Those shows like Ancient Aliens were all over cable TV back when I had cable TV, which was like 10 years ago.

That is a routine riggie approach. If you doubt it them go to the huge online poker riggie thread and see riggie after riggie toss out some random theory or belief after watching a few hands or even less data, and then getting upset when it gets dismissed. After all, we should keep an open mind when fringe people scream about fringe things in case they get one right by accident. Otherwise we are saying every site has been legit all the time.

The smug ones are the conspiracyderps who think their endless theories merit serious attention.




Actually it is more debunking people like you and how you interpret things. Feel free to shed your ideas about Sandy Hook or vaccines or a whole host of other topics and then sit back and wonder why YOU get dismissed when suddenly your topic of the day is UFOs.

Now, if any of you ever embrace Lizard People properly - I am there with you!


Well, let's see if it changes the needle at all moving forward with humanity or if it is just another media cycle blip which happens to all sorts of stories. You and other derps presenting your manifestos do nothing to change my opinion, because why should that be an agent of change?

All the best.

They are "verified". Defense Department confirms leaked video of unidentified aerial phenomena is real CNN story from two weeks ago:

The Defense Department has confirmed that leaked photos and video of "unidentified aerial phenomena" taken in 2019 are indeed legitimate images of unexplained objects.

Photos and videos of triangle-shaped objects blinking and moving through the clouds were taken by Navy personnel, Pentagon spokeswoman Sue Gough said in a statement to CNN. She also confirmed that photos of three unidentified flying objects -- one "sphere" shaped, another "acorn" shaped and one characterized as a "metallic blimp" -- were also taken by Navy personnel.

I mean you are correct that they still aren't saying that these are actual little green men flying around and that they aren't just camera tricks. But they're definitely putting the ideas that these are real out into the public sphere.

I'm not familiar with Bennewitz or Doty but the Dulce stuff I have heard of. But you can definitely be correct here. It isn't my expectation that we're due for actual 'revelations' in the near future. But they are ringing the bell there for some reason.

Once upon a time I think it is fair to say we assumed 'we are just lucky this planet had the perfect conditions come together for life to form'.

It was so accepted that it became a way to diminish those 'perfect conditions' coming together elsewhere and thus why the odds of life being low, elsewhere.


Now I think it is far more believed that 'life finds a way' as opposed to believing some type of ideal conditions exist. As I mentioned we have found life existing in 'sulphur environments', 'well below freezing conditions', 'chemosynthesis', etc, etc.

So if we were looking to 'Seed' other planets, the satellites would seeded with all of these known type extreme adverse condition life forms here on earth with the idea one or more might take root on a foreign planet with some of elements of what spawned life here and then evolve in that environment.

What might actually emerge might never look like man but whatever did evolve would be a legacy continuation of 'life on earth'.

I didn't create this thread. I pay attention to the media, I see the UFO stories, this thread exists, so now we're talking about it some.
And it's your media I have to keep reiterating. Not a single infowars article has been posted in this thread. I appreciate your 'nothing to see here' attitude about basically everything and in one sense I actually agree with that.
And if it's your claim that your media puts out a lot of bullshit then I would wholeheartedly agree.

Oh ya That's pretty much the stuff I was referencing.

I kinda slide in on the psychedelic side/takes of things potentially as a sort of communication device. Whether there's any truth to it or not is debatable for sure--but sometimes the experiences with some psychs can definitely give you those kinda impressions. It's tapping into -something- regardless though imo. I don't really think it's a huge stretch to think that we can at least access aspects of the whole thing at the individual level. One time out in the desert on like ~10gs(was a ~100fresh in actuality) had one of the more memorable trips off in that direction--at a certain point the message was pretty clear and it was basically--you work for us now Not really ominous but kinda serious/playful at the same time.

You're probably looking for some version of something called the zoo hypothesis or directed panspermia in that wiki.

Not sure why you call it my media when you spend likely 20x+ more time consuming it than I do, but if continuing to say that makes you feel better then fine, whatever.

A couple UFO stories - hey, cool, whatever. Similarly there were stories about some celebrity failing a driver's test and doing a routine on Tik Tok about it. Also, cool - whatever. Your hairs will stand up with the former story where you will share your beliefs, concerns and ask questions of others as you tend to do with conspiracyderp stuff. The latter story probably generated no interest from you, unless you have some dark theories about driving tests, which is a nonzero possibility.

To you the UFO is a topic you really want to not be a nothingburger. The other is a nothingburger to you. In the end both (in the real world) are nothingburgers, so when you try to turn the first one into something - that is you at work, not the story or the media. You are cherry picking the, as you call it, "bullshit" and then acting all upset when the bullshit wrapped in a Lucky conspiracyderp package gets dismissed.

All the best.

Why should you be taken seriously here when you fully understand that we aren't talking about random UFO sightings or one-off stories, but rather "officialdom' pushing it out there?
Are you denying that is the case?

Hard to see how I'm cherry picking the media here. CNN, NYT, WaPO, Guardian etc are as mainstream as it comes. Do I think I spotted a trend two years ago that is continuing to this day? Sure. Is it the case that whenever more of the official political establishment pushes this story, the more I feel that I'm correct? That's true too.

Here is an NBC piece from two weeks ago:
The U.S. military takes UFOs seriously. Why doesn't Silicon Valley or academia?: The government wants to know if these unidentified objects pose a military threat. But they also represent an opportunity to advance science and technology.

In our era of life-changing innovation, there are major breakthroughs that could well come from the serious study of a phenomenon we too often mock: UFOs. The government has reversed its official position of publicly ignoring UAPs (unidentified aerial phenomenon, the new trendy name for UFOs) and is starting to tackle the subject openly. But within academia and industry, the topic is still too frequently dismissed with a chuckle accompanied by some trite remark about “extraterrestrials.”

More or less confirming what I'm saying

In June, a new task force championed by Sen. Marco Rubio, R-Fla., must submit an unclassified report on unidentified aerial phenomena to Congress. It comes as several erstwhile officials, including former Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid and two former CIA directors, have called for a more rigorous look at these sightings.[...]
Now recently retired national security officials are speaking out. In the run-up to the task force’s report in June, John Ratcliffe, former director of national intelligence, told Fox News last month that there were “a lot more sightings than have been made public.” Similarly, James Woolsey, former director of the CIA, said on a podcast this month he was taking the subject seriously, as did a successor at the CIA, John Brennan, in December.

Harry Reid, John Ratcliffe, James Woolsey, and John Brennan are not "nobodys".
Former directors of the CIA or the DNI don't just "speak out" in ways that don't serve the agenda of the CIA/ruling class. That's not how it works.

I deny the case you are trying to make with the minimal news stories out there so far to satisfy your conspiracyderp needs.

At this point that story is an utter nothingburger. If that changes then we can re-evaluate. You trying to make it a something does nothing to change anything.


You are cherry picking the stories you want to use to further your conspiracyderp agenda. You obsessively consume media, so with that much time you devote to it you will find the stories that have you ready to strike when they allow. UFOs? Go time! A celebrity failing a driver's test? Swipe right to the next story.

You can continue to try to make this not about you - but in the end you are the one trying to build this into something it is currently not, and no amount of "are you denying this is the case?" routines that you always do will change that. Hope that helped explain it better, even though I made these points several times by now. Do you deny this?

With regard to your NBC link you should also comment on the following story in the same section.

"How Demi Lovato crossed the line by demanding a trigger-free froyo store."

https://www.nbcnews.com/think/opinio...we-ncna1265012

All the best.

I mean I don't see how a reasonable person could conclude that that NBC piece I just posted is a "cherry pick".

Of course, Infowars puts out periodic UFO stories as well. Are they part of the conspiracy as well?

https://www.infowars.com/posts/nyc-s...ufo-sightings/

They are actually.

Bobo's already demonstrated via google trends that you could go back to just about any timeframe over the past few years and find periodic UFO stories.

Which is never anything I denied. The google trends makes my argument more than anyone else's here though.

That is because you are an unreasonable person so you do not get what reasonable means.

The NBC is an opinion piece from a dude who also wrote opinions about whether we are living in the Matrix or not. It is basically a fluff piece, created for entertainment value. It is not a news report. It is in the same section as the article I linked about a celebrity and frozen yogurt.

You just want it to mean more than it does. It is a nothingburger, though it can satisfy entertainment needs. You need it to be more, but it is not.

Anyway, a month or two from now nobody will be talking about this and you can conclude at that time that it is all a massive coverup.

All the best.

Except it doesn't back your claim that there's been an increase in UFO stories recently.

Again, we can pick any year and find CNN running fluff UFO stories. Just a few from 2002 as a random example:

Clinton aide slams Pentagon's UFO secrecy
https://www.cnn.com/2002/TECH/space/10/22/ufo.records/

UK opens its own 'X-file'
http://www.cnn.com/2002/WORLD/europe...ufo/index.html


China baffled by 'alien' pyramid
https://www.cnn.com/2002/WORLD/asiap...x.html?related

Strange 'flying saucer' spotted in our galaxy
http://www.cnn.com/2002/TECH/space/0...cer/index.html


None of it matters, of course. You made up your wind ahead of time about (((the media))) trying to manipulate being into believing in UFOs and now the rest of us have to deal with your crackpot ideas.

I said from the start the Pentagon are simply stating that there's unexplained aerial phenomena which is nothing new at all as everyone has known this sine the 50s- it's not verified that they're the result of alien intelligence is what I meant.


Define "real", They're saying some aspects of the phenomenon are unexplained. Which is hardly a revelation or "putting" anything out as it's nothing they haven't said before. This guy makes a reasonable enough case that one of the released examples may actually be a helium balloon, the object itself is shown at 2:14


Well I speculated a reason in my last post, could be a psyop against perceived enemies on the world stage such as commies and ex commies. And UFOs were pretty much always popular in the media, from the late 1940s onwards and even before that there was the so called airship phenomenon of the late 19th & early 20th century with media at the time speculating aliens.
It's theorized that the Aurora Texas alleged ufo crash was invented at the time by local papers desperate to drum up business for the town so UFO popularity in the media is certainly nothing new and tends to come in cycles.

It sounds like you and agree are agreeing on a lot, just that you're inclined to think the propaganda has mostly mundane [there is a pun there] purposes and I'm open to various fanciful explanations. Both mundane and fanciful explanations are of course also possible.

It's a reasonable take. Though if I were in charge I'd try to keep as much distance as possible to any kind of military involvement. I guess actually playing cops and robbers is more fun than sitting on the sidelines watching

Quite the word salad you tossed there. Perhaps you will agree with agree who agrees with agree agreeing.

Anyway, fluff stories, which this is, are often times simply fluff/filler stories, and not propaganda. Is the celebrity failinga driver test or getting triggered by frozen yogurt a form of propaganda as well in your mind, or can some fluff just be fluff. If you agree with agree agreeing that some stories can just be fluff pieces (and not propaganda) then the next step might be for you to step back and wonder why most humans consider your breaking news stories or interpretation of cherry picked stories to often be nothing more than fluff pieces with you putting a conspiracyderp spin to it. Note, I never expect people like you to do that last part.

All the best.

If you want to consider these stories fluff then I think that is somewhat defensible.
The question should be why the US Government keeps releasing fluff for them to write about, and why the media keeps doing it?
Again, I have no problems with you calling your media garbage. I think it's also admirable that you're able to pick out the fluff that comes from America's most venerable news outlets. Lots of people can't do that though and when looking at the news from a propaganda perspective, there really isn't a lot of reason to draw a hard line between hard news and fluff fwiw.

This is a fluff story. Even the "NBC News" article you linked is in essentially their fluff section of opinion pieces. Not like Tom Brokaw was walking through the door to talk about it as the lead story on the nightly news. How people consume news has changed a ton, and a lot of the news agencies have areas where non news "news" is put to fill that need.


Shrug, who cares other than you and other conspiracyderps. Maybe someone did it for fun. Maybe they release all sorts of things and some reporter/writer looks for the more fun stuff to then toss in a report they do to get clicks. Maybe Lizard People overlords. Odds are their is no sinister reason or the reasons are mundane, but I get that people like you assume that is a cover for something else, hence you always need to ask your versions of "why?"


You keep trying to call it my media. You are the one obsessed with it, not me. Dude, it is your media. You show me a fluff piece, I call it fluff. You were the one who did all the research, not me. This is your obsession. I just like debunking people like you.


Hint - if it is in a section that is for opinion pieces and has articles about failed drivers tests and celebrities getting angry at frozen yogurt - odds are it is fluff. If somehow the next Watergate story is revealed in that section - hey, cool. Even the Enquirer got some actual news stories first. Math happens.

Well, lots of people lack common sense. You have a different agenda, so when you try hard to convert fluff into something it is not you will use every trick in your book to fight back when debunked. It is what you do. Anyway, you should probably go back and do more research on this important topic for you. This could be your next Portland.

All the best.

can't that be explained by a simple change in policy?

- Policy 1 - we do not comment on, nor release any footage that we cannot confirm or explain and that might feed speculation

- Policy 1A Revised - we will release all information as we have it making it known it is simply 'unknown' because keeping it buttoned up was leading to leaks and people then creating CT's assuming this was more important than it was

As to the media reporting on the Releases, I would say 'well d'uh' of course with every release some elements of media will seize on it to report as it is sensational stuff.

I'm not inclined to think it's propaganda or indeed that there's disinfo necessarily happening at present. I'm saying that I'd be ambivalent regarding disinfo as intel have a track record of such things re UFOs/UAP.
However it's not to cover up The Horrible Truth re the existence of Aliens imo but again more grounded reasons. In the past governments were more secretive but that was against a backdrop of the Cold War.
But today disinformation isn't necessarily at play and if it were, again would be for more grounded reasons.

What fanciful explanations would you be open minded to don't mind my asking? You stated earlier it wasn't true so I doubt if you believe that Aliens are visiting earth & the US Gov are covering it up.

Why do you think the media are pushing things or there's an increase in UFO coverage?

Bear in mind people love the unknown, by and large, whether it's the supernatural, cryptids, other dimensions and Aliens. A lot of coverage is simply filler imo in the hope of getting a spike in ratings or possibly simply cuz everyone's sick of hearing about covid.

The UFO phenomenon came in flaps ad always against significant backdrops. In the late 19th/early 20th century with the airships, it was against the industrial revolution, late 40s-80s the Cold War.

Today- and I personally don't think there's been an undue increase in coverage to clarify- we're in a global pandemic, uncertain economic times and social strife, combined with the social media communication age.

Maybe it simply seems that there's more coverage because info is much more readily available. I don't think there's any nefarious or arcane aspect to any of this or less grounded reasons ultimately.