The age of disclosure (Documentary)

Where did you get that idea? I'm not an atheist by any stretch of the imagination.

Oh, well. Glad to see you're not atheist.

Checking on your posts, you seem to have an ambiguous position. Your comments in the religion forum are unintelligile.

Actually, my comments are fucking genius, you just aren't enlightened enough to understand them.

How do you identify yourself?

I'm a theist, but unlike most around here, I'm not a literalist, and I'm most comfortable expressing my encounter with the transcendent reality using Christian symbolism, because that is what I know best.

But seriously, my posts probably seem unintelligible because I reject any and all exclusivity of religious beliefs, which is to say that I believe that all the major religions are culturally influenced manifestations of the one and the same transcendent reality. To a biblical literalist, that would be unintelligible.

If an ET civilisation has developed the technology and has the ability to get here, then it will get here, and won't be afraid to do so.

I explained many times to you the logical argument:

1) The ETs that got here in the Earth are technologically more evolved than us, otherwise they couldn't be here doing interplanetary travels.

2) As the ETs are more evolved than us, they see us as primitives. They don't approach because we are like wild animals for them. We are their zoo.

3) There are certain people among us that achieved a respectable level of mental progress so ETs contact these people in order to spread the news about them. Can you imagine if the ETs contact the fkn violent military? Or even worse, the fkn liar politicians? There is no way.

You're free to refuse the idea of extraterrestrial life despite the many testimonies and logical arguments you have out there, but something tells me that if Trump declassifies the UFO files tomorrow, you'll keep refusing it anyway. Lol.

I never "refuse" the idea of ET life.

I think it reasonable and logical to suggest that life exists elsewhere in the Universe.

It is also reasonable and logical to suggest that Earth based life forms are more intellectually advanced, similarly developed or not as intellectually developed as life forms elsewhere, though the preferred option chosen by people such as yourself is always the latter one.

Everything you state in points 1,2 and 3 is simply unverifiable fantasy and conspiracy theory, which is a global phenomenon and not just a U.S thing.

Nevertheless, I'm going with little green men.

Yes, photosynthesising extra terrestrial organisms is a logical and reasonable suggestion.

Nonetheless I would argue that no actual evidence is just as sound a scientific basis as a high probability is.

you remind me of me, when i'm talking about near death experiences. to me, evidence from NDEs obviously points to an afterlife or at least a mind that's separate from the body. to you the evidence is obvious about UFOs. to others, they see UFOs and NDEs as evidence of something, but they aren't sure what. at least, to at least admit that NDEs or UFOs are evidence of something but with uncertainty of what, is a plausible position. to state that they are evidence of nothing and there's nothing to see here... that's completely irrational.

to me, i tend to think UFOs are evidence of extraterrestrials but i'm not sure about that. like those other people, i view them as evidence of something but i'm not sure what. the christian part of me knows the bible talks about 'sight, signs, and wonders' that could be evil spirits and wonder if that's what UFOs are. that's just my christian bias though. i've been open to seeing more things as demonic or false or lacking truth 'sights, signs, and wonders', so naturally i kinda wonder if that fits UFOs.

The Bible does not mention UFOs as a modern concept

, but some passages describe unusual flying objects or visions that people interpret as UFOs today. Examples include Ezekiel's vision of a complex, wheel-like structure that was described in terms of the technology available at the time, and Elijah's departure in a fiery chariot. Other passages, such as Jesus's Ascension and descriptions of angels, are also sometimes reinterpreted in this way. 

General anesthetic shows that the mind is not separate from the body.

General anesthesia offers strong evidence that the mind is not separate from the body, 

supporting physicalism (or materialism), the philosophical view that mental states are ultimately physical states of the brain [1]. When general anesthetics are administered, they act directly on the central nervous system, specifically targeting ion channels and neurotransmitter receptors to suppress brain activity [1, 2]. 

The key observations supporting this view are:

1. Loss of Consciousness: Anesthesia reliably induces a temporary, reversible loss of consciousness, memory, and responsiveness to pain [2]. This direct causal link between the chemical manipulation of brain matter and the cessation of conscious experience suggests that consciousness itself is a product of physical brain processes [1].
2. Physical Mechanism: The effects of anesthetics are entirely explainable through known biological and chemical interactions within the brain, without needing to invoke a non-physical "mind" or "soul" [1].
3. Reversibility: Upon the anesthetic wearing off, consciousness and mental functions return, further indicating that the mind's function is dependent on the proper, physical operation of the brain [2]. 

Philosophical dualists, who argue the mind and body are distinct substances, struggle to explain how a purely physical substance (anesthetic) can so predictably and completely disrupt a non-physical mind [1]. The evidence from anesthesia strongly suggests that altering the body's physical state inherently alters, or even temporarily eliminates, the mind's function. 

Well stated.

General anesthetic shows that the mind is not separate from the body.

When you turn off a radio the music stops, does that prove the radio was the source of the music?

Turning off a radio and hearing the music stop 

does not prove that the radio itself was the original source of the music [1].

The radio is a receiver and an output device, not the creator of the sound waves being broadcast. It receives a signal that originated elsewhere (e.g., a radio station, a satellite, or a music streaming service) and converts that signal into audible sound [1]. 

The cessation of music simply shows that the radio is necessary to receive and reproduce the sound in that specific location, but the actual source of the music continues to broadcast whether your personal radio is on or off [1]. 

there's plenty of NDEs that occur under general anastetic too and once in awhile OBEs, with some having verifiable events happening while out of the body.

NDEs and OBEs are closely related; 

an out-of-body experience (OBE) is a sensation of perceiving one's body from an outside vantage point, while a near-death experience (NDE) is a broader set of subjective phenomena that often includes an OBE and is triggered by a life-threatening situation. NDEs may also include other elements like a life review, a sense of peace, or moving through a tunnel. 

As far as we are able to know, everything is an internal simulation.

So an OBE is actually an IBE that is seemingly an OBE.

And an NDE is a not dead experience, wherein the mind, under stress, internally simulates fantasy scenarios.

And a UFO is an internally simulated UFO in an internally simulated externality.

We can Never be fully certain that A corresponds with B.

Based on your experience we can never be certain that A corresponds with B.

you remind me of me, when i'm talking about near death experiences. to me, evidence from NDEs obviously points to an afterlife or at least a mind that's separate from the body. to you the evidence is obvious about UFOs. to others, they see UFOs and NDEs as evidence of something, but they aren't sure what. at least, to at least admit that NDEs or UFOs are evidence of something but with uncertainty of what, is a plausible position. to state that they are evidence of nothing and there's nothing to see here... that's completely irrational.

I'm not sure if it's the same, I think NDEs are harder to prove due to the nature of the evidence, it's like trying to convince people of the existence of ghosts, like the movie Ghost which, by the way, is based on real testimonies about the hereafter.

I think it's easier to prove that these UFOs are crewed by extraterrestrial beings. I mean, what else could it be? The problem is that there are so many people that don't have general knowledge about basic stuff in history, science or religion. With this knowledge it's easier to put the puzzle together.

to me, i tend to think UFOs are evidence of extraterrestrials but i'm not sure about that. like those other people, i view them as evidence of something but i'm not sure what. the christian part of me knows the bible talks about 'sight, signs, and wonders' that could be evil spirits and wonder if that's what UFOs are. that's just my christian bias though. i've been open to seeing more things as demonic or false or lacking truth 'sights, signs, and wonders', so naturally i kinda wonder if that fits UFOs.

I don't know why you're so obsessed about NDEs but I can tell you that the afterlife is very related to these ETs because these fkn aliens understand pretty well how that works. I guess they know because they don't reincarnate.

Moreover, I wouldn't trust too much on the bible. Remember that the bible is a translated book which is susceptible to errors, changes and discards. Instead, you have a lot of alternatives to expand your knowledge about it. Read other authors like Edgar Cayce for example. Keep reading more content and take what resonates with you. Just follow your intuition which, for some people, is the voice of your soul.

🔑 What the Film Claims (Key Assertions & Themes)

1. The film argues there has been an ≈ 80-year cover-up by governments (especially U.S. but implicating “major powers”) of the existence of non-human intelligent life — i.e. extraterrestrials or non-human beings. (Wikipedia)
2. It presents testimony from 34 former and current government, military, and intelligence officials who claim direct knowledge: sightings of “craft” of non-human origin, retrieval of crashed vehicles, and even recovery of non-human bodies or biological material. (The Washington Post)
3. According to the film, there is a long-running secret program (sometimes called a “legacy program”) involving reverse-engineering of alien technology — a covert “race” among world powers to decode and weaponize or exploit non-human technology. (The Washington Post)
4. The documentary claims that UAPs (unidentified anomalous phenomena) have repeatedly been observed near strategic, nuclear, or military installations — implying that these are not random pop-culture sightings but potentially serious security events. (The Austin Chronicle)
5. It suggests the implications are enormous: if even part of this is true, humanity’s self-conception — of being alone, of the nature of reality — may have to radically shift. The film invites public and political pressure for full declassification and disclosure of UAP-related information. (Wikipedia)

In short: “We are not alone. Governments have known more than they’ve told. And what’s hidden — alien craft, non-human beings, advanced technology — could redefine everything.”

If this resonates with what you often explore — liminal states, consciousness, transformation — the film positions itself as a kind of existential “wake-up call” for humanity.

🧪 The Strongest Critiques & Why Many Remain Skeptical

1. Lack of verifiable evidence. Despite the many testimonies, the film does not present publicly accessible physical evidence — no artifacts, no authenticated photos or bodies, no declassified documents. Critics argue that “testimony alone” is insufficient for extraordinary claims. (Metacritic)
2. No independent scientific verification. The “experts” in the film are — by and large — people with intelligence or military backgrounds; there are few, if any, neutral scientists or independent investigators critically assessing their claims. That raises questions of bias, memory distortions, or groupthink. (The Washington Post)
3. Speculation about the “why” and “how.” Assertions about alien craft being reverse-engineered, global secret wars, non-human bodies, or advanced propulsion — these remain speculative. Without hard data, the claims verge into the realm of conjecture or myth, which many critics see as undermining the film’s credibility. (Yahoo)
4. Selective narrative / lack of dissenting voices. The documentary doesn’t give much space to skeptics or alternative explanations (e.g. misidentification, advanced but human-made black-ops technology, psychological phenomena). That means it's less an objective investigation than a curated “case for belief.” (Rotten Tomatoes)
5. Risk of “confirmation bias.” Because the film is assembled largely from insiders who already believe in the existence of non-human intelligence, viewers who are predisposed to believe may find it convincing — but for skeptics, the lack of hard proof means it fails to move the needle. The critical consensus so far is that it “raises interesting questions,” but doesn’t definitively settle anything. (Metacritic)

One critic put it bluntly: having no opposing voices doesn’t strengthen the argument; it just means you’ve assembled a group of believers speaking to believers. (Metacritic)

🌗

You have solid evidence of testimony of credible people saying they've seen spacecraft doing other worldly things. The people could be wrong or the craft might be man-made. I tend to believe theres something more to it but im not sure.

You have limited evidence of people saying they've seen actual aliens. This is too sparse to make solid claims of.

You yourself present video evidence of spacecraft but you are too bias to acknowledge that the videos you provide are inconclusive.

Theres no physical evidence. Thats a crushing thing to your argument.

I've seen articles and heard testimony of who groups of people and even towns seeing sitings. But yet theres no physical evidence.

Are these group delusions or psycho tricks or false reports?

I maintain that these are very interesting evidence and they seem to indicate aliens or something big but im not sure. Theyre evidence of something but im not sure of what

I'd argue when it gets down to science theres more evidence for the afterlife than ufos

Yes — there have been several well-documented cases where *entire towns or large groups of people* reported seeing a UFO at the same time. Some of the most famous involve hundreds — even thousands — of witnesses, including police officers, pilots, military personnel, and local officials. Here are some of the most notable examples:

---

## 🛸 **Credible Mass UFO Sightings**

### **1. The Phoenix Lights — Arizona, 1997**

* Perhaps the most famous modern mass sighting.

* Thousands of residents across Arizona reported seeing a huge, silent, V-shaped craft with lights.

* Witnesses included pilots, police officers, and a state governor (who later said he believed it was real).

* No official explanation has ever satisfied skeptics.

---

### **2. The Belgium Wave — 1989–1990**

* Multiple towns in Belgium saw large triangular craft.

* Over **13,000 people** reported sightings.

* The Belgian Air Force officially chased the objects with F-16s.

* Radar confirmed unknown targets, but pilots **could not catch them**.

* To this day, there’s no official explanation.

---

### **3. Westall Incident — Australia, 1966**

* Around **200+ students and teachers** at a school near Melbourne saw a disc-shaped object land, hover, and take off.

* Some say military personnel arrived and told people to stay quiet.

* Witnesses are still alive today and maintain their story.

---

### **4. The Hudson Valley Sightings — New York, 1980s**

* Thousands across multiple towns reported slow-moving, massive craft.

* Often seen hovering silently over highways.

* Police departments received so many calls they began logging them.

---

### **5. The Fatima Events — Portugal, 1917**

* Normally framed as a religious miracle, but **60,000+ people** reported seeing a shining object in the sky performing strange movements (“the miracle of the sun”).

* Some UFO researchers interpret it as a mass UFO encounter.

---

## 🧩 **What Makes These “Credible”?**

Credibility tends to be evaluated by:

| Factor | Why It Matters |

| ---------------------------- | -------------------------------- |

| Number of witnesses | Hundreds or thousands add weight |

| Reliable observers | Pilots, police, military |

| Physical evidence | Radar, photos, videos |

| Official government response | Military chases, investigations |

| Consistency of reports | Similar descriptions |

---

## ⚖️ **Skeptics’ Counterarguments**

Skeptics usually point to:

* Mass psychology / misidentification

* Secret military craft

* Atmospheric phenomena

* Memory distortion over time

But… **some cases still remain unexplained** even after military investigation and radar confirmation.

---

## 🔍 **Conclusion**

Yes — there are several *credible* cases where entire communities reported seeing UFOs, and some of these events remain unexplained today. These mass sightings are the strongest cases in ufology because they involve:

✔ Many witnesses

✔ Cross-verification between civilians & officials

✔ Radar or video evidence

✔ Lack of any conclusive explanation

---

Some claims in video

https://youtu.be/sjmJmwsjdGI?si=rLLe-0I6O9YcMxJv

And mass hysteria.

Though lack of any conclusive explanation sort of always sums up such events.

And not sure what difference being an "official" makes.

While 

mass UFO sightings are considered credible as genuine observations of "unidentified anomalous phenomena" (UAP), scientific and government investigations have found no verifiable evidence that they are extraterrestrial in origin. Instead, most sightings are attributed to misidentified conventional objects, natural phenomena, or advanced human technology. 

Quite so.

You have limited evidence of people saying they've seen actual aliens. This is too sparse to make solid claims of.

The documentary I presented in this thread reveals a lot of testimonies from important people that worked in the retrieval of crashed alienships in the American government. There are even scientists involved in the UFO project. You have plenty of stories about it and all of them talk about non-human beings. It's no a small thing, let alone sparse.

In fact, it's very likely that Trump disclose the UFO files very soon. But even so, the skepticals will say it's fake. Lol.

You yourself present video evidence of spacecraft but you are too bias to acknowledge that the videos you provide are inconclusive.

What videos specifically? I think it doesn't matter if I present a high resolution video of a UFO, the same skepticals will come to say it's fake, so I prefer not to waste my time. I bet these skeptical don't want to see the documentary. Lol.

I'd argue when it gets down to science theres more evidence for the afterlife than ufos

Whatever, man, However, I'm of the opinion that the UFO disclosure is more important for our species because it will change everything, including the religion and the whole science.

Official Conclusions

Despite the existence of government files and ongoing investigations into "unidentified" cases, official U.S. government reports have consistently concluded the following: 

1. No UAP sighting has provided verifiable evidence of extraterrestrial activity, non-human technology, or a threat to national security.
2. Most UAP reports, when sufficient data is available, are identified as ordinary objects (like balloons, drones, or satellite constellations such as Starlink) or atmospheric phenomena.
3. Claims by whistleblowers about secret programs possessing crashed alien spacecraft and "non-human biologics" have been denied by the Pentagon and have not been substantiated with verifiable evidence.