The Elizondo Collection


Hey hey Skeptics, you got a win!!!!
Out of 144 reports the big hats looked at one was a balloon :)
The rest unknown. You all must be excited to get a 1 in 144 win loll
OK for part 2....swamp gas for the 2 in 144 :) Hope you guys get a win.

Elizondo suggests that the 144 in the last "8 months" <<------ Skeptics did you read this? 8 months?
The 144 is likely the tip of the iceberg.

I have been a forum participant back to the Bulletin board days, maybe 30 years ago now, too old to work it out.
I have been laughed at, called names, regularly demeaned as an idiot (<<-- Doc, Skarlett and others)
Had stupid pictures and memes poked at me.
I have had all you arm chair scientists do this to me and others like me for decades.
You have all thrown the same shit at us for as long as I can remember,

But now many folks in places much more informed than any of us, as can be seem by the amazing efforts of Leta :love: posting so many informed testimonies you skeptics are progressively getting egg on your faces.

The armchair scientists relying on debunkers testimony from 1950 are grasping at straws.

The testimonies here have been quoting just about word for word what I and others have been saying for decades.
All our arguments are now mainstream from informed people.

I am calling it.

I say these UAPs, in the extreme category are ET.
The experts are alluding to it to play safe.
I am calling it.
Its ET. Prove me wrong.
 
Steven Greenstreet of The New York Post obtained the cover letter of Luis Elizondo's 12-page complaint against the Pentagon filed with the Inspector General.

-------------------------------------​

j7uZ4ea.jpg
 
Steven Greenstreet of The New York Post obtained the cover letter of Luis Elizondo's 12-page complaint against the Pentagon filed with the Inspector General.

-------------------------------------​

j7uZ4ea.jpg
It would be interesting to read the other 11 pages.
 
..Its ET. Prove me wrong..

The onus is on you to prove you are right.
No it is not. That has been the skeptics escape rout for decades. That argument is long long done. You need to get your thoughts out of 1945 skeptics. We are now way way past that bullshit. If you stick wiyj that shit you ate going to get squashed by the future. Thats a rubbish argument and a lazy one
 
You wanted a scientific examination of the situation. You didn't get one.

In a court of law the prosecution has to prove you guilty based on the facts provided; you do not have to prove yourself innocent.

So although, to continue the analogy, it has been found to be that a crime has been committed, The weapon has not been found.

In respect to this, the evidence against you is tenuous at best. Everyone may know 'you did it', but they have to provide the evidence.

This report says 'yes, there is something there'. But not what it is or where it comes from.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Dr Wu
You wanted a scientific examination of the situation. You didn't get one.

In a court of law the prosecution has to prove you guilty based on the facts provided; you do not have to prove yourself innocent.

So although, to continue the analogy, it has been found to be that a crime has been committed, The weapon has not been found.

In respect to this, the evidence against you is tenuous at best. Everyone may know 'you did it', but they have to provide the evidence.

This report says 'yes, there is something there'. But not what it is or where it comes from.
OK mate, you just reinforced one of my beefs with another prominent member here by the court of law analogy. I am not religious but a quick google search tells me there is 6.9 billion people on earth who believe in a God. And your test above would fail to establish the existence of god. Are they right? I don't know. but it shows how pintless the court of law approach is on this subject. An argument I have had many times here. You and Doc take the same black and white court of law approach.

So I don't know what to say now. You seem determined to not advance your point of view in the face of overwhelming evidence, testimony and government comment. You choose to live in the world view that you do. We are all different.
I choose to not ignore the overwhelming and mounting evidence pointing to a very new world of disclosure and go with the evidence..

I have nothing else to offer in the way of arguments.
You seem steadfast in your skepticism.
All the best mate (y)
 
It's simply amazing how many of these you tube podcasts and interviews Elizondo has gone on lately....one would think he's running for office or something.......?
:biggrin:
 
He wants to. Go Lue!
Why not. Then he can contribute even more to the list of supposedly confidential information being leaked out.

Guess he'll have to make do with a few books and some tv appearances.

Maybe all these leakers should form their own club.
 
  • Haha
Reactions: Dr Wu