That guy is literally surrounded by deceit and criminal activity. The more I see Lazar and Greer and the rest held up as the patron saints of this whole thing the more it all sucks.Aztec1948 said:Bob Lazar wasn't lying back in 1989.Rocagnante said:TCTTS said:
Agreed.
(Now, prepare for a dozen posts telling you how it's going be blue balls for eternity.)
Grusch appears willing to discuss behind closed doors with anyone with sufficient clearance. The more he does then things will begin to leak. Which will hopefully force things with those controlling access to the proof.
I still can't shake this feeling the past 4-5 years is all a big ruse but it's certainly becoming harder to keep my marker there.
Note: while it would be ok for a private company to protect its secrets if the gov was not involved, if those efforts are being *funded* by the government, or were given tech by te gov, then gov should be able to send in whoever they want to do an audit, whenever they want.
— Riz Virk (@Rizstanford) July 26, 2023
TIME Magazine with a hell of a headline.https://t.co/fbrrjUFBSJ#ufotwitter #ufo #uap pic.twitter.com/FcW5QE7h3U
— UAP James (@UAPJames) July 26, 2023
A former intelligence community official testified on an alleged covert government program to recover and reverse engineer crashed alien spacecraft. https://t.co/BAYUQtjwWR
— ABC News (@ABC) July 26, 2023
Former U.S. intelligence official David Grusch claims under oath that aliens exist and that the U.S. government is in possession of UFOs and non-human bodies 🤯👽 pic.twitter.com/Qu7KZGs9v3
— Daily Loud (@DailyLoud) July 26, 2023
The @Washingtonpost talks David Grusch & NHIs (ETs) … Finally. https://t.co/owCxqXUczr
— Ross Coulthart (@rosscoulthart) July 26, 2023
At a House hearing on UFOs on Wednesday, lawmakers rebuked what they described as decades of unnecessary secrecy in U.S. programs that studied unexplained phenomena and a former official said the government was sheltering alien spacecraft. https://t.co/QmOKRMsYo5 pic.twitter.com/RYY8oy9cz9
— The New York Times (@nytimes) July 26, 2023
People say they want evidence. Short of walking out of an NHI or flying a UAP over Congress in real time, please define what you want to see? I mean it... state what you want? And how you would get it and believe it?
— Garry P. Nolan (@GarryPNolan) July 26, 2023
I'll give you my approach: So, what Congress is doing is…
Skeptics are saying that Grusch, in particular, shared nothing new (no proof). My question to my skeptical friends is this. How do you suggest that Grusch reveal classified material in a public forum without breaking the law and inviting prosecution? He said he would be glad to…
— Jim Harold (@THEJimHarold) July 26, 2023
Horse, here is water:Rocagnante said:
Lazar can't even prove he went to college where he said he did
Oh come on, extraordinary claims require.. uh.. some circumstantial evidence and testimony.Brian Earl Spilner said:
How about one picture of said alien?
TCTTS said:People say they want evidence. Short of walking out of an NHI or flying a UAP over Congress in real time, please define what you want to see? I mean it... state what you want? And how you would get it and believe it?
— Garry P. Nolan (@GarryPNolan) July 26, 2023
I'll give you my approach: So, what Congress is doing is…
I didn't expect him to present anything today, I don't think most people did. In my opinion they did all they could and that's great, most of the people disappointed are actually the believers who were hoping to shock the world, not the skeptics.TCTTS said:Skeptics are saying that Grusch, in particular, shared nothing new (no proof). My question to my skeptical friends is this. How do you suggest that Grusch reveal classified material in a public forum without breaking the law and inviting prosecution? He said he would be glad to…
— Jim Harold (@THEJimHarold) July 26, 2023
Aztec1948 said:Horse, here is water:Rocagnante said:
Lazar can't even prove he went to college where he said he did
This is heading one way: verification and acknowledgement.
— Christopher Sharp (@ChrisUKSharp) July 26, 2023
Either it isn't true and senior intel and defence personnel are all mad and lying.
Or it's true. And I believe it's true. Pandora's Box has been opened.
We're never going back.
