Pentagon releases UFO footage

Pottsey said:
The Executive Summary corroborates a lot of the event with what looks like a lot more then just 1 or 2 other people.
Click to expand...

I'm not conviced by that executive summary, it contains too much hyperbole and I think it's dubious or possibly fake.

It was suddenly and mysteriously "obtained" by George Knapp - an investigative journalist for KLAS-TV, yet it contains details and accounts which seem quite detailed and sensitive. Other people on twitter have poined out that it's odd, that the report has references to Wikipedia, combined with the way it's written - I'm going to bet it's fake.

For example this line;

Based on the lack of detection of any unidentified sonar contacts it is highly unlikely that an AAV operated below the surface of the ocean; it is possible that the AAV demonstrated the ability to be cloaked or invisible to the human eye based on pilot reporting of the water disturbance with no visible craft.
Click to expand...

Things like this just don't read right to me, there's too much supposition; how can the author of this document say that it's "highly likely" than an AAV operated below the ocean, or that it's possible for such a thing to be invisible to the human eye?
 
Well apparently we're only a few weeks ago from some big announcement. It's a big vague (like the videos lol) but its somewhere between another blurry video or report or introduction to first contact and alien-human consciousness ascension (like at the end of Close Encounters of the Third Kind).
 
keyser van someone said:
Pilot's can't lock on something, the equipment locking on tech doesn't work very well seems a more likely explanation. Not something the military want known but were forced to release. You wouldn't want to show any weakness in a system as the enemy could capitalise on it.
Click to expand...
Accept for the reason they couldn't lock onto it was because active jamming was used as shown in the video with Cmdr. David Fravor. Not because of equipment not working. Given the jamming alerts what is more likely an active jamming system is detected and causes 4 planes and boats to lose radar. Or that 4 planes and boats all fail to lock as the top of the range military grade equipment doesn't work very well. This is active jamming meaning it came from some form of technology. I don't see how equipment doesn't work very well is a likely explanation in this case. If it was 1 single plane you could put it down to possibly faulty equipment. There are to many boats and planes involved for it to be faulty equipment. At one point they say 70 people picked up the objects across the entire battlegroup.

EDIT:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Eco2s3-0zsQ&t=2s 38min mark debunks the gimbaling diffraction spikes glare explanation.
 
Cmdr. David Fravor has gone full ufologist. Never go full ufologist. :) He sure makes a lot of wild claims. Right from the get go I'm sceptical. He is trying to convince me these are flying tech of some kind. Okay and off I watch his claims.

He talks about radar data that would back up his claims, was this released?

The guy with beard is convinced its tech that is real. It's a camera glare :)

How does locking tech on the plane work? Cause I can see pixels on a screen and then use software to lock on to it. Couldn't they just use that? How does locking tech work in the first place would be my question and then my second question is how do you 'jam' pixels on a screen?
 
keyser van someone said:
Cmdr. David Fravor has gone full ufologist. Never go full ufologist. :) He sure makes a lot of wild claims. Right from the get go I'm sceptical. He is trying to convince me these are flying tech of some kind. Okay and off I watch his claims.

He talks about radar data that would back up his claims, was this released?

The guy with beard is convinced its tech that is real. It's a camera glare :)

How does locking tech on the plane work? Cause I can see pixels on a screen and then use software to lock on to it. Couldn't they just use that? How does locking tech work in the first place would be my question and then my second question is how do you 'jam' pixels on a screen?
Click to expand...

The missiles are radar guided, they can't lock onto pixels just because you can see them on a screen. You can go research how radar guided missiles work if you want, missiles being radar guided isn't a hoax
 
Screeeech said:
I'm not conviced by that executive summary, it contains too much hyperbole and I think it's dubious or possibly fake.

It was suddenly and mysteriously "obtained" by George Knapp - an investigative journalist for KLAS-TV, yet it contains details and accounts which seem quite detailed and sensitive. Other people on twitter have poined out that it's odd, that the report has references to Wikipedia, combined with the way it's written - I'm going to bet it's fake.

For example this line;



Things like this just don't read right to me, there's too much supposition; how can the author of this document say that it's "highly likely" than an AAV operated below the ocean, or that it's possible for such a thing to be invisible to the human eye?
Click to expand...
You mean just like the videos themselves which are detailed and quite sensitive and should have remained classified. The videos where unauthorized copies leaked that was never meant to be released to the public. If it was just the report sure it could be fake but given, someone also managed to get hold of the videos I think we have to give them some benefit of doubt in being a fake. It’s pretty clear someone really does have access to sensitive data. The executive report, videos are backed up by high-ranking officers in interviews.

