Several people have emailed me about the news that the Russians have de-classified their UFO records (we actually do NOT know how many, yet the claims make it sound like all of them or the motherlode–a logic lesson in itself).
I’ve read a few different blog posts on the announcement, and it came as no surprise that at least two leaps of logic were made (read: two examples of bad logic).
First, bloggers breathlessly relate how the Russian records have eyewitnesses saying the craft traveled at “incredible speeds”. Yeah — let’s have the numbers. So far I’ve read the records say anywhere from 400 mph to 1000 mph. So what? Again, those of you who haven’t done so need to read Joseph Farrell’s research here. Those numbers are NOT outside the patented physics he supports with documentation that the Nazis had (and we and … lo and behold … the RUSSIANS had after WWII as a result of the scramble to get Nazi scientists over here or behind the iron curtain). Nothing new or non-human at all. But here’s the biggest logic blunder. Let’s ask ourselves a simple question: how many mph are needed to interplanetary / interstellar space travel? Hmmmm. Well, the Space Shuttle’s orbital speed is 17,500 mph, FAR in excess of UFO reports (here or from the Russians). That would mean that these “incredible speeds” are NOT capable of interplanetary or interstellar space travel. In case you don’t get the point, our Space Shuttle isn’t slated to be our solution for a journey to Mars, for example. And since the aliens are supposed to come from places like Zeta Reticuli, the speed of these eye-witnessed craft ain’t even close. “But Mike,” you might object, “maybe the eyewitnesses saw only a low speed; maybe they can go much faster.” True–maybe they can. Maybe chocolate pudding is like kryptonite to them, too. If THAT “maybe” is your defense of the extraterrestrial hypothesis here, then your argument isn’t based on what has been observed, it’s based on what HASN’T been observed (which is another way of saying “nothing” or “speculation” — same goes for the chocolate pudding). This points to a true, oft-repeated logically incoherent point of argumentation for the ET view. Logic lesson one for this post.
Second, I’m SURE that the Russian de-classified files would NEVER contain any disinformation. Right. Like ours don’t! This is in fact a time-honored technique for classified material. You mix in bogus information with real information, so that double agents or moles get caught or misdirected. Those in the know on the originator’s end know what is real and what isn’t. It’s also a technique for passing on information WITHIN a classified community to people who are an inner circle. Any reading in intelligence materials / espionage will remind you that this IS done. Joseph Farrell has something to say in that regard as well. For instance, he goes through several Majestic documents and finds something very curious: alongside information that points to aliens (and that material is always biological – mention of bodies or EBEs) you have other material IN THE SAME DOCUMENTS at times that point very clearly to HUMAN-created craft (mentions of GEARS in wrecked saucers, citations of specific technological components traceable via documentation back to Nazi black programs, etc.). You have both sides in the same material. A genuine ET craft capable of interstellar travels is ruled out by the technology described, contrary to what UFO “researchers” (i.e., very biased reporters) say. So what are the explanations that are possible for ALL the information components?
1. Human craft, bodies of what witnesses thought were not humans are actually humans (after all, body witnesses only saw the remains for literally a few seconds).
2. Misidentified bodies could be human unfortunates (Redfern, The Facade) or Japanese (Redfern), or perhaps chimps (see here as well). And as for the Russian account of pursuing “humanoid” creatures under water–on what basis are we to believe they KNEW they weren’t human? Just because they were unexpected? Or because someone had seen a disk craft before the event? When it comes right down to it, the Russian eyewitnesses were GUESSING. Their statement wasn’t based on scientific analysis of what they were chasing. Or maybe that was excluded in this “disclosure” dump.
3. Classified documents that our Air Force was mystified by UFOs (while other documents have military people saying they were military) and by an alien presence served to influence Russian spies (and British spies) that what they were seeing in their skies may not have been American–and this was useful for Cold War posturing. Same for the Russians; they aren’t stupid.
So, like all the other items, the Russian “disclosure” actually proves nothing. Again.
Lest I be misunderstood on this and the previous logic post. I have no problem with the idea that there could be ETs and that they might be visiting earth. In principle, there is nothing incoherent (or in my case, theologically alarming) about that. But I want REAL PROOF, not speculation, and not “evidence” that is propped up only by very poor logic. UFO researchers OWE IT to those who follow their work to put up something of value, not something that is made to fit the hypothesis articualted with inept thinking.