Skip to main content
No. of Recommendations: 1
Unidentifiable Aerial Phenomenon (UAP is the new UFO).

If you asked me a month ago, I would have ranked the possibilities of UAP (really unidentifiable ones, not those classified as balloons, satellites, etc) for which we verifiable documentation (pictures, videos, multiple serious and sober witnesses, etc) as being from:

1) Top secret US technology 90%
2) Top secret Chinese technology 8%
3) Top secret Russian technology more than 1%
4) Other galactic intelligent life less than 1%
5) Intergalactic intelligent life 0%

I absolutely believe that intelligent life exists in our galaxy as well as other galaxies. Not so certain about intelligent life on Earth.

The reason I give #5 a 0% has to do with the mind boggling distances between galaxies, let alone within our galaxy. The nearest solar system to the sun is about 4.3 light years away. Given technology we think we will have in 2027, a rocket ship could travel over 400,000 miles an hour. That means it would only take us about 60,000 years to get to our nearest solar system.

That’s just traveling next door in our own galaxy. Let’s not get started on intergalactic space travel. Space is BIG.

Maybe some advanced race has figured out how to beat the universe’s speed limit, the speed of light. Or bend space time. Or cut travel down to a few centuries and just send AI craft. Once they were here, it would only take 8.6 years to send and receive a message. Piece of cake.

So, next month the Pentagon and U.S. Intelligence is reporting to Congress about UAP. Probably won’t be public, but you know there will be leaks.

Of course, everything will probably remain part of the big U, unidentifiable.

But someone is starting to take this seriously as a huge national security issue, regardless of where, or if, the technology exists.

Part of me thinks it would be cool to know there is intelligent life off Earth. Another part of me doesn’t want a visit from off-Earth because when advanced civilizations encounter a less technologically advanced civilization, guess who wins.

I doubt we’ll find out a lot next month, but I’m becoming much more interested in UAP.

Print the post Back To Top
No. of Recommendations: 0
Sorry, forgot to post link to an article in the New Yorker which is an interesting read:

Print the post Back To Top
No. of Recommendations: 3
Part of me thinks it would be cool to know there is intelligent life off Earth.

I sometimes wonder if there is intellegent life on earth!
Print the post Back To Top
No. of Recommendations: 0
"I sometimes wonder"


The wondering sets up intelligence theory.
The testing and interpreting of results then provides the proof.

Print the post Back To Top
No. of Recommendations: 0
The UAPTF (Unidentified Aerial Phenomena Task Force) released it very short 9 page unclassified report on UAP to Congress yesterday. Below is a link to the report (hopefully not behind a firewall). Some interesting tidbits, but absolutely nothing surprising.

Neil deGrasse Tyson has an interesting take on UAP (I’m paraphrasing) that there are billions of high definition cameras (smartphones) around and yet we don’t have any clear pictures of UAP. He also thinks it could be software anomalies, but one of the comments from the report mentions most UAP were registered across multiple sensors.

In addition, most UAP are “detected” around military sites. This makes some sense because (as pointed out by the UAPTF) the military has the most sophisticated detection equipment.

Below are a couple of small sections from the report. The report doesn’t offer anything new, doesn’t answer any questions, and doesn’t temper my interest in UAP. Especially the “other” bin. Lol


• Most of the UAP reported probably do represent physical objects given that a majority of UAP were registered across multiple sensors, to include radar, infrared, electro-optical, weapon seekers, and visual observation.

The UAP documented in this limited dataset demonstrate an array of aerial behaviors, reinforcing the possibility there are multiple types of UAP requiring different explanations. Our analysis of the data supports the construct that if and when individual UAP incidents are resolved they will fall into one of five potential explanatory categories: airborne clutter, natural atmospheric phenomena, USG or industry developmental programs, foreign adversary systems, and a catchall “other” bin. With the exception of the one instance where we determined with high confidence that the reported UAP was airborne clutter, specifically a deflating balloon, we currently lack sufficient information in our dataset to attribute incidents to specific explanations.
Print the post Back To Top