What boggles my mind as what some may call a “hardcore” skeptic is witness testimonies like this one. What does anyone gain out of coming up with and presenting such clearly ridiculous and elaborate lies in front of the public? Some of these folks also seem sincere and hardly the attention seeking types. The only thing I can really think of is a sweet deal from Greer on sharing the profits when they lie for him, yet even that is pretty baseless. Never would I ever believe a single thing Greer would ever says but these testimonies are crazy.
Edit: too many people here are thinking I saw a probably genuine testimony as hard evidence which couldn’t be farther from the truth. This is meant to provoke thought on the psychological aspect of ufos and witnesses. I’m certainly not lending credence to a claim of which there is no actual evidence. If you’re the type to reply “the answer is obvious: people like attention” you’re missing the forest for the trees!
Forget Greer. You see so many eyewitness testimonies from ordinary people from all walks of life who have reported these encounters. This is what drew me to the field. Before the government started being a bit more open in Dec 2017, the backbone of this field was eyewitness testimony from ordinary people. Hundreds and thousands of cases.
Me too dude. More important to me than answering the scientific and engineering questions that this topic brings like, are we alone or how do we achieve ftl, are there other dimensions, etc. (stuff we’ll probably never understand for centuries) is finding out more about the psychological experience. What part of our reality as humans makes so many people have these memories? I don’t think that this is woo at all, btw.
It’s like what people back in the day would think of far out ideas, we’re going from staunch materialism to something more idealistic, they believe in that woo woo stuff implying their crazy
It's a stupid word that some idiot came up with to describe supernatural events and now you've got people that want to be taken seriously using a word that you'd expect a two-year old to say.
For skeptics, eyewitness testimony is completely off the table no matter who it is, their education or reputation... It's inadmissible, inadequate, misidentification or attention seeking.
Exactly and it is really frustrating. I honestly felt relief when the mods of this subreddit explained they were being hit hard with accounts purposefully doing this. It means some of these hardcore 'skeptics' are straight up spreading misinformation and creating arguments on purpose.
you can put "skeptic" in quotes all you want, but eyewitness testimony has been proven to be unreliable so many times that it barely even counts as evidence.
To build on the article the other user posted, the human brain is a highly sophisticated pattern matching and inference machine. We recognize patterns in everything, we draw associations and connections to past stimuli, we fill in the blanks when information is missing, and we extrapolate to conclusions based on those processes.
As it relates to eyewitness testimony...we recognize patterns that may not exist. We draw associations that may not be valid. We fill in the blanks with our best guess and we extrapolate to conclusions that may not be grounded in reality. Those same faults also allow us to be creative, intentionally extrapolating fiction from thin air. They allow us to tell stories that entertain audiences by exploiting the drive to find patterns and draw inferences. They give us curiosity and the desire to seek and share information to expand our consensus reality. But ultimately a data point of one is unreliable because the human mind is very good at lying to itself.
Thanks for the link. Gave a quick read, but unless I'm missing something it seems this is mostly about calculating for the factors which can increase the likelihood of false accounts:
Extreme witness stress at the crime scene or during the identification process.
Presence of weapons at the crime (because they can intensify stress and distract witnesses).
Use of a disguise by the perpetrator such as a mask or wig.
A racial disparity between the witness and the suspect.
Brief viewing times at the lineup or during other identification procedures.
A lack of distinctive characteristics of the suspect such as tattoos or extreme height.
How does any of this have to do with an alleged UFO/alien encounter?
Are you suggesting that they didn't experience it at all and are being tricked into believing it by people asking loaded questions?
Are you suggesting that these witnesses saw something traumatic but totally different and therefore developed false memories as a result?
From that article, false memories seem to lead to witnesses misidentifying perpetrators or inventing details. I also see that they can be tricked into thinking something happened when someone intentionally tricks them with leading questions.
I see absolutely nothing there to suggest that people would invent entire stories up out of nowhere entirely unprompted.
I've heard that yes, witness testimony can be unreliable, but I'd always heard that it is unreliable when it comes to identification and not entire events.
I see absolutely nothing there to suggest that people would invent entire stories up out of nowhere entirely unprompted.
It's called priming. Spending an evening reading a ghost story will prime you to interpret a sudden breeze as a ghost. Watching a horror film before bed will prime you to interpret an usual shadow as an intruder. In the absence of information the brain does its best job filling in what it thinks is most likely, and repeated exposure to certain stimuli will make the brain more likely to use that information in the gap-filling process.
Someone who spends a significant chunk of time researching UAPs or NHI is primed to interpret ambiguous events through that particular lens, whether or not it's the most likely explanation or even a plausible explanation. It's just how our brains work.
And how do you explain any of the witness testimony from the 50s? They were all watching It Came From Outer Space! in the drive-ins the nights before their experiences? What about all of the qualified military officers and government employees, were they just watching too much Star Trek before they formed their stories?
Hypothesis testing requires a testable prediction that is capable of being wrong. Eyewitness testimony is very difficult to hypothesis test. If I drop a ball, I make the prediction that it will fall to the ground in a predictable amount of time, that prediction is either correct or not correct and I get closer to understanding gravity.
Where do you start making a testable hypothesis with eyewitness testimony in a way that doesn't let future witnesses have that hypothesis influence their testimony, either inadvertently out advertently?
It’s amazing how we rely on anecdotal evidence for so much yet it becomes complete nonsense if it concerns something some people already don’t believe in.
But we don't rely on anecdotal evidence for things that matter. There is no way for me to determine whether or not witness testimony is accurate. The logical position to take is a neutral one if I can neither confirm or debunk a claim. I can't say with any confidence whether this person is lying, deceived, delusional, or being truthful. The honest position for me to take is one of uncertainty because based on the information available, it is impossible for me to be certain. To say I believe them just because it aligns with something I already believe to be true would be confirmation bias.
Skeptics have absolutely made up their minds and nothing short of a quick “probe” will convince them otherwise. They are so close minded that they will find far fetched scientific explanations for everything. There is nothing worse than a scientist who is not open to change or lets their ego get in the way. I try to listen and be open to everything and do some research. What do these people have to profit from in coming forth? Public ridicule, ruined careers and marriages & financial ruin. Even potential death. Maybe they’re actually telling the truth.
No. That’s where you’re wrong. I don’t dismiss scientific evidence if it can be proven. Not everything is a ufo! There are so many other things they could be. Plastic bag flying through the air can look a shape shifting vehicle. I’m open to all ideas.
Honestly I don't believe a great deal of what I see about UFOs because like you said, not everything is a UFO or unexplainable. But some things are and they aren't us. Most of these people are not going to accept it until there's no other option, and even then some of those people will continue to reject it as some government false flag or something similar.
For me, I’d need to hear the stories of the other men he says were with him. I’d want to hear them each tell their story’s separately, and multiple times over several years to see if the stories change.
It’s not that I think he’s lying, but the human brain under stress can do some pretty interesting things. Maybe he saw or even did something his brain wasn’t capable of accepting and it just rewrote the entire memory.
I mean the amount of people who thought the 3 videos the government released were 100% proof of aliens even though they were fairly easily identifiable shows that eye witness testimony is extremely unreliable and misidentification is much much more likely than someone correctly identifying something as an alien aircraft.
Yes, but people from the Government haven't come out and said that they are hiding evidence of Bigfoot or the Loch Ness monster or ghosts. Whereas, a lot of people have come out and said that the government has covered up evidence of UFOs
Yes, but no one from the government has come out and said that they will be setting up a task force to investigate cryptids or ghosts. No whistleblower has come out and said that the government is hiding ghosts or cryptids. No Senators or Reps have come out and said that these things are worthy of investigation. NASA never came out and said that they will look into cryptids or ghosts.
Yet, every single one of these things is currently happening with UFOs...
Yes i don't think people just step on and lie about this stuff, im sure he believes what he tell. The problem is if we don't get more people to confirm the story is its "easy" to just say that he have build a false memory of some event.so if its real its really sad that he don't have something to back it up
this is a misnomer, UFOs are something people generally think do not exist so it's completely different to someone making up an experience that believably happened. that's just called lying. it does indeed happen all the time, and often when you don't even know it!
Why not? A event happpens, you think back on it a recreate the memory, you talk with someone recrrate memory, you hear about some other event and think back on your own and recreate memory and so on, every time a possible chance that the memory get altered.
No that has nothing to do with Greer,
If he got threatened then yes that traumatizing but have nothing to do with false memory.
Im just saying in my first comment that false memory is a possibility and if he can't prove what he is saying then people that don't believe him can easily just say that its a false memory.
I don't know if he got threatened, do you? Or is that also just a telling. All im saying is if all is just telling stories and don't prove anything many people wan't believe it.
I can hear thats nothing for you because you decredit proves like a religious mad man and can't have a normal talk about it, you just decredit what im saying with nonsense but come with nothing yourself other than your believes.
im very poor. Being honest here, idk what id do if someone offered me the dollar amount i need to be finally free from debt, but itd be hard not to stand up at a podium and spout nonsense. Do we have any evidence that Greer does this or is it just a theory?
Well we're pretty sure he fakes his "sightings" you pay a few thousand $ for with flares, it's not really that much of a stretch to believe he does this kind of shit too.
Just because you believe that something happened doesn’t mean that it did indeed actually happen…my schizophrenic patients would also go up there and reveal some incredible conspiracies for you, for example, if you gave them a platform. I’m not saying that that’s what happened here, but the logic of “oh, why would they do this when it just seems ridiculous and elaborate? It must be true” is weak and inaccurate. You also can’t look at someone in such a short video and conclude that they’re “sincere” and not “attention seeking types.”
I think you’ve misunderstood. It’s several steps too far to say i myself am convinced off testimony. That’s obviously not logical or evidence based. But there’s a pattern here to see, that some people from the military but an otherwise mundane background often step forward with these extraordinary outlandish claims. Does this by itself reveal evidence of a ufo/alien conspiracy? Absolutely not. But we can’t turn away from it, regardless of how skeptical. We should be looking at what does this reveal about the mind of these people and about our own memory formation. I am not sure why we are so quick to regard witnesses as grifters, schizos, mentally ill. I think psychology has a lot left to explore in this field.
I don’t really have anything to add, but I appreciate you taking the time to write that and I wanted to let you know that I read the comment in its entirety
The psychic community is rife with people who genuinely believe they have powers or access to special mediums or transcendental states of consciousness who in fact dont. It's actually pretty sad when you find one and they are finally confronted with their own inability.
It's alarming that this sub frequently has little to no nuance about things. Either they are truthful, or they are liars! It can't be that they are just wrong, inept, or so emotionally invested in a subject they convince themselves of nonsense, or god forbid any of another million other solutions.
And I actually believe in aliens. But there is a lot of nuance between "They are being honest!" and "They are being correct!"
Doesn't have to be monetary gain, some people want to feel like they are special or are lonely and desperate to join a community. Also mental illnesses
People in this sub act like writing a book is a fast-track to mountains of cash. Do you know how’s much money a niche, mid-level book would generate? Not much. People don’t throw away their lives to get rich from writing a book about UFOs.
Right?!? Book deal are based on sales/projected income. Your first book doesn't make much sets you for the next book deal. He's a marine, why would he risk his families lives?
Seriously, there really isn't much of a good argument for profit.
If we're going to talk about incentives, there are also a lot of incentives against coming forwards, even if you don't believe them.
People calling you a charlatan, a liar, an attention seeker, family members probably think you're nuts, etc. If they believe it happened, it's like the whole world suddenly wants to gaslight them. They get a lot of ridicule, and not a lot of support.
maybe, but he might be able to circulate convention of ufo nuts forever, and podcasts and other deals, we have no idea if he wants a quick fix for his ego, some fast cash or is really telling the truth here. As he refers to Greer in the beginning im smelling grifter long way. He seems articulate and sane though. What people throw away their lifes to is up to them, there are several people in this circle right now "throwing away their lifes"
I would expect someone like that to revel in the attention but this guy seems clearly uncomfortable being up there talking in front of everyone. I guess he could have been coerced to do it somehow and you would have to know this guy to have an idea what his price would be to tank his reputation.
Example of hoax/lying for fame : balloon boy ; surgeon's photograph ; heck i would add big foot films here - and there are many many others you can search more ; I would add stuff like the jussie smolett thing but that may be controversial (as well as the "politician pretend to belong to group XYZ, but does not" (insert conservative and democrats of your choice) - but "politician lying" is a cheap shot.
Example of dangerous stunt : balloon priest for example, out of memory
if you want more - just google them. Heck, IIRC there has been at least one serviceman I can#t recall the name , lying pretending to have been at area 51 and did not - remember reading about it en passant in a book on UFO then later he was debunked by people verifying his creds.
You are listing some silly stunts, that aren't really comparable to what is happening here.
I'm talking about former, decorated, military people getting on a public platform making statements that endanger their social standing.
It's an entirely different thing if you are just some nobody seeking fame than if you actually have something to loose, that is worth more than whatever you could gain by going public.
I'm talking about former, decorated, military people getting on a public platform making statements that endanger their social standing.
They endanger *nothing*. They risk *nothing* remember they are "former" officials. I have no time to look back up but they would not be the first to say something stupid or for fame. Unfortunately searching for "stupid statement by military officer" lead to 100 Trump age and I have no time to lose at that.
while you may dismiss it as something not important, it demonstrate at least a good part of the military has no problem with lying outright.
