Connect with us

Alternative News

Prime Minister Justin Trudeau Makes Decisions for Canadian Pipeline Approvals

Avatar

Published

on

Before you begin...

Coherent icon

Take a moment and breathe. Place your hand over your chest area, near your heart. Breathe slowly into the area for about a minute, focusing on a sense of ease entering your mind and body. Click here to learn why we suggest this.

The federal Canadian government was expected to make a decision regarding whether two high-profile oil pipelines in the country would go ahead. As anticipation accumulated, Prime Minister Justin Trudeau faced increasing pressure over his commitment to keeping a healthy balance between economic interests with environmental concerns and the hopes of Canada’s First Nations peoples.

advertisement - learn more

Yesterday, November 29, Trudeau revealed his decision for the project set to replace a section of Line 3, which spans across Canada and into the U.S., as well as the Northern Gateway project in British Columbia. Both projects are supported by the Canadian energy company Enbridge.

-->Free e-book - Eat to Defeat Cancer : Are you eating any of the foods that fuel cancer... or the foods that help PREVENT it? Get the TRUTH, and discover the top 10 Cancer-Fighting Superfoods Click here to get the free ebook.

The projects have been steeped in history, particularly the Northern Gateway, which has suffered legal setbacks after being challenged by a BC First Nations community. “The major concern that we have is that a spill in the ocean—the tankers will be going right by our village—would destroy everything that we stand for,” explained Art Sterritt, a spokesperson for the Gitga’at First Nation.

The Gitga’at First Nation lives on the coast, and they worry that if a spill were to occur, similar to the diesel spill near Bella Bella BC that happened earlier this year, their community would suffer disastrous consequences.

Line 3 was proposed to replace and expand a decades-old conduit that runs from Hardisty, Alta., to Superior, Wisc.. According to Enbridge,  it is an essential safety and maintenance project. The National Energy Board recommended Line 3’s approval in April, and since then, all eyes have been on Trudeau, as this would be his first oilsands pipeline expansion.

Approval of the project would permit exports to skyrocket from 390,000 to 760,000 barrels a day, and with further permitting and pump stations, this number could increase to  915,000 barrels a day. But while the energy industry supports Line 3, environmentalists argue that it would merely increase the already alarming level of emissions.

advertisement - learn more

But after all the debate, both for and against the two projects, yesterday marked a long-awaited answer from Trudeau, as he and his cabinet colleagues signed off on Line 3, as well as Kinder Morgan’s Trans Mountain Pipeline Expansion Project. This details the pipeline expansion to Vancouver Harbour in Burnaby, permitting a capacity increase of an existing pipeline from 300,000 to 890,000 barrels per day.

“The decision we took today is the one that is in the best interests of Canada,” Trudeau said. “It is a major win for Canadian workers, for Canadian families and the Canadian economy, now and into the future.”

The Prime Minister called the passing of the two projects necessary, saying that if they aren’t built, more diluted bitumen would need to be transported by rail tanker cars. “That is less economic, and more dangerous for communities, and is higher in terms of greenhouse gas emissions than modern pipelines would be.”

As for why the Northern Gateway project did not pass, Trudeau said  it was “not in the best interests of the local affected communities, including indigenous peoples.”

The news was poorly received by environmentalists in both the United States and Canada who opposed the projects, and opposed in particular Kinder Morgan’s $6.8 billion project.

“Prime Minister Justin Trudeau has decided to value short-term profits over the long-term health of the Pacific Northwest’s people, climate and orcas,” Marcie Keever, Friends of the Earth’s oceans and vessels program director, said.

And Jane Kleeb, the president of Bold Alliance and a leading anti-pipeline activist in the United States, said Trudeau’s decision contradicts his claimed support for climate change action.

“Trudeau should be ashamed today using middle class workers as cover to wreak havoc on our water, climate and property rights,” she said.

Activists were also outraged over Line 3’s approval. “The Canadian approval of Line 3 is a slap in the face to the landowners and indigenous community members of North Dakota, Minnesota and Wisconsin, who will work harder than ever to make sure this dirty tar sands pipeline does not cross into the United States,” said Andy Pearson, the midwest tar sands coordinator at MN350.

But no matter the opposition, Trudeau and the pipeline giants harp on the projects’ ability to generate thousands of jobs and billion in tax and royalty revenue.

“This is a defining moment for our project and Canada’s energy industry,” Kinder Morgan Canada President Ian Anderson said.

“This decision follows many years of engagement and the presentation of the very best scientific, technical and economic information. We are excited to move forward and get this project built, for the benefit of our customers, communities and all Canadians.”

Is this just more proof that all politicians are bought and paid for?

Pipelines always break.

The Funny Thing Is, Pipelines Are No Longer Necessary

These pipelines are completely unnecessary. It’s already known that we have many other viable options for generating energy. One of them we know of, beyond solar, wind, and other clean energy technologies that are less effective than we’ve been led to believe, is the Magnetic Transducer Generator by Noca Clean Energy.

You can check out the specs and more information in the links above. CE has been vetting this technology for the past six months, and it’s making major strides in several countries around the world.

The bottom line is, we have solutions, and the fact that oil companies and other major corporations control nearly every aspect of our lives is no longer a conspiracy theory.

The argument for why we don’t need to generate energy using oil isn’t even an argument anymore; it’s so self-evident that no further points need to be made. The real problem we must now tackle is dethroning the people behind these pipelines and the financial banking elite that funds them, and replacing them with people who hold Earth, its people, and all life on the planet first in their hearts.

We can create a world where everybody can thrive.

 

Dive Deeper

Click below to watch a sneak peek of our brand new course!

Our new course is called 'Overcoming Bias & Improving Critical Thinking.' This 5 week course is instructed by Dr. Madhava Setty & Joe Martino

If you have been wanting to build your self awareness, improve your.critical thinking, become more heart centered and be more aware of bias, this is the perfect course!

Click here to check out a sneak peek and learn more.

Advertisement
advertisement - learn more

Alternative News

WHO Data Shows Ivermectin Reduces COVID Mortality By 81%, But They Won’t Recommend It?

Avatar

Published

on

By

CE Staff Writer 5 minute read
(Salvatore Di Nolfi/Keystone via AP, file)

In Brief

  • The Facts:

    The World Health Organization's own data shows use of safe and inexpensive drug called ivermectin could have reduced COVID mortality by 81%, but they still won't endorse it and are instead recommending vaccinations.

  • Reflect On:

    If global health officials truly cared about saving lives, would they be holding back on information about these drugs? Is it even possible to accept such an idea that they may not be acting in people's best interests?

Before you begin...

Coherent icon

Take a moment and breathe. Place your hand over your chest area, near your heart. Breathe slowly into the area for about a minute, focusing on a sense of ease entering your mind and body. Click here to learn why we suggest this.

We’ve said it before and we’ll say it again, there is ample evidence to support a completely different approach to treating COVID-19, yet it’s being ignored. We would likely not need any potentially harmful lockdowns, expensive drugs or vaccines if we used these treatments – and this might be exactly why they are not being talked about.

What Happened: Last week the World Health Organization (WHO) updated its guidelines on COVID-19 and the drugs that go with treating it. A drug we’ve reported on in Dec 2020 called Ivermectin, shows, via meta-analysis, that an 81% drop in mortality was seen in those treated with Ivermectin as opposed to standard care. This also came with a 64% decrease in hospitalizations. These are powerful numbers given what’s happening in our world with COVID, yet the WHO still refuses to endorse ivermectin as it feels confidence is low in how effective Ivermectin might be.

“The issue with the Ivermectin is that based on initial study and the currently available data, it is not strong enough for us to advocate the use of Ivermectin for treatment of COVID or prevention of COVID,” said WHO representative to the Philippines Rabindra Abeyasinghe.

He further goes on to state that without strong evidence they might be providing false confidence to the public. While this is understandable, it seems given how much is known about how safe and effective Ivermectin is, it’s likely not going to provide unreasonable hopefulness. Interestingly, the WHO hasn’t had a problem recommending highly experimental and not fully proven vaccines to the public, with no fear of giving them overconfidence. Why is this the case?

Ivermectin is useful in guarding against COVID-19 infection as well.

Why It Matters: Ivermectin is not a new drug that we know little about. To date, there have been 49 studies looking at the drug, and 26 of them were randomized controlled trials, showing that ivermectin works to treat COVID-19.

Back in December of 2020, multiple physician specialists were urging the CDC to look at Ivermectin as they had clinically seen it was  a powerful treatment for COVID-19, yet this fell on deaf ears.

The pooled results of Ivermectin/COVID studies show an 80% improvement when used early, 89% when used as prophylaxis, and even a 50% improvement at late stages of contraction. You might be wondering why such a safe, long used and well understood drug is not being used while experimental vaccines are – you are right to wonder this. In the US, the FDA has not yet approved the vaccines and no vaccine company will be held liable for damages caused to citizens. Unlike ivermectin, the vaccines also have zero long term safety studies associated with them.

William C. Campbell and Satoshi Ōmura discovered ivermectin as a cure to river blindness and received a Nobel Prize for their work in 2015. Here is an excerpt from the press release of the Nobel Assembly:

“Today the Avermectin-derivative Ivermectin is used in all parts of the world that are plagued by parasitic diseases. Ivermectin is highly effective against a range of parasites, has limited side effects and is freely available across the globe. The importance of Ivermectin for improving the health and wellbeing of millions of individuals with River Blindness and Lymphatic Filariasis, primarily in the poorest regions of the world, is immeasurable. Treatment is so successful that these diseases are on the verge of eradication, which would be a major feat in the medical history of humankind.”

Disease nearly eradicated without vaccines? Interesting. Perhaps COVID’s story could be the same if there was greater coverage of this potential use case. What’s a bit concerning is there has been virtually no legitimate investigation by mainstream media to bring forth the controversy around how ivermectin is being ignored. This is important to mention as with such a huge percentage of the population relying on mainstream media for their news, not covering this story is changing the overall public perception and one could argue MSM is not doing their job.

The Takeaway: There are a number of treatments that are promising in treating COVID-19, and quickly, supplements like vitamin D or effective doses of IV Vitamin C, but instead mainstream consensus is to ignore these treatments, cast doubt on them, throw a mask on everyone and urge people to take experimental vaccines. When people question why this is the case and why other treatments are being ignored, they are gaslit and called conspiracy theorists.

To be clear, I’m not suggesting this is a miracle cure, I’m suggesting that in a culture that is deeply fearing a disease, it seems hypocritical to ignore a safe a potentially highly effective drug while promoting an experimental vaccine.

Hypocrisy is apparent in our current situation, and while not everything is certain and clear when it comes to COVID-19, what is clear is that there is a lack of honesty and transparency around why certain decisions are made, and people are noticing.

As we’ve said before, lack of trust in governing institutions is not the result of crazy online conspiracies, it’s the result of people becoming more aware of actions being taken by these institutions that don’t make sense.

The WHO lists ivermectin as one of its Model List of Essential Medicines for 2019 as it is so effective against parasitic infections and has a long standing track record of safety, yet all of a sudden we can’t use it against COVID. To not ask why this is happening might be irresponsible.

Dive Deeper

Click below to watch a sneak peek of our brand new course!

Our new course is called 'Overcoming Bias & Improving Critical Thinking.' This 5 week course is instructed by Dr. Madhava Setty & Joe Martino

If you have been wanting to build your self awareness, improve your.critical thinking, become more heart centered and be more aware of bias, this is the perfect course!

Click here to check out a sneak peek and learn more.

Continue Reading

Alternative News

Most Diabetic, Heart Disease & Alzheimer’s Deaths Categorized As “Covid” Deaths (UK)

Avatar

Published

on

By

CE Staff Writer 10 minute read

In Brief

  • The Facts:

    According to professor of evidence based medicine at Oxford Dr. Carl Heneghan , who is also an emergency GP, most diabetic, heart disease & alzheimer's deaths were categorized as COVID deaths.

  • Reflect On:

    How many deaths have actually been a result of COVID? Why is this pandemic surrounded with so much controversy? Why does mainstream media fail at having appropriate conversations about 'controversial' evidence/opinions?

Before you begin...

Coherent icon

Take a moment and breathe. Place your hand over your chest area, near your heart. Breathe slowly into the area for about a minute, focusing on a sense of ease entering your mind and body. Click here to learn why we suggest this.

 Dr. Carl Heneghan has an interesting view on the pandemic, not only is he a professor of evidence-based medicine at Oxford University, he also works Saturday shifts as an emergency GP. This allows him to see healthcare from both the academic perspective as well as the healthcare experience, more specifically, it allows him to see COVID from both perspectives.

What Happened: In a recent article he wrote for The Spectator, he writes the following,

It’s hard to imagine, let alone measures, the side effects of lockdowns. The risk with the government’s ‘fear’ messaging is that people become so worried about burdening the NHS that they avoid seeking medical help. Or by the time they do so, it can be too late. The big rise in at-home deaths (still ongoing) points to that. You will be familiar with the Covid death toll, updated in the papers every day. But did you know that since the pandemic, we’ve had 28,200 more deaths among diabetics that we’d normally expect? That’s not the kind of figure they show on a graph at No. 10 press conference. For people with heart disease, it’s 17,100. For dementia and Alzheimer’s, it’s 22,800. Most were categorised as Covid deaths: people can die with multiple conditions, so they can fall into more than one of these categories. It’s a complicated picture. But that’s the problem in assessing lockdown. you need to do a balance of risks.

Evidence-based medicine might sound like a tautology — what kind of medicine isn’t based on evidence? I’m afraid that you’d be surprised. Massive decisions are often taken on misleading, low-quality evidence. We see this all the time. In the last pandemic, the swine flu outbreak of 2009, I did some work asking why the government spent £500 million on Tamiflu: then hailed as a wonder drug. In fact, it proved to have a very limited effect. The debate then had many of the same cast of characters as today: Jonathan Van-Tam, Neil Ferguson and others. The big difference this time is the influence of social media, whose viciousness is something to behold. It’s easy to see why academics would self-censor and stay away from the debate, especially if it means challenging a consensus.

This is something that’s been a concern since the beginning of the pandemic. For example, a report published during the first wave in the British Medical Journal  titled Covid-19: “Staggering number” of extra deaths in community is not explained by covid-19″ has suggested that quarantine measures in the United Kingdom, as a result of the new coronavirus, may have already killed more UK seniors than the coronavirus has during the months of April and May.

According to the data, COVID-19, at the time of publication, only accounted for 10,000 of the 30,000 excess deaths that have been recorded in senior care facilities during the height of the pandemic. The article quotes British Health officials stating that these unexplained deaths may have occurred because quarantine measures have prevented seniors from accessing the health care that they need.

Fast forward to more recent research regarding lockdowns, and these concerns have grown. Professor Anna-Mia Ekström and Professor Stefan Swartling Peterson have gone through the data from UNICEF and UNAIDS, and came to the conclusion that at least as many people have died as a result of the restrictions to fight COVID as have died of COVID. You can read more about that here.

These are just a few of many examples. You can read more about the hypothesized “catastrophic” impacts of lockdown, here.

When it comes to what he mentions about academics shying away from debate, especially if their research goes against the grain, we’ve a seen a lot of that too. Here’s a great example you can read about from Sweden regarding zero deaths of school children during the first wave despite no masks mandates or lockdown measures. Jonas F Ludvigsson, a paediatrician at Örebro University Hospital and professor of clinical epidemiology at the Karolinska Institute is quitting his work on COVID-19 because of harassment from people who dislike what he has discovered.

Why This Is Important: Heneghan’s words are something that many people have been concerned about when it comes to the deaths that are attributed to COVID-19. How many of them are actually a result of COVID? The truth seems to be that we don’t really know. But one thing we do know is that total death toll caused by COVID doesn’t seem to be quite accurate.

That being said, we do know that people with comorbidities are more susceptible to illness and death from COVID, and that’s something to keep in mind. For people with underlying health conditions, covid, just like flu or pneumonia, can be fatal.

Ontario (Canada) Public Health has a page on their website titled “How Ontario is responding to COVID-19.” On it, they clearly state that deaths are being marked as COVID deaths and are being included in the COVID death count regardless of whether or not COVID actually contributed to or caused the death. They state the following:

Any case marked as “Fatal” is included in the deaths data. Deaths are included whether or not COVID-19 was determined to be a contributing or underlying cause of death…”

This statement from Ontario Public Health echoes statements made multiple times by Canadian public health agencies and personnel. According to Ontario Ministry Health Senior Communications Advisor Anna Miller:

As a result of how data is recorded by health units into public health information databases, the ministry is not able to accurately separate how many people died directly because of COVID versus those who died with a COVID infection.

In late June 2020, Toronto (Ontario, Canada) Public Health tweeted that:

“Individuals who have died with COVID-19, but not as a result of COVID-19 are included in the case counts for COVID-19 deaths in Toronto.”

It’s not just in Canada where we’ve seen these types of statements being made, it’s all over the world. There are multiple examples from the United States that we’ve covered since the start of the pandemic.

For example, Dr. Ngozi Ezike, Director of the Illinois Department of Public Health stated the following during the first wave of the pandemic:

If you were in hospice and had already been given a few weeks to live and then you were also found to have COVID, that would be counted as a COVID death, despite if you died of a clear alternative cause it’s still listed as a COVID death. So, everyone who is listed as a COVID death that doesn’t mean that was the cause of the death, but they had COVID at the time of death.

Also during the first wave, the Colorado Department of Public Health and Environment had to announce a change to how it tallies coronavirus deaths due to complaints that it inflated the numbers.

As you can see, we’ve struggled to find an accurate way to go about tallying COVID deaths since the start, creating more fear and hysteria around total numbers that are plastered constantly in front of citizens by news stations. That being said, a lot of people who are dying of COVID do have co-morbidities as well. But as the professor says, “it’s a complicated picture” and hard to figure out, and probably something we will never figure out.

There’s been a lot of “fear mongering” by governments and mainstream media, and some believe that lockdowns and masks are simply being used as a psychological tool to keep that fear constant, which in turn makes it easier to control people and make them comply.

Meanwhile, there are a lot of experts in the field who are pointing to the fact that yes, COVID is dangerous, but it does not at all warrant the measures that are being taken, especially when the virus has a 99.95 percent survival rate for people over the age of 70. There are better ways to protect the vulnerable without creating even more chaos that lockdown measures have created, and are creating throughout this pandemic.

That said, it’s also important to note that some calls for lockdown measures are focused on stopping hospitals from becoming overwhelmed. Why do some places with very restrictions see no hospital capacity issues? Why do some places with a lot of restrictions see hospital capacity issues? Why do we also see the opposite for both in some areas? These questions appear to be unanswered still. That being said. Hospitals have always been overwhelmed. This is not a new phenomenon.

The main issue here is not who is right or wrong, it’s the censorship of data, science, and opinions of experts in the field. The censorship that has occurred during this pandemic has been unprecedented.

