|
MicrostockGroup Sponsors
This section allows you to view all posts made by this member. Note that you can only see posts made in areas you currently have access to.
Messages - Lowls
Pages: 1 [2] 3 4 5 6 7 ... 18
26
« on: February 09, 2024, 13:58 »
27
« on: February 09, 2024, 05:12 »
28
« on: February 07, 2024, 10:42 »
We are writing to let you know about a pricing update for video content on Adobe Stock: 4K video clips will now be offered alongside HD clips for licensing as part of Adobe Stock subscriptions. This change will simplify the offering for Stock customers, allowing them to license HD and 4K video content as well as standard images, templates, 3D, and audio tracks using their subscriptions.
There is no change to the current royalty rate.
However, it's worth noting that per-video license royalty payments for 4K videos may see a reduction, as these videos will be available to subscription customers at varying discounts based on their plans. The existing Adobe Stock royalty rate (35%) remains consistent, calculated based on the price per clip. 4K video pricing remains unchanged for all on-demand clips and credit packs.
oh cool
oh f f s
29
« on: February 06, 2024, 05:21 »
Sean Kirkpatrick who is supposed to be very careful about what he reveals regarding sensors and methods and means - has been on a whirlwind media tour and he has one thing to say- we found nothing. He spent a whole year looking and found nothing. The sponsor for some of it - Northrup and Lockhead Martin - you couldn't make it up. "Sean Kirptarick is a liar and there are FOIAble emails between Kirpatrick and various people, that exist. I know because I've seen them" https://youtu.be/mKKoDextN_I?feature=shared"Dr Kirkpatrick even suggested tic tac-shaped objects, such as the one which out-manoeuvred a top gun pilot in 2004 could be explained by a balloon produced in Florida." Kirkpatrick "discouraged congressional members from investigating UAP and claimed investigations informed by whistleblowers were based on a whirlwind of tall tales, fabrication and secondhand or thirdhand retellings of the same. https://www.liberationtimes.com/home/the-empire-strikes-back
30
« on: January 30, 2024, 17:48 »
brutal but is he wrong https://x.com/jamescfox/status/1752188569706242514?s=20Ah the link has been taken down. Professor Garry Nolan making his feelings about Neil D Tyson's opinions on UAP known. If I can find a saved copy I'll place link here.
31
« on: January 28, 2024, 14:13 »
While Mick West is still defending his balloon theory for the Jellyfish footage Dave Falch has stepped in to give his analysis.
Conclusion: Black DARPA craft undergoing testing and footage leaked.
https://youtu.be/S9qbB23BuhI?feature=shared
He does however explain what it's unlikely to be. Spoiler: No balloon animals
When you post stupid videos and allegations like this, you make yourself look like a fool. Giant jellyfish UFO. Looks like a deflated weather balloon, drifting in the wind. Stick to serious questions like Dod, disclosure and the oversite committee, not foolish sci-fi click bait.
It's just a weather balloon. UFO nuts make the ordinary into a mystery. They lack critical thinking of any kind.
Lowls, prove it's not just a weather balloon.
As I'm often reminded - you made the claim - have at it 😊 UFO nuts he said in a sweeping statement. And does sir or madame or they, have a feral belief system that you cling rigidly to. Licking some priests hand every weekend and choking back some hearty backswill filled goblet contents to rinse your chakras before returning to Satan's work or .... lol I mean if you are a happy clapping, Bible thumping, grovelling God botherer then I can understand if these false idols doth offend. But if you are just being lazy and adding your inconsequential 'meh' to the masses then job done you've 'meh'ed' successfully and can sleep soundly that you've told that loser on that thread that barely anyone will see. I mean I'd kind of like a bit more ... detail shall we say that we can't get our teeth stuck into but if that's what you came here to do, you've done it well and message recieved. It's bunkum and you know it.
32
« on: January 28, 2024, 12:56 »
33
« on: January 27, 2024, 16:56 »
Hahahahaha what is a "birther". I'm not going to even look that up it sounds annoying.
No the box experiment wasn't disingenuous at all and if you feel it was then you do 🤷 oh well. It showed exactly what the situation is. You a staunch stickler explained perfectly. Big Toe did as well .
...
thanks for a reasoned reply that addressed previous posts - as someone here would say "you must be inebriated"?!?
if you don't know what a birther is, you're lucky - it's a US political meme
Thank you also. I still don't know what a birther is and it's sounds like I should be grateful lol. Edit: I cracked and looked it up. Good grief 😔 I do not subscribe to birtherism.
34
« on: January 27, 2024, 13:05 »
While Mick West is still defending his balloon theory for the Jellyfish footage Dave Falch has stepped in to give his analysis.
Conclusion: Black DARPA craft undergoing testing and footage leaked.
https://youtu.be/S9qbB23BuhI?feature=shared
He does however explain what it's unlikely to be. Spoiler: No balloon animals
When you post stupid videos and allegations like this, you make yourself look like a fool. Giant jellyfish UFO. Looks like a deflated weather balloon, drifting in the wind. Stick to serious questions like Dod, disclosure and the oversite committee, not foolish sci-fi click bait.
Do you understand the use of the word allegation? The above statement points to no but I'm willing to give you the benefit of the doubt so you'll have to elaborate. Mick West has claimed exactly what I wrote. That's not an allegation that's a fact. If you believe with your expertise that it is a deflated weather balloon please show this is so. It looks nothing like a deflated weather balloon to me but as it is as yet an unknown we can't say for sure but please show the evidence for your assertions I'll pass them on. Fact - https://youtu.be/ojotsKjshHc?feature=sharedAnd he makes a glaring error. Also fact.
35
« on: January 27, 2024, 03:15 »
This is a photo of a box. As a layman's experiment tell me what I photographed.
What can science tell me about this box.
What can the scientific minds here tell me about the box I photographed.
I photographed it, therefore its on earth and contains oxygen, Co2 and Nitrogen.
I'm curious and have a purpose in this experiment. Nothing petty. I just want to see what you think.
not much, too little evidence among unverifiable claims - it's a brown, blurry image and with no scale it's just a series of unfocused, brownish polygons. without photos from several sides, can't even verify the claim it's a box.
even the photographer's claim 'it's on earth' cannot be verified. it could also be ai generated
Precisely and this is unfortunately where we are with UAP.
Debunkers don't need to ask for more data.
Skeptics don't tend to ask for more data.
Science can't be given more data which it needs other than this photo which as you say shows nothing.
But you've excluded me from the equation.
...
Science would love to be given the freedom to examine UAP data. But it has to wait for it like
all the rest of us.
of COURSE science (and skeptics) need more data, as you admit in the final sentence, hence their tentative conclusion:
whereof one cannot speak, thereof one must be silent. - Wittgenstein
simply put, you don't matter - you asked about the photo and the replies emphasized the need for more data, not your CV - examining you would be the argument from authority --"they're a military genius, therefore they must be right" - look where that's gotten us in the past - lies about CIA intervention in Iran in the 5s, and a host of other countries, the bay of pigs, the cuban missile crisis and most damaging the weapons of mass destruction in Iraq
Right but we can't get to the point where science can have more data because:
There is no reliable repository therefore it all gets dumped on twitter, Facebook and utube. Once there it gets picked over by the Mick Wests and his ilk and tossed aside.
I wasn't offering a CV (slight exaggeration and neither was it about me but about witnesses)
and we don't need to place witness statements to the exclusion of all else, wr need to also have witness statements regardless of social position. All data is valid. Or none of it is. Witnesses give context. Witnesses correct assumptions. Witnesses may but only, may, be unreliable. Not all.
so your 'photo query' was disingenuous - you just used a pointless example to regurgitate your uninformed views of how science works and slime critics once more .
All data is valid. Or none of it is. - nonsense - are we supposed to include flat earthers, birthers, election or holocaust deniers in our considerations?
Your way is no longer working in this circumstance. If science knew anything, science would have built it already. It hasn't that we are aware of so any assumption it has is incorrect because that's all it is, is an assumption.
once again you expose your lack of understanding - it's not my way, altho my background in the sciences you don't get to make this silly declaration about science's end. according to you, since we didn't know about airplanes or telephones or computers we couldn't have made them.
it's again the opposite - science explores areas to expand its knowledge& new technologies often results.
science makes assumptions aka hypotheses, but that's only the beginning - it then performs experiments or looks for physical evidence to support or deny te hypothesis. UFOlogy has yet to creep up to this basic procedure
Hahahahaha what is a "birther". I'm not going to even look that up it sounds annoying. No the box experiment wasn't disingenuous at all and if you feel it was then you do 🤷 oh well. It showed exactly what the situation is. You a staunch stickler explained perfectly. Big Toe did as well . I haven't 'exposed' anything. This context comes from fighting or war where someone exposes a weakness. Lack of knowledge of a process isn't a weakness it is just a lack of knowledge. I don't have that knowledge but is that a weakness in your eyes? Odd. But of course irrelevant. It's knowledge I don't need. Oh to apparently hold credibility with you and your 'liker' yes but not in the real world. And by real world I mean what is happening now. "science makes assumptions aka hypotheses, but that's only the beginning - it then performs experiments or looks for physical evidence to support or deny te hypothesis" "not much, too little evidence among unverifiable claims - it's a brown, blurry image and with no scale it's just a series of unfocused, brownish polygons. without photos from several sides, can't even verify the claim it's a box." How did that work out for you? What you showed admirably was what happens to most data given to the public no matter its source. "Meh" lol. I'm not mocking you. I've had you prove an 'assumption'. Thank you. You don't have to believe it or agree - its what happened. The data won't even get to the second stage of your scientific process model because "meh" is what happens world wide online in the public eye. Not many scientists want to risk their position fighting against such assumptions by the masses of debunkers and skeptics and their following who to be fare sometimes show some plausable explanations or theories.
36
« on: January 26, 2024, 18:37 »
This is a photo of a box. As a layman's experiment tell me what I photographed.
What can science tell me about this box.
What can the scientific minds here tell me about the box I photographed.
I photographed it, therefore its on earth and contains oxygen, Co2 and Nitrogen.
I'm curious and have a purpose in this experiment. Nothing petty. I just want to see what you think.
not much, too little evidence among unverifiable claims - it's a brown, blurry image and with no scale it's just a series of unfocused, brownish polygons. without photos from several sides, can't even verify the claim it's a box.
even the photographer's claim 'it's on earth' cannot be verified. it could also be ai generated
Precisely and this is unfortunately where we are with UAP.
Debunkers don't need to ask for more data.
Skeptics don't tend to ask for more data.
Science can't be given more data which it needs other than this photo which as you say shows nothing.
But you've excluded me from the equation.
...
Science would love to be given the freedom to examine UAP data. But it has to wait for it like
all the rest of us.
of COURSE science (and skeptics) need more data, as you admit in the final sentence, hence their tentative conclusion:
whereof one cannot speak, thereof one must be silent. - Wittgenstein
simply put, you don't matter - you asked about the photo and the replies emphasized the need for more data, not your CV - examining you would be the argument from authority --"they're a military genius, therefore they must be right" - look where that's gotten us in the past - lies about CIA intervention in Iran in the 5s, and a host of other countries, the bay of pigs, the cuban missile crisis and most damaging the weapons of mass destruction in Iraq
Right but we can't get to the point where science can have more data because: There is no reliable repository therefore it all gets dumped on twitter, Facebook and utube. Once there it gets picked over by the Mick Wests and his ilk and tossed aside. I wasn't offering a CV (slight exaggeration and neither was it about me but about witnesses) and we don't need to place witness statements to the exclusion of all else, wr need to also have witness statements regardless of social position. All data is valid. Or none of it is. Witnesses give context. Witnesses correct assumptions. Witnesses may but only, may, be unreliable. Not all. Your way is no longer working in this circumstance. If science knew anything, science would have built it already. It hasn't that we are aware of so any assumption it has is incorrect because that's all it is, is an assumption. But someone has built it and its being seen with increasing regularity and governments are spending a lot of time, money and resources on something that isn't allegedly real. Kirkpatrick claims there is no evidence of extra terrestrial anything. Which is great. Why has AARO got new director. Why have the US government issued a statement yesturday stating they aren't doing enough to make our airspace more safe from UAP. Why did Senators Schumer and Rounds create a brutal amendment. Why are congressional members going to hold future UAP briefings once they have investigated the information divulged to them in the classified meeting last week. Why did they state that no one in that meeting was left in any doubt that Grusch wasn't legitimate. Surely this should die right now or in fact following Kirkpatricks misjudged oped. Why did Elizondo threaten Kirkpatrick that if you are not willing to tell the truth then we are. Elizondo has been a pain in the arse regarding openness. He never is. It's all duty and patriotism. What's happened to make him no longer care about that. It needs to be pushed kicking and screaming into the light no matter the cost. Because to not do so now when too much has been leaked would cause open rebellion in the Intelligence agencies and we all know what that looks like - Snowdon etc
37
« on: January 26, 2024, 11:13 »
Senator Gillibrand questioned by Askapol who the new director of AARO is and she sates that she asked AARO staffers whonit is and they didnt know. This appeared on their own website suddenly
39
« on: January 25, 2024, 16:27 »
This is a photo of a box. As a layman's experiment tell me what I photographed.
What can science tell me about this box.
What can the scientific minds here tell me about the box I photographed.
I photographed it, therefore its on earth and contains oxygen, Co2 and Nitrogen.
