Question Does interview by Professor Nolan of Stanford University, a Nobel Prize Nominee, on his US Govt UFO work make it mainstream science or still fringe?

Dec 15, 2023
6
0
30
Can people discuss what they know or think of Professor Nolan saying at a public conference in May, and in a long public interview in December, 2023, he knows from his US Govt and CIA work, that UFOs are real and of non-human origin.

Prof Nolan says however it is unclear, at least to him, where UFOs come from

Are UFOs now mainstream science or still just a fringe topic?

Dr Nolan, a Professor of Pathology at Stanford University School of Medicine who has published more than 300 research articles and holds 40 US patents, made the bombshell comments during a talk at the Salt iConnections conference in New York in a talk titled “The Pentagon, Extraterrestrial Intelligence and Crashed UFOs”.

He has researched unidentified aerial phenomena for the US government says he believes extraterrestrial intelligence has not only visited earth but “it’s been here a long time and it’s still here”.

Below is a long video interview with Professor Nolan on his UFO work for the US Govt and CIA, and he says this work is part of the reason he knows and believes UFOs are real and not of human origin.

View: https://m.youtube.com/watch?v=XR0JtbuLhPo


Prof Nolan also says he has talked to numerous senior scientists and military people, who are not discussed in the media, and have already given, or will give, sworn testimony to Congress, in secret or public, of their first hand UFO work for, and direct UFO experience with, the US Govt and whats being hidden. This will eventually be disclosed to the public.

Prof Nolan says he and many others think the way UFOs are being handled is bad for humanity and is bad science.

Professor Nolan makes clear his view that formal disclosure of the alien origins of UFOs and alien life is being planned and what is going on now is a fight back by those who dont want the public to know. However he does not have knowledge of a specific timetable.

He also says he will lose promotions, awards, recognition and financing for discussing what he knows openly and breaking ranks, but is ok with that.

Dr Garry Nolan also claimed that whistleblowers who have worked on “reverse-engineering downed craft” had recently given classified testimony to Congress, creating a “hornet’s nest in Washington”.

The respected researcher is one of the most accomplished scientists publicly studying the phenomenon, including by analysing the brains of people who say they’ve experienced a UFO encounter. He did this for the CIA on military people who had been attacked by UFO weapons and were then sent to him to study the tissue, blood and brain damage suffered.

During the session, moderator Alex Klokus, founder and managing partner of Salt Fund, asked Dr Nolan, “Do you believe that extraterrestrial intelligence has visited planet earth?”

“I think you can go a step further — it hasn’t just visited, it’s been here a long time and it’s still here,” Dr Nolan replied.

“You know, people talk about the ‘Wow! signal’ looking for extraterrestrial intelligence. The ‘Wow! signal’ is that people see it on an almost regular basis, that’s the communication that’s already here.”


I am curious why this UFO subject is so toxic, and why its been mostly, and is still being, ignored by the media.

It does seem UFOs have been a forbidden subject, and some sort of cover up or sometimes a heavy, and an unscientific bias against discussing existed for many years.

It looks like UFO discussions are changing now to be more open to scientific discussion, with top Harvard Professors and others also making comments about non human life and UFOs being real or very likely to be real.

Is the UFO subject now more open for academic discussion, or was there never a bias against discussing UFOs?

Thanks for your thoughts
 
Last edited:

SHaines

Administrator
Staff member
Nov 12, 2019
70
93
4,630
Prof Nolan says however it is unclear, at least to him, where UFOs come from

Are UFOs now mainstream science or still just a fringe topic?

Dr Nolan, a Professor of Pathology at Stanford University School of Medicine who has published more than 300 research articles and holds 40 US patents, made the bombshell comments during a talk at the Salt iConnections conference in New York in a talk titled “The Pentagon, Extraterrestrial Intelligence and Crashed UFOs”.

He has researched unidentified aerial phenomena for the US government says he believes extraterrestrial intelligence has not only visited earth but “it’s been here a long time and it’s still here”.

Thanks for your thoughts

Until the topic moves beyond interviews and claims, it will remain a fringe topic. It's essentially how all information is treated throughout human history, with limited exceptions. People who work in government can make any number of claims they want based on conjecture, but until someone comes forward and swears under oath that they travelled inside of one and they have components of the ship they were allowed to keep for study, it's pretty much all just speculation.

The millisecond someone can provide even a single piece of evidence that definitively proves literally any aspect of the topic, then the discussion will shift.

It's important to keep in mind that our notion of aliens and spaceships comes from old sci-fi writers who lacked the context to understand that little rocket ships aren't a way to do intergalactic travel. Any species capable of visiting distant worlds in a single lifespan wouldn't be traveling via a craft that would need to physically enter our atmosphere to study anything.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Miles
Sep 18, 2023
2
1
10
Extraordinary claims require extraordinary evidence. Scientists are human. Einstein would not accept superposition. A number of physicists have "proven" the existence of God. I am just a lab scientist, who has the sign "'Maturity is the ability to endure uncertainty.'...Clerk Maxwell" over his desk. My mentors taught me that all scientific conclusions are temporary, regardless of the stature of their proponents. One piece of contradicting evidence negates the most appealing theory. I'll wait.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Miles
Dec 15, 2023
6
0
30
Until the topic moves beyond interviews and claims, it will remain a fringe topic. It's essentially how all information is treated throughout human history, with limited exceptions. People who work in government can make any number of claims they want based on conjecture, but until someone comes forward and swears under oath that they travelled inside of one and they have components of the ship they were allowed to keep for study, it's pretty much all just speculation.

The millisecond someone can provide even a single piece of evidence that definitively proves literally any aspect of the topic, then the discussion will shift.

It's important to keep in mind that our notion of aliens and spaceships comes from old sci-fi writers who lacked the context to understand that little rocket ships aren't a way to do intergalactic travel. Any species capable of visiting distant worlds in a single lifespan wouldn't be traveling via a craft that would need to physically enter our atmosphere to study anything.

Prof Nolan's comments are based he says on studying damage done to "military" people by UFO weapons and has seen major internal brain and body tissue damage. He also he has been given material supposedly originating from UFOs to study.

In the video interview Ross Coulthart asks Prof Nolan @14mins:40secs about some material Prof Nolan was given to analyze.

Ross Coulthart discusses that he understands this material levitates if certain wave forms are directed at it. Prof Nolan says he has heard of that claim as well and that was handled by another group.

Coulthart then asks what were the results of the levitation tests done.

Prof Nolan says I am not allowed to discuss that.

In the minutes before this subject is discussed Prof Nolan talks about other material found in a hot molten state in a remote location by police that defies explanation about how it got there, other than the claims of the witnesses, and confirms he has studied this material.

At 3mins:20secs in Prof Nolan states absolutely there has been a cover up and why it is dangerous to cover this up.

Prof Nolan discusses what people in the military have told him about the origins of whatever this phenomenon is.

There is no agreement on this, however Prof Nolan states it appears sentient and it appears to have been on earth longer than we have been civilized.

While none of this proves UFOs exist what is fascinating is how no media picks up on the claims of a top Professor.

They dont say he is mad or its interesting. Just zero.
 
Last edited:
Dec 15, 2023
6
0
30
Extraordinary claims require extraordinary evidence. Scientists are human. Einstein would not accept superposition. A number of physicists have "proven" the existence of God. I am just a lab scientist, who has the sign "'Maturity is the ability to endure uncertainty.'...Clerk Maxwell" over his desk. My mentors taught me that all scientific conclusions are temporary, regardless of the stature of their proponents. One piece of contradicting evidence negates the most appealing theory. I'll wait.

While I to believe its good to wait, its also good to ask why credible claims of evidence that have been disclosed publicly are not being researched or discussed openly so they can be dismissed if false. It also appears they are even being blocked from investigation and people involved in disclosure are being targeted.

Extraordinary claims require extraordinary evidence

I have never understood why people say "extraordinary claims require extraordinary evidence" - dont any even extraordinary claims just need evidence that is clear - why extraordinary?

An apple falling from a tree to the ground is evidence of gravity. Gravity in its day was an extraordinary concept as was weightlessness in space.

The lack of strong gravity in most of space or sub space is evidenced by things that are heavy floating. Is that really extraordinary evidence ?

Professor Nolan's disclosures should not be viewed isolation. Harvard professor Avi Loeb has made a series of findings on the subject as have senior military whistleblowers such as David Grusch, whose claims of things happening that defy the laws of known physics have been supported by other senior military officers.

Some of the US Navy film and other tracking data from multiple Navy vessels and devices, which collected data over many days and even weeks, of the UFO perfomance around the USS Nimitz aircraft carrier task group, while training 200 miles off the US coast, was released in 2017.

However this was just few minutes of film, so just a very very small part of the total evidence was released in 2017.

Nothing was later put forward from the many hours of remaining evidence, to show that what was seen was explicable and within the laws of physics as we know them.

It is also some what ignored that at one point one of the aircrew is heard to say something along the lines of look there is a fleet of them (UFOs). Other servicemen involved in the Nimitz incident have said publicly they monitored fleets of UFOs, on many occassions disappearing south of the Nimitz task group or off into space.

We also recently had the sworn testimony of Commander Fravor in the US Congress, and previously some of the pilots and aircrew were allowed to be interviewed on TV from around 2017 onwards.

In one part of the David Grusch US Congress testimony Commander Fravor who flew with the UFOs, mentioned above, makes it clear the objects were doing things that defy the laws of known physics and nothing we can expect to do in the foreseeable future.

This testimony is important because Commander Fravor's current job, which was briefly brought up during his US Congress sworn testimony questioning, is to analyze and project, for the US military, the type of military aircraft to be developed in the next 50 years.

It is clear that some sort of cover up or deliberate ignoring of publicly released information is going on, as there is no real open discussion about the cover up let alone what is being said by credible people or why they are credible.

If I can listen to the testimony and pick up on Commander Fravor's clear on going expertise in future tech, and his comments that what was observed and monitored for days defies the laws of known or foreseeable future physics - so can journalists.

David Grusch has recently come out and said he has only just now in late 2023 been given permission to confirm to the public that he was himself directly involved in one classified US Govt UFO program.

I assume David Grusch had previously disclosed this information over a year ago to the Intel Inspector General, so is part of the original basis for the formal finding that Grusch's claims were "credible and urgent", by the current US Govt Intel Inspector General

Grusch says he was not previously allowed to disclose to the public his direct involvement and work in a classified UFO project, so this now makes clear his evidence is not just second hand testimony as many were claiming.

There seems little reason to have withheld the right for Grusch to make this limited disclosure for over a year, other than to make him seem like someone with no direct first hand knowledge of, and involvement in, classified UFO programs.

He also says he is still not allowed to discuss the project details, only to confirm his first hand involvement in the project.

Even the older news is still not discussed, or joined up with the new Grusch information releases about his first hand direct involvement in a classified UFO program, nor is it asked why was Grusch not allowed to originally make these disclosures in one go.

Certainly this drip feeding of information appears to reduce its impact.

It would seem David Grusch has supplied to the public, and continues to supply to the public evidence that was previously, supplied to and, deemed "credible and urgent" by the current US Govt Intel Inspector General - yet nothing happens.

A simple example of the cover up, or deliberate ignoring of what is going on, relates to the group called ARRO - set up by the military to investigate UFOs.


It has been widely reported that ARRO has found no evidence in the military records of UFOs, and Pentagon spokespersons periodically trot this out as evidence that there is no military records showing evidence of UFO activity.

We know this is false because the US Air Force records for a major UFO / nuclear missile event at Malmstrom Air Force base, and other events, have been disclosed and clearly linked to UFOs. However these events are outside the time frame that ARRO was set up to investigate.

This would seem to be a strategic decision designed to find nothing.

It has also been pointed out by some (not the mainstream) that ARRO only has a level 10 security clearance, while David Grusch the whistleblower has a level 50 security clearance.

This means the Intel Inspector General cannot give ARRO some or most of the information David Grusch has given him that is "credible and urgent".

It also means ARRO cannot investigate or see or be told of the Grusch or similar evidence such as the, many documents, formal testimony and other information that David Grusch says he has already given to the Intel IG including Grusch's own involvement in a classified UFO project.

