NoParty
Senior Member.
Well, on one hand, that sounds promising.
On the other hand, the previous 17,860 promises of great evidence coming "next week"
have virtually never turned out well...
Jake Barber tells Ross Coulthart about non-human technology - The "Egg"
- Thread starter Nemon
- Start date
On the other hand, the previous 17,860 promises of great evidence coming "next week"
have virtually never turned out well...
tjskep
Member
My issue is, Why didn't he just wait to get those better vids cleared before the news nation interview? Then just show that? What's the point of holding out and stringing along other than the obvious of course.
NoParty
Senior Member.
A) They don't exist?
B) Better imagery exists, but gives away the game?
C) Some really solid, honest, understandable reason that any rational person would accept?
Wagers?
Wait, wait, wait... they have "proper, good quality video" of an alien craft in the possession of the United States government and they're thinking of releasing it, but only if some bureaucrats think proof of alien technology in American hands has no national security implications. That's going to happen...
It also occured to me that one rationalization as to why the green egg video has no ground crew in it is that it's unsafe for them to be in close contact with the egg due to radiation or feminine energy or something -- but the thing is a big round object sitting in a sling and some team of guys would have had to put this big round object into the sling in the first place. If the video narrative were real, then there'd be some process for putting the egg into the sling, either by guys in hazmat suits, someone using a forklift or crane, or some funky robotic gear -- and no particular reason for none of the receiving infrastructure to be visible during what's supposedly one of several repeated deliveries.
deirdre
Senior Member.
ah.
how about this which is page 245 in the pdf (and might read as page 244 on a kindle?
https://ia803403.us.archive.org/12/...n's Hunt for UFO's (2024) - Luis Elizondo.pdf
Dave51c
Active Member
On the sling question, this is a video of an animal lifting harness being used to rescue cows in Switzerland. The sling is open ended and may be the basis of the sling in the video (model or life size) and maybe where the idea of using this type of sling for an "egg" came from.
Nemon
Active Member
This is interesting. But as Mick has already pointed out:
We have already established that what we see in the egg video does not correspond to typical transport nets and also seems unsafe for the transport of extremely significant cargo. It is also strange that Barber describes these 'pumpkins', which do not correspond to what we see in the egg video, nor to nets for solid objects, which he would normally have transported, while the 'pumpkin tank' seems to be a means of transport for water.
Couldn't it simply be a cargo net, similar to the one seen in the top left, secured by two ratchet straps? If the straps are tightened firmly around a somewhat deflated balloon (or another soft object), it would likely be squeezed into an egg shape, even if it started out round. My point is that we can't really tell the true shape of the object.
Two thin wires seem to be attached to the net, connecting it to the larger wire. While it appears to be a rather primitive method of securing cargo, it's plausible if the object being transported is cheap, durable, and, most importantly, lightweight—like a balloon. Then again, it could, of course, be a pure hoax. But if it's not, all indications suggest it's some mundane object of little significance to those handling it.
Eburacum
Senior Member.
Nice reconstruction. One thing that is apparent is that the egg is very pale indeed, and does not show any shadow from the sling, or from its own self-shadowing from the light source. That suggests it is very pale indeed, perhaps translucent.
A 2015 article on CBS News got me thinking the same way about all those "whistleblowers." The article describes the Army surveillance blimp that broke loose and crashed. It states:
https://www.cbsnews.com/amp/news/military-blimp-maryland-fighter-jets-pennsylvania/
Sounds like a "crash retrieval program" to me. Obviously, the pilots knew exactly what they were looking for, but an engineer without direct knowledge of the mission could easily start spinning stories in their mind. While it's probably not the same incident Barber is referring to, it's a great example of how stories of "alien crash retrieval programs" might have originated.External Quote:
Z.W. Wolf
Senior Member.
Looking at the video rather than screen captures, this appears to be vignetting.
I speculate that this was added in an effort to simulate a night vision image. Night vision images often show a halo effect.
