White Beard
Active member
I’ve listened to some of Howe’s Youtube stuff (listened rather than watched, because there’s nothing to see but still pictures, shots from science fiction movies, images that don’t actually relate to the narrative, etc - just like in the link you post), including the YT posting about the Antarctic octagon “covered” in that “article”.
I call it a narrative, but it’s not even a good ghost story: her informants don’t seem to have any information at all, which I frankly found disappointing, but I’ve since learned that such weak sauce is all she’s got. Neither she nor her guests offer anything even remotely informative, it’s all unprovable and unsupported assertions without names, dyes, faces, actual photos of anything, like I said, a visual montage of suggestive images and artists conceptions...and not even any imagination applied to it, no reality-based content at all. Yes, yes, “secrecy”, “protected identities”, etc - but no actual content. No substance.
After taking in several of her vague and drawn-out ‘investigations’ and ‘revelations’, I’ve just chalked it up to time wasted and lessons learned. Like Stein said of Philadelphia, there’s no “there” there.
And, like I said above, disappointing: so much gullibility, so little payoff.
Much the same is true of most “UFO research”; after decades of reading and digging into things, it got tired of getting nowhere. If and when there’s anything substantial, I’ll be all over it - but until then my life is full enough to to keep me busy and informed. Just, not about shared delusions and deliberate misinformation. I’d rather chase some ACTUAL tail than some tall tale.
