The Disclosure Paradox
Building Our Collective Capacity for the Contact We Desire and Fear
Most people now believe we are not alone in the universe, viewing the existence of non-human intelligence (NHI) as a logical inevitability. Yet this intellectual acceptance exists alongside deep anxiety about humanity’s readiness to encounter NHI in a more visible and irrefutable way. We face the paradoxical challenge of preparing the public for what many already believe.
This tension between acceptance and anxiety emerged in our recent study examining public perspectives on contact with NHI. Through in-depth interviews with 39 individuals across multiple generations—from Baby Boomers to the children of Gen Z—we explored how people think and feel about potential contact with NHI. Our diverse sample included roughly equal numbers of men and women, primarily from the United States, with varying levels of interest in the topic. These weren’t self-avowed experts or deniers—they were everyday people grappling with extraordinary possibilities.
Our study uncovered a complex web of competing desires. Like adolescents on the cusp of adulthood, humans simultaneously crave and dread greater responsibility. We seek profound change while fearing its practical consequences. We dream of transformation while clinging to stability and the status quo. We fear that what should aid and uplift us will be our undoing.
It seems that in gazing into our cosmic future, we confront the trauma of our human past. In stepping into the unknown, we drag behind the weight of our collective distrust and dismay over the current state of our world. As one respondent said, “Humans are small, stupid little beings.”
The core anxiety is not what these "others" will do to us but how humanity will respond to meeting them.
This creates a problem for disclosure advocates.
How do you bring disclosure to a public that both wants truth and fears it?
A public that distrusts authority but still relies on it?
A humanity that longs for a golden age but believes we are incapable of it?
What does it look like to be truly ready for contact? Or is that the wrong question? Our interviews revealed the need to reframe how we think about public preparation.
A Whole New World
The interviews revealed tremendous hope and excitement for what contact with advanced civilizations could mean for humanity. Many mentioned the potential for technological advancements that bring medical breakthroughs, provide for limitless energy, and solve environmental problems. People imagined a world where no one goes hungry and the growing chasm between rich and poor shrinks to give everyone a good life.
People were also hopeful that confirming the existence of NHI would unite us by creating a common human bond. The idea is that meeting beings who may not look, speak, think, or live like us would dissolve the superficial differences between us, like shades of skin tone and cultural milieus. As the human bond strengthens, conflict between nations and people should fall away. For the first time in our human history, people see an opportunity for lasting peace.
On the more personal side, some interviewees welcomed the prospect of accelerated spiritual growth. They saw contact as a powerful impetus to reevaluate life’s purpose and meaning and explore the nature of reality from an expanded consciousness. Some spoke of increased human capabilities and psychic development, as well as learning more inspired ways of living and being from non-human cultures. The most positive people seemed to be the most imaginative and self-aware, seeing themselves thriving in a world of new possibilities.
The vision of a post-contact world is predominantly positive. So where is the disconnect?
We get a clue in the responses. On the heels of excitement about the possibilities of clean energy and medical breakthroughs is a worry about how competing power structures might weaponize or monopolize such advancements. As one respondent noted, "Think about it - whoever gets this technology first, they're going to want to control it. Just look at what we've done with nuclear power." We want the gifts but are concerned about how others might use them.
Herein lies the greatest fear—that the failings of our current leaders and fellow man will plunge us into chaos.
The Trust Deficit
One of our interviewees stated it this way:
World leaders wouldn't be who I want representing me…I don't have a high opinion of people in charge.
Several people picked up on the problem of entrusting the same individuals and institutions who guarded the secrets of NHI with leading disclosure and speaking for humanity.
The government has kept their mouth shut for so, so long. They have this disinformation campaign...Whatever the reason is, whoever the 'they' is in the government...they clearly kept it from us for a reason.
While some secrecy is perhaps justified, like where national security capabilities and vulnerabilities are concerned, the almost impenetrable silence around NHI raises the specter of nefarious motives.
As noted above, some worry that advanced technology would be co-opted by those in power to consolidate control and further their own selfish political and economic interests. That instead of promoting peace among men, the seeking of decisive advantage would further divide us, pitting nation against nation in possible doomsday destruction. This fear is not hypothetical—for many it represents continuation of wars and genocide that the vast majority of humanity never consented to and doesn’t support, which begets a sense of powerlessness.
Aside from fighting one another, people also fear an aggressive human response to peaceful or neutral NHI that, at best, costs us the benefits of what NHI can bring, and at worst, ends humanity forever. We distrust our leadership and militaries to correctly assess the situation, effectively navigate an unprecedented scenario, diplomatically handle it, and act in humanity’s collective best interest.
Again, this is people viewing past as prologue.
The cognitive dissonance comes from both holding a vision of hope and seeing no way to get there.
People seem to have an intuitive sense that the transformation of a post-contact world is only possible through transformation of our pre-contact world and that seems too scary or far-fetched to face. Underneath this doubt is a fear of our capacity to process and adapt to paradigm shifts. One GenX participant captured it this way:
I want to know everything, but I also know we need to be really careful about how this gets out. You can't just drop this bomb on people.
Building Our Collective Capacity
The interviews revealed a complex relationship with change. While many viewed expanded consciousness and spiritual growth as natural outcomes of contact, they questioned our collective readiness to integrate paradigm-shifting revelations peacefully. Several commented on how poorly we have handled smaller societal changes, citing recent responses to political shifts, technological advances, and global challenges. Some worried about certain groups, particularly religious sects, engaging in fear-mongering and misinformation when faced with new information that challenges their worldview. Alternately, as one person stated it, “There’s going to be a lot of cults worshipping the aliens.” Neither extreme is constructive.
