Jump to content

Recommended Posts

Posted
18 hours ago, Warcodered said:

I'm sure I'm missing something, but that explanation didn't make complete sense to me, sure it's much smaller than the picture made it look but that doesn't seem like what the issue is.

Yeah. The biggest takeaway here is that Martians are very small. 

 

But let's not underestimate them. We've seen what small Martians can do!

 

Looney Tunes No GIF by Looney Tunes World of Mayhem

Scheming Area 51 GIF

Posted

https://www.cbsnews.com/news/ufo-hearing-congress-pentagon-watch-live-stream-today-2022-05-17/

 

Washington — A House panel held the first public congressional hearing on unidentified flying objects in more than half a century on Tuesday, with top Pentagon officials saying the number of "unidentified aerial phenomena" (UAP) reported by pilots and service members had grown to about 400. 

Under Secretary of Defense for Intelligence and Security Ronald Moultrie and Deputy Director of Naval Intelligence Scott Bray testified before a House subcommittee about how the Defense Department is organizing reports of UAPs after a congressionally mandated report released last year found most of the incidents analyzed remain unidentified. 

Rep. André Carson, a Democrat of Indiana and the chairman of the House Intelligence Subcommittee on Counterintelligence, Counterterrorism, and Counterproliferation, opened the hearing by saying UAPs "are a potential national security threat, and they need to be treated that way."

 

 

Posted
4 hours ago, Tiberius said:

https://www.cbsnews.com/news/ufo-hearing-congress-pentagon-watch-live-stream-today-2022-05-17/

 

Washington — A House panel held the first public congressional hearing on unidentified flying objects in more than half a century on Tuesday, with top Pentagon officials saying the number of "unidentified aerial phenomena" (UAP) reported by pilots and service members had grown to about 400. 

Under Secretary of Defense for Intelligence and Security Ronald Moultrie and Deputy Director of Naval Intelligence Scott Bray testified before a House subcommittee about how the Defense Department is organizing reports of UAPs after a congressionally mandated report released last year found most of the incidents analyzed remain unidentified. 

Rep. André Carson, a Democrat of Indiana and the chairman of the House Intelligence Subcommittee on Counterintelligence, Counterterrorism, and Counterproliferation, opened the hearing by saying UAPs "are a potential national security threat, and they need to be treated that way."

 

 

I saw snippets of this garbage fest.  Artifacts of drones, a complete load of hoo hah that I’m sure the charlatan politicians from all across the political spectrum can figure out a way to monetize and create some new graft.

 

They don’t exist.  

Posted
12 minutes ago, 4merper4mer said:

I saw snippets of this garbage fest.  Artifacts of drones, a complete load of hoo hah that I’m sure the charlatan politicians from all across the political spectrum can figure out a way to monetize and create some new graft.

 

They don’t exist.  

 

Thank goodness we have your infinite wisdom to rely upon to tell us all things true. So many people on this tiny planet don’t know everything, but we have you to count on! Oh, how blessed we are!!! 

  • Haha (+1) 2
Posted
1 hour ago, Augie said:

 

Thank goodness we have your infinite wisdom to rely upon to tell us all things true. So many people on this tiny planet don’t know everything, but we have you to count on! Oh, how blessed we are!!! 

I don’t know everything nor do I make any such claim.  I do know congresscritters create narratives to dupe the public and skim off the top.  I also know that the notion of UFOs is nonsensical and refuted by math.

Posted
6 minutes ago, Augie said:

I admit I chuckled about “your math”.  Got me there! 

Which is more likely?  Aliens flying from who knows how many trillions of miles to Earth, knowing how to navigate the galaxy, having never given off radio signals from their home in their entire history, not wanting to be known and having the technology to get here but not the technology to hide from humans and getting caught on a regular basis……or……congresspeople using trumped up crap to create power and wealth for themselves?

Posted
3 minutes ago, 4merper4mer said:

Which is more likely?  Aliens flying from who knows how many trillions of miles to Earth, knowing how to navigate the galaxy, having never given off radio signals from their home in their entire history, not wanting to be known and having the technology to get here but not the technology to hide from humans and getting caught on a regular basis……or……congresspeople using trumped up crap to create power and wealth for themselves?

UFOs does not automatically equal Aliens.

 

5 minutes ago, 4merper4mer said:

having never given off radio signals from their home in their entire history

This is a terrible argument, I've already pointed out how incredibly tiny the area where our signals could have gone in our entire history of putting them out, the same applies for anyone else.

Posted
6 minutes ago, 4merper4mer said:

Which is more likely?  Aliens flying from who knows how many trillions of miles to Earth, knowing how to navigate the galaxy, having never given off radio signals from their home in their entire history, not wanting to be known and having the technology to get here but not the technology to hide from humans and getting caught on a regular basis……or……congresspeople using trumped up crap to create power and wealth for themselves?

 

“Likely” is a real word. “Positively” is another real word. They do not mean the same thing, no matter how much you want them to. 

Posted
6 minutes ago, Warcodered said:

1. UFOs does not automatically equal Aliens.

 

2. This is a terrible argument, I've already pointed out how incredibly tiny the area where our signals could have gone in our entire history of putting them out, the same applies for anyone else.

1. Agreed.  
 

2.  But they beat their signals here with physical craft?  Ummmm nope.

8 minutes ago, Augie said:

 

“Likely” is a real word. “Positively” is another real word. They do not mean the same thing, no matter how much you want them to. 

It’s not me that’s positive.  It’s math.

Posted (edited)
10 minutes ago, 4merper4mer said:

2.  But they beat their signals here with physical craft?  Ummmm nope.

If they find a way to get from point A to point B faster than light would, absolutely.

Edited by Warcodered
Posted (edited)
11 minutes ago, 4merper4mer said:

1. Agreed.  
 

2.  But they beat their signals here with physical craft?  Ummmm nope.

It’s not me that’s positive.  It’s math.

 

No, it’s you. 

 

You just have a poor grasp of math. 

 

Zero is one thing. Anything else is everything else. That’s a lot. 

 

 

.

Edited by Augie
  • Haha (+1) 1
Posted (edited)
18 minutes ago, Warcodered said:

If they find a way to get from point A to point B faster than light would, absolutely.

More holes in that than in a Swiss cheese factory.  

Edited by 4merper4mer
Posted
3 minutes ago, 4merper4mer said:

More holes in that than in a Swiss cheese factory.  

There's one hole so I'm not sure how they get into and out of their cheese factories in Switzerland.

Posted
On 5/17/2022 at 10:02 PM, Warcodered said:

There's one hole so I'm not sure how they get into and out of their cheese factories in Switzerland.

I’ll reword to “within a factory that produces Swiss cheese”.  
 

All of a sudden your a stickler for grammar? How about being a stickler for math too?

  • Dislike 1
Posted
8 minutes ago, 4merper4mer said:

I’ll reword to “within a factory that produces Swiss cheese”.  
 

All of a sudden your a stickler for grammar? How about being a stickler for math too?

That doesn't change anything there was still only one hole so anything with less would be 0.

Posted
3 hours ago, Warcodered said:

That doesn't change anything there was still only one hole so anything with less would be 0.

Wouldn't have to be zero.  Anything less than 1 is "less than 1."

 

Like .75 for example.

 

Or .9937, or tons of other values.

 

 

Posted
25 minutes ago, Nextmanup said:

Wouldn't have to be zero.  Anything less than 1 is "less than 1."

 

Like .75 for example.

 

Or .9937, or tons of other values.

 

 

Why don't you show me .75 holes.

  • Haha (+1) 1

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Restore formatting

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

Loading...
×
×
  • Create New...