User Answers


August 26, 2007 By Joseph P. Farrell

Dr. Steven Greer(MD) of the Disclosure Project is at it again in the latest issue of Nexus magazine (Vol 14, No 5, Sept-Oct 2007), with his latest in the series "Understanding the Reasons Behind UFO Secrecy." This time I'm afraid I must rather firmly part company with Dr. Greer, and I hope - lack of sleep, and the problems of disorganized thoughts associated with unpacking after a move notwithstanding - to make my reasons for doing so more or less clear.
The central thesis of Greer's article is reached on p. 58 of the magazine: "Continued secrecy on the UFO subject must be related, then, to ongoing anxiety related to the essential power dynamics of the world and how such a disclosure would impact these. That is, the knowledge related to the UFO/ET phenomenon must have such great potential for changing the status quo that its continued suppression is deemed essential at all costs." Dr. Greer then pinpoints the technological and scientific basis for these concerns in the next paragraph: "Going back to the early 1950s, we have found that the basic technology and physics behind these ET spacecraft were discovered through very intensive reverse-engineering projects. It was precisely at this point that the decision was made (sic) to increase the secrecy to an unprecedented level."
And the reason for this concern over the technology and physics that the UFO-ET phenomenon generated? Simple: "The basic physics behind the energy generation and propulsion systems was such that these systems could easily replace all existing energy generation and propulsion systems on the Earth - and with them, the entire geopolitical and economic order."(p. 58, emphasis added) This is a reasonable argument, and indeed, is one I have made myself in my various books.
But it is precisely here that Dr. Greer's analysis begins to break down, I believe, for he then indicates why he believes the disclosure of such physics and technology would cause major geopolitical and economic upheaval: "The inescapable fact is this: the disclosure of the ET presence would bring with it the certain release of these technologies - and that release would sweep away the entire technological infrastructure of the entire planet. The changes would be immense - and sudden."(p. 58, emphasis added.) There are, to my mind, two fallacies here, one logical, and the other analytical.
As to the logical fallacy, there is no necessary logical reason why disclosure of "the ET presence" should logically entail the disclosure of ET's physics and technology. To be sure, such a disclosure of the former might entail the probable disclosure of the latter. But if this is the case, Dr. Greer has provided no sufficient rationalization for why it should be so. He has merely asserted his belief that it is so. It may, indeed, be a reasonable belief, but Dr. Greer has failed to argue the case why disclosure of the one would lead ineluctably to the revelation of the other. Indeed, a case could be made that with his putative secret group's iron grip on UFO secrecy and compartmentalization of its projects, its grip would most likely extend to the media of information dissemination, and thus a limited disclosure of the "ET presence" is theoretically possible without a disclosure of the implied technology and physics. In other words, his "ET Disclosure" Faith is showing the signs of serious internal contradictions.
But this brings us to the second fallacy, the analytical fallacy, and to what I believe is the more serious problem in his quasi-religious faith in "the ET presence": the assumption that the disclosure of "ET technology", or, for that matter, of any exotic energy technology, whether ET or not, would be necessarily sudden and therefore bound to cause massive geopolitical and economic instability. Here again, Dr. Greer has simply asserted a position without argumentation. To be sure, a case could be argued that disclosure of such technologies would be sudden, and from that position, a further case could be argued that such sudden disclosure would be geopolitically and economically deleterious. However, that is precisely the point: such cases would have to be argued, and this, quite simply, Dr. Greer has failed to do.
It does not logically or automatically follow that disclosure of the physics and technology of "ET" would be necessarily sudden, nor, even if it were, that it would necessarily negatively impact the world geopolitically or economically. After all, the introduction of the automobile, the telephone, the airplane, the computer, were all relatively "sudden", but it took some time before these technologies became available to a wide enough segment of the world's population to impact its geopolitics, cultural habits, and economies.
Dr. Greer makes this leap of logic evident in the almost utopian descriptions of what such disclosure, in his opinion, would do to the world's culture and economies; "These decentralized, nonpolluting technologies will change that permanently. Even the deserts will bloom..." (p. 59). And thus, the "ET Presence" and its associated technologies and physics position themselves in Dr. Greer's presentation like some latter-day Isaiah, promising peace, prosperity, and above all, local sovereignties on the newly blooming and once-arid deserts of globalism's apocalypse.