This would seem to also be a strategic decision designed to find nothing.

This Grusch evidence also includes testimony from around 40 people whom Grusch says have told him, they have been or are still currently working on highly classified non human UFO programs including the reverse engineering of captured non human UFOs.

This was disclosed to Grusch as part of his 4 year formally authorized Intel/Military investigation into UFOs during which he discovered the misappropriation of US Govt assets and funding, linked to these non human UFO programs.

Grusch also sets out he was told people have been killed to keep the UFO program secret, has personally been threatened, and he has directed those with information about murders to other agencies.

Grusch has even said in the US Congress sworn testimony he can provide the locations of around 12 non human UFOs that are currently being worked on.

He is either mad, misled, part of some other disinformation campaign or telling the truth.

Any and all of these should be of great interest, and even concern, to any real journalist or news agency or real UFO review by NASA or ARRO, given David Grusch's super high security clearances, the number of senior serving military officers and others linked to government who have publicly vouched for his integrity, and now his confirmation of his direct involvement in a classified UFO program.

David Grusch has said he has given all this and other evidence to the Intel Inspector General.

This evidence seems extraordinary.

Although part of the Intel Inspector General's report has publicly been quoted as saying Grusch's claims are "credible and urgent", nothing is done to verify or discuss this publicly.

Instead it appears much is being done to block and slow walk transparency and the non human elements of UFO disclosure, into a dead end which can be used to close down those promoting true transparency and any meaningful discussion (as has now been clearly shown to have happened previously with the Condon Report).

Legislation making it an offence to hide any non human UFO information and assets from Congress was essentially blocked in Congress, by defense contractor backed Senators and Congressmen.

It is alleged by Grusch and others that captured non human UFOs have been transferred illegally to defense contractors.

If such non human UFOs did not exist there would be no need for defense contractor linked politicians to block this legislation, as there would be nothing to find or see "there there".

Any human based UFO type tech not linked to non human origins, would not be effected by the propsed legistation.

I assume any human UFO military tech would be for the US Govt and legally funded by the US Govt, so easily identifiable for what it is and not cause any confusion or easily resolved as human and US Govt funded.

It is also claimed that a defense contractor backed Republican Senator has organized the funding for an alternative Republican candidate to unseat Tim Burchett the Republican Congressman leading the investigations promotimg UFO transparency.

Again why would such actions be necessary if there was nothing to see "there there"

Its a kind of juicy story in its own right, either as a fake story or a true one but no one is reporting it.

Why would David Grusch and others expose this story if they were lying about any campaign to unseat Congressman Burchett.

It would be simple to prove there was no such stalking horse or campaign.

In fact I would have thought proof that no such campaign existed would have discredited both the Grusch UFO disclosures and Grush as an independent witness/whistleblower.

The recent interview by David Grusch setting out much of the above, plus his recent authorization to disclose his own first hand direct involvement in a classifed US Govt UFO project has received no coverage, either for being the words of a madman or worth looking into to see if its true or false.

It seems likely that some sort of internal disclosure battle is going on in the military / intel around disclosing the claims about the non human element of UFO disclosure.

"the powerful internal investigative body that oversees the nation’s intelligence agencies found a whistleblower’s assertion that UFO-related information was inappropriately concealed from Congress “urgent and credible.”

Beyond this stunning revelation, the whistleblower – a former high-level intelligence official – was represented until recently by a lawyer who served previously as the intelligence community’s first inspector general, a Senate-confirmed position. The managing partner of the law firm representing the whistleblower reportedly co-signed the complaint submitted to the current intelligence community inspector general."


An internal memorandum leaked to Look magazine in 1968 showed, Condon and his chief assistant knew before they started that they were to reach negative conclusions


Can we take a broader look at the released UFO information in the public domain, and why the investigation of the subject has not be conducted in a scientific and open way showing both sides of the debate and not focused on attacking the messenger but maybe on why the information that is provided maybe true or false or if worth further investigation why this does not happen publicly.

This might be a good first step to now really looking into what is fact, fiction or something in between
 
Last edited: