Underwater UFOs (called USOs)

Click on the Link for details:

 Former US Navy admiral leads search for underwater alien USOs (msn.com)

“As represented by multiple credible military personnel, objects have been recorded by sonar moving at speeds underwater that are far beyond our best submarines or other hardware."

AARO's Definition of "Evidence" Excludes Evidence

Published in American Thinker dot com

by Robert Arvay

Absence of evidence, is not evidence of absence, according to the adage.  AARO (All-domain Anomaly Resolution Office) seems a little bit unclear on that. 

The recent statement of the official government "UFO Hunters," AARO, is that it has not found any “empirical” evidence of any technology "not of this earth."  If, by evidence, one means incontrovertible, physical proof beyond any doubt, then, yes, we have no evidence.  If instead, one uses a more reasonable definition, such as credible eye witness accounts by experts, by means of air, ground and radar observations, all at the same time and place, then there are massive amounts of evidence, and the reports keep coming in.

None of which are proof, but many of them are indeed evidence. 

AARO, almost from its beginning, has suffered from what might be called, a lack of candor, when making statements to the public.  It dutifully reports, and correctly so, that the great majority of UFO accounts are readily explainable as ordinary phenomena—but it gratuitously adds that those few which are not explained, probably could be, if more data were available.  “Probably could be” is not a scientific statement, and does not reflect the rigorous, disciplined analysis which AARO claims as its mantle.  Moreover, it sounds very much as if its conclusions have already been reached beforehand.

For context, remember that AARO is dealing with a subject matter that could potentially change the course of human history.  It deserves much more intensity than a routine procedural inquiry.  If it actually does find, and reports, that there is a significant likelihood that even one UFO sighting, even without proof, is evidence of interplanetary spacecraft from another planet—one cannot overstate the implications.  AARO’s secondary mission, then, is to instill confidence in the public mind that it has no hesitation in reporting all the facts, accurately, no matter what they are, nor whose apple cart is upset.

Is it doing that?

No.  From its beginning, AARO was openly disinterested in revisiting government records of past UFO reports, and instead stated that it would be focusing only on new reports as they come in.  In open testimony before Congress, some officials amazingly seemed unaware of the cumulative historical data that are available, much of it professionally documented, which might offer clues not only as to what UFOs are, but how best to proceed investigating them.  When pressed, they reluctantly agreed to “look into” reports that congressmen specifically mentioned, but seemed remarkably incurious.  There was no indication that they would be turning over every stone.  The attitude seemed to be, that’s not my job, but if you really must insist, a routine inquiry will be made; we hope that satisfies you.

At the least, knowing what mistakes have been made in the past (such as intimidating witnesses, jumping to conclusions, and failing to gather all available data), can be used to create effective protocols and policies going forward.  Numerous forensic clues for which technology did not exist in the 1950s might be applied now, to what criminologists might call, cold cases.  Possibly, they could solve some of the most spectacular UFO sightings, for example those which occurred over the White House decades ago.  Doesn’t AARO consider that worth looking into?  Apparently not.

That lack of interest in historical context is a glaring omission, which AARO seems, appallingly, to shrug off.

It is no wonder, then, that some potential witnesses indicate a distrust of AARO, and therefore, will not report to it.  If “the truth is out there,” then the bureaucratic attitude might be, that’s a good place for it.

The situation is made more complicated by hordes of hoaxsters and UFO cultists, who clutter up the files with false and misleading reports.  Unfortunately, there is a tendency to indict honest and competent reports by association with them.

The UFO phenomenon, whatever it turns out to be, if ever we find out what it is, may fall into the category of so-called “far out physics,” something so unlike what we might expect, that we have nothing in our experience to which to relate it.  For example, dark matter, dark energy, and singularities in the cosmos, are in that category.  Our best scientists have failed to solve those mysteries.

Until we get a reliable agency, with aggressive methods of getting at the truth, we may not know whether we are simply uninformed, perhaps by an incompetent agency, or are being stonewalled.  AARO can do much to dispel such notions, but only by expressing more curiosity about UFOs.  

In order to succeed, it needs to go where no investigation has gone before.

Nat Geo VIDEO: UFOs Are A Hazard to Aircraft Safety

 The Global Threat (Full Episode) | UFOs: Investigating the Unknown (youtube.com)

The UFO Hunter Has Quit

This commentary was sparked by the following linked article.

Here's What I Learned as the U.S. Government's UFO Hunter | Scientific American

My comments follow.

By now, I have become a UFO skeptic, but that has not changed my skepticism about government agencies.  I do not necessarily believe anything they claim, nor anything they deny.  They lie.

While I guard against being overly cynical, there is ample reason to guard against being gullible when it comes to government agencies.  Rarely, if ever, has any agency head admitted that the need for his agency has diminished to the point that it should be abolished.  Almost all of them request more money than they received the year before, not less.

When it comes to UFOs, however, there may actually be some justification for the practice of  deception.  If hostile foreign nations believe that we are on the cusp of retro-engineering some vastly advanced technology, they may fear us.  At the least, they may waste time and effort attempting to discover what we have.

On the other hand, it may be our own Congress that is wasting our tax dollars rummaging around looking for planetary aliens, instead of solving the real problem with earthly illegal aliens.

"Jelly-Fish" UFO: Controversy and Mystery

Video of "Jellyfish UFO" and interview with "second-hand" witness. Click on the link below the image,

Warning:  the video linked below contains some vulgar spoken words.

WEAPONIZED : EPISODE #47 — WEAPONIZED (weaponizedpodcast.com)

They’re Back. Secret UFO Hearings Held in Congress

for American Thinker

by Robert Arvay

Whatever the UFOs are—or are not—they continue to generate controversy. Congress held secret, closed-door hearings on January 12, 2024, about them. We are not being told much more than that.

I have gradually become a UFO skeptic, based on news releases and documentaries, both recent and over the years. Most of them tend toward the assumption that UFOs are space-craft, built by technologies “not of this earth.” My reasons for being skeptical are detailed here on my UFO blog.

Being a skeptic does not mean denying that there are unexplained aerial phenomena in our skies. The video and eye witness evidence is compelling in that regard. My skepticism is based on one simple fact: there is no public, verifiable, physical evidence of nonhuman advanced technology—anywhere. By physical evidence I mean such things as metal objects, or objects composed of other material, something so substantial that you can hold it in your hand and (in principle) hit it with a hammer. Such items of evidence, were they to be credibly presented, would have to fit at least two, preferably more, of the following criteria:

1. They would be clearly artificial, intelligently manufactured objects, not produced by nature, but made by no known earthly technology.

2. They would be tangible, physical objects.

3. They would not be merely photographic or computer-generated images, or testimony.

4. They would be clearly designed to perform some purposeful function, even if we could not discern what that function is.

5. They would possess physical properties, or performance characteristics, that cannot be explained by presently understood laws of nature.

6. They would be coherent, assembled, systems or devices, such as flyable vehicles.

7. They could include biological materials clearly unlike any known earthly forms of life. Complete organisms, whether dead or alive, would be the most definitive evidence.

As far as I know, no such objects (or samples) exist. It seems implausible that any person or government could possess them and maintain secrecy for very long.

The more of these criteria that are met, the more credibly we could ascribe to such objects an origin from another planet. The complete absence of such evidence undermines the validity of the off-world hypothesis. Worse yet for UFO believers, no witnesses (to my knowledge) under oath have publicly testified that they have put their own hands on such objects, and independently found (by unbiased experiment) that they meet the specifications listed above.

This is not to say that there are no known natural anomalies that defy physical description. There are. Dark matter and dark energy are two of them. Both are so controversial that some reputable scientists say that they do not exist. Most, however, can make a very strong case for them, despite not being able to define precisely what they are. From an engineering perspective, even something so obviously real as the Great Pyramid of Egypt could not today (according to many credentialed experts) be made without modern technology, or perhaps, even with it.

As a UFO skeptic, I place the UFOs in a similar category, that is to say, of real phenomena that defy explanation. UFOs are the “dark matter,” so to speak, of aerial phenomena. Absent tangible physical evidence, all the logic goes against UFOs being space-craft. For one thing, any technology capable of making them, could also make them undetectable. If, on the other hand, the supposed aliens intended to be detected, or did not care one way or the other, then we should see them often, under such conditions that no one would bother to deny their existence.

Therefore, if the UFOs are under intelligent control, we should either never see them, or else quite frequently (and verifiably) see them. It makes no sense that they act as if they wish not to be seen, and then get seen anyway, but only under disputed circumstances.

All this having been said, one must ask, given that UFOs are real, but their behavior seems paradoxical, then what are they?

I will answer that, as soon as I can work out what dark matter and dark energy are.

-

Whistleblower Says UFO Coverup is Unlikely

Edward Snowden is perhaps the most wanted fugitive on American government lists.  He is currently in self-imposed exile in Russia.  His supposed crime was to reveal unlawful surveillance of innocent Americans by the NSA / CIA etc.  Fearing that he would be "disappeared" or "suicided" by the government, he fled from the US.  He was asked in an interview whether he had discovered any government secrets about UFOs.

"Snowden claimed that it was very unlikely the United States government could be hiding information about alien life. He went on, “I had ridiculous access to the networks of the NSA, the CIA, the military — all these groups. I couldn’t find anything. So, if it’s hidden, and it could be hidden, it’s hidden really damn well — even from people who are on the inside.”

NSA Whistleblower Edward Snowden Had A Revelation About The Moon Landings (digitaltrends.com)