Science is being suppressed for political and financial gain. COVID-19 has unleashed state corruption on a grand scale, and it is harmful to public health. Politicians and industry are responsible for this opportunistic embezzlement. So too are scientists and health experts. The pandemic has revealed how the medical-political complex can be manipulated in an emergency—a time when it is even more important to safeguard science. –  Dr. Kamran Abbasi, recent executive editor of the prestigious British Medical Journal (source)

This censorship alone has been an excellent catalyst for people to question what we are constantly hearing from mainstream media, government, and political scientists. Any type of information that calls into question the recommendations or the information we are receiving from our government seems to be subjected to this type of censorship. Mainstream media has done a great job at not acknowledging many aspects of this pandemic, like clinically proven treatments other than a vaccine, and therefore the masses are completely unaware of it.

Is this what we would call ethical? When trying to explain this to a friend or family member, the fact that they are not aware of these other pieces of information, because they may be avid mainstream news watchers, has them in disbelief and perhaps even sometimes labelling such assertions as a “conspiracy theory.” This Brings me to my next point.

The Takeaway: As I’ve said in a number of articles before, society is failing to have conversations about “controversial” topics and viewpoints. This is in large part due to the fact that mainstream media does such a poor job at covering these viewpoints let alone acknowledging them. The fact that big media has such a stranglehold over the minds of many is also very concerning, because we are living in a time where independent research may be more useful. There seems to be massive conflicts of interest within mainstream media, and the fact that healthy conversation and debate is being shut down by mainstream media contributes to the fact that we can’t even have normal conversations about controversial topics in our everyday lives.

Why does this happen? Why can’t we see the perspective of another? To be honest, I still sometimes struggle with this. When it comes to COVID, things clearly aren’t as black and white as they’re being made out to be, and as I’ve said many times before when things aren’t clear, and when government mandates oppose the will of so many people, it reaches a point where they become authoritarian and overreaching.

In such circumstances I believe governments should simply be making recommendations and explaining why certain actions might be important, and then leave it to the people to decide for themselves what measures they’d like to take, if any. What do you think? One thing is for certain, COVID has been a catalyst for more and more people to question the world we live in, and why we live the way that we do.

To help make sense of what’s happening in our society today, we have released a course on overcoming bias and improving critical thinking. It’s an 8 module course and you can learn more about it here.

Dive Deeper

Click below to watch a sneak peek of our brand new course!

Our new course is called 'Overcoming Bias & Improving Critical Thinking.' This 5 week course is instructed by Dr. Madhava Setty & Joe Martino

If you have been wanting to build your self awareness, improve your.critical thinking, become more heart centered and be more aware of bias, this is the perfect course!

Click here to check out a sneak peek and learn more.

Continue Reading

Alternative News

F18 Navy Pilot Uses His iPhone To Take A Picture of UFOs: Pentagon Confirms

Avatar

Published

on

By

CE Staff Writer 9 minute read

In Brief

  • The Facts:

    Last year, many media outlets reported on supposed leaked UFO photographs captured by the rear-seat weapons system officer of an F/A-18 fighter jet. The Pentagon has recently confirmed that the pictures are indeed authentic.

  • Reflect On:

    Can we rely on governments and mainstream media to properly disclose what they know about the subject? Will there be an attempt to manipulate our perception of the phenomenon? Should this be something citizens look into for themselves?

Before you begin...

Coherent icon

Take a moment and breathe. Place your hand over your chest area, near your heart. Breathe slowly into the area for about a minute, focusing on a sense of ease entering your mind and body. Click here to learn why we suggest this.

There are so many leaks coming out regarding UFOs right now that it’s difficult to cover and keep up with. Many of these leaks are hitting mainstream media, but not all of them, and it seems over the past five years or so, there is a story put out by mainstream media that has been attracting the attention of the masses. That story centered on the New York Times publishing a piece about three videos released by the Pentagon of US Navy UFO encounters, where objects performed maneuvers no known man-made piece of machinery are capable of, defying our understanding of physics and aerodynamics.

In one of these encounters, the object descended from 60,000 feet in the air to near ocean level, and began hovering – all in a span of milliseconds. That same object could also appear in other locations in what seemed to be instantaneous transport, all  while apparently being able to predict the future location of the Navy pilot.