This creates an interesting tension where people generally expressed confidence in their own ability to handle disclosure while doubting the collective capacity for adaptation—a bias referred to as fundamental attribution error. Yet when pressed, many acknowledged their own uncertainty about how they would actually process such profound changes to their understanding of reality. As one respondent noted, "I think I'd be okay, but honestly, how can any of us really know how we'd react?"
Interestingly, actual responses from religious interviewees highlight the contrast between stereotype and reality, which should give us hope. For example, when speaking of the intersection of contact and his Christian faith, one interviewee stated that his faith, “allows for mystery and things beyond our understanding,” without fundamentally challenging core beliefs.
Sometimes our biases lead us to underestimate others' capacity for adaptation and growth and overestimate our own ability to react calmly and rationally.
Finally, these fears about humanity’s inability to handle the truth may reflect our own limited perspective and programming rather than an immutable human trait. Our research suggests that younger generations and those with broader cosmic awareness often express more optimistic views of human potential. They see contact not as a test of our current nature but as a catalyst for revealing our deeper capabilities. As one young respondent noted, "Maybe we need a unifying moment to change our trajectory."
This generational insight suggests an important shift in perspective: rather than asking whether humanity is ready for contact, we should focus on building our collective capacity for processing profound and rapid change. The question becomes not if we are ready, but how we can strengthen our ability to navigate transformation together, beginning with trusting each to move into the unknown without falling apart.
Communicating About Contact
The data suggests that trust-building must begin well before any official disclosure. The challenge and conundrum is that many people want authoritative confirmation of NHI reality yet deeply distrust traditional authorities. They seek official disclosure while questioning the motives and credibility of those who would make such announcements.
"I need the government to tell me the truth," said one Millennial, "but how will I know they're actually telling the truth this time?"
This creates both a seemingly impossible standard and a mandate for change.
We need trusted leadership in a world where trust in leadership has eroded to historic lows.
Our study suggests that building trust requires a new approach based on a disclosure process we can witness and verify ourselves, not just assumptions and conclusions we're asked to accept. This means:
Creating transparent, inclusive processes for sharing information
Developing multiple independent verification channels
Establishing support systems for processing practical and psychological change
Investing in educational resources with trusted experts in relevant fields
Empowering individual engagement alongside collective preparation
Building community-level discussion forums that respect diverse perspectives
Fostering international cooperation under themes of unity and collective benefit
As one interviewee put it, "This affects all of humanity. We should all have a voice in how we handle it."
A global communication strategy should balance multiple needs and concerns while allowing for a gradual release of information that allows time for processing, integration, and adaptation. Many noted this appears to be happening organically already, though not as transparently as desired. The public needs better visibility into how information is being verified and validated. As one participant noted, "I don't just want to hear it from one government or one group of scientists. We need different perspectives all confirming the same thing."
Responsible messaging would emphasize the potential benefits of contact, like technological advancements and personal growth while addressing fears of hostility and societal breakdown. This allows for a nuanced view of how contact could unfold, acknowledging that there will be many challenges and pitfalls to navigate.
While we are reforming our institutions, we would also benefit from emphasizing individual agency and personal preparation.
As confirmed in our study, people seem more positive when they feel personally empowered and informed, as opposed to collectively managed.
In fact, this is part of growing up—assuming personal responsibility for one’s choices and pursuing independent thought. The mature person is able to weather trials, turbulence, and tribulation by grounding in their own truth. The mature person—the conscious person—is a beacon of resilience and stability for others in uncertain times.
From Paradox to Preparation
Perhaps the goal is not to reach a defined point of readiness but to affirm humanity’s capacity to handle contact, however it may come.
Thus, readiness is not a state we achieve but a process we embrace.
As we face our fears while maintaining hope, balance caution with excitement, acknowledge our limitations while moving toward our potential, we increase our collective confidence in managing monumental change thoughtfully and constructively.
Instead of waiting for contact to catalyze our growth, we can start to build the traits of higher consciousness now, like showing care and compassion, strengthening our critical thinking and creative problem-solving, and seeing the common wishes in the human heart. And then demand those behaviors from our leaders or choose more enlightened ones that share those values.
The paradox of simultaneously wanting and fearing disclosure reflects a fundamental truth about transformation—it requires us to step into uncertainty with both wisdom and wonder. By building trust, strengthening our collective capacity for change, and cultivating higher consciousness now, we prepare ourselves not just for contact with NHI, but for our own evolution as a species.
This article draws on findings of the 2024 Cosmic Connectors Interview Study. The study highlights will be available at www.cosmicconnectors.net. My thanks to our interviewees and the volunteers who interviewed them. For more information, contact me.
Carolyn Brouillard is Managing Partner of ExoFuturesConsulting, which partners with forward-thinking organizations ready to explore the profound implications of contact with NHI.
Strangely, I think religious people will be just fine. The people we are going to need to worry about are scientists and their crisis of purpose.
Great framing of the complexities of being human - we are full of inconsistencies and paradox! The UAP/NHI ‘disclosure paradox’ helps to surface some of these contradictory beliefs.
Listening to a recent discussion of UAP/NHI realities I noted several in the audience wanting disclosure while also admitting that national security was paramount. One speaker went as far as saying it was critical that the USA remains militarily ahead of all adversaries - which probably requires extreme secrecy.
I believe many years ago, Richard Dolan may have referred to this as a ‘national insecurity issue’ - and a very expensive one.
I like to way you reference human development and transformational change. Perhaps transformative learning theory (eg Jack Mezirow and others) may offer some insight into the nature of this process. Transformative learning journeys are probably complex and unique for each person. A diverse range of supporting facilitation may be required.
I wonder if NHI also experience a ‘disclosure/contact paradox’, and if so what might that look like 🙂