Pentagon June 2021 Report on 120+ UAP Incidents

Status
Not open for further replies.
I thought these examples from the report listed under the header “International UAP Cases” were noteworthy:

Type: Data
Authority: Astronomers from Baylor University
A team of researchers from Baylor University in Texas have found a large cluster of mass under the Moon’s largest crater. Perhaps, it is a core of a metal asteroid that struck the Moon a millenia ago or a magma solidification. Some scientists even go so far as to assume that there can be a metal structure under the Moon’s mantle. There are different hypotheses; however, none of them can be confirmed yet.

Type: Data
Authority: International team of astrobiologists
Data sent to Earth by NASA’s Curiosity rover indicates that Mars could have has the environment factors to support life. Thiophene, a chemical substance found in coal and crude oil, could be a sign of life on the Red Planet. “There are several biological pathways for thiophenes that are more likely than chemical ones,” says Dirk Schulze-Makuch, Washington State University astrobiologist.
Source: https://analytics.dkv.global/spacetech/Unidentified-Aerial-Phenomena-Special-Overview-2021.pdf

A subsurface mass on the moon, and thiopenes detected in ancient Martian sedimentary rocks are apparently unidentified aerial phenomena.
 
also on the first page
Since 2004, there have been about 200 UAP cases reported worldwide.
Content from External Source
that seems awful low. i thought there were 144 in the usa alone.

and what does this phrase mean (again first page)
In light of the techno-signatures received from outer space, potential challenges and threats regarding UAP are discussed here.
Content from External Source
does this mean Russian spy satellites?
 
We should make a list of words like "structure" that are often used to ride the line of "I'm not saying it's aliens, but..."
 
We should make a list of words like "structure" that are often used to ride the line of "I'm not saying it's aliens, but..."
single light = ORB or SPHERE
two lights = TWO ORBS in Formation!
three lights = Triangle shaped craft

distant plane = tic tac

its visible = it emits light

something is far away = not making a sound!

something is stationary, moving very slow or on your LoS = its hovering!!

something is moving = instant acceleration

falls in the sea = clearly transmedium capabilities

light source out of sight = ..and it was gone JUST LIKE THAT

throw in random words like "bizarre" or "mysterious" for that extra icing on the cake
 
Last edited:
I'd add cylinder or cigar shape for 3 or more lights in a row, or a line of Starlink satellites before they start to spread out....
 
and what does this phrase mean (again first page)
In light of the techno-signatures received from outer space, potential challenges and threats regarding UAP are discussed here.
Content from External Source
does this mean Russian spy satellites?
"techno-signatures" is a buzzword they made up

satellites are not in outer space
 
It reads oddly. Interested to read what you all think of it

It reads extremely amateurishly. Plenty of hand-woo-wooving embedded therein too (presented indirectly, they're only reporting that someone else said it, which remains a fact even if the woo-woo itself is debunked).

The last but one page piqued my interest - I wonder who the top-1000 space-tech leaders in the world are...
(clicky-clicky: https://mindmaps.dka.global/1000-spacetech-leaders )

Yup, you guessed it - Jared Leto. Maybe because of his well-published and peer-reviewed /30 Seconds to Mars/ work? ( nope, much less spacey: https://mindmaps.dka.global/reports/303/faces/6673 ) My brain rebooted at Roman Abramovich ( https://mindmaps.dka.global/reports/303/faces/6703 ). What - waaaat!?!?!?
 
Source: https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Technosignature

As to which technosignature they’re referring to, my best guess is they’re declaring Oumuamua to be a technosignature, but I really don’t know.
They could be referring to the suggestion that the unusual light fluctuations from Tabby's Star are the result of an alien mega-structure.

On 14 October 2015, Planet Hunters' citizen scientists discovered unusual light fluctuations of the star KIC 8462852, captured by the Kepler Space Telescope. The star was nicknamed "Tabby's Star" after Tabetha S. Boyajian — the initial study's lead author. The phenomenon raised speculation that a Dyson sphere may have been discovered.[38][39] Further analysis based on data through the end of 2017 showed wavelength-dependent dimming consistent with dust but not an opaque object such as an alien megastructure, which would block all wavelengths of light equally.[40][41]
From Wikipedia: Dyson sphere
 
1667205750648.png
Excuse me, what does that mean about "Most of the UAP reported probably do represent Physical objects"?
View attachment 55740
Since most of them are physical objects , why put "Airborne Clutter" and "Natural Atmospheric Phenomena" in the probability analysis ,even In the first two places.
It seems that there are some contradiction in this.

How are "airborne clutter" and "natural atmospheric phenomena" not phenomena falling within the realm of physics, physical science or natural sciences? I'm sure you're not claiming ice crystals are ghosts, thermal fluctuations spiritual epiphanies and plastic bags evil spirits.
 
Last edited:
Excuse me back, but how are "airborne clutter" and "natural atmospheric phenomena" not phenomena falling within the realm of physics? Are you saying ice crystals are ghosts, thermal fluctuations spiritual forces and plastic bags evil spirits?
Oh shit,I have modified the post.I didn't clearly see what refers to "airborne clutter".But one doubt: thermal fluctuations also belongs to "physical object"?a bit strange.
 
It does not say that.

And "most" means "more that 50%", which leaves plenty of room (up to 49%) for other things.
I see some persons become excited when mention the "physical objects" in this report. And I initially didn't understand what refers to "airborne clutter" so that I think there isn't a reasonable explanation for the physical objects in the report.(I didnt read it carefully)
But after reading the reprot, I find the explanation placed first is still bird,balloon,UAV and so on.
So the reprot mean the physical objects "registered across multiple sensors,to include radar,infrared, electro-optical,weapon seekers,and visual observation" is mostly the regular object which can fly in the sky?
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top