Russians {General} Make Major UFO Disclosure Statement, Aliens Are Real

[Quix]

.
http://www.educatinghumanity.com/2013/02/UFO-Disclosure-Russian-Aliens-Are-Real.html
.

According to this new information the Russians have known about alien civilizations for several decades, to many this comes as no surprise, there have been rumors floating around for many years. Well respected military and government scientist have been trying to speak out on this issue for sometime now. In the vast majority of cases the mainstream media either treats this like a non event, or they treat it like the information is coming from very unreliable sources. This information is a big step in disclosure process for mankind.
.
. . .

On a regular winter day in Moscow, in the comfort a room with a fireplace, journalists were given a real sensation. A senior retired official of the Ministry of Defense, lieutenant-general in reserve, PhD, a fellow of the Academy of Natural Sciences Alexey Savin said that in the late 1980's a group of researchers from the Expert Management Unit of General Staff managed to make a contact with representatives of another civilization. Interestingly, none of the journalists were particularly surprised but, rather, relieved with the "confession."

Vasily Yeremenko, a Major General of FIB in reserve, academician of the Academy of Security, Defense and Law Enforcement, was the first to speak to the press. In Soviet times he served in the KGB and supervised the Air Force and development of aviation technology. Among his assignments was collection of information by the Air Force of the facts of appearance of unidentified flying objects. According to Vasily Yeremenko, by that time there was an ample amount of such information.

Missile units were even given a directive in case of detection of UFOs. The main task was not to create opportunities for reciprocal aggression. In 1983-1984 at the testing grounds of the Academy of Sciences by Vladimirovka, the Ministry of Defense and the KGB organized a large-scale study of paranormal phenomena. The military training site was not a random choice. Experts have long come to the conclusion that UFOs inevitably appear in places where military equipment and weapons are tested.
.
. . .
"We can say that we learned to summon UFOs in Vladimirovka. To do this, we dramatically increased the number of military flights and movement of the equipment. If the intensity on our side increased, UFOs appeared with the probability of 100 percent," explained Yeremenko. After six months of tests the authoritative commission came to three main conclusions.
g.
. . .

.
I realize that naysayers will not be moved by such facts from the historical record.
.
It's interesting that Russia is moving the disclosure ball down the field in this way.
.

[stephen50right]

Alien life certainly exists in the universe. That is basically a fact even though it hasn't been discovered yet.

If UFO's truly were discovered on this planet, it would be impossible for human beings to keep it a secret. Therefore, there have been none at least since the dawn of recorded history.

[Quix]

Alien life certainly exists in the universe. That is basically a fact even though it hasn't been discovered yet.

Uhhhhh, your assumptions are showing. You are stating as a fact that which has not been overtly, publicly proven. I think it is true. But most folks hesitate to state it so emphatically in view of the fuzzy PUBLIC record--SO FAR.

If UFO's truly were discovered on this planet, it would be impossible for human beings to keep it a secret. Therefore, there have been none at least since the dawn of recorded history.

Actually, that assumption has been repeatedly, essentially proven wrong, as Stanton Friedman has repeatedly documented.

And, I can say from my own Navy communications job with a Top Secret/Crypto clearance that we can very successfully keep many incredible secrets for decades.

Though, actually, in terms of the leaks--there have been thousands of leaks. The problem is to distinguish between the disinformation, misinformation, blatant lies etc. etc. Certainly some of the information leaked and some of the observations made likely contain significant amounts of raw truth. It is, so far, not very doable to draw clear boundaries between the truth of which parts of such information and the lies, disinformation in such data.

The decision was made decades ago to use RIDICULE as the major way to discredit leaked information. It has worked very well.

[stephen50right]

Uhhhhh, your assumptions are showing. You are stating as a fact that which has not been overtly, publicly proven. I think it is true. But most folks hesitate to state it so emphatically in view of the fuzzy PUBLIC record--SO FAR.

Actually, that assumption has been repeatedly, essentially proven wrong, as Stanton Friedman has repeatedly documented.

And, I can say from my own Navy communications job with a Top Secret/Crypto clearance that we can very successfully keep many incredible secrets for decades.

Though, actually, in terms of the leaks--there have been thousands of leaks. The problem is to distinguish between the disinformation, misinformation, blatant lies etc. etc. Certainly some of the information leaked and some of the observations made likely contain significant amounts of raw truth. It is, so far, not very doable to draw clear boundaries between the truth of which parts of such information and the lies, disinformation in such data.

The decision was made decades ago to use RIDICULE as the major way to discredit leaked information. It has worked very well.

If ya do the mathematical calculations, with the number of stars and galaxies, the conclusion has to be what I stated. There is no other reasonable conclusion, unless one's religious beliefs don't allow any conclusion other than what is in their religious text.

I understand your overall point about the "secrets" but we're talking UFO's here. I find it impossible to believe that could be kept under wraps and not come out to be plausibly believed if in fact it was real.

[Quix]

If ya do the mathematical calculations, with the number of stars and galaxies, the conclusion has to be what I stated. There is no other reasonable conclusion, unless one's religious beliefs don't allow any conclusion other that what is in their religious text.

I understand your overall point about the "secrets" but we're talking UFO's here. I find it impossible to believe that could be kept under wraps and not come out to be plausibly believed if in fact it was real.

Stanton Friedman shreds the Drake equation. There are far tooooo many unknowns for such an equation or even line of logic to make any sensible conclusion along the lines of your assertion about probabilities etc.

And, Dr J Allen Hynek and Dr Jacques Vallee disagree. Hynek was heavily involved at the upper levels of secrecy on the topic. Vallee studied the topic for 10 years and also had some upper level connections and jobs.

BOTH concluded that the critters do NOT come from distant planets but are 'evil entities from an evil dimension.'

They are right.

I'll post a thread shortly with an interesting source about that issue.

[stephen50right]

Stanton Friedman shreds the Drake equation. There are far tooooo many unknowns for such an equation or even line of logic to make any sensible conclusion along the lines of your assertion about probabilities etc.

And, Dr J Allen Hynek and Dr Jacques Vallee disagree. Hynek was heavily involved at the upper levels of secrecy on the topic. Vallee studied the topic for 10 years and also had some upper level connections and jobs.

BOTH concluded that the critters do NOT come from distant planets but are 'evil entities from an evil dimension.'

They are right.

I'll post a thread shortly with an interesting source about that issue.

I've seen the Drake equation from the 1960's. The bottom line on that is we know so much more about the universe now, than we did back then. Still, it's an interesting equation to ponder.

Those who automatically shoot down life on other planets, I've found they invariably have a religious bent on their viewpoints about that topic. I have no problem at all with religion being an individual's faith and I respect that. However when it comes to science such as the history of the earth, life on other planets, etc, religious views can and usually do interfere with the facts.

I could do a dissertation on this, but it probably wouldn't change anyone's mind. If the thread expands, I'll comment where applicable

[Quix]

I've seen the Drake equation from the 1960's. The bottom line on that is we know so much more about the universe now, than we did back then. Still, it's an interesting equation to ponder.

Those who automatically shoot down life on other planets, I've found they invariably have a religious bent on their viewpoints about that topic. I have no problem at all with religion being an individual's faith and I respect that. However when it comes to science such as the history of the earth, life on other planets, etc, religious views can and usually do interfere with the facts.

I could do a dissertation on this, but it probably wouldn't change anyone's mind. If the thread expands, I'll comment where applicable

Certainly some religionists have an extremely narrow and rigid view of Scripture and of reality.

I'm probably within the upper levels of intense conservative Pentecostal Christians.

However, I do not believe The Bible teaches anything, per se, against distant worlds and their citizens. There's 1-2 hints, even, that such might well be the case. One of them is "All Creation groans, desperately yearning for the manifestation of the sons of God."

The context indicates--SO THAT the burden of sin and corruption will then be  lifted from all creation and however many galaxies and their citizens . . . or whatever all Creation includes.

HOWEVER, THE EVIDENCE, SO FAR for those sufficiently doing their homework

IS THAT

the critters--as Dr Hynek and Dr Vallee both indicate--are evil entities from an evil SPIRITUAL DIMENSION who will pretend, masquerade as "ET's"  from distant orbs.

I no longer have any doubt about that.

[Quix]

I've seen the Drake equation from the 1960's. The bottom line on that is we know so much more about the universe now, than we did back then. Still, it's an interesting equation to ponder.

Those who automatically shoot down life on other planets, I've found they invariably have a religious bent on their viewpoints about that topic. I have no problem at all with religion being an individual's faith and I respect that. However when it comes to science such as the history of the earth, life on other planets, etc, religious views can and usually do interfere with the facts.

[snip]

And, I would note that--the hyper  'naturalists' ... the 'Religion of Scientism' acolytes, priests, high priests and bishops ...

ROUTINELY and seemingly ignorantly and mindlessly

set themselves up to fall prey to a FALSE NEGATIVE error because they are sooooooooooo generically and obsessively allergic to a FALSE POSITIVE error. And the  SCIENTIFIC METHOD is extremely clear on that score--doing the latter merely INSURES you will fall prey to a FALSE NEGATIVE error--sometimes very devastatingly.

And that is certainly what I have observed in the more than 50 years I've studied the UFO stuff.

[stephen50right]

Certainly some religionists have an extremely narrow and rigid view of Scripture and of reality.

I'm probably within the upper levels of intense conservative Pentecostal Christians.

However, I do not believe The Bible teaches anything, per se, against distant worlds and their citizens. There's 1-2 hints, even, that such might well be the case. One of them is "All Creation groans, desperately yearning for the manifestation of the sons of God."

The context indicates--SO THAT the burden of sin and corruption will then be  lifted from all creation and however many galaxies and their citizens . . . or whatever all Creation includes.

HOWEVER, THE EVIDENCE, SO FAR for those sufficiently doing their homework

IS THAT

the critters--as Dr Hynek and Dr Vallee both indicate--are evil entities from an evil SPIRITUAL DIMENSION who will pretend, masquerade as "ET's"  from distant orbs.

I no longer have any doubt about that.

<<< However, I do not believe The Bible teaches anything, per se, against distant worlds and their citizens. >>>

I agree with ya. I read the Bible, cover to cover, when I was in my teens, and don't recall any passages regarding willful ignorance towards future knowledge.

I've never understood the problem some have with their religion and science. But I guess if some wish to believe that the earth is only ten thousand years old, then that's their prerogative.

I don't comprehend why believing the fact that the earth is around four billion years old, and at the same time being a good Christian is in conflict.

[stephen50right]

And, I would note that--the hyper  'naturalists' ... the 'Religion of Scientism' acolytes, priests, high priests and bishops ...

ROUTINELY and seemingly ignorantly and mindlessly

set themselves up to fall prey to a FALSE NEGATIVE error because they are sooooooooooo generically and obsessively allergic to a FALSE POSITIVE error. And the  SCIENTIFIC METHOD is extremely clear on that score--doing the latter merely INSURES you will fall prey to a FALSE NEGATIVE error--sometimes very devastatingly.

And that is certainly what I have observed in the more than 50 years I've studied the UFO stuff.

I'm not sure if I completely grasped your post. But the bottom line is we are just in the infancy of gaining knowledge about our universe. Perhaps an analogy could be the disparity of learning to harness fire and building a nuclear power plant.

[the_doc]

@Quix

I find it impossible to believe that could be kept under wraps and not come out to be plausibly believed if in fact it was real.

Actually, none of this has been keep perfectly under wraps.  Despite non-disclosure orders, quite a few whistleblowers came out over the past few decades (usually after retirement from the military).  In some very well-documented cases, it has been proven that the U.S. military has falsified records to dispute whistleblowers and has even tried to ruin their professional careers.

I'm waiting to hear what Putin says next.

[stephen50right]

@Quix
Actually, none of this has been keep perfectly under wraps.  Despite non-disclosure orders, quite a few whistleblowers came out over the past few decades (usually after retirement from the military).  In some very well-documented cases, it has been proven that the U.S. military has falsified records to dispute whistleblowers and has even tried to ruin their professional careers.

I'm waiting to hear what Putin says next.

Well okay, but from my perspective, I've never seen yet anything tangible.

I fully believe that life abundantly lives in the universe. Not on each planet or solar system, but abundant in numbers simply because the universe is so vast. There could be hundreds of millions, perhaps billions of planets and moons which contain abundant life.

However I don't believe since recorded history, that aliens from outside our solar system have ever visited our planet to the point where anyone truly gathered evidence about it.