But again, it is bald assertion, or, as is now evident, fiath in a post-apocalyptic energy utopia, and not an argued case, that has led to this statement. It is a pronouncement of faith, an article in what increasingly looks like an "ET-Disclosure Creed." Consider, how does it necessarily follow that free-energy technologies will lead to decentralization? Or be non-polluting? If, as Dr Greer says, "one must consider what will happen when every village in India (or Africa of South America or China) has devices that can generate large amounts of power without pollution and without spending huge sums of energy on fuel", then one must also consider the implications that the possession of such energy sources on such a localized basis could lead to a condition where such villages would have the ability to weaponize such energy. This would be the equivalent of making each village a thermonuclear superpower, able to rain global destruction and complete annihilation on any of its enemies, anywhere in the world. And note too the fallacy implied both in Dr. Greer's statement of his position, and in my own response to it. Dr. Greer seems to imply that the disclosure of the ET presence and its associated technologies will lead almost immediately - recall his use of the word "sudden" above - to this state of affairs. It never crosses his mind, and therefore never gets set down in the hard and fast words of his article, that this state of affairs may arrive only after some decades or even centuries of progress in the basic physics and technological applications. Again, he has not argued his case, but merely asserted it. Indeed, on reflection, it would seem that Dr. Greer describes a state of affairs more or less at the end stage of a technological development, rather than at its beginning, when a new science and its associated technologies have been refined, developed, and widely dispersed throughout a society. The same, therefore, holds true of my response concerning weaponization.
Again, this is without argumentation. Would such technologies necessarily be cheap enough for villages in South Africa or India or China even to afford? We do not know, for Dr. Greer has not, in this article at least, argued his case.
And finally, let us grant, for the sake of that all-important missing argumentation, all of Dr. Greer's implied postulates, namely:
1) that ET exists ;
2) that ET is the source of UFOs and their implied exotic technologies and physics; and,
3) that this implied technology and physics would upset the geopolitical and economic status quo, a point on which Dr. Greer and I are not disagreed, though for very different reasons.
But from all this it does not necessarily or logically follow that the "hidden, secretive global cabal" that controls this technology does not wish to disclose it because it would be a cheap technology affordable by such third world villages. Indeed, it does not even logically follow that this elite could not contrive means and methods for maintaining more or less a monopolistic hold on it, and selling it to the world accordingly, as it has done with other technologies in the past.
If all these musings be true in whole or in part, then Dr. Greer's case for the "reasons" behind UFO secrecy, as elaborated - not argued - in this most recent missive, collapse. This means that there must be reasons that Dr Greer as yet has either not guessed at, or that he wishes to avoid admitting or mentioning, and, alas, in my opinion it is the latter. If one grant, for the sake of argument once again, that Dr. Greer's postulates, as generally summarized above, are true, then it follows inevitably as a product of the very same science and technology that a means would exist for controlling such physics and energy for destructive purposes. This energy potential, as I have repeatedly argued, explored, outlined, surveyed and documented in my books, has a weaponization potential that would make a hydrogen bomb look like a kitchen match. And if it be true that it would be CHEAP and easy to disseminate to Third World villages, then Greer's secretive UFO-technology-suppression cabal would have ample, reasonable, and moreover ethical reasons for maintaining their secrecy, for the release of that technologywould create a proliferation nightmare for the globalist-powers-that-be. Their own self-survival would be imperiled, as Dr. Greer so clearly avers, but not for the reasons - or rather - unargued assertions - that he advances.
And this brings us to his last two, and most implortant, implied hypotheses, hypotheses running implicitly throughout his Nexus magazine series: 1) ET exists; and 2) ET is peaceful and benign. As to the first of these, the fact remains that in no instance of an alleged technological description of an allegedly recovered piece of "ET" technology, is that technology sufficiently exotic enough to compel to the conclusion of its "ET" origins. Indeed, as I have tried to show in my books Reich of the Black Sun and SS Brotherhood of the Bell, the most extensive documented descriptions of allegedly ET devices are the dubious MAJIC-12 documents, which, when examined closely as to the nature of their internal evidence and descriptions of technology, fall far short of describing a physics sufficient to compel to the conclusion of their interstellar origins. Exotic they are, to be sure, but not exotic enough to be self-evidently "extra-terrestrial." As to the second implied postulate that "ET is peaceful and benign", it should be plainly obvious to anyone familiar with the UFOlogy field, that this is a conclusion hotly debated within those circles, and thus once again not self-evident nor compulsive to one or another conclusion.
No, with this most recent missive, I had more the impression of reading a sermon preached to the faithful ET believer, one lacking in argumentation, and even lacking in Dr. Greer's customary sharing of anecdotes from anonymous sources or highly placed individuals.
As such, it isn't even a good sermon.