Soldato
- Joined
- 2 Aug 2016
- Posts
- 4,985
- Location
- Third Earth
You’re
Pentagon releases UFO footage
- Thread starter Doobedoo
- Start date
Man of Honour
- Joined
- 29 Mar 2003
- Posts
- 57,746
- Location
- Stoke on Trent
If that's your only comeback why not pick on his spelling of Lawyer? Probably because you haven't read his excellent reply and only read the last sentence.
Felon is getting absolutely owned
So what? You can have all the 'skif' meetings in the world with san fairy ann, for all I care - but it's meaningless without any actual output or evidence.
Unless you can point to some sort of outcome or conclusion that came out of this charade that's in any way conclusive, you and everybody else are just ******* in the wind and are not fooling anybody.
Last edited:
Soldato
- Joined
- 2 Aug 2016
- Posts
- 4,985
- Location
- Third Earth
Oh do calm down, dear.
As I said before in this thread. I struggle with grammar and spelling and will be the first person to hold my hand up and say my posts are not perfect due to Dyslexia. I often edit my posts but mistakes will always slip though like reversing letters thats just the nature of Dyslexia.
You mean like the actual compete lack of evidence or substantive evidence to go along with your wild claims? So, we can write off your wild claims as meaningless because you cannot explain the massive holes in the claims and have zero evidence to back up your wild claims.
Great I am glad we got that sorted. Without evidence your claims are meaningless and not true.
It’s not a charade there is a reason the UAP Taskforce is real and well-funded and well staffed. Which is one of the outcomes. The out come is the UAP threat was so real the US military setup a well-funded and well-staffed UAP Taskforce to counter the threat.
The outcome and conclusion is that some UAPs are a real and credible threat. UAP’s presumably from a rival nation(s) are a major national security concern and have been invading restricted military airspace and harassing navy ships and fighter jets not just in the US. Brazil, Belgium, Japan and a bunch of others are all having there own UAP problems among others.
Japan have their own version of the UAP Congress briefing, Belgium and Brazil acknowledge UAPs and have had multiple fighter jet intercepts with UAP. The Brazilian Government gave a 5 Hour Public Hearing w/ picture of military encounters with UAP, and stated UAP are highly advanced technological and real.
What you see as a joke and are dismissing, worldwide nations are saying are a real credible threat.
To take a few quotes from the GOP Oversight. The transcriber auto caps locks everything ☹ Sorry for the poor formatting. I don’t have time to edit the transcribe.
“TODAY, I WANT TO STATE CLEARLY THAT THIS IS NOT SCIENCE FICTION OR CREATING SPECULATION. THIS IS ABOUT NATIONAL SECURITY, GOVERNMENT ACCOUNTABILITY, “
““THE MOST COMMON OF WHICH IS NATIONAL SECURITY CONCERNS.”
“SENATOR ROUNDS HAS STATED THAT THESE ARE BRILLIANT INDIVIDUALS AND THEY ARE NOT MAKING THIS STUFF UP. AND OUR CURRENT SECRETARY OF STATE, MARCO RUBIO, HAS STATED VERY HIGH CLEARANCES AND HIGH POSITIONS WITHIN OUR GOVERNMENT IN REGARDS TO THESE WHISTLEBLOWERS. SENATOR MCCONNELL ALSO DESCRIBED THESE WHISTLEBLOWERS AS SANE AND CREDIBLE, AND THE WITNESSES TODAY ARE NOT ALONE. IN FACT, THEY'RE FAR FROM IT. IN FACT, 34 SENIOR MILITARY, GOVERNMENT AND INTELLIGENCE OFFICIALS HAVE BROKEN THEIR SILENCE.THIS INCLUDES SENATOR, SENATOR OR SECRETARY OF STATE MARCO RUBIO, SENATOR ROUNDS, SENATOR GILLIBRAND, GENERAL JIM CLAPPER, THE FORMER DIRECTOR OF THE GOVERNMENT'S UAP TASK FORCE, THE FORMER HEAD OF AVIATION SECURITY FOR THE WHITE HOUSE NATIONAL SECURITY COUNCIL, THE FORMER SECRETARY OF DEFENSE, AND MANY MORE. AGAIN, TO QUOTE“
If you look into it, there are lots more like this that proves the whistle-blowers are real, are in large numbers, the UAP Task Force is real and that some UAP are a real credible threat. Not just for the US but world wide nations are reporting the same.
Last edited:
I don't really need substantive evidence to doubt the accounts of people like David Grusch, because those accounts are inherently unlikely - and are totally unproven.
It's perfectly reasonable to choose to disbelieve their accounts and side with a more likely explanation - that it's a bunch of theatrics. (leaving aside the associations to people like Jeremy Corbell and various podcasts / ufo shows)
Because it is a more likely and reasonable explanation.
The burden of proof rests with the people making the claim.
I think we can all agree that UAPs are 'real' anything unidentified in the sky, is technically a UAP.
However, if we go deeper and look into the claims of Jeffrey Nuccatelli who claims he saw a red cube hovering over an airforce base - without any evidence, we're just expected to believe it because these people appeared at a conference?
I think the problem you have, is you take everything at face value - because it appears on TV, or because some people from the government were involved - you're too easily fooled into thinking that it somehow gives it credibility, when in actual fact it doesn't.
What provides credibility is evidence, and there is none.
Associate
- Joined
- 27 Jan 2022
- Posts
- 809
- Location
- UK
They are whistle blowing and then showing a video showing a missile test, claiming this is further evidence of advanced tech doing advanced tech things. But it isn't.
Congress gave them the platform and all they do is make various claims and seeing/hearing stuff. Where was the deep dive video analysis?
I don't trust their judgement.
The general public having a bash on various forums seem to be doing a lot better then them and what this object could be.
Congress gave them the platform and all they do is make various claims and seeing/hearing stuff. Where was the deep dive video analysis?
I don't trust their judgement.
The general public having a bash on various forums seem to be doing a lot better then them and what this object could be.
Last edited:
Well yeah, of course. Since the dawn of time nations have tried to maintain an edge over their rivals. Land, sea, air, cyberspace. So yeah of course there are departments dedicated to doing it and departments dedicated to detecting it. Is that not a reasonable base line we're all in agreement to? I even assume @Felon agrees to that? But just because documents get written and secret chats happen - that's not new or special. You don't need to put the word 'real' in front of a lot of your statements, it's not adding anything.
Everything else is just theatrics until the 'new advanced tech' is made public. Why on earth do civilians have such FOMO for this stuff, losing their **** to 'leaked' videos. If there's anything interesting going on it the stuff that won't be picked up on camera and the stuff we don't know about. And then, well we'll just have to do with real testimony which might as well be ghost stories. I believe that these people believe they saw what they saw (mostly), but humans are crazy creatures with terrible memories and hyperactive imaginations.
At a very basic level, it baffles me that any of the FLIR vids got so much interest and that they weren't accompanied by some context from the department that recorded them. Things like explaining parallax, lens artefacts or just more data; even at this level this seems like a massive dumb error OR theatrics. So it doesn't surprise me the departments that supposedly want/need funding to exist drop some morsels out there now and again to be discussed in Congress.
Bit cynical, maybe
Bit cynical, maybe
At a very basic level, it baffles me that any of the FLIR vids got so much interest and that they weren't accompanied by some context from the department that recorded them. Things like explaining parallax, lens artefacts or just more data; even at this level this seems like a massive dumb error OR theatrics. So it doesn't surprise me the departments that supposedly want/need funding to exist drop some morsels out there now and again to be discussed in Congress.
Bit cynical, maybe
It was completely ridiculous.
This new video showing the hellfire missile go through what looks like a balloon or some other benign object is also ridiculous, exactly what it is it being touted to be?
It can't be anything special, if it's unable to avoid a ground attack missile based on technology from the 1970s....
It would be one thing, if a heat-ray came out and zapped the missile, or the thing disappeared or did *something* - but it just looks like a training video, or some other low-key incident. :shrugs:
That’s the thing Felon doesn’t agree to that. You would think it’s a reasonable base line we're all in agreement to. But Felon doesn’t agree those departments are real and Felon certainty doesn’t agree the Senior Intelligence officers we are talking about are real staff members of those departments. I felt like I had to put the word real in front because Felon doesn’t agree any of its real. Despite the solid evidence Felon doesn't even agree they are real whistle-blowers. (sorry with "real" word again).
What Felon has been arguing is these people are faking it. He thinks it’s all a load of baloney with those people working on behest of his usual suspects. The usual suspects being George Knapp, Ross Coulthard, Jeremy Corbell (or anyone else Felon doesn't like.) According to Felon the usual suspects are behind all this and all the whistle-blowers are working for George Knapp, Ross Coulthard, Jeremy Corbell to further there agenda.
Felon is basically saying its all a bunch of theatrics being run by George Knapp, Ross Coulthard, Jeremy Corbell who are the mastermind BS artists behind all this. He has created this grand conspiracy theory where the same circle of people, his usual suspects are behind everything.
EDIT: At the way we are going when Senior Intelligence officers number 35 comes out, Felon will still be arguing they are fake military officers working on behest of his usual suspects.
Last edited:
When conference number 35 comes out, I'll still be arguing to see the evidence like I have been all along.
Stop spamming silly packaged-for-media conferences, nonsense accounts with no basis in reality being propelled by people with a blatant conflict of interest.
I think that's a pretty reasonable and sensible position.
Only that is not what is happening and your position is not remotely seasonable, reasonable or even likely at this point. This delusion you have of it all being propelled by the usual people is entirely in your head with zero evidence and a mass of evdeince to go against your idea. Every single time you have failed the burden of proof.
As for evidence I have not doubt that's true. Its pretty clear for everyone to see you will still be arguing for evidence when number 35 comes out as you automatically dismiss any evidence that doesn't fit your conspiracy theory. That's why despite the burden of proof being 100% proven that the whistle-blowers are who they say they are, worked where they say they worked and are Senior Intelligence officers you still refuse to admit that and call them fake because you cannot accept any evidence that goes against your theory that the usual suspects are behind it all.
Last edited:
Ok.
So lets apply this level of scrutiny to the claim that Jeffrey Nuccatelli makes about a red cube the size of a football field hovering over an airforce base;
We can;
- Verify the whistleblowers name.
- Verify the department they worked at.
- Verify their job title.
- Verify that they appeared on the television.
- Verify that a bunch of other people confirm the above as true.
No one said that evidence is conclusive. I have never looked into Jeffrey in detail. From a quick glance what was said is each incident was witnessed by multiple personnel both military and Boeing contractors, documented, investigated, and reported up the chain of command. The official Air Force records documented the event. The evidence was handed over to AARO and the FBI. What precisely the object was is not conclusive. Its not even clear if its the same object for each incursion.
If you have some evidence that George Knapp, Ross Coulthard, Jeremy Corbell faked this event go ahead and show it. Your the one making the wild claims that Jeffrey Nuccatelli is working on behest of the usually suspects. If Jeffrey didn't work at the base and the other witness's to this event didn't confirm the same story and the air force records dont back up the events. Go ahead and show it.
I am happy to write off Jeffrey Nuccatelli if there is solid evidence, but I need 100% solid evidence. Which I keep asking you for and you keep failing at. Your making wild claims George Knapp, Ross Coulthard and Jeremy Corbell are masterminds behind all this. Go and prove it. Explain to us how they faked this along side Jeffrey.
You're backtracking from what you said previously;
How can you say he's the real deal on one hand, when on the other you freely admit you haven't even looked at it in detail?
It sounds like you’re just deflecting to avoid your mistake. I bet you didn’t realise there was more to it then just a single person standing up and talking. Likely you didn’t realise about the other witness’s that confirmed the same event and the official Air Force records that got handed over to the FBI and AARO.
When I said real I meant real as all evidence I have seen they are military officers that worked where they said they worked. Had the security clearance they said they had and did the jobs in the departments the said they did. Real deal as in the ones who say they are whistle-blowers are actually part of the whistle-blowers program. None of that is back tracking.
I looked into them enough to prove your claims are fake. So just what is your point? Like I said before if you have some evidence Jeffrey Nuccatelli is not who he says he is then prove it. You keep claiming him and the others are not real but so far have refuse to provide any shred of evidence.
You said you wanted to apply this level of scrutiny to the claims. But I am not seeing any evidence from you. Like I said before "If you have some evidence that George Knapp, Ross Coulthard, Jeremy Corbell faked this event go ahead and show it. Your the one making the wild claims that Jeffrey Nuccatelli is working on behest of the usually suspects. If Jeffrey didn't work at the base and the other witness's to this event didn't confirm the same story and the air force records dont back up the events. Go ahead and show it."