Randall
J. Randall Murphy
On the '52 DC flap, pretty much all of what we know is believable, meaning that there were some misidentifications as well as genuine UFOs and the signal has been separated from the noise with enough confidence to say which was what.Which was already 66 years ago, and since there are alternative explanations for at least some of it, it is once again one of those cases where it's hard to say which parts to believe.
That is a possibility I frequently entertain. But it implies the aliens have since left and never come back, and the thing I saw in the 1970s definitely wasn't one of ours, and it doesn't seem reasonable to believe that out of all the other reports since the Early Modern Era, that the only person in the world to have seen such things since then is me.Maybe that was all there was to disclose.
I'm remaining hopeful, but reserved. If and when the TTSA actually is given officially disclosed unambiguous info that is verifiable through official channels, then I'll know which side of the fence to come down on. In meantime I'm just watching it all play out.With the AATIP, the situation looks to be basically so that either some blurry videos and cases like Nimitz are all there is to disclose, or alternatively that project didn't have access to all the significant data. Either way, it looks we have already seen the kind of material we can hope to get from it, although by Elizondo's latest remarks, it's actually our job to try to get that declassified and published, not his/theirs. There's no reason to expect any sort of disclosure beyond that.
Listen to the podcast. Basically, my impression is that he doesn't think official disclosure requires a PR venture like the TTSA to get the job done, and that focusing on extraneous entertainment projects is questionable in terms of making the best use of their resources.What did he say?
Last edited: