118
Who should we trust more:
the 3 military personnel/whistleblower who requested to be sworn in under oath
Or the person who frequently denies to be put under oath and instead vents on LinkedIn
Agreed. Not one single piece of empirical evidence. Just "they told me that..."
In their defense, the only reason the government allowed him to talk about it WAS because it's hearsay. The government allowing him to talk is neither a denial or confirmation of the anything he said. The interesting part to me was that he said he was willing to talk specifics in a SCIF, but for some reason wasn't allowed use of one. Also the hearing, while talking about UAP, is actually more about how congress has been allegedly kept from oversite of a government program and that's illegal.
There was empirical evidence shown, just not to the public, because said evidence is classified. That's why so much has happened since this hearing.
https://twitter.com/ddeanjohnson/status/1684735678200909824?t=rnxdggCC5-MGA8M65kWGhQ&s=19
Sure, believable.
Lol, did he want him to walk in with an alien?
He must realize that, if he had first hand evidence, he’d have been dead by now if he was talking like this.
Dr. Sean Kirkpatrick’s letter, published on his personal LinkedIn page and circulated Friday across social media, criticizes much of the testimony from a retired Air Force intelligence officer that energized believers in extraterrestrial life and produced headlines around the world.
Ufo nut jobs please gb2 reddit
I would actually prefer them over you... So goodbye.
Later!
This but socialists.
Lol wut? Socialists under every rock and behind every tree?
There are tons of socialists on Lemmy. There was a front page thread about why lol
I literally have two spewing nonsense at me right now
There was a sub r/UFO I would check in on occasionally. The arguments people would get into there were … interesting.
I mean if these guys were grifters, surely there would be more than just one retired guy saying they are liars. No?
I don't discount aliens outright, in fact I do believe, but I'd imagine any type of meta being would not be bound by physical bodies, and would more so exist within consciousness itself.
I do think the whole proceeding is some flavor of sham though.
Agreed. I can't help but feel like this hearing is intended as a distraction. My midwestern city just had another thunderstorm with 70+mph winds and its the 5th or 6th of the summer. We're in the middle of the hottest month ever in history and it's like DC is humming along as if it's business as usual. Nobody is even trying to do anything about fixing climate change or even just improving emergency preparedness for severe weather. Instead we have senators literally sitting in congress catatonic and having strokes on TV because staying in power is more important than doing anything for the country.
But hey, here's a crazy hearing about UFOs.
If this is a distraction it's a really shitty one, because it is front-page news nowhere in the US.
Meanwhile there are literally millions of other potential "distractions" like Hunter Biden news actually making and keeping headlines.
The "manufactured distraction" concept has always seemed as conspiracy-theory as alien encounters or flat earth or whatever in its own right, to me.
What do you think a consciousness looks like without a physical body?
Well I wouldnt say looks. Maybe feel. It would kind of look like a "simple technicolor light" to a physical body in the minds eye, but you'd feel a separate entity with you for sure. I've had this happen to me once or twice very intensly while practicing some home brew weird shit. It was kinda overwhelming. No one will ever be able to convice me that I was not interacting with something. It was 1 or 2 sperate, but one thing, and it literally threw a weird ass tiny ball of white string at me and all my cabinets opened up upstairs. I'm a crazy person. Proceed with caution.
this post was submitted on 29 Jul 2023
118 points (100.0% liked)
News
23311 readers
4102 users here now
Welcome to the News community!
Rules:
1. Be civil
Attack the argument, not the person. No racism/sexism/bigotry. Good faith argumentation only. This includes accusing another user of being a bot or paid actor. Trolling is uncivil and is grounds for removal and/or a community ban. Do not respond to rule-breaking content; report it and move on.
2. All posts should contain a source (url) that is as reliable and unbiased as possible and must only contain one link.
Obvious right or left wing sources will be removed at the mods discretion. We have an actively updated blocklist, which you can see here: https://lemmy.world/post/2246130 if you feel like any website is missing, contact the mods. Supporting links can be added in comments or posted seperately but not to the post body.
3. No bots, spam or self-promotion.
Only approved bots, which follow the guidelines for bots set by the instance, are allowed.
4. Post titles should be the same as the article used as source.
Posts which titles don’t match the source won’t be removed, but the autoMod will notify you, and if your title misrepresents the original article, the post will be deleted. If the site changed their headline, the bot might still contact you, just ignore it, we won’t delete your post.
5. Only recent news is allowed.
Posts must be news from the most recent 30 days.
6. All posts must be news articles.
No opinion pieces, Listicles, editorials or celebrity gossip is allowed. All posts will be judged on a case-by-case basis.
7. No duplicate posts.
If a source you used was already posted by someone else, the autoMod will leave a message. Please remove your post if the autoMod is correct. If the post that matches your post is very old, we refer you to rule 5.
8. Misinformation is prohibited.
Misinformation / propaganda is strictly prohibited. Any comment or post containing or linking to misinformation will be removed. If you feel that your post has been removed in error, credible sources must be provided.
9. No link shorteners.
The auto mod will contact you if a link shortener is detected, please delete your post if they are right.
10. Don't copy entire article in your post body
For copyright reasons, you are not allowed to copy an entire article into your post body. This is an instance wide rule, that is strictly enforced in this community.
founded 1 year ago
MODERATORS