UFOs, Paranormal, Pseudoscience Thread

[Bishop2b5]

Correct me if I'm wrong, but are you or are you not proving my point? Interstellar travel is all but impossible because...and then you proceed to explain to me in terms of physics that only our current civilization of human species can comprehend...? Your thought process is limited to what is or isn't possible based on what "We" know, with little humility for that we do not.

Watch the videos and expanded explanation I linked to. Going faster than the speed of light isn't a matter of just figuring it out or improving our technology. There's every reason to believe that the speed of light is a fundamental property of the universe and that no future discoveries or advances in technology will ever serve to exceed it. When we observe the entire universe, we don't see a single thing that suggests anyone nor any cosmic event has found a way to do so. It's not just a matter of "we'll understand physics better in the future." We understand it well enough in this regard to know with a very high degree of certainty that the speed of light cannot be exceeded, period.

 

[Irish#1]

I think that the work Mike has done and continues to do is important, and we absolutely should investigate and study the phenomenon of UFO's. I would be thrilled to finally find unambiguous evidence of alien intelligence, though I'm not sure it would end well for us.

This thinking probably goes back to the 50's Sci-Fi movies where the aliens almost always were bad guys. Most of the newer Sci-Fi movies also depict them as bad guys.

 

[FightingIrishLover7]

Watch the videos and expanded explanation I linked to. Going faster than the speed of light isn't a matter of just figuring it out or improving our technology. There's every reason to believe that the speed of light is a fundamental property of the universe and that no future discoveries or advances in technology will ever serve to exceed it. When we observe the entire universe, we don't see a single thing that suggests anyone nor any cosmic event has found a way to do so. It's not just a matter of "we'll understand physics better in the future." We understand it well enough in this regard to know with a very high degree of certainty that the speed of light cannot be exceeded, period.

If you bend spacetime, and go at the speed of light - your net speed is effectively faster than the speed of light. Physically going the speed of light, but over a shortened space.

 

[Bishop2b5]

If you bend spacetime, and go at the speed of light - your net speed is effectively faster than the speed of light. Physically going the speed of light, but over a shortened space.

No, that's just another plot device from works of fiction for the most part. What you're referring to is called an Einstein-Rosen Bridge, better known as a wormhole. Theoretically, they can exist, but they're extremely narrow and ALL the math and theories and testing and everything else says that once you go in, you cannot come back out either end. In other words, they're nice and interesting theoretical novelties, but other than in works of fiction, they're entirely useless for travel. You're confusing plot devices from works of fiction with actual physics.

Again, please read the link I provided. All of this has already been covered in greater detail and explained before.

 

[Bishop2b5]

This thinking probably goes back to the 50's Sci-Fi movies where the aliens almost always were bad guys. Most of the newer Sci-Fi movies also depict them as bad guys.

True, but some of it is based on the fact that in virtually every case in human history where a civilization that was vastly superior technologically encountered a more primitive one, it hasn't ended well for the inferior one. Think Native Americans, sub-Saharan Africans, the Australian Aborigines, and even prehistoric human species such as Neandertals and H. erectus. It usually goes badly for the less advanced culture.

 

[TNUtoNotreDame]

True, but some of it is based on the fact that in virtually every case in human history where a civilization that was vastly superior technologically encountered a more primitive one, it hasn't ended well for the inferior one. Think Native Americans, sub-Saharan Africans, the Australian Aborigines, and even prehistoric human species such as Neandertals and H. erectus. It usually goes badly for the less advanced culture.

But is this not putting our own sinful nature on what could be a more evolved species?

 

[NDRock]

True, but some of it is based on the fact that in virtually every case in human history where a civilization that was vastly superior technologically encountered a more primitive one, it hasn't ended well for the inferior one. Think Native Americans, sub-Saharan Africans, the Australian Aborigines, and even prehistoric human species such as Neandertals and H. erectus. It usually goes badly for the less advanced culture.

We have also “evolved” to the point that we try to protect endangered animals and tribal people. There’s a reason to believe that a more advanced life form than us would treat us the same. Unless they needed our planet for their survival, then we’re fucked.

