Welcome to DU! The truly grassroots left-of-center political community where regular people, not algorithms, drive the discussions and set the standards. Join the community: Create a free account Support DU (and get rid of ads!): Become a Star Member Latest Breaking News Editorials & Other Articles General Discussion The DU Lounge All Forums Issue Forums Culture Forums Alliance Forums Region Forums Support Forums Help & Search

Gaugamela

(3,070 posts)
4. It's equally important not to rule it out as a viable hypothesis. The papers do not
Sun Oct 26, 2025, 06:30 PM
9 hrs ago

state the extraterrestrial explanation as a conclusion, but the lead scientist on the project, Dr. Beatriz Villarroel, has asserted this conclusion as her opinion in several interviews. She says that these transients appear to be highly reflective fabricated objects with flat surfaces, and they’re clearly not ours. And actually, there’s quite a bit of evidence supporting the extraterrestrial hypothesis. Testimony from credible witnesses is one type of evidence, called case history. There are also many recorded conversations between pilots and air traffic control, and between air traffic control and NORAD, that happened during encounters. These are frequently corroborated by radar. But evidence is not proof.

Personally, I suspect this is something more mundane, but I’m willing to keep an open mind.

Recommendations

0 members have recommended this reply (displayed in chronological order):

Latest Discussions»Culture Forums»Science»NBC covering breakthrough...»Reply #4