Are the Navy UFOs "Real," or just in the Low Information Zone?

Mick West

Administrator
Staff member
Several media reports are making much of recent statements from Joseph Gradisher, the spokesperson for the Deputy Chief of Naval Operations for Information Warfare, as relayed by John Greenewald of TheBlackVault.com. Before I get into that, let's recap what I think are the most reasonable hypotheses for the three videos in questions:

Flir1 (also called Nimitz, or TicTac) is a fuzzy blob in the distance. It does not move (although it jumps around when the camera changes zoom settings or does a gimbal lock correction). There's what looks like a final "zipping away at high speed" at the end of the video, but it's actually just the camera no-longer tracking the object, combined with a change in zoom that gives the illusion of speed. See:
https://www.metabunk.org/2004-uss-nimitz-tic-tac-ufo-flir-footage-flir1.t9190/

Gimbal is a saucer-shaped infrared glare. It rotates because the camera is rotating to counter gimbal lock. We can prove this because there are other light patterns in the sky that rotate at the same time the glare rotates. The video is consistent with a jet engine several miles away. it does not have any sudden acceleration. See:
https://www.metabunk.org/nyt-gimbal-video-of-u-s-navy-jet-encounter-with-unknown-object.t9333/

Go Fast is what looks like a cool object moving rapidly across the surface of the ocean. However, the angles and range on the screen allow us to triangulate the position and speed of the object. It turns out it's actually moving quite slowly (under 50 knots) and is quite high (13,000 feet). It does not accelerate at all. In fact, it most closely resembles a balloon, or possibly even a large gliding bird. See:
https://www.metabunk.org/go-fast-footage-from-tom-delonges-to-the-stars-academy-bird-balloon.t9569/


The statements are generally framed with a lot of commentaries, paraphrasing, and older statements, which can be rather confusing - especially in secondary stories, but also in Greenwald's originals. Greenewald has not released the actual emails, so I've extracted here what was reported in his article as attributed to Gradisher.

https://www.theblackvault.com/docum...ial-phenomena-not-cleared-for-public-release/
https://www.theblackvault.com/docum...ally-acknowledged-encounters-with-phenomena/#
https://www.theblackvault.com/docum...ated-circumstances-behind-leaked-ufo-footage/
Summary: there's something in some videos that's unidentified that was observed in military airspace and the Navy did not authorize the public release of the videos and are looking into how Gimbal and Go-Fast got out.

A variety of different headlines arose from this
  • Greenwald: "U.S. Navy Releases Dates of Three Officially Acknowledged Encounters with “Phenomena”"
  • Fox News: "UFO videos are footage of real 'unidentified' objects, US Navy acknowledges"
  • Live Science: "UFOs Are Real — and You Were Never Supposed to See Them, Military Official Says"
  • The Brag: "US Navy confirms Tom Delonge’s videos contain UFO footage"
Really the headline should be: "Navy Confirms Unidentified Flying Objects are Unidentified." It's an old conflation of meanings. Of course "UFO's" are "real". But "real" here means that there are objects that people sometimes see that they can't identify. Maybe they are planes, bird, or ballons, maybe they are alien spaceships or ghosts. But to the UFO enthusiast who thinks that UFO = Aliens, then "UFO's are real" has a very different meaning.

UFOs exist in what I call the Low Information Zone (the LIZ). That's the physical region around you (or your camera) just beyond the distance where you can make out what something is. The LIZ is a curious thing in that it expands and contracts based on the lighting conditions, the size and shape of the object, the quality of your eyesight, the presence of optical aids like telescopes, and the resolution and zoom of your camera.

The Navy pilots have a LIZ in any given situation (they probably even have an acronym of their own for it). Radar can only go so far and does not always give you much information beyond position and sometimes speed. FLIR cameras have only so much zoom. The human eye has shorter limits and is subject to a variety of confounding factors.

So, regardless of any belief about aliens or secret technology of some sort, whenever you detect something flying in the LIZ, then that's automatically being to a UFO simply because there's not enough information to identify it.

