In Defense of AARO

A Defense of AARO

I’m stepping into controversial territory here, but it’s time to argue that AARO operates with integrity.

In recent years, we’ve witnessed relentless attacks on institutions in the U.S. from the Trump administration, openly rejecting genuine scientific progress.

Consider the defunding of government Alzheimer’s research, the NIH layoffs jeopardizing years of important cancer studies, the threats to Social Security and Medicaid, and the alarming resurgence of measles outbreaks. The administration’s efforts to foster public distrust are clearly motivated by a political agenda aimed at dismantling federal structures, with science denial at its core.

This brings us to AARO. Formed to investigate serious issues, the community has often found their findings unfulfilling because they assert there’s nothing substantial to uncover.

When I read that article back in 2017 and learned about figures like Mellon, Elizondo, and Grusch, I was convinced that the UFO phenomenon had merit.

However, a closer look at their current activities reveals a troubling trend toward opportunism.

Grusch recently appeared at a conference at Esalen focused on psychedelics and alien summoning.

Barber runs a for-profit venture that feels more like an X-Files storyline than a legitimate scientific endeavor.

Nolan is right alongside them, validating many of their claims while engaging critics online.

And Elizondo? He’s out promoting his book.

We hear stories about orbs invading homes, UFO summoning rituals led by privileged participants on yoga mats, encounters with inter-dimensional werewolves, and even “dinobeavers.”

What are we actually doing here?

It’s disheartening to see that even those with genuine credentials seem to have bought into the hype, causing the scientific integrity that once surrounded this topic to dissipate rapidly.

From my vantage point, Kirkpatrick’s observations ring true. The situation is rife with circular reporting, pseudoscience, and opportunistic capitalism, all coalescing into a money-making venture that resembles a cult.

Occam’s razor tells us to seek the simplest explanation—and that’s exactly what we’re facing.

Let’s not forget: If their claims hold water, then there’s a hidden room out there containing intact craft and even bodies.

But where’s the evidence? If you think figures like Nancy Mace, Luna, and Moskowitz are going to reveal the truth to the public, let’s reconnect in three years; I’d wager that the evidence available will be as elusive as ever, simply wrapped in more fanciful narratives.

One thought on “In Defense of AARO

  1. Your post raises some compelling points about the current state of UFO disclosure and the integrity of those involved in AARO. It’s hard to ignore the broader context of mistrust in institutions and science, especially given the political climate you’ve described.

    Many members of the UFO community undoubtedly hoped that AARO would provide clarity and substance, but it seems that the outcomes have left a lot to be desired. While the desire for transparency is understandable, the way some of the figures you mentioned have chosen to engage with the public — through sensationalism or commercial ventures — does raise questions about their motivations and the integrity of the information they present.

    Kirkpatrick’s insistence on rigorous analysis is a refreshing contrast, but as you pointed out, the overwhelming noise from those seeking attention or profit can overshadow genuine inquiry. Occam’s razor is a valuable principle here, guiding us to consider the simplest explanation rather than getting lost in convoluted narratives.

    Ultimately, it seems that while AARO was established with good intentions, the environment around it, combined with the actions of certain individuals, has complicated its mission. Until tangible evidence emerges to substantiate claims of advanced technology or extraterrestrial life, skepticism may be the most prudent stance. Your call for accountability and evidence serves as an essential reminder that true integrity in any scientific endeavor requires more than just claims — it needs verifiable support.

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *