Disclosure has begun

[ANNEE]

I know I know Neil is plugging his new book, "Take me to your leader", but I agree with his point that they should 'bring out the alien' and he explains how the physics does not work with some UAP behaviour.

LOL -- I was just gonna post that.

But - I still haven't taken the time to learn how to post videos.

So - good on you! 

[ANNEE]

I know I know Neil is plugging his new book, "Take me to your leader", but I agree with his point that they should 'bring out the alien' and he explains how the physics does not work with some UAP behaviour.

I'm a big fan.  He makes things interesting by adding a personality to it.

He says he's taken jabs all his life for having multiple interests and an enthusiastic personality for all of them.

He's never been the straight A student with a single focus.

[Sirius]

19:19
19 minutes, 19 seconds
And if you check his resume, you will find out that over the past two decades, he didn't publish a single scientific

paper. So he's not a a practitioner of science. Yet he speaks with authority about science and he's an influencer.

And how do you tell the difference between an influencer and someone who practices science? By the fact that someone who practices science is sometimes going against the wind.

Because sometimes you see anomalies and you have to say something different than the rest of the community. That's how discoveries are made. Whereas the

influencers always count how many likes they have. So this particular person wrote a book now about aliens because he

recognizes that there is more public I mean the subject is more popular and so that was my expectation from the
Five years ago he resisted my book extraterrestrial tried to suppress the message and now he’s taking
ownership of the message just because it’s becoming more popular. That’s how you define an influencer. That that’s someone who responds to the audience.
But you know, just like in soccer, playing soccer, you can keep your eyes on the ball. If you’re a player, you have to do that in order to score a goal. You have to put your eyes on the
ball. You can’t pay attention to the audience. The audience has introduces a lot of noise. And so the difference between a player and a member of the
audience or a commentator or an influencer is that the influencer or commentators looks at everyone around
them and and and tries to be popular whereas someone who plays on the field does the right thing in order to score a goal. So that’s the difference between

[Randyvine]

Some of you are bringing up pole numbers about belief. Belief in what exactly? The poles are too ambiguous to get any answers. Belief that your neighbor is from another planet? Belief that life could exist on other planets in the universe? Belief that we have been visited? Belief that the Bible and other ancient stories are about space aliens?

In those poles, all those believers are just thrown together in a meaningless jumble. 

I personally believe in the possibility but have seen no evidence of it. This "new" reliese has changed nothing for me.

When I look at the whole phenomena from Rosewell
to Carol Rosin, from "whistles blowers ?" in congress, to 
to missing and murdered nuclear physicists add one
General of the highest clearence in charge of research
at Los Alamos of the most prestigeous educations. I see
what no ET fans are going to like. No Steven Spielburg
is no hero to anyone.

Like you BK I see nothing but bullsh2t. No evidence just
gov. employees telling "gov. servants" about grainy low
resolution videos of white specs running ( I suppose)
in perfect sync of speed and direction to allow it's own 
15 seconds of filming fame by a GOVERNMENT high
ranking officer fighter pilot.

When you just think about all this with the mind that
looks for a hoax. All you see is the same ole story that's
been with us all the way back to the garden. LIES LIES
LIES and LIES on top of LIES. Man can they tell a fib.

Where is the only place UFOs are seen. No not by NASA
out in space either. I've seen em five times and everytime
it was right here on this planet. Mothership Earth I call it.

And the reason why we will never get full discloser is 
right there in everyones face. Because all that gravity
tech comes from only one Mothership. It's ours and it
always has been ours.

It's been of Earth tech for I suspect a very longtime.
And that truth of disclosure would be that it was common
deered from the whole world long ago. Hoarded by
whoever away from us. We who are meant to serve
them only as gods. I believe what Carol Rosin quoted
Werner Von Braun as saying.

They need us in a state fear constantly. The enemy,
the barbarians, the natives are savages, the Germans,
Japaneese, Koreans, Vietcong, Chinese, Russians, 
terrorists, Hamas, Hezbollah, the Iranians and soon
what Carol quoted.

The last card would be an alien invasion.

I also believe it will be very fearful as well. In fact unless
I miss my mark, it's going to be a real life horror show.
But the only monsters will be those running the show.
The earth will be filled with blood everywhere to the
entertainment of a few.

Disclosure would tell us the truth of all this and
everything hidden from us. Everything God meant us
to have. All that's been stolen from the rest of us.
Why do so many world events seem scripted even 
timed specifically? Because they are. All done by ritual.

[Astyanax]

I agree with the extraordinary claim definition, but not with the extraordinary evidence definition, as to me, the fact that evidence may be hard to find doesn't make it extraordinary, ordinary or extraordinary being a characteristic of the evidence, not of how it was obtained or how hard it was.

Fine. Give us a valid example of ‘extraordinary evidence’. Your last try was a bit of a mess.
 

Don't distort my words, I never talked about sparing the truth and much less of stroking people's egos, I was talking about being opposed to someone's ideas without being rude.

I am not distorting your words, I am making clear their implications, which you seem not to have grasped fully. You cannot ever expose the truth without offending people. History demonstrates that such has always been the case; psychology makes clear that it always will be. And ‘being rude’ has nothing to do with it; no-one is saying rudeness is necessary. The courage to state the truth plainly is all that is required, and a great deal of courage is required for that.

Sirius just posted the following. They are right, and you would do well to acknowledge it.
 

Sirius: And how do you tell the difference between an influencer and someone who practices science? By the fact that someone who practices science is sometimes going against the wind... Sometimes you see anomalies and you have to say something different than the rest of the community. That's how discoveries are made. 

You seem to be labouring under the delusion that you and others are wholly rational actors. People stopped believing that with the rise of the Romantic movement in the eighteenth century. Time for an update, ArMap!
 

