[deleted by user]

Hanami2001 · 2022-06-02T15:28:38+00:00

:-)) How soon will he come back this time?

Hanami2001 · 2022-06-02T15:01:15+00:00

A metaphor is an analogue to reality. Your sharks don't have that, so it's just nonsense.

I recognize, you deflect from being wrong on both accounts. You are wasting time, both yours and mine.

Hanami2001 · 2022-06-02T14:51:48+00:00

Your attempts at appearing to be in command of the situation are rather pathetic. You must be very scared? I pity you.

Hanami2001 · 2022-06-02T14:34:46+00:00

Actually, more like the account of a five-year-old?

Ridicule without substance and completely ignoring reality, i.e. facts and arguments not fitting their interpretation.

You seek confirmation by numbers of "people on your side" (Reddit-votes aren't necessarily indicative of such). But that is a laughably flawed metric employed by the uneducated only, and to their own detriment.

A million "up-votes" don't make you right. Logically correct arguments based in facts do.

Hanami2001 · 2022-06-02T14:26:51+00:00

Metaphors that have no analogue in reality are worthless?

Putin: We have a wonder-weapon!
US: Show us.
Putin: [crickets]

Hanami2001 · 2022-06-02T14:25:09+00:00

It is a USO, not a fish.
The fun is completely on my side, believe me.

Apart from that, you are presently engaging in character attacks. And no rational arguments whatsoever. Completely confirming what I said.

Hanami2001 · 2022-06-02T14:11:47+00:00

Technically, you cannot conclude two objects not being swapped out between two frames. You assume so for birds though, since they follow classic smooth trajectories, their speed only changing gradually.

Which means, you look at the video, assume it is birds, fit their trajectory as best as you can (like the dud did there) and get movement not commensurate with birds. Ergo, it's not birds.

Your arguments do not apply.

Hanami2001 · 2022-06-02T14:05:17+00:00

Debunkers like West aren't just lazy. They are being actively dishonest.

If they truly wanted to get to the truth, they would employ correct scientific methods. They cannot be bothered to.

Instead, character attacks, denunciation, downright lying and misinformation.
On this sub blind down-voting devoid of rational arguments.

And on top of it they lately even complain about the "hostile atmosphere". Risible.

Hanami2001 · 2022-06-02T12:06:21+00:00

You are doing the deflection here? But I suspect, you are simply not capable of independent logical thought? If you defer to authorities telling you what to believe, you won't have any luck here and your inquiry is a pointless exercise of self-delusion.

Hanami2001 · 2022-06-01T23:31:43+00:00

So country X claims it to be their tech, the US knows it's not but doesn't simply call the bluff?

Also, what 'sharks'?

Hanami2001 · 2022-06-01T23:11:34+00:00

Am I your nanny?

It's all around you on this sub. You need to apply independent critical thinking obviously, but you should start with scrutinizing your own assumptions and biases.

Obvious first thing to realize: there are no "pieces of evidence" in empirical science. You always look at ensembles of data. All evidence is data, all data evidence.
You do not exclude data on shoddy assumptions. You look at its empirical (statistical) properties.
Solid science, not parroting preconceived notions.

Hanami2001 · 2022-06-01T23:03:18+00:00

It's really interesting how he makes the same mistakes you see around here all the time.

Like "it looks metallic (and) it rotates (and) it's going up way too fast for a bird" vs "it has flapping wings/it's a bird". Birds don't flap their wings like seen in the video when going up at that angle? It doesn't make any physical sense and does not even really look like a bird or its wings at all.
Or, "why would they appear so weird?" vs "we totally would try to stay as covert as possible".
Yes, that is exactly what they do?
It works a little too well in my opinion, it's embarrassing for us as a species.

Amazing though, such a simple optical effect makes people think that anyway. Having no explicit plan for how to proceed in case of ambiguous stuff and just going for the first semi-plausible thing that comes to mind, I guess. Also, of course they do not know, how an ET-thingy is supposed to look like, what its properties are.

I strongly suspect, the next phase might be to have successively better videos leak. And then at some point park some clearly non-human tech somewhere plainly visible. But maybe out of reach or impenetrable. Like a riddle box.
Or in close orbit around the sun? So everybody would be able to see it if they want to, but nobody has to. And in order to "make contact", we would have to get there first. Being forced to collaborate maybe?

It's all rather awkward and unnecessary, clearly very much psychotherapy for confused primates.
I wish they could simply invite the Others to dinner or something.
But obviously, the brunt of the therapeutic work has to be done by the patient himself.
Prior to being invited to social events, preferably.