If you were to suddenly change the size of the LIZ, to expand it by getting out your 10x binoculars, then the UFO often becomes an IFO. Sometimes the expansion does not work, because the object is still in the Low Information Zone, the LIZ.

And that's what we have here. There are three objects, Flir1, Gimbal and Go Fast, that are far enough away that you can't make out what they are. All the videos use the maximum optical zoom, so the pilots have pushed out the LIZ as far as it will go. Flir1 (Nimitz) is tens of miles away and in a very low-resolution video, and so appears as in indistinct blub. Gimbal has no range specified but seems to be obscured by an infrared glare, probably from the engines. it rotates optically. Go Fast is "only" 3.4 nautical miles away, but is so small (maybe six feet wide) that it occupies only a few pixels on-screen, and so again is an indeterminate blob. None of the objects in these three videos performs any physics-defying

So yes, "UFOs" are real because there are always going to be objects flying in the LIZ, the Low Information Zone, that we can't identify. I see them every day. I assume they are planes, birds, balloons, spider webs, etc, but I don't always have my binoculars with me. I'm not always able to expand the LIZ far enough.

As many people have observed in different ways since the dawn of UFOs, the border of the LIZ has been expanding over time. XKCD did a famous cartoon about this:


Of course, it's not actually settled, just pushed things back a long way, and raised some very difficult questions about why the distance to UFOs always just exceeds the power of the camera. You can't eliminate especially sneaky or lucky aliens, but it really does seem to point to the phenomena being just ordinary things that are too far away.

Back in the good old days when you were luck to be carrying a Kodak Instamatic when you saw a UFO, the photos were relatively close, just a few feet away, like this one from the 1950s. Metabunk 2019-09-18 08-39-32.jpg


But as technology improved, the LIZ got further away, but the UFOs move with the LIZ, just beyond where we could tell what they actually were, and the quality of the images remained about the same, even though now the LIZ is tens of miles out.
Metabunk 2019-09-18 08-33-13.jpg

Is it possible that there are alien craft flying around out there in the LIZ? Sure, although it does not seem particularly likely. A huge strike against the alien hypothesis is the somehow the Aliens would have to know exactly what the megapixels and a megazoom capabilities were of everyone near where they were flying, and stay in the LIZ.
 
Last edited:

Mick West

Administrator
Staff member
More details form the Navy via Roger Glassel, who published the entire response - probably some of which is cut-and-paste from the answers given to Greenwald.
https://www.facebook.com/groups/ufoupdates/permalink/10156254091656790/
The most interesting one is #9
Which raises the unfortunate possibility that we may never know what they think is in these videos, even if they are something banal.
 

Getoffthisplanet

Active Member
The wide proliferation and availability of inexpensive unmanned aerial systems (UAS) isn’t contradictory, it’s just when the UAS is *NOT* immediately identifiable we refer to it as UAP. A quadcopter is immediately identifiable. As we have previously acknowledged, the number of incursions into our ranges has increased with that wide proliferation and availability of inexpensive UAS.
So...drones? :)

Meanwhile the rest of the internet right now: U.S. NAVY ADMITS ALIENS REAL

I looked at Roger Glassel's Facebook but didn't see who he spoke with at the Navy. Gradisher?

It would be nice to be able to attribute a name to these quotes.
 

Mick West

Administrator
Staff member
That seems odd.
It does not seem odd at all. It's really a non-story, hyped initially by Greenewald, then went viral because nobody really understood what it was about, or why the Navy was keeping it classified.

Nothing has changed here. The big story boils down to:
https://time.com/5680192/navy-confirms-ufo-videos-real/
It's surprising this is news because I've never thought the videos were not real. Nor have I really seen this raised as a serious possibility. Nor is this new "it's real" really a progression from seeing the DD1910 form months ago, or the DoD's comments on that, or the email's about if that were FOIAed a few weeks ago.

