Mikey4

This is why every man needs an offset smoker and a brisket every Saturday during cfb season. Get the fire going before your wife wakes up. "Oh no, I really want to go to the 6 year old's birthday party, but I can't leave the fire unattended!"

As a preface, I'm pretty convinced that the crafts spotted by pilots have terrestrial explanations and that the whistlebower's claims will be debunked with investigation. But to address your question.... Think about the steps of the Drake equation. We should expect that habitable planets are more common than planets with life, planets with life are more common than planets with intelligent life, and, probably, planets with intelligent life are more common than planets with intelligent life and the capability to detect and shoot down spacecraft. So assume that an intelligent civilization studies star systems like we do -- detects exoplanets and does spectral analyses to look for chemical signatures consistent with life -- and then sends scouts out to explore interesting planets. They may do this for thousands of years or longer without ever encountering planets in that last category -- where intelligent life could detect and shoot down their crafts. In that case, it would be logical for the crafts not be equipped with stealth tech... because why would they need it?

Yeah, barring some behind the scenes infighting that hasn't been reported, I'd say give that man a blank check.

In Ketch's defense, this exchange took place exactly 4 hours before the buffet opened, and he was rushing so he could be first in line.

That should be equally easy to track down. "Where did you see the ship?" And then send people out to investigate.

This is 100% true. The problem is, our Constitution sets up 3 branches of government, and everyone working for the federal government is ultimately accountable to (falls under) at least one branch. The Constitution doesn't allow for some shadow agency that doesn't report to Congress or the President.

I believe the pilots are telling the truth in that they observed things they cannot explain. The true explanation may be mundane (parralax effect), exciting but terrestrial (top secret tech from US or China), or extraterrestrial. You just can't tell from the videos and testimony. I really doubt that they're pawns in some conspiracy. They saw something they can't explain. That's it. The other guy is just repeating what unnamed sources have told him. So what good is his testimony? Let's hear from his sources.

So I haven't followed this super closely, but am I correct that 100% of his testimony is hearsay? In other words, he is relating what others have told him but has not personally seen the ships or aliens? If so, then it really doesn't matter how credible *he* is. He could 100% believe the things he has been told, but those things may still be untrue because the person he talked to was confused, crazy, combining elements of truth with speculation or exaggeration, etc. --- Edit here: Also, keep in mind that it's been ~80 years since the world superpowers had the opportunity and incentive to put their most top-secret tech on display for the world to see. We don't know what's locked up in research labs. It's entirely possible that this guy talked to someone who knew we had recovered wild and unexplained technology but drew an incorrect conclusion that the tech was extraterrestrial. --- It sounds like they have the wrong guy testifying. Give us the names of the people you talked to, who claim to have first-hand knowledge, and let's get them under oath.

"I think he is probably the most slept on QB in the league." We slept they QB?

Damn, sorry for your loss. I had a similar experience when my FIL was in the final days of his battle with cancer. I promised to take care of his wife and daughter. I don't think anyone could keep his eyes dry in such a surreal moment.

It may turn blue faster than anticipated.

I haven't seen any predictions that American cities will be "under water" 27 years from now. But I'm land locked and don't pay super close attention to this stuff, so maybe I've missed it.

Atlantis

This thread has really gone to shit

247 had him as a 3*, but he was a composite 4*

Dude just took a 3* QB and coached him up to a 4th round draft pick at RB. That's called player development. Don't get me started on Bijan. We'll be fine.

He's pissed! Like, REALLY PISSED!

Just saw it on the live stream. Hook 'em!

Damn, all five of our losses were within 7 points. Does that mean we were basically undefeated? (Hint: no)

I just call it the Red River Shootout.

Don't forget our "depth" (/s) players -- Cook, Niblett, Moore. I don't recall Texas ever having a wr room with this much potential. 2008 got it done with Shipley, Cosby, Collins, and Kirkendall, but they also had the most accurate qb in CFB history throwing the ball and a big running threat (Colt) to keep defenses honest. In terms of pure wr talent and potential, it's hard to improve on what we have now.

This week marks 2 years without a drink. At this point, I'm fairly confident that I could enjoy a glass of wine with dinner every once in a while without relapsing. At the same time, I'm perfectly content not drinking, so no point in running the risk.

To he fair, he committed to a time. He then decommitted and committed to a different time.

Yes, apparently the "hi" means that an athlete will commit to one of Texas's athletic programs today or at some unknown time in the future.

Given how much shit we give looch for pumping up aggy recruits in his top 44, it's probably better to rely on composite than do our own star ratings.