[Quix]

Well okay, but from my perspective, I've never seen yet anything tangible.

I fully believe that life abundantly lives in the universe. Not on each planet or solar system, but abundant in numbers simply because the universe is so vast. There could be hundreds of millions, perhaps billions of planets and moons which contain abundant life.

However I don't believe since recorded history, that aliens from outside our solar system have ever visited our planet to the point where anyone truly gathered evidence about it.

I understand that you do not BELIEVE such evidence has been gathered.

I believe it is abundantly clear that folks from your fairly stern and overly narrow sensibilities about "proof" particularly "scientific" proof have automatically set yourselves up for chronically making a FALSE NEGATIVE ERROR--also called a TYPE II ERROR.

http://www.chegg.com/homework-help/definitions/type-i-and-type-ii-errors-31

i.e. The research WRONGLY indicates that the NULL HYPOTHESIS (which states that nothing is there) is true--when, IN FACT, it is false (i.e. SOMETHING  *IS* THERE).

It is a long accepted scientific fact that WHEN one's stance is persistently on an extreme end of that continuum (because of bias, faulty logic, habit, 'religion of scientism doctrine' etc, it virtually forces and INSURES that the opposite kind of error will bite you in the rear.

Millions of people refuse to accept any validity to the UFO phenomena because THEY PERSONALLY have not had a UFO land in THEIR back yard; land in their lap and castrate THEM; etc. etc. etc. i.e. the bar for accepting evidence is held soooooooo unreasonably high that there's no way with such a phenomena that in the current context, any proof would be accepted short of something THAT dramatic.

All this is utterly absurd on the face of it.

10's of thousands of high quality professional witnesses from government military and scientific whistle-blowers to pilots, MD's, psychiatrists, psychologists, engineers etc. have provided high quality personal observation narratives and sometimes even hard tangible data.

It has not made a nanogram's worth of difference to those locked into a mentality insuring a TYPE II error. They are still compulsively and slavishly addicted to making virtually certain that they will insist nothing is there when something IS there. i.e. they make a FALSE NEGATIVE error chronically.

THERE HAVE BEEN many TANGIBLE evidence cases:

(A) One type of tangible case has been the trace evidences left at a landing site. This has included very significant differences in plant life within X inches of the landing; significant differences in soil composition and degree of hydration; indentations from landing 'feet' of the craft; broken tree limbs; lack of plant growth at the site--often for decades thereafter--unexplainably; etc. etc. etc.

(B) One type has been the implant excisions from abductees. The implants' mechanical compositions have been called "not of this earth." Their compatibility with the body--particularly triggering NO foreign body reaction from the body has been remarkable. The implants' very tenacious adherence to body tissues has been unparalleled.

There have been persistent reports that when the MD's went to excise the implants, the implant inexplicably MECHANICALLY MOVED AWAY FROM THE SCALPEL--evidently on it's own accord.

(C) In very rare cases, bits and pieces of crashed UFO's have been analyzed and the composition of the pieces has been examined with very sophisticated instruments. Bismuth has often been found to be layered almost only at a single layer atom or 2 or 3 thickness with metals that are not that commonly used on earth or the alloy composition of the metals are not that commonly used or have never been known.

(D) There have been multiple reports--maybe in the dozens--of women who recalled being impregnated on an abduction trip ... only to have the critters return and forceably take the baby out of their womb at the end of the 3rd trimester of the pregnancy. One could write an occasional tale of such off as a wild story. When the tales include dozens of such reports from very disconnected women who are not familiar with the literature--it becomes a more serious  issue.

It is all the  MORE serious when the woman's gynecologist (as has happened in a few cases) took an ultra sound on say Wednesday. The baby was definitely there and doing fine. Wednesday night the mother experienced another abduction when the baby was taken from her womb. The mother returns on Thursday to the gynecologist who verifies that the baby is no longer in the womb.

= = = =

imho, a fair-minded person would take such evidence as AT LEAST very sobering to ponder.

However, Religion of scientism acolytes, priests etc. usually rationalize such evidence away as ridiculous for one fantasized reason or another.

Yet, the fact is, that many murderers have been executed for FAR FAR FAR LESS evidence than has long existed about the UFO phenomena.
 

[Victoria33]

ping

[Victoria33]

@stephen50right
@Quix

Quix, if you do not have the book, "Counting to God", published 2014, author Douglas Ell, I will buy it and have it sent to you.  Ell is a scientist.

Both you and Stephen need this book, and here is why (bold is mine):

"Counting to God":
Chapter 1:  "Let me ask you a question: Do you think we live in a meaningless universe, and human beings were created by accident?  Or do   you think we live in a universe designed and created by a great intelligence, and human being were designed?  Accident or design - that is the question."

"I think it's a 'great question.'  I think it's the great question.  It is about the existence of God."

"In this book, I'll share new clues.  They come not from traditional religion or some televangelist, not from a new prophet or miracle, and certainly not from the government or our mass media.  They come from an unexpected source, perhaps the last place you might expect, a place you might think is far from questions of faith.  They come from science."

"After thirty years of thinking, after thirty years of studying philosophy, particle physics, cosmology, evolution, molecular biology, planetary formation, quantum physics, and more, I've learned that modern science is consistent with the Bible, with the three faiths of Abraham - Judaism, Christianity, and Islam.  As strange as it may sound, science and mathematics are now the foundation of my faith."

A statement from Professor Peter Fisher, Head of the Department of Physics, MIT:
"I highly recommend this thoughtful exploration of the relation between science and spirituality, two seemingly opposed descriptions of our world.  Posed as a personal journey, Doug asks, 'How can we relate the descriptions of the spiritual and physical world?'  Doug takes on the biggest questions of our time: cosmology, the origin of the universe, and the biochemistry of genetics in a relevant and accessible way."

It takes intelligence to understand the scientific technical aspects of this book upon which it is based throughout the book.  It is not a hasty read and many would put it down due to the technical science, but that is its strength - scientific truths about the universe and DNA/other new science pertaining to the scientific creation of a body. 

There is no way to fully describe this book due to the intense science in it.  Once you read it, you will likely read parts or all of it again.  You will always know where this book is in your house because you will likely pick it up again and again to reread parts.

Quix, let me know if you don't have this book.  I have to get ready now to go to a casino today, so if you write more on this thread, I will read it after I get back this evening.  Last week I won $1,278 at a casino.  I now have over $4,000 won in the last two months.  I did have over $5,000 won, but bought a new computer for $1,100 of that money.

How do I win all this money at casinos?  It is a scientific secret.  Actually, it isn't but I do have a method of selecting the right machines to pay off.

[Quix]

@stephen50right
@Quix

Quix, if you do not have the book, "Counting to God", published 2014, author Douglas Ell, I will buy it and have it sent to you.  Ell is a scientist.

Both you and Stephen need this book, and here is why (bold is mine):

"Counting to God":
Chapter 1:  "Let me ask you a question: Do you think we live in a meaningless universe, and human beings were created by accident?  Or do   you think we live in a universe designed and created by a great intelligence, and human being were designed?  Accident or design - that is the question."

"I think it's a 'great question.'  I think it's the great question.  It is about the existence of God."

"In this book, I'll share new clues.  They come not from traditional religion or some televangelist, not from a new prophet or miracle, and certainly not from the government or our mass media.  They come from an unexpected source, perhaps the last place you might expect, a place you might think is far from questions of faith.  They come from science."

"After thirty years of thinking, after thirty years of studying philosophy, particle physics, cosmology, evolution, molecular biology, planetary formation, quantum physics, and more, I've learned that modern science is consistent with the Bible, with the three faiths of Abraham - Judaism, Christianity, and Islam.  As strange as it may sound, science and mathematics are now the foundation of my faith."

A statement from Professor Peter Fisher, Head of the Department of Physics, MIT:
"I highly recommend this thoughtful exploration of the relation between science and spirituality, two seemingly opposed descriptions of our world.  Posed as a personal journey, Doug asks, 'How can we relate the descriptions of the spiritual and physical world?'  Doug takes on the biggest questions of our time: cosmology, the origin of the universe, and the biochemistry of genetics in a relevant and accessible way."

It takes intelligence to understand the scientific technical aspects of this book upon which it is based throughout the book.  It is not a hasty read and many would put it down due to the technical science, but that is its strength - scientific truths about the universe and DNA/other new science pertaining to the scientific creation of a body. 

There is no way to fully describe this book due to the intense science in it.  Once you read it, you will likely read parts or all of it again.  You will always know where this book is in your house because you will likely pick it up again and again to reread parts.

Quix, let me know if you don't have this book.  I have to get ready now to go to a casino today, so if you write more on this thread, I will read it after I get back this evening.  Last week I won $1,278 at a casino.  I now have over $4,000 won in the last two months.  I did have over $5,000 won, but bought a new computer for $1,100 of that money.

How do I win all this money at casinos?  It is a scientific secret.  Actually, it isn't but I do have a method of selecting the right machines to pay off.

I'm slightly familiar with the book but have not read it. Would be delighted to receive it from you.

Will get a copy for J to give to R.

Need to write you about all that but been dragging my feet.

Congrats on your winnings!

Blessings!

I gather B is back safe and sound.

[Quix]

@stephen50right
@Quix

Quix, if you do not have the book, "Counting to God", published 2014, author Douglas Ell, I will buy it and have it sent to you.  Ell is a scientist.

[snip]

If I may ... the Kindle version would be the most useful and handy, to me.

[Victoria33]

If I may ... the Kindle version would be the most useful and handy, to me.

@Quix

No, it is too technical not to have the page you just read still visible to connect to the next page, plus there are charts and graphs to study.  Trust me on this and I don't mind paying the extra money for you to have the actual book in your hand.  Pretend I signed the book on the inside just for you. I'm pretty sure I still have your address; I'll look tomorrow if I can't find it, I'll contact you by email.  I know it is on my old computer and it still works, but I think I copied your information onto this new computer.

We went to a casino today and I won $578 dollars net gain to add to my stash.
Yes, Bob got back safely.  My townhouse did not flood in the great Texas flood.  I am thankful for both.

[Gefn]

@Quix

No, it is too technical not to have the page you just read still visible to connect to the next page, plus there are charts and graphs to study.  Trust me on this and I don't mind paying the extra money for you to have the actual book in your hand.  Pretend I signed the book on the inside just for you. I'm pretty sure I still have your address; I'll look tomorrow if I can't find it, I'll contact you by email.  I know it is on my old computer and it still works, but I think I copied your information onto this new computer.

We went to a casino today and I won $578 dollars net gain to add to my stash.
Yes, Bob got back safely.  My townhouse did not flood in the great Texas flood.  I am thankful for both.

I'm going to read this book....congratulations on the casino win @Victoria33

I personally think there are too many planets out there not to be in Goldilocks zones to have life on them. And once you have life on a planet, I'm sure you have intelligent life. Animals, mammals, etc. I think we're going to find life on Encedelaus and Europa, but it may be primitatve. But won't that be exciting!

[Quix]

@Quix

No, it is too technical not to have the page you just read still visible to connect to the next page, plus there are charts and graphs to study.  Trust me on this and I don't mind paying the extra money for you to have the actual book in your hand.  Pretend I signed the book on the inside just for you. I'm pretty sure I still have your address; I'll look tomorrow if I can't find it, I'll contact you by email.  I know it is on my old computer and it still works, but I think I copied your information onto this new computer.

We went to a casino today and I won $578 dollars net gain to add to my stash.
Yes, Bob got back safely.  My townhouse did not flood in the great Texas flood.  I am thankful for both.

Sure. That's fine. Happy to trust your judgment on that score.

CONGRATS ON YOUR GOOD NEWS--PARTICULARLY THE 'MUSEUM' NOT BEING FLOODED!

Will resend info by email.

PTL.

[Quix]

I'm going to read this book....congratulations on the casino win @Victoria33

I personally think there are too many planets out there not to be in Goldilocks zones to have life on them. And once you have life on a planet, I'm sure you have intelligent life. Animals, mammals, etc. I think we're going to find life on Encedelaus and Europa, but it may be primitatve. But won't that be exciting!

Personally, Dear Freya,

I don't think 'sucking up' to the 'evolution' construct will turn out to have anything to do with anything of substance and reality. Our world has been brainwashed with that farce as though it were real. It colors the thinking in this era wholesale.

It's just not based on facts.

Even the perpetrators are about to throw it overboard in favor of 'panspermia' a la 'ET's.'

Thanks for your kind post.