Latest activity

National secrets cannot be patented. If anything, this is a counter-intelligence operation, designed to confuse America's adversaries. Or Pais found some military brass without access to reliable science advisors.

Thank you. There are massive red flags in that wikipedia article: He reported that he began in 2015 to publish his patents "after rejections from academic publishing" No working prototype of any of the patented inventions was ever developed...

I'm not buying it, I think the Navy were sold on an idea and essentially proved it didn't work. RIP project and RIP patent. He also contradicts himself to some degree, he mentioned he didn't write the patents and then later says he "left out...

@JMartJr, You use the term "evidence" uncritically here, but perhaps there should be a category for "insufficient evidence for study", i.e. stuff in the LIZ. If things are going to be studied in the future with, possibly, a few researchers and a...

Well damn! Had I been a Twitter guy and seen all your posts, I'd have just used your post for the OP. Would have saved me a lot of time ;) I've harped on this case repeatedly for good reason. As you point out, it was a minor thing from likely...

We might be veering slightly off-topic, here. But I hope this will clarify things enough so we can move back to the original topic. Indeed this is one of Shermer's "stock phrases" to introduce topics and, as @Gary C said above, to keep...

Toward that end, we have proposed a rating scale meant to help citizens and scientists alike assess the reliability of UAP reports based on the type and quality of evidence. This won't solve most cases (more than half of the sightings reviewed by...

In practical terms, provenance is a factor, as is provenience. If you can't establish a chain from the actual observer to the report you're seeing somewhere, or if it's unclear where and when the observation was, the report is going to be hard...

NorCal Dave did a good summary of this case. I was the one who provided Brian Dunning with the general timeline and Brophy connection and all that. Quick recap: Pinotti got those documents, it was a relatively mild story, nothing in the telegrams...

Possibly -- but is it also possible that the algorithm has noted your engagement, and so is shoveling them at you at a higher rate?

Whilst I agree with you on this, it is our biased opinion. Many ufo-fans don't accept the multitude of prosaic explanations that have been presented. For every tweet that Mick puts out showing that something is starlink / ISS/ balloons / planes...

But is he really? He's always struck me as just a person who'd made his mind up, but then who flipped to making his mind up in a different way. Shermer thinks that "aliens are sky gods for skeptics" - does he even know what a skeptic is? 03:50...

There does seem to be a pattern... Garry Nolan and Peter Skafish from Sol Foundation, Matthew Szydagis from UAPx. Loeb's colleagues. Shermer as the token skeptic

Whilst I agree with you on this, it is our biased opinion. Many ufo-fans don't accept the multitude of prosaic explanations that have been presented. For every tweet that Mick puts out showing that something is starlink / ISS/ balloons / planes...

Fair enough but how many of the PhDs on his current list would have had the idea of building SITREC?