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.

 

Why all the secrecy surrounding UFOs? All theories welcome!

page: 3
5
<< 1  2    4 >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Mar, 25 2009 @ 11:22 PM
link   
Well lets say its someones secret now.
Say Rockefeller and TC/CFR and a few others.

And say its not free energy but using energy wisely.

The use of oil is perhaps eliminated and airlines would speed
passengers very quickly.

Some how the energy process has been secreted by elimination
of all scientific references.




posted on May, 16 2009 @ 11:34 PM
link   
I wanted to digest some thoughts more before spouting off. Sorry it's taken so long, but better late than never eh?



Originally posted by Rotwang17

[Snipped] ... Against Method - Paul Feyerabend


For the most part I have to say I agree with Paul F.'s quote. Even seemingly whimsical thoughts have the ability to lead to compelling and profound realizations.


The Psychologist, Muzafer Sharif, PhD, set about in his landmark study, The Psychology of Social Norms, to explain human behavior within a group context. He primarily used ambiguious stimuli upon his test subjects which confirmed that when in a group context, individuals will tend to comform their interpretations of the ambiguious stimuli to that of the person in the group with the most percieved authority.


I haven't read Dr. Sharif's work, but I've witnessed this sociological bias first-hand. I concur, no reason to contradict the assertion.



This is very important when we weigh this with Paul Feyerabend's concept of Scientific Chauvinism. Why, when faced with ambiguious choices, we do tend to side with those choises which are percieved as the most authoritative.


The idea of authority as "trustworthy source" directly relates to cognitive biases employed by each person to rationalize the world around them. These biases fundamentally relates to the weight of evidence needed by each individual before a person is willing to alter their position or view.


Most importantly, the people you did not mention are the eye-whitnesses. Speaking to an eye-whitness with a 6th grade education is more valuable than hearing the opinions of 100 PhDs. Our above dialectic argument concerning our choices in interpreting UFO's is a good example; your choices were meteorologists, astronomers and physicists, mine were folklorists and psychologists. Your leanings are towards interpreting this ambiguious phenomenon as objective, while mine are subjective.


I spent a goodly amount of time reflecting on what it is I'm willing to accept and under what circumstances this changes. For mundane every day scenarios I'm willing to accept subjective experience / reality as proof of whatever it is I observe.

I realize by saying this, since subjective experiences differ from person to person, that what I take for granted as true creates a local reality that differs from those who haven't shared my observations; and even when others do share the same experience, cognitive biases and differing beliefs are cause for disagreement.

Now when it comes to subjects that are extremely controversial, borderline-paranormal or outright-paranormal, it's at that threshold that I require some form of objectivity. As far as I'm concerned objective reality starts when there's corroboration by many trustworthy sources (ie/ people who have more to lose than they have to gain) backed by standardized equipment that measures and authenticates the observation. Following this data collection I then require analysis by a group of people who are supposed to be expert in a given area of study.

Following that process I'm then willing to accept such things as plausibly true.

To further refine my definition of trustworthy sources, the stick I use to measure credibility of testimony is the amount of supporting evidence (additional testimony counts as long as the other witnesses can be confirmed as having no connection to the source) in conjunction with, as I said before, how much the person stands to lose.

The former FAA Head of Accidents & Investigations, John Callahan, is my best example of trustworthy testimony. He has the raw JAL-1628 radar print-outs, the FAA report, the flight-tapes, his testimony is corroborated by the pilot, co-pilot, the flight-engineer, the AARTC controller, and the ROCC controller. Not to mention he's gone before the National Press Club and flatly stated he's willing to provide this data, along with testimony, before Congress under oath.

This is compelling because there's a stable of physical evidence; circumstantial evidence supported by physical evidence; as a former high-ranking FAA official he's put his reputation on the line; the degrees of removal between all the witnesses is extremely high; and if he's lying he would face perjury charges.

So to address your point head on,


the people you did not mention are the eye-witnesses.


I'm very interested in witness testimony! So long as I have their word, other peoples word with some degree of removal, and something tangible to determine whether or not the witness is confabulating details and to ascertain the accuracy of the persons' recollections.


Now, can subjective phenomena be studied in an objective and scientific manner? Very much so. Thus, this chauvinism reveals both of our biases.

In fact, the ambiguious stimuli that Dr. Sherif had used in his experiments which pioneered the study of social norms was the autokinetic illusion. The autokinetic illusion was first discovered by an astronomer, Alexander Von Humbolt in 1799. Although he was not aware of the fact that this was a subjective phenomonon, he believed that it was a real and objective attribute of some stars and planets.

...

Why was it a psychologist and not an astronomer that was able to make this discovery? Because psychologists were trained on how to distinguish the difference between objective and subjective phenomena.


This is a fantastic example! However I think you'd agree before you can conclude a subjective basis you must first rule out objective. This is why I start by requiring numerous witnesses that each observed something similar, where they had equipment in their presence to record the event, and if the equipment failed to record what either person experienced, it's at that point we might conclude we're dealing with something subjective by nature.

[edit on 17-5-2009 by Xtraeme]



posted on May, 17 2009 @ 12:02 AM
link   
This is a global conspiracy that all governments participate in willingly or not. The reason is quite clear to me why they all do it. Our governments, and more specificially the rich and powerful that run them, would more than likely lose their wealth and control over the destiny of this planet and its inhabitants would the truth be known.

Throughout mankind's short but eventful recorded history when primitive civilizations have come into contact with a more advanced one, the primitive society almost always gets assimilated into the more advanced one way or another. Our leaders know this same thing will happen if ETs make themselves known and all that power they wield will disappear almost overnight as the public rejects them for a better way of life that a space faring race would assuredly have over one that hasn't left its homeworld.

Also at this point decades of criminal procedures to continue this secret would more than likely have been required which compounds our leaders' fears of loss of control with an angry public looking for vengence over the whys and hows the secret has been kept. And while half of the secret is directly attributable to ETs maintaining their covert status here, the blame will largely fall upon our governments whenever the secret is out.

[edit on 17-5-2009 by Frith]



posted on May, 17 2009 @ 12:13 AM
link   

Originally posted by Frith
This is a global conspiracy that all governments participate in willingly or not. The reason is quite clear to me why they all do it. Our governments, and more specificially the rich and powerful that run them, would more than likely lose their wealth and control over the destiny of this planet and its inhabitants would the truth be known.

Also at this point decades of criminal procedures to continue this secret would assuredly have been required which compounds our leaders' fears of loss of control with an angry public looking for vengence over the whys and hows the secret has been kept.


So you subscribe to "greed theory" and "CYA theory."

I would say overall my current view is "Snowball theory." I'm not terribly convinced the government is, now in modern times, intentionally hiding anything. I have a feeling the documentation that's in the public domain represents 90-95% of the entirety of what's known about UFOs. With the remaining 5-10% showing that the government was simply scared silly; wanted to gain more information on the subject before speaking prematurely (ie/ CYA theory); in a state of disbelief; wanted to prevent and preempt panic; and I'd wager quite a bit of money the bulk of the remaining files touch on the psychological warfare aspect of UFOs and how we used it as a cover (ie/ mogul balloons over Russia and counter-intel).

For a more complete treatise on this see here.

Now take all of these original motivations for "covering up" UFOs and you get one misleading statement resulting in another or, in other words, "snowball theory." Now consider how large the military is let alone the civilian component of our government (the left-hand rarely knows what the right is doing) and couple "snowball theory" with the revolving door of government employees.

It then becomes extremely probable people currently in government simply have no idea what was or wasn't known back in the 40's and 50's, and the misinformation fed to the public is now the same misinformation the government feeds to itself. No different really than how NASA lost the data about how sticky, abrasive moon dust affects the lunar lander.

Sadly statements we're getting from the USAF are likely completely honest. They probably don't know which box to search in the several mile warehouse at WPAFB. That is if the data even still exists.

[edit on 17-5-2009 by Xtraeme]



posted on May, 17 2009 @ 12:28 AM
link   
reply to post by Xtraeme
 


I'm not one to accept the notion that the governments of the world are largely ignorant of this conspiracy. Certainly the majority of government workers are, but I do believe a select few and in particular the air forces of the world know more than they'll ever admit.

Human history as we currently know it being quite ugly at times has led me not to assume ignorance when malice is quite within the capacity of our governments. Of course I could be wrong, but I've seen and read enough to come firmly to my own conclusions.

[edit on 17-5-2009 by Frith]



posted on May, 17 2009 @ 12:44 AM
link   

Originally posted by Frith
reply to post by Xtraeme
 


I'm not one to accept the notion that the governments of the world are largely ignorant of this conspiracy. Certainly the majority of government workers are, but I do believe a select few and in particular the air forces of the world know more than they'll ever admit.


Out of curiosity if you had to point to a single source that convinced you this was the case, who or what would it be? If it's no one source please mention many. No links needed, just general names, or whatever you can remember
.



posted on May, 17 2009 @ 01:12 AM
link   
reply to post by Xtraeme
 


There is no single source I can point to as to why I think the air forces of the world know as much as they do, but most of the well known cases form my beliefs as to what they know. 1947 Roswell , the 1952 Washington D.C. UFO flap, 1956 Bentwaters, 1957 RB-47 incident, the 1965 Edwards incident, the 1976 Tehran incident, 1980 Bentwaters, and 1990 Belgium are the ones that come to mind immediately.



posted on May, 17 2009 @ 01:51 AM
link   

Originally posted by Frith
reply to post by Xtraeme
 


There is no single source I can point to as to why I think the air forces of the world know as much as they do, but most of the well known cases form my beliefs as to what they know. 1947 Roswell , the 1952 Washington D.C. UFO flap, 1956 Bentwaters, 1957 RB-47 incident, the 1965 Edwards incident, the 1976 Tehran incident, 1980 Bentwaters, and 1990 Belgium are the ones that come to mind immediately.


I find that interesting. I've read over all of those cases in great detail and my takeaway was pretty much what I've seen with every other case, clamp down due largely to lack of knowledge and not wanting to have to deal with the complexity surrounding the political hot potato that is UFOs.

I'll have to put together a paper at some point weighing the relative merits of the "grand foul-up" vs "conspiracy cover-up" hypothesis. However, I will say this. Hynek, as the official scientific consultant for Blue Book, obviously had a much deeper insight than any of us can hope to gather by analyzing historical accounts.

In the 'Hynek UFO Report' he said it over and over again. "It can't be therefore it isn't." Reading other notable individuals biographies from the time-period, that does indeed seem to be the original domino.

[edit on 17-5-2009 by Xtraeme]



posted on May, 17 2009 @ 02:11 AM
link   
reply to post by Xtraeme
 


I'm sure there have been many people in high positions of power hoping and praying that this subject wasn't real, but then I'm sure there are many more that have felt this vast unknown to be a great threat and commissioned all they could to investigate and extrapolate as much information as they could to better understand and quell what I'm sure they deem to be a menace. The USA doesn't have sixteen known intelligence circles just to cover their eyes and hope the public doesn't stumble onto something they're consciously avoiding.

[edit on 17-5-2009 by Frith]



posted on May, 17 2009 @ 02:33 AM
link   

Originally posted by Frith
reply to post by Xtraeme
 


I'm sure there have been many people in high positions of power hoping and praying that this subject wasn't real, but then I'm sure there are many more that have felt this vast unknown to be a great threat and commissioned all they could to investigate and extrapolate as much information as they could to better understand and quell what I'm sure they deem to be a menace. The USA doesn't have sixteen known intelligence circles just to cover their eyes and hope the public doesn't stumble onto something they're consciously avoiding.


That's a good logical argument that deserves serious consideration. However, not to play devils advocate, consider that our intelligence agencies have failed spectacularly in recent history. First the FBI and other domestic agencies dropped the ball on the 9-11 hijackings and, second, the international intelligence gathering branches assaying the Iraqi-WMD threat are largely responsible for a war that's been as much of a catastrophic disaster as the present state of the economy.



posted on May, 17 2009 @ 02:44 AM
link   
reply to post by Xtraeme
 


This is a conspiracy website and as you've seen, quite a few people do not believe 9/11 or Iraq were intelligence lapses, but this is not the thread for such things.

