Steven Greer: Leading the Charge For UFO Disclosure or Chasing the Spotlight?

Dr. Steven Greer, a retired physician turned ufologist, has long positioned himself as a central figure in the UFO disclosure movement. His recent push to sway the Trump administration highlighted by a released memo urging executive orders to declassify UFO data—has reignited debates about his credibility. However, beneath his authoritative veneer lies an increasingly controversial reputation, casting doubt on his suitability as a spokesperson for genuine disclosure.

Greer’s journey into ufology began in the early 1990s with the establishment of the Center for the Study of Extraterrestrial Intelligence (CSETI) and the Disclosure Project. Initially, these initiatives appeared promising, gathering over 700 testimonies from whistleblowers and claims of thousands of pilot sightings and landing traces. His 2001 press conference, held in Washington D.C., successfully placed the UFO phenomenon in the mainstream spotlight. Yet, in recent years, the precision and credibility of Greer’s claims have drifted into questionable territory.

Initially, Greer’s Disclosure Project provided a credible platform, presenting compelling testimonies that challenged official silence and drew necessary attention to unexplained aerial phenomena. However, his more recent claims—such as interactions with 69 distinct alien species and the promotion of human-initiated extraterrestrial contact known as CE-5 protocols—have diminished his credibility. Most notably, a 2019 incident, in which Greer showcased a clearly debunked “alien” photograph during a paid event, revealed a troubling shift. What once appeared as a genuine passion now seems overshadowed by exaggeration.

Adding to this concern, a recently released memo to the Trump administration exemplifies Greer’s drift toward extravagant claims. The memo alleges an intricate conspiracy involving reverse-engineered UFOs used for drug trafficking since the 1950s, and it proposes executive orders to establish diplomatic relations with Non-Human Intelligence (NHI). These explosive assertions lack any tangible proof, sharply contrasting with the restrained, evidence-focused reports from official bodies such as the Pentagon’s UAP Task Force and the Office of the Director of National Intelligence (ODNI), which prioritize verifiable data over speculation.

Greer’s motives have also become increasingly suspect. His evasive response during a recent VladTV interview about purported discussions with Trump suggests a strategy focused more on stirring interest than providing clarity. Social media further amplifies unsubstantiated claims about meetings with high-ranking officials, enhancing his public profile but diminishing trust. His public release of the memorandum—rather than a discreet submission—mirrors past self-promotional stunts, like the 2019 event where Greer sold access to a now-debunked photograph of an alleged alien being. Coupled with these missteps, a troubling pattern emerges: truth-seeking seemingly replaced by financial incentives.

Ufology, already a contentious field, desperately needs credible representatives capable of bridging the gap between the mainstream scientific community and fringe enthusiasts. Greer, unfortunately, is no longer that bridge. His repeated missteps contrast sharply with the rigorous, evidence-based approach taken by groups like the Pentagon’s UAP Task Force and the Scientific Coalition for UAP Studies (SCU). These organizations exemplify a transparency and analytical rigor absent in Greer’s increasingly sensational narratives.

Comparing Greer to peers like Jeremy Corbell and Ross Coulthart further highlights his drift into sensationalism. Corbell, known for captivating but underwhelming ‘orb’ documentaries, and Coulthart, infamous for sourceless 2027 alien arrival predictions, share Greer’s tendency for dramatic, yet unproven claims. Greer, however, sets himself apart through even more sensational narratives—such as allegations of UFOs involved in drug trafficking—further undermining his position as a credible advocate.

Ultimately, while Greer’s early contributions to ufology are undeniable, his recent trajectory has tarnished his once-respected legacy. Disclosure—a subject demanding utmost trust and meticulous validation—cannot thrive under a figure whose credibility has repeatedly faltered. As interest in UAPs grows through official channels and public discourse, the community must embrace voices committed to authenticity and accountability. Greer’s quest for the personal spotlight falls short.