Earlier quoted context omitted.
> It does not explain why these were observed on radar as well. The lens flare was caused by the camera looking at the ass end of another jet. The radar saw the other jet. For even one of these videos to have a mundane explanation that should have been obvious to the Navy upon investigation, I think that discredits the lot. Either the Navy couldn't figure it out themselves (which seems highly improbable), or for some…
The Navy was directed by the Executive branch to release the videos. They released the videos and a non-statement about what the videos were. My guess is that there's an internal report describing the FLIR system and how the FLIR system works and how the internal workings of the FLIR system caused the visual phenomena. But that's all classified. So they did the absolute minimum the Executive branch required them to d…
As for the other reports/hearings, it seems like it’s driven more by Congress. For example: https://www.dni.gov/files/ODNI/documents/assessments/Prelima...
> This preliminary report is provided by the Office of the Director of National Intelligence (ODNI) in response to the provision in Senate Report 116-233, accompanying the Intelligence Authorization Act (IAA) for Fiscal Year 2021, that the DNI, in consultation with the Secretary of Defense (SECDEF), is to submit an intelligence assessment of the threat posed by unidentified aerial phenomena (UAP) and the progress the Department of Defense Unidentified Aerial Phenomena Task Force (UAPTF) has made in understanding this threat.