Breakdown of the Pentagon UFO videos with Mick West

The Pentagon have declassified three videos showing apparent UFOs. The internet is ablaze and those of us looking for evidence of life elsewhere in the Universe are naturally curious about what these videos truly show. I hopped onto a call with Mick West to breakdown these videos.
::More about this Video::
►Check out Mick's KZbin channel over at: / mickword
► Intro music is Cylinder Seven (chriszabriskie.com/cylinders/) by Chris Zabriskie (chriszabriskie.com/); licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution license
::Playlists For Channel::
Latest Cool Worlds Videos ► bit.ly/NewCoolWorlds
Cool Worlds Research ► bit.ly/CoolWorldsResearch
Guest Videos ► bit.ly/CoolWorldsGuests
Q&A Videos ► bit.ly/CoolWorldsQA
Science of TV/Film ► bit.ly/ScienceMovies
::Follow us::
SUBSCRIBE to the channel bit.ly/CoolWorldsSubscribe
Cool Worlds Lab coolworlds.astro.columbia.edu
Twitter / david_kipping
Instagram / cool.worlds
THANKS FOR WATCHING!!
0:00 Prologue
0:57 Introduction
5:27 "FLIR"
8:01 "Gimbel"
11:52 "GoFast"
15:29 Pilot Accounts
18:43 The Pentagon's Decision
20:26 Would Aliens Visit?
22:19 The Lure of Aliens
#UFOs #NavyUFOs #PentagonUFOs

[@looktowhere]

Beautifully done! Mick West reasons so elegantly! I love this kind of this stuff. Please do more things like these, in this world blinkered with belief, rationality is sorely needed.

[@holdenrobbins852]

Mick will mislead you. He plays into people confirmation bias with things that sound rational.

[@looktowhere]

@@holdenrobbins852 so you have another source for these explanations? Mick performs the experiments and proves his points. What else is needed in your opinion?

[@holdenrobbins852]

@@looktowhere You will never see him debate someone with solid counter-evidence with alternate explanations because his hand-waiving dismissive explanations he gives so confidently (like a con-man) are intended to keep people from not looking into things for themselves. Look into Carl Sagan's Baloney detection tool kit. You'll see Mick scores high.

[@emmanuelmahuni8163]

I'd not recommend doing that on this channel as it will move it into conspiracy theories channel. I view this as a legit science channel. That guy's theories of debunking conflict themselves yet alone prove his reasoning.

[@looktowhere]

@@holdenrobbins852 so I haven't seen this work elsewhere before this, but in this video he does not come across as not wanting people to look into things themselves. In fact on his channel he describes the experiments he does in detail, enabling anyone else to try it out for themselves. That makes it pretty much scientific, in attitude at least if not by qualification. Don't you think?

[@karlvanginderdeuren4009]

As Lex Fridman said: People that are into the Phenomenon should also study the work done by Mick West. There is a big difference between wanting to believe and finding out the truth.

[@markm586]

Mick West is an absolute nobody that thinks he knows better than highly trained, skilled pilots who saw these things with their own eyes and their instruments. He thinks his analysis is better than that of the Pentagon and the US Navy? Give me a break.

[@Kitties-of-Doom]

I made a clip dedicated to this one. You'll love it!

[@dougg1075]

The pilots said it was a 40 foot tic tac object with no visible form of propulsion. Mick West “ it’s a bird mate”

[@jeffreygrimm2361]

I stopped watching once they did not bring up the three pilots account. The pilots actual VISUAL account and not the cameras. Horrible analysis. Sorry buddy not subscribing.

[@dougg1075]

Jeffrey Grimm it just blows my mind that today’s scientist may be ignoring one of the most important events in our history. I want to know more than just flippant dismissals. If these trained pilots are so fascinated and freaked out by a bird ( go fast video) then we are in trouble.

[@daltonlucas5529]

Exactly!!! Thank you. It’s so annoying that you don’t take into eye witness accounts.

[@amit4rou]

Thanks for saving my time, closed the video at 0:27

[@Jay-407]

Jeffrey Grimm they do at 16:10 he still makes no sense. He thinks these pilots aren’t trained to identify a balloon

[@DoubleBarrelDarrell]

We need a lot more logical, reasoned thinkers like Mick West. We've got too many easily manipulated people in this world that are not skeptical and do use critical thinking skills.

[@YouTuber-mc2el]

Easily manipulated people = Gullible

[@darkfoxjj]

You mean a guy who takes videos out of context and presents this like this isball the info there is on the videos? We need more people to pay more attention to the entire story and the details. For instance multiple radars, an entire fleet tracking objects whereafter pilots were scrambled to interxept and them then seeing it with their own eyes and onboard cameras.

[@blehblehbleh86]

​@@darkfoxjjout of context? One of the videos debunks itself, with the data on the screen. This is how science works - everything must be tested.

[@MPP241]

Opposite. He completely discounts multiple experienced pilots. He is stuck and stubborn. They also saw these things with their own eyes. It was seen - by multiple fighter jet pilots (in different planes) - picked up by the fighter jet's radar - picked up by the USS Nimitz's radar.

[@Kitties-of-Doom]

I made a clip dedicated to this one. You'll love it!

[@sacha6530]

“There is no magic, there is only knowledge, more or less hidden” 👍❤️

[@PrgressiveHouse]

Well yeah obviously, depends on how you define magic, it's all just semantics. That quote is not that profound 😂 Also keep in mind that this guy is giving his opinion, there's no proof for any of that

[@Kitties-of-Doom]

Youre right! i made a vid dedicated to this one! you'll love it!

[@Bruceless]

If our military cannot differentiate or identify a balloon, a bird, or plane then I think we have much bigger problems than alien spaceships!! 😂

[@cropunisher5879]

👍

[@Bruceless]

@Politically Correct, do you not think the element of instant detection and identification is paramount in both defense and offense scenarios? Therfore one may venture to guess that these men are supposed to be trained in the most advanced prices of engineering in order to differentiate a plane from a bird and a bird from a tic tac? Or at least I'd hope so or I'm going to start asking for my federal income tax back!! 😂

[@jjt1881]

​@Politically Correct So, great wise man, do you know what these objects actually are? If so, please enlighten all of us.

[@jjt1881]

@Yesmer Not!

[@jjt1881]

@Politically Correct BTW. What an incredibly arrogant assumption coming from a guy who just accused the whole scientific community of ignorance and arrogance!

[@DvDick]

These are pretty reasonable explanations, but I'm unconvinced about pilots being so easily fooled by perspective. I don't know what they teach you in flight school, but I imagine that being able to recognize correctly targets by eye is a pretty fundamental skill for a fighter pilot

[@stevencoardvenice]

Everybody gets disoriented man. Kobe Bryant's pilot crashed into the side of a hill in the middle of los Angeles in broad daylight l. It's not aliens

[@irn2flying]

Quite true. However, you don't so much learn this in flight school as being out in the environment for thousand and thousands of hours, and knowing what's abnormal. What they saw WAS wildly abnormal, and can not be dismissed by calling it a balloon, or by being disoriented on a clear day. Never.

[@stevenutter3614]

The video tricked a large percentage of the world, I have no doubt the pilots could have had their measly 2d visual fields' fooled by this. We're 3d creatures that can only see in 2d, we get 2 , 2d images though so our brain takes whats left of the images after it makes the blood vessels magically go away and inverts the image and fills in the blind spot and uses previous experiences to help it determine what its looking at. That portion remaining btw which is actually useful for detailed tasks is very very narrow.

[@ipproductions]

Pilots are deemed unfit to fly jets for having some slight aberration in eyesight. But Mr. Professional Internet Debunker thinks, oh-so-logically, that their eyesight was poor just that day. 100% shill.

[@stevencoardvenice]

@@ipproductions Move on man. Your obsession with this stuff isn't healthy, especially in light of all the earthly problems we have now. When the little green men arrive, and they want us to see them, it will be unmistakable

[@mattcy6591]

That parallax effect is trippy when your brain thinks it's at one distance when it's actually way closer. I've been fooled by it and it's mind blowing

[@paulannable3734]

Try telling that to the ‘I Want To Believe’ people commenting on this video. Even after it being explained what the actual speed of that zipping UFO was, and the effect of parallax, some bloke a few comments up is STILL going on about impossible speeds against the wind. What is fascinating is the psychology of people.

[@sirmoke9646]

The "I want to believe people" happened to mention that the first hand accounts were conveniently left out of the "debunking". Which also assumed that the entire US navy cannot tell the difference between a bird a balloon or a jet. And that you can build an F-18 and a carrier task force in your garage. You know... small details. Some people really need to learn to say 'I don't know' instead of this divisive tribal bullshit.

[@cal4625]

I don't know what these people saw, but I am always amazed by how people interpret what they see. Human beings believe what they want to believe, be it ghost, bigfoot , aliens, or Jesus in a taco.

[@TheJimmercury]

I wouldn’t live in a country where the army is so stupid....

[@denononohardcore2]

Not sure the pilots know what they observed, in fact they openly admit that. They are some of the best in the world as far as training and experience goes, so if they say they have seen a tick tack object maneuvering the way they describe it’s probably foolish to dismiss them.

[@petergriffin383]

@@denononohardcore2 I agree 100%. The pilots that intercepted the tic tac are the most reliable eyewitnesses we've ever had when it comes to UFO/UAP sightings.

[@Jm-ff7hg]

do objective research and you’ll find there’s substantially more evidence for ufo’s than for something as silly as Jesus or bigfoot. Different topics altogether but they get thrown in a barrel labeled “FRINGE, DO NOT TOUCH”

[@HDMI-VGA]

We’ll said and very tru, we often see what we want to see, the first thing that comes to mind or things we fear and don’t understand. Probably some form of primal survival instinct which corresponds with our fight or flight instinct

[@3gypt1an]

yup ... the Navy doesn't know a pelican when it see's one

[@bm5448]

oh, it knows. I'm convinced they're trolling. Also, they declassified that tracking info to show off our tech. It's really that simple

[@jacknguyen5677]

It’s the new one, before it was swamp gas, weather balloons, glitches on camera! Passenger airplane that outran jet fighter!

[@Ffollies]

Yeah humans NEVER make mistakes *heavy sarcasm*

[@jacknguyen5677]

Ffollies pelican or passengers airplane don’t climb or drop 80,000-20,000 feet. The Nimitz group been tracked that objects for few days.

[@Ffollies]

@@jacknguyen5677 That's because the object in the video did NOT climb or drop 80,000 feet and it was NOT a pelican or passenger airplane. Did you even watch the video?

[@JamesLCoxe]

I’m very skeptical about the skeptic

[@sicfxmusic]

I’m skeptical about the skeptical skeptic

[@eyle6839]

@@sicfxmusic i'm skeptical whether you are skeptical about the skeptical skeptic

[@christophernix5695]

Jim C was the way I was going on your

[@CoolWorldsLab]

It would be odd to not show any skepticism when presented with these videos and accept them, unquestionably, on face value as aliens.

[@Jamerica]

@@CoolWorldsLab no official of the government has. If they did debate would be over.

[@johngreen4610]

My guess is that radar return they got on the FLIR object was what is called a "second time around return" A radar sends out a pulse every so many microseconds then displays the returns. Once the maximum time for the range is exceeded another pulse is sent. Sometimes the radar will pick up a return from a previous pulse but the range will be displayed incorrectly. There is an incident recorded in the Condon report of a radar sighting at Kincheloe AFB in Sept. 1967 in which the target behaved "erratically", that incident went down as unexplained. I was present that night as an Air Traffic Control Radar Maintenance technician at the radar. I am here to tell you that was a second time around return. The investigation interviewed the radar operators, no one wanted to talk to a mere maintenance technician. But I knew a hell of a lot about radar than any idiot operator. A radiosonde launched from Sault Ste. Marie at the time indicated a strong temperature inversion, a perfect recipe for a second time around returns.

[@livethemoment5148]

I work with ultrasonics, I know not the same, but in principle, I am an expert in that, and yes, there can be many "ghost" or erroneous signals detected if your set up of instrumentation is incorrect...and once you setup parameters are fixed, the erroneous signals go away, and yes, there are many "dumb" operators who only know the basics of operating the instrumentation and know very little about the details of "how it works" and how all the setup parameters work.

[@Humungojerry]

interesting. apparently it was a new radar system as well? but would this second time around phenomenon happen with modern radar?

[@geoffreychippersongiraffe5695]

5:20 breakdown starts

[@tribbybueno]

bless

[@fisherroastedpeanut]

Thank you

[@createx1751]

bullshitting start at*

[@arlandoamb6754]

The whole video is a breakdown. SMH

[@cakemoss4664]

I for one welcome our new Tic Tac overlords.

[@CoolWorldsLab]

Haha this made me laugh!

[@nathanforrest3483]

Hahaha hilarious comment.

[@johnbarrett4846]

I hope it's the orange ones lol

[@jonnjonnn8010]

You took that comment form another video loser

[@cakemoss4664]

@@jonnjonnn8010 It's a old joke that I adapted to this situation. Also Jonn remember that a spellchecker is your friend.

[@MoneyMotivation360]

This guy took annoying his older brother to a whole nother level.

[@r1thou]

I bet he took a pin and popped his brother’s birthday balloons

[@therealb888]

@@r1thou lol what? XD!

[@bodystomp5302]

Mick attacked just one aspect of the case, and its weakest aspect at that; the grainy, fuzzy videos. Mick has to explain how 4 Naval aviators saw the object eyes-on, which he hasn't done. The 5 people flying & working in the EC2 Hawkeye also had eyes on the tic-tac.

[@Mark-df3qc]

I respect that

[@despizedicon]

@Rich Michael Poticar Spicer You Gotta get different hobby. You seriously do, hope you figure it out.

[@lightningsparx5786]

...so a Balloon ,a Pelican or experienced Pilots confused by equipment malfunctions. sigh

[@keep_walking_on_grass]

12:10 that effect is similar, like when you observe a star at night in the sky. do this: walk around and look for a star which looks like close to the top of a tree (or a building) around which is about 20 meters in front of you. (can be 15 or 50 meters as well.) this is very easy. if you have found a position/standing point, where a star is right at the top of the tree, now stand still and observe that star. now start walking slowly to the right or left. the star *seems* to move around quickly, in any direction you want.

[@mr.hardtruth6475]

If these trained fighter pilots are this easily fooled we are in trouble .

[@senju2024]

That is WHY we ARE in trouble!!!

[@KneeoGeeo]

Trouble then. US pilots are terrible. Many times theyve killed innocent people from their bad judgement.

[@cjoakman7715]

@@senju2024 oh yeah? Have you been to Syria or Iraq lately? How about Afghanistan? Go spend a week in any of these 3 countries and IF you make it back, explain again how we here in the US are in trouble! You should be thanking our military each night before you're able to sleep peacefully, for being able to do so!

[@docwhiskey996]

@@KneeoGeeo ok I'm sure you have a ton of experience flying.

[@allineedis1mike81]

We are in trouble. Its absolutely shocking how much people dont know about what they dont know.

[@davemclean3899]

Didn't multiple navy pilots have eyes on the object. I would love to see Mick west debate commander fravor

[@cargeek8419]

Mick West is only analyzing the videos. He can't and hasn't commented on what commander Fravor did or did not see.

[@user-xp4ov5od8t]

This same UFO was seen in the 70s by an helicopter pilot.

[@mxtw7910]

@@cargeek8419 yes he is. This is footage of what he saw - so he is clearly implying Fravor is a lier

[@jonnyroxx7172]

@@mxtw7910 No video exists that we know of for what Fravor saw. Fravor stated that video from a different source taken later that day was consistent with what he witnessed, but his story has also changed over the years.

[@thevoid831]

@@jonnyroxx7172 He had another seasoned pilot positioned above him who observed the object from another angle. Fravor is not lying. This is textbook denying not debunking. Since when does Credible and in this case immaculately credible testimony not count?

[@DocDanTheGuitarMan]

How do the “Tic Tac” accounts not match? Underwood and Fravor match exactly. You could imply that Fravor led Underwood into believing he was going to see an anomaly (confirmation bias) but their accounts are consistent. And I would place my trust in veteran F18 pilot.

[@Kitties-of-Doom]

He makes no sense dude. I made a clip dedicated to it. You'll love it

[@richarddeese1991]

Thanks. I love Mr. West's comment that he posted some BLOGs debunking chemtrails, and that he "thought it would all be sorted", then he adds that 12 years later it's still a major conspiracy theory. Yeah, I'm afraid you're not going to be able to get past the mental roadblocks & blind spots most conspiracy buffs put up about their little pet ideas. Interestingly, it's much the same with religions & cults - not to mention various other things. There's an old saying that goes, "Never argue with someone who's convinced they're right." Then there's one of my favorite Robert A. Heinlein quotes: "Never try to teach a pig to sing. It wastes your time and annoys the pig." Someone asked me on Quora how to convince their friend that the Earth isn't actually flat. My reply? Don't even bother; you can't win that argument because they "know" exactly what they want to know. tavi.

[@RoySATX]

It doesn't help when people are called conspiracy theorists for beliefs that are then proven fact just months later. I don't intend to make this a political debate, but I could list dozens of such "conspiracy theories" recently that have been fact. I'm not arguing this fact because, like you said, when someone is convinced they are infallible, Richard, there is no point telling them they may have it wrong. You can always put your trust in science, you just shouldn't trust all scientists.

[@richarddeese1991]

@@RoySATX I don't trust individual scientists, so much as I trust the process of science itself. When it works - and it usually does - it systematically eliminates wrong ideas, homing in on ever better ones. tavi.

[@Beemernow]

So true 👍

[@danrose5104]

@@RoySATX ¨...I could list dozens of such "conspiracy theories" recently that have been fact.¨ I will settle for just a dozen.

[@RoySATX]

