Гарвардский физик говорит, что фрагменты метеора могут быть частями «технологического гаджета» из космоса
Похожие записи:
Статья в Newsweek за 2018 год о загадочном взрыве метеорита возле Питуффика.
Радуга Х
Пришельцы Ванджины
Фил Шнайдер, разоблачитель с высоким уровнем допуска, полная презентация 1996 года после того, как неделю назад в него стреляли. Он показывает свое доказательство существования инопланетян, включая металлы и фотографии. Он попал в перестрелку с инопланетянами, убив 2 серых и потеряв левую руку. В том же году он совершил «самоубийство».
Пилот F-100 Super Sabre Рой Мур рассказывает о своей встрече с НЛО в 1957 году над северными Филиппинами.
Темный объект, парящий над городом, мысли?
Weather Channel: Юмор или что?
Сенатор Мартин Хайнрих (D-NM) сомневается в разоблачителе НЛО, но поддерживает слушания
Специальный макет от Google при поиске «Дэвид Груш»
Пожалуйста, проверьте мой КАНАЛ YT. Много информации и отчетов об инопланетной деятельности.
🏆 Big shout out to “might be” which is doing the heavy lifting in this headline. Respect to the weasel words that help keep hope alive. 🫡
The Harvard physicist Avi Loeb boils down to more eyeballs is more money for either him, his team, and/or his research. No publicity is bad publicity really. How else would he sit back and rake in the kind of cash he has available to him and do the things he does? I will save my opinion on his «research conclusions» and the like, but I feel that he is click-baiting just with what he discusses and how he presents it. It’s also the reporters’ fault for presenting it as such. I do wish there was a better resource to bring this to light, and to more eyes. I would also like to see some of this stuff peer reviewed and see what makes sense and not about what he has said. Just my $.o2
The problem I have with this guy, is that every time I actually read the entirety of any of the articles about his endeavors, every one of them turns out to be quasi-clickbait. The headlines always imply something really exciting, and then the substance is basically “hey it might be from alien tech, but also, like, it totally might not be…and I don’t have any evidence to suggest that it IS alien tech, either.” Seems kind of like an attention whore who is drafting off of the Harvard name to publish a whole lot of nothing.
They may also be pieces of my Aunts melted toaster oven that got dumped in the pacific by one of these bogus “recycling” companies. Loeb is an attention seeking blowhard looking for personal glory based on his association with Harvard. Harvard used to be a good school until it became an investment management company for rich white blowhards that also gouges a few students for optics. 43% of the intake are white legacy or donor kids. Alan Dershowitz is another example of the inbred self-aggrandizing hypocrisy that is the new Harvard. It breeds arrogance. I have never hired a good Harvard grad.
I can see into the future. It won’t be
Whatever!
Just read this today too, I trust Avi honestly. Let’s see where it goes
it’s a bunch of fucking iron balls bro lmao.
https://www.the-alien-project.com/en/mummies-of-nasca-results/
Scientists presented to the Congress of Peru their findings on 5 “reptilian humanoids” not know before. Watch the videos
I feel dubious about this guy because to me it seems the things he looks at just «smell» natural to me. Like ‘Oumuamua, because it was seen to be tumbling as it passed through. Why would a spacecraft that presumably has enough power to fire a maneuvering thruster, tumble erratically like that? It just «smells» natural to me, from what I’ve picked up unconsciously over reading and looking at many ideas and sources of information.
Likewise the meteor here. If it was a «meteor», I would immediately say that it should be treated as natural unless *very, very strongly* indicated otherwise. He seems like he might be making a good case it’s interstellar — which is SUPER COOL on its own because you could literally see what an alien mineralogy looks like and that’s something I’ve long wondered about — but that doesn’t mean artificial; again, it’d be like ‘Oumuamua, but with the advantage we can actually hold this one in our hands. Just because it has funny mixed-up materials doesn’t mean artificial because that’s also *exactly* what we’d expect if we were looking at a *natural* object from a star formed out of a different nebula with different mixtures of base elements, thermal history, etc. .
(Though I’m also very much in favor of sending off a nuke propelled craft to catch ‘Oumuamua. Space is so gobsmackin’ huge that even though you might *think* it’s «long gone», it’s actually not!)