Of course they did not go through like every single line of their computer printouts concerning the radar contacts and so on
I am not sure why you think that argument makes sense. In a proper investigation, you will have to do more than just blindly collect information. In a proper conference you'll have to make sure people will be able to review your updates on the topic. A big chunk of convincing people is coming up with the most interesting
e v i d e n c e. You don't need to show each and every testimony.
The conferences are just there to tell the people that those guys are there, that they have facts and they want an official investigation to break the entire cover up that's upon this topic.
It's like churches... they don't care about facts, they just claim to have them. So easy, not having to back that up, ain't it?
What's needed is an actual investigation that doesn't just collect all the present info but has the power to actually go further than that and start to ask some serious questions...
Unless the people make it clear that this investigation is a strong desire nobody will ever start doing this
Actually, you're wrong here. Many governments have taken the subject quite seriously, as is evident by their own research. That it's commonly shrouded in secrecy doesn't really say much, as most government research is.
what could those people actually do to satisfy your need of a "proof"?
It's not unfair to demand some actual proof for their statements. Recorded conversations won't cut it, we'll need evidence of said alien aircraft or life instead. It's not unfair. Just like it's not unfair to ask the same proof for the God question.
What more do you want than their testimonials and evidences which are way beyond "trivial" or "unlikely" in order to get a full scale investigation started?
What evidences? Their testimonies is all there is. Alien life itself might not be unlikely at all, but so far there hasn't been a first contact and mathematically speaking that's pretty unlikely, especially with our own technology in mind. That might not say much for alien life that's much more advanced, but it would take extraordinary means of transport, possibly even through time.
You seem to try to make everything they say into "seeing something" as if everyone of them would talk about some lights dancing in the sky.
It is all about seeing something, where in reality, they certainly aren't seeing anything, but instead interpreting as if they have seen something. They might think they have seen something, but that's not necessarily true to reality.
The UFO stories exist in a strange world of hearsay, where each ever more extraordinary story somehow becomes a credible source of information for the next.
Well they're not - even if one's beliefs would disallow any alien lifeforms there still would be flying objects hovering over a military base, paralyzing the controls of the nuclear weapons afaik leading to in increase in defcon status that is something VERY real. At least I'd start to worry about you if you say that it's a totally normal thing that shiny aircrafts fly over your military bases disabling your nukes and that this is nothing worth an investigation...
Enjoy your meal
Toast
Simply put, technology this advanced can still malfunction. In fact, it's more likely to fail. A lot of equipment is vulnerable to atmospheric interference in which cases you might not even need to flip a switch or enter a code. Electromagnetic fields change all the time, there are really much more realistic explanations for those events than alien aircraft.
As an analogy, take a mountain of fire matches. If you know how to operate them you can make fire. But under the influence of only the sun, they can start burning themselves. This is only one of many external influences that can start an event.
It's pretty shortsighted to think that in case of those nuclear silos it must have been aliens.
