Greg Eghgian

Yeah. So one of the biggest challenges throughout the whole history of this phenomenon has been giving it a name. Yeah. It has defied any kind of adequate description. And every label, every acronym that's been employed has been called into question. Part of the reason, of course, is because you, first of all, don't have complete agreement on what the phenomenon is.

Yeah. So one of the biggest challenges throughout the whole history of this phenomenon has been giving it a name. Yeah. It has defied any kind of adequate description. And every label, every acronym that's been employed has been called into question. Part of the reason, of course, is because you, first of all, don't have complete agreement on what the phenomenon is.

Yeah. So one of the biggest challenges throughout the whole history of this phenomenon has been giving it a name. Yeah. It has defied any kind of adequate description. And every label, every acronym that's been employed has been called into question. Part of the reason, of course, is because you, first of all, don't have complete agreement on what the phenomenon is.

Secondly, you don't even know, is it a phenomenon? Yeah. So it becomes really, really difficult to do it. Flying saucer was first employed. That was really a media construction in the late 40s, very popular, remained popular well into the 1970s. But it gets replaced by the US Air Force in the early 50s by unidentified flying object, which was seen as being more generic, right?

Secondly, you don't even know, is it a phenomenon? Yeah. So it becomes really, really difficult to do it. Flying saucer was first employed. That was really a media construction in the late 40s, very popular, remained popular well into the 1970s. But it gets replaced by the US Air Force in the early 50s by unidentified flying object, which was seen as being more generic, right?

Secondly, you don't even know, is it a phenomenon? Yeah. So it becomes really, really difficult to do it. Flying saucer was first employed. That was really a media construction in the late 40s, very popular, remained popular well into the 1970s. But it gets replaced by the US Air Force in the early 50s by unidentified flying object, which was seen as being more generic, right?

That was a term that would eliminate this kind of image of this disc-like object. The problem was other people said, well, hold it. A UFO doesn't eliminate the problem. It too implies that this thing's a physical object. It implies that if it implies flying, it implies there must be a pilot, right? Mm-hmm. So that was seen as a problem.

That was a term that would eliminate this kind of image of this disc-like object. The problem was other people said, well, hold it. A UFO doesn't eliminate the problem. It too implies that this thing's a physical object. It implies that if it implies flying, it implies there must be a pilot, right? Mm-hmm. So that was seen as a problem.

That was a term that would eliminate this kind of image of this disc-like object. The problem was other people said, well, hold it. A UFO doesn't eliminate the problem. It too implies that this thing's a physical object. It implies that if it implies flying, it implies there must be a pilot, right? Mm-hmm. So that was seen as a problem.

And now we have the UAP, as you point out, a term that was seen as a way to, again, get at something generic. But the other idea behind it by the people who were in government circles studying this stuff, their thinking was this would eliminate any associations with the whole history of this phenomenon. that all that quote-unquote noise would no longer be relevant. We can start from scratch.

And now we have the UAP, as you point out, a term that was seen as a way to, again, get at something generic. But the other idea behind it by the people who were in government circles studying this stuff, their thinking was this would eliminate any associations with the whole history of this phenomenon. that all that quote-unquote noise would no longer be relevant. We can start from scratch.

And now we have the UAP, as you point out, a term that was seen as a way to, again, get at something generic. But the other idea behind it by the people who were in government circles studying this stuff, their thinking was this would eliminate any associations with the whole history of this phenomenon. that all that quote-unquote noise would no longer be relevant. We can start from scratch.

As a historian, I don't think you get to just rename something and give it a new brand name, and somehow you're released from all that legacy that doesn't kind of work that way.

As a historian, I don't think you get to just rename something and give it a new brand name, and somehow you're released from all that legacy that doesn't kind of work that way.

As a historian, I don't think you get to just rename something and give it a new brand name, and somehow you're released from all that legacy that doesn't kind of work that way.

Yeah, so I think there's no question that in recent years, and certainly by at least 2020, that the intelligence services within the US government have come to at least acknowledge, and this is fairly unprecedented, have acknowledged not only are physical objects being seen that at least on the surface can't be accounted for, but that they themselves have historically played a role in stigmatizing people reporting this stuff.

Yeah, so I think there's no question that in recent years, and certainly by at least 2020, that the intelligence services within the US government have come to at least acknowledge, and this is fairly unprecedented, have acknowledged not only are physical objects being seen that at least on the surface can't be accounted for, but that they themselves have historically played a role in stigmatizing people reporting this stuff.

Yeah, so I think there's no question that in recent years, and certainly by at least 2020, that the intelligence services within the US government have come to at least acknowledge, and this is fairly unprecedented, have acknowledged not only are physical objects being seen that at least on the surface can't be accounted for, but that they themselves have historically played a role in stigmatizing people reporting this stuff.

particularly within military circles, particularly military pilots, but also civilian pilots, that there's been disincentives created to report these things because it was seen as a blemish on your record. It was seen as something that indicated that you might not be qualified for promotion down the road.

particularly within military circles, particularly military pilots, but also civilian pilots, that there's been disincentives created to report these things because it was seen as a blemish on your record. It was seen as something that indicated that you might not be qualified for promotion down the road.