Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

US Congress doubles down on claims of illegal UFO retrieval programs

thehill.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

451–460 of 657 posts

Re: US Congress doubles down on claims of illegal UFO retrieval programs

#451

Post by zzzeek »

100721 wrote: post #303
joshuahedlund wrote: post #278

Earlier quoted context omitted.

All entertaining to speculate, but it's classic human-centered thinking to suppose that aliens would be regularly appearing a few thousand feet or so from us, but never ever anywhere in the rest of the billions of miles of our solar system and everywhere else in between here and wherever they came from (in addition to their conveniently never appearing within clear view of regular citizens' phones or cameras and neve…

In this context, it actually makes sense to think in a human-centered way. Consider how many planets are capable of supporting intelligent (as we know it). Now suppose we detect evidence of industrial behavior (certain pollutants, nuclear detonation, etc). Would we not laser focus on that one planet and observe it with everything we have - including sending reconnaissance drones? Furthermore, would we not want to avo…

> Also, it would be trivial to avoid detection in our own solar system. Duck behind a moon or planet, or just quietly float in the blackness of space, and no earthling will ever see you.

yet we have thousands of reports of UFO sightings (the vast majority seem to be in the US for some reason). So the aliens who can travel here in...assuming they come from a nearby solar system 4 light years away, and they are arriving as a result of observing "pollutants and nuclear detontations", meaning if they started traveling in 1950 (upon receiving the light from the first nuclear detontation in 1945) and UFO sightings picked up by the 1960s they traveled 4 light years in about 10-15 years, and can be "undetectable" except.... for thousands of non-confirmable sightings per year.

I think the aliens aren't going to visit us until Zefram Cochrane achieves his first warp flight.

Re: US Congress doubles down on claims of illegal UFO retrieval programs

#452

Post by themagician »

mustacheemperor wrote: post #368
themagician wrote: post #352

Earlier quoted context omitted.

So many reasons. If you want unlimited funding, if you want people to join, if you want citizens to feel safe… you really want them to feel like the government is powerful. If people think their government is a joke they will treat it as a joke. You don't want people thinking that a dozen people with box cutters can fly planes into buildings. You don't want people thinking that "the greatest superpower in the world"…

There's a vast gulf between "believing that spaceships from other planets have crashed and some elite division..." and subscribing to your theory which is so far only supported by you insisting to us what "you want" as a theoretical deep state government apparatus. From my perspective, it would seem like the widespread belief that terrorists could crash planes into buildings resulted in a lot of public money, enlistm…

Not really. I will admit that it's totally possible that there is no conspiracy. It's entirely possible that people are so naturally brainwashed that they conspire against themselves without the help of the government. Pride is a hell of a drug, so that is totally possible. I mean, people do it with religion so why not this.

Re: US Congress doubles down on claims of illegal UFO retrieval programs

#453

Post by nobody9999 »

pohl wrote: post #408
shiftpgdn wrote: post #22

Earlier quoted context omitted.

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.

There's no way that could be Watergate-squared. The defining characteristic of Watergate was the audio tapes, so this has to be a reference to the "Bring some Cokes in, please" recording.

>There's no way that could be Watergate-squared. The defining characteristic of Watergate was the audio tapes, so this has to be a reference to the "Bring some Cokes in, please" recording.

I have to disagree. The defining characteristic of Watergate was the illegal (break-ins to steal political opponents' strategies and psychiatrists files) activities by a political organization (CREEP[0]) that were then covered up by those at the highest levels of the executive branch.

The issue wasn't that there were recordings of such a cover up, it was the cover up that was the problem. Unless, of course, you'd like to argue that something isn't illegal/immoral if you don't get caught.

[0] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Committee_for_the_Re-Election_...

