The Futility of the Search For Extraterrestrial Intelligence

that glow around the edges of the tic tac, and the edges blurry, looks a lot like chromatic aberration to me.

Not 'heat signature'.

 

So, you know exactly what I mean.

What the pilots witnessed was thoroughly recorded.

The math doesn't get it wrong.

The Navy does not have an opinion that they are willing to state.

As you saw, one military person who knows about this stuff in detail stated that it is most likely of Earthly origin.

BUT, you refuse to accept that. Instead, you accept the pilots, but I showed proof that they were in error.

There is no record that I can find that gives any information concerning what these pilots were talking about. You can not claim that what they were referring was related in any significant way to the primary object in the videos. You can not claim that as evidence.

 

The heat signature is the central blackness recorded as it was in reverse color with the infrared detector.

As you know, there re many factors that can lead to photographic aberrations around a relatively sharp perimeter.

The issue is that there was a claim of "no power", but the infrared photography showed a major heat plume.

 

The Navy is never going to make a statement about this or any other fighter pilot claims of sightings of ANYTHING. The fact that they released it is clear indication that they see it as innocuous.

Calling someone a "nerd" because they can apply trig to solve a trivial problem is absolutely NOTHING but ad hom.

I do not respect that.

Analysis of the video shows that the assumptions concerning no power, no control surfaces, flying underwater, speed, acceleration - ALL these assumptions are clearly just plain not shown in these videos.

 

You can't defy the math. And, the data needed is right there on the aircraft instruments, easily readable.

And, if you swap black and white on the infrared display, the heat signature obviously shows up a s BLACK. Denying there is a heat signature is just not possible, as again the data is right there.

 

I find your video unsat, you have a guy there spewing off numbers on the top of his head.
He's far removed from what pilots know, experience, and their testimony refutes 'balloons' and 'birds'.

Okay, DNI does:

https://www.dni.gov/files/ODNI/documents/assessments/Prelimary-Assessment-UAP-20210625.pdf
The limited amount of high-quality reporting on unidentified aerial phenomena (UAP)
hampers our ability to draw firm conclusions about the nature or intent of UAP

One man's opinion is not the final word on anything. He sat there cavalierly making some guesses. That doesn't cut it, sorry.

But pilots who WITNESSED the thing,UP CLOSE, that Lt Commander Frazier is a TOP GUN pilot.

Sorry, your guy doesn't do it for me.

 

Billions of galaxies each with billions of stars with many more trillions of planets and billions of years.....sounds to me like the least probable answer is that we are alone in all those trillions of possibilities.

 

No, you are flat out WRONG on this.

The numbers used were the ones on the display panel of the aircraft.

You need to take that comment back.

That is a statement about the quality of REPORTING.

As numerous sources have pointed out, the military is NOT going to issue a stronger statement that this. Having a position on UAPs is a DETRIMENT, not an advantage to our military.

Your cite does not counter the clear and obvious interpretation of the instruments in the aircraft in the Navy tapes.

Yes, ALL you have is ad hom.

 

You are guilty of purposeful selection in order to misrepresent this report.

The report states:

I supplied additional analysis as noted by your cite as likely being required.

In NO WAY can you suggest this is supportive of alien visitation.

 

It appears white in IR,

Refresh your browser.

I'll go with several military personnel who have said there was no visible heat plume.

You have a guy, cavalierly making guesses as to what the thing is.

His calculations do NOT establish what it is.

We have a TOP Gun Pilot confirming it is not a balloon, or a bird, that it defies conventional physics.
We have another pilot saying 'look on the ASA, there's a fleet of them' ( paraphrased )
We have the former director of AATIP telling ud that his team of whom some are engineers and scientists that they have determined it is not a balloon, or birds.

You have nothing.

I have something.

and that something is, it could be one of the following

1. Foreign
2. American
3. ET

No one knows. But what they do know is that it is not a bird or a balloon.

If that were true all of this reportage would have fizzled, and the pilots and military personnel wouldn't be talking about it to 60 minutes.

