this post was submitted on 09 May 2024
74 points (91.1% liked)
UAP - The Most Active Community Discussing UAP/UFOs
1239 readers
1 users here now
A community for civil discourse related to Unidentified Anomalous Phenomena. Share your sightings, experiences, news, and investigations. Everyone is welcome here, from believers to skeptics and everything in between.
New to Lemmy?
See the Getting Started Guide
Want Disclosure?
Declassify UAP offers a tool that automatically finds your representatives and sends them a prewritten message.
Community Spotlight
Featured Posts and User Investigations
Useful Links
- UAP Guide
- Disclosure Diaries
- UAP Timeline
- UFOs Wiki
- MUFON - Mutual UFO Network
- Investigate a Sighting
- Report a Sighting
Community Rules
- Follow the Code of Conduct.
- Posts must be on-topic.
- No duplicate posts.
- No commercial activity.
- No memes.
- Titles must accurately represent the content of the submission.
- Link posts must include a submission statement (comment on your own post).
- Common Question posts must include a link to the previous question thread if previously asked.
- Low effort, toxic comments regarding public figures may be removed.
- Off-topic political discussion may be removed at moderator discretion.
Other Communities
If you're interested in moderating or have any suggestions for the community, feel free to contact SignullGone or HM05_Me.
founded 1 year ago
MODERATORS
you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
view the rest of the comments
I still remain logically skeptical and also want hard evidence, but a lot of what you say doesn't make any sense.
He went under oath as a whistleblower. Book writing and doing this as a cash grab makes absolutely zero sense. If he's lying or making shit up, he's toast. He seems to know and follow the law way too well for some fancy grift.
The entire reason he's not "showing evidence" is because it's all classified and he'll be crucified. You know this, which means you are being deliberately disingenuous.
Imo he's done his job. The ball is now in the court of our ridiculously flawed and corrupt government. Why don't they grab all the 40 people Grusch interviewed? Why don't they forcefully get the answers and evidence Grusch has?
We know. It's classified. Need to know. National security.
People still lie though.
I think this is already the consensus among people who at least didn't believe in UFOs before hearing about him.
Pathologies can be sneaky like that.
You can't know that, you're just wildly guessing. It's a convenient cop-out for bullshitters.
No, I just think he's full of shit, whether he realizes it or not. Until I see some evidence I'm not willing to change my mind.
There are other countries and governments and people of the world. Not a single one has ever shown any credible evidence in the history of ever.
Because I believe it's all made up.
Meh, I'm kinda suspicious of even replying to you as your arguments are really silly, and your probably just a troll, but,
Honestly, what argument are you even making here? If he's lying under oath, severe criminal penalties. His claims are based on evidence he was given by people he investigated/interviewed. You're saying he's lying about it? For what, a book deal? You are very much grasping at straws here.
Zero evidence of "pathologies". All signs point to him being very mentally stable, thus far. You're just making stuff up now.
What are you even talking about? This is what's being reported. I'm only as good as the information I'm given. What you're trying to say is he's lying, he has no info, nothing is classified? You have zero evidence to back up your claim that he's lying.
I only agree with you only that I want hard evidence before I just "believe aliens are here".
Very simply, you don't have evidence "it's all made up". Obviously. Anyway you seem like you're just having fun being the antagonist troll as none of your arguments are compelling.
I find the whole situation interesting and want real answers regardless of the outcome.
If your argument comes down to "you don't have the evidence to prove a negative" that's a pretty strong indicator that your argument is weak. People saying something isn't proof. If one is to make expansive claims there should be evidence to support those claims.
I dont think what you're saying is accurate.
I dont think im asking for this. The poster I'm responding to is making very specific claims. Very definitively, that Grusch is lying, either for a money grab grift in some form, or due to "pathologies". For these specifics I would like some evidence, of which there is none.
If OP would leave it simply at "I don't believe it because I haven't seen enough evidence to convince me", then we would have a lot more in common as I'm in the same boat! I also want to see evidence regardless of which conclusion it leads to.
However, where we differ might be that given all the current info the public has, there is enough to take it seriously and desire more investigation. There's too much now to automatically say it's "absolutely untrue, and all BS and lies."