Showing posts with label UFO Community. Show all posts
Showing posts with label UFO Community. Show all posts

Monday, March 26, 2018

Deception and Fake Videos: It's Not Just for YouTubers

Bookmark and Share

Deception and Fake Videos: It's Not Just for YouTubers
“The majority in the UFO community are clueless about the depths that an intelligence agency can go to manage people of interest.”

- James Carrion, commenting in The Greys Have Been Framed: Exploitation in the UFO Community
      People interested in UFOs often possess vast amounts of knowledge on popular cases and intricate details of happenings within the community. High profile ufology personalities and their followings know their UFO stuff. Unfortunately, we might sometimes be viewed as knowing a lot about a little, and those observations may at times have merit.

The genre is rather infamously notable for neglecting to give adequate study to topics often found less enthralling than saucer stories, yet nonetheless extremely relevant. Procedures of the intelligence community is one such relevant topic, among many. Let's take a
Jack Brewer
By Jack Brewer
The UFO Trail
3-19-18
relatively brief look at how better understanding the intelligence community might be important for those desiring to know more about events taking place within ufology.

The Pentagon spent over $500 million – half a billion bucks – to create fake videos, according to sources such as Independent and The Bureau of Investigative Journalism. But it was much more than perception management. As a matter of fact, the videos were designed to appeal to Al-Qaeda members and sympathizers, not change their minds. This particular batch of propaganda consisted of fake terrorist vids that tracked the locations of viewers. The material was created by a UK-based public relations firm hired by the U.S. Department of Defense.

Former video editor Martin Wells reportedly worked on the project, which took place between about 2006 and 2011. Requirements included specific format and code, he explained. Marines would leave copies of the completed videos, contained on compact discs, at the scenes of raids and ransacked houses in Iraq so that enemies would later find them. According to Independent, Wells further explained:
“If one if looked at in the middle of Baghdad… you know there’s a hit there,” Mr. Wells said. “If one, 48 hours or a week later shows up in another part of the world, then that’s the more interesting one, and that’s what they’re looking for more, because that gives you a trail.”
A former chairman of Bell Pottinger, the PR firm, reportedly confirmed the existence of its contract with the Pentagon. Likewise, the Pentagon also confirmed the contract, while insisting all material distributed was truthful. That may actually be the case while the videos nonetheless fall well under the definition of Al-Qaeda propaganda.

“Bell Pottinger was first tasked by the interim Iraqi government in 2004 to promote democratic elections,” Independent reported. “They received $540m between May 2007 and December 2011, but could have earned as much as $120m from the US in 2006.”

Howard Hughs
Howard Hughes, 1938
We might also consider what history teaches us about relationships between intelligence agencies and wealthy eccentrics. The CIA recruited Howard Hughes to supply cover for Project Azorian, a multi-million dollar effort to secretly raise a sunken Russian submarine from the bottom of the ocean. The project took years to fully execute and involved Hughes announcing a fabricated plan to mine the seafloor. In actuality, sailors would work to raise the sub under the guise of mining, which, by the way, was reasonably successful. The CIA eventually released documents indicating about 40 feet of the over 300-foot vessel was retrieved.

We might be wise to familiarize ourselves with such operations and keep them in mind when contemplating the Advanced Aviation Threat Identification Program and its close relations to Robert Bigelow and To The Stars Academy. Every instance of career intelligence officials moonlighting as ufologists is certainly not the tip of a far reaching conspiracy. That stated, it is not unreasonable by any means to expect verification of evidence presented. The same can be said for claims asserted. That might particularly be considered the case when To The Stars claimed able to present a verifiable chain of custody of videos published, yet has failed to do so.

There is not a lot of wiggle room in the definition of a fact. It can be publicly reviewed and confirmed by third parties or it can't. When it can't, it simply shouldn't yet be accepted as a fact.

It's reasonable to be open-minded. It's also reasonable to be inquisitive and interested in what might be navigating the skies.

