Source: smoothiex12.blogspot.com
Description:
Shocking news about new ICBM. NATO tries to spoil 80th.
The Corbett Report | UK Censorship and the Future of BitChute with Ray Vahey | May 7, 2025
Source: corbettreport.com
Description:
Ray Vahey, founder of BitChute.com, joins us today to discuss the recently introduced UK Online Safety Act of 2023 and how it has forced BitChute to discontinue its video sharing service for UK residents. We discuss the history of the Online Safety Act, how it impacts all online platforms in the UK, and what concerned citizens can do to evade the censorship dragnet.
Show Notes:
BitChute notice re: Online Safety Act in the UK
Online Safety Act: explainer
Online Safety Act 2023
Best VPNs for Privacy in 2025 (Cover Your Tracks)
Adolescence | Official Trailer
SPI-B: Sustaining behaviours to reduce SARS-CoV-2 transmission, 22 April 2021
SPI-B: “Use of fear to control behaviour in Covid crisis was ‘totalitarian’, admit scientists”
Description:
Ray Vahey, founder of BitChute.com, joins us today to discuss the recently introduced UK Online Safety Act of 2023 and how it has forced BitChute to discontinue its video sharing service for UK residents. We discuss the history of the Online Safety Act, how it impacts all online platforms in the UK, and what concerned citizens can do to evade the censorship dragnet.
Show Notes:
BitChute notice re: Online Safety Act in the UK
Online Safety Act: explainer
Online Safety Act 2023
Best VPNs for Privacy in 2025 (Cover Your Tracks)
Adolescence | Official Trailer
SPI-B: Sustaining behaviours to reduce SARS-CoV-2 transmission, 22 April 2021
SPI-B: “Use of fear to control behaviour in Covid crisis was ‘totalitarian’, admit scientists”
Tom Campbell | Your Authentic Self | May 7, 2025
Source: my-big-TOE.com
Description:
Matthew Ramoth and Tom Campbell discuss who is our authentic self and how would we discover that self?
Description:
Matthew Ramoth and Tom Campbell discuss who is our authentic self and how would we discover that self?
Peter Merlin | Area 51 Exposed (Part Two) | Michael Schratt | May 7, 2025
Source: Michael Schratt youtube
Description:
Part two of this detailed and informative interview, Michael Schratt talks to Aviation Archaeologist and Area 51 expert Peter Merlin on the true history of the remote test site in Nevada.
In this installment, Peter Merlin highlights the following topics: Classified demonstrator flown by Test pilot Frank Birk. Northrop B-2 Stealth Bomber. Air Force Plant 42.
---
Below is a summary of the YouTube video "Area 51 Exposed (Part Two)" based on the provided transcript. The takeaways highlight main arguments, actionable insights, and crucial statistics related to classified aerospace programs, particularly the B-2 Stealth Bomber, and other secretive projects.
Description:
Part two of this detailed and informative interview, Michael Schratt talks to Aviation Archaeologist and Area 51 expert Peter Merlin on the true history of the remote test site in Nevada.
In this installment, Peter Merlin highlights the following topics: Classified demonstrator flown by Test pilot Frank Birk. Northrop B-2 Stealth Bomber. Air Force Plant 42.
---
Below is a summary of the YouTube video "Area 51 Exposed (Part Two)" based on the provided transcript. The takeaways highlight main arguments, actionable insights, and crucial statistics related to classified aerospace programs, particularly the B-2 Stealth Bomber, and other secretive projects.
Key Takeaways from "Area 51 Exposed (Part Two)"
• Advanced Aeronautics Company (1984–1988): Lockheed, McDonnell Douglas, and Boeing formed a temporary independent company, the Advanced Aeronautics Company, between 1984 and 1988.
• Evidence of Existence: The Advanced Aeronautics Company is documented in an LA Times article, though its purpose remains unclear.
• Classified Programs in the 1980s: The 1980s saw numerous classified aerospace programs with limited public information.
1983 Classified Demonstrator: A classified advanced technology demonstrator was flown in 1983, piloted by Major Frank Burke.
• Demonstrator Details Unknown: No details on the 1983 demonstrator’s builder, configuration, or purpose are publicly available.
• Tacit Blue Declassification (1996): The Tacit Blue stealth demonstrator was declassified around May 1996, coinciding with an Aviation Week article.
• B-2 Subscale Prototype Rumors: Aviation Week (May 6, 1996) suggested a possible B-2 subscale prototype, though Northrop officials denied a direct prototype.
• Tacit Blue Connection: The 1996 article likely referred to Tacit Blue, but other secret programs may have existed.
• Cryptic Industry Comments: Aerospace industry officials often make vague references to classified projects, hinting at undisclosed programs.
• Lockheed’s X-56 Program: Lockheed Martin’s Skunk Works developed the X-56 to study wing flutter, revealing past classified programs affected by flutter issues.
• Skunk Works Timeline: Lockheed’s project timeline includes undisclosed aircraft (marked as skunks) from the 1980s to 1990s.
• Northrop’s B-2 Subscale Prototype: No concrete evidence supports claims of a Northrop-built subscale B-2 prototype, despite rumors.
• B-2 Original Design (Pre-1983): The B-2 was initially studied as either a low-altitude or high-altitude penetrator.
• Low-Altitude Configuration: The low-altitude B-2 design was a sharp flying triangle.
• High-Altitude Configuration: The high-altitude design resembled the final B-2 but lacked multiple trailing edge points.
• 1983 Wing Redesign: Northrop redesigned the B-2’s wing in 1983 to address bending moments, flutter, and structural issues.
• Redesign Cost: The 1983 B-2 redesign cost taxpayers $1 billion.
• Redesign Benefits: The new design added structural strength and maintained stealth characteristics.
• B-2 Cost Escalation: The B-2’s unit cost rose to $2.3 billion due to reduced orders and high development costs.
• Order Reduction: The B-2 order was cut from 132 to 21 aircraft, significantly increasing per-unit costs.
• Development Cost Impact: Spreading development costs over fewer airframes caused the B-2’s high unit cost.
• B-2 vs. Gold: At $2.3 billion, a B-2 costs more than its weight in gold.
• B-2 Subassembly Plant (Pico Rivera): Northrop built the cockpit, center body, and stealthy edges at Pico Rivera.
• Other Contractors: LTV and Boeing built the weapons bay and wing structures; GE supplied engines.
• Radar Development: Hughes developed the B-2’s low-probability-of-intercept radar.
• B-2 Crash in Guam (2008): A B-2 crashed during takeoff in Guam due to moisture in pitot sensors, resulting in a total write-off.
• Guam Crash Aftermath: The crashed B-2 was shredded after investigation due to extensive composite material damage.
• B-2 Repair Incident: Another B-2 was damaged in Guam, repaired temporarily, and overhauled in the U.S.
• Current B-2 Fleet: The B-2 fleet now consists of 20 aircraft after the Guam crash.
• Test Airframe Conversion: The 21st B-2 was a test airframe converted to operational status.
• Air Force Plant 42 Overview: Plant 42 in Palmdale is a government-owned, contractor-operated facility for manufacturing and testing.
• Plant 42 Management: It is controlled by the Air Force Test Center at Edwards AFB.
• Lockheed at Plant 42: Lockheed Martin operates Sites 1 and 2, handling U-2 overhauls and Skunk Works prototypes.
• Skunk Works Projects: Lockheed’s Site 1 developed hybrid airships, the P-175 (RQ-170 precursor), and other unmanned vehicles.
• Northrop at Plant 42: Northrop operates Site 4, working on the X-47B, B-2, and likely the B-21.
• NASA at Plant 42: NASA leases Site 9 for airborne science, including DC-8, SOFIA, and ER-2 aircraft.
• Rockwell’s Past Role: Rockwell International built B-1Bs at Site 9 (now NASA’s) until Boeing acquired it.
• Boeing’s Facility: Boeing maintains a facility for space shuttle modifications, though activity has declined post-shuttle retirement.
• B-2 Rollout (1988): The B-2 was unveiled on November 22, 1988, at Plant 42, orchestrated to limit visibility of sensitive areas.
• Security Failure at Rollout: Aviation Week photographed the B-2 from above during rollout, exposing the exhaust deck.
• B-2 as Paperless Airplane: The B-2 was the first aircraft designed using a paperless CAD system called ENCAD.
• ENCAD System: Northrop developed ENCAD with 400 workstations and mainframe computers for B-2 design.
• ENCAD Fate: The fate of ENCAD equipment is unknown, likely destroyed or repurposed.
• Data Destruction: Much of the B-2 and YF-23 documentation was shredded due to high costs of maintaining classified materials.
• YF-23 Loss: Over 10 pallets of YF-23 documentation were destroyed, erasing significant program history.
• Classified Material Challenges: Maintaining classified materials is costly, leading to frequent destruction.
• Lockheed’s Storage Practices: Lockheed historically avoided marking documents as classified to reduce attention, per Kelly Johnson’s system.
• F-117 Program Impact: Air Force inspections during the F-117 program forced Lockheed to mark and store materials, leading to shredding of non-essential documents.
• Unknown Lockheed Designs: Blueprints and conceptual artwork for unacknowledged Lockheed programs may be stored in vaults or destroyed.
• Historical Loss: The destruction of classified aerospace documentation represents a significant loss of national history.
Actionable Insights
• Research Classified Programs: Use resources like Aviation Week archives or declassified documents to uncover hints about programs like the 1983 demonstrator or Advanced Aeronautics Company.
• Monitor Industry Comments: Pay attention to cryptic statements from aerospace officials, as they may hint at undisclosed projects.
• Advocate for Historical Preservation: Push for better archiving of classified aerospace data to prevent loss of technological history.
• Study Plant 42 Operations: Investigate contractor activities at Air Force Plant 42 for insights into ongoing classified projects like the B-21.
• Track Declassification Trends: Monitor declassification events (e.g., Tacit Blue in 1996) to anticipate future disclosures of stealth programs.
Main Arguments
• Secrecy in Aerospace: The aerospace industry operates with high secrecy, with many programs (e.g., 1983 demonstrator, Advanced Aeronautics Company) leaving minimal public traces.
• B-2 Cost Drivers: The B-2’s astronomical cost stemmed from reduced orders and high development expenses, exacerbated by the 1983 redesign.
• Data Destruction: The routine destruction of classified materials, as seen with the B-2 and YF-23, erases valuable technological history.
• Security Oversights: Even tightly controlled events like the B-2 rollout can be compromised, as shown by Aviation Week’s aerial photography.
• Ongoing Innovation: Facilities like Air Force Plant 42 and Lockheed’s Skunk Works continue to develop cutting-edge, often classified, aerospace technologies.
Crucial Statistics
• Advanced Aeronautics Company Duration: Operated from 1984 to 1988.
• B-2 Redesign Cost (1983): $1 billion.
• B-2 Unit Cost: $2.3 billion per aircraft.
• B-2 Order Reduction: From 132 to 21 aircraft.
• Current B-2 Fleet: 20 aircraft after the Guam crash.
• ENCAD Workstations: 400 used for B-2 design.
• YF-23 Documentation Destroyed: Over 10 pallets shredded.
This summary captures the core discussions from the transcript, focusing on secretive aerospace programs, the B-2’s development challenges, and the loss of historical data due to classification practices.
• Advanced Aeronautics Company (1984–1988): Lockheed, McDonnell Douglas, and Boeing formed a temporary independent company, the Advanced Aeronautics Company, between 1984 and 1988.
• Evidence of Existence: The Advanced Aeronautics Company is documented in an LA Times article, though its purpose remains unclear.
• Classified Programs in the 1980s: The 1980s saw numerous classified aerospace programs with limited public information.
1983 Classified Demonstrator: A classified advanced technology demonstrator was flown in 1983, piloted by Major Frank Burke.
• Demonstrator Details Unknown: No details on the 1983 demonstrator’s builder, configuration, or purpose are publicly available.
• Tacit Blue Declassification (1996): The Tacit Blue stealth demonstrator was declassified around May 1996, coinciding with an Aviation Week article.
• B-2 Subscale Prototype Rumors: Aviation Week (May 6, 1996) suggested a possible B-2 subscale prototype, though Northrop officials denied a direct prototype.
• Tacit Blue Connection: The 1996 article likely referred to Tacit Blue, but other secret programs may have existed.
• Cryptic Industry Comments: Aerospace industry officials often make vague references to classified projects, hinting at undisclosed programs.
• Lockheed’s X-56 Program: Lockheed Martin’s Skunk Works developed the X-56 to study wing flutter, revealing past classified programs affected by flutter issues.
• Skunk Works Timeline: Lockheed’s project timeline includes undisclosed aircraft (marked as skunks) from the 1980s to 1990s.
• Northrop’s B-2 Subscale Prototype: No concrete evidence supports claims of a Northrop-built subscale B-2 prototype, despite rumors.
• B-2 Original Design (Pre-1983): The B-2 was initially studied as either a low-altitude or high-altitude penetrator.
• Low-Altitude Configuration: The low-altitude B-2 design was a sharp flying triangle.
• High-Altitude Configuration: The high-altitude design resembled the final B-2 but lacked multiple trailing edge points.
• 1983 Wing Redesign: Northrop redesigned the B-2’s wing in 1983 to address bending moments, flutter, and structural issues.
• Redesign Cost: The 1983 B-2 redesign cost taxpayers $1 billion.
• Redesign Benefits: The new design added structural strength and maintained stealth characteristics.
• B-2 Cost Escalation: The B-2’s unit cost rose to $2.3 billion due to reduced orders and high development costs.
• Order Reduction: The B-2 order was cut from 132 to 21 aircraft, significantly increasing per-unit costs.
• Development Cost Impact: Spreading development costs over fewer airframes caused the B-2’s high unit cost.
• B-2 vs. Gold: At $2.3 billion, a B-2 costs more than its weight in gold.
• B-2 Subassembly Plant (Pico Rivera): Northrop built the cockpit, center body, and stealthy edges at Pico Rivera.
• Other Contractors: LTV and Boeing built the weapons bay and wing structures; GE supplied engines.
• Radar Development: Hughes developed the B-2’s low-probability-of-intercept radar.
• B-2 Crash in Guam (2008): A B-2 crashed during takeoff in Guam due to moisture in pitot sensors, resulting in a total write-off.
• Guam Crash Aftermath: The crashed B-2 was shredded after investigation due to extensive composite material damage.
• B-2 Repair Incident: Another B-2 was damaged in Guam, repaired temporarily, and overhauled in the U.S.
• Current B-2 Fleet: The B-2 fleet now consists of 20 aircraft after the Guam crash.
• Test Airframe Conversion: The 21st B-2 was a test airframe converted to operational status.
• Air Force Plant 42 Overview: Plant 42 in Palmdale is a government-owned, contractor-operated facility for manufacturing and testing.
• Plant 42 Management: It is controlled by the Air Force Test Center at Edwards AFB.
• Lockheed at Plant 42: Lockheed Martin operates Sites 1 and 2, handling U-2 overhauls and Skunk Works prototypes.
• Skunk Works Projects: Lockheed’s Site 1 developed hybrid airships, the P-175 (RQ-170 precursor), and other unmanned vehicles.
• Northrop at Plant 42: Northrop operates Site 4, working on the X-47B, B-2, and likely the B-21.
• NASA at Plant 42: NASA leases Site 9 for airborne science, including DC-8, SOFIA, and ER-2 aircraft.
• Rockwell’s Past Role: Rockwell International built B-1Bs at Site 9 (now NASA’s) until Boeing acquired it.
• Boeing’s Facility: Boeing maintains a facility for space shuttle modifications, though activity has declined post-shuttle retirement.
• B-2 Rollout (1988): The B-2 was unveiled on November 22, 1988, at Plant 42, orchestrated to limit visibility of sensitive areas.
• Security Failure at Rollout: Aviation Week photographed the B-2 from above during rollout, exposing the exhaust deck.
• B-2 as Paperless Airplane: The B-2 was the first aircraft designed using a paperless CAD system called ENCAD.
• ENCAD System: Northrop developed ENCAD with 400 workstations and mainframe computers for B-2 design.
• ENCAD Fate: The fate of ENCAD equipment is unknown, likely destroyed or repurposed.
• Data Destruction: Much of the B-2 and YF-23 documentation was shredded due to high costs of maintaining classified materials.
• YF-23 Loss: Over 10 pallets of YF-23 documentation were destroyed, erasing significant program history.
• Classified Material Challenges: Maintaining classified materials is costly, leading to frequent destruction.
• Lockheed’s Storage Practices: Lockheed historically avoided marking documents as classified to reduce attention, per Kelly Johnson’s system.
• F-117 Program Impact: Air Force inspections during the F-117 program forced Lockheed to mark and store materials, leading to shredding of non-essential documents.
• Unknown Lockheed Designs: Blueprints and conceptual artwork for unacknowledged Lockheed programs may be stored in vaults or destroyed.
• Historical Loss: The destruction of classified aerospace documentation represents a significant loss of national history.
Actionable Insights
• Research Classified Programs: Use resources like Aviation Week archives or declassified documents to uncover hints about programs like the 1983 demonstrator or Advanced Aeronautics Company.
• Monitor Industry Comments: Pay attention to cryptic statements from aerospace officials, as they may hint at undisclosed projects.
• Advocate for Historical Preservation: Push for better archiving of classified aerospace data to prevent loss of technological history.
• Study Plant 42 Operations: Investigate contractor activities at Air Force Plant 42 for insights into ongoing classified projects like the B-21.
• Track Declassification Trends: Monitor declassification events (e.g., Tacit Blue in 1996) to anticipate future disclosures of stealth programs.
Main Arguments
• Secrecy in Aerospace: The aerospace industry operates with high secrecy, with many programs (e.g., 1983 demonstrator, Advanced Aeronautics Company) leaving minimal public traces.
• B-2 Cost Drivers: The B-2’s astronomical cost stemmed from reduced orders and high development expenses, exacerbated by the 1983 redesign.
• Data Destruction: The routine destruction of classified materials, as seen with the B-2 and YF-23, erases valuable technological history.
• Security Oversights: Even tightly controlled events like the B-2 rollout can be compromised, as shown by Aviation Week’s aerial photography.
• Ongoing Innovation: Facilities like Air Force Plant 42 and Lockheed’s Skunk Works continue to develop cutting-edge, often classified, aerospace technologies.
Crucial Statistics
• Advanced Aeronautics Company Duration: Operated from 1984 to 1988.
• B-2 Redesign Cost (1983): $1 billion.
• B-2 Unit Cost: $2.3 billion per aircraft.
• B-2 Order Reduction: From 132 to 21 aircraft.
• Current B-2 Fleet: 20 aircraft after the Guam crash.
• ENCAD Workstations: 400 used for B-2 design.
• YF-23 Documentation Destroyed: Over 10 pallets shredded.
This summary captures the core discussions from the transcript, focusing on secretive aerospace programs, the B-2’s development challenges, and the loss of historical data due to classification practices.
Debashish Banerji | Understanding the Upanishads
Source: New Thinking Allowed with Jeffrey Mishlove youtube
Description:
Debashish Banerji, PhD, is Haridas Chaudhuri Professor of Indian Philosophies and Cultures and Chairman of the East West Psychology Department at the California Institute of Integral Studies in San Francisco. He is author of Integral Yoga Psychology, Seven Quartets of Becoming: A Transformative Yoga Psychology Based on the Diaries of Sri Aurobindo and also The Alternate Nation of Abanindranath Tagore, a book about his great grandfather. He edited an anthology about his great uncle, Rabindranath Tagore in the Twenty-First Century. Another anthology is titled Critical Posthumanism and Planetary Futures.
In this video, rebooted from 2019, he discusses the cosmology inherent in what is arguably the world's oldest religious scripture, aspects of which are surprisingly modern. He points out that the Vedas share many Indo-European traits. So, the Vedic pantheon is similar to the Greek. He refers to hymns celebrating the use of a mysterious entheogen known as "Soma". He elaborates upon the role of sacrifice in ancient India. He also notes that this ancient scripture can be viewed in a psychological context. (Recorded on May 22, 2019)(Recorded on May 22, 2019) (Recorded on May 22, 2019) Below is a summary highlighting actionable insights, main arguments, and crucial points from the provided transcript. The discussion, hosted by Jeffrey Mishlove on New Thinking Aloud, features Professor Debashish Banerji exploring the Upanishads, their historical context, philosophical significance, and relevance to modern thought.
---
Takeaways
Description:
Debashish Banerji, PhD, is Haridas Chaudhuri Professor of Indian Philosophies and Cultures and Chairman of the East West Psychology Department at the California Institute of Integral Studies in San Francisco. He is author of Integral Yoga Psychology, Seven Quartets of Becoming: A Transformative Yoga Psychology Based on the Diaries of Sri Aurobindo and also The Alternate Nation of Abanindranath Tagore, a book about his great grandfather. He edited an anthology about his great uncle, Rabindranath Tagore in the Twenty-First Century. Another anthology is titled Critical Posthumanism and Planetary Futures.
In this video, rebooted from 2019, he discusses the cosmology inherent in what is arguably the world's oldest religious scripture, aspects of which are surprisingly modern. He points out that the Vedas share many Indo-European traits. So, the Vedic pantheon is similar to the Greek. He refers to hymns celebrating the use of a mysterious entheogen known as "Soma". He elaborates upon the role of sacrifice in ancient India. He also notes that this ancient scripture can be viewed in a psychological context. (Recorded on May 22, 2019)(Recorded on May 22, 2019) (Recorded on May 22, 2019) Below is a summary highlighting actionable insights, main arguments, and crucial points from the provided transcript. The discussion, hosted by Jeffrey Mishlove on New Thinking Aloud, features Professor Debashish Banerji exploring the Upanishads, their historical context, philosophical significance, and relevance to modern thought.
---
Takeaways
• Context of the Upanishads: The Upanishads are classical Indian spiritual texts that follow the Vedas, marking a transition from ritualistic to philosophical literature around 1200–800 BCE.
• Historical Transition: They emerged after the Rig Veda, with intermediary texts like the Brahmanas and Aranyakas, reflecting evolving cultural and spiritual practices.
• Brahmanas' Role: Brahmanas interpret Rig Veda verses, introduce mythology, and outline ritual uses, laying groundwork for Upanishadic thought.
• Aranyakas as Proto-Wisdom Texts: Aranyakas are early wisdom texts that mine Vedic insights, bridging to the Upanishads.
• Earliest Upanishads: The Brihadaranyaka and Chandogya Upanishads are the earliest, compiled from Brahmanas and Aranyakas, described as sprawling compilations.
• Brihadaranyaka Meaning: Named "Vast Forest Upanishad," it reflects its expansive, nature-connected content tied to forest-dwelling ascetics.
• Chandogya and Sama Veda: The Chandogya Upanishad, linked to the Sama Veda, emphasizes chanting, meditation, and yogic practices.
• Social Change Influence: Upanishads reflect social shifts, with ascetics and urban groups challenging Vedic ritualism dominated by priests.
• Critique of Vedic System: They critique the fossilization of Vedic society, particularly the collusion between priestly (Brahmin) and royal classes.
• Rise of Ashrams: Adepts moved to forest hermitages (ashrams), forming communities that developed unmediated spiritual practices.
• Philosophical Shift: Upanishads transition from mythic to philosophical thought, introducing sophisticated categories of understanding.
• Sanskrit Evolution: Written in Sanskrit, Upanishads use a more grammatical form than the earlier Vedic Sanskrit, indicating cultural evolution.
• New Concepts Introduced: They introduce concepts like Atman (individual self) and Brahman (universal consciousness), central to Indian philosophy.
• Atman-Brahman Equation: The Upanishads equate Atman with Brahman, suggesting the individual self is identical to universal consciousness.
• Unmediated Access: This equation allows individuals direct access to truth, bypassing priestly mediation, a revolutionary shift.
• Vidya and Avidya: Upanishads distinguish between Vidya (knowledge/wisdom) and Avidya (ignorance), representing unified and dualistic realms.
• Undivided Knowledge: Vidya is the realm of unity where knowledge is direct, as all is one being, undifferentiated yet not divided.
• Avidya as Ignorance: Avidya is the fragmented, dualistic world where knowledge is inferred, likened to delusion or projection.
• Maya’s Introduction: The concept of Maya (illusion) appears late in the Shvetashvatara Upanishad, hinting at the divide between these realms.
• Maya’s Early Use: Maya is not fully developed in the Upanishads as it is in later Advaita Vedanta but points to the illusion of duality.
• Philosophical Parallels: The discussion compares Upanishadic thought to Kant’s idea that space and time are imposed by the mind, shaping perception.
• Critique of Materialism: Modern materialistic thinkers reverse Upanishadic priorities, viewing the dualistic world as primary and unity as inferred.
• Buddhism’s Context: Buddhism (5th century BCE) emerges from Upanishadic culture as a critical reaction, addressing common people’s experiences.
• Buddha’s Inversion: The Buddha inverts Upanishadic categories, focusing on suffering and phenomena rather than transcendental unity.
• Social Conditions’ Role: Philosopher Michel Serres’ concept of “mystics” suggests mystical experiences are grounded in social conditions.
• Self’s Importance: The Upanishads introduce the self (?tman) to counter Vedic mythic conditioning, emphasizing individual agency.
• Apophatic Method: The “Neti Neti” (not this, not that) method in the Brihadaranyaka Upanishad teaches non-identification to realize Atman.
• Yajnavalkya’s Dialogue: Yajnavalkya’s conversation with his wife in the Brihadaranyaka introduces early yogic and philosophical approaches.
• Cataphatic Method: Yajnavalkya also uses symbols (e.g., lightning, lotus) for contemplation, complementing the apophatic approach.
• Focused Cognition: A third method involves one-pointed focus on sights and sounds as forms of Brahman, a precursor to later yoga practices.
• Fourfold Yoga Formula: Yajnavalkya’s formula—Shravana (hearing), Darshana (seeing), Manana (focusing thought), Nididhyasana (identity)—guides realization.
• Mantra’s Evolution: The Upanishads transform Vedic mantras from rote repetition to tools for focused meditation, as seen with “Om.”
• Om’s Significance: The Mandukya Upanishad dedicates itself to “Om,” linking its syllables to states of consciousness (waking, dreaming, dreamless sleep, and beyond).
• Parable of the Dogs: The Chandogya Upanishad’s parable mocks rote mantra repetition, advocating for deeper understanding.
• Psychological Insights: Upanishads blend philosophy, poetry, and psychology, akin to pre-Socratic Greek thinkers like Heraclitus.
• Postcognitive Philosophy: Their poetic-philosophical style aligns with modern calls for postcognitive thought, reconnecting with mythic and earthly power.
• Paradox as Meditation: Upanishads use paradoxes (e.g., Isha Upanishad’s “unmoving is swifter than thought”) to transcend rational limits.
• Isha Upanishad’s Structure: With 18 poetic couplets, it juxtaposes Vidya and Avidya, advocating their non-dual integration.
