Disclosure project inminent?

[elprimodelyeti]

For those into the UFO subject, it is of capital importance that the truth embargo on extraterrestrial involvement in recent and not so recent human history is lifted and the facts surrounding the real history of humanity are diclosed by the government(s). The implications are huge but the question is, will we ever behold such event?

[plotthickens]

How many things are being presumed here? I'm counting:


The existance of UFOs
They come here
They influence us
And have been influencing us
Someone knows about that
yet keeps it covered up
That someone is in the government
Other people believe this as well
Is there any proof for any of this, besides #8?

[Shauru]

Is there any proof for any of this, besides #8?

Are you cereal!?

Try all these documentaries....

Aliens
Close Encounters of the Third Kind
Star Trek:First Contact
Taken
Various X-Files programs
Predator
Mars Attacks
The Day The Earth Stood Still
Invasion of the Body Snatchers
War of the Worlds
Independence day


I mean seriously. If that is not enough to convince you I don't know what is.

Honestly though. Supposing this is happening. I actually think Star Trek used numerous really good episodes that explain the logical reasons why aliens if visiting Earth would 1. Not make it well known. 2. Only speak to world leaders.

In ST:First Contact it is explained that aliens never visit or interact with Earth UNTIL they find out that Humans have discovered how to travel faster than light. Basically, if we start using the intergalactic superhighway they're probably going to have to take an interest/strike up a conversation. And in an episode of ST:TNG Picard visits a developing alien race on the very of FTL travel. He explains that it is policy not to interfere or interact with cultures until this point and he offers assistance. Noting that it is up to the representatives of a worlds government, as certain incidences could cause panic amongst the populous(a situation that takes place within the episode).

[plotthickens]

Are you cereal!?


Try all these documentaries....
Aliens
Close Encounters of the Third Kind
Star Trek:First Contact
Taken
Various X-Files programs
Predator
Mars Attacks
The Day The Earth Stood Still
Invasion of the Body Snatchers
War of the Worlds
Independence day

I mean seriously. If that is not enough to convince you I don't know what is.

Honestly though. Supposing this is happening. I actually think Star Trek used numerous really good episodes that explain the logical reasons why aliens if visiting Earth would 1. Not make it well known. 2. Only speak to world leaders.

In ST:First Contact it is explained that aliens never visit or interact with Earth UNTIL they find out that Humans have discovered how to travel faster than light. Basically, if we start using the intergalactic superhighway they're probably going to have to take an interest/strike up a conversation. And in an episode of ST:TNG Picard visits a developing alien race on the very of FTL travel. He explains that it is policy not to interfere or interact with cultures until this point and he offers assistance. Noting that it is up to the representatives of a worlds government, as certain incidences could cause panic amongst the populous(a situation that takes place within the episode).

OH OH OH oh ohhhhhh I'm sorry, I get it now. *munches cheerios, drinks the kool-aid*

So when do you think we'll get FYI'd by the grays? Obviously (see OP) they've already contacted us. What do you think the trigger will be?

[Shauru]

Actually I think Star Trek put forth a pretty plausible scenario. I mean, why would aliens think us anything more then cavemen if we couldn't actually interact with them on that level.

Hopefully if they do exist, it requires a level of evolution and and unification of Earths people before they'll allow us to even join their space club.

I honestly don't doubt there is advanced life out there, but I don't know that they would find us more interesting then we find Zoos. I just can't imagine them purposely visiting us. And I think the government would stay pretty tight lipped about it if they knew, because they either don't want to spread panic or probably worry about how involvement in interstellar politics could effect their Earth based power. After all a bunch of suits controlling the world, thinking they're God are probably going to be pretty pissed off if aliens show up and start calling them noobs.

[plotthickens]

Holy crap, Shauru, you're agreeing with the OP. Unfortunetly, this means that the 'truth embargo' will likely never be lifted.

[Dodeca]

Once we reach the level acceptable for contact, it will accrue regardless of the powers that be.

[azelismia]

What we do know is that there have been a few governmental programs in a few countries dedicated to the subject and there has never been a full disclosure of what they have found. until they give the people that full disclosure (And probably even then because no matter what they say there will still be conspiracy theorists) this debate will rage on.

[Doppelbock]

A lot of the reason countries may not provide full disclosure is because their investigations involve classified sources and methods -- for instance, spy satellites. It's not necessarily the existence of UFO's/aliens they are trying to protect, but rather the existence and abilities of technical intelligence assets.

The point being, that failure to disclose everything should not be interpreted as evidence that there is some big UFO/alien secret being kept.

(I know of what I speak: I worked here (To view links or images in this forum your post count must be 2 or greater. You currently have 0 posts._Air_and_Space _Intelligence_Center) for a large chunk of my career.)

[azelismia]

Yeah, I know that. you know that and what they've captured is probably enemy spy gear or spy gear they were testing, but until they come clean with whatever it is they've done the controversy will rage on.

[Doppelbock]

Point taken. The controversy will probably rage on for quite a while, because such things take decades. For example, the imagery from our country's first CORONA spy satellites from the early 60's wasn't declassified until 1995.

[SShack]

The argument will rage on forever because it's impossible to prove that aliens don't exist.

Given that I'm in the media, I'm probably part of the conspiracy, though, so don't trust me.

[khadi]

I honestly don't doubt there is advanced life out there, but I don't know that they would find us more interesting then we find Zoos. I just can't imagine them purposely visiting us.

You wouldn't want to visit an alien zoo?? I'd be excited to study the tiniest sample of plant tissue :wideeyed:

I'd have a hard time believing that an alien race capable of space travel is devoid of scientific curiosity.

[Doppelbock]

I think it might be a bit unreasonable for us to assume we can know much at all about intelligent alien races. For all we know, once you achieve a certain advanced level of intelligence you discover other parallel dimensions better than this one, and leave never to return -- so there may not be any aliens around.

[plotthickens]

The argument will rage on forever because it's impossible to prove that aliens don't exist.

Isn't this the same basis as the argument for God? Hm!

[RBM]

For those into the UFO subject, it is of capital importance that the truth embargo on extraterrestrial involvement in recent and not so recent human history is lifted and the facts surrounding the real history of humanity are diclosed by the government(s). The implications are huge but the question is, will we ever behold such event?

Why is it important - at all ?

For background, I and 2 friends had a UFO sighting (Wiki classifies it a 'Close Encounter of the Second Kind') that allowed visual contact minutes long at a range of several hundred yards to downrange at many miles and out the top of the sky.

So, my question is born of a different perspective.

[Arkeph]

That's a good question. Even if there are some UFO's which are genuine alien spacecraft, their apparent avoidance of contact paired with technology doubtless far more advanced than ours makes their existence irrelevant in my view. We can't force them to share their knowledge, and they apparently won't do it willingly until unknown conditions are met, if at all.

We might be lucky in that respect. Since their knowledge is also unknown to us, we can speculate that they might have bad news that we wouldn't want to hear:

"A stellar event will destroy your solar system in 37 years."
"Beings from your universe will be forever incapable of intergalactic or inter-dimensional travel."
"There is no Higgs field."
"Your planet is scheduled to be demolished so that a hyperspace bypass can be constructed through this solar system."
"Humans are deemed too dangerous to be truly free. We are here to limit your technological progress."

[LaoTzu]

We have enough trouble with reality as it is...

I do think it likely there is life 'out there', but until they come down and hold a love-in; I couldn't care less. (To view links or images in this forum your post count must be 2 or greater. You currently have 0 posts.)

Anyone ever think that perhaps we're as advanced as life gets in this universe?? :/
Maybe there's amoeba out there wishing we'd come down and help out on their gig?

It's gonna be around 500 years buddy...give or take a century or ten..... don't go over-evolving on us now...

[plotthickens]

We might be lucky in that respect. Since their knowledge is also unknown to us, we can speculate that they might have bad news that we wouldn't want to hear:

"You can't be allowed to fly around space until you can prove you can take care of your home planet."
"Organic life cannot survive the technology needed to move between star systems."

[Night Runner]

Fun fact! When Jimmy Carter first ran for president, one of his campaign promises was the complete disclosure of all the UFO files. He never mentioned it after he got elected. :thinking:

[Ray9]

You know, if we could just figure out some way to stop breathing, eating and shiting we could probably leave this galaxy. Thought I'd just throw in a reality check. As far as aliens go, my guess is that they would have the same issues. I hope they haven't been flushing their space toilets over Siberia.

[Aronnax]

You know, if we could just figure out some way to stop breathing, eating and shiting we could probably leave this galaxy. Thought I'd just throw in a reality check. As far as aliens go, my guess is that they would have the same issues. I hope they haven't been flushing their space toilets over Siberia.

We can deal with all those problems: oxygen scrubbers, hydroponic gardens with UV lamps and water treatment aren't that revolutionary. Astronomical distances and short lifespans are the serious challenge. Thought I'd just throw in a reality check.

[plotthickens]

It would be easier to just grow mushrooms in space. There are mushrooms which, instead of sunlight's spectra, live off radiation such as is found all over space. Some strains are quite safe to eat after a short decontam period.

The two great problems I see are immense distances re: how bloody long it takes to get anywhere, and what to do once one gets there. There are more bacterium in one teaspoon of soil than there are humans on the face of the earth. If just one of those little alien buggers liked the taste of humanflesh, we'd be toast. No way to defend against it.

I guess we could find a planet with atmosphere, but then we'd have to colonize it with everything that Earth has. Probably a Jovian moon would be best for such a thing, though we'd also have to whip up an atmosphere and magnetic field.

[daydreamer]

We have enough trouble with reality as it is...

I do think it likely there is life 'out there', but until they come down and hold a love-in; I couldn't care less. (To view links or images in this forum your post count must be 2 or greater. You currently have 0 posts.)

Anyone ever think that perhaps we're as advanced as life gets in this universe?? :/
Maybe there's amoeba out there wishing we'd come down and help out on their gig?

It's gonna be around 500 years buddy...give or take a century or ten..... don't go over-evolving on us now...

even the expert optimists don't think it is likely, as it is believed that, statistically speaking, the number of civilizations in our galaxy with which communication might be possible is only 2.31

To view links or images in this forum your post count must be 2 or greater. You currently have 0 posts.

but keep a good thought.

[Paul Siraisi]

even the expert optimists don't think it is likely, as it is believed that, statistically speaking, the number of civilizations in our galaxy with which communication might be possible is only 2.31

To view links or images in this forum your post count must be 2 or greater. You currently have 0 posts.

but keep a good thought.

That would be 2.31 times 125+ billion galaxies in the universe.

I've heard a lot of what I think is fairly convincing eye-witness testimony regarding extraterrestrial visits. For anyone here who has hunted that kind of stuff down, do you really not believe any of it?

This is long, but maybe interesting: To view links or images in this forum your post count must be 2 or greater. You currently have 0 posts. Note that the meeting was intended to launch a campaign of disclosure, but that 911 happened 4 months later, which I guess kind of upstaged it.

[Scatterbrane]

even the expert optimists don't think it is likely, as it is believed that, statistically speaking, the number of civilizations in our galaxy with which communication might be possible is only 2.31

Eh. Anyone doing the Drake Equation has to fill it in with little more than a bunch of Silly Wild-Ass Guesses to get a number out of it, even more so if you're going to try to use it to estimate how likely it is a civilization has or will make contact with us within some particular timeframe. I'm having none of it.

I'm willing to bet there's a whole lot of classified government documentation on UFOs, but that it's no better than the usual blurry photographs, and largely consists of descriptions from people who've chanced upon weather balloons, just like yon typical UFO claim.

Governments classify a lot of shit secret because for some agencies it's easier to classify on sight than to give thought to which specific areas of your job might not need to be kept secret.

[daydreamer]

That would be 2.31 times 125+ billion galaxies in the universe.

I've heard a lot of what I think is fairly convincing eye-witness testimony regarding extraterrestrial visits. For anyone here who has hunted that kind of stuff down, do you really not believe any of it?

This is long, but maybe interesting: To view links or images in this forum your post count must be 2 or greater. You currently have 0 posts. Note that the meeting was intended to launch a campaign of disclosure, but that 911 happened 4 months later, which I guess kind of upstaged it.

i watched over half of this. what is interesting to me is wondering what each person's agenda is. it seems like a group of various people who witnessed something that they personally never got to the bottom of; that's a far cry from proof that we are not alone.

i dont disbelieve people's experiences, but i do disbelieve that it constitutes proof.

[RBM]

In my sighting case analysis as close a 'getting to the bottom' I got, comes down to 'who was piloting' ?

A terrestrial explanation means some special clique has a specific technology that far surpasses anyone elses on the planet and it keeping it secret for themselves. There are many, many ramifications to such potential technology to underscore the disruptive nature potential. But it's still a secret ... right !

An ET explanation means we are being visited.

I find the first totally implausible. The second is at least plausible.

i watched over half of this. what is interesting to me is wondering what each person's agenda is.

If your first concern is an agenda, then you have an 'agenda' other than the truth. The logical way to undermine an agenda is to disprove the evidence. Instead you imply an agenda other than the stated one. Well what might that agenda be ? How about something substantive to the dialog ?

i dont disbelieve people's experiences, but i do disbelieve that it constitutes proof.

That statement indicates a cognitive disconnect - which is most likely quite complex to disassemble in this medium. so ... What constitutes proof ?

[elprimodelyeti]

In one of the views on the subject, aliens have been on earth for thousands of years, and humanity is a produce of genetic manipulation for their benefit (apparently related to minning or other workmanship). We were created to perform manual duties that the "gods" will not do, by mixing some animal dna with their own, with the purposse of having workers with the required physical strength yet capable of following basic directions. Allegedly, these races left the planet as the minerals were scarcing and left the planet to our command. Some of the human in those days were holding leadership positions as granted by the gods and liked it that way and with time the knowledge of the alien races disapeared from common men, but not from a very well kept lineage (blood), same blood that rules the earth today in several ways. Now, admitting that aliens exist means they have lied to us, by stealing our monies through black projects (the ones in the backyard of grey top secret projects); it would mean that our officials need to pay indemnities to all those ones ridiculed in court for allegations on cases of national security; it would mean that they would have to explain espionage to other nations by technologies not known to the public and the list goes forever. Guess who "our officials" is: the same blood from the beginig of human race that infiltred the government.

[daydreamer]

If your first concern is an agenda, then you have an 'agenda' other than the truth. The logical way to undermine an agenda is to disprove the evidence. Instead you imply an agenda other than the stated one. Well what might that agenda be ? How about something substantive to the dialog ?


1. stating that i have an agenda other than the truth is projection.
2. evidence cannot be undermined. something is either evidence, or it is not.
3. a logical way to stop an agenda is to first recognize it for what it is/discover what it is. undermining other's agendas, however, at this point seems premature. until i know what the agenda is/agendas are, i dunno if they are worth undermining.
4. i did not imply that the agendas were not stated. i stated it was interesting to me to wonder/consider what they are. many of the eyewitnesses statements hint or perhaps plainly state what their agendas are; but i was holding back jumping to conclusions based on one video, having otherwise known nothing of those people- i'm giving them the benefit of the doubt.
5. if you're trying to invite me into substantive dialog, you might try being a bit kinder. i've little incentive to talk about something with someone who takes an aggressive stance towards me out of the blue. seems like a waste of my effort. i'm not competitive. if this is a contest, i forfeit. congratulations.


That statement indicates a cognitive disconnect - which is most likely quite complex to disassemble in this medium. so ... What constitutes proof ?

first-hand knowledge/experience constitutes evidence as potential credible eyewitness accounts. the video was really hard to pay attention to, i admit, what with the droning on about non-relevant details. but i did not hear anyone mention that they saw something first hand, other than a radar blip.

someone mentioning that they heard or were told by someone else that:
someone else saw something
someone else heard something
or that they heard firsthand them seeing or hearing something
... does not constitute proof. and it is not credible eyewitness evidence.

proof is artifactual in nature. where are parts of these alien ships. where are the fingerprints and photos of these aliens. where are the cell samples of these alternative life forms. did we not even get an autograph from them? or a picture of someone shaking their "hand"?

so far only proof that there are believers exists. there is no cognitive disconnect. i can believe that they believe in their experience, without believing in their conclusions. i believe in the reality of religious faith of others everyday, even though i'm an atheist. i believe that my nephew still believes in santa, but that doesnt mean that i believe in santa.

