The Age of Disclosure film

[Eburacum]

Yes, that may have been the answer in this case, but it was all a very long time ago, so it is difficult to be certain.
Nice to see that Jacobs is still around, anyway.

 

[Montauk]

It's been announced today that The Age of Disclosure will receive an Oscar-qualifying theatrical run in New York and Los Angeles beginning November 21, alongside a simultaneous Amazon Prime Video release.

A new trailer for it dropped today as well:


Source: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=SXUEcfgZv70

 

[Ann K]

3) It's hilarious how the same garbage can be respun over and over and over again, does the audience have the memory of pondlife?

There's a sucker born every minute.

(Attributed to P.T. Barnum)

The older we get, the more we realize that whole generations have passed who never heard the debunk the first time, either because they were too young or because they were interested in other topics back then. There will always be newbies to the field.

 

[Montauk]

There's a sucker born every minute.

(Attributed to P.T. Barnum)

The older we get, the more we realize that whole generations have passed who never heard the debunk the first time, either because they were too young or because they were interested in other topics back then. There will always be newbies to the field.

I agree. One of the things that annoys me the most are the people who have been around for a while and have the decades of skeptical inquiry and evidence and analysis at their fingertips, but post something like this...

even though such questions can be answered pretty easily.

Thankfully, in the case of this exchange, there was a skeptic on hand to reply:

but OP was not pleased by the argument and so they through out a rhetorical dodge in response:

It seems it's not just the newbies we need to help out.

 

[JMartJr]

My response to GuinnessStache's second post there would be, "Well, produce such evidence, and we'll see. But in 80 years of studying this stuff, nobody ever has."

 

[Mendel]

The film drops on Amazon Prime tomorrow.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_Age_of_Disclosure

According to The Guardian reviewer Adrian Horton, "As IndieWire put it, The Age of Disclosure presents 'the most convincing argument you can make without showing any actual evidence'."[6]​

Writing in The Hollywood Reporter, Daniel Fienberg called the film a "sensationalistic wolf in understated sheep's clothing" and opined that "almost nothing in The Age of Disclosure is 'new,' per se" but that the quality of its production values set it apart from similar films of the genre and that "some viewers will happily celebrate the fantasy, when it looks this legitimate". Fienberg dismissed it as a "a basic cable exploitation doc done up with a fancy gloss", in which "nothing is proven, and thus nothing can be refuted".[1]​

​

 

[jdog]

The film drops on Amazon Prime tomorrow.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_Age_of_Disclosure

According to The Guardian reviewer Adrian Horton, "As IndieWire put it, The Age of Disclosure presents 'the most convincing argument you can make without showing any actual evidence'."[6]​

Writing in The Hollywood Reporter, Daniel Fienberg called the film a "sensationalistic wolf in understated sheep's clothing" and opined that "almost nothing in The Age of Disclosure is 'new,' per se" but that the quality of its production values set it apart from similar films of the genre and that "some viewers will happily celebrate the fantasy, when it looks this legitimate". Fienberg dismissed it as a "a basic cable exploitation doc done up with a fancy gloss", in which "nothing is proven, and thus nothing can be refuted".[1]​

I feel the need to point out it premiered in the SXSW Film Festival on March 9 and was seen by the glitterati of the UFO community, so the substance -- or lack of -- has been available for months.

 

[beku-mant]

I think it's probably going to be mainly about getting some insight into what people in government who have access to some of the classified stuff think. It's unsatisfying, because we can't see the classified stuff, and we lack transparency in how any conclusions were drawn from it by those who do. We already also have AARO suggesting there is evidence of anomalous aerospace technology that violates what we expect to be possible based on known technology.

I think the takeaway is, this is worth trying to get to the bottom of. The current situation blocks us from doing that. So we should pass legislation that would enable transparent investigations into the claims, and open up the evidence to scientists.

 

[Mick West]

Ben Kenigsberg at The New York Times is not a fan:

https://www.nytimes.com/2025/11/20/...e_code=1.2k8.PqnG.ojS1w3OOxhQH&smid=url-share

Directed by Dan Farah, a producer on "Ready Player One," "The Age of Disclosure" follows a time-honored method of easing viewers into its incredible assertions, mixing out-there concepts with ideas that have the ring of truth. Surely some anomalous phenomena exist; surely they have the potential to become national security threats. And it is not surprising to hear that the government might classify certain details that should be public. The bipartisan, high-profile figures who sat for interviews (including Senator Kirsten Gillibrand of New York and former Senator Marco Rubio of Florida, now the secretary of state and national security adviser) lend credibility to the proceedings.

But "The Age of Disclosure" sneakily slips from those officials' arguments for transparency into the realm of pure speculation. If you don't believe that extraterrestrials surveil our planet in bubbles that can warp time and space, the movie suggests that you've simply fallen victim to a government disinformation campaign intended to make people skeptical of U.A.P.s. (Hasn't Hollywood, described as part of that effort, done precisely the opposite?) Question the film and you're a chump, it implies. But anyone who sits through its nearly two hours of unprovable claims is a chump of a different sort.

Most of the reviews on IMDB are from the March Screening. Here's one new one:
http://nycmovieguru.com/nov21st255.html#ageofdisclosure

If you're looking for a fair and balanced documentary about UFOs, you'll be disappointed. If you don't believe in UFOs and are looking for a documentary to convince you otherwise with hard evidence, The Age of Disclosure won't change your mind. In other words, it's preaching to the choir. If, however, you're among those who are already convinced that extraterrestrial life exists and that there's a global cover-up, this will be music to your ears. It's fast-paced like a thriller which makes it feel less dry and more cinematic.

I was invited to an advanced screening last week, but I was too busy to go.

 

[mystry]

The line with "anyone who sits through its...unprovable claims is a chump of a different sort" seems a bit harsh? I guess maybe I will find out if I feel the same way once I watch it, as is my current intention. It seems reasonable to see what all the folks in the film say. These folks, some if not all, do have access to classified information I do not (true or false though the information may be). Some may actually have seen actual materials or phenomena, or if not then what exactly is going on with some of their statements...anyhow, I will try to give it a fair viewing. Even if you dismiss some of these folks based on gaffes or X, Y, or Z, others may say things perhaps worth considering, like I am curious to see what Colonel Nell and people I may not have heard before may say in it. In short, I'm curious. That does not mean I will "like" the film per se, but curious about what all is said.

 

[Mendel]

That does not mean I will "like" the film per se, but curious about what all is said.

Please be curious about actual evidence.
Look up the points that most interest you here on Metabunk, the names of the people have almost all popped up here before.
And please remember that claims to "classified" information have tended to be hearsay, and not lead anywhere.

In short, please don't let the film lead you down a rabbit hole.

 

[JMartJr]

The line with "anyone who sits through its...unprovable claims is a chump of a different sort" seems a bit harsh?

Perhaps they mean "of the better sort, one of the good ones!"

 

[NorCal Dave]

I think it's probably going to be mainly about getting some insight into what people in government who have access to some of the classified stuff think.

These folks, some if not all, do have access to classified information I do not (true or false though the information may be).

I think the whole idea that these guys, Elizondo, Grusch, Puthoff, Gallaudet have all this inside classified info is all part of the mystique. I'd wager that for the most part they don't have jack-shit, just a bunch of stories they pass amongst themselves and repeat for the likes of Coulthart or will share with paying costumers at various UFO festivals. Which of these guys insights are you actually interested in? Elizondo and his "mother ship/ceiling light reflection? Stratton and the 7' bipedal werewolves in Virginia? Grusch and the crashed Italian UFO that isn't classified at all? Puthoff and Igo Swann's remote viewing or Geller's spoon bending?

 

[beku-mant]

Which of these guys insights are you actually interested in?

I'm mostly interested in what James Clapper, Kirstin Gillibrand, Marco Rubio, Karl Knell, André Carson, and Mike Rounds have to say. I honestly don't trust Elizondo, Puthoff, or Stratton very much. I trust Grusch, but already know his claims, and I'm still waiting for them to be investigated, or corroborated. Eric Davis, I don't know enough about. I imagine he will make some claims similar to Grusch's. I'm not sure about Gallaudet. Mellon I've heard from extensively, not sure if there is anything new from him. The others probably have nothing new to add, although I'll wait and see.

 

[jackfrostvc]

Jay Stratton's BIO indicates he was involved with Information Warfare

I get the feeling a lot of the core group are connected and knew each other.

 

[jdog]

Jay Stratton's BIO indicates he was involved with Information Warfare

I get the feeling a lot of the core group are connected and knew each other.

View attachment 86307

I don't have military experience, but I do think one can read too much into that.

If you look at the information warfare ratings at https://www.mynavyhr.navy.mil/Career-Management/Community-Management/Enlisted/Information-Warfare/, the jobs cover the spectrum from weather and ocean forecasting to computer science and foreign language training. There's a "psyops" element to information warfare, but it also includes just finding the enemy, identifying their intentions, and communicating that to your team while denying your location and intentions from your adversary (and maybe other departments eyeing your budget and your staff).

As for them all knowing each other, Gallaudet did have to issue information warfare strategy guidance as part of running Naval Meteorology and Oceanography Command. (His text at https://www.navy.mil/Press-Office/N...graphy-releases-information-warfare-strategy/ talks about the need for improved forecasting, communicating forecasts, and "cyberhardening.")

And I would guess to a certain extent these are just crappy middle- and upper-management positions with a lot of budgeting and paperwork and maybe a footlocker or two labeled "crystal skull, do not open."

 

[MapperGuy]

I'm mostly interested in what James Clapper, Kirstin Gillibrand, Marco Rubio, Karl Knell, André Carson, and Mike Rounds have to say. I honestly don't trust Elizondo, Puthoff, or Stratton very much. I trust Grusch, but already know his claims, and I'm still waiting for them to be investigated, or corroborated. Eric Davis, I don't know enough about. I imagine he will make some claims similar to Grusch's. I'm not sure about Gallaudet. Mellon I've heard from extensively, not sure if there is anything new from him. The others probably have nothing new to add, although I'll wait and see.

You need to consider the backgrounds of these people and where they have worked. Jim Clapper, retired Air Force General, was director of NGA for six years and also Director at DIA, up to his eyeballs in the highest classified stuff there is for more than a decade. Gillibrand and Rubio know what they were told in hours of classified briefings, compared to Clapper they know nothing. Others in this menagerie have been on the outside looking in for years after maybe having access decades ago. It's a very mixed bag, some I would trust, others I wouldn't believe a word they said.

 

[Mendel]

Gillibrand and Rubio know what they were told in hours of classified briefings,

From uap.guide :

There are so many of us now on the intel committee and armed services that we're going to stand by the service members who documented this stuff. They have video. They have radar. They have heat sensors. They have everything.
— Kirsten Gillibrand, US Senator (D), Committee on Armed Services, 8/26/2022 | Twitter

We have people at very high clearances, both today and in the past, who did really important work for our government, who continue to do important work for the government, who have come forward with some claims about the US having in the past recovered exotic materials and the reverse engineered those materials to make advances in our own defenses and technologies... One of two things is happening here. Either they are telling the truth, and that is something that would obviously be the biggest story in human history, or we have people in really important positions in government who are crazy, who are making up stories, and who are still in positions of importance.
— Marco Rubio, US Senator (R), 9/15/2024 | Fox News

None of the evidence and claims have ever panned out.
We've been investigating, AARO has been investigating, there's nothing behind them.

I expect Clapper is advocating being more open with the data that the USG does have, but we've since learned that it doesn't prove aliens, either; and I don't think Clapper says it does.

 

[beku-mant]

Since statements from those in charge of AARO have confirmed there does appear to be something very extraordinary to the UAP topic according to the evidence they have, I am especially interested to know more about what specifically in the data led them to those conclusions. It may be we will never know, but I am guessing some of the people appearing in this Doc. have at least more insight into what some of that data shows than we do.

I weakly agree with others here, who have stated that evidence of aircraft far in advance of known technology, with no incremental provenience, and no known attribution, would be compelling evidence pointing in the direction of an ET origin. But, I am not sure. I think AARO is also agnostic. They say, just because it defies what we can replicate with known technology, doesn't mean it violates the laws of physics. We cannot absolutely infer it is non-human, just because it performs in ways that seem far in advance of all technology we have or thought technically possible to build.

 

[Scaramanga]

I think it should be renamed ' The Age Of Paying £18.61 For A Film That Tells You Absolutely Nothing New'

 

[Scaramanga]

I think the whole idea that these guys, Elizondo, Grusch, Puthoff, Gallaudet have all this inside classified info is all part of the mystique. I'd wager that for the most part they don't have jack-shit, just a bunch of stories they pass amongst themselves and repeat for the likes of Coulthart or will share with paying costumers at various UFO festivals.

I'm always struck by the vast and ever increasing chasm between the claims and the 'evidence'...much of which has long been debunked. It's almost comical the way every single UFO documentary contains debunked footage presented as 'UFOs'. Even the fact that Mick West explained the 'Go Fast' UAP speed as parallax just gets forgotten about.

I'm almost reminded of the bizarre concept of 'Spectral evidence'....long since made illegal but it was all the rage back in the 16th and 17th centuries. This is where a person could claim to have received information from a spectre, which of course no-one else could see or test. Spectral evidence was used in the Salem witch trials. What we have today is really just another form of ' I have all this evidence...but I can't tell you where I got it from'. It is spectral evidence under a new guise.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Spectral_evidence

 

[JMartJr]

Since statements from those in charge of AARO have confirmed there does appear to be something very extraordinary to the UAP topic according to the evidence they have

A link to that would be helpful.

All I can find is:

"It is also important to underscore that, to date, AARO has discovered no verifiable evidence of extraterrestrial beings, activity or technology. None of the cases resolved by AARO [has] pointed to advanced capabilities or breakthrough technologies," he pointed out.

from Nov 2024, perhaps there is something more recent that I am missing?
https://www.war.gov/News/News-Stori...d-examining-unidentified-anomalous-phenomena/

Edit -- My search was hampered by having initially searched for "Aaron Syad they have evidence of unknown technology" because I am tired and typing sloppily. When that was corrected to "AARO said" I found the above. Google assuring me that Aaron Syad had never made any claims about advanced technology was a confusing moment...^^

 

[Todd Feinman]

A link to that would be helpful.

All I can find is:

"It is also important to underscore that, to date, AARO has discovered no verifiable evidence of extraterrestrial beings, activity or technology. None of the cases resolved by AARO [has] pointed to advanced capabilities or breakthrough technologies," he pointed out.

from Nov 2024, perhaps there is something more recent that I am missing?
https://www.war.gov/News/News-Stori...d-examining-unidentified-anomalous-phenomena/

Edit -- My search was hampered by having initially searched for "Aaron Syad they have evidence of unknown technology" because I am tired and typing sloppily. When that was corrected to "AARO said" I found the above. Google assuring me that Aaron Syad had never made any claims about advanced technology was a confusing

moment...^^

Perhaps beku-mant was thinking of these statements:

"However, he (Kosloski) acknowledged that "a small percentage of reports" involve objects with highly anomalous characteristics that warrant further analysis. These include incidents where objects exhibit unusual flight patterns, speeds, or behaviors that defy conventional explanations."
Source
https://thebaynet.com/pentagons-latest-uap-report-sheds-light-on-anomalies-but-questions-remain/

And:

Source: AARO Historical record report Vol 1

 

[NorCal Dave]

As for them all knowing each other,

Many of these guys have been interacting with each other for years. The photo from up-thread:

Puthoff and Davis along with Kit Green and Jacques Vallee had been discussing crashed UFOs and secret programs for decades. Nolan claims to have learned most of his UFO beliefs from these guys. Vallee, Puthoff and Davis were all instrumental in the National Institute for Discovery Science (NIDS), Bigelow's first privately funded "research" program at Skinwalker Ranch. NIDS was shut down due to a lack of results, but was reconstituted as BAASS with taxpayer funds under a DIA contract for the AWWSAP program, which also fooled around at Skinwalker Ranch and included the likes of Stratton.

BAASS contracted with Puthoff's EarthTech Sciences company to produce a series of speculative papers which included papers by Puthoff and Davis. When AWWSAP funding was cut, it was Puthoff, with some others that tried to get the KONA BLUE program going at DHS. That failed because of the UFO language they tried to include. With AWWSAP done and no new UFO/paranormal program to replace it, Elizondo and Stratton started their own UFO side-gig, AATIP.

Elizondo left the government and Stratton went on to head up the UAP Task Force, bringing in TV personality Travis Taylor and David Grusch. Eric Davis claims to be one of Grusch's prime sources, which is interesting giving he also claims he's never been giving the clearance he wants to actually access the supposed super secret crashed UFO programs.

Meanwhile, Puthoff and Semivan hooked up with Blink 182 punk-pop rocker Tom Delong to form To The Stars Academy of Arts & Sciences (TTSA). TTSA also included Elizondo, Chris Mellon and others.

It's the same group of people telling each other the same stories and never producing evidence for any of it.

 

[Mick West]

It's the same group of people telling each other the same stories and never producing evidence for any of it.

Pretty much all of them believe they (and/or someone they know) have had paranormal experiences - some of them pretty extreme encounters with beings.

So it's not like they are all just going off what the others say. Most of them have their own memories of perceived events (which they assume are accurate) as foundational evidence.

 

[beku-mant]

A link to that would be helpful.

In the linked interview below, Greenstreet asks Tim Phillips from AARO what he has seen that is particularly strange, and Phillips replies,

the black triangles

says they have

all of the above

evidence, and that,

there are some spooky things in places they shouldn't be, with performance characteristics that we couldn't duplicate today, so what is it?

