Pentagon releases UFO footage

Felon said:
It's stupid.

By cherry picking the first part - but disagreeing with the other part, simply makes it look like a very poor story, from a very poor, incompetent and unreliable witness, or the witness is lying outright.

If it was a solid account from a solid witness the story would make sense and add up as a whole, and you wouldn't need to cherry pick the bits you like, because the whole account would add up.
Click to expand...
Its not stupid too anyone with basic reading comprehension skills.

Do you realise I just spent 3 pages saying my opinion is the alien part of the story is poor and doesn’t convince me about aliens and that I think the pilot is wrong as he is an unreliable witness for the reasons I stated.

Not only that, but every single time I explained why I think the pilot is wrong making him an unreliable witness you challenged me and disagreed with me. Perhaps you could stop flip flopping and make up your mind. Either I am right and the pilot is wrong or the pilot is right and I am wrong. You cannot have it both ways that we are both wrong.

As for cherry picking that’s just a stupid thing to say. I am not cherry picking the bits I liked. I am fact checking. After looking at the evidence and fact checking, I am saying the first part checks out and is real. The 2nd part doesn’t check out and has flaws that I pointed out and a simple alternative explanation which I pointed out. That is not cherry picking that is critical thinking.

Since the start I have been saying it’s not an alien meaning its not a solid account and not a solid witness. You’re the one that has been arguing against that and challenging me every time I said the pilot is not reliable.

Yes, the account doesn’t add up, I have been saying that since the start hence why I disagree with the 2nd part. The first part adds up, the 2nd part doesn't add up. Somehow that is a giant mystery to you.

You cannot have it both ways. You cannot complain I am dismissing the alien part as not real and say its not an alien while also saying I am wrong in calling it not reliable and not a solid story.

In short unless more evidence comes out I think the pilot is wrong in what he thinks he picked up.
 
Release the egg!

Pottsey said:
I don't believe your alien story one bit based on current evidence. Given the environmental conditions its more likely the pilot is mistaken.
Click to expand...

So it's possible that sometimes we can rule out expert evidence? :)

How about we just still to actual evidence, like an egg rolling or UAP video, but when people flap their lips it's just that; meaningless words without substance.
 
Last edited:
Pottsey said:
I think the pilot is wrong as he is an unreliable witness for the reasons I stated.
Click to expand...

If the pilot is an unreliable witness, then it’s reasonable to assume he’s either incompetent, mistaken or simply lying.

With that in mind, why believe anything he says?
 
Felon said:
If the pilot is an unreliable witness, then it’s reasonable to assume he’s either incompetent, mistaken or simply lying.

With that in mind, why believe anything he says?
Click to expand...
Which is what I have been saying since the start that I believe he is mistaken due to the environmental conditions which make his account unreliable. You challenged me over calling him mistaken. If you agree he is an unreliable witness why are you challenging me every time I say I think he is mistaken?


"With that in mind, why believe anything he says?"
As I explained to you multiple times the factchecks and background checks seem to show the militry side of the story is true and that he did retrieval runs for the militry. After he left the militry the paperwork shows he owned his own company with a register helicopter with him as the pilot that continued to do contract missions for the militry in the area he say he flaw missions. Hence why I say the first part of the story checks out and the 2nd part does not. You called me stupid and called me inconsistent because I think that militry part of the story is true. But that is what the evidence and facts show. The first part seems to be true. The 2nd part with aliens I don't think is true.
 
Pottsey said:
You called me stupid and called me inconsistent because I think that militry part of the story is true. But that is what the evidence and facts show. The first part seems to be true. The 2nd part with aliens I don't think is true.
Click to expand...

It is stupid and inconsistent, to think this person is telling the truth and is legit, yet in the same breath write off half of his entire account, especially when you or anyone impartial can't verify any of it.

If we both agree he’s a crap witness and half of his entire story is rubbish, why believe or trust anything he says, and why cherry pick only half of his story?

Can you not see the obvious problem?
 
Last edited:
Felon said:
For reference, this is the egg :D

From the bastion of truth that is Ross Coulthart of Newsnation.


Moist Charlie's breakdown of it is quite entertaining:

Click to expand...
is this a joke? it literally looks like a baloon, captured by a piece of cardboard and string attached to a rope

where's this footage evens supposed to be from? someone doing it for the lols?
 
Last edited:
arknor said:
is this a joke?
Click to expand...

Yes it is.

Straight from the people who brought us these BS whistleblowers, David Grusch, this new guy and a bunch of other crap.

I think the whole thing has been a joke, from the start, this joke video they’re trying to pass off as aliens, is a pretty good foundation for that.
 
arknor said:
is this a joke? it literally looks like a baloon, captured by a piece of cardboard and string attached to a rope

where's this footage evens supposed to be from? someone doing it for the lols?
Click to expand...
The footage is not from Jake Barber.

Its unlikely to be a balloon. Some people thinks its a Aerostat but balloons like that would be extremely dangerous and typically would not be picked up or dropped off by helicopter. Plus it appears to have weight around it when it hits the ground and appears to be pretty solid. Its more likely to be some sort of militry shell covering to protect what ever the equipment being transports in flight is. I do agree its not an alien and a load of nonsense. I very much doubt its a balloon though, far to risky.

Felon said:
For reference, this is the egg :D
Click to expand...
No its not. That is not the egg that Jake Barber is talking about. Its diffrent footage from a diffrent source at least that's what they said on the new channel and in the interview.
 
Pottsey said:
No its not. That is not the egg that Jake Barber is talking about.
Click to expand...

Who ******* cares? It’s all a load of balls.

It all came from Newsnation, it’s all coming from the same orifice of horse crap as the rest of it.
 
Last edited:
Felon said:
It is stupid and inconsistent, to think this person is telling the truth and is legit, yet in the same breath write off half of his entire account, especially when you or anyone impartial can't verify any of it.

If we both agree he’s a crap witness and half of his entire story is rubbish, why believe or trust anything he says, and why cherry pick only half of his story?

Can you not see the obvious problem?
Click to expand...
As I said before its not stupid or inconsistent too anyone with basic reading comprehension skills.

Your wrong as anyone impartial can verify the first part of the story. You say why should we believe the first part of the story. Well for what feels like the 100th time, the reason I believe the first part of the story is I can verify its real and true. I don’t know why this is so hard for you to understand. It’s been explained enough times.

To give some examples. His flew his helicopter at company NCAGE code 55XQ0 established 2008.-08-14. He flew retrieval missions from location 5020 W Mineral King Ste C, Visalia, CA 993291 which matches the location he talked about flying around. We can also view his militry papers and verify a ton of other information like his helicopters on file are: Bell UH-1H's, Bell 407's, Bell 206's and a Robinson R44 plus a load of other stuff I don't need to post as my point is proven.

As for why that matters well it proves a lot of the stuff you have being saying is wrong and nonsense as is often the case with your posts. It proves you calling me inconsistent and stupid is just you being yet again wrong.

Lastly it fits into my believe that a lot of UAP’s are militry based. Sometimes unknown experimental stuff and/or counter intelligence agents who muddle the waters to keep the militry stuff out of public sight. Its far better to have some pilot going I picked up an alien egg then saying I moved classified militry gear. Its a well known and proven militry tactic.
 
Last edited:
Pottsey said:
Lastly it fits into my believe that a lot of UAP’s are militry based. Sometimes unknown experimental stuff and/or counter intelligence agents who muddle the waters to keep the militry stuff out of public sight. Its far better to have some pilot going I picked up an alien egg then saying I moved classified militry gear. Its a well known and proven militry tactic.
Click to expand...

Do you not think you're overestimating your own ability and position, by claiming you know better than the person who says he was there, says it was aliens and furthermore - was told after the fact by the UAP taskforce that it was aliens (according to his interview on NewsNation) ?

Do you not think it's a bit arrogant and foolish, to say you know better by contradicting his story - with no experience, no knowledge and no prior involvement with this?
 
Were those legal aliens or these illegal aliens the US was talking about this week crossing their border?
 
Felon said:
Do you not think you're overestimating your own ability and position, by claiming you know better than the person who says he was there, says it was aliens and furthermore - was told after the fact by the UAP taskforce that it was aliens (according to his interview on NewsNation) ?

Do you not think it's a bit arrogant and foolish, to say you know better by contradicting his story - with no experience, no knowledge and no prior involvement with this?
Click to expand...
Talk about double standards. How many times have you said false things about David Grusch. To quote you. “Do you not think it's a bit arrogant and foolish, to say you know better by contradicting his story - with no experience, no knowledge and no prior involvement with this?”

Same for Jake, I guess based on your statement above you think your comments about Jake are rather arrogant and foolish to contradict his story. More so when you Felon incompetently watched the wrong video and criticised the wrong video for 4 days while thinking it was Jake when it wasnt. All those things you said about Jake that was based on a video that wasnt Jake. Don't you think that was a bit arrogant and foolish?

The fact is you got it wrong. You called me stupid and inconsistence over something I was right about and consistence about.
 
Pottsey said:
I guess based on your statement above you think your comments about Jake are rather arrogant and foolish to contradict his story
Click to expand...

No - I just don’t believe any of them at all, everything they say is suspicious to me.

You on the other hand are trying to change their stories to suit your agenda.

How can you not see the difference?
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom