UAP
This article is a stub. You can help us by editing this page and expanding it.On X
2021
As I said before, I have no idea what to make of the UAP shift of our government. But I do know that this period is unlike *any* other epoch. And there are many *different* unprecedented things that could happen so close to the source code as we have been for 50 to 75 years.
The number of higher credibility officials or former officials choosing to walk right up to, yet generally not over, the line of confirming alien encounters via UAP has changed markedly.
I have always avoided UFO discussion. This makes that impossible:
At this point, the story I am tracking isnât âLittle Green Menâ. It is âOfficials inexplicably change course on UFO narrativeâ.
Also, the story about âTechnology never before seen.â Would make more sense with âTechnologyâ replaced by âPhysicsâ.
High level government officials have given UAPs credibility, but it's still pretty hard for an outsider to analyze the evidence objectively. It's all video footage and testimony. We need much stronger evidence to form any real opinion on UFOs being extraterrestrial or not.
The US/Europe seriously diverted attention from doing real theoretical physics almost 40 years ago in 1984 to explore physics inspired mathematics. Did China/Iran/Russia/Israel? I donât know.
But I can tell you this: no one in government is appropriately focused on new physics.
Imagine in 1900 some âcrankâ told you about thermonuclear weapons. Would you listen or laugh? Well, theyâd be only 5 decades away with no aliens necessary. And powered flight hadnât happened yet!
Thatâs how powerful a ânew physicsâ advantage is. Weâre behaving like lunatics.
Any time ANYONE at least 1/2-way viable says something weird or kooky or interesting (Wolfram, Lisi, etc.) the cost of a Department of Energy 1hr phone call is negligible. Almost no one with that background says anything like this. Maybe less than 1 such PhD âlunaticâ per year.
Do I think Wolfram, Lisi, Kaku, Smolin, Klee Irwin, Sarfatti, Woit/Penrose etc are right or on the doorstep of new physics? No! But Itâs also totally irrelevant to the security risk.
It wouldnât matter to me at all. I would check in with all of them: the cost is zero. The risk?
The thing I like least about Geometric Unity is not being able to know what it would unlock if true, any more than Einstein and Bohr understood Lise Meitner, Stan Ulam & Edward Tellerâs weaponization of New Physics.
We are talking about UFOs while not worrying about New Physics.
Think about the g-2 muon anomaly. Have you heard as much about that suggesting the possibility of New Physics from high precision (rather than high energy) as you have about the TicTac UAP?
Similarly, how often do you hear about UAP technology rather than physics issues. Right??
I have no idea what to make of the change in the UAP narrative. What I can tell you with certainty is that for such an ENORMOUS change in the narrative there is no sane explanation for the DOE not to be talking new physics risks and taking every one of the few claims seriously.
As we saw over & over in the 20th century, any small change in physics can change everything almost overnight. From A-Bombs to Semiconductors.
The handful of PhD level claims are of negligible cost to investigate & dismiss compared to a single fighter jet.
DOE lost the plot.
Enough! Letâs get back to UFOs and space opera so we donât have to worry about China & Iran making a breakthrough on a white board in some lab we canât see.
Moral: if you take UFOs seriously but not the risk of new physics, you arenât thinking clearly.
Just think about it. đ
Â
We are being told L*ttl*-Gr**n-M*n and are being handed the vowels i and four eâs by our defense department.
Only donât say UFO...say UAP. And when we ask âSo...aliens?â They say âThis is not consistent with the capabilities of any nation.â
Cut the crap: https://t.co/cfDIUVvndC
No one knows how to talk about this. It isnât our top headline.
My question is *how* is this not our top headline? Either the defense department is pranking the entire world or we have the largest dire security mystery on earth or we have contact.
All 3 would be our top story.
When our experts now talk openly about all these UFOs they talk about their âtechnologyâ.
And every time they do, I replace the word âtechnologyâ with the word âphysicsâ for the obvious reasons. Because if non-terrestrial craft are here, physics > technology.
Imagine if these UAP were actually visitors from beyond the local solar neighborhood. You wouldnât be focused on their technology first. Youâd want to understand how they got here and if they used new physics to do so. Most importantly, youâd want to know about dimension hacking.
A key issue in Geometric Unity for me is whether additional temporal & spatial degrees of freedom are accessible or shielded from manipulation. But consider what 6 additional temporal dimensions or the ability to manipulate rulers and protractors fundamentally could yield.
We are somehow no longer worried about any new physics. We are so sure it wonât suddenly progress in an unexpected way or unlock anything new that we arenât even paying attention to the field. After String Theory it all feels ironic.
