A great , under 10 min., concise recounting of the highlights and known facts from the last 75 years without getting bogged down in minutia and conjecture.
I get your frustration, and I feel the same, but I don't think we are the target here, it's for people totally fresh to this who may not normally be interested in any of this
@Lance Manspear yeah..maybe the idiot should start with that..but..it's an idiot who wouldn't of thought anything of her own aswell as stating- and starting off with..eg: for those who are new/and don't know..simply simple..ya goofy m8te from Australia
1. Just a heads up. UAP was updated again this year.... It's Anomalous, not Aerial. They're no longer just looking at airborne objects, but Unidentified objects both under the sea and in space. 2. "Crackpot community, please don't come at me" - Seriously? Isn't this the point when you *SHOULD* be wrapping your mind around the possibility those people were never crackpots to begin with?? Even as a joke, it does nothing to help lessen or remove the stigma around it. You're helping to maintain it. Thank you for covering the subject, but would implore to you to *please* do better. The time for jokes has passed. As for that case missing from the Blue Book files... It's not the only one. HIGHLY recommend looking up the Bolender Memo, if you haven't yet. It references a second investigation *outside* of Blue Book that handled cases sensitive to national security, which a fighter plane disappearing surely would have been. Blue Book was just a cover for that other program. It was always meant to downplay the subject for the public.
Hey there, SkepticalBeliever. Thanks for your feedback. I'm always looking to make better content. 1.You're 100% correct! I made reference to the AARO, but didn't update the "aerial" to "anomalous" when describing UAP. (I probably should have). Since the most recent official ODNI UAP report still uses the "aerial" term, I didn't think to update it. That was a miss on my part. Thank you for the correction. 2. I see your point. I would also argue that not every account was legit. That being said, my intention was actually to highlight how society often labeled those with close encounters as crackpots, but now not so much. I do hear you, and I will be more sensitive with my jokes in the future. 3. I will definitely check out the Bolender Memo. Thanks again. Take care and I hope that you'll stick around while we explore new content ideas.
Ashley killed it! I love this kinda stuff! 🛸👽
Thanks, PJ! I dig it too.
A great , under 10 min., concise recounting of the highlights and known facts from the last 75 years without getting bogged down in minutia and conjecture.
Thanks for your feedback! The minutia and conjecture is super interesting, but I just wanted to hit some highlights.
6:17 lol no, they are referring to countermeasure chaff. Like what aircraft drop to evade radar-guided missiles.
Oh! That makes more sense!
Whoops! I was using primary sources and there were birds and other natural items on the list…so I just assumed…I’d like to issue a retraction!
I think people should worry more about what they represent, the real reality, not this bubble most people live in
What do they represent? 🤔
Glen! Tell me more.
YOU👽👈.
🛸
Agree.
I'm missing something...Y r you repeating what everyone knows..ya goofy m8te from Australia
I get your frustration, and I feel the same, but I don't think we are the target here, it's for people totally fresh to this who may not normally be interested in any of this
@Lance Manspear yeah..maybe the idiot should start with that..but..it's an idiot who wouldn't of thought anything of her own aswell as stating- and starting off with..eg: for those who are new/and don't know..simply simple..ya goofy m8te from Australia
Hey there! We're just getting started. Everybody's gotta start somewhere. Do you have any suggestions for what you'd like to see a video on?
1. Just a heads up. UAP was updated again this year.... It's Anomalous, not Aerial. They're no longer just looking at airborne objects, but Unidentified objects both under the sea and in space.
2. "Crackpot community, please don't come at me" - Seriously? Isn't this the point when you *SHOULD* be wrapping your mind around the possibility those people were never crackpots to begin with??
Even as a joke, it does nothing to help lessen or remove the stigma around it. You're helping to maintain it. Thank you for covering the subject, but would implore to you to *please* do better. The time for jokes has passed.
As for that case missing from the Blue Book files... It's not the only one. HIGHLY recommend looking up the Bolender Memo, if you haven't yet. It references a second investigation *outside* of Blue Book that handled cases sensitive to national security, which a fighter plane disappearing surely would have been. Blue Book was just a cover for that other program. It was always meant to downplay the subject for the public.
Hey there, SkepticalBeliever. Thanks for your feedback. I'm always looking to make better content.
1.You're 100% correct! I made reference to the AARO, but didn't update the "aerial" to "anomalous" when describing UAP. (I probably should have). Since the most recent official ODNI UAP report still uses the "aerial" term, I didn't think to update it. That was a miss on my part. Thank you for the correction.
2. I see your point. I would also argue that not every account was legit. That being said, my intention was actually to highlight how society often labeled those with close encounters as crackpots, but now not so much. I do hear you, and I will be more sensitive with my jokes in the future.
3. I will definitely check out the Bolender Memo. Thanks again.
Take care and I hope that you'll stick around while we explore new content ideas.
Start off by trying to find a real picture of outer space before spouting this rubbish..
Kindergarten level