USS Omaha UFO / UAP Radar Video

neo_seoul

New Member
Maybe it's based on altitude to determine if they are sea or air tracks. But then they would have to be flying low, so yeah don't know. It is strange they are showing up as surface tracks ie green cross

Did you find any info on what the classification of Neutral is . That would be interesting to see what they classify as being a Neutral target


all in all, I don't see anything inconsistant with them encountering drones along with the rest of the fleet which TheDrive reported on

https://www.thedrive.com/the-war-zo...us-drones-off-california-over-numerous-nights
This one from the PDF (https://www.jcs.mil/Portals/36/Documents/Doctrine/Other_Pubs/ms_2525d.pdf) seems more recent symbology/nomenclature:
1622189259425.png

Also, from what I can tell, the VisionMaster FT X band radar is a normal spinning radar that is also available commercially, it's not a 3D beamforming radar (like the AN/SPY-1 is for example), so it's entirely possible that it wouldn't be able to distinguish between actual sea surface and low altitude flying objects that are within the detection area. I haven't looked at the spec in depth.

Definitely the tracks on the video are yellow, compared with the SWAN ACE which is green, and the shapes seem to have more rounded corners, which would match with the newer table from the 2008 MIL-STD-2525D PDF.
 

gtoffo

Active Member
The Pentagon has confirmed the video is taken by Navy personnel: https://www.theblackvault.com/docum...ther-swift-pentagon-confirmation-is-received/

The Black Vault reached out to the Pentagon for comment on the release, and in just over three and a half hours, Pentagon Spokesperson Susan Gough replied and confirmed the video’s authenticity. She stated:

“I can confirm that the video you sent was taken by Navy personnel, and that the UAPTF included it in their ongoing examinations. I have no further information on it for you.”

“The only videos that have been authorized for release were the three that we announced and posted to an official DoD website in April 2020.

Due to the high public interest, we’ve been confirming the videos as having been taken by Navy personnel to avoid misconceptions about them. Note that on all these recent ones, we’re only confirming two things:

— that they were taken by Navy personnel
— that the UAPTF included them in the ongoing examinations

That’s it. Nothing else. Not confirming any other details or information about them.
When asked if the Department of Defense was launching, or has launched, an investigation or inquiry regarding the unauthorized release of material, she simply replied:

“I can’t comment on what we may doing about these unauthorized releases at this time.”
 

jackfrostvc

Active Member
At this point, I'm not seeing anything that suggests anything other than drones as was reported by the drive.

So far it seems, we have party balloons off virginia beach which Knapp implies as being alien craft

Drones and Bokeh which Corbell implies as being flying pyramid alien craft and transmedium alien craft.

This is ridiculous, the MSM seem unwilling to put even the slightest effort to look into the claims.
 
Last edited:

Max Phalange

Active Member
I think I'm honestly going crazy over what's being said - I hear "oh actually 38 knots" and then I hear "a 138 knots holy shit". I cleaned up your audio using a notch filter to remove what to eye looked like the most egregious spikes in the FFT (which I assume would be the background whines). I guess this is yanny/laurel all over again. But I do think 138 makes sense in the context of "holy shit"
I can hear it either way if I try, but "oh a hundred and" comes a bit easier than "oh actually".

But compared to the previous "46 knots, 50 knots," would 38 knots merit a "holy shit, they're going fast"? There is an edit in between, so the conversation may have lost that context, and 38 knots is still pretty fast for a surface target I suppose.
 

JFDee

Senior Member.
On Twitter, someone posted pages from a VisionMaster FT brochure. It suggests that there are advanced versions for military purposes that include abilites for 'helicopter approach'.

I'm attaching the full PDF.
 

Attachments

  • VMFT-Naval-Features.pdf
    4.3 MB · Views: 57

DavidB66

Active Member
Anti-ship missiles like the French Exocet or the Chinese Silkworm often fly close to the surface precisely in order to avoid or delay detection by radar. In recent times small drones carrying an explosive device would also be a threat from terrorists, or even drug traffickers, as well as state actors. One would expect any warship to be sensitive to these threats. Radar aimed primarily at low-level targets (e.g. the Silkworm flying at about 20 meters) might serve a dual purpose of detecting surface vessels and low-flying missiles or drones. As the two types of target overlap in height (up to, say, 50 meters) any radar system aimed primarily at one type would also be likely to detect the other, even if this wasn't the intention.
 

Kvothe7

Member
Sorry, but what is the symbol at 310° ? I think it's friendly air but i'm not sure.

Also, I did a few calculations:-
Correct me if I'm wrong, but 12 nm (nautical miles) refers to the radius of the outer circle, right ?
The distance from the ship to the outer circle is 234 pixels.
Therefore, 1 nm=234/12=19.5 pixels.
The reading at 250° is at a distance of 143 pixels or 143/19.5=7.33 nm.
The reading at 180° is at a distance of 90 pixels or 90/19.5=4.61 nm.
The reading at 40° is at a distance of 175 pixels or 175/19.5= 8.97 nm.

corbell-radar1.png
Could anyone please find the exact location of the ship Swan Ace at that time ? The coordinates given here are not very clear. If Swan Ace's coordinates can be found, we can also find the USS Omaha's exact location along with those of the radar blips
 
Last edited:

HaaOK

New Member
I ran it through a denoiser. Sounds like 138 knot to me.
 

Attachments

  • audionoisereduction.wav
    217.3 KB · Views: 0

JFDee

Senior Member.
There is! I sent off an email earlier today and just got back the reply. They offer locations for Swan Ace in Jun-Aug 2019 down to every five minutes, or every hour if you're willing to pay less. Even the lowest price, $171 for hour-by-hour data, is a bit much for my measly coffers, unfortunately.

OK, I've sent annother request, for just one week (July 11-18 2019). We would need only the position and the timestamp.
Let's see what they propose.
 

jarlrmai

Senior Member
So is this the same radar that would be used for those threats? Those missiles are very fast. I guess low drones and small boats could be covered by this kind of system.

Watching the video there seems to be 2 cuts, one just before when he starts saying track 781 just sped up to 46kts 50kts, then there's a jump in the position and heading of tracks, then he says 138kts holy shit

as per the time line

:01 “OOD if you can write a general lat/long of where we’re at.”
:03 [faint voice] “We do have some X-band RADAR tracks…”
:05 “Yes sir.”
:06 “And then… the number of contacts you’ve got. Get the course and speed meters off ’em.”
:09 “Copy.”
:10 “You know what I mean? In relative position to us. And bearings. Might be helpful too.”
:15 “Eyes up.”
:16 “Eyes down.”
:18 [intercom] “CSM TAO Maintain track, maintain track as best you can.”
few seconds roll

CUT?, jump in camera, and tracks move around, and cursor moves.

:24 “Track 781 just sped up to 46 knots. 50 knots. Closing in.”

CUT?, tracks move slightly an VV changes and camera jumps.

:33 “138 knots. Holy s***. They’re going fast. Oh, it’s turning around.”
:36 “That one’s pretty much perfectly zero zero zero relative, right?”
:39 “Yeah.”
:40 “263 at 3 miles. 55 knots, speed.”
 

FatPhil

Active Member
OK, I've sent annother request, for just one week (July 11-18 2019). We would need only the position and the timestamp.
Let's see what they propose.

Could Mick use his name and reputation as some kind of /quid pro quo/ - would any of these services want an "as used by Mick West of Metabunk" as something that could increase their brand value?

Of course, this kind of thing is what crowd funding was designed for - how many redditors would be willing to part with a dollar for something that could crack the case?
 

JFDee

Senior Member.
OK, I've sent annother request, for just one week (July 11-18 2019). We would need only the position and the timestamp.
Let's see what they propose.

I've received a quote and a demo file which includes the very first position of that time span. It's at the West Coast, right off the Salish Sea, at the border between Canada and the U.S.

So quite plausible for a following journey southward.

