House Oversight Hearing on UAPs - July 26, 2023

[jarlrmai]

I agree. Of course there is a place for debate, disagreement etc. But it's the forum 'mockery' of experienced military veterans and the instant kneejerk dismissal of everytthing they say, that irks me.

By "instant kneejerk dismissal" I presume you are referring to the dozens of multiple hundred post threads debating the evidence presented?

 

[steviemac]

Fravor has probably never flown an F-15 either, with him being a Navy pilot and the F-15 being an Airforce jet..

If a radiologist tells me they see a tumor on an organ i'd probably believe them, if they told me I was pregnant with an alien I might seek a second opinion.

yeah, I threw that plane in randomly, to be fair, sorry. Your last analogy is a bit silly though. What if he just tells you he sees something 'highly unusual' that he hasnt seen before. He'd be just hallucinating, yeah? Based on your dismisal of other experts in their field.

 

[Duke]

A general scan at all the comments really. Mockery and the like. Someone saying they believe Commander Fravor didn't see anything really...all his imagination.. and that assertion was simply based on what the poster 'thought'.

Correct me if I'm wrong, but I'm guessing most here have never flown a tiny plane, let alone an F-15. I mean how condescending to tell a veteran of his experience that he (and the others) were simply hallucinating.

When you go to see a medical consultant, with 30 years of experience, and he tells you he sees something unusual on your X-ray, I hope you poo-poo that too. Afterall, you must know better? Same basic principle...is it not?

Sorry, not what I asking. I was specifically referring to the "30 year airforce commander" you referenced (and I highlighted in my response) in your post.

 

[jarlrmai]

yeah, I threw that plane in randomly, to be fair, sorry. Your last analogy is a bit silly though. What if he just tells you he sees something 'highly unusual' that he hasnt seen before. He'd be just hallucinating, yeah? Based on your dismalls of other experts in their field.

Let's pretend that I pretend to be be upset that you put so little thought into understanding the career of this 30 years of experience Navy pilot by "getting his branch of service completely incorrect in a flippant manner", would you think I was overreacting?

re my unsual medical diagnosis

Then I go to another expert, maybe a more specialised expert in the area that he sees an issue with.

The thing is there's evidence, a CT/MR/XR/US scan that other people can look at the evidence with and can be performed again with better equipment.

And hey maybe after it's been escalated to a multidisciplinary team they come up with an explanation, or maybe not and its something new to medical science and I die as patient zero, but it's probably unlikely that this initial doctor is stating that thing he sees on my xray is incompatible with biology/physics as we understand them and if he is, it's more probable that they made a mistake.

 

[steviemac]

By "instant kneejerk dismissal" I presume you are referring to the dozens of multiple hundred post threads debating the evidence presented?

lol...well now I remember when the initial Airforce videos came out, years ago; they were instantly dismissed as fakes, a nonsense...essentially a bit of a laughing stock. Then when the Pentagon eventually came out and said, ok, actually these are genuine videos , you could have heard a pin drop.

 

[jarlrmai]

lol...well now I remember when the initial Airforce videos came out, years ago; they were instantly dismissed as fakes, a nonsense...essentially a bit of a laughing stock. Then when the Pentagon eventually came out and said, ok, actually these are genuine videos , you could have heard a pin drop.

By us on this forum? Like you were talking about in the 1st instance?

 

[deirdre]

tic

sorry? The tic tac did not show up on anyone radar, even though he has just repeated, he was told by the ship, that it had already arrived at his meeting point?

When Fravor was seeing whatever he was seeing, nothing was showing on radar. You and Fravor are assuming the later blip at the meeting point was the same thing Fravor saw.

 

[RTM]

lol...well now I remember when the initial Airforce videos came out, years ago; they were instantly dismissed as fakes, a nonsense...essentially a bit of a laughing stock. Then when the Pentagon eventually came out and said, ok, actually these are genuine videos , you could have heard a pin drop.

Real video’s don’t mean real aliens.

 

[Duke]

lol...well now I remember when the initial Airforce videos came out, years ago; they were instantly dismissed as fakes, a nonsense...essentially a bit of a laughing stock. Then when the Pentagon eventually came out and said, ok, actually these are genuine videos , you could have heard a pin drop.

Which "Airforce" (sic) videos are you referencing?

 

[steviemac]

Let's pretend that I pretend to be be upset that you put so little thought into understanding the career of this 30 years of experience Navy pilot by "getting his branch of service completely incorrect in a flippant manner", would you think I was overreacting?

re my unsual medical diagnosis

Then I go to another expert, maybe a more specialised expert in the area that he sees an issue with.

The thing is there's evidence, a CT/MR/XR/US scan that other people can look at the evidence with and can be performed again with better equipment.

And hey maybe after it's been escalated to a multidisciplinary team they come up with an explanation, or maybe not and its something new to medical science and I die as patient zero, but it's probably unlikely that this initial doctor is stating that thing he sees on my xray is incompatible with biology/physics as we understand them and if he is, it's more probable that they made a mistake.

well actually, I was typing as I work, so that quick response I made was a very lazy reply. But hardly something to make a meal out of.

Anyway, I should have known better not to comment on the UAP mockeryfest going on here. I know from experience its pointless.

I'm not saying either that I am a UAP/ET believer, however... I do think there is just too much evidence, from every possible source (military, fighter pilots, commercial pilots, the public etc) to not even consider the possibility that something very unusal is going on in the skies and elsewhere. (and by unusual I do not mean, kites, or Balloons etc etc).

 

[steviemac]

Real video’s don’t mean real aliens.

I didn't say they did...but hey, nice deflection from the fact that forum regulars were full of the usual contempt for the 'faked' videos. It actually took the Pentagon coming right out and admitting it, to silence many people here, for a while anyway. I could almost see the egg dripping down some faces here... So in that respect it was worth it. lol . , who knows, it might happen again

 

[jarlrmai]

I didn't say they did...but hey, nice deflection from the fact that forum regulars were full of the usual contempt for the 'faked' videos. It actually took the Pentagon coming right out and admitting it, to silence many people here, for a while anyway. I could almost see the egg dripping down some faces here... So in that respect it was worth it. lol . , who knows, it might happen again

Cite this forum saying that

 

[DavidB66]

hey, nice deflection from the fact that forum regulars were full of the usual contempt for the 'faked' videos

I've been following this forum for a good few years (initially mainly for 'flat earth' posts), but I don't recall anyone claiming the leaked Navy videos (specifically Gimbal, Gofast, and FLIR1) were faked. If you can't give at least a couple of examples you should withdraw your comment.

 

[Duke]

How many times do the honorable members have to ask the same questions? It's almost as if they are not listening to the questions of their colleagues or the witness responses. They are also leading the witnesses with their questions.

 

[Amathia]

Let's pretend that I pretend to be be upset that you put so little thought into understanding the career of this 30 years of experience Navy pilot by "getting his branch of service completely incorrect in a flippant manner", would you think I was overreacting?

re my unsual medical diagnosis

Then I go to another expert, maybe a more specialised expert in the area that he sees an issue with.

The thing is there's evidence, a CT/MR/XR/US scan that other people can look at the evidence with and can be performed again with better equipment.

And hey maybe after it's been escalated to a multidisciplinary team they come up with an explanation, or maybe not and its something new to medical science and I die as patient zero, but it's probably unlikely that this initial doctor is stating that thing he sees on my xray is incompatible with biology/physics as we understand them and if he is, it's more probable that they made a mistake.

It's my understanding that the other 4 pilots who witnessed the event have never come forward, but at least one other pilot has. We're not just dealing with one person's testimony here.


Source: https://youtu.be/ygB4EZ7ggig

 

[JMartJr]

How many times do the honorable members have to ask the same questions? It's almost as if they are not listening to the questions of their colleagues or the witness responses. They are also leading the witnesses with their questions.

That's pretty standard practice -- you want video of the Congressperson "asking the tough questions" for future campaign use. Video of somebody else asking it is not useful.

 

[Amathia]

Some things Grusch said worth noting:

-The information he's gathered comes from at least 40 individuals he interviewed, all either former or currently working in the intelligence community. This at leasts casts doubt on the idea that the info he's gathered just came from public Ufology sources and also that it all just came from the usual circle jerk suspects (Elizondo, Davis, Taylor, etc.)

-Specifically claimed bodies have been retrieved from some crashed vehicles, that these bodies are specifically biologically non-human, and knowledge of these comes from interviews with individuals who are *currently* involved in said program.

(Sorry I don't have time-stamps, typing as I watch).

 

[jarlrmai]

It's my understanding that the other 4 pilots who witnessed the event have never come forward, but at least one other pilot has. We're not just dealing with one person's testimony here.


Source: https://youtu.be/ygB4EZ7ggig

Yes we have Dietrichs account which has some variations from Fravors

 

[Duke]

That's pretty standard practice -- you want video of the Congressperson "asking the tough questions" for future campaign use. Video of somebody else asking it is not useful.

Fair point. I think like an investigator, not like a politician.

 

[Amathia]

Yes we have Dietrichs account which has some variations from Fravors

Variations are the norm with any multiple-person eyewitness testimony accounts of any singular event. If the testimony were identical it would be cause for suspicion.

Of course I'm sure you agree that what matters here is where the testimony deviates and where there is agreement.

 

[jarlrmai]

Variations are the norm with any multiple-person eyewitness testimony accounts of any singular event. If the testimony were identical it would be cause for suspicion.

Of course I'm sure you agree that what matters here is where the testimony deviates and where there is agreement.

Pretty sure there's a while thread on it here can't dig it up at the moment though

 

[JMartJr]

We're not just dealing with one person's testimony here.

No, but we are dealing with testimony from witnesses who discussed their story with one another, potentially many times, before we ever heard of it. We have no video of that incident, no contemporaneous notes or records (to my knowledge at least). The liklihood of stories converging and coming to agreement (and thus becoming less accurate) thus seems high. And at the end of the day it's just more eyewitness stories. Even the best trained observer can make mistakes or misremember what happened.

In other cases, where we have videos to analyze, it turns out that the claims made of things like extreme speeds (GoFast), sudden accelerations (Flir1 aka Nimitz) and weird rotating flight (Gimbal) are not supported by the evidence.

Everybody, of course, can decide what evidence rises to the level that they find convincing, but I think it is significant that the extreme flight characteristics and physics-defying aspects seem to cluster heavily in the cases where there is no video, and to be absent in cases where such data is available and subject for analysis.

 

[deirdre]

Of course I'm sure you agree that what matters here is where the testimony deviates and where there is agreement.

and what they are willing to admit. For instance i dont recall Fravor ever specifying that all the "little seperate events" of the Nimitz encounter might not have been related at all. An experienced pilot should know that what another pilot saw 3 hours later may not be the same thing he saw .

To me that's what matters. The Fravor story isnt really about his specific sighting. It's an entire story of possibily unrelated events that have been weaved into 1 alleged event.

 

[fizzBuzz]

Is Ms. Foxx wearing Xbox earrings?

 

[tjskep]

how long is the hearing scheduled to be?

 

[Duke]

No, but we are dealing with testimony from witnesses who discussed their story with one another, potentially many times, before we ever heard of it.

And discussed their testimony/stories with the committee members and their staffers prior to the hearing. This was mentioned 3-4 times by various members. At times, at least to me, the hearing took on a scripted, theatrical aspect as a result.

 

[Amathia]

No, but we are dealing with testimony from witnesses who discussed their story with one another, potentially many times, before we ever heard of it. We have no video of that incident, no contemporaneous notes or records (to my knowledge at least). The liklihood of stories converging and coming to agreement (and thus becoming less accurate) thus seems high. And at the end of the day it's just more eyewitness stories. Even the best trained observer can make mistakes or misremember what happened.

In other cases, where we have videos to analyze, it turns out that the claims made of things like extreme speeds (GoFast), sudden accelerations (Flir1 aka Nimitz) and weird rotating flight (Gimbal) are not supported by the evidence.

Everybody, of course, can decide what evidence rises to the level that they find convincing, but I think it is significant that the extreme flight characteristics and physics-defying aspects seem to cluster heavily in the cases where there is no video, and to be absent in cases where such data is available and subject for analysis.

The evidence certainly doesn't rise to the level I personally need to be convinced of anything. My point in bringing the other pilot's testimony up was in response to the medical doctor analogy. One doctor making strange claims about what they're seeing in your x-rays is one thing, but the presence of another pilot backing up those claims makes the situation disanalogous. Then you add to the fact that there are four other pilots out there who could have at any moment come forward and said "wait a minute, that's not what we saw" but haven't makes the analogy even less useful. Analogies should capture salient details about the scenarios being compared if they're to be useful in illustrating a point.

 

[LilWabbit]

Initial CNN coverage:

Article:

“This is an issue of government transparency,” said Rep. Tim Burchett, a Tennessee Republican who pushed to hold Wednesday’s hearing. “We’re not bringing little green men or flying saucers into the hearing … We’re just going to get to the facts. We’re going to uncover the cover up, and I hope this is just the beginning of many more hearings.”

No government officials testified at Wednesday’s hearing. In April, Sean Kirkpatrick, the director of the Pentagon’s All-domain Anomaly Resolution Office, which Congress created to focus on UAPs, told a Senate subcommittee the US government was tracking 650 potential cases of unidentified aerial phenomena, playing video from two of the episodes. Kirkpatrick emphasized there was no evidence of extraterrestrial life and that his office found “no credible evidence” of objects that defy the known laws of physics.

Source: https://edition.cnn.com/2023/07/26/politics/ufo-house-hearing-congress/index.html

 

[tintintintin]

Some things Grusch said worth noting:

-The information he's gathered comes from at least 40 individuals he interviewed, all either former or currently working in the intelligence community. This at leasts casts doubt on the idea that the info he's gathered just came from public Ufology sources and also that it all just came from the usual circle jerk suspects (Elizondo, Davis, Taylor, etc.)

-Specifically claimed bodies have been retrieved from some crashed vehicles, that these bodies are specifically biologically non-human, and knowledge of these comes from interviews with individuals who are *currently* involved in said program.

He also said a lot of "I can tell you that in a classified setting (, if you have the right clearance)". Which he allegedly had been in (the classified setting) for 11 hours with both HPSCI and SSCI.

But definitely Congress has to follow-up on the allegations of misappropriation of funds.

 

[Ann K]

Variations are the norm with any multiple-person eyewitness testimony accounts of any singular event. If the testimony were identical it would be cause for suspicion.

I'm not so much concerned with person-to-person variations. But has anyone who has followed this closely noticed any change in the stories told by any one of these individuals? Granted, there were many "I can't tell you this here" comments.

 

[Duke]

Early on, Grusch was asked a question about retribution he'd experienced. He declined to go into any detail so as to not affect the ongoing, open investigation of his complaint. I assume he was speaking of his second IG complaint, to the IGIC. If that's the case, that explains why he/his counsel has not released the results of that investigation. Or could there be some appeal of their findings/ruling?

 

[deirdre]

One doctor making strange claims about what they're seeing in your x-rays is one thing, but the presence of another pilot backing up those claims makes the situation disanalogous. Then you add to the fact that there are four other pilots out there who could have at any moment come forward and said "wait a minute, that's not what we saw" but haven't makes the analogy even less useful.

the doctors probably arent all friends with each other. More than friends, they were all on the same crew. I'm not at all thinking any of them are lying (i think it was some kind of flotation thing they saw, liek a balloon ) but even if i didnt see anything, i would lie for my teammate if i didnt want people to think they were crazy. just saying.

 

[Amathia]

He also said a lot of "I can tell you that in a classified setting (, if you have the right clearance)". Which he allegedly had been in (the classified setting) for 11 hours with both HPSCI and SSCI.

But definitely Congress has to follow-up on the allegations of misappropriation of funds.

Just to clarify, the 11 hours of testimony he provided was to HPSCI and SSCI which are different committees from the one he was just speaking with, correct? I believe someone asked something along the lines of "and how can I get access to that testimony?"

 

[Eburacum]

The Nimitz witnesses presumably all saw the Underwood FLIR1 clip, that shows a white, featureless, elongated blob like a tic-tac; this may have coloured their subsequent recollection of its shape.

 

[Amathia]

I'm not so much concerned with person-to-person variations. But has anyone who has followed this closely noticed any change in the stories told by any one of these individuals? Granted, there were many "I can't tell you this here" comments.

A while back I came across a claim regarding how Fraver's story has changed over the years. May have been on YouTube or an article, and it didn't go into detail on what the changes were, but considering how many interviews he's done over the years, and how many of those interviews are easy to access via YouTube, it'd be a worthwhile and doable project to track the changes. I'd be up for it unless anyone here knows of someone else who's already done it and posted their findings.

 

[Duke]

But definitely Congress has to follow-up on the allegations of misappropriation of funds.

Throughout Grusch's fifteen minutes of fame, he has talked about illegal/unlawful actions on the part of those involved in his claimed crash retrieval program(s.) From personal experience, the only two actions I could think of that would fall in that category were lying under oath and misuse/misdirection of allocated funds.

Not to marginalize the possiblity/seriousness of the former, but the latter, if proven, will put some folks in federal prison. It's like the feds finally putting Capone away for income tax evasion.

 

[Ravi]

So, if in this "SCIF" thing the members of Congress get to know the real info, do they then themselves need to keep their mouth shut?

 

[Amathia]

Throughout Grusch's fifteen minutes of fame, he has talked about illegal/unlawful actions on the part of those involved in his claimed crash retrieval program(s.) From personal experience, the only two actions I could think of that would fall in that category were lying under oath and misuse/misdirection of allocated funds.

Not to marginalize the possiblity/seriousness of the former, but the latter, if proven, will put some folks in federal prison. It's like the feds finally putting Capone away for income tax evasion.

I'd imagine murdering people to maintain the secret would also fall into the category of unlawful/illegal actions.

 

[deirdre]

A while back I came across a claim regarding how Fraver's story has changed over the years. May have been on YouTube or an article, and it didn't go into detail on what the changes were, but considering how many interviews he's done over the years, and how many of those interviews are easy to access via YouTube, it'd be a worthwhile and doable project to track the changes. I'd be up for it unless anyone here knows of someone else who's already done it and posted their findings.

pretty sure there's a thread on that.

 

[deirdre]

So, if in this "SCIF" thing the members of Congress get to know the real info, do they then themselves need to keep their mouth shut?

yes.