• Golden Lid Metaphor: The Isha Upanishad’s “golden lid” symbolizes the barrier between unity (sun) and duality (rays), removable through grace.
• Dialectical Approach: The Upanishads propose a third perspective where Vidya and Avidya are complementary, not oppositional.
• Relevance to Modernity: Their paradoxical thinking addresses modern alienation, where rationalism separates mind from environment.
• Deconstruction Parallels: Jacques Derrida’s deconstruction, with its focus on aporia (mental dead-ends), echoes Upanishadic paradox contemplation.
• Sri Aurobindo’s Insight: Aurobindo notes that realizing every thought’s opposite is equally true frees the mind to contemplate reality.
• Derrida’s Aporia: Derrida’s aporia highlights how opposing ideas coexist, requiring contemplation of both to transcend mental limits.
• No Privileged Perspective: Postmodernism, like Upanishadic thought, rejects privileged perspectives, preserving plurality.
• Dhyana’s Legacy: The Upanishadic concept of Dhyana (concentration) evolves into Chan (China) and Zen (Japan), influencing koan practice.
• Critique of Logic: Upanishadic methods contrast with Aristotelian logic, using irrational paradoxes to propel the mind beyond rationality.
• Modern Crisis: The discussion suggests modern science and technology’s rationalism leads to absurdity, resolvable through paradox contemplation.
• Translation’s Role: Effective translation of Upanishadic texts can revive their practices, making them accessible to modern audiences.
• Actionable Insight: Contemplate paradoxes (e.g., unity vs. duality) to transcend mental separatism, fostering a holistic connection with reality.
Main Arguments
• The Upanishads mark a philosophical and social evolution from Vedic ritualism, emphasizing individual access to truth through concepts like Atman and Brahman.
• They bridge mythic and philosophical thought, using paradox and poetic devices to transcend rational limits and reconnect with unity.
• Their teachings, rooted in social changes, remain relevant for addressing modern alienation and rationalism’s limits, paralleling postmodern and deconstructive thought.
• Practices like Dhyana and paradoxical contemplation offer actionable methods for personal transformation and holistic understanding.
Crucial Statistics
• Time Period: Upanishads emerged around 1200–800 BCE, following the Rig Veda (circa 1200 BCE) and preceding Buddhism (5th century BCE).
• Key Texts: Brihadaranyaka and Chandogya are the earliest Upanishads; Isha Upanishad has 18 couplets.
• Cultural Shift: The Upanishads reflect a move from urban priestly dominance to peripheral ashram communities.
• Historical Transition: They emerged after the Rig Veda, with intermediary texts like the Brahmanas and Aranyakas, reflecting evolving cultural and spiritual practices.
• Brahmanas' Role: Brahmanas interpret Rig Veda verses, introduce mythology, and outline ritual uses, laying groundwork for Upanishadic thought.
• Aranyakas as Proto-Wisdom Texts: Aranyakas are early wisdom texts that mine Vedic insights, bridging to the Upanishads.
• Earliest Upanishads: The Brihadaranyaka and Chandogya Upanishads are the earliest, compiled from Brahmanas and Aranyakas, described as sprawling compilations.
• Brihadaranyaka Meaning: Named "Vast Forest Upanishad," it reflects its expansive, nature-connected content tied to forest-dwelling ascetics.
• Chandogya and Sama Veda: The Chandogya Upanishad, linked to the Sama Veda, emphasizes chanting, meditation, and yogic practices.
• Social Change Influence: Upanishads reflect social shifts, with ascetics and urban groups challenging Vedic ritualism dominated by priests.
• Critique of Vedic System: They critique the fossilization of Vedic society, particularly the collusion between priestly (Brahmin) and royal classes.
• Rise of Ashrams: Adepts moved to forest hermitages (ashrams), forming communities that developed unmediated spiritual practices.
• Philosophical Shift: Upanishads transition from mythic to philosophical thought, introducing sophisticated categories of understanding.
• Sanskrit Evolution: Written in Sanskrit, Upanishads use a more grammatical form than the earlier Vedic Sanskrit, indicating cultural evolution.
• New Concepts Introduced: They introduce concepts like Atman (individual self) and Brahman (universal consciousness), central to Indian philosophy.
• Atman-Brahman Equation: The Upanishads equate Atman with Brahman, suggesting the individual self is identical to universal consciousness.
• Unmediated Access: This equation allows individuals direct access to truth, bypassing priestly mediation, a revolutionary shift.
• Vidya and Avidya: Upanishads distinguish between Vidya (knowledge/wisdom) and Avidya (ignorance), representing unified and dualistic realms.
• Undivided Knowledge: Vidya is the realm of unity where knowledge is direct, as all is one being, undifferentiated yet not divided.
• Avidya as Ignorance: Avidya is the fragmented, dualistic world where knowledge is inferred, likened to delusion or projection.
• Maya’s Introduction: The concept of Maya (illusion) appears late in the Shvetashvatara Upanishad, hinting at the divide between these realms.
• Maya’s Early Use: Maya is not fully developed in the Upanishads as it is in later Advaita Vedanta but points to the illusion of duality.
• Philosophical Parallels: The discussion compares Upanishadic thought to Kant’s idea that space and time are imposed by the mind, shaping perception.
• Critique of Materialism: Modern materialistic thinkers reverse Upanishadic priorities, viewing the dualistic world as primary and unity as inferred.
• Buddhism’s Context: Buddhism (5th century BCE) emerges from Upanishadic culture as a critical reaction, addressing common people’s experiences.
• Buddha’s Inversion: The Buddha inverts Upanishadic categories, focusing on suffering and phenomena rather than transcendental unity.
• Social Conditions’ Role: Philosopher Michel Serres’ concept of “mystics” suggests mystical experiences are grounded in social conditions.
• Self’s Importance: The Upanishads introduce the self (?tman) to counter Vedic mythic conditioning, emphasizing individual agency.
• Apophatic Method: The “Neti Neti” (not this, not that) method in the Brihadaranyaka Upanishad teaches non-identification to realize Atman.
• Yajnavalkya’s Dialogue: Yajnavalkya’s conversation with his wife in the Brihadaranyaka introduces early yogic and philosophical approaches.
• Cataphatic Method: Yajnavalkya also uses symbols (e.g., lightning, lotus) for contemplation, complementing the apophatic approach.
• Focused Cognition: A third method involves one-pointed focus on sights and sounds as forms of Brahman, a precursor to later yoga practices.
• Fourfold Yoga Formula: Yajnavalkya’s formula—Shravana (hearing), Darshana (seeing), Manana (focusing thought), Nididhyasana (identity)—guides realization.
• Mantra’s Evolution: The Upanishads transform Vedic mantras from rote repetition to tools for focused meditation, as seen with “Om.”
• Om’s Significance: The Mandukya Upanishad dedicates itself to “Om,” linking its syllables to states of consciousness (waking, dreaming, dreamless sleep, and beyond).
• Parable of the Dogs: The Chandogya Upanishad’s parable mocks rote mantra repetition, advocating for deeper understanding.
• Psychological Insights: Upanishads blend philosophy, poetry, and psychology, akin to pre-Socratic Greek thinkers like Heraclitus.
• Postcognitive Philosophy: Their poetic-philosophical style aligns with modern calls for postcognitive thought, reconnecting with mythic and earthly power.
• Paradox as Meditation: Upanishads use paradoxes (e.g., Isha Upanishad’s “unmoving is swifter than thought”) to transcend rational limits.
• Isha Upanishad’s Structure: With 18 poetic couplets, it juxtaposes Vidya and Avidya, advocating their non-dual integration.
• Golden Lid Metaphor: The Isha Upanishad’s “golden lid” symbolizes the barrier between unity (sun) and duality (rays), removable through grace.
• Dialectical Approach: The Upanishads propose a third perspective where Vidya and Avidya are complementary, not oppositional.
• Relevance to Modernity: Their paradoxical thinking addresses modern alienation, where rationalism separates mind from environment.
• Deconstruction Parallels: Jacques Derrida’s deconstruction, with its focus on aporia (mental dead-ends), echoes Upanishadic paradox contemplation.
• Sri Aurobindo’s Insight: Aurobindo notes that realizing every thought’s opposite is equally true frees the mind to contemplate reality.
• Derrida’s Aporia: Derrida’s aporia highlights how opposing ideas coexist, requiring contemplation of both to transcend mental limits.
• No Privileged Perspective: Postmodernism, like Upanishadic thought, rejects privileged perspectives, preserving plurality.
• Dhyana’s Legacy: The Upanishadic concept of Dhyana (concentration) evolves into Chan (China) and Zen (Japan), influencing koan practice.
• Critique of Logic: Upanishadic methods contrast with Aristotelian logic, using irrational paradoxes to propel the mind beyond rationality.
• Modern Crisis: The discussion suggests modern science and technology’s rationalism leads to absurdity, resolvable through paradox contemplation.
• Translation’s Role: Effective translation of Upanishadic texts can revive their practices, making them accessible to modern audiences.
• Actionable Insight: Contemplate paradoxes (e.g., unity vs. duality) to transcend mental separatism, fostering a holistic connection with reality.
Main Arguments
• The Upanishads mark a philosophical and social evolution from Vedic ritualism, emphasizing individual access to truth through concepts like Atman and Brahman.
• They bridge mythic and philosophical thought, using paradox and poetic devices to transcend rational limits and reconnect with unity.
• Their teachings, rooted in social changes, remain relevant for addressing modern alienation and rationalism’s limits, paralleling postmodern and deconstructive thought.
• Practices like Dhyana and paradoxical contemplation offer actionable methods for personal transformation and holistic understanding.
Crucial Statistics
• Time Period: Upanishads emerged around 1200–800 BCE, following the Rig Veda (circa 1200 BCE) and preceding Buddhism (5th century BCE).
• Key Texts: Brihadaranyaka and Chandogya are the earliest Upanishads; Isha Upanishad has 18 couplets.
• Cultural Shift: The Upanishads reflect a move from urban priestly dominance to peripheral ashram communities.
Actionable Insights
• Practice Paradoxical Contemplation: Reflect on opposites (e.g., unity vs. duality) to transcend mental limits, as suggested by the Isha Upanishad’s paradoxes. • Use the Fourfold Yoga Formula: Apply Shravana, Darshana, Manana, and Nididhyasana to focus on everyday experiences as manifestations of the universal. • Explore “Neti Neti”: Practice non-identification with transient phenomena (emotions, thoughts) to realize the deeper self. • Meditate on “Om”: Use the Mandukya Upanishad’s framework to explore states of consciousness through the mantra “Om.” • Study Translations: Seek modern translations of Upanishads to make their practices accessible and relevant. This summary encapsulates the video’s exploration of the Upanishads’ historical, philosophical, and practical dimensions, offering insights for both scholarly understanding and personal practice. Parent Post
• Practice Paradoxical Contemplation: Reflect on opposites (e.g., unity vs. duality) to transcend mental limits, as suggested by the Isha Upanishad’s paradoxes. • Use the Fourfold Yoga Formula: Apply Shravana, Darshana, Manana, and Nididhyasana to focus on everyday experiences as manifestations of the universal. • Explore “Neti Neti”: Practice non-identification with transient phenomena (emotions, thoughts) to realize the deeper self. • Meditate on “Om”: Use the Mandukya Upanishad’s framework to explore states of consciousness through the mantra “Om.” • Study Translations: Seek modern translations of Upanishads to make their practices accessible and relevant. This summary encapsulates the video’s exploration of the Upanishads’ historical, philosophical, and practical dimensions, offering insights for both scholarly understanding and personal practice. Parent Post
The Corbett Report | Why Aren't You Using XMPP? - #SolutionsWatch | May 5, 2025
Source: corbettreport.com
Description: Hakeem Anwar of TakeBackOurTech.org and AbovePhone.com joins us to discuss the latest TBOT guide to Getting Started with XMPP. What is XMPP? Why is it superior to the centralized, Big Tech messaging apps? And, most important of all, why aren't you using XMPP?
Show Notes:
Take Back Our Tech – #SolutionsWatch
https://takebackourtech.org/xmpp – Get the XMPP Getting Started Guide
https://abovephone.com – Privacy tech from Above Agency
https://learn.abovephone.com – Learn about more freedom technology (free webinars)
Description: Hakeem Anwar of TakeBackOurTech.org and AbovePhone.com joins us to discuss the latest TBOT guide to Getting Started with XMPP. What is XMPP? Why is it superior to the centralized, Big Tech messaging apps? And, most important of all, why aren't you using XMPP?
Show Notes:
Take Back Our Tech – #SolutionsWatch
https://takebackourtech.org/xmpp – Get the XMPP Getting Started Guide
https://abovephone.com – Privacy tech from Above Agency
https://learn.abovephone.com – Learn about more freedom technology (free webinars)
Andrei Martyanov | His War Now. | May 5, 2025
Source: smoothiex12.blogspot.com
Description:
No matter how DJT tries to deny it. RUK/ROK in action. WSJ laments.
Description:
No matter how DJT tries to deny it. RUK/ROK in action. WSJ laments.
Dr. Gregory Rogers | Former NASA CHIEF OF MEDICINE | Exclusive NASA Whistleblower Statement | May 4, 2025
Source: Total Disclosure: UFOs Cover Ups & Conspiracies youtube
Description:
In this EXCLUSIVE VIDEO STATEMENT By DR. Gregory Rogers- Former NASA CHIEF OF MEDICINE- He breaks Down his encounter with an UNIDENTIFIED CRAFT In an Undisclosed LOCATION- Bearing the US air force emblem, along with a few details that truly make this story out of this world. THIS IS PART 1 OF A MULTI PART SERIES- Part 2 Will debut 5-5-25.
--- Below is a summary of the YouTube video "EXCLUSIVE NASA Whistleblower Statement- DR. GREGORY ROGERS-FLIGHT SURGEON" from the provided transcript.
• Background: Dr. Gregory Rogers, a retired military officer and physician, served as Chief of Aerospace Medicine for the 45th Medical Group, 45th Space Wing, in 1992.
• Military Service: Rogers was a Major in the US Air Force, stationed at Patrick Air Force Base, overseeing Cape Canaveral Air Force Station and Eastern Space and Missile Center.
• NASA Involvement: Supported NASA space shuttle missions through the Department of Defense Manned Spaceflight Support Office.
• Rescue Operations: Conducted air rescues in the Atlantic using HH3 and HH60 helicopters, earning two Saikorski Rescue Awards, a Humanitarian Service Medal, and an Air Medal.
• Hurricane Andrew: Supported South Africa post-Hurricane Andrew, highlighting his humanitarian efforts.
• Flight Surgeon Role: Served as a rescue flight surgeon for over two dozen space shuttle missions at Kennedy Space Center (KSC) and Edwards Air Force Base.
• Training: Completed Air Force Space Operations Course and Shuttle Orbiter Familiarization Course at Cape Canaveral, certified as a NASA flight surgeon at Johnson Space Center.
• Unmanned Missions: Supported Titan, Atlas, and Delta launches from Cape Canaveral.
• 1992 Incident: Witnessed a significant event at Cape Canaveral Air Force Station in late spring 1992, which he kept secret for over 30 years.
• Religious Belief: Believes the universe was created by God, equating the Big Bang with Genesis’ “Let there be light.”
• View on Science: Argues human scientific knowledge is limited, predicting future advancements will dwarf current understanding.
• Human Intelligence: Suggests humans overestimate their intelligence, with much of the universe still beyond comprehension.
• Extraterrestrial Life: References scripture to support the idea that humans are not God’s only creations.
• Incident Context: The 1992 event occurred during a routine visit to a Cape facility, overseen by contractor EG&G (Edgerton, Germeshausen, and Grier Incorporated).
• Unexpected Encounter: An unfamiliar Major showed Rogers a video in a locked office, claiming it would “knock his socks off.”
• Video Description: The video showed a smooth, white, egg-shaped vehicle, resembling a flying saucer, in a hangar via closed-circuit feed.
• Vehicle Details: Approximately 20 feet long, with no visible flight control surfaces, propulsion systems, or antennas.
• Markings: Featured black vertical and horizontal rectangles at specific positions, likely for test evaluation, and US Air Force insignia with “US Air Force” text.
• Umbilical Hoses: A pole from the vehicle’s dome connected to hoses, suggesting it was tethered during testing.
• Personnel: Two engineers in lab coats and three technicians in Tyvek suits were present, used to estimate the vehicle’s size.
• Vehicle Movement: Smoothly rose, rotated clockwise and counterclockwise, moved laterally, and tilted to a 45-degree angle while remaining stationary.
• Electromagnetic Activity: Visual and auditory signs of electromagnetic discharges occurred, but Rogers avoids detailing due to potential classification.
• Major’s Claim: The Major stated, “We got it from them,” pointing upward, implying extraterrestrial origins.
• Secrecy Concerns: The Major locked the door and later begged Rogers not to disclose the video after officers interrupted.
• Cover Story: The Major claimed he showed Rogers a skin lesion for privacy, which Rogers corroborated to avoid reporting.
• Moral Dilemma: Rogers chose not to report the incident, fearing career repercussions and the complexity of involving multiple parties.
• Security Clearances: Rogers had broad access to Cape facilities, unlike most workers, due to his role and clearances.
• Compartmentalization: Security protocols limited workers’ knowledge to their specific tasks, enhancing secrecy.
• Anger and Silence: Rogers was angered by the incident and kept silent for decades due to potential consequences.
• Whistleblower Motivation: Recent UAP congressional hearings and whistleblower testimonies prompted Rogers to speak out.
• 2023 Decision: In late 2023, Rogers sought permission to discuss UAPs at the Navy’s Professional Development Symposium (PDS) in April 2024.
• PDS Presentation: Titled “Human Factors in Identification of Aircraft, Military Drones, and Other Aerial Phenomena,” approved by PDS and public affairs officers.
• UAP Discussion: Discussed declassified Navy FA-18 UAP footage, noting flight characteristics beyond known human technology.
• Presentation Success: Well-received, earning a congratulatory letter from the PDS commander.
• Retirement: Fully retired from the Defense Health Agency, enabling him to share his 1992 experience.
• Congressional Context: References congressional calls for more whistleblower testimony on UAPs.
• Reverse Engineering: Confirms whistleblower claims that the government has attempted to reverse-engineer UAP technology.
• Financial Accountability: Argues the vehicle’s development costs should have been reported to Congress, per constitutional oversight.
• Unknown Origin: Unclear if the vehicle was from Cape Canaveral, Skunk Works, Area 51, Wright-Patterson, or another DoD site.
• Technological Novelty: The vehicle’s lack of conventional flight surfaces and stable tilted flight were unprecedented.
• Call for Transparency: Urges DoD and NASA to provide official explanations for such technologies to military personnel.
• Support for Others: Encourages other military members to report similar experiences, emphasizing the need for their voices to be heard.
• Public Disclosure: Notes the lack of official DoD/NASA descriptions matching the 1992 vehicle’s capabilities.
• UAP Reports: Recent declassified UAP reports are the closest match to what Rogers witnessed.
• Adding to Testimony: Aligns his account with other whistleblowers to validate their claims.
• Resentment: Expresses resentment for being unexpectedly involved in the 1992 incident, disrupting his serious career.
• Human-Made Craft: Believes the vehicle was human-built but based on reverse-engineered extraterrestrial technology.
• Philosophical Reflection: Advocates for humanity to recognize its small place in the universe and treat each other with kindness.
• Peace Advocacy: Suggests extraterrestrial presence could unify humanity, reducing national and religious conflicts.
• Closing Prayer: Prays for global peace and blessings for the United States, emphasizing unity on Earth.
Actionable Insights:
• Encourage Reporting: Military personnel witnessing UAPs should feel supported to report without fear of reprisal, requiring policy changes for safe reporting channels.
• Congressional Oversight: Advocate for transparency in military spending on advanced technology, ensuring Congress is informed of projects involving UAP-derived tech.
• Public Engagement: Scientists and civilians should engage with declassified UAP reports to foster informed discussions on extraterrestrial possibilities.
• Military Training: Integrate UAP awareness into military training to prepare personnel for encounters with advanced technologies.
Main Arguments:
• The 1992 vehicle was likely reverse-engineered from extraterrestrial technology, supporting broader whistleblower claims.
• Government secrecy on UAPs hinders transparency and accountability, necessitating open dialogue.
• Humanity’s limited understanding of the universe calls for humility and peaceful coexistence.
Crucial Statistics:
• 1992: Year of the incident.
• 20 feet: Estimated length of the vehicle.
• 45-degree angle: Stable tilt maintained by the vehicle.
• 30 years: Duration Rogers kept silent.
• April 2024: Date of his PDS lecture discussing UAPs.
This summary captures the essence of Rogers’ whistleblower statement, emphasizing his experience, its implications, and his call for transparency and unity.
Description:
In this EXCLUSIVE VIDEO STATEMENT By DR. Gregory Rogers- Former NASA CHIEF OF MEDICINE- He breaks Down his encounter with an UNIDENTIFIED CRAFT In an Undisclosed LOCATION- Bearing the US air force emblem, along with a few details that truly make this story out of this world. THIS IS PART 1 OF A MULTI PART SERIES- Part 2 Will debut 5-5-25.
--- Below is a summary of the YouTube video "EXCLUSIVE NASA Whistleblower Statement- DR. GREGORY ROGERS-FLIGHT SURGEON" from the provided transcript.
• Background: Dr. Gregory Rogers, a retired military officer and physician, served as Chief of Aerospace Medicine for the 45th Medical Group, 45th Space Wing, in 1992.
• Military Service: Rogers was a Major in the US Air Force, stationed at Patrick Air Force Base, overseeing Cape Canaveral Air Force Station and Eastern Space and Missile Center.
• NASA Involvement: Supported NASA space shuttle missions through the Department of Defense Manned Spaceflight Support Office.
• Rescue Operations: Conducted air rescues in the Atlantic using HH3 and HH60 helicopters, earning two Saikorski Rescue Awards, a Humanitarian Service Medal, and an Air Medal.
• Hurricane Andrew: Supported South Africa post-Hurricane Andrew, highlighting his humanitarian efforts.
• Flight Surgeon Role: Served as a rescue flight surgeon for over two dozen space shuttle missions at Kennedy Space Center (KSC) and Edwards Air Force Base.
• Training: Completed Air Force Space Operations Course and Shuttle Orbiter Familiarization Course at Cape Canaveral, certified as a NASA flight surgeon at Johnson Space Center.
• Unmanned Missions: Supported Titan, Atlas, and Delta launches from Cape Canaveral.
• 1992 Incident: Witnessed a significant event at Cape Canaveral Air Force Station in late spring 1992, which he kept secret for over 30 years.
• Religious Belief: Believes the universe was created by God, equating the Big Bang with Genesis’ “Let there be light.”
• View on Science: Argues human scientific knowledge is limited, predicting future advancements will dwarf current understanding.
• Human Intelligence: Suggests humans overestimate their intelligence, with much of the universe still beyond comprehension.
• Extraterrestrial Life: References scripture to support the idea that humans are not God’s only creations.
• Incident Context: The 1992 event occurred during a routine visit to a Cape facility, overseen by contractor EG&G (Edgerton, Germeshausen, and Grier Incorporated).
• Unexpected Encounter: An unfamiliar Major showed Rogers a video in a locked office, claiming it would “knock his socks off.”
• Video Description: The video showed a smooth, white, egg-shaped vehicle, resembling a flying saucer, in a hangar via closed-circuit feed.
• Vehicle Details: Approximately 20 feet long, with no visible flight control surfaces, propulsion systems, or antennas.
• Markings: Featured black vertical and horizontal rectangles at specific positions, likely for test evaluation, and US Air Force insignia with “US Air Force” text.
• Umbilical Hoses: A pole from the vehicle’s dome connected to hoses, suggesting it was tethered during testing.
• Personnel: Two engineers in lab coats and three technicians in Tyvek suits were present, used to estimate the vehicle’s size.
• Vehicle Movement: Smoothly rose, rotated clockwise and counterclockwise, moved laterally, and tilted to a 45-degree angle while remaining stationary.
• Electromagnetic Activity: Visual and auditory signs of electromagnetic discharges occurred, but Rogers avoids detailing due to potential classification.
• Major’s Claim: The Major stated, “We got it from them,” pointing upward, implying extraterrestrial origins.
• Secrecy Concerns: The Major locked the door and later begged Rogers not to disclose the video after officers interrupted.
• Cover Story: The Major claimed he showed Rogers a skin lesion for privacy, which Rogers corroborated to avoid reporting.
• Moral Dilemma: Rogers chose not to report the incident, fearing career repercussions and the complexity of involving multiple parties.
• Security Clearances: Rogers had broad access to Cape facilities, unlike most workers, due to his role and clearances.
• Compartmentalization: Security protocols limited workers’ knowledge to their specific tasks, enhancing secrecy.
• Anger and Silence: Rogers was angered by the incident and kept silent for decades due to potential consequences.
• Whistleblower Motivation: Recent UAP congressional hearings and whistleblower testimonies prompted Rogers to speak out.
• 2023 Decision: In late 2023, Rogers sought permission to discuss UAPs at the Navy’s Professional Development Symposium (PDS) in April 2024.
• PDS Presentation: Titled “Human Factors in Identification of Aircraft, Military Drones, and Other Aerial Phenomena,” approved by PDS and public affairs officers.
• UAP Discussion: Discussed declassified Navy FA-18 UAP footage, noting flight characteristics beyond known human technology.
• Presentation Success: Well-received, earning a congratulatory letter from the PDS commander.
• Retirement: Fully retired from the Defense Health Agency, enabling him to share his 1992 experience.
• Congressional Context: References congressional calls for more whistleblower testimony on UAPs.
• Reverse Engineering: Confirms whistleblower claims that the government has attempted to reverse-engineer UAP technology.
• Financial Accountability: Argues the vehicle’s development costs should have been reported to Congress, per constitutional oversight.
• Unknown Origin: Unclear if the vehicle was from Cape Canaveral, Skunk Works, Area 51, Wright-Patterson, or another DoD site.
• Technological Novelty: The vehicle’s lack of conventional flight surfaces and stable tilted flight were unprecedented.
• Call for Transparency: Urges DoD and NASA to provide official explanations for such technologies to military personnel.
• Support for Others: Encourages other military members to report similar experiences, emphasizing the need for their voices to be heard.
• Public Disclosure: Notes the lack of official DoD/NASA descriptions matching the 1992 vehicle’s capabilities.
• UAP Reports: Recent declassified UAP reports are the closest match to what Rogers witnessed.
• Adding to Testimony: Aligns his account with other whistleblowers to validate their claims.
• Resentment: Expresses resentment for being unexpectedly involved in the 1992 incident, disrupting his serious career.
• Human-Made Craft: Believes the vehicle was human-built but based on reverse-engineered extraterrestrial technology.
• Philosophical Reflection: Advocates for humanity to recognize its small place in the universe and treat each other with kindness.
