What people say is irrelevant. What matters is what can be demonstrated.
Maybe it was aliens, maybe it was some physics breaking craft from a hidden civilization from the core of the earth.
But like I said, if I see a hoof print, it could be a zebra or a unicorn, but it could also be a horse so the hoof print is not evidence of unicorns.
The video alone is not evidence of anything.
Agreed with the bolded. That's why it's important to learn the context of the video, listen to people who were there. You have to take a lot of leaps to say that so many people and instruments in this scenario are wrong and conclude it was a distant airplane as you have done.
What people say is not evidence of anything; people are fallible, memories change.
You also shift from people and put "instruments" in there as well when that wasn't the case at least with the videos that have been discussed; there isn't corroborating radar recordings for example.
Saying a person is trained to recognize airplanes implies they can't be fooled (humans are easy to fool) is just an appeal to authority, also not evidence.
What qualifies as actual evidence isn't controversial.
__________________ Uncertainty is an uncomfortable position.
But certainty is an absurd one.
The Following 2 Users Say Thank You to photon For This Useful Post:
What people say is not evidence of anything; people are fallible, memories change.
You also shift from people and put "instruments" in there as well when that wasn't the case at least with the videos that have been discussed; there isn't corroborating radar recordings for example.
Saying a person is trained to recognize airplanes implies they can't be fooled (humans are easy to fool) is just an appeal to authority, also not evidence.
What qualifies as actual evidence isn't controversial.
You've done your research on the Tic tac incident and have concluded it was a distant airplane and that Fravor and everyone else directly involved that has come forward must be mistaken. Does it feel good to know what Fravor saw? I'd like to know what that feels like.
Lol don't be so dramatic. Your argument of course is meaningless, you can same the same thing for everything else. Angels and demons must exist right? Ghosts. Astral projection. Telepathy.
Otherwise everyone who has come forward must be mistaken! Appeal to authority, argumentum ad populum, etc may sway some, but again they aren't actual evidence.
I of course didn't conclude anything; I don't conclude things without proper evidence. There's just the probabilities. I may not know exactly who put the gift under my Christmas tree, but it's more likely to be my son than Santa.
__________________ Uncertainty is an uncomfortable position.
But certainty is an absurd one.
Of course I didn't make a conclusion; all knowledge is provisional. I'm willing to accept new explanations for phenomenon given new evidence. The problem is that evidence part.
__________________ Uncertainty is an uncomfortable position.
But certainty is an absurd one.
Of course I didn't make a conclusion; all knowledge is provisional. I'm willing to accept new explanations for phenomenon given new evidence. The problem is that evidence part.
Photon, what are you talking about? The Fravor incident had included video shot by the 2nd plane (well, technically, third, since there were 2 in the initial contact) that went out, plus the "tic tac" was tracked by their weapons pod. They were initially called out to intercept by the Princeton, an AEGIS cruiser that was tracking the "bogeys" on radar. Fravor isn't just some guy - he was a Top Gun graduate and instructor, and at the time, wing commander on the Nimitz, so, basically, one of the top pilots USA had in 2004. He is certainly capable of judging the size, movement, and relative positions of airborne objects - probably better than anyone on Earth, aside from the handful of other people similarly qualified. The USN/Pentagon says this is a legitimate "encounter".
Of course, none of that says "OMG, ALIENS!" The real interesting thing is the tech, and, of course the big question is - whose tech is it? God damn, it's pretty exciting that this sort of flight is possible, whether it's a gravity drive, warp or whatnot. Now, is it American, Chinese, alien probe, something salvaged from an an alien crash, human time-travelers? Ihave no idea. I am open-minded enough to be willing to consider any of the above - I really don't know but am curious to see.
BTW, couple days ago Rogan interviewed Christopher Mellon (hope the spelling is right), former intelligence "guy" and Asst Sec Def (and I hope that's the right title - something on that level anyhow) under Clinton and Bush the younger. I thought the interview would be about dealing with China, given the profile, but, nope - UFOs! Good interview - they actually went through the whole history of the key "UFO" incidents over the decades and it was interesting to listen to, regardless of your "buy-in" level. Anyhow, he was pretty dismissive of Lazar, but said the Nimitz incident (Fravor) was the most compelling one of all. He said there are some more that have not yet been released by DOD that are on the same level, and that they are considered "real" by the "government". He said it is getting a lot more attention now, and is a real security issue. Again, that does not automatically mean "ALIENS!", but the fact that something can **** with a carrier group is a big deal, particularly if it is in fact Chinese or Russian....
What would be the best video to watch on the Fravor incident, with explanations the the like?
IMHO watch Fridman interview first because it is more technical, then Rogan, and then Rogan with Mellon (if you want to devote 10 hours to this). Fridman is deffinitely on the spectrum a bit, so you have to get used to his style.
I don't know about best, but Mick West does a great job responding to Fravor.
1. He is not qualified to discuss this subject with a fighter pilot.
2. There is nothing to respond to - Fravor's account and the instrument readings/video is considered a "fact" by the State.
3. There is, obviously, debate about what it in fact means.
A lot of "sceptics" and people in this thread are making the mistake of equating "UFO" (or "UAP" or whatever DOD calls it) with "OMG, ALIENS!" The important subject here is the issue of technology, not ET's.
1. He is not qualified to discuss this subject with a fighter pilot.
Nothing West says requires him to be a fighter pilot. Did you watch the video?
Quote:
2. There is nothing to respond to - Fravor's account and the instrument readings/video is considered a "fact" by the State.
3. There is, obviously, debate about what it in fact means.
Of course there is something to respond to. Fravor called West stupid and he felt a need to show that he knows what he's talking about. West could be wrong, but he's just putting out a hypothesis, and he'd be happy to be proven so if the evidence existed.
Quote:
A lot of "sceptics" and people in this thread are making the mistake of equating "UFO" (or "UAP" or whatever DOD calls it) with "OMG, ALIENS!" The important subject here is the issue of technology, not ET's.
I'm not. Unidentified Flying Objects could be anything, including a balloon. Fravor is conflating his training to identify a known aircraft with an ability to identify an unknown airborne object. Perspective, parallax, and any other optical illusion can make you unable to understand what you're seeing.
Lol don't be so dramatic. Your argument of course is meaningless, you can same the same thing for everything else. Angels and demons must exist right? Ghosts. Astral projection. Telepathy.
Otherwise everyone who has come forward must be mistaken! Appeal to authority, argumentum ad populum, etc may sway some, but again they aren't actual evidence.
I of course didn't conclude anything; I don't conclude things without proper evidence. There's just the probabilities. I may not know exactly who put the gift under my Christmas tree, but it's more likely to be my son than Santa.
Come on photon, that's quite the display of arrogance. You don't conclude "anything," "without proof," but have that audacity to dismiss the experience of the individuals involved in the events AND the evidence submitted in support of them, because you don't like their evidence. And HIS argument is meaningless? Wow! This is one of the things I laugh at when it comes to the skeptic community. They have become so entrenched in their disbelief of anything that they will only alter their opinions - and that is all they have to counter these events, is their opinion - if they have first hand experience with the subject matter, or the evidence is proven/disproven by a body of their liking, often stacking the decks against the potential of any actual fair evaluation. It is bordering on the very edge of religiosity and doesn't further the cause of examination.
I fully believe in people being skeptical, but when individuals are willing to put themselves out there, with nothing to gain but ridicule and attack, they obviously have something they believe to be important and worthy of disclosure and conversation. When they come with documents or video from the event, they are worth listening to. You can dismiss Lazar all you like, as the decades long smear campaign has been quite effective, but Cmdr. Fravor is a well respected and decorated aviator who had nothing to gain from this this. In fact, neither Lazar nor Fravor have sought out the attention they have received. They had to be convinced to appear at most of these events to share their experience. And in Lazar's case, he refuses to take any money or use his infamy to profit in any shape or fashion. Be skeptical, but make sure you weigh the evidence and know the story over the years, and the lengths the government has gone to keep this stuff under the rug.
Now you can think your five minutes of google-foo gives you the unique ability to be judge, jury, and ultimate authority on these events, and people buying the decades long smear campaign against some of these people who have had experiences and were brave enough to come forward, but you do yourself and the subject a disservice. I mean, the United States government has admitted they had a program in place to discredit and ridicule anyone who spoke on the topic of UFOs. You become the sheeple that the very people who perpetuate these smears are hoping you to be. But I get it. We want and need order in our lives, and we want and need to think we are the apex being on this planet and universe, it is human nature and part and parcel of our psychological makeup. The thought that we may not be the top banana and master of our domain is too much for a lot of people to consider. It's sad, but the vast majority of people just don't have it in them to think we might now be the smartest or best thing around.
Me? I honestly don't know. I originally viewed Lazar as a disinformation agent. But as I followed the work of Knapp I quickly found there was some credibility to what he was saying and he, as a third party, was finding data to support the claims made. Lazar may not have any credibility, but as a journalist, Knapp's credentials are pretty impressive. The work of Knapp and Corbell together provide a compelling case that there is a disinformation campaign at work here, but it is more focused on making Lazar disappear and discrediting him than actually discrediting his claims. Knapp convinced me more than Lazar.
Quote:
Originally Posted by DownInFlames
I don't know about best, but Mick West does a great job responding to Fravor.
Don't know Mick West, but after watching this video I would say he's a professional ####### who hides behind the persona of being a "skeptic." This clown is trying to play word games and discredit what the witness claims, not acknowledging that the event had secondary and tertiary witnesses and data to provide triangulation data to support the claims of the witness. Like, how big a clown do you have to be to try and play the game of you said you had eyes on it at all times, but then you admit you took your eyes off it to check instrumentation? What as idiot. Pilots have HUDs so they can check instrumentation and keep eyes on target. But what a skeptic! Amiright? And yes, Cmdr. Fravor is right on target when he laughs and says West doesn't know what he's talking about. West proves it time and time again, but to the skeptic community, those who get of on disbelieving everything, they get all juiced up by this condescending comments and ridiculous questions. West doesn't know #### about flying jets, doesn't know #### about the optical systems in these aircraft, but is certain he knows the precise precision of the optic stabilization and the rate by which the tic tac left the tracking system, and it being very slow? Really? And that is more credible than the guy who was there and had millions of dollars of hardware and sensors at his disposal? God bless the skeptic community. They are consistent as they are stupid.
Quote:
Originally Posted by DownInFlames
Unidentified Flying Objects could be anything, including a balloon. Fravor is conflating his training to identify a known aircraft with an ability to identify an unknown airborne object. Perspective, parallax, and any other optical illusion can make you unable to understand what you're seeing.
It's not just what Fravor saw. It's what his second saw. It's what his wingman and his second saw. It was what the radar operators on the ships saw. It is multiple people with multiple perspectives and a ton of data saw. West is a clown because he seems to ignore this fact. Don't fall into that same trap.
The Following 2 Users Say Thank You to Lanny_McDonald For This Useful Post:
It was just an airplane. All the "sudden movements" are just the camera moving as it gimbals, loses and reacquires lock, changes lenses, changes zoom, etc.
Here is your conclusion unless you've changed your mind.
A submersible flying craft. Just wrapping my head around that firstly. That's crazy.
I've let go of the idea that UFO directly corresponds to extraterrestrial aircraft. It's a brand spectrum now.
But the thing about it all is for me. If people on this planet have cold propulsion drones that's aajor major discovery. The fact it's not American is a major discovery.
The inertia effects on aircraft is also a discovery on this tic tac video. Somewhere someone has developed drone tech that responds to being tracked, mirrors its trackers movements, can drop and rise out of the ocean in less than a second to 60 or 70k feet or higher.
These things fascinate me. These things are massive steps towards advanced everything.
Honestly that tic tac video looked very much like an Apollo Lunar orbiter from the way it was pitching and yawing and adjusting at speed.
It's all fascinating.
Is it mag lav propulsion? New heat masking materials that confuse flir?
All these interesting things come to my mind when I see these UFO videos. And more so, if not extraterrestrial, who on earth has this tech? Has the Americans jumpy.
The Following 2 Users Say Thank You to dammage79 For This Useful Post:
Nothing West says requires him to be a fighter pilot. Did you watch the video?
Of course there is something to respond to. Fravor called West stupid and he felt a need to show that he knows what he's talking about. West could be wrong, but he's just putting out a hypothesis, and he'd be happy to be proven so if the evidence existed.
I'm not. Unidentified Flying Objects could be anything, including a balloon. Fravor is conflating his training to identify a known aircraft with an ability to identify an unknown airborne object. Perspective, parallax, and any other optical illusion can make you unable to understand what you're seeing.
I watched as much as I could take, and I second New Era's comments (yep, I never thought I would type those words ). The guy seems to be actively breathing his own farts. He is specifically alleging that Fravor can't possibly do what he in fact was trained for decades to do - identify flying objects, track them, and be able to plot their course and likely course. I hate professional sceptics - everybody should be a sceptic, but to call yourself a professional one or a "de-bunker" just makes you someone I am not interested in interacting with. And, as NE pointed out, it is not just Fravor; it is four top pilots in 2 planes with one on intercept and one as observer. Plus all the instrument and radar readings.