What you have is not compelling. one man's cavalier opinion is not the final word on anything.

 

How many times have I told you that this is not about proving alien visitation, but the governments
new policy that it is an open question?

But, in the final analysis:

The limited amount of high-quality reporting on unidentified aerial phenomena (UAP)
hampers our ability to draw firm conclusions about the nature or intent of UAP

That is the bottom line, the rest is just guesswork, the above statement is the final determination of what they can say, with certainty:

Which is, it is an open question..

His calculations do NOT establish what it is.

We have a TOP Gun Pilot confirming it is not a balloon, or a bird, that it defies conventional physics that are impossible with balloons or birds.
We have another pilot saying 'look on the ASA, there's a fleet of them' ( paraphrased )
We have the former director of AATIP telling us that his team of whom some are engineers and scientists that they have determined it is not a balloon, or birds.

 

Yes, that is a LOT of lab time for nature to take its shots! Even slim odds seem better than impossible.

So, good guess!

There is certainly way more than enough reason to be serious and excited about looking.

 

Not if it's in reverse color mode.

The information on the pilot's display in the go fast video shows how high the object is and how fast it is moving.

It's behaving like a weather balloon would behave.

These comments have been refuted by high school math and the instruments in the video.

Testimony doesn't beat that, unless you can find someone who can show that the math is wrong.

You are free to find someone to try to refute the math that a good number of people have shown.

 

That's not a new military policy. That's the policy they've always had.

The military is NEVER going to divulge what they believe objects are, unless there is a national defense reason for doing so.

Please cite someone who shows how the math is wrong in the determination that the "go fast" object is traveling at an elevation and speed that matches normal weather balloon behavior.

In other words, I think you are just saying that some pilot said it was X, so any suggestion that it isn't X is false. And, that is NOT AN ANALYSIS.

 

Your video is not an official video, so why would anyone care to refute it? It's not a video which has been established as the official final word on the subject.

Your math guy doesn't establish, for a fact, what the thing is. Moreover, this is one video of hundreds the Navy possesses.

Even the Lt who thought they were foreign, said they see these things every day, for years, and that is why it's reasonable to conclude they have a more of them, therefore....

that means there are hundreds of videos of these things, which is probably why the former director of AATIP made the following statement, noting that 60 minutes asked him about whether they are conventional phenomena, and he replied that his team consisted of engineers and scientists who have done the due diligence, and though a portion of the sightings are conventional phenomena, a portion of them are not, so to that portion, he exclaimed the following, at 2:12 in the video

Imagine a technology that can do 600 to 700 G forces, that can fly at 13,000 miles per hour, that can evade radar, that can fly through air, and water, and possibly space, and, oh, by the way, has no obvious signs of propulsion, no wings, no control surfaces, and yet can still defy the natural effects of earth's gravity. That is precisely what we are seeing:

So, what, you are telling me that he and his team are stupid, that the reason for the $200 Million Advanced Aerospace Threat Identification Program was given that name because of birds and balloons, that they spent that money to find more birds and balloons, and perhaps it should have been named 'Advanced Balloons and Birds Threat Identification Program?

I don't think so.

This argument is not about one video, but you seem to think it is.

 

There is a pretty wide field of people who are curious about these Navy tapes.

Many of them are capable of high school math.

There is no federal or otherwise "official" site that debunks this stuff.

That doesn't help you cause in any way. There are lots of weather balloons. And, your own cite from the military points out that what is in the videos is often not identified.

Those two paragraphs do not make ANY kind of logical sense. It's just you trying out more ad hom on me - as if THAT makes you look good!

We know plenty about these three Navy tapes.

But, that isn't an evaluation of our military threat analysis capability. Nobody has posted anything about that in this thread as far as I know.

 

delete

 

Top Gun Pilot Lt Commander David Frazier, one of the four pilots who witnessed, up close, the Tic Tacs,
responds to Mick West 'debunking'.



Here is the full version:

 

F-16 fighter pilot Christ Lehto has put out a video challenging Mick West.

