<videos released>
If they release the radar data we will know!
<radar data released>
If they release ...
Either the pilots, Senators, and intelligence officials are lying (or absurdly incompetent) or it is as they say.
Maybe they should build in a third seat on those planes and staff it with some intellectually adequate people from hacker news?
The point isn't pilots and other professionals being perfect, it is about the probability of them being wrong (should be slim). Independent probabilities multiply, making such a confluence of mishaps exceedingly unlikely.
Humans make mistakes, we have multiple layers of checks and controls for the management of complex systems like planes because of this. It's why airliners have co-pilots, it's why we like to have multiple confirmations from different systems before making life or death critical decisions. Yet still friendly fire incidents happen, mid-air collisions happen. Accidents like the shooting down of flight 655 by the USS Vincennes happen, in which a whole bridge crew and leadership with access to all the information misinterpreted it at multiple levels of review. Similar full system failures by multiple personnel simultaneously have lead to warship collisions.
It boggles my mind that somehow knowing all of this about the ever present potential for human error, even by highly trained competent people, goes out of the window when it comes to potential "UFO" sightings. All of a suddens military pilots and sensor operators are perfect paragons that never make mistakes and should never be questioned.
This is your error.
There is no "absurdity" needed, as we didn't evolve for accurately perceiving phenomena seen while manoeuvring in transsonic flight, and we don't develop a perfect "common sense" for them either.
I'm not going to try to come up with something counterintuitive about flight, because I don't even do flight simulators.
But I can say this general category of us doing things we didn't evolve for is also why so many people — even smart people — struggle with the Monty Hall paradox, even though it's fairly simple probability.
I don't know if you've ever been in a small private aircraft, but if you have you may have seen another plane crossing your path. It is quite hard to see such an object until it is right on you (thank god for ADS-B). I couldn't imagine the same situation in a fighter jet. Having also seen things like balloons and birds while flying, I can tell you that things don't look the same. Your perspective is really different and optical illusions are abound (people even frequently misinterpret flight paths looking up at planes and birds). Yes, you get training for this, but at the same time that training doesn't break the illusion.
80kft in a second? Remember that the speed of sound is ~1.1kfps (at atm). But 80 times that? The sonic boom from that would be INSANE. I'm going with new radar new glitch. Per the video, they don't describe seeing this movement except on radar and, from my understanding, not the other object with their physical eyes but the weapons systems (which the 60 minutes video even shows an example of a glitch with Go Fast).
Why are you being purposefully obtuse?
Speculation that also does not factor in multi eye witness accounts and radar measurements.
As for instrument measurements, the track that turns out to be a bird is identified as such mainly by simply correctly interpreting the instrument data.
So we’re back the square one. All the ‘smoking gun’ evidence turns out to be a damp squib and now we’re just expected to believe unrecorded ‘radar measurements’ and eye witness accounts.
People of planet earth KNOW, that YOU and your friends are HERE and we will not submit to extraterrestrial leadership!
Your denial of an obvious fact is evidence of you being part of the extraterrestrial gang that tries to stay in the dark - but it is too late, you can hide in Antarctica or in the oceans, we still know that YOU are here!
BTW - would you please like to support us in building better polyphonic analog synthesizers? This technology is stuck in the 80s and we still have limitations in total voice count and number of modulation sources - we need some serious evolutionary jump in this area. Thanks!
It could be a plane (or something else) and reflecting light in a way that causes bokeh/glare
Looks like for every ten "I want to believe" person there's also another 'skeptic' that will discard a video for unrelated reasons
Do you think human vision is something that is absolutely 100% foolproof?
Why are there thousands of known optical illusions examples? https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_optical_illusions
Have you heard of spatial disorientation? https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Spatial_disorientation
Do you think the human eye stereo baseline is large enough to determine the depth of objects more than 15m away?
Interesting conclusion.
False, congressional report shows not all of them can be attributed to that.
Mick West does good work, but he's not _neccesarily_ right on all accounts. Definitely good armchair expert porn though.
It says it, but does it actually show it? The videos released by the Pentagon that Mick West analysed were also supposed to have been checked by defence analysts.
It's perfectly obvious in the bird video that the pilots are mistaken, their recorded statements are obvious misreadings of the instrument data actually shown in the video. You can go and watch it yourself. This material is in the public domain now.
lack trust in institutions. I think I'm smarter than experts, and know better with 1/1000th the training, and 0 context they have access to. See my other contributions on covid or the war in Ukraine.
(Not targeting you specifically, but the general sentiment)
This not a theory, we know for a fact highly trained people working in these sorts of conditions, even whole teams of them, can get things tragically wrong. It’s how we get blue on blue incidents even when pilots and controllers have plenty of time to review situations and make decisions, mid air collisions happen, it’s how the USS Vincennes command crew collectively at multiple levels of review misread tactical data and shot down flight 655. It’s how several navy crew have managed to fail their way into collisions. Many such incidents have been examined and investigated in meticulous detail. People sometimes simply misread the situation they are in, even collectively. It seems like sometimes one person makes a mistake and everyone else just goes along with it.
I know it seems unlikely, but we have many, many thoroughly documented cases. These are extreme statistical outliers, but there are thousands and thousands of such crews and teams constantly on alert all over the world in US service every day. Every now and then even some very unlikely events are going to turn out.
As an example in the Gimbel video [1], he concludes the a pilot is unknowingly locked onto another ship and what's actually showing up is just the exhaust of that ship. Would the military be unable to determine the presence of another ship in their immediate vicinity? The pilots reference a fleet of such ships showing up on instrumentation, as well as implying unusual aerodynamic factors. These factors are all completely ignored. I would put the probability of aliens as something near 0, but I would assess that probability as higher than 'another ship's exhaust', even if one may be able to create a similar effect through such.
[1] - https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=QKHg-vnTFsM
---
All that said I'm extremely skeptical of these videos and even testimony for a simple reason. All this stuff started coming out at the same time three other things also happened. There was a leak about a bunch of sci-level research supposedly be doing by the military. Shortly thereafter the Navy publicly patented it. Here [2] is a patent on an inertial mass reduction tool. A web crawl for the author's name "Salvatore Pais" is an interesting and utterly bizarre. If we were researching e.g. alien technology, patenting it achieves nothing except advertising it to the world. And that's something you'd actually want to keep secret.
This was (and has been) happening also at the time that the US military has began failing to meet recruitment goals, and the endless absurd failures of technology (Zumwalt class destroyers, F-35, submarines running into rocks, ships running into each other, etc) seems to imply there's been a brain drain in the military. I think this is largely just a covert recruiting campaign to get more higher-brow types interested in the military. Come enlist, and build a Stargate! It sounds a whole lot more fun than "Come join us and push ads on people who don't want them." Unfortunately it's also probably completely fake.
The Gimbel video is pilots having a laugh. They zoomed in on a commercial plane and it looks like a saucer due to camera glare, then they're having a laugh when the Gimbel rotates and it looks like the saucer is rotating. "There's a whole fleet of 'em look at the SA", snickers another guy. No shit, there are a lot of airplanes in the sky.
Later, Pentagon is pressed to "declassify" UAP evidence, and they have gems like this lying around. Works perfectly for sending adversaries on a wild goose chase. Additional sensor data is classified, of course.
A recruitment advertising campaign, aliens, and then lastly a plausible camera illusion mixed with some unclear or just mistaken testimony?
Here are some claims of something extraordinary. We have multiple High End sensors Witness this. Your Government is not even recording this data, let alone give it to you. They don't want you to investigate it, they don't want to investigate it themselves yet multiple independent people on different ships and official documentation all tell the same story: Something extraordinary happened.
The response? Let's google "$event + debunk" and believe the first Result. Mick Wests Explanation has many issues and straight up ignores multiple facets of the event. But it sure had a great chilling effect on actually figuring out what that was. And why? Because the possibility of something extraordinary happening is unpalatable to the reflexive skeptics. Things are a priori declared to be ordinary and any evidence that doesn't fit that get's ignored.
The only thing that makes the world more interesting than it really is is our brains that love to make crap up. Extraordinary claims require extraordinary evidence.™
The Nimitz incident falls under the same category. I don't know what that was but the "debunking" by Mick West simply ignores most of the little evidence we have. And so, at least 3 People (2 Pilots, 1 Radar Operator) have come forward and told a consistent story of what happened. No one has come forward and claimed they were lying (which would be the most likely explanation). The US Government is spending at least a few bucks investigating this as a result and changes their policies on reporting UFOs. During his presidency Obama himself gathered thousands of documents on Ufos[0] and told us straight up there's stuff out there we can't explain[1].
Is it possible that is all explainable? Sure, for all I know everyone is lying and North Korea doesn't have Nukes. Is it possible that we stumbled upon something extraordinary? Yes. My Argument is simply: Mick Wests "explanations" ignore a lot of the facts out there to give an answer. Any answer. And that answer will do for the people that google $topic+debunk and stop thinking there. The fact that his explanations require you to ignore evidence, believe in really, really weird coincidences and believe that all our modern sensors on f16s and radar boats fail to account for our own planes and pilots can't distinguish our own planes from flying container sized tictacs that they stare at from multiple angles for 5 minutes on a clear day.
