Now that we have hard evidence of UFO's

[I'mConvinced]

22 hours ago, Trelane said:

What high ranking officer has confirmed they saw an unidentified aircraft? I don't mean some random field grade officer. When you say high ranking, it normally means Colonel or higher to those of us who serve.

I was referring to Commander Fravor.  I consider that high ranking but if you wish to split hairs then fine, how would you classify his position within the strike group? 

[I'mConvinced]

On 7/1/2020 at 7:22 PM, Robotic Jew said:

And you trust Fravor? I do not.

Can you explain why? People that worked closely with him for many years have come forward to back him.  If all you have is your personal opinion you'll excuse me for believing them over you, if you can deliver facts that prove Fravor to be unreliable, a liar and inept at his job then I'd love to see them.

[Robotic Jew]

9 minutes ago, I'mConvinced said:

Can you explain why? People that worked closely with him for many years have come forward to back him.  If all you have is your personal opinion you'll excuse me for believing them over you, if you can deliver facts that prove Fravor to be unreliable, a liar and inept at his job then I'd love to see them.

His association with Jeremy Corbell is enough to make me doubt the veracity of his stories and his interpretations of them.

[I'mConvinced]

Just now, Robotic Jew said:

His association with Jeremy Corbell is enough to make me doubt the veracity of his stories and his interpretations of them.

So no you don't have any factual information?

[Robotic Jew]

Just now, I'mConvinced said:

So no you don't have any factual information?

It's a fact that he associates with him...

[I'mConvinced]

Just now, Robotic Jew said:

It's a fact that he associates with him...

Ok so you don't see the flaw in your logic here? I am looking for actual evidence that he is being deliberately deceptive and not your opinion.   

[I'mConvinced]

I'm trying to be objective here and just look at the facts.  With regards to the radar jamming there are a couple of small discrepancies I want to clear up.  Here are two statements regarding the supposed active radar jamming:

Did The Tic Tac Try To Jam The Radar?

Fravor:

“As we hit it with the radar, it started to jam. Went to the jam extrapolate and the aspect vector started spinning around because it didn’t want to be locked up. And Chad saw that, you know, that’s what he had seen when he did it. And then, obviously the video. But all the radar tapes from the Princeton…there’s a bunch of stuff that’s missing that they can’t find.”

The Chad referenced is Chad Underwood, who was the one who piloted the jet that acquired the Tic Tac FLIR video. The one controlling the radar (I assume it was his WSO/back-seater) spoke about tracking the Tic Tac in this executive report:

“LT. (name redacted) was controlling the radar and FLIR and attempted multiple times to transition the radar to Single Target Track (STT) mode on the object. The radar could not take a lock…When asked, LT. stated that there were no jamming cues. ‘It just appeared as if the radar couldn’t hack it.’ The radar couldn’t receive enough information to create a single target track file.”

So did the object Underwood captured on FLIR jam the radar? Depends on who you ask.  What we can say is that two F-18's failed to lock onto a target that they had visually confirmed as being a real object.  It is highly strange that this would be the case if the objects were passenger planes, other military vehicles or drones.  It wouldn't be so strange if these were aircraft from a foreign state that shouldn't be were they were.  Active jamming is an earthbound technology and no evidence of ET, however if a foreign state has planes in restricted US airspace, performing acts of war by jamming interceptors, I would say this was a big deal no? 

[I'mConvinced]

23 hours ago, Trelane said:

What high ranking officer has confirmed they saw an unidentified aircraft? I don't mean some random field grade officer. When you say high ranking, it normally means Colonel or higher to those of us who serve.

Just to touch back on this and to show what other, high ranking officers, thought of the people involved in the incident, please read the following excerpt:

 

You can find the full report here:

https://thevault.tothestarsacademy.com/tictacreport/

[I'mConvinced]

On 7/1/2020 at 8:07 PM, Hazzard said:

My take on everything UFO to this date is that ... If someone wants to claim that they have anything to do with ETI,  I say that we are missing the most important part... Credible hard scientific evidence. I need better evidence. 

Until that day comes, if ever, I will remain skeptical.

 

Good, you absolutely should and that is exactly the position I take.  The question remains, what aircraft/vehicles or objects are regularly entering protected US airspace, causing near miss incidents, multiple NOTAM's to be issued and have been confirmed both visually, optically, by radar and IR?

At this point it doesn't matter if they are ET or not, what matters is that people don't seem to look at the facts just because the term UFO was used.  Heck even the US Navy has said it needs to move away from the term as it is hampering its ability to investigate these incidents due to large amounts of ridicule being heaped on those who come forward. 

