Response to the Review of “Age of Disclosure” in Variety
Variety Review Link
While the author raises a valid point about the prevalence of cameras in today’s world—an observation that remains pertinent despite varying interpretations—the rest of the piece leans towards a “I won’t believe it until I see it” stance, accompanied by attempts to rationalize this skepticism.
…the real truth is that each era responds to the extraterrestrial “evidence” that’s tailor-made for it.
It’s unclear what this really means, but it seems to suggest that people are most influenced by aspects of popular culture that resonate with them. I can agree with that, but why is it labeled a “real truth,” and how does this apply to the film? Is he implying we should doubt these government officials because their claims resemble something out of the X-Files? Are abductee stories merely the result of exposure to narratives like Close Encounters of the Third Kind?
But then my skepticism kicked in. It has to do with two highly earthbound phenomena. The first is the power of suggestion — the way that stories get repeated, and exaggerated, and embellished, and confirmed.
That is true, but how does this relate to the film? Some officials claim first-hand knowledge. Is he insinuating they either lack this knowledge or are merely embellishing the “non-human” aspect?
I commend anyone examining this topic through a critical lens. There are indeed many inconsistencies and complexities. However, I encourage the author to redirect his skepticism towards a different inquiry. It’s entirely reasonable to not believe in non-human intelligence until solid evidence emerges. In the meantime, let’s consider this critical question:
They are 34 senior members of the U.S. government, military, and intelligence communities, all claiming to have “direct knowledge” of UAPs. These are credible individuals, primarily composed of serious-looking white men. So they must be correct, right? They assert their claims with unwavering certainty.
WHY ARE THESE INDIVIDUALS SPREADING THEIR MESSAGES WITH SUCH CONFIDENCE?
Do we have doubts about their qualifications, their honesty, or their intentions? It must be one or more of these factors because otherwise, it’s hard to believe they would make such potentially self-damaging assertions unless they are indeed true.
“Age of Disclosure” challenges us to confront and explore these questions. Instead of making sarcastic remarks about “UAPs,” offering vague, unsupported thoughts on the link between popular culture and “the truth,” and adopting a dismissive attitude with “I’ll believe it when I see it,” a more insightful review would address these essential questions directly.
Your response raises important points about the nuances of skepticism and the specific claims made in “Age of Disclosure.” It’s clear that the film taps into a deeper exploration of why credible figures in government and the military are stepping forward with their experiences regarding UAPs. Your question regarding their motives and the certainty of their claims is crucial.
The author’s commentary could benefit from a more thorough examination of those motivations rather than dismissing the claims outright or attributing them to the influence of popular culture. This is especially relevant when considering the potential implications of such statements from those in positions of authority.
Skepticism is vital, but it’s equally important to balance it with an understanding of the context in which these claims are made. It is not enough to simply wait for “concrete evidence” while ignoring the narrative unfolding in front of us. The implications of senior officials speaking out are far-reaching and deserve a thoughtful analysis.
Your call for a more in-depth approach to evaluating why these individuals are making their assertions is a step in the right direction. Instead of framing skepticism as a barrier to belief, it can be a tool for deeper inquiry into the legitimacy of their claims. This approach could lead to a richer discussion about not just what these officials are saying, but why they are saying it at this particular moment in time. In an era where the line between truth and fiction often feels blurred, these questions are more relevant than ever.