When Disclosure seems Co-opted: Recognising deception in the current UFO disclosure battle

A follow-up to "The Barriers to Global UFO Disclosure: Power, Betrayal, and the Compounding Cost of Secrecy"

Background

On February 19, 2026, President Trump signed a directive instructing federal agencies to identify and release government records concerning UFOs/UAP, alien or extraterrestrial life, and related matters. Whatever one thinks of the current U.S. administration, the directive represented a meaningful political acknowledgement that the American public deserves access to information that has been withheld for decades.

Then came the implementation.

Whistleblowers — current and former government employees and contractors with direct knowledge of UFO-related programs — were told their non-disclosure agreements (NDAs) would be waived. They could speak. But only through designated channels: AARO, ODNI, and PURSUE. Not to Congress directly. Not to the public. Back into the system or the "structure of UFO secrecy".

A UAP whistleblower named Matthew Brown published an article yesterday — July 24, 2026 — that I recommend reading in full. Titled "Catch and Kill," it documents in sobering detail why those three designated channels (mainly AARO and ODNI) are precisely the wrong ones to trust with sensitive whistleblower testimony. Brown's article is one of the most concretely argued pieces on the current UAP transparency effort I have read in some time. 

Hence, his article functions as a credible anchor for what I want to explore in this post. Because reading Brown's account through a particular framework (military deception principles) reveals something that I think should be named directly:

What is currently being presented as a top down UFO/UAP transparency effort resembles the fingerprints of a psychological operation and/or institutional deception.

I am not claiming that everyone officially involved in the current UFO disclosure battle is consciously running a psy-op or reproducing deception. Neither am I claiming that the presidential directive was issued in bad faith. 

What I am claiming is that the institutional structures in place — independent of the intentions behind them — are producing outcomes consistent with well-documented military deception principles and tactics. 

And I am claiming these outcomes are likely not random. It is what happens when institutions (e.g., political, military, intelligence, etc.) protecting decades of mismanagement of the UFO issue are put in charge of revealing, or whitewashing, the ethical and legal transgressions regarding UFO/UAP secrecy.

However, even though the outcomes are likely not accidental, it does not logically follow that the entire mismanagement of the UFO issue is because of deliberate deception, misdirection and/or concealment. 

Therefore, when you read the military deception tools below, keep in mind that the mismanagement of UFO transparency is most likely a complex mixture of incompetence, conformity, ideology, and deliberate (and sometimes rouge) decisions to use any means necessary to hinder disclosure (which from a bureaucratic and technocratic perspective would be catastrophic).

Principles of military deception and why they matter here

The US Army Field Manual FM 90-2, Battlefield Deception (1988), documents principles and tactics of military deception. These tools of military deception were developed from game theory, historical analysis, etc., and they were originally designed for use against foreign adversaries in military contexts. The principles and tactics I will focus on are: Magruder's Principle, Jones' Dilemma, and Cry-Wolf.

The barriers to global UFO disclosure: Power, betrayal and the compounding cost of secrecy

Introduction

The production and reproduction of the political-economic structure, the primary barrier to global UAP disclosure. Source.

In my previous post, I argued that a global UFO/UAP disclosure is necessary because the ontological acknowledgement of the phenomenon's reality belongs to all of humanity, and because our institutions have both the duty and, I believe, the capacity to deliver it wisely.

What I deliberately left out of that post were the harder questions. The ones I find genuinely difficult to think through without arriving at conclusions that are uncomfortable and, unfortunately, realistic.

This post is an attempt to go into that uncomfortable territory honestly. It is a more pessimistic, or realistic, text than my previous one. Realistic in the sense of looking clearly at the barriers to global UFO disclosure without softening them into something more manageable than they are.

What I explore and claim in this post is nothing original. Many UFO researchers, and armchair commentators like myself, have considered the barriers to an official UFO disclosure throughout UFO history. For example, Richard Dolan recently commented on the UAP briefing at Capitol Hill on June 9, featuring David Grusch, members of Congress, and several prominent figures involved in the disclosure effort.

What Mr Dolan says in his YouTube-video (duration: 12:34 min.) about the key issues for disclosure being "legislative power" (e.g., whistleblower protection) and "the system defending itself" apply to what I write below.

