This is insane no matter the underlying cause and requires a very thorough investigation.
Were they expecting the world to just shrug that off?
Why do you think I don't?
they said (see OP for link, Op=Opening Post), bold for emphasisThe DoD told us last week those are still unexplained phenomena
The Department of Defense has authorized the release of three unclassified Navy videos, one taken in November 2004 and the other two in January 2015, which have been circulating in the public domain after unauthorized releases in 2007 and 2017. The U.S. Navy previously acknowledged that these videos circulating in the public domain were indeed Navy videos.
After a thorough review, the department has determined that the authorized release of these unclassified videos does not reveal any sensitive capabilities or systems, and does not impinge on any subsequent investigations of military air space incursions by unidentified aerial phenomena.
DOD is releasing the videos in order to clear up any misconceptions by the public on whether or not the footage that has been circulating was real, or whether or not there is more to the videos. The aerial phenomena observed in the videos remain characterized as "unidentified." The released videos can be found at the Naval Air Systems Command FOIA Reading Room:
why did they choose to release the videos and attract all this attention to them?
some finer points of FOIA requests.
Possible. Why not just release them to one of the FOIA petitioners in a quiet manner and let only UFO researches deal with it? Why the grand announcement?The likely released them because they were probably snowed under by FOIA requests by the UFO community and decided that it would relieve administrative pressure they just released them. Up until then the source for the videos was the TTSA.
The US Navy considers them unidentified, this might mean a number of things but what is does do is allow them to release them without having to say what they likely are which might mean they don't know the exact objects in the frame or it might just mean they never really looked into them. EIther way they can relieve the FOIA department from this pressure and never have to admit to the capability or otherwise of the systems in the videos. It doesn't mean the Navy thinks that something other than a manmade or natural object is in either of the videos.
No. But it doesn't mean they don't think it could be something else either.It doesn't mean the Navy thinks that something other than a manmade or natural object is in either of the videos.
So you think they will stop now? This will only increase the flood obviouslyThem releasing them to one request would probably not stem the requests from other requesters, they were already leaked people were looking for other information related to them
Sure sounds like a conspiracy to me. If they know what it is why don't they say so? Why lie? Especially if "the Navy likely thinks the videos have mundane explanations". Why not say what it is? "The phenomena is likely X" and we wouldn't be here no more.No-one here thinks there is a conspiracy quite the opposite, we believe the videos are most likely mundane and that the Navy likely thinks so as well.
The investigations here are a reaction to the investigation/claims with regards to the contents of the videos of others not the Navy.
he did not say any of those things.they just don't care and never researched this or they know it's a party balloon flying but they won't bother to tell anyone because... because?
The DoD does not know everything about all the DoD things going on. A while back when I was in charge of airspace somewhere in CA (okay, supposed scheduling office), another DoD entity contacted "me" about a possible thermal event in the area we scheduled. I knew F-111s at depot nearby would go to the areas and "flight test" their aircraft... and F-111 had a fuel dump where they could make a giant flame... (doing a fuel dump flame is most likely not required to complete an FCF flight)Thanks for the recap @deirdre but I am very familiar with those events and their publishing history
The DoD told us last week those are still unexplained phenomena and decided to release the videos for the record.
All of this doesn't make much sense.
- As Mick has discussed with Tim McMillan they couldn't have said something they know to be false without breaking federal law. Which I think is significant. So I trust it is still unexplained.
- If this was a secret program by some DoD controlled entity why did they choose to release the videos and attract all this attention to them? I don't think they were obliged to do so but maybe I don't understand some finer points of FOIA requests.
We were waiting for an SR, this is not near Okinawa, this is the western USA...
I have nothing to add really. Drones and balloons are a problem. Sometimes pilots see them. There are concerns some of them might be from a foreign power.@Mick West
What are your thoughts on the new pilot reports leading up to the Gimbal event?
Seems they encountered drones and balloons , even the quadcopter type at altitude remaining still in wind.
I have nothing to add really. Drones and balloons are a problem. Sometimes pilots see them. There are concerns some of them might be from a foreign power.
The aerial phenomena observed in the videos remain characterized as "unidentified."
The aerial phenomena observed in the videos remain characterized as "unidentified."
The release announcement does not refer to objects, but to aerial phenomena.
Is that common parlance?
Taken literally, it could mean they identified the object but not the weather.
Doubtfull they are from a foreign power when there are things like this in the 2nd incident report from the article I linked
"Most curiously, this report notes that "surface traffic was light with only a single stationary commercial fishing trawler and a single unidentified US Naval vessel traveling south" during the incident, but that "the identity of the Naval vessel in the vicinity was undetermined." It's not at all clear how the Navy was able to determine that one of its ships was operating on the surface in the same general area, but not able to figure out which ship it was specifically."
Yes. The other explanation would be: total and utter incompetence by the Navy.
I'll let others assign the probabilities they see fit but I agree it may very well be an explanation to all of this. It cannot be excluded.
I believe it is much less probable given the size and resources available to such an organisation. It would require many, many, many things to go wrong at the same time and many checks and balances to fail spectacularly.
It's not incompetance if it were a secretive program or black project test.
Go and listen to a TD Barnes talk where he mentions how the US own defence forces didn't know about the SR71, and how US pilots used to report it as a UFO.
Usually external private companies are used exactly for this purpose. It isn't "us" doing the test. We didn't know Skunkworks was testing this. Did the DoD make any comment at the time though? I don't think so.
Any government entity is prohibited from lying purposefully to the American people. Even if this is a black project. They can use propaganda and lies against foreign adversaries and nation. But not the taxpayers (who are ultimately themselves). Could they use the "external company" trick even in this case to say they have no clue? Maybe... but it would set up a pretty complex legal precedent and may be challengeable in court (incidentally what would it be if they were convicted of lying to the taxpayers in this case? Treason by the Secretary of Defense? Or the command in chief? Oh boy!).
EDIT: I think the relevant policy is this one: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Smith–Mundt_Act
Not really. That's a "Statement by the Department of Defense". It's basically the Secretary of defence addressing the nation officially. Not a lot of wiggle room there.How is it a lie if they honestly don't know. If they say we conducted an investigation - which asked the pilots who couldn't identify the craft, and they report such. No lie has been given. Doesn't mean a secret part of the defense force responsible for black or secretive projects didn't know what it was. I think this whole can't lie thing has been overplayed and the real world scenarios have been over looked
Consider that F-18 pilots started detecting objects in 2015 after their radars were upgraded. If those were actual objects and not false detections, then the old radars didn't detect them. Perhaps Fravor and Underwood didn't get a radar track for the same reason.
This guy took an analog FLIR of an F/18 as it flew away from him.
Got to be honest, it looks a lot like the Gimbal video
@Mick West What are your thoughts on it ?
We are discussing exactly this here: https://www.metabunk.org/threads/the-shape-and-size-of-glare-around-bright-lights.10596/
We are trying to figure out what the shape of the IR glare seen in GIMBAL means and what it may say about the thing producing it.
Yea, the real setup is more complicated, I think briefly mention this on one of the videos. Much of the tracking comes from the heliostat mirrors - these are a series of mirrors that can rotate around one axis each and are used for fine tracking. But at some point when going from left to right the main front housing needs to rotate by a large amount. This is discussed in the patent as happening somewhere near 0°Hi, Mick! Awesome place! I'm so glad I found it. Respect for Your work! Sorry if such a question has already been asked. In Your demonstration, the glare rotates all the time You rotate the camera. In Gimbal, the object rotates between 8 L and 5 R. According to Your explanation, the object should rotate all the time. Between 54 L and 7 R. Sorry if this has already been commented.
Yea, the real setup is more complicated, I think briefly mention this on one of the videos. Much of the tracking comes from the heliostat mirrors - these are a series of mirrors that can rotate around one axis each and are used for fine tracking. But at some point when going from left to right the main front housing needs to rotate by a large amount. This is discussed in the patent as happening somewhere near 0°
Meet John Ehrhart. John is an electro-optics specialist who was tasked by his employment with Boeing - an Aerospace defense contractor - to directly work on the operational Navy ATFLIR targeting pod systems. These systems are commonly used on American fighter jets. Jets like Cmdr. David Fravor’s - the pilot who chased a UFO for the United States Military. Like Chad Underwood - the pilot who FILMED - the now famous TIC TAC UFO. If anybody knows how these ATFLIR targeting-pod bad boys work - the details, their mechanics - and how to interpret the data... it’s John. The reason I felt compelled to clarify the specifics of the Pentagon GIMBAL UFO CRAFT footage - is because I’ve witnessed numerous debunkers contort and twist the facts of this bonafide UFO footage - with a mental gymnastics worthy of a gold medal. It’s almost as if they fear a reality greater than the one they have pre-determined. It’s a sort of existential bias - and their only defense - is that you’re too dumb to investigate the unexplained. I don’t think you’re dumb - I just think you’re busy. So I did some of the work for you. This is a twelve minute podcast for your enjoyment. So here’s John. He shared some time with me to give you some ACTUAL expert testimony. To clarify some technical aspects of what you are and what you are NOT seeing in the GIMBAL UFO FLIR footage.
Impossible to say really. It could be "well at first look" or "well affairs l..."Is it me, or does the Gimbal pilot mention flares after the 28 second mark ?
"well the flares look .. "
(That shows up several times)
Sent: Friday, September 20, 2019 4:50 PM
Subject OSD(PA) COB
* UFOs. Received multiple queries concerning Navy confirmation of UFO videos. Responded with coordinated lines on Unidentified Aerial Phenomena.
* Navy UAP Videos. Following extensive review, and coordination within intel channels, three Navy videos showing purported encounters with unidentified aerial phenomena will be officially released by DOD on Monday, April 27. These three videos have been circulating in the public after unauthorized release since 2017 and earlier. Media attention is expected.
[Update] Looks like this came from an FOIA request from D. Dean Johnson* UAPs. Continued to coordinate with Navy, OUSD(I), DIA, DOPSR and now USAF, on continuing multiple queries from multiple outlets about military aircraft videos depicting unidentified aerial phenomena that were highlighted in a summer program on the History Channel, the old AATIP program, the review and release procedures and investigations, and related matters.