While it’s easy to lose track of this subject when the members of Congress (and the media) have so much else on their plates these days, the House and the Senate have continued to work on new legislative language regarding the Pentagon’s investigation into the strange objects being seen in the skies over our restricted military airspace. But it’s no longer just the skies. As the always-reliable research journalist Douglas Dean Johnson recently reported, multiple defense and intelligence bills are currently moving quickly out of the appropriate committees and heading for floor votes where they are expected to pass with little or no objection. One such bill that Johnson highlights redefines the meaning of UAP (formerly Unidentified Ariel Phenomena) to be, “unidentified aerospace-undersea phenomena.” The language also includes references to “transmedium” vehicles capable of transitioning from space to Earth’s atmosphere and into bodies of water. Dean’s full analysis at the link is well worth the time to go through.

The Hill tags on Dean’s reporting and brings to light an even more remarkable change. The very definition of a UFO has been altered in a provocative fashion. In addition to listing the various, remarkable capabilities that some of these objects appear to demonstrate, Congress is pointing to one thing that they either are not or we’re not interested in. They specify that the new definition of UFO “excludes man-made objects.” (Emphasis added)

In short, members of a key national security-focused committee believe that objects of unknown origin are demonstrating remarkably advanced technology by moving seamlessly between space, air and water. A report accompanying the legislation notes that “transmedium threats to United States national security are expanding exponentially.”

It strains credulity to believe that lawmakers would include such extraordinary language in public legislation without compelling evidence. Perhaps members have seen the classified sensor data that prompted former President Trump’s director of national intelligence to state that UFOs exhibit “technologies that we don’t have [and] that we are not capable of defending against” (among several other eyebrow-raising comments).

Most strikingly, Congress’s new definition of “UFO” excludes “man-made” objects.

It’s not a definitive statement that ET is phoning home, but it’s not far from it. After all, if some of these objects buzzing around near our nuclear facilities are technological in nature – as some of them clearly seem to be – and they are not “man-made,” then who or what made them? Women? We can probably rule that out since not many people in Washington these days can even say what a woman is with any confidence. So who else does that leave? Dolphins? That’s a pet theory of mine, but there is no evidence to support it.

Are the members who are crafting this legislation ready to simply rip off the bandaid and say the four famous words from the halls of ufology aloud? (We. Are. Not. Alone.) That might seem remarkable, but we’ve been seeing a large volume of remarkable news items on this subject showing up over the past few months.

For the longest time, you couldn’t get an elected official to whisper “UFO” in public. It was considered career suicide. Then, after the public revelation of the AATIP program, the UAP Task Force, and the latest activities being pried out of the Pentagon, things began to change. Describing unknown objects as a potential national security or at least air safety threat gave members of Congress cover to begin taking the matter seriously. But now the volume has really been turned up.

We’ve had members of congress coming out and flatly accusing the Pentagon of a coverup regarding UFOs. Others have openly speculated about the existence of crashed nonhuman technology in the possession of the military or – more likely – some defense industry contractor such as Lockheed. Some of the new congressional language that Dean highlights demands searches for hidden government programs and investigations into whether or not the Pentagon has been engaged in activities and potentially spending taxpayer money with no congressional oversight whatsoever. Another bill calls for historical research into the history of UFO sightings dating back specifically to 1947. (For those not familiar, that’s when the alleged Roswell crash took place.)

Yes, we’re clearly moving into uncharted waters here. And assuming all of this legislation goes through in a bipartisan fashion as expected, it’s probably only going to get stranger as we go. And I, for one, couldn’t be happier.