So it's perfectly understandable that Gradisher is surprised there's so much attention. There's nothing to pay attention to. The videos are the same, the accounts are the same. The Navy has simply weighed in and said they are not going to say anything about the videos. So no change there.
 

deirdre

Senior Member
There's nothing to pay attention to.

[Gradisher says: ] “With respect to the other 2 videos cited, the Navy has no information on how they were released into general circulation.”
I find this statement ^^ odd. Granted Elizondo might have pulled a "Comey" and slipped the leaked info to a friend to "release them" to the company he now works for, the company that released them into general circulation... but c'mon. that's just semantics.
Unless he meant like (paraphrase) 'we have no information to share with you regarding the release into general circulation.' ??
 
Which raises the unfortunate possibility that we may never know what they think is in these videos, even if they are something banal.
I thought that displayed both the power and arrogance of the "military industrial complex" really. They wouldn't have all these training areas and high tech tracking if it wasn't for taxpapers' money. Imagine what else they cover up under the guise of "classified" not least where all the money goes.
 
I find this statement ^^ odd. Granted Elizondo might have pulled a "Comey" and slipped the leaked info to a friend to "release them" to the company he now works for, the company that released them into general circulation... but c'mon. that's just semantics.
Unless he meant like (paraphrase) 'we have no information to share with you regarding the release into general circulation.' ??
Elizondo wasn't working for the Navy so maybe that's what they meant.
 

Getoffthisplanet

Active Member
So no change there.
I agree, nothing has really changed.

Maybe he does, but I doubt that the Spokesman for the Deputy Chief of Naval Operations for Information Warfare keeps an eye on pop culture and social media regarding TTSA, UFO's, etc.

Because if he had he certainly would've understood that any bleep out of anyone "in authority" regarding TTSA, UFO's or the 3 videos, nearly instantly results in hundreds and thousands of comments, discussions, news articles, podcasts and videos across the internet.

Maybe I should've said it seems like a strikingly naive thing to say.
 

Mick West

Administrator
Staff member
I thought that displayed both the power and arrogance of the "military industrial complex" really. They wouldn't have all these training areas and high tech tracking if it wasn't for taxpapers' money. Imagine what else they cover up under the guise of "classified" not least where all the money goes.
I'm no fan of the Military-Industrial Complex, but the rationale for military things being classified by default seems like a perfectly obvious and reasonable one.
 

Joe_the_Joe

New Member
It could be that he wasn't prepared for the actual scope of this particular pseudo-Streisand effect rather than whether or not the effect occurred since some of the footage is over a decade old and all of it has already been subject to public scrutiny, whereas in his mind he was just affirming the origins and classified status of the footage.
 

Getoffthisplanet

Active Member
It could be that he wasn't prepared...
Gradishner has apparently done more than a few interviews over the past week, he appears to be quite prepared.

It seems in contrast to the "I'm surprised!" narrative in the Time article.

It's my hope the Navy's Information Warfare community would not be so taken by "surprise".
 

igoddard

Active Member
UFOs exist in what I call the Low Information Zone (the LIZ). That's the physical region around you (or your camera) just beyond the distance where you can make out what something is. The LIZ is a curious thing in that it expands and contracts based on the lighting conditions, the size and shape of the object, the quality of your eyesight, the presence of optical aids like telescopes, and the resolution and zoom of your camera.
And FLIR footage opens a Pandora's box of LIZ variants. For example, some targets might not be that far away and thus would not be in the visible-light LIZ, but due to FLIR imagery not being dictated by visible light and thus the mass-shape of objects, there is thereby less-to-no information about the actual shape of an object. The shape of an object's heat is not necessarily going to conform to the shape of its mass, creating a FLIR-specific LIZ.

So it's likely that we will continue to see a strong showing of UFO mysteries arising from FLIR footage.
 

sphinx

New Member
Is it possible that there are alien craft flying around out there in the LIZ? Sure, although it does not seem particularly likely. A huge strike against the alien hypothesis is the somehow the Aliens would have to know exactly what the megapixels and a megazoom capabilities were of everyone near where they were flying, and stay in the LIZ.
Playing devil's advocate, they could conceivably stay in the LIZ the same way that experimental aircrafts manage to do so.
 

