-10
Astrophysicist Avi Loeb: ‘UFOs should be the subject of mainstream inquiry. Science must bring clarity’
(www.theguardian.com)
this post was submitted on 29 Aug 2023
-10 points (34.4% liked)
science
14445 readers
2 users here now
just science related topics. please contribute
note: clickbait sources/headlines aren't liked generally. I've posted crap sources and later deleted or edit to improve after complaints. whoops, sry
Rule 1) Be kind.
lemmy.world rules: https://mastodon.world/about
I don't screen everything, lrn2scroll
founded 1 year ago
MODERATORS
you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
view the rest of the comments
You either have very poor reading comprehension or you're engaging in disingenuous argumentative strategies intended to blanket discredit without honest consideration or information exchange.
I feel like I'm arguing with an anti-vaxxer here.... you're still misrepresenting his claims and the situation.
He sent the material to labs in order to analyze them for their chemical structure. Not "Hey, prove these are from an alien spaceship!"
He also has not claimed definitively that they are from an alien spaceship, as you keep falsely claiming. He has stated that it's molecular structure, trajectory, speed, etc. are all very unusual and that it could be indicative of a piece of manufactured technology, such as a probe, which collided into our planet.
That is what Avi Loeb has claimed. Not the ignorant misinformation you're peddling in the comments here.
Link to all these instances in which Avi Loeb claims definitively this is proof of aliens. Not where he says it "suggests" but where you claim he definitely states it's proof.
Let's see it. Put up, or shut up.
For anyone who may see that link but not click it, Avi Loeb does not state this is proof.
I'm not a conspiracy nut job. If you had said from the beginning his publicity-seeking can hinder or complicate things, that would be different. But that's not what you claimed. You made repeated false claims here.
I asked you for links because you were making erroneous claims and misquoting him; not because I'm a conspiracy theorist.