4 ms·

A copy for EU readers: https://web.archive.org/web/20210528131648/https://www.mysterywire.com/ufo/ufos-swarm-uss-omaha/ https://web.archive.org/web/20210528131

A copy for EU readers: https://web.archive.org/web/20210528131648/https://www.mysterywire.com/ufo/ufos-swarm-uss-omaha/ https://web.archive.org/web/20210528131648/https://www.myste... Debunking by Thunderf00t: https://youtu.be/Th4VlqQyVr4 https://youtu.be/Th4VlqQyVr4

gfodor 5y ago
The video in that debunk is obviously a plane and also has literally zero to do with the more interesting disclosures from the military.
romseb 5y ago
Original story would be https://www.extraordinarybeliefs.com/news4/navy-ufo-radar-data https://www.extraordinarybeliefs.com/news4/navy-ufo-radar-da...
graderjs 5y ago
Your "debunking" video has already been debunked: your video released on May 9, the radar data you are pretending to debunk was released on May 27. Your linked video does not address the footage released today! :p ;) xx
robkop 5y ago
I'd take any "debunking" video from that creator with a small foothill of salt. I feel like a long time ago he made genuinely insightful journalism into scams/ falsities but it seems a few years ago it just turned into a pessimists reaction video channel. Even just looking at that video now, you can see it has been "debunked" by this latest release of info and 5 seconds of looking through the comments and you can see people pointing out falsehoods stated in the video.
- gspr 5y ago
  Of course people point out things they think are falsehoods in his debunking. It's YOUTUBE. And the guy has (in a very rational and sensible way) angered a lot of Muskrats over the years – no wonder he attracts such comments. Would you care to actually point out what parts of Thunderf00t's debunking you object to? I also cannot fathom how a real scientist debunking wishful thinking gets labeled a "pessimist" by the science fans (I'm not calling you a science fan, I'm talking about the horde of Muskrats that are very angry with Mason). That being said: I do believe the stuff this article is about is different from what Mason debunks in his video (his video predates this release), so I don't think we should consider the two together at all.

gfodor 5y ago

The video in that debunk is obviously a plane and also has literally zero to do with the more interesting disclosures from the military.

romseb 5y ago

Original story would be https://www.extraordinarybeliefs.com/news4/navy-ufo-radar-data https://www.extraordinarybeliefs.com/news4/navy-ufo-radar-da...

graderjs 5y ago

Your "debunking" video has already been debunked: your video released on May 9, the radar data you are pretending to debunk was released on May 27. Your linked video does not address the footage released today! :p ;) xx

robkop 5y ago

I'd take any "debunking" video from that creator with a small foothill of salt. I feel like a long time ago he made genuinely insightful journalism into scams/ falsities but it seems a few years ago it just turned into a pessimists reaction video channel. Even just looking at that video now, you can see it has been "debunked" by this latest release of info and 5 seconds of looking through the comments and you can see people pointing out falsehoods stated in the video.

gspr 5y ago
Of course people point out things they think are falsehoods in his debunking. It's YOUTUBE. And the guy has (in a very rational and sensible way) angered a lot of Muskrats over the years – no wonder he attracts such comments. Would you care to actually point out what parts of Thunderf00t's debunking you object to? I also cannot fathom how a real scientist debunking wishful thinking gets labeled a "pessimist" by the science fans (I'm not calling you a science fan, I'm talking about the horde of Muskrats that are very angry with Mason). That being said: I do believe the stuff this article is about is different from what Mason debunks in his video (his video predates this release), so I don't think we should consider the two together at all.