Navy spokesman Gradisher's definition of UAP

Getoffthisplanet

Active Member
“The videos were never officially released to the general public by the DoD and should still be withheld,” said Pentagon Spokesperson Susan Gough to The Black Vault earlier this year. Mr. Gradisher, on behalf of the Navy, confirms the Pentagon’s position this week by adding, “The Navy has not released the videos to the general public.”
Content from External Source

“The Navy designates the objects contained in these videos as unidentified aerial phenomena,” said Joseph Gradisher, official spokesperson for the Deputy Chief of Naval Operations for Information Warfare. When asked why the phrase “UAP” is now utilized by the U.S. Navy, and not “UFO,” Mr. Gradisher added, “The ‘Unidentified Aerial Phenomena’ terminology is used because it provides the basic descriptor for the sightings/observations of unauthorized/unidentified aircraft/objects that have been observed entering/operating in the airspace of various military-controlled training ranges.”
Content from External Source
Neither the cognizant Navy offices nor DOPSR have record of any correspondence responding to a request for unrestricted release of the subject videos in 2017,” said Mr. Gradisher, thus confirming that no evidence exists that authorized a public release for the three videos in question.
Content from External Source
Source: https://www.theblackvault.com/docum...al-phenomena-not-cleared-for-public-release/#

I'm confused about Gradisher's definition of UAP.

While he does specifically say "The Navy designates the objects contained in these videos as unidentified aerial phenomena".

Is it fair to say, "authorized, unidentified aircraft were observed operating in the airspace of various military-controlled training ranges"?
 
Last edited by a moderator:

deirdre

Senior Member.
I'm confused about Gradisher's definition of UAP.

While he does specifically say "The Navy designates the objects contained in these videos as unidentified aerial phenomena".

Is it fair to say, "authorized, unidentified aircraft were observed operating in the airspace of various military-controlled training ranges"?

how can they be unidentified if they were authorized?
 

Getoffthisplanet

Active Member
how can they be unidentified if they were authorized?

Does permission absolutely require identification?

I'm probably just over thinking it.

But it is a weird way to frame all of this; unauthorized/unidentified, aircraft/objects, entering/operating and sightings/observations.
 

deirdre

Senior Member.
Does permission absolutely require identification?
yes :) it's the military, not a ouija board session.

i agree it's weird to write "unauthorized" unless to the military UAP can also mean "unauthorized aircraft phenomenon". ?? But that sounds doubtful to me that they would use the same term.
 

Getoffthisplanet

Active Member
yes :) it's the military, not a ouija board session.

lol

Not to nitpick on Mr. Gradisher, well, actually to nitpick, if something is an aircraft hasn't it been somewhat identified?

So...the Flir1, Go Fast and Gimbal videos show "unauthorized and unidentified aircraft and objects that are observed and sighted entering and operating in the airspace of various military-controlled training ranges".

Yeesh.

See, it's the /'s that throw me.

If the things are unauthorized and unidentified, then how are they aircraft and objects?

Is he saying one video shows an unauthorized and unidentified aircraft and another shows an unauthorized and unidentified object?

But if something is an aircraft, then it's been identified. And if something is an object then it has not been identified.
 
Last edited:

jarlrmai

Senior Member
lol

Not to nitpick on Mr. Gradisher, well, actually to nitpick, if something is an aircraft hasn't it been somewhat identified?

So...the Flir1, Go Fast and Gimbal videos show "unauthorized and unidentified aircraft and objects that are observed and sighted entering and operating in the airspace of various military-controlled training ranges".

Yeesh.

See, it's the /'s that throw me.

If the things are unauthorized and unidentified, then how are they aircraft and objects?

Is he saying one video shows an unauthorized and unidentified aircraft and another shows an unauthorized and unidentified object?

But if something is an aircraft, then it's been identified. And if something is an object then it has not been identified.

It's a context issue, to the US military an aircraft is probably "unidentified" because they don't know make/model/flight number etc the only people that make the leap from unidentified in this context to alien spacecraft or and object not of human origin are people looking for aliens.
 

Joe_the_Joe

New Member
Authorized and unidentified would perhaps be the designation of an aircraft for training purposes pertaining to unidentified aircraft, and unauthorized and unidentified would be an actual incident? (Assuming a one-layer-deep rabbithole of authorization i.e. not a surprise drill)
Authorized could potentially just mean that the aircraft got permission to enter the airspace first.
 

Keith Beachy

Senior Member
how can they be unidentified if they were authorized?
If they are a secret program hypersonic vehicles which have been lost to the sea in Warning Areas along the coast where USAF/Navy/Marine pilots go to play. The Copilot on my crew lost his door panel on the T-38 he was flying at 700 mph in the Warning Area in along the coast in Northern California.

The military/NASA/et al do not always deconflict (or schedule properly) with all agencies authorized, or who think the are authorized to use Military Airspace. Thus a Navy pilot could see a vehicle in the airspace they are playing in, and not have a clue what it is.

My experience with scheduling errors, or thinking they can just use the Military Airspace and stuff that should not happen concern an SR-71 refueling next to Okinawa in a Warning Area. We are in orbit waiting for the SR-71 to takeoff, and I see a F-86 towing a triangular target right in front of us (I kind of sloughed into my seat... ). We are at 27-28,000 feet. We are kind of radio silent, and I look down in a minute or two and see what look like bees (other fighters below us) trying to attack the target the F-86 is towing. Then on Guard (emergency frequency for the Military 243.0, twice the freq of civil emergency), we hear knock it off, 'knock it off', and reference to the Tanker in the area...

Thus it is possible for planes to be where other planes don't expert other planes or experiments to be. The military has a constant turnover, and "new guys" are always taking over positions. I know people don't properly schedule military airspace all the time. I have more war stories as examples.
 
Last edited:

Getoffthisplanet

Active Member
The military/NASA/et al do not always deconflict (or schedule properly) with all agencies authorized...Thus it is possible for planes to be where other planes don't expert other planes or experiments to be.

That's what I meant by "authorized, unidentified aircraft were observed operating in the airspace of various military-controlled training ranges", but fell short in elucidating properly.

Awesome story. Thanks for sharing it.

But, as Greenewald stated yesterday:

"training exercises utilizing classified drone or related technology seems like a plausible explanation for these encounters, ...these new statements by the Navy labeling the cases as “unidentified aerial phenomena” are making some second guess that theory."
 

Getoffthisplanet

Active Member
I'm certainly not suggesting that there needs to be any super-advanced technology on display that needs explaining.

I completely agree with you.

But, now I'm wondering, does the Navy labeling something unidentified exclude it being from classified? Would they use "unidentified" to obscure "classified"?

And would NASA or DARPA or whoever have circled back and given a courtesy call up to the Navy saying, "Whoops. Yeah, those were ours. We're not gonna tell you what they are, but they're ours".

Or would they leave the Navy hanging out to dry?
 

Mick West

Administrator
Staff member
I extracted all the quotes from Grardisher in another thread:
https://www.metabunk.org/are-the-navy-ufos-real-or-just-in-the-low-information-zone.t10921/

https://www.theblackvault.com/docum...ial-phenomena-not-cleared-for-public-release/
SEPT 10, 2019
  • “The Navy designates the objects contained in these videos as unidentified aerial phenomena,”
  • “The Navy has not released the videos to the general public.”
  • “Neither the cognizant Navy offices nor DOPSR have record of any correspondence responding to a request for unrestricted release of the subject videos in 2017,
Content from External Source
https://www.theblackvault.com/docum...ally-acknowledged-encounters-with-phenomena/#
SEPT 11 2019
  • “The ‘Unidentified Aerial Phenomena’ terminology is used because it provides the basic descriptor for the sightings/observations of unauthorized/unidentified aircraft/objects that have been observed entering/operating in the airspace of various military-controlled training ranges.”
  • “The Navy has not publicly released characterizations or descriptions, nor released any hypothesis or conclusions, in regard to the objects contained in the referenced videos.”
  • “The Navy considers the phenomena contained/depicted in those 3 videos as unidentified”
  • “The Navy’s official identifiers for the referenced videos do not match the names referenced (FLIR1, Gimbal and GoFast)… the Navy identifies these videos by the respective dates of the observations/sightings,”
  • “[The] dates are 14 November 2004 for ‘FLIR1’ and 21 January 2015 for both ‘Gimbal’ and ‘GoFast.’”
  • “We will not be providing any details on individual reports,”
Content from External Source
https://www.theblackvault.com/docum...ated-circumstances-behind-leaked-ufo-footage/
SEPT 17 2019
  • “With respect to the 2004 sighting by aircraft from the aircraft carrier USS Nimitz (CVN 68); that video was widely shared throughout the ship at that time. In 2007, one of those crewmembers posted the video onto the public web,”
  • “In 2009, the online post of the video came to the attention of Navy officials,”
  • “…in consultation with Navy law enforcement personnel, [the Navy] decided not to pursue the matter. Given the time since recording (approximately 5 years), the widespread distribution of the recording within the ship at the time of recording, and the size of the crew at the time (approximately 5,000), it was determined that there was no way to accurately determine who might have released the video.”
  • “With respect to the other 2 videos cited, the Navy has no information on how they were released into general circulation.”
  • “The Navy will not comment on claims/comments from any outside parties with respect to the videos you’ve mentioned.”
Content from External Source
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.

It really does not amount to much when you strip away the commentary.
 
Last edited:

JohnP

New Member
Authorized and unidentified would perhaps be the designation of an aircraft for training purposes pertaining to unidentified aircraft, and unauthorized and unidentified would be an actual incident? (Assuming a one-layer-deep rabbithole of authorization i.e. not a surprise drill)
Authorized could potentially just mean that the aircraft got permission to enter the airspace first.

Maybe eveything is "unauthorized" until it's authorized?
 

Mick West

Administrator
Staff member
I'm confused about Gradisher's definition of UAP.

While he does specifically say "The Navy designates the objects contained in these videos as unidentified aerial phenomena".

Is it fair to say, "authorized, unidentified aircraft were observed operating in the airspace of various military-controlled training ranges"?

I'm a bit confused as to why you are confused.

“The ‘Unidentified Aerial Phenomena’ terminology is used because it provides the basic descriptor for the sightings/observations of unauthorized/unidentified aircraft/objects that have been observed entering/operating in the airspace of various military-controlled training ranges.”
Content from External Source
The "/" means "or", so read it as:

"the sightings or observations of unauthorized or unidentified aircraft or objects that have been observed entering or operating in the airspace of various military-controlled training ranges."

It's a non-exclusive or, and in each case could maybe be read as "or, more generally,"

"the sightings (or, more generally, observations) of unauthorized (or, more generally, unidentified) aircraft or, more generally, objects) that have been observed entering (or, more generally, operating) in the airspace of various military-controlled training ranges."

Although it's probably a mistake to try to parse too deeply.
 
Thread starter Related Articles Forum Replies Date
jarlrmai New potential hoaxed/LARP "Navy FLIR" video UFO Videos and Reports from the US Navy 8
banditsat12oclock US Navy "UFO" patent by Salvatore Cezar Pais UFOs and Aliens 8
M FLIR Technician Discusses Navy videos and claims to refute Mick's claims UFO Videos and Reports from the US Navy 300
dimebag2 Poll : Which DOD Navy video do you consider debunked ? UFO Videos and Reports from the US Navy 74
LorentzHall White Flying Object Over US Navy base in Japan (July 2021) Skydentify - What is that Thing in the Sky? 14
Mick West Corbell: "Unidentified glowing objects near US Navy ship" [Planes or drones?] UFO Videos and Reports from the US Navy 17
Agent K Why all the UFO reports from the Navy, and not the Air Force? UFO Videos and Reports from the US Navy 13
bird_up "Gimbal UFO video rendered in 3D" by Abominati0n UFOs and Aliens 5
Mick West The Evolution of Official DoD/Pentagon Statements Regarding The Navy UFO Videos and UAP Investigations UFO Videos and Reports from the US Navy 6
Mick West Explained: New Navy UFO Videos UFO Videos and Reports from the US Navy 210
Mick West Are the Navy UFOs "Real," or just in the Low Information Zone? UFO Videos and Reports from the US Navy 31
Mick West Why Michio Kaku is wrong about the UFO Burden of Proof & Navy Videos UFO Videos and Reports from the US Navy 38
Getoffthisplanet Flir1, Go Fast, Gimbal - Navy Releases New Information: Official Dates UFO Videos and Reports from the US Navy 9
Mick West Cube in a Sphere UFO's Seen by Navy pilots. Radar Targets? UFO Videos and Reports from the US Navy 17
Mick West NYT: GIMBAL Video of U.S. Navy Jet Encounter with Unknown Object UFO Videos and Reports from the US Navy 814
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
Related Articles

























Related Articles

Top