Pentagon releases UFO footage
- Thread starter Doobedoo
- Start date
Except for its not the usual suspects and no one is ranting and raving. From what I can see both those statements are just something fake you made up, so you can dismiss what you don’t like. Where is your evidence the usual suspects are involved? You cannot even name one of them and show how they are behind this.
I don’t take issue with you not believing and waiting to see more evidence as that is reasonable. But I do have a problem with the way you are dismissing everything without even looking clearly at the claims.
So basically, your argument there is no way these 6 ish people who worked in the government UAP departments are telling the truth about UAP’s is because if UAPs are real there is no way it could be contained and it would be leaked. So any leaks from the people in the UAP department about UAPs are not true because if it was true they would leak the data.
In all seriousness I know we disagree on a lot. But the one thing we both agree on. Is more and solid evidence it needed to backup any claims. Blindly believing them without seeing the evidence they handed over is not wise. Its just even if I have major doubts about them, I prefer to see precisely what it is they said and precisely what evidence they gave before I make a final judgement. So how about we ignore everything we don't agree on. Focus on the one bit we do agree on which is solid evidence is 100% required then sit back and watch how this plays out? As it should be an interesting ride no matter which side anyone thinks it will land on.
Last edited:
Undisputable proof that aliens have a preference for either probe giving or probe receiving.
**** me @Pottsey do you even look into the origins of anything?
Leslie Kean
Ralph Blumenthal
Those two (who published this story in the debrief) are the same people who published the duck (gofast video) in the NYT back in 2017 or whenever it was.
Leslie Kean is a well known UFO/Aliens foamer, so anything she publishes, is instantly dubious and biased to high hell.
It's called a conflict of interest.
If I'm a massive beliver in flying saucers, and I author books, write articles and make money from things to do with flying saucers, and I publish a news story to do with flying saucers - which would net me a lot of cash, that's called a conflict of interest.
It's a gigantic problem with regard to the trustworthiness and foundation of the story itself, it doesn't disprove the story outright - but it makes it much harder to take seriously.
Those two are not part of the usual names or the BS artist group making podcasts and YouTube videos like the BS artist video you posted before who was only after clicks and money. Those two are real investigative journalists who do proper background checks and write real investigative articles. She did stuff like being a producer on Flashpoints a program covering wrongful convictions, the death penalty, and other criminal-justice issues.
The NYT 2017 article was a genuine article that disclosed the existence of a secret program investigating UAPs which the government denied at the time. As it turned out the government did have a secret program investigating UAP. So it was a real article and she did proper investigative journalist research into it.
As for the video in the article if that's the same video as https://www.nytimes.com/2017/12/18/insider/secret-pentagon-ufo-program.html then that’s not the Gofast video and instead a genuine video leaked from the governments UAP department. The video is not a lame duck as you appear to say and has yet to be explained. Even if its one day explained it’s a genuine video from the department that made sense to post at the time of the article. So I don’t see what your problem is. Its a genuine investigative journalists article that turned out to be true. EDIT: Also the Gofast has not been fully debunked, its still debatable and partly unexplained.
“Leslie Kean is a well known UFO/Aliens foamer, so anything she publishes, is instantly dubious and biased to high hell.”
She also has a track record of being mostly correct and doing proper investigative Journalism with proper background checks. Take the NYT article not only was it correct but she did months of research speaking to Senators, reviewing documents, following money. https://www.nytimes.com/2017/12/18/insider/secret-pentagon-ufo-program.html she had a great deal of vetting. Take this latest article she did extensive background checks and posted all the background checks for us to see and all have turned out to be valid.
In other words if you are going to post something you believe is real about UFO's and the mainstream newspapers are refusing. Then she is your best bet as she will do a proper researched article.
Also apparently (I don't know how true this is but I am leaning towards true as they where right last time about Whistblowers coming forward which I heard about 4 weeks ago) there are now up to 24 whistle-blowers from the government UAP program. Some of the evidence has now been shown to journalists which consists of official signed documents. The journalists are not permitted to publish this till a set date. The NYT is meant to be writing a detailed article on this for Saturday/Sunday with further background checks. The reason they have not joined everyone else posting the article is they want to do extensive proper vetting. Also apparently more Whistblower are to be revealed and some of the evidence it to be bought out to the public. I cannot really prove this but given the talk about the current whisblowers has turned out to be true so I am giving this the benefit of doubt tentatively.
The current rumours are David Grusch has physical evidence proving that US Retrieved the Mussolini UFO with signed documents. Dutch Journalist Max Moszkowicz with at least 2 more Whistleblowers coming forward to share testimony. Some of the official orders will be signed and be stuff like below.
"By personal order of the D U C E (Mussolini) it is disposed immediate - REPEAT Immediate arrest diffusion of the news related to aircraft of unknown nature and origin which in dispatch of Stefani - Date today 7:30 AM. STOP. Immediate Recasting of any leads from the newspapers bearing said news is ordered. Stop. Maximum Penalties for the transgressors are foreseen up to refer to the supreme court of state security stop. Immediate confirmation of receipt required. Stop. GENTILE DIRECTOR SPECIAL AFFAIRS. END STOP."
Like I said take this tentatively but if its true there is a lot more to come.
Last edited:
I disagree, I think they're both BS artists, and they have you - hook line and sinker.
wtf is this?
So this is apparently something to do with a UFO from 1933?
Meanwhile in 2023, in the world of iPhones, DSLRs with 600-800mm lenses, and friggin' military drones with multi-million dollar lenses and sensor arrays that can read your drivers license number from 20k feet - we can't find anything other than ducks, lens flare, sensor dust and party balloons, so lets drag stuff up from 1933.....
All BS.
Last edited:
They're all part of the same union, that does Bigfoot, Nessie, The Beast of Bodmin Moor, etc. Standard-issue camera has grease smothered all over it.
I've not been on these forums for quite some time, as all my spare time has been completely involved elsewhere online in supporting the effort you see unfolding this week. But I thought I'd drop back in to see how people were reacting to this news.
For those that are struggling to get their head around what is happening or if it is real. Don't worry, there will be further confirmations. David Grusch is just the first in a line of people who are going to come forward once the Congressional hearings start. There are people inside the retrieval programs who were looking for a green light from Congress to reveal what they know. They now have this.
For those that are struggling to get their head around what is happening or if it is real. Don't worry, there will be further confirmations. David Grusch is just the first in a line of people who are going to come forward once the Congressional hearings start. There are people inside the retrieval programs who were looking for a green light from Congress to reveal what they know. They now have this.
The problem is, the people making these claims have overplayed their hand.
They've made very specific and explicit claims, about alien flying saucers and alien technology being recovered by the government, they've made all of these frankly ridiculous allegations - so now they've got to put up, or shut up, end of.
With the Pentagon UFO videos released a few years ago, those videos were nonspecific and didn't really show anything, so it was possible to backtrack - as eventually the analysis was performed and it turned out those videos showed a: a duck, b: a sensor malfunction and c: something completely unremarkable, so they could be swept under the rug - as they are doing now.
But with these latest claims, they're so far out and specific - the only option is to provide that evidence and bring it into the open, or (as I think will happen) they'll drip feed some stuff which doesn't substantiate anything, and the whole thing will remain vague and nothing will be proven - which won't cut it this time.
The problem is, the people making these claims have overplayed their hand.
They've made very specific and explicit claims, about alien flying saucers and alien technology being recovered by the government, they've made all of these frankly ridiculous allegations - so now they've got to put up, or shut up, end of.
With the Pentagon UFO videos released a few years ago, those videos were nonspecific and didn't really show anything, so it was possible to backtrack - as eventually the analysis was performed and it turned out those videos showed a: a duck, b: a sensor malfunction and c: something completely unremarkable, so they could be swept under the rug - as they are doing now.
But with these latest claims, they're so far out and specific - the only option is to provide that evidence and bring it into the open, or (as I think will happen) they'll drip feed some stuff which doesn't substantiate anything, and the whole thing will remain vague and nothing will be proven - which won't cut it this time.
I think unless you look at the legal process behind what is happening, it is very, VERY easy to be cynical. I have been following this extremely closely since 2021 and have talked directly to people within the effort to get this story out. Until recently I was sceptical myself and have flip-flopped at every stage if this was actually real and not some kind of modern day folklore that echoed the halls of the Pentagon.
Could this be an incredibly elaborate hoax or disinformation plot that has grown legs and gone too far...possibly. But I now doubt it is when you look at the fine details. Try and ignore what sound like ridiculous claims and sensational headlines and keep a close eye on the coming legal process, is all I can say.
Last edited:
This is like the next UFO meta isn't it.
We've exhausted the videos of lens flare, birds, airliners, balloons and malfunctioning sensors. So instead, the next stage is to have somebody go and give crazy statements that read like the plot from a 1980s low-budget sci-fi movie, to congress - because they're saying it under oath, gotta be legit right?
I mean, in the history of legal systems - nobody has ever lied under oath right?
Last edited:
This is like the next UFO meta isn't it.
We've exhausted the videos of lens flare, birds, airliners, balloons and malfunctioning sensors. So instead, the next stage is to have somebody go and give crazy statements that read like the plot from a 1980s low-budget sci-fi movie, to congress - because they're saying it under oath, gotta be legit right?
I mean, in the history of legal systems - nobody has ever lied under oath right?
The only reason we know of his claims is that they were declassified. The legal action that David Grusch had taken against the government has been taken seriously by the Inspector General. It's not like he was called up and then lied, you are implying he has created a lie and accused the government of wrong doing. If it is what you say it is, he will likely be prosecuted.
What do you propose the motive of this man is, bearing in mind he is not alone and that there are others following suit?
Last edited:
He's only going to be prosecuted, if it can be proven that he lied, this is the point I've been trying to make - people lie all the time under oath and get away with it, because it can't be proven that they're lying, which is what you need to do to convict someone of perjury, or contempt of court.
If the story he's telling, is vague and can't be disproven like it could in a murder case, eg: if somebody gave a fake statement under oath to try and frame somebody, but exculpatory evidence later came out (CCTV or forensic) which disproved the statement, you could directly prove, and thus convict that person of lying under oath.
But in the world of flying saucers and aliens, that's never going to happen, because that CCTV or foresic evidence doesn't exist, so nothing can ever be proven wrong and therefore the story is very good and legit, because it can't be proven wrong.
That's why this method of lying is very effective: Go to congress with some cockamaime story about flying saucers which nobody can disprove, then profit from the fanfare that comes out of it, just because somebody dared to go under oath.
As for motive - the same motive that's present in all of these stories: Cash.
It's no coincidence that the people publishing the stories and getting this out into the open, all have books to sell is it..
Last edited:
Do you have any evidence any of those 3 video have being debunked and explained via a valid analysis that wasnt done by a BS artists YouTuber like you used last time. As far as I can tell the 3 reasons you gave to dismiss them are made up just like the other stuff you dismissed with a fake made up narrative. As far as I can tell no one was swept them under the rug and they are still active as unexplained. If there is some valid evidence I haven't seen it.
I can't be arsed to go through all of them again, but seeing as it's you - we'll stick with the gofast video, as everyone was harking on about it outrunning the jets... It wasn't - it was moving at 40mph, the current windspeed at that altitude:
NASA panel: No convincing evidence for extraterrestrial life connected with UAPs
Amid ambiguity and poor data, “We don’t know exactly what we’re looking for.”…
arstechnica.com
I don't know how many times you need this to be pointed out to you? Shall we do it again?
I can do another paint drawing if you like?
Last edited:
Not only does that have nothing to do with debunking the other two videos.I can't be arsed to go through all of them again, but seeing as it's you - we'll stick with the gofast video, as everyone was harking on about it outrunning the jets... It wasn't - it was moving at 40mph, the current windspeed at that altitude:
NASA panel: No convincing evidence for extraterrestrial life connected with UAPs
Amid ambiguity and poor data, “We don’t know exactly what we’re looking for.”…
I don't know how many times you need this to be pointed out to you? Shall we do it again?
I can do another paint drawing if you like?
Many don’t agree with that conclusion because it doesn’t seem to work for the rest of the video and it was explained how the Gimbles + onboard processing removes the parallax effect on locked on targets which rule out that parallax effect.
As well as the Gimbles the backgrounds are stabilized frame to frame in processing which the guy doing the the parallax math didn’t know.
So the parallax contributing to the apparent motion seems to have been ruled out. Plus even if it hadn't been ruled out it still doesn't explain what the 3 videos are. All of this has been pointed out to you before. EDIT: As per NASA statement the parallax effect is not there official position.
Last edited:
I can't be arsed to go through all of them again, but seeing as it's you - we'll stick with the gofast video, as everyone was harking on about it outrunning the jets... It wasn't - it was moving at 40mph, the current windspeed at that altitude:
NASA panel: No convincing evidence for extraterrestrial life connected with UAPs
Amid ambiguity and poor data, “We don’t know exactly what we’re looking for.”…
I don't know how many times you need this to be pointed out to you? Shall we do it again?
I can do another paint drawing if you like?
When you see how easy it was to debunk based purely on the video alone, you imagine whichever department is dealing with UAPs must be a bunch of crayon eating rejects that get sidelined to a department for the LOLz..
Well the people who don't agree, should have spent more time in maths and less time watching ancient aliens and smoking weed.
It's not even up for debate - the data you need to compute the speed of the object is on the screen, the person from NASA's UAP team (Joshua Semeter) on the panel who said it's moving at 40mph, who even provided a slide which I linked above, showing the ******* workings out....
How in the blue mother of lord, do you "remove parallax effect" from a video of a moving object
that's literally impossible, you can't stop the background from moving fast if your subject is in front of it, and the angle of view is creating that motion effect, because you're in a fighter jet moving at 1000mph, you're talking nonsense.
Last edited:
Only the people who have access to the raw data don't agree with the explanation and went into detail why its not valid as the parallax had been removed via multiple methods. Which the guy doing the math on the video was not aware off.