David Grusch, Whistleblower, Claims U.S. Has Retrieved Craft and Bodies of Non-Human Origin

Status
Not open for further replies.
I don't think we can at this point. Falsifiability works with something testable. If I say "there are 59 cards in a standard deck of cards", that's a testable statement. We can count a bunch of decks and find that my statement is false.

If on the other hand I say, "I was told there are 59 cards in a standard deck of cards and I was shown a deck of 59 cards", that's not a very testable statement. How does one falsify what I claim I was told? One can show that what I was told is not accurate, but that doesn't falsify what I claim I was told or saw.

Grusch's claims are step removed from my example above. In the case of being told there are 59 cards in a deck, we can at least show that the idea of 59 cards in a deck is inaccurate. I was told something inaccurate, even I was told it. Claims of retreaved UFOs isn't easily shown to be inaccurate. We can say there is no current evidence for retrieved UFOs, but that's the best we can do.

Right now, Grusch's claims consist largely of what he was told, what he heard and maybe what he was shown and even what he was told is hard to falsify, let alone trying to falsify that he was told something.
I agree with this to an extent, but if he has the detailed knowledge he claims to have he should be able to provide information regarding the names of people he spoke to, names of programs, locations and so on.
 
In the strictest sense, you're absolutely right, but if we use witness credibility as a proxy we can to a certain degree. That is relatively testable.

Hmmm, I'll respectively disagree. A very credible person can tell a bald-faced lie, and a very unreliable witness can still make a true statement. Not that I'm saying Grusch is lying, just that credibility only goes so far. At some point the actual claim needs to be looked at, regardless of who's making it. And right now, Grusch's main claim is "I was told these things", that's difficult to test or falsify.

We could try to pin him down as to a timeline of when he was told these things and where and by whom, then cross reference where everybody was at that time and see IF he could have been told something by this person at this location. But that's not going to happen.

Credibility can't serve as a proxy for something testable. A person may be credible in one thing and not in an other.
 
I'm wondering the same thing and frankly all options I can imagine are highly concerning.

H1:
DoD and / or US government are using the 'alien' UFO narrative as psyop in a new Cold War against Russia and China. If I had a say in counterintelligence I'd go that path. The message is simple. There may or may not be unidentified objects exhibiting intelligent behavior and capabilities beyond known physics in our airspace and we may or may not be in possession of this technology. So think twice before messing with us. Given the paranoia of both Russian and Chinese administration, I'm certain such rumors would indeed leave some nagging afterthoughts over there. But that would be a reverse UFO conspiracy.

H0:
The US military and administration are utterly incompetent with staff not only routinely reporting misidentified mundane objects as exotic UAPs but also leaking such info to the general public. And the tax payer is being scammed by UFO nutjobs making a fortune promoting their fringe ideas.

Personally I hope H0 is not true but the ignorance and incompetence of humans should never be underestimated. The question remains - who aggressively pushes this entire UAP phenomenon and who profits from it?
The DoD has hidden classified aircraft programs behind UFO reports going back to the U-2 in the late 50s. It got even easier to taken advantage of UFOs with the black programs in later years because of the nonstandard physical appearance of a/c like the F-117, the Whale (Tacit Blue), and the Boeing's one-off Bird of Prey.
 
I agree with this to an extent, but if he has the detailed knowledge he claims to have he should be able to provide information regarding the names of people he spoke to, names of programs, locations and so on.

Yes, but this points out the other problem with the idea of falsifying his claims. He's the one making the claim, it's not our burden to falsify it, it's Grusch's burden to provide evidence for his claims.

I think what we'll see unfortunately, is that all the things you mentioned as backing up his claims will always be referred to as classified and unavailable.
 
In the strictest sense, you're absolutely right, but if we use witness credibility as a proxy we can to a certain degree. That is relatively testable.
words like credible are opinion. so are pretty much worthless. plus you would have to seriously define your terms and criteria. getting a consensus of terms is gonna be a tough nut.
 
