https://cowboystatedaily.com/2026/0...ver-cody-and-ufo-authority-cant-explain-them/
From the article
Just like orbs floating up over the mountain," Krubeck said. "They would float up and move toward each other. There were quite a few that basically followed the ridge line from left to right."
"They would interact with each other," Krubeck said. "I don't think it was a naturally occurring phenomenon in the way that they moved. Because not only would they change directions, they would stop. I had a little laser that I'd shine on them, and they would stop."
Krubeck says that the orbs changed course. We can compare that witness testimony to what his videos show.
We have four videos to work with. Three from the NUFORC reports and one from YT. I prompted GPT-6 Astra to keep track of the moving lights and trace their path with a red line.
This is from the first video in this report:
https://nuforc.org/sighting/?id=194754
The horizontal line is an aircraft.
From the second video in that report.
There is one video in this report
https://nuforc.org/sighting/?id=194812
This is the result from the YT video
And a composite of all four
These paths are straight and are consistent with the expected paths of satellites. There are no changes of course. They do travel along intersecting paths (2-D), which is to be expected.
We have to keep in mind that these paths are a 2-D map of a 3-D situation. The camera records a 2-D image. A human will also perceive this as a 2-D situation. A naive witness won't question this perception. A more experienced witness will appreciate the 3-D nature of this view and make a mental adjustment.
We've already run into this kind of witness report... the satellites are changing course.
The witness in this 2024 case reported that the satellites were coming to a complete stop, changing course and interacting with each other.
https://www.metabunk.org/threads/uf...sachusetts-likely-starlink.13641/#post-323037
But the evidence in his videos showed that they weren't stopping or changing course. The bit about interacting turned out to that they were traveling on intersecting paths... and making "perfect triangles".
Krubeck
Because not only would they change directions, they would stop.
Krubeck reports this, but his videos show that the satellites don't change course or stop.
What's going on?
I think it's pretty simple. It's a confusing situation. You can only concentrate on a small area at one time. One satellite at a time. If your gaze keeps shifting, you lose track of what's really going on. Then you make some assumptions. There can be misperceptions.
There were quite a few that basically followed the ridge line from left to right.
They would float up and move toward each other.
Unconscious depth attribution (not keeping in mind that this is a 3-D situation)
This also involves another bias.
They would float up and move toward each other.
I speculate that the witness is anthropomorphizing these lights in the sky. Attributing human intent to inanimate objects.
Agency attribution/intentionality bias. Very common in UFO witness testimony.
I had a little laser that I'd shine on them, and they would stop.
Another classic. In 1966 people would shine a flashlight at a star and then insist that the star was reacting to the flashlight. They could even "make" the star move around by moving the flashlight beam. Now its laser pointers. Is this case Krubeck made a moving satellite "stop" instead of making a star "move".
What's going on?
Autokinetic effect - In a dark, featureless sky an isolated star can appear to drift or wander. You can "will" it to "move" or to stop moving. Same thing applies to a slowly moving satellite. Normally the brain accounts for eye movements and image movements across the retina. But that ain't easy, brother. We've got to keep in mind how difficult a task this is for the eye and brain. Eye tracking
does not automatically make an object appear stationary or moving. But eye tracking
does affect perceived movement and speed.
Observer's frame of reference - If a flashlight/laser beam is visible in haze, dust, pollen, plant parts it becomes another visual reference which the brain uses to create a visual experience. Movement of that reference can make a star appear to move, and likewise a stationary laser beam can make a slowly moving satellite "pause" for a moment.
Illusory causation, an illusion of control - we are self-centered beasts.
Confirmation bias - Repeated attempts to make the thing respond to you, personally, creates a lot of opportunities for the brain to misperceive and to cause apparent successes. Successes are more memorable than failures.
"The other thing that I found interesting is once they kicked off and they were doing their thing, the number of conventional aircraft would increase pretty dramatically as well," Krubeck said. "Typically, you'll see a few aircraft moving across the sky, but there would be like four or five aircraft moving up and over the mountain."
Selective attention/detection bias - Once the satellites attract his attention, he scans the sky and notices aircraft that he normally doesn't see... because he doesn't look at them. Our old friend -
Sky Shock. That then becomes an apparent increase in traffic.
Confirmation bias - If he suspects a connection, when he does see several aircraft, it becomes memorable. When he doesn't... well... meh.
Inadequate baseline: "Typically, you'll see a few" is a casual impression. He's acting as if he were really keeping track of the sky on a regular basis. He isn't.
Post hoc reasoning/cause and effect error - Very old friends in UFO witness reports.
