K2Siteck

Date: 08-24-92 From: Michael CorbinOur special thanks to John Pickens, who conducted an independentinvestigation of the Phoenix Project's claims of an underground alienbase in Northern California. As you will read, John's report clearlyshows that the K2 report is definitely questionable.REFLECTIONS ON THE K2 REPORT & OBSERVATIONS AT PILOT PEAKHaving read the Phoenix Project's K2 report and having visited the PilotPeak area I offer some of my impressions and observations.Animal Sounds: The K2 Report suggests there is curious lack of animalsounds and indicated there is an unnatural quiet in the area.Having spent 2 nights in the immediate area in question I can say therewas nothing I observed, either by night or by day, to support thiscontention. The level of animal sounds was consistent with what I haveheard in other forested areas.Animal Life: The K2 report makes much of the fact that there was anabsence of animal life in the area (this additionally supported by theclaim of lack of animal sounds). In particular the report comments onthe apparent absence of squirrels, chipmunks, rodents, owls and birdsflying over the area.On my first night at the Pilot Peak area I spent the night at a spotover looking the location of the "landing zones." I had an unobstructedview of the area. I was there while the Moon was still below theeastern horizon and I used a high-powered spotlight to illuminate thearea. I saw no less than two (possibly three) deer - one of which wasvery close by, if not on, one of the "landing zones." Throughout thenight, owls could be heard hooting. During the day birds could be seenflitting about the meadow that contained the "landing zones" and bothsquirrels and chipmunks were easily seen. At the very top of Pilot Peakthere is a lookout station which I explored. There I found twoexhausted boxes of D-Con rodent killer and rodent droppings in the firstand second floors of the station - clearly evidence of rodents. Anothervariety of rodent - bats - were seen in no small numbers around thePilot Peak area.I will comment on the K2 report itself concerning their claim of absenceof animal life and animal sounds. I found it a curious contradictionthat one of their observers (and I do not recall how they identifiedhim/her, it was perhaps Contact #2, but it was the one who forgot theircamera and had to come back the next day to make photographs) indicatedthat there was a sighting of a UFO and once it came into view all theanimal noises ceased. I have to ask - if there was a curious andnoteworthy lack of animal sounds how could they cease?Landing Zones: Having seen the purported "landing zones" personally,and in some cases having walked over them, I have to say there seems tobe a more prosaic explanation. There was an abundance of deer tracksthroughout the area. It is not unreasonable to assume these are placeswhere deer have rested. I found it odd that in the midst of theflattened grass there was, in some instances, a variety of tall weedthat was still standing, unbent, in the area of flattened grass. Inaddition, the "landing zones" exhibited none of the swirling patternsassociated with UFO "nests" or the more recent crop circles. Very lowstrangeness index and certainly subject to more "Earthly" explanationthan landed craft. I also found other, smaller, areas of flattenedgrass which looked exactly like the purported "landing zones" but whichcould clearly be discounted as such.There are two other factors which weigh heavily against these areasbeing "landing zones" which I will address next.Camping Area: Far from being the desolate area one might imagine fromreading the K2 report there is a camping area immediately adjacent tothe "landing zones." To the southwest, and just behind a moderatelydense stand of trees, this camping area did not remain unoccupied duringthe time of my visit. On the first night there were three carloads ofpeople camping and on the second night there was one family there. Thearea of the "landing zones" is easily seen from this camping area andaccess to the "landing zones" from the camping area is immediate. It isnot the sort of area one would choose if one wanted any sort of privacy.In addition, the area of the "landing zones" is clearly seen from theroad which passes nearby and the view from the road is unobstructed,save for two small trees, for over a quarter mile of travel.The Road: The report mentions a road which passes the K2 site. This isnot the unused and long-forgotten road one would envision from readingthe K2 report. Quite the contrary. During the day logging trucks,pick-up trucks, residents of the La Porte & Quincy areas and camperstravel this road. While it will never resemble rush hour, I wassomewhat surprised at the number of vehicles traveling that road as Ithought we were well off the beaten track.At night the traffic is much less active. The first night there was notraffic from 9 PM until 4:15 AM the next morning. The second nightthere was traffic on and off throughout the night. Again, the meadowwith the "landing zones" is clearly and unmistakably visible from theroad.Forest Service: The K2 report alludes to the Forest Service personnelbeing mind-controlled minions of the Greys and says they were questionedabout their reasons for being there. The report paints a picture of theForest Service watching their every move and questioning their everyaction. I found quite the opposite to be the case. Not once did theForest Service exhibit the slightest interest in what I was doing - evenwhen I passed a Forest Service truck on the mine road (a dirt road thatleads right to the base of the summit of Pilot Peak). The only reactionI received from the Forest Service was a smile and a wave as they drovepast in their trucks. -!-My observations cover a brief period of time - from the evening ofWednesday, August 19 to the morning of Friday, August 21. My commentsand observations can be verified and confirmed by Mr. Ed Stuart whoaccompanied me to Pilot Peak.As Ed has asked, "If the facts we CAN verify are false then are thefacts we CAN'T verify false?" To which I must reply, not necessarily,but they are certainly called into question.Other lines of inquiry come to mind. IS the corridor from the west toPilot Peak actually RADAR blind as put forth by the Phoenix Project K2report? I'm sure any ATC person from the area can answer that easilyenough.I also think a discussion with Forest Service personnel is in order.Are they aware that some of their members are being presented asunwitting allies of the Greys? Did they have occasion to question theactivities of a group of people investigating the Pilot Peak area? Hasthere ever been a female member of their team, and if so, who was she?And if so, what does she think of the seduction for information scenarioas described by the K2 report?I think I'm ready to go ask some questions.

Origin: aquarius-project.blogspot.com