Michael Recchia

BTW, our AI system AdaptOne, has flagged these other locations (see attached pics) as possibly containing NHI. AdaptOne is assigning a probability of 60/40 in favor of Pareidolia although that might change as AdaptOne uses an enhanced isolation algorithm and associates the chasing of the family out of the yard with one of these locations. This is covered extensively in the baseline document due shortly.

What to expect from “Age of Disclosure”: - There are more stories about “actual NHI”, “actual UAP”, and “actual UFO”. Although some of these are brand new, the overall message that “We are not alone” is old news. We ALREADY KNOW DEFINITIVELY from the Las Vegas April 30/May 1 case that NHI are here with us on earth. - What we truly don’t know is “Why” the various different NHI are here. Is it just a visit? Is it a conquest attempt? Are they interested in befriending mankind or killing mankind? The “WHY” is the biggie that is simply not answered in “Age of Disclosure”. - As a consequence, the can is ONCE AGAIN kicked further down the road, this time possibly out of reach for good. In the mean time, this photo shows Entity3 NHI in the backyard of a Las Vegas family on May 1, 2023. Notice the canonical-shaped head, kind of like the Prey Mantis species.

Which is it? LM-SWs or actual UAP? adaptnet-ai.com/wp-content/u…

Here is AdaptNet AI Lab's preliminary analysis of the video released at the Sep 9 hearings: adaptnet-ai.com/wp-content/u… At this point one cannot rule out an actual ET-based UAP based on the probability analysis. Here is what we know for sure: - The UAP definitely has horizontal velocity, faster than a typical floating balloon or a balloon pushed by wind (see velocity charts in the report). - Very little of the observed horizontal velocity is due to the "mis-perception" of velocity caused by the Reaper drone. Some have theorized that "ALL" of the observed horizontal velocity was due to this Reaper-vantage point mis-perception. This is CATEGORICALLY FALSE. - The HellFire missile "bounced" off of the UAP at a 5deg to 10deg angle. This definitively means that the UAP was not a "soft" object, like a typical balloon. It may still have been a balloon but it would have to be more like a "very hard-shelled aerostat", where the shell is made from very hard but very light materials, which in the case of the USA military or known enemy aerostats is currently very unlikely. - The UAP and 3 main debris continued to have, for some distance, "level" horizontal velocity after impact. Eventually debris could be seen at the level of the ocean. - The HellFire missile failed to "explode". This is most likely due to mis-configuration of the "contact-mode" or "distance-mode" settings. However, it cannot be ruled out that other factors caused the explosion failure as seen in the probability analysis, including action taken by the UAP itself to defuse the missile. This means that an ET-based UAP taking action to defuse the missile is still a possibility, but lower on the probability scale. So all debunkers to date have been premature in their findings. We would be very happy to have a real time discussion with any and all debunkers to review our respective analysis.

A colleague of mine recently commented on the video shown at the UAP hearing involving supposedly a Hellfire missile and UAP (als, "UFO"). I have also seen comments from persons supposedly intimately knowledgeable regarding the operation of Hellfires. Given that I formerly worked for Lockheed Electronics, Lockheed-Martin Skunk Works, Bell Labs, MITRE Labs, and other organizations that were involved in the development of missiles (including Hellfire), I felt compelled to add my 2 cents. Now, the biggest issue we face is validating the assumptions. If the assumptions are validated to be true, then there would be no question that we are dealing with a truly anomalous situation. Assumptions: - The object shown approaching from the top is indeed a Hellfire MQ-9 Reaper missile. - The fuze was "activated" properly either by target contact or by distance-vector calculation. - The missile made contact with the target and then "bounced" to an "off-target" vector. - The MQ-9 was not experiencing any electronic failure modes. - The MQ-9 hit the target with sufficient force to cause "shrapnel" from the target, thus satisfying the 'fuze/explosion activation threshold' ". If these assumptions are all true, then there would have been an explosion with enough force, and then some, to completely destroy the target. Currently there is no reason to believe that "ANY" of the assumptions are not true. In fact, data exists such that the probability that "ALL" of the assumptions are true is greater than the probability that even a single assumption is not true. So based on our work with the Hellfire in an R&D capacity, and given that it is more likely that all of the assumptions are true, then indeed it is SPECTACULARLY ANOMALOUS that the UAP target was not blown completely to smithereens.

Evil

Evil

Entity3 in the Las Vegas 2023 backyard NHI event is indeed an actual NHI as conclusively demonstrated by our Motion and Heat Map Analysis: adaptnet-ai.com/wp-content/u… Original family video where Entity3 is seen hiding: adaptnet-ai.com/wp-content/u… Stills of Entity3 in Uncloaked & Partially Cloaked Modes: adaptnet-ai.com/wp-content/u… adaptnet-ai.com/wp-content/u… There is indeed NO QUESTION that NHI are here on earth with us. Gifs with Heat Map Overlays:

The following was expressed by my colleague at “AdaptNet AI Labs”, Dr. Aldo Ritondale, in response to Ross Coulthart. Basically, the message is, unless there is a “New Physics” that not even our brightest physicists are aware of, then the observations of the Tic Tac cannot be from “human made” sources. This “new physics” is in fact unknown to any human being dead or alive, including all of the brilliant scientists & engineers at Lockheed Martin Skunk Works. Therefore, the “new physics” observed must be coming from non-human intelligence (NHI) sources: From Dr. Ritondale to Ross Coulthart: “I’m so very sorry to see you go off on a very surprising tangent with respect to the so-called “Tic-Tac”. Ross, among other assignments, I worked for many years as a professional research scientist and engineer at Bell Laboratories. There was a period of time in which we produced on average 1k patents/week & all of the hi-tech products & services currently in production are a direct result of our inventions. My career at “The Labs” was extremely rewarding and it was typical for me to be assigned the most “forward looking” work imaginable, including work that was considered “magical”. You see, Ross, the word and term “Magical” is one of the most commonly used terms to describe the outputs of R&D works. We were “R&D” and it was simply assumed that the outputs of our works would indeed be “magical”. That is what was expected of us, technology so advanced that it was considered “magical”, like the transistor, quantum entanglement, fiber optics, etc.. So that term “magical”, in and of itself, is something that is quite common in the R&D world. I was assigned to work on the most sensitive projects, requiring AT A MINIMUM “TOP SECRET” CLEARANCE. I worked on many of these projects with key technology partners, like LM Skunk Works. We were able to see all of the key projects that our tech partners were working on. I can PROMISE YOU WITHOUT HESITATION that the aircraft that engaged Top Gun pilots off the coast of southern California in 2004: - WERE NOT CRAFT PRODUCED IN ANY WAY WHATSOEVER by Lockheed-Martin Skunk Works or any other US or foreign nation enterprise, - Exceeded BY FAR the capabilities of any known craft built by mankind, - Based on the level of R&D that we do within our own labs & with our partners there has been nothing on the science & technology blackboard that comes within 1,000 years of the tech we have seen on the Tic-Tacs. Let’s take one of the observation: the ability to make a right angle turn, 90 degrees, without decelerating. An instant 90° change at 900 mph keeps kinetic energy the same but changes momentum direction. Doing that in zero time requires an impulse (i.e.,a “push”); mathematically that amounts to INFINITE FORCE for an instant. No known machine can generate “INFINITE FORCE”, even for an instant. No human can survive “INFINITE FORCE”, even for an instant. What we can build are systems that turn very sharply but over some finite time and distance, capping the g-forces to survivable levels. Please read this analysis Ross which should help you understand why it is impossible to develop a machine observed by Navy pilots that did the things that the Tic-Tac did: adaptnet-ai.com/wp-content/u…… Note: Survivability depends on airframe structural limits and human tolerance. Modern fighters can briefly reach ~9 g with a G-suit and training; sustained turns are typically kept lower. Unmanned vehicles can exceed human limits, but airframe loads still scale with n. You are being misled Ross.”

He’s complaining again. He did his latest podcast stating that “Nobody in science is looking into the Vegas case” yet here we are and he knows it. Why is he doing that? We offered to collaborate with his efforts yet he goes on and on and on, “Nobody cares about the Vegas case yet we have the proof”. ET Reality? Really? Hello, here we are!

