I totally agree with you on this, and as such, perhaps we do agree on something fundamental here. We got that!
My problem with the way you state your case is severalfold:
• It does not appear, based on anything you’ve said, that you’ve either read the detailed incident report that accompanies the tic-tac video (pretty sure it’s that one) – which I graciously provided a link to – nor looked at any of the multiple pilot interviews – which I also linked to. Because some of what is in those highly-credible descriptions goes well beyond what can be described as a military drone. Did you get to the part where it went under the water, apparently? I don’t feel like you did get to that part, because I don’t think you really read it. If you have, I apologize – but then instead of being ignorant of the facts around one of these sightings, you are actually intentionally misleading. That would be less cool than being a skeptic who happens to not be up on the facts.
• Nor are you accurately describing the known capabilities of any current aircraft, manned or drone, when you say “there are things that can do this.” Because there aren’t, not anything that is known by the public, or multi-decade black project aircraft enthusiasts. Saying “an unmanned aircraft can fly at multi-mach speed” and then say “and this other one can hover, make right angle turns, fly around weirdly, etc.” is not describing the same vehicle. For you to imply heavily that there are known aircraft capable of performing with the flight characteristics observed now over years across multiple incidents on multiple sensor platforms and visually – sometimes for days and weeks at a time, as the Navy is now acknowledging – is simply not true.
Again, I am going off of what the Navy itself is saying in public releases. Last time I checked, the most advanced military force in the world counts as “backup.” They are saying these are not ours, and inviting pilots, for the first time ever, to report them without fear, because sightings are increasing – likely in some cases, perhaps many, because of better sensor systems that tip us off to their presence – and they are literally worried it’s going to lead to in-air accidents. Have you read any of the articles being reported in The New York Times and Washington Post? What, it’s all “fake news” I suppose?
This is why your form of “skepticism” annoys me so. Because in my opinion, it’s actually a front for my number one biggest pet peeve in the world: Contrarianism. It just bothers me more than a lot of other things, even awful things. Because, as I said earlier, it has this way of breeding, you see. Many of us do the contrarian thing at times. I think it’s the number one factor that got Trump elected, for instance. But I’ve put a lot of time over multiple decades researching military black projects, and UFOs, among many other subjects. And so when someone says “well what about blah blah blah” but they clearly have either not looked at any of the referenced information, or are going out of their way to create subterfuge around the issue – I dunno, it really gets my goat. I admit it.
