Kuro5hin.org: technology and culture, from the trenches
create account | help/FAQ | contact | links | search | IRC | site news
[ Everything | Diaries | Technology | Science | Culture | Politics | Media | News | Internet | Op-Ed | Fiction | Meta | MLP ]
We need your support: buy an ad | premium membership

Disclosing the UFOs

By nanook in News
Thu May 17, 2001 at 08:19:21 AM EST
Tags: News (all tags)

On Wednesday, May 9th, a group of government and military officials held a press conference at the Press Club in Washington DC, where they, under the name of "The Disclosure Project", urged the government to disclose what it purportedly knows about UFOs and "extraterrestial technology". The group, lead by Dr. Steven Greer, said that the "Military-Industrial complex" has over the last 50 years controlled a "shadowy government" that through the military, CIA, NSA, NRO, corporations and other nameless and faceless organisations has intimidated and acted criminally to ensure that the information was kept secret and known fully only to a group of "less than 50 people".

Sponsor: rusty
This space intentionally left blank
...because it's waiting for your ad. So why are you still reading this? Come on, get going. Read the story, and then get an ad. Alright stop it. I'm not going to say anything else. Now you're just being silly. STOP LOOKING AT ME! I'm done!
comments (24)
active | buy ad

While this maybe sounds more like a X-Files episode than reality, I will not question the validity of the testmonies (ie that they are not lying about what they have seen). To orchestrate a hoax of this proportion (there were over 20 witnessess at the conference, about 100 more named testimonies and some 300 more that wanted to remain anonymous, summary here) is out of the question. People are risking their careers and "good name" to tell of this. Could what they have seen been non-extraterrestial, just some weird military project that is secret, but very mundane? Not likely. Many witnessess confirm that at least those that work with this consider it not of this world, or at least not of this planet.

On a related note, the Majestic Documents site are housing pdfs of leaked top secret documents that also supports at least parts of their stories. Most of these, however, are from the 60s or older and may be fakes, although some research says they're not. One key point that UFOlogists maintain is that the knowledge of this and the research going on is not known widely even in the CIA or the rest of the government/military and since the late 60s more or less left governmental control. At least two presidents haven't been briefed. Daniel Sheehan, the groups counselor and well-known lawyer, said that George Bush Sr. as head of the CIA during the Carter administration denied the president access to the information.

While reading all this, and about UFOs in general, you have of course to be very skeptical and indeed much (if not most) of the speculations and/or "New Age" ramblings widely available on the net and elsewhere are impossible to prove and are often contradictory in themselves. But if you have an open-minded scientific approach to this, you can't deny that there is something out there. Is it the truth?

Media Coverage:

Dr. Steven Greers introductory points in his Executive summary:

The evidence and testimony presented in the [Executive Summary] establishes the following:

  • That we are indeed being visited by advanced extraterrestrial civilizations and have been for some time;
  • That this is the most classified, compartmented program within the US and many other countries;
  • That those projects have, as warned in 1961 by President Eisenhower, escaped legal oversight and control in the US, the UK and elsewhere;
  • That advanced spacecraft of extraterrestrial origin, called extraterrestrial vehicles (ETVs) by some intelligence agencies, have been downed, retrieved and studied since at least the 1940s and possibly as early as the 1930s;
  • That significant technological breakthroughs in energy generation and propulsion have resulted from the study of these objects (and from related human innovations dating as far back as the time of Nicola Tesla) and that these technologies utilize a new physics not requiring the burning of fossil fuels or ionizing radiating to generate vast amounts of energy;
  • That classified, above top-secret projects possess fully operational anti-gravity propulsion devices and new energy generation systems that, if declassified and put to peaceful uses, would empower a new human civilization without want, poverty or environmental damage.


Voxel dot net
o Managed Hosting
o VoxCAST Content Delivery
o Raw Infrastructure


UFOs are ...
o Very real and the government knows about them. 23%
o Real, but there's no conspiracy to hide it. 7%
o Natural phenomena explainable by current science. 20%
o Hallucinations. 12%
o Lies and damned lies. 17%
o Inoshiro (hey, this makes sense!) 18%

Votes: 64
Results | Other Polls

Related Links
o Yahoo
o press conference
o The Disclosure Project
o here
o Majestic Documents
o not
o Washington Times
o Yahoo [2]
o Yahoo again
o FOX News
o Washington Post
o Washington Post again
o Independen t
o Executive summary
o Also by nanook

Display: Sort:
Disclosing the UFOs | 65 comments (59 topical, 6 editorial, 0 hidden)
But I like the X-Files! (3.00 / 4) (#2)
by Crashnbur on Tue May 15, 2001 at 11:51:31 PM EST

While this maybe sounds more like a X-Files episode than reality...
Hey! That's a good show! And perhaps it's closer to truth than we think. Sometimes I wonder if any one in Washington is scratching his head over the X-Files, wondering whether or not the subject of that episode was just pure coincidence or not.

Or maybe not, but all of this UFO/mystery stuff is really interesting to me, conspiracy or not. And the way you wrote it up was brilliant, in my opinion.

As for your Swedish English grammar, you should generally use the article "an" instead of "a" when it preceeds a word with a soft impact, such as a soft "H" sound or a vowel sound...

an apple.
an X-Files episode.
an hour.
a plane.
a home run.
You may not care, but I figured I'd throw that in... just in case someone found it useful.


Err....huh? (none / 0) (#49)
by OmegaIndustries on Thu May 17, 2001 at 09:53:00 AM EST

Hi. New here, just wanna say "Hello" before I do my first post. Wide spread hysteria? No way! When scientists found those little bugs in that rock near/on Antartica it was on basicly every newspaper in the world. The human race as a whole is ready to accept that there are other ententies besides ourselves. The only people that would be complaining about it or not believing it would be the damn religious people. Priests, Pope..so on. I'd be happy to live along side a 120 cm tall grey dude that had a huge head. that be awsome. Clean/Free energy is here. Has been for a few years. One mention of the word "Anti-Matter" and everybody thinks your a damn Star Trek fanatic. But its real, it works, and the only thing so far to be "beyong break-even piont". 1 gram of anti-matter could run a medium sized city for a whole day. 1 gram! 1 ounce could power a ship to Mars and back with a one month stay over. The universe is a couple of billion years old. Something besides ourselves has had time to evolve. But they have tools (elements besides our 92 + 15) with properties unimaginable. Its allways not a question of "if" but "where". Coz we will probably never find the bastards. Anti-Matter Info

[ Parent ]
*concentrating* (3.33 / 3) (#3)
by Shren on Wed May 16, 2001 at 12:03:46 AM EST

I can't take it seriously.

I'm not even saying that I'm discarding it out of hand. I can't bring myself to take it seriously. I can't seem to aim my brain at it. It's just too big. There would have to be an alien outside my office or something, dammit. World? Yes. Aliens? Yes? Secret Aliens? Yes. World + Secret Aliens? Just can't pull it off. I feel like I'm back in Diff. Equ. class, staring at something horribly complicated and trying to figure out how to get partial credit.

This subject is a personal pet peeve of mine (4.33 / 3) (#4)
by Anonymous 242 on Wed May 16, 2001 at 12:08:40 AM EST

Given the number of eye-witnesses I have a hard time giving much credence to the testimony given the lack of credible objective evidence. For example, the best photographs are blurry and hard to identify as being definiatively extraterrestrial in origin.

