How to think about UAPs

 [[{“value”:”I have a new Bloomberg column on that topic, I would most of all stress the closer: When I think about all this, I try to keep two questions separate. First, is there a major puzzle to account for? And second, what is the best explanation for that puzzle? It helps to focus on the
The post How to think about UAPs appeared first on Marginal REVOLUTION.”}]] 

I have a new Bloomberg column on that topic, I would most of all stress the closer:

When I think about all this, I try to keep two questions separate. First, is there a major puzzle to account for? And second, what is the best explanation for that puzzle? It helps to focus on the first question in isolation, since we can’t seem to keep our heads on straight when it comes to the second.

By admitting that there is a real puzzle to be solved, the Senate Intelligence Committee has moved decisively to answer the first question. Once we clarify exactly what the puzzle is, maybe we’ll be able to make some progress explaining it.

As for background:

The Senate Intelligence Committee isn’t buying it. The Intelligence Authorization Act , which it passed last week, among other things calls for review of the All-Domain Anomaly Resolution Office . The bill would also limit research into what are now called UAPs (for unidentified anomalous phenomena) unless Congress is informed and add whistleblower protections for anyone who might wish to step forward and speak their minds.

Recommended, I make other points as well.

The post How to think about UAPs appeared first on Marginal REVOLUTION.

 Uncategorized