NASA says more science and less stigma are needed to understand UFOs

Re:NASA says more science and less stigma are needed to unde... by david-gpu on Friday September 15, 2023 @02:49PM (#37527557)

I'm not saying "we don't know have X data, so Y must be true/false, I am saying there is a perfectly plausible explanation for why if data from military sources did exist then it wouldn't automatically be known to the public. Because that is the argument that was being made by the comment I was replying to.

If you have a more detailed criticism I would be happy to address it.

[ Parent | on HN ]

Re:NASA says more science and less stigma are needed to unde... by empyrrhicist on Friday September 15, 2023 @03:25PM (#37528025)

Replace "true/false" with "probably/reasonable to consider" and you're doing exactly that. You're using uncertainty to elevate an implausible hypothesis for consideration.

[ Parent | on HN ]

Re:NASA says more science and less stigma are needed to unde... by david-gpu on Friday September 15, 2023 @03:48PM (#37528282)

The comment I replied to was stating that if alien vehicles visited Earth then the military would be aware of it, with the implicit assumption that if the military was aware of UAPs then the it would inform the public.

My counterargument is that if the military detected UAPs then they would have both a strong incentive not to inform the public and the means to keep it secret.

Happy to address any other misunderstandings.

[ Parent | on HN ]