UFOs are Real, Lockheed Skunkworks Engineer, Don Phillips
July 1, 2009
UFOs are Real : Lockheed Skunkworks Engineer, Don Phillips
Don Phillips, "These UFOs were huge and they would just come to a stop and do a 60 degree, 45 degree, 10 degree turn, and then immediately reverse this action". During the Apollo landing, Neil Armstrong says, "They're here.They are right over there and look at the size of those ships. And, it is obvious they dont like us being here".When I was working with the Skunkworks with Kelly Johnson, we signed an agreement with the government to keep very quiet about this.
Anti-gravitational research was going.We know that there were some captured craft from 1947 in Roswell, they were real. And, yes, we really did get some technology from them. And, yes, we really did put it to work.We knew each other from what we call unseen industry. We can term it black, deep black, or hidden.
The knowledge I have of these technologies came from the craft that were captured here. I didnt see the craft, nor did I see the bodies, but I certainly know some of the people that did. There was no question that there are beings from outside the planet.
Are these ET people hostile? Well, if they were hostile, with their weaponry they could have destroyed us a long time ago.We got these things that are handheld scanners that scan the body and determine what the condition is. We can also treat from the same scanner.
I can tell you personally that we've been working on them. And we have ones that can diagnose and cure cancer. One of the purposes I had for founding my technology corporation in 1998, was to bring forth these technologies that that can clean the air and can help get rid of the toxins, and help get rid of the need for so much fossil fuel. Yes, it is time. I can tell you personally that it has already started. pp. 375 ,383.
The Disclosure Project Briefing Document (500 Pages)
9 comments:
I'm skeptical of any government claims, like Mr Phillips, and others, supporting public 'disclosure' when not a shred of physical evidence has been produced to back up a mountain of claims. He cites Greer, who is certainly a credible source for what is known and knowable. However, if you say aliens were on the moon, show us authenticated pictures, released by NASA. Otherwise, dropping NASA as a source doesn't work, because they have not disclosed what they know.
We need physical evidence to back up any of these claims, otherwise, the government, or anyone making claims, can say anything, and not have to substantiate it. The government can pretend to be supporting disclosure, through planted 'witnesses', and not have to disclose anything. A convenient, often used ploy.
And this claim that Neil Armstrong said the aliens "are here" when he was on the moon. To my knowledge, Mr Armstrong has never publicly admitted to seeing alien craft on the moon. The supposed NASA/astronaut transcripts, copied supposedly by ham radio operators, neglects the fact we used high speed, more reliable satellite comm, notshort wave, even in the "old days". And who are these ham operators by name, with signed affadavits? And in addition, NASA has never admitted that the conversations between capcom and the astronauts about alien craft was authentic, ever.
So, whatever Phillips is pushing, and it seems to be some kind of access to alien technology for his energy corporation, with page references to other scientist's energy work, should include, if he's legit, that the government has given him "secret" rights to use "reengineered alien technology", via special access projects. He doesn't say that, so, as far as reality is concerned, he's citing Thomas Bearden's work, for example, and I've read some of his online research, and he's never admitted to having secret technology. He's doing it the old fashioned way, with patents and limited funding and American guts and research.
And finally, correct me if I'm wrong, but I do not see Phillips in the list of credits or witnesses within Dr Greer's Disclosure Document. He cites the entire Disclosure Document, notes a couple pages, and he supports the concept, but he provides no proof, and he's a former government employee. I have my doubts about this man, and why does one more UFO Blog push unauthenticated information? What purpose does it serve, beyond disinformation aims?
Barry, I concur completely. However, I always ask myself, "What does this person have to gain by making these sorts of statements?" For me, there could be several answers to that question.
