Corbell drops another video

Did anyone watch the 3 hour special on UFOs hosted by Josh gates last night on Science/Discover/Travel networks?

I have to get up at 3 am-ish for work so I watched the first 90 minutes, rest is recorded. Any thoughts on the show from those that have seen the whole thing?

Better than the TMZ special I hope

originally posted by: canucks555
People who are serious about this don't care about your angst, frustration, ignorance, whatever.

People who are serious about this will see the garbage Corbell has put out. He doesn't help the believer community, he hurts it by releasing these photos and videos as other-wordly craft. He'll eventually fall by the way side like so many others have because he's shown he has nothing to give us. Exactly like his movies. And exactly like all his predecessors. He's just the latest Steven Greer.

originally posted by: canucks555
You're not seeing the big picture, and I don't think you care, so carry on. Live your lives thinking everything is bunk.

He's brought on the bunk himself. I see believers desperately trying to hold onto something... anything. Now telling people to listen to all this hearsay and believe it from this. I guess we're to ignore what's been released because after a little research, it's common aircraft and balloons.

originally posted by: NightVision
We must change the legislation to get this stuff into the hands of the civilian scientific community. Period.

How about the 5+ billion phones in use worldwide? No need for the scientific community to question why we still have no convincing visual evidence? Anyone with simple common sense should question that.
It's funny, during the 60s we had crap cameras but had some pretty detailed photographs:

I guess the aliens have become shy today.

originally posted by: Lucidparadox
Every video Corbell has released has been corroborated by the Pentagon confirming they are authentic. Why are there some people thinking this is anything different?

Authentic in the way of the Navy confirming personnel took the photographs and they couldn't identify the objects. Not that they are photographs of spacecraft. They just admit they couldn't identify them at the time. You've been really streeeeeetching that statement to work for you.

It’s possible that digital cameras are the problem. I dunno. However if these UFO’s really do generate their own fields - effectively their own bubble of reality, perhaps all we can film is a blurry, in distinct outline, because we are seeing the disturbance and not the craft. a reply to: Ectoplasm8

originally posted by: ARM1968
It’s possible that digital cameras are the problem. I dunno. However if these UFO’s really do generate their own fields - effectively their own bubble of reality, perhaps all we can film is a blurry, in distinct outline, because we are seeing the disturbance and not the craft. a reply to: Ectoplasm8

UFO photos never go away. Yeah, some of the older ones are more clear, but we also don't know if they are authentic or just somebody whipping hubcaps into the air. Besides, even a Kodak Brownie Hawkeye used 127 roll film, which was cheap but still had both better and higher resolution and contrast than most digital cameras these days.

Corbell is doing ufology a disservice with such pathetic releases that show nothing of substance. Couple that with a US government nonchalant about getting to the bottom of this phenomena publically and we are left to fend for ourselves as to what is going on in our skies - again (still).

No, we will literally need a ufo to land on the white house lawn now, anything else is going to be relegated to speculation and heresay.

Sad, but true.

originally posted by: ARM1968
It’s possible that digital cameras are the problem. I dunno. However if these UFO’s really do generate their own fields - effectively their own bubble of reality, perhaps all we can film is a blurry, in distinct outline, because we are seeing the disturbance and not the craft. a reply to: Ectoplasm8

With the two photos I posted, these were craft within range of a clear photograph. Close enough to see details of the structure of the craft. This is a distance issue, not a camera one.

Back in the 50s and 60s we were shown photos claimed to be real. What happened? Where are the detailed closeup photographs today? 5 billion phones and not a single closeup.

I know they keep saying these UFO's are not US militaries secret tech but I think if they did belong to a foreign power and were getting close enough to spy on US military assets/operations the US would shoot them down. And if the tech did belong to another nation the US would have made a serious effort to obtain one of these devices a long time ago.

I guess we (the general public) don't know if the US has tried to shoot them down but so far there has been no mention in mainstream sources of US jets or ships opening fire on these apparently unknowns. For example, I don't recall Commander Fravor saying they tried to shoot the tic tak down.

This leads me to speculate the following possibilities;

1/ They ARE US tech and therefore those in charge, right at the top of the tree, know exactly who flies and what these craft are and therefore, do not attempt to shoot them down. The order is passed down the line to not engage.

2/ They belong to the 'others' and again they know exactly whose they are, who flies them, want they want and still do not attempt to shoot them down. There could be many reasons for this.

OR

3/ They have tried to shoot them down and they either have or have not been successful but again at this stage I have not heard of this happening through the MSM.

I understand the angst people express but I find the unfolding story fascinating.

originally posted by: Slowhand
I know they keep saying these UFO's are not US militaries secret tech but I think if they did belong to a foreign power and were getting close enough to spy on US military assets/operations the US would shoot them down.

I don't think they have any right to shoot them down in international waters, and this one may be a commercial airliner, there were commercial aircraft flying right overhead when the video was made, so there would be big trouble if they shoot down a commercial airliner, the red circle shows the position of the ship right under a major airplane corridor, and the "UFO" has the same kind of flashing strobe lights as the commercial airplanes have:


www.youtube.com...

For example, I don't recall Commander Fravor saying they tried to shoot the tic tak down.

They verified he had no weapons while he was in transit to the UFO. Fravor said they don't normally carry live weapons for training exercises, the risk of friendly fire accidents is too high.

a reply to: Arbitrageur

You make some good points and I forgot about the jets not being armed when they went to meet the tic tak 👍 I guess accidentally shooting down a commercial plane would be devastating but let me put this another way.

In a post 9/11 world, I find it highly implausible that those who monitor and control the skies around the US would not immediately take decisive action against any aerial vehicle that did not identify itself.

In these situations, we have these allegedly unknowns dropping in on military assests/operations and the US just watches from a distance? Furthermore, the tic tak 'appears to have' had access to encrypted communications between a battleship and the jets sent to check it out and the US does nothing? (or at least that we know of).

If I could jump in an odd looking plane and flew towards, hovered around, observed military forces and had the ability to intercept classified communications I think it'd be fair to suggest I would be committing suicide.

This brings me back to square one. If they are not attempting to shoot them down they must know exactly what they are, who flies them, who owns them, what their intentions are and therefore, do not fire on them (that we know of).

Whether the craft are US tech or some unidentified other it appears, based on what's been released to the public at least, that the US does not consider them a threat. The disclosure players themselves are talking threat and yet these craft are not fired upon. Something smells quite fishy about that to me.

As to the OP, I think everyone realises by now that the secret keepers most definitely have super hi resolution footage and stills of these vehicles.

The questions are why do they not just cut to the chase and release the hi def stuff? What is it they want to remain hidden? Why release crap photos and footage and stand up and say we don't know what these are but we must treat them as a threat?

They might say we don't want our adversaries knowing the tech we are using!

What a load of rubbish! If someone were in the right place at the right time a good telescope and camera could capture amazingly clear footage. And they release the worst possible footage/photos and we are supposed to be grateful???

And as Ectoplasm8 pointed out photos from 60 years ago are clearer.

I think most can smell a big fat dirty rat!!!

originally posted by: Ectoplasm8
Back in the 50s and 60s we were shown photos claimed to be real. What happened? Where are the detailed closeup photographs today? 5 billion phones and not a single closeup.

Hasn't the phenomenon itself always evolved ?

I mean the last "airship" sighting must have been a century ago.

The same (perfectly valid) question is asked regularly and for me it isn't a stretch to believe that whatever is behind the phenomena has total control of the sighting, including whether or not photos / video or other measurable signatures are able to be taken. It is a display for an as yet undetermined purpose.

It seems to be the most plausible of the alternatives once you accept the total control aspect, which I can understand if you can't, I base that on my own personal experiences / knowledge.

If you're in the nuts and bolts ETH camp I can see how it might not tally but if you accept that what is behind the phenomenon is practically omnipotent I can't see a more compelling answer to that question.

originally posted by: Slowhand
I think most can smell a big fat dirty rat!!!

You're right. This is the kind of thing that makes a person think that someone in a powerful position is purposely withholding some very sharp, definitive images or other kind of possibly solid evidence that clearly shows these for what they are, although perhaps not specifically who is flying them or where they come from. I would be an actual conspiracy to keep people in the dark as long as possible.

However, the way I understand governments and security, they only want to hide two things -- what they know -- and what they don't know. So if they did come out with crystal clear images of these things, they would have to say one way or another if they knew what these things are. And they don't want to do that. Even though they are now saying, "we don't know what these things are," it's pretty hard to believe them.

Just a reminder for those interested, Ben Hansen has a 3 part series on Roswell on Discovery plus today. haven't seen it yet. But honestly, I don't expect any new info, Roswell has been rehashed so many times it may just be more of the same. We'll see.

Ben does seem like he knows his stuff and is at least somewhat discerning about supposed evidence

a reply to: vlawde

Noooo.... just no:
www.abovetopsecret.com...

a reply to: vlawde

Do you mean this one that has Nick Pope in it. There's so many shows out there with them all.

m.facebook.com...


In 2013 Nick told us to move on from Roswell.



www.ufodigest.com...


Clearly he changed his mind after that damning article about it. $$$$

a reply to: chunder

As to the question of why 5 billion phones can't/haven't captured a clear image, I think the answer to that is as you say the phenomenon is in total control. The unknown others would no doubt be acutely aware of our level of tech and take appropriate measures to avoid being filmed or photographed. To think that we could just whip out our phones and capture Mork's egg zipping around suburbia is to imply ET is a little thick and totally oblivious to the computers in our pockets.

originally posted by: Sublimecraft

No, we will literally need a ufo to land on the white house lawn now, anything else is going to be relegated to speculation and heresay.

Sad, but true.

Even if this event were to actually occur, the community would remain equally divided. Skeptics would argue it was CGI, eyewitnesses were not credible, or it was staged in an attempt to create more disinfo.

The reality in the world today with any topic of public interest is there are controlling interests behind the scenes hard at work to ensure the people are ALWAYS divided.

Through division there can never be unity.

Divide and conquer is "their" mantra and "they" execute this with extreme prejudice.

originally posted by: Slowhand
a reply to: chunder

As to the question of why 5 billion phones can't/haven't captured a clear image, I think the answer to that is as you say the phenomenon is in total control. The unknown others would no doubt be acutely aware of our level of tech and take appropriate measures to avoid being filmed or photographed.

How can you tell the difference between a phenomenon that can avoid being photographed, and a phenomenon that doesn't exist at all?

This story applies to dragons which can't be seen or photographed, but it also applies to similar claims of UFOs.

The Dragon in My Garage by Carl Sagan

originally posted by: Guyfriday
a reply to: vlawde

I've tried to get something from the videos I saw. I even asked if I could take a still shot from one of the video. I'm not going to do so without permission and risk losing my credibility with these guys and gals in the Navy. I would rather try and get them to release it on their own.

From a personal perspective I think one of the reasons why most won't release the videos they might have is because when you're on board a Naval Ship, full of seasoned Sailors and the Captain is losing his crappos over what is happening outside the windows on the bridge, then the Sailors that are taking the videos are literally surrounded by fear. So even if they aren't afraid at first to release the videos, that fact that everyone else on board was fearful, it probably wears on them into thinking that they should be afraid too.

Seeing these videos though, I have to say it pisses me off that the public doesn't get to see them, or that there is either an "Official" coverup taking place, or an accidental one going on. Either way Corbell is claiming to have the goods, well then maybe he should deliver on the stuff that's worth seeing. Not this "lights in the night sky" stuff, but the good stuff like the stuff I've seen. There is a rumor (I'll just say this, since I haven't gotten anyone to talk about it other than just say that the video exists) that one of these UFO/UAP got so close to the deck of a LHA that the crew thought it was going to land. There is supposedly video from the flight deck that has really great pictures of one of these craft is full detail. Like I said though, I'm been told by good sources that this video exists but as of yet haven't talked to anyone that was either there when this happened, or can tall me what ship other then it happened on a LHA and not an Aircraft Carrier.

To draw a analogy the same issue happens in cryptozoology. Two points, one is there is no upside to releasing clear images since to do so pretty much destroys your life. Ufology is & has been nothing but a crazed dog & pony show so individuals, rightfully so, walk away. What we think of as "our right to know" will never outweigh the damage to anyones personal life and that of their families due to releasing clear footage.

The 2nd point of contention is to remain on a ship in the Navy you need to pass multiple trainings/exams that are grueling, besides your day to day duty assignments. NO individual works that hard to just toss it aside by releasing personal footage of ANYTHING not sanctioned by the chain of command.

For example plenty of stress-busting good natured hi-jinks occur an get filmed by people on duty, but you'll never see any of that either till years later an even then it's only shared privately. People keep forgetting that active duty personal can be court marshaled, fined, or imprisoned for going outside the chain of command.

Which releasing footage of something during active duty qualifies as.
In fact if filmed onboard a Navy Ship I'm not entirely sure the footage doesn't then become automatically "Property of the Navy".

Someone can correct me if I'm wrong on that last bit.