It is thought the frequency and intensity of these typhoons could be linked to climate change.

Over 40 new papers highlight the incredible progress that’s been made in the last eight years.

They only sting as babies. Then, it’s crushing time.

Maybe Bowie was right about the spiders from Mars.

The head of the U.S. Department of Defense’s UFO research agency has acknowledged that many sightings of unidentified objects remain hard to explain. On Tuesday, November 19, John Kosloski, the director of the All-Area Anomaly Analysis Office (AARO), testified before the Senate, presenting new findings from the agency’s investigation into UFO sightings. Established in July 2022, AARO is tasked with studying unidentified anomalous phenomena (UAP), a term encompassing unexplained objects or events observed in the sky, in water, in space, and even between these domains. Kosloski shared insights from investigations conducted between May 1, 2023, and June 1, 2024, as well as unresolved cases from previous reports. During the hearing, Kosloski emphasized that AARO has found no evidence of extraterrestrial beings or alien technology. He stated that the majority of UFO sightings can be attributed to explainable phenomena. This statement starkly contrasts with testimony presented to the House of Representatives just a week earlier, where a retired U.S. Navy rear admiral and a former counterintelligence official alleged a decades-long government cover-up of evidence suggesting “we are not alone in space.” A new AARO report presented the results of an investigation into 485 UFO sightings around the world between May 1, 2023 and June 1, 2024. Kosloski outlined the findings of AARO’s latest report, which analyzed 485 UFO sightings worldwide between May 2023 and June 2024. Of these, 118 cases were conclusively explained, with 174 additional cases on track to be resolved as unrelated to alien technology. The report attributed most of the identified objects to mundane sources such as birds, balloons, and drones. However, Kosloski admitted that a number of objects remain “highly anomalous” and require further investigation. “We do not yet have enough data to accurately identify these phenomena,” he explained. While Kosloski presented several videos purportedly showing UFOs during the hearing, all were ultimately identified as non-alien in nature. Despite the lack of evidence for extraterrestrial visitation, Kosloski affirmed AARO’s commitment to continued research. The Pentagon’s special office will persist in its efforts to understand the phenomena behind sightings that defy explanation, he said. The challenge of investigating highly anomalous phenomena underscores the complexities of UFO research, with much work still needed to separate fact from fiction in this strange field. The post Pentagon Can’t Explain UAPs: They’re Not Birds, Drones, or Balls appeared first on Anomalien.com.

Late Tuesday, word leaked out from The Wall Street Journal before spreading elsewhere and made official Wednesday morning that Comcast will be spinning off failing, far-left cable network MSNBC, along with CNBC and five other channels to become its own, publicly traded company. That said, it’s not a full break from television as Comcast will keep NBC, the cable network Bravo, and the Peacock streaming platform. Take notice of the publicly traded description for this company. Conservatives, Elon Musk, and others tired of MSNBC’s poisonous rhetoric has the opportunity to do perhaps the funniest thing ever. Fox News Digital’s Brian Flood detailed MSNBC’s recent ratings headaches last week: MSNBC’s reliably liberal audience has tuned out the anti-Trump network since Election Day with a staggering 54% drop in primetime viewership.  MSNBC averaged 1.1 million viewers during the month of October but plummeted to an average audience of 736,000 on Wednesday, Thursday and Friday of last week following President-elect Donald Trump’s historic landslide victory over Vice President Kamala Harris. MSNBC’s remarkable 31% drop comes as Fox News Channel’s viewership grew by 61% over the same time period.  MSNBC also shed 26% of its year-to-date totals, but things got even worse in primetime. During the primetime hours of 8-11 p.m. ET, MSNBC averaged 1.8 million total viewers in October but viewership of "Alex Wagner Tonight," "All in with Chris Hayes" and "The Last Word with Lawrence O’Donnell" have averaged only 808,000 total viewers since election night. The 54% drop represents more than half of the network’s primetime viewers, and MSNBC is also down 51% from its year-to-date totals while Fox News is up 58% in primetime compared to 2024 averages. MSNBC is also down 16% among total day viewers and 57% during primetime among the critical demographic of adults age 25-54, which is most coveted by advertisers.  The Journal’s Amol Sharma had the details in the original piece updated to include Comcast’s public confirmation, including their acceptance “that it will be better off without a business that was once its crown jewel” after only a month since word trickled out this was being studied. Sharma explained this also was an acknowledgment of Americans increasingly cutting the cord, leaving a set of costly assets Comcast no longer wanted to be burdened with. “Comcast is betting that NBCUniversal’s remaining assets—including in broadcast TV, sports, movies and theme parks—will be better positioned for growth, and that its strong balance sheet can absorb the loss of still-healthy profits from cable networks,” he said. As for why Bravo’s staying, look no further than it being the home for reality TV shows such as Below Deck, the Real Housewives franchises, and Andy Cohen’s Watch What Happens Live. The move will “take around a year to complete” and, under the name SpinCo, “will have an ownership structure that mirrors Comcast’s, with Comcast Chairman and CEO Brian Roberts holding a one-third voting stake” but not “on the board of the new venture.” Along with other executives from Comcast remaining involved with this new company, Sharma said “Mark Lazarus, who is currently the chairman of NBCUniversal’s media group, with oversight of TV and streaming platforms, will be named chief executive of the new venture” plus “Anand Kini, who has served as chief financial officer of NBCUniversal, will be the CFO and operating chief of the new company.”