1. Notariety; so he can get "famous" and get funding for his own projects???
2. To get people riled up so that we demand disclosure??
3. To make himself look smart??
4. To make himself look stupid (fecicious)??
5. To impress someone (like a chick)??
I just question why anyone would stick his neck out about this stuff. I can't seem to answer my own question logically. Most folks make big claims to "show off" but wouldn't this guy know that folks like us are looking at him through a microscope? Seriously, what does anyone making any UFO claims have to gain other than some sort of false fame or glory? This question has always hounded me when looking at anything that seems "out of the norm". What I believe to be true is that there is A LOT of compelling eyewitness testimony other than his, there are A LOT of photos that can't be explained by "normal" phenomenon and there seems to be quite a few folks who have made such claims though they offer no solid evidence. I saw photo the other day of a flatbed truck carrying a very unconventional disc shaped "craft" and the photo was dated back to the '50s. The photo was apparently validated by a few folks. So there are just so many questions, some evidence and several testomonies, whether valid or not. Where there's smoke there's USUALLY fire.
It is amazing how people, who supposed to be intelligent, always result to name smearing when someone of stature, who would know, claims Roswell was real. There is some things you can always count on, death, taxes and debunkers attacking any messenger unjustly, who claims knowledge of UFO ETs. But always and I mean always these same people give a skeptic the benefit of the doubt.
Joe Capp
UFO Media Matters
Non-Commercial Blog
This is not about giving someone the benefit of the doubt.
I agree with the first 2 posters.
No matter how much i believe aliens are interacting with earth and have always been, i cant PROVE it.
Without PROOF we are all just living in our own subjective dream worlds.
I'm waiting for the day to shove proof in everyones face but we need hard facts without disinformation.
People who need proof are usually the first to go when an unexpected crisis occurs. I personally don't have a problem with believing the testimony of people who say they've seen a UFO, especially if my ear tells me that they sound credible...it's called discernment.
There's no proof that O.J. Simpson killed his wife but most people believe that he did. Why? Because something inside them senses that he did. True, you can't convict someone on a hunch, but there are many people sitting jail on a preponderance of evidence - Scott Peterson is a good example.
Bottom line - My gut tells me that there's a lot of truth to what Don Philips is saying.
Speaking of proof, I have been looking for the company that is referred to with no links. If the product that Don Philips is manufacturing is so wonderful, where can we purchase them?
Unfortunately, this comes close to the science/religion debate. That's to say data versus belief. Although I have seen a "UFO" (bright white luminous sphere about the size of a quarter at arm's length traveling in a lineal path about a hands-length above the horizon, NH, 1961), my data can only be "belief" to anyone who wasn't there. It's also frustrating to attempt to get a definition of "acceptable evidence" from anyone who views the subject as belief and not science. What will it take, specifically? How can this be obtained from "insiders", and presented?
How about some reality? Barry, Mr. Philips was not speaking on behalf of the government. Nutterview, you have a few facts wrong. First, there was a lot of evidence that OJ Simpson killed Nicole Simpson and Ron Goldman. How about his and the victims blood on the crime scene, inside OJ's vehicle and in OJ's house? How about OJ being seen sneaking into his house when he was supposed to be ready for the limo driver to go to the airport? How about the disappearing bag of clothing? How about his behavior when he was supposed to surrender himself to the police, and he ran instead?
Moreover, there are not a lot of people in prison for murder on a "proponderance of the evidence." The standard of proof for homicide/murder charges is "beyond a reasonable doubt."
Lastly, why would you rely on "discernment" to prove the reality of events that, so far, have no physical evidence to support them? After all, discernment told most people that the earth was flat, that the earth was at the center of the universe (and that their own community was at the center of the universe), that animals don't feel any pain, that the objects in a large body of water are where they seem to be when viewed from shore, and on and on with "facts" that we now know to be false. When it comes to proving the existence of extraterrestrial life, especially intelligent extraterrestrial life, you should need at least SOME physical evidence. Feelings and hunches don't do it for me on this topic.
what i know beyond any resonable doubt is that extraterrestrials have been visiting and interacting with human beings on earth , forget the details, they just complicate the matter and confuse, the bottom line is that they are here, anyone who demands proof has not reserached all the witness testimony over the decades and i say shame on YOU !! if this were in a court of law it would have been proven beyond any resonable doubt and much much more.I see no point getting into debates and confrontation over silly details. we have to by pass this for now and get on with the information at hand.They are here now and You should be aware of this .
Post a Comment