Jump to content
Sign in to follow this  
birdguy

NASA to start UFO investigations...

Recommended Posts

Makes one wonder, Martin, how much stuff has not been discovered because we lack the tools, understanding, or even an idea of what to look for.

We don't even know how limited we are in understanding even a minute fraction of the universe.

Science is replete with "We used to think but now we know".  And today's "now we know" becomes tomorrow's "we used to think".  Humankind is not as smart as it thinks it is.

Noel


The tires are worn.  The shocks are shot.  The steering is wobbly.  But the engine still runs fine.

Share this post


Link to post
2 hours ago, martin-w said:

 

I'm not a fan of Travis Taylor to be honest. After watching that Skinwalker Ranch TV show I'm not impressed. But I'll watch them later. 

 

Sorry a fem minutes in and not impressed already. He criticizes other people that claim its Bokeh because they don't have other data sets. Huh... there was only one video where Bokeh was claimed and that has now been confirmed in the Congressional Hearing to be exactly that and an aircraft, just as Mick West and others claimed. So he can criticise de-bunkers all he likes, but they were absolutely 100% correct.

 I studied photography for 3 years and gained qualifications and recognised Bokeh immediately. Flashing aircraft anti collision lights, flying in a know airway, at the speed of an airliner... and he complains when de-bunkers claim the obvious. 🙄

Same for the gimbal rotation, this is now pretty much 100% definitive it didn't rotate and it was glare. 

I absolutely respect your opinion and your qualifications. I'm not an expert in photography, lens artifacts etc, so I can't comment on any of it. 

One more video: Same guy discussing the gimbal video, and adding some color w.r.t. the information the general public doesn't have (about the sensor system that captured it). Please watch it, again it's only a couple minutes long. 

 

Here, we have a highly credentialed scientist, doing real science, using information, and corroborative data the general public does not have access to (yet). 

Our options are now:

1 - He's (very) wrong, and the corroborative data is also being misinterpreted. 

2 - He and others are lying about the corroborative data.... to push some narrative. 

3 - The work was actually done diligently to investigate these phenomena, things like lens artifacts etc were ruled out by experts when combined with other data, and information regarding the operational characteristics of the sensors that captured them. 

4 - Some combination of the above? 

It's really hard to prove something definitively, and remove all doubt. 

 

I'd almost say this whole thing would be more compelling without the videos, because videos can be faked, and picked apart fairly easily to be honest. 

I guess we'll just have to see. 

Something smells very funny about the entire thing and I can't shake the feeling that the public is being gaslit (again) in some way. 

 

Ultimately it's up to the individual to make up their minds no? Even if the US government were to hypothetically "come clean" and say ailens are real (or whatever) many would still be inclined to think they were lying, or still hiding something. The best predictor of future behaviour is past behaviour. 

 

DB

Share this post


Link to post
15 hours ago, birdguy said:

Makes one wonder, Martin, how much stuff has not been discovered because we lack the tools, understanding, or even an idea of what to look for.

I’m more interested in what has been discovered by the military, gov’t, defense contractors, black programs, etc., that is kept under wraps. I have a feeling they know a lot more that what they’ve divulged to the public. I wouldn’t be surprised if a lot of the recent hearings and research programs are just for show. 

  • Like 2

Avsim Board of Directors | Avsim Forums Moderator

Share this post


Link to post
Posted (edited)
19 hours ago, DaviiB said:

I absolutely respect your opinion and your qualifications. I'm not an expert in photography, lens artifacts etc, so I can't comment on any of it. 

One more video: Same guy discussing the gimbal video, and adding some color w.r.t. the information the general public doesn't have (about the sensor system that captured it). Please watch it, again it's only a couple minutes long. 

 

He came to fame in the following way: Writing science fiction, TV shows like, Curse of Oak Island, In Search of Monsters, Unexplained Files, The Unexplained, Ancient Aliens, Secret of Skinwalker Ranch, among others. Consequently his net worth according to Google is claimed to be $18 million. Thus, do you think he might be biased toward a certain interpretation?  Most of the aforementioned TV shows sensationalise and push the "it might be aliens agenda". Or the "it's a mystery" interpretation. 

As for the video you posted, he doesn't mention the rotation in the "gimble" video, only the glare and makes the comment that its not glare. As someone who is qualified in this field I say nonsense. I say it absolutely is glare and it is, without doubt, unequivocally NOT rotating. Even former F18 pilots have commented that its not rotating, for example CW Lamoine. 

You can determine yourself its not rotating by simply watching Mick Wests video. The cloud line jerks in synchrony with the objects rotation. Now unless our mischievous aliens decided to send a special tractor beam over to the ATFLIR pod and make the entire image jerk in exact synchrony with their spaceships rotation, just for a laugh, its the de-rotation mechanism in the ATFLIR pod responsible.   

Furthermore Mick West enlarged the image to reveal the pixels, and definitively demonstrated that the pixels in the surrounding scene also rotate in exact synchrony. I think this is about as definitive as you will get that the object is not rotating and it is indeed the de-rotation mechanism at play.

I have witnessed this effect many times as a photographer, you can even demonstrate it yourself, right now, with your cell phone. Smear the lens with grease, point your phone at a bright light, rotate your phone, and the glare rotates but the surrounding image doesn't. 

Now don't get me wrong, neither Mick West, me, or anyone I can think of is claiming to know what the object in the "gimble video is, just that its not rotating. In fact if you watch Ryan Graves interesting presentation on this he had some fascinating things to say about the object and even more interestingly the mysterious cubes within spheres that were flying alongside it and passing within 50 feet of jets. I'm not saying I believe this and I'm not saying I don't believe, just that its a fascinating presentation. If true, its astonishing. But of course we don't know for certain it is true.

I've watched your videos, so please watch the following. And gain, this is only about the rotation. 

 

 

Edited by martin-w

Share this post


Link to post
Posted (edited)
19 hours ago, DaviiB said:

Ultimately it's up to the individual to make up their minds no?

 

Well yes, but hopefully by using common sense.

Some more to ponder...

 

Quote

 

In the KLAS-TV report, Taylor reviewed now-debunked video of triangle-shaped camera artifacts and easily identifiable stars and falsely claimed they were inexplicable. The same day, Rep. Jim Himes (D-CT) told Avengers actor Chris Evans during a podcast appearance that he had reviewed all of the UAPTF evidence and “we don’t have any definitive proof of extraterrestrial activity.” He added that the UAPTF evidence and other classified military material made plain that most UFO sightings were of weather balloons, flying debris, and other misidentified terrestrial sources, but said that in that data may be some misunderstood reports of foreign technology, which is why not all information can be shared publicly. Himes directly contradicts Taylor. 

 

The shocking lack of ethics astonishes even me, as does the incestuous relationship between government UFO “research” and cable TV UFO media

 

We should all be disgusted that the Pentagon and Congress continue to patronize the same crew of lying word not allowed and kooks orbiting Skinwalker Ranch—people who have turned up no evidence of aliens or space ghosts after decades of taxpayer-subsidized research, people who frequent shows claiming racist space aliens had sex with prehistoric women, people who grift across UFO conferences and media, people who have no compunction about lying to the public while collecting media and government checks. It’s corrupt, and bright red line that should never be crossed.

 

 

https://www.jasoncolavito.com/blog/travis-taylor-admits-to-being-a-paid-government-ufo-researcher

 

So he claimed the green triangle UFO was "inexplicable". So how come a person with qualifications in optics, and aeronautics, that worked for NASA, couldn't identify aircraft anti-collision lights and simple Bokeh? And I remind you, that in the Congressional hearing they confirmed that the green triangle object is just an aircraft, not inexplicable at all.

Do you think there might be a bias toward the "its an alien spaceship" interpretation, or the "its a mystery" interpretation? 

Edited by martin-w

Share this post


Link to post
21 hours ago, birdguy said:

Makes one wonder, Martin, how much stuff has not been discovered because we lack the tools, understanding, or even an idea of what to look for.

We don't even know how limited we are in understanding even a minute fraction of the universe.

Science is replete with "We used to think but now we know".  And today's "now we know" becomes tomorrow's "we used to think".  Humankind is not as smart as it thinks it is.

Noel

 

As I mentioned, we don't know what 95% of the universe is, namely dark energy and dark matter. We do have ideas of course, like axions for dark matter, and the cosmological constant for dark energy, but we can't say we "know". 

So yes, there an abundance of stuff still to be discovered. 

 

Share this post


Link to post

@martin-w  Thanks for the NIH ghost studies link.  I'm glad I kept reading.  I found this to be interesting:

Recent research further complicates the EMF-haunted house relationship. Wilson et al. (2010) found changes in EMF during a séance session where light anomalies and rappings sounds occurred. Additionally, two detailed studies appear to show significant real-time associations between EMFs and clearly physical (vs. imagined) anomalies (Laythe and Owen, 2013; Laythe and Houran, 2019). In these latter studies, anomalous phenomena captured in audio or video recordings were shown to correlate with significant micro-expansion or -suppression of the area’s EMF field during the time period of the documented anomalous event.

Also, hourly correlations of EMF/GMF meters in the Laythe and Owen (2013) study varied wildly on an hourly basis in a location that was approximately a half-mile from any confounding electrical sources. Further investigation by Laythe et al. (2017) in a laboratory séance setting found significant variability of EMF and GMF across sessions, and EMF-spikes were significantly associated with participants’ anomalous experiences. This suggests that micro-expansion or micro-contraction of EMF may be a significant factor in haunt-type experiences.

end quote.

I've always hated those ghost hunter shows where they walk around with EMF detectors and audio recorders.  I've always thought all of that was BS but maybe at least the EMF thing is real.


|   Dave   |    I've been around for most of my life.

There's always a sunset happening somewhere in the world that somebody is enjoying.

Share this post


Link to post
2 hours ago, martin-w said:

so please watch the following

He says the "object" would have been too far away to be seen with the naked eye so I wonder how it came to the pilots' attention in the first place. They must have seen it only on their screens at extreme zoom.


Dugald Walker or, possibly, Dave.

Share this post


Link to post
26 minutes ago, dmwalker said:

He says the "object" would have been too far away to be seen with the naked eye so I wonder how it came to the pilots' attention in the first place. They must have seen it only on their screens at extreme zoom.

 

and also -- while I can fully accept that its apparent rotation is caused by the camera -- why was this not well known to the pilot or so many others who watched the video?  Why did the commonplace have to be "deduced by the intrepid team of debunkers"?


|   Dave   |    I've been around for most of my life.

There's always a sunset happening somewhere in the world that somebody is enjoying.

Share this post


Link to post
1 hour ago, dmwalker said:

He says the "object" would have been too far away to be seen with the naked eye so I wonder how it came to the pilots' attention in the first place. They must have seen it only on their screens at extreme zoom.

Radar. 

DB

Share this post


Link to post
1 hour ago, sightseer said:

I've always thought all of that was BS but maybe at least the EMF thing is real.

 

I think I mentioned in our PM's that I could imagine some kind of electromagnetic effect being responsible. We know that we can attach electrodes to peoples heads and by subjecting them to various EM and magnetic fields, generate all manner of emotions and visual filed effects. 

 

1 hour ago, dmwalker said:

He says the "object" would have been too far away to be seen with the naked eye so I wonder how it came to the pilots' attention in the first place. They must have seen it only on their screens at extreme zoom.

 

Radar onboard the vessels. The AN/SPY-1 system was very advanced in the tic tac incident. These days they are up to AN/SPY-6 I recall, might be higher. And of course the aircrafts radar. Gimbal was 2015 I think, not sure which variant they were using. 

Share this post


Link to post
3 hours ago, martin-w said:

 

Well yes, but hopefully by using common sense.

Some more to ponder..

https://www.jasoncolavito.com/blog/travis-taylor-admits-to-being-a-paid-government-ufo-researcher

 

So he claimed the green triangle UFO was "inexplicable". So how come a person with qualifications in optics, and aeronautics, that worked for NASA, couldn't identify aircraft anti-collision lights and simple Bokeh? And I remind you, that in the Congressional hearing they confirmed that the green triangle object is just an aircraft, not inexplicable at all.

Do you think there might be a bias toward the "its an alien spaceship" interpretation, or the "its a mystery" interpretation? 

Thank you for posing that video. Very in-depth analysis. 

So now we're down to options 1 and 2:

Flat-out incompetence, lies, or half-truths

None of those are good options. What the hell is going on?

 

As a sidenote: Skinwalker ranch should not be dismissed without doing some digging of your own. That place is very weird, and has produced lots of 'evidence'..... just nothing science has been able to make much sense of to date. 

 

DB

Share this post


Link to post
1 hour ago, sightseer said:

 

and also -- while I can fully accept that its apparent rotation is caused by the camera -- why was this not well known to the pilot or so many others who watched the video?  Why did the commonplace have to be "deduced by the intrepid team of debunkers"?

 

I don't think its a phenomenon that's happens that often. The ATFLIR pod camera rotates to follow a target, so the image would be upside down, very distracting for the pilots, so the de-rotation mechanism is designed to stop that and keep it the right way around. Clearly rotation of glare isn't a daily occurrence, or the pod would be built to compensate. I suspect that something like fouling on the lens element might be at play. Important to understand that its not flare we are talking about either, its glare which is caused by the sensor being overloaded. Which might lend credence to the claim that the object was emitting  a lot of heat. 

Some pilots have identified what was happening though. CW Lamoine took one look at it and proclaimed nothing unusual in the video and pointed out that it was probably the heat glare rotating not the craft. 

Share this post


Link to post
9 minutes ago, DaviiB said:

What the hell is going on?

 

I think its worth remembering that there's a truck load of money to be made from the phenomenon. Lectures, books, TV appearances, documentaries, etc. What that does is muddy the waters and make it harder for us to determine if we are being given an unbiased opinion. 

 

16 minutes ago, DaviiB said:

As a sidenote: Skinwalker ranch should not be dismissed without doing some digging of your own. That place is very weird, and has produced lots of 'evidence'..... just nothing science has been able to make much sense of to date. 

 

I'm not convinced to be honest. 

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Skinwalker_Ranch

 

Quote

 

According to skeptical author Robert Sheaffer, "the 'phenomenon' at Skinwalker is almost certainly illusory. Not only was the several years long monitoring of 'Skinwalker' by NIDS unable to obtain proof of anything unusual happening, but also, the people who owned the property prior to the Shermans, a family whose members lived there 60 years, deny that any mysterious 'phenomena' of any kind occurred there". Sheaffer says "the parsimonious explanation is that the supernatural claims about the ranch were made up by the Sherman family prior to selling it to the gullible Bigelow". Sheaffer wrote that many of the more extraordinary claims originated solely from Terry Sherman, who worked as a caretaker after the ranch was sold to Bigelow.[10]

In 1996, skeptic James Randi awarded Bigelow a Pigasus Award for funding the purchase of the ranch and for supporting John E. Mack's and Budd Hopkins' investigations. The award category designated Bigelow as "the funding organization that supported the most useless study of a supernatural, paranormal or occult".[11]

 

 

Share this post


Link to post

Ryan Graves presentation below. Here he ltalks about the encounter with the "gimbal" UAP and comments that it was in formation with several objects that were said to be cubes within transparent spheres. He mentions that two pilots in formation had a cube within sphere fly straight between them, missing the jets by 50 feet. 

 

 

 

Share this post


Link to post

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now
Sign in to follow this  
  • Tom Allensworth,
    Founder of AVSIM Online


  • Flight Simulation's Premier Resource!

    AVSIM is a free service to the flight simulation community. AVSIM is staffed completely by volunteers and all funds donated to AVSIM go directly back to supporting the community. Your donation here helps to pay our bandwidth costs, emergency funding, and other general costs that crop up from time to time. Thank you for your support!

    Click here for more information and to see all donations year to date.
×
×
  • Create New...