Just out of curiosity, do you hold all of the other claims made by those featured on ancient aliens to be credible, or just specific researchers? If the later, what criteria have you used to distinguish between that which you do and do not believe?
Well you sound like you're doubting your own process. So that's good! First step. You also sound like you have trouble seeing things through other people's eyes, that's also good! Where you should go next! Mind expansion without drugs. You're welcome! Ha ha ha! :)
>Unironically posting ancient aliens.
First video, guy finds small piece of metal with a metal detector. He's a geology professor, but doesn't go into the geology at all, just
"I've never seen anything like this in all my years" ∴ alien metallurgy
maybe.
Second video:
Are there desirable properties to an alloy of bismuth and magnesium? The 'expert metallurgist from New Jersey' didn't say, just that they didn't know of any way to make it. All that really proves is the limits of the knowledge of one metallurgist from New Jersey. There are any numbers of ways that metal might condensate in layers over time, all unlikely to naturally occur, but any far more likely than ancient aliens.
Third video:
Guy literally admits that this is all pure speculation and that no definitive conclusions can be drawn from these random pieces of metal and that none of them are rule out all possibilities besides the existence of visitors with manufacturing technology beyond our comprehension.
whoops, replied to the wrong post. Watched it last night. I believe that guy truly believes. I believe the leaker is real. I believe the programs are real. I even believe they've observed phenomena/ recovered samples they can't explain. None of that is direct evidence of aliens. If the US government actually possesses meta-materials of non human origin, they will never be declassified as long as the potential to weaponize them exists. If they do not, it is still to their advantage for their adversaries to believe they might. As such no position of authority within the US government gives the meat of the claim -nonhuman origins- any greater legitimacy. It makes the claims the programs are real more legitimate. It makes the claims that they have recovered objects more legitimate. But my priors on the likely origin of those objects have not been shifted by any of evidence thusfar presented. At no point has he made any sort of claim as to WHY they believe they have evidence of non human technology, merely asserted that the evidence exists. If it exists and this guy has the clearance, then he should have leaked that. I know he said he's keeping it secret for security but then what was the point of leaking it in such a way as to be indistinguishable from a psyop? All the people like you already believe what he's claiming, and all the people like me won't be convinced by the level of evidence he's presenting. What has been accomplished?
Ha ha ha! :) No, I replied the right one, you need to own your own opinion, but just go to your own limit, and remember you don't know me, so don't pretend you do, okay? Ha ha ha! Good! :)
Oh I was referring to myself when I said replied to the wrong comment. Seems I omitted the subject of the sentence, and you assumed I was referring to you. No one can ever know the mind of another, so we use the things others say and do to form simplified models.
From the things you've posted in this thread, my model of you is someone who has believed the US government to be in possession of alien craft prior to David Grusch's announcement. That is the only piece of information I implied when I said 'people like you', no pejorative connotation. People who already believed what Grusch is saying is true. Was my model of you accurate? y/n
I notice you didn't answer my question on the wrong thread that I replied to. Do you believe the theories of every researcher who has appeared on ancient aliens with equal credibility? y/n
If not, what is your criteria for which ones you believe more or less than others? If you treat every theory with equal seriousness, I would like to know your opinion on the following statement:
"The moon is made of cheese, I have proof"
I have a piece of cheese from the moon. It's well toasted from it's entry through Earth's atmosphere of course, but I've had a widely respected dairy farmer examine it, and he confirmed that it is real cheese. Well toasted cheese does not simply appear in fields such as the one I found it in. The only explanation is that it was knocked off of the moon and fell to earth.