Or : It could be Natural Vignetting; a consequence of a short focal length lens.
GPT
Last edited:
FatPhil
Senior Member.
I do get a more mechanical vignetting vibe from the fall-off, but that's because I'm expecting a wide aperture, and I might be fooling myself into expecting that.
Anyway, confirmation of the cos^4 law, and some lovely ascii art:
-- https://nvlpubs.nist.gov/nistpubs/jres/39/jresv39n3p213_A1b.pdf
Code:
? plot(t=-60,60,cos(t*Pi/180)^4,0,1)
1 |'''''''''''''''''''''''''''_x""""x_'''''''''''''''''''''''''''|
| x" "x |
| _" "_ |
| x x |
| _" "_ |
| _ _ |
| x x |
| x x |
| x x |
| x x |
| x x |
| " " |
| " " |
| _" "_ |
| _ _ |
| x x |
| " " |
| _" "_ |
| _" "_ |
| _" "_ |
x" "x
0 ,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,
-60 60Z.W. Wolf
Senior Member.
I did "like" your comment. But... note that those commercially available cargo nets have multiple attachment points. I see four "cables" here. I also note that the real world slings or cargo nets tend to have spreaders. These "cables" also appear to be much longer than anything we see in real life examples.
The thinness may be explained by how light the object is. Maybe a shell made of fiberglass or whatever light material. This also may explain the seeming distortion of the object under the pressure of the cables, and the change of shape when tension is released.
I don't really see four cables, just two—but I could definitely be wrong.
This is basically what I see in the blurry video:
Yet again, what I see is two wires, possibly suggesting it's something lifted by a crane rather than a helicopter.
jarlrmai
Senior Member.
If you are hoaxing the same types of harnesses could be used from both a crane or a helicopter, once you acknowledge a hoax is likely then the options are vast and all over the place because they could construct the hoax in many different ways.
I mentioned a crane or a bridge earlier in the thread.
You could buy a lift harness for a helicopter but hire a crane to dangle it from or use a bridge and a car winch etc etc.
For me the idea of it being a hoax using a helicopter is possible, because let's say we assume Barber is behind the hoax, he would have easy access to helicopters and lift lines.
I mentioned a crane or a bridge earlier in the thread.
You could buy a lift harness for a helicopter but hire a crane to dangle it from or use a bridge and a car winch etc etc.
For me the idea of it being a hoax using a helicopter is possible, because let's say we assume Barber is behind the hoax, he would have easy access to helicopters and lift lines.
JMartJr
Senior Member.
Or it could be dangled from your hand, being much smaller than it is supposed to appear.
jarlrmai
Senior Member.
Indeed, I just think some of the rope deformations in the video indicate larger scale than that.
It's weird because to me at least, the rope part of the video screams large scale due to how the rope seems to have weight to it, but the netting just looks like a low budget small scale replica, I can't even think on why someone would lift something like that, let alone an alien craft.
jarlrmai
Senior Member.
One defense I theorised would be "oh the eggs are commonplace and we've got hundreds now so they are just moved out of the way"
I feel like that would explain the lack of care on landing (letting it roll), but it would lead to a more specialized and appropriate netting. Unless the eggs vary in size (which maybe they mentioned somewhere), this one just feels like they were expecting the object they were going to lift to be half the size that it turned out to be.
John J.
Senior Member.
Even if the object is light, using just two lines attached to a wraparound sling seems a bit of a precarious way to transport the most significant artefact in human history.
And if the egg has (as Barber implies) active capabilities, of which we're unsure, maybe escorted land transport- however inconvenient- would be more responsible.
Something like the packets of vehicles sometimes seen on the roads in some places- big (armoured) transport truck, breakdown rig, fire tender, command vehicle, a couple of utes/ vans a few hundred metres fore and aft carrying, um, helpers.
If a helicopter was absolutely necessary, something which might carry appropriate monitoring gear/ sensors (whatever they might be) and organic protection, e.g. an MH-47 Chinook, might be a better choice. Again with an escort, perhaps including a reserve "lifter" of similar type.
Despite all the UFO lore, I'm not convinced the US DoD would put recovery/ transport of a likely alien spacecraft out to a contractor. -It might be cheaper, but in this context the initial cost might be of little concern (and less concern than safety).
In terms of marshalling resources such as special mission helos and dependable security, and managing "need to know", keeping everything in-house would be a practical default position.
The US recovery of (part of) Soviet submarine K-129 in 1974 used a purpose-built ship, Hughes Glomar Explorer. Its cover story was that it was built for Hughes as a manganese nodule-gathering platform, but it was operated by the CIA with USN assistance, not by Hughes or any other contractor (see Wikipedia "Project Azorian",
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Project_Azorian). Global Marine, an offshore drilling company, designed the vessel and some of its engineers participated in Project Azorian, having specialised knowledge of the equipment used and challenges to be faced.
It's hard to see an analogous requirement for contracted expertise applying to a helicopter-based retrieval or movement of an alien artefact on land in the USA.
Hypothetical scenario:
Senior intelligence official: "We've got an interesting anomalous artefact of possible extraterrestrial origin. Its value is inestimable. Reports from some personnel in proximity with the artefact indicate it might have unexplained properties that impinge on affect, possibly cognition, so it might in some sense remain operational.
Its contents and purpose are unknown.
And we need to move it."
Senior military officer: "If an airlift is necessary, and the object is active in some way, in-flight monitoring would seem essential.
You'd want a robust platform with a crew experienced in working under pressure, perhaps with compromised systems. I'd suggest a second, similar lift capability in attendance. A small number of other craft would carry CBRN specialists, a medic team and highly-trained, dependable troops for establishing a cordon if a set-down is deemed necessary en route. We have these capabilities."
Random treasury official: "But that could cost up to four million dollars- that's almost half an Abrams tank!
I know a guy in California who can pilot a small Bell helicopter; he's got a couple of ropes and a tarpaulin.
And he's a black belt in some Brazilian jiu-jitsu franchise, so that's the security angle covered."
It might be time to entertain the possibility that all these reported UFO crashes aren't the result of UFOs crashing, they're UFOs which have landed safely- perhaps donated to humanity- which have subsequently been dropped by contractors.
And if the egg has (as Barber implies) active capabilities, of which we're unsure, maybe escorted land transport- however inconvenient- would be more responsible.
Something like the packets of vehicles sometimes seen on the roads in some places- big (armoured) transport truck, breakdown rig, fire tender, command vehicle, a couple of utes/ vans a few hundred metres fore and aft carrying, um, helpers.
If a helicopter was absolutely necessary, something which might carry appropriate monitoring gear/ sensors (whatever they might be) and organic protection, e.g. an MH-47 Chinook, might be a better choice. Again with an escort, perhaps including a reserve "lifter" of similar type.
Despite all the UFO lore, I'm not convinced the US DoD would put recovery/ transport of a likely alien spacecraft out to a contractor. -It might be cheaper, but in this context the initial cost might be of little concern (and less concern than safety).
In terms of marshalling resources such as special mission helos and dependable security, and managing "need to know", keeping everything in-house would be a practical default position.
The US recovery of (part of) Soviet submarine K-129 in 1974 used a purpose-built ship, Hughes Glomar Explorer. Its cover story was that it was built for Hughes as a manganese nodule-gathering platform, but it was operated by the CIA with USN assistance, not by Hughes or any other contractor (see Wikipedia "Project Azorian",
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Project_Azorian). Global Marine, an offshore drilling company, designed the vessel and some of its engineers participated in Project Azorian, having specialised knowledge of the equipment used and challenges to be faced.
It's hard to see an analogous requirement for contracted expertise applying to a helicopter-based retrieval or movement of an alien artefact on land in the USA.
