Pentagon releases UFO footage

[Screeeech]

Luis Elizondo worked for the US government at high levels.

This hasn't been verified at all, the claims he had anything to do with the AATIP program have been directly contested by the Pentagon;

https://theintercept.com/2019/06/01/ufo-unidentified-history-channel-luis-elizondo-pentagon/

Yes, AATIP existed, and it “did pursue research and investigation into unidentified aerial phenomena,” Pentagon spokesperson Christopher Sherwood told me. However, he added: “Mr. Elizondo had no responsibilities with regard to the AATIP program while he worked in OUSDI [the Office of Under Secretary of Defense for Intelligence], up until the time he resigned effective 10/4/2017.”

So this could be the US flexing its advanced technology to China as a warning not to start a war or we'll bring out craft and weapons the world as never seen.

If the US was "flexing" it's advanced technology to China, why would it do so via a bunch of hazy, vague videos that basically show a duck, and a distant out of focus plane?

China is already using laser phasers that burn people.

No they're not, the Chinese "laser rifles" were proven to be a load of fake nonsense, and are basically the crappest most impractical weapon you could ever invent.

The 1980s version of me as seen technology today that we could only dream of back then. So its not going to be a shock to me if we find out we have anti-gravity air craft flying around, where-ever they are from.

Crack pipe?

 

[ethan]

There's also no evidence that anything was ever corroborated to have been moving in the atmosphere at 46000mph, because that's basically impossible. If it was true and it did indeed happen, there would be far more information to go off, other than a few random people being interviewed by the media.

Unless you have actual data which you can provide, which actually has conclusive evidence, that something was actually hovering and it wasn't simply an illusion, or misinterpretation. Or regarding the other object it was actually moving at 46000mph and wasn't equipment malfunction, or someone making a mistake?

Well you've kind of unknowingly answered your own question there. Nick Cooke, the former editor of Janes Defence weekly previously indicated the reporting and cataloguing of UAP's doesn't usually present itself in isolation when it comes from the military. So the things being reported by them wouldn't have just come from a few random people being interviewed by the media:

Within the last two decades, the U.S., particularly the Navy, has fielded a new generation of sensors, particularly in the radar field and in the infrared field, which may have accounted for an increase in the sightings data. The airborne, electronically scanned array AESA radars of these F/A-18s, which have been going up against these craft, are relatively new. The technology itself is not that new, but they've been fielded within the last couple of decades. So it may be an attribute of the sensor systems that they're picking up more evidence of these things. There are other sensors like infrared search and track systems. And then there's the fusion of data that you get from within a fleet; that is all networked now. So even if your own radar on your F-18 is blinded or blindsided, to some degree, you can tap into offboard data from ships, from airborne early warning aircraft and even satellites, to give you a sort of fused picture of the battle space. And that may be eliciting more sightings data than we've had than before.

It's quite interesting listening to Ryan Graves, one of the pilots who has come up against these things. He said even when he couldn't pick them up on his own radar, he was fed off-board data from the rest of the fleet, either from an airborne early warning aircraft or a ship itself that suggested these things were out there in his airspace.

When asked if he had talked about this phenomena to people in the industry, his response was as follows:

I've maintained a lot of links into the aerospace and defence world. So I talk to people a lot in and around the kinds of regimes where this sort of technology would be developed, if it were being developed. And they are predominantly as baffled as everyone else. So you have several bodies of people who should know about this stuff and who remain baffled — the pilots and the operational community, and the development community, insofar as I can speak to it. Even outfits known for the development of radical technology, like Lockheed Martin Skunk Works, appear to be baffled by this technology. Now, you have to caveat that with: It's not impossible that this has been developed in the black. But on the balance of probabilities, when after you've spoken to all of those people who are all equally baffled by what is going on, and then you apply that to Congress, which should have, at least in some courses, some oversight of what is going on, and they are baffled, you've got to sort of shrug your shoulders and go, you know, whatever this is, it's much more interesting than anything I've had an opportunity to examine in the course of a 30-odd year career in aerospace and defense.

 

[Angilion]

[..] We know there are around 120 documented cases from the last 20 years the Pentagon claims it has no good explanation for. It is hard to believe good data doesn't exist as they would need data to make that judgement.

