I note you said on Twitter (2 April) , "It's amazing that a TV production company would be able to get insurance allowing them to film in a location with dangerous and unpredictable levels of radiation."
Then Steven Greenstreet chimed in to Brandon Fugal (2 April), "Can you please provide the EPA's, NRC's, and DOE's "conclusion" that "there is no known source of radiation or contamination. It is transient"?"
Why the combined Tweets to raise this? Could this result in shutting down the Skinwalker Ranch investigation on safety grounds? Would you and your supporters or those in the background that support you back this? A complete shutdown?
Taylor's interview was of course quite stunning and raised other issues re the seemingly intelligent nature of the phenomenon at the Ranch.
BTW, I note Brandon is rightly ignoring your attempts to get the above files. This is correct in the light of your debunking approach and it's certain this is one reason. Actual scientists on the team support this of course.
West, your attempt to get the text files from the Skinwalker Ranch bottle-drop experiment of 2021 is an interesting one. I note you also asked members of the Invisible College to give you some data (who I suspect did not respond), and I also note Lt. Ryan Graves also is ignoring you.
You describe yourself as 3D data expert yet forget the errors you've made in the analysis of the Gimbal object as pointed out not only by Lt. Graves (relevant ... Mick "disregards all pilot testimony… which is very clear that [the ‘Gimbal’] object is within 10 miles of the aircraft that observed it, not 30 miles.") but jointly by the scientist who Tweets as @the_cholla and by the analyst Marik von Rennenkampff.
The point is you are wilfully ignoring data in other cases. Why would Brandon Fugal and his dedicated team of scientists trust you at all?
Mick, Ryan would prefer if you just “Trusted him brah!!”
Hopefully the “trained observer” will observe this excellent write up and reply. We know he won’t, because “the data don’t exist, Graves is on the grift”
Just been reading your latest pinned Tweet on Gimbal, Flir1 and Gofast in relation to the new AARO website ... "Gimbal doesn't rotate, GoFast goes slow, and FLIR1 makes no sudden moves." - you say. But no expert involved in the systems looking at these objects or any of the F-18 pilots involved at the time agree. I honestly wonder and are concerned whether you need some help, as this would be "denialism".
If you know you're wrong that's another issue. What would you be doing this for?
Two points that are factually incorrect in your recent New York Post article.
1. "Official videos, such as the “Gimbal” rotating flying saucer in 2017, or the “Go Fast” anomalous craft in 2018, turned out to more likely be planes and balloons."
Re Gimbal Lt. Ryan Graves said this, my comment above,
Mick "disregards all pilot testimony… which is very clear that [the ‘Gimbal’] object is within 10 miles of the aircraft that observed it, not 30 miles." Note F-16 pilot Chris Lehto showed quite simply using geometry around 10 miles is the correct option. Also the scientist who Tweets as @the_cholla and the analyst Marik von Rennenkampff are submitting their analysis to a conference at the AIAA shortly and their analyses of Gimbal have been considered worthy by Lt. Graves. It is noted you are not presenting.
Re Go Fast you have also been shown to be incorrect in the analysis by the scientist @the_cholla
and other analysts.
2. "A leaked UAP Task Force slide from 2021 was labeled as supposedly showing two unidentified triangular craft, but actually only showed out-of-focus stars."
Dr. Travis Taylor has never said there were not stars visible for this case, but what *was* unexplained he said was the blink rate of one object moving across the field of view (also pointed out by F-16 pilot Chris Lehto early on) which did not match any aeroplane. Besides your point above ignores the full context of the sightings.
In short, you are omitting vital facts (I'm afraid this has been pointed out to you many times before by others). You need to explain yourself here, which scientifically is very serious.
Again, I would suggest presenting your theories with *all* the data to peer-review, not cobble together a point of view lacking facts.
It's been occurring to me looking extensively at Steven Greenstreet's (of the New York Post) very recent tweet history that not only is he rubbishing the science experiments and results at Skinwalker Ranch but that there may be an attempt here to shut down the experiments. Would this be only him operating here or could others be involved as backers? People behind him. As we've seen, these experiments challenge directly our view of reality with the presence of some kind of subtle and interacting intelligence (it's been termed a "precognitive sentient intelligence") in situ - also with extended effects over space (the "hitchhiker" effect). Would you support shutting down the Ranch and surely you too have a team of backers? Would they?
Ok, but there are backers. I'm actually fascinated by the number of people on Twitter who keep on asking Brandon Fugal to give you the data you request. I only had to look at a few to realize they don't have good intentions re the Skinwalker science studies. And no comment on Greenstreet? The guy was actually witness to a stunning triangle UAP (Basement Office episode with Nick Pope) yet he's now trashing everything UAP.