Question: What would you do if someone presented irrefutable evidence that Non-Human Intelligences (NHI) actually do exist. Furthermore, how would you react if they presented unaltered videos and photos of actual NHI? Well, at AdaptNet AI Labs, our reaction was at first "significant skepticism", followed by "cautious curiosity", followed ultimately by "sheer amazement". When a country's formal government bodies asked us to "analyze" and "report on" our findings regarding the Las Vegas 2023 Backyard NHI event, our first "instinctive: reaction was to give them an IMMEDIATE & LOUD "no". But then we listened to the 911 call by a teenager from the family, describing an 8' to 10' tall being, "definitely not human", which was then corroborated by the father on the same 911 call. It is of course a crime to fake a 911 call; why would a father do that to his family? Then we later heard that the Las Vegas Metro PD had said that they "do not consider the family's 911 call a hoax." That was enough "probable cause" to have us at the very least perform a cursory review of the family's home video of the backyard, including when the father and sons armed themselves as they readied to enter the backyard. Well, we had our flagship AI. "AdaptOne", run through the family video several times, as it as continuously done since we started it on the task. It has learned something new during each and every run and after only 7 pass-throughs AdaptOne identified this NHI in various "cloaked" states: Vid1: adaptnet-ai.com/canonvid/ Pic1: adaptnet-ai.com/canonicalhid… Pic2: adaptnet-ai.com/hidinghalfcl… At AdaptNet AI Labs we TRULY believe that the image seen in this video & these pictures IS AN ACTUAL NHI. We also know from AdaptOne's analysis that the video has NOT BEEN ALTERED IN ANY WAY WHATSOEVER. This SHOULD BE MAJOR NEWS. This should have been plastered across the news media, but it has not been. An "ACTUAL NHI" yet the major media has ignored it!! We can prove to anyone who is interested that this NHI, and others that we discovered, were in that backyard in real time with those family members. They are here folks, and we have proved it: adaptnet-ai.com/analysis-of-…

During the ongoing learning process by our AI "AdaptOne", it discovered that there are potentially several NHI of different types in and around the trailer seen in the far rear-right of the family video. Remember, AdaptOne is based on a Human Learning Model (HLM) that we developed, which enables AdaptOne to learn like humans learn: adaptnet-ai.com/adaptone_whi… The video snippet that follows (taken by AdaptOne from the family video) is not clear for a couple of reasons: 1) It is a snippet zoomed in very closely to the trailer and 2) the NHI are in various fractional states of cloaking and uncloaking. What you will see in the video snippet are 5 second pauses each time a pair of black eyes are either uncloaked to some degree or come out from behind a hiding position in or around the trailer. Some of the eye pairs will appear "smudged" because of the level of zoom and because of fractional cloak states. This picture extracted by AdaptOne shows the first eye pair pop encircled in red: adaptnet-ai.com/nhi-eyespopp… This is the video with 5 second pauses after each eye pair pop: adaptnet-ai.com/nhi-in-the-c… These pictures extracted by AdaptOne attempt to show the potential multitude of NHI in and around the trailer. In one picture AdaptOne is telling us that there is a possible "vehicle of some kind", possibly a craft, somewhere behind or above the trailer. adaptnet-ai.com/wp-content/u… adaptnet-ai.com/wp-content/u… Each one of these picture extractions by AdaptOne has an associated "Probability Assessment", which is a calculation of formal probability as to whether the potential NHI shown are real or not. The potential NHI shown in the above picture extractions were assigned probabilities of 45%, which means that the likelihood of actual NHI being present is 45%. Again, that is a calculation made by AdaptOne based on its current level of understanding. As it learns, the assessments will likely change.

Just a note to those of you who wish to respond in a nasty way to our postings: you will most likely be blocked after the very first nasty reply. Of course we are open to "valid" criticisms, but nobody deserves nasty replies for the sake of nastiness. For any valid criticism or disagreement, we will gladly get on a Zoom session with those who are interested in our material. We even share phone numbers over DM for those truly interested and of course you can always use our corporate emails: [email protected] [email protected] As you probably know by now, UAP/UFO/NHI is nowhere near our primary business model, which is NextGen Computing, Networking, AI, & Media Forensics. The only reason why we took a big chance with the Las Vegas & Turkey NHI cases is because they are so compelling that they warrant media forensics at the very least. We are not trying to step on anybody's toes and people can choose to accept or reject the results without the need to resort to nastiness. We have received some very nasty replies to our postings, which is very unfortunate. Most of the replies, in fact nearly 98% of the replies have been very positive, but it doesn't take much nastiness to turn this into an unproductive group. We have indeed noticed a tendency to "not cooperate" and "not collaborate" between people & organizations with honorable goals in this field, and that's fine, but unfortunate. This is one of the reasons why we were very hesitant to do studies in this space. We don't fault people and groups for not wanting to collaborate and cooperate because there are often good and valid reasons not to do so. We just feel that it is unfortunate because we believe it would provide a much higher degree of credibility to the overall effort if we did collaborate to a higher degree than what is currently being done. We are in the process of setting up a livestream session where we will explain our results and take questions. We are targeting late September or early October because our baseline analysis of the LV'2023 case will be completed & published by late September or Early October. This version will contain significant updates including the correlation of objects moving in earth orbits and flying in earth's atmosphere layers with the LV'2023 backyard NHI event. Feel free to attend that session if you are truly interested; challenges are always welcome but please do not attend if nastiness is one of your objectives. Ty.

Ever wonder how many times this has happened.. People are doing research, part of which involves the identification of faces in a particular area, say the identification of people who were thought to be hiding out in a wooded area,. At some point a face in a video provides the clue that people have been looking for. They go ahead and process the information found, publish a report, and get accolades for the "great work" that they did. After the "high fives" a few weeks go by and somebody from the original team decides to take yet another look at the data they had gathered to support their original work, including a review of the stills they had derived from the videos that they had reviewed. Suddenly one or two of the team members gasp as they review a couple of the stills and the videos from which the stills were derived. It is now evident to them that what they had originally identified as faces of actual people were in fact NOT faces but were misinterpreted as such; in actual fact, they had NOT identified actual faces..they had constructed faces where no faces existed from a process your brain goes through called "Pareidolia". In our draft paper on the 2023 Las Vegas NHI Event, we indeed do point out where figures seen in videos and pictures are more likely to be Pareidolia than actual faces. This occurred several times, and we had no choice but to inform the reader when this "brain process" was more likely to "kick in" based on the elements being observed and based on the knowledge of how the human brain would interpret those elements. If you haven't done so already, now would be a good time to read or re-read the draft and lookup the discussion on Pareidolia: adaptnet-ai.com/analysis-of-… Now, take a look at these 2 pictures taken from the same video at the same relative location in the video: Pic0: adaptnet-ai.com/entity1-orig… Pic1: adaptnet-ai.com/entity1-ligh… Pic2: adaptnet-ai.com/entity1-pare… Then take a look at the analysis done by ChatGPT: adaptnet-ai.com/anomaly_enti… What has happened here? Unfortunately because ChatGPT has learned to mimic the process the human brain uses to piece together information available in a given scene into a "face" even if no face exists, it has erred quite dramatically. That is, ChatGPT interpreted data in the Las Vegas family video as "a face" and now believes that Pic1 & Pic2 are the same "human" as mistakenly interpreted in Pic3. In FACT Pic3 is not really showing an actual human face, but enough data exists there to cause most humans to execute their "Pareidolia" code in their brain...or is it? What do YOU think? Is Pic3 an actual human face, implying that what has been assumed to date as "Entity1 NHI" is in fact a human being with an "NHI mask", pulling an outright FRAUD on all of us? This changes everything, doesn't it, if in fact Pic3 is NOT Pareidolia. If in fact it is a human face then ALL OF US have been fooled to the nth degree!! In a following post we will show you how AdaptNet's AI, AdaptOne, handled this case.

