This is an automated archive made by the Lemmit Bot.
The original was posted on /r/ufos by /u/fluffyfawn803237 on 2024-11-18 19:45:09+00:00.
With Dr. Jon Kosloski set to appear before the Senate tomorrow for an open hearing on UAP, it’s important to approach this event with tempered expectations. Based on his recent remarks and operational insights, we can better understand how AARO plans to continue operating—particularly its approach to transparency and information sharing.
Firstly, I want to start off by talking about compartmentalization of responsibility. Let’s be clear, AARO does not take a comprehensive role in all UAP investigations. Once a case involves known technologies like UAVs or UASs, AARO hands it off to other agencies. Dr. Kosloski clarified this approach during the media roundtable:
“Once we know that it’s a UAV or a UAS of some nature, we then hand that responsibility off to one of our partners.”
He also used Langley as an example:
“So Langley being a great example. It was known to be UAV activity, so we were there in a supporting role, but it was not our responsibility to address that.”
This compartmentalization continues to creates silos, where different agencies handle specific aspects of UAP incidents, reducing the likelihood of cohesive investigations or comprehensive public disclosures.
Even when AARO gathers data, its conclusions often remain ambiguous. Dr. Kosloski highlighted this during the media session:
“It remains to be seen whether or not that additional data is going to be sufficient for us to either resolve the case, understand whether it’s a UAV, bird or balloon, or say something substantive about the nature of the unknown phenomenon.”
Such ambiguity preserves uncertainty around unresolved cases, making it challenging for the public to gauge progress.
It’s especially important to note that even resolved cases undergo a lengthy declassification process before they can be shared. Dr. Kosloski admitted:
“We’re working on downgrading several of those cases, so we can talk about them publicly.”
This suggests that the public won’t immediately receive answers, even for cases AARO has resolved.
Furthermore, it has become evident that AARO relies heavily on partnerships with other entities across the intelligence community and Department of Defense:
“We’re working closely with the services to implement existing reporting guidance while expanding UAP reporting to more of the interagency.”
Unfortunately, it’s clear that this outsourcing leads to fragmented investigations, where no single entity has a full grasp of UAP activity, making comprehensive analysis and public disclosure more difficult.
While tomorrow’s hearing may offer some insights, it’s unlikely to deliver groundbreaking revelations. Expect careful wording, a focus on scientific rigor, and reassurances about AARO’s commitment to transparency. However, due to the compartmentalized nature of UAP investigations and the slow declassification process, significant disclosures are improbable.
To me, this feels like it may be a continuation of the obfuscation of truth, but I know that the hearing is part of a broader process that will require patience, as AARO works within the constraints of interagency collaboration, compartmentalization, and classified data.
Let’s hope for clarity, but remain realistic about the pace and nature of disclosure.