HomeUncategorizedHistory Channel’s Unidentified

History Channel’s Unidentified

So I did not find the Unidentified program’s narrative that compelling at first because I think it paints a few clueless officials and their pop culture mascot as heroes in a movement that is in my opinion way over their heads or understanding. Or what little they know is classified, so they are pushing on aspects of the phenomenon that are more likely to be believed because of the nature of the events discussed, events which were witnessed by multiple expert people.  This naturally will get more broad publicity for the issue. This is all fine though it may deflect attention away from the ongoing disclosure coming from people willing to whistleblow, willing to disclose classified material that is far more “compelling” in the sense of making sense of the much vaster collection of related phenomenon. Of course just because a narrative fits doesn’t mean it is true. There are reasons to critique a story even if it explains more, especially if the storyteller has unknown or ulterior motives.  But ultimately the motives and biases behind all narratives and explanations of phenomenon are part of the phenomenon and all should be considered if possible, and within reason.

But I am liking the show more in the third and fourth episode as they talk to the local fisherman and visit that creepy island.  And I think the people involved have good intentions. But it seems so far to want us to believe that UFOs are ignored by military and intelligence elites because of fear of ridicule, and that these few people organized by a crazy former rockstar are the forefront of disclosure.  None of these people are discussing anything classified. It is just people more or less out of the loop that saw something. The inclusion of Hal Puthoff is interesting. He probably knows more than he can say as well as the skunkworks guy. Puthoff has hinted before that his declassified CIA psychic studies were abandoned because the real programs were already going on in Black projects that he would never dare discuss.  But I suspect, like many of the officials in the disclosure movement, they know enough to know there are people that know, yet the show seems to emphasize the ridiculous idea that all UFOs could be our “enemies”, either from this planet or not, and yet the military is just ignoring and has been ignoring these events for the past half century because they don’t want people to freak out or make fun of them. The inclusion of the Russiagate conspiracy narrative to explain Podesta’s email leaks was particularly annoying and indicative of the level of establishment b.s.

The Nimitz incident is convenient because it was probably alien and not military, and the military involved were not informed or debriefed.  This fits well with the narrative that Delonge has been promoting for his generals, that the UFOs are a threat and the government is good. Other officials behind Steven Greer having been pushing the opposite narrative: UFOs are spiritual saviors and the government and military are evil.  It’s part of what Grant Cameron calls “Managing Magic” in his book of the same name. In any case, the Nimitz incident isn’t that interesting in itself if you are familiar with the history. I do like that Christopher Mellon admitted on a FOX interview that these sightings by Navy pilots were a near daily occurrence.  In the fourth episode they are branching out, which is good. There are so many incidents often with many or even hundreds of witnesses (Phoenix lights).  

But since the Nimitz incident was intercepted by navy pilots and they didn’t even bother to debrief them with any binding of secrecy, the incident serves a good purpose for this narrative of cluelessness.  It has such a good marketing campaign that it is unusual and not altogether a bad thing in my opinion.  It is bringing this to the mainstream. But most UFOlogists have commented on how so many of the signs point to this being an attempt at manipulation of the UFOlogy community by a faction of elites with mysterious motives.  Podesta, Clinton and their Rockefeller connections have been on this tip for a while. I have had a similar opinion of Steven Greer, another Rockefeller associate who was being used before Delonge came along in this more organized popular campaign.  The whole field though is ridden with paranoia because there is no doubt different factions using different personalities to direct their own disclosure narrative, either to manipulate the public as an end in itself or perhaps to press other more “in the know” factions to release more of the truth.