UFOs and UAVs Welcome to the New World of UFOlogy, Stagna on and Na onal Survival

by Louis Charles Taylor

© 2021, 2023 Louis Charles Taylor All Rights Reserved

Once upon a me the skies were sovereign territory. Owing to the general level of technological
sophis ca on of terrestrial aeronau cal engineering combined with our physical isola on we could
expect our skies to be occupied only by domes c weapons and the ci zens of nature itself. But then
came the uniden fied objects whose existence the US military privately conceded. And there were the
off-world visita ons..1 But since they weren't a acking we learned to dismiss them and pretend that
they didn't even exist since their level of technological sophis ca on was so advanced that we probably
couldn't do anything about them even if we wanted to. It seemed so safe to do this that it became a
parlour game for debunkers to come up with prosaic explana ons to make them disappear. And they
could afford to be wrong as there was no penalty or consequence for their fellow countrymen.

But technology on Earth advances and by the middle of the second decade of the 21st Century this was
no longer the case. With the development and open prolifera on of unmanned aerial vehicles and
drone technology no longer is it merely the complicated ques on about the off-world presence, no. An
en re new level of complexity has been slapped down on top of it that makes the iden fica on of every
unknown poten ally vital to our country's na onal security. Even without knowing anything one could
already imagine the poten al menace that the access to drones might cause in society. Forget
explosives, "What happens if someone merely equipped one with a can of gasoline and sent it flying into
a hospital or a school?" Then imagine highly intelligent swarms of these things going through ci es
killing everyone.

Now when one looks up one has to consider more than ever before whether an unknown may or may
not be a drone from an unfriendly country or even organiza on. Whereas once the technology was
used to hunt down and dispatch terrorists the prolifera on of this technology would make it the
terrorist's number one go-to weapon of choice because of all the op ons as poten al conveyors of
mayhem that they provide. "How difficult would it be to bring a big box of drones into any par cular
country and just release them?" Many commercially available drones are small enough to be easily
concealable. The only limi ng factor would be their range of opera on.

Beyond this another even more important considera on has to be what the level of technological
sophis ca on that the uniden fied object represents. This will require a greater degree of cau on in
our defensive posture in any and all instances in which these appearances coincide directly or
meaningfully with our security infrastructure. In this sense the recent concerns over the origin and
nature of the 'UFOs' that have been tailing our US Navy cra should be seen as a wake-up call. With the
advances in propulsion technology and our eventual ac ve u liza on of field propulsion technologies
whose existence goes back a full century at this point it is expected that there will come a me when the
origin of an unknown will become uncertain if this assump on is based merely upon the performance
level of the u lized technology. UFOlogists such as former MUFON Director John Schuessler have
1
Comprised of perhaps the descendants of those of our species originally relocated from this planet by a
technically advanced, genuinely foreign and dis nct extraterrestrial form of life either for temporary study or
preserva on during one of this planet's periodic glacial ages hundreds of thousands or even millions of years ago.
a empted to assemble profiles of UFO performance characteris cs in the past. (see UFO FLIGHT
CHARACTERISTICS by John Schuessler, 1984) More recently, former U.S. Army Counterintelligence
Special Agent and former employee of the Office of the Under Secretary of Defense for Intelligence Luis
Elizondo provided this list of observable characteris cs to guide classifica on:

The Five Observables

 Instantaneous Accelera on
 Hypersonic Velocity
 Low Observability
 Transmedium Travel
 Posi ve Li or An gravity

Of these, items one, two, and five can be defined as the degree of control over iner a. The other two
points are control of index of refrac on and trans-medial freedom of propaga on.

From the subjec ve point of view this means that the ini al phase of UFO inves ga on and background
study is going to be based less on understanding ma ers relevant to the off-world presence on Earth in
the 21st Century. It will rely more upon an understanding of what the current state of the art of drone
technology is, the current status of domes c and foreign defense projects as well as the development of
related propulsion and other associated technologies. All of this will be necessary in order to simply get
a sense to what extent the observed characteris cs might fit the specific parameters such as those
observables men oned above that might qualify it as origina ng from this world or not. These general
areas of concern can be summed up as two parameters, their origin/intent and the degree to which they
manage to control their own iner a. These have become major points of conten on with respect to the
recently observed objects yet both are crucial in determining the correct response.

Scenarios:

Origin Level of Technological Sophis ca on Implica on

1) Extraterrestrial Advanced Field Propulsion providing total control of Severe Poten al Threat/
iner a Not directly threatening

As far as the images recently leaked or released of alleged Uniden fied Aerial Phenomena (UAP) are
concerned, from my own sense, as someone who has spent the be er part of 30 years inves ga ng the
phenomenon and studying the photographs, the objects presented look to be less sophis cated than
their other worldly counterparts. One thing that you see in the images of genuine off-world vehicles is a
sense that the technology used does not require any external indica on as far as the design or detailing
of the cra . The cra look to be 'technology-agnos c/independent' in their design which appears
en rely 'sani zed' as far as any indica ons of func onality. The object in the McMinnville photograph
taken by Paul Trent is a typical example:
These photos may be seen as further examples:
By contrast, these two ‘Chads’ depicted in the recently leaked photographs that were confirmed by the
Defense Department tend to be crystal clear and the objects themselves don’t necessarily impress one
as represen ng anything beyond human technical capability (“If these things ‘look like magic’ then my
ass looks like magic..”)

(Does Not Look Like a 'Cube')

(Does not look like a ‘pyramid’)

Given the level of technical sophis ca on and the degree of threat they represent the customary
response in the past has been to simply monitor them since there really isn't anything that we have
been capable of effec vely doing about them regardless of what physical hazards they may have posed
even in those specific cases in which genuine hos lity was displayed. This might be because they realize
that once a party reaches a par cular threshold of destruc ve capability that direct use of overwhelming
force by itself won’t secure control of a planet without the serious risk that the ensuing conflict will
result in its destruc on. Not that this would preclude the very real and persistent danger from a empts
to secure material advantage via more indirect or covert means short of direct military confronta on
such as those proposed by Temple University Professor David Michael Jacobs. These would s ll require
con nued vigilance on our part.

2) Terrestrial Field Propulsion such as simple charge separa on or enhanced reac on engine Credible threat

As far as sta c/solid state thrust propulsion methods go this technology has tradi onally been limited in
the amount of thrust that it produces based upon the amount of charge difference that can be built up.

Electrohydrodynamic/ion dri propulsion:

Flight of an aeroplane with solid-state propulsion
Wilson, J., Perkins, H. D. & Thompson, W. K. An Inves ga on Of Ionic Wind Propulsion. Report No. NASA/TM 2009–
215822 (NASA, 2009).

Masuyama, K. & Barre , S. R. H. On the performance of electrohydrodynamic propulsion. Proc. R. Soc. A 469,
20120623 (2013).

Monrolin, N., Ploouraboué, F. & Praud, O. Electrohydrodynamic thrust for in-atmosphere propulsion. AIAA J. 55,
4296–4305 (2017)

Analy cal model of electro-hydrodynamic flow in corona discharge

A Model of an Ideal Electrohydrodynamic Thruster

Electrohydrodynamic thrust density using posi ve corona-induced ionic winds for in-atmosphere
propulsion

Electrogravi c Field Propulsion:

Is the object using charge separa on for its propulsion? The knowledge of the Biefeld Brown effect goes
back a century and represents the least technically sophis cated form of an -gravity. Its prac cal usage
can be traced back to the ionocra developed by Alexandre de Seversky and its u liza on in our own
defense program includes supplemental li provided to defense systems such as the B-2 Stealth
Bomber. The big ques on is to what extent does their propulsion technology give them control over
iner a? Something like electrogravi cs/ion dri will only give them a rela vely modest amount of
control as the studies referenced above suggest only modest thrust capabili es for travel within or
outside the Earth’s atmosphere.
In this context it’s worth men oning that there has been some discussion of the probability that
addi onal force is clearly present beyond the presumed ionic wind or dri

Although there are several videos of li ers becoming non-opera onal under zero atmosphere
condi ons inside a vacuum chamber the ques on is why.

h ps://www.youtube.com/watch?v=NjvDnwBDovE

h ps://www.youtube.com/watch?v=93rsfqwGfOs

Is it because the ionic medium supplying their counterforce has been removed and there is no wind
passing through the center or is it because the insulator between the two poles of the capacitor in the
li er that the atmosphere effec vely provides has been removed and the charge separa on has broken
down? In both videos we see a tremendous amount of arcing once the atmosphere is gone and the
electrons are given free rein to travel from posi ve to nega ve terminals in li le sparks of lightning
which would seem to be dissipa ng the charge separa on. My own direct observa on of a li er
revealed no significant air displacement at all comparable to the mo on of the object itself nor is there
any explana on as to why experiments demonstra ng a reversal of charge polarity do not result in a
reversal of direc on of mo on.

The other problem with these demonstra ons is the level of voltage used. Experiments have been
performed that have shown the addi onally observed force increasing at discrete intervals2 and tending
to be more pronounced at higher voltages. Of course, even a modest source of propulsion applied over
an extended period of me can be used to build up significant veloci es. Regardless of whether this
may be a measurable factor or not, a review of the publicly available technical literature would indicate
that China has been working developing of this form of field propulsion in their space program.

China's use of 'Ion Wind' technology involving Ion wind using gasses released into the center for
spaceflight:
Electrified rocket technology:

System Design of Electric Propulsion Spacecra by Wang Min

Engineering of Ion Electric Propulsion

With respect to more advanced propulsion schemes currently said to be under development a video
that was posted recently a er the Pentagon Report was released by UFO researcher Richard Dolan
disclosed that a source had revealed to him that the classified version of the report had focused on the
development of different forms of advanced propulsion systems including ion and an -gravity related
propulsion methods that have been under development at the Nellis Test Range including the test range
detachment 3 (Area 51).

h ps://www.youtube.com/watch?v=oJNbCeE110A
2
Experiments by Ankur S Bha And F M Becker showed minor accelera on towards the anode. Others by physicist
Mike McCulloch showed increasingly greater thrust at 1.3 Volts with a dielectric of 7 microns and 2.3 Volts with a
dielectric of 14 microns. (Presenta on by Mike McCulloch on Electric Drive and Quantum Iner al Energy given at
the First Silicon Valley Secret Space Program Business Applica ons Conference, September 17th, 2022. On further
ques oning Mike McCulloch did indicate that he expected the observed displacement to con nue the pa ern of
increase if the dielectric con nued to be increased along with the voltage.)
Though the material provided Richard Dolan concerning the classified material in the recent pentagon
report has yet to be verified, the Pentagon has confirmed research into this type of propulsion. An
ar cle by Roger Glassel shows these and many other topics were the subjects of individual reports
issued by the DIA's Advanced Aerospace Threat Iden fica on Program.

Given the different op ons reportedly under development we might consider the account of the USS
Nimitz Naval Carrier Strike Group Incident published in The New York Times that describes the radar
returns as indica ng an unknown object had traveled 60 miles in ‘less than a minute’.

This would indicate a minimal average velocity of three thousand six hundred miles per hour. The only
current publicly known programs that achieve these veloci es involve elaborate conven onal
propulsion schemes such as scramjet or pulse detona on engines.

No other systems currently developed beyond these types of advanced reac on engines provide
anything close to the mo ve force necessary for these veloci es.

In order to match these capabili es we would be required to implement a similar program and
standardize its applica on to all airborne defense systems.

If the possibility that they are terrestrial compe tors is correct we have to assume poten al hos lity and
take their presence seriously. This requires the iden fica on and evalua on of All Observa ons in the
interests of preserving the safety of our ci zens.

If the object disappeared one has to consider two dis nct possibili es to explain what was observed.
Did the object fly away so fast that its movements could not be tracked? From observed records this is a
feature of some off-world vehicles.

What if the drone cloaked? That technology isn't as advanced as the ability to completely control
iner a. That might also mean that they could send drones into a country at any me poten ally without
detec on unless the border was monitored using equipment that monitored other frequencies of EM
such as infrared.

Invisibility cloaking

Does the object control its iner a completely, or merely its perceived 'index of refrac on'? From
available demonstra ons we can determine that the ability to cloak is not beyond our present level of
technology. The only aspect that would be would be the ability to selec vely cloak or deploy the
lens/cloaking mechanism around the object.

Cross medium traversal

Nor, strictly speaking, is the ability for a drone to operate effec vely across different mediums beyond
our current technical capabili es.

This presents only a limited tac cal threat that can be addressed using sensors that respond to different
frequencies of electromagne c energy such as night vision equipment.

