Disclosure Project by Steven M. Greer: Reliability?

  • Thread starter Thread starter eyesoftruth
  • Start date Start date
  • Tags Tags
    Project
Click For Summary
The discussion revolves around the credibility of Dr. Steven M. Greer and his Disclosure Project, which claims to present testimonies from high-ranking military and government officials regarding UFOs and extraterrestrial encounters. Participants express contrasting views on Greer's reliability, with some defending him based on the number of witnesses willing to testify, while others label him a "crackpot" due to perceived lack of substantial evidence and claims of sensationalism. Critics argue that the testimonies provided are vague and lack concrete evidence, questioning the motivations behind the witnesses' statements. Supporters counter that the sheer volume of credible witnesses suggests there is merit to Greer's claims, despite the absence of definitive proof. The debate highlights a broader skepticism towards both the claims of UFO sightings and the methods used to investigate them, with some participants advocating for a more thorough examination of the evidence before dismissing it outright. Overall, the conversation reflects a tension between belief in potential government cover-ups and the demand for rigorous scientific validation of extraordinary claims.
  • #31
greer is claiming that these ets travel faster than light. that is some sort of substantial claim.

if a society is millions of years ahead of us, most anything is possible.

if we look back a million years, everything we do today would seem impossible to those people.

so i keep an open mind about greer and ets.

it seems to me that if these substantial claims are true, that something truly concrete will surface in my lifetime.
 
Physics news on Phys.org
  • #32
Physics-Learner said:
greer is claiming that these ets travel faster than light. that is some sort of substantial claim.

Agreed. To date there is no evidence that anything travels faster than light much less something with mass.

Physics-Learner said:
if a society is millions of years ahead of us, most anything is possible.

The simple passage of time does not actually make more things possible. It gives time for technology to be developed which could accomplish things within the same rules that define what is possible even before that time passed.

That is the difference between "impossible in principle" and "impossible in practice."

The following is impossible in principle: go faster than light
The following is impossible in practice: accelerate to a speed very close to that of light

Physics-Learner said:
if we look back a million years, everything we do today would seem impossible to those people.

Argument from incredulity.

Physics-Learner said:
so i keep an open mind about greer and ets.

it seems to me that if these substantial claims are true, that something truly concrete will surface in my lifetime.

Good to keep an open mind, of course. However, there is no guarantee that evidence will surface in your lifetime. I wish there was a more obvious way to say that.

Your life is not so cosmically important that the universe has a deadline before which is must reveal it's secrets to you. I fully expect to die with so many mysteries unsolved.
 
  • #33
Physics-Learner said:
greer is claiming that these ets travel faster than light. that is some sort of substantial claim.

if a society is millions of years ahead of us, most anything is possible.

if we look back a million years, everything we do today would seem impossible to those people.

so i keep an open mind about greer and ets.

it seems to me that if these substantial claims are true, that something truly concrete will surface in my lifetime.

This is all well and good, by all means be open minded. However, this is a physics forum and the rules are clear regarding personal theories and claims of this nature.
 
  • #34
jarednjames said:
This is all well and good, by all means be open minded. However, this is a physics forum and the rules are clear regarding personal theories and claims of this nature.

Oh, knock it off Iva--... oh... it's you.
 
  • #35
FlexGunship said:
Oh, knock it off Iva--... oh... it's you.

:biggrin:

I consider myself open minded and love seeing discussions on these sort of things, but this whole thread is nothing but a request / denial process which negates the fact evidence is required.

I've just read through the some of the PMM threads and am currently rather miffed at the ignorance people show to basic principles. I think I'm bringing my negativity here.

You said it yourself, going faster than the speed of light is, as far as we know, impossible. To ignore this fact and simply imagine something can (as nice a thought as that is) doesn't make it a valuable source of info and any discussion that follows is pointless.

EDIT: Just noticed the dates on the OP. Thought it was all on the same convo then.
 
  • #36
the passage of time does not make something impossible, become possible.

but we are saying something is impossible, according to what we refer to as established principles. in theory, we can't say something is impossible, to begin with.

it is not an argument about credulity. it is an argument about realities. and some mathematics to go along with it. go back a million years, and look at what was thought to be impossible. then another million years, another million years, etc.

then start going forward a million years, etc. we would have to be a bit arrogant to think that our million year span is the span in which everything we think is impossible remains impossible in the umpteen spans ahead of us.

my life is not cosmically important in the slightest little bit. i know i will die with mysteries unsolved. my statement had to do with the sorts of claims being made, and the number of these claims being made.

it seems to me that something imminent is bubbling at the top of the teacup, just waiting to fall out.
 
  • #37
PL let's look at it another way:

1000 years ago, the physics for computers were as possible then as they are now. We just didn't know how.

1000 years ago, the physics for ftl travel was impossible, now the physics for ftl travel remain impossible, in the future, who knows, but it isn't looking good given what physics currently show. But hey, it may all change, but that doesn't change the physics they need to overcome.
 
  • #38
Physics-Learner said:
it seems to me that something imminent is bubbling at the top of the teacup, just waiting to fall out.

It seemed that way in the 60s, the 70s, the 80s, the 90s, the 00s, and, well.. .the trend continues! In the 20s it will seem the same way.

Welcome to the UFO phenomenon. We're always just about to get big news! Always just about to see proof!

I welcome it, but I remain skeptical.
 
  • #39
hi jared,

i agree completely.

i am simply saying that we can't know if something is impossible.

one thing i have noticed as i have grown older, is that i need to temper what i think is impossible. i thought that all this ufo stuff was a bunch of people wanting attention.

and any ufo researcher will admit that most submitted stuff is purely a hoax.

i simply just can't dismiss hundreds of high level people all coming forward with these sorts of claims as a bunch of hooey, just because it doesn't jive with my thought processes.

as i have matured, i realize that none of my thought processes are absolute. and i need to take in a claim, and measure how substantial it seems to be, and then possibly adjust my thought processes.

sorta like our standard practice of theory, testing, and then re-theorizing, if necessary.

i simply am not nearly as confident that this et stuff is a bunch of hooey, as i had previously thought.

when i saw this thread, i was curious as to what you guys thought. i know it is not about physics. but i was thinking that something in the pf lounge was not relegated to strict physics principles ?
 
  • #40
hi flex,

i can't say that i have given much credence to ufos, so i don't know the history like you probably do.

but all these top level people coming forward is not something that has ever happened before. i have tried to come up with an agenda as to why this might happen, and haven't been able to do so.

when it comes to society, i always suspect an agenda - i am certainly not one of these people who tend to believe in the supernatural, and all that stuff.

and i am still on the fence with regard to greer and ets.

the speed of light plays a big part of me being on the fence.

i would not be the least surprised to find out that there are millions of life forms in the galaxy. but the speed of light is too slow for anyone to get here and back, so to speak.

so i really gave it no credence that ets were ever here.
 
  • #41
hi flex,

i can't say that i have given much credence to ufos, so i don't know the history like you probably do.

but all these top level people coming forward is not something that has ever happened before. i have tried to come up with an agenda as to why this might happen, and haven't been able to do so.

when it comes to society, i always suspect an agenda - i am certainly not one of these people who tend to believe in the supernatural, and all that stuff.

and i am still on the fence with regard to greer and ets.

the speed of light plays a big part of me being on the fence.

i would not be the least surprised to find out that there are millions of life forms in the galaxy. but the speed of light is too slow for anyone to get here and back, so to speak.

so i really gave it no credence that ets were ever here.
 
  • #42
Please remember what a UFO is, an Unidentified Flying Object. Nothing alien there. Nothing about FTL travel.

Just because a 'high level' person comes forward as seeing something, doesn't make it anything other than that.
 
  • #43
hi jared,

if it was a few people, that is one thing. but we are talking about a few hundred. some of the people are claiming to be involved with the capture of spacecraft and the bringing in of actual aliens. not just roswell.

if there are truly ets, then it begs the question of how were they able to get here ?

i do agree that none of these high level people are claiming that the objects moved faster than light. we would have no way of measuring that, if it were happening, as far as i know.

but it is something that greer is saying.

to have true interstellar travel, either one needs to travel faster than light, or have access to some sort of dimension unknown to us, which changes what we typically think of as space, such that they could get from a to b without going the same distance that we would measure the distance from a to b, to be. no pun intended.
 
  • #44
Physics-Learner said:
when i saw this thread, i was curious as to what you guys thought. i know it is not about physics. but i was thinking that something in the pf lounge was not relegated to strict physics principles ?

I know you were talking to Jared, but I want to take a whack here.

There is a core issue here of reliability. What has been shown repeatedly is that human beings are among the worst observation tools. Optical illusions, hallucinations, cognitive biases, and everything else gets in our way.

So if an observation conflicts with carefully tested and repeatable data, it's best to discard the observation until there's more to investigate.
 
  • #45
Generation ship would be the most likely for interstellar travel (physically possible) as far as I'm concerned, but even that doesn't answer the supply issue.

So to say "either one needs to travel faster than light, or have access to some sort of dimension unknown to us" is utter rubbish. You might as well claim they have some sort of stasis system for long haul space flight.
 
  • #46
FlexGunship said:
There is a core issue here of reliability. What has been shown repeatedly is that human beings are among the worst observation tools. Optical illusions, hallucinations, cognitive biases, and everything else gets in our way.

So if an observation conflicts with carefully tested and repeatable data, it's best to discard the observation until there's more to investigate.

I was actually going to bring this very point up, regarding humans and optical illusions and inconsistent memory.
 
  • #47
Physics-Learner said:
but all these top level people coming forward is not something that has ever happened before. i have tried to come up with an agenda as to why this might happen, and haven't been able to do so.

It happens routinely. Look through history. Ever since the "official" beginning with Project Grudge, there have been plenty of government, military, and corporate officials that have gone on the record claiming they know someone who knows someone who swears they say something that they thought looked like the same thing a friend of a friend saw. Or that they got a report of a disc flying around a thing. Or two discs turned into one, or one had a light, or four lights, and it turned red. Or whatever...

Here's a list of what a UFO is:

 
Last edited by a moderator:
  • #48
FlexGunship said:
It happens routinely. Look through history. Ever since the "official" beginning with Project Grudge, there have been plenty of government, military, and corporate officials that have gone on the record claiming they know someone who knows someone who swears they say something that they thought looked like the same thing a friend of a friend saw. Or that they got a report of a disc flying around a thing. Or two discs turned into one, or one had a light, or four lights, and it turned red. Or whatever...

The official beginning was project Sign. Project Grudge began in response to project Sign.

Please show a specific example of a group of former officials publically going on the record.

It is also a misrepresentation to suggest these reports are all based on hearsay. Many people claim direct observations.
 
  • #49
Ivan Seeking said:
Please show a specific example of a group of former officials publically going on the record.

The original report of Project Sign favored the ET hypothesis.
(http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Project_Sign)

J. Allen Hynek was a government employee for a while.
(http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/J._Allen_Hynek)

There's also the Rendlesham Forest incident.
(http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Rendlesham_Forest_incident)
(Lt. Col. Halt's memo to the UK MoD)

In all cases, one or more government (or ex-government) official has claimed to be witness (first-hand or second-hand) to UFOs.
 
  • #50
it is not rubbish. i am talking about going back and forth, like you and i do when we take a trip.

i certainly know that we have optical illusions. i put no credence to these videos that show dots of lights in the sky.

perhaps you arent aware of what these claims are ?

they may be lies, but they are not optical illusions.

when you look up, and see a spaceship shining light down at your feet, that is not an optical illusion. this is why it has gotten the interest of a previous skeptical person.

a crashed spacecraft with aliens inside is not an optical illusion.

i am still skeptical, but not so sure any more.
 
  • #51
Physics-Learner said:
they may be lies, but they are not optical illusions.

when you look up, and see a spaceship shining light down at your feet, that is not an optical illusion. this is why it has gotten the interest of a previous skeptical person.

a crashed spacecraft with aliens inside is not an optical illusion.

There aren't any of those cases that I know of. There are claims; but a claim without evidence is like spaghetti and meatballs without the spaghetti and meatballs.

They are usually built upon speculation, or misunderstanding. In almost any case illusion, delusion, hallucination, or hoax are your best explanatory tools.

EDIT: Here is a link to a site that covers one specific topic: Venus. It lists several cases in which people has mistaken the planet for an alien spaceship... in one story a police officer reported that it was flying away from him and he made some humorous estimates as to its altitude. (http://home.comcast.net/~tprinty/UFO/Venusufo.htm )

Take it seriously. These reports come from members of the SAME SPECIES that is providing "reliable" reports.
 
Last edited by a moderator:
  • #52
i totally disregard illusion, delusion or hallucination.

we are talking about many such claims. as i said, hundreds of high level people coming forward, all with substantial claims.

if it is a hoax, (which is the same thing as having an agenda), i come back to what in the world could it be for ?
 
  • #53
Physics-Learner said:
i totally disregard illusion, delusion or hallucination.

images-2.jpe


Physics-Learner said:
we are talking about many such claims. as i said, hundreds of high level people coming forward, all with substantial claims.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Miracle_of_the_Sun

Which is more likely? That the entire solar system was torn asunder and the Earth collided with the sun and that only people in Portugal knew about it. Or that 100,000 people were wrong about the same thing?

100,000 people.

100,000 people swore the sun fell to the Earth.

Surely they can't all be lying!
 
  • #54
Physics-Learner,

If humans were good observers, we wouldn't need science. We come from a species that has believed in demons, ghosts, devils, and spirits. Only with the advent of science have we pulled ourselves out of the dark closet of superstition and ignorance. The problem is that when we disregard it, abandon it, and begin to accept unscientific propositions based on unscientific evidence we are thrust back into the darkened closet of superstition and ignorance.

So your plea for ignorance, your cry to disregard science and accept "eye witness accounts" in it's stead is falling on deaf ears.

The only candle we have to cast light on the mysteries of the universe is science. To snuff it out is intellectual high treason and to convince others to do the same is moral high treason.
 
  • #55
Physics-Learner said:
it is not rubbish.

You said:
to have true interstellar travel, either one needs to travel faster than light, or have access to some sort of dimension unknown to us,

What I proposed would give interstellar travel. Making your claim that you need one of the two above options rubbish.
I don't understand your whole "true interstellar travel" thing, if you travel at / near the speed of light you get time dilation which means you would only experience a few years but the universe would experience many if not hundreds or thousands. So no matter how you play it, the actual journey time is immense. Whether you experience the lengthy journey time or not, the rest of the universe still does so your whole "true interstellar travel" point is irrellevant.
a crashed spacecraft with aliens inside is not an optical illusion.

Proof such a vehicle exists please.
 
  • #56
i am not disregarding science. these people have claims that are substantial. they are not illusions.

i am on the fence. but i am not dismissing these claims. i do want proof.
 
  • #57
Physics-Learner said:
i am not disregarding science. these people have claims that are substantial. they are not illusions.

i am on the fence. but i am not dismissing these claims. i do want proof.

Could you at least admit to the possibility that they are seeing substantial illusions?

Look, you're going to have to actually tell a story or something. Put up a claim. Post a link. You're philosophizing on a topic which is clearly in the realm of science. These are not philosophical discussions. Either some UFOs are aliens visiting the Earth or they are not.

So far, not a single shred of evidence has indicated in the slightest degree that any UFO has been an alien spaceship. There is zero evidence. None. Nothing. Not a single iota of it. You seem to think there is. So let's see it!

I'm waiting for you to overturn the current scientific understanding of the universe. Hit us with it! YEAH!
 
  • #58
jared,

what i meant by true interstellar travel, is as i restated - going back and forth. not simply launching a spaceship that travels for millions of years before it reaches its destination. so once again, my statement was not rubbish. if you go back and forth between destinations thousands or millions of light years apart, you are doing as i described.

of course i want proof that this spaceship exists. this is what the whole disclosure project is about. the real wealth of the world is supposed to have the power such that they have control of the info, and the project is trying to get this info to be made public.

which is why i say i am on the fence. i would not be on the fence if we had true and definitive proof of said spacecraft .
 
  • #59
Physics-Learner said:
i am not disregarding science. these people have claims that are substantial. they are not illusions.

Proof they aren't illusions?

You contradict yourself. Saying they definitely aren't illusions and then asking for proof.

You have drawn a conclusion and then asked / look for the evidence to back it up. That is how religion works, not science.
 
  • #60
Physics-Learner said:
what i meant by true interstellar travel, is as i restated - going back and forth. not simply launching a spaceship that travels for millions of years before it reaches its destination. so once again, my statement was not rubbish.

S: (adj) interstellar (between or among stars) "the density of hydrogen in interplanetary and interstellar space" (http://wordnetweb.princeton.edu/perl/webwn?s=interstellar)

S: (n) change of location, travel (a movement through space that changes the location of something) (http://wordnetweb.princeton.edu/per...WordNet&o2=&o0=1&o7=&o5=&o1=1&o6=&o4=&o3=&h=0)

You're using the "no true Scotsman fallacy" and you're doing it all wrong!

Your claim is rubbish. But if we accept it. Then all you've proven is that interstellar travel is impossible. Sadly, this is probably more true than we would like it to be.
 

Similar threads

How reliable is an Expert Witness?
  • · Replies 56 ·
2
Replies
56
Views
10K
The Disclosure Project: Military & Gov't Witnesses Reveal UFO Secrets
  • · Replies 3 ·
Replies
3
Views
4K