nothing happened during the encounters they all said it. they didn't even need any weapons. in the 1960s they had top secrete classified jets (SR 71 blackbird) that can go about twice the speed of the planes these frauds were flying so u mean to tell me that secrete unmanned spy planes (drones)are not flying even faster and more argyle. the 60s please
This is the link I'd send someone who's watched the Grusch/Fravor/etc testimony to congress and now thinks aliens are here and they've broken physics. I was already familiar with Mick's excellent Navy footage explanations but Dr Ramsey F's insights around radar tech and testing are new to me and super enlightening. Thanks!
Glad you enjoyed it, Alex! We’ll be meeting again next week to discuss the hearings. Watch this space and feel free to sub. Hopefully catch you next week :)
No mention of the radar "rain" or how a balloon can be hot but Mr Faragher has enlightened me. It really does look like they were testing classified equipment.
I think there are multiple things going on during these encounters tbh and there are certainly a lot of unknowns. What do you think happened during these encounters?
@@BadBoyofScience Someone with knowledge of radar spoofing techniques like Mr Faragher could probably come up with a pretty convincing timeline. But essentially a radar decoy unit participating in real world wargames spent a week trying to get the attention of the carrier strike groups new radar equipment with ghost squadrons and radar rain. Rebooting and recalibration of the ships radar equipment merely made the anomalies sharper. Eventually the group sent out fighters to investigate and came close to catching the amphibious ship/submarine in the very act of deploying active radar decoy balloons. If you look into the radar decoy business you'll be amazed how advanced it is. Some very clever people with balloons managed to spoof the latest radar equipment the most experienced pilots, and millions of us who bought into it.
@@maughan3061 Yeah, this is the rough idea. It doesn’t mean it’s a perfect hypothesis or that other things weren’t going on. We do not claim to have all the answers, but it’s definitely a fascinating and important possibility to consider. If you have all the spec for a sensor, you can work out how to trick that sensor and - as Ramsey mentioned - often countermeasures are developed in parallel with new technology.
the laser hologram thing is silly for a number of reasons. The way these "displays" work is by causing dielectric breakdown and avalanche ionization in the air using gigawatt scale pulsed lasers focused to near diffraction limited spots in mid air. the power levels and numerical aperture of the lens required to do something like this in broad daylight at mile+ distances would be absolutely insane. like multi-petawatt, multi-meter diameter final focusing lenses insane....to say nothing of the atmospheric aberrations that would need to be dealt with just to get enough energy to the focal spot to actually achieve breakdown. total fantasy with present technology.
Yeah, this was definitely the most speculative piece of potential tech. We almost left it out, as the video touches on. It could potentially explain the dots of light some sailors say they saw through high powered binoculars, but not much more than that.
@@zair_salahuddin Ahhh! Yeah, the laser thing is definitely out there. I just wanted to include it because it’s cool tbh ;) I’d be very surprised if it were involved in this tale.
Excellent, informed and intelligent discussion! I just think there are so many corroborating layers - sustained radar targets over a seven day period from a state of the art radar system showing objects dropping to sea level almost instantly. Eyewitness accounts from people on the ships seeing physical objects through high powered binoculars & then two planes, 4 highly trained witnesses physically see a highly bizarre object displaying impossible flight characteristics - a then you have an additional pilot vectored to an area due to radar hits from the ship then locks on an object with the radar on his plane and then he films it on FLIR and tv mode. So You have at least two independent radars , as well as FLIR, TV mode and highly trained eye witnesses seeing the same phenomenon in closed and controlled air space where there should not have been anything there to film. To imagine a complex scenario where there were a series of mistakes, misperceptions, equipment glitches, etc that lined up in a perfect storm of misidentifications is harder to fathom than perhaps the reality that they confronted a novel, unknown phenomenon (or a military exercises). Also, the TV mode is not a blob. It’s a tight cigar shape that corresponds pretty closely with the FLIR image in the later part of the video. It would require further testing - but I am not convinced the tv mode of a distant plane would look cigar shaped.
Who is claiming "sustained" tracking of multiple objects? How does one verify the physicality of an object through binoculars? And finally, how much of this do we have *independent* evidence of? There are some individual layers but not enough to independently account for all the third party observations people provide in their own composite interpretations, so it's inaccurate to say that *we* have a lot of layers.
Thanks for the comment, Lite and glad you enjoyed it! There’s certainly a lot going on and I tend to believe that those present saw *something* or at least believe they saw something. I don’t think everyone is lying. There’s also a lot more research that could be done if the sensor data had been made accessible, but sadly, it wasn’t. What do you think happened out there?
@@caitgaist Kevin Day reported they tracked the objects for 7 days and also tracked objects dropping from around 30,000 feet to sea level. They also tracked objects at 80,000 feet. They rebooted and recalibrated the system thinking initially it had to be some kind of glitch - and the returns became even sharper. This reboot was confirmed by radar tech Gary Voorhis. Voorhis at one point went up to the bridge and looked through the high powered binocs at the bearing given by the radar and saw objects hovering and darting erratically. He saw them both day and night through the binocs. At night they appeared as phosphorous looking lights. The radar and the visual sightings from the bridge are what initiated the intercept where 4 witnesses described the bizarre tic-tac object & seeing it with their eyes - which was then later filmed (or similar object) in FLIR and Tv mode and slaved to radar. An object with no transponder in closed and controlled airspace. So the event is corroborated by multiple witnesses whose account is supported by at least two radar systems, FLIR and tv-mode. It is not just eye witness testimony - & if you think the military is going to let anyone see all of the radar and electro optical data you will be waiting a long time. Eye witness accounts and memory are the weakest form of evidence - but this took place for over a week and is supported by the video. This is a very compelling case that can not be easily dismissed.
@@BadBoyofScience I have no idea what they are and definitely need more data - but to me it is one of two scenarios. Either a top secret military test of incredible technology performed on the unsuspecting Navy strike group or true unknowns that our government has some knowledge about. This would explain why there wasn’t more alarm from the chain of command. The videos in of themselves, while interesting, do not reach the threshold of scientific proof of anything (& the TV Mode doesn’t show an amorphous blob - but a cigar shape) - but it cause cry out to be taken seriously and for a scientific perspective. Great content! I am a new sub and look forward to whatever you do next.
@@LiteShaper1 You still have the completely unconfirmed object in there but thank you for dropping the obviously invalid "sustained" because that could not possibly work with troubleshooting the systems. You're still interpolating widely from something that could be occasional contacts given his description, but even removing a single embellishment like that makes it sound a lot less impressive then the impression of having it locked down 24/7 for a whole week with the same exact track across multiple systems. Takes a lot of the magic out and consistently sticking to the observations conveyed instead of repeating an even grander narrative then the one he gives would do wonders to turn it into actual analysis.
The quick descension reminds me of values being smoothed or averaged out for easier reading. I understand the video shown when talking about this is just an example, but do we know anything about if these devices can smooth values out like this? I imagine this can be deceptive and perhaps naive so maybe not.
Those objects coming in from space are known by NORAD as " fastwalkers" ....they coined the term during the cold war when objects were seen entering our atmosphere on a non ballistic trajectory from BEHIND the satellites and entering our oceans on numerous occasions.
