New Super Hornet UAP video from 2015

"Highly anticipated"? Really? What hogwash. "... the report will not provide definitive explanations..." And so the air is let out of the Balloon. "Move along. Nothing to see here."

Yawn.
 
sublight is back said:
If your gonna pretend the boogie man, big foot, and the loch ness monster are real, at least you can make it interesting instead of feigning complete incompetence. You make the DoD look really stupid....

https://www.dni.gov/files/ODNI/documents/assessments/Prelimary-Assessment-UAP-20210625.pdf
Click to expand...

The DoD has been in 'look really stupid mode' about this subject for a long time. Look up J. Allen Hynek, official U.S. Air Force spokesman. Then look up his 'swamp gas' explanation from when? 1966. Look up The Condon Report, 1968. The end result of a University of Colorado study funded by the U.S. Air Force. Answers or explanations? On the level of swamp gas. I have the paperback at over 1,000 pages (released in 1969). An excellent example of incompetence and stupidity.
 
Last edited by a moderator:
"Date: March 22, 1949

"To: Director, FBI

"From: SAC, San Antonio

"Re San Antonio letter to the Director dated January 31, 1949, which outlined discussion had at weekly Intelligence Conferences of G-2, ONI, OSI and FBI in the Fourth Army area concerning "Unidentified Aircraft" or "Unidentified Areial [SIC] Phenomena" otherwise known as "flying discs", "Flying saucers" and "balls of fire". It is repeated that this matter is considered secret by Intelligence Officers of both the Army and the Air Force."

So, UAPs in 1949.
 
This is a summary:

Collecting and tabulating this data is difficult as there was no ecosystem for doing so until very recently
Several of these encounters are, indisputably, of technological origin
Physical objects are involved, and are confirmed across a multitude of sensors, infrared imagers, weapons seekers, and visual observations
These objects and their activities cannot be tied to any known foreign adversary's or domestic intelligence collection efforts, nor any other private organizations
They appear to exhibit breakthrough propulsion capabilities beyond any known state of the art

More information and analysis is needed to produce a more comprehensive threat analysis.
 
To me them saying we don’t know what they are is actually quite a change of tack compared to past reports. I mean was anyone seriously expecting them to say for certain these are flying saucers flown by little green men.

Good to see them using the term UAP in the report rather than UFO. As to me UFO has to many negative connotations after all this time.

Also that many of the leaked videos were of explained cases. For example that so called pyramid UAP was obviously an aircraft I find it hard to credit that the USG couldn’t identify it. Or the low flying UAP that looked very much like a flying seagull shot in low light.
 
Last edited:
Flyaway said:
To me them saying we don’t know what they are is actually quite a change of tack compared to past reports.
Click to expand...
Wow, did you completely miss project blue book? The CIA literally said the whole purpose of the project was to come up with excuses to cover for A-12 and other reconnaissance platform sightings.

Its right here on page 72.
 
December, 1948. Askania cinetheodolites at the White Sands Proving Ground tracked an unidentified as did a second film camera. Since triangulation could not be effected - "no information was gained." Dr. Louis Elterman.

So they saw, and filmed, nothing at a missile testing range. Jump to 2021 and the answers/explanations are precisely the same.

Project Blue Book was a joke. Throw out all sightings. Period. The central reporting center for early 'flying disc' reports was air technical intelligence at Wright Field in Dayton, Ohio. People in certain geographic areas may have seen an A-12 or U-2 but this does not explain pre-1950 reports. In the case of the U-2, the goal was low observables. We did not want to make it easy to spot from the ground.
 
Last edited by a moderator:
Flyaway said:
To me them saying we don’t know what they are is actually quite a change of tack compared to past reports. I mean was anyone seriously expecting them to say for certain these are flying saucers flown by little green men.

Good to see them using the term UAP in the report rather than UFO. As to me UFO has to many negative connotations after all this time.

Also that many of the leaked videos were of explained cases. For example that so called pyramid UAP was obviously an aircraft I find it hard to credit that the USG couldn’t identify it. Or the low flying UAP that looked very much like a flying seagull shot in low light.
Click to expand...


That is precisely what people were expecting. Either tells us these are spaceships from other planets or enemy aircraft, meaning Russian or Chinese. Instead, the same old nothing.
 
Flyaway said:
This is a summary:

Collecting and tabulating this data is difficult as there was no ecosystem for doing so until very recently
Several of these encounters are, indisputably, of technological origin
Physical objects are involved, and are confirmed across a multitude of sensors, infrared imagers, weapons seekers, and visual observations
These objects and their activities cannot be tied to any known foreign adversary's or domestic intelligence collection efforts, nor any other private organizations
They appear to exhibit breakthrough propulsion capabilities beyond any known state of the art

More information and analysis is needed to produce a more comprehensive threat analysis.
Click to expand...

The same thing from Nathan Twining in 1947. More study... followed by nothing.
 
sublight is back said:
Flyaway said:
To me them saying we don’t know what they are is actually quite a change of tack compared to past reports.
Click to expand...
Wow, did you completely miss project blue book? The CIA literally said the whole purpose of the project was to come up with excuses to cover for A-12 and other reconnaissance platform sightings.

Its right here on page 72.
Click to expand...
I would put that down to my general historical ignorance on a lot of the topic. I can’t claim that it’s a subject I’ve followed that closely.
 
Last edited:
According to this article the now head of NASA Bill Nelson has seen the classified report.

NASA Administrator Bill Nelson said he had seen the classified UAP report when he was serving in the Senate. “The hair stood up on the back of my neck,” he said in an interview. He also spoke with some of the pilots involved in the incidents it documented. “They know they saw something,” he said.
While NASA was not involved in writing the public report, Nelson, who spent six days orbiting the Earth during a space shuttle mission in the 1980s, said he had asked the agency’s scientists to study the incidents that the report addressed and their potential explanations. NASA has a small office devoted to searching for extraterrestrial life.
Nelson said his personal view was that the vastness of the universe suggested there must be alien life. “If the universe is that big . . . is there likelihood of life? My answer is yes.”
Click to expand...

https://www.washingtonpost.com/nati...323b20-d52c-11eb-ae54-515e2f63d37d_story.html
 
As I wrote before: Nothing even close to the truth. Followed by rumors and speculation. Followed by even more rumors and speculation. At this rate, The National Enquirer looks almost... uh... almost...
 
I was struck by the fact that the DoD has concluded that the anomalies shown in these videos are real, physical objects simply because they are recorded by multiple sensor systems. My immediate reaction when I first saw the videos was that they showed artifacts produced by image processing. Unprecedented new technologies are one thing. But completely bypassing all laws of known physics is another.

The headup display is a synthetic image. Computers integrate multiple data streams from independent and incompatible sensors sensors to produce a comprehensible, composite image that can be projected on the see-through display. The image includes many non-real objects, like symbols, weapon-sighting cues, and imagery created from IR and RF wavelengths that the human eye cannot see. But we accept them as real because we expect to see such things in a HUD. But when the HUD is not displaying the expected, we jump to the conclusion that Something is Out There, if only because a lot of money has been spent and we need to trust our tools.

I didn't keep the reference, unfortunately, but an article in the Guardian pointed to just such an explanation for at least one of the phenomena shown. The author identified a rapidly maneuvering, triangular thing as a combination of a shutter malfunction in a FLIR combined with tumbling and resetting of the sensor ball.
 
sublight is back said:
Justo Miranda said:
The day of revelation is approaching:)
Click to expand...
....Aaaaaaand what makes you believe that?
Click to expand...
I have the feeling that our leaders are less and less respected by a population that is increasingly difficult to deceive, there are many conspiracy theories about the existence of a Higher Power, moderate people with their own ideas, like me, have never seriously considered this possibility, but now that the media has become a monster that eats Presidents ...
 
All those luminous images that disappear in a second reaching impossible speeds (without shockwaves)... have you seen those videos of cats chasing a laser point?
 
The real resolution versus the fake resolution? Yes, of course.
 
edwest2 said:
The real resolution versus the fake resolution? Yes, of course.
Click to expand...
Well.... Most of the photos/videos published are obvious CGI, window reflections and the fact that no clear images exist despite most folks carrying an SLR quality camera in their pocket.... Make up your own mind.
 
I have made up my own mind. High quality photos exist of circular aircraft, along with movie film.
 
Flyaway said:
New article by Avi Loeb.

Announcing a New Plan for Solving the Mystery of Unidentified Aerial Phenomena

The newly organized Galileo Project will use a three-pronged approach to replace unreliable eyewitness reports with reproducible scientific observations
Click to expand...

https://www.scientificamerican.com/...the-mystery-of-unidentified-aerial-phenomena/
Click to expand...

I can absolutely, positively guarantee that nothing will come of it. And it's been done before with the same Zero results.
 
I'm just curious what other group of human people will eventually be found out as having caused all these shenanigans a few decades hence. I fully expect any putative pilots of any flying disk or tic-tac or other such advanced propulsion craft to be humans from Earth, and all with very long highly classified records of distinguished service to their countries of origin.
 
E6yKXFnXEAgCjSZ
 
edwest2 said:
Flyaway said:
New article by Avi Loeb.

Announcing a New Plan for Solving the Mystery of Unidentified Aerial Phenomena

The newly organized Galileo Project will use a three-pronged approach to replace unreliable eyewitness reports with reproducible scientific observations
Click to expand...

https://www.scientificamerican.com/...the-mystery-of-unidentified-aerial-phenomena/
Click to expand...

I can absolutely, positively guarantee that nothing will come of it. And it's been done before with the same Zero results.
Click to expand...
That’s a specious argument being as the technology now being used in astronomy is nothing like when this was conducted before.
 
dannydale said:
I'm just curious what other group of human people will eventually be found out as having caused all these shenanigans a few decades hence. I fully expect any putative pilots of any flying disk or tic-tac or other such advanced propulsion craft to be humans from Earth, and all with very long highly classified records of distinguished service to their countries of origin.
Click to expand...
That presupposes we know everything about the Earth’s atmosphere and all the things it can do. Which we don’t. Ball lightning was only accepted as a genuine phenomena comparatively recently and we still don’t know the exact theory of how it works.
 
Ball lightning? Seriously? And I have a good, not specious argument. If the technology is better now then why no answers? I can guarantee that no answers will be forthcoming. About a month ago I watched qualified persons give lengthy, meaningless statements as it relates to this. I expect no deviation from this approach in the future.

Images of solid objects have nothing to do with earth's atmosphere. A number of books have been written about atmospheric phenomena.
 

Similar threads

Back
Top Bottom