Alienating aliens: Do nukes make them go ballistic?

THE DEPROLIFERATOR — Paul R. Hill was an aerodynamics scientist who led some key projects for NASA. Also, like moon-walking astronaut Edgar Mitchell, he believed in UFOs, in part because of two personal sightings. In fact, Hill marshaled his aerodynamic and mathematical expertise to the task of determining what made them fly. . . and stop on a dime. . . and change directions in a heartbeat. The book that was the result of his labors, Unconventional Flying Objects (Hampton Roads Publishing, 1995), is one of the most respected works in UFO lore, as well as great fun to read (despite all the equations).

Hill determined that their means of propulsion were — no surprise — an anti-gravity force field. Of course, he wasn’t able to conceptualize a working model. Had he been, NASA would no doubt have yanked him out of retirement and become involved in a tug of war with the Pentagon for his services.

How, you’re no doubt asking by now, do UFOs fit under the umbrella of “Nukes and Other WMDs”? Because they beggar the question: Why aren’t UFOs (assuming, for the sake of argument, a belief in their existence) powered by nuclear energy?

Perhaps it’s impossible to configure nuclear energy to that end. Or maybe, to extraterrestrials, it’s an ancient technology long ago superseded by less hazardous scientific advancements. Come to think of it, even for an earth technology, nuclear power is old — over 60 years.

We too would probably have developed an energy source to replace it (as well as oil, of course). But apparently the staggering cost of its development can’t be justified without a world war, as was Project Manhattan. Guess the planet’s looming doom thanks to climate change due in large part to fossil-fuel use doesn’t qualify.

Could it be that aliens, aside from repudiating nuclear energy themselves, are opposed to its use — not to mention that of nuclear weapons — by other civilizations? At about the same time as Hill’s book was published, a man named Robert Salas wrote about his experiences 30 years earlier when he was with the Air Force Strategic Air Command. His job was to operate, maintain, and protect a Minuteman intercontinental ballistic missile base in central Montana. Salas writes:

On March 16 1967, Captain Eric Carlson and First Lieutenant Walt Figel. . . were below ground in the. . . Launch Control Center [while missile] maintenance crews and security teams were camped out [above ground]. During the early morning hours, more than one report came in from [them] that they had seen UFOs. A UFO was reported directly above one of the. . . silos. …

Around 8:30 a.m., Figel. . . was briefing Carlson. . . when the alarm horn sounded. One of the Minuteman missiles they supervised had gone off alert. … Within seconds, the entire flight of ten ICBMs was down! … Power had not been lost to the sites; the missiles simply were not operational because, for some unexplainable reason, each of their guidance and control systems had malfunctioned. … When we were relieved by our scheduled replacement crew later that morning the missiles had still not been brought on line by on-site maintenance teams. …

Robert Kaminski [who] was the Boeing Company engineering team leader for [a subsequent investigation stated]: “There were no significant failures, engineering data or findings that would explain how ten missiles were knocked off alert. . .”

UFOs to Earth: The Milky Way Is a No-Nukes Galaxy

It turns out the nexus of nuclear weapons and UFOs is a hot topic on the Web. Spearheading efforts to gather information and investigate the subject is one Michael Salla (not to be confused with Salas cited above), who calls his popular website Exopolitics: The political implications of the extraterrestrial presence. (Aside to Dr. Salla: Ditch the goofy image of saucers buzzing the Capitol building.)

On the occasion of Obama’s Prague speech, during which he outlined his disarmament plans, Dr. Salla commented:

Obama’s intent to take steps towards a nuclear weapons free world has already been welcomed by many scientists, elder statesmen and national security organizations. If a select group of former military whistleblowers are to be believed, there are also others that will be happy to see the eradication of nuclear weapons — extraterrestrial occupants of UFOs.

Dr. Salla then cites whistleblowers, including Salas, who. . .

. . . concluded that UFOs are vitally interested in nuclear weapons and have actively interfered with these in an apparent effort to deter the US and other countries from ever using them. This is supported by the testimony of [others] such as Colonel Ross Dedrickson (ret.) who had worked with the US Air Force and Atomic Energy Commission [and who claimed]:

“After retiring from the Air Force I joined the Boeing company and was responsible for accounting for all of the nuclear fleet of Minuteman missiles. In [one] incident they actually photographed the UFO following the missile as it climbed into space and, shining a beam on it, neutralized the missile. I also learned of a number of incidents [in which] nuclear weapons sent into space were destroyed by the extraterrestrials.”

Raise your hand if you knew ICBMs, some with nuclear warheads, had been launched into space. (Me neither.) More recently, you may recall an episode of the Bush administration’s that gained a lot of mileage on the Web — the Divine Strake, which was a test of a 700-pound bomb planned for spring 2006 in the Nevada desert. Dr. Salla explains that, based on statements by officials in the public record, the test might have been intended as a simulation — proxy might be a better word — of a test of the Robust Nuclear Earth Penetrator (RNEP) — a nuclear “bunker buster.” He writes:

[The] delay of Divine Strake may consequently have been a result of . . . generals opposed to a nuclear bombing campaign against Iran. There is, however, [another] explanation. [Extraterrestrials may have given] warnings through their communications with individuals and military officials of impending action to prevent the possible use of nuclear weapons.

What? You didn’t get the memo that the Pentagon and aliens were, well, sending memos to each other? Be that as it may, what exactly is it about nukes that aliens object to? Dr. Salla again:

[Former SAC man] Salas believes that UFOs interfere with nuclear weapons out of an altruistic desire to prevent nuclear war on Earth. Dedrickson, however. … claims that a nuclear weapons test over the Pacific in the 1960s was [something] that the extraterrestrials were really concerned about because it affected our ionosphere. In fact, the ET spacecraft were unable to operate because of the pollution in the magnetic field which they depended upon.

Furthermore, Dr. Salla writes that French UFO researcher Eric Julien, who wrote the visionary The Science of Extraterrestrials, “argues that there is a correlation between UFO behavior around nuclear tests and 74 alleged UFO crashes documented in Ryan Wood’s book, Majic Eyes Only.”

Seventy-four! Odds are that adds up to a higher crash rate per flight than earthly aircraft. If so, it’s a testament to how, as Julien sees it, “the use of nuclear weapons affects the time/space continuum in ways that disrupt UFO/extraterrestrial navigation and propulsion systems.”

Dr. Salla concludes that the use of nuclear weapons may be a threat to extraterrestrial civilizations. Planning to use them “could provoke extraterrestrials to respond in a preemptive manner.”

However open to the possibility of the existence of extraterrestrials, disarmament advocates shouldn’t hold their breath waiting for aliens to ride to their rescue. (It’s as chimerical as hawks who seek to huddle under missile defense systems.) But if extraterrestrials are darting about our atmosphere, it’s a safe bet that they can’t be happy about past tests of nuclear detonations and the prospect of their use in warfare. Apparently extraterrestrials perceive a truth about nuclear weapons that many of us on earth don’t — that they’re a rip in the fabric of the space-time continuum.

First posted at the Faster Times.

1 reply »