We need to fundamentally shape public perception and acceptance in what concerns ETI. This clearly means we need to apply a phased engagement with ETI. Instead of an abrupt disclosure of their presence, a more effective strategy might involve intermittent interactions or communications that gradually familiarise humanity with the concept. This requires utilising existing reserved and sensitive technologies, such as MilOrbs and PSVs, something SV17q opposes to.Obviously, if ETI were to share their knowledge, intentions, and capabilities in a transparent manner, it could facilitate a smoother integration process, reducing fear and ambiguity associated with their presence. This, however, is a wrong expectation. It assumes ETI are just like us, though far smarter. This is not the case, you see.The strategy comprises a gradual acclimatisation process that initially frames UAPs as terrestrial engines, based on PSVs and MilOrbs, thereby normalising their presence, before eventually revealing their non-terrestrial origins, namely, that there are other systems out there that are not ours.Does AI serve not merely as a development in technology but as a poignant case study for humanity’s future encounters with ETI? Do the lessons we learned —such as gradual normalisation, ethical considerations, and transparency— hold for a future where contact with extraterrestrial intelligence becomes public? Can we guarantee the proposed strategic approach will minimise potential societal disruptions?"
This narrative can be grounded in existing technological advancements, such as drone and hypersonic flight research, which are already familiar to the public. We then introduce PSVs together with a public relations campaign that highlights the advances in aviation and drone technology. Officials and scientists might speak on how the boundaries of flight capabilities are constantly being pushed, suggesting that the UAPs represent not extraterrestrial craft but rather human innovation. Later on, we can implement joint demonstrations showcasing emerging technologies. This would include strategic indirect reveals, showing our UAPs in controlled settings. Once the public has acclimatised to the idea of UAPs as terrestrial technologies, the second phase entails revealing their actual origins without triggering widespread panic.I understand that presenting compelling evidence of UAPs' non-terrestrial origins should be done gradually and responsibly. This could start with declassified military footage, accompanied by testimonies from credible sources, that supports claims of non-human technology while simultaneously reinforcing the idea that such technologies co-exist with us. Are we there right now? As far as I understand the issue, the crux of this strategic approach lies in the meticulous crafting of a narrative that encourages civilians to perceive UAPs not as visitors from the cosmos but as advancements of their civilization. I don't see why should any disclosure take place before 2075 when even only a few of us know the truth of the matter. As I see it, we don't even control the narrative. It would only take one of those NHI's engines appearing over a city to blow this whole strategy sky high.
>>524356556so...... it's a nothingburger?
The first protocol is non-negotiable: we will never accept the existence of the NHI in the depths of the ocean. We are no longer concerned with the air and space segments. We don't feel that space belongs to us. As for the air segment, what does it matter if there is occasional ETI activity? The ocean is different. We feel it belongs to us; it is our planet, and that cannot change.>... asking for information on whether the nuclear-powered fast attack submarine USS Newport News diverted to Bermuda instead of going to the Venezuelan area because DOLYN detected strong anomalies northeast of Bermuda... and said he is not autorized to comment on ongoing missions... he confirmed that area is classified as a hot spot of anomalous underwater activities due to the presence of R-27 nuclear missiles from the K-219 sub that sank there on October 3, 1986... questioned whether there was a recent incident involving hostile unidentified underwater objects at those coordinates, northeast of Bermuda, on DENIED day at DENIED hours, he answered we should ask the CJCS, as CJSC is the one that would coordinate military resources and strategy for any recovery mission...
Look, the context in which disclosure occurs —be it subatmospheric, space, or underwater— does indeed lead to significant differences in impact and public perception. Each environment not only shapes the nature of the objects involved but also influences societal reactions, regulatory frameworks, and the broader implications for humanity. At the outset, the categorisation of non-terrestrial phenomena into these distinct environments alters the context within which they are understood. We need to fully understand this. Any disclosure related to subatmospheric objects cause immediate concerns tied to national security and technological supremacy. If disclosure pertains to space objects, the implications shift towards a more expansive view of the cosmos. But when considering underwater objects, the focus alters further. If underwater phenomena were disclosed, they might be viewed through the lens of environmental stewardship and discovery of new intelligent marine life or ecosystems, rather than as a threat.The regulatory frameworks also differ depending on the environment. Subatmospheric phenomena necessitates immediate government action, prompting military involvement and national security considerations. Remember what happened with the Chinese balloons? On the other hand, space-related disclosures could lead to international dialogues and treaties focused on collaboration and responsible exploration. Underwater phenomena are totally different. So far we are happy the hadal zone is virtually unexplored. The public knows nothing about what happens just a few meters below the water surface, and that must continue to be the case.
>>524356556>ETI>all that textnot sure what its about but the craft are all ours
>aliens have underwater bases and shoot out disc UFOS and orbs when they feel like it for surveillance, monitoring, testing, or abduction >The discs are "manned" surveillance craft the "tic tacs" cargo vessels from another galaxy, and the orbs "drones">they have always been hereYeah. Pretty much.
