It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.
Please white-list or disable AboveTopSecret.com in your ad-blocking tool.
Thank you.
Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.
Originally posted by Rotwang17
[Snipped] ... Against Method - Paul Feyerabend
The Psychologist, Muzafer Sharif, PhD, set about in his landmark study, The Psychology of Social Norms, to explain human behavior within a group context. He primarily used ambiguious stimuli upon his test subjects which confirmed that when in a group context, individuals will tend to comform their interpretations of the ambiguious stimuli to that of the person in the group with the most percieved authority.
This is very important when we weigh this with Paul Feyerabend's concept of Scientific Chauvinism. Why, when faced with ambiguious choices, we do tend to side with those choises which are percieved as the most authoritative.
Most importantly, the people you did not mention are the eye-whitnesses. Speaking to an eye-whitness with a 6th grade education is more valuable than hearing the opinions of 100 PhDs. Our above dialectic argument concerning our choices in interpreting UFO's is a good example; your choices were meteorologists, astronomers and physicists, mine were folklorists and psychologists. Your leanings are towards interpreting this ambiguious phenomenon as objective, while mine are subjective.
the people you did not mention are the eye-witnesses.
Now, can subjective phenomena be studied in an objective and scientific manner? Very much so. Thus, this chauvinism reveals both of our biases.
In fact, the ambiguious stimuli that Dr. Sherif had used in his experiments which pioneered the study of social norms was the autokinetic illusion. The autokinetic illusion was first discovered by an astronomer, Alexander Von Humbolt in 1799. Although he was not aware of the fact that this was a subjective phenomonon, he believed that it was a real and objective attribute of some stars and planets.
...
Why was it a psychologist and not an astronomer that was able to make this discovery? Because psychologists were trained on how to distinguish the difference between objective and subjective phenomena.
Originally posted by Frith
This is a global conspiracy that all governments participate in willingly or not. The reason is quite clear to me why they all do it. Our governments, and more specificially the rich and powerful that run them, would more than likely lose their wealth and control over the destiny of this planet and its inhabitants would the truth be known.
Also at this point decades of criminal procedures to continue this secret would assuredly have been required which compounds our leaders' fears of loss of control with an angry public looking for vengence over the whys and hows the secret has been kept.
Originally posted by Frith
reply to post by Xtraeme
I'm not one to accept the notion that the governments of the world are largely ignorant of this conspiracy. Certainly the majority of government workers are, but I do believe a select few and in particular the air forces of the world know more than they'll ever admit.
Originally posted by Frith
reply to post by Xtraeme
There is no single source I can point to as to why I think the air forces of the world know as much as they do, but most of the well known cases form my beliefs as to what they know. 1947 Roswell , the 1952 Washington D.C. UFO flap, 1956 Bentwaters, 1957 RB-47 incident, the 1965 Edwards incident, the 1976 Tehran incident, 1980 Bentwaters, and 1990 Belgium are the ones that come to mind immediately.
Originally posted by Frith
reply to post by Xtraeme
I'm sure there have been many people in high positions of power hoping and praying that this subject wasn't real, but then I'm sure there are many more that have felt this vast unknown to be a great threat and commissioned all they could to investigate and extrapolate as much information as they could to better understand and quell what I'm sure they deem to be a menace. The USA doesn't have sixteen known intelligence circles just to cover their eyes and hope the public doesn't stumble onto something they're consciously avoiding.
Originally posted by Frith
reply to post by Xtraeme
This is a conspiracy website and as you've seen, quite a few people do not believe 9/11 or Iraq were intelligence lapses, but this is not the thread for such things.
Back to the subject. Until the real story is known, the case for ignorance or malice can be made without much in the way to dispell either. I just don't see how any government could willfully ignore something as big as ET visitation given the implication that their inaction could lead to public discovery.
Originally posted by Xtraeme
Now add in various cognitive biases like "it can't be therefore it isn't" and peoples susceptibility to ridicule. I must have read several dozen accounts relating how the USAF approached the problem in an open-minded fashion during the Project Sign days only to completely change their position after the team sent the Estimate of the Situation (supporting the ET hypothesis) up to Vandenberg. Following that Dir. Ruppelt spelled it out clearly: the senior brass disassembled the group and aptly renamed the investigation to Project GRUDGE.
Originally posted by TeslaandLyne
I heard this answer once:
" two words free energy "
"We have, indeed, been contacted - perhaps even visited - by extraterrestrial beings, and the U.S. government, in collusion with the other national powers of the earth, is determined to keep this information from the general public.”
"The purpose of the international conspiracy is to maintain a workable stability among the nations of the world and for them, in turn, to retain institutional control over their respective populations. Thus, for these governments to admit that there are beings from outer space... with mentalities and technological capabilities obviously far superior to ours, could, once fully perceived by the average person, erode the foundations of the earth's traditional power structure. Political and legal systems, religions, economic and social institutions could all soon become meaningless in the mind of the public. The national oligarchical establishments, even civilization as we now know it, could collapse into anarchy.”
"Such extreme conclusions are not necessarily valid, but they probably accurately reflect the fears of the 'ruling classes' of the major nations, whose leaders (particularly those in the intelligence business) have always advocated excessive governmental secrecy as being necessary to preserve 'national security."
Victor Marchetti - Former Special Assistant to the Executive Director of the CIA, May 1979.
Originally posted by VelmaLu
reply to post by ET_MAN
We're sort of on the same page.
People assume it's the government keeping us from disclosure, when an advanced civilization capable of traversing the stars, monitoring nuclear facilities and abducting people could not be prevented from disclosing this information if they wanted.
It doesn't matter what the government wants or doesn't want.
The fact is that alien civilizations do not wish to make contact with us on a broad scale. Instead, they make themselves known to a few individuals at a time, and operate in a relatively covert manner.
The question behind that motivation is far more pertinent than whether some two-star general doesn't believe.
Why? Obviously, if an alien race was capable of this type of travel, then they must know that a good portion of the population wants disclosure.
Heck, they could probably even make themselves known to those who have a desire for the answer.
There must be some advantage to keeping us ignorant. If you look at our history, there has been a pervasive pattern of keeping the people ignorant.
Frankly, I think the reason we are kept in the dark is because if we did know the truth, we may reject ANY involvement by any outside race, declare our sovereignty as sentient beings and kick every ET off the planet. Perhaps humans as a mob are viewed as not only unruly, but unpredictable. Perhaps we have "rights" in this universe that we are unaware of, and as long as we do not assert those rights, we can be kept as property?
Best to keep us as ignorant prisoners and our government as trustees.