*** UAP THREAD ***

404,535 Views | 4876 Replies | Last: 1 hr ago by astros4545
Joes
User Profile Ignore User Stop Ignoring
How long do you want to ignore this user?
24 hours One week Permanently Cancel
12:39p, 8/12/23
I'm honestly curious where you guys think this goes next. Like I said, the whole world saw Grusch bluntly testify he knows the exact locations of the NHI remains and that he has specific knowledge of violent coverup tactics and he's provided that. How long do you give Congress to give an update on what was found?

Other than Shumer I don't think I've even seen any other reaction from anyone in the House or Senate, much less the White House, to these statements. At face value they're by far the most shocking statements ever uttered in Congress. And yet almost everyone seems more focused on common budgetary items and vacation and such. Are you guys still confident in imminent official disclosure?


Congressman Tim Burchett asked Mr Grusch whether he believes anyone has been "murdered" in an attempt to cover up the existence of UAPs. Mr Grusch said; "I know of multiple colleagues of mine that got physically injured" as a result of UFO activity and government action."

When Representative Mike Garcia, for California, pushed him as to the locations of these alleged recovered remains, Mr Grusch replied: "I know the exact locations and those locations were provided to the Inspector General".
Reply Quote
1
Rocagnante
User Profile Ignore User Stop Ignoring
How long do you want to ignore this user?
24 hours One week Permanently Cancel
In reply to Joes • 12:49p, 8/12/23
AG
Joes said:
Rocagnante said:
Good lord did you just compare police radar guns in the 80's to advanced radar systems of a modern aircraft carrier group?

These pilots have not mis-identified Batman balloons hundreds of times.

Either they are seeing advanced drone like objects.

Or

The Pentagon wants us to believe they are.
It was just a metaphor to explain that equipment is not foolproof.



It was more of a comparison than a metaphor and a bad one at that but I'm not an English major so I guess we'll just agree to disagree on that.

I find it funny the mental gymnastics people like you go thru to say it's possible these pilots aren't lying. Hundreds of cases of military pilots seeing objects objects with their own eyes confirmed by radar (and probably other sensor data) yet it all could be bogus because "equipment is not foolproof ".

It's A or B dude.
Reply Quote
2
Joes
User Profile Ignore User Stop Ignoring
How long do you want to ignore this user?
24 hours One week Permanently Cancel
In reply to Rocagnante • 12:53p, 8/12/23
Rocagnante said:
Joes said:
Rocagnante said:
Good lord did you just compare police radar guns in the 80's to advanced radar systems of a modern aircraft carrier group?

These pilots have not mis-identified Batman balloons hundreds of times.

Either they are seeing advanced drone like objects.

Or

The Pentagon wants us to believe they are.
It was just a metaphor to explain that equipment is not foolproof.



It was more of a comparison than a metaphor and a bad one at that but I'm not an English major so I guess we'll just agree to disagree on that.

I find it funny the mental gymnastics people like you go thru to say it's possible these pilots aren't lying. Hundreds of cases of military pilots seeing objects objects with their own eyes confirmed by radar (and probably other sensor data) yet it all could be bogus because "equipment is not foolproof ".

It's A or B dude.
My gosh, I was asked what I thought it was and I listed equipment error as only one of the possibilities and then even clarified that it's far more likely that if it's human then it's just high-tech experimental equipment, not error. I also clearly said they weren't lying and that NHI was a possibility. You make it sound like I have to commit to it being aliens until proven otherwise and I won't do that.

Wait, I just reread your post again to make sure and it really does look like you're saying there's only two choices, I have to call them liars or else it's aliens, is that right?
Reply Quote
2
1 edit
Sea Speed
User Profile
Private Message
Ignore User Stop Ignoring
How long do you want to ignore this user?
24 hours One week Permanently Cancel
In reply to Rocagnante • 1:00p, 8/12/23
AG
Rocagnante said:
Joes said:
Rocagnante said:
Good lord did you just compare police radar guns in the 80's to advanced radar systems of a modern aircraft carrier group?

These pilots have not mis-identified Batman balloons hundreds of times.

Either they are seeing advanced drone like objects.

Or

The Pentagon wants us to believe they are.
It was just a metaphor to explain that equipment is not foolproof.



It was more of a comparison than a metaphor and a bad one at that but I'm not an English major so I guess we'll just agree to disagree on that.

I find it funny the mental gymnastics people like you go thru to say it's possible these pilots aren't lying. Hundreds of cases of military pilots seeing objects objects with their own eyes confirmed by radar (and probably other sensor data) yet it all could be bogus because "equipment is not foolproof ".

It's A or B dude.


Radar does funny things. I've seen false returns, spoofing, mirrored returns etc etc with my own eyes. To dismiss out of hand the possibility that there MAY be something unexplained or unknown with the electronic systems is arguing in bad faith imo.
Reply Quote
2
Joes
User Profile Ignore User Stop Ignoring
How long do you want to ignore this user?
24 hours One week Permanently Cancel
In reply to Sea Speed • 1:04p, 8/12/23
Sea Speed said:
Rocagnante said:
Joes said:
Rocagnante said:
Good lord did you just compare police radar guns in the 80's to advanced radar systems of a modern aircraft carrier group?

These pilots have not mis-identified Batman balloons hundreds of times.

Either they are seeing advanced drone like objects.

Or

The Pentagon wants us to believe they are.
It was just a metaphor to explain that equipment is not foolproof.



It was more of a comparison than a metaphor and a bad one at that but I'm not an English major so I guess we'll just agree to disagree on that.

I find it funny the mental gymnastics people like you go thru to say it's possible these pilots aren't lying. Hundreds of cases of military pilots seeing objects objects with their own eyes confirmed by radar (and probably other sensor data) yet it all could be bogus because "equipment is not foolproof ".

It's A or B dude.


Radar does funny things. I've seen false returns, spoofing, mirrored returns etc etc with my own eyes. To dismiss out of hand the possibility that there MAY be something unexplained or unknown with the electronic systems is arguing in bad faith imo.
And I didn't even say I thought that's what it was, I was just listing possibilities, and we were also talking in the context of that one video, it was not even remotely on my mind that it was the explanation for all the hundreds of incidents. That's why I said I simply don't know what it is until we see better data.
Reply Quote
Sea Speed
User Profile
Private Message
Ignore User Stop Ignoring
How long do you want to ignore this user?
24 hours One week Permanently Cancel
In reply to Joes • 1:06p, 8/12/23
AG
Agreed. The odds that electronic equipment malfunction is the source of all of this stuff is for all intents and purposes impossible. The possibility that it is not the explanation for any of it probably has about the same odds of being true.
Reply Quote
2
Joes
User Profile Ignore User Stop Ignoring
How long do you want to ignore this user?
24 hours One week Permanently Cancel
In reply to Sea Speed • 1:13p, 8/12/23
Sea Speed said:
Agreed. The odds that electronic equipment malfunction is the source of all of this stuff is for all intents and purposes impossible. The possibility that it is not the explanation for any of it probably has about the same odds of being true.
Oh come on, you were just an officer in the Navy with top secret clearance, what would you know about any of this?



Seriously though, we were only spit balling specifically about the 20 year old black and white Nimitz radar image and among other things I said equipment is not always foolproof and even said it was unlikely the case but gave an example to show what I was talking about, if that's going through mental gymnastics then yeah, I guess we're speaking a different language.
Reply Quote
Sea Speed
User Profile
Private Message
Ignore User Stop Ignoring
How long do you want to ignore this user?
24 hours One week Permanently Cancel
In reply to Joes • 1:23p, 8/12/23
AG
As a point of clarification, i worked for the navy and was not in the navy. My position was the equivelant of O6 though. I worked side by side with USN Captains on a daily basis and was deployed with Carrier Strike Groups on several occasions.
Reply Quote
Joes
User Profile Ignore User Stop Ignoring
How long do you want to ignore this user?
24 hours One week Permanently Cancel
In reply to Sea Speed • 1:30p, 8/12/23
Sea Speed said:
As a point of clarification, i worked for the navy and was not in the navy. My position was the equivelant of O6 though. I worked side by side with USN Captains on a daily basis and was deployed with Carrier Strike Groups on several occasions.
My apologies and thanks for correcting me, I hope you understand I was only using light humor and meant no disrespect.
Reply Quote
Mr President Elect
User Profile Ignore User Stop Ignoring
How long do you want to ignore this user?
24 hours One week Permanently Cancel
In reply to Joes • 1:40p, 8/12/23
AG
Joes said:
I'm honestly curious where you guys think this goes next. Like I said, the whole world saw Grusch bluntly testify he knows the exact locations of the NHI remains and that he has specific knowledge of violent coverup tactics and he's provided that. How long do you give Congress to give an update on what was found?

Other than Shumer I don't think I've even seen any other reaction from anyone in the House or Senate, much less the White House, to these statements. At face value they're by far the most shocking statements ever uttered in Congress. And yet almost everyone seems more focused on common budgetary items and vacation and such. Are you guys still confident in imminent official disclosure?


Congressman Tim Burchett asked Mr Grusch whether he believes anyone has been "murdered" in an attempt to cover up the existence of UAPs. Mr Grusch said; "I know of multiple colleagues of mine that got physically injured" as a result of UFO activity and government action."

When Representative Mike Garcia, for California, pushed him as to the locations of these alleged recovered remains, Mr Grusch replied: "I know the exact locations and those locations were provided to the Inspector General".
Stuff is going on behind the scenes. I think it has been too public to get swept back under the rug, but still wouldn't surprise if that ends up happening. I posted this the other day, but Rubio has been pretty public about taking this seriously

Reply Quote
Aztec1948
User Profile Ignore User Stop Ignoring
How long do you want to ignore this user?
24 hours One week Permanently Cancel
1:42p, 8/12/23
We are all guiltyof confirmation bias. And when I came across this video...aha, I figured that was the explanation all along. But after viewing this....


"I have been told that we have recovered technology that did not originate on this".-Former Deputy Assistant Secretary of Defense for Intelligence-Chris Mellon

“Behind the scenes, high-ranking Air Force officers are soberly concerned about UFOs. But through official secrecy and ridicule, many citizens are led to believe that unknown flying objects are nonsense.” Former CIA Director, Roscoe Hillenkoetter, public statement, 1960.
Reply Quote
Sea Speed
User Profile
Private Message
Ignore User Stop Ignoring
How long do you want to ignore this user?
24 hours One week Permanently Cancel
In reply to Joes • 1:45p, 8/12/23
AG
Joes said:
Sea Speed said:
As a point of clarification, i worked for the navy and was not in the navy. My position was the equivelant of O6 though. I worked side by side with USN Captains on a daily basis and was deployed with Carrier Strike Groups on several occasions.
My apologies and thanks for correcting me, I hope you understand I was only using light humor and meant no disrespect.


Of course! I completely understood what you meant. I did not want anyone thinking I was claiming to be an O6 Naval Officer is all.
Reply Quote
Rocagnante
User Profile Ignore User Stop Ignoring
How long do you want to ignore this user?
24 hours One week Permanently Cancel
In reply to Joes • 1:46p, 8/12/23
AG
Joes said:
Rocagnante said:
Joes said:
Rocagnante said:
Good lord did you just compare police radar guns in the 80's to advanced radar systems of a modern aircraft carrier group?

These pilots have not mis-identified Batman balloons hundreds of times.

Either they are seeing advanced drone like objects.

Or

The Pentagon wants us to believe they are.
It was just a metaphor to explain that equipment is not foolproof.



It was more of a comparison than a metaphor and a bad one at that but I'm not an English major so I guess we'll just agree to disagree on that.

I find it funny the mental gymnastics people like you go thru to say it's possible these pilots aren't lying. Hundreds of cases of military pilots seeing objects objects with their own eyes confirmed by radar (and probably other sensor data) yet it all could be bogus because "equipment is not foolproof ".

It's A or B dude.
My gosh, I was asked what I thought it was and I listed equipment error as only one of the possibilities and then even clarified that it's far more likely that if it's human then it's just high-tech experimental equipment, not error. I also clearly said they weren't lying and that NHI was a possibility. You make it sound like I have to commit to it being aliens until proven otherwise and I won't do that.

Wait, I just reread your post again to make sure and it really does look like you're saying there's only two choices, I have to call them liars or else it's aliens, is that right?


Nope
Reply Quote
Joes
User Profile Ignore User Stop Ignoring
How long do you want to ignore this user?
24 hours One week Permanently Cancel
1:51p, 8/12/23
Gotta go but I just want to say I've been seriously following all this lately and I have genuine curiousity about it and trying to give it the benefit of the doubt. I enjoy good exchanges like I had this morning on the previous page. Yes, I'm skeptical, but it's purely my own that I've always had. I'd bet of all the interviews and documentaries and podcasts and such I've watched these past several weeks it's about a 10-1 ratio as far as the ones supporting the aliens idea vs being skeptical. I'm trying hard to give it a fair chance.

But when some of you say we who aren't fully on board are using mental gymnastics or are being unfairly critical... I mean surely you must see this topic in context. I'm one of the few skeptics that's even participating here so I guess I stand out, but to make it seem like I'm not taking it seriously enough when we're here in the entertainment subforum right now sandwiched between Lord of the Rings books and Star Trek strange New Worlds Season 2 is a bit strange.

This is supposed to be the biggest story in world history and there are generally about 4 or 5 people participating regularly here while the politics and football forums have hundreds or thousands at a time. Congress was just told point blank that Grusch knows exactly where the alien craft and bodies are and the overall reaction has been "Ok yeah thanks, we'll get back to you after our August vacation." So I really don't think I'm the one in left field. Step back a little and look around.

Anyway, I intended good contributions this morning and I enjoyed it, but I'll let you guys get back to it and hope we get more news. Why would I not want to be alive during the biggest moment in history? If it's real then great, bring it on.
Reply Quote
7
1 edit
Aztec1948
User Profile Ignore User Stop Ignoring
How long do you want to ignore this user?
24 hours One week Permanently Cancel
1:59p, 8/12/23
"Behind the scenes, high-ranking Air Force officers are soberly concerned about UFOs. But through official secrecy and ridicule, many citizens are led to believe that unknown flying objects are nonsense." Former CIA Director, Roscoe Hillenkoetter, public statement, 1960.

odd wording for a weather balloon...
"I have been told that we have recovered technology that did not originate on this".-Former Deputy Assistant Secretary of Defense for Intelligence-Chris Mellon

“Behind the scenes, high-ranking Air Force officers are soberly concerned about UFOs. But through official secrecy and ridicule, many citizens are led to believe that unknown flying objects are nonsense.” Former CIA Director, Roscoe Hillenkoetter, public statement, 1960.
Reply Quote
1 edit
Rocagnante
User Profile Ignore User Stop Ignoring
How long do you want to ignore this user?
24 hours One week Permanently Cancel
In reply to Joes • 2:01p, 8/12/23
AG
Joes said:
Sea Speed said:
Agreed. The odds that electronic equipment malfunction is the source of all of this stuff is for all intents and purposes impossible. The possibility that it is not the explanation for any of it probably has about the same odds of being true.
Oh come on, you were just an officer in the Navy with top secret clearance, what would you know about any of this?



Seriously though, we were only spit balling specifically about the 20 year old black and white Nimitz radar image and among other things I said equipment is not always foolproof and even said it was unlikely the case but gave an example to show what I was talking about, if that's going through mental gymnastics then yeah, I guess we're speaking a different language.


You mean the same radar image that the radar ship in the carrier group saw first, diverted two F-18's on a training mission to investigate, and both of those two pilots are on camera saying they saw a physical drone like object at that location?

Your logic is flawed and every time you are called out you change your story of what you were claim you meant.

Yes it is A or B. The objects are real or the Pentagon wants us to believe they are real. There is no C "sensor error".
Reply Quote
1
Aztec1948
User Profile Ignore User Stop Ignoring
How long do you want to ignore this user?
24 hours One week Permanently Cancel
2:08p, 8/12/23
To state that most people even if they state they believe extraterrestrial life exists, will have a really hard time accepting this is quite an understatement. The idea of confirmational bias (both "ways") is so evident. Thats fine as long as the truth is exposed. But will the et "flat earthers" still be out there? Yes, no doubt.

Truth is most have not taken the time to seriously look into it. There have been reasons for that:

"Behind the scenes, high-ranking Air Force officers are soberly concerned about UFOs. But through official secrecy and ridicule, many citizens are led to believe that unknown flying objects are nonsense." Former CIA Director, Roscoe Hillenkoetter, public statement, 1960.
"I have been told that we have recovered technology that did not originate on this".-Former Deputy Assistant Secretary of Defense for Intelligence-Chris Mellon

“Behind the scenes, high-ranking Air Force officers are soberly concerned about UFOs. But through official secrecy and ridicule, many citizens are led to believe that unknown flying objects are nonsense.” Former CIA Director, Roscoe Hillenkoetter, public statement, 1960.
Reply Quote
1 edit
Rocagnante
User Profile Ignore User Stop Ignoring
How long do you want to ignore this user?
24 hours One week Permanently Cancel
In reply to Sea Speed • 2:10p, 8/12/23
AG
Sea Speed said:
Agreed. The odds that electronic equipment malfunction is the source of all of this stuff is for all intents and purposes impossible. The possibility that it is not the explanation for any of it probably has about the same odds of being true.


So you agree with me that equipment malfunction is not the source of all the hundreds of sightings.

Edited to clarify: hundreds of Navy sightings.
Reply Quote
1 edit
Sea Speed
User Profile
Private Message
Ignore User Stop Ignoring
How long do you want to ignore this user?
24 hours One week Permanently Cancel
In reply to Rocagnante • 2:16p, 8/12/23
AG
Rocagnante said:
Sea Speed said:
Agreed. The odds that electronic equipment malfunction is the source of all of this stuff is for all intents and purposes impossible. The possibility that it is not the explanation for any of it probably has about the same odds of being true.


So you agree with me that equipment malfunction is not the source of all the hundreds of sightings.

Edited to clarify: hundreds of Navy sightings.


I think my statement was pretty clear. I think that it is a certainty that it can explain some number of them. Not all, not none. I dont think we can say with any certainty what the cause of all of them is though.
Reply Quote
2
Aztec1948
User Profile Ignore User Stop Ignoring
How long do you want to ignore this user?
24 hours One week Permanently Cancel
2:23p, 8/12/23
The data suggests that the tic tac vehicles were et in origin.
"I have been told that we have recovered technology that did not originate on this".-Former Deputy Assistant Secretary of Defense for Intelligence-Chris Mellon

“Behind the scenes, high-ranking Air Force officers are soberly concerned about UFOs. But through official secrecy and ridicule, many citizens are led to believe that unknown flying objects are nonsense.” Former CIA Director, Roscoe Hillenkoetter, public statement, 1960.
Reply Quote
Rocagnante
User Profile Ignore User Stop Ignoring
How long do you want to ignore this user?
24 hours One week Permanently Cancel
In reply to Sea Speed • 3:50p, 8/12/23
AG
Sea Speed said:
Rocagnante said:
Sea Speed said:
Agreed. The odds that electronic equipment malfunction is the source of all of this stuff is for all intents and purposes impossible. The possibility that it is not the explanation for any of it probably has about the same odds of being true.


So you agree with me that equipment malfunction is not the source of all the hundreds of sightings.

Edited to clarify: hundreds of Navy sightings.


I think my statement was pretty clear. I think that it is a certainty that it can explain some number of them. Not all, not none. I dont think we can say with any certainty what the cause of all of them is though.


So that's a yes. You agree it's not the source of all the sightings.

Focusing on the ones not explained by equipment error, what's your guess as to what the Navy pilots are seeing?
Reply Quote
1
Sea Speed
User Profile
Private Message
Ignore User Stop Ignoring
How long do you want to ignore this user?
24 hours One week Permanently Cancel
In reply to Rocagnante • 4:02p, 8/12/23
AG
I have no idea but I'm skeptical that jumping straight to beings from another planet should be where we let our minds go out of the gate.
Reply Quote
3
Rocagnante
User Profile Ignore User Stop Ignoring
How long do you want to ignore this user?
24 hours One week Permanently Cancel
In reply to Sea Speed • 4:11p, 8/12/23
AG
Sea Speed said:
I have no idea but I'm skeptical that jumping straight to beings from another planet should be where we let our minds go out of the gate.


I agree and have stated that multiple times.

