@michaelshermer Why wouldn’t it be plausible? If you immediately reject a hypothesis without any supporting data, is that scientific? Why don’t we work to get the classified data out to support this hypothesis before jumping to conclusions? This has always been about releasing the data.
You're being disingenuous bc you know damn that the push back is bc of your deleted tweets, shared below.
And the reason we give Grusch's info. so much weight is bc he says he interviewed over 40 witnesses who worked/work in the alleged UAP legacy program, and that's where the claims come from. Also, he says he's seen evidence (photos) of retrieved craft.
Is that enough? To me, no. Do we need to hear from those firsthand folks? Of course. But these tweets/posts are pathetic, and @ProfAviLoeb should do the right thing and find a true skeptic who doesn't attack and insult a whistleblower who put his reputation and career on the line to get the truth out. ⬇️⬇️⬇️
Not an auspicious start for sceptic @michaelshermer in his appointment to the UAP Science Advisory Committee. He deleted the puerile and snide tweets he posted about UAP former IC informant David Grusch and then he wonders why he's getting push-back from a community looking for an objective analysis from a Govt committee.
While bonus eligibility and NIL led plenty of teams to build around players in their 20s, Arizona sprinted in the other direction. Now its teenagers have the Wildcats one win from the Final Four. https://t.co/pRf7wzro0V
“There is growing recognition that disclosure was "forced on us because of the AI curve," since developing superintelligence is potentially risky to any non-human intelligence that has access to Earth.”
The alignment problem may be more complicated than we think…