Navy Officially Releases 3 UFO Videos

Discussion in 'UFOs & Sightings' started by wwkirk, Apr 27, 2020.

  1. Spaceman spiff

    Spaceman spiff Honorable

    Messages:
    419
    Probably still more of an expert on this phenomenon than your average talking head like Neil Tyson, sadly.
     
    Last edited: May 3, 2020
    • Agree Agree x 2
  2. Thomas R. Morrison

    Thomas R. Morrison Administrator

    Messages:
    1,142
    It's funny you should post this - today I was listening to an old Art Bell interview with Greer from September of 2006, and Greer was talking about the meeting he had with an Admiral who inquired about a back-engineering program operating under a code name that apparently Greer had given to him, and how that Admiral at the top of the US intelligence apparatus had been denied access to that program. I had assumed that Greer was talking smack, but now it's clear that he was talking about the meeting with Dr. Mitchell and Dr. Davis and Admiral Wilson that recently yielded the Wilson memo leak. Weird to see that even wayward New Agers like Greer can help move this field forward in unexpected ways.

    Time will tell ole friend. I can see why you'd take such a cynical position (because history has usually confirmed our most cynical suspicions). But on close inspection I can see valid reasons why this situation won't just be a repeat of similar past episodes.

    I think it's always important to bear in mind that new things do happen...even though novelty is usually under-represented in the data. For one thing, this isn't just a lone base commander sending out a press release, only to be squashed by the top brass at the DoD within 24 hours - we now have major admissions from the official PR departments of the Navy and the DoD...so this time is very different: the Navy and the DoD can't suddenly dismiss these statements as an aberration by some maverick peon - these statements have the official seal of approval from top management. You can't redact statements at that level, without seriously and permanently compromising the credibility of everything that you say in the future. And their credibility is their central asset - they depend on it to lie us into every new mass-murder operation abroad from Iraq to Libya and Afghanistan to Syria and Yemen. So I think it's extremely unlikely that they'd be willing to flush their greatest asset for manufacturing unquestioning public consent for unjust wars to defend the PetroDollar, just to discredit a handful of UFO disclosure advocates like you and me that nobody's listening to anyway.

    They had 16 years to come up with an explanation of the Tic-Tac incidents, and 5 years to explain the Gimbal incident...and they just admitted that they're completely stumped. If they suddenly turn around and discredit those incidents and the footage with some mundane explanation, then they're the ones who are going to look incompetent and untrustworthy. I don't think they'd do that to themselves. These people have been winning the game for decades...they're not going to suddenly wet the bed now
     
    • Like Like x 1
    • Thanks Thanks x 1
  3. Spaceman spiff

    Spaceman spiff Honorable

    Messages:
    419
    This is what the official release says: "The aerial phenomena observed in the videos remain characterized as ‘unidentified", some people including skeptics say theres some weasel wording in there. That its not clear.



    Theres something not right here. What troubles me is that TTSA has given some contradictory claims regarding these videos. Something they still havent fixed. The description on their site for the Gofast vid for example says it is moving fast and on low altitude, while the math that has been done to the video by several other people in addition to Mick West shows thats not the case, its mostly a parallax effect on a high altitude object. Why are they not fixing this? Its been there for a long time, Mick also debunked it a long time ago.

    If they are more intrested in making their History Channel show than fixing these errors, we have a problem here.

    Also why bring that video along anyway, if some math can show its not as it appears? Did they not do this analysis when they were at AATIP or the Navy and triple check it, or did they simply miss something this simple? Did the purposefully pick a video of a common object into the mix? Why in the hell would you do that, if youre trying to prove UAPs are real?

    Even if youre trying to say their doing a scam, it makes little sense theyd left it like this if they know its a mundane object, theyre not stupid, these are ex-intelligence people, they didnt think people would comb through everything they bring out or say? It would just put holes in their ship.

    Do some of these errors, like the presentation Mylar balloon, this, the DC photo thing in Italy, flaunting Arts Parts and Lazars book, to you seem like they show either repeated incompetence for people trying to get the public to take UFOs seriously, or manufactured errors that are purposefully put into the mix, to keep the whole message mixed?

    What message are they really trying to get along here, and why?
     
    Last edited: May 4, 2020
    • Like Like x 1
  4. Dejan Corovic

    Dejan Corovic Noble

    Messages:
    941
    Back on Mick's rotating glare and his one-dimensional analysis. First and foremost, glares do not rotate when the camera rotates. What rotates is the sensor, not the glare. And specifically only CCD sensors have this problem because leaking of current along the whole vertical column of individual sensor units. CMOS sensors are immune to blooming. Here is what expert site says:

    " Why does 'blooming' happen?

    Blooming occurs when the charge in a pixel exceeds the saturation level and the charge starts to fill adjacent pixels. Typically CCD sensors are designed to allow easy vertical shifting of the charge, but potential barriers are created to reduce flow into horizontal pixels. Hence the excess charge will preferentially flow into the nearest vertical neighbors. Blooming, therefore, produces a characteristic vertical streak, e.g. see the image below right."
    source: CCD Blooming and Anti-Blooming | Can Anti-Blooming Sensors Help - Andor Learning Centre- Oxford Instruments

    That means that if your sensor IS NOT CCD sensor, there will be no blooming. So the whole Mick's theory fails. Not to mention if one de-rotates sensor with 4-th servo.

    Now the question is, is the particular thermal vision sensor that F-18 was using CCD, CMOS, or something else? Obviously if that is not military secret.
     
    Last edited: May 4, 2020
    • Like Like x 1
    • Awesome Awesome x 1
  5. Spaceman spiff

    Spaceman spiff Honorable

    Messages:
    419
    Christophe Spitzer posted on Facebook how its doubtful the Flir1 video is showing a plane, like Mick and some other people claim.
     
    Last edited: May 4, 2020
    • Thanks Thanks x 1
  6. Dejan Corovic

    Dejan Corovic Noble

    Messages:
    941
    Mick said lots of useful things.

    One of them is the thermal sensors have this sharpening algorithm and he had shown few examples. Algho's purpose in life is to remove hallo glare around an object and highlight the contour of the object. But le problem with hallo glare is that it obscures the background information and one can't make something that is not there. That's why the gimbal video shows white hallo around the object. That white hallo is not an atmospheric effect, it's, unfortunately, a very virtual image created by algho.

    One possible artifact created by glare cleaning algho. are possibly two apparent spikes in the middle and at a top and the bottom of the sharpened image. That means while object was real, those two spikes might had not been real.
     
    • Like Like x 1
  7. Spaceman spiff

    Spaceman spiff Honorable

    Messages:
    419
    Last edited: May 8, 2020
  8. Thomas R. Morrison

    Thomas R. Morrison Administrator

    Messages:
    1,142
    Nah. New video about the same old shit. There are five independent rotations, and at least four of them are abrupt - unlike the single smooth rotation that we see in some IR footage as the angle relative to the target is shifting. And three of those four rotations happen well beyond the 3-degree range that Mick West attributes to internal gimbal rotations within the ATFLIR pod. So his hypothesis doesn't explain those rotations. Strangely, he never mentions the fact that most of the rotations happen beyond that 3-degree window where mirror rotations inside the pod transpire:

    14 deg L to 13 deg L - rotate and stop
    7 deg L to 6 deg L - rotate and stop
    3 deg L to 2 deg L - rotate and stop
    2 deg L to 2 deg R - the field of view rotates
    5 deg R to 6 deg right - final rotation and stop

    And frankly the silhouette of the object in the footage doesn't resemble the rear-view examples of jets that he's shared.

    I'd love to see a credible explanation for this footage. I'm just not willing to willfully overlook all of the data points that don't conform to his model, because I'd rather not know what's in that footage than believe a shoddy and at best incomplete hypothesis like the one he's offering.

    I wish that an ATFLIR analyst would surface to offer an expert opinion on this footage. Mick West is certainly no expert. Maybe the reason why nobody with pertinent professional credentials has come forward with a prosaic explanation, is that there isn't one.
     
    • Awesome Awesome x 2
  9. The shadow

    The shadow The shadow knows!

    Messages:
    3,831
  10. Spaceman spiff

    Spaceman spiff Honorable

    Messages:
    419
    Phil Plaits article is old news. Another a priori guy who blocks people that post counters.
     
    • Like Like x 1
    • Agree Agree x 1
  11. Dejan Corovic

    Dejan Corovic Noble

    Messages:
    941
    For example, Mick's analysis is good but at least 90% incomplete. Based strictly on what Mick said an expert would still have a ton of questions to ask. For starters, in his video, Mike implies that there are only 2 servos, while according to the patent there are 4 servos. 4 servos are specifically used to avoid gimbal lock. But Mick still deserves credit for using relatively scientific methods and not regular ad hominem attacks, so frequent in overheated UFO debates.

    I've tried to look into it, but it's too much work. There are 11 correction mirrors and prisms in that patent. It's certainly don't have time to dive all the way into it.

    So it's exactly as @Thomas R. Morrison said, we need an expert to dive into it. For starters, as stated above, after the thermal camera's sharpening algho. cleaned up glare we should be able to see two engine exhausts, but there are none. Even to undecided observer object still looks more like a UFO than as one or two jet engines.
     
    • Like Like x 1
    • Awesome Awesome x 1
  12. Spaceman spiff

    Spaceman spiff Honorable

    Messages:
    419
    Some people are now debating could something like this explain the Nimitz encounter?

    U.S. Navy Laser Creates Plasma ‘UFOs’

    To a layman this would be more likely than us having super advanced tech or it being aliens, sure. Another explanation thrown into the mix of UAP sightings, for the future.

    Does it fit into all the aspects of these particular cases tough?
     
    Last edited: May 11, 2020
    • Like Like x 1
    • Thanks Thanks x 1
    • Agree Agree x 1
  13. Dejan Corovic

    Dejan Corovic Noble

    Messages:
    941
    Yeah, that's a way to blow up military secrets. Just talk ufos :-( .

    Anyway, a very good find. Thanks.
     
  14. nivek

    nivek As Above So Below

    Messages:
    18,529
    I tend to agree with something the article stated, "It is unlikely the Pentagon would release videos of their own secret weapon in a bizarre double bluff."...Its a nice neat explanation to use for the debunkers and skeptics, easier for them to call the UFOs as 'Navy lasers' instead of giving them the possibility of being alien...

    ...
     
    • Like Like x 1
  15. Dejan Corovic

    Dejan Corovic Noble

    Messages:
    941
    News lead on CNN is that "
    Pentagon task force to release new report on UFO encounters"

    But I can't get link to work in the post

     
    Last edited: Jul 31, 2020 at 9:15 AM
  16. wwkirk

    wwkirk Celestial

    Messages:
    2,264
    Me either! Weird!
     
  17. The shadow

    The shadow The shadow knows!

    Messages:
    3,831

Share This Page