Just consider it a part of the psy op then.

All the best.

This is why it's so amazing how much flack I've gotten here.

Well you should tell us in advance what your reply will be to any disclosure or non disclosure based on some easy assumptions you can make as I agree with Monty that regardless of what comes out, right now, if you want to frame it as substantiation of your CT stuff you can and will.

If you do not want to go thru all options just tell us what could be said that you would see as a repudiation of your CT stuff?

Actual aliens would repudiate it for sure.
I'm not sure how I could possibly go through whatever the options are for the future.

Right.

So short of actually aliens you cannot foresee anything they might disclose in June as substantiate of your point as Monty said.

Nope not what I said.

I predict that the UFO report will involve UFOs in some way.

Navy pilots describe encounters with UFOs
Here is the 60 Minutes segment.
Story is like a who's who of this: Luis Elizondo, Christopher Mellon, Marco Rubio, and some of the alleged fighter pilots.

James Clapper: Logical for intel community to address UFOs
CNN segment with Clapper.
UFOs regularly spotted in restricted U.S. airspace, report on the phenomena due next month
CBS piece.
Something in the air: The increased attention to UFOs
And another.

That's a superb way to appear to be accepting criticism while making no actual adjustments to your position.

Would it? Let's say in a month's time there's a release that says "We're in direct communication with intelligent ETs and they've been giving us technology far beyond our years". Are you going to think "Well, I guess I was wrong", or are you far, far more likely to say "I didn't expect that but I was obviously onto something"?

The falsification criteria you've chosen for you idea that "something is different" is for the most exciting reveal in all of history. It would demonstrate that there was a conspiracy all along, that things really were different, and you're saying this would show you wrong?

This makes sense

I pointed out earlier in the thread that the thing with people like Rubio is that he's essentially found a policy that is an absolute no-lose situation. He goes out, says "Hey, I'm not saying it's anything weird, but we have all these reports, we should be looking into this because I value the security of our nation and its people". What's anyone going to say to that? You can't say "No, we shouldn't investigate possible incursions into US airspace", can you?

As we've seen itt, the only genuine response is to point out "We already investigate this stuff, and it's always nothing", but then they're going to point out one or two weird cases (probably with very boring explanations, but look a bit weird), point to an ex-serviceman's testimony, and you're left having to litigate the entire history of UFOs over the past 70 years just to hold the position "I don't think we need to do anything more than our current standard policy". Just in terms of optics, it'd be a bad move to even challenge someone like that as a politician. Your best move is to nod along that, yes, it's good to look into it.

Maybe it is a PR move to keep funding in that direction, but it's also exactly the kind of unobjectionable non-policy that politicians dream of spouting off on. Makes them look good, can't backfire, and because it's already happening there's zero risk of even having to write a draught of an actual policy.

As an aside, for the ex-servicemen who come out with their stories, let me paint another picture. You're ex-military/intelligence. You have a ton of cool stories you want to talk about, and you start talking about them. After five minutes you realise that everyone wants to know things like "What's the weirdest thing you saw as a pilot?" or "Are there things being covered up that you got a sneak peak at?", so you play to the crowd. You start telling the story of the weird thing you saw in the sky once. People love it. You get time as an after-dinner speaker, the History Channel reaches out to you, News shows want you. This idea that people have absolutely no incentive to tell these stories is incredibly naive. They end up telling their stories because people want to hear them. Far more than they want to know about how insanely cool the actual flying object you spent your life in was.

Yeah it's a win/win for everyone.
Military gets to secure it's big budget for a make believe enemy, news agencies get good clickbait headlines, UFO truthers get to feel vindicated.

Let the good time roll!

It's better than that though. I don't know if Rubio is pushing for a budget increase (the US loves its military spending so wouldn't surprise me), but that's not even necessary. All you need to do is say "We need to look into this". That's the kind of "policy" that can be filled by getting a few office lackeys to catch up on the paperwork. In terms of commitments it's about ten steps down from asking for an inquiry.

But why on Earth would a politician do that...

Imagine believing aliens that have technology to travel across the galaxy/galaxies have to clumsily fly within earth's atmosphere to spy on us. lmao.

Does make one wonder about the results if conspiracyderps ever used their super powers of investigation to actually uncover the routine and mundane real behavior that does happen and account for a good chunk of money.

It was like what I used to say long ago in the Lock Poker thread - as whenever a riggie would shout out his psy op related nonsense the reps from Lock Poker loved to discuss those, because the one thing those riggies never cared about was the reality of the financial situation going on there, and the site reps were more than happy to talk about doomswitches than their actual financial situation. They would even toss some extra "money" in the accounts of some of the riggies to thank them for their reporting, in response to the riggies wondering if a special team of people were hired to give them bad beats or something. If others would ask them why a poker room that had not paid a customer in a year yet they would still pay for the elite strike team to doomswitch them of their fake money - the replies were similar (albeit dumber) than the types Lucky has done in this thread.

Yeah, I think the feeling is something like if you don't buy into the conspiracy then you're just buying whatever you're told. It's a false dichotomy. I can be very sceptical and cynical towards Rubio without needing to think that there's secret technology defying the laws of physics.

I don't think this is necessarily directed about me, but I never claimed anything of the sort of course
The whole transition to: "yes you were mostly right Luckbox but you're still wrong" can be fun here though.

It wasn't aimed at you specifically.

You have yet to find a single other person say you are right about any element of your psy op theory which you will not properly explain. Well, except you. The only one who will say that you were mostly right is you.

At least with Lock Poker I did get to mildly enjoy the dummy riggies who refused to use common sense eventually realize all the free "money" they got for their complaints was worth $0. That specific aspect had nice closure, but with real world conspiracyderps like you - you will just drop the UFO stuff soon and move onto the next thing to weave into your narrative, similar to how the Qderp kept giving new important date updates even after one after another kept failing for him.

Any idea what will be the next thing you will look into when the UFO stuff goes nowhere to be part of your spooky undefined psy op?

All the best.

No adjustments to my position were ever needed.
Points have been raised but because my position has never been much, I never needed to even worry about accommodating them-- like the stuff about project bluebook is all fine it's just hasn't been that germane. My position has been drawn from seeing how all this has been playing out in the media since 2019-- although it was the late 2017 NYT story that started it.


I probably wouldn't believe it until I actually saw the aliens myself. I won't lie.

The thing is I went point by point through the things that a theory should have, all things that yours doesn't have, and your response was to agree but express surprise that that's seen as a criticism.


The epistemic grounds for what would make you believe in aliens wasn't what I was asking about. What I was asking about was if such incontrovertible proof came up in a month's time would you really think "I guess I was wrong" or would you think "I didn't realise how far this would go, but I was definitely onto something"?

Even if the Max Blumenthal/ 5 South 'this is mostly for pecuniary reasons' narrative turns out to be mostly correct one [which it definitely can be]-- there is still a psy-op component to that. Unless UFOs are actually real, the psy-op aspect cannot be avoided, the only question is the extent and aim of it.

Probably just back to the next deadly threat.

I wasn't the OP of this thread. I posted my thoughts in it but expecting me to have some full fledged theory before posting here isn't too reasonable and I hope that's not what you're saying.
My question at the start of this thread was 1) what's going on? [Because I myself didn't know and still don't know]. And I was saying: 2) that something is happening.

Most people have just denied that anything is even happening so we've gone back and forth on that repeatedly. Yes?

No I'd be legit shocked and it would cause me to question a lot.