Skywatcher Part II: "Mapping The Unknown"

Ann K said:
It's sad when those UAP's can't even keep in formation as well as an earthly drone swarm, isn't it...
Click to expand...

Actually, that's the argument the guy makes for why these aren't birds, they don't stay in position. First the "system operator" thought this was a stealth bomber:

1748638690240.png


I don't know where this "operator" lived or what his life was like. I can only go with personal experience, but if one lives anywhere near the central valley of California, and Barber lives at the southern end and has a business in the middle of it, you've seen this. As have millions of other people, Snow Goose migration patterns:

1748639392314.png

https://www.allaboutbirds.org/guide/Snow_Goose/maps-range

So, assuming it's a Stealth bomber is problematic to begin with. Either he's primed to assume everything he sees is a physical craft or he made a poor identification of something so obvious. But it gets better.

It's then pointed out that the geese UAPs or crafts from the bottom move out of position:

1748639726892.png

1748639878469.png



1748639818495.png


Once again he trips himself up and calls this a "flock". This formation falling apart is something birds would never do, so this can't be birds:

1748640069361.png


So, he's never seen birds realign their formations, insinuating that when birds fly in V formations they stay in lock step like a marching band. It's only anecdotal, but I've hunted a bit in the past, which includes sitting on my ass for long stretches watching snow geese do this maneuver. They're geese, not computer controlled drones.

Maybe it's just me, but this seems almost like a sketch comedy routine poking fun at overly gullible UFO people.
 
NorCal Dave said:
So, he's never seen birds realign their formations, insinuating that when birds fly in V formations they stay in lock step like a marching band.
Click to expand...
Compare:
Article:
Recently, more comprehensive videographic evidence shows that the positions of birds within the formation are actually much more fluid than first thought, and changes can occur multiple times a minute, sometimes taking less than a second for both birds to complete the maneuver.
 
NorCal Dave said:
So, he's never seen birds realign their formations, insinuating that when birds fly in V formations they stay in lock step like a marching band. It's only anecdotal, but I've hunted a bit in the past, which includes sitting on my ass for long stretches watching snow geese do this maneuver. They're geese, not computer controlled drones.
Click to expand...
Many different species of birds migrate in a V formation, not just snow geese. In Ohio it's usually ducks or Canada geese we see.
External Quote:

A V formation is a symmetric V- or chevron-shaped flight formation. In nature, it occurs among geese, swans, ducks, and other migratory birds
......
Flying in the V formation is thought by some to improve energy efficiency.[1]​[2]​[3]​[4]​[5]​[6]​Others hypothesize that it is the formation that most reliably allows a flock of large birds to fly very close together without any member of the flock being disturbed by the vortices of a bird flying ahead, while at the same time having the most favorable conditions for the optical perceptions to maintain the flight formation.[7]​[8]​ Usually, large birds fly in this formation. V formations are thought to improve the fuel efficiency of aircraft.

The V formation possibly improves the efficiency of flying birds, particularly over long migratory routes.[1]​ It is hypothesized that the birds after can take the upwash lift force due to the wingtip vortices at the tip of the wings of the lead bird.[6]​ The upwash would assists each bird in supporting its own weight in flight, in the same way a glider can climb or maintain height indefinitely in rising air. The birds are said to be able to find the place where the uplift is the most desirable either by sight or by sensing the airflow by their feathers, scientists suspect.[1]​[6]​

According to a 1970 paper, in a V formation of 25 members, each bird can achieve a reduction of induced drag and as a result increase their range by 71% while flying at a 24% lower speed.[1]​[9]​ In a 2001 Nature study, researchers used trackers on pelicans, trained to fly behind a motor boat. They found that pelicans flying alone had higher heart rate and flapped their wings more frequently compared to those flying at the same speed in V formation.[10]​[11]​
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/V_formation

As you say, they're geese ...and can make mistakes. I've watched when several different groups flew successively from a lake. Three went one direction, the fourth flew a different direction, and the fifth followed the first three. Within a few minutes, the errant fourth group returned to the pond, gabbled amongst themselves (probably saying "I thought YOU had the map!") then departed again, this time heading the right direction.
 