This video, both of them together, talking about it, this ought to be interesting.

Thing is, there ARE challenges by fighter pilots, both Frazier and now Lehto, to the Mick West 'debunk' video



See my other reply which has Lt Commander Top Gun Piloto David Frazier's challenge to Mick West

 

The pilot in these videos misrepresented what Mick West stated. Mick West did NOT claim the go fast object was a bird, he said it was highly unlikely to be a bird.

And, he didn't address anything in particular that Mick West DID say.

I know there is a dispute about what was seen, but this interviewee didn't counter what Mick West pointed out.

He did confirm that infrared can show heat as black or as white, depending on what mode the display is in. That is confirmation of the mistake made by the 737 pilot you cited.

 

Frazier, when asked, replied that he is 99.9% certain his eyes did not deceive him. In the 60 minute video, he, as well as other pilots, witnessed the tic tac follow him, mimicking his jet's movements, letting him know that the tic tac was aware of him, as he spiraled upward, in followed him, similarly. The reason we call these things 'tic tacs' is not due to what they look like on camera or the radar, it's what the pilots said they saw, up close, asserting that the tic tac was about the size of an aircraft and that it looked like a tic tac. A pill, in other words.

Balloons and birds do not do follow pilots and mimic their movements.

The tic tacs have been documented to descend from 80,000 feet in less than a second or two. This is on the 60 minutes video.

Lou Elizondo, former director of the AATIP, confirmed that these things can do up to 700 Gs, and defy gravity with no visible means of propulsion. Now, they may appear 'hot' on a video, but they have not been witnessed to have exhaust plumes or any visible means of support, no airfoil, no nascelles, no props, no surface controls, nothing to explain why they are not falling into the ocean.

What you are not accepting is the fact that there dozens, if not hundreds, of credible persons describing incredible things, testimonies that defy convention and physics as mankind currently understands them. And if they were conventional things, this video below would not have been made. You would not have a former Leader of the Senate get $200,000,000 to study and create the Advanced Aerospace Threat Identification Program if it were a consensus that it is ALL schlock, as you put it. You would not have professor Allen Hynek, hired to debunk all of the citings, for Project Blue Book, whereupon, after years of investigation, finally came to the same conclusion that General Samford in 1952 made, that, though most of the citings have an earthly explanation, a portion of them are by credible persons testifying to unexplainable and incredible things.

The testimony of numerous military and professional testimonies begins at 14:29 into the video.

Note that you have told me that 'this is not evidence'.

That is not the point. An abundance of credible testimonies of unexplainable and incredible things, is the point.



And, the above, is only scratching the surface of what is out there.

 

Mick West merely made some calculations but such does not prove what they are, only it's movements through space. In the other video, it is clear that they do not know. Numerous pilots say the same thing, that they are compelling, they are real, and they do not know what they are.

One thing that they are not, are balloons or conventional anything.

 

I know where tic tac came from.

??
Mick did not make that claim of anything actually following pilots. That is NOT what the interpretation of go fast is. Go fast shows the effects of parallax.

lol - yes, that's the claim in the 60 Minutes video.

That TV show did not permit any challenge to their story. So, claiming it is the whole truth is totally unjustified.

Asked and answered.

Very true.

There are lots of claims.

You are AGAIN using Hynek, but Hynek backed off the whole idea of alien craft flying around Earth after he left Project Blue Book.

Hynek supports ME, not you. He investigated and decided it was not a supportable conclusion.

Oh, please.

I know what the claim was.

So, you tell me its not the point, then you USE that point!!!

You can't have it both ways, especially not in one post.[/QUOTE]

 

Please note:

This video is sold with a picture of the math explaining the go fast video.

But, the content does not address that AT ALL. It's just a long diatribe from some pilot claiming how freaking infallible he is - and NOT addressing the evidence.

I seriously detest crap like that.

 

Yes - they totally ignored the evidence!!

Why do you continually demand that the evidence be ignored?