Effec ve counter measures might include the con nued development and deployment of hypersonic
missiles of the type that Russia has tested, High energy laser weapons such as the HELIOS or even just
low tech hypersonic ar llery. Currently the only effec ve counter systems to drone swarms u lizing
high precision targe ng, rapid fire cannon and missile defenses currently being manufactured are
produced by Rheinmetall which is a German defense firm. No US defense systems offer anything
comparable.

Laser weapons would be limited in effec veness by technologies such as smoke screens or more
advanced measures such as the previously men oned cloaking technology.

The witness and sensor data of the observed unknowns give no indica on of any apparent means of
propulsion which should be clearly in evidence if some advanced form of reac on or jet engine were
being u lized.

In general summary, if confronted by a propulsion technology with this level of efficiency, our defense
infrastructure would need to be upgraded but would not have to fundamentally change in order to meet
the poten al threat posed by the new technology for our society to survive. However, because of the
limited nature of the advantage that the enemy were provided it would definitely exist since the
condi ons governing the current geopoli cal rela onships would not be fundamentally affected and we
would be obligated to meet it by any and all means necessary for our con nued survival and the
preserva on of our freedoms.

3) Terrestrial Field Propulsion sophis cated enough to impart total Our ARVs, or
control of iner a Severe Poten al Threat/
Poten al Geopoli cal
Threat Transcendence

Given the level of importance in resolving the exact nature of the threat it would seem immediately
impera ve to obtain and study a sample of one of these objects that might be using it. Why has this not
been done? Are we to assume that there has been no a empt whatsoever to intercept and capture
physical specimens for iden fica on? Why not? Published studies of the Off-World phenomenon
would indicate a substan al record of incidents in which the highly sophis cated technology that is used
by the visitors has been ac vely sought and retrieved. Just the urgency of this ma er would suggest a
lack of candour on the part of the Navy with respect to the UAVs.

Based on what has been leaked in the images taken by the Navy it would seem that this country owes
Luis Elizondo a tremendous debt for a emp ng to remove the collec ve s gma that has prevented a
ra onal response to the very real poten al threats that these objects may represent if nothing else. The
only real ques on is: What categoric level does this current threat represent? This determina on
would hypothe cally be based on their origins along with what the performance metrics these drones
are currently capable of achieving and right now this is open to ques on. As journalist Tyler Rogoway
men ons in his ar cle posted on the War Zone website, “Beyond the so-called 'Tic-Tac' video .. nothing
in any government 'UAP' videos .. show unexplainable capabili es or cra that actually portray that..”
Indeed, the objects and performances depicted in most of the released materials would represent
nothing radically different than what has been discussed as currently available or under development.
No other leaks of informa on would indicate anything radically advanced beyond the statements
reported by 60 Minutes and other sources in conjunc on with the encounter reported by pilots and
radar operators of the Aircra Carrier USS Nimitz back on November 12th of 2004. In a report by 60
Minutes correspondent Bill Whitaker who discussed the incident with the commanding officer of the
Black Aces Dave Fravor and Lt. Cmdr. Alex Dietrich he characterizes the me frame between the
disappearance of the object that was being observed and tracked and its reappearance 60 miles away as
‘seconds later’ rather than the ‘less than a minute’ Commander Fravor described in his interview with
The New York Times.3 According to the published statements of Kevin Day, the senior chief opera ons
specialist in radar systems who was monitoring the encounter from the Combat Opera ons Center
aboard the USS Princeton, this change in posi on took only two seconds.4 30 miles a second comes out
to 108,000 miles per hour. To put this into context, ground to orbital velocity is 18,000 miles per hour,
Earth escape velocity is 24,200 and ground to lunar orbital velocity is 25,700 miles per hour.

Based upon the available informa on I would classify the objects in the leaked videos and photographs
as follows:

The video of the submerging object would at most represent a category 2 incident while the objects in
the photographs haven’t demonstrated any extraordinary capability beyond the unconven onality of
their physical appearance that would necessarily qualify them as category 2 incidents although they
might very well be. In further cases such as this more extensive scanning and EM data would need to be
collected in order to determine if their energy signature might represent anything out of the ordinary.

