What's new
Fantasy Football - Footballguys Forums

This is a sample guest message. Register a free account today to become a member! Once signed in, you'll be able to participate on this site by adding your own topics and posts, as well as connect with other members through your own private inbox!

Are Aliens Visiting Us? (2 Viewers)


I'm actually looking forward to getting a look at this. Some rather high ranking officials interviewed. The idea of extraterrestrial tech or visitors is fun even if we're a little light on evidence and it's total BS. I've probably heard crazier ideas in the last week and there's still a few days left in this one, so why not aliens?

:alien:
 

I'm actually looking forward to getting a look at this. Some rather high ranking officials interviewed. The idea of extraterrestrial tech or visitors is fun even if we're a little light on evidence and it's total BS. I've probably heard crazier ideas in the last week and there's still a few days left in this one, so why not aliens?

:alien:
https://www.foxnews.com/politics/th...plores-claims-80-year-cover-up-non-human-life
 

I'm actually looking forward to getting a look at this. Some rather high ranking officials interviewed. The idea of extraterrestrial tech or visitors is fun even if we're a little light on evidence and it's total BS. I've probably heard crazier ideas in the last week and there's still a few days left in this one, so why not aliens?

:alien:
https://www.foxnews.com/politics/th...plores-claims-80-year-cover-up-non-human-life
I think i saw this guy on Bill Maher a few weeks ago. He seemed anything but crazy.
 

I'm actually looking forward to getting a look at this. Some rather high ranking officials interviewed. The idea of extraterrestrial tech or visitors is fun even if we're a little light on evidence and it's total BS. I've probably heard crazier ideas in the last week and there's still a few days left in this one, so why not aliens?

:alien:
https://www.foxnews.com/politics/th...plores-claims-80-year-cover-up-non-human-life
I think i saw this guy on Bill Maher a few weeks ago. He seemed anything but crazy.
Supposedly the amount of extremely credible people in this documentary is incredible.
 

I'm actually looking forward to getting a look at this. Some rather high ranking officials interviewed. The idea of extraterrestrial tech or visitors is fun even if we're a little light on evidence and it's total BS. I've probably heard crazier ideas in the last week and there's still a few days left in this one, so why not aliens?

:alien:
https://www.foxnews.com/politics/th...plores-claims-80-year-cover-up-non-human-life
I think i saw this guy on Bill Maher a few weeks ago. He seemed anything but crazy.
Supposedly the amount of extremely credible people in this documentary is incredible.
I don't think it's supposedly though. The credible people in the doc are actually in it and talking about things we can't explain.
 

I'm actually looking forward to getting a look at this. Some rather high ranking officials interviewed. The idea of extraterrestrial tech or visitors is fun even if we're a little light on evidence and it's total BS. I've probably heard crazier ideas in the last week and there's still a few days left in this one, so why not aliens?

:alien:
https://www.foxnews.com/politics/th...plores-claims-80-year-cover-up-non-human-life
I think i saw this guy on Bill Maher a few weeks ago. He seemed anything but crazy.
Supposedly the amount of extremely credible people in this documentary is incredible.
I don't think it's supposedly though. The credible people in the doc are actually in it and talking about things we can't explain.
Not a lot of people are paying attention to this. It’s either the biggest story in history if true or the biggest scandal with all the dark money if it’s false.
 

I'm actually looking forward to getting a look at this. Some rather high ranking officials interviewed. The idea of extraterrestrial tech or visitors is fun even if we're a little light on evidence and it's total BS. I've probably heard crazier ideas in the last week and there's still a few days left in this one, so why not aliens?

:alien:
https://www.foxnews.com/politics/th...plores-claims-80-year-cover-up-non-human-life
I know nothing about this stuff, but after skimming through the article, one thing that jumps out is, what could make this "advanced technology" definable as "of non-human origin"?

"Well, I'm a human, and I've never heard of this tech ... what about you?"
"Nah, never seen anything like that either."
"And you're a human too! There's no way this is of human origin."
 

I'm actually looking forward to getting a look at this. Some rather high ranking officials interviewed. The idea of extraterrestrial tech or visitors is fun even if we're a little light on evidence and it's total BS. I've probably heard crazier ideas in the last week and there's still a few days left in this one, so why not aliens?

:alien:
https://www.foxnews.com/politics/th...plores-claims-80-year-cover-up-non-human-life
I think i saw this guy on Bill Maher a few weeks ago. He seemed anything but crazy.
Supposedly the amount of extremely credible people in this documentary is incredible.
I don't think it's supposedly though. The credible people in the doc are actually in it and talking about things we can't explain.
I was just couching my words as I haven’t actually seen it yet. But yes, I agree with you completely.
 
It's interesting to me that the public doesn't seem to care.

Potentially the biggest discovery in the history of mankind and it barely makes the news.
No doubt.

My take, for what ever it’s worth. I think it’s decades of conditioning. For most of our lives “Aliens” lives in the crazy conspiracy world. Over the past few years (largely after the NY Times article broke) when I’ve talked to people I know who don’t follow this stuff, they are completely unaware of any of the details. When I ask why, as lots of this has been in the news for years, the common response I get is they “zone out” or don’t pay attention because it’s already determined to them to be “crazy conspiracy theory” stuff.
 
It's interesting to me that the public doesn't seem to care.

Potentially the biggest discovery in the history of mankind and it barely makes the news.
No doubt.

My take, for what ever it’s worth. I think it’s decades of conditioning. For most of our lives “Aliens” lives in the crazy conspiracy world. Over the past few years (largely after the NY Times article broke) when I’ve talked to people I know who don’t follow this stuff, they are completely unaware of any of the details. When I ask why, as lots of this has been in the news for years, the common response I get is they “zone out” or don’t pay attention because it’s already determined to them to be “crazy conspiracy theory” stuff.
When you see the credentials of the people now willing to discuss this topic and not pooh pooh it, but take it seriously and talk about things they know that aren't easily explained away the fact almost nobody is even aware of it backs up your point.

I agree we've been conditioned to immediately tune it out as nonsense and anyone entertaining it as more than that is a neck bearded basement dweller for lack of a better term. The truth for even verifiable and easily proven facts are cloudy in our current environment so no real surprise there isn't an appetite for "aliens". I don't think much outside of an "independence day" (meaning such in your face disclosure it can't be denied) type event moves the needle, but regardless i think this documentary will be very entertaining and maybe a little eye opening.

:alien:
 
Last edited:
Haven't watched it, but my take is the same as previous big news on this stuff. Is there any concrete evidence or is this just more eyewitness stuff? To be clear, I count "I saw aliens" and "I saw the files" and "I saw the evidence" all as eyewitness stuff. Personally, I don't lend any credence to the eyewitness stuff. If there's real, hard evidence, let's see it. Until then, GTFO.
 
Haven't watched it, but my take is the same as previous big news on this stuff. Is there any concrete evidence or is this just more eyewitness stuff? To be clear, I count "I saw aliens" and "I saw the files" and "I saw the evidence" all as eyewitness stuff. Personally, I don't lend any credence to the eyewitness stuff. If there's real, hard evidence, let's see it. Until then, GTFO.
There’s plenty of concrete evidence. Search Tic Tac, gimble or go fast videos. But these are radar or lidar so the average joe doubts/doesn’t understand what they are seeing. Another problem is unless it is 4K video people won’t believe, and even now with AI and normal peoples video processing skills even that wouldn’t be proof.
 
It's interesting to me that the public doesn't seem to care.

Potentially the biggest discovery in the history of mankind and it barely makes the news.
I don' t think the public doesn't care, just think we are tired of being jacked around with disclosure. "We're going to tell you everything!!!!" turned into I talked to a guy who talked to a guy but I can't tell you anything because it's classified. **** right off, tell us or don't but quit ****ing around. I've seen a lot of grainy **** I can't explain but I turn on my TV and see beads of sweat falling in slow motion on a 4k TV watching local High School football. Maybe it's just me but got tired real quick of all the "you just wait till we tell you what we know and you don't".
 
Last edited:
Yeah, that too. So many promises of "real info" and "hard evidence", yet every time it turns out to be eyewitness accounts (useless) or grainy video of something that could easily be explained as any one of a dozen different things. I can't even count the number of grainy videos purporting to be "conclusive proof" that are almost certainly just a mylar balloon blowing in the wind.

@dkp993 - If there is real, concrete evidence, I'm happy to review links. I've given up trying to search for it myself as that inevitably leads to a video of "Loch Ness Monster" quality.
 
It's interesting to me that the public doesn't seem to care.

Potentially the biggest discovery in the history of mankind and it barely makes the news.
I don' t think the public doesn't care, just think we are tired of being jacked around with disclosure. "We're going to tell you everything!!!!" turned into I talked to a guy who talked to a guy but I cna't tell you anything because it's classified. **** right off, tell us or don't but quite ****ing around. I've seen a lot of grainy **** I can't explain but I turn on my TV and see beads of sweat falling in slow motion on a 4k TV watching local High School football. Maybe it's just me but got tired real quick of all the "you just wait till we tell you what we know and you don't".
I get a kick out of the idea that we'd finally become aware of aliens not by scientists or even a government but from a for-profit documentary film.
 
Yeah, that too. So many promises of "real info" and "hard evidence", yet every time it turns out to be eyewitness accounts (useless) or grainy video of something that could easily be explained as any one of a dozen different things. I can't even count the number of grainy videos purporting to be "conclusive proof" that are almost certainly just a mylar balloon blowing in the wind.

@dkp993 - If there is real, concrete evidence, I'm happy to review links. I've given up trying to search for it myself as that inevitably leads to a video of "Loch Ness Monster" quality.
I think this speaks exactly to the point @TripItUp brought up a few posts up. The evidence is incredibly compelling, especially if you are someone who understands radar or LiDAR. The government is even admitting that they don’t know what those crafts are, and they move and operate in a way that no known craft does. So this couldn’t be further from someone’s home grainy video of the loch ness monster. Yet the public lumps into those two together because they don’t understand the videos they’re seeing.

In my opinion, they couldn’t be further apart. When experts in a field say this is weird and anomalous and doesn’t make sense, that carries a whole lot more weight than Jim Bob saying he saw something on a video
 
Yeah, that too. So many promises of "real info" and "hard evidence", yet every time it turns out to be eyewitness accounts (useless) or grainy video of something that could easily be explained as any one of a dozen different things. I can't even count the number of grainy videos purporting to be "conclusive proof" that are almost certainly just a mylar balloon blowing in the wind.

@dkp993 - If there is real, concrete evidence, I'm happy to review links. I've given up trying to search for it myself as that inevitably leads to a video of "Loch Ness Monster" quality.
You're obviously going to get different definitions of "concrete" evidence, but for me, if Mick West can give a perfectly reasonable explanation for it that doesn't involve aliens (as he has done for every one of the things I see touted over and over again), then it doesn't seem very concrete.
 
Yeah, that too. So many promises of "real info" and "hard evidence", yet every time it turns out to be eyewitness accounts (useless) or grainy video of something that could easily be explained as any one of a dozen different things. I can't even count the number of grainy videos purporting to be "conclusive proof" that are almost certainly just a mylar balloon blowing in the wind.

@dkp993 - If there is real, concrete evidence, I'm happy to review links. I've given up trying to search for it myself as that inevitably leads to a video of "Loch Ness Monster" quality.
I think this speaks exactly to the point @TripItUp brought up a few posts up. The evidence is incredibly compelling, especially if you are someone who understands radar or LiDAR. The government is even admitting that they don’t know what those crafts are, and they move and operate in a way that no known craft does. So this couldn’t be further from someone’s home grainy video of the loch ness monster. Yet the public lumps into those two together because they don’t understand the videos they’re seeing.

In my opinion, they couldn’t be further apart. When experts in a field say this is weird and anomalous and doesn’t make sense, that carries a whole lot more weight than Jim Bob saying he saw something on a video
This is the difference. We're talking about the people in charge of knowing what's in our airspace saying they don't know what's in our airspace. Military personnel witnessing things on radar they can't explain. How compelling will this documentary be I'm not sure, but they're asking the very people that we want to ask these questions to on camera. I doubt very much there's any "proof" if you're looking for an actual artifact, but it does carry more weight coming from the military and government (I know, nobody lies more than they do) than Cletus on his way to milk the cows and his 8mm camera.
 
If aliens exist and have been visiting Earth, I feel like the government authorities and the entertainment media have done a pretty good job at desensitizing us. Like, I’m at the point where I think it’s probably a coin flip. But, I’m not as interested as I should be because these visitations haven’t had a material impact on my life.

Of course, I don’t see my apathy and ignorance as a great thing, as the implications are enormous. So, I’m gonna try to pay more attention going forward.
 
Yeah, that too. So many promises of "real info" and "hard evidence", yet every time it turns out to be eyewitness accounts (useless) or grainy video of something that could easily be explained as any one of a dozen different things. I can't even count the number of grainy videos purporting to be "conclusive proof" that are almost certainly just a mylar balloon blowing in the wind.

@dkp993 - If there is real, concrete evidence, I'm happy to review links. I've given up trying to search for it myself as that inevitably leads to a video of "Loch Ness Monster" quality.
You're obviously going to get different definitions of "concrete" evidence, but for me, if Mick West can give a perfectly reasonable explanation for it that doesn't involve aliens (as he has done for every one of the things I see touted over and over again), then it doesn't seem very concrete.
Certainly not trying to be argumentative, as everyone has the right to their opinion. But what you’re saying here is Mick West has explanations that the military or the US government don’t.

There is no question there is a gluttony of stuff out there that Mick West can explain away. Not every thing is aliens, but the literal world experts with developing and using this equipment can’t explain the three videos I’ve mentioned above. Trained fighter pilots whose job it is to observe and work with this equipment every single day are giving testimony to this being unexplainable with current human technology. (This of course on top of what they saw with their eyes). How is Mick West more credible than these people?
 
It's interesting to me that the public doesn't seem to care.

Potentially the biggest discovery in the history of mankind and it barely makes the news.
If there is extraterrestrial life that has infiltrated our government and media, I would have higher expectations for both. If this is the best they can do, I'm not really interested in what they have to offer.
Maybe the aliens are "Bubba".
 
How is Mick West more credible than these people?
For one, Mick West and others can say things that US government and military officials can't or won't. For instance, you won't see a US government official say publicly "China has better drone tech than we do" or similar. Remember that these are the same government and military officials that were surprised and confused (or acted that way) at foreign weather balloons floating above our airspace.

That said, you mentioned some videos. Did you provide links?
 
Im fresh off the Tartarian Empire theories!!!:tinfoilhat:


The "new one" I find most interesting is the idea that after the Younger Dryas event, survivors supposedly went underground — and some even adapted to live underwater — to escape the cataclysm. Those are what we are seeing.
 
Im fresh off the Tartarian Empire theories!!!:tinfoilhat:


The "new one" I find most interesting is the idea that after the Younger Dryas event, survivors supposedly went underground — and some even adapted to live underwater — to escape the cataclysm. Those are what we are seeing.
Derinkuyu, help me understand.

Yeah that place is sick!

And thats just one of them that we know of.
 
Im fresh off the Tartarian Empire theories!!!:tinfoilhat:


The "new one" I find most interesting is the idea that after the Younger Dryas event, survivors supposedly went underground — and some even adapted to live underwater — to escape the cataclysm. Those are what we are seeing.
Derinkuyu, help me understand.

Yeah that place is sick!

And thats just one of them that we know of.
Listening to a Danny Jones podcast and the guy on there, Matt LaCroix, says there is similar settlement 5 miles away connected by a tunnel at the bottom of Derinkuyu to Kaymakli so they could go back & forth between the two underground cities. Dude throws a lot of stuff on the wall and I'm not going to spot check it all but it's an interesting conversation. Take it for what it's worth.

 
Im fresh off the Tartarian Empire theories!!!:tinfoilhat:


The "new one" I find most interesting is the idea that after the Younger Dryas event, survivors supposedly went underground — and some even adapted to live underwater — to escape the cataclysm. Those are what we are seeing.
Derinkuyu, help me understand.

Yeah that place is sick!

And thats just one of them that we know of.
Listening to a Danny Jones podcast and the guy on there, Matt LaCroix, says there is similar settlement 5 miles away connected by a tunnel at the bottom of Derinkuyu to Kaymakli so they could go back & forth between the two underground cities. Dude throws a lot of stuff on the wall and I'm not going to spot check it all but it's an interesting conversation. Take it for what it's worth.

Ill check it out, thanks!
 
How is Mick West more credible than these people?
For one, Mick West and others can say things that US government and military officials can't or won't. For instance, you won't see a US government official say publicly "China has better drone tech than we do" or similar. Remember that these are the same government and military officials that were surprised and confused (or acted that way) at foreign weather balloons floating above our airspace.

That said, you mentioned some videos. Did you provide links?
If you’re interested, and in my opinion you/everyone should be, there is a treasure trove of information out there in mainstream sources. But this tech is not simply better then ours stuff, it’s orders of magnitude more advanced. Like dropping from 50,000 feet to 100 in a sec, transmedium (going from air to underwater and back), no visual or measurable means of propulsion, right angle turns, etc etc.
And if it is somehow China or Russian it’s even more disturbing as it’s happening in our airspace and off our shores.

Bottom line is it’s worth all of us knowing about regardless of the origin.
 
I'm interested in real, credible evidence. I've gone looking for it dozens of times. Each time I've been massively disappointed with grainy videos that could literally be anything. For example, I don't consider the so-called Tic Tac video proof of anything.
 
I'm interested in real, credible evidence. I've gone looking for it dozens of times. Each time I've been massively disappointed with grainy videos that could literally be anything. For example, I don't consider the so-called Tic Tac video proof of anything.
Fair, and certainly your right. Again, not trying to convince you, largely because we should all start from a skeptical position.

My point really is about bringing us back to Trips originally asked question of why this isn’t a bigger story. I’m convinced we’ve been conditioned over the decades, and this conversation proves my point. When officially released videos from the government come out with incredibly credible people saying these can’t be explained get lumped into the same bucket of some dudes grainy video from his backyard we’ve (not you and I, the collective “we”) lost the narrative.
 
I'm interested in real, credible evidence. I've gone looking for it dozens of times. Each time I've been massively disappointed with grainy videos that could literally be anything. For example, I don't consider the so-called Tic Tac video proof of anything.
Fair, and certainly your right. Again, not trying to convince you, largely because we should all start from a skeptical position.

My point really is about bringing us back to Trips originally asked question of why this isn’t a bigger story. I’m convinced we’ve been conditioned over the decades, and this conversation proves my point. When officially released videos from the government come out with incredibly credible people saying these can’t be explained get lumped into the same bucket of some dudes grainy video from his backyard we’ve (not you and I, the collective “we”) lost the narrative.
Like RCon, I’ve never been impressed by the clips that I’ve seen. But I’m not, say, a military pilot who’s used to observing/ deciphering aerial phenomena. So, I don’t know what I’m looking at, and I need the experts to tell me what’s normal vs abnormal.
 
I'm interested in real, credible evidence. I've gone looking for it dozens of times. Each time I've been massively disappointed with grainy videos that could literally be anything. For example, I don't consider the so-called Tic Tac video proof of anything.
Fair, and certainly your right. Again, not trying to convince you, largely because we should all start from a skeptical position.

My point really is about bringing us back to Trips originally asked question of why this isn’t a bigger story. I’m convinced we’ve been conditioned over the decades, and this conversation proves my point. When officially released videos from the government come out with incredibly credible people saying these can’t be explained get lumped into the same bucket of some dudes grainy video from his backyard we’ve (not you and I, the collective “we”) lost the narrative.
Like RCon, I’ve never been impressed by the clips that I’ve seen. But I’m not, say, a military pilot who’s used to observing/ deciphering aerial phenomena. So, I don’t know what I’m looking at, and I need the experts to tell me what’s normal vs abnormal.
Sure, completely reasonable. Radar or LIDAR isn’t sexy or a 4k video. Despite my conviction here I’m extremely skeptical in general too. I’ve just been paying a lot of attention to these things since the 2017 NY Times article so I’ve read enough on it or seen enough interviews with very credible people to have been convinced there is something more here then Mick West (who I also listen to at times and makes good points, though I believe he’s now every bit agenda driven as are those on the other side) explanations.
 
I'm interested in real, credible evidence. I've gone looking for it dozens of times. Each time I've been massively disappointed with grainy videos that could literally be anything. For example, I don't consider the so-called Tic Tac video proof of anything.
Fair, and certainly your right. Again, not trying to convince you, largely because we should all start from a skeptical position.

My point really is about bringing us back to Trips originally asked question of why this isn’t a bigger story. I’m convinced we’ve been conditioned over the decades, and this conversation proves my point. When officially released videos from the government come out with incredibly credible people saying these can’t be explained get lumped into the same bucket of some dudes grainy video from his backyard we’ve (not you and I, the collective “we”) lost the narrative.
Like RCon, I’ve never been impressed by the clips that I’ve seen. But I’m not, say, a military pilot who’s used to observing/ deciphering aerial phenomena. So, I don’t know what I’m looking at, and I need the experts to tell me what’s normal vs abnormal.
Sure, completely reasonable. Radar or LIDAR isn’t sexy or a 4k video. Despite my conviction here I’m extremely skeptical in general too. I’ve just been paying a lot of attention to these things since the 2017 NY Times article so I’ve read enough on it or seen enough interviews with very credible people to have been convinced there is something more here then Mick West (who I also listen to at times and makes good points, though I believe he’s now every bit agenda driven as are those on the other side) explanations.
What’s his agenda?
 
The government is even admitting that they don’t know what those crafts are, and they move and operate in a way that no known craft does.
This seems like misleading language to me. Has there been an official government position that concedes the UAPs were "crafts"? They conceded the videos were real, not that what we think we see in those videos is real & accurate. Of course they don't know what the phenomena are, otherwise they wouldn't be UAPs. And things have the appearance of something "moving in a way that no known craft does." That is very much different from saying it's a craft moving in that way.
Certainly not trying to be argumentative, as everyone has the right to their opinion. But what you’re saying here is Mick West has explanations that the military or the US government don’t.
No I'm not. I'm not assuming that if the government says they don't know for sure what a UAP is then it means that they don't have rational explantions that they feel are the best explanations. I think there's a very good chance their best explanations match up closely with his.

There is no question there is a gluttony of stuff out there that Mick West can explain away. Not every thing is aliens, but the literal world experts with developing and using this equipment can’t explain the three videos I’ve mentioned above. Trained fighter pilots whose job it is to observe and work with this equipment every single day are giving testimony to this being unexplainable with current human technology. (This of course on top of what they saw with their eyes). How is Mick West more credible than these people?

He's more credible than most people I hear speak of this because he doesn't start with the assumption that what we are perceiving are actual crafts moving in ways they appear to be moving, including the phenomena in those three videos. Usually those trained fighter pilots aren't considering things like camera artifacts and illusions when they give answers to questions asking if they can explain them.
 
I'm interested in real, credible evidence. I've gone looking for it dozens of times. Each time I've been massively disappointed with grainy videos that could literally be anything. For example, I don't consider the so-called Tic Tac video proof of anything.
Fair, and certainly your right. Again, not trying to convince you, largely because we should all start from a skeptical position.

My point really is about bringing us back to Trips originally asked question of why this isn’t a bigger story. I’m convinced we’ve been conditioned over the decades, and this conversation proves my point. When officially released videos from the government come out with incredibly credible people saying these can’t be explained get lumped into the same bucket of some dudes grainy video from his backyard we’ve (not you and I, the collective “we”) lost the narrative.
Like RCon, I’ve never been impressed by the clips that I’ve seen. But I’m not, say, a military pilot who’s used to observing/ deciphering aerial phenomena. So, I don’t know what I’m looking at, and I need the experts to tell me what’s normal vs abnormal.
Sure, completely reasonable. Radar or LIDAR isn’t sexy or a 4k video. Despite my conviction here I’m extremely skeptical in general too. I’ve just been paying a lot of attention to these things since the 2017 NY Times article so I’ve read enough on it or seen enough interviews with very credible people to have been convinced there is something more here then Mick West (who I also listen to at times and makes good points, though I believe he’s now every bit agenda driven as are those on the other side) explanations.
What’s his agenda?
He’s anchored in the disproving skepticism position, it’s literally now his brand.
 
This seems like misleading language to me. Has there been an official government position that concedes the UAPs were "crafts"? They conceded the videos were real, not that what we think we see in those videos is real & accurate. Of course they don't know what the phenomena are, otherwise they wouldn't be UAPs. And things have the appearance of something "moving in a way that no known craft does." That is very much different from saying it's a craft moving in that way.

Craft, as I used here, simply means something flying under power and direction. Doesn’t imply manned or unmanned, drone or not. Simply something flying with purpose. In other words these are not weather balloons.

No I'm not. I'm not assuming that if the government says they don't know for sure what a UAP is then it means that they don't have rational explantions that they feel are the best explanations. I think there's a very good chance their best explanations match up closely with his.

All of the videos I reference fall into the unexplained category by the government. They’ve ruled out 95% of all the garbage videos and explained them away with conventional explanations. Like Mick does. None of these can be explained by conventional means and they admit to that. For example, I’ve seen a video where Mick explains that the gimbal video is just an airplane turning at a certain angle that makes it look the way it does. The government does not come to that conclusion.

He's more credible than most people I hear speak of this because he doesn't start with the assumption that what we are perceiving are actual crafts moving in ways they appear to be moving, including the phenomena in those three videos. Usually those trained fighter pilots aren't considering things like camera artifacts and illusions when they give answers to questions asking if they can explain them.

I don’t think that makes him more or less credible than people that start with the position that it’s true. When you start with a conclusion, as Mick does, and as people who start that it’s alien, you’ll likely get there.

In regarding the pilots, you’re dismissing the angle that might be the most important. They witnessed these things with their eyes, multiple different pilots. The radar and LIDAR isn’t simply backing up what they saw with their own eyes.
 
This seems like misleading language to me. Has there been an official government position that concedes the UAPs were "crafts"? They conceded the videos were real, not that what we think we see in those videos is real & accurate. Of course they don't know what the phenomena are, otherwise they wouldn't be UAPs. And things have the appearance of something "moving in a way that no known craft does." That is very much different from saying it's a craft moving in that way.

Craft, as I used here, simply means something flying under power and direction. Doesn’t imply manned or unmanned, drone or not. Simply something flying with purpose. In other words these are not weather balloons.

No I'm not. I'm not assuming that if the government says they don't know for sure what a UAP is then it means that they don't have rational explantions that they feel are the best explanations. I think there's a very good chance their best explanations match up closely with his.

All of the videos I reference fall into the unexplained category by the government. They’ve ruled out 95% of all the garbage videos and explained them away with conventional explanations. Like Mick does. None of these can be explained by conventional means and they admit to that. For example, I’ve seen a video where Mick explains that the gimbal video is just an airplane turning at a certain angle that makes it look the way it does. The government does not come to that conclusion.