@@BadBoyofScience I think they're coming from space obviously and entering our oceans and vice versa... Most likely drones, or something like we currently send to Mars but much more highly advanced. We've been technologically "advanced" for not even a hundred years, our universe is 14 billion years old, if you don't think that's enough time for a civilization to have evolved for just a couple thousand years I'm quite sure they'd be able to build the technology to reach our solar system, and that's assuming they're not from close by. There are stories from all across the world from ancient civilizations that all describe the same thing: "God's" that are from the sky, from the Hopi to the Sumerians. How did these people's half a world apart have similar beliefs? There's an iota of truth in there somewhere and it's likely the very core of the myths " they came from the sky " in my opinion... We have over 100 moons alone between Jupiter and Saturn, it wouldn't be hard for a highly advanced civilization to leave probes here or have an outposts so to speak basically anywhere in our solar system including under our oceans, and we'd have no clue. We assume everything operates how we do with radio signatures or some other primitive way we do. It's like thinking an alien race would show up and have ak47s ....all I know is what I've been able to surmise from my studies is that these things are not new to hear and we have known about them for decades by our government and for thousands of years by older civilizations. We don't know as much as we think, I know that with a certainty
@@anthonyw9129 Interesting hypothesis. You'd love Stargate SG-1. It's a sci-fi series that follows a lot of these "ancient alien" type ideas. Thanks for sharing your thoughts! :)
Just on a tiny point of terminology, what does the 'WS' in 'WSO' stand for? In this video Mick West says it is 'Weapon Systems', but the so-called Executive Report released/leaked to the TTSA defines it as 'Weapons and Sensors'. 'Weapon Systems' seems to be the standard terminology: en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Weapon_systems_officer so the definition in the Report may be a variant usage or just a casual error.
A fantastic discussion! If this was a military test of some kind, it seems to me that perhaps it was not intended that planes got anywhere near the tic tac thing (I think this 'intercept' happened due to the initiative of Kevin Day and he clearly was not told it was all a test). As such, I like Ramsey's speculation that perhaps what happened was that the tic-tac was a dirigible tethered to a submarine and there was a bit of panic when it became clear that some planes were trying to approach it (which may have led to the thing bursting!). If it was this way, I'd say there's still a bit of a question mark over what is shown in the FLIR video. Furthermore, to play devil's advocate - by some odd coincidence, a couple of weeks *before* the tic-tac incident, a guy in Riverside California - claiming to be an experienced plane watcher - had submitted a report to one of the 'UFO databases'. In his words: ''It appeared to be shiny, opaque white, not self-luminous. There were no wings, fins or other protrusions visible. The shape was a short tube with rounded ends, like a vitamin capsule or maybe an aircraft drop tank. I watched it until it disappeared in the distance to the south.'' For me this keeps the possibility open that what those pilots saw was a very unusual experimental aircraft.
This sounds very interesting. But there's something a bit off about the sync of sound and picture (the short clip earlier posted was also not in sync at all).
@@BadBoyofScience I reloaded it at around 6minutes or so, and then it stayed in sync (close enough at least) for the remainder. Something in the intro? Or in Lemmino's footage? (Oh, should probably mention that I watch at 1.25 or 1.5 - but that doesn't usually create any problems.) Nice discussion - very good overview when you haven't been following this too closely.
@@Asptuber Yeah, looks like it! Probably a weird setting he used that my editing software doesn’t like. Sorry about that! Glad it sorts itself out! Thanks for letting me know! What do you think happened in these encounters?
@@BadBoyofScience Glad you found the glitch, hopefully it means you can avoid it in the future :-) What happened? No idea. Not having followed it much, I'm sort of surprised that these possible explanations haven't been explored before. I listened to one of these Air Force (?) guys on Rogan way back when, and I just naively assumed that he had already checked and excluded these kinds of questions... This actually goes to a broader point: very often the general public _assumes_ that these kinds of technological sources of error has accounted for before something hits the news. If the pandemic has taught us anything it should be that very often it hasn't...
@@Asptuber For sure! If we had the data from the sensors, we could do a lot more, but obviously we don't. That could be because: - advanced tech was being trialled - aliens are being covered up - incompetence etc etc The lack of clarity allows for interpretation and fantasy :)
A lot of speculation, educated guesses, however you want to call it. Certainly not the worst I've seen on the subject, but I guess pretty much everything that can be said about the subject is already said many times. For parts educated guesses may be the best we can do as only limited data is available for the one off incidents. But some pilots claim to see the tictacs almost daily. I'ld love to see some solid data collection and analysis, can't be too hard given daily encounters, and it beats speculation to find a solid explanation.
Yeah, we don’t claim to have all the answers. We just wanted to show that modern, human sci and tech can reproduce a lot of the things people claim to have seen. That’s all. It’s a hypothesis. Definitely keen to see anymore data. What’s your take on what happened during these encounters, Willy?
It seems there is (or was) a bad problem in the FLIR system as the operator switches between modes. So it appears. Has the quality of the system already been developed not to have problems between the mode switches? There is a lot to work to do before the UAPs will disappear (for good).
Yeah, the losing of lock seems like a significant weakness of the system. I guess this was 2004 tech, but still... What do you think happened out there, Modafinil?
@@BadBoyofScience I cannot say anything but my opinion. There are sightings from 1940s. It would be close of my conclusion to say there is no smoke without a fire. But there are a lot of details that are bringning doubts to the picture. As they say there was a UFO crash in Roswell they do say that a craft that is way beyond anything we have there seem to be technical difficulties with those crafts if they are falling from the sky due to simple weather phenomenon such a thunderstrom is. So the ET (or ?) should have maintenance services for their cratfs. Hopefully Pentagon will get the truth out for us in the (near) future. Or Avi Loeb with his Galileo project. I have to say anyway that I have never seen anything that weird in the skies that I could say I've even seen a UFO. One strange blue light phenomenon in the 1970s but no craft or object. I'd say also, that Christianity claims all kinds of miracles to happen and what I have been seen is that there is no such thing such as miracles. Why Christianity then in this context? Due to people that believe in UFOs believe also in different kind of paranormal phenomena. Even if ET is real it doesn't mean that anything paranormal is real. This is not about an opinion. There even is a real phenomenon or there isn't and no opinion can even rise a phenomenon or shut it down.
Tic-Tac: The odds of a strange radar glitch combined with very strange multiple visual observations in the same area along with very strange infrared verification from a completely different pilot in the same area, are effectively zero unless something very strange was actually physically there. Please.
Also, this should be terrifying Nothing ever happens without context. What would the context for that scenario be? Someone trying to find ways to confuse the systems and reliably interfere with a pilot's ability to fight. That's what the context for such a situation would be. What's going on in the world right now, hmm I don't know, maybe the fact that China is committing genocide, while conducting regular military drills and even invading other territories like the Philippines, which by the way they have declared the Philippines their territory and have stationed military on one of the islands and are conducting military operations from it, while also declaring themselves allies with the Taliban and many other things. Including telling the usa that the usa is not in a position of power to engage in diplomacy with them, and psychologically preparing their citizens for war and instilling hatred of other cultures into them while making many leisure activities illegal and trying to encourage them to work more hours and increase production. No matter how you look at it China is ready for war and making moves, and there's situations where other countries military technology and radar is all of a sudden getting lots of strange data reports? No that's not a coincidence, neither is China releasing a genetically modified virus from a safe and secure laboratory that handles many dangerous viruses, one such virus that just happens to be very very good at crippling other countries economies and medical capabilities while demoralizing individual citizens greatly. That is the context, this is not accidental, sure the odds of that crap happening on accident are low, but it happening intentionally? No those odds aren't low at all. Open your damn eyes and look at the world as a whole
The odds of that happening on a regular basis are not great but occasional overlapping events in cases where people are primed to look for anything can't really be ruled out in the same way.
@@martinw245 Which events have truly independent observers to begin with and what is your basis for claiming that independent observations without a positive id are of the *same* origin?
They came in from space and was loitering for days, the US. Military did nothing, you may find it ridiculous but do not underestimate the incompetence of the US military. Should this circus ever involve it self in a war with a developed nation it will be totally destroyed. It is the most incompetent and dysfunctional military i have ever experienced during my military service, working with units from all over the world.
@@BadBoyofScience I actually worked at the Norad stations in Greenland during the 1980s and these things was observed then, but ignored. I dont know what it is.
The balloon notion doesn't make sense. The object Fravor saw suddenly reorientation itself to point at him, engaged him in a two circle fight where both tic tac and F18 were flying in circles, F18 descending, tic tac climbing. And then when Fravor cut across the circle and got close to it, it rapidly accelerated away. Balloons don't engage jets in a two circle manoeuver. It was also tracked on RADAR before merge plot and tracked descending rapidly to just above the ocean.
Something appeared on radar and something appeared to circle a jet as observed from that jet. The link is somewhat more speculative, unless you have some fresh testimony, or preferably recording, from the radar people tracking active engagement or at least observation from another jet.
@@caitgaist Oh yes, all of this is dependent on Fravor's testimony being correct. But if we accept the accuracy of his testimony, then no, personally I don't favor the balloon hypothesis. Regarding observation from another jet: this was two F18's that encountered the tic tac, so four observers, two pilots and two WSO's. Alex dietrich stayed high in her F18 to observe the proceedings while Fravor decended in a circle to investigate. Dietrich has confirmed she witnessed it too, as I believe one of the WSO's has too. The tic tac was obviously tracked on radar, hence why Fravor and Dietrich were vectored to it. It was also tracked descending from 28,000 feet to just above the ocean prior to merge plot. This is all "what we have been told" of course, so nothing definitive. They could all be lying and part of a disinformation campaign for all we know. My only objective here is to express a personel opinion regarding the balloon hypothesis. The other point I should mention re the balloon notion is that Fravor didn't say it vanished. He said it rapidly accelerated away. So the balloon bursting idea isn't valid if Fravors account is accurate.
@@martinw245 I'm not substantiality questioning his observations, however Dietrich does not back most interesting parts of his interpretation. With what we have it's simply not possible to conclusively disambiguate his observations with regards to circling. I don't have any one hypothesis, I'm just seeing various ways the pieces can go together without any clear way to differentiate between them.
@@caitgaist It's hard to know if the balloon shot off or Fravor changed his relative motion sharply (cutting across the circle) and because it was closer than he anticipated (high above the ocean and slow rather than close to the ocean and fast) it *appeared* to shoot off. I tend to accept that these people saw something and are acting honestly, but there are so many ways we can trick ourselves and - in the interviews I have seen - Fravor seems more happy to say "aliens" than the others. That doesn't mean he's wrong of course...
@@BadBoyofScience Absolutely. There's any number of ways to give rise to apparent motion and even more ways for something that can be honestly interpreted as apparent notion in real time.
Great podcast! As I see it, the people left believing the 3 navy ufo videos show something extraordinary, are the subset of people who don't understand Micks technical explanations. I've yet to see a single actual technical refutation of any of Micks explanations for any of the 3 videos, just strawman arguments, misunderstandings and fallacious appeals to authority.
@@BadBoyofScience I'm not sure to be honest. However, what we can say is: the claim that we have video evidence showing anything extraordinary or physics defying, just doesn't hold up once the videos are analysed. It is very telling that those publicly pushing this currant UFO flap, cannot demonstrate an understanding of Micks Hypothesis for each of the videos. Then, the "it's aliens" crowd appeal to those very same people who, themselves, cannot grasp the technicalities of Micks explanations.
@@deanjdk Indeed. When there is a lack of evidence they just say “you’re not ready for the truth” or “it’s the truth *they* don’t want you to know”. Appealing to antiestablishment thinking is a substitute for evidence in a lot of topics atm: COVID, IVM, aliens etc etc etc
Wanted to believe..but tethered ballon theory sounds way to good..also that disturbing water went away afterwards..so probably the submarine submerged deeper after it released the ballloon..
We’re not saying that this is the definitive answer, but some possibilities worth considering. We can do all this without aliens. Doesn’t mean it wasn’t aliens ;)
@@BadBoyofScience there's still the issue that there isn't a single known definitive proof of aliens at all. Anything over 1% is effectively almost guaranteed to happen compared to these being aliens. And even something at a 1% chance, if the conditions that give it a chance to happen, occur 10,000 times. Odds are it will be guaranteed to happen at least once. Heck, even just in video games where math is set in stone and cannot be altered by other things. Events with odds around 0.1% like a rare item drop, are actually fairly common and happen all the time Even if it's a damn bird, if there's only a 0.1% chance a flock of birds can cause this, odds are sooner than later, there will be a flock of birds that cause it
@@thezyreick4289 I believe the point is precisely that in the abstract interstellar travelers can be used to "explain" any observation. Calculating speculative odds on a conceptual level isn't sufficient because, no matter how unlikely you make their presence, their explanatory explanatory power is only limited by imagination and believers have already overcome the hurdle of imagining alien visitors.
@@thezyreick4289 Yep - it’s important to look at thinks I’m context and not in a vacuum. Are any of these ideas less probable than “aliens came down for a day at the seaside?”. Personally, I don’t think so. Of course, everyone is welcome to their opinion. You’re also correct that low probability events will happen once in a while. In this video we just wanted to show that all these things *can* happen and we have the tech and science to achieve them. We don’t claim we have the 100% correct flow of events. That would be silly and unscientific. Thanks for the comment! What do you think happened out there?
@@caitgaist Yeah, they’re a kind of omni-answer like ‘God did it’ or ‘It was a dream’. If you throw out the laws of physics than anything is possible. Here, we wanted to show that these things *can* be achieved with our current sci and tech. We certainly don’t claim to know what happened or have the only sensible suggestion. What do you think happened out there, Proton?
Err.... that's not correct. 80,000 feet is not space. SR71 flew at 85,000 feet. The Karmen line is 330,000 feet. So no, a UFO dropping from 80,000 feet to lower altitude would not trigger any kind of DEFCON alert. The other point is that it occured too rapidly to do so. DEFCON alerts wood be triggered every day if it was thar simple, by meteorites for example. Not a good argument from Mick West. The other point is that if the military and government are familiar with such UFO activity, it wouldn't trigger an alert.
