this post was submitted on 31 Aug 2023
-4 points (33.3% liked)
UAP - The Most Active Community Discussing UAP/UFOs
1250 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 keep coming back to the same line of reasoning. If it's all baseless and there is nothing to this, why are we seeing very specific wording in legislation?
In today's politics, where everything is partisan, one would think that a fabricated story would follow the same trend. Yet, this issue is currently the most bipartisan.
Corbell and Knapp have been active in this area for quite some time. Like all individuals, they have their own goals, aspirations, and motivations. For the most part, their statements have proven accurate. George is notably cautious with his choice of words and has a more pessimistic view on disclosure, possibly due to his three decades of experience in the field. In contrast, Corbell comes across as more audacious.
I simply can't understand the animosity towards either of them. At the very least, they are taking action.
Ok, thanks for saying this, I'm glad I'm not the only one.
If it wasn't for the congressional hearing, the legislation, and my own personal experience I would definitely be much more cautious about putting my faith in them. I'm still reserved as it is, because of the historic roller coaster nature of government inquiries and attempts to bring disclosure.
Since we're talking, I'll put on the tinfoil hat. It feels to me, without proof, like a significant event is on the horizon and there's a faction who wants as much time to prepare people psychologically as possible while there's another faction who wants to keep people from learning "the truth" for as long as possible. This event is likely a couple of years off, but I can imagine sightings and other interactions will become increasingly common leading up to it.
In my whimsical moments I imagine that "giant ships hovering over major cities" type of event happening and how the world would change. It's also interesting to think of the entire planet receiving a telepathic download at the same time: "Be sure to drink your Ovaltine". :)
You're definitely not the only one!
It's an interesting thought and one that is speculated by some in the topic.
It would be interesting to see if we can come together as a species if we all simultaneously realized how pointless these conflicts were.
That's really my dream.
A realization that we have built the world we live in and could build a different world of we wanted to.
There is generational trauma that prevents a lot of people from trusting others enough to even believe this is possible.
If we could see an example of it and learn from it, with a little help from tech that makes resource conflicts meaningless, we might get there.
I don't think a threat narrative will accomplish this. That will make us pull deeper into a fear based hierarchy that would be even more likely to result in conflict.
This is why I like to stick to fact based understanding of the phenomenon; my mind really tends to wander into the speculation. Fun but not necessarily productive. :)
Part of where I'm stuck with The Phenomenon is the manipulation. I have to be careful and cognizant of my speculation about what it is and what it wants. I believe it is guiding us in a certain direction.
What I don't know is whether that direction is beneficial to us, to it, or to both of us. That is what is unsettling.