But don't be gullible. Don't be guilty of confirmation bias. Demand professionally presented evidence. The truth depends on it.

Continue Reading ►

See Also:

Secret Pentagon UFO Study – Interview with former Deputy Assistant Secretary of Defense Christopher Mellon | VIDEO

What’s Up With The Slow Dribble of Jet Fighter/UFO Videos?

The Aftermath Re The Pentagon’s UFO Study: Corporate Media Sitting on Their Hands

3rd AATIP Video & the Pentagon UFO Study – Interview with Luis Elizondo | VIDEO

Third Government UFO Video Released | VIDEO

The Military Keeps Encountering UFOs – Why Doesn’t the Pentagon Care? | VIDEO

UFO Research Gets New Life By Way of The Pentagon's Mysterious Project

BREAKING NEWS: The Pentagon’s Mysterious UFO Program Revealed | VIDEO

Ex-Military Official Details Pentagon's Secret UFO Hunt | INTERVIEW – VIDEO

Billionaire Robert Bigelow's Decades-Long Obsession With UFOs

Navy F-18 'Gimbal UFO' Video Explained?

Post Pentagon’s UFO Research Program Revelations – Skeptics Regroup

Understanding the Science of UFOs and Space Time Metric Engineering | VIDEO

Secret UFO Program Recorded Encounters with Unknown Objects | INTERVIEW – VIDEO

UFO-Pentagon FOIA Request Delayed

BREAKING NEWS: The Pentagon’s Mysterious UFO Program Revealed | VIDEO

Ex-CIA Chief - Keep Studying UFOs

Herald Tribune Reporter, Billy Cox Queries CIA On Chase Brandon's Roswell UFO Claims

Luis Elizando Former Head of Secret Pentagon UFO Program Describes Five Categories of UFOs | INTERVIEW

While Waiting for the Next New York Times UFO Bomb to Drop

Navy Pilot, Who Chased A UFO, Says ‘We Should Take Them Seriously’

UFO Legacy: What Impact Will Revelation of Secret Government Program Have?

UFO Reports at Nuclear Missile Sites and The Pentagon UFO Program

Astrophysicist, Neil deGrasse Tyson Discusses The Pentagon UFO Program on Colbert | VIDEO

Ex-Military Official Details Pentagon's Secret UFO Hunt | INTERVIEW – VIDEO

Pentagon's Secret UFO Search, Stanton Friedman Weighs In | INTERVIEW – VIDEO

What the New York Times UFO Report Actually Reveals

'Second' Navy Pilot Comes Forward Re UFO Encounter | INTERVIEW – VIDEO

'The Pentagon’s Newly Revealed UFO Research Program' – What a Week!

On the Trail of a Secret Pentagon U.F.O. Program

UFO-Pentagon Story Reflects Fundamental Problems

Pentagon UFO Study Examined UFO Activity at Nuclear Missile Sites Says Former U.S. Senator Harry Reid

UFO Study Focused on U.S. Military Encounters

PENTAGON UFO PROGRAM: 'Recovered Material' From UFOs Discussed By Leslie Kean | INTERVIEW – VIDEO

Senator Reid Discusses Secret UFO Program | INTERVIEW – VIDEO

Navy Pilot Recounts UFO Encounter | INTERVIEW – VIDEO

Aliens, UFOs, Flying Discs and Sightings -- Oh My!

Secret Programs, U.S. Senators and Money, Who Wants to Talk UFOs Now?

Navy Pilot Talks: The UFO Jammed Their Radar — ‘It Accelerated Beyond Any Airplane We Have’

BREAKING NEWS: The Pentagon’s Mysterious UFO Program Revealed | VIDEO

Navy UFO Encounter: 'It Accelerated Like Nothing I’ve Ever Seen’ – F/A-18F Pilot | VIDEO

Secret UFO Pentagon Program Explained By Leslie Kean | INTERVIEW – VIDEO

Secret Pentagon UFO Program Spent Millions

The Pentagon’s Secret Search for UFOs




REPORT YOUR UFO EXPERIENCE


Saturday, December 20, 2014

Project Core, the UFO Community and Professional Research

Bookmark and Share


Jack Brewer By Jack Brewer
The UFO Trail
12-16-14

      Reports from Project Core were recently published at projectcore.net. The project was a professionally conducted research endeavor in which written testimonies of paranormal experiences from over 200 individuals were obtained via surveys and considered at length. Questions were posed to respondents in which trends in responses could be analyzed. Several avenues for potentially productive future research were subsequently identified.

Project Core team members included self-described experiencers of paranormal phenomena Jeff Ritzmann and Jeremy Vaeni. Working on the project were also Dr. Tyler A. Kokjohn, Dr. D. Ellen K. Tarr and Dr. Kimbal E. Cooper.

I have read all material posted on the Project Core website. After having revisited the reports and commentaries a few times, and feeling that I have reasonably processed the data and observations contained therein, I feel there are some important points.

Aristotle
Science pioneer Aristotle
Among the more relevant observations, in my opinion, is that such a project is most certainly possible within the UFO and paranormal communities. Not only does Project Core contradict popularly held assumptions that science is unable to systematically and competently address reported paranormal phenomena, but it also demonstrates that self-described experiencers and professional researchers can collaborate on such ventures.

That leads us to another important point I considered as a byproduct of reviewing Project Core: Extreme opposite camps within ufology, which I will for the time being label "unquestioning believers" and "stubborn debunkers", share responsibilities for collective tire-spinning. Futility rests on the shoulders of both demographics, not just one or the other.

Unquestioning Believers

Obviously, unquestioning belief is unattractive to critical thinkers. It is easy to see how claims of vacuum cleaner nozzles on the surface of Mars might lower public interest in the UFO genre, at least among those some of us might prefer be drawn to it.

David Jacobs
Retired historian David Jacobs
In addition to those who consistently try to direct our attention to interpretations of photos at craptastic dot com, the unquestioning believer side of the scale also includes individuals and organizations which manipulate and shape those poorly conceived beliefs. That would include alien-hunting hypnotists that sell their clients' data without consent, historians that recommend chastity belts to their research subjects, and the organizations that provide them venues to promote their unsupported claims while prospecting for more people to exploit.

There is even much more to it than that, though. Among the additional harmful social dynamics is a cultism that quickly embraces newcomers seeking credible information. In return for courageous open-mindedness, newcomers are often bombarded with assurances that everyone abducted by aliens had difficulty accepting it at first. The pseudo recovery might include suggestions to attend meetings purported to provide emotional support which, in actuality, serve to spread such beliefs inherent to the genre as big news about an alien presence will be released any day by the White House. One might also get indoctrinated with a lot of material that will assure future hypnosis sessions would go as hoped.

If one is fortunate enough to get out of a recon mission into the UFO community without landing in front of a rogue hypnotist and author masquerading as a therapist, they can cut their losses and return to a life where they keep relatively quiet about those 'something weird happened one time' stories. If not that fortunate, well, then they have a whole lot more emotional baggage to carry and healing to do than they started with – and that's if they're wise and brave enough to consider that many of those "helpful" UFO people have no idea whatsoever what the hell they're talking about.

So the unquestioning believer demographic has many detrimental aspects. One of the most damaging is that its members are prone to interpreting the experiences of others and thinking themselves qualified to explain them in outrageously assumptive detail. The bottom line is that people of higher intelligence and emotional availability don't want other people trying to tell them what happened to them who have no idea and don't even know they don't.

Stubborn Debunkers

The stubborn debunkers conduct a different, but nonetheless detrimental, brand of bait and switch. They often try to lead newcomers to believe they promote skepticism and rationality when, in actuality, they can be among the most opinionated, dogmatic demographics one might ever encounter. Healthy skepticism is a very good thing - I would confidently say entirely necessary - but it is nowhere to be found among stubborn debunkers and despite their claims to the contrary.

