It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.

Please white-list or disable AboveTopSecret.com in your ad-blocking tool.

Thank you.

 

Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.

 

Coping with the Disinformaton

page: 2
0
<< 1   >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Mar, 21 2006 @ 12:55 PM
link   
I have seen both rational discourse and discussion on TV shows...
But i have seen deliberate disinfo spread as well...

It is interesting how one or two words can change the whole future research of a sighting or crash...




posted on Mar, 21 2006 @ 01:00 PM
link   


Disinfo - SOURCE external to the UFOlogy community. Motive and players indeterminate without true examples to study. If it exists, it
would be difficult to find as it would be designed to become part of the community belief structure, and even defended
by the very folks who need to learn to identify and reject it.


that's where the unmentionable hoax is so strange...
don't get me wrong, I have believed (and still do) that it was bunk all along, but the SOURCE of some of the incidents involved and around it came from outside the UFOlogy community, and inside the US Intel system...(or some very good hackers of course)

In any case, there are some real examples of disinfo. Roswell of course is one major example. In this case, the US military is on record for putting out false information (or deliberate disinfo), and has had to constantly correct itself or put forward even more elaborate explanations. That Popular Mechanics episode is one of my faves...with the "pristine" Mogul debris (complete with regular old tape, not the flowery ones the skeptics keep trying to use)....



posted on Mar, 22 2006 @ 01:37 AM
link   
I think the best way to try and avoid the problem is to recognize what the problem is. That would be to disguise potential TRUE or SECRET INFORMATION and TRUTH ( About UFOs in General ) in a SEA of UNINFO.

Uninfo , can be anything because it is all made up or perpetuated with the INTENT and PURPOSE to HIDE the TRUTH or REAL INFORMATION. ( Hoaxes , fictional accounts , partial Truths , white Lies , etc... )

The advantage to using this would be that you can make sensational claims that are much more attractive to the "Interested Public" and you can "feel out " and influence Public reaction and make even more obscure claims and "CRAZY" Uninfo accessible to the public.

Eventually as Hal9000 said , potentially REAL EVENTS or potential TRUTH can be irretrievably buried in a SEA of UNINFO. Or just USELESS information that the Public will not accept or be able to successfully navigate in a truly meaningful way.



"The only way is no way - the only limitation is no limitation" - Bruce Lee.






[edit on 22-3-2006 by lost_shaman]



posted on Mar, 22 2006 @ 02:02 AM
link   
Oh, Wow !

The synergy in this thread is beginning to fascet into a gem and it looks to be diamond.

I need to try to put together what is comming together here. You folks make my head hurt (grin).

Thus far we have

Uselessinfo

Uninfo

Misinfo

Disinfo

But the characteristics being discussed are mixed throughout all of these. Somehow the characteristics
must be separated out so that each category is uniquely defined. And I still believe that what I was
intending for Disinfo as external was aluding to a level of information hard to detect, and truly sinister
in the results. Meaning it fools all the people....for a time. And it is not done for a personally profitable
or reputation type motive, but TO STEER PEOPLE ON DOWN THE ROAD. Control Motive.

Any of you following that or is my insomnia drooling out the keyboard ?



posted on Mar, 22 2006 @ 08:52 AM
link   

Originally posted by nightwing
And I still believe that what I was
intending for Disinfo as external was aluding to a level of information hard to detect, and truly sinister
in the results. Meaning it fools all the people....for a time. And it is not done for a personally profitable
or reputation type motive, but TO STEER PEOPLE ON DOWN THE ROAD. Control Motive.

Where are they being steered to, and for what reason?

This sounds to me like your talking about disclosure with plausible deniability. This would be to acclimate the public to the idea of alien visitations, but not provide solid proof. But you couldn't be making that assertion right Nightwing? Maybe you could explain.

[edit on 3/22/2006 by Hal9000]



posted on Mar, 23 2006 @ 09:04 PM
link   
"Where are they being steered to, and for what reason? " == Hal

You really know how to cut to the chase. Kudos.

"Maybe you could explain." == Hal

I wish I could. But I do not have clear cut examples in that area.

I will try to explain what I meant by "truly sinister".

Ever seen "Three Days of the Condor", starring Robert Redford etc....



posted on Mar, 24 2006 @ 09:09 AM
link   

Originally posted by nightwing
"Maybe you could explain." == Hal

I wish I could. But I do not have clear cut examples in that area.

I will try to explain what I meant by "truly sinister".

Ever seen "Three Days of the Condor", starring Robert Redford etc....

I can't say that I have, but will see if I can find it.

I know sometimes it is easy to smell a conspiracy, but determining the reason is tough. I just thought you were alluding to same reason that I think many fall back on, which is disclosure.

How many times have UFOologists been promised solid proof and the source backs out at the last minute? Some say this is due to a program called Cosmic Journey, which is what I was referring to. Some say it is real and the reason is to acclimate the public, but others say it is disinfo and meant to discredit.

I find it hard to believe that this pattern is acclimating the public because the best way would be to provide proof. Otherwise, they are just preaching to the choir. But then if it is for the purpose of discrediting UFOologists, then why do they need to be discredited? I guess the third choice is the source never existed in the first place and someone is trying to make a buck. In every case though there is deceit, which in my opinion is disinfo.

More questions than answers.



posted on Mar, 25 2006 @ 02:53 AM
link   
"In every case though there is deceit, which in my opinion is disinfo. " == Hal

Bingo. You gave me the break I was looking for, at least for my own clarification.

Source internal to UFOlogy community, with deceit becomes....

wait for it......

DisMisInfo.

External source with deceit remains, simply, DisInfo.



posted on Mar, 25 2006 @ 03:16 AM
link   
" Coping with the Disinformaton "

doubt ?

you have doubt ?

why ?

there's ALWAYS gonna be a schlemeel to lie and cheat ! and be shown to be a liar , so what !

but all the lying and cheating can't make an ARMADA of ufo's go away that buzzed the capital in the 1950's !

www.cufon.org...

they're real , get over it already...lol




top topics



 
0
<< 1   >>

log in

join