West uses simple math to make it seem plausible that the objects that were tracked are everyday aircraft. Is there data available that shows the object might be something beyond the abilities of our current aircraft? Sorry, but I can't just take the word of someone's eyewitness account, even if they are a fighter pilot (or pilots). I need more proof.
For what it's worth, I am not saying that Fravor or the other pilots are lying when they say they saw something they can't identify, I am just skeptical of his opinion that what he saw was out of this world. I think there is technology out there that he probably doesn't have the privilege to know about. There actually is a Navy patent for the technology that he witnessed, and probably even more.
Such technology could produce a human controlled vehicle that could withstand the G-forces and inertial mass he described. A vehicle like that could also baffle instrumentation and cause it to make measurements that it is not calibrated for, or just not possible to take at all.
Also, let's not pretend that there isn't a lot of money to be made from the interviews and appearances. I am sure he has an agent at this point and doesn't do any of this for free. It's in his best interests to sensationalize the events as much as possible.
From the patent above (filed in 2016):
Quote:
It is possible to reduce the inertial mass and hence the gravitational mass, of a system/object in motion, by an abrupt perturbation of the non-linear background of local spacetime (the local vacuum energy state), equivalent to an accelerated excursion far from thermodynamic equilibrium (analogous with symmetry-breaking induced by abrupt changes of state/phase transitions). The physical mechanism which drives this diminution in inertial mass is based on the negative pressure (hence repulsive gravity) exhibited by the polarized local vacuum energy state (local vacuum polarization being achieved by a coupling of accelerated high frequency vibration with accelerated high frequency axial rotation of an electrically charged system/object) in the close proximity of the system/object in question. In other words, inertial mass reduction can be achieved via manipulation of quantum field fluctuations in the local vacuum energy state, in the immediate proximity of the object/system. Therefore it is possible to reduce a craft's inertia, that is, its resistance to motion/acceleration by polarizing the vacuum in the close proximity of the moving craft.
Polarization of the local vacuum is analogous to manipulation/modification of the local space tie topological lattice energy density. As a result, extreme speeds can be achieved.
If we can engineer the structure of the local quantum vacuum state, we can engineer the fabric of our reality at the most fundamental level (thus affecting a physical system's inertial and gravitational properties). This realization would greatly advance the fields of aerospace propulsion and power generation.
The physical equation which describes the maximum intensity achieved by the high energy electromagnetic field generator (HEEMFG) system is described by the magnitude of the Poynting vector, which in non-relativistic for (accounting for all three modes of motion) can be written as:
S max =f G(σ2/ε0) [R r ω+R v v+v R] (Equation 1), where fG is the HEEMFG system geometric shape factor (equal to 1 for a disc configuration), σ is the surface charge density (total electric charge divided by surface area of the HEEMFG system), ε0 is the electrical permittivity of free space, Rr is the radius of rotation (disc radius), ω is the angular frequency of rotation in rad/s, Rv is the vibration (harmonic oscillation) amplitude, v is the angular frequency of vibration in Hertz, and the term vR is the curvilinear translation speed (acquired via a propulsive unit of either chemical, nuclear or magneto-plasma-dynamic (VASIMR) type attached to the HEEMFG system—the integrated unit being the craft).
Therefore, if we consider only rotation, given a disc configuration, with σ=50,000 Coulombs/m2,a disc (spinning/axially rotating) radius of 2 m and an angular speed of 30,000 RPM, and generate an electromagnetic (EM) field intensity (Smax is the rate of energy flow per unit area, or energy flux) value on the order of 1024 Watts/m2 (this value does not account for any QVP interactions).
Furthermore, if we couple the high frequency of rotation with high vibration (harmonic oscillation) frequencies in the range of 109 to 1018 Hertz (and above) we can obtain Smax intensity values in the range 1024 to 1028 Watts/m2 (and beyond). These extremely high EM field intensity values emphasize the novelty of this concept, especially suited for the design of energy generation machinery with power output levels much higher than those currently achievable.
__________________
"A pessimist thinks things can't get any worse. An optimist knows they can."
Last edited by FlamesAddiction; 05-09-2021 at 03:59 PM.
Now, is it American, Chinese, alien probe, something salvaged from an an alien crash, human time-travelers? Ihave no idea. I am open-minded enough to be willing to consider any of the above - I really don't know but am curious to see.
