All About UFO's

[Chrispy]

The scale of time and distance would make any interaction extremely unlikely.....ever.

 

[solderdude]

Tell that to captain Kirk !

 

[somebodyelse]

This isn't science fiction. This is declassified military intelligence work from a man who was there.

Why no links to the declassified docs then?

 

[Audiofire]

We need a rigorous, demonstrable (hehe) definition of what an "actual demon" is.

"Hell is empty and all the devils are here"
William Shakespeare

 

[Taiga]

This man burned out $50 million in military computers with his mind. The Army's response? Recruit him to lead one of the most classified intelligence programs in U.S. history: The Stargate Program.

Sgt. Lyn Buchanan spent years as a remote viewer, gathering intelligence for the U.S. government that no satellite or spy could access. He's seen ET bases on Earth. Facilities on Mars. Covert agendas that have been running for decades. And in sessions from 1998, he remote-viewed tipping points that are unfolding right now.

This isn't science fiction. This is declassified military intelligence work from a man who was there.

In this conversation, Lyn breaks down what military remote viewers discovered about competing ET agendas (some friendly, some not), why your subconscious mind has access to everything in all space and time, and what he believes is coming for humanity in the years ahead. He also shares how controlled remote viewing transformed his own life from debt to total self-sufficiency, and practical tools anyone can use: how to spot lies with four interrogation rules, how to trust gut signals your conscious mind can't decode, and how to prepare mentally, physically, and spiritually for hard times.

"We will be a major power in the universe," Lyn says. But only if we develop what we already have.

This is the conversation for anyone who suspects the reality they've been handed is smaller than the one they actually live in.

I already knew all that but have never heard of the man. I had never seen the video but knew that you would post it. You are a better person for believing in me.

 

[Audiofire]

I already knew all that but have never heard of the man. I had never seen the video but knew that you would post it. You are a better person for believing in me.

Sarcasm or not? I'm not claiming everything I post is true. That is to say I don't think I am educated about everything (and neither should the skeptics).

"Each person judges well what they know and is thus a good critic of those things. For each thing in specific, someone must be educated [to be a critic]; to [be a critic in general] one must be educated about everything."
Aristotle

 

[sam_adams]

I guess ‘you’ refers to somebody, maybe the soft-brained, but the bro-fluencer slopstream flushed through this thread generally removes doubt for me.

The 'you' is the generalized group or collective—usually accompanied by a gesture to all present at the time—and not meant to single out anyone in particular. I could have used a more folksy and welcoming, "you all" or a more regional dialectical, "yinz", but that might cause some of the smooth-brained to lapse into a cataleptic state.

It's unfortunate that the bro-sphere has taken over YT. It's just too easy these days to post a video on a ridiculous subject and watch the cash roll in—albeit in probably very small amounts. It's not like it was sixty years ago when you wanted to promote some wild theory about some ridiculous subject and had to really put some work into it:

MSN

 

[terryforsythe]

A lengthy discussion with astrophysicist Dr. Eric Davis, 30 years in the field of UAP/UFOs via US government programs (via AAWSAP etc) and Dr. Eric Weinstein, who is not a believer or supporter of what Dr Davis and co claim about the topic and asks the skeptics Qs as someone with the high level background to ask them. Below the vid on YT is extensive time stamps for those who don't want to sit through approx 4 hours of that show:

The interview discusses a lack of theoretical physicists in the "legacy program", with Eric Davis being the only one of whom he is aware. That threw up a red flag to me. During the Manhattan project the government put America's top physicists on the challenge of developing an atomic weapon. It's hard to fathom they would not have done the same to study retrieved UFOs if we actually had them. Indeed, Eric Weinstein addresses that point. It doesn't make any sense.

I enjoyed the exchange between Weinstein and Davis, but walked away more skeptical of whether we have retrieved NHI craft. It also left me even more disappointed in our federal bureaucracy. Regardless of whether we really don't have any recovered UFO's, or we do have some but have not assigned our best physicists to figure out the physics behind their operation, the conclusion from either scenario is that we have far too many people at the highest levels of our government and military that lack competence for those positions.

 

[Axo1989]

The 'you' is the generalized group or collective—usually accompanied by a gesture to all present at the time—and not meant to single out anyone in particular. I could have used a more folksy and welcoming, "you all" or a more regional dialectical, "yinz", but that might cause some of the smooth-brained to lapse into a cataleptic state.

It's unfortunate that the bro-sphere has taken over YT. It's just too easy these days to post a video on a ridiculous subject and watch the cash roll in—albeit in probably very small amounts. It's not like it was sixty years ago when you wanted to promote some wild theory about some ridiculous subject and had to really put some work into it:

MSN

Ahh 'smooth-brained' was the idiom I was going for, yes. I conflated with 'soft in the head'.

I knew what you were getting at with the plebeian 'you' of course (and that you didn't mean me personally) I was just anecdoting the opposite effect. As for effort, yes the bros barely need to even try. Almost the whole scope of the problem.

 

[WillBrink]

The interview discusses a lack of theoretical physicists in the "legacy program", with Eric Davis being the only one of whom he is aware. That threw up a red flag to me. During the Manhattan project the government put America's top physicists on the challenge of developing an atomic weapon. It's hard to fathom they would not have done the same to study retrieved UFOs if we actually had them. Indeed, Eric Weinstein addresses that point. It doesn't make any sense.

I enjoyed the exchange between Weinstein and Davis, but walked away more skeptical of whether we have retrieved NHI craft. It also left me even more disappointed in our federal bureaucracy. Regardless of whether we really don't have any recovered UFO's, or we do have some but have not assigned our best physicists to figure out the physics behind their operation, the conclusion from either scenario is that we have far too many people at the highest levels of our government and military that lack competence for those positions.

That's always been a major Q Eric has, and is understandably baffled why so few seem to have the advanced physics background you'd expect working on such projects. It would also not surprise me the focus on secrecy and compartmentalization exceed competency and the physicists and related scientists working on the good stuff are found in the private corps, which is hidden from view and immune to FOIA, Congressional oversight, etc. We know that's been a common tactic post WWII to hide the blackest of projects.

 

[Axo1989]

The interview discusses a lack of theoretical physicists in the "legacy program", with Eric Davis being the only one of whom he is aware. That threw up a red flag to me. During the Manhattan project the government put America's top physicists on the challenge of developing an atomic weapon. It's hard to fathom they would not have done the same to study retrieved UFOs if we actually had them. Indeed, Eric Weinstein addresses that point. It doesn't make any sense.

I enjoyed the exchange between Weinstein and Davis, but walked away more skeptical of whether we have retrieved NHI craft. It also left me even more disappointed in our federal bureaucracy. Regardless of whether we really don't have any recovered UFO's, or we do have some but have not assigned our best physicists to figure out the physics behind their operation, the conclusion from either scenario is that we have far too many people at the highest levels of our government and military that lack competence for those positions.

Fairly obvious conclusions: 1. 'we' don't have any 'recovered UFOs' that aren't simply prosaic/terrestrial, and 2. competent physicists would generally steer clear of the cray-cray. That stuff—and the 'major Qs'—would be best 'worked on' by smoother brains.

 

[Audiofire]

Another relevant/interesting video that can tease the skeptics or cynics, which they can just call slop or trash without counter-evidence, although the guest Maaneli Derakhsani is a theoretical physicist:

 

[antcollinet]

Another relevant/interesting video that can tease the skeptics or cynics, which they can just call slop or trash without counter-evidence, although the guest Maaneli Derakhsani is a theoretical physicist:

Counter evidence is not needed until there is some evidence to counter. And one of the problems the ai revolution has caused is that neither video, nor photographic images can be considered evidence alone - without some form of corroboration - which needs to be separate from the person or people presenting the images. And that is even assuming the "blurry" images are evidence at all, rather than simply something to speculate over, even without the risk of fakery.

 

[Audiofire]

Counter evidence is not needed until there is some evidence to counter.

There is evidence of a cover-up. Additionally, your reply was about 23 minutes after mine. The video is 1 hour, 46 minutes and 52 seconds with analysis of anomalies. NASA can cover anything up for national security like the Department of Defense, explained in the video.

 

[Taiga]

In addition to NASA, you’ll have to add Russia/USSR, Japan, China, India, Europe/ESA, South Korea, and Israel to the lunar looney tunes cover-up list.

Moon Missions - NASA Science

Here are the major missions launched to the Moon, from the dawn of the space age through the present day.

science.nasa.gov

The UAE used their wealth to launch a mission in 2022 to blow the lid off the lunar cover-up and reveal detailed pictures and evidence of what the other nations are hiding. In one of the greatest mysteries to rock the international intelligence community, the UAE mission failed just seconds before landing. It crashed and was destroyed on the lunar surface eliminating all traces of evidence collected during the approach.

Emirates Lunar Mission - Wikipedia

en.wikipedia.org

 

[Audiofire]

Sneaky ETs I guess you have to be part of the NATO club secretly run by aliens to take over the world, allegedly!

 

[Chester]

n addition to NASA, you’ll have to add Russia/USSR, Japan, China, India, Europe/ESA, South Korea, and Israel to the lunar looney tunes cover-up list.

Not one of those has had a slip up and something concrete has made its way out to the public? Come on.

 

[kemmler3D]

Counter evidence is not needed until there is some evidence to counter.

Beat me to it.

NASA can cover anything up for national security like the Department of Defense, explained in the video.

Yes, because the government has the theoretical legal right to hide evidence of aliens, that means aliens are real.

It crashed and was destroyed on the lunar surface eliminating all traces of evidence collected during the approach.

Lots of lunar missions have crashed at the last minute, so what? Airplanes don't stop working until they hit the ground either.

OK, my turn to be a delusional crackpot!

I propose that it is infinitely more likely that any real NHI would be from "other dimensions" (other universes) than our own.

1. We know that there are very real physical constraints on how and whether NHI could visit earth from other solar systems, which makes the proposition almost physically impossible, based on our understanding of physics.

2. If the ultimate constraint on "the multiverse" is whether the laws of physics in another universe are simply logically consistent, (this is what I propose) then every conceivable logically consistent universe exists "somewhere".

3. If it is not a violation of basic logic for beings from one universe to cross into our universe, then they are doing so, because there would be infinitely many universes from which they might cross over.

4. This doesn't mean there would be an infinite *variety* of such universes, (infinite numbers between 1 and 2, none are 3) but if it's possible then it's happening. This explains why paranormal beings have a variety of descriptions, but also some consistency among them.

5. We don't see infinitely many aliens multiversal beings crossing over into our universe, because there are infinite universes with the same character / physics as ours, and so the rate of interaction between our universe and logically compatible other universes is ~1:1.

So there you have it, NHI mystery solved, you can rest easy now.

 

[antcollinet]

In addition to NASA, you’ll have to add Russia/USSR, Japan, China, India, Europe/ESA, South Korea, and Israel to the lunar looney tunes cover-up list.

Exactly.

Additionally, your reply was about 23 minutes after mine

Of course I've not wasted my time watching it. If there was anything in it even remotely likely to convince me - it would also have convinced all the other non conspiracy theorists - and would be mainstream news globally. The fact it isn't tells me all I need to know.

 

[Audiofire]

I guess wormholes or something like that are possible too