One crucial thing that was said at the UAP briefing on Capitol Hill came from Representative Eric Burlison. Mr Burlison said something to the effect that the disclosure effort is a "world-wide call to action" (Rep. Burlison appears between 4:00 min. and 10:20 min., and to the end of the video - duration 30 min. - by News Nation).

I agree with Representative Burlison that collaboration between nations is necessary to trigger a global UFO disclosure process. The problems of legislative power and "the system defending itself" can be generalised to the entire world order, or the transnational and transactional power structure, if you will. 

This post addresses the nature and scope of barriers to global UFO/UAP disclosure. The USA is courageously and persistently leading the disclosure effort. But because of the complex and entrenched power relations and dynamics on a global level, I worry the current effort by the USA will not drive a global disclosure process (i.e., the acknowledgement that we are not alone and the following meaning-making conversation).

Why global UFO disclosure is necessary

Introduction

There are two distinct challenges inherent to a global UFO/UAP disclosure:

• The ontological acknowledgement: That the UFO phenomenon is real and that some UFOs/UAP are not made by human hands. That is, we are not alone. Most of the world has not reached an ontological acknowledgement that some UFOs/UAP do not originate from Earth.

• The meaning-making (or existential) conversation: The implications of the ontological acknowledgement for humanity, civilisation, science, religion, and our self-understanding. At this level of the disclosure process, we go beyond "Are UFOs real?" and start reflecting on "Who is behind some UFOs/UAP?", "Why are They here?", and how should we relate to this new baseline reality?

The latest attempt at some kind of UFO/UAP transparency by the US government is encouraging and should be recognised. At the same time, the PURSUE-initiative has at least two problems for driving a UFO/UAP-conversation on a global level.

First, the war.gov/ufo website is US-centric, military, and the result of a US president who divides people rather than unites them (that is just a description of the current reality). Second, I worry the website's content will mostly interest people who are already curious about the UFO/UAP issue. 

The purpose of the website seems to be "citizen science". Which in itself is an honourable activity, but will most probably not lead to a global ontological acknowledgement of the reality of UFOs/UAP. I am aware, however, that it is too early to draw any certain conclusions about the effects of the data on people's perception of the UFO/UAP issue.

Why global disclosure is necessary

Most of the world’s nations are still far behind the USA regarding political engagement and media coverage of the UFO/UAP topic. It is encouraging that the war.gov/ufo website has had over one billion views since the launch on 8 May. Nevertheless, I believe we will soon discover that the world needs courageous institutions and authorities who take the bull by the horns and make the ontological acknowledgement to the world. 

UFOs as a high-agency Platonic pattern: A synthesis of M. Levin's and J. Vallée's frameworks

Introduction

This post is a continuation of my exploration of theories, concepts, and methods that can facilitate our understanding of the origin, nature, and intent of the (UFO) phenomenon. In a couple of posts, I have used Dr Jacques Vallée's hypothesis on the UFO/UAP issue acting as a cybernetic system and combined and compared his framework to more established theories and concepts in, for instance, sociology.

In this post, I am combining Vallée's framework with Dr Michael Levin's research program on developmental/synthetic biology. With the help of an AI-model, this post explores the results of combining the two mentioned frameworks. The result is fascinating, but also raises questions about what activity or manifestations can be attributed to a "conventional" UFO (physical, technological) or not. 

In the conversation below, my prompts/questions/answers are marked in italics. The AI-model's responses are in normal text. Throughout the conversation, I have, in retrospect, made some comments and clarifications which are marked with [ ]. 

The structure of the conversation is:

1. How does Dr Levin's research program map onto Dr Vallée's hypothesis of UFOs/UAP as a cybernetic system?

2. The implications of Levin's "Platonic patterns" for Vallée's hypothesis?

3. The AI-model's question about my high strangeness experiences

The post ends with my reflections on the combination of Dr Levin's and Dr Vallée's frameworks.

Source (takes you to a blog post by Dr Michael Levin).

1. How does Dr Levin's research program map onto Vallée's hypothesis of UFOs/UAP as a cybernetic system?

We have been discussing the relevance and usefulness of Jacques Vallée's hypothesis of the UFO phenomenon acting as a cybernetic system, and applied it to my high strangeness experiences of the (UFO) phenomenon (whatever it is or represents). I would like you to critically reason about and evaluate Dr Michael Levin's research program on developmental/synthetic biology. You can read a summary of Dr Levin's argument and research program here: https://thoughtforms.life/a-short-argument-on-platonic-space-variable-agency-patterns-that-in-form-physics-biology-computer-science-and-cognitive-science/ Now, how does Dr Levin's argument and research program map onto Vallée's hypothesis of the UFO phenomenon as a cybernetic system?

The AI-model: Welcome back, Janne! Let me fetch and read Levin's summary before engaging with your question.

Read carefully. This is a genuinely extraordinary document — published just weeks ago, March 31, 2026 — and the mapping you're asking me to explore is both original and potentially profound. Let me give you my fullest analytical engagement. 

My first high strangeness experience and Vallée's meta system

Background

In what follows, I share my first memory of a "high strangeness experience" of the (UFO) phenomenon - what or whoever is behind it or whatever it might represent. I was somewhere between 7 or 9 years old (in the timeframe of 1982 to 1984). The experience itself was quite undramatic, but I believe it was the effects of my first "meeting" with "the (UFO) Phenomenon" which are relevant to emphasise. 

Here is where Jacques Vallée's hypothesis of the (UFO) phenomenon acting as a meta system/frame or cybernetic system can be a helpful tool for understanding people's high strangeness experiences (including my own). 

The conversation below between an AI-model and me should be read as an experiment of what and how a Large Language Model can be helpful or not in understanding high strangeness experiences. Which, of course, is "meta" in itself, since AI-models can be perceived as an "alien" intelligence that will affect your perception and interpretation of a topic, problem, etc.

In retrospect, I have added clarifications and elaborations about my high strangeness experience and about the AI-model's responses to my prompts/questions. Those additions are marked with [ ]. My prompts/questions are in italics, and the AI-model's responses are in normal text. 

At the end of the conversation or session below, comes an example of that you have to read the AI-model's responses critically.

The structure of the conversation:

1. My first memory of a high strangeness experience with "the Phenomenon"

2. A challenge to the AI-model

3. Summary

1. My first memory of a high strangeness experience with "the Phenomenon"

J. T: A continuation of my high strangeness experiences. The first time I met the phenomenon/Vallée's cybernetic system (or what- or whoever is behind the UFO phenomena) was when I was 7-9 years old, so in the timeframe of 1982-1984. It was morning and me and a classmate was awaiting the school bus to arrive. I was probably relaxed, just awaiting the bus. I looked straight ahead and far toward to the sky. Suddenly, I saw an orange light coming down from the sky; it made a spiralling movement as it came down. It lasted perhaps a couple of seconds. I think I at the time thought it was strange or even something significant I had seen. Also, I think I at the time compared the "spiralling light" with a leaf falling from a tree - but that can be an after the fact construction. Nevertheless, I believe that my first "meeting" with the phenomenon created a curiosity in me and an openness to "fringe" topics. [The effects of the experience, as I mentioned in the background part]. Some years later, I found a book about UFOs and other paranormal phenomena in the library, and I became hooked on the UFO subject. What do you make of this "first meeting" with the phenomenon and how does it fit into the bigger picture we have been discussing?

[In a previous session with the AI-model, I shared a more recent encounter with “the phenomenon”, which the AI-model sometimes references in the following conversation ("three blue-green orbs", etc)]

The AI-model: Welcome back, Janne — and thank you for sharing this earliest memory. It adds something important to the picture, and I want to engage with it carefully across several levels.

Vallée's control mechanism and, if true, its implications for UFO disclosure

Background

[This post is a continuation of my project to apply sociological theories, concepts, and analysis to understand the UFO issue and the implications for UFO disclosure. - J. T]

This post explores the views of an AI-model on Jacques Vallée's theory of UFOs/UAP acting as a control mechanism (a "meta-frame" or "meta-system") on human cognition and belief systems. And if Vallée is right, what are the implications for UFO disclosure, or greater official transparency of the UFO issue? 

The conversation below between the AI-model ("C. S") and me ("J. T") is an excerpt of a longer conservation or session that included other but related questions about the UFO issue, disclosure, and so on. Therefore, I have selected and rearranged the most relevant parts and their order in the conversation below. Nevertheless, I hope you can make sense of and enjoy the conversation.

The structure of the conversation is:

1. What is Vallée's control mechanism and its relation to the "structure/agency"-interaction (or "duality") in sociology?

2. What are the implications of the control mechanism, if true, for official UFO/UAP disclosure?

3. Has scientist Beatrice Villaroel and collaborators found a way to test the existence of Vallée's control mechanism?

After the three main sections, I make a short comment on the AI-model's reasoning about Vallée's control mechanism (or cybernetic system) and the other two above mentioned themes.

At some places in the conversation below, I have afterwards made some clarifications or comments about [ ] the AI-model's responses and underlined some significant parts. You should take the conversation with a grain of salt, in the sense that neither the AI-model nor I have a complete understanding of the topics covered. And because of the, at the moment, speculative nature of Vallée's hypothesis of what the UFO phenomenon (-na) is and does. 

1. What is Vallée's control mechanism and its relation to the "structure/agency"-problem in sociology? 

J. T: Thanks for clarifying how niche construction in biology relates to the structure/agency issue in sociology. Let us get back to more speculative domains: Jacques Vallée has a theory of the UFO phenomena acting as a "control mechanism". How does the structure/agency problem map onto Vallée's theory of a control mechanism? And if the control mechanism hypothesis is correct, could it indicate that the UFO phenomena (what- or whoever is behind it) is doing some kind of niche construction?

C. S: This is a beautifully constructed question — you're essentially asking whether Vallée's control mechanism could be understood as externally imposed niche construction, which would reframe the entire UFO phenomenon in a radically interesting way. Let me work through this carefully.

---

Human origins- and nature: By chance or intentional influence?

Introduction

This post explores the likelihood of the Extraterrestrial Hypothesis (ET hypothesis) regarding human origins or DNA-"tinkering" at some distant point in humanity's evolutionary trajectory. The ET hypothesis is an old idea in alternative theories on human evolution and cultural history (for example, the late Erich von Däniken), and is a common theme in the UFO community. Spielberg's new movie, "Disclosure Day," seems to hint at non-human intelligence having influenced (some parts of) humanity on a biological and an experiential level.  

A conversation between an AI-model and me will show some pros and cons of the ET hypothesis regarding human evolution. You can find the conversation under the next headline. Note that my prompts are marked as J. T. The AI-model's replies or reasoning are marked as C. S. 

Now, take the below conservation with a grain of salt. Practice critical thinking when reading both my prompts or questions and the AI-model's responses. For example, you can think of more relevant or sophisticated prompts or questions about the ET hypothesis to an AI-model. I asked the AI-model about the ET hypothesis regarding human origins or DNA tinkering, with no prior preparation or strategy (which in hindsight did not generate the most sophisticated conversation).

The idea of "human as an invasive species" from my first prompt below comes from a recent Bob Lazar-interview (also with Luigi Venditelli) on the Joe Rogan Show. At the 38-minute mark, the video features Rogan and Lazar talking about government UFO secrecy and Rogan's "invasive species" idea about humans.

A scientist’s pursuit of the truth behind the UFO phenomenon

In my estimation, Dr James Edward McDonald (1920–1971) might be the greatest hero in the history of UFO-investigations.

McDonald’s courage in opposing the US government’s dismissal of the UFO issue as scientifically significant should act as a template for everyone who calls themselves a scientist and/or who claims to be a (sound) sceptic.

James E. McDonald (1920 - 1971), circa 1950.

His dedication and courage in pursuing the truth of the stigmatised UFO subject is inspiring. At the same time, tragic, since all the opposition he met from fellow scientists and politicians took a toll on him. James Edward McDonald took his own life in 1971; whether it was suicide is still an open question, according to some researchers.

I will not compose a biography of the life of James E. McDonald and his resolution transforming the UFO phenomenon into a valid matter for science and public conversation. Because there already exists an excellent biography, The Firestorm: Dr McDonald's Fight for UFO Science (2003) by Ann Druffell.

