Latest activity

I'd settle for someone, anyone just asking him what he means. The lack of calling out this unusual term is poor journalism.

If they're redefining terms to put their spin on a narrative, that's propaganda, and I feel we ought to call it out when we see it. Like, I know we're not controlling the narrative about the "UAP threat", but I'm still going to keep calling it...

Of course they don't, but surely they automatically prove that, from the evidence given by pilots who witnessed those 'residual unexplained phenomena', there is very probably nothing substantial to look at. Morale: I personally would not choose...

If they're redefining terms to put their spin on a narrative, that's propaganda, and I feel we ought to call it out when we see it. Like, I know we're not controlling the narrative about the "UAP threat", but I'm still going to keep calling it...

There is indeed a pattern of pilots seeing stuff they either can't identify, or that they attribute to something erroneously. However, on further post-flight analysis the things that can be identified have turned out to be entirely prosaic albeit...

If they're redefining terms to put their spin on a narrative, that's propaganda, and I feel we ought to call it out when we see it. Like, I know we're not controlling the narrative about the "UAP threat", but I'm still going to keep calling it...

To speak a bit more broadly to the topic, pilots are actually quite poor witnesses of things they are unfamiliar with. They are trained to quickly identify and respond to threats, not take careful observations. ... Yet the pilots involved in...

I agree that a prosaic explanation should always be the default position. That's just good science. My point about the “pattern” is slightly different. When we look at cases that remain unexplained even after rigorous post-flight analysis by...

I'm not sure rocket launches should be considered unusual, there was almost *one per day* last year. And starlink flares definitely can't be considered unusual, as they're happening somewhere constantly.

I'm not sure rocket launches should be considered unusual, there was almost *one per day* last year. And starlink flares definitely can't be considered unusual, as they're happening somewhere constantly.

Does this count: stepson was listening to "Great Balls of Fire" on Spotify. His cheap fake vape did just that and was sent toot-sweet out the window.

There is indeed a pattern of pilots seeing stuff they either can't identify, or that they attribute to something erroneously. However, on further post-flight analysis the things that can be identified have turned out to be entirely prosaic albeit...

It proves pilots too are subject to perceptual errors, as any other human being. Many references to pilots misjudging what they saw (and to a dedicated thread), have already been posted above. I suggest you read them.

Journalists are not scientists. And, as has been pointed out, the fact that a word is used in one discipline does not give them exclusive possession of an uncopyrighted word. That's as true for "biologics" as it is for "aliens" or "orbs". Trying...

I feel like this case deserves real emphasis when we talk about pilots being reliable witnesses. This was not an object in the air with no references. They knew the approximate distance and speed (on the ground at road speeds at most), and they...