At AdaptNet AI Laboratories, our best scientists & engineers decided to take a look at two “NHI/UAP/UFO” cases, a 2023 “Las Vegas Backyard NHI (LV’23)” event and 2007-2009 “Kumburgaz, Turkey UFO” events. This was highly unusual given that our business model focuses on “NextGen Computing, Networking, AI, and Media Forensics”. Spending valuable time on these two “NHI/UFO” cases was indeed a very big risk given the ongoing stigma associated with the “NHI/UAP/UFO” arenas. Initially our focus was on forensics of the family home video. We started the analysis with our flagship AI, “AdaptOne”, designed with a Human Learning Model (HLM) which learns and executes several techniques to validate that the observed “entities” are in fact “real”. Those techniques include, among others, “Motion Based Heat Mapping (MBHM)”, “Motion Tracking (MT)”, “Technology Reverse Engineering”, & “Cloak” and “Cloak Algorithm Decryption” To learn more about MBHM & MT please download the following: adaptnet-ai.com/motion_heatm… adaptnet-ai.com/entity1_moti… Within the first several 10s of seconds of the family video we were able to identify 3 entities: The 1st (Entity1), about 8’ to 10’ tall with a large head and large black eyes, standing behind the fence, peering over it, near the family, in a “semi-cloaked” state. The 2nd entity (Entity2) approached the family as they entered the backyard in order to intimidate them into not proceeding into the backyard. We have yet to obtain a clear view of Entity2. The 3rd (Entity3), which was going in and out of “cloak mode” as the family started their entry into the backyard, had a giant canonical-shaped head, with large black eyes, and was almost directly in front of the family as they started their walk into the backyard. Entity3 is the classic “Mantis”-like NHI. As we continued our investigation into these three, we discovered that there were many more NHI than we had expected. That led us into investigations of objects in the earth’s atmosphere and orbits, looking for “craft” that could carry a multitude of NHI. Aside from the natural excitement we feel as scientists & engineers when a project like this comes along, we are also extremely motivated by comments from so-called “debunkers”, who have convinced themselves that the family members, and others who studied the video, had really witnessed wild animals, shadows, or pareidolia when they claimed to have seen NHI in the family’s backyard. They “certainly did not see actual NHI” according to the debunkers. In the following video and picture snippets (taken by AdaptOne AI from the Las Vegas family video), we focus on Entity1, an NHI that was very near the family, hiding behind the fence near the backyard entrance where the family was. The following pictures are taken from the family video which shows Entity1’s large head and large black eyes. The entity appeared in a semi-cloaked state as there was failure of the NHI cloaking mechanism unbeknownst to the NHI themselves. Others have stated that there is a certain percentage of pixels missing in the image itself insofar it involves Entity1’s head (the quote we heard was 66.6% pixels, but we will prove in our paper that the number is misinterpreted). At AdaptNet AI Labs we believe the entity was partially cloaked, hence explaining the misinterpretation of missing pixels upon being recorded by a camera. Entity1 Original Face Original (Top-Left of Fence): adaptnet-ai.com/entity1-orig… Entity1 Lightened Face (Top-Left of Fence): adaptnet-ai.com/entity1-ligh… In V1 below, we see Entity1 starting at the Left-Top of the fence, almost on top of the family, with its head above the fence, and the shadow of its legs seen on the slats of the fence near the bottom as it moves from Left-to-Rright and then back again. Play the video in “slower” motion so that you can see the entity movements and the shadows on the lower fence: V1: adaptnet-ai.com/wp-content/u… The following sequence of snapshots were taken from the video. Take a look over the top of the fence and the fence slats toward the bottom of the fence. In successive pictures we see the slow appearance of the head and the appearance of “leg” shadows as Entity1 comes fully to the left edge of the fence. Remember, Entity1 starts at the top-left and moves right as the family starts to enter the backyard. In this state the entity’s shadow fills the lower fence slats: adaptnet-ai.com/e1-start-4/ As the family moves forward to enter the backyard, Entity1 moves to the right to hide. In this case the shadow moves right with Entity1 and eventually dissipates: adaptnet-ai.com/e1-move-4/ adaptnet-ai.com/e1-pre-4/ The family members are then scared by Entity2, which chases the family backwards. As this happens Entity2 moves back left as does the shadow (but partially commensurate with Entity2’s partial movement back: adaptnet-ai.com/e1-almostfin… As the family is almost completely back out of the yard, Entity1 returns to the top-left part of the fence again: adaptnet-ai.com/e1-final-4/ Pay particular attention to the top of the fence to the right of the family. Right above the top of the fence the space is “dark”. That “dark” space then moves to the right and as the family retreats from the yard, the “dark” space moves back to the left. With just this video one can already surmise that the dark area is not a shadow because its movement is independent of the movement of all family members. In the next set of videos AdaptOne and the broader team used “Motion Based Heat Mapping (MBHT)” and “Motion Tracking (MT)” to validate that the figures seen are in fact actual physical automaton. V2: adaptnet-ai.com/lasvegasalie… V3: adaptnet-ai.com/lasvegasalie… In V2, V3 we see that lighting between the fence slats lights up “white”. Further, the intense white light is indicative of a fair amount of “movement” even if a shadow were not to be cast. In other words, if one were to look through the openings between slats one would witness a fair amount of movement of Entity1. In the case of the red sprite, the bottom of the fence is graphically “lifted” so it is easier to see the likeness between the top & bottom in terms of the tracking of movement. Download an explanation of MBHM & HM here: adaptnet-ai.com/motion_heatm… V2 & V3 compare the lighting in the fence slats with the appearance of Entity1’s head above the fence. As the lighting turns “white” through the slats of the fence the “head” of the entity is again back to the “top-left” of the fence. This proves without any question that the movement of the head corresponds exactly with movement of “something” far below the head (and behind the fence); this is likely “legs” associated with the head). One can then reasonably conclude that the “legs” of the being are in fact causing the shadow on the fence from light coming from the opposite direction; the fence shadow is in fact associated with the head movement. Because of this obvious association, the “moving” dark area above the fence in fact cannot be a shadow, it MUST be a physical object connected to the physical object casting a shadow on the fence slats. Pics: P1: adaptnet-ai.com/entity1edgea… In the video and picture you can see the entity peering over the fence in the first 2 frames. In the 3rd frame an arrow points to a dark spot in the Edge Analysis. That dark spot indicates that something physical is there, so it cannot be a shadow.