They make fun of people who hold ideas and beliefs different than their own, employ sarcasm as a preferred mode of expressing themselves, and, by and large, do not even conduct research – they just criticize and make light of others who do, unless it happens to support their preferred perspective. They virtually never address a topic of which they are unwilling to offer speculative conclusions, and they fail miserably at asking the right, productive questions.

James Randi
Self-described skeptic James Randi
In his 1992 paper, 'CSICOP and the Skeptics: An Overview', writer/researcher George P. Hansen observed that facets of the organized skeptical movement opted to employ an extended public relations campaign rather than conduct research. "These activities display more parallels with political campaigns than with scientific endeavors," Hansen wrote. His paper frequently came to mind while reading Project Core and considering how the project embodied what professional research conducted by competent and qualified individuals actually looks like and is capable of producing.

Stubborn debunkers typically attempt to minimize reported experiences of high strangeness or conspiratorial implications by employing any number of explanations that might indeed be applicable in some circumstances, but do not necessarily apply to a case at hand. While the burden of proof indeed falls upon one asserting a claim, the fact of the matter is that a more discerning group of experiencers and researchers do not assert claims, but simply question. The bottom line - again - is that people of higher intelligence and emotional availability don't want other people trying to tell them what happened to them who have no idea and don't even know they don't. Same as with the unquestioning believers. Whether one's field of interest includes psychic phenomena, entities, the intelligence community or most anything else, they should prefer to allow facts lead them to conclusions, not lobbying techniques.

Professional Research

So to tie this together, the UFO community consists of demographics with virtually polar opposite beliefs but each detrimentally effecting the paranormal genre in similar manners: They try to lead others to believe they are able to explain things to them of which they actually have little idea, are frequently unfamiliar with relevant material and are often not even qualified to venture an intelligent guess. People therefore become very reluctant to share their ideas and experiences for various different reasons, not just the well known fear of ridicule invoked by stubborn debunkers, but also because they don't want unquestioning believers saddling their reputations with wild and disturbing rumors based upon little more than questionable interpretations of reality.

And that is what's different about Project Core. I could tell you a lot of things it's not, but here's what it is: An objective and professional assessment of experiences reported by over 200 individuals, as well as assessments of answers provided to a series of specific questions. The only stipulations for reporting experiences were to provide sincere accounts, no matter how bizarre the perceived events, and to not submit any information obtained via hypnosis.

Researchers demonstrated a full awareness that surveys obtained did not necessarily contain accurate information, but might at times be more representative of what respondents interpreted, such as in the cases of reported physiological circumstances and perceived experiences. Data was professionally organized and presented, with much careful consideration given to patterns and correlations that seemed to emerge.

About a third of those surveyed indicated multiple witnesses were present during the events. Taking into consideration that many respondents reported multiple experiences, researchers suggested that future events might be accurately anticipated. A number of additional avenues for future research were also identified, including the implementation of cost effective technological advances.

It was also apparent that researchers of alleged alien abduction have largely failed to explore the cases of witnesses who have unaided conscious recall of events. Pursuing such witnesses, while ceasing to rely upon regressive hypnosis as an investigative tool, was strongly suggested.

Yet another emerging point was that respondents largely felt their experiences have not been portrayed accurately in media. Researchers considered that assertion might be due to the more bizarre aspects of the reports being frequently omitted by those portraying the experiences to the public. Readers were additionally free to surmise that ill advised use of regressive hypnosis, and leading of witnesses by biased hypnotists and investigators, likely play major roles in such inaccurate media portrayal. While reading Project Core reports, it seemed entirely possible to me that the common abduction narrative is, in reality, a rather small percentage of reported experiences, if not largely inaccurate and unreported. At the least, it appeared reasonable to question if the stereotypical alien abduction narrative is a very poor representation of what people perceive themselves to be experiencing.

I recommend reading the material posted at Project Core. There are several intriguing points and interesting insights.

But mostly I recommend it because it serves as a model of what professional research of reported paranormal experiences looks like. Pro research is pro research. Everything else is not.