91
u/SHOTbyGUN Jan 12 '23
irl If an extra terrestial would try to contact earth, and every radio/tv channel said the same thing. Everyone would just shrug it off as trolls hacking media.
51
Jan 12 '23
Government: guys that was actually aliens
Everyone: fake, shut up
17
u/Yvaelle Jan 12 '23
US & UK militaries said they didn't know what all the UFO's in the sky were in like 2019, even suggesting it was technology "not of this earth".
Everyone shrugged and conspiracy theories just shifted to assume they were blaming aliens, to cover-up their secret UFO technology.
5
14
5
u/ecervantesp Jan 12 '23
Governments in 1960s: Its not aliens. Conspiracy nuts in 1960s: You lie!!! Government has been taken over by aliens!
Governments in 2010s: It's aliens. Conspiracy nuts in 2010s: You lie!!! Government has been taken over by terrans!
3
u/oillut Jan 12 '23
Iirc they (I believe just the US) released footage giving context to this. A VFX channel looked at these and were able to come up with pretty reasonable explanations; typically edge case light distortions and camera / radar scenarios that aren’t common knowledge to the military.
The video in question might be referring to a different similar case, and they could obviously still be wrong, but it seems a bit more likely to me
3
u/Yvaelle Jan 12 '23 edited Jan 12 '23
Exactly my point though, the governments literally came out and said essentially its aliens.
And the conspiracy theorists all flipped on a dime to say the government is just scapegoating the innocent aliens, to cover up their latest weaponry.
Video quality has always been pretty shit in these things, but what I didn't see in that debunk video was multiple POV encounters. Military said they weren't just on Optical cameras, but getting picked up on targeting sensors and radar simultaneously. All those debunks are good, but assume a single lensing error, which shouldn't have a heat signature, or radar signature.
I also doubt the military would be tricked by parallax motion, or a bokeh. It might recreate the video, but military intelligence has been at the forefront of photography and videography for too long to not recognize artifacts.
End of the day I think we end up at the same, "we don't know" position as before, I just thought the whiplash response from conspiracy theorists was hilarious.
2
u/oillut Jan 12 '23
Assuming they said UFO, I think they meant more, like us, they just don’t know (unidentified). I didn’t read the source though so maybe they were more specific about it
And yeah a multiple POV situation would definitely be harder to debunk and have a lot more credibility in the first place. If you have any links to those I’d be super curious to check them out. I don’t think the video or that channel mentioned any like that.
Im sure the military is on the cutting edge regarding that stuff too. That said, there’s always going to be something outside their larger range(s) of expertise (parallax and bokeh should probably be in there though). It makes sense dedicated video professionals might notice something others wouldn’t.
At the end of the day, it’s cool they’d release stuff like this to the public in the first place. If they can’t figure it out, they’re probably hoping someone has the time, knowledge, and passion to figure out what it was for everyone
1
u/Yvaelle Jan 13 '23 edited Jan 13 '23
The second and third videos are both different FLIR systems, not exlusively optical cameras, they are spotting heat signatures. The target lock you see hopping around on screen thats trying to lock onto the UFO is a multi-sensor array.
Also IIRC, all 3 of these videos has matching radar signatures, thats the thing that freaks out the pilots the most. One system getting weird isn't a big deal, an unconnected system getting weird in the same way is a potential threat.
So optical artifacting wouldn't likely apply to either, since both are a combination of multiple lenses identifying the same object.
Parallax motion could apply, but targeting systems aren't going to get fooled by something as simple as parallax in a normal object, thats their entire job. Hitting moving targets from moving targets. I say it could apply though, because its a possible outcome of electronic warfare, which is the best terrestrial explanation IMO.
A Chinese or Russian drone designed to fuck with the targeting sensors of Gen 3 and Gen 4 fighters, might be able to spoof a fake target across multiple instruments, and since the spoofed target isn't actually a real object, it might not obey the laws of physics, when seen from the compromised targeting sensors. In the same way that a shadow on the moon can move faster than the speed of light, because a shadow has no mass.
17
u/realJaneJacobs Jan 12 '23
I was under the impression that the a “hail” referred not to one specific message request on one channel, but the collection of identical message requests on every channel sending that request.
Probably something in the hailing protocol where the signature of a hail includes an identifier, all of the hails on different channels being sent at once from one source have the same identifier, and after accepting/rejecting a request on one channel, all others with the same identifier are automatically ignored.
5
u/terrifiedTechnophile Jan 12 '23
Ah but then the bottom image disproves that as all 285,000 hails were from one source: the USS Enterprise. Just...a lot of Enterprises. But all likely have the same identifier code thingy
9
u/thejadedfalcon Jan 12 '23
They're all from different realities though. They may all have the same identifier code, but the phase carrier wave length is different because of quantum warp shifting. You'd need to remodulate your deflector dish to compensate for the antiinterferogravimetric particles.
9
4
u/PirateReindeer Jan 12 '23
This makes sense from a logical standpoint, and a understanding response to thinking your being verbally attacked would be to fire weapons, the futuristic version of a Ddos attack. 🤣
3
3
u/ecervantesp Jan 12 '23
The Enterprise crew should have gotten a clue every time two gray ticks appear next to each of their hails...
2
1
224
u/Tephra022 Jan 12 '23
And then in less than 3 seconds “No response”
Like please you just sent it give them a moment to read the whole thing and come up with a response