UFOs - The Nimitz incident
Published online (December 2020).
With comments by Kevin Day.
The Nimitz
UFO incident is well explained in some great videos, in case
you know nothing about it:
A documentary by Dave Beaty, a recreation of the events
Dave Beaty's channel, with interviews with the people involved
Brian Hanley's channel, with interviews with the people involved
Lemmino's take on the events
Joe Rogan interviewing David Fravor, who saw the UFO from 800 m
A documentary by Dave Beaty, a recreation of the events
Dave Beaty's channel, with interviews with the people involved
Brian Hanley's channel, with interviews with the people involved
Lemmino's take on the events
Joe Rogan interviewing David Fravor, who saw the UFO from 800 m
A Summary
There
were thousands of people on the Nimitz and the
Princeton, I
only cited the witnesses who came forward. Hopefully, this gives a good
idea of who was doing what at the time. All these officers gave
interviews that, on video, last 30-60 minutes. The
following is then just a glimpse of the story and in no way I meant to
diminish the original reports.
In
November 2004 the Nimitz
Carrier Strike Group
(USS Nimitz, USS Princeton and other smaller ships) is on a routine
mission and organizing training manoeuvres on the west coast of the US,
off San Diego.
Circa
November 1, 2004: Karson
Kammerzell (Cryptologic Technician, USS
Princeton) pays occasional visits to the officers in the radar
room, he sees them wondering (not shaken) about an unidentified
object on the radar, an uncategorized vector that appears randomly on
different parts of the screen. They think more about a glitch than
about an actual object that is moving at hypersonic speed in random
areas that are tens of kilometres away from each other.
November
10-13, 2004: Kevin
Day (Air Controller, USS Princeton) and Gary
Voorhis (Fire Controlman and Aegis
Computer/CEC technician, USS Princeton) keep
seeing
unidentified objects on the radar, proceeding slowly from north to
south along the training area. Contested events: *** Day
says the
objects were moving in groups of 5-10, others say that the object was
only one. *** The object(s) appear around Santa Catalina
Island,
proceed south and disappear around Guadalupe Island. "Fearing the
ship's brand new AN/SPY-1B passive radar system was
malfunctioning, Voorhis says the air control systems were taken down
and recalibrated in an effort to clear out what was assumed to be false
radar returns" (popularmechanics.com).
However, the tracks reappear and they are even more well-defined.
Day and Voorhis on occasion go to the bridge to see the object(s)
through
binoculars when on the radar they appear close enough to be seen. They
can see distant lights moving in odd ways, they can't tell if it's
one, appearing and disappearing, or many. The fact that they appear
and disappear around the maximum altitude detectable by the radars
suggests that they
actually come from space and go back into space. On the night of
November 13, Sean Cahill (Chief Master-at-Arms, USS Princeton) sees
in the sky what seems a constellation of 5-7 stars, which then all move
in a spiral to join at the centre.
November
14, 2004: There are finally airborne jets that can go and
check. Plus, the Hawkeye,
an aeroplane with a large radar dish on its top, which acts as a flying
radar station, an extra eye between the ships and the squadrons that
can record in multiple forms everything that happens in the sky:
radio signals, radar tracks, etc. Day sends Douglas Kurth
(Squadron Commanding Officer) to the coordinates where one of the
objects seems to be (moving? standing?). Kurth reaches the area
indicated by Day, he sees nothing except a large disturbance in the
water. He doesn't check further because Day tells him he's sending two
other jets with more fuel so that Kurth can leave. While leaving,
Kurth notices that the disturbance is disappearing. By the time he
leaves, he can't yet see the other two jets arriving. Later on,
the other two jets arrive, one piloted by David
Fravor
(Squadron Commanding
Officer) and a co-pilot, one piloted by Jim Slaight (Lieutenant
Commanding Officer) and Alex
Dietrich (co-pilot). Meanwhile
(actually the following day, see questions below), Day sees on the
radar
that as soon as the two jets
arrive at the coordinates, the object descends from 8.5 km a.s.l. to
sea level in less than a second. The two jets see nothing at their
altitude, so they look down, and they notice a disturbance in the water
with the size and rough shape of a 737. They look better and they
notice a
white, tictac-shaped object, as large as a jet, hovering with abrupt
movements over the disturbance, "like a ping-pong ball bouncing" inside
a glass box, along north-south and east-west axes. The
distance
between jets and UFO is still about 6 km. Fravor tries to get closer,
leaving the other jet higher up to have a double perspective of the
events. As Fravor goes down following a
curve, the tictac points towards him and starts going up mirroring
Fravor's movement, to keep at a distance. Fravor tries to cut the
circle to meet the tictac where the latter is going to be. He manages
to get as close as 800 m, at which point the tictac accelerates
at hypersonic
speed disappearing from the view of the two jets in less
than a second. The whole encounter lasts about five minutes. The jets
go
back to check the disturbance in the water, but that's also gone. After
about ten seconds, Day contacts the two jets to say that the object has
just appeared on the radar 90 km away, at the coordinates where a
training exercise was supposed to take place (CAP point). The two jets
go back to the USS Nimitz. The Hawkeye too. Patrick
Hughes (Avionics
Technician, USS Nimitz) says that one of the Hawkeye pilots
(serious/shaken) told him that they saw a tictac-shaped craft, it
appeared out of nowhere just next to their plane, for 5-10 seconds, and
then it disappeared (it's not clear when this conversation happens). Contested events:
*** Hughes goes on saying that the Hawkeye pilots are
brought to sign a non-disclosure agreement, while he is asked by his
commanding officer - on behalf of two mysterious officers who arrived
on
the USS Nimitz by helicopter - to hand over all the Hawkeye tapes. At
the
same time, Voorhis reports the arrival of similarly mysterious officers
by helicopter on the USS Princeton, to whom he has to hand over all
the
AEGIS radar tapes. Fravor maintains instead that this whole "men in
black" thing never happened, although he acknowledges that the tapes
did
in fact eventually disappear and nobody seems to know where. ***
As
Fravor lands on the Nimitz, he meets one of his pilots, Chad Underwood,
who's going to take off. Fravor tells him about the encounter and
suggests to be on the lookout and bring a FLIR (a camera attached to
the wing). While flying and hoping to have a similar encounter,
Underwood is given some coordinates by Day, as it happened with Fravor.
Contested
events:
*** Day sees on the radar that as soon as other jets
leave the carriers, all the UFOs drop from their altitude of about 8 km
down to sea level in a second. Fravor maintains that the object was
just one. *** Underwood has problems locking on the object
located at
the coordinates, which is 30 km away (his jet has multiple sensors,
radar, FLIR, etc., some can lock it, some can't). Eventually, he
manages
to get a lock with the FLIR and he takes a video. Then he loses the
lock, he gives up, but he
brings the video back
to the Nimitz. Jason
Turner (Petty Officer, USS Princeton) and Ryan
Weigelt (Petty Officer, USS Princeton) remember seeing the
video live
while on the Princeton. The video eventually also disappears from the
carriers' internal channels, but (probably) someone manages to make a
low-resolution copy of it and send it to himself by email. There are
different opinions about the video's length, some people say it was
originally about ten minutes long, some people say the one-minute
version
that was later made public is the original version, although at a lower
resolution.
Some
days after November 14: for three nights, Kammerzell
sees in the sky a completely silent triangular formation of three
lights (not clear if it was one object or three) hovering not too far
from the Princeton (about 1 km?). Kammerzell
says that he
didn't even report the sighting because at that point
everybody knew that this thing(s) was around, the issue had clearly
been discussed more than once by the higher ranks, and as the thing(s)
didn't do any harm, the final decision was to ignore it and go back to
work.
Circa
November 30, 2004: During the night, Omar
Lara (Sailor, USS
Nimitz), from the Nimitz bridge, sees a glowing object, larger than a
shooting star, in the distance (a few kilometres). In a second it falls
vertically from the sky down to a few metres a.s.l., it stops
on a dime
and stands for a second, then moves right at a 90° angle
(basically
the movement is L-shaped) covering in a split second more or less the
line of the horizon that can be seen from the front of the bridge, in
another split second it makes a 45° angle turn (in relation to
the
movement along the horizon) towards the Nimitz, and it heads at
45°
(in relation to the sea surface) towards space, where it disappears.
The
General Quarters alert is launched from inside the ship and less than a
minute later it gets secured (nulled).
The aftermath
Late
2008/early 2009: Fravor receives an email from a colleague, with a
link to strangeland.com, where he's very surprised to see that
Underwood's video has been published by an unknown user.
2009:
Fravor receives a phone call from a government employee, who says
they are going to investigate the Nimitz UFO incident. Fravor and other
officials provide their version of the story to Luis Elizondo, who
produces a
report. Elizondo directs the AATIP
(Advanced Aerospace Threat Identification Program), which is
classified, FOIA exempt and studies UFOs. The AATIP (with the
name
AAWSAP at first: Advanced Aerospace Weapon Systems Applications
Program) went on from 2007 to 2012. "Elizondo commented that, while the
effort's government funding ended in 2012, the program continued with
support from Navy and CIA officials even after his resignation"
(Wikipedia).
October
2017: Elizondo resigns from the DoD, "to protest
government secrecy and opposition to the investigation, stating in a
resignation letter to U.S. Defense Secretary James Mattis that the
program was not being taken seriously" (Wikipedia). Later in the month,
Elizondo joins To
the Stars
(TTSA), a for-profit company. "The entertainment leg of To the Stars,
often referred to as To the Stars Media, publishes albums, books, TV
shows and films" (Wikipedia). "The company's partnership with the U.S.
Army may mean that it fancies itself as a military contractor, but the
organization swings between being contenders for military contracts and
a UFO research organization" (Wikipedia).
December
2017: The New York Times publishes an
article
about the AATIP, citing Elizondo and TTSA, and featuring 3 U.S. Navy
videos collected by AATIP, including Underwood's video (where did the
AATIP get the video from?). Elizondo will explain in more than one
occasion that the videos were not stolen by him, they were released
following a completely
legal procedure. The article creates clamour and inconsistent
reactions
from the U.S. government. The witnesses gradually come forward. Fravor
reports having talked twice with "high-level government officials in
D.C." about the encounter, officials
whose reaction was "You gotta be joking" (Rogan's interview, 1:18:00).
It's good to keep a sceptical
perspective in consideration too.
April
2019: The U.S. Navy drafts
new guidelines
for pilots and other personnel to report encounters
with unidentified aircraft. From the same article: "The Navy
isn't endorsing the idea that its sailors have encountered
alien
spacecraft. But it is acknowledging there have been enough strange
aerial sightings by credible and highly trained military personnel that
they need to be recorded in the official record and studied, rather
than dismissed as some kooky phenomena from the realm of
science-fiction".
June
2019: Three U.S. senators receive
a classified briefing about the Navy UFO encounters. The
president as well, although he remains doubtful: video,
video.
September 2019: The Navy confirms the 3 videos are real and they show objects that remain unidentified.
September 2019: The Navy confirms the 3 videos are real and they show objects that remain unidentified.
December
2019: After sending a FOIA to the U.S. Navy in October 2019,
asking for "all releasable portions of records and reports related to
investigation of the detection of and encounter(s) with Anomalous
Aerial Vehicles (AAVs) by personnel involved with the Nimitz Carrier
Strike Group (CSG) operations off the western coast of the United
States during the period of approximately 10-16 November, 2004",
Christian Lambright receives
a reply
by the Office of Naval Intelligence: they do have slides and a video,
which are classified respectively as top secret and secret, and are
going to remain so "under Executive Order 13526, and the Original
Classification Authority has determined that the release of these
materials would cause exceptionally grave damage to the National
Security of the United States". Again this creates clamour.
April 2020: The Department of Defense officially releases the same 3 videos "in order to clear up any misconceptions by the public on whether or not the footage that has been circulating was real, or whether or not there is more to the videos". The DoD confirms that the videos show objects that remain unidentified. Due to these recent events, Japan's Self-Defense Forces (SDF) plan to formulate a response procedure if its personnel encounter a UFO.
April 2020: The Department of Defense officially releases the same 3 videos "in order to clear up any misconceptions by the public on whether or not the footage that has been circulating was real, or whether or not there is more to the videos". The DoD confirms that the videos show objects that remain unidentified. Due to these recent events, Japan's Self-Defense Forces (SDF) plan to formulate a response procedure if its personnel encounter a UFO.
June
2020: The Senate Intelligence Committee instructs
the director of national intelligence, the secretary of defense and
other agency heads to compile data on unidentified aerial phenomena. In
particular, "the Committee remains concerned that there is no unified,
comprehensive process within the Federal Government for collecting and
analyzing intelligence on unidentified aerial phenomena, despite the
potential threat".
August 2020: Deputy Secretary of Defense David Norquist approves the establishment of the UAP (Unidentified Aerial Phenomena) Task Force. The UAPTF will be led by the U.S. Navy. The DoD specifies that the UAPTF findings won't necessarily be made public: "To maintain operations security and to avoid disclosing information that may be useful to our adversaries, DoD does not discuss publicly the details of either the observations or the examination of reported incursions into our training ranges or designated airspace, including those incursions initially designated as UAP".
August 2020: Deputy Secretary of Defense David Norquist approves the establishment of the UAP (Unidentified Aerial Phenomena) Task Force. The UAPTF will be led by the U.S. Navy. The DoD specifies that the UAPTF findings won't necessarily be made public: "To maintain operations security and to avoid disclosing information that may be useful to our adversaries, DoD does not discuss publicly the details of either the observations or the examination of reported incursions into our training ranges or designated airspace, including those incursions initially designated as UAP".
December
2020: We get the first leaks about the first two UAPTF reports
(The
Debrief). The first report would include the photo of an
unidentified silver "cube-shaped" object. What
seems to be the
picture in question
(not cube-shaped!) goes viral and most likely it shows a balloon. The
second report would include the photo (taken by an
F/A-18 fighter
pilot off the eastern coast of the U.S. in 2019) of a triangular
aircraft, an "equilateral triangle with rounded or blunted
edges
and large, perfectly spherical white lights in each corner.
The
photo was taken after the triangular
craft emerged from the ocean and began to ascend straight upwards at a
90-degree angle". Christopher
Mellon asks
for the photo to be released and points out that the UAPTF relies on
just two individuals, with no budget, who are being stiff-armed for
access to relevant and timely information.
June 2021: The UAPTF releases the much-awaited report. Apart from pointing out that between 2004 and 2021 there have been 143 events involving objects that haven't been identified (the events are not described in the document), the report doesn't draw any conclusion about what these objects could be. It presumes they might have different causes and more information would be required to pinpoint such causes. Before and after the publication of the report, many sources (example) underline why it's important: not to confirm or disconfirm aliens, but to remove the stigma associated with aliens; pilots must feel free to report strange sightings through the right channels without the fear of being ridiculed; science will then tell, thanks to this information, when and if these sightings involve birds, balloons, Russians or aliens, and the latter shouldn't be excluded from the range of possibilities.
July 2022: The UAPTF becomes AARO (All-domain Anomaly Resolution Office), directed by Sean Kirkpatrick. The AARO reports its findings during a couple of public conferences, but not much is shown apart from a couple of videos with the usual unidentified little things in the sky (balloons?). One could wonder, why don't they discuss the findings related to the Nimitz incident and other very interesting ones? But after all, "the UAPTF findings won't necessarily be made public" (August 2020), so we're stuck with the same pre-Nimitz system: the DoD knows, we don't.
2019 - July 2022: The UAPTF has people of reference, investigators, in the various branches of the DoD. One of these is David Grusch, who has been working for 14 years as the equivalent of colonel at NRO (National Reconnaissance Office). The NRO is one of the DoD's Big Five together with CIA, NSA, DIA and NGA. Grusch investigates for the UAPTF from 2019 to July 2022, and eventually he goes public with some incredible claims, so this becomes a whole other story that I discuss in another article.
June 2021: The UAPTF releases the much-awaited report. Apart from pointing out that between 2004 and 2021 there have been 143 events involving objects that haven't been identified (the events are not described in the document), the report doesn't draw any conclusion about what these objects could be. It presumes they might have different causes and more information would be required to pinpoint such causes. Before and after the publication of the report, many sources (example) underline why it's important: not to confirm or disconfirm aliens, but to remove the stigma associated with aliens; pilots must feel free to report strange sightings through the right channels without the fear of being ridiculed; science will then tell, thanks to this information, when and if these sightings involve birds, balloons, Russians or aliens, and the latter shouldn't be excluded from the range of possibilities.
July 2022: The UAPTF becomes AARO (All-domain Anomaly Resolution Office), directed by Sean Kirkpatrick. The AARO reports its findings during a couple of public conferences, but not much is shown apart from a couple of videos with the usual unidentified little things in the sky (balloons?). One could wonder, why don't they discuss the findings related to the Nimitz incident and other very interesting ones? But after all, "the UAPTF findings won't necessarily be made public" (August 2020), so we're stuck with the same pre-Nimitz system: the DoD knows, we don't.
2019 - July 2022: The UAPTF has people of reference, investigators, in the various branches of the DoD. One of these is David Grusch, who has been working for 14 years as the equivalent of colonel at NRO (National Reconnaissance Office). The NRO is one of the DoD's Big Five together with CIA, NSA, DIA and NGA. Grusch investigates for the UAPTF from 2019 to July 2022, and eventually he goes public with some incredible claims, so this becomes a whole other story that I discuss in another article.
The video
Plain
and
simple, I'm pretty sure
that Underwood's video depicts a plane, more specifically one of their
jets Super Hornet. Although I'm not of course the first one to say this
(just google metabunk.org + Nimitz, tictac, DoD videos, etc.), the
reason why most people find it hard to dismiss the object in the video
as
a
plane is that its shape hides inside the fraction of a second. The
remaining minute - together
with the reports pushing the idea that the video shows the tictac UFO -
can easily give the impression that the object in the video is
tictac-shaped. In the video, we see different filters/focuses
used by
Underwood. The "black and white/visible light" mode is the one
that matches the most with what a human eye
would see. If you make the effort to save the frames of the last
fraction of a second of that mode, you get this:
I
remember someone noticing these frames and commenting that the object
is changing shape and/or splitting, adding science
fiction to
confusion.
The object is just banking (it's turning left, showing part of its side instead of mostly its back, that's why it becomes slightly longer in the process), making its shape and its angles more clear. Once you have a better idea of its real shape, and you make the effort to find online a picture of a jet taken from the same angle, and you make a comparison, you get this:
The object is just banking (it's turning left, showing part of its side instead of mostly its back, that's why it becomes slightly longer in the process), making its shape and its angles more clear. Once you have a better idea of its real shape, and you make the effort to find online a picture of a jet taken from the same angle, and you make a comparison, you get this:
I
think
there are too many parts sticking out that match in the two
photos to deny that they show the same thing.
I know the reports about the radar jamming, the impossible manoeuvres, the exhaust plume, the erratic behaviour, etc., and I know about the odd movement at the end of the video. However, if the video shows a plane, it shows a plane. There are many ways to explain why a jet can look like a hypersonic white tictac, but there's no way to explain why a hypersonic white tictac suddenly looks like a jet. Underwood was given some radar coordinates that were 30 km away, he had no idea of what he was filming, he did an excellent job at concentrating on locking and filming in different modes, the object recorded happens to be one of their jets, perfectly understandable and it doesn't change the rest of the story (maybe the UFO was very close to the jet in the video, that could explain a few things!). As long as the later misidentification is due to wishful thinking, rush, bureaucracy, variably interpretable screen data, a shape hidden in three frames and the fact that the video is blurry, and not to purposeful lying, we can ignore the issue. If purposeful lying is involved, go to the test theory below.
I know the reports about the radar jamming, the impossible manoeuvres, the exhaust plume, the erratic behaviour, etc., and I know about the odd movement at the end of the video. However, if the video shows a plane, it shows a plane. There are many ways to explain why a jet can look like a hypersonic white tictac, but there's no way to explain why a hypersonic white tictac suddenly looks like a jet. Underwood was given some radar coordinates that were 30 km away, he had no idea of what he was filming, he did an excellent job at concentrating on locking and filming in different modes, the object recorded happens to be one of their jets, perfectly understandable and it doesn't change the rest of the story (maybe the UFO was very close to the jet in the video, that could explain a few things!). As long as the later misidentification is due to wishful thinking, rush, bureaucracy, variably interpretable screen data, a shape hidden in three frames and the fact that the video is blurry, and not to purposeful lying, we can ignore the issue. If purposeful lying is involved, go to the test theory below.
The test theory
Here we really must explain speeds and craft.
- 1.200 km/h = sound speed
- 1.500-6.000 km/h = supersonic speed
- 6.000-12.000 km/h = hypersonic speed
- 12.000-30.000 km/h = high-hypersonic speed
- more than 30.000 km/h = re-entry speed
- fastest birds = 300 km/h
- jets = 2.000 km/h
- hypersonic and high-hypersonic craft have been made public throughout the years without problems.
- rockets leaving Earth = 40.000 km/h
- Mach and g are used to measure speed and acceleration but they are more confusing than else, so I leave those out.
The
problem with the tictac is not the speed in itself, which is well
within the limits of human technologies. The problem is about
acceleration and deceleration.
Always assuming that all reports are correct, what is being consistently reported is an object that makes the following manoeuvre: 0 km/h - 20.000 km/h - 0 km/h ...in one second. Said in another way, the tictac is standing in one place, and one second later it's standing 10 km away. It can also make 45° or 90° turns with the same acceleration/deceleration. This is well beyond human technologies, even forgetting for a second that the tictac doesn't make any sound, doesn't produce sonic booms and has no visible means of propulsion.
Always assuming that all reports are correct, what is being consistently reported is an object that makes the following manoeuvre: 0 km/h - 20.000 km/h - 0 km/h ...in one second. Said in another way, the tictac is standing in one place, and one second later it's standing 10 km away. It can also make 45° or 90° turns with the same acceleration/deceleration. This is well beyond human technologies, even forgetting for a second that the tictac doesn't make any sound, doesn't produce sonic booms and has no visible means of propulsion.
A
popular idea is that these officers might have witnessed
a test
for some brand new
and secret technology, belonging to the U.S. or another country. To
make things simple, let me
start by saying that - like said by many - if in 2004, anywhere on the
planet, there was some human
technology that has the tictac
capabilities, now we would live in a different world. "But before the
stealth
technology was invented we thought the same of...". Come on, I think
we're clearly talking about different levels of technology.
Then we have three possibilities:
1)
The
secret technology belongs to the US. Of course it doesn't have
the tictac capabilities, some of the above people want to believe that it
does, some of them want people to believe
that it does,
but it doesn't. It was all a strange cover-up to test some weird
technology, made of ghost radar tracks and maybe ghost visual tracks.
This interpretation would help to stick many pieces of the puzzle in
the right place, but it would leave out a major chunk: if that's what
happened, the Department of Defense wouldn't have gone
through so much trouble with senators and the general public for 3
years
(2017-2020). Let's say that just some of the officers named in the
summary were informed about the test, let's say that the test data were
then forgotten in some dusty office, let's say that the AATIP of course
didn't know about the test and genuinely investigated the whole
incident, creating a report that includes both official lies and
official truths. Good, but as soon as the story reaches Department of
Defense, senators and president, the whole problem should have been
solved with a simple "ehm, sorry gentlemen, it was our test, no fuss
needed, let's just
bring the whole thing back into silence". Just imagine that it was a
test
and then go through the above chronology from 2017 to 2020. It doesn't
really work.
2)
The
secret technology belongs to other countries. In that case, none
of the officers named in the summary had any reason to lie about what
they saw. Which means the tictac capabilities are real.
But as we ruled out that such
a technology can be human, the foreign technology hypothesis
doesn't work.
3) The U.S. or other countries were testing alien technology. It would then be conceivable that really nobody except a few high-ranking officials, not even senators or president, is supposed to know anything. No matter what happens between 2017 and 2020, people and government can think and do whatever they want, pilots can risk an accident, but such a technology must remain secret, it can't be used for civil or military purposes, its origin would become quickly obvious and that just can't happen. I have a few problems with this. First, there would be no reason to hang out in the area for at least a month. Second, presuming that Day's report is correct, someone testing such a technology doesn't need to constantly travel between Santa Catalina and Guadalupe. Third, honestly, do you really need to test the tictac capabilities against something?
3) The U.S. or other countries were testing alien technology. It would then be conceivable that really nobody except a few high-ranking officials, not even senators or president, is supposed to know anything. No matter what happens between 2017 and 2020, people and government can think and do whatever they want, pilots can risk an accident, but such a technology must remain secret, it can't be used for civil or military purposes, its origin would become quickly obvious and that just can't happen. I have a few problems with this. First, there would be no reason to hang out in the area for at least a month. Second, presuming that Day's report is correct, someone testing such a technology doesn't need to constantly travel between Santa Catalina and Guadalupe. Third, honestly, do you really need to test the tictac capabilities against something?
The coincidence theory
I
use
the word "coincidence" to
simplify. Let's say
that a commercial pilot who happens to be a UFO enthusiast is flying a
plane at 3 o'clock in the night. By coincidence, he had an extra drink.
By coincidence, a meteor enters the atmosphere and disintegrates. By
coincidence, his colleagues are sleeping. The perfect storm of
coincidences results in the pilot thinking he saw an alien craft. In
our case:
Several officers observe inexplicable vectors on the radar. These could be glitches or too-sensitive radars. Good.
By coincidence, Voorhis and Day see lights moving in a strange way where the vector is supposed to be.
By coincidence, Cahill sees strange lights in the sky.
By coincidence, when Kurth is sent where one vector is supposed to be, he sees an odd disturbance in the water.
By coincidence, when Fravor goes to the same coordinates, he reports seeing a white, hypersonic tictac on the disturbance.
By coincidence, ten seconds after the tictac disappearance, Day tells Fravor that the vector appeared 90 km away.
By coincidence, one of the Hawkeye pilots decides to tell his friend Hughes that he saw the same white, hypersonic tictac.
By coincidence, days later, and for three nights, Kammerzell sees a silent triangular formation of three lights in the sky.
By coincidence, two weeks later, Lara sees a light moving at hypersonic speed and making 45°/90° turns.
By coincidence, all radar tapes disappear.
All events seemingly witnessed by tens of people, who hopefully will eventually come forward.
Several officers observe inexplicable vectors on the radar. These could be glitches or too-sensitive radars. Good.
By coincidence, Voorhis and Day see lights moving in a strange way where the vector is supposed to be.
By coincidence, Cahill sees strange lights in the sky.
By coincidence, when Kurth is sent where one vector is supposed to be, he sees an odd disturbance in the water.
By coincidence, when Fravor goes to the same coordinates, he reports seeing a white, hypersonic tictac on the disturbance.
By coincidence, ten seconds after the tictac disappearance, Day tells Fravor that the vector appeared 90 km away.
By coincidence, one of the Hawkeye pilots decides to tell his friend Hughes that he saw the same white, hypersonic tictac.
By coincidence, days later, and for three nights, Kammerzell sees a silent triangular formation of three lights in the sky.
By coincidence, two weeks later, Lara sees a light moving at hypersonic speed and making 45°/90° turns.
By coincidence, all radar tapes disappear.
All events seemingly witnessed by tens of people, who hopefully will eventually come forward.
If
we
had just one or two of these reports, we
could talk about coincidences and debunking (for example, that's what
seems
to have happened with the video).
But with ten, that would be a hell of a perfect storm.
Still, and I say this in support of anybody who wants to delve into these as explainable coincidences, one should keep in mind that:
- If these officers made arrangements to lie about the main facts, they wouldn't be arguing vivaciously about the minor details included between asterisks.
- Their reports shouldn't be seen as carved in stone either. Trained doesn't mean flawless cyborg. A jet has been confused with a hypersonic tictac and an agreement can't be found about the number of vectors (one or fifty?) and the fate of the tapes. These are minor details when compared to the report of a hypersonic tictac, but one should still listen to every detail of every report with doubt.
But with ten, that would be a hell of a perfect storm.
Still, and I say this in support of anybody who wants to delve into these as explainable coincidences, one should keep in mind that:
- If these officers made arrangements to lie about the main facts, they wouldn't be arguing vivaciously about the minor details included between asterisks.
- Their reports shouldn't be seen as carved in stone either. Trained doesn't mean flawless cyborg. A jet has been confused with a hypersonic tictac and an agreement can't be found about the number of vectors (one or fifty?) and the fate of the tapes. These are minor details when compared to the report of a hypersonic tictac, but one should still listen to every detail of every report with doubt.
The alien theory
Maybe
we're being visited by alien probes and possibly by alien beings.
It's possible, but "extraordinary claims require extraordinary evidence".
Less than ten witnesses coming
forward + no physical records are more than it's needed to deserve
investigation but are not extraordinary enough to prove the
alien theory.
At the same time, I can't see why the alien theory wouldn't work. Any input in that sense would be welcome because no reason comes to mind. Possibly not because this theory has more chances than the others, but because by nature it can imply anything. "An alien craft wouldn't... couldn't... shouldn't...". How do we know?
At the same time, I can't see why the alien theory wouldn't work. Any input in that sense would be welcome because no reason comes to mind. Possibly not because this theory has more chances than the others, but because by nature it can imply anything. "An alien craft wouldn't... couldn't... shouldn't...". How do we know?
Questions and doubts
-
Day
says that once Fravor comes back and the other jets leave,
all vectors drop from the sky, likely in response to many jets
leaving the ships within minutes. But only ONE jet is sent towards ONE
vector? What about all the other vectors and jets? How many jets were
sent within minutes after Underwood?
Day: Please see the answer to this in more detail below. This is an excellent question, but I want to recount it in sequence.
(But replying to another question): ...Fast Eagle 1 flight (Fravor) was simply the first airborne, other aircrews were now aware of the objects from radio chatter as well as the objects being reported to flight crews on our datalinks. Madness shortly ensued for a time as the aircrews took it upon themselves to attempt their own autonomous intercepts. And suddenly, we had a lot of our interceptors racing after the objects. At one point, all ten objects on the radar suddenly dropped from 28,000 feet down to sea level in reaction. It was literally raining UFOs.
- Day says that the day after Fravor's sighting, he could verify on the recordings that the exact speed of Fravor's tictac dropping from the sky was less than a second. Isn't this also the day after the helicopters came to take away all recordings?
Day: On the morning of November 15th, I headed up to CIC (Combat Information Center) with the intention of drafting an after-action report. A naval message describing what had taken place the day before. I was not at all sure whether or not Captain Smith would agree to release the message, but I was gonna try anyway. I found the senior technician (who is now debating about coming forward) in charge of our Cooperative Engagement Capability (CEC), because I wanted to review the data that was recorded during the event so I could draft a detailed report. It was then that I learned the data was all missing, but the technician declined to say why. With a twinkle in his eye, he did say however that he still had the CEC data recording for Fast Eagle 1's intercept, Commander Fravor's flight. He replayed it for me and our system had indeed captured the object being intercepted descending from 28,000 feet down to sea level in less than one second; .78 seconds to be precise. Our SPY radar had held the highest track quality possible the entire time. It was only much later when I heard the rumor that folks had arrived aboard the Princeton later in the day on the 14th and had taken our data with them. Gary Voorhis later revealed that he was ordered to erase all recordings even including already blank media. Just so you know, US Navy watchstanders seldom choose to look at the raw radar. We use symbology instead that depicts what the radar or sonar track is. Back in the early days when symbology first started being used, the symbols themselves were generated by oscilloscopes using the familiar sine-wave pattern. The top half of the wave depicts an air contact, the bottom half depicts an underwater contact, and when combined, a surface contact. We still use the same symbology today.
- It's not clear to me what happens in the days after November 14 (16-30). Lara and Kammerzell say the UFO was still in the area, although at that point people were trying to forget about it and think about their job. The jets were still coming and going. Shouldn't we have plenty of FLIR videos and non-seized radar tapes from those two weeks too?
Day: According to Gary Voorhis, one of the computer techs aboard Princeton, all data related to those objects was erased and/or confiscated. Including objects tracked days following the 14th.
(Follow-up questions): So did other jets manage to film the object on FLIR, even if the videos were later confiscated? Or the day after Fravor/Underwood's event they gave up and never tried again? And if the objects were being observed almost daily, were the radar tapes being confiscated daily for two weeks? What Lara (and another 30-50 people who were on the bridge at the time) saw is pretty impressive: although no other people came forward, shouldn't the people who came forward be aware of Lara's sighting and possibly of other people's sightings happened in those two weeks (word of mouth)? I guess my doubt in general is that we have a lot of information (although the data were confiscated) regarding three or four days, then the same phenomenon seems to go on for two weeks but from those two weeks we don't seem to have much, apart from Lara. Even if without official records, the "chatting in private" about the topic at the time had to be crazy ("He said they saw this...", etc.), so we should have plenty of material.
- With one or more vectors on the screen moving at crazy speed in crazy directions, what allows Day to be sure that the object that appears at the CAP point is the same as seen by Fravor 90 km away and ten seconds earlier?
Day: I was standing watch as the Air Intercept Controller Supervisor (AICS) during Fast Eagle's intercept. I was wearing a headset with a long cord which allowed me to walk between the watchstations and the Front Table areas of CIC. My role was to coordinate information and keep the Tactical Action Officer and Commanding Officer, when present in CIC, informed and to provide recommendations. As stated above, the object that FAST EAGLE had intercepted was held by SPY radar the entire time – the highest quality track possible – keeping the same 'Track Number' (TN) the entire time as well. I was walking back to the AIC console when I heard the AIC actually controlling the flight say over the radio: "Uhm, sir, you're not going to believe this, but that thing is now at your CAP station!". Stunned silence then followed on both internal and external comms. Fast Eagle's assigned Combat Air Patrol station was approximately 60 miles away from them at the time. That same object was exactly on the CAP point too, exact latitude and longitude and assigned altitude. Having just launched as Event 1 off the Nimitz, Fast Eagle had not even manned the CAP point yet. The AIC and others watched this play out on their consoles witnessing the same track, same TN, as it vectored those 60 miles in distance in under two seconds. Again, no sonic booms.
- In a video interview (11:10) Voorhis says that he only saw the lights from the bridge during the day, while on Popular Mechanics he says: "At night, they'd give off a kind of a phosphorus glow and were a little easier to see than in the day".
Day: Please see the answer to this in more detail below. This is an excellent question, but I want to recount it in sequence.
(But replying to another question): ...Fast Eagle 1 flight (Fravor) was simply the first airborne, other aircrews were now aware of the objects from radio chatter as well as the objects being reported to flight crews on our datalinks. Madness shortly ensued for a time as the aircrews took it upon themselves to attempt their own autonomous intercepts. And suddenly, we had a lot of our interceptors racing after the objects. At one point, all ten objects on the radar suddenly dropped from 28,000 feet down to sea level in reaction. It was literally raining UFOs.
- Day says that the day after Fravor's sighting, he could verify on the recordings that the exact speed of Fravor's tictac dropping from the sky was less than a second. Isn't this also the day after the helicopters came to take away all recordings?
Day: On the morning of November 15th, I headed up to CIC (Combat Information Center) with the intention of drafting an after-action report. A naval message describing what had taken place the day before. I was not at all sure whether or not Captain Smith would agree to release the message, but I was gonna try anyway. I found the senior technician (who is now debating about coming forward) in charge of our Cooperative Engagement Capability (CEC), because I wanted to review the data that was recorded during the event so I could draft a detailed report. It was then that I learned the data was all missing, but the technician declined to say why. With a twinkle in his eye, he did say however that he still had the CEC data recording for Fast Eagle 1's intercept, Commander Fravor's flight. He replayed it for me and our system had indeed captured the object being intercepted descending from 28,000 feet down to sea level in less than one second; .78 seconds to be precise. Our SPY radar had held the highest track quality possible the entire time. It was only much later when I heard the rumor that folks had arrived aboard the Princeton later in the day on the 14th and had taken our data with them. Gary Voorhis later revealed that he was ordered to erase all recordings even including already blank media. Just so you know, US Navy watchstanders seldom choose to look at the raw radar. We use symbology instead that depicts what the radar or sonar track is. Back in the early days when symbology first started being used, the symbols themselves were generated by oscilloscopes using the familiar sine-wave pattern. The top half of the wave depicts an air contact, the bottom half depicts an underwater contact, and when combined, a surface contact. We still use the same symbology today.
- It's not clear to me what happens in the days after November 14 (16-30). Lara and Kammerzell say the UFO was still in the area, although at that point people were trying to forget about it and think about their job. The jets were still coming and going. Shouldn't we have plenty of FLIR videos and non-seized radar tapes from those two weeks too?
Day: According to Gary Voorhis, one of the computer techs aboard Princeton, all data related to those objects was erased and/or confiscated. Including objects tracked days following the 14th.
(Follow-up questions): So did other jets manage to film the object on FLIR, even if the videos were later confiscated? Or the day after Fravor/Underwood's event they gave up and never tried again? And if the objects were being observed almost daily, were the radar tapes being confiscated daily for two weeks? What Lara (and another 30-50 people who were on the bridge at the time) saw is pretty impressive: although no other people came forward, shouldn't the people who came forward be aware of Lara's sighting and possibly of other people's sightings happened in those two weeks (word of mouth)? I guess my doubt in general is that we have a lot of information (although the data were confiscated) regarding three or four days, then the same phenomenon seems to go on for two weeks but from those two weeks we don't seem to have much, apart from Lara. Even if without official records, the "chatting in private" about the topic at the time had to be crazy ("He said they saw this...", etc.), so we should have plenty of material.
- With one or more vectors on the screen moving at crazy speed in crazy directions, what allows Day to be sure that the object that appears at the CAP point is the same as seen by Fravor 90 km away and ten seconds earlier?
Day: I was standing watch as the Air Intercept Controller Supervisor (AICS) during Fast Eagle's intercept. I was wearing a headset with a long cord which allowed me to walk between the watchstations and the Front Table areas of CIC. My role was to coordinate information and keep the Tactical Action Officer and Commanding Officer, when present in CIC, informed and to provide recommendations. As stated above, the object that FAST EAGLE had intercepted was held by SPY radar the entire time – the highest quality track possible – keeping the same 'Track Number' (TN) the entire time as well. I was walking back to the AIC console when I heard the AIC actually controlling the flight say over the radio: "Uhm, sir, you're not going to believe this, but that thing is now at your CAP station!". Stunned silence then followed on both internal and external comms. Fast Eagle's assigned Combat Air Patrol station was approximately 60 miles away from them at the time. That same object was exactly on the CAP point too, exact latitude and longitude and assigned altitude. Having just launched as Event 1 off the Nimitz, Fast Eagle had not even manned the CAP point yet. The AIC and others watched this play out on their consoles witnessing the same track, same TN, as it vectored those 60 miles in distance in under two seconds. Again, no sonic booms.
- In a video interview (11:10) Voorhis says that he only saw the lights from the bridge during the day, while on Popular Mechanics he says: "At night, they'd give off a kind of a phosphorus glow and were a little easier to see than in the day".
Day: I
cannot be
sure without clarifying this point with Gary Voorhis, but there is
constant interaction and communication between those of us standing
watch in CIC and those standing watch on the ship's bridge. My fellow
Chief Petty Officer, Sean Cahill, who had the night watch on the bridge
during the days in question, watched the objects several times through
the ship's Big Eye binoculars. His testimony is that he watched the
objects actually doing the incredible manoeuvres we were witnessing on
radar down in CIC. I will ask Gary to clarify this point when I talk to
him again soon. I had the morning and evening watch as the
Anti-Air Warfare Coordinator (AAWC) and was stuck in my chair during
all hours of darkness or asleep down in the berthing compartment. And
so, I personally only ever saw the objects during the afternoon
daylight hours when I was conducting other duties in CIC and free to
roam about the ship. We would gain a contact, I would get the relative
bearing, range, and altitude, and run up to the bridge to look at them
through the Big Eyes. For me, always just a boring white light in the
sky. I never got to see them behaving wildly with my own eyeballs.
- On the carriers' radars, apart from altitude, speed, etc., do they have in clear letters what belongs to them and what doesn't? Like "Jet X5-S1-Fravor"...
Day: The radar symbology for a friend contact is a rounded top half of a circle, again based on the sine-wave pattern. The symbol has a small vector originating from the bottom center of the symbol depicting direction of flight and speed. When a radar operator uses the trackball on the console to hook a contact, detailed information about the contact then gets displayed on the screen.
- Day sees the tictac drop from the sky while Fravor is there looking for it. During the moments between Fravor looking around and "I'm engaged, I'm engaged", shouldn't have Day said: "Ehm, Fravor, on our radar the object has just dropped to sea level"?
Day: No doubt I was physically up at the Front Table in CIC conferring with the CO and TAO who were both shitting their pants at that moment. My AIC at the console controlling the flight may have, and likely did, update Fast Eagle with another BRAA call (bearing, range, altitude, aspect) and it's entirely possible that I missed hearing that updated call. I was hoping to put all of this together in an after-action report, but all of the comms and radar data was 'missing' by the next morning. Looking at the Large Screen Displays up at the Front Table area in CIC, we saw Fast Eagle immediately chase the object down towards the surface – likely based on the AIC's updated BRAA call. It all happened very, very quickly and it's likely I simply missed or do not remember the updated altitude included in that likely would-be BRAA call. Please remember that I was not the one talking to the flight over the air control circuit, just listening in. And dealing with some seriously shocked senior officers at the time. Your questions go to the heart of why I wanted to review the recorded data – in order to put this whole dealio together including things I may have personally missed in the moment. For example, at that moment I was not yet aware that our BMD watchstanders had been tracking these objects descending from space.
- On the carriers' radars, apart from altitude, speed, etc., do they have in clear letters what belongs to them and what doesn't? Like "Jet X5-S1-Fravor"...
Day: The radar symbology for a friend contact is a rounded top half of a circle, again based on the sine-wave pattern. The symbol has a small vector originating from the bottom center of the symbol depicting direction of flight and speed. When a radar operator uses the trackball on the console to hook a contact, detailed information about the contact then gets displayed on the screen.
- Day sees the tictac drop from the sky while Fravor is there looking for it. During the moments between Fravor looking around and "I'm engaged, I'm engaged", shouldn't have Day said: "Ehm, Fravor, on our radar the object has just dropped to sea level"?
Day: No doubt I was physically up at the Front Table in CIC conferring with the CO and TAO who were both shitting their pants at that moment. My AIC at the console controlling the flight may have, and likely did, update Fast Eagle with another BRAA call (bearing, range, altitude, aspect) and it's entirely possible that I missed hearing that updated call. I was hoping to put all of this together in an after-action report, but all of the comms and radar data was 'missing' by the next morning. Looking at the Large Screen Displays up at the Front Table area in CIC, we saw Fast Eagle immediately chase the object down towards the surface – likely based on the AIC's updated BRAA call. It all happened very, very quickly and it's likely I simply missed or do not remember the updated altitude included in that likely would-be BRAA call. Please remember that I was not the one talking to the flight over the air control circuit, just listening in. And dealing with some seriously shocked senior officers at the time. Your questions go to the heart of why I wanted to review the recorded data – in order to put this whole dealio together including things I may have personally missed in the moment. For example, at that moment I was not yet aware that our BMD watchstanders had been tracking these objects descending from space.
-
How
large is a merge plot? When two objects are in the same plot, they
are within the same 10-20 m? Or 200 m? Or 1 km? Also, Fravor describes
the merge plot as a cube, not as a square, does that mean that if two
objects are in the same merge plot they are also at a close
altitude?
Day: Radar of course tracks in 3D space. However, our radar consoles are flat 2D displays. A merge plot occurs when the interceptor and the contact being intercepted are in the same vertical piece of sky – and therefore not, necessarily, at the same altitude. On the consoles, both symbols are now overlying each other but aren't necessarily close. One could be at 10,000 feet and the other at 35,000 feet for example but the plot is still considered merged. However, it can be stated that generally a fighter-interceptor will want to get as close as safely possible to improve the chances of obtaining a solid VID. That is to say, at co-altitude as in the case of Fast Eagle's intercept.
- The tictac can disappear in a second. In a second it drops from the sky to sea level when it feels it could be detected. In a second it leaves when Fravor gets too close. Why bouncing east-west and north-south? Why waste time pointing towards him and going up mirroring his movement?
Day: Great question here! It was as if the objects wanted us to see them, but did not want anything else to do with us beyond that desire. It was like watching some super-capable flock of birds. Toss a stone at a flock and they of course scatter only to regroup soon after and continue on their way. Those groups of objects behaved in the same, intelligent way.
- Even if there was no other training in that specific area (nothing for 15 years? If yes, no more odd vectors tracked ever again?), shouldn't the U.S. radars and satellites, especially on the coasts, have a constant check on what flies over the sea? Otherwise, any other nation could have jet-size objects flying over the sea along the U.S. coasts without anybody knowing.
Day: Yes, yes, and yes. It seems like every day now a new story about these objects gets revealed by the Navy. Those objects are most definitely still out there now and we at UAPx are going to go re-find them this Summer and Fall. And record them in multi-modal formats using some pretty far-out and cutting-edge technologies.
- Day describes a scenario where the vectors go from north to south between two islands, if not disturbed by the jets, in which case they drop from the sky and still proceed south. But Voorhis, Day, Kammerzell, Lara and Cahill also describe a scenario where the vectors are stationary or recurring at a close distance from the ships for days. This second scenario, on the radars, should have been seen like a frequent: "Ok, now they are all just 5 km from us, all around, just moving back and forth around us". For days or weeks! Was that the case?
Day: Yes. The objects displayed the ability to sit motionless in space as well as zip from Point A to Point B in seconds even though separated by many, many miles. Again, never any sonic booms.
Day: Radar of course tracks in 3D space. However, our radar consoles are flat 2D displays. A merge plot occurs when the interceptor and the contact being intercepted are in the same vertical piece of sky – and therefore not, necessarily, at the same altitude. On the consoles, both symbols are now overlying each other but aren't necessarily close. One could be at 10,000 feet and the other at 35,000 feet for example but the plot is still considered merged. However, it can be stated that generally a fighter-interceptor will want to get as close as safely possible to improve the chances of obtaining a solid VID. That is to say, at co-altitude as in the case of Fast Eagle's intercept.
- The tictac can disappear in a second. In a second it drops from the sky to sea level when it feels it could be detected. In a second it leaves when Fravor gets too close. Why bouncing east-west and north-south? Why waste time pointing towards him and going up mirroring his movement?
Day: Great question here! It was as if the objects wanted us to see them, but did not want anything else to do with us beyond that desire. It was like watching some super-capable flock of birds. Toss a stone at a flock and they of course scatter only to regroup soon after and continue on their way. Those groups of objects behaved in the same, intelligent way.
- Even if there was no other training in that specific area (nothing for 15 years? If yes, no more odd vectors tracked ever again?), shouldn't the U.S. radars and satellites, especially on the coasts, have a constant check on what flies over the sea? Otherwise, any other nation could have jet-size objects flying over the sea along the U.S. coasts without anybody knowing.
Day: Yes, yes, and yes. It seems like every day now a new story about these objects gets revealed by the Navy. Those objects are most definitely still out there now and we at UAPx are going to go re-find them this Summer and Fall. And record them in multi-modal formats using some pretty far-out and cutting-edge technologies.
- Day describes a scenario where the vectors go from north to south between two islands, if not disturbed by the jets, in which case they drop from the sky and still proceed south. But Voorhis, Day, Kammerzell, Lara and Cahill also describe a scenario where the vectors are stationary or recurring at a close distance from the ships for days. This second scenario, on the radars, should have been seen like a frequent: "Ok, now they are all just 5 km from us, all around, just moving back and forth around us". For days or weeks! Was that the case?
Day: Yes. The objects displayed the ability to sit motionless in space as well as zip from Point A to Point B in seconds even though separated by many, many miles. Again, never any sonic booms.
(follow-up question):
like said before, I
guess my doubt is: as this situation lasted for two more weeks,
shouldn't
we have plenty of unofficial reports from the people who came forward
describing how the objects behaved/positioned for those two weeks
(again,
even if based on word of mouth)? Like "it seems today they just went
from north to south all day, but it seems yesterday afternoon for about
two hours they all stopped just 3 km north of us, just above the sea
surface". In two weeks, God knows how many behavioural observations
could have been done.
- It would be useful to know the exact correspondence between Fravor's arrival and the tictac's fall, because while the reports seem to suggest that there could have been something underwater, it would be very strange that whatever is underwater appears exactly when and where the tictac drops from the sky. It's more likely that the effect on the water was caused by the tictac, in which case Kurth didn't see the tictac but the tictac was there or it had just left the sea surface (that's why, when he leaves, the disturbance is already almost gone and then it appears again when the other two jets arrive?). Disturbance aside, Day should have seen the tictac drop at the arrival of both Kurth and Fravor.
Day explains that, as for the answer related to the BRAA call above, he became aware of the quick descent of the tictac the day after, when he checked the data. At that point, as explained in the second answer above, only Fravor's data were available, not Kurth's. Having Kurth's data (or better, the data indicating what the tictac did when Kurth arrived in the area) would explain a lot at this point!
- It would be useful to know the exact correspondence between Fravor's arrival and the tictac's fall, because while the reports seem to suggest that there could have been something underwater, it would be very strange that whatever is underwater appears exactly when and where the tictac drops from the sky. It's more likely that the effect on the water was caused by the tictac, in which case Kurth didn't see the tictac but the tictac was there or it had just left the sea surface (that's why, when he leaves, the disturbance is already almost gone and then it appears again when the other two jets arrive?). Disturbance aside, Day should have seen the tictac drop at the arrival of both Kurth and Fravor.
Day explains that, as for the answer related to the BRAA call above, he became aware of the quick descent of the tictac the day after, when he checked the data. At that point, as explained in the second answer above, only Fravor's data were available, not Kurth's. Having Kurth's data (or better, the data indicating what the tictac did when Kurth arrived in the area) would explain a lot at this point!
Taking action
There
is a short circuit in the system that would be funny if it wasn't
tragic.
There's a chance that we're being visited by alien probes (to say the least, because other conjectures might include a whole alien colony coming and going from our oceans). What to do? There would be endless options: let's check the registers of 2004 and let's ask that handful of witnesses to provide the names of other witnesses, let's call here another sixty and let's see if they corroborate the facts. If they do, we actually have something. It's then worth checking the registers again, we want to talk with all the officials who were in command on all ships, we want to know who allowed the presumed helicopters to land, what helicopters were flying at the time in the area, what other offices and officers on the mainland were following the events, who from the carriers contacted whom on the mainland, and we want to know where the hell are those tapes. And while we're here, we want every piece of paper with any type of record taken on those days. Then we make sure that a ship carrying the same radar that was able to detect those vectors is constantly present in the same area where the vectors were detected. Of course, if we detect the vectors again, very quietly we observe, and even more quietly we record videos and radar tracks. We try to understand where they come from and what they want. We might even try a contact, Fravor (possibly the whole strike group, considering how often the vectors appeared to hang around the carriers) wasn't too far from a "dialogue". Then the sky is the limit. Do you want more specific ideas? Here they are. That's what everybody would expect.
But then you look at what actually happens, and you're a bit disappointed:
- Between 2004 and 2009 it's like nothing ever happened, no attention whatsoever from anybody.
- Fravor says: ...you would ask: "But what do you do?"... and I say, well, because it was all white, and it didn't have any markings on it, it didn't have any wings, it didn't have any rotors, and it outperformed anything that we have... I think that if I would have painted "China" or "Russia" on the side... (Rogan's interview, 37:30). And then again: we have a tendency... if you don't know what it is, if you ignore it, it will go away... (1:15:50).
- Kammerzell says: ...we had actually just all decided, sort of unanimously, to just go about our business... I know that sounds really weird, because people not in the military look at that and think that doesn't sound right, but the reality is we were out there for training, and this thing hasn't caused any issues (...) Everybody just decided: "Well, we gotta go back to training"(...) It's not like it's taking anybody off the ship, it's not running around lighting things on fire, it just is... and it's not causing any problems, so, I have things to do... (interview, 27:30).
- Elizondo leaves the AATIP to protest government secrecy and opposition to the investigation, and because the issue isn't being taken seriously.
- The UAPTF relies on two people with no budget being stiff-armed for access to information.
There's a chance that we're being visited by alien probes (to say the least, because other conjectures might include a whole alien colony coming and going from our oceans). What to do? There would be endless options: let's check the registers of 2004 and let's ask that handful of witnesses to provide the names of other witnesses, let's call here another sixty and let's see if they corroborate the facts. If they do, we actually have something. It's then worth checking the registers again, we want to talk with all the officials who were in command on all ships, we want to know who allowed the presumed helicopters to land, what helicopters were flying at the time in the area, what other offices and officers on the mainland were following the events, who from the carriers contacted whom on the mainland, and we want to know where the hell are those tapes. And while we're here, we want every piece of paper with any type of record taken on those days. Then we make sure that a ship carrying the same radar that was able to detect those vectors is constantly present in the same area where the vectors were detected. Of course, if we detect the vectors again, very quietly we observe, and even more quietly we record videos and radar tracks. We try to understand where they come from and what they want. We might even try a contact, Fravor (possibly the whole strike group, considering how often the vectors appeared to hang around the carriers) wasn't too far from a "dialogue". Then the sky is the limit. Do you want more specific ideas? Here they are. That's what everybody would expect.
But then you look at what actually happens, and you're a bit disappointed:
- Between 2004 and 2009 it's like nothing ever happened, no attention whatsoever from anybody.
- Fravor says: ...you would ask: "But what do you do?"... and I say, well, because it was all white, and it didn't have any markings on it, it didn't have any wings, it didn't have any rotors, and it outperformed anything that we have... I think that if I would have painted "China" or "Russia" on the side... (Rogan's interview, 37:30). And then again: we have a tendency... if you don't know what it is, if you ignore it, it will go away... (1:15:50).
- Kammerzell says: ...we had actually just all decided, sort of unanimously, to just go about our business... I know that sounds really weird, because people not in the military look at that and think that doesn't sound right, but the reality is we were out there for training, and this thing hasn't caused any issues (...) Everybody just decided: "Well, we gotta go back to training"(...) It's not like it's taking anybody off the ship, it's not running around lighting things on fire, it just is... and it's not causing any problems, so, I have things to do... (interview, 27:30).
- Elizondo leaves the AATIP to protest government secrecy and opposition to the investigation, and because the issue isn't being taken seriously.
- The UAPTF relies on two people with no budget being stiff-armed for access to information.
Throughout history, UFOs have been studied by Project Sign, Project Grudge, and Project Blue Book, all the way to AATIP and UAPTF (now AARO). The projects terminate because there's no indication of threat to national security and there's no indication that aliens are involved. Then again public and government bring up the issue of a possible threat and possible aliens and the DoD replies that, "after long evaluation", it concluded that there is no threat and there are no aliens. This is all fine if all UFO incidents in history turn out not to be about aliens, but if that's not the case, saying that we're missing a chance/risking our ass is the biggest understatement ever. It's hard not to conjure complot theories: there are entities (DoD, government, CIA, up to you) that don't want these incidents to be investigated further, for a good bunch of possible reasons. It doesn't necessarily mean that these entities know that aliens are visiting Earth, that there are craft hidden in hangars or that there are bodies hidden in fridges. One of the reasons included in that bunch is in fact preventive caution: the entities know nothing, "but it could be aliens, so let's start by hiding all the data, maybe one day we'll have a good look at them" (see what happened with Underwood's video).
|
|