4 ms·

Agree, you have the pentagon with its task force looking into ufos/uaps under a formerly secret program - https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Unidentified_Aerial_Phe

Agree, you have the pentagon with its task force looking into ufos/uaps under a formerly secret program - https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Unidentified_Aerial_Phenomena_Task_Force https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Unidentified_Aerial_Phenomena_... You have Commander Fravor and other decorated US fighter pilots with both eyewitness accounts, video evidence, and radar evidence on numerous encounters with unidentified craft(NYTimes reported on these videos as well) - https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Pentagon_UFO_videos https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Pentagon_UFO_videos As for the 180 days to release everything about UFO's it is mentioned in this CNN article - https://www.cnn.com/2021/01/10/us/ufo-report-emergency-relief-bill-trnd/index.html https://www.cnn.com/2021/01/10/us/ufo-report-emergency-relie...

swebs 6y ago
>https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Pentagon_UFO_videos https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Pentagon_UFO_videos There's more in better info in the original USS Nimitz UFO Incident page. But Wikipedia authors scrubbed it when they merged the pages for whatever reason. https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=USS_Nimitz_UFO_incident&oldid=959589757 https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=USS_Nimitz_UFO_in...
- jk7tarYZAQNpTQa 6y ago
  Wikipedia editors have a clear stance against anything fringe, which is very wrong IMO. As an example, take this sentence from the intro for the Project Blue Book page [1]: By the time Project Blue Book ended, it had collected 12,618 UFO reports, and concluded that most of them were misidentifications of natural phenomena (clouds, stars, etc.) or conventional aircraft. According to the National Reconnaissance Office a number of the reports could be explained by flights of the formerly secret reconnaissance planes U-2 and A-12.[2] A small percentage of UFO reports were classified as unexplained, even after stringent analysis. That "small percentage" is actually 22%, as indicated many paragraphs below. And if we only consider the "Highest quality reports" category, the reports deemed unidentified goes up to 35%. That's not a "small percentage". [1] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Project_Blue_Book https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Project_Blue_Book

swebs 6y ago

>https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Pentagon_UFO_videos https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Pentagon_UFO_videos There's more in better info in the original USS Nimitz UFO Incident page. But Wikipedia authors scrubbed it when they merged the pages for whatever reason. https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=USS_Nimitz_UFO_incident&oldid=959589757 https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=USS_Nimitz_UFO_in...

jk7tarYZAQNpTQa 6y ago
Wikipedia editors have a clear stance against anything fringe, which is very wrong IMO. As an example, take this sentence from the intro for the Project Blue Book page [1]: By the time Project Blue Book ended, it had collected 12,618 UFO reports, and concluded that most of them were misidentifications of natural phenomena (clouds, stars, etc.) or conventional aircraft. According to the National Reconnaissance Office a number of the reports could be explained by flights of the formerly secret reconnaissance planes U-2 and A-12.[2] A small percentage of UFO reports were classified as unexplained, even after stringent analysis. That "small percentage" is actually 22%, as indicated many paragraphs below. And if we only consider the "Highest quality reports" category, the reports deemed unidentified goes up to 35%. That's not a "small percentage". [1] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Project_Blue_Book https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Project_Blue_Book