Back to the subject. Until the real story is known, the case for ignorance or malice can be made without much in the way to dispell either. I just don't see how any government could willfully ignore something as big as ET visitation given the implication that their inaction could lead to public discovery.



posted on May, 17 2009 @ 03:36 AM
link   
reply to post by Xtraeme
 


An unmentioned group of people have held the secrets dating back thousands of years, coming from distant civilizations, with this knowledge in their possession they were aware of many things about creation, where we came from, who created/designed us and what the purpose is for our species on this planet. The knowledge held in their possession describes how advanced the ET races were and are and how they manipulate space, time, matter in 3D among everything happening in our world. How some races are living and sharing the earth with us without ever being made known, how some are among us without us even aware of it.

The secret is best kept not by the government but by the ET's themselves. People in high places including leaders aware of this know they could never get away with making mention of it or attempting disclosure, even sharing with their own family some things can never be spoken of, some secrets are learned and erased, recalled to memory only when needed then erased again, some people know but they also know they cannot speak of it. Before anything could be shared that may reveal a well kept secret. It's proof that must not exist, we as a species will only accept hard proof.

ET's with knowledge and capabilities as we believe God to be, creators, knowing our thoughts, knowing beforehand our actions, reactions, knowing everything about us not only collectively but individually.
ET's are in fact the illuminated one's, they have all seeing eyes in our 3D world and can know our thoughts, desires, emotions, read our minds, they can know everything about us individually. If you design, invent, create and construct something you tend to know everything there is to know about that particular item whatever that may be. So do the ET's know everything there is to know about our species, which in fact they consider ownership of. There are greater reasons then this why disclosure will never take place and ET's will never make themselves known. It won't happen because they won't allow it to happen. We are supposed to be left in the dark and nothing will change in the near future.

How will the world react to learn we have never been alone but in fact we are continually being downgraded and upgraded genetically, every single race on the planet. If we were to find out that ET's live among us and have been visiting us changing our environment, upgrading and downgrading earth which is not ours by the way but theirs, our bodies are theirs are DNA is theirs, everything on this planet is theirs but you see we are not supposed to even hear about it and if we did how would we feel about that? How would it affect the world to know we are not what we think we are, this life is not the way we believe it to be. Once our security blankets are torn off us we realize we are here for other reasons we never even possibly considered, our EGO is gone, we feel cold, confused, scared, lost.

The hardest thing someone can ever go through in this lifetime IMO is shifting realities one from another, knowing with certainty about ET's for themselves, what they are, where they come from, who they are to us as a species and what role they played in creation and design. When someone finds out for themselves by leaving this planet on the ET tour of space and revealed many things, this shock is the hardest thing to deal with for an individual. Having one's memory erased starts to sound like a great idea, most out there who have experienced such things BEG to have that knowledge erased or they may never function again on earth knowing what they know. This life is not fun N. Games and rewards, the hardest part will be learning the truth behind the mask of what this world is really all about.

ET's occupy human bodies which are nothing more than outfits to them, they interact with governments on all levels. Earth is setup by them.



posted on May, 17 2009 @ 04:38 AM
link   

Originally posted by Frith
reply to post by Xtraeme
 


This is a conspiracy website and as you've seen, quite a few people do not believe 9/11 or Iraq were intelligence lapses, but this is not the thread for such things.


Heh, trying to sum up the 9-11 / Iraq war conspiracy for this one thread would be a mighty task.



Back to the subject. Until the real story is known, the case for ignorance or malice can be made without much in the way to dispell either. I just don't see how any government could willfully ignore something as big as ET visitation given the implication that their inaction could lead to public discovery.


I've always envisioned government involvement in the study of UFOs as a bit of a tight-rope walk.

