We may be faking a UFO situation
"We may be faking a UFO situation" on Feb 21, 2023, JRE 1945 and "We may be faking a UFO situation" JRE Clip, confirmed on June 6, 2025 via WSJ article The Pentagon Disinformation That Fueled Americaâs UFO Mythology and June 11, 2025 via New York Post.
On X
The title of this @joerogan clip from #1945 is literally: "We might be faking a UFO situation."
OBVIOUSLY.
As I have said before, "When we do something secret and cool, we generally pair it with something fake." This is standard operating proceedure (e.g. Operation Overlord was D-Day/Operation Fortitude was a Faked Norway Invasion). This is what 'Covert' means. Covert means 'Deniable'. Not secret, but *deniable*.
BOMBSHELL: Pentagon created fake UFO evidence, promoted false alien stories https://nypost.com/video/bombshell-pentagon-created-fake-ufo-evidence-promoted-false-alien-stories/
Imho, This @nypost article is **NOT** the big story. That is coming.
CLAIM: We will find that there is a minimum of *one* pair of fake/real programs and that it is much much bigger than the hazing ritual being reported. But, more importantly, there are likely many more such pairs of REAL/FAKE programs in this area.
Yes: we fake UFOs. And yes, there is a REAL Aerospace program that hides under cover of the FAKE UFO program.
But this is not about an Air Force Hazing ritual. This isn't a prank. This is a whole life ruining program where we will find that we regularly destroy the minds of our own people with disinformation and threats to their mental health and families. Military heroes. Scientists. IC spooks.
The real FAKE programs are bigger than this. And the REAL program is also bigger than just conventional Aerospace. I wish to mark this claim now: eventually, this is going to be about the actual SCIENCE of Physics.
I don't think Quantum Gravity as it is practiced is a real research program. It is the obvious candidate for the "inhibitor" that, when added to research, stagnated physics...and it didn't come out of some longstanding program from the birth of quantum mechanics. It came out of nowhere right before we stopped making progress on the Lagrangian of the real world.
This is going to explain what @pmarca keeps talking about with @bariweiss, @bhorowitz and others: we took whole areas of physics off line after the Manhattan project and that was *NOT* limited to just the Nuclear Physics of nuclear warheads.
CLAIM: These FAKE and REAL programs will keep going and extend to "The Golden Age of General Relativity". We will eventually learn that the mysterious philathropists Roger Babson and Agnew Bahnson who funded Louis Witten and Bryce deWitt (respectively), along with others were (obviously) NationalSecurity cutouts. They were real people giving cover to some major Post-Manhattan physics thing.
From Australian Intelligence (circa 1971) we have this which I both believe and hypothesized LONG before finding it:
It's time to come clean. The disclosure is coming. One way or the other. A so-called "Limited Hangout" is impossible in 2025. This is not going to work. There is too much information out here already:
Claim: We are going to learn that just as public work on chain reaction physics mysteriously vanished during the Manhattan Project, research in fundamental physics changed character TWICE. Once in the late 1960s-early 1970s with the Mansfield Amendment, after the quark model and spontaneous symmetry breaking and then more dramatically around 1983-1984 shortly after the catastrophic disclosures of Howard Borland and John Aristotle Philips to handle the "Streisand Effect" problem, which had no such name at the time.
Eventually we learned why progress immediately stalled in physics due to secrecy and the building of the atomic bombs. We have an obvious second candidate and we aren't allowed to ask questions about why we aren't getting back to real physics in open universities. The dangerous and powerful kind that can build prosperity, weapons, energy, travel, propulsion and insight.
We have now found out that we were lying to our own people. As I predicted to you all.
I predict that this is **way** more interesting. This revelation about the lies is just the beginning. And it may have nothing whatsoever to do with NHI or flying saucers.
But either way, let us be bold enough to ask for the *full* lie. About our own history. Our science. Our Intelligence Community. Our Defense Contractors.
It's our country after all. At least supposedly...
đ
One of my greatest frustrations is the inability for nuance and ânot knowingâ to survive internet discussion.
My assertion that âwe may be faking a UFO situationâ on Rogan is independent of alien visitation. Yes, it appears that we faked UFOs! I wasnât wrong.
And yes, there still could be Aliens. ButâŠNo, I have not seen any credible evidence of this to date.
So many of you know what is going on. Congratulations. I, myself, do not.
But I do think I called it correctly on several fronts:
A) We do fake UFOs!!
B) We use UFOs as a multi-purpose cover.
C) We mentally destroy and intimidate our own folks over UFOs. Why? I donât know.
D) There is some weird tie between actual high level physics and anti-gravity / UFOs that lasted for about 15-20 years that showed up as âThe Golden Age of General Relativityâ centered around Louis Witten/Roger Babson and Bryce DeWitt/Agnew Bahnson. Babson and Bahnson appear to be âcutoutsâ who funded this.
E) US aerospace companies are not just about conventional aerospace. They also appear to be secure shells in which some theoretical research was done. At least historically. The Glenn L Martin company (Later Martin-Marietta, then Lockheed-Martin) may be foremost among them.
F) If we were smart enough to have a permanent secret post Einsteinian physics project, it would be hidden in plain sight in the age of satellites, rather than off in New Mexico again. It would be under a cover story for a secretive secure facility running through billions employing particle theorists, differential geometers/relativists and machine learning people. It would be easy to find because of that signature, but impossible to prove. It would be co-located with other institutions on which it depended.
G) We are likely not smart enough to have such a program. 10%-20% chance we are. Most likely not. Breaks my heart. But we arenât as smart as we were in the â40s.
ââ-
In my world of people who actually study gravity professionally, all of the above claims have been shocking to these PhD colleagues. Even when presented with direct evidence they donât want to think about it.
So many of you seem to know so much that I donât. You are perpetually certain.
Yet you canât prove anything.
My proposal: you do you.
I have seen no hard evidence for anything shocking beyond that list above. Which is still plenty shocking to gravity researchers.
Thanks.
Only thing i disagree with here is the UFO issue is fake. Itâs absolutely not. Look up the Bugo Sphere research ongoing in Mexico if you want to see a real UFO object. Or the UFO footage above the LA fires in Feb.