US Government has no explanation for UFO's.

[ChrLzs]

Sorry, taking some time off.  I will be back.  Maybe.

[psyche101]

20 hours ago, SeekTruth said:

How does this account for the Tic-Tac appearing at the rendezvous?

You're assuming it's the same thing in both places are you? 

[SeekTruth]

Just now, psyche101 said:

You're assuming it's the same thing in both places are you? 

I’m simply going with what Fravor and others involved have reported. 

[psyche101]

Just now, SeekTruth said:

I’m simply going with what Fravor and others involved have reported. 

That's another reason natural phenomena is a better explanation. Nothing tracked the object going from one place to another so it's assumed to be the same thing. I'd say it's not. Plasmas would appear the same, that whitish cloud like when a plane breaks sound. 

[SeekTruth]

16 minutes ago, psyche101 said:

That's another reason natural phenomena is a better explanation.

What you followed with did not amount to an argument that supports your position.

 

Quote

Nothing tracked the object going from one place to another so it's assumed to be the same thing.

 

Not without reason. Just after the object rapidly flew away from Fravor, an object matching its radar signature appeared at the cap point, of all places. Odd, wouldn't you say?

 

Quote

I'd say it's not. Plasmas would appear the same, that whitish cloud like when a plane breaks sound. 

But the pilots' descriptions of the Tic-Tac don't match a whitish cloud, let alone the fact that there are multiple features described which are unlike any observed plasma.

From the report @ChrLzs linked to:

Quote

However, the object was uniformly white across the entire body. It was approximately 46 feet in length. LT.__________ described it as “solid white, smooth, with no edges. It was uniformly colored with no nacelles, pylons, or wings.” When asked to describe the appearance, if it glowed or reflected sunlight he said, “neither, it looked like it had a white candy-coated shell, almost like a white board.”

 

[psyche101]

2 hours ago, SeekTruth said:

What you followed with did not amount to an argument that supports your position.

I disagree, what criteria does it not fill?

2 hours ago, SeekTruth said:

Not without reason. Just after the object rapidly flew away from Fravor, an object matching its radar signature appeared at the cap point, of all places. Odd, wouldn't you say?

No, how different would you expect the same or similar phenomena to look?

What's the proof that it is the same object? 

2 hours ago, SeekTruth said:

But the pilots' descriptions of the Tic-Tac don't match a whitish cloud, let alone the fact that there are multiple features described which are unlike any observed plasma.

From the report @ChrLzs linked to:

 

What do the pictures depict?

Not that hey. 

[SeekTruth]

9 hours ago, psyche101 said:

I disagree, what criteria does it not fill?

You merely noted that what was observed can be consistent with plasma. That's not tantamount to an argument that it was in fact plasma.

Quote

No, how different would you expect the same or similar phenomena to look?

The same or similar.

Quote

What's the proof that it is the same object? 

There is none, just as there is no proof that it was two different objects or plasmoids. Do you suppose the radar tech(s) had a reason for concluding that the same object observed by Fravor was the object that appeared at the cap point? Do you think it merely coincidental that an object appeared at the cap point just moments after the object Fravor witnessed zipped off at a rapid speed? And what do you make of the fact that an object was reported to be at the cap point?

Quote

 

What do the pictures depict?

Not that hey. 

 

What?

 

Again, the Tic-Tac was described this way: 

Quote

However, the object was uniformly white across the entire body. It was approximately 46 feet in length.....When asked to describe the appearance, if it glowed or reflected sunlight he said, “neither, it looked like it had a white candy-coated shell, almost like a white board.”

How is this consistent with a description of plasma?

Edited June 11, 2021 by SeekTruth

[docyabut2]

 

[docyabut2]

A US`s  air craft,  I just think all those UFO `s  people are seeing are really our crafts.

[Trelane]

14 hours ago, SeekTruth said:

You merely noted that what was observed can be consistent with plasma. That's not tantamount to an argument that it was in fact plasma.

The same or similar.

There is none, just as there is no proof that it was two different objects or plasmoids. Do you suppose the radar tech(s) had a reason for concluding that the same object observed by Fravor was the object that appeared at the cap point? Do you think it merely coincidental that an object appeared at the cap point just moments after the object Fravor witnessed zipped off at a rapid speed? And what do you make of the fact that an object was reported to be at the cap point?