"Entitlement" in respect of the UAP issue has crossed my mind of late. So Brandon Fugal said this (3 April 2023 on Twitter) in respect of the NMEA text files re the bottle drop experiment over the ranch (the bottles got deflected off course dropped from a helicopter while in the air over the "triangle area", as if hitting an invisible object, when winds could not account for this) ...
"Although we obviously engage with the public, organizing & submitting terabytes of data regarding every event is a bit more involved. I also find the level of "entitlement" [my emphasis] a bit disheartening, especially when observing completely disingenuous, premature & inaccurate critiques."
While real scientists in the investigation (Erik Bard, Dr. Travis Taylor etc.) at Skinwalker Ranch have analysed this and will further have to if peer-review and publication occurs, release of partial data such as this to the "public" will only confuse the issue and create tabloid style results. A general blogger outside these actual studies has no right to such data therefore. He/she has no entitlement.
I also wonder about entitlement and the British character, entitlement and the debunker, and the frustration that results when being actively ignored by scientists and researchers. We must be on the alert for motives.
A challenge for you Alan. Watch the episode in full. Look at the visualization and the animation. Do they match? Does the visualization match what is described?
Yet they already did an entire TV show on collecting and analyzing that data. They discussed what it showed and created a 3D visualization and an animation of it.
So surely releasing the actual data (less than 1MB) would allow rigorous verification and duplication?
West, this is from Sean Kirkpatrick (which you've seen), the April 19 public hearing on UAPs. This will refer to the Gimbal, GoFast and FLIR1 objects which you've tried to explain away on your blog.
"For those few cases that have leaked to the public previously and subsequently commented on by the US Government, I encourage those who hold alternative theories or views to submit your research to credible peer-reviewed scientific journals. AARO is working very hard to do the same. That is how science works, not by blog or social media."
@MvonRen and @the_cholla are submitting their analysis of Gimbal to the AIAA shortly. Why don't you? Do some actual science.
A scientific investigation does not involve farming out bits of data to any person outside the effort unless trusted and with approval. "Rigorous verification and duplication", as you say, can be carried out without unapproved third parties. Besides, Dr. Taylor (SWR team member) has you blocked on Twitter and has commented several times on the motives of certain other individuals as well.
Well, you certainly have chutzpah West and your technique is interesting this time. And a quick article on what you see as relevant in the news. But, and as you well know, at this point in the conversation everything has moved on from this kind of "approach", shall we say, with the US Gov NDAA having a "Science Plan", the AIAA UAP group with Lt. Graves lead, the Galileo Project and other initiatives and pilots like Lt. Cdr. Alex Dietrich and others briefing Congress members.
Hello Oswald, West hasn't of course been "read in" to the classified information, which the pilots and US Gov quite rightly cannot reveal. And which would have surely helped to influence the specific NDAA wording (remember again, pilots have testified to political figures and *not* about balloons). I do however note that West asked a short while back on Twitter for Invisible College members to give him some info. and he'd keep it secret, etc. etc. Some members are still under NDAs so that wouldn't have panned out for him but there'd be no response anyway.
Hey, just noticed in respect of the two key pilots.
West has "taken on board" on Lt. Graves' article in Politico and @BrentlyLee (Twitter) has just tagged (28 Feb. - and pinned his Tweet) Lt. Cdr. Alex Dietrich in respect of her very latest conversation on the Somewhere in the Skies podcast with Ryan Sprague. Brently has his bizarre "missile" debunking view for the Tic-Tac as we've all seen. West retweets Brently obviously hoping for a response. Twin pronged approach from both? This gets noticed - it's worth looking at people's full Tweet history to see patterns. The pilots? Beyond reproach, open, fair, honest, curious and scientific. That gets noticed.
Background and the overall arc of a life matters, as you yourself well know. I worry about individuals who should be looking for truth, or actively and knowingly perpetuate a "truth of the false", as a great quantum physicist I learned from indicated to me. That path will lead to a kind of inner destruction.
In respect of the pilots (and many others researching and promoting this subject), these are truth-seekers and are courageous on this path.
I feel like you have been getting a lot of sh*t in the last couple days Mick West, with Gary Nolan setting off #UFOTwitter.
I just wanted to say you are doing a great job and to keep it up :-)
Thanks!
In the light of the Dr. Travis Taylor (former chief UAP scientist for the US Gov) interview on the Rick and Bubba show https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=5lTT0GYzkao
I note you said on Twitter (2 April) , "It's amazing that a TV production company would be able to get insurance allowing them to film in a location with dangerous and unpredictable levels of radiation."
Then Steven Greenstreet chimed in to Brandon Fugal (2 April), "Can you please provide the EPA's, NRC's, and DOE's "conclusion" that "there is no known source of radiation or contamination. It is transient"?"
Why the combined Tweets to raise this? Could this result in shutting down the Skinwalker Ranch investigation on safety grounds? Would you and your supporters or those in the background that support you back this? A complete shutdown?
Taylor's interview was of course quite stunning and raised other issues re the seemingly intelligent nature of the phenomenon at the Ranch.
BTW, I note Brandon is rightly ignoring your attempts to get the above files. This is correct in the light of your debunking approach and it's certain this is one reason. Actual scientists on the team support this of course.
West, your attempt to get the text files from the Skinwalker Ranch bottle-drop experiment of 2021 is an interesting one. I note you also asked members of the Invisible College to give you some data (who I suspect did not respond), and I also note Lt. Ryan Graves also is ignoring you.
You describe yourself as 3D data expert yet forget the errors you've made in the analysis of the Gimbal object as pointed out not only by Lt. Graves (relevant ... Mick "disregards all pilot testimony… which is very clear that [the ‘Gimbal’] object is within 10 miles of the aircraft that observed it, not 30 miles.") but jointly by the scientist who Tweets as @the_cholla and by the analyst Marik von Rennenkampff.
The point is you are wilfully ignoring data in other cases. Why would Brandon Fugal and his dedicated team of scientists trust you at all?
Mick, Ryan would prefer if you just “Trusted him brah!!”
Hopefully the “trained observer” will observe this excellent write up and reply. We know he won’t, because “the data don’t exist, Graves is on the grift”
Just been reading your latest pinned Tweet on Gimbal, Flir1 and Gofast in relation to the new AARO website ... "Gimbal doesn't rotate, GoFast goes slow, and FLIR1 makes no sudden moves." - you say. But no expert involved in the systems looking at these objects or any of the F-18 pilots involved at the time agree. I honestly wonder and are concerned whether you need some help, as this would be "denialism".
If you know you're wrong that's another issue. What would you be doing this for?
Very well put. Thanks.
Two points that are factually incorrect in your recent New York Post article.
1. "Official videos, such as the “Gimbal” rotating flying saucer in 2017, or the “Go Fast” anomalous craft in 2018, turned out to more likely be planes and balloons."
Re Gimbal Lt. Ryan Graves said this, my comment above,
Mick "disregards all pilot testimony… which is very clear that [the ‘Gimbal’] object is within 10 miles of the aircraft that observed it, not 30 miles." Note F-16 pilot Chris Lehto showed quite simply using geometry around 10 miles is the correct option. Also the scientist who Tweets as @the_cholla and the analyst Marik von Rennenkampff are submitting their analysis to a conference at the AIAA shortly and their analyses of Gimbal have been considered worthy by Lt. Graves. It is noted you are not presenting.
Re Go Fast you have also been shown to be incorrect in the analysis by the scientist @the_cholla
and other analysts.
2. "A leaked UAP Task Force slide from 2021 was labeled as supposedly showing two unidentified triangular craft, but actually only showed out-of-focus stars."
Dr. Travis Taylor has never said there were not stars visible for this case, but what *was* unexplained he said was the blink rate of one object moving across the field of view (also pointed out by F-16 pilot Chris Lehto early on) which did not match any aeroplane. Besides your point above ignores the full context of the sightings.
In short, you are omitting vital facts (I'm afraid this has been pointed out to you many times before by others). You need to explain yourself here, which scientifically is very serious.
Again, I would suggest presenting your theories with *all* the data to peer-review, not cobble together a point of view lacking facts.
It's been occurring to me looking extensively at Steven Greenstreet's (of the New York Post) very recent tweet history that not only is he rubbishing the science experiments and results at Skinwalker Ranch but that there may be an attempt here to shut down the experiments. Would this be only him operating here or could others be involved as backers? People behind him. As we've seen, these experiments challenge directly our view of reality with the presence of some kind of subtle and interacting intelligence (it's been termed a "precognitive sentient intelligence") in situ - also with extended effects over space (the "hitchhiker" effect). Would you support shutting down the Ranch and surely you too have a team of backers? Would they?
I have no team of backers. Brandon can spend his money however he likes.
Ok, but there are backers. I'm actually fascinated by the number of people on Twitter who keep on asking Brandon Fugal to give you the data you request. I only had to look at a few to realize they don't have good intentions re the Skinwalker science studies. And no comment on Greenstreet? The guy was actually witness to a stunning triangle UAP (Basement Office episode with Nick Pope) yet he's now trashing everything UAP.
