You don’t expect much on the subject of UFOs or UAPs (unidentified aerial phenomena) from a Congressional Committee. The headlines are all over the place in terms of actual findings and the information provided. Explicable UFOs and metrics for UAPs are taking center stage at the moment. National security threats are a thing, too.
To be strictly fair – Some of the Congressional Committee members do seem to be trying to get some sense out of the usual runarounds, and good luck to them. The problem is overcoming the noble tradition of ignorance we’ve all come to know and despise.
Green triangular things are also a thing happily explained as drones after being somehow classified as unidentified. As though all those billions of dollars worth of hardware and software couldn’t have figured that out for themselves.
What’s getting attention, occasionally or not at all, is what I want to focus on. Hypersonic things doing things that current tech can’t do, apparently, isn’t a thing. It should be. Hypersonic means well outside all known natural solid-object phenomena, to start with.
Maybe that’s a security issue, maybe not. Maybe it’s part of the endless “too hard basket” of not explaining things and expecting to get away with it. Nobody expects the US Air Force to be totally transparent about its own stuff, But when you hear pilots asking, “WTF is that?” maybe you need to start asking a few questions yourself.
For very basic examples:
- One UAP/UFO had “no visible means of propulsion”. Huh? This doesn’t ring any bells? You’re kidding.
- Flight dynamics and performance of many reported sightings don’t make sense and aren’t possible with known technologies. No interest? Why not?
- Some of the things these things are reported to have done would rip any airframe, including hypersonic, to shreds. No interest? Why not?
The Great Failed Sitcom Clichés of traditional non-interest in UFAs (Unidentified Flying Anythings) have been at farcical levels since the 1950s. it’s like an ongoing version of Russian air defense in Ukraine – Sees nothing, knows nothing, does nothing.
This assumption of omniscience is going way too far this time. The verified metrics for the performance of these things can’t be ignored even by the most dedicated ignoramuses.
More to the point – The tech required to achieve performance like that is ultra-valuable, and more importantly, necessary.
Let’s stop being technologically omniscient for a second. Consider:
- Navy UFO sightings have been able to run rings around modern fighters in maneuverability.
- Some sightings indicate super-fast atmospheric speeds.
- What are the thermal profiles of these things in the atmosphere?
- Duh… What if things on radar are real, Goober?
- What if these technologies have some use other than proving human ignorance, gosh almighty already?
…Or to put it another, more obvious way, there are plenty of reliable metrics; why the hell is any of this vast amount of information being considered fictional? There’s a long history of UFOs. UFOs were reported way back in WW2. People in the process of killing and being killed somehow noticed them. Not worth a look? Why?
Is there some secret cabal of highly trained idiots dedicated to denying the existence of things millions of people have seen for themselves? Cloistered collegiate cretins, whose lives are based on ensuring that common knowledge is never mentioned and trashing official military credibility in the process? How adorable.
How vacuous, and how useless, can you get? Do they do workshops? Where do you sign up to be totally unable to admit you don’t know something? Even an admission of ignorance would be better than the usual totally unconvincing babble.
If these things are extraterrestrial, what are they doing here? Trying to prove Fermi wrong? Maybe it’s a tourist thing; “Come and see the stupid chimps being stupid”. I mean, let’s face it; it would be funny if you didn’t live on Earth.
“Unidentified” is a simile for “unknown”. The unknown can be dangerous and impossible to manage if you insist on knowing nothing about it. To say that anything like enough effort has been put into trying to understand these things would be flattery. This is the first Congressional hearing, or even official attempt, to find out anything in 50 years since Project Blue Book.
Now a question – Who’s stupider, the person who doesn’t know, or the person who refuses to know? …Or maybe the person who thinks other people don’t know?
Tough question, but one that will be answered, sooner or later. Later just isn’t good enough.
__________________________________________
Disclaimer
The opinions expressed in this Op-Ed are those of the author. They do not purport to reflect the opinions or views of the Digital Journal or its members.
