UFOs (UAPs): Explanations?

By my definition anything the military tried to cover up is a cover-up.
OK, so military launch codes being kept secret are a "cover up".
Military fleet positions being kept secret are a "cover up".
Communications and radar data being kept secret are a "cover up".
So, anything not available to the public is a cover up".
Since not making every process and bit of data available to the public is required in order for them to do their jobs, the term "cover up" has no negative connotation whatever.

But since that is not the general meaning up cover up, you are obfuscating the issue.

The military had no obligation to broadcast this to the world.

End of story.
You're such a drama queen... :wink:
 
It's what was reported as happening. Why would anyone doubt it?
Didn't you just finish saying they're trying to cover it up? Disinformation is one form of covering something up.

So, which is it? Do you believe what they're telling you or don't you?
Or is that that you only believe them when you think they didn't mean it, but don't believe them when you think they did?
You can't have it both ways.
 
Didn't you just finish saying they're trying to cover it up? Disinformation is one form of covering something up.

They did cover it up for 12 years until those personel got out of the Navy and reported it. What's so hard to understand about this?
 
They did cover it up for 12 years until those personel got out of the Navy and reported it. What's so hard to understand about this?
Because they get to do this.

Do you think that, generally, military personnel are free to discuss anything they wish at any time about military ops?

Anything covered up is a cover up. End of story.
The end of the story is that, despite simply making the same unfounded assertion several times, you have not addressed the indicated paradox.

Not all military secrets are cover ups. Like this one, some some merely secret.

End. Of. Story.
 
All military cover-ups are cover-ups. End of story.
You know, I addressed you in good faith in this thread. Didn't cast aspersions or demean, stayed on-topic, with thoughtful replies. Tried to have a sincere discussion. You did not.

I double-dog end of story you.
 
Last edited:
You know, I addressed you in good faith in this thread. Didn't cast aspersions or demean, stayed on-topic, with thoughtful replies. Tried to have a sincere discussion. You did not.

I double-dog end of story you.

TalkToTheHand.jpg
 
I just did. It's a Classified Military Secret.

To declare it a cover-up, you'd have to show that the public should have the right to know.

Remember, all personnel and equipment involved belong to the military.

Or do you not think the military has a right to its own secrets? For example: do they get to keep their missile launch codes - or positions of their fleets - secret?
The military is supposed to serve the public. It is funded by taxpayer money. Its personnel is drawn from the public. Its equipment is funded by the public purse. The military should be answerable to the public, don't you think?

It seems strange to me that if the military decided to make their video of this incident public, and to allow former personnel to speak publically about it, that they would choose to keep some of the relevant information a secret. The only rationale for doing so that I can think of is that the withheld information relates to national security in some sensitive way. For example, it is possible that the identity of these "mysterious" objects is known within certain levels of the military, but to make it public would potentially give too much sensitive information to potential enemies of the US.

Clearly, missile launch codes and fleet positions are sensitive information whose disclosure would threaten national security. But these are not secrets kept from the public for the thrill of keeping a secret.

UFO nuts enthusiasts are often conspiracists as well. They automatically tend to assume that all classified information is classified because there's a secret, powerful cabal running the military/government/world/etc. that is concealing a great and important Truth from the "ordinary" people. Don't feed their theories by claiming it's all just fine by you if the military is unanswerable to anybody.
 
Last edited:
It's what was reported as happening. Why would anyone doubt it?
First of all because it doesn't sound particularly plausible that men in black can appear on a ship in the ocean seemingly out of nowhere at just the right time to swipe the most valuable data on the UFOs, and nobody can tell us who they are. It sounds more like gossip spread after the incident by certain crew members on the ship.

Second, we all know how unreliable eyewitness accounts can be. Don't we? Since that's all the corroboration of the story that is available to us, it's just common sense to doubt it. If you have any better information, of course, I invite you to present it. I won't hold my breath, because you have a long history of making claims here that you are completely unable to back up.
 
First of all because it doesn't sound particularly plausible that men in black can appear on a ship in the ocean seemingly out of nowhere at just the right time to swipe the most valuable data on the UFOs, and nobody can tell us who they are. It sounds more like gossip spread after the incident by certain crew members on the ship.

In any case it's exactly what happened. And there's certainly no reason for anyone to doubt that that is exactly what happened, unless you're some paranoid skeptic who doesn't want to believe in ufos.
 
The military is supposed to serve the public. It is funded by taxpayer money. Its personnel is drawn from the public. Its equipment is funded by the public purse. The military should be answerable to the public, don't you think?
Answerable? Sure. Completely transparent? Not and still do the job for which they are tasked.

How is this incident (the communications, the data, etc.) any different than any other operation?

Were the details of Seal Ops and Operation Neptune Spear made public (more than necessary)?

The military doesn't go around posting its operations on a blog.

Why does the public have the right to know?
 

"In other words, in 2004 the Nimitz Carrier Strike Group got its radar upgrade, and soon was reporting “unidentified objects”, including the Tic Tac. In 2014-15, Carrier Air Wing One got its radar upgrade, and soon they, too, were reporting UFOs galore. One could interpret this to mean that the radars had finally gotten powerful enough to detect the UFOs that had long been knocking about. But a more prudent interpretation is that the radars had gotten powerful enough to begin detecting birds, small balloons, insect clouds, ice crystals, windborne debris, and various other things found in the atmosphere."

Looks like just a more verbose version of James R's ridiculous seagull theory. :rolleyes: Ofcourse we are left mystified how birds and balloons and insects and ice crystals and "windborne debris" can be observed speeding around at hypersonic speeds and changing direction on a dime and making sudden evasive maneuvers not to mention the clear shape of the ufos captured on the infrared cameras. They presented as giant tic tacs and spinning tops and even a sphere with a cube inside of it:
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
"The unidentified flying objects look like white Tic Tacs, or spinning tops flying against the wind — and Navy pilots keep reporting their presence over U.S. airspace. In interviews with the New York Times, five more pilots have come forward describing their experiences with UFOs flying off the Eastern seaboard from Virginia to Florida between 2014 and 2015.

One ten-year veteran, Lieutenant Ryan Graves, claimed that he saw UFOs almost daily, and that the objects could reach hypersonic speeds and heights of up to 30,000 feet without any visible engine or plumes of infrared exhaust. Graves, who reported his experience to the Pentagon and Congress, said, “These things would be out there all day,” and that, “with the speeds we observed, 12 hours in the air is 11 hours longer than we’d expect.”

In late 2014, a pilot of a Super Hornet reported a near-collision with a UFO when an object that looked like a “sphere encasing a cube” zipped between two fighter jets flying roughly 100 feet from each other. Another pilot, Lieutenant Danny Accoin, could identify a flying object’s presence on his radar, missile system, and infrared camera but was not able to actually see it in his helmet camera. “I knew I had it, I knew it was not a false hit,” Accoin said. But still, “I could not pick it up visually.”

...What fascinated Lieutenant Graves about his interactions with the objects was their ability to stop rapidly, turn instantly, and immediately accelerate to hypersonic speed — maneuvers that would burden human pilots with unbearable G-forces. “Speed doesn’t kill you,” Graves said. “Stopping does. Or acceleration.”----- http://nymag.com/intelligencer/2019...ing-ufos-on-an-almost-daily-basis-report.html
 
Last edited:
I took a look at your video from the 14 minute mark onwards. There's nothing much there that I was not previously aware of. Most of that video has "re-creations" - i.e. imagined footage - mixed in with some interviews with witnesses and the grainy footage published by the military. There's also a lot of speculation, along with dubious estimates of the sizes of the objects, their speeds, their manoevering and the like.

As usual with this kind of thing, there's not enough information available to allow us to suggest plausible explanations for the events in question. I agree with you that probably the military has a better idea than we do what went on. There's no evidence of any cover-up. On the contrary, the release of the footage would tend to suggest the opposite.

Wild speculations about other-worldly objects and the like are all well and good, but they aren't supported by the available data.
A few hours after last posting here, had an internet outage that has only just been fixed. That's why no response from me since then.
Nothing surprising in the reactions to that vid I posted. Everyone takes up their usual positions and no-one (participating here) shifts position. Yawn.
What James R left out was the impressive credentials of the four former crew members who appeared on camera. Plus one who didn't want to be filmed.
It's clearly stated in text below vid that none received any monetary payments for participation. Far more often than not such UFO (more recently UAP) event(s) witnesses are derided and ostricised by media and public rather than receivers of any support or fame. Therefore the onus is rightly on those hardened skeptics who allude or outright postulate they all colluded in a hoax. Or all transformed into unreliable crazies at the same time(s). Or that incredible synchronized equipment malfunctions fooled everyone. Or any such crap 'debunking' postulations.

Specific claims were made about multiple events recorded with a variety of state-of-the-art military grade surveillance equipment. Including underwater tracking by submarine using sonar.
Let me know if any are or have been indicted for making false and misleading statements deemed 'likely to impune the good reputation of US navy'.

There are just so many parallels with the 1952 Washington flap incidents:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/1952_Washington,_D.C._UFO_incident
Multiple eyewitness reports from trained military personnel, backed by radar confirmations. Then an 'official report' that for sure amounts to a coverup. Hotly contested in turn by the personnel involved when subsequently interviewed for reaction to official story.

Nothing much changes over the decades. All the investigations get no further than exercises in accumulated stamp collecting. And imo 'they' - meaning the true intelligences behind the ongoing phenomena - intentionally want it that way. My definitive position again: http://www.sciforums.com/posts/3506955/
 
In any case it's exactly what happened.
How do you know?

And there's certainly no reason for anyone to doubt that that is exactly what happened, unless you're some paranoid skeptic who doesn't want to believe in ufos.
I've explained carefully to you exactly why there is reason to doubt.

Moreover, Dywyddyr's article, linked above, casts massive doubt on the whole story of men in black removing key evidence. And much more besides.

Are you still going to stick your head in the sand and claim it's all true?
 
Last edited:
Looks like just a more verbose version of James R's ridiculous seagull theory.
It's a fact that the radars were upgraded, and following that there was an increase in UFO radar reports. But once the radar operators got used to the new system, suddenly we hear no more reports. That suggests that they learned how to identify birds and balloons etc. on their radars, which previous they reported as UFOs.

:rolleyes: Ofcourse we are left mystified how birds and balloons and insects and ice crystals and "windborne debris" can be observed speeding around at hypersonic speeds and changing direction on a dime and making sudden evasive maneuvers not to mention the clear shape of the ufos captured on the infrared cameras.
That's what you call clear? You realise that, at the very least, there are artifacts in the video due to image processing?

And all that guff about hypersonic speeds etc. turns out to be somebody misinterpreting a camera zoom. Ho hum.

One ten-year veteran, Lieutenant Ryan Graves, claimed that he saw UFOs almost daily...
And yet he couldn't manage to get one clear photo or video of any of them. How strange. Or not.
 
Back
Top