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."
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.