Mick West

Administrator
Staff member
Playing devil's advocate, they could conceivably stay in the LIZ the same way that experimental aircrafts manage to do so.
Top secret experimental aircraft have a hard LIZ distance though. They can't detect what type of camera people might have nearby, so need to stay 50+ miles away from them.
 

sphinx

New Member
Top secret experimental aircraft have a hard LIZ distance though. They can't detect what type of camera people might have nearby, so need to stay 50+ miles away from them.
I agree, but UFOs could have the same hard LIZ distance. They probably could deduce needed distance from the military operations.
As a curious sidenote, Nimitz radar operators supposedly started detecting UAPs just after they instaled more powerfull radars.
Having said that, I do think that first and much more likely suspect in any such case should be a man made object.
 

Mick West

Administrator
Staff member
I agree, but UFOs could have the same hard LIZ distance.
Sure, but then that would mean every photo taken with a non-zoom camera is bogus. Should we automatically discount them?

If they are are in the LIZ, then what evidence is there that they exist, given that we'd expect regular objects in the LIZ to be unidentified by definition.

What distinguishes UFOs in photos and videos from regular objects that are far away?

I jokingly tweeted:

"U.F.O. stands for Too Far Away"
 

Z.W. Wolf

Senior Member
The article sheds some light on why the Advanced Aerospace Threat Identification Program (AATIP) exists.

Although Gradisher works for the Navy and isn't a part of AATIP, it's logical to assume the rational for AATIP is similar.

Luis Elizondo's interest in "Alien Spaceships" would seem to be purely personal; and he has misrepresented what the program is about and what his job was.
 
Last edited:

deirdre

Senior Member
What distinguishes UFOs in photos and videos from regular objects that are far away?

I jokingly tweeted:

"U.F.O. stands for Too Far Away"
Unidentifiable From Observation.

it is kinda silly to bother with "flying/floating" or "objects" for things that are in the sky. it's kinda like "duh". and sometimes people think lens flares and camera weirdness is "objects" but they aren't. I guess that's why they changed it to 'aerial phenomenon'. (that and angels don't like to be objectified. ;) )
 
The military complex is only going to release information to the public on a “need to know” basis. Does the public need to know? No. The reason. Because these objects posed no threat to the public, or to the military. If there was a Real threat, the military would have had armed planes in the air ASAP. Remember, 911 was still fresh in their memory from approx two years previous.

Here is a thought. What obligation does the military have to tell the public the truth. Zero. What makes anyone believe when they are accessing information from this government that they are going to get a truthful response? Are they under oath? No.

The military isn’t going to admit that their pilots pranked the media. But given what we have seen in the media (including the internet) recently it really isn’t about news, it is about the entertainment value to grab a share of the audience to sell products.

I believe your analysis of the objects is correct.
 
Last edited:

Agent K

Active Member
What distinguishes UFOs in photos and videos from regular objects that are far away?
Right, you'd want to rule out manmade or natural objects, which is why so many UFO sightings describe objects that "take off like a bullet." The Nimitz video appears to show that, but of course it's just an artifact, so it doesn't rule out manmade aircraft.
 

Agent K

Active Member
Unidentifiable From Observation.

it is kinda silly to bother with "flying/floating" or "objects" for things that are in the sky. it's kinda like "duh". and sometimes people think lens flares and camera weirdness is "objects" but they aren't. I guess that's why they changed it to 'aerial phenomenon'. (that and angels don't like to be objectified. ;) )
UAV already stands for unmanned aerial vehicles, and Unidentified Sensor Artifact has a confusing acronym.
 

sphinx

New Member
Sure, but then that would mean every photo taken with a non-zoom camera is bogus. Should we automatically discount them?

If they are are in the LIZ, then what evidence is there that they exist, given that we'd expect regular objects in the LIZ to be unidentified by definition.

What distinguishes UFOs in photos and videos from regular objects that are far away?

I jokingly tweeted:

"U.F.O. stands for Too Far Away"
If we speculate that they are mimicking military LIZ ranges then I would expect more "credible" close up photos in the past and less so today.
There would be no evidence of them if they are in the LIZ, but my point is that it would not be so hard for them to stay in the LIZ if they wanted to.
They would probably mostly be interested in the military in the first place given military is the only if any threat to them.
Also, the military arguably uses the most advanced technology that might be of interest.
Even if they were not actively trying to avoid detection but are interested in the military and its advanced programs that would tend to put them in the LIZ by the virtue of military trying to avoid detection as much as possible.
So my point is that it would not be so unlikely to expect them in the LIZ.
Consider this quote from the recent CNN report for example:
"The public clips capture just a fraction of the frequent incursions Navy training ranges see, he said."
https://m.cnn.com/en/article/h_3a89efbbfd2a07b96878ea83e76477a0
 

deirdre

Senior Member
So my point is that it would not be so unlikely to expect them in the LIZ.
Consider this quote from the recent CNN report for example:
"The public clips capture just a fraction of the frequent incursions Navy training ranges see, he said."
https://m.cnn.com/en/article/h_3a89efbbfd2a07b96878ea83e76477a0
Your quote -that isnt actually in quotes in your article link- doesn't support your point. There is nothing to indicate what pilots are seeing are ONLY in the LIZ. He also said (bold added for emphasis)

from post #2 above
 

Mick West

Administrator
Staff member
Your quote -that isnt actually in quotes in your article link- doesn't support your point. There is nothing to indicate what pilots are seeing are ONLY in the LIZ. He also said (bold added for emphasis)
The LIZ border is kind of like a filter. Anything that wanders across it is identified, and either dealt with appropriately: either intercepted or warned off if it's an airspace incursion, or ignored if it's benign (like a bird, stray bunch of balloons, or friendly forces)

So there loads of stuff on both sides. The unidentified stuff is probably just the same stuff, but unidentified, because it's too far away.
 

Quixotic

New Member
The most interesting one is #9
Which raises the unfortunate possibility that we may never know what they think is in these videos, even if they are something banal.
The analysis carried in these forum pages relies on the sensor, gimbal and aircraft characteristics, capabilities and limitations. The Navy has this knowledge and more and will have already carried out the relatively straightforward calculations and made deductions. Military effectiveness is all about being able to detect, identify, post-process and classify to a high probability in the presence of potentially conflicting and vague data. They will have many models and can run many simulations of how the sensors may behave with real world encounters in the many atmospheric conditions. So they have already drawn conclusions, but to release into the public domain may then expose their capability or someone may reverse engineer this. So they keep quiet and let the masses continue to speculate for entertainment.
 

igoddard

Active Member
Which raises the unfortunate possibility that we may never know what they think is in these videos, even if they are something banal.
One might think, given the unprecedented level of public-media hoopla these videos have generated that they'd be somehow obligated to ease up on their default secrecy, to make an exception. If they've determined that the Gimbal UAP rotates due to the gimbal camera -- as the fact that someone in the DoD named its file "gimbal" seems to suggest -- but they keep tight lips while the entire major media goes through cycles of 'mania' over the video, that would seem irresponsible, indeed a dramatic public disservice.

They say the videos weren't supposed to be released. But that they were is on them. Elizondo, it seems to me, did his best to go through proper procedures to secure their release, and in so doing all parties could and should have become aware. So that they got out is really on the DoD establishment. Therefore, they ought to make up for their failing to secure the videos by having that apparently difficult conversation with the public. And also trees should be made of candy. lol
 

Agent K

Active Member
https://www.theblackvault.com/docum...ial-phenomena-not-cleared-for-public-release/
Well, the DOPSR cleared the videos "for open publication" so that's their problem.
 

deirdre

Senior Member
but they keep tight lips while the entire major media goes through cycles of 'mania' over the video, that would seem irresponsible, indeed a dramatic public disservice.
Gradisher seems pretty serious that he wants pilots to report stuff. and to take the stigma out of reporting stuff. (be they indications foreign aircraft, the public screwing around in military airspace or pilots that need a break )

An official debunking of these videos would just add to the ridicule of reporting.

I could be wrong, but ive always had the impression the military views 'civilians' as lowly, and the service personnel and the safety of said personnel (as well as the country) is a more pressing issue for them.. over say a bunch of civilians believing in little green men. Civilians have been doing that for like 70? years now, its not like a few debunks (no one will believe anyway because they don't trust the government) is gonna change people's wanting to believe.
 

igoddard

Active Member
Gradisher seems pretty serious that he wants pilots to report stuff. and to take the stigma out of reporting stuff. (be they indications foreign aircraft, the public screwing around in military airspace or pilots that need a break )

An official debunking of these videos would just add to the ridicule of reporting.
That's an excellent point! So they may reason to just let the TTSA narrative run uninterrupted. If it keeps people on the look out, and pilots from being disincentivized from reporting unexpected or anomalous aircraft, the sooner we may identify Russian or Chinese drones snooping around our airspaces.
 
The military complex is only going to release information to the public on a “need to know” basis. Does the public need to know? No. The reason. Because these objects posed no threat to the public, or to the military. If there was a Real threat, the military would have had armed planes in the air ASAP. Remember, 911 was still fresh in their memory from approx two years previous.
But if this constitutes a scientific discovery then we should be told.
 
Thread starter Related Articles Forum Replies Date
Mick West Explained: New Navy UFO Videos UFO Videos and Reports from the US Navy 69
Mick West Why Michio Kaku is wrong about the UFO Burden of Proof & Navy Videos UFO Videos and Reports from the US Navy 32
Getoffthisplanet Flir1, Go Fast, Gimbal - Navy Releases New Information: Official Dates UFO Videos and Reports from the US Navy 9
Getoffthisplanet Navy spokesman Gradisher's definition of UAP UFO Videos and Reports from the US Navy 12
Mick West Cube in a Sphere UFO's Seen by Navy pilots. Radar Targets? UFO Videos and Reports from the US Navy 16
Mick West NYT: GIMBAL Video of U.S. Navy Jet Encounter with Unknown Object UFO Videos and Reports from the US Navy 452
Mick West Explained: Chilean Navy "UFO" video - Aerodynamic Contrails, Flight IB6830 Skydentify - What is that Thing in the Sky? 186
MikeG Claim: Secret Navy Electromagnetic Warfare Training Conspiracy Theories 0
TEEJ Contrails during Russian Navy Cruise Missile Strike in Syria, 2015 Contrails and Chemtrails 3
Mick West Debunked: Leaked US Navy Map, New Madrid, Submerged US General Discussion 40
Gary Cook Debunked: 'Gun used in Navy Yard shooting was an assault rifle.' General Discussion 8
Alhazred The Sane Alex Jones & the Navy Yard Shootings Conspiracy Theories 1
Mick West Washington Navy Yard Shootings - False Flag Conspiracy Theories? Conspiracy Theories 73
FreiZeitGeist HAARP-Website offline (Navy renegotiating management contract) HAARP 28
dizzle Boston: Navy Seals Boston Marathon Bombings 28
Cairenn US Navy map of US General Discussion 13
D [Possible explanation] Kevin Day (Nimitz tictac ufos) radar encounter UFOs, Aliens, Monsters, and the Paranormal 1
M Ufos arrive to the central zone of Chile. (Debunked). Skydentify - What is that Thing in the Sky? 0
Mick West TFTRH #34 - Stian Arnesen: Debunking, Censorship, 9/11, and UFOs Tales From the Rabbit Hole Podcast 0
TheoryQED El ROsario UFO spawning smaller UFOs- Filmed from two angles simultaneously [CGI] Skydentify - What is that Thing in the Sky? 6
Mick West "UAP" Causes Lockdown of White House UFOs, Aliens, Monsters, and the Paranormal 3
Mick West TFTRH #25 - Jason Bermas: Producer of Loose Change, Shade, Invisible Empire Tales From the Rabbit Hole Podcast 1
Mick West TFTRH #24: Nick Pope – Area 51, UFOs and UFOlogy Tales From the Rabbit Hole Podcast 13
Mick West TFTRH #23: Ian/TheoryQED: UFOs, Government Cover-ups, and Alien Visitors. Tales From the Rabbit Hole Podcast 32
Mick West TFTRH #22: Seth Shostak: SETI Senior Astronomer: ETs, UFO "Disclosure" Area 51 Tales From the Rabbit Hole Podcast 3
Mick West Explained: "UFOS" in Donald Trump's Crowd Photo on 4th of July UFOs, Aliens, Monsters, and the Paranormal 3
Mick West TFTRH #3 & #4 - Stian Arnesen, 9/11, Crop Circles, and Debunkers Tales From the Rabbit Hole Podcast 28
Mick West "Golden Orb" Daytime Reflective Sphere UFOs in Photos UFOs, Aliens, Monsters, and the Paranormal 42
Mick West UFOs Filmed from Moving Helicopters and Planes. Not So Fast! UFO Videos and Reports from the US Navy 6
Mick West Multiple UFOs Fly Across Moon- Birds? Skydentify - What is that Thing in the Sky? 17
Mick West Explained: A Dozen Or More Southern Valley UFOs UFOs, Aliens, Monsters, and the Paranormal 0
Mick West The role of Canopy reflections in Pilot Accounts of UFOs UFO Videos and Reports from the US Navy 11
Mick West Purple UFOs/Beams in Arizona [Insects] UFOs, Aliens, Monsters, and the Paranormal 0
Trailblazer "UFOs" in sky over London [internal camera reflection] Skydentify - What is that Thing in the Sky? 0
mickbubbamack Ufos Spokane Washington air show July 2017 [Birds] Skydentify - What is that Thing in the Sky? 3
Mick West Aguadilla Infrared Footage of 'UFOs' - Hot Air Wedding Lanterns Skydentify - What is that Thing in the Sky? 26
Mick West Some Perspective on Perspective Foreshortening - Contrails and UFOs Skydentify - What is that Thing in the Sky? 1
Mick West Argentina's Committee for Aerospace Phenomenae Research (CEFAe) Skydentify - What is that Thing in the Sky? 0
Mick West Explained: Moon Terminator/Shadow UFOs UFOs, Aliens, Monsters, and the Paranormal 1
ki_cz "UFOs" from plane over Chicago Skydentify - What is that Thing in the Sky? 3
Santa's sidekick Chemtrails, NWO, and UFOs: How many believers do these CTs have? General Discussion 72
Sagittarius The Ariel School, Zimbabwe UFO sighting - has it ever been debunked? UFOs, Aliens, Monsters, and the Paranormal 27
Mick West Identifying Landing Lights Reported as UFOs Skydentify - What is that Thing in the Sky? 38
CapnPegleg Debunked: Boyd Bushman, Area 51 scientist, claims existence of aliens in deathbed video [Hoax] Conspiracy Theories 16
Mick West Debunked: Chemtrail "Laser Line" and 4 UFOs Contrails and Chemtrails 1
Rroval Video: US Government Admits UFOs in Press Conference | Disclosure UFOs, Aliens, Monsters, and the Paranormal 3
sgirl Col. Richard French of the USAF States his Job was to Debunk UFOs - Citizen Hearing Conspiracy Theories 6
George B Debunk Bigelow Aerospace is Obsessed with UFOs and ETs General Discussion 11
Mick West Debunked: Denver UFOs [Insects] UFOs, Aliens, Monsters, and the Paranormal 11
tryblinking Dead birds? UFOs? Chemtrails? Contrails and Chemtrails 6
Related Articles


















































Related Articles

Top