Hi Martin! I think we're using 'space' quite colloquially here, but thanks for the clarification :) It certainly seems like the response was muted. People can interpret that in many different ways: - They knew an exercise was underway - These types of glitches are common and not dangerous (from experience) - We have an understanding with the aliens like in X-Files. Everything is obviously open to massive interpretation. We don't claim to have the right answers here or the accurate timeline, but some of the responses are interesting and we can do things with sci and tech that explain most of the observations. Really enjoying the discussion. What do you think happened out there?
Yup! They never released the sensor data, so we can’t say much for sure. However, we *can* demonstrate that you can do all/most of this stuff with modern tech and science we understand. That was the goal. What do you you think happened out there, dude?
@@bobbyhill8215 Now, that’s a true scientist’s answer ;) I felt the same, dude. That’s why I turned to 2 experts. It takes a lot of digging to work out even what *might* have happened. I’m not sure we will ever know for sure.
@@BadBoyofScience it feels like that’s the point... whatever happened out there was designed by its very natural to be unsolved! I’m done speculating, I admit defeat but it’s still fascinating listening to other people’s views.
Glad you're enjoying it, Fury! Love the alien themed handle btw. My fav sci-fi franchise. ;) What do you think might have happened during these encounters?
the images are worse than 1950s TV black and white. how can you have such bad quality images in the 2000s come on guys the only amazing thing is the bad camera 1mega pixel really and we are going to ask what was it , shame on us they fooled us twice.
Air Force Pilots: Its rotating Mick West: The camera is rotating Who are you gonna believe? To further highlight how ridiculous his hypothesis is if the camera rotating would cause the object to rotate then why did the clouds not rotate? Why is Mick interviewed? He is not intelligent enough to be putting his two cents in on this topic.
Thats Boring as Debunkers like Mick now only concentrate on the Radar System. 1. Mick can‘t prove his Theory 2. What is about the Witnesses by David Fravor and Alex Dietrich People like Mick will never give the Possibility of Unbelievable or Unimaginable things.😎
Can we prove aliens or ‘unbelievable and unimaginable things’? No - almost by definition. We’re not saying we have the perfect answer, but trying to show that all these things *can* be explained by science and technology. Fravor and Dietrich (interviewed by Mick) have vastly different accounts and are not infallible. Who should we believe? They’re also no infallible. Perhaps they were fooled. Can we rule out unimaginable things? No - again, almost by definition, but we have no need for hypotheses involving aliens 👽 or inter dimensional creatures when many hypotheses much closer to home are just as possible.
Mick's a skeptic and debunker without all of the evidence so I'd consider claiming to debunk something without all the data intellectually dishonest... How can you disagree? Let the real scientific minds with actual security clearances study this and make a conclusion instead of a video game programer who used to believe in ghosts lol.
Do you trust the government/military to be honest if classified tech or sensitive national security data is at stake? It would definitely have been better if the sensor data had been made publicly available. Then, we’d have a lot more to go on! It doesn’t matter to me who raises hypotheses, it matters whether those hypotheses are sensible and physically achievable. I think most of Mick and Ramsey’s ideas are. That doesn’t mean they have the right answers of course :)
@@BadBoyofScienceI do trust the government has the sensors that they say they have and that it's classified for a reason. Unless you want to be on the level of flat earthers why wouldn't you trust the head of NASA Bill Nelson, Ex DNI Ratcliffe , and congressman on the Intel committee when they're saying that these things are not anywhere near what we have in our inventory? There's no possible way that Russia or China have leapfrogged us when they're constantly trying to steal from us and spend a fraction of what we do lol.... Again why wouldn't I trust the government to protect sensitive data? I'm quite sure they lie about what we secretly have I'm sure we have black projects that are really advanced such as nuclear pulse propulsion capable craft but that still wouldn't be capable of what these pilots (plural) not just from the Nimitz have seen. Bill Nelson said it himself , but according to you he must be lying correct because he's part of the government? You guys are becoming the conspiracy theorists. Your question arises another one; why would the government let it go this far if it was ours,to the point of intel hearings and demands for a report from the armed forces and Intel agencies...and a new development, a report every 90 days? They'd want it to go away correct? The actions being taken suggest that lawmakers who approve the spending on these black programs are quite concerned, as they're doing away with the task force ( as those are temporary) and making an actual department to investigate these. This isn't a new phenomenon either it's been being reported by military and civilian pilots and regular people alike for years. So that's why Mick is intellectually dishonest.... he's not in a position to make a theory as he hasn't personally seen one, seen the radar data, or the other more highly classified data that Ratcliffe and Obama spoke of from satellites. How can you honestly try to debunk something missing all those factors? Let alone his approach to this is as a debunker which is not a scientific approach to begin with.
@@anthonyw9129 I haven’t said anyone is lying. What we set out to demonstrate is that all these sightings *could* be the result of science and technology. We don’t need to invoke aliens or unknown phenomena. Nothing more than that. I just find it odd that we expect those reporting these sightings to do their own investigation to or disclose all relevant data/tech etc. Maybe they did. Maybe they didn’t. I don’t know and nor do any of us.
Mick seems to be the only showing intelligence on this panel. no one ever bring any proof but to assume it aliens, what about secret spy drone crafts???
![FORTNITE CLASSICS IS BACK! Fortnite Item Shop [November 15th, 2024] (Fortnite Chapter 5)](http://i.ytimg.com/vi/RbQURbeFwqs/mqdefault.jpg)
![Wolfram Physics Project: Working Session Wednesday, Apr. 29, 2020 [Finding Black Hole Structures]](/img/1.gif)
What do you think happened during these famous UAP encounters?
nothing happened during the encounters they all said it. they didn't even need any weapons. in the 1960s they had top secrete classified jets (SR 71 blackbird) that can go about twice the speed of the planes these frauds were flying so u mean to tell me that secrete unmanned spy planes (drones)are not flying even faster and more argyle. the 60s please
Either a lie or mistaken interpretation. Easy question.
You think Ramsey who is an intelligent tech guy could manage to get a decent mic .
Ha! We grabbed him after a long work day and he isn’t a YT guy to be fair, but I’ll make sure he’s better kitted out for next time ;)
All the best to you and yours! Many thanks for rational discussion.
This is the link I'd send someone who's watched the Grusch/Fravor/etc testimony to congress and now thinks aliens are here and they've broken physics. I was already familiar with Mick's excellent Navy footage explanations but Dr Ramsey F's insights around radar tech and testing are new to me and super enlightening. Thanks!
Glad you enjoyed it, Alex!
We’ll be meeting again next week to discuss the hearings. Watch this space and feel free to sub.
Hopefully catch you next week :)
@@BadBoyofScience subbed :)
No mention of the radar "rain" or how a balloon can be hot but Mr Faragher has enlightened me. It really does look like they were testing classified equipment.
I think there are multiple things going on during these encounters tbh and there are certainly a lot of unknowns.
What do you think happened during these encounters?
There are no guarantees that the flir video shows the objects that were on radar hours earlier.
@@ventsyv This is a very important point. It has always been assumed that these were the same objects, but that may not be the case.
@@BadBoyofScience Someone with knowledge of radar spoofing techniques like Mr Faragher could probably come up with a pretty convincing timeline. But essentially a radar decoy unit participating in real world wargames spent a week trying to get the attention of the carrier strike groups new radar equipment with ghost squadrons and radar rain. Rebooting and recalibration of the ships radar equipment merely made the anomalies sharper. Eventually the group sent out fighters to investigate and came close to catching the amphibious ship/submarine in the very act of deploying active radar decoy balloons. If you look into the radar decoy business you'll be amazed how advanced it is. Some very clever people with balloons managed to spoof the latest radar equipment the most experienced pilots, and millions of us who bought into it.
@@maughan3061 Yeah, this is the rough idea. It doesn’t mean it’s a perfect hypothesis or that other things weren’t going on. We do not claim to have all the answers, but it’s definitely a fascinating and important possibility to consider.
If you have all the spec for a sensor, you can work out how to trick that sensor and - as Ramsey mentioned - often countermeasures are developed in parallel with new technology.
the laser hologram thing is silly for a number of reasons. The way these "displays" work is by causing dielectric breakdown and avalanche ionization in the air using gigawatt scale pulsed lasers focused to near diffraction limited spots in mid air. the power levels and numerical aperture of the lens required to do something like this in broad daylight at mile+ distances would be absolutely insane. like multi-petawatt, multi-meter diameter final focusing lenses insane....to say nothing of the atmospheric aberrations that would need to be dealt with just to get enough energy to the focal spot to actually achieve breakdown. total fantasy with present technology.
Yeah, this was definitely the most speculative piece of potential tech. We almost left it out, as the video touches on. It could potentially explain the dots of light some sailors say they saw through high powered binoculars, but not much more than that.
No it's actually antigravity alien tictacs
@@zair_salahuddin Interesting - what makes you think that?
@@BadBoyofScience I was joking about the idea that a plasma hologram is a fantasy but antigravity alien flying saucers aren't.
@@zair_salahuddin Ahhh! Yeah, the laser thing is definitely out there. I just wanted to include it because it’s cool tbh ;) I’d be very surprised if it were involved in this tale.
Excellent, informed and intelligent discussion!
I just think there are so many corroborating layers - sustained radar targets over a seven day period from a state of the art radar system showing objects dropping to sea level almost instantly. Eyewitness accounts from people on the ships seeing physical objects through high powered binoculars & then two planes, 4 highly trained witnesses physically see a highly bizarre object displaying impossible flight characteristics - a then you have an additional pilot vectored to an area due to radar hits from the ship then locks on an object with the radar on his plane and then he films it on FLIR and tv mode. So You have at least two independent radars , as well as FLIR, TV mode and highly trained eye witnesses seeing the same phenomenon in closed and controlled air space where there should not have been anything there to film. To imagine a complex scenario where there were a series of mistakes, misperceptions, equipment glitches, etc that lined up in a perfect storm of misidentifications is harder to fathom than perhaps the reality that they confronted a novel, unknown phenomenon (or a military exercises). Also, the TV mode is not a blob. It’s a tight cigar shape that corresponds pretty closely with the FLIR image in the later part of the video. It would require further testing - but I am not convinced the tv mode of a distant plane would look cigar shaped.
Who is claiming "sustained" tracking of multiple objects?
How does one verify the physicality of an object through binoculars?
And finally, how much of this do we have *independent* evidence of?
There are some individual layers but not enough to independently account for all the third party observations people provide in their own composite interpretations, so it's inaccurate to say that *we* have a lot of layers.
Thanks for the comment, Lite and glad you enjoyed it!
There’s certainly a lot going on and I tend to believe that those present saw *something* or at least believe they saw something. I don’t think everyone is lying. There’s also a lot more research that could be done if the sensor data had been made accessible, but sadly, it wasn’t.
What do you think happened out there?
@@caitgaist Kevin Day reported they tracked the objects for 7 days and also tracked objects dropping from around 30,000 feet to sea level. They also tracked objects at 80,000 feet. They rebooted and recalibrated the system thinking initially it had to be some kind of glitch - and the returns became even sharper.
This reboot was confirmed by radar tech Gary Voorhis. Voorhis at one point went up to the bridge and looked through the high powered binocs at the bearing given by the radar and saw objects hovering and darting erratically. He saw them both day and night through the binocs. At night they appeared as phosphorous looking lights.
The radar and the visual sightings from the bridge are what initiated the intercept where 4 witnesses described the bizarre tic-tac object & seeing it with their eyes - which was then later filmed (or similar object) in FLIR and Tv mode and slaved to radar. An object with no transponder in closed and controlled airspace. So the event is corroborated by multiple witnesses whose account is supported by at least two radar systems, FLIR and tv-mode. It is not just eye witness testimony - & if you think the military is going to let anyone see all of the radar and electro optical data you will be waiting a long time.
Eye witness accounts and memory are the weakest form of evidence - but this took place for over a week and is supported by the video. This is a very compelling case that can not be easily dismissed.
@@BadBoyofScience I have no idea what they are and definitely need more data - but to me it is one of two scenarios. Either a top secret military test of incredible technology performed on the unsuspecting Navy strike group or true unknowns that our government has some knowledge about. This would explain why there wasn’t more alarm from the chain of command.
The videos in of themselves, while interesting, do not reach the threshold of scientific proof of anything (& the TV Mode doesn’t show an amorphous blob - but a cigar shape) - but it cause cry out to be taken seriously and for a scientific perspective. Great content! I am a new sub and look forward to whatever you do next.
@@LiteShaper1 You still have the completely unconfirmed object in there but thank you for dropping the obviously invalid "sustained" because that could not possibly work with troubleshooting the systems. You're still interpolating widely from something that could be occasional contacts given his description, but even removing a single embellishment like that makes it sound a lot less impressive then the impression of having it locked down 24/7 for a whole week with the same exact track across multiple systems.
Takes a lot of the magic out and consistently sticking to the observations conveyed instead of repeating an even grander narrative then the one he gives would do wonders to turn it into actual analysis.
This is going to go down as one of the biggest political humiliations in history
The quick descension reminds me of values being smoothed or averaged out for easier reading. I understand the video shown when talking about this is just an example, but do we know anything about if these devices can smooth values out like this?
I imagine this can be deceptive and perhaps naive so maybe not.
Those objects coming in from space are known by NORAD as " fastwalkers" ....they coined the term during the cold war when objects were seen entering our atmosphere on a non ballistic trajectory from BEHIND the satellites and entering our oceans on numerous occasions.
If we’ve been seeing these dive bombing object for a while, Anthony, what do you think they are? :)
@@BadBoyofScience I think they're coming from space obviously and entering our oceans and vice versa... Most likely drones, or something like we currently send to Mars but much more highly advanced. We've been technologically "advanced" for not even a hundred years, our universe is 14 billion years old, if you don't think that's enough time for a civilization to have evolved for just a couple thousand years I'm quite sure they'd be able to build the technology to reach our solar system, and that's assuming they're not from close by. There are stories from all across the world from ancient civilizations that all describe the same thing: "God's" that are from the sky, from the Hopi to the Sumerians. How did these people's half a world apart have similar beliefs? There's an iota of truth in there somewhere and it's likely the very core of the myths " they came from the sky " in my opinion... We have over 100 moons alone between Jupiter and Saturn, it wouldn't be hard for a highly advanced civilization to leave probes here or have an outposts so to speak basically anywhere in our solar system including under our oceans, and we'd have no clue. We assume everything operates how we do with radio signatures or some other primitive way we do. It's like thinking an alien race would show up and have ak47s ....all I know is what I've been able to surmise from my studies is that these things are not new to hear and we have known about them for decades by our government and for thousands of years by older civilizations. We don't know as much as we think, I know that with a certainty
@@BadBoyofScience And they are not "dove" bombing, I said NON ballistic trajectory, that means it's slowing down. :)
@@anthonyw9129 Thank you for catching the typo, buddy :)
@@anthonyw9129 Interesting hypothesis. You'd love Stargate SG-1. It's a sci-fi series that follows a lot of these "ancient alien" type ideas. Thanks for sharing your thoughts! :)
Great discussion. Thank you Gents!
You’re welcome, Homosapien! Glad you enjoyed it!
What do you think happened during these famous encounters?
I really enjoyed this. Thanks very much
Glad you enjoyed it, Matthew!
What do you think happened during these encounters? :)
Just on a tiny point of terminology, what does the 'WS' in 'WSO' stand for? In this video Mick West says it is 'Weapon Systems', but the so-called Executive Report released/leaked to the TTSA defines it as 'Weapons and Sensors'. 'Weapon Systems' seems to be the standard terminology: en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Weapon_systems_officer so the definition in the Report may be a variant usage or just a casual error.
A fantastic discussion!
If this was a military test of some kind, it seems to me that perhaps it was not intended that planes got anywhere near the tic tac thing (I think this 'intercept' happened due to the initiative of Kevin Day and he clearly was not told it was all a test). As such, I like Ramsey's speculation that perhaps what happened was that the tic-tac was a dirigible tethered to a submarine and there was a bit of panic when it became clear that some planes were trying to approach it (which may have led to the thing bursting!).
If it was this way, I'd say there's still a bit of a question mark over what is shown in the FLIR video. Furthermore, to play devil's advocate - by some odd coincidence, a couple of weeks *before* the tic-tac incident, a guy in Riverside California - claiming to be an experienced plane watcher - had submitted a report to one of the 'UFO databases'. In his words: ''It appeared to be shiny, opaque white, not self-luminous. There were no wings, fins or other protrusions visible. The shape was a short tube with rounded ends, like a vitamin capsule or maybe an aircraft drop tank. I watched it until it disappeared in the distance to the south.''
For me this keeps the possibility open that what those pilots saw was a very unusual experimental aircraft.
do you have the link for this report?
This sounds very interesting. But there's something a bit off about the sync of sound and picture (the short clip earlier posted was also not in sync at all).
Really, that’s odd. It seems fine to me and on the editing software. Hmmm... I’ll have a dig around! Thanks for letting me know!
@@BadBoyofScience I reloaded it at around 6minutes or so, and then it stayed in sync (close enough at least) for the remainder.
Something in the intro? Or in Lemmino's footage?
(Oh, should probably mention that I watch at 1.25 or 1.5 - but that doesn't usually create any problems.)
Nice discussion - very good overview when you haven't been following this too closely.
@@Asptuber Yeah, looks like it! Probably a weird setting he used that my editing software doesn’t like. Sorry about that! Glad it sorts itself out!
Thanks for letting me know!
What do you think happened in these encounters?
@@BadBoyofScience Glad you found the glitch, hopefully it means you can avoid it in the future :-)
What happened? No idea.
Not having followed it much, I'm sort of surprised that these possible explanations haven't been explored before. I listened to one of these Air Force (?) guys on Rogan way back when, and I just naively assumed that he had already checked and excluded these kinds of questions...
This actually goes to a broader point: very often the general public _assumes_ that these kinds of technological sources of error has accounted for before something hits the news. If the pandemic has taught us anything it should be that very often it hasn't...
@@Asptuber For sure! If we had the data from the sensors, we could do a lot more, but obviously we don't. That could be because:
- advanced tech was being trialled
- aliens are being covered up
- incompetence etc etc
The lack of clarity allows for interpretation and fantasy :)
A lot of speculation, educated guesses, however you want to call it. Certainly not the worst I've seen on the subject, but I guess pretty much everything that can be said about the subject is already said many times. For parts educated guesses may be the best we can do as only limited data is available for the one off incidents. But some pilots claim to see the tictacs almost daily. I'ld love to see some solid data collection and analysis, can't be too hard given daily encounters, and it beats speculation to find a solid explanation.
Yeah, we don’t claim to have all the answers. We just wanted to show that modern, human sci and tech can reproduce a lot of the things people claim to have seen. That’s all. It’s a hypothesis.
Definitely keen to see anymore data.
What’s your take on what happened during these encounters, Willy?
It seems there is (or was) a bad problem in the FLIR system as the operator switches between modes. So it appears. Has the quality of the system already been developed not to have problems between the mode switches? There is a lot to work to do before the UAPs will disappear (for good).
Yeah, the losing of lock seems like a significant weakness of the system. I guess this was 2004 tech, but still...
What do you think happened out there, Modafinil?
@@BadBoyofScience I cannot say anything but my opinion. There are sightings from 1940s. It would be close of my conclusion to say there is no smoke without a fire. But there are a lot of details that are bringning doubts to the picture. As they say there was a UFO crash in Roswell they do say that a craft that is way beyond anything we have there seem to be technical difficulties with those crafts if they are falling from the sky due to simple weather phenomenon such a thunderstrom is. So the ET (or ?) should have maintenance services for their cratfs. Hopefully Pentagon will get the truth out for us in the (near) future. Or Avi Loeb with his Galileo project. I have to say anyway that I have never seen anything that weird in the skies that I could say I've even seen a UFO. One strange blue light phenomenon in the 1970s but no craft or object. I'd say also, that Christianity claims all kinds of miracles to happen and what I have been seen is that there is no such thing such as miracles. Why Christianity then in this context? Due to people that believe in UFOs believe also in different kind of paranormal phenomena. Even if ET is real it doesn't mean that anything paranormal is real. This is not about an opinion. There even is a real phenomenon or there isn't and no opinion can even rise a phenomenon or shut it down.
@@Modafinil Yep - we don't have all the answers...yet! Lots more to learn :)
Tic-Tac: The odds of a strange radar glitch combined with very strange multiple visual observations in the same area along with very strange infrared verification from a completely different pilot in the same area, are effectively zero unless something very strange was actually physically there. Please.
The odds of a human lying.
Roughly 70%
Also, this should be terrifying
Nothing ever happens without context. What would the context for that scenario be? Someone trying to find ways to confuse the systems and reliably interfere with a pilot's ability to fight. That's what the context for such a situation would be.
