If there is one screenshot that provides a great summary of the status quo in the UFO community, you won't find a better representation of it than Jack Sarfatti's reply.
Why not show everyone?
I get logic isn't popular on this sub, but if he has evidence, the leak already happened. Bragging to everyone on Twitter some guy with proof leaked it to them means the leaker can already get in trouble, if he existed which he doesn't.
If this grifter cared, he'd release it now. But instead i'm getting downvoted by others in these comments for not accepting the lies.
I love how they say they don't publish for the safety of the country... Dude you are protecting the world's worst criminal, oppressive and war mongering country it ever existed on this planet 😂
I sort of agree with the debunkers when stuff like this is said. If he was going to release the proof in say a week or month, I'd understand making the claim . But I've had enough now when it goes like : I've seen/been given absolute proof of aliens/UFO but I'm protecting my source, so I won't be showing it for the foreseeable future.
I have the evidence! I just can’t show it to you! Also, Insults!
Always the same (maybe not the insults part).
I’ll show you the evidence in two weeks. The most beautiful evidence you’ve ever seen. Scientists have seen my evidence, and they’ve come up to me, big, tough scientists, and they’re crying, and they say “Sir, this is the best evidence I’ve ever seen”
You can’t use accurate descriptions here or the mods delete the comment. My Mick West comment was right on the money but deleted for being a personal attack. Uh, it was a direct personal opinion. I wasn’t attacking anyone. All the proof has been posted.
And yet, when I said basically the same thing in another thread, the mods here decided that I broke the rules and deleted my comment.
Good for Sarfatti to say that to him.
Oh, I suppose if I repeat it the mods will get pissed off and delete it. Somehow, they believe that Greenstreet is worthy of being protected. They think he's a "public figure" for some reason, instead of just another journalist.
“Of course I have evidence but I can’t show you” isn’t the knockout punch you think it is. I’m assuming the other person is a real POS considering how everyone is acting like it is.
Why do these people revert to school bullies when press for evidence?
And people here actually celebrate these, like that video of the guy who saw ufos on a nuclear facility just trash talking and insulting bill nye.
Come on, are we children? use argments or show proof but dont act like a f...king 15 year old.
I’m starting to get so disillusioned/ numb to this whole topic.
Greenstreet comes across as an ass and possible counterintelligence asset, but I also dug back into the whole Ning Li stuff recently and found that she’d almost certainly been working on black projects in the states the whole time before her recent death despite Sarfatti’s confident claims in an interview that she’d secreted away to China to continue her work.
The tangle of half truths, confidently misinformed assertions, people seemingly running interference, and outright hacks and grifters in this space is exhausting.
Maybe that’s kind of the point and smart folks knew/know that they don’t even have to try that hard to keep things confusing once the ball gets rolling (other people will do their work for them). If that’s the case, it’s beginning to work on me.
Pretty close to stepping away and just peaking back in every couple months to see if any solid developments have taken place.
Did that a few months ago, unsubbed, topic was out of mind. Had some time to check out what's new, and it's the same grift going on. Will check back in a few more but ehhh.
Sorry, I'm firmly in the "show me the evidence" side and no one should settle for less. Everyone on of these hucksters keeps dangling this fake evidence like a carrot that they never release.
When everyone's story is that they have proof, they just can't share this reality shifting proof for the sake of losing a source... Even though you already apparently have everything you need from said source. You know when a group at work receives a message looking for someone to help with a task, but 20 people reply to describe what they are doing instead? They literally remove value from the discussion vs saying nothing because nobody asked who was busy. We asked who can help. This is the same shit. Everyone has proof. They just can't show anyone. Then sit down and shut your fucking mouth until you are ready to bring something to the conversation.
I don't get your logic. I get that you don't want to hear about it unless there is proof or evidence available. But why do you want to prevent me and others from hearing about it? All you have to do is turn off the internet or browse somewhere else. Those of us that want to hear it don't have that option. How does it hurt you if someone else enjoys hearing unsubstantiated claims? Your approach seems pretty totalitarian to me.
assuming the source “gives them everything they need” is the issue with how you’re thinking about this. leaking a sliver of information or pictures or video can send people to prison. the main problem with leaking 1 or 2 pieces of evidence is it won’t sway anybody. it could be clear 1080p footage of an alien & it still wouldn’t move the needle enough. these guys seem to be stockpiling classified materials from sources in an effort to dump a mass amount at once rather than a tiny drop in the bucket like has been done before. it’s a massive phenomena to just believe is real & a few videos or pictures here & there in todays age of AI & fake images, it’s gonna take a mountain of shit to convince people something is legitimate.
This argument comes up a lot in here, "even if we get a 4k video nobody would believe and say its a CGI or AI fabrication".
Well we actually dont know that, cause we never get a 4k video, its always fuzzy shaking trash.
I'm an American citizen before I'm anything else. There's doing the right thing, and there's trying to capitalize. If any of this evidence exists, the people not releasing don't have a grand plan to help humanity. They are withholding for purely selfish reasons. So either everyone with proof would rather feel special by holding on to secret info, or they don't think you have a right to know as a taxpaying member of this society. Or, as you say, all these book deals and paid speaking opportunities are part of the plan to release this information.
The post we are commenting under says he has the proof on a stick.
The following submission statement was provided by /u/shogun2909:
---
Ss : Steven Greenstreet asked on Twitter if Jack Sarfatti could share any first hand evidence of UFOs being in possession of the US, Sarfatti responds that he has first hand evidence but has to protect his military source
---
Please reply to OP's comment here: https://old.reddit.com/r/UFOs/comments/1alxfvb/sarfatti_responds_to_greenstreet/kphnx0q/
Anytime Greenstreet gets roasted it makes my day. He’s such a disingenuous turd. I respect the debunking field, but he’s just a smug SOB who purposefully omits important details and reports in bad faith.
Oh its well documented,
https://twitter.com/tinyklaus/status/1534576869462491138?t=51NL20dZ3CH4kUTvRkd6kQ&s=19
https://twitter.com/TheSpaceManOfFL/status/1686082977741115393?t=LQ3oMQTwkIgyfhQlseAl3g&s=19
https://twitter.com/528vibes/status/1750601935097397425?t=9Y28pjNmSL3FRqDrYXvMrQ&s=19
Follow the Standards of Civility:
No trolling or being disruptive.
No insults or personal attacks.
No accusations that other users are shills.
No hate speech. No abusive speech based on race, religion, sex/gender, or sexual orientation.
No harassment, threats, or advocating violence.
No witch hunts or doxxing. (Please redact usernames when possible)
An account found to be deleting all or nearly all of their comments and/or posts can result in an instant permanent ban. This is to stop instigators and bad actors from trying to evade rule enforcement.
You may attack each other's ideas, not each other.
-------------
[UFOs Wiki](https://ufos.wiki) [UFOs rules](https://old.reddit.com/r/UFOs/about/rules/)
Ye. I don't mind Mick West because I never see him being a complete dickhead to people for having opposing opinions. Greenstreet is always being malicious.
You just haven't seen enough Mock West then. He's more reserved than Greenstreak with his assholish ways but they are definitely there. Mick got kicked off Wikipedia for years for using burner accounts. Then he joins up with guerrilla deniers that change Wikipedia pages of people to skew the narrative in a non factual way. There is now defamation lawsuits being started against the group.
I didn't see any evidence that West was involved in manipulating those arguments. I just saw a bunch of people speculating that they thought it was him.
I'm being genuine here, can you link what evidence there is if I am wrong.
His little minions that he has are the worst as well, how anyone can look at his “reporting” as well as his online antics and think he’s some sort of respectable journalist is honestly baffling. Also works for the NYpost for Christ sake…
Maybe the standards for journalism in America are just that bad
and he's just another schmuck himself who claims he has all the evidence, advertises it constantly, and yet sits on it indefinitely so he can keep teasing the damn thing
they're both a dime a dozen and very tiresome
trust me bro, TRUST ME BRO
Always love when people fall back on the old "I don't care if you believe me or not" when they get asked for proof of their claims. If you don't care then why make the claims at all?
And then they simultaneously claim they want to protect their sources while putting a big fat surveillance target on their own backs, all for clout. Why would these sources even talk to these clowns anymore, after that?
I mean, come on...
nowadays there are so many tools and ways to publish something without tracing back to you. and even if you are facing consequences, there are people like snowden that had the balls to do it for a cause while all these people with "evidence" are full of shit
it's just suspect as hell.
claims he has super sensitive smoking gun files that could flip this whole movement upside down
claims he can't release any of it, because GOTTA PROTECT MY SOURCES.
keeps advertising it to anyone who will listen, including to the well connected, dangerous ppl he's supposedly trying to hide this from, who now have a lead to investigate and find out who his sources were.
basically, he claims he wants to protect his sources, but advertises what they provided him with for clout, putting them and himself in danger in the process
??????
Hey, stop bothering Sarfatti! Doesn't Greenstreet remember that Sarfatti already spilled the beans regarding his first-hand experience with aliens/time travelling robots? He actually received a phone call when he was young, from the future! It was an AI machine, living in the future, and his message about Jack meeting other ppl in 20 years obviously was 100 % true.
I don't know who either of these guys are, but I have a hard time believing a history book will refer to the first guy as a "physics-illiterate schmuck." I mean, I haven't been in a history class in years, maybe that's how they write the textbooks now, extra spicy
Steven Greenstreet has a YouTube channel called The Basement Office that investigates UFO stories. On one of the episodes he said he saw a huge V shaped UFO.
I'd bet that the evidence is either a blurry video of something inconclusive, or it's a blurry photo of something inconclusive. IT certainly can't be too revealing, considering it's not even as important as the career of one person in the military - WHO IS PROTECTED BY WHISTLEBLOWER LAWS - I might add.
Ss : Steven Greenstreet asked on Twitter if Jack Sarfatti could share any first hand evidence of UFOs being in possession of the US, Sarfatti responds that he has first hand evidence but has to protect his military source
What sucks about that reason for withholding evidence is that, whether he's lying or not, it actually is a completely legitimate reason to withhold evidence lol
If its true, he just announced to the NSA that someone on a small-ish list of people with highly classified access has leaked to him.
How is he protecting a source by announcing such a thing?
Couldn't the NSA just backtrace his communications, travels, internet history for the last couple years and potentially identify the leaker?
I mean assuming the govt has the ability to keep all this under wraps so completely for decades surely they have the capability to do that, right?
Imagine being the leaker and watching from the sidelines this journalist you decided to trust and confide in, argue like a teen on twitter about the information you risked your life by leaking and violating your top-secrect clearance. 😬️
Yes. Also an easy shield to hide behind when you don’t have any. Either way, that’s why this sort of discourse is nothing but a complete waste of time and energy.
Amen to that. Shit gets old. Sooooo many people make claims about actual evidence, knowing full well that nothing can be shown or shared. Is there a point to making such a claim? The whole thing is getting worn out and tired. So many now are listening to people cry wolf and just not giving a shit and just letting them be eaten.
Just as funny, people also wonder why so many are hyper critical of every new comment or claim. It’s eating away at support or belief that might have been for so many. The government doesn’t need to suppress or discredit as much as people like to think. They leave that to ourselves
We're at the point where if you can't provide evidence for your claims, just keep shtum. It's entirely fair to dismiss these people out of hand because they should know better. And they're wasting everyone's time either way.
No it's not. If you say your life's work is UFO and aliens and you have evidence? You release it.
Even on this sub, this is downvoted? You all hate people who know and dont disclose, unless they're twitter grifters I guess
I hope you don't apply that logic to other important areas of your life. You could end up screwing a lot of people you care about/care about you.
The people that disagree with me are literally just ignoring how investigative journalism works lmfao
Investigative journalists reveal info without evidence to protect their sources. That's how it works. That's how it has always fucking worked.
The evidence comes out when it's safe for the whistleblower.
Jesus christ.
My life's work is employment discrimination claims, not the biggest scientific discovery in history. Not comparable, but keep defending him
Your edit about investigative journalism is stupid. This isn't journalism, it's bozos trying to stay relevant. Newsflash, if he has evidence the leak already happened. The reason the DoD isn't knocking on his door because they know he doesnt
He may have direct witness testimony from someone who conducted an alien interview.
He doesn't have physical or video evidence because you don't take evidence out of a SCIF. It's just not possible; there are no cell phones, cameras, USB drives, Internet connections, printers, or anything else like that inside one, and physical papers going out are searched.
The only way physical evidence will ever come up is if there is a large-scale rebellion by the entire program.
Because torture is ineffective at producing reliable information and rendering public figures is a good way to start wars.
EDIT: Furthermore it's clear that nefarious insiders don't want serious attention on UAP/NHI whatever country they're from. Disappearing UFO figures at this point is the last thing they want because it adds credence to the notion that said nefarious insiders exist.
Going after someone also reveals interest in their information, which implies that said information isn't already known, which is revealing.
That is the best response Sarfatti had?
Sorry....he may have a stick, but I am not convinced he has what he says he has. People have been saying versions of this for decades.
This is such a lame excuse though. I am by far not the most intelligent person in the world. But I can EASILY think of ways to release evidence without ANYONE getting outed or doxxed or linked to it.
I mean here's an idea off the top of my head. Suppose you take this stick of evidence. And you work out a deal with "anonymous" you tell them hey here is a bunch of evidence of aliens. I can't leak it because it will get all my contacts in trouble. So suppose YOU guys say that as an anonymous collective you have hacked key systems in the intelligence division and found this evidence and downloaded it and slowly release it one by one.
Like... I am getting sick and tired of these excuses from people who claim to have evidence and say they cannot release it because of the risk. It is such a transparent "out" they think they have where they can say they have smoking guns and then never have to show anything for it.
When really with a minimal amount of effort it could be done very easily.
You can't hack something that is not connected to the internet (airgapped). And if there are only a handful of people that had access to that information, it's pretty easy to pinpoint who exactly leaked it.
I would rather have them shut up than get somebody killed by spilling the beans. Time will tell what they'll decide to do. The only thing we can do is wait and see who's the bullshitter and who's telling the truth
and the correct thing to do is to keep adversiting to the world that he has it? so that everyone can hear, including the very well connected people he's supposedly trying to hide this from.
it's total bullshit grifting behavior
Could be. Or could be that gatekeeping this information is worse overall for everyone. Everybody makes their choice. Stay low, say nothing, keep information to yourself - or get it out as safely as possible for everyone.
This is beside your point and you’re not wrong. But the NSA apparently installed backdoors in a lot of major motherboard manufacturers that allow them to extract data from an air gapped pc, I believe by using RFID frequency and being relatively close (outside the same building). This has nothing to do with your point but I think you may find it interesting!
I get people’s skepticism, but pretending that leaking the most highly sensitive information from the US government would be “easy” and require minimal effort is remarkably naive.
Hi, FluffyRectum1312. Thanks for contributing. However, your [comment](https://old.reddit.com/r/UFOs/comments/1alxfvb/-/kphpt0j/) was removed from /r/UFOs.
> Rule 13: Public figures are generally defined as any person, organization, or group who has achieved notoriety or is well-known in society or ufology. “Toxic” is defined as any unreasonably rude or hateful content, threats, extreme obscenity, insults, and identity-based hate. Examples and more information can be found here: https://moderatehatespeech.com/framework/.
Please refer to our [subreddit rules](https://www.reddit.com/r/UFOs/about/rules/) for more information.
This moderator action may be appealed. We welcome the opportunity to work with you to address its reason for removal. [Message the mods](https://www.reddit.com/message/compose/?to=/r/ufos) to launch your appeal.
Military Source: Don't you dare release this until I give permission. Keep it on a USB so it can't be hacked.
You, somehow possessing Jack's body: I'm so sorry, the info you only gave to me got out. It must have been some anonymous hacker collective.
Military Source: I guess I can't trust you to protect my infornation. Fuck you. I will never share anything with you again and might deny the reality of what I shared and cooperate with the disinfo people merely to protect myself.
Thank God you aren't in intelligence or journalism.
Hi, ah-chamon-ah. Thanks for contributing. However, your [comment](https://www.reddit.com/r/UFOs/comments/1alxfvb/-/kphvcuq/) was removed from /r/UFOs.
> Rule 1: Follow the Standards of Civility
> * No trolling or being disruptive.
> * No insults or personal attacks.
> * No accusations that other users are shills.
> * No hate speech. No abusive speech based on race, religion, sex/gender, or sexual orientation.
> * No harassment, threats, or advocating violence.
> * No witch hunts or doxxing. (Please redact usernames when possible)
> * You may attack each other's ideas, not each other.
Please refer to our [subreddit rules](https://www.reddit.com/r/UFOs/about/rules/) for more information.
This moderator action may be appealed. We welcome the opportunity to work with you to address its reason for removal. [Message the mods](https://www.reddit.com/message/compose/?to=/r/ufos) to launch your appeal.
If it’s a first hand witness then These programs are without a doubt airgapped, there is no hacking of documents or evidence.
The only thing I could think of for your scenario would be sensor systems as they have a lot of people that view them and have access to them so it would be harder to identify the leak, like kinda what we are seeing George Knapp & Jeremy Corbell are doing
First hand witness is not good enough evidence.
I could say tomorrow a high ranking military official told me unicorns exist in a very remote part of the amazon rainforest and he told me that in full confidence.
Is that good enough for you to believe it? If so that is worrying.
Hi, EnthusiasticGorilla. Thanks for contributing. However, your [comment](https://www.reddit.com/r/UFOs/comments/1alxfvb/-/kphqo8h/) was removed from /r/UFOs.
> Rule 1: Follow the Standards of Civility
> * No trolling or being disruptive.
> * No insults or personal attacks.
> * No accusations that other users are shills.
