Guest Commentary

The Law of Confusion and its Necessity in the Progression of "Controversial Science" (PART TWO)

By David Jinks

In my book I predicted that at least one private space mission would land on the moon by the year 2000, possibly revealing the presence of artifacts there. That has not happened, and won't for several years yet. There's an interesting story behind this disappointing turn of events. (See the article "Whatever happened to LunaCorp?") But plans to commercial space are in the works for many private and public companies, and new images of the moon are a certain byproduct of these ventures. So hope is not lost, and these potential lunar discoveries no longer rest solely in the hands of one space agency. Given NASA's resistance to any theory supporting ET artifacts, this can only be good news.

Also discouraging is the fact that the "crop circle" phenomenon has continued to increase in complexity and scope, yet little consideration of it is ever made in any mainstream medium. Even were it not for a host of data showing electromagnetic anomalies present in grain taken from crop formations, one might argue the phenomenon deserves coverage as an extraordinary art form. Yet the circles receive no consideration by scientific institutions or the mainstream press, even as the formations approach nearly impossible to reproduce size and geometry.

Which brings us, somewhat belatedly, to the main theme of this article.

In surveying the "state of the research" I have concluded that, while we have made progress in bringing the topics of UFOs and the like into the scientific arena, we are still far from our ultimate goal of complete acceptance of their scientific validity by those with the resources to pursue them. There is no surprise here. This is the way all scientific revolutions progress.

But there is something fundamentally different about the current revolution. The dilemma posed by UFOs, crop circles and ET artifacts goes far beyond anything we have had to deal with before. It is presumed that the current power structure knows more about these topics than it admits, and has a vested interest in withholding potentially explosive information from the public. If it's true there is a concerted effort to deceive then we might ask whether we'll ever see progress beyond the past several decades' sluggish advance.

My answer is "no." In fact, despite claims by many "alternative" investigators, I do not believe there will ever be an official "disclosure" by those in power, at least in the United States. We will never see the President stand at his podium and declare UFOs are real. We will never see Ted Koppel or Dan Rather utter "Mars was once inhabited by intelligent life" during the course of their news shows. The New York Times will never print that crop circles are caused by an unknown electromagnetic force, possibly under intelligent guidance. Never. At least not until these phenomena become so obvious, to so many people, that to ignore them is akin to denying the possibility of flight even as the Wright brothers fly overhead. Given the elusive origin and nature of UFOs, cold fusion, crop circles and the like, it is unlikely that this critical mass can be achieved. (If it is, however, we can be sure that former skeptics-read: debunkers-will suddenly and quietly switch positions, claiming that they "knew it all along." Such are the tactics of the defenders of the status quo.)

But suppose, as many of us have for quite some time, that there is a small group of officials at the top levels of government who know that sooner or later the truth must come out. Recognizing the gravity of the situation, they have formulated a plan to deal with public dissemination of potentially explosive information-with the goal of avoiding a "Brookings Report" - predicted societal upheaval.

It can be argued, convincingly, that there is a method to the madness created by a government campaign of misinformation and suppression of evidence. Just as parents withhold knowledge of the "birds and the bees" from their children by broaching sensitive subjects with innocuous euphemism, government sanctioned distortion of information and withholding of certain facts may be an efficient way to perpetuate the natural cycles of public knowledge acquisition. In a Darwinesque "survival of the fittest" vein, the Law of Confusion says that only those who are able to see past the smoke-and-mirrors effect of misinformation are fit to receive certain types of knowledge. Referring to the alleged UFO cover-up, Richard Thompson, co-author of Forbidden Archeology and author of Alien Identities, explains:

The basic idea is that in order to preserve the free will of human beings, it is necessary to withhold information from them and even bewilder them with false information. This concept may help explain not only the bewildering character of UFO communications but also the elusive nature of UFO evidence in general. Often this evidence is strong enough to be impressive, but it is never so overwhelming that a skeptic would be denied his own free will in deciding whether or not to accept it. One can conceive of scenarios, such as a mass landing of UFOs in Washington, DC, that would be so convincing as to rule out this exercise of free will. Could it be that the Law of Confusion is being applied to the UFO phenomenon so as to preserve people's freedom to reject or disregard it, while at the same time providing useful information for people who are prepared to accept it? [Source: Alien Identities, pp. 380-381.]

(Continued in Part 3)


The PAG Network
Sedona, AZ 86339

Phone: 520-203-0567

The PAG Network 2001.  All Rights Reserved.
Portions Copyright CAUS 2001.   All Rights Reserved

Send CAUS Comments and Reports to: CAUS@CAUS.ORG