As predicted by many of
us in the UFO community, the MSM did not read the entire AARO report though
they would comment on its 64 page length. As happened in the past, such as with
the Condon Committee “scientific study,” they just read the Executive Summary.
They didn’t bother wading through the evidence, some of it quite technical. The
MSM just decided they didn’t need to understand what had transpired. They were only
interested in the end, never considering that the end might not be supported by
the internal documentation.
 |
| Congressional Hearing on UAP |
As I said, we all
predicted what would happen with this new report. I happened on one of the news
channels when the host of the program mentioned the latest on the UFO (UAP)
front. The host threw the question to the reporter, mentioning the Pentagon and
their assessment of UAP (yeah, really UFOS). That reporter, I believe, did
mention the length of the report and then said:
To date, AARO has not discovered any empirical evidence
that any sighting of a UAP represented off-world technology or the existence a
classified program that had not been properly reported to Congress.
Investigative efforts determined that most sightings were the result of
misidentifications of ordinary objects and phenomena. Although many UFO reports
remain unsolved, AARO assesses that if additional, quality data were available,
most of these cases also could be identified and resolved as ordinary objects
or phenomena.
That is, of course, the
last statement in the AARO report. There was, of course, no commentary on the
accuracy embodied in the report. No comment about the trivial, such as the
claim the Kenneth Arnold sighting was on June 23, 1947, when it was actually on
June 24. And analysis that Mogul explanation for the debris recovered near
Roswell had nothing to do with the balloon launches. Just an acceptance of the
AARO report.
But the real point
here, is that we see the lack of reporting. I doubt the reporter even read the
report but instead, flipped to the rear and read the conclusions. He never
considered that this latest AARO report might be the same sort of misdirection
that we have been fed for more 70 years.
How hard would it be to
get comment from the other side? There are dozens of us out here who could have
suggested that the conclusion had little to do with the history of the UFO
phenomenon. A phone call or email might have provided some context. Instead, we
hear just a single quoted paragraph from the report with no questions about the
accuracy of it.
More to follow…
2 comments:
I believe that the gist of this post is that Ufologists (and what college did they go to, to earn their UFO degrees at?) was not invited to give their side of the UFO mystery in the report, and they are hurt. I understand that and would feel hurt too, if I was left out of the final report. I see nothing of value discussing these old UFO reports and sightings at all. I would be looking for new ET reports where the evidence would be fresh and new, since they are visiting our little earth.
Sky70 -
Nope... a mere suggestion that an invitation to some of the old hands in UFO researcher (or as Rich Reynolds would call us... geezers) could have saved them some of the errors that are found in their report.
And wouldn't a better question have been, "What colleges did they go to earn their science degrees?"
Since it was AARO that brought up these old reports and cases, shouldn't we be able to comment on it... and how many discoveries have been found in the basements of museums where the old research and materials are stored?
Post a Comment