HOAGLAND AND DISCLOSURE

I heard my friend Richard Hoagland on Coast to Coast AM last night, and I heard a rather different take on what the meaning of the term "disclosure" is. In his understanding, it is a disclosure not so much of something in the future (ET contact, government coming clean, etc). In his thinking, it is as much a disclosure of a disguised past, a disguised human history, as it is about the future.

I have to admit, I find this idea intriguing and engaging from any number of vantage points, not the least of which is because I have written about such topics in many of my books (consider only The Cosmic War for example). I am also intrigued with this idea because it seems to play much less to the idea of "messianic expectations" of a deliverance from the future, a revelation from authorities or the Powers that Be, and much more to the idea of a cultural transformation, the growing belief that human history, especially ancient human history, is very different than standard academic models would have us believe.

This model is someting very different than authorities holding a press conference and saying "We're not alone." It would seem to be driven by research - whether sound or unsound - but even here, I am somewhat pessimistic. I doubt the academic models will surrender easily. If there is any transformation here, any "disclosure," it will happen, I think, when enough of the old school dies off, and the new replace them. But will even that make a difference? I doubt it, so long as the various mechanisms to maintain academic "orthodoxy" remain in place.

So...will there be any "disclosure"? I doubt it, at least not in the traditional sense. But will there be growing awareness of the problems with standard models of human history? Those models are already under assault, and most people here know why and how. THe academy will never surrender its models... so in the end, what will be disclosed is its vast irrelevance.