You don't need to have good data on something in order to not have a good explanation for it. The opposite is true - you need good data in order to have a good explanation. Not having a good explanation doesn't require any data at all. For example, I don't have a good explanation of what dark matter is. By your argument, that means that I have to have good data on what dark matter is. In reality, I have no data on what dark matter is. Which is why I don't have a good explanation of what dark matter is.

 

[Screeeech]

Well you've kind of unknowingly answered your own question there.

No - nothing has been answered, I asked a question and the answer is still outstanding; Where is the data on this thing which was moving at 46000mph in the atmosphere (that's almost 3x orbital velocity and essentially impossible by the way), or data on the thing which was hovering?

When asked if he had talked about this phenomena to people in the industry, his response was as follows:

You realise that the person being interviewed writes books about UFOs and anti-gravity right? You also understand that this is a problem?

Why is it always like this?

I ask a simple easy question - "hey, show me the evidence that this crazy stuff really is there, any actual evidence will do to start with" and I keep getting linked random interviews from media people and UFO authors, citing interviews which are half buried on random science and tech websites. There's never any actual evidence which can be analysed or discussed, it's all just vague circumstantial randomness.

 

[Richdog]

I ask a simple easy question - "hey, show me the evidence that this crazy stuff really is there, any actual evidence will do to start with" and I keep getting linked random interviews from media people and UFO authors, citing interviews which are half buried on random science and tech websites. There's never any actual evidence which can be analysed or discussed, it's all just vague circumstantial randomness.

Screech, you are not asking intelligent questions to open up a two-way debate, you are asking unintelligent and rhetorical questions, that you know full well that there is no answer to, in order to re-enforce your arguments.

No-one can give you: "evidence that all of this crazy stuff is there" (lol), because obviously there is nothing that constitutes any kind of unequivocal evidence within the publicly available domain. Anyone with any shred of sense knows this, so why are you going 'full broken record' with this line of questioning?

No-one has categorical proof either way, no-one has any concrete answers, which is why many of us are so interested that the US government is actually publicly addressing the repeat sightings that have been made by experienced military personnel.

 

[MookJong]

Basically until the report comes out and then Congress / NASA push to get access to all the data, its mainly a faith game. You either put your faith in Mellon, Elizondo, Fravor, Obama and the camp saying there is definitely something strange being observed. Or you put your faith in these things being misidentified and that people with a vested interest are hyping them up either because they are UFO zealots and just happen to be in the halls of power, or they are using it as a money making / attention vehicle.

Nobody knows for sure yet, even the Pentagon if taken on face value doesn't really know what it has been observing. I'm siding with there being something unusual captured but if it is a whole lot of nothing it wouldn't surprise me because this topic has been going 70 years and there is not a lot to show for it.

Either way it is fascinating to follow.

 

[Lysander]

Basically until the report comes out and then Congress / NASA push to get access to all the data, its mainly a faith game. You either put your faith in Mellon, Elizondo, Fravor, Obama and the camp saying there is definitely something strange being observed. Or you put your faith in these things being misidentified and that people with a vested interest are hyping them up either because they are UFO zealots and just happen to be in the halls of power, or they are using it as a money making / attention vehicle.

Nobody knows for sure yet, even the Pentagon if taken on face value doesn't really know what it has been observing. I'm siding with there being something unusual captured but if it is a whole lot of nothing it wouldn't surprise me because this topic has been going 70 years and there is not a lot to show for it.

What I find kind of amusing is the "what's more likely?" argument versions.

The argument of "what's more likely - that these are foreign/alien craft, or that people are lying/they don't exist/they're just lens flare etc" is rather awkward when measured against, "what's more likely, that people at the high end of government and the military with access to monitoring technology the likes of which most people will never see, let alone use, are saying that something strange exists and they appear to be foreign/unknown craft or that some person on the internet has worked out the entire thing from watching a few Youtube videos?"

This thread is really just confirmation bias now. Not much point discussing it.

 

[Screeeech]

Screech, you are not asking intelligent questions to open up a two-way debate, you are asking unintelligent and rhetorical questions, that you know full well that there is no answer to, in order to re-enforce your arguments.

No-one can give you: "evidence that all of this crazy stuff is there" (lol), because obviously there is nothing that constitutes any kind of unequivocal evidence within the publicly available domain. Anyone with any shred of sense knows this, so why are you going 'full broken record' with this line of questioning?

You're attempting to wriggle out of it by claiming that the questioner is in the wrong, because the phenomena in question is so strange and unknown, those questions can't have any answers, so it's wrong to ask any. This inevitably results in people making crazy claims like anti-gravity, or things which move at 46000 mph in an atmosphere, being given a free ride, and their claims are accepted at face value.

Which is fine, but people making those sorts of claims are never going to be taken seriously because none of it meets the bare minimum in terms of any qualifying criteria, that can be used to demonstrate that it's really there.

No-one has categorical proof either way, no-one has any concrete answers,

This isn't true at all, there is evidence that these Pentagon UFO sightings, and the associated drama that goes with them, is far more likely to be the result of an elaborate money making scheme, designed by someone from Blink 182 to fool people who want to see aliens, that they are in fact seeing aliens.

 

[Richdog]

You're attempting to wriggle out of it by claiming that the questioner is in the wrong, because the phenomena in question is so strange and unknown, those questions can't have any answers, so it's wrong to ask any.

I am not saying not to ask any questions, but yours are pointedly and obviously rhetorical questions.

This inevitably results in people making crazy claims like anti-gravity, or things which move at 46000 mph in an atmosphere, being given a free ride, and their claims are accepted at face value.

Of course they are not simply 'accepted at face value', stop talking nonsense.

This isn't true at all, there is evidence that these Pentagon UFO sightings, and the associated drama that goes with them, is far more likely to be the result of an elaborate money making scheme, designed by someone from Blink 182 to fool people who want to see aliens, that they are in fact seeing aliens.

Dear lord, do you even understand what categorical proof means? There are a lot of educated guesses and theories, but to say or even heavily imply that every video or report currently being analyzed by the pentagon is 100% not a genuine UAP, is at this point patently false.

You are genuinely a terrible and disingenuous debater, engaging in very circular and rhetorical arguments and presenting opinions as facts. With with your biased and definitive language you also seem unable to objectively analyze the available information. Feel free to believe that they are "likely" not UAP's, but don't say that they definitively aren't when you simply do not know that. None of us know that.

 

[Lysander]

Dear lord, do you even understand what categorical proof means? There are a lot of educated guesses and theories, but to say or even heavily imply that every video or report currently being analyzed by the pentagon is 100% not a genuine UAP, is at this point patently false.

See my post above. The "I know more than the Pentagon" crowd is quite amusing, if not ridiculous.

The Pentagon: These things exist and we've seen them
The internet: no they don't

 

[MookJong]

This isn't true at all, there is evidence that these Pentagon UFO sightings, and the associated drama that goes with them, is far more likely to be the result of an elaborate money making scheme, designed by someone from Blink 182 to fool people who want to see aliens, that they are in fact seeing aliens.

The "To the Stars" element of this story is most certainly a bizarre one. Only made stranger by the Wikileaks emails showing Tom Delonge was indeed speaking with officials about a drip feed public disclosure program.

From the emails it seems the TTSA plan had relied on Hillary winning the 2016 election (Hillary talked about and used the phrase "UAP" in the run up and long before the New York Times articles popularised it). When that didn't happen and John Podesta wasn't in the right position it seemed to fall apart.

And what to make of this...

On October 17, 2019 the company announced it entered into a cooperative research and development agreement with the United States Army Combat Capabilities Development Command.[34] The five-year contract will focus on "inertial mass reduction, mechanical/structural meta materials, electromagnetic meta material wave guides, quantum physics, quantum communications, and beamed energy propulsion." According to the U.S. Army, no public funding will go the group,[35] but at least $750,000 will be provided in support and resources for developing and testing To the Stars technologies

 

[Screeeech]

Dear lord, do you even understand what categorical proof means? There are a lot of educated guesses and theories, but to say or even heavily imply that every video or report currently being analyzed by the pentagon is 100% not a genuine UAP, is at this point patently false.

This is actually incorrect, just to clear it up - at no point have I claimed that the videos are fake, I agree they're genuine - one shows what appears to be a migratory bird (gofast) and the other two videos show what appears to be an out of focus plane. However all three remain officially unidentified. It should also be pointed out, that the Pentagon has at no point said anything of these videos provide proof of anything "unusual" or "otherworldly" merely A: The videos are genuine and B: The objects remain unidentified, that's basically all the Pentagon has to say on the matter.

With with your biased and definitive language you also seem unable to objectively analyze the available information. Feel free to believe that they are "likely" not UAP's, but don't say that they definitively aren't when you simply do not know that. None of us know that.

So regarding the available information; presumably you think I'm somehow barking up the wrong tree, in providing evidence which proves how Luiz Elizondo stands to directly profit by releasing these Pentagon videos to the media, before going on a media interviewing crusade. He then goes on to join up with Tom Delonge with his company "To the stars academy" to create a company which creates and produces TV shows to do with aliens and UFOs, obviously they're being paid to do all of this?

How do you explain this glaringly obvious problem and massive conflict of interest?

Presumably, it sits fine with you, is perfectly normal and shouldn't be questioned at all? I assume - that I'm somehow in the wrong for questioning it?

The "To the Stars" element of this story is most certainly a bizzare one. Only made stranger by the Wikileaks emails showing Tom Delonge was indeed speaking with officials about a drip feed public disclosure program.

So in theory then - we shouldn't have to wait that long, until we start getting drip-fed the actual truth, and of course it's all going to come from Tom Delonge and his company.

Yeah that all sounds legit, I have no problem with any of this

 

[BowdonUK]

This hasn't been verified at all, the claims he had anything to do with the AATIP program have been directly contested by the Pentagon;

https://theintercept.com/2019/06/01/ufo-unidentified-history-channel-luis-elizondo-pentagon/

Why would the US government confirm anything to the media of a high security subject? Especially when at the time of that report he was saying things they didn't want to come out. If you've ever been to the US you'll know they are extremely strict when it comes to rules and security. If you doubt that then keep walking across the boundaries to Area 51 and see how long you live.

I find it a bit odd that you have jumped on to the debunk track about the objects when that isn't the question being talked about. The objects exist. The report is asking what are their origins.

The additional speculation is why this subject is now being officially mentioned. Do you believe it was an accident that the requirement to make this report was slipped in past all the legislators?

 

[Screeeech]

Why would the US government confirm anything to the media of a high security subject?

You'd have to ask the US government that.

Over the years the US government has release thousands of videos from their jets and helicopters, showing all manner of things, happens all the time. (I enjoy watching them)

My guess is - they looked at it, saw no problem and just released it to Luis Elizondo. This is essentially what the email thread which someone linked earlier, shows.

Of course, some people will look at this and think "aliens" though.

I find it a bit odd that you have jumped on to the debunk track about the objects when that isn't the question being talked about. The objects exist. The report is asking what are their origins.

I'm not denying and have never said that the objects (likely a bird and out of focus plane) did not exist. However some people are saying it's aliens, I'm saying - it almost certainly isn't.

The additional speculation is why this subject is now being officially mentioned. Do you believe it was an accident that the requirement to make this report was slipped in past all the legislators?

Which report are you referring to exactly? Can you link it?

 

[Richdog]

It should also be pointed out, that the Pentagon has at no point said anything of these videos provide proof of anything "unusual" or "otherworldly" merely A: The videos are genuine and B: The objects remain unidentified, that's basically all the Pentagon has to say on the matter.

Of course they have said they are evidence of something unusual. If they weren't unusual they wouldn't be investigating them. But yes, obviously they have not said it is evidence of anything otherworldy but we all know that and no-one has said otherwise. Sigh.

So regarding the available information; presumably you think I'm somehow barking up the wrong tree, in providing evidence which proves how Luiz Elizondo stands to directly profit by releasing these Pentagon videos to the media, before going on a media interviewing crusade. He then goes on to join up with Tom Delonge with his company "To the stars academy" to create a company which creates and produces TV shows to do with aliens and UFOs, obviously they're being paid to do all of this?

How do you explain this glaringly obvious problem and massive conflict of interest?

Presumably, it sits fine with you, is perfectly normal and shouldn't be questioned at all? I assume - that I'm somehow in the wrong for questioning it?

Honestly, it's like debating with my 12 year old cousin. You are literally just repeating the same talking points that confirm your bias, and now you are suggesting that because I said you are only asking pointed rheotrical questions... that you shouldn't be asking any questions? I mean seriously come on, this is kindergarten levels of logic.

