Okay so wait a minnit – are you saying that William Bridge was the shrink on the plane who refused to look out the window? Because the fact that a witness on the plane didn’t see it, doesn’t mean anything if he refused to look. [And man, what an ostrich that shrink is…“I’m not going to look because I like my restricted worldview”…lol] Paul Dean studied this case intensively, and spoke with Callahan personally, and it’s fascinating to hear what he has to say about it – I may post some of his remarks about it at some point. Like any case involving humans, it does have some cracks as you mentioned, but there are also lots of good reasons to think there’s something to it. Right, but as we all know, the radar data isn’t available (it’s never made available). So eyewitness accounts are all we can ever get, plus some blurry pics here and there. And in this incident we have the radar operator who tracked the objects for two weeks, and provided exact numbers from the best radar system in the world. That’s hard to discount imo. Oh c’mon – Mick West would argue that there’s no Moon if he hadn't seen it with his own eyes. This came up the other day in a discussion I was having with Dr. Knuth at an AATIP facebook group. He said that one of the reviewers couldn’t believe that the Tic-Tac was a solid object, so it was difficult to get their article published. No human tech of any kind can zig-zag around “like a ping-ping ball" bouncing off of invisible walls as Fravor described its motion above the ocean…and take off from essentially a standstill to thousands of mph like a bullet…without any propulsion signature whatsoever. Humans can do a lot of stuff, but reactionless propulsion isn’t one of them. Not yet anyway. Given what we know about modern physics and technology, we can be roughly 99.9999999% certain of that. I did – that stuff is child’s play compared to things like the Tic-Tac incident. We know for a fact that the SPY-1 radar data from the Cmdr. Fravor intercept was recorded and saved to an optical disk. Then apparently it was confiscated. So that’s just one smoking gun that we know about. If you read Paul Dean’s blog you’ll see abundant evidence – official manuals detailing the reporting protocols for unidentified aircraft, for example. Then when he FOIA’s each and every one of the facilities that store those reports, they refuse to release a single page of that data. Sure, it’s not 100% proof that they’re withholding the evidence of UFO activity, but I can’t 100% prove that there’s still a room on the other side of my door, until I open it. Even the official scientific standard for the discovery of a new particle isn’t 100% - it’s a high probability of 5-sigma, which is a 99.99997% probability that the signal represents a real particle and not a statistical fluke. The only reason we can’t meet that standard to prove the reality of AAVs zipping around our skies from time to time is, imo, the irrefutable fact that all of the scientific data of anomalous aerial activity is being sequestered by the military agencies – the only organizations that have the instrumentation to collect that data. I agree that there’s always a non-zero probability that the military found some supergenius akin to a fusion of Einstein and Tesla to crack the seemingly insoluble obstacles to producing warp field propulsion by spending trillions of dollars over the course of decades, to secretly discover, develop, and ultimately perfect that technology so that now, today, the military is producing warp drive devices with USS-Enterprise-level spaceflight capabilities. But given what we know about our place in the universe – that there are at least 2 billion Earth-like worlds orbiting Sun-like stars in our galaxy alone, and that those planets have on average a 2-3 billion year head-start on the Earth’s evolutionary timeline, I think it’s a far simpler and more probable explanation to conclude that some other folks out there have developed hyperfast spaceflight capabilities long ago, and they like to drop by and have a look around from time to time. Okay first off, Cmdr. Fravor and the trainee pilot rendezvoused at the cap point before they intercepted the Tic-Tac; so if it had been monitoring the air traffic in the area, it would’ve known where that cap point was. Secondly, Kevin Day reported that the targets he saw on his radar system zipped across over five miles of distance in .78 second. A transit that fast would be too fast for the human eye, or even our best radar system, to track in real time. And in Cmdr. Fravor’s other interviews, he said that it took 1-2 seconds for the Tic-Tac to zip out of sight – he did see it move. That’s not a good argument. On my dream list I would write “the ability to instantaneously teleport to anyplace in the universe.” That doesn’t mean that the military can do that either. I would argue that alien motivations and behaviors would most likely be totally inscrutable to the contemporary human mind, so the fact that these craft do in fact seem to behave in an incomprehensible manner indicates that they are alien. Since both of those arguments are reasonable, neither one is significant. That’s definitely true. Sen. Reid applied for SAP status for the program, in part to permit the AATIP to share data with other SAP programs. We would expect an SAP program to have “the good stuff,” like scientific equipment to conduct scientific analyses for example, because classification level is related to intelligence value. Did you read those articles, or just the (sensationalistic) headlines? I studied that experiment last year, and here’s the reality: They’re using a nearby laser array to trap a minuscule mote of reflective particle in the air, and move it around in front of a series of colored laser beams so quickly that it draws lines in the air. In principle it’s similar to an old-style television, where a moving electron beam rapidly activates the phosphors to create the illusion of a moving image. But look at the severe limitations of this type of imaging: - it requires special reflective particles of the right size to be deployed in a very small activation area within inches of the laser control system. - it has to be done against a dark background because the image is transparent, not opaque. - the image glows because the image is produced by reflected laser light. - if they can draw anything more than little lines in the air, they haven't proved it. - it has to be done in still air, because the slightest wind frees the particle from the tenuous optical trapping. - it must be done within an inch or two of the control laser. - the image must be smaller than about 1/4" because the larger the image the more quickly the particle must move in order to draw a continuous line, and a larger image would impart too much angular momentum to the particle to contain it within the optical trapping field. Now compare those conditions to the Tic-Tac incident. The object was opaque, not glowing or transparent. It was seen in broad daylight by all four observers, under ordinary windy conditions above the sea. The nearest ship that might’ve housed a projection apparatus was at least 40 miles away. So it’s a cool trick, but a very far cry from the opaque, non-radiant, freely-flying object seen in the Tic-Tac incident, miles away from the nearest vessel.