Latest activity

I actually agree with you, but: GEIPAN's official methodology specifically defines Category D cases as anomalous precisely because of the quantity and reliability of the data. Furthermore, GEIPAN is a civilian branch of CNES; just like AARO, if...

I get that, but implicit in your criticism is the assumption that governmental employees are not already doing that. We do not know that, but in the many years (and many administrations) of study, they've either (1) found diddly-squat in the way...

You should be! Like a cancer on the planet. We know better.

I’m more scared of humans gotta be honest here!

I don’t look for aliens.

No matter how much better sensors get there will always be things just beyond their range. The solution is more sensor locations. If your sensor can identify out to three miles, and I build an identical sensor five and a half miles away, then...

Hopefully they won’t look for you!

I’m more scared of humans gotta be honest here!

Hopefully they won’t look for you!

That’s where dangerous adversarial tech would start to show; in the LIZ. So even skeptics should want to have a careful watch. I think Dave was just suggesting not looking for aliens in particular, as he’s a skeptic.

I don’t look for aliens.

That’s where dangerous adversarial tech would start to show; in the LIZ. So even skeptics should want to have a careful watch. I think Dave was just suggesting not looking for aliens in particular, as he’s a skeptic.

Fair! I just don’t think studying the subject with better sensors and possibly with more accessible data is a total waste of time and money.

Look, If some academic scientists will start to do that in the most scientific way possible, I’m all for it. I don’t care if they find more balloons, they could even find new ways of identifying space junk and birds.

Fair! I just don’t think studying the subject with better sensors and possibly with more accessible data is a total waste of time and money.