politics
Welcome to the discussion of US Politics!
Rules:
- Post only links to articles, Title must fairly describe link contents. If your title differs from the site’s, it should only be to add context or be more descriptive. Do not post entire articles in the body or in the comments.
Links must be to the original source, not an aggregator like Google Amp, MSN, or Yahoo.
Example:
- Articles must be relevant to politics. Links must be to quality and original content. Articles should be worth reading. Clickbait, stub articles, and rehosted or stolen content are not allowed. Check your source for Reliability and Bias here.
- Be civil, No violations of TOS. It’s OK to say the subject of an article is behaving like a (pejorative, pejorative). It’s NOT OK to say another USER is (pejorative). Strong language is fine, just not directed at other members. Engage in good-faith and with respect! This includes accusing another user of being a bot or paid actor. Trolling is uncivil and is grounds for removal and/or a community ban.
- No memes, trolling, or low-effort comments. Reposts, misinformation, off-topic, trolling, or offensive. Similarly, if you see posts along these lines, do not engage. Report them, block them, and live a happier life than they do. We see too many slapfights that boil down to "Mom! He's bugging me!" and "I'm not touching you!" Going forward, slapfights will result in removed comments and temp bans to cool off.
- Vote based on comment quality, not agreement. This community aims to foster discussion; please reward people for putting effort into articulating their viewpoint, even if you disagree with it.
- No hate speech, slurs, celebrating death, advocating violence, or abusive language. This will result in a ban. Usernames containing racist, or inappropriate slurs will be banned without warning
We ask that the users report any comment or post that violate the rules, to use critical thinking when reading, posting or commenting. Users that post off-topic spam, advocate violence, have multiple comments or posts removed, weaponize reports or violate the code of conduct will be banned.
All posts and comments will be reviewed on a case-by-case basis. This means that some content that violates the rules may be allowed, while other content that does not violate the rules may be removed. The moderators retain the right to remove any content and ban users.
That's all the rules!
Civic Links
• Congressional Awards Program
• Library of Congress Legislative Resources
• U.S. House of Representatives
Partnered Communities:
• News
view the rest of the comments
At the end of yesterdays hearing one of the congresspeople asked them if they thought the UAP's were probing our defenses or after our nukes.
The witnesses all said yes.
Now they were being asked to speculate about the unknown, but it is ridiculous to think that a non human probe that has presumably broken the light speed limit wants anything from us. Uranium isn't special. Jets running on dead dinosaurs are not special. If a non human probe is here it is just to study us, it doesn't give a single shit about human tech and resources. The universe is vast and getting resources out of a gravity well is expensive.
Now we could say that they were playing it up for congress and they are likely to get more funding if they pose it as a us vs them problem, but they lost all credibility to me at that point.
That wasn't my take on it. Maybe we are thinking of different scenes in the movie - sorry, different points in the hearing - but I understood the question was "is it POSSIBLE they are a threat" not "do you actively think they are a threat" or whatever. Subtle but super important difference.
We still study chimpanzees, ants, coral, bees, prarie dogs and any number of other social animals.
If you're working from the assumption that the tictacs are aliens then "the Earth and humans aren't interesting" isn't the best of places to stake your claim.
I've been pretty clear over my various posts on this topic that I don't think that this is actual aliens, but whatever it is is something that is worth investigating to improve our understand of science and the universe. And Fravor's main point was that there isn't a good way for pilots to say "I saw weird thing X midflight" without getting exiled to career Siberia over UFO alarmism. So the hope is to set up a centralized data collection and collation center so that the reports can be assembled together, the data looked at with scientific rigor and the science advanced.
Grusch was the one who went full XCOM "they're here and we have the crashed ships and bodies" conspiracy theorist. Without the extraordinary proof that his extraordinary claims require, we can safely ignore him, save for maybe using the UFO nuts to shine some light on the corruption and waste on the black projects he alleges exist outside of congressional control. Yanno, get some of our sprawling secret projects back under command of the actual civilian government like they're ostensibly supposed to be.
Yeah my main takeaway is that there isn't a good method of reporting anomalies. Fravor said on 60 minutes they were ridiculed and the ship played Independence Day, Men in Black, and Signs. To me that's like a navy boat driver running into some weird debris in the water, reporting it, and everyone laughs at them and makes Cthulhu jokes. If there's weird shit out there flying around or floating around friggin report it and investigate, what's the big deal?