I was an Operations Specalist in the Navy, we operate RADAR, comms, navigation stuff like that. I tracked an object in the Caribbean Sea that would stop mid flight, then accelerate to more than Mach 3 nearly instantly, then reverse direction at the drop of a hat. This went on for more than an hour and was tracked by us, a Ticonderoga class , and an AWACS.

Our air search RADAR was 2-D so we had no idea of altitude, but the AWACS and Tico said this thing would bounce up tp 100,000+ feet and back down to sea level in less than a second.

No idea what it was and it never got close enough to us or allowed us to get close enough to it to be considered a threat.

Thanks Brass- I am going to read more about these types of reports.

That is...odd. I wonder what patterns would form if you plotted the axis of these maneuvers? For example, assume we had the ability to remote sense and map objects that were unusually dense or even specific concentrations of elements. The UAP association with nuclear materials might be a false trigger for UAPs, not necessarily that they are particularly interested in atomic weapons/power.

Basically I wonder if we could (taking a wider scope view of their flight behavior) reveal that what seems to be nonsensical maneuvers is in fact a search pattern.

Bout halfway thru the book now. I’d read it cover to cover if I could. This is one I will definitely read a few times.

Does anyone get the impression that - even though Lue is not a dummy - maybe he had some help writing this book? The stuff about Planck Time (p. 126, hardcover version) makes me wonder if he’s pushing into (or being pushed into) some of the things he’s written into the book.

If this is all happening within the purview of classified/non-classified type of approvals, does that mean that there are also people who can verify/challenge things being said?

For example, if Lou were to say something that is classified, but really out there, wouldn't only a very small amount of people even exist to say whether it's true or not to go after his clearance for saying it?
Meaning those giving him permission have to be read in to the programs, right?

Wouldn't that then be a confirmation of what he's saying?

I'm using him as an example, but I don't remember him really saying much of anything at all in this specific interview. Just wondering how the process works in the military.


In my opinion, tech and details should be classified, but existence of NHI shouldn't.
Classified is usually for national defense, right? Existence of NHI has nothing to do with that.

ETA: The main driving factor as to why I believe it should be classified comes from an interview with Garry Nolan where he explains how much energy would be required to move these ships the way they do:

19:21 - "The total energy required for that instantaneous acceleration and deceleration is more than the nuclear output basically of the whole planet for a year."

I don't trust people on this planet to have access to that level of energy. Even the "smart" ones.

Even beyond the energy required for that sort of movement, the sort of speeds they're moving could turn nearly anything dense into a serious kinetic weapon.

Yeah, NDAs and Classified Material don't work like Elizondo implies they do.  He wouldn't be "limited on how detailed" he can get.  You can't "hint" or "infer" or "obliquely describe" things you aren't allowed to talk about.  He'd already be in prison if any of the shit he's saying was true.

It's like a Manhattan Project member going on the radio in '44 and talking about how he's part of a secret weapons project that is based "somewhere dry", has radioactive components, and the University of Chicago is involved....but he can't go into details, because of his Security Oath.  He'd be beaten unconscious by Hoover Men before the broadcast finished.

The craft and sightings aren't classified.  The sensor systems and locations are what's being protected.

That's why Lue can say "I saw a video of X" but can't say "this video was captured by a satellite just off the coast of China".

Further, he cleverly switches to non-US sites and situations regularly to describe what he’s alluding to more. So he leads with “people including US servicemembers have been injured by UAP” then switches to Colares, Brazil for more that he can say.

I believe that Cypher's post below yours:


might apply equally here.   It's possible that the reviewers may have been SMEs only in things like sensor technology, or other "mundane" issues which might harm national security by being disclosed.

Or, there might have been actual UAP SMEs involved. But I don't think we can necessarily infer, simply from the fact that someone had to review the material, that the NHI claims are true.