Hello, thanks for reading. This is part 7 of 7.
The Hearings The Whistleblower Investigations The Pilots The UAP Disclosure Act/NDAA and The Potential Authors The Political Representatives The US Government Can’t Solve These Six UAP Cases The Sol Symposium – Overview
I GOT INVITED BY ACCIDENT I THINK
I will do a more detailed post once the videos are released by the Sol Foundation (I believe they said a couple of weeks out). I was lucky enough to be invited after putting in a brief application a while back. I believe I was a late addition, as I received my invite a week before the event. I felt like a sore thumb most of the time, my background is not science/tech/academia. However, reflecting on my interactions there has given me clarity on exactly how I can help. I think many walked away from it with a similar feeling.
Attendance was by invitation only, and they did not request admission fees. Attendees were responsible for their travel and lodging. Food/drinks/coffee were provided on both days. This field is often said to be full of “grifters”. Seeing this applied to Professors from Stanford, Harvard, Rice University, and other esteemed institutions is laughable. I think it’s incredibly disrespectful to the presenters, the staff that helped facilitate, the incredible student body that hosted, and the people that attended to even insinuate as much.
WHO ELSE WAS THERE
Lots of awesome people. I can only describe the vibe as “history in the making”. For regular folks like me who attended, it was an opportunity to spend face time with pretty much everyone involved with Pro-Disclosure efforts. Garry Nolan, Peter Skafish, Diana Pasulka, Avi Loeb, Beatriz Villarroel, Kevin Knuth, Chris Mellon, Iya Whiteley, Chuck McCullough, Leslie Kean, the list goes on and on and on. There were UFOlogy legends, some media, popular content creators, and more. The most amazing thing about the event was that all of them were highly approachable, and it seemed like they were just as excited as the attendees were to be there.
I can say the following about the caliber of the non-presenting attendees: WOW. I was surrounded by alphabet soup, accomplished professionals, and people way smarter than I am. It appeared it was an incredibly diverse group that spanned most major industries/sectors. Maybe it was all happenstance, but they did an incredible job of inviting people from many walks of life to attend. I’m confident in saying there were 275 people max, and productive conversation filled every second of the weekend.
I’ve seen angry comments proclaiming that it was a US-only event. I found that claim ludicrous, as there was a noticeable amount of international representation. Attendees and presenters flew in from Europe, Canada, Australia, and more. It was also mentioned that many feel like the US taking a solo lead on this would be a mistake and cause unwanted issues. There was a clear desire for international cohesion.
WHY COULDN’T YOU WATCH FROM HOME
I’ve seen anger about them not livestreaming. They made it clear they did not want anyone live tweeting, sharing photos/videos, etc. Here are a few reasons as to why:
They made it clear that no classified information would be shared. You didn’t miss anything. For god sake, let them cook, please. Chatham House Rule – They asked that everyone respect a modified instance of Chatham House Rule since this topic is sensitive, and they didn’t want anyone to be afraid to speak openly and freely. I can point to an easy example: The leaked tweet. It was an irresponsible mischaracterization that betrayed trust. They wished for this event to establish a serious tone around the topic and wanted to prevent sound bites from being taken out of context. How could you expect people to attach themselves to this topic if you lambast them because you have FOMO? I think the event was a significant step toward progress. I could not agree more with their decision to ensure the information they deliver to the public is prepared professionally so that the speakers feel comfortable. Public speaking is not everyone’s strong suit. Allowing them to edit the footage into the most presentable format will maximize the content’s efficacy. This isn’t secretive. It is smart. Every day, you can point to countless examples of people spreading rumors and misinformation based on their inability to click the link in the post they are commenting on. If you want to progress in this topic, the message delivered must be cohesive and well thought out, or else it may be skewed in a way that hinders Disclosure. Additionally, you never know when a question may veer into an area where a speaker would like to answer speculatively but may feel uncomfortable due to live cameras. There were questions asked that resulted in disagreements at times. Let them figure this stuff out in a comfortable place so that opposition to Disclosure doesn’t have the ammo. Disclosure is a process, not an event. We are in it right now. The lack of patience indicates they made the correct decision in not live-streaming. There was no “unveiling of the master plan”. All discussion about “the future” was prefaced with: We really need the UAPDA to pass. However, I got the vibe that there is no stopping this train. It was clear that this will be taken seriously by academia moving forward, and I firmly believe this is the beginning of a new age in the study of the phenomenon.
Clearly, so much work is being done to make this happen. My friends, after this weekend, I am confident this train is leaving the station. I was lucky enough to share space with an incredible group of people expressing nothing but a pure desire to pursue the truth. Almost every speaker made it clear that there were so many unknowns, and they had doubts about the legislation passing. But to be completely honest, I sensed an air of victory.
MY FIRST IMPRESSION
Friday morning arrived, and I decided to get coffee a couple of hours before the start of day 1. On my way out of the hotel, I saw Ryan Graves jumping into an Uber, presumably to finish some early morning meetings. I got to Stanford earlier than a sane person because I didn’t want to be late and ended up meeting like-minded individuals excited about the day. I met one of the incredible clinical psychologists at UAP Med and an AI Scientist and Cybersecurity researcher for a State University.
While chatting it up, we saw Danny Sheehan and his incredible hair from across the courtyard. With our backs turned, a tall Aussie named Cooltart walked up with his top two buttons undone. He greeted us with a genuine smile while simultaneously insulting American coffee’s weakness. I agreed with him but didn’t have time to respond as the Founder of Lumina joined our little huddle. A few others joined, and we eventually entered the building.
Let me summarize the rest of the trip. I’ll probably do a more detailed post on the sessions, similar to my write-up for the UAP Hearings. These summaries will do the sessions a disservice, but I’ll have more to share when the videos are released.
OVERVIEW OF DAY FRIDAY, NOVEMBER 17TH
– Peter Skafish and Garry Nolan were fantastic hosts, as were Stanford’s staff/students and the Sol team. I don’t have enough good things to say here. It was evident that blood, sweat, and tears poured into setting up and executing the Symposium.
– The scientists (Loeb, Villarroel, Knuth, Nolan) walked through excellent presentations that showed analysis and findings related to materials, physics, historical info, sensor data, etc. There wasn’t any room for arguments because there wasn’t speculation, only conclusive findings that were evident based on the data they had. Everyone did an excellent job establishing the following: “This is what the data says. Here are further questions we have. Also, we need more data plz?”
– Next, we had Humanities presentations that were super refreshing. Having the scientists lay the groundwork of “these questions need to be addressed because the data is clear” was a good lead-up to the Anthropology and Sociology discussions. It amplified the message effectively by portraying: This is more than just science; this is life as we know it. I walked away from those sessions feeling like the concerns around ontological shock and societal change were at the forefront of Sol’s work.
– Closing out the day involved Puthoff, Leslie Kean, and Larry McGuire from Canada’s parliament. For me, I think this session is where I realized the gravity of being there. The dialogue sounded to me like there was a kind of fearlessness by the panelists. I realized during this session that this was probably history in the making.
– Reception afterward allowed everyone to network and discuss!
OVERVIEW OF DAY FRIDAY, NOVEMBER 18TH
– Saturday opened with information about issues caused by the government’s lack of transparency on USOs. I thought this was a good session highlighting how the lack of transparency causes a failure in leadership. I really enjoyed this session’s message now that I reflect on it. I hope Gallaudet’s sentiment is shared amongst current Navy leadership, as we need leaders aligning with his discussed priorities.
– I think the individual sessions by Jarius Grove, Karl Nell, and Jonathan Berte were in the correct order. Initially, we heard well-thought-out potential outcomes of Disclosure (mostly negative). Then, we received an analysis of the Schumer amendment and potential areas that need focus if the amendment passes (humanities, private sector, science). Lastly, we heard some of the positive potentialities that may stem from Disclosure and how it may lead to human prosperity.
Here’s all I feel comfortable sharing about these presentations: The slide that was shared, in my opinion, was not the most important. I wrote something from the last Nell slide: “Whole-of-Society contributions can’t wait and should be integrated and synchronized”. I don’t mind sharing that because it was a continuous theme and attitude that presented itself in every interaction I had this weekend.
– Next, we had Chris Mellon and Charles McCullough sessions, which were very interesting. I’ll save most comments on their sessions until the videos are released, as I would like to relate some of their points to my previous writing. It felt genuine that these former intelligence community leaders are intent on eliminating the issues caused by US bureaucracy, overcomplicated but ineffectual legislation, and other issues highlighted by the fact that we still have to fight for the truth 80 years later.
– Lastly, on day 2, I think we had the most important sessions of the event from 3:00P to 5:30P. Dr Iya Whiteley’s talk was utterly fascinating. She made it clear that this is not only a nuts-and-bolts issue, and she related it to her extensive experience of being a world-renowned expert in the field of space medicine for astronauts and pilots. Next, we heard from Paul Thigpen on the complexity of integrating religion and NHI. Then, Jeff Kripal spoke on religion and NHI from a historical perspective. The panel discussion that followed was remarkable.
Here’s why I think this was so important: The spiritual discussion was had at a serious level, and there was no attempt at delegitimizing the “woo”. As a matter of fact, I took the last two and half hours as a clear sign that some of the professionals behind the pro-disclosure efforts actually may be leaning into it. It seems that when you look into the phenomenon for an extended period, you typically realize this goes far beyond little green men. I was blown away to hear them speaking toward consciousness, the woo, and spirituality. Seeing this part of the topic get stage time at such an esteemed event was so impressive. I got the vibe that there will be much more to come.
– The last speaker was Grusch. I wrote enough about him already, though. For now. Thanks, Grusch.
MY PROMISE TO ALL YOU ANGRY REDDITORS
Thanks for taking the time to read this, sorry there aren’t many links, I’ll beef it up later. I really cannot stress enough how lucky I felt to get to go to that event. I will be the first one to say I believe there were people far more deserving than I, so I will do my best in relaying lots of important stuff once they post the videos and I can get detailed write ups posted on the sessions. Thanks again for reading.
GET ACTIVE, LEGALLY AND RESPECTFULLY
Write your Governors Write your Reps (Create an effective template, resist.bot) Declassify UAP UAP Caucus Disclosure Diaries The Disclosure Party Sign a Petition Get involved with organizations (international and domestic)
PLEASE USE THE REPORT BUTTON WHEN NECCESSARY, I’M TOLD THAT IT HELPS THE MODS