I also have a hard time understanding the why of the alleged cover-up. I don't see who profits from keeping this under wraps. Given US government admissions in such cases as tesing radioactive substances on patients without informed consent, I don't see what the US government has to gain from hiding anything about UFOs. I suppose one could argue that the discovery of UFOs during the cold war would have been destabilizing, but why keep it under wraps?

Lastly between all the amateur astronomers in this day and age, I would expect that any visitation of this planet would be pretty well documented by multiple independent attestation.

Well hey (3.00 / 1) (#6)
by regeya on Wed May 16, 2001 at 12:23:51 AM EST

I have a hard time seeing this unequal treatment of minorities that people talk about so much. Doesn't mean it doesn't exist.

[ yokelpunk | kuro5hin diary ]
[ Parent ]

There is evidence for unequal treatment... (3.00 / 1) (#7)
by Anonymous 242 on Wed May 16, 2001 at 12:36:53 AM EST

There is unequivoval, objective evidence for the unequal treatment of minorities that people talk about so much: differentials in pay for equal work; signs that say no coloreds aloud; police in Cincinnati ticketing twice as many minority drivers for secondary violations (violations that are only discovered after a driver is pulled over) than non-minority drivers.

Your point, again?

Lighten up, dammit!
You're right. I should. We know that aliens do not exist because a wuss like Will Smith would never be able to punch one out singlehandedly.

[ Parent ]
Oh, and another thing (2.00 / 1) (#8)
by Anonymous 242 on Wed May 16, 2001 at 12:39:17 AM EST

Have you ever read Umberto Eco's Foucault's Pendulum?

If not, please do. It explains everything.


[ Parent ]

Why? (4.60 / 5) (#10)
by DoomHaven on Wed May 16, 2001 at 01:56:12 AM EST

I also have a hard time understanding the why of the alleged cover-up. I don't see who profits from keeping this under wraps. Given US government admissions in such cases as tesing radioactive substances on patients without informed consent, I don't see what the US government has to gain from hiding anything about UFOs. I suppose one could argue that the discovery of UFOs during the cold war would have been destabilizing, but why keep it under wraps?

1) Mass de-moralization. The vast majority of people will not believe in the existance of a race more highly advanced than ourselves. Hell, most Americans refuse to believe in other countries being better than them. It's tunnel vision that most of us have; removing that tunnel vision will have disasterous results on humanity. As well, most people measure a culture's worth by the culture's technological achievements. We look at the past, and mainly measure past empires by the architecture (IE: technological/scientific) left by them. If we met a more advanced race, there is a great chance that we will consider ourselves inferior to them, and mass de-moralization would result.
2) Historical. In every, *EVERY*, contact between a highly advanced people and their technological inferiors on this planet has left the technological inferiors marginalized at best and extinct at worse (Micmac Indians, anyone?). Quite simply, there is a tremendous historical precedence set by our people that states if we meet a more advanced race, the lesser race as we know would cease to exist, or would be damaged socially beyond repair.
3) Political. The United States of America is the world leader purely because of the technological edge they have over the rest of the world. If another country was to get "outside" help in jumping ahead in the tech race, this would de-stabilize that power base. It is in the USA's best interest to prevent that from happening, even at the cost of their own perceived benefits from said technology. Another country having a technological or military alliance with a technologically advanced race would tilt the power balance on our planet irrevocably.
4) Greed. Anytime a new resource has been discovered by any world power, all of the world powers that can grab as much of it as possible will grab as much of it as possible, and will fight over and defend that new resource. European powers squabble over the Americas and Africa for centuries. Rome and Carthage before that. Athens and Sparta before that. God knows what before that. If a technologically advanced race comes to this planet, the same thing will happen with that new race's technology becoming that new resource.
5) Resistance to change. How many people today still don't know anything about computers or the internet? Understand about space travel? Think the world is flat? People don't like change. Period. Aliens would bring change, and as stated before, probably not *good* change. And even if it was beneficial change, there are too many people in power who don't want beneficial change to happen because status quo lines their pockets. The internet is the perfect example of this; imagine what the internet *could* do, and because of the old guard in power, look at what it has been hamstrung and crippled to do.
6) Inertia of falsehood. Assuming the alleged events of Roswell happened, the USA has been covering up the knowledge of UFOs for over 50 years. This falsehood has gone from a mere cover up then to an institution now. The government coming clean and admitting 50 years (at least 2-3 generations or about 10 administrations) of lies would shake what little faith the American people have left in their government, and internationally, the USA would be condemned for hoarding the greatest discovery of the last millenium. If this conspiracy was international in coverage, anarchy could result in the world's populatin overthrowing their governments in a fit of spite or retribution for being lied to for 50 years.
7) Xenophobia. Through millenia of hatred, killling, holy wars, racism, slavery, and fear, humankind has proven, without a shred of doubt, that as a species we are dangerous xenophobic. To this day there are groups bent on exclusion and seperation at best, and genocide at worse, based on skin colour, creed, or religion. Face it, people, we are a disgustingly savage and primitive people, that on the basis of the slightest difference within our own species become hatemongers. Any advanced race that has been keeping tabs on us, even for the only last ten years, would notice this as a given. Quite possibly, the advanced race would contact our governments and tell them to stay confined to our planet/solar system or be exterminated for the good of alienkind. That would be something the government would probably cover up on the simple grounds that the information that a greater power had that power over us would be de-moralizing.

These 7 reasons are a mere start. I hope that they are sufficient.

My bleeding edge comes from cutting myself on Occam's Razor.
[ Parent ]
Govt Behavior the best "pro-UFOolist" ev (none / 0) (#53)
by DontTreadOnMe on Fri May 18, 2001 at 10:25:56 AM EST

The vast majority of people will not believe in the existance of a race more highly advanced than ourselves.

I can't find the citation at the moment, but I did see a statistic not too long ago that indicated more than half the American people believe in extraterrestrials and UFOs. As a reason for instituting a coverup your first point is valid, as a reason for continuing it I think it falls apart. In a very real sense we've been "prepped" by Hollywood to accept UFOs with, if not open arms, at least with the same degree of equinimity we accept our government's involvement in yet another skirmish overseas.

I do agree with your other points, however. Governments do appear to have a great deal of incentive in hiding the truth, and world religions (which are often intertwined with such governments) even more so. Until the general population has an equally strong incentive to "know the truth" such a coverup, were it being propogated, would continue.

I am a skeptic with respect to UFOs in general, but the government's behavior throughout the last 50 years with respect to this has been extremely suspicious. Indeed, the zeal and money expended by the government to attack the characters and credibility of anyone who admits to having seen something unusual smacks of guilt, of having something to hide. Why else spend so much energy, and so many millions of dollars, if the people they are attacking are only the kooks they're painted out to be.? Such actions are remeniscent of the smear campaign against Oppennheimer when he changed his political stance to oppose a nuclear arms race, and ironicly it is these actions which are the most compelling evidence (at least for me) in favor of the existence of UFOs.

The UFOs are probably not little green or grey men from space, but the government's own behavior indicates people are seeing something legitimate, and that the government is very interested in keeping it a secret. Alien technology or simply the latest in aeronotical engineering? Who knows, but either way, this makes these people at least worth listening to, with a suitably large grain of salt of course.

http://openflick.org - Fighting Copyright with Free Media
[ Parent ]
Abstract belief differes from Concrete belief (none / 0) (#59)
by DoomHaven on Sun May 20, 2001 at 12:31:20 PM EST

I can't find the citation at the moment, but I did see a statistic not too long ago that indicated more than half the American people believe in extraterrestrials and UFOs. As a reason for instituting a coverup your first point is valid, as a reason for continuing it I think it falls apart. In a very real sense we've been "prepped" by Hollywood to accept UFOs with, if not open arms, at least with the same degree of equinimity we accept our government's involvement in yet another skirmish overseas.

A good point, of course. But, my impression is that it's an abstract belief; that is, that people don't really not believe in UFOs, but they don't fully believe in UFOs. A person can believe in carbon dating, but not understand the science behind it to comprehend and belief it concretely. For instance, when I was younger, I abstractly believed in ghosts and the supernatural. However, I didn't realize how abstract my belief was until coming face-to-face with an actual ghost. It scared the living shit out of me. Now, I concretely believe in the supernatural, and there is a difference between the two types of belief.

However, there is a chance that if aliens where admitted to exist, most people would just say, "Oh, I knew it", and go on with their lifes. Business as usual; life goes on.

Personally, that would be what I would hope for; the flocks of sheeple just moving on. I really would, because the alternatives are not particularly nice.

My bleeding edge comes from cutting myself on Occam's Razor.
[ Parent ]
Crop Circles (5.00 / 1) (#21)
by hulver on Wed May 16, 2001 at 06:54:03 AM EST

I saw a program on the BBC once about a veteran crop circle maker. He would go around during the summer, evading the "researchers" looking for fakers, and then put a big crop circle in a field. Usually with nothing more than a couple of bits of string, a flat bit of wood and a scribled out drawing.
The next day he, and the film crew went back to the field to find it crawling with these "researchers" who would take lots of readings and insist that the circle was genuine. Even when the guy told them that it was him who did it the night before, they would show him all their readings to do with magnetism, and radiation levels and then tell *him* that he was the fake.
The fact that there was a TV crew behind him, laughing at them, didn't put them off.

People believe what they want to believe. I don't put much faith in eye witnesses.

[ Parent ]
Funny that you mention crop circles... (none / 0) (#32)
by theboz on Wed May 16, 2001 at 01:46:50 PM EST

I'm planning to make some either this weekend or the next in NC. Hopefully they don't cut down the field I spotted this past weekend. Yes, it is very easy to do, and here is a guide to help you get started if you find it interesting.

[ Parent ]

Crop Circles (none / 0) (#48)
by guinsu on Thu May 17, 2001 at 09:50:44 AM EST

I thought that some of the more irregular/non-circular shapes were very hard/impossible to make using those methods.

[ Parent ]
Cost (3.00 / 1) (#22)
by Ceebs on Wed May 16, 2001 at 07:54:20 AM EST

Well if this was known to be true then people would be crying out for a missile defence system and everyone knows that one of those would be obscenely expensive and ruin the economy hey we might even have to put taxes up.

[ Parent ]
Stealth Bomber (5.00 / 1) (#24)
by retinaburn on Wed May 16, 2001 at 08:34:33 AM EST

This is a good example of a successful cover up. No definitive photo evidence existed of the plane, just wild eyed accounts of people seeing a mysterious 'thing' in the air. It didn't show up on radar (or a very small footprint) so there was no evidence there. And the government denied its existence.

Now this was a much shorter time scale to keep it a secret, but how long could they have continued. What new plane are they working on that they haven't told us about yet ?

I think that we are a young species that often fucks with things we don't know how to unfuck. -- Tycho

[ Parent ]
Aurora (5.00 / 1) (#36)
by wiredog on Wed May 16, 2001 at 02:28:34 PM EST

What new plane are they working on that they haven't told us about yet ?

There's, allegedly, one called Aurora. Aviation Week had all sorts of stuff about it several years ago. It was believed to be a replacement for the SR-71 and used a type of hypersonic external-combustion engine. AW&ST had pictures of the exhaust trails it left. Very different looking. If you've ever seen a bunch of sausages strung together end to end, that's what it looked like.

The idea of a global village is wrong, it's more like a gazillion pub bars.
[ Parent ]

The possibilities. (4.50 / 2) (#5)
by podrodena stanica on Wed May 16, 2001 at 12:11:07 AM EST

There can be little doubt that something is going on in our skys and in or society with regards to so called 'UFO's'. But what is it? Here are a number of possibilities:

1)It is all a mass hallucination. First out forward by the respected psychologist Carl Jung, this theory is that UFO's are some sort of manifestation of the collective unconscious, by which visions are seen that reflect the concerns of the wider culture. For example, in 16th century Spain visions of the Virgin Mary were common - a positive craze. It is most intriguing that UFO's are commonly shaped like the mandala, the Jungian symbol of great importance, a primitive mechanism of the mind.

2)The UFO's are government projects. This would require the government to have incredible technology not available to and well in advance of civil society's. Unlikely, as all military tech pretty much comes from the private sector.

3)The UFO's are a product of a sect of humankind. This would mean that there has been a branch of the human race with hugely advanced technology that has been concealing itself from us and observing us for thousands of years. They could live among the asteroids, or deep under the oceans, or some such inaccessible place. Lack of artifacts could be explained by the civilisation having been based on 'Atlantis' in the beginning - such as the huge island of the coast of China that sunk some 10000 years ago. I consider this possibility remote.

4)Actual Aliens. An intelligent biological/mechanical race that has decided to observe us for the ourposes of science, and prepare us.

I consider option 4 to be reasonably likely. Although people often say that there is little evidence for ET, I hold that there is, in Astronomy.

To explain, let me talk about types of civilisation. The Kardashev classification scheme classifies by energy consumption. Kardashev Type I is a civilisation that has learned to harness the entire energy of a planet.Type II consumes the entire energy of a star. Type III that of a whole galaxy. Ours would be type 0 then.

Type III and even type II civilisation should be easily observable. Type II would employ Disonspheres, easily spottable from huge distances. Type III would render entire galaxies dark.

If we observe our galaxy in the infra red, we see that there are lots of 'red dwarves' - failed and aging suns. However, there is another ecplanation, that we are in fact seeing the outside of Dysonspheres. I think that there is a real possibility that in our galaxy a civilisation is on the way to attaining Kardashev Type III status. The theorem of Dysonspheres and other megastructural engineering projects being common also solves our galaxy's so-called 'missing mass' problem.

I think that these are exciting times to live in, and I really hope that soon we will make contact one way or another and find out directly. They must be aware that they are easily spottable, and are just preparing for when we realise that we are totally surrounded by a civilisation of immense power and technological capability.

Hopefully they will also be far more morally advanced than we are.

I search for my Anya. She runs with my mind.

On point I (3.50 / 2) (#9)
by Anonymous 242 on Wed May 16, 2001 at 12:58:53 AM EST

I think it interesting that modern stories of alien abductions have very similiar characteristics to stories of demonic abductions from the medieval era.

Also, I think that mass hysteria would be a better way of wording than mass hallucinations. I don't think that (assuming for the sake of discussion that option I is the correct option) the case is so much people seeing things that are non-existent so much as people interpreting the evidence of their senses in a way guided by hysterical groupthink. Consider the number of UFO sightings and calls to police stations for gas masks during and after H.G. Wells' original War of the Worlds broadcast.

