Pentagon releases UFO footage

Screeeech said:
Yeah, he did, or he suggested it quite strongly - but later it turned out to be false, it's a comet.

Loeb might be an intelligent person and a distinguished scientist, but I'd question just how smart he is here, for getting involved with this flying-saucer craze - as there's a big difference between intelligence and being smart.

A smart person with a reputation, would likely look at this - and keep their mouth shut until something actually definitive and trustworthy comes out of it. Because if it turns out to all be a load of lies - he's going to look like an idiot if he gets too close to it.
Click to expand...

Loeb obviously has no classified clearances but he has been speaking to those who have and was given advice on the design of the Harvard sensor system his team developed. In a similar way to Grusch, Loeb has been suitably convinced that there is a reality to the phenomenon.
 
Last edited:
Demon said:
So 'not taking windspeed in to account' is a debunk? I mean, where do you get accurate measured data of the windspeed at the height of the target? The plane can measure windspeed at it's altitude but considering the disparity in height, how do we know?

It's fine to throw question over ultimate accuracy, but to throw the maths out completely is disingenuous.. but I'm open to more evidence if you have it.
Click to expand...
You are right I didn't mean to throw out his math completely. But its right to say his math didn't factor in important areas and so his conclusion of 40MPH is wrong or inaccurate. Lots of people have looked at the trigonometry he used and talked about the rudimentary mistakes Joshua made. I gave links to two different people who said that and backed it up with facts. There are plenty more that disagree with Joshua.

Some of the people used weather reports and built full 3d scientific data mapped simulations and filled in different windspeed measurements to see how would impact the planes and object. It was found that Joshua's math missed out a number of key elements that impacts the real speed the object was flying at. As seen in the links I posted and other website if you have time to search around. It might not have been going as fast as some people say but was also not going at 40MPH either.

The other major problem is Joshua only did the math for one frame / 1 second out of 1 video of 3 videos and Screech is using that 1 second to try to dismiss the entire video and dismiss the other 2 videos which is just very disingenuous. So what if the objects was doing 40MPH at one point or what ever the real number is as we know 40-MPH is wrong. It doesn't explain away the rest of the video or explain away the other two videos or match what the pilots in the fighter jets reported or radar.

As I asked many times but only get called names by Screeech when I do. Where is the evidence the rest of the video has been debunked and should be dismissed and where is the evidence the other two video have been explained away? Even if 40MPH is correct which I don't believe it is as the maths seem to show 40MPH is wrong. Why would an object doing 40MPH for 1 second mean its not doing anything different at other points in the video or in the other videos? Didn't the pilot report at one point the object moved vertically and he had to change attitudes which rules out a balloon at 40MPH. Wasnt there at one point multiple fighter jets in the air all reporting the same thing none of which is not explained away by Screeech. (Am talking across the 3 videos here)

Screeech seems to be acting like the object is doing 40-MPH thought the entire video and in the other two videos at all points in time. But that is not what is happening is it? Saying its doing 40MPH at one single point and then dismissing the entire 3 videos + pilot reports all over 1 second seems extremely disingenuous me.

Anyway I am out of time, back to work. Hopefully the rumours are true and there will be lots of interesting things out this weekend. I am looking forward to the NYT article as they will do proper background research.
 
Last edited:
MookJong said:
Loeb has been suitably convinced that there is a reality to the phenomenon.
Click to expand...

Well I'm not, so there :p

My prediction for 2023-2024:

We'll see some more stories as people try to jump on the bandwagon, reports of this and that - but no evidence. This whole Grusch thing will turn out to be either a hoax or a big misunderstanding and will likely get pushed under the rug or forgotten, once the current fanfare has died down. We'll get to the end of 2024 and there will be zero evidence* of flying saucers or aliens on or around earth.

*When I say evidence, I specifically mean evidence which directly substantiates the claim being made - not heresay, or verbal/written statements which can easily be fabricated and are by their very nature - inherently unprovable, they're just statements.
 
Last edited:
Pottsey said:
You are right I didn't mean to throw out his math completely. But its right to say his math didn't factor in important areas and so his conclusion of 40MPH is wrong or inaccurate. Lots of people have looked at the trigonometry he used and talked about the rudimentary mistakes Joshua made. I gave links to two different people who said that and backed it up with facts. There are plenty more that disagree with Joshua.

Some of the people used weather reports and built full 3d scientific data mapped simulations and filled in different windspeed measurements to see how would impact the planes and object. It was found that Joshua's math missed out a number of key elements that impacts the real speed the object was flying at. As seen in the links I posted and other website if you have time to search around. It might not have been going as fast as some people say but was also not going at 40MPH either.

The other major problem is Joshua only did the math for one frame / 1 second out of 1 video of 3 videos and Screech is using that 1 second to try to dismiss the entire video and dismiss the other 2 videos which is just very disingenuous. So what if the objects was doing 40MPH at one point or what ever the real number is as we know 40-MPH is wrong. It doesn't explain away the rest of the video or explain away the other two videos or match what the pilots in the fighter jets reported or radar.

As I asked many times but only get called names by Screeech when I do. Where is the evidence the rest of the video has been debunked and should be dismissed and where is the evidence the other two video have been explained away? Even if 40MPH is correct which I don't believe it is as the maths seem to show 40MPH is wrong. Why would an object doing 40MPH for 1 second mean its not doing anything different at other points in the video or in the other videos? Didn't the pilot report at one point the object moved vertically and he had to change attitudes which rules out a balloon at 40MPH. Wasnt there at one point multiple fighter jets in the air all reporting the same thing none of which is not explained away by Screeech. (Am talking across the 3 videos here)

Screeech seems to be acting like the object is doing 40-MPH thought the entire video and in the other two videos at all points in time. But that is not what is happening is it? Saying its doing 40MPH at one single point and then dismissing the entire 3 videos + pilot reports all over 1 second seems extremely disingenuous me.

Anyway I am out of time, back to work. Hopefully the rumours are true and there will be lots of interesting things out this weekend. I am looking forward to the NYT article as they will do proper background research.
Click to expand...

I like Mick Wests summary post at the end of that thread.. the inaccuracies and lack of measured absolutes leave several inaccuracies or inadequacies open, but ultimately taking measurement errors and modelling errors in to consideration, there is still overlap with it being a bird..

Remember, a weather report does not give anything remotely exact at any given specific location/height wind is too localised.. the assumption that the weather report of 120kts @ 25K Feet means we should assume the windspeed is perfectly uniform down to the target height is equally as erroneous as assuming no wind.. neither is accurate but it's all within the margin of error..

MookJong said:
Loeb obviously has no classified clearances but he has been speaking to those who have and was given advice on the design of the Harvard sensor system his team developed. In a similar way to Grusch, Loeb has been suitably convinced that there is a reality to the phenomenon.
Click to expand...
I don't get that impression, he's fairly sceptical (now) of indirect information, but he definitely and desperately wants to find alien life, and so far has come down on the science side enough to give me hope he is the man for the job.. he wants proper scientific proof..

Strange how people interpret things differently.. I watch a lot of podcasts with him in.. even the Oumuamua stuff I feel people read too much into, he explains his reasoning for not calling it a comet (which seems fair since it assumes things), and whilst he is not taking it's an alien craft off the table, neither is he taking it being just a rock with a non standard formation that outgasses without a trail making it behave like a comet..
 
Last edited:
Pottsey wont send me links :(

Also you didn’t send two links. You sent a Twitter post of somebody saying “has he taken in to account wind speed” or something, with somebody replying with the metabunk link, which was your second link. So really you’ve only provided one link, which if you read the entire thread, seems to suggest all the wind data used in their “scientific” models were taken from the wrong day……….
 
Well scientists are free to say whatever they want but unless he's providing some kind of paper, with evidence that is then peer reviewed, he's just a guy with an opinion but no evidence.

In summary: Avi Loab = guy with an opinion but no evidence.
 
One of the lines that has come up a few times in this story, that makes me laugh is this one, with regard to the question of whether or not anyone has been killed or hurt by these aliens:

Grusch:
"While I can't get into the specifics because that would reveal certain US classified operations, I was briefed by a few members on the program that there were malevolent events like that."
Click to expand...

So, talking about recovering and reverse engineering alien technology from flying saucers, recovering alien bodies, so on and so forth - it's totally fine, no problem talking about that. But go any further about anyone getting hurt or killed by it - nah, that's just going too far :cry:
 
Screeeech said:
So, talking about recovering and reverse engineering alien technology from flying saucers, recovering alien bodies, so on and so forth - it's totally fine, no problem talking about that. But go any further about anyone getting hurt or killed by it - nah, that's just going too far :cry:
Click to expand...
Aye, start talking about dead humans and there then becomes hard evidence that can be verified or more likely debunked a lot more easily.
 
We are not alone!

With the vastness of space, the odds of us being alone are nil...
 
Last edited:
I believe in the phenomenon but I don't believe it is space aliens as such. David Grusch also hinted the evidence doesn't exactly point to extraterrestrials.

Non human intelligence, is a much better phrase to use and way to start thinking about it. Maybe think about it more like a quantum computer AI.

Anyway things aren't going to slow down with this now. Too many people are ready to talk, it's coming whether people like the idea or not.
 
MookJong said:
I believe in the phenomenon but I don't believe it is space aliens as such. David Grusch also hinted the evidence doesn't exactly point to extraterrestrials.

Non human intelligence, is a much better phrase to use and way to start thinking about it. Maybe think about it more like a quantum computer AI.

Anyway things aren't going to slow down with this now. Too many people are ready to talk, it's coming whether people like the idea or not.
Click to expand...

Its been a gradual drip feed to something.
I'm getting convinced now this is a ploy to a greater agenda.
 
It is a fascinating debate, but all if this stuff is human derived in my opinion.

I did see a ‘documentary’ about a space ship, believed to have landed in San Francisco, that has invisible aluminium. Apparently one of the aliens got onto a US carrier but he had a Russian accent. There was also talk of an incident on a bus seen by locals where a punk rocker got owned…but all I took from it was “wale stealers”.
 
Last edited:
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom