INC
Member
So its not been classified as plane, because people are lazy, and thats that then.......
This ufo solving stuff is easy, now I know procedure
-
Hey, guest user. Hope you're enjoying NeoGAF! Have you considered registering for an account? Come join us and add your take to the daily discourse.
Aliens and UFOs
- Thread starter Grand Theft Scratchy
- Start date
- Status
So its not been classified as plane, because people are lazy, and thats that then.......
This ufo solving stuff is easy, now I know procedure
zeomax
Member
Pretty much yes.
INC
Member
Then I'm happy to leave it at that, because its ultimately a shit video anyway
Last edited:
QSD
Member
IDK, his general vibe definitely comes across as somewhat affected but he and that Elizondo dude have been making pretty far-reaching claims about what's coming. Their public reputation would be unsalvageable if it all turned out to be horse dung.
StormCell
Member
At least that quote and/or that portion of the report may be reference to advanced aerial drones being used by adversaries for low flight high-fidelity surveillance of our more sensitive restricted air spaces. I guess this crap has been going on for years now without much word out of the military...
OmegaSupreme
advanced basic bitch
Its today right?
Romulus
Member
The French UAP summary report is from Sigma 2, a civilian scientific committee tasked to look into this for the French Air Force. Still waiting on the main doc, but this is the summary.
A quote from their scientific panel. Apparently, they looked at more than just French encounters:
Basically, the report is a giant "we have no idea what it is, but it's definitely real."
A quote from their scientific panel. Apparently, they looked at more than just French encounters:
Basically, the report is a giant "we have no idea what it is, but it's definitely real."
Last edited:
IDKFA
I am Become Bilbo Baggins
It's always interesting to see a report from another nation beside the US. Makes it seem more real when other nations are also experiencing them.
The evidence these things are real is, IMO, incontrovertible. The question now is, what the hell are they?
Phunkydiabetic
Banned
What's the .pdf? Is that the report?
QSD
Member
Man I haven't seen Greer anywhere in a long time. What I was trying to say is that it basically seems like some kind of (career/reputation) suicide for Corbell and Elizondo to build up all this anticipation if what's coming is a nothing burger. They can't be that short-sighted... I hope.
QSD
Member
"You wouldn't cross interstellar space just to sneak around a little" = I understand and am qualified to speculate about what motivates a completely alien species that is so far advanced we cannot even fathom it, because I'm an astronaut and obviously they're just like me!
Omega Supreme Holopsicon
Banned
Many people witnessing and recording something does not prove it a high enough quality hologram can pass all smell tests. Mass induced halluzination
Last edited:
Nester99
Member
I dont know if we can guess the motivation of other life but I really respect this guy.
He has walked the walk and does amazing work in Canada highlighting science youth programs.
Did the Congress report drop yet? Setting up for disappointment of JUST "We see stuff, we dont know what it is"
Airola
Member
I don't think it's the French Air Force that's involved in this at all other than perhaps giving logs and info or whatever if asked.
3AF seems to be a different thing:
Association Aéronautique et Astronautique de France - Wikipedia
What really bugs and disappoints me is the amount of ex this and former that involved, and some official French report "tasked by French Air Force" ends up being a civilian group doing this for an association instead of for an actual Air Force.
And I know I shouldn't really put much weight into how professional their logo looks like as it shouldn't have anything to do with anything, but it doesn't give me too much confidence to the whole thing when it's a civilian group that has this kind of an amateurish logo:
I just wish that all the investigation and debunking and all of that would be done by actual official professional science groups.
This whole thing is filled with ex this and former that, and "civilian scientists" and hobbyists. And yeah I count Mick West part of that too. It sucks that revelations and debunkings have to be done by others than officials actually involved with the original things.
Here's hoping the US report is a lot more in the official side of things.
And of course correct me if I'm wrong here. Maybe this Sigma2 is a top group. It's just that I felt a bit let down when it ended up being a "civilian group of scientists" (which could mean anything really) when I first thought it's some official government thing that's going on there.
Last edited:
Omega Supreme Holopsicon
Banned
We all know they planning fake alien invasion using holograms
Omega Supreme Holopsicon
Banned
Human relations emerge from biology which emerges from chemistry which emerges from physics which emerges from math
The densest substance in the universe is the brain of a mathematician no one is more stubborn and as a group they dont take no for an answer
The densest substance in the universe is the brain of a mathematician no one is more stubborn and as a group they dont take no for an answer
Romulus
Member
I don't think it's the French Air Force that's involved in this at all other than perhaps giving logs and info or whatever if asked.
3AF seems to be a different thing:
Association Aéronautique et Astronautique de France - Wikipedia
en.wikipedia.org
What really bugs and disappoints me is the amount of ex this and former that involved, and some official French report "tasked by French Air Force" ends up being a civilian group doing this for an association instead of for an actual Air Force.
And I know I should really put much weight into how professional their logo looks like as it shouldn't have anything to do with anything, but it doesn't give me too much confidence to the whole thing when it's a civilian group that has this kind of an amateurish logo:
I just wish that all the investigation and debunking and all of that would be done by actual official professional science groups.
This whole thing is filled with ex this and former that, and "civilian scientists" and hobbyists. And yeah I count Mick West part of that too. It sucks that revelations and debunkings have to be done by others than officials actually involved with the original things.
Here's hoping the US report is a lot more in the official side of things.
And of course correct me if I'm wrong here. Maybe this Sigma2 is a top group. It's just that I felt a bit let down when it ended up being a "civilian group of scientists" (which could mean anything really) when I first thought it's some official government thing that's going on there.
The thing is almost all scientists are civilians. Doesnt mean they're not scientists. I'll find what i saw about the air force and space agency connection through translator.
But I dont understand the need to be more skeptical of everyone here versus a 'real' government report. It's not like world governments don't have the absolute worse reputation for concealing and skewing information.
Months or years earlier when they were employed by the government they were honest, but not now?
The main thing for me is the actual data, not the summary. I want to see the entire thing.
This an 8 year study too btw.
Romulus
Member
Theres a connection here too but this is like the French UAP program counterpart. Very interesting info.
French Space Agency Releases Information About UFOs: 600 Cases Over 64 Years
Reporting to France’s Space Agency (CNES) is a little-known unit that investigates the unidentified aerial phenomenon and makes its findings public. GEIPAN stands for Groupe d’Études et d’Informations sur les Phénomènes Aérospatiaux Non-identifiés (unidentified aerospace phenomenon research and...
www.collective-evolution.com
Phunkydiabetic
Banned
Alright so where's the report get on with it U.S. government. Is this thread going to explode after it drops or what. Or is it going to drop today but take days to see it like this supposed French release we haven't seen yet.
Wheeljack539
Member
I eagerly await our disappointment.
INC
Member
StormCell
Member
I don't think it's the French Air Force that's involved in this at all other than perhaps giving logs and info or whatever if asked.
3AF seems to be a different thing:
Association Aéronautique et Astronautique de France - Wikipedia
What really bugs and disappoints me is the amount of ex this and former that involved, and some official French report "tasked by French Air Force" ends up being a civilian group doing this for an association instead of for an actual Air Force.
And I know I should really put much weight into how professional their logo looks like as it shouldn't have anything to do with anything, but it doesn't give me too much confidence to the whole thing when it's a civilian group that has this kind of an amateurish logo:
I just wish that all the investigation and debunking and all of that would be done by actual official professional science groups.
This whole thing is filled with ex this and former that, and "civilian scientists" and hobbyists. And yeah I count Mick West part of that too. It sucks that revelations and debunkings have to be done by others than officials actually involved with the original things.
Here's hoping the US report is a lot more in the official side of things.
And of course correct me if I'm wrong here. Maybe this Sigma2 is a top group. It's just that I felt a bit let down when it ended up being a "civilian group of scientists" (which could mean anything really) when I first thought it's some official government thing that's going on there.
Hey, if it's any consolation, a leading skeptic believes leading civilian UFO researchers know a lot more about these UAP than the US DoD. They're all over the top of this and can assure you it's just drones, bro. And bokeh. Poor Navy has no idea what they're looking at -- probably should have called the local UFO group to get their lead skeptics on it asap.
I refuse to believe any of that. You can't base your respect on the look of someone's logo. Would you have judged Einstein based on his attire and the shape of his living quarters? You're going to have to trust peer review on studies such as that one, if there even is any. In the absence of good peer review, you will have to review it yourself based on the quality of the data sampling they're looking at and the likelihood of false data (which is always high with this topic).
Razorback
Member
Yeah, that's why you can see the string, making it obvious it's just a balloon. Had the camera been slightly worse or the object further away it would make a fine addition to the pile of evidence of things just far away enough you can't tell what they are.
Not that it stopped people from sharing this anyway. I guess you need the extra step of zooming in to see the string.
StormCell
Member
The people who were filming did not think it was a UFO. They knew it was one of their balloons from the show. They just thought it was funny how it kinda looked like a UFO at the right zoom level (made it appear to be moving quickly). It was a gag question for their viewers.
Airola
Member
Sorry, I had a typo in the original post. I said that I know I shouldn't place too much weight on the logo (I typoed "I should" instead of "I shouldn't"), in case you misunderstood.
I guess I'm just voicing my initial disappointment with what I was expecting what comes to who made a report to who, and then the first look on the first page looks like it's from some amateur fringe group. Now, as I said, that doesn't really necessarily mean anything but on the other hand as I'm very much into all kinds of fringe stuff, I've spent a lot of time watching conferences and reading reports by all kinds of groups where doctors and scientists and experts and former senior officials and whoever else make all kinds of statements and studies that a lot of time end up being nonsense that mostly just sound good.
Not that this is the case here, but my initial reaction to what it ended up being wasn't too good. But anyway, the full report is what in the end counts.
My point is that especially in the last few years the words "scientist" and "expert" and "doctor" etc have lost quite a bit of their meaning. It's not that they wouldn't be honest either, but I'm not sure how much I should trust in their methods and reasonings in observing data.
But yeah sure, I'm interested in the full thing too. It's just that I've been interested in all kinds of fringe things forever and for the longest time especially the UFO stuff has been delivered in a certain manner. Lots of experts and scientists tell us and show us this and that. Sure, some might just be scam artists but others are honest in what they believe in, but the honesty doesn't mean they've treated or understood their data correctly. I'm just kinda afraid that what we are expecting to be an actual real super official look into UFOs worldwide ends up being mostly just what it was before but in a sort of a more glorified fringe way. Like, the fringe groups are given a mainstream chance, and they take it, but nothing really comes of it.
Anyway, what comes to the whole subject, I'd love Elizondo and co. to be right, especially now as he has talked about remote viewing too. I'd LOVE stuff like that to be real and be acknowledged by governments. But I'm not holding my breath for it.
If the wildest things become true, and if that Reddit story is actually real, it would mean that we are only a few weeks away from aliens showing themselves to us AND them having video material of god damn neanderthals and if they have that, I can only try to imagine what other footage they would have from tens of thousands of years ago. I'd LOVE that to be real. But whenever something new is first said to come up, there's always something that ends up being disappointing. And the initial feeling towards this French report summary kinda was a bit disappointing too, not necessarily by the content itself that much but because of the context of the content being less "big" and "official" as I was expecting. But I guess I can only blame my own expectations for it.
SirKicksalot
Member
Phunkydiabetic
Banned
Phunkydiabetic
Banned
9 pages? If this is the preliminary report when is the real deal dropping. Or is this it?
StormCell
Member
Summary from the preliminary report:
There are a bunch of objects flying in our restricted airspace that represent a potential threat to air travel and national security. They have not been gathering sufficient data, lacked a standardized method for gathering such data from across multiple sources, and therefore have been unable to identify a large number of these objects. They have 5 categories that these objects fall into such as sensor malfunction, air clutter, pilot confused, foreign craft, and other. A lot of these fall into other because of insufficient data. A very small number of other appear to be a form of technology demonstrating strange movement and acceleration without a form of propulsion. In conclusion, they promise to give af more in the future and take better notes on the aliens raping them in the ass as they write this report.
Phunkydiabetic
Banned
Haha that's it really. Welp, back to business as usual. I'm assuming this thread will continue on with its blurry videos full of dubiosity and "experts" chiming in on random podcasts or whatever. Not that I expected anything different to happen really, but a boy can dream.
SirKicksalot
Member
The most important part IMO is the push for better reporting.
It drops some new information (11 near misses, radio emissions, 80 encounters registered with multiple sensors) but it's mostly focused on the stigma and lack of standardization in reporting and analysing. Says they will look at historical data and use AI to discern patterns (like the Chinese already do).
They're getting the USAF and FAA on board, request funds for research and propose "a UAP Collection Strategy, UAP R&D Technical Roadmap, and a UAP Program Plan".
tl;dr: they're taking it seriously and want to reduce the stigma in order to gather more info, and this includes the entire aviation community. They really focus on the stigma part on every page.
It drops some new information (11 near misses, radio emissions, 80 encounters registered with multiple sensors) but it's mostly focused on the stigma and lack of standardization in reporting and analysing. Says they will look at historical data and use AI to discern patterns (like the Chinese already do).
They're getting the USAF and FAA on board, request funds for research and propose "a UAP Collection Strategy, UAP R&D Technical Roadmap, and a UAP Program Plan".
tl;dr: they're taking it seriously and want to reduce the stigma in order to gather more info, and this includes the entire aviation community. They really focus on the stigma part on every page.
Wheeljack539
Member
At this point they probably thought best to cut it there rather than pdf untold pages of blacked out content.
Still though, 9 pages? That's even less than what I figured for a disappointment.
StormCell
Member
Preliminary - something that precedes or is introductory or preparatory.
Romulus
Member
Then why not just post a screen grab of the string if its that easy? I'll wait.
I would have guessed drone and balloon is totally feasible. But let's see this obvious string.
SirKicksalot
Member
The political statements coming out are interesting. This is the best so far, because of the last paragraph:
Last edited:
Razorback
Member
Are you watching on a phone? Try a bigger screen. Watch the video from time 00:23 to 00:27.
The string is noticeable when the frames change. It's hard to see on a screengrab because the footage has a lot of noise, but it's obvious in motion.
EDIT: I know how to gif.
Last edited:
StormCell
Member
Oh c'mon. It's clearly visible when the object is in motion.
Scroll about a page or two down into the comments. This thing is not a space craft. The film crew knew it too.
Last edited:
jufonuk
not tag worthy
UFO report: US finds no explanation for sightings
A Pentagon report says it can only explain one of 144 sightings made by the US military since 2004.
www.bbc.com
The US government has said it has no explanation for dozens of unidentified flying objects seen by military pilots.
A Pentagon report released on Friday says of 144 reports made about the phenomena since 2004, all but one remain unexplained.
It does not rule out the possibility that the objects are extraterrestrial.
Razorback
Member
- Status
Similar threads
- Locked