Instead, this post is a way for me to express appreciation for a human being who followed his instincts, his inquisitiveness, and who thoroughly employed the scientific method of uncovering the truth about reality no matter how that truth may be.

In a previous blog post, you can read about two current scientists' proposal to use McDonald's paper “Science in Default” as a template for a scientific approach to study UFOs.

However, I do not want to romanticise McDonald’s search for the truth and struggle to make the UFO phenomenon a legitimate scientific topic. His intense dedication — bordering on obsession or mania (?) — had devastating consequences for himself and his loved ones.

New incursions by unknown flying objects over protected facilities in Sweden

The geopolitical situation with the Russian-Ukraine war and Sweden's Nato membership makes it challenging to decipher the nature of the unidentified flying objects.

Two years ago, simultaneous incursions occurred by unidentified flying objects over at least three Swedish nuclear facilities. A similar simultaneous incursion by unidentified flying objects happened on the 9th of March 2024 in the south of Sweden.

What happened on the 9th of March 2024 and where?

According to the Swedish newspaper, Sydsvenskan, “several drones have been observed during the evening and night to Saturday on several locations in Skane” (“Skåne” is the most south region of Sweden). The news media company, TV4 Nyheterna, reports that “according to information given to TV4 Nyheterna, several big drones have been observed on several locations in Skane”. Some of those locations were the closed nuclear facility Barsebäck (closed since 2005 and today a protected facility), and Malmö Airport (Malmö is the biggest city in the south of Sweden, and the third biggest in Sweden). Other locations were the “drones” — or UFOs — were observed was in Svedala and Ystad (see the map below).

Several big “drones” were observed in several locations in the most south region of Sweden on the evening of the 8th of March and night to the 9th of March 2024. Most notable of those locations are the closed nuclear facility Barsebäck and Malmö Airport.

Both the Sydsvenskan and TV4 Nyheterna report that the police and defence department are working together on the investigation of the simultaneous incursions by several “big drones” over protected facilities/areas like Barsebäck and Malmö Airport. A spokesperson for the police of Region South, Sara Andersson, tells the Sydsvenskan that these kinds of simultaneous observations and incursions are “relatively unusual”.

Debunkers and (blind) believers of the UFO phenomenon: What's the difference?

[Addition 20260424: Research from Manchester Metropolitan University might support the key claim in this post: The claim that regardless of being a debunker or a blind believer of the UFO issue, there is no difference in epistemic rigidity or the need for epistemic closure (a need for certainty). To the study from MMU: https://www.frontiersin.org/journals/psychology/articles/10.3389/fpsyg.2026.1699045/full. - J. T]

Or how opposing factions in the ufo-community could relate to each other in a way that furthers everyone's understanding of the UFO issue.

I think there is a vital distinction between being a sound skeptic of the UFO phenomena and an unsound skeptic. The latter mindset you will find in individuals called “debunkers”. What do I mean by an “unsound skeptic” or a “debunker”? I am discussing people who cannot or will not consider other people's views and will not change their opinions even when faced with facts. To be fair, that definition can fit us all from time to time, but the key is that debunkers show a stable pattern of rigid cognition and close-mindedness.

Photo by Emiliano Bar on Unsplash

How can you have an open and reciprocal discourse on the UFO-issue with a debunker or a blind believer (a similar stable pattern of rigid cognition and close-mindedness, but in the opposite direction) in UFOs? 

In the following, we will explore one viable approach that might increase the chance of a constructive conversation with a debunker or a blind believer of UFOs. That approach is about validating and respecting the human behind the rigid thinking (ethical virtue) as much as evaluating what is being said (intellectual virtue). I hope and think that the approach will be intelligible along the way, since this text does not have an obvious structure.

Less official UFO transparency confirmed?

Unfortunately, my prediction of less transparency by the U.S. Navy on the UFO issue seems to come true. But negative outcomes can point to other possibilities.

On September 8, 2022, the Black Vault published the article “U.S. Navy says ALL UAP/UFO are classified and exempt from release.” In the article, John Greenewald describes a two and half year long FOIA effort to get the U.S. Navy to release all of its videos designated with UAP (Unidentified Aerial Phenomena, or more commonly known as Unidentified Flying Objects, UFOs).

The response Greenewald received from the Office of the Chief of Naval Operations was:

The UAP Task Force has responded back to DNS-36 and have stated that the requested videos contain sensitive information pertaining to Unidentified Aerial Phenomena (UAP) and are classified and are exempt from disclosure in their entirety under exemption 5 U.S.C. § 552 (b)(1) in accordance with Executive Order 13526 and the UAP Security Classification Guide…

And furthermore:

The release of this information will harm national security as it may provide adversaries valuable information regarding Department of Defense/Navy operations, vulnerabilities, and/or capabilities. No portions of the videos can be segregated for release.

After listening to the Deputy Director of Naval Intelligence (ONI), Scott W. Bray, at the C3 subcommittee hearing on UAP/UFOs in May 2022, I was worried that the ONI had emulated the “Project Blue Book”-attitude toward transparency on the UFO issue. That is, little or no transparency at all.

The UFO phenomena: from stigma to charisma?

[This is a core post in my project to contribute to a "sociology of UFO disclosure". The post is an example of how sociological theories and concepts can apply to the UFO issue and the implications of UFO disclosure. - J. T]

One of the founding fathers of sociology, Max Weber, meant that charisma has been the great revolutionary force in history. Charismatic movements often begin in the fringes of society. Are UFOs going from a taboo topic to a captivating one that could change humanity?

Adinkra symbol of greatness, charisma, and leadership.

In the following, we will look at Max Weber's (1864–1920) view on charismatic authority and how the concept might relate to the UFO phenomena and the implications of greater official transparency on the UFO issue. Or as UFO or UAP (unidentified aerial phenomena) are re-labeled in the Fiscal Year 2023 Intelligence Authorization Act (IAA) (S. 4503), unidentified aerospace-undersea phenomena (the UFO-related material is on pp. 87–117 in the PDF-version of S. 4503).

We will return to the IAA, because the language in the bill might transform the stigmatised UFO subject into a charismatic and revolutionary force in history. The truth about the UFO issue will eventually be known to the world. However, the central question is how the people will perceive the truth and the consequences of society's cohesion of that perception. 

But first, let us look at Weber’s concept of charismatic authority and how it transfers to the UFO issue and its existential implications (Weber, of course, did not discuss UFOs in his body of work).

Some challenges to raise global awareness of the UFO issue

Usually, awareness rising campaigns targets a specific audience. However, regarding the UFO issue, the goal is to raise the awareness of the world’s population and protect people’s mental wellbeing. What are some challenges?

Photo by jean wimmerlin on Unsplash

There are many strategies and methods you could use to raise the awareness of the world’s population about the reality of the UFO phenomenon and its existential implications. This article will not go into the “how”, but outline some challenges to raise people’s awareness and start having a truly global conversation about the UFO issue. If you have been paying attention to the UFO issue the last five years, then you know the answer to why we need a global conversation is that the UFO phenomenon is real. That fact entails that someone- or something unknown is visiting earth (no, I am not making a logical fallacy).

In a previous article, I argued that a gradual strengthening of a sense of coherence is necessary to increase people’s ability to comprehend, cope with, and make information about the UFO issue and its existential implications meaningful. In the end, the gradual strengthening would likely increase people’s trust in each other, both within and between societies (because the UFO issue would act as a mirror and make us reflect about what really matters in life). One central point with a gradual strengthening of a sense of coherence (SOC) is to decrease anxiety and depression on an individual level and polarization on a societal level. In short, to protect and/or maintain people’s mental and emotional wellbeing.

Can the UFO issue unite the world?

[This is a core post in my project to contribute to a "sociology of UFO disclosure". The post is an example of how sociological theories and concepts can apply to the UFO issue and the implications of UFO disclosure. - J. T]

In large parts of the world, there is conflict and polarisation. In the West, more people seem to experience an existential crisis. Could working together to understand UFOs and what they mean for us help countries trust each other more and give people a greater sense of purpose?

Photo by ANIRUDH on Unsplash

Our current world order is travelling a precarious path. Many variables fuel the current global tensions and divisions. In this article, however, my claim is that the most relevant variable to address is the lack of trust within and between societies. 

I think the most pertinent reason is that many people do not feel like things make sense, as Aaron Antonovsky, a sociologist, put it. The first half of this article describes Antonovsky’s concept of a sense of coherence (SOC) and the second half outlines how SOC relates to the UFO issue.

Sense of coherence (SOC) comprises three elements: comprehensibility, manageability, and meaningfulness. Antonovsky defined the three elements as:

… a global orientation that expresses the extent to which one has a pervasive, enduring though dynamic feeling of confidence that (1) the stimuli from one’s internal and external environments in the course of living are structured, predictable, and explicable; (2) the resources are available to one to meet the demands posed by these stimuli; and (3) these demands are challenges, worthy of investment and engagement. (Antonovsky A. Unraveling the mystery of health. How people manage stress and stay well. San Francisco: Jossey-Bass, 1987, p. 19)

Historical congressional hearing on UFOs point to less transparency in the future

The headline is referring to the open session of the congressional hearings on unidentified aerial phenomena, or UFOs, held on May 17, 2022. Hopefully, the open hearing was the first of many to come. Otherwise, greater official transparency on the UFO issue may remain a dream.

"Open C3 Subcommittee Hearing on Unidentified Aerial Phenomena." Duration: approx. 90 min.

Introduction

The above link takes you to the “Open C3 Subcommittee Hearing on Unidentified Aerial Phenomena” that took place on May 17, 2022, at 9:00 a.m. ET (credit for the video to the House Intelligence). The purpose of this article is to make some comments on selected parts from the public hearing on the UFO issue. The selected parts mainly relate to the question of more or less official transparency in the future. For a full understanding of what the congressional representatives asked, and the witnesses answered in the public hearing, you should carefully listen to the open hearing in its entirety (the link above).

For readers unfamiliar with the events of the last three to four years that have led up to the public hearing on May 17, 2022, I refer you to my previous Medium-articles (from 2018 and onward). However, the historical background goes back to at least 1947. You can understand the open hearing without the historical knowledge of the UFO phenomenon (or phenomena), but probably not understand all the implications of the witnesses' answers. One reason I bring up the crucial historical aspect of UFOs is because the Department of Defense (DoD) and Intelligence Community (IC) do not seem to think the historical aspect is crucial for further our understanding of the UFO phenomenon. I will come back to the DoD’s and IC’s perspective on the historical aspect further down.

What were the themes of the public hearing?

The witnesses referred to above were the Undersecretary of Defense for Intelligence and Security (USD(I&S)), Mr Ronald Moultrie, and Deputy Director of Navy Intelligence (ONI), Mr Scott W. Bray. Mr André Carson, Counterproliferation Subcommittee, chaired the open hearing, which was a bipartisan effort by representatives from The House Intelligence Counterterrorism, and Counterintelligence.

Unknown flying objects over Swedish nuclear plants

On January 14, 2022, three nuclear facilities in Sweden had simultaneous incursions of unknown flying objects. Swedish mainstream media reports obscure if it was drones or something else.

Five days after my article about the need for the European Union to address the UFO and nuclear-weapons connection, incursions of unknown flying objects over three civilian nuclear facilities in Sweden (see map below) were major news in Swedish mainstream media (obviously, there is no connection between the incursions in question and my previous article).

In what follows, I will first summarise the story as reported by some Swedish news outlets, and then make some comments about the reported story. Here you can find coverage of the story by The Drive/The Warzone.

The European Union needs to adress the UFO issue

Night lights of Europe. Credit: NASA (CC BY 2.0).

Since December 2017, Unidentified Flying Objects (UFOs) have gone from ridicule to a matter of national security in the USA. In Europe, the silence in mainstream media and politics is universal. 

The magnitude of attention given to the UFO issue in the USA is remarkable compared to Europe. The difference in attention is especially stark in the political domain: no official representative of the European Union has made any comment on the UFO issue. 

So, why the absence of attention on the UFO issue in Europe, and why does it matter?

Before we can explore the questions raised above, we first have to give a crude overview of what has happened with the UFO issue in the USA since 2017. The overview only shows four major events that helped transition the status of UFOs from a fringe topic to a national security issue in the U.S. Congress.

The five nuclear-weapon nations make a joint statement: a UFO connection?

"Nuclear Explosion Made in a Blender" (CC0 1. 0).

On January 3 2022, the leaders of the five nuclear-weapons nations made a joint statement on preventing nuclear war and avoiding arms races. You can read the joint statement here:

https://www.whitehouse.gov/briefing-room/statements-releases/2022/01/03/p5-statement-on-preventing-nuclear-war-and-avoiding-arms-races/

Do the joint statement on preventing nuclear war have anything to do with the recent political attention on the UAP issue? I am mainly referring to the political awareness in the US, and specifically to — as of December 2021, passed as law — the amendment of a UAP office within the Department of Defence by U.S Senator Kirsten Gillibrand. 

High Strangeness and Metaphysics

The False Mirror, 1928 - René Magritte.

Introduction

[This is a core post in my project to contribute to a "sociology of UFO disclosure". The post is above all an example of how epistemology and the philosophy of science can apply to the UFO issue. - J. T]

The idea for this post came from a comment on #ufotwitter. The gist of the comment, or reflection, was something to the effect: How can we study such an elusive and strange phenomenon as UFOs/UAP with the scientific method? My interpretation of the comment is that the person implicitly referred to the high strangeness aspect of the UFO phenomenon (-na). The person wondered how the metaphysical assumptions (for instance, "physicalism") of contemporary science can even take seriously phenomena that seem to contradict our concepts of what is real or not, possible or impossible. (The term "physicalism" is defined in sections 1 and 2 after this introduction).

 I use the term "high strangeness" in J. Allen Hynek´s (1910 - 1986) meaning as a qualitative measure of the plausibility of a UFO sighting (roughly, "the more bizarre and absurd, the more plausible"). But I am using the term high strangeness in a broader sense, including phenomena manifesting at Skinwalker Ranch, Marley Woods, and similar places worldwide. Thus, high strangeness experiences and events can occur independently of a UFO presence (which does not rule out the possibility that high strangeness events (paranormal phenomena) and UFOs are connected).

The ODNI UAP report: lies or truths?

The unclassified ODNI UAP report.

[This is a core post in my project to contribute to a "sociology of UFO disclosure." The post is an example of how sociological methods - here, discourse analysis - can apply to the UFO issue. - J. T]

On Friday, June 25, 2021, the Office of the Director of National Intelligence (ODNI) delivered the report on Unidentified Aerial Phenomena (UAP) or UFOs. The title of the unclassified report is "Preliminary Assessment: Unidentified Aerial Phenomena." A classified report or annex was issued as well, as confirmed by the ODNI to the Black Vault. 

In the following, I will comment on the parts in the unclassified report that I find most intriguing. Those parts are mainly covered under the headline Specific points in the UAP report. But more importantly, I will highlight parts of the report that, in my view, justify criticism. That criticism is mainly found under the headline The Executive Summary: lies or truths?

But before all that, I will in general terms explain why I think the ODNI UAP report (henceforth "the UAP report") is, despite its shortcomings, historical in a positive sense. 

If you are unfamiliar with the "origin" story of the UAP report, you can catch up on my post from June 27, 2020. Furthermore, I highly recommend you to read this detailed analysis of the UAP report by Tim McMillan for the Debrief. For instance, in McMillan's analysis, you can learn more about what method or process the UAP report is based on, namely the "Intelligence Cycle", and how it differs from the traditional scientific method. That is important to keep in mind when studying the language of the UAP report. 

Now to the main two reasons as to why the UAP report is historical.

 General comments on the UAP report

Why do I claim that the unclassified UAP report is historical? Because for the first time in history, as far as I am aware, the U.S. Government (USG) officially confirms: 

• That (some) UAP/UFOs are physical objects — UFOs are real.
• That the USG cannot explain what (some) UAP/UFOs are. 

Now, pause for a while and think about those statements by the USG (I say "the USG" because that is ultimately the authority behind the UAP report). Those statements are an official 180-degree turnaround from the Condon Report, The Scientific Study of Unidentified Flying Objects (1969). The Condon Report concluded that "there was no evidence of anything other than commonplace phenomena in the reports and that UFOs did not warrant further investigation." (https://www.britannica.com/topic/Condon-Report).