I worked for Bell Labs as a distinguished scientist and engineer for many, many years. In those years I had the opportunity to work with the best scientists and engineers in the world during partnerships with esteemed laboratories, such as LM Skunkworks, NASA, MITRE Labs, IBM Research, RAND Corp, and several others. During those partnerships we worked on the most sensitive and secretive of projects, including several for many government agencies. At no time did we have an opportunity to work on the so-called "Tic-Tac" because that never happened at LM Skunkworks or any other lab. We partnered with LM Skunkworks and other labs on several top secret and above projects for the DoE, DoD, NOAA, NASA, and other government agencies. However, I can tell you this. There were these so-called "Reverse Engineering" projects where we were asked to look at very exotic technology that nobody was familiar with and attempt to reverse engineer it into a viable product for particular industries. We were never told where these "exotic technologies" came from, we just did what we were asked to do.

Here are stills capturing the being, one in a fully uncloaked mode with Canonical head shape and big eyes trying to hide, and another shot of the same being half-cloaked and in an odd shape with black eyes visible: adaptnet-ai.com/canonicalhid… adaptnet-ai.com/hidinghalfcl…

Wow, ET Reality has gone off the deep end. We were with them for LV'23 and Turkey, but lately the discussion is either biased ChatGPT or far-out, on the fringe science. There is NO CREDIBLE SCIENTIFIC EVIDENCE of ET craft surrounding earth in the 1950s. Whoa, way off, which was the latest discussion. Add that to the fake alien in the Compton, CA Ring camera and the new Avi Loeb conspiracy theory about an alien probe hurtling toward us, then we have a podcast that is quickly losing cred.

Our team at AdaptNet AI Labs studied 31/Atlas...guess what, it's a comet. No signs of intelligence, no intelligent movement, nothing....

Draft analysis of Las Vegas 2023 Backyard NHI Incident. See pictures & videos of actual NHI: adaptnet-ai.com/analysis-of-…