“It's all just exactly the same retort again though, isn't it?”
No, it’s not if you bothered to look into it. They are finding more and more supporting evidence with a growing list of supporting whistle-blowers who worked directly inside and alongside these special access programs. Which is not what would happen if this is all BS. In fact, the opposite it happening. At every step of the way the evidence is being produced. Which goes directly against the BS theory you made up about selling books.
Furthermore, you said these people talking BS would have zero evidence. But you were 100% wrong as they all stood up and backed them self-up with large amounts of supporting evidence. Even the new people are saying there have classified evidence and are willing to hand it all over in a secure environment. That is not something that a BS speaking person trying to sell books would say or do. You said Grush would never provide any evidence yet they called him into a classified setting and he handed over the classified data which according to you he didn't have, yet he stood up and produced it.
The way you describe this as a bunch of people talking nonsense without evidence doesn’t fit the facts.
If like you say this is all a made-up story with no evidence, how do you explain Congress looking into the evidence David Grush handed over and finding more whistle-blowers directly inside the programs? How do you explain the evidence Congress has gained access to?
At this point its pretty clear the illegally run special access programs you dismissed are in fact real. The crash retrieval teams again you dismissed them turned out to be real. The technology be it human made experimental Skunk work style like I think it is or something else seems to be real.
The threats and retaliation against whistle-blowers trying to expose these illegally run program again you dismissed and joked them away but Congress have confirm they are real.
All this stuff about BS to sell books from the usual suspects its made up by you. This has nothing to do with the usually suspects trying to sell books for cash.
The people like Dylan Borland, Joe Spielberger, Chief Alexandro Wiggins, Jeffrey Nuccatelli, David Grusch and many of the others are the real deal. Not BS like you keep saying. None of them have anything to do with selling books for cash.
It’s about a serious matter that needs investigating and your trying to dismiss it as a joke.
If you take out the aliens stuff all the rest seems to be real and has supporting evidence. That being UAPs, illegally run special access programs, crash retrieval teams, threats against people, experimental technology, large sums of money being diverted without Congress oversight. This is all serious stuff that needs looking into not being dismissed as a joke.
Take this quote
“I was further exposed to classified information from the UAP legacy crash retrieval program through a sensitive position I held within a Special Access Program (SAP). During this time, intelligence officers approached me in fear for their own careers, citing misconduct within these programs and the same retaliation I was already enduring.”
Look, if you want to say its not Alien Technology I am fine with that. As you know I think its human made skunk work style technology anyway. But its clear these are real people trying to report misconduct and they really did work in these classified Special Access Program they say they did. They deserve better then being dismissed as BS trying to sell books.
What if its not BS trying to sell books and this misconduct is real? Which is what its strongly looking like now.
... Couldn't help refreshing my memory, and yeah it used words like perceived, apparent and then wild ranges of speeds 'possible'. I still see no reason to think it's anomalous, we don't have enough data. Mick's trigonometry sits somewhere in the range so no point labelling it as a theory that ignores evidence. Take his videos for what they are - his brand of mathematical analysis. If you prefer the vague reported range of numbers in an AARO report, that's fine too.
We can infer that we must be mistaken if we go down that path. You're gonna need to do better than that video for me to believe otherwise.
