The Cat🦁🐯😸 (Aaron Kesel)

"You're censoring the same areas on literally every video. Blurry videos aren't doing anything." ~Nolan 🛸 Disclosure: Any Reason to be Hopeful? 🛸 "I've watched the progression of [a UAP council member's] disbelief turn into, 'Huh, isn't this interesting!'" ~Nolan Highlights... UAP Council is not reporting to the White House. We were started by ODNI. The council has yet to receive any data. Dr. Phil sees videos before the council. does. Leaders of the three-letter agencies like the CIA and NSA are trying to help and that might not have been the case before Trump did all of this. But there ARE people within those agencies who are trying to stop it. ODNI: We're going through the process to get the permissions to do it. Patience. They're wiping all the metadata on the videos and Nolan has called them out. "You can take the metadata and clean it in a way that we could at least get a sense of the velocity, the intensity, etc." Representative Luna, Burlison, and Burchett have seen videos and received briefings. The UAP Council? Nope. "Are we just a decoration? Are you gonna frustrate us to the point where members start leaving?' Measurements vs. Anecdotes "I think the tide has turned, [but] it's not where we need it yet." ~~~Full Transcript and My Comments~ @g_knapp: "Can you give Robert [Bigelow] and I sort of...what kind of progress you're making, and what kind of blocks you're running into?" @GarryPNolan: "There's a distinction here that we need to make, is...the White House is in charge of the PURSUE project. The UAP Council is not reporting to the White House, nor were we started by the White House. We were started by ODNI. And we've been asked to make sure that that's clear. "We have no subpoena power, we can only ask questions. Whatever data they might give us, which they haven't so far - given us any data - which I'm not happy about. We don't even get the videos the before they're released. So, you know, Dr. Phil sees stuff before we do. "But, that said, ODNI is, first of all - and I've told the rest of the other people on the panel who are like, impatient. I mean, I'm impatient, too - that look, there's a process, and ODNI has said, 'Look, we're going through the process to get the permissions to do it.'" (I think we'd all be fine with the process being a little slow if we know we'd be getting some OMG videos relatively soon. But we don't know that, so we're impatient and worried that the good stuff will never make its way out. As always, I'm assuming the good stuff exists. We need to see just one white UFO (and crow) to turn that assumption into a fact. H/T: William James.) Nolan: "And believe it or not, the groups that you might have thought were problematic, you know - name your three-letter agency, NSA, CIA, whatever - the people who are in charge there are actually trying to help. So, that might not have been the case before Trump did all of this, right? Made the transparency. "You know, we thought of these three-letter agencies as adversarial, whereas, at the at the very least, they're, you know, saying the right things, and they seem to be trying. But, I think the consistent feedback is that even within their own agencies, there are people trying to stop it, right? But the people at the top are trying." (If the people at the top are being stopped from sharing their best UFO data, how can that be overcome? Can the people in the USG who are trying to stop it be replaced? And if it's a matter of the best stuff being in the hands of private contractors, will eminent domain (if the UAPDA somehow becomes law) overcome that problem?) Nolan: "So, to Jacques' point (that the UFO topic is now accepted), I think the tide has turned. It's not where we need it yet. I mean, scientists - again, back to the standard of proof discussion - scientists need data that we can replicate. I mean, I called them out, specifically, in one of our meetings. I said, 'You know, look at all these videos. You're blanking out the same areas, you're censoring the same areas on literally every video, so, we know there's data there. We know the reasons why you can't give us some of the information: methods and sources, etc. Or, it might give away the locale. But you can take the metadata and clean it in a way that we could at least get a sense of the velocity, the intensity, etc. Blurry videos aren't doing anything.' (I'd love to see how the people Nolan is saying that to are reacting. What is their reasoning for redacting everything?) Nolan: "And when we hear from the likes of Representative Luna and/or Burlison, and/or Burchett, where they say that they have seen videos and briefings, we're like, 'Well, we're the science council, why can't we see these briefings?' I mean, are we just a decoration? And are you expecting us to write a Blue Book out of this? I mean, are you gonna frustrate us to the point where members start leaving?' "I don't know. I mean, I'm not gonna leave, but, you know, I feel the frustration of the community. But there's an interesting thing, though, that's out there, You know, you read on Twitter or whatever, people saying, 'Well, why do we need this council? Because we already know they've got something. Why don't they just release it?' "Well, you know, yeah, but again, back to the standard of evidence, they could release information, but unless, you know, some people won't be satisfied until they shake the hand of an alien, or they see a UFO land on the White House lawn. But a scientist will be convinced by data collected by, you know, instruments that can be validated, and then can be passed on. "So, at some point, even if they do land on the White House lawn, you're gonna need a science council anyway to help you validate, 'Well, okay, how did they do that? Where's the propulsion system, etc?' So having this council pre-set up already, basically, might foreshorten the moment when, let's say, catastrophic disclosure, in Karl Nell's terms, or processed disclosure...you're not running around trying to assemble a group of newbies. "What's been nice on the council, frankly, is a lot of people that were brought on weren't, necessarily, ufologists. I mean, there were people who were brought on who were just, 'Oh, this is interesting. Let me do it.' And I've watched the progression of their disbelief turn into, 'Huh, isn't this interesting!' "So, you know, it came back to that literal day when, as it turned out, it was Kit Green and Colm (Kelleher) who showed up in my office, pretty much unannounced, to show me what ended up being mostly Havana syndrome patients. They showed me the data. They didn't come in and just tell me stories, they had data ready to show me." (I think that's the first time he's named Green and Kelleher, although most of us had figured it out.) Nolan: "If I can convince another scientist that the data is real and has been collected in the right way, it's not up to me then to explain it. It's up to anybody who might be interested to look at it. But, at least what we do with the base data is we've all agreed the base data is true. Now we just need to have a hypothesis to explain it, some sort of story around it. And then, you know, in the scientific terms, you need to validate it and repeat it if you can. "It's interesting. If you kind of run the numbers, you only need four or five simultaneous measurements of a single anomalous thing that are clearly separate to form a, let's call it a Bayesian prior, that the thing is 95% likely to be true. But you need hundreds of anecdotes, all seeing the same thing, because anecdotes are processed through [hallucination]-prone brain. You know, we all know the stories of, you know, five people watch an accident and everybody says that the car was a different color. "So, you know, the numbers might be the reveal, you know? I mean, the White House might come out and say something, and people will say, 'Okay, well, Daddy government says it's okay, so now I can believe.' But then probably, you know, they'll still be the debunkers who say, 'Oh, they're just using it to distract us from X, Y, or Z.'" (If Trump is using UFOs as a distraction, he's doing a poor job of it.)