Given the combination of data it seems to me to be very unlikely fake.


“Things like this just don't read right to me, there's too much supposition; how can the author of this document say that it's "highly likely" than an AAV operated below the ocean, or that it's possible for such a thing to be invisible to the human eye?”
My take on it is they moved extremely fast and the human eye lost track of it. It wasn’t really invisible it just moved out of site. I wouldn’t be surprised to find out these objects what ever they turn out to be are unmanned.

There are theoretical gravity propulsion systems that in theory can operate both above and under water. These systems do not work via thrust and do not have eject plumes so as long as they are air tight they should work. These UFO objects in the video appear to follow and fly via the same way the theoretical theory we know about gravity propulsion system work.

My guess is these are experimental unmanned craft using experimental or prototype propulsion systems. Possible based on gravity propulsion or Plasma propulsion.

The US military does have patents on inertial mass reduction devices and the shape of the craft does match the shape UFO are often seen as. https://patents.google.com/patent/US10144532B2/en

What if these unconventional spacecraft propulsion systems are less theoretical and more practical. I expect some people won’t like the words “Antigravity Propulsion System" but theoretically it is possible and it seems far more likely that someone has moved past the theoretical stage and into the prototype stage rather than aliens visiting. I find it interesting how the triangle shape of the patents for a theoretical gravity propulsion system matches the years worth of trigonal UFO sightings.
Is it unfeasible that the military have tested unconventional propulsion systems with technology that is ahead of the public. This to me could be a likely explanation for many UFO sightings.
 
Pottsey said:
You mean just like the videos themselves which are detailed and quite sensitive and should have remained classified. The videos where unauthorized copies leaked that was never meant to be released to the public.
Click to expand...

This is incorrect.

The videos you refer to (the ones apparently leaked via the Pentagon) were actually requested by Luiz Elzondo via official channels, with the proviso that they would be published by the media. The Pentagon provided the videos openly, and gave him permission to publish them.

Nothing was leaked at all. Elzondo made a huge song and dance about the videos being leaked or whatever, because he wanted to get people to invest in the company him and Tom Delonge from Blink182 had created, to make UFO documentaries and shows. But it's not true - the Pentagon simply declassified the videos and gave them freely to him, probably because there's nothing whatsoever remarkable about them.

Pottsey said:
There are theoretical gravity propulsion systems that in theory can operate both above and under water. These systems do not work via thrust and do not have eject plumes so as long as they are air tight they should work.
Click to expand...

What you're talking about is basically nonsense psuedoscience which has been doing the rounds for years. Crackpot failed inventors have been welding magnets and crystals together in their garages or whatever for years and gotten nowhere, because the things you describe are literally, impossible - or so far away from possible, that they're like magic.

The theories you refer to are highly exotic, unproven, not accepted by any physicist worth his/her salt, and basically amount to junk science, they're nothing new.
 
keyser van someone said:
Cmdr. David Fravor has gone full ufologist. Never go full ufologist. :) He sure makes a lot of wild claims. Right from the get go I'm sceptical. He is trying to convince me these are flying tech of some kind. Okay and off I watch his claims.

He talks about radar data that would back up his claims, was this released?

The guy with beard is convinced its tech that is real. It's a camera glare :)

How does locking tech on the plane work? Cause I can see pixels on a screen and then use software to lock on to it. Couldn't they just use that? How does locking tech work in the first place would be my question and then my second question is how do you 'jam' pixels on a screen?
Click to expand...
You seem to be treating each incident as isolated and not connected. Cmdr. David Fravor was flying the plane in the first wave which landed and his wingman confirmed so that's 4 people. There is video from the 2nd wave of fighters which took off with extra tracking pods and video from a 3rd incident with different fighters which is more people. There is no way all that is just a glare.

"He talks about radar data that would back up his claims, was this released?”
Some of it was and some of it is still classified. The videos where never meant to be released and should have been classified then got leaked. So publicly we only have part of the data. The data we have matches what all the multiple high-ranking officers are saying. You can hear the pilots talking about the radar data even if you cannot see all of it. The pilots voice confirms the radar data and confirm its more then a glare. In case you are unware it is impossible for a glare to show up on radar data. These objects show up on radar when jamming is not active. Plus multiple pilots see the objects with there own eyes again impossible if its glare.

In once of the video we do see the some radar data and how active jamming is used on the fighter pilots radar something that can only be done by technology. The radar data from the pilots is shown in the UI and it shows being actively jammed. Meaning its not a glare but from a technology based object of some sort. It’s all in the video. If its a glare how did it jam the radar? If its a glare how did it get picked up on by multiple fighters and the battlefleet ships? The locking of the object works by tracking infer red heat. The object had a heat source and that heat source was being tracked. We can see the fighter pilot cycling though different sensor modes to try to get the object.
 
  • Like
Reactions: B&W
Pottsey said:
My guess is these are experimental unmanned craft using experimental or prototype propulsion systems. Possible based on gravity propulsion or Plasma propulsion.

The US military does have patents on inertial mass reduction devices and the shape of the craft does match the shape UFO are often seen as. https://patents.google.com/patent/US10144532B2/en
Click to expand...
Sure. Or it could be glare from the camera.
 
Pottsey said:
The videos where never meant to be released and should have been classified then got leaked.
Click to expand...
That's treason.

Pottsey said:
In once of the video we do see the some radar data and how active jamming is used on the fighter pilots radar something that can only be done by technology.
Click to expand...
What video?

Pottsey said:
Plus multiple pilots see the objects with there own eyes again impossible if its glare.
Click to expand...
From 12 miles away? damn! good eye sight.

Pottsey said:
It’s all in the video.
Click to expand...
What video?
 
Pottsey said:
The US military does have patents on inertial mass reduction devices and the shape of the craft does match the shape UFO are often seen as. https://patents.google.com/patent/US10144532B2/en
Click to expand...
thats an impressive amount of meaningless speculation for a patent with zero evidence or practical examples - just goes to show how rubbish the US patent office is. That would never be granted anywhere else.
 
Screeeech said:
This is incorrect.

The videos you refer to (the ones apparently leaked via the Pentagon) were actually requested by Luiz Elzondo via official channels, with the proviso that they would be published by the media. The Pentagon provided the videos openly, and gave him permission to publish them.

Nothing was leaked at all. Elzondo made a huge song and dance about the videos being leaked or whatever, because he wanted to get people to invest in the company him and Tom Delonge from Blink182 had created, to make UFO documentaries and shows. But it's not true - the Pentagon simply declassified the videos and gave them freely to him, probably because there's nothing whatsoever remarkable about them.



What you're talking about is basically nonsense psuedoscience which has been doing the rounds for years. Crackpot failed inventors have been welding magnets and crystals together in their garages or whatever for years and gotten nowhere, because the things you describe are literally, impossible - or so far away from possible, that they're like magic.

The theories you refer to are highly exotic, unproven, not accepted by any physicist worth his/her salt, and basically amount to junk science, they're nothing new.
Click to expand...
That's news to me about the leak but not a surprise as this subject always has a lot of false information going around.

As for the psuedoscince I don't think it is. What I am talking about are the high levels of research done by the military and NASA backed up by official patents and science. I am not on about the Egyptian anti-gravity nonsense based around magnets and crystals. According to NASA with breakthroughs from the Propulsion Physics program it is no longer just conjecture. That's on there website. Along with patents like https://patentimages.storage.googleapis.com/de/4c/43/62c585ccc936cc/US10144532.pdf

EDIT: I still think the most likely explanation is some sort of unmanned prototype propulsion system on a drone based craft. That seems far more likely then Aliens.
 
Last edited:
keyser van someone said:
That's treason.


What video?


From 12 miles away? damn! good eye sight.


What video?
Click to expand...
Are you ignoring facts that you don't like that don't fit into you debunked glare idea? The objects where not all 12 miles out. 1 object was 12 miles out the other objects where much closer. There was a fleet of 5 objects. Just because 1 object is 12 miles out that does not mean all 5 objects are 12miles out. As for the video it has been posted multiple times, how many times do I have to give you the link? The videos involving Cmdr. David Fravor shows the active jamming of the radar. I gave you a link to an interview where he breaks down where the jamming happens with the other video running side by side and a link to the direct video of the raw footage which shows the radar jamming in the UI.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom