Man of Honour
- Joined
- 29 Mar 2003
- Posts
- 57,747
- Location
- Stoke on Trent
Sorry no comebacks, I was making Felon look silly by using AI and you fell for it by trying to be clever and rude
Last edited:
Pentagon releases UFO footage
- Thread starter Doobedoo
- Start date
Sorry no comebacks, I was making Felon look silly by using AI and you fell for it by trying to be clever and rude
Both statements are right. AI is both superb and a pile of dog poo. At the risk of going off topic I have very mixed feelings about AI. I have used it at work and saved hours (superb), I have also used it at work and on subjects I know about and the answers have been down right useless passed off as correct and at times I couldn't get a proper answer no matter how I reworded the job.
So I think its fair to say "some of it is absolutely superb" as well as some of its a pile of dog poo. Although personally at the moment I think its more like 2/3 poo and 1/3 superb.
More proof that people whose job is/was being in the air can be just as terrible as ground walkers at analysing UAP footage. Are these the kind of people that leak footage because they think they found aliens while flying?
Definitely did not watch the video, just skimmed the transcript BTW.
Definitely did not watch the video, just skimmed the transcript BTW.
Apparently and I say apparently as I cannot prove this is real. The classified full video is reported as 5 minuets longer and the object continues to fly for for the rest of the video with no descent. The object after taking into account parallax is moving at 40 Knots above windspeed. The object is also running very hot. All the people that say its a balloon seem to be skipping over flight speed and hot temperature of the object neither of which match a balloon. Having not seen the full video myself, I am only repeating what was reported.
If its decent I couldn't say. Not watched the video myself either the one you posted or this one. WEAPONIZED : EPISODE #89 had Merrick VanLandingham as a guest who did a technical analyst. He is the only person I have read who did an analyst of the speed and mentioned temperatures. Like you I only did a quick skim of the transcript so I am happy to be corrected if I got anything wrong. I know some people on here dont like the hosts of Weaponized but unless there is something I dont know about Merrick the guest technical analyst is ok?
Associate
- Joined
- 27 Jan 2022
- Posts
- 809
- Location
- UK
3D Analysis of the Yemen Orb
This is a more focused spin-off from https://www.metabunk.org/threads/uap-hearing-new-video-yemen-orb.14427/ The Yemen Orb video appears to show a fast-moving object (the UAP) colliding with another object (the missile). It's not immediately clear from the video what is happening. @Zaine M...
www.metabunk.org
Not sure about thermal detection, I believe the colour gradient can be configured to whatever the pilot/drone operator wants to the make the objects more visible I guess.
Last edited:
Associate
- Joined
- 27 Jan 2022
- Posts
- 809
- Location
- UK
Where is the debunk? All I see is a load of BS and nonsense to make money from his sponsor. Calls it a balloon but ignores all the facts that seem to go against it being a balloon. Doesn't bother to explain the flight speed of the object being faster then wind speed which rules out a balloon or the heat thermal profile of the object being being too hot for a balloon. Where is the explanation for the object get hits and doesn't descend downwards like a balloon being hit by a missile would. That was just a typical, Youtuber BS artist joining the bandwagon to get clicks and money. He spends more time talking about his sponsor then actual real debunking.
Last edited:
Associate
- Joined
- 27 Jan 2022
- Posts
- 809
- Location
- UK
I don't think the video was ever bunked, it was shown once at a Congress hearing with zero video analysis. The Congress chap (dunno name, glasses) that was asking questions later said they showed it publicly to try and get some experts to tell us what it is because he's keeping an open mind what is it (not the exact quote).
Until the experts get here we have the public. So far some people have made some good points in issues with the 'advanced tech' claims.
I will also be interested to hear what the Pentagon’s UAP Taskforce says about it.
Here is a link to that video where they debunked GoFast https://forums.overclockers.co.uk/t...s-ufo-footage.18885266/page-320#post-37986066
"We don't know exactly what that object is but we do know it's moving at wind speed" followed by "consistent with a bird or balloon".
Last edited:
Its a balloon. It has been debunked by an ex F16 pilot among others...
I have yet to see any of them explain the speed which was shown to be faster then wind speed and too fast for a balloon and no explanation for why its running a hot thermal temperature like a missile, too hot for a balloon. Also if the 2nd part of the video is true with the classified extra run time the balloon explanation makes no sense.
How is an object a balloon when its reported as going 40 Knots above windspeed and keeps flying for 5 minuets after being hit by the missile? Given the speed of 40 knots above wind speed and given the thermal temperature surly its more likely to be military grade drone that's active in a warzone over a balloon.
Last edited:
That was indeed debunked too....
Where though? The only experts I have seen brought on to run the math showed it was flying at 40 Knots above wind speed. I have seen lots of people talk about the thermal profile is to high for a balloon. Not seen one expert say otherwise or explain that away. Then we have the reports the object in the full video keeps flying after the missile hit for an extra 5 minuets. Granted that last one cannot be proven or disproven at this stage. But the first two are pretty major points that rule out balloons.
40 Knots above wind speed with a thermal profile like that matches a military grade drone over a balloon.
Last edited: