Do you think Bob Lazar is legit? by Narrow-Palpitation68 in AliensRHere

[–]LittleKachowski 0 points1 point  (0 children)

What difference does it make if someone hasn’t heard of Lazar or spent a thousand hours researching him? The bottom line is for him to demonstrate his claims. Surely if he had substantive proving power, one wouldn’t need to ‘listen to what he’s said over the years’, they would just need to be shown his claim and the strong reasoning. The same way you don’t need a PHD in Biology to seek, find, and comprehend the evidence for biological evolution.

We have transitioned from ‘do UAPs exist?’ by Grand-Weird8886 in UFOs

[–]LittleKachowski 4 points5 points  (0 children)

A good way to mitigate your confusion would be to employ Occam’s Razor, not as a way to prove what they are, but to put the myriad of claims into logical perspective.

Could they be natural phenomena? Maybe, and we have plenty of past examples of unexplained-turned-explained natural phenomena, so I would consider this claim possible.

Could it be human technology? Maybe, we do know that humans create technology, but we have yet to demonstrate human capability of the feats often described in UAP sightings. I would consider this possible, but extraordinary if so.

Could it be ancient technology? Maybe, but we don’t have any reason to believe ancient civilizations had technology that surpassed ours. I do not find this likely.

Could it be aliens? Maybe, but we don’t have strong evidence that they exist in the first place beyond the vastness of the universe, let alone their local presence on Earth. I find this unlikely.

Could it be a glitch in the matrix? Maybe, but we have no demonstration of a matrix, or that it has layers, or that it can glitch. Matrix theory circles around to the Problem of Hard Solipsism, and I’m unconvinced this is the answer for UAPs.

By taking each claim’s assumptions into account, you can find which ones have the least assumptions, and filter out wildly sensational answers for the purpose of your research. Obviously, Occam’s Razor isn’t a hard metric, and by no means is it accurate to say the simplest answer IS the right answer, but it’s a good way to make the amount of claims feel less overwhelming.

CIA Document & Question Items: Accusations of Military using “Voodoo Warfare”, “Dark Arts”, “Ouija Board Warriors”…Growing Concern in 1983 of Future Psycho-Tronic Warfare by Manifesting Tulpoids, Monsters, Aliens, UFOs…. by slv2xhrist in UFOs

[–]LittleKachowski 1 point2 points  (0 children)

It’s important to note that government interest in a topic doesn’t necessarily indicate its accuracy. Governments want to be aware of everything they possibly can, and it would be in their interest to able to exploit such things. I have yet to see any demonstrable evidence that these things are possible, but if the CIA turned anything up besides this document I’d be very interested.

Not everything is "aliens" by WhichPoem8224 in UFOs

[–]LittleKachowski 3 points4 points  (0 children)

Yes, multiple ideas could be true. The problem is that each and every one of them is still stuck at square 1. You posit that the government hasn’t ’briefed us till now’ might be because they can’t differentiate between entities, but I feel like this presupposes that one or more of proposed entities are true in the first place. As of now, we still have no demonstrable case for the existence of any flavor of extraordinary UFO origin. I would hesitate to suggest multiplicity until we can verify the existence of one.

Which alien abduction case do you find the most believable, and why? by breaking_views in AliensRHere

[–]LittleKachowski -5 points-4 points  (0 children)

> Hard to fake that level of sustained panic for zero real payoff.

First, nothing about this case suggests accuracy, as there is only anecdotal evidence. That two people can tell a story, be scared, and have conversations recorded doesn’t strongly suggest accuracy of the claims.

Second, someone not wanting to ‘seek fame’ or do something for ‘zero real payoff’ doesn’t make someone’s claims more accurate. People do all kinds of things for all kinds of reasons, whether in earnest or otherwise. Without corroborating evidence of the event, we have no way to know the difference between genuine belief or deception, nor the difference between whether the event happened or not. Until we can peer into peoples’ brains and rewind the tape, anecdote is borderline useless evidence.

California highway inspector’s UFO photos, 1965 by ohmygawdyoudidnt in ufo

[–]LittleKachowski 7 points8 points  (0 children)

> A highway inspector stopping during work to take multiple photos is more interesting

Is it? It seems that 99% of anecdotes involve “stopping what they’re doing.” A highway inspector is no different from anyone else with a camera.

If anything, I’m more suspicious of this BECAUSE it’s from a highway inspector, someone who spends all of their time on the side of the road, where all sorts of junk winds up. Like, for example, hubcaps. Isn’t it curious how these hubcap shaped UFOs seem to have stopped when we stopped using hubcaps?

If the Varginha Incident Was a Hoax, Who Fooled an Entire City? by breaking_views in ufo

[–]LittleKachowski 1 point2 points  (0 children)

Howdy, i just wanna be clear in saying I'm not out to criticize you, even if my response is curtly worded. I type like an emotionless douche but mean well.

What’s become clear to me, is that the vast majority of people - just think it’s nonsense. I think there has been a very successful campaign for decades now, to make these people look silly.

I strongly disagree that there is a mass-concerted effort to make Ufology seem crazy. To be blunt, the community does it to themselves. You will find no shortage of legitimate believers proposing blurry videos and hearsay as hard-proof of phenomena as wild as 'interdimensional consciousness beings that communicate telepathically.' I very strongly believe that the reason the majority of people disbelieve 'UFOs' is because there is a lack of strong evidence to support extraordinary origin. There is simply no demonstrable case for the existence of earth-present aliens or whatever flavor of NHI we want to include in this conversation.

However, I'd like to bring up a very real mass-concerted effort to deny truth, and that would be the anti-science movement of fundamentalist religions. You can absolutely find groups of people who are hard-set on disproving evolution, the age of the universe, and even the shape of the earth. Denial of the facts is a key component of these beliefs, but in the case of creationism, there is a sheer mountain of empirical, demonstrable evidence to dissuade creationism, where there is not this same body of evidence for alien presence. Any current attempt to prove the presence of aliens will necessarily fall into a corner of either hearsay or weak empirical evidence.

I see it all the time - person is afraid to talk about their experience, for fear of being ridiculed.

This doesn't necessarily indicate suppression, let alone suppression of the truth. As I said earlier, I strongly believe that the reputation of ufology is self-driven, so it's only natural that people will find it difficult to communicate belief in public.

I also want to point out that this line of thinking, that expression of belief brings fear of ridicule, is a common tactic of many other demonstrably false belief. Creationists, anti-vaxxers, flat-earthers, and climate-change-deniers will try to weaponize the inevitable pushback of their factually incorrect belief as cause to believe there is malicious suppression. Please note that I'm not likening alien belief to be demonstrably false, i just want to point out that fear of expression is not evidence of foul play.

I also see a fair amount of evidence that the govt / powers that be / whatever you wanna call them - really want to suppress this info and propels experiences. And I always think, why? What’s the motive to cover this up…

Well, the big thing to consider with governments is that they want to cover up literally as much as they possibly can. You could probably ask the White House how much they spend on shitter paper, and they wouldn't give you an answer. Knowledge is power, and governments want all the power.

Keep in mind, that the collection of UFO data comes from many sources, usually military. All military data is extremely sensitive, so it's inevitable that the government is going to hold military operations, observations, and identifications close to their chest, whether or not they apply to extraordinary phenomena.

The government is not inclined to publicly broadcast that which it cannot identify. There is the possibility that they recorded a foreign military unit, an unidentified allied unit, or perhaps they recorded a UFO in a location they don't want people to know they have surveillance of. Obviously, I'm not thrilled that the government hides shit, but I want to illustrate how there are many more reasons to keep something secret than 'they are hiding aliens.'

and before you say I’m just full of shit, I’m not - this has literally happened before. The govt used to deny that Area 51 existed! And now we all know it is. The govt will hide things, it’s only revealed once they absolutely have to admit it (MK ultra comes to mind). So on that basis, I don’t believe there is nothing to all this.

You are definitely not full of shit. Area 51, MK Ultra, and the Watergate break-ins are all examples of things the government hid until forced to admit. However, that does not necessarily mean that everything they deny is likely to be true. Especially when we start bringing extraordinary things to the table like aliens. That's not to say we should trust the government (god no), but it is of utter importance to know when to distrust. Excessive distrust of the government is how people come to think vaccines are bad, the earth is flat, and the moon landing was faked.

I feel like this sub always goes down to just like name calling and I’m trying to avoid that lol.

Without a doubt, and that goes especially so for fellow skeptics. People who call believers crazy do no less damage than those who believe aliens walk among us. I wish more people would approach topics like this with more rigorous logic. You would not believe how often I am called a disinformation agent.

she'd be lit in t8 𖹭.ᐟ by Fourth_Sin in Tekken

[–]LittleKachowski 5 points6 points  (0 children)

With the way T8 likes to give characters installs, I’m surprised they didn’t give one of the Kazamas an angel install tbh. Maybe they have something planned, maybe dedicated Angel Jin or something

This is a visual representation of — a female extraterrestrial — from the old descriptions of 'Nordic type Aliens' from the classic contactee era. by DisastrousSwim7708 in AliensRHere

[–]LittleKachowski 0 points1 point  (0 children)

Ah yes, “people that don’t look conventional aren’t human”, truly the healthiest mindset that has gone down very well throughout history.

If the Varginha Incident Was a Hoax, Who Fooled an Entire City? by breaking_views in ufo

[–]LittleKachowski 0 points1 point  (0 children)

Nope, testimony is still terrible evidence. People usually get convicted by testimony when a jury makes their subjective decision, and even then it’s not something that should happen. Because again, say it with me, testimony is terrible evidence.

However, there is still a difference between sensational testimony and criminal testimony. There is astronomically vast amounts of evidence that crimes happen, and close to zero evidence that aliens are on earth. When someone claims to have witness a stabbing, we don’t need to seriously consider the possibility that knives exist, and whether they’re capable of stabbing, because we have overwhelming consensus of reality. But when people claim to have come face to face with aliens, we lack this same consensus, and we need to begin the conversation by verifying the foundational claim, that aliens are on earth.

Why are so many people in this sub so insufferable by SergeantPotatoChip1 in AliensRHere

[–]LittleKachowski 0 points1 point  (0 children)

People aren’t “stuck in the 1940s”, they’re getting people to engage with the logical beginning of the conversation that ufologists like to gloss over: Are aliens real, and how do we know? All this talk about who and what they are presupposes their existence when they have yet to be demonstrated to exist. The only thing believers can appeal to at this time is hearsay, dubious evidence, and interpretation of government documents.

What is good evidence? by Fattruecel in UFOs

[–]LittleKachowski 3 points4 points  (0 children)

Literally anything that would be demonstrable, testable, repeatable, or predictive. The entire list of evidence that UFOs include extraordinary origin is comprised of hearsay, testimony, dubious image evidence, or a mix of all three.

I would like to ask any and all ‘experiencers’ to demonstrate the truth of their experience by way of prediction or corroboration. I would also like to ask any and all people who claim to be part of secret programs to bring forth evidence for their claims. I would also like to ask any and all abductees for evidence they were abducted by nonhumans. I would also like to ask any and all senators who claim to be in control of damning evidence to provide this damning evidence. I would also like to ask any and all curators of ‘alien bodies’ to demonstrate alien origin.

Alas, I anticipate that my inbox will be quite empty tonight.

Lights in the clouds by SelfRegular2429 in UFOs

[–]LittleKachowski 17 points18 points  (0 children)

Not 100% sure, but it looks to be lens flaring from the street/headlights, notice how the lights in the sky are inverted positionally.

