Yeah, one possible explanation for a lot of this is that the US military has been scammed by a bunch of quacks and they lack personnel with sufficient scientific competence to evaluate what they are being sold.

I don't see how it could explain the 2004 Nimitz incident though.

The they're-a-bunch-of-quacks story doesn't have to explain the Nimitz incident. They were given footage and reports of the incident, but the existence or nonexistence of the event is independent of them.

Sorry I don't understand what you're saying here. Could you please elaborate ? (It might help to clarify who the different instances of they and them are referring to.)

Apologies! It was late and my proofreading became less rigorous.

I'll rewrite it:

"The they're-a-bunch-of-quacks story doesn't have to explain the Nimitz incident. The AAWSAP/AATIP group were given footage and reports of the incident, but the existence or nonexistence of the event is independent of what that group says."

By analogy:

People see a man in the distance stumbling through the woods covered in blood. They go to help, but can't find him. A hunting camera catches something moving through the trees around the same time the man was spotted. The police investigate, but it goes unresolved.

Years pass. A private detective appears in our story. This detective has unconventional views, such as believing that dogs can see dead people, vampires exist, Hitler is alive and imprisoned under the White House, etc. The detective has written about these subjects. In past unsolved murders, he has claimed Dracula was the murderer. Once, he tried to get a homeless man arrested after a stray dog led him from a grave to a back alley.

The private detective convinces the police chief, who already has some suspicion that vampires exist, of the danger posed by vampires. The police chief decides to fund the private detective, telling him to investigate the vampire angle.

Whatever the truth is regarding the blood-covered man, the police chief should have looked at the detective's wide range of bizarre beliefs, considered the severe deficit in judgement that those beliefs indicate, and not given him funds to investigate the case. Especially as it turns out he's using some of the funds to investigate all of his other wild beliefs, and even used funding to pay the costs of a group of Hitler-is-under-the-White-House believers.

But we have lots of evidence about the Nimitz incident that doesn't appear to have anything to do with AAWSAP/AATIP.

There's a video that the government has confirmed as being authentic and showing an object they consider to be unidentified.

Further there are many (not sure the exact count, but I would say about a dozen) witnesses who have come forward and whose stories are broadly consistent. One of them is a retired Navy Commander who commanded a fighter squadron on the Nimitz and who has described visual observations of phenomena that appear to defy the laws of physics as we understand them. His testimony was supported by 3 or 4 other witnesses who observed the same event.

So whatever opinion one may have about AAWSAP/AATIP, I don't see how the credibility of those programs impacts that of the Nimitz incident.

>So whatever opinion one may have about AAWSAP/AATIP, I don't see how the credibility of those programs impacts that of the Nimitz incident.

Perhaps surprisingly, this is actually what I've been trying to say. It appears my communication and reading comprehension skills leave an incredible amount to be desired. In your first reply, when you mentioned the Nimitz incident ("I don't see how it could explain the 2004 Nimitz incident though."), I read 'it' as "your bunch-of-quacks assertion". I thought you were saying that in order for my assertion to be true, it had to somehow explain the Nimitz incident. The confusion has flowed from there. I apologize for it!

(My long analogy didn't help things. I should have chosen something much more mundane than vampires (or indicated that many people considered the vampire theory plausible). My bias against the exotic technology explanations for the Nimitz incident made me forget that people consider it much more plausible than I do. It's possible I grew too attached to the little story I'd written and forgot it had to actually communicate something!)

the first two are real, I've seen it. RV is used as a signal for stock picking, is a not very well known but real niche industry. There are people who consistently perform above 75%.

telekinesis is real, but humans are pretty weak at it. just watch YouTube.

as for the last two, I haven't seen anything that proves it but the reports of tech and others stuff make it sound possible.

your editorial stance is just one of many possibilities ellipsis why you so attached to it?

A slightly more charitable interpretation: DoD hired a bunch of loonies to keep Harry Reid happy and they used the opportunity to evaluate whether public information about UFOs could be used to compromise actual SAP research projects (imagine if the conclusions of the report had been, “yeah this particular set of sightings could easily be explained by this hypothetical near future technology” and the tech described was an actual black project). Which actually isn’t a terrible idea from a counter intelligence perspective, though they definitely over paid for the product. Ultimately that’s on Harry Reid’s shoulders, though.