8 ms·

I find this subject fascinating. As the article states, Navy pilots are on record as eye witnesses for this stuff, along with the various radar feeds, etc. I'm

• yellow_lead 3y ago
  What about 4. A collection of shadows, mistakes, pilot fatigue, and instrument malfunction?
  • v0idzer0 3y ago
    Too coincidental for pilot fatigue/shadows AND instrument malfunction to always happen at the same time in all of these cases. There are hundreds of reported instances in the past few years. This is simply not a serious explanation.
    • SonicScrub 3y ago
      Strongly disagree. The sheer number of flight hours performed by all the world's professional pilots multiplied by the average percentage of a flight that a pilot could be considered to be "fatigued", multiplied by the odds of a cosmetic/minor sensor blip occuring is still an astronomically large number. That confluence of events probably happens quite regularity. This can be acendotealy verified hanging out at any general aviation flight club, and asking pilots about the times they got temporarily confused by some aerial phenomenon that turned out to be a strange reflection off a cloud. Happens literally all the time.
      • stevenhuang 3y ago
        I would encourage you to actually look into the sort of anomalous cases we're talking about here. https://www.narcap.org/blog/narcaptr20 https://www.narcap.org/blog/narcaptr20
  • wizofaus 3y ago
    I'd even suggest a good percentage of reports are either deliberate hoaxes themselves or genuine reports of hoaxes carried out by others. If not hoaxes, then deliberate misreporting to cover up worse truths. Ultimately almost any other such explanation is vastly more likely than advanced alien species having crossed the galaxies (undetected) to visit us only to crash land on our little ball of rock.
  • belval 3y ago
    Not really into UFOs myself, but that's not what the article (the whistleblower) is claiming: > “We are not talking about prosaic origins or identities,” Grusch said. “The material includes intact and partially intact vehicles.” There is a difference between claiming to have seen the modern equivalent of the Loch Ness monster and saying "they have its body in a hangar".
    • deleted 3y ago
      [deleted]
    • spywaregorilla 3y ago
      Yeah. For example, in the Loch Ness example, they're at least claiming to have seen it.
• JPLeRouzic 3y ago
  * From another univers (in multivers) * From deep in Oceans * From subterranean * From millions of years in past * From millions of years in future
  • twic 3y ago
    * From hell (the Operation Trojan Horse theory) Functionally, all of these can be classified under the first option, "ET origin", because they all involve the revelation that some advanced intelligence unknown to the mass of humanity is active on Earth. But there is a fourth: * These craft are of natural origin Some very strange analogue of St Elmo's Fire which results in the formation of metallic spheres of unknown composition in the vicinity of jet fighters.
    • JPLeRouzic 3y ago
      > "These craft are of natural origin. Some very strange analogue of St Elmo's Fire" "we humans are property of some more highly evolved beings that live in a realm that we cannot see. Those invisible beings are immaterial: they are made of energy and Russell compares them to ball lightning." https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sinister_Barrier https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sinister_Barrier
• cozzyd 3y ago
  I'd say a combination of 2 and 3 is most likely, if it's not just a complete fabrication/mirage/misunderstanding (which is maybe even more likely...)
• nso 3y ago
  4. Dust, misidentifications, radar ghosts. David Grunch is a liar.
  • JPLeRouzic 3y ago
    David Charles Grusch
• TrainedMonkey 3y ago
  Probably a combination of 2 & 3 along with weird natural phenomena + the fact that human brains run on error prone wetware, are full of hacks, and make shit up all the time... In short, given prevalence of aliens in popular culture + brains being predictive machines + existence of things that are hard to explain = it would be far more surprising if there weren't people claiming aliens. Note 1: actual aliens would be really exciting, but Occam's Razor...
• lisasays 3y ago
  4. A bunch of well-fed military-industrial complex types, some lying, some naive and sincerely deluded -- stovepiping and embellishing each other's BS as usual.
• krapp 3y ago
  4. Misinterpretation and/or equipment malfunction and/or hoaxes. A few probably are secret military tech (nothing like antigravity, but I think most people - even in the military - probably don't have a good grasp of what true cutting edge technology is capable of,) but I think there are UFO true believers within the government trying to stir up publicity for funding[0]. To me that is the most intriguing, and plausible, explanation for a lot of this. Because remember we just went through this with the Chinese balloon shit. "Sources" in the government making the same claims. Rumors about craft defying physics. But it all turned out to be balloons and paranoia and hype. It's never aliens. It's never aliens. [0]https://nypost.com/2023/03/21/ufo-believing-pentagon-bosses-missed-spy-craft-for-years/ https://nypost.com/2023/03/21/ufo-believing-pentagon-bosses-...
• petilon 3y ago
  4. Time-traveling humans from the future. Don't discount that possibility!
  • wizofaus 3y ago
    I do. If it were possible we'd surely see them everywhere. Even if time travel was a one-way trip there's enough future billions of us that there'd be massive numbers with the sort of incurable fascination seth the past that they'd be motivated to travel back and see what it was like. Doesn't really seem any more or less likely than alien intelligence at any rate.
    • petilon 3y ago
      Time traveling humans is more likely for the following reason: It requires only one thing: worm hole or some other yet-to-be-invented mechanism for traveling to the past. For this to be alien intelligence, two things are required: First alien intelligence has to exist, and second, they too need a mechanism for speedy travel, to travel to another galaxy such that they can reach the destination within an individual alien's lifetime.
      • wizofaus 3y ago
        I'm probably more positive alien intelligence exists than I am that humanity will last long enough to discover such a mechanism. To be clear, I'd say both are quite likely - I just very much doubt the mechanism actually exists.
      • kalkaran 3y ago
        And they have to want to
      • spywaregorilla 3y ago
        describing something as yet-to-be-invented to contextually imply that it exists and will be invented is a strange proposition
      • TechBro8615 3y ago
• worik 3y ago
  4. It is optical illusions
• kipchak 3y ago
  It could also be some combination of the three, for example a craft that is human origin but derived from ET bits being presented in a pysop manner for some reason. The Navy's claimed operable AGRAV/room temperature superconductor patents and Salvadore Pais[1] add another layer of huh to the whole thing. [1]https://www.thedrive.com/the-war-zone/29232/navys-advanced-aerospace-tech-boss-claims-key-ufo-patent-is-operable https://www.thedrive.com/the-war-zone/29232/navys-advanced-a...
• clashmoore 3y ago
  Are the Navy pilots actual eye witnesses to seeing these crafts or are they eye witnesses to whatever is electronically displayed to their HUDS/Helmets/lenses? It seems every video I've come across, it was all electronic so it has me thinking just a software error.
  • black6 3y ago
    Every video I've seen, too, has been from some sort of electronic sensor. The US Navy was working on Project NEMESIS at least as far back as 2019, which sought to (and likely did) develop the means to spoof electronic signatures.
    • wil421 3y ago
      They’ve had “drones” (more like gliders) since the gulf war that can fake electronic signatures of different planes. They worked well and were targeted by Iraqi defenses.
  • deleted 3y ago
    [deleted]
  • whinenot 3y ago
    How about cell phone video?[0] [0]https://www.dvidshub.net/video/843620/navy-2021-flyby-video https://www.dvidshub.net/video/843620/navy-2021-flyby-video
    • juve1996 3y ago
      Can you point out what's happening in the video? I don't see anything
      • psiops 3y ago
        There's something captured flying by the camera as it is pointing sideways.
      • whinenot 3y ago
• Eji1700 3y ago
  You’re missing 4, which is eye witnesses are reading instruments wrong. “Yes I saw it move impossible in the camera” “Yep you’ve got a speck on your camera. “ This stuff happens all the time mixed with “yeah crazy visual stuff happens” When the alternative is that an unfathomable amount of energy was used to cross a mind boggling amount of space, you need a very bullet proof argument
  • LinuxBender 3y ago
    Perhaps number 5 could be partial hypoxia leading to hallucinations and delusions as it pertains to pilots. I would not be surprised if a pilot swore they saw a Klingon bird of prey.
• shrimpx 3y ago
  After taking the pilots' accounts on face value, this analysis gave me new insight: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=qsEjV8DdSbs https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=qsEjV8DdSbs The pilots claim they saw a flying saucer that was rotating in weird ways, and provide a grainy video that's kind of convincing. The analysis proves it was lens flare. There are additional debunked UAP videos released by the military, including one that is lens bokeh around starlight, which is debunked by showing the configuration of the "triangle UAPs" matches the positions of stars at that time, including additional evidence that the camera used on those ships has triangle aperture. This tells me there's a chance of a disappointing but realistic option 4: military incompetence. They take these videos, they don't know what they are, so they go into some data pipeline and categorized as UAP. Then people/congress become aware that there are "UAP videos", and we go through this declassification song and dance, only to get these bokeh and lens flare videos, that the military themselves do not know they are bokeh/lens flare, and they have to find out about it on YouTube. Giving the military more benefit of the doubt, the likely option is 3: psyop. They spread UAP rumors to confuse adversaries, knowing these UAP videos they have are BS. When they release these easily debunked videos, the adversaries could be further confused, still not knowing what they really have.
  • 2-718-281-828 3y ago
    for context: https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=34746738 https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=34746738
  • cypherpunks01 3y ago
    Thanks for linking this analysis, it makes a lot of sense. It's very funny how this particular video was released entitled "gimbal", as they mention. It seems to indicate that the same analysis was already done internally, but the full report wasn't shared so as to not reveal too much military tech, so all we got was the single-word video title.
  • user3939382 3y ago
    Interesting analysis but doesn’t that not make sense since the radar was tracking a fleet of the same objects? Radar wasn’t picking up a fleet of lens flares.
• jredwards 3y ago
  This reminds me of the "Liar, Lunatic, or Lord" argument that religious people use regarding Jesus. Let's not railroad the options, here. There's room for nuance (like combinations or, frankly, just misunderstandings).
  • spywaregorilla 3y ago
    what kind of nuanced compromise exists that does not paint jesus as a liar, lunatic, or lord exclusively?
    • jredwards 3y ago
      That he believed a falsehood? Does that make him a lunatic? Would that not necessarily make billions of people lunatics?
      • prawn 3y ago
        That he was misrepresented?
      • spywaregorilla 3y ago
        I do think believing that you are a deity is a sufficiently far fetched falsehood to justify calling you a lunatic. For the sake of argument I suppose I'm willing to accept "profoundly confused individual" as a fourth alternative. But I don't think it helps the rhetorical point against painting arguments for "lord lunatic or liar" as an unjustified demand for absolute beliefs. And no, you're not a lunatic for believing someone else's bullshit.
  • TechBro8615 3y ago
    That's a convenient argument and a good analogy for the UFO phenomenon, because it omits the fourth option, which is that Jesus never existed outside of a carefully constructed narrative distributed by institutional authorities with the goal of manipulating their taxpaying population.
• HeyLaughingBoy 3y ago
  > Navy pilots are on record as eye witnesses for this stuff Yeah! I used to work with someone who was a Marine F/A-18 weapons officer (back seat guy; I may have the aircraft type wrong). He knew everything there was to know about air combat & ground attack, but outside that, he was a complete moron. I mean, he seriously believed that we stole aircraft technology from aliens, because "there is no way that humans are that smart." Let's just say I have my doubts.
• WalterBright 3y ago
  The eye and your brain are easily fooled. So are instruments.
• Avshalom 3y ago
  N+1. They're 25 and they've just popped some amphetamine (now modafinil) to get them through the hangover from getting shit faced on shipboard moonshine last night.
• jackmott 3y ago
  [dead]
• notatoad 3y ago
  why is it always the navy pilots that always see the aliens, and not the commercial pilots. is it because navy pilots are more likely to be flying at some combination of high speed, bad weather conditions, or darkness that tends to make ordinary occurrences look more mysterious?
  • detrites 3y ago
    Because commercial pilots are in control of aircraft flying over densely populated areas, and often responsible for the lives of hundreds on board. A navy pilot typically just has the expensive aircraft and is somewhat expected to be crazy. So, if a commercial pilot does see such things, they'd be far less likely to report them, as it may well ruin their career. Navy pilots, on the other hand may well get some commendation for identifying an unusual, or anomalous thing (enemy tech?).
  • haswell 3y ago
    There have been reports from commercial pilots in the past few years as well. That aside, it could make logical sense that the military is seeing these more often for a few reasons: - The nature of their missions, flight speed, equipment, and flexibility to investigate further - If it’s a terrestrial adversary, it makes sense that they’d fuck with military - If it’s ET, it makes sense that they’d pay more attention to military jets than passenger jets if it’s some kind of recon
  • whinenot 3y ago
    Commercial pilots don't get scrambled to get eyes on radar anomalies in the middle of nowhere. They get paid to go from point A to point B using a pre-determined amount of fuel.
  • ryanmercer 3y ago
    >and not the commercial pilots Because they don't want to lose their job when their employer thinks they're nuts and shouldn't be flying hundreds of people.
  • stevenhuang 3y ago
    Commercial pilots see them all the time. https://www.narcap.org/blog/narcaptr20 https://www.narcap.org/blog/narcaptr20
• heavyset_go 3y ago
  > As the article states, Navy pilots are on record as eye witnesses for this stuff, along with the various radar feeds, etc. Watch the introduction to the 4 hour UAP panel that NASA hosted a few days ago[1], they address this. According to NASA, even highly trained and experienced pilots can easily be fooled, and often reported UAPs are artifacts of the technology that detects them, or are indeed things like weather balloons. For example, NASA even used the example of Navy pilots being fooled by a procession of commercial airplanes queueing to land at an airport 40+ miles away from their base. They also emphasize that radar, detection systems, etc are not scientific instruments that are suitable for the detection or analysis of this phenomenon. They emphasize that the technology that the Navy et al. use are strictly optimized for defensive/offensive interception of conventional weapons. That's to say that they're calibrated for war and not for accurate scientific observation. Going back to the procession of airplanes waiting to land, according to the instruments available to pilots and their own observations, those airplanes were doing things that were impossible to do without bending the laws of physics. Yet all they were were just a bunch of airplanes doing what all airplanes do. > Due to the supposed feeds and eye witness accounts, it seems infeasible there is a 'weather balloon' type explanation Pilots and their system are fallible, you'd have to assume some argument from authority to believe otherwise, which is why I think the military loves this conspiracy theory. It shifts criticism or suspicion of government and power to a narrative that they control and that inflates the military's competence and abilities, and assumes that the military is looking out for us and willing to tell us the truth. [1] https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=bQo08JRY0iM https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=bQo08JRY0iM
• ryanmercer 3y ago
  >There are 3 comprehensive possibilities I'd say there is a 4th comprehensive possibility: these are one or more natural phenomenon we've yet to document and may have no intelligence behind them at all.
• throwaway892238 3y ago
  There are probably 5,000 comprehensive possibilities. You could sit around all day making up "what ifs". What if it's a psyop? What if it's some meteorite that crashed into a pile of pine resin and made a composite? What if it's a fake craft two dudes in a covert research lab made to troll an intelligence service with some experimental materials? What if the dude is actually lying? Who cares? It's not going to amount to anything. Even if it exists, nobody's gonna let us see it.
  • newZWhoDis 3y ago
    Keyhole, AEGIS, and classified hydrophone systems have trans medium craft entering theater at LEO and dropping below sea level. It’s not the fucking Russians, if they could do that we’d be glass
    • TechBro8615 3y ago
      Wow all that jargon sure makes it sound legit. I'm glad these military operators have produced such infallible data. When can we look at it?
• Reubachi 3y ago
  "Navy pilots are on record" PSYops. What about being a "navy pilot" validates these claims? That's like saying "Police officers have come out on record to say that bad buys have lazer guns". Of course they would say that, they want everyone to think THEY have big lazer guns too! like any other piece of the military, Pilots are only allowed to disseminate what the current strategy-focus tells them to disseminate.
  • dragonwriter 3y ago
    > That's like saying "Police officers have come out on record to say that bad buys have lazer guns". Or, you know, the things police officers actually say about fentanyl and its magic properties.