Not long ago the New York Times also broke a story of retrievals involving “off world vehicles.” When I came across this it reminded me of former Apollo 14 mission astronaut Dr. Edgar Mitchell’s statement, “yes there have been crashed craft, and bodies recovered.”

Keep in mind, there are thousands of these encounters that have been released via de-classified documentation over the past few decades, it’s only this instance from the Navy that got any real mainstream media coverage.

Another common theme within this phenomenon seems to be the loss of critical electrical instrumentation of military jets, like the inability to fire their weapon, or the air radar going haywire, for example. Here’s a case from Iran you can read about that provides a good example of that.

What Happened: For the past couple of years, the U.S. Department of Defense’s “Unidentified Aerial Phenomena Task Force” (or UAPTF) has been busy briefing lawmakers, Intelligence Community stakeholders, and the highest levels of the U.S. military on encounters with what they say are mysterious airborne objects that defy conventional explanations.

A supposed leak was brought to my attention when it was tweeted by Christopher Mellon, Former Deputy Assistant Secretary of Defense for Intelligence. It came in the form of multiple videos and pictures taken by Navy personnel. You can access the video in this article if you’d like to see the video footage. Below are some pictures an F18 pilot snapped with his iPHONE.

According to a recent article by The Debrief,

“The Pentagon has confirmed that U.S. Navy personnel captured several leaked images and a video depicting unidentified aerial phenomena, or UAP, involving incidents being investigated currently by the Department of Defense’s Unidentified Aerial Phenomena Task Force (UAPTF). Pentagon Spokesperson Susan Gough told the The Debrief in an email.”

John Greenwald, who runs the popular government document archive The Black Vault, also confirmed the videos were authentic via a statement from Susan Gough. He also conducted an interesting interview with Ex CIA Director James Woolsey.

Here are a couple of the pictures, captured by the rear-seat weapons system officer of an F/A-18 fighter jet.

The object in the first photo, now referred to as the “Acorn,” and two other newly leaked images depicting unusual aerial objects, were published by KLAS Las Vegas investigative journalist George Knapp on April 6, 2021. The other two images, described by Knapp as “the metallic blimp” and “sphere,” were all reportedly captured within a period of 30 minutes on the same day. The other object in the second photo looks like a translucent sphere.  

You can refer to the cover photo (above) for a close up of that specific object you see there in the first photo.

Below is a picture taken by two Royal Canadian Air Force pilots on August 27th, 1956, above Fort MacLeod, Alberta, Canada. (“Physical Evidence Related To UFO Reports” – The Sturrock Panel Report – Electromagnetic Effects) (source) (source)

The pilots were flying in a formation of four F86 Sabre jet aircraft. One of the pilots described the phenomenon as a “bright light which was sharply defined as disk-shaped,” that looked like “a shiny silver dollar sitting horizontal.” Another pilot managed to photograph the object, as you can see below.

Then there are pictures that can expand the mind a little more, also still open to interpretation. The picture below comes from Norman Bergrun, a scientist and engineer who was part of NASA’s voyager program. He worked at NASA for decades at the Ames Research Centre. He also worked at Lockheed Martin where he managed the Polaris missile tests. The picture comes from the Voyager mission in 1980. That mission was tasked with photographing Saturn, its rings and its moons.

What is the picture of? It’s a “luminous source,” that comes from Bergrun’s Book, “The Ringmakers of Saturn.” According to Bergrun, there are several large craft “proliferating” out around Saturn and its moons. His book goes into much greater detail. According to him, extraterrestrial craft, even craft of this magnitude, are a certainty.

Why It’s Important: Again, videos and pictures locked up within the black budget world seem to be a reality, and it makes one wonder what type of video footage and photographs are being concealed from the public. For example, a document obtained via the CIA’s electronic reading room outlines an examination of the UFO phenomenon that took place more than a decade ago between Chinese & Russian researchers. It states,

Scientists of the PRC and the Soviet Far East have begun a joint study of UFO’s. The first meeting of ufologists of the two countries has ended in the small maritime townlet of Dalnegorsk. The Soviet and Chinese specialists on anomalous phenomena have mapped out a program for investigating incidents that are already known and have also arranged to directly exchange video and photographic materials on new similar phenomena.

