It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.

Please white-list or disable AboveTopSecret.com in your ad-blocking tool.

Thank you.

 

Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.

 

What Are the Implications of This?

page: 1
16
<<   2 >>

log in

join
share:
+2 more 
posted on Dec, 17 2017 @ 04:33 PM
link   
Having read a good bit regarding the US government's history of interaction with the UFO subject, this weekend's revelations strike me as rather remarkable. The first officially acknowledged government investigation into UFOs in almost 50 years has just come to light - five years after its (official) closure. Additionally, a new and apparently legitimate US military video showing an unidentified flying object displaying plainly anomalous flight characteristics, along with audio of the mystified pilots involved, is now available for scrutiny. And to top it all off, the story is broken in a serious manner (as it should be) by the New York Times and picked up by tons of other news outlets.

If anyone knows of a comparably momentous happening in the UFO field in the last five decades, please enlighten me.

Here's an analysis of the video in question by the folks who got it released.

From the analysis:


At 0:27, the object begins a series of distinct rotations and changes orientation by almost 100 degrees. Its orientation is now perpendicular to the horizontal plane despite the headwinds. This maneuver is executed in a manner that is inconsistent with current principles of aerodynamics, and possibly indicative of a vacuum environment. As the video concludes, the object's orientation and performance seem to defy current principals of physics to include atmospheric resistance and normal aerodynamic forces. During the orientation change, it also slows to a near stop, but does not change altitude.

One observer states, “Look at that thing!”

Another observer says, “It’s rotating.”


Here's the footage in question, with the anomalous maneuvers beginning at 1:35:






Several key observations are contained in this one video that may help us collectively better understand the physics and technology being employed. In addition, we hear US fighter pilots struggling to determine the nature of object. Key findings include:

• Low observability in both electro-optical and electromagnetic spectrums.
• No distinguishable flight surfaces. • Lack of obvious propulsion system.
• Never-before-seen flight capabilities.
• Possible energy or resonance field of unknown nature.

The filename “GIMBAL” seems to be traceable to the unusual maneuvering of the UAP.



So, just for the sake of argument, let's assume this is actual gun camera footage from a Navy aircraft. What are some of the possible explanations for what we might be looking at? Does this video depict an object defying our current understanding of physics and/or the laws of aerodynamics? Is it a coincidence that the appearance behavior of the object in this video is similar to that of objects seen by a number of American military pilots in the 1940's and 1950's?

Where does this leave the official government stance of UFOs? Since 1969, we've gotten:


The decision to discontinue UFO investigations was based on an evaluation of a report prepared by the University of Colorado entitled, "Scientific Study of Unidentified Flying Objects;" a review of the University of Colorado's report by the National Academy of Sciences; previous UFO studies and Air Force experience investigating UFO reports during 1940 to 1969. As a result of these investigations, studies and experience gained from investigating UFO reports since 1948, the conclusions of Project Blue Book were:

1) No UFO reported, investigated, and evaluated by the Air Force has ever given any indication of threat to our national security.

2) There has been no evidence submitted to or discovered by the Air Force that sightings categorized as "unidentified" represent technological developments or principles beyond the range of present day scientific knowledge.

3) There has been no evidence indicating the sightings categorized as "unidentified" are extraterrestrial vehicles.

source


It's looking like, based on statements by the former head of this hitherto unacknowledged UFO investigation, the official line may have to undergo at least one slight revision.

If the Pentagon's secret UFO study was officially operational from 2008 to 2012, and - as it's been claimed - the program investigated 10 - 12 incidents per year, there may be several dozen cases like this one - recent, thoroughly documented, potentially backed up by radar or video evidence, and officially acknowledged - awaiting revelation. Indeed, members of the group responsible for the release and organization of this most recent drop have indicated that there is more to come.

So what is the consensus? Is this all just a bunch of nothing? Or, as I'd argue, is this an unprecedented and potentially game-changing occurrence?




edit on 17-12-2017 by BiffWellington because: (no reason given)

edit on 17-12-2017 by BiffWellington because: (no reason given)




posted on Dec, 17 2017 @ 04:45 PM
link   
a reply to: BiffWellington

My problem with this is that there is a for-profit company, full of ex-spooks, who are trying to make money off of this gov't property. Apparently these videos were considered "classified". So why were they given/taken to/by these "ex" gov't employees? As much as I want to believe, my hunch is that this is a psy-op.



posted on Dec, 17 2017 @ 04:49 PM
link   
a reply to: BiffWellington


And to top it all off, the story is broken in a serious manner (as it should be) by the New York Times and picked up by tons of other news outlets.

Which doesn't really make a case for aliens released by the DOD, now does it. If it was released by the DOD you would have seen a press conference with Pentagon Officials.

ETA: This is a DOD press conference, with video, by 'officials'--

edit on 17-12-2017 by intrptr because: ETA:



posted on Dec, 17 2017 @ 04:53 PM
link   
a reply to: TobyFlenderson


Apparently these videos were considered "classified". So why were they given/taken to/by these "ex" gov't employees?


My thinking too. If the gubment is finally disclosing, they would do better than this. If the films are in the public realm its because they are declassified because they don't show anything--

' out of the ordinary '.



posted on Dec, 17 2017 @ 04:56 PM
link   

originally posted by: BiffWellington

So what is the consensus? Is this all just a bunch of nothing? Or, as I'd argue, is this an unprecedented and potentially game-changing occurrence?



It's mostly nothing, for one simple reason...they don't know what it is...since they don't say.
If they do say at some point, they do know what it is, then it is something more than nothing. It looks like they haven't got to that point yet.



posted on Dec, 17 2017 @ 04:59 PM
link   

originally posted by: intrptr
a reply to: TobyFlenderson


Apparently these videos were considered "classified". So why were they given/taken to/by these "ex" gov't employees?


My thinking too. If the gubment is finally disclosing, they would do better than this. If the films are in the public realm its because they are declassified because they don't show anything--

' out of the ordinary '.


But they DO show something. It's just a matter of discussing what that something might be. It certainly looks out of the ordinary to me, and apparently it did to the pilots following it as well.

And nobody needs to be talking about "aliens" right now. Even if the object is totally terrestrial, it still displays inexplicable flight characteristics. Or, I should say, I've seen no plausible explanation offered for what that object (or "objects" if we consider that one of the witnesses mentions that there were more than one) might be.



posted on Dec, 17 2017 @ 05:04 PM
link   
a reply to: BiffWellington


And nobody needs to be talking about "aliens" right now. Even if the object is totally terrestrial, it still displays inexplicable flight characteristics.

Not to me.

.o2



posted on Dec, 17 2017 @ 05:05 PM
link   
a reply to: BiffWellington

You know what bothers me about the video? It is this: Why did it stop? What happened then? It makes me suspicious.

Understand...... I WANT to see a vetted video of a UFO. I want to see their occupants, and glean their culture. I believe they are out there.

It felt authentic. Why did the video stop?



posted on Dec, 17 2017 @ 05:09 PM
link   
a reply to: BiffWellington

Looks like bugs moving close to the camera 😉

See, for me, Im taking this at face value. I think we may be witnessing something that even I had thought would never happen.

This video is just the tip of the iceberg of material we know has to exist. To see it presented and copped to is pretty unprecedented.

I do think there is a program moving in slow motion to acclimate the world to the fact that this is real. With this release a significant crack has formed in the UFO Secrecy wall theyve built over the last century or so.

Nice write-up Biff 😊



posted on Dec, 17 2017 @ 05:12 PM
link   
Problems with this;

The video was public back in 2007 it was discussed here on ATS at the time.
www.abovetopsecret.com...

In 2015 the pilots story was written up here.
fightersweep.com...

And again by NYT this week
www.nytimes.com...

The NYT's can also take the credit for the Disclosure article and NOT Delonge. If anything the information was provided by Luis Elizondo who ran the program and came forward.

In looking at all this over the past 24 hours I can say this is not much different than the Foo-Fighters and the governments admissions at the time of the gun footage from back then plus Project Blue Book.
Yesterdays announcement looks very much like wash-rinse-repeat of the 1940's thru 1960's.

Less a true disclosure, but more like tossing us a bone hoping we won't notice thee's no actual meat on it.
The fact the DOD is recycling an already public video should have everyone's BS meter going off the charts.
Handing us an already public incident an claiming it's been declassified?
REALLY????



posted on Dec, 17 2017 @ 05:39 PM
link   

originally posted by: Urantia1111
a reply to: BiffWellington

Looks like bugs moving close to the camera 😉



I see almost the same thing. Some dirt stuck on the camera lens of the sensor. Then, it falls off near the end of the flick, as it comes loose from the operator fiddling with the camera orientation. It then "appears to fly with great speed" since it's so close sitting on the lens, while in fact, it's just skidding over the surface of the lens to the left and out of view.

Nothing there at all.

This is so disappointing.

After all the Alien movies that came out over the last 50 years, we need to see something like Humans and Aliens talking t each other and discussing why they are here. Not this nonsense about a fuzzy unclear smudge on a film clip.


edit on 17-12-2017 by AMPTAH because: (no reason given)



posted on Dec, 17 2017 @ 05:47 PM
link   

originally posted by: Caver78
Problems with this;

The video was public back in 2007 it was discussed here on ATS at the time.
www.abovetopsecret.com...

In 2015 the pilots story was written up here.
fightersweep.com...

And again by NYT this week
www.nytimes.com...

The NYT's can also take the credit for the Disclosure article and NOT Delonge. If anything the information was provided by Luis Elizondo who ran the program and came forward.

In looking at all this over the past 24 hours I can say this is not much different than the Foo-Fighters and the governments admissions at the time of the gun footage from back then plus Project Blue Book.
Yesterdays announcement looks very much like wash-rinse-repeat of the 1940's thru 1960's.

Less a true disclosure, but more like tossing us a bone hoping we won't notice thee's no actual meat on it.
The fact the DOD is recycling an already public video should have everyone's BS meter going off the charts.
Handing us an already public incident an claiming it's been declassified?
REALLY????





I'm not seeing the video in question at the link you provided, and in fact the discussion seems to be about a different video entirely. Can you clarify?



posted on Dec, 17 2017 @ 06:21 PM
link   
a reply to: BiffWellington

www.abovetopsecret.com...

The thread was a bit of a travesty, but the CVW-11 EVENT SUMMARY was posted on page 9, The video was on youtube at the time but removed. It's covered in the thread and in another made just prior to this one.

www.abovetopsecret.com...

At the time the information by the OP was determined to be a probable hoax. In fact the first thread was removed, but fortunately retrieved for posterity by the MOD. It's a bit of reading, I know, but this can of worms goes back aways.
To be clear at the time the OP danced around providing their copy of the video, but there is enough corroborating info to conclude the OP was discussing the incident used for yesterdays disclosure.

Forgot a link to the article that used ATS as a reference
theaviationist.com... at-it-was/



Back in 2007, a user (cometa2) of the popular Above Top Secret (ATS) forum posted an alleged official CVW-11 Event Summary of a close encounter occurred on Nov. 14, 2004. Back then, when the encounter had not been confirmed yet, many users questioned the authenticity of both the event log and the footage allegedly filmed during the UFO intercept. More than 10 years later, with an officially released video of the encounter, it’s worth having a look at that unverified event log again: although we can’t say for sure whether it is genuine or not, it is at least “realistic” and provides some interesting details and narrative consistent with the real carrier ops. Moreover, the summary says that the callsign of the aircraft involved in the encounter is Fast Eagle: this callsign is used by the VFA-41 Black Aces – incidentally the very same squadron of David Fravor, formed Co of VFA-41, the pilot who recalled the encounter to NYT.


Hope this clears things up for you?




edit on 17-12-2017 by Caver78 because: (no reason given)



posted on Dec, 17 2017 @ 06:26 PM
link   
Oh jeez....

Well there are now a million threads on this, but here it seems people are actually analyzing the footage.

www.abovetopsecret.com...

^ in that posted I point out some significant issues with the "Gimbal" video, and what was written about it on the TTS/AAS website.

What do you all make of this?



posted on Dec, 17 2017 @ 06:27 PM
link   
a reply to: BiffWellington


What about the part where you clearly hear him say "that is a f ing drone, bro""



posted on Dec, 17 2017 @ 06:31 PM
link   
There are conspiracy theories floating on other sites that the shadow government is about to do a huge false flag using aliens as the bad guys.

The theory goes that they are going to do this to prevent themselves from being exposed.



posted on Dec, 17 2017 @ 06:32 PM
link   
a reply to: Iridomyrmex

Thanks for your link!!!
You're right that refereeing all this is getting to be like herding cats. That's why I posted all the supporting links as well.
The material is completely scattered.

Off to read your link!



posted on Dec, 17 2017 @ 06:50 PM
link   

originally posted by: butcherguy
There are conspiracy theories floating on other sites that the shadow government is about to do a huge false flag using aliens as the bad guys.

The theory goes that they are going to do this to prevent themselves from being exposed.


Wouldn't that be a colossal FUBAR since the material was originally posted here on ATS back in 2007 a Conspiracy website?
Did they "trial balloon" it here to save for later?

I agree this whole thing stinks like 3 day old fish, but I'd be more concerned they were using this and the Weinstein debacle to cover up monetary/financial shenanigans yet to see the light of day.



posted on Dec, 17 2017 @ 10:16 PM
link   
2018 full disclosure! The governments of the World are finally given in to Extraterrestrial demands for their existence to be made public.



posted on Dec, 18 2017 @ 03:42 AM
link   

originally posted by: intrptr
a reply to: BiffWellington


And nobody needs to be talking about "aliens" right now. Even if the object is totally terrestrial, it still displays inexplicable flight characteristics.

Not to me.

.o2


Well then what flies at over 120 knots and rotates?




top topics



 
16
<<   2 >>

log in

join