The UFO/UAP coverup continues

Occam's razor applies when the explanation is sufficient. The ones you proposed manifestly are not. Did you even read the article?

Do you have any hard facts like radar data to suggest it wasn’t a balloon?

[Laird]

Do you have any hard facts like radar data to suggest it wasn’t a balloon?

Yes. For example, from the article:

In one bizarre incident, a Nebraska deputy sheriff reported “observing 30 to 50 [objects] flying independently of each other with a larger ‘mothership’ hovering for hours.”

Some of these objects also reportedly flew in “adverse weather conditions,” including “hovering” in winds of “30 mph with 40-plus mph gusts.” A briefing document prepared for the FAA administrator noted that sheriffs from several Colorado counties reported that the objects flew for “several hours at a time in less than optimum flying conditions (high winds and storm-like conditions).”

Balloons don't hover in 30 mph winds, nor could a balloon be mistaken for a mothership.

Hence my question: did you even read the article?

Yes. For example, from the article:


Balloons don't hover in 30 mph winds, nor could a balloon be mistaken for a mothership.

Hence my question: did you even read the article?

I was only replying to the sighting having the colorful light. Each sighting likely have an independent explanation.

[Laird]

I was only replying to the sighting having the colorful light. Each sighting likely have an independent explanation.

There was no singular sighting having colourful lights. The colourful lights were characteristic of the sightings described in the article - if not of all of them, then of most or at least many of them. For example, from the article:

Video recorded by a civilian observer shows numerous craft with flashing lights appearing to hover in the vicinity of the base [that base being the Langley Air Force Base in Virginia --Laird].

Like the Langley Air Force Base incursions, incident reports [of unknown “drones” that stalked some of the U.S. Navy’s most advanced warships off the coast of Southern California, including a spherical object that descends slowly into the ocean approximately 120 miles off the California coast --Laird] note that the unknown objects displayed flashing lights, predominantly white, red and green.

Like the Langley Air Force Base incursions and the incidents off the Southern California coast, the objects over rural Colorado, Nebraska and Wyoming often displayed bright flashing white, red and green lights “not consistent with standard aircraft signal light patterns.”

According to Air Force documents, the 1965 observations involved unknown objects with “red and green flashing lights” that illuminated “at one to two second intervals.”

The answer to my as-yet-unanswered question as to whether you've even read the article seems pretty clear by now.

There was no singular sighting having colourful lights. The colourful lights were characteristic of the sightings described in the article - if not of all of them, then of most or at least many of them. For example, from the article:


The answer to my as-yet-unanswered question as to whether you've even read the article seems pretty clear by now.

No I have only read this bit

Over the course of three nights in 1965, more than 140 Air Force personnel stationed at nuclear missile silos in the same areas of rural Colorado, Wyoming and Nebraska reported nearly 150 mysterious craft demonstrating the enigmatic characteristics observed during the 2019-2020 incidents.

According to Air Force documents, the 1965 observations involved unknown objects with “red and green flashing lights” that illuminated “at one to two second intervals.”

My reason for commenting was to focus on the unhealthy obsession with conspiracy theories and not an attempt to provide a mundane explanation for every single sighting.

[Laird]

My reason for commenting was to focus on the unhealthy obsession with conspiracy theories

An apparently credible and certainly highly credentialled member of the military - David Grusch - has blown the whistle on crash retrieval programs. The Office of the Intelligence Community Inspector General has found his claim that information about these programs has been hidden from Congress to be "urgent and credible". That puts the matter beyond a mere conspiracy theory and into the realm of plausible allegations that deserve scrutiny and investigation at the highest level. That there are and have over the years been other whistleblowers only strengthens this assessment. It is healthy to bring to light at least potential deception on matters as significant as this one. Your reason for commenting is misplaced.

and not an attempt to provide a mundane explanation for every single sighting.

That's sensible, because you couldn't even suggest an even vaguely plausible mundane explanation for one sighting.

An apparently credible and certainly highly credentialled member of the military - David Grusch - has blown the whistle on crash retrieval programs. The Office of the Intelligence Community Inspector General has found his claim that information about these programs has been hidden from Congress to be "urgent and credible". That puts the matter beyond a mere conspiracy theory and into the realm of plausible allegations that deserve scrutiny and investigation at the highest level. That there are and have over the years been other whistleblowers only strengthens this assessment. It is healthy to bring to light at least potential deception on matters as significant as this one. Your reason for commenting is misplaced.


That's sensible, because you couldn't even suggest an even vaguely plausible mundane explanation for one sighting.

The problem with your reasoning is that faster than light travel simply isn’t even possible. You need to build a super cooled tunnel 25 km long just to accelerate a few protons to 99% the speed of light. This fact makes the whole idea of exterterrestials visiting earth terrible naive. Hence all these sightings must have a mundane explanation. 

Let’s pick it up again in 12 months when there still won’t be any hard facts.

[Laird]

The problem with your reasoning is that faster than light travel simply isn’t even possible. You need to build a super cooled tunnel 25 km long just to accelerate a few protons to 99% the speed of light. This fact makes the whole idea of exterterrestials visiting earth terrible naive. Hence all these sightings must have a mundane explanation.

My reasoning is fine. It's yours which is fallacious:

"According to our current understanding of physical reality, this can't happen, therefore, it isn't happening."

After applying the necessary correction:

"This is happening when according to our current understanding of physical reality, it can't happen, therefore, our current understanding of physical reality is incomplete and needs updating."

Let’s pick it up again in 12 months when there still won’t be any hard facts.

...and you still won't be able to prove that our current understanding of physical reality is sufficiently final, complete, and definitive as to rule out the possibility of technology that works according to principles that we haven't yet discovered.

My reasoning is fine. It's yours which is fallacious:

"According to our current understanding of physical reality, this can't happen, therefore, it isn't happening."

After applying the necessary correction:

"This is happening when according to our current understanding of physical reality, it can't happen, therefore, our current understanding of physical reality is incomplete and needs updating."


...and you still won't be able to prove that our current understanding of physical reality is sufficiently final, complete, and definitive as to rule out the possibility of technology that works according to principles that we haven't yet discovered.

By the very definition of science, a theory can't be proven, only falsified. Demonstrating faster-than-light travel will be a paradigm-breaking change to our foundational theories of physics, necessitating new models that could expand our understanding of the universe. When it comes to faster-than-light travel it seems overwhelming unlikely it can be done as there’s nothing to suggest among the properties of the universe we can observe that it can be done. 

In other words, if you are dissatisfied with the world as it is, you can pin your hopes on future discoveries, such as faster-than-light travel, that might change it.

I think it’s sad when conspiracy theories becomes part of such hope. I will refrain from commenting more on this as I realize there’s strong feelings on this subject.

My reasoning is fine. It's yours which is fallacious:

"According to our current understanding of physical reality, this can't happen, therefore, it isn't happening."

After applying the necessary correction:

"This is happening when according to our current understanding of physical reality, it can't happen, therefore, our current understanding of physical reality is incomplete and needs updating."


...and you still won't be able to prove that our current understanding of physical reality is sufficiently final, complete, and definitive as to rule out the possibility of technology that works according to principles that we haven't yet discovered.

An extremely arrogant assertion followed by justification for wishful thinking.  You are more like @David001  and @nbtruthman  than I could ever have imagined!