 

[Henges24]

We have also “evolved” to the point that we try to protect endangered animals and tribal people. There’s a reason to believe that a more advanced life form than us would treat us the same. Unless they needed our planet for their survival, then we’re fucked.

Great point but one cannot believe that creatures outside of this planet think the same or have the same morals. Their world more than likely has a whole different set of rules, whether that be good or evil or something in between.

We the same to them but they have clearly been studying us, if these “sightings” are real. So maybe they will understand us more than what we think, I don’t know.

 

[arahop]

Understand that these could be interdi

These aliens sending ships across the the gigantic space void and then the fucker crashes in the woods. Okaaaayy.

Think in terms of interdimensional.

The human eye is limited to seeing between 430-770THz. Our ears can only detect sound between 20Hz-20KHz. These ranges constitute only a fraction of the entire sound and light frequency spectrum. As a result, there is a vast amount of activity occurring around us that remains unseen and unheard.

 

[arahop]

We know how the pyramids were built. At least we have a very good idea of how it was done practically with tech known to people in those times. We can never say for certain that we "know" exactly how they did it because there aren't drawings or writings detailing their process.

They used an internal ramp to move the blocks up layer by layer.

Nah that's a theory and they weren't pushing 16 ton megaliths precision cut up wooden ramps. Engineering 101
Fun fact
Did you know that the The Great Pyramid aligns to the Cardinal directions and is a perfect 1:42,300 scale of the Northern Hemisphere of the Earth? It also took into account precession of the Earths wobble( that you'll to research on your own

 

[NorthDakota]

Nothing with the pyramids would surprise me. They are cool regardless. The ancients were not dumb people. Anyone who has spent time around a redneck or hillbilly knows what a toothless inbred dropout is capable of. Sometimes it's rather impressive

 

[arahop]

You really believe we have a mastery of physics? Not a chance

No, that's just another plot device from works of fiction for the most part. What you're referring to is called an Einstein-Rosen Bridge, better known as a wormhole. Theoretically, they can exist, but they're extremely narrow and ALL the math and theories and testing and everything else says that once you go in, you cannot come back out either end. In other words, they're nice and interesting theoretical novelties, but other than in works of fiction, they're entirely useless for travel. You're confusing plot devices from works of fiction with actual physics.

Again, please read the link I provided. All of this has already been covered in greater detail and explained before.

Now physics.org is claiming that the universe is 26 billion years old not 13 billion. We think we know it all until something changes.

There is known physics and there is unknown physics. Once again you quotes theories as fact. How good are the physics when we can't quantitize gravity or dark matter?

Then what happens to physics when additional dimensions get added to the equation?

 

[INLaw]

In general if there is ufo type stuff I think it is more likely inter dimensional stuff or membrane theories or multiverse stuff more than super long distance space ship stuff

 

[arahop]

In general if there is ufo type stuff I think it is more likely inter dimensional stuff or membrane theories or multiverse stuff more than super long distance space ship stuff

It's interesting that the easy explanation is Aliens.
Then it gets stranger

And a weirder theory Ultra-terrestrial

And weirdest. interdimensional

My gut tells me interdimensional I'll keep an open mind.

 

[arahop]

Senators move to require release of US government UFO records

The Senate in the coming days is expected to consider a bipartisan measure that would compel the U.S. government to publicly release records relating to possible UFO sightings after decades of stonewalling.

www.reuters.com

This is big. many credible witnesses backed by radar, FLIR, Pilot Testimony and other detection.

Things will get interesting.

Old Man Mike I hope you keep posting here. You're a National Treasure in this field. Don't let knuckleheads chase you off.

MSM took a few days to catch on.

OMM and others where do you stand?
Aliens? Interdimensional, Ultra-terrestrial? AI?
Some other Box? Watchers

 

[INLaw]

Senators move to require release of US government UFO records

The Senate in the coming days is expected to consider a bipartisan measure that would compel the U.S. government to publicly release records relating to possible UFO sightings after decades of stonewalling.

www.reuters.com

This is big. many credible witnesses backed by radar, FLIR, Pilot Testimony and other detection.

Things will get interesting.

Old Man Mike I hope you keep posting here. You're a National Treasure in this field. Don't let knuckleheads chase you off.

MSM took a few days to catch on.

OMM and others where do you stand?
Aliens? Interdimensional, Ultra-terrestrial? AI?
Some other Box? Watchers

I want to second and third this part. OMM is fantastic and a treasurer. He dont know me from steve and at one point has some on point book recommendations for me that I bought and read and well many thanks from me and my family.

 

[GATTACA!]

Nah that's a theory and they weren't pushing 16 ton megaliths precision cut up wooden ramps. Engineering 101
Fun fact
Did you know that the The Great Pyramid aligns to the Cardinal directions and is a perfect 1:42,300 scale of the Northern Hemisphere of the Earth? It also took into account precession of the Earths wobble( that you'll to research on your own

Internal sand ramps in voids that we know exist inside the pyramids. There are also larger cavities in the corners where the ramps change direction which are the perfect size to be able to rotate the blocks. Hmmm almost like it was designed that way. Most of the blocks, especially towards the tops, are only about 2.5 tons.

Much more likely that fucking aliens built them lol

Fool

 

[arahop]

Internal sand ramps in voids that we know exist inside the pyramids. There are also larger cavities in the corners where the ramps change direction which are the perfect size to be able to rotate the blocks. Hmmm almost like it was designed that way. Most of the blocks, especially towards the tops, are only about 2.5 tons.

Much more likely that fucking aliens built them lol

Fool

I never said aliens built them, nor do I think they did . Some of them weigh 25-80 tons. If you think that was done by a pulley system/ sand ramp/ muscle power, I don't know what to tell you. If You think they slid them up a sand and wooden ramp.

they had far superior technology and mathematical skills than the bronze age gives them credit for.

For those interested read engineer Christopher Dunn's book on it. Or watch this video if you want to get into the precise calculations. Below is a really informative video



Egypt is most likely much older than you
were taught in 6th grade. The Sphinx weather erosion takes it back about 12 thousand years or earlier when that region was tropical and had an abundance of rain.

 

[Giddyup]

Still haven’t seen the pics of the shuttle and alien driving it. Was expecting more from our government. Pfft, 😂

 

[Old Man Mike]

My "position":

A. There is NO "belief" here. I approach the field as a scientist. I posit a hypothesis and then look for evidence one way or the other. I also look for alternative explanations of found data. I don't "believe" in "aliens" or any of those other concepts. My beliefs are reserved for IMPORTANT ontological things: GOD, Free Will, Soul, The purposefulness of existence, Afterlife, and a very small number of such Spiritual things (mainly based on the New Testament Gospels and the Presence of the Holy Spirit.) UFOs don't come anywhere near those things in importance --- so, "No" I don't believe in "aliens." (I think that scientific evidence in many fields would say that there is a great chance that non-human civilizations have developed galaxy-wide, but I don't have to elevate that to a "belief.")

B. Where do I stand on UFOs? The key is focusing on what exactly IS the hypothesis I'm interested in testing. Here is the statement of that hypothesis: "There is evidence to support the hypothesis that highly advanced aerotechnology is moving about in our atmosphere which has behavioral characteristics that we humans cannot currently match." Researching THAT hypothesis does not require me to find and test "aliens" nor any such technology builders. It DOES however require me to make determination as to whether we human technologists are currently capable of matching the performance witnessed. And I and my researcher friends have done a GREAT deal of study on humantech flight capabilities from WWII onwards.

C. What therefore is my position on the hypothesis? The hypothesis is not merely supported, but it is robustly powerfully supported. We do not have a (publicly known) piece of that technology to share out with the textbook engineers technical labs, but we have overwhelming close encounter human and equipment witness data of its truth. IF it is so supported, THEN others can speculate away about "who" might be behind the observed technology. So speculate away, I'll not interfere other than to say that I don't HAVE to have an alien-in-hand to make UFO research respectable.

