All About UFO's

[terryforsythe]

Here is another interview of Tim Phillips, former Deputy Director of AARO, this time conducted by Mick West. Phillips discusses a lot of different aspects of the UAP topic. I found it to be very informatative and well worth watching.

 

[Axo1989]

Here is another interview of Tim Phillips, former Deputy Director of AARO, this time conducted by Mick West. Phillips discusses a lot of different aspects of the UAP topic. I found it to be very informatative and well worth watching.

The sotto voce intro was tonally promising, but around a minute in we are back at the New York Post so ... I'm bemused by the prospect of wading though acronym soup for an hour and forty-five minutes! Better you than me!!

Anyway speaking of excellent documentaries on alien encounters I finally managed to watch Nope (which I enjoyed more than his previous two films possibly due to this subject matter). Certainly a more entertaining and informative way to spend a similar amount of time. If only the funnel of YouTube slop you are helping to deliver here was as well conceived/scripted/acted/shot/edited/produced then all y'all crazies may be able to hold my attention.

 

[Audiofire]

in my case, for reliable amusement (as others have pointed out, much like the cable threads)

Good grief, the cable snake oil is already a can of worms. You did not even try to hide your intention is trolling.

 

[Axo1989]

Haha you think I'm trolling? After you invoke Kruger-Dunning to defend facile arguments and half-baked anecdata for existence of little green men and their black triangles? Oh come on ...

 

[Audiofire]

Oh come on ...

You did not contribute except for questionable attitude. I can respect your point of view, but you should try the same approach in my opinion.

 

[Axo1989]

You did not contribute except for questionable attitude. I can respect your point of view, but you should try the same approach in my opinion.

If you head back a fair way in this thread you'll see my argument for assigning low truth-value to this milieu of YouTube entertainment. That platform directly monetises attention, not veracity. Over time we've seen whole subject areas of dubious fringe beliefs adapt to (and expand due to) the attention algorithms, entirely for profit. There is little point in assessing truth-value of these areas of monetised content separately from the microeconomic context.

 

[BeeKay]

If you head back a fair way in this thread you'll see my argument for assigning low truth-value to this milieu of YouTube entertainment. That platform directly monetises attention, not veracity. Over time we've seen whole subject areas of dubious fringe beliefs adapt to (and expand due to) the attention algorithms, entirely for profit. There is little point in assessing truth-value of these areas of monetised content separately from the microeconomic context.

Not very different from snake oil promoting audio experts. All find their gullible audience. And behind the last veil there always is money. Could be funny but it’s just annoying.

 

[Audiofire]

Sorry, I didn't read the entire thread. I do agree some of it is science fiction.

 

[terryforsythe]

If only the funnel of YouTube slop you are helping to deliver here was as well conceived/scripted/acted/shot/edited/produced then all y'all crazies may be able to hold my attention.

The host, Mick West, is a well known skeptic. The video presents information debunking much of the UFO lore. If that is not worthy of attention, and videos presenting the contrary view also are not worthy of attention, then I think you are participating in the wrong thread. Really, other than trolling, what is the point?

 

[Audiofire]

Really, other than trolling, what is the point?

to defend facile arguments

I guess that was the intention. Just ignoring any information about UFOs that cannot be easily debunked. Then pretend to know everything about the topic

 

[kemmler3D]

I guess that was the intention. Just ignoring any information about UFOs that cannot be easily debunked. Then pretend to know everything about the topic

There are two kinds of information about UFOs: debunked and inconclusive. The third type of information I've seen is lists of credentials of people who have said something about UFOs, which is a naked appeal to authority and seems mostly like a means of making speculation feel more worthwhile.

If someone is out for hard facts about UFOs, after 4000+ posts I think we're still at "people have seen things that seem to defy conventional explanation" but nothing solid beyond that. What more education is to be had if there's no knowledge of what these things are?

 

[Audiofire]

The UFOs are real. Safe to assume something is being kept secret from the public. People just believe what they want, either for or against aliens, but these advanced craft have been reported and there are pictures of UFOs for many decades.

Now, we can at least expect some superficial data from official sources, maybe to prepare the public for unavoidable disclosure or there is an extremely competent deception about ETs that don't really exist.

We are currently updating guidelines to be more aircraft specific in order to facilitate reports of unidentified aircraft/unmanned aerial systems (UAS) that support an objective data driven analysis … Furthermore, any report generated as a result of these investigations will, by necessity, include classified information on military operations. Therefore, no release of information to the general public is expected. Joseph Gradisher, spokesperson for the Deputy Chief of Naval Operations for Information Warfare

 

[Axo1989]

The host, Mick West, is a well known skeptic. The video presents information debunking much of the UFO lore. If that is not worthy of attention, and videos presenting the contrary view also are not worthy of attention, then I think you are participating in the wrong thread. Really, other than trolling, what is the point?

Your anodyne introduction to that video doesn't indicate why an hour and forty-two minutes of apparent tedium would be reasonably recommended to anyone not captivated by the minutiae of this infotainment milieu. What does it say that is particularly interesting or meaningfully advances the discussion here? Otherwise it's barely embellished post-and-run ...

There are two kinds of information about UFOs: debunked and inconclusive. The third type of information I've seen is lists of credentials of people who have said something about UFOs, which is a naked appeal to authority and seems mostly like a means of making speculation seem more worthwhile.

Yes, now I can add 'well known skeptic' to that list.

 

[somebodyelse]

Yes, now I can add 'well known skeptic' to that list.

Mick West has developed tools to make it easier to check for likely man-made explanations, and provides details of their use when debunking stills or video for which there is sufficient information to check - time, location, direction etc. He posts videos giving worked examples such as using these tools and other publicly available information (ADS-B data for aircraft, satellite and celestial body positions etc.) to show the view from the camera location at the time the image was taken to check whether the UAP matches known objects. See for example: the LA fire UAP explanation. Many more on his youtube channel.

 

[Mort]

This is the oddest thread on ASR.

 

[RayDunzl]

I wonder which one is the evenest.

 

[Audiofire]

‘Tis strange—but true; for truth is always strange, Stranger than fiction

Lord Byron, 1823

 

[sam_adams]

This is the oddest thread on ASR.

 

[Axo1989]

View attachment 458614

A thread more odd? I can’t even imagine.

 

[mhardy6647]

This is the oddest thread on ASR.

I wonder which one is the evenest.

Yes, but is it prime?

It's certainly the least scientific.
EDIT: short on audio, too.