I already have been skeptical of Farsight from the beginning and continue still to try to maintain a healthy skepticism. Courtney's right: the new concept of filming UAP is the iron gauntlet. Nothing before then or since has given me satisfactory answers both in the whistleblowing scene or the skeptics.

Now it is my litmus test. Anyone whom does not publically address this question of can they be filmed and why - is immediately written off my books as reliable.

Greer - powerful and moving agenda and commentary, will mean nothing to me until they answer that question. Channelers will immediately get my attention if and when they answer this. Even the corrupt news networks of the major media will get my interest if they just address this.

I wanted it written somewhere, anywhere. Doesn't matter how amazing, convincing, interesting the claims. Until they directly address whether the public at large can film them - I have reason to believe is still a massive shill.

I teach an IB subject called Theory of Knowledge (I actually changed my career path to teach this!!!)

And my students have to do an exhibition on a prompt.

One of the prompts is what counts as evidence.

So - what will count as sufficient evidence for you?

I've mentioned elsewhere that blurry lights don't do much for me, no matter how amazing the acrobatics. They *may* be alien tech. They *may* be glitches. They *may* even be something never encountered before, and even has a 'supernatural' origin... but that's not what the claim is.

Also, since we're not living in the age of the deep fake, why would you believe any film?? Unless you did it yourself...

I think the subject itself is almost psychologicaily (perhaps even physiologically) disruptive, that many develop a psychological defense mechanism that overrides common logical, rational thought. Flat earth folk come to mind sometimes. There is simply no amount of proof/evidence. I do think many would like to trust our gov and the MSM and are simply waiting to be given permission to believe perhaps. Recall how it took an article in a mainstream pub (NYT) in 2017 to really get the balling rolling on the subject. It wasn't until then that many started to think "hey, there may be something here".

And what about believe?!
How enough is to be skeptical.. where's that line, where's the end, where since skepticism is based on a non-believe belief and the pre-determination itself by "facts based" that is also created by a belief of one-self (in this case) in the ways those facts are held accountable.
"You" believe we can never be too much or 100% of one thing nor can anyone be the same as the other one with it's own belief systems.
Now of course, there's a question of sanity involved, wich is also a question embedded of what is considered the base structure in a collective society, in terms of a belief systems, or in this case close enough to what is consciously considered to be the truth.
Everything outside of those lines it starts to go outside "the normal", and more into fantasy land or insanity!
But never once evolution occupies a safe place, and has in itself the variable of being one thing only.
It has a tail of infinite truths in regards of what each civilization manifests itself throughout creation.

So you can never be too skeptical but you also have to.. you can never be to outside the realm of "reality" but you also have to.. you can never be too much in the middle but you have too.
That's one of the reasons there's so many of us with it's own belief systems within this collective coming together going forth what i can call a greater good, because in the end that's what we are doing.

So for me im going to believe, and i choose to believe in the unknown and also believe in others that i resonate more with, but in the mean time im also going to be skeptical and im going to fact check my self and others, because im not in the same mood everyday and by knowing that, that's my attempt to be in the middle moving forward, to bring balance (talking about common values!!)

Now, with all of this being said..

What determines a good evidence from my understanding is a set of pre-requisites determined by a collective belief system that brings the evidence closer to the truth, or what it is determined by common ground, once again by the collective to be the truth (once again truth is a never ending procedure, what it is today isn't tomorrow, but there is a base in the universe, wich is also "part" of the existence.)
So it's the same saying that is a political discernment, for example,
it's like hearing AARO hearings with the senate where they explain how they do the procedures of identifying an anomaly, in the end they came up with a conclusion, never 100%, but close to.. (what they believe to be by what the data suggests) and most of the time i ask the question how many times are they revealling the truth, because of some issue with their agenda, where they say its not this or that and i now with every bone of my body that it is the truth!

What about intuition!

So what i found from a last resource of all the procedure is that if there is a testimony and depending on the quality/credibility of the witness it is taken as a last resource, in other words, the belief system of that same person.
Another example..

a group of navy personnel in the Sub encounter through audio an anomaly 620ftunderwater, they do a report presenting all the data collected, all that data follows a set of procedures and in the end the marine gives his testimony from his own perception wich is align with is belief system, what he believe to be true, he never makes assumptions or say it was an ET craft, and sometimes nor even an USO Unidentified Submerged Object, but even there in the military, from what i understood they are open for conspire of ,its a human process.

We need to believe!

I should add that I don't want to splinter an already challenged movement. If we're going to have impact you need to put aside differences as best and consolidate wherever possible. Sure many of these things could have been engineered by the authoritarians but let's not forget that their tactics have also been to take good movements and twist them to their own agenda. So fight fire with fire. Take the potential shills along with what you consider the good stuff. In the end it's all just a collective push for a wake up.

So I'm on board with all of it. Greet, gaia.com, channelers. But the uap filming is still my central push and whomever ignores it can, like the mainstream, fade in the dust