House Oversight Hearing on UAPs - July 26, 2023

[Landru]

By the way: using "UFO" and "UAP" for man-owned alien spacecrafts doesn't make any sense; they'd be the less unidentified objects or phenomena of all. So may I suggest the one side continues with their old acronyms while the other side switches to more applicable ones - like "unproven failed objects" (UFO) and "unproven alleged phenomena" (UAP)

Not really a topic for this thread.

 

[Agent K]

Is "legacy program" referring to AASWAP/AATIP, UAPTF, or what? Project Blue Book?

It's the alleged UFO recovery and reverse-engineering program, or multiple programs as Corbell pointed out in his Weaponized episode 28.
"When everybody's saying legacy program that not the right term we should be using, because you all know that there are multiple legacy UFO exploitation programs..."

Source: https://youtu.be/t2xSFMkmWg4?t=4097

 

[LilWabbit]

I wonder if it's time to start wrapping this thread up. On my part, I would offer the following few words in conclusion.

As long as there remains (1) a sizeable and noisome alien-believing demographic of voters, represented by the 'usual suspects' as a well-funded political interest-group, and newly fired up by the Grusch hearings, and (2) bipartisan congressional interest in securing their votes and campaign sponsorships, (3) some manner of congressional pressure on the Government to investigate UAPs and to increase transparency will continue to be exerted irrespective of the actual national security threat the UAP pose in DoDs own estimation, or the lack of evidence for aliens in DoD's possession.

The Congress, for obvious reasons, panders to public opinion. Some Members of Congress also genuinely share public opinion, whatever it may be. If public opinion, or at least a sizeable voter demographic, believes in aliens and distrusts the Government, many a Member of Congress would be poised pander to those sentiments, at least in public. And if it's a Government controlled by one party, those from the other will jump on the bandwagon of fomenting distrust entirely irrespective of their belief or non-belief in aliens. The Pentagon, I'm sure, is acutely aware of this.

The DoD is unlikely to express objections to congressional pressure for AARO or equivalent to become even better resourced with a beefed up budget if such an entity secures funding from outside the DoD's core budget, humbly accepts denials of access to classified programs without complaint when denials are issued, and strengthens Pentagon's public relations with the Congress and the general public.

If there really is no hard evidence for aliens hidden even in the most secret chambers of the deepest top secret caverns of the remotest underground facilities of the DoD, all of this flap will eventually taper off. The Congress simply cannot expect absolute transparency from the DoD and many Members know that full well and understand it's in the interest of national security. If Congress were to push the matter of transparency too far, the DoD is likely to secure the President's support who, in turn, could invoke executive privilege to keep classified programs classified from the Congress for sound national security reasons.

Personally, I don't think the Congress will ever get enough votes to get that far. After a while, the public will get tired of a Congress endlessly debating on UFO disclosures instead of their jobs, mortgages and livelihoods. And the Congress knows this. Hence, to disappoint Grusch et al, there won't be endless amounts of hearings of 'witnesses'.

 

[Itsme]

note he phrases "believe they have seen something" and not simply that they've seen something. Kirkpatrick technically says that AARO believes that the witnesses believe they've seen something. He does not say that AARO believes they've seen something. If AARO believed that, Kirkpatrick couldn't say that AARO doesn't have verifiable information.

but, yes, you are right, Kirkpatrick doesn't rule out that some of this testimony might lead somewhere some day. It just hasn't yet, and probably never will.

I'll repeat Kirkpatrick's statements:

Article:

"We've interviewed almost 30 individuals who have come in to provide their testimony. And out of all of those, none of it has yet led to any verifiable information that substantiates the claim that the U.S. government has those ships or has a reverse-engineering program either in the past or currently,"
[...]
"A number of these [whistleblowers] believe and have stated -- and we believe them now -- that they have seen something. And we are investigating"

Source: https://abcnews.go.com/Politics/extraterrestrial-technical-supremacy-top-concern-pentagon-ufo-investigator/story?id=101218299

With his Title 10 authorization, Kirkpatrick has no access to any relevant SAP in the IC, so he can't verify anything these '30 individuals' told him.
The only thing he can do is cross-correlate what they told him. Why does he state "we believe them now", I wonder?

 

[MonkeeSage]

I'll repeat Kirkpatrick's statements:

Article:

"We've interviewed almost 30 individuals who have come in to provide their testimony. And out of all of those, none of it has yet led to any verifiable information that substantiates the claim that the U.S. government has those ships or has a reverse-engineering program either in the past or currently,"
[...]
"A number of these [whistleblowers] believe and have stated -- and we believe them now -- that they have seen something. And we are investigating"

Source: https://abcnews.go.com/Politics/extraterrestrial-technical-supremacy-top-concern-pentagon-ufo-investigator/story?id=101218299

With his Title 10 authorization, Kirkpatrick has no access to any relevant SAP in the IC, so he can't verify anything these '30 individuals' told him.
The only thing he can do is cross-correlate what they told him. Why does he state "we believe them now", I wonder?

He was very clear on his position in the interview.

DD: You believe them?
SK: I believe that they believe what they are telling me. And I, my job, is not to-- it's not a question of belief. It's a question of what can I go research.

 

[a_robot_kicker]

Right it does sound like Kirkpatrick/AARO did review the people Grusch spoke to, and followed up on their claims and were unable to verify them (which is a charitable way of saying that their claims are probably wrong or just unsubstantiated rumors). I do remember (although I can't find the quote) Kirkpatrick also saying that at no point were they denied any access to classified info during this process; the oft-repeated claim that AARO doesn't have access to the same info Grusch had access to may also simply be wrong.

 

[Duke]

With his Title 10 authorization, Kirkpatrick has no access to any relevant SAP in the IC, so he can't verify anything these '30 individuals' told him.

All this Title 10 v. Title 50 discussion is only muddying the water. Do you think the CIA and other Title 50 intel organizations withheld classified information needed to kill OBL from the USN/SEALS because as a DoD organization they fell under the auspices of Title 10? If Dr Kirkpatrick had/has the appropriate clearance level and a need-to-know, he had/has access.

 

[PublicStranger]

Right it does sound like Kirkpatrick/AARO did review the people Grusch spoke to, and followed up on their claims and were unable to verify them (which is a charitable way of saying that their claims are probably wrong or just unsubstantiated rumors). I do remember (although I can't find the quote) Kirkpatrick also saying that at no point were they denied any access to classified info during this process; the oft-repeated claim that AARO doesn't have access to the same info Grusch had access to may also simply be wrong.

I think the UFO enthusiast argument would be that AARO are left so out of scope that they aren't being denied access, just not in the know. I'm not denying you access by technicality if I say the alleged programs are so far out of oversight they essentially do not exist on paper.

 

[MonkeeSage]

I think the UFO enthusiast argument would be that AARO are left so out of scope that they aren't being denied access, just not in the know. I'm not denying you access by technicality if I say the alleged programs are so far out of oversight they essentially do not exist on paper.

That's been the general counter-argument I have heard. According to a statement from Sen. Gillibrand from an interview that was published today, she seems to be saying that AARO is equipped to deal with those SAPs, in agreement with Kirkpatrick's statement "I have access to anything and everything I need."

Article:

I think this AARO office is excellent and built to do this job. If there are special access programs – they are called SAP programs – that Congress was not read in on, we put an amendment in the defense bill to say they can't be funded. We do not want to be misled. We do not want to be led astray. We want to get to the bottom of this and this office is perfectly positioned to do that work.

Source: https://www.cityandstateny.com/personality/2023/08/kirsten-gillibrand-wants-know-truth-about-aliens/389198/

I also created a new thread earlier to discuss her new statements around the HOC hearing and AARO.

 

[Mendel]

I think the UFO enthusiast argument would be that AARO are left so out of scope that they aren't being denied access, just not in the know. I'm not denying you access by technicality if I say the alleged programs are so far out of oversight they essentially do not exist on paper.

No, that's a conspiracy theorist argument: there's no evidence for it, it's just there to make up for the fact that AARO doesn't support their belief. These people tend to trust whomever agrees with them, and distrust whoever doesn't, which makes them easy to con, and easy targets for populist politics.

But this also means there's no way to "fix" AARO that can change that (unless the US actually have flying saucers, which seems unlikely).

 

[LilWabbit]

I'll repeat Kirkpatrick's statements:

Article:

"We've interviewed almost 30 individuals who have come in to provide their testimony. And out of all of those, none of it has yet led to any verifiable information that substantiates the claim that the U.S. government has those ships or has a reverse-engineering program either in the past or currently,"
[...]
"A number of these [whistleblowers] believe and have stated -- and we believe them now -- that they have seen something. And we are investigating"

Source: https://abcnews.go.com/Politics/extraterrestrial-technical-supremacy-top-concern-pentagon-ufo-investigator/story?id=101218299

With his Title 10 authorization, Kirkpatrick has no access to any relevant SAP in the IC, so he can't verify anything these '30 individuals' told him.
The only thing he can do is cross-correlate what they told him. Why does he state "we believe them now", I wonder?

Imho the ufologists are over-reaching with this whole Title 50 authorization thing in order to tell themselves the narrative that Grusch knows critically more than Kirkpatrick. There's no evidence that he does. To the contrary, Grusch himself complains he was denied access to classified programs and hence we're here. As an insider at the top command of a large military organization, I can assure you clearances don't work that way at all, and I'm not saying it to counter your narrative or out of spite, but just as a matter of fact.

However, I've dealt with officers (usually younger ones) who themselves aren't fully trained in how security clearances work and who begin to assume too much about their rights and authorizations when their clearance level is increased. I myself have had moments earlier in my career where I've proudly "waved the badge" at various components of the organization expecting automatic compliance to my information requests but was denied. Frustrated by the denial, I examined the rationale for denial and consulted our in-house lawyers only to realize I didn't have the legal need-to-know to that particular information to begin with -- information which wasn't even of the highest clearance level -- despite possessing the highest general clearance level. The classified information would have had to be directly material to my assigned duties in order for this component to have not had the right to deny me access. It turns out it wasn't.

I could well imagine a UAPTF investigator with a Title 50 authorization being denied access to classified programs that have nothing to do with UAPs, but the knowledge of which (that the program has nothing to do with UAPs) itself would be too much to disclose. As I've observed, there's a certain self-satisfaction involved upon promotion or being granted increased access which can get into one's head if one isn't careful enough.

Based on several statements, before and during the hearing, Grusch appears to have thought his clearance grants him automatic access to everything, to the point he was frustrated about the "wall of silence" he faced with White House when he approached them.

 

[PublicStranger]

No, that's a conspiracy theorist argument: there's no evidence for it, it's just there to make up for the fact that AARO doesn't support their belief. These people tend to trust whomever agrees with them, and distrust whoever doesn't, which makes them easy to con, and easy targets for populist politics.

But this also means there's no way to "fix" AARO that can change that (unless the US actually have flying saucers, which seems unlikely).

The whole UFO (alien) debacle is a conspiracy tbh

 

[Domzh]

on a site note, does anyone else finds the language they are using problematic?

specifically the term "uap" which is used synonymously for alien spaceships.

for example "is the government in possession of uaps?"

this includes weather phenomena and balloons right?

imo this muddies the perception even more when official statements and reports are released and or interpreted, because other people will adapt to it the same way.

 

[MapperGuy]

Imho the ufologists are over-reaching with this whole Title 50 authorization thing in order to tell themselves the narrative that Grusch knows critically more than Kirkpatrick. There's no evidence that he does. To the contrary, Grusch himself complains he was denied access to classified programs and hence we're here. As an insider at the top command of a large military organization, I can assure you clearances don't work that way at all, and I'm not saying it to counter your narrative or out of spite, but just as a matter of fact.

However, I've dealt with officers (usually younger ones) who themselves aren't fully trained in how security clearances work and who begin to assume too much about their rights and authorizations when their clearance level is increased. I myself have had moments earlier in my career where I've proudly "waved the badge" at various components of the organization expecting automatic compliance to my information requests but was denied. Frustrated by the denial, I examined the rationale for denial and consulted our in-house lawyers only to realize I didn't have the legal need-to-know to that particular information to begin with -- information which wasn't even of the highest clearance level -- despite possessing the highest general clearance level. The classified information would have had to be directly material to my assigned duties in order for this component to have not had the right to deny me access. It turns out it wasn't.

I could well imagine a UAPTF investigator with a Title 50 authorization being denied access to classified programs that have nothing to do with UAPs, but the knowledge of which (that the program has nothing to do with UAPs) itself would be too much to disclose. As I've observed, there's a certain self-satisfaction involved upon promotion or being granted increased access which can get into one's head if one isn't careful enough.

Based on several statements, before and during the hearing, Grusch appears to have thought his clearance grants him automatic access to everything, to the point he was frustrated about the "wall of silence" he faced with White House when he approached them.

People often assume that Intel Agencies and offices do not talk to each other, they do. That if Kirkpatrick did not personally know about something that would be the end of the search. Actually his questions would be passed "over that wall" to other offices who would only respond if there "was a problem here". That is how people without access to or even knowledge of some program could find out if the statements Grusch wanted to make would cause problems. There is no reason for Kirkpatrick himself to know the identify of everyone queried, all he would be told is that it was passed to the relevant people and they have no comment. Just because information may not flow OUT of a SAP program does not mean that information does not flow INTO that program.

 

[Agent K]

on a site note, does anyone else finds the language they are using problematic?

specifically the term "uap" which is used synonymously for alien spaceships.

for example "is the government in possession of uaps?"

this includes weather phenomena and balloons right?

imo this muddies the perception even more when official statements and reports are released and or interpreted, because other people will adapt to it the same way.

Well, the government can't be in possession of weather phenomena, and the government would surely be able to identify balloons or meteorites in its possession. So if the government is in possession of something it can't identify, it's not necessarily an alien spaceship, but it's probably not something mundane like a balloon or a meteorite.

 

[jarlrmai]

The funniest thing is the government could have fleet of flying saucers in hangars at Area 51 and answer this question truthfully in the negative, because they are identified alien spaceships.

 

[Domzh]

Well, the government can't be in possession of weather phenomena, and the government would surely be able to identify balloons or meteorites in its possession. So if the government is in possession of something it can't identify, it's not necessarily an alien spaceship, but it's probably not something mundane like a balloon or a meteorite.

you missed my point entirely my friend

 

[Ann K]

specifically the term "uap" which is used synonymously for alien spaceships.

"Unidentified" means they don't know what it is, therefore they don't know what category to put it into (except provisionally, if it resembles some known object). UAP, UFO - none of them, as far as we know, have yet been officially identified as "alien spaceships", except by those who wish to sensationalize them. The terms (and their use in fables) have entered into common usage, and the same would be likely of any new term coined.

 

[Domzh]

"Unidentified" means they don't know what it is, therefore they don't know what category to put it into (except provisionally, if it resembles some known object). UAP, UFO - none of them, as far as we know, have yet been officially identified as "alien spaceships", except by those who wish to sensationalize them. The terms (and their use in fables) have entered into common usage, and the same would be likely of any new term coined.

my point was that if the senate is using the term "uap" in context of physical crafts - more so even alien crafts - then those not as familiar with the topic will automatically assume its a synonym for that when they read articles, reports or listen to interviews or documentaries.

instead of being able to perceive it critically with the possibility of uap being ice crystals, balloons, airborn clutter, sensor malfunctions etc "they" will be primed to understand (alien) crafts.

those new to ufology will be even more convinced.

maybe i take some time out of my day to mark the specific situations i noticed during the hearings where senators used uap during the grusch testimony when it would have been more appropriate to call them alien spacecrafts because that was the context they were referring to.

