Pavel Ibarra Meda's October 29 X post accuses former AARO director Sean Kirkpatrick of deception over Jim Ryder's contacts. It amplifies an Android Paranormal post presenting a photograph as a rebuttal. The editorially important detail is a parenthetical label inside the circulating quotation: “(AAWSAP)”.

That addition matters because it tells readers who Kirkpatrick supposedly meant by “those people.” Checking the source reveals that this identification is not present in the quoted words in the original article.

Compare the quotation with its context

In Ben Schreckinger's October 29 Paradigm report, the sentence immediately before Kirkpatrick's quotation refers to Ryder's alleged contacts with the CIA. The quotation begins: “We confirmed he didn't speak to those people.” The report does not insert AAWSAP into that sentence.

This does not conclusively establish every person Kirkpatrick intended to reference. It establishes a narrower, verifiable difference between the published report and the social-media version. A parenthetical interpretation should not silently acquire the authority of a speaker's own words.

Paradigm attributes its account to Kirkpatrick's written responses and reports that several parties did not respond to requests for comment. It does not provide a public correspondence archive resolving all the contacts in dispute. Our earlier coverage addressed those broader allegations; this follow-up examines the newly circulating rebuttal's quotation and evidence.

A shared research roster answers a different question

A SAFIRE project report lists James Ryder and Harold Puthoff on its science review team. That is primary documentation of a shared listed affiliation. It adds concrete context to claims that the two moved in overlapping research circles.

It does not establish an AAWSAP meeting, the date or content of a particular conversation, or a transfer of anomalous material. The circulating photograph is not inserted here, and this review does not independently authenticate its date or identify its subjects from appearance. Even an authenticated photograph would need contextual records before it could answer a program-specific question.

AARO's 2024 historical report separately records a former CIA official's denial of involvement in an alleged materials transfer. That is an official account of a denial, not independent confirmation that every private conversation has been reconstructed correctly.

The next evidence test

The most useful next step would be clarification of the people and time period Kirkpatrick meant, supported by dated correspondence or meeting records. Evidence of acquaintance, evidence of a particular discussion and evidence of a transfer are different propositions.

Pavel's post is an attributable criticism worth examining. The added AAWSAP label and a shared roster do not, by themselves, establish that Kirkpatrick knowingly lied. Keeping the quotation intact makes the dispute more testable for everyone.

Hero image: original AI-generated editorial illustration. It does not depict evidence or an actual scene from the reported events.