Edit: Do you think they Navy pilots are lying?
Reply Quote
1 edit
Sea Speed
User Profile
Private Message
Ignore User Stop Ignoring
How long do you want to ignore this user?
24 hours One week Permanently Cancel
In reply to Rocagnante • 4:35p, 8/12/23
AG
No but I sure get the feeling you're trying to get me with some gotcha. I equated this a couple of times to the history of ancient seafaring. Sailors saw all kinds of stuff they were unfamiliar with and it was almost always attributed to seamonsters or other mythical creatures. We know that isn't true now. Man has been going to sea for centuries upon centuries yet we just took to the sky. I think as time marches on we will figure out the natural origins of some of these things. I honestly don't waste too much time thinking or worrying about it, just like all those Bigfoot shows etc, because when there is actual undeniable proof of these sorts of things, it will be the biggest story on earth. Every thing up to that point is just watching the soap opera.
Reply Quote
5
TCTTS
User Profile
Private Message
Ignore User Stop Ignoring
How long do you want to ignore this user?
24 hours One week Permanently Cancel
5:25p, 8/12/23
AG
I'm going to keep trusting Coulthart (who interviewed Grusch, and is proving increasingly connected) until he gives me reason not to, but this is pretty wild…

https://x.com/docneuroeo/status/1690480688531984384?s=46&t=V_a3BB2a55PJwofG5p28tw
Quote:
1. He knows specifics around the type of NHI (I assume he's referring to aliens vs AI etc) and soon he'll reveal more info. There's a "good reason" he hasn't said specifics, to protect sources and methods.

2. The videos taken by the Elgin pilots (that Luna, Burchett, and Gaetz were blocked from seeing) are "shocking". The videos were taken with the pilots' mobile phones and show objects engaging with planes. Ross has seen these videos.

3. When asked why he said "Watch Donald Trump" at the end of a podcast, he said Trump had been "backed into a corner", but didn't go into any further detail. He's been told by 3 sources that Trump was briefed about UAPs in early 2020.


More here…

https://www.reddit.com/r/UFOs/comments/15p024i/in_plain_sight_ross_coulthart_1208_discussion/
Reply Quote
1
1 edit
TCTTS
User Profile
Private Message
Ignore User Stop Ignoring
How long do you want to ignore this user?
24 hours One week Permanently Cancel
In reply to TCTTS • 5:28p, 8/12/23
AG
Ffs, are tweets - or whatever the hell Elon calls them now - not embeddable anymore?
Reply Quote
Sea Speed
User Profile
Private Message
Ignore User Stop Ignoring
How long do you want to ignore this user?
24 hours One week Permanently Cancel
In reply to TCTTS • 5:39p, 8/12/23
AG
Yea look at the url, it is now x.com and not twitter.com. I assume texags simply needs to update their code and it will be fixed.
Reply Quote
Agristotle
User Profile
Private Message
Ignore User Stop Ignoring
How long do you want to ignore this user?
24 hours One week Permanently Cancel
In reply to TCTTS • 5:47p, 8/12/23
AG
thanks. This the first meat on this thread in a while.
The part about Trump being backed into a corner fits my scenario. Our "leaders" get a limited-info brief from the military/spooks and then are told "national security, fate of the nation depends on secrecy..." and that's it.

If anyone was going to go public, it would be Trump. If they backed HIM down, nobody else has a chance.
Reply Quote
TCTTS
User Profile
Private Message
Ignore User Stop Ignoring
How long do you want to ignore this user?
24 hours One week Permanently Cancel
In reply to Sea Speed • 5:47p, 8/12/23
AG
Yeah, it must have just happened, as tweets from even a couple hours ago are embedding properly.
Reply Quote
Sea Speed
User Profile
Private Message
Ignore User Stop Ignoring
How long do you want to ignore this user?
24 hours One week Permanently Cancel
In reply to TCTTS • 5:49p, 8/12/23
AG
Yea I noticed it about 2 or 3 hours ago for the first time and I've had absolutely nothing to do today but chase rabbits so I have spent an inordinate amount of time online. Here's to my job finally starting.
Reply Quote
2
TCTTS
User Profile
Private Message
Ignore User Stop Ignoring
How long do you want to ignore this user?
24 hours One week Permanently Cancel
In reply to Agristotle • 5:52p, 8/12/23
AG
Agristotle said:
thanks. This the first meat on this thread in a while.
The part about Trump being backed into a corner fits my scenario. Our "leaders" get a limited-info brief from the military/spooks and then are told "national security, fate of the nation depends on secrecy..." and that's it.

If anyone was going to go public, it would be Trump. If they backed HIM down, nobody else has a chance.


The rumor for years was that only certain presidents were briefed, and never in a million years did I think Trump would have been one of him. But maybe that policy has changed for whatever reason, or wasn't ever a thing to begin with. Either way, I trust Coulthart knows what he's talking about.

How wild/hilarious would it be if Trump's the one who spills the beans…
Reply Quote
2 edits
Sea Speed
User Profile
Private Message
Ignore User Stop Ignoring
How long do you want to ignore this user?
24 hours One week Permanently Cancel
In reply to TCTTS • 6:05p, 8/12/23
AG
If you knew for certain he would give out all the information that the entirety of the US govt machine has on this subject, would you vote for him?
Reply Quote
TCTTS
User Profile
Private Message
Ignore User Stop Ignoring
How long do you want to ignore this user?
24 hours One week Permanently Cancel
In reply to Sea Speed • 6:16p, 8/12/23
AG
I can't stand the man but would vote for Trump in a heartbeat in this scenario. Assuming, of course, disclosure of this nature wouldn't lead to our demise (meaning the cat's out the bag so they go ahead and wipe us off the map for whatever reason). Otherwise, after a few initial headaches, I think it would ultimately go on to be a massive win for the world/civilization, and would make the past eight years, and the next five - of having to listen to/hear about Trump every damn day - more than worth it.
Reply Quote
4 edits
Aztec1948
User Profile Ignore User Stop Ignoring
How long do you want to ignore this user?
24 hours One week Permanently Cancel
In reply to Sea Speed • 6:19p, 8/12/23
Sea Speed said:
I have no idea but I'm skeptical that jumping straight to beings from another planet should be where we let our minds go out of the gate.
"Behind the scenes, high-ranking Air Force officers are soberly concerned about UFOs. But through official secrecy and ridicule, many citizens are led to believe that unknown flying objects are nonsense." Former CIA Director, Roscoe Hillenkoetter, public statement, 1960.

"We alone cannot take credit for our technological advances,we have had help from people of other worlds". Dr. Herman Oberth, father of rocketry and aeronautics - American Weekly 1954

"We'll know our disinformation program is complete when everything the American public believes is false" -William Casey, CIA director, 1981

It is the most sensible, logical explanation.
"I have been told that we have recovered technology that did not originate on this".-Former Deputy Assistant Secretary of Defense for Intelligence-Chris Mellon

“Behind the scenes, high-ranking Air Force officers are soberly concerned about UFOs. But through official secrecy and ridicule, many citizens are led to believe that unknown flying objects are nonsense.” Former CIA Director, Roscoe Hillenkoetter, public statement, 1960.
Reply Quote
Ghost of Bisbee
User Profile Ignore User Stop Ignoring
How long do you want to ignore this user?
24 hours One week Permanently Cancel
In reply to Aztec1948 • 7:03p, 8/12/23
AG
Aztec1948 said:
Sea Speed said:
I have no idea but I'm skeptical that jumping straight to beings from another planet should be where we let our minds go out of the gate.
"Behind the scenes, high-ranking Air Force officers are soberly concerned about UFOs. But through official secrecy and ridicule, many citizens are led to believe that unknown flying objects are nonsense." Former CIA Director, Roscoe Hillenkoetter, public statement, 1960.

"We alone cannot take credit for our technological advances,we have had help from people of other worlds". Dr. Herman Oberth, father of rocketry and aeronautics - American Weekly 1954

"We'll know our disinformation program is complete when everything the American public believes is false" -William Casey, CIA director, 1981

It is the most sensible, logical explanation.


These explanations are much more believable and credible than the Greer videos
Reply Quote
First Page Last Page
Page 44 of 140 ▼
 
×
subscribe Verify your student status
See Subscription Benefits
Trial only available to users who have never subscribed or participated in a previous trial.