Edit: the price looks reasonable to me, so I'm going to invest a bit into this hobby :)
 

JFDee

Senior Member.
So here is the position data of the SWAN ACE of July 15 and 16 2019, resolution one hour.
Looks like it's a pretty good match for the 15th. The ship is on its way into San Diego Bay / harbor.

Don't have the time to compare with the radar video right now. Anyone else?

Note that the time stamp is UTC, so local DS time should be 9 7 hours back, I think. (Still confused about DST ...)

Edit: Tracking map added

swan_ace.png
 

Attachments

  • SWAN_ACE_1hour_20190715-20190716.csv
    6.4 KB · Views: 70
Last edited:

Hydra

New Member
Someone on Twitter is claiming one of the objects accelerates to 1200mph (see full thread for more data)

Source: https://twitter.com/4Eridani/status/1398187720330072064?s=20


I'm not sure this method is sound.
Here's their method:

They've made another, unstated assumption.

Assumption 3: The single-frame jump is the motion of the object, and not the tracking system making an adjustment, or something else.

Very tricksome to show that third assumption is true, particularly considering the reported speeds of everything else.
 

jackfrostvc

Active Member
Someone on Twitter is claiming one of the objects accelerates to 1200mph (see full thread for more data)

Source: https://twitter.com/4Eridani/status/1398187720330072064?s=20


I'm not sure this method is sound. The contacts seem to be jumping around a lot. Is that actual movement or just inaccuracy in the system? They seem like pretty big jumps for it to be a system inaccuracy though.....


This is the same guy that popped up from no where and made a claim on twitter saying the triangle video was legit and Mick West had faked stuff or something to that effect in his debunking.

This guy confused focus with zoom, got the field of view wrong etc. It's one of the accounts I have on my "Very Suspicious" list
 

Alphadunk

Active Member
So here is the position data of the SWAN ACE of July 15 and 16 2019, resolution one hour.
Looks like it's a pretty good match for the 15th. The ship is on its way into San Diego Bay / harbor.

Corbell noted in the Mysterywire interview a civilian vessel is also on the radar so it's likely the Swan Ace. Is it possible the Swan Ace was used to launch drones? I've read a few articles that have mentioned China has used vessels registered as civilian for surveillance activities. I don't see anything suspicious in Swan Ace's travel logs though.

Here's the quote from Corbell (Source):
There’s also in the footage, there’s a civilian vessel, so you can kind of see the difference.
 

JFDee

Senior Member.
Corbell noted in the Mysterywire interview a civilian vessel is also on the radar so it's likely the Swan Ace. Is it possible the Swan Ace was used to launch drones? I've read a few articles that have mentioned China has used vessels registered as civilian for surveillance activities. I don't see anything suspicious in Swan Ace's travel logs though.

Here's the quote from Corbell (Source):

Yes, the name SWAN ACE is displayed in the NE of the screen on some shots. It was easy to find the ship.

I see no indication that the vessel had anything to do with the incident. It travels on with its normal cruise speed - no slowing down or changing course.
 

Mick West

Administrator
Staff member
Via twitter:
 

jarlrmai

Senior Member
I
Yes, the name SWAN ACE is displayed in the NE of the screen on some shots. It was easy to find the ship.

I see no indication that the vessel had anything to do with the incident. It travels on with its normal cruise speed - no slowing down or changing course.

The speculation is that China uses commercial ships as platforms to spy on US Navy ships. It wouldn't need to change course or anything to be a surveillance platform.

There are 3 levels of speculation going on simultaneously here.

1. Nothing out of the ordinary is happening, but there is a 'drone flap' in the US Navy

2. There is a real drone situation, with foreign drones flying around US Navy Ships.

3. Alien spaceships or foreign super drones with physics defying technology.
 

Kvothe7

Member
According to Corbell, the so-called 'crafts' were 'minimum 6 ft in diameter-solid mass', 'spherical' and 'self-illuminated'. I don't quite understand where they are getting this data from. The closest reading on the radar in this footage was 4 and a 1/2 nautical miles away. As far as I know, there has been no confirmation of visual sighting of the 'crafts' in question. Is it possible to interpret the radar data that we have seen and calculate the size, shape, density etc. of the objects ?
 

Kvothe7

Member
I

The speculation is that China uses commercial ships as platforms to spy on US Navy ships. It wouldn't need to change course or anything to be a surveillance platform.

There are 3 levels of speculation going on simultaneously here.

1. Nothing out of the ordinary is happening, but there is a 'drone flap' in the US Navy

2. There is a real drone situation, with foreign drones flying around US Navy Ships.

3. Alien spaceships or foreign super drones with physics defying technology.
Adressing point 3. , is there any evidence so far that these drones are defying physics ? The fastest military drone( Falcon Hypersonic Technology Vehicle) in the world has a top speed of 27,167 kmph. It even survived the flight for 9 minutes. There are also several drones capable of flying at speeds of Mach1 to Mach 6. There is also a drone capable of flying for 120 hours with a top speed of 222 kmph.(Yabon Smart Eye UAV)
 

Scaramanga

Member
I'm curious for anyone's opinion on how close the cellphone is to the screen both in this video and the 'oval' UFO that sinks into the sea. It's just that if they are screens someone is sitting in front of...there surely ought to be a head in the way. And I'd consider it unlikely that the person sitting at the screen is the same person taking the video, as the act of videoing would mean he was not paying full attention to what was going on. In neither videos does the angle of video appear to be well off to one side. If one knew the size of these screens, one could work out from the horizontal fore-shortening what angle the videos were taken at.
 

jarlrmai

Senior Member
I'm curious for anyone's opinion on how close the cellphone is to the screen both in this video and the 'oval' UFO that sinks into the sea. It's just that if they are screens someone is sitting in front of...there surely ought to be a head in the way. And I'd consider it unlikely that the person sitting at the screen is the same person taking the video, as the act of videoing would mean he was not paying full attention to what was going on. In neither videos does the angle of video appear to be well off to one side. If one knew the size of these screens, one could work out from the horizontal fore-shortening what angle the videos were taken at.

Yeah I was curious about that. It is possible though that the screen being observed was duplicated to this screen. We also don't know if the videos are cropped a bit.
 

jarlrmai

Senior Member
Adressing point 3. , is there any evidence so far that these drones are defying physics ? The fastest military drone( Falcon Hypersonic Technology Vehicle) in the world has a top speed of 27,167 kmph. It even survived the flight for 9 minutes. There are also several drones capable of flying at speeds of Mach1 to Mach 6. There is also a drone capable of flying for 120 hours with a top speed of 222 kmph.(Yabon Smart Eye UAV)

You get into the weeds a bit here, if Micks analyses of the videos produced so far are mostly accurate and I have no reason to doubt them so far and no-one else has been willing to come on here and show good counter claims. Then the only "evidence" of speed / "impossible" manoeuvres is the second-hand telling of what was picked up on the RADAR of Nimitz, and some parts of Fravor's telling of his encounter. So no there is no hard evidence that we have seen.

The recent videos leaked to Corbel are getting increasingly less "analysis" from the UFO people and are more being left for the viewer to fill in the gaps with whatever they want. The original 3 videos all came with "expert analysis" by TTSA. This is where we started with them trying to see if they showed what the TTSA said they did, they did not seem to.

Now we start from scratch with each video not only trying to work out what it shows, but whether it actually show's anything extraordinary at all.
 

Alphadunk

Active Member
Then the only "evidence" of speed / "impossible" manoeuvres is the second-hand telling of what was picked up on the RADAR of Nimitz, and some parts of Fravor's telling of his encounter. So no there is no hard evidence that we have seen.
I don't disagree with what you've said here, namely that we don't have any sort of evidence of these extraordinary flight characteristics in the public sphere. That said, it isn't just Fravor, Day, etc. saying this stuff. Over and over we've heard officials, servicemen, etc. make the claim that "things" are moving in ways we can't explain. The big mystery is where they're getting this stuff and why they're vocalizing it so candidly. Are they just repeating the same stories we've all heard or have they been privy to evidence outside of what is available to the public?

Pasting this excellent comment from @Empiricist for quote sourcing:

Sure, but Obama has also claimed that there are things we can't explain: "What is true, and I'm actually being serious here, is that there are, uh, there's footage of and records of objects in the skies that we don't know exactly what they are, we can't explain how they move, their trajectory, they did not have an easily explainable path." It's possible that he is just quoting from things he's heard recently on the news who report on this all too credulously, but the way he spoke about it seems to me to imply that he actually had been briefed on it and wasn't just repeating tabloids.

Or John Ratcliffe: "Frankly, there's a lot more sightings than have been made public... When we talk about sightings, we're talking about objects that have been seen my Navy or Air force pilots, or have been picked up by satellite imagery, that um, frankly engage in actions that are difficult to explain, that um, movements that are hard to replicate, that we don't have the technology for, are traveling at speeds that exceed the sound barrier without a sonic boom."

Or John Brennan: "But I think some of the phenomena we’re going to be seeing continues to be unexplained and might, in fact, be some type of phenomenon that is the result of something that we don’t yet understand and that could involve some type of activity that some might say constitutes a different form of life."

Then you have people on the Senate Intelligence Committee like Martin Heinrich saying things like "I don't know what it is, but anytime you have legitimate pilots describing something that doesn't seem to conform to the laws of physics that govern aviation and is in US airspace, I think it is something we need to get to the bottom of [...] If there is a foreign government that had these kinds of capabilities I think we would see other indications of advanced technology. I can't imagine that what has been described or shown in some of the videos belongs to any government that I'm aware of."
 

jarlrmai

Senior Member
I don't disagree with what you've said here, namely that we don't have any sort of evidence of these extraordinary flight characteristics in the public sphere. That said, it isn't just Fravor, Day, etc. saying this stuff. Over and over we've heard officials, servicemen, etc. make the claim that "things" are moving in ways we can't explain. The big mystery is where they're getting this stuff and why they're vocalizing it so candidly. Are they just repeating the same stories we've all heard or have they been privy to evidence outside of what is available to the public?

Pasting this excellent comment from @Empiricist for quote sourcing:

I think a lot of those quotes are referring to Kevin Day/Fravor's account and possibly Dietrich/Graves. Also there's been a lot of conflation and confusion of the accounts with the videos, outside of this forum I'm sure no one actually could tell you the provenance and relation of the various videos and accounts. It's all pinned on the accounts with the videos thrown into the mix and we know the accounts and the videos don't match up.
 

Empiricist

New Member
It's all pinned on the accounts with the videos thrown into the mix and we know the accounts and the videos don't match up.

Heinrich is on the Senate Intelligence committee, Brennan is the former CIA director, and former presidents like Obama continue to get security briefings. I find it very hard to believe that all these people, rather than referring to classified information they have access to (especially considering Ratcliffe referred to "satellite imagery") are instead just breathlessly repeating the Tic Tac account claims without some stronger evidence, especially since this topic is so culturally taboo and I don't believe this many people would put their credibility on the line to signal-boost these claims otherwise. I mean, Ratcliffe explicitly states the following, in contradiction to your claim: "Frankly, there's a lot more sightings than have been made public."

Obviously you can just claim Ratcliffe is lying, but his specific statements directly contradict the interpretation you are proposing - that all these claims are just referring to the Tic Tac incident and related lore.
 
Last edited:

Scaramanga

Member
I

The speculation is that China uses commercial ships as platforms to spy on US Navy ships. It wouldn't need to change course or anything to be a surveillance platform.

There are 3 levels of speculation going on simultaneously here.

1. Nothing out of the ordinary is happening, but there is a 'drone flap' in the US Navy

2. There is a real drone situation, with foreign drones flying around US Navy Ships.

3. Alien spaceships or foreign super drones with physics defying technology.
I would add 4) Unknown natural phenomenon. I doubt we've discovered the full range of things such as sprites, earthquake lights, etc. The list should definitely include the possibility that whatever is being observed is not 'technology' at all.
 

Heavytread

Member
So here is the position data of the SWAN ACE of July 15 and 16 2019, resolution one hour.
Looks like it's a pretty good match for the 15th. The ship is on its way into San Diego Bay / harbor.

So *all* of the NOAA tracking data for pretty much what looks like all of North America is available in about 1 minute resolution from this site here. These are huge files-- each day is about ~330 MB of data

I grabbed all data for Jul 13 - 17 of 2019 and imported it into a database. Here is a complete track at about 5 minute resolution for the Swan Ace (there will be some samples missing here and there because they don't fall directly on the 5 minute mark. I'll write a more capable query later).

It definitely passes to the north of the Omaha as previously located from the radar display. (This pic actually shows the position of the cursor.. the ship's position is 7.7 NM to the west.. I'll get something more accurate when I get a chance)

1622225190169.png

Pardon my lousy Google Earth skills.. I'll put something together a bit better later.

This weekend I'll work on determining all ships that were in the area around the time of the incident, but honestly I'm pretty sure the US Navy has already done their homework in that regard ;)
 

Attachments

  • swan ace coordinates.csv
    41.9 KB · Views: 64

jarlrmai

Senior Member
Yeah getting back to actual analysis does anyone concur that the video appears to have 2 cuts as per below, that would seem to possibly affect the narrative.

:01 “OOD if you can write a general lat/long of where we’re at.”
:03 [faint voice] “We do have some X-band RADAR tracks…”
:05 “Yes sir.”
:06 “And then… the number of contacts you’ve got. Get the course and speed meters off ’em.”
:09 “Copy.”
:10 “You know what I mean? In relative position to us. And bearings. Might be helpful too.”
:15 “Eyes up.”
:16 “Eyes down.”
:18 [intercom] “CSM TAO Maintain track, maintain track as best you can.”
few seconds roll

CUT 1?, jump in camera, and tracks move around, and cursor jumps.

:24 “Track 781 just sped up to 46 knots. 50 knots. Closing in.”

CUT 2?, tracks move slightly and VV changes direction and camera jumps again.

:33 “138 knots. Holy s***. They’re going fast. Oh, it’s turning around.”
:36 “That one’s pretty much perfectly zero zero zero relative, right?”
:39 “Yeah.”
:40 “263 at 3 miles. 55 knots, speed.”
 

Alphadunk

Active Member
Yes and if IIRC Corbell has never clarified the origin of the cuts in the two Omaha videos. I'd also want to ask him if he has manipulated these videos in any way, even in terms of file type conversion, or if he is disseminating them exactly as transmitted to him.

It's unclear if a single video was cut into shorter snippets for unknown reasons or if the person recording just recorded several short clips of a single event and then stitched them together. It also remains unclear whether the two Omaha videos are related, i.e. Are we to assume both videos are tracking the same "object?"
 
