Mastodawn

from Wikipedia article about David "I saw the aliens" Grusch

Australian political commentator Caitlin Johnstone pointed out that this resurgence of UFO/UAP coverage is coincident with a renewed U.S. emphasis on weaponizing space: "Is it a coincidence that this new UFO narrative began its rollout in 2017, around the same time as the rollout of the Space Force? Are we being manipulated at mass scale about aliens and UFOs to help grease the wheels for the movement of war machinery into space?"

John Shirley Jul 28, 2023

Johnstone's speculation is not far fetched. There is a history of military intel using UFO claims and hysteria to smokescreen foreign intel regarding our stealth planes, and other experiments and efforts. That could apply to the weaponization of space. These theoretical weapons would be pointed downward, at human targets--not outwards, at approaching flying saucers.

John Shirley Jul 28, 2023

For my own speculation on the militarization of space, see my technothriller novel, which just came out:

https://bookshop.org/p/books/suborbital-7/18871631?ean=9781803363820

Seán Fenian Jul 28, 2023

@JohnShirley2023 👍👍 just bought a copy.

Seán Fenian Jul 31, 2023

@JohnShirley2023 It's very good as a Clancyesque technothriller ... but I find myself compelled to note that it contains some pretty significant orbital mechanics errors. S-7 can't be "geosync over Canada" at 2000km. Geosync doesn't work that way. They're 33,000km too low to be geosync over anywhere.

John Shirley Jul 31, 2023

@zakalwe you're right--although! Although geosync has become a bendier term than that, it has come to mean, geostationary relative to a place on the ground. Maybe I should have said geostationary.

Seán Fenian Jul 31, 2023

@JohnShirley2023 actually that's even harder, because you can only be geostationary over the equator (the Clarke orbit).
2000km is about a two-hour orbit.

John Shirley Jul 31, 2023

@zakalwe rats. Well then, what's the proper term for being stationary (relatively, though of course the object is moving in space) over a specific spot on the ground, at 2000 km? If there are further printings I may be able to make some corrections.

Seán Fenian Jul 31, 2023

@JohnShirley2023 The short answer to that is you can't do it without continuously burning fuel. But only the purists like me are going to worry about it, so .... 😉

Seán Fenian Jul 31, 2023

@JohnShirley2023 I just did the math ... at ~2000km gravitational attraction is about 5.7 meters per second squared, so you need to be maintaining roughly 0.58G of thrust to hold station over a point on the earth. Neglecting the continuous orbital plane change because you're not over the equator.

John Shirley Jul 31, 2023

@zakalwe would an ion thruster, as an adjunct, provide enough thrust?

Seán Fenian Jul 31, 2023

@JohnShirley2023 no, the strength of ion thrusters is being able to maintain low accelerations (like 0.01G) for months on end on almost no fuel, because they have insane specific impulse as high as 50,000 seconds. (The Space Shuttle main engines managed 450.) If we had an ion thruster that could produce enough thrust to maintain the 0.58G boost you'd need to hold station over ground at 2000km, it would open up the solar system at a stroke.

(We are working on them by the way. One example to look up is something called VASIMR.)

John Shirley Jul 31, 2023

@zakalwe would be be Legrange point?

Seán Fenian Jul 31, 2023

@JohnShirley2023 That's even further out. L1 and L2, the closest two Lagrange points, are about 1.5 million km out towards and away from the sun respectively. They're stationary relative to Earth and Sol, but not relative to any particular point on Earth's surface.
The only way to be holding position 2000km up over Canada (or anywhere else) would be to continuously burn fuel for station-keeping. Not really feasible with chemical propulsion.

Of course, all this said, I'm not holding Sub Orbital 7 to strict scientific rigor because it would need such an insane specific impulse to make SSTO with that mass ratio in the first place. 😉

John Shirley Jul 31, 2023

@zakalwe station keeping in microgravity is not so expensive, necessarily. Or are you saying it's too low for that? At any rate I establish they have new fuels that are highly compressed.

Seán Fenian Jul 31, 2023

@JohnShirley2023 yeah, the handwave of super-densified cryogenic slush fuels is a good one. It helps with the storage volume at least, which cuts down on structure required to hold fuel, and hence overall mass.

The thing about 'station-keeping in microgravity' is, relative to what. Relative to the ISS? Easy. Maybe a half-second burn every couple of days just to correct for drift. Relative to the Japanese station (which I haven't actually gotten to yet)? Again, easy. Really, drift is all you have to worry about.

But holding station above a point on the ground is a whole different problem, because in a 2000km orbit you're moving about ... lemme see ... roughly five kilometers a second faster than the ground is.

Honestly? Thinking about it if I were going to fix that, I'd forget about geosync and just change that "geosync over Canada" to something like "passing over Western Canada right now." That avoids all of the major orbital-dynamics issues, and everything else is handwavable.

John Shirley Jul 31, 2023

@zakalwe Frequent steadying adjustments, carried out automatically, is not inconceivable...if I get a chance to do a re-edit I'll throw that in. What about ion thrusters? Is the ship too massy to be helped by them?

Seán Fenian Jul 31, 2023

@JohnShirley2023 Not CURRENT ion thrusters, but maybe future ones. They're really the wrong tool for the job, even for orbital station-keeping.

There's actually one type of very clever thruster that uses no fuel at all, but again it's very low acceleration. Fundamentally you spool out a very long wire, charge the wire electrically, and use the reaction against the Earth's magnetic field to generate thrust on the order of .001G.

John Shirley Jul 31, 2023

@zakalwe right I read about that! Thanks for the reminder, if I write a sequel I'll work that in. It's very cool.

Hey do you think space elevators are plausible?

Seán Fenian Jul 31, 2023

@JohnShirley2023 Totally, given the right materials. And we're working on developing materials with sufficient tensile strength.

Skyhooks are a similar idea that in certain respects are actually easier (in theory) to build.

John Shirley Jul 31, 2023

@zakalwe I am trying to make plausible an idea that an overheated Earth could somehow draw heat through space elevators and skyhooks (along with their original purpose) to cool off especially threatened areas of the planet, the heat then used to generate energy at the orbital end of the elevator etc. Ridiculous? Possible?

Seán Fenian Jul 31, 2023

@JohnShirley2023 Hmmmmmmmm.

If the supermaterial used to construct the elevator were also a thermal superconductor (which is not implausible; diamond conducts heat so fast it is close to being a thermal superconductor), I have no doubt you could power an orbital facility using heat carried up the cable.

The amount of heat you'd have to dissipate to significantly cool areas of the planet that way, though, is staggering. Look on the web for David Morgan-Mar's Irregular Webcomic. In one of his footnotes he discusses in detail the hypothetical thermal dynamics of keeping Coruscant from cooking itself. (Or trying, at any rate.) It explains the problem well.

Realistically, I suspect that any future approach to actively cooling the planet is going to have to rely on preventing some of the incoming solar energy from reaching the planet in the first place. We've demonstrated that it is technically possible to beam infrared lasers into space, but lasers are so inefficient that it's a net loss.

John Shirley Jul 31, 2023

@zakalwe Yes I've thought about the challenge of getting enough heat up. It would be a local effect, but one that could affect meteorological conditions, I hope positively, perhaps creating a greater likelihood of rain, condensation...you'd have to have a LOT of these to make a difference. If it helped ten percent it might be worth doing if you're making space elevators anyway...The Earth might end up looking spiny...could provide energy to be translated into electricity for orbital use...

Seán Fenian Jul 31, 2023

@JohnShirley2023 Yeah, if you're already building the elevators and the materials HAPPEN by narrative chance to have the right properties ... sure, if you've got it there already, why not use it? Every little helps. We only need a few percent.

You could possibly even deploy solar-cell "parasols" from the geostationary point on the elevator and transmit the power back down the cable, if it was an electrical superconductor as well as thermal.

John Shirley Jul 31, 2023

@zakalwe right! That could serve dual purposes, create coolant areas (and possibly rain where there wouldn't have been?) I mean, heat rises...so if you could help it rise...and rise and rise...

John Shirley Jul 31, 2023

@zakalwe re the SSTO in S7 - You're saying the orbital vehicle's mass ratio wouldn't work out? But of course this is set in the future and assumes new technologies...and some of it based on some material leaked to me by...er, friends in classified places...but it's thought to be plausible. First of all it hasn't got the mass of something like that attempted now--new lighter yet powerful metals are coming (and marvels like transparent metals). Yeah I thought LaGrange wouldn't work.

Seán Fenian Jul 31, 2023

@JohnShirley2023 I think the mass ratio can be handwaved with your superdense-fuels gambit. Lighter materials, denser fuel storage, more efficient engines...

Mr. Completely Jul 28, 2023

@JohnShirley2023 all that makes sense, plus it makes a convenient distraction from literally anything else you might want to distract from - for instance, a bunch of upcoming congressional votes that could destroy internet privacy forever - since "whoa aliens" will always draw the clicks and eyeballs. There's no conflict between that and what you're talking about either, it's a useful noise generator on two different timelines/subjects

Medea Vanamonde🏳️‍⚧️ ♀Jul 28, 2023

@JohnShirley2023 No Pink Teran Weapon is going to take out an X-ist Destructor or Pleasure Saucer

John Shirley Jul 28, 2023

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/David_Grusch_UFO_whistleblower_claims

read down to the scientist's responses. Essentially, this Grusch guy is full of shit.

David Grusch UFO whistleblower claims - Wikipedia

Medea Vanamonde🏳️‍⚧️ ♀Jul 28, 2023

@JohnShirley2023 GQP thinks Stargate SG-1 is a documentary

Pythia Jul 28, 2023

@JohnShirley2023 it could be, one thing that would gwt ppl back into the military would be space travel

Alan Aster Jul 28, 2023

@JohnShirley2023 of course we’re being manipulated by warhawks at all times.

But there are over 100 billion stars in our galaxy alone. Do you think there’s even the remotest chance that humanity is the most advanced species in all those star systems?

And why fixate on bashing Grusch’s whistleblowing when the other two pilots that testified have way more compelling camera/infrared/radar/eye witness evidence?

John Shirley Jul 28, 2023

@AlanAster The other people who testified saw only lights and vague shapes moving in the sky. Grusch claims to have seen alien bodies, etc etc. Very different. Of COURSE there are extraterrestrials--out there. Somewhere. There's no evidence they've been here...yet. This guy is likely someone setting up his plans for a moneymaking book and movie.

Alan Aster Jul 29, 2023

@JohnShirley2023 Fair enough! If Grusch is lying, I hope he goes to jail for lying under oath and wasting taxpayers' time/money.

On the other hand, former pilots Lt. Graves and Cmdr. Fravor seem (in my opinion) very uninterested in the spotlight, and as credible of witnesses as I’ve ever seen.

Alan Aster Jul 29, 2023

@JohnShirley2023 I’d agree that many sightings are most likely human/military craft, black-op craft, natural phenomena, hallucination, etc.

But I’d bet what these 2 pilots saw were non-human spacecraft, and that some of these downed crafts have, over the years, illegally been in military custody, in attempt to reverse engineer for military dominance.

In any case, totally fine if we disagree and I appreciate the friendly discourse! 🖖

John Shirley Jul 29, 2023

@AlanAster Right, the pilots are credible, I don't doubt they saw what they testified they saw. But as I said earlier--they didn't see the rivets on the spacecraft (speaking figuratively). All they saw were moving objects, moving in strange ways. Google Preliminary Assessment: Unidentified Aerial Phenomena. The pdf says: "analysis of the data supports the construct that when individual UAP incidents are resolved
they will fall into...explanatory categories" (continued in the next reply):

John Shirley Jul 29, 2023

@AlanAster ...and yeah, aerial debris, one was a partly deflated balloon as it turned out, some are probably mylar party baloons which are very shiny and deceptive and cause many UFO reports and move in weird ways. Atmospheric conditions and ordinary illusions can cause an object to seem bigger than it is. Why jump to betting the 2 pilots saw nonhuman craft? What's probability tell you? Drones or experimental foreign craft are more likely. Occam's Razor is a thing.

John Shirley Jul 29, 2023

@AlanAster if they had shot down and recovered alien craft, as the Senators said and other people in govt had said, no way they could keep that secret. Just. Too. Big. A human or natural cause will always be more likely. Did you know that many UFO reports come from clusters of spiders that use little parachute like webs to migrate? they look truly bizarre up there.

John Shirley Jul 29, 2023

@AlanAster https://a-z-animals.com/blog/flying-spiders-where-they-live/

Flying Spiders: Where They Live

Where do flying spiders live? We've done the research! Jump in to read about the ultimate flying spiders and where they live!

AZ Animals

Seán Fenian Jul 29, 2023

@JohnShirley2023 @AlanAster I remember a comment LONG LONG ago from one of the USAF Generals in charge of Project Blue Book.

"Unidentified flying objects don't interest me," he said. "Now, IDENTIFIED flying objects ... THOSE are interesting."

Alan Aster Jul 31, 2023

@JohnShirley2023 Those 2 pilots Fravor & Graves describe (while under oath) seeing on clear days with no visibility issues, tictac-shaped objects that accelerated vastly beyond any military craft's capability.

You can publicly view the camera & infrared video of this incident. The object shows no heat exhaust, rotor wash, or any sign of propulsion.

In their testimony and previous interviews, they rule out all ordinary explanations. They also state that it jammed their radar.

John Shirley Jul 31, 2023

@AlanAster They don't rule out ordinary explanations. *You* rule out ordinary explanations. Or rather, ordinary isn't the word--non ET explanations. If there were indications of jammed radar--such indications can be iffy--then that suggests foreign drones or something similar. The Chinese seem to be testing our defensive capabilities--note those balloon intrusions--so it could be them. It *looked* like "objects that accelerated vastly beyond any military craft's capability"--common illusions.

Alan Aster Aug 1, 2023

@JohnShirley2023 Come on, John, it's silly to say the Chinese or any other nation or company would secretly have a craft that can go from stationary to supersonic in a matter of seconds. If any nation had that tech, they wouldn't hide it, they would flaunt it for military dominance.

It didn't *look* like it accelerated extraordinarily, it *did* accelerate extraordinarily. Camera, infrared, radar, & pilot witnesses. Not an illusion.

John Shirley Aug 1, 2023

@AlanAster Or -- they would test it. Use it to spy on our defense capabilities. . .as for illusion, that's not the kind I mean. I should have been clearer. The object is there--but is it doing what it seems to be doing? “Pilots are human,” West said in the video, “and while they are great at flying planes, they are not always good at identifying things they have never seen before. But really, who is?” Again: probability. What's more probable, some unknown earthly misinterpretation? Or ETs?

John Shirley Aug 1, 2023

@AlanAster Whether the radar corroborated unusual speed I don't know. But suppose it were, as one example, a mylar balloon, a very low-mass object, and suppose it was farther than it appeared so he couldn't be sure of size--there is nothing in the bg for scale--and suppose it was suddenly sucked into something like a jet stream, or some other fast air current. It would move *very* fast as it's *very* light. It would change direct "impossibly" because it's not using any engine, its swept away.

Alan Aster Aug 2, 2023

@JohnShirley2023 Yes, no doubt that some sightings were balloons. But in this case, Cmdr. Fravor stated in opening statement (under oath) that the tictac-shaped object went rapidly from altitudes of 80,000 feet to 20,000 feet, stayed there, then went back up to 80,000 feet.

He also mentions, "Clear skies, light winds, calm seas, no white caps or waves...It rapidly accelerated in front of us and disappeared."

His description & the footage do not match balloons, human craft or weather phenomena.

John Shirley Jul 31, 2023

@AlanAster and they'd have been too far off to see any rotor wash or propulsion or exhaust. Where's this video? The stuff I saw on video from these accounts was very distant. Also this was almost 20 years ago! 2004, if we're talking about the same thing, so couldn't have been China's current "testing" program (if they have one). I think it was far more likely that they saw something that looked like more than it was. It's unclear how close Fravor got to what he saw.

John Shirley Jul 31, 2023

@AlanAster CBS news: Rubio told 60 Minutes that unidentified aerial phenomena detected by our military are "not ours," and he's concerned they might represent a foreign surveillance threat. "We certainly want to make sure that it's not a foreign adversary capability, meaning…the Russians, or the Chinese…have developed some technology.... It's a huge counterintelligence threat if that's what it is. We want to take that seriously."

Seán Fenian Jul 31, 2023

@JohnShirley2023 @AlanAster A spokesman from AARO, the actual government project that actually investigates this stuff, stated that the supposed "whistleblower" who can't actually show any evidence for his claims "because it's all classified" was never a part of the project anyway.

John Shirley Jul 31, 2023

@zakalwe @AlanAster then he's been lying-- because he claimed to be part of the program. So he wasn't after all. So he has no credibility.

Seán Fenian Jul 31, 2023

@JohnShirley2023 @AlanAster Not that the Republicans care that he's lying. They probably knew in the first place.

John Shirley Jul 31, 2023

@zakalwe @AlanAster yes it's just a smokescreen for them

John Shirley Jul 31, 2023

@AlanAster https://www.history.com/videos/uss-nimitz-tic-tac-ufo-declassified-video here's some good video. It's too blurry to tell what it is. There's a famous super 8 film of a disc shaped object taken over Catalina, flying along. Analysis showed it was an airplane--it's just that often in the distance and with haze airplanes or jets blur into oval shapes. In the video when the thing leaves the view, it doesn't to me seem to be moving with any kind of unprecedented acceleration. Pilots are human beings, who've all see science fiction movies

HISTORY

The HISTORY Channel - Geschichte erleben! The HISTORY Channel ist der deutschsprachige Pay-TV-Sender für spannende Dokumentationen und macht die Faszination von Menschen und Ereignissen täglich greifbar!

HISTORY

Alan Aster Aug 1, 2023

@JohnShirley2023 I've seen this before. We've already established that most sightings have simple explanations. The tictac-shaped craft has no simple explanation.

John Shirley Aug 1, 2023

@AlanAster Okay, and I do yes believe the pilots, but the far-greater probability is some explanation *more simple than extraterrestrial craft*.

John Shirley Aug 1, 2023

@AlanAster “Pilots are human,” West said in the video, “and while they are great at flying planes, they are not always good at identifying things they have never seen before. But really, who is?” https://thedebrief.org/recent-pilot-uap-sightings-point-to-aviation-safety-challenges-experts-say/

Recent Pilot UAP Sightings Point to Aviation Safety Challenges, Experts Say - The Debrief

Science, Tech and Defense for the Rebelliously Curious.

The Debrief

John Shirley Aug 1, 2023

@AlanAster I'm not sure about any of this, though. Except one thing: David Grusch is a liar. The pilots--I'm sure they're telling the truth. But not Grusch. And it'll always be more probable that it's got *some* Earthly explanation than that it's ET based.

Alan Aster Aug 2, 2023

@JohnShirley2023 I'm not 100% sure either and perfectly open to being wrong. But if Grusch were lying under oath and his sources don't corroborate, he'd be facing years if not decades in prison for perjury.

You'd think given the implications, the national security subcommittee would follow up on his sources and witness list, (which he said in the testimony that he would provide).

Definitely either Dept. of Defense or Maj. Grusch are lying. And of course DoD has never lied before 😆

John Shirley Aug 2, 2023

@AlanAster it's not perjury anyone can prove, is his calculation. He was pretty careful about his wording too. oh and some official said that Grusch was never in that investigation of UFOs outfit

John Shirley Aug 3, 2023

@AlanAster Grusch did not repeat his most sensational claims under oath. He "danced around them" as someone said. He also says he's starting a foundation to study this stuff. when you're starting foundations you need to drum up funding. You can drum up funding with sensational claims.