I'm not talking about valuing feelings above truth, I'm talking about using people's feelings to make them easier to accept the idea they may be wrong and make them think.

Irrelevant, as I have already made clear. Try to grasp the distinction between the roles you say the site is supposed to be playing. Appreciate their incompatibility. I will not waste my time explaining this again.
 

You see, to me it's the same thing, only on a bigger scale, with more important consequences.

You are not a stupid person, so you will learn some day how wrong you are. I hope the lesson will not be too painful.
 

Is [Richard Dawkins] supposed to be someone important? I don't do that "personality" thing.

No need; all you need is that ‘education’ thing. Richard Dawkins is one of the pioneers of evolutionary biology and one of the developers of the gene-centred view of evolution. You may have heard of The Selfish Gene.
 

I can't even remember any extraordinary claim, much less of one being explained by ordinary evidence.

Then you have lost the debate. I hope this exchange has been of some profit to you nevertheless.

[Sirius]

I think Mulder and Scully up there is a much more interesting talking point than the rest of what is going on here
 

Momo Ayase is a high school girl who believes in ghosts but not aliens, while her fellow high schooler, Ken Takakura, whom Momo nicknames "Okarun", believes in aliens but not ghosts. In a bet to determine who is correct, the two decide to separately visit locations associated with both the extraterrestrial and the occult—Momo visiting the former, and Okarun the latter. Momo is abducted by a group of aliens who accidentally unblock her chakras, enabling latent psychic abilities. Meanwhile, Okarun becomes possessed by a spirit, and together with Momo's abilities, they use his possessed form to defeat the aliens.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Dandadan

most curious

[ArMaP]

No need; all you need is that ‘education’ thing. Richard Dawkins is one of the pioneers of evolutionary biology and one of the developers of the gene-centred view of evolution. You may have heard of The Selfish Gene.

Never heard of The Selfish Gene.
You see, some people have different tastes and interests in life, so their education may be different from yours (or is it "different to yours", I never know). Some people may be interested in whatever field Richard Dawkins works/worked, some not.
 

Then you have lost the debate. I hope this exchange has been of some profit to you nevertheless.

It was, it's always good to see how other people think, specially when we don't agree.

[quintessentone]

I'm a big fan.  He makes things interesting by adding a personality to it.

He says he's taken jabs all his life for having multiple interests and an enthusiastic personality for all of them.

He's never been the straight A student with a single focus.

Here's a really good interview with Neil if you have an hour to kill.

"Neil deGrasse Tyson (astrophysicist, “StarTalk” podcast host, and author, “Take Me to Your Leader: Perspectives on Your First Alien Encounter”) joins Chris Cuomo for a wide-ranging conversation on why the longtime UFO skeptic is finally taking the UAP conversation seriously — and what changed.

Tyson explains why the recent wave of military whistleblowers and congressional hearings pushed him to engage with the UAP debate, even as he maintains that eyewitness testimony is not evidence. He breaks down the difference between believing that life likely exists elsewhere in the universe and claiming that extraterrestrials are visiting Earth, and argues that the burden of proof remains the same as in any other scientific question.

Cuomo and Tyson also explore the intersection of science, religion, and human belief, from ancient aliens and crop circles to why people are drawn to ideas they want to be true. The conversation offers a skeptical but open-minded look at UFO disclosure, government secrecy, and what first contact with alien life might actually mean."

[Orby]

I watched some of the videos, including the one with the star shaped object, which is by far the most intriguing.

Grainy sensor videos that basically show nothing but contrasted points of light or darkness.

We know nothing more now than we did before they released them.

Thanks.

Until we navigate the deep oceans and get to the bottom (not intended lol) of what on Earth's going on down there, nothing will change and we'll term these undiscovered seafaring creatures as ET for some bizarre reason

[quintessentone]

Until we navigate the deep oceans and get to the bottom (not intended lol) of what on Earth's going on down there, nothing will change and we'll term these undiscovered seafaring creatures as ET for some bizarre reason

Here are the seafloor mapping data:

"While a 2020 U.S. Naval Institute proceedings article cited that only 10 percent of the seafloor has been "adequately mapped," more recent data from the Nippon Foundation-GEBCO Seabed 2030 Project indicates that approximately 24.9% to 26.1% of the global ocean floor has been mapped to modern standards as of late 2023 and 2024.  The discrepancy arises because "adequate" mapping requires high-resolution direct observations using multibeam sonar, whereas earlier or lower-resolution estimates often relied on satellite-derived gravity models or sparse soundings. 
Key distinctions in mapping coverage include:

• High-Resolution Mapping: Less than 0.05% of the ocean floor has been mapped at the highest detail level (features just a few meters in size), an area roughly equivalent to the size of Tasmania. 
  
• Adequate vs. Coarse Data: Approximately 75% of the mapped area relies on estimated depths from satellite gravity measurements, which provide only coarse resolutions and may miss significant underwater features like ridges and canyons. 
  
• Regional Variance: Mapping is uneven, with the North Atlantic and North Pacific having the highest proportional coverage (over 30-40%), while the Indian Ocean remains the least mapped at roughly 17.5%. 
  
• Depth Zones: The hadal zone (depths greater than 6,000 meters) has a high proportional coverage of 55.6%, whereas the shallow zones (0–200 meters) and abyssal zones (3,000–6,000 meters) have lower coverage rates of around 25%. 
  

The Seabed 2030 initiative aims to reach 100% coverage by the year 2030, but current annual progress rates suggest this target may be challenging to meet without significant increases in autonomous vehicle usage and international data sharing. " (LLM)

https://www.usni.org/magazines/proceedin...n-seafloor