What’s your standard of proof?

Generate New Template

public (1567) , uap (1561) , disclosure (1383) , ufo (1296) , transparency (1220) , government (1066) , information (1011) , disinformation (943) , ufos (919) , campaign (862) , congress (769) , people (678) , phenomena (648) , national (632) , urge (586) , issue (565) , regarding (565) , unidentified (561) , security (538) , truth (506) , american (506) , support (503) , potential (498) , know (477) , trust (469) , uaps (467) , writing (462) , accountability (461) , time (424) , scientific (410) , intelligence (381) , understanding (370) , act (363) , rep (357) , members (354) , defense (331) , action (314) , efforts (311) , research (310) , committee (309) , objects (302) , related (301) , legislation (297) , house (290) , secrecy (288) , oversight (286) , template (283) , ndaa (282) , concern (280) , being (274) ,

I see a lot of posts about needing “proof” of UAPs in order to take it seriously. Understandable. What seems to be missing is folks actually stating what exactly that proof should be. It’s easy to play the role of “debunker” when there is no agreed upon standard of proof. That attitude moves nothing forward– in fact, it’s merely the flip side of believing anything one is told. So, what do YOU think the standard of proof should be?

submitted by /u/garlynp
[link] [comments] 

Read More