This is potentially a *catastrophic* mistake.
Every threat against a head of state is taken seriously. Even the absurd ones. It is cheaper to dot a few âiâs and cross a few âtâs than to not worry about such threats.
Obviously.
UAP, Gain Of Function, New Physics, MANPADS, loose nukes, etc should be the same.
Obviously.
You can recover a surprising amount from just one simple statement: UAP, public health, standardized testing, immigration, mortgage backed securities, crypto, inflation methodology, String Theory, Aaron Swartz, Etc.
âInstitutions do not have the right to gaslight individuals.â
In a certain sense, that is the main through-line of my politics. Any institution that gaslights an ordinary human trying to make sense of the world in a reasonable fashion is wrong to me in a particularly profound way.
Donât know how to describe this as a political perspective.
Folk wisdom to the contrary, we are somehow mildly pregnant with UFOs.
Itâs very weird. Itâs ongoing titration of UFO declassifications so that we never wake up to hear âItâs little green men!â nor âWe figured out they were just seagulls covered in metallic flotsam.â
We just get pulled farther and farther out. Like a rip-tide you donât even notice.
Iâm not saying that the UAP/UFO stuff is đ˝. I am saying that weâre being *told* itâs đ˝ in a game.
The game: we present a mystery (UFOs) and then take away all but one option. If you guess *anything* but đ˝, we tell you it is de facto been ruled out.
Guess đ˝, and we shrug đ¤ˇââď¸.
Our National and military position on UAP/UFO in restricted military airspace makes no sense to me.
As in zero. Maybe I just donât get it but I really really donât get it. Can anyone make this make sense? Why is the leadership of the US scientific community totally absent?
The US isnât explaining or keeping secrets. We arenât debunking. We arenât defending ourselves. We arenât interested as a nation or even particularly curious. We arenât outraged. We do giggle a bit. We arenât debating. We arenât excited.
We are sleepwalking. As usual. Even here.
UFO / UAP Poll:
Note: if you think this is Atlantis or future humans or Orca technology, choose âalienâ to this earth. There just werenât enough characters allowed. Sorry.
On UFO/UAP: note the absence of top physicists. Or scientists more generally. Or academicians more generally than that.
Any science fiction author would know to get our leading physicists, geometers, evolutionary biologists, linguists on this if itâs real. Ok, so where are they?
There has been a tiny response. Mostly we see military, ex-military and civilians UFO community commenting.
The number of top relevant academicians commenting is near zero. This is very odd because we know from the Manhattan project that you need to tap your academics. Thoughts?
The UAP data is all of ours. Not the militaryâs exclusively.
It is scientific data. It is physics data.
We need to get it to our physicists. Not just our aerospace companies & defense contractors.
The Institute for advanced study, fully informed, should be leading discussion.
@the_IAS > @LockheedMartin
This is ridiculous.
Not releasing claimed (remarkable) data and expecting scientists comment is a recipe for destroying scientific credibility.
The Military destroyed lives of those who claimed to have seen what leaked.
I demand our data from the defense department. Demand yours as well.
- UAP #UFO
25000 of you answered. Almost 3 in 4 of you believe either that UFOs are a deliberate fabrication of the government and/or Next Generation US Tech, or from some previously unknown advanced civilization.
About 1 in 4 say the US is just incompetent (in error or being leapfrogged).
The poll ran for 3 days to decrease selection bias. It was stable from early on in the response patterns.
Over 2/5 of you have already gone to some form of alien explanation.
Even at this crude level I find this fascinating having run several of these Twitter polls in the past.
The poll was intended to force people to make a definite guess:
There is nothing real there (lying or incompetence)
There is something there (US tech)
There is something there (Adversaries).
There is something there (Aliens)
More characters would have helped, but not much.
But here is what I find fascinating: if 2/5 of us think this is Aliens, and 3/4 of us think the US is *baldly* lying on a matter of grave security, in possession of out of this world tech, or are being visited by advanced alien civilizationsâŚand UAP is still not the top story.
I personally have no idea whatâs going on. If I believe in my country then it is most likely aliens. If I disbelieve my country we are engaged in a lie that will soon collapse and destroy our trust and credibility even more.
Moral: get us US scientists our own US UAP data. Now.
My 1st tweet thread ever about UFO/UAP so far as I know was end of April of 2020.
So I am WAY late to this party.
Why? Because I thought this was all bullshit. I shutdown most every conversation until last year on this.
Why? Because it seemed obviously preposterous. I trusted.
I never went through an X-files phase. No âChariots of The Godsâ or âAncient Aliensâ phase. Ever.
I canât even conceive of a world where this national strategy makes any sense.
The US can be occasionally ruthless. But just plain dumb? I still canât believe we are Keystone Cops.
John reached out to me not all that long ago. I also will not kill myself. Iâm not suicidal.
Also, this is getting fucking ridiculous.
This authoritarian turn around Epstein, Wuhan, Ivermectin, âFortifying Democracyâ, UAP, climate, mostly peaceful protests, Leaked Tax ReturnsâŚ
Getting subtle messages from U.S. officials saying, in effect: "We're coming for you McAfee! We're going to kill yourself". I got a tattoo today just in case. If I suicide myself, I didn't. I was whackd. Check my right arm.
$WHACKD available only on http://McAfeedex.com:)
Â
âŚmandatory racism exorcism at work, #metoo witch hunts, shadowbanning, Build Back Better, Trust and Safety, TOS changes, compulsory speech, ANTIFA denials, Labor Shortage claims, denial etcâŚetc⌠is clearly a repudiation of all the US stands for. He was bugged by it all.
And if you mention the ENORMOUS number of issues that are behaving in this *same* totally artificial fashion, the reputation attacks SOAR from all sides.
What the hell has control of the US and why is it localized to the Democratic Party & itâs associated media and businesses?
I wish I could remember his call w/ more precision. But it was when I was in San Francisco. I couldnât believe I was known to him.
NOTE: I will be taking a new approach to all repetitive doxing, reputational or other attacks as a result.
Think Iâm done fucking around.
Having been menaced over asking for Epstein as a fake âDisgraced Financierâ to be called out by our press and connected to any intelligence services, this takes on new meaning.
When you canât call your own damn teams for help, who can you even call?
I so hate this shit. RIP JM.
DOD: It appears not to be that we can't confirm that it's no longer the case that with multiple sensor data that it is now unlikely that at least some UAP are likely to be non-human technology or enemies leapfrogged us.
Public: Huh. Gosh. Ok. Meh.
DOD: Phew. Dodged that bullet.
Itâs totally irresponsible for any scientist to refuse to investigate UAP after this report with a full and unpruned decision tree at her side.
That includes considering the total incompetence of the defense department, *aliens*, spoofing by enemies and UFO political economy.
Name a single species on earth so insignificant that biologists do not bother to include it on the phylogenetic tree or consider it interesting?
Neil:Pardon me for asking, but isnât *this* an egocentric anti-curiosity position elevating radical obligate âdebunkingâ over science?
How egocentric of us to think that Space Aliens, who have mastered interstellar travel across the Galaxy, would give a shit about humans on Earth.
Â
This isnât meant as a dig. I am trying to use your same exactly choice of normative framing that you used to dismiss my fellow inquiring minds in the wake of the UAP report. Happy to remove it if we can get rid of the invective. Thanks.
*exact
I subscribe to an unpopular position. Consider 3 kinds of đ:
A) Ones with no life or at least no life within striking distance of the source code (ToE).
B) Worlds that are on the verge of gaining the source code but are confined to a terrestrial surface.
C) Root level access.
Now, if you can jack into the cosmos as âRootâ it MAY facilitate stuff thatâs unimaginable (e.g. dimension hacking) yet only one remaining big upgrade away from being able to fuse nuclei. Which is where we are now.
Iâd guess all civilizations that are Root care about each other.
The following is pure speculation (Tutored by experience w/ GU):
I think we sent a signal to the cosmos in 1945 and then on Nov. 1, 1952. Fusing Nuclei is what you do JUST before you become root. If this is right, we let the cosmos know âEarth is root adjacentâ w/o awareness.
Is there anyone in the cosmos listening? Perhaps not. But we are all acting as if living on a terrestrial surface with the ability to fuse nuclei is some totally normal thing due to <70 years of good luck. Which is insane.
Now what if Iâm right in the above and the cosmos cares?
The idea of a newly space-time-faring unwise civilization with fresh root level access is a nightmare. And no one but no one on earth takes this seriously anymore. After 1952 fundamental physics went on progressing normally for ~20yrs. So after that itâs been~50yrs of stagnation.
In those ~50yrs we learned to stop worrying. About Fusion-weapons, interstellar travel, a cosmos that listens or even our ability to progress to the end. In 1984, physicists were talking about the end of physics without irony. They then failed, while failing to report failure.
So they told another story: âString theory didnât fail!! It may take 100s of years to figure it out!â That is âIf we String Theorists canât make progress, a Theory of Everything is now far over the Horizon for everyone else.â But thatâs not logically necessary. I say weâre close.
