Interesting discussion on UFOs with Professor Garry Nolan

Investigative journalist Ross Coulthart sat with Nolan for just over an hour, and asked some very pertinent questions. It's good to see someone with Nolan's intellect discussing the subject. One of the more fascinating points Nolan wonders about is the "religious" implication. If the beings behind the UFOs are so incredibly advanced, then where do they fit on a "scale" of God\angels\demons. We're talking about beings that can literally control and manipulate the laws of physics. (Which we barely understand)

Many topics are discussed, including:

A message to skeptics.
Analyzing alleged physical material left behind by UFOs.
Pine Gap in Australia, and whether China or Russia know more about UFOs.
Nolan's advice for people who have had experiences, and why experiences run in families.




It's very interesting that Nolan is familiar with Religious Studies Professor Diana Pasulka, who wrote the book 'American Cosmic'. In her research, Pasulka 'discovered' the “Invisible College”, a term which was coined by Dr. J. Allen Hynek. She describes it as “A group of scientists, academics, and others who will never make their work public, or at least not for a long time, although the results of their investigations impact society in many ways.”

a reply to: ColeYounger2

So Garry says we are getting disclosure in the next two years.

I can’t wait to see how they unpackage this.

BTW, you have a PM.

a reply to: KKLOCO

I read an opinion a while back by one of the big names in UFOlogy. It may have been Vallee. Their thoughts on disclosure was that the govt would probably state the "obvious" with some "reassuring" talking points. Something to the effect of:

"It's official. The UFOs are real. They have been here for a long time. They don't pose a threat, blah, blah, blah"

I'm guessing that's probably how it will be.

a reply to: ColeYounger2

This interview is huge as Dr. Nolan has USA authority to speak publically on UFO / UAP. Notice all the stars and flags that are absent from your thread. Just a coincidence? Deny Ignorance? Yea right.

So why is that?

53:17 / 1:09:28 of the video he states that the USA is in an active coverup of UFO's.

He also knows of several more UFO whistleblowers.

I have seen stuff as described by him and others. At issue is I cant get my materials to said offce as they only want to hear from USA empoyees or contractors as thats how far this thing has gone.

To the average US citizen they have no clue as to what is ongoing.

Can I be the first? Another nothing burger. Is this another part of the "disclosure" project? Because he is not coming out with anything that everybody already knows.
Just to add This guy is a professor immunology, nothing to do with the subjects he's talking about. That's like asking a brain surgeon to put a new clutch in my car, he might be able to do it but probably not. As usual it's either might be, anecdotal or I'm not allowed to say.

a reply to: crayzeed

This guy is a professor immunology, nothing to do with the subjects he's talking about.

For starters:
Because of the technology his lab possesses, coupled with his knowledge of anatomy, he has been asked by the govt to examine and diagnose individuals who've had encounters, and those who've been exposed. I'm guessing you know nothing about Nolan. Again, that's just the start. He knows things. He's on the inside.

a reply to: ColeYounger2
Just like his mate Elizondo. Give me a break.

originally posted by: ColeYounger2
a reply to: KKLOCO

"It's official. The UFOs are real. They have been here for a long time. They don't pose a threat, blah, blah, blah"

Replace "UFO" with "UAP" and you have the current situation. So, if that oneliner is your definition of disclosure, we already had disclosure.

originally posted by: ColeYounger2
Investigative journalist Ross Coulthart sat with Nolan for just over an hour, and asked some very pertinent questions. It's good to see someone with Nolan's intellect discussing the subject. One of the more fascinating points Nolan wonders about is the "religious" implication. If the beings behind the UFOs are so incredibly advanced, then where do they fit on a "scale" of God\angels\demons. We're talking about beings that can literally control and manipulate the laws of physics. (Which we barely understand)

Many topics are discussed, including:

A message to skeptics.
Analyzing alleged physical material left behind by UFOs.
Pine Gap in Australia, and whether China or Russia know more about UFOs.
Nolan's advice for people who have had experiences, and why experiences run in families.

It's very interesting that Nolan is familiar with Religious Studies Professor Diana Pasulka, who wrote the book 'American Cosmic'. In her research, Pasulka 'discovered' the “Invisible College”, a term which was coined by Dr. J. Allen Hynek. She describes it as “A group of scientists, academics, and others who will never make their work public, or at least not for a long time, although the results of their investigations impact society in many ways.”

I have watched the video and it's really interesting to see an educated person to speak in a confident manner about the existence of aliens but arguing they're not from far away but they just live alongside us and they have been living with us for many many years. Perhaps the original inhabitants of this planet.

originally posted by: ForteanOrg

originally posted by: ColeYounger2
a reply to: KKLOCO

"It's official. The UFOs are real. They have been here for a long time. They don't pose a threat, blah, blah, blah"

Replace "UFO" with "UAP" and you have the current situation. So, if that oneliner is your definition of disclosure, we already had disclosure.

UAP captures a range of phenomena and it's a broader term.

originally posted by: ColeYounger2

I made some notes. It is interesting that Nolan doesn't seem to favor the idea that extraterrestrials are involved, yet he mentions Vallee's IDH in spite of noting that Vallee "got in a lot of trouble" for that!

Professor Garry Nolan & Ross Coulthart: Full interview | UFO UAP News

1:22
Coulthart: so what do we know for sure about uaps?
Nolan: well I think the thing that we know for sure is that we don't know what it is, but we do know that there is something here something that I think defies explanation but that something can be studied from a scientific viewpoint there's a genuine mystery.

So first Nolan says that we don't know what it is. Then he proceeds to tell us he sort of knows what it is and isn't, which I see as contradicting his first point that we don't know what it is. He says it's not human, but when asked if it's extraterrestrial, his reply is "I don't think so".

4:10
Coulthart:Let's talk about "it". What is "it"?
Nolan: I wish I knew and of all the people that I've spoken with on the inside there's uh really very little unanimity about what it is except for that there whatever it is appears to be so far advanced from us that it beggars understanding
Coulthart:so you don't think it's human?
Nolan: I'm sure it's not human. is it intelligent? yes it certainly acts it and in some cases it seems to have a sense of humor
Coulthart: So Gary, the implications of what you're saying there are enormous, aren't they? You're suggesting that there is a highly Advanced civilization that is intelligent it's not human and it's real.

Do you see what happened there? Nolan says "non-human" and suddenly Coulthart is talking about a highly advanced civilization. Nolan didn't mention a highly advanced civilization and he seems to distance himself from that conclusion:

Nolan: yeah I almost hesitate even to call it a civilization. A civilization implies a lot of interacting parts uh that are moving toward some sort of goal I couldn't even say whether or not what it is that is being observed is something like that.
Coulthart:now the classic explanation for years and the reason everybody Giggles is because they're immediately thinking of Little Green Men from Zeta reticuli

Do you think the the highest probability is that whatever they are they are extraterrestrial?
Nolan: I don't think so.
No I think it's whatever it is it's been here a long time so and certainly it's been here longer than we've been civilized, so at the very least, who really owns the planet? who was here first? uh I'm not sure it was us.

Coulthart: now you're good mates with Lou alzando Who we've interviewed who was the former head of the Pentagon UFO program and Lou has suggested publicly that what whatever this is the Extraterrestrial explanation doesn't quite explain it.
Nolan: yeah, I mean and I mean it it could explain it, but you could equally and this is Jacques Valee's original uh hypothesis that he got in a lot of trouble decades ago, over the interdimensional hypothesis, right?

So Coulthard brings in Elizondo's speculation that it's not extraterrestrial, and Nolan then brings up Vallee's IDH or Interdimensional Hypothesis. I should point out that the idea of extraterrestrial civilizations has a lot more scientific support (that they at least should exist), than the interdimensional hypothesis which would seem to violate our laws of physics. The mumbo-jumbo about the laws of physics supporting the IDH is nonsense, in fact the laws of physics only work in 3 dimensions of space and one in time. The extra dimentions proposed by physicists would have to be smaller than a proton, and nobody is seeing any UAPs smaller than a proton, so maybe that's why Nolan is saying Jacques Vallee got in trouble for the IDH. That it's not scientifically feasible, plus, it also doesn't seem very popular among believers who mostly seem to want the UFOs or UAPs to be extraterrestrial.

I see nothing here to suggest that Nolan knows any more than the rest of us. As for his supposed "insider contacts", he even says that they don't have any common understanding. So basically all we have is one person's opinion, which Nolan is certainly entitled to have his opinion, as is everybody else. But I don't think it means more than anybody else's opinion. Especially when the so-called "data" he cites to support his conclusions is:

-the videos (presumably the videos released by the pentagon? Unclear if he's also referring to the "leaked" videos from Corbell and Knapp).
-Eyewitness reports.

Well, I've seen all the videos, and heard from many, many eyewitnesses. The videos, frankly, do not support what Nolan is saying. Even though we don't know what the objects are, they are not hard to explain at all seeing as they are usually just fuzzy blobs that could be anything and don't seem to do much of interest. Some eyewitness testimony is hard to explain, but when you scruninize that there are always issues, like David Fravor and his WSO couldn't even agree if the UAP they saw was "hovering" or traveling at something like 500 knots. They both saw something, but with such differences in eyewitness accounts, eyewitness testimony has never really been a very reliable source.

Personally I find David Fravor's story interesting, but, he really should have turned his camera on to show what he was seeing, and we really need something better than his possible visual misperceptions which didn't even agree with the misperceptions of his own Weapon Systems Officer in the same cockpit, to jump to the kind of conclusions that Nolan is jumping to.

originally posted by: crayzeed
Can I be the first? Another nothing burger. Is this another part of the "disclosure" project? Because he is not coming out with anything that everybody already knows.

I didn't realize he didn't think the "non-humans" operating the UAPs were extraterrestrial, even though I knew he was an experiencer/believer.

Just to add This guy is a professor immunology, nothing to do with the subjects he's talking about. That's like asking a brain surgeon to put a new clutch in my car, he might be able to do it but probably not. As usual it's either might be, anecdotal or I'm not allowed to say.

Lou played that I'm not allowed to say card too much. Well sorry guys (Garry and Lou), but what you can't say doesn't have value.

What disappointed me the most was mentioning "the videos" as evidence. I never saw anything in any videos suggesting the "non-human" opinion Nolan gives.

originally posted by: Arbitrageur

originally posted by: ColeYounger2

I made some notes. It is interesting that Nolan doesn't seem to favor the idea that extraterrestrials are involved, yet he mentions Vallee's IDH in spite of noting that Vallee "got in a lot of trouble" for that!

Professor Garry Nolan & Ross Coulthart: Full interview | UFO UAP News

1:22
Coulthart: so what do we know for sure about uaps?
Nolan: well I think the thing that we know for sure is that we don't know what it is, but we do know that there is something here something that I think defies explanation but that something can be studied from a scientific viewpoint there's a genuine mystery.

So first Nolan says that we don't know what it is. Then he proceeds to tell us he sort of knows what it is and isn't, which I see as contradicting his first point that we don't know what it is. He says it's not human, but when asked if it's extraterrestrial, his reply is "I don't think so".

4:10
Coulthart:Let's talk about "it". What is "it"?
Nolan: I wish I knew and of all the people that I've spoken with on the inside there's uh really very little unanimity about what it is except for that there whatever it is appears to be so far advanced from us that it beggars understanding
Coulthart:so you don't think it's human?
Nolan: I'm sure it's not human. is it intelligent? yes it certainly acts it and in some cases it seems to have a sense of humor
Coulthart: So Gary, the implications of what you're saying there are enormous, aren't they? You're suggesting that there is a highly Advanced civilization that is intelligent it's not human and it's real.

Do you see what happened there? Nolan says "non-human" and suddenly Coulthart is talking about a highly advanced civilization. Nolan didn't mention a highly advanced civilization and he seems to distance himself from that conclusion:

Nolan: yeah I almost hesitate even to call it a civilization. A civilization implies a lot of interacting parts uh that are moving toward some sort of goal I couldn't even say whether or not what it is that is being observed is something like that.
Coulthart:now the classic explanation for years and the reason everybody Giggles is because they're immediately thinking of Little Green Men from Zeta reticuli

Do you think the the highest probability is that whatever they are they are extraterrestrial?
Nolan: I don't think so.
No I think it's whatever it is it's been here a long time so and certainly it's been here longer than we've been civilized, so at the very least, who really owns the planet? who was here first? uh I'm not sure it was us.

Coulthart: now you're good mates with Lou alzando Who we've interviewed who was the former head of the Pentagon UFO program and Lou has suggested publicly that what whatever this is the Extraterrestrial explanation doesn't quite explain it.
Nolan: yeah, I mean and I mean it it could explain it, but you could equally and this is Jacques Valee's original uh hypothesis that he got in a lot of trouble decades ago, over the interdimensional hypothesis, right?

So Coulthard brings in Elizondo's speculation that it's not extraterrestrial, and Nolan then brings up Vallee's IDH or Interdimensional Hypothesis. I should point out that the idea of extraterrestrial civilizations has a lot more scientific support (that they at least should exist), than the interdimensional hypothesis which would seem to violate our laws of physics. The mumbo-jumbo about the laws of physics supporting the IDH is nonsense, in fact the laws of physics only work in 3 dimensions of space and one in time. The extra dimentions proposed by physicists would have to be smaller than a proton, and nobody is seeing any UAPs smaller than a proton, so maybe that's why Nolan is saying Jacques Vallee got in trouble for the IDH. That it's not scientifically feasible, plus, it also doesn't seem very popular among believers who mostly seem to want the UFOs or UAPs to be extraterrestrial.

I see nothing here to suggest that Nolan knows any more than the rest of us. As for his supposed "insider contacts", he even says that they don't have any common understanding. So basically all we have is one person's opinion, which Nolan is certainly entitled to have his opinion, as is everybody else. But I don't think it means more than anybody else's opinion. Especially when the so-called "data" he cites to support his conclusions is:

-the videos (presumably the videos released by the pentagon? Unclear if he's also referring to the "leaked" videos from Corbell and Knapp).
-Eyewitness reports.

Well, I've seen all the videos, and heard from many, many eyewitnesses. The videos, frankly, do not support what Nolan is saying. Even though we don't know what the objects are, they are not hard to explain at all seeing as they are usually just fuzzy blobs that could be anything and don't seem to do much of interest. Some eyewitness testimony is hard to explain, but when you scruninize that there are always issues, like David Fravor and his WSO couldn't even agree if the UAP they saw was "hovering" or traveling at something like 500 knots. They both saw something, but with such differences in eyewitness accounts, eyewitness testimony has never really been a very reliable source.

Personally I find David Fravor's story interesting, but, he really should have turned his camera on to show what he was seeing, and we really need something better than his possible visual misperceptions which didn't even agree with the misperceptions of his own Weapon Systems Officer in the same cockpit, to jump to the kind of conclusions that Nolan is jumping to.

originally posted by: crayzeed
Can I be the first? Another nothing burger. Is this another part of the "disclosure" project? Because he is not coming out with anything that everybody already knows.

I didn't realize he didn't think the "non-humans" operating the UAPs were extraterrestrial, even though I knew he was an experiencer/believer.

Just to add This guy is a professor immunology, nothing to do with the subjects he's talking about. That's like asking a brain surgeon to put a new clutch in my car, he might be able to do it but probably not. As usual it's either might be, anecdotal or I'm not allowed to say.

Lou played that I'm not allowed to say card too much. Well sorry guys (Garry and Lou), but what you can't say doesn't have value.

What disappointed me the most was mentioning "the videos" as evidence. I never saw anything in any videos suggesting the "non-human" opinion Nolan gives.

Nolan clearly says they often play games with us and they are way more advanced but the aliens are not from another planet but probably from here. So he knows more than what he admits (if he is saying the truth)

originally posted by: Arbitrageur

originally posted by: ColeYounger2

I made some notes. It is interesting that Nolan doesn't seem to favor the idea that extraterrestrials are involved, yet he mentions Vallee's IDH in spite of noting that Vallee "got in a lot of trouble" for that!

Professor Garry Nolan & Ross Coulthart: Full interview | UFO UAP News

1:22
Coulthart: so what do we know for sure about uaps?
Nolan: well I think the thing that we know for sure is that we don't know what it is, but we do know that there is something here something that I think defies explanation but that something can be studied from a scientific viewpoint there's a genuine mystery.

So first Nolan says that we don't know what it is. Then he proceeds to tell us he sort of knows what it is and isn't, which I see as contradicting his first point that we don't know what it is. He says it's not human, but when asked if it's extraterrestrial, his reply is "I don't think so".

4:10
Coulthart:Let's talk about "it". What is "it"?
Nolan: I wish I knew and of all the people that I've spoken with on the inside there's uh really very little unanimity about what it is except for that there whatever it is appears to be so far advanced from us that it beggars understanding
Coulthart:so you don't think it's human?
Nolan: I'm sure it's not human. is it intelligent? yes it certainly acts it and in some cases it seems to have a sense of humor
Coulthart: So Gary, the implications of what you're saying there are enormous, aren't they? You're suggesting that there is a highly Advanced civilization that is intelligent it's not human and it's real.

Do you see what happened there? Nolan says "non-human" and suddenly Coulthart is talking about a highly advanced civilization. Nolan didn't mention a highly advanced civilization and he seems to distance himself from that conclusion:

Nolan: yeah I almost hesitate even to call it a civilization. A civilization implies a lot of interacting parts uh that are moving toward some sort of goal I couldn't even say whether or not what it is that is being observed is something like that.
Coulthart:now the classic explanation for years and the reason everybody Giggles is because they're immediately thinking of Little Green Men from Zeta reticuli

Do you think the the highest probability is that whatever they are they are extraterrestrial?
Nolan: I don't think so.
No I think it's whatever it is it's been here a long time so and certainly it's been here longer than we've been civilized, so at the very least, who really owns the planet? who was here first? uh I'm not sure it was us.

Coulthart: now you're good mates with Lou alzando Who we've interviewed who was the former head of the Pentagon UFO program and Lou has suggested publicly that what whatever this is the Extraterrestrial explanation doesn't quite explain it.
Nolan: yeah, I mean and I mean it it could explain it, but you could equally and this is Jacques Valee's original uh hypothesis that he got in a lot of trouble decades ago, over the interdimensional hypothesis, right?

So Coulthard brings in Elizondo's speculation that it's not extraterrestrial, and Nolan then brings up Vallee's IDH or Interdimensional Hypothesis. I should point out that the idea of extraterrestrial civilizations has a lot more scientific support (that they at least should exist), than the interdimensional hypothesis which would seem to violate our laws of physics. The mumbo-jumbo about the laws of physics supporting the IDH is nonsense, in fact the laws of physics only work in 3 dimensions of space and one in time. The extra dimentions proposed by physicists would have to be smaller than a proton, and nobody is seeing any UAPs smaller than a proton, so maybe that's why Nolan is saying Jacques Vallee got in trouble for the IDH. That it's not scientifically feasible, plus, it also doesn't seem very popular among believers who mostly seem to want the UFOs or UAPs to be extraterrestrial.

I see nothing here to suggest that Nolan knows any more than the rest of us. As for his supposed "insider contacts", he even says that they don't have any common understanding. So basically all we have is one person's opinion, which Nolan is certainly entitled to have his opinion, as is everybody else. But I don't think it means more than anybody else's opinion. Especially when the so-called "data" he cites to support his conclusions is:

-the videos (presumably the videos released by the pentagon? Unclear if he's also referring to the "leaked" videos from Corbell and Knapp).
-Eyewitness reports.

Well, I've seen all the videos, and heard from many, many eyewitnesses. The videos, frankly, do not support what Nolan is saying. Even though we don't know what the objects are, they are not hard to explain at all seeing as they are usually just fuzzy blobs that could be anything and don't seem to do much of interest. Some eyewitness testimony is hard to explain, but when you scruninize that there are always issues, like David Fravor and his WSO couldn't even agree if the UAP they saw was "hovering" or traveling at something like 500 knots. They both saw something, but with such differences in eyewitness accounts, eyewitness testimony has never really been a very reliable source.

Personally I find David Fravor's story interesting, but, he really should have turned his camera on to show what he was seeing, and we really need something better than his possible visual misperceptions which didn't even agree with the misperceptions of his own Weapon Systems Officer in the same cockpit, to jump to the kind of conclusions that Nolan is jumping to.

originally posted by: crayzeed
Can I be the first? Another nothing burger. Is this another part of the "disclosure" project? Because he is not coming out with anything that everybody already knows.

I didn't realize he didn't think the "non-humans" operating the UAPs were extraterrestrial, even though I knew he was an experiencer/believer.

Just to add This guy is a professor immunology, nothing to do with the subjects he's talking about. That's like asking a brain surgeon to put a new clutch in my car, he might be able to do it but probably not. As usual it's either might be, anecdotal or I'm not allowed to say.

Lou played that I'm not allowed to say card too much. Well sorry guys (Garry and Lou), but what you can't say doesn't have value.

What disappointed me the most was mentioning "the videos" as evidence. I never saw anything in any videos suggesting the "non-human" opinion Nolan gives.

You're right about the videos but these are not the only videos available to them (Army and Government branches) and there must be an assessment of this phenomenon that classifies them as intelligent, advanced, and unknown.

originally posted by: ForteanOrg

originally posted by: ColeYounger2
a reply to: KKLOCO

"It's official. The UFOs are real. They have been here for a long time. They don't pose a threat, blah, blah, blah"

Replace "UFO" with "UAP" and you have the current situation. So, if that oneliner is your definition of disclosure, we already had disclosure.

As I explained in the comment, it's not my definition. A well-known ufologist said it, meaning that we will probably hear the same tired old cliches.

originally posted by: Zetor
You're right about the videos but these are not the only videos available to them (Army and Government branches) and there must be an assessment of this phenomenon that classifies them as intelligent, advanced, and unknown.

I'm sure there are videos the public hasn't seen, but has Nolan seen those? I don't have reason to think he has.

As for the "assessment of this phenomenon that classifies them as intelligent, advanced, and unknown", remember that Nolan says not only has the government been lying to us, but there has been a disinformation campaign which is undoubtedly true. The government would like us to believe that they never identified this "UAP", that was identified online by balloon vendors in less than an hour of the photo being posted:

www.abovetopsecret.com...

originally posted by: Ectoplasm8
a reply to: Lucidparadox

So alien beings just happen to create a spacecraft with the exact same design as the Batman balloon as shown?

That "UAP" on the right is supposedly "unknown" according to US officials. So how can we be expected to believe anything they say when that claim is such obvious bollocks?

originally posted by: Zetor
UAP captures a range of phenomena and it's a broader term.

Yes, I know. That's why I wrote "replace UFO's with UAP's". The official stance is not "we have visitors from outer space flying in our airspace" - it is "we see weird things we don't understand". Which actually is what most experiencers say, for decades if not for centuries.

Charles Fort, in his book "Lo!", postulates that some sort of mysterious force, known as the "cosmic joker" (sic), is responsible for the teleportation of people, animals, and materials. It may well be the same joker that demonstrates behaviours, clearly visible and provable, that deny the laws of nature. Or, as Nolan observes, to move in a way that, according to our current scientific knowledge, requires as much energy as our total planetary nuclear output for years - and then in the next few seconds repeat such moves, as to jokingly demonstrate our total ignorance.

originally posted by: ForteanOrg

originally posted by: Zetor
UAP captures a range of phenomena and it's a broader term.

Yes, I know. That's why I wrote "replace UFO's with UAP's". The official stance is not "we have visitors from outer space flying in our airspace" - it is "we see weird things we don't understand". Which actually is what most experiencers say, for decades if not for centuries.

Charles Fort, in his book "Lo!", postulates that some sort of mysterious force, known as the "cosmic joker" (sic), is responsible for the teleportation of people, animals, and materials. It may well be the same joker that demonstrates behaviours, clearly visible and provable, that deny the laws of nature. Or, as Nolan observes, to move in a way that, according to our current scientific knowledge, requires as much energy as our total planetary nuclear output for years - and then in the next few seconds repeat such moves, as to jokingly demonstrate our total ignorance.

There are may things still unexplained but not necessarily involving extraterrestrial or supernatural forces but some of these UAPs are definitely defying the laws of nature and cannot be ignored or downplayed.

originally posted by: Arbitrageur

originally posted by: Zetor
You're right about the videos but these are not the only videos available to them (Army and Government branches) and there must be an assessment of this phenomenon that classifies them as intelligent, advanced, and unknown.

I'm sure there are videos the public hasn't seen, but has Nolan seen those? I don't have reason to think he has.

As for the "assessment of this phenomenon that classifies them as intelligent, advanced, and unknown", remember that Nolan says not only has the government been lying to us, but there has been a disinformation campaign which is undoubtedly true. The government would like us to believe that they never identified this "UAP", that was identified online by balloon vendors in less than an hour of the photo being posted:

www.abovetopsecret.com...

originally posted by: Ectoplasm8
a reply to: Lucidparadox

So alien beings just happen to create a spacecraft with the exact same design as the Batman balloon as shown?

That "UAP" on the right is supposedly "unknown" according to US officials. So how can we be expected to believe anything they say when that claim is such obvious bollocks?

Nolan said the government has been lying to us in a number of ways and we can all agree on this. But the way they have lied is to call all these sightings by credible observers as misidentifications, weather balloons, or even hallucinations. There is a disinformation campaign but it has been exposed.

I like the part where Nolan argues we know they are here, they are advanced and could play games and with us, but they are not from somewhere far away.

originally posted by: Arbitrageur

originally posted by: Zetor
You're right about the videos but these are not the only videos available to them (Army and Government branches) and there must be an assessment of this phenomenon that classifies them as intelligent, advanced, and unknown.

I'm sure there are videos the public hasn't seen, but has Nolan seen those? I don't have reason to think he has.

As for the "assessment of this phenomenon that classifies them as intelligent, advanced, and unknown", remember that Nolan says not only has the government been lying to us, but there has been a disinformation campaign which is undoubtedly true. The government would like us to believe that they never identified this "UAP", that was identified online by balloon vendors in less than an hour of the photo being posted:

www.abovetopsecret.com...

originally posted by: Ectoplasm8
a reply to: Lucidparadox

So alien beings just happen to create a spacecraft with the exact same design as the Batman balloon as shown?

That "UAP" on the right is supposedly "unknown" according to US officials. So how can we be expected to believe anything they say when that claim is such obvious bollocks?

In relation to the picture you have linked I can say again that not all UAPs are out of this world. Many can be explained or even explained away. But if you take the bs out of the equation there is a whole world out there which is unknown to us.

originally posted by: crayzeed
Can I be the first? Another nothing burger. Is this another part of the "disclosure" project? Because he is not coming out with anything that everybody already knows.
Just to add This guy is a professor immunology, nothing to do with the subjects he's talking about. That's like asking a brain surgeon to put a new clutch in my car, he might be able to do it but probably not. As usual it's either might be, anecdotal or I'm not allowed to say.

You wanted him to be a Professor of Aerospace Engineering?

Ok he isn't an expert on aerial phenomena but she who is educated and has shown interest in the subject.