I think it's time to just bung you on the ignore list rather than waste any more time in very silly circular arguments. Good luck with the thread.

 

[BowdonUK]

I'm not denying and have never said that the objects (likely a bird and out of focus plane) did not exist. However some people are saying it's aliens, I'm saying - it almost certainly isn't.

I'm not saying its aliens either. But until we can find and identify these objects then its an open question.

Which report are you referring to exactly? Can you link it?

I'm talking about the report that is due to come out at the end of this month where the Pentagon are going to confirm, at least, there are objects they can't fully identify.

This is one headline about it;

UFOs are about to make their way to the U.S. Senate.
https://www.nbcnews.com/science/science-news/ufos-are-make-way-us-senate-know-rcna973

U.S. intelligence agencies are expected to deliver a report on “unidentified aerial phenomena” to Congress next month, sparking renewed interest and speculation into how the government has handled sightings of mysterious flying objects — and if there's any worldly explanation for them.

The unclassified report, compiled by the director of national intelligence and the secretary of defense, aims to make public what the Pentagon knows about unidentified flying objects and data analyzed from such encounters.

 

[Screeeech]

Of course they have said they are evidence of something unusual.

They've said no such thing, their report hasn't even come out yet (as far as I'm aware?) it's due out in the next week or so.

The Pentagon has simply said - yes the objects existed, the videos were legitimate and yes the objects remain unidentified, that's basically it - they've said literally nothing else.

Honestly, it's like debating with my 12 year old cousin. You are literally just repeating the same talking points that confirm your bias, and now you are suggesting that because I said you are only asking pointed rheotrical questions... that you shouldn't be asking any questions? I mean seriously come on, this is kindergarten levels of logic.

I think it's time to just bung you on the ignore list rather than waste any more time in very silly circular arguments. Good luck with the thread.

These are the same sorts of tactics used by people who deny things like evolution, or claim faith healing is legitimate. They get asked very specific questions which are relevant, however the answer doesn't fit their narrative. Instead they simply deflect, and then blame the other person for one reason or another, to get away from actually answering the point head on.

So, rather than attacking the poster, why not actually address the point?

What is your opinion on Luis Elizondo and Tom Delonge, A: releasing the videos to the media whilst saying it's aliens, then B: going on to make money, by setting up a company which produces TV shows to do with aliens? (this is in a nutshell exactly what has happened)

Spoiler

It's almost certainly a scam.

I'm talking about the report that is due to come out at the end of this month where the Pentagon are going to confirm, at least, there are objects they can't fully identify.

But we presumably understand, that there always will be things which get seen, or picked up by aircraft which can't be fully identified - because it's just reality. I don't see how you could design a system, which could fully identify absolutely everything, at all times with 100% accuracy every time, there are always going to be mistakes - just look at US blue on blue friendly fire incidents.

My bet - is that the Pentagon report will be very generic and basically reveal nothing interesting at all. If we're lucky we'll get lots of videos of unidentified blobs which are essentially benign, meaningless and from which no other conclusions can be drawn, other than "we don't know what this is"

 

[koolpc]

Its amazing the 'experts' on here who 'think' they know more than the people at the Pentagon or Military!

 

[Washout]

Its amazing the 'experts' on here who 'think' they know more than the people at the Pentagon or Military!

Not really. The pentagon released a few videos saying they don't know what the objects in question are. That's it, no more or less.
People appear to be conflating those videos with the stories from ex-fighter pilots like the guy on the Joe Rogan podcast and the other chap who said they were seeing them daily for a year or so. The latter of which sounds suss since if it were going on that regularly for that amount of time something would have been done or come of it!

But anyway, the three videos we have, by looking at the info available IN THE VIDEOS would appear to be nothing more than mundane terrestrial objects. Bird/weather balloon and aeroplanes.
Any and all 'impossible' manoeuvres can be replicated and put down to camera gimbals movements etc.
We can't precisely say what they were - same as the pentagon couldn't because we didn't have nice optical images of them. Only IR blobs. They aint ET in those videos though.

Now, if they release any of the footage from all these other encounters we hear about 2nd/3rd hand then great! I'd like nothing better than to find out we're not alone. Although the implications could be scary.

 

[koolpc]

Pentagon saying they are investigating for our ears.

Truth is, they been investigating for many many years!

They know a LOT more than what they are letting on, thats for sure!