Unraveling the Mystery of UFOs

After 75 years of research into UFOs, why can so little be concluded about this phenomenon and its implications for our human species?

Is it the lack of available evidence? Is it the coverup by governments and their lack of transparency with the public? Is it the varied and complex nature of the phenomenon itself? Is it our unquenchable thirst for novel information and our love of the enigma, and desire to stay within it?

Yes, all of those. But I would argue there are other reasons why ufology has been unable to progress toward resolving the fundamental issue of this phenomenon: who is visiting our planet and what should we do about it?

These are the problems:

  1. Not engaging in a process of inquiry by which progressive degrees of certainty can be achieved.
  2. A lack of courage and intention to move through the stages of that process, resulting in:
  3. The inability to formulate a “working conclusion” about the phenomenon sufficient to articulate a position, proposed actions and a framework for human response.

And then, there’s a fourth problem. Ultimately it’s much bigger than those above, and is effectively created by them. That is the inability to clearly determine the nature of the event taking place in our world—the agenda of the non-human intelligence (NHI), their activities and likely intent—and to respond to it.

I’ll talk about that in a minute, but first I’d like to discuss the three issues I’ve raised above: process, courage, conclusions.

The Process of Inquiry

After all these years, the field of ufology is asking the same questions, hemming and hawing on the nature of the phenomenon, avoiding any conclusions about the visitors or the agenda (let alone what to do about it) and lost in spirals of government conspiracy, some of which is only the predictable byproduct of a larger secrecy created by the NHI themselves. Still today, the UFO community is swimming in a sea of confusion and unbounded possibilities with seemingly little appetite to focus, narrow and push forward to any firm assessment of the phenomenon.

Ask anyone involved in the UFO field what they think about this visitation, and you are likely to get either a “dunno” or “could be anything” or a set of strongly held beliefs not founded coherently on available evidence, observation, logic and common sense.

How do we distill down these possibilities to a better set of probabilities?

  • Extraterrestrials? (Aliens, not from here)
  • Ultraterrestrials? (Aliens, from here)
  • Ultratemporals? (Us or Aliens, from the past/future)
  • Interdimensals? (Anything, from outside our dimension)
  • Non-physical intelligence? (ghosts, angels, demons, etc)
  • Non-sentient, physical intelligence? (AI tech, bio-engineered robots, viral super-microbe etc)
  • Just us, and our secret defense programs? (if you think so, begin here)
  • Weather, space junk, known aerospace tech (do your research).
  • Not us, not anything. Systematic error or human misperception. (sorry, no).

It is critical, at this point, that we start thinking in the right way regarding UFOs and Contact. That doesn’t necessarily mean we have the same thoughts, or come to the same conclusions. It means engaging in a cognitive process by which we can move from speculation to certainty, while remaining grounded in the objective realities of the phenomenon.

Here, I would propose a framework for moving through this cognitive process and determining the reality of UFOS and Contact with non-human intelligence.

reedsummers.com/framework

To unpack this framework:

  1. Entertain the possibilities for a time, but then:
  2. Focus on the most logical, responsible and evidence-based probabilities, and from that:
  3. Make a starting assessment of the phenomenon (don’t worry, its not a final conclusion) and iterate your assessment based on presently available evidence, until you can:
  4. Formulate a working conclusion (still adaptive to new evidence), which is then the basis to:
  5. Take a position on what needs to happen.
  6. Now propose some actions,
  7. And negotiate with others’ proposed actions in the common interests of the human species, and then:
  8. Work toward the goals you can articulate. Mine are: 1) Reveal the NHI presence: its activity and intent. 2) Encourage a united human response to Contact. 3) Ensure human survival, and advancement

It all begins with moving from possibilities to probabilities and making a starting assessment that is substantiated by available evidence. This assessment then iterates based on new evidence until you can make “working conclusion” regarding the phenomenon.

Now a word on intuition. For some, they might have been drawn to this issue out of an innate sense that this phenomenon is true and has a basic validity to it: “Yeah, UFO’s are real. I get it.” And this instinctual or intuitive sense is important—its a part of our HI (human intelligence), which is rarely discussed in the context of interaction with NHI (non-human intelligence).

But intuition is not enough to make a working conclusion. You still have to reason it through, engage your critical thinking and go through some kind of cognitive process and an actual “walk-around” of the phenomenon, taking into account the evidence and the demonstrated behavior of the NHI activity.

How to think. Not what to think.

With an understanding of the process of inquiry and where you stand within it, you can begin to see the cognitive process necessary to progress from the early-stage of entertaining possibilities to the later-stage of taking a responsible position and starting to think about action.

But this is not what’s happening. Many of the theories in circulation regarding the NHI are not well considered and reflect very incomplete or immature logic, are loaded with logical fallacies and unfounded assumptions and reflect a nascent thought process not tested against the evidence or that is, at times, willfully negligent of the evidence.

Sadly as well, the discourse regarding UFOs is highly contaminated and manipulated and there is still a tremendous amount of ridicule directed at those interested in this phenomenon. This makes coherent discourse and straight thinking even harder for those entering this space. And this is why we need to move through a process of inquiry within some logical framework.

This is about how to think, not what to think. It’s not about anyone’s final answer or set of personal conclusions. It is about the process, not the product. And Ufology has a bravery problem in being able to move through the process:

  • The problem is being unwilling to go from possibilities to probabilities — an act which does not require any more evidence than we presently have.
  • The problem is being unwilling to center the controversy upon the NHI activity and secrecy, instead of the easier controversy of human activity and secrecy.
  • The problem is being unwilling to move past the first order question: “What is happening?” to the second and third order questions: “What does it mean?” and “What do we need to do about it?”

Those latter questions suggest being involved in more than a mild inquiry. They suggest purpose, responsibility, action and consequence. And that’s because of the nature of the situation.

Why Bravery?

Why am I calling for ufology to be brave? Why not keep the enigma-train rolling and sit back to enjoy this glorious “adventure in consciousness” that is and has been “UFOs.” Why this call to cross the hard lines of assessment, conclusion, position and action?

It’s because of the nature of what is happening. THIS IS NATURE. This visitation is a real, forceful, intentional incursion into our world by a set of physical forces who have not disclosed their presence, their activities or their motivations for being here and who are displaying vastly greater technological and psychological capabilities than our own.

I’m sorry to burst the bubble, but this is life — the hard, species-to-species encounters that happen in life that lead one’s kind to either adapt, diminish, or go extinct. Yes, it’s that kind of Contact. How do I know that? Because i have moved through the logical process above, and have mustered my own bravery to move from one stage to another, over time.

Where do you stand?

Where do you stand in your process of inquiry?

  • Are you considering possibilities? Or are you moving on to probabilities?
  • Do you have a starting assessment of the NHI, and with it a sense of focus and direction to go further?
  • Have you formed a set of conclusions regarding the NHI, and if so, is it adaptive to new evidence and information but solid enough to enable you to take a position?

Or maybe none of that — you’re just interested and have no set opinions, let alone any conclusions. That’s fine, be there. Be right where you are and yet look ahead to the process and the phases necessary to progressing through it.

For many in the UFO field they have gone beyond interest into real inquiry, and that is commendable: they are really working to understand the phenomenon and are ready to go beyond “entertaining the possibilities.” The key then is to understand that you are in a process, and that implies direction and movement and to some extent: conclusions. Or at the minimum, the conclusion of one phase of the inquiry and so you can move on to the next, to some actual end goal.

Inquiry without conclusion is… back to interest, and entertainment. And this is the “paralysis by analysis” which sums up the forever-state of ufology.

NHI is not neutral

I also want to note that the UFO inquiry is different from other forms of inquiry into natural phenomena. We are dealing with another sentience here. We’re not engaging with phenomena such as animal behavior, the replication of viruses or the formation of molecules. We are engaging with a set of extraordinarily adaptive, intelligent and calculating intelligences which, once perceived, perceives you and can respond to you.

And this intelligence is not neutral. They absolutely have an intent for coming here, an interest and an agenda for involving themselves in our world. And their deep incursion into our earth-system and human-system demonstrates this—a programmatic intent for being in our world. We should not, for a moment, underestimate that intent or count the NHI as a neutral variable in the equation. We are in the ring, now.

Therefore, I believe a personal inquiry into UFOs, in the face of the actual planetary incursion taking place, means going beyond interest and going beyond being a forever-student of the phenomenon to becoming involved in a process of inquiry that delivers one to actual conclusions, actual positions, actual action. The world needs people to become involved like that. Ultimately, many people will need to step up to support the interests of human beings into and through this Contact event.

And that is why right now, growing numbers of people need to go beyond entertaining possibilities to pursuing probabilities, and to forming an actual assessment of this visitation.

Crossing into the next phase

Taking the next step is not so hard. There is nothing conclusive or exclusive about making an assessment. This is about where to start, not where to end up.

A starting assessment can adapt and iterate with new information. But what it gives you now is a coherent lens with which to interface with that new evidence as it arises and a sense of direction in your inquiry, which will either prove itself correct or incorrect as you proceed. If it proves incorrect, revise and make a new assessment.

If you never want to go beyond assessment to making an actual conclusion, or taking a position, fine, I get it. It’s scary to take a position. But here I encourage your bravery to do so.

And that’s because I feel those of us in this fight for “the truth” are not just here out of interest or novel information seeking. It’s because this issue somehow has our name on it. We’re somehow made for this moment — this event and all that it may entail for the human species—and the world is calling for us to be involved now as an actual participant, an agent of change.

What we can do now

I am grateful, very grateful for how far the good people in the field of ufology have taken our understanding of the issue. A lot of work has been done to get us this far and in fact, I believe we now have all the evidence needed to move on from entertaining possibilities.

Now the question is, do we have the bravery to cross over into the next phase of the inquiry?

After 75 years of UFO research, we know enough to do the following:

  1. To identify the most logical, probable and responsible explanations for what this visitation most likely is.
  2. To make a starting assessment of NHI being, activity and intent and to center the controversy on the NHI secrecy, not our own.
  3. To articulate the meaning of this visitation for our human civilization and its implications—whether hard or hopeful—for our world.
  4. To begin to talk about the framework for our necessary human response and rules of engagement, and the precise actions that should be taken in response to this Contact.

For bullets 1–2, I teach about 8 core capabilities for making an assessment of the phenomenon and working towards a conclusion. More on that over here.

But asthe push for government transparency and disclosure regarding UFOs gains momentum, we should stop and seriously think for a moment about what is it that will be disclosed? What do we know about the phenomenon?

That is what millions of people are about to hear. What is disclosed changes the whole meaning and implication of Disclosure itself.

And if our answer to the question of what is happening, is “don’t know” or “could be anything” or is our own wishful thinking or cherished assumptions, then we’re in serious trouble.

I hope you feel some urgency here because that is the honest nature of the situation. Urgency means we have to move forward in the inquiry. It means taking a position, and ultimately talking about action.

And we cannot, in fact, take another 75 years to get to that.

Similar Posts