UFOs (UAPs): Explanations?

I'm sure you are. And that's OK. We have previously seen where you set your bar for believability.

Here's something for astute readers to chew on: one doesn't use the word typically if one is describing one thing.
That's why this sounds dumb: "Typically, Alice has five digits on each hand."
It's a word you attribute to a category, to-wit: Typically humans have five digits on each hand.



That aside, your interpretation is still an objectively hasty conclusion. The wording of the director does not, in fact, warrant it. He did not say or imply that were the same things.

You introduced one video. The follow-up claims had literally nothing to do with the content of that video, beyond - as I mentioned - it's round and it's moving.

 

Log in or Sign up to hide all adverts.

Thanks, and I will. But I don't need your permission to take the director at his word, who has reviewed numerous more videos and photos of metallic sphere uaps and has justifiably based his description of them on that data accordingly.

 

Log in or Sign up to hide all adverts.

Perfect. Then put your money where your mouth is and take him at his word. He did not say they were the same things.

 

Log in or Sign up to hide all adverts.

Found this

Newly released UFO video broken down 'frame by frame' by Pentagon official: 'Truly anomalous'

https://www.foxnews.com/us/newly-re...nomaly-resolution-office-aaro-truly-anomalous
Not sure what the link above is saying

Please Register or Log in to view the hidden image!

 

Any reference that isn't from "Faux News" (Fox News)?

 

Ooops. Should have checked back an extra page further to see if this had already been posted. Never mind.

UFO Office Fails to Find Anything That Defies the Laws of Physics
https://www.universetoday.com/16104...ind-anything-that-defies-the-laws-of-physics/

EXCERPTS: The head of the Pentagon office that is reviewing reported unidentified anomalous phenomena [...] told the US Congress this week that his office is now reviewing more than 650 incidents, but so far, none exhibited anything that was evidence of extraterrestrial activity or defied the known laws of physics.

[...] “I want to underscore today that only a very small percentage of UAP reports display signatures that could reasonably be described as ‘anomalous,'” Kirkpatrick said told the Senate Armed Services Subcommittee on Emerging Threats and Capabilities. “The majority of unidentified objects reported to AARO demonstrate mundane characteristics of balloons, unmanned aerial systems, clutter, natural phenomena, or other readily explainable sources.”

[...] Kirkpatrick noted that most of the UAP reports from the military follow similar trendlines ... For the unresolved sightings, the AARO experts feel the likely explanation is that the sightings are of technology created by US adversaries, not aliens.

What is needed, Kirkpatrick said, is due to a lack of available data that could help investigators conduct more thorough reviews.

“Without sufficient data, we are unable to reach defendable conclusions that meet the high scientific standards we set for resolution, and I will not close a case that we cannot defend the conclusions of,” he said... (MORE - missing details)

 

Just came across this useful item:

Please Register or Log in to view the hidden image!

 

Totally weird

They missed out There was never a Elvis

Please Register or Log in to view the hidden image!

 

SCU's (Scientific Coalition for UAP Studies) response to the recent congressional hearing and AARO report on UAPs...

https://www.explorescu.org/post/scu-responds-to-senate-hearing-on-unidentified-anomalous-phenomena

 

What did Sean Kirkpatrick say at the meeting?
April 19 2023.
From Kirkpatrick statement: My bold.

This link will take you to where you can download / see Kirkpatrick statement here:
https://www.armed-services.senate.gov/download/kirkpatrick-statement

Or just see it here:
https://www.armed-services.senate.gov/download/kirkpatrick-statement?download=1
April 19 2023.
Dr. Sean Kirkpatrick
Director, All-domain Anomaly Resolution Office
Statement for the Record
Senate Armed Services Committee on Emerging Threats and Capabilities
* * * * * * * * * * * * * * *

Was the following aimed at those ufo TV show 'experts'?

''For those few cases that have been leaked to the public previously, and
subsequently commented on by the U.S. Government, I encourage those who hold
alternative theories or views to submit your research to credible peer-reviewed
scientific journals. AARO is working to do the same. That is how science works,
not by blog or social media.''
from the statement

 

"Can Spheres Fly?"

Written by Condorman - 23 April 2023

Insight from a senior level aerospace engineer.

"After seeing all the recent news about flying orbs and spheres, a few colleagues and I spent time looking at the possibilities of how spheres could fly, or at least levitate..."

https://www.liberationtimes.com/home/can-spheres-fly

 

That’s interesting! But, I think there’s been speculation about “super sonic speeds” not being a tangible / measurable method to categorize UAP’s. In other words, the tic tac image for example seems fast and elusive, but I’ve read some somewhat convincing arguments against that idea. And what our minds think is super sonic speed, doesn’t mean it is - hence, the bird theory, which some birds can appear to fly very fast.

I’m not converting to Mick Westicism, but just saying.

Has anyone “simulated” some of these seemingly super fast UAP’s? Or claims of UAP’s? Like the tic tac object - I don’t recall now, has anyone simulated the possible speed just from a theory standpoint?

 

"The most famous incident was in 2004 where pilots who were attached to the USS carrier Nimitz had this encounter that has been described as the “Flying Tic Tac.” They were out flying over the ocean, and they looked down and they saw what appeared to be whitewater on the surface of the ocean, where the surface was troubled or roiling in some kind of a way. They look down and atop this spot in the water they see this object that they’ve described as looking like a capsule—which is where the flying Tic Tac analogy comes from. It was moving very erratically, seemingly very randomly over the surface of the water, doing all kinds of things that a plane doesn’t do. It doesn’t appear to have wings. It doesn’t appear to have a propulsion system like a jet or a propeller. And then it just disappears. There’s been some reporting that it’s then picked up two seconds later, many, many miles away by the radar systems on the carrier. So these people are describing—and the sensors are backing them up—some kind of physical object that appears to be moving at rates of speed and demonstrating aerodynamic properties and characteristics that don’t match what we understand as human technology."---- https://slate.com/technology/2021/07/shane-harris-interview-uap-ufo-report.html

Not that I'm aware of..

 

So no one saw them moving at supersonic speed.

Strange, same happened to me just last week. I spotted a blue BMW at Bay and Front St. before it disappeared. Just moments later, my wife spotted a blue BMW at University and College St. - miles away.

We didn't see it in the intervening time but we easily deduced that it must have topped out at 450 miles per hour. That's the only possible explanation.

And if that's not evidence of advanced technology I don't know what is.

 

The UAP was being tracked on the USS Nimitz's radar. That's how they knew it had traveled from one point to another at extraordinary speed.

 

Really? They actually tracked their supersonic motion, between the two locations - is that what you're saying? So they have hard data of exactly how fast they were travelling. Gee, you'd think they'd lead with that. That's huge.

You're more familiar with this in incident than most, can you point us at the clip where the radar tracks and displays the speed?

 

I believe all the data recordings of the radar were confiscated by govt agents and are now classified. So we don't have that. But we do have the testimony of the pilots to the events as well as a FLIR video..

 

OK, so other than the testimony of the pilots saying what they thought, there is no evidence of any supersonic flight. There's noting that can rule out, say, losing sight of one craft and then gaining sight of another craft at a different location.

Got it.
For a second there, I thought you actually had something.

 

Correction, that is the testimony of Kevin Day, chief radar operator on the Princeton that day. If anybody should know how the uaps performed that day, he would.

There's nothing suggesting that's what happened. It's just another screwball scenario like water drops or stars that you pulled out of your ass in order to invalidate the firsthand experiences of the eyewitnesses who were actually there.

 

But he did not testify that he saw it move supersonically; he said it was here and then it was there, and he drew a conclusion. One he can't support with his testimony.

There's more evidence suggesting there were multiple objects than that one object moved supersonically.