The Modern UFO Myth and Imminent Disclosure

Fellow members, I'd like to submit some ideas for discussion.

A word of warning: this is a long posting that actually spans over 3 posts, with the intention of, hopefully, producing intellectually honest, rational and healthy discussion. Please read everything to understand my whole argument. If you have no interest in that, please don't derail and ruin the discussion for others who are.

I suspect the title alone will likely cause strong emotions in some members, so I'll start by explaining my position and approach to the UFO phenomenon.

I am a proclaimed skeptic—I don't think unusual claims should be automatically rejected out of hand, but I discourage accepting them based on faith or anecdotal evidence. These claims, however, should be critically examined and subjected to systematic scientific investigation and reasoning.

I don't consider myself part of any group or tribe. I'm just someone who, based on the evidence I've analyzed, thinks the UFO phenomenon could be more and something other than just misidentifications, hoaxes, natural phenomena and secret military aircraft, but I don't proclaim to know the answer.

I have some suspicions and theories on what that other could be, but, objectively, I don't know, and claiming otherwise would be intellectually dishonest, in my opinion. I think we should be wary of anyone who claims to know what the answer is, because quite frankly, there is simply not enough hard evidence to point to a conclusive answer.

Now that you, hopefully, know where I'm coming from, let's get down to business.

The Modern UFO Myth

The phrase comes from the subtitle of Greg Bishop's “Project Beta” book and is meant here to symbolize the picture that was painted based on the uncertainty, misinformation and disinformation, ignorance and overall confusion about the UFO phenomenon in general, and the cases.

I'm in no way implying that the whole UFO phenomenon is a myth, but I maintain that many of the stories that are the basis, or at the heart, of extremely popular notions and basically make up the bulk of UFO lore in modern times, for one reason or another, for nefarious purposes or not, don't correspond to the reality of the phenomenon, whatever it might be.

I believe, in fact, most stories and theories, certainly the most popular, are practically all based on tales and narratives constructed in the 80s and early-mid 90s. There are, of course, popular notions that predate these periods in time—like UFO crashes and retrievals—but when carefully analyzed, I think the bulk of the modern UFO lore can be traced to those decades, as well as to a handful of individuals.

Most of it, for instance like underground alien bases (Dulce in particular), the term EBE, X number races of aliens, genetic manipulation, and secret agreements with aliens, and many other tidbits of ‘information’ regarding alien visitation, presence, technology and even history, originate from a disinformation campaign in the early 80s by AFOSI Agent Richard Doty, at Kirtland Air Force Base in Albuquerque, New Mexico, targeting Paul Bennewitz in particular, but many others.

Briefly, Paul Bennewitz was a businessman who owned a company that supplied scientific equipment to Kirtland AFB. Thunder Scientific Corporation stood right in front of the entrance to the base. Bennewitz stumbled upon strange signals and witnessed weird light phenomena over Kirtland AFB. Worried about the implications of this—and probably out of a sense of duty—he informed the base of what he had witnessed. Soon after, the Air Force would launch a systematic disinformation campaign that culminated, ultimately, in the destruction of Bennewitz's mental health. A campaign that, according to Greg Bishop—whose book is dedicated to Bennewitz and this campaign—was to divert Bennewitz's attention away from secret projects at Kirtland.

Bennewitz who, based on the things he had seen believed aliens were up to no good, now thanks to the disinformation campaign, was completely convinced aliens were indeed behind the strange signals, but also, were abducting people and taking them to an underground base in Dulce to do all sort of nefarious stuff. This would all prove to be too much for Bennewitz as he grew ever more paranoid and, eventually, would have a nervous breakdown.

Around the same time, Doty was sharing information and showing allegedly secret documents to Linda Moulton Howe. Howe was, at that point, preparing a UFO documentary to be aired on HBO. Doty told Howe the Government would soon disclose everything and she would get the story. Needless to say that disclosure never came, and Howe's previously planned documentary never materialized either.

Controversial documents, known as MJ12, that surfaced in early and mid 80s contained similar information given or present in documents shown to Bennewitz, Linda Howe, and probably others. Details ranging from a recovered live alien calling itself EBE being interrogated and claiming their origin being Zeta Reticuli, to the US Government successfully contacting and making agreements with the aliens, were contained in the documents.

During the mid-late 80s, several individuals spoke, wrote and expanded on many of these claims. Phil Schneider, Bill Cooper and John Lear were the most popular. Many of their stories were similar to—and based on, in my opinion—the information contained in the MJ12 documents and other narratives that stemmed from the disinformation campaign against Bennewitz.

Not long after, Bob Lazar would show up and make his famous claims about reverse-engineered craft and activities at Area 51, making the whole world—from amateur UFO enthusiasts to foreign press, trying to get a glimpse of the evidence of aliens—focus its attention and camera lenses on the base at Groom Lake. Curiously, or not, the former pilot and CIA agent that had been on the UFO circuit for some time talking about the extraordinary things that the Government was allegedly covering up—John Lear—was at the center of this development, and some of his claims were now, surely, being vindicated.

It's not important, nor is it now the place, to discuss at length the credibility of these men and their stories, but seeing as none really have any concrete and objective evidence of the things they claimed, unless supported by yet to be discovered and presented persuasive evidence, I don't find a good reason to believe any of it.

I'm not saying we should just discard and ignore it all, but we should consider them for what they are—unsubstantiated claims that are all oh-so-familiar to a narrative put forward by a disinformation campaign and documents that, in all likelihood, were forged, altered or fabricated by certain agents.

I believe it is important to recognize and understand the timelines, the players, the lore, the original stories and how subsequent tales grew based on them and their implications today. The implications for a picture that portraits the US Government having a deep knowledge of—and involvement in—the UFO phenomenon and their alleged occupants.

If we put aside, for a second, all these unverified stories, with what, objectively and documented are we left with?

Sightings of unknown objects by civilian and military people, radar returns of unknown objects, interactions of military and commercial aircraft with unknown objects, and indentations and marks left on the ground and surrounding areas allegedly made by unknown objects. The pattern is self-evident.

We have to ask ourselves, why would a Government, clandestinely, paint a picture—to its citizens and enemies—that it has extensive knowledge of the phenomenon, incredible technology in its possession and agreements with other-worldly entities?

The answers we can only suspect and deduce, but the implications, in my view, are obvious for the idea of ‘disclosure.’

(Cont.)

The House of Cards

The problem with the premise of ‘Disclosure’ is that it relies on the picture the modern UFO myth painted—that the Government has deep and extensive knowledge of the UFO phenomenon. It's also based on the assumption that, if the Government disclosed what it knows, nothing catastrophic would happen. This idea of disclosure, submitted by those in the so called ‘exopolitics’ movement, is a house of cards that, if the assumptions aren't valid, if the modern UFO myth isn't more than just that—a myth, the house comes tumbling down rather quickly.

The prime motivation for a Government is power. Unless it doesn't lose power—whether real or perceived—by doing disclosure, there is no reason for it to do so. Unless it knows everything there is to know about the phenomenon and its alleged occupants, any disclosure would become, automatically, a disclosure of something the Government doesn't know, doesn't control or both.

Politicians and pundits frequently mention the “world after 9/11,” an expression symbolizing the consequences of an event that changed the perceptions of a lot of people. Disclosing the existence or visitation to our planet of non-human entities would certainly qualify as a “world after” event. Conceivably, one of the biggest perception-changing events imaginable, if not the biggest.

We can debate for days—and we do—the arguments for disclosure and their feasibility, about whether or not you think the population is prepared for this event or if the world's religions would be able to “take it,” but at the end of the day, those arguments are still based on assumptions, and on a picture for which I have yet to see any credible evidence for.

And let's not forget—the alleged aliens haven't landed or invaded either. The Government doesn't need to make a move one way or the other. There is simply no incentive or motivation to open a can of worms—of unforeseeable consequences—if it's not absolutely necessary.


I think the Government knows more about UFOs than it publicly acknowledges, but that doesn't mean they are covering up secret agreements, underground bases where genetic manipulation goes on or knowledge of where aliens come from, as painted by the modern UFO myth.

There are a few things we do know, however. We know, for instance, the Government was misrepresenting its interest in UFOs. We have declassified documents showing the Government was very much interested in the phenomenon while at the same time, publicly, it was claiming it wasn't. However, there is nothing concrete and documented that would lead us to conclude the Government has extensive knowledge of UFOs. Quite the contrary if one goes through all the documents that have been declassified. The notion of extensive knowledge—and involvement—comes, strictly, from the tales of the 80s and 90s and alleged insiders claiming they saw, were told, or worked on things that ‘substantiate’ the picture painted by the modern UFO myth.

Many—I'm sure—would say we don't have documentation of this because the Government is “hiding the real stuff.” I know... I've heard the same stories and claims, but they are still stories and claims nonetheless, that remain unsubstantiated. What I'm getting at is that we should deconstruct and analyze the lore, stories and notions that we have been told because most of the premise seems to be based on assumptions, unverified and unverifiable claims and little more.

Unfortunately most people have blindly accepted the picture that was painted by these stories, and base their understanding of the phenomenon and the Government's actions, or inaction, on it. These unsubstantiated claims are then ‘substantiated’ by the fact that the Government hasn't released “the real documents.”

Purposely or not, the way the picture was painted of what is supposed to be going on, has made it that anything the Government does—or doesn't do—that doesn't conform to the disclosure of what is thought of going on, is automatically accepted as evidence that all of it is going on and the Government is covering it up.

The Government didn't release the documents about Roswell and the alien bodies? It can only mean it happened and the Government is hiding it. No documents mentioning reverse-engineering were released? It means it's going on and the Government doesn't want you to know about it. Nothing about underground bases? Those bastards are covering it up!

There is middle ground between thinking the Government is hiding something about UFOs and believing it's secret agreements with grey aliens from Zeta Reticuli.

I can't disprove none of these claims, of course, but I can't disprove the Government isn't covering up the existence of underground bases where unicorns run freely either. I'm not comparing the two, I'm simply pointing out that if we don't address and stick to the facts—the demonstratively factual information—we're just believers preaching to believers and denialists denying for the sake of denying, endlessly, neglecting the middle ground.

Some people like to talk frequently about open-mindedness. Unfortunately the meaning has been distorted and the term gets hurled at people as a way of implying that if you don't believe what they believe you're close-minded.

What being close-minded actually is is not considering all the possibilities; is dismissing, up front, the alleged evidence because it doesn't fit into your box of perceived reality; is giving more weight to some unsubstantiated claims because they reinforce your personal beliefs. That is being close-minded. Open-mindedness means “having or showing a mind receptive to new ideas or arguments” and being ‘impartial.’

You're not being impartial when you accept the Air Force's nonsensical claim that UFOs don't exist, but don't accept Phil Schneider's claim that aliens are living in underground bases. And you're not impartial when you accept Schneider's claim but not the Air Force's. Being impartial means not taking sides and judging the merits of a claim based on the corroborative and supporting evidence. And in regards to these claims—the Air Force's and Schneider's—there is none.


The unconditional supporters of the so called disclosure movement need to reflect and recognize that misdirected anger seems to be the driver behind the wheel of the disclosure bus. If there are really aliens coming here, as most believe, why is the Government to blame? There could be disclosure tomorrow regardless of the Government's position and policies. All the aliens had to do is land and say ‘hello’—but they don't. So people need a target for their frustrations, for not getting what they want, and what better target than the good ol' evil Government? They are certainly not going to blame the aliens, since Steven Greer and other ‘exopolitics personalities’ have painted the picture of benevolent aliens that can do no wrong.

Disclosure is always around the corner. It didn't start in 2001 with Steven Greer, and it didn't start with Doty telling Linda Howe that it was coming soon, in the 80s.

It's a notion that has always been present during the modern UFO era—since people first started toying with the idea that the Government was covering it up.

(Cont.)

Charlie Brown and imminent Disclosure

There's a recurring gag in Peanuts, I'm sure you are all aware of—Lucy shows Charlie Brown a football and says “How about practicing a few kicks?” Charlie Brown says he's not interested because he knows Lucy will trick him by pulling the football away from him at the last second and he'll fall flat on his back. Lucy provides Charlie Brown with many justifications and reasons why this time it will be different. “This time you can trust me,” she says. Lucy eventually convinces Charlie Brown and, as expected, at the last second she snatches the football and Charlie Brown falls on his back.

Imminent disclosure is the recurring gag in ufology.

There are many Lucys. They will, for one motive or another, justify and tell you the reasons why this time disclosure will really happen. It's so easy! You only have to believe them, sit back and at an announced date the Government will reveal all about the ‘cosmic brothers.’ How can you not believe them? Well, they have on other occasions, over the span of several decades, promised you disclosure too and nothing happened. But you believe them anyway. You want to. After all, it's so easy believing.


People need to realize Disclosure isn't going to happen because they strongly believe, or want it to. Maybe it will never happen. Maybe there is nothing to disclose. If it's ever going to happen however, one thing it's obvious is that it's going to happen when they—the ones with the information—are comfortable with the idea. It doesn't matter if you are comfortable with it, or you think that the world's religions can “take it.” Understand that, certainly, it's not up to you.

But if it's going to happen, why in the hell would they tell you in advance the date of when they're going to do it? Usually these dates come with a story. It's an ‘insider’ that knows the date. Then the date comes and goes and they will sell you another story. It was the other ‘faction’—you know, the one that doesn't want disclosure?—that sabotaged it!

Let's indulge that possibility for a minute as an exercise. So, there's a faction that wants disclosure and another that doesn't. The one that wants disclosure—that is supposed to be formed by Government, military and intelligence agents and officials—commits the fatal strategic error of broadcasting in advance the date of their move so the ‘enemy’ faction—that is supposed to be formed by the same kind of people—is aware of their move and when. If you don't see anything wrong with that scenario, there's something wrong with you. I swear that sometimes these things are comically ridiculous.

And when it's not an ‘insider’ it's someone like Stephen Bassett or Michael Salla, that will convince you, through all their reasons and justifications—just like Lucy—that this time it's for real. It makes sense... Just listen to their arguments! It makes damn perfect sense! It does... if you take a lot of assumptions for granted along the way.

As if Stephen Bassett or Michael Salla would know—or could know—better than you or me when it's the perfect time for disclosure, much less when it's actually going to happen! And if you paid to go to some conference see them tell you that they are—you've wasted your money.

Conclusions

Let's focus on the facts—the objective, undeniable, hard facts. All the entertaining and fascinating stories, are just that—stories, and unverified at that. If people are ever going to really listen—being intellectually interested in the topic and not just entertained by it—and be convinced UFOs should be officially, scientifically and openly investigated is because they were persuaded by the hard facts and data.

The extraordinary tales only convince the people who already believe, in one way or another.

We can remain in this perpetual, and childish, state of expecting and demanding someone else to give us all the answers. We can continue making the field even more polarized and less respectful. We can continue the bickering between people with different opinions. We can continue making groups and tribes. We can continue being believers simply reinforcing each other's beliefs, exchanging the extraordinary tales crafted by con men, charlatans, opportunists and disinformation artists. We can continue being denialists rejecting everything, denying even to look at the evidence because we've decided, up front, “it's all bunk” and only crazies believe in UFOs. It's the easiest thing to do—leave things as they are. We'll get nowhere, but we can do all of that...

... Or we can grow up, start acting like adults and recognize our ignorance, and be serious about the subject.


Have you thought about the possibility that maybe, whatever this other that could be out there might be, it wants us to think about it and search for it, and not just blindly and simply believe in it?

Have you thought why, whatever this other might be, only seems to show itself enough for us to notice it and then, seemingly, disappears out of reach?

Have you thought about the possibility that we're not supposed to be given the answers, but go look for them?

We've been acting and approaching this phenomenon exactly the same way we have for over 60 years. And there are days that, quite frankly, it seems lately it only gets worse. If we're supposed to just be given the answers, we're as prepared now as we were half a century ago.

If we're supposed to go look for the answers, whatever we're doing right now—we're doing it wrong!

The absolute need for disclosure serves only as security for the mind, which is faced with a mystery and is unable to get answers from within. As i said in previous threads, disclosure will not be on human terms, and never will be for our consciousness levels are too low, meaning our intelligence (not intellect) is not up to par. So disclosure will be on ET terms.

reply to post by converge


Great thread mate. Aliens & UFO Board needs more level headed threads like this. You mentioned Doty a few times in passing but I doubt many here will fully understand how pervasive Doty has been in the Alien/UFO Myth Making & Dis-Info Campaign.

In fact, Doty is so confident of peoples ignorance and willingness to swallow complete garbage that he'd have them believe he's jumped the fence and bats for the other side these days.

He's just playing the same game from a different angle and creating a ball of confusion.

I suggest to the less skeptical people on this board to go and perform some honest research on Rick Doty... and his many alias'.

S&F4U!

IRM

[edit on 30/1/10 by InfaRedMan]

Converge, I'd like to feed your viewpoint (not necessarily change it). Some people do indeed know the true story of the planet. Humans were once carriers of the "12 energy (12-stranded DNA)," which connected them to the entire universe. Humans were superbeings at one point, because they were telepathic receivers for energies and information from all over the universe. Through conscious intention, they could manifest anything and do anything.