The object observed in the Nimitz Carrier Incident would rate either a Category 1 or Category 3. In cases
such as this where the careful evalua on of the tes mony is so crucial in the determina on of the
category one has to consider every detail as carefully as possible and even then one may not be able to
arrive at a definite conclusion. Although Day’s tes mony has remained generally consistent there has
been some varia on in the exact me given between the disappearance of the object and it’s
reappearance at the Combat Air Patrol point. 5 Other details indicated the possibility that prior to their
appearance at 28,000 feet near the strike group the objects had been tracked in a low Earth orbit. 6 If
this detail were true one might ini ally be inclined to consider a classifica on of Category 1 if we based
our conclusion merely upon historical precedence. From this author’s own research there is some
evidence that the UFO that was observed and recorded over the Columbia River near Portland, Oregon
in the early morning hours of March 17th of 1981 was preceded by an ELF pulse recorded 7 hours earlier
from Eugene, Oregon indica ng the re-entry of a vehicle roughly the size of a space shu le into the
Earth’s atmosphere.7 There were no recoded shu le missions in opera on at that me. Although not
conclusive in proving an off-world origin it would at least confirm that these objects had the same
command of the space around them with respect to our geography as vehicles from other star systems.

3
During the House Oversight Commi ee Hearings of the US Government Subcommi ee on Na onal Security, the
Border, and Foreign Affairs on July 26th, 2023 Commander Fravor described the me frame as 'less than a minute'.
4
Somewhere in the Skies (Second Edi on) by Ryan Sprague, 2020, pp. 242-243.
5
When speaking at the First Silicon Valley Secret Space Program Business Applica ons Conference he casually
referred to it being ‘less than a second.’
6
This detail was confirmed during the House Oversight Commi ee Hearings of the US Government Subcommi ee
on Na onal Security, the Border, and Foreign Affairs on July 26th, 2023 in tes mony provided by Commander
Fravor.
7
See ar cle, ‘Magne c disturbances produced by UFO and by space shu le re-entry’ by William Van Bise published
in the Planetary Associa on for Clean Energy Newsle er Vol 3 #1, June 1981.
If the informa on reported by Senior Chief Kevin Day were accurate and the object was terrestrial and
capable of this level of performance then the next ques on would have to be, "What's Going on Upstairs
then? Why the heck would they be bothering to waste me toying with our Navy? Why not just use
this propulsion means to head off and explore the Moon and Mars?

Yes, some of these things are engaged in a pa ern of surveillance but in almost every one of these
specific incidents their performance metrics suggest nothing more significant than your average drones
and LTE vehicles. However we must s ll consider the possibility that the object as described in the
incident involving the USS Nimitz might be.

The development of Field Propulsion that would explain what is described in the Nimitz encounter might
be some form of technology as far advanced as to allow them complete ability to control their own
iner a. Such ability has recently been announced in patents origina ng from Aerospace Engineer
Salvatore Pais:

High Energy Superconduc ve Electromagne c Field Quantum Vacuum Propulsion

In summary, as far as the stated capabili es are concerned:

if you can a) create a room temperature superconductor capable of storing an incredibly high
amount of energy and b) get the energy field created by that superconductor moving at
incredibly high speeds around or within the cra , you can create a polarized energy vacuum
around it which allows it to basically ignore the energy of the air or water around it, thereby
removing its own iner a and mass from the equa on.

One of the patents is tled, "Cra using an iner al mass reduc on device". Although one must certainly
be aware of the perfectly reasonable skep cism that has been raised regarding the technical feasibility
of the specific patents themselves by scien sts prominent in the field of advanced physics and nuclear
engineering, the reality as to why the patent was issued to begin with would s ll remain. According to
the Navy their mo va on for pressing the issuance of this patent as necessary was pursuant to the
achievement of a similar technical accomplishment that they believe has already been made by a
compe tor na on and concerning which this na on presumably cannot be le behind.

Of course, the key to this scheme as well as to the advanced u lity of the anomalous force seen in
charge separa on at higher frequencies is the ability to achieve room temperature superconduc vity
and the ability to control significant amounts of energy by building it up without loss due to resistance.
From what we publicly know our technology in superconduc ve materials is now advanced to the point
where we can create superconductors that can operate at a temperature as high as -20 o Celsius. From
what has been publicly disclosed so far by U.S. Naval Avia on Enterprise's Chief Technology Officer Dr.
James Sheehy the technology based upon the specific patent for room temperature superconduc vity is
'not only enabled, but operable' even though, as a report by the War Zone website into the submission
and review of this patent has disclosed, there as of yet has been no actual data from its prac cal
experimental tes ng submi ed as of yet.

