Do you know that, recently, Mrs. Susan Gough (PR spokeswoman of the OSD – Office of the Secretary of Defense) allegedly/apparently wrote an email to Mr. John Greenwald (The Black Vault) saying (according to Mr. Greenwald) that AATIP did not investigate UAP (UFOs)? I still haven’t read the original letter but it is something that has to be known.
I expect more information to come out soon, from Mr. Greenwald, perhaps from Mrs. Gough, perhaps from the Navy and from TTSA. Is it a misunderstanding or a fundamental conflict of factual information? Is it a strange strategy to confuse people?
These declarations would have to deny not only Mr. Elizondo’s but also Mr. Jim Semivan, Chris Mellon, H. Puthoff and other serious people (such as Senator Harry Reid), not only knowledgeable about classified information (and intelligence clearances) but also linked to TTSA, credible persons who today – as a whole – guarantee that AATIP did investigate UAPs (UFOs).
Is all of this a confusion or a reversal of policy?
It doesn’t seem to make sense but (if the information shared by Mr. Greenwald is accurate) WHY would this be happening now? Do some persons “in the know” want to lock the cat back after it came out of the box?
Or is Mr. Greenwald’s information not very clear? Or perhaps is this the old pattern of those who try to control what the population knows, using the practice of revelation followed by denial? (However, this revealing was to one or a few individuals only before the denial).
Is it a mistake from Mrs. Gough who doesn’t know all the information? Or has she been told to say that? Is this a strategy from a faction inside those “in the know” because something else is in the offing? Is this apart of an old plan or a new move?
In terms of UFO disclosure, the “powers that be” follow a pattern of revealing and denying information to society as Randy Koppang and Grant Cameron would likely agree. They usually reveal something to one or a few individuals and later deny it after these individuals have been used to deliver a message to society. But this time they would be denying a whole team of intelligence- savy VIPs gathered in TTSA.
A few days before, another letter by Mrs. Gough (in response to an SCU (Scientific Coalition for Ufology request) publicly shared by Mr. Greenwald) stated that the U.S. Navy only had the “source” videos similar in quality and in length of the 3 videos shown to the public through TTSA (“GIMBAL” “GO FAST” and “FLIR 1”). That these were not classified. She doesn’t actually deny that there may be full-length and higher quality “original ” videos somewhere else but seems to be minimizing or trying to minimize expectations from the general public regarding what the U.S. Navy (and, by extrapolation, the Government in general) may have.
What is happening here?
LINK to John Greenwald’s report in The Black Vault:
In the image above I’m trying to measure ionizing radiation in from of the largest mummy “María.” It had to be done but the test gave a negative result. The door has been sealed for protection.
On November 6, 2019, at the Universidad Nacional San Luis Gonzaga during the VI International Research Congress (VI Congreso Internacional de Investigación) the scientists Galeckii Dimitri from Russia, José the la Cruz Ríos from Mexico, explorer-anthropologist Thierry Jamin and investigative reporter Mr. Jaime Maussan gave information about the 3-finger Nazca-Palpa mummies and some new findings were presented.
Besides previous information that the genetic tests revealed that María the largest mummy coincided genetically with homo sapiens by about 25% and the smaller specimens by about 15%, the vertebrae of the smaller specimens in the neck were said to be cylindrical which would have permitted the specimen to rotate its head beyond human range.
One of the tomographic images appeared to show a grape seed or similar in the intestines.
As had been previously mentioned histological analysis showed that the skin in both the large specimen and the smaller ones appeared to be that of a reptile.
Mr. Maussan was thankful to the people of GAIA -TV recognizing that without their auspices they would not have been able to carry out several genetic tests.
Vice-Rector of Research Dr. Martin Alarcón Quispe mentioned that keeping the bodies in the university and promoting their research could benefit the university which could become a hotbed to generate future researchers. He invited new scientists including those of the Ministry of Culture that had opposed. He also mentioned that he had been threatened. Some archaeology students loudly opposed during part of the presentation but I think that the scientific reasons which they presented could have been easily answered.
Unfortunately, the one Peruvian reporter most seriously dedicated to covering the news, Mr. Jois Mantilla announced that he would retire from covering this case to have more time for his paying work and family.
The mummies that the university is protecting (and for which it is coordinating further research with a new team of scientists) were shown to attendees, in spite of previous attempts by the Ministry of Culture to confiscate them.
The researchers associated with the Maussan-Gaia TV team were happy to have done their best to research these mummies.
I interviewed in English and Spanish Mexican biologist José de la Cruz Ríos López and the Vice-rector of the university Dr. Martin Alarcón Quispe. With another interpreter, I interviewed Dr. Galetckii Dimitri. And I interviewed in English-only Dr. Robert E. Farrel who was attending this Congress. Mr. Jaime Maussan was interviewed in English-only by Freedom Press News.
In relation to an extraterrestrial presence, we may be dealing with “Hyperobjects” or “Multiple Objects.” For intelligently influencing an Intelligent Disclosure we would need to study Developmental Psychology and how human consciousness and subjectivity may deal with these objects.
Consciousness can be understood as the capacity to experience meaning, in fact, forms of meaning, including how to interpret them. The meanings of experience are normally related to objects of experience and, ultimately, even consciousness itself can be understood as an object of its own experience. Therefore, epistemology and ontology are not separate. Meanings can be of multiple kinds like sensations (pain, pleasure), sentiments/feelings, concepts, ultimate spiritual meanings…any form of meaning.
Leading a ‘sensible’ human adaptation to emergent, culturally and instinctively-challenging global issues requires a global form of integrative perspective-taking. This would be a level of interpretation capable of appreciating the importance of previous forms of interpretation in such a way that its possible to work with individuals interpreting reality under such previous levels. Moreover, it would be a form of interpretation that operates under a more extended experience of “meaningful time” in which for practical purposes the motivation to act in the present experience includes more of the past and of the future.
A creative, adaptive political and cultural acknowledgment of a globally active, advanced, non-human extraterrestrial presence on Earth is akin to intelligently dealing with culturally-challenging, global issues like “climate change.” These are issues which are so widely distributed in space and in time that only fragments of their meaning can be grasped simultaneously by most people. They trump traditional ideas about what a thing is in the first place. These issues are called “hyperobjects” by Timothy Morton, author of “Hyperobjects: Philosophy and Ecology after the End of the World” (2013). They require a completely different way of thinking and being in the world; quite likely post binary, connecting the subjective and objective realms of experience and inclusive of a type of science in which the non-physical consciousness, information and subtler forms of energy are used to modify physical matter.
On the other hand, integrative philosopher Sean Esbjörn-Hargens consider climate change and similar issues as “multiple objects.” This is an object that is objectively real but enacted through different subjective perspectives producing different meanings about it. I think that the “global technologically advanced, non-human, presence related to UFOs” can also be considered as a “multiple object.”
In the following article, Gail Hochachka studies the multiple responses to the issue of “climate change” under the aegis of Developmental Psychology. With a greater capacity for taking multiple perspectives, individuals may be able to deal with “hyperobjects” or with “multiple objects” more appropriately. Hochachka also shows how individuals operating under different interpretive levels of development “make meaning” including greater or lesser degrees of the present, past and future considerations accompanying different degree of abstraction and personal identifications.
I recognize the crucial importance that TTSA has played in moving the UFO subject into the mainstream, serving as a bridge between the highest levels of secrecy and the general public. However, it is time for many more serious cultural influencers to join a serious conversation regarding the “global, technologically advanced, non-human presence related to UFOs” beyond the influence of those in the know within military and intelligence circles who may only be able to interpret the situation under particular valid but partial limited perspectives. But we must rise to the challenge surpassing conventional modes of thinking.
If UAP intelligences are able to handle a more extended present, a present that includes more of the future and of the past in a non-linear way as Luis Elizondo suggested (as a personal opinion) during a MUFON interview (see the May 2018 edition of “The MUFON Journal”), their conscious capacity for doing so may be similar or above an integrative perspective-taking capacity. At the very least, they would also be able to adequately understand “hyperobjects” or “multiple objects” and think in global and species-wide terms in constructive and adaptive ways. And this would entail that eventually most of humanity would also need to rise to an integrative perspective-taking capacity.
“What if there were other species or even humans, where their understanding of the present, that optic, that spark, is maybe a little bit bigger? Maybe that optic is a little bit wider. Rather than being a point, maybe it’s a range. Maybe the understanding of the present isn’t a point, but it’s a range, and maybe there’s elements of the future and the past that are experienced as the present, and, therefore, what we perceive as linear space-time maybe others don’t. In fact, maybe these are things that have lived here forever, before us. Maybe, we share the space with them.” (Luis Elizondo).
Whether UAP or UFO intelligences pose an actual physical threat or not (and I surmise that most don’t), not rising to a capacity for understanding tantamount to dealing with “hyperobjects” may produce a cultural type of threat since we would not be able to adapt. We would need to adapt to cultures that may not want to conquer us as technologically advanced cultures did on Earth against less technologically developed ones. However, their understanding of complexity, consciousness, information, in a post-materialist way capable of transcending our spacetime-limited cultural traditions may be a threat if we are unable to rise to the challenge. It would require the greatest shift for human civilization since the taming of fire and the discovery of stone tools. What if (just like “hyperobjects” or “multiple objects”) “they” (the UAP or UFO intelligences) may be already participating inside of us as we may be participating inside of them? What if we can only understand this if we rise above a rigid, binary distinction between objectivity and subjectivity? Rigid distinctions between “us” and “them” would melt along with rigid distinctions between our “present” linear, interpretive experiences and non-existing pasts and futures.
Gail Hochachka’s study would also be useful to cultural leaders willing to influence the ways society may respond to a “global technologically advanced, non-human presence related to UFOs” inasmuch as its reality is becoming uncontroversial. With the aim of promoting a healthy, adaptive response to the technologically advanced, non-human presence in society, we need to study Developmental Psychology and how a greater number of individuals may intelligently or constructively relate to “Hyperobjects” or “Multiple Objects.” The good news is that human capacity seems to be able to reach an integrative level suitable for an adequate, intelligent cultural adaptation and flourishing under the new circumstances. We just need to implement ways to promote the massive psychological development of individuals up to that level. We need the political will beyond the hyper nationalisms in vogue today. Realistically speaking, only perhaps by being forced to deal with the extraordinary realities at hand will activate that political will.
Hochachka’s study can be useful to the intellectually serious disclosure activist, UFO researcher, experiencer or exopolitician since a “global, technologically advanced, non-human presence related to UFOs” can also be considered a “hyperobject” or as a “multiple object.” Again, understanding the human capacity to intelligently relate with such objects would be crucial for politically and culturally influencing or guiding a policy of “intelligent disclosure” in an adaptive, positive, constructive manner.
Hochachka, Gail (2019). “On matryoshkas and meaning-making: Understanding the plasticity of climate change.” https://reader.elsevier.com/reader/sd/pii/S0959378018309762?token=D77478FF2E973E616FF618580A7BDC87B07DB7D8FC1B7012979A7BD5F00FD8B1B43CC12B5F15030D6CC5D9FAF61D1D2D
Hochachka, Gail (2019). “On Matryoshkas and Meaning-making: Understanding the Plasticity of Climate Change.” https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0959378018309762