[ Parent ]

Not all nuts, just a lot of them (3.50 / 2) (#16)
by John Milton on Wed May 16, 2001 at 03:04:09 AM EST

I remember reading a while back that the military admitted they were testing an experimental nuclear airplane in Roswell at the time of the crash. It was saucer shaped.

"When we consider that woman are treated as property, it is degrading to women that we should Treat our children as property to be disposed of as we see fit." -Elizabeth Cady Stanton

[ Parent ]
I've seen pictures (4.50 / 2) (#17)
by Anonymous 242 on Wed May 16, 2001 at 03:18:23 AM EST

In the (forties and?) fifties, the US government built several flying saucers and tested them out. The Skeptical Inquirer ran a great little article on them a number of years ago. Eventually the plans were dropped because the desgin was aerodynamically unstable.

Anyway, that is my point. People see something that falls outside of their mental schema (how many people think regularly on Uncle Sam building and flying saucer shaped aircraft in the deserts of New Mexico?) and interpret it in a way that makes sense to them, but that does not necessarily correspond to external reality.

Nor do I contend that hysteria or misinterpretaion adequately explain all UFO sightings. They do, however, explain a large number of them.

Lastly, I don't feel compelled to be able to offer a non-extraterrestrial explanation for any otherwise unexplained sighting. I'd rather shrug and say, "I dunno" than start conjecturing explanations I have no other basis for.

[ Parent ]

Time Travel (2.00 / 1) (#18)
by nospoon on Wed May 16, 2001 at 04:29:29 AM EST

Have you ever considered that the UFO's are actually time machines from many 1000's of years in the future coming back to once and for all explain what the UFO 'flying saucer' things were in the late 20th and early 21st century. This may or may not involve a paradox.

"Do not try and bend the spoon. That's impossible. Instead, only try to realize the truth."
"What truth?"
"There is no spoon."
[ Parent ]
On Types of Civilizations (4.00 / 2) (#31)
by DontTreadOnMe on Wed May 16, 2001 at 10:27:17 AM EST

The classificaiton of civilizations you refer to is interesting, but also perhaps a little naive.

Consider a civilization which renounces exponential growth and encodes its intelligence into a form (biological or technological) which requires less energy than before. An example of this would be Greg Egan's "introdus" described in his fictional work "Diaspora," in which the majority of human beings encode themselves as software running in "polisis" (clusters of tiny supercomputers), where they are able to live, grow, and persue their personal goals, and even have children, using a tiny fraction of the energy required by a coporeal being. If the mind is truly the seat of the soul, and the soul all that is a person, such a notion of encoding people as software isn't so farfetched ... and a tiny fraction of a planet's energy could concievably power the lifes of trillions upon trillions of such beings.

He hypothesizes that a species which attains a sufficient level of technology to build dyson spheres and the like would have by necessity learned restraint (else it would not have survived to reach that level), and in so doing would never consider such grandiose (and potentially destructive) acts of celestial engineering. This is not to say that no type I, type II, or type III civilizations exist, merely to point out at least one very obvious path an advanced civilization might take which is completely unaddressed by this nomenclature.

There are likely many paths an advanced civilization can take on its upward journey to whatever it considers to be its own fulfillment. I suspect very few involve the kind of celestial engineering Kardashev appears to assume to be inevitable characteristics of such a civilization.

http://openflick.org - Fighting Copyright with Free Media
[ Parent ]

Have you considered another possibility... (3.00 / 1) (#43)
by SIGFPE on Wed May 16, 2001 at 05:40:08 PM EST


I think that almost everyone who claims to have seen a UFO is simply mistaken or lying. I think anything involving sighting of actual aliens is almost certainly lying. I'm bemused as to why people aren't taking the lying hypothesis seriosuly. We all know people who lie. Suppose only one in a thousand people are pathological liars. Then in the US there are at least 200,000. That's at least enough to keep the media permanantly happy with new reports.

It's a simple elegant explanation. It requires no new hypotheses about human behaviour (eg. bizarre kinds of psychological disturbance or mass delusions). It requires no new laws of physics. It is an explanation that relies on ordinary everyday facts that we know about humans (they lie a lot) and seems to explain everything to me.

It's just that saying people are lying seems to be too boring an explanation for most people. Nobody would ever report it on TV. Nobody will get a PhD out of researching it. And it's psychologically difficult to confront people directly and tell them they're lying and by claiming it you risk being sued.
[ Parent ]

Other possibilities... (none / 0) (#50)
by Fred_A on Thu May 17, 2001 at 10:36:19 AM EST

Furthermore, there is one point that is fairly obvious to us (us being most of the inhabitants of this planet) and that US-ians seem to miss: all those abduction and cattle mutilation, and whatever stories *always* happen in the US. There are no examples anywhere else.

The simple lack of a regular statistical distribution of the cases is enough to show that they are pure fantasy.

If that wasn't enough, why are there so few instances of observations from the people who spend all of their time looking upwards ? Astronomers, both professional and hobbyists (like myself) regularly spend nights looking at the sky. Most of them (us) believe that there are other lifeforms in the universe. None of them ever see little green men. We do see lots of spaceships though. I see artificial satellites every night I go out, I saw the ISS... Didn't see any saucers though (well, once but that was Saturn positionned just so).

So there is no need for any kind of documents, just plain statistics is enough to debunk this silly US craze.

Now why the US ? Dunno, my theory is that it's something in their food. There is such an astounding number of vocal loonies in the US that it's the only thing that comes to mind. :)

Fred in Paris
[ Parent ]

Now why the US? (none / 0) (#54)
by SIGFPE on Fri May 18, 2001 at 01:30:12 PM EST

Maybe because it's a TV culture. To be anyone in the US you need to be on TV. One way to get on TV is to tell everyone you've seen an alien and be interviewed on some high quality documentary on Fox.

I guess that's not just it. They're also a pretty gullible bunch with a love of bogosity ranging from psychotherapy to creation science. I'm not sure why the American people should be more gullible than the population of other Western nations but you can see hints of it in writings as far back as a century ago.
[ Parent ]

In other news (2.66 / 3) (#12)
by xriso on Wed May 16, 2001 at 01:57:34 AM EST

Newsflash: The object you may have seen moving around in the skies recently is not a UFO. I repeat, it is not a UFO. It has been identified as a flying saucer from outer space.

--paraphrased from SimCopter
*** Quits: xriso:#kuro5hin (Forever)

Hoax of what proportion? (3.60 / 5) (#13)
by i on Wed May 16, 2001 at 02:24:37 AM EST

It's a child's play. There are hoaxes that are orders of magnitude bigger. Religion, for instance. (If you're offended, think about one particular religion that is everybody's favourite. One that copyrights its sacr&!@#$(&^Kbv3409 NO CARRIER

and we have a contradicton according to our assumptions and the factor theorem

These "UFOlogists"... (4.25 / 4) (#14)
by Anonymous 6522 on Wed May 16, 2001 at 02:33:53 AM EST

...aren't going to be happy until the government tells them exactally what they want to hear. They want their whole big alien conspiracy myth validated, they don't care if there are other explanations, and they don't want to hear them.

Maybe the 1950s atomic bomb tests mutated some soldiers into superintelligent bald midgets that, for the past 50 years, have been working on top secret jet powered hovercraft, and in their spare time abducting gullible people for fun.

Deep issues (5.00 / 4) (#15)
by John Milton on Wed May 16, 2001 at 03:00:10 AM EST

And they all claim to have been forced into orgies and anally penetrated. Sounds like someones repressing some college experimentation. Seriously people, why would a super-intelligent race come millions of light years to ram our asses.

