Just curious to know if anyone listened and what your thoughts were.
I can see where he is coming from, looking at it from a scientific point of view. Hes basically saying we need more data. Which I agree with. He seems to miss the whole point of what the hearings were actually about. E.g the witnesses testimonies and the cover up. Although I know none of that is science based. But still. Hes basically clickbaiting with his episode title. He doesnt seem to be all that clued up on the hearings.
He also has a guest on. David Spergel from NASAs UAP independent study program. I would love to hear more from him. I
I feel like there was a lot of mockery going on towards the subject. But hey, maybe I just picked it up wrong.