BLACK LIGHT: PERSPECTIVES ON MYSTERIOUS PHENOMENA (#11)

 

Chapter 10

Drone in Love With You

 

You may have noticed the escalation of UFO sightings between 2010 and present day. I certainly have, and spend several hours each week watching news.

   I give no great credence to Internet material, but it does provide literally hundreds of hours, on any given week, of cell phone footage. It’s too late to complain, so I merely pay attention, as though personally taking time to stand outdoors with my (nonexistent) Blackberry. Let’s get something out of the way. I hate cell phones, even though I had the chance to be among the first, in 1993, to own one. My then-employer settled for my keeping a “beeper” at my side, in case some black-clad terrorist decided to attack our aggressively bland company.

   Personal angst aside, I do understand I ought to be grateful that most of you possess cell phones. I am grateful. Why? Because some of you, between texting what you ate for lunch, are capturing anomalous aerial objects. All I can say is “wow.” You’re getting some stuff people in the 20th century would have killed for, had they the technology.

   The real problem rears its head, as it must, when said technology is mishandled. As you know, we have some talented bastards out there, devious and empty-headed. A terrible combination. The same type who have punked UFO investigators, journalists, and even military charges (who mostly hate even having to take UFOs seriously). Google “UFO photos” and you’ll find thousands, some so good you might reach into the photo and brush your fingers across silvery metal, or even the tight-fitting suits of UFO occupants.

   I’ve seen these. So have you. But seeing definitely is not–I hope–believing.

   Fact: a photograph of a genuine UFO proves nothing. Visuals are visuals–nothing more. These can never tell us where the object originated, who’s in charge, or what intent our visitors might have. Period.

   As Metallica says, sad but true.

   Hence this post.

   I have seen video of strange aerial objects. 90% of these must be drones, because they’re seen hovering over military bases, banks, reservoirs, power plants, schools, and large cities. They cannot be extraterrestrial vehicles, because these would have no need whatsoever even to penetrate our atmosphere. As noted by Jacques Vallee, a human-manufactured satellite the size of a beer-keg could gather in two hours enough data to inform its makers of every important activity on Earth, with no landings. Vallee wrote this decades ago. Now we have personnel living on orbiting space stations.

   I am not aware of even a single report from these platforms claiming to have seen UFOs entering our atmosphere, though there are accounts of space-borne anomalies. These are genuinely weird, if accurately given, but almost always end up explained away by NASA.
I think NASA has many images hidden from public scrutiny. I’ve reviewed most of those supposedly gathered from the lunar surface. Many, undoubtedly, are nothing more than terrestrial wreckage; but not all. Some things cannot be hidden, but that doesn’t mean their origin is extraterrestrial. Silvery cones, disks, stitch-like tracks exist. Several resemble domes which, if real, must be hundreds of miles in diameter. As an amateur astronomer since 1978, I have seen every surface feature of our moon, including some of the aforementioned anomalies. They exist. What they might represent, I cannot say, but certainly they are very provocative.

Drones are now a fact, used most prominently against those in league with terrorist agendas. I recall buying a magazine several months after 9/11 featuring photos of “early” drones, one of which obviously was a prototype for the Predator so ubiquitous in present-day media. Military technology, from all accounts, is 15 years ahead of publicly-displayed artifacts. Example: the F-117 Stealth fighter was on the drawing boards–so to speak–in the early 1970s, and “outed” by a single photograph in the late 80s. This vehicle was often reported, during test-flights in Nevada, as a UFO. Hard to believe, but I have witnessed a daylight flyover of the Stealth, and can easily see it, in darkness, taken as a UFO–regardless of its fairly loud engines. The B-2 bomber, basically a flying wing, was a strange sight, but noisy. Viewed at night, you wouldn’t long mistake it for a UFO.

Which brings us to the subject of the so-called black triangle UFO, so prominent during the Hudson Valley, New York UFO flap of roughly 1984 to 1987–but apparently still active.
So much has been written about what this object might be, or might not be, any chance of objectivity is lost. While I have no intention of replaying the events, I will recount the basics. Hundreds of people in the Hudson Valley, about one hour north of New York City, reported seeing a (usually) gigantic triangular craft with green, red, and white lights at each point. Some claimed to have stood directly under this craft, and saw a red plasma-like light. All reports on record–save a very few–mention the craft as being silent. This, at the very least, ought to flag the object(s) as a dirigible.

You may have seen on TV the famous video-footage shot by one Hudson Valley resident. Clearly, we can see a dark triangular form dimly illuminated by lights at each point, heading east with little more than a subdued humming. As my late father remarked, “That humming should tell us something.” I know what it tells me. The UFO, no matter its size, very probably was a dirigible–a blimp. What else, of tremendous size, could move so leisurely, even hover? It’s often reported, too often, in UFO sightings, that the craft was “as big as a football field.” Have you ever stood beneath a blimp? I have. Growing up near Cleveland, Ohio, I often saw the Goodyear blimp (based in Akron, some 30 miles south) as it nosed toward Cleveland to provide news-coverage of sporting events in the stadium there. Once, around 1968, the blimp had engine trouble, and came near to ground at the abandoned airfield across the road from my house. Every boy in the neighborhood dropped whatever they were doing and ran over to see this rare spectacle–myself among them. My point: I would not have known the blimp–as long as a football field–even was there, had one of my pals not telephoned me.

In darkness, no one would have seen it.

I cannot be certain this explains the Hudson Valley sightings, but I’m pretty sure it does. I have a book from 2001 stating that dirigibles might be used to transport troops.
But I know that doesn’t explain away what was seen in the Hudson Valley, and–to present day–many other places. Triangular UFOs have been reported as long ago as the 1960s. Were these early drones?

As late as the 1980s, many UFO reports might have been solved by inserting “drone” for “UFO.” But no model, in the public eye, existed for this. Our present world is absolutely alien to that of the 1980s, for good or ill.

In my guise as a writer of short fiction and novels, I often try to imagine how someone from the 1960s–or 1970s–might react were he transported to our time. My guess: total shock. Not at anything as trivial as clothing (though that would stand out), but at the pace of our ordinary lives. The unfortunate traveler would more than likely end up sick by the end of his or her first day in our manic, media-controlled run, where nothing is actually real, even daily news, spun-out and topped by some other disaster within the hour. Christ, I can barely handle it.

People are seeing many odd things in the skies these days, similar to the UFO waves of 1952, 1966, 1973, 1984, etc. These days are nothing at all like those.

I would estimate that out of every 100 UFO sightings, 95% can be explained by drones employed by military, government, law enforcement, and obscure or even covert institutional and corporate concerns. Let’s face it, most of these can afford the hyper-thread, massive parallel-processing computers necessary to drive their water-cooled data-farms.
The most radical, hard-edge drones are no larger than a dragonfly. Expensive? Yes. Out of the question?

No.

Advertisements

One thought on “BLACK LIGHT: PERSPECTIVES ON MYSTERIOUS PHENOMENA (#11)

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out / Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out / Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out / Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out / Change )

Connecting to %s