Massive 'drone swarm' in and around New Jersey: UFO flap, govt tech, or mass hysteria?

[Ðekel]

Appearing, hovering then leaving / turning off. The patterns make it seem like they are either searching for something or Mapping something.

Most of these objects appear to be of 3d origin, yet something about this whole episode does not read as business as usual.

 

[Wandering Star]

Argentina

https://twitter.com/x/status/1868025976136831059

Starlink starting the dispersion.

 

[ApotheosisMMC.]

Well ok, it's a nice "story" and very 'dramatic'. I'm hoping it's not true and they're just testing technology, not looking for dirty bombs!

https://twitter.com/x/status/1868065136784597090

Yesterday on SOTT radio network in spanish program they made a comment about how UFOs didn't like nuclear weapons. I was going to make a joke about how they were looking for one of the supposed nuclear weapons that Israel had hidden to carry out blackmail. I didn't do it because it was too far from the topic... but since the topic of searching for radiation has come up, couldn't the development of this technology have partly to do with that?

 

[KJS]

Continuing the speculations that I've made by posting this remote viewing session, I was thinking if the person that did the remote viewing wasn't perceiving the artificial intelligence system that was executing the task via her UFO-enthusiast bias. If we interpret the session by abandoning that lens, what we have is:​

• Advanced swarm-like military technology tasked with finding something. How would that artificial intelligence system respond when given the multi-modality capability? "Watch us" and "we are here in the timeline and the objective is there", meaning that it is focused on achieving the objective via some time-constrained strategy.​
• There are helicopters monitoring what the swarm is doing and reporting, with pilots not clued into what's happening (they are "afraid" and "got a message").​
• There is something that the swarm is searching for, in which the daylight sun interferes.​

Now, the really interesting part might be that by summoning people’s belief systems en masse by these drones, true non-human intelligence orbs are appearing, in the same way as Chris Bledsoe (that "The UFO of God" book guy) does this and often records. Or maybe even non-human orbs are interested in what the military drones are searching for? If so, it might be worrying in conjunction with silence on the objective, producing unneeded tensions.

Another interesting thing is radio disruptions. I have nothing to back my claims, but the argument about 200GHz communications channels interfering with ~100MHz FM radio feels not very plausible.

But the weirdest thing so far is that the sightings align with Clif High’s decade-old web bot data, that 39 days after a temporal marker, which he thinks is the Trump and Rogan interview, there will be a "melee" involving UFOs in the sky. Well-known remote viewer, Ed Riordan, was tasked with what will be Clif's melee event months ago and got data about "the testing of a system".

​

To sum up, my take is that this was indeed a testing of some advanced military system, but the scared people’s belief systems actually summoned some "High Strangeness".​

 

[Ricardo]

ok , but testing over populated areas ? even more so while un-cloaked ? , general public attention may indeed do things to the veil but, imo it doesn't look like it's as simple as that at the moment , Clif high has interesting stuff to say indeed , but even if his tech gets objective readings it seems he is getting stuff from laterals all mixed up in a "single" potential/probability result ( my 2x cents ).

 

[KJS]

Clif high has interesting stuff to say indeed , but even if his tech gets objective readings it seems he is getting stuff from laterals all mixed up in a "single" potential/probability result ( my 2x cents ).

Sure, I guess that's how clairvoyance at our level works - you get only as much data as not to introduce any paradoxes. Probably that's why remote viewers can find the body of a deceased person with remarkable precision sometimes, but only see the start of the Israeli-Hamas conflict as a bunch of explosions that could happen anywhere. Joseph McMoneagle could only pinpoint a novel Soviet submarine in the Cold War era so precisely because nobody would ever believe him; his data was worthless in the context of changing anything. Just my thoughts, but I'm digressing.
​

ok , but testing over populated areas ?

Maybe there's some objective other than "testing". By "beta testing," you often test the product by giving it to the selected group of customers to spot some issues before its general availability.​

 

[Mari]

First, Joe you’re such a spoil sport! Drones!!! That’s sooo anticlimactic!!!

Secondly, what does this mean?

It started after the Russians showed their Oresnik rocket, saying we are the most powerfull force on the planet.
Now, US is showing drones that you can see on the radar but you can’t actually do anything about them: they have no heat signature, no frequency, so in theory you can’t easily shoot them down, so basically, they could arrive to any Russian facility and make madness.

What does that mean? That US is now the most powerful force? Or maybe that the field is leveled up? Fine, you have drones we can’t shoot down and we have missiles you can’t intercept.

And it would be interesting to know where did US get the technology from.

 

[Joe]

That's the issue I have with the psy-op or MIC element. These New Jersey politicians are definitely hot under the collar from their constituents. The above post of State Rep Brian Bergen who was an Apache helicopter pilot and trainer made a lot of sense with his outrage that basic procedure to see where these things are landing wasn't followed through with.

