06-09-2024, 04:28 PM
I will attempt to add a small point to this realization. Perhaps affirming the state of affairs, but ending on a less underwhelming tone.
I think between you, and and everyone here, we have amassed sufficient evidence and points of discussion to say that there is no more to find... or perhaps better considered, what remain and is being added is mostly "more of the same" and nothing relatively noteworthy taken against everything we have studied.
But I remind us all of what is probably becoming tiresome to hear. "We don't know everything."
There are undeniably gatekeepers of further data... but you know what? They don't know everything either.
If we are to presume they are hiding what they "know," we have to remember they don't necessarily have anything more meaningful than what has already been accumulated in the topic. I don't know if whatever is being concealed behind the effort to shroud the discussion can be called "a game changer." There's infinite room for "what if" discussions, but the task of accumulating new information seems to be sufficient to say, "Yes... it is not a 'fantasy' or a 'fabrication,' there is something more than ourselves here."
But soon, I believe, new technologies and and approaches to sensing equipment may yet provide data which at the very least can separate the wheat from the chaff. New approaches don't have to be limited to the gimmickry of tech though. There have been movements towards a less materialistic approach to communication, and while it's not scientifically concrete, it is interesting.
There is also the missing debate from the topic... namely that IF we understand things correctly, someone has to answer for the gatekeepers in the first place. The unformed image must be resolved. What "commercial enterprise" was actually a cabal of government whose purpose was to hold and control this aspect of reality? How much of the topic has been deliberately kept from the rest of the world. They must explain "why" beyond the base platitudes...
There are still elements of this "UFO conspiracy theory" that merit explanation. We've spent half a century, in our modern world, simply justifying the belief. That is not the "end" of the story in any way.
Having gathered all the data we can use doesn't mean the effort is 'over.'
Now comes the meta analysis... crafting a larger image out of the puzzle pieces. There had been such an effort to refute the pieces, that many overlooked the actual image it produces. I suggest we can't let ourselves be distracted from that... which if anything, is at least closer to an actual "end-point" than where we are now.
((But in all things there must be balance... and taking a break can often be more "productive" than doggedly plodding through while fatigued.))
I think between you, and and everyone here, we have amassed sufficient evidence and points of discussion to say that there is no more to find... or perhaps better considered, what remain and is being added is mostly "more of the same" and nothing relatively noteworthy taken against everything we have studied.
But I remind us all of what is probably becoming tiresome to hear. "We don't know everything."
There are undeniably gatekeepers of further data... but you know what? They don't know everything either.
If we are to presume they are hiding what they "know," we have to remember they don't necessarily have anything more meaningful than what has already been accumulated in the topic. I don't know if whatever is being concealed behind the effort to shroud the discussion can be called "a game changer." There's infinite room for "what if" discussions, but the task of accumulating new information seems to be sufficient to say, "Yes... it is not a 'fantasy' or a 'fabrication,' there is something more than ourselves here."
But soon, I believe, new technologies and and approaches to sensing equipment may yet provide data which at the very least can separate the wheat from the chaff. New approaches don't have to be limited to the gimmickry of tech though. There have been movements towards a less materialistic approach to communication, and while it's not scientifically concrete, it is interesting.
There is also the missing debate from the topic... namely that IF we understand things correctly, someone has to answer for the gatekeepers in the first place. The unformed image must be resolved. What "commercial enterprise" was actually a cabal of government whose purpose was to hold and control this aspect of reality? How much of the topic has been deliberately kept from the rest of the world. They must explain "why" beyond the base platitudes...
There are still elements of this "UFO conspiracy theory" that merit explanation. We've spent half a century, in our modern world, simply justifying the belief. That is not the "end" of the story in any way.
Having gathered all the data we can use doesn't mean the effort is 'over.'
Now comes the meta analysis... crafting a larger image out of the puzzle pieces. There had been such an effort to refute the pieces, that many overlooked the actual image it produces. I suggest we can't let ourselves be distracted from that... which if anything, is at least closer to an actual "end-point" than where we are now.
((But in all things there must be balance... and taking a break can often be more "productive" than doggedly plodding through while fatigued.))