Let me give you an example of the literal THOUSANDS of credible witness testimonies: Way back in about 1950 (this is off the top of my head so I could be off a year on either side), there was an Air Force Captain taking out a trainer for a test flight. He was flying over Hastings, MN. Out in front of him appeared an odd object. It was all white and like an elliptical disk with a hard outline. It had erratic motion but also smooth flight. He couldn't come close to match its speed and watched it sail off unchallenged by him. He was a veteran pilot even back then, so he knew that this was strange, so when he landed he directly reported the encounter. He found that others on the ground had been watching the same object, and were similarly flummoxed.

Who were these people? The trainer pilot was Deke Slayton, one of our future astronauts and an Air Force ace. The ground observers were members of the country's hightechnology high atmosphere balloon engineers. There were TWO teams of these researchers that saw the object, AND they watched it through their theodolites as well. It is worth noting that these high atmosphere balloon technologists were the highest trained experts the world had to offer at identifying objects in the atmosphere. They absolutely KNEW that this was no balloon, no missile, no jet, etc. It was AN UNKNOWN. And it has stayed unknown for 70+ years. So when people come on here and say ignorant things about evidence and alternate hypotheses, they are simply ignorant --- flat unstudied ignorant. And another "proof" of that is that the Air Force NEVER thought these cases were solved in ANY way --- right up to modern days. And that is why the Navy took the more recent things VERY seriously, and was NOT shook up about the fact that they could not assign a human cause to them.

I could give you a lengthy quote from the lead engineer of the Minnesota balloon tech group (JJKaliszewski) about how the whole tech group felt about these things --- they visited their balloons in flight ALL the time, and demonstrated wildly advanced flight characteristics. These characteristics amused and reminded lifelong researchers like myself recently because they match almost precisely the sorts of things that our Navy pilots have recently said about their "TicTacs."

I have a small impossible wish: could people who in the honesty of their own heads know that they really don't know hardly anything about the UFO data of the last almost 80 years please address my statements above with some humility? ... and collegiality? It genuinely bothers me to have to read strongly worded contrary assertions when it is obvious that the forceful nature of those assertions is based on no depth of either researched information nor thoughtfulness. ... but I know that there is no chance of that, so this will be treated as if the information here is no different than that of a typical IE thread.

 

[arahop]

Thanks for the feedback OMM! I appreciate and thank you for your countless hours of research and scientific approach. beers and dinner are on me if you are ever up for it!?

My friend years about 10 years ago who worked for NASA showed me something incredible that I'll never forget. ( I might have shared in this thread years ago) it was a smoking gun for me, a long with Astronauts Gordon Cooper, Edgar Mitchell and Buzz Aldrin interviews on the subject.

It's clear to me that we don't have the mastery of physics that we think we do, as this phenomenon clearly breaks our laws of known physics. But humans by nature are egotistical and tend to stay in the parameters of the known science of the time. That in itself is a hinderence and severely handicaps advancement. (The ole, we can't do it so it's not possible)I'm all for the scientific method just to be clear. In comparison, Our science is that of a protozoa compared to what's going on .

Jaques Vallee's stance really opened my mind and made me think out of the box. His book "Passport to Magonia" is an eye opening theory. My gut tells me the phenomenon has access to dimensions that we can't comprehend and probably won't for a very long time.. This week scientists said the age of the universe is double that of what we originally thought.

My "position":

A. There is NO "belief" here. I approach the field as a scientist. I posit a hypothesis and then look for evidence one way or the other. I also look for alternative explanations of found data. I don't "believe" in "aliens" or any of those other concepts. My beliefs are reserved for IMPORTANT ontological things: GOD, Free Will, Soul, The purposefulness of existence, Afterlife, and a very small number of such Spiritual things (mainly based on the New Testament Gospels and the Presence of the Holy Spirit.) UFOs don't come anywhere near those things in importance --- so, "No" I don't believe in "aliens." (I think that scientific evidence in many fields would say that there is a great chance that non-human civilizations have developed galaxy-wide, but I don't have to elevate that to a "belief.")

B. Where do I stand on UFOs? The key is focusing on what exactly IS the hypothesis I'm interested in testing. Here is the statement of that hypothesis: "There is evidence to support the hypothesis that highly advanced aerotechnology is moving about in our atmosphere which has behavioral characteristics that we humans cannot currently match." Researching THAT hypothesis does not require me to find and test "aliens" nor any such technology builders. It DOES however require me to make determination as to whether we human technologists are currently capable of matching the performance witnessed. And I and my researcher friends have done a GREAT deal of study on humantech flight capabilities from WWII onwards.

C. What therefore is my position on the hypothesis? The hypothesis is not merely supported, but it is robustly powerfully supported. We do not have a (publicly known) piece of that technology to share out with the textbook engineers technical labs, but we have overwhelming close encounter human and equipment witness data of its truth. IF it is so supported, THEN others can speculate away about "who" might be behind the observed technology. So speculate away, I'll not interfere other than to say that I don't HAVE to have an alien-in-hand to make UFO research respectable.

Let me give you an example of the literal THOUSANDS of credible witness testimonies: Way back in about 1950 (this is off the top of my head so I could be off a year on either side), there was an Air Force Captain taking out a trainer for a test flight. He was flying over Hastings, MN. Out in front of him appeared an odd object. It was all white and like an elliptical disk with a hard outline. It had erratic motion but also smooth flight. He couldn't come close to match its speed and watched it sail off unchallenged by him. He was a veteran pilot even back then, so he knew that this was strange, so when he landed he directly reported the encounter. He found that others on the ground had been watching the same object, and were similarly flummoxed.

Who were these people? The trainer pilot was Deke Slayton, one of our future astronauts and an Air Force ace. The ground observers were members of the country's hightechnology high atmosphere balloon engineers. There were TWO teams of these researchers that saw the object, AND they watched it through their theodolites as well. It is worth noting that these high atmosphere balloon technologists were the highest trained experts the world had to offer at identifying objects in the atmosphere. They absolutely KNEW that this was no balloon, no missile, no jet, etc. It was AN UNKNOWN. And it has stayed unknown for 70+ years. So when people come on here and say ignorant things about evidence and alternate hypotheses, they are simply ignorant --- flat unstudied ignorant. And another "proof" of that is that the Air Force NEVER thought these cases were solved in ANY way --- right up to modern days. And that is why the Navy took the more recent things VERY seriously, and was NOT shook up about the fact that they could not assign a human cause to them.

I could give you a lengthy quote from the lead engineer of the Minnesota balloon tech group (JJKaliszewski) about how the whole tech group felt about these things --- they visited their balloons in flight ALL the time, and demonstrated wildly advanced flight characteristics. These characteristics amused and reminded lifelong researchers like myself recently because they match almost precisely the sorts of things that our Navy pilots have recently said about their "TicTacs."

I have a small impossible wish: could people who in the honesty of their own heads know that they really don't know hardly anything about the UFO data of the last almost 80 years please address my statements above with some humility? ... and collegiality? It genuinely bothers me to have to read strongly worded contrary assertions when it is obvious that the forceful nature of those assertions is based on no depth of either researched information nor thoughtfulness. ... but I know that there is no chance of that, so this will be treated as if the information here is no different than that of a typical IE thread.

 

[BleedBlueGold]

Thank you, Mike, for putting into words what I've been trying to explain to friends lately, but have struggled to find a way to articulate such position.

Essentially, I agree, and it's why my focus has been more on the unknown aerotech and whether or not this is of human creation. Data, as you point out, suggests that it is not (at least not known publicly, which is why these hearings and whistleblowers are important to support).

With that said, I do enjoy the entertainment value of a good "alien" story. Perhaps it's best to leave the speculation of who/what is behind said space crafts to the Hollywood producers and conspiracy theorists. Let us first uncover any potential Earthling involvement before delving into the idea of little green men taking over our planet.

OMM, Thank you for your hard work and dedication.

 

[arahop]

I think the point is that we know that this isn't human technology. Especially as the phenomenon has been documented going back 70 plus years.

What else can we do but speculate?
What are who would it be?

Thank you, Mike, for putting into words what I've been trying to explain to friends lately, but have struggled to find a way to articulate such position.

Essentially, I agree, and it's why my focus has been more on the unknown aerotech and whether or not this is of human creation. Data, as you point out, suggests that it is not (at least not known publicly, which is why these hearings and whistleblowers are important to support).

With that said, I do enjoy the entertainment value of a good "alien" story. Perhaps it's best to leave the speculation of who/what is behind said space crafts to the Hollywood producers and conspiracy theorists. Let us first uncover any potential Earthling involvement before delving into the idea of little green men taking over our planet.

OMM, Thank you for your hard work and dedication.

 

[arahop]

Legendary Astronaut Gordon Cooper's account.

 

[BleedBlueGold]

I think the point is that we know that this isn't human technology. Especially as the phenomenon has been documented going back 70 plus years.

What else can we do but speculate?
What are who would it be?

That's fair. I didn't mean to imply no one should speculate. I just meant in terms of the Hollywood portrayal of "aliens."

I think getting to the foundational and fundamental truth of these UFO/UAP sightings is most important because it may unlock specific pathways in which we can continue to research. Blindly meandering down every rabbit hole makes little sense until we know more about the tech, where it comes from, who developed it etc. (if it is in fact human-originated, what kind of pathway of questions does this lead to, for example). Sure, we can all speculate. I just don't see the point until more information is provided. Which is why everyone needs to continue incentivizing whistleblowers to come forward and for Congress to dig deeper.

 

[Old Man Mike]

So, I'll "complete the thought."

Once the stated hypothesis is strongly supported, and even though we do not have evidence of the next step in a hypothetical train (i.e. if not made by us, then what is the Causal Agency?), we, because we cannot resist doing so, create a list of imagined speculations which we label "alternative hypotheses" for the causal agency.

Now we KNOW that we don't have much if any evidence to distinguish between these guesses, but it of course turns out that the answer to this is ALL that the general public is interested in. So ALL media coverage and popular culture response strongly emphasizes the part of this which we, as scientific explorers, cannot answer for them. This leaves the public arena WIDE open for liars, snake oil salesmen, and every form of money and/or fame craving scumball. These people quickly become the "face of the field."

The structure of US "culture" and the general profound ignorance and impatience of most of it, allow persons with an agenda (not concerned with Truth) to simply repeat over and over what they want to manipulate "you" with, and after a hundred repetitions a fair number of persons believe anything --- see politics as a second such phenomenon. The phonies on Ancient Aliens are currently the primary public offenders in the UFO arena, as , astoundingly, almost zero content in their presentations is intellectually honest and everything is deliberately heavily slanted. With scam masters like them in control, the UFO research community has almost no chance to clarify things.

Nevertheless, real UFO researchers are asked for their/our opinions about the Causal Agency regularly, so we have to think about our responses to that. Because an honest response isn't simple and quick, all of our responses are ineffective. Mine goes sort of like this:

A. Folks have tried to come up with theories about what is behind the UFO phenomenon since its popular beginnings in the late 1940s. Here are some of those theories: 1. Angels; 2. Devils; 3. Daemons (paranormals not so demonic); 4. Atlantaeans; 5. Masters from Shamballa; 6. General underworld creatures; 7. Cryptozoological things; 8. Intelligent Lightforms; 9. Time Travelers from our future; 10. Beings from a parallel reality alongside us; 11. Extraterrestrials from distant advanced worlds; 12. Extraterrestrials from Mars (or some other Solar System location); 13. Psychic Thoughtforms created by us; 14. Psychic Forms generated by the Earth Consciousness GAIA (trying to get us off destroying it.) ... etc ... as you can intuit this is only limited by your own imagination linked with your sophistication in folklore knowledge.

B. People have jumped on different ones of these. Conservative Christian ministers immediately went to "Devils/Demons", but Billy Graham went for "Angels." Even holding onto one's shred of scientific approach, some of these just seem very unlikely. But note one big thing: NONE of these ideas is "normal." ANY of these would shake up everyone's concept of reality if generally "approved." This is why almost everyone who really thinks about this is a bit afraid of the answer.

