What is this thing and where did it come from ? Image Credit: YouTube / Jeremy Corbell
The Pentagon has confirmed the authenticity of recently released footage of pyramid-shaped UFOs.
Sourced by filmmaker Jeremy Corbell and reporter George Knapp, the newly unearthed evidence includes images and video footage of pyramid-shaped objects flying through the night sky.
Now the Pentagon has come forward to confirm that these UAPs (Unidentified Arial Phenomena) are in fact authentic and that they were captured by the US Navy.
"I can confirm that the referenced photos and videos were taken by Navy personnel," said Pentagon spokesperson Susan Gough in a statement that has since been widely distributed by the media.
"The UAPTF has included these incidents in their ongoing examinations."
"As we have said before, to maintain operations security and to avoid disclosing information that may be useful to potential adversaries, DOD does not discuss publicly the details of either the observations or the examinations of reported incursions into our training ranges or designated airspace, including those incursions initially designated as UAP."
According to Corbell and Knapp, these images were presented during a series of classified intelligence briefings back in May 2020.
It is also believed that they were captured from the USS Russell off the coast of San Diego in 2019.
Exactly what these strange pyramid-shaped objects are, however, continues to remain a mystery.
Let me ask a follow-up question:  Let me ask a more extreme question, @ChrLzs, is it possible that ST saw lights behave as he claim, and I'll even go further, is it possible that this was actually a craft from outer space? For my eventual point to ST, I just need yes or no, and I'm not asking this to point out any inconsistency with you, I don't see any.
After reading everything you've posted in this forum I feel you're provoking a confrontation by saying this- because you know dam well the responses you'll get== you're telling a story- anyone can say what you've said here= what part of that do you not understand? Now go away & think about it
Offtopic, but hopefully worth a read seeing the thread seems to have died..  Fire away!! Yes, it is. But .. the possibility is vanishingly small and shrinking by the day as our sky surveillance coverage and the number of people equipped with half decent cameras at all times, all increase every day. No-one has ever recorded such behaviour, and most mobile phones would be capable of doing so. Not one report is evidenced and the claim is easily explainable by 'micro-saccades' or similar, along with a little convenient 'memory variation' where the story changes a bit as necessary to deal ... [More]
In my view it goes further than that, you have also developed some expertise in psychological/perception effects of viewing things in the sky, as well as seemingly quite a bit about the details, far more than me, of the many distortions that occur from the path of a sighting through a camera to a video file. You've taken the trouble to learn about why specifically we should be skeptical about inferring things from, well, the usual 'unexplained mystery' evidence. Thanks for the response on the main question concerning possibility, your answer was what I anticipated and mirrors mine. So ... [More]
Do not underestimate humans: -we can do movies where human beats ETs; -we can beat them senseless with our keyboard warriors; -we have a bunch of sceptics who will deny anything; -we also have God on our side; -we have cats; -we have TikTok; -we have Alex Jones which will: - convince them to buy awesome food supplements;                           - will convince them democrats are eating their enemies babies; - we´ll have Trump as a General, greatest mind EVER, and big fingers to small buttons; - ETs were not elected; - some weird Nostradamus... [More]
I appreciate that. You might have noted that I was accused of making things up as I go along with regard to my comments about the autokinetic effect. I much rather appreciate your approach here. Can you be more specific? Fireflies were brought up, and I explained why they do not fit the bill. Faulty memory was proposed and I offered the following reasons why I think that prospect is highly unlikely (while noting that memory is subject to error and and change): 1. I had another witness (my wife, who wrote about the event the next day) 2. We were both of clear mind and we intently observed f... [More]
Please Login or Register to post a comment.