 

[JMartJr]

So if the government is in possession of something it can't identify, it's not necessarily an alien spaceship, but it's probably not something mundane like a balloon or a meteorite.

But it would no longer be a UAP. Part of the reason for adopting UAP was that UFO had come to equal "flying saucer" in general usage. UAP was intended to take us back to a neutral term that did not imply the identity of the thing which is by definition not identified. Predictably, UFO Fandom, the media and "just folks" have already preceeded well along the track of re-muddying the water and changing the perception of the term that us supposed to mean "don't know what it is" to "it's an alien spaceship."

 

[Mendel]

changing the perception of the term that is supposed to mean "don't know what it is" to "it's an alien spaceship."

because to them, there's no difference
if we can't explain it, it must be alien, right?

the new bill introduces "temporarily unattributed objects", maybe that helps

 

[FatPhil]

"Unidentified" means they don't know what it is, therefore they don't know what category to put it into (except provisionally, if it resembles some known object). UAP, UFO - none of them, as far as we know, have yet been officially identified as "alien spaceships", except by those who wish to sensationalize them. The terms (and their use in fables) have entered into common usage, and the same would be likely of any new term coined.

It would have been so much simpler if they'd have just adopted "uncategorised" for the uncategorised phenomena, rather than equivocating on "(un)identified".

 

[Domzh]

because to them, there's no difference
if we can't explain it, it must be alien, right?

the new bill introduces "temporarily unattributed objects", maybe that helps

TUO sounds way less sexier than UFO and UAP so this might really help

 

[Agent K]

It would have been so much simpler if they'd have just adopted "uncategorised" for the uncategorised phenomena, rather than equivocating on "(un)identified".

Target identification sounds more like military jargon. A more academic term used in machine learning is object classification, but this creates confusion when talking about classified and unclassified information.

Article:

Source: https://digital-library.theiet.org/content/books/10.1049/sbra018e_ch6

 

[Ravi]

IMO relevant for this thread,

From over at reddit r/ufos, it seems things are heating up and calls are being made for action and organisation.. Just because of the news below:

edit

I wonder how this will go. There is a clear risk mobs are going to take action. Scary how group madness works.

 

[Domzh]

qanon 2.0

now imagine all the MH370 was abducted videos this guy will receive, as leverage to keep the hearings going

 

[Domzh]

IMO relevant for this thread,

From over at reddit r/ufos, it seems things are heating up and calls are being made for action and organisation.. Just because of the news below:

View attachment 61705

edit

I wonder how this will go. There is a clear risk mobs are going to take action. Scary how group madness works.

there you go


Source: https://www.reddit.com/r/UFOs/comments/15wgox7/this_is_something_we_are_going_to_have_to_get/?utm_source=share&utm_medium=ios_app&utm_name=ioscss&utm_content=2&utm_term=1

 

[Mendel]

there you go
Source: https://www.reddit.com/r/UFOs/comments/15wgox7/this_is_something_we_are_going_to_have_to_get/?utm_source=share&utm_medium=ios_app&utm_name=ioscss&utm_content=2&utm_term=1

Do you want all of DaviD Grusch's hard work, bravery and pain to be for nothing?

So both fortunately and unfortunately Grusch has done all that he can

Hero worship.

 

[tintintintin]

But it would no longer be a UAP. Part of the reason for adopting UAP was that UFO had come to equal "flying saucer" in general usage. UAP was intended to take us back to a neutral term that did not imply the identity of the thing which is by definition not identified. Predictably, UFO Fandom, the media and "just folks" have already preceeded well along the track of re-muddying the water and changing the perception of the term that us supposed to mean "don't know what it is" to "it's an alien spaceship."

the new bill introduces "temporarily unattributed objects", maybe that helps

TUO sounds way less sexier than UFO and UAP so this might really help

TUO (technically TNO) won't replace UAP, the two are mutually exclusive. The (convoluted) text in https://www.congress.gov/amendment/118th-congress/senate-amendment/935/text says

Sec 9003
(A) In general.--The term ``temporarily non-attributed objects'' means the class of objects that temporarily resist prosaic attribution by the initial observer as a result of environmental or system limitations associated with the observation process that nevertheless ultimately have an accepted human origin or known physical cause. Although some unidentified anomalous phenomena may at first be interpreted as temporarily non-attributed objects, they are not temporarily non-attributed objects, and the two categories are mutually exclusive.

[...] includes--
(i) natural celestial, meteorological, and undersea weather phenomena;
(ii) mundane human-made airborne objects, clutter, and marine debris;
(iii) Federal, State, and local government, commercial industry, academic, and private sector aerospace platforms;
(iv) Federal, State, and local government, commercial industry, academic, and private sector ocean-surface and undersea vehicles; and
(v) known foreign systems.

Sec 9004
(C) The Collection shall consist of record copies of all Government, Government-provided, or Government-funded records relating to unidentified anomalous phenomena, technologies of unknown origin, and non-human intelligence (or equivalent subjects by any other name with the specific and sole exclusion of temporarily non-attributed objects)

It is used in the bill to explicitly ask agencies to not transmit TNO to NARA's collection (they represent cases that are explained). So a UAP determined (after initial observer) to be by Skunkworks tech is actually a TNO, a UAP determined (after initial observer) to be by a Starlink satellite is a TNO, or more broadly any already debunked UAP is a TNO.

To the point about UAP and UFO being now wholly conflated, TNO would potentially assist, but it probably won't remedy the "it's an alien spaceship" issue in any substantial way.

 

[Mendel]

or more broadly any already debunked UAP is a TNO.

the way I read the bill, it's better than that.
A sighting just needs to be explainable to qualify as TOU; only those sightings that transcend physics and/or existing tech are UAP now.

See https://www.metabunk.org/threads/uap-disclosure-act-of-2023-proposed-u-s-legislation.13058/

 

[SuppaCoup]

I feel like if there were people in possession of undeniable hard evidence of alien tech they'd have leaked it after all of this and gone to the several prominent high-ranking politicians that are saying they want the full truth for protection. I mean the cat would be out of the bag at that point, retaliation seems totally pointless and like it would just get the people above that person under intense scrutiny.
We KNOW that very highly secret stuff leaks sometimes-how is it that it is NEVER explicit clear alien stuff? The lack of any real followup to all this noise makes the whole Grusch thing feel pretty hollow imo.

 

[Cogg84]

I feel like if there were people in possession of undeniable hard evidence of alien tech they'd have leaked it after all of this and gone to the several prominent high-ranking politicians that are saying they want the full truth for protection. I mean the cat would be out of the bag at that point, retaliation seems totally pointless and like it would just get the people above that person under intense scrutiny.
We KNOW that very highly secret stuff leaks sometimes-how is it that it is NEVER explicit clear alien stuff? The lack of any real followup to all this noise makes the whole Grusch thing feel pretty hollow imo.

Because there is almost certainly nothing to leak. Snowden, Manning, Wikileaks. Millions of files leaked and nothing about aliens. People want to believe this stuff is true because it gives them some sort of meaning.

 

[Ann K]

I feel like if there were people in possession of undeniable hard evidence of alien tech they'd have leaked it after all of this and gone to the several prominent high-ranking politicians that are saying they want the full truth for protection. I mean the cat would be out of the bag at that point, retaliation seems totally pointless and like it would just get the people above that person under intense scrutiny.
We KNOW that very highly secret stuff leaks sometimes-how is it that it is NEVER explicit clear alien stuff? The lack of any real followup to all this noise makes the whole Grusch thing feel pretty hollow imo.