C. Maybe the most brilliant scientist who really dedicated a lot of his life to investigating UFOs (Dr. James McDonald, atmospheric physicist of the University of Arizona during the 1950-60s and through the Condon Study era) had an answer that I still believe is best. All of such hypotheses could, under stretched imagination of either small or colossal proportions, be presented as a cause for what we see in ufology, but most would be extremely weak and unconvincing at any level. BUT, The Extraterrestrial Hypothesis (#11 above) is THE LEAST INSUFFICIENT of the whole. In fact, when one considers what we think that is true of the universe and our galaxy is true (as presented as normal science in textbooks), then this hypothesis violates nothing in the currently accepted probable reality.

D. Once the original research hypothesis is strongly supported (as it is), THEN one finds oneself led to the ETH as the strongest possibility even though we cannot prove it.

This is, I believe, where most of the world's best actual UFO researchers stand.

 

[arahop]

So, I'll "complete the thought."

Once the stated hypothesis is strongly supported, and even though we do not have evidence of the next step in a hypothetical train (i.e. if not made by us, then what is the Causal Agency?), we, because we cannot resist doing so, create a list of imagined speculations which we label "alternative hypotheses" for the causal agency.

Now we KNOW that we don't have much if any evidence to distinguish between these guesses, but it of course turns out that the answer to this is ALL that the general public is interested in. So ALL media coverage and popular culture response strongly emphasizes the part of this which we, as scientific explorers, cannot answer for them. This leaves the public arena WIDE open for liars, snake oil salesmen, and every form of money and/or fame craving scumball. These people quickly become the "face of the field."

The structure of US "culture" and the general profound ignorance and impatience of most of it, allow persons with an agenda (not concerned with Truth) to simply repeat over and over what they want to manipulate "you" with, and after a hundred repetitions a fair number of persons believe anything --- see politics as a second such phenomenon. The phonies on Ancient Aliens are currently the primary public offenders in the UFO arena, as , astoundingly, almost zero content in their presentations is intellectually honest and everything is deliberately heavily slanted. With scam masters like them in control, the UFO research community has almost no chance to clarify things.

Nevertheless, real UFO researchers are asked for their/our opinions about the Causal Agency regularly, so we have to think about our responses to that. Because an honest response isn't simple and quick, all of our responses are ineffective. Mine goes sort of like this:

A. Folks have tried to come up with theories about what is behind the UFO phenomenon since its popular beginnings in the late 1940s. Here are some of those theories: 1. Angels; 2. Devils; 3. Daemons (paranormals not so demonic); 4. Atlantaeans; 5. Masters from Shamballa; 6. General underworld creatures; 7. Cryptozoological things; 8. Intelligent Lightforms; 9. Time Travelers from our future; 10. Beings from a parallel reality alongside us; 11. Extraterrestrials from distant advanced worlds; 12. Extraterrestrials from Mars (or some other Solar System location); 13. Psychic Thoughtforms created by us; 14. Psychic Forms generated by the Earth Consciousness GAIA (trying to get us off destroying it.) ... etc ... as you can intuit this is only limited by your own imagination linked with your sophistication in folklore knowledge.

B. People have jumped on different ones of these. Conservative Christian ministers immediately went to "Devils/Demons", but Billy Graham went for "Angels." Even holding onto one's shred of scientific approach, some of these just seem very unlikely. But note one big thing: NONE of these ideas is "normal." ANY of these would shake up everyone's concept of reality if generally "approved." This is why almost everyone who really thinks about this is a bit afraid of the answer.

C. Maybe the most brilliant scientist who really dedicated a lot of his life to investigating UFOs (Dr. James McDonald, atmospheric physicist of the University of Arizona during the 1950-60s and through the Condon Study era) had an answer that I still believe is best. All of such hypotheses could, under stretched imagination of either small or colossal proportions, be presented as a cause for what we see in ufology, but most would be extremely weak and unconvincing at any level. BUT, The Extraterrestrial Hypothesis (#11 above) is THE LEAST INSUFFICIENT of the whole. In fact, when one considers what we think that is true of the universe and our galaxy is true (as presented as normal science in textbooks), then this hypothesis violates nothing in the currently accepted probable reality.

D. Once the original research hypothesis is strongly supported (as it is), THEN one finds oneself led to the ETH as the strongest possibility even though we cannot prove it.

This is, I believe, where most of the world's best actual UFO researchers stand.

Excellent post!

From what I'm hearing we will be getting first hand testimony of individual accounts( from people with the highest of clearences) who have handled craft and other non-human technology at the Congressional hearings.

They certainly have something very credible for both Republicans and Democrats to see eye to eye and be pushing this forward so quickly. It's amazing how quickly this happening. I feel like the release of the Nimitz and Go Fast incidents via the New York Times was an attempt at a "soft disclosure."

If not us and not Aliens from our solar system or a different cosmic home,
I have a suspicion that this will be an inflection point for humanity in a myriad of ways. My concern is for people who are very set in their belief systems and the very Zeitgeist of today. It is scary to think of the theoretical.( What if everything we believed to be true isn't that at all) It's ingrained in our DNA to fear the unknown and to address situations with an " out of site out of mind approach"

The credible sightings of craft/phenomenon blipping in and out are the ones that really make me think it could possibly be something more than ET's from elsewhere. I kind of hope that it just an off planet phenomenon because that has the least amount of collateral damage on current belief systems.

Something has been and is currently going on for long time now and I would bet every asset that I have that it's not us. Interesting to note the scientific and technological advances humanity has made since the believed/documented inception of this phenomenon. I think it's been going for much longer than that but that's just my opinion. (Italy 1933 and Texas 1896)

The very phenomenon alone I believe violates all of our known science imo. If these allegations are true I believe that those who might be in possession of these materials have done all they can and are opening it up because they have hit a dead end.... Just an opinion.

A paradigm shift is about to happen and it's long overdue. I would rather know truth than feel comfortable in my current belief system no matter what it holds. Even if we humans are a zoo attraction so to speak.

 

[Old Man Mike]

I dislike doing what I am about to, but, just for your future speculation's sake: I know the leading researchers on both the Texas 19th century claim and the 1933 Italian claim, and neither of those appear to be credible. There MIGHT be good pre-WWII cases, but trust scholars like Dr. Eddie Bullard before you buy anything from Vallee or even Aubeck on this sort of claim. (and for God's sake don't take anything from the Ancient Aliens program ever.)

Jacques is particularly off on this, and neither he nor Aubeck have really studied these things deeply enough to do more than write interesting books (Aubeck admitted to a good friend of mine and a real scholar while talking about differences between his views and mine, that he wasn't really that interested in UFOs.)

As to the Mussolini alleged crash, that was put forward by Pinotti in his slightly going crazy period, and the real studs of Italian UFOlogy, Edoardo Russo et al, don't see the evidence at all. (This, by the way, is the biggest YIP in the commentaries by David Grusch. One might save Grusch's reputation despite the gaff by assuming that he was told that one bit by a dissembler, or maybe just someone else speculating shallowly, but that bit is a flag so far.) Russo is a friend and internet colleague of mine and a great ufologist. Pinotti is more like a mediocre MUFON quality investigator. I trust Russo and his organization.

 

[arahop]

I respect your intelligence and expertise on the events.

1896 alleged incident piques my interest because of the News paper article. New item by Paul O'Hara.

Lots to digest there since we didn't have flying machines outside of maybe balloons in 1896. And I think a case that old would be almost impossible to gather concrete scientific evidence outside of witness testimony. Unlikely that the scientific method could do anything to prove the alleged incident. There seems to be physical evidence according to the newspaper article but it wouldn't be there years later to study. Of course it could also be a possibility that the author of the article was trying to drum up interest in the town.

On another note, the 3 speaking at the Congressional hearing are

Graves, Fravor, and Grusch. I was personally hoping for a more extensive list.

 

[arahop]

As far as Grusch is concerned, Edgar Mitchell said the same thing Grusch has reported recently as Mitchell said many years ago. Gordon Cooper at took a video in 1957 at Edwards Air Force Base and sent it to Washington of a UFO landing.