I'm curious and have a purpose in this experiment. Nothing petty. I just want to see what you think.
not much, too little evidence among unverifiable claims - it's a brown, blurry image and with no scale it's just a series of unfocused, brownish polygons. without photos from several sides, can't even verify the claim it's a box.
even the photographer's claim 'it's on earth' cannot be verified. it could also be ai generated
Precisely and this is unfortunately where we are with UAP. Debunkers don't need to ask for more data. Skeptics don't tend to ask for more data. Science can't be given more data which it needs other than this photo which as you say shows nothing. But you've excluded me from the equation. Which may happen more than not. You could have asked if I had a better photo. Any footage, where it was found, its dimensions, its weight and of course what is inside it but in order to get that far we would need a reliable platform to display these photos and answer questions and the answers scrutinised. Lacking any further evidence of value the witness becomes some evidence or the only evidence and when enough of that is gathered patterns can emerge that may reveal something that would otherwise be missed. AARO it seems is not that platform because Kirkpatrick has now been proven to be a liar. Not just a skeptical scientist being careful and scientific. In his oped he has blatantly lied and it seems Gough and his new ex boss (who's career role has always been to create misinformation campaigns for the government) were his handlers. Statements now claim today that even the people on his hand picked team were not permitted to take notes when taking statements in interviews which were largely over the phone. It's a mess. And it's unravelling extremely fast in real time. So with luck some significant releases will be happening shortly because Elizondo has now stated yesterday in response to Kirkpatrick "if you won't tell the truth then we will" because he knows full well who gave testimony to Kirkpatrick and what he was told and by how many. As does Grusch and Mellon. And Mellon has also exposed Kirkpatrick as a liar today. Science would love to be given the freedom to examine UAP data. But it has to wait for it like all the rest of us.
40
« on: January 24, 2024, 20:16 »
This is a photo of a box. As a layman's experiment tell me what I photographed.
What can science tell me about this box.
What can the scientific minds here tell me about the box I photographed.
I photographed it, therefore its on earth and contains oxygen, Co2 and Nitrogen.
I'm curious and have a purpose in this experiment. Nothing petty. I just want to see what you think.
41
« on: January 23, 2024, 16:08 »
...
Pete and gang for advice and confirmation instead of experts military or otherwise
I'll believe Pete over the military any day!
That's an interesting stance. You must elaborate.
I was mostly joking but not completely. Pete seems to have a very balanced view of most things. I used to have a lot of respect (or at least an assumption of competency) about the military but after some of them were in a previous administration it appears otherwise (I'm thinking of one who should be in jail except for a pardon), plus I know of one who was in military intelligence who was a complete crackpot. Very nice guy but not who you would want in charge of anything, and I think he was a Colonel. The crackpots seem to mostly be in the Air Force so maybe the other branches are better. However, in my experience most military people have little background or abilities to make reasonable conclusions about scientific phenomena - I would leave that to the scientists and keep the military out of it. As for UAPs, I'll take the opinion of independent scientists over the military any day.
The military isn't the epicentre of crackpots but I do agree. Scientists tend ro default to being skeptics first in many circumstances no less in the subject of UAP and this is not scientific at all. All data must be considered. Instead they tend to approach using prosaic means and if that fails they claim lack of data but exclude that provided by witnesses of any stripe who, also can claim their share of crackpots also. In the militaries favour are on the lower levels people who are trained well to use their equipment, a claim not many scientists or skeptics can share. And in the upper tiers you get denial and omission for whatever reason. Ego, position, reputation and religion and a denial. This is now changing and so rapidly as never before seen. Science is in the business of knowns as a metric where it is clear this is not usual. Interestingly witnesses statements aren't used for analysis but they are used to prove a prosaic claim. Time will tell.
42
« on: January 23, 2024, 04:07 »
Earlier this week it was revealed that a skeptic group may have been altering the Wikipedia pages of ufo investigators, sympathetic academics and UFO and UAP historic events to suit their own agenda. Mick West, and Susan Gerbic recieved the brunt of the comments regarding the changes. From The Good Trouble Show - Matt Ford explains. https://www.youtube.com/live/Bq-GuSs8kX8?feature=shared3 hours long and a bit hap hazard but it is brutal. When they locate these editors who have encircled the UAP subject and deliberately pushed their own agenda across multiple subjects not just UAP there will be legal cases. The I.P. addresses are known. Syntax across known debunkers and editors has been run through chat GPT for analysis and its conclusion was that certain debunkers and editors have a high degree of either being the same person or knowing each other extremely well due to spelling errors and punctuation mistakes and vocabulary used including phrases.
43
« on: January 22, 2024, 17:22 »
...
Pete and gang for advice and confirmation instead of experts military or otherwise
I'll believe Pete over the military any day!
That's an interesting stance. You must elaborate.
44
« on: January 22, 2024, 06:56 »
While Mick West is still defending his balloon theory for the Jellyfish footage Dave Falch has stepped in to give his analysis. Conclusion: Black DARPA craft undergoing testing and footage leaked. https://youtu.be/S9qbB23BuhI?feature=sharedHe does however explain what it's unlikely to be. Spoiler: No balloon animals
45
« on: January 21, 2024, 13:51 »
regarding speculation about the Jellyfish UAP footage the Pentagon have released the following statement:
Susan Gough states:
"We do not comment on the authenticity of alleged DOD material that may have been leaked. DOD takes public interest in unidentified anomalous phenomena seriously and is committed to openness and accountability to the American people.
"This commitment must be balanced with the departments obligation to protect sensitive information, sources, and methods. To that end, AARO will provide updates to the public via its website as it resolves UAP cases, including sharing the analytic approach and method used for each case, as well as imagery, when approved for public release."
Although typically they confirm the footage that's been leaked in around 3 weeks from its release. So we shall see.
46
« on: January 20, 2024, 07:39 »
Anyway and moving on ...
quite a firefight going on with governmental departments and civilian organisations regarding UAP this week.
Jeremy Corbell and Geroge Knapp released footage of the Jellyfish UAP throwing skeptics and law makers into chaos and ufology followers splut down the middle claiming nonsense like this wasn't helpful and others actually digging into the details. As mentioned Mick West almost instantly threw out a debunking video some of which had merit but he failed spectacularly on two major fronts.
At first stab his video shows it isnt as he girst claimed bird poop on the lens. Later he showed that it was an object but that it was most likely balloons and the general concensus was that it was balloons celebrating Eid. There is in all fairness a similarity roughly in shape.
As things progressed it was revealed that this UAP was filmed in 2018. Eid was in June and the footage was taken in a different part of the year. From memory I believe February or March though that may be wrong. Suffice to say it wasn't at Eid time by some months.
Mick West claimed that it wasn't filmed in 2018 at all and that it must be 2017 because he checked against publicly available satelite images and in 2017 the buildings matched better than in 2018. Eid was still June in 2017. He then found a camera operator willing to state that it was a balloon. Or collection of balloons.
However and he has refused to answer questions on this, he used satelute data to show the system used to collect the footage as being a surveillance balloon and said matching up the buildings in the image so the size match he accurately assessed the height of the S Balloon looking down and the buildings and calculated the height of the collection of balloons to be a. retain height.
Two glaring errors which he is now ignoring. He has assumed the size of the UAP. And in doing so (assuming it is an Eid balloon display) has judged the height based on that. He doesn't know its balloons. So he can't work out tye height because he can't tell distance tye object is between camera and budings.
And he cannot post the focal length of the camera lens because he doesn't know it. And in fact in the balloons own release bumf it states that it will be tethered at 1000 feet. But West claims that's it nearly double this. Later versions are tethered higher but we don't know what version this is. So he is claiming its balloons without being able to verify its size and therefore distance and height.
But he has other things to worry about because he stands accused of working with a skeptic group who also stand accused of editing the Wikipedia pages for various journalists, writers and academics involved in the UAP timeline and also changing details that are historic fact on Wikipedia pages of UAP events. Lots of them. And the reason he stands accused are that the same user that made a lot of these changes also altered his Wikipedia page to make him look great, allegedly. A lot of very angry people none less angry then Gary Nolan who was a target as was Ross Coulthart, Corbell, Mellon, Knapp etc ...
Several members of Congress have taken their gloves off after the latest UAP footage of the jellyfish and have watched Corbell and Knapps interview with a surveillance camera operative who confirmed that he knew there were 17 minutes of footage. But the two videos of Jellyfish amount to about 4 minutes. Missing footage which Corbell and Knapp claim was confiscated. Today they have stated they know by whom. And Corbell is going to release what department took it.
For anyone that's followed this in the last two years I can say with complete sincerity and honesty that I have NEVER seen anything like this in my life and I've followed this since I was a kid. Nothing has ever happened this was before but it is amazing to witness. Maybe in the past one ufologist has made outlandish claims but this .... jaw dropping behaviour. The closest was Lazar. This is however history happening live. And the week isn't even over.
47
« on: January 20, 2024, 02:36 »
An interesting analysis of the situation by Bernardo Kastrup:
https://www.bernardokastrup.com/2024/01/uaps-and-non-human-intelligence-what-is.html
This the problem with articles. It's already out of date. While KirkPatrick did acknowledge that spheres are world wide and classified as UAP he has published an article of his own. If anything it helps prove he was a bad actor but still. Its certainly getting ugly out there. I mean lol its literally a hate letter to Grusch, Elizondo, Mellon and George Knapp and Corbell. The guy is unhinged. ... Jesus he is a real dodgy guy.
LDV81 ---thanks for the link, it's a very interesting & well thought out argument, with little actual discussion of extra-terrestials, concentrating more on the possible evolution of terrestrial non-human intelligences - no test will prove they don't exist, but it is possible to demonstrate evidence that they DO exist.
lowls:
Its a LONG article did you actually read it? Or just repeat your kneejerk denialist claims that all skeptics can be dismissed? The article doesnt say anything like you just claimed
whats good for the goose... department: Importantly, did you read his credentials? They are as good if not better than most of the folk you support and how can you, as an admitted layman, dare to challenge his veracity?!?
