So UFOs aren't a theory anymore - but we still don't know what they are

Like with most conspiracy theories, this one is based just on what people half remember from the news, not actual statistics.

But the point wasn't about the "range of possibilities." It was about the fact that you and other believers won't detail any other possibilities beyond sci fi technobabble. Most likely because such possibilities would sound very bad from a credibility standpoint. You got very upset when I suggested a valid possibility because it sounded silly.

The other possibility that you don't want to consider, because it doesn't involve aliens is that there is a recovery program for drones and other aircraft from Russia and China etc. And that information and claims about this program gets conflated and confused with separate claims about UAPs.

If this happens to come out, I highly suspect all of the people making claims about non human intelligences and inter dimensional beings etc will be claiming that they were still right all along.

The claim is that it's aliens who have the ability to break known physics. Possibly several races of aliens from different planets observing different rules and with different levels of technology. And that they are potentially visiting Earth regularly, up to millions of times over the centuries.

This is the most likely explanation apparently.

Personally I feel that time traveling humans or denizens of the hollow Earth are statistically more likely and rely on less jumps in logic or appeals to magic technology. But believers won't find these as acceptable cause they sound ridiculous.

Since an actual response to this is not forthcoming, I think the question demonstrates the kind of reasoning behind the UFO believers.

Aliens are the most likely explanation because people want to believe it's aliens.

But they don't want to say it's aliens because that would make their claims sound less credible. The term "non human intelligences" sounds much more sciencey.

But again you're falling back to an argument from authority.

You are propping this guy up as being more credible because he's a physicist. But in reality he's simply just repeating unsubstantiated reports from anonymous people who have no actual physical or verifiable evidence.

We just have to believe him because a physicist can't be wrong.

It's the oldest simplest marketing trick in the book.

Also again you're providing unnecessary dictionary definitions for things that people are aware of. Very odd.

Carl Sagan was an astronomer. He wrote only one science fiction book among many non-fiction books promoting critical thinking.

No it doesn't matter if someone is a nuclear physicist or if they are "smart" in your view. This doesn't mean they are immune to being wrong and it doesn't really add more weight to them repeating unsubstantiated and unverifiable claims. The claims remain unsupported.

However it is a very common marketing tactic for people to promote such experts using their credentials as if they do add more weight to their claims.

And yes that is what you claimed. This clashes with what you claimed the video said. Unless you're now dismissing the video you posted as wild guessing.

Also again no need for the definitions. We are aware of what a physicist is. It's not really helping your point by spamming that link.

You just quoted when your claimed it yourself. Not sure what you're demanding here.

On one hand you are saying that any speculation about the motivations of aliens is pointless. Then on the other hand, you present speculation of the motivation of aliens as interesting insight.

The difference seems to be that if it's speculation in support of the idea of aliens, then it is acceptable. But if its speculation that doesn't support the idea of aliens, or pointing out how the positive speculation is contradictory and inconsistent, then it's not acceptable.

This is a double standard. It's a bit ridiculous to invite speculation, then dismiss speculation you don't like.