Posted on 02/09/2025 5:27:51 AM PST by RoosterRedux
Donald Trump could be poised to pull back the curtain on UFOs, according to an expert.
Dr Steven Greer, one of the driving forces behind the UFO disclosure movement, claims the new administration is considering executive orders that would publicize the government's involvement in secret UFO research.
He says a wave of new whistleblowers are set to come forward exposing how they worked on top-secret projects which involved retrieving and back-engineering otherworldly craft.
Dr Greer said: 'With the new president, I've been working with a number of people close to him, encouraging a number of executive orders to launch this sort of investigation, provide whistleblower blower protection, and action.'
He is a retired emergency physician who began working in the 1990s to persuade whistleblowers in the military, government and corporations to come forward.
Dr Greer said: 'The ones I'm working with are waiting to see what the new administration does, what the new Congress does, the way to see if there's lethal or legal push back from these covert operations.
The 'covert operations' Dr Greer refers to are secret groups within the Government which he believes work to prevent the release of information relating to alien technology.
(Excerpt) Read more at dailymail.co.uk ...
In a small, currently out of print "Glossary of Cognitive Science," Dunlop and Fetzer (Paragon), there is an interesting notion of "propositions."
The mostly supported proposition is "knowledge" and the mostly unsupported proposition is "belief." Imagine a scale, zero to one hundred, some knowledge is more supported than others, and some beliefs have some support to them, yet they are all propositions. One then mounts a defense of a proposition by citing sources, clarifying histories and finding supports which augur well for any debate. One need not close one's mind to belief, anymore than to knowledge, as long as one remains aware that ranges of belief and ranges of knowledge are all propositions.
Oddly, and in spite of the current ballyhoo about artificial intelligence, it seems we will not model the human brain UNTIL we are able to model human belief. The range of current processors manages symbols and symbol manipulation, graphics and mathematics all quite well and speedily, but beliefs? No yet, and the advances in cognitive science don't seem to be getting near to doing so.
The debate game of proving "there is a God" devolves rather easily into its inverse, proving "there isn't." A jolly waste of time may be had, thereby. But, since the UFO is posited to be able to be understood through "knowledge," then well supported argumentation is required. If the UFO is perceived through "belief," then precious little supported argumentation need be given. Mere assertion works quite well. Propositions, well supported and poorly supported, are part of us. We all know something, and we all believe something. Something about self-awareness seems to flummox us mere mortals.
If one can pick up a used copy of the Dunlop-Ftezer glossary, I highly recommend it. Best wishes.
In a small, currently out of print "Glossary of Cognitive Science," Dunlop and Fetzer (Paragon), there is an interesting notion of "propositions."
The mostly supported proposition is "knowledge" and the mostly unsupported proposition is "belief." Imagine a scale, zero to one hundred, some knowledge is more supported than others, and some beliefs have some support to them, yet they are all propositions. One then mounts a defense of a proposition by citing sources, clarifying histories and finding supports which augur well for any debate. One need not close one's mind to belief, anymore than to knowledge, as long as one remains aware that ranges of belief and ranges of knowledge are all propositions.
Oddly, and in spite of the current ballyhoo about artificial intelligence, it seems we will not model the human brain UNTIL we are able to model human belief. The range of current processors manages symbols and symbol manipulation, graphics and mathematics all quite well and speedily, but beliefs? No yet, and the advances in cognitive science don't seem to be getting near to doing so.
The debate game of proving "there is a God" devolves rather easily into its inverse, proving "there isn't." A jolly waste of time may be had, thereby. But, since the UFO is posited to be able to be understood through "knowledge," then well supported argumentation is required. If the UFO is perceived through "belief," then precious little supported argumentation need be given. Mere assertion works quite well. Propositions, well supported and poorly supported, are part of us. We all know something, and we all believe something. Something about self-awareness seems to flummox us mere mortals.
If one can pick up a used copy of the Dunlop-Ftezer glossary, I highly recommend it. Best wishes.
I see you’ve never been to a UFO convention. Roswell wouldn’t exist anymore if it wasn’t for this stuff, the town would have dried up and blown away. Sure it’s not a major part of the GNP. But it’s major for the people, and towns, who make their living on it.
And you know this how?
By observation of people who believe in them you one of them too?.
I agree with you. I gave up listening to him years ago.
Sure.
He’s a con man.
I appreciate the perspective. I agree that knowledge and belief exist on a spectrum, but some beliefs can still be rational without full empirical support. The challenge is when people conflate belief with knowledge, avoiding the burden of proof.
Regarding UFOs, the key is whether claims are backed by strong evidence (knowledge) or weak assertion (belief). Skepticism and evidence-based reasoning are essential in any debate.
Are you saying that you know for a fact that they do not exist? If so, what evidence do you have for that?
I am sure glad you have the problem all resolved for us, even if you had to drag it out of your ass.
Did you know, that were more than one person who was at Roswell and involved with that event, on their death bed, admitted that there was a UFO crash involving alien beings? They were sworn to secrecy, but at that point in their lives, did not worry about anything on this earth.
Funny. I organized a few of those in the 1980s.
I used to correspond with General Jesse Marcel. Then he up and died. I can assure you, he was positive the crash was of ET origin.
Then you should know, there’s a lot of cash that runs around those thing. I’ve been to the Roswell celebration, the ENTIRE town becomes a convention. Every business figures out a way to tie into the thing. Not to mention the “official” part of the convention with all the vendors in the convention center. It’s a blast. And that week is probably when 90% of the money that comes into town arrives.
Many years ago I took my wife (a UFO skeptic) to a UFO convention in Laughlin.
I told her my mission—I wanted her to talk in person to people who claimed they had been abducted by aliens.
I wanted her to give them a fair hearing and then decide if she thought they were lying.
It was quite the experience for her.
She did not know what to think about the topic after that—but she was totally convinced they were not lying.
They do not exist there not one bit of evidence they do if you examining the mountains for it you need help with wishful thinking.
People seize what is available to them. I have been to a really crappy town in New Hampshire that is world famous for its Lobster Rolls. Those were well worth the visit to an otherwise bland place.
That little town's grasping at straws does not diminish what happened there. It is true, that town is nothing without its legend. Such is the case of any town that borders a military base.
Yup. And also, totally up. Best wishes.
PS The Dunlop-Fetzer in used condition is being hawked via WalMart for about seven bucks. It's a fine little and concise thought tool book.
Hmmm. Conservation of belief?
You only have enough for one? God? Country? Political party? Company? Space aliens?
Interesting...
You believe quite strongly, and have complete right to believe as you do. As to your rude remark, well that's a 'fine' debate and discussion tactic. When beliefs collide, such is bound to happen.
Who is demanding someone swear "to secrecy?"
I feel her pain. I was a member of a team that put on well-funded UFO symposiums in Atlanta. The kook density is great in and around those activities. The "New Age" group is quite a collection of unknowing people who will latch onto any preposterous idea, and then pass themselves off as a spiritual guru. They injected a lot of content that was never there, if you know what I mean. Many are sincere but just plain stupid.
On the other hand, I got to meet and converse with some major shakers and movers of UFO investigators and witnesses. There is definitely something going on; but, it sure is difficult to sift through the fluff. As one guest lecturer said, "This is a little like using an electric staple gun to fasten Jello to the wall".
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.