Key Players in the Kirkpatrick, AARO, Project Mogul, and Moore Initiatives

The History of UFO Investigations and Anti-UFO Sentiments

In a recent article by the former director of AARO, Dr. Sean Kirkpatrick, it’s evident that he has a strong bias against alien visitation. This is not uncommon among those who have been in charge of UFO (or UAP) investigations in the past. The history of official UFO investigations is filled with individuals who held a dislike for the topic and were not open to the idea of alien visitation.

One notable example is General Hoyt S. Vandenberg, who refused to accept an intelligence analysis suggesting that some flying saucers were alien craft. He ordered the declassification and destruction of a report known as the Estimate of the Situation (EOTS) which concluded that some flying saucers were indeed alien spacecraft. Vandenberg’s decision set the tone for future investigations, with his subordinates following his lead.

Captain Edward Ruppelt, who was appointed as the chief of Project Blue Book, made an effort to conduct an unbiased investigation into UFOs. However, after he was reassigned, the old guard took over and the investigations became less objective. The CIA even convened a panel of scientists in 1953 to review the facts gathered by Project Blue Book, but the final report was written before the panel even met. It concluded that there was nothing to alien spacecraft visitation and that sightings could be explained as misidentified objects, weather phenomena, hallucinations, and hoaxes.

The Birth of the Condon Committee and the Controversy Surrounding Project Mogul

In the late 1950s, there was a movement within the Air Force and higher levels of government to get rid of Air Force responsibility for investigating UFOs. The Air Force eventually found a university, the University of Colorado, to conduct a scientific study on UFOs. However, it’s worth noting that the conclusions of this study were written before the investigation even began, highlighting a lack of objectivity.

One theory, proposed by Dr. Sean Kirkpatrick, suggests that the Roswell UFO debris can be explained by Project Mogul, a top-secret spy program that launched metallic spy balloons into the air. Kirkpatrick’s explanation is criticized by Dr. David Rudiak, who argues that Kirkpatrick failed to do a comprehensive literature search before presenting his theory.

Examining the Flaws in Kirkpatrick’s Rant

Dr. Rudiak points out several flaws in Kirkpatrick’s arguments. He highlights that the balloon launches conducted by New York University in 1947 were not classified and did not include “oddly shaped metallic spy balloons.” Moreover, according to records and interviews with engineers working in New Mexico in 1947, flights that were canceled could not have dropped such balloons. The evidence contradicts Kirkpatrick’s claims about Project Mogul explaining the Roswell case.

Dr. Rudiak also reveals that Kirkpatrick’s investigation into Roswell was limited to official sources, ignoring contradictory evidence. He criticizes Kirkpatrick for dismissing claims that contradict his own narrative and failing to think testimony from credible sources who had intimate knowledge of the Roswell case.

The Lack of Transparency in UFO Investigations

The pattern of bias and lack of transparency in UFO investigations is a recurring issue. Many individuals charged with investigating UFOs have had a predetermined agenda or were pressured to provide certain conclusions, which hindered honest and objective research. The goal was often to hide information and discourage independent research.

Kirkpatrick’s claim that his investigation was science-based and aimed to bring clarity to the UFO phenomenon is met with skepticism. Several experts, including H. P. Robertson and Edward Condon in the past, have made similar claims but failed to provide unbiased investigations.

The Importance of Counterpoints

While Kirkpatrick’s rant may have been presented as a definitive explanation or debunking of the Roswell case, it’s essential to think counterpoints to maintain a balanced perspective. There are credible sources from the past who have provided valuable insights into the UFO phenomenon, including the Roswell case. Dismissing their testimonies and failing to think contradictory evidence only perpetuates the lack of transparency that has plagued UFO investigations for decades.

To wrap it up, the history of official UFO investigations is marred by biases and a lack of transparency. Kirkpatrick’s rant against alien visitation and his explanation of the Roswell case are met with critical inquiry and counterarguments. It very important to consider all perspectives and evidence to gain a comprehensive understanding of the UFO phenomenon. Only then can we move closer to resolving the long-standing mystery of credible observations of UFOs and UAP.