• @Yawweee877h444OP
    link
    English
    57 months ago

    Meh, I’m kinda suspicious of even replying to you as your arguments are really silly, and your probably just a troll, but,

    People still lie though.

    I think this is already the consensus among people who at least didn’t believe in UFOs before hearing about him.

    Honestly, what argument are you even making here? If he’s lying under oath, severe criminal penalties. His claims are based on evidence he was given by people he investigated/interviewed. You’re saying he’s lying about it? For what, a book deal? You are very much grasping at straws here.

    Pathologies can be sneaky like that.

    Zero evidence of “pathologies”. All signs point to him being very mentally stable, thus far. You’re just making stuff up now.

    You can’t know that, you’re just wildly guessing. It’s a convenient cop-out for bullshitters.

    What are you even talking about? This is what’s being reported. I’m only as good as the information I’m given. What you’re trying to say is he’s lying, he has no info, nothing is classified? You have zero evidence to back up your claim that he’s lying.

    I only agree with you only that I want hard evidence before I just “believe aliens are here”.

    Because I believe it’s all made up.

    Very simply, you don’t have evidence “it’s all made up”. Obviously. Anyway you seem like you’re just having fun being the antagonist troll as none of your arguments are compelling.

    I find the whole situation interesting and want real answers regardless of the outcome.

    • @[email protected]
      link
      fedilink
      English
      -57 months ago

      If your argument comes down to “you don’t have the evidence to prove a negative” that’s a pretty strong indicator that your argument is weak. People saying something isn’t proof. If one is to make expansive claims there should be evidence to support those claims.

      • @Yawweee877h444OP
        link
        English
        87 months ago

        I dont think what you’re saying is accurate.

        “you don’t have the evidence to prove a negative”

        I dont think im asking for this. The poster I’m responding to is making very specific claims. Very definitively, that Grusch is lying, either for a money grab grift in some form, or due to “pathologies”. For these specifics I would like some evidence, of which there is none.

        If OP would leave it simply at “I don’t believe it because I haven’t seen enough evidence to convince me”, then we would have a lot more in common as I’m in the same boat! I also want to see evidence regardless of which conclusion it leads to.

        However, where we differ might be that given all the current info the public has, there is enough to take it seriously and desire more investigation. There’s too much now to automatically say it’s “absolutely untrue, and all BS and lies.”