Forbes явно продвигает пропаганду против НЛО в этой статье: Заявления, сделанные «разоблачителем НЛО» Дэвидом Грушем, являются чистой научной фантастикой

PSA Forbes is pay-to-publish in effect. It’s not the legitimate business magazine of years ago; it’s just a shell. All sorts of blather appears there now.

They’re Medium articles.

>Senior Contributor

Opinion discarded.

It’s not clever to call it «pure science fiction» because what was «fantastical science fiction» sometimes becomes science fact. It becomes our reality.

SS: This article published by Forbes, not only used Mick West to try and justify that the claims made by UFO whistleblower’ David Grusch are pure science fiction, but they also use some rather weak arguments, such as claiming that the revelations are simply tropes used in science fiction narratives. They attempt to use arguments, such as advanced E.T’s would never crash, flesh and blood pilots would never be used, and that humans would not be able to back engineer any crash retrievals, in order to justify their position. However, any logical person can see that all of these arguments are weak, and make major assumptions about the motivations, intentions and capabilities of NHI’s and humans alike.

They are like church in medieval times

“Notably, many of Grusch’s claims contain illogical assumptions, popularized by science fiction tropes.”

I think you’ll find that science fiction has largely been derived from rumors and reports in the latter half of the 20th century. As somebody said recently on here: X-Files was a documentary

What do you expect, we do not have hard evidence.

“Science fiction” claimed by a pop culture analyst and movie commentator. When you have a hammer, every problem looks like a nail.

His “logic” is garbage.

It’s advanced therefore it is perfect and cannot crash.

That’s an absurd leap to make. If a caveman saw an F-18 fly by he would think this way too, yet we know fighter jets are quite capable of crashing or being shot down.

everything he has said has also been said before by people with better credentials and none of you ever battered an eye lol

Seems just like this guy’s take.

Idk why people always equate advanced tech with infallibility.

He even says why would they even pilot them at all in the same breath as how ridiculous the idea of them crashing is, when we know how frequently auto pilot crashes in our own technology. I just read an article the other day about how frequent the Tesla autopilot crashes. I mean we had the Boeing max dive straight into the ground even though the planes were perfect fine, it was just a software glitch.

Then he says they crash frequently. And we don’t have any reason to think that based off Grusch’s telling. He said quite a few and the coverup is 90 years. Even assuming 45 that’s only one crash every two years, and let’s say 15 that’s only one crash every 6 years. If they operate in any regular fashion and in any decent population numbers I’d say that’s a pretty reliable and advanced technology. I mean shit we only had like a few shuttles and a couple of those exploded.

This was actually a good article. All the author wants, like the rest of us normal logical Americans, is actual evidence and not more stories of the week from random guy of the week.

A Forbes article basically proves the opposite of what they say. Them and business insider are 100% shill

This acticle is defenetly a tentative of obfuscation and is part of a disinformation campaign.

If you write about this subject, which is very serious if you pay attention to the core reason of Grusch’s ICIG complaint, you don’t write an article by a blogger-film critic who writes about pop culture… It makes no sense.

Overall, this article is not mentionning Grusch real credidential, not explaining entirely the seriousness of his complaint to the ICIG and the reason of it and the legal procedures he went through with his attorneys. It is not explaining the context.

Instead, he makes silly correlation between Grusch claims and hollywood movies, rick and morty, and clearly tries to make Grusch affirmations wacky and thinfoil looking. When a senior intel officer explained under oath, while previously providing real proofs to congress and to the ICIG, says that crimes, murders, and illegal programs are happening, you don’t do this even though there’s 1% chance it’s veredict.

Therefore, saying that Mick West debunking video is «An excellent response video», full of assomptions while providing no more proofs that Grusch provided is completely stupid and definitely comes from a biased opinion. That’s the problem there, this article is screaming «That’s my opinion and I think I’m right!».

Right after, the writer tell us : «many of Grusch’s claims contain illogical assumptions, popularized by science fiction tropes». Again, an opinion of the author. Seriously, Dani Di Placido need to start giving examples, and analysis elements. He actually never does whenever he tries to denigrate and/or ridicule Grusch.

For the «Alien craft would never crash» speech, this is an illogical assumption in itself based on a opinion popularized by some science fiction tropes as well. It contradicts his previous paragraph. How would he knows? As Garry Nolan, Grusch, Jacques Vallée and many other said ;

— Crashes are rare, and the craft crashing are usually drones, flying machine with no occupants. Grusch explained it very well.

— They sometimes simply land the craft and leave/abandoned it. This could imply that the crashes are also a way to give us their technology in a voluntary way.

— As many suggest, even though you are very advanced technologically, that doesn’t mean that accidents probability is 0%. If there’s a lot of those probes/drones/crafts around Earth and elsewhere, it would simply be natural that some of them occasionally crashes, accidents happening here and there, since their technologies being very sophisticated and maybe fragile. I mean, they are traveling at high speed through space, air, water, at super high speed, there’s all sort of dangerous elements. We crashed many of our probes, spacecraft exploded before, anything can happen to us and so to them as well. Them being not human doesn’t mean that they are at safe from accidents and unexpected problems.

— We also need to mention that crashes might occurred, for some at least, because we wanted to and because we used weapons to put them down.

The author seems to think that non human technology would be some gods with perfect technologies.

He brought many empty arguments outside that we need proofs.

>Whether one believes that said vehicles are extraterrestrial or inter-dimensional in origin, it is an extraordinary leap of logic to assume that they are janky enough to crash, let alone with the frequency that Grusch and other UFO enthusiasts claim.

So let me get this straight … it’s fine that the vehicles could be extraterrestrial or inter-dimensional. But the author finds the «extraordinary leap of logic» is the assumption that they crash?

Somebody please show Dani *»I write about film, television, pop culture, and other fun stuff»* Di Placido, the door. They are clearly out of their comfort zone here.

Well, until there is any evidence, there’s not much else to say…

Any article that contains the sentence » UFO skeptic Mick West released an excellent response», well, yeah, says it all really….

Look, if you’re buying anything Forbes is selling you should know better. Because what they’re really selling is the same as always, capitalism and the love thereof.

If aliens have been here for thousands of years, where are the crashed ufos and bodies? The mainstream thought is they’ve been around for that long, and somehow they’re now using drones, because they kept trashing in the 20 century. But why not change that up prior centuries? So they just all started crashing recently? Doesn’t add up.