Just days before the anniversary of John F. Kennedy’s assassination on Nov. 23, 1963, Americans are no closer to knowing the whole truth about what happened at Dealey Plaza in Dallas that day. In fact, the Biden administration is taking steps to ensure that the truth may never be known. On Friday, Oct. 18, Joe Biden’s Justice Department took further action to block the release of secret records related to the assassination. The government filed a summary judgment motion to assert control over congressional records related to JFK’s murder. This marks the latest effort by the Biden administration, which has moved since 2021 to prevent the release of remaining assassination documents held by the National Archives and Records Administration. Each time the government attempts to conceal or restrict critical information about the assassination, it sparks a massive and visceral public reaction. The Justice Department’s moves contradict the 1992 John F. Kennedy Assassination Records Collection Act, which explicitly prohibits the president from exercising authority over congressional and non-executive branch records. The JFK Records Act also mandated the full public disclosure of all assassination records by Oct. 26, 2017. On Oct. 19, 2022, the nonprofit Mary Ferrell Foundation, a privately operated archive specializing in records related to the Kennedy assassination and other major events of the 1960s and 1970s, filed a lawsuit against Biden and the National Archives. The lawsuit demands the release of all assassination records in compliance with the 2017 statutory deadline. The suit also seeks court orders requiring the National Archives to maintain a complete public directory of assassination record identification forms and fulfill other responsibilities mandated by law. The idea for the lawsuit emerged after two successive presidential administrations missed the deadline to release all assassination records. However, it was President Biden’s actions after 2021 that triggered the lawsuit. Biden’s decisions effectively dismantled the standards set by the JFK Records Act, allowing executive agencies like the CIA, FBI, and Secret Service to withhold records. These agencies, which have long resisted releasing assassination documents, have even admitted to destroying some of the records. The Justice Department’s motion for summary judgment would undermine the intent of the JFK Records Act. The law aimed to strip executive agencies of their authority over assassination records and establish an accountable, enforceable process for reviewing and releasing these documents. From 1994 to 1998, the Assassination Records Review Board, an independent agency established under the law, issued legally binding orders to review, postpone, or release millions of documents. These decisions ensured that postponements adhered strictly to the limited criteria outlined in section 6 of the law. The Justice Department’s attempt to assert presidential control over congressional records is especially baffling. Multiple sections of the JFK Records Act explicitly state that the president’s authority applies only to executive branch records. Section 9(d)(1) clearly limits presidential power, underscoring that it does not extend to congressional assassination records. Section 7(l) of the JFK Records Act explicitly states that the House and Senate Oversight Committees retain ongoing control and oversight over the management of assassination records, even after the ARRB concluded its work. When Congress passed the JFK Records Act 32 years ago, lawmakers expressed deep concerns that executive branch agencies, with their history of obstructing investigations into the assassination, would continue to block the release of records. The Senate unanimously ratified the Act and filed a report emphasizing its intent, providing an interpretive guide for courts to refer to in cases involving the Act. The Senate’s apprehension about presidential control over congressional records leaves no room for misinterpretation. Since Kennedy’s assassination 61 years ago, federal agencies have aggressively collected and locked away documents and evidence related to his murder. Each time the government attempts to conceal or restrict critical information about the assassination, it sparks a massive and visceral public reaction. This occurred when the infamous Zapruder film was first broadcast in 1975, 12 years after the assassination, and again after Oliver Stone’s Academy Award-winning 1991 film brought public attention to the government’s secret troves of JFK assassination records. “The JFK Assassination Chokeholds” chronicles over 60 years of government obstruction surrounding the Kennedy assassination. It details how recent presidential orders have effectively sealed thousands of records from public disclosure, directly violating the unanimous will of Congress and the expressed desires of the American people.

Conservative CNN contributor Scott Jennings mocked chief media correspondent Brian Stelter's reporting that offered a new explanation for why "Morning Joe" hosts Joe Scarborough and Mika Brzezinski met with President-elect Donald Trump after years of unhinged criticisms against their former friend.Stelter reported that according to "two sources," Scarborough and Brzezinski wanted to meet with Trump because they were "credibly concerned that they could face governmental and legal harassment from the incoming Trump administration."As Stelter talked about his reporting, Jennings chuckled at the reasoning offered by the unnamed sources. Jennings pointed out the two hosts did not say that fear was the reason for the meeting when they revealed what happened at at Mar-a-Lago. 'So there is an environment, Scott, where there are understandable concerns.'“If that’s what happened and if that’s what they truly believed, why didn't they go on TV and say that? ‘We went down there to meet with the president to tell him that, hey, anyone who’s been critical of you, you know, you should treat us like journalists and not like the enemy,'" Jennings said."They didn’t go on TV and say that. They went on TV and portrayed it much differently. So what I hear you saying in your reporting is they had a motive that they weren’t willing to disclose to their audience, which I think should get them more scorn today than they were already getting to begin with," he continued."I understand some people might think this is paranoia inside MSNBC, for example. There are some people who think these fears I’m describing are way overblown. But then there’s others who are worried about prosecution. So there’s a wide range of concerns right now," Stelter explained.When Jennings asked what exactly people in the media industry are so afraid of, Stelter said, "Last week, Steve Bannon said, 'Lawyer up, you MSNBC producers.' So there is an environment, Scott, where there are understandable concerns."Scarborough and Brzezinski's sit-down with Trump at his South Florida estate has been met with laughter from MAGA supporters and intense criticism from the liberal camp. For years, especially in the days leading up to the election, both hosts used their program to claim Trump was very dangerous for the country.Like Blaze News? Bypass the censors, sign up for our newsletters, and get stories like this direct to your inbox. Sign up here!

Last week, Jason Whitlock made a bet that Deion Sanders’ Colorado Buffaloes will lose two of their last three games of the season. If he is proved wrong, however, Jason promised he would fly himself to a bowl game and cheer on Sanders’ team decked out in Buffaloes gear. After the Buffaloes' 49-24 victory over the Utah Utes last weekend, it looks like Whitlock might be packing his bags soon. “I'm being inundated over the weekend with people suggesting I owe Deion Sanders an apology,” he says. While he’s willing to admit that he was “wrong about what their record would be this year,” Jason is not willing to apologize. “I am going to be transparent and say I'm wrong, but I'm not apologizing,” he says. “After they lost to Nebraska, after they should have lost to Baylor, I was real confident that the wheels were going to fall off, and the wheels did not fall off. This team has improved throughout the course of the season,” he admits. “Hats off to Deion; hats off to Colorado.” However, Jason still doesn’t "respect the way Deion has gone about” running his football program and never has. From the gold chains he wears and the rappers he brings into the locker room to the flagrant materialism he promotes and his lack of humility — “none of it's consistent with my values; none of it's consistent with Christian values,” says Whitlock. He also doesn’t approve of the media’s celebration of Sanders when it’s not deserved. “You went 4-8 last year, and Sports Illustrated named you Sportsman of the Year; you were in last place in the Pack 12 last year, and Sports Illustrated called you Sportsman of the Year; ‘60 Minutes’ did two features on you in a year’s span,” Jason criticizes. On top of that, players like Travis Hunter begin to take on an “egomaniacal” demeanor under Deion’s leadership. “Travis Hunter has started to mimic Deion's attitude and Deion's lack of humility,” says Jason. Even still — if the Buffaloes win another game, Jason will keep true to his word and cheer on the Buffaloes at a bowl game this year. Next weekend when the team takes on the Kansas Jayhawks, Jason will know whether or not he’ll be ordering Colorado gear. Want more from Jason Whitlock?To enjoy more fearless conversations at the crossroads of culture, faith, sports, and comedy with Jason Whitlock, subscribe to BlazeTV — the largest multi-platform network of voices who love America, defend the Constitution, and live the American dream.

Lorie Smith is the owner of 303 Creative, a graphic design firm based in Colorado. While generally happy to produce work for any paying customer, Smith wanted to offer wedding-related services exclusively to straight couples because complicity in the celebration of homosexual unions would otherwise "compromise [her] Christian witness." Since Colorado's Anti-Discrimination Act would have forced her to do just that, she took the Democrat-run state to court — and won. Months after the U.S. Supreme Court ruled 6-3 in Smith's favor and a federal circuit court barred the state from enforcing the CADA's communication and accommodation clauses against the designer, Colorado officials have come to a settlement, agreeing Tuesday to pay a hefty sum to the guarantors of their defeat. "As the Supreme Court said, I'm free to create art consistent with my beliefs without fear of Colorado punishing me anymore," Smith said in a statement. "This is a win not just for me but for all Americans — for those who share my beliefs and for those who hold different views." Smith's original complaint filed in 2016 claimed that Colorado law stripped her and her organization "of the freedom to choose what messages to create and to convey in the marriage context." 'The First Amendment’s protections belong to all, not just to speakers whose motives the government finds worthy.' The complaint cited a section of the CADA that prohibits a person to refuse, withhold from, or deny the "full and equal enjoyment of the goods, services, facilities, privileges, advantages or accommodations of a place of public accommodation" to an individual on the basis of sexual preference, "gender identity," and "gender expression." Another clause in the CADA prohibits individuals from advertising that refusal. The lawsuit asked the U.S. District Court to restore the constitutional freedoms of Smith and 303 Creative "to speak their beliefs and not be compelled to speak messages contrary to those beliefs, and to ensure that other creative professionals in Colorado have the same freedoms." The case ultimately got kicked up the Supreme Court, which decided in June 2023 that the First Amendment bars Colorado from coercing a website designer to create content with which she disagrees. Justice Neil Gorsuch noted in the high court's majority opinion, "The First Amendment’s protections belong to all, not just to speakers whose motives the government finds worthy. In this case, Colorado seeks to force an individual to speak in ways that align with its views but defy her conscience about a matter of major significance." "All manner of speech — from 'pictures, films, paintings, drawings, and engravings,' to 'oral utterance and the printed word' — qualify for the First Amendment’s protections; no less can hold true when it comes to speech like Ms. Smith’s conveyed over the Internet," wrote the conservative justice. "Consistent with the First Amendment, the Nation's answer is tolerance, not coercion," added Gorsuch. 'No government has the right to silence individuals for expressing these ideas.' Justice Sonia Sotomayor wrote in her dissenting opinion for the leftist minority that the ruling was "profoundly wrong" and will "mark gays and lesbians for second-class status." Other social liberals similarly bemoaned the court's affirmation of free speech, including CNN talking head Van Jones, who said, "If you care about inclusion and equal opportunity and care about folks who don’t have much and are trying to make it today, this is a tragedy." Colorado Attorney General Philip Weiser, who unsuccessfully represented the state, said at the time that the ruling was "far out of step with the will of the American people and American values." According to Alliance Defending Freedom, the legal group that represented Smith, the Supreme Court's decision has already been cited nearly 1,000 times in court opinions, briefs, and various legal publications. Colorado's Civil Rights Division agreed this week to pick up the bill for the CADA's defanging, covering over $1.5 million in attorneys' fees. Weiser's office confirmed to the Denver Gazette the settlement over the fees but declined to comment. Kristen Waggoner, the CEO and president of Alliance Defending Freedom, stated, "The government can't force Americans to say things they don't believe, and Colorado officials have paid and will continue to pay a high price when they violate this foundational freedom." "For the past 12 years, Colorado has targeted people of faith and forced them to express messages that violate their conscience and that advance the government’s preferred ideology. First Amendment protections are non-negotiable," continued Waggoner. "Billions of people around the world believe that marriage is the union of one man and one woman and that men and women are biologically distinct. No government has the right to silence individuals for expressing these ideas or to punish those who decline to express different views." Smith expressed hope that "that everyone will celebrate the court's decision upholding this right for each of us to speak freely." Like Blaze News? Bypass the censors, sign up for our newsletters, and get stories like this direct to your inbox. Sign up here!