chapter 4 also strongly\nsuggest the existence ofan intelligent [civilization] behind the UAP Os. In the Valensole,\nI\n\"Amaranth\" and Cussac cases, once the witness or witnesses are brought face to face with\nthe UAP D, everything generally happens very quickly, and the object escapes without\nhaving shown the slightest aggressiveness toward the witnesses.\nI\n7.6.5 Foreign Cases - Conclusion\nI\nThe study ofcertain foreign cases leads to conclusions similar to those drawn from the\nFrench cases. One may reread in this spirit the description ofthe aeronautical cases\npresented in Chapter 2. We could also relate foreign cases ofclose encounters, such as\nI\nI\nI" }, { "n": 37, "image": "https://wearenotalone.space/transcripts/255-413270-ufo-s-and-defense-what-should-we-prepare-for/p37.jpg", "text": "I\nthe Socorro (New Mexico) case, which is similar to the Trans-en-Provence case, but the\nI\ncritical overview of which would needlessly weigh down this report.\nOne strong conclusion emerges from this set offacts: some UAP Ds do seem to be\ncompletely unknown flying machines with exceptional perf orrnances that are guided by a\nI\nnatural or artificial intelligence.\nI\nChapter 8 - UFOs: Hypotheses, Modeling Attempts\n8.1 Partial Models\nI\nCredible sightings ofaeriaJ objects can be reinforced by plausible technical explanations\nI\n-\nofthe phenomena reported. Among the most striking observations in relation to the\ncurrent state ofour_knowledge, we cite:\naerial movements canied out silently with very rapid accelerations and/or very high\nspeeds,\n- the shutting offofthe engines ofnearby land vehicles,\n- the locomotive paralysis ofwitnesses.\nInsofar as the sightings that are the most well documented, and the most credible owing\nto the obvious competence ofthe witnesses, come from aircraft pilots, it is their sightings\nofaerial movements, sightings which are, moreover, supported by radar plots, that should\nbe explained first.\nI\n8.1.l Travel\nI\nThere are, from the standpoint ofthe concept, various principles of propulsion that do\nnot require propellers or jet engines that could thus be silent. The most advanced uses\nI\nmagnetohydrodynamics, abbreviated MHD, but many others can also be considered. We\nwill review these.\n8.1.1.1 MHD Propulsion\nI\nThe principle ofMHD propulsion, which cannot be envisioned in a vacuum, consists of\nI\ncausing an electrical current to flow in the medium surrounding the .ship At the same\ntime, the ship emits a magnetic field. According to Laplace' s law, this field exerts a force\non the current and thus on the medium in which it is flowing; this is the principle ofmost\nelectric motors. The medium being thus displaced in relation to the ship, it is in fact the\nlatter that undergoes, by reaction, a force that enables it to be propelled. It remains to\nI\ncreate the necessary field and current:\nI\n- for the magnetic field, this is easily accomplished by installing windings (like those in\nelectric motors}, in which a suitable electrical current travels, in or under the walls ofthe\nship,\nI\n- for the electrical current, all depends on the medium.\nIn sea water it is easy to cause a current to flow using electrodes positioned on the hull.\nThis is why MHD propulsion has been experimented with, so far successfully, in the\nI\nUnited States and Japan on both surface and submarine ship models.\nIn air, which is naturally insulating, it is more difficult to cause an electrical current to\nflow, but air can be made conducting by using, for example, strong electric fields generated\nhere again by suitable electrodes (air, when rendered conducting, can become more or less\nI\nI" }, { "n": 38, "image": "https://wearenotalone.space/transcripts/255-413270-ufo-s-and-defense-what-should-we-prepare-for/p38.jpg", "text": "I\nluminous, which has frequently been observed around unknown objects). As for the\nmagnetic field, it can be created as it is for boats.. However, propulsion is much more\nI·\ndifficult to achieve in air, since, in that case1 it must not only propel the aircraft but first of\nall compensate for its weight. The electrical and magnetic fields required are therefore\nmuch stronger than for a _naval ship and, in practice, obtaining the very strong fields that\nI\nare essential is scarcely conceivable without having recourse to superconductive wirings.\nStill theoretical until a only few years ago, their use in an aerial vehicle has been a credible\nprospect since 1991, with the discovery ofsuperconductors capable ofoperating at near­\nI\nambient temperatures.\nPropulsion in the atmosphere without propellers or jet engines is, therefore, completely\npossible in principle with MHD, and the calculations show that the power necessary is not,\nI\nin certain cases, incompatible with our current aeronautical engines. The fact that no\ncooling system has been seen (or heard) on the objects that have been observed close up\ncan be explained as long as the length ofthe craft's flights does not. exceed a few dozen\nI\nminutes. Furthermore, other motors that we already use - electric motors, from energy\nstored on board or flywheels if they are not yet powerful enough - would not need immediate\ncooling, which duly proves that this problem is not insurmountable.\nI\nNumerous witnesses have been struck by the silence accompanying the maneuvers of\nthe objects, which do not create a \"bang\" even at supersonic speeds ( cf. Part 1, Chapters\n1, 2, and 3). :MHD propulsion could account for this silence: preliminary experiments in\nI\nnoise reduction by eliminating the wake and shock wave, albeit under very special\nconditions, are encouraging.\nThere has been extensive work on the different aspects ofMHD propulsion ofaircraft\nI\nabroad: in the United States at Rensselaer Polytechnic Institute in Troy (NY), and\naccording to the journal New Scientist (February 1996), in Great Britain and in Russia.\nTo sum up, based on the current state ofour knowledge, an MlID aircraft model is\nI\nconceivable in the short term, while the creation ofa craft having the same movement\ncapabilities as the aerial vehicles described by the witnesses seems quite· likely to us within\na few dozen years. For the time being, only the quasi absence ofperceptible air flow and\nI\nnoise while hovering close to the ground pose problems.\nI\n8.1.1.2 Other Propulsion Methods\nIn a vacuum, the absence or scarcity ofmolecules or atoms prevents current flow in the\nI\nmedium as well as the projection ofa mass ofsufficient substance pulled from this\nmedium. MlID propulsion is therefore not possible, and it is necessary to formulate other\nhypotheses. Jet propulsion by means ofchemical reactions, comparable to our rocket\nI\nengines - even though its performance is more advanced - should not be ruled out a\npriori. In fact,. the space phase of the travel ofunknown objects takes place very far from\nsight.\nI\nIn addition, skins for stealth purposes render them invisible to telescopes and radars\nbeyond a few lcilometers or a few dozen kilometers. Consequently, at these distances,\nthese objects could very well use classic propulsion systems without being detected.\nI\nMainly, then, problems with respect to power consumption and mass to be expelled are\nraised, but the method reviewed below in 8.1.1.3 would enable these problems to be\npartially solved.\nI\nMore advanced technologically are propulsion systems that call for very high velocity\nexhaust - a considerable fraction of the speed oflight - ofparticle beams. Due to the\nI\nI" }, { "n": 39, "image": "https://wearenotalone.space/transcripts/255-413270-ufo-s-and-defense-what-should-we-prepare-for/p39.jpg", "text": "I\nextremely high exhaust velocity, the mass expelled is low and expulsion can be continued\nI\nfor a very long time. Such particle beam generators that can be loaded on board satellites\nhave been developed for space warfare in the former USSR (at the von Ardenne\nlaboratory in Soukhoumi, Georgia) and the United States, especially at the Argonne\nI\nNational Laboratory. At present, ofcourse, these beams are much less powerful than\nwhat would be necessary here, but they are already ofinterest as low-power engines once\nout ofthe proximity of planets. The U.S. probe \"Deep Space 1,,, which should narrowly\nI\nmiss asteroid 1992 KD on July 29, 1999, was equipped with an engine ofthis type.\nOther methods ofspace propulsion are being studied very actively: nuclear propulsion\nusing fission (\"NERVA/' \"ORION,\" and \"DAEDALUS,, projects) and, more recently,\nI\nfusion, which would offer respective gains ofone and over two orders of magnitude in\ncomparison with the best engines at present. Beyond this, the use of power stored in the\nform ofantimatter - which has become credible since CERN [European Council for\nI\nNuclear Research) created an anti hydrogen atom and demonstrated the means for storing\nI\nit - will offer gains even one hundred times greater.\nThis is why a growing number of research centers are doing work on this subject: the\nJet Propulsion Laboratory, Lawrence Livermore Laboratory, the Air Force Astronautical\nI\nLaboratory (Edwards Air Force Base), where antigravitation is also being studied,\naccording to the June 10, 1996 issue ofJane 's Defence Weekly. The latter topic is\nreportedly also being pursued in Great Britain and in the CIS [Commonwealth of\nIndependent States].\nI\n8.1.1.3 Use of Planetary or Stellar Impulse\nI\nCloser to our current technologies, even though, strictly speaking, it does not have to\ndo with propulsion, the Jet Propulsion Laboratory imagined, in 1961, that a spacecraft\n. slingshotting off the potential [gravity] wells ofsuitably selected planets could attain higher\nI\nand higher speeds without expending any energy. This method is now routinely used for\nmissions to the remote planets in our [solar] system. One can then envision that by using\n\"reflections,,, not only by planets but also by stars, as Dyson proposed in 1963,\nI\nconsiderable speeds could be attained (limited only by escape velocities) and interstellar\ndistances could be crossed using relatively little energy at the price, ofcourse, ofthe time\nnecessary for the departure and arrival slingshots\nI\nThis method would lead to interstellar voyage lengths probably figuring in thousands of\nyears, thus with an order ofmagnitude greater than lengths anticipated for the envisioned\nantimatter propulsion.\nI\n8.1.1.4 Conclusion Regarding Travel\nI\nTo sum up, for travel both in the atmosphere and in space, we can formulate reasonable\nhypotheses on flight without any apparent means oflift in the first case and on the crossing\nofgreat distances, up to an interstellar scale, in the second.\nI\n8. 1.2 The Shutting Off of Land Vehicle Engines\nI\nTo explajn this phenomenon, which has been reported frequently abroad, it is necessary\nto consider a remote action. [Since] no beams oflight appear to be associated with these\nengine , immobilizations we can imagine radio-frequency radiation, such as microwaves,\nI\nI" }, { "n": 40, "image": "https://wearenotalone.space/transcripts/255-413270-ufo-s-and-defense-what-should-we-prepare-for/p40.jpg", "text": "I\nwhich we know can cause effects ofthis type and which can be easily formed into beams\nto act from a distance. Under these conditions, microwave emissions from unknown\nI\nobjects would be likely to create around the vehicle an electrical field strong enough to\ncause, when added to the ignition volt.~ •.?s, ionization and electrical breakdown of the air around\nthe high voltage circuit ofthe engi1 l(ignition] coil, distributor, spark plug wire), thus\nI\nshort-circuiting the firing pulses to the engine mass and shutting it off.\nSince electronic ignition came into widespread use in the 70s, the action of microwaves,\napart from the mechanism previously described, may be exerted directly, paralyzing the\nI\nelectronic circuit generating the high voltage. We can therefore envision the action of\nunknown objects on land vehicles, including nowadays those with diesel engines, which\nare made vulnerable due to their more and more common electronic regulation circuit. Let\nI\nus recall that the ability to generate high power microwave beams is within the capabilities\nofour own technologies, as demonstrated by the intensive work being carried out in the\nUnited States and the former USSR to develop microwave weapons intended precisely to\nI\ndestroy or immobilize enemy electronic systems from a distance, and even to act on\nperso;1nel. In France, high power microwave generators that can be used for this purpose\nare being studied.\nI\nThis does not rule out the possibility ofother types ofradiation being used. Charged\nparticle beams would be capable ofanalogous effects, passing through, if necessary, living\nmatter, such as the bodies ofsome witnesses, without being felt by the latter or leaving\nI\nany notable or lasting sequels..\nThis can be illustrated by the beams ofaccelerators used in proton therapy, which begin by\npassing through tissue without causing too much damage and becoming destructive only\nI\nwhen their energy falls below a certain threshold as a result of their penetration.\nThis mode ofaction corresponds, moreover, to certain testimonies that report the\nobservation ofbeams oflight passing through physical obstacles; in fact, by ionizing the\nI\nair, proton beams generally do become visible in the form of truncated beams oflight the\nlength ofwhich is a function oftheir initial energy.\nI\n8.1.3 Locomotive Paralysis of Some Witnesses\nThis phenomenon is less common. It is remarkable in that the paralysis reported only\nI\naffect certain voluntary movements, but not respiration or posture (balance, in particular,\nis not compromised; the witnesses do not fall down) or eye movements. From the\nstandpoint ofconcepts, it can be remarked that in human beings posture and respiration\nI\nare controlled by the cerebellum, an organ that is independent ofthe cerebrum, which\ngoverns voluntary movements. The paralysis effects observed can reasonably be\nattributed to microwaves acting from a distance on certain parts ofthe human body (this is\nI\nalso one ofthe objectives ofthe work mentioned above on nucrowave weapons). We\nshould note that these effects, among others, are being studied at the Air Force Weapons\nLaboratory at Kirtland AFB.\nI\n8.2 Modeling and Credibility\nI\nThe fact that we can formulate a credible hypothesis on the propulsion of the objects\nsighted is obviously only a positive indication, but not proof of their existence, no more\nthan that of their conformity to the model that we imagine.\nI\nIn this regard, the history ofthe technique teaches hunulity, but it can also yield quasi\nI\nI" }, { "n": 41, "image": "https://wearenotalone.space/transcripts/255-413270-ufo-s-and-defense-what-should-we-prepare-for/p41.jpg", "text": "I\ncertainties:\nI\n- humility in noting prognostic errors committed in the past. It suffices to recall the\naffirmations made by or attributed to several very great scientists: \"You cannot breath in\ntunnels, \" \"science is almost finished, \" \"something heavier than air cannotfly, \" etc. It\nI\nwould therefore be presumptuous to claim to foresee, based on _ our current knowledge and\naccomplishments what might be technologies (-----) only slightly more advanced than our\nown - or our own technologies in one or two centuries. Let us consider that only 150\nI\nyears ago, engines, electricity, the existence ofthe atom, and Hertzian waves were\nunknown! We can also reread Jules Verne: Paris au XXesiecle [Paris in the 20th\nCentury} or Hier et demain {Yesterday and Tomorrow}. ..\nI\n- certainties, since scientific and technical progress can only continue, supported by\nI\nmore scientists and engineers than there have ever been, spurred by competition among\nnations. This competition, in our now \"closed\" world will focus on all of the resources that\nonce were free: potable water, the deep sea, the polar regions, \"air, space, radio\nI\nfrequencies, etc.\nAlthough it is risky to predict the results ofan increasingly accelerated scientific and\ntechnical development, it is, at least, almost certain that our own knowledge will have\nI\nadvanced greatly even within a few decades. There's no telling what progress will be\nmade beyond that time! Under these circumstances, we can conclude with a high degree\nofcertainty that movements ofobjects that at present are just beyond our capabilities will\nI\nbe technically possible within a few decades, or even a few centuries, even if the\nknowledge put into play is not what we are predicting.\nTo the extent that the preceding conclusion is acceptable, let us go further and\nI\ncomment that only a few million years will have elapsed (barring a catastrophe) between\nthe appearance of man and the future stellar expeditions ofour descendants ( cf. Chapter\n8.3.6 and Appendix 4).\nI\nThis interval between the appearance on earth ofa conscious intelligence and the time\nwhen we will be able to perform the same feats as those performed by the objects we are\ndealing with here is infinitesimal (one to two thousand years) compared with the age of the\nI\nearth or even with the 600 million years that separate us from the appearance ofthe first\nliving organisms at the beginning ofthe Cambrian period.\nBut the development ofother intelligent [beings] on other worlds cannot have taken\nI\nplace at exactly the same rate as on earth. Ifthe age ofthese other worlds, like that ofthe\nearth, is on the order of4 billion years, and ifa conscious life [form] appeared, neither the\nI\nrate ofits development nor the epoch in which that world was created cannot have been\nexactly the same as ours.\nUnder these conditions, even a minuscule deviation of0. 1%, for example, in regard to\nI\nthese initial data would make it possible to place such a civilization between several\nmillion years ahead ofours and several million years behind ours.\nThus the probability of the extent ofdevelopment oftwo civilizations in the universe,\nI\nand in the same solar system, being equal appears to be very low, and in all likelihood we\nhave only two possibilities:\n- our \"neighbors\" are several thousand or several million years behind us (or do not yet\nI\nexist as a conscious species), and it will be we who discover them,\n- our neighbors are ahead ofus, but then the probability is that this advance figures in\nthe thousands ofyears or more, rather than in years or even hundreds ofyears, and if we\ncan judge from the rate ofour own development, their level ofdevelopment would\ncertainly exceed our forecasting capabilities in every domain.\nI\nI" }, { "n": 42, "image": "https://wearenotalone.space/transcripts/255-413270-ufo-s-and-defense-what-should-we-prepare-for/p42.jpg", "text": "I\n8.3 UFOs - Overall Hypotheses\nI\nFor several dozens ofyears, the systematic collection and scientific study ofunusual\natmospheric phenomena have permitted a number of major advances. Ofcourse, on\nanalysis, a good proportion ofthe sightings have proven completely explicable: satellite ,\nI\nre-entries sounding balloons, etc. This has furthermore enabled the precision ofthe\nobservers, as well as the veracity and consistency ofthe testimonies, to be tested. Cases\nof hoaxes are, on the whole, very rare and quite easy to detect. The majority ofthe\nI\nobservers provide reliable reports, although it is necessary to take into account the\nproblems ofdiverse assessments.\nMost ofthe sightings of all types have also enabled the credible and well-documented\n.I\nsightings called UAP Ds (category D unidentified aerospace phenomena)l for which no\nexplanation has been found .i..to be classified separately. However, these phenomena are\noften attested by means ofconsistent testimonies all the way up to visual sightings coupled\nI\nwith radar sightings. Ofcourse, ifthere had only been ten or so UAP D [sightings], this\nambiguous file could just have been classified as \"no action,\" but we are no longer at that\npoint and are far beyond that. Thus we are forced to seek plausible explanations. AJI\nsorts of hypotheses have been constructed, and they may be classified as follows:\n-I\n8.3.1 Non Scientific Hypotheses\n\"We are being manipulated without realizing it\" (by a very secret, very powerful, and\nI\nvery knowledgeable group ofpeople; by strange, unknown, or even extraterrestrial beings;\nby spirits; by the devil; by our psychological fantasies; etc.). Obviously, we cannot say a\npriori whether these hypotheses are true or false [since] they cannot be proven; their main\nI\ndrawback is that they aren't much good to us.\nParapsychological phenomena and collective hallucinations should be classified in this\ncategory.\nI\nThe same is true ofthe idea that is sometimes expressed that the futuristic craft _sighted\nare actually products ofthe future activity ofhumanity. Our descendants of the distant\n[future], who have found the way to go back in time, come to observe us ...\nI\nIt is obviously classic to try to reconstruct and observe the past via any ofthe traces\nthat it leaves, and one could theoretically observe it directly (for example, by discovering a\nwell-oriented mirror on a planet located a few light years away). It is, however, out ofthe\nI\nquestion for such an observation to be able to influence a bygone time in any way, even by\nbeing detectable.\nI\n8.3.2 Secret Weapons of a Superpower\nUAP Ds would then be piloted or remote-controlled craft ofterrestrial origin. There is\nno lack ofobservers to believe that the object with fantastic performances that they saw\nmaneuvering in the sky is the state ofthe art of military progress, which would explain the\nsecrecy in which they are cloaked. Certainly studies such as those regarding the stealth\naircraft or magnetohydrodynamics actually lead to impressive progress. But besides the\nfact that it would be extremely unwise to expose to the eyes of laymen and foreign experts\nI\nin this way what there has been so much interest in concealing, it can be added today that\nI\nI" }, { "n": 43, "image": "https://wearenotalone.space/transcripts/255-413270-ufo-s-and-defense-what-should-we-prepare-for/p43.jpg", "text": "I\nI\nthroughout the decades during which these phenomena have occurred, the secret would\nhave inevitably come out, especially ifthe political upheavals of recent years are taken into\naccount.\nI\n8.3.3 Disinformation Attempts\nI\nInto this category fall special effects and montages, which are generally accompanied by\na lot ofmedia publicity. Some researchers believe that without necessarily lending\nthemselves to the manufacture of ultramodern weapons, the performances of high-tech\nI\ncraft might serve to brainwash public opinion in the same way as other propaganda\ntechniques. Of course, th.is point of view is a direct result ofthe cold war period. Any\nmeans were good at that time for destabilizing the other camp, including fear ofan\ninvasion by extraterrestrials or the instilling ofdoubt about leaders \"who hide something\nI\nmanifestly very: serious from us. \"\nThis type of hypothesis is even less satisfying than the preceding ones because it runs\nup against the objections to each ofthose.\nI\n8.3.4 Holographic Images\nI\nAt the junction between disinformation attempts and extraterrestrial hypotheses lies the\nI\ntechnique of holographic images, whether they be the work ofa superpower or\nextraterrestrial crews. In actual fact, th.is technique is difficult to employ. It requires\nconsiderable preparation because air is very transparent and diffuses light only very poorly.\nI\nTherefore it is necessary to have large equipment covering the optical field used or at least\nto project an appropriate screen on it, for example, a film ofwater.\nThe first method corresponds to theoretical holographic images, while the second is\nI\nsimpler and is frequently used for spectacular effects, but it obviously leaves traces\nbehind ... We can also envision using clouds or a curtain ofrain, but this, ofcourse, poses\nmultiple hazards. Without necessarily being able to judge them at present, the method of\nholographic images and associated methods have only very limited use.\nI\n8.3.5 Unknown Natural Phenomena\nThis hypothesis cannot be ruled out completely and must therefore be cited. However,\nI\nit is difficult to support in cases where the UFO sighted behaves in an apparently\nintelligent manner (approach, pursuit, evasion, and escape maneuvers, etc.).\nI\n8.3.6 Extraterrestrial Hypotheses\nA large number of people today are convinced that UFOs are piloted by intelligent\nI\nbeings who have come from a very remote part ofthe universe and are tasked with\nwatching us and even initiating contact with us. As appealing as they may be, these\nhypotheses run up against all sorts of huge difficulties. The hypothetical Martians only\nI\nrecently disappeared from the realm ofpossibility, and apart from earth, the solar system\nappears to be totally unable to have produced organized life and even more unable to have\nproduced an advanced civilization. It is therefore necessary to look farther, to the stars,\nI\nbut the closest star is already one hundred million times further away than the moon.\nThe only contacts that we may try to establish from such distances at present are radio\nI\nI" }, { "n": 44, "image": "https://wearenotalone.space/transcripts/255-413270-ufo-s-and-defense-what-should-we-prepare-for/p44.jpg", "text": "-\n-\n- - -- ---- - - -\nI\ncontacts. Astronomers have attempted contacts via message transmission and radio\nlistening in the \"SETI\" and \"MEGASETI\" programs. Although some enthusiasts have\nI\nsuggested futuristic ideas to \"bypass\" the vast expanse, such as, for example, the use of\n\"black holes,\" the crossing ofinterstellar distances by possible extraterrestrials has elicited\nmuch skepticism and the majority ofastronomers reiterate that \"to date there has been no\nI\nUFO case that is sufficiently well established to imply that it came from an\nextraterrestrial civilization. \"\nTwo professional astronomers, Jean-Claude R.ibes and Guy Monnet, have, however,\nI\nproposed a scenario in our future in space that includes plausible interstellar voyages. In\nthis scenario, which is summarized in Appendix 4, they envision the establishment oflarge\ncommunities in verdant \"islands in space, \" enonnous artificial structures orbiting the\nI\nearth, as described by the physicist O'Neill, and even inside large asteroids, where an\nabundance ofdifferent mc;1terials, including water and oxygen, as well as .ready protection\nagainst meteorites and cosmic radiation, are found. Later on, when our descendants have\nI\nmastered the production, storage and use ofantimatter as energy, they will utilize it to\npropel some of their habitats to another solar system. They will settle in an asteroid belt,\nstart families there, and then visit the planets ofthe receiving system aboard craft that are\nI\nperceived by any possible natives the same way we perceive UFOs today.\nThis scenario, which in essence relies onJy on laws of physics that are currently well\naccepted, gives the extraterrestrial hypothesis a certain degree of plausibility; it is possible\nI\nto imagine that a civilization that came from somewhere else colonized the region ofour\nasteroid belt and used it as a staging base to our planet. Current progress in the conquest\nofspace and physics reinforces this idea.\nI\nWe should point out that some people envisage another hypothesis, which is very\ncontroversial: the UFOs do belong to a civilization located in the asteroid belt, but this\ncivilization itselfcomes from our planet. Older than any known terrestrial civilizations and\nI\nhighJy advanced, it supposedly disappeared from earth (nuclear war, radioactivity,\npollution; etc.) but resettled in the solar system.\nBoth hypotheses have to their credit the fact that they place the UFO problem outside\nI\nthe realm ofthe paranormal and promote thought about the future ofour planet.\nI\nChapter 9 - Organization of the Research Abroad\nI\n9.1 Organization of the Research in the United States\nThe subject ofUFOs is presently very popular in the United States. This is evidenced\nI\nby the number and su~cess offiction films such as Independence Day, Men in Black, and\nContact, which deal with this topic. A survey conducted in June 1997 for Time magazine\nshowed that nearly one American in four believes that an extraterrestrial craft crashed at\nI\nRoswell (New Mexico) at the beginning ofJuly 1947. A professor ofpsychiatry at\nHarvard, Dr. Mack, treats the problem ofthe temporary abduction, whether real or\nimagined, of his fellow countrymen by UFOs very seriously. In view of the public's\nI\nexpectations, what are the authorities doing?\nThey deny that the UFO phenomenon poses a threat to national security, or that it is\nevidence ofan extraterrestrial origin. This position has been taken almost continuously by\nI\nthe Air Force, which was tasked with the study ofUFOs from 1948 to 1969 within the\nI\nI" }, { "n": 45, "image": "https://wearenotalone.space/transcripts/255-413270-ufo-s-and-defense-what-should-we-prepare-for/p45.jpg", "text": "I\nI\nframework ofa project which bore the overall title Blue Book. It was confirmed in the\nsummary and conclusions ofthe university commission in charge ofevaluating the Blue\nI\nBook [Project], the Condon ComITllssion. The physicist Condon wrote in his conclusions\nthat the study ofUFOs had little chance ofadvancing science. All official studies thus\ncame to a halt in the United States as ofDecember 1969, and the Air Force referred those\nI\nwho were curious to private ufological associations.\nAlthough it was endorsed by the Academy ofSciences, the Condon report was harshly\ncriticized by numerous scientists, particularly at the powerful AIAA (American Institute of\nI\nAeronautics and Astronautics). The latter justly pointed out that the summary and\nconclusions ofthe report, which were drafted by Professor Condon himself, conflicted\nwith a number of analyses Wlthin its body. The AIAA recommended moderate, but\nI\ncontinuous scientific work on UFOs.\nAn amendment to the Freedom oflnformation Act (FOIA) passed in 1974 pennitted\ndeclassified official documents on UFOs to be obtained as of 1976. One ofthese, in\nparticular, attracted attention. It was a letter from Air Force Brigadier General Bolender\nfrom October 1969 stating that the imminent conclusion ofthe Blue Book Project would\n1.\nnot put an end to military reports concerning UFOs that constituted a threat to national\nsecurity. These were not part ofthe Blue Book system and would continue, as in the past,\nto be handled in accordance with the directive JANAP 146 and Air Force Manual 55-11.\nI\nI\n\"As regards authenticity, only negative conclusions are definitive\"\nI\nBy Fran~ois Louange,\nChief Executive Officer of Fleximage Companv\nI\nAmong the investigations conducted on the subject ofUFOs, photograph analysis\nrepresents one ofthe more delicate areas. In fact, in the public's eyes, photographs\nI\nconstitute indisputable proof par excellence ofthe existence ofthe phenomenon, which\ngives them a very special emotional factor. But photography is in reality a field where one\nstill finds many errors and hoaxes, because many natural or technical effects can give rise\nto surprising documents: it is becoming easier and easier for a specialist who has computer\nI\nequipment to produce a doctored negative that stands up well to investigations. This\ncan sometimes even prove lucrative.\nI\nMoreover, experience shows that most of the negatives that stand up to analysis contain\nonly extremely poor and unusable information, often limited to a saturated bright spot on a\nblack background or vice versa, which makes this area of investigation relatively\nI\ndisappointing.\nFor about forty years, alleged photographs ofUFOs, which are sometimes renowned in\nufological circles, have occasionally been the subject ofexpert appraisals on the part of\nI\nspecialists interested in this topic. The physical and technical fields that come into play are\nquite varied, ranging from atmospheric propagation to photography or video and including\ndigital image processing.\nI\nThe analysis ofa photographic document or video is broken down into two steps:\n1 - Establishing or disproving authenticity, uncovering hoaxes, fake maneuvers or\nparasitic phenomena that could have affected the photographing equipment or the original\ndata storage medium (film, video cassette). This concept ofauthenticity is furthermore\ncompletely relative, because only negative conclusions are definitive and in the best of\nI\nI" }, { "n": 46, "image": "https://wearenotalone.space/transcripts/255-413270-ufo-s-and-defense-what-should-we-prepare-for/p46.jpg", "text": "I\ncases a document can stand up to analyses at any given moment.\n2 - With respect to a document deemed to be authentic, extracting the maximum\namount of information permitting a known phenomenon to be identified or a phenomenon\nI\nthat is a priori inexplicable to be characterized (size, position, speed, albedo, energy\nemitted, etc.). This phenomenon will then be compared with other unexplained\nI\nphenomena in order to draw possible parallels.\nIt is important to emphasize that the photographic as well as the video documents\navailable come only from fortuitous witnesses~ there are very few opportunities for\nI\nsignificant data to be exploited by reason ofsimple statistical considerations: the chances\nofbeing witness to a rare phenomenon, the likelihood ofhaving [camera] equipment in\nhand ready to use, the probability ofbeing able to make the proper adjustments and calmly\nI\ntake professional quality photographs, etc.\nIn any case, it seems reasonable to limit in-depth investigations to. cases in which the\nfollowing two conditions are met:\nI\nI - The original document (negative, slide, video cassette, etc.) is available.\n2. -There is at least one other independent source of information (visual testimony or\nanother sensing device).\nTrick of the eye: lens-shaped clouds\nI\nI\nI\n[Photo]\nCentral bulge, broad and narrow disk, this is the definition oflenticular galaxies. It is also\nthe definition of a type of cloud, cirrocumulus lenticularis, which forms above 7000 m\n1·\naltitude and up to the limits ofthe troposphere. Their very specific shape is due to factors\nsuch as pressure, temperature, turbulence, and very strong winds. But this shape is\ndefinitely open to every interpretation for those who wish to see it as a flying saucer...\nI\nI\nWhen military craft play UFOs\nI\nI\n[Photo]\nI\nLeft:\nPhotographed in 1989 offshore from Los Angeles, this unpiloted surveillance unit is a\nI\nI\nI" }, { "n": 47, "image": "https://wearenotalone.space/transcripts/255-413270-ufo-s-and-defense-what-should-we-prepare-for/p47.jpg", "text": "I\nCanadair CL-227 Sea Sentinel military drone.\nI\nRight:\nThis Sikorsky \"Cypher\" surveillance drone is used by the U.S. Anny in urban conflict\nI\nsituations.\nI\nJANAP (Joint Anny, Navy, Air Force Publication) 146 applies to military personnel but\nalso to some civilians (flight captains ofcommercial aircraft, merchant marine captains) in\nthe United States and Canada. It stipulates that an urgent report should be filed with\nI\ncertain authorities, which must in turn file a report, namely with the Air Operations\nCommand (now NORAD [North American Air Defense]) in Colorado Springs, when\nobjects requiring very urgent defensive action and/or an investigation by the armed forces\nI\nI\nofthe United States or Canada are sighted .\n. Among these objects, UFOs (Unidentified Flying Objeqts) are listed along with missiles\nand hostile or unidentified submarines, etc. Disclosure ofthe contents ofthese reports is\nsubject to the penalties ofthe laws cracking down on espionage. JANAP 146 was in effect\nin recent years and perhaps is still in force. This regulation may explain the frequent\nI\nreticence of American military personnel, aviators in particular, to bring up the subject of\nUFOs.\nThe members of American ufological associations number several thousand. These\nassociations attempt to fill the gap left by the public authorities in the field of\"UFO\"\nstudies. The FOIA brought them a resurgence ofactivity, showing them that contrary to\nI\ntheir statements, the Air Force and various special departments, namely the CIA, are very\nI\nmuch interested in the subject ofUFOs and have been for some time. It pennitted them to\nlearn ofcertain spectacular cases, such as the overflight of missile bases in 197 5, or the\n1976 Tehran incident related in Chapter 2. DIA deemed this a \"radar/visual\" case: \"A\nI\nclassic case that meets all the conditions required for a legitimate study ofthe UFO\nphenomenon. \"\nIn recent years, the three main ufological associations have been brought together by a\nleading U.S. personality, Marie Galbraith, to conduct a joint study. She is the wife of\nEvan Griffith Galbraith, who was U.S. ambassador to France from 1981 to 1985. Thus\nI\nshe is well-acquainted with our country and our language, since she lived on A venue\nGabriel. Supported both morally and financially by Laurance Rockefeller, brother ofthe\nfamous David Rockefeller, she traveled the world to meet the principal scientists\nI\ninterested in UFOs and to collect the best cases.\nShe then oversaw the drafting ofa clear and documented book entitled Unidentified\nFlying Objects, Briefing Document, the best available ·evidence, which was endorsed in\nI\n1995 by the chairmen ofthe three associations CUFOS [Center for UFO Research],\nFUFOR [Fund for UFO Research], and MUFON [Mutual UFO Network]. She had this\nwork sent to more than a thousand prominent figures throughout the world and, namely,\nI\nto a large number of U.S. congressmen. Her goal is to get the U.S. government and\npossibly other governments to end the secrecy surrounding UFOs. For the editors ofthe\nbook, this secrecy is essentially military in origin: the nation that is first to reproduce the\nI\nexceptional characteristics ofUFOs will dominate the world. The secrecy was justified\nduring the cold war, but it is no longer justified now given the scientific and technical\nbreakthroughs useful to humanity that one can expect [ to obtain] from the study of UFOs.\nI\nOn the whole, Marie Galbraith's book is descriptive. It does not interpret the\nphenomena sighted (physical modeling or hypotheses regarding the origin ofthe objects).\nSuch was also the spirit ofthe international scientific colloquium organized in September\nI\nI" }, { "n": 48, "image": "https://wearenotalone.space/transcripts/255-413270-ufo-s-and-defense-what-should-we-prepare-for/p48.jpg", "text": "1997 by Laurance Rockefeller at Pocantico, near West Point, on the property ofthe\nRockefeller Bros. Fund. Moderated by astrophysicist Peter Sturrock, this colloquium\nfocused on physical evidence concerning UFOs.\nSpecialists on radar, the biological effects of microwaves, photography, etc., who often\nwere not very familiar with the UFO problem, formed a scientific council there that judged\nthe papers presented by the UFO researchers. French participation was quite noteworthy;\nit consisted of the head ofSEPRA and two members ofthe scientific council. A summary\ndocument expressed the desire that many countries have a UFO research organization\ncomparable to that ofFrance\nColonel Corso's theory\nIn July 1997, for the fiftieth anniversary ofthe Roswell incident, an astonishing book\nentitled The Day After Roswell was published. It was written by Colonel Corso, who\nfrom 1953 to 1957 was the military member of the National Security Council Staffand\nthus was in constant contact with President Eisenhower. The foreward of this book was\nwritten by Strom Thurmond, the current chairman of the Senate Armed Services\nCommittee, who, already a member of this committee, appointed Corso as congressional\nattache when he left the Army in 1963. The author states that the object found at Roswell\nwas indeed an extraterrestrial vessef He reportedly saw for himself, in July 1947, the\ncadaver ofone ofthe occupants preserved in a glass coffin. From 1961-1962, as chiefof\nforeign technology in the Anny R & D Department, he apparently was tasked with\ndiscretely allowing U.S. industry to benefit from the extremely high-tech objects found in\nthe wreckage (according to him: printed circuits, a laser, light intensifier, etc.).\nColonel Corso affirms that high-ranking military officers and some U.S. congressmen\nknow about the existence ofextraterrestrial craft in our skies. They have concealed it\nfrom the public to avoid panics, but full disclosures are going to be able to be made,\nbecause the United States, which has been striving to do this for 50 years, reportedly now\nhas the means to counter a possible UFO attack. Some ofthese claims are surprising at\nthe very least, but the entire contents of the book cannot be easily dismissed when one\nconsiders the remarkable career ofits author and Senator Thurmond's tribute to him. It is\ntrue that the latter requested that his fforeward not appear in reprints ofthe book, a request\nthat was granted. The author allegedly had not told him that the book was about UFOs ...\nBut it is difficult to believe that the foreward writer, the third in line in the U.S.\nGovernment to succeed the President, and the publisher, Simon & Schuster, were not\nacting with full knowledge ofthe facts at the time ofthe first printing. As soon as the\nbook came out, the U.S. Air Force published a second report on Roswell again denying\nthe plausibility ofthe hypothesis ofthe crash ofan extraterrestrial craft. The first report,\nwhich was published in 1994, was presented as the first official study on UFOs since the\nend ofthe Blue Book [Project) in 1969 (see \"Roswell and Disinformation\" in Appendix\n[5]). This reaction is not incompatible with Colonel Corso's theories; it may be intended\nto reassure those whom Corso's revelations might worry.\n9.2 Organization of the Research in the United Kingdom\nGreat Britain has been the scene ofseveral remarkable cases. We presented the\nLakenheath \"radar/visual\" case (1956) in Chapter 2. The RAF and the Ministry in charge\nofit therefore became interested in UFOs very early on, but we do not possess much\nI\nI\nI\nI\nI\nI\nI\nI\nI\nI\nI\nI\nI\nI\nI\nI\nI" }, { "n": 49, "image": "https://wearenotalone.space/transcripts/255-413270-ufo-s-and-defense-what-should-we-prepare-for/p49.jpg", "text": "I\ninformation on their work. Since its creation in 1964, the British Ministry ofDefence\nI\n(MOD) has had a UFO study unit, whose [designator] abbreviation Sec(AS)2a stands for\nI\nDepartment 2a ofthe Secretariat (Air Staff) division. Its activity was recently described\nby Nick Pope, who was its head from 1991 to 1994, in a book written in a very lively style ,\nOpen Skies, Closed Minds.\nI\nThis department receives telephone calls or letters from witnesses, but more generally\nreports prepared from the depositions ofthese witnesses taken at police stations, airports\nor RAF bases. It conducts classic investigations ifit deems them useful. They then\nI\nquestion radar stations or weather stations, the RAF space object surveillance base at\nFlyingdales, other RAF bases, the Greenwich Observatory, etc. Its unique mission-is to\ndetermine whether the reports are ofinterest for defense purposes (\"area ofdefence\nsignificance\").\nI\nNick Pope, who is currently a MOD career employee, has broken new ground in\nI\ncomparison with his predecessors. He has given interviews to the press and participated in\ntelevision programs.\nHe has cooperated with the ufological associations, giving their address and phone number\nI·\nto witnesses who have written to him. In his letters of response he admitted that a small\nproportion ofUFO sightings defied explanation and that the MOD was keeping its mind\nopen regarding these. His predecessors wrote: \"Ifwe had sufficient data, all ofthe cases\nI\ncould undoubtedly be explained \" In his book, Nick Pope evokes various hypotheses to\nexplain certain unidentified cases that were the subject ofcredible and detailed reports.\nHe strongly favors the extraterrestrial hypothesis and expresses the desire that his ministry\ntake seriously the potential threat that UFOs represent in his eyes.\nIs there a department that is further developed than his (where he is alone) in the\nI\nMinistry ofDefence that would conduct secret studies on the UFO phenomenon? His\nstatements on the subject are contradictory (pp. 129 and 181 ). Ralph Noyes, who was\none ofNick Pope's predecessors from 1969 to 1972 and ended his career at MOD in 1977\nI\nas Undersecretary ofState for Defence, considers the existence ofsuch a department\nlikely. Lord Hill-Norton, Admiral of the Fleet, who was Chief ofDefence Stafffrom 1971\nto 1973, shares this opinion. This information is found in a book the foreword to which\nI\nwas written by Lord Hill-Norton himself (Above Top Secret, by Timothy Good). Admiral\nHill-Norton was among some thirty iords active in a House ofLords group studying UFOs\nin the 1980s. Ifthis secret study department does exist, it can be presumed that it works\nI\nin collaboration with the United States (Above Top Secret, pp. 48-49).\n9.3 Organization of the Research in Russia\nI\nI\nThe Academy ofSciences ofthe USSR has conducted studies on UFOs since 1979 at\nleast. During that time, Vladimir Migouline, a member ofthis academy, expressed his\nopinion in La Recherche regarding the sightings made in the Soviet Union ofluminous\nI\nphenomena and unusual objects: \"The vast majority ofthese sightings correspond to real\nphenomenajust about the same as those sighted in other countries. But there is no\nindisputable proofthat some ofthem involve technological manifestations ofa highly\nI\ndeveloped civilization. It is also necessary to try to connect them with atmospheric\nphenomena,\" he said.\nThis is the goal that his assistant Platov aimed for in a work published in 1992, UFOs\nandModem Science. At that time, Migouline and Platov, heads ofthe expert's group on\nabnormal phenomena in the Academy ofSciences, proposed a scientific and technical\nI\nI" }, { "n": 50, "image": "https://wearenotalone.space/transcripts/255-413270-ufo-s-and-defense-what-should-we-prepare-for/p50.jpg", "text": "I\ncooperation program to SEPRA, but the CNES management did not follow-up on the\noffer. It should be noted that in the Siberian section ofthe Academy ofSciences, the\nI\nstudies, which are less well known in the West, do not rule out the extraterrestrial\nhypotheses, and even favor it.\nDuring \"Glasnost,\" information was disseminated on the studies being conducted by\nI\nboth the KGB and by the military. In 1991, the KGB declassified 124 pages ofdocuments\nfrom Cases ofSightings ofAbnormal Events over USSR Territory, /982-1990, which\ncovered a total of 17 regions. One ofthese cases, which we detailed in Chapter 3,\nI\nconcerns the extraordinary aerial maneuvers of three bright disks over an Army missile\nbase near Astrakhan in 1989. The objects, which were sighted by seven military members,\nwent from hovering to high speed and back again all without making any noise. When it\nwas approached by a Soviet fighter jet, one object escaped so quickly that it seemed to\nleave the fighter jet standing still in its tracks.\nIn 1994, Colonel Boris Sokolov sold ABCNews a collection ofinvestigations\nconducted by military personnel from 1978 to 1988. Earlier, in 1990, the newspaper\nRabochaya Tribuna had published an article by Aviation General Maltsev, who\ncommanded the territorial air defense, concerning a well-documented visual/radar case\nI\nwith multiple witnesses (Pereslav-Zalesski, the night ofMarch 21, 1990) in which a silent\ndiscoid object went from hovering to a speed two or three times faster than that ofa\nmodem fighter jet. We described th.is case in Chapter 2.\nI\nPART3\nI\nUFOs and Defense\nI·\nTo date, a UFO has not been the certain cause ofany accident or a fortiori any hostile act,\nat least officially; no UFO threat has materialized in France, although intimidation\nI\nmaneuvers have been confirmed (Chapters 1.1, 2.1, and 2.3). However, numerous\nmanifestations observed by reliable witnesses could be the work ofcraft ofextraterrestrial\norigin. Indeed, if it were a question ofterrestrial craft, these could only be American and,\nI\ndespite all precautions taken to maintain secrecy, this would be known. The first\nprototype stealth aircraft flew at the end of 1977; the existence ofstealth aircraft became\nknown about ten years later, in 1988. But credible, confirmed UFO sightings began in\nI·\n1944.\nCertainly, this subject still sometimes elicits amused skepticism, ifnot a certain mistrust\nI\nwith regard to those who mention it seriously, but in the absence ofexplanations for the\nphenomena sighted, the hypothesis ofan extraterrestrial origin can no longer be ruled out.\nIn this third part, we set out to study, from a strategic, scientific, political, religious, and\nI\nmedia standpoint, the consequences ofthis hypothesis based on present scientific\nknowledge.\nI\nChapter 10 - Strategic Planning\nThe definition ofa strategy toward an \"adversary\" requires that one know the\nI\nI\nI" }, { "n": 51, "image": "https://wearenotalone.space/transcripts/255-413270-ufo-s-and-defense-what-should-we-prepare-for/p51.jpg", "text": "I\nI\nadversary, understand his intentions, and ascertain his modes ofaction. In the case in\nquestion, we can onJy advance hypotheses formulated on the basis ofthe facts observed\nand their interpretation, while trying to answer three questions: Who are they? What are\ntheir intentions? Are they seeking to make contact or have they already done so?\nI\n10.1 What Extraterrestrials? Who Are They and What Are They Like?