No evidence that UFOs are aliens — NASA attempts to make conversations about aerial phenomena more scientific::NASA attempts to make conversations about aerial phenomena more scientific.
No evidence that UFOs are aliens — NASA attempts to make conversations about aerial phenomena more scientific::NASA attempts to make conversations about aerial phenomena more scientific.
There are legitimate scientific organizations studying UAP, such as UAPx and the Galileo Project at Harvard.
Referring to UAP and not aliens, our government has admitted to having secret government programs monitoring/studying UAP, and other nations around the world have as well, including the UK and France who’ve both opened their information to the public. The US is uniquely secretive, withholding, and obfuscating the subject.
If you want a rational representation of valid information, I would encourage you to read my post. Everything is cited and it contains declassified US government documents and admission of the existence of UAP and secret government programs monitoring them. Again, I’m speaking in regard to UAP (Anomalous Aerial Phenomenon) and not aliens.
You’d be taken a lot more seriously if you dropped the “admission” phrasing.
What would be better phrasing? Acknowledged? It was previously classified and denied, and they have now admitted to the existence of the programs and phenomenon.
The information is valid regardless if people want to believe it. My post is thoroughly cited.
That’s cool man if you want to keep sounding like a dime store Don Quixote. The adversarial subtext of your phrasing will make the majority of people ignore you and will taint the perception of whatever you cite.
Nah, I don’t have a problem with my wording. You’re just jumping to all sorts of conclusions. I’m not responsible for other people’s ignorance and unwillingness to challenge their beliefs.
My argument is logically sound and I don’t feel it comes off like the mad scrolls of some Q-anon nut job whatsoever. I think your hang-up and useless criticism here is just a reflection of your emotional maturity level and propensity for emotional reasoning. I presented factual information with logical reasoning. You’re emotionally reasoning here.
If someone is unwilling to even open a lemmy post link and instead writes it off without any consideration, that’s just a reflection of their own ignorance and unwillingness to challenge their beliefs.
I don’t feel the need to tiptoe around the facts, and there’s always going to be people unwilling to consider the information. I’ve already done a hell of a lot, compiling all of that information and that write-up. But I’ll be sure to remember that you don’t like the way the information makes you feel next time.
Nah I was trying to help ya but it sounds like you might be closer to the mind set that I was trying to help you not sound like.
Yeah, what help you were by repeatedly condensing me and calling me a q-anon crazy! You should become a motivational speaker!
I didn’t call you that but your responses do lend some credibility to the notion. If you don’t want to be taken seriously fine, I don’t really care
Tell me when they have something tangible that isn’t “here’s this thing on video that we can’t identify”. We’ve been collecting data for >80 years so I’m sure there must be something by now? Or is “fuzzy photography” the extent of it?
UAP has the same stigma as well. You can’t say "Oh, it’s Unidentified Anomalous Phenomenon while winking and nodding about aliens and hinting at conspiracies. We know what you mean.
Decades of “it might be aliens” when looking at blurry and out-of-context videos and photos deserves the stigma. It’s not aliens. It’s never aliens. All we have is “we don’t know what that thing was.” Until we do and then it’s an insect close to the camera, an internal reflection on an SLR lens, another aircraft, etc.
To jump to the conclusion that aliens is even an option is ridiculous given the number of crap we have in the skies today.
You’re clearly uneducated in the topic if you think a bug on lense is responsible for these crafts when there have been many instances in which radar has verified recordings and/or eyewitness reports. That rules out bugs.
And the UAP have been measured at temperatures that rule out birds or other warm-blooded animals.
There’s enough evidence that exists to make the belief that these physical objects exist rational and reasonable. Just because you haven’t honestly evaluated the evidence for something doesn’t mean that evidence doesn’t exist.
Ugh. Just… Don’t.
Evidence for… WHAT?
Crafts that our government has stated are not our technology, that are capable of outperforming our current aircraft/war machines, such as the F/A-18F Superhornets in the Nimitz Event.
That should be concerning to people if that air superiority exists in the hands of a possible adversary. There is also the aerospace safety hazard posed by UAP that affects both commercial and military aircraft, where there have been many reported cases of near-misses.
The Pentagon’s Office of the Director of National Intelligence (ODNI) was mandated to produce a report on UAP, and stated in their report that:
Of the 510 total UAP reports studied by ODNI, 171 remained “uncharacterized and unattributed,” and “some of these uncharacterized UAP appear to have demonstrated unusual flight characteristics or performance capabilities, and require further analysis." [11]
Not only has the US government confirmed that UAP exist, they have acknowledged that they pose a serious safety risk to our pilots; both commercial and domestic.
We have those crafts? That would indeed be news to me.
What is a UAP? I’m not being academic I’m trying to get at the heart of the discussion. Let me rephrase this to show my point:
I’m on board with that. If a pilot reports seeing something you want to find out what it was. Could be a bird, drone, meteor, internal camera refraction, part that fell from an aircraft, space debris de-orbiting, etc.
Okay. So what? It’s not aliens. It’s unknown by your definition.