For those who didn't read the articles, I read the bbc one because I figured the British would be more lucid about American politics. Basically, some group of ex-military personnel saw some things in the sky while they were in the service. They have deluded themselves into thinking that Tesla, who was who to what, invented magical technology.

There is intelligent life in the universe, and they don't want to talk to us. It would be a waste of resources to even bother with us.


"When we consider that woman are treated as property, it is degrading to women that we should Treat our children as property to be disposed of as we see fit." -Elizabeth Cady Stanton

[ Parent ]
The reason... (4.00 / 1) (#33)
by rusty on Wed May 16, 2001 at 01:51:35 PM EST

The reason for all this is right there in the last sentence.
That classified, above top-secret projects possess fully operational anti-gravity propulsion devices and new energy generation systems that, if declassified and put to peaceful uses, would empower a new human civilization without want, poverty or environmental damage.
(Emphasis mine)

That's the common thread in virtually all UFOlogist lore -- that if only the Evil "shadow government" weren't keeping this from us, we could all live happily ever after.

Isn't it lovely to think so?

Not the real rusty
[ Parent ]

Is that the same gov't (none / 0) (#35)
by wiredog on Wed May 16, 2001 at 02:22:54 PM EST

That poisoned your Girl Scout cookies?

The idea of a global village is wrong, it's more like a gazillion pub bars.
[ Parent ]

"Shadow Government" (none / 0) (#55)
by nanook on Fri May 18, 2001 at 02:41:33 PM EST

Well .. the theories are pretty wild right now in ufo/conspiracy circles. While they all can't be right, I think there is some kernel of truth in this. Consider the fact that since WWII (and even more since the Soviet breakdown) the US has exercised more or less total (military and economical) power over the rest of the world, and as you know power corrupts and total power corrupts totally.

Provided this, the groundwork for conspiracy (corruption) is laid out, but not to the extreme extent that now is being "considered" (speculated). But if you add the ingredient of alien contact with all its implications, then the whole thing is out of control, since we have no f*¤% clue what these are up to.

The question is whether aliens have contacted us, and whether some people have gained in power by this contact. If so, then I think no speculation is "out of the question" until we have some clarity in this matter.

Will any technology make people "live happily ever after"? No, never; this is irrational since happiness is not only caused by technology. I admit, though, that Greer seems to think that something that the gmnt (shadow or standard) knows about that allows infinite energy. This doesn't sound very likely, but I won't say it's impossible.

If you look at the technological inventions that have happened the last century that revolutionized not only science but also everyday life for billions of people, then I don't understand why the notion that another revolutionary technology could be hidden from the general public just because some people can and want to do it. It has happened before, you know.

"I am a charlatan, a liar, a thief and a fake altogether." -- James Randi
[ Parent ]

Aliens: Yes UFOs: No (3.00 / 1) (#19)
by dcodea on Wed May 16, 2001 at 05:05:42 AM EST

I have to agree with the position my astronomy teacher took. The universe is just too big, and every discovery we make about it shows us to be less and less unique. So there likely is intelligent life in the universe besides us, and we'll never ever meet. The unvierse being so big.

Who Dares Wins

UFOs: Yes, Aliens: dunno (3.80 / 5) (#20)
by moshez on Wed May 16, 2001 at 06:17:58 AM EST

Well, do you people know what UFOs are? Unidentified Flying Objects. I'm not a native English speaker, but I'm pretty certain that all it takes for an object to be a UFO is that it will both fly and not be identified. That means that a private plane which does not ask for permission, is at the edge of some radar screen and does not answer communications is a UFO. So is a hot-air balloon which goes astray. Anyone not believing such things exist ought to have his head checked.

[T]he k5 troll HOWTO has been updated ... This update is dedicated to moshez, and other bitter anti-trolls.
la la la (2.33 / 3) (#25)
by axxeman on Wed May 16, 2001 at 08:48:36 AM EST

This is somewhere on par on the "cracker" vs "hacker" debacle.

lec·tur·er (lkchr-r) n. Abbr. lectr: graduate unemployable outside the faculty.
[ Parent ]

Facts vs Poor Reasoning (4.00 / 2) (#23)
by DesiredUsername on Wed May 16, 2001 at 08:26:19 AM EST

UFOs exist. That is, there are instances of an item being in the sky where the viewer could not identify the object. Does this prove that "aliens are among us"? No.

Sometimes these UFOs are identified as conventional aircraft, planets, clouds, etc. But sometimes the identification is never known. Does this prove that "aliens are among us"? No.

Some of those publicly unidentified UFOs (if that's no redundant) have identities that are known to the government only. For instance, spy planes, reconaissance balloons, test aircraft, etc. Does the existence of secrets prove that "aliens are among us"? No.

The X-Files could be *right on* with the conspiracy and eye-witness stuff--but still wrong about the existence of extraterrestrial "visitors".

Hypothetically, the government could come out and claim that, indeed, they *have* captured "UFO technology" and are applying it to aircraft or what have you. Does the making of this claim prove that "aliens are among us"? *No*!

Here is the only thing that will prove that "aliens are among us": Finding aliens among us. Lights in the sky, secrecy, and claims are all incidental.

Play 囲碁
More from the Post (4.50 / 4) (#27)
by wiredog on Wed May 16, 2001 at 08:58:00 AM EST

Some thoughts from a Washington Post reporter who covered the Disclosure press conference. He says that the press conference "established beyond the shadow of a doubt -- that reached levels of credibility so high as to constitute actual proof -- that there really do exist people who believe in UFOs."

"Anything that's invented after you're 35 is against the natural order of things", Douglas Adams
Two thoughts. (4.40 / 10) (#29)
by jd on Wed May 16, 2001 at 09:29:42 AM EST

First, on whether or not there has been any kind of concealment of the truth - that's been established. Not by kooks, but by the organizations themselves coming clean, at least insofar as whether they held any information back.

This does NOT mean that UFOs exist, don't exist, or eat beans on toast. What it DOES mean is that honesty has not been a hallmark of claims or counter-claims in the past. And THAT means that anything said now, by anyone, should be taken with a grain of salt the size of Mount Everest.

Second, if we =really, truly= wanted to know if UFOs existed, we could and would. The problem is that knowing would destroy the market that's built up, would put large numbers of investigators out of work, wreck havoc with the mystical worshipping that takes place, and finish the tourist industry in major "hot spots". In short, nether those "for" or "against" have any real desire to know for sure. The mystery is what is keeping them in business. No mystery, no business, no pay check.

Ok, so how can we know? Well, we know that the laws of physics as we understand them MUST be a valid subset of any future physics, within certain constrants.

For example, if an ancient Greek looked at an Aircraft Carrier, he obviously won't recognise what it "is", since such ships didn't exist in his/her time-frame. On the other hand, they know Archimedes' Principle. This would allow them to figure out the mass. They know things remain stationary, unless pushed, and can see that this mysterious vessel complies. They know that certain geometric constructions are impossible, and that (therefore) builders probably won't use these. Again, the vessel matches theory perfectly. An examination of the engines would leave the Ancient Greek in awe, but they would likely notice certain similarities with the engine that did exist in their world. As such, it would not be unreasonable to believe that they could figure out (in time) the nature and purpose of these machines.

Just from these few, simple "laws" as the Greeks understood them to be, a picture of the nature, function, design and technology required, could be built up. This is only possible because newer "laws" DON'T replace old ones, they extend or refine them. The old "laws", within the constraints for which they were intended, still work perfectly.

How does this apply? Easy. Let's play-pretend, for a moment, that some amazingly advanced civilization exists, has developed means to travel interstellar distances efficiently, and STILL wants to visit Earth. Whatever science these people posess, HOWEVER advanced it may be, MUST STILL be a well-defined superset of our own science, as it exists right now.

The science that we posess makes some things clear: Action and Reaction are Equal And Opposite. ie: To move in one direction, you must apply a force in the EXACT OPPOSITE direction to the NET direction you wish to change in, and have a magnitude EQUAL to the NET change in magnitude along that vector.

This does not place any limitations on the form of propulsion used, the form of engine, etc. All it does is stipulate that Newton's 1st, 2nd and 3rd Laws will still be obeyed in the 210th century as much as it is in the 21st.

What does this gain us? Well, for a start, when you apply a force, you're going to change your environment. That is inevitable. It follows that if no change occurs (HOWEVER SLIGHT), then no force was applied, and no real vehicle was observed.

What constitutes a change?

  • Temperature variation, plus or minus, outside a couple of standard deviations from the immediate vicinity.
  • Localized chemical variation in the atmosphere. (If you've ever used a diffraction grating, you'll know how to do this test. Since an absorbtion line will still be there, if -any- of a given chemical is present, this should be valid for a good many hours.)
  • Meteorological variation, in excess of 2 standard deviations from expeected values, within a day or so of the observation. (Meteorology is not an exact science, but it's not too bad, either. However, as was noted in James Gleik's excellent book "Chaos", even slight variations can have massive knock-on effects, over time. A butterfly's wings can, potentially, affect the course of a storm, over a continent away, given several months. It seems reasonable, then, to assume a large, fast-moving vehicle, performing extreme manoevers, would affect the local weather patterns a good deal sooner.)

The observent reader will note that I repeatedly talk of variations in excess of 2 standard deviations. ANYTHING =can= happen, given long enough. The question is not "will it?", but "how likely is it?". The best any statistical test can show is that there is a given probability. Here, what I am seeking, is to produce a verifiable, repeatable test which will have one of three results:

  • 1) That the observations are within the realms of what is likely to be observed anyway, with or without something being present.
  • 2) That the observations are NOT explicable, if you assume the null hypothesis (that nothing is present), to within the threshold defined.
  • 3) There is simply not enough information to produce a clear-cut answer. The results could mean anything. Go round and try again.

Essentially, my test(s) reduce to the following statistical test:

    Null Hypothesis: There is, and has not been, anything in this locality, within a reasonably short timeframe, that has perturbed the natural state of this system.
(Null hypothesys are ALWAYS given in the form of assuming that there is nothing happening. The test then seeks to see the liklihood of that being true. Depending on your field, the test results are given either as a number of standard deviations from the "norm", or as a percentile liklihood of the null hypothesis being correct. For something like this you really should be looking at the 1% or even 0.5% probability. Anything higher is just too vague.)

The concept is simple enough. If there's something out there, it DOESN'T MATTER what science they have. Our science will be a subset of theirs, a special case. One won't replace the other. We saw that, with the example of the Ancient Greek. Our science is vastly superior in many ways, yet the Greek could easily derive much information, simply by applying a few basic principles.

If there =isn't= anything out there, then no amount of observation, however acute, will EVER distinguish the results from the expected results. The two will always be close enough together.

If there =is=, then one observation showing a self-consistant variation from the expected should be enough to convince every skeptic on Earth that it's not simply a pursuit of the gullible or foolish.

The bottom line is this. We don't NEED to be ignorant. If we are, it's by our own choice. The question I will ask is "Why choose ignorance?" (Of course, I answered that, earlier. Ignorance is much more profitable, and gives better job security.)

The applicability of the laws of physics (none / 0) (#63)
by Imran on Mon May 21, 2001 at 04:55:32 PM EST

I think that in assuming alien technology will obey the current laws of physics your making a mistake. Our laws of physics have been created based upon experimentation with our enviroment.

Thousands of years ago people believed everything was made from four elements, a hundred years ago it was believed that atoms were equally dense throughout. Science can sometimes lead us to the wrong result, even if it appears to explain the situation.

Our theories may be right, but then again they may be wrong. If they're right then yes any alien science is probably likely to be a superset of our science. But then again if our theories are wrong, alien science could be totally different to ours.

There may exist technologies which are outside our understanding, for instance if an alien craft could somehow alter it's localised enviroment into a form unknown on Earth, scientist would be baffled as they would never have had experimented with anything like it.

Newton's laws have been shown to be accurate for almost all situations available to us, but there is nothing to say around the corner we won't find a situation where it won't apply, unlikely I grant you but not impossible.

To mimic the financial markets "The effect of gravity may go up as well as down. Past performance is no guarantee of future performance."
TickleTux Hangman 0.3.0 (For Windows and Linux) http://tickletux.sourceforge.net/
[ Parent ]
UFOlogists are Religious Zealots (4.80 / 5) (#30)
by theboz on Wed May 16, 2001 at 10:00:22 AM EST

First of all, let's get a good definition of a UFO. Click here to see a picture of a UFO and to get my point. Only from too many movies have people made the conclusion that because something is a UFO, it must be a spacecraft from another planet. The name UFO means Unidentified Flying Object. If these people want to call something that they "know" is an alien spacecraft a UFO, they are completely wrong. However, that is getting off on a tangent.

It is interesting that there are many parallels with the UFO cults and various religions of the world. You said yourself, "I will not question the validity of the testmonies (ie that they are not lying about what they have seen)." However, you must question the validity. People have been known to halucinate. When you were a little kid, that pile of laundry in the corner of your room mysteriously transformed into a horrible monster waiting to pull you out of bed. Clearly, the means for halucination is there, why not question these people? Do parents believe it when little children say there is a monster in the closet waiting to eat them? Also, a lot of these people are lead to "remember" their UFO experiences from hypnotism. Hypnotism is not science, it's utter bullshit that somehow allows people to have impressions put into their head. If a person is hypnotized and questioned about meeting aliens and such, they are suddenly going to start coming up with stories to make their therapist happy. What difference is that than the trances of people that claimed to have been talking to the dead, God, angels, etc? What about the halucinations too? Why can't it be people's imaginations running wild?

Another point is the fakers. There are a lot of people that fake these things intentionally. They probably lead a normal boring life and are searching for something more in life. So, they draw attention to themselves by faking UFO abduction stories, and even cutting themselves in extreme examples in order to provide "proof" of their abduction. These people are in it for their 5 minutes of fame, book deals, etc. They are charlatans and boldly lie to anyone and everyone in order to make themselves seem important.

Then, there are the smallest group, who actually have seen something. Usually these are honest people that just saw some weird lights in the sky, a weird shape flying through the air, or something of that nature. While a lot of these people can be proven mistaken, there are some cases when we can't explain what it was they saw. Just because we can't prove it was an airplane doesn't mean it's not. The U.S. Air Force was testing different designs of the stealth bombers and fighters since the 1940s if I remember correctly. They never admitted it until the 1990s if I remember correctly. Sometimes we won't be able to get a satisfactory answer for what these people saw, but that doesn't mean that the most outrageous explanations are true. Nobody anywhere in the world has any solid proof whatsoever of the existance of an alien lifeform or spacecraft.

The problem is that the UFO cults expect you to take things on faith. They give you fantastic ideas without proof, only their word. I don't doubt the sincerity of them, just as I don't doubt the sincerity of any strongly religious people. Clearly, the Taliban destroyed statues to conform to their religion, they are very sincere in their beliefs, but does that mean I have to agree with them? The underwhelming amount of evidence, and the overwhelming amount of hoaxes make it hard to believe any of the UFO cults. There are so few people that claim to have seen anything that it is rediculous. You can probably find an equal amount of people that have claimed to see pink elephants hovering over their beds at night, what is the difference? What about the amount of people in the dark ages that were sure their neighbors were witches? They were serious enough to have their own family members burned at the stake. People that believe in the existance of aliens visiting Earth must also believe in Allah, Yaweh, Buddha, Thor, Zeus, and many other things that have been around much longer than this new religion. Skepticism must be used when dealing with stuff like this. Always remember that the fantastic answers are probably not true when they can be explained by something simpler. When someone wakes up with a cut on their hand and claims abduction, isn't it more likely that they were having a bad dream and swung their hand and hit it on the corner of the nightstand or something like that? Isn't it more probable than some green perverts from the Nth dimension coming to stick a metal probe up his butt? If the aliens need to stick things up people's butts, why can't they do it to their own beings, or if they are without anuses, why can't they find a race closer to them to probe? It all sounds like the plopping of fresh cow patties in a pasture to me.

Anyways, to see my refutation of the Yahoo article that I posted in someone's diary, click here. And, if you want to read more about this and have a good explanation of why the UFO cults are bunk, please read Carl Sagan's "The Demon-Haunted World: Science As a Candle in the Dark" It is better to be unsure of what you believe, than to believe something wrong.


Daily Show (3.66 / 3) (#37)
by Devil Ducky on Wed May 16, 2001 at 02:52:12 PM EST

I saw this a while ago on the only real news show I watch (CNN doesn't count because I just watch it for the funny parts (Bush speaking etc.)) The Daily Show.

IIRC, in the story Jon Stewart mentioned that Dr. Steven Greer was an ER doctor, not the type of doctor that you would expect to be leading a bunch of quacks on a meta-physical search for the truth from within the government.

You'd think he'd have had enough of not getting answers form insurance companies, but apparantly not and he wants to fight the only organization more tight-lipped about helpful information, the U.S. government.

I had to highlight the text to read it, since it was black on black in mozilla.

Devil Ducky

Immune to the Forces of Duct Tape
Day trading at it's Funnest
I've been "visited" (4.66 / 6) (#38)
by electricbarbarella on Wed May 16, 2001 at 02:55:29 PM EST

This article that I saw in Wired does much to explain "alien visitation" as well as a few other, similar experiances. Ever been lying in bed and suddenly you can't move and there's a mysterious presence in the room? It's a type of dream, one that can be induced in the lab (read article).

I have these dreams quite often. I'm not being abducted.

-Andy Martin, Home of the Whopper.
Not everything is quantifiable.
HHEs (4.00 / 1) (#51)
by fluffy grue on Thu May 17, 2001 at 12:27:50 PM EST

Yup, hypnagogic hallucinations are fun things. It's sad that most people are so afraid of their own imagination that they often can't tell the difference between a dream and reality...
"Is not a quine" is not a quine.
I have a master's degree in science!

[ Hug Your Trikuare ]
[ Parent ]

The government is covering it up! (3.00 / 4) (#40)
by Minion on Wed May 16, 2001 at 03:59:02 PM EST

I used to be against the orbiting mind-control satellites.

Deep belly laugh (3.50 / 4) (#42)
by weirdling on Wed May 16, 2001 at 05:16:23 PM EST

Every time I hear about 'benevolent aliens', I have a nice, deep belly laugh and it cleanses all the other evil thoughts, such as, if there really are aliens out there, I need to go home and clean my gun.
Does anyone remember the kind of helping Europe dished out to much of the rest of the world back in the 1400s? Raped and pillaged is more like it.
Perhaps they are more enlightened, but, in a way, that's worse. Having Mr. Rodgers the alien come down here and tell me how to run my life would be a kind of living hell.
I suppose they might have such a clean and pure energy source, but I shudder to think what they want for it. As to world peace, that's a laugh. What are these aliens going to do, monkey around with human genetics? There's another thing I'd rather not see...
I suppose that a largely clean and cheap energy source would help towards reducing poverty, but odds are that if it is sufficiently complex to be worthwhile, you'll still have to maintain the darn thing, and, voila, you have a new segment of McMillionaires. Hiring somebody sufficiently competent to work on advanced alien technology won't be cheap. And, once again, people just assume that there exists a technological solution to the third world problem, which is largely social.
The funniest ones are the ones who claim aliens with indescribable technological miracles at their fingertips wish to contact us but the US government keeps them from doing so.
Do aliens exist? Possibly. Have they existed? Probably. Are we going to meet them? Probably not. If we do, I'm going to hide the good silverware and send the kids to Canada.

I'm not doing this again; last time no one believed it.
The "Majestic" documents... (2.66 / 3) (#44)
by mwright on Wed May 16, 2001 at 06:11:48 PM EST

are fake. See this site on CSICOP.

you can't deny that there is something out there
The governent does keep secrets. Many times in the past, they have kept some new airplane secret, for example. I don't know why it is that when the government keeps secrets, that people suddenly assume that they are hiding extraterrestrials. Can someone please explain this to me?

... are true (4.00 / 2) (#45)
by nanook on Wed May 16, 2001 at 07:36:41 PM EST

Judge for yourself.

Especially, look for the (possible) explanation for the "copied" signature, and the Cutler date controversy. Also look for the explanation to the reference to Area 51 in 1952 in the SOM 1-01 document.

As for the raised 8s in some documents, this is interesting, and may lead to some conclusions regaring the document's authenticy, but since this is almost all Klass got left, I don't think so. Mind you, I'm not saying that every single MJ document is true and there are indeed some that are questionable. A problem is that the sceptical research on this issue is too rare, because it's not as "sexy" to debunk these documents as there is to promote them.

Let's say that there is extraterrestials "visiting" us at the moment, and that the US military has had some relations with these. The Aliens are (as we can tell) not very obvious, that is, they don't "land on the White House lawn". The conclusion of this hypothetical scenario is that the military (or whoever interested) as priviliged contacts want to use this position to strengthen their own power, which is natural from a military standpoint.

Why people "suddenly assume" that the government is "hiding extraterrestials" I can not explain. This is not the case (that "the government" is hiding extraterrestials that is). Some people with access to billions of budget dollars are trying to keep secret what they know about ETs and their technology. If you read the executive summary and listened to the press conference you should know that even some presidents didn't get to know. If that isn't "government" I don't know what is.

"I am a charlatan, a liar, a thief and a fake altogether." -- James Randi
[ Parent ]

There's a reason the government won't tell us.. (2.00 / 3) (#46)
by bsdave on Wed May 16, 2001 at 11:33:00 PM EST

Think about it; I'd say it's a very good idea not to tell us. I have NFI if UFO's exist or not, but if they suddenly admitted it -- there would be widespread hysteria.

You could always use my favorite word extortion (the x makes it sound cool) by giving them something that they want in return. Maybe kidnap a politician? ;p


Mass hysteria (none / 0) (#58)
by goosedaemon on Sun May 20, 2001 at 09:30:20 AM EST

I've never seen any proof (definitive or otherwise) of mass hysteria. Would you care to help me? (if not, i'll be looking for it myself)

[ Parent ]
What I'd like to know (4.33 / 3) (#47)
by Sheepdot on Thu May 17, 2001 at 01:14:40 AM EST

I'd like to know at what point UFOlogists became people that believed in little green folk. I used to think of myself as one till someone asked me why I believed in aliens.

What is funny is the most respected UFOlogists I knew from the early nineties *knew* it was government testing of currently unidentified aircraft and never believed this alien crap.

I've got a tape of a guy doing extensive research that found out about various government organizations within the US years before the government acknowledged that they existed. A number of them the US still hasn't acknowledged.

The sad thing is that this guy has been pretty good at analyzing the info he's gotten from Area 51 and actually quit his work when the government came out with a press report stating that "UFO's" and the Roswell incident were all related to government testing of aircraft to be kept secret from the Russians and Chinese. It's the reason why they picked the secluded areas for their testing.

Anyway, I admire the folks that keep a reasonable head about themselves and deal with the data bit by bit. I do NOT admire the guys and gals that jump on every abduction story like it is the holy grail of alien and flyer saucer proof.

say there's this guy. (4.00 / 4) (#52)
by Shren on Thu May 17, 2001 at 07:09:33 PM EST

He doesn't live in America - he lives somewhere else. He decides one day that he has some advice for a US Senator. He writes a great letter, packed with insight and scientific discovery. The Senator likes the letter a lot and starts implementing some of the ideas and technology as he sees fit.

The question is, do the American people have a right to see this letter? The man sent it only to the Senator. Let's say that he even sent the letter to the Senator's private residence. Demanding the Senator's private correspondance is a reasonably unethical thing to do. It was from the man, to the Senator, and both sides decide to keep it private.

Anyone demanding to see the letter is being plain rude. It's private correspondance. Us k5ers make a big deal about privacy, remember?

Does this change if the sender of the letter is an alien?

If an alien has a spaceship that can cross the stars, and can evade detection by most radar and telescopes, then he's far from a dumb cookie. If he wanted to contact all of mankind he'd call a realible PR firm and have a press conference that would make the US President's press conference look like a small tea gathering, and tell the world what he wants to say. He could do this by radio, and the governments of the world couldn't even stop him.

The fact that he (the hypothetical alien) has chosen not to do this indicates that he does not want to. Maybe he has strange reasons. Maybe he doesn't want to be a celebrity. Maybe he doesn't want to cause panic. Maybe it's just the tradition in the culture he's from. Whatever. Get off his back. If there are aliens in the sky, apparently they value thier privacy.

I like your idea but... (5.00 / 2) (#56)
by Betcour on Sat May 19, 2001 at 04:13:17 AM EST

Say the said anonymous genius who sends new ideas to the Senator actually ask for something in return. After all nothing in this world is really free... he ask the Senator for prisonners to experiment on, for rare minerals, biological samples of plants and animals... say said Senator sign treaties engaging his whole nation with the anonymous guy, on very important subjects. Shouldn't all this be made public ???

[ Parent ]
what does the senator really have to offer? (3.00 / 1) (#64)
by Shren on Tue May 22, 2001 at 11:19:31 PM EST

he ask the Senator for prisonners to experiment on, for rare minerals, biological samples of plants and animals...

rare minerals : uh, asteroids?

biological samples : they can visit the park and pick them...

prisoners to experiment on : unlikely. anal probe mythology aside, do you really think they will need to do things so horrific that our humble senator wouldn't volunteer for the job?

These are just stock light science fiction examples. Try to think of something that humans and earth have, but aliens wouldn't.

[ Parent ]

Something we have... (none / 0) (#65)
by Betcour on Thu May 24, 2001 at 07:51:46 AM EST

Well if nothing else - culture. If western civilizations can bother to pay guys to stydy "primitive" civizilisations, then it's quite likely that any extra-terrestrial civilization would be interested in the same. And then, you need for humans to somewhat cooperate.

[ Parent ]
oh, no! (none / 0) (#66)
by Shren on Fri May 25, 2001 at 02:37:45 AM EST

The aliens are after our culture! Bastards! Good thing we can make more. The alien can come to the next party I go to. Counter-Strike, alcohol, flirting, and movies. Culture to spare. He can take a UFO full and we'd still have some left over in the fridge the next morning.

[ Parent ]
Tesla (none / 0) (#57)
by renigademaster on Sat May 19, 2001 at 11:42:12 PM EST

Once Tesla's name was mentioned the Bullshit alarm went off. This man "invented" AC current, and some other important things, but he never made large amounts of money and made up lies to try to get funding. If anyone actually beleives that Tesla could do all that he claimed, why would you need any explinations for UFO's? Most of what he said went against the laws of physics and were proved to be false. Whenever I hear his name come up with UFO's and gov conspericies I just think someone is making up a fantastic story to get attention.

Tesla's weirder stuff... (none / 0) (#60)
by NiMBUS on Sun May 20, 2001 at 07:49:44 PM EST

Take a look at:

Barrett, T.W., Annales de la Fondation Louis de Broglie,
Vol.16, No. 1, 1991, p.23-41.

I haven't yet read this myself but apparently it's an analysis of Tesla's free energy machine using quaternion-based EM theory, showing that it should indeed work.

[ Parent ]
Physics of UFO technology (4.00 / 1) (#61)
by NiMBUS on Sun May 20, 2001 at 08:05:41 PM EST

The physics on which UFO technology is allegedly based is called "scalar electromagnetics". It's main proponent and expert is Lt. Col. Tom Bearden. If what I have read about it so far is true, then you can basically do anything if you understand scalar EM - free energy (i.e. extracting 'zero point energy' from the vacuum), anti-gravity, telekinesis etc. Bearden is often described as a 'crackpot' or 'kook'. Some of his claims - such as his explanations for cancer and the idea that it can be cured with exposure to the right scalar EM waves - are a little too fantastic for me to believe without actually seeing them. However, those parts that relate to free energy appear to be well established in the scientific literature, if you know where to look and how to put the pieces together. I am not a physicist and have not yet had the time to try and understand Bearden's theories in depth, but I think there's likely something to them. We probably don't need any alien technology to extract free energy.

I'm convinced (3.00 / 1) (#62)
by aonifer on Mon May 21, 2001 at 03:13:58 PM EST

I didn't believe that aliens were visiting us until I saw a show at 1 AM on FX the other night. It was called "UFOs: The Best Evidence Ever, 2". The fact that it was a sequel intrigued me. Then they showed a video of an alien being interviewed telepathically by some g-men. That convinced me. Aliens walk amongst us. They apparently come from the Jim Henson planet.

Disclosing the UFOs | 65 comments (59 topical, 6 editorial, 0 hidden)
Display: Sort:


All trademarks and copyrights on this page are owned by their respective companies. The Rest © 2000 - Present Kuro5hin.org Inc.
See our legalese page for copyright policies. Please also read our Privacy Policy.
Kuro5hin.org is powered by Free Software, including Apache, Perl, and Linux, The Scoop Engine that runs this site is freely available, under the terms of the GPL.
Need some help? Email help@kuro5hin.org.
My heart's the long stairs.

Powered by Scoop create account | help/FAQ | mission | links | search | IRC | YOU choose the stories!