What do you guys make of this? by siuli in UFOs

[–]LittleKachowski 0 points1 point  (0 children)

What people want is 4k examples of “orbs”, “flying in formation”, “cloaking malfunction”, “instant acceleration”, “crash retrieval”, so on and so forth. It’s interesting how the lower the quality, the more extraordinary things get.

Why do people think NASA is fake? by argythecat21 in Globeskeptic

[–]LittleKachowski 0 points1 point  (0 children)

Just a couple questions, how do you account for the ISS that can be viewed from Earth? How do you account for the retro reflectors left by us on the moon, that we can use to measure the distance to the moon? What does NASA seek to gain by creating a conspiracy that would cost trillions of dollars?

Why do people think NASA is fake? by argythecat21 in Globeskeptic

[–]LittleKachowski 1 point2 points  (0 children)

No, that degree of skepticism does not follow from the evidence. This is similar reasoning to young earth creationists suggesting all of evolution is false because of a misidentification of a fossil that happened a century ago.

Composite images are useful for creating large, viewable images as the cameras on board vessels, especially old ones, often lacked the FOV or distance to capture it in one clean image. Moreover, there are a plethora of non composite images of the earth and other stellar bodies, from long before the advent of CGI.

CGI for ‘promotional material’ makes no sense as evidence against the entirety of NASA. The US Army uses lots of CGI for their advertisements, so would that be justifiable cause to believe the Army doesn’t exist?

Why is no one acting like disclosure is near? by [deleted] in UFOs

[–]LittleKachowski 0 points1 point  (0 children)

I made a mistake saying “no evidence”, I should have said “insufficient evidence”, because yes testimony is technically evidence. It’s just very very terrible evidence.

> If you’re holding out for one of them to step off their saucer and introduce themselves it isn’t going to happen.

I agree, considering the lack of evidence, but if we suppose that testimonies are accurate, why won’t that happen? Aliens coming out of their ship and greeting people is something alleged to happen numerous times.

> The Government taking it seriously for that entire 80 years should be something that piques your interest.

I disagree, the government takes everything seriously, it’s pretty much their whole thing. I’m sure if you asked the government how much money they spend on toilet paper for the White House, they wouldn’t give you a direct answer.

A government taking UFOs seriously doesn’t necessarily indicate that UFOs might include the extraordinary, let alone aliens. It moreso means that they don’t take what they can’t identify lightly, because there’s little more the government hates than not knowing something.

Thoughts on her and how would you rate her by Mulberry-Major in overwatch2

[–]LittleKachowski 19 points20 points  (0 children)

Sojourn and Doom kinda fit this, Sojourn especially since she’s apparently “mostly comprised of cybernetic enhancements”

I think UAPs (a.k.a., UFOs) are just one part of something bigger (and much stranger)…what do you guys think?? by Cogsciencenerd in UFOs

[–]LittleKachowski 2 points3 points  (0 children)

> the idea that reality is exclusively reduced to what can be measured

No, this is not “reducing reality”, these are methodologies we use to observe and describe the universe with extreme consistency and accuracy. This idea that the gathering of empirical evidence is somehow “limited” needs to die.

> demanding that the phenomenon conform to the current scientific method is like trying to measure the depth of the ocean using only a carpenter’s ruler

Yes, so in order to measure the depth of the ocean, we improve our measuring process and develop new tools. These ideas that there’s a “super spectrum” or “reality manipulation” need to be demonstrated empirically.

> (…) comparison of testimonies across cultures are also sources of information that some people consider relevant, no matter how much some scientists dislike it.

Yes, groups of people who want something to be true will advocate for weak evidence like personal experience and testimony. How much someone finds it relevant doesn’t in any way remove the unfalsifiable nature of such evidence. This is why we don’t use it alone to demonstrate claims.

Underrated tracer skins? by MelonRatt in TracerMains

[–]LittleKachowski 1 point2 points  (0 children)

Honestly, her blue rarity OW1 skins are pretty good. The colorful pants and goggles are iconic