Here’s a revised version of your post:<\/p>\n
Distinguishing Good-Faith Skeptics from Bad-Faith Skeptics with One Simple Question<\/strong><\/p>\n Ask this: “Do you support the idea of a constitutional amendment stating, ‘If the government becomes aware of any non-human intelligence or technology, it must disclose this information immediately to the public, regardless of national security concerns’?”<\/p>\n A good-faith skeptic would likely respond, “Absolutely! That way, if nothing is revealed, the debate can finally come to an end, and we can stop discussing it!”<\/p>\n Conversely, a bad-faith skeptic might reply, “No, that would just waste everyone’s time and money!”<\/p>\n The Disclosure movement aims for either voluntary transparency from the government or the establishment of a constitutional amendment that mandates such Disclosure.<\/p>\n And yes, a constitutional amendment would ultimately resolve the debate. If any program is willing to flout the Constitution so openly, it suggests we were never going to achieve Disclosure in the first place.<\/p>\n While the exact phrasing may leave some room for legal interpretation, the core principle remains clear.<\/p>\n","protected":false},"excerpt":{"rendered":"