posted on Jan, 20 2008 @ 04:43 PM
Okay, I got to thinking about this whole Google Maps thing - and it's pretty damning evidence that the government is not trying to cover up alien
Let's look at this logically. If you were the U.S. government, and you knew there were these UFOs flying all over the place, and you didn't want
your citizens to know about them, would you just give carte blanche to some company (Google) to photograph the entire United States whenever they
wanted? It doesn't make sense. If you were the gov't, wouldn't you be worried as hell that they might photograph one of these things? I mean, I
*guess* you could have an agreement with them, that anything unusual they found they would have to airbrush out, but then you just add one more
entity, and dozens more people you can't control, to the cover-up, which makes said cover-up infinitely more difficult to "cover up". This goes
for all photographing satellites out there (of which I understand there are many - from many different companies). How do you keep each one of those
in check? Make sure each one of them is erasing all evidence of photographed UFOs? The only excuse I can think of is if there's some system in
place whereby all photographic satellite images are first filtered through a government "clean-up" team, before being released to the satellite
company. This would make some sense I guess. But I would be very interested to know, from those more knowledgeable on this issue, if that's the
protocal involved. Because if Google does have "first-look" access to this picture data, I simply have a hard time believing the government is
covering anything up.
Oh, and yes. I have seen the google earth youtube video of supposed spacecraft. The first one is just a white blur and, quite honestly, could be
anything. I'm more convinced by dark lights in a night sky. The second one (the triangle) looks like a joke put forth by one of the google nerds.
It's way too crisp and clean to the point where it looks fake. It's just not that convincing to me. (yeah, I know, one's too blurry, one's too
crisp. Does anything satisfy me?? - sorry, this is the way they look to me)
I'm totally open for debate on this. Contrary to what my post implies, I am not a skeptic. I'm somewhere in the middle. So try and refrain from
calling me "stupid" for thinking such a thing, and address me by refuting my theories in an intelligent manner. I will be much more likely to
engage you back.