• Peace Advocacy: Suggests extraterrestrial presence could unify humanity, reducing national and religious conflicts.
• Closing Prayer: Prays for global peace and blessings for the United States, emphasizing unity on Earth.
Actionable Insights:
• Encourage Reporting: Military personnel witnessing UAPs should feel supported to report without fear of reprisal, requiring policy changes for safe reporting channels.
• Congressional Oversight: Advocate for transparency in military spending on advanced technology, ensuring Congress is informed of projects involving UAP-derived tech.
• Public Engagement: Scientists and civilians should engage with declassified UAP reports to foster informed discussions on extraterrestrial possibilities.
• Military Training: Integrate UAP awareness into military training to prepare personnel for encounters with advanced technologies.
Main Arguments:
• The 1992 vehicle was likely reverse-engineered from extraterrestrial technology, supporting broader whistleblower claims.
• Government secrecy on UAPs hinders transparency and accountability, necessitating open dialogue.
• Humanity’s limited understanding of the universe calls for humility and peaceful coexistence.
Crucial Statistics:
• 1992: Year of the incident.
• 20 feet: Estimated length of the vehicle.
• 45-degree angle: Stable tilt maintained by the vehicle.
• 30 years: Duration Rogers kept silent.
• April 2024: Date of his PDS lecture discussing UAPs.
This summary captures the essence of Rogers’ whistleblower statement, emphasizing his experience, its implications, and his call for transparency and unity.
Peter Merlin | Area 51 Exposed (Part One) | Michael Schratt | May 4, 2025
Source: Michael Schratt youtube
Description:
In Part 1 of this detailed and informative interview, Michael Schratt talks to Aviation Archaeologist and Area 51 expert Peter Merlin on the true history of the remote test site in Nevada.
Topics to be included: U-2 Spyplane, A-12, SR-71, Have Blue, Tacit Blue, F-117, Dyson's Dock, "Sam's Place", burn pits at Area 51, and much more.
Strap in and prepare yourself for a non-holds-barred interview with the world's expert on the topic (also see Peter Merlin's new book DREAMLAND). ___ Below is a summary of the YouTube video "Area 51 Exposed (Part One)" based on the provided transcript. The transcript features an interview with Peter Merlin, an aviation and aerospace historian, discussing his background, the Lockheed Have Blue program, stealth technology development, and related black programs. The takeaways highlight main arguments, actionable insights, and crucial details, with a focus on clarity and conciseness.
Takeaways from "Area 51 Exposed (Part One)"
• Interview Date and Guest: The interview was conducted on March 6, 2016, with Peter Merlin, an aviation and aerospace historian.
• Merlin’s Background: Merlin has been interested in aviation and space since childhood, sparked by watching Apollo launches.
• Educational Path: He graduated from Embry-Riddle Aeronautical University with a degree in aeronautical studies and management in 1987.
• Career Shift: Due to an aerospace industry downturn in 1987, Merlin worked for a commuter airline for 10 years.
• Freelance Journalism: Merlin became a freelance journalist, writing aviation and space stories, which launched his writing career.
• Lockheed Have Blue Program: The Have Blue program was a pioneering effort in stealth technology to reduce radar, infrared, and acoustic signatures.
• Stealth Definition: Stealth technology aims to make aircraft less detectable by minimizing radar cross-section and other signatures.
• DARPA and Air Force Involvement: In the mid-1970s, DARPA and the Air Force explored stealth for tactical aircraft.
• Project Harvey: Initial stealth studies were conducted under Project Harvey, involving major aerospace companies.
• Lockheed’s Exclusion: Lockheed was initially excluded from Project Harvey due to no recent tactical aircraft production.
• Lockheed’s Secret Expertise: Lockheed had extensive, classified experience with low observables from the A-12 Blackbird program.
• A-12 Blackbird: Developed in the 1960s, the A-12 was designed for high speed, high altitude, and reduced radar detection.
• Kelly Johnson’s Role: Lockheed’s Kelly Johnson faced challenges balancing stealth and performance in the A-12 design.
• D-21 Drone: The D-21, a Mach 3 drone, had the lowest radar cross-section of its time, showcasing Lockheed’s stealth expertise.
• Lockheed Joins Harvey: Lockheed gained entry to Project Harvey after declassifying some A-12 data, funded by their own resources.
• Initial Design: Lockheed’s early stealth design resembled the D-21 but removed the vertical tail and intake for stealth.
• Faceting Technique: Lockheed adopted faceting—using flat plates—to enhance stealth, inspired by a Russian study.
• Echo One Software: Dennis Overholzer’s Echo One program calculated radar cross-sections for faceted shapes.
• Hopeless Diamond: The faceted “Hopeless Diamond” design was nearly invisible to radar but aerodynamically challenging.
• Aerodynamic Trade-offs: Faceting conflicted with traditional aerodynamic principles, prioritizing stealth over flight performance.
• XST Development: The Experimental Survivable Testbed (XST) turned the Hopeless Diamond into a flyable aircraft.
• Fly-by-Wire System: The XST required an analog fly-by-wire system due to its inherent instability.
• Vertical Fins: Inward-canted vertical fins were added to the XST to minimize radar reflection.
• Have Blue Prototypes: Two small Have Blue prototypes were built as technology demonstrators, not operational aircraft.
• Northrop’s XST: Northrop competed with a faceted XST design but lost to Lockheed due to higher radar cross-section.
• Northrop’s Future Role: The Air Force encouraged Northrop to stay involved, leading to the B-2 stealth bomber.
• First Have Blue Purpose: The first prototype tested handling qualities to ensure basic flight capability.
• Angular Design: Have Blue’s wings lacked traditional airfoils, designed by electrical engineers for stealth.
• Revolutionary Design Process: Stealth was the primary design goal, with flight performance secondary.
• Pentagon’s Low Observable Office: A small Pentagon team in the 1970s studied stealth under the Senior High program.
• Team Members: The team included Jerry Babber, Dave England, Joe Ralston, and Robert Bond.
• Senior High Program: This program covered all stealth aircraft development, including Have Blue and beyond.
• Stealth Cruise Missile: The team explored stealthy cruise missiles for penetrating defended airspace.
• F-117A Origins: Have Blue’s success led to the F-117A, a stealth tactical bomber, not a fighter.
• F-117A Role: Designed to slip through defenses and strike targets with minimal detection.
• Desert Storm Success: The F-117A proved its stealth capabilities in Operation Desert Storm.
• Senior Trend Program: The F-117A was developed under the Senior Trend program, tested at Area 51.
• Area 51 Testing: Have Blue and F-117A were tested at Area 51, with F-117A later deployed to Tonopah and Holloman.
• Tacit Blue: The Pentagon team developed Tacit Blue, a stealthy battlefield surveillance aircraft demonstrator.
• Tacit Blue Impact: Its technology influenced the B-2 stealth bomber, though it wasn’t mass-produced.
• Have Blue Photos: No declassified photos exist of Have Blue’s first flight takeoff on December 1, 1977.
• First Have Blue Features: The first prototype had a drag chute box and test boom, painted in camouflage.
• Second Prototype: The second Have Blue lacked the boom and chute, painted light gray for stealth.
• Accidents: Both Have Blue prototypes crashed, but pilots Bill Park and Ken Dyson survived.
• Data Preservation: The crashes occurred after the program’s goals were met, with no significant data loss.
• Ben Rich Meeting: Merlin met Ben Rich, former Skunk Works head, known for a laid-back management style.
• Rich’s Projects: Rich led Have Blue, F-117A, Sea Shadow, and a stealth cruise missile proposal.
• Rich’s Exaggerations: Rich’s book “Skunk Works” contained exaggerations, disputed by stealth pioneers.
• ET Comment: Rich jokingly referenced a contract to “send ET home,” causing misinterpretations.
• Advanced Aeronautics: The transcript cuts off before discussing the Advanced Aeronautics organization’s projects.
Actionable Insights
• Research Primary Sources: When studying stealth programs, cross-reference accounts like Ben Rich’s with other pioneers’ perspectives to avoid bias.
• Leverage Historical Expertise: Engage with historians like Merlin for accurate, detailed insights into classified programs.
• Understand Trade-offs: In stealth design, prioritize mission goals (e.g., stealth vs. aerodynamics) to guide development.
• Explore Declassified Data: Seek declassified documents or photos for programs like Have Blue, though availability may be limited.
• Learn from Failures: The Have Blue crashes highlight the importance of testing prototypes thoroughly before operational use.
Main Arguments
Description:
In Part 1 of this detailed and informative interview, Michael Schratt talks to Aviation Archaeologist and Area 51 expert Peter Merlin on the true history of the remote test site in Nevada.
Topics to be included: U-2 Spyplane, A-12, SR-71, Have Blue, Tacit Blue, F-117, Dyson's Dock, "Sam's Place", burn pits at Area 51, and much more.
Strap in and prepare yourself for a non-holds-barred interview with the world's expert on the topic (also see Peter Merlin's new book DREAMLAND). ___ Below is a summary of the YouTube video "Area 51 Exposed (Part One)" based on the provided transcript. The transcript features an interview with Peter Merlin, an aviation and aerospace historian, discussing his background, the Lockheed Have Blue program, stealth technology development, and related black programs. The takeaways highlight main arguments, actionable insights, and crucial details, with a focus on clarity and conciseness.