TCTTS said:Note: while it would be ok for a private company to protect its secrets if the gov was not involved, if those efforts are being *funded* by the government, or were given tech by te gov, then gov should be able to send in whoever they want to do an audit, whenever they want.
— Riz Virk (@Rizstanford) July 26, 2023
Rep. Tim Burchett and Rep. Anna Paulina Luna talk with reporters following the Congressional UAP Hearing and discuss non-human intelligence in relation to UAP, as well as reverse engineering programs.#ufotwitter #ufo #uap pic.twitter.com/7lVlxAgOOe
— UAP James (@UAPJames) July 26, 2023
Brian Earl Spilner said:
How about one picture of said alien?
me hearing the ufo news pic.twitter.com/A0ld0yXQvs
— madison (top 0.1% on sudoku) (@madsmotionless) July 26, 2023
Dude, no.Teddy Perkins said:
I'm seeing a lot of folks clamoring for "evidence" but ignoring that testimony is a form of evidence. You can take issue with the credibility of the witness providing testimony but that does not change the fact that testimony, under oath, is evidence in and of itself.
Teddy Perkins said:
I'm seeing a lot of folks clamoring for "evidence" but ignoring that testimony is a form of evidence. You can take issue with the credibility of the witness providing testimony but that does not change the fact that testimony, under oath, is evidence in and of itself.
Then say "scientific proof," not evidence.Joes said:Dude, no.Teddy Perkins said:
I'm seeing a lot of folks clamoring for "evidence" but ignoring that testimony is a form of evidence. You can take issue with the credibility of the witness providing testimony but that does not change the fact that testimony, under oath, is evidence in and of itself.
This is not a courtroom; it's supposed to be science. Einstein didn't swear under oath that he figured out relativity and to take his word for it. Scientists don't skip peer review because the claimant "seems credible".
Because it's both in sequence, we expect the evidence to be provided first, it doesn't skip ahead to proof, that's a process.Teddy Perkins said:Then say "scientific proof," not evidence.Joes said:Dude, no.Teddy Perkins said:
I'm seeing a lot of folks clamoring for "evidence" but ignoring that testimony is a form of evidence. You can take issue with the credibility of the witness providing testimony but that does not change the fact that testimony, under oath, is evidence in and of itself.
This is not a courtroom; it's supposed to be science. Einstein didn't swear under oath that he figured out relativity and to take his word for it. Scientists don't skip peer review because the claimant "seems credible".
I appreciate your comments and post, but if we're going to even try to depend on photos then they need to look like that image of the woman on the right. And given all of the incidents in the past that I posted where people were within few feet (several of those featured in the highly-recommended-by-enthusiasts The Phenomenon doc), combined with modern cameras, getting just one like that shouldn't be hard if they exist. I do hear what you're saying, there's different levels of imagery available depending on what your standard is.Michael Cera Palin said:
Joes, I really appreciate you being a skeptic voice on this thread. It's good that someone is here keeping everyone level headed.
But at the same time they have done this. Marines at 21 palms filmed a UAP formation over the base in 2021, and immediately the debunkers went to work telling them it was flares and they're crazy.
A house camera in Colorado caught a strange bipedal creature walking down the driveway and the debunkers told the mom she was crazy and it was her son with underwear on his head walking around in the middle of the night.
The Graves and Fravor experiences literally filmed the craft on their targeting systems (the same ones that successfully put ordinance on terrorists) and the debunkers went to work telling them "oh it's too grainy and they're just stationary objects being distorted by the plane and camera movement".
I want to be clear, I don't look at any of those individual videos as definitive proof (especially the Colorado one) but stuff has been filmed in the modern age, our news cycle just doesn't treat them the same way it did back in the day.
Are there hysterical BS stories that have polluted the UFO/UAP scene over time? ABSOLUTELY. Have some of those stories died down now that people can call BS with respect to cameras? ABSOLUTELY. But that doesn't mean it's all a stink.
And there's a possibility, assuming the aliens are real, that they wised up to some of our photographic capabilities and are being stealthier about it (this is a large stretch by me but it's a possibility).