[RBM]

In one of the views on the subject, aliens have been on earth for thousands of years, and humanity is a produce of genetic manipulation for their benefit (apparently related to minning or other workmanship). We were created to perform manual duties that the "gods" will not do, by mixing some animal dna with their own, with the purposse of having workers with the required physical strength yet capable of following basic directions. Allegedly, these races left the planet as the minerals were scarcing and left the planet to our command. Some of the human in those days were holding leadership positions as granted by the gods and liked it that way and with time the knowledge of the alien races disapeared from common men, but not from a very well kept lineage (blood), same blood that rules the earth today in several ways. Now, admitting that aliens exist means they have lied to us, by stealing our monies through black projects (the ones in the backyard of grey top secret projects); it would mean that our officials need to pay indemnities to all those ones ridiculed in court for allegations on cases of national security; it would mean that they would have to explain espionage to other nations by technologies not known to the public and the list goes forever. Guess who "our officials" is: the same blood from the beginig of human race that infiltred the government.


I'm familiar with the 'manipulation' narrative. If true, so what ?

The rest of your case smacks of alien/human racism. My view. is. human's will change if they don't kill themselves off, and whose to say a hybrid is a bad thing ?
Thanks for painting a fuller picture of your viewpoint.

---------- Post added 03-17-2010 at 07:13 PM ----------

@ daydreaner

This post indicates that you are just new to the topic and I won't fault you for that:
1. Agenda is in quotes, suggesting it's a projection is misunderstanding - consider belief systems from a psychological perspective is the tip of the iceberg I was alluding to.
2.Experience is evidence - period. (also see #4)
3. You are casting an aspersion ... besides I suspect you have no idea how much of a agenda asking the US Gov. 'to talk UFO's' is.
4. good for you not 'jumping to conclusions'. This topic, by the way, is as old as mankind.
5. Lack of kindness or aggressiveness is your perception not mine. My posting style is brusk, I am totally kind and non-aggressive in person.

Many years ago, my boss and his family were driving down the highway when a UFO appeared over their car. The car stopped, scared him, his wile and kids half to death.

None of your expectations for proof exists in that second hand story. They are 'believers'. The problem is your definition of 'proof', not the experience of the 'believers'.

I'd suggest you continue to research the topic.

[elprimodelyeti]

How many things are being presumed here? I'm counting:


The existance of UFOs
They come here
They influence us
And have been influencing us
Someone knows about that
yet keeps it covered up
That someone is in the government
Other people believe this as well
Is there any proof for any of this, besides #8?
The thing is, that what constitutes proof to you might not be constitutive of evidence to me or viceversa. I've seen a UFO myself and that experience alone constitutes proof of at least the first three items on your list. For the rest of things, you cannot expect anyone person to be in a position where they can prove all of them, but there is solid testimonial evidence that may very well be considered as sufficient to tie the knots.

I've been there where it is easier to conclude that those things are everything but spaceships, but take it from me that when you see them, your way of thinking about the subject changes forever. Thanks for posting.

[daydreamer]

I'm familiar with the 'manipulation' narrative. If true, so what ?

The rest of your case smacks of alien/human racism. My view. is. human's will change if they don't kill themselves off, and whose to say a hybrid is a bad thing ?
Thanks for painting a fuller picture of your viewpoint.

---------- Post added 03-17-2010 at 07:13 PM ----------

@ daydreaner

This post indicates that you are just new to the topic and I won't fault you for that:
1. Agenda is in quotes, suggesting it's a projection is misunderstanding - consider belief systems from a psychological perspective is the tip of the iceberg I was alluding to.
2.Experience is evidence - period. (also see #4)
3. You are casting an aspersion ... besides I suspect you have no idea how much of a agenda asking the US Gov. 'to talk UFO's' is.
4. good for you not 'jumping to conclusions'. This topic, by the way, is as old as mankind.
5. Lack of kindness or aggressiveness is your perception not mine. My posting style is brusk, I am totally kind and non-aggressive in person.

Many years ago, my boss and his family were driving down the highway when a UFO appeared over their car. The car stopped, scared him, his wile and kids half to death.

None of your expectations for proof exists in that second hand story. They are 'believers'. The problem is your definition of 'proof', not the experience of the 'believers'.

I'd suggest you continue to research the topic.

didn't read what i wrote too closely did ya. i never said first-hand experience wasnt valid. i did say hearing about first-hand experience and reporting on it wasn't valid evidence.

btw, doesn't matter much to me if you are kind in person, what matters to me is if you're kind to me online.

researching the topic - no thanks, it doesn't hold my interest.

[RBM]

i did say hearing about first-hand experience and reporting on it wasn't valid evidence.

Does that view stand regarding my boss's experience and my subsequent reporting of it here ?