Right, I thought that at first but then I went with the opposite! Gave it to much time to cook, I suppose! Ha ha ha! :)
Ha ha ha! :) A sequence of y/n questions. A human is not a computer, you really don't know people, do you? Ha ha ha! :)
No, I am so much more than you can fathom. Your model of me is nothing, yet people can know the mind and more of another, a skill you have not yet mastered, I see. Ha ha ha! :)
You worry too much, and have not taken responsibility for your opinions, so you are lost in confusion. I could teach you how, but, I don't think you're ready. Ha ha ha! :)
Yes they are. The human brain is a biological computer. Unfortunately, it is not optimized for accurate computation, thus the need for rigorous self-examination of the origin of one's beliefs. To know the mind of another would require 1:1 neural connections shared between you. That leaves no neurons left to be you. Obviously you don't use all of your neurons to simulate the minds of others, you only use some. Therefore, your model will not be perfectly accurate. It might get quite close, but there are some details you don't have because you haven't lived their life, you've only lived your own. Even with the help of psychedelics ;D
My model of you is simple because I have constructed it from the scant contents of a couple of comments. To assume more would be forming baseless assumptions off data I don't have, which would be irresponsible if I value the accuracy of my model, which I do. I don't presume or even really care to know anything about anything else you believe. I am only interested in this one claim in the intersection of our neural venn diagrams, that of the US government possessing alien craft. my yes/ no questions were an attempt to get you to articulate what you think you know and how you think you know it.
I take a great deal of responsibility for my opinions, which is why I will only change them when the source of new information can articulate both the what and the how better than I currently understand them. I told you exactly what I believe on this topic. I believe the leaker is real. I believe the programs are real. I believe they have found things they do not know how to explain. I do not believe they are in possession of alien craft that are bigger on the inside than the outside and can warp time. Basically this https://xkcd.com/2786/
This is a total tangent from the article, and I understand what it actually entails, but I just love that there is a real office in the Australian government whose title is 'Shadow Energy Minister'. Sounds like something out of warhammer.
I was about to say - I took this for a Gödel, Escher, Bach reference given it's someone at Google, as well as the fact the pun is very much Hofstadter's style. In fact I would go so far as to say that the whole project was made to justify the title.
They do, they just don't call them TVs. Look up commercial digital displays, exact same brands with the same screens as the consumer model but no tracking and bloatware. Of course, without the subsidies from selling your data, they're going to run you an extra 30-50%
it's not just that, they're generally rated for 24/7 usage and feature much higher build quality - often with ultra thin bezels to allow them to be used in tiled arrangements.
whether that usage rating is related to any actual difference in the hardware is something i've pondered, but it is something they do specifically mention.
I wish it was only a 30-50% premium though as my experience is that they are an integer multiple of the equivalent consumer TV.
generally we get around this by using rentals for a lot of things, the only people purchasing them (in my realm) are production rental houses like PRG or VER, or permanent installers where the cost is just another line on the buildout of a space.
I'm very happy with my current dumb 65" 1080p screen, but have thought about whether I would pay signage screen prices if the only other option was something with its own rogue computer - smart TVs really are terrible in every iteration I've seen. Eventually I may desire more resolution or size, or my screen may have an irreparable failure.
Having modded thinkpads to use better / higher resolution panels, and having disassembled a number of consumer TVs, I do suspect that the next best option is going to be getting a dumb driver board to accept HDMI and turn it into the LVDS / EDP / whatever interface is needed to directly drive the panel (as well as a backlight driver, and something to spit audio from the HDMI to some speakers). As it gets harder to buy a quality large screen without crapware (without paying signage prices) I hope enough of us will pursue this route that there can be a known process and BOM to make it a straightforward project. I would imagine you could have your cake and eat it too by pairing up a quality dumb driver board and a high quality screen that is not available in dumb form.
At that point we could consider interesting modifications like a teensy with ethernet to allow remote control over LAN with a protocol like OSC, or some lightweight hardware to decode an NDI stream to allow creating "channels" coordinated by a centralized media server / NAS. One could accomplish interesting things that would be concerning if not under local-only control, like video calling that hops between screens in the house as you change rooms, shows that automatically pause if you get up for a restroom break, gesture control for when you're watching a cooking video while cooking and have dirty/wet hands, and so on. There is a ton of smart home functionality around screens that is compelling and useful when not paired with creepy companies or unknown data exfiltration.
The ultra-high-end LG V10 and V20 phones have this too. However, the V30 and V40 went to non-replaceable batteries. Also, the Galaxy S5 had it too, but the S6 and latter did not.
