Late to the party on this one, but I mostly agree with the OP regarding the magnitude of the evidence. Most of the comments here attempting to explain away the

Late to the party on this one, but I mostly agree with the OP regarding the magnitude of the evidence. Most of the comments here attempting to explain away the recent Navy reports as "experimental aircraft" are perhaps uninformed. For instance, the Cdr. Fravor account published in the NYT a couple of years ago regarding the 2004 incident is extremely difficult to explain without considering otherwordly technology. For example, the instant acceleration/deceleration witnessed directly by several pilots and on multiple radar systems corresponds with exactly ZERO technology known to mankind. That type of acceleration has the same effect as smashing into a mountain at hyper-mach velocity. There is no mapping of the reported events to our current understanding of physics; it simply cannot be explained, so forget the idea that something we built could achieve those maneuvers. Also the idea that Cdr. Fravor and other pilots who've come forward with their testimony are all lying or are somehow mistaking what they saw for atmospheric light tricks is ridiculous. Similarly, the Navy UFO cases that have more recently surfaced provide yet more of the same level of evidence -- Multiple pilots, multiple radar, infrared, and other tracking systems, etc. To put forward the idea that all these people are lying or are mentally unwell or are somehow sharing a group hallucination is to suggest a far more unlikely event than the ones they reported.