Source: https://youtu.be/LcwkyRLpz4Q?t=970

In a subsequent interview with Mick, he characterized the nature of that evidence as, from sensor systems at sensitive military sites, although he was a little cagey about it.

In an interview with Neil deGrasse Tyson, acting director of AARO Jon T. Kosloski, explains their agnosticism regarding whether something is physics defying. In reference to how they define breakthrough technology, Kosloski says,

We're not quite as picky. So, we're not requiring breaking the known laws of physics. We're just saying, going well past the bounds of our engineering. So, for example, we're not assuming it can travel faster than the speed of light, we're just saying, if it's in the lower atmosphere and it's going mach 35, that's very interesting to us. May be physically possible, but the engineering would be very outlandish.

Timestamped link below.


Source: https://youtu.be/mvsU4p0Gsas?t=1450

 

[jimmyslippin]

Many of these guys have been interacting with each other for years. The photo from up-thread:

View attachment 86340

Puthoff and Davis along with Kit Green and Jacques Vallee had been discussing crashed UFOs and secret programs for decades. Nolan claims to have learned most of his UFO beliefs from these guys. Vallee, Puthoff and Davis were all instrumental in the National Institute for Discovery Science (NIDS), Bigelow's first privately funded "research" program at Skinwalker Ranch. NIDS was shut down due to a lack of results, but was reconstituted as BAASS with taxpayer funds under a DIA contract for the AWWSAP program, which also fooled around at Skinwalker Ranch and included the likes of Stratton.

BAASS contracted with Puthoff's EarthTech Sciences company to produce a series of speculative papers which included papers by Puthoff and Davis. When AWWSAP funding was cut, it was Puthoff, with some others that tried to get the KONA BLUE program going at DHS. That failed because of the UFO language they tried to include. With AWWSAP done and no new UFO/paranormal program to replace it, Elizondo and Stratton started their own UFO side-gig, AATIP.

Elizondo left the government ...

This is one of the most fascinating parts of the entire story. AAWSAP was a Harry Reid boondoggle that came about because James Lacatski, a physicist at the DIA, reads 2005's Hunt for the Skinwalker by George Knapp and Colm Kelleher (NIDS/BAASS). Lacatski is intrigued and writes a letter to Bigelow, Bigelow then gets on the horn to Harry Reid (a true believer of UFOs) and a scheme to fool Congress into authorizing spending on studying paranormal phenomena at Skinwalker Ranch under the guise of investigating advances in future aerospace technology is hatched. It is successful, and Lacatski is appointed as the director of AAWSAP.

Then in 2009 Harry Reid writes a letter to the Secretary of Defense requesting higher security protocols for some of the stuff BAASS is getting up. The next paragraph was taken from page 91 of James Lacatski's (with Kelleher and Knapp) 2021 book Skinwalkers at the Pentagon - An Insiders' Account of the Secret Government UFO Program:

A new unclassified nickname, the Advanced Aerospace Threat Identification Program (AATIP), was created for use within the unclassified letter because it was decided for security reasons not to use the AAWSAP acronym. Reid's letter was carefully crafted to initiate the process of urgently conferring Special Access Programs (SAP) status to some of the more sensitive projects at BAASS.

The book also describes Lue Elizondo's AATIP as a "small unofficial effort within the DoD to investigate UAPs encountered by the military" that had "adopted" the AATIP moniker "much later" (page 27).

Leslie Kean's 2017 New York Times article Glowing Auras and 'Black Money': The Pentagon's Mysterious UFO Program introduces Lue Elizondo as the guy who ran the Pentagon's $22m UFO research program, AATIP. But it's now 100% clear the entire article is actually about James Lacatski's AAWSAP which Elizondo vehemently denied being part of. The timeframe Elizondo gives for his taking on the role of running AATIP neatly aligns Lacatski's being appointed as director of AAWSAP.

Is there a ufology version of stolen valor?

 

[Scaramanga]

Many of these guys have been interacting with each other for years. The photo from up-thread:

What gets me is that Puthoff has been allowed to regain scientific respectability after falling for Ingo Swann and Uri Geller.

 

[jimmyslippin]

What gets me is that Puthoff has been allowed to regain scientific respectability after falling for Ingo Swann and Uri Geller.

Has he though? Look at the company he keeps and the people that cite him. They still believe Ingo Swann and Uri Geller.

 

[jackfrostvc]

Pretty much all of them believe they (and/or someone they know) have had paranormal experiences - some of them pretty extreme encounters with beings.

So it's not like they are all just going off what the others say. Most of them have their own memories of perceived events (which they assume are accurate) as foundational evidence.

Although they may say that, I doubt all of them believe what they say.

 

[Giddierone]

"Straight to DVD" has become "straight to torrent." Has there ever been a new release film where this happened so quickly?

 

[jarlrmai]

Every thing that is released is a torrent as soon as they can do it.

 

[Giddierone]

The number of deceptive edits in this film is staggering. We have Puthoff talking about craft creating barriers to space time that prevents their capture by photography, while they cycle through some of the most crap UFO images.

 

[jimmyslippin]

The number of deceptive edits in this film is staggering. We have Puthoff talking about craft creating barriers to space time that prevents their capture by photography, while they cycle through some of the most crap UFO images.

Yikes... I downloaded this yesterday but have been putting off watching it because I know I'm going to end up hating people. I was just about to put it on when I saw your comment.

Ok... Wish me luck. I'm going in...

 

[GM4AJK]

Age of Dillusion is a documentary film I might go and see if it were ever made, as I can't help but think that's what we are sliding into. It'd be up there with Science Friction

 

[NorCal Dave]

Even The Guardian is in on it. I thought they were supposed to be a bit more respectable, but then so was the the NYT.


Source: https://www.facebook.com/theguardian/posts/pfbid0sw9Zp4rJKr1WJ62NxodYtBkoheyTkojRX4aAv5PuZfNdziuJCAQYq5Rf4KqGa5WXl


This appears to be an interview with the director Dan Farah, so I'm assuming he's the sole source here. And that The Guardian made no attempt to verify any of this. It seems right off the start, The Guardian is making the same mistake the NYT did, claiming Elizondo has credibility because he ran the governments UAP program, AATIP:

But there's a reason why Farah gravitated towards Elizondo (who also serves as an executive producer on the film). He's got genuine credentials. A former Pentagon official, who helped lead the Advanced Aerospace Threat Identification Program (AATIP), Elizondo eventually left his role in 2017, claiming the department was hiding vital information from the public. He also claims there was a "powerful disinformation campaign" from the Department of Defense to discredit his work.

https://www.theguardian.com/film/2025/nov/22/age-of-disclosure-documentary-aliens?

It also says the people interviewed for the film have "direct knowledge" of these programs:

Making a point to "only interview people who have direct knowledge" of these programs from working within the US government was a north star for Farah –

And right away we get the Skinwalker Ranch take on UAP:

His first big commitment came from Jay Stratton, one of the defense officials who started AATIP. He had an established career investigating UAP and non-human intelligence life on behalf of the government, and was responsible for briefing senior lawmakers in Congress and the White House. "I have seen with my own eyes non-human craft and non-human beings," Stratton says plainly at the beginning of the film.

As noted multiple times, AATIP was an unfunded (except when Elizondo "borrowed funds" from legit programs), unofficial side hustle run by Elizondo and Stratton after the boondoggle at Skinwalker Ranch that was AASWAP got shutdown. I'd have to check, but IIRC, the "non-human beings" Stratton saw at Skinwalker Ranch were were-wolves or something similar.

The article mentions a new character I haven't heard of yet, the Chief Scientist for AATIP, who is of course unnamed:

The former chief scientist for AATIP claims that those who are tasked with ensuring information about UAPs doesn't leak "will use whatever tool they can find to try to convince people they shouldn't come forward".

Just completely speculating here, but maybe Farah has mixed up somebody from AWWSAP/BAASS like Colm Kelleher or he's mixed up Stratton's time at the UAP Task Force where Travis Taylor was the "chief scientist". Maybe Farah took whatever the Skinwalker Ranch crew told him at face value and they just played him. They recreated the halcyon days of 2017 when Elizondo and Stratton were running the governments official $22M UAP program. I don't know.

Then there is this nugget, that we're aware that the Soviets have UFOs, but contradictory, the people government don't know this. Huh?

He says this race escalated when the US found out that other countries, like Russia, were capturing and retrieving UAP technology. "Here we are now where the people who run our country are not aware of the facts," he added.

So, Farah and the author know about Soviet UFOs, but people in the government don't.

While the author, Shari Popat, was talking to Farah, it reads like a press release, but I guess what's the difference. As for any skeptical thoughts on UAP, Farah says they're not needed, as it would "cloud" the narrative:

In The Age of Disclosure, it's clear that there is little room for push back or skepticism, particularly since there's not a single detractor in the film to serve as a foil to the plethora of resolute interviewees. And Farah, for his part, doesn't see the need for those voices to cloud the documentary's throughline. "I think when people watch this movie, one of the realizations will be that the stigma around this topic is completely illogical and makes no sense and is not good for humanity," he said.

Farah continues (bold by me):

"We need the scientific community, not only in the United States, but in every nation, accepting the fact that this is a real situation, this is a valid area of inquiry, and that they should put their brain power towards learning about this and answering a lot of the big questions that remain."

And the scientific community needs to accept alien UAPs as fact based on what? Evidence? No silly, just based on testimony:

Testimony is ultimately what film hinges on, and it's really the only "proof" it can offer. This, for Farah, is more compelling. He believes that "the strongest evidence" is "credible people putting their name and reputation on the line to tell you what they know at great risk". When it comes to video and photos, the director notes that it would do little to quieten claims that it's all a hoax. "You could put a picture or a video of the most extraordinary thing on the cover of a major news publication or on major plants on TV, and half the human population would tell you they think it's AI or they think it's visual effects," he said.

Apparently evidence can be faked, people talking about evidence can not. Not sure about people not fake talking about fake evidence .

 

[MapperGuy]

Although they may say that, I doubt all of them believe what they say.

Once you join a congregation you may find yourself having to continue to profess belief, despite your true beliefs, or risk being accused of heresy and being excommunicated from the group. If your living revolves around the UFO world, for fame and/or money, you are kind of stuck with it.

 

[Giddierone]

A mini review:

• That they use Marco Rubio, current secretary of state, as the keystone of credibility here, to bridge the divide between fringe and mainstream is perhaps it's biggest sleight of hand. He's a politician and all his remarks are those of a politician. He suggests we need to consider threats from all origins and that the US must maintain it's technological preeminence—hardly controversial.
• Then by the end of the film we're told that shadowy groups, corporate entities (also the Vatican!) / three main world governments already have tech from this global threat and wouldn't it be nice if we could end global suffering and advance humanities place in the cosmos by getting that tech into the marketplace.
• Some more banalities
  • Important people saying UFOs are real.
  • Gov figures saying we don't want our adversaries to know what we can see or detect.
• If you take a shot for each time Jay Stratton blinks during this film, you'll be completely sober by its end.
• Someone somewhere has an awful lot of B-roll of Elizondo walking, and sitting looking wistful. He's extremely well media trained.
  • He goes through the "6 observables" - No evidence of their observation is provided.
  • 
  • He says he knows more but can't say any more because his life is at risk. Typical Elizondo schtick.
• Toward the end it just becomes a supercut of CSPAN footage with every ounce of scepticism removed from it. I'm surprised they resisted the temptation to overlay canned gasps and whoops from a live studio audience audio track.
• Also, love this fictional globe view that appears at one point. Methinks it might be a tad biased toward the United States...
  
  
• I can only imagine what people who don't follow this topic will take away from this film except bags of bunk.

 

[Montauk]

Age of Dillusion is a documentary film I might go and see if it were ever made, as I can't help but think that's what we are sliding into. It'd be up there with Science Friction

We already kinda have it, also courtesy of Brian Dunning


Source: https://youtu.be/s09kAkzapPI

 

[Jack Mallory]

I watched it. Twice, already. And so can you (it's available on Rumble. Sorry, not sorry.)

Any questions, fire away. But let me start with this: IMHO, I consider this to be, by far, the absolute worst film I've ever watched on the topic. I'm not even kidding. Considering the unwarranted levels of hype this preceded this laughable production, I've no inhibitions when it comes to laying waste to the absolute farcical nature of this comical collection of every unsubstantiated claim that we've all been subjected to for years now but simply repeated on yet another platform.

First off, it may just as well have been titled, Lue Elizondo's Magical Mystery Tour because he is, far and away, the leading figure throughout the film. Nauseatingly so. He's always been a bit of a drama queen, but in this film he very clearly takes it to the next level. I can almost imagine an acting coach, by his side, encouraging "just one more take" to fully bring out his inner thespian. I found it to be the most contrived version of Elizondo yet presented to the world—and that's saying something.

The most annoying aspect to the film is how all of it—and I mean all of it—comes across as though you're watching a trailer. Just imagine a 110-minute trailer to a film that never actually begins. There are far too many edits throughout, with not an ounce of skepticism ever allowed to enter into the narrative. The viewer is expected to accept everything at face value, all because of the "credentials" of the people taking part in the film.

Speaking of the trailer: If you've watched that, then you've essentially watched the entire film. Director Dan Farah has no qualms about baiting the potential audience in with edge-of-the-seat claims from the likes of Jay Stratton who states, quite emphatically: "I have seen, with my own eyes, non-human craft and non-human beings." With a teaser like that in the trailer, how could you not want to invest your hard-earned money in watching this film? If they make claims like that in the trailer, just imagine the depth of information that must surely be present in the full-length feature!

Well, wouldn't ya' know it? That very clip comes up within the first seven minutes of the film. Exactly as it appears in the trailer. And guess what? There is zero follow-up on that statement throughout the remaining 100+ minutes of the documentary. Nada. Zilch. Zip. The most fantastical and outrageous claim of the entire film is allowed to pass without a single moment of curiosity as to the validity of such a wild claim. Literally none. Like tossing a coin into a wishing well, then walking away without giving any of it a further thought. He's not pressed for details regard the supposed craft or beings. We're not given the slightest clue as to where, when or under what circumstances this supposed event occurred. Nor are we ever granted the courtesy of the usual types of disclaimers whereby outlandish proclamations are so often followed by, "I'd love to tell you more, but it's classified." Nope. Not even that. It's just a throwaway statement with zero context and zero follow-up offered. Truly astounding. That, alone, should completely disqualify this embarrassing charade.

As if Elizondo wasn't bad enough, Jay Stratton single-handedly ruins the film with his incessant creepiness and lunatic underpinnings. How anyone thought that putting him on film would benefit the intended narrative is beyond me. To me, he comes across as very unstable—at best. 'Untrustworthy' would be an understatement.

We then hear from Col. James Cobb, who is billed as a retired Air Force fighter pilot, and NORAD Director of Operations.
He claims that during his time at NORAD, "I witnessed an event that I will remember forever." What was the nature of this forever-remembered event? He says that they were tracking, on radar, an unknown object somewhere off the eastern seaboard. After sending multiple fighter jets to investigate, none could find or intercept with the object. And that's it. That's literally the entire story. That segment of the film lasts no more than 45 seconds. And of course, no follow-up of any kind whatsoever.

At my most charitable, I would say this film is a masterclass in obfuscation, sleight-of-hand, and deceptive editing. On that front, it really does shine. I'll elaborate more on this in future posts because, for now, I'd like to continue with some of the more absurd claims still remaining.

Towards the end of the film, @ 1:19:55 Eric Davis (another individual simply not fit for on-camera appearances) states quite boldly that "UAPs have exhibited propulsive performance characteristics that imply the generation of 1,100 BILLION watts of power. This is more than 100 times the daily electrical utility power generated in the U.S."

Cut immediately to Elizondo who, with great drama, repeats the above claim, verbatim, in order to add as much emotional emphasis to the point as they could possibly conjure up. Now, how did they actually arrive at such calculations? Who knows? Like so many other aspects of this cartoon narrative, the specifics of such are never addressed. Not even a little. The viewer is just supposed to accept these claims simply based on the emotional delivery. Welcome to Ufology 2025.

Not to be outdone, good old Lue has yet more secrets up his sleeve. Only a few minutes later in the film (yes, all the topics tend to bounce around like this from beginning to end) @ 1:26:00 Elizondo makes the following unverified, undocumented and uncorroborated claim:

He says that he received a phone call from a friend of his who happens to be a "staffer on The Hill." This source supposedly goes on to tell Elizondo that "an extremely, extremely senior person in the U.S. Intel community told Congress, for the record, that there's a committee of 27 individuals who were 'mulling over the idea' of using extreme measures to silence" both David Grusch and and Elizondo himself. To "kill us," he specifies. He then goes on to say (with more dramatic fanfare) "If I wind up, a month from now, floating in the Potomac somewhere? You know what happened. You know what happened. This is the truth."

Except for one, small detail. We won't actually know anything, because even with the supposed threat of assassination hanging over his head, Lue doesn't name any names, and he outright refuses to even divulge the supposed "code-name" of the aforementioned "Majestic 17" (my term for this shadowy group of ne'er-do-wells). Oh, the drama. This little story of doom is then concluded with yet another hot-button quote from the film's trailer. Elizondo, channelling his inner-Jeremy Corbell, then leans into the camera and begs, "What else do you want to know?"

Well golly gee, Lue, there's TONS that'd like to know! Good thing I sat through this entire film in order to discover just where this tantalizing quote from the trailer leads me! Except...[spoiler alert!]...it leads absolutely nowhere. Exactly like the tactic used with the earlier quote from Stratton. The viewer is simply left hanging, with, yet again, zero follow-up from the filmmaker!

I do have some more opinions, perspectives, and quotes from the movie to share, but I'll leave with that for now.
I'll post again tommorrow.

Cheers.

.