4 ms·

The videos have been explained: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Le7Fqbsrrm8 https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Le7Fqbsrrm8 The pentagon released them because they

The videos have been explained: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Le7Fqbsrrm8 https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Le7Fqbsrrm8 The pentagon released them because they were getting sick of FOIA requests from the mob of people the To The Stars folks have been rallying. GAO is currently reviewing the contracts granted to those folks as well.

nchi3 5y ago
That video only explains the video footage if you assume everyone who were part of that operation are lying. There were plenty of people who saw it on their radars, and at least one of them was a very highly ranked military.
- jasonwatkinspdx 5y ago
  The radar issue is discussed in the video. What he says is entirely accurate. Despite how capable these radars are, they don't prevent the operator doing the equivalent of asking the wrong question. Eyewitness testimony, even from experts, is notoriously unreliable. However everything in the testimonies so far is consistent with misunderstanding parallax.
  - nchie 5y ago
    His radar explanation for FLIR doesn't really hold well if you take their stories into account though. There's a limit to how far away it could have been since they're saying they saw it near sea level below where they were. He also doesn't explain why the jet engines of said plane didn't show up as a different color on the IR camera. Eyewitness testimonies are not very reliable, no, but unless they're lying, there was definitely something unexplained going on there. It's possible there's an explanation which covers all of it, but Mick West's doesn't. Not to mention that he's a game developer and not an aerospace engineer. I really doubt he has any experience using the systems that he's explaining. I would love to see that video "peer-reviewed" by someone who has the credentials to talk about those things.
zionic 5y ago
That video was debunked, the author clearly has no idea how these systems work. >GAO is currently reviewing the contracts granted to those folks as well. The inspector general is investigating the complete and total failure of our bureaucracy to report and respond to these things.
gadf 5y ago
Hahaha. "Debunking" video by Mick West. He's the guy that thinks the Navy can't tell the difference between a bird, and an aircraft. A bug on a sensor and the plane. Desperate mental gymnastics a crazy attempt to confirm existing biases and preserve a belief system he feels is threatened by data. Why have anything to do with someone so trapped like that?

nchi3 5y ago

That video only explains the video footage if you assume everyone who were part of that operation are lying. There were plenty of people who saw it on their radars, and at least one of them was a very highly ranked military.

jasonwatkinspdx 5y ago
The radar issue is discussed in the video. What he says is entirely accurate. Despite how capable these radars are, they don't prevent the operator doing the equivalent of asking the wrong question. Eyewitness testimony, even from experts, is notoriously unreliable. However everything in the testimonies so far is consistent with misunderstanding parallax.
- nchie 5y ago
  His radar explanation for FLIR doesn't really hold well if you take their stories into account though. There's a limit to how far away it could have been since they're saying they saw it near sea level below where they were. He also doesn't explain why the jet engines of said plane didn't show up as a different color on the IR camera. Eyewitness testimonies are not very reliable, no, but unless they're lying, there was definitely something unexplained going on there. It's possible there's an explanation which covers all of it, but Mick West's doesn't. Not to mention that he's a game developer and not an aerospace engineer. I really doubt he has any experience using the systems that he's explaining. I would love to see that video "peer-reviewed" by someone who has the credentials to talk about those things.

zionic 5y ago

That video was debunked, the author clearly has no idea how these systems work. >GAO is currently reviewing the contracts granted to those folks as well. The inspector general is investigating the complete and total failure of our bureaucracy to report and respond to these things.

gadf 5y ago

Hahaha. "Debunking" video by Mick West. He's the guy that thinks the Navy can't tell the difference between a bird, and an aircraft. A bug on a sensor and the plane. Desperate mental gymnastics a crazy attempt to confirm existing biases and preserve a belief system he feels is threatened by data. Why have anything to do with someone so trapped like that?