Maybe! I know that legally, witness credibility and corroborating testimony is a big deal. Grusch may not be an expert on aliens, but I think it's reasonable to say he's an expert on UAP programs.
 
Every time something like this comes along, I'm always baffled by the inherent contradiction. "The reveal" is both something that the government or "they" don't want the public to know, and yet there is absolutely no repercussions for revealing it. Actual whistleblowers like Edward Snowden had to run and faced immediate and very severe consequences for speaking out.

So why would the DoD be seemingly completely okay(even giving an approval, as far as I understand) to this person revealing something that would be an absolutely massive security risk if it was true?
 
In the strictest sense, you're absolutely right, but if we use witness credibility as a proxy we can to a certain degree. That is relatively testable.
But we assess witness credibility by evaluating the truth of what they say. You can't turn around and do the reverse, evaluate the truth by witness credibility. Firstly, it's circular. Secondly, it's akin to the defendant who says "but I never robbed a bank before!".
 
I'm not a huge fan of the psyop theories, but in the past we have seen criminal conspiracies with respect to politics - eg, watergate.

One possibility I am on the lookout for, haven't seen any strong indicators of this yet, is a ploy to undermine trust in the government and potentially leverage that for political benefit. For example, maybe there is no alien program but the biden administration won't be able to prove that (proving a negative here would be hard)

An opponent could make political hay on the idea of 'oh i'm going to finally get the truth of the matter'. They have in the past - in fact Jimmy Carter used this tactic exactly.

What's interesting is that the democrats are pretty much forced to go along with anything Republicans try to pass or do in this arena, otherwise they could be seen as 'covering up the truth' and playing into the strategy.

I'll see if I can do a rundown of political donations of all the players here.
 
Last edited:
Maybe! I know that legally, witness credibility and corroborating testimony is a big deal.
eh. only to a certain extent and those witnesses (even in civil trials) can be cross examined. which is key. and hearsay is hearsay and the opposing counsel will object.

in criminal trials you need some actual evidence.

to me if he was credible he would at least say. 'i got my information from mellon and elizondo and the skinwalker dude, etc. but four current high level employees have never spoken about ufos publicly and dont want to be named."

The fact that he wont name even the 'well known in ufo circle' guys who have already spoken out, means he loses all credibility for me personally. Does anyone believe he didnt get at least some info from Elizondo and Mellon ( i dont remember the other big names attached to the Nimitz thing). Just be straight with us.

Grusch may not be an expert on aliens, but I think it's reasonable to say he's an expert on UAP programs.
i'm not sure i agree with this statement. "expert" is a big word. and he's only 36. how long was he involved in any uap programs with the government? a year? ie. so now i need you to define 'expert'.

i've been on MB like 10 years and i read alot. and have been exposed to alot. am i an expert debunker? if you want to call me that, i'm going to need to know your definition of 'expert'. because i wouldn't call myself an expert.
 
I think we should spend less time worrying about if the actual aliens are real, and more time noticing that the goverment might think they are - while they simultaneously act cagey about it, outright lie about it, or and ridicule people trying to find out the truth.

To me the whistleblower is telling us there are high ranking officials in the goverment that are knowingly lying to us, more than he is really convincing me that there are aliens.

If we can prove that these are not real and we're keeping valuable info about these incidents from the public, then the whistle should be blown, should it not? Is it so unbelievable that there are individuals that may be lying to the American public, that have high ranking positions?

They may be wrong, but if they believe it and are involved with covering it up, then they are officially lying about aliens.

If there are emails, discussions, where they mistakenly think they are dealing with extra terrestrial craft, but then not going public with that, that's enough to blow the whistle on.

Don't you want to see the footage of the 3 spy balloons they shot down a few months ago? Why cant we? Probably because there is someone in a high ranking position that thinks they are aliens, and if it were true it would benefit the military to own all the intelligence about it.

Don't we need someone to whistle blow potential compartmentalized incompetency, or the hording of intelligence? Especially if it's creating decades of mass delusions and hysteria?
 
Last edited:
eh. only to a certain extent and those witnesses (even in civil trials) can be cross examined. which is key. and hearsay is hearsay and the opposing counsel will object.

in criminal trials you need some actual evidence.

to me if he was credible he would at least say. 'i got my information from mellon and elizondo and the skinwalker dude, etc. but four current high level employees have never spoken about ufos publicly and dont want to be named."

The fact that he wont name even the 'well known in ufo circle' guys who have already spoken out, means he loses all credibility for me personally. Does anyone believe he didnt get at least some info from Elizondo and Mellon ( i dont remember the other big names attached to the Nimitz thing). Just be straight with us.


i'm not sure i agree with this statement. "expert" is a big word. and he's only 36. how long was he involved in any uap programs with the government? a year? ie. so now i need you to define 'expert'.
I had a boss back in the day who defined an expert as anyone "with a briefcase and more than 35 miles from home."
i've been on MB like 10 years and i read alot. and have been exposed to alot. am i an expert debunker? if you want to call me that, i'm going to need to know your definition of 'expert'. because i wouldn't call myself an expert.
He may be knowledgeable about a UAP program he was read into and/or a member of, but he'd know nothing (other than what he's heard) about other programs, especially if they are classified.

Even unclassified programs are different to one another. Yes, all program offices must obey the same federal laws and DoD regulations, but how they operate/manage programs is a function of a number of variables. In 30+ years with the USAF/DoD, I was assigned/co-located to six different program offices, and held functional (engineering) staff positions on five occasions. Every assignment was different, especially the black program offices.
 
Grusch may not be an expert on aliens, but I think it's reasonable to say he's an expert on UAP programs.

Not necessarily. He would know about the particular program he was assigned to as @Duke alluded to above. What program was that? It would appear to be several. From the original story:

External Quote:
He served as the reconnaissance office’s representative to the Unidentified Aerial Phenomena Task Force from 2019-2021. From late 2021 to July 2022, he was the NGA’s co-lead for UAP analysis and its representative to the task force.
https://web.archive.org/web/2023060...icials-say-u-s-has-retrieved-non-human-craft/

So, he worked on the UAPTF from '19-'21. However:

External Quote:
On Aug. 4, 2020, Deputy Secretary of Defense David L. Norquist approved the establishment of an Unidentified Aerial Phenomena (UAP) Task Force (UAPTF). The Department of the Navy, under the cognizance of the Office of the Under Secretary of Defense for Intelligence and Security, will lead the UAPTF.
https://www.defense.gov/News/Releas...t-of-unidentified-aerial-phenomena-task-force

The UAPTF didn't exist until the latter half of 2020, so for a year or more he was working for whom? The last previous official UFOish program was AASWAP which was funded from 2009-2010 with Senator Ried and the head of AASWAP, Dr. James Lacatski, trying to secure more funding for a number of years afterwards. Lacatski retired in 2016

Somewhere in the 10 year gap seems to be where AATIP might have fit in. AATIP never officially existed and was never funded. People like Elizondo and possibly Gursch looked into UFOs on their own. Also possibly working on his own was former AASWAP Intel Officer, Jay Stratton. That may be why he headed up the UAPTF:

This is a quote about Dr. Travis Taylor working for the UAPTF headed by Stratton:

External Quote:
At the time of Dr. Taylor’s initial work with the UAPTF, former Office of Naval Intelligence senior civilian John Stratton was leading the effort and informally referred to Dr. Taylor as his chief scientist as efforts to assemble a larger team were underway.
https://www.theblackvault.com/docum...dr-travis-taylors-uap-task-force-involvement/

So, we know for sure that Gursch was working under Stratton and with Taylor during his stint in the UAPTF

Stratton, Taylor, Reid and Lacatski are all heavily into the Skinwalker Ranch "phenomenon" and are all connected to it's former owner Robert Bigelow.

If Gursch was working at the UAPTF with their chief scientist , Travis Taylor, what did he learn about UAP programs? Consider, Taylor is a regular on Ancient Aliens, The Curse of Oak Island, Secrets of Skinwalker Ranch and other fringe and speculative shows that are often big on entertainment and lite on evidence:
External Quote:

Filmography[edit]​

YearTitleRoleProductionEpisodesNotes
2009–2010The UniverseSelfThe History Channel6 episodes[24]
2010Life After PeopleSelfThe History Channel5 Episodes[24]
2011When Aliens AttackSelfNational Geographic ChannelFilm[24]
2011–2013Rocket City RednecksHost and producerNational Geographic Channel6 Episodes (Producer for 1 episode)[24]
2014The IndependentsSelfFox BusinessApocalypse Now (2014)[24]
20153 Scientists Walk into a BarHostThe Weather Channel4 episodes[24]
2018The Tesla FilesHostThe History Channel5 episodes[24]
2014–presentThe Curse of Oak IslandSelfThe History ChannelRock Solid (2019)[24]
2019In Search of MonstersSelfTravel ChannelThe Loch Ness Monster (2019)[24]
2019NASA's Unexplained FilesSelfScience Channel5 episodes[24]
2021America's Book of SecretsSelfThe History Channel5 episodes[24]
2017–2021Ancient AliensSelfThe History Channel23 episodes[24]
2019–2021The UnXplainedSelfThe History Channel15 episodes[24]
2022A Tear in the SkySelfOmnium MediaDocumentary Film[24]
2020–presentThe Secret of Skinwalker Ranch([a])SelfThe History Channel27 episodes[24]

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Travis_S._Taylor

Taylor also made numerous errors when the UAPTF report was released, many of them quickly pointed out in threads like this one:

https://www.metabunk.org/threads/pyramid-ufos-in-night-vision-footage-maybe-bokeh.11695/

Gursch's training on how a UAP program should run may not have been all that great.

Here is our discussion of AASWAP and the Skinwalker Ranch connection:

https://www.metabunk.org/threads/the-origins-of-aawsap.12484/

Here is another thread highlighting the very large shadow Skinwalker Ranch has cast over any US UAP/UFO program of the last 15 years:

https://www.metabunk.org/threads/ar...fo-projects-linked-to-skinwalker-ranch.12490/
 
Stratton, Taylor, Reid and Lacatski are all heavily into the Skinwalker Ranch "phenomenon" and are all connected to it's former owner Robert Bigelow.
. . .
Here is another thread highlighting the very large shadow Skinwalker Ranch has cast over any US UAP/UFO program of the last 15 years:

https://www.metabunk.org/threads/ar...fo-projects-linked-to-skinwalker-ranch.12490/

Thanks for aptly summarizing the salient points in the above @NorCal Dave. @qrdl may benefit from diving a little deeper into these threads to realize the key point you are making.

In brief:

There's a Skinwalker Ranch associated lobby of select ufologists, some of which have initially served the DoD in various capacites unrelated to UAP. They have managed to lobby Congress (Harry Reid having been especially instrumental due to his friendship with Bigelow) to establish a very modestly funded and staffed UAP investigation entity in the Pentagon. An entity that never arose from pure national security interests nor from rank-and-file DoD officials seeing any need for such an entity. An entity that has had different names, directors and a checkered history in funding. At its lowest funding ebbs (AATIP period), it seems to have merely been a part-time preoccupation of Luis Elizondo and a few other characters, alongside their day to day work.

The 'usual suspects', the Bigelow-connected characters mentioned by @NorCal Dave in the above, have been associated with this entity consistently throughout the years. Mellon, who's never been officially part of the entity, remains another relevant character associated with this lobby group who has worn the 'senior DoD intelligence official' title to attach credibility to the unsubstantiated beliefs promoted by these ufologists.

Anyone who doesn't know the background and connection of these main protagonists can be easily fooled by poor reporting quoting anonymous 'present or former DoD intelligence officials overhearing other DoD officials about secret programs within the DoD'. Not realizing that it's just the same ol' suspects chatting amongst themselves and citing one another within their little echo chamber.
 
i'm positive that statement is one of the classic logical fallacies.
A charitable interpretation might be just a tautology - if Grusch's credibility is buoyed by the credibility of those who agree with his narrative, then the reduction in perceived reliability of those who support him reduces his credibility.

