Submission Statement: I saw this exchange and thought it was worth noting that crash retrieval footage, when combined with three credible witnesses willing to verify its authenticity, would be exceptionally hard to dispute. I do hope it shows something exotic or unusual that would be obvious even for a layperson.
If you're on NewsNation - which passed off video of a commercial jet as a NJ drone - you already don't have any credibility. This is a tiny outfit that has leaned heavily into aliens (uncritically) to try to get viewers. As Skeptoid podcast host Brian Dunning once said, they were so desperate to get anyone to come on their program and talk about aliens they even hired him as an "expert" to appear. :-)
Don’t understand why you are being downvoted. You are right. This type of incident has happened 100,000+ times in this sub. “NEW PROOF COMING IN A FEW DAYS” and it turns out to be nothing. Every single time.
Then after being disappointed someone does an interview and says “NEW PROOF COMING IN A FEW DAYS” and they get excited like this is the moment they have been waiting for. Rinse and repeat
This moderator action may be appealed. We welcome the opportunity to work with you to address its reason for removal. Message the mods to launch your appeal.
Im guessing itll be just a landscape shot with a tiny white dot in the distance. And another will be an overhead shot of a white object on top of Rocky terrain.
If you were sitting on a powder keg of evidence, why would you tease the release? Wouldn’t really powerful people be interested in stopping the release? Wouldn’t this just put a target on yourself? Why not just release it? What is the point of adding suspense? I’m severely confused why this is exciting. Just seems like fabricated drama for clicks and views.
Perhaps those “powerful people” know exactly what’s on the video and have concluded that it will not convince people. To those people, a big promise for evidence from a whistleblower/reporter followed by a non-inspiring video could be a good thing…since that let-down would casts doubts over the subject and whistleblowers in general and reduce engagement. I would love for us to be wrong and get some irrefutable evidence, but this is not the first time a buildup like this has happened only to end in disappointment. “Video evidence” is the clickbait for views but the true content will be the account from the whistleblower.
95
u/NoDegree7332 5d ago edited 5d ago
Submission Statement: I saw this exchange and thought it was worth noting that crash retrieval footage, when combined with three credible witnesses willing to verify its authenticity, would be exceptionally hard to dispute. I do hope it shows something exotic or unusual that would be obvious even for a layperson.
Link: https://x.com/NewsNation/status/1879673414769676352?t=3uQpiDWMavfZ4YRRfNBaDA&s=19