\nI\nA relative consistency emerges from the numerous descriptions ofthe phenomena:\nsaucer, luminous sphere or cylinder, hovering followed by accelerations at lightning speed,\nthe absence ofnoise, easily supersonic speed with no sonic boom, associated\nI\nelectromagnetic effects that interfere with the operation of nearby radio or electrical\napparatus. Obviously, these extraterrestrials are highly endowed intellectually and are\ntechnologically advanced over us to have been able to achieve what we do not yet know\nI\nhow to do. But the rest remains a mystery! Morphology~ physical make-up, type of life,\nI\nmanner ofcommunication and form of society, sense ofvalues, concept chime,\nmotivations, etc. Ifthey are observing us, it is necessary to note an apparent contradiction\nbetween the interest that they show in us and their furtiveness. Rather than observe us, it\nI\nseems that they want to show themselves to us and to gradually acclimate us to the idea of\ntheir existence.\n10.2 What Intentions and What Strategy Can We Deduce from Their Behavior?\nI\nExtrapolation pased on a rational analysis ofthe objectives that the extraterrestrial\ncivilization or civilizations could be pursuing should permit us to get an idea ofthe\nstrategies that they are implementing and should consequently lead us, in response, to\nI\ndeduce the broad lines ofwhat our own strategies might be. UFOs have manifested\nthemselves in many places throughout the world in recent decades, with surprising peaks\nbetween 1952 and 1954, without our being able to deduce a well-defined course of action.\nI\nWhat are they seeking?\nAfter the observation phase and the phase ofdemonstrating that they exist, it would\nseem logical to us for them to be seeking to leave their mark and impose their will on the\nI\nStates ofthe earth, but at present, nothing allows us to deduce from their manifestations\nthe existence ofa driving desire serving purposes that we are presently unable to discern.\nI\nIt is plausible that preferred contacts can be attributed to the United States. But nothing\ncontradicts the possible establishment ofother contacts with some European countries or\nI\neven with Russia, China, or Japan, [or] others perhaps ... However, it seems difficult to\nimagine that they could _have been able to position themselves on earth with the complicity\nofcertain States. Moreover, the hypotheses ofcontacts do not enable us to deduce the\nI\nexistence of some status quo with these visitors. Actually, the sporadic manifestations of\nUFOs and even the occurrence ofrepeated waves [ofsightings] have continued since\n1947. One would have every right to think that these visitors - fortified by their\nI\nsuperiority - are showing their intention to continue to make themselves known in the\nmost diverse locations on the planet and to continue to carry out their plans, the aims and\nmeans ofwhich still escape us. It could be that, before I 94 7 and after, they have had fears\nfor the future ofearth, a future threatened by risks ofnuclear war. Their influences have\nbeen able to be accompanied by appropriate demonstrations:\nI\n- overflights ofnuclear missile bases, an example ofwhich is given in Chapter 3,\n- intimidation maneuvers against aircraft as in Luxeuil and Tehran (Chapters 1.1 and\nI\nI" }, { "n": 52, "image": "https://wearenotalone.space/transcripts/255-413270-ufo-s-and-defense-what-should-we-prepare-for/p52.jpg", "text": "I\n2.3),\n- witnesses paralyzed, engines shutting off, lights going out (San Carlos de Bariloche,\nChapter 2.5).\nI\nThe advances that have been made in the conquest ofspace and in the development of\nnuclear technology could be troubling them. Wouldn't it be logical to think that these\nI\nextraterrestrial civilizations have established stations, even colonies, in the asteroid belt\nand why not relay stations on the moon? Our forays and projects studied in the United\nStates for modifying the orbits ofasteroids using H bombs in order to bring them closer to\nI\nthe earth's orbit for mining purposes could be disturbing them. For the moment, they do\nnot appear to be meddling in our affairs, but it is advisable to ask ourselves what they are\nactually seeking. Do they want to invade earth? To preserve it from nuclear self­\nI.\ndestruction? To learn about and preserve the patrimony that our civilizations have created\nover the span ofcenturies? In view ofthese uncertainties concerning their intentions, we\ncan't tell what the future holds and, in particular, we.cannot consider that they will\nI\ncontinue not to intervene. Some oftheir undertakings in regard to us might, therefore, not\nbe innocent in the long term. Perhaps they don't have any need for our sensibilities or the\npolitics ofStates?\n10.3 Repercussions ofUFO Manifestations 01• the Official and Unofficial Conduct of\nStates\n'\nI-\nThe repercussions have been varied in scope. Based on what can be learned ofthe\nreactions ofStates, it is permissible under our hypothesis to classify them as:\nI\na) States that have no knowledge ofextraterrestrial phenomena_ or believe they are not\nconcerned.\nb) States that know ofextraterrestrial phenomena but have no means to investigate\nI\nthem,\nc) States that know ofextraterrestrial phenomena and have the means to investigate\nthem,\nI\nd) States that have entered into contact with one or more extraterrestrial civilizations\nand that have established relations and/or entered into political, scientific, and\ntechnical collaboration.\nI\n10.4 Have Contacts Possibly Been Made with One or More States?\nIndividuals claim to have been contacted for the purpose ofstudies or with a view to\nI\nestablishing relations between one intelligent life form and another. Can we imagine direct\nand continuous contacts at the highest level ofone or more States, particularly the United\nStates? It is true that the position ofthat country has been among the strangest since the\nI\nwave [ofsightings] in June 194 7, followed by the Roswell affair in July 194 7 ( cf\nAppendix 5). Ifthe Americans were able on that occasion or on other occasions to collect\nat least debris or entire wreckage ofextraterrestrial vessels in fairly good condition, and\nI\neven cadavers of humanoids, a certain type ofcontact would then have been established.\nFirst statements and reactions are often considered to be more probative than\nsubsequent affirmations. Thus immediately following what would later become the\nI\nRoswell affair, General Twining was tasked with preparing a secret report on \"flying\ndisks, •• the existence ofwhich was not revealed until 22 years later in the Condon report.\nI\nIt emerges from this that these objects truly do exist. But since then the United States has\nfollowed a policy ofincreasing secrecy ( classification above \"top secret \" ofcertain UFO\nI\nI" }, { "n": 53, "image": "https://wearenotalone.space/transcripts/255-413270-ufo-s-and-defense-what-should-we-prepare-for/p53.jpg", "text": "I\nfiles, according to General Bany Goldwater) and constant disinformation. The strange\nI\nconclusions of the Condon report are just one case in point. Why would, and how could,\nI\nsuch an important secret be kept all the way up to the present, despite everything? The\nsimplest response would be that the United States wants to maintain at any cost military\ntechnological superiority over rival countries and, perhaps, a preferential contact.\nI\nThis policy ofsecrecy and disinformation could have been dictated by an\nunderstandable concern for not creating panic reactions or irrational crazes among the\npublic, or the concern at the time for protecting the country against actions by the USSR,\nor else, in a more prosaic and political fashion, not appearing in the eyes ofvoters to be\nincapable ofproviding convincing explanations regarding these phenomena. No doubt it\nI\nwould not do to undennine the prestige ofthe armed forces, which was incapable of\ninterdicting these violations ofair space, and invite attacks against the military budgets on\nthe part ofpolitical opponents. Anything is conceivable, even the fear ofseeing various\nI\ngovernment agencies accused ofhaving lied at one time or another.\nWhatever the case, it is symptomatic and illustrative to note that since 1953, the United\nI\nStates has equipped itselfwith an impressive repressive arsenal, which is still in force, it\nseems. In particular, they enacted two military regulations, AFR (Air Force Regulation)\n200-2 and JANAP (Joint Anny Navy Air Force Publication) 146, the first prohibiting the\nI\npublic disclosure ofinformation relating to sightings of unidentified objects and the second\nmaking the unauthorized disclosure ofa UFO sighting by the witness an infraction\npunishable by 10 years in prison and a $ I0,000 fine. The JAN AP regulation applies to\nI\nmilitary personnel, but also to commercial airline pilots and captains in the merchant\nmanne.\nI\n10.5 What Measures Must We Take From Now On?\nI\nWhether or not UFOs are extraterrestrial in origin, the UFO phenomenon is already\nwith us and, at any rate, requires critical vigilance on our part. In particular, the\nphenomenon involves risks ofdestabilizing manipulations from a media, psychological,\nI\ncultural, and religious standpoint: panic fear, world wars, psychoses created by sects or\nlobbies, etc. These appreciable risks ofcosmic fear, as well as the discovery and no doubt\nconquest ofthe cosmos that is to come, henceforth justify, on the part ofthe political,\nI\nscientific, and intellectual elite, a certain degree ofcosmic vigilance calculated to prevent\nany shocking surprise, erroneous interpretation, and malicious or unhealthy manipulation.\nI\nWithout a doubt, measures must be contemplated on the national and international\nI\nlevels. Specifically, whatever the givens are with respect to American political problems,\nand in the face ofa posture ofongoing secrecy, how can we conceive ofharmonious\npolitical and military relations among allies, and particularly within NATO, which normally\nmust be founded on basic trust, if access to information ofincalculable importance ­\nparticularly technological information - is not shared?\nI\n10.5.1 National Structures\nI\nIfFrance wants to affirm its presence in this domain, it seems urgent to expand\nSEPM which must:\nI\nI" }, { "n": 54, "image": "https://wearenotalone.space/transcripts/255-413270-ufo-s-and-defense-what-should-we-prepare-for/p54.jpg", "text": "I\n- increase its human and material resources so as to be able to collect information\nrelating to all UFO manifestations, both in Europe and throughout the world,\n- expand its investigation and analysis capabilities,\nI·\n- boost its representation and foreign relations status.\nIt would likewise be advisable to create a unit at the highest State level to collaborate\nI\nwith SEPRA that would be tasked with:\n- fonnulating all prospective hypotheses,\n- promoting scientific and technical research and, as such, would have a small minimum\nI\nbudget,\n- proposing elements of military strategy,\n- participating in the establishment of regional cooperation agreements with interested\nEuropean and foreign countries. It should be noted that many countries already have\nsmall bodies for the collection of UFO sightings withi.n their armed forces or intelligence\nservices.\n10.5.2 European Structures\nIt would be desirable then for the European States and the European Union\nCommission to conduct every type ofresearch and to initiate diplomatic approaches with\nthe United States, exerting useful pressure, to clarify this crucial issue, which must fall\nI\nwithin the scope ofpolitical and strategic alliances. Would it perhaps be opportune for\nFrance to propose to the Commission that it create within it - so as to no longer be blind,\ndumb, and paralyzed - a special expanded coordinating body provided with the necessary\nI\nhuman and material resources?\n10.6 What Situations Must We Prepare For?\nI\nWhat strategies could we map out in the following situations:\n- appearance ofUFO and extraterrestrial desire to establish an official and peaceful\nI.\ncontact,\n- chance or intentional discovery ofa microbase or base at some location in France or\nin Europe: position to adopt toward a friendly or non-friendly power,\nI\n- invasion (hardly likely given the fact that an invasion could have been carried out\nbefore the discovery ofthe atom) and targeted or massive attacks on strategic or\nnonstrategic locations,\n- deliberate manipulation or disinformation with a view to destabilizing other States.\nIn the case ofthe first situation cited, we are not precluded from suggesting that the\nStates that are equipped with sophisticated research and analysis tools will perhaps have\nI\nmore chances than others ofbeing chosen as preferred contacts, but at what risks and\nadvantages?\nI\nChapter 11 - Aeronautical Implications\nI\n11.1 Why Aeronautical Implications?\nI\nIt is not intellectually possible to remain indifferent in light ofan unexplained\nI\nI" }, { "n": 55, "image": "https://wearenotalone.space/transcripts/255-413270-ufo-s-and-defense-what-should-we-prepare-for/p55.jpg", "text": "I\naeronautical phenomenon which numerous civilian and military pilots have come face to\nface with. Ofthe several hundred confirmed aeronautical cases, there are primarily five\nI\ntypes ofimplications:\n- simple sighting ofa phenomenon by the crew, passengers, or ground personnel,\n- detection ofa track on a radar screen, which occurs in one out offive aeronautical\nI\ncases, sometimes culminating in the recording ofa track, as was the case on January 28,\nI 994, at the Cinq-Mars-la-Pile Control and Detection Center (CDC) ( cf Chapter I),\n- interferences with ground (San Carlos de Bariloche) or onboard (Tehran) electrical or\nelectronic equipment,\n- shadowing ofaircraft (San Carlos de Bariloche, RB-47, etc.),\n- apparently aggressive conduct ( Colonel Giraud in his Mirage IV, student pilot at\nTours, the Tehran incident, etc.).\nThe number oftestimonies and the quality ofthe witnesses are such that one cannot dodge\nthe phenomenon and aeronautic personnel, and more especially defense personnel, must be\nsensitized and prepared to deal with the situation. In fact, how can one try to ignore a\nphenomenon that is manifested by the regular crossing ofour air space by moving objects\n1.\nthe behavior ofwhich suggests that they are piloted by an intelligent [being]? Can one\nI\nclaim, because this appears to exceed our technical knowledge, that it does not fall within\nour purview? Ifwe do nothing, the very principle ofdefense and air intelligence would be\ncalled into question.\nI\nThe first sightings made by aviators date back to the beginning ofthe 40s. Since then,\nthe number ofunexplained sightings (after an expert's appraisal: UAP Ds) reported by\npilots or [air traffic] controllers has risen to over 500. As a reminder1.. in France, this figure\nis three or four since 1951 . It is the responsibility of the Air Force to take into account\nthese phenomena, which, until proven otherwise, occur primarily in air space.\nI\n11.2 Who is Involved?\nI\n11.2.1Flight Crew\nI\nI\nThe flight crew is naturally involved, particularly the pilots, because whether they are\ncivilian or military, they are in a more advantageous position for making sightings and\nwould be the first affected in the event ofan incident (risk ofcollision, in particular). This\nis especially true for a combat pilot, because he is trained to constantly monitor the sky\nand he now has more and more advanced weapons systems capable ofdetecting faster and\nfaster and smaller and smaller targets at greater and greater distances. The pilot/weapons\nsystem pair is now more than ever an excellent sighting instrument and would be our first\nI\nmeans ofintervention if, by chance, this were to prove necessary. The concerns ofa\nI\ncommercial airline pilot are different because, in addition to the fact that he does not have\nthe same equipment, his priority is obviously the safety ofhis passengers. Although he\nremains a primary partner in the quest for information, he would be totally powerless in\nthe face ofan aggressive stance by a UFO.\nI\n11.2.2 (Air Traffic) Controllers\nI\nThe radar [air traffic] controller is, ofcourse, involved, but depending on whether he is\ncivilian or military, the control equipment at his disposal offer him different options. In\nboth cases, since he is in radio contact with the pilot, it is he who is the first to receive the\nsighting report from the crew.\nI\nI" }, { "n": 56, "image": "https://wearenotalone.space/transcripts/255-413270-ufo-s-and-defense-what-should-we-prepare-for/p56.jpg", "text": "I\nHe must be prepared to note and supplement the sightings transmitted with the clear­\nheadedness that the distance ofhis position gives him. In regard to radar detection, only\nI\nthe military controller has adequate equipment to detect a flying object that does not\nfollow general air traffic rules. In fact, military air defense radars permit a visual display of\nthe primary detection, as well as a synthetic display used by civilian [ air traffic] controllers,\nI\nto appear on the military controller's radar scope (see Appendix I). In addition, they are\nthe only ones who are able to obtain an image ofcraft moving at the supposed speeds of\nUFOs. Finally, the means to record and reconstruct radar situations on site at the Control\nI\nand Detection Centers (CDC) enable supplemental investigations to be conducted, if\nnecessary.\nI\n11.2.3 Meteorologists\nUnusual phenomena are often explained by meteorological phenomena. Questions can\nI\neasily be explained ifthe specialized departments are informed ofthe importance of their\nobservations. AJI military and civilian personnel specializing in meteorology must\ntherefore be able to meet this expectation.\n..\n11.2.4 CNES Engineers\nCNES engineers are the French space specialists. They cannot remain indifferent to\nI\nUFO phenomena. Knowledge ofour universe, observation ofthe sky, and surveillance of\nanything that is deployed into the sky naturally makes them just the right people to head\nup the study ofextraterrestrial phenomena. We have described their work above.\nI\n11.2.5 Engineers in the Aeronautics Sector\nI\nEngineers in the aeronautic sector are naturally involved. Their work is presel)ted in\nthe next chapter on scientific and technical implications.\nI\n11.3 How Do We Involve Aeronautics [Personnel] ?\nIn order for aeronautics personnel, along with their resources, to be involved, we need\nI\nto know how to interest them and, in order to do this, how to inform them ofthe\nphenomenon, to specify what is expected ofthem, and to define what their reflex\nresponses should be and what course ofaction they should take.\nI\n11.3.1 Informing Personnel\nI\nInforming amounts, first and foremost, to getting someone to accept the possibility of\nthe presence ofextraterrestrial craft in our sky. It is necessary to overcome the fear of\nridicule and to admit that, failing certainty, there are strong presumptions based on a list of\nI\nexamples selected fl-om among the testimonies fl-om the aeronautics world.\nMoreover, it is necessary to reach all generations. Informational conferences can be\neasily scheduled at aeronautics schools for the young generations (Ecole de I' Air, Ecole\nI\nNationale de )'Aviation Civile [National Civil Aviation School] (ENAC, Sup'Aero, etc.),\nand for the not-so-young, in continuing education courses and, obviously, at the College\nInterarmees de Defense [Interarmy Defense College] (CID) and IHEDN. SEPRA is\nI\nalready holding conferences at ENAC within the framework ofcivilian [air traffic]\nI\nI" }, { "n": 57, "image": "https://wearenotalone.space/transcripts/255-413270-ufo-s-and-defense-what-should-we-prepare-for/p57.jpg", "text": "I\nI\ncontroller training.\nThis practice just needs to be extended to all flight crew training schools, regardless of\nthe specialty being taught. For the generations already on the job, these conferences can\nI\neasily be offered at the Control and Detection Centers and flight units for military\npersonnel, and, at least for civilian [ air traffic] controllers, at the Regional Air Navigation\nCenters (CRNA). As for commercial flight crews, the airline companies - Air France, in\nparticular - have set up a systematic information sheet for crews that is periodically\nI\nupdated.\nI\nThis information must furthermore be updated on a regular basis in the knowledge that\nthe intended objective is to permit a future witness, whether he plays an active role or is\nmerely an observer, to be fully aware of what course ofaction to take in the face ofthe\nphenomenon sighted. Ifwe want personnel to get involved, it is necessary that they know\nhow to react in real time and what to communicate and to whom, how to take the\nmeasures corresponding to the present situation, etc. For this reason, it is advisable to\ndefine with them what their reflex responses should be and what course ofaction they\nshould take.\nI\n11.3.2 Reflex Responses\nI\nIndeed, it is necessary to instill in_personnel who may face the phenomenon what their\nreflex responses should be, in the knowledge that they may merely be simple observers or,\nin some cases, have to take concrete measures (for example, at San Carlos de Bariloche,\nI\nthe surprise ofthe landing strip lights going out in the middle ofthe UFO incident). It is\nI\nquite certain that it would be better to be prepared in order to be fully aware ofwhat\ncourse ofaction to take in the face ofsuch an unforeseen and poorly understood event.\nThese reflex responses differ in type depending on whether it is a matter of sighting,\nrecording a testimony, transmitting information collected, or reacting in real time in order\nto take ad.hoc measures in response to the phenomenon.\nI\n11.3.3 Course of Action to Take\nThe course ofaction to take seems to us to be summarized as follows: observe, note\nI\nthe maximum amount ofdetails, take photographs if possible, _report, allowing the visitors\nthe initiative of possibly making contact, and avoid premature publicity in the media.\nI\n11.3.3.1 Objective Observation\nIn the face ofan unknown situation, one must be on guard against any instinctive self­\nI\ndefense reaction that could be easily interpreted as a provocation. One must just observe\nand avoid any initiative aimed at seeking contact.\nI\n11.3.3.2 Reporting\nI\nOnce a phenomenon has been sighted, it is advisable to report it in order to alert the\nother crews, on the one hand, which is what is currently done, and the authorities, on the\nother hand, through the air [traffic] control chain ofcommand in civilian cases and the air\ndefense chain ofcommand in military cases.\nI\n11.3.3.3 Remaining Discrete Vis-a-Vis the Public\nAs a witness to a phenomenon ofthis type, one must know how to adopt a certain level\nI\nI" }, { "n": 58, "image": "https://wearenotalone.space/transcripts/255-413270-ufo-s-and-defense-what-should-we-prepare-for/p58.jpg", "text": "I\nofdiscretion vis-a-vis the press. It is essential to allow scientists [time] to make use of the\ninformation before letting the media trigger the curiosity ofthe general public, which\nI\ncould result in the disappearance ofimportant evidence.\nChapter 12 - Scientific and Technical Implications\nI\nThe significance ofthe UFO phenomenon to defense in the broad sense leads to several\nproposals.\nI\n12.1 Stepping Up the Collection and Analysis of Data\nIt is, ofcourse, advisable to continue and, if possible, expand geographically the\ncollection, initial analysis, and classification ofdata and testimonies performed\nsuccessively by GEP AN and then by SEPRA, which was described in Chapters 5 and 6.\n12.2 Establishing a Watch and Initiate Work Upstream\nFrom the studies presented in Chapter 8, it can be concluded that at least a passive, and\npreferably an active, techno-watch is required in the fields ofleading-edge propulsion such\nas, for example, magnetohydrodynamics. It is truly essential to know what the other\nnations are doing in this area. In other high-tech fields, the study of the various\nI\ntestimonies could be combined with appropriate scientific experiments to enable significant_\nprogress. A typical example is that of particle beams or microwaves, together with their\neffects: tools, weapons, etc. All ofthese subjects are, on the whole, more advanced than\nI\nthe technical problems presently under study by DGA or the public research institutions.\nTherefore they will not be dealt with unless a decision is made at the highest State level.\nI\n12.3 Encouraging Thought in Order to Place the Phenomena in a Global Context\nI\nThe work mentioned above will enable progress in the partial models ofthe phenomena\nsighted, along with considerable spill-over for defense and industry. But the global\ninterpretation of these well-documented but inexplicable phenomena will require other\nI\nresearch. The principal areas ofresearch relate to the extraterrestrial hypothesis; we will\nmention ,for reference, the current research on the detection ofextrasolar planets, which\nwill take a new direction when the VLT (Very Large Telescope) ofthe ESO (European\nI\nSouthern Observatory) in Chile enables them to be observed directly. Each discovery ofa\nplanet, which is presently made indirectly via the disturbances that the planet causes in its\nstar, has met with a favorable response in the media.\nI\nLess spectacular, albeit fascinating to a cultured public, is the research on the origin of\nlife that is being conducted internationally at a very satisfying rate. It forms the basis of\nexobiology, the science ofextraterrestrial life (see Appendix 3). Studies on evolution and\nI\nits mechanisms are currently handicapped by school disputes. They are important to our\nsubject: How might life evolve elsewhere? Underdeveloped but also important are the\nstudies on the genesis and future of civilizations. The latter are normally extended by\nI\nlong-term, forward-looking scenarios for our planet and, ofcourse, for others.\nInterstellar travel, as visualized in Appendix 4 - entitled \"Colonization of Space\" - must\nbe the object ofat least passive monitoring. This subject is currently being dealt with in\nI\nthe United States, where numerous NASA or Pentagon study contracts concern\nI\nI" }, { "n": 59, "image": "https://wearenotalone.space/transcripts/255-413270-ufo-s-and-defense-what-should-we-prepare-for/p59.jpg", "text": "I\npropulsion using antimatter in solar or interstellar space. It was also in the United States\nI\nwhere the astronomer Papagiannis won a NASA study contract a few years ago to detect\npossible space cities in the asteroid belt located between the planets Mars and Jupiter.\nI\nIn carrying out the study, he examined the photos taken in 1983 by the IRAS [Infrared\nAstronomical Satellite] satellite and looked for possible abnormal infrared emissions\ncoming from objects in th.is belt. It would seem that NASA did not renew Papagiannis'\ncontract, which apparently did not yield any results.\nI\n12.4 Special Studies\nI\nSome studies do not come under the \"hard\" sciences and technologies: for interstellar\nvoyages, the stability ofthe earmarked societies requires study. What, in particular, is\ntheir minimum size? The different attempts at disinformation made by certain foreign\nI\ngovernments should be analyzed discretely, but in depth. The wish ofthese governments\nto appropriate for themselves alone any possible futuristic technologies relating to military\nI\naircraft and weapons might help explain these attempts (see Appendices 5 and 7). It\nwould be advisable to already be anticipating the measures to be taken and the decisions to\nbe made should events such as indubitable physical or radio contacts with an outside\ncivilization take place.\nI\nChapter 13 - Political and Religious Implications\nI\nAn assessment ofthe impact that the formal confirmation ofthe existence ofUFOs and\nextraterrestrial civilizations would have on the political and religious situation ofthe\nI\ncountries on earth could be a bit ofa challenge. However, the task is less arduous when\nwe try to put ourselves in the shoes ofextraterrestrials who supposedly have chosen earth\nas a field ofobservation and/or intervention. We will use th.is method. It is appropriate,\nofcourse, to postulate that the technical and human difficulties have been resolved,\nI\npermitting us to exceed the limits ofour solar system, and even our galaxy:\nI\n- Either in secular voyages aboard \"ship-worlds,\" in which thousands ofvolunteers\nwho have embarked would see their generations reproduce. It is necessary to keep in\nmind that these craft will not be able to one day return to earth, at least that is what we are\nI\nassuming, which would confer - defacto - a political autonomy and freedom ofdecision to\nthe onboard government independent oforders and programs established prior to\ndeparting earth (cf Appendix 4: \"Colonization ofSpace\").\n- Or, in [voyages of] several months or years - based on totally revolutionary scientific\nI\nconcepts and techniques that remain to be imagined - using aircraft or probes piloted by\nclassic crews or by bionic androids, which would follow the instructions received from a\nI\nparent station or from earth.\nDuring the course ofthese explorations, we might discover one or more celestial bodies\npopulated with beings that have evolved more or less similarly to us, \"humans,\" humanoid,\nI\nor even stranger creatures. They may have created civilizations that are comparable to or\nmore advanced than our present civilization, or they may be endowed with only\nrudimentary aptitudes for civilization, unless they still remain only at the elementary\nsurvival stage.\nI\n(Nora Bene: in this chapter, the numbers in parentheses refer to the references, pp. 87\nto 89)\nI\nI" }, { "n": 60, "image": "https://wearenotalone.space/transcripts/255-413270-ufo-s-and-defense-what-should-we-prepare-for/p60.jpg", "text": "I·\n13.1 Phase One: Observation From a Distance (Remote Sensing and Obscn·ation ?)\nIt seems reasonable to think that our earthling explorers have received a mission to\npeacefully observe these worlds and/or conquer, purely and simply, these new territories in\norder to establish a line ofdescendants there (cf. 13.4 below). The state ofadvancement\nofthe local populations will likely dictate the manner ofobtaining, as well as the nature\nand duration, ofthese observations, and the initial observations will, ofcourse, be for\nanalyzing:\nI·\n- the living organisms, the manners in which they think and live, their languages, their\nreligions and beliefs, their arts, sciences, techniques and weapons, their political\ninstitutions, their social organizations, and their histories in general,\n- the environments in which these populations live, [and] animals, plants, minerals, etc.\nThis first phase, which excludes any physical or material contact, would be that of\nscientific, in vivo laboratory observation: electronic surveillance, remote sensing,\nrecording, decrypting oflanguages, analyses, evaluations, etc. It is important to\nemphasize that this period could last one year, ten years, a century, [or] a thousand years,\nwhy not? Actually, what better scientific experiment - Jato sensu - than that ofhaving\nmore or less civilized, stagnant or evolving populations, either at peace or at war,\norganized in a hundred different manners, no doubt having languages that are foreign to\nI:\none another, each one assuming, in its own way, the organization ofts terrestrial and\ncelestial cities. In a word, we would be in the situation ofobserving ourselves!\nI\n13.2 Phase Two: In situ Sampling and Furtive Appearances\nI\nThe interpretation ofthe data collected can only be complete when a second phase has\nbeen implemented, during which sampling and analyses ofmineral, plant, and animal\nelements, and perhaps even elements from evolved beings, are performed. Consequently,\nI\nthe question is raised as toAhe types ofcontacts that would be appropriate to establish and\nthe political, psychological, and religious implications for the local populations that might\nresult from these contacts: furtive and covert contacts, visible and overt contacts,\nI\ncontinuous or intermittent contacts. Ifthe furtive and covert mode ofoperation is\ninitia.llyselected, it nevertheless could not - at least based on the present state ofour\ntechnology - go completely unnoticed by the indigenous populations. It is permissible to\nI\nconsider that the psychological and religious impacts may vary according to the different\ntypes of political organizations and the levels ofmoral and scientific development\nencountered on the same world.\nI\n13.2.l Impacts on Preindustrial-Age Civilizations\nI\nIndividuals or masses from preindustrial-age civilizations might note the passage and/or\nlanding ofour ships or our remote-controlled craft. They might collectively view them\nequally as natural, divine, extraordinary, supernatural, aberrant, or diabolical phenomena\nI\n(frescoes in the Yugoslavian monastery at Detchani, spheres in Nuremberg and Basel in\n1561 and 1566 - cf Appendix 6). Furthermore, the collective memories ofthese peopies\nand their imagination in general could be more or less sharply marked by such\nI\nmanifestations if they are accompanied, in particular, by the sighting ofour astronauts,\nI\nI" }, { "n": 61, "image": "https://wearenotalone.space/transcripts/255-413270-ufo-s-and-defense-what-should-we-prepare-for/p61.jpg", "text": "I\nI\nI\nwhether dressed in their coveralls or their space suits or not, or robots, androids, or any\nartifacts that we may deem appropriate to disembark or represent. Such appearances, if\nI\nthe local authorities note and publicly certify their reality, would undoubtedly have a\ncreative impact capable ofmodifying the indigenous political and religious conceptions for\nsome time.\nI\n13.2.1.1 Impacts on Local Religions\nI\nSince terrestrial a~d celestial orders are closely interlinked in people's minds, the\nappearances of spaceships or remote-controlled craft, and, moreover, the appearances of\nastronauts or bionic robots, would be capable ofcreating a lasting impression in minds,\nI\nreorienting religions, inspiring new ones. or originating founding myths. The flying\nmachines that Ezekiel described at length ( 1 ), the air war of the Ramayana, the Epic of\nGilgamesh (2), the Elohim ofGenesis (3), and the Watchmen of the Sky, mixing with the\nI\ndaughters of men and begetting giants, whom Enoch also speaks of( 4 ), and more\ngenerally, the Immortals, the Sons or the Kings ofthe Sky ofthe Orient and China (5),\nI\nJapan, the \"Land ofGods\" ( 6), the Viracochas of South America, the Incas, or the great\ngods ofAncient Egypt, the Gods, the Titans, the Giants, the Children ofthe Gods, and the\nHeres ofwestern and oriental Antiquity (7), etc., come to mind.\nBoth supernatural and extraordinary phenomena were part ofthe natural order of things\nI\nin the past. Would religions founded on the existence of a God or a creative order be\nshattered by such apparitions? Nothing is less certain. Once the shock, terror, and\nI\ncuriosity have passed, a new appreciation ofthe cosmic order could replace the old\nreligious conceptions, without necessarily destroying the divine principle itself. To say the\nleast, these religious conceptions could be reoriented or even sublimated. God does not\nI\ntravel around in a spaceship. Besides, the great religions ofearth do not condemn the idea\nofthe existence of other inhabited worlds in the universe. Must we recall that certain\ncollective memories experience aberrations, despite the tangible proofsubsequently\nI\nfurnished to the catechumen (the cult ofthe cargo plane in New Hebrides) (8)?\nBonaparte's military and scientific expedition to Egypt left no trace in the local annals,\nwhich recorded only an interruption ofthe pilgrimage to Mecca (9). Closer to home,\nmany people did not believe that men had walked on the moon, believing it to be a\npublicity stunt or disinformation. It would be appropriate, however, to avoid\nI\noverestimating this impact, insofar as all ancient civilizations conceived of pantheons, the\nI\ngods ofwhich were associated with terrifying manifestations of the sea, wind, volcanoes,\nearthquakes, or .lightning. It is therefore difficult to say whether they were the avatars of\nextraterrestrial influences or, more simply, the product ofthe invention of mythologies\nexplaining the world.\nI\n13.2.1.2 Political Impacts\nI\nWith respect to the political impacts, these should be much more ephemeral, at least in\nappearance. In fact, once the moments ofastonishment have passed, the political\norganization of States does not seem to have to be affected in a lasting manner, since\nI\ncontingencies quickly regain the upper hand. However, that monarch or chief of state\ncould proclaim himselfthe exclusive and privileged interpreter ofthese extraordinary\nmanifestations. Would he not be tempted to consecrate himself a god-king 9r a king-god\nI\nI" }, { "n": 62, "image": "https://wearenotalone.space/transcripts/255-413270-ufo-s-and-defense-what-should-we-prepare-for/p62.jpg", "text": ". II·\nin the eyes of his subjects?\nI\nOnce again without being able to distinguish what is the product ofthe natural and\nI\nspontaneous search for the legitimacy ofpower from what could actually only be the result\nof an opportunity seized by inveigling, we are forced to note that history abounds in god­\nkings or king-gods (pharaohs; Assyrian kings; Hellenic epiphanic kings; Roman, Chinese,\nI\nor Japanese emperors; sons of the Sun ofCentral or South America, etc.).\n13.2.2 Impacts on Industrial-Age Civilizations\nIndustrial-age civilizations are more skeptical than they formerly were and have more\ndifficulty envisioning what is not a product ofthe immediately explainable or the simply\nmeasurable. However, it is certain that the furnishing ofirrefutable proof ofthe existence\nofextraterrestrials would leave a profound mark on populations such as ours today. Th.is\nissue is at the heart ofour report.\n13.3 Phase Three: Influences on Local Civilizations\nThe third phase would be that ofthe influences that we would consider appropriate to\nexert on the environment and the civilizations encountered with a view to causing them to\nevolve in our fashion. It goes without saying that the advantages and risks would have to\nI\nbe studied carefully.\n13.3.1 Influences on Preindustrial-Age Civilizations\nI\nWe might consider it necessary, in certain cases, to influence the environment in a\nspecific manner and the evolution oflocal civilizations in a subtle way. It might seem\nI\nnecessary to us, upon completion ofour observations and our analyses, to modify, bit by\nbit, the natural environment and the ecosystem by, for example, seeding or introducing\nselect plants and organisms that are lacking.\nI\nLikewise, the course ofindigenous civilizations could be gradually modified by\ninfluencing, either from a distance or directly, the qualities or defects ofselect individuals,\naccentuating their intellectual and moral tendencies and their scientific knowledge, or by\nI\ncausing genetic mutations by different processes that are yet to be invented.\nIn this case, it would be a matter of playing the role that these populations would have\nwillingly reserved for gods, who, by providing sacred texts, would reorient, for example,\nI\ntheir sense ofmorals, their religiosity, and perhaps their laws and their political\ninstitutions. The use ofelements likely to terrify and impress could be appropriate in some\ncases. And, with all due reverence, nothing would prevent one from thinking ofdifferent\nI\nepisodes in the Old Testament, the conditions under which the laws of Manu were\ninstituted ( I 0) or even the Koran given. The influences relate back to a certain number of\nenigmas in history, including, perhaps, the concomitant appearance of the great\nI\ncivilizations of the Indus, Mesopotamia, and Egypt ( cities, architecture, writing, calendar,\nastronomy, etc.). They also call to mind the extraordinary map ofthe Antarctic, which\nwas drawn almost free ofice by the Frenchman Oronce Fine in 1531, nearly three centuries\nI\nprior to the discovery ofthis continent in 1820 ( 11 ).\n13.3.2 Influences on Industrial-Age Civilizations\nI\nI\nI" }, { "n": 63, "image": "https://wearenotalone.space/transcripts/255-413270-ufo-s-and-defense-what-should-we-prepare-for/p63.jpg", "text": "I\nI\nThe nature of these influences will vary according to the type of civilization, its\ntechnological development, and its psychological acclimatization or lack thereofto the\nexistence ofextraterrestrial civilizations. It would be advisable beforehand to accustom\nI\nthe mind ofthese populations to the idea ofthe probable existence ofextraterrestrial\ncivilizations (science-fiction novels, films, cartoon strips, video games, advertisements, a\nfavorable psychological climate, [and] why not suitable sects?, etc.).\nI\nNew and essential technological knowledge could be provided via different avenues or\nby means ofchance or provoked accidents with one ofour spacecraft. The contemporary\nI\nRoswell case thus comes to mind. In order for_this case to be retained in full (or disposed\nof), it would still be necessary for the U.S. government to accept to show, communicate\nand let analyze, without beating around he bush, all of the elements that it actually\nrecovered on that occasion.\nI\n13.4 Phase Four: Direct Contacts\nA fourth phase would be that of establishing direct contact with the locals or with entire\nI\npopulations, whether or not a vanguard ofbionic robots were used. Once again, the goals\nsought must be precisely determined. The benefit and true utility ofestablishing such\ncontacts must be weighed with care in order to calculate the risks and consequences. A\nI\nstringent program could plan for these. However, a serious technical accident affecting\nI\none ofour spacecraft could be the start ofan unofficial contact, a necessary settlement, or\na colonization, or even, if necessary, an information-disinformation campaign. It is also\nadvisable to envision the sedition of some ofour crews whom it might be necessary to\ndisembark or who might decide on their own authority to live on one ofthe worlds\nI\ndiscovered and, eventually , mix with the indigenous populations, going against orders\nreceived, whatever happens not to intervene or interfere in local affairs. These contacts\npresuppose that the worlds discovered are populated with human beings or hominids\nI\nwhose complexion is identical or close to ours. But under the hypothesis of contacts and\nplanned long-term settlements ofmembers ofour crews, should mixes be prohibited, as\nprophylaxis, by imposing a major ban on them ( 12) or, on the contrary, should they be\nI\ntolerated and even encouraged? Bearing in mind that direct or prolonged contacts would\ninevitably lead the indigenous populations to believe, infine, that we are not so different\nI\nfrom them. It would be prudent, however, to send remote-controlled androids in advance\nin order to assess the reactions that such an intrusion would arouse, or to acclimate the\npopulations to the idea through furtive, episodic appearances.\nI\n13.4.1 Direct Contacts with Preindustrial-Age Civilizations\nI\nIt is certain that such contacts would immediately cause the local populations to\nimagine that they are in the presence ofgods. Historical parallels naturally come to mind:\nthe arrival ofthe Spaniards in Central America in armor and on horseback, or, more\ngenerally, the arrival of the Europeans at the time ofthe discovery and exploration ofthe\nglobe. The impact on populations that had never seen horses, armor that shone brightly in\nI\nthe sun, or white men, particularly with blond or red hair, must have been felt strongly.\nI\nHowever, the shock ofthese apparitions would be quickly lessened with the multiplication\nof relations, and even more so ifour crews were to take an eminent place in the local\npolitical and military orders. This, of course, relates back to the different epics ofthe\ndiscovery ofthe world, European colonization, and also the end ofthe western empires.\nI\nI" }, { "n": 64, "image": "https://wearenotalone.space/transcripts/255-413270-ufo-s-and-defense-what-should-we-prepare-for/p64.jpg", "text": "---- - - - - --\nI\n13.4.2 Direct Contacts with Industrial-Age Civilizations\nI\nThe day would come when we believed that these civilizations, gradually brought to\nour level through our efforts, are able to participate in our world. With the ground\nprepared in advance, contacts could, for example, be established discretely with selected\nI\nindividuals or at the highest level of the States, or ofsome ofthem, and, if possible, be\nkept secret. Although leaks should not be ruled out, the leaders selected would then have\nto conduct infonnation, disinfonnation, and counterinfonnation campaigns to maintain the\nI\nprivileged nature ofthese relations and, who knows, to benefit, from our side, from novel\nscientific, technical, and political infonnation, giving them an edge over their rivals. The\nselection of States, rulers, key figures, or mere individuals would, ofcourse, be of\nI\nparamount importance.\n.\nBefore or after the implementation ofan influencing program, why not imagine having\nbionic robots that look like humans or resemble the living beings there appear in order not\nI\nto risk the lives ofmembers ofour expeditions? Finally, why not purely and simply\npresent ourselves openly and publicly? It is easy to imagine the huge sensation that this\nwould cause in all psychological, political, military, strategic, and religious spheres, to say\nI\nnothing ofthe media, [as well as the] multiple meetings and international colloquiums,\nunintenupted sessions oforganizations such as the UN, calls for \"world unity, \"\ninternational consultations, the creation ofwelcoming committees, etc. [ that it would\nI\nprompt]. The rivalry of the States would be interesting to observe.\nIt goes without saying that our intentions must be perceived as peaceful. Ifthis were\nnot our policy, there would, ofcourse, be no need to take special precautions to show\nI\nconsideration for the sentiments of the local populations. In all of these scenarios, we\nshould encounter idolaters, sycophants, Herodians, who, out ofa millenialist conviction,\ngullibility, pragmatism, or interest, would welcome us with enthusiasm as saviors, capable\nI\nofsolving all of their problems and bringing them peace and prosperity, preferably without\nhaving to exert much effort. These would be our first allies. Zealots, skeptics, and those\nI\nwho have withdrawn into the venerable secular conceptions oftheir world, which has been\nturned upside-down, would cast doubt on or deny our existence. Ifthey were to admit it,\nthey would consider us as so many invaders, whose intentions would be perceived as all\nI\nthe more suspect since they would be peaceful. There is but one logical step to take\nbetween that and imagining the creation ofdefense movements and resistance movements\nagainst the invader. The strength ofthese movements would depend, in part, on our skill\nI\nin squashing them, convincing them, in the hope ofattaching them to us.\nBut how then do we avoid the pitfall ofgood intentions and good sentiments that\neveryone knows the road to hell is paved with? (13) Should we admit how long we have\nI\nbeen observing them? Would they reproach us for not having intervened to prevent a\nworld war, or would they blame us for it, or, more generally, would they hold it against us\nthat we changed the course ofcivilizations? Very severe and lasting psychological\nI\ndisturbances should be envisioned in these cases.\nWould they be disappointed to learn that we are not immortal? Later, economic and\ntechnological exchanges and financial ties should be established with these populations.\nI\nWould it be a wise policy to involve ourselves in local affairs? And in one manner or\nanother. could we escape the requests to become arbitrators of political disagreements,\npeace, war, and economic crises?\nI\nWhatever the case, one day or another we would be in charge ofthe unsolved\nproblems. Would they not go so far as to reproach us for the contributions ofour very\nI\nI" }, { "n": 65, "image": "https://wearenotalone.space/transcripts/255-413270-ufo-s-and-defense-what-should-we-prepare-for/p65.jpg", "text": "I\nI\nadvanced civilization, or at least for what we thought would be ofbenefit to them?\nChanges ofopinion and attitude toward us could occur over time. Wouldn't groups of\nI\npeople be one day tempted to consider themselves our equals, because we did not remain\ninaccessible? Protest movements would consequently arise and revolutionary cycles\nwould no doubt be set in motion, as a result ofwhich we, as well as our Herodian allies,\nwould suffer. Our global policy would then be compromised and we would have to\nconsider making our contacts less frequent and, possibly, withdrawing onto our ships and\nI\nretreating. We would then have the time necessary to review our policies, based on\nI\ntechniques still unknown from our catechumens.\nThe discovery of new worlds could enable us to enter into contact with civilizations just\nas developed as our own and even far more advanced. Nothing allows us to rule out the\npossibility that, why not , we would encounter explorers from other more distant worlds.\nUnder these hypothetical conditions, it is permissible to imagine that we might have been\nI\ndiscovered in space first. It would be our turn then to experience - at least in part - the\npsychological effects and the political and religious implications that we have described.\nWhat would be the policy oflocal governments toward us? Would they welcome us\nI\npeacefully or would they prudently keep us at a distance? Should we fear seeing nuclear\nspace weapons or other weapons aimed at ourselves gainst, for example, the bases that we\nhad attempted to establish or had succeeded in establishing in an asteroid belt close to one\nI\noftheir worlds?\nI\nWhat would be the results ofsuch encounters? What relations could we establish and\nwhat influences would we exert on these different types ofcivilizations? Anything is\nconceivable. Having come full circle, we thus return to our concerns and our current\nquestions.