Takeaways from "Area 51 Exposed (Part One)"
• Interview Date and Guest: The interview was conducted on March 6, 2016, with Peter Merlin, an aviation and aerospace historian.
• Merlin’s Background: Merlin has been interested in aviation and space since childhood, sparked by watching Apollo launches.
• Educational Path: He graduated from Embry-Riddle Aeronautical University with a degree in aeronautical studies and management in 1987.
• Career Shift: Due to an aerospace industry downturn in 1987, Merlin worked for a commuter airline for 10 years.
• Freelance Journalism: Merlin became a freelance journalist, writing aviation and space stories, which launched his writing career.
• Lockheed Have Blue Program: The Have Blue program was a pioneering effort in stealth technology to reduce radar, infrared, and acoustic signatures.
• Stealth Definition: Stealth technology aims to make aircraft less detectable by minimizing radar cross-section and other signatures.
• DARPA and Air Force Involvement: In the mid-1970s, DARPA and the Air Force explored stealth for tactical aircraft.
• Project Harvey: Initial stealth studies were conducted under Project Harvey, involving major aerospace companies.
• Lockheed’s Exclusion: Lockheed was initially excluded from Project Harvey due to no recent tactical aircraft production.
• Lockheed’s Secret Expertise: Lockheed had extensive, classified experience with low observables from the A-12 Blackbird program.
• A-12 Blackbird: Developed in the 1960s, the A-12 was designed for high speed, high altitude, and reduced radar detection.
• Kelly Johnson’s Role: Lockheed’s Kelly Johnson faced challenges balancing stealth and performance in the A-12 design.
• D-21 Drone: The D-21, a Mach 3 drone, had the lowest radar cross-section of its time, showcasing Lockheed’s stealth expertise.
• Lockheed Joins Harvey: Lockheed gained entry to Project Harvey after declassifying some A-12 data, funded by their own resources.
• Initial Design: Lockheed’s early stealth design resembled the D-21 but removed the vertical tail and intake for stealth.
• Faceting Technique: Lockheed adopted faceting—using flat plates—to enhance stealth, inspired by a Russian study.
• Echo One Software: Dennis Overholzer’s Echo One program calculated radar cross-sections for faceted shapes.
• Hopeless Diamond: The faceted “Hopeless Diamond” design was nearly invisible to radar but aerodynamically challenging.
• Aerodynamic Trade-offs: Faceting conflicted with traditional aerodynamic principles, prioritizing stealth over flight performance.
• XST Development: The Experimental Survivable Testbed (XST) turned the Hopeless Diamond into a flyable aircraft.
• Fly-by-Wire System: The XST required an analog fly-by-wire system due to its inherent instability.
• Vertical Fins: Inward-canted vertical fins were added to the XST to minimize radar reflection.
• Have Blue Prototypes: Two small Have Blue prototypes were built as technology demonstrators, not operational aircraft.
• Northrop’s XST: Northrop competed with a faceted XST design but lost to Lockheed due to higher radar cross-section.
• Northrop’s Future Role: The Air Force encouraged Northrop to stay involved, leading to the B-2 stealth bomber.
• First Have Blue Purpose: The first prototype tested handling qualities to ensure basic flight capability.
• Angular Design: Have Blue’s wings lacked traditional airfoils, designed by electrical engineers for stealth.
• Revolutionary Design Process: Stealth was the primary design goal, with flight performance secondary.
• Pentagon’s Low Observable Office: A small Pentagon team in the 1970s studied stealth under the Senior High program.
• Team Members: The team included Jerry Babber, Dave England, Joe Ralston, and Robert Bond.
• Senior High Program: This program covered all stealth aircraft development, including Have Blue and beyond.
• Stealth Cruise Missile: The team explored stealthy cruise missiles for penetrating defended airspace.
• F-117A Origins: Have Blue’s success led to the F-117A, a stealth tactical bomber, not a fighter.
• F-117A Role: Designed to slip through defenses and strike targets with minimal detection.
• Desert Storm Success: The F-117A proved its stealth capabilities in Operation Desert Storm.
• Senior Trend Program: The F-117A was developed under the Senior Trend program, tested at Area 51.
• Area 51 Testing: Have Blue and F-117A were tested at Area 51, with F-117A later deployed to Tonopah and Holloman.
• Tacit Blue: The Pentagon team developed Tacit Blue, a stealthy battlefield surveillance aircraft demonstrator.
• Tacit Blue Impact: Its technology influenced the B-2 stealth bomber, though it wasn’t mass-produced.
• Have Blue Photos: No declassified photos exist of Have Blue’s first flight takeoff on December 1, 1977.
• First Have Blue Features: The first prototype had a drag chute box and test boom, painted in camouflage.
• Second Prototype: The second Have Blue lacked the boom and chute, painted light gray for stealth.
• Accidents: Both Have Blue prototypes crashed, but pilots Bill Park and Ken Dyson survived.
• Data Preservation: The crashes occurred after the program’s goals were met, with no significant data loss.
• Ben Rich Meeting: Merlin met Ben Rich, former Skunk Works head, known for a laid-back management style.
• Rich’s Projects: Rich led Have Blue, F-117A, Sea Shadow, and a stealth cruise missile proposal.
• Rich’s Exaggerations: Rich’s book “Skunk Works” contained exaggerations, disputed by stealth pioneers.
• ET Comment: Rich jokingly referenced a contract to “send ET home,” causing misinterpretations.
• Advanced Aeronautics: The transcript cuts off before discussing the Advanced Aeronautics organization’s projects.
Actionable Insights
• Research Primary Sources: When studying stealth programs, cross-reference accounts like Ben Rich’s with other pioneers’ perspectives to avoid bias.
• Leverage Historical Expertise: Engage with historians like Merlin for accurate, detailed insights into classified programs.
• Understand Trade-offs: In stealth design, prioritize mission goals (e.g., stealth vs. aerodynamics) to guide development.
• Explore Declassified Data: Seek declassified documents or photos for programs like Have Blue, though availability may be limited.
• Learn from Failures: The Have Blue crashes highlight the importance of testing prototypes thoroughly before operational use.
Main Arguments
• Stealth Innovation: The Have Blue program marked a revolutionary shift in aircraft design, prioritizing stealth over traditional aerodynamics.
• Lockheed’s Legacy: Lockheed’s secret expertise from the A-12 and D-21 gave it a critical edge in stealth development.
• Team Collaboration: The Pentagon’s Low Observable Office and Lockheed’s Skunk Works collaborated closely to advance stealth technology.
• Program Evolution: Have Blue’s success directly led to the F-117A and influenced other stealth projects like Tacit Blue and the B-2.
• Historical Accuracy: Ben Rich’s accounts, while valuable, require scrutiny due to exaggerations, emphasizing the need for multiple perspectives.
Crucial Statistics
• Timeline: Have Blue’s first flight was December 1, 1977; Project Harvey began in the mid-1970s; F-117A was operational by Desert Storm (1991).
• Prototypes: Two Have Blue aircraft were built, both lost in accidents (1978 and later).
• D-21 Achievement: In the 1960s, the D-21 drone had the lowest radar cross-section of any aircraft at the time.
• Team Size: The Pentagon’s Low Observable Office was a small team of key figures like Babber, England, Ralston, and Bond.
• Hopeless Diamond Facets: The initial Hopeless Diamond design used about six flat plates for stealth.
This summary captures the essence of the video, focusing on Merlin’s expertise, the technical and historical significance of the Have Blue program, and the broader context of stealth development. For further details, viewers can watch the video at the provided link or explore declassified sources on stealth programs.
• Lockheed’s Legacy: Lockheed’s secret expertise from the A-12 and D-21 gave it a critical edge in stealth development.
• Team Collaboration: The Pentagon’s Low Observable Office and Lockheed’s Skunk Works collaborated closely to advance stealth technology.
• Program Evolution: Have Blue’s success directly led to the F-117A and influenced other stealth projects like Tacit Blue and the B-2.
• Historical Accuracy: Ben Rich’s accounts, while valuable, require scrutiny due to exaggerations, emphasizing the need for multiple perspectives.
Crucial Statistics
• Timeline: Have Blue’s first flight was December 1, 1977; Project Harvey began in the mid-1970s; F-117A was operational by Desert Storm (1991).
• Prototypes: Two Have Blue aircraft were built, both lost in accidents (1978 and later).
• D-21 Achievement: In the 1960s, the D-21 drone had the lowest radar cross-section of any aircraft at the time.
• Team Size: The Pentagon’s Low Observable Office was a small team of key figures like Babber, England, Ralston, and Bond.
• Hopeless Diamond Facets: The initial Hopeless Diamond design used about six flat plates for stealth.
This summary captures the essence of the video, focusing on Merlin’s expertise, the technical and historical significance of the Have Blue program, and the broader context of stealth development. For further details, viewers can watch the video at the provided link or explore declassified sources on stealth programs.