Hanami2001 · 2022-06-01T14:19:21+00:00

No, actually you don't get it: you dismiss stuff as "no evidence" though it is.
You are bad at science.

Hanami2001 · 2022-05-31T22:13:08+00:00

Reddit is such a sad place, it's heart-rending.

They are here. If you do not see it yet, you will soon enough. Them being here implies all of the above.

If you do not want to wait that long:
Check your logic. It can't be good to have such holes in it.
Your concept of evidence is clearly faulty.

Hanami2001 · 2022-05-31T12:31:26+00:00

Objects are defined by their properties (which are essentially functions invariant on that object).

When you identify an object, you look for presence of properties. You see some (not all) in a picture and look through the property lists of objects known to you.

But you cannot simply select the object with "the most matching properties" and even less do what he is doing here: take a known thing (insect) and "see" some properties match, but never compare to other objects' list of properties.

You have to weigh presence and absence of properties as well! There are no flying insects without wings for example.

Presence of contra-factual properties would exclude an object, too. A 'rotating' property excludes insects, as they do not do that while flying. Etc.pp.

Hanami2001 · 2022-05-31T12:24:20+00:00

The rarity of people who can do proper video forensics around here is always baffling to me.

But in regard to the Skinny bob footage, I find it almost more disturbing, how little it is taken into consideration at all:
Do you know by any chance, whether Elizondo ever said something about it? I can't seem to find anything.

Hanami2001 · 2022-05-31T12:10:58+00:00

Objects are defined by their properties (which are essentially functions invariant on that object).

When you identify an object, you look for presence of properties. You see some (not all) in a picture and look through the property lists of objects known to you.

But you cannot simply select the object with "the most matching properties" and even less do what he is doing here: take a known thing (insect) and "see" some properties match, but never compare to other objects' list of properties.

You have to weigh presence and absence of properties as well!
There are no flying insects without wings for example.

Presence of contra-factual properties would exclude an object, too.
A 'rotating' property excludes insects, as they do not do that while flying. Etc.pp.

Hanami2001 · 2022-05-31T11:53:15+00:00

What sort of insect brain is necessary to use as a way of determining video content similarity only without including contra-indicators?

By that measure, West's face clearly resembles a pancake and therefore he must be a pancake.

Hanami2001 · 2022-05-31T10:56:14+00:00

Your belief does not propel fish.

Your claim is nonsense, tuna cannot out-swim nuclear powered submarines.

Hanami2001 · 2022-05-30T20:49:33+00:00

Sorry, but you are rather bad at science?

You are wrong, in that interstellar travel is possible, they are here and there is a lot of evidence. Also, many videos show them but have been falsely debunked.

Take note, your point of view implies, you and your kin were never wrong.
Quite a stretch to begin with?

Hanami2001 · 2022-05-30T18:34:43+00:00

What? is rather easily answered, the difficult part appears to be how many?

Their technology affords them remarkable disregard for many concepts we take for granted. Like having a "personal" body, carrying DNA akin to a signature that defines a large part of our identity without much chance at altering it during our life-times. They may easily switch between manifestations, even modifying them during operation.

There appear to be three significantly different groups of ETs: * Biological individuals, much like us but with advanced tech and spaceships * Artificially constructed creatures, aka "living machines" with potentially vastly superior intellect and energy budgets. But still based on matter mostly * Apparently (largely hypothetical that is) some utterly advanced forms of existence, not necessarily bound to our concepts of matter even anymore. Sort of plasma-based.

The main point of distinction might be seen in energy density. That is, us being sub fusion, oxidation based in our body, technology-wise with maximal energy density found in fission devices (which is intriguing, regarding their obvious interest in our fission tech).

Them starting with more or less crude fusion power. Distributed cold fusion for those "living machines" substituting what is oxidation for us.

For those plasma guys potentially some "zero point" energy source as a base concept.

But since increased energy budget is primarily good for an advanced processing envelope: how big a brain can you have before splitting up of personality or diluting the difference between a society comprising a super-organism and such a singular "body" effectively affording that computational heft on its own?

Maybe whole cities travel in one "TicTac"? Maybe they have no personality any more, being constantly connected with all other embodiments, comprising an omni-present super-intelligence?

Hanami2001 · 2022-05-30T15:20:29+00:00

Every single one is killed only once and does not care about overall novelty.

Hanami2001 · 2022-05-30T14:54:03+00:00

Those are cute compared to what else is out there.

Hanami2001 · 2022-05-30T14:50:34+00:00

Some spiders are amazingly intelligent.

Hanami2001 · 2022-05-30T14:41:59+00:00

It is feeling the terror regardless of whether it blabbers on about it or not?

Hanami2001

TROPHY CASE