I suspect It’s a Chinese or Russian sub floating a balloon that specifically does things to capture information on our radar systems.we used to do it to them too.
Famous Navy UFO video was camera glare, evidence suggests
361–370 of 401 posts
Re: Famous Navy UFO video was camera glare, evidence suggests
#362Earlier quoted context omitted.
> So the claim is...these highly trained pilots and the other sensor systems didn't realize that objects cause IR glare, but this guy did. Case closed. And frankly the "this guy" appears to be someone with no expertise and who is strongly biased towards particular investigatory outcomes: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mick_West : > Mick West is a British science writer, skeptical investigator, and retired video game p…
>Not to say he isn't right in this case, but I'm equality unenthusiastic about "skeptics" like that as I am about conspiracy theorists. My working theory for what creates the lowest common denominator of internet comments, is that you have to believe whatever is necessary to believe to keep the conversation going. If a skeptic debunks something by appeals to mundane facts relating to camera angles and physics princip…
The problem with both conspiracy theorists and non-expert "skeptics" is they both approach a phenomenon with their results already decided. It's just the conspiracy theorist has decided it's must be a conspiracy, and the "skeptic" has decided it must be some mundane thing with camera angles, and they both produce explanations to confirm their biases. They (especially the "skeptic") are just performing their identities.
And note the quotes around "skeptic," I'm not talking about people with real expertise in some area who show some crazy theory to be implausible or impossible.
Re: Famous Navy UFO video was camera glare, evidence suggests
#363Earlier quoted context omitted.
Russia has been rather subdued in the Ukraine invasion, but they have won 95%+ of every military engagement in Ukraine: https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_military_engagements... They have taken nearly the entire Black Sea coastline and most major cities east of the Dnieper River. That entire eastern part of Ukraine will collapse imminently under Russian advances. And meanwhile none of the aforementioned weapons…
> Russia has been rather subdued in the Ukraine invasion, but they have won 95%+ of every military engagement in Ukraine: https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_military_engagements ... You mean 95% of the ones on that list, which was made by an external observer. It's also a military engagement each time one of their vehicles gets exploded by a TB2 drone strike. Their equipment losses: https://www.oryxspioenkop.com…
"Their equipment losses:"
I'm skeptical of any list of equipment losses being comprehensive on both sides. We are very much in a fog of war situation.
The map you linked looks fairly dire to me. The Russians control the Sea of Azov and the Black Sea at this point, and all of Ukraine's eastern border. With Belarus to the north, it leaves Ukraine landlocked with only its western border for imports and exports (mainly via Poland). There's a cauldron
Russia has already captured many of the major cities east of the Dnieper, and it will be harder and harder for Ukraine to supply the eastern front, particularly across that river.
Re: Famous Navy UFO video was camera glare, evidence suggests
#364I suppose the radar signature was camera "glare" too, smh. This is pretty weak.
It's probably worth at least skimming the article prior to dismissing it. He's not saying nothing's there. > He says that his video does not address the object itself as it’s not clear what the object is and there is nothing to say that it isn’t special or exemplary in some way. He just argues that his analysis shows that it isn’t actually exhibiting any incredible behavior and opens the door to other “mundane possib…
There are plenty of "mundane" explanation for the motion of the object to be real as well, and not just camera glare. No need to invoke aliens. For example, this video shows SDI technology from the 80s:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=RnofCyaWhI0
which appears perfectly capable (albeit in test) of in-place rotation/motion very similar to that of the object. It could very well have been a drone, but I find it incredible that people dismiss first hand accounts in preference to some internet armchair quarterback.
Re: Famous Navy UFO video was camera glare, evidence suggests
#365I suppose the radar signature was camera "glare" too, smh. This is pretty weak.
The video states that there's something there, but its heat signature is causing the glare (the video is in IR). Was the object flying steadily and rotating weirdly throughout the video? You can't see how the object is flying, the smooth motion and weird rotation you perceive is the effect of the glare! But nah, of course you know better!
You're right, some random guy on the internet definitely knows better than the first hand witnesses and U.S. Navy!
Actually, it was probably swamp gas. Case closed.
Re: Famous Navy UFO video was camera glare, evidence suggests
#366Earlier quoted context omitted.
Russia has been rather subdued in the Ukraine invasion, but they have won 95%+ of every military engagement in Ukraine: https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_military_engagements... They have taken nearly the entire Black Sea coastline and most major cities east of the Dnieper River. That entire eastern part of Ukraine will collapse imminently under Russian advances. And meanwhile none of the aforementioned weapons…
The aforementioned weapons systems only exist in labs if that. Hypersonics are expensive and Russia is poor. Look at their GDP. And you do realize that satellites don't "lock" onto anything. They orbit around the earth. Geosynchronous orbits aren't used by RORSATs. Spyplanes? What spy planes? Russian maritime surveillance aircraft have limited range, (as do the PLANs) and can't see an infinite distance. Google the ea…
> The aforementioned weapons systems only exist in labs if that. Look at their GDP.
https://thebarentsobserver.com/en/security/2022/02/russian-n...
"The missile can be armed with a nuclear or conventional warhead and has been tested several times over the last few years in the Barents Sea and White Sea regions, both from surface warships and the latest class of multi-purpose submarine."
Sometimes it matters what a country spends its budget on rather than how much.
This is all noted by our own DOD: https://media.defense.gov/2018/Feb/02/2001872886/-1/-1/1/201...
"U.S. efforts to reduce the roles and numbers of nuclear weapons, and convince other states to do the same, have included reducing the U.S. nuclear stockpile by over 85 percent since its Cold War high. Potential adversaries, however, have expanded and modernized their nuclear forces."
"Russia possesses significant advantages in its nuclear weapons production capacity and in non-strategic nuclear forces over the U.S. and allies. It is also building a large, diverse, and modern set of non-strategic systems that are dual-capable (may be armed with nuclear or conventional weapons). These theater- and tactical-range systems are not accountable under the New START Treaty and Russia’s non-strategic nuclear weapons modernization is increasing the total number of such weapons in its arsenal, while significantly improving its delivery capabilities. This includes the production, possession, and flight testing of a ground-launched cruise missile in violation of the INF Treaty. Moscow believes these systems may provide useful options for escalation advantage. Finally, despite Moscow’s frequent criticism of U.S. missile defense, Russia is also modernizing its long-standing nuclear-armed ballistic missile defense system and designing a new ballistic missile defense interceptor."
Re: Famous Navy UFO video was camera glare, evidence suggests
#367Earlier quoted context omitted.
Russia has been rather subdued in the Ukraine invasion, but they have won 95%+ of every military engagement in Ukraine: https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_military_engagements... They have taken nearly the entire Black Sea coastline and most major cities east of the Dnieper River. That entire eastern part of Ukraine will collapse imminently under Russian advances. And meanwhile none of the aforementioned weapons…
Oh and I forgot to address your ridiculous comment about winning every engagement in the Ukraine. Tell that to the 7K dead Russians. How about the 400+ destroyed MBTs, and 4K IFVs? If you think that Russia is winning this conflict currently, you've been listening to Tucker Carlson too much. Russia lost this war on D Day, when they failed to establish an air bridge at Hostomel when the VDV got smoked.
How many Russians are dead? Who counted the bodies and how did they do so during an active engagement? How many Ukrainians have died by comparison? Do you have complete information or do you have incomplete information during a literal fog of war situation?
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Casualties_of_the_Russo-Ukrain...
Russia says they've lost 400 men, USINT says 7K. Who's telling the truth? They're both known to lie.
We can be relatively sure, based on the numerous maps of Russian advances that eastern Ukraine will fall in the next couple of weeks. You let me know if that's a win or a loss. I'm not sure. It's certainly a thing.
Re: Famous Navy UFO video was camera glare, evidence suggests
#368Wasn’t this tracked by multiple operators in more than one location using visible light and also radar and was visually confirmed by pilots? How does glare explain that?
Re: Famous Navy UFO video was camera glare, evidence suggests
#369Earlier quoted context omitted.
The video states that there's something there, but its heat signature is causing the glare (the video is in IR). Was the object flying steadily and rotating weirdly throughout the video? You can't see how the object is flying, the smooth motion and weird rotation you perceive is the effect of the glare! But nah, of course you know better!
You're right, some random guy on the internet definitely knows better than the first hand witnesses and U.S. Navy! Actually, it was probably swamp gas. Case closed.
"Some random guy" did the research, showed you other examples of glare, did all the maths, but hey, you DO know better! Well done!
Re: Famous Navy UFO video was camera glare, evidence suggests
#370Always find "UFO are aliens" belief so non-logical. Like a FTL civilization would even be curious about earth, having such advanced sensor technology to avoid dust at beyond light speed that they actually need to cruise around in the atmosphere? Or that their ship would be so small? There's no penalty for mass in space, why not make it the size of a city? Certainly a FTL civilization has no construction limitations.…
But this assumes FTL travel is the only way they’d show up?
At 10% the speed of light it would take 45 years to get here and slow down from Alpha Centauri, and it goes way up from there:
https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/7Gdct9VzQFHUYf8Ec8GXmY.jpg
Again that's exponentially beyond anything we could do and why would they even bother buzzing around inside the atmosphere if they can do that?
Unless you are saying they are popping in from other dimensions/universes and that's way beyond even FTL theory.
Earth would be a huge yawn to them. They'd catalog it and move on. Unless earth-like planets are so incredibly rare to find even with those abilities.