Claim that the Nimitz FLIR1 object could not be a plane because it would have been Identified

jackfrostvc

Active Member
There was this un confirmed post on reddit a few weeks back. But he deleted his post recently. No one knows if he was on the level or not
He also made another post reply which I didn't grab, were he said he was airforce, and that they were also testing a new aircraft - and I think he said it was the F-22. Looking up his username, it did seem like he was airforce at the time.


1620807979499.png
 
Last edited:

Max Phalange

Active Member
There was this un confirmed post on reddit a few weeks back. But he deleted his post recently. No one knows if he was on the level or not
He also made another post reply which I didn't grab, were he said he was airforce, and that they were also testing a new aircraft - and I think he said it was the F-22. Looking up his username, it did seem like he was airforce at the time.


1620807979499.png
Removeddit caught some but not all of his deleted responses. A couple of interesting comments, though it's all completely unsubstantiated, of course - https://archive.ph/eXvYP

 

DebunkMee

New Member
This shows 3°R and +6° (Not 0° and -5°)

Well this is interesting...

You mean 4150? How could you determine that from that poor copy?

I guess they might have made the following mistake: they saw 5° and saw the object below the artificial horizon so assumed this was -5°? Underwoods inconsistent testimony might have also pushed them in the wrong direction.
Did the lack of reliable radar data force Underwood & his co-pilot to manually read the initial radar track files and manually point the ATFLIR themselves towards it, or did it orientate itself?

Also, do we have the entire video from the point where the ATFLIR starts tracking the object? Otherwise the positions could have changed from the start of the tracking to the start of the video we see, which would explain the inconsistency.
 

FatPhil

Active Member
(Off topic, but - Matt Parker did a good video on the likelyhood of events with extremely low probabilities actually occuring Source: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=8Ko3TdPy0TU
)

He did a closely-related followup very recently which also warns against misinterpretation of incredibly low odds:
"How did the 'impossible' Perfect Bridge Deal happen?" (minor cosmetic edit, I suck at BBcode)
Source: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=s9-b-QJZdVA


This time, the warning is that the stated odds usually contain implicit assumptions (mostly of some kind of "randomness") that doesn't hold true. Recent cases would include various (at least 3 completely different ones come to mind, not just cookie-cutter repeats of the same mistake) of the "election fraud" claims which have relied on incredible probabilities, several of which have had their own threads here on MB.

(I appreciate that this little subthread has deviated from the core claim of this thread, we're in the realms of learning the tools to help debunking, rather than doing any debunking.)
 

gtoffo

Active Member
Did the lack of reliable radar data force Underwood & his co-pilot to manually read the initial radar track files and manually point the ATFLIR themselves towards it, or did it orientate itself?

Also, do we have the entire video from the point where the ATFLIR starts tracking the object? Otherwise the positions could have changed from the start of the tracking to the start of the video we see, which would explain the inconsistency.

According to the pilots they used the radar track to point ATFLIR but we have no way of determining that from the video for sure.

The video is almost certainly not the unedited original. This was probably cut and the original full length video is probably lost at this point.

The reason is tapes are usually left running once they are turned on and left running. So even if the video started when we see it at the very least it would have kept running for a long time afterwards.

It might not have shown anything though or maybe just Underwood trying to find the object again.

The fact Underwood could not "reacquire" the object either tells us how hard it is to manually slew ATFLIR precisely to an airborne target or that the target moved unpredictably and was lost.
 

Mick West

Administrator
Staff member
The reason is tapes are usually left running once they are turned on and left running. So even if the video started when we see it at the very least it would have kept running for a long time afterwards.

It might not have shown anything though or maybe just Underwood trying to find the object again.

The fact Underwood could not "reacquire" the object either tells us how hard it is to manually slew ATFLIR precisely to an airborne target or that the target moved unpredictably and was lost.
Underwood said there was nothing worth talking about on the rest of the video.
UNderwood - NOTHING WORTH TALKING ABOUT - NOTHING EXCEPTIONAL.jpg

Although he probably has a different idea of what is interesting here. I'm really interested in how the target was acquired on video - i.e. how it first shows up. Then I'm also interested in what he did after it drifted off the left side.
 

jackfrostvc

Active Member
@Mick West

In my opinion , if they are not forthcoming with the full video, IMO it could be that there is something to hide on the full video. Not saying there is, but it raises suspicions and with that, I'd certainly suggest getting the longer video via FOIA
 

jackfrostvc

Active Member
Also, looks like the Wing woman that was with Fravor has come out to tell her story. She will be on 60 minutes

1621035762167.png
 
Last edited by a moderator:

jarlrmai

Senior Member
According to the pilots they used the radar track to point ATFLIR but we have no way of determining that from the video for sure.

The video is almost certainly not the unedited original. This was probably cut and the original full length video is probably lost at this point.

The reason is tapes are usually left running once they are turned on and left running. So even if the video started when we see it at the very least it would have kept running for a long time afterwards.

It might not have shown anything though or maybe just Underwood trying to find the object again.

The fact Underwood could not "reacquire" the object either tells us how hard it is to manually slew ATFLIR precisely to an airborne target or that the target moved unpredictably and was lost.

They say they used the RADAR tracks to point the ATFLIR, the tracks they had were aging tracks ie they were picked up a while ago and since there was no new update the current position of the track was based on prediction from the last actual contact.

All we know from the video is that the ATFLIR was not pointing (slaved) at a RADAR track in the video, as stated before if it were SLAVE or L+S would be boxed. It could have been slaved just before the video, but this is never shown, hence why we'd like to see from before the video. It runs counter to what they say in the report though, they never mention it not being slaved but the video clearly shows it is not.

Underwood not being able to reacquire the target means the RADAR could not acquire it, nothing to do with the ATLFLIR which was happily tracking the object using it's optical tracking until it was zoomed and lens changed finally losing optical track right at the end of the video.

This is why the rest of the video is so important, there seems to be some implication that the object performs some sort of high speed acceleration, which Mick has already shown not to be the case, this means the object would still have been there, the ATLFIR could likely easily have been slewed to it manually or zoomed back out, it was not moving quickly.
 

Lu Ann Lewellen

New Member
Underwood claimed that it was him who coined the term in the first place. The others must have adopted it immediately.

https://nymag.com/intelligencer/201...o-q-and-a-with-navy-pilot-chad-underwood.html

The problem is indeed that the usage of the term in both events suggests that the object in the video and the object in Fravor's encounter were identical, while there is no good indication that this is the case.

Agreed. Wasn't the radar image picked up some 60 miles away after whatever Fravor was seeing "disappeared"? How would they know it was the same thing?
 

JFDee

Senior Member.
Agreed. Wasn't the radar image picked up some 60 miles away after whatever Fravor was seeing "disappeared"? How would they know it was the same thing?

That's where the major part of the incident hinges on - the interpretation by the newly upgraded radar system of the Princeton. As Kevin Day stated: "I don't see raw radar".

The interpretation and designation of targets is basically a software thing. New software can have flaws.
 
Last edited:

DebunkMee

New Member
I think the scenario could possibly go like this

1. A RADAR track is made, lost and ages, this track is at -5
2. The FLIR is pointed at this aging track in or later switched to wide angle mode when nothing showed in the narrow mode.
3. An object is seen in the wide angle the slave is cancelled and this object optically tracked, this object is at +5.
4. A mistake is made that the FLIR is pointing at the aging trace (-5 for 5) , RADAR targets at +5 are dismissed even though this is what the FLIR is pointed at.

Does anyone know what 0 ATA is in this case? It is referred too alongside the incorrect -5 FLIR angle. Is this possible some indication of the speed of the trace 0 ATA meaning still, ie hovering?
On this theory, what created the first radar track? According to the report it seemed like the radar used was the aircraft's own and not the Princeton. If the radar detected some unknown object (possibly the same one the Princeton was tracking), and then they made a mistake and pointed the FLIR at a friendly jet, it seems we're back where we started, with an unidentified object. The FLIR1 video hardly shows anything spectacular to begin with, so what is the theory really explaining away?

Are both the Princeton and the jets giving anomalous radar tracks?
 

jarlrmai

Senior Member
On this theory, what created the first radar track? According to the report it seemed like the radar used was the aircraft's own and not the Princeton. If the radar detected some unknown object (possibly the same one the Princeton was tracking), and then they made a mistake and pointed the FLIR at a friendly jet, it seems we're back where we started, with an unidentified object. The FLIR1 video hardly shows anything spectacular to begin with, so what is the theory really explaining away?

Are both the Princeton and the jets giving anomalous radar tracks?

It's trying to explain what is said in the written report with the video. Because the video does not match the written report as it stands so either the video is of a different event than the one described the report writer was mistaken on how events happened as per the video.
 
Does ATFLIR have automated aerial target seeking?

Can anyone clarify what type of F-18 we are talking about...I'm assuming F-18D as it appears to have been a two seater.
 
I'm lost here. Could you recap what your analysis of the event is?
  1. An object is spotted on radar?
  2. ATFLIR is pointed at it but is imprecise and hits something else (a friendly F-18?)
  3. The radar malfunctions
  4. The F-18 is extremely out of focus for some reason both on IR and TV mode
  5. The pilots are confused and think it's a UFO
Is this what you are saying happened?

Why does there need to be a radar malfunction...There's a difference between a radar being able to detect the presence and general heading of an object (providing a minimal track, sufficient to bring ATFLIR into play) and locking the radar system onto an object (gathering sufficient data to generate a firing solution).
 
Thread starter Related Articles Forum Replies Date
Rory Claim: Harriet Hall says that acupuncture isn't "ancient" and maybe doesn't come from China Health and Quackery 0
Rory Debunked: UK undertaker's claim that Covid vaccine is responsible for spike in deaths Coronavirus COVID-19 0
Mick West Claim: Faraday Cage Experiment with radios contacts Non-Human Intelligence UFOs and Aliens 48
Oystein Debunked: Claim that Bobby McIlvaine's injuries ("lacerations") are best explained as result of glass shards and debris from bombs 9/11 22
J Claim: Genomic analysis of SARS-CoV-2 shows that it already existed in other countries such as France, India, Netherlands, England and United States Coronavirus COVID-19 1
D Claim: Videos of people exhaling vape smoke through a mask, demonstrate masks as useless against a virus.. Coronavirus COVID-19 42
Peter Robert Malone and Steve Kirsch claim spike protein is Cytotoxic Coronavirus COVID-19 18
Rory Claim: The Indian/Chinese systems of nadis/meridians have been proved by science because of hyaluronic acid and piezoelectricity Health and Quackery 105
V Needs debunking: flat earthers claim this reflection to show a harness in ISS video Flat Earth 10
T Claim: Communist Gus Hall express support for LBJ's Great Society Quotes Debunked 3
P Claim: Ghost of deceased Soldier, Freddy Jackson, captured in a photo UFOs and Aliens 18
T Claim: Heritage Foundation article asserts that Sex Ed programs encourage porn use General Discussion 2
T Claim: Willi Munzenberg said that ''We must make Western Civilisation stink'' Quotes Debunked 2
H CLAIM: USS Omaha videos were taken on the ship's "Combat Information Center" by "VIPER team" UFO Videos and Reports from the US Navy 5
gtoffo CLAIM: Sen. Martin Heinrich on UFOs (Senate Select Committee on Intelligence Member) UFO Videos and Reports from the US Navy 10
R Flat Earth Claim: "The Greatest Laser Experiment In History" - FECORE Flat Earth 11
T Claim: Jim Hoffman's "9/11 progressive collapse challenge" can't be met 9/11 348
BigFatAtheist Claim: MI Court: Michigan Secretary of State’s Absentee Ballot Order Broke Law, Vindicating Trump Claim Election 2020 6
TEEJ Debunked: Claim that Joe Biden's hand passes through microphone during White House press gaggle, 16th March 2021 Election 2020 8
S Claim: "Most U.S. terror deaths have come from 'extreme right wing groups' in recent years" General Discussion 14
G Claim: China refused to hand "key data" to WHO delegation during the recent investigation in Wuhan Coronavirus COVID-19 29
P Claim: NASA tried to stop Spielberg's 'Close Encounters of the Third Kind' Quotes Debunked 21
Mick West Mike Lindell's 2-Hour Election Fraud Claim Video "Absolute Proof": Hacking Claims Election 2020 7
P Claim: NASA cuts ISS livestream after "Millennium Falcon UFO" enters the frame UFOs and Aliens 16
P Claim: Admiral Byrd's "secret diary" proves hollow earth Flat Earth 9
P Claim: UFOs appeared at the Stadio Artemio Franchi in Florence UFOs and Aliens 15
P Claim: 1990 Calvine UFO UFOs and Aliens 24
P Claim: Men in black "Threatened a hotel manager" in 2009 UFOs and Aliens 14
P "Deleted Votes" Claim, 2020 Election, Erie County, New York Election 2020 16
T Claim: Thousands of fraudulent votes in Georgia cast by felons, dead, underage voters Election 2020 6
Rory Claim: Li Hongzhi (founder of Falun Gong) was made an honorary citizen of Houston, Atlanta and Georgia People Debunked 1
P Claim: "Dogman" spotted on a Facebook livestream Ghosts, Monsters, and the Paranormal 35
Mick West Debunked: Claim that the Electoral College Count On Jan 6 will Change the Election Election 2020 136
P Claim: Biden campaign short code '30330' is veiled message Election 2020 29
Mick West Debunked: Trump's Claim of "1,126,940 votes created out of thin air" in PA Election 2020 9
P Claim: UFO Black Knight Satellite spotted over Philippines UFO Videos and Reports from the US Navy 3
Mick West Explained: Trump's Claim of Suspicious Early Morning Michigan Bump [It's Detroit] Election 2020 1
Mick West Claim: R-Squared Coefficient of Determination as a Election Fraud Signal Election 2020 5
Akton Claim: Ballots in Wayne County were run through the tabulator and counted as many as 4-5 times Election 2020 16
Mick West Trump's Claim that "THE OBSERVERS WERE NOT ALLOWED INTO THE COUNTING ROOMS." Election 2020 6
P Claim: Authorities supressed alleged UFO findings of a reporter of the 1965 Kecksburg crash UFOs and Aliens 7
M Claim: Hints of life on Venus: Scientists detect phosphine molecules in high cloud decks UFOs and Aliens 21
Shade sitter Claim: Covid vaccine gives you "Serpent" DNA/marks you 666 Coronavirus COVID-19 9
P Claim: Ronald Reagan warned the world of aliens/alien invasion UFOs and Aliens 4
P Claim: Man took photo of an alien spacecraft in 2016 UFOs and Aliens 21
Arugula Claim: Only 6% of COVID deaths are "real" - the rest died due to comorbidities Coronavirus COVID-19 12
P Claim: Finding of potentially chemiluminescent compound in soil proves aliens landed UFOs and Aliens 11
M Claim: UFO performs sharp maneuver after laser pointer directly hits craft UFOs and Aliens 20
Critical Thinker Claim: Correlations Between Media Preference and Coronavirus Infection Rates Coronavirus COVID-19 11
L Claim: NASA is doctoring an image [Scanner Dirt] UFOs and Aliens 7
Related Articles


















































Related Articles

Top