Elon Musk is holding back.

Why doesn't he build UFOs? He knows how.

Elon Musk is the man — right?

He's the guy building electric cars to free humanity from fossil fuels, and aiming to colonize Mars in case Earth becomes uninhabitable — right?

So why is he building rockets instead of UFOs?

Here’s what I mean

I don’t mean the literal definition — an “unidentified flying object” could be a loud insect in a dark room.

I’m referring to that 5% of UFO sightings described by the French military’s COMETA Report as completely defying explanation by known natural or artificial phenomena — despite having an abundance of high-quality data, like radar records, multiple expert eyewitnesses, physical traces, and combinations thereof.

Whether they’re extraterrestrial, military, or both remains to be seen — but these UFOs are not illusions, and they’re not subject to conventional physics.

Back to Elon

Given that UFOs are physical objects that appear pilot-controlled and fly unbelievably fast, their technology may hold the key to solving both of Elon Musk’s favorite problems:

• UFOs solve the human survival problem, because they make going to Mars as easy as going to the grocery store.

• They also solve the climate change problem, because when going to Mars is that easy, the entire solar system becomes our grocery store for natural resources.

So if UFO technology would instantly solve both major problems Elon is purportedly all about, why is he building on a World-War-II tech stack — “missiles that point up”?

I see two possibilities: either he doesn’t know UFO technology exists, or he’s not allowed to use it.

Here’s why I believe we can rule out “he doesn’t know” as an option.

Moon astronauts assert the reality of extraterrestrial craft

Before the recent mainstream discussion of UFOs by major media corporations, polite society had generally dismissed the topic as laughable. Yet high-ranking officials from military, government, and scientific institutions have asserted the importance of UFO technology for decades.

Of the 12 astronauts who have walked on the moon, at least 2 have stated unequivocally and on film that non-earthly aircraft exist.

• Here’s moon astronaut Gordon Cooper describing his encounter with a squadron of 12 to 16 UFOs.

• Here’s moon astronaut Edgar Mitchell saying UFOs are extraterrestrial craft, and that aliens “have been observing us for some time.”

In 1960, Admiral Roscoe Hillenkoetter, the first-ever director of the CIA, was quoted in the New York Times, saying

 "It is time for the truth to be brought out in open Congressional hearings ....Behind the scenes, high-ranking Air Force officers are soberly concerned about UFOs. But through official secrecy and ridicule, citizens are led to believe the unknown flying objects are nonsense....To hide the facts, the Air Force has silenced its personnel."

You might argue, “Okay, maybe Elon knows they’re real — but that’s very different from knowing how to build one.”

Good point! Let’s talk about that...

We have patents

The US Patent Office has granted many remarkably UFO-like patents to owners like the US Department of the Navy. These are public, not classified, and you can find them on Google Patents.

In 2017, the CTO of Naval Aviation wrote regarding the above patent: “If successful, this patent... moves propulsion technology beyond gas dynamic systems to field-induced propulsion based hybrid aerospace-undersea craft… Based on the initial findings I would assert this would become a reality.”

​​We have motives

UFOs have been known to remotely deactivate American nuclear weapons. Therefore, it would be in America’s national security interest to build functioning UFOs to compete with whatever adversary — earthly or not — already has them. Here’s CBS News on the matter in 2010:

As recently as last week, retired USAF officers shared their accounts of UFO interference with nuclear weapons in a conference that drew the attention of Tucker Carlson.

Perhaps we’ve seen how powerful UFO technology is, and decided not to build any because it would be too dangerous for humanity to have this technology.

Einstein allegedly regretted teaching President Truman how to build an atomic bomb — perhaps the military-industrial complex has learned its lesson, and decided not to risk building the next civilization-scale breakthrough.

But probably not.

We have mechanisms

The Biefield-Brown effect, discovered by T. Townsend Brown in the 1950s, involves positively charging one end of a craft, while negatively charging the other. The disparity will cause the negative side to “chase” the positive side, propelling the craft forward.

You’ve likely seen Brown’s work in action — you know those air purifiers that use “ion wind” to blow air without any fan blades? According to UFO nerds, the same concept can make aircraft fly without propellers or jets.

This is basically a UFO

A 1992 issue of Aviation Week Magazine revealed Northrop’s B-2 bomber electrically charges its front wing, while negatively charging the exhaust gases coming out the rear. This “charge splitting” resembles the Biefield-Brown effect, and has started rumors that the B-2 uses it for propulsion.

Rumors pictured here

There’s a lot of public information about anti-gravity flight and electrogravitics (Google it), much of it directly from official military reports and declassified documents. The book Secrets of Antigravity Propulsion by Dr. Paul LaViolette provides a great overview.

We have tons of information

Crypto nerds may remember Clif High, an engineer who uses “predictive linguistics” to make predictions about the future. Here he is describing exactly how to make a UFO.

After a brief survey of the public information about anti-gravity flight and electrogravitics, you’ll watch this 40-minute video nodding to yourself the whole time. A lot of Clif’s descriptions here resemble the Biefield-Brown effect, for example.

Back to Elon

From moon astronauts, to the US Patent Office, to The Sharper Image, it seems every echelon of worldly authority is rife with whole-hearted endorsements of UFO technology — and by extension, the physics breakthroughs it represents.

It seems unlikely that Elon Musk — presumably the world’s most technologically ambitious man — has no knowledge of, nor interest in, any of this.

So let’s explore hypothesis #2: 

Hypothesis #2: Elon Musk isn’t allowed to build UFOs.

This is where things get weird.

If we live in a world where humanity has access to UFO technology, and if someone is forbidding Elon from building it, that means there’s a governmental or military-industrial body far more powerful than the public knows about.

There’s no avoiding this.

If UFOs are secret military tech that humans possess, who’s running that military?

Seems unlikely that it’s the same people who fight over oil in Iraq — who needs Iraqi oil when you have effortless interplanetary travel?

Let’s walk through this one more time:

1. If UFO technology exists (seems likely)

2. And it solves all of Elon’s favorite problems (seems likely)

3. And Elon knows this (seems likely)

4. But he isn’t building it

5. Then it seems reasonable to assume someone is preventing him from building it. If so, that someone wields physics completely outside of conventional science, and therefore wields power completely outside of conventional politics.

Consider the sci-fi trope of the “super-advanced civilization that could easily take over the world.”

Could it be... us?

Mystery: Science Theater

If we lived in a world where some subset of humanity possessed super-advanced tech and was forbidding Elon Musk from building it, what would that world look like?

In writing this article, I’ve taken only one path out of a zillion. The same argument could be re-made end-to-end using hundreds of different examples at each stage. The evidence — so frequently derided as nonexistent — is an utter deluge.

Now consider the SETI Institute, which makes the news a few times a year for the giant donations it receives, and whose activities consist primarily of monitoring deep-space radio waves and finding little of interest.

With all this evidence for UFO tech lying on the kitchen table, why spend billions listening to the dial tone of the universe?

Is it to make people feel like we’re serious about researching alien life, when we’re not?

Is mainstream science actually... science theater?

Consider this:

Here’s Nikola Tesla holding a wirelessly-illuminated lightbulb in 1899. Over 120 years later, modern science has built on his achievement by developing wireless cell phone chargers that have… wires.

Wait, what?

Yeah.

We’ve enjoyed 100 years of slowly-backwards technological progress in this area, and it feels like business as usual.

This doesn’t make sense.

Where are the venture capitalists investing in Nikola Tesla acolytes, UFO technologists, antigravity pioneers?

Why do all the best repositories of advanced propulsion schematics live on plaintext crackpot websites like rexresearch.com, and not in Andreessen Horowitz’s portfolio?

It gets worse

Consider the three pillars of physics, each of which conflicts with the others: Newtonian, Einsteinian, and quantum mechanics.

Our first question should be obvious — why three?

We live in one universe. Seems like there should be one set of physical laws governing it.

Have we given up hope in the hypothesis of science itself — that the universe obeys understandable laws?

Having three conflicting sets of physical laws falls far short of the scientific ideal of discovering a coherent universe, yet institutional science seems wholly satisfied, and regards with contempt any re-investigations of physics from first principles.

Outside institutional science, a spate of less self-contradictory theories have arisen, from the electric universe, to Walter Russell, to Harmonic Interference Theory, to holography.

Why is the hype train always so reliably far from Interestingsville?

Do we avoid looking at physics from these angles because they lead to discovering electrogravitics, anti-gravity flight, and free energy?

The point of all this

Here’s the point of all this:

The world’s best information isn’t kept secret — it’s kept uncool.

And that’s why I believe Elon Musk is holding back.

His strategy is to Make Nikola Tesla Cool, while maintaining plausible deniability to his spacefaring overlords.

What’s his car company called again?