\nI\nChapter 14 - Media Implications\nI\nAs was stressed earlier, it may seem extravagant that sensible people, scientists\nI\nmoreover, are interested in unexplained - and for the time being still inexplicable ­\nphenomena at the risk ofappearing ridiculous. But, as this report tries to demonstrate,\nthere are enough questions regarding tangible evidence to justify the scientific interest\ngenerated by these issues. What separates our approach from the media's approach is the\nI\nI\nresearcher's curiosity with respect to the research to be conducted in order to solve the\nenigmas posed to his sagacity even ifscience has not reached an adequate state to answer\nthem fully, as opposed to the curiosity of the press regarding a subject with regular\nsudden new developments that are likely to produce marvelous scoops, which generally\nare not characterized by scientific precision.\nI\nIt is not a question of criticizing the press; its aid is often most valuable. But these\nfleeting events are supported in part by human testimonies, which are all the more flimsy\nsince they come from people who are affected by their encounter with \"the unknown\" and\nsince they elude the usual benchmarks. The press has a tendency sometimes to either\nridicule the facts reported or to make itself look ridiculous because ofthe excess of\nI\ninformation extrapolated from the elements described by the witnesses.\nI\n14.1 What Can a Government Fear From the Curiosity of the Media?\n- Panic: the media broadcast terrifying information liable to sow panic among the\nI\nI" }, { "n": 66, "image": "https://wearenotalone.space/transcripts/255-413270-ufo-s-and-defense-what-should-we-prepare-for/p66.jpg", "text": "I\npopulation. The famous example ofOrson Welles's fictional program taken literally by\nradio listeners in 1938, wreaking tremendous havoc in one region ofthe United States,\nmay have influenced the reaction ofU.S. military personnel vis-a-vis the Roswell incident\nI\nin 1947. The disinformation campaign was skillfully conducted, since it has muzzled the\nmedia for 30 years. Panic, which is accompanied by considerable human chaos (suicides,\npeople fleeing on the roads, riots, and vandalism, etc.) would cause any government for\nI\nwhich peace alone is a wealth and stability factor for its power to shrink back.\n- Mistrust: the fear ofseeing accurate information divulged and repeated with obvious\nirony is also a deterrent to openly mentioning UFO questions. This posture is at the core\nI\nof the disinformation and confusion in which public opinion is steeped with regard to what\nis true and what is false. It can only be dreaded by decision-makers.\n- Fear ofridicule: although ridicule has no longer killed for some time, it is nonetheless\nI·\noften difficult to overcome.\n- Manipulation: the media can be manipulated by lobbies or pressure groups for\nI\nsectorial purposes (for example, push politicians to create an anti-UFO SDI [Strategic\nDefense Initiative]) and could thus become the unwitting spokesmen ofa disinformation\ncampaign or a destabilization attempt.\nI:\n14.2 What Attitudes do the Media Adopt?\n- For the tabloids, anything is good ifit sells. The public's curiosity is great and its\nI\ndemand generates enticing and often phony articles. AJthough they become the relayer of\nincredible theories, it is, on the other hand, thanks to the tabloids that the latest revelations\nconcerning Roswell made by old witnesses have begun to become known.\nI\n- For the major newspapers, irony or aggressiveness are most often a manner of\nbroaching a taboo subject that no one has a handle on. But the press can also spread the\nnews about an extraordinary phenomenon when, as in the case ofSan Carlos de Bariloche,\nI\ndozens ofpeople were witnesses to it. It sometimes also makes a good presentation ofthe\nUFO case.\n- For television and movies, the subject is in vogue because it can be dealt with as\nI\nfiction, and there nothing checks the imagination ofthe producers. The bizarre fashion\nadopted by Channel +\",a French television station] for its \"Nuit des Extraterrestres\n[Extraterrestrials Night]\" does not prompt one to take this subject seriously. However,\nI\ntribute should be paid to several serious and well-documented broadcasts, like that of\n\"Arte\" in March 1996.\nI\n14.3 What Should Be Done?\nI\nThe future ofour planet lies in space. Whether it be overpopulation, a spirit of\nadventure, the search for other raw materials, a liking for conquest and colonization, or\nother, more or less altruistic, motivations, everything is pushing toward humankind's\nI\nexpansion. Will we one day be the extraterrestrials for other planets? When our probes\norbit around more and more distant worlds and film them, what might hypothetical\ninhabitants think ofthem?\nI\nWe must prepare ourselves for this prospect, and the media can help educate the\nmasses.\nA strengthened SEPRA could usefully dedicate its efforts to the training ofjournalists\nI\nand could create a documentary site on the Internet.\nI\nI" }, { "n": 67, "image": "https://wearenotalone.space/transcripts/255-413270-ufo-s-and-defense-what-should-we-prepare-for/p67.jpg", "text": "I\nI\nConclusions and Recommendations\nI\nThe UFO problem cannot be eliminated by mere caustic and offhand witticisms. Since\nthe publication ofthe first report by the Association des Auditeurs ofIHEDN 20 years\nI\nago, CNES has conducted serious studies in close collaboration with the Gendarmerie\nNationale and the Air Force primarily, as well as with other State agencies (Civil Aviation,\nI\nWeather Service, etc.). These studies tally with other research conducted more or less\ndiscretely abroad, mainly in the United States.\nThey demonstrate the almost certain physical reality ofcompletely unknown flying\nI\nobjects with remarkable flight performances and noiselessness, apparently operated by\nintelligent [beings]. With their maneuvers, these flying objects considerably impress\ncivilian and military pilots, who hesitate to speak [ about them]. The fear ofappearing\nI\nridiculous, alienated, or simply gullible is the principal reason for this reserve. Secret craft\ndefinitely ofearthly origin ( drones, stealth aircraft, etc.) can only explain a minority of\ncases. Ifwe step back and take an objective look over the years, we clearly perceive the\nI\nlimits ofthis explanation.\nThus we are forced to resort to other hypotheses. Some can neither be confirmed nor\ninvalidated. They are therefore not scientific, and, certainly, it is very difficult to\nI\nscientifically study rare, elusive, and random phenomena, when science is based above all\non experiments and their reproducibility. However, the example of meteorites shows that\nthis type of phenomenon can nevertheless end up being accepted by the scientific\nI\ncommunity after centuries ofdoubt and rejection.\nA single hypothesis sufficiently takes into account the facts and, for the most part, only\ncalls for present-day science. It is the hypothesis ofextraterrestrial visitors. Advanced as\nI\nof 1947 by certain U.S. military personnel, today it is popular worldwide. It is discredited\nby a certain elite, but is plausible. Scientists.( astronomers, physicists, engineers,\nfuturologists, etc.) have elaborated on it enough for it to be receivable - as a hypothesis ­\nI\nby their peers. Different plausible variants concerning the voyage ofone or more\ncivilizations from a remote solar system to ours have been developed. A model of\nmagnetohydrodynamic technology, which could be employed to propel the UFOs in the\nI\natmosphere, has _.reached a significant stage of development. Other manifestations ofthese\nobjects have begun to receive a physical explanation (automobile breakdowns, truncated\nbeams [of light], etc.).\nThe purposes ofthese possible visitors remain unknown, but they must be the subject\nofindispensable speculations and the development ofprospective scenarios.\nI\nThe extraterrestrial hypothesis isby far, the best scientific hypothesis. It certainly has\nnot been categorically proven, but strong presumptions exist in its favor and if it is correct,\nit is loaded with significant consequences.\nI\nBased on this prudent but solid assessment, we can make several recommendations:\n1) Inform the political, military, and administrative decision-makers, as well as the\naircraft and helicopter pilots. A gradual information campaign could target:\nI\n- ENA (National Public Management College] and IHEDN, •\n- [Ministry ofJ Defense schools: Air, Navale, Saint-Cyr, Gendarmerie, ( officers\nand NCO gendarmes), Sante des Armees [Military Health College],\nI\nPolytechnique [Polytechnical College], ENSTA [National College of Advanced\nTechnologies], ENSAE [National College ofAeronautics and Space), CID,\nCHEAR [Center for Advanced~ Armaments Studies], CHEM [Center for\nI\nI" }, { "n": 68, "image": "https://wearenotalone.space/transcripts/255-413270-ufo-s-and-defense-what-should-we-prepare-for/p68.jpg", "text": "•\nI\nAdvanced Mili,ary Studies], etc.,\n- civilian schools and their alumni: Ecole Nationale Superieure de Police\n[National Police College], Ecole des Officiers de Police [Police Officers\nI\nAcademy], journalism schools, Ecole Nationale de l' Aviation Civile. At the\nlatter school, numerous conferences have allowed air [traffic] controllers to be\ntaught the proper reactions in the event an aircraft encounters a UFO,\nI\n- agencies that support or conduct research for military purposes: DGA,\nONERA, CEA/DAM [Directorate ofMilitary Applications], etc.,\n- special civilian and military departments, as well as the Direction de la\nI\nCommunication de la Defense [Defense Communications Directorate], DICOD\nfonner central SIRPA [Anned Forces Information and Public Relations\nDepartment]), calling their attention to disinfonnation processes.\nI\n2) Boost SEPRA's human and material resources so that it can:\n- develop its investigation and analysis possibilities,\nI\n- collect infonnation relating to all UFO manifestations, both in Europe and\nthroughout the world,\n- maintain and develop databases on different aspects ofthese manifestations,\n- reinforce its representation and foreign relations status.\n3) Make the detection of UFOs an objective for civilian and military space surveillance\nsystems, which it is necessary to develop for other reasons (prevention of collisions\nI\nbetween satellites and space debris, etc.).\n4) Create a unit at the highest State level to collaborate with SEPRA, that would be\ntasked with:\nI\n- fonnulating all prospective hypotheses,\n- promoting scientific and technical efforts and, as such, have an annual budget\nofa few million francs,\nI\n- participating in the establishment of sectorial cooperation agreements with\nother countries.\n5) Initiate diplomatic demarches to the United States, with the support ofother States\nI\nand even the European Union, to urge the superpower to collaborate and, if necessary,\nexert useful pressure to clarify this crucial issue that necessarily comes within the\nframework ofpolitical and strategic alliances.\n•\nI\n6) As speculative as these possibilities are, reflect, at the level ofpublic authorities and\nwith the aid ofthe unit mentioned in item 4), on the measures to take in the event ofa\nspectacular and indisputable manifestation ofa UFO:\nI\n- overt attempt to make contact,\n- landing before numerous witnesses,\n- other substantial actions.\nI\nThese reflections would be carried out methodically, while maintaining, obviously, a\nminimum distance.\nI\nAppendices\nAppendix l - Radar Detection in France\nI\nRadar detection in France is carried out by two radar station networks, the military\nnetwork equipped with both primary and secondary radars and the civilian network\nI\nequipped almost entirely with secondary radars. Primary radar permits one to detect and\nvisualize on a screen (or scope) the geographic position and the altitude (three-\nI\nI" }, { "n": 69, "image": "https://wearenotalone.space/transcripts/255-413270-ufo-s-and-defense-what-should-we-prepare-for/p69.jpg", "text": "I\nI\ndimensional radar) ofall moving objects via the reflection ofradar waves offof the body\nofthe moving object.\nConversely, secondary radar permits the detection and display on the screen only of\nI\nmoving objects equipped with a \"transponder\" that is able to respond to the coded signals\nthat it emits. Thus any moving object not equipped with a \"transponder~' will not be\ndetected by secondary radar.\nI\nThis detail is extremely important in the case in question, because on]y the primary\nradars installed at military Control and Detection Centers (CDC) and radar detection\naircraft, the Air Force AW ACS and soon the Navy Hawkeyes, may detect a UFO,\nI\nprovided that the latter is not a \"stealth\" craft.\nFinally, it is necessary to know that all radar information detected by the totality of\nradar stations in the territory, airborne warning aircraft, and the radar stations of\nneighboring countries are being collected and processed in the STRIDA (Systeme de\nTraitement des Informations de Defense Aerienne [ Air Defense Information Processing\nCenter]) network, thus permitting detection coverage over a square more than 4500 km\nper side.\nI.\nI\nAppendix 2 - Astronomers' Sightings\nby Jean-Claude Ribes\nI\nI\nastronomical object. But we can expect them to be extremely reticent to relate such a\nsighting out offear of ridicule, because amateurs are generally desirous of\"professional\"\nrecognition. At any rate, no specific investigation has been conducted, to my knowledge,\nI\nin this particular population.\nThe results oftwo independent studies conducted by professional astronomers with\ntheir colleagues are quite different: in the 50s, Hynek informally questioned some forty\nI\nastronomers, a little more than I0% of whom had actually sighted unexplained\nphenomena. Among the latter, Josef Allen Hynek cites Professor Lincoln La Paz,\nDirector ofthe Institute ofMeteoritics at the University ofNew Mexico, and Clyde\nI\nTombaugh, the discoverer ofthe planet Pluto, who died in 1997. In the 70s , Peter A.\nSturrock sent a detailed questionnaire to 2611 members ofthe American Astronomical\nI\nAssociation, guaranteeing them anonymity. Halfresponded, and sixty sightings were\nencountered.\nNo systematic study of this type has been conducted in France, but a sighting by\nI\nMarseilles astronomers Georges Courtes and Maurice Viton is frequently cited. One of\nmy colleagues also related to me a sighting that he had made in his youth ofan object with\nan apparent diameter ofthe moon (which, moreover, was visible), moving slowly from\nI\nnorth to south. He was not yet a professional at the time but rather a well-informed\namateur, and he does not see any explanation for his sighting, which he has never\nmentioned publicly.\nThus it appears that the percentage ofsightings by astronomers is comparable to that\nnoted in the overall population, although there is a definite reticence among a vast\nI\nI\nI\nI" }, { "n": 70, "image": "https://wearenotalone.space/transcripts/255-413270-ufo-s-and-defense-what-should-we-prepare-for/p70.jpg", "text": "- -\n- - - - - --- - - - - -\nI\nmajority to mention them without being assured ofanonymity. In addition, the general\nopinion ofastronomers on the subject is much less negative than one says sometimes, and\nthe least that you could say is that there is no consensus, with many wanting an objective\nI\nstudy ofthe phenomenon without any preconceived ideas. The private conversations that\nI have had with French colleagues confirm Sturrock's conclusion: many would refuse to\nbroach the question with a journalist, but when I speak with them about a serious scientific\nI\nstudy, they state that they are in agreement.\nAppendix 3 - Life in the Universe\nI\nThe question ofextraterrestriaJ life left the domain ofbelief barely a few decades ago\nand entered the domain ofscientific research, and the advances in this domain have been\nI\nvery rapid for several years. Beyond earth, the solar system proves to be currently\nunsuited to life, but the \"Viking\" probes have shown that some three-and-a-half billion\nyears ago, the planet Mars must have offered much more favorable conditions than at\nI\npresent, namely with the existence ofliquid water. Thus it is not ruled out that an\nelementary life form (bacteria) could have existed there, as was then the case on earth.\nThe study offossils is, besides, one ofthe reasons for future Martian expeditions,\nI\nautomated first, then with humans aboard. The discovery offossils in a meteorite\noriginally from Mars, as announced by NASA, is still the subject ofa debate in the\nscientific community. But the very existence ofthis debate increases the interest in going\nI\nto take a look on site .\n. Outside the solar system, astronomers have long thought that, very generally, the stars\nshould be surrounded by planetary systems, but it has onJy been in very recent years that\nI\nexperience has con.finned this theory: we now know ofa half dozen stars each\naccompanied by at least one planet. Biologists, for their part, are making rapid advances\nin understanding the chemical mechanisms that give rise to life, and this appears more and\nI\nmqre to be a necessity rather than a coincidence.\nTwenty years' experience has shown, from Siberia to the ocean depths, that life adapts\nitselfto sharp variations in temperature or to extreme temperatures where it was\nI\npreviously considered to be impossible.\nFor 35 years, radioastronomers have carried out different programs searching for an\nintelligent radio signal corning from space (SETI: Search for ExtraTerrestrial Intelligence).\nI\nNo signals have been detected yet, which is not surprising given the immensity ofthe\nspatial and frequency domain to be explored. A major NASA program, which was\ncanceled by the U.S. Congress, was revived using private funds and should improve the\nI\nsensitivity ofthe search by severaJ orders ofmagnitude. The French radiotelescope at\nNan9ay, where several SETI studies have already taken place, will perhaps be included in\nthis program.\nI\nAppendix 4 - Colonization of Space\nI\nThe second half of the 20th century will have been the half century of the exploration of\nthe solar system: man on the moon, probes placed on Mars and Venus, others in the\nimmediate vicinity of the other planets ( except Pluto), comets, and asteroids. The 21st\nI\ncentury might be the century of the colonization ofour system, with pennanent human\nsettlements and preparation for voyages to other planetary systems.\nThe corning years will see the positioning of the permanent orbital station Alpha, the\nI\ninternational follow-up to the Russian Mir program. Next, the Americans plan, in\nI\nI" }, { "n": 71, "image": "https://wearenotalone.space/transcripts/255-413270-ufo-s-and-defense-what-should-we-prepare-for/p71.jpg", "text": "I\nI\nprinciple, to establish a permanent base on the moon, a minimal station like the Antarctic\nbase. Beyond that, it would be necessary to recreate an ecosystem where the essential raw\nmaterial needs (including air, water, and food) could be extracted on site or recycled.\nI\nActually, we cannot consider applying the current method on a large scale, where almost\neverything must be brought from earth via costly launches.\nI\nEcosystems ofthis type were studied by the Russians first (the first experiment was in\n1961) and by the Americans, namely with Biosphere 2, a greenhouse 1.3 ha in surface\narea, planned to maintain in closed circuit (with an outside power supply) a set of plants\nand animals, including the presence of eight people. This experiment, which was carried\nI\nout initially using private funds, was unjustly criticized by the press and a portion ofthe\nscientific community. In fact, despite certain \"amateur,, sides, it has already contributed a\ngreat deal: during an initial two-year experiment from 1991 to 1993, four men and four\nwomen lived almost entirely self-sufficiently, demonstrating the validity ofthe principle.\nI\nThe recycling ofwater was total, while the recycling ofair was imperfect (it was necessary\nI\nto add oxygen after fifteen months of total isolation), and the production offood slightly\ninadequate (the inhabitants ofthe biosphere left thinner, having started in on the reserves).\nAfter another six-month experiment, the structure was taken over by the University of\nI\nColumbia, which seems interested especially in the ecological aspect, to the detriment of\nthe space application. However, it is a descendent ofBiosphere 2 who could represent the\nfuture autonomous moon base ofthe middle ofthe next century. A human settlement on\nthe moon is first of all a scientific necessity, namely for astronomers. It is also a\nspringboard into space. Almost all the materials necessary for the construction ofstations\nI\nand spaceships can be found on the moon, the exploitation ofthese resources will be\nmuch more economical than on earth because the reduced gravity and the absence of\natmosphere on our satellite enable an easy and sure launch into orbit.\nI\nHuman expeditions will necessarily follow automated missions to Mars, iffor no other\nreason than to verify the past existence oftraces oflife. As for the development of\npermanent Martian colonies, this can be envisioned, but one can also imagine skipping this\nI\nstep, by creating artificial planets. The idea was conceived by American physicist O'Neill,\nwho studied in detail cylindrical structures 30 km in length by 6 km in diameter, in rotation\nto create an artificial gravity and able to shelter millions of people in an earth-type\nI\nbiosphere.\n.\nThese artificial planets could be constructed in the asteroid belt, between the orbits of\nMars and Jupiter, where we find an abundance ofmaterials that are easy to exploit, which\nI\nwill be able to provide numerous chemical bodies, including oxygen and water.\nIn longer term, and when the industrial-scale manufacture, storage, and use of\nantimatter is mastered, smaller models ofthese same craft will be able to leave the solar\nI\nsystem. They will be able to reach the vicinity of another star, after a voyage of several\ncenturies, during which generations will succeed one another in these \"ship-worlds\"\n(unless we have mastered human hibernation by then).\nI­\nThese migrations probably will not take place until after reconnaissance [missions]\nconducted by automatic probes [have been completed]. The preferred destinations would\nobviously be systems where a planet supposedly shelters evolved life.\nI\nImagine that a human expedition settles in the asteroid belt ofa system where a\ncivilization exists that is quite probably at a lower stage oftechnical development than\nI\nours (ifthe reverse is true, it is likely that the contact was already made via\ntelecommunications, or else that the most advanced civilizations made the voyage before\nus): for ethical reasons, but also in the interest of a serious scientific study, it could not\nafford to intervene openly, at the risk of inducing a fatal culture shock. The study should\nI\nI" }, { "n": 72, "image": "https://wearenotalone.space/transcripts/255-413270-ufo-s-and-defense-what-should-we-prepare-for/p72.jpg", "text": "I\ntherefore be discrete, using high-speed and silent craft to move through the planet's\natmosphere (MHD propulsion offers interesting prospects in this respect), and non lethal\nweapons to avoid the consequences ofan untimely encounter (the paralyzing effect of\nI\npulsed microwaves is under study in several countries).\nWhen the civilization visited has reached the stage ofspace voyages, it will become\nI\nnecessary to make it aware ofthe existence ofvisitors. One way to do this, without\ncausing trauma, would be to commit \"calculated indiscretions\" that would accustom the\npopulation, little by little, to the idea that there could indeed be extraplanetary visits.\nI\nAppendix 5 - The Roswell Affair - Disinformation\nI) Roswell: indisputable facts\nI\nNote: the parenthetical annotation (video) indicates that video testimonies are\navailable\n•\nSummer 1947 - The Roswell (New Mexico) base houses the only nuclear-armed\nI\nbombers in the world. The bombers still have propellers.\nJune 24 - Sighting of nine UFOs by American Kenneth Arnold. The news is broadcast\nthroughout the world.\nI,\nJuly 8 (morning), Roswell - The base provides the local radio stations with information\nthat would circle the globe: a flying disk had crashed on a ranch and the military personnel\nfrom the base recovered the debris (video).\nI\nJuly 8 (afternoon), Fort Worth (Texas) - General Ramey, Commander ofthe 8th Air\nForce, who commands the base, announces to journalists that after examination ofthe\ndebris, [it was determined that] they were from a weather balloon. He shows them some\nI\nofthe debris, which the journalists photograph. The affair was buried for over thirty year.\n1978 - Lieutenant Colonel Marcel (ER), an intelligence officer on the base in 194 7 who\nI\nrecovered the debris, declares on television that the debris was definitely of\nextraterrestrial origin (video). The debris that General Ramey had shown the journalists\nwas not the debris that Marcel had brought him from Roswell.