Why is the Pentagon’s UFO office so clueless about UFOs?
Why is the Pentagon’s UFO office so clueless about UFOs?
You're viewing a single thread.
I skimmed the article, but read the AARO report ages ago:
It boils down to something like 88-92% of aerial phenomena having really mundane explanations or are related to top secret aviation projects in some way.
Given it's the Pentagon we're dealing with, coming out and saying, "Oh that wasn't a flying saucer, it was the prototype Lockheed Martin fuckshit 9,000 carrying Geneva Convention violating payloads."
The remaining 8% qualify as "substantial, unexplainable UAP" and that's probably what most people are actually interested in -- but again, military. Defense.
"We don't know what it is but it can jump dimensions" is a huge confidence destroying factor for a defense organization of any metric.
In summary: The Pentagon's UFO office is so clueless about UFOs due to completely logical reasons and necessity.
For the other 8%, we're out there, but..
Y'know. Y've seen Star Trek, and know how uncontacted species react from human anthropology.
The best thing ahem.. {they} can all do -- is literally leave the Earth the fuck alone. Not speaking from experience or anything. C:
That's a fairly spot on breakdown. The key thing is that the All-domain Anomaly Resolution Office's goal is "resolution", so they'll be focusing on cases they can resolve. Some of these cases are "resolved" if they can be partially replicated.
Take for example the Eglin UAP sighting, which AARO was able to replicate "some aspects" of with a commercial lighting balloon. "AARO conducted extensive testing using one of these balloons and found it could replicate some aspects of the pilot’s account." Because of that, the case is marked as "resolved" with "moderate" confidence.
They didn't confirm if any of these lighting balloons had been lost. And, while these balloons are powered by cable, AARO concluded that they could have been adapted to use a battery. Though, that would also limit their time powered and make it easier to pinpoint the source of a lost balloon. But, because some elements could be replicated by making adjustments to a physically similar object they were able to "resolve" the sighting.
Even with that approach to resolution, they still have unexplained anomalous events. And, it's completely understandable that there will be cases they can't explain or can't admit to publicly. However, their attempts to dismiss the truly anomalous events have been disingenuous.