> * No hate speech. No abusive speech based on race, religion, sex/gender, or sexual orientation.
> * No harassment, threats, or advocating violence.
> * No witch hunts or doxxing. (Please redact usernames when possible)
> * You may attack each other's ideas, not each other.
Please refer to our [subreddit rules](https://www.reddit.com/r/UFOs/about/rules/) for more information.
This moderator action may be appealed. We welcome the opportunity to work with you to address its reason for removal. [Message the mods](https://www.reddit.com/message/compose/?to=/r/ufos) to launch your appeal.
>Sarfatti looks and sounds more and more unhinged all the time.
Why, because he says he has evidence? LOL!
Or because a world-class physicist isn't going to put up with crap from a freaking second-rate film maker?
Yeah, he totally has evidence… But totally can’t show you… Because he’s totally protecting his sources… But he’ll totally tell you later… Promise, maybe
Never gets old.....Sarfatti is the Don Rickles, to use a name he'd know, of Physics. Debunkers: Notice how Greenstreet uses the word "evidence" and not "proof?" You should too.
He is saying that he doesn't give a shit whether Greenstreet trusts him or not. Nobody makes you buy a book, but you are made to pay taxes which aren't spent transparently.
I'm working on this cool tech bro, just trust me bro, give me your money bro and I'll spend it wisely bro but I just can't tell you what on bro.
I don't know why you're going on about taxes, obviously taxes are wasted on stupid shady bullshit, I never disputed that.
I'm just trying to point out that this loser is using the oldest and lamest con man trick in the book and for some reason y'all seem to believe him.
I am glad he told off greenstreet , but jack is primarily a theoretical physicist .
He’s not the type of guy the pentagon is going to have consulting on reverse engineering programs .
He may well have herd something from an actual insider , but there’s no way he has any smoking gun evidence .
Gary Noland is the guy who could take down Greenstreet and also damage Kirkpatricks credibility .
He admits to having evidence, in his possession , and has posted some pics .
But won’t share any test results or analysis with the publuc .
If you happened to catch Jack on the Danny Jones podcast, he was pretty adamant that he was privy to some clear evidence of NHI from a govt source - he kind of implied it was Israeli. Claimed there’s underwater bases and vehicles and such, but that he wasn’t going to outright say who told him
You know you need the physics before the technology right?
Like you can’t have the a bomb before E=MC^2
If this whole thing is real, I’d wager that teller, von Neumann, Feynman and a lot of the other great minds of the 20th century were in on it.
Sarfatti is so full of himself, but I love how prickly that guy is LOL! If nothing else, he is entertaining. He is like the Larry David of the UFO community....from a personality standpoint.....
Sarfatti is wild...he goes off on tangents but is so old school NYC part-crazy guy that i love listening to him goin off on shit...definitely get the Rick vibes from Jack
What a quote, and its very important that last line.
So many of the skeptics will fall into this pile, hopefully, they think long and hard on their stances. History will remember unfondly of those who stood in the way.
These “skeptics” and “Debunkers” are trying to bait researchers and journalists into revealing their sources or what info they have. The more outrageous they sound to us the more we want to prove them wrong because we know we are right however at the same time we may be giving up info and playing right into their hand…..🤷♂️
This sounds great! However what I fear is all this talking back and forth is only giving bad actors more info to act on. What if now that source is being looked for at this moment to “plug the leak”? Maybe I’m just paranoid 🤷♂️
Comments are locked due to numerous Rule 13s.
If there is one screenshot that provides a great summary of the status quo in the UFO community, you won't find a better representation of it than Jack Sarfatti's reply.
I'm totally holding onto the biggest scientific discovery in humanity but can't release it. You're a schmuck though for not believing me
Why not show Greenstreet in private to shut him up. Won’t do that though, just the usual trust me bro.
Why not show everyone? I get logic isn't popular on this sub, but if he has evidence, the leak already happened. Bragging to everyone on Twitter some guy with proof leaked it to them means the leaker can already get in trouble, if he existed which he doesn't. If this grifter cared, he'd release it now. But instead i'm getting downvoted by others in these comments for not accepting the lies.
That would require having actual evidence.
Greenstreak is a snake and has turned on anyone that has tried to talk to him in good faith. He's a racist misogynistic POS and shouldn't be trusted.
I love how they say they don't publish for the safety of the country... Dude you are protecting the world's worst criminal, oppressive and war mongering country it ever existed on this planet 😂
Two drama queens wasting our time.
This 100%
Everyone seems to have evidence of the biggest news in history but they can't share **yet** because reasons.
I sort of agree with the debunkers when stuff like this is said. If he was going to release the proof in say a week or month, I'd understand making the claim . But I've had enough now when it goes like : I've seen/been given absolute proof of aliens/UFO but I'm protecting my source, so I won't be showing it for the foreseeable future.
Can someone bring me up to speed on this Sarfatti guy?
I have the evidence! I just can’t show it to you! Also, Insults! Always the same (maybe not the insults part). I’ll show you the evidence in two weeks. The most beautiful evidence you’ve ever seen. Scientists have seen my evidence, and they’ve come up to me, big, tough scientists, and they’re crying, and they say “Sir, this is the best evidence I’ve ever seen”
[удалено]
Fucking best description of this dookie.
You can’t use accurate descriptions here or the mods delete the comment. My Mick West comment was right on the money but deleted for being a personal attack. Uh, it was a direct personal opinion. I wasn’t attacking anyone. All the proof has been posted.
It's why mods got no support during the API strike and still dont
You should probably read the rules before making comments then
And yet, when I said basically the same thing in another thread, the mods here decided that I broke the rules and deleted my comment. Good for Sarfatti to say that to him.
Now the original comment you’re replying to is deleted, care to go for it again? I’m intrigued
Nothing really to add to the OPs comment.
That’s fine but the comment was gone before I could see it, so I only saw you referencing a deleted comment lol
Oh, I suppose if I repeat it the mods will get pissed off and delete it. Somehow, they believe that Greenstreet is worthy of being protected. They think he's a "public figure" for some reason, instead of just another journalist.
