Home » News » Campus Events »

UFO expert speaks at UC auditorium, says aliens have tampered globally with nukes

By Seth Newman on October 21, 2010 11:36 am in Campus Events / 43 comments

 

Robert Hastings came to CMU with one clear message: “Flying saucers are real.”

The UFO expert spoke to a full Bovee University Center Auditorium Wednesday night.

“There is a race of beings from somewhere else in the universe, that are technologically more supreme than us,” he said. “This isn’t Hollywood, a practical joke or science fiction, this is real.”

Hastings, who has been broadcast on CNN and appeared as a guest on “Larry King Live,” said he has interviewed over 120 ex-air force officers and has been studying UFOs for 37 years. He has spent 29 years on the lecture circuit at over 500 colleges.

“Few people want to touch the subject,” he said. “Journalists rarely write about it and scientists try to avoid it. I come to colleges to spread the word on the truth about UFOs.”

Canton sophomore Jeff Oldani said he enjoyed the presentation.

“I learned a lot of new stuff and how to access government files,” Oldani said. “I really think it’s possible that aliens exist.”

Hastings said he grew up on Malmstrom Air Force Base in Montana. When he was 16, he says a missile site on the base was preparing to launch when an unidentified flying object flew over the base, causing all 10 missiles to malfunction.

All of the witnesses to that event, he said, were sworn to secrecy. Ever since then, he said he has chased the truth.

The presentation opened with a 25 minute informative movie on the history of UFOs and a timeline of important dates.

Hastings then went over what he referred to as top-secret documents from the government about extraterrestrial intelligence and UFOs, and closed with a question and answer session. He said his main goal is to open the eyes of the public.

“These flying saucers are monitoring us, deactivating and tampering with our nukes,” Hastings said.

Tawas sophomore Michael Friedgen was surprised by the facts and connections Hastings presented.

“I was surprised on how focused the UFOs were on the nuclear sites,” Friedgen said. “It’s not hard to believe that there is another race in the universe.”

 

Tags

, , , , , , ,

Related Posts

 
  • Cvtheis55

    Much as I would truly love for this to be the case, physics and the near impossibility of faster-than-light travel, wormhole travel, etc. make this proposition highly unlikely. Also, these super-advanced races (1) can't avoid being glimpsed, or (2) won't just show themselves? Travel across the galaxy to lurk in the shadows and not engage us? Come on – we are not going to be THAT interesting to an advnced race. I like the comedian who asks why most aliens are observed by beer-drinking rednecks who have had something shoved up their butts?

  • Cvtheis55

    Much as I would truly love for this to be the case, physics and the near impossibility of faster-than-light travel, wormhole travel, etc. make this proposition highly unlikely. Also, these super-advanced races (1) can't avoid being glimpsed, or (2) won't just show themselves? Travel across the galaxy to lurk in the shadows and not engage us? Come on – we are not going to be THAT interesting to an advnced race. I like the comedian who asks why most aliens are observed by beer-drinking rednecks who have had something shoved up their butts?

  • Cvtheis55

    Much as I would truly love for this to be the case, physics and the near impossibility of faster-than-light travel, wormhole travel, etc. make this proposition highly unlikely. Also, these super-advanced races (1) can't avoid being glimpsed, or (2) won't just show themselves? Travel across the galaxy to lurk in the shadows and not engage us? Come on – we are not going to be THAT interesting to an advnced race. I like the comedian who asks why most aliens are observed by beer-drinking rednecks who have had something shoved up their butts?

  • Hoorayforbryan

    1. Faster-than-light and wormhole travel aren't necessary for extraterrestrials to have reached Earth. 2. They do have stealth technology. 3. There's no reason to assume categorically that super-advanced races would show themselves.

  • Hoorayforbryan

    1. Faster-than-light and wormhole travel aren't necessary for extraterrestrials to have reached Earth. 2. They do have stealth technology. 3. There's no reason to assume categorically that super-advanced races would show themselves.

  • Hoorayforbryan

    1. Faster-than-light and wormhole travel aren't necessary for extraterrestrials to have reached Earth. 2. They do have stealth technology. 3. There's no reason to assume categorically that super-advanced races would show themselves.

  • Hoorayforbryan

    1. Faster-than-light and wormhole travel aren't necessary for extraterrestrials to have reached Earth. 2. They do have stealth technology. 3. There's no reason to assume categorically that super-advanced races would show themselves.

  • JARRJARR22

    Listen genius. What makes you think that YOU or any other human being..be they a scientist/physicist knows all there is to know about physics. Einstein's theory came out..what..early 1900s. That is about 10 seconds ago in the expance of time. We are still learning. I would like to know by what authority you make these bold claims about “impossibility”. Critical thinking good. Extreme scepticism bad. Keep an open mind and read more.

  • Ted

    Where's Fox Mulder when you need him?

  • http://www.facebook.com/people/Cristian-Mihaila/100000836791913 Cristian Mihaila

    - (VIDEO): Apollo Astronaut Edgar Mitchell: The UFO crash in Roswell… FoxNews ( October 08, 2010): Conspiracy Theorists Confident: Altered Image a NASA Cover-Up…CNN (VIDEO): U.S. Nuclear Weapons Have Been Compromised by UFO…Pravda (Russian News): Extraterrestrial Spaceships Land and Crash on Earth Regularly… UFO Disclosure 2010: The Vatican's Key Role… Pope's star watcher to visit Nasa (12th February 2009) and talk aliens:
    http://cristiannegureanu.blogspot.com/2010/10/conspiracy-theorists-confident-altered.html

  • Agreatguy62

    With electron excelleration, and magnetic power and field generation… its possible to travel at or
    faster than speed of light and energy….

  • Brian

    What the heck is this gibberish?

  • InjunTrouble77

    The aliens have been concerned about nuclear weapons and their ability to destroy the planet for a long time now. They have been sending messages to the US military warning about this. Periodically they disable US nuclear missiles as part of this warning. The US military/intelligence community does not want the truth about advanced aliens visiting from outer space to be revealed, since that would undermine US military and economic dominance of the world. This elaborate coverup has been going on for almost 60 years. See http://www.ufocoverup.org for more info

  • Garvorg

    Apparently they have shown themselves….. to thousands of people, Military and otherwise, across the planet.

  • Jkglh

    haha…wow.

  • Nick

    I am glad that the human race has someone like you to show us the way. I am also glad you have a fundamental understanding of how the universe really works, your the first human ever to figure it all out!

  • showandtell

    Maybe they don't show themselves because we are uncivilized, arrogant and violent. We like to make “war” on everything … unfortunate but true.

    P.S. Maybe, just maybe, they find our planet interesting.

  • EDB

    I keep hearing over and over that ET's know about our nuclear sites and that they are trying to send a warning. My personal opinion on that is complete B.S. ET's don't even know what our political or environmental state is with nuclear power. Has anyone thought of the obvious that maybe they have the ability to refuel or rejuvenate their energies from these resources? After all their technology is far beyond ours. Sorry, I just don't by the B.S. that their sending us a signal.

    A True UAP Believer

    EDB

  • Laz

    it would be only too stupid to make war on a race that can travel an unknown number of light years while we can't even get back to our moon.I don't see why such a characteristic would be of any concern to such a race- the explanation fails to convince me.

  • Laz

    4. you have watched too much Star Trek, dylithium chrystals etc. were just plot devices to move a television drama along

  • Is Glen Beck a terrorist?

    “UFO expert”
    That's an oxymoron.

    ““These flying saucers are monitoring us, deactivating and tampering with our nukes,” Hastings said.”
    That's just a moron.

  • Is Glen Beck a terrorist?

    “I would like to know by what authority you make these bold claims about “impossibility”.”
    Way to misrepresent his actual position: “Much as I would truly love for this to be the case, physics and the near impossibility of faster-than-light travel, wormhole travel, etc. make this proposition highly unlikely.”

    “Critical thinking good.”
    Try it sometime.

    “Extreme scepticism bad.”
    It takes hardly any measure of scepticism to consider Hastings a nut. The world is full of crackpots; scepticism is well advised.

  • Davidkangel

    A population of intellegent culture other than our own on earth is apparent all around us, this has been the case for thousands of years throughout humans own history. Clue: Eygiption toy plane taken from tomb, look at plane very closely, any marks on it?. Technologically speaking, you do not have to be physically somewhere to be there, to project in the same way you project your own thoughts and the self illusion of being within, and the biggest question of all, why are we, what are we, why do we feel we are two entities in one body, and one trying to get out.

  • Cam5e

    Perhaps these “super advanced” beings are 'us' from the future coming here to prevent stupidty?

  • Richard

    Oh, wow, what a novel concept. A human that knows exactly how a race a million or more years in advance of us would travel the universe and perceive a planet full of warlike heavily armed savage hairless primates with nukes. Dude, stop wasting your valuable time on these blogs and use your superior intelligence to take over the world. Oh, and by the way, Glen Beck doesn’t have the IQ to be a terrorist. Even that vocation requires a functioning brain stem.

  • SimpleBob

    Does the information presented by these former officers warrant closer attention, or do you just dismiss their testimony out of hand? I invite anyone who is curious to apply critical thinking to the Belgian flap, JAL 1628, Rendlesham and other prominent, well documented cases.

  • Is Glen Beck a terrorist?

    The application of critical thinking does not result in “There is a race of beings from somewhere else in the universe, that are technologically more supreme than us” as the most reasonable explanation.

  • SimpleBob

    Apparently it does in some cases, including the Swedes in 1948. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/File:1948_Top_Secret_USAF_UFO_extraterrestrial_document.png

  • Is Glen Beck a terrorist?

    Meteor.

  • SimpleBob

    Your critical thinking missed the point there bud.

  • Is Glen Beck a terrorist?

    Not really. Your provided example shows a marked lack of critical thinking in the assumption that the phenomena had a basis in technology.

  • SimpleBob

    The example provided shows that other, technically qualified people investigating the phenomena reached a different conclusion to yourself. That was the point of the example, a point which you failed to recognize, for whatever reason.

  • Is Glen Beck a terrorist?

    It doesn't make it the most reasonable explanation, “a point which you failed to recognize, for whatever reason.”

  • SimpleBob

    That depends on how an individual weighs the evidence. At least as early as 1975 scientists concluded that if alien life existed then E.T.s would already be here, but because there was no evidence of their presence on Earth then we must be alone in the galaxy (one conclusion of the Fermi paradox).

    You don't think the ET hypothesis is the most reasonable explanation, but obviously others do, especially if one considers the probability of an alien presence to be high. If we can't agree then that's reason enough why everyone should look at the available evidence and make up their own mind.

  • Is Glen Beck a terrorist?

    Silly people believe silly things.

    Belief that aliens are responsible for the alleged phenomena is about as reasonable as believing that clothes dryers eat socks.

    Some people believe in ghosts, others in vampires. Taking those people seriously is an equivalent waste of time.

  • SimpleBob

    You obviously didn't look up the Fermi paradox or related scientific papers. Where's your reasoning and your ability to follow the flow of an argument? Are you unwilling or just unable to add anything other than unsubstantiated opinion and non-sequiturs?

  • Is Glen Beck a terrorist?

    The part of the Fermi paradox that isn't wanton speculation, the lack of evidence of the existence of advanced extraterrestrial civilizations, doesn't counter my previously stated position:
    'The application of critical thinking does not result in “There is a race of beings from somewhere else in the universe, that are technologically more supreme than us” as the most reasonable explanation.'

    Why is it that you think this statement of yours helps your case?
    “At least as early as 1975 scientists concluded that if alien life existed then E.T.s would already be here, but because there was no evidence of their presence on Earth then we must be alone in the galaxy (one conclusion of the Fermi paradox).”

    “if one considers the probability of an alien presence to be high.”
    There is no reasonable basis for such consideration. There's only one known occurrence of technologically advanced life coming into being anywhere in the universe. There is insufficient data to produce a meaningful estimate of the probability of another occurrence. It's just wishful thinking.

  • SimpleBob

    The Fermi paradox is a question, but the assumptions can be considered a theory: that we expect E.T. to be here in our solar system; (while acknowledging that different scientists speculate on different answers to the Fermi paradox). Witness testimony, backed by radar returns, could be considered good evidence in support of this theory.

    Speculation that we are unique in the universe represents an extreme possibility, the guys at SETI have a different opinion to your own. Discovery of organic compounds in space, experiments producing amino acids and the power of evolutionary forces all lead some scientists to have a high expectation of finding E.T. life. Dismissing or ignoring all evidence that suggests that some UFOs are alien craft could also be considered an extreme position to take.

    People assess the data in various ways, assigning different probabilities to the 'unknowns' (such as: chance of intelligent E.T. life, integrity and accurate perception of witnesses). The fact that someone reaches a different conclusion to yourself doesn't mean that they haven't analyzed the available data in a reasonable manner.

    I don't expect to change your opinion of the possibilities, but hopefully you can appreciate that different opinions can be reached through sound reasoning (e.g. the 1948 Swedes) and that everyone should assess the evidence for themselves.

  • Is Glen Beck a terrorist?

    “assumptions can be considered a theory: that we expect E.T. to be here in our solar system”
    Any wild guess can be labeled as a 'theory' by dictionary definition. Calling it theory doesn't make it scientifically sound.

    “Speculation that we are unique in the universe represents an extreme possibility”
    Sure, but that's far past considering the 'extraterrestrial hypothesis' to be implausible.

    “the guys at SETI have a different opinion to your own.”
    And simple physics would suggest that their time would be better spent on more practical matters. They've accomplished nothing so far, and there's no reason to expect they ever will.

    “Dismissing or ignoring all evidence that suggests that some UFOs are alien craft could also be considered an extreme position to take.”
    There is no evidence that hasn't a far more plausible explanation.

    “People assess the data in various ways, assigning different probabilities to the 'unknowns' (such as: chance of intelligent E.T. life, integrity and accurate perception of witnesses).”
    Eyewitness testimony has been scientifically demonstrated to be unreliable. There is no basis for assigning probabilities to things such as the chance of intelligent E.T. life; it's pure guesswork, not science.

    “The fact that someone reaches a different conclusion to yourself doesn't mean that they haven't analyzed the available data in a reasonable manner.”
    The fact that they've reached an absurd conclusion does.

    “different opinions can be reached through sound reasoning (e.g. the 1948 Swedes)”
    That's not at all an example of sound reasoning.

    “I don't expect to change your opinion of the possibilities”
    It's not my position that it's impossible. Again: 'The application of critical thinking does not result in “There is a race of beings from somewhere else in the universe, that are technologically more supreme than us” as the most reasonable explanation.'

    “everyone should assess the evidence for themselves.”
    'Everyone' isn't qualified to make such judgments, in general. It'd be nice if that were the case, but it's quite obviously not, else homeopathy and other quackery wouldn't have any customers.

  • SimpleBob

    We obviously have a fundamental disagreement on what constitutes science, reason and basic logic; making it impossible to find any common ground for rational debate.

    It is very revealing that you consider your opinion to be the only correct one in these matters; it appears that anyone who disagrees with you is, by your definition, wrong. Or am I wrong? However, I am happy to state for the record that I disagree with practically all of your opinions.

    I believe the only new insights either of us may have gained from this exchange have been in regard to our respective psychologies, as revealed by our comments.

  • Is Glen Beck a terrorist?

    “Or am I wrong?”
    Very much so. You show a marked lack of capability in logic, reasoning and science.

    “If we can't agree then that's reason enough why everyone should look at the available evidence and make up their own mind.” Non sequitur; that's not how logic works.

    You appear to think that the exotic is the most reasonable explanation for phenomena that can be adequately explained without recourse to novelty. That's not how reasoning works.

    An incredibly small and inherently biased sample is insufficient for producing meaningful estimates of the properties of a population. It is not an opinion, it is scientific fact.

    If you actually care about science and critical thinking, rather than just trying to justify believing what you want to believe, read this: http://isc.astro.cornell.edu/~sloan/science/pseudo.html
    After reading, click on the “UFOs” link on that page if you still feel the need for a more detailed addressing of the subject of UFOs.

  • SimpleBob

    Read it – fails to address the evidence. The writer chose an Interesting role model in Philip Klass. I can see where you get your point of view.

  • Is Glen Beck a terrorist?

    Sure it does, it just doesn't support your point of view.

    The writer, G. C. Sloan, is a professional astronomer with a Ph.D. in physics: http://isc.astro.cornell.edu/~sloan/research/experience.html

    Robert Hastings was a crackpot well before he was any small measure of scientist: http://www.ufohastings.com/BioPage.html

    I have a far deeper and broader background in science than Hastings, though not so deep as Sloan. Hastings is a buffoon, who makes outlandish claims of fact with a complete absence of proof. Read the article for examples.

    I hadn't read Sloan's writings on pseudoscience or UFOs prior to the day I posted the link. My point of view comes from being well trained in science. Your point of view appears to come from wishful thinking and demonstrated ignorance.