He's more credible than most people I hear speak of this because he doesn't start with the assumption that what we are perceiving are actual crafts moving in ways they appear to be moving, including the phenomena in those three videos. Usually those trained fighter pilots aren't considering things like camera artifacts and illusions when they give answers to questions asking if they can explain them.

I don’t think that makes him more or less credible than people that start with the position that it’s true. When you start with a conclusion, as Mick does, and as people who start that it’s alien, you’ll likely get there.

In regarding the pilots, you’re dismissing the angle that might be the most important. They witnessed these things with their eyes, multiple different pilots. The radar and LIDAR isn’t simply backing up what they saw with their own eyes.
Link to the government conceding these phenomena are actual somethings "flying with purpose"? (As opposed to a UAP appearing to)
Link to the government admitting that these phenomena can't be explained by conventional means? Mick explains what it could be or is most likely to be - when has the government said that it couldn't be explained that way? (Rather than simply saying they can't be sure)

The other 95% of the garbage videos (actually more like 99%) likely had more concrete/obviously correct non-alien explanations. Just because this small % of garbage videos is less obviously non-alien doesn't mean they are alien. If anything, that other 95% is evidence against the rest being alien.

I strongly disagree that starting with the assumption that aliens are involved is equally as valid as starting with the assumption that there are other, more mundane explanations. My wife woke me up last night because she heard a big thump downstairs. I went down and looked around and didn't see anything before going back to bed. I could start with the assumption that it was a ghost, or that it was a small meteorite hitting my door, or I could start with the assumption that it had a more likely normal explanation. Turned out it was just the heavy door to a foldup cabinet that wasn't closed all the way and fell down on the desk part. I mean, I guess it could still be ghosts that pulled it down, but why go there when we have gravity?

My point really is about bringing us back to Trips originally asked question of why this isn’t a bigger story. I’m convinced we’ve been conditioned over the decades, and this conversation proves my point.

I agree that we're conditioned, but also feel it's a rational position to hold that this won't be a big story. Whether they realize it or not, a lot of the public does stick to the idea that, "Extraordinary claims require extraordinary evidence." We've seen so many extraordinary claims about UFOs over the years that are backed up by weak evidence that we ignore the new claims (or rehashed old claims) until we see the extraordinary evidence. Or just "good" evidence. Heck, I'd take some "decent" evidence at this point before thinking it should be a bigger story.
 
Link to the government conceding these phenomena are actual somethings "flying with purpose"? (As opposed to a UAP appearing to)

We were discussing how I used craft, that’s how I described what I meant not what the government said. I’m not sure what you mean or are implying with your part in the parentheses

Link to the government admitting that these phenomena can't be explained by conventional means? Mick explains what it could be or is most likely to be - when has the government said that it couldn't be explained that way? (Rather than simply saying they can't be sure)

I feel like this is a semantics game here, I don’t really understand where you’re going with it. If Mick claims something could be an airplane, and the government comes out and says after a bunch of analysis we can’t identify what it is. Don’t you think they thought about the possibility it was a plane, especially since they’ve eliminated 95% plus of the other things as such?* These people’s literal job is to determine exactly what’s on these videos and have access to the technology and source data yet Mick at home on his computer can determine what is where they can’t? And to be clear, they don’t couch their statements as “that’s most likely a plane but we can’t be sure so we classified it UAP”. They’ve ruled out the plane explanation, they just can’t come up with a good explanation for what it is.

* to be clear I’m not implying that they’re saying they don’t know then makes it an alien craft. But whatever it is, alien, China, Russia or Doc Browns flux capacitor, it’s absolutely worthy of further investigation to determine exactly what they are.

Or just "good" evidence. Heck, I'd take some "decent" evidence at this point before thinking it should be a bigger story
Again, this is just where we differ. But if you don’t think some of the most highly trained credible people in the world, and we’re not talking about one or two at this point but many (people we trust with 10’s of millions of dollars of aircraft and to make life or death decisions based on their observational skills and decision making in combat) witnessing crafts fly in ways that far and away defy any known craft and conventional technology then back that up with radar and LIDAR as not even “decent” evidence, well I’m not sure what meets your criteria for decent.
 
