HecticHector Its a shame GrapheneOS get so defensive and abrasive
I haven't read all the replies in this thread, so can you point out where in this thread this has been the case? From whatever I've read so far, replies from all accounts marked as being mods have been very reasonable. They have been specifically quoting points being raised and given their p.o.v on the matter.
HecticHector I didn't even want to post this, especially without any evidence of my experience
Posting without evidence could be seen as (1) someone's genuine/honest and simply wants to know more (2) is a troll (3) has an agenda and is either acting independently or employed by an "adversary" ... etc. We don't really know each other, so strictly speaking any of these is equally likely. However it seems most the time folks (including GOS folks) in this forum give the benefit of doubt and assume it's "(1)" and proceed to engage in a meaningful way.
HecticHector He stated "I'm having a hard time seeing what he's writing" as I was texting someone letting know the situation
Assuming all this really happened, a lot of warfare these days is fought on psychological levels. Maybe they said that to plant a doubt in your mind, maybe to unsettle you into making a mistake, maybe this maybe that. Who knows.
HecticHector With an easy Google search
This is not just for your post but there are others who seem to resort to this often. Firstly, if it's so easy, why don't you do it, filter out the relevant content, link and post it here yourself? Wouldn't that help others (who btw have no obligation to respond to you or me or anyone) help you better and quicker?
This is like someone raising an issue on GitHub repo of a large project (or commenting on a PR) claiming "There are several places you have assigned a string to a variable you should have assigned a number to. With an easy eyeballing of source code you should be able to find it out.". That's pretty much a nonsense description waiting to be flagged and closed. Folks would expect you to link to specific parts of the code so that there can be inspection and meaningful discussion.
Bimmy That absence of evidence is not evidence of absence
That's true but I'm not sure what you want ppl to do with it. There's no evidence that unicorns (was gonna say God but that might trigger some folks so keeping it to unicorns) exist and yet no one can claim that they don't exist. However this is not very useful/interesting. Everyone can clam infinite such things and apply that quote - so what do you want people to do, keep looking for (the proverbial) unicorns?
There's merit in theorising and assumptions, but science is driven by evidence (preferably empirical) or a search for it. It doesn't depend on your biases, what you think/thought, whether you "genuinely, 100%" saw aliens, etc etc.