Thread starter Related Articles Forum Replies Date
H CLAIM: USS Omaha videos were taken on the ship's "Combat Information Center" by "VIPER team" UFO Videos and Reports from the US Navy 5
Mick West USS Omaha "Transmedium" Sphere Descending To the Sea UFO Videos and Reports from the US Navy 289
P Possible explanation for radar jamming in the Nimitz encounter UFO Videos and Reports from the US Navy 33
jarlrmai ATFLIR and range information (RADAR/LASER/Passive range?) UFO Videos and Reports from the US Navy 15
H Were Fravor and co in the middle of a test of radar spoofing tech? UFO Videos and Reports from the US Navy 20
D [Possible explanation] Kevin Day (Nimitz tictac ufos) radar encounter UFO Videos and Reports from the US Navy 9
Mendel Debunked: Radar Waves Affect Clouds General Discussion 4
Z.W. Wolf Kobe Bryant Helicopter: Air Traffic Recording and Radar Footage General Discussion 3
Mick West Cube in a Sphere UFO's Seen by Navy pilots. Radar Targets? UFO Videos and Reports from the US Navy 17
Whitebeard 'Strange' Flight Path on FR24 Skydentify - What is that Thing in the Sky? 10
W Debunked: RADAR proves no curve! Flat Earth 30
Marin B Flight Radar 24 glitch? Skydentify - What is that Thing in the Sky? 4
S Claim: Russian radar would have picked up MH17 missile Flight MH17 15
Jparmele89 Radar Anomaly, October 9, 2015 Science and Pseudoscience 7
Trailblazer Unusual flight paths over SW England Skydentify - What is that Thing in the Sky? 12
TEEJ Belfast Observer Skywatch claiming that airliners do not appear on Flight Radar 24 - 10th March 2015 Skydentify - What is that Thing in the Sky? 0
D [MoreInfoNeeded]Germany NewsTV: Explanation for radar cloud Contrails and Chemtrails 14
TEEJ Gary Cameron Clydebank, Scotland Video, 1st May 2015- Claim of aircraft not being on Flight Radar 24 Skydentify - What is that Thing in the Sky? 11
Efftup Issue with Flight Radar 24? General Discussion 10
Simon Gunson MH370 Radar sighting in Straits of Malacca debunked Flight MH370 30
Qualiall Air Algerie Flight AH5017 carrying 116 disappears from radar General Discussion 10
BlueCollarCritic Weatherman Acknowledges Military's Dumping of Chaff into The Atmosphere Contrails and Chemtrails 27
M Claim: MH370 "thrown around like fighter jet in a bid to avoid radar source"? [Dubious] Flight MH370 11
David Fraser The NERC funded MST Radar facility in Wales is not a HAARP installation Contrails and Chemtrails 58
ssfor27 Debunked: Dover Air Force Base radar "pulse" HAARP 1
solrey Debunked: Radar anomalies and severe weather HAARP 42
solrey Debunked: RADAR used to GENERATE LIGHTNING via S-band HAARP 2
Spongebob New analysis of 9/11 radar and video evidence 9/11 6
Mick West Debunked: Chemtrail Spray Operations Captured on Doppler Radar Contrails and Chemtrails 10
N Explained: "Jellyfish object" video in Russia [Rocket Launch] Skydentify - What is that Thing in the Sky? 11
F Example of a Boeing 737 "Tic Tac" (video) UFOs and Aliens 9
ki_cz Need help debunking FE video Flat Earth 42
R Video of UFOs around/on the sun - Sunspots and a Bird UFOs and Aliens 15
dimebag2 Poll : Which DOD Navy video do you consider debunked ? UFO Videos and Reports from the US Navy 41
LorentzHall Elizondo Claims DoD Have A 50-Feet-Away Photo & 23 Minute Video UFO Videos and Reports from the US Navy 30
R Explained: Video of Vandenberg UFO shooting down ICBM [reenactment] UFOs and Aliens 8
Vara La Fey Video of all FAA mandated aircraft lights? Skydentify - What is that Thing in the Sky? 7
V Needs debunking: flat earthers claim this reflection to show a harness in ISS video Flat Earth 10
M Any explanation for this UFO video? UFOs and Aliens 6
V Gimbal Video Interactive Software/Program UFO Videos and Reports from the US Navy 16
S Does this video footage show a dragon (sea serpent) attacking a manatee? [No] Ghosts, Monsters, and the Paranormal 4
CeruleanBlu Video summary of Independent Forensic Team Report on Oroville Dam Oroville Dam 2
J White dot in top left of Gimbal video UFO Videos and Reports from the US Navy 3
bird_up "Gimbal UFO video rendered in 3D" by Abominati0n UFOs and Aliens 5
M 'UFO' video just shows contrail formation? Contrails and Chemtrails 5
Mick West Mike Lindell's 2-Hour Election Fraud Claim Video "Absolute Proof": Hacking Claims Election 2020 7
Mick West Debunked: Video of Poll Worker "Filling In" Ballots. Election 2020 3
Trailblazer Reutlingen Fake UFO Video 2013 UFOs and Aliens 3
V GIMBAL Video: Simulating the ATFLIR Tracking and Gimbal Rotation UFO Videos and Reports from the US Navy 20
Rocky Gettysburg 'ghosts’ run across road [Windscreen smudge] General Discussion 4
Related Articles


















































Related Articles

Top