This comment comes across as incredibly privileged, to be honest. Most people must drive to work. Asking them to use Uber for such a purpose is just… it’s kind of infuriating.

We are all forced to buy a car. There is no one with a gun to our head forcing such a purchase, or a law specifically requiring you to buy a car. But nevertheless the laws are structured so that everyone realistically must buy a car, whether they want to or not.

If you chose not to buy a car then your life will be dramatically more expensive and difficult to live, because of the network effects of this requirement.

So while you are technically free to not buy a car, realistically you are forced to do so.

Is that approximately what you mean?

Look no further than the failure of the Paris Agreement and the ascent of authoritarianism worldwide. No one cares about environmental agreements, certainly not those in the rarified airs of billionaires, oligarchs, and other captains 9f industry.

Libertarians gonna libertarian. Even if it kills everyone.

List of ports

And then you call them a liar.

So you can conflate all you like, and will, but that’s your problem. There is no evidence as to the source for UAPs, interplanetary or otherwise.

I do not know what is going on, and make zero claims that I do. The one and only claim I make is that something is going on, but what that exactly is is now.

You, on the other hand, can read minds.

That’s the more fantastical claim.

I do not see anyone, let alone multiple people, making that claim. Can you link to one?

One of the common reported characteristics of some UAP is that they are able to accelerate hypersonic speeds without a sonic boom.

If that is true then there are things to be learned here. You appear to be saying that this obviously cannot be true because it violates what we currently know.

I think that is tragically unscientific.

Which it only is if you limit cosmology to spectroscopy and ignore UAP. If you start to examine UAP as a real thing, and ask questions about “how”, then it all falls apart.

Which is exciting.

Why do you believe that our current understanding of physics is the final one?

Let me propose a thought experiment. Let’s just say for the sake of argument that humanity has survived 100,000 years into the future. Now, let’s put you in a time machine and fast forward you to that distant future.

Would you be surprised to learn that relativity, and the limits it imposes, are viewed by those future humans as anachronistic and silly? Barely remembered artifacts of humanity’s Stupid Ages? That new discoveries were made over those thousand centuries, discoveries that we 21st century humans can only vaguely begin to comprehend?

Because you raised my biggest problem with modern cosmology: it’s arrogant assumption that Einstein is the end. But more importantly, that evidence indicating that relativity is not in fact the end — such as UAPs — is completely disregarded.

And the reason it is disregarded? Because relativity is the end! It’s circular reasoning at its absolute worst.

I’m sorry, but West is not convincing. He has a predetermined outcome in mind, namely, that there is nothing but man-made vehicles in the sky, and that there is zero chance for it to be anything else. Ever.

This conclusion does not match the evidence, and symbolizes a tragic incuriosity about the possibilities the universe holds.

Neil deGrasse Tyson is similar. They both approach the subject with a very unscientific, bad faith attitude.

I disagree with them both. I have experienced something that I do not believe has a prosaic explanation. Further, I do not believe that relativity is the end of physics as Tyson or west so strongly imply.

Curiosity in this subject should be encouraged, not ridiculed.