The fact that local authorities have been getting so worked up about it might suggest the reason the planners of the op didn't ask permission: they wouldn't have given permission or they would have created a big deal about it before the op even got going. That's something you'd obviously want to avoid, so it seems to me that the planners decided that the best option was to just go ahead and do it. It's easier to ask for forgiveness than permission in some cases.

AS of yet it doesn't look like a "simple" M.I.C. op , they usually create "media " narratives for any changes , though not explicitly ( or directly for that matter ), with a us congress critter declaring on teevee that it's Iranian drones , link @ youtube , something's amiss here.

Interestingly enough, that US congressman who made the 'crazy' Iranian claim may not have been far from the truth. What he missed was that the op was simulating an "Iranian attack" - and the response to it - rather than it actually being an Iranian attack.

Reading the thread I think that @axj may be onto something. Some of the information about the drones, like not showing up on IR vision, crazy maneuvers, affects on FM radio, and even the odd car incident (reminded me of a part from The Eighth Tower), makes me think there is a hyperdimensional component to it,

All of those capabilities, and more, are pretty standard 3D tech at this point.

And it would be interesting to know where did US get the technology from.

This is part of the problem, the average person (myself included) not keeping track of advancements in tech, and then when it's made somewhat public, we freak out and think it's magic.

 

[Joe]

First, Joe you’re such a spoil sport! Drones!!! That’s sooo anticlimactic!!!

I know, it seems to be a habit!

What would be really useful, IMO, would be if, from the beginning of situations like this, everyone here would take the approach of attempting to debunk the more extreme interpretations of what's going on, rather than running with such interpretations. That's doesn't mean going to the opposite extreme and insisting on the more mundane explanation, but trying our best to see if it fits, and leaving no stone unturned in doing do.

The benefit of that approach is that, once you've ruled out all the things that can be ruled out, whatever is left is going to be the data that is as-close-to-objective-as-possible. Basically, it's trying to remove confirmation bias from the equation.

 

[Cosmos]

And as far as I can see you wouldn’t even need a big conspiracy on the ground to pull off a mass drone “flap“ over a larger area in the US. Meaning, that you don’t need one person on the ground or somewhere else to manually control one drone (start it on the ground somewhere and fly around and back), which would mean a lot of manpower and possible detection. Instead you just need one or several key locations (like military installations for example) from where they are started/controlled/landed in MASS Formations in which each drone can fly and do individual stunts governed by just one person or program. Like you can see officially here for example:

So you could even just have one or two military installations around NJ where such mass amounts of drones are being started, and programmed to fly around randomly doing stunts and stuff while being programmed/flown by just one or two people and/or programs. I think in that way it is entirely possible and not even very difficult to pull off a rather big flap over large areas.

 

[Cosmos]

I would also assume that most more or less conventional drones, with their electric motors and rotor blade designs, by definition, will have a very low and maybe even hard to see/detect heat signature: There are no big heat emitters because fossil fuel engines are not used, and also, there isn’t a living creature on board that could emit a bigger heat signature. And if you then fly them fast and/or high enough, detecting a heat signature might get even harder (possibly even for very good instruments). One problem with conventional drones though seem to be the noise, but you could minimize that if you fly them high enough and make them bright enough. Or maybe they already have figured out how to make some of those drone designs much more quiet?

 

[Cosmos]

Turns out there are already much more quiet conventional drone designs out there, for the human ear:

So what secret stuff might already exist that is even quiter than this, not even assuming that it would need to have “anti gravity“ tech on it?

 

[ranger]

I came across interesting insight from this guy. He is talking about some anti-drone "legislation stuff" which expires at 20 December, and they simply arranged this to demand more money and legislation to tighten the grip around general population. Here is the link to his video: Yandex
It sort of makes sense. Authorities say - "we don't know what these drones are about, but there is no danger" - seriously?

 

[axj]

To sum up, my take is that this was indeed a testing of some advanced military system, but the scared people’s belief systems actually summoned some "High Strangeness".

Maybe the testing is of both the advanced drones and people's reaction to large scale "UFO" sightings. The latter seems plausible since they did not announce this 'exercise' and continue denying it. Plus, the potential use of this public display as a message to either Trump, Russia, or both.

 

[Ina]

My 0.00000000194 BTC.
There are two narratives the Greer one, aliens are good and the establishment one aliens are a threat.
Both narratives are tested at the moment on the population.
Should the population respond with fear, then, alien threat is the way the establishment will use to create the state of emergency required to invoke cog and perhaps Lockdown 2.0 ( and leave the newly elected president at his current home). By far the cheapest way.
Should the population respond with curiosity and lack of fear, there will be plan B.

All this drone jikamajika is nothing more than a crude psytest.