What happened was that a certain group of extraterrestrials (gods with a lowercase "g") raided the planet, fought for it in wars, and won the fight. The "dark" extraterrestrials beat out the light-bearing extraterrestrials who had planned and designed this place as an intergalactic exchange center for information, and the concept of duality was birthed. This is all referenced in ancient Biblical texts, and in Summerian and Babylonian tablets. These beings have been called The Nephilm, The Annunaki, The Reptilians, etc. in modern history. In actuality, they were part human, and part Reptilian.

They came here because they wanted this place for many of their own reasons, one being to use human emotions as a food supply that kept them in power. They also didn't want the native human species to know what had occurred, so they created versions of humans with a two-stranded double helix DNA system, and the remaining DNA was left intact, but it was inactive. Remember, over 98% of DNA has an unknown function. Scientists call this "junk DNA." These Reptilian beings interfere and control this reality through their own dimensions in a variety of different ways (mainly by manipulating the collective consciousness of civilization), and they create emotional chaos in order to nourish and keep themselves in power. This has been the case for thousands of years.

What's happening at the moment -- through sometime around 2011-2012 -- is that the planet is going through an accelerated evolutionary phase, and our DNA is rebundling back into what it once originally was: a 12-Stranded helix system. The Reptilian energies know that after this happens, they will no longer be in control, so they are re-entering and merging back with our dimension one last time to create emotional chaos and keep people in fear (low vibration). It is not a planet (Nibiru) which is going to clash with ours; it's a dimension -- the dimension where the Reptilians reside in and operate.

reply to post by hermantinkly


Oh the irony! Read the Op hermantinkly!

Originally posted by converge

Conclusions

Let's focus on the facts—the objective, undeniable, hard facts. All the entertaining and fascinating stories, are just that—stories, and unverified at that. If people are ever going to really listen—being intellectually interested in the topic and not just entertained by it—and be convinced UFOs should be officially, scientifically and openly investigated is because they were persuaded by the hard facts and data.

Emphasis Mine.


Some people just don't get it!

IRM

Originally posted by converge

Conclusions

Let's focus on the facts—the objective, undeniable, hard facts.

Coverge -interesting read and good point.

I think these are two of the most important statements made about Ufology:

"The opposite conclusion could have been drawn from The Condon Report's content, namely, that a phenomenon with such a high ratio of unexplained cases (about 30 percent) should arouse sufficient scientific curiosity to continue its study."
"From a scientific and engineering standpoint, it is unacceptable to simply ignore substantial numbers of unexplained observations... the only promising approach is a continuing moderate-level effort with emphasis on improved data collection by objective means... involving available remote sensing capabilities and certain software changes."
Ronald D Story - American Institute of Aeronautics and Astronautics UFO Subcommittee -New York: Doubleday, 1980




"Probably the most striking discrepancy in the Condon report, however, was between its contents and conclusions. Condon had concluded that science could gain nothing from studying UFOs. Yet, the report ended up with a near 30 percent unexplained rate, and a core of cases that came within a hair's breadth of being conclusive evidence for the reality of alien technology – cases which, under the most rigorous analysis, appeared to be the result of extraordinary craft in the skies."
Richard Dolan PHD

Debunking the Condon Report

Cheers.

Originally posted by karl 12

Coverge -interesting read and good point.

I second that. Star and Flag.

Originally posted by Converge
I have some suspicions and theories on what that other could be, but, objectively, I don't know, and claiming otherwise would be intellectually dishonest, in my opinion.

Well said.

[edit on 30-1-2010 by Malcram]

Great thread, Converge, I learned a lot from it. Star and flag and all that.

You went over a lot of separate subjects, but I'd like to point out a few things I was thinking while I read your opinion about open-mindedness.

I think it's absolutely healthy to be open to all realistic possibilities (underground unicorn base is probably OK to just dismiss out of hand ), but it's very easy for someone to believe all possibilities while putting the real weight of their belief behind the most "Unicorn Base" explanations.

An example would be someone who believes that the possibility of intelligent alien life, and visiting alien life with the same weight, as though if alien life exists somewhere that means it must be visiting the Earth.

People throwing around the open minded excuse all the time is one of the biggest pet peeves I have about this place. If everyone were 100% open minded about every possibility, then there'd be no reason for a discussion board to exist in the first place. Everyone would agree that nobody knows anything any more than the next person. It would be very simple to point to any picture of a fuzzy dot and say "That is probably an alien" and nobody could say it wasn't, or they'd be accused of being close-minded (which they are anyway, but that's off point).

My main point is this: Given the scientific knowledge we as a race have (or we as the "common people" have, if indeed the governments are hiding something) I see it as perfectly fine to weight the belief in no alien visitation whatsoever heavier than any number of the theories that have flown around on these boards, the rest of the internet, or within the UFOlogy community as a whole. Being open minded doesn't mean being unrealistic. I'm personally open to the idea of visiting alien life, but I find it much, much less likely than terrestrial explanations at this point in time with the available evidence I've seen.

What imminent disclosure? You mean the same imminent disclosure that happened last year?

This new Peter Robbins interview focuses on the problem of disclosure....

www.binnallofamerica.com...

Originally posted by SuperSlovak
What imminent disclosure? You mean the same imminent disclosure that happened last year?

Sounds like someone didn't bother to read the OP before responding.

Knee jerk?

This is one of best posts, if not the best post, I have read on the UFO topic. Nice work.

I've been reading pretty extensively on the subject for a little over two years now, and book-wise I've found it's a good rule of thumb to steer pretty much clear of anything published much more recently than the early 1970s. To appreciate the reality of the UFO phenomenon - whatever it is - you really don't need to look much beyond the period from 1947 to 1969, a time when the waters were significantly less muddy. Look closely at how the issue was dealt with by the Air Force during those years, look at the information gathered by NICAP, read what James McDonald had to say on the subject.

Not that very interesting and worthy events haven't taken place in the last forty years; indeed, there are many notable sightings and waves that have been well documented in the last few decades. But the verdict was pretty much in during the 1950s and 1960s.

Forget Roswell, forget the whistleblowers, nevermind Area 51, and don't hold your breath regarding disclosure. You don't need the government to tell you that the UFO phenomenon is real. There is plenty of publicly available information to prove - not scientifically of course, but certainly beyond a reasonable doubt - that the phenomenon is real and that it is anomalous.

The ETH seems to be one of the most reasonable theories of what it's all about, based on our current understanding of the universe, but that is by no means proven - not even beyond a reasonable doubt. Look to Jacques Vallee, for one, to consider some interesting alternative ideas regarding what's up with UFOs.

Based on the evidence, we can safely say that they are real and it's extremely unlikely that they are ours. That alone makes this topic incredibly interesting, but the rest is speculation.

[edit on 31-1-2010 by Orkojoker]

Originally posted by converge
(Cont.) Purposely or not, the way the picture was painted of what is supposed to be going on, has made it that anything the Government does—or doesn't do—that doesn't conform to the disclosure of what is thought of going on, is automatically accepted as evidence that all of it is going on and the Government is covering it up.

I truely want to believe... therein lies the problem.

S&F Great Thread

Well written, and what a clever little paradox we have here.

Just another minor flaw of the human condition

Also, I agree with a lot of your perspectives. We are babyfed so much information that we expect disclosure, we expect explainations, we expect the Truth. And when not given it, we draw conclusions based on SUSPICIONS and try to pass them off as facts to everyone else. blind leading the blind.

a little skepticism can be healthy

I also like that you brought up that it are the aliens that wish to remain hidden and avoid an undoubtable public appearence... so why do we automaticly blame the government? If they want to make themselves known im sure it really wouldn't be that difficult.

Originally posted by EsSeeEye
Being open minded doesn't mean being unrealistic. I'm personally open to the idea of visiting alien life, but I find it much, much less likely than terrestrial explanations at this point in time with the available evidence I've seen.

Thank you for your kind words, first of all.

Regarding your points, you seem to have described an interpretation of open-minded as meaning someone considering all possibilities and give them the same weight, being equally probable. I don't, and I disagree with that interpretation. And that's not the way I meant it in my post.

As I've mentioned, I suspect that there is something more to UFOs than mundane causes, but that doesn't mean I think this possibility has the same weight as the possibility of UFOs having mundane explanations. I recognize the two aren't equally likely, and that's why I will—until there is objective and undeniable evidence to say otherwise—as I have always done, represent that stance of mine for what it is as of now—an unsubstantiated opinion.

Since no one truly knows what the explanation or cause is, we can't dismiss, a priori, any possibility. That doesn't mean we should throw out the window burdens of proof, weight of evidence and common sense.

reply to post by converge


Beautiful, Converge. I do not think there has been a better post on the history behind some of the more, to be kind, extraordinary claims and the psychology of the Disclosurists and True Believers, those who treat this as more religion than science.

The Doty story is a great cautionary tale and exposes an inherent contradiction among the Disclosurists and True Believers. This field is plagued with a Want-To-Hear-ism. When a government official says what we don't want to hear, it is dismissed and rationalized. However, when a government official says what we want to hear, it is far too often accepted without question. But why? This is someone who works (or worked) for the same government believed to be engaged in a massive cover-up. Not often enough are their motives questioned. They should be held to the same scrutiny as saying what we don't want to hear. And it should not just be skeptics doing this.

All too often much of the mythology is taken as face-value. The remedy to this is history. Everyone interested in this field should learn it's history. Not simply events and dates, but where and with who did certain claim originate. This post is a great-jumping off point for that, Converge. But could you provide links to websites and books so anyone interested can better study this history?

Originally posted by converge
Let's focus on the facts—the objective, undeniable, hard facts. All the entertaining and fascinating stories, are just that—stories, and unverified at that. If people are ever going to really listen—being intellectually interested in the topic and not just entertained by it—and be convinced UFOs should be officially, scientifically and openly investigated is because they were persuaded by the hard facts and data.

I know the above paragraph is followed by an appeal against division, infighting and bickering, but I feel that some division is necessary. However, this should not be along the traditional lines of skeptics vs. believers.That conflict is a false dichotomy. Rather, it should be critical thinking vs. the gullible, the true believers, the disclosurists. Critical thinking believers have far more in common with skeptics than they do true believers. Among the critical thinkers, we may disagree about what is driving the phenomenon. However, we are all interested in the pursuit of the truth, whatever-it-may-be. And we agree that we are blind men groping in the dark.

We, as critical-thinkers, need to combat those damaging and damning the field at every turn. While we may not be able to convince them, it is not for their benefit but for that of anyone looking in at us. All too often the true believers, disclosurists, the gullible are held as representative of those interested in the UFO phenomenon. We need to show the world that it is not them, but us, the critical thinkers, that are representative. Before the world can take UFO research seriously, we need to show that we take it seriously.

[edit on 31-1-2010 by DoomsdayRex]

[edit on 31-1-2010 by DoomsdayRex]

I agree with almost everything except the lack of persuasion by scientific fact. There is plenty science out there that documents landing cases, etc. but the problem is there is nothing to compare it to. Whatever "it" is, it doesn't want to be documented, and does not want to be identified. That is one of the largest hurdles that this subject differs from standard science.

However, perhaps all the UFOs we see are not related. Some could be military, some could be extraterrestrial. When we try to connect the dots we could be making a mistake since there might not be anything related between case A and B, except that they were lights in the sky.

Originally posted by bananasam
However, perhaps all the UFOs we see are not related. Some could be military, some could be extraterrestrial. When we try to connect the dots we could be making a mistake since there might not be anything related between case A and B, except that they were lights in the sky.

That is one of the few truths in this field. We cannot say what all UFOs are or are not. Trying to do so only serves to distance us from the truth. All we can do is say what some UFOs are or are not.

Great Thread!!!

Inspired me to revisit chapter 13 of the Fire Officer's Guide to Disaster Control, Enemy Attack and UFO Potential.

It also inspired me to revisit the Stephenville 2008 sighting.

I have to ask you OP, factual evidence of UFO encounters? Do you have some? You mentioned UFOs appear and disappear.

Have Presidents ever spoke on the subject of ET's? Anything unusual or noticeable in the tone of their voice, or the look in their eyes?

Since you believe there is a "cover up" designed and implemented by the US Government, why would they fantasize the whole scenario?

The cover up cover up theory? To create a cult following?

It's funny someone wrote about the Reptilians living in another dimensions controlling the world, haha that is pretty funny. But they did mention the low vibration theory. If you read about Quantum Physics, maybe there is more to the whole fear tactics by the US Government. Wouldn't you say that every move by the US Government, is a cover up? Everything? Every Government in the World? Everyone has satellites. Anyone could disclose, couldn't they?