Even if there is a very ordinary explanation for what happened, Mick West doesn't have it but his bad explanation is enough for those that don't really care and just want to reflexively debunk anything that doesn't fit their world view. If you really care, you can watch him talk with alex dietrich one of the pilots[2]. She explains to him quite well that his "explanations" for what they saw are complete nonesense. But that doesn't get you the headlines as the great debunker.
[0] https://www.vice.com/en/article/jgmnqd/obamas-presidential-l... [1] https://youtu.be/u1hNYs55sqs?t=5 [2] https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=uwZU6RiTEAw
This is why we have multiple confirmations and public databases:
The Preparatory Commission for the Comprehensive Nuclear-Test-Ban Treaty Organization (CTBTO) was set up in 1996 with its headquarters in Vienna, Austria. It is an interim organization tasked with building up the verification regime of the Comprehensive Nuclear-Test-Ban Treaty (CTBT) in preparation for the Treaty's entry into force, as well as promoting the Treaty's universality.
All six nuclear tests by North Korea were clearly detected by Australia’s IMS seismic stations,” Zerbo said.
https://www.ga.gov.au/education/classroom-resources/hazards/...
Yet I believe that those Sensors Measured what they did and north korea did in fact explode a few nukes.
Discord: Painbow#9553. Give me a call in 3 hours from now.
> and I have 0 way to verify any of this.
That would be because you haven't joined any geophysical data organisations .. and that'd be on you.
a) they witnessed an alien probe, potentially the equivalent of a mars rover from an advance civilization or
b) this is a big Psyop by the CIA.
I believe North Korea has nukes on the same premise that it's more likely a diverse set of experts saw what they saw and interpreted the sensors they work with every day correctly than that it's all a big psyop by the CIA to fake NK Nukes. Where do you see the difference between both cases?
Oh, a conspiracy theorist keyboard warrior who can't orally defend the BULLCRAP they spew on the internet in real-time voice chat.
Funny how that works.
You forgot to add an address where to send you an invoice for my time. Funny how that works
Man you disingenuous panda fuckers. All of you broken brain tards are the same.
We do have the proof that North Korea and nuclear weapons exists. The US government could be lying about the tests like it lied about iraqis WMD but 1/ there are other sources 2/ its in the domain of plausability anyway.
At the reverse, alien origin of UFO relies on unproved and impossible facts: 1/ the existence of life outside earth, 2/ the existence of technology outside earth, 3/ the possibility of FTL travel, 4/ the regulat visit of alien on earth, 5/ having a technology good enough to be almost undetected but not completely 6/ having an irresistible urge to crash in the US
Some of them are unproved, none of them are impossible.
> 1/ the existence of life outside earth,
Life spontaneously emerging on earth implies at the very least the possibility that it can happen elsewhere
2/ the existence of technology outside earth,
Same as above, Crows and Apes using tools implies technology is a possible result of life.
3/ the possibility of FTL travel,
Nope, those probes could very well be subluminal, see for example: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Self-replicating_spacecraft
4/ the regulat visit of alien on earth,
Not regular, we just have to notice them at least once
5/ having a technology good enough to be almost undetected but not completely
Which is literally what every stealth tech we have made is.
6/ having an irresistible urge to crash in the US
There's probably 10x more UFO reports coming from outside the US, especially south america, than from inside the US and I have made no claim that I have heard any good evidence that any crashed UFO has been retrieved (though we have crashed some mars rovers in our time so it's not out of the realm of possibility that an alien species might crash their stuff on our planet)
UFO fans are already convinced the events are UFOs which to them always means extraterrestrial aliens they just have to prove their point. Like flat Earthers have to prove how they are not wrong.
I honestly don't know why anyone thinks West has managed to explain everything. These objects were picked up by multiple sensor systems which wouldn't show the same artifacts. Of the hundreds to thousands of reports, the DoD analysis managed to explain all except something like 14. There's still something to left to explain here.
This is like saying "of the hundreds to thousands of firefox segfaults, the Mozilla programmers managed to explain all except something like 14.
Of course, there's something left to explain and improve. But Occam's razor applies, and we prefer simpler answers (like a sensor quirk).
The second one is much later, from a time I was obsessed with UFOs, and I don't know if I really saw it or it was a dream. It just bothers me so much that I can't recollect if it was all a dream or not and that I've had this memory for so long.
These were supposed to be the smoking gun evidence. UFO believers inside the DoD and as high up as US Senators fought for years to get them declassified.
As soon as they were public, they were all quickly identified as sensor glare, bokeh, or mis-understood perspective. More generally this showed how easy it is to misinterpret the information being put out by complex sensors like FLIR, even the operators do it.