I strongly disagree that starting with the assumption that aliens are involved is equally as valid as starting with the assumption that there are other, more mundane explanations. My wife woke me up last night because she heard a big thump downstairs. I went down and looked around and didn't see anything before going back to bed. I could start with the assumption that it was a ghost, or that it was a small meteorite hitting my door, or I could start with the assumption that it had a more likely normal explanation. Turned out it was just the heavy door to a foldup cabinet that wasn't closed all the way and fell down on the desk part. I mean, I guess it could still be ghosts that pulled it down, but why go there when we have gravity?
IMO, the issue is how disinterested the public is when it comes to this topic, and that’s where the conditioning part comes in play. To use your analogy of the thump downstairs, your prior probability that it’s someone trying to harm your family isn’t gonna be very high. Indeed, it’s most likely your cat being silly. But, given that it could be something quite nefarious, you’re at least gonna get out of bed to check it out…
 
I'm interested in real, credible evidence. I've gone looking for it dozens of times. Each time I've been massively disappointed with grainy videos that could literally be anything. For example, I don't consider the so-called Tic Tac video proof of anything.

Giorgio Tsoukolas has already addressed this. His word is good as gold and should be evidence enough 💯
 
I'm interested in real, credible evidence. I've gone looking for it dozens of times. Each time I've been massively disappointed with grainy videos that could literally be anything. For example, I don't consider the so-called Tic Tac video proof of anything.
Fair, and certainly your right. Again, not trying to convince you, largely because we should all start from a skeptical position.

My point really is about bringing us back to Trips originally asked question of why this isn’t a bigger story. I’m convinced we’ve been conditioned over the decades, and this conversation proves my point. When officially released videos from the government come out with incredibly credible people saying these can’t be explained get lumped into the same bucket of some dudes grainy video from his backyard we’ve (not you and I, the collective “we”) lost the narrative.
Like RCon, I’ve never been impressed by the clips that I’ve seen. But I’m not, say, a military pilot who’s used to observing/ deciphering aerial phenomena. So, I don’t know what I’m looking at, and I need the experts to tell me what’s normal vs abnormal.
Sure, completely reasonable. Radar or LIDAR isn’t sexy or a 4k video. Despite my conviction here I’m extremely skeptical in general too. I’ve just been paying a lot of attention to these things since the 2017 NY Times article so I’ve read enough on it or seen enough interviews with very credible people to have been convinced there is something more here then Mick West (who I also listen to at times and makes good points, though I believe he’s now every bit agenda driven as are those on the other side) explanations.
What’s his agenda?
He’s anchored in the disproving skepticism position, it’s literally now his brand.
maybe he's in the "being a good skeptic" position.

if critiquing "evidence" is now automatically an agenda, we're in trouble

an extraordinary claims require extraordinary evidence. this is about as extraordinary as it gets.
 
I'm interested in real, credible evidence. I've gone looking for it dozens of times. Each time I've been massively disappointed with grainy videos that could literally be anything. For example, I don't consider the so-called Tic Tac video proof of anything.
Fair, and certainly your right. Again, not trying to convince you, largely because we should all start from a skeptical position.

My point really is about bringing us back to Trips originally asked question of why this isn’t a bigger story. I’m convinced we’ve been conditioned over the decades, and this conversation proves my point. When officially released videos from the government come out with incredibly credible people saying these can’t be explained get lumped into the same bucket of some dudes grainy video from his backyard we’ve (not you and I, the collective “we”) lost the narrative.
Like RCon, I’ve never been impressed by the clips that I’ve seen. But I’m not, say, a military pilot who’s used to observing/ deciphering aerial phenomena. So, I don’t know what I’m looking at, and I need the experts to tell me what’s normal vs abnormal.
Sure, completely reasonable. Radar or LIDAR isn’t sexy or a 4k video. Despite my conviction here I’m extremely skeptical in general too. I’ve just been paying a lot of attention to these things since the 2017 NY Times article so I’ve read enough on it or seen enough interviews with very credible people to have been convinced there is something more here then Mick West (who I also listen to at times and makes good points, though I believe he’s now every bit agenda driven as are those on the other side) explanations.
What’s his agenda?
He’s anchored in the disproving skepticism position, it’s literally now his brand.
maybe he's in the "being a good skeptic" position.
My personal opinion on this, it has nothing to do with the position he (or anyone else) takes, it’s more about when you gain recognition and build a brand off of taking a specific position (whether it’s the pro or anti, skeptic or believer) I believe that will ultimately drive your conclusions (likely in direct association with the recognition you get for said position). And when you are motivated to come to a specific conclusion, you’re likely to find your way there one way or another.
 
The closest solar systems to our are Alpha Centauri and Proxima Centauri. Both are ~25 trillion miles away. Next closest? ~38-40 trillion miles away.

That's a lot of gas...
 

Users who are viewing this thread

Back
Top