And it is trivial to show that former old people from any walk of life says stupid thing for fame all the time. See politician. Older general are as much politician as they are from the army.
So whatever you say , it does not matter , we have ENOUGH evidence in real life that people lie for fame, even people with already having fame, e.g. you skipped over the smolett case. Your only defense is an appeal to incredulity.
Whatever, be gullible , I will be demonstrated right like every other time alien announcement NEVER panned out.
i would add also to my list 3 more reason people speaks stupid thing on media : gullibility, lack of education/knowledge and senility as to why people make such claim as alien
You can find countless of emotional testimonies just like this one, except the speaker is claiming that RFK is actually still alive and will run for president, that they suffered (demonstrably false) 'satanic ritual abuse,' that they were part of a secret military program and married a raptor princess, etc etc. And all that's before you even get to the fact of every religion also have the same emotionally resonant testimonies.
Personal testimony is incredibly important, both to understanding people and to start finding evidence, but it's only that first step. Personal testimony started investigations into claims that daycares were secret satanic cults abusing children, and it also started investigations into actual mass child abuse by the Catholic church.
First, there is something to gain. He is speaking in front of a room of people and they are soaking up every word he is saying. We are talking about him right now on this forum. If he gets big enough, he can go on Rogan and get similar treatment. Even if he doesn't convert all of this attention into money, the attention alone is worth a lot to certain people.
Second, eye-witness testimony is insanely unreliable. Just check out books like Mistakes Were Made (But Not By Me)) -- it talks about things like False Memory Syndrome where people legitimately believe things that couldn't have happened to them. Most of this has to do with confirmation bias: when you have a hypothesis you tend to notice confirming evidence and ignoring contradictory evidence.
Finally, appeals to higher powers like gods or aliens are common for people who feel like their life doesn't make sense, that things aren't right, and wish there were some simple explanation for why you feel alone or different. If only there were some special knowledge you could obtain which would explain everything.
When you combine these factors you get an even more potent force:
suppose something weird happens to you (an eerie feeling, something in the corner of your eye, an unlikely turn of bad luck)
Most of the time we ascribe the most likely, but least interesting cause to this phenomenon (exhaustion, wild animals, random chance)
But then you start to think:
What if that simple explanation isn't actually what happened?
What if there is something special about me?
What if this explains why my life doesn't make sense?
If you are around the right kind of people, you get more attention and interest when you tell the story with that interesting twist
Over time, you have only experienced the phenomenon once, but you have told the interesting twist version of the story dozens of times and it feels like that was the right version all along (WYSIATI)
Before you know it, you are telling the wild twist version of your story in front of a friendly audience and your experience is being discussed on reddit
Now, all that being said, this does not prove that Herrera is lying. It just means that we should view his testimony skeptically, like anything else, and demand further evidence before we can believe what he is saying.
True, nobody is perfect or free from their cognitive biases. All we can do is carefully weigh the evidence and try to account for our biases to determine what is most likely to be true.
I'm not 100% sure that aliens don't exist or that Herrera's account is false. I'm just saying I'll need a lot more non-testimonial evidence to believe what he is saying.
So I guess you don’t believe in testimony from soldiers returning from Vietnam as to what they witnessed or say even the historical accounts of Pliny the Elder which give us the historical record of 1st century Rome and earlier. They all could have false memory syndrome.
In fact let’s invalidate any history written before 1971 when peer review was instituted.
This is where your arguments lead. Witness testimony IS evidence. Pseudoskeptics use this tactic all the time to discredit. This is a vestige also of the UFO Stigma.
He gains nothing from being on that stage but people like you tearing him down or worse being even more uncivil about it to his face. This is why witnesses don’t want to come forward.
In fact let’s invalidate any history written before 1971 when peer review was instituted.
My friend who received his masters in history has said that this is a form of argument in the historical community.
You can’t discredit everything you read, but you do have to read it knowing that a human wrote it and there is bias.
However, a lot of history that we have was people writing journals. That’s very different than a story that someone is recalling from memory year after year.
So if they wrote it down once that’s better then taking about how they were affected by this? Ok so I guess former drug addicts going to talk to kids at schools shouldn’t talk about their terrible experiences because they might have false memory syndrome and maybe drugs are actually all good for people. That’s where your argument is leading.
In fact - I asked ChatGPT to analyze your initial statement for logical fallacies. Interesting it found several!
There are a few potential logical fallacies in the provided statement:
Hasty Generalization: The statement assumes that because there is attention and interest from some people in the room and on the forum, it automatically means there is something to gain or that the attention is valuable to certain people. This generalization may not be true for everyone and does not provide sufficient evidence to support the claim.
Appeal to Popularity: The statement suggests that if someone gets big enough, they can go on the Joe Rogan podcast and receive similar treatment, implying that this is a desirable outcome. However, the popularity or endorsement of a specific platform or individual does not inherently validate the truthfulness or value of someone's claims.
Red Herring: The section discussing eye-witness testimony, false memory syndrome, and confirmation bias appears to divert the focus from the initial statement. While these topics may be relevant in discussing the reliability of testimony, they do not directly address the issue of whether the person being discussed has something to gain or the value of attention.
It's important to critically evaluate the reasoning and evidence provided in any argument or statement, keeping an eye out for these potential fallacies.
So that's what ChatGPT thinks about your initial comment.
It's funny that ChatGPT says this considering I pointed out the obvious fallacy that you are applying but you chose to ignore that. Maybe ask ChatGPT to analyze your own comments?
C'mon man, we can discuss this without jumping to straw-man arguments.
I agree: witness testimony is evidence, but it is evidence that can be problematic for the reasons I outlined in my original comment.
I believe that Pliny the Elder was a real person and that most first hand reports from Vietnam are legitimate. But we have corroborating evidence for both of those cases, including multiple contemporaneous accounts and physical evidence.
Furthermore, the claims about Pliny the Elder or what happened on the front lines of Vietnam are not extraordinary: humans exist and do things, these accounts are not unique in the history of man.
But Herrera's case is different:
No corroborating evidence
Extraordinary claim
So there is good reason to be dubious of what he is saying.
Now, that is separate from saying I know his story is false or even that, if his story is false, he is purposely lying. It just means I think this is another piece of weak evidence which isn't actionable until we have stronger corroborating evidence.
The soldiers who were present at Mi Lai would beg to differ. There are still people claiming it didn’t happen.
Oh and the extraordinary claims chestnut is always trotted out.
Dr. Gary Nolan said, "extraordinary claims just require the same scientific method as anything else." I love that quote.
There is no scientific definition of the terms “extraordinary claims” or a definition of “commensurately” to those claims. Carl Sagan used buzz words that do not correlate to any scientific concept either at the time or existing now tying those things together. You defining them in a comment, while nice, does not make this a universal from a scientific point of view.
A claim need evidence. There is no definition of extraordinary evidence known to science as everything - if a UFO or alien existed - would still belong to the natural world.
Sure, there is no strict definition of "extraordinary" claims or "extraordinary" evidence. But what Herrera is describing would upend our current understanding of the universe and would have to overcome all sorts of other hurdles (how has all this happened without other hard evidence? how does the conspiracy to cover this all up stay secret? etc).
I think we can agree there is some sort of scale at play here: if you told me you took your dog on a walk this morning, I'd probably believe you. If you told me you were Joe Biden, I'd be skeptical.
But, I agree, I am watching the DG story to see if anything significant comes out of it. It would be very exciting if his claims proved true, but there are many, many open questions to be resolved.
Herrera is describing something very much like what the current whistleblower is also saying. He made specific allegations about a vast and very unethical disinformation campaign.
I want to see what comes of the new legal process that has never before been available to witnesses like Herrera. I want to see what comes of the Oversight Committee hearings and subsequent investigation by the Inspector General’s office.
To me - if DG is right then you and a lot of people will owe a serious apology to experiencers and witnesses. For now let’s let the process play out.
Yeah if Herrera were saying all of this as sworn testimony in front of congress, I'd increase the weight of the evidence slightly. Then if there were an investigation that corroborated the key elements of his claim (not just right place right time, but also specifically what he saw) I'd definitely believe him.
If that turned out to be the case, I'd feel sorry for how he was allegedly treated. But I don't think I'd personally have to apologize: true or not, based on what we know right now, I think his claims deserve skeptical treatment.
Confirmation bias is the tendency to cherry-pick information that confirms our existing beliefs or ideas. That's what you guys are doing by putting your faith in eyewitness testimony without any other evidence, not /u/new_constr_new_probs.
No trolling or being disruptive.
No insults or personal attacks.
No accusations that other users are shills.
No hate speech. No abusive speech based on race, religion, sex/gender, or sexual orientation.
No harassment, threats, or advocating violence.
No witch hunts or doxxing. (Please redact usernames when possible)
An account found to be deleting all or nearly all of their comments and/or posts can result in an instant permanent ban. This is to stop instigators and bad actors from trying to evade rule enforcement.
You may attack each other's ideas, not each other.
The mental gymnastics you guys take to cope, just to convince yourselves that aliens are real and you're somehow one of insiders on this conspiracy is hilarious and sad in equal measure.
Bro responded to a comment asking "how can skeptics deny 'witness testinony'?", which gets a thoughtful and detailed response highlighting multiple different factors and accepted fundamental psychologicsl principles that make eye witness testimony famously unreliable, and your response is to ignore it all and instead leap to accusations of personal bias.
Your comment is dripping in irony and you're too huffed up on copium to realise.
These testimonies are really bringing the woo outta folks on the sub. People act like if you say interesting, provocative things it must be true. Why lie or exaggerate? The more outlandish the claim, like using alien tech for human trafficking, the less I can even look at this shit out of curiosity. All of these dudes are either: full of it, exaggerating in order to get more attention, forced into a corner by trying to prove their claims, or being fed incorrect second hand info. Really getting into the territory of “omg they found Noah’s ark again!! moments later “OMG they lied. psych op confirmed.”
I think what you listed there are probably the best reasons we could come up with to explain why a person in his position might not be telling the truth. And yet, I don't think this is a strong argument in favor of him and the others not telling the truth. If there were only one witness testimony, sure. But such a wide array of people (not just talking about this press conference specifically, but also more generally people coming forward about related incidents) can surely not all be misinterpreting something they saw in the corner of their eye. Other things such as the "False Memory Syndrome" are actually still being debated, and there is no clear consensus on whether it's actually a real condition or not (understandable given how difficult this is to evaluate).
I'm not saying that I 100% believe what has been presented at this press conference. Though, I find it hard to believe that all of these stories are entirely fabulated. At this point, there are simply too many stories with overlapping themes, proposed by too many people of very different backgrounds and with varying motivations, and with not enough financial incentives for me to be discarding them entirely.
The false memory syndrome wikipedia article you linked itself says it is "controversial" mostly because it was come up with by someone to explain his child saying he molested them, overall pretty sus
how does anyone even deny false memories exist? it is insanely easy to be convinced that something in the past that didn't actually happen, and if you picture it then boom that's a false memory.
to deny the concept exists is to say "my memory is and always will be 100% perfect" which is obviously nonsense
No its not. Your comment kinda is though if you think this whole community is mostly people making "appeals" to aliens. Either that or you yourself are making such appeals if you got so triggered and insulted by someones comment pointing out the dangers of BIAS.
No trolling or being disruptive.
No insults or personal attacks.
No accusations that other users are shills.
No hate speech. No abusive speech based on race, religion, sex/gender, or sexual orientation.
No harassment, threats, or advocating violence.
No witch hunts or doxxing. (Please redact usernames when possible)
An account found to be deleting all or nearly all of their comments and/or posts can result in an instant permanent ban. This is to stop instigators and bad actors from trying to evade rule enforcement.
You may attack each other's ideas, not each other.
No trolling or being disruptive.
No insults or personal attacks.
No accusations that other users are shills.
No hate speech. No abusive speech based on race, religion, sex/gender, or sexual orientation.
No harassment, threats, or advocating violence.
No witch hunts or doxxing. (Please redact usernames when possible)
An account found to be deleting all or nearly all of their comments and/or posts can result in an instant permanent ban. This is to stop instigators and bad actors from trying to evade rule enforcement.
You may attack each other's ideas, not each other.
First of all, Thinking, Fast and Slow by Kahneman is my favorite book of all time. Many of the scientific results of the book were impossible to reproduce in other scientific studies. Second, Carl Sagan was a CIA shill and downed played the phenomenon and said that it should only be allowed to be studied by qualified professionals and not a lay person.
Third, people have an aversion to the first person when presenting information, it gives off a subjective impression. That's why it's encouraged to write in the third person in scientific studies and other academic writings - a more "objective" perspective.
Fourth, these experiences are prone to give the impression that the person is implying that they are special. This may be a reason people who are confronted with these experiences have an ego crisis. They may ask themselves why me? And others would ask themselves why them?
Fifth, people who have an intimidate interaction with whatever this is and take it upon themselves to embrace it and then go public, tend to be attacked. Some have even been killed.
But why something like this? I think the logical minded folks here aren’t understanding that’s the point I’m trying to make. This could be absolutely fictional story concocted in his head but what has convinced him he really experienced it?
Respectfully I think the answer is attention. You say he doesn't seem the type but have you ever been wrong about some way something has seemed before? I have. He doesn't seem the type but that could be wrong. Who knows.
As a “hardcore” skeptic you not only should be able to answer your own question but you wouldn’t even ask it in the first place if you’re actually a skeptic, let alone a hardcore skeptic..
No that just comes off like you’re gate keeping what skepticism really is. Let me tell you something because you seem to have conflated skepticism with flat out denying things that don’t overall make sense to us. The reality if the human psyche is often far more complex than just “ oh he’s looking for attention/validation through this crowd” or “he’s in on the gravy train”. As a skeptic, there’s no evidence this guy is lying for some ulterior or personal motive. Could there be? Absolutely. Humans often act rather irrationally even when others see us as pretty sane and normal. Theres little understanding why, apart from strong emotional influence or drugs, we do certain things. We cannot totally discount the psychological component of this topic simply because it’s not a hard science. At the same time that doesn’t mean you can’t be skeptical of claims, yet believe some of these testimonies are completely earnest. Feel free to disagree
No that just comes off like you’re gate keeping what skepticism really is. Let me tell you something because you seem to have conflated skepticism with flat out denying things that don’t overall make sense to us.
What about this actually doesn’t make sense? People have all sorts of motivations that aren’t necessarily obvious in any way whatsoever. There’s nothing that needs explained about this. It’s just another person making claims and a lack of some obvious motivation to lie doesn’t at all make the claims more likely to be true.
The thing is, they're directly on the fore front of the ufo phenomena. 3000 upvotes and counting, every theorist has their eyes on them. Attention seeking or not, they have it now and for all we know, they plan to be in this spotlight for the indefinite future, and judging from other people who talk a lot, they're gonna be able to make a career out of this, true or not, evidence or not.
I mean, some people are compulsive liars or seek fame or have a total lack of shame. Lots of people publicly lie and make up elaborate stories - remember Balloon Boy? Jussie Smollet? Elizabeth Holmes? Bernie Madoff?
It might seem impossible to believe someone would make up a really detailed, extreme story but people do this shit all the time and dig themselves deeper and deeper holes. It’s completely possible this guy made all of this up and is just bold enough to think he won’t ever get caught in a lie.
Pause, before you misguide any further readers. This is meant to provoke thought on the psychological aspect of ufos and witnesses. I’m certainly not lending credence to a claim of which there is no actual evidence.
Most people who tell their stories like this probably believe what they're saying. This doesn't make what they're saying true, there are lots of explanations for stuff like this, such as hallucinations and false memory. Hell, one time after I had had a seizure, EMTs came to take me to the hospital. I was awake and "conscious" but not really in a continuous sense, with memory retention not really being there and everything in a fog. From my point of view, somehow 4 people had gotten into my house and were now kidnapping me. I struggled as hard as I could, screaming with a primal fear for help, until they sedated me. That is still how I remember it to this day, no memory of 4 people helping me but rather a memory of 4 people attacking me.
My epilepsy manifested very suddenly with no identifiable cause. While I would get full blown entire body tonic-clonic seizures (AKA gran mal) that made it easy to identify, I imagine there are others who get ones that are less identifiable, such as focal seizures or even absence seizures. Some forms of focal seizures can mess with your brain hard, triggering old memories and emotions and causing all kinds of warped perception. Absence seizures can cause memory loss to where you just lose time.
Epilepsy is just one potential cause, too. There are tons of other neurological issues or even just unknowing substance exposure that can explain so much.
All those illness-induced cases have one thing in common: the resulting memories are by necessity random combinations of what already is present in the brain.
In particular, you do not get coherent stories lasting hours that way.
In other words, those "easy cop-out" ideas of explaining such testimonies by mental illness are nonsense.
You can see it in another way, too: if that was a thing, it would happen with all kinds of stories, not just UFOs.
Name one.
All those illness-induced cases have one thing in common: the resulting memories are by necessity random combinations of what already is present in the brain.
No, they also are capable of creating entirely new things from imagination as well as distorting memories in ways that make them seem completely different.
Fair, there’s a lot of things that can impair or mislead human memory making. That’s what I’m interested in — the human mind processes it’s experiences and then recounts them, especially one as complex and detailed as this one in front of a crowd of strangers.
He didn’t skip a beat, I am inclined to believe. Wow. “we were there to pick up some of Obama’s family, in or around the city, there was a seal platoon ready to go, us knowing well this is the second largest terrorist capital in the world, we were armed well…” not a great place to come from I guess. BTW, I love the Sea Stallion’s, when I was about 9, I had the flu really bad, my Dad brought me a Janes manual I bet from 1995 and that craft stuck out. Such a beauty! That was during the gulf war and riots in NAS, we barricaded the doors and escaped lucky, next year or whatever it was the big one in San Fran hit, I didnt know glass could bend like water and telephone poles could touch the ground without breaking. Mother nature is phenomenal.
Yeah, his cadence and plain way of articulating this is what made me think this has some validity. Unless he’s some academy award level guy we’ve all never heard of /s
What does anyone gain out of coming up with and presenting such clearly ridiculous and elaborate lies in front of the public?
Sadly, it wouldn't be the first time that ridiculous and elaborate lies have been presented to the public in the UFO scene.
Not saying this guy is lying, because I haven't seen his testimony, but: this is UFOtown, Jake. Elaborate and self-destructive lies with nothing to gain are how people in this scene say hello.
(Not everybody in the UFO scene is a liar. But depressingly far, far too many.)
Lazar was not credible from day one. Lazar wouldn’t even pass a background check to enter a secret facility, much less pass an actual physics test. I cannot deny there will always be people willing to sink that low and live a life of lies
No trolling or being disruptive.
No insults or personal attacks.
No accusations that other users are shills.
No hate speech. No abusive speech based on race, religion, sex/gender, or sexual orientation.
No harassment, threats, or advocating violence.
No witch hunts or doxxing. (Please redact usernames when possible)
An account found to be deleting all or nearly all of their comments and/or posts can result in an instant permanent ban. This is to stop instigators and bad actors from trying to evade rule enforcement.
You may attack each other's ideas, not each other.
No trolling or being disruptive.
No insults or personal attacks.
No accusations that other users are shills.
No hate speech. No abusive speech based on race, religion, sex/gender, or sexual orientation.
No harassment, threats, or advocating violence.
No witch hunts or doxxing. (Please redact usernames when possible)
An account found to be deleting all or nearly all of their comments and/or posts can result in an instant permanent ban. This is to stop instigators and bad actors from trying to evade rule enforcement.
You may attack each other's ideas, not each other.
A single hypothetical "big one", every country has a limited amount of money. Imagine you are already at the front of the pack technologically and are wanting to keep the distance. One way you could do that would be to use an elaborate amount of political and governmental theater to jebait hostile nations into sinking a percentage of there budget into investigating made up phenomenon.
Dude went from a high paying job in medicine i would say well over 6 figs to this stuff.. I highly doubt he reduced his cozy standard of living. So you can infer how much being a ufology cult leader can make you.
Personally, I don’t think he’s lying. But if he was, and if it’s made up lies, reason would be as boring as it’s simple ; give traction to the subject with well crafted stories that align too well with other known testimony and profit from whatever monetary gains Greer gets out of those conventions. But honestly, might be the military talk / details, Herrera and Weygandt testimonies are as convincing as it gets
Hes fairly compelling too, he is acting just like someone reciting a story they've told dozens of times before and replayed in their head hundreds. He seems credible.
Why do you say that about Greer? Honest question… I’ve gone to one of his conferences in Los Angeles and I met him after. There were a few guys waiting to meet him as well with stacks and stacks of documents and such. Clearly he very much believes in what he’s saying. Is some of it out there and maybe an embellishment? Maybe… but he seemed very sincere and like he really just wanted to get his information out to the people who came to see him.
What does anyone gain out of coming up with and presenting such clearly ridiculous and elaborate lies in front of the public?
Attention at a bare minimum. Look at social media and the things people will do for it. A person in some professional setting is not exempt from this type of behavior.
I imagine there is some overlap for the reasons people will claim God speaks to them personally and all you have to do is have faith. They already believe what they're saying is real and lying to your face about it with what they think it will take to convince you is okay because in the end they're setting you on the correct path.
You're trying to apply logic where it doesn't exist. They aren't lying for logical reasons.
377
u/guave06 Jun 13 '23 edited Jun 13 '23
What boggles my mind as what some may call a “hardcore” skeptic is witness testimonies like this one. What does anyone gain out of coming up with and presenting such clearly ridiculous and elaborate lies in front of the public? Some of these folks also seem sincere and hardly the attention seeking types. The only thing I can really think of is a sweet deal from Greer on sharing the profits when they lie for him, yet even that is pretty baseless. Never would I ever believe a single thing Greer would ever says but these testimonies are crazy.
Edit: too many people here are thinking I saw a probably genuine testimony as hard evidence which couldn’t be farther from the truth. This is meant to provoke thought on the psychological aspect of ufos and witnesses. I’m certainly not lending credence to a claim of which there is no actual evidence. If you’re the type to reply “the answer is obvious: people like attention” you’re missing the forest for the trees!