Luis Elizondo on The Joe Rogan Experience#2194

[Ingrid Delaney]

In a recent episode of "The Joe Rogan Experience" episode#2194. Luis Elizondo makes a claim that there is a High-Definition, Military Video of an underwater object that was bigger than an Off-Shore Oil Derrick and was clocked at over 500 miles per hour (450-550knots.)

Another kind of derrick is used on oil wells and other drilled holes. Both the structure itself and the complex set of machines associated with it are referred to as a derrick. A derrick is also used on some offshore oil and gas rigs.

Source: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Derrick#Oil_derrick

The knot (/nɒt/) is a unit of speed equal to one nautical mile per hour, exactly 1.852 km/h (approximately 1.151 mph or 0.514 m/s).

Source: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Knot_(unit)

This is the video I in which Luis Elizondo makes this claim. Source: https://youtu.be/9gLPtRwXgCM?list=PLk1Sqn_f33KuWf3tW9BBe_4TP7x8l0m3T

The following is an excerpt from the conversation they had about this topic.

Timestamp 43:50 through 45:15

Elizondo: "So uhm, our focus was looking specifically at military sourced information. I was not focusing at all on what the private citizens were seeing because at the end of the day, we couldn't use it. You can't, you can't do anything with the data."

Joe: "And it seems like you got plenty of compelling footage from the military."

Elizondo: "Overwhelming, overwhelming. Uh its, there's absolutely no doubt, that we didn't have to look at civilian data, because we had better collection sensor systems from the military that was looking at stuff and giving us better insight."

Joe: "If you can't tell us about, can you give us some sort of an understanding of like, what you're talking about?"

Elizondo: "Yeah, sure, uhm."

Joe: "Without being specific."

Elizondo: "Yeah let me see, uhm, ok yeah, uhm. There is a uh, a video, high resolution video, of a, I can't say what platform it was taken from, I can't say where it was taken from."

Joe: "Ok."

Elizondo: "But uhm, an object that you know. Do you know how large a, uh, an off shore oil derrick is? They're huge right?"

Joe: "Yeah."

Elizondo: "They're almost like a small city, they're like one city block, they're huge, they're enormous things. Uhm, there is a video that shows one of these objects underwater, that goes by uh, the speed was calculated between 450 and 550 knots underwater and it was bigger than the off shore derrick that it was passing, because you could see in the video the offshore derrick and you could see this thing zip right by it."


I don't believe anything that large or fast exists underwater, including man-made, natural or supernatural.

 

[CasualDebunk]

It doesn't sound like the video left much of an impression on him if those are the only details he can recall about it

 

[Ravi]

[edit, other words]

If Eli wants to make a difference, show the footage. What is the difficulty in showing this underwater city? Unless ,of course, it does not exist apart from in his own mind.

 

[Mendel]

Elizondo: "They're almost like a small city, they're like one city block, they're huge, they're enormous things. Uhm, there is a video that shows one of these objects underwater, that goes by uh, the speed was calculated between 450 and 550 knots underwater and it was bigger than the off shore derrick that it was passing, because you could see in the video the offshore derrick and you could see this thing zip right by it."

With Elizondo's documented inability to recognize parallax (e.g. Aguadilla in his book), I'd bet the "huge" fast object was actually small, slow, and close to the camera.

 

[FatPhil]

Elizondo: "They're almost like a small city, they're like one city block, they're huge, they're enormous things. Uhm, there is a video that shows one of these objects underwater, that goes by uh, the speed was calculated between 450 and 550 knots underwater and it was bigger than the off shore derrick that it was passing, because you could see in the video the offshore derrick and you could see this thing zip right by it."

Naahhhh. He seems to be overlooking the fact that this thing is still travelling through Water 1.0.

Here's the girth and length of the current world-record holder, at only half of the above claimed speed:

via -- https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Superkavitierender_Unterwasserlaufkörper

Every hydrophone in the world would pick up something as preposterous as his claim, and yes, there does exist a global hydrophone network, which may have slipped under Lue's radar as it cunningly disguises itself behind the somewhat cryptic name "Global Hydrophone Network".

 

[Mendel]

Every hydrophone in the world would pick up something as preposterous as his claim, and yes, there does exist a global hydrophone network, which may have slipped under Lue's radar as it cunningly disguises itself behind the somewhat cryptic name "Global Hydrophone Network".

I bet everyone who works in Intelligence knows about this.

Cavitation would be very obvious to see on any video. If we actually had evidence, we could see it for ourselves—or not. If we couldn't see any, the object would be small and slow. (Dolphins can produce cavitation with their tail fins.)

 

[Mick West]

Every hydrophone in the world would pick up something as preposterous as his claim

I think he is suggesting that it uses a warp bubble to be able to move fast underwater with no acoustic signature.

 

[FatPhil]

I bet everyone who works in Intelligence knows about this.

Cavitation would be very obvious to see on any video. If we actually had evidence, we could see it for ourselves—or not. If we couldn't see any, the object would be small and slow. (Dolphins can produce cavitation with their tail fins.)

But they don't like it, as it hurts. Tuna are the speed kings, as they aren't as fleshy.

1. Introduction

In a curious example of converging evolution, all of the fastest marine swimmers have similar propulsion systems that are based on a narrow crescent caudal fin, better known as the 'lunate tail' (Lighthill 1969). Dolphins, tunas and mackerel sharks are obvious members of this group. Since the pioneering work of Gray (1936), the maximal speed attainable by these swimmers has been repeatedly debated (e.g. Wardle 1975; Wardle & Videler 1980), undoubtedly fuelled by reports of yellowfin tuna and wahoo swimming faster than 20 m /s (Walters & Fierstein 1964) and anecdotal reports of dolphins overtaking fast vessels. Yet undisturbed measurements of dolphin swimming (Fish & Rohr 1999) have never resulted in speeds in excess of 15 m/ s, suggesting that reports of much higher speeds could have been biased by proximity to the observing vessel (Weihs 2004).

...

4. Discussion

In fact, cavitation poses a real limit on warm-bodied large swimmers at shallow depth, with 10–15 m /s being the maximal cavitation-free velocity. Above that speed cavitation is imminent. Lacking pain receptors on their caudal fins, scombrids may temporarily cross the cavitation limit, and cavitation-induced damage has been observed (Kishinouye 1923); on the other hand, delphinids probably cannot cross it without pain (Lang 1966).

https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC2607394/

Of course, fish and propellers are playing by one set of rules, and that torpedo I posted above is a *rocket*, so doesn't have the same limitations. It would be nice of Lue told us whether there was evidence of a hydrodynamic propulsion system or of rocketry.

 

[FatPhil]

I think he is suggesting that it uses a warp bubble to be able to move fast underwater with no acoustic signature.

The water that at time T is where the craft will be at time T+deltaT still needs to move out of the way in that time deltaT. Is he playing his silly made-up-physics games again?

 

[Ravi]

The water that at time T is where the craft will be at time T+deltaT still needs to move out of the way in that time deltaT. Is he playing his silly made-up-physics games again?

It is always handy to use a bit of that good old science fiction to explain things. Why complain? It just has not been invented yet, and we see ufos using it so it must be possible.

 

[Mauro]

I think he is suggesting that it uses a warp bubble to be able to move fast underwater with no acoustic signature.

Essentialy, "warp bubble" = "magic means". Water in front of the craft would need to disappear somewhere and then be teleported back, precisely where it should have been as if no craft had passed. And this without disturbing the motion of all the remaining water molecules on the sides.

And what if they encounter a pod of whales on their way? Would they be converted to whale marmalade (which would generate lots of signatures, including acoustic ones), or their process is so exquisite it will reconstitute alive whales after the craft has passed, as if nothing had happened? What if one of the whales is caught midway?

 

[Riverman63]

Presented in the same dramatic fashion as Greer does, but with no evidence to back it up. A yawnfest really

 

[jarlrmai]

He also has a Youtube channel now as well so I expect we'll be hearing a lot from from Lue in coming months.


Source: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=_Lz903auEcA

 

[jarlrmai]

Maybe it will be an advice channel for people that need shirts where the arm holes are as big as the neckhole, or maybe UFOs I guess time will tell.

 

[Ravi]

There is also a new NewsNation interview uploaded, where our pal Ross asks some questions to Lui.

 

[Giddierone]

What kind of "platform" would record high-resolution video of an oil derrek? Presumably it's not a stationary surveillence camera's footage?

 

[jarlrmai]

What kind of "platform" would record high-resolution video of an oil derrek? Presumably it's not a stationary surveillence camera's footage?

Maybe an ROV submersible.

There's no reason it couldn't be from an underwater monitoring camera, they are common around platforms.

 

[Calter]

there is a video that shows one of these objects underwater, that goes by uh, the speed was calculated between 450 and 550 knots underwater and it was bigger than the off shore derrick that it was passing, because you could see in the video the offshore derrick and you could see this thing zip right by it."

Based on this description of the event, I would assume this was filmed from above water (possibly even from the sky), since the implication is that the camera can see the offshore derrick and the object to compare sizes. Though I'm open to the idea of a fish just swimming in front of an underwater camera and someone deciding it's actually a gigantic insanely fast USO.

 

[MapperGuy]

What kind of "platform" would record high-resolution video of an oil derrek? Presumably it's not a stationary surveillence camera's footage?

US Navy or Coast Guard maritime surveillance aircraft looking for drug-running narco submarines, people smuggling speed boats, illegal fishing, lost boaters, etc. would carry multiple downward looking cameras. They would record everything the cameras see for future review and for use as evidence in court.

Aircraft can cover a lot of ocean in a day, for example in the Gulf of Mexico or off the California coast, where drug activity can be expected.

 

[Eburacum]

Sounds like a parallax effect; an object in the sky (and close to the camera) that appears to be under water. It may even be a mangled account of the Aguadilla clip.

 

[Giddierone]

US Navy or Coast Guard maritime surveillance aircraft looking for drug-running narco submarines, people smuggling speed boats, illegal fishing, lost boaters, etc. would carry multiple downward looking cameras. They would record everything the cameras see for future review and for use as evidence in court.

Aircraft can cover a lot of ocean in a day, for example in the Gulf of Mexico or off the California coast, where drug activity can be expected.

Sound like slippery nonsense to me. If such a video exists we'd have heard at least as much about it already as Elizondo just divulged to Rogan's massive audience. Similarly his claims that the 3 Navy videos are the "least compelling" of "hundreds and hundreds of [UFO] videos" (presumably taken / seen by hundreds and hundreds or different people) we'd also have heard at least something about their existence - that is unless we've already seen all those videos and none of them is compelling in the least.

 

[Mendel]

Elizondo: "They're almost like a small city, they're like one city block, they're huge, they're enormous things. Uhm, there is a video that shows one of these objects underwater, that goes by uh, the speed was calculated between 450 and 550 knots underwater and it was bigger than the off shore derrick that it was passing, because you could see in the video the offshore derrick and you could see this thing zip right by it."

If it's aerial or space surveillance footage of a smaller platform in shallow water, Lue could be looking at the shadow of a jumbo jet. Compare:

Article:

For most commercial airliners, the airplane's cruising speed ranges between 550 and 600 mph (478 to 521 knots).

Source: https://www.flyingmag.com/guides/how-fast-do-commerical-planes-fly/

It'd look like a dark shape moving underwater.

 

[JMartJr]

It may even be a mangled account of the Aguadilla clip.

Interesting -- my brain went over towards the cases where flaring oil rigs offshore have been mistaken for UFOs, and wondering if this was a garbled version of one of those. I am having no luck searching for a case I recall being discussed here, off Mexico or South America. Perhaps I'm placing a discussion here that was in fact elsewhere? Or maybe somebody else recalls it better than I do and can point to it.

Sound like slippery nonsense to me. If such a video exists we'd have heard at least as much about it already as Elizondo just divulged to Rogan's massive audience. Similarly his claims that the 3 Navy videos are the "least compelling" of "hundreds and hundreds of [UFO] videos" (presumably taken / seen by hundreds and hundreds or different people) we'd also have heard at least something about their existence - that is unless we've already seen all those videos and none of them is compelling in the least.

It does seem an odd tactic -- to leak only the LEAST compelling videos in order to cause disclosure to happen. Why not leak the best ones? Would save time.

 

[jarlrmai]

The claim will be that these are the ones they could get/leak ther others are super secret and classified etc etc.

 

[Mick West]

It does seem an odd tactic -- to leak only the LEAST compelling videos in order to cause disclosure to happen. Why not leak the best ones? Would save time.

According to Elizondo's book he showed their good videos to Mellon, but Mellon says that Gimbal is the most compelling of the videos - except for one other that's "emotionally" compelling (and sounds like a balloon)

I escorted Chris to a small conference room within another SCIF. For the next three hours, I proceeded to share with Chris our reports, photographs, pictures, and data, and intel we had gathered on legacy efforts. Chris was transfixed by the large monitor as videos rolled along with pilot audio. At the end of our meeting, Chris was frustrated, to say the least. He had spent years having oversight of all the SAPs for the DoD and he admitted to us that he had zero visibility into the UAP topic. Simply put, he should have been in the know and he wasn't. Now he was fired up and wanted to be a part of the solution to what he agreed was a serious problem. After expressing some frustration, he pledged his loyalty to our efforts, and he became a trusted member of the team.

Elizondo, Luis. Imminent: Inside the Pentagon's Hunt for UFOs: the Former Head of the Program Responsible for Investigating UAPs Reveals Profound Secrets (p. 185). HarperCollins. Kindle Edition.

Source: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=h8vjx6-ZFvI&t=7447s

 

[jdog]

According to Elizondo's book he showed their good videos to Mellon, but Mellon says that Gimbal is the most compelling of the videos - except for one other that's "emotionally" compelling (and sounds like a balloon)

I escorted Chris to a small conference room within another SCIF. For the next three hours, I proceeded to share with Chris our reports, photographs, pictures, and data, and intel we had gathered on legacy efforts. Chris was transfixed by the large monitor as videos rolled along with pilot audio. At the end of our meeting, Chris was frustrated, to say the least. He had spent years having oversight of all the SAPs for the DoD and he admitted to us that he had zero visibility into the UAP topic. Simply put, he should have been in the know and he wasn't. Now he was fired up and wanted to be a part of the solution to what he agreed was a serious problem. After expressing some frustration, he pledged his loyalty to our efforts, and he became a trusted member of the team.

Elizondo, Luis. Imminent: Inside the Pentagon's Hunt for UFOs: the Former Head of the Program Responsible for Investigating UAPs Reveals Profound Secrets (p. 185). HarperCollins. Kindle Edition.

View attachment 70994


Source: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=h8vjx6-ZFvI&t=7447s

I guess it's compelling in the popular imagination because the heat signature has a shape similar to the traditional saucer shape (and I've watched Mick's videos analyzing the footage), though it seems ironic to me because the UFO community rarely claims "saucer" sightings anymore and there are even threads on reddit pondering why.

We get plenty of posts of distant or blurry imagery of orbs, tic-tacs, black triangles, floating lights, floating humanoids and underwater lights, but this clip and screen grab seems completely orthogonal to contemporary claims of UAP sightings, which makes it a weird poster child for the movement, at least to me.

Come for the saucers, stay for the racetracks?

 

[JMartJr]

Re: Mick's post #25 above:

Those familiar with previous work on this site in relation to the Original Three leaked Navy videos will understand that not only do we not have anything that can sit there hovering, then just suddenly swoosh with "instantaneous acceleration," the video in question does not show that either. Analysis of the FLIR1/Nimitz video, sometimes called the Tic-Tac video, is in this thread here:
https://www.metabunk.org/threads/2004-uss-nimitz-tic-tac-ufo-flir-footage-flir1.9190/

For Mick's YT video analyzing this,

Source: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=U1di0XIa9RQ

 

[Ann K]

According to Elizondo's book he showed their good videos to Mellon, but Mellon says that Gimbal is the most compelling of the videos - except for one other that's "emotionally" compelling (and sounds like a balloon)

I don't know what "emotionally" compelling can possibly mean, except "this is the one that will get the most people on our side". I would be much more impressed with one that is scientifically compelling.

 

[Eburacum]

If it's aerial or space surveillance footage of a smaller platform in shallow water, Lue could be looking at the shadow of a jumbo jet.

The problem with that is, planes don't really cast shadows when flying at cruising altitude. The Sun is about 30' across; half a degree. Any plane that looks smaller than half a degree across in the sky won't cast a full shadow - it will, cast a penumbral shadow, which gets less and less visible as the plane gets higher. After about 5000 feet a Jumbo jet wouldn't cast an easily visible shadow at all.

Maybe this shadow was a low-flying C-130 or similar- but the plane should have been visible as well, much more clearly than the shadow.

 

[JMartJr]

Or I suppose the imagery COULD have been the actual jet, maybe motion blurred, rather than the shadow? Given how little we know, there are a LOT of things that can't be ruled out...

 

[elvenwear]

And what if they encounter a pod of whales on their way? Would they be converted to whale marmalade

According to cannon, they would be converted into a very confused pot of petunias.

US Navy or Coast Guard maritime surveillance aircraft looking for drug-running narco submarines, people smuggling speed boats, illegal fishing, lost boaters, etc. would carry multiple downward looking cameras. They would record everything the cameras see for future review and for use as evidence in court.

Aircraft can cover a lot of ocean in a day, for example in the Gulf of Mexico or off the California coast, where drug activity can be expected.

I think you are on the right track with surveillance aircraft. Typical visibility when scuba diving is usually around 10m. It can be higher, but not a lot higher. I don't think you would get a lot of frames of an object that is moving at 231.5 metres per second at that distance (450 knots was the lower bound of Elizondo's description). I don't know what visibility is in the infrared so it may be a lot further.

Elizondo described the object as being visible next to the rig, which is quite a wide field of view, meaning the camera would need to be a decent distance from the rig, which rules out a camera underwater. Since he says it is a military platform, I think you are looking at a helicopter or a plane.

Does anyone know the limits of the depth underwater that you can see from the air?

 

[jdog]

According to cannon, they would be converted into a very confused pot of petunias.


I think you are on the right track with surveillance aircraft. Typical visibility when scuba diving is usually around 10m. It can be higher, but not a lot higher. I don't think you would get a lot of frames of an object that is moving at 231.5 metres per second at that distance (450 knots was the lower bound of Elizondo's description). I don't know what visibility is in the infrared so it may be a lot further.

Elizondo described the object as being visible next to the rig, which is quite a wide field of view, meaning the camera would need to be a decent distance from the rig, which rules out a camera underwater. Since he says it is a military platform, I think you are looking at a helicopter or a plane.

Does anyone know the limits of the depth underwater that you can see from the air?

Depth visibility is going to vary greatly with local conditions; it may be 0-1 meters in surf or turbulent waters, it may be tens of meters. Visibility is usually measured with a high-contrast Secchi disk; you lower the disk until you can't see it and make repeated measurements to establish the depth. (The deepest measurement was about 80 meters.) So lower-contrast objects (not pure white, not pure black) won't be as visible closer to the surface.

You can dive near defunct oil rigs off California; diving sites says the visibility will vary between about 3 and 30 meters. It's not clear from the discussion above where Elizondo's oil rigs might be.

You also, of course, get the sense of movement in the water from passing clouds, as well as actual movement from passing schools of fish, like this dense, constantly moving anchovy swarm in the shallows off Scripps Pier about 10 years ago:

 

[Ann K]

A speedboat in one position could cast a shadow at another position, depending on the angle of the sun. As for the reported speed ...well, it's maybe a little bit like that fish grandpa caught which gets bigger and faster with every retelling.

 

[Ravi]

IF (and that is a big IF) this video exist, will we ever see it?
How can we ever verify any of this is true?

We can continue to try to analyze a video we have never seen, but I don't know..

 

[Mendel]

We can continue to try to analyze a video we have never seen, but I don't know..

We haven't started to analyze anything.

We're speculating off a vague description.

 

[jdog]

A speedboat in one position could cast a shadow at another position, depending on the angle of the sun. As for the reported speed ...well, it's maybe a little bit like that fish grandpa caught which gets bigger and faster with every retelling.

Footage of an underwater something as large as an oil rig passing by an oil rig at high speed recorded by an unknown platform is also pretty vague, since we don't know if it's supposed to be a recording in visible light or other spectra, day or night, with or without a wake, in what sea conditions, etc.

Is this just another "jellyfish" story where a video got passed around among the guys on base as something spooky until one person who wasn't a direct witness finally shared it?

 

[yoshy]

Essentialy, "warp bubble" = "magic means". Water in front of the craft would need to disappear somewhere and then be teleported back, precisely where it should have been as if no craft had passed. And this without disturbing the motion of all the remaining water molecules on the sides.

And what if they encounter a pod of whales on their way? Would they be converted to whale marmalade (which would generate lots of signatures, including acoustic ones), or their process is so exquisite it will reconstitute alive whales after the craft has passed, as if nothing had happened? What if one of the whales is caught midway?

Elizondo (and Mick) are referring to an Alcubierre drive, a very theoretical means of transportation that warps spacetime itself to move an object by contracting spacetime in front and expanding it behind. It is perfect for people who want to believe because it is theoretically possible (again stressing theoretical), but doesn't have a concrete concept yet. So it's basically unfalsifiable, while at the same time, the believer can give it any properties they need it to fit. As you said, "magic"

 

[taurusclover21]

Elizondo (and Mick) are referring to an Alcubierre drive, a very theoretical means of transportation that warps spacetime itself to move an object by contracting spacetime in front and expanding it behind. It is perfect for people who want to believe because it is theoretically possible (again stressing theoretical), but doesn't have a concrete concept yet. So it's basically unfalsifiable, while at the same time, the believer can give it any properties they need it to fit. As you said, "magic"

The logical fallacy of appeal to probability, also known as possibiliter ergo probabiliter, or "possibly, therefore probably", is the fallacy of assuming something is true because it's possible.

It's a fallacy wherein it is asserted that no possibility, no matter how absurd, can be ruled out unless explicitly disproven. Sometimes, the justification for this is the presence of a deity or other supernatural being; aliens from outer space possessing advanced technology, etc.

 

[Ann K]

The logical fallacy of appeal to probability, also known as possibiliter ergo probabiliter, or "possibly, therefore probably", is the fallacy of assuming something is true because it's possible.

Of course, "not falsifiable" doesn't actually mean "possible".

 

[Mendel]

Elizondo (and Mick) are referring to an Alcubierre drive, a very theoretical means of transportation that warps spacetime itself to move an object by contracting spacetime in front and expanding it behind.

So it would warp the water while not actually removing it?
While travelling at 500 knots = 250 m/s = 0.0000008 c ?
Why would you engage a warp drive at such a slow speed?