What's going on in the world right now, hmm I don't know, maybe the fact that China is committing genocide, while conducting regular military drills and even invading other territories like the Philippines, which by the way they have declared the Philippines their territory and have stationed military on one of the islands and are conducting military operations from it, while also declaring themselves allies with the Taliban and many other things. Including telling the usa that the usa is not in a position of power to engage in diplomacy with them, and psychologically preparing their citizens for war and instilling hatred of other cultures into them while making many leisure activities illegal and trying to encourage them to work more hours and increase production. No matter how you look at it China is ready for war and making moves, and there's situations where other countries military technology and radar is all of a sudden getting lots of strange data reports? No that's not a coincidence, neither is China releasing a genetically modified virus from a safe and secure laboratory that handles many dangerous viruses, one such virus that just happens to be very very good at crippling other countries economies and medical capabilities while demoralizing individual citizens greatly. That is the context, this is not accidental, sure the odds of that crap happening on accident are low, but it happening intentionally? No those odds aren't low at all. Open your damn eyes and look at the world as a whole
@@thezyreick4289
What are the odds of multiple independent observers lying about the same thing?
The odds of that happening on a regular basis are not great but occasional overlapping events in cases where people are primed to look for anything can't really be ruled out in the same way.
@@martinw245 Which events have truly independent observers to begin with and what is your basis for claiming that independent observations without a positive id are of the *same* origin?
They came in from space and was loitering for days, the US. Military did nothing, you may find it ridiculous but do not underestimate the incompetence of the US military. Should this circus ever involve it self in a war with a developed nation it will be totally destroyed. It is the most incompetent and dysfunctional military i have ever experienced during my military service, working with units from all over the world.
What do you think happened during these encounters, tag?
@@BadBoyofScience I actually worked at the Norad stations in Greenland during the 1980s and these things was observed then, but ignored. I dont know what it is.
@@nyttag7830 Cool! Join the club! ;)
Which military is the best?
@@robpri The alien military. Haven’t you played XCOM? ;)
Dunno about the aliens but Ramsey's audio is unidentified :p
Ha! We grabbed him after a long work day, so I think he’s stuck on his office laptop 👨💻 I’ll buy him a blue yeti ;)
The balloon notion doesn't make sense. The object Fravor saw suddenly reorientation itself to point at him, engaged him in a two circle fight where both tic tac and F18 were flying in circles, F18 descending, tic tac climbing. And then when Fravor cut across the circle and got close to it, it rapidly accelerated away.
Balloons don't engage jets in a two circle manoeuver.
It was also tracked on RADAR before merge plot and tracked descending rapidly to just above the ocean.
Something appeared on radar and something appeared to circle a jet as observed from that jet.
The link is somewhat more speculative, unless you have some fresh testimony, or preferably recording, from the radar people tracking active engagement or at least observation from another jet.
@@caitgaist
Oh yes, all of this is dependent on Fravor's testimony being correct.
But if we accept the accuracy of his testimony, then no, personally I don't favor the balloon hypothesis.
Regarding observation from another jet: this was two F18's that encountered the tic tac, so four observers, two pilots and two WSO's.
Alex dietrich stayed high in her F18 to observe the proceedings while Fravor decended in a circle to investigate. Dietrich has confirmed she witnessed it too, as I believe one of the WSO's has too.
The tic tac was obviously tracked on radar, hence why Fravor and Dietrich were vectored to it. It was also tracked descending from 28,000 feet to just above the ocean prior to merge plot.
This is all "what we have been told" of course, so nothing definitive. They could all be lying and part of a disinformation campaign for all we know.
My only objective here is to express a personel opinion regarding the balloon hypothesis.
The other point I should mention re the balloon notion is that Fravor didn't say it vanished. He said it rapidly accelerated away. So the balloon bursting idea isn't valid if Fravors account is accurate.
@@martinw245 I'm not substantiality questioning his observations, however Dietrich does not back most interesting parts of his interpretation. With what we have it's simply not possible to conclusively disambiguate his observations with regards to circling.
I don't have any one hypothesis, I'm just seeing various ways the pieces can go together without any clear way to differentiate between them.
@@caitgaist It's hard to know if the balloon shot off or Fravor changed his relative motion sharply (cutting across the circle) and because it was closer than he anticipated (high above the ocean and slow rather than close to the ocean and fast) it *appeared* to shoot off.
I tend to accept that these people saw something and are acting honestly, but there are so many ways we can trick ourselves and - in the interviews I have seen - Fravor seems more happy to say "aliens" than the others. That doesn't mean he's wrong of course...
@@BadBoyofScience Absolutely. There's any number of ways to give rise to apparent motion and even more ways for something that can be honestly interpreted as apparent notion in real time.
Good discussion. Should I make my usual comment on this?
Sure! You’re always welcome to share.
Worried about the YT censors? ;)
@@BadBoyofScience Nope. OK then.
Great podcast! As I see it, the people left believing the 3 navy ufo videos show something extraordinary, are the subset of people who don't understand Micks technical explanations. I've yet to see a single actual technical refutation of any of Micks explanations for any of the 3 videos, just strawman arguments, misunderstandings and fallacious appeals to authority.
Indeed. I have heard no serious rebuttals beyond “you’re being mean about the pilots” or “but I love aliens!”. We’re not and I love aliens too!
What do you think happened out there, Deanjdk?
@@BadBoyofScience I'm not sure to be honest.
However, what we can say is: the claim that we have video evidence showing anything extraordinary or physics defying, just doesn't hold up once the videos are analysed.
It is very telling that those publicly pushing this currant UFO flap, cannot demonstrate an understanding of Micks Hypothesis for each of the videos. Then, the "it's aliens" crowd appeal to those very same people who, themselves, cannot grasp the technicalities of Micks explanations.
@@deanjdk Indeed. When there is a lack of evidence they just say “you’re not ready for the truth” or “it’s the truth *they* don’t want you to know”.
Appealing to antiestablishment thinking is a substitute for evidence in a lot of topics atm: COVID, IVM, aliens etc etc etc
Ramsey may be a great scientist but he needs to get a new microphone or better radar. Sounds muffled and echo, had to hear him properly. What a shame.
Wanted to believe..but tethered ballon theory sounds way to good..also that disturbing water went away afterwards..so probably the submarine submerged deeper after it released the ballloon..
We’re not saying that this is the definitive answer, but some possibilities worth considering. We can do all this without aliens. Doesn’t mean it wasn’t aliens ;)
@@BadBoyofScience there's still the issue that there isn't a single known definitive proof of aliens at all.
Anything over 1% is effectively almost guaranteed to happen compared to these being aliens.
And even something at a 1% chance, if the conditions that give it a chance to happen, occur 10,000 times. Odds are it will be guaranteed to happen at least once. Heck, even just in video games where math is set in stone and cannot be altered by other things. Events with odds around 0.1% like a rare item drop, are actually fairly common and happen all the time
Even if it's a damn bird, if there's only a 0.1% chance a flock of birds can cause this, odds are sooner than later, there will be a flock of birds that cause it
@@thezyreick4289 I believe the point is precisely that in the abstract interstellar travelers can be used to "explain" any observation. Calculating speculative odds on a conceptual level isn't sufficient because, no matter how unlikely you make their presence, their explanatory explanatory power is only limited by imagination and believers have already overcome the hurdle of imagining alien visitors.
@@thezyreick4289 Yep - it’s important to look at thinks I’m context and not in a vacuum. Are any of these ideas less probable than “aliens came down for a day at the seaside?”. Personally, I don’t think so. Of course, everyone is welcome to their opinion.
You’re also correct that low probability events will happen once in a while.
In this video we just wanted to show that all these things *can* happen and we have the tech and science to achieve them. We don’t claim we have the 100% correct flow of events. That would be silly and unscientific.
Thanks for the comment!
What do you think happened out there?
@@caitgaist Yeah, they’re a kind of omni-answer like ‘God did it’ or ‘It was a dream’. If you throw out the laws of physics than anything is possible.
Here, we wanted to show that these things *can* be achieved with our current sci and tech. We certainly don’t claim to know what happened or have the only sensible suggestion.
What do you think happened out there, Proton?
Err.... that's not correct. 80,000 feet is not space. SR71 flew at 85,000 feet. The Karmen line is 330,000 feet.
So no, a UFO dropping from 80,000 feet to lower altitude would not trigger any kind of DEFCON alert. The other point is that it occured too rapidly to do so.
DEFCON alerts wood be triggered every day if it was thar simple, by meteorites for example.
Not a good argument from Mick West.
The other point is that if the military and government are familiar with such UFO activity, it wouldn't trigger an alert.
Hi Martin! I think we're using 'space' quite colloquially here, but thanks for the clarification :)
It certainly seems like the response was muted. People can interpret that in many different ways:
- They knew an exercise was underway
- These types of glitches are common and not dangerous (from experience)
- We have an understanding with the aliens like in X-Files.
Everything is obviously open to massive interpretation. We don't claim to have the right answers here or the accurate timeline, but some of the responses are interesting and we can do things with sci and tech that explain most of the observations.
Really enjoying the discussion.
What do you think happened out there?
Still inconclusive even now 🤷🏻♂️
Yup! They never released the sensor data, so we can’t say much for sure.
However, we *can* demonstrate that you can do all/most of this stuff with modern tech and science we understand. That was the goal.
What do you you think happened out there, dude?
@@BadBoyofScience I’m more lost than ever if I’m honest 🤣🤣🤣
@@bobbyhill8215 Now, that’s a true scientist’s answer ;)
I felt the same, dude. That’s why I turned to 2 experts. It takes a lot of digging to work out even what *might* have happened. I’m not sure we will ever know for sure.
@@BadBoyofScience it feels like that’s the point... whatever happened out there was designed by its very natural to be unsolved!
I’m done speculating, I admit defeat but it’s still fascinating listening to other people’s views.
@@bobbyhill8215 Always fun and very open to opposing views. Thanks for stopping by! Hope you'll stick around and we can chat again :)
This is an absolute banger!
Glad you're enjoying it, Fury!
Love the alien themed handle btw. My fav sci-fi franchise. ;)
What do you think might have happened during these encounters?
Just wish it had some mash to go with it.
@@Saiphes haha! Next time...and gravy
It's aliens.
Do tell... 👽 👽
the images are worse than 1950s TV black and white. how can you have such bad quality images in the 2000s come on guys the only amazing thing is the bad camera 1mega pixel really and we are going to ask what was it , shame on us they fooled us twice.
I tend to agree. There really isn’t enough here to be jumping to aliens or similar.
Air Force Pilots: Its rotating
Mick West: The camera is rotating
Who are you gonna believe?
To further highlight how ridiculous his hypothesis is if the camera rotating would cause the object to rotate then why did the clouds not rotate? Why is Mick interviewed? He is not intelligent enough to be putting his two cents in on this topic.
Thats Boring as Debunkers like Mick now only concentrate on the Radar System.
1. Mick can‘t prove his Theory
2. What is about the Witnesses by David Fravor and Alex Dietrich
People like Mick will never give the Possibility of Unbelievable or Unimaginable things.😎
Can we prove aliens or ‘unbelievable and unimaginable things’? No - almost by definition.
We’re not saying we have the perfect answer, but trying to show that all these things *can* be explained by science and technology.
Fravor and Dietrich (interviewed by Mick) have vastly different accounts and are not infallible. Who should we believe? They’re also no infallible. Perhaps they were fooled.
Can we rule out unimaginable things? No - again, almost by definition, but we have no need for hypotheses involving aliens 👽 or inter dimensional creatures when many hypotheses much closer to home are just as possible.
What do you think happened out there?
Mick's a skeptic and debunker without all of the evidence so I'd consider claiming to debunk something without all the data intellectually dishonest... How can you disagree? Let the real scientific minds with actual security clearances study this and make a conclusion instead of a video game programer who used to believe in ghosts lol.
Do you trust the government/military to be honest if classified tech or sensitive national security data is at stake?
It would definitely have been better if the sensor data had been made publicly available. Then, we’d have a lot more to go on!
It doesn’t matter to me who raises hypotheses, it matters whether those hypotheses are sensible and physically achievable. I think most of Mick and Ramsey’s ideas are. That doesn’t mean they have the right answers of course :)
@@BadBoyofScienceI do trust the government has the sensors that they say they have and that it's classified for a reason. Unless you want to be on the level of flat earthers why wouldn't you trust the head of NASA Bill Nelson, Ex DNI Ratcliffe , and congressman on the Intel committee when they're saying that these things are not anywhere near what we have in our inventory? There's no possible way that Russia or China have leapfrogged us when they're constantly trying to steal from us and spend a fraction of what we do lol.... Again why wouldn't I trust the government to protect sensitive data? I'm quite sure they lie about what we secretly have I'm sure we have black projects that are really advanced such as nuclear pulse propulsion capable craft but that still wouldn't be capable of what these pilots (plural) not just from the Nimitz have seen. Bill Nelson said it himself , but according to you he must be lying correct because he's part of the government? You guys are becoming the conspiracy theorists. Your question arises another one; why would the government let it go this far if it was ours,to the point of intel hearings and demands for a report from the armed forces and Intel agencies...and a new development, a report every 90 days? They'd want it to go away correct? The actions being taken suggest that lawmakers who approve the spending on these black programs are quite concerned, as they're doing away with the task force ( as those are temporary) and making an actual department to investigate these. This isn't a new phenomenon either it's been being reported by military and civilian pilots and regular people alike for years. So that's why Mick is intellectually dishonest.... he's not in a position to make a theory as he hasn't personally seen one, seen the radar data, or the other more highly classified data that Ratcliffe and Obama spoke of from satellites. How can you honestly try to debunk something missing all those factors? Let alone his approach to this is as a debunker which is not a scientific approach to begin with.
@@anthonyw9129 I haven’t said anyone is lying. What we set out to demonstrate is that all these sightings *could* be the result of science and technology. We don’t need to invoke aliens or unknown phenomena. Nothing more than that.
I just find it odd that we expect those reporting these sightings to do their own investigation to or disclose all relevant data/tech etc. Maybe they did. Maybe they didn’t. I don’t know and nor do any of us.
Mick seems to be the only showing intelligence on this panel. no one ever bring any proof but to assume it aliens, what about secret spy drone crafts???