HOOSIER GUNZ Posted January 9 Posted January 9 I’ll post this link that Patrick Scott Armstrong posted in his most recent ufo video on his yt channel Vetted. it details Lockheed Martin’s possession of material discovered in the 1950’s. Materials Quote
HOOSIER GUNZ Posted January 10 Posted January 10 Senator Nancy mace said that the government said there are two shapes they cannot explain. And that the government will release more information they can and can’t explain. Quote
evilfacelessturtle Posted January 10 Posted January 10 On 1/7/2025 at 12:50 PM, EvanG said: You actually read it? And so fast? I am proud of you, buddy. Now let me take us back to thursday last week: Still valid. Some people don't believe. Some people do believe. Others (much like myself) are somewhat in the middle and think some of it is plausible. He and I both did exactly what you insisted we would never do, and read the crackpot's so-called evidence... ... and you have no response at all. Quote
HOOSIER GUNZ Posted January 10 Posted January 10 POTUS #47 said yesterday that he will “report” on the “drone sighting” very soon after he takes the Oval Office back! I think he’s going to drop some truth on us? 1 Quote
Fitha_whiskey Posted January 10 Posted January 10 (edited) 53 minutes ago, HOOSIER GUNZ said: POTUS #47 said yesterday that he will “report” on the “drone sighting” very soon after he takes the Oval Office back! I think he’s going to drop some truth on us? I saw where he said that… there was something strange about the way he said it. If he does truly know what is going on with the drones, why not say it now? Edit: I just watched the entire clip. There were also statements by the governors of VA, LA and WY. They said drones are flying over sensitive infrastructure all the time and apparently unstoppable. Listen to Gov Youngkin talking about Quantico naval base in VA. Edited January 10 by Fitha_whiskey Quote
HOOSIER GUNZ Posted January 10 Posted January 10 Yes, there was more to that clip than what the press originally reported. I think the establishment media knows too. I think they’ve been gagged from doing honest reporting? Fitha, I think you’d find Nancy Maces comments last night on timcastirl worth your time? She sits on a couple important committees that seem to show concern about this topic. its always fascinating for folks with security clearances when they get that questioning they’ve not been authorized to answer. 1 Quote
HOOSIER GUNZ Posted January 11 Posted January 11 (edited) Magneto hydrodynamic propulsion “MHD drives could also theoretically propel submarines or ships at high speeds underwater, exceeding the capabilities of traditional propulsion systems, and with a greater manoeuvrability, as the MHD drive could exert force in any direction” 🚀🛸⚓️ https://www.researchgate.net/figure/Principle-of-the-magneto-hydrodynamic-slipstream-accelerator-Source-Goksel-and_fig13_333603261 Edited January 11 by HOOSIER GUNZ 🛸 Quote
Fitha_whiskey Posted January 11 Posted January 11 Some interesting quotes and anecdotes about the “drones” in this article. It just defies logic that a foreign adversary is behind them, and it sounds like military intelligence has drawn that conclusion as well. https://thehill.com/opinion/national-security/5077295-some-of-these-mysterious-drones-are-indeed-ufos-and-should-be-taken-seriously/ Quote
HOOSIER GUNZ Posted January 11 Posted January 11 Fitha, the more I read hear see I’m more and more convinced there is big big news on the way…currently I feel as though all this recent news is like a champagne bottle that’s been shaken up and primed to pop!! Is it NIH or breakthrough tech? Fascinating! Quote
Fitha_whiskey Posted January 11 Posted January 11 38 minutes ago, HOOSIER GUNZ said: Fitha, the more I read hear see I’m more and more convinced there is big big news on the way…currently I feel as though all this recent news is like a champagne bottle that’s been shaken up and primed to pop!! Is it NIH or breakthrough tech? Fascinating! I have to agree… Quote
evilfacelessturtle Posted January 11 Posted January 11 On 1/10/2025 at 8:39 AM, HOOSIER GUNZ said: POTUS #47 said yesterday that he will “report” on the “drone sighting” very soon after he takes the Oval Office back! I think he’s going to drop some truth on us? He said the exact same thing in 2016. Amazing how his supporters keep falling for the same broken promises over and over again. On 1/10/2025 at 10:17 AM, HOOSIER GUNZ said: Yes, there was more to that clip than what the press originally reported. I think the establishment media knows too. I think they’ve been gagged from doing honest reporting? Fitha, I think you’d find Nancy Maces comments last night on timcastirl worth your time? She sits on a couple important committees that seem to show concern about this topic. its always fascinating for folks with security clearances when they get that questioning they’ve not been authorized to answer. Ah yes, don't trust scientists, get your info from Timcast IRL! 😂 Nancy Mace is the establishment's store brand version of Marjorie Taylor Greene. Quote
HOOSIER GUNZ Posted January 12 Posted January 12 Yes! Listen to Tim Pool (IRL, The Culture War, Pop Culture Crisis.) like daily. Great topics! Great guests! Great podcasts! that said “He who smelt it, delt it.” 🐟 Quote
EvanG Posted January 13 Posted January 13 (edited) On 1/10/2025 at 4:46 AM, evilfacelessturtle said: Ah yes, don't trust scientists, get your info from Timcast IRL! 😂 A lot of credible and respected scientists, from Eric W. Davis to nobel prize nominee Garry Nolan (and the list is very long), believe in exactly what you are trying to ridicule. I guess they're all crazy or looking for money too according to you. Quote He and I both did exactly what you insisted we would never do, and read the crackpot's so-called evidence... You went through hundreds of documents or interviews with hundreds of credible whisteblowers and scientists, huh? You read misinformation on wikipedia, that's what your posts in here show. And then you are smug because you act like your claims hold the only truth without any evidence to back it up, and you ridicule those with a different opinion or who are open minded. I haven't seen anyone with an open mind in here act this way. I guess it must be a coincidence that you have been called out on this in both this thread and the politics thread where you also try so hard to argue with everyone with a different opinion. But they're probably all wrong and you're right, hm? Best I will put you on ignore too now because there's no point in replying and that'll prevent me from having to scroll through your long wikipedia posts again if you keep posting in this thread. Edited January 13 by EvanG Quote
EvanG Posted January 13 Posted January 13 That reminds me, interesting interview with Garry Nolan. 1 Quote
SoulMonster Posted January 13 Posted January 13 17 minutes ago, EvanG said: A lot of credible and respected scientists, from Eric W. Davis to nobel prize nominee Garry Nolan (and the list is very long), believe in exactly what you are trying to ridicule. "A lot" makes it seem like it is somewhat accepted among most scientists. "A few" is more correct when considered against the thousands of scientists working in the related fields. And a lot of it is just pseudoscience. Quote
Axls_Moustache_Rules Posted January 13 Posted January 13 3 hours ago, SoulMonster said: "A lot" makes it seem like it is somewhat accepted among most scientists. "A few" is more correct when considered against the thousands of scientists working in the related fields. And a lot of it is just pseudoscience. Can I get your scientific definition of a few please. Also, when does a lot make it seem like it is somewhat accepted. Where are you getting this leap from? 1 Quote
SoulMonster Posted January 13 Posted January 13 (edited) 7 minutes ago, Axls_Moustache_Rules said: Can I get your scientific definition of a few please. Also, when does a lot make it seem like it is somewhat accepted. Where are you getting this leap from? I don't think there is a "scientific definition" of a few. I mean "few" as relative to all the ones who are not endorsing UFO myths. How many are there? A few dozen scientists who have gone on public stating they believe we have been visited by aliens? And compared to thousands of scientists working within astrophysics and related disciplines who have never supported any UFO conspiracy theories. People in this thread keep trying to make it seem like UFO theories have widespread scientific support - far from it. It's the classical, "I don't really have any evidence supporting my beliefs, but look here, he's a scientists who agrees with me! And here's one more! There are many of them! I must be correct!" Edited January 13 by SoulMonster 1 Quote
HOOSIER GUNZ Posted January 13 Posted January 13 Perhaps there are “a lot of scientists” that have evidentiary knowledge of unexplained phenomena and chose to not disclose it. Example: Harold Puttoff Hey Fitha, Patrick over on the VETTED yt channel has great new video Hal. and I finally saw the James Fox show “the Program”. Pretty good stuff! Fox said Spielberg is releasing a new film in 2026 titled “The Dish”. 1 Quote
EvanG Posted January 13 Posted January 13 19 minutes ago, HOOSIER GUNZ said: Perhaps there are “a lot of scientists” that have evidentiary knowledge of unexplained phenomena and chose to not disclose it. A lot of them don't come forward or don't even want to touch this subject because of the stigma that is around it, especially in the scientific community. Therefore much respect to those who have come forward, knowing the ridicule they might face or what it could possibly do to their respected reputation. Quote from the interview with Garry Nolan that I posted: Quote ".....I, of course, have been approached by scientific colleagues that said: "Garry, you're going to ruin your reputation with this", and my immediate answer is, what scientist takes a possible explanation off the table, especially when you've got so many credible individuals saying that this is something that is happening, so why not investigate it...." 1 Quote
SoulMonster Posted January 13 Posted January 13 34 minutes ago, HOOSIER GUNZ said: Perhaps there are “a lot of scientists” that have evidentiary knowledge of unexplained phenomena and chose to not disclose it. Why would they choose to not publish it? Actual evidence of aliens would make them world famous. And research councils would throw money after them. They'd go from relative scientific anonymity (like is the case for most scientists) to become science superstars. It would be the break of their careers. Having revolutionary data that changes our understanding of the world so dramatically is exactly what scientists long for. Instead they have to publish scientific papers on the migrating patterns of hornbill frogs or on a slightly more intensely radiating neutron star than what is commonly observed. Quote
SoulMonster Posted January 13 Posted January 13 10 minutes ago, EvanG said: A lot of them don't come forward or don't even want to touch this subject because of the stigma that is around it, especially in the scientific community. Therefore much respect to those who have come forward, knowing the ridicule they might face or what it could possibly do to their respected reputation. Yes, but also, most scientists follow actual evidence. They don't go out and proclaim beliefs in the absence of evidence. They sit on the fence until evidence is in. Until that happens, they won't make no statement either way. Garry Nolan is different in that he, based on personal experiences as a child has decided -- courageously -- to go public about his belief in aliens despite him, too, not having any actual hard proof. Quote
HOOSIER GUNZ Posted January 13 Posted January 13 (edited) I’d attribute the in-numerous amount of scientists that don’t speak about this subject to government & corporate non disclosure agreements…simple teally, they go to jail, lose employment etc… https://youtu.be/XtOe2ht6U6Y Edited January 13 by HOOSIER GUNZ vetted Hal bombshells Quote
SoulMonster Posted January 13 Posted January 13 2 hours ago, HOOSIER GUNZ said: I’d attribute the in-numerous amount of scientists that don’t speak about this subject to government & corporate non disclosure agreements…simple teally, they go to jail, lose employment etc… You'd be wrong, then. Firstly, academia don't typically have NDAs. At least I have never heard of any. In fact, universities pride themselves on academic freedom of speech. Secondly, how would the US government silence thousands of scientists across the world without this coming out? They'd have to have control over all major academic institutions in the world, including those in Russia, Sweden, France, Korea, China, Australia...and then have a 100% efficient way of silencing scientists without any of it reaching the press. what fantasy world do you live in, really? This is advanced level conspiracy nonsense. Do you have to be this delusional to believe we are visited by aliens? No, but it probably helps. 1 Quote
Axls_Moustache_Rules Posted January 13 Posted January 13 For me, eye witness accounts are what intrigue me the most and make this whole subject feel like a very real phenomenon. First hand accounts, even abductions. Quote
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.
Note: Your post will require moderator approval before it will be visible.