441–450 of 657 posts
Earlier quoted context omitted.
By Mick West numerous times, for instance here: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=qsEjV8DdSbs
Mick West is very sure he is correct. I'm not sure that's enough.
If you believe the government is capable of covering this up for decades then you must also believe they're just as capable of lying about UFO's existing for some other reason. I heard some guy saying they were actually demons, which I found quite funny/entertaining. Supposedly these aliens smell like sulfur badly. Maybe aliens/demons are the same thing? I guess we're gonna need the Doom Slayer.
When did you hear this? perhaps after this person saw Childhood's End[0] (based on the 1953 novel[1], which is much better IMHO) and mistook it for a documentary?
[0] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Childhood%27s_End_(miniseries)
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Sure, but those COTS parts still underwent lots and lots of rad/ vac testing. There's a design-for-resilience vs test-for-resilience tradeoff at play. I'm saying that not all systems require design-for-resilience.
Ingenuity is also running a very customized software stack to go along with the highly tested hardware. IIRC the OS can reboot in a some relatively small number milliseconds. It's meant to be able to crash in mid-air and reboot and recover before the probe loses lift and crashes in most flight envelopes. The software is also set up to crash and reboot rather than try to recover or operate in a compromised state.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
By Mick West numerous times, for instance here: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=qsEjV8DdSbs
Mick West is very sure he is correct. I'm not sure that's enough.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Are you really comparing China to the US in terms of military power? China just finished their first domestic aircraft carrier, and the current military hasn't really been in any major war. In the meantime, the US has continually maintained a state of readiness and nearly constant wars while modernizing its fleet. But you had to just go 9/11 Truther which means nobody here should really be paying attention to you.
A "9/11 Truther" is somebody who disputes the 9/11 Commission's Report. themagician is doing the opposite; men with box cutters crashing planes into buildings is precisely what the 9/11 Commission Report says. Will realizing this change how you feel about the merit of his comment, or will you still feel the same way even though your original reason for feeling this way was completely backwards?
thinking that the person I was responding to was suggesting the DoD may have funded the terrorists (a "conspiracy" is a secret plan to do something unlawful).
After re-reading, I see now the claim is that the DoD may have funded the truthers- which I know nothing about.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Are you really comparing China to the US in terms of military power? China just finished their first domestic aircraft carrier, and the current military hasn't really been in any major war. In the meantime, the US has continually maintained a state of readiness and nearly constant wars while modernizing its fleet. But you had to just go 9/11 Truther which means nobody here should really be paying attention to you.
Is it really “9/11 truther” to believe the terrorists flew planes into buildings and the government was too incompetent to stop them? I believe that’s the most anti-truther take possible.
Ezra Klein just did a long interview with Leslie Kean (a popular author and Coast to Coast AM guest) about her article in "The Debrief" --- where it went, after the Washington Post wouldn't run it on her time schedule --- about David Grusch: https://www.nytimes.com/2023/06/20/opinion/ezra-klein-podcas... It does not make Kean and Grusch's claims sound a lot more credible. Some of Kean's sources are proponents of thin…
That was a great podcast, and the entirety of Kean's journalistic research and integrity basically amounts to "I trust Grusch because he seems like a decent guy and I've been told he's trustworthy. But yeah, he's never seen any UFO, just reports and heard people talk about them, but since I trust him, I implicitly trust their words as well." I love how Ezra asks her obvious questions about her research like "how is i…
Ideally that evidence would take the form of a personal experience with the aliens. Less ideally, maybe I could accept documented and consistently observable photographic or videographic evidence from non-government citizens. What I will not accept is evidence that comes in the form of second-hand hearsay from a government "whistleblower" who gets approval for what he speaks about publicly. That's not a whistleblower, it's a spokesperson - and his claims do not resolve the paradox because it's effectively one entity telling me "we lied to you, but now we're telling the truth" - either you're telling the truth but I can't believe you because you lied to me, or you're lying to me and I'm not surprised because you've always lied to me. In other words, this is institutional gaslighting.
For me to accept evidence from a government "whistleblower," I need to see them overcoming some form of institutional resistance. Snowden was a whistleblower. His claims were obviously credible because they made a lot of people very mad, and they chased him to the end of the earth trying to imprison or kill him. Bill Binney was not a whistleblower, despite his claims, because the NSA never prosecuted him and so obviously everything he says during his ongoing speaking tour is somewhat sanctioned by them.
For me to believe aliens are here, based on the words of a "whistleblower," he needs to release documents and photos and videos and scientific data about the craft, and the DoD needs to prosecute or at least ridicule him. But this current situation of passive acceptance by the DoD (or "soft disclosure" in the words of Lue Anon followers) is absolutely unconvincing, and just pisses me off because either my government thinks I'm stupid enough to fall for it, or too stupid to handle the full truth.
While I understand and appreciate the aspects of the bill that offers protection for whistleblowers, I don't understand cutting all funding for reversing such technology. If it exists, don't we want to understand it ASAP? Regardless of whether it's alien in origin or not, why in the world wouldn't we want to study potentially advanced technology?
It's the carrot and the stick: - Stick. Today a program that is doing "Advanced Propulsion Research" that happened to be reverse engineering UFO tech would be perfectly legal. Cutting funding for this, unless explicitly authorized, opens up liability for anyone in the government and related contractors. - Carrot. The amnesty is an opportunity to come forward without the liability.
Enter the intergalactic copyright lawyers...
Earlier quoted context omitted.
What scandal are you referring to…?
The president's son allegedly committed quite a few crimes, including offering access to his father (The US President) for money. He has been charged for some of these crimes recently.
It's certainly plausible that the junior Biden may well have offered "access to his father" as a lure to obtain pecuniary benefit.
And while the optics are terrible, I'd note that the current US president held no elective or appointed office in any government when the telegram message that's been cited to "corroborate" the "influence peddling" allegations.
As such, It's not clear to me what, if anything, the senior Biden could have done, at that time, in that context.
I'm not defending anyone here, nor am I trying to skewer anyone. Rather, the narrative presented just doesn't make sense to me given the time frames involved.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
To add to this, I've noticed a lot of the material that gets declassified, that is purported to be evidence of aliens/psychics/magic/etc, is in the form of field notes or case studies that either contain full quotations or summaries of what someone else claims is true, but are not actually experiments or demonstrations of what is claimed. For example, you might have a declassified CIA document that's being distribute…
When they first released the CIA psychic documents I clicked a few at random and my impressions were much different. The papers I read were very much "We're conducting this experiment on remote viewing. Here are our procedures and results."