The CIVILIAN INTELLIGENCE CENTRAL on Facebook
Here is an excellent article written by Tomas Scolarici on Conspiracy Theories:
(by Tomas Scolarici/James Black)
March 14, 2011
(QUOTE):
Most conspiracy theories don't make sense nor withstand any scrutiny. They usually involve operations so immense that it's basically impossible for them to be kept secret, and all the proof given by conspiracy theorists usually have a very simple explanation (usually much simpler than the explanation given by the theorists).
Yet conspiracy theories are very popular and appealing. Even when they don't make sense and there's just no proof, many people still believe them. Why?
One big reason for this is that some conspiracy theorists are clever. They use psychology to make their theories sound more plausible. They appeal to certain psychological phenomena which make people to tend to believe them. However, these psychological tricks are nothing more than logical fallacies. They are simply so well disguised that many people can't see them for what they are.
Here are some typical logical fallacies used by conspiracy theorists:
Appeal to the "bandwagon effect"
The so-called "bandwagon effect" is a psychological phenomenon where people are eager to believe things if most of the people around them believe that too. Sometimes that thing is true and there's no harm, but sometimes it's a misconception, urban legend or, in this case, an unfounded conspiracy theory, in which case the "bandwagon effect" bypasses logical thinking for the worse.
The most typical form of appealing to the bandwagon effect is to say something along the lines of "30% of Americans doubt that..." or "30% of Americans don't believe the official story". This is also called an argumentum ad populum, which is a logical fallacy.
Of course that kind of sentence in the beginning of a conspiracy theory doesn't make any sense. It doesn't prove anything relevant. It's not like the theory becomes more true if more people believe in it.
Also the percentage itself is always very dubious. It may be completely fabricated or exaggerated by interpreting the poll results conveniently (eg. one easy way for bumping up the percentage is to interpret all people who didn't answer or who didn't know what to say as "doubting the official story"). Even if it was a completely genuine number, it would still not be proof of anything else than that there's a certain amount of gullible people in the world.
That kind of sentence is not proof of anything, yet it's one of the most used sentences in conspiracy theories. It tries to appeal to the bandwagon effect. It's effectively saying: "Already this many people doubt the official story, and the numbers are increasing. Are you going to be left alone believing the official story?"
Appeal to rebellion
Conspiracy theories in general, and the "n% of people doubt the story" claims in particular, also appeal to a sense of rebellion in people.
As Wikipedia puts it, "a rebellion is, in the most general sense, a refusal to accept authority."
People don't want to be sheep who are patronized by authority and told what they have to do and how they have to think. People usually distrust authorities and many believe that authorities are selfish and abuse people for their own benefit. This is an extremely fertile ground for conspiracy theories.
This is so ingrained in people that a sentence like "the official story" has basically become a synonym for "a coverup/lie". Whenever "the official story" is mentioned, it immediately makes people think that it's some kind of coverup, something not true.
Conspiracy theorists are masters at abusing this psyhcological phenomenon for their advantage. They basically insinuate that "if you believe the official story then you are gullible because you are being lied to". They want to make it feel that doubting the original story is a sign of intelligence and logical thinking. However, believing a conspiracy theory usually shows, quite ironically, a great lack of logical thinking.
This is an actual quote from a JFK assassination conspiracy theory website. It's almost as hilarious as it is contradictory:
In the end, you have to decide for yourself what to believe. But don't just believe what the U.S. Government tells you!
(In other words, believe anything you want except the official story!)
Shotgun argumentation
"Shotgun argumentation" is a metaphor from real life: It's much easier to hunt a rabbit with a shotgun than with a rifle. This is because a rifle only fires one bullet and there's a high probability of a miss. A shotgun, however, fires tens or even hundreds of small pellets, and the probability of at least one of them hitting the rabbit is quite high.
Shotgun argumentation has the same basic idea: The more small arguments or "evidence" you present in favor of some claim, the higher the probability that someone will believe you regardless of how ridiculous those arguments are. There are two reasons for this:
Firstly, just the sheer amount of arguments or "evidence" may be enough to convince someone that something strange is going on. The idea is basically: "There is this much evidence against the official story, there must be something wrong with it." One or two pieces of "evidence" may not be enough to convince anyone, but collect a set of a couple of hundreds of pieces of "evidence" and it immediately starts being more believable.
Of course the fallacy here is that the amount of "evidence" is in no way proof of anything. The vast majority, and usually all of this "evidence" is easily explainable and just patently false. There may be a few points which may be more difficult to explain, but they alone wouldn't be so convincing.
Secondly, and more closely related to the shotgun metaphor : The more arguments or individual pieces of "evidence" you have, the higher the probability that at least some of them will convince someone. Someone might not get convinced by most of the arguments, but among them there may be one or a few which sounds so plausible to him that he is then convinced. Thus one or a few of the "pellets" hit the "rabbit" and killed it: Mission accomplished.
I have a concrete example of this:
I had a friend who is academically educated, a MSc, and doing research work (relating to computer science) at a university. He is rational, intelligent and well-educated.
Yet still this person, at least some years ago, completely believed the Moon hoax theory. Why? He said to me quite explicitly that there was one thing that convinced him: The flag moving after it had been planted on the ground.
One of the pellets had hit the rabbit and killed it. The shotgun argumentation had been successful.
If even highly-educated academic people can fall for such "evidence" (which is easily explained), how more easily are more "regular" people going to believe the sheer amount of them? Sadly, quite a lot more easily.
Most conspiracy theorists continue to present the same old tired arguments which are very easy to prove wrong. They need all those arguments, no matter how ridiculous, for their shotgun argumentation tactics to work.
Straw man argumentation
A "straw man argument" is the process of taking an argument of the opponent, distorting it or taking it out of context so that it basically changes meaning, and then ridiculing it in order to make the opponent look bad.
For example, a conspiracy theorist may say something like: "Sceptics argue that stars are too faint to see in space (which is why there are no stars in photographs), yet astronauts said that they could see stars."
This is a perfect example of a straw man argument. That's taking an argument completely out of context and changing its meaning.
It's actually a bit unfortunate that many debunking sites use the sentence "the stars are too faint to be seen" when explaining the lack of stars in photographs. That sentence, while in its context not false, is confusing and misleading. It's trying to put in simple words a more technical explanation (which usually follows). Unfortunately, it's too simplistic and good material for straw man arguments. I wish debunkers stopped using simplistic sentences like that one.
(The real explanation for the lacking stars is, of course, related to the exposure time and shutter aperture of the cameras, which were set to photograph the Moon surface illuminated by direct sunlight. The stars are not bright enough for such short exposure times. If the cameras had been set up to photograph the stars, the lunar surface would have been completely overexposed. This is basic photography.)
Another straw man, still related to stars, which I have seen is simply "they claim that you can't see stars in space" (referring to some kind of notion that stars are too small and far away to be seen directly, and that they are visible from Earth only because the atmosphere scatters their light making them look bigger). This is simply a lie. I don't think any debunker has ever said that a person cannot see stars in space. (Even if someone has, he is obviously wrong. However, that's irrelevant to whether the explanation for the lack of stars is wrong or not.)
Citing inexistent sources
There's a very common bad habit among the majority of people: They believe that credible sources have said/written whatever someone claims they have said or written. Even worse, most people believe that a source is credible or even exists just because someone claims that it is credible and exists. People almost never check that the source exists, that it's a credible source and that it has indeed said what was claimed.
Conspiracy theorists know this and thus abuse it to the maximum. Sometimes they fabricate sources or stories, and sometimes they just cite nameless sources (using expressions like "experts in the field", "most astronomers", etc).
This is an actual quote from the same JFK assassination conspiracy theory website as earlier:
Scientists examined the Zapruder film. They found that, while most of it looks completely genuine, some of the images are impossible. They violate the laws of physics. They could not have come from Zapruder's home movie camera.
Needless to say, the web page does not give any references or sources, or any other indication of who these unnamed "scientists" might be or what their credentials are. (My personal guess is that whenever the website uses the word "scientist" or "researcher", it refers to other conspiracy theorists who have no actual education and competence on the required fields of science, and who are, like all such conspiracy theorists, just seeing what they want to see.)
Citing sources which are wrong
A common tactic of conspiracy theorists is to take statements by credible persons or newspaper articles which support the conspiracy theory and present these statements or articles as if they were the truth. If a later article in the same newspaper corrects the mistake in the earlier article or if the person who made the statement later says that he was wrong or quoted out of context (ie. he didn't mean what people thought he was meaning), conspiracy theorists happily ignore them.
Since people seldom check the sources, they will believe that the statement or newspaper article is the only thing that person or newspaper has said about the subject.
This is closely related to (and often overlaps with) the concept of quote mining (which is the practice of carefully selecting small quotes, which are often taken completely out of context, from a vast selection of material, in such a way that these individual quotes seem to support the conspiracy theory).
Sometimes that source is not credible (because it's just another conspiracy theorist) but people have little means of knowing this.
Cherry-picking
Cherry-picking is more a deliberate act of deception than a logical fallacy, but nevertheless an extremely common tactic.
Cherry-picking happens when someone deliberately selects from a wide variety of material only those items which support the conspiracy theory, while ignoring and discarding those which don't. When this carefully chosen selection of material is then presented as a whole, it easily misleads people into thinking that the conspiracy theory is supported by evidence.
This is an especially popular tactic for the 9/11 conspiracy theorists: They will only choose those published photographs which support their claims, while outright ignoring those which don't. The Loose Change "documentary" is quite infamous for doing this, and pulling it out rather convincingly.
The major problem with this is, of course, that it's pure deception: The viewer is intentionally given only carefully selected material, while leaving out the parts which would contradict the conspiracy theory. This is a deliberate act. The conspiracy theorists cannot claim honesty while doing clear cherry-picking.
Just one example: There's a big electrical transformer box outside the Pentagon which was badly damaged by the plane before it hit the building. It's impossible for that box to get that damage if the building was hit by a missile, as claimed by conspiracy theorists (the missile would have exploded when hitting the box, several tens of meters away from the building). Conspiracy theorists will usually avoid using any photographs which show the damaged transformer box because it contradicts their theory. They are doing this deliberately. They cannot claim honesty while doing this.
Argument from authority
Scientists are human, and thus imperfect and fallible. Individual scientists can be dead wrong, make the wrong claims and even be deceived into believing falsities. Being a scientist does not give a human being some kind of magic power to resist all deceptions and delusions, to see through all tricks and fallacies and to always know the truth and discard what is false.
But science does not stand on individual scientists, for this exact reason. This is precisely why the scientific process requires so-called peer reviews. One scientist can be wrong, ten scientists can be wrong, and even a hundred scientists can be wrong, but when their claims are peer-reviewed and studied by the whole scientific community, the likelihood of the falsities not being caught decreases dramatically.
It's very likely that someone somewhere is going to object and to raise questions if there's something wrong with a claim, and this will raise the consciousness of the whole community. Either the objections are dealt with and explained, or the credibility of the claim gets compromised. A claim does not become accepted by the scientific community unless it passes the peer reviewing test. And this is why science works. It does not rely on individuals, but on the whole.
Sometimes some individual scientists can be deceived into believing a conspiracy theory. As said, scientists do not have any magical force that keeps them from being deceived. Due to their education the likelihood might be slightly lower than with the average person, but in no way is it completely removed. Scientists can and do get deceived by falsities.
Thus sometimes the conspiracy theorists will convince some PhD or other such person of high education and/or high authority, and if this person becomes vocal enough, the conspiracy theorists will then use him as an argument pro the conspiracy. It can be rather convincing if conspiracy theorists can say "numerous scientists agree that the official explanation cannot be true, including (insert some names here)".
However, this is a fallacy named argument from authority. Just because a PhD makes a claim doesn't make it true. Even if a hundred PhD's make that claim. It doesn't even make it any more credible.
As said, individual scientists can get deceived and deluded. However, as long as their claims do not pass the peer review process, their claims are worth nothing from a scientific point of view.
Argument from ignorance
In this fallacy the word "ignorance" is not an insult, but refers to the meaning of "not knowing something".
Simply put, argument from ignorance happens when something with no apparent explanation is pointed out (for example in a photograph), and since there's no explanation, it's presented as evidence of foul play (eg. that the photograph has been manipulated).
This can be seen as somewhat related to cherry-picking: The conspiracy theorist will point out something in the source material or the accounts of the original event which is not easy to immediately explain. A viewer with no experience nor expertise on the subject matter might be unable to come up with an explanation, or to identify the artifact/phenomenon. The conspiracy theorist then abuses this to claim that the unexplained artifact or phenomenon is evidence of fakery or deception.
Of course this is a fallacy. Nothing can be deduced from an unexplained phenomenon or artifact. As long as you don't know what it is, you can't take it as evidence of anything.
(In most cases such things have a quite simple and logical explanation; it's just that in order to figure it out, you need to have the proper experience on the subject, or alternatively to have someone with experience explain it to you. After that it becomes quite self-evident. It's a bit like a magic trick: When you see it, you can't explain how it works, but when someone explains it to you, it often is outright disappointingly simple.)
It might sound rather self-evident when explained like this, but people still get fooled in an actual situation.
Argument from (personal) incredulity
In its most basic and bare-bones from, argument from incredulity takes the form of "I can't even begin to imagine how this can work / be possible, hence it must be fake". This is a variation or subset of the argument from ignorance. Of course conspiracy theorists don't state the argument so blatantly, but use much subtler expressions.
Example: Some (although not all) Moon Landing Hoax conspiracy theorists state that the Moon Lander could have not taken off from the surface of the Moon, because a rocket on its bottom side would have made it rotate wildly and randomly.
In essence what the conspiracy theorist is saying is "I don't understand how rocketry can work, hence this must be fake", and trying to convince the reader of the same.
The problem of basic rocketry (ie. how a rocket with a propulsion system at its back end can maintain stability and fly straight) is indeed quite a complex and difficult one (which is where the colloquial term "rocket science", meaning something extremely complicated and difficult, comes from), but it was solved in the 1920's and 30's. This isn't even something you have to understand or even take on faith: It's something you can see with your own eyes (unless you believe all the videos you have ever seen of missiles and rockets are fake).
Pareidolia
Pareidolia is also not a logical fallacy per se, but more a fallacy of perception.
Pareidolia is, basically, the phenomenon which happens when we perceive recognizable patterns in randomness, even though the patterns really aren't there. For example, random blotches of paint might look like a face, or random noise might sound like a spoken word (or even a full sentence).
Pareidolia is a side effect of pattern recognition in our brain. Our visual and auditory perception is heavily based on pattern recognition. It's what helps us understanding spoken languages, even if it's spoken by different people with different voices, at different speeds and with different accents. It's what helps us recognizing objects even if they have a slightly different shape or coloring which we have never seen before. It's what helps us recognize people and differentiate them from each other. It's what helps us reading written text at amazing speeds by simply scanning the written lines visually (you are doing precisely that right now). In fact, we could probably not even survive without pattern recognition.
This pattern recognition is also heavily based on experience: We tend to recognize things like shapes and sounds when we have previous experience from similar shapes and sounds. Also the context helps us in this pattern recognition, often very significantly. When we recognize the context, we tend to expect certain things, which in turn helps us making the pattern recognition more easily and faster. For example, if you open a book, you already expect to see text inside, and you are already prepared to recognize it. In a context which is completely unrelated to written text (for a completely random example, if you are examining your fingernails) you are not expecting to see text, and thus you don't recognize it as easily.
Pareidolia happens when our brain recognizes, or thinks it recognizes, patterns where there may be only randomness, or in places which are not random per se, but completely unrelated to this purported "pattern".
As noted, pareidolia is greatly helped if we are expecting to see a certain pattern. This predisposes our brain to try to recognize that exact thing, making it easier.
This is the very idea in so-called backmasking: Playing a sound, for example a song, backwards and then recognizing something in the garbled sounds that result from this. When we are not expecting anything in particular, we usually only hear garbled noises. However, if someone tells us what we should expect, we immediately "recognize" it.
However, we are just fooling our own pattern recognition system into perceiving something which isn't really there. If someone else is told to expect a slightly similar-sounding, but different message, that other person is very probably going to hear that. You and that other person are both being mislead by playing with the pattern recognition capabilities of your brain.
Conspiracy theorists love abusing pareidolia. They will make people see patterns where there are none, and people will be fooled into believing that the patterns really are there, and thus are proof of something.
Posted by James Black/Tomas Scolarici
(UNQUOTE)
--------
Wednesday, March 23, 2011
Thursday, January 13, 2011
Where I stand on "UFOs","beliefs in UFOs" and other topics
Norio Hayakawa
e-mail: noriohayakawa@gmail.com
May 4, 2011
The perception of UFOs as physical alien spacecraft piloted or maneuvered by physical alien entitites continues to dominate Ufology solely for the purpose of convenience.
It is important to take into consideration that UFO reports may not necessarily be caused by visits from space travelers.
Alternate realities co-exist with us, making it extremely difficult to define "reality" through our limited empirical understanding and our inability to detect them via the five senses.
Here are my additional thoughts on UFOs:
My perspective on the UFO phenomenon
HERE ARE SOME OF MY ARTICLES THAT I WROTE RECENTLY (most of them in 2010):
Some old but fascinating reports from Dulce, New Mexico
Enigmatic personalities behind the initial Dulce underground base rumors
Nevada Test Site gets new name (N2S2).....its impact on Area 51!!
Why "UFOs" will never become a top nightly TV news story
Beliefs in "UFOs" no different from "religious beliefs
Top priority U.S military report claims "Apocalyptic Christians" and the Second Coming of the Christ could pose a serious threat to world peace!!
The Roswell incident.....was it hastily "staged" to cover something else?
The most spectacular UFO sighting in U.S. history: 1950, Farmington, New Mexico!
UFOs, Area 51 and Dulce....the bottom line
UFOs, The Bottom Line: My Honest Answers
Dulce, New Mexico, Bio-warfare and Project Blue Beam
and
The historic Dulce base conference in Dulce, New Mexico, on March 29, 2009!!
HERE ARE SOME OF MY EARLIER ARTICLES:
Behind the mysterious crash of a helicopter near Area 51 in 1991
Death is only the beginning of life!!
The strange behavior of Bob Lazar (alleged former Area 51 "scientist")
William Cooper, a manipulated misinformant of the 90's?
Strange Behavior of Col. John Alexander in the early 1990s
Col. John Alexander, Robert Bigelow and the goal of NIDS?
My "connections" to Area 51
My visits with Lyndon LaRouche and Victor Marchetti in 1994
NORIO HAYAKAWA
http://noriohayakawa2012.blogspot.com
The CIVILIAN INTELLIGENCE CENTRAL on Facebook
e-mail: noriohayakawa@gmail.com
May 4, 2011
The perception of UFOs as physical alien spacecraft piloted or maneuvered by physical alien entitites continues to dominate Ufology solely for the purpose of convenience.
It is important to take into consideration that UFO reports may not necessarily be caused by visits from space travelers.
Alternate realities co-exist with us, making it extremely difficult to define "reality" through our limited empirical understanding and our inability to detect them via the five senses.
Here are my additional thoughts on UFOs:
My perspective on the UFO phenomenon
HERE ARE SOME OF MY ARTICLES THAT I WROTE RECENTLY (most of them in 2010):
Some old but fascinating reports from Dulce, New Mexico
Enigmatic personalities behind the initial Dulce underground base rumors
Nevada Test Site gets new name (N2S2).....its impact on Area 51!!
Why "UFOs" will never become a top nightly TV news story
Beliefs in "UFOs" no different from "religious beliefs
Top priority U.S military report claims "Apocalyptic Christians" and the Second Coming of the Christ could pose a serious threat to world peace!!
The Roswell incident.....was it hastily "staged" to cover something else?
The most spectacular UFO sighting in U.S. history: 1950, Farmington, New Mexico!
UFOs, Area 51 and Dulce....the bottom line
UFOs, The Bottom Line: My Honest Answers
Dulce, New Mexico, Bio-warfare and Project Blue Beam
and
The historic Dulce base conference in Dulce, New Mexico, on March 29, 2009!!
HERE ARE SOME OF MY EARLIER ARTICLES:
Behind the mysterious crash of a helicopter near Area 51 in 1991
Death is only the beginning of life!!
The strange behavior of Bob Lazar (alleged former Area 51 "scientist")
William Cooper, a manipulated misinformant of the 90's?
Strange Behavior of Col. John Alexander in the early 1990s
Col. John Alexander, Robert Bigelow and the goal of NIDS?
My "connections" to Area 51
My visits with Lyndon LaRouche and Victor Marchetti in 1994
NORIO HAYAKAWA
http://noriohayakawa2012.blogspot.com
The CIVILIAN INTELLIGENCE CENTRAL on Facebook
Tuesday, November 30, 2010
Arizona's Pinal Air Park (Marana): CIA Black Ops facility or just a boneyard for commercial aircraft?
by Norio Hayakawa
E-mail: noriohayakawa@rocketmail.com
For many years, the civilian intelligence communities (as well as part of the public sector) seemed to have been aware of CIA's connection and presence at Arizona's Marana facility (a.k.a., Pinal Air Park or EVERGREEN AIR facility).
In the early 1990s, rumors began to circulate that the Marana facility (7 miles northwest of Marana) had been utilized by what was allegedly known then as the Multi-jurisdictional Task Force.
A friend of mine who, in 1991, was a commercial pilot for the American Airlines told me back then that one weekday (during his day off from work) he rented a Cessna plane and decided to fly over the Marana complex, just for curiosity.
He told me that while he was flying over the facility, he distinctly heard from his radio transmission the code word "MAJIC" several times. I thought that was quite interesting.
The rumors had it then that the facility was a training area for special helicopters as well as for other Black Ops programs. A school for governmental limo drivers was even said to have been there.
A few years ago I drove straight to this Pinal Air Park and was told to turn around and leave immediately at the Guard Shack. Even today this facility is guarded by a private security force. (I am not certain if it is Wackenhut or not).
Since around February of 2010, another strange rumor about this "suspicious" facility has been circulating. (at least among some who hold on to conspiracy theories!!)
(Courtesy of Glenn Canady):
EVERGREEN AIR and A SECRET CHEMTRAIL FACILITY?
http://www.project.nsearch.com/forum/topics/evergreen-airs-secret
By the way anyone can clearly see this facility on Google Earth....just go to Marana in Arizona and look for Pinal Air Park, about 7 miles northwest of Marana.
Anyway, it is quite possible that, at one time, Pinal Air Park may have been used as a logistics airport for some CIA-involved operations.
Pinal Air Park claims that today it is nothing but a "boneyard" for civilian commercial aircraft, utilizing the dry desert climate to prevent any form of corrosion and says that it is one of the largest aircraft graveyards in the U.S.
It is quite difficult to state for sure what is really going on at Pinal Airpark.
Speculations abound.
One, for example, is:
EVERGREEN FACILITY CAUGHT ON FILM: CHEMTRAIL PLANES??
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=2yijTiDapCg&feature=mfu_in_order&list=UL
Norio Hayakawa
http://noriohayakawa2012.blogspot.com
E-mail: noriohayakawa@rocketmail.com
For many years, the civilian intelligence communities (as well as part of the public sector) seemed to have been aware of CIA's connection and presence at Arizona's Marana facility (a.k.a., Pinal Air Park or EVERGREEN AIR facility).
In the early 1990s, rumors began to circulate that the Marana facility (7 miles northwest of Marana) had been utilized by what was allegedly known then as the Multi-jurisdictional Task Force.
A friend of mine who, in 1991, was a commercial pilot for the American Airlines told me back then that one weekday (during his day off from work) he rented a Cessna plane and decided to fly over the Marana complex, just for curiosity.
He told me that while he was flying over the facility, he distinctly heard from his radio transmission the code word "MAJIC" several times. I thought that was quite interesting.
The rumors had it then that the facility was a training area for special helicopters as well as for other Black Ops programs. A school for governmental limo drivers was even said to have been there.
A few years ago I drove straight to this Pinal Air Park and was told to turn around and leave immediately at the Guard Shack. Even today this facility is guarded by a private security force. (I am not certain if it is Wackenhut or not).
Since around February of 2010, another strange rumor about this "suspicious" facility has been circulating. (at least among some who hold on to conspiracy theories!!)
(Courtesy of Glenn Canady):
EVERGREEN AIR and A SECRET CHEMTRAIL FACILITY?
http://www.project.nsearch.com/forum/topics/evergreen-airs-secret
By the way anyone can clearly see this facility on Google Earth....just go to Marana in Arizona and look for Pinal Air Park, about 7 miles northwest of Marana.
Anyway, it is quite possible that, at one time, Pinal Air Park may have been used as a logistics airport for some CIA-involved operations.
Pinal Air Park claims that today it is nothing but a "boneyard" for civilian commercial aircraft, utilizing the dry desert climate to prevent any form of corrosion and says that it is one of the largest aircraft graveyards in the U.S.
It is quite difficult to state for sure what is really going on at Pinal Airpark.
Speculations abound.
One, for example, is:
EVERGREEN FACILITY CAUGHT ON FILM: CHEMTRAIL PLANES??
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=2yijTiDapCg&feature=mfu_in_order&list=UL
Norio Hayakawa
http://noriohayakawa2012.blogspot.com
Thursday, November 18, 2010
Nellis AFB range commander keeps his cool in a rare 1998 interview at Area 51 Public Hearing!!
from Norio Hayakawa at: Civilian Intelligence Central
Here is a rare, 1998 "interview" with Nellis AFB range commander by my colleague, Anthony J. Hilder.
This impromptu "interview" was held during a break between various speakers at a public hearing held in Las Vegas and organized by Nellis Air Force Base to discuss the aquisition of additional 4000 acres of public land as a buffer zone to the buffer zone at Area 51.
Anthony Hilder and I both attended this hearing which was held at El Dorado High School in Las Vegas. We both spoke at the hearing.
What was most amazing about this interview was that the commander did not expect such an impromptu "interview" which lasted close to 10 minutes.
However, the commander surprisingly kept his cool throughout the grueling, tough questioning by conspiracy-promoting Anthony J. Hilder.
Anthony J. Hilder pulled no punches.
But my hat's off to the Commander for keeping his cool. He responded to the questions exactly as he was trained to do.
This historical "interview" was one of the most serious (but yet most amazing, amusing, historical and even hysterical) interviews I have ever witnessed with my own eyes. I was right next to Hilder, looking at the Commander.
(Actually I felt a little embarassed when Anthony began to bombard him with questions I am sure that sounded "nuttier" and "nuttier" to the commander).
Here is the AMAZING INTERVIEW:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=NMTpW8xlA_w
P.S.
According to a military aviation historian, Commander Percival was, at that time, a wing commander not of Detachment 3 of the Air Force Flight Test Center (DET 3, AFFTC, the official name for the "operating base near Groom Lake", Nevada, a.k.a., Area 51, assigned, managed and operated by Edwards AFB AFFTC) but a wing commander of Nellis Air Force Range itself, which is not directly affiliated with the operations at Groom Lake.
By the way, the U.S. government (through the Department of Energy) finally began to compensate these workers who were sickened while they worked at Groom Lake. The reason for their illnesses was primarily because they were contaminated by toxic chemicals used in stealth programs (stealth coatings, etc.) at the base and not because of bacteriological weapons.
NORIO HAYAKAWA
http://noriohayakawa2012.blogspot.com
Here is a rare, 1998 "interview" with Nellis AFB range commander by my colleague, Anthony J. Hilder.
This impromptu "interview" was held during a break between various speakers at a public hearing held in Las Vegas and organized by Nellis Air Force Base to discuss the aquisition of additional 4000 acres of public land as a buffer zone to the buffer zone at Area 51.
Anthony Hilder and I both attended this hearing which was held at El Dorado High School in Las Vegas. We both spoke at the hearing.
What was most amazing about this interview was that the commander did not expect such an impromptu "interview" which lasted close to 10 minutes.
However, the commander surprisingly kept his cool throughout the grueling, tough questioning by conspiracy-promoting Anthony J. Hilder.
Anthony J. Hilder pulled no punches.
But my hat's off to the Commander for keeping his cool. He responded to the questions exactly as he was trained to do.
This historical "interview" was one of the most serious (but yet most amazing, amusing, historical and even hysterical) interviews I have ever witnessed with my own eyes. I was right next to Hilder, looking at the Commander.
(Actually I felt a little embarassed when Anthony began to bombard him with questions I am sure that sounded "nuttier" and "nuttier" to the commander).
Here is the AMAZING INTERVIEW:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=NMTpW8xlA_w
P.S.
According to a military aviation historian, Commander Percival was, at that time, a wing commander not of Detachment 3 of the Air Force Flight Test Center (DET 3, AFFTC, the official name for the "operating base near Groom Lake", Nevada, a.k.a., Area 51, assigned, managed and operated by Edwards AFB AFFTC) but a wing commander of Nellis Air Force Range itself, which is not directly affiliated with the operations at Groom Lake.
By the way, the U.S. government (through the Department of Energy) finally began to compensate these workers who were sickened while they worked at Groom Lake. The reason for their illnesses was primarily because they were contaminated by toxic chemicals used in stealth programs (stealth coatings, etc.) at the base and not because of bacteriological weapons.
NORIO HAYAKAWA
http://noriohayakawa2012.blogspot.com
Sunday, November 14, 2010
My perspective on the UFO phenomenon
from Norio Hayakawa at Civilian Intelligence Central
E-mail = noriohayakawa@gmail.com
November 14, 2010
My perspective on the UFO phenomenon is based on the propositions made by both Dr. Jacques Vallee and Tomas Scolarici (a.k.a., James Black):
1. "The things we call unidentified flying objects are neither objects nor flying.
They can materialize, as some reliable photographs seem to show, and they violate the laws of motion as we know them".
(QUOTE from Dr. Jacques Vallee's acclaimed book, DIMENSIONS)
2. "Those unidentified flying objects that remain UNIDENTIFIED and challenge any natural definition, are not a new phenomenon.
These "Entities" are with us from the beginning of our historical times, and perhaps before."
(QUOTE from Tomas Solarici, a.k.a., James Black).
"UFOs have been seen throughout history and have consistently received (or provided) their own explanation within the framework of each culture.
In antiquity their occupants were regarded as gods; in medieval times, as magicians; in the nineteenth century, as scientific geniuses; in our own time, as interplanetary travelers.
(Statements made by occupants of the 1897 airship included such declarations as 'We are from Kansas' and even 'We are from anywhere....but we'll be in Greece tomorrow')"
(QUOTE from Dr. Jacques Vallee's acclaimed book, DIMENSIONS)
3. "UFO reports are not necessarily caused by visits from space travelers. The phenomenon could be a manifestation of a much more complex technology. If time and space are not as simple in structure as physicists have assumed until now, then the question 'Where do they come from?' may be meaningless; they could come from a place in time. If consciousness can be manifested outside the body, then the range of hypotheses can be even wider."
(QUOTE from Dr. Jacques Vallee's acclaimed book, DIMENSIONS)
"The extraterrestrial hypothesis is not satisfactory at all. The time travelers hypothesis about UFOs, is better than the extraterrestrial one, but in no way answers all our questions".
(QUOTE from Tomas Solarici, a.k.a., James Black).
4) "The key to an understanding of the phenomenon lies in the psychic effects it produces (or the psychic awareness it makes possible) in its observers.
Their lives are often deeply changed, and they develop unusual talents with which they may find it difficult to cope.
The proportion of witnesses who do come forward and publish accounts of these experiences is quite low; most of them choose to remain silent".
(QUOTE from Dr. Jacques Vallee's acclaimed book, DIMENSIONS)
5) "Contact between human percipients and the UFO phenomenon always occurs under conditions controlled by the latter. Its characteristic feature is a factor of absurdity that leads to a rejection of the story by the upper layers of the target society and an absorption at a deep unconscious level of the symbols conveyed by the encounter.
The mechanism of this resonance between the UFO symbol and the archetypes of the human unconscious has been abundantly demonstrated by Carl Jung, whose book FLYING SAUCERS makes many references to the age-old significance of the signs in the sky".
(QUOTE from Dr. Jacques Vallee's acclaimed book, DIMENSIONS)
"The UFO phenomenon COEXISTS with us, humans.
The UFO phenomenon is with us, was with our ancestors and will be in the future without changes.
These "Entities" have no need, or are not interested, or cannot openly contact us"
(QUOTE from Tomas Solarici, a.k.a., James Black).
6) "It's possible that the complexity of the UFO phenomenon makes any understanding impossible.
Nobody knows what the UFO phenomenon is, and probably we will never know more"
(QUOTE from Tomas Solarici, a.k.a., James Black).
7) "The UFO phenomenon is not a threat to our security.
The same phenomenon neither was a threat for the Sumerians or Romans, or Indians".
(QUOTE from Tomas Solarici, a.k.a., James Black).
8) "There is no such thing as a cover-up, and the authorities know as little about the nature of the UFO phenomenon as ourselves.
They learned however that the UFO phenomenon is not a threat for our Security".
(QUOTE from Tomas Solarici, a.k.a., James Black).
I am in total agreement with both Dr. Jacques Vallee and Tomas Solarici, a.k.a., James Black.
Yes, they summarize my personal position on the entire UFO phenomenon.
This is the reason why, in my opinion, there will be no such thing as DISCLOSURE by the government.
Sure, the governments of the world could release ALL files on UFO sightings anytime, if they wish to.
However, just releasing such files will do absolutely nothing, since the public will clamor for the explanations as to what the UFO phenomenon is.
The government is only responsible for explaining things that deal with physical, tangible, solid, empirical evidence as we know them.
Anything else, the governmet is not in the business of dealing with.
If there will be any DISCLOSURE, it will come directly from the "Entities" themselves or from a paradigm-shifted majority of mankind (which has not happened yet).
Norio Hayakawa
P.S.
Although some people may label me as a UFO skeptic, I have never been (and will never be) a UFO debunker.
I have researched the phenomenon for more than 45 years, and although it seems (at least to me) that there appears to be no physical, tangible, irrefutable evidence whatsoever that we have ever been visited by physical extraterrestrials in physical UFOs, I have never been (and will never be) a debunker.
The UFO phenomenon and the "belief in UFOs" (as physical spacecraft piloted or maneuvered by physical aliens from elsewhere in the universe) are separate matters.
It is highly likely that the U.S. intelligence communities as well as the military have manipulated (and in some instances even created) a segment of the population's "belief in UFOs" as part of counter intelligence operations. Many defense contractors still continue to create cover stories to conceal or detract attention away from public's scrutiny of sensitive defense programs.
Yes, people's "belief in UFOs" is a very important factor in all of this.
What about alien visitations?
As most UFO enthusiasts have heard already, theoretical physicist Stephen Hawking (one of the most brilliant minds of our time) recently made several statements suggesting that there OUGHT to be extraterrestrial life and civilization elsewhere in this vast universe.
But he also made a puzzling statement (a statement which has not been popular with most UFO enthusiasts) saying that "aliens have never visited earth in UFOs and will never visit earth in UFOs".
Here is what he said: "I discount suggestions that UFOs contain beings from outer space. I think any visits by aliens would be much more obvious, and probably also, much more unpleasant."
"What is the explanation of why we have not been visited? One possibility is that the argument about the appearance of life on Earth, is wrong. Maybe the probability of life spontaneously appearing is so low, that Earth is the only planet in the galaxy, or in the observable universe, in which it happened. Another possibility is that there was a reasonable probability of forming self reproducing systems, like cells, but that most of these forms of life did not evolve intelligence."
"I am discounting reports of UFOs".
So, basically, Stephen Hawking thinks aliens exist somewhere in the universe but doesn't believe any are visiting us.
Stephen Hawking is not only skeptical about UFOs but also about alien abductions.
