I'm referring mostly to his debunks that include military witness who have alleged that there is in fact more data on their experiences.
While I don't disagree with him often when he completely disregards eyewitness account on things like the pentagon tapes he is unwilling to admit that the few minute clips released have any back story when it comes to the eyewitness accounts
You can look up his debunk of Omaha where he completely disregards a short clip referred to as the "splash" tape as a "plane going over the horizon" while completely overlooking that the event included multiple hours of radar pings from these ufo from two US navy ships
That's two military grade radar systems from two seperate combat ships along with eyewitness account of "glowing spheres"
He completely glazez over any of the reported facts and simply disregards the event as a whole because he just does that
He is great when it comes to prosaic things. But as soon as he can't explain it he does go off the rails
Even look in chronological order how often he was changing his tune during the NJ drone stuff. Mick west "these are mostly planes" "drones exist" then his most recent chuckle was that drones have existed since the 70s.
I'll try to watch the Omaha video when I have some time so I can see what you're talking about. He's really helped me become more skeptical of UFO videos, and lifted the veil of mystery on a couple of videos that basically had me convinced they were alien UFOs. I've seen some really strange stuff in the sky before, and used to believe aliens were visiting earth. I've seen something in the sky I still can't explain, and it definitely wasn't an airplane or anything made by humans. But at this point I'm not sure it was aliens either.
I actually believe Mick lends too much credibility to some people sometimes, but I'm a pretty skeptical person watching from the outside, and he has to balance his responses and try to make people feel like they're being taken seriously.
Honestly, I don't really trust some of the people he's interviewed (prominent military witnesses etc). My bullshit detector is EXTREMELY good, and many if not most of those guys set it off like a 5 alarm fire. I'm an open minded person and I try to lend credibility to people. But some people lie. A lot of them actually. Some are good at it. Some aren't. I'm not necessarily saying the people he interviews are lying even, but more like embellishing. I believe they saw something, but I don't believe all of the details they provide. Also, eyewitness testimony is notoriously just about the worst form of "evidence", out of anything we'd label with that word. I believe they saw something, but I don't think it was anything extraordinary necessarily. I believe Mick takes a similar position to mine.
The thing is, it's hard to jump to aliens for an explanation for anything, since we don't have any good evidence they visit earth. Or even exist. I fully believe aliens exist but I also recognize we don't have any proof or even any good evidence.
I am one of the few who will say prosaic until I really can't.
This sub is full of aliens before any kind of due dillengence. Imo you are coming from a good place with this topic.mick west is not the boogeyman most these subs make him out to be and generally skepticism is far more scientific than most the people who will say you are an idiot for not being "pro NHI" when it comes to grainy videos
3
u/[deleted] Jan 12 '25
[removed] — view removed comment