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

Tom Delonge’s UFO Research Center Is Making Politicians Demand Answers

vice.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

311–317 of 317 posts

Re: Tom Delonge’s UFO Research Center Is Making Politicians Demand Answers

#311

Post by vokep »

typeformer wrote: post #213
vokep wrote: post #49

Earlier quoted context omitted.

This. It fits a lot of aspects of past "UFO" sightings that were actually just a reflection. The major issue in this case is multiple witnesses, and also supposedly multiple instruments detecting it (I've seen this claimed in comments but not the evidence itself) If the thing behaves as though it has no inertia and does all these amazing movements, what else does? A reflection or otherwise illusory object can do all…

Nothing your saying makes sense, multiple pilots are not going to see the same reflection, not to mention these objects were tracked by spaced based radar, the radar on the ships, the radars on the fighter jets, sonar, and via infrared and high def video! The video that has been available to the public is a grainy copy of the original as many of the Navy witness have stated.

If they're all using the same equipment it could be having the same artifact. If closely examined it should be different from different instruments then. And what I said is based on a lack of confirmation of multiple instruments detecting the same anomaly and taking the necessary steps to rule out any sort of reflection style thing

Re: Tom Delonge’s UFO Research Center Is Making Politicians Demand Answers

#312

Post by vokep »

erik_landerholm wrote: post #108
vokep wrote: post #49

Earlier quoted context omitted.

This. It fits a lot of aspects of past "UFO" sightings that were actually just a reflection. The major issue in this case is multiple witnesses, and also supposedly multiple instruments detecting it (I've seen this claimed in comments but not the evidence itself) If the thing behaves as though it has no inertia and does all these amazing movements, what else does? A reflection or otherwise illusory object can do all…

How do you explain the pilots who said they saw it visually for 5 minutes?

I don't, that combined with other info may be enough to fully rule out any possibility of reflection

I consider the possibility of reflection high by default, especially with the properties this thing has (glow around it, seems to immediately react to camera movements, movements that appear to violate inertia)

But I'm definitely no authority on this, just sharing my perspective based on previous similar things I've read about.

Re: Tom Delonge’s UFO Research Center Is Making Politicians Demand Answers

#313

Post by vokep »

cronix wrote: post #130
erik_landerholm wrote: post #108

Earlier quoted context omitted.

How do you explain the pilots who said they saw it visually for 5 minutes?

And on other radar systems within the strike carrier group. The Nimitz event was tracked on multiple systems of varying technologies, for multiple days, not just the planes. FLIR was just one piece of the puzzle, of which video was released.

I've seen this claimed and I doubt the claim is made up, but I haven't seen the evidence itself. The FLIR video is the only publicly available evidence I'm aware of

Re: Tom Delonge’s UFO Research Center Is Making Politicians Demand Answers

#314

Post by majani »

typeformer wrote: post #194
lamontcg wrote: post #35

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Its probably a system for "jamming" FLIR sensors an allowing the attacker to project targets onto the system. The pilots were guinea pigs. Which is made more plausible by the fact that the USS Princeton asked the Nimitz pilots first if they were armed, and only after they informed the Princeton that they were not that they were given the orders to investigate. There probably was a real object -- since one was sighted…

The US Navy does not do guinea pig exercise with live weapons because if pilots don't know it's a exercise, people die. One of these craft almost crashed into a fighter jet which is part of the reason so many personnel have come forward

Perhaps a case of CYA gone wild?

Re: Tom Delonge’s UFO Research Center Is Making Politicians Demand Answers

#315

Post by jonathankoren »

typeformer wrote: post #201
jonathankoren wrote: post #99

Earlier quoted context omitted.

This is of course assuming that the purported maneuvers actually happened, and I’m not the least convinced that they are. Unfortunately I can’t find the video right now, but there was a video I watched where the guy broke down the GoFast video using the angles and speed displayed screen, and made a very convincing argument that it’s not actually moving fast, but appears to be going fast do to parallax. Instead it’s b…

Yeah that guy, he doesn't know jack squat.

This is the video. I don’t know why you’re dismissive. It’s literally just trigonometry using numbers displayed in the video itself.

https://youtu.be/PLyEO0jNt6M

Re: Tom Delonge’s UFO Research Center Is Making Politicians Demand Answers

#316

Post by ChrisGranger »

sudosteph wrote: post #298
ChrisGranger wrote: post #260

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Mind telling us about the weird thing you and your husband saw?

I'm hesitant to post it because I know how people judge this stuff, but I'll share anyhow since the other commenter did. My husband was driving on a remote part of i-10 in Mississippi very late at night, and were the only ones on the road for a long time and it was pitch black - no overhead lights at all, no cars in either direction. We were traveling in the right lane when we both saw a car's tail lights ahead of us…

I'm extremely skeptical of the concept of a shared delusion (although shared misinterpretation of an optical illusion of some sort is a possibility), so I think it's more likely that you both did see something. What it was is the question. Thanks for sharing that.

I wonder if anyone else has seen that in the area as well. I'm not sure how one would find out. Besides looking it up on Google Maps, did you check Street View too?

I was thinking it might have been the red reflectors some people around my neighborhood have to mark the edges of their driveway entrance. They're on a scrawny metal pole and about taillight-height, and could be mistaken for a car's rear end from a distance, I guess, if there were a pair of them, and they caught the headlights just right. If an area is rural, no streetlights, I could definitely see someone having those.

Again, thanks for sharing.

Re: Tom Delonge’s UFO Research Center Is Making Politicians Demand Answers

#317

Post by maxharris »

hinkley wrote: post #174
ALittleLight wrote: post #137

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The subject would still be blinded though. You could tell them after the fact. Then you get the real experience of a pilot encountering your system plus you get the added benefit that they won't tell people about the "UFO" they saw.

But what about the next experiment? How are you going to keep the other pilots from figuring out they're test subjects? Especially if any word about the experiment got out. Swearing another pilot to secrecy versus letting them think you're nuts for the rest of your lives, I think they're gonna pick door #1.

Isn't that a bit paranoid?
Post reply on HN