I love when this stuff hits the networks. I always go back to you. I shared this on Twitter. Maybe more people become interested in what the heck is going on.
Billy, I read Avi Loeb very recently was invited to talk to the NASA team (his 25 Oct Medium article) so Nadia would have been there, I guess. From his piece it all seems really upbeat! ... "We agreed that we all look forward to an exciting future ahead, guided by high-quality scientific evidence." And he met Alex Dietrich there! (did she also talk to the team?). So looking good methinks. Be interesting to watch some of Nadia's next tweets after meeting Avi.
And I just don't get the recent NYT piece saying Gimbal has been "explained since Ryan Graves gave evidence to Congress as well as Dietrich! The rest of the "fleet" as well as Gimbal? Their movement? The extraordinary level of detail Graves has given? It's bizarre. As people have rightly said, *what* "plane" was it?
The subject is too much of a leap, psychologically, for some people. Anyone with natural curiosity about UFOs/UAP would read up and find cases that stand out as very strange and yet are supported by credible witnesses and sometimes sensor data. Investigation is the natural consequence of the available evidence.
But when individuals assert that they don't 'believe' in the possibility of an extra-terrestrial explanation then they are either failing to pay attention or they are psychologically flawed - unable to accept the possibility that reality has something new to reveal. (The flip side to implying that witnesses with very strange accounts are psychologically or cognitively impaired.)
Imagine an AI, sans ego and with no regard for 'optics', discovering strange anomalies. It would have no issue conducting an investigation; no bias one way or the other, just an impulse to discover. Nothing to lose.
Humans, on the other hand, often have something to lose, or possess a bias created by hubris.
We don't know what exists out there, but one day it will be the new norm, no matter how bizarre it might seem to us today. An entire universe vs the expectations of naive Earthlings. Do we really think we're not going to be surprised or amazed?
Having just watched Dr. Steven Greer's latest film (Beyond Top Secret: The Technology Behind Disclosure), I would imagine he would put NASA's new effort to consider validating UFOs/UAPs as one more move by the "Military-Industrial Complex" to frame these phenomena for the general public as a major security threat to justify spending trillions. Up until recently, the range of official responses has amounted to, "Nothing to see here. Move on." It does seem that something has changed in officialdom, but whether it lasts, broadens, and moves forward seems to be too soon to tell. Greer and followers clearly outline what would be called a conspiracy theory, and what usually happens in cases like this, people polarize to the point that conspiracy is synonymous with crazy or with Truth. We do accept as fact (something verifiable) that the financial elite have been very good at maintaining and adding to their wealth often by hidden means and with sometimes fierce efforts to create a legal basis for their efforts. There is a publication that shows how interconnected many are through being on boards together, though I have a hunch that often similarities in actions happen because of having the same perspective. But Greer is outlining something much more deliberate and collective than that on the part of the uber wealthy aided by hidden groups within the government who have access to knowledge of forms of energy that would be vastly superior to anything we have today -- to the point that some would lose fortunes, power, and positions. And this cabal, he believes, has used lethal means to maintain control. So, I am curious, Billy, how you and others who have been a part of this for so long see Greer's efforts and the conclusions he is now sharing? Is there any kind of consensus about the pros and cons of his efforts? I'm going to watch this again because I found some of the interviews confusing in part because it seemed that some comments required a background I don't have.
Oct 28, 2022·edited Oct 30, 2022Liked by Billy Cox
Do you "believe" in UFOs?
If that's the first question from a reporter then one can immediately deduce 'this fluffy-haired, self-indulgent cipher is ridiculously ignorant of anything significant concerning the subject,' so why waste my time.
Perhaps at last, at long long last... we are near the day when one of our serious UFO World investigators can turn the ridicule table and reply "That's a stupid question, really. Next..."
As for the NASA project, they're going to formulate the best scientific way to study the nature of UAP? (Heck, I can help with that: They are very, very fast.) Then what? Another team to formulate the best way to implement the recommendations of the former? Like M.C. Escher stairways?
Do I smell a lingering odor from the Condon Report?
"The trick is to pretend that we are seriously studying the topic while we already know the outcome, but we can't reach that official conclusion for another few years"
And the bobblheads in the news media will simply accept the conclusions and discard serious study of the topic ..Not that they ever did or will...The fix is in...... thanks to NASA and SETI.
On Oct. 21, 2022, the day that the make up of the NASA team was announced, NASA said in a tweet, "There is no evidence supporting the idea that UAP are extraterrestrial in origin." I sent an email to Dr. David Spergel, the chairman of the NASA team:, stating: "'There is no evidence' -- that is a pretty sweeping pre-emptive declaration. First the verdict, then the investigation?"
The next day, Dr. Spergel replied, "I am entering into this study with an open mind. I am hoping that we will be informing NASA not so much about the nature of the UAPs but about how to design a program to most effectively understand their nature."
I love when this stuff hits the networks. I always go back to you. I shared this on Twitter. Maybe more people become interested in what the heck is going on.
