mfn-Admin
Jun 4, 2018

Facts from DHS footage/ 2013 Aquadilla, Puerto Rico

0 comments

-Video confirmed made by Dept. of Homeland Security

-Video shot from U.S. Customs and Border Protection Bombardier DHC-8Q200

-Video is a black and white infrared recording using a $2,000,000 L3 MX15 EOIR Camera mounted to the craft

-The IR video uses back hot, meaning the blacker something is the hotter, or fuller of energy it is.

-Video was taken April 25, 2013 at 2122 Local/April 26, 2013 0122Z

-The Customs and Border Protection crew thought the aircraft might be a smuggler so they began to follow it, and record an IR video

-Object's speed fluctuates between 70mph - 120mph

-Object's size fluctuates between 3ft - 5.2ft (this could be due to obj shifting angles, or rolling)

-Object was a reddish light over the ocean moving towards the airport. -Pilot confirmed visual contact with the tower personnel and they also confirmed visual on their end.

-As the target approached shore its light went out. The pilot requested monitoring of the craft with the on-board surveillance equipment. The object was not detected by on-board radar but the thermal imaging camera did see it.

-01:23:30 Object flies through a residential area, through buildings and trees in complete darkness, at 70mph and 25ft altitude, leaving the residential area at 16ft altitude.

-01:24:12 Object hits the water at 109mph and slightly slows to a high of 95mph and an average of 82.8mph while underwater

-Object continues to radiate a great deal of heat even when dipping in and out of the water

-01:24:41 In less than 1 second, the object's thermal image doubles in size, its center of heat then becomes bimodal; the object then splits in halves. The process appears similar to mitosis observed during cell division with the splitting of the nucleus, the expansion of the cell, and the final separation of 2 cells. ----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

 

-BALLOON? No

-BIRD? The researchers note that the object was much too fast to be a bird. The peregrine falcons, which do occasionally visit Puerto Rico, have an avg horizontal speed of 40-56mph and a max of 65-69mph.

-DRONE? The only drone capable of both air and water travel is the Navy's "Flimmer" (fly and swim) with a max air speed of 57mph and 11mph underwater, compared to 120mph air / 95mph water

Conclusion: "There is no explanation for an obj capable of traveling underwater at over 90mph with minimal impact as it enters the water, through the air at 120mph and at low altitudes through a residential area without navigational lights in the darkness of night, and finally to be capable of splitting into 2 separate objects. No bird, no balloon, no aircraft, and no known drone have that capability."

Report Classified: UNKNOWN

 

The full report can be downloaded here:

https://drive.google.com/file/d/0B643ntN4WxBVNnc5enFPU0VUZVpLY2tJWFgwWWhoTEcyTkV3/view

 

 

Commenting is off for this post.
New Posts
  • mfn-Admin
    Aug 5, 2018

    This video was the first half of Dr. Steven Greer's presentation in Phoenix, AZ back on May 12, 2018. I wanted to add a bit of commentary on just a few things that have caught my attention on the Atacama case. These are just some things not mentioned in the above video. Being Objective means listening to ALL the data, especially when mainstream tries to tell you not to. Without curiosity there would be no science, but statements like “In the case of Ata, costly and time-consuming scientific testing using the whole genome techniques was unnecessary” just seem contradicting of that. That would be on the lines of a Geneticist telling me they were refusing to take my money and check my genome because “You look full blood Cherokee, case closed, your welcome.”. That just sounds lazy to me. There are also certain wording in statements that throw huge red flags for me as an investigator, and this is one of them, especially seeing as it was on the record: “This mummy reflects a sad loss for a mother in the Atacama Desert”. This type of wording is psychology 101 in tieing an emotion into influencing a person’s thought process and should never be part of any scientific study. Another statement, on the 10 ribs part: “these so-called ‘floating ribs’ may simply not have begun to form yet at this stage.” - first off, the xrays show NO floating ribs, they don’t exist. Second the way they originally explained away the bones appearing to be that of a 6-8 year old was by stating it had “‘accelerated bone age”. So, to get this straight.. these 2 ribs were the only bones in the body that formed slower than a typical fetus (A fetus at the age they claim it actually was already has these bones), yet all the other bones on the entire specimen had already aged to that of a 6-8 yr old child while in the womb, including 1 tooth present in its mandible? How does that make any sense? So where is the DATA to back up everything? Well there is always this letter sent to Nolan by the leading name in Skeletal Dysplasia in our country (they also manage the international registry for dysplasia), Dr Ralph Lachman. http://siriusdisclosure.com/wp-content/uploads/2018/05/Ralph-Lachman-MD-report.pdf A few interesting statements he made: · “This specimen does not fall under any known, to me, class of disorders or syndromes” · “There is no known form of dwarfism that accounts for all of the anomalies seen in this specimen” · “Most interestingly, based on knee epiphyseal standards, the specimen appears to be 6-8 years of age” · “While there remains a possibility this latter result is due to some form of UNKNOWN progeria (accelerated aging syndrome), in my opinion this is a LOW PROBABILITY .” · To explain the missing 2 bones in the skull: “ POSSIBLE cranial suture abnormality & dysmorphism” He also adds: · “ SPECULATIVE mutations based on knowledge to date:” How does any of this stand up as Hard Evidence? Everything here is just guessing with nothing concrete to back it up… yet all this guess work was placed in the peer review as Hard Evidence that this specimen was human. Above is centered around only 2 of the 22 irregularities that were cited. As someone that questions everything and likes to see real data, this case just has way too many holes. On July 18th 2018 (after above video was released) another study came out to try to clean up the mess from March, it seems, but truthfully it had the opposite effect for myself. If any of this has at all sparked your sense of "Curiosity", I would suggest watching the Unacknowledged movie. Questions need to be asked... if we don't ask them, who will? We also have the original Sirius movie posted in the Gallery section here which is discussed in the above video, along with the Disclosure movement that paved the way for where we are at today. There is also the "other" specimen that was found in 1996 on the opposite side of the world in Russia, Alyoshenka (Алёшенька). I have put several months into researching him, translating Russian, but not sure if we will post our findings. Important things to note on him is he was in the care of a woman, witnessed by several people ALIVE for between 3 weeks to 1 month. Aborted fetus's are rarely known to survive even hours. While it "is" possible the Atacama specimen had a compressed skull to make the onion skull look, Alyoshenka's skull was in no way compressed. Truthfully Alexey (nicknamed by the woman) is an even greater find and possible proof of another ancient race that exists *today*, but like most, it disappeared while in the hands of a group running tests on it.

Copyright © 2018 Mutual UFO Network

Become a member of the world's oldest and largest UFO investigative organization.

If you have had a UFO sighting, please tell us all about it. Report your UFO experience here.

Interested in training to be a certified MUFON Field Investigator? Learn the ins and outs today! 

For 45 years, MUFON has thrived thanks to the generous donations of our loyal supporters.