Ever notice how UFO witnesses are extremely well read on the subject, and can recall various cases, names and places at ease … a skeptical person might even suspect that they are creating testimony based on the things they read. But no, that would be super unlikely…
Discussion
You should start a vlog about this
Is it possible some became interested and learned more after their experience?
Yes. But could also just be the case that they are stitching together experienced from their knowledge about the subject.
Almost certainly happens. It's a common (similar) issue with healthcare and psychology students as well. But there are also instances where people find things more often specifically because they are looking and haven't written it off or developed tunnel vision (an opposite problem in healthcare differentials). I don't know how to strike a balance with these things other than to have an open mind while leaning heavily on evidence, as you mentioned.
Online maybe, but all the people I know in real life who claimed to have been abducted by UFOs are just drug addicts and schizos who haven't researched the subject at all.
So “credibility” is the attribute you are trying to establish with so called witnesses. It seems like, at least in the UFO arena, that there is no full proof way to confirm credibility. It’s always a good move to play the skeptic card!
Military personnel are definitely more credible than average Joe, but most of the time they don’t present any “holy shit what is that?!” Type of evidence. Even first hand experience only goes so far without some type of evidence.
Agreed. There is a definite hard stop to the trail. On a slightly different note, I reckon we will start seeing more mainstream media pushing a “first contact” narrative and the flavour will change from bad alien to neutral/possibly half decent alien.
I don't believe in aliens but if I had to steel man the argument I would say, of course there is no solid evidence because the aliens have memory wipe devices