https://twitter.com/MvonRen/status/1768159355344699492 – MarikVR from The Hill posted this thread with great analysis as always.
AARO’s historical* review of U.S. government involvement with UAP omits the most important and relevant *historical* documents.*
Moreover, the inclusion of an egregious falsehood betrays the report’s extraordinary bias and fundamentally flawed analytic tradecraft.
—————————————————————–
AARO omits the document that established the USG’s formal analysis of UAP.
-UAP are “real and not visionary or fictitious.”
-Exhibit “extreme rates of climb, maneuverability… and action which must be considered evasive when sighted or contacted by friendly aircraft and radar.”
—————————————————————–
The U.S. government’s *first formal intelligence estimate of UFOs* concluded that the objects were of “interplanetary” (!) origin.
This, naturally, is of significant relevance to any historical review of U.S. government involvement with UAP, yet is pointedly downplayed by AARO.
—————————————————————–
AARO omits earliest surviving assessment of UAP:
Many reports came from observers “who, because of their technical background and experience, do not appear to be influenced by unfounded sensationalism nor inclined to report explainable phenomena as new types of aerial devices.”
—————————————————————–
In early 1947, “trained and experienced U.S. Weather Bureau personnel” observed “strange metallic disks” on multiple occasions.
These sightings predate the Arnold incident by several months, eliminating media coverage or pursuit of “personal publicity” as plausible explanations.
—————————————————————–
The most-reported UAP were “silver disks or balls.”
Despite widespread *historical* reporting of such objects, AARO’s report makes no link to ex-AARO director Kirkpatrick stating that “metallic orbs” are observed “all over the world” “making very interesting apparent maneuvers.”
—————————————————————–
Worst of all, AARO’s review blatantly misrepresents the most exhaustive, comprehensive historical analysis of UAP.
According to AARO, the resulting report found that “all cases that had enough data were resolved and explainable.”
That is *demonstrably – and alarmingly – false.*
—————————————————————–
AARO’s review makes dozens of references to Capt. Edward Ruppelt, the first director of Project Blue Book.
Despite citing Ruppelt more than any other individual, AARO’s report obfuscates and omits his most relevant commentary.
submitted by /u/TommyShelbyPFB
[link] [comments]