r/disclosure

I will definitely get hate for this, but based on the reaction I am seeing to David Grusch on JRE, I am starting to think disclosure is impossible.

If what he’s saying is true, Human beings are too arrogant to accept something this “unbelievable.” If they released the video he mentions everyone would just say it’s fake. If Our president confirmed what Grusch said everyone will just say it’s fake and it’s only being done for politics. Any video evidence they release that is supposedly “catastrophic disclosure” will just be shot down as fake, because we didn’t see it with our own eyes.

Obviously disinformation campaigns are real and there are bad actors, but that doesn’t matter when no one will believe the good actors.

Let’s say everything Grusch said is 100% true and factual;

What would it take for you to believe it?

What would have to be inside of a disclosure video to convince you that what you’re seeing is real and legitimate?

What would the president of the United States need to say (or show) to 100% convince you we are not alone?

[supprimé]

[supprimé]

I watched all of the Doomer Friday guy’s podathon yesterday and it was an extraordinary event, genuinely. $20,000 raised, going directly to Vanguard, an organization created by and for real whistleblowers. The amount of heavy-hitters in the space who joined the conversation was really incredible and it produced an in-the-moment cross-pollination of ideas.

But, for my money, the more intriguing/fascinating thing it produced was the reactions by Matthew Brown and Dylan Borland, in response to these discussions. I think it was telling that there were moments of palpable tension, and it became clearer than ever that there is a strange juxtaposition of sentiment among those in the know.

On the one hand, we have David Grusch expressing largely nothing but optimism that humanity can handle it all and that ultimately disclosure could lead to what amounts to a renaissance in human advancement. But then, on the other hand, we have Dylan and Matthew, who express a range of emotions on this. It ranges from positivity about humanity and what could come next once we get through this, all the way to what appears to be a deeply foreboding doom. But all the while, everyone involved is working on initiatives, re-building their lives after having their careers destroyed, and planning for the future in general. So which is it? Are we headed for something amazing or horrifying? And why do some people in the know seem to be expressing both?

During the stream, a few moments stood out to me:

• The caller who had attended the event Dylan was in Sweden for caused Dylan to nod his head and seemingly gesture to get the attention of the other guys on the stream. He then, twice, used his fingers to count out “2027”.
• When Jeremy Corbell said “think about where we’ll be 10 years from now” (in reference to progress on the topic) and Matthew quickly did an eyebrow raise, seemingly indicating some kind of “he doesn’t know what I know about that timetable.”
• Clint Weldon asked Dylan what is the timetable for this supposed “event”, asking, “Is it decades? Less than decades?” And Dylan responded by saying “I’m gonna go back on mute and listen to music.” Then, when pressed, and before he signed off, he said “Look, take care of your family, keep love in your heart, there’s life after death, and whatever is going to happen, is going to happen.”

My best assessment at this point is that there is some possible event that no one is actually certain will happen. How the advice about love and life after death exactly relates to this isn’t exactly clear. But I don’t think it’s necessarily the darkest possible conclusion.

But all of that said, my contention is this: I think the community that is already deep into this deserves at least some kind of “State of the Union” on where these guys are at. I understand there could be legitimate national security or even metaphysical/spiritual reasons why they can’t say exactly what they know. But at least a confirmation of “we have reason to believe that something catastrophic could be coming, but we can’t know for sure, so we just want everyone to have the truth of the possibility of what that is, and in the mean time, we’re living our lives and hoping for the best.” THAT would at least make sense to me and I think it would serve the community and progress on the topic well.

The Last Stand is a weekly live show hosted by Vetted & Astral covering the latest UFO news. Sundays 7pm EST. In this episode they're covering Grusch's appearance on Joe Rogan's podcast.

I watched all of the Doomer Friday guy’s podathon yesterday and it was an extraordinary event, genuinely. $20,000 raised, going directly to Vanguard, an organization created by and for real whistleblowers. The amount of heavy-hitters in the space who joined the conversation was really incredible and it produced an in-the-moment cross-pollination of ideas.

But, for my money, the more intriguing/fascinating thing it produced was the reactions by Matthew Brown and Dylan Borland, in response to these discussions. I think it was telling that there were moments of palpable tension, and it became clearer than ever that there is a strange juxtaposition of sentiment among those in the know.

On the one hand, we have David Grusch expressing largely nothing but optimism that humanity can handle it all and that ultimately disclosure could lead to what amounts to a renaissance in human advancement. But then, on the other hand, we have Dylan and Matthew, who express a range of emotions on this. It ranges from positivity about humanity and what could come next once we get through this, all the way to what appears to be a deeply foreboding doom. But all the while, everyone involved is working on initiatives, re-building their lives after having their careers destroyed, and planning for the future in general. So which is it? Are we headed for something amazing or horrifying? And why do some people in the know seem to be expressing both?

During the stream, a few moments stood out to me:

• The caller who had attended the event Dylan was in Sweden for caused Dylan to nod his head and seemingly gesture to get the attention of the other guys on the stream. He then, twice, used his fingers to count out “2027”.
• When Jeremy Corbell said “think about where we’ll be 10 years from now” (in reference to progress on the topic) and Matthew quickly did an eyebrow raise, seemingly indicating some kind of “he doesn’t know what I know about that timetable.”
• Clint Weldon asked Dylan what is the timetable for this supposed “event”, asking, “Is it decades? Less than decades?” And Dylan responded by saying “I’m gonna go back on mute and listen to music.” Then, when pressed, and before he signed off, he said “Look, take care of your family, keep love in your heart, there’s life after death, and whatever is going to happen, is going to happen.”

My best assessment at this point is that there is some possible event that no one is actually certain will happen. How the advice about love and life after death exactly relates to this isn’t exactly clear. But I don’t think it’s necessarily the darkest possible conclusion.

But all of that said, my contention is this: I think the community that is already deep into this deserves at least some kind of “State of the Union” on where these guys are at. I understand there could be legitimate national security or even metaphysical/spiritual reasons why they can’t say exactly what they know. But at least a confirmation of “we have reason to believe that something catastrophic could be coming, but we can’t know for sure, so we just want everyone to have the truth of the possibility of what that is, and in the mean time, we’re living our lives and hoping for the best.” THAT would at least make sense to me and I think it would serve the community and progress on the topic well.

Title: The Technological Disclosure Convergence Model: what if disclosure is ultimately about humanity itself?

I've been working through a speculative model connecting UAP disclosure, AI, human origins, ancient religious traditions, and Christian eschatology. I've been calling it the Technological Disclosure Convergence Model, or TDCM.

I'm not claiming I've proven any of this. I'm also not saying "aliens are demons," AI is the Antichrist, or that any current technology is the Mark of the Beast.

What I'm trying to do is lay out a model ahead of time that makes predictions and can actually be proven wrong later.

The main idea is pretty simple.

I don't think the biggest possible disclosure shock would be finding out that intelligent life exists somewhere else in the universe. Humanity could probably absorb that eventually.

I think the much bigger shock would be finding out that whatever intelligence is behind the phenomenon has some unexpected relationship to us.

Maybe that relationship is biological. Maybe it's historical. Maybe it's connected to consciousness, human origins, or something we don't currently have a good category for.

If that's the case, disclosure wouldn't stop at "there are craft."

It would gradually become a question about humanity itself.

Who are these beings? Why do some reports describe them as humanoid? Have they interacted with us before? How long has that been happening? Did ancient people encounter the same thing? Does any of this have something to do with human origins?

That's where I think religion eventually becomes unavoidable.

One thing that started changing this model for me was looking more carefully at the biblical and Second Temple view of nonhuman beings.

It's actually more complicated than "angels versus demons."

You have Satan/the Dragon as an overarching adversarial figure. You have the sons of God/Watchers tradition associated with Genesis 6 and 1 Enoch. You have demons or unclean spirits. You have territorial powers and principalities. You have beings associated with the abyss. And obviously you also have loyal heavenly beings.

So if the biblical worldview reflects something real, it might make more sense to expect multiple kinds or factions of nonhuman intelligence rather than one single "alien species."

I want to be careful here though.

I'm not saying the modern UAP phenomenon is definitely the Watchers.

In fact, there's an obvious problem with that idea: in the Enochic tradition, and arguably in Jude and 2 Peter, the rebellious Watchers are restrained.

So if modern nonhuman activity is real, it may involve related beings, other factions, manifestations, subordinate intelligences, or something else entirely.

The Watcher connection is a hypothesis inside the larger model, not something the model has to assume is true.

Where Revelation starts becoming interesting to me is that it may describe a later stage where whatever is normally hidden or restrained becomes much more openly manifested.

I'm not talking about the old "John saw helicopters and thought they were locusts" argument. I think that's way too simplistic.

Revelation 9 describes the abyss being opened and strange beings emerging. Revelation 12 describes spiritual conflict becoming intensely focused on Earth. Revelation 13 describes spiritual rebellion becoming tied to a human political, religious, and economic system.

That last part is especially important to this model.

I don't think the Antichrist needs to be AI, an alien, or some kind of nonhuman being.

He could simply be a human political figure who rises during an enormous civilizational crisis and successfully tells humanity what all of this means.

Imagine the effect of genuine disclosure if it didn't just prove NHI exist, but also raised questions about human origins, ancient religion, consciousness, and reality itself.

Now combine that with rapid AI development, biotechnology, neural interfaces, autonomous systems, digital identity, economic instability, and widespread distrust of existing institutions.

That would create an incredible demand for someone who could provide order and a coherent explanation.

In that framework, the Antichrist is the political focal point. The False Prophet is the ideological or religious legitimizer. The Mark is the point where identity, economic participation, and allegiance become tied together.

I don't think the Mark has to be a specific device. Trying to predict "it's definitely a chip" or "it's definitely digital currency" seems like a mistake.

The function matters more than the hardware.

The AI part of this model is also different from "AI becomes evil."

I think advanced AI or AGI may be a catalyst.

It could massively accelerate materials science, biology, data analysis, consciousness research, robotics, and our ability to analyze classified or compartmentalized information.

So you potentially have two separate developments happening at the same time.

One is disclosure moving from physical objects toward intelligence, consciousness, human origins, and religion.

The other is humanity developing increasingly powerful AI, biotech, neurotechnology, autonomous systems, augmentation, and digital economic infrastructure.

The important prediction is that these two things eventually become connected.

If they never do, that's a major problem for the model.

Another part I think is important is the possibility of a competing explanation of what humanity is.

Christianity says humanity was created by God, humanity fell, Christ redeems humanity, and the final answer is restoration and resurrection.

A completely different worldview could emerge from disclosure.

Something like: humanity was engineered or guided by higher intelligence, ancient religions were misunderstood encounters with those beings, disclosure is finally revealing our real history, and technological transformation is the next stage of human evolution.

At that point the disagreement isn't really "religion versus aliens."

It's two different answers to the same questions:

Who made us?

What is wrong with us?

What are we supposed to become?

How are we saved?

That's where I think the disclosure side, the technology side, and Revelation could potentially converge.

The main predictions I'm putting down ahead of time are:

1. Disclosure increasingly moves away from just craft and materials and toward consciousness or ontology.

2. Objective evidence eventually shows some meaningful connection between NHI and humanity.

3. Evidence eventually suggests the phenomenon interacted with humanity before the modern UFO era.

4. The phenomenon turns out to be heterogeneous rather than one simple species with one motive.

5. AI-era technology becomes directly connected to disclosure rather than simply developing at the same time.

6. Human origins become a serious part of the disclosure conversation.

7. A major political or religious movement eventually tries to explain NHI, human origins, transformative technology, and humanity's future as one unified story.

8. Identity, economic participation, technology, and allegiance increasingly become tied together.

I also want this model to have a real failure condition.

If mature disclosure eventually shows that we're dealing with an independently evolved extraterrestrial civilization from another star system, with no meaningful relationship to humans, no ancient interaction, no unusual consciousness component, and no connection to the AI/biotech/economic-control side of the model, then the central idea here is substantially wrong.

I don't want to just reinterpret everything afterward to keep the theory alive.

A humanoid encounter story isn't proof of human continuity. Ancient art that vaguely resembles a UFO isn't proof of ancient contact. AI becoming extremely powerful isn't evidence for this unless it actually intersects with disclosure.

The basic prediction is that disclosure eventually stops being mainly about "them" and becomes about "us."

And if that happens at the same time humanity is developing technologies capable of radically changing intelligence, biology, identity, economics, and political control, I think the possibility of a much larger religious and civilizational convergence becomes worth taking seriously.

Again, I don't know that this is true.

I'm putting it out there because I'd rather state the model before the evidence than build it after the fact.

The part I'm most interested in people challenging is the weakest bridge in the whole thing: whether there is any legitimate connection at all between the modern UAP/NHI phenomenon and the nonhuman intelligences described in ancient biblical and Second Temple traditions.

I'm getting dizzy trying to keep up with where we are with UAP Disclosure Act and its history in politics. I created this timeline (AI assisted of course - what human could keep up with everything). I am not sure if there will be any movement on getting it passed this year.

https://preview.redd.it/r5899tsm24th1.png?width=848&format=png&auto=webp&s=0858737eca59b32a5e363621f9af0ebaca034b81

[supprimé]