Yes, it is true that I consider myself a UFO skeptic when it comes to alien visitations.
I was a strong proponent of the E.T. hypothesis of the origins of UFOs up till the late 1970s when I began to abandon that theory. That was when I became a UFO skeptic.
But I consider myself a "healthy" skeptic.
That is to say, my policy is to give an opportunity to any sincere researcher to express their viewpoints, even if I may not agree with them.
Do I believe in the existence of "underground bases"?
Yes, certainly I believe that there may be "underground bases", large and small, in many locations but personally I tend to believe that those are government/military/scientific installations or laboratories that have nothing to do with aliens.
I still maintain that if, for example, the alleged Dulce underground installations in New Mexico really exist, they would most likely be related to the U.S. government's biological warfare research facilities.
However, as difficult as this may be for me to say, I do not rule out anything.
Yes, "healthy" skepticism is very important because it does not completely leave the door closed.
The door must be kept open, even slightly, for any possibility.
I am a believer in open platforms so that people with other viewpoints could freely express their opinions.
NORIO HAYAKAWA
E-mail = noriohayakawa@gmail.com
November 14, 2010
My perspective on the UFO phenomenon is based on the propositions made by both Dr. Jacques Vallee and Tomas Scolarici (a.k.a., James Black):
1. "The things we call unidentified flying objects are neither objects nor flying.
They can materialize, as some reliable photographs seem to show, and they violate the laws of motion as we know them".
(QUOTE from Dr. Jacques Vallee's acclaimed book, DIMENSIONS)
2. "Those unidentified flying objects that remain UNIDENTIFIED and challenge any natural definition, are not a new phenomenon.
These "Entities" are with us from the beginning of our historical times, and perhaps before."
(QUOTE from Tomas Solarici, a.k.a., James Black).
"UFOs have been seen throughout history and have consistently received (or provided) their own explanation within the framework of each culture.
In antiquity their occupants were regarded as gods; in medieval times, as magicians; in the nineteenth century, as scientific geniuses; in our own time, as interplanetary travelers.
(Statements made by occupants of the 1897 airship included such declarations as 'We are from Kansas' and even 'We are from anywhere....but we'll be in Greece tomorrow')"
(QUOTE from Dr. Jacques Vallee's acclaimed book, DIMENSIONS)
3. "UFO reports are not necessarily caused by visits from space travelers. The phenomenon could be a manifestation of a much more complex technology. If time and space are not as simple in structure as physicists have assumed until now, then the question 'Where do they come from?' may be meaningless; they could come from a place in time. If consciousness can be manifested outside the body, then the range of hypotheses can be even wider."
(QUOTE from Dr. Jacques Vallee's acclaimed book, DIMENSIONS)
"The extraterrestrial hypothesis is not satisfactory at all. The time travelers hypothesis about UFOs, is better than the extraterrestrial one, but in no way answers all our questions".
(QUOTE from Tomas Solarici, a.k.a., James Black).
4) "The key to an understanding of the phenomenon lies in the psychic effects it produces (or the psychic awareness it makes possible) in its observers.
Their lives are often deeply changed, and they develop unusual talents with which they may find it difficult to cope.
The proportion of witnesses who do come forward and publish accounts of these experiences is quite low; most of them choose to remain silent".
(QUOTE from Dr. Jacques Vallee's acclaimed book, DIMENSIONS)
5) "Contact between human percipients and the UFO phenomenon always occurs under conditions controlled by the latter. Its characteristic feature is a factor of absurdity that leads to a rejection of the story by the upper layers of the target society and an absorption at a deep unconscious level of the symbols conveyed by the encounter.
The mechanism of this resonance between the UFO symbol and the archetypes of the human unconscious has been abundantly demonstrated by Carl Jung, whose book FLYING SAUCERS makes many references to the age-old significance of the signs in the sky".
(QUOTE from Dr. Jacques Vallee's acclaimed book, DIMENSIONS)
"The UFO phenomenon COEXISTS with us, humans.
The UFO phenomenon is with us, was with our ancestors and will be in the future without changes.
These "Entities" have no need, or are not interested, or cannot openly contact us"
(QUOTE from Tomas Solarici, a.k.a., James Black).
6) "It's possible that the complexity of the UFO phenomenon makes any understanding impossible.
Nobody knows what the UFO phenomenon is, and probably we will never know more"
(QUOTE from Tomas Solarici, a.k.a., James Black).
7) "The UFO phenomenon is not a threat to our security.
The same phenomenon neither was a threat for the Sumerians or Romans, or Indians".
(QUOTE from Tomas Solarici, a.k.a., James Black).
8) "There is no such thing as a cover-up, and the authorities know as little about the nature of the UFO phenomenon as ourselves.
They learned however that the UFO phenomenon is not a threat for our Security".
(QUOTE from Tomas Solarici, a.k.a., James Black).
I am in total agreement with both Dr. Jacques Vallee and Tomas Solarici, a.k.a., James Black.
Yes, they summarize my personal position on the entire UFO phenomenon.
This is the reason why, in my opinion, there will be no such thing as DISCLOSURE by the government.
Sure, the governments of the world could release ALL files on UFO sightings anytime, if they wish to.
However, just releasing such files will do absolutely nothing, since the public will clamor for the explanations as to what the UFO phenomenon is.
The government is only responsible for explaining things that deal with physical, tangible, solid, empirical evidence as we know them.
Anything else, the governmet is not in the business of dealing with.
If there will be any DISCLOSURE, it will come directly from the "Entities" themselves or from a paradigm-shifted majority of mankind (which has not happened yet).
Norio Hayakawa
P.S.
Although some people may label me as a UFO skeptic, I have never been (and will never be) a UFO debunker.
I have researched the phenomenon for more than 45 years, and although it seems (at least to me) that there appears to be no physical, tangible, irrefutable evidence whatsoever that we have ever been visited by physical extraterrestrials in physical UFOs, I have never been (and will never be) a debunker.
The UFO phenomenon and the "belief in UFOs" (as physical spacecraft piloted or maneuvered by physical aliens from elsewhere in the universe) are separate matters.
It is highly likely that the U.S. intelligence communities as well as the military have manipulated (and in some instances even created) a segment of the population's "belief in UFOs" as part of counter intelligence operations. Many defense contractors still continue to create cover stories to conceal or detract attention away from public's scrutiny of sensitive defense programs.
Yes, people's "belief in UFOs" is a very important factor in all of this.
What about alien visitations?
As most UFO enthusiasts have heard already, theoretical physicist Stephen Hawking (one of the most brilliant minds of our time) recently made several statements suggesting that there OUGHT to be extraterrestrial life and civilization elsewhere in this vast universe.
But he also made a puzzling statement (a statement which has not been popular with most UFO enthusiasts) saying that "aliens have never visited earth in UFOs and will never visit earth in UFOs".
Here is what he said: "I discount suggestions that UFOs contain beings from outer space. I think any visits by aliens would be much more obvious, and probably also, much more unpleasant."
"What is the explanation of why we have not been visited? One possibility is that the argument about the appearance of life on Earth, is wrong. Maybe the probability of life spontaneously appearing is so low, that Earth is the only planet in the galaxy, or in the observable universe, in which it happened. Another possibility is that there was a reasonable probability of forming self reproducing systems, like cells, but that most of these forms of life did not evolve intelligence."
"I am discounting reports of UFOs".
So, basically, Stephen Hawking thinks aliens exist somewhere in the universe but doesn't believe any are visiting us.
Stephen Hawking is not only skeptical about UFOs but also about alien abductions.
Yes, it is true that I consider myself a UFO skeptic when it comes to alien visitations.
I was a strong proponent of the E.T. hypothesis of the origins of UFOs up till the late 1970s when I began to abandon that theory. That was when I became a UFO skeptic.
But I consider myself a "healthy" skeptic.
That is to say, my policy is to give an opportunity to any sincere researcher to express their viewpoints, even if I may not agree with them.
Do I believe in the existence of "underground bases"?
Yes, certainly I believe that there may be "underground bases", large and small, in many locations but personally I tend to believe that those are government/military/scientific installations or laboratories that have nothing to do with aliens.
I still maintain that if, for example, the alleged Dulce underground installations in New Mexico really exist, they would most likely be related to the U.S. government's biological warfare research facilities.
However, as difficult as this may be for me to say, I do not rule out anything.
Yes, "healthy" skepticism is very important because it does not completely leave the door closed.
The door must be kept open, even slightly, for any possibility.
I am a believer in open platforms so that people with other viewpoints could freely express their opinions.
NORIO HAYAKAWA
Saturday, November 13, 2010
A suspicious ranch at the foothills of Archuleta Mesa on the Colorado side?
A suspicious ranch at the foothills of Archuleta Mesa on the Colorado side?
by Norio Hayakawa
November 13, 2010
November 11, 2010 was quite an interesting day for me.
A good colleague of mine from Dulce and I drove the entire circumference of the Archuleta Mesa, beginning from County Rd. 357 (going north) from Highway 64 in Lumberton to view the eastern slope and then entering into Colorado (near Edith), and then going west and then north on County Rd. 359 (Coyote Park Rd.) and then going northeast on County Rd. 542 (Montezuma Rd.) and then viewing the northern foothills of the Mesa.
From there we went south on County Rd. 500 (south Trujillo Rd.) and then to Indian Rte 169 (Juanita Rd.), crossing into New Mexico side to see the Western Slope and finally to the southern hills of the Mesa along the Navajo River north of the town of Dulce. All these roads were dirt roads.
We drove about 45 miles to take the entire trip around the Mesa.
This really showed me how large the entire Archuleta Mesa area is.
(By the way the Archuleta Mesa includes Mount Archuleta on the west side, just south of the Colorado state line).
In this trip we did not see anything unusual, except for a somewhat suspicious-looking private ranch (the Redding Ranch) on the northern side of the Archuleta Mesa (the Colorado side).
There seemed to be a metallic hangar-like building in the ranch and, if that is the case, then most likely a landing strip behind it.
There were some small buildings in the ranch, along with four or five metallic (bullet-proof?) hunting-towers that seem to guard the area. Those hunting towers definitely seemed out of place in such an area.
This former private ranch (the Redding Ranch) changed hands many times and is now under the total control of the Utes of Southern Colorado, and the warning sign says "No Trespassing" and "property of the Utes tribe". Could this be an outpost for a base or an operating area in Archuleta Mesa?
*READ MORE ABOUT THE REDDING RANCH AT THE END OF THIS ARTICLE.
It seemed to me that this type of a compound could easily be used by any Black Ops programs.
Moreover, the Redding Ranch may be the only access to the Archuleta Mesa from the Colorado side.
As for the Eastern slope areas of Archueta Mesa (as we drove on County Rd. 357 from Lumberton towards Edith), it seems that the Mesa is inaccessible to any heavy traffic (such as trucks, etc) since it is protected by the river and since there are no bridges on any northeastern portion of the mesa.
According to the Air Force Colonel from whom Anthony Sanchez got the information, the second, two-level underground installation is located in an area between the Eastern slope of Archuleta Mesa and County Rd. 357, near the Colorado stateline.
True, it seems that there are some ranches (which could easily be used as outposts for any Black Ops programs) near the northerneastern portion of the Mesa on the Colorado side. However, the logistics involved in creating such an alleged entrance and concealed heli-pads in that area may have been difficult or nearly impossible with lack of any bridges to get to the Eastern as well as to the Northeastern slope.
As I just mentioned it seems that the only access to the Mesa from the northeastern side or from the North side of the Mesa (i.e., from the Colorado side) may be from the Redding Ranch.
Anyway, as I mentioned, we continued driving further westward from the Redding Ranch area (still on County Rd. 542 - i.e., Montezuma Rd. - and then turned southward towards New Mexico from County Rd. 500 (Trujillo Rd.).
Then we took Indian Rte 169 (Juanita Rd., which is a public road) and entered New Mexico through County Rd. 551 (which is also a public road) to view the Western hills of the Mesa, which is also very rugged area.
Then we turned eastward on J-9 Rd. (a public road) towards Dulce.
J-9 Rd. splits into two, one becoming the Narrow Gage Rd. (also a public road which becomes Jicarilla Rd. that merges with Hwy 64 which takes you in front of Best Western and then on to Lumberton and to Chama) and the other one which becomes J-2 Rd. (also a public road).
The J-2 Rd. (a public road) is the road alongside the southern rugged hills of Archuleta Mesa.
About a third of a mile on J-2 Rd. (from the juncture of J-9 Rd. and J-2 Rd.) there is a steep road that takes you towards the summit of Mount Archuleta. Legally one must be accompanied by a Jicarilla Apache person in order to drive or hike on this steep road. Mount Archuleta is located near the west side of the Mesa slightly south of the Colorado stateline. It definitely seems that one would need a 4-wheel drive just to drive on that steep, rugged road towards the Mountain.
Then about a mile or so east on J-2 Rd., there is a steep road towards the Mesa called the Seguro Canyon Rd. This also seems to be a rugged road and probably the only road that will take you only to a point one third (if one is willing to hike for two or three hours further) to the radio antenna towers of the Archuleta Mesa). Legally one must also be accompanied by a Jicarilla Apache person in order to drive or hike on this road.
All of this shows that the access to Archuleta Mesa from the southern hills is extremely difficult, unless one is willing to hike for 5 or 6 hours to the top of the Mesa on the eastern side (the communications towers area) from these two steep roads. Moreover, as I mentioned, legally one must be accompanied by a Jicarilla Apache person to get to the top.
The way to get back to Dulce from J-2 Rd. is to keep going east on J-2 Rd. Then you will cross the bridge which connects J-2 Rd. and the River Rd.
The River Rd. then becomes Hawks Dr. which takes you back to Best Western Hotel area on Hwy 64.
*MORE ON THE REDDING RANCH:
*From a 1998 report by the National Institute For Discovery Science Report on the Redding War
Ranch at Mt. Archuleta, New Mexico - Colorado Border:
"It has been reported in the media and on the internet that the Redding War Ranch, located at 37° 2.91' north latitude and 107° 1.44' west longitude (GPS) next to Mt. Archuleta (straddling New Mexico - Colorado border), is rumored to be an undercover facility engaged in secret activity connected with Mt. Archuleta. These rumors further state that the ranch has eight armed guard watch towers scattered along the property. In addition, there is an unusual round steel (and air conditioned) building located behind a ranch entrance gate on the opposite side of the property (37° 6.02' north latitude and 107° 2.85' west longitude - GPS).
A metal plaque prominently posted on a watch tower door identified the manufacturer as Houston Blow Pipe & Steel Plate Works (P.O. BOX 1692, Houston, TX 77251-1692, phone: 713-675-2273, FAX: 713-675-5038). Having seen the towers and being interested in their origin and purpose, a simple phone call was made to the phone number above. It was learned during the phone conversation that the President and CEO of the company is Mr. W. A. Redding. Contrary to the myths that have been perpetuated, a simple explanation was provided by Mr. Redding.
1) Mr. Redding stated that the watch towers are actually hunting stands with the brand name "The Ultimate Hunting Stand." The hunting stands on the ranch are weather proof-heavy gauge steel construction (5 feet diameter, 850 pounds est. total weight) equipped with 10 feet high steel angle frame supports, steel ladder or a steel walk-up type stairway with steel pipe hand railing, propane heater and tank, five large one way mirror-pane plate glass (hinged and latched) windows (hunters can see out, but game cannot see inside), swivel chair, and indoor-outdoor carpet on floor and side wall. Further, the stands are used for photographing game and birds, and hunting of game (deer, elk, javelina, moose, sheep and turkeys). According to published literature, the stands have been in production since 1963 and employ 75 years of hunting and 60 years of steel fabrication experience in their design for all-weather hunting.
2) The round steel building is a bunk house for ranch hands designed and manufactured by Mr. Redding's Houston steel company. The bunk house design employs the same all-weather heavy gauge steel construction as the hunting stands along with air conditioning and fuel-oil heater. It is not currently being used.
3) The owner of the Redding War Ranch is Mr. Redding himself. He can be contacted at the phone number given above.
4) The Redding War Ranch is used to raise small herds of Beefalo"
OR, IS THERE MORE TO THE REDDING RANCH THAN THE ABOVE EXPLANATION BY NIDS?
Yes, I think so.
Here is what my good colleague from Dulce says about this. And I agree with him:
"Based on the source of research by NIDS, yes, this was their take on the ranch years after the ranch let its defense down and allowed folks to travel through it.
From early 1960's to late 1980's, you could not trespass on the Redding ranch, not even to retrieve a cow.
Why?
That is the million dollar question.
And, why are all the structures including the towers, doors and windows in bunkhouse constructed of a very heavy gage steel (making them bullet proof)?
NIDS continues to provide information or is it disinformation? to keep us off track, in my opinion.
In the fall of 1997, I led Gabe Valdez (former New Mexico State Patrol Officer in charge of the Dulce area) and two other scientists from NIDS on the expedition and continued through up to Mt. Archuleta.
We were able to go directly to the towers, enter, photograph and see the tags with the manufacturer.
I told them that the glass, doors, shutters and structures were bullet-proof and was going to show them, but inexplicably, Gabe Valdez stopped me.
I could not get them to go to the "bunkhouse and hangar" to investigate further.
It seemed that they were not very interested in the facilities.
Also, I noticed that the airstrip had been plowed and planted with oats.
But again, no interest was shown by Gabe Valdez and the NIDS folks".
I could not agree with him more, especially his take on NIDS.
I also do not trust NIDS (National Institute of Discovery Sciences).
Norio Hayakawa
http://noriohayakawa2012.blogspot.com
by Norio Hayakawa
November 13, 2010
November 11, 2010 was quite an interesting day for me.
A good colleague of mine from Dulce and I drove the entire circumference of the Archuleta Mesa, beginning from County Rd. 357 (going north) from Highway 64 in Lumberton to view the eastern slope and then entering into Colorado (near Edith), and then going west and then north on County Rd. 359 (Coyote Park Rd.) and then going northeast on County Rd. 542 (Montezuma Rd.) and then viewing the northern foothills of the Mesa.
From there we went south on County Rd. 500 (south Trujillo Rd.) and then to Indian Rte 169 (Juanita Rd.), crossing into New Mexico side to see the Western Slope and finally to the southern hills of the Mesa along the Navajo River north of the town of Dulce. All these roads were dirt roads.
We drove about 45 miles to take the entire trip around the Mesa.
This really showed me how large the entire Archuleta Mesa area is.
(By the way the Archuleta Mesa includes Mount Archuleta on the west side, just south of the Colorado state line).
In this trip we did not see anything unusual, except for a somewhat suspicious-looking private ranch (the Redding Ranch) on the northern side of the Archuleta Mesa (the Colorado side).
There seemed to be a metallic hangar-like building in the ranch and, if that is the case, then most likely a landing strip behind it.
There were some small buildings in the ranch, along with four or five metallic (bullet-proof?) hunting-towers that seem to guard the area. Those hunting towers definitely seemed out of place in such an area.
This former private ranch (the Redding Ranch) changed hands many times and is now under the total control of the Utes of Southern Colorado, and the warning sign says "No Trespassing" and "property of the Utes tribe". Could this be an outpost for a base or an operating area in Archuleta Mesa?
*READ MORE ABOUT THE REDDING RANCH AT THE END OF THIS ARTICLE.
It seemed to me that this type of a compound could easily be used by any Black Ops programs.
Moreover, the Redding Ranch may be the only access to the Archuleta Mesa from the Colorado side.
As for the Eastern slope areas of Archueta Mesa (as we drove on County Rd. 357 from Lumberton towards Edith), it seems that the Mesa is inaccessible to any heavy traffic (such as trucks, etc) since it is protected by the river and since there are no bridges on any northeastern portion of the mesa.
According to the Air Force Colonel from whom Anthony Sanchez got the information, the second, two-level underground installation is located in an area between the Eastern slope of Archuleta Mesa and County Rd. 357, near the Colorado stateline.
True, it seems that there are some ranches (which could easily be used as outposts for any Black Ops programs) near the northerneastern portion of the Mesa on the Colorado side. However, the logistics involved in creating such an alleged entrance and concealed heli-pads in that area may have been difficult or nearly impossible with lack of any bridges to get to the Eastern as well as to the Northeastern slope.
As I just mentioned it seems that the only access to the Mesa from the northeastern side or from the North side of the Mesa (i.e., from the Colorado side) may be from the Redding Ranch.
Anyway, as I mentioned, we continued driving further westward from the Redding Ranch area (still on County Rd. 542 - i.e., Montezuma Rd. - and then turned southward towards New Mexico from County Rd. 500 (Trujillo Rd.).
Then we took Indian Rte 169 (Juanita Rd., which is a public road) and entered New Mexico through County Rd. 551 (which is also a public road) to view the Western hills of the Mesa, which is also very rugged area.
Then we turned eastward on J-9 Rd. (a public road) towards Dulce.
J-9 Rd. splits into two, one becoming the Narrow Gage Rd. (also a public road which becomes Jicarilla Rd. that merges with Hwy 64 which takes you in front of Best Western and then on to Lumberton and to Chama) and the other one which becomes J-2 Rd. (also a public road).
The J-2 Rd. (a public road) is the road alongside the southern rugged hills of Archuleta Mesa.
About a third of a mile on J-2 Rd. (from the juncture of J-9 Rd. and J-2 Rd.) there is a steep road that takes you towards the summit of Mount Archuleta. Legally one must be accompanied by a Jicarilla Apache person in order to drive or hike on this steep road. Mount Archuleta is located near the west side of the Mesa slightly south of the Colorado stateline. It definitely seems that one would need a 4-wheel drive just to drive on that steep, rugged road towards the Mountain.
Then about a mile or so east on J-2 Rd., there is a steep road towards the Mesa called the Seguro Canyon Rd. This also seems to be a rugged road and probably the only road that will take you only to a point one third (if one is willing to hike for two or three hours further) to the radio antenna towers of the Archuleta Mesa). Legally one must also be accompanied by a Jicarilla Apache person in order to drive or hike on this road.
All of this shows that the access to Archuleta Mesa from the southern hills is extremely difficult, unless one is willing to hike for 5 or 6 hours to the top of the Mesa on the eastern side (the communications towers area) from these two steep roads. Moreover, as I mentioned, legally one must be accompanied by a Jicarilla Apache person to get to the top.
The way to get back to Dulce from J-2 Rd. is to keep going east on J-2 Rd. Then you will cross the bridge which connects J-2 Rd. and the River Rd.
The River Rd. then becomes Hawks Dr. which takes you back to Best Western Hotel area on Hwy 64.
*MORE ON THE REDDING RANCH:
*From a 1998 report by the National Institute For Discovery Science Report on the Redding War
Ranch at Mt. Archuleta, New Mexico - Colorado Border:
"It has been reported in the media and on the internet that the Redding War Ranch, located at 37° 2.91' north latitude and 107° 1.44' west longitude (GPS) next to Mt. Archuleta (straddling New Mexico - Colorado border), is rumored to be an undercover facility engaged in secret activity connected with Mt. Archuleta. These rumors further state that the ranch has eight armed guard watch towers scattered along the property. In addition, there is an unusual round steel (and air conditioned) building located behind a ranch entrance gate on the opposite side of the property (37° 6.02' north latitude and 107° 2.85' west longitude - GPS).
A metal plaque prominently posted on a watch tower door identified the manufacturer as Houston Blow Pipe & Steel Plate Works (P.O. BOX 1692, Houston, TX 77251-1692, phone: 713-675-2273, FAX: 713-675-5038). Having seen the towers and being interested in their origin and purpose, a simple phone call was made to the phone number above. It was learned during the phone conversation that the President and CEO of the company is Mr. W. A. Redding. Contrary to the myths that have been perpetuated, a simple explanation was provided by Mr. Redding.
1) Mr. Redding stated that the watch towers are actually hunting stands with the brand name "The Ultimate Hunting Stand." The hunting stands on the ranch are weather proof-heavy gauge steel construction (5 feet diameter, 850 pounds est. total weight) equipped with 10 feet high steel angle frame supports, steel ladder or a steel walk-up type stairway with steel pipe hand railing, propane heater and tank, five large one way mirror-pane plate glass (hinged and latched) windows (hunters can see out, but game cannot see inside), swivel chair, and indoor-outdoor carpet on floor and side wall. Further, the stands are used for photographing game and birds, and hunting of game (deer, elk, javelina, moose, sheep and turkeys). According to published literature, the stands have been in production since 1963 and employ 75 years of hunting and 60 years of steel fabrication experience in their design for all-weather hunting.
2) The round steel building is a bunk house for ranch hands designed and manufactured by Mr. Redding's Houston steel company. The bunk house design employs the same all-weather heavy gauge steel construction as the hunting stands along with air conditioning and fuel-oil heater. It is not currently being used.
3) The owner of the Redding War Ranch is Mr. Redding himself. He can be contacted at the phone number given above.
4) The Redding War Ranch is used to raise small herds of Beefalo"
OR, IS THERE MORE TO THE REDDING RANCH THAN THE ABOVE EXPLANATION BY NIDS?
Yes, I think so.
Here is what my good colleague from Dulce says about this. And I agree with him:
"Based on the source of research by NIDS, yes, this was their take on the ranch years after the ranch let its defense down and allowed folks to travel through it.
From early 1960's to late 1980's, you could not trespass on the Redding ranch, not even to retrieve a cow.
Why?
That is the million dollar question.
And, why are all the structures including the towers, doors and windows in bunkhouse constructed of a very heavy gage steel (making them bullet proof)?
NIDS continues to provide information or is it disinformation? to keep us off track, in my opinion.
In the fall of 1997, I led Gabe Valdez (former New Mexico State Patrol Officer in charge of the Dulce area) and two other scientists from NIDS on the expedition and continued through up to Mt. Archuleta.
We were able to go directly to the towers, enter, photograph and see the tags with the manufacturer.
I told them that the glass, doors, shutters and structures were bullet-proof and was going to show them, but inexplicably, Gabe Valdez stopped me.
I could not get them to go to the "bunkhouse and hangar" to investigate further.
It seemed that they were not very interested in the facilities.
Also, I noticed that the airstrip had been plowed and planted with oats.
But again, no interest was shown by Gabe Valdez and the NIDS folks".
I could not agree with him more, especially his take on NIDS.
I also do not trust NIDS (National Institute of Discovery Sciences).
Norio Hayakawa
http://noriohayakawa2012.blogspot.com
Tuesday, November 9, 2010
Some old but fascinating reports from Dulce, New Mexico residents
E-mail = noriohayakawa@gmail.com
Here are some old but fascinating UFO sighting reports from Dulce, New Mexico residents.
The first one is actually a quote from an article written by reporter Tom Sharpe* that appeared on April 5, 1996 on Albuquerque Journal:
(QUOTE)
"Darren Vigil Gray says that in the late 1960s, when he was a fourth-grader on the Jicarilla Apache Reservation in northern Rio Arriba County, he saw a flying saucer on his way to parochial school about 6:30 a.m.
A "dirty metallic colored" disk about 20 feet in diameter passed about 50 feet in the air over his school bus between Dulce and Lumberton, he said.
"It created all this chaos on the bus", Gary said. He said his brother, then a sixth-grader, yelled, "It's a flying saucer", but the priest driving the van didn't stop to investigate the phenomenon and instead stepped on the gas.
Gray said the disk appeared to come from Archuleta Mesa and continued for several miles over the low hills south of the highway.
He said cattle mutilations soon began to be reported in the same area, and the mesa was said to be a sort of UFO base.
"The experience really changed my whole scope", said Gray, now a well-known artist in Santa Fe.
(END QUOTE)
This is quite interesting because according to researcher Anthony Sanchez, an alleged former Air Force Colonel in California told Sanchez that one of the entrances to the base is located between the eastern slope of Archuleta Mesa and County Road 357 near the Colorado state line. County Road 357 going north starts on Highway 64 in Lumberton. Lumberton does have a well-known Catholic school and I clearly remember a teacher from that school testified at the 2009 Dulce base conference (held in Dulce, New Mexico) about some interesting artistic imagery (relating to many UFO sightings in that area) created by many children who attended that school.
I also just recently learned that one of the sons of Manuel Gomez (formerly the largest rancher in the Dulce area) was also in the same bus with Darren Vigil Gray.
Now a good colleague of mine and fellow researcher, he personally described to me the metallic, disc-shaped object that he saw from inside the same bus that morning.
According to him, the object was flying slightly above Highway 64.....only less than 10 feet above the highway.....and this took place between Dulce and Lumberton.
He told me that the bus driver, a priest from the Catholic school in Lumberton, got so scared that he began to step on the gas pedal and sped toward the school in Lumberton.
The following interviews were conducted by members of the Aztec UFO Oral History Project. Many thanks to the Aztec UFO Oral History Project for preserving these fascinating reports:
Here is a January, 2000 interview with Lloyd Tiznado regarding UFO activity in Dulce, New Mexico:
http://www.aztecufo.com/ufooralhistory/oral7.htm
What is particularly interesting in the above interview is that the interviewee mentions about a possible UFO base south of Dulce between Dulce and Gobernador.
This is just south of Highway 64 and southwest from the juncture of Highway 64 and Highway 537.
Again, according to researcher Anthony Sanchez, an alleged former Air Force Colonel in California claimed to have stated that the third underground installation was right near Ground Zero area of the 1967 underground nuclear explosion. The colonel will not give the exact co-ordinates to the entrance of this third installation but he hints that it is not too far from Ground Zero.
By the way, here is how to get to the Ground Zero area of the 1967 underground nuclear explosion site:
From U.S. Highway 64 going southwest from Dulce, go past the juncture of Highway 64 and Highway 537. Keep on going for about another 6 and a half miles.
Then turn south onto BIA-J10.
After a little over 7 miles, bear right at the fork in the road.
Stay on this road.
You will enter Carson National Forest, and it's another half-mile to Ground Zero, where there is a U.S. government plaque.
Here is a June, 2001 interview with Brian from Dulce:
http://www.aztecufo.com/ufooralhistory/oral13.htmand, finally,
Here is a 2001 interview with Bernadette regarding underground noises in Dulce, New Mexico:
http://www.aztecufo.com/ufooralhistory/oral14.htm
---------
*Former Albuquerque Journal reporter, Tom Sharpe, seemed to have believed that one of the origins of the rumors about the Dulce underground base and tunnels may have stemmed from the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers' works on the San Juan-Chama Diversion Project (which may have started in the mid 1960s), involving some 100 miles of deep tunnels to channel water from the west side of the Continental Divide (near Dulce) to the east side.
Others trace the rumors to the 1967 underground experimental nuclear blast which took place about 22 miles southwest of Dulce. This U.S. governmental experiment, carried out by the Atomic Energy Commision, was called Project Gasbuggy and was purportedly conducted to ease the flow of natural gas in that region.
Some say that this may have caused creation of further cavities in that region, facilitating the creation of underground tunnels in that area.
On top of all this came the cattle mutilations which seemed to have started in the mid 1970s in that area, giving rise to the rumors about the already existent "alien" involvement in all of this.
NORIO HAYAKAWA
http://noriohayakawa2012.blogspot.com
Here are some old but fascinating UFO sighting reports from Dulce, New Mexico residents.
The first one is actually a quote from an article written by reporter Tom Sharpe* that appeared on April 5, 1996 on Albuquerque Journal:
(QUOTE)
"Darren Vigil Gray says that in the late 1960s, when he was a fourth-grader on the Jicarilla Apache Reservation in northern Rio Arriba County, he saw a flying saucer on his way to parochial school about 6:30 a.m.
A "dirty metallic colored" disk about 20 feet in diameter passed about 50 feet in the air over his school bus between Dulce and Lumberton, he said.
"It created all this chaos on the bus", Gary said. He said his brother, then a sixth-grader, yelled, "It's a flying saucer", but the priest driving the van didn't stop to investigate the phenomenon and instead stepped on the gas.
Gray said the disk appeared to come from Archuleta Mesa and continued for several miles over the low hills south of the highway.
He said cattle mutilations soon began to be reported in the same area, and the mesa was said to be a sort of UFO base.
"The experience really changed my whole scope", said Gray, now a well-known artist in Santa Fe.
(END QUOTE)
This is quite interesting because according to researcher Anthony Sanchez, an alleged former Air Force Colonel in California told Sanchez that one of the entrances to the base is located between the eastern slope of Archuleta Mesa and County Road 357 near the Colorado state line. County Road 357 going north starts on Highway 64 in Lumberton. Lumberton does have a well-known Catholic school and I clearly remember a teacher from that school testified at the 2009 Dulce base conference (held in Dulce, New Mexico) about some interesting artistic imagery (relating to many UFO sightings in that area) created by many children who attended that school.
I also just recently learned that one of the sons of Manuel Gomez (formerly the largest rancher in the Dulce area) was also in the same bus with Darren Vigil Gray.
Now a good colleague of mine and fellow researcher, he personally described to me the metallic, disc-shaped object that he saw from inside the same bus that morning.
According to him, the object was flying slightly above Highway 64.....only less than 10 feet above the highway.....and this took place between Dulce and Lumberton.
He told me that the bus driver, a priest from the Catholic school in Lumberton, got so scared that he began to step on the gas pedal and sped toward the school in Lumberton.
The following interviews were conducted by members of the Aztec UFO Oral History Project. Many thanks to the Aztec UFO Oral History Project for preserving these fascinating reports:
Here is a January, 2000 interview with Lloyd Tiznado regarding UFO activity in Dulce, New Mexico:
http://www.aztecufo.com/ufooralhistory/oral7.htm
What is particularly interesting in the above interview is that the interviewee mentions about a possible UFO base south of Dulce between Dulce and Gobernador.
This is just south of Highway 64 and southwest from the juncture of Highway 64 and Highway 537.
Again, according to researcher Anthony Sanchez, an alleged former Air Force Colonel in California claimed to have stated that the third underground installation was right near Ground Zero area of the 1967 underground nuclear explosion. The colonel will not give the exact co-ordinates to the entrance of this third installation but he hints that it is not too far from Ground Zero.
By the way, here is how to get to the Ground Zero area of the 1967 underground nuclear explosion site:
From U.S. Highway 64 going southwest from Dulce, go past the juncture of Highway 64 and Highway 537. Keep on going for about another 6 and a half miles.
Then turn south onto BIA-J10.
After a little over 7 miles, bear right at the fork in the road.
Stay on this road.
You will enter Carson National Forest, and it's another half-mile to Ground Zero, where there is a U.S. government plaque.
Here is a June, 2001 interview with Brian from Dulce:
http://www.aztecufo.com/ufooralhistory/oral13.htmand, finally,
Here is a 2001 interview with Bernadette regarding underground noises in Dulce, New Mexico:
http://www.aztecufo.com/ufooralhistory/oral14.htm
---------
*Former Albuquerque Journal reporter, Tom Sharpe, seemed to have believed that one of the origins of the rumors about the Dulce underground base and tunnels may have stemmed from the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers' works on the San Juan-Chama Diversion Project (which may have started in the mid 1960s), involving some 100 miles of deep tunnels to channel water from the west side of the Continental Divide (near Dulce) to the east side.
Others trace the rumors to the 1967 underground experimental nuclear blast which took place about 22 miles southwest of Dulce. This U.S. governmental experiment, carried out by the Atomic Energy Commision, was called Project Gasbuggy and was purportedly conducted to ease the flow of natural gas in that region.
Some say that this may have caused creation of further cavities in that region, facilitating the creation of underground tunnels in that area.
On top of all this came the cattle mutilations which seemed to have started in the mid 1970s in that area, giving rise to the rumors about the already existent "alien" involvement in all of this.
NORIO HAYAKAWA
http://noriohayakawa2012.blogspot.com
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)