Edited July 2, 2020 by I'mConvinced

[Hazzard]

There are multiple possible prosaic explanations for the Navy pilots' observations, said Seth Shostak, a senior astronomer at the SETI (Search for Extraterrestrial Intelligence) Institute in Mountain View, California.  He pointed out, for example, that the sightings occurred off the coast, as did a similar 2004 observation unveiled in conjunction with the December 2017 stories. (That previous sighting occurred near San Diego).

Coastal regions are where you might expect to find a rival nation's advanced reconnaissance craft, Shostak said, because incursions over the continental United States would be more obvious and easily detected.  He also noted that, according to the recent Times story, the Navy pilots began spotting the UFOs after their jets' radar system was upgraded. That detail suggests the sightings might stem from some sort of software bug or instrument issue, he said.

https://www.space.com/ufos-real-but-not-alien-spaceships.html

 

I dont think there is just one explanation for the UFOs these guys reported, there is most likely a number of real and not so real "targets". I also think that whatever said UFO really was, ET has to be at the bottom of a very long list...

Edited July 2, 2020 by Hazzard

[Trelane]

4 hours ago, I'mConvinced said:

I was referring to Commander Fravor.  I consider that high ranking but if you wish to split hairs then fine, how would you classify his position within the strike group? 

I would consider it as not high ranking. I give a hoot at his strike group. As I'm sure he wouldn't give a fig about my battalion.

I'll ask it differently then, what General Officers of higher DoD staff have confirmed they saw an unidentified aircraft? You know, high ranking people...

Edited July 2, 2020 by Trelane

[Timothy]

9 hours ago, I'mConvinced said:

Can you explain why Commander David Fravor is not a reliable source? 

He spoke publicly about leaked and classified military footage multiple times over a two+ year period prior to them eventually being declassified.

That is at the very least questionable and unprofessional.

My turn: Is Fravor your only source for the suggestion of jamming?

[Hazzard]

 

 

I found these two videos very interesting. 

 

Here is more on the NAVY UFO videos.  https://www.metabunk.org/threads/go-fast-footage-from-tom-delonges-to-the-stars-academy-bird-balloon.9569/

Edited July 4, 2020 by Hazzard

[Hazzard]

On 7/2/2020 at 9:56 PM, I'mConvinced said:

 

I would like you to watch and comment the videos I posted above.

Edited July 4, 2020 by Hazzard

[stereologist]

On 6/30/2020 at 10:43 AM, I'mConvinced said:

Can you honestly say you have done the same in your debunking efforts? Or did you just listen to Mick West, yawn, and get on with your life? 

People here are so full of opinion but so short on facts.  If you think Mick West is correct then say so and explain him having to change his mind when presented with further evidence? What 'facts' are you guys using to determine what these things are? I haven't said they are ET, I have even stated I think that is the least likely explanation.  

Facts people conveniently ignore:

1. The US Navy has confirmed that there have been frequent incursions into protected US airspace by aircraft it cannot identify.  

2. We have the 8 FOIA documents from the pilots that reported these incidents.  These confirm the above statement.

3. We have high ranking military personnel confirming that they did indeed see these unidentified aircraft.

4. The current attempts to explain these videos all contain serious flaws.

 

So you'll excuse me for believing the US military, the investigative journalists who have worked with the military, the eye witnesses, the FLIR expert and the available data over some hand waving on the UM forums.  Either pony up with hard facts that cannot be disputed that show these are terrestrial, everyday objects, that the military couldn't identify or, like most professionals out there, admit you haven't got a decent explanation and leave it at that.

We have a series of videos which show nothing unusual in terms of maneuvers but that  has not stopped the baloney stories from freely flowing.

There are no serious flaws as you claim. That is just you pretending in yet another thread.

This whole story starts with a lousy investigative journalist named Kean that wrote a book about a Chilean incident that was determined to be a commercial flight. The claims of support by high ranking Chilean military and investigative journalists and eye witnesses was a joke.

You would like to shift the burden from your own position to someone else. I guess you'd want to do that after failing so miserably to support your own bad stories.

There is nothing unusual in these videos.

[stereologist]

On 7/2/2020 at 2:47 PM, I'mConvinced said:

So no you don't have any factual information?

You've gotten nothing factual to back up Fravor. Fravor has nothing factual to back himself up.

[stereologist]

On 7/2/2020 at 3:00 PM, I'mConvinced said:

I'm trying to be objective here and just look at the facts.  With regards to the radar jamming there are a couple of small discrepancies I want to clear up.  Here are two statements regarding the supposed active radar jamming:

Did The Tic Tac Try To Jam The Radar?

Fravor:

“As we hit it with the radar, it started to jam. Went to the jam extrapolate and the aspect vector started spinning around because it didn’t want to be locked up. And Chad saw that, you know, that’s what he had seen when he did it. And then, obviously the video. But all the radar tapes from the Princeton…there’s a bunch of stuff that’s missing that they can’t find.”