Hypothetical scenario:
Senior intelligence official: "We've got an interesting anomalous artefact of possible extraterrestrial origin. Its value is inestimable. Reports from some personnel in proximity with the artefact indicate it might have unexplained properties that impinge on affect, possibly cognition, so it might in some sense remain operational.
Its contents and purpose are unknown.
And we need to move it."
Senior military officer: "If an airlift is necessary, and the object is active in some way, in-flight monitoring would seem essential.
You'd want a robust platform with a crew experienced in working under pressure, perhaps with compromised systems. I'd suggest a second, similar lift capability in attendance. A small number of other craft would carry CBRN specialists, a medic team and highly-trained, dependable troops for establishing a cordon if a set-down is deemed necessary en route. We have these capabilities."
Random treasury official: "But that could cost up to four million dollars- that's almost half an Abrams tank!
I know a guy in California who can pilot a small Bell helicopter; he's got a couple of ropes and a tarpaulin.
And he's a black belt in some Brazilian jiu-jitsu franchise, so that's the security angle covered."
It might be time to entertain the possibility that all these reported UFO crashes aren't the result of UFOs crashing, they're UFOs which have landed safely- perhaps donated to humanity- which have subsequently been dropped by contractors.
The danger with collecting something that might be active is that while you are collecting IT, IT might decide to collect YOU.
There would always be someone nearby, at a safe distance presumably, to record the potential fireworks/kidnapping. Or at least to point the way to the wreckage. These events are happening out in the middle of nowhere, or so it seems, no reason to keep the crew so small that if something goes wrong you don't have eyes-on the event.
This goes back to my problem with the whole retrieval/reverse engineering idea. On the one hand it has vast resources and manpower and on the other it seems to be dirt poor and relying on the cheapest manpower and equipment.
FatPhil
Senior Member.
It's what they aliens would have wanted, they have a certain affinity for the less sophisticated.
jackfrostvc
Senior Member
These days, my concern is when people say they will release a convincing video, I wonder if AI will be used to create it. I guess the concern is a sign of the times.
I really think that all AI generated videos/images should be searchable. That is, you should be able to video search some how and even text search keywords at some master site that will tell you if the video / image was created on any AI platform.
I really think that all AI generated videos/images should be searchable. That is, you should be able to video search some how and even text search keywords at some master site that will tell you if the video / image was created on any AI platform.
Duke
Senior Member.
I chuckled when I read this. Replace "AI" with "trick photography" and you'd have a statement that espouses the same thought but would have been appropriate 50 years ago. Progess.
Mendel
Senior Member.
every video intended to prove something must have provenance: a source, a known chain of transmission.
Case closed.
Last edited:
jackfrostvc
Senior Member
All these AI sites that people can use to create videos and pictures should be required to keep a searchable DB of everything that has been generated. At least have some kind of digital tagging / indexing/hashing, because I know storing the content would take up a vast amount of storage and perhaps be prohibitive. (Although , look at Youtube it somehow manages)
I'm getting the feeling, this will be an issue in the future . And it's possible a future legislation will require this to stop fakes / miss information. As I see a deluge coming of that stuff with AI, in all sorts of ways that could really be used to harm people / reputations etc
I'm getting the feeling, this will be an issue in the future . And it's possible a future legislation will require this to stop fakes / miss information. As I see a deluge coming of that stuff with AI, in all sorts of ways that could really be used to harm people / reputations etc
JMartJr
Senior Member.
That would be a HUGE database. I'm not particularly into it, but I've posted several generated images here in, for example, the humor thread. For each of those, there a a handful of gens that didn't work out, or weren't funny enough. For folks who are really into it, the number of gens they go through would be massive - and the volume of nekkid people with too many fingers that the online pervert community cranks out would be almost incalculable.
Ann K
Senior Member.
I wonder whether they will themselves become part of the data that is fed back into AI to create crazier and crazier stuff. If that happens it shouldn't take too long for AI to become a parody of itself, and utterly useless.
MonkeeSage
Senior Member.
That's actually a kind big concern of some researchers right now. @FatPhil posted about a paper back in 2023 in this thread https://www.metabunk.org/threads/claim-generative-ai-is-sentient.12992/post-292183 where it shows "model collapse", where after only 9 generations, one of the models that was training on its own output was just spitting out nonsense.
Shumailov, et al. published an updated version of the paper including newer models in Nature last year: AI models collapse when trained on recursively generated data https://www.nature.com/articles/s41586-024-07566-yExternal Quote:
elvenwear
Senior Member
Absolutely true.
Option 1
Let a contractor dangle the most important artifact in history from a cable close enough to the ground to be risky.
Option 2
Get well vetted DoD personnel to place the item inside a lead lined box and put it in a cargo plane.
Even without looking at the video, there is nothing believable about this story. Add Ross Coulthard's name into the mix and there is even less.
MonkeeSage
Senior Member.
James Hodgkins, a "psionic asset" with Jake Barber's Skywatcher group just did an interview (video below). I am only like 15 minutes in but out of the gate in the teaser preview at the start he says the aliens are actually ghosts.
Synopsis of the first 10 minutes:
He says he has been psychic since he was a kid, didn't know it was strange, yada yada. He says he wasn't into UFOs as a kid (though his grandfather was AF intelligence stationed in Roswell so UFO wasn't tabboo), but was really into mysticism and new age ideas. Then he says he was contacted/abducted in 2003 (lost time, transported to different location, etc), and someone told him to read Jacques Vallee's Passport to Magonia and that's what got him into UFOs. Then he read Diana Pasulka's book American Cosmic and thought she really "got it" about what the entities are.
He says he was trying to contact aliens/entities with smaller groups but decided in 2023 that he was looking for people doing "something big in the space between UAP and consciousness" and was introduced to Alex Klokus (the SALT guy) when "Skywatcher and other initiatives around it" were initially being developed. It was initially very UAP focused, but after talking to other believers (he says "whistleblowers and scientists") they were pushed back towards the consciousness side (psychic stuff) and he thinks it is the key to understanding the phenomena.
He says Klokus reached out to him in summer of 2024 and said he knows someone from a crash recovery team, which ended up being Jake Barber, who was using a pseudonym at the time. Jake immediately wanted to talk to him about psychic stuff, which was a breath of fresh air compared to other nuts and bolts "whistleblowers" he talked to (he thinks they just weren't into psi stuff because of stigma), and that validated to him that psychic stuff is taken very seriously (I'm assuming he meant taken seriously by the government).
Asked about Rep. Tim Burchett saying Jake Barber might be a CIA plant (the host calls him Jim Baker then Jake Baker before being corrected, yikes), and if religious people like Burchett might be scared by psi stuff, he says this kind of thing has always been real and we just called it different things (he gives djinn and faeries as examples). He doesn't think it's dangerous but if you have preconceived negative emotions it can sometimes manifest that way.
Not sure how much emperical evidence and data we can expect from Skywatcher going foward if Mr. Hodgkins is accurate about their focus and mindset.
Source: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=QU-wJ-O5VzI
External Quote:
Synopsis of the first 10 minutes:
He says he has been psychic since he was a kid, didn't know it was strange, yada yada. He says he wasn't into UFOs as a kid (though his grandfather was AF intelligence stationed in Roswell so UFO wasn't tabboo), but was really into mysticism and new age ideas. Then he says he was contacted/abducted in 2003 (lost time, transported to different location, etc), and someone told him to read Jacques Vallee's Passport to Magonia and that's what got him into UFOs. Then he read Diana Pasulka's book American Cosmic and thought she really "got it" about what the entities are.
He says he was trying to contact aliens/entities with smaller groups but decided in 2023 that he was looking for people doing "something big in the space between UAP and consciousness" and was introduced to Alex Klokus (the SALT guy) when "Skywatcher and other initiatives around it" were initially being developed. It was initially very UAP focused, but after talking to other believers (he says "whistleblowers and scientists") they were pushed back towards the consciousness side (psychic stuff) and he thinks it is the key to understanding the phenomena.
He says Klokus reached out to him in summer of 2024 and said he knows someone from a crash recovery team, which ended up being Jake Barber, who was using a pseudonym at the time. Jake immediately wanted to talk to him about psychic stuff, which was a breath of fresh air compared to other nuts and bolts "whistleblowers" he talked to (he thinks they just weren't into psi stuff because of stigma), and that validated to him that psychic stuff is taken very seriously (I'm assuming he meant taken seriously by the government).
Asked about Rep. Tim Burchett saying Jake Barber might be a CIA plant (the host calls him Jim Baker then Jake Baker before being corrected, yikes), and if religious people like Burchett might be scared by psi stuff, he says this kind of thing has always been real and we just called it different things (he gives djinn and faeries as examples). He doesn't think it's dangerous but if you have preconceived negative emotions it can sometimes manifest that way.
Not sure how much emperical evidence and data we can expect from Skywatcher going foward if Mr. Hodgkins is accurate about their focus and mindset.
Source: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=QU-wJ-O5VzI
tjskep
Member
no freakin way
NoParty
Senior Member.
Somehow I conned myself into watching the whole 56 minutes.
It's exactly what you expect: Zero evidence of Hodgkins' magical abilities.
Promises that new "scientific" evidence is coming soon!
And a lot of new age "You can think it to happen" bumpersticker wisdom. Run!
Dave Beaty
Active Member
On the youtube channel Need To Know yesterday Ross Couthart made some statements about Jake Barber and specifically about the egg video. Apparently, according to Ross, Jake did not provide the video and it was obtained by Couthart completely independently. While this may be just the honest truth, it could also be a way to dissuade researchers from tracking helicopter companies that Barber is involved with. Here is the relavant section that explains the video's provenance.
Source: https://youtu.be/PLVpruAjP1c?si=BjcLxfXZiCIFSKat&t=2916
Source: https://youtu.be/PLVpruAjP1c?si=BjcLxfXZiCIFSKat&t=2916
Dave Beaty
Active Member
For those of you working on the sling load evidence. I am talking to a crew chief on one of the big helo companies. He provided me with a wealth of information which I will share here. One obvious thing he said to me. There are two things a pilot will need for any job. WIthout those he or she is not going to do the job. Weight and Distance. He asked "How'd they know the weight of the UFO?" Of course I don't know. Jake never talked about logistics. But maybe the men on the ground brought a scale. But he said there is no way a pilot would sling an object without that data. I guess there is a pick site and drop site so they have the distance and altitude. Any ideas how object weight could be determined for a UFO?
According to Barber, they are given size and weight estimates
Source: https://youtu.be/t37-SKj4rtY?si=JukAc5nZtXwharvf&t=2731
45:31 of the full interview between Barber and CoulthartExternal Quote:
Source: https://youtu.be/t37-SKj4rtY?si=JukAc5nZtXwharvf&t=2731
Kyle Ferriter
Senior Member
It is odd that the weight of the egg in the video and the weight of the egg Barber picked up (can be assumed to be different objects), has never been brought up either by Barber or Coulthart. Lots of other details touched on but not weight. Which as you say a helicopter pilot would be keenly aware of.
Coulthart has also been more explicit now that the egg video he showed on NewsNation did not come from Barber (not just an unnamed source, he's now said that it was *not* Barber) but that just raises more questions about where it did come from and why it was shown during the segment where Barber is describing his egg encounter, if it's not directly related. And why Coulthart didn't make it clear in the NewsNation segment that the clip he inserted into the Barber interview actually was not directly related to it. But does the egg video have anything to do with Barber? Like was he on that mission, or were his colleagues on it? The details for the size of the egg and the length of the line match from Coulthart's description of the egg video, and Barber's description of his own egg encounter.
Similar threads
- Locked
Trending content
-
-
Thread '"Active Social Engineering Defense" and "Large Scale Social Deception"'
- Mick West
Replies: 22 -
-
-