What?

 

Again, the Tic-Tac was described this way: 

How is this consistent with a description of plasma?

If you don't mind, what do you think these items are?

[SeekTruth]

34 minutes ago, Trelane said:

If you don't mind, what do you think these items are?

I lean towards them being technology. That said, I think plasma is a fascinating avenue to pursue.

[Trelane]

36 minutes ago, SeekTruth said:

I lean towards them being technology. That said, I think plasma is a fascinating avenue to pursue.

Ok thank you.

[Nobu]

9 hours ago, docyabut2 said:

A US`s  air craft,  I just think all those UFO `s  people are seeing are really our crafts.

Some of it yes. Arizona lights… yes. Etc etc.

some of this stuff I’m not so sure about.

[Vaz]

On 6/10/2021 at 6:58 PM, the13bats said:

What i want to see is the believers that this stuff = aliens to stop being bashful and be true to your convictions you already are transparent goes ahead and come out of the closet admit you think its aliens,

I wont agree with you but i will award you a "cool" point for standing for what you believe. 

Not a questions of convictions.  Honest dedicated hard study, combined with common sense, and an unbiased sense of detections is all that is required.

The straw arguments of the skeptics are gradually blowing away.

[Vaz]

5 hours ago, SeekTruth said:

I lean towards them being technology. That said, I think plasma is a fascinating avenue to pursue.

Whose?  Where is it?  Who has it?  Why isn't it being used to gain a vital edge now against peer rivals?  Why has the USM allowed itself to be pushed around in recent years by an assertive and technologically capable Russia?  

All of this needs to be carefully reflected upon.  Along with of course a flat out denial by the Pentagon that they own these toys.  Even if they were lying to us, why cause such a sensation by shadowing US Carrier groups close to the US mainland?

It's a dead argument.  No credibility whatsoever.

Then add into the mix that shadowing nuclear armed carriers by UAP's goes back the middle of the 20th century and it's game set and match.

No apology required.  You all should have known here what was coming.

[Vaz]

2 hours ago, Nobu said:

Some of it yes. Arizona lights… yes. Etc etc.

some of this stuff I’m not so sure about.

No.  The huge delta chaped craft that flew over Arizona in 1997 flew far too slow and silently.  DYOR

[SeekTruth]

4 hours ago, Vaz said:

Whose?  Where is it?  Who has it?  Why isn't it being used to gain a vital edge now against peer rivals?  

Great questions. I don't know, of course. But when considering the possibilities in light of Occam's Razor, the ETH and IDH certainly seem more likely than human tech.

[Nobu]

5 hours ago, Vaz said:

No.  The huge delta chaped craft that flew over Arizona in 1997 flew far too slow and silently.  DYOR

We have craft that can fly very slow. Our drones can even do this now and you can watch them train in San Antonio. I’ll take videos next time I see one for you. There are tricks that are done with thrust.

[Rlyeh]

10 hours ago, Vaz said:

Not a questions of convictions.  Honest dedicated hard study, combined with common sense, and an unbiased sense of detections is all that is required.

So something that is entirely alien to you.

[Trelane]

11 hours ago, Vaz said:

Whose?  Where is it?  Who has it?  Why isn't it being used to gain a vital edge now against peer rivals?  Why has the USM allowed itself to be pushed around in recent years by an assertive and technologically capable Russia?  

All of this needs to be carefully reflected upon.  Along with of course a flat out denial by the Pentagon that they own these toys.  Even if they were lying to us, why cause such a sensation by shadowing US Carrier groups close to the US mainland?

It's a dead argument.  No credibility whatsoever.

Then add into the mix that shadowing nuclear armed carriers by UAP's goes back the middle of the 20th century and it's game set and match.

No apology required.  You all should have known here what was coming.

1. Well therein lies the real issue and there is no catch-all answer to every sighting worldwide. Depending on locations and nature of sightings there are a numerous terrestrial explanations. Some objects if not most are US owned, that's for certain. Others are very likely to be natural phenomenon if checked thoroughly. Some elevated technology assets are not utilized or disclosed as a means of maintaining said "vital edge". You don't show all your cards unless you absolutely have to. Currently, the US does not.

2. Denials are nothing new and should be looked at as skeptically as reports and speculations of extraterrestrial craft. There was no sensation, certainly not perpetrated by the Navy. The sensation was a result of someone illegally obtaining and releasing what is apparently classified information. This was highly probable to be a vulnerability test of the carrier group using these emerging technologies. There have always been highly classified force on force drills. This one was leaked it appears. In order to keep curious eyes away from our projects, the DoD engages in counterintelligence and psyops. It worked well in the Cold War and is apparently working quite well again.

3. Don't know whose credibility you are referring to on this.

4. I'm not aware of any reports of UAP "shadowing" carriers back to the middle of last century. There have been anecdotes of phenomenon sighted but I don't recall "shadowing" or following. I could be wrong though.

5. What was coming exactly?

Edited June 12, 2021 by Trelane

[Vaz]

19 hours ago, Nobu said:

We have craft that can fly very slow. Our drones can even do this now and you can watch them train in San Antonio. I’ll take videos next time I see one for you. There are tricks that are done with thrust.

The proof is in the pudding.  Show me please something that we have of that shape that is that huge that creeps silently across the sky...........

[Vaz]

15 hours ago, Trelane said:

1. Well therein lies the real issue and there is no catch-all answer to every sighting worldwide. Depending on locations and nature of sightings there are a numerous terrestrial;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;

Everything you have said is easily debunked, dismissed and can be disregarded, by simply reading reports like this and scores more like it.

1952

The first Mainbrace encounter came on September 13 when the captain and crew of a Danish destroyer spotted a triangular-shaped object moving through the night sky at alarming speeds. The unidentified craft emitted a blue glow and was estimated by Lieutenant Commander Schmidt Jensen to be traveling upward of 900 miles per hour.

 

On September 20, an American newspaper reporter named Wallace Litwin was aboard the USS Franklin D. Roosevelt, an aircraft carrier participating in the Mainbrace exercises, when he saw a commotion on deck: several pilots and flight-crew members pointing at a silver sphere in the sky that appeared to be following the fleet. Litwin quickly shot four color photos of the round object, which he assumed was a weather balloon.

In a letter to a UFO investigator years later, Litwin recounts that he went below deck and joked with fellow newspaper correspondents that he had just “shot a flying saucer.” This caught the attention of the ship’s executive officer, who informed Litwin that no weather balloons had been released that day. The officer then radioed the Midway, the only other ship in the vicinity, which also confirmed that no weather balloons were in the air or unaccounted for.

“In other words, the skies above this NATO fleet were very carefully observed and nothing flew around overhead unobserved,” wrote Litwin, “But I knew that I had taken a picture (4) of what looked like a ping-pong ball 10 feet over my head.”

https://www.history.com/news/uk-ufos-mainbrace-nato

So just to make the argument crystal clear so there is no room for misunderstanding or arguments aimed at avoiding the issue..  This was 1952.  Exactly what was the triangular object and spherical object?  Who did they belong to?  Why couldn't NATO identify them?  

[Trelane]

5 hours ago, Vaz said:

The proof is in the pudding.  Show me please something that we have of that shape that is that huge that creeps silently across the sky...........

Allegedly is a key word that seems to missing here. I counter with, show me this even happened at all. 

3 hours ago, Vaz said:

Everything you have said is easily debunked, dismissed and can be disregarded, by simply reading reports like this and scores more like it.

1952

The first Mainbrace encounter came on September 13 when the captain and crew of a Danish destroyer spotted a triangular-shaped object moving through the night sky at alarming speeds. The unidentified craft emitted a blue glow and was estimated by Lieutenant Commander Schmidt Jensen to be traveling upward of 900 miles per hour.

 

On September 20, an American newspaper reporter named Wallace Litwin was aboard the USS Franklin D. Roosevelt, an aircraft carrier participating in the Mainbrace exercises, when he saw a commotion on deck: several pilots and flight-crew members pointing at a silver sphere in the sky that appeared to be following the fleet. Litwin quickly shot four color photos of the round object, which he assumed was a weather balloon.

In a letter to a UFO investigator years later, Litwin recounts that he went below deck and joked with fellow newspaper correspondents that he had just “shot a flying saucer.” This caught the attention of the ship’s executive officer, who informed Litwin that no weather balloons had been released that day. The officer then radioed the Midway, the only other ship in the vicinity, which also confirmed that no weather balloons were in the air or unaccounted for.

“In other words, the skies above this NATO fleet were very carefully observed and nothing flew around overhead unobserved,” wrote Litwin, “But I knew that I had taken a picture (4) of what looked like a ping-pong ball 10 feet over my head.”

So just to make the argument crystal clear so there is no room for misunderstanding or arguments aimed at avoiding the issue..  This was 1952.  Exactly what was the triangular object and spherial object?  Who did they belong to?  Why couldn't NATO identify them?  

The first part of the statement I'll simply address as you being confrontational and antagonistic towards those who have contrasting viewpoints and those who can present coherent counterpoints to your proposals and links. Bottom line, no need to get lathered up as I'm not here to argue. I'm here to reasonably discuss the topic.

You are referencing one alleged account from Operation Mainbrace. This exercise consisted of 80,000 men, 200 or so ships from 9 countries. No other reports like this came from the rest of the vast personnel pool available. Additionally there were 6 other major operations in that area over a 6 year span with no other reports of this kind. How could this be? The easiest and most likely answers are usually the correct ones. A combination of factors led to this cute story keeping people enthralled for decades now. Natural phenomenon and new jet airplanes that the sailor was not familiar with are very likely the genesis of this tall tale. A tale that has not been corroborated or substantiated in the ensuing years. Litwin stated he took photos. Where are they? Other items recounted point towards a natural phenomenon that the sailor could not identify or make sense of. Again, alleged triangular and spherical objects. We have no way to validate this statement. To answer your last question, NATO likely wasn't overly concerned. However, I will counter with, where is the official NATO report addressing this alleged event. It stands to reason that if his Executive officer had been briefed this their would be a formal information brief to the ship's Captain. There would be a corresponding ship log . As I stated earlier there were numerous boats in the vicinity. Where are all their reports? There are none, because others knew what they were observing.

[psyche101]

On 6/11/2021 at 10:15 PM, SeekTruth said:

You merely noted that what was observed can be consistent with plasma. That's not tantamount to an argument that it was in fact plasma.

That makes it best candidate does it not? I said it's the best explanation. Do you disagree with that? 

On 6/11/2021 at 10:15 PM, SeekTruth said:

The same or similar.

So why would two seperate objects not be the most likely answer? 

On 6/11/2021 at 10:15 PM, SeekTruth said:

There is none, just as there is no proof that it was two different objects or plasmoids. Do you suppose the radar tech(s) had a reason for concluding that the same object observed by Fravor was the object that appeared at the cap point? Do you think it merely coincidental that an object appeared at the cap point just moments after the object Fravor witnessed zipped off at a rapid speed? And what do you make of the fact that an object was reported to be at the cap point?

Try putting it into a realistic perspective. What's more likely? 

Why did RADAR operators conclude that without the all important track connecting the two locations? 

That it was seen in both places would indicate the possibility that done transmission from the defence forces is triggering the phenomena.

On 6/11/2021 at 10:15 PM, SeekTruth said:

What?

 

Again, the Tic-Tac was described this way: 

How is this consistent with a description of plasma?

It was described this way. You are overreaching again.

The “Tic Tac.”
The term “Tic Tac,” I actually coined that. So, any time you heard the term, “It looked like a ‘Tic Tac’ out there in the sky,” I was the one that kind of coined that.

Was that named based on what you saw with your own eyes, or from looking at the screen on the camera?
No. I was more concentrated on looking at the FLIR. It was inside of 20 miles. You’re not going to see it with your own eyes until probably 10 miles, and then you’re not going to be able to visually track it until you’re probably inside of five miles, which is where Dave Fravor said that he saw it. So, at that point I didn’t see anything with my eyeballs. I was more concerned with tracking it, making sure that the videotape was on so that I could bring something back to the ship, so that the intel folks could dissect whatever it is that I captured.

https://www.google.com/amp/s/nymag.com/intelligencer/amp/2019/12/tic-tac-ufo-video-q-and-a-with-navy-pilot-chad-underwood.html

 

You almost seen offended at the suggestion of natural phenomena. Why is that? 

[psyche101]

On 6/12/2021 at 11:05 PM, SeekTruth said:

Great questions. I don't know, of course. But when considering the possibilities in light of Occam's Razor, the ETH and IDH certainly seem more likely than human tech.

Why are they likely?