this post was submitted on 13 Aug 2022
15 points (100.0% liked)

World News

22026 readers
164 users here now

Breaking news from around the world.

News that is American but has an international facet may also be posted here.


Guidelines for submissions:

These guidelines will be enforced on a know-it-when-I-see-it basis.


For US News, see the US News community.


This community's icon was made by Aaron Schneider, under the CC-BY-NC-SA 4.0 license.

founded 2 years ago
MODERATORS
you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
[–] w_ortiz@beehaw.org 15 points 2 years ago (1 children)
  1. Are sufficiently technologically advanced that they’re clearly not from our Earth

As much as I want to believe (!), govs don't acknowledge that. If it's not plasma or optical phenomenon like Hessdalen lights, then there's a chance it's something else, but nothing says it's clearly not from our earth.

[–] idle_american@lemmy.ml 1 points 2 years ago (1 children)

I remember a viral video that went around where a US general pretty explicitly said it's "not terrestrial technology" or something along those lines. But you're right, that also leaves open the explanation that it is terrestrial, just not technological, so I guess they haven't explicitly admitted that. I also remembered the government had said that UAPs had played with and disabled, then reenabled US nuclear infrastructure in a way that seemed intentional during the Cold War, but I looked it up and that claim only comes from one guy who used to direct the DOD's UAP observation program, not speaking on behalf of the government. Still, the way that they react to our aircraft pretty cleanly eliminates for me the idea that there's a non-technological explanation for all of them.

[–] sexy_peach@feddit.de 4 points 2 years ago (1 children)

I remember a viral video that went around where a US general pretty explicitly said it’s “not terrestrial technology” or something along those lines.

well that for sure is proof then xD

[–] admin@beehaw.org 0 points 2 years ago (3 children)

What type of proof do you require?

[–] Whom@beehaw.org 8 points 2 years ago

Any would be a start.

[–] sci@feddit.nl 6 points 1 year ago (1 children)

something more than someone saying "i saw a viral video"

[–] CmdrShepard@lemmy.one 4 points 1 year ago (1 children)

This post is 11 months old just FYI.

[–] sci@feddit.nl 4 points 1 year ago

oh, lmao. lemmy things

[–] sexy_peach@feddit.de 1 points 2 years ago

any good reason why I should believe. Just an off sentence isn't much.