Well well well. Link to detailed testimony from a confirmed top gun veteran, with reliably corroborated, first-hand experience of a well recorded/observed UFO/UAP encounter, and deafening silence from the SF debunker crew results.
You really need to work on your capacity for patience. You may be sitting fuming at your screen all day, but some of us have lives outside of sciforums.
Fravor is the main outspoken guy pushing the alien spacecraft tic tac idea. Clearly, he has realised he is onto a good gig, touring the country and no doubt getting paid to tell his truth over and over again, as breathless UFO enthusiasts clap him on the back and buy him lunch after the presentations.
Being a "confirmed top gun veteran" doesn't mean you can't also be completely barking about a topic like UFOs. Didn't you realise that?
Oh yeah, it does get harder and harder for the debunker/skeptics brigade to keep pushing their 'but you haven't PROVED it!' stupid-as narrative.
No. It would only get harder if you
had proved it. Understand?
You're angry precisely because, unfortunately, you can't
prove any of the conclusions you so desperately wish you could prove. And, at some level, you know it.
And I note the absence of any support from former allies here. Not hard to guess why...
Sooner or later, everybody becomes part of the Grand Conspiracy, don't they, Q-reeus? Trust Nobody. Oh, except the people pushing the conspiracy theories - you should definitely take
their word as Absolute Gospel Truth, all the time. Right?
... - 'hate speech' accusations trigger automatic programmed revulsion reactions.
If you don't want to be accused of hate speech, here's a suggestion: don't post hate speech.
Not too hard. Most people here manage it just fine. What's your problem?
Fravor himself is cautious and believes such 'advanced tech' is way beyond any human capabilities. Thus 'not of this world' in his words.
Why do you trust Fravor? Why are you willing to take at face value everything he believes and/or tells you? Because of his credentials? When it comes to the credentials of skeptics, you place no stock in those. Seems like a clear double standard you have there, to me, but maybe you can explain. Besides, the truth of something like this shouldn't rest on what perceived authority you think somebody does or doesn't have, anyway. What you
really need to do is to
critically evaluate the evidence, but you just don't ever want to do that, do you?
These days, you're as bad as Magical Realist ever was. Almost completely disconnected from the real world.