The Chad referenced is Chad Underwood, who was the one who piloted the jet that acquired the Tic Tac FLIR video. The one controlling the radar (I assume it was his WSO/back-seater) spoke about tracking the Tic Tac in this executive report:

“LT. (name redacted) was controlling the radar and FLIR and attempted multiple times to transition the radar to Single Target Track (STT) mode on the object. The radar could not take a lock…When asked, LT. stated that there were no jamming cues. ‘It just appeared as if the radar couldn’t hack it.’ The radar couldn’t receive enough information to create a single target track file.”

So did the object Underwood captured on FLIR jam the radar? Depends on who you ask.  What we can say is that two F-18's failed to lock onto a target that they had visually confirmed as being a real object.  It is highly strange that this would be the case if the objects were passenger planes, other military vehicles or drones.  It wouldn't be so strange if these were aircraft from a foreign state that shouldn't be were they were.  Active jamming is an earthbound technology and no evidence of ET, however if a foreign state has planes in restricted US airspace, performing acts of war by jamming interceptors, I would say this was a big deal no? 

Are you even aware that the so-called tic-tac video has nothing to do with Fravor?

[Timothy]

31 minutes ago, stereologist said:

Are you even aware that the so-called tic-tac video has nothing to do with Fravor?

That’s why I’m interested to know if Fravor is @I’mConvinced’s (Tag not working) only source for the suggestion of jamming.

And again if 99.9 RNG 99 is directly related to jamming or not, what it signifies etc.

We need an FA-18 user manual. I wonder if it’s in Flight Simulator games?

[ChrLzs]

5 hours ago, Timothy said:

That’s why I’m interested to know if Fravor is @I’mConvinced’s (Tag not working) only source for the suggestion of jamming.

And again if 99.9 RNG 99 is directly related to jamming or not, what it signifies etc.

We need an FA-18 user manual. I wonder if it’s in Flight Simulator games?

IIRC, the ATFLIR is usually slaved to a radar system, which does two main things - it 'helps' the ATFLIR get an initial lock before the optics/contrast system are able to lock on, and it also provides the range information (by its nature, ATFLIR is not designed to get range information - that's NOT what IR does - it's what radar does).  When either the radar system is not available or it does not currently have a lock that matches the ATFLIR's current target, it displays 99.9.  That means it can offer no useful range information.  I can't find a link to where that was, but yes, I'm pretty sure the information came via a high end flight simulator that had ATFLIR built in, and a LOT of information on what all the display indications meant.  If it is in dispute I'm happy to look harder, but for now, I've other fish to fry..

[Timothy]

@ChrLzs, no rush. I’m just interested to know if it is an indicator of jamming. 

[Timothy]

On 7/3/2020 at 5:56 AM, I'mConvinced said:

Good

Are you still looking for sources other than Fravor?

You have gone uncharacteristically quiet. 

[ChrLzs]

9 hours ago, Timothy said:

@ChrLzs, no rush. I’m just interested to know if it is an indicator of jamming. 

That I can tell you - by the nature of jamming...  If a radar signal is jammed, either by passive or active means, then yes the radar that is being jammed may not acquire (or loses) its range, thus the 99.9 display will appear on the ATFLIR - however, there are many other reasons why the radar isn't getting a return and thus is unable to report the range to whatever the ATFLIR is currently tracking..

As to what display indications there may be on the ATFLIR display when jamming is involved, I don't know.  I've not seen any example of a jamming event, and I suspect they would be very rare and would also likely NOT be included in any footage that was released/unclassified.

It's worth remembering that you can't really jam the ATFLIR image and information, as it is essentially optical.  The 99.9 is simply a number that is coming from the associated radar system.

If memory serves, the jamming claim was made rather late in the discussions? - if that is true, then it seems very likely to be a fabrication, I'm afraid.  If anyone wishes to push it, I'd like to see the actual claimed evidence of jamming.  It sounds a lot like the old tried and false method of saying "oh, but these spirits are interdimensional, that's why they can't be recorded..."  Same principle - any old excuse will do.

[Free99]

Hard evidence? Am I missing something? We got zero evidence! A video ? Of what drones? Who knows the way I see it is we got zero evidence until one lands.

[Timothy]

@ChrLzs, yes, early October 2019 Joe Rogan Experience #1361 podcast is all I could find with Fravor mentioning the jamming. So I don’t know if it was mentioned earlier.

And yes exactly, they would unlikely release anything showing active jamming taking place. Another reason to question the character of Fravor.

Someone seems to have forgotten about this thread...

[preacherman76]

On 7/2/2020 at 2:50 PM, I'mConvinced said:

Ok so you don't see the flaw in your logic here? I am looking for actual evidence that he is being deliberately deceptive and not your opinion.   

Oh you didn’t know? Only one side can be judged for opinions and assumptions. When they do it it’s perfectly reasonable. Heck might as well be fact.