It makes sense to worry about *every* small boutique program: Lisi, Wolfram, Barbour, LQG, Tegmark, ConnesLott, Octonions, amplitudhedron, etc. Our science/defense establishment doesnât seem to get this idea: after 50yrs of no progress it seems too abstract to practical men.
I learned from my buddy @SamHarrisOrg that he thought đ˝ would be Millenia ahead of us. Look at Nov 1, 1952 from Nov 1 1902: you donât have powered flight, know what relativity or the quantum is, know that neutrons exist, know about anti-matter, etc.
From â02, â52 IS millennia. https://t.co/YiRc1AbkcU
Well, we may or may not have a major update in our future. And if it unlocks dimension hacking, looking glass matter, VEV/potential hacking, multi-temporal pseudo-Riemannian metrics, Dark Chemisty, Dark Light, additional families, RaritaSchwinger fields, etc then we get upgraded.
And I believe all at once.
What does that mean? I honestly donât know.
But Imagine you sent a chainsaw, a Bugatti, Ibogaine, âMy-1st-Crisperâ, and an F-18 to a badly behaved 5yr old child for a birthday present w a simple card: âEnjoy!â Weâd worry specifically b/c immaturity.
Thatâs what NDT has most wrong. He thinks we are far behind anything that could visit us, but that ISNâT backed up by science. Heâd have to explain why we arenât âroot adjacentâ right now or that root buys us nothing. Well?
Think of the relationship of Iran to nukes for example.
Iran is now Nuke adjacent. And their facilities and scientists keep running into mysterious problems. Why? Surely not because Iran is too insignificant to her more advanced neighbors. That would mirror NDTâs argument. My argument is that root level access to nuclei *suffices*.
Am I saying âAliens are hereâ? Of course not. But the âRoot Adjacency Hypothesisâ is not properly discussed almost anywhere. Which defies all explanation.
Perhaps everyone else is right & Iâm wrong. Absolutely! But itâs common for the world to make a crazy dumb idea a consensus.
And I think NDT is enforcing a dangerous âCopernicanâ consensus that we are too insignificant to even monitor or visit, to go along with âWeâve had Nukes for 70 years without losing a city. I wouldnât worry. What could possibly go wrong.â
This is just a human rationality flaw.đ
When does Jon Stewart signal it is finally okay to talk about progressing cognitive decline?
He isnât the only one. Jon did the Wuhan lab leak. @TIME did âfortificationâ 2020. @BarackObama got UAP and Wokeness. Brad Delong got to reveal NAFTA was social DarwinianâŚ
But the rules are very clear on EXACTLY who is allowed to say âPrevious Fringe view X is now Mainstream!â
What was special about Stewart was quite subtle. He didnât say âThe facts have changed.â He said: itâs obvious & has always been so, that the Biosafety Level4 Bat Corona Virus lab is the likely origin while Colbert feigned being shocked: The Gated Institutional Narrative updated.
An irrational attachment to being able to feed their families & avoid reputational ruin on a going forward basis. Call it a hunch.
UAP with crappy video and without hard data is unbounded downside with limited upside for scientists.
Itâs absurd: We donât bring in our own team.
The fact that many of us have moved on from the UAP report is fascinating.
During the financial crisis, the phrase âNon-Recourse Loanâ was used to describe the governmentâs âreliefâ strategy.
And folks just walked right by âNon-Recourse Loansâ as if it were just boring jargon.
@JohnGingyJo Read it *super* closely. Thatâs the only way it is so interesting.
Physicsâ Overton Window.
We can talk about CRAZY stuff thatâs irrelevant to our lives & never progresses: Boltzmann Brains, Many Worlds, String Theory Unification, AdS, Super-partners, etc.
We canât talk about anything that COULD suddenly change everything. UAP, other TOEs, etc
My point isnât at all that low probability topics are likely to change everything. Itâs that we feel *safe* knowing certain crazy ideas always seem to lead nowhere. But we feel unsafe when we donât know if what weâre looking at *could* surprise us by suddenly changing our world.
An example: In GU, relativity theory is recovered from the Observerse which is constructed around two separate spaces X and Y. Einsteinâs Spacetime (a signature (1,3) 4-manifold with pseudo Riemannian metric) is recovered from observations of Y by X.
Another example. Some see spacetime as the commutative limit of a non-commutative manifold. That would be beyond relativity.
Others see topology changing operators that allow agents to change spacetime topologically. Again that would be beyond the usual relativity theory.
But in standard Relativity theory as an effective theory, I donât think about FTL. Sorry.
Scratch the UAP story and you soon learn that there are a surprising number of seemingly sane people orbiting around the Pentagon who assert that UAP are particularly active around our nuclear weapons.
What to make of this? đ¤ˇââď¸ But the above *can* be said *without* speculation.
Are they all insane? Donât know. Seems unlikely.
Are they propagandized? Seems far fetched but possible.
Is it a Psy-op? Maybe.
Mass psychosis? Donât think so. But it could be a self reinforcing belief.
But no one wants to chew up their credibility talking about these rumors.
And just so we are clear on the nature of the rumors, here is what you hear over and over again:
âThe UAP arenât merely hovering over nukes. The UAP know how to *shut down* nuclear weapons.â
This is why I never listened to UFO rumors BEFORE the DOD report. Itâs just too crazy.
Things I don't believe we can't conclusively resolve:
A) COVID's origin.
B) The Jeffrey Epstein story.
C) UAP.
D) JFK assassination.
E) Vegas Shooting.
F) Extent of 'Democracy Fortifying' in 2020.
G) Efficacy of Non-Vaccines.
H) Mysterious WEF 'Build Back Better' mantra.
I) Negative impacts of Trade known to have been suppressed.
J) Adulteration of BLS CPI measure of inflation.
K) Negative economic impacts of Immigration.
L) Sudden spike in fake 'Objective Third Party Fact Checking'.
M) Sudden "Diversity Equity Inclusion" explosion.
Q) Joe Biden's state of cognitive decline.
R) Nature of MSNBC campagin against Andrew Yang.
S) Nature of Dean Scream, Anti-Ron Paul and other interference in democracy by Mainstream media News.
T) Impact of loss of mandatory retirement on young people seeking work.
U) Rex84.
V) Collusion between National Academy and National Science foundation division of Policy Research and Analysis to fake demographic crisis in mid 1980s.
W) Lack on anyone building the significant & desperately needed new non-profit institutions despite skyhigh wealth inequality.
X) Loss of Academic Freedom across the board in Academe.
Y) Loss of the Lancet and other publications as trusted non-political sources of fact.
Z) The true nature of @EcoHealthNYC w its relationship to @doddtra & Dr A. Fauci.
Moral: much of this 'ambiguity' is serving the few.
@MLGACE Whatever our data is for UFO/UAP. Accelerations. Heat signature. Cloaking. Transmedia behavior. Cornering ability. I have no idea. I just know we aren't looking at high quality data and I know we have MUCH higher quality data than has been released.
After a zoom call yesterday with Avi Loeb, Iâve decided to join Harvardâs Galileo Project on its Research Team.
Time to de-stigmatize the whole topic and help the data talk. The claimed phenomenon of UFO/UAP, after all, should be a scientific question.
A key point. We use cosmic rays as if they were from an accelerator. There is an outside chance that UAP should be thought of the same way.
If weâre hurting for new physical phenomena to analyze, some portion of our physics effort should be spent debunking or understanding UAP.
@delta_waverider There are many sightings that are bunk. Your issue is with the nature of the complement of that set. But debunking will need to be done in all future scenarios. Nature of the beast.
@michaelshermer I havenât seen any compelling data. I have been told that such data exists in abundance from multiple sources that I trust. No idea how to square that.
@s_offiler @michaelshermer Not saying anything beyond that I find the videos released uncompelling as data. I find the incident super interesting. Would like to see the entire time series of data taken in by all sensors.
I have been dismayed by the senator before this.
But this is correct. And courageous. UAP is both a security and a scientific issue. Stop the giggles. Start the study.
Maybe I was too hasty about dismissing KG. Opening my mind again.
2022
Can someone authenticate the existence of this claim for me? Iâm new to UFOs. Before the report on UAP this last summer, I would think this is BS.
Now I believe itâs more likely to be real, having updated my Bayesian priors. And, again, apologies to all of you Iâve denigrated.
Is there such a text?
Has the USG owned up to it?
Is there a PDF of it circulating?
Are there others attached to Wright Patterson AFB, or the RIAS, or the Physical Fields institute of UNC Chappell Hill or Brown Universityâs Non Linear Dynamics Group, or the Glen L Martin Co.?
Sorry for the weird specificity but Iâm trying to link this to things that I know to be real and that Iâve been puzzled about for years that never made sense to me.
Also, itâs hard to fake an entire text competently. So this is interesting.
Thanks #ufotwitter.
Hi Michael,
Not updating my priors on all UFO sightings. Iâm updating my priors on âThe Golden Age of General Relativityâ, B DeWitt, L Witten, RIAS, the Martin Company, etc.â And Iâm doing it based on a government report inconsistent with the closing report of BlueBook. And you?
Dear @EricRWeinstein
According to UFOlogists 95% of all sightings for all time are explained by natural/terrestrial phenom (planes, blimps, geese, sun dogs, lens flares, etc.). 5% unexplained (â ET or Russian tech). X new sighting is made. Which bin is X most likely to be in?
We have been spun. And as skeptics we have to notice the inconsistencies.
We were likely either spun this last summer, or spun at the closure of Operation BlueBook.
The whole thing sounds like total bullshit. But we also have a lot of weird stuff from real 1950s science.
Who were Babson and Bahnson? Those stories donât make much sense. Why Bryce and Cecile DeWitt and Peter Higgs in Chappell hill funded as part of a weird anti-gravity program?
Simple question: how did you tutor your priors last summer? Not at all? A tiny amount?
Skeptically, E
My colleague and friend Jesse Michels asked me to interview Dr. @haroldputhoff on UAP/UFO. Wasnât sure how to do this, so we tried oscillating between steelmanning and critiquing what Puthoff was able to say within his obligations of non-disclosure.
Can we just end the secrecy?
For those of you speculating on channels reaching out to Sam Harris, myself and others on UFO/UAP. There was a minimum of one planned dissemination that got called off for reasons unknown. I am not at liberty to discuss. But I can say why people like Sam are likely to be quiet.
What has so far been released to the public by government has been minimal. No one I know wants to incinerate credibility becoming a true believer over a tiny number of relatively low quality USG videos which, at least to me, prove absolutely nothing.
So then: why be interested?
Because there is an ocean of weird behavior and claims coming from otherwise sober seeming USG and former USG people. And a lot of it is weirdly consistent. So Iâm totally underwhelmed by the direct evidence so far. But Iâm baffled by the indirect evidence. What generated this?
I wonât speak for @SamHarrisOrg. But I failed to generate *any* good explanation for the repeated and fairly consistent assertions of DOD/IC types with no evident training in acting or theater. To say nothing of ordinary non-USG people. SoâŚnone of us knows what to think. Truly.
Something huge is up. It could be a psychological operation. It could be next generation spoofing by an adversary. It could be mass psychosis. But I donât want to speculate beyond a decision tree. Something huge *is* up. And I dug hard, but failed to get beyond indirect evidence.
What is worse, the most parsimonious explanations are the obvious two:
A) Our government is engaged in deception and utterly brilliant at it.
B) đ˝.
If the former, it is more competent than we ever suspected.
Everything else is less parsimonious. But I canât make sense of it.
One request: stop speculating. Some folks are reaching out. They pulled back a bit. And I for one may stop talking about this if asked due to the security issues. But that which has been shared with the public is not enough to go on. Itâs the indirect evidence we are watching. đ
2023
So far as I am aware, there is as yet ZERO evidence of UAP/UFO craft defying the laws of known physics based on high quality publicly available data.
There are simply an enormous number of videos, rumors, eye witness accounts, and indirect indications.
What should we propose?
I have no idea what the ground truth is on UAP. But I strongly believe itâs time for science to take UAP seriously, & push for answers. Even if every single one is mundane, we will surely learn things along the way. There is LOTS of evidence. Itâs time to look for PROOF w/data!
I donât mean to rain on any parades, but the complete absence of high quality data made available to scientists is both a MAJOR clue and an impediment to figuring this out. It is interpreted as the government not wanting scientists to investigate. Thus, it makes it sound like BS.
My position on UFO/UAP is that this is something *huge* that Iâm simply not smart enough to figure out. Iâm not going to lie and say itâs all weather balloons. And Iâm not going to lie and say we have solid high quality publicly available data when we donât: we are being starved.
Did I miss some tweets, Eric, where you slowly pivoted from the "government have kept all of this data secret, this must mean something, why is no one taking this seriously" to the message today?
I haven't got a strong stance here but felt like there's been a change in yours.
Point blank: we are being starved for information. My response to being starved for information is not to guess which branch of the decision tree is correct but to share with you the contradictory evidence both direct and circumstantial. I donât know why others pretend to know.đ
2024
Many of you are asking for my reaction regarding the just released @DoD_AARO report. There is much to say. I want to think carefully before saying more. I am not unsympathetic to US National Security needs in this.
In February of 2023, @joerogan invited me for four hours onto the world's largest English Language program (episode #1945) to describe in detail the mystery of potential US Government involvement in UFOs and Post-Einsteinian physics during the mysterious "Golden Age of General Relativity". It has been seen and discussed by millions as expected. I was thus eager to see how thorough this report would be by combing it for search strings raised in my research.
REFERENCES:
"Glenn L Martin Company": 0
Bryce Cecile DeWitt: 0
Institute for Field Physics: 0
Research Institute for Advanced Study: 0
Louis Witten: 0
Roger Babson: 0
Agnew Bahson: 0
Gravity Research Foundation: 0
Gravity: 1 (pg. 32)
Rennaisance Technologies: 0
UNC Chapel Hill: 0
Solomon Lefschetz: 0
Freeman Dyson: 0
Herman Bondi: 0
Negative Mass: 0
"Scientific and Intelligence Aspects of the UFO Problem"
Australian Intelligence 1971 Report: 0
Australia: 0
George Rideout: 0
Edward Teller: 0
Robert Oppenheimer: 0
David Kaiser: 0
Wright-Patterson Air Force Base: 1 (pg. 18)
Curtis Wright Aerospace Buffalo: 0
Pascal Jordan: 0
Mansfield Ammendment: 0
Joshua Goldberg: 0
Office of Global Access: 0
University of Texas, Austin: 0
Center for Dynamical Systems: 0
Physics: 5 (pgs. 16-17, 53)
Relativity: 0
Albert Einstein: 0
George Bunker: 0
Welcome Bender: 0
George Trimble: 0
CONCLUSION: This report purports to have studied the questions raised surrounding UFO/UAP related research of the US federal Government. It, in fact, appears to have studied a carefully chosen SUBSET of the claims selected from among those which appear to have mass appeal to the so-called "UFO Community." It completely, or nearly completely, avoided reporting on all questions surrounding issues which have been raised in serious research and by PhD level researchers who have raised scientific questions in this area. This continues the pattern of using PhD level government scientists who appear to avoid the actual research questions most likely to involve sensitve Special Access Programs and Stovepiped Research which are compartmentalized by design. Whether the omissions are due to issues of avoidance, misdirection (e.g. so-called Limited Hangout strategy), ignorance or incompetance cannot be discerned from the information given.
RECOMMENDATION: It is simply not possible to treat the current AARO report as historically complete or comprehensive. To gain the public trust, the successor to AARO would have to expand and redo this analysis with input from domain professionals who are trusted by the public not to have an apparent agenda or government background (e.g. Prof. David Kaiser of MIT or Dr. Nima Arkani Hamed of IAS, Prof. Brian Keating of UCSD, Avi Loeb of Harvard) Otherwise, it is relatively easy for scientists to "Follow the Silence" in government reports to see what is *not* being addressed or discussed.
Â
Today the DoD released our Historical Record Report Volume 1.
AAROâs report covers more than 70 years of the U.S. record relating to UAP, draws from interviews, archival research, and partnerships across government and industry.
Read it here: https://statics.dod.teams.microsoft.us/evergreen-assets/safelinks/1/atp-safelinks.html
NOTE: Above reference to the work of Prof. Kaiser and to JRE #1945 are included to establish that both were in the public domain, independent, in high levels of agreement, and that there was *ample* time for AARO to investigate these claims which appear not to have any impact.
2025
No. You are correct.
Assume even that beings were using additional hidden dimensions to traverse space and time. You still wouldnât talk like this. Itâs just mental sludge.
I can riff a bunch of equally vapid vibe terms:
âDigital Seraphimâ
âEnergetic Consciousnessâ
âDistributed Cognitionâ
âDisembodied Guardiansâ
âPlasmic Willâ
âResonance Lifeformsâ
âVibrational Travelersâ
âRetrocausal Projectorsâ
âTrans-Temporal Sentinalsâ
âAutonomous Vaccum Faunaâ
This is just super embarrassing. This is the level of us as a country now.
Am I crazy to assume that this is internally facing propaganda rather than actual interdimensional beings?
đĽđ¨BREAKING NEWS: Rep. Anna Paulina Luna just broke the internet after claiming she has seen evidence of "interdimensional beings" with credible people reporting "movement outside of time and space."
"They call them interdimensional beings. I think that they can actually operate through the time spaces that we currently have."
"I can tell you without getting into classified conversations that there have been incidents where very credible people have reported that there have been movements outside of time and space."
This comes after claims of a possible alien invasion in December by Harvard scientist, and several reports of aliens and UAPs in the last 4 years like the incident at the Bayside mall in Miami which has never been fully reported.
Something is coming whether it be real or fake be prepared.
I then asked AI to come up with equally meaningless technical terms based on âInterdimensional beingsâ. Here are the first 50 results:
1. Quantum Nomads
2.Etheric Sentinels
3.Chrono-Weavers
4.Harmonic Architects
5.Phase-Walking Entities
6.Neuro-Aether Collectives
7.Prismatic Wanderers
8.Dreamfield Navigators
9.Celestial Executors
10.Photon Shepherds
11.Metacognitive Guilds
12.Temporal Lattice Keepers
13.Spectral Conservators
14.Luminal Envoys
15.Gravimetric Messengers
16.Pan-Dimensional Heralds
17.Subspace Wardens
18.Chrono-Sovereigns
19.Singularity Whisperers
20.Interstitial Custodians
21.Reality Sculptors
22.Hyperspace Envoys
23.Archetypal Infiltrators
24.Thoughtform Navigators
25.Omniversal Pathfinders
26.Quantum Seers
27.Hyperconscious Collectives
28.Mindwave Pilgrims
29.Scalar Frequency Keepers
30.Eidolon Oracles
31.Astral Cartographers
32.Metatronic Stewards
33.Voidborn Shepherds
34.Causal Horizon Monitors
35.Memetic Wardens
36.Phase Entanglers
37.Pulseborne Architects
38.Resonance Nomads
39.Energy-Field Sentinels
40.Tachyonic Dreamers
41.Infrasonic Voyagers
42.Consciousness Carriers
43.Zero-Point Custodians
44.Orbital Keepers
45.Psychewave Diplomats
46.Entropic Harvesters
47.Lightwoven Inhabitants
48.Chrono-Spiral Navigators
49.Plasmatic Envoys
50.Harmonic Continuum Guardians
Yes.
I think the US almost certainly has at least one fake UFO program. A decoy.
Think of that decoy as putting out bad information to confuse adversaries. But what does it due to our own scientists?
Now imagine a post relativistic gravitational theory group PRTG here on earth. You would imagine that our own government would be working with that PRTG. Because that group is trying to figure out if we are trapped here, the last thing you want to do is to have the f****ng decoy program polluting our own understanding.
I think the morons in our decoy program forgot to bring in their own PRTGs. Because to a PRTG, UFOsâŚ.real NHI craftâŚ.would be key data. And fake craft is just feeding your own scientists poison and polluting their own understanding.
So we donât have ANY top tier PRTG in this game. Thatâs what makes me think there is only a fake UFO decoy program. OTOHâŚ
Can you explain your thoughts a little better?
Have you put any thought into whatâs actually going on specifically in the null hypothesis case? Whatâs this all for? Itâs not clear to me at all that there is any sensibility in either direction.
ContinuedâŚ.on the other hand it sure looks like in the 1950s we set up two cut outs and created âThe Golden Age Of General Relativityâ.
And then in the wake of Howard Morland and John Aristotle Phillips, it kinda looks like we stagnated and soft sunsetted real open research in fundamental physics with a preposterous story about String Theory and Quantum Gravity. Which makes no sense to anyone honest after 40 years of failure.
So that is pretty odd. Scientists donât shoot down new ideas for 40 years to protect one known not to work. That isnât how science works.
So that opens the question, is there a second secret physics program (like a Manhattan Project for Gravity 2.0) and perhaps a second UFO program. A non decoy. And while I see no direct evidence of NHI craft, we do have a mystery as to why the U.S. would destroy its own commanding advantage in fundamental Physics over string theory and its obvious failure. It just doesnât pass the laugh test.
The only thing I can wonder about is if we figured a bit of new physics out that lead to new Manhattan Project-level secrecy around all fundamental physics. Maybe 50 high ranking people (e.g. @SecRubio ) arenât lying with the skill of Pacino and Brando. đ¤ˇââď¸.
Something is way off. We arenât doing physics in the open any more. And we arenât asking our own people for help. So you would be crazy not to wonderâŚWTAF?
This is, unfortunately, consistent with a second Manhattan project on Gravity. This is exactly how secret science works. For example: We stagnated chain reaction research outside los Alamos and continued doing successful physics inside the compound.
Well, the first part of this is true today. We are dead in the water in university level fundamental physics beyond GR and the SM. The second part is unknown. Is there a place where you can get paid to succeed at physics rather than paid to do things which are known not to work? I just donât know.
Moral: Physics when done well and right, is very very dangerous after all. And I want us to get back to doing physics that will go way beyond Einstein.
Even the kind that goes boom:đĽ
đ