However, I don't believe any of that matters - those who believe based on the feeblest of anecdotes are still going to have feeble anecdotes they can base their beliefs on.
 
Other than his claims, what proof is there that "people" have told Grusch about aliens?

Well, we should be a little patient: News Nation is releasing the info they have slowly, as media outlets do so they can keep the story going as long as possible, and build up a virality to it before they release the shocking news.


Source: https://twitter.com/NewsNationComms/status/1666905532890750976

For me, I'm not really interested if the aliens are real, I'm more interested if there are powerful members of our goverment actually thinks they are - and are keeping it secret.

I hope there are long paper/email trails that prove that the ranking members of the goverment does at least believe there are aliens, and are doing logistics about crash sites they believe are extra terrestrial.

If they do, and keep it secret, then I think that is dangerous and has resulted in a myriad of delusional hysterical conspiracy theories and death cults.
 
Last edited:
If the goal is not to falsify, but just find the truth, than here are the three scenarios I deem possible, ordered by most likely
  1. David is telling the truth, but some combination of the following
    1. He misunderstood / misjudged some of his sources
    2. Some of his sources are confabulating, but not purposely and misunderstood what they saw
    3. Some of his sources are purposely confabulating for reasons of
      1. Supporting their reputations or others in ufology
      2. trying to undermine trust in government, whether criminal conspiracy or just individual actions
  2. David is trying to create a career for himself in the industry of ufology/undermine trust in govt and has stretched the truth
    1. Stretched it by lying about how reliable he thinks his sources are
    2. Stretched it by personally fabricating / purposely misunderstanding sources of information
  3. David is telling the truth and there are non human craft
I roughly estimate about 50%, 30%, and 20%. It would be 60%, 35% , 5% if not for the highly credible voices that seem to be vouching for it. Nobody credible that I'm aware of is saying it's not possible, only just unlikely, of course proving a negative here is very hard to do.

It's worth noting that everything is in a constant heisenberg state and as boxes are opened, waveforms will collapse, and priors need to be updated with appropriate changes to probabilities.

That all said, I think falsification is a very admirable activity and given the lack of folks listing both pros and cons to these stories, that's why I reasonably assumed what was being done here. The best way to prove anything true is very often to start out by trying to prove it false.
 
Last edited:
  1. David is telling the truth, but some combination of the following
    1. He misunderstood some of his sources
    2. Some of his sources are confabulating, but not purposely and misunderstood what they saw
    3. Some of his sources are purposely confabulating for reasons of
      1. Supporting their reputations or others in ufology
      2. trying to undermine trust in government, whether criminal conspiracy or just individual actions
  2. David is trying to create a career for himself in the industry of unfology/undermine trust in govt and has stretched the truth
    1. Stretched it by lying about how reliable he thinks his sources are
    2. Stretched it by personally fabricating sources of information
  3. David is telling the truth and there are non human craft
I roughly estimate about 50%, 30%, and 20%. It would be 60%, 35% , 5% if not for the highly credible voices that seem to be vouching for it. Nobody credible that I'm aware of is saying it's not possible, only just unlikely, of course proving a negative here is very hard to do.

It's worth noting that everything is in a constant heisenberg state and as boxes are opened, waveforms will collapse, and priors need to be updated with appropriate changes to probabilities.

That all said, I think falsification is a very admirable activity and given the lack of folks listing both pros and cons to these stories, that's why I reasonably assumed what was being done here.

4. David sincerely believes in the truth of the anecdotes of other sincerely believing DoD ufologists who misconstrue the nature of the classified programs they've received only anecdotal knowledge of due to inherent believer's bias and lack of security clearance to gain direct access to said programs.
 
4. David sincerely believes in the truth of the anecdotes of other sincerely believing DoD ufologists who misconstrue the nature of the classified programs they've received only anecdotal knowledge of due to inherent believer's bias and lack of security clearance to gain direct access to said programs.

Yep! David sincere with unreliable sources is my most likely scenario as well! Glad we're in agreement!

I will say that speculating more than 1 ply though just leads to exponential error (a speculation built on a speculation). Soo I try to avoid that if I can.,
 
Last edited:
But there's a critical caveat:

Debarring their (ufologically inclined UAP investigators') access to classified programs serves to only fuel their ufologist conspiratorial conviction of the Government hiding alien secrets and consequently their calling to act as righteous whistleblowers serving public interest. Yet it's precisely their higher mission to uncover gov't secrets and to stick their noses into classified programs that renders them risky DoD personnel destined to either remain at a low security clearance level or to 'resign'.

It's a bit of a vicious cycle.
 
A compelling thesis, but it largely rests on the idea that David was a ufologist before joining the task force. If you have proof, even weak proof that he was already a ufologist before joining the task force - I'd really love to hear that. Otherwise it sounds like very unfair speculation.
 
A compelling thesis, but it largely rests on the idea that David was a ufologist before joining the task force. If you have proof, even weak proof that he was already a ufologist before joining the task force - I'd really love to hear that. Otherwise it sounds like very unfair speculation.

It's compelling because with or without proof, it's the far likelier and less extraordinary hypothesis than the similarly proofless speculation of recovered alien technologies.

@NorCal Dave amongst others has provided on this and other threads ample proof that the whole task force was established and lobbied by ufologists. That's proof enough of many members of the TF being ufologists prior to task force. Why would David not be?
 
I see a lot of speculations here based on assumptions easily falsified by the Debrief article.

All excerpts below are from this article (https://thedebrief.org/intelligence-officials-say-u-s-has-retrieved-non-human-craft/)

First of all, Grusch is not alone:

Karl E. Nell, a recently retired Army Colonel and current aerospace executive who was the Army’s liaison for the UAP Task Force from 2021 to 2022 and worked with Grusch:
External Quote:
“His assertion concerning the existence of a terrestrial arms race occurring sub-rosa over the past eighty years focused on reverse engineering technologies of unknown origin is fundamentally correct, as is the indisputable realization that at least some of these technologies of unknown origin derive from non-human intelligence"
Jonathan Grey, a generational officer of the United States Intelligence Community with a Top-Secret Clearance who currently works for the National Air and Space Intelligence Center (NASIC), where the analysis of UAP has been his focus:
External Quote:
“The non-human intelligence phenomenon is real. We are not alone”

“Retrievals of this kind are not limited to the United States. This is a global phenomenon, and yet a global solution continues to elude us.”

“A vast array of our most sophisticated sensors, including space-based platforms, have been utilized by different agencies, typically in triplicate, to observe and accurately identify the out-of-this-world nature, performance, and design of these anomalous machines, which are then determined not to be of earthly origin,”

“High-level, classified briefing materials exist in which real-world scenarios involving UAP, as evidenced by historical examples, are made available to Intelligence Personnel on a need-to-know basis,” he told us. “I have been the recipient of such briefings for almost a decade.”
Secondly, this is not 'a friend of a friend told me'. Grusch had direct contact with people involved in the recovery operations:

External Quote:

Grusch said that the craft recovery operations are ongoing at various levels of activity and that he knows the specific individuals, current and former, who are involved.

“Individuals on these UAP programs approached me in my official capacity and disclosed their concerns regarding a multitude of wrongdoings, such as illegal contracting against the Federal Acquisition Regulations and other criminality and the suppression of information across a qualified industrial base and academia,” he stated.
Thirdly, the IG does not only have second hand information from Grusch. These 'current members of the recovery program' spoke to the IG but apparently do not seek public exposure:

External Quote:

Several current members of the recovery program spoke to the Inspector General’s office and corroborated the information Grusch had provided for the classified complaint.
And fourthly, Grusch does have evidence:

External Quote:
Beginning in 2022, Grusch provided Congress with hours of recorded classified information transcribed into hundreds of pages which included specific data about the materials recovery program.
This, of course, is all according to the content of the Debrief article.
 
Beginning in 2022, Grusch provided Congress with hours of recorded classified information transcribed into hundreds of pages which included specific data about the materials recovery program.
There is also similar discussion of this in the Public article which I referenced in an earlier post.
 
I see a lot of speculations here based on assumptions easily falsified by the Debrief article.
<snip>
Absolutely agreed, I'm tracking this here - https://github.com/qrdlgit/misc/blob/main/vouch.md and have been updating it carefully on feedback from both sides of the discussion.

Any rational discussion needs to account for these voices.

LilWabbit's thesis that David was already a ufologist before his 'interviews' would blow a hole wide open in all of this.

Why?

Because a) it would contradict David's critical assertion that he was skeptical and b) it would show significant bias

I have seen Zero proof that David was a ufologist before the task force, but if it's true, it's very likely out there somewhere.
 
Last edited:
Absolutely agreed, I'm tracking this here - https://github.com/qrdlgit/misc/blob/main/vouch.md and have been updating it carefully on feedback from both sides of the discussion.

Any rational discussion needs to account for these voices.

LilWabbit's thesis that David was already a ufologist before his 'interviews' would blow a hole wide open in all of this.

Why?

Because a) it would contradict David's critical assertion that he was skeptical and b) it would show significant bias
Just out of interest how do you define a ufologist? For example, is Kirkpatrick a ufologist because he wrote that strange paper with Avi Loeb? Can someone be open minded and not be ufologist or is it black and white?
 
I see a lot of speculations here based on assumptions easily falsified by the Debrief article.

All excerpts below are from this article (https://thedebrief.org/intelligence-officials-say-u-s-has-retrieved-non-human-craft/)

First of all, Grusch is not alone:

Nobody claimed he is.

In fact the salient claim (which has been supported by ample evidence on many threads here at MB) is that there's a whole network of ufologists within the DoD and across government agencies who actively keep in touch. They lobby together with ufologists outside the government circles -- all more or less loosely associated with the Skinwalker Ranch -- for the Gov't to study UFOs and uncover 'what they already know'. Their belief and infatuation with ufology has preceded all claimed evidence and lobbying. The DoD entity UAPTF and its precursors are the result of these lobbying efforts whereby some of the lobbyists have managed to either get themselves or their ufologist friends/colleagues appointed to serve under these entities. The end-result is an entity / entities entirely devoid of scientific objectivity, in addition to demonstrably lacking in scientific competence.

In brief, the known UAP entities that have existed under Gov't agencies have been established as well as staffed by people who were already adamantly convinced aliens have visited us and the US Gov't possesses evidence for them.

There's therefore every reason to believe Karl E. Nell (the Army liaison for the UAPTF) and Jonathan Grey at the NASIC are part of the same ol' network. And they're all peeved that there's been a purge of ufologists and a transition towards more objective leadership at UAPTF/AARO.

So even if we were to go by anecdotes of people with credentials, which is the go-to 'body' of evidence for ufologists in the absence of undisputable physical evidence (and Leslie Kean's main angle in her story), Leslie Kean's article offers nothing in the way of credible witness testimonies by parties that have been demonstrably unaffiliated with ufology before making their claims of recovered technologies. This is why the likes of New York Times seem to have taken distance to Kean and why her stories only appear on fringe publications or others meeting less rigorous journalistic standards.

The article is so sketchy in terms of its factual specifity on the alleged programs for recovering alien crafts, and the people who have worked on these programs who have allegedly talked to Grusch, that it's hardly indistinguishable from received UFO lore. It's almost as if the lore was first, and Kean went looking for 'credible' witnesses to prove it.

That's not journalism. That's fiction writing posing as prose.

P.S. It's also possible that Grusch is a ufologist convert due to other convincing senior ufologists within DoD, rather than due to any credible piece of physical evidence that he has had access to. Nobody claims he had to be a strong ufologist before the UAPTF in order for the narrative I presented to still remain compelling.
 
Last edited:
Just out of interest how do you define a ufologist? For example, is Kirkpatrick a ufologist because he wrote that strange paper with Avi Loeb? Can someone be open minded and not be ufologist or is it black and white?

It's probably more of a spectrum thing and you are right perhaps ufologist isn't the right term.

Anyways, David expressed significant skepticism here - "I thought it was totally nuts":


Source: https://youtu.be/ZSj7QsHRxHQ?t=236


If there is prior evidence that David does not think it was 'totally nuts', then my belief is we've caught him out on a lie around a very core premise. His credibility rests on the fact that he is an impartial observer as he is trying to lead us to believe.
 
It's probably more of a spectrum thing and you are right perhaps ufologist isn't the right term. I

Anyways, David expressed significant skepticism here - "I thought it was totally nuts":


Source: https://youtu.be/ZSj7QsHRxHQ?t=236


If there is prior evidence that David does not think it was 'totally nuts', then my belief is we've caught him out on a lie around a very core premise. His credibility largely rests on the fact that he is an impartial observer as he is trying to lead us to believe.


As I wrote in my P.S. in my previous post, it's also possible that Grusch is a ufologist convert due to other convincing senior ufologists within DoD rather than becoming a convert due to any scientifically credible piece of physical evidence that he has had access to. Nobody claims he had to be a strong ufologist before the UAPTF in order for the narrative I presented to still remain compelling.
 
P.S. It's also possible that Grusch is a ufologist convert due to other convincing senior ufologists within DoD rather than any credible piece of physical evidence that he has had access to. Nobody claims he had to be a strong ufologist before the UAPTF in order for the narrative I presented to still remain compelling.

This feels like you're walking a bit backwards, but I'll allow it, because I agree it's a spectrum. He could have been a 'weak ufologist' (ufologist is being used lazily here, if someone has a better term...?). It would be less compelling argument, but still an important red flag.
 
This feels like you're walking a bit backwards, but I'll allow it, because I agree it's a spectrum. He could have been a 'weak' ufologist. It would be less compelling argument, but still an important red flag.

Don't misconstrue the argument. He'd still be a strong ufologist, especially since he's a convert. But he's a ufologist converted by other ufologists. It actually makes even more sense since he's a more junior figure as compared to the Elizondos and Mellons.
 
Don't misconstrue the argument. He'd still be a strong ufologist, especially since he's a convert. But he's a ufologist converted by other ufologists. It actually makes even more sense since he's a more junior figure as compared to the Elizondos and Mellons.

Yeah, I don't find that as compelling as being a prior ufologist (weak or not) because it means he was lying when he said "i thought it was totally nuts". And not just any lie, but a lie at the heart of his claims to credibility.
 
Yeah, I don't find that as compelling as being a prior ufologist (weak or not) because it means he was lying when he said "i thought it was totally nuts". And not just any lie, but a lie at the heart of his claims to credibility.

No, it doesn't at all mean it's a lie. It only means that he thought these claims were nuts until he was converted by more senior ufologists who convinced him oherwise. Rigorous analysis of incontrovertible evidence is far less likely to have led him to convert.
 
LilWabbit posted “Don't misconstrue the argument. He'd still be a strong ufologist, especially since he's a convert. But he's a ufologist converted by other ufologists. It actually makes even more sense since he's a more junior figure as compared to the Elizondos and Mellons.”

What do you mean by more Junior figure? His role in NRO and NGA would likely give him clearance above Elizondo, Taylor etc. Why would he need to believe their stories?
 
Don't misconstrue the argument. He'd still be a strong ufologist, especially since he's a convert. But he's a ufologist converted by other ufologists. It actually makes even more sense since he's a more junior figure as compared to the Elizondos and Mellons.

What do you mean by more Junior figure? His role in NRO and NGA would likely give him clearance above Elizondo, Taylor etc. Why would he need to believe their stories?

Junior by age and exposure to ufology. And since Elizondo was basically running the precursor of the UAPTF for years, there's no way Grusch would have been a more senior figure there. I don't think he was even serving the 'entity' then. UAPTF was reshuffled after Elizondo 'resigned'.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top