Pentagon releases UFO videos

[FlamesAddiction]

Originally Posted by TrentCrimmIndependent

Grusch's "I'm not allowed to divulge in a public domain" response got old fast, I will say.

Interesting where the line between classified and not was.

He would give enough away to whet peoples appetites then shut it down.

Hope they investigate his "sources" asap so as to out him as full of #### or not sooner. If he is, he's wasting people's time which could be directed towards the UAPs rather than his alien murders and supposed "biologics".

Yeah, something about his demeanor from the get go hasn't sat well with me. His credentials seems solid, so I don't want to dismiss him, but I have trouble balancing it against my BS detector. If he is trolling, he is going to set the whole thing back.

That's the problem with the whole UAP thing. There are some strange things happening for which there is no satisfactory explanation for, at least that the public is made aware of. But there are a lot of liars and trolls in the field too, which makes it hard to believe anyone.

[GGG]

Originally Posted by FlamesAddiction

Yeah, something about his demeanor from the get go hasn't sat well with me. His credentials seems solid, so I don't want to dismiss him, but I have trouble balancing it against my BS detector. If he is trolling, he is going to set the whole thing back.

That's the problem with the whole UAP thing. There are some strange things happening for which there is no satisfactory explanation for, at least that the public is made aware of. But there are a lot of liars and trolls in the field too, which makes it hard to believe anyone.

If your conspiracy minded his testimony is refutable enough that one might thing the government places him there so when he is discovered as being inconsistent with his testimony it makes the other two less credible.

[Lanny_McDonald]

Originally Posted by GGG

My insistence that someone other than the government that has lied about ETs for 90 years be required to verify if ETs exists is somehow unreasonable? That’s the standard of evidence that is required.

I didn't say anything about whether it was unreasonable just that it was unlikely because peer review doesn't exist in the form you're suggesting. Not many interests allow a third party to come in and review their research and development, especially something that is compartmentalized. I really don't care what you think would be the standard of evidence, it just isn't going to happen. If verification is required it will be the government that invites the party to the private table, not an open table for anyone to review.

It may never happen but to believe conclusively without it would be ridiculous. If you want to that is your choice but to chastise someone for wanting real evidence before believing extraordinary claims is absurd. It’s a very convenient position to be able to state evidence doesn’t exist because it would never be released therefore the absence of 3rd party reviewed evidence which is stated to exist is not an issue.

What third party would you suggest be acceptable? You seem to ignore a ton of real evidence because it doesn't meet your high standard, so what is that standard. Who is this authoritative third party?

Grusch’s testimony was such garbage and feels like someone trying to avoid purjury. Essentially he says I have no first hand information on anything related to UAPs but he has talked to people about it.

Sounded like someone who knows he's discussing highly classified information and has been informed by his handlers that he needs to be cognizant of that fact. Hence him willing to provide details in a SCIF outside of session. That is the appropriate way to discuss such information, not in a public session.

Anyway highly disappointing

I don't disagree but it was exceptionally predictable. They were not going to roll out ET and they were not going to arrive in a captured tic-tac. This was going to be a public admission of on-going programs, sort of like what Snowden did, except with proper procedural protection as a whistleblower. They weren't going to trot anything tangible out. This is the start. Some of Grush's private disclosures may generate other witnesses that will step up and provide the access needed. But nothing big was going to come of this session. Anyone who thought this was going to be the big one just doesn't understand how government works.

[GGG]

Originally Posted by Lanny_McDonald

If verification is required it will be the government that invites the party to the private table, not an open table for anyone to review. What third party would you suggest be acceptable? You seem to ignore a ton of real evidence because it doesn't meet your high standard, so what is that standard. Who is this authoritative third party?

Say a few university physics and biology departments like your MITs, Cal Techs and some where non US like an Imperial college.

Or as I said before the same level of rigor that will be done when NASA announces biological life on mars.

[TrentCrimmIndependent]

Originally Posted by GGG

If your conspiracy minded his testimony is refutable enough that one might thing the government places him there so when he is discovered as being inconsistent with his testimony it makes the other two less credible.

I'm inclined to believe the other two guys because they seem reasonable and without ulterior motives (just witnessed something extraordinary), but Grusch really feels like the clown of the group. Almost like he represents the disinformation campaign he (and only he) claims is ongoing.

Grusch is absolutely the one driving away the people still steeped in the stigma around the subject.

He'd better be right. But then if he is right, that would have terrifying implications.

A craft or craft sample/s in possession doesn't seem outrageous to me but bodies and aliens harming people sounds like x-files ####.

I believe if we did have anything, it would be like a remote, unmanned vehicle collecting information just like the satellites of ours currently hurtling through deep space.

