4 ms·
Possibly not. But this narrative has been around for a lot longer than social media. Current technology certainly accelerates the spread of it, but people have
by King-Aaron 3y ago
Possibly not. But this narrative has been around for a lot longer than social media. Current technology certainly accelerates the spread of it, but people have been discussing this topic since the literal dark ages.
- mc32 3y agoPeople have been discussing all kinds of things since the dark ages. Should the military consider astrology when making war plans and battle plans too cuz some people did and still make decisions based on astrology?
- King-Aaron 3y agoI understand you're being facetious, but if the military had visual and sensor data of a foreign power entering their airspace due to astrology, then the answer would likely be "probably".
- Communitivity 3y agoDuring World War 2 the British consulted astrologers as part of their planning process. Not because they believed the astrology predictions, but because Hitler did and was known to have astrology influence his attack plans.
- mc32 3y agoThat's a cool anecdote and makes sense if you're trying to meet him at his level... So what purpose does pursuing a belief in UFOs have? Are China and Russia gonna be like, what, UFOS?! Let's waste money studying something we have no evidence for!
- King-Aaron 3y agoThere is evidence, however, which is why the government is studying it.
- kube-system 3y agoThere's also a reason the government calls them 'phenomenon' and not 'objects' and not 'aliens'. The reason the government is interested is not because they think there are aliens, it's because their job is to know what is in the sky and understand their sensor readings. It doesn't really matter if it's China, aliens, a lens flare, or a kid with a drone. The military should be able to know what is in the sky.
- King-Aaron 3y agoThat's it. It would be far better to know if it's some feedback in our sensors rather than Chinese hypersonic drones. I find it concerning that so many people want to just dismiss this off-hand when clearly the military considers it something to be worth looking into.
- kube-system 3y agoThe part that is worth dismissing is the immediate jump to aliens. This topic is really a sensor data analysis discussion, not a conspiracy theory convention.
- mc32 3y agoWhy does the government not just say that? Hey, our instruments are having errors/artifacts and we want to fix it AND also dismiss any suggestion of alien craft --but, no, they go along with the most unlikely scenario. Are they looking to look stupid?
- kube-system 3y agoBecause it would be dumb to publicly acknowledge any specifics of their weaknesses to their enemies. It's not the military's job to placate conspiracy theorists. It's their job to counter foreign threats.
- 3y ago
- halfcat 3y ago> Are China and Russia gonna be like, what, UFOS?! Let's waste money studying something we have no evidence for! Yes. That’s exactly what happens. [1] “In 1970 United States intelligence sources believed that the Soviet Union was spending 60 million roubles annually on "psychotronic" research. In response to claims that the Soviet program had produced results, the CIA initiated funding for a new program known as SCANATE ("scan by coordinate") in the same year.” That program was funded until 1995. [1] https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Stargate_Project https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Stargate_Project
- RF_Savage 3y agoEverything for an edge over the other side. Some folks just are good at staring at goats.
- jfoutz 3y agoRonald Reagan did, right? Commander in chief did, so for at least a time, they did?
- mrandish 3y agoTrue, but good agit prop leverages existing themes.