• kromem@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      2
      arrow-down
      2
      ·
      1 year ago

      I find it interesting that the quoted denial during the hearing by the head of the central whistleblower’s agency explicitly denied that the UAPs were non-terrestrial.

      The theoretical physics that was brought up by that witness about the holographic principle (and what was effectively discussing the idea of travel through a wormhole) in order to explain potential FTL travel is the same mechanism behind theoretical time travel.

      Tech that can explicitly disable our military radar, multi vehicle diamond flight formations, and any interest in Earth circa 21st century when signals from intelligence on Earth would only have traveled in an ~100 light years radius away – all seem to point away from extraterrestrial origins.

      But all those details would be in line with much more advanced terrestrial origins.

      Ever since Lucian’s A True Story in the 2nd century AD, there’s been the idea of extraterrestrial life. And yet the thing that actually ended up true from that satirical story was a ship of humans flying up to the moon.

      I think a lot of the attention on this topic is over reliant on projecting advanced versions of human technology onto “visitors from outer space” rather than recognizing that the time proven trend over our history has been human driven technological advancement tending to overcome the wildest expectations of earlier humans.

      A lot of the testimony in that hearing does seem rather legit, and to point to things outside the scope of what we’d consider possible today. But it may be the direction of questions about origins asked are barking up the wrong Sci-Fi tree, and leaving wiggle room for carefully worded yet truthful denials as a result.

  • SpikesOtherDog
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    3
    ·
    1 year ago

    Amazing. Next up, is Sinclair Media confirming that they regularly employ lizard people.

    • kromem@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      4
      ·
      edit-2
      1 year ago

      Fun fact - in 1952 UFOs over Washington DC made the front page news across legit newspapers.

      Also in 1952, Gene Pope, who graduated MIT in only three years, and was working in the CIA’s psyops program, left to buy up the National Enquirer.

      Two years later he turned it into a nonsense tabloid rag that frequently featured UFO stories alongside claims Elvis still lived, etc.

      He later had the Weekly World News, of batboy fame added to the mix.

      So when you associate discussion of UFOs/UAPs with lizard people, you are doing so because of explicit earlier efforts in what was probably one of the most successful known intelligence agency propaganda programs in modern history.

      The people on the stand in the hearing had legit credentials and knew exactly what they were talking about down to the specific mentions of UAPs in declassified parts of a 1970s US/USSR treaty and pointing legislators towards very specific next steps. And the legislators from both parties were treating it seriously even expressing their own frustrations at being uniquely turned away from their own investigations into an incident (that’s now a part of public record).

      While I think the idea this stuff is alien is far less likely than other explanations - the taboo and dismissal towards it has a very detailed history that’s arguably even more interesting than the UAPs themselves (and evidently still extremely successful decades after initiated).

    • distantsounds@lemmy.worldOP
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      3
      ·
      1 year ago

      I did some contract IT work for them and Shurz Com a few years back and yeah total reptiles. Not lizard people though

      • SpikesOtherDog
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        1
        ·
        1 year ago

        Oof, super cold? I have done financial support, and there were some cold fish. The biggest thing I have seen is whether they see you as an inside or an interloper.

  • SheeEttin@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    5
    arrow-down
    2
    ·
    1 year ago

    Yes, a flying object that isn’t conclusively identifiable is common, unless you put work into identifying it. This isn’t a huge story.

    • distantsounds@lemmy.worldOP
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      4
      arrow-down
      1
      ·
      1 year ago

      Absolutely, but the hearing was never about presenting evidence of extraterrestrials. It is about creating a safe and transparent process for reporting unidentified flying objects. A system for collecting data on such incidents is something worthwhile for many reasons. Then and only then could we have an actual discussion on anything further regarding the potential of extraterrestrials if credible evidence exists. Too much bs until then