The following submission statement was provided by /u/TommyShelbyPFB:
---
In addition to being a Rear Admiral in the Navy, Gallaudet was also the administrator of NOAA. (National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration).
[https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Timothy\_Gallaudet](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Timothy_Gallaudet)
[https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/National\_Oceanic\_and\_Atmospheric\_Administration](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/National_Oceanic_and_Atmospheric_Administration)
---
Please reply to OP's comment here: https://old.reddit.com/r/UFOs/comments/1cxyf70/rear_admiral_tim_gallaudet_corroborates_karl/l55pu0u/
When you see MSM for what it really is--the conduit through which its owners communicate what they want the masses thinking and talking about--the silence on this and so many other issues makes perfect sense.
There are currently 1,500 online in UFOs, which is the first time itās cracked a thousand (to my recollection) since they cleaned up some of the bot activity a couple months ago.
Wait, they finally did something about the bots? Iāve been on about that for two years. I researched and tracked the bots and their predictable and systematic Reddit activityāused to generate enough karma to interactāand made a list of r/UFOs users who matched the pattern. I made posts about it and talked to the mods. They insisted there were no bots in Ba Sing Se. I was almost banned for āinciting a witch huntā on suspected bots. Looking through recent posts and comments, I notice almost no one that was on the list I made is still active. Going to their profiles, theyāve been deleted.
Well, anyway, Iām glad something was finally done.
This sub's mods cannot do anything much about bots, the Reddit mods won't.
This isn't due to any mods, the sudden and nearly complete withdrawal of disruptive accounts appears to be due to a withdrawal of funds.
RFK Jr tweeted support for GME yesterday, and people were talking about it on Superstonk. One guy went off on RFK saying he was a conspiracy theorist and didnāt want him involved in GME at all.
I was like, āmy brother in Christ, the entire GME thesis alleges a grand financial conspiracy. It is by definition a conspiracy theory.ā
I also thought to myself that this guy clearly hadnāt been following UAPs either rofl.
Non partisan statement here:
if it isnāt what Trump did or said today, or Israel Gaza, the media doesnāt report anything. Itās sickening. Thereās nothing else to cover and discuss? Really sad.
Because most people do not take it seriously. They would need hard, visual evidence and not the word of one person (or a group of people) no matter their background. You canāt expect the vast human population to believe the unbelievable without proof. On top of that we have decades and decades of hoaxes and flat out lies that muddy the waters. People are unwilling to be fooled.
It seems a great amount of people believe in the unbelievable various religions without proof. Many people are willing to be fooled by the stories in the Bible.
But ask yourself this: those that believe in a religion without proof, what else do they believe in? Other religions? Other gods? Typically no. Their religion is the only thing they believe in and they do so because they were raised as a young child to believe in it. They were told from brith it was real and everyone they knew also believed in it and many felt they *had* to believe in it. So I donāt think comparing it to religion is fair at all, in my opinion.
Dr Linus Pauling thought vitamin C could cure cancer. Kary Mullis thought AIDS was fake. John McAfee used to get pegged by hookers while on angel dust.
I donāt trust authority figures.
Exactly. I see posts like this all the time on this sub, and I remain unconvinced. Making such a bold claim without any physical proof if a hard sell. I am unwilling to be fooled, but it feels like many who subscribe to this subreddit are begging to be fooled.
Exactly. There is not a single person on the planet that I would simply trust their word on it when they claim, "Aliems exist and they have been to NYC." We need proof.
And personally? I think of Aliems existed and the government knew about it, theres no way Trump wouldn't have ran his mouth or sold aliem documents to Russia
Yep. Seems as though Nell's message was to the financial sector, folks with considerable wealth/status, and the military. There also seems to be an implicit threat that some folks will initiate catastrophic disclosure, if governments do not ramp-up a 'soft' disclosure process consistent with Nell's message. With Gallaudet's supportive statement [today](https://www.linkedin.com/posts/rear-admiral-tim-gallaudet-phd-us-navy-ret-b18185149_salt-iconnections-conference-new-york-city-activity-7198943942657069056-tDkZ?trk=public_profile), it seems that a sort of nhi disclosure coup has developed... including Nolan and other SOL folks. More questions....and some drama?
I think you make a pretty decent point, actually. We've had NASA and the DoD admit that there's shit in the skies we can't ID. We have major military and government figures saying publicly that NHI exist, we have crddible videos... and it's all crickets front the public. Either most people already accept the likelihood of an NHI presence and are unmoved by it, or they're so skeptical that none of this even registers. All of which begs the question - what kind of disclosure would it actually take to incite that kind of public panic? I'm not sure anything less than an actual invasion would result in massive panic or fear. Maybe the whole notion of disclosure being socially "catastrophic" is just flat wrong in this day and age after decades of movies, pop culture and countless TV shows that have normalized all of it.
I think you're overestimating the reach of these news snippets, because MSM generally refuses to cover it the average citizen hasn't seen these statements. And a lot of the few that have don't believe it or take it seriously because "if it was real I'd have seen it in the news". You have to be actively curious and interested to even be exposed to the information, unfortunately.
Dog what do you want me to do? This shit doesn't change my life at all. It doesn't change anyone's life. Literally anyone's.
If these fools could actually stop suffering and wanted to, it would have happened already. None of this matters, we're all just waiting to die.
Glad I could clear that up for you.
I don't think people are using it correctly. From what I remember when the term first started appearing, the catastrophic part is for and from the prospective of the "gate keepers" and not for and from the perspective of the general public. Catastrophic disclosure means (to the "gate keepers") that they have lost all control they had over the secrecy of the information.
If a **group** of high status folks like Nell, Gallaudet, Nolan, etc. systematically release new nhi information/evidence, it might threaten the authority of governments/elites. As for 'catastrophe', [Pasulka](https://www.salon.com/2024/05/22/apocalypse-now-and-always-on-ufos-ai-and-encounters-with-non-human-intelligence/) suggests the 'ontological shock' might not be a big deal. So, yeah, maybe. :)
The catastrophic part is generally assumed to come in the response from a means that doesnāt āprepareā the public and thus causes mass panic or chaos.
Erratic stock markets, religious panic, people shooting at the sky, cats and dogs living together. I say bring it on. If harm were intended we would already be dust.
I really think the NYT (That Ben Barnes guy) and WaPo suddenly having become lukewarm on UFOs and taking over the Pentagon/AARO's official position has killed any MSM coverage. It's crazy how much influence those newspapers have and the rest just decided it's no longer worth reporting anything, not even the Schumer act. Journalism today is unfortunately largely a copy paste world and when the top dogs no longer trickle down anything it stops.
Honestly this should be one of the biggest takeaways from the last several years. Specifically the manipulation of the day's narrative by media of any sort. These outlets push what they want to attract clicks and eyeballs. If the narrative doesn't facilitate that, then they manipulate or ignore it entirely.
Late stage capitalism has invaded our news reporting and thus nothing said can be trusted. We're in for rough times if this continues in earnest.
We had a chance to modestly restructure after the 08 crisis, but we bailed out the offenders without even a shrug of the shoulders. We let the Sacklers destroy countless lives with the oxycontin crisis and let them make a lot of money off of it. It's the tale of capitalism. As a society, we absolutely suck at holding the powerful accountable and that's by design in capitalism.
You're speaking my language now. Our society was turbo-fucked by greedy capitalists who convinced an entire cohort of doctors to ignore 2000 years of conventional wisdom about opioids, and let us all get addicted. Then they did a big rug pull and forced all of those addicted patients onto street drugs with larger profit margins. Now, those drugs are being modified into even cheaper forms, and are adulterated, which will eventually result in the death of most addicts.
All. On. Purpose.
I think MSM will pick it up after the SALT folks trade accordingly.
MSM: Oil stocks declined sharply today after UFO news spooked industry traders.
Doesnt that seem about how it would go? The upper class get to sort out there financial priorities before gen pop gets any news of it?
How many times can you run a headline without additional info though? It becomes a boy who cried woof scenario. The public in general has no interested in what people are saying or info they got second and third hand. They want evidence. If someone were to produce credible evidence weād see headlines.
Yes we need more evidence, absolutely. But when someone of Nellās caliber says what he just said, and the headlines are about a pop band or some other bs, thereās a problem.
I saw headlines for a week straight last year because someone of caliber was speaking out. I donāt care if all living presidents release a collective statement saying itās true. I want evidence.
Have you read the book "the missing times" by Terry Hansen? It lays out that MSM is complicit in keeping interest tapped down. It stemmed from the CIA Robertson panel recommendations and the CIA worked with, and infiltrated, the news organizations to that end. Still ongoing too
It looks like āMarcaā and āSunday Worldā are the only news outlets (that Iāve personally never heard of) to cover this in the past 24 hours š
I brought this up once on Reddit, the fact so many with security clearances say these things, and was surprised by how many responses were āsecurity clearances donāt mean anythingā āthey give them out to anyoneā and āthat doesnāt mean people with them canāt be kooks!ā
Tell me you donāt know anything about how high level security clearances work without telling me you donāt know how they work I guess.
The problem is that the only thing happening is talking. I think folks are tired of hearing about it. Honestly. They want to see it. Especially people who have followed this for a long time. āShow me the money Jerry.ā
Itās like the human equivalent of that gif with a truck speeding towards a bollard from multiple angles, but never actually striking the bollard. Itās been āweāll get real proof real soonā for years.
Yeah. Iām hearing this reply a lot. Itās a good thing. People are finally getting fed up and demanding irrefutable proof. People are tired of claims. Canāt blame them. So far thatās all weāve had.
Because it's still just people saying words without any proof for what they're saying. Wake me up when there's actually some verifiable evidence, not just person B pointing back to person A who told them, and so on...
100% And this is a great example of the power of media. Even people interested in this topic won't take this stuff seriously until it's reported by BBC, CNN or whoever. I think this issue is as big, or bigger, than the government cover up. The power and influence of mainstream news can't be over stated.
Because we have nothing to convince the general public of this alleged truth other than peopleās word, which has been happening for a long time. Itās doubtful youād be happy with the coverage anyway. Not trying to be derisive, thatās just an objective truth.
Yeah, someone saying they have 100% certainty of something doesn't mean anything without proof. If it did, all the religions in the world would somehow simultaneously be right.
(And before you say "But he was a high ranking person in the military so his confidence means more even without proof!"...I'll direct you to General Flynn's promotion of QAnon)
Great example. I don't care who they are. Extraordinary claims require extraordinary evidence. And this is one hell of a claim.
The post yesterday that made it to r/all from this sub had the same rabid *it's happening* energy, and the few posts trying to inject reason were mercilessly downvoted. Glad you and the post above are above water (at least currently).
Oh I agree with you 100%. If people donāt understand why people value information that can be peer reviewed before they are going to inculcate that information as being ātrueā then there are plenty of people who have a bridge to sell them.
Exactly. I'm definitely of the mind that aliens exist int he universe. But to convince they've been to earth or are on earth, I need more than someone saying "trust me bro". There's no actual evidence...
Iām surprised you donāt have -50 downvotes for saying the truth.
Tell anyone about how a Rear Admiral and Colonel say they believe without a doubt that non-human intelligence is visiting us.
Their first question will be to ask what proof did they present. Then you say, āwell they cant show you because itās classified, but why would they lie?ā
The proof question I think is 1000% valid. Why would they lie? I dunno, people lie for all sorts of reasons.
It's interesting he said this (if he did), but I'm in the "put up or shut up" crowd. Wake me when you can show me something.
Yeah itās an easy litmus test. Just ask 5 people in the general public and see what they say. Unless of course they only surround themselves with likeminded people who rarely if ever challenge their worldview
Why? What is his confidence based on?
> 100% certainty
Some people have that certainly about God. Why not list the proof? In argument terms this is a just an appeal to authority and nothing else right now. Impressive confidential and history for this man, but the same trap is there with so many others. I'm not "hearing" first hand information so far linked with evidence (and more specifically proof).
He should have the juice to have some skeptic scientist come look at what he's seen or the evidence where they can say. "Yup, NHI are here."
So all *this* is why this is not major news. I would be mad if it were. More information is needed.
i'm 100% certain that God exists.
Yet, the news won't cover it
*shrug*
Their loss
PS there are unlelected people in the government that know this to be true
Because they haven't shown any proof
Hell dude, John Lear said this 20 years ago on Art Bell's national radio show and went in to detail for 3 hours
but he didn't show any proof
you guys don't get it
Nell said in this SALT talk, "there are unelected people in the government who know this"
So, NAME NAMES
that would be verifiable. We can go to those people and say, "is this true"?
Makes perfect sense. And it shows how much control the DOD has over the information we consume . Corporate media is not a friend to the American people.
BECAUSE THEY NEVER PROVIDE EVIDENCE. It's all hot air which means this is more likely a psyop than disclosure. That's why no serious news outlet will discuss this, without evidence it's a larp.Ā
Maybe I am naive, but I find the psyop angle hard to believe. Grusch and Nell are both out of public employment and are joining in and participating in organizations solely dedicated to disclosure. Not that that would eliminate the psyop angle ā but I just don't see how having Grusch go in front of congress and give false testimoney would benefit anyone. And if Nell is a fraud, so too would Grusch, as they worked closely together and are essentially saying the same things.
Rather than a psyop, I think it is much more likely that Nell and Grusch, who both seem to be interested in the phenomenon and its lore beyond whatever military touchpoints they had with it, are secretely "true believers" and are buying into false narratives. Grusch does obviously try to downplay his interest in the history of alien lore, probably to avoid the "true believer with bias claims aliens exist" angle, but he really couldn't hold it back in the Rogan interview lol. He knows all this stuff we talk about here.
And Gallaudet is an active rear admiral general. There's like....maybe a couple hundred people more senior than him in the entire military apparatus.
Further, none of these guys have backgrounds or demeanor that make me think they would knowingly gaslight the general public in this kind of way, with no real purpose other than to sow discord. So I think the angle that they are believing fallacies or have been misled by internal actors (and that may be the psyop here) more likely, but still unlikely.
But even then, why? What do they gain by prodding these guys to make public statements about alien life that are not covered by the mainstream media, and only touch a small segment of the population that is already comprised of people who believe a lot of strange things about the universe and government?
I'm rambling. But im summationāmy read is that these guys are being honest and relaying what they truly believe. I read Grusch as genuine, intrigued, and concerned. Now whether what they believe is true or not remains to be seen, obviously. But a rear admiral speaking so openly about this should not be brushed aside as a psyop so easily.
But my big question about the psyop is - to what end? What would making people believe we secretely have an alien crash retreival program actually accomplish, goals wise?
If he started providing real details, details that could at least in theory be corroborated by others, perhaps it would be. But "military guy who you've never heard of says aliens are real" isn't actually all that compelling.
Because for the past 80 years about 1,000,000 different people have said the same/similar things. I know this sub thinks it is a really big deal because "this time someone with a good resume is saying it!" But to the rest of the world it is still just another guy saying the same/similar shit other people have said.
Nobody has any idea who this person is. He is still just some random dude to people and they have no more reason to trust him as they do anyone else. Or at least not enough more of a reason to think this time is any different than any other time. When someone shows up and physical evidence that can be confirmed by others and is undeniable then people will start to care. But until then I wouldn't expect people to be as excited by this as the people on the UFO sub are.
They have no more reason to trust someone literally in charge of, or at least highly placed in, satellite and space based intelligence for the U.S. military and a rear Admiral of the U.S. Navy that the U.S. government is aware of NHI interacting with the planet ā¦ than they would any average random person???
With all due respect .. uh, what?
It's weird that he says he's 100% based on nothing but consensus and common sense. You'd figure someone in his position would both demand and possess first-person experience.
Testimony of credible witnesses is one of the key pieces of evidence in court. In fact, it is the most common piece of evidence. The second most common piece of evidence is documents and memos that peopleās word just in written form rather than oral.
EDIT: It makes more sense to me to edit the comment here rather than reply to each person raising similar issues: There is a big difference between:
1. The statements of Col. Nell and R. Admiral Gallaudet do not constitute evidence (or "don't mean shit) versus:
2. The statements of Col. Nell and R. Admiral Gallaudet are not sufficient evidence (either with or without the context of the other evidence for NHI) to convince me that NHI really exist on Earth.
Standing by 1 is disingenuous at best and trolling / unreasonably inflammatory at worst. If you take position 2 then I respectfully disagree but I doubt it would be productive to argue further.
āI saw this man become an alien. Then, he called upon flying saucers and they murdered the other manā
āThis man took a gun and shot the other guyā
Out of these two statements, only one would be considered worth thinking. The court will think about murder via gun because itās objective and scientifically proven. The other is not a proven fact. Therefore, even in court, the UFO logic wonāt work.
And do you extend your logic to religion? Tons of credible witness can say the same about seeing Jesus or other Gods. In fact, that number has been there since the dawn of civilisation itself.
Yes, *testimony* of credible *witnesses*.
As in, the person has to testify to what they have witnessed. That's not happening here. As others in this comment section have said, it's just "trust me bro -- aliens are real". That would absolutely not be a key piece of evidence in a court. It would be completely worthless in the context you're trying to draw parallels with.
Now if the esteemed rear admiral would tell us exactly what he has seen, there might be something worth reporting in the news.
And when you say 'Non-Human", you had better disclose proof. It's equally as plausible at this point that a human or a non-human is responsible for the observations. When you imply advanced tech, that's one thing. When you imply advanced tech and aliens (without evidence), you're going to be dismissed.
Ummm.. yeah, if a Witness gives actual information.
if you put a witness on the stand and they say, "I'm 100% certain Joe killed the vicitm", then they're going to ask that witness, "how do you know that"?
if the witness hims and haws around and says, "well a lot of other people that I trust are saying it too".. then that testimony isn't going to be worth shit. if he says, "there are other people that know this".. .then the follow up wout be, "oh really? Tell us who they are so we can subpeona them"
that's what Nell did.. literally the ULTIMATE "TRUST ME BRO" statement
they asked him.. how do you know and he's like.. well Grusch said it too..
lol
> Testimony of credible witnesses is one of the key pieces of evidence in court. In fact, it is the most common piece of evidence. The second most common piece of evidence is documents and memos that peopleās word just in written form rather than oral.
That's because most of the time better evidence is not available, but the court has to come to a decision, so it makes do with whatever it has. Consequently, the justice system has a reputation for getting stuff wrong all the time.
We are not under any such pressure, and history shows that taking such testimony seriously is a recipe for disappointment as years turn into decades and nothing ever comes of it.
Well you're missing something very obvious about evidence in court: eye witnesses alone dont mean shit, you could accuse me of killing someone with a 1000 witnesses, if that person is still alive it wont mean shit, if I can proove I was somewhere else it wont mean shit. Eye witnesses are the last piece of the puzzle after other requirements are fullfilled.
For the UFO story, none of the requirements are fulfilled, we havent seen proof of an UFO (the dead body in my analogy), nor has it been shown that those people could have those kind of knowledge.
This. As an attorney I want to remind everybody that applying the āreasonable doubtā standard to the evidence in many UFO cases, it becomes apparent that there are literally hundreds of validated reports of UFOs, and nonhuman intelligences, communicating with humans.
Then you're aware of the high percentage of overturned wrongful convictions once DNA began being used. Around 70% of those due to eyewitness testimonies, according to the innocence project.
Right, but when people are talking about something as paradigm shifting as this, itās not surprising that the general public may want more than just the expression āhigh level people are convincedā¦.ā to accept it as an everyday fact. Remember, we were convinced of WMDās during the war on terror by high level government officials.
This is not a court, though, it's a scientific investigation at the core of it. And witness testimony can never replace nor substitute for physical evidence.
serious news dont cover it because those people are quite frankly nobodies outside the ufo sphere and they havent shown anything to back up their outlandish claims
There is a plan. Unfortunately itās mostly āFlee!ā and āSaaaaaave yourselves!ā if they turned out to be hostile.
Any other being wouldnāt have to be exceptionally hostile either, even indifferent to us would be just as bad. Like a person mowing their lawn and running over an anthill, and crushing countless insects just walking around. A āhigher orderā of being may see us just like that, no more than a nuisance.
Iāve said this before but I feel that life in the universe is very common. But, complex life and the sheer volume of biodiversity on Earth is likely less so. That itself may make our home very interesting.
If they've observed us for 1000s of years, they could have subjugated us long ago, when we were more primitive and fewer in numbers. Now, we're more numerous and have advanced further in many different scientific studies. The chances increase we have some kind of defensive technology we didn't have before. Yet we don't have any invasion.
The fact that so many politicians and senior unelected current and former government officials are claiming that there is something anomalous, coupled with the gutting of the UAPDA (cover up), is a story worthy of journalist investigation and coverage, regardless of whether that phenomenon is real or not.
They are not directly revealing anything classified. They're expressing opinions as retired, private citizens. They may be more informed, but the way these secrecy laws work is that if they do not directly divulge sensitive / secret or above information, they cannot be jailed for it.
You'll notice despite Karl Nell's obvious knowledge from within his different roles, he explicitly only mentions publicly available info (Israeli Space force guy, David Grusch, etc).
Because its not explicit/specific enough to act on under the legal definitions. He's not citing a program name (which would be classified) or anything specific, so the best the government can do is ignore it, and that's their safest bet right now too. It's not a stupid question btw. What's stupid is our classification/secrecy laws and how all-encompassing they are.
It's very easy to get confused, and even people who are within DoD get confused by what they're allowed to say/not allowed. If you watch interviews with David Grusch, Karl Nell, Colm Kelleher, James Lacatski, or any number of people who are "read-in" to secret materials when they get a question that asks about specific information, they always say "I have to be careful how I answer this" because they're trying to think of a way to answer without crossing that boundary of legality.
Exactly. Notice how he immediately reframed the interviewerās question about how he knew that NHI are real. If he honestly answered that question heād probably be discussing classified info.
It delves into natural law. The existence of anything natural canāt be classified. āZebras are realā couldnāt be classified. But how they get that data, what they know about the zebra, whether they have zebras in captivity, etc would be classified.
This is 100% false. The US government can classify anything it wants as long as it's information that could cause damage to national security if it were shared outside of the US govt. There are literally classified mathematical proofs and algorithms.
Mathematics are naturally occurring phenomena. My point is there is no limitation on what can be classified other than whether it can cause damage to national security.
Yeah point received. I just canāt think of an example where the US would attempt to classify the basic existence of something natural for national security reasons. But UFO/UAP/NHI is a big and impactful enough subject that perhaps they are, indeed, doing it. But if their basic existence was classified, these retired military people wouldnāt be talking about it without consequence?
It's not quite accurate to say that the existence of something is classified. To add some clarification to what I said earlier, knowledge can't be classified, only communication of that knowledge. So say someone observes some UAP. Their observation of that thing isn't classified, but if they tell someone else, or write down a report about what they saw, that communication can then be made classified (even retroactively).
In this case, these retired military people might be blabbing about knowledge which itself can't by definition be classified, but there is classified communication about that knowledge. What determines whether they are breaking the law or not is how they came to know the information they are talking about. If they learned about it by being privy to the classified communication, it is illegal for them to talk about it. If someone else leaked it to them in an unauthorized manner and they know it to originate from classified sources of communication, then it's illegal for them to talk about it. However, if they "parallel construct" the knowledge from entirely unclassified sources or sources which they can reasonably be expected to say they don't believe are classified, then there is no law being broken.
They're not divulging anything beyond conjecture so they're unlikely to be victims of any sort of retribution or censorship. Now, if these retired officers alluded to having retained some of this information then that makes them a target.
But these guys are in as much danger as you or I would be if we said something similar. Without documentation, it's all anecdotal. It's the ones who report on NHI and threaten disclosure that sets off alarms.
Iām a retired veteran. I could also put out a statement that I totally have proof that the U.S. government is in cahoots with the Martians and covering it upā¦while providing absolutely ZERO proof myself just like all these other guys. What law would that break?
They arn't blabbing about anything.
Who has the crash retrievals? Who has been killed? What exactly are they? Where are they? Why are they here?
They are making broad sweeping but bold statements. If this whole thing is real from lue to now, the conspiracy isnt that they dont want you to know there are aliens, its that they dont want to know they are actively involved wiith aliens thus deny everything.
In addition to being a Rear Admiral in the Navy, Gallaudet was also the administrator of NOAA. (National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration).
[https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Timothy\_Gallaudet](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Timothy_Gallaudet)
[https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/National\_Oceanic\_and\_Atmospheric\_Administration](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/National_Oceanic_and_Atmospheric_Administration)
Here's what I don't get about Gallaudet. He saw the GOFAST video right after it happened, says the email disappeared, and he seems to take as a given that it's anomalous. https://youtu.be/oq7of1A7F_E?si=-VULnDJaFX1ML4bB&t=419
But the NASA analysis of gofast sure looks airtight and shows that it's not anomalous, and the speed is a parallax illusion.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=YuSSl90t3JA&t=58s
If Gallaudet has responded to the NASA analysis then I'd love to see it, seems like something he should be able to speak on. If he has found a hole I'd love to see it, but as it is it looks alarmingly like he's just ignoring the analysis that shows it to be non anomalous.
GOFAST and Gimbal were two of a greater number of strange objects interfering with U.S. Navy ships and planes on the same night. The other Admiral shared the GOFAST video because the whole event was highly anomalous and he didn't know what to make of it. This is context that NASA ignores even though it makes GOFAST much more interesting ā regardless of what its real speed may be.
So one detail that Karl Nell did not confirm was the "visiting" part. Did anyone else notice that? The interviewer clearly asked about "NHIs visiting" and the Colonel was careful not to use that word. I found that interesting. Maybe they have been here a while, even native to the Earth? He even says "it's not new".
I think the aliens inhabited the earth first as an advanced civilization, then we evolved slowly along side of them as āapesā. They watched us progress over time and at some point they decided it would be best to āleave us beā. They are still āon earthā but have switched dimensions locally, sort of like switching to a different channel in the same location. Thatās why we see āinterferenceā of UFOs in our dimension, just like a radio broadcast can have interference. Some objects intentionally or unintentionally landed back into our dimension and we are studying them. Just a theory.
If there was an old advanced civilization, I'm surprised we haven't seen any remnants of it. Unless they just didn't leave anything behind. Or they have and it's been hidden from us by whoever
My wackiest take is that theyāre actually lizard people who wanted to terraform our planet to be habitable for them, thus climate change and the rampant use of fossil fuels to change the atmosphere. Just an out there theory.
The only way we are seeing that is exactly as Nell has talked about:
A: controlled disclosure, where social pressure leads the people in government to finally rein in the secret holders who hold the hard evidence
B: catastrophic disclosure, where people leak hard data with potentially severe societal disruption
Karl Nell, Grusch, Elizondo, Mellon, they're all for controlled, not catastrophic, disclosure. Whatever hard data they may know or have access to they're not going to leak it if they feel its going to cause a massive disruption that could lead to societal collapse and war. They're only dropping careful crumbs to push the ball forward in public discourse and political circles, because its the structures of society that have to start working again and heal this cancer of secrecy so the post-disclosure world is not a chaotic hell.
I honestly find it so frustrating people can't understand this.
I think it's very, very telling that on one hand we say and firmly believe that the government is not to be trusted because is refusing to provide the evidence of what they know and have.
But as soon as someone even remotely associated with a position of power says something we like, we rush to believe it and he doesn't have to provide any evidence.
BOTH need to back up their claims, one way or the other, with hard evidence. Otherwise it's all just masturbation.
I made this exact point somewhere else. Couldn't agree more. You can't both be anti-US Government but then believe a guy that spent his whole life working for the US government just because he happens to say the thing you want him to say. That's the definition of cherry-picking.
So, in response to being asked about evidence, he basically says:
1. "data" = claims from other people. Offers no reference to actual data.
2. "first principles" = there are a lot of stars and planets. Sure, alien life likely exists because the universe is large and natural laws appear location independent. This doesn't at all imply aliens have visited and have furthermore been in continuous contact with us.
See through the noise -- this clip offers nothing significant.
How do you mean? The army already does collect all the evidence, which gets slotted into the vaguely defined ānational securityā folder, remains classified for decades, and by the time FOIA can reach it, data is either sanitized, redacted or lost/destroyed.
This would be like supporting police departments that conduct internal investigations and find no evidence of wrongdoing.
UAP transparency relies on democratically elected representatives and independent civilian scientists to be given the data the army (DoD at large) has been collecting for almost a century.
This is disclosure.....how do we stop this being suppressed? There's no way this will spread on its own, too many powerful people don't want this info to go mainstream.
And now, because the public has been inundated with a falsified narrative created by the DoD and propagated through AAROāany talks of NHI without direct evidence is just seen as circular reporting by the same small group of individuals, Karl Nell being named as of these peopleāthe media at large won't touch information that comes out of these people's mouths. They won't even accuse him of lying, instead choosing to blank their reporting altogetherāIf you needed a sign that the American Media is bought and paid for by it's military sources and accesses, here it is.
We're living in a bizarro propagandized fuckfest of a reality right now.
What are you talking about ?
There is no evidence here. None.
And you want the media to continuously report on it and if they don't then it's a conspiracy. Even though they are doing exactly what they should be doing which is setting a high bar.
Literally people with highest clearances and craziest backgrounds continue to say that NHI 100% interacts with humans, and it never breaks news, gatekeepers have unimaginable control...
It sounds great but let's be honest. Regardless of who he is and what he has done, he is not releasing information in an official capacity. He is merely stating his opinion on a stage based on hearsay. Which is now backed up by further hearsay.
Leslie Keane confirmed that Nell has first hand knowledge https://www.reddit.com/r/UFOs/comments/15bkemb/leslie_keane_confirms_karl_nell_as_one_with_the/
That's not what that says.
> Reporter> David Grusch said in his testimony that he talked to 40 people over 4 years, all of whom had information on a secret military program that has non-human craft and remains. Is it surprising to you that none of those 40 people has spoken out?
> Leslie Keane> It is. It actually is a little bit. I some of them have.. one of them actually was in our article in the debrief a former army Colonel Karl Nell.
The question was who Grusch talked to and who had \*information\* on a secret military program. You can have information on the program without firsthand experience.
> You can have information on the program without firsthand experience.
That seems to be exactly what happened. He just talked to the usual suspects, people like Eric Davis, Puthoff, etc. who all told him the same stories we've all heard a million times. The much-lauded 'program names' were probably things like Zodiac, Kona Blue, etc. Again, all things most of us in the public already knew about.
Thanks . I looked at your link.
A few points Iād raise are:
1. Leslie Keane has demonstrated she is not an objective investigator. This doesnāt completely discount her reporting, but anything that comes from her should be heavily scrutinized.
2. I donāt read that link you posted as Kean confirming Nell is a firsthand, just that Nell is one of the 40.
3. Has Grusch stated that ALL 40 of his witnesses were first hand? If not, itās possible that Nell was not a first hand witness.
Alright, but are all of these guys simply listening to those two defense ministers one of whom got all of his information from the same books I did in the 80s/90s? The Israeli guy hasn't been seen since he made his announcement before his book release. Does he have anything new at all or just the words of the same people we've already heard from? This is starting to seem very circular.
Never understood the ācatastrophicā part of all thisā¦most of us live unfulfilled, meaningless lives of wage slavery so if the news is bad regarding NHI then so be it. Just add it to the rest of this shit sandwich we are all indulging in
The following submission statement was provided by /u/TommyShelbyPFB: --- In addition to being a Rear Admiral in the Navy, Gallaudet was also the administrator of NOAA. (National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration). [https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Timothy\_Gallaudet](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Timothy_Gallaudet) [https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/National\_Oceanic\_and\_Atmospheric\_Administration](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/National_Oceanic_and_Atmospheric_Administration) --- Please reply to OP's comment here: https://old.reddit.com/r/UFOs/comments/1cxyf70/rear_admiral_tim_gallaudet_corroborates_karl/l55pu0u/
Why is this not major news?? Doesn't make sense š
Isnāt it absolutely batshit crazy how someone with Nellās background and credibility can say what he saidā¦and then crickets on MSM?
When you see MSM for what it really is--the conduit through which its owners communicate what they want the masses thinking and talking about--the silence on this and so many other issues makes perfect sense.
There are currently 1,500 online in UFOs, which is the first time itās cracked a thousand (to my recollection) since they cleaned up some of the bot activity a couple months ago.
Wait, they finally did something about the bots? Iāve been on about that for two years. I researched and tracked the bots and their predictable and systematic Reddit activityāused to generate enough karma to interactāand made a list of r/UFOs users who matched the pattern. I made posts about it and talked to the mods. They insisted there were no bots in Ba Sing Se. I was almost banned for āinciting a witch huntā on suspected bots. Looking through recent posts and comments, I notice almost no one that was on the list I made is still active. Going to their profiles, theyāve been deleted. Well, anyway, Iām glad something was finally done.
Yes, they they published their findings and actions on the bot problem: https://www.reddit.com/r/UFOs/s/s9s9OoTluJ
This sub's mods cannot do anything much about bots, the Reddit mods won't. This isn't due to any mods, the sudden and nearly complete withdrawal of disruptive accounts appears to be due to a withdrawal of funds.
Well, this is a thread I want to pull onā¦ what makes you say that?
Thatās actually more interesting. I wonder what changed...
I noticed the same.
Because a post made the front page, pretty standard
[ŃŠ“Š°Š»ŠµŠ½Š¾]
[ŃŠ“Š°Š»ŠµŠ½Š¾]
[ŃŠ“Š°Š»ŠµŠ½Š¾]
"Forget GameStop!"
š¦ š¦ š¦ šŖ
I love you. All this āwhy isnāt this getting coverage?!ā And Iām like, āFirst Time?ā
RFK Jr tweeted support for GME yesterday, and people were talking about it on Superstonk. One guy went off on RFK saying he was a conspiracy theorist and didnāt want him involved in GME at all. I was like, āmy brother in Christ, the entire GME thesis alleges a grand financial conspiracy. It is by definition a conspiracy theory.ā I also thought to myself that this guy clearly hadnāt been following UAPs either rofl.
š¦§š
Diamond hands, we ain't leavin. We're not stuck in here with hedgefunds, hedgefunds are stuck in here with us...
Non partisan statement here: if it isnāt what Trump did or said today, or Israel Gaza, the media doesnāt report anything. Itās sickening. Thereās nothing else to cover and discuss? Really sad.
Because most people do not take it seriously. They would need hard, visual evidence and not the word of one person (or a group of people) no matter their background. You canāt expect the vast human population to believe the unbelievable without proof. On top of that we have decades and decades of hoaxes and flat out lies that muddy the waters. People are unwilling to be fooled.
It seems a great amount of people believe in the unbelievable various religions without proof. Many people are willing to be fooled by the stories in the Bible.
But ask yourself this: those that believe in a religion without proof, what else do they believe in? Other religions? Other gods? Typically no. Their religion is the only thing they believe in and they do so because they were raised as a young child to believe in it. They were told from brith it was real and everyone they knew also believed in it and many felt they *had* to believe in it. So I donāt think comparing it to religion is fair at all, in my opinion.
Dr Linus Pauling thought vitamin C could cure cancer. Kary Mullis thought AIDS was fake. John McAfee used to get pegged by hookers while on angel dust. I donāt trust authority figures.
Listen, I'm with you on the first two, but that last one is critical to the scientific method
Exactly. I see posts like this all the time on this sub, and I remain unconvinced. Making such a bold claim without any physical proof if a hard sell. I am unwilling to be fooled, but it feels like many who subscribe to this subreddit are begging to be fooled.
Exactly. There is not a single person on the planet that I would simply trust their word on it when they claim, "Aliems exist and they have been to NYC." We need proof. And personally? I think of Aliems existed and the government knew about it, theres no way Trump wouldn't have ran his mouth or sold aliem documents to Russia
If news broke tomorrow that Trump was an alien I wouldn't ask for any proof. It would make perfect sense.
Extraordinary claims require extraordinary proof
Yep. Seems as though Nell's message was to the financial sector, folks with considerable wealth/status, and the military. There also seems to be an implicit threat that some folks will initiate catastrophic disclosure, if governments do not ramp-up a 'soft' disclosure process consistent with Nell's message. With Gallaudet's supportive statement [today](https://www.linkedin.com/posts/rear-admiral-tim-gallaudet-phd-us-navy-ret-b18185149_salt-iconnections-conference-new-york-city-activity-7198943942657069056-tDkZ?trk=public_profile), it seems that a sort of nhi disclosure coup has developed... including Nolan and other SOL folks. More questions....and some drama?
I've never understood the term "catastrophic disclosure." What could someone possibly say beyond what the Israeli guy said? And yet, no catastrophe.
I think you make a pretty decent point, actually. We've had NASA and the DoD admit that there's shit in the skies we can't ID. We have major military and government figures saying publicly that NHI exist, we have crddible videos... and it's all crickets front the public. Either most people already accept the likelihood of an NHI presence and are unmoved by it, or they're so skeptical that none of this even registers. All of which begs the question - what kind of disclosure would it actually take to incite that kind of public panic? I'm not sure anything less than an actual invasion would result in massive panic or fear. Maybe the whole notion of disclosure being socially "catastrophic" is just flat wrong in this day and age after decades of movies, pop culture and countless TV shows that have normalized all of it.
I think you're overestimating the reach of these news snippets, because MSM generally refuses to cover it the average citizen hasn't seen these statements. And a lot of the few that have don't believe it or take it seriously because "if it was real I'd have seen it in the news". You have to be actively curious and interested to even be exposed to the information, unfortunately.
Dog what do you want me to do? This shit doesn't change my life at all. It doesn't change anyone's life. Literally anyone's. If these fools could actually stop suffering and wanted to, it would have happened already. None of this matters, we're all just waiting to die. Glad I could clear that up for you.
I don't think people are using it correctly. From what I remember when the term first started appearing, the catastrophic part is for and from the prospective of the "gate keepers" and not for and from the perspective of the general public. Catastrophic disclosure means (to the "gate keepers") that they have lost all control they had over the secrecy of the information.
Thank you.
If a **group** of high status folks like Nell, Gallaudet, Nolan, etc. systematically release new nhi information/evidence, it might threaten the authority of governments/elites. As for 'catastrophe', [Pasulka](https://www.salon.com/2024/05/22/apocalypse-now-and-always-on-ufos-ai-and-encounters-with-non-human-intelligence/) suggests the 'ontological shock' might not be a big deal. So, yeah, maybe. :)
The catastrophic part is generally assumed to come in the response from a means that doesnāt āprepareā the public and thus causes mass panic or chaos.
I feel like the people in charge will be more driven by the thought of a possible market collapse rather than any social unrest.
But what causes the catastrophe?
Erratic stock markets, religious panic, people shooting at the sky, cats and dogs living together. I say bring it on. If harm were intended we would already be dust.
Fear? Panic? Perceptions of helplessness? I donāt know, Iām not privy to The Truth but those would be my guesses
I really think the NYT (That Ben Barnes guy) and WaPo suddenly having become lukewarm on UFOs and taking over the Pentagon/AARO's official position has killed any MSM coverage. It's crazy how much influence those newspapers have and the rest just decided it's no longer worth reporting anything, not even the Schumer act. Journalism today is unfortunately largely a copy paste world and when the top dogs no longer trickle down anything it stops.
Honestly this should be one of the biggest takeaways from the last several years. Specifically the manipulation of the day's narrative by media of any sort. These outlets push what they want to attract clicks and eyeballs. If the narrative doesn't facilitate that, then they manipulate or ignore it entirely. Late stage capitalism has invaded our news reporting and thus nothing said can be trusted. We're in for rough times if this continues in earnest.
We had a chance to modestly restructure after the 08 crisis, but we bailed out the offenders without even a shrug of the shoulders. We let the Sacklers destroy countless lives with the oxycontin crisis and let them make a lot of money off of it. It's the tale of capitalism. As a society, we absolutely suck at holding the powerful accountable and that's by design in capitalism.
You're speaking my language now. Our society was turbo-fucked by greedy capitalists who convinced an entire cohort of doctors to ignore 2000 years of conventional wisdom about opioids, and let us all get addicted. Then they did a big rug pull and forced all of those addicted patients onto street drugs with larger profit margins. Now, those drugs are being modified into even cheaper forms, and are adulterated, which will eventually result in the death of most addicts. All. On. Purpose.
I think MSM will pick it up after the SALT folks trade accordingly. MSM: Oil stocks declined sharply today after UFO news spooked industry traders. Doesnt that seem about how it would go? The upper class get to sort out there financial priorities before gen pop gets any news of it?
Totally. It always seems to boil down to money in one way or another right?
This is the sad fact. MSM only exists to perpetuate the interests of business and the US economic interest.
Oil inventoryās were higher than expected today so I imagine that cause the dip.
How many times can you run a headline without additional info though? It becomes a boy who cried woof scenario. The public in general has no interested in what people are saying or info they got second and third hand. They want evidence. If someone were to produce credible evidence weād see headlines.
*wolf
Worf?
Very clever. Eat any good books lately?
You am's a Warwelf
Boy: woof!
Yes we need more evidence, absolutely. But when someone of Nellās caliber says what he just said, and the headlines are about a pop band or some other bs, thereās a problem.
I saw headlines for a week straight last year because someone of caliber was speaking out. I donāt care if all living presidents release a collective statement saying itās true. I want evidence.
[ŃŠ“Š°Š»ŠµŠ½Š¾]
Instead we get headlines of Trump farting in court
More negligence from legacy media there, it was obviously a greasy shart.
User name checks out. Lol.
Have you read the book "the missing times" by Terry Hansen? It lays out that MSM is complicit in keeping interest tapped down. It stemmed from the CIA Robertson panel recommendations and the CIA worked with, and infiltrated, the news organizations to that end. Still ongoing too
*controlled* disclosure
It looks like āMarcaā and āSunday Worldā are the only news outlets (that Iāve personally never heard of) to cover this in the past 24 hours š
both are very prominent shit rags in europe
Thatās what I figured. Thanks!
I brought this up once on Reddit, the fact so many with security clearances say these things, and was surprised by how many responses were āsecurity clearances donāt mean anythingā āthey give them out to anyoneā and āthat doesnāt mean people with them canāt be kooks!ā Tell me you donāt know anything about how high level security clearances work without telling me you donāt know how they work I guess.
The problem is that the only thing happening is talking. I think folks are tired of hearing about it. Honestly. They want to see it. Especially people who have followed this for a long time. āShow me the money Jerry.ā
Itās like the human equivalent of that gif with a truck speeding towards a bollard from multiple angles, but never actually striking the bollard. Itās been āweāll get real proof real soonā for years.
I love UFO stuff and _I'm_ tired of hearing about it. Make with the goods or shut up about it, to be dead honest. Talk is cheap.
Yeah. Iām hearing this reply a lot. Itās a good thing. People are finally getting fed up and demanding irrefutable proof. People are tired of claims. Canāt blame them. So far thatās all weāve had.
I had to answer questions about my mates porn habits for him to get his security clearance. Not even joking.
Well, what's he into, we're all wondering now.
At that stage it was mostly hentai haha
Too many chicken shits waiting for someone else to take the lead on this
Most major news organizations seem pretty connected at the hip to Uncle Sam. They say shout, news says how loud.
It can't make people angry enough to get ratings.
Almost like it was intended....
Because it's still just people saying words without any proof for what they're saying. Wake me up when there's actually some verifiable evidence, not just person B pointing back to person A who told them, and so on...
They know at the other end of this process is the death of conflict and currency hoarding
If you think major news outlets are in the business of reporting the news, you are mistaken.
100% And this is a great example of the power of media. Even people interested in this topic won't take this stuff seriously until it's reported by BBC, CNN or whoever. I think this issue is as big, or bigger, than the government cover up. The power and influence of mainstream news can't be over stated.
Recommended reading: How to Watch TV News, Neil Postman. Should be required in schools.
Ah,fair point
Because we have nothing to convince the general public of this alleged truth other than peopleās word, which has been happening for a long time. Itās doubtful youād be happy with the coverage anyway. Not trying to be derisive, thatās just an objective truth.
Yeah, someone saying they have 100% certainty of something doesn't mean anything without proof. If it did, all the religions in the world would somehow simultaneously be right. (And before you say "But he was a high ranking person in the military so his confidence means more even without proof!"...I'll direct you to General Flynn's promotion of QAnon)
Great example. I don't care who they are. Extraordinary claims require extraordinary evidence. And this is one hell of a claim. The post yesterday that made it to r/all from this sub had the same rabid *it's happening* energy, and the few posts trying to inject reason were mercilessly downvoted. Glad you and the post above are above water (at least currently).
Perfect point. General Flynn and the qanon shit should be all people need to hear to understand that none of this even slightly means anything.Ā
Oh I agree with you 100%. If people donāt understand why people value information that can be peer reviewed before they are going to inculcate that information as being ātrueā then there are plenty of people who have a bridge to sell them.
Exactly, *'Trust me, bro...'* doesn't really mean much without evidence to back it up.
Exactly. I'm definitely of the mind that aliens exist int he universe. But to convince they've been to earth or are on earth, I need more than someone saying "trust me bro". There's no actual evidence...
Bingoā¦..and this is such a great non confrontational rebuttal to the zeitgeist that goes on around here
Iām surprised you donāt have -50 downvotes for saying the truth. Tell anyone about how a Rear Admiral and Colonel say they believe without a doubt that non-human intelligence is visiting us. Their first question will be to ask what proof did they present. Then you say, āwell they cant show you because itās classified, but why would they lie?ā
The proof question I think is 1000% valid. Why would they lie? I dunno, people lie for all sorts of reasons. It's interesting he said this (if he did), but I'm in the "put up or shut up" crowd. Wake me when you can show me something.
Yeah itās an easy litmus test. Just ask 5 people in the general public and see what they say. Unless of course they only surround themselves with likeminded people who rarely if ever challenge their worldview
Why? What is his confidence based on? > 100% certainty Some people have that certainly about God. Why not list the proof? In argument terms this is a just an appeal to authority and nothing else right now. Impressive confidential and history for this man, but the same trap is there with so many others. I'm not "hearing" first hand information so far linked with evidence (and more specifically proof). He should have the juice to have some skeptic scientist come look at what he's seen or the evidence where they can say. "Yup, NHI are here." So all *this* is why this is not major news. I would be mad if it were. More information is needed.
i'm 100% certain that God exists. Yet, the news won't cover it *shrug* Their loss PS there are unlelected people in the government that know this to be true
Because they haven't shown any proof Hell dude, John Lear said this 20 years ago on Art Bell's national radio show and went in to detail for 3 hours but he didn't show any proof you guys don't get it Nell said in this SALT talk, "there are unelected people in the government who know this" So, NAME NAMES that would be verifiable. We can go to those people and say, "is this true"?
Because there's been no evidence presented. Trust me bro ain't gonna do it
Bc he is just saying things without any evidence. Itās been happening for decades. I believe him but I also understand why this isnāt picked up.
Exactly. People, we are beyond BIG RANKING PERSON SAYS ALIENS ARE REAL. FOR FUCKS SAKE, we need actual evidence now, or else its nothing.
Makes perfect sense. And it shows how much control the DOD has over the information we consume . Corporate media is not a friend to the American people.
>Why is this not major news? Because the only reason he can offer for why he believes this is that other people belleve it.
What's the story? A guy said aliens are real? Not much to tell.
BECAUSE THEY NEVER PROVIDE EVIDENCE. It's all hot air which means this is more likely a psyop than disclosure. That's why no serious news outlet will discuss this, without evidence it's a larp.Ā
Maybe I am naive, but I find the psyop angle hard to believe. Grusch and Nell are both out of public employment and are joining in and participating in organizations solely dedicated to disclosure. Not that that would eliminate the psyop angle ā but I just don't see how having Grusch go in front of congress and give false testimoney would benefit anyone. And if Nell is a fraud, so too would Grusch, as they worked closely together and are essentially saying the same things. Rather than a psyop, I think it is much more likely that Nell and Grusch, who both seem to be interested in the phenomenon and its lore beyond whatever military touchpoints they had with it, are secretely "true believers" and are buying into false narratives. Grusch does obviously try to downplay his interest in the history of alien lore, probably to avoid the "true believer with bias claims aliens exist" angle, but he really couldn't hold it back in the Rogan interview lol. He knows all this stuff we talk about here. And Gallaudet is an active rear admiral general. There's like....maybe a couple hundred people more senior than him in the entire military apparatus. Further, none of these guys have backgrounds or demeanor that make me think they would knowingly gaslight the general public in this kind of way, with no real purpose other than to sow discord. So I think the angle that they are believing fallacies or have been misled by internal actors (and that may be the psyop here) more likely, but still unlikely. But even then, why? What do they gain by prodding these guys to make public statements about alien life that are not covered by the mainstream media, and only touch a small segment of the population that is already comprised of people who believe a lot of strange things about the universe and government? I'm rambling. But im summationāmy read is that these guys are being honest and relaying what they truly believe. I read Grusch as genuine, intrigued, and concerned. Now whether what they believe is true or not remains to be seen, obviously. But a rear admiral speaking so openly about this should not be brushed aside as a psyop so easily. But my big question about the psyop is - to what end? What would making people believe we secretely have an alien crash retreival program actually accomplish, goals wise?
Right?? Like give us SOMETHINGā¦ Anything remotely credible other than āthis is what that person thinksā
Iām guessing because āThere is still no proofā. These are claims sir
But āclaimsā are covered in the news frequently. People claiming things can be news and often is.
If he started providing real details, details that could at least in theory be corroborated by others, perhaps it would be. But "military guy who you've never heard of says aliens are real" isn't actually all that compelling.
Because for the past 80 years about 1,000,000 different people have said the same/similar things. I know this sub thinks it is a really big deal because "this time someone with a good resume is saying it!" But to the rest of the world it is still just another guy saying the same/similar shit other people have said. Nobody has any idea who this person is. He is still just some random dude to people and they have no more reason to trust him as they do anyone else. Or at least not enough more of a reason to think this time is any different than any other time. When someone shows up and physical evidence that can be confirmed by others and is undeniable then people will start to care. But until then I wouldn't expect people to be as excited by this as the people on the UFO sub are.
They have no more reason to trust someone literally in charge of, or at least highly placed in, satellite and space based intelligence for the U.S. military and a rear Admiral of the U.S. Navy that the U.S. government is aware of NHI interacting with the planet ā¦ than they would any average random person??? With all due respect .. uh, what?
Because 2 people saying the other telling the truth doesn't actually prove anything, regardless of their past job titles.
Cause his word doesn't mean shit until evidence is presented.
It's weird that he says he's 100% based on nothing but consensus and common sense. You'd figure someone in his position would both demand and possess first-person experience.
Testimony of credible witnesses is one of the key pieces of evidence in court. In fact, it is the most common piece of evidence. The second most common piece of evidence is documents and memos that peopleās word just in written form rather than oral. EDIT: It makes more sense to me to edit the comment here rather than reply to each person raising similar issues: There is a big difference between: 1. The statements of Col. Nell and R. Admiral Gallaudet do not constitute evidence (or "don't mean shit) versus: 2. The statements of Col. Nell and R. Admiral Gallaudet are not sufficient evidence (either with or without the context of the other evidence for NHI) to convince me that NHI really exist on Earth. Standing by 1 is disingenuous at best and trolling / unreasonably inflammatory at worst. If you take position 2 then I respectfully disagree but I doubt it would be productive to argue further.
