4 ms·
>I've seen all of them clearly and thoroughly explained away. No, you haven't. Every "debunking" has itself been thoroughly debunked.
by zionic 5y ago
>I've seen all of them clearly and thoroughly explained away.
No, you haven't. Every "debunking" has itself been thoroughly debunked.
- simonh 5y agoThe 'debunk the debunkers' videos I've seen are hilariously, worst fringe of flat earth level wrong headed. They very much reminded me of the attempts to 'debunk' SpaceX rocket landing videos as fake, all of which died out when they landed multiple rockets in daylight in front of tens of thousands of people. IIRC one of the air force videos couldn't be readily explained, but that was just because there wasn't enough information in the video to calculate scale or relative motion, so it could have been anything. The other two were definitively explained.
- wokwokwok 5y agoIs this what we’re reduced to? No you didn’t. Yes I did. No you didn’t... Talk about low bar to discussion. They have been debunked; even if you refuse to believe that, the overwhelming body of evidence, statistically, shows no consistent conclusive evidence. So, what do you want to believe? That there are one or two pieces of “evidence” to prove “it’s all true”, or that there are thousands of pieces of evidence which have shown no evidence of anything out of the ordinary. This is how conspiracy theory stuff grows; people hang on to the few outliers. ...now when its true, the body of compelling evidence grows over time (see COVID vaccine -> blood clots) and eventually there is enough of a body of evidence that it starts to be compelling. ...but no matter how “smoking gun” your one example is, it does let make it convincing even if it’s true. What we haven’t seen is a growing compelling body of evidence for ufos. That’s fair reason to believe that... > No, you haven’t Yes. I have.