\nI\nAmerican ufologists conduct numerous investigations and collect affidavits (sworn and\nnotarized written statements) and filmed testimonies. Many witnesses state that in July\n1947, military personnel had threatened them with death if they talked (video). According\nI\nto some testimonies, at some distance from the field ofdebris, the Army had found the\nframe ofa sort ofspace glider and cadavers ofsmall humanoids (video).\n1991 -General du Bose [sic] (CR), who was General Ramey's chiefofstaffin 1947,\nI\nconfirms by affidavit that the latter had substituted the debris from a weather balloon,\nwhich he had shown the journalists, for the debris sent by the Roswell base.\nBeginning of 1994 - U.S. Representative Schiff (New Mexico) asks the Department of\nI\nDefense (DoD) for explanations regarding the affair. Not obtaining any, he requests that\nthe General Accounting Office (GAO) conduct an inquiry into the manner in which the Air\nForce, primarily, had handled the documents relating to the Roswell crash.\nI\nSeptember 1994 - The Office ofthe Secretary of the Air Force publishes a report on\nRoswell: the debris found on the ranch cannot be from an aircraft or a missile. They are\nprobably debris from a series of balloons from the secret Mogul project. To protect the\nI\nsecret, General Ramey leads everyone to believe it is a weather balloon, the materials of\nwhich ( essentially the shell and radar reflector) are the same. The report shortens the\naffidavits ofcertain witnesses so that the strange debris that they describe appears to be\nI\ndebris from a Mogul balloon. It does not mention the frame and attributes the ''bona.fide\ntestimonies\" regarding humanoids to \"foggy memory~\"\nI\nI" }, { "n": 73, "image": "https://wearenotalone.space/transcripts/255-413270-ufo-s-and-defense-what-should-we-prepare-for/p73.jpg", "text": "I\nI\nJuly 1995 - The GAO report mentions the new Air Force version, and states:\n- page 1, \"The debate on what actually happened at Roswell continues.\"\nI\n- page 2, \"All ofthe base's administrative documents for the March 1945-December\nJ949 period were destroyed, andall radio messages sent by the base from October 1946\nto February 1949 were destroyed. The destruction report does not mention when, by\nI\nwhom, and 0 11 whose orders this destruction was carried out. \"\nThe GAO inquiry provided him with practically no documents of interest concerning\nthe Roswell incident, despite his requests to numerous organizations (CI~ FBI, DoD,\nI\nDoE, NSC, etc.).\nSummer and fall of 1995 - A film ofthe autopsy of an alleged \"humanoid cadaver _ in\n1947 is aired by about thirty television stations around the world. Its authenticity is\nI\nquestionable, but, above all, nothing in the film proves that the cadaver has even the\nslightest connection with the Roswell incident. The hodgepodge is, however, made up in\nlarge part from written and televised press, thus making the Roswell affair look ridiculous.\nI\nThe conclusions ofthe GAO and the videos ofthe principal witnesses presented by TFl [a\nFrench television channel] go unnoticed, lost in the middle ofthe film ofthe autopsy.\n1996 - The film Independence Day and the [television] series X-Files make significant\nreferences to Roswell.\nI\n2) Opinions on Roswell\nI\n- Very consistent interviews, affidavits, and video testimonies describe the discovery of\nmaterial that no one knows how to make in our time: a thin sheet that looks like metal\nwith very great resistance and that is so elastic that after it has been crumpled up into a\nI\nball, it spontaneously returns to its initial shape without the least sign ofa residual fold.\n- It does seem that the crash occurred on July 4, Independence Day, at around 2330\nhours. The date and time symbolize American power, whence the following\nI\nquestion [arises]: ifthe crash was in fact that of an extraterrestrial vessel, was it\ntruly an accident or a was it a deliberate crash constituting a message and/or the\nauthenticator?\n3) Roswell and disinformation\nI\nThe disappearances offiles and the Air Force's clumsy attempts at explaining [the\nI\nincident] show that U.S. military personnel are hiding something important that occurred\nat Roswell in July 1947, just as they concealed their experiments on the effects of\nplutonium .on human beings The hypothesis of an extraterrestrial vessel that is supported\nby quality testimonies cannot be dismissed.\nTo protect the secret, the two main types ofdisinformation, reducing and amplifying,\nI\nwere used in the Roswell affair. One should note, however, that the dissemination of\ninformation and contradictory analyses - by ufologists, for example - may be a spill-over\neffect ofthis reducing disinformation is apparent in the Air Force report: testimonies on\nI\nthe debris have been cut down so as to give credence to the Mogul balloon hypothesis. It\nis also found, more subtly, in Roswell in Perspective, a book by '\\Jfologist\" Karl Pfloc~ a\nformer CIA and DoD employee: affidavits mentioning the tear-proof and crease-resistant\nI\nmaterial are given in full in an appendix, but they are ignored or cited only in shortened\nform in the text.\nIn France, sociologist Pierre Lagrange appears to be a victim ofthis simplified\nI\ndisinformation. After having endeavored to put the Air Force report and the publications\nof Karl Pflock into perspective, he concluded:\n''fl will] close with a bit ofpsychology. Why do manypeople not believe in the\nI\nI" }, { "n": 74, "image": "https://wearenotalone.space/transcripts/255-413270-ufo-s-and-defense-what-should-we-prepare-for/p74.jpg", "text": "I\nRoswell saucer like they believe in Mogul balloons or the V2s? Because it reminds them\ntoo much ofpopular science fiction. AsBertrand Meheust emphasizes, the topic ofthe\nMartian craft that had the exquisite courtesy to crash in the vicinity ofa military base\nI\ncomes under the heading ofthe technological imagination ofthe beginning ofthe\nce111ury, just like the detail regarding the ultralight and 11/traresistant materials that were\nused in its construction. \"(the journal Ovnipreserice, February 1995).\nI\nThis is, on the whole, the simplistic theory concerning UFOs stated by French\n\"socio psychologists.\" It can be refuted as follows: at the beginning ofthe century,\npopular science fiction described light rays capable of killing or healing. Nonetheless,\nI\nmilitary or medical lasers exist today.\nAmplifying disinformation was manifested when the film on the autopsy of the \"Roswell\ncreature\" was aired. In expanding the Roswell affair with this spectacular, but\nI\n. .,\nquestionable, autopsy, some have succeeded in discrediting it and, especially, in covering\nup the publi~ation ofthe GAO report and the dissemination ofvideo testimonies. It is\ntempting to believe in a well-orchestrated manipulation.\nI\n4) Reducing disinformation on UFOs\nThe Air Force has practiced this from the onset, as has been revealed by the astronomer\nHynek, who was an Air Force consultant from 1948 to 1966 and who described how he\naided in trivializing numerous cases by giving them unjustified astronomical\ninterpretations.\nThe disinformation policy was intensified as a result ofthe recommendations ofa\n'I\n\"scientific\" committee assembled by the CIA in December 1952, the Robertson\nCommittee, which suggested \"stripping the UFO phenomenon ofits aura ofmystery. \"\nI\nThe same committee recommended \"monitoring\" the ufological movements, which were\ninfiltrated1 by the CIA mainly.\nSeveral key figures have tried to nullify numerous important cases. Philip Klass, then\nI\neditor ofAviation Week qnd Space Technology, took on, among others, three major\naeronautical cases: Lakenheath in 1956, RB-47 in 1957, Tehran in 1976, which are\ndescribed in Chapter 2. He is hardly convincing. In the Tehran case, for example, he\nI\ncorrectly cites the testimonies at the beginning ofhis account, but doesn't take certain\naspects into account when he discusses them.\nReducing disinformation is effective on those who do not want to accept the possibility\nI\nofthe extraterrestrial hypothesis. Amplifying disinformation is aimed at others.\n5) Amplifying disinformation on UFOs\nI\nThis policy was probably implemented very early on~ Adamslci's alleged contacts with a\nVenusian in 1952 no doubt fall into this category.\nIt has become considerably extensive since the resurgence ofthe Roswell affair at the\nI\nend ofthe 70s. The point ofdepanure is the Bennewicz case. This ufologist physicist\nrecorded pulsed microwaves from a testing ground at J(jrtland (New Mexico) Air Force\nbase. He attributed them to UFOs exerting control over \"abductees\" (lcidnapped humans)\nI\nfurnished with implants! Fearing, it seems, the publication of his recordings, the Air Force\nOffice ofSpecial Investigation (AFOSI) and, namely, its special agent Doty from the\naforementioned air base, as well as, perhaps, other agencies, induced him to make fantastic\nI\n\"revelations\": there were numerous kidnappings, with the placement ofimplants to control\nthe \"abductees.\" Furthermore, technology transfers were supposedly carried out on bases\nin New Mexico and Nevada jointly owned by the U.S. Army and extraterrestrials baptized\nI\nEBEs, Extraterrestrial Biological Entities.\nBennewicz disclosed this information to American saucerists, many ofthem thus being\nI\nI" }, { "n": 75, "image": "https://wearenotalone.space/transcripts/255-413270-ufo-s-and-defense-what-should-we-prepare-for/p75.jpg", "text": "I\nincreasingly cut off from the common opinion. John Lear, son ofthe aircraft builder,\ncontributed on his part details that he had obtained from friends in the Air Force: the\nI\nNevada base is Groom Lake base, in \"area 51 '' (Groom Lake does in fact exist; it is so\nsecret that the Air Force does not recognize its existence; nevertheless, it is mentioned in\nthe June 1996 issue ofJane's Defence Weekly). Later, a former Navy petty officer from\nI\nthe 2nd Marine Division, Bill Cooper, \"revealed\" that the Council for Foreign Relations\nI\n(CFR), which, according to him, governs the world through the Bilderberg [Group] and\nthe Trilateral [Commission], supposedly does so in close union with the EBEs...\nAmplifying disinformation has probably permitted the protection ofresearch on\nmicrowave weapons at Kirtland and on new types ofaircraft at Groom Lake. It has\nI\ncertainJy allowed the weapon of ridicule to be used against certain gullible ufologists.\nAppendix 6 - The Long History ofthe UFO Phenomenon - Elements ofa\nI\nChronology\nThe UFO phenomenon truly experienced worldwide dissemination as of pilot Kenneth\nArnold's sighting on June 24, 1947, in the area ofMount Rainier in the northwest United\nI\nStates. In reality, air phenomena that are still unexplained today are much older.\nBefore going further, it is interesting to note that between May and July ofthis same\nyear, 850 different sightings were recorded across the United States and that in January\nI\nan RAF Mosquito night fighter tried in vain to intercept a very rapid object detected by\nradars over the North Sea.\nI\nIn 1946, phantom rockets overfly Sweden\nFrom February to December 1946, many witnesses sighted generally fusiform objects\n( occasionally resembling spheres or disks) flying most often horizontally in Swedish skies,\nI\nin some cases leaving a luminous trail, but also capable ofvery suddenJy ascending or\ndescending.\nCaJled \"ghost rockets,\" these apparitions ( close to a thousand were detected)\nI\nconsiderably worried Scandinavian, British, and U.S. military authorities, who conducted\nI\ninvestigations.\nAlthough no debris was ever found (officially), it was long thought that it could have\nbeen a case of Soviet tests conducted with craft recovered in German factories. This\nhypothesis has since been completely ruled out.\nI\nDuring World War Il, the \"foo fighters\"\nFrom 1940 to 1945, numerous aviators sighted either swarms ofred or green luminous\nballs several dozen centimeters in diameter or groups ofsmall metal-looking disks that\nI\nfollowed the aircraft or flew around them, giving the impression ofintelligent behavior.\nMost often not detected by the radars ofthe time, they did not seem \"material\" in nature.\nIn fact, some observers saw them touch the wings or the tail assemblies ofthe aircraft\nI\nwithout causing any visible damage to them.\nI\nFirst called \"Kraut fireballs,\" then \"foo fighters\" (probably in reference to a comic\nstrip), they were reported in all theaters ofoperation as of the start ofthe war. They\nbegan to appear in number during the first major day bombings over Germany. They were\nI\nalso observed from the ground and were the subject of numerous reports as ofJune 1944.\nThese sightings were the cause ofmuch concern to the Allied authorities, who believed\nthem to be a secret German process in the beginning. It became clearly apparent at the\nend ofthe war that it was nothing ofthe sort.\nI\nI" }, { "n": 76, "image": "https://wearenotalone.space/transcripts/255-413270-ufo-s-and-defense-what-should-we-prepare-for/p76.jpg", "text": "I\nIt seems that, for their part, the Gennan pilots had been persuaded that it was a case of\na secret U.S. weapon. A board ofinquiry reportedly was even created in Berlin to study\nthe matter.\nI\nThe current explanation ofelectrical phenomena such as the Saint Elmo's fires is not\nconvincing because it does not take into account the diverse characteristics observed. The\nfiles relating to the \"foo fighters\" seem to have been subject to military secrecy at least\nI\nuntil 1949.\nMany other sightings concerning much larger, cigar-shaped, disk-shaped, or sphere­\nshaped objects were recorded in both camps.\nI\nFrom 1880 to 1900, \"airships\" over the United States and Great Britain\nDuring these years, tens ofthousands ofwitnesses sighted flying machines resembling\nI\nmodern dirigibles, which were not produced by factories until twenty years later. In most\ncases, it was a matter offairly voluminous, fusiform, vessels equipped with powerful\nsearchlights, often emitting engine sounds, and, in some cases, even seeming to have\nI\npropellers.\nIn the United States, the majority ofthe sightings occurred between 1896 and 1897.\nOther cases were reported, particularly in Spain, Germany, Sweden, and Russia. A\nI\nsecond wave [ofsightings] occurred at the turn ofthe century in Great Britain.\n. ::\nThe explanation that comes irruT1ediately to mind is that oftrue dirigibles (and right\naway we think ofcraft ofGerman origin). However, it has a hard time holding up to a\nI\nthorough examination.\nIn actuality, in 1880, the technology ofthese craft was still in its infancy. It is true that\nColonel Giffard did conduct an initial test in 1852 with an elongated balloon equipped\nI\nwith a very low-power steam engine. Then in 1885, Renard traveled several kilometers\nfor the first time, overflying Paris with a dirigible equipped with an internal combustion\nengine, but it was still extremely slow and not very easy to fly.\nI\nIn fact, the first truly efficient aircraft were subsequent to 191 O; however, even the\nzeppelins built during World War I far from possessed the characteristics observed by the\nwitnesses to these phenomena.\nI\nFrom Greco-Latin antiquity to the beginning of the in~ustrial age\nHuman beings in all ages have sighted phenomena in the sky that they considered,\nI\nrightly or wrongly, to be abnormal. It is true that our epoch naturally has a tendency to\ndoubt the accuracy ofancient testimonies, and especially so the further back into the past\nwego.\nI\nDuring the first three quarters ofthe 19th century, chroniclers related several dozen\nsightings ofspheres and luminous wheels resembling present-day UFOs. The 18th century\nI\nwas marked by one strange case. Goethe recounts, in fact, that in his youth, in I 768,\nduring a trip between Frankfort and Leipzig, he and two other witnesses saw a type of\nlarge luminous tube positioned on the ground, surrounded by a multitude of small, very\nbright, moving flames.\nI\nIn the 16th and 17th centuries, authors mentioned numerous sightings, not only in\nEurope but also in America and Japan. Among these, a few hold our attention due to their\nI\nspectacular appearance and the multitude ofwitnesses. In the skies ofNuremberg, in\nApril 1561 , a large number ofbrightly colored spheres, disks, and \"cigars\" seemed to\nwage a sort of battle that left a profound mark on the population and caused the\nI\nauthorities great concern. A spectacle ofthe same kind took place in August 1566 in\nBasel.\nI\nI" }, { "n": 77, "image": "https://wearenotalone.space/transcripts/255-413270-ufo-s-and-defense-what-should-we-prepare-for/p77.jpg", "text": "I\nI\nFrom the year one thousand to the year 1500, chroniclers mentioned various sightings\nofluminous spheres, wheels, lances, or bars moving more-or-less rapidly in the sky. The\nmonastery at Detchani, built in Yugoslavia between 1327 and 1335, is decorated with\nI\nfrescoes that represent angels enclosed in sorts ofvessels flying in the sky.\n(Even further back in time), during the reign ofCharlemagne, it is reported that\nAgobard, Bishop ofLyons, succeeded in saving from the stake three men and one woman\nI\nwho had descended from an airship, claiming to be returning to earth after having been\nkidnapped by celestial beings who allegedly showed them wonders.\nElsewhere, luminous celestial phenomena similar to modern UFOs seem to have been\nI\nrelatively frequent in China and Japan, particularly in the Middle Ages.\nSeveral other Latins, Dion Cassius, Pliny the Elder, Titus Livy, Julius Obsequens, and\nI\neven Cicero relate the appearance oflights in the sky, glowing shields, multiple moons and\nsuns, [and] golden flying spheres.\nAs for the _testimonies reported by the Greek chroniclers, these are fewer in number. •\nI\nDaimachos recounts that a globe offire crossed the sky several times during the 78th\nOlympiad. Anaxagoras asserts that he saw celestial lights the size ofa large beam.\nAppearances ofbeams and shields offire are described several times, by Homer among\nothers.\nI\nAppendix 7 - Reflections on Various Psychological, Sociological, and Political\nAspects ofthe UFO Phenomenon\nI\nNote: these reflections apply primarily to the United States; many ofthem, however,\ncan be transposed to other countries\nA large number ofAmericans are convinced ofthe physical reality ofUFOs, of their\nI\nextraterrestrial origin, and ofthe fact that the U.S. government is systematically covering\nI\nup the truth with lies and disinformation.\nMost ofthe recent American works that have been published on the subject end with\nthis conclusion, and almost all ofthem close with a demand for a partial or full lifting of\nI\nthe alleged secrecy. The media frenzy surrounding the Roswell affair (cf Appendix 5),\nwhich experienced a resurgence at the end ofthe 70s after a more than thirty-year\nblackout, and which has not ceased to go from new development to new development for\nI\n15 years, is a typical illustration ofthis line ofthought. By admitting that the\nextraterrestrial hypothesis is the good one, the secret, say some, would be kept out of\nfear of panic reactions, which, they assure, would not fail to occur, as demonstrated by the\nI\nunfortunate experience ofthe radio program \"The War ofthe Worlds\" broadcast by\nOrson Welles in the United States in 1938 (only nine years prior to Roswell). This\nexplanation should not necessarily be rejected; however, it does seem a bit narrow. In\nI\nfact, the roots of the matter probably go deeper, and the sociopsychological motivations\nseem to be more complex.\n7.1 The UFO Paradox\nI\nWhile a majority ofAmericans seem to support the idea ofthe existence ofintelligent\nI\nextraterrestrial [beings], a very strong resistance remains in scientific circles, among\nleaders, and in most of the media to the idea that these entities, whatever they may be,\nhave been able to or continue to visit our planet and travel our solar system.\nThe idea is ridiculed by much ofthe media. At the same time, in this spirit, most\nI\nI" }, { "n": 78, "image": "https://wearenotalone.space/transcripts/255-413270-ufo-s-and-defense-what-should-we-prepare-for/p78.jpg", "text": "I\npoliticians and the vast majority of members ofthe intelligentsia state that humanity has\nbetter things to do than to chase such rainbows.\nI\n7.2 Why this Resistance?\n7.2.l On the Part of Scientists (from Scientists)\nI\nGiven an official attitude ofcontempt, and in view of the fear ofbeing likened to the\nactivists from \"saucerist\" sects and the \"lunatic fringe,\" the vast majority ofscientists,\nI\neven though they may be interested, quite obviously hesitate to tackle such a heretical\nproblem and naturally do not wish to call their reputation, career, and the funding oftheir\nresearch into question (cf. Appendix 2, \"Astronomers' Sightings\"). This being the case,\nI\nthere appear, upon analysis, to be other, deeper reasons.\nA general school ofthought has existed for close to two centuries that tends to dismiss\nthe idea that terrestrial phenomena could be influenced from the outside.\nI\nAt the start, this was a positive, rational, and creative reaction to ancient beliefs.\nCompared with ancient times, modem science has, in fact, advanced by eliminating the\ngods. It would seem counterproductive and incongruous to bring them back in other\nforms.\nThe idea prevails in almost all minds that man is master of the earth and, by extension,\nofthe immediate cosmic vicinity, that _he is the best nature can produce in this small comer\nof the galaxy, and that he alone remains the controller of his destiny. Various American\nphilosophers have termed this concept \"anthropocentric humanism. \"\nTo admit that intelligent [beings], which are not only outside [our planet] but are also\nsuperior due to their scientific and technological knowledge, could have interfered or\nmight continue to interfere in our affairs, in our domain, or in proximity to it, is considered\nby many to be frightening and unacceptable, because admitting it would cause the collapse\nI\nofthe framework ofcomfortable thoughts ofanthropocentric humanism.\nMoreover, in some disciplines such as physics, the risk run is to find oneself confronted\nwith a science that is more advanced by several centuries, milleniums, or even more.\nI\nOur own concepts could literally appear infantile, which would completely demobilize\nthe researchers who employ them.\nIt is clear that under the hypothesis that the existence of UFOs ofextraterrestrial origin\nI\nis proven, there is a risk that not only the position ofthe intellectual authorities but, quite\nsimply, the social position of the scientific elite would be considerably compromised. This\nis, furthermore, what happened each time that groups or nations found themselves in\nI\ncontact with a more developed human civilization, with the notable exception ofJapan in\nthe Meiji period, which it would be advisable to look into.\nOne can understand that advancing knowledge ofthe UFO phenomenon, at the risk of\nI\nsucceeding, would not necessarily be a thrilling prospect for a number· ofscientists, who\nthus might not really want to lend a hand in this effort.\nI\n7.2.2 On the Part ofPoliticians\n7.2.2.1 With a few rare exceptions (President Jimmy Carter, Senator Barry M.\nI\nGoldwater), the majority of politicians have almost always displayed a very skeptical and\nmost often ironjc attitude regarding the question. However, some have had a more\npositive attitude.\nI·\nThe best known allusions to the possible existence ofextraterrestrials and to the\nI\nI" }, { "n": 79, "image": "https://wearenotalone.space/transcripts/255-413270-ufo-s-and-defense-what-should-we-prepare-for/p79.jpg", "text": "I\nI\ndangers that they might represent come from General MacArthur and President Ronald\nReagan.\nWhile he had already touched on the problem in 1955, in a conversation with the mayor\nI\nofNaples, Achille Lauro, General MacArthur said in an address at West Point Military\nAcademy in 1962:\n\"You nowface a new world, a world ofchange. The throst into outer space ... marks a\nI\nbeginning ofanother epoch in the long story ofmankind... We deal now, not with things\nofthis world alone, but with the illimitable distances and asyet unfathomed mysteries of\nthe universe ... ofultimate conflict between a united human race and the sinister force of\nI\nsome other planetary galaxy. \"\n[French translation ofthe quote from General MacArthur's address]\nGeneral Secretary Mikhail Gorbachev, for his part, revealed during a private discussion\nat the 1985 summit conference that President Reagan had told him that if earth had to\nconfront an invasion by extraterrestrials, the United State~ and the Soviet Union would\njoin forces to repel that invasion.\nI\nIn addition, at the end ofa speech before the 42nd General Assembly ofthe United\nNations on September 21, I 987, President Reagan affirmed:\nI\n\"In our obsession with the antagonisms ofthe moment, we often forget how much\nunites all the members ofhumanity. Perhaps we need some outside, universal threat to\nmake us recognize this common bond. I occasionally think how quickly our differences\nworldwide would vanish ifwe were facing an alien threat from outside this world. \"\n[French translation ofthe quote from President Reagan' s speech]\nI\nI\n7.2.2.2 However, for political leaders, just as for scientists, to be officially interested in\nUFOs and extraterrestrials is firstly to risk ridicule before commentators and the media,\nwho regularly use omission, destructive irony, and even lies.