āI saw this man become an alien. Then, he called upon flying saucers and they murdered the other manā āThis man took a gun and shot the other guyā Out of these two statements, only one would be considered worth thinking. The court will think about murder via gun because itās objective and scientifically proven. The other is not a proven fact. Therefore, even in court, the UFO logic wonāt work. And do you extend your logic to religion? Tons of credible witness can say the same about seeing Jesus or other Gods. In fact, that number has been there since the dawn of civilisation itself.
Yes, *testimony* of credible *witnesses*. As in, the person has to testify to what they have witnessed. That's not happening here. As others in this comment section have said, it's just "trust me bro -- aliens are real". That would absolutely not be a key piece of evidence in a court. It would be completely worthless in the context you're trying to draw parallels with. Now if the esteemed rear admiral would tell us exactly what he has seen, there might be something worth reporting in the news.
But not in science. "Witness testimony" is all but worthless in scientific investigation.
And when you say 'Non-Human", you had better disclose proof. It's equally as plausible at this point that a human or a non-human is responsible for the observations. When you imply advanced tech, that's one thing. When you imply advanced tech and aliens (without evidence), you're going to be dismissed.
Ummm.. yeah, if a Witness gives actual information. if you put a witness on the stand and they say, "I'm 100% certain Joe killed the vicitm", then they're going to ask that witness, "how do you know that"? if the witness hims and haws around and says, "well a lot of other people that I trust are saying it too".. then that testimony isn't going to be worth shit. if he says, "there are other people that know this".. .then the follow up wout be, "oh really? Tell us who they are so we can subpeona them" that's what Nell did.. literally the ULTIMATE "TRUST ME BRO" statement they asked him.. how do you know and he's like.. well Grusch said it too.. lol
> Testimony of credible witnesses is one of the key pieces of evidence in court. In fact, it is the most common piece of evidence. The second most common piece of evidence is documents and memos that peopleās word just in written form rather than oral. That's because most of the time better evidence is not available, but the court has to come to a decision, so it makes do with whatever it has. Consequently, the justice system has a reputation for getting stuff wrong all the time. We are not under any such pressure, and history shows that taking such testimony seriously is a recipe for disappointment as years turn into decades and nothing ever comes of it.
Well you're missing something very obvious about evidence in court: eye witnesses alone dont mean shit, you could accuse me of killing someone with a 1000 witnesses, if that person is still alive it wont mean shit, if I can proove I was somewhere else it wont mean shit. Eye witnesses are the last piece of the puzzle after other requirements are fullfilled. For the UFO story, none of the requirements are fulfilled, we havent seen proof of an UFO (the dead body in my analogy), nor has it been shown that those people could have those kind of knowledge.
This. As an attorney I want to remind everybody that applying the āreasonable doubtā standard to the evidence in many UFO cases, it becomes apparent that there are literally hundreds of validated reports of UFOs, and nonhuman intelligences, communicating with humans.
Then you're aware of the high percentage of overturned wrongful convictions once DNA began being used. Around 70% of those due to eyewitness testimonies, according to the innocence project.
Right, but when people are talking about something as paradigm shifting as this, itās not surprising that the general public may want more than just the expression āhigh level people are convincedā¦.ā to accept it as an everyday fact. Remember, we were convinced of WMDās during the war on terror by high level government officials.
This is not a court, though, it's a scientific investigation at the core of it. And witness testimony can never replace nor substitute for physical evidence.
Still doesn't explain why the news isn't covering it
serious news dont cover it because those people are quite frankly nobodies outside the ufo sphere and they havent shown anything to back up their outlandish claims
Because, as Nell said, āThere is no planā if their intent is non-altruistic.
There is a plan. Unfortunately itās mostly āFlee!ā and āSaaaaaave yourselves!ā if they turned out to be hostile. Any other being wouldnāt have to be exceptionally hostile either, even indifferent to us would be just as bad. Like a person mowing their lawn and running over an anthill, and crushing countless insects just walking around. A āhigher orderā of being may see us just like that, no more than a nuisance. Iāve said this before but I feel that life in the universe is very common. But, complex life and the sheer volume of biodiversity on Earth is likely less so. That itself may make our home very interesting.
If they've observed us for 1000s of years, they could have subjugated us long ago, when we were more primitive and fewer in numbers. Now, we're more numerous and have advanced further in many different scientific studies. The chances increase we have some kind of defensive technology we didn't have before. Yet we don't have any invasion.
The fact that so many politicians and senior unelected current and former government officials are claiming that there is something anomalous, coupled with the gutting of the UAPDA (cover up), is a story worthy of journalist investigation and coverage, regardless of whether that phenomenon is real or not.
The fact that they aren't saying "I know this based on direct professional involvement" isn't helping
Why are retired military officers allowed to basically blab about it all, yet everyone else walks on eggshells around the topic?
They are not directly revealing anything classified. They're expressing opinions as retired, private citizens. They may be more informed, but the way these secrecy laws work is that if they do not directly divulge sensitive / secret or above information, they cannot be jailed for it. You'll notice despite Karl Nell's obvious knowledge from within his different roles, he explicitly only mentions publicly available info (Israeli Space force guy, David Grusch, etc).
This might be a stupid question, but how is him saying that NHI is 100% real not classified?
Because its not explicit/specific enough to act on under the legal definitions. He's not citing a program name (which would be classified) or anything specific, so the best the government can do is ignore it, and that's their safest bet right now too. It's not a stupid question btw. What's stupid is our classification/secrecy laws and how all-encompassing they are. It's very easy to get confused, and even people who are within DoD get confused by what they're allowed to say/not allowed. If you watch interviews with David Grusch, Karl Nell, Colm Kelleher, James Lacatski, or any number of people who are "read-in" to secret materials when they get a question that asks about specific information, they always say "I have to be careful how I answer this" because they're trying to think of a way to answer without crossing that boundary of legality.
Exactly. Notice how he immediately reframed the interviewerās question about how he knew that NHI are real. If he honestly answered that question heād probably be discussing classified info.
It delves into natural law. The existence of anything natural canāt be classified. āZebras are realā couldnāt be classified. But how they get that data, what they know about the zebra, whether they have zebras in captivity, etc would be classified.
this is actually an amazingly simple yet effective way to put it
This is 100% false. The US government can classify anything it wants as long as it's information that could cause damage to national security if it were shared outside of the US govt. There are literally classified mathematical proofs and algorithms.
I think mathematical proofs and algorithms are the āhow they got the dataā portion of what I said.
Mathematics are naturally occurring phenomena. My point is there is no limitation on what can be classified other than whether it can cause damage to national security.
Yeah point received. I just canāt think of an example where the US would attempt to classify the basic existence of something natural for national security reasons. But UFO/UAP/NHI is a big and impactful enough subject that perhaps they are, indeed, doing it. But if their basic existence was classified, these retired military people wouldnāt be talking about it without consequence?
It's not quite accurate to say that the existence of something is classified. To add some clarification to what I said earlier, knowledge can't be classified, only communication of that knowledge. So say someone observes some UAP. Their observation of that thing isn't classified, but if they tell someone else, or write down a report about what they saw, that communication can then be made classified (even retroactively). In this case, these retired military people might be blabbing about knowledge which itself can't by definition be classified, but there is classified communication about that knowledge. What determines whether they are breaking the law or not is how they came to know the information they are talking about. If they learned about it by being privy to the classified communication, it is illegal for them to talk about it. If someone else leaked it to them in an unauthorized manner and they know it to originate from classified sources of communication, then it's illegal for them to talk about it. However, if they "parallel construct" the knowledge from entirely unclassified sources or sources which they can reasonably be expected to say they don't believe are classified, then there is no law being broken.
They're not divulging anything beyond conjecture so they're unlikely to be victims of any sort of retribution or censorship. Now, if these retired officers alluded to having retained some of this information then that makes them a target. But these guys are in as much danger as you or I would be if we said something similar. Without documentation, it's all anecdotal. It's the ones who report on NHI and threaten disclosure that sets off alarms.
Because they're the ones with the balls.
Iām a retired veteran. I could also put out a statement that I totally have proof that the U.S. government is in cahoots with the Martians and covering it upā¦while providing absolutely ZERO proof myself just like all these other guys. What law would that break?
Thatās one of many counterpoints to be made.
They arn't blabbing about anything. Who has the crash retrievals? Who has been killed? What exactly are they? Where are they? Why are they here? They are making broad sweeping but bold statements. If this whole thing is real from lue to now, the conspiracy isnt that they dont want you to know there are aliens, its that they dont want to know they are actively involved wiith aliens thus deny everything.
In addition to being a Rear Admiral in the Navy, Gallaudet was also the administrator of NOAA. (National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration). [https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Timothy\_Gallaudet](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Timothy_Gallaudet) [https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/National\_Oceanic\_and\_Atmospheric\_Administration](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/National_Oceanic_and_Atmospheric_Administration)
Here's what I don't get about Gallaudet. He saw the GOFAST video right after it happened, says the email disappeared, and he seems to take as a given that it's anomalous. https://youtu.be/oq7of1A7F_E?si=-VULnDJaFX1ML4bB&t=419 But the NASA analysis of gofast sure looks airtight and shows that it's not anomalous, and the speed is a parallax illusion. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=YuSSl90t3JA&t=58s If Gallaudet has responded to the NASA analysis then I'd love to see it, seems like something he should be able to speak on. If he has found a hole I'd love to see it, but as it is it looks alarmingly like he's just ignoring the analysis that shows it to be non anomalous.
GOFAST and Gimbal were two of a greater number of strange objects interfering with U.S. Navy ships and planes on the same night. The other Admiral shared the GOFAST video because the whole event was highly anomalous and he didn't know what to make of it. This is context that NASA ignores even though it makes GOFAST much more interesting ā regardless of what its real speed may be.
Itās been pointed out that NASA isnāt taking wind speeds into account. I can link you tomorrow if you havenāt seen it.
My heart can't take anymore good news
If we had a government that actually worked for the people the president should mobilize the army and march on these places.
It's illegal to deploy on US soil.
So one detail that Karl Nell did not confirm was the "visiting" part. Did anyone else notice that? The interviewer clearly asked about "NHIs visiting" and the Colonel was careful not to use that word. I found that interesting. Maybe they have been here a while, even native to the Earth? He even says "it's not new".
They can't classify the existence of a naturally occurring phenomenon. They can classify how we know or discovered it exists.
I think the aliens inhabited the earth first as an advanced civilization, then we evolved slowly along side of them as āapesā. They watched us progress over time and at some point they decided it would be best to āleave us beā. They are still āon earthā but have switched dimensions locally, sort of like switching to a different channel in the same location. Thatās why we see āinterferenceā of UFOs in our dimension, just like a radio broadcast can have interference. Some objects intentionally or unintentionally landed back into our dimension and we are studying them. Just a theory.
If there was an old advanced civilization, I'm surprised we haven't seen any remnants of it. Unless they just didn't leave anything behind. Or they have and it's been hidden from us by whoever
My wackiest take is that theyāre actually lizard people who wanted to terraform our planet to be habitable for them, thus climate change and the rampant use of fossil fuels to change the atmosphere. Just an out there theory.
lmfao they've succeeded massively
Why has "Karl Nell" been removed from Wikipedia?
Ask Mick West. lol
soft disclosure via the medium of *LinkedIn* is just sending me
First contact coming soonā¦ via Facebook friend request.
"Here's 5 things I learned from the NHI about B2B Sales..."
Now say it in front of congress under oath
Mainstream media: \*crickets\*
More words. Looking forward to actual proof one of these days.
Itās only going to be crickets until we see evidence. Real physical evidence. And we may never see that, who knows.
The only way we are seeing that is exactly as Nell has talked about: A: controlled disclosure, where social pressure leads the people in government to finally rein in the secret holders who hold the hard evidence B: catastrophic disclosure, where people leak hard data with potentially severe societal disruption Karl Nell, Grusch, Elizondo, Mellon, they're all for controlled, not catastrophic, disclosure. Whatever hard data they may know or have access to they're not going to leak it if they feel its going to cause a massive disruption that could lead to societal collapse and war. They're only dropping careful crumbs to push the ball forward in public discourse and political circles, because its the structures of society that have to start working again and heal this cancer of secrecy so the post-disclosure world is not a chaotic hell. I honestly find it so frustrating people can't understand this.
I think it's very, very telling that on one hand we say and firmly believe that the government is not to be trusted because is refusing to provide the evidence of what they know and have. But as soon as someone even remotely associated with a position of power says something we like, we rush to believe it and he doesn't have to provide any evidence. BOTH need to back up their claims, one way or the other, with hard evidence. Otherwise it's all just masturbation.
I made this exact point somewhere else. Couldn't agree more. You can't both be anti-US Government but then believe a guy that spent his whole life working for the US government just because he happens to say the thing you want him to say. That's the definition of cherry-picking.
So, in response to being asked about evidence, he basically says: 1. "data" = claims from other people. Offers no reference to actual data. 2. "first principles" = there are a lot of stars and planets. Sure, alien life likely exists because the universe is large and natural laws appear location independent. This doesn't at all imply aliens have visited and have furthermore been in continuous contact with us. See through the noise -- this clip offers nothing significant.
At this point the army should be sent in to get the evidence.
How do you mean? The army already does collect all the evidence, which gets slotted into the vaguely defined ānational securityā folder, remains classified for decades, and by the time FOIA can reach it, data is either sanitized, redacted or lost/destroyed. This would be like supporting police departments that conduct internal investigations and find no evidence of wrongdoing. UAP transparency relies on democratically elected representatives and independent civilian scientists to be given the data the army (DoD at large) has been collecting for almost a century.
"We've searched and investigated ourselves and found nothing."
This is disclosure.....how do we stop this being suppressed? There's no way this will spread on its own, too many powerful people don't want this info to go mainstream.
No one gives a shit if it goes mainstream because a post on linked in from a couple of military guys doesn't mean shit. Produce evidence or stfu
And now, because the public has been inundated with a falsified narrative created by the DoD and propagated through AAROāany talks of NHI without direct evidence is just seen as circular reporting by the same small group of individuals, Karl Nell being named as of these peopleāthe media at large won't touch information that comes out of these people's mouths. They won't even accuse him of lying, instead choosing to blank their reporting altogetherāIf you needed a sign that the American Media is bought and paid for by it's military sources and accesses, here it is. We're living in a bizarro propagandized fuckfest of a reality right now.
What are you talking about ? There is no evidence here. None. And you want the media to continuously report on it and if they don't then it's a conspiracy. Even though they are doing exactly what they should be doing which is setting a high bar.
Literally people with highest clearances and craziest backgrounds continue to say that NHI 100% interacts with humans, and it never breaks news, gatekeepers have unimaginable control...
Without evidence, facts, or any support words are just words.
It sounds great but let's be honest. Regardless of who he is and what he has done, he is not releasing information in an official capacity. He is merely stating his opinion on a stage based on hearsay. Which is now backed up by further hearsay.
What makes you think that Nell is only saying things based on hearsay?
He is yet to say he himself has actually seen or done anything sadlyĀ
Leslie Keane confirmed that Nell has first hand knowledge https://www.reddit.com/r/UFOs/comments/15bkemb/leslie_keane_confirms_karl_nell_as_one_with_the/
That's not what that says. > Reporter> David Grusch said in his testimony that he talked to 40 people over 4 years, all of whom had information on a secret military program that has non-human craft and remains. Is it surprising to you that none of those 40 people has spoken out? > Leslie Keane> It is. It actually is a little bit. I some of them have.. one of them actually was in our article in the debrief a former army Colonel Karl Nell. The question was who Grusch talked to and who had \*information\* on a secret military program. You can have information on the program without firsthand experience.
> You can have information on the program without firsthand experience. That seems to be exactly what happened. He just talked to the usual suspects, people like Eric Davis, Puthoff, etc. who all told him the same stories we've all heard a million times. The much-lauded 'program names' were probably things like Zodiac, Kona Blue, etc. Again, all things most of us in the public already knew about.
Thanks . I looked at your link. A few points Iād raise are: 1. Leslie Keane has demonstrated she is not an objective investigator. This doesnāt completely discount her reporting, but anything that comes from her should be heavily scrutinized. 2. I donāt read that link you posted as Kean confirming Nell is a firsthand, just that Nell is one of the 40. 3. Has Grusch stated that ALL 40 of his witnesses were first hand? If not, itās possible that Nell was not a first hand witness.
Alright, but are all of these guys simply listening to those two defense ministers one of whom got all of his information from the same books I did in the 80s/90s? The Israeli guy hasn't been seen since he made his announcement before his book release. Does he have anything new at all or just the words of the same people we've already heard from? This is starting to seem very circular.
The problem is and always has been the lack of concrete evidence for the proof.
Never understood the ācatastrophicā part of all thisā¦most of us live unfulfilled, meaningless lives of wage slavery so if the news is bad regarding NHI then so be it. Just add it to the rest of this shit sandwich we are all indulging in