Beyond Bigelow & BAASS, After AATIP and on To the Stars...

originally posted by: Guest101
It’s pretty straightforward:

Your hypothesis is, but that's the problem with it, the real world is more complicated.

If one assumes that the object has about the same temperature as its surroundings, there will hardly be any difference in emitted IR brightness due to temperature, so the object is hardly visible in the ATFLIR’s IR mode UNLESS it reflects sunlight (which also contains IR light).

No, it's not that simple.

The part in the shadow is only visible in TV mode due to the backlit effect of the bright blue surrounding sky. The brightly lit top of the object hardly shows any contrast to the bright blue surrounding sky in TV mode, so it is hardly visible in TV mode.

That's possible.

Summary: IR mode clearly shows top of object; TV mode clearly shows bottom of object. The two modes combined will show the whole object (please read ‘solar reflected’ instead of ‘solar warmed’ in the picture below):

link to picture

I was open-minded to your hypothesis and I had some doubts about Goddard's Journal's claims (and still do), but I will present some evidence that appears to me to mostly reject your hypothesis. There are a couple of caveats:

Caveat 1. The IR camera used for these images of airplanes might not have the same frequency response as the FLIR in the Nimitz video. If you can find similar videos of airplanes painted white (assuming your hypothesis is trying to compare with a white tic tac) using the same FLIR equipment that would be a better comparison, but I don't expect it will be dramatically different than this, maybe a little different.

Caveat 2:
We have a good idea of composition and coatings of these aircraft.
We don't know anything about the composition and coatings of the UFO in the Nimitz FLIR video.
This means we can't necessarily assume we are comparing apples and apples.

So while it's possible that one or two of the caveats above might salvage your hypothesis somehow, these visual and infrared images actually show the opposite of what you are suggesting, so they don't support your hypothesis that:

"the object is hardly visible in the ATFLIR’s IR mode UNLESS it reflects sunlight (which also contains IR light). This makes the top part of the object lit by the sun visible to the ATFLIR in IR mode".

Below are visible and infrared images of white objects reflecting sunlight. Contrary to your hypothesis that the reflected sunlight will show up in the FLIR, we see the exact opposite, the reflected sunlight actually doesn't seem to show up in the infrared camera and the top of the images look darker, not lighter as you are suggesting. In reality I think what is happening is that there is reflected infrared light from the sun reaching the camera as you suggest, so you're not wrong about that part, but what makes you wrong is thinking that it will be brighter than the rest of the object. There is infrared light reflected from the sun reaching the camera but it's dwarfed by thermal effects so it's not a significant contributor to the infrared in these infrared images. So while I'm not sure about Goddard Journal's solar warming analysis either, I think the images below suggest it's a more plausible hypothesis than your hypothesis, however his hypothesis doesn't support his conclusions for reasons I explained in my previous post.

Here is a mostly white plane about to land. See how it's darker on top in the IR image, not lighter?


Here is the landed plane approaching the gate. In the visible light image you can see the shadows indicating bright sunlight on the white object, but there is little correlation between the sunlight (including infrared reflected sunlight from the white plane) and the heat seen in the infrared image. The tires look pretty hot though.

Note the effect of the darker paint color in the middle of the tail, which shows that thermal effects dominate over reflected-IR from sunlight. The darker paint can absorb solar radiation better than the white paint which reflects most of it, and so it looks like the tail section with the darker paint is warmer. This is why if Goddard's journal is right about solar warming, any color other than white would be a better fit but even then it's more suggestive of a floating object (like a balloon) instead of a flying object).

This is the source video. If you can find a similar video using the same type of FLIR as in the Nimitz FLIR video, that would be a better comparison, but that may be hard to find.

Airplanes On Long Range Thermal Camera

This is really a complicated subject and there are so many things that can affect the infrared image that I'm afraid your hypothesis about infrared sunlight being reflected is a little over-simplified.

a reply to: Arbitrageur

Arti... you are completely wrong about this....as you don't have all the info that Chris Mellon and Zondo have...

As for you analysis:

"Garbage in.....Garbage out"

You are performing analysis with in complete data points....

originally posted by: celltypespecific
a reply to: Arbitrageur

Arti... you are completely wrong about this....as you don't have all the info that Chris Mellon and Zondo have...

As for you analysis:

"Garbage in.....Garbage out"

You are performing analysis with in complete data points....

I'm open to corrections but just saying I'm completely wrong doesn't tell me what is wrong nor does it tell me how you know it's wrong. Exactly what is wrong and how do you know it?

I'm not performing an independent analysis anyway, I'm critiquing Guest101's interpretation of the analysis by Goddard's Journal, where Guest101 says Goddard's journal got the interpretation wrong about solar warming and I'm saying I'm not convinced it's wrong, though I'm not convinced it's right either.

a reply to: Arbitrageur

Interesting find, that video.

Note that a direct reflection of the sun is visible: At 0:34 you see a small bright spot underneath the second N of FINNAIR. That spot moves forward over the plane as it turns, and is directly reflected sunlight.
The same is visible at 0:53, where a small bright spot just underneath the left leg of the first N moves backwards as the plane turns. This one, however, is not in the sun’s direction but it could be sunlight reflecting off a window or something.

So, a direct, mirror-like reflection contains enough IR energy to be visible but apparently the differences in brightness on the white nose of the plane are too small.

(One unrelated thing I noticed is that the two front windows are almost as hot as the wheels, while all the other windows are cold. Apparently the front windows run very hot while flying?)

As for the tic-tac, hard to tell if such bright reflections came into play. Seeing your video I think heating could play a role as well. It’s hard to distinguish one from the other, as can be seen at 1:30 in the video below. The right sides of the buildings are lit by the sun and clearly stand out from the rest. At 1:46 you can even see sharp shadows being cast, and at 2:19 the side windows of a car act like a mirror to the IR sunlight. Hard to tell what is due to heat(ing) and what is due to reflection.

originally posted by: Guest101
So, a direct, mirror-like reflection contains enough IR energy to be visible but apparently the differences in brightness on the white nose of the plane are too small.

Something like that, yes.

(One unrelated thing I noticed is that the two front windows are almost as hot as the wheels, while all the other windows are cold. Apparently the front windows run very hot while flying?)

Remember I said it's complicated? I think that may have something to do with emissivity because the emissivity of glass is rather high, but there could be other reasons.

These blocks all have the same temperature but they look different in FLIR not because the temperature is different, but because the emissivity is different:

www.flir.com...


So I'm not sure how much of the cockpit window appearance is related to temperature and how much is related to emissivity.

Hard to tell what is due to heat(ing) and what is due to reflection.

True, and how much of a role does emissivity play?

That's why I stated the caveat and can't confirm or reject either hypothesis without some knowledge of the emissivity of the materials or coatings of the UFO, but with a white airplane, the reflected IR of sunlight seems to have minimal contribution to the IR image, but not zero.

a reply to: Arbitrageur

Hi Arbitrageur

What about the effect of conditions like Temperature Inversion and also phenomenon like Anomalous Propagation? How do we rule out, or indeed in, things like that?

Thanks

originally posted by: celltypespecific
a reply to: Arbitrageur

Arti... you are completely wrong about this....as you don't have all the info that Chris Mellon and Zondo have...

...And neither do you.

It seems like blind belief in Pied Pipers is pretty much the norm amongst certain people currently- but it's rare to see it highlighted so.... lazily.

a reply to: Arbitrageur

Yes, both temperature and emissivity of the UFO will determine its grayscale value in the ATLFIR IR part of the Nimitz video.

The high image noise, the long distance to the UFO, and the poor grayscale resolution of the Nimitz video would make the UFO hardly visible in a considerable range of temperature/emissivity values, as long as the UFO is relatively cold.

The UFO’s surface was described as ‘like a whiteboard’, so I would expect its surface to be a bit more specular than that of an airplane. Specular reflections tend to be pretty intense (like the moving spots on the plane I described in my previous post). So, the IR image in the Nimitz video could be a blurred specular (mirror like) reflection.

Note that in this picture (source: Wikipedia), the shapes of the specular reflections off a tic tac candy (the white spots) show some resemblance to the shapes of the IR images in the Nimitz video.

Hi Arti, Miregman, CourseCatalog, Jukione, Piggsy, baablack, the gut, confusedbrit and others.....

There is a new source on twitter he/she seems like a genuine insider that has decided to come out after the DOD officially released their videos. I highly recommend reading his tweets....he/she is dropping very very juicy bread crumbs ...

This person is a DoD official.

James Greywood

Very interesting bread crumb by James Greywood

Private activity which is made public can have far reaching effects on the USG & even society itself. A book written by Knapp & Kelleher being read by an individual in a position of influence kicked off a series of events which last week culminated in an official USG statement.

Greywood

a reply to: celltypespecific

Another character that has been parachuted into ufology post-2017. Just like many others to support the TTSA/Intel narrative. Didn't you appear last year too Cellty?

Keep those Arizona and Lubbock lights burning because we'll expose them one by one. Or just make up stuff like these people. If you can't prove its wrong then it must be true!!

As mentioned earlier... there are a number of new characters who have been parachuted into ufology since late 2017 and suddenly taken on authoritative positions in the field. Aided by some of the old timers pushing them forward and embraced by new ufology's gullible twitterati.

One of the characters who strangely parachuted into ufology post TTSA is Deeptanshu Prasad. Literally a genius in his own lunchtime. Although he seems to now be employed as a memetic social engineer or has been socially engineered himself.

Last week he wrote a blog claiming a few months earlier that he'd ".....briefed the deputy commander of NORAD on how to detect and track hypersonic UFOs". That's right - Lt. General Christopher J. Coates! Brings back memories of when Greer claimed he had to brief the head of the CIA all those years ago.



Deeptanshu has now edited the comment to claim that he briefed a "...prominent North American Aerospace Defence Organization" on how to detect and track hypersonic UFOs. Why he felt the need to be less specific about the person he "briefed" could be because this wasn't a briefing at all and he didn't want Christopher Coates being questioned about this. Even though, as we know, ufo mythology is built around prominent people lying when their claims do not conform to beliefs and given wholehearted support when they do.



But Deeptanshu goes even deeper....

Last week I had a call with a scientist who was given a contract by the Pentagon’s UFO program which was recently declassified in 2017. He mentioned to me that the intelligence the DIA was studying is capable of manipulating people’s consciousness easily....

I could guess who that might have been. Over a period of years, UFOs have been slowly moved from being physical objects of unidentified origin to being outside the reach of scientific detection and thus remaining unfalsifiable.

His blog continues...

I believe that Alien spacecraft crashed on Earth in different countries around the world from the 1940s onwards. Some of these crashes could not stay under wraps, hence embarrassments like Roswell.....Overtime, it became well known fact in upper echelon military and tech circles that Aliens exist and sometimes bring technology to Earth that can also be theoretically reverse engineered for military/tactical purposes....

It gets better...

Some ETs that are only slightly more advanced than us often get here in super worn down spaceships which need repair ... These ETs...have struck some sort of agreement with a ...controlled group of generals, military scientists and private defence contractors who provide material resources as necessary and protect their presence from being revealed to the world.....

Then some real Deep thoughts...

interactions between Aliens and humans on a reverse engineering program has certainly resulted in calculated leaps and breakthroughs in our technology. I believe the internet was planned and necessary for disclosure

Yep of course Deep. But he finally then proves he has been totally suckered by the LoopyLear virus....

.....Finally, tangible evidence exists of Alien bases that are inhabited by species a few hundred to maybe tens of thousands of years or more ahead of us. This evidence will be readily found the day a private space company like SpaceX goes to the far side of the moon where there are multiple massive structures there that were not built by man. They existed before we even landed on the moon. Key people in NASA/DoD as well as high level officials from Russia and China are well aware of these non-human bases....

[#cough#]



Academic qualifications do not protect you from harbouring insane thoughts. I would say this guy has gone off the deep end. Or he's purposely spreading lies to further the aims of whoever his handlers are.

Looks like James Greywood is the next ufotwitter star... he has now be documented by outside news sources:

James Greywood is a person on #UFOTwitter who seemingly has a lot of prior knowledge on AATIP, AAWSAP and the progress of the behind the scenes initiative. His anonymity suggests he is unverifiable as a source and should be taken with caution. However, his words resonate and can be taken seriously on the matter of pressuring congress.

Source

Bottom line - has TTSA ever released anything of substance that other people involved in UFO research were not aware of?

a reply to: mirageman

Mirageman,

Deep seems like a nice kid....but he is out of his depth.

He clearly "lost it" around 5 to 6 months ago.

Lt. Timmy and James Greywood seem pretty solid!!!!

a reply to: mirageman

As you mentioned, this character is “literally a genius in his own lunchtime” I was reminded immediately of the well-accomplished Ed Mitchell. Doesn’t fit the rational choice theory. Evidence of bases? Wut?! The far side of the moon?? This has to be a goof, amirite?

Oy Vey!

I’m no kiss-a$$, but at this point in time, MM, you’re going up against the junior varsity team — must’ve furloughed the Ufogoly ringers — and I pity the fool(s) that continues to step on the pitch.

Would be nice for some competition, living in the RONA’s temporary fiefdom, but I’m not holding my breath...

originally posted by: celltypespecific

There is a new source on twitter he/she seems like a genuine insider that has decided to come out after the DOD officially released their videos. I highly recommend reading his tweets....he/she is dropping very very juicy bread crumbs ...

James Greywood

Who is this charmer referring to when he says, "Oh God this nutter"? Mick West? As West says during that particular strand of discussion:

I don't know what he [Fravor] saw. But here I'm focusing on the FLIR video of an event he did NOT observe and which shows something in level flight.

Which is absolutely true - Fravor had no participation in, or observation of, the later flight/event that supposedly gave us the FLIR video. And West is classified a "nutter" for stating the bare-faced truth?

I don't question that Fravor and Co had an incident, but I ask yet again: are the FLIR video itself and the November 2004 event even remotely connected? We're told they are, as far back as early 2007, but have no incontrovertible proof of such (aside from say-so) before it ended up in the Pentagon's unclassified UAV bucket.

Question everything, that's supposedly ATS's job (especially since ATS were given the first 'exclusive' peek of the FLIR way back in 2007, courtesy of a couple of ATS-reading UFO fanatics). Be especially cautious when a company such as TTSA has been the ringmaster of this circus since the Nimitz staff began being interviewed in 2015, eleven years after the main event.

Meanwhile, the stolen Powerpoint does need to be returned to its rightful place, and I doubt the authorities will give up anytime soon, by hook or by crook.

a reply to: ConfusedBrit

His tweets are truly refreshing he sounds like an "adult in the room"

1.) If those videos did not exist it would not change the USG public statement or internally of them being unidentified and unknown origin aerial vehicles (UAP).

2.) I have a feeling the videos were part of a rather effective strategy put out for public & Congressional awareness that this is an issue with an actual physical (real) basis. Words can be denied, images not so much. It has forced DOD to admit the issue both internally & public

3.) Internally in DOD videos are mostly useless in regards to this issue. Gray pixels on a screen is not proof of anything. There has to be other confirming data that cannot be mistaken or monkeyed with. In this case as stated publicly there is more which "proves" it was UAP.

4.) Again going back to a regulatory and legal framework this stuff all operates in. There was enough data besides the videos to provide a firm legal basis to declare those objects UAP in an official statement from OSD.

5.) If this other data (the "proof") is one day released publicly is up to the American people to apply pressure the best they can to move things along.

Greywood

This sounds alot like ZONDO....??!!! Or someone that worked with ZONDO...?!!!

a reply to: celltypespecific

Not sure about this @JamesGreywood. That's one dodgy account.

Lt. Tim, he's definitely a solid character. On a contract to infiltrate ufology to find out who and were secrets are being leaked out of America isn't he? Or did you just make that one up?

But hey! he has easily been granted access to TTSA people when others in ufology were ignored. Yep! been doing it for months apparently. He's been fed all the right information that an investigative journalist would need to write general pieces for obscure websites about the big UFO story that TTSA promote (their only one really). But he's an American boy far from home and not earning much from doing that. He's hardly prolific and you only earn a few hundred dollars a piece. So you may be onto something Cellty.

He's even suddenly besties with a British Aerosace Journalist mentioned in the very first few paragraphs of my original thread. So maybe you're right and he's had help from his Uncle Sam or Joe, or Aunt Sally or someone?

But I am just guessing based on your supposition.

a reply to: mirageman

Lt. Tim, he's definitely a solid character.

And he sure likes his donuts

Per these ufo newcomer stars…


When one first gets into UFO lore some tend to believe the most extreme theories. And the genius newcomers are no different.

Now, these bright boys when they get a glimpse of that lore( and only scan the surface) and since they’re bright boys (self-appointed geniuses) they think or are deluded to think they can figure out this perplexing issue all by themselves.


A lot of these guys fit that mold.


Not the average newcomer since they will also have a tendency to at first believe the more exotic theories… nothing wrong with that, since if they remain in the UFO lore for any length of time, they’ll learn to be more discriminating… usually.