The US government is holding a historic UFO hearing this week. Here's how to watch

Dec 15, 2019
57
28
4,560
Visit site
About 70 years too late, but sure, I'll watch the recap.

The most entertaining thing about these developments will be the spectacular routine of mental gymnastics on display as skeptics scramble to clarify that they "knew the whole time" that there was something to all these UFO reports. Luckily, we have a lengthy public record of their endless ridicule, scorn and minimization of the issue, which reveals quite a different reality.

While the 18 intelligence agencies the U.S. proudly claims as its own surely carry their share of the blame for delaying serious examination of the UFO topic through their tireless obfuscation, it is ultimately the pompous, condescending members of the scientific community--and their legions of defenders of the status quo--who most deserve our derision.

Can you image how much further along the discussion would be if typical mainstream UFO pseudo-skepticism didn't pervade almost every major media outlet and institute of higher learning? I'm not talking about reasonable critical thinking about this or that particular UFO case. I mean the blanket denial of hundreds or thousands of reports from credible witnesses swept under the rug because of an inability to accept that humans may not reside on the top rung of the cosmic ladder.

Let's hope thing change at least a little after tomorrow's hearing.
 
Jul 26, 2023
3
0
10
Visit site
About 70 years too late, but sure, I'll watch the recap.

The most entertaining thing about these developments will be the spectacular routine of mental gymnastics on display as skeptics scramble to clarify that they "knew the whole time" that there was something to all these UFO reports. Luckily, we have a lengthy public record of their endless ridicule, scorn and minimization of the issue, which reveals quite a different reality.

While the 18 intelligence agencies the U.S. proudly claims as its own surely carry their share of the blame for delaying serious examination of the UFO topic through their tireless obfuscation, it is ultimately the pompous, condescending members of the scientific community--and their legions of defenders of the status quo--who most deserve our derision.

Can you image how much further along the discussion would be if typical mainstream UFO pseudo-skepticism didn't pervade almost every major media outlet and institute of higher learning? I'm not talking about reasonable critical thinking about this or that particular UFO case. I mean the blanket denial of hundreds or thousands of reports from credible witnesses swept under the rug because of an inability to accept that humans may not reside on the top rung of the cosmic ladder.

Let's hope thing change at least a little after tomorrow's hearing.
I believe it will yet again be a Huge Giant Nothing Burger 🍔 with the Wrong Sauce and No Cheese.
Hyped and marketed by the same wastrel band of UFO grifters who sell bottles of Alien-oil for $$$, clicks and views.
Will be rife with stories and provide no evidence, names, or locations.
I trust no one to disclose UFO/alien history and information that uses the coverup term UAP under the guys of it being a "more inclusive term".
None the less, I will watch, bc nothing is as cool as a guy drinking coffee in his underwear, watching a congressional hearing about Aliens 👽🛸....👁️👃👁️
 
Jul 26, 2023
3
0
10
Visit site
I believe it will yet again be a Huge Giant Nothing Burger 🍔 with the Wrong Sauce and No Cheese.
Hyped and marketed by the same wastrel band of UFO grifters who sell bottles of Alien-oil for $$$, clicks and views.
Will be rife with stories and provide no evidence, names, or locations.
I trust no one to disclose UFO/alien history and information that uses the coverup term UAP under the guys of it being a "more inclusive term".
None the less, I will watch, bc nothing is as cool as a guy drinking coffee in his underwear, watching a congressional hearing about Aliens 👽🛸....👁️👃👁️
And it looks like I was correct... A huge underwhelming monstrosity of a Nothing Burger, filled with UFO grift, and devoid of names, locations, programs, specifics, or evidence.... But extra "Stories" on the side...Bucket size
 
Mar 31, 2020
146
28
4,610
Visit site
Thank you to the brave souls reporting at todays hearing. Please watch if you have not done so already.
Misdirection revealed. The crack in the glass ceiling has allowed the truth to start seeping through.
Spacecrafts with advanced technology beyond earth's capability have been observed numerous times. As they said at the hearing. History has been made today. This is confirmation that intelligent lifeforms are observing us. Only 5% of those observing the sightings report them.
 
Dec 15, 2019
57
28
4,560
Visit site
Instead of dog and pony shows like this, watch Steven Greer's disclosure videos. There are at least 600 witnesses there, many of whom name names and places.

The main problem with this scenario is NOT that there aren't credible witnesses, whose testimony would hold up in a court of law, but that the mass media does virtually no investigative reporting on this topic. It's all Barbie, celebrity breakups and pretty-white-girls-gone-missing.

I don't think it was a total Nothing Burger, but without serious follow-up by mass media and academia, it's not likely to rock many boats.
 
The burden of proof in law is about the same as in science, "beyond reasonable doubt". Science formalizes that as "repeatable at five nines".

The problem with UFO testimony is there are HUGE benefits to "making it all up" and NO downside since no one can ever prove something did not exist. You can make big money off of this. Get fame and publicity. Testify before Congress. Reasonable people look at this and say: "Wait a minute!! I need more than that, I have a reasonable doubt".

In the case of verifying the extraterrestrial origin of "some thing" we need a physical piece of it. A fingernail clipping or matchbook cover would be fine. We can do an isotopic analysis on it and tell, with absolute certainty, it is ET. We can tell you how far from the Sun it formed, and if from outside the Solar System we can tell you which Solar System it came from. If of Earthly orgin, we can tell you which mine the metal came out of.
 
Dec 15, 2019
57
28
4,560
Visit site
All
The burden of proof in law is about the same as in science, "beyond reasonable doubt". Science formalizes that as "repeatable at five nines".
Our judicial system is built largely on the testimony of credible witnesses, not physical evidence. The "case" for UFO reality is no different. In the hearing Grusch said he interviewed 40 people, including first hand sources, and they corroborated his claims. There are literally hundreds of government contractors and others with high clearances who have been saying the same thing for decades. People familiar with this voluminous body of evidence understand that we have surpassed the "beyond reasonable doubt" standard long ago.

By the way, very few scientific disciplines require, let alone achieve 99.999% certainty. This standard only applies to manufacturing or highly physical sciences. Are you suggesting subjects like medicine or sociology aren't real science? The UFO problem is likely a complicated mix of multiple hard and soft sciences, so setting a bar that high is unreasonable. Most people agree that if dozens of witnesses corroborate a basic truth that puts their careers (or even lives) at risk, those witnesses should be taken seriously.

The absence of a craft or alien body on public display doesn't prove anything other than that the military-industrial complex is good at using the trillion dollars it gets every year to compartmentalize evidence that threatens "national security."

The problem with UFO testimony is there are HUGE benefits to "making it all up" and NO downside since no one can ever prove something did not exist. You can make big money off of this. Get fame and publicity. Testify before Congress. Reasonable people look at this and say: "Wait a minute!! I need more than that, I have a reasonable doubt".
I don't see all these people making lucrative livings off of making stuff up about UFOs. What I do see is 700 or so ex- and current military, law enforcement or defense contractor employees in the Disclosure Project risking their careers and reputations on bringing things to light that they know are either illegal or paradigm busting, or both. Grusch and the others in the hearing today are taking huge risks. They're not making big paydays.
In the case of verifying the extraterrestrial origin of "some thing" we need a physical piece of it. A fingernail clipping or matchbook cover would be fine. We can do an isotopic analysis on it and tell, with absolute certainty, it is ET. We can tell you how far from the Sun it formed, and if from outside the Solar System we can tell you which Solar System it came from. If of Earthly orgin, we can tell you which mine the metal came out of.
Sure. Then join the rest of us and demand that congress and the mass media follow up on all the allegations made by Grusch and others and go investigate their claims with the powers vested in them as representatives of government and the free press.
 
I am all for the government releasing whatever it knows. As taxpayers we own that information. If it leads to a physical piece of an ET vehicle then, great. It will be the greatest discovery ever. Meanwhile all of the "expert testimony" out there is nothing but words. They might be telling a truthful story about ET or they might be foisting on us a huge pile of baloney. Something that cannot be disproven. You can't prove someone didn't see something.
On the other hand it is trivially easy to verify ET origin. If there are so many ET vehicles then where is a piece of one? First one there gets a Nobel Prize.
 
Mar 31, 2020
146
28
4,610
Visit site
Yesterdays hearing was historical. The witnesses were very credible and mentioned they receive nothing for being 'whistleblowers.' We can all look forward to more testimony, as well as evidence in the future. We can now all turn the page in the understanding of this topic. The important event is the testimony being allowed to be shared with the public. This is the tip of the iceberg. As most of us suspected Intelligent lifeforms are observing us.
They do not wish to be discovered. They do not wish to contact us.
The reasons why are speculative in nature.
Humanity is dangerous. We have not yet evolved to be anything beyond separate tribes. War and poverty plague us. We do not take care of our planet, or our own. We must learn to integrate ideologies. Care for the most vulnerable among us, and our world. Come together as one race. The human race. In the future we may select a world leader from amongst our current leaders to run human affairs. Only time will tell.
Meanwhile, they are watching. You may not like it, but it is happening.
 
Dec 15, 2019
57
28
4,560
Visit site
I am all for the government releasing whatever it knows. As taxpayers we own that information. If it leads to a physical piece of an ET vehicle then, great. It will be the greatest discovery ever. Meanwhile all of the "expert testimony" out there is nothing but words. They might be telling a truthful story about ET or they might be foisting on us a huge pile of baloney. Something that cannot be disproven. You can't prove someone didn't see something.
On the other hand it is trivially easy to verify ET origin. If there are so many ET vehicles then where is a piece of one? First one there gets a Nobel Prize.
Why are you putting "expert testimony" in quotes? These are experts. And they are giving testimony. And of course testimony is "words." That's literally the definition of it. Grusch and the others are indeed expert witnesses by any definition of the term.

In any case, demanding that one witness, or a dozen of them, bring out physical evidence of ET, when it's clearly the most closely guarded secret in the history of the world, is a tad unrealistic. What's he going to do, hitch the craft to his pickup truck and drive it out of Hangar 18? LOL.

The whole point of the hearings is to pinpoint where the evidence is and who is hiding it and under what authority. Grusch and Greer and others who have been trying to crack the seal on this thing for decades say the entire operation is illegal and anti-American. Why not get on board with it and ask your representatives what the hell they're doing about it rather than waiting around for someone to sneak out an alien candy wrapper?

Above all, watch the hearings and make a judgment about whether follow up is needed. I've never seen congresspeople so invested in a subject. They're past making quips about little green men. These men and women know there's something of crucial importance to uncover here and they're finally doing something about it.
 
Where I used to work, an "expert" was anyone who flew in from out of town. I've learned to take this poorly defined word with a grain of salt. It means nothing to me.
I am all for the government disclosing whatever they know. It is the job of Congress to get to the bottom of it. They are in the process of doing it. Me personally, I have no interest in trying to prove the existence of ET. I think they are out there, just too far away to have any interest in us. I am a big fan of SETI, sent them money once. As for ET here on Earth, I will wait for the candy wrapper.
 
Dec 15, 2019
57
28
4,560
Visit site
Where I used to work, an "expert" was anyone who flew in from out of town. I've learned to take this poorly defined word with a grain of salt. It means nothing to me.
I am all for the government disclosing whatever they know. It is the job of Congress to get to the bottom of it. They are in the process of doing it. Me personally, I have no interest in trying to prove the existence of ET. I think they are out there, just too far away to have any interest in us. I am a big fan of SETI, sent them money once. As for ET here on Earth, I will wait for the candy wrapper.
Have you watched the hearing? If not, why not? Have you already made up your mind until you're hand delivered physical proof? That's a tenuous position at best. But we all have our way of dealing with this topic.

It's very clear to those of us who have been reading about this subject, viewing UFO/UAP imagery, and listening to the testimony of experts across disciplines for decades that not only are UFOs a non-prosaic phenomena demanding our immediate attention, but "ET" is here now, not light years away. This understanding is going to be a tremendous shock to scientists, educators and leaders alike when they finally grasp the reality of the situation. The less prepared we are as a species, the greater the turmoil we'll experience when we have to grapple with our true place in the cosmos (i.e. not at the top of the cosmic ladder).

I suggest those of you still in the gray area of acceptance start reading some of the more even handed researchers like Richard Dolan or Timothy Good. Also check out Steven Greer's Disclosure Project witnesses on YouTube.
 
When "testimony" is that somebody else who you won't name told you something, that is not "expert".

if somebody comes out and says "When I was working on Project [whatever] I analyzed the biological remains found in a crashed space craft, and determined that they were from another plant by performing {several proper tests], and those remains are now stored {exact location]," then there will be something to follow up on.

Whistle-blower testimony is not "expert" testimony, and still needs sufficient specifics to allow somebody to follow up with the actual people involved.
 
  • Like
Reactions: billslugg
I have not watched the hearings. I have no interest in testimony. I will not help the effort to find ET here on Earth. I believe it's a massive waste of time. I've heard enough talk. Read/listened/watched everything I could find about ET for half a century and all they do is go in circles. I've had it up to here. Talk is cheap. If the testimony leads to a chunk of a UFO, great. Physical evidence talks, testimony walks.

And this is the great dichotomy. Proving ET would be the greatest news story in the last 2000 years. The first person to prove it would become famous and wealthy. All it takes to conclusively prove it is an ET fingernail clipping or matchbook cover. Thousands upon thousands of people have seen ET, been on ET craft, operated upon by ET, been on ET planets, our government has them in cold storage. Yet NEVER has a single one of them come back with so much as a fleck of lint. I can't rule out ET visitation but I'm not holding my breath.

Current mantra from the believers:
"We have experienced ET visitation and we will produce a physical sample."

Translation:
"Shoulda' been here yesterday, check's in the mail, free beer tomorrow."
 
Last edited:
Dec 15, 2019
57
28
4,560
Visit site
When "testimony" is that somebody else who you won't name told you something, that is not "expert".

if somebody comes out and says "When I was working on Project [whatever] I analyzed the biological remains found in a crashed space craft, and determined that they were from another plant by performing {several proper tests], and those remains are now stored {exact location]," then there will be something to follow up on.

Whistle-blower testimony is not "expert" testimony, and still needs sufficient specifics to allow somebody to follow up with the actual people involved.
So you didn't watch the hearings, I guess. Because Grusch says he interviewed 40 witnesses, including several first-hand, who have project names, locations and dates. Congress members vowed that they will convene the Special Compartmented Information Facilities (SCIFs) in which such top secret subjects are be discussed. Whether they will tell you or me about it is another matter. I'm guessing they won't. But that doesn't mean it's not real.
 
Dec 15, 2019
57
28
4,560
Visit site
I have not watched the hearings. I have no interest in testimony. I will not help the effort to find ET here on Earth. I believe it's a massive waste of time. I've heard enough talk. Read/listened/watched everything I could find about ET for half a century and all they do is go in circles. I've had it up to here. Talk is cheap. If the testimony leads to a chunk of a UFO, great. Physical evidence talks, testimony walks.
Why are you arguing about something you haven't bothered to watch? Kinda silly, if you ask me.

I share your bitterness in not ever being included in whatever these guys do behind the scenes. Blame the military-industrial complex and its trillion dollar per year black budget. They've got the toys and they ain't sharing it with Joe Public.
And this is the great dichotomy. Proving ET would be the greatest news story in the last 2000 years. The first person to prove it would become famous and wealthy. All it takes to conclusively prove it is an ET fingernail clipping or matchbook cover. Thousands upon thousands of people have seen ET, been on ET craft, operated upon by ET, been on ET planets, our government has them in cold storage. Yet NEVER has a single one of them come back with so much as a fleck of lint. I can't rule out ET visitation but I'm not holding my breath.
I think you're oversimplifying how easy it would be to prove an ET origin for anything short of an actual alien body or ET craft fabricated elsewhere. Almost any anomalous chemical or biological material can be dismissed (and has been multiple times) as fakery. Even isotope ratios and genetic material can be altered. If you're a disbeliever you will find a way to dismiss or ignore anomalous material. The idea that anyone inside the MIC is going to willingly parade out an alien body or UFO for public consumption is wishful thinking, in my opinion.
 
I am not arguing about the specifics of the testimony. Testimony is irrelevant to me. I have no use for testimony. My interest piques when someone shows up with a box full of samples. Until then I have no interest.

Isotopic manipulation requires a multi billion $$ separation plant, several hundred acres of land, probably 1,000 employees. Then it would take roughly a year to separate out each desired isotope for later mixing. There are hundreds of isotopes needed. Roughly a century to make a convincing sample. Total cost in the $$ trillions, hundreds of thousands of people involved. This is why I doubt it could be done, practically. It would be "essentially irrefutable".

I will dismiss, out of hand, anything that can possibly be faked. That includes testimony, images, videos, weird DNA. I will accept any sample and dismiss it only if it came from Earth. If the ratios match an ET location, then I'm in. Until then I'm out.
 
Dec 15, 2019
57
28
4,560
Visit site
I am not arguing about the specifics of the testimony. Testimony is irrelevant to me. I have no use for testimony. My interest piques when someone shows up with a box full of samples. Until then I have no interest.

Isotopic manipulation requires a multi billion $$ separation plant, several hundred acres of land, probably 1,000 employees. Then it would take roughly a year to separate out each desired isotope for later mixing. There are hundreds of isotopes needed. Roughly a century to make a convincing sample. Total cost in the $$ trillions, hundreds of thousands of people involved. This is why I doubt it could be done, practically. It would be "essentially irrefutable".

I will dismiss, out of hand, anything that can possibly be faked. That includes testimony, images, videos, weird DNA. I will accept any sample and dismiss it only if it came from Earth. If the ratios match an ET location, then I'm in. Until then I'm out.
Those seem like some pretty unreasonable standards. Our entire judicial system rests on testimony, "expert" and otherwise. In the vast number of cases we have to make a judgment about whether something reflects consensus reality without benefit of "a box full of samples." Maybe O.J.'s glove meets your criteria, but I can't image how we'd ever know whether material with an anomalous isotope ratio matches an "ET location," so your standard isn't just unreasonable...it sounds impossible to achieve.

I guess the good thing is that when we get to the point where ET is freely flying in the skies above your house, and we are actively fighting a space war again alien invaders, you can continue to not care about it, as it could all just be in the minds of the believers! Tongue in cheek, of course.
 
Our judicial system has a group of 12 reasonable persons making a guilty decision beyond a reasonable doubt. Science also has a group of reasonable persons who reach conclusions also beyond a reasonable doubt. But science has sometimes better methods, and if available must be insisted upon. Laser ablation mass spectroscopy is easy to do and answers the question definitively.

I care about consensus, that of scientists reporting in peer reviewed articles.

I do care if ET shows up at Earth. I'll believe it when I see it.

We have an extensive database of isotopic signatures from direct examination of Earth rocks and Moon rocks. We have meteorites that match with various asteroids, thus a map of the Solar System. We use spectroscopy of the light from the stars in our neighborhood to measure their isotopic abundances.

BTW - OJ's glove may have met your criteria but I know it was leather that had set for years after being blood soaked and it shrank several sizes. Plus he is an actor. His trade is to convince people something fake is true.
 
Dec 15, 2019
57
28
4,560
Visit site
I have no doubt every possible verification of ET material has been done already. The problem is that it's hidden away in illegal Special Access Projects that 99.999% (there's your five-nines) of us will never see. So you'll likely be waiting a long time before someone delivers you a peer reviewed paper proving UFOs are a non-trivial phenomenon.

The point of the hearing(s) is not to prove anything is alien. It's to prove that data, observations and, possibly, craft and pilots are being covered up by a "shadow government" that consists of an illegal amalgam of intelligence agencies, defense contractors and quasi-governmental entities. Once we prove the existence of that group beyond a shadow of a doubt, something that's already been done, it becomes much easier to accept what hundreds of witnesses say: UFOs are non-prosaic and many are likely extraterrestrial, if not inter-dimensional.
 
And, in legal terms, "habeas corpus" ("where is the body")? This strategy of comparing testimony at a Congressional hearing to criminal law is ridiculous. And, having been a juror more than once, I am not very confident even in the judicial system. So, none of those arguments here are compelling for me.
 
"...it becomes much easier to accept what hundreds of witnesses say: UFOs are non-prosaic and many are likely extraterrestrial, if not inter-dimensional." - Robotron

It might be easier for you to accept. Speak for yourself. I take the entire historial record of UFO testimony, every single image, and toss it into the trash. I want hard evidence.

There is no such thing as "interdimensional".
 
"...it becomes much easier to accept what hundreds of witnesses say: UFOs are non-prosaic and many are likely extraterrestrial, if not inter-dimensional." - Robotron

It might be easier for you to accept. Speak for yourself. I take the entire historial record of UFO testimony, every single image, and toss it into the trash. I want hard evidence.

There is no such thing as "interdimensional".
I must disagree, Bill. All the possible -- and passable (most especially the 'quantum') -- dimensionalities existing between 'multi-dimensional' universe and 'Flatland' universe. Those toy size UFOs flitting around here could easily be as big as aircraft carriers -- or even enormously bigger -- in some other [temporarily] quantum entangling-like SPACE and/or TIME.

Stephen Hawking dealt in exactly the same information, the same entity, existing inter-dimensionally both inside and outside the horizon of a black hole at exactly the same time . . . going in two different directions in the Mirror (in fact exactly two ways (+/-) the same direction but observed equally but oppositely (+/-) different), of course. If they're travelers, being one and the same traveler, and turn around into the horizon, into the Mirror...! Who knows.
 
Last edited:
Yeah, sorta. There could be hidden dimensions we don't know about and cannot see. Anyone claiming them as the explanation for their pet theory could never be proven wrong. This is a great deal for the theorist.
 
Last edited:
  • Like
Reactions: Atlan0001