"Entitlement" in respect of the UAP issue has crossed my mind of late. So Brandon Fugal said this (3 April 2023 on Twitter) in respect of the NMEA text files re the bottle drop experiment over the ranch (the bottles got deflected off course dropped from a helicopter while in the air over the "triangle area", as if hitting an invisible object, when winds could not account for this) ...
"Although we obviously engage with the public, organizing & submitting terabytes of data regarding every event is a bit more involved. I also find the level of "entitlement" [my emphasis] a bit disheartening, especially when observing completely disingenuous, premature & inaccurate critiques."
While real scientists in the investigation (Erik Bard, Dr. Travis Taylor etc.) at Skinwalker Ranch have analysed this and will further have to if peer-review and publication occurs, release of partial data such as this to the "public" will only confuse the issue and create tabloid style results. A general blogger outside these actual studies has no right to such data therefore. He/she has no entitlement.
I also wonder about entitlement and the British character, entitlement and the debunker, and the frustration that results when being actively ignored by scientists and researchers. We must be on the alert for motives.
A challenge for you Alan. Watch the episode in full. Look at the visualization and the animation. Do they match? Does the visualization match what is described?
Yet they already did an entire TV show on collecting and analyzing that data. They discussed what it showed and created a 3D visualization and an animation of it.
So surely releasing the actual data (less than 1MB) would allow rigorous verification and duplication?
West, this is from Sean Kirkpatrick (which you've seen), the April 19 public hearing on UAPs. This will refer to the Gimbal, GoFast and FLIR1 objects which you've tried to explain away on your blog.
https://twitter.com/the_cholla/status/1648729937719721986?cxt=HHwWhICwxZPJu-EtAAAA
"For those few cases that have leaked to the public previously and subsequently commented on by the US Government, I encourage those who hold alternative theories or views to submit your research to credible peer-reviewed scientific journals. AARO is working very hard to do the same. That is how science works, not by blog or social media."
@MvonRen and @the_cholla are submitting their analysis of Gimbal to the AIAA shortly. Why don't you? Do some actual science.
A scientific investigation does not involve farming out bits of data to any person outside the effort unless trusted and with approval. "Rigorous verification and duplication", as you say, can be carried out without unapproved third parties. Besides, Dr. Taylor (SWR team member) has you blocked on Twitter and has commented several times on the motives of certain other individuals as well.
Brandon Fugal link here,
https://twitter.com/BrandonFugal/status/1642790021358063617?cxt=HHwWgsDU-cG0rswtAAAA
Well, you certainly have chutzpah West and your technique is interesting this time. And a quick article on what you see as relevant in the news. But, and as you well know, at this point in the conversation everything has moved on from this kind of "approach", shall we say, with the US Gov NDAA having a "Science Plan", the AIAA UAP group with Lt. Graves lead, the Galileo Project and other initiatives and pilots like Lt. Cdr. Alex Dietrich and others briefing Congress members.
So far, all that buzz hasn't changed the situation with respect to unambiguous evidence for extraordinary craft.
Hello Oswald, West hasn't of course been "read in" to the classified information, which the pilots and US Gov quite rightly cannot reveal. And which would have surely helped to influence the specific NDAA wording (remember again, pilots have testified to political figures and *not* about balloons). I do however note that West asked a short while back on Twitter for Invisible College members to give him some info. and he'd keep it secret, etc. etc. Some members are still under NDAs so that wouldn't have panned out for him but there'd be no response anyway.
Hey, just noticed in respect of the two key pilots.
West has "taken on board" on Lt. Graves' article in Politico and @BrentlyLee (Twitter) has just tagged (28 Feb. - and pinned his Tweet) Lt. Cdr. Alex Dietrich in respect of her very latest conversation on the Somewhere in the Skies podcast with Ryan Sprague. Brently has his bizarre "missile" debunking view for the Tic-Tac as we've all seen. West retweets Brently obviously hoping for a response. Twin pronged approach from both? This gets noticed - it's worth looking at people's full Tweet history to see patterns. The pilots? Beyond reproach, open, fair, honest, curious and scientific. That gets noticed.
Why would a pilot be "beyond reproach" any more than you or I?
Background and the overall arc of a life matters, as you yourself well know. I worry about individuals who should be looking for truth, or actively and knowingly perpetuate a "truth of the false", as a great quantum physicist I learned from indicated to me. That path will lead to a kind of inner destruction.
In respect of the pilots (and many others researching and promoting this subject), these are truth-seekers and are courageous on this path.