UAP - The Most Active Community Discussing UAP/UFOs

1464 readers

1 users here now

A community for civil discourse related to Unidentified Anomalous Phenomena. Share your sightings, experiences, news, and investigations. Everyone is welcome here, from believers to skeptics and everything in between.

New to Lemmy?

See the Getting Started Guide

Want Disclosure?

Declassify UAP offers a tool that automatically finds your representatives and sends them a prewritten message.

Community Spotlight

Useful Links

Community Rules

Follow the Code of Conduct.
Posts must be on-topic.
No duplicate posts.
No commercial activity.
No memes.
Titles must accurately represent the content of the submission.
Link posts must include a submission statement (comment on your own post).
Common Question posts must include a link to the previous question thread if previously asked.
Low effort, toxic comments regarding public figures may be removed.
Off-topic political discussion may be removed at moderator discretion.

Other Communities

!uapmemes@lemmy.world

If you're interested in moderating or have any suggestions for the community, feel free to contact SignullGone or HM05_Me.

founded 2 years ago

MODERATORS

SignullGone@lemmy.world

HM05_Me@lemmy.world

NASA UAP Independent Study Team Report (science.nasa.gov)

submitted 2 years ago by SignullGone@lemmy.world to c/uap@lemmy.world

13 comments fedilink hide all child comments

you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments

[–] HM05_Me@lemmy.world 4 points 2 years ago (2 children)

I think the important thing to keep in mind is that studies won't always determine what an object was. They'll likely stop research once they get enough data to support the idea of a prosaic source. That will leave a lot of sightings in a grey area where it's easier and safer to assume prosaic. Some will grasp that as hope it could still be non-human. While others will accept it as proof it's prosaic and move on. Just know that it's okay to accept something as both unresolved, but potentially prosaic. There are a lot of sightings out there and it can be easy getting hung up on one event. Regardless, keep asking questions and pushing for answers on the subject as a whole.

[–] SignullGone@lemmy.world 3 points 2 years ago

It's also important to note that NASA has the same data as the public. I don't believe they have access to the classified sensor data, which paint the full picture.

[–] pimento64@sopuli.xyz 1 points 2 years ago (1 children)

I don't know, that seems a bit prosaic

[–] HM05_Me@lemmy.world 1 points 2 years ago

I'm speaking broadly of cases. And, I feel like you may be misreading my statement where I support the idea of accepting things as prosaic, but understanding the limit of the research. Is there a specific incident you'd like to expand your statement upon?