So where's the wreckage? Why are they being so vauge? Where's the footage?!

a reply to: porschedrifter

You can always tell when politicians and govt. officials lie. It's whenever they move their mouths and emit noises. The job description of bureaucrats and politicians should really read "professional liar".

No.1 seems the likeliest option. Not to see how the world reacts though, as I don't think the world cares for the most part. They're probably too busy laughing.

Your govt. is playing its people. It's a distraction being provided specifically for Americans for whatever reason (there are more than enough to choose from, so take your pick). Also, such things never seem to lead to a decrease in military spending.

a reply to: porschedrifter

Thank you for starting this thread. I made a long post in the Aerial Event Megathread explaining why the descriptions offered by the authorities, sparse as they were, suggested that whatever the objects might be, they are very unlikely to be balloons. I may be wrong, but at this time of writing, no-one has even tried to debunk me.

I won’t repeat here what I said there. And I don’t have any theories about what the bogeys, as I call them, really are. But it’s plain to me that the balloon explanation is no explanation at all, and I am quite surprised to see that, even on ATS, everyone seems to have embraced it so uncritically.

a reply to: Kocag

My question is. If they are alien. Why are they letting their probes to be shot down without firing at our planes? It seems they would have a method of protecting these objects.

They're toys - of no real importance beyond getting us to notice them

A mobile hung over baby's crib to stimulate the mind

Just spit balling 😉

The balloon over the Yukon area appears to have been a Pico balloon.

www.rtl-sdr.com...

a reply to: Zaphod58

The balloon over the Yukon area appears to have been a Pico balloon.

You mean the thing many of you have concluded was a balloon is being represented in a totally speculative article -- it actually repeats more than once in the article itself that it's speculation -- as being something obviously quite different from whatever it was the authorities described shooting down over Yukon.

Nobody knows what was shot down. This insistence on balloons is just scared kids whistling in the dark.

a reply to: Astyanax

Yes, something tracked to almost exactly where the shootdown occurred, described almost exactly like a Pico balloon, but it’s not a Pico balloon. It’s got to be aliens capable of crazy technology, but susceptible to a chemical rocket.

a reply to: Zaphod58

Who said anything about aliens or rockets? I am neither a UFO buff nor a conspiracy theorist, so please stick your labels elsewhere.

I read the article. It's 100% speculative and not in the least bit authoritative. It reads as if it's written by a ham radio enthusiast. It is also posted on an extremely dodgy, anonymous web site. And it is itself unsigned -- thus doubly anonymous.

Its claim that the balloon was tracked is sourced to a couple of balloon-enthusiast Twitter posts and an article in globalnews.ca that says nothing of the sort. It's an obvious made-up story.

And yes, the bogey was 'almost exactly like' a pico balloon -- if you cherry-pick one sentence ftom the official object description and leave out all the rest. Which is what your source article does. Amateurs trying to be spin doctors and failing pathetically.

You have a reputation on this site as something of an oracle on certain matters. Is this really the best you can do?

You're not dealing with some enthusiast or visionary or delusive here, Zaphod58. I'm sure you know that; I'm another old member like you -- joined 2005. Show some respect, as I have shown you. And some proper humility,
because on this subject, you know exactly as much as anyone else and not a sausage more.

Shall we try again?

a reply to: Astyanax

The initial description of the balloon came from other sources, not this article. Sources that were in a far better position to note than we are. And they described a metallic object with a tethered payload. That’s where the description in the article came from.

As for rockets, I know you didn’t mention them, *I* did. That’s exactly what a missile is. And yes, you’ve been very careful about not saying UFO, while stating as fact the wreckage will never be found, and they aren’t balloons. So what are they then. Please, enlighten us.

a reply to: Zaphod58

I’m re-post my observation from another thread……

I find it interesting that…….if we shot Sidwinders at objects the “size” of ATV’s ……wouldn’t at that size….those objects be obliterated by the high altitude explosive impact…….virtually leaving only tiny bits and pieces of debris falling and widely spreading over large areas of land and water below? In other words, there may be nothing left to discern of the objects… to find.

👽

a reply to: Ophiuchus1

No. Missiles don’t obliterate targets. Not even balloons. If the missiles even tracks the target, it still has to recognize that it is in range and detonate. If it detonates, it’s going to depend on how much of the shrapnel from the warhead hits the balloon. Not all of it will.

a reply to: Zaphod58

I thought I read that it was a dummy warhead to bring it down?

I may be wrong.

originally posted by: Astyanax It is also posted on an extremely dodgy, anonymous web site. And it is itself unsigned -- thus doubly anonymous.

Says the person posting anonymously on an extremely dodgy anonymous website .....

a reply to: Oldcarpy2

That’s what was originally said, but it was later said it was a full up -9X with a live warhead. It’s only a 21 pound warhead so it’s not particularly large.

a reply to: Zaphod58

Thanks, that explains it.

originally posted by: Zaphod58
The balloon over the Yukon area appears to have been a Pico balloon.

www.rtl-sdr.com...

I don't know... I'm skeptical. The article states "May have been an amateur radio 'pico' balloon". But I find it very hard to believe the Air Force would waste Sidewinder missiles on what basically looks like a mylar party balloon. One would think those entrusted with multi-million dollar equipment would have more sense than that.

a reply to: UnknownOrigin

There were previous descriptions from people involved that described a metallic balloon, with a tethered payload handing below it. Better to waste a missile and it be nothing than to not and it be something that can compromise systems.

originally posted by: Astyanax
a reply to: porschedrifter

Thank you for starting this thread. I made a long post in the Aerial Event Megathread explaining why the descriptions offered by the authorities, sparse as they were, suggested that whatever the objects might be, they are very unlikely to be balloons. I may be wrong, but at this time of writing, no-one has even tried to debunk me.

I won’t repeat here what I said there. And I don’t have any theories about what the bogeys, as I call them, really are. But it’s plain to me that the balloon explanation is no explanation at all, and I am quite surprised to see that, even on ATS, everyone seems to have embraced it so uncritically.

I read your long post. You mention something about "rigid" but I'm not sure where you got "rigid" from.

I don't know if it was a pico balloon or not but there does appear to be tracking information about it being in a similar area and it doesn't appear to be rigid. It's a 32" balloon that sells for about $15 with a tiny 16.4 gram payload of solar panels and electronics, here's a photo of a similar pico balloon:

The US Airforce may have shot down an Amateur Radio Pico Balloon over Canada

I don't know how much that could damage an aircraft colliding with it but I would guess not much, since it's well within the FAA's exemption of less than 4 pound paylods attached to balloons. Way below 4 pounds, like 100 times less than 4 pounds.
Here's the alleged tracking inforation overlay:

So I agree the pico balloon guess is somewhat speculative, it's not the most baseless speculation I've ever seen.
It could be a coincidence K9YO-15 was in about the same place at the same time as the object shot down, and that apparently it hasn't transmitted again since the object was shot down, but those do seem to very loosely support the speculation.

I am interested in where you got "rigid" from because K9YO-15 doesn't appear to be rigid.

originally posted by: Zaphod58
a reply to: UnknownOrigin

There were previous descriptions from people involved that described a metallic balloon, with a tethered payload handing below it. Better to waste a missile and it be nothing than to not and it be something that can compromise systems.

What about wasting 2 missiles? Over $450,000 each, so over $900,000. Seems a bit much if that is what it took to down what was really a $15 balloon with a 16.4 gram payload. Bullets might have been cheaper but maybe that wasn't an option?

The Pentagon and White House had not previously disclosed that the first missile did not strike the target, but NORTHCOM and NORAD Commander Gen. Glen VanHerck told reporters on Sunday that acquiring and targeting the object was difficult because of its small size.

The pilots opted to use short-range AIM-9X Sidewinders, which are capable of seeing the heat contrast between an object and the surrounding area. But even so, the first missile failed to hit its target. It is not clear what happened to the missile.

Anyway, the US military apparently has trouble identifying balloons, if one was to believe their proclamations to the public (which I don't necessarily believe). The UAP task force's report appears to indicate they still never identified the object that online balloon vendors instantly recognized as a batman balloon within an hour of the UAP photo being posted.

www.abovetopsecret.com...

originally posted by: Ectoplasm8
a reply to: Lucidparadox

a reply to: Arbitrageur

The military has a history of not saying anything when they might appear foolish, so I’m not surprised they haven’t admitted to that one. As for the two missiles, we don’t know enough about the Lake Huron object to know if they were a waste, or if it was something that could have damaged a plane.

Things will settle down eventually. Even though they got a lot of Intel from the Chinese balloon, they got a pretty big black eye, so now they’re over reacting the other way. Pretty soon everyone will forget about it, and things will quietly go back to normal, with a few changes.

originally posted by: porschedrifter
So as I'm sure a lot others are wondering the same things, I have to talk about this because it's been running through my head for a few days now. This is both exciting and scary all at the same time.

1 balloon and 3 UFO's. All seems quiet today though thankfully.
What is the deal with this? Why is our government being so vague about the craft identification and shape?

What's up with the pilots differing stories about what it looked like, and the instrument jamming?

This is incredibly strange all the way around.

Where is the wreckage? 3 days have gone by now since the Alaska UFO was shot down. Nada, nothing.
Where's the video footage? I've not seen civilian nor military footage of said objects, and you KNOW they were recording from many different angles.

If these were simple balloons (which they officially are saying they don't appear to be) then why all the secrecy.
The pentagon live briefing last night was a joke. It wasn't even live on tv over video, it was a very small attended briefing with reporters asking questions, and very vague information from the government. Also, they said they are not ruling out these being alien craft... WHAT!?

The time it took place was highly suspicious as well, during the Superbowl, when they knew much less attention would be drawn to this.

Very odd indeed. I was hoping for more interesting stuff to happen today, but so far it's been quiet in the sky's

As of right now after examining every video, audio, news report, & official statement over the last few days, I've come to the conclusion that:

1. There are no actual UFOs being shot down and it's all a big exercise to see how the world reacts (lack of wreckage and photo/video proof makes me think this)

2. It's China/Russia and they are balloons that are just disintegrating on impact.

3. They are extra-terrestrial in origin and we're either being tested or they are just doing UFO things. Lack of wreckage or evidence in the scenario has also made me think that maybe they are getting hit but not taking damage, and just disappearing like the tic-tacs are able to.

Anyone else have anything to add?
Please no blue-beam talk or any wild conspiracy theories, I'd like to keep this as analytical and accurate as possible.
I get that people think this is a distraction to cover up other things going on in the media but that's honestly said about everything that happens. Multiple bad things can be happening at the same time, they aren't all distractions.

If anyone has any decent video/photo evidence to share, please do!

Likely #3. 1 and 2 are highly unlikely. And you're right, there is NO Project Blue Beam...

This being a "distraction" is also very unlikely. The media does a good enough job at hiding important stories that there isn't a need to concoct something like this.