Soldato
Ignore
Pentagon releases UFO footage
- Thread starter Doobedoo
- Start date
Soldato
Issues to do with the identification of natural phenomena did not form a significant part of the body of text Congress was referring to.
Congress had clearly identified a threat to the security of the United States that was growing exponentially from vehicles/objects moving from space to water, classed as "cross-domain trans medium threats".
Given the terms and context being used to describe the phenomena, it is pretty obvious they were not referring to anything natural or man-made at all
Don
Mankind fears the unknown.
Occam's razor is in effect.
You seem desperate to assign meaning to something that simply is not there.
Occam's razor is in effect.
You seem desperate to assign meaning to something that simply is not there.
Soldato
Modern academics and professionals are more hesitant to apply the criterion of simplicity liberally to all reasoning, because it can lack firmness and consistency when applied to complex ideas or phenomena.
Occam’s razor is more commonly seen as a guiding heuristic than as a principle of absolute truth.
The jury is still out on the latter (with regard to ascribing meaning to things that are not there)
Occam’s razor is more commonly seen as a guiding heuristic than as a principle of absolute truth.
The jury is still out on the latter (with regard to ascribing meaning to things that are not there)
![[FnG]magnolia](/styles/overclockers/avatars/9.png){kind=avatar}
Caporegime
ethan has not been selected by the aliens, so sad, sO SAD OH WELL NEVER MIND AND
e: the typo I made was bothering me so I fixed it ('selected', if you care) but the sentiment remains. Oh, it remains
e: the typo I made was bothering me so I fixed it ('selected', if you care) but the sentiment remains. Oh, it remains
Soldato
Are we are on about the same simpleton congress that at the first hearing just parroted the ill conceived Fox News rhetoric?
To say congress have clearly identified a threat to the security of the USA carries as much weight as Diane Abbot at an accountants convention.
The spin and narrative pushing are hugely at odds with reality.
I listen to Avi Loeb when he’s on the Event Horizon podcast (a great pod cast for this kind of thing) and he’s literally just done one on the Galileo project:
No real ‘spin’ on things, just good info on how they are setting it up, and as can be seen, it’s an earnest attempt to improve the data surrounding UAPs.
You don’t get any sense of heightened threat or huge scientific discovery, but an open minded attempt to improve data gathering, and you can see, they would nothing better than to find evidence of extra terrestrials.
To say congress have clearly identified a threat to the security of the USA carries as much weight as Diane Abbot at an accountants convention.
The spin and narrative pushing are hugely at odds with reality.
I listen to Avi Loeb when he’s on the Event Horizon podcast (a great pod cast for this kind of thing) and he’s literally just done one on the Galileo project:
You don’t get any sense of heightened threat or huge scientific discovery, but an open minded attempt to improve data gathering, and you can see, they would nothing better than to find evidence of extra terrestrials.
Soldato
Avi Loeb is a very intelligent guy, if we ever discover alien life it will be due to people like him.
You found a blurred video of a plane which was not a video I recall directly posting. This plane video was from a different date and time from the other data and has nothing to do with the drone swarm event and was not from the USS Omah. Then you used that unrelated blurred video to write off the drones as being a plane despite all the evidence 100% proving they are not planes. Your explanation is not simple or sane it's as crazy as what the UFOlogists do. By ignoring the evidence and insisting the event is a plane you're the one making outlandish claims. How does a blurred video of a plane from a different date, time, ship disprove the UAP drone swarm event from the USS Omah? It's been a while so let me remind you the USS Omah has hard evidence and facts to prove the objects are not planes which has been provided to you multiple times. The Navy didn't even have that plane marked as one of the confirmed UAP's. Its unrelated to the event at hand.
As I said before you appear to be just like the UFOlogists as you seem to decide what you want to see before looking at the evidence. Then you blank out everything that doesn't fit what you want to see despite the evidence provided. You're the one that has made multiple false statements, failed to provide valid evidence or sane explanations. I backed up my point of view with sensiable, logical real facts and cross-referenced data from reliable sources and in the case of the high-level serious navy reports, multiple sensor platforms so you cannot write that off as Hyperbole even though you keep attempting to. It is 100% proven a drone UAP swarm event happened and that the objects are not planes. Trying to argue against that at this stage and calling them planes with the evidence provided is nonsensical.
(I was traveling over the summer holidays and my 2FA ran out so I couldn't post till I got back)
I haven't seen any hard evidence and facts about what these objects are anywhere.
I've seen conjecture, speculation and outright scams galore, but no facts, certainly no hard evidence.
Oh and also, a lot of books being sold by these people making these claims.
You've fallen head-first into an abyss of poor quality journalism, scams and lies whilst simultaneously trying to present them to me as "hard evidence".
Then obviously you complain when I discover the gigantic conflicts of interests, outright nonsense and totally exaggerated claims being made, by people who just want to make a few dollars.
For example - the quality of evidence you're presenting is a joke, you say words tantamount to "there's proof of incredible tech, aliens, or something incredible" when I look at the people making the claims (like George Knapp) it's about as clear as ******* crystal, that there's a bunch of people using all of this stuff as a cash vehicle to make some money. Books, TV shows, interviews, Joe Rogan - they're getting in on all of it. They play videos of lens flare, sensor dust, planes on the approach to LAX and SAN and lens bokeh - whilst foaming that it's aliens, I mean come on for ***** sake.
You need to take a step back, and consider that you're just being conned and you've swallowed the bait, hook line and sinker.
Soldato
I stumbled across this the other day and found it a very interesting viewpoint from a former US Naval Aviator and F-14 pilot.
youtu.be
The Truth Behind the Super Hornet UFO Encounters
Support Ward's channel by becoming a Patron at https://www.patreon.com/wardcarroll Buy "Punk's War," Ward's bestselling debut novel about life in a deployed ...
youtu.be
The hard evidence and facts have been provided multiple times. It's like when I posted the cross-reference radar data backed up by a transcript of the operators direct from the military. Somehow you failed to see anything while everyone else can. Or when I posted the evidence showing the UAP hovering and following the navy ship deck at night you just ignored the fact it was hovering and wrote it off as a plane even though planes do not hover over a deck at night like that. Or you refusing to see evidence and writing it off as sensor dust even when the object was picked up on 4 different types of sensor platforms including eyewitnesses using their own eyes and the radar was from multiple navy ships, so sensor dust is an impossible explanation. The source of this data was a navy investigation, but you want to write that off as just some people trying to sell books. I am not referencing those people. The more recent data I was referencing was the raw navy data and navy reports. The evidence and data I gave you are directly from the Navy, not from the people selling books for money.
It’s been a while so let’s backtrack and quickly go over the type of data we are talking about. There was an ongoing drone swarm UAP incident harassing the navy fleet for a period of time. This was serious enough to trigger a high-level security investigation. After the full-scale high-level navy investigation went over the data from all the navy ships, they came to the conclusion the drone swarm UAP event happened and that most of the objects where not planes. This was backed up with multiple types of sensor data, reliable eyewitnesses, ship logs, multiple types of radar coverage from multiple navy ships plus more. You keep ignoring that and going on about how it's just a plane despite all the evidence showing it's not a plane. You were even provided with the ships logs both raw full logs and highlighted sections from multiple navy ships and you just ignored it all and still falsely insist it’s a plane.
Using a car analogy, it goes something like this. 1st September
Person A in house A says they spotted a DeLorean driving down the road on the 1st
Person B in house B says I spotted that too and recorded its speed as 66mph here is my scanner results
Person C in house C says I spotted that to at the same time here is my video footage.
Person D in house D says yeah I spotted that to on thermal version here is my data.
Screeeech in house E on the 15th of September. You’re all wrong here is my video from the 15th of September of a blurred plane, you’re all wrong it’s not a DeLorean on the 1st of Sep it’s a plane. There was never a DeLoren its all planes.
That’s how you come across to me.
The only poor-quality journalism style data and lies I see are coming from you. You the one that appears to be making stuff up that doesn’t match the facts. At this point with the evidence, to deny there was a drone swarm UAP event is more delusional they saying it was Aliens. As astronomical small a chance that the objects are of Alien origin this is more likely than the objects being a plane based on current evidence. Basically, your stance that it’s a plane is more delusional and more unlikely than someone saying it’s an Alien Craft which is itself beyond extremely unlikely. You talk about me needing to take a step back. I strangely suggest you’re the one that needs to take a step back and look at the data objectively. There is no way the majority of these objects are planes that’s just not possible. While I am not ruling Aliens out, I don’t think they are Alien craft as I have said many times. The chances of them being Alien craft is so tiny it's not worth doing the maths behind. The chance the drone swarm UAP event are planes is even less likely than Aliens based on the data we have. Which is why I find your stance so crazy, saying it's a plane is just not logical or reasonable. A plane doesn’t match of the data we have. The UAP's swam event is something like 99.9999% technology based unmanned craft of some sort. 00.0001% an alien craft, 00.0000% a plane. Yet you keep insisting it's a plane. The only joke of evidence is the evidence you have provided so far. Just like when you were wrong about that guy lying which turned out to be something you made up, you are wrong about the UAP swarm being planes.
Hard evidence of what exactly?
The radar footage, the so called "UFO swarm" hasn't been confirmed as being hard evidence of anything by anybody, other than the UFOlogist Jeremy Corbell. The language "UFO swarm" and other nonsense was created only by him, the video which he provided showing what looks like US navy personnel engaged in an exercise - is being used by him, to claim there's something weird and strange going on.
The Navy hasn't confirmed anything he has said on the matter.
The Navy has said the videos he's provided are genuine and that's about it, - and I agree, they look genuine, but also completely benign and don't show any evidence whatsoever, of anything unusual going on.
Pretty much everything you've provided, has either originated from Jeremy Corbell, George Knapp, or any of the others, they're all in it together - if you haven't figured it out by now, that's your problem.
Really? You're claiming that it's more likely these objects are aliens, as opposed to planes based on what what you've provided?
I complained when you posted a bunch of nonsense then failed to provide any real facts or evidence to back up what you were saying. You’re the one claiming the event is something that it's not. You’re the wrong who is ignoring evidence to pretend it’s a plane. You’re the one that is saying people are lying based on nothing but what appears to be your make believe.
Yes, I did that to show how delusional and crazy your idea that they are planes are. Given the evidence provided the objects are more likely to be Aliens then planes. This goes to show just how crazy your viewpoint is, given how almost impossible the chance of them being Aliens is. As I said before I don’t think they are Aliens and the chance of them being Aliens is not impossible but beyond extremely unlikely but that’s still more sensible than the nonsense you’re saying about them being planes. How many times have I explained that UFO/UAP doesn’t automatically mean Alien and that I don’t think these UAP swarms are Aliens. We are 100% sure they are not planes but we are only 99.9999% sure they are not Aliens or if you prefer 99.999999999% sure they are not Alien’s. Hence your viewpoint they are planes is crazier than the hard core nutjob UFOlogists.
Trying to argue these UAP swarm objects are planes is nutjob territory give the evidence provided. If we rule out tiny little Aliens in tiny little craft, then the objects are 100% unmanned drone craft, not planes. So, I have no idea why you keep insisting they are planes when all the evidence clearly shows they are not planes but unmanned drone craft.
That’s not remotely true. The majority of the data I have posted has nothing to do with Jeremy Corbell, George Knapp, or any of the others who are in it for the money. As far as I can see your as far down the rabbit hole as the UFOlogists. It's not my fault your blind to the data that has been posted. Did you even bother to click and read the links from the navy reports? We already know you didn't bother to read the military ships logs as you admitted that even though it was pointed out to you the logs prove the swarm is not a plane.
I posted link after link from the unclassified Navy reports and direct ships logs. Which has nothing to do with from Jeremy Corbell or George Knapp
The data 100% proves unmanned drone craft swarming and harassing the navy fleet. The data 100% proves these objects are not planes.
Rather than go around in circles, we'll just let the posts speak for themselves;
You said;
To which I replied with;
To which you replied;
At this point, I click on the article titled; "Radar confirms UFO swarm around Navy warship"
It's a news report by George Knapp (A known UFOlogist) reporting on a video which Jeremy Corbell (UFOlogist and UFO film maker) "released" claiming that a US warship was swarmed by UFOs.
So this has everything to do with Jeremy Corbell and George Knapp, the very article you started this with - goes direct to those people from the very first instance.
The next problem is the language used. The words "Radar confirms UFO swarm around Navy warship" appears to be quite startling and provocative, if true - it would be a very serious incident indeed. The first thing I did was try to figure out where the words "UFO SWARM" came from;
- Did they come from the captain of the Omaha? No
- Did they come from any official US defense source? No
- Did they come from, or were they verified by anybody in an official capacity whatsoever? No.
They came from Jeremy Corbell, here's the original tweet; https://twitter.com/JeremyCorbell/status/1397991804130131969 (in the 2.5 minutes I just spent looking - as far as I can tell that's the original source of the whole thing)
Bearing in mind, the US military made on mention of any swarm, the videos provided by Corbell show nothing particularly untoward - other than US navy personnel operating radar systems which the navy said were legit, because they just are........ (go ahead and point out in that video exactly where anything unusual happens)
At this point I look at the person making the claim at the start of all of this (Jeremy Corbell) and come to the conclusion, based on his conflict of interest and the fact he'd stand to gain financially from selling this story, that it's far more likely he's "hyped up" the whole thing for shock value to get clicks, rather than any US warship was swarmed by whatever.
Sure, we can let the posts speak for themselves. https://forums.overclockers.co.uk/threads/pentagon-releases-ufo-footage.18885266/post-35790863 I said "While the UAPs do appear to be unmanned drone like craft." backed up by all the data in my post from the Pentagon report your direct response after this was https://forums.overclockers.co.uk/threads/pentagon-releases-ufo-footage.18885266/post-35791036 which started with a silly giggle then a load of nonsense about planes and blinking lights on planes with a video of a blurred plane that has nothing to do with the drone swarm event. You are trying to explain away the UAP drone swarm event as planes when the evidence clearly shows 100% we are not talking about planes.
As for "The next problem is the language used. The words "Radar confirms UFO swarm around Navy warship" appears to be quite startling and provocative"
The problem for you is multiple times I explained that UFO/UAP does not automatically mean Alien and that I don't believe the swarm objects are Aliens. So, there is no way you can say the language in my posts is provocative. I was very clear time and time again in saying that I don't believe the UAP's are aliens and referenced unmanned drone like craft as being behind the objects in the swarm.
- Did they come from the captain of the Omaha? I don't remember it being the captain. There was official reference using the word swarm in relation to the USS Pual Hamilton and the USS Russell used the words multiple instead of swarm and the USS Omaha had up to 14 targets being tracked on radar at one point with the operator transcript which is a swarm although I don't recall if they used the word swarm. As shown from the Pentagon investigation slides that I linked to before. The words swarm came from the Pentagon.
- Did they come from any official US defence source? Yes the Pentagon slides from the investigation
- Did they come from, or were they verified by anybody in an official capacity whatsoever? Yes the Pentagon confirmed. As you know the slides I used and linked to are the declassified slides from the Pentagon investigation into the swarm harassment. It was a very serious incident which is why there was a special high-level investigation as I have pointed out multiple times. This is why I don't get your insistence its planes flying overhead as clearly that is not the case.
I assume that's a minor typo and you mean no mention of swarm by the US military. Thats incorrect. The swarm's name came from the navy report on the investigation that I linked for you before and as shown in my old post links above, not from Jermey Corbell. The swarm is clearly targeting and harassing the navy fleet over a period of time hence the high-level navy investigation. Also why we know they are not planes.
lol like this one? (taken from the same group of ships, on or around the same time the other stuff was reported) in the same group of incidents (drones and stuff being reported near ships)
In reading through those links on thedrive.com, i'm suprised you didn't mention the Hong Kong bulk carrier "Bass Strait" as it looks like that ship was launching drones (identified as quadcopter drones) to fly over and video the US Navy ships.
Pacific Basin bulker tied to US Navy drone spying allegations
Documents released by the US Navy link the bulker to drones used to surveil warships in US waters
So if this is true, it's basically some ships (probably being paid by the Chinese government) to spy on US ships, which really isn't anything to be too concerned about is it.. It would certainly be a simple, down to earth explanation - cheap disposable drones from wish.com, get some shakey night video of a destroyer, then crash it into the ocean..
It's just funny, because you look at the reports and it seems like Chinese ships being naughty, yet when Corbell gets hold of it - he turns it into an episode of the x-files.
Associate
Every time I open this thread I hear the X-Files theme.
Checkout the film NOPE, it's pretty good.
Checkout the film NOPE, it's pretty good.
That video was found to be unrelated to the UAP incident and unrelated to the drone swarm. It was not marked/logged as part of the UAP swarm. It was just a random plane they picked up while searching for UAP's. That plane doesn't disprove any of the rest of the event, that plane was not one of the UAP swarm that was harassing the navy ships. How many times does this need pointing out to you? Why are you still going on about planes when planes have been ruled out as a possible explanation? No one is saying there was no planes flying overhead. What we are saying is the UAP swarm was not a plane. Try looking at the evidence objectively and logically. Instead of acting like a Ufologists and searching for only what you want to see then making silly giggles and LOL comments at everything.
Only because you are not objective and are bias in how you are looking at the data. The Chinese ship was ruled out by the navy as the source of the UAP drones. The Chinese ship was only in range for something like 1% of the drone swarm event timeline and the drones it used did not have the enhanced abilities of the UAP drone swarm. If you read the reports, you would know some of the ships had drones but didn't have drones with the endurance, flight speed, range or other ability to explain away the drone swarm. The Chinese ship was also not following the navy ships so how could it have been responsible for the UAP drone swarm? HOw can a ship just passing by that moved off be responsible for the ongoing swarm harassment?
Your joking, right? it's like you just want to create this fake narrative and do not care about the facts and evidence. It's a good job you're not an investigator based on what I have seen. You say I want to turn this into an episode of the x-files.. Well you seem to want to turn this into an episode of a bad cop show where we have that cop that writes everything off and doesn't want to look into anything as he has already decided he is right before looking at the evidence.
Associate
If only the navy had the ability to shoot them down.. oh well.
www.thedrive.com
Problem solved.
Navy Ships Swarmed By Drones, Not UFOs, Defense Officials Confirm
Defense officials confirmed in a recent hearing that it was drones that swarmed Navy ships off California and it even happened again off another coast.
www.thedrive.com
Problem solved.
Ok - if I’m the bad cop show, you’re every episode of “most haunted” ever.
*door slams shut* everyone loses their mind that it’s a ghost.
Are you insane??
It can’t be a drone, if you look at one of the videos you can see they fly on a tilt.