Back in the '50s and '60s there were a number of powerful constituents writing to high-level DOD/USAF officials and congressmen flatly stating that the study of UFOs was a waste of tax-payers money. These same people worded themselves in such a way as to suggest they would use their power or platform to deride officials who didn't acquiesce. There's a long paper trail evidencing this. Phillip Klass was a particularly aggressive budget-pincher (Firestorm; Druffel, Ann).

On the flip-side of the coin there were the tinfoil crazies like Adamski advocating "space brothers" and the galactic federation, which didn't lend credibility to the governments argument that they needed to study the subject further.

Now add in various cognitive biases like "it can't be therefore it isn't" and peoples susceptibility to ridicule. I must have read several dozen accounts relating how the USAF approached the problem in an open-minded fashion during the Project SIGN days only to completely change their position after the team sent the Estimate of the Situation (supporting the ET hypothesis) up to Vandenberg. Following that Dir. Ruppelt spelled it out clearly: the senior brass disassembled the group and aptly renamed the investigation to Project GRUDGE.

The final component that I imagine motivated the armed forces was the "technological advantage," "psychological warfare," "panic the public" and the general "cultural of secrecy" angle. Throw in the Cold War and you have a recipe for a very tight-lipped military.

So I see several axises emerge here:

  1. Political pressure (more against than for)
  2. Media involvement (more against than for)
  3. Personal bias and emotion (more against than for)
  4. Desire to keep cards close to the military's chest for a host of reasons (could be the Russians, new technology that could be used to the US's advantage, to allay possible domestic upheaval -- which could be used to the enemy's advantage, etc)

Now bake that for few years and imagine a worst case scenario. ie/ the '52 White House flyover. Have a person with a high rank and station in government (Gen. Samford), say a few words that aren't entirely on the level to the public and that starts the ball rolling. It's at that point that CYA theory kicks in to effect.

A few years later in '55, with a new secret aircraft coming down the pipeline, counter-intelligence becomes a serious motivation with UFOs providing a perfect cover for U2 flights. Unfortunately as most intelligence officers will tell you there's something called the, "blowback principle." Which boils down to, "once you start to manufacture a lie there's no telling what repercussions will follow or whether or not even the people who started the mythology end up believing their own myth."

Now consider the confusion involved where one government agency like the USAF was conducting an investigation into UFOs through Project Blue Book (which also had the task of playing down reports - gee I wonder why
) while the CIA independently and simultaneously manufactured lies to cover TS aerospace projects. The fabricated stories all the sudden become official Blue Book reports.

Since the two branches didn't work together, in effect, there's no good way to sort the garbage in from the garbage out.

Thereby completing the circle-jerk.

People who know about the disinformation campaign have no real motivation to talk because it's their arse is on the line (CYA theory). These people start to leave government and the people that come in behind them are left to sort out what's what from information on file, what they observe themselves, and based on their own biases. Eventually the myth takes on a life of its own and, sadly, all data has in effect become polluted.

"Snowball theory" at its worst.

[edit on 17-5-2009 by Xtraeme]



posted on May, 17 2009 @ 04:51 AM
link   
reply to post by ET_MAN
 


I take it this is all first hand experience and that you're an abductee?



posted on May, 17 2009 @ 10:41 AM
link   

Originally posted by Xtraeme
Now add in various cognitive biases like "it can't be therefore it isn't" and peoples susceptibility to ridicule. I must have read several dozen accounts relating how the USAF approached the problem in an open-minded fashion during the Project Sign days only to completely change their position after the team sent the Estimate of the Situation (supporting the ET hypothesis) up to Vandenberg. Following that Dir. Ruppelt spelled it out clearly: the senior brass disassembled the group and aptly renamed the investigation to Project GRUDGE.


This could be the case, but then the Roswell incident happened before Project Sign was put into effect. One could make the case that the USAF already had physical proof of ETs and everything else they did after it was a smokescreen to feign ignorance and remove suspicion that they knew anything.

[edit on 17-5-2009 by Frith]



posted on May, 17 2009 @ 11:16 AM
link   

Originally posted by TeslaandLyne
I heard this answer once:

" two words free energy "


I've also heard this answer:

" two words self preservation "

Timothy Good makes some interesting comments in this interview about how he thinks full disclosure would be disasterous for society:
www.dailymotion.com...

As for motives- this is an intriguing quote made by Former Special Assistant to the Executive Director of the CIA Victor Marchetti from his book "How the CIA Views the UFO Phenomenon":


"We have, indeed, been contacted - perhaps even visited - by extraterrestrial beings, and the U.S. government, in collusion with the other national powers of the earth, is determined to keep this information from the general public.”
"The purpose of the international conspiracy is to maintain a workable stability among the nations of the world and for them, in turn, to retain institutional control over their respective populations. Thus, for these governments to admit that there are beings from outer space... with mentalities and technological capabilities obviously far superior to ours, could, once fully perceived by the average person, erode the foundations of the earth's traditional power structure. Political and legal systems, religions, economic and social institutions could all soon become meaningless in the mind of the public. The national oligarchical establishments, even civilization as we now know it, could collapse into anarchy.”
"Such extreme conclusions are not necessarily valid, but they probably accurately reflect the fears of the 'ruling classes' of the major nations, whose leaders (particularly those in the intelligence business) have always advocated excessive governmental secrecy as being necessary to preserve 'national security."
Victor Marchetti - Former Special Assistant to the Executive Director of the CIA, May 1979.


Great thread



posted on May, 17 2009 @ 02:12 PM
link   
The reason for secrecy can be summed up with one phrase: create
vs be created. Most people might not know this, but humans naturally are
creators of their own existences and realities, they just aren't
consciously aware of it. Every thought and belief we have had has
shaped our futures.

Now, there is a consciousness that exists on all planes of existence
and in all planets of the universe: the consciousness of power. Just
how we have the Bushes and Rockefellers of this planet, other, more
advanced planets have intelligent life that also seek to control their
populations at extreme levels. Except, since they're much more advanced, they have the capability to go out and "conquer" the populations of other
planets as well, not just their own.

The power mongers of this planet, which consist of both human
and unethical extraterrestrials, seek to create us into something so
that they can maintain control. Create us into what, exactly? Create
us into consumers, patriots, religious fanatics, race classes, wealth
classes, etc. Basically, anything that helps to divide and cause
conflict between the population.

On the other hand, there are indeed ethical extraterrestrial factions
that are interested in the evolution of our consciousness, who want
to help us free from this nightmare paradigm so that we could
become complete conscioius co-creators, and since the people at
the very top know this, they suppress the information well to keep
us dumbed down and unknowing of our true potential as said
creators
. In other words, they don't want us to know that there's any
type of alien presence because they would undoubtedly begin
losing their power over us; it would be much harder for them to
manipulate and create us at their own will if people were aware of the truth about their existences.

You don't have to believe this, but it's what is going on if your eyes have been open!

[edit on 17-5-2009 by cmazzagatti]

[edit on 17-5-2009 by cmazzagatti]

[edit on 17-5-2009 by cmazzagatti]

[edit on 17-5-2009 by cmazzagatti]



posted on May, 17 2009 @ 02:53 PM
link   
reply to post by ET_MAN
 


We're sort of on the same page.

People assume it's the government keeping us from disclosure, when an advanced civilization capable of traversing the stars, monitoring nuclear facilities and abducting people could not be prevented from disclosing this information if they wanted.

It doesn't matter what the government wants or doesn't want. The fact is that alien civilizations do not wish to make contact with us on a broad scale. Instead, they make themselves known to a few individuals at a time, and operate in a relatively covert manner.

The question behind that motivation is far more pertinent than whether some two-star general doesn't believe.

Why? Obviously, if an alien race was capable of this type of travel, then they must know that a good portion of the population wants disclosure. Heck, they could probably even make themselves known to those who have a desire for the answer.

They don't, though.

There must be some advantage to keeping us ignorant. If you look at our history, there has been a pervasive pattern of keeping the people ignorant.

Frankly, I think the reason we are kept in the dark is because if we did know the truth, we may reject ANY involvement by any outside race, declare our sovereignty as sentient beings and kick every ET off the planet. Perhaps humans as a mob are viewed as not only unruly, but unpredictable. Perhaps we have "rights" in this universe that we are unaware of, and as long as we do not assert those rights, we can be kept as property?

Best to keep us as ignorant prisoners and our government as trustees.



posted on May, 17 2009 @ 04:38 PM
link   

Originally posted by VelmaLu
reply to post by ET_MAN
 


We're sort of on the same page.

People assume it's the government keeping us from disclosure, when an advanced civilization capable of traversing the stars, monitoring nuclear facilities and abducting people could not be prevented from disclosing this information if they wanted.

It doesn't matter what the government wants or doesn't want.


There's no doubt that there's an element of non-intervention (as discussed in "The non-interventionist policy of UFOs / aliens, why?").

However consider that several thousand people witnessed the Phoenix lights (not the flares -- the craft that one man claimed, "was so big we could park all our B2 bombers on it"); the Hudson Valley sighting (again hundreds if not thousands of witnesses) over several weeks; tens if not hundreds of people saw the Stephenville, TX object; and yet reputable, national news sources were for the most part quiet.

As we look back in history to the '42 Battle of LA, the '52 Washington DC Flap, and on-and-on there's significant evidence to show that there's no outright "secrecy" associated with these flyovers. The only point where there's demonstrated elements of "covertness" are in abductions reports (ie/ the reported "missing time" component) and CE3 encounters.


The fact is that alien civilizations do not wish to make contact with us on a broad scale. Instead, they make themselves known to a few individuals at a time, and operate in a relatively covert manner.


Flying over our capital and the city of Phoenix is a pretty "broad scale" if you ask me.

Even if "they" wanted to establish contact by coming out and greeting us, put yourself in the shoes of an ET observer, where would you set down and land? The best spot would probably be determined to be something like an airport. As an observer that's where humans take their sky-crafts, park them, and deplane.

Remember Chicago O'hare? Or another quick example off the top my head, take Maj. General A. Filer's story of a UFO landing at an airport (Fort Dix) where a creature is reported to have emerged from the craft (source).


The question behind that motivation is far more pertinent than whether some two-star general doesn't believe.

Why? Obviously, if an alien race was capable of this type of travel, then they must know that a good portion of the population wants disclosure.

Heck, they could probably even make themselves known to those who have a desire for the answer.


Those are some large assumptions.

Who's to say that they're aware we don't know about them? Furthermore who's to say they know anything about our behavior or what we want? Maybe they assume our entire society takes their presence for granted.

I don't mind speculating, but there's no evidence that I've read of to date to support pro-or-con positions for any of these ideas.

Please correct me if I'm mistaken!


There must be some advantage to keeping us ignorant. If you look at our history, there has been a pervasive pattern of keeping the people ignorant.

Frankly, I think the reason we are kept in the dark is because if we did know the truth, we may reject ANY involvement by any outside race, declare our sovereignty as sentient beings and kick every ET off the planet. Perhaps humans as a mob are viewed as not only unruly, but unpredictable. Perhaps we have "rights" in this universe that we are unaware of, and as long as we do not assert those rights, we can be kept as property?

Best to keep us as ignorant prisoners and our government as trustees.


I'm not sure we'd have the ability to kick another race off the planet, but we might put up a fight
. I like this theory of "humans as a mob as an unruly & unpredictable" and therefore reason for concern, motivating covertness.

The idea of rights certainly has interesting implications! If you don't mind I'm going to copy those ideas over to the Non-intervention thread.

Good thoughts, thanks VelmaLu!


[edit on 17-5-2009 by Xtraeme]



posted on May, 17 2009 @ 04:52 PM
link   
reply to post by Xtraeme
 


The reality is the government and military does not want to share with other governments what it may have learned. They also do not want them to have someone there who would figure something out they could not.

The simple fact of selfishness could be the main reason the information is kept from the public.



new topics

top topics



 
5
<< 1  2    4 >>

log in

join