Re: US Congress doubles down on claims of illegal UFO retrieval programs

#454

Post by mcpackieh »

esbranson wrote: post #427
mcpackieh wrote: post #273

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> And why are we acting like this is a new phenomenon? It's been going on since at least the 1940's Exactly what has been going on since the 40s though? The Roswell Incident in 1947 was a balloon. There was no evidenced advanced propulsion technology, neither from aliens or the government. It was just a balloon that got blown up into an massive bizarre cultural phenomena of people whispering rumors about alien spacec…

Mick West should stick to Tony Hawk videogames and leave this to the pilots who say his explanations are idiotic.

When discussing something rationally what matters is the merits of the arguments, not the background of the speaker. Mick West's background as a video game developer don't detract from his arguments. Furthermore, Navy pilot are not assured against dishonesty or error; even US Navy pilots are humans. Spare me this "support the troops" style of rhetoric; you can't use patriotism to shame me into uncritically taking military personnel at their word.

Re: US Congress doubles down on claims of illegal UFO retrieval programs

#455

Post by throwaway743 »

doctorpangloss wrote: post #391
runjake wrote: post #376

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> she cites the now-discredited "Gimball Video". (sic) When/where/by whom was the Gimbal video discredited? I’m especially curious because I’m somewhat of an “expert” in the area (having worked on those sensor systems and seen tons of footage in a former life) and I think it’s a legitimate object of some sort [1]. Though I don’t believe it’s extraterrestrial. 1. Eg. The footage of a purported object speeding right ov…

> U.F.O. skeptics and experts in optics have long said many of the videos and sightings by naval aviators represent optical illusions that have made ordinary objects — weather balloons, commercial drones — appear to move faster than possible. > Military officials have largely come to the same conclusion. … > Another video, known as Gimbal, shows an object that appears to be turning or spinning. Military officials now…

Honestly, Mick West reaches hard for any way to debunk everything and his conclusions on certain subjects are just flat out ridiculous.

Ex: Suggesting that what kids saw at the Ariel school sighting were just puppeteers. Those kids are now adult professionals and have stuck to what they saw. Don't take my word, have an open mind and watch the past and recent interviews with them.

Was great to see him put in his place on the News Nation post-interview segment.

Re: US Congress doubles down on claims of illegal UFO retrieval programs

#456

Post by godelski »

WalterBright wrote: post #356
godelski wrote: post #312

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Another part is that people don't realize how within the government, and especially the military, there are a lot of false documents and reports that are sitting around AND highly classified. You do this because there are spies and they will steal shit. You want to make that process noisy. It's also beneficial because you may get your adversary to spend millions or billions studying a thing that isn't even possible.…

Interestingly, much of the stealth radar technology on the Skunkworks' stealth airplanes came from a Soviet research paper. Personally, I would have thought such a paper was disinformation. Maybe the Soviets did, too!

Well that's why disinformation works so well. You have to explore stolen material even if you think it might be misinformation.

But also military misinformation is so prolific that it even infiltrates public knowledge. Often on purpose. Many people still believe that eating carrots will help you see in the dark. It's definitely true that the vitamins in carrots can help eyesight, but they aren't _that_ good. Good disinformation has a mixture of truth in it for people to latch onto. Just a sprinkling can give something a lot of validity. Should also say something about how you take in information, especially from YouTube university.

https://www.smithsonianmag.com/arts-culture/a-wwii-propagand...

Re: US Congress doubles down on claims of illegal UFO retrieval programs

#457

Post by giantrobot »

WalterBright wrote: post #375
scrlk wrote: post #361

Earlier quoted context omitted.

"While working in Moscow, Ufimtsev became interested in describing the reflection of electromagnetic waves. He gained permission to publish his research results internationally because they were considered to be of no significant military or economic value." https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Pyotr_Ufimtsev Looks like he's still publishing papers in this area: https://ieeexplore.ieee.org/author/37344722000

> they were considered to be of no significant military or economic value Oops!

No one uses radio waves to detect things in the air! That's preposterous!

Re: US Congress doubles down on claims of illegal UFO retrieval programs

#458

Post by TechBro8615 »

seanw444 wrote: post #444
binbag wrote: post #412

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Mick West is very sure he is correct. I'm not sure that's enough.

Have you actually watched his video on the Gimbal craft? I thought that was a big piece of evidence myself, went into his video at the recommendation of someone here on HN with heavy skepticism, and came out sufficiently convinced it was not actually a UFO. He's also classy with his debunkings. To me that's a big bonus. Other YouTubers whose niche is debunking things seem to love being snarky, sarcastic, and condesce…

I'm not generally a fan of Mick West, particularly when he gets into specific debunkings of videos, because his argumentative framework depends on the same flawed approach as those he's debunking: he starts from the conclusion that the aliens are not here, and then claims any evidence offered against this conclusion is insufficient. He depends on the same fallacy as his opponents. The only difference is the conclusion from which he starts. And of course he has an inherent advantage of credibility because his conclusion doesn't require any extraordinary evidence. That's why it feels like he's just taking cheap shots - in many ways he's on the easier side of the debate (but ironically it's become the harder side because it's nearly impossible to deprogram his opponents out of their cult).

However, I did enjoy his recent video [0] on Grusch, where he focuses on the meta arguments against the narrative itself. He does a good job of describing the logical and dialectical flaws in the claims of the so-called "whistleblower" (who needs to get approval to speak publicly), and the reporting of the story itself (which was rushed and published by the same group of people with monetary and reputational incentives to uncritically promote the same narrative for which they've previously lost credibility).

[0] https://youtube.com/watch?v=AvhMMhW-JN0

Re: US Congress doubles down on claims of illegal UFO retrieval programs

#459

Post by themagician »

echelon wrote: post #343
sokoloff wrote: post #310

Earlier quoted context omitted.

To keep Americans happy about the over 3/4 Trillion dollars we spend on defense every year? “You spend a lot, but you get the best!” sounds a lot better than “You spend a lot, but we still suck!”

> “You spend a lot, but you get the best!” sounds a lot better than “You spend a lot, but we still suck!” This argument doesn't make any sense. The US military is better than the next top three militaries combined. The Ukraine war is showing the superiority of decades old Western tech.

The war in Ukraine is showing that the "superpowers" aren't so super. It's showing just how much of the military superiority is propaganda and nothing more. But we already knew that, because the US just went through what Russia is now going through.

The US just lost a 20 year war in Afghanistan against cave dwellers with Soviet-era rifles, homemade explosives and random bits from the bottom of a toolbox. You'd think maybe they'd have busted out the ray guns or spaceships instead of taking the L.

Re: US Congress doubles down on claims of illegal UFO retrieval programs

#460

Post by godelski »

mcpackieh wrote: post #324
godelski wrote: post #295

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> they're as mundane as any other first surface mirror This is a huge understatement. Like calling GPT4 "as mundane as any other transformer." Just because things have a high abstraction similarity doesn't mean the details aren't critical. Very expensive and difficult to produce __is__ exotic technology. There's also a large range of "paradigm shifting" technologies between here and antigravity. Don't listen to YouTu…

> Very expensive and difficult to produce __is__ exotic technology. Not in the sense of antigravity. Enough money and time can buy you an arbitrarily nice mirror, it doesn't rely on presently unknown to the public attributes of the universe.

> Enough money and time can buy you an arbitrarily nice mirror

Yes and no. But I'm going to go with mostly no. The yes is only because over thousands of years we have in fact improved mirror quality, but if we're talking about building a perfect mirror within a 5-10 year time-frame from now, it is definitely no. No matter how much money you spend.

A lot of people like to make assumptions about our capacity to build and make things. The reason we don't live in a super futuristic society isn't just because we're not dumping enough money into such a goal (obviously that would help) but because even with infinite resources we don't have great paths towards those things right now. Nuance sucks, but is necessary. The truth is that there's no such thing as "simple" when we're talking about "arbitrary precision." Honestly, not even true long before that. There's a good reason you'll find books with thousands of pages dedicated to a seemingly simple thing e.gs: o-rings, screws, bolts, threading, and so on. Don't fall for the simplicity trap.

Post reply on HN