this post was submitted on 17 Sep 2023
436 points (98.4% liked)

Technology

66503 readers
5123 users here now

This is a most excellent place for technology news and articles.

Our Rules

  1. Follow the lemmy.world rules.
  2. Only tech related content.
  3. Be excellent to each other!
  4. Mod approved content bots can post up to 10 articles per day.
  5. Threads asking for personal tech support may be deleted.
  6. Politics threads may be removed.
  7. No memes allowed as posts, OK to post as comments.
  8. Only approved bots from the list below, this includes using AI responses and summaries. To ask if your bot can be added please contact a mod.
  9. Check for duplicates before posting, duplicates may be removed
  10. Accounts 7 days and younger will have their posts automatically removed.

Approved Bots

founded 2 years ago
MODERATORS
L3s@lemmy.world
enu@lemmy.world
technopagan@lemmy.world
L4s@lemmy.world
436
No evidence that UFOs are aliens — NASA attempts to make conversations about aerial phenomena more scientific (arstechnica.com)
submitted 2 years ago by L4s@lemmy.world to c/technology@lemmy.world
107 comments fedilink hide all child comments
 

No evidence that UFOs are aliens — NASA attempts to make conversations about aerial phenomena more scientific::NASA attempts to make conversations about aerial phenomena more scientific.

you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
[–] nul@programming.dev 7 points 2 years ago (1 children)

The person you replied to said extraterrestrial not UAP.

[–] 5BC2E7@lemmy.world -2 points 2 years ago (1 children)

yes and given the dismissive tone I believe that he doesn't make any distinction between uap and ufo, nhi and aliens.

[–] nul@programming.dev 7 points 2 years ago (1 children)

Doesn't sound dismissive to my ear. Sounds like they believe nhi are likely out there, but our attention is being maliciously diverted by the classical specter of "little green men" for the purposes of politics and control. That's my read, anyway.

[–] 5BC2E7@lemmy.world 4 points 2 years ago* (last edited 2 years ago)

I hope he can clarify. your interpretation seems equally valid to me, i just did not see it until you said it.

EDIT: he made it clear with his reply, it's all the same in his mind.