57 ALIEN SPECIES SO FAR: THE FACT vs FABRICATION REPORTING DILEMMA.
There are a few basic statements made in the Disclosure Project’s website which identify the project’s nature (to fully disclose facts about UFOs, ET intelligence and advanced energy systems), as well as supporting their existence by claiming that “we have over 400 government,…..,etc. personnel testifying to their direct,…….,etc. experience with such systems and entities”. The ‘smoking gun’ is apparently the 2001 conference, with direct testimony from Sgt Stone. What needs to be immediately isolated from these media statements is the suggestion by speakers that eyewitness accounts are both plentiful and detailed. However, (using Sgt Stone’s account as typical witness account) the issue of speculation seems to override the more important descriptive and explanitory nature of factual documenting and reporting.
Sgt Stone did indeed provide colourful descriptions of various witnessed entities, such as alien morphology and slightly more crude details about their spacecraft. What he then did (a cardinal sin among scientists, but forgiveable among army sergeants) was offer a number of his speculatory insights into how these creatures would interact with their surrounds, were they alive. The obvious issue thus following on from such speculation that witness accounts only offer accounts based on their subject matter being deceased, or not in a motive state. Therefore, tying this issue in with the interesting and relevent statement made by Sgt Stone within the briefing (“….the absence of evidence is not evidence of absence…”) leads those of us who scrutinise reports for a living to define the problem as one of circumstance versus assumption.
Basic acceptance of public doctrine has, for countless millenia, shaped the core of human functionality in nature. Our ability to learn, memorise and subsequently utilise the myriad of things which enhance our prosperity are all based on direct exposure to phenomena which we experience through trial and error. Furthermore, our increasingly advanced level of higher thinking has allowed us to assign theory and modelling to subject matter. Such powerful tools allow us to support or discard (or filter) results obtained from experiments conducted on such models. Even more significant is the crucial relationship we recognise between this aforementioned ’empirical’ style of study, and the less obvious ‘integral’ or ‘reverse-engineering’ style of study. The latter style enables one to break a system down into its base building blocks, before rebuilding it to achieve more accurate and desired results and conclusions about the theory’s soundness. Such is the ‘proof and disproof’ nature of science that allows for it to hold most tenacity when applied to everyday issues. This rigid scrutineering process, if applied to the current batch of data presented by the Disclosure Project, would surely yield systemic failure within the group’s fundamental model.
Even if there have been a multitude of unidentified extra-terrestrial entities discovered on Earth (57 in total, over exactly how many years?), one has to ask WHAT this work is aiming to achieve, and WHY it is so very prominent in many social networks today. How do we even identify alien species/spacecraft based on 57 findings alone. Could many hundreds of such discoveries have been documented since man began recording history? If so, then would we be able to model alien life-forms based on credible historic records? Without debating pros and cons of this subject matter, this author simply chooses to address the only inputs and outcomes that do matter. Evidence or no evidence, any subject study is doomed from the beginning without providision of a means to an end (aims, goals), a sound methodology for study (properly designed and calibrated experiments, tests etc.), accurate and easily read result collation and interpretation, and final conclusive/discussive remarks and possible recommendations borne out of such conclusions. Therefore (in this author’s conclusion) the project reports are being treated as story-like, complete with eye-popping, riveting witness accounts and descriptions. Such work could only achieve the status of credible, factual documentation were its very perpertrators already establishing models of such ET-based theories before gathering evidence to support the models. This is not exactly easy to do, especially without more than a morsel of knowledge of outer space, especially from the perspective of an Earth-bound mammal!
