Advanced Aerospace Threat and Identification Program (AATIP)

Written by Jay09784691

On the 6th of August 2018 I was researching into Christopher Mellon, one of the newly appointed advisory staff at Tom DeLonge's new company "To The Stars Academy" an organisation that was set up to research and release information on "scientific phenomena". While looking around to see if he was involved in any published scientific papers, I happened across a link on his now-deleted Twitter page - it was a link to his website. While searching around his site, I came across a section titled "Miscellaneous" that included several documents on the AATIP, the group within the US Pentagon that was researching the same phenomena that DeLonge's new company was looking into. 

The files that were found included the following:

1. Luis Elizondos resignation letter
2. Original copies of three videos that were released by TTSA:

flir1_981.mp4: sized 3.85MB, pixel resolution 352x264, duration 1:16
gimble_vid_492.mp4: sized 6.93MB, pixel resolution 640x480, duration 0:34
gofast_737.mp4: sized 9.15MB, pixel resolution 640x480, duration 0:34

3. Photographs of a package received from the Pentagon addressed to Mr. Elizondo:

From R. Essex, with CHRIS MELLON 16:00 9/7/17written onto it

4. A photograph of four CDs marked as "UNCLASSIFIED U.S. Government Property"
5. Five pages of a full unredacted report from the Nimitz incident
6. Seven slides from a presentation on the AATIP

At the time that this occurred, it made a little splash within a fairly small group of people on Twitter. I shared all of the detail initially on the 6th of August and then further detail to Twitter on the 7th of August - on the recommendation from a friend (Joe Murgia - Twitters @UfoJoe11) I removed a tweet that included the unredacted names of the pilots involved in Nimitz incident. I let another friend (Danny Silva of know of what I'd found and he published some detail on the now-defunct UAPInfo website. The main purpose of their article was highlighting Mr. Elizondo's resignation letter. 

The purpose of writing this article now so long after the event is to highlight the detail that was present in the AATIP slides and to analyse the content. It's worth noting that the slides themselves were reworked and the TV show Unidentified included redacted versions of the slides, interesting that multiple omissions were present, so intentionally removing some of the detail. I may prepare a follow-up article demonstrating the differences between what was present in the original and what was released as part of the TV program. For now, I will share the source files and provide some analysis of the detail. 
The slides were numbered 1, 2, 3, 4, 7, 8, 9 - the omissions being 5 and 6. Those were not present within Mr. Mellons website and cannot be shared here.

The first slide is as follows: 

So quite simply the name of the program. There was contention around the name of AATIP for several weeks, with some stating that it was Advanced Aviation Threat Identification Program, but here it is listed exactly as it was used while active at the Pentagon. So "aerospace" is unarguably the correct terminology. It may seem semantic to point out, only the difference between the two can be the difference between something in the sky (aviation) to something in space (aerospace). An important distinction. 

From the name, it appears that the group considered the advanced aerospace objects/vehicles as being a "threat" and at the same time wanted to identify what they are. As we progress through the slides it becomes apparent that AATIP was analysing the capabilities of the objects and assessing whether or not they're to be considered a problem for national security. 

You can see the numeric labelling of the slides at the bottom left. It also appears that the slides themselves were not the original PowerPoint presentation, but rather a scan of the pages - some show darkening around the upper left of the image where it seems clear that a folding of the pages occurred at the time the pages were scanned. Quite why the original electronic file wasn't present is anyone's guess - possibly classification issues? I would have thought copying the original PowerPoint file onto the CD would be easier than printing/scanning/copying the file. It's possible that Mr. Mellon made the photocopies after receiving the source files.

The second slide: 

This has the heading "Purpose", so presumably to give detail on the AATIP for those in attendance of the presentation itself. So it's clear that the Deputy Secretary of Defence is well aware of the program and was updated on its progress intermittently. AATIP was also wanting to get itself set up as a SAP (Special Access Program), with a "bigoted access list", so limited in its availability to Pentagon staff. 

At the time the presentation was given it appears that they were looking for additional funding and the associated resources, with a dedicated "support office". Presumably those present in the AATIP before this time must have split themselves between this project and other unrelated activities. We have no additional information on the FTE allocation, but some staff may have been full time on the project and required further dedicated staff. 

The bullet labelled Establish a DoD AATIP Reporting Chain of Commandsuggests that they wanted to add weight to the program thatd then potentially give them access to files within other associated SAPs - like those detailed in Wilson Memo.

We know that much of the Pentagon is separated into stovepipes, so essentially disassociated from one another, presumably for privacy purposes. Looking at this slide, it appears like they would have wanted access to other similar groups and programs.

The third slide: 

And here we have the full mission statement for the AATIP. So they wanted to identify the threats and take full advantage of the technology that are being used. It's clear that the slide has no suggestion on the source of the objects only that they're "employed by other countries, actors, or entities". The US DoD wanted to use the technology for military purposes since it's stating that understanding the tech would "provide the U.S. with a decisive advantage over adversaries and threats". As we'll see in one of the later slides they're looking to identify all of the aspects of the objects and try and determine how the systems functioned and replicate them. 

The AATIP vision is to make use of the "Beyond Next Generation" technology within "aerospace", so they are referring to something that's able to navigate in space and likely within the air too. The technology is considered highly advanced and presumably way beyond anything that was being used at the time the slides were created - and likely not now either. One has to wonder if the speech marks and capitalisation on "Beyond Next Generation" is indicating some other file or program assessing these devices or materials. These words were once coloured before the scan, therefore adding emphasis - as they're currently grey in this black-and-white version shown above. 

The only indication as to why the devices are considered a threat here is that they already consider the tech as being outside of the departments capability. This is further elaborated later.

Again, its clear by reviewing the upper left of the image that this is a scan of a paper document.

The fourth slide: 

This one is headed "AATIP Preliminary Assessments", so the program's initial views of the technology or objects that they're assessing as part of the report and the relating projects within it. Part of this assessment is that if the technology were to be used against the US, it would be considered a "game changer" and this isn't in any way positive for the US since the final bullet on the page states that the US "has no countermeasures" against the technology. So the military has no suitable weapons to fight against it. Knowledge of this fact is listed as being considered "highly sensitive" - presumably not for the wider population to know how significantly the military is handicapped against the objects. This is further emphasized in bullet two where it's stated that the evidence indicated that the military cannot defend itself.

It is also stated that some details around the technology are so unusual as to be considered unconventional. I imagine this means they include unanticipated aspects that the military has not expected to be included in any kind of conventional weapon or vehicle. These aspects are still undetermined and require understanding the "full scope" of them. As with one of the earlier slides, they're suggesting that they need to exploit the technology (i.e., use it themselves) or for it to be defeated. 

Considering that US military spending is by far the highest in any country, it's hard to assume that any of the other countries of the world (and specifically non-allies) would have any advanced technology that the US, admittedly, has no defense against. There's no specific elaboration on where it's expected to come from though and considering the group wanted to "identify" (as listed in their name), it doesn't appear that identification was ever performed. At least the identification wasn't included in these available slides.

So we now know that the objects or technology that was being assessed by AATIP was considered way beyond the capacity of any known country or group - so far beyond that some aspects were still unknown and couldnt be determined.

The seventh slide (again, there are no slides available for 5 and 6): 

Quite a lot to digest on this one - we now have the Contract Focus, so these are relating to the scientific papers that were contracted out to several scientists across the world. Some scientists are better known than others. The papers themselves are considered technical studies.

While reviewing these different bullets, you have to ask yourself what kind of technology has all of these different aspects - certainly nothing thats available to the military today. We can only consider some of them as applying to known technology (not much of which is related to aerospace, mind you); lift, propulsion, control, power generation, materials, configuration, structure. Those all sound fairly mundane until you cross-check them against the scientific papers listed on the following slide.

Several of the other items are a little more significant:

1. Spatial/Temporal Translation: so the technology can adapt space and time(!)
1.1 The significance of this is really striking to me. The technology can change and manipulate the very space around you and presumably move somewhat through time. To what extent isn't clear, so we can only assume that by adjusting gravity it's also impacting time (as time warps and changes depending on the mass of an object). I'd imagine that the suggestion is that the craft can manipulate its mass and therefore affecting time within proximity, not necessarily time travelling, but we may need to include that as a possibility too, as outlandish as it sounds. 

2. Signature Reduction: so the technology can give itself a significant amount of stealth from optical, infrared, radiofrequency, and acoustics 
2.1 So invisible to the eye, radar, even sound. I've previously referred to multiple metamaterial patents by military groups that are looking to use microwave frequency radiated materials layered in a specific orientation that allows for stealth. Makes you wonder if this technology was inspired by what's being listed here, or it was independently determined. 

3. Human Interface: I assume this means how the craft are specifically controlled.
3.1 It suggests that the interface is with the human itself, rather than through some related tool or steering contraption. Is the technology interfacing with the mind of people in proximity or with the pilots themselves - perhaps both? I've previously written about how these types of objects appear to affect people in significant ways and how consciousness itself may be a polymorphic interface. It's possible that the information here may add additional emphasis to that idea. 

4. Human Effects: this is a reference to how the craft effects people in close proximity to them and the physiological impact on their bodies. 
4.1 At this point, it's also worth mentioning that on the EarthTech website (company owned by Hal Puthoff - one of the paper's authors) had the following image present until I posted about it on Twitter, then it was taken off the site. Keith Basterfield (Twitter's @KeithBasterfie1) wrote a blog post about it in 2018 and showed the original image while it was still present on the EarthTech site. 

4.2  I wonder if this ties back to the research being performed by Dr. Garry Nolan and Dr. Kit Green (who is coincidentally the author of a relating paper on the following AATIP slide). Are these devices somehow impacting the caudate-putamen area of the brain of people in proximity? The signs certainly point in the direction of it being a possibility.

5. Armament: this relates directly to weapons. 
5.1 Specifically radiofrequency (RF) and directed energy weapons (DEW) - certainly unconventional today, but my understanding is that these have been somewhat developed over the past few decades. I doubt to the same capacity as present within the relating craft detailed in these slides.

So definitely the types of technologies that we havent been able to fully develop (with some minor exceptions). All of these have their relating technology papers associated with them.

The slide ends with a comment asking if the abilities are even achievable using our current understanding of physics and engineering. So they're accepting that our knowledge of physics could be about to fundamentally change, once we're better able to understand these technologies. I like to think that this would include some kind of subjectivity tech, but the only clues here are with the human effects and interface.

The eighth slide: 

These are the relating papers that were contracted out to the science teams, as specified in the previous slide. Ill try and pick out the items of particular interest, its also worth reading through the list yourself to see if anything else stick out, Id be interested to hear of any other views here, as theres a lot to acknowledge. These papers are largely not available to the public.

Novel MEMS-based Biosensors & Biosensors and BioMEMS:
Bruce Towe, the author of these papers also has multiple relating patents about devices that would be inserted into people's bodies and able to stimulate the brain of those with the implants. See patent # US 10,022,566 B2. This has obvious ties to Jeremy Corbell's documentary titled Patient Seventeen and the work of Roger Leir, both claiming that devices are implanted into people from something non-human. It's quite "out there", but we have it listed as a contracted study by the Pentagon, so something that shouldn't be quickly discounted. At the very least it's interesting that the Pentagon considered implants genuine, even if they're not elaborated in these slides, there must have been separate communication on them. 

There are the two relating papers listed above, the distinction between them is unclear from their titles alone.

Space-Time Modifications for Spaceflight applications:
Here is the paper that was written by Hal Puthoff who is famous for being involved in the remote viewing "Stargate Project" activities for the CIA in the '70s. The specific paper here relates directly to his research on bending space and time for the purposes of spaceflight. I doubt that actual practical applications for this research were ever completed since this paper was put together. 

Field Effects on Biological Tissues:
Presumably written by Christopher Canfield (Kit) Green, this is one of the single most interesting of the papers listed here as it likely documents cases where people have been in direct proximity to the unusual craft and list the impact on the bodies of those people. I suspect that the image from Dr. Puthoff's website (the MRI brain scan) is likely to have been part of this research. So people within a certain radius receive damage to their brains and it later causes the death of the patients. 

As we know the devices likely also radiate their materials with microwave and/or terahertz frequencies, I'd suspect that people were also receiving burns and lesions to their skin. These types of impacts have been listed in the literature from people that are exposed to these devices. Impacting actual brain tissue (and presumably the conscious states of people) appears to be of particular interest, as enclosed within the skull and without damage to the relating bone tissue. No bone damage appears in the MRI, but the patient was given multiple scans of the brain, presumably because of self-reported changes that the patient will have described with their conscious experience.

The rest of the papers:
There is quite a lot of information that's present on this slide and I'd previously looked into the names of the relating scientists - posting the nearest available papers as links from my Twitter account (@Jay09784691). Many of the source files are not present, as they were contracted by the US government, although several of the authors have written follow-up papers (not contracted) that are publicly available. Each of the papers themselves could be whole articles, so I'll avoid analysing each of them (at least for now).

The ninth (and final) slide:

This is documenting how the DoD considers the craft as threats and the relating rationale. The slide refers to the craft as an "enemy", or at least a potential enemy, and makes references to the fact that the US has facilities where activities have been detected. Presumably the often referenced nuclear facilities. This is essentially a confirmation that these craft have been engaged with these sites and the activities of the craft (turning on/off nuclear weapons?) causes them to be considered threats. Somewhat understandable. 

The craft are listed as being able to manipulate physical environments, so it could be a reference to cases where pilots have seen their technology interfered with or even events that occurred at nuclear or military sites. They're also listed as being able to manipulate "cognitive environments", so have affected people's experiences to the point where they may have a differing understanding of their environments and maybe the subject to novel or bizarre communications. This is again emphasized with the bullet stating "Cognitive Human Interface". If a person can control these craft using their minds, then what is their conscious experience during those times? It's not clear to me if they're suggesting that people have been in control of the objects, or if they're hypothesizing potential control methods. Not enough detail is present.

A reference to altering biological organisms is present as a bullet and I can only guess that this is a reference to the paper that was written by Dr. Green. It doesn't specifically state the kind of manipulations, so we'll have to assume that it relates to affecting people's brains in unexpected ways, as we have evidence of the brain MRIs (even if they do not look especially unusual to the untrained eye, they may point to the aforementioned hyperdensity fibre connections within the caudate nucleus).

The technology, if to be taken fully literally from this slide, is actually able to "influence decision makers" - does this mean that these devices can control people and their perceptions directly? This is likely another confirmation of why the department considered them to be a "threat". Although they could be referring to indirect influence, as people may want to get the information out after considering the full importance and significance of the data.

Apparently, the Department of Defence has previously been involved in similar experiments in the past. I can only assume this means that the experiments have changed as our technological progress has increased. It also means that this subject isn't new and has been researched for a number of years. Quite how long is down to how much of the popular story you choose to believe (i.e., the reported "crash" sites that have been reported since about '47). 

The last aspect of the full slides is the final statement, as follows:

What was considered phenomena is now quantum physics

It's a bold statement and isn't explained at all. You'd hope that the person presenting the slides would have elaborated on this item more at the time unless the slide deck is greater than nine slides in length. You can take this statement in several different ways. It's referring to "phenomena" so the plural variation of "phenomenon", so appears to be referring to multiple things. I guess it may be saying that a lot of the unexpected and unexplained novel events that occur could be explainable with the idea that the world doesn't always function in a classical sense. At least that's how I like to read it, as it matches somewhat with my thoughts on the subject, as written in previous articles on this blog.

If you take all of the slides and the relevant details in a literal sense, then it very much suggests that the ETH (extraterrestrial hypothesis) is the answer to what's happening. Only as a hyper-advanced civilisation that understands how the mental experience may be as fundamental to experience as the physical nature (maybe even more so). I may be applying confirmation bias to this though, as I get the impression that we're dealing with an incredibly advanced intelligence. I just prefer to think of any interacting civilisations as having evolved beyond needed to have physical bodies - so fully transcended at some point during their evolution.

Most incredibly is the fact that the Pentagon spent millions researching this area with only this one program, presumably there must have been multiple concurrent programs researching different areas of the phenomena, each tasked with different approaches. So the military and secret service consider this a very important area of research and if these slides are to be taken at face value, then they must have some incredible materials, papers, and analysis into something that has the potential to change society down to its absolute core, likely in a very positive way, even though there are constant references to threats.

We have people like Luis Elizondo who has come out of the governmental system to get the information out, he's now working for a private company with the intention to enlighten and hopefully broaden the horizons of the world's population. So while I understand some criticisms towards DeLonge's "To The Stars Academy", I think the current efforts should be congratulated and I'd hope that they're able to push this difficult subject further into the mainstream.


  1. Great article. Lots to unpack here. This caught my eye:

    "Five pages of a full unredacted report from the Nimitz incident"

    I want to see this. Anyone know if and where it can be found?

    1. Thank you, always appreciate kind words. :)

      The report is the same as this one:

      Only with the pilots' names and contact information listed. Honestly nothing particularly new. TTSA's version has all the main content.

  2. Hi. Good article
    What are your thoughts on slide 9 "penetration of solid surfaces"?

    1. I wonder if it's something to do with the mass manipulation that the NAVY referenced in this patent.

      Presumably denser objects could pass through less dense ones. I really have no idea.

    2. Yes, interesting. But something else immediately came to mind the second I read that. Now people may call me fringe or whatever for saying this, but.....multiple experiencers/abductees have stated that some of the entities they encounter have the ability to traverse glass and walls - I'm confident you are aware of such accounts. Now lets not beat about the bush - Despite the "we're trying to figure out what these things are" line, there are individuals who know perfectly well what they are, and not surprisingly that some (all? maybe not) of the UFOs/UAPs have occupants and is it possible that's what they are referring to?

      Thanks for the reply btw.

    3. To add to that previous comment. The ability to move through solid objects (is anything truly solid?) includes the moving of said experiencer/abductee too. After all, is this not just a matter of advanced technology, albeit seemingly extremely advanced?


    4. Yeah, you could well be right. Difficult to say. They certainly seem to be able to operate in spaces that we have not properly understood yet.

  3. @Danno: I thought the exact same thing upon reading it. As Arthur C. Clarke famously said: "Any sufficiently advanced technology is indistinguishable from magic."

    1. And it would. Just like electricity years ago would be deemed the devil's work. Given our embryonic understanding of quantum physics and entanglement, is it too far a stretch to contemplate that a far advanced intelligence used it's understanding of entanglement to allow our (and theirs) base particles to be able to disassemble, or become separated and then reassemble seamlessly on the other side of (perceived) solid objects. Some cases hint that it was the consciousness of the witness(es) that was transferred without the actual physical body - but not all.

  4. My opinion. So-called phenomena are not what they seem to be. Not an appearance within the atmosphere is understood. Everything behind a certain process is still imperceptible. Humanity has been exposed to remarkable things to find certain questions. But she cannot solve the paradox so quickly. To do this, mankind has to find the point of origin, what it was created from and where we are as intelligence. Three-dimensional states are an amusing curiosity and nobody has ever seen it from the outside. The question of what it is is more complex than the black monolith in a certain movie. It knows more about us than we see in ourselves.

    1. Completely agree with this. I've made a couple of attempts with other posts on the blog to try and understand the phenomena from the same perspective.

      I find it a struggle that some of the major players are suggesting the most obvious answer. So I'm of two minds whether to consider two separate phenomona, or if one is simply a type deception, intentional or otherwise.

      I feel that our internal processes are likely involved somehow, by accessing the cosmic hyperdimension through the dulling of senses or by manifesting physical aspects due to consciousness being fundamental.

    2. One is the answer. It shows only one pattern. But it has many layers that are interwoven. It means that a few have deciphered the why and with what question. And that alone questions everything we define as a perceptible world. And it doesn't just stop with the planet itself. There is nothing more to say because it cannot be evaluated with human ideas, because we can neither understand this world nor speak for it. And how processes have to develop.

    3. The scale of this process is of astonishing dimensions. Imagine your fixed point is within a spatially limited curvature, comparable to that of an embedded state. But mankind believes it is on a section of an infinite curvature where these seemingly familiar constants apply. Significantly more complex patterns will appear where two states appear to exist at the same time.

    4. Thanks for the words. I need a bit of time to fully digest.

      I guess you're saying that humans cannot understand a wider reality, since we haven't yet got the fundamental principles to comprehend it properly, and we may be misinterpreting what we're currently sensing?

      It does seem like human ideals are completely misjudged at the moment. If we have significant omissions or incorrect understanding of existence, then we'd need to fully reassess. Which is difficult as these things are well settled into a societal consciousness. Even the collective unconscious.

      It feels a bit like there's a bubbling, or beginning, of groups of people wanting to question our own reality. I wonder if it's through some morphic field that this knowledge may be starting to spread beyond the limited few.

      But yeah, I understand that it may be completely beyond human comprehension no matter how much it's studied.

    5. No. The scale and the fact that we are dealing with something incredible that is expressed on so many levels is shocking. In the end, everything that people imagine as a perceptible world is to be assessed as a misinterpretation. I don't even know what came into being uninfluenced, the processes of the planet and the so-called star system are not what we think we know. I have identified so many patterns as not human origin that it surpasses any imagination. And the knowledge that we as humanity have not been able to achieve intelligence on our own. I can say it's more complex than '2001: A Space Odyssey' could ever describe. We are the ones who have a wrong idea of how an approach should work.

  5. It sounds like you're suggesting that the many statistically impossible variables that constitute this reality, are suggesting to you that some other intelligence may have created everything?

    I'd very much like to discuss these items outside of Blogger if you're able to?

    1. Everything? The question is more of which is of natural origin and at which point something unknown is at work. You have certainly noticed how I carefully describe certain things that indicate something impossible. Humanity dreams of first contact with humanoid-like constructs of itself, the dream of star civilizations and star ships. And that wasn't really our idea either, and it's just an easier construct to demonstrate a later, more complex impossibility. This resulting UFO cult is no better than all previous patterns. Both perspectives are an incomprehensible disappointment. The ideas of humanity and the perceptible results of something limitlessly superior. I am currently unable to answer the second question. Maybe I wanted to imply that nobody should commit to knowing something, simple questions result in even bigger questions that are incredibly difficult.

    2. I agree that the answer to what's going on is likely more complex than anyone can easily understand. I'm not an advocate of the idea that aliens are visiting from some other world. As far as I can tell, there appears to be a significantly wider reality just outside of view, it does feel like we're catching up with it though. But I also believe that even as we start to understand the wider reality, it may take many hundreds/thousands of years to fully make sense of it.

      It's there. I've had enough anomalous experiences to comprehend that 3Ds and sense perception isn't everything.

      I also agree that we need to ask more questions, but I also think it's okay to make attempts to try and make sense of the questions, providing we dont speak in absolute terms.

      I'm trying to find the correct forum to try and discuss these ideas.

    3. I tell you that there are no UFO fleets. It is something completely different. And that only reacts when the right questions are asked and connections are made. You know the presumption from science from a certain level is sophisticated intelligence no longer perceptible and recognizable as such. Amusingly, no one can tell science what to focus on. And that they can't find any answers to anything bigger than the star system itself. Science does not seem to understand which cosmic superlative is right in front of their nose.

    4. I think you're right that people are far too quick to conclude what the phenomenon actually is. There are people that have made successful careers out of this being an ET problem. It will be difficult to convince those people that the answer is much more complex, as they'll hear what they want to hear and disregard the rest.

      All I can think to do for the moment is follow what feels correct, providing it's able to be somewhat rationalised and not pure indulgent fantasy. I'm going to concentrate on the non-physical aspects and try to ignore the usual "aliens" answer.

      Thanks for giving a bit of direction, intentionally or otherwise. I dont think it really matters if you're speaking from a position of authority, or just a random internet user.

    5. I can say that I deeply regret what I know. I would rather be in this dream world of the 21st century, where everyone can believe everything. This is neither positive nor negative. If it should decide that humanity has seen it without the certain perceptual filter, there will be serious changes in what humanity believes to know. Humanity will encounter something very unusual where they thought that there could be nothing like that. In fact, these are fascinating circumstances, but unfortunately new knowledge always comes with a loss of familiar knowledge. And that's harder than you can imagine. In human terms you have to question everything ..


Post a comment

Popular Posts