Welcome to our latest Monthly Topic! Remember, you don’t have to write an eloquent treatise – just a couple of simple sentences will do!
It’s a great time for our NEW MEMBERS to jump in and let their voices be heard!
This month’s topic was written by SOPHIA Executive Board member Brandy Robinson.
Given that numerous presidential administrations have chronicled data of Unidentified Anomalous Phenomena (UAP), including Unidentified Flying Objects (UFOs), do you think that, for natural security reasons, presidents maintain executive privilege in deciding whether or not to release such data, or may Congress and/or the courts compel such release?
It’s hard to say. It’s a balance between the public having a right to know and a president’s concern about not creating mass panic.
Hi Roy: Thanks for responding and entertaining this response. I wanted to add more context to your ‘mass panic’ response since many times this type of response is thrown out there to silence disclosures of any kind. This seems to be an old and classic paternalistic model of crisis communication management (a top down leadership style) that has been shown to not be as effective anymore. There are more risks associated with this approach than before especially with public trust. This approach also assumes people cannot handle themselves properly. But we have seen with so many disasters that people have not resorted to mass panic but have leaned into each other and gathered resources. Further, with the advancement of technology, it has been shown that disclosure as early as possible may be the best approach.
The most recent example is the pandemic and how disclosure and guidance on a constant basis was key to avoid misinformation. But we saw how misinformation spread faster due to the top down type of crisis communications. Finally, are we also assuming that people do not believe there is life beyond this planet and themselves? Besides, a large segment of the population believes in a religious deity, can we not imagine or assume a segment of the larger population also believes in life beyond themselves?
Finally, I saw the movie Disclosure Day this past weekend and questions pertaining to this thread that popped up for me, after watching the movie. For example, I guess the questions that should be posed are who or what entity holds this truth, can we really compel this truth or is it really a truth we will never really know or even should know? This is an interesting discussion and arguably a current topic and ironically one that has constitutional meat to it. Again, thanks for responding and entertaining this seemingly non-traditional constitutional question. I think differently so this question may not be for everyone.
I forgot to add: what do we do with that truth once revealed? Does courts and/or Congress also dictate the next steps or does society? Very interesting questions where the constitution can add the force of law for these disclosures but it cannot always give us the next steps after those disclosures as it would fall short of this.
Brandy, that’s a great point about people believing in a deity. I wonder why when phenomena occur that leads people to believe that it might be some intelligent form of life trying to communicate, why they don’t contemplate the possibility that it could be a higher power, i.e., whatever their particular definition of “god” is.