I have linked multiple articles in other essays that seem to say otherwise, so I don't think I am being unfair in that. He has explained where his data to find said meteor came from. He has used 'alien' themed speculative discourse to get funding to get the equipment and ships to go right to a designated spot, from old data, goes right to the spot and claims to have evidence for something, calling it all science without peer review, and no one is giving him the grief or pushback that science has given every other claim. Heck, even the 2004 Nimitz TICTAC UFO had more data than that meteor. We have more data on that Malaysia Airlines flight 370, and science hasn't found that. Too bad military satellites and radars don't track airplanes or balloons; we might actually find stuff.

but fair enough. You read a lot of Loeb's stuff. Maybe as much or more than I do, and you like him. I want to like him. He seems likeable... I don't know if you're kinder in disposition because you're nicer or I am more skeptical. I have seen him in interviews and when someone confronts him, he rolls his eyes. It's subtle. Still, I'd rather hold a dialogue with him than Niel deGrasse Tyson, at this point.

I actually appreciate you dialoguing with me, championing the other side of this. Maybe I have misread media who is mistranslating Loeb. Then again, this alien story is not going to move forwards in cautious steps, but by bold statements and theories that get falsified after the fact- and if that's all Loeb is doing, well, God bless him.