I do not believe that the masses will ever be told what exactly has been discovered about these objects from government sources, and we will simply receive a “sanitized” version of “disclosure”, one that perhaps does not represent the phenomenon well. The sources of government and mainstream media have always attempted to manipulate our perception of major topics and events.

The idea of a “threat” has been a common theme in mainstream UFO disclosure discussions, this is quite concerning to many researchers in the field given the fact that the behaviour of these objects are not indicative of any type of threat. They’ve always performed evasive maneuvers to avoid our own aircraft. This has been emphasized by many, like Canadian Defense Minister Paul Hellyer in 2008, General Nathan Twining in the 1940’s, and more recently Richard F. Haines, a senior NASA research scientist for more than two decades now.

According to the Task Force mentioned above:

The Department of Defense established the UAPTF to improve its understanding of, and gain insight into, the nature and origins of UAPs (Unidentified Aerial Phenomenon). The mission of the task force is to detect, analyze and catalog UAPs that could potentially pose a threat to U.S. national security.

Another recent quote is from Renowned UFO researcher, scientist, mathematician, and astrophysicist Dr. Jacques Vallée touches upon this concern.

We have to stop reacting to intrusions by UFOs as a threat, I mean that’s the whole thing behind this new task force, as much as I respect, you know, the task force, my colleagues and I want to cooperate with them to the extent that we can bring information or resources to what they do. But there is more, this is not, should not be looked at specifically as a threat…With the phenomenon that we observe if they wanted to blow up those F18s they would do it. Obviously that’s not what it’s all about, and this idea of just labelling it all as a threat because it’s unknown, that’s the wrong idea. (source)

The mainstream media and government are quickly gaining a reputation for manipulating the consciousness of the masses with regards to a number of topics, why would UFOs be any different? You can read more about that discussion here and here.

The Takeaway: The main takeaway from this article can be that we may not want to rely solely on governments, mainstream media and intelligence agencies to provide us with information about the UFO phenomenon. This goes with all things. Mainstream media has long been able to “control” the perception of the masses, effectively telling us when we’re allowed to explore certain topics culturally, and when we’re not. Just look at the UFO subject, 6 years ago it was ridiculed, once mainstream culture spoke of it, it was all of a sudden acceptable. Why?

Most of us now simply rely on our T.V. for information without doing our own research, and this leaves us open to large amounts of perception manipulation on a topic.

Having researched this topic for more than 15 years, I can tell you that the phenomenon is vast and, as I say in virtually all my articles on the subject, it has huge implications and leaves no aspect of humanity untouched. These sightings have been documented for thousands of years in many different forms, and just as there was evidence for the existence of UFOs when they were considered a “conspiracy theory,” now, I can tell you there is very strong evidence, based on my research, that these objects do not originate from any human being on planet Earth.

This is a major paradigm shifting topic that can help expand human consciousness and change the way we look at ourselves, the cosmos, and the nature of reality. Ultimately, in some unexplainable way I believe the phenomenon can be a great catalyst to help us look within, observe ourselves, and ask ourselves why we live the way we do and do the things we do when we have the potential to do so much better and create a human experience where everybody can thrive.

Dive Deeper

Click below to watch a sneak peek of our brand new course!

Our new course is called 'Overcoming Bias & Improving Critical Thinking.' This 5 week course is instructed by Dr. Madhava Setty & Joe Martino

If you have been wanting to build your self awareness, improve your.critical thinking, become more heart centered and be more aware of bias, this is the perfect course!

Click here to check out a sneak peek and learn more.

Continue Reading
advertisement - learn more
advertisement - learn more

Video

Elevate your inbox and get conscious articles sent directly to your inbox!

Choose your topics of interest below:

You have Successfully Subscribed!