4 ms·

I’m taking a different approach to disclosing UFOs If they did come out and say “ yeah we’ve known for a while” you have to realize that the world economy woul

I’m taking a different approach to disclosing UFOs If they did come out and say “ yeah we’ve known for a while” you have to realize that the world economy would crash. Eventually there would be Instant transportation for everyone and Free energy for everyone That is why disclosure will never happen until the powers that be all die off or something unimaginable happens. My two cents.

throwawaymanbot 3y ago
[dead]
Spk-17 3y ago
[flagged]
- Zetice 3y ago
  Why can't it be that all self reported close encounters are "crazy"?
  - Spk-17 3y ago
    [flagged]
    - 000ooo000 3y ago
      Half the world believes in a man in the sky..
      - Spk-17 3y ago
        [flagged]
    - Zetice 3y ago
      Half the world isn't reporting UFO sightings, only 2%-5% of 50-100 (which is 1-5) monthly are considered "possibly really anomalous" (per the article). Now if you think 1-5 monthly is "too many" to be considered "crazy" people, I've got some bad news...
- skissane 3y ago
  > The number of people you know who have already had close encounters is incredible, it cannot be that they are all crazy, something has to be true How many people in this world claim to have had close encounters with supernatural entities-deities, spirits, angels, demons, ghosts, etc? It cannot be that they are all crazy, something has to be true If you aren’t convinced by that argument, you shouldn’t be convinced by your own, because its logic is the same
  - Loquebantur 3y ago
    ? No, it's not. If you show "uneducated" people wild stuff, they will give even wilder recounts of that experience. That doesn't make the event unreal. Religious or "esoteric" explanations are simply representations in a pre-scientific world view. That doesn't necessarily render the events represented "unscientific" (which people equate to "unreal").
  - etrautmann 3y ago
    You could use this argument to either support or refute all world religions. I don’t understand how you could argue that large numbers of people can’t be wrong (see most of history)
    - s1artibartfast 3y ago
      That is the same point made in the post you are replying to.
- Sai_ 3y ago
  What is this gibberish and how are people replying to it as if it is a serious comment that makes complete sense to them? FWIW, I checked spk-17's profile - there's no key or trick mentioned to help the clueless like me decipher this.
  - xk_id 3y ago
    I don't understand, this particular comment doesn't even show up in the comment page for that use profile? It's so bizarre haha. somebody should @ dang and ask edit: I think the sequence of events was this: - user posted a genuine comment - people replied to the original comment - user edited the comment and changed it to that random sequence of letters and digits - replies now appeared out of context - the edited post was flagged in the short time span between me seeing it, and checking the comments page on the user profile (which is why I couldn't see it)
    - Sai_ 3y ago
      Sounds plausible. Didn’t think that the comment was possibly edited after the fact.

throwawaymanbot 3y ago

[dead]

Spk-17 3y ago

[flagged]

Zetice 3y ago
Why can't it be that all self reported close encounters are "crazy"?
- Spk-17 3y ago
  [flagged]
  - 000ooo000 3y ago
    Half the world believes in a man in the sky..
    - Spk-17 3y ago
      [flagged]
  - Zetice 3y ago
    Half the world isn't reporting UFO sightings, only 2%-5% of 50-100 (which is 1-5) monthly are considered "possibly really anomalous" (per the article). Now if you think 1-5 monthly is "too many" to be considered "crazy" people, I've got some bad news...
skissane 3y ago
> The number of people you know who have already had close encounters is incredible, it cannot be that they are all crazy, something has to be true How many people in this world claim to have had close encounters with supernatural entities-deities, spirits, angels, demons, ghosts, etc? It cannot be that they are all crazy, something has to be true If you aren’t convinced by that argument, you shouldn’t be convinced by your own, because its logic is the same
- Loquebantur 3y ago
  ? No, it's not. If you show "uneducated" people wild stuff, they will give even wilder recounts of that experience. That doesn't make the event unreal. Religious or "esoteric" explanations are simply representations in a pre-scientific world view. That doesn't necessarily render the events represented "unscientific" (which people equate to "unreal").
- etrautmann 3y ago
  You could use this argument to either support or refute all world religions. I don’t understand how you could argue that large numbers of people can’t be wrong (see most of history)
  - s1artibartfast 3y ago
    That is the same point made in the post you are replying to.
Sai_ 3y ago
What is this gibberish and how are people replying to it as if it is a serious comment that makes complete sense to them? FWIW, I checked spk-17's profile - there's no key or trick mentioned to help the clueless like me decipher this.
- xk_id 3y ago
  I don't understand, this particular comment doesn't even show up in the comment page for that use profile? It's so bizarre haha. somebody should @ dang and ask edit: I think the sequence of events was this: - user posted a genuine comment - people replied to the original comment - user edited the comment and changed it to that random sequence of letters and digits - replies now appeared out of context - the edited post was flagged in the short time span between me seeing it, and checking the comments page on the user profile (which is why I couldn't see it)
  - Sai_ 3y ago
    Sounds plausible. Didn’t think that the comment was possibly edited after the fact.