From my own prior research into the subject I would think that it might be possible to u lize Bismuth
filaments formed in very high magne c fields to do just this. Experiments in which fibers of this nature
were produced were described by engineer Ronald Bourgoin back in 1980 by a process specified in
patent #4,325,795 "Process for forming ambient temperature superconduc ng filaments".8 If these
were valid then the ques on is, does someone else possess this technology? If they do, how much
power can they generate and how much iner a can they remove? If they remove it all then they can
basically go anywhere they want in li le or no me and do whatever they want just like off-world
vehicles can. So that's it, hypothe cally, 'people would have to start breaking out the ‘Alien
Reproduc on Vehicles’ reportedly being stored in ‘The Museum’ at Area S4 at some point just to survive
and if that doesn't exist then I guess that's just tough shit for us.' The reason I say this is as a response
to a statement reportedly made by the Deputy Director of the Na onal Reconnaissance Office to
Thomas Valone indica ng that it’s essen ally easier to start over and re-invent these technologies than
it is to have them declassified. 9

The ul mate irony in all of this would be that if there is Disclosure and an opening up of this country's
Black Projects it might be as a direct response to China's Black Programs. For decades there have been
indica ons of such programs being conducted by our own military but all we have to work with are
unconfirmed reports and specula on. Now this repressive autocracy halfway around the world has
begun openly discussing plans for the construc on of large-scale spaceships several KM in length as part
of their incep on as a spacefaring civiliza on. Might this be mere unrealis c aspira on in pursuit of
their long term aims in space? Rough es mates made have es mated the cost of such a project at over
3 trillion dollars at the current level of infla on.10

But even if only par ally realized, this may be the ul mate indictment of our own secrecy establishment
because as repressive as they are at least publicly they support human progression when it comes to our
species moving out into space more than our own secrecy establishment. "'Take an act of God for the
technology to be released..'? How about a compe tor secrecy establishment with their own advanced
programs to light a fire under your asses.." Not that this should come as any surprise. China simply
does not have any mo va on to maintain the current status quo based upon petroleum as the principal
energy resource.

At this point other ques ons might be raised, 'What might be the response of those running our own
black projects to the encroachment of the compe tor forces out into space?' Or to assert whatever
territorial differences they might have with Taiwan or Japan? 'How will the current status quo be
maintained?' One thing that should be kept in mind is how progressively difficult it becomes to be able
to dis nguish the uniden fied technology as terrestrial vs non-terrestrial. How are we going to keep
things straight and how are we to respond? Now that the ability to convey enormous destruc ve
poten al is so widely dispersed, how are we to respond to any given unknown? Do we just determine if
its sophis ca on is above a certain level and then just do whatever we can to blow it out of the sky? We
certainly hope that there aren't any off worlders trespassing on this planet if that were the case.
8
The Emerging Energy Science An Annotated Bibliography, 1985, p. 40, Electric Spacecra Journal #21 pp. 32-33.
9
Electrogravi cs II, 2005, p. 27.
10
I might men on in this context the asser on that at least some form of actual projected cost es mates were
made formally or informally for Werner Von Braun’s so called ‘Mars Project’. When speaking back in 1999 with Al
Siepert who worked directly under Kurt Debus as chief of physical security at Cape Kennedy and who knew von
Braun personally I was told that during a visit with von Braun at his home back in 1958 he had no ced that Von
Braun had copies of the popular version of his work ‘The Explora on of Mars’ published in many languages. A er
complimen ng him he men oned that he no ced that the book included no men on of the required expense.
Von Braun reportedly confided to him that no complete es mates were ever disclosed because if they had known
of their magnitude legislators would have thought him crazy for even sugges ng anything so costly.
Wouldn't do to start an interstellar war that we might not be able to finish.. The problem is that if they
have total control of iner a then their cra will be almost indis nguishable in performance from off
world vehicles in most respects. Earlier this year I threw together my own set of parameters that might
be used in evalua ng the iden ty of unknown vehicles:

i) What Cons tutes a genuine off-world vehicle? - A Checklist

a) Does it
A) Glow? I mean, Bright!11
B) Go from dead stop to high speeds instantly?
C) travel hundreds of miles in seconds?
D) make right angle turns?
E) disappear instantly?
F) ma er phase (pass through other objects)?
G) emit beams of light that are bent or slowed by intense gravita onal fields?
H) emit EM fields strong enough to interfere with electrical equipment?
b) Is it
A) hundreds of feet in length?
B) thousands of feet in length?
C) miles in length?

