New whistleblower comes out with UFO program information to Congress. Program name is called "Immaculate Constellation"

[jaydawg08]

How many years of this not happening will you wait to go by before you would accept that you were wrong?

Which part exactly? The fact that there is life in the universe is a statistical certainty.. the fact that something may have/are visiting this planet is within the realm of possibility due to that

 

[Geordi]

Everything that begins will end..

The facade ends, and nikkas who think like you struggle with reality

What does that mean

I'm a sci fi fan and keep up with news about space exploration and the search for extraterrestrial life thats why I'm in this thread. So far yall just post the same grainy footage of weather balloons and updates about meaningless congressional hearings.

I guess the mystery from all the whistleblowers and rumors of secret govt lairs is exciting to yall. I'd rather see if JWST found anything until the government shows us the sexy green alien bytches you say they are hiding.

 

[O.T.I.S.]

What does that mean

I'm a sci fi fan and keep up with news about space exploration and the search for extraterrestrial life thats why I'm in this thread. So far yall just post the same grainy footage of weather balloons and updates about meaningless congressional hearings.

I guess the mystery from all the whistleblowers and rumors of secret govt lairs is exciting to yall. I'd rather see if JWST found anything until the government shows us the sexy green alien bytches you say they are hiding.

It means exactly what it means

It doesn’t matter what you believe, its whats happening.

Don’t worry about it though, worry about what you can control breh. Whatever your opinion is. Im talking about facts/the reality of the situation and you talking about scifi movies and “grainy” video and never asked why theyre all grainy…

 

[Professor Emeritus]

Which part exactly? The fact that there is life in the universe is a statistical certainty..

Not a "statisical certainty" if you study astrobiology. Astrobiologists themselves are all over the map on that one. But that's irrelevant, I think it's very likely there is life outside of Earth, quite possibly intelligent life, but.....

the fact that something may have/are visiting this planet is within the realm of possibility due to that

The issue is that you can't conflate the possibility of life in the universe with the possibility of life visiting us because the very immensity you're using to insist on life in the universe simultaneously makes it almost impossible for that life to visit us.

First off, you can almost completely discount that any being outside our galaxy will ever visit us. This is both due to the sheer distance to the closest galaxy (2,500,000 light years - even light would take MILLIONS of years to reach us from even the very very closest one) as well as the sheer number of stars in their own galaxy. So with that fact alone, you reduced the # of potential star systems with life by a factor of a trillion. Only 0.0000000001% of stars in the universe are within our galaxy.

Second, even in our own galaxy, we are 25,000 light years away from the center. Sure, there are 100 billion stars in the Milky Way, but ~99.99% of those are over 1000 light years away from us. So consider that the first long-distance radio broadcasts were made in the late 1800s, that means that a star 1000 light years away wouldn't receive that signal until the 2800s, and even if they can fly at the speed of light, wouldn't get back here until the 3800s at the earliest. And an additional problem you run into - even if those civilizations started exploring the universe before we sent out radio signals, why would they have reached us? Wouldn't they have thousands upon thousands or millions upon millions of closer stars to explore and develop first? Why would they have skipped the 10,000 stars closest to themselves in order to randomly manage to make it to us?

If you close it down to within 100 light years of Earth, you get a reasonable 500 or so stars. Just 500 stars are within ONE HUNDRED light years of us, which is still an insane distance. And now that you're down to 500 stars, are you still sure it is a "statistical certainty" that one of them has developed life, and not just life but intelligent life, and not just intelligent life but interstellar-travelling life, and not just interstellar-travelling life but interstellar-travelling life on the exact same time frame as us (not going extinct 100 million years ago or arising 100 million years later) and travelling to our exact location?

Once you get to within 20 light years of Earth, you're down to about 100 stars. Spread out over a 5 billion year old time frame, it's just not that likely that one of those 100 stars has developed interstellar life on the exact same timeframe as our narrow existence. We're a tiny blip in our planet's history and we could unalive ourselves before too much longer.


All of those star numbers can be plugged into the Drake Equation (

), which you can learn more about by looking up than I have time to share here. But suffice it to say that, while the correct values for the drake equation are unknown, there's a high probabilty that some of them are very small numbers, and thus reducing your R from "the number of stars in the Milky Way" to "The number of stars within X light years" seriously reduces your chances of getting an N larger than 0.5.



My confidence that alien life forms have not visited Earth, beyond just the physical improbability of travelling such immense distances and the relatively few stars within close range of Earth, is mostly based on:

1. The complete, utter lack of serious evidence for any such visit
2. The extreme difficulty that humans have keeping secrets of any serious import, which makes a conspiracy to hide all evidence extremely unlikely
3. The unlikeliness that any one government or secret para-government body could control all knowledge of such visits
4. The complete lack of NHI-derived signals we've detected, which suggests that no one within the range has been sending anything out via radio signal or any other detectable signal....which suggests to me that it is unlikely that interstellar travel and communication is occurring in any serious way anywhere near us.



Like I said above I'm open to the possibility that aliens will LATER visit us. But it seems very unlikely to happen in my lifetime for the reasons I gave above.

 

[Geordi]

It means exactly what it means

It doesn’t matter what you believe, its whats happening.

Don’t worry about it though, worry about what you can control breh. Whatever your opinion is. Im talking about facts/the reality of the situation and you talking about scifi movies and “grainy” video and never asked why theyre all grainy…

You got proof of the ETs, show us breh

 

[O.T.I.S.]

You got proof of the ETs, show us breh

Not sure you could handle it

 

[AngryBaby]

Because you answered with a meaningless word salad. You said that they were "more credible" by virtue of their position, but that's pointless. If all humans are prone to error and can make mistakes, then how does someone having a position that is "more credible" eliminate the possibility that they made a mistake?

Another breh posted evidence in here that people flying are MORE prone to making optical errors than people on the ground, and you completely ignored that post.

lol At this point we should do a poll to see if that response was "meaningless word salad" amongst the people in this thread; and see if that goes in your favor. Because we aren't going to get honesty from you.


You used Indian doctors that incorporate religion into their practice as a comparison towards U.S. military addressing and analyzing a potential national security threat.

you said:
"If you go to India, you will find famous politicians and PhD scientists who claim that holy cow urine will cure COVID (or cancer, or AIDS, or anything else) and ascribe magical powers to Hindu idols. If you go to Latin America or Southern Europe, you will find people of substantial success who believe in the power of touching religious icons. Anywhere in the world you'll find people who believe in ghosts, or seances, or palm readers, or astrology. Am I supposed to pause and give weight to their word-of-mouth claims EVERY time I hear a dumb, unlikely story?

I responded:

"well because those Indians aren't accounting for any human error; and have a pre-disposition for religion....of which doesn't really exist in a national security situation where personnel are merely indicating that upon deductive reasoning...they don't know what something is that is flying in their air space. big difference between the two."

How was that meaningless? How was that not a direct response to what you said? actually, I can't trust you to answer honestly...let's make a thread about it with a poll?

maybe I should @ a few people in this thread to verify so we can see what the majority perspective is.

uhh let's see...
@O.T.I.S.
@The Dust King
@Dzali OG

was my response meaningless and word salad toward Professor? Or is he just throwing that word out there to save face?

you also said:

"Claiming that they are different from other humans and can't make simple mistakes is treating them like gods. ALL humans are prone to making mistakes."


whereas I responded:

"lol yeah that's why you have some humans that are educated in a certain field or realm to avoid encountering these mistakes, they are just as capable of acknowledging potential for human flaw as you are. But acting as if these sources aren't at the very least...more credible than others, on the basis that their nature is to prevent the variable of human flaw...is intellectually dishonest. There is levels to credibility and you know that. Especially if the party is also accounting for the possibility of human error already, you act as if you are the only (or metabunk members)one who is capable of thinking like that"


So again...how was that a direct response to what you said? Should I make a thread?

There is zero evidence that those "classified videos" show anything that is not explainable by human technology. Remember, the Navy videos were "classified videos" once upon a time too, until they were revealed and then it turned out that all three could be easily explained.

AARO has access to the classified videos, and they've already said they have no evidence for non-human intelligences.

all three were theorized ideas of what it "could be" by Mick west and metabunk; not at all proven to be what that actually was. But the actual point is...they aren't going off of hearsay; as you claimed lol

Which you were 100% wrong on after being shown one proof after another, and refused to accept.

I think the being right about the object not being attached to the camera and in motion is more important of a position. You however heavily tried to argue that it was attached to the casing. and showcased an inability to even have the talent of noticing it was an object in real space.

Lie. I never once said that it wasn't an actual object.

you heavily leaned toward the idea that it was attached to the casing. and you argued feverishly for that just as you did here in saying that every person in history that had a sighting always described as something that reflected the technology in their time period.

Lie. I said that it COULD be a spider molt on the lens but it also COULD be balloons. I never once said I KNEW it was a spider. I just said it was an open possibility until the new footage emerged.

You argued far more intensely that it was a spider casing; you were reluctant to acknowledge it as an object at all. And your narrow mind won't allow the object to be anything other than balloons. As if you NEED to have an exact answer for what it is lol; you have an issue with the idea of not knowing wtf it is. that's the problem with you. You need answers, that's why you're religious.

Lie. And I already told you multiple times you were lying about that, yet you still repeat the lie.

multiple people brought up proof that you are well aware of that site and frequent it. you even said you visit it in that thread. stop lying dude lol you even said you go there FIRST for perspectives on this subject.

stop. lying.

If you have to lie this many times to make your argument, then perhaps it's a faulty argument?

you are just willing to argue in bad faith about this lol countdown til you end up running away like you did the last thread.

 

[O.T.I.S.]

lol At this point we should do a poll to see if that response was "meaningless word salad" amongst the people in this thread; and see if that goes in your favor. Because we aren't going to get honesty from you.


You used Indian doctors that incorporate religion into their practice as a comparison towards U.S. military addressing and analyzing a potential national security threat.

you said:
"If you go to India, you will find famous politicians and PhD scientists who claim that holy cow urine will cure COVID (or cancer, or AIDS, or anything else) and ascribe magical powers to Hindu idols. If you go to Latin America or Southern Europe, you will find people of substantial success who believe in the power of touching religious icons. Anywhere in the world you'll find people who believe in ghosts, or seances, or palm readers, or astrology. Am I supposed to pause and give weight to their word-of-mouth claims EVERY time I hear a dumb, unlikely story?

I responded:

"well because those Indians aren't accounting for any human error; and have a pre-disposition for religion....of which doesn't really exist in a national security situation where personnel are merely indicating that upon deductive reasoning...they don't know what something is that is flying in their air space. big difference between the two."

How was that meaningless? How was that not a direct response to what you said? actually, I can't trust you to answer honestly...let's make a thread about it with a poll?

maybe I should @ a few people in this thread to verify so we can see what the majority perspective is.

uhh let's see...
@O.T.I.S.
@The Dust King
@Dzali OG

was my response meaningless and word salad toward Professor? Or is he just throwing that word out there to save face?

you also said:

"Claiming that they are different from other humans and can't make simple mistakes is treating them like gods. ALL humans are prone to making mistakes."


whereas I responded:

"lol yeah that's why you have some humans that are educated in a certain field or realm to avoid encountering these mistakes, they are just as capable of acknowledging potential for human flaw as you are. But acting as if these sources aren't at the very least...more credible than others, on the basis that their nature is to prevent the variable of human flaw...is intellectually dishonest. There is levels to credibility and you know that. Especially if the party is also accounting for the possibility of human error already, you act as if you are the only (or metabunk members)one who is capable of thinking like that"


So again...how was that a direct response to what you said? Should I make a thread?




all three were theorized ideas of what it "could be" by Mick west and metabunk; not at all proven to be what that actually was. But the actual point is...they aren't going off of hearsay; as you claimed lol


I think the being right about the object not being attached to the camera and in motion is more important of a position. You however heavily tried to argue that it was attached to the casing. and showcased an inability to even have the talent of noticing it was an object in real space.



you heavily leaned toward the idea that it was attached to the casing. and you argued feverishly for that just as you did here in saying that every

You argued far more intensely that it was a spider casing; you were reluctant to acknowledge it as an object at all. And your narrow mind won't allow the object to be anything other than balloons. As if you NEED to have an exact answer for what it is lol; you have an issue with the idea of not knowing wtf it is. that's the problem with you. You need answers, that's why you're religious.




multiple people brought up proof that you are well aware of that site and frequent it. you even said you visit it in that thread. stop lying dude lol you even said you go there FIRST for perspectives on this subject.

stop. lying.


you are just willing to argue in bad faith about this lol countdown til you end up running away like you did the last thread.

Of course I agree with you

Because he does this in every single thread on the subject.


I was you once… trying to intellectually have a conversation with this guy only to have him tell me hundred of school kids didn’t see Aliens, they saw short Rastafarians in a silver mystery machine wearing sunglasses..


Only because there was a reggae concert nearby that day… that was the day I block this Mick West meat slider … a guy who they pay to try to debunk this shyt with ZERO credentials… who gets cooked by real scientist regularly.

I often think @Rhakim is Mick West.

 

[Geordi]

Not sure you could handle it

Da fukk you talking about now?

 

[O.T.I.S.]

Da fukk you talking about now?

You said you needed my deep dive specifically


You said fukk all the evidence posted by myself and others in this very thread… you need more

 

[Geordi]

You said you needed my deep dive specifically


You said fukk all the evidence posted by myself and others in this very thread… you need more

Your evidence is gifs that look like sega genesis games? A guy who heard about something? A meeting next year?

Stop the pump faking where is the alien at

 

[O.T.I.S.]

Your evidence is gifs that look like sega genesis games? A guy who heard about something?

Stop the pump faking where is the alien at

Bruh, you obviously want attention

I gave you my answer. You want my evidence? Watch the videos I posted.

You want some personal shyt from me? I don’t got none for you but seen some shyt too… tf you think I’m linking shyt for.. for fun? But im not gonna put out no fukkin video with my face all on camera to prove something to your random ass.

I told you.. believe wtf you want. Time tells all

 

[AngryBaby]

Of course I agree with you

Because he does this in every single thread on the subject.


I was you once… trying to intellectually have a conversation with this guy only to have him tell me hundred of school kids didn’t see Aliens, they saw short Rastafarians in a silver mystery machine wearing sunglasses..


Only because there was a reggae concert nearby that day… that was the day I block this Mick West meat slider … a guy who they pay to try to debunk this shyt with ZERO credentials… who gets cooked by real scientist regularly.

I often think @Rhakim is Mick West.

you know what I realized...I want everyone to see exactly how dishonest @Professor Emeritus really is, and actually hopes you won't look back at his posts.

My initial response to him was about this comment he made:

Do you find it odd that the sightings always seem to match the technology of the era? Before we had planes, no one reported flying saucers or tic tac UFOs in the sky to any serious degree. What few sightings there were usually looked like meteor showers or were described as slow airships....the exact thing that existed with man at the time

now note that he said ALWAYS. which I disagreed with and said there are definitely sighting descriptions that describe tech that is outside their time period.

tell me why...a few pages later he says this:

" I said that WAVES of UFO sightings tend to follow the technology of the time, and that before planes no one reported flying saucers or tic tac UFOs TO ANY SERIOUS DEGREE. This isn't the first time that you've distorted things I said."

and

The most basic reading comprehension would have shown to you that I wasn't trying to refer to "every ufo description in history."

but...look at this dude's original post...he literally said ALWAYS. He's a fukking liar. and will gaslight you and distort arguments. I should've just called back his post earlier. wow.

 

[O.T.I.S.]

you know what I realized...I want everyone to see exactly how dishonest @Professor Emeritus really is, and actually hopes you won't look back at his posts.

My initial response to him was about this comment he made:



now note that he said ALWAYS. which I disagreed with and said there are definitely sighting descriptions that describe tech that is outside their time period.

tell me why...a few pages later he says this:



and

but...look at this dude's original post...he literally said ALWAYS. He's a fukking liar. and will gaslight you and distort arguments. I should've just called back his post earlier. wow.

He definitely tries to out-gaslight nikkas out of conversations, ruining threads he don’t like with this long winded bullshyt.

Tried to change his name but still doing the same shyt. Disrespectful to Rhakim and professors. nikka aint got no credentials and no stats off this forum

 

[AngryBaby]

you know what I realized...I want everyone to see exactly how dishonest @Professor Emeritus really is, and actually hopes you won't look back at his posts.

My initial response to him was about this comment he made:

"Do you find it odd that the sightings always seem to match the technology of the era? Before we had planes, no one reported flying saucers or tic tac UFOs in the sky to any serious degree. What few sightings there were usually looked like meteor showers or were described as slow airships....the exact thing that existed with man at the time"

now note that he said ALWAYS. which I disagreed with and said there are definitely sighting descriptions that describe tech that is outside their time period.

tell me why...a few pages later he says this:
" I said that WAVES of UFO sightings tend to follow the technology of the time, and that before planes no one reported flying saucers or tic tac UFOs TO ANY SERIOUS DEGREE. This isn't the first time that you've distorted things I said."


and: "The most basic reading comprehension would have shown to you that I wasn't trying to refer to "every ufo description in history."
but...look at this dude's original post...he literally said ALWAYS. He's a fukking liar. and will gaslight you and distort arguments. I should've just called back his post earlier. wow.

Hey @Geordi you have a different perspective so i'll ask you....because @Professor Emeritus will try and spin this. (it will be hard}

did he not say always in this post? Am I crazy lmao He literally said always. not sometimes, always.

and he said NO ONE reported flying saucers; and I immediately gave him a example of an event where flying saucers were described lol and he had no *real* retort.

what a fukking liar. He almost gaslighted his way out of that. wowww