Mendel said:
Compare:
Article:
Recently, more comprehensive videographic evidence shows that the positions of birds within the formation are actually much more fluid than first thought, and changes can occur multiple times a minute, sometimes taking less than a second for both birds to complete the maneuver.
Click to expand...
Are you sure that's a reliable source?
External Quote:
Parents begin communicating with the young while they are still in the shell, possibly imparting wisdom and developing relationships while the goslings are still in an embryonic stage.
However, I'm not sure the principle needs much explaining, it's a simple optimisation, a trait that's advantagous and more likely to be selected for. You see it in competive runners and in particular cyclists too (perhaps even in NASCAR, but my knowledge of that is limited to "shake and bake"). Were it not to happen, that would be the interesting thing that required explanation.
 
NorCal Dave said:
Maybe it's just me, but this seems almost like a sketch comedy routine poking fun at overly gullible UFO people.
Click to expand...
No one in this world, so far as I know—and I have searched the records for years, and employed agents to help me—has ever lost money by underestimating the intelligence of the great masses of the plain people.​
—H. L. Mencken, September 18, 1926​
 
Ann K said:
Familiarity with the songs, OK. That makes sense. But it's the "imparting wisdom" bit that ventures off into woo-land.
Click to expand...
Do you speak the bird language? How do you know it can't possibly be wisdom? Do you have any evidence besides incredulity? And why do you help Phil move the goalposts?
 
While I yield to no person here present in my enjoyment of a good debate on goose wisdom, I wonder if we are getting off topic a bit? :)
 
Mick West said:
Sandhill cranes are likely, as they change formations quite a bit and will "flash" as they flap their wings alternating with gliding
Click to expand...

Watching the original video I thought the wing flap was a bit too fast for sandies, but going full screen they're not as fast as I first thought. The thing is, sandhills don't fly all that fast and often glide or soar. They look relaxed compared to geese, so if these are sandies, once the SW crew managed to lock onto them, one would think there would be more video than what they show. Seems like there should be more footage and if there is, why just this short snip-it?

Regardless, it's obviously birds. Not a class 1 tetrahedron UAP.
 
I once went off-trail on skis along the Cuyahoga River, and when I came around a bend I found that several hundred geese had settled there for the evening. I inadvertently startled a large number of them, and they circled around me at a low altitude for 10 or 15 minutes. They are spectacular when the setting sun turns their white breasts gold, then pink. They returned to land as the sun finally set, and I apologized for disturbing them and went on my way. It was a magical moment.
 
Scaramanga said:
The one thing you can absolutely guarantee with UFO 'evidence' is that there's never, ever, a wide angle photo of a UFO in glorious sharp close up detail showing the rivets on the thing. And yet, with my camera in zoom mode I can easily make out the windows on jet plane at 20,000 feet.
Click to expand...
Well, no, of course you can't see the rivets or the fine details. The flapping of their wing feathers make them hard to pick out.
 
Ann K said:
Well, no, of course you can't see the rivets or the fine details. The flapping of their wing feathers make them hard to pick out.
Click to expand...

I think what sickens me most is videos like that in the OP claiming to be using 'the scientific method' to validate or invalidate supposed evidence, when in fact the alleged evidence has not been within a million light years of the scientific method.

We are more and more getting these utterly bogus 'scientific' documentaries....it is equally happening which ghosts, bigfoot, and so on. They have become very skilled in never actually presenting any scientific evidence but making it look as if they are just ( eternally, it seems ) on the edge of it.
 
Something that's confusing me but which may have a sensible explanation: Does anyone know why the infrared version of the flock video is so damn pixelated?

PotPlayerMini64_sFs96cZhnh.png
 
Okay, it had been almost 2 months since I made myself watch Skywatcher Part II, so I decided to refresh
my memory this afternoon. I made the mistake of watching it while reclining...and yes, I did in fact fall asleep.

But before I did, I found myself (as in early April) asking:
"Is this guy about to drop the serious face, & start laughing uncontrollably, like he's in the SNL Debbie Downer sketch?" or
"Do these guys realize how much this looks like the 12 year-old boys of Oak St.,
playing as if they're top secret agents in some kind of Mission Impossible-type movie?"

I'm serious. I'm sincerely not trying to be insulting, but it just all seems so obviously cosplay...at least the
12 year-olds would break character every once in a while...it's fun, but they're all in on the joke.

For the life of me, I can not tell if any of these guys "get" how make believe all this is...
 
Fin said:
Something that's confusing me but which may have a sensible explanation: Does anyone know why the infrared version of the flock video is so damn pixelated?

View attachment 80832
Click to expand...
Not for sure, but for a point of comparison my son's IR drone. has better resolution on the visible camera than the IR one. Not as bad as this, but it would not seem unlikely that the UV cam might have poorer resolution, or just not as good a zoom.
 
JMartJr said:
Not for sure, but for a point of comparison my son's IR drone. has better resolution on the visible camera than the IR one. Not as bad as this, but it would not seem unlikely that the UV cam might have poorer resolution, or just not as good a zoom.
Click to expand...

That was going to be my first uninformed guess & makes complete sense. Thanks.
 
Mendel said:
Do you speak the bird language? How do you know it can't possibly be wisdom? Do you have any evidence besides incredulity? And why do you help Phil move the goalposts?
Click to expand...

No, that's where my goalposts always were - I quoted *that* sentence because I objected to *that* assertion - why else do you think I quoted what I did? You're being disingenuous with your accusation.

Of course conditioning and familiarisation happens in the shell, but I don't consider that "wisdom". Wisdom is a decision-making skill, conditioning's quite the opposite.
 
FatPhil said:
No, that's where my goalposts always were - I quoted *that* sentence because I objected to *that* assertion - why else do you think I quoted what I did?
Click to expand...
Assertion: "Parents begin communicating with the young while they are still in the shell"
Speculation: "possibly imparting wisdom and developing relationships while the goslings are still in an embryonic stage."
You did not clarify what you were objecting to, so I understood you to object to the assertion.
You now claim that you objected to (a part of!) the speculation only.
There is no evidence for that.
Unfortunately, your objections are also devoid of evidence, which leads to a low class of discourse.

Some light-hearted speculation does not devalue a source.
And it's completely off topic to the point I used the source for, i.e. the claim that there's videographic evidence that the birds in a V-formation rapidly change position. That topic pivot is the first goalpost shift that you're responsible for. You have no evidence that the claim is untrue, or that the source is unreliable.
If I told you here why I thought you did that, I'd probably get moderated.
 
Last edited:
I saw a Reddit post (that I can no longer find) about this so I checked out myself in Skywatchers Tic Tac video at 31 seconds they show footage of a "tic tac"


Source: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=3IBIJk2Pirk


at 36 seconds the video picture changes position in the frame, but the HUD/overlay does not move

1748765765209.png


1748765744198.png

Additionally in the blurred section on the right there's a greyer blurred section next to the blurred green text, it appears to move with the frame

1748765937309.png


1748765963787.png


We can see some changes in the visible green HUD/overlay during the video, so it's not a static image

It's possible the metadata that generates the HUD and the video stream are independent until mixed on a playback system, but the grey blurred part moving is curious if this is the case as that would make it part of the video stream
 
jarlrmai said:
It's possible the metadata that generates the HUD and the video stream are independent until mixed on a playback system, but the grey blurred part moving is curious if this is the case as that would make it part of the video stream
Click to expand...
This would be a non-issue if they released the original video files.
Disclosure now!
 
Mendel said:
Some light-hearted speculation does not devalue a source.
Click to expand...
The evidence we have is that I have decreased my evaluation of that source's credibility because of its speculation. So perhaps light-hearted speculation does devalue a source?
 
jarlrmai said:
It's possible the metadata that generates the HUD and the video stream are independent until mixed on a playback system, but the grey blurred part moving is curious if this is the case as that would make it part of the video stream
Click to expand...

That's possible. but I've never seen it happen.

Here's the clip in question


It seems odd that they are supposedly following it down, but we see no indication of this in the background. There's a light area under the "LRF" text that seems a bit like clouds, but is maybe an internal reflection.

The shifting of the image with black areas behind it looks like image stabilization, but that is usually something you see in post, and you'd expect the UI to move too.

Speaking of the UI.The text "LRF: ARMED" seems like common text, but "VALID: INVALID" is not, and makes no sense.

I'm leaning towards this being a simulated display.
 
jarlrmai said:
I'm not so sure, we see more of it in the main Skywatcher vids,
Click to expand...

Hmm, yes we do
2025-06-04_15-04-30.jpg


Interesting that we can see the text they have blurred out. Distance, Altitude, Speed, and the FOV (Zoom).

Why would they do that?

A second after that frame, we see this map, same software.
2025-06-04_15-05-38.jpg



But what is it? ChatGPT tells me it's the L3Harris MX-GUI. I can't find any info on this. Possibly it's software that synthesizes different views from the raw video and embedded data - so you can adjust the UI later.
 
I think the UI is added as a layer to the stabilized video, it is not part of the raw video coming from the recording device. It's possible they have the camera feed coming in and are applying post-sensor stabilization on the full frame of the video and that is then getting merged into another video stream that is getting displayed on their screen which has the UI elements on it, and then they are recording that as the final video, but that seems like a bad idea if it means they're losing the raw camera feed.

jarlrmai said:
I'm not so sure, we see more of it in the main Skywatcher vids,
Click to expand...
For reference that view of their computer display, and one from a different angle, is at 6m07s in the 'Part 2' video: https://youtu.be/JUthXIGUsq8?t=370

Here's the best frame I could get from it:
frame_000486.png


The LRF section in the top right is hard to read. The first line in particular, which looks like something like "LRF: FB546". It definitely does not say "ARMED" though like 1:12 tictac clip says. It also has some of the values in magenta and in yellow, rather than all green like the video file they provided later, which could suggest that maybe LRF: ARMED is normally rendered in green, and LRF: FB546 (or whatever) is normally rendered in magenta, but it seems odd for VALID: INVALID to be in green and VALID: WAITING to be in yellow, since INVALID seems like a more abnormal state which would not use green. It could suggest these are editable elements they are adding to the raw camera feed.

Code: 
LRF: FB546
VALID: WAITING
LRF SR: -

lrf-frame-486.png


In the 1:12 video clip of the tictac he's talking about the elevation angle and the zoom factor. It would be really useful to know the FOV but it doesn't seem to be provided in that video, rather there's unitless W->T (wide->telephoto) slider. Here's my understanding / guesses for the on screen elements:

Screenshot 2025-06-01 at 5.35.09 PM.png


Interestingly enough though if you go to the frame from the documentary above, that lower right section is not censored and there is a FOV. Again it is hard to read though. I think it looks like either 1.1, 1.2, or 1.3 degrees. It does raise the question of why they censored the FOV from the video they released. This screenshot below also has 4 short lines of text, while the screenshot above from the final released video has what looks more like 2 lines of longer text. I think again suggests these elements are post-camera, they are rendering this on their computer, adding these elements to the video after the video has already been recorded, and applying stabilization to the raw video before adding this UI layer.

doc-screen-fov.png


Lol @Mick West was typing at the same time as me.
Interesting that we can see the text they have blurred out. Distance, Altitude, Speed, and the FOV (Zoom).

Why would they do that?

...

Possibly it's software that synthesizes different views from the raw video and embedded data - so you can adjust the UI later.
Click to expand...
Agree with this^
 
Last edited:
These cameras record FMV (Full Motion Video), which has a MISB format data track along with the video, typically combined in a .TS file. Sitrec supports extracting the camera position and heading from MISB data, and so if they released the actual FMV video we could analyze it in a more useful way.
 
Calter said:
Is anyone familiar with this system to know what might be getting censored on the top left?
View attachment 79095
From another part of the video I figured the bottom right seems to be
Distance, Altitude, Speed and FOV
View attachment 79096
Click to expand...
That is a counter drone system manufactured by a company called AVT. Look up AVT Australia and look on their website for their CUAS system. The parts of the screen that are blurred out are the GPS info, etc
 
Mendel said:
This would be a non-issue if they released the original video files.
Disclosure now!
Click to expand...
They will not do that because it would reveal the coordinates where it was taken, and the fact the video was captured way before SkyWatcher existed, which means they didn't record it to begin with.
 
Mick West said:
Hmm, yes we do
View attachment 81029

Interesting that we can see the text they have blurred out. Distance, Altitude, Speed, and the FOV (Zoom).

Why would they do that?

A second after that frame, we see this map, same software.
View attachment 81030


But what is it? ChatGPT tells me it's the L3Harris MX-GUI. I can't find any info on this. Possibly it's software that synthesizes different views from the raw video and embedded data - so you can adjust the UI later.
Click to expand...
It is mfr by AVT. Google AVT Australia. Look at their CUAS package and you will see that is what it is. They are also using the AVT camera, the tan one.
 
Last edited:
You must log in or register to reply here.

Similar threads

Fin
"Tetra Class" UAP "Leaked" (more birds)
Replies
7
Views
1K
jarlrmai
jarlrmai
flarkey
ASA Report ID: CIV-2023-261 - weird object
Replies
10
Views
428
JMartJr
JMartJr
Mick West
Weaponized: Triangle Formation UAP in the Persian Gulf
Replies
32
Views
3K
JFDee
JFDee
flarkey
Psionic Contact with UFOs near Skinwalker Ranch
2
Replies
66
Views
5K
Mick West
Mick West
W
Alien Autopsy 2008
Replies
0
Views
164
Wonko
W

Latest posts

Trending content

Back
Top