I mean lol its literally a hate letter to Grusch, Elizondo, Mellon and George Knapp and Corbell
'where's the beef?' should be simple to show the passages where he does this, but i doubt you can since in fact, he doesn't even mention Elizondo, Knapp or Corbell and his comment on Mellon is straightforward:
Christopher Mellon, who spent nearly twenty years in the US Intelligence Community and served as the Deputy Assistant Secretary of Defence for Intelligence, [has] lent credibility to the claim that there are active UAP crash-retrieval and reverse-engineering programmes
quotes from the actual article
In my view, a significant portion of the published material could benefit from greater rigor, empirical grounding, theoretical clarity, and logical reasoning. This field often appears to diverge from the standards of intellectual precision and level-headed analysis that hold in academia. However, recent developments over the past six or seven years invite us to re-examine the subject from a more open and inquisitive perspective.
...
Enough has been officially acknowledged since 2017 that the topic is now undoubtedly deserving of serious treatment. After laying foundations for my argument, I will then proceed to elaborate on what I currently consider to be the most level-headed and plausible account of the phenomenon. And to anticipate a question you are bound to be already asking, no, I dont think it is aliens from Zeta Reticuli; the facts may be a lot more surprising and closer to home than that.
...
the names and credentials of the individuals mentioned above are not in doubt; they are who they say they are. And their ranks and roles put them in a position to plausibly know what they claim to know. These individuals are willing to testify under oath in public hearings and confidentially provide evidence to members of congress.
So.. no ad hominem attacks, and NO disparagement of those folk - instead he examines several hypotheses and describes methods that could actually prove them stating they found non-human biologics requires publication in a peer reviewed journal not just testimony from someone, who may sincerely believe it but has not presented any actual facts
Therefore, if the biologics in the freezers of the powers-that-be have the same biochemistry we do, I believe it is safe to assume that they are terrestrial; they are our older cousinslikely forever traumatised by earlier planetary cataclysmsand certainly not aliens.
Another prediction of the ultra-terrestrial hypothesis is this: the materialssay, the metalsused in the UAP craft should have isotope ratios compatible with an earthly origin, as opposed to one outside the solar system. If the powers-that-be are in possession of such craft, this shouldnt be a difficult test to perform.
Together, the two test results suggested above, if mutually consistent, should be conclusive.
Most of the article is a discussion of the possibility of non-human terrestrial intelligence
Notice that my claim here is not that it is likely that high-tech nonhuman civilisations have emerged on Earth before us; I cannot evaluate the probabilities involved. My claim is that, based on what we know, such civilisations are not impossible or inconsistent with the geological record. On the contrary: as Dr. Schmidt and Dr. Frank point out, the record shows several periods of global warming consistent with large-scale industrialization.
A side discussion maps the difficulties of translating the language of a species that doesnt share our cognitive space (whales, praying manti? ) great SF series by Adrian Tchaikovsky Children of Time & The 3 body problem trilogy by Cixin Liu about the difficulties of dealing with an intelligent group of spiders
His final caveat:
Notice, however, that the hypothesis proposed here presupposes the UAP data disclosed thus far to be authentic, and not the result of a sprawling disinformation campaign. In the latter case, the key motivations and empirical ground for the speculations in this essay would be void, and the hypothesis should be disregarded in its entirety
I did. I didn't bother reading all of what you wrote why would I? I've no interest in anything you have to say. Glad you've found something you enjoyed.
so you admit you didn't bother to read the article before condemning it! and now you can't respond not to my comments, but to the actual article that you slimed w/o actually knowing what it said?
your response is the usual ad hominem attack against the poster rather than responding to the actual questions & your mis=-representation of its content. - i quoted from the actual article & you have no response to that actual content & lying about the article you didn't bother to read!
prove me wrong!
As your English is almost perfect I'll have to assume you're inebriated, you've lost your glasses (we've all been there), have not read what I wrote sufficiently well or are deliberately attempting to smear me. As I said in the previous post I did, as in read the article in full. The writer gives Kirkpatrick a favourable commentary. Which would now be out of date because of the article I posted written by Kirkpatrick himself where he slams the names I mentioned. Whilst you aren't stupid you aren't very well read regarding those historically involved and so when he mentions a small group pushing the narrative he only means those who pushed the narrative and we who have followed this from the beginning know who that small core are. The only comment I made about the original article you claim is fair was that it was already out of date. I never referred to it thereafter because my post was regarding Kirkpatrics article. I don't have to prove anything to you because you are a disingenuous troll who doesn't understand the ironic nature of his repeated claims of attack. So write whatever you want because we both known you are going to until any current information is buried in your latest rant. So because of that I'll bump the relevant posts when needed whenever you derail the thread again.
