I think you'll enjoy this.

They Hacked McDonald’s Ice Cream Machines—and Started a Cold War

It's hard to prove a negative, that there are no waves. Scientists aren't the type to rush to judgement, especially to verify wild claims associated with aliens. To determine that you would need to wait awhile to see what pops up and also know where to look. Plus there are also national security vibes coming off this topic which would discourage a lot of people from speaking publicly on it, especially those who depend on public funding. Weighing in on this heavily is bound to piss off high powered people on one or the other side of it.

Still, you have a bit of a point, tho I have trouble seeing the institutional aims at play in scenarios where the phenomena isn't real. I also have trouble explaining why grand ambitious psyops aimed at the American public by it's own government isn't really a thing. I think that would be highly illegal not to mention.

No, scientists aren't the type to rush to judgement. But at the same time there are an awful lot of people in the sceptic communities online, even on sites like this we have maths wizards and physicists. The calculations aren't too complicated, most of it is just knowing what the on-screen numbers mean and doing some basic trig to calculate approximate size and distances. If the videos that have been the focus of this recent UFO talk really did show the kind of speeds and manoeuvres talked about it strains my belief to think that we wouldn't have those people crunching the numbers and going "Holy ****, what is this?".

It wouldn't be very hard to show with reasonable certainty that these videos do show something behaving very strangely, or something that can't be easily recreated with camera artefacts.

Here's an alternative hypothesis as to why we see ex-military types telling these stories. Say you served as a pilot. Say you want to talk about your experiences, but it turns out a lot of being a pilot is kind of dull to talk about, and a lot of what isn't dull can't be talked about. Now say that you tell the story of the time you saw a UFO and people are hooked. They're interested, they like to speculate, they like that someone "in the know" is backing up their suspicions, adding credibility to the stories they've heard before. Say it's cool enough to get you after-dinner speaking roles, maybe a local newspaper column, maybe eventually a spot on 60 minutes. Can you see how maybe totally innocently people get sucked into the world of talking about UFOs? How they might end up having their experience reinforced over time with people telling them it's important, it needs to be shared, that this is a big deal? And then maybe all this speculation because people are fascinated by the possibilities means the government have to occasionally comment and say "Well, we need to keep looking but so far there's not really much to go on". And then that comment leads to people saying "Well if they're letting on this much then the rabbit hole must go even deeper".

That to me seems like a very plausible explanation. At least equally plausible as yours.

As for psyops, my personal take is that they probably don't go all that deep because they don't need to, but it's going to come down to where we draw the line on what constitutes a conspiracy or a psyop. I'm more than willing to believe in something like the Manufacturing Consent kind of view. But subtly spreading disinfo to slowly stir a movement in a certain direction? I'm not sure that's either effective or needs to be done. We saw over here with Brexit that sticking a sign on the side of a bus was enough for a lot of people. Over in the US we saw that Trump could say more or less whatever he wanted and people would back him. I just take a very cynical view of people here that covert psyops are probably not even necessary let alone as effective as the blatant misinformation we see regularly from the Breitbarts of the world.

Bit of a tangent, but one thing that the media is definitely reporting on much much much much more these days is asteroid near miss stories.

Like clockwork.

https://news.sky.com/story/the-odds-...-says-12379305

Would not be surprised (well would be a bit) if we are being teased the bad news so its no so hard to digest. Not this asteroid but maybe something out there they have calculated as being a bit edge lord say 1 in 1000~.

I'm curious what people think about the above?

IF there is a potential Edge Lord event where they speculate a planet killing asteroid will pass within X miles of the Earth and thus the risk is very real, do you think the gov't should share and broadcast that?

Not sure they could keep it secret anyway (do amateur astronomers have the ability to predict?) but lets say they could keep it classified... should they?


I think I would want to know but not want everyone to know (lol). Like with the start of covid society has too many emotional and extreme actors who trigger others to extremes and I don't see how that is at all helpful. The asteroid either hits or it does not. People running around crazy adds nothing.

This isn't a good explanation because it is focused on individuals and not institutions. You aren't taking into account the sizeable Pentagon funding and planning behind the effort or its ability to get the media cooperatively involved. There is money behind this, and personnel. Scientists have weighed in that the phenomena are not easily dismissed. This was a Pentagon project, as was explicitly stated on the 60 minutes segment. This isn't a couple of people spinning a yearn about their time as military pilots and pranking 60 Minutes and NYT- that's not a thing.

Between real threats to human existence voiced by the Left, the Christian Right's rapture hysteria, and the general signs of breakdown (pandemic, crumbling infrastructure, kooky leaders, absence of truth) that have the masses nervous, there is a lot of demand for end times content. People seem open to the idea. It's not manipulation.

Why do you think that's what people would do? Even people, during WWII, lined up in front of trenches they had just dug to hold their own dead bodies waited calmly for the bullet.

Do people with a terminal diagnosis run around crazy?

I think people would invest less in the future, maybe. I mean, people have a natural tendency to act on expected value of a outcome. If the chance was small but not insignificant I don't think people would behave too different than they already do. There would be a disinvestment in the future roughly proportional to the risk of impact but I doubt we would be looking at social chaos.

Why do I need to buy into the premise that some ex-pilot doing a TV interview is actually representing an institution as opposed to being a fluff piece because people love UFOs?

For example, I don't think I need to invoke the Pentagon or the military to explain why Ancient Aliens gets views.

It seems to me that the Pentagon project to review UFOs is exactly the type of thing I expect to occur without need for any motivation beyond "sometimes we get reports of weird occurrences and it's out job as an intelligence agency to review them". It would be bad if they didn't.

But when we look for what the Pentagon's position is, or what the report has shown, it's nothing. There's some stuff people report, it might be sensor glitches, at least one was a weather balloon, but since we can't conclusively rule out other explanations in all cases then we'll have to keep an eye on it.

I'm sure there are some scientists that have weighed in on this as not easily dismissed, but it doesn't seem to be representative of the field in general. I'm really not seeing many of them, and I'm seeing several who find it laughable. Fact is, we don't have anything like the kind of evidence that would make the scientific community prick up their ears.

The problem we would have now is that a million russian bots would get to work flooding social media that the 1 in whatever chance was fake and its in fact a dead certainty it will hit.

Bill gates has already built a bunker on the moon dont you know?

I find your assessment of human behaviour highly detached from recent events, which are much more relevant than stories about WW2. People are bat **** hysterical these days.

It would be hell up as we like to say locally.

Why don't you put wannabe professional debunker next to your avator and get it over with? Don't know how?

Copy paste it into your avator settings under location.
Watch Lol.

Btw with 'thunderfoot" you didn't debunk anything. You were just driving me nuts since I had to debunk this guy.
So for the record you haven't debunked the 60min video, the navy pilot.

I assume we're just getting better at detecting asteroids. Media is always gonna report that for views.

As a wannabe professional debunker I will advertise my wannabe professional debunker status however I see fit.

I, as a wannabe professional debunker, didn't make a big deal out of Thunderf00t's videos beyond saying that he actually shows some maths. Which is similar to what I did referencing an article (contain a YouTube video) doing similar.

I don't expect you to debunk anything. I don't particularly care about getting into a war of "my expert says this" back and forth. What I'll ask though is do you have anyone who's done a similar breakdown of the numbers to show that the object is in fact moving at some insane speed? Or do you just have someone sitting there giving their opinion without any maths?

And probably best not to try and condescend to me after our last discussion.

Lol. So you are still not convinced thunderfoot is wrong there? I showed you a ex navy pilot going over the hud stats. Why didn't she find anything wrong? ( the video with the female pilot)

Again, I'm not interested in doing a "my expert says you're wrong" where we just pick one to go with.

Did they actually do any maths to show the size or speed of the object? Have they managed to convince any number of people in the scientific community of their findings?

You don't get it. There is nobody, NOBODY imo that has debunked the navy pilot other than this guy here, your guy. Around 18.05 he actually says he is a research scientist.

We've been over this. I don't watch random YouTube videos when you don't even bother to summarise them or tell me how it's relevant.

If you want to tell me how it relates to anything I'm talking about then I might.

I don't care about Thunderfoot. I don't care about your opinion on Thunderfoot. What I asked for was whether you had any maths showing the speed or size of the object?

Yes they have, lots of people. And nobody came to the same findings as thunderfoot or as you implied. Imo you were just throwing **** at the wall to see what sticks. To sabotage or idk why. The thing was faster than anything known. They calculated the exact speed which is supereasy, when you have coordinates and time stamps.
Isn't it weird to you that nobody else has debunked it?

Great, so instead of spamming me with unrelated YouTube videos about nothing relevant, can I see someone do a breakdown of the maths on the camera stats like I asked for?

Here you go, again. I showed you this but you didn't notice. Looks like you are the one that needs to be debunked mate.

This is much more credible than your boi imo.

Ok so I looked him up and to my astonishment he is actually a chemist. Lol

Okay, but you know what I'm about to say, right?

I'm not watching those videos unless you're going to tell me where in them someone calculates the speed and size of the object and shows the maths.

Same here. You showed me that video about thunderfoot debunking the tik tak. Which can't be done imo and hasnt been done.

I watched the first video and didn't see any calculations going on. Just statement of fact. It's a good point - I'd love to see alternative explanations to Mick Wests backed up by actual calculations.