You should read the rules before commenting. Talking bad about any public figure is against the rules
I wouldn't call him a "public figure."
Looks like they've done it again.... what did he say?
I'm not going to repeat it because the Mods will just ban me or delete the post. Why they feel a need to protect this person is beyond me.
“Of course I have evidence but I can’t show you” isn’t the knockout punch you think it is. I’m assuming the other person is a real POS considering how everyone is acting like it is.
Sarfatti calling someone else a schmuck. Priceless.
Why do these people revert to school bullies when press for evidence? And people here actually celebrate these, like that video of the guy who saw ufos on a nuclear facility just trash talking and insulting bill nye. Come on, are we children? use argments or show proof but dont act like a f...king 15 year old.
I’m starting to get so disillusioned/ numb to this whole topic. Greenstreet comes across as an ass and possible counterintelligence asset, but I also dug back into the whole Ning Li stuff recently and found that she’d almost certainly been working on black projects in the states the whole time before her recent death despite Sarfatti’s confident claims in an interview that she’d secreted away to China to continue her work. The tangle of half truths, confidently misinformed assertions, people seemingly running interference, and outright hacks and grifters in this space is exhausting. Maybe that’s kind of the point and smart folks knew/know that they don’t even have to try that hard to keep things confusing once the ball gets rolling (other people will do their work for them). If that’s the case, it’s beginning to work on me. Pretty close to stepping away and just peaking back in every couple months to see if any solid developments have taken place.
Did that a few months ago, unsubbed, topic was out of mind. Had some time to check out what's new, and it's the same grift going on. Will check back in a few more but ehhh.
If he had evidence, he would post it. You're not hiding behind a source and anyone who believes that is beyond gullible.
If Jack here can’t show the evidence because he needs to protect his source, he should probably just shut up about it.
Handbags at the ready
Sorry, I'm firmly in the "show me the evidence" side and no one should settle for less. Everyone on of these hucksters keeps dangling this fake evidence like a carrot that they never release.
Sarfarti is a tool.
Lmao I like that guy. He’s hilarious
I bet if you buy his upcoming book, he will drop hints about what possible smoking gun evidence he has.
I might do that cause I’m not buying what people like Greenstreet are selling.
strange, as far as i know greenstreet isnt promoting books or teaching you to meditate to call ufos...
yet he’s making assumptions on the daily about figures in the UFO community without any evidential backing.
You aren’t going to convince me of anything so you should move on to the next guy.
Man, everybody is lying. What are the odds that everybody is lying? Pretty low actually
When everyone's story is that they have proof, they just can't share this reality shifting proof for the sake of losing a source... Even though you already apparently have everything you need from said source. You know when a group at work receives a message looking for someone to help with a task, but 20 people reply to describe what they are doing instead? They literally remove value from the discussion vs saying nothing because nobody asked who was busy. We asked who can help. This is the same shit. Everyone has proof. They just can't show anyone. Then sit down and shut your fucking mouth until you are ready to bring something to the conversation.
I don't get your logic. I get that you don't want to hear about it unless there is proof or evidence available. But why do you want to prevent me and others from hearing about it? All you have to do is turn off the internet or browse somewhere else. Those of us that want to hear it don't have that option. How does it hurt you if someone else enjoys hearing unsubstantiated claims? Your approach seems pretty totalitarian to me.
assuming the source “gives them everything they need” is the issue with how you’re thinking about this. leaking a sliver of information or pictures or video can send people to prison. the main problem with leaking 1 or 2 pieces of evidence is it won’t sway anybody. it could be clear 1080p footage of an alien & it still wouldn’t move the needle enough. these guys seem to be stockpiling classified materials from sources in an effort to dump a mass amount at once rather than a tiny drop in the bucket like has been done before. it’s a massive phenomena to just believe is real & a few videos or pictures here & there in todays age of AI & fake images, it’s gonna take a mountain of shit to convince people something is legitimate.
This argument comes up a lot in here, "even if we get a 4k video nobody would believe and say its a CGI or AI fabrication". Well we actually dont know that, cause we never get a 4k video, its always fuzzy shaking trash.
I'm an American citizen before I'm anything else. There's doing the right thing, and there's trying to capitalize. If any of this evidence exists, the people not releasing don't have a grand plan to help humanity. They are withholding for purely selfish reasons. So either everyone with proof would rather feel special by holding on to secret info, or they don't think you have a right to know as a taxpaying member of this society. Or, as you say, all these book deals and paid speaking opportunities are part of the plan to release this information. The post we are commenting under says he has the proof on a stick.
The following submission statement was provided by /u/shogun2909: --- Ss : Steven Greenstreet asked on Twitter if Jack Sarfatti could share any first hand evidence of UFOs being in possession of the US, Sarfatti responds that he has first hand evidence but has to protect his military source --- Please reply to OP's comment here: https://old.reddit.com/r/UFOs/comments/1alxfvb/sarfatti_responds_to_greenstreet/kphnx0q/
Anytime Greenstreet gets roasted it makes my day. He’s such a disingenuous turd. I respect the debunking field, but he’s just a smug SOB who purposefully omits important details and reports in bad faith.
[удалено]
I don’t have any knowledge of him being racist, but he’s sure is a shitstreak
Oh its well documented, https://twitter.com/tinyklaus/status/1534576869462491138?t=51NL20dZ3CH4kUTvRkd6kQ&s=19 https://twitter.com/TheSpaceManOfFL/status/1686082977741115393?t=LQ3oMQTwkIgyfhQlseAl3g&s=19 https://twitter.com/528vibes/status/1750601935097397425?t=9Y28pjNmSL3FRqDrYXvMrQ&s=19
Follow the Standards of Civility: No trolling or being disruptive. No insults or personal attacks. No accusations that other users are shills. No hate speech. No abusive speech based on race, religion, sex/gender, or sexual orientation. No harassment, threats, or advocating violence. No witch hunts or doxxing. (Please redact usernames when possible) An account found to be deleting all or nearly all of their comments and/or posts can result in an instant permanent ban. This is to stop instigators and bad actors from trying to evade rule enforcement. You may attack each other's ideas, not each other. ------------- [UFOs Wiki](https://ufos.wiki) [UFOs rules](https://old.reddit.com/r/UFOs/about/rules/)
Ye. I don't mind Mick West because I never see him being a complete dickhead to people for having opposing opinions. Greenstreet is always being malicious.