That or the projection hypothesis brought up by Graves? feels like it could have legs. This would sort of explain the things defying the laws of gravity and aerodynamics. They're projected but not actually occupying the same physical space.

[FlamesAddiction]

I finished watching the whole thing and I think Ryan Graves comes off as the most compelling of the three.

[Lanny_McDonald]

Originally Posted by GGG

Say a few university physics and biology departments like your MITs, Cal Techs and some where non US like an Imperial college.

Where do you think they get the scientists who are working on these programs? Local community colleges?

Or as I said before the same level of rigor that will be done when NASA announces biological life on mars.

Oh, so you know the level of rigor that will be met by NASA over future events. Good to know. I would suggest waiting to determine the level of classification of such data before claiming what process will be used and who will be able to apply to play a part. You just don't walk into NASA and demand data/samples for your "peer review" you have to apply and be selected, which includes achieving security clearances where needed.

[GGG]

So what level of evidence would you require to believe the government does not have ships and bodies?

[jammies]

I just find it amazing that the Pentagon can suppress the evidence from the entire world. Now we know where their trillion dollar budget goes - it costs a lot of money to bribe every politician, civil servant and military officer from every nation.

Sent from my Pixel 4a (5G) using Tapatalk

[TrentCrimmIndependent]

Originally Posted by jammies

I just find it amazing that the Pentagon can suppress the evidence from the entire world. Now we know where their trillion dollar budget goes - it costs a lot of money to bribe every politician, civil servant and military officer from every nation.

Sent from my Pixel 4a (5G) using Tapatalk

Pretty sure the proceedings yesterday revolve around what US personnel have seen and whatever their military is or isn't sitting on.

They don't need to bribe. Apparently they threaten with dismantling said person's career, as well as (potentially) threats of harm.

People are reporting their sightings and taking recordings all the time. Stigma does the "work" for the Pentagon.

[Lanny_McDonald]

Originally Posted by GGG

So what level of evidence would you require to believe the government does not have ships and bodies?

Evidence these UAPs/UFOs are of human creation. You keep going on and on about the government throwing the doors open and showing everything they have to disprove the claims of vehicle and body recovery, wouldn't it just be easier to fly one of these things to news conference and have our human pilot step out and wave to the press? That would be all the evidence I need to confirm we have a greater understanding of physics than the academic community appears to have and that we are indeed the masters of the universe. Produce the craft then produce the documentation to support the development cycle of such magical craft. Every other flight platform has been documented from cradle to grave, so it should be easy to roll that proof out that this has been developed by the military industrial complex on their own.

This is another reason why the cynic community is silly. They go to opposite extremes to suggest equally outlandish explanations. They ignore the obvious as well. These UAPs defy physics as we know it, yet the skeptics point to the subject as proof it is impossible to travel vast distances in space - making us alone - but failing to acknowledge the fallibility of our understanding of how these craft do what they do. Don't you see the contradiction there?

Or my favorite, the military industrial complex is sitting on these craft and their energy source - and have been for over 80 years - for the reason of... ??? When has a private company NOT used technology they have developed to try and turn a profit through the sale of such tech? It is counter to their mandate to turn a profit for their shareholders. In a world where we are so hungry for energy the power source that makes such flight possible would power cities and produce billions and billions of dollars for these companies. But they are sitting on the technology because of... ??? If these things were terrestrial in origin they would be in mass production and the energy source solving the greatest existential crisis to face our species and possibly this eco system we sit at the top of.

[Fuzz]

Originally Posted by Lanny_McDonald

Evidence these UAPs/UFOs are of human creation. You keep going on and on about the government throwing the doors open and showing everything they have to disprove the claims of vehicle and body recovery, wouldn't it just be easier to fly one of these things to news conference and have our human pilot step out and wave to the press? That would be all the evidence I need to confirm we have a greater understanding of physics than the academic community appears to have and that we are indeed the masters of the universe. Produce the craft then produce the documentation to support the development cycle of such magical craft. Every other flight platform has been documented from cradle to grave, so it should be easy to roll that proof out that this has been developed by the military industrial complex on their own.

This is another reason why the cynic community is silly. They go to opposite extremes to suggest equally outlandish explanations. They ignore the obvious as well. These UAPs defy physics as we know it, yet the skeptics point to the subject as proof it is impossible to travel vast distances in space - making us alone - but failing to acknowledge the fallibility of our understanding of how these craft do what they do. Don't you see the contradiction there?

Or my favorite, the military industrial complex is sitting on these craft and their energy source - and have been for over 80 years - for the reason of... ??? When has a private company NOT used technology they have developed to try and turn a profit through the sale of such tech? It is counter to their mandate to turn a profit for their shareholders. In a world where we are so hungry for energy the power source that makes such flight possible would power cities and produce billions and billions of dollars for these companies. But they are sitting on the technology because of... ??? If these things were terrestrial in origin they would be in mass production and the energy source solving the greatest existential crisis to face our species and possibly this eco system we sit at the top of.

Correction, "These UAPs appear to defy physics as we know it".


Your last paragraph can work opposite to how you present it as well. So if we have had it for 80 years, why haven't we developed anything with this tech? Or more specifically, why hasn't the US, or any other country that has physical evidence?


Also, no one every explains why these aliens are such ####ty pilots that they crash so often. Able to defy physics, but also occasionally fall out of the sky?

[Monahammer]

Originally Posted by Fuzz

So if we have had it for 80 years, why haven't we developed anything with this tech? Or more specifically, why hasn't the US, or any other country that has physical evidence?


Also, no one every explains why these aliens are such ####ty pilots that they crash so often. Able to defy physics, but also occasionally fall out of the sky?

I don't want to delve into your debate too much, but I thought these two points are interesting, and to me show that you definitely did not watch the testimony yesterday.

The ####ty pilot question was actually asked and addressed directly by Grusch. His answer was actually terrifying, IMO. It amounts to a N failure problem. Even if chance of failure is small on any given sortie, because you make many 100s or thousands of sorties there is bound to eventually be a failure. The implication here is that the NHI are making a massive amount sorties on the planet.

The technological point you make is actually kind of baffling. In the last 80 years humans went from barely flying planes to landing on the moon- just in the field of aerospace technology. There are myriad techonological advancements made in the last 80 years that are obtusely accelerated compared to previous technological advancement. I am not saying this is a definite point for UFOs or reverse engineering technology, but I don't even understand the nature of your argument when the last 80 years defines a ludicrous (compared to historical) pace of technological growth for our species. 80 years ago we were still figuring out cars for f sakes.

[Fuzz]

Originally Posted by Monahammer

I don't want to delve into your debate too much, but I thought these two points are interesting, and to me show that you definitely did not watch the testimony yesterday.

The ####ty pilot question was actually asked and addressed directly by Grusch. His answer was actually terrifying, IMO. It amounts to a N failure problem. Even if chance of failure is small on any given sortie, because you make many 100s or thousands of sorties there is bound to eventually be a failure. The implication here is that the NHI are making a massive amount sorties on the planet.

The technological point you make is actually kind of baffling. In the last 80 years humans went from barely flying planes to landing on the moon- just in the field of aerospace technology. There are myriad techonological advancements made in the last 80 years that are obtusely accelerated compared to previous technological advancement. I am not saying this is a definite point for UFOs or reverse engineering technology, but I don't even understand the nature of your argument when the last 80 years defines a ludicrous (compared to historical) pace of technological growth for our species. 80 years ago we were still figuring out cars for f sakes.

Sure, so I did watch the testimony, but was also working s maybe missed the details of that. That's just his line of reasoning to explain it. It's a possible explanation that still leaves them as being OK with dying, and have the tech to get here, but still have problems. Basically "these beings are incredible, but also not" which leads to a logical conundrum. If it was just drones crashing it would be a more convincing argument.


As to the tech, no, all of what we have is explained as steps of progress and easily understandable going way back. What would you say would be a sudden advancement that doesn't flow from previous developments or implementing past ideas as technology allows for it?

[Lanny_McDonald]

Originally Posted by Fuzz

Correction, "These UAPs appear to defy physics as we know it".


Your last paragraph can work opposite to how you present it as well. So if we have had it for 80 years, why haven't we developed anything with this tech? Or more specifically, why hasn't the US, or any other country that has physical evidence?

Because governments WILL sit on information/technology. It is not the government's mandate to develop new technology or bring new products to the market. That is the domain of free enterprise and the driver behind free enterprise.

Also, no one every explains why these aliens are such ####ty pilots that they crash so often. Able to defy physics, but also occasionally fall out of the sky?

Here's an explanation. Our atmosphere is alien to them. The craft use electromagnetic engines for propulsion and guidance and our atmosphere can be extremely volatile with discharges that can disrupt or disable the systems. Kind of like how a jet can have its systems taken out during a lightning strike. I mean, what the #### is up with our pilots. Used to flying in our atmosphere but occasionally they just fall out of the sky, with regularity (five crashes a day according to the FAA). How is that possible?

[Fuzz]

Originally Posted by Lanny_McDonald

Because governments WILL sit on information/technology. It is not the government's mandate to develop new technology or bring new products to the market. That is the domain of free enterprise and the driver behind free enterprise.

Here's an explanation. Our atmosphere is alien to them. The craft use electromagnetic engines for propulsion and guidance and our atmosphere can be extremely volatile with discharges that can disrupt or disable the systems. Kind of like how a jet can have its systems taken out during a lightning strike. I mean, what the #### is up with our pilots. Used to flying in our atmosphere but occasionally they just fall out of the sky, with regularity (five crashes a day according to the FAA). How is that possible?

I guess I don't understand your argument. We aren't seeing this tech in use because it doesn't exist, or we aren't seeing it because government sits on tech with near infinite value because it's not their job?


Your second point is just being silly. There are 10's of thousands of flights a day, if we crashed at the rate aliens do, we'd not have an aviation industry, unless they are sending multiple times more craft than that, because surly they can travel light-distance scale distances, but can't quiet work out flight in our atmosphere? Are they incredible, or incompetent? I also love your assumptions about their flight systems as if it is fact.

[FlamesAddiction]

Originally Posted by Lanny_McDonald

Because governments WILL sit on information/technology. It is not the government's mandate to develop new technology or bring new products to the market. That is the domain of free enterprise and the driver behind free enterprise.




Here's an explanation. Our atmosphere is alien to them. The craft use electromagnetic engines for propulsion and guidance and our atmosphere can be extremely volatile with discharges that can disrupt or disable the systems. Kind of like how a jet can have its systems taken out during a lightning strike. I mean, what the #### is up with our pilots. Used to flying in our atmosphere but occasionally they just fall out of the sky, with regularity (five crashes a day according to the FAA). How is that possible?

I don't trust the private sector that much either to be honest. They only care about technological advances if they can make money from it. An example of this is how digital cameras were invented in the 1970s, but camera companies buried the technology because they made too much money from selling film. I am sure the same things happen with other technologies like electric cars, computers, medicine, and so on.

[TrentCrimmIndependent]

Why is it assumed that the NHI are excellent pilots within the unique atmosphere that is earth's?

Lol.

You assume they don't exist, BUT if they DID, they must be world universe class pilots and never leave a trace!

Seems like a pretty narrow perspective of a foreign species you've never encountered that jumps to a few conclusions.

I mean I'm not even convinced we have wreckage, but it's just funny the conclusions skeptics will jump to just to avoid the possibility. Doesn't it feel like a stereotype in itself based on little/nothing to believe that an alien species making visits MUST be flawless and so advanced that their #### would never malfunction.

Traveling a very long distance in space versus maneuvering within this rock's atmosphere seem like two pretty different things. If we had vehicles probing the moon daily, how often do you think #### would go sideways. If it's a dozen times total (which is allegedly the rough amount their military is sitting on), that's a pretty damn good track record.

[Fuzz]

Originally Posted by TrentCrimmIndependent

Why is it assumed that the NHI are excellent pilots within the unique atmosphere that is earth's?

Lol.

You assume they don't exist, BUT if they DID, they must be world universe class pilots and never leave a trace!

Seems like a pretty narrow perspective of a foreign species you've never encountered that jumps to a few conclusions.

I mean I'm not even convinced we have wreckage, but it's just funny the conclusions skeptics will jump to just to avoid the possibility. Doesn't it feel like a stereotype in itself based on little/nothing to believe that an alien species making visits MUST be flawless and so advanced that their #### would never malfunction.

Traveling a very long distance in space versus maneuvering within this rock's atmosphere seem like two pretty different things. If we had vehicles probing the moon daily, how often do you think #### would go sideways. If it's a dozen times total (which is allegedly the rough amount their military is sitting on), that's a pretty damn good track record.

What is so unique about Earth's atmosphere? If they have come to Earth, they have visited many other worlds. To argue otherwise is not really scientific.


As to the rest of it, with our non-interstellar technology we've managed to send a lander to another planet and launch and fly a helicopter from it, where the atmosphere is much more challenging to deal with. And we haven't even crashed it.


So ya, I think the "aliens happen to have crashes too" argument is bafflingly silly.

[Muta]

Could also be theorized that any UAP crash may be intentional in order to 'provide' tech to our species or pose as some other gesture. Not saying that's the case at all, but wouldn't rule out that possibility either in the matter of this discussion.

I'm totally, calmly open to the possibility that we are/have been visited too - wouldn't really surprise me either if that's the case. Our species' presence on Earth is limited to mere thousands of years; a mere, microscopic blip in the cosmic timeline. If there's other civilizations that have been around longer, possibly in the millions of years, they would likely be so far advanced in technology that we wouldn't understand it - including the development of trans-medium or multi-dimensional craft that could address the space-time continuum. Our understanding of physics and travel would be incredibly primitive to theirs. Perhaps there are 'outposts' or 'waypoints' deep in our ocean, which would explain some of the 'disappearing of UAPs into the water' stories.