Anonymous
8/26/2025, 1:10:09 AM
No.938962486
>>938961910
1. Multi-sensor data vs. regular jets
Yes, a jet shows up on radar, IR, and visually—but the anomalies we’re talking about don’t behave like jets. These objects stop and accelerate instantaneously, change direction without deceleration, and defy known aerodynamics. That’s the difference between “it shows up on sensors” and “it shows up doing things no known aircraft can do.” Multiple independent sensors tracking the same object doing the impossible is what makes the data meaningful.
2. Pilot perception vs. reality
You’re assuming pilots are always fooled by motion. But these anomalies are recorded simultaneously on calibrated radar, FLIR, and visual observation. It’s not just perception—it’s objectively measured acceleration, trajectory, and speed beyond human capability. The “gofast video” is a cherry-picked, poorly understood example, not the norm.
3. Civilization timing and distance
You’re correct that chances seem low—but there are mitigating factors:
Civilizations don’t need to develop exactly like humans. Even a million-year-old species could explore the galaxy over eons.
Advanced life may monitor nascent civilizations over vast time scales without us noticing.
We are not assuming perfect simultaneity or large-scale contact—just that some contact or observation could occur. Rare events can still happen, and the universe is enormous.
4. Correlation with Sci-fi
Yes, cultural influence may prime people to interpret lights as UFOs—but multi-sensor detections don’t depend on imagination. Radar logs, IR imaging, and physical traces are independent of cultural narrative. That’s why some encounters can’t be explained by “influence of Sci-fi.”
1. Multi-sensor data vs. regular jets
Yes, a jet shows up on radar, IR, and visually—but the anomalies we’re talking about don’t behave like jets. These objects stop and accelerate instantaneously, change direction without deceleration, and defy known aerodynamics. That’s the difference between “it shows up on sensors” and “it shows up doing things no known aircraft can do.” Multiple independent sensors tracking the same object doing the impossible is what makes the data meaningful.
2. Pilot perception vs. reality
You’re assuming pilots are always fooled by motion. But these anomalies are recorded simultaneously on calibrated radar, FLIR, and visual observation. It’s not just perception—it’s objectively measured acceleration, trajectory, and speed beyond human capability. The “gofast video” is a cherry-picked, poorly understood example, not the norm.
3. Civilization timing and distance
You’re correct that chances seem low—but there are mitigating factors:
Civilizations don’t need to develop exactly like humans. Even a million-year-old species could explore the galaxy over eons.
Advanced life may monitor nascent civilizations over vast time scales without us noticing.
We are not assuming perfect simultaneity or large-scale contact—just that some contact or observation could occur. Rare events can still happen, and the universe is enormous.
4. Correlation with Sci-fi
Yes, cultural influence may prime people to interpret lights as UFOs—but multi-sensor detections don’t depend on imagination. Radar logs, IR imaging, and physical traces are independent of cultural narrative. That’s why some encounters can’t be explained by “influence of Sci-fi.”