S4 base, real or fake?

Is the S4 Base Real or Fictional?

A 2010 report has brought to light significant revelations concerning UFO crash retrievals, which allegedly involved two U.S. Presidents. According to this report, a secretive facility in Nevada houses remnants from the 1947 Roswell incident and the 1953 Kingman crash, including an alien craft reminiscent of “black, liquid mercury” and a being referred to as Chi’el’ah—a “future human.”

Michael Schratt, a private pilot and aerospace researcher, describes this case as one of the most important in UFO history, potentially yielding explosive implications. In 2011, he shared the story of Dr. Dan Burisch, who purportedly worked at the S4 facility—an establishment associated with Bob Lazar. Schratt asserts, “The information, drawings, and illustrations in this presentation stemmed directly from Dr. Burisch’s testimony and guidance.”

Who is Dr. Dan Burisch?
Schratt explains, “Dr. Burisch was the youngest person ever inducted into the Los Angeles Microscopical Society.” He earned his degrees in Biological Sciences and Psychology from a prestigious university and obtained a Ph.D. in 1989. Allegedly, Dr. Edward Teller assisted Bob Lazar in securing an interview with EG&G, which led to Lazar’s job at S4.

In 1991, Burisch served as a biowarfare expert during Desert Storm. By 1994, he received Q clearance at S4 and commenced work on “Project Aquarius,” a project encompassing mankind’s interactions with extraterrestrials, under the direction of the Naval Research Laboratory and the Defense Intelligence Agency.

What is Project Aquarius?
Schratt commenced a detailed virtual tour of the secret S4 facility, describing its five-story structure, with four levels below ground. “They possess not only hardware but also tissue samples, film reels, and audio-visual records,” he noted. Among its many hangars, Hangar 1 reportedly housed Bob Lazar’s “Sport Model,” while Hangar 3 contained the Roswell craft, covered by a tarp.

Schratt recounted, “Hangar 6 featured a man-made version of the Roswell craft, while Hangar 8 contained a black isosceles triangle nicknamed the ‘licorice drop.’”

The account reveals corroboration from three independent sources, including Lazar himself, that the S4 base is indeed real. “Dr. Dan Burisch confirmed S4’s existence, as did Bill Uhouse, who worked on flight simulators at S4 and Los Alamos National Lab.”

Highlight from Burisch’s Testimony:
Notably, Burisch asserted that from Hangar 1 to Hangar 7, all housed extraterrestrial vehicles. He distinguished that only Hangar 8 contained an alien vehicle, stating it appeared “like black, liquid mercury.”

Describing the P45 craft known as the Sport Model, Burisch indicated it measured 52 feet in diameter and 16 feet high, featuring three levels and a smooth aluminum exterior. The propulsion system utilized Element 115, which was allegedly bombarded with protons within an anti-matter reactor, producing the necessary power.

Kingman Crash and Presidential Involvement:
The 1953 UFO crash in Kingman, AZ allegedly involved retrieval operations authorized by President Dwight Eisenhower. “The craft was transported by a 40-ton tank hauler,” said Schratt, who claims three bodies were recovered—one dead, one sent to Los Alamos, and the third to S4, known as the J-Rod with whom Burisch interacted.

During a 1954 meeting between Eisenhower and P52 Orion representatives, a treaty was supposedly sealed, and Eisenhower received an “Orion Cube,” an 8×8 inch device that purportedly provides insights into future events.

Eisenhower’s Warning:
It’s crucial to

One thought on “S4 base, real or fake?

  1. This post presents a fascinating and complex narrative intertwining UFOs, secret government projects, and alleged extraterrestrial interactions. While it’s engaging and full of intricate details, its credibility remains highly questionable due to the absence of verified evidence and the lack of corroboration from reputable sources.

    1. S4 and Its Claims: The existence of S4 and the specifics mentioned, such as different hangars supposedly housing various extraterrestrial crafts, relies heavily on anecdotal accounts from individuals like Bob Lazar and Dr. Dan Burisch. While their stories are engrossing, they have not been substantiated through tangible, verifiable evidence. The concept of classified government facilities and operations is not new, but the fantastical claims about the technologies and beings involved here warrant skepticism.

    2. Dr. Dan Burisch and Bob Lazar: While both have their proponents, they also face significant criticism. Lazar’s initial claims about working on reverse-engineering alien technology have led many to question his background and integrity. Likewise, Burisch’s account mixes a variety of sensational elements that could be construed as more science fiction than fact.

    3. Project Aquarius and the “Looking Glass”: The idea of a project that catalogues human interaction with extraterrestrials sounds compelling, but it echoes themes found in science fiction literature rather than established scientific fact. Similarly, concepts like the “Looking Glass” and the references to natural Stargates are speculative and lack empirical support.

    4. Complexity of Claims: The intricate details regarding the anatomy and experiences of J-Rods, the function of alleged technology, and interactions with U.S. Presidents are layered and dense with lore. They may attract interest and intrigue, but without verifiable evidence, they remain speculative narratives.

    5. Historical Context and Warnings: The mention of Eisenhower’s caution against the military-industrial complex adds a real-world dimension to the discussion. It underscores a genuine concern about unchecked power and secrecy; however, it also risks conflating genuine societal issues with speculative narratives about UFOs.

    In summary, this post illustrates an intriguing intersection of conspiracy theory, speculative science, and folklore. While it captures the imagination and fuels ongoing discussions about extraterrestrial life and government secrecy, a critical approach demands that we seek concrete evidence before accepting these claims as truth. The exploration of such topics should prioritize verifiable information and a healthy skepticism towards sensational assertions.

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *