What if we've been lied to about UFOs?
theguardian.com
theguardian.com
While at first I thought they were covering up some UFO phenomena, I'm increasingly leaning to the belief that there are a lot of people making a lot of money off of bogus UFO research and they don't want it to come to light.
It’s a democracy, mostly.
Its demos [δῆμος] is weakly educated, poisoned by the self-regard of an imperial metropole, and, of course, of average intelligence.
That the officers of government and their priorities reflect this might be seen as a proper operation of the democracy. Garbage in, garbage out.
If that were true, a massive seven decade coverup seems like a lot to go through.
What would Sagan say? "Extraordinary coverups require extraordinary truths."
The article shows the famously debunked "gimbal" video. The rotation of the object is a result of the tracking camera getting close to a robot singularity. What was the unidentified object? The twin engine exhaust of another aircraft.
>People have been seeing unexplainable things in the sky for millennia. While it is easy to dismiss them as hallucinations or flights of fancy, it is much harder to ignore photographs and videos from reputable sources.
The recordings make it even easier to debunk. We have had more cameras than ever and yet we have less evidence of aliens than ever. The "best" evidence is always a video of photo of such a poor quality that anything could be interpreted into it.
While I do agree with your sentiment here, I think the gimbal video has not been debunked as of yet, if we don't include random YouTubers.
> The "best" evidence is always a video of photo of such a poor quality that anything could be interpreted into it.
I think modern military cameras, like the one in the gimbal video, are not that bad in terms of quality. But yes, at this point in time, you have to come up with decent quality video and if possible extra sensors like infrared, radar, and so on to capture the phenomenon. I think it is worth investigating, no matter the outcome, because if something can be observed on multiple sensors (including video), then there is some kind of interference that could potentially expose improvement potentials for the sensors (e.g., to filter out such artifacts or to categorize them correctly).
There are a lot of air forces around the world. Individual not as big and not as much flying as the USA'S three air forces, but together with an awful lot of flight hours and for some air forces the same jets flying with the same or similar sensor packages. And then there is commercial aviation which dwarfs everything else in flight hours.
But for some reason UFO/UAP sightings seem to happen mostly in the US and the US southwest.
Yeah, I'm not convinced, chief. Especially when considering how far back flying saucers have been sighted prior to this whelming research.
Also, this isn't really new concept. Look at this [1] craft from the 50s. If a government was able to do as well as they did back then, I have no reason to think they couldn't do better now.
It's hard to imagine aliens travelling across interstellar space to observe our early-stage civ with a serious expectation of learning from our tech. If you went back to ancient Cartage, or Athens, or Babylon, you might expect to learn a lot of things from them. But would you expect to learn from their tech?
Mind you, those ancient earth civs are merely single-digit-thousands of years behind ours. Given that the universe is billions of years old, it seems unlikely that any visitors would hail from civs which are close enough to us on the "tech tree" to to consider our tech worth serious interest. They could easily be a billion years farther up the tree!