© BillyMeier
There are a number of reasons why the reality of extraterrestrial visitation on our planet remains largely unacknowledged or dismissed by many otherwise rational, intelligent and educated people. One reason is the desire of the scientific, religious and political elite classes to maintain the status quo. After all, if such a thing as the existence of ETs not only visiting but actually interacting with us, and all that that entails, were to be publicly divulged in any meaningful way, it would probably change a lot of people's thinking on the big questions, and thereby run the risk of dis-empowering the ruling class, whose positions depend on the rather rigid shaping and control of popular belief.

The official position by the U.S. government, for instance, has been that there are no ETs visiting us. According to official reports from groups like the Condon Committee, and numerous statements made by government agencies since, there is nothing serious to consider as regards the subject of the UFO phenomenon.

Official denial

The Condon Committee was a University of Colorado UFO Project funded by the United States Air Force from 1966 to 1968 at the University of Colorado to study unidentified flying objects under the direction of physicist Edward Condon. The result of its work, formally titled Scientific Study of Unidentified Flying Objects, and known as the Condon Report, appeared in 1968.

© Unknown
Project Bluebook and the Condon Committee making a show of investigating the UFO phenomena.
After examining hundreds of UFO files from the Air Force's Project Blue Book and from the civilian UFO groups National Investigations Committee On Aerial Phenomena (NICAP) and Aerial Phenomena Research Organization (APRO), and investigating sightings reported during the life of the Project, the Committee produced a Final Report that said the study of UFOs was unlikely to yield major scientific discoveries.

The Report's conclusions were generally welcomed by the scientific community and have been cited as a decisive factor in the generally low level of interest in UFO activity among academics since that time. According to British astrophysicist Peter Sturrock, a principal critic of the Report, it is "the most influential public document concerning the scientific status of this UFO problem. Hence, all current scientific work on the UFO problem must make reference to the Condon Report".

So in spite of the plethora of books, documentaries, research and eyewitness reports which point to a very different conclusion, the 'Condom' Committee (prophylactically protecting humanity from the reality of ETs for generations!) saw fit to dismiss it all. This official and authoritative rejection of the objective reality pertaining to UFOs, and the physical, psychological and emotional experiences of many thousands of individuals around the world who've had direct experience of their 'occupants', has served to impose a lock-down on any serious discussion of UFOs since 1968! But the censorship of all things UFO began long before that, as we'll see.

Fermi's paradox and the thinking that follows

The first installment in a series of articles written by University of Rochester professor of astrophysics Adam Frank - 'Why Aren't The Aliens Here Already?' - illustrates some of the more subtle ways people's thinking on this topic gets narrowed down, boxed in and corralled into dead ends. Frank's articles are published by "NPR, or National Public Radio [...] a privately and publicly funded non-profit membership media organization that serves as a national syndicator to a network of 900 public radio stations in the United States." In alternative news circles NPR is sometimes referred to as National Propaganda Radio because it so often takes the government's position on so many issues, despite the pretense of having progressive leanings. But that's another story.

The author starts by recalling a lunch meeting in 1950 at the Los Alamos National Laboratory between Edward Teller (father of the nuclear bomb) and the Nobel Prize-winning Enrico Fermi. The discussion is alleged to have included a spate of recent UFO sightings and the possibility of seeing an object (made by aliens) move faster than light. After a short time pondering these questions, Fermi suddenly asked: "Where is everybody?"
© Unknown
Enrico Fermi asking the big questions.
What Fermi realized in his burst of insight was simple: If the universe was teeming with intelligent technological civilizations, why hadn't they already made it to Earth? Indeed, why hadn't they made it everywhere?

But Fermi, and Frank by repeating it, were making some rather large assumptions. Why should they simply assume that intelligent life from other worlds hadn't yet made it to Earth? Must aliens take a stroll around Times Square in broad daylight in order for us to accept the idea that they had already made it here? Or anywhere? Granted, there is a lot more information available to us today about the existence of UFOs/ETs than there was in 1950, and it's easy to look back and be critical of Fermi, who didn't have access to it. But the famous physicist did have the capacity to question and use his imagination to focus on what was then an important and new phenomenon that had invaded the mass consciousness. So why couldn't he have taken it a step or two further? Was he so myopic in his role as a physicist that he could only acknowledge the physical world through the tools and ideas that he and his colleagues invented to that point in time?

© Unknown
Think the ants know that they are in an ant farm?
Consider ants and cows for a moment (yes, ants and cows). Both species are familiar to us and we know quite a lot about them. But even though they are sentient, what can we say about their 'states of awareness'? The ant's prerogative is to help build the colony, gather food, and protect its queen and her young. Similarly, the cow seems to exist mostly to feed, rest, reproduce, and moo. The point is this: Ants and cows are, by their very nature, limited in their awareness of us. We have studied cows' digestive systems and know how they work. What do cows know about ours? But cows' and ants' limited awareness of humans doesn't change the fact that humans exist and carry on our activities all around these creatures in many instances, and that our 'state of awareness' seems to be far broader in scope and depth than the ants and cows. You might say that we humans, along with many of the creatures of the planet, live in a somewhat shared - yet profoundly different - reality.

Taking this a step further; why block out the possibility of an 'extraterrestrial reality' that is analogous to the above as far as 'states of awareness' go? In other words, what if human awareness, as compared to animal awareness, is similar in many ways to ETs' level of awareness as compared to humans'; where our relative realities sometimes interpenetrate - but are, for most of the time, separated by what we choose to, or are able to, be aware of. One may even imagine that ants and cows may respond to humans, in their own way of course, as though we were aliens. And, in a way, we are.

Further on in his article, Franks states that the "Fermi's paradox" is now a staple of astrobiological/SETI thinking and that within it lies a terrible possibility that haunts the fate of humanity: we are all alone in the universe! But the real terrible possibility here is that it is "Fermi's Paradox" itself and its adoption by the scientific community and SETI (Search for Extraterrestrial Intelligence) that has closed down the minds of scientists towards data that would immediately render Fermi and his paradox obsolete.

The problem with SETI

© SETI@home
SETI@home screensaver. Ain't it cool?
As a sub-sect of the materialistic scientific priesthood, SETI relies heavily upon both technology and assumptions. First, the technology.

SETI and SETI-inspired groups attempt to use all manner of technologies to try to send signals and identify incoming messages from the ETs. Among the wizardry in use we find electromagnetic radiation, radio signals, microwaves, telescope arrays, laser technology, gamma-ray bursts and techno-signaturing. But my personal favorite of these has to be SETI@home. Basically, you can set up your own PC in a distributed computing project that allows anyone to donate idle computer power to analyze radio signals for signs of ETs. Yes, you too can join the scientific priesthood -- and you don't even need a degree! The implication, it seems, is that with all our wondrous new-fangled technology we simply must be able to find signs of ET. Why? Because it's great stuff, we're great for having it, and look how cool we are!

If this assessment seems a little, well, pessimistic, then consider the sentiments of nuclear physicist and UFO researcher Stanton Friedman and his challenge to debate SETI representatives. It's a doozie of informed thinking on the subject. The crux of Friedman's argument is the obvious arrogance and presumptuousness of SETI Specialists, or as Friedman likes to refer to them, 'SS'. Just one of the several aspects of SETI's approach with which Friedman takes issue is their studious ignorance of official large-scale studies that conflict with what they want to believe.

Friedman points out that there are 13 anti-UFO books and dozens of pro-SETI books that don't even mention the largest USAF scientific study conducted by engineers and scientists at the Battelle Memorial Institute in Columbus, Ohio. They found that 21.5% of the 3,201 cases investigated were UNKNOWNS, completely separate from those cases deemed to provide "Insufficient Information." They found that the better the reliability of the reports, the more likely to be unidentifiable. Statistical cross comparisons between the UNKNOWNS and the KNOWNS showed that the probability that the former were just missed KNOWNS was less than 1% for six different characteristics.

© Unknown
The State of Denial: a pretty big land with tight border control.
Friedman specifies some basis rules that appear to inform SETI researchers:

1. Don't bother me with the facts, my mind is made up.

2. What the public doesn't know, I won't tell them.

3. If one can't attack the data, attack the people; it is much easier.

4. Do one's research by proclamation. Investigation is too much trouble and nobody will know the difference anyway.

The SS also makes the mistake of presuming that ET has any interest at all in responding to SETI's search. What if they don't? And if they don't, why not? I mean, is there something wrong with us?? Now that's a question that should haunt us all!

In his article, Frank attempts to point out the logic of Fermi's paradox by explaining that you don't need faster-than-light travel, a warp drive or other exotic technology to take it (the paradox) seriously. Even if ET only had human technology, like a souped-up John Deer tractor, we might still expect all the stars (and the planets) to be "colonized", assuming they left early enough.

For example, at one-hundredth of the speed of light, a high-tech alien ship would cross the typical distance between stars in a few centuries to a millennium. If, once they got to a new solar system, they began using its resources to build more ships, then we can imagine how a wave of colonization begins propagating across the galaxy.

But how long does it take this colonization wave to spread?

Weapons of mass assumption

Let us say, hypothetically speaking, that we can answer this by looking at current events here. What if the "colonization" of the Planet Earth by 'negative' ETs (if such a thing is in the works) is a little bit like the U.S. government's planned and stage managed coup d'etat in Ukraine last year - in order that the U.S. may better position itself to destabilize and, ultimately, make Russia its vassal state. I admit it's not a perfect analogy (and you really have to be informed on what's happening now in Ukraine to get this) but follow me a moment if you will.

The U.S. didn't just go into Ukraine, guns and drones blazing, and say "here we are and now we're boss!". No, the U.S. funded think tanks, activists, snipers, cookies even. U.S. military and political institutions literally spent decades figuring out how they could take control of Russia's vast resources and put it under the thumb of the U.S.'s failing economic system. But it could not afford to be too obvious about it. Rather, the home of freedom and democracy needed a strategy that was slow and steady until it could ultimately convince enough people that the change in government in Ukraine was autonomous and the "will of the people".

Does it need to look like this before humanity raises its awareness?
To understand the dynamic described above, it would help greatly to understand the mechanisms and motivations of "color revolutions," a history of U.S. "intervention" in other countries, and the role of the psychopathic mindset, among other things. The extent to which many in the West do not see the reality of the situation is the extent to which they are blind-sided by media and U.S. government lies, and their belief in the lies of authorities. Are you getting the picture? "Colonization" need not occur overtly but quite often occurs by stealth and mass ignorance of how things really work when such large projects are undertaken. Just because we've been told differently by the voices of education, the media, government spokespeople and "conventional wisdom", just doesn't mean that it is true.

So, is there any similar information that would suggest a covert "alien presence" here on Earth? Yes, I think there is. But, like anything else, one has to want to know and begin by accepting that the extent of the lies we've been told, and that are constantly repeated, are very large indeed.

Getting back to Frank's article on Fermi; he states that it would only take a fraction of our galaxy's lifetime before all the stars are inhabited by the alien race, a mere 10 million years, a blink of the eye in astronomical terms. Throw in the possibility/likelihood of cryogenic suspension or mobile worlds where occupants live out entire lives during the millennia-long crossing, and those aliens really should be here already.

Yes, the aliens should be here already, but what Frank can't seem to get his head around is the evidence that they are! Then again, can we blame him for wanting to stay ignorant of this fact? After all, it's far easier to muse about the existential implications of the evidence against an alien presence than to impartially face the evidence for it. Adepts of the religion of mainstream science would have to reconsider literally everything they think they know about the nature of reality itself. No easy task! And yet given the magnitude and importance of the implications, isn't the effort warranted?

Frank does deal, in passing, with other explanations for the lack of ETs around here by admitting that maybe the aliens don't want to colonize other worlds or maybe none of the technologies for the necessary trip really work, but he doesn't seem too enamored with these suggestions. In fact, he, and the scientific community that he represents, seem to insist that probability suggests that high-tech aliens must really exist, but since they haven't walked down Times Square, they must really not. Newsflash: If something logically should happen, but doesn't, it doesn't mean it hasn't; it isn't a 'paradox', it means you're too arrogant or stupid to figure it out.

A much more rational approach for open-minded humans interested in the UFO topic is to read any number of well-researched books that do not attempt to solve the alien problem from a perspective of willful ignorance, and connect the dots for ourselves. (I've included a list of excellent starting points at the end of this article).

Here's a fancy word for you: Anthropocentrism. It's basically the idea that human beings are at the center of all things on the planet and in the Universe. Think of it as arrogance and narcissism on a scale only human beings living under the rule of psychopaths could achieve. Some examples: in Christianity anthropocentrism exists as the human attitude of dominion over animals or 'lesser' life forms. Any sign of disrespect/abuse towards animals for instance, may be seen as a reflection of anthropocentric thinking; just because we can do whatever we like to do to animals means it's ok to. It's as though Christianity and other organized religions are saying that you, and whatever limited understanding of God you have, is all that matters. The 'human-cosmic connection' or one's relationship to ALL things - including beings of other worlds - is rarely, if ever, considered.


U.S.-installed Ukranian PM Arseniy "Russians are sub-human" Yatsenyuk
On another level, whenever one race or nation considers another race or nation to be "sub-human," or ascribes an "exceptional status" to itself - "American exceptionalism" for example - it implies that it is 'above the law' and can do whatever it wants without regard, deference to, or consideration of, higher values or the values of the 'other'.

As above, so below. Anthropocentrism not only implies a dehumanization of others here on our planet, it also points to the dismissal of the possibility of beings from other 'places'. From this very narrow point of view, that we're it - and that's it, and that is all that matters, we reduce our 'state of awareness' to the cosmic equivalent of a spoiled child. Even worse, when we don't acknowledge our true and objective position in the 'grand scheme of things', we become vulnerable and subject to the type of 'thinking' that permits some of the nations of our planet to dominate, if not outright destroy, others.

Frank ends his article with a third option for why we haven't yet met any 'space brothers': other species, he says, may have reached our technological 'prowess' but no further due to some 'great filter', in our case war or environmental collapse, that keeps everyone, everywhere from reaching beyond our stage of technological development. If that's true, he morosely muses, like all those who have come before us, we too are doomed.

Where are we?

Yet all of this is so much baseless theorizing while completely ignoring the evidence for an alien presence in our reality. While it may be interesting to wonder how many other species in the Universe have been limited by something like a common "great filter," a more constructive question may be: what is it about us as a species that refuses to objectively investigate the alien question? Are those who attempt to explain reality from a much larger and less dogmatic framework still subject to a scientific inquisition? The persecution of non-materialist scientists like Rupert Sheldrake (who don't even address ETs) suggests the answer to be an emphatic 'yes!'.

© Mr. Fish
Further, we may do well to consider how things like war and environmental collapse - rather than keeping others from reaching us - may actually be factors (in addition to others mentioned here) that could facilitate "colonization" due to the chaos involved. We know that a great many crimes are committed under the cover of war and environmental disaster. There is mass human trafficking and rape, ease of drug distribution, wholesale theft and elimination of reporters and those who resist, to name a few crimes that are facilitated by environmental and social chaos. War-torn areas become a literal playground for psychopaths of all stripes and levels of power. That we, on this planet, are experiencing such events - and on the precipice of much more, does not bode well if you consider that ETs may be more like the psychopathic elites of our world than we'd care to think! A very scary proposition, I know, but one worth considering after equipping yourself with the hard facts.

So rather than Fermi's phony paradox question of "where is everyone?", a more constructive question at this juncture may be - where are we? The willful ignorance of billions of human beings here on Earth, and their acquiescence in the face of mass death and destruction is a serious problem for us all - it has always been so - and it may be directly linked to the nature and intentions of our "space brothers", who appear to have been interfering with life on this planet for a very long time. As we have said many times before on 'who needs aliens when you have psychopaths?'

Suggested reading

Roughly in order of 'beginner' to 'advanced':

UFOs and the National Security State - Richard Dolan
Gods of Eden - William Bramley
Operation Trojan Horse - John Keel
The Eighth Tower - John Keel
Into the Fringe - Karla Turner
Taken - Karla Turner
The Threat - Dr. David Jacobs
The Stargate Conspiracy - Picknet and Prince
High Strangeness - Laura Knight-Jadczyk