Member-only story
UFO/Aliens
Unidentified aerial annoyance: Full disclosure or dubious UFO nonsense? an article on Space.com, by Leonard David suggests some folks might be growing tired of the UFO presence. It’s hard to know what to make of it. The author is a bit ambiguous on their position with UFOs; perhaps that’s evidence of a good author, just reporting the facts. But then why add annoyance to the title at all? After all, I have heard some scientist say data doesn’t care about your feelings. UFOs persist because there is something there! Apparently some folks are irritated we’re actually starting to look at the data.
“Whatever is at play here, organizations are taking close encounters with weirdness seriously,” David writes. It does feel like a ‘play,’ doesn’t it. The question is, who is getting played? And when it comes to UFOs, weirdness is definitely the correct word!
“The coming year will surely see a persistence of debate, discussion and disbelief regarding anonymous airborne occurrences,” David writes. I can’t help read this as a grievance. Did he mean ‘anonymous’ or ‘ambiguous?’ Doesn’t anonymous denote an entity? Perhaps I am trying too hard to read between the lines.
What confidently looms ahead is an entire year of UAP and UFO banter. Could 2023 become the year of the great reveal, the “truth” that…