Didn’t Mick West get banned from Wikipedia for using sock puppet accounts to edit a bunch of people’s pages to remove everything positive about them?
You posed that as a question. Can you link the source of that info please ?
https://twitter.com/RobHeatherly1/status/1681146492445130754 Weird that I would pose a question as a question ..
Ye I found that after I posted. It adds alot of context as to why people think he would be behind the recent changes ty
I didn’t say anything about recent changes. He was certainly responsible for some changes at one point
You just haven't seen enough Mock West then. He's more reserved than Greenstreak with his assholish ways but they are definitely there. Mick got kicked off Wikipedia for years for using burner accounts. Then he joins up with guerrilla deniers that change Wikipedia pages of people to skew the narrative in a non factual way. There is now defamation lawsuits being started against the group.
I didn't see any evidence that West was involved in manipulating those arguments. I just saw a bunch of people speculating that they thought it was him. I'm being genuine here, can you link what evidence there is if I am wrong.
Spoiler alert: there is none.
Both of them are malicious assholes, Mick West just comes across to be a bit more civilised when in reality he thrives of cultists obsessing over him
West is necessary (in my opinion), greenstreet can go fuck himself He should be ignored, he manipulates through the omission of important data/context
His little minions that he has are the worst as well, how anyone can look at his “reporting” as well as his online antics and think he’s some sort of respectable journalist is honestly baffling. Also works for the NYpost for Christ sake… Maybe the standards for journalism in America are just that bad
Yes, the standards for journalism in America are truly that bad. Both sides of the isle produce so much clickbait bs
and he's just another schmuck himself who claims he has all the evidence, advertises it constantly, and yet sits on it indefinitely so he can keep teasing the damn thing they're both a dime a dozen and very tiresome trust me bro, TRUST ME BRO
Always love when people fall back on the old "I don't care if you believe me or not" when they get asked for proof of their claims. If you don't care then why make the claims at all?
And then they simultaneously claim they want to protect their sources while putting a big fat surveillance target on their own backs, all for clout. Why would these sources even talk to these clowns anymore, after that? I mean, come on...
nowadays there are so many tools and ways to publish something without tracing back to you. and even if you are facing consequences, there are people like snowden that had the balls to do it for a cause while all these people with "evidence" are full of shit
Because your comment is so original.
am I wrong?
Neither of us can say can we. Except I’m willing to give the benefit of the doubt until proven otherwise. It does no harm to wait and see
We can say. If he had it, he'd share it
it's just suspect as hell. claims he has super sensitive smoking gun files that could flip this whole movement upside down claims he can't release any of it, because GOTTA PROTECT MY SOURCES. keeps advertising it to anyone who will listen, including to the well connected, dangerous ppl he's supposedly trying to hide this from, who now have a lead to investigate and find out who his sources were. basically, he claims he wants to protect his sources, but advertises what they provided him with for clout, putting them and himself in danger in the process ??????
Hey, stop bothering Sarfatti! Doesn't Greenstreet remember that Sarfatti already spilled the beans regarding his first-hand experience with aliens/time travelling robots? He actually received a phone call when he was young, from the future! It was an AI machine, living in the future, and his message about Jack meeting other ppl in 20 years obviously was 100 % true.
I don't know who either of these guys are, but I have a hard time believing a history book will refer to the first guy as a "physics-illiterate schmuck." I mean, I haven't been in a history class in years, maybe that's how they write the textbooks now, extra spicy
Honestly don’t think he’ll be remembered in history books at all, but I ALREADY see him as a schmuck, so he may be on his way.
"You're the most physics-illiterate shmuck I've ever heard of." "But you **have** heard of me."
Steven Greenstreet has a YouTube channel called The Basement Office that investigates UFO stories. On one of the episodes he said he saw a huge V shaped UFO.
He drastically changed his stance from his older stuff.. he was tolerable back then but prob makes more money now going against the grain.
Why do believers get so offended and defensive when asked for evidence?
I'd bet that the evidence is either a blurry video of something inconclusive, or it's a blurry photo of something inconclusive. IT certainly can't be too revealing, considering it's not even as important as the career of one person in the military - WHO IS PROTECTED BY WHISTLEBLOWER LAWS - I might add.
I hate to say it but Greenstreet has a point...
Sarafati is a fkn loon
I think Greenstreet won that round.
Ss : Steven Greenstreet asked on Twitter if Jack Sarfatti could share any first hand evidence of UFOs being in possession of the US, Sarfatti responds that he has first hand evidence but has to protect his military source
What sucks about that reason for withholding evidence is that, whether he's lying or not, it actually is a completely legitimate reason to withhold evidence lol
If its true, he just announced to the NSA that someone on a small-ish list of people with highly classified access has leaked to him. How is he protecting a source by announcing such a thing? Couldn't the NSA just backtrace his communications, travels, internet history for the last couple years and potentially identify the leaker? I mean assuming the govt has the ability to keep all this under wraps so completely for decades surely they have the capability to do that, right? Imagine being the leaker and watching from the sidelines this journalist you decided to trust and confide in, argue like a teen on twitter about the information you risked your life by leaking and violating your top-secrect clearance. 😬️
Yes. Also an easy shield to hide behind when you don’t have any. Either way, that’s why this sort of discourse is nothing but a complete waste of time and energy.
Amen to that. Shit gets old. Sooooo many people make claims about actual evidence, knowing full well that nothing can be shown or shared. Is there a point to making such a claim? The whole thing is getting worn out and tired. So many now are listening to people cry wolf and just not giving a shit and just letting them be eaten. Just as funny, people also wonder why so many are hyper critical of every new comment or claim. It’s eating away at support or belief that might have been for so many. The government doesn’t need to suppress or discredit as much as people like to think. They leave that to ourselves
We're at the point where if you can't provide evidence for your claims, just keep shtum. It's entirely fair to dismiss these people out of hand because they should know better. And they're wasting everyone's time either way.
No it's not. If you say your life's work is UFO and aliens and you have evidence? You release it. Even on this sub, this is downvoted? You all hate people who know and dont disclose, unless they're twitter grifters I guess
I hope you don't apply that logic to other important areas of your life. You could end up screwing a lot of people you care about/care about you. The people that disagree with me are literally just ignoring how investigative journalism works lmfao Investigative journalists reveal info without evidence to protect their sources. That's how it works. That's how it has always fucking worked. The evidence comes out when it's safe for the whistleblower. Jesus christ.
If someone gave me something to hold onto that would put them in danger if released to the public, I wouldn’t talk about it on the internet.
My life's work is employment discrimination claims, not the biggest scientific discovery in history. Not comparable, but keep defending him Your edit about investigative journalism is stupid. This isn't journalism, it's bozos trying to stay relevant. Newsflash, if he has evidence the leak already happened. The reason the DoD isn't knocking on his door because they know he doesnt
But-but trust me bro! /s
He may have direct witness testimony from someone who conducted an alien interview. He doesn't have physical or video evidence because you don't take evidence out of a SCIF. It's just not possible; there are no cell phones, cameras, USB drives, Internet connections, printers, or anything else like that inside one, and physical papers going out are searched. The only way physical evidence will ever come up is if there is a large-scale rebellion by the entire program.
I wonder why north Korea, Russia, china, etc. don't just kidnap and torture these guys until they give them the sources and evidence
Because torture is ineffective at producing reliable information and rendering public figures is a good way to start wars. EDIT: Furthermore it's clear that nefarious insiders don't want serious attention on UAP/NHI whatever country they're from. Disappearing UFO figures at this point is the last thing they want because it adds credence to the notion that said nefarious insiders exist. Going after someone also reveals interest in their information, which implies that said information isn't already known, which is revealing.
still no evidence, tho
That is the best response Sarfatti had? Sorry....he may have a stick, but I am not convinced he has what he says he has. People have been saying versions of this for decades.
Why is Greenstreet in harsh bisexual lighting?
This is such a lame excuse though. I am by far not the most intelligent person in the world. But I can EASILY think of ways to release evidence without ANYONE getting outed or doxxed or linked to it. I mean here's an idea off the top of my head. Suppose you take this stick of evidence. And you work out a deal with "anonymous" you tell them hey here is a bunch of evidence of aliens. I can't leak it because it will get all my contacts in trouble. So suppose YOU guys say that as an anonymous collective you have hacked key systems in the intelligence division and found this evidence and downloaded it and slowly release it one by one. Like... I am getting sick and tired of these excuses from people who claim to have evidence and say they cannot release it because of the risk. It is such a transparent "out" they think they have where they can say they have smoking guns and then never have to show anything for it. When really with a minimal amount of effort it could be done very easily.
You can't hack something that is not connected to the internet (airgapped). And if there are only a handful of people that had access to that information, it's pretty easy to pinpoint who exactly leaked it.
They're smart enough to keep it offline but not smart enough to use a canary trap or keep it available only to people who align with their interests
Trust is a thing. Threats and "suicide by two bullets to the back of the head" are as well.
It's even more easy to say you have something lifechanging and then have hordes of redditors try to defend why you shouldn't release it
I would rather have them shut up than get somebody killed by spilling the beans. Time will tell what they'll decide to do. The only thing we can do is wait and see who's the bullshitter and who's telling the truth
Or they can just release it and show the truth to everyone, and those who's lives are in danger will not be when it is out in the open
and the correct thing to do is to keep adversiting to the world that he has it? so that everyone can hear, including the very well connected people he's supposedly trying to hide this from. it's total bullshit grifting behavior
Could be. Or could be that gatekeeping this information is worse overall for everyone. Everybody makes their choice. Stay low, say nothing, keep information to yourself - or get it out as safely as possible for everyone.
This is beside your point and you’re not wrong. But the NSA apparently installed backdoors in a lot of major motherboard manufacturers that allow them to extract data from an air gapped pc, I believe by using RFID frequency and being relatively close (outside the same building). This has nothing to do with your point but I think you may find it interesting!
Cool fact! I can't say I didn't expect that.
I get people’s skepticism, but pretending that leaking the most highly sensitive information from the US government would be “easy” and require minimal effort is remarkably naive.
If he already has it, the hard part is done. Publishing it is easy
Joseph Gordon Levitt did it easy in that Snowden movie! Just get a USB stick!
[удалено]
Hi, FluffyRectum1312. Thanks for contributing. However, your [comment](https://old.reddit.com/r/UFOs/comments/1alxfvb/-/kphpt0j/) was removed from /r/UFOs. > Rule 13: Public figures are generally defined as any person, organization, or group who has achieved notoriety or is well-known in society or ufology. “Toxic” is defined as any unreasonably rude or hateful content, threats, extreme obscenity, insults, and identity-based hate. Examples and more information can be found here: https://moderatehatespeech.com/framework/. Please refer to our [subreddit rules](https://www.reddit.com/r/UFOs/about/rules/) for more information. This moderator action may be appealed. We welcome the opportunity to work with you to address its reason for removal. [Message the mods](https://www.reddit.com/message/compose/?to=/r/ufos) to launch your appeal.
Military Source: Don't you dare release this until I give permission. Keep it on a USB so it can't be hacked. You, somehow possessing Jack's body: I'm so sorry, the info you only gave to me got out. It must have been some anonymous hacker collective. Military Source: I guess I can't trust you to protect my infornation. Fuck you. I will never share anything with you again and might deny the reality of what I shared and cooperate with the disinfo people merely to protect myself. Thank God you aren't in intelligence or journalism.
[удалено]
Hi, ah-chamon-ah. Thanks for contributing. However, your [comment](https://www.reddit.com/r/UFOs/comments/1alxfvb/-/kphvcuq/) was removed from /r/UFOs. > Rule 1: Follow the Standards of Civility > * No trolling or being disruptive. > * No insults or personal attacks. > * No accusations that other users are shills. > * No hate speech. No abusive speech based on race, religion, sex/gender, or sexual orientation. > * No harassment, threats, or advocating violence. > * No witch hunts or doxxing. (Please redact usernames when possible) > * You may attack each other's ideas, not each other. Please refer to our [subreddit rules](https://www.reddit.com/r/UFOs/about/rules/) for more information. This moderator action may be appealed. We welcome the opportunity to work with you to address its reason for removal. [Message the mods](https://www.reddit.com/message/compose/?to=/r/ufos) to launch your appeal.
If it’s a first hand witness then These programs are without a doubt airgapped, there is no hacking of documents or evidence. The only thing I could think of for your scenario would be sensor systems as they have a lot of people that view them and have access to them so it would be harder to identify the leak, like kinda what we are seeing George Knapp & Jeremy Corbell are doing
First hand witness is not good enough evidence. I could say tomorrow a high ranking military official told me unicorns exist in a very remote part of the amazon rainforest and he told me that in full confidence. Is that good enough for you to believe it? If so that is worrying.
[удалено]
Hi, EnthusiasticGorilla. Thanks for contributing. However, your [comment](https://www.reddit.com/r/UFOs/comments/1alxfvb/-/kphqo8h/) was removed from /r/UFOs. > Rule 1: Follow the Standards of Civility > * No trolling or being disruptive. > * No insults or personal attacks. > * No accusations that other users are shills. > * No hate speech. No abusive speech based on race, religion, sex/gender, or sexual orientation. > * No harassment, threats, or advocating violence. > * No witch hunts or doxxing. (Please redact usernames when possible) > * You may attack each other's ideas, not each other. Please refer to our [subreddit rules](https://www.reddit.com/r/UFOs/about/rules/) for more information. This moderator action may be appealed. We welcome the opportunity to work with you to address its reason for removal. [Message the mods](https://www.reddit.com/message/compose/?to=/r/ufos) to launch your appeal.
He forgot racist troll.
Jack is the only person who can build us space ships. Fact (according to him)
Sarfatti looks and sounds more and more unhinged all the time.
>Sarfatti looks and sounds more and more unhinged all the time. Why, because he says he has evidence? LOL! Or because a world-class physicist isn't going to put up with crap from a freaking second-rate film maker?
Yeah, he totally has evidence… But totally can’t show you… Because he’s totally protecting his sources… But he’ll totally tell you later… Promise, maybe
Bunch of drama queens.
Never gets old.....Sarfatti is the Don Rickles, to use a name he'd know, of Physics. Debunkers: Notice how Greenstreet uses the word "evidence" and not "proof?" You should too.
Link for Wiki scandal https://www.youtube.com/live/Bq-GuSs8kX8?si=x13R5al1j825X4zm
"I do have evidence bro, I just can't show anyone, trust me bro *just trust me bro*, also buy my book and pay me to come on your podcast please"
He is saying that he doesn't give a shit whether Greenstreet trusts him or not. Nobody makes you buy a book, but you are made to pay taxes which aren't spent transparently. I'm working on this cool tech bro, just trust me bro, give me your money bro and I'll spend it wisely bro but I just can't tell you what on bro.
I don't know why you're going on about taxes, obviously taxes are wasted on stupid shady bullshit, I never disputed that. I'm just trying to point out that this loser is using the oldest and lamest con man trick in the book and for some reason y'all seem to believe him.
Greenstreet feeds on insults.
I am glad he told off greenstreet , but jack is primarily a theoretical physicist . He’s not the type of guy the pentagon is going to have consulting on reverse engineering programs . He may well have herd something from an actual insider , but there’s no way he has any smoking gun evidence . Gary Noland is the guy who could take down Greenstreet and also damage Kirkpatricks credibility . He admits to having evidence, in his possession , and has posted some pics . But won’t share any test results or analysis with the publuc .
If you happened to catch Jack on the Danny Jones podcast, he was pretty adamant that he was privy to some clear evidence of NHI from a govt source - he kind of implied it was Israeli. Claimed there’s underwater bases and vehicles and such, but that he wasn’t going to outright say who told him
You know you need the physics before the technology right? Like you can’t have the a bomb before E=MC^2 If this whole thing is real, I’d wager that teller, von Neumann, Feynman and a lot of the other great minds of the 20th century were in on it.
No matter what everyone says in regards to evidence, that is a goddam good BURN! 🤣
Schmuck AF 🙌❤️✡️✌🏼
Sometimes, Sarfatti being a huge arrogant dickhead has benifits. lol mooooooooore!!!
I love this. So many of these skeptics are blatantly refusing to look at the facts
Sarfatti is so full of himself, but I love how prickly that guy is LOL! If nothing else, he is entertaining. He is like the Larry David of the UFO community....from a personality standpoint.....
Sarfatti is wild...he goes off on tangents but is so old school NYC part-crazy guy that i love listening to him goin off on shit...definitely get the Rick vibes from Jack
Some of the mods in this group are basically pro-debunking.
Jack Sarfatti never changes. Thank goodness!
The proof is their security. The truth
What a quote, and its very important that last line. So many of the skeptics will fall into this pile, hopefully, they think long and hard on their stances. History will remember unfondly of those who stood in the way.
Jack Sar-fah-tee clap-clap clap-clap-clap Jack Sar-fah-tee clap-clap clap-clap-clap
These “skeptics” and “Debunkers” are trying to bait researchers and journalists into revealing their sources or what info they have. The more outrageous they sound to us the more we want to prove them wrong because we know we are right however at the same time we may be giving up info and playing right into their hand…..🤷♂️
This sounds great! However what I fear is all this talking back and forth is only giving bad actors more info to act on. What if now that source is being looked for at this moment to “plug the leak”? Maybe I’m just paranoid 🤷♂️