As expected, the degree of control over iner a was the basis for most of them. But even some of these
are being achieved through the use of other technology. The ability to cloak is being accomplished
through the use of lenses at least in crude form. Poten ally, if the cra is able to build up tremendous
charge through superconduc on it could even produce tremendous luminosity as well. The only ones I
would really consider reliable at this point would be these:

a) Does it
A) ma er phase (pass through other objects)?
B) emit beams of light that are bent or slowed by intense gravita onal fields?
b) Is it
A) hundreds of feet in length?
B) thousands of feet in length?
C) miles in length?

But even the size of the cra won't be a clear dis nguishing aspect if the Chinese were hypothe cally
able to build their spacecra as large as a mile in width. From my own research, the best specula on
concerning the ability of ma er to pass through other ma er is based on a completely different
principle unrelated to an object's iner a. This ‘phase shi ing’ of ma er involves the superimposi on of
par cles of ma er; 180 degrees out of phase ma er passes 'through' the loca on where other ma er
par cles are located while they have temporarily blinked out of existence.

In summary, the above scenarios should be considered merely stages of the development of technology
as it relates to our current interna onal situa on. This is to say, if each of these condi ons does not
exist currently then they will Eventually and our country must make every effort to prepare itself for
each in order to preserve those poli cal principles that our country is commi ed to protect and defend.

11
See Confronta ons by Jacques Vallee, Chapter 1
If a compe tor na on has developed Category 3 technology and is using it in the manner described then
the fundamental danger in the current situa on is that a compe tor is inten onally trying to use
confusion in order to build up their offensive capabili es. The more destruc ve the weapons systems
that are available the greater are their poten al for mistaken use. This is an enormously short sighted
strategy as things become more and more dangerous and the poten al for compe on leading to
conflict becomes greater. At some point the only way to avoid war would be disclosure.

The only way we've historically managed to refrain from using our nuclear arsenals is through
communica on and control. What can we expect from a strategy based upon total mutual decep on?
This makes the task that must be performed regarding a UFO inves ga on more difficult and important.
The first dis nc on that must be made in any inves ga on now is to iden fy whether a UFO is in fact a
terrestrial UAV such as a drone. Once this is done then we know whether to treat the situa on as a
defense ma er or not. Then we can proceed with the standard inves ga on procedures and
classifica ons for all off-world and other unusual phenomena as have been conducted in the past.

On the other hand, this isn't just any technology with a strategic implica on. This technology provides
the ability to transcend the geopoli cal context in which the mo va on for their usage is ordinarily
considered and opens up much more profitable areas of use. As I men oned before, if they have this
technology then the big ques on would be, why are they not really using it. Who cares about Terran
geopoli cs? If they have this capability then terrestrial fun & games are over. They can go to the stars
right now. Why even bother with Taiwan when you can send a ship out to Saturn and plant Mainland
China's flag on Iapetus in a day? ‘Why even bother shadowing our navy with their drones if the
technology that they use has this capability? ‘ All I could say is if they really did have this technology and
yet they s ll insisted on being a bunch of pe y, belligerent pricks then 'we'll just have to see what
happens if this is how things really are..'

All we really have is rumor and specula on beyond this but we can at least suggest possibili es based on
what we know. However, if this technology does exist and one or more terrestrial na ons possess it the
really big ques on is why all the fooling around? Why aren’t we a spacefaring civiliza on yet?
Unfortunately what we are seeing would not seem to make any sense at all. This isn't just some new
technology. This would fundamentally alter the situa on and our collec ve sphere of conduct if true
unless there were some major inhibi ve factor preven ng this, some third party for example. Of course,
this is just specula on but if all of this is true the big ques on would have to be,

"What is holding everything back?"

© 2021, 2023 Louis Charles Taylor All Rights Reserved