Billy, I read Avi Loeb very recently was invited to talk to the NASA team (his 25 Oct Medium article) so Nadia would have been there, I guess. From his piece it all seems really upbeat! ... "We agreed that we all look forward to an exciting future ahead, guided by high-quality scientific evidence." And he met Alex Dietrich there! (did she also talk to the team?). So looking good methinks. Be interesting to watch some of Nadia's next tweets after meeting Avi.
And I just don't get the recent NYT piece saying Gimbal has been "explained since Ryan Graves gave evidence to Congress as well as Dietrich! The rest of the "fleet" as well as Gimbal? Their movement? The extraordinary level of detail Graves has given? It's bizarre. As people have rightly said, *what* "plane" was it?
The subject is too much of a leap, psychologically, for some people. Anyone with natural curiosity about UFOs/UAP would read up and find cases that stand out as very strange and yet are supported by credible witnesses and sometimes sensor data. Investigation is the natural consequence of the available evidence.
But when individuals assert that they don't 'believe' in the possibility of an extra-terrestrial explanation then they are either failing to pay attention or they are psychologically flawed - unable to accept the possibility that reality has something new to reveal. (The flip side to implying that witnesses with very strange accounts are psychologically or cognitively impaired.)
Imagine an AI, sans ego and with no regard for 'optics', discovering strange anomalies. It would have no issue conducting an investigation; no bias one way or the other, just an impulse to discover. Nothing to lose.
Humans, on the other hand, often have something to lose, or possess a bias created by hubris.
We don't know what exists out there, but one day it will be the new norm, no matter how bizarre it might seem to us today. An entire universe vs the expectations of naive Earthlings. Do we really think we're not going to be surprised or amazed?
Having just watched Dr. Steven Greer's latest film (Beyond Top Secret: The Technology Behind Disclosure), I would imagine he would put NASA's new effort to consider validating UFOs/UAPs as one more move by the "Military-Industrial Complex" to frame these phenomena for the general public as a major security threat to justify spending trillions. Up until recently, the range of official responses has amounted to, "Nothing to see here. Move on." It does seem that something has changed in officialdom, but whether it lasts, broadens, and moves forward seems to be too soon to tell. Greer and followers clearly outline what would be called a conspiracy theory, and what usually happens in cases like this, people polarize to the point that conspiracy is synonymous with crazy or with Truth. We do accept as fact (something verifiable) that the financial elite have been very good at maintaining and adding to their wealth often by hidden means and with sometimes fierce efforts to create a legal basis for their efforts. There is a publication that shows how interconnected many are through being on boards together, though I have a hunch that often similarities in actions happen because of having the same perspective. But Greer is outlining something much more deliberate and collective than that on the part of the uber wealthy aided by hidden groups within the government who have access to knowledge of forms of energy that would be vastly superior to anything we have today -- to the point that some would lose fortunes, power, and positions. And this cabal, he believes, has used lethal means to maintain control. So, I am curious, Billy, how you and others who have been a part of this for so long see Greer's efforts and the conclusions he is now sharing? Is there any kind of consensus about the pros and cons of his efforts? I'm going to watch this again because I found some of the interviews confusing in part because it seemed that some comments required a background I don't have.
Do you "believe" in UFOs?
If that's the first question from a reporter then one can immediately deduce 'this fluffy-haired, self-indulgent cipher is ridiculously ignorant of anything significant concerning the subject,' so why waste my time.
Perhaps at last, at long long last... we are near the day when one of our serious UFO World investigators can turn the ridicule table and reply "That's a stupid question, really. Next..."
As for the NASA project, they're going to formulate the best scientific way to study the nature of UAP? (Heck, I can help with that: They are very, very fast.) Then what? Another team to formulate the best way to implement the recommendations of the former? Like M.C. Escher stairways?
Do I smell a lingering odor from the Condon Report?
Anyone remember the Low Memo in 1967??
How about this hypothetical scenario...
⁹
Ms Drake to Scott Kelly ...on the QT:
"The trick is to pretend that we are seriously studying the topic while we already know the outcome, but we can't reach that official conclusion for another few years"
And the bobblheads in the news media will simply accept the conclusions and discard serious study of the topic ..Not that they ever did or will...The fix is in...... thanks to NASA and SETI.
On Oct. 21, 2022, the day that the make up of the NASA team was announced, NASA said in a tweet, "There is no evidence supporting the idea that UAP are extraterrestrial in origin." I sent an email to Dr. David Spergel, the chairman of the NASA team:, stating: "'There is no evidence' -- that is a pretty sweeping pre-emptive declaration. First the verdict, then the investigation?"
The next day, Dr. Spergel replied, "I am entering into this study with an open mind. I am hoping that we will be informing NASA not so much about the nature of the UAPs but about how to design a program to most effectively understand their nature."
Douglas Dean Johnson
@ddeanjohnson on Twitter