So then your argument should be something like: “I don’t think any of these sources are credible at this time and therefore don’t find anything they present to be valid.”
Your argument should not be to misrepresent what the sources actually say.
I would not think the source was non-credible if the claims were to contradict my rather firm priors and my model of the world significantly less. As it is, If someone otherwise credible claims they can extract energy from “quantum vacuum” without explaining how they managed to overturn all of the Standard Model, I would dismiss the claims as the usual crackpot noise. A number of prominent and distinguished scientists went off the rails that way. The alien tech claims are in about the same ballpark. A lot of what we think we know about the universe would have to turn out wrong for the claims to be accurate. I would love to be proven wrong though, but it would require a lot more than words of one or two humans, or of a niche media outlet.
The thing that I think you’re missing, personally, is that David Grusch is really not asking any of us to believe his account just based on his words in an interview. His words as of now are not the thing that matters. What matters is the hundreds of pages and photos and hours of testimony given under oath to the Intelligence Community Inspector General and Congress. That’s the evidence that matters, not Grusch’s words.
I don’t know if I can believe Grusch, because I too haven’t seen the things he claims to have, the sources, documents, names, locations, etc. But you know who has? The ICIG. And he has deemed Grusch’s allegations credible and urgent. It is the ICIG I’m choosing to “believe” right now, in so far as there is anything to believe in. Or maybe not even him, as a person, but the office and legal procedures and government apparatus he represents.
If someone otherwise credible claims they can extract energy from the “quantum vacuum” without explaining to me how they did it, of course I would be incredulous. But if it was shown that they provided hours upon hours of sworn testimony to officials at the Department of Energy, who then said they were taking it very seriously, then my ears would prick up. Then I would go, “Oh, huh, some otherwise serious people in a serious bureaucracy dedicated to these things are taking this person’s claims seriously. I wonder what that’s about? Surely if there was nothing there they would not be taking him seriously.”
That’s the point we’re at here. I’m not inclined to believe there’s something to what Grusch is saying based on his words in an interview. I’m inclined to believe there’s something because an entire government apparatus (who has actually seen the evidence Grusch claims to have in his possession) is taking him seriously. And that, to me, seems worth taking seriously right now.
He’s provided classified information to congress already yes. The intelligence committees in both houses I believe.
Information on these vehicles is being illegally withheld from Congress, Grusch told the Debrief. Grusch said when he turned over classified information about the vehicles to Congress he suffered retaliation from government officials. He left the government in April after a 14-year career in US intelligence.
So then your argument should be something like: “I don’t think any of these sources are credible at this time and therefore don’t find anything they present to be valid.”
Your argument should not be to misrepresent what the sources actually say.
I would not think the source was non-credible if the claims were to contradict my rather firm priors and my model of the world significantly less. As it is, If someone otherwise credible claims they can extract energy from “quantum vacuum” without explaining how they managed to overturn all of the Standard Model, I would dismiss the claims as the usual crackpot noise. A number of prominent and distinguished scientists went off the rails that way. The alien tech claims are in about the same ballpark. A lot of what we think we know about the universe would have to turn out wrong for the claims to be accurate. I would love to be proven wrong though, but it would require a lot more than words of one or two humans, or of a niche media outlet.
The thing that I think you’re missing, personally, is that David Grusch is really not asking any of us to believe his account just based on his words in an interview. His words as of now are not the thing that matters. What matters is the hundreds of pages and photos and hours of testimony given under oath to the Intelligence Community Inspector General and Congress. That’s the evidence that matters, not Grusch’s words.
I don’t know if I can believe Grusch, because I too haven’t seen the things he claims to have, the sources, documents, names, locations, etc. But you know who has? The ICIG. And he has deemed Grusch’s allegations credible and urgent. It is the ICIG I’m choosing to “believe” right now, in so far as there is anything to believe in. Or maybe not even him, as a person, but the office and legal procedures and government apparatus he represents.
If someone otherwise credible claims they can extract energy from the “quantum vacuum” without explaining to me how they did it, of course I would be incredulous. But if it was shown that they provided hours upon hours of sworn testimony to officials at the Department of Energy, who then said they were taking it very seriously, then my ears would prick up. Then I would go, “Oh, huh, some otherwise serious people in a serious bureaucracy dedicated to these things are taking this person’s claims seriously. I wonder what that’s about? Surely if there was nothing there they would not be taking him seriously.”
That’s the point we’re at here. I’m not inclined to believe there’s something to what Grusch is saying based on his words in an interview. I’m inclined to believe there’s something because an entire government apparatus (who has actually seen the evidence Grusch claims to have in his possession) is taking him seriously. And that, to me, seems worth taking seriously right now.
Did Grusch already testify to Congress? I thought that was still being planned.
He’s provided classified information to congress already yes. The intelligence committees in both houses I believe.
https://www.theguardian.com/world/2023/jun/06/whistleblower-ufo-alien-tech-spacecraft
The one you linked is a new set of hearings planned by the House Oversight Committee.