It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.

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

Thank you.


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


The Pentagon Destroyed Emails Of Luis Elizondo: Here's How It Went Down

page: 4
<< 1  2  3   >>

log in


posted on Jun, 9 2021 @ 08:41 AM
a reply to: sean

Hmmm, man that makes no sense, especially at 25k ft and an object at that distance you wouldn't even be able to see it. Unless, of course something tipped them off and/or this object is bigger than thought and they got it on radar.

That's the point of systems like ATFLIR. ATFLIR is an electro-optical camera system designed to help pilots see targets on the ground at 40 nm (46 miles) and 50,000 feet. Since it's an EO system, with a thermal capability, it can see targets in the air as well. It's not an IRST system, which is designed to track airborne targets passively, but it can be used to track airborne targets, as we see here. The original FLIR system was simply giving a night vision capability, especially to pilots and was pretty impressive. The new ATFLIR system is light years ahead of what that system was.

posted on Jun, 9 2021 @ 12:36 PM

originally posted by: sean
That is a triangle with a 8.42nm distance and down angle distance with a hypotenuse of 9.37nm!! That is a lot of distance. The camera is zoomed in a lot, but wow it doesn't even change it's zoom once it locks on either. Then at lock the object is 4.4nm.
Now you're getting on track, so at -26 degrees, from 25000 feet, the surface of the water at the center of the image is 9.37nm away, we could round it to 9.4 nm, to the nearest .1 nm.

So the UFO at target lock is 4.4 nm away from the plane, and since the water is 9.4 nm away as sighted behind the UFO, that means along the hypotenuse you calculated, it's 5 nm from the water, so it's actually 0.6 nm closer to the plane than it is to the water. Are you seeing now that Mick West's analysis is correct?

originally posted by: karl 12
Actually looked into all the highly irregular AATIP contradictions or the way Pentagon FOIA protocol was co-opted and laws changed?
Like it or not there are some extremely uncomfortable (and unequivocable) facts being presented in this video - certainly don't agree with everything (jiust like I don't disagree with everything in your post) but I guess my question to you is why are you not addressing them?
When Tom DeLonge did his "Ask Me Anything" thread here on ATS, someone asked him how does he know he's not part of a disinformation operation (which seems like a reasonable question given the intelligence backgrounds of so many ATS staff).

Tom's answer was that his advisors were intel, not counter-intel. Of course that implies that intelligence sources are more trustworthy that counterintelligence sources. So who was his main source? Lue Elizondo with 20 years experience in counter-intelligence. So, Tom's answer made me wonder if he understood Lue Elizondo's background.

Tom Delonge AMA posts, page 1

francogirotti Q: Hi tom , how can we be sure you're not a disinformer , I say that I find it strange that by defending the Masons are a seeker of truth .
Tom DeLonge A: I assembled Advisors from very specific parts of the Government, not the areas that have active counter-intel programs. Yes, Intelligence, but not couter-intel.

But what did the TV show "Unidentified" say about Lue Elizondo in Season 2 Episode 2, near the beginning of the show (8:45)?
"Lue Elizondo may be the most significant US official to ever claim the UFO phenomenon is real
For two decades, he served as a counter-intelligence officer, for the department of defense."

So according to Tom Delonge's own criteria, Elizondo's background should at least raise some questions, so should Susan Gough's, so yes, we should question everything.

posted on Jun, 9 2021 @ 12:42 PM
a reply to: Zaphod58

Hey Zaphod, do you know if the ATFLIR is slewed to and then locked onto an AA target manually completely independent of AA radar or is it slaved to AA radar and tracked that way.

I know for ground operations you would use it to get a positive ID on target and laser designate but in AA engagements your primary source of locking on would be your AA radar.

I understand ATFLIR was used to get some sort of visual image as the crafts were BVR, would standard procedure be to lock on with AA radar and slave the ATFLIR automatically if that can be done to get the image.

I know there was talk of jamming in some of these events. That would mean AA radar was being used in these engagements no?

I guess basically what I'm asking is wouldn't AA radar have been used in all the ATFLIR video instances to lock onto the target initially?

Wouldn't the AA radar give you far more information regarding the capability of these craft, information we don't have.

posted on Jun, 9 2021 @ 12:59 PM

originally posted by: Slyder12
a reply to: Zaphod58

Hey Zaphod, do you know if the ATFLIR is slewed to and then locked onto an AA target manually completely independent of AA radar or is it slaved to AA radar and tracked that way.
The audio of the Gofast video suggests there's more than one option, around time index 1:40, it sounds like someone asked him if boxed the target manually. and he replies that he didn't.

After he gets target lock, someone asks him:

"Did you box a moving target?"

He answers,

"No, it's on autotrack"

I agree there must be more data we don't have (or at least was at one time), and I also think the pilots are withholding some eyewitness information from us beyond that, because what Kevin Day says the pilots said doesn't agree with what the pilots have said in public, referring to David Fravor and Chad Underwood specifically.

posted on Jun, 9 2021 @ 02:18 PM
a reply to: Slyder12

Both actually. In the case of an F-18F, the WSO in the back seat can slew it manually and use it as an IRST style system. In an F-18E, it's usual going to be tied to the radar, because the pilot doesn't want to be looking down in the cockpit. He can use radar to find the general area of the target and then manually slew it to look though, and spend less time looking down.

posted on Jun, 9 2021 @ 02:43 PM
a reply to: Zaphod58

Very good, thanks for the info.

posted on Jun, 9 2021 @ 03:37 PM
a reply to: Arbitrageur

Yes, I agree that his analyses makes sense now with the gimbal having it's axis separate from the jet. I was trying fit in what the pilots eye witness and reporting that the object was flying low, but @ 1.92nm? How could they be that far off? As you said, there are things in video that don't make sense and obviously missing data and the craft was maybe flying low at one point? Anyways, I am still on the fence with parallax though. You can see in the beginning of the video the white object is moving faster than the background. It appears the the pilot is manually moving the gimbal to catch up to the object to get a lock and only then do you see the background sweeping along. I would also add to all this that the range and angle is changing and getting smaller and the angle wider, but the aspect of the plane is somewhat still the same. I don't know what to make of that.

posted on Jun, 9 2021 @ 08:01 PM

originally posted by: sean
a reply to: Arbitrageur

You can see in the beginning of the video the white object is moving faster than the background. It appears the the pilot is manually moving the gimbal to catch up to the object to get a lock and only then do you see the background sweeping along.
Glad we agree on the distances now.

Yes, you mentioned this issue before the lock earlier, and I didn't address it then because I wanted to focus on the distance first which was the simpler problem to solve.

What you have to remember is the motion is apparent motion. Before target lock, the UFO has apparent motion, the background doesn't. After lock the UFO does not have apparent motion, the background does. But, of course, the lock does not change any actual motions at all, and don't forget the third very important thing which doesn't appear in the video at all, the F/A 18 plane the video is taken from is moving. So regardless of the speed of the UFO, if it's very roughly halfway between the F/A-18 and the water, there HAS to be some parallax, unless the UFO is going in the same direction and speed as the F/A-18, and it's easy to show that's not the case.

If you want to calculate how fast the UFO is actually moving, it gets a little more complicated because there are more things to consider, plus you have to estimate some things instead of using the precise display readings like we did for the distance calculation, so that's why West comes up with an approximate range for the speed of the UFO and not a solid calculation. I went through his numbers and I think if he's off, it's not by much. I think he might have admitted those calculations could be a bit off because of the estimations part, but he's quite confident it's not going anywhere near 2/3 the speed of sound as claimed in the TTSA TV show and I'm pretty sure he's right about that.

posted on Jun, 10 2021 @ 03:41 PM
Well we're also looking at a heavily sanitized video. We don't know what happen before or after this video. Why did they go out to look for it? Did they continue to chase it? Did it zip off at high speed? Did it splash down? It's pretty mind boggling to think of a craft with no wings no signs of conventional thrust. Whatever that is inside this craft is countering gravity creating thrust and at the same time canceling the forces upon it. It's mass. That is why it doesn't create a sonic boom, there is nothing there to chop through the atmosphere to create a boom. Some kind of field around it maybe two fields one to drive it and another field to cancel out the mass. That's nuts. It's really starting to give credence to all the sightings all these years.

Hell I have seen some pretty strange stuff myself. I have seen a black disc up close in the 1990's and still the same qualities, not a sound and hovering. When I say close, I mean within a rock throwing distance. I saw good detail of it and objects sticking out of it's surface.

I saw a disc fly close to the surface of the moon and watched it curve around the moon as it flew off the edge of the moon. I was looking through my 8 inch reflector telescope at approximately 250x power. So I knew it was close as the craft curved with the Moons curve as it went around to the backside of the Moon. This happen in the summer of 1986, Reagan years and shortly after the Challenger incident in Jan I believe of that year. They grounded astronauts for like 3 years. I don't know of anything flying around the Moon at that time. It looked like a silver disc literally the hue of silver when light reflects off it. It had shiny patches and dirty patches on it's surface like tarnished silver.

I've seen 2 other weird craft as well. Silver tic tac looking thing with a stretched out nose like a egg shape stretched out. The size of it looked like as big as 4 school buses 2x2. Probably 1000ft in the air. Stationary for about 2-3 minutes. Hell I thought was a tethered mylar balloon at first. Then I started to see houses and tree's and storage facility and cars going by in it's reflection. Realizing that it's quite large and bigger than your average balloon. Then it starts to move very slowly North straight as an arrow at a very slow pace and went over the mountains. IT had no cockpit, props, no wings, no sound, no seams, no grooves, no antenna. It never waived around erratic like a balloon would. Mind boggling.

I saw a very large black obtuse chevron fly over my head really fast heading directly west to east. Shortly after that, the Phoenix lights was reported. That thing flew in from the West coast I bet. It was very very fast, but from my vantage point the tip to tip was like horizon to horizon, of course it wasn't that big literally, but it was BIG. Maybe the length of a aircraft carrier. It stretched beyond my neighborhood on both sides. So I estimate that it stretched out with a wingspan of like 3 city blocks if not more.

So from this coming out now it's like I feel vindicated. I'm telling the truth as it happen. Somebody out there has got a bunch of toys and they aren't sharing one bit.

edit on 10-6-2021 by sean because: (no reason given)

new topics

top topics

<< 1  2  3   >>

log in