48
« on: January 19, 2024, 19:44 »
An interesting analysis of the situation by Bernardo Kastrup:
https://www.bernardokastrup.com/2024/01/uaps-and-non-human-intelligence-what-is.html
This the problem with articles. It's already out of date. While KirkPatrick did acknowledge that spheres are world wide and classified as UAP he has published an article of his own. If anything it helps prove he was a bad actor but still. Its certainly getting ugly out there. I mean lol its literally a hate letter to Grusch, Elizondo, Mellon and George Knapp and Corbell. The guy is unhinged. ... Jesus he is a real dodgy guy.
LDV81 ---thanks for the link, it's a very interesting & well thought out argument, with little actual discussion of extra-terrestials, concentrating more on the possible evolution of terrestrial non-human intelligences - no test will prove they don't exist, but it is possible to demonstrate evidence that they DO exist.
lowls:
Its a LONG article did you actually read it? Or just repeat your kneejerk denialist claims that all skeptics can be dismissed? The article doesnt say anything like you just claimed
whats good for the goose... department: Importantly, did you read his credentials? They are as good if not better than most of the folk you support and how can you, as an admitted layman, dare to challenge his veracity?!?
I mean lol its literally a hate letter to Grusch, Elizondo, Mellon and George Knapp and Corbell
'where's the beef?' should be simple to show the passages where he does this, but i doubt you can since in fact, he doesn't even mention Elizondo, Knapp or Corbell and his comment on Mellon is straightforward:
Christopher Mellon, who spent nearly twenty years in the US Intelligence Community and served as the Deputy Assistant Secretary of Defence for Intelligence, [has] lent credibility to the claim that there are active UAP crash-retrieval and reverse-engineering programmes
quotes from the actual article
In my view, a significant portion of the published material could benefit from greater rigor, empirical grounding, theoretical clarity, and logical reasoning. This field often appears to diverge from the standards of intellectual precision and level-headed analysis that hold in academia. However, recent developments over the past six or seven years invite us to re-examine the subject from a more open and inquisitive perspective.
...
Enough has been officially acknowledged since 2017 that the topic is now undoubtedly deserving of serious treatment. After laying foundations for my argument, I will then proceed to elaborate on what I currently consider to be the most level-headed and plausible account of the phenomenon. And to anticipate a question you are bound to be already asking, no, I dont think it is aliens from Zeta Reticuli; the facts may be a lot more surprising and closer to home than that.
...
the names and credentials of the individuals mentioned above are not in doubt; they are who they say they are. And their ranks and roles put them in a position to plausibly know what they claim to know. These individuals are willing to testify under oath in public hearings and confidentially provide evidence to members of congress.
So.. no ad hominem attacks, and NO disparagement of those folk - instead he examines several hypotheses and describes methods that could actually prove them stating they found non-human biologics requires publication in a peer reviewed journal not just testimony from someone, who may sincerely believe it but has not presented any actual facts
Therefore, if the biologics in the freezers of the powers-that-be have the same biochemistry we do, I believe it is safe to assume that they are terrestrial; they are our older cousinslikely forever traumatised by earlier planetary cataclysmsand certainly not aliens.
Another prediction of the ultra-terrestrial hypothesis is this: the materialssay, the metalsused in the UAP craft should have isotope ratios compatible with an earthly origin, as opposed to one outside the solar system. If the powers-that-be are in possession of such craft, this shouldnt be a difficult test to perform.
Together, the two test results suggested above, if mutually consistent, should be conclusive.
Most of the article is a discussion of the possibility of non-human terrestrial intelligence
Notice that my claim here is not that it is likely that high-tech nonhuman civilisations have emerged on Earth before us; I cannot evaluate the probabilities involved. My claim is that, based on what we know, such civilisations are not impossible or inconsistent with the geological record. On the contrary: as Dr. Schmidt and Dr. Frank point out, the record shows several periods of global warming consistent with large-scale industrialization.
A side discussion maps the difficulties of translating the language of a species that doesnt share our cognitive space (whales, praying manti? ) great SF series by Adrian Tchaikovsky Children of Time & The 3 body problem trilogy by Cixin Liu about the difficulties of dealing with an intelligent group of spiders
His final caveat:
Notice, however, that the hypothesis proposed here presupposes the UAP data disclosed thus far to be authentic, and not the result of a sprawling disinformation campaign. In the latter case, the key motivations and empirical ground for the speculations in this essay would be void, and the hypothesis should be disregarded in its entirety
I did. I didn't bother reading all of what you wrote why would I? I've no interest in anything you have to say. Glad you've found something you enjoyed.
49
« on: January 19, 2024, 14:33 »
An interesting analysis of the situation by Bernardo Kastrup:
https://www.bernardokastrup.com/2024/01/uaps-and-non-human-intelligence-what-is.html
As usually, Bernardo is very interested in parsimony. However, there is no guarantee that parsimony will lead to the truth. Still, an interesting hypothesis, an intersting point of view and a very balanced article. It might also be one of multiple aspects of the phenomenon. Bernardo had consulted the essay with such people as e.g. Garry Nolan and Hal Puthoff.
This the problem with articles. It's already out of date. While KirkPatrick did acknowledge that spheres are world wide and classified as UAP he has published an article of his own. If anything it helps prove he was a bad actor but still. Its certainly getting ugly out there. I mean lol its literally a hate letter to Grusch, Elizondo, Mellon and George Knapp and Corbell. The guy is unhinged. Not only has he shown he couldn't get access to stuff he's whining that he was being bypassed. And this shows why he should have been. Jesus he is a real dodgy guy. https://www.scientificamerican.com/article/heres-what-i-learned-as-the-u-s-governments-ufo-hunter/
50
« on: January 18, 2024, 04:16 »
Grusch told legislators that he was told there has been a "multi-decade UAP crash retrieval and reverse engineering program" but was denied access to the program.
He told his superiors, essentially "becoming a whistleblower," for which he said he suffered retaliation. Other people have been harmed or injured both by UAP activity and by government efforts to cover up the program, he testified, without giving specifics.
When asked by Rep. Nancy Mace, R-S.C., whether the U.S. has the bodies of the pilots of crashed aircraft from the UAP programs, Grusch said, "Biologics came with some of these recoveries."
When Mace asked whether they were human or nonhuman, Grusch said, "nonhuman, and that was the assessment of people with direct knowledge of the (UAP) program I talked to that are currently still on the program." He later said that he had not seen any bodies personally.
Yes all correct. And whilst it isnt popular there are restrictions to what he could say. And I understand that. Remember sitting behind him was his lawyer who briefed him thoroughly. Also his own complaint investigation was still ongoing and as anyone knows you must be careful not to prejudice a case by revealing specifics. It was odd that he chose to say biologics instead of bodies. But I assume he lifted that phrase directly from the reports rather than chose it. And as you say he initially claimed he had not seen them for himself. However that doesn't invalidate his testimony because as he stated he attempted to gain access to the programmes and was denied. He couldn't get read in. So people can use that as they will but most are clueless as to how that works. And in context that's surprising because he had access to a sh%t tonne of programmes. And that would be very exotic research. I've trawled the CIA website for declassified programmes and Jesus the stuff they were attempting in the 50s was out there. I mean out there. I've also read through some of the Russian stuff and decades ago they were building high energy targeted microwave blasters and mounting them on turrets around bases. So he attempted to gain access, was refused and then raised the alarm because he was tasked with cataloguing all the secret programmes. Which is when he began being approached by those in these programmes and they told him what was happening. So he could have left it at that and filed his reports and sent them up the chain snd to be honest it should have died there. It could have been killed dead at that point. And he'd appear alongside Greer in 20 years ... so why didn't it? It should have but its exploded on such a scale that the fan the sh&t hit has been smashed back to the 70s. I can only assume it is being orchestrated. And the way this is happening in stages stinks. It stinks because Chris Mellon is behind it. He is loaded. More money than God. Why does he care. Elizondo again why. He's walked away, made his money and milked his position. Set for life on the circuit. Why. I personally think this is too meticulous and too orchestrated. A couple of weeks and another chunk. And so on. It isnt drip drip, its watergate. And its reaching a point where in a minute someone is going to step foreward and dump it all out there because they can't be touched. Or it's gonna be dumped out there as part of the schedule. Mellon and Elizondo walked out of the Pentagon with go fast, gimble and Tic Tac under their arm and did so exploiting a loophole. what how? Cockpit footage taken by pilots on their own phones has been confiscated and classified. And there is legal push to retrieve those phones and data because the law makes it the pilots property. You can go on utube and see navy pilots go pro footage of them performing dog fights. Crystal clear. I watched cockpit footage of a pilot following a misile side by side from his head cam. Some pilots even have their own channels on utube. So how on earth can they confiscate footage or UAP legimately using national security rules. What legal loophole got Chad Underwoods footage out there and Mellon and Elizondo aren't making numberplates. Money, power and permission and that is significant if true.
Pages: 1 [2] 3 4 5 6 7 ... 18
|
Sponsors
Microstock Poll Results
Sponsors
|
Show Posts
