Search results

So don't use numbers! They're not required to arrive at this conclusion. And if you do use numbers, call them your "personal confidence", instead of labeling them a probability that hasn't and won't be measured. Btw., 90% confidence that 90% are true amounts to a bet value of 81%, not 9:1. If...

I understand your point. It simply does not address what I wrote, for reasons already detailed.

yes, but there was never anything official for AATIP-that-was-not-AAWSAP. You have to look to AAWSAP for something with a budget and presumably an org chart.

the new AARO report was pretty explicit

You're not assigning probabilities, you're making up numbers.

Well, in your OP you have the moon diameter at 0.56⁰. Now consider that the moon actually moved 0.28⁰ degrees further than you saw, i.e. half a diameter more—won't that boost her speed considerably?

your number for circumference is actually the radius, you need ×2π That's with the moon set to 10,000 km, at 370,000 km the angle is ~0.3⁰, which is big enough to be a problem (but I did not use exact values). Orbital motion of Earth vs. the sun adds another ~0.03⁰, but I think in the other...

Not just the distance, but also the parallax effect. The Earth's surface in effect "overtakes" the moon, so parallax would appear to slow the apparent speed of the moon down. (I can sketch it for you if it's still unclear.)

40 minutes elapsed, yet your maths does not take the motion of the observer due to Earth's rotation (15⁰/hour) into account.

Here's an explanation of the ladder game and its physical principles (cued up). Source: https://m.youtube.com/watch?v=tk_ZlWJ3qJI&t=411

I guess it depends on what we want this be a metaphor of. When we think of Zondo's Navy videos being explainable, the fake prize comes to mind; when we think of disclosure activists, we see them demanding another step on the ladder to failure.

no, some of these games (e.g. the ladder) are rigged such that it appears possible to get a price (just one more attempt!) but actually isn't that's what this feels like to a UFOlogist, that it's possible to get a good proof of these visitors, it's just the details that seem to somehow never...

Being young? ;)

Being old is not a brag. :p

I'm not referring to "the side that is arguing aliens". I was responding to your, "The case fascinates me more from the level of bias from all sides than it does the alien aspect." And the level of bias is markedly different depending on which side you look at. That's one of the distinctions...

To be fair, I couldn't be bothered to look for photos, but the silt deposit is asymmetric.

I thought both clues indicated a "downward" flow in that bend, so right-to-left or eastward. The solution proves this correct.

might be even better to find cemeteries with no buildings at all near them (not just churches) this one has farmland directly adjoining

Yes, but I was thinking that precipitation radar works precisely because water drops/droplets generate radar returns.