Jesse Michels

If you go bolder in your claim, I do think you need more evidence for which we don't necessarily have that evidence.

I think you have to have an extremely open kind of aperture as far as what conclusions you draw from the evidence.

But ignoring the evidence, I think, that's a tragedy.

That's like where then I think you fall into kind of the other side, like dogmatic skepticism.

I think science is a constant process of the Scylla and Charybdis.

The two failure modes are extreme belief in everything.

Everything is everything.

And, you know, like A and B can't be true if they're mutually exclusive.

exclusive, which like we engage in all the time in UFO world or whatever.

And then the other side is extreme dogmatic skepticism where the evidence could literally be staring you in the face and you just won't look at it.

You won't look at the data set.

And I've had arguments, you know, I like did this informal debate with Michael Shermer, who's a great skeptic.

Yeah.

And like, he's really smart.

I really like him.

But often it's one of those things where

So I agree with, you know, your point that extraordinary claims require extraordinary evidence.

I do think a lot of people who aren't in UFO world assume that it's not a repeatable pattern.

They assume it's like random person in the middle of the woods or like, you know, a farmer who like sees the thing and then, you know, they're trying to like, they have some histrionic complex and they want to be famous in their local village or whatever.

And I think the nuclear thing is...