https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=tfx1bIDTz0E

(http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=5665232&forum_id=2Elisa#48562188)

I'm particularly drawn to conspiracy porn like this. You've got the schizos who are very clearly mentally ill, but then you've got true sociopaths who've mastered the art of manipulation. You'll see this only in long-form podcasts, because it's the only format wherein the "groundwork" can be put into place for the deceit to occur. For example, you'll see some "whistleblowers" intentionally tailoring their responses to questions about their childhood/career/whatever in a way that causes listeners to subconsciously trust them when their crazy claims come later. It's pretty cool.

(http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=5665232&forum_id=2Elisa#48562244)

@toddsellars4694

2 days ago

Ross is incredible. We need more truly investigative journalists like him at all major news outlets, both local and national.

(http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=5665232&forum_id=2Elisa#48562416)

NewsNation:

NewsNation markets itself as a fact-based and unbiased news outlet. While it has gained some traction for avoiding overt partisanship, it’s worth noting that its credibility depends on the quality of its investigative journalism and sources. Claims made in programs like this one should still be independently corroborated.

Anchor (Elizabeth Vargas) and Reporter (Ross Coulthart):

Elizabeth Vargas is a seasoned journalist, which adds credibility to the platform. Ross Coulthart has significant experience covering topics like UAPs (Unidentified Aerial Phenomena) but has faced skepticism in the past for delving into controversial and unverified claims. His expertise in investigating military and intelligence sources lends weight but does not guarantee reliability.

2. Content of the Claims:

Whistleblower Testimony (Jake Barber):

Whistleblower accounts often hinge on the credibility and motives of the individual. Key points to assess:

Background Verification: Is Jake Barber’s military service and alleged involvement in classified UFO programs verifiable through independent records or corroboration by credible entities?

Specific Claims: The video description suggests he describes encountering a white, egg-shaped object. While intriguing, this lacks the technical or forensic evidence needed to substantiate extraordinary claims.

Backing by Other Veterans: The mention of corroboration adds some weight, but it depends on the credibility and testimony of those additional witnesses.

Extraordinary Nature of the Claim:

Claims about UFO retrieval programs require extraordinary evidence, given their implications. Anecdotal testimony, even from credible sources, is insufficient without physical evidence, official documentation, or scientific corroboration.

3. Contextual Red Flags:

Sensationalism Potential:

The use of phrases like "Hunting UFOs" and a televised special indicates an entertainment element that may prioritize engaging content over rigorous verification.

Timing and Publicity:

The proximity to a televised event might indicate a push for viewership, which could affect the framing of the story. Whistleblower claims often surface around media events or book releases, making it critical to separate marketing from substantiated facts.

4. Lack of Evidence in Description:

No concrete evidence is provided in the video description—such as documents, footage, or scientific analyses. The reliance on personal testimony, even when "backed by other military veterans," requires further validation.

5. Broader UAP Disclosure Context:

Recent years have seen a shift in how governments address UAPs, with the U.S. government releasing declassified reports. While this legitimizes interest in the topic, it does not automatically validate all claims. Assertions about crash retrieval programs remain controversial and unverified in the scientific and intelligence communities.

Conclusion and Recommendations:

The credibility of this video hinges on further evidence:

Investigate Jake Barber’s military background and corroborating witnesses to verify his credibility.

Look for concrete evidence (e.g., documents, photographs, physical artifacts) presented in the TV special.

Be cautious of sensationalist framing and scrutinize the claims with a critical lens.

Without additional evidence beyond anecdotal testimony, the claims made in the video remain intriguing but unverified. Skepticism and further investigation are warranted.

(http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=5665232&forum_id=2Elisa#48562419)