\nI\n7.2.2.3 But other elements should be taken into consideration. Although a significant\nnumber ofU.S. citizens seem to accept the existence ofUFOs ofextraterrestrial origin,\nI\nsome political leaders might hesitate to call for resources to research this subject, because\nthey might fear they would then be accused ofincurring expenses for one ofthe most\nhazardous ofsubjects.\nI\n7.2.2.3.1 Under these circumstances, ifwe advance the hypothesis that political\nleaders at the highest level in the United States possess unambiguous information\nI\nattesting to that existence, their situation would be particularly uncomfortable. The armed\nforces have officially reiterated for fifty years that this phenomenon does not threaten the\nsecurity ofthe country, which does not mean that the phenomenon does not exist.\nI\nHowever, there have been disturbing sightings such as visits above secret installations\nand missile bases, intense electromagnetic effects, military aircraft shadowed (as in the\nRB-47 case) or the object of mock interceptions. In reality, faced with the impossibility of\nI\ncountering this type ofthreat, the authorities may have thus far been tempted to affirm\nthat it does not exist.\nIn the absence ofa direct threat, and even though there never truly was any attack in\nI\nthe past, the potential threat itself can appear overwhelming in the eyes of the authorities\n(and especially the military).\n\"They\" come from the stars, \"their\" craft watch us and seem to taunt us, ''they\" have\nperhaps been on earth for thousands ofyears, and we don' t know ''their\" intentions.\n\"Their\" science and \"their\" technology, thus \"their\" power, are incomparably superior to\nI\nI" }, { "n": 80, "image": "https://wearenotalone.space/transcripts/255-413270-ufo-s-and-defense-what-should-we-prepare-for/p80.jpg", "text": "1­\nours.\nWithout being completely disarmed, and even taking into account the enormous\nresources that we have on the earth and our obvious ability to learn quickly, we can only\nfeel anxious in the face of\"their\" presence.\nBringing this out into the open by calling for the manpower and funds to conduct the\nI\nnecessary research is hard to visualize officially for the onJy superpower in the world.\n7.2.2.3.2 This is all the more true since, under the additional hypothesis that the\nI\nU.S. armed forces actually already possess formal proof ofthis threat, for example, in the\nform ofextraterrestrial ships that have crashed on the ground, intensive research on\nforeign technologies should have already commenced a long time ago under the cover of\nthe highest level ofsecrecy.\nI\nAs will be seen in 7.3.3, it would then be completely out of the question to divulge this\ntype ofinformation.\n•\nI\nIndeed, revealing a situation as novel as it is upsetting too quickly would perhaps be\nrunning the risk ofsocial upheavals, accompanied by panic, a demobilization ofenergies, a\nmultiplication ofmillenialist sects, and a massive move ofpeople to take refuge in\nreligious fundamentalisms.\nThe loss oftrust in the leaders in power could even lead rapidly to their ousting.\nGiven such a problem, their normal reactions would obviously be to gain as much time\nas possible by continuing their denials, all the while continuing work in secret and\nfervently hoping that their successors will take on the responsibility when the reality\nbecomes manifest.\n7.3 U.S. Leaders and the Politics of Secrecy\nI\n7.3.l The U.S. Army and UFOs\n.\n.\n.\nThe U.S. Anny has been directly confronted with the phenomenon since World War II.\nIt seems to have been the onJy army to have officially broached the problem with\nI\nconsiderable resources.\n7.3.2 The Spill-Over Effect of the Study of UFOs\nI\nThe U.S. Anny has, in actual fact, designed aircraft that exhibit the characteristics\ndescribed by the most reliable witnesses. The spill-overs are potentially considerable in\nI\nthe areas ofpropulsion, materials and structures, stealth technology, and weapons.\n7.3.3 Finally, Why the Secrecy?\nI\nWe are currently not aware of the extent ofthe knowledge that U.S. military personnel\nhave gleaned from all ofthe studies that they have conducted on this subject either based\nI\non sightings or, as has sometimes been written, based on materials that have allegedly been\nrecovered.\nWhatever the case, it is clear that the Pentagon has had, and probably still has, the\nI\ngreatest interest in concealing, as best as it can, all ofthis research, which may, over time,\nlead the United States to hold a position ofgreat supremacy over terrestrial adversaries,\nwhile giving it a considerable response capacity against a possible threat corning from\nI\nspace.\nI\nI" }, { "n": 81, "image": "https://wearenotalone.space/transcripts/255-413270-ufo-s-and-defense-what-should-we-prepare-for/p81.jpg", "text": "I\nI\nWithin this context, it is impossible for them to divulge the sources ofth.is research and\nthe goals pursued, because that could immediately point any possible rivals down the most\nbeneficial avenues. Cover-ups and disinformation (both active as well as passive) would\nI\nstill remain, under this hypothesis, an absolute necessity.\nThus it would appear natural that in the minds ofU.S. military leaders, secrecy must be\nI\nmaintained as long as possible.\nOnly increasing pressure from public opinion, possibly supported by the results of\nindependent researchers, by more or less calculated disclosures, or by a sudden rise in\nI\nUFO manifestations, might perhaps induce U.S. leaders and persons ofauthority to\nchange their stance.\nIt does not seem that we have arrived at that point yet.\nGlossary\nI\nAFB Air Force Base\nI\nEMAA (French] Air Force Chief ofStaff\nAFOSI Air Force Office of Special Investigation\nI\nENAC [French] National Civil Aviation School\nAIAA American Institute of Aeronautics and Astronautics\nESO European Southern Observatory\nI\nAirmiss Name of the investigation procedure covering the risks ofair collisions\nETCA [French) Central Technical Armaments Institution\nALAT [French) Anny Air Corps\nI\nFOIA Freedom ofInformation Act\nBlue Book Name of the U.S. Air Force study ofUFOs\nFUFOR Fund for UFO Research\nI\nCCD Charge-coupled device cameras\nGAO General Accounting Office\nCCOA [French] Air Operations Center\nGEPA [French) Aerospace Phenomena Study Group\nCDC [French] Control and Detection Center\nI\nGEPAN [French] Unidentified Aerospace Phenomena Study Group\nCEA [French] Atomic Energy Commission\nffiEDN [French] Institute for Advanced National Defense Studies\nI\nCEAT Toulouse Aeronautic Test Center\nINRA [French] National Institute for Agronomic Research\nCFR Council for Foreign Relations\nI\nJANAP Joint Anny Navy Air Force Publication\nCHEAR [French] Center for Advanced Armament Studies\nMEGASETI see SETI, whjch MEGASETI is an expansion of\nI\nCHEM (French] Center for Advanced Military Studies\nMHD MagnetoHydroDynamics\nCIA Central Intelligence Agency\nI\nMOD [British] Ministry ofDefence\nI\nCID [French] lnterarmy Defense College\nMUFON Mutual UFO Network\nCIRVJS Communications Instructions for Reporting Vital Intelligence Sightings\nNASA National Aeronautic and Space Administration\nI\nI" }, { "n": 82, "image": "https://wearenotalone.space/transcripts/255-413270-ufo-s-and-defense-what-should-we-prepare-for/p82.jpg", "text": "CNES [French] National Center for Space Studies\nNORAD North American Air Defense\nCNRS [French) Natio nal Center for Scientific Research (National Space Agency)\nNSC National Security Council\nCODA [French) Air Defense Operations Center\nONERA [French] National Aerospace Study and Research Office\nCONDON Physicist at the University ofColorado who signed the UFO report ordered by\nthe U.S. Air Force\nI\nRAF [British] Royal Air Force\nCRNA [French] Regional Air Navigation Center\nSEPRA [French] Atmospheric Reentry Phenomena Assessment Department\nI\nCUFOS Center for UFO Research [sic]\nSET Search for ExtraTerrestrial Intelligence\nDGA [French] General Delegation for Annaments •\nI\nSIRPA [French] Anned Forces Information and Public Relations Department\nDGAC [French] Civil Aviation Directorate\nSPOC [French] Sky Observation Probe System\nI\n..·\nDIA Defense Intelligence Agency\nSTRIDA [French] Air Defense Information Processing Center\nDICOD (French] Defense Communications Directorate\nI\nUAP Unidentified Aerospace Phenomenon\nDoD Department of Defense\nUAP D Category D Unidentified Aerospace Phenomenon\nI\nDoE Department ofEnergy\nUFO Unidentified Flying Object\nEBE Extraterrestrial Biological Entity\nI\nVLT Very Large Telescope\nUFO, Unidentified Flying Object ...\nI\nSince 194 7, the subject has disturbed, fascinated, called out.\nOh how debated, the question has been studied with extreme meticulousness and from\nI\nmany points ofview (scientific, technical, aeronautical, strategic, political, religious,\nmedia) by a French committee composed offormer auditors of the very serious-minded\nInstitut des Hautes Etudes de Defense Nationale [French Institute for Advanced National\nI\nDefense Studies] and qualified experts from every background, COMETA [Committee for\nIn-Depth Studies].\nI\nFor the first time, men, some of whom occupy very high positions, have agreed to write\na report devoted entirely to the UFO problem in the belief that based on the knowledge\nthat has been acquired to date, sufficient questions ofnational interest are raised for the\nI\nChief of State and the Prime Minister to be provided with this information.\nIn this report, COMETA studies several unexplained French and foreign UFO cases.\nI\nVery well documented, these sightings are often supported by traces on the ground or\ntracks confirmed by radar. Are these secret terrestrial craft? In some cases, perhaps. Are\nI\nwe in the presence ofcraft of nonterrestrial origin? This hypothesis cannot be ruled out.\nIfit were to prove correct, it would be loaded with consequences for Defense.\nI\nI" }, { "n": 83, "image": "https://wearenotalone.space/transcripts/255-413270-ufo-s-and-defense-what-should-we-prepare-for/p83.jpg", "text": "I\n: Bibliographie\nI\nParmi les nombmu livrcs c1 art ides sur noire sujct, de V2lcur no1oi­\nrcmcnt incgalc, nowavons juge paniculiercmcnt in1ercssam de ci1cr\nles suivants :\nCHA.PITRE 2\nI\nLe cu ra.dar/visuel de Lakc.nhcath (GB)\n• Edward U. Condon cl Daniel S. Gilmor\n(Rapport Condon)-Scimrifir StuayofUniJmrifiedFlying ObjutJ­\nBantam Books, New York, janvicr 1969.\nI\n• James E. Mac Donald\n(UFOs au-dcssus de Lakcnhcath en 1956) - Revue du Gtpa\n(Groupcmcm d'etudc de phenomcnes acricns), mars 1974. (Traduction\nd'un anidc de la Flying Saurer &view, ma.rs-avril 1970).\nI\n• Gordon D. Tbaylcr\nI\n(\"UFO cncoun1cr II - Sample case selected by the UFO subcom•\nmince of the AIAA : The Lakcnhca1h England radar/visual\nUFO Case, August 13-14, 1956\") -Aitroruzurirs and Aeronaurirs,\nscptembrc 1971.\n• PhilipJ. IOus\nI\n(\"UFOs over England (Bcntwatcrs and Lakcnhc:11h)\") - UFOs\nrxplaintd- Random Howe, New York, dcccmbrc 1974 ; Vintage\nBooks, New York, scptcmbrc 1976.\n•J. Allen Hynek\nNt,uveau rapport sur ks ormis- Bclfond, J'ai lu, 1979- p. 154 sq.\nI\n(Traduction de Tht Hynelt UFO rrport - Dell Publishing Co Inc.,\nNew York, 1979).\nI\nI.:avion RB-47 aux\" Etau-Unis\n• Rapport Condon, op. cit.\nI\n• James E. Mac Donald\n(\"UFO encounter I - Sample case selected by the UFO sub­\ncomminec ofthe AlAA : Air Force obscrv21ions ofan Unidentified\nObject in the South-Central U.S.,July 17, 1957\") -Astronauria and\nAm,nauria, juillct 1971.\n• Philip J. Kws\nI\n(\"The funow RB-47 c::uc\") - UFOs cq,lainrd - op. cit.\nI\n• Brad Sparks\nRJJ-47elmronir inulligmre rast ralibrrzudscientificproofofUFO~ ­\nconfidential copyrigh1cd ma1crial, 1997.\nTt!hcran\n• Philip J. IOa.ss\nI\n(\"UFOs over Iran\") - UFOs, The public tkuived - Promcthcous\nBooks, New York, 19n.\nI\n• Lawrence Fawcett Cl BuryJ. Greenwood\nCkar Intent, tht gowrnmmt roverup oftht UFO txptrimu- Prentice\nHall Inc., N.J., 1984 - p. 81 sq.\nRussic\n• \"UFOs on Air Defence radars\" - RAborhaya Tribuna, 19 avril 1990.\nI\n(Traduction anglaisc par le U.S. Foreign Broadcast Information Service\n(FBIS), cite par Don Berliner, Marie Galbraith C( Antonio HWlDCtll\ndans UniJmrifad Flying Objrrts Briefing D«ummt- publica1ion pri­\nCHAPITRE3\nUn cas de tcmoins multiples dans une base de missiles russe\n• Dossierovni du KGB publiecn 1991 -revue AuraZ. n° I, Moscou,\nmars 1993.\n(Ci1c dans Unulmrified Flying Objtrts Briefing Docummt - op. cit. ;\ncl, de fa~n plus complete, dans O1111is m Rwne-op. cit. - p. 3 I 9 sq.).\nCHAPITRE6\nGcpan, notes d'information ct notes techniques :\n• Notes d'informaiion :\nN° 1, \"Observations de phcnomcnes a1mospheriqucs\nanormaux en URSS - Analyses statistiqucs\"\nN° 2, \"Les crudes de phenomencs aerospa1iaux\nnon identifies awe USA\", 1• panic\nN° 3, \"Les crudes de phcnomcncs acrospatiawe\nnon identifies aux USK, 2• panic\nN° 4, \"Les crudes de phcnomcnes aerospuiaux\nnon identifies awe USA\", 3• panic\n• No1cs 1cchniques :\nN° 1, \"Analyse du problcmc de pre-traitcmcm des donnecs\"\nN° 2, \"Erudc comparative des rcsultats suristiques c.lemcnuircs\nrclatifs aux observations de phenomencs aerospatiaux non\nidentifies\"\nN° 3, \"Mcthodologic d'un probl~mc : principc ct applications\n(methodologic, isoctlic, information)\"\nN° 4, \"Rcchcrchc statisiiquc d'unc typ0logic des dcscriplions de\nphenomencs aerospatiaux non idcnlifics\" ·\nN° 5, comp1c rcndu de l'cnquctc du Gcpan 7_9/03\nN° 6, cnquc1c Gcpan 79/07: \"Apropos d'une disparition\"\nN° 7, cnquc1c Gcpan 79/05 : \"Apropos d'unc rcncontrc\"\nN° 8, cnquctc Gcpan 79/06\nN° 9, \"La magne1ohydrodynamiquc, l'ctat de l'art ct la premiere\nexperience probatoirc\"\nN° 10, \"Les phcnomcncs aerospatiaux non identifies c1 la\npsychologic de la pcrccp1ion\"\nN° 1I, cnquctc Gcpan 81/02\nN° 12, cnquctcs Gcpan 8I/07 ct 8 I/09\nN° 13, \"Rcchcrchc statiniquc d'unc typ0logic idcnlifiec, non\nidcmifiec\"\nN° 14, mini-cnquetcs en 1981 ct 1982\nN° 15, \"Rcchcrchc de stereotype: dcssinc•moi un ovni\"\nN° 16, \"Analyse d'unc trace (cas de Trans-en-Provence)\"\nN° 17, \"L:Amaramc\"\nN° 18, \"Systemc d'acquisition ct d'analysc : le point sur !'utili­\nsation des rescaux de diffraction\".\n•Jean-Oaudc Bou.rttt ct Jean•Jaaiues Vela.sco\nOvnis, la scimu auance - Robert Laffont, 1993.\n• Dominique Weinstein\nRencontrts Jans~ ciel - rapport pour le MUFON (Mutual UFO\nNetwork), 1996.\n• Rapport Condon - op. cit.\nI\nvec, deccmbrc 1995).\nAppendix R: \"Lrrurftom gmmzl Twining to Ccmmanding Gmmzi\n• Comptc rcndu plus dc1aillc de l'articlc de RAbochaya Tribuna\nAnny Air Forr:es\", 23 scp1 1947.\npar Boris Chourinov dans Ounis m Rwsie - Guy Trcdanicl, 1995\np. 230 sq.\nI\n-87­" }, { "n": 84, "image": "https://wearenotalone.space/transcripts/255-413270-ufo-s-and-defense-what-should-we-prepare-for/p84.jpg", "text": "CHAPITRE 7\nPropulsion MHD\n•Jean-Pierre Petit\nLemur du silmu - Belin, 1983,\n• \"Recherches pour un avion du futur\" - Trchniq~s avandr1 (pla­\nqucttc de !'Ecole nation.ale supcrieure des techniques avancecs), 1988.\n• Jeao-lliudc rubes Ct Guy Monnet\nI.A vie extratnrmrr- Larousse (coU. f..=ntiels), 1990 (epuisc).\n• J.-C. BoWTCt Cl J.-J. Vela.sco\n(His1orique des recherches sur la propulsion MHD des navires e1 des\naeronefs) - Ovnis, la sdma avan«- op. cir. - p. 171 sq.\n• Mike Ross\n\"Rider on the shock wave\" - New Sdmtiu. 17 fcvrier 1996.\nPropulsion par ancigravite\n• Nick Cook\n\"Turning science fiction into F.act\" - Jane's Defm« ~ek(y, IO juin\n1996.\nPropulsion dans l'espacc\n• Eugene Mallowe et Gregory Matloff\nStarjlighr Handbook-John Wiley & sons, 1989.\n• Robcn L Forward e1 Joel Davis\nMirror Matter-John Wiley & sons, 1988.\n• W. B. Scon (Edwards Air Force Base)\n\"USAF Predicts Amimancr Propellants could be in use by early\n2 I• century\" - Aviation ~ek and Spa« Technology, 21 mars 1988.\nPannes de voinuc\n• James Mc Campbell\n\"Self starting engines\" - MUFON proceedings, 1983.\n(Anide resume dans Ovnis, la scim« avan«- op. cit - p. 181 sq.).\nParalysie de temoins\n• Keith Aorig\n\"The future banlefidd, a blast ofgigawans\" - IEEspectrum, mars I988.\n• J.-C. Bowrct ct J.-J. Velasco\nOvnis, la sdmce avancr - op. cit. - p. 185 sq.\nCHAPITRE 8\n• Rapporr Condon - op. cit.\n• Lawrence Fawccn et Barry Greenwood\nClearlnrmt - op. cit.\n• Don Bcrlioer, Marie Galbraith, Antonio Hunncus\nUnidmtified Flying Objects Briefing Docummr - publication privce,\ndc:ccmbrc 1995.\n• Col. Philip J. Cono (rct)\nThr day after RoswrU- Pocket Books, 1997.\n• Headquarters United States Air Force\nThe RonwUrrpon, casr cloud- 1997.\n• Nick Pope\nOpm Skirs, CloudMinds - Pocket Books, 1997.\n• Tunothy Good\nAbovt top UuW /rs voies.•\nX IO: \"(... ) /run pms n'obrimdronr rim dr a qu'ils ont dnnandl pour\nrux-mmm rt pour rux, a/an qu'ils espmzimr pour twe-mhnrs unr vie\nlrrrnr/k rr pour chacun de /run fils dnq cmtr annlrs dr vie. •\n(Cf.. cgalcment le livre des Jubilcs: V 1-5: mcme rccit).\n(5) G. Pauthicr, Les Ulm!I sacris dr l'Orimt (p.c. Le Chou-King ou\nle Livrc Sacre, Part. III, Ch. X-2) - Ed. Au Bureau du Pantheon\nLincraire (Paris), 1852.\n(6) Arnold Toynbee, I.A civilisation al'lprruw, GaUimard (Paris) 1951\n-p. 89.\n(7) cf. les lmmortcls, Dicux, fils cc fillcs des Dicux, Hcros, litans ct\nGcants chez H csiode, Homere, Virgile, Pline, H crodote, Plutarque,\netc., cgalement lcs representations divines ct colossalcs de Memnon,\nde Karnak, d'Hc:rmonchis, d'Abou-Simbd ct le Sphinx de Ghiuh,\nlcs colosscs de l'ilc de Paques, !cs geants de Barnyan en Afghanistan,\nccux de Ninive et de Khorsabad ; !cs H rimchursars des Eddas scan­\ndinaves, le gcam Skrymcr combanu par Thor, etc.\n(8) Pc1cr Lawrence, Leculudu cargo- Fayard (Paris), 1974. (Le pre­\nmier dcbarqucmcnt de marchandises d'un avion-cargo frappa force­\nmcnt !'esprit des Papous, au point qu'ils instaurcrent le \"cultc du\ncargo\", dispensateur de richcsses, bicn qu'ils se soicnt, par la suite,\naccoutumcs aux produits occidcnraux ct aux vols des avions).\n(9) Arnold Toynbee - op. cit - p. 88 : AI-Gabraii.\n-88­" }, { "n": 85, "image": "https://wearenotalone.space/transcripts/255-413270-ufo-s-and-defense-what-should-we-prepare-for/p85.jpg", "text": "(10) G. Paudiier-op. dL •Manzva..Dtwma-Sasm ou Lois de Manou,\na>mprawit 1cs institutions rdigieuscs ct civiles des lndicn.s\", p. 331\nct L : ·u\"'\"\"M MDJtN l'llpprod,/(... ) ,kma,kMina d ,kMiMS,\nqptmiml.a ch.aindes~tJNnmr\"\"Xo dillins ~\nnulld1flla idlades\nlndims. 6111 SWttSriwmmtpuwrnik \"\"111/U.•\n(11) •Mais qui a d&ouvcrt l'Antu'Ctiquc ?\" - Lil &chnrht, n° 161,\nd6:anbrc 1984.\n(c£ awsi Ow-les Hapgood-usalrta des llncims rois des mn1 - Ed.\ndu Rocher (Monaro), 1981 - p. 85 ct s.\n(12) Lil Bibk: Etrits intmatmnmlllim- op. dt.\nI\nLim: des sccrca d'Hmoch :\nX 2: •Or,Jqn-/Mim Mon nom tk N airhn- \"\"1\"TIn ovni.s-op. di. p. 27 sq.\n• Peter A. Scum,ck\nI\n•Rq,onon a Sw-Yeyofchc Membershiporthe Amcrian Asaonornial\nSociety Concaning the UFO problem\" -Rlzpport n•681 - Institute\nfor Plasma R.cscarch, Sandford Universiiy, c.A. janvier 1977.\nI\n• J..C. Riba ct G. MollDd\nI.\nLt, w ~-op. dt.\nANNExE4\nI\n• O'Neill\nus ,,;Jin1k lt1JN1«- Laffont. 1978.\n• Ancln!Lc:beaa\nL'tsptz« m hmuf.r- Odilc Jacob, 1986.\nI\n• Paine et al. (National Commision on Space)\nl'um«ri\"fthe SJM« Frontirr- Bantam Books, 1986.\nI\n• J..C. Riba ct G. Moanet\nLt, vktxl1'tlln'J'tSI- op. dt.\n• Thicny Guadifl et aL\n2/00, rmliUI p'°\"'4in sik/.r-Payot, 1990.\nI\n• Jeu-Oaade Boarm ct.Jan•Jacqua V&.co\nOrmi.s, 14 Kim« ,n,m,a- op. dt.\nI\nANNExES\nRoswd.l\n• William Moore\nTht RDswrU inddmr - G.P. Putman & sons, USA, 1980.\n(En Inn~ : u mynmtk RDswrU-France Empire. 1981).\n• Kmn D. Randle\n1) UFO muh 111 Ros-II- Avon Books, USA. 1991 (en a>U. avcc\nDonald R. Sdunin).\n2) 77,r Tl'Mlh 11bDU1 d,r UFO mzsh111 &swrll- Evans. USA. 1994.\n3) &murU UFO mz.sh \"pdak- Global Comm., USA. 1995.\n•Ka.nP8ock\nRmwrllinpmp«tivr-Fund for UFO Rcscarch Inc, Washington DC.\n1994.\n(Peu objcaif, mais intacssant par Jes affidavits en annexe).\n• Ridwd L Wea,,u, Col. de l'USAF\nRrpon on Air Forcr Rm11rch rtlll~int tht •Roswt/J lncitknt•­\njuillct 1994.\n• United Sates General Accounting Office.\n•Rcpon to the Honorable SteYl:ll H. Schiff. HouseofRqmscntariYcs.\nGovcmmcnt Records : • Results ofaSearch for R.ccords Conc:cming\nthe 1947 Cnsh Near R.oswdl, New Mexico._-- juillct 1995.\n• Owne de t~bision anglaisc Channd Four\nEruegisucmcna vidro de t~oignages sur lecrash de R.oswdl, la plu­\npan provcnant du Fund for UFO Rcscarch rR.oswdl Rccollcaions,\npan n·. 1992)\nDcsinformation mluctti~\n• Kan P8ock\nRMwtUin Pmprrtivr-op. dt.\n• R.appon Condon\nAppendix U : R.cpon ofmeetings ofScientific Advisory Pand on\nUnidentified Aying Objec:a {Robenson Panel) - 14-18january 1953\n- op. di. - p. -905 sq.\n• AlleaJ. Hynek\nus objtts 1J01\"nts non idmtifiis- Bdfund, 197 4.\n(Traduit de 71,r UFO &ptrimct, 11 Kitntifot'N{JU1'J- 1972) .\nDcsinformation ampli6antc\n• Milton William Coopu\nThe Secret GoYCtnmcnt ;The Origin. ldentiiy,andPurpose ofM.J.12\n- Fullc:rton, CA• The Author, 23 mai 1989, 25 p.\n•Jaome Ouk\nC-UFO in the 80'si - Tht UFO mgr/4prdi;,- Omnigraphics Inc.,\nDetroit, 1990.\nANNExE6\n• Don Berliner; Marie Gtlbraitb, Aatoo.io Haoecm\nUnidmtifad Flyint Objtcts briefinl ,/«,,mn,1 - Tht Mt 1111t1il..bk\nt11idnu-r-CUFOS, FUFOR. MUFON, 1995.\n• Michd Bongard ct alter\nDn so1«011prs vo'4ntn IIMX ovnis - Editions SOBEPS, 1976." }, { "n": 86, "image": "https://wearenotalone.space/transcripts/255-413270-ufo-s-and-defense-what-should-we-prepare-for/p86.jpg", "text": "I\nI\nUFO, Unidentified Flying Object. ..\nI\nSince 194 7, the subject has disturbed, fascinated, called out.\nI\nOh how debated, the question has been s~died with extreme meticulousness and\nfrom many points ofview (scientific, technical, aeronautical, strategic, political,\nI\nreligious, media) by a French committee composed offormer auditors ofthe very\nserious-minded Institut des Hautes Etudes de Defense Nationale [French Institute\nI\nfor Advanced National Defense Studies] and qualified experts from every\nbackground, CO:META [Committee for In-Depth Studies].\nI\nFor the first time, men, some ofwhom occupy very high positions, have agreed to I\nwrite a report devoted entirely to the UFO problem in the belief that based on the\nknowledge that has been acquired to date, sufficient questions ofnational interest\nI\nare raised for the Chief ofState and the Prime Minister to be provided with this\ninformation.\nI\nIn this report, COMET A studies several unexplained French and foreign UFO\nI\n~ases.\nI\nVery well documented, these sightings are often supported by traces on the\n~ound or tracks confirmed by radar. Are these secret terrestrial craft? In some\nI\n;ases, perhaps. Are we in the presence ofcraft ofnonterrestrial origin? This\n1ypothesis cannot be ruled out. Ifit were to prove correct, it would be loaded with\nI\n~onsequences for Defense.\nI\nI\nI\nI\nI" }, { "n": 87, "image": "https://wearenotalone.space/transcripts/255-413270-ufo-s-and-defense-what-should-we-prepare-for/p87.jpg", "text": "S ATURDAY 17 J UNE 2000\n---------------------~1=tilid•1@iii=lit¥__,..___________________\nUFO's once the\npreserve ofthe purely\nparanoid are now\nbeing taken seriously.\nAstronauts, Generals\nand a number of\ninfluential scientists\nare hammering away\nat the crust of\ninternational\nscepticism. LESLIE\nKEAN explains why a\nstudy by the French\nmilitary may finally\nmake governments sit\nup and take notice.\nT\nHE release in April of 1he first\ndetailed satellite images of Area\n51 . the 1op-secre1 Air Force test\nsite in Nevada, prompted a web­\nsite meltdown as people from\naround the world searched for\nclues about unidentified flying objects.\n\"The interest has been really phenomenal,•·\nsaid David Mountain, marketing director for\nAerial Images. Inc which posted the high\nresolution aerial photos of A rea 51 on the\nInternet. But those hoping 10 see signs of\nsomething extraordinary were destined to be\ndisappointed. Most of Area 51 s operations\noccur\nunderground,\nmaking\nphotos\nextra-terrestrial origin\" and that, in fact, the\nand Defense: What Should We Prepare For?,\"\nunexplained objects have been reported since\nmeaningless. Anyone looking for the fresh\nbest\nexplanation is \" the extraterrestrial\npublished in France by the magazine VSD.\n1944. The rest \" seem to be completely\ninformation on UFOs would have beller luck\nhypothesis.\" Although not categorically\nunknown flying machines with exceptional\ntr ying a new, but less publicized source: by the\nproven, \"strong presumptions exist in its favor\nTHE MECHAN ICS O F A\nperformances that arc guided by a natural or\nFrench military. just translated into English.\nand if it is correct, it is loaded with significant\nMYSTERY\nartificial intelligence,\" they say. Science has\nHigh level officials --\nincluding retired\nconsequences.•·\ndeveloped plausible models for travel from\ngenerals from the French Institute of Higher\nThe French group reached that conclusion\n\"The number of sightings, which arc\nanother solar system and for technology which\nStudies for National Defense, a government­\nafter\nexamining\nnearly\n500\ndetailed\ncompletely unexplained despite the abundance\ncould be used to propel the vehicles, the report\nfunded strategic planning agency -- recently\ninternational\naeronautical\nsightings and\nand quality of data from them, is growing\nsays.\ntook a giant step in openly challenging\nradar/visual cases, and previously undisclosed\nthroughout the world,\" the team declared. _The\nIt\nassures\nreaders\nthat\nUFOs\nhave\nskepticism about UFOs. In a report based on a\npilots' reports. They drew on data from official\nauthors note that about 5 percent of sJghtings\ndemonstrated no hostile acts, \" although\nthree year study, they concluded that,\nsources, government authorities, and the Air\non which there is solid documentation cannot\nintimidation\nmaneuvers\nhave\nbeen\n\" numerous\nmani festations\nobserved\nby\nForces of di fferent countries. The findings are\nbe easily allributed to earthly sources, such as\nconfirmed.'\"\nreliable witnesses could be the work of craft of\ncontained in a 90-1>age report titled. \" UFOs\nsecret military exercises -\nespecially since\nGiven the widespread scepticism about\n£.J Irish Independent\nSATU R D AY 17 J UN E 2 000\n12" }, { "n": 88, "image": "https://wearenotalone.space/transcripts/255-413270-ufo-s-and-defense-what-should-we-prepare-for/p88.jpg", "text": "NEW FRONTIERS\nUFOs. many will quickly dismiss the generals'\nET hypothesis. But it is less easy 10 do so once\nthe authors' credentials are considered. The\nstudy·s originators are four-star General\nBernard Norlain. former commander of the\nFrench Tactical Air Force and military\ncounselor 10 the prime minister: General Denis\nLeuy. an air force fighter pilot: and Andre\nLebeau. former head of the National Center\nfor Space Studies (the French equivalent of\nNASA in the United States.)\nThey formed a 12-member \"Commi11ee for\nIn-depth Studies,\" abbreviated as COMETA,\nwhich authored the report. Three-star Admiral\nMarc Merlo. national chief of police Denis\nBlancher and Jean-Jacques Velasco. head of a\ngovernment agency studying UFOs, as well as\nscientists and weapons engineers. were also\ncontributors. Not only does the group stand by\nits findings. it is urging international action.\nThe\nwriters\nrecommend\nthat\nFrance\nestablish \"sectorial cooperation agreements\nwith\ninterested\nEuropean\nand\nforeign\ncountries\" on the mailer of UFOs. They\nsuggest that the European Union undertake\ndiplomatic action with the United States\n\"exerting useful pressure to clarify this crucial\nissue which must fall within the scope of" }, { "n": 89, "image": "https://wearenotalone.space/transcripts/255-413270-ufo-s-and-defense-what-should-we-prepare-for/p89.jpg", "text": "SATURDAY 17 JUN E 2 000\n­\n-------------------.J\n~•:i\\tlid•>l••i=id=-1-------------------­\npol ittcal and strategic alliances ... Why\nmight other nations be inclined to take\nthis ~ubject seriously?\nFor one thing,\ndeclassified US government documents\nshow that unexplained objec:ts with\nextraordinary technical capabilities pose\nchallenges to military activity around the\nglobe.\nFor example, US fighter jets have been\nscrambled to pursue UFOs. according 10\nNorth American Aerospace Defense\nCommand logs and US Air Force\ndocuments. Iranian and Peruvian Air\nForce planes attempted to shoot down\nunexplained\nobjects\nduring\nair\nencounters in 1976 and 1980. and\nBelgian\nF-16's\nequipped\nwith\nautomatically guided missiles pursued\nUFO's in 1990.\nFurther, the French\nreport says that there have been \"visits\nabove secret installations and missile\nbases•· and \"military aircraft shadowed\"\nin the US. Dr. Edgar Mitchell, the Apollo\n14 astronaut who was the sixth man to\nwalk on the moon. is one of many\nsupporters of international cooperation\non UFOs. Of the French report, he says,\n\"It's significaot that individuals of\nsome\nstanding in the government,\nmilitary and intelligence communiry in\nFrance came forth with this.\" Mitchell,\nwho holds a doctor of science degree\nfrom the prestigious\nMassachusetts\nInstitute of Technology, is convinced \"at\na confidence level above 90pc, that there\nis reality to all of this.\" He adds, \"People\nhave been digging through the files and\ninvestigating for years now. The files are\nquite convincing. The only thing that's\nlacking is the official stamp.\" He joins\nfive-star Admiral Lord Hill-Norton, the\nformer head of the British Ministry of\nDefense, in calling for US congressional\nfact-finding hearings into the UFO\nquestion.\nHearings\nwould\ninclude\ntestimony by government witnesses from\nthe Air Force, Army, Navy, NASA,\nprivate\nindustry\nand\nintelligence\noperations\nwith personal, first-hand\nknowledge of UFO phenomena and\nrelated projects.\nTHE ASTRONAUT AMO\nTHE INVESTIGATION\nDespite the fact that Mitchell is a\nnational hero and bas been honoured with the\nPresidential Medal of Freedom, the USN\nDistinguished Service Medal and the NASA\nDistinguished Service Medal, his request for an\ninvestigation has been ignored by U.S.\nofficials.\nNonetheless, the public's interest in UFOs is\nundiminished. A ballot initiative underway in\nthe US state of Missouri, and certified by the\nsecretary of state in March, urges Congress to\nconvene hearings. The initiative states that \"the\nFederal Government's handling of the UFO\nissue has contributed to the public cynicism\ntoward, and general mistrust of, government.·•\nUS Naval Reserve Commander Willard H.\nMiller has been communicating this same\nconcern to high level officials for a number of\nyears. With over 30 years in Navy and Joint\nlnteragency operations with the US Defense\nDepartment, Miller has participated in a series\nof\npreviously\nundisclosed briefings for\nPentagon brass about military policy regarding\nUFOs.\nLike many. he says he worries that the\nmilitary's lack of preparation for encounters\nwith unexplained craft could provoke a\ndangerous confrontation when, and if, such an\nencounter\noccurs:\n\"precipitous\nmilitary\ndecisions...\nhe\nwarns.\n\"may\nlead\nto\nunnecessary confusion, misapplication of\nforces.\nor\npossible\ncatastrophic\nconsequences.\nAnd he says he is not alone in his concerns.\n\"There are those in high places in the\ngovernment who share a growing interest in\nthis subject,\" Miller reports.\nMiller retired in 1994 from active duty on\nthe Current Operations Staff (13) of U.S.\nAtlantic Command, Norfolk, Virginia where he\nworked operations, intelligence, and special\ncontingency issues. In a February, 2000\nconfidential memo prepared for this reporter,\nhe spelled out the details of meetings with\nnamed officials - including the Director of the\nDefense Intelligence Agency, an Admiral on\nthe Joint Staff. and the U.S. Atlantic\nCommand's Director for Intelligence - between\n1989 and 2000.\nMiller concurs\nwith\nthe\nCOMETA's\nobservation that there is no evidence of\nhostility from UFOs ''The only threat to the\nnational security of the United States is the\ncontinued denial of undeniable physical UFO\noccurrences and sightings to a public growing\nincreasingly frustrated with its government's\nweak explanations,\" Miller says.\nAir Force Regulation 200-2, \"Unidentified\nFly ing O bjects Reporting,·• prohibits the\nrelease to the public and the media any data\nabout\n\"those\nobjects\nwhich\narc\nnot\nexplainable\" while allowing disclosure only of\nthe UFOs that have been identified as \" familiar\nobjects.\"\nAn even more restricti ve procedure is\noutlined in the Joint Army Navy Air Force\nPublication\n146,\nwhich\nprovides\ncommunications instructions for rcponing\nsightings relevant to US security. Anyone\n\"If we persist in\nrefusing to recognize\nthe existence ofthe\nUFOs, we will end\nup, one fine day, by\n1nistaking them for\nthe guided missiles\nof_an enemy - and\nthe worst will be\nunder its jurisdiction disclosing reports\nwithout authorization is subject to prosecution\nunder the Espionage Act.\nEven the President of the United States\nrecently had trouble accessing information on\nthe subject. In 1995, philanthropist Laurence\nRockefeller provided UFO briefing materials\nto President Clinton, Hillary Clinton, and\nPresidential science advisor Jack Gibbons\nwhile they spent a weekend at Rockcfcllcrs'\nWyoming ranch. Clinton then instructed\nAssociate Attorney General at the Justice\nDepartment, Webster Hubbell. to investigate\nthe existence of UFOs. as disclosed by Hubbell\nin his book, Friends i11 High Places. Despite\nthis request from the Commander in Chief,\nHubbell was unable to obtain information on\nBREAKING SILENCE: US Naval\nReserve Comma11der Willard H. Milfer\nworries that the military 's lack of\npreparatio11 for e11co1111ters with\n1111expfai11ed craft co11/d provoke\nco11fro11talio11. Leslie Ge11era/ Norlai11\nf orci11g the establishme11t to think\nagai11 about those fights i11 the sky.\nPicl11res courtesy ofBernard Tho11a11el\nVSD photo archives.\nthe subject.\nT HE D ECADES OF\nD ISTRU S T\n......................................\nIn earlier decades, issues that remain\npertinent today were openly discussed. In\n1960. for example, US Representative\nLeonard G. Wolf of Iowa entered an \"urgent\nwarning\" from R.E.\nHillenkoeller, a fonncr CIA Director and\nNavy vice admiral, into the Congressional\nRecord that 'ccnain dangers are linked with\nunidentified 0ying objccis.\" Wolf cited Gen.\nLM. Chassin, NATO coordinator of Allied\nAir Service, warning that \"If we persist in\nrefusing to recognize the existence of the\nUFOs, we will end up, one fine day, by\nmistaking them for tl1e guided missiles of an\nenemy - and the worst will be upon us.\"\nTI1ese concerns were taken seriously\nenough to be incoll)Or.ited into the I971\n• \"Agreement on Measures to Reduce the\nOutbreak of Nuclear War\" between the US\nand the Soviet Union. The treaty states tl1at\nthe two countries will \"notify each other\nimmediately in the event of detection by\nmissile warning systems of unidentified\nobjects...if such occurrences could create a\nrisk of outbreak of nuclear war between tlie\ntwo countries.\"\nThe French report may open the door for\nnations to ~ more forthcoming once again.\nChile, for example, is openly addressing it's\nown concerns about air safety and UFOs. TI1e\nnow retired Chief of the Chilean Air Force\nhas formed a commiuec witl1 civil aviation\nexperts to study recent near collisions\nbetween UFOs and civilian airliners.\nAs tlie international conversation about\nUFOs\nunfolds,\nsightings continue,\nas they have for\ndecades. Perhaps\nthe most notable\nrecent US sighting\ntook\nplace\nin\nMarch\n1997.\nHundreds\nof\npeople ·across tl1e\nstate of Arizona\nreported\nseeing\nhuge\ntriangular\nobjeclS, hovering\nsilently in the night\nsky - a sighting\nthat, as the state's\nSenator\nJohn\nMcCain\nnoted\nrecently,\nhas\n\"never been fully\nexplained.\"\nAs recently as\nJan. 5, 2000, four policemen at different locations in\nSt. Claire County. Illinois. witnessed a huge,\nbrightly lighted, triangular craft flying and hovering\nat I000 feet. One officer reported witnessing\nextreme rapid motion by the craft that cannot be\nexplained in conventional terms. Nearby Scott Air\nForce base and the FAA pull)Ort to know nothing.\nThe French Institute of Higher Studies for\nNational Defense and the National Center for\nSpace Studies remain several steps ahead of the\nUnited States military and_NASA. Perhaps the\nreport by the bold French generals -- with its goal\nof \"stripping the phenomenon of UFOs of its\nirrational layer\" -- will be a catalyst for authorities\naround the world to publicly examine the issue of\nUFOs in a new light. ■\n14" }, { "n": 90, "image": "https://wearenotalone.space/transcripts/255-413270-ufo-s-and-defense-what-should-we-prepare-for/p90.jpg", "text": "Pilot encounters with UFOs\nStudy challenges secrecy (and denial)\nLESLIE KEAN\nSAN FHANCISCO\nB\nACK IN JANUARY, Agence\nFrance Presse reported thnt a\nSiberian airport was shut for I¼\nhours while a luminescent unidenti­\nfied flying object hovered above its\nrunway. Although it's hard to imagine\nsuch an event taking place in the in­\ndustrialized United States, a compel­\nling October 2000 study by a retired\naerospace scientist from NASA-Ames\nResearch Centershows that similar in­\ncidents have occurred in America 1\nskies over the last 50 years. \"Aviation\nSafety in America -\nA Previously Ne­\nglected Factor\" presents more than\nI 00 pilot and crew reports of encoun­\nters with unidentified aerial phenome­\nna (UAP) that appear to have compro­\nmised aviation safety.\nAuthor Richard F. Haines, formerly\nNASA's chief of the Spnce Human\nFactors Office and a Raytheon con­\ntract scientist, is chief scientist for the\nNational Aviation Reporting Center\non Anomalous Phenomena (NAR·\nCAP), a research organization found­\ned last year. In stunning detail, pilots\nand crew describe a range of geomet­\nric forms and lights inconsistent with\nknown aircraft or naturaJ phenomena.\nBizarre objects paced aircraft at rela­\ntively near distances, sometimes dis­\nabling cockpit instruments, intern1pt­\ning ground communications, or dis­\ntracting the crew.\nThe data include 56 near-misses.\nImpulsive responses by pilots to an ap­\nproaching high-speed object can be\nhazardous; in a few cases, such vio­\nlent evasive reactions injured passen­\ngers and flight attendants. However,\nHaines states that there is no threat of\na collision caused directly by UAP\n\"because of the re-ported high degree\nof maneuverability shown by the\nUAP.\" While flying over Lake Michi­\ngan in 1981, TWA Capt. Phil Schultz\nsaw a \"large, round, silver metal ob­\nject\" with dark portholes equally\nspaced around the circumference that\n\"descended into the atmosphere from\nabove,\" according to his hand-written\nreport. Schultz and his first officer\nbraced themselves for a mid-air colli­\nsion; the object suddenly made a high­\nspeed tum and departed.\nVeteran Japan Airlines 747 Capt.\nKenju Terauchi reported a spectacular\nprolonged encounter over Alaska in\n1986. \"Most unexpectedly, two space\nships stopped in front of our face,\nshooting off lights,\" he said. \"The\ninside cockpit shined brightly and I felt\nwann in the face.\" Despite the Federal\nAviation Administration's determina­\ntion that he and his crew were stable,\ncompetent and professional, he was\ngrounded for speaking out.\nIn 1997, a Swissair Boeing 747 over\nLong Island just missed a glowing,\nwhite, cylindrical object speeding to­\nward the plane. According to an f'M\nCivil Aviation Security Office memo­\nrandum, pilot Philip Bobet said that \"if\nthe object was any lower, it may have\nhit the right wing.\"\nGround-systems operators\nhave\nalso been affected by UAP. \"The ele­\nment of sulJ}rise means a decrease in\nsafety because it diverts the attention\nofair-traffic controllers that should be\nfocused on landing planes. That is o\ndanger,\" says Jim McClenahen, a\nrecently retired FMair-traffic-control\nspecialist and NARCAP technical\nadviser. \"Aviation Safety in America\"\ndoes not attempt to explain the origin\nof these mysterious objects. But\nHaines writes that hundreds of\nreports, some dating back to the\n1940s, \"suggest that they IUAPsj are\nassociated with a very high degree of\nintelligence, deliberate flight control,\nand advanced energy management.\"\nIn the 1950s, pilots and crews reported\nseeing flying discs, cigar-shared craft\nwith portholes, and gyrating lights, all\nwith extraordinary technical capabili­\nties. Documents show the unexplained\nobjects were considered a national ~e­\ncurity concern. By order of th~ Joint\nChiefs ofStaff, commercial pilot., were\nrequired to report sightings and the un•\nauthorized release of a Uf'O report\ncould cost them 10 years in prison or a\n$1 0,000 fine.\nTo keep this information from the\npublic, officials ridiculed and de•\nbunked legitimate sightings, angering\nsome pilots. According to the Newark\nStnr Ledger in 1958, more than fl()\ncommercial pilots who hnd reported\nsightings, each with nt least 15 years of\nmajor airline experience, blasted the\ncensorship policy and deninls as \"bor­\ndering on the absolutely ridiculous.\"\n1l1ese pilots said they were intenu­\ngated by the Air f'orce, sometimes all\nnight long, and then \"treated like in•\ncompetents and told to keep quiet,\" ac­\ncording to one pilot. \"11,e Air force tells\nyou that the thing that paced your plane\nfor 15 minutes was a mirage ora bolt of\nlightening,\" he told the Stor-Led~er.\n\"Nuts to that. Who needsit?\" /\\s a result,\nmanypilots \"forget\" to repor1 their sight•\nings at all, one pilot said.\nAccording to a 1952 Air f'orce Sta­\ntus Report on UFOs for the AirTechni­\ncal Intelligence Center, pilots were so\nhumiliated that one told investigators,\n\"If a space ship flew wing-tip to wing­\ntip formation with me, I would not\nreport it.\" The vast majority of sight­\nings by American pilots are still not\nreported. The media perpetuate the\ncensorship and ridicule, handicapping\nthe collection of valuable data.\nIn contrast, other countries arc\nopenly investigating the impact of\nUAP on aviation safety. A Im.m f'rench\nstudy by retired generals from the\nr-rench Institute of Higher Studies for\nNational Defense and a government\nagency with the National Center for\nSpace Studies examined hundreds of\nwell-documented pilot reports from\nnround the world. The study could not\nexplain a I 9!l4 Air f'rance viewing of a\nUAP that instantaneously disappeared\nas confirmed by radar and a 1!195\nAerolineas Argentinas Boeing 727\nencounter with a luminous object that\nextinguished airport lights as the\nplane attempted to land.\n\"Aeronautic personnel must be\nsensitized and prepared to deal with\nthe situation,\" the repor1 stntes. They\nmust first \"accept the possibility of the\npresence of extraterrestrial craft in\nour sky.\" Then, \"it is necessary to over•\ncome the rear of ridicule.\"\nIn 19!l7, the Chilean government\nformed the Committee for the Study of\nAnomalous Aerial Phenomena (CE­\nFM) following publicly acknowl­\nedged observations ofunidentified fly.\ning objects at a remote Chilean air­\nport. Both the f'rench group and Gen.\nRicardo Bermudez Sanhuesn, presi•\ndent of the CEFM, have made over­\ntures to the U.S. government for coop•\neration on this issue, with no response.\nGeneral Bermudez, and Air force\nGen. Denis Letty, chairman of the\nFrench group. said in recent inter­\nviews that the Haines study has inter­\nnational significance and should be\ntaken seriously.\n13rian E. Smith. current head of the\nAviation Safety Program ot NASA·\n,/\\mes, agrees. \"There is objective evi­\ndence in pilot repor1s of unexplained\nevents that may affect the safety of the\naircraft, \" he says. \"Yet getting people\nto talAY. MAY:I. Wll" }, { "n": 91, "image": "https://wearenotalone.space/transcripts/255-413270-ufo-s-and-defense-what-should-we-prepare-for/p91.jpg", "text": "L\nTHEDOST<>NSUNDAYGLOBE • MAY21,2000\nE3\nSCIENCE &SOCIETY\nUFO theorists gain support abroad, but repression at home\nStudyby French officials, routine unexplained sightings, US military safety aspects combine to boost believers\nBY L~:SLIF. KEAN\nast month's release of the first\ndetailed satellite images of Area\n51, the top-secret US Air Force\ntest site in Nevada, prompted a\nWeb site meltdown as people\nfrom across the nation logged on in search\nof clues about unidentified flying objects.\n\"The interest has been really phenom­\nenal,\" said David Mountain, marketing di­\nrector for Aerial Images Inc., which post,.\ned the high-resolution photographs of\nArea 61 on the Internet.\nBut those hopingto see signs thatcap­\nturecl UFOsare st.oredatthesite (assome\naficionados have suggested) were des­\ntined to be disappointed. Mostof Area 61's\noperations occur underground, making\nphotos meaningless.\nAnyone looking for fresh information\non UFOs would have better luck trying a\nnew, but less publicized, source: a study\nby the French military, just translated\ninto an approved Engl.ish edition.\nHigh-level officials - including retired\ngenerals from the French Institute of\nHigher Studies for National Defense, a\ngovernment-financed strategic planning\nagency - recently took a giant step in\nopenly challenging skepticism about\nUFOs.\nIn a report based on a three-year\nstudy, they concluded that \"numerous\nmanifestations observed by reliable wit,.\nnesses could be the workof craft of extra­\nterrestrial origin\" and that, in fact, the\nbest explanation is \"the extraterrestrial\nhypothesis.\" Although not categorically\nproven, \"slrong presumptions exist in its\nfavor and if it is correct, it is loaded with\nsignificant consequences.\"\nThe French group reached that eon­\nclusion after eJtamining nearly 600 inter­\nnational aeronautical sightings and radar/\nvisual cases, and previously undisclosed\npUots'reports. Theydrew on data from of­\nficial sources, government authorities,\nand the air forces of other countries. The\nfindings are contained in a 90-page report\ntitled \"UFOs and Defense: What Should\nWe Prepare For?\"\n\"The number of sightings, which are\ncompletely unexplained despite the abun•\ndance and quality of data from them, is\ngrowing throughout the world,\" the team\ndeclared.\nThe authors note that about 6 percent\nof sightings on which there is solid docu­\nmentation cannot be easily attributed to\nearthly sources, such as secret military\nexercises.This 6 percent seem\"to be com­\npletely unknown flying machines with ex­\nceptional performances that are guided\nby a natural or artificial intelligence,\" they\nsay. Science hasdeveloped plausible mod­\nels for travel from another solar system\nancl for technology that could be used to\npropel the vehicles, the report points out.\nIt assures readers that UFOs have\ndemonstrated no hostile acts, \"although\nintimidation maneuvers have been con­\nfirmed.\"\nGiven the widespread skepticism\nabout UFOs, many will quickly dismiss\nthe generals' \"extraterrestrial hypoth­\nesis.\" But it is less easy t.o do so once the\n·authors' credentials are considered. The\nstudy's originators are four-star General\nBernard Norlain, former commander of\nthe French Tactical Air Force and mili­\ntary counselor t.o the prime minister; Gen­\neral Denis Letty, an air force fighter pilot;\nand Andre Lebeau, former head of the\nNational Center for Space Studies, the\nFrench equivalent of NASA\nThey formed a 12-member \"Commit,.\ntee for In-depth Studies,\" abbreviated as\nCOMET.A, which authored the report.\nOther contribut.ors included a three-star\nadmiral, the national chief of police; and\nthe head of a government agency studying\nthe subject, as well as scientists and weap­\ni11g this same concern to high level f<'dC'ral\nthe French report chastises the United\nons engineers.\nofficials. WiU1 over 30 yeai\"!I in Navy and\nStales for what it calls an \"imprei;.qivc re­\nNot only does the group stand by its\njoint interagency operationR with the De­\npressive arsenal\"on thesubject., including\nfindings, it is urging international action.\nfense Department., Miller ha.er In 1966; below right, a\ncraftshadowed\" in the Unit,.\nedStates.\nhigh school student In Beaver, Pa.; bottom right, teenage brothen In Detroit In 1967.\nEdgar Mitchell, the\nApollo 14 astronautwho was\nthe sixth man to walk on the\nmoon, is one of many sup­\nporters of international c~\noperation on UFOs. Of the\nFrench report, he imys, \"It's\nsignificant that individuals\nofsome standing in the gov­\nernment, military, and intel­\nligence community in\nFrance came forth with\nthis.\"\nMitchell, who holds a\ndoctorate from MITin aero­\nnautics and astronautics, is\nr \".'\nconvinced \"at a confidence\nlevel above 90 percent, that\n' •\nI •\nthere is reality to all ofthis.\"\nHe says, \"People have been\nlttJ\ndigging through the files\nand investigating for years\nnow. The files are quite con­\nvincing. The only thing\nthat's lacldng is the official\nI\n;\net.amp.\"\nI\n.\nI\nI\nMitchell joins five-star\nAdmiral Lord Hill-Norton,\nthe former head of the British Ministry of\nthe military's lack of preparation for en­\nample, prohibits the release to the public\nDefense, in calling for congressional fact,.\ncounters with unexplained craft could\nand the mediaof any data about \"those ob­\nfinding hearings into the UFO question.\nprovoke dangerous confrontation when,\nject.'! which are not explainable.\" An even\nAlthough Congress seems disinclined\nand if, such an encounter occurs; \"precipi­\nmore reiitrictive procedure is outlined in\nto pursue the matter, the public's interest\ntous military decisions,\" he warm,, \"may\nthe Joint Army Navy Air Force Publica­\nin UFOs is undiminished. A ballot initia­\nlead to unnecessary confm,ion, misappli~\ntion 146, which threatens to prosecute\ntive underwayin Missouri, certified by the\ncation of forces, or possible cata.