I agree with you, but (putting on my True Believer hat, I'd say something like the following "Grusch spilled the beans, so the ones working on the little green men have really clamped down on security, and won't tell us the Truth", followed by a spittle-flecked rant about "the gub'mint lies to us all the time".

Let's face it, we don't KNOW if there has been (or will be) any "real followup", and if Grusch's testimony put anyone on alert about escaping secrets, we are even less likely to hear about it. But count me firmly in the camp of those who think they don't really have any "alien" parts or machinery to study. They may well have other things to keep secrets about, of course.

 

[Domzh]

Source: https://www.reddit.com/r/UFOs/comments/15xeblg/rep_burlison_on_ufos_theyre_either_angels_or/?utm_source=share&utm_medium=ios_app&utm_name=ioscss&utm_content=2&utm_term=1


its aliens versus angels now

and both parties are mocking each other as being delusional

cant make this shit up

 

[Mendel]

its aliens versus angels now

Article:

That's what U.S. Rep. Eric Burlison, R-Missouri, said he believes after taking part in a recent congressional hearing [.. :]

"I find I have a hard time buying the idea that an alien species is technologically capable to reach nearly the speed of light, travel trillions of miles or more, and gets here and somehow incapable of navigating Earth's atmosphere," he said.

"In my opinion I think it's either angels or it's manmade," he said. "I think the most likely explanation is that it's manmade."

Source: https://www.missourinet.com/2023/08/21/burlison-on-ufos-theyre-either-angels-or-man-made/

Good thing that Burlison is a skeptic, generally speaking.

Source: https://twitter.com/RepEricBurlison/status/1682027535696289798

 

[Ann K]

Article:

That's what U.S. Rep. Eric Burlison, R-Missouri, said he believes after taking part in a recent congressional hearing [.. :]

"I find I have a hard time buying the idea that an alien species is technologically capable to reach nearly the speed of light, travel trillions of miles or more, and gets here and somehow incapable of navigating Earth's atmosphere," he said.

"In my opinion I think it's either angels or it's manmade," he said. "I think the most likely explanation is that it's manmade."

Source: https://www.missourinet.com/2023/08/21/burlison-on-ufos-theyre-either-angels-or-man-made/

Good thing that Burlison is a skeptic, generally speaking.

Source: https://twitter.com/RepEricBurlison/status/1682027535696289798

Wikipedia describes him as belonging to a "Charismatic megachurch", whatever that might be, so he might have been quite serious about the angels. That casts a bit of shade over his claim to be a "skeptic".

 

[Mendel]

Wikipedia describes him as belonging to a "Charismatic megachurch", whatever that might be, so he might have been quite serious about the angels. That casts a bit of shade over his claim to be a "skeptic".

Don't overlook—like reddit did—that he thinks they're most likely man-made.

 

[Cogg84]

Don't overlook—like reddit did—that he thinks they're most likely man-made.

Feel like he could have left the angel part out of the statement.

 

[jarlrmai]

The main problem is that they all seem to think whatever "It" is It is extraordinary and It is an It as in one thing, with a capital I.

Aliens
Angels
Super Chinese tech
etc

But in reality there's just a whole load of different mundane things being mistakenly thought to be extraordinary and conflated into one thing.

 

[FatPhil]

Wikipedia describes him as belonging to a "Charismatic megachurch", whatever that might be, so he might have been quite serious about the angels. That casts a bit of shade over his claim to be a "skeptic".

He and his wife, Angie, are active members of the Destiny Church in Republic, MO.

-- https://www.ericburlisonforcongress.com/about

The church's website is at https://destinychurch.me/ - I didn't see anything particularly quote-worthy to bring back here from it - it's a church, it seems to do churchy stuff in a churchy way. I'm apparently gonna be sent to HELL where I will be eternally tormented with the devil and the fallen angels, but you guys all knew that anyway.