UFO Conjecture(s)

Sunday, November 30, 2014

My position on "secrecy" -- governmental and ufological

This is a portion of a paper from Nucleonics about Nuclear Space Secrecy:
The whole paper may be found HERE.

The paper provides the view of Edward Teller and I use it, in conjunction with other advisories, to placate those who think that "UFO research" (or any research) should be private and secret, until its denouement.

The problem with some in the UFO milieu is that they want to pretend they are real researchers vetting something top secret when, in fact, they are only keeping material to themselves with the intent of capitalizing upon it, economically (personal gain) or to accrue a modicum of fame.



  • From my perspective these circumstantial, the alleged slides were not worth any amount of effort toward turning a process of discovery into a transparent one, while keeping names etc confidential as a compromise that no one would have been satisfied with anyway.

    The entire subject as well as the phenomenon itself is anything but transparent despite the whole looney effort of “disclosure” aimed at the government as an end run, which, given the character of the social movement behind it, was and is doomed to failure. The entire subject is awash with social politics.

    The whole affair was an abstraction of an abstraction, a disjointed narrative based on an absence of corroborative evidence, which remains true today.

    I suspect the slides will join the flotsam and jetsam of old photographs, notes, witness accounts etc as incoherent bits and pieces that do provide ample evidence that anyone who thinks they have an answer in hand is seriously deluded.

    The lack of any sober perspective placing the slides in their proper context led to a hyperbolic sort of compulsion to magnify their importance in a erstwhile poker game with stakes on the table.

    Over what? Essentially nothing of import.

    By Blogger Bruce Duensing, at Sunday, November 30, 2014  

  • Make that Steak$ on the table.

    By Blogger Bryan Daum, at Sunday, November 30, 2014  

  • I have no problem with individuals keeping things private, including research. Think about invention and innovation in business and about the process that brings it about. It is often secret with all sorts of non-disclosure agreements among the participants. And it is certainly expensive requiring massive amounts of time and money. All of this (non-transparency) is necessary in order to be first out of the box for patent rights and/or commercial recoupment of investment and some profit.

    The work on the slides is an investment and there is nothing morally or economically wrong with keeping the details private until the "reveal." And there is nothing inherently wrong with a profitable "reveal" either; after all, the researchers put in the time and money and took all of the risks. Chances are, as Bruce suggests, it will all amount to nothing and, of course, the researchers will take the "loss." But the aim of the research process is success and profit and I find nothing inherently wrong with that.

    Government secrets, on the other hand, are an entirely different matter. Taxpayers put up the funds and taxpayers deserve the information.

    By Blogger Dominick, at Sunday, November 30, 2014  

  • Sorry, Dominick, I vibrantly disagree.

    There should be no secrets in the pursuit of truth.

    If I know something that others should also know, I'm going to disclose it ASAP.

    The secretive nature of some in the UFO community is a ploy to appear privy to info that makes them special, that's all.

    No one in the UFO community is special.

    Ufology harbors the worst characters in the human family.


    By Blogger RRRGroup, at Sunday, November 30, 2014  

  • No secrets in the pursuit of truth? Sounds utopian to me, Rich, and I thought you were way to cynical for that. Full disclosure at every moment in the process or pursuit...regardless of the consequences or contracts or prior agreements assaociated with this discovery process? Sounds like "information socialism" to me and I have a real problem with that.

    You were a reporter, yes? You never kept secrets, confidences,in the pursuit of the truth of a story? What if your editor told you that at every point in the search you had to disclose your findings....not just to him but to the whole damn world. No way, no how.

    By Blogger Dominick, at Sunday, November 30, 2014  

  • Dominick:

    i worked for a lot of newspapers and a TV station.

    I often was called in by editors for providing material that wasn't to be public: salaries of government and my newspaper colleagues, IRS troubles for businesses, et cetera.

    My sources knew my stance before divulging info.

    Dammit, I hate secrets, even my own.

    Someone on the way to a big discovery shouldn't be skunked by a premature disclosure but once he or she hits their goal, it's fair game in my book.

    You might say the slides operation was one of those "on its way" activities.

    But I felt the thing was mired in secrecy for reasons having nothing to do truth but to protect the persons involved.

    And the persons involved, from the person who found the damn things to the guys working it, don't have enough respect from me to offer them protection from public scrutiny.


    I'm not budging on this, but I do like your "information socialism" sobriquet.


    By Blogger RRRGroup, at Sunday, November 30, 2014  

Post a Comment

<< Home