Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

Famous Navy UFO video was camera glare, evidence suggests

petapixel.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

11–20 of 401 posts

Re: Famous Navy UFO video was camera glare, evidence suggests

#11

Post by tshaddox »

NyxWulf wrote: post #2

So the anomaly that the carrier group tracked, then scrambled fighter jets for. The object that four different pilots saw visually, and was confirmed on multiple different sensors. That was camera glare? The video is only one piece of the evidence. The pilots are trained, and other sensor systems confirmed what the camera was showing. This analysis is pretty flimsy.

> the gimbal UFO video almost certainly shows a glare that hides the actual object

This is in the first 15 seconds of the YouTube video.

Re: Famous Navy UFO video was camera glare, evidence suggests

#12

Post by [deleted] »

tshaddox wrote: post #11
NyxWulf wrote: post #2

So the anomaly that the carrier group tracked, then scrambled fighter jets for. The object that four different pilots saw visually, and was confirmed on multiple different sensors. That was camera glare? The video is only one piece of the evidence. The pilots are trained, and other sensor systems confirmed what the camera was showing. This analysis is pretty flimsy.

> the gimbal UFO video almost certainly shows a glare that hides the actual object This is in the first 15 seconds of the YouTube video.

[deleted]

Re: Famous Navy UFO video was camera glare, evidence suggests

#13

Post by ssully »

Mick West has some interesting videos and does a good job debunking a lot of crap, but to me he is on the complete opposite spectrum of a UFO truther in that he doesn't seem to leave any room for the possibility that he might be wrong.

With that said, I suggest reading this New Yorker piece [1] on the subject. It's actually how I came to learn about Mick. He is covered a bit in the story and gives decent counter points at certain parts.

[1]: https://www.newyorker.com/magazine/2021/05/10/how-the-pentag...

Re: Famous Navy UFO video was camera glare, evidence suggests

#16

Post by RobertMiller »

zmgsabst wrote: post #7
NyxWulf wrote: post #2

So the anomaly that the carrier group tracked, then scrambled fighter jets for. The object that four different pilots saw visually, and was confirmed on multiple different sensors. That was camera glare? The video is only one piece of the evidence. The pilots are trained, and other sensor systems confirmed what the camera was showing. This analysis is pretty flimsy.

This analysis even admits that there’s an object required for the “glare” to exist. This analysis doesn’t reject an actual object being tracked: it confirms it and describes it as one that causes IR glare!

No post body was provided.

Re: Famous Navy UFO video was camera glare, evidence suggests

#17

Post by cma »

NyxWulf wrote: post #2

So the anomaly that the carrier group tracked, then scrambled fighter jets for. The object that four different pilots saw visually, and was confirmed on multiple different sensors. That was camera glare? The video is only one piece of the evidence. The pilots are trained, and other sensor systems confirmed what the camera was showing. This analysis is pretty flimsy.

> The pilots are trained

Fraver (not sure he was one of the ones in this incident) has a history of UFO pranks, shutting down engines and gliding over campfires then lighting up after burners when right over them, explicitly to give a UFO experience, and someone found a contemporaneous report of him doing it, so it wasn't just a story.

Re: Famous Navy UFO video was camera glare, evidence suggests

#18

Post by a9h74j »

NyxWulf wrote: post #2

So the anomaly that the carrier group tracked, then scrambled fighter jets for. The object that four different pilots saw visually, and was confirmed on multiple different sensors. That was camera glare? The video is only one piece of the evidence. The pilots are trained, and other sensor systems confirmed what the camera was showing. This analysis is pretty flimsy.

> the carrier group tracked

Naive question: If a carrier group cannot, in essentially real-time, document three dimensional trajectories at this point (four if you include speed), what possible defense can they claim to have against evasive incoming missiles, etc.

Re: Famous Navy UFO video was camera glare, evidence suggests

#19

Post by Johnny555 »

Isn't he only debunking the image that appeared on the video as being glare as opposed to the actual object? So the object is real, but what appeared in the video is glare, not an actual representation of the object?

West contends that what is being seen in the video is actually infrared glare that hides a hot object behind it and only rotates in the way it does because the camera rotates when tracking the target from left to right.

Re: Famous Navy UFO video was camera glare, evidence suggests

#20

Post by Miner49er »

NyxWulf wrote: post #2

So the anomaly that the carrier group tracked, then scrambled fighter jets for. The object that four different pilots saw visually, and was confirmed on multiple different sensors. That was camera glare? The video is only one piece of the evidence. The pilots are trained, and other sensor systems confirmed what the camera was showing. This analysis is pretty flimsy.

Do you have links to reading more about this? The video saying it was glare made it seem like the object was very far from the jet, much farther then the naked eye could see. Was it closer at some point?
Post reply on HN