Associate
- Joined
- 27 Jan 2022
- Posts
- 818
- Location
- UK
Pentagon releases UFO footage
- Thread starter Doobedoo
- Start date
I came up with a theory.
Earth — and possibly other planets — was seeded by an advanced civilization to prevent cultural and technological stagnation. The parent civilization, having matured in a single cluster of the galaxy, faced no inherent reason to explore or expand beyond its local region. To avoid stagnation, original colonists — volunteers seeking opportunity, influence, and autonomy — founded isolated worlds where they could lead, innovate, and thrive free from the constraints of a dense, hierarchical society.
Knowledge was designed to decay over generations: advanced technology and original wisdom were lost intentionally, forcing later populations to adapt, innovate, and rediscover solutions independently. Monuments, anomalous events, and early “miracles” served as subtle guidance to inspire curiosity about the past, while UFO-like phenomena represented observation craft — becoming more discreet as civilizations matured.
This process ensures natural expansion: each world evolves along its own path, generating unique technologies, philosophies, and cultures that the parent civilization could never have developed alone. Over time, mature colonies may reintegrate or seed new worlds, perpetuating the cycle of growth, innovation, and cosmic expansion.
Objects such as 3I/‘Oumuamua or 2I/Borisov, and potentially Atlas, could be among these ancient automated probes — silent observers maintaining contact, recording progress, or preparing the next stage of the seeding process.
Earth — and possibly other planets — was seeded by an advanced civilization to prevent cultural and technological stagnation. The parent civilization, having matured in a single cluster of the galaxy, faced no inherent reason to explore or expand beyond its local region. To avoid stagnation, original colonists — volunteers seeking opportunity, influence, and autonomy — founded isolated worlds where they could lead, innovate, and thrive free from the constraints of a dense, hierarchical society.
Knowledge was designed to decay over generations: advanced technology and original wisdom were lost intentionally, forcing later populations to adapt, innovate, and rediscover solutions independently. Monuments, anomalous events, and early “miracles” served as subtle guidance to inspire curiosity about the past, while UFO-like phenomena represented observation craft — becoming more discreet as civilizations matured.
This process ensures natural expansion: each world evolves along its own path, generating unique technologies, philosophies, and cultures that the parent civilization could never have developed alone. Over time, mature colonies may reintegrate or seed new worlds, perpetuating the cycle of growth, innovation, and cosmic expansion.
Objects such as 3I/‘Oumuamua or 2I/Borisov, and potentially Atlas, could be among these ancient automated probes — silent observers maintaining contact, recording progress, or preparing the next stage of the seeding process.
Apparently the art of skepticism has been lost. Why is the image of “cigar” cropped? Where are the other objects in the image and are they cigar shaped as well?
I bet they are and it’s just a long exposure image and probably not even of 3I Atlas at all.
The most recent actual images of 3I Atlas verify it is a round comet shaped object. Hubble image of 3I Atlas (a three second google). Or shorter than it took either of you to post on here. Ironically it’s the only non cigar shaped object (for reasons that should be obvious).
image
Sorry if this seems harsh but fantastical claims should require at least the most cursory of skeptical research. Not a cropped screen from the highly dubious source such as Reddit.
Haha stupid poetic justice… I see Keyser beat me to it. That’ll teach me
Last edited:
Associate
- Joined
- 27 Jan 2022
- Posts
- 818
- Location
- UK
I think of it as a numbers game. We switched on the mavity waves detector and detected mavity waves straight away, therefore the universe must be filled with events that create mavity waves for us to detect (likely).. or we just got incredibly lucky with detecting that one signal (unlikely).
"As of September 2025, over 300 gravitational wave events have been detected. The LIGO-Virgo-KAGRA (LVK) network, which includes the primary observatories, announced that the count had surpassed 300 events by September 2025."
Same with interstellar rocks, we now have the ability to detect them, if big enough, and we did, therefore it's likely we will continue to see more of them in the future.
Anyone that's seen or done any level of astrophotography will tell you that a bar shape like that is due to a long exposure of a point like object due to the earth moving, or in this case the rocks speed.
the word mavity is broken on this forum for some reason. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/mavity checkmate wtf g r a v i t y
"As of September 2025, over 300 gravitational wave events have been detected. The LIGO-Virgo-KAGRA (LVK) network, which includes the primary observatories, announced that the count had surpassed 300 events by September 2025."
Same with interstellar rocks, we now have the ability to detect them, if big enough, and we did, therefore it's likely we will continue to see more of them in the future.
Anyone that's seen or done any level of astrophotography will tell you that a bar shape like that is due to a long exposure of a point like object due to the earth moving, or in this case the rocks speed.
the word mavity is broken on this forum for some reason. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/mavity checkmate wtf g r a v i t y
Last edited:
Some useful information here, for those willing to take the subject seriously. It's worth a look at the team (and their experience) along with the news resources:
uapdisclosurefund.org
Anna Brady-Estevez, PhD - UAP Disclosure Fund
Founding Partner, American DeepTech; Former Program Director, Small Business Innovation Research (SBIR), U.S. National Science Foundation
uapdisclosurefund.org
Associate
- Joined
- 27 Jan 2022
- Posts
- 818
- Location
- UK
Associate
- Joined
- 27 Jan 2022
- Posts
- 818
- Location
- UK
Reminds me of this, staring Sarah Silverman!
In Star Trek: Voyager season 3, episode 15, "Future's End," the ship doesn't hide. Instead, it is pulled into a temporal rift and arrives in 1996 Los Angeles. To survive, the crew must avoid detection, which they accomplish by flying low to the ground and using their cloaking technology. They also have to stop a villain who has a timeship and is using future technology to gain wealth.
Hiding from 1996 surveillance
Low altitude flight: To avoid being detected by 20th-century surveillance, the crew descends to a low altitude of 10 kilometers.
Cloaking technology: The crew uses a cloaking device to stay hidden and prevent the ship from being detected by modern technology.
Blending in: The crew is also forced to blend in with the 1996 society to avoid detection.
This will go down in history as useful of the 'wow signal'. Interesting, but lacking more information.
In Star Trek: Voyager season 3, episode 15, "Future's End," the ship doesn't hide. Instead, it is pulled into a temporal rift and arrives in 1996 Los Angeles. To survive, the crew must avoid detection, which they accomplish by flying low to the ground and using their cloaking technology. They also have to stop a villain who has a timeship and is using future technology to gain wealth.
Hiding from 1996 surveillance
Low altitude flight: To avoid being detected by 20th-century surveillance, the crew descends to a low altitude of 10 kilometers.
Cloaking technology: The crew uses a cloaking device to stay hidden and prevent the ship from being detected by modern technology.
Blending in: The crew is also forced to blend in with the 1996 society to avoid detection.
This will go down in history as useful of the 'wow signal'. Interesting, but lacking more information.
Last edited:
Man of Honour
- Joined
- 29 Mar 2003
- Posts
- 57,777
- Location
- Stoke on Trent
Star Trek beat you to it, also my favourite episode besides Q.
The Chase (Star Trek: The Next Generation) - Wikipedia
or imperfect lens?
same as foo fighters in ww2, how do we know it wasnt just because of the glass? people wouldn’t be used to looking through thick curved glass etc like some of the bombers had
how do we know 5 dots in a row aren’t lens flare
even super expensive modern camera lens can have vignetting etc or imperfections.
some chemical coatings on modern lens are purely to smooth out imperfections
you really think the mirrors or glass they used to capture these astrophotography plates were perfect?
youtubers who are clued up likely know exactly whats happening, but they can earn more money from stoking peoples imaginations and WHAT IF scenarios
lets face it, if you cover “space topics” and you tell everyone every video yea these are lens flare, probably lens imperfections and end their “belief in aliens” your probably not going to have a large core audience because people want to believe
viewers want videos to reinforce their own opinions, not change them
Last edited:
Wasn’t there more to this one though. Lens flares ruled out as the objects go dark when they enter shadow and light up again after leaving the shadow. Along with the Havard plates multiple observatories and astrophysicists validated her claims with plates from
- The Sonneberg Observatory in Germany, featuring a collection of 240,000 plates recorded starting from 1926.
- The Central Astronomical Observatory in at Pulkovo, Russian Federation, featuring 50,000 plates recorded starting from the 1930's.
- The Marie Mitchell Observatory in Nantucket, Massachusetts, featuring a collection of 8,000 plates recorded from 1915—1995.
It does appear these are real physical objects in space rather then dust, lens flares or other ground based sources.
There is also the wired part of the story where Howard Menzel working for the DOD inexplicably destroyed the rest of the evidence.
Unlike all the 3I Atlas nonsense this one is interesting and appears to have proper science backing it up. Likely has a proper science explanation as well.
As @Pottsey points out - there seems to be more to this, and the objections you've mentioned were largely ruled out. At the very least, it's real science done by real scientists.
Associate
- Joined
- 27 Jan 2022
- Posts
- 818
- Location
- UK
So, science check, aliens check. Job done, case closed. We did it everyone!
Don’t you find it interesting there is good evidence of satellite/craft like objects moving in and around Earth Orbit recorded and cross checked by multiple observatories and multiple astrophysicists. Objects with seem to have no explanation and seem to match up to ground UFO/UAP reports. The science behind this one is interesting and has multiple science papers and evidence behind it.
This could be a real phenomenon that is behind some UFO/UAP sightings.
Some of the data is really interesting.
“UAP reports was created (n = 2,718 days). Results revealed significant (p = .008) associations between nuclear testing and observed transients, with transients 45% more likely on dates within + /- 1 day of nuclear testing. For days on which at least one transient was identified, significant associations were noted between total number of transients and total number of independent UAP reports per date (p = 0.015).”
In plain English that is beyond expected random chance. 45% increase in unexplained near earth objects flying by matching nuclear tests. What could be flying near Earth orbit during these nuclear tests?
https://www.nature.com/articles/s41598-025-21620-3
Gravitational lensing, gamma ray bursts, fragmenting asteroids, plate defects seem to have all been ruled out. I am sure there is a proper science based explanation. But at the moment its a bit of a puzzle and seems to have solid evdeince.
Associate
- Joined
- 27 Jan 2022
- Posts
- 818
- Location
- UK
Lay people are poking a few holes in the paper. Scientists haven't really responded yet, they aren't as hyped about this paper as the UAP community is.
From what I gather so far, the key holes in the paper are:
How much data did they sift through?
How much data it they omit from the paper?
It was common for photographic plates from that era to have blobs on that were part of the flaws of the photographic process.
How much sifted and omitted data contains random blobs on the plates?
From what I gather so far, the key holes in the paper are:
How much data did they sift through?
How much data it they omit from the paper?
It was common for photographic plates from that era to have blobs on that were part of the flaws of the photographic process.
How much sifted and omitted data contains random blobs on the plates?
Some of that is covered in the paper. But as a layperson, I would have assumed if they're cherry picking data to support their conclusions then it would not have passed peer review, nor been published in Nature.
I would guess that what follows will be further scientific papers on the subject, by people who know what they're talking about that will either support the conclusions or not.
Personally, I find it quite interesting.
i should point out that its not Nature as such - its their open source journal that is nowhere near as prestigious or rigorously peer reviewed. In fact there have been quite a few problems with papers in this journal over the years.