4 ms·

Having spent a few years in skeptic groups helping debunk aliens and yeti footage, I must say that these are refreshing documents: authenticated videos, sensors

by Iv 7y ago

Having spent a few years in skeptic groups helping debunk aliens and yeti footage, I must say that these are refreshing documents: authenticated videos, sensors are specified, we even have original audio of one! I would like to just ask something I may have missed: how did they shield themselves from the (very) classic error of mistaking something small and close, like a bird or a bug, for something big and distant? There is an abundance of footage of blurry insects close to a camera being mistaken for very fast alien ships. I mean, this is supposedly locked by radars, why is the distance measured by those not given? And I must say, reading the analysis of the Nimitz incident by this paper, it is a glorious case of over-analysis. They base themselves on an oral recollection of approximate values, add to it wild assumption ("Since we want a minimal power estimate, we took the acceleration as 5370 g and assumed that the UAV had a mass of 1000 kg.") and to unnecessarily complicated calculations to guess random things about this supposed vessel. Also worthy of note is that this is part of a program [1] paid by a senator in the direction of a close friend, who is a UFO enthusiast, and had to justify spending 22 million USD with some things. In such a case, I don't think they have an excuse for not having actual radar data as well. I suspect such data would dismiss cases as something easily identifiable like a meteorite. [1] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Advanced_Aerospace_Threat_Identification_Program https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Advanced_Aerospace_Threat_Iden...

typeformer 7y ago
We know for sure that at least the radar from E-2C Hawkeye plane in the area that had returned was confiscated by plainclothes officials who landed on the Nimitz via helicopter.
- lolc 7y ago
  How do "we" know this?
  - typeformer 7y ago
    Because the guy on the plane responsible for the data testified on camera that he was instructed to grab the the "bricks" (specialized hard drives) immediately upon landing and they were then confiscated and quickly flown off of the carrier rather than being stored in the safe as per usual. Watch Histoy's Unidentified series.
    - lolc 7y ago
      Oh ok. I don't trust that story. Sounds like somebody is embellishing if not inventing things. It's unfortunate but this is my general experience with UFO events that get publicized. People confabulate stories that fit the alien origin and government conspiracy narrative. Time to slink out now for me. I derive some entertainment from the puzzling over what a UFO might be. The ensuing unwarranted speculation into alien origins puts me off. And the people who posit a government conspiracy tend to assume just those origins.
- saul_goodman 7y ago
  In all of this, folks should just go back to this interview with one of the pilots (Commander Fravor) who was one of the 4 people who actually saw the tic-tac thing first hand. Even he calls BS on some of the claims others involved (radar and technicians) have made. So, I would be careful about accepting some of the less directly involved parts of the 2004 story at face value. This doesn't diminish the incident at all, just shows how incidents like this can become twisted over time. This jumps to some of his comments about the other folks involved in the story: https://youtu.be/f7XJD_54aNk?t=549 https://youtu.be/f7XJD_54aNk?t=549 Another part of what he says: https://youtu.be/f7XJD_54aNk?t=1868 https://youtu.be/f7XJD_54aNk?t=1868 Say what you will of Corbel, but the entire 2 hours of interview are worth watching, Fravor is about as solid of a person to report this as you can get.
dfsegoat 7y ago
> Also worthy of note is that this is part of a program [1] paid by a senator in the direction of a close friend, who is a UFO enthusiast, and had to justify spending 22 million USD with some things. Per your link, the AATIP program you are mentioning only ran from 2007-2012, and was then dissolved. The new videos are from 2014/2015 etc. and with this all happening now, why do they have to justify anything for a program that no longer exists? Further, I don't think $22M really needs to be justified "with some things" when compared to the remainder of defense spending: - The Air Force is spending $850M to replace a $5 part in the W88 nuclear warheads currently in service. [1] - A single F-35 aircraft in FY2019 is $85M. [2] ... compared to these, you can probably find dozens of small DOD programs that were laughable, but still ate $20-100M with zero accountability [3]. 1 - https://www.thedrive.com/the-war-zone/30039/u-s-to-spend-hundreds-of-millions-to-replace-a-5-part-in-revamped-nuclear-weapons https://www.thedrive.com/the-war-zone/30039/u-s-to-spend-hun... 2 - https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Lockheed_Martin_F-35_Lightning_II https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Lockheed_Martin_F-35_Lightning... 3 - https://www.fbo.gov/index.php?_psort=current_set_aside_s-d-asc https://www.fbo.gov/index.php?_psort=current_set_aside_s-d-a...
- saul_goodman 7y ago
  I'm all for calling out BS where it exists, but lets get our facts straight. The program (AATIP) existed beyond 2012, they just changed how it was funded. Luis Elizondo, former lead investigator for AATIP, explains this here: https://youtu.be/D3r6SmrCUM0?t=706 https://youtu.be/D3r6SmrCUM0?t=706
  - dfsegoat 7y ago
    I was not aware! Thanks for the education! side note: Somebody should probably clarify this in the wiki article for AATIP: > Although the official AATIP program has ended, a related group of interested professionals have extended the effort, founding a nonprofit organization called "To The Stars Academy of Arts & Science".

by Iv 7y ago

typeformer 7y ago

We know for sure that at least the radar from E-2C Hawkeye plane in the area that had returned was confiscated by plainclothes officials who landed on the Nimitz via helicopter.

lolc 7y ago
How do "we" know this?
- typeformer 7y ago
  Because the guy on the plane responsible for the data testified on camera that he was instructed to grab the the "bricks" (specialized hard drives) immediately upon landing and they were then confiscated and quickly flown off of the carrier rather than being stored in the safe as per usual. Watch Histoy's Unidentified series.
  - lolc 7y ago
    Oh ok. I don't trust that story. Sounds like somebody is embellishing if not inventing things. It's unfortunate but this is my general experience with UFO events that get publicized. People confabulate stories that fit the alien origin and government conspiracy narrative. Time to slink out now for me. I derive some entertainment from the puzzling over what a UFO might be. The ensuing unwarranted speculation into alien origins puts me off. And the people who posit a government conspiracy tend to assume just those origins.
saul_goodman 7y ago
In all of this, folks should just go back to this interview with one of the pilots (Commander Fravor) who was one of the 4 people who actually saw the tic-tac thing first hand. Even he calls BS on some of the claims others involved (radar and technicians) have made. So, I would be careful about accepting some of the less directly involved parts of the 2004 story at face value. This doesn't diminish the incident at all, just shows how incidents like this can become twisted over time. This jumps to some of his comments about the other folks involved in the story: https://youtu.be/f7XJD_54aNk?t=549 https://youtu.be/f7XJD_54aNk?t=549 Another part of what he says: https://youtu.be/f7XJD_54aNk?t=1868 https://youtu.be/f7XJD_54aNk?t=1868 Say what you will of Corbel, but the entire 2 hours of interview are worth watching, Fravor is about as solid of a person to report this as you can get.

dfsegoat 7y ago

> Also worthy of note is that this is part of a program [1] paid by a senator in the direction of a close friend, who is a UFO enthusiast, and had to justify spending 22 million USD with some things. Per your link, the AATIP program you are mentioning only ran from 2007-2012, and was then dissolved. The new videos are from 2014/2015 etc. and with this all happening now, why do they have to justify anything for a program that no longer exists? Further, I don't think $22M really needs to be justified "with some things" when compared to the remainder of defense spending: - The Air Force is spending $850M to replace a $5 part in the W88 nuclear warheads currently in service. [1] - A single F-35 aircraft in FY2019 is $85M. [2] ... compared to these, you can probably find dozens of small DOD programs that were laughable, but still ate $20-100M with zero accountability [3]. 1 - https://www.thedrive.com/the-war-zone/30039/u-s-to-spend-hundreds-of-millions-to-replace-a-5-part-in-revamped-nuclear-weapons https://www.thedrive.com/the-war-zone/30039/u-s-to-spend-hun... 2 - https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Lockheed_Martin_F-35_Lightning_II https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Lockheed_Martin_F-35_Lightning... 3 - https://www.fbo.gov/index.php?_psort=current_set_aside_s-d-asc https://www.fbo.gov/index.php?_psort=current_set_aside_s-d-a...

saul_goodman 7y ago
I'm all for calling out BS where it exists, but lets get our facts straight. The program (AATIP) existed beyond 2012, they just changed how it was funded. Luis Elizondo, former lead investigator for AATIP, explains this here: https://youtu.be/D3r6SmrCUM0?t=706 https://youtu.be/D3r6SmrCUM0?t=706
- dfsegoat 7y ago
  I was not aware! Thanks for the education! side note: Somebody should probably clarify this in the wiki article for AATIP: > Although the official AATIP program has ended, a related group of interested professionals have extended the effort, founding a nonprofit organization called "To The Stars Academy of Arts & Science".