Source
r/UFOs•
_Nullius

TOPIC FOR DISCUSSION: COVERUP

Hey folks, I expect this sort of debate happens here from time to time but I’m new to Reddit so I’m curious to hear everyone’s opinion.

I take the following statements to be essentially factual at this point:

  1. There are unidentified aerial phenomenon throughout the last hundred years of history at least. These phenomena conform to what seems to be advanced technological objects and that they are likely to be extraterrestrial and possibly intelligent.

  2. There is no world in which the hyper sophisticated air defense screens and trans orbital radar surveillance screens of the US and the former USSR have NOT developed a detailed record of these objects’ comings and going’s and some kind of analysis as to the meaning of their collected data.

  3. Neither government mentioned above has ever formally acknowledged the extent of their data nor their analysis and, indeed, has occasionally taken active steps at disavowing knowledge of these phenomena. (sometimes with what feels like a classic coverup but with what more often feels like a polite shrug of feigned ignorance).

So my question to you all is why? Why lie?

My own hypothesis is below. What is yours?

Posted Feb 24, 2021, 6:08 AM UTC

214
_NulliusOP•

I believe that what the governments of the US and Russia are hiding is their powerlessness to enforce their own sovereign airspace. Acknowledging the existence of UFOS would encourage the voters to form their own idiotic opinions. One can only imagine what the American voter might demand in an election year if it were accepted fact that our national airspace was being regularly violated by extraterrestrial machines. What would the Q-anon voter or the Christian fundamentalist demand of their elected representative? That the Air Force fire upon these objects; that we consider their curiosity to be an act of war? How long before some invented hokum about cattle mutilations or anal probing or body snatchers is turned into a sinister conspiracy theory that drives US politics?

I believe the US government has every reason to believe that the voter will be unable to rationally contend with the existence of extraterrestrial visitors with whom the government are disinclined -quite rationally- to interfere.

2
SagansCandle•

I read a book once with a plausible explanation that makes a lot of sense. I can't recall the name of the book, but it was a scientific author (Might have been Carl Sagan....)

Essentially the general population doesn't like "unknowns." Everyone kind of expects the government to have all the answers. It's akin to how many UFO enthusiasts just assume the government knows ALL about UFO's and is covering it up. But history tells us that large conspiracies have a very short lifetime, making this assumption implausible.

A more plausible explanation is that the government doesn't want to admit it doesn't know something. We depend on the government for our protection. If the government makes a statement like, "Yea, we have a ton of data on UFO's, but we have no idea what they are," that could cause a panic.

My guess is that UFO sightings have increased thanks to technology, and the recent release of the evidence was testing the waters to see how the public would react to more disclosure. No panic, so that's good. It also seemed like a ploy to get the government to fund the programs designed to investigate UFO's. Since that seems to have succeeded, it's unlikely we'll hear anything more about UFOs (or UAPs) until there's more hard evidence.

The questions you raise are good questions, though. Keep asking them. Make reasonable conclusions. For example, if the government had UFO technology, why would we be investing billions into new fighters? If we had superior technology, would we really sit idly by while china builds entire islands to wrest control of trade routes?

To me, it makes sense that the government just doesn't know; the government's not in the business of announcing that it doesn't know something. The alternative - a massive cover-up, just doesn't really match the other evidence we do have.

2
_NulliusOP•

That’s more or less exactly how I feel. The only thing the government is covering up is their own ignorance and powerlessness in the face of the unknown.

The fantasy that the US government secretly has access to its own secretly established laws of physics and corresponding hyper technology seems almost laughably unlikely. Why would the government invest billions in the machinery of war if the US already had godlike aerospace tech? And how would the physicists possibly be silenced when even a seemingly unrelated paper connected to this ridiculous “secret physics” would win the publisher a Nobel prize and a place in history.

The only secrets that the government can keep are those secrets which all the folks who know them acknowledge, without argument, are too dangerous to know. I think the way people would react to an official acknowledgment of UFO’s is just too volatile, and a regime with a penchant for firing missiles at alien technology could easily endanger us all. This is the sort of secret that is so obviously dangerous, people are inclined to keep it.

1
OnaPaleHorse80•

Yup.

1
OnaPaleHorse80•

What you said in a way, plus not knowing how to go about admitting to lying to the people and suppressing the most important discovery in history, pressure from the uber rich and those in power to maintain our dependence on fossil fuels and nuclear energy when tech can be produced that is possible to fulfill both needs to ALL for FREE. That's why I was a bit surprised to see the Naval videos actually released to the public and confirmed to be legit as they all exhibit clear evidence that a silent, clean, non-combustible form of an energy source providing crafts with maneuverability and power centuries beyond our own technologically- is not only possible, but is in use on these crafts. And ofc, the fear of how we, the ppl, would respond to such revelations. Those of us on here all say "yeah, Id be ok with it, I'm ready to accept that kind of news in a calm, civil manner," but look how the US crumbled into chaos and severe division over a simple election. We have Karens and Q's in buffalo hats acting like asses, Wallstreet fervently fighting to prevent the poor from sharing in their financial endeavors to keep an unspoken caste system in place, the right deifying a morally-deprived man like Trump and thinking hes a "warrior of God," the left and libs trying to jump from one bandwagon to the next canceling everything and everyone that hurts their precious feelings or offends them in the slightest, the media lying to us daily and pushing paid agendas telling us who we should hate and who we should vote for, picking and choosing what info to release and what to suppress to sway us- we are a species in chaos. We war amongst ourselves over every little disagreement, so I don't find it hard to believe that they fear our reaction to "disclosure," we destroy our own cities already over FAR less earth-shattering news than aliens.

2
_NulliusOP•

Indeed. Actually for the first time in my life I’ve begun to see that concealing evidence and analysis relating to extraterrestrial technology makes a great deal of sense. The public at large just seems completely unprepared for the information. They are hostile to scientific and technological progress and eager for primal violence against whomever they identify as the ‘other.’ (And alien intelligence would certainly fall into this category).

As to the technology, there is only so much basic physics to go around, and the advancement of nuclear engineering and plasma physics has been relentless. I don’t know if, as a physicist myself, I would ever describe energy as “free,” but certainly the cost of releasing energy and generating power will come down by so many orders of magnitude that it will seem free by our current standards (at least where low-energy mechanics like moving a metal box down the street is concerned). The curious thing about the craft in the naval video was that it seemed to be of uniform temperature which suggests that it had no exhaust or reaction fuel and that whatever was powering it would have to have been something that ran relatively cool and likely used the hull as a radiator and kept it’s temperature relatively uniform across the surface. (Not too difficult with a conductive metal hull) High-output Aneutronic fusion is a decent candidate for this sort of power supply and has little thermal output.

2
OnaPaleHorse80•

With "free" energy (ofc it never would be in our greed-driven society) I was referring to things like the hydro-cell battery that was invented, reported on in national news to supposedly revolutionize the auto industry and nix our reliance on fossil fuels only to be stricken from the entire media shortly after the inventor's questionable death and things like the "zero point energy" and other claims made by Stephen Greer and Bob Lazar. Greer claimed to have knowledge of some clean burning, renewable energy source that anyone could use by installing some kind of generator in their home at a one-time cost of about $2k per home with no reason for monthly utility bills since you're powering your own home. Many seem to think Greer is a snake oil salesman though so take that as you will. As you mentioned with the lack of exhaust or any real indication of heat expulsion at all, a clean, contained (and possibly self-renewable?) energy source is implied to be powering these crafts and given their speed and maneuverability, one that is capable of immense power output. If such a thing existed and were released to the public it would be devastating to more than a few industries, and I don't find it totally unfathomable that someone worth billions may be able to grease some palms to sway the decisions of already morally corrupt leaders and media outlets. They say everyone has a price- I would assume several million is more than enough to turn a few self-professed saints into sinners.

2
_NulliusOP•

Ah while I agree that funding priorities have often been woefully misdirected (towards fossil fuels on the right and windmills on the left), I don’t think there is any organized effort to prevent the discover of novel forms of nuclear power. Rather it’s just a lack of imagination among the Department of Energy types and the notoriously aging and hidebound nuclear energy business.

Zero point energy is a concept from electrodynamics that is woefully misunderstood by Lazar who had no physics or engineering background as far as I could tell. (And is totally full of shit in my frankly extremely informed opinion Lol) It is by definition not a harnessable form of energy. (It is the zero level for energy in the electromagnetic field in some equations, like sea level for water. All energy is relative)

Hydrogen fuel cells are pretty elementary tech that has been around forever, but they don’t solve any problems. Free hydrogen is extremely rare on earth, most of it having been bound into chemical compounds long ago (most commonly water). Fuel cells take advantage of the fact that these reactions are extremely exergonic. Even the space shuttle simply combined hydrogen and Oxogen to create water and that released enough energy to put her in orbit. That being said, cracking the hydrogen back OUT of the water requires that you expend at least as much energy as it released when it was bound, which means that refining hydrogen fuel (and storing it cryogenically) is all extremely energy intensive. So without a ton of nuclear and solar power at your fingertips hydrogen fuel cells are prohibitively expensive. They are not a source of energy, just a storage medium, like a battery -but cleaner. The energy still has to come from somewhere.

Clean, cheap, abundant power would wildly enrich all industries on earth aside from traditional power generation companies. The reason we haven’t made it work yet (my interest is in Hydrogen-Boron11 fusion, for example) is because it’s really, really hard. These types of fusion require temperatures and pressures 15 times higher than the core of the sun and even ordinary, pedestrian, dirty solar fusion happens at solar temperatures. That is NOT an easy bit of engineering. But we WILL figure it out, and nobody is going to stop us. It’s just a matter of time, effort, money, and good old human ingenuity.

That being said I would caution against any dubious claims of “free” energy. That is undoubtedly snake oil. Unfortunately everything in the universe is conserved. Energy is just the capacity to do work in the simplest definition, and it’s usual form is in the potential for some reaction to happen that hasn’t happened yet (hydrogen bonds with Oxogen, a ball rolls down a hill, an electric charge distribution equalizes across a potential caused by an uneven distribution), and once the reaction has happened the energy has already changed form. You can shave a bit off the top, but that’s all you get. You can’t design a self-cocking slingshot without a source of power, for example. Once the slingshot has been fired, the energy stored in the molecular bonds of the rubber band are gone. All energy works like this.

1