UFOs and Aliens

[Jetflag]

Well, is this really an acceptable answer? If I am understanding you correctly, you do not personally believe in what they say, therefore you do not trust them. This seems flawed. If these men are not telling the truth we still expect critical thinking to offer the explanation as to why. This hearing and what was said is not exactly a regular event. Did you ever think that UFOs and aliens would be discussed in congress and by people from Nasa and the Navy, who we typically trust with important things? I’ll tell you it was not on my bingo card for 2024. I am new to all this and don’t know much, so I may be missing some important context?

The important context I think you're missing or excluding is the mundane-factor of the claim.

So for instance:

When its October where I live, and the weather man predicts its probably going to rain tomorrow on the radio, I acknowledge his claim on the face of it. Because its a mundane one congruent with reality, and hence I don't ask for, or check the satellite imagery every hour to confirm he's right, and simply put a jacket with a hoodie on.


When a military expert or political pundit claims that aliens are visiting us in spacecraft that completely break known-physics and that he really really really believes "he saw that/something" I dismiss his claim on the face of it, because its an extraordinary one not congruent with reality, and hence I ask for, or check the relevant evidence provided, which so far has been severely lacking, and/or is either to be explained away by other factors or vague enough to simply be labeled "unknown"

 

[Archon]

Did you ever think that UFOs and aliens would be discussed in congress and by people from Nasa and the Navy, who we typically trust with important things?

I think there's a risk of potential bias here, as they all require funding, and in fact like it very much. So I would expect a lot of open-ended non-answers (which is naturally expected because of the topic and the claims). The real answers would be locked behind a huge paywall.

And don't get me wrong, that's a decent generator for the economy (based on the salaries and employment alone), but I wonder how a voting taxpayer can justify prioritizing that over any other NASA project...let alone everyday issues like healthcare etc.