If hard proof, why disclosure not exposure?

a reply to: neutronflux

If they had the goods, they could expose. And wouldn’t need the false argument of disclosure.

Maybe we need to step back and realize that we are all similarly steered and tend to share a "hive mind" that is sometimes stratified by local observation and feedback.
Someone that worked within a military compartmentalized system might have learned things that are classified.
How would they convey that information?

From the Canadian video example.
White noise on a TV screen with two black dots that end up on either side of the observer?
Lots of artistic examples that might work for that, although I would tend to think from the context in the rest of the video that there is some convergence there.

This is another strange example that makes little sense unless you share an intepretaion.


And here is another classic example of a split with flight overhead.
Homer included some ET descriptions from ancient legends.

a reply to: Slichter

And here is another classic example of a split with flight overhead.
Homer included some ET descriptions from ancient legend

Really. Have any proof over demons from hell?

a reply to: Slichter

Or a simpler explanation. A truth exaggerated? I had dreams I could fly as a child long before The comprehension of UFO’s.

Your confusing basic roots from elements of human imagination and fears, and trying to pin a “rational” explanation for exaggerated truth. It’s like trying to rationalize the irrational fear of things that go bump in the night by manifesting something just a figment of one’s imagination into something tangible by labeling it UFO and Aliens. The 21 first century UFO was the 500 AD demon when there was nothing there in the first place. Or you can not jangle there are really demons.