@@danrose5104 Well, for starters let's go with UFOs shall we? For fifty years people who said they witnessed a UFO where wrongly called conspiracy theorists. Little green men aside, few people can identify every flying object 100% of the time so it stand to reason UFOs exist. I hate to be political, but I didn't start this the Feds did so there's the Hunter Biden Laptop is Russian disinformation conspiracy. No, the laptop is real. The whole Trump/Russia collusion conspiracy. No, the FBI, the media, and Hillary Clinton colluded to invent this hoax. I'm not going to list them all but so much of the information put out about the Corona virus came with the Govt/Media chorus calling anyone who questioned the obviously wrong, stupid, and entirely un-scientific information a conspiracy theorist; Did it come from a lab? Are cloth face masks greater vectors of bacteria than they are effective at preventing viral spread? Was Fauci involved in the funding/creation of the virus? These and more all called conspiracy theories by the media and govt. bureaucrats despite the mountains of evidence and frankly common sense that proves otherwise. The truth is out there, you just have to seek it out for yourself and not believe everything the cabbage says you should believe. Here's the latest conspiracy theory to prove true, was Joe Biden responsible for blowing up the Nord Stream pipeline? Joe told a reporter before the Ukraine war started he would blow it up if Russia attacked Ukraine, but despite that the media and the Biden admin called people conspiracy theorists for asking if he had, in fact, blown up the pipeline. Now, just days ago, the truth comes out that yeah, it was Joe who ordered the destruction of the Nord Stream and the ecological damage it caused, despite the price increases, food shortages, and suffering in Europe. The admin had Navy divers set the explosives prior to the war during military training exercises. Of course, the talking heads and cabbages of the media and govt. aren't talking about this, they as always assume you are too lazy and under their spell to go seek the truth. And for most people they are sadly correct.

[@abhijitmajee6754]

Plot twist: Mick West is an alien living on Earth actively engaged in discarding such proofs of alien footage so that their cover is not blown.

[@CatMan_7]

Who is Mick West?

[@thomasfholland]

CatMan 82375 Didn’t you even read the video description? Mick West is the name of the guy being interviewed! 😂

[@holdenrobbins852]

He's a fraud paid to keep people from looking into things for themselves.

[@zadeanrobinson1608]

CatMan 82375 🤣 your a bot! Go watch the video.

[@holdenrobbins852]

@To Release is To Resolve No need to worry about that. We would be about as interesting as ants to aliens who could travel between stars. Aliens is the cover military use to misdirect people who see their classified tech, for people who don't fall for Mick West style dismissive hand waiving anyways.

[@KennethSmithLive]

I’m not convinced that trained fighter pilots with radar and visual could not determine something as an optical illusion. Nor that the military wouldn’t have come up with the same conclusions this guy did-and not just the military, civilian leaders too. The analysis ignores the context in which the incidents happen, an important source of data, to fit their own narrative. It is not unbiased analysis.

[@swirvn10]

Me either

[@1FatLittleMonkey]

_"I’m not convinced that trained fighter pilots with radar and visual could not determine something as an optical illusion."_ And yet it happens. Many of the procedures that pilots are trained to follow -- drilled on over and over -- exist for precisely that reason: experienced professional pilots died because of perceptual illusions. Including airline pilots, military pilots, etc. (I've heard it described that way, "Every page on this training manual is soaked in blood and ashes of those who came before you.")

[@PaulBunyun]

@@1FatLittleMonkey The United States has the most advanced Radar systems in the world. Multiple $70m planes and an aircraft carrier worth billions equipped with the world's most advanced radar were corroborating the same claims. But I guess without actual recording data of the radars (which would take an act of God to produce) people wouldn't accept this.

[@HELLBENDER77]

exactly

[@darkbeach72]

@@PaulBunyun Right? I'll go with the guy whose qualifications include Tony Hawk game.

[@bhoot2194]

I would doubt that a trained naval pilot, doing training exercises at sea, does not understand if an object is moving towards him or he is the one going fast against it. Not saying it was aliens, but definitely unconvinced by the “debunking”

[@logiconabstractions6596]

I'm thinking that as well, a bit. Though on the other hand, consider all the man-hours spent flying/navigating around the globe. I guess just statistically, some fairly dumb mistakes will be made?

[@Lucifer11.]

I would agree but all the friendly fire that happens during times of war speaks volumes about these so called expert observers.

[@Logan_93]

@@Lucifer11. Friendly fire doesn't happen with fighter pilots lmao

[@Lucifer11.]

@@Logan_93 yeah I'm sure it doesn't lmao

[@ouandello]

Yea, not to mention these people literally risk losing their careers by saying they saw UFOs. "Debunking" my ass, from an "expert" that made his money off Tony Hawk for the playstation lol

[@user-mh5qg5jb7d]

Although I love your channel and tend to agree that the majority of "ufo" sightings have terrestrial explanations that are far less interesting than many people would like to believe, I think Mick West is doing a great disservice to the significance of the Nimitz encounter, specifically. Mick cannot possibly suggest that two weeks' worth of Aegis radar data, the most advanced radar system in the world at that time, was "just a glitch." Furthermore, I think it is a very weak argument to suggest that all four naval aviators, who are arguably the very best in the world at identifying aircraft, all suffered from situational awareness. Mick is obviously suffering from confirmation bias, otherwise he would realize this particular encounter has no logical explanation. One of the radar operators who witnessed this even has come forward in interviews and said the crew of the ship actually powered down and restarted the entire radar system at one point to check for glitches. And after doing so, the unexplainable radar sightings continued. The radar data from numerous ships in the carrier strike group, the FA-18 data and the aviator's eyewitness accounts cannot be dismissed as a balloon, not without making himself look like a fool.

[@winstonsutton9812]

You said it brother I couldn't believe that this program with put something on like this without somebody canceling him in any way or even at least making him answer some of the tough questions that the aviator pilot said doing that video it just doesn't seem like he knows what he's talking about.

[@sudazima]

"most advanced radar systems" lmao, just a bunch of authoritarian arguments by you. these fly boys arent exactly geniuses that understand the equipment theyve been given. gimme a break.

[@user-mh5qg5jb7d]

@@sudazima Your comment is pure ignorance and you wouldn't last a week in the training they have gone through. You sound like a keyboard warrior stuck in a third-world country. I guess that is why you play video games instead of achieving anything?

[@spirok593]

Anything to not say the obvious even guessing that its this or that. De-bunkers are just like atheists who deny deny deny regardless of the evidence.

[@ricomajestic]

The hubble telescope was the most advance telescope in the world at one time and all it gave was blurry images!

[@dabombbizzle]

Career Fighter Pilot: This thing was about 1/4 mile away. I'd never seen anything like this before. Mick: Looks like a plane 150 miles away

[@iraniansuperhacker4382]

its funny watching people trying to debunk shit but ends up with what amounts to a lose conspiracy theory that doesnt explain at all what actually happened. You know how scientist like to say they are rational, impartial and all that jazz? Well if that was actually the truth a scientist could come out in the public and say "I THINK its possible these things could be aliens" and watch him lose his career and be shunned by the scientific community for literal thought crimes. Some people dont even say they believe in aliens just that its possible it could be alien and they have had their careers ruined. Look at what the scientific community did to Dr. Gil Levin in 1997 after he concluded that life is the best evidence to explain the viking landers positive results and that its imperative we send another probe there immediately to figure it out for 100% and to try and test if its related to earth life, they started shunning him and REFUSE to publish his papers. He has extremely compelling evidence for a microbial biosphere on mars and the scientific community ignores it because NASA ignores it. Its just so happens that the higher ups at NASA directly said to DR. Levin that another ambiguous experiment will hurt the mars manned program and that ALL future direct life detecting experiments will be refused on any NASA lander. Another scientist who worked on the viking landers Dr. Patricia Ann Straat says the exact same thing and she even hinted NASA is being irresponsible by ignoring the results setting up not only get return sample mission but a manned mission and she thinks there is a very real possibility of them bring back something to earth that could be deadly. Sorry I went off on a rant but this shit bothers me and the dumb ass way this dude talks bothers me too, I have never seen someone so pretentious that you could literally hear it by the way they pronounce words. Modern science is about politics and career moves not science, it needs a restart.

[@dodosicko8347]

@Rich Michael Poticar Spicer ok but a career scientist can be wrong and a career pilot can be wrong right? I think the most interesting take from this is why would aliens just fly around in plain view ? What's the purpose of their visit? We can think up a hundred different reasons but If you can think up a hundred different reasons for a phenomena I would classify what ever reason you go with as speculation. They could have spotted a spaceship from a far far away civilisation or they could have spotted a glitch in the simulation or they could have made a mistake. Who knows, there for I believe that this isn't hard hitting eviden for an alien visitation of earth.

[@jjt1881]

@@dodosicko8347Thank you. It is not hard evidence of alien visitation to Earth.

[@lokolop1]

Right??

[@raffitorres1714]

@@dodosicko8347 David Fravor, the pilot that caught one of these videos said that he had no idea what it was, and has never said it was hard evidence for aliens, but said it definitely wasn’t a bird or a plane. I find it hard to believe that Mick West could identify something but multiple navy pilots and the pentagon couldn’t. Seems just as ridiculous as the hardcore alien believers.

[@michaelreale8930]

Hmm.. "I'm a 'Debunk-er" and "Quite Good at analyzing videos of mysterious objects high in the sky" His 'Go Fast' analysis simply doesn't hold up. The object is locked on the FLIR and is showing good ranging data averaging around 4 nm to target. The on board computer is also calculating the speed based on the relative speed of the plane vs the target based on the telemetry fed to the computers by the FLIR pod. This isn't a matter of "oh, the pilot and pod op were duped into believing that they were chasing a stationary balloon 1,100 ft above the ocean! The targeting computers are not fooled that easily. These are complicated systems that MANDATE accurate telemetry for the purposes of acquiring, targeting, and destroying objects at high relative speeds. In fact if you look at 14:17, just before the op zooms in, you can see that the background is relatively slow vs the speed of the target. His biopsy of this video is riddled with incorrect statements and math. Just because you show an irrelevant example of a balloon at close proximity with a telephoto lens 'speeding' just above the ground DOES NOT equate to what is actually being experienced by the pilots. If you actually do the trig he referred to, his math simply doesn't hold up!!! at 14:35 he says its a balloon adrift at 1,100 ft. Impossible! Even with his trig! The plane is at 25,000 ft AGL, and the ranging data shows 4.4 nm to target, that would place the object at approximately 1.9 nm (11,500 ft) BELOW THE PLANE parallel with the ocean. Hence 25,000 ft - 11,500 ft = 13,500 ABOVE THE WATER! This object is almost 3 MILES above the ocean! That is a HUGE difference in what the field of view and camera perspective would show! And the video of a slow moving balloon would NOT resolve that kind of velocity as shown in the video! Look, I am not a conspiracy theorist, and I am NOT declaring an alien ship. Just trying to understand the truth. However this guys' math simply doesn't hold up! He ''waxes quite eloquent,' like do most deniers, but my high school kid can see through his erroneous observations. So Mick West really needs to devote his time to getting up to speed on math and logic!

[@aaronrandolph1267]

yup this video was not well executed at all. many details that they could not explain were also left out which is a common tactic for debunkers. no one is sure what these objects are but those pilots were quite adamant that it wasnt run of the mill tech they were observing but rather out of this world type stuff which is where the possibility of it being extraterrestrial was pondered. the tech that these craft displayed if the navy pilots observations were to be taken at face value and in their entirety definitely would be quite a significant event that warrants the question of whether these were alien craft or not

[@ovnilab]

*WELL SAID! These guys are two of the weakest debunckers I've seen/hear in a long time! LOL*

[@ptennyson3175]

Very interesting information. I did my own superficial check on Mick West's argument and found an immediate hole. He claims the Tic Tac video showed a distance to target of 9999 saying showing he had no lock and the object could be much further 50-100 miles away... ...Except I rechecked the guide to the FLIR read outs given by TTSA in their release of the video (and apparently provided by David Fravor) and there is no 'distance reading' on the readouts. There is a 19990 reading, but this is the altimeter in feet! In fact because the camera changes between 1.0x and 2.0x zoom, it implies the object is just a few miles away. So based on your much detailed analysis of Mick West's own analysis it appears to have more holes than a piece of Gorgonzola!

[@bonao99]

@@aaronrandolph1267 the Nimitz incident, radar operators say they tracked one of the UFOs as it dropped from the sky at more than 30 times the speed of sound. Black Aces squadron commander David Fravor, the Nimitz-based fighter pilot who was sent to intercept one of the objects, likened its rapid side-to-side movements, later captured on infrared video, to that of a ping-pong ball. Radar operators on the USS Princeton, part of the Nimitz carrier group, tracked the object accelerating from a standing position to traveling 60 miles in a minute-an astounding 3,600 miles an hour. According to manufacturer Boeing, the F/A 18 Super Hornet fighter jet typically currently reaches a maximum speed of Mach 1.6, or about 1,200 miles an hour.

[@ptennyson3175]

Actually I have checked the FLIR video again and a range of 99.9 does appear a bit later in the video, but looked up the Chad Underwood, pilot, own description of this and he says he initially picked it up on radar and locked on with the FLIR camera... ...and the target was within 20 miles (but beyond the 5-10 miles needed) to see it visually. The pilot 'could' be mistaken...but when Mick West says it could be 40 to 100 miles away he has no evidence for this, it is pure conjecture, and actually contradicts a clear statement from the pilot. My trigonometry is very rusty but I am still scratching my head to work out how in the GOFAST video a plane flying at 252 knots (289 mph) can overfly an object, get a target lock, hold it for 20 seconds and fly along with it, during which time the Hornet has flown at least a mile, the camera during this time only moves 8 degrees in the vertical axis and 10 degrees in the vertical to track it, and yet Mick West calculates the object observed is only flying at 40-100 mph. Surely if the Hornet was flying at 3x to over 6x faster than the object the camera angle would have had to move by more than this small angle to track it, indeed within 20 seconds the Hornet would surely have flown straight passed it not being able to fly alongside it? The Navy did call the video 'GO FAST' for a reason.

[@papinbala]

I dont know why people would dislike this video.... Mick probably has the best explanation for these videos than any UFO show that revolved around these videos.

[@simvlacrvm]

nope, he just has the best wich doesnt involve aliens.

[@papinbala]

@@simvlacrvm wait.... you think aliens are here on earth?

[@simvlacrvm]

@@papinbala no, i just think he has his bias and is completely unaware, just like you. very unscientific.

[@sksososo3295]

papinbala yep ever since we tested our first nuclear warhead

[@hedgehog3180]

@@simvlacrvm You think it's unscientific to not immediatly jump to aliens as the explanation? Also how are aliens in any way a better explanation.

[@zimports]

Why are these videos and pictures of UFOs always always always vague, blurry, too far away? Where is the one incontrovertible, unmistakeable clear video or picture of an alien spacecraft?

[@Hamani1999]

they dont exist because aliens havent visited us. people will literally record anything weird they see on their phones and post it on the internet. even a phone from 2015 will have better qualitty than this garbage

[@LaurenMiddleton28]

Nick....the Navy didn't realize it was just a plane...lol didn't realize with radar and seeing it come down from 80,000 feet... "it was just a plane" LOL

[@eddiesaint8713]

Vincent Nowak who are you to speak for the navy😂😂😂

[@nosferatu5]

Perhaps they did. Seems to me it was discarded in the military as something not worth any hassle. Then when it was declassified upon request they just chuckled at the monkeys dancing over what internally was deemed just another misunderstanding or a practical joke.

[@ivanalvarez5511]

Vincent Nowak I’ll let the secretary of the Navy speak for the Navy, I was a Marine but would never presume to speak for the Marine Corps

[@Ffollies]

Try to take a drive, use an infrared camera, and try to later identify every single thing caught on camera. Then get back to me

[@PaulBunyun]

@@Ffollies What a horrible comparison. Try recording the sky with an infrared camera (which is quite literally what is happening in this case) and see how many objects you can identify. You just limited your search QUITE a bit. You now see only planes, helicopters and other various misc. forms of fuel-powered aviation crafts. You now have a much more narrow field to identify from. So remind me, where does this craft lie in that field?

[@chrisloUSA]

Are you suggesting I wasted 8 hours of my life making signs to welcome our alien overlords? 🙄

[@danfrednz]

lmao... love your comment. i burst out laughing actually . thank you for that! i need it.

[@colinp2238]

Yes.

[@CrimxSun]

So the radar can pick up a balloon, but can't distinguish an airplane? Oh oke.

[@ExplorerBen7]

The david fravor explanation doesn't make sense because the second fighter was above watching the whole thing as well and they saw it take off and was gone in 2 secs with 50 miles of visibility. Also he didn't say it went towards him he said it cut across in front of him and was gone from sight in 2 secs and disappeared. It was then picked up on radar 60 miles away.

[@BreakTheRules2011]

I'm with him on the Gimble camera rotation, but what about when he states ''There's a fleet of them''... Planes don't fly in fleets, right? - Also, doesn't the 'tick tac' in the 'Go Fast' video appear to dip below the water at one point? The pilot (who later interviewed with Joe Rogan) said that he saw the 'tic-tac' darting around erratically above the sea with bubbling water below it. To add to that, he then informed Joe that these objects were picked up multiple times on radar over the course of DAYS and that it was not a one-off incident. They were eventually scrambled (two planes) to intercept the target, which disappeared from radar to then 'pop' back into existence at their CAP (pre-determined point)... That's one hell of a 6-12 foot balloon... ^_^

[@misium]

Somebody mentions fleets, but we dont know what they refer to. We see nothing of the sort in the vids. And nothing dips below the water.

[@Theodorus5]

Why should the video show everything?

[@arkhitekt7733]

I suppose we're just gonna ignore the fact he clearly states, 'It's rotating!'

[@BreakTheRules2011]

@@misium - I was thinking of the Puerto Rico airport video, my mistake, but suprising similar in shape.

[@Ffollies]

@@arkhitekt7733 They explained that in the video.

[@prawnmikus]

If one of the best pilots the military had was so easily confused, then we're in a world of trouble. David Fravor is about the most credible person you could find to report on something like this, and he has gone into great detail about things not mentioned in this vid. Not saying it's real or not real. Just that multiple credible accounts must be factored in, including reports from techs below deck reporting on sensor data.

[@mrbobo86]

It's so convenient for mick to ignore all the sensor data reported by these technicians on board the princeton

[@MickWest]

I don't think he was easily confused. I think it took an extraordinary set of circumstances to confuse him, with things having to line up just right. This isn't something that happens every day.

[@Diewux]

Mick West exactly

[@hugerush7073]

Exactly NOTHING! Cmdr Fravor was one of FOUR pilots that saw from at least TWO different angles that day. Why you would hang your hat on 'this extremely trained extremely experienced military pilot got confused' is one thing, but you don't even admit there were more witnesses than just him (which is easily proven)? You think they all were fooled by this mysterious 'nothing'? You realize they were VECTORED (you're a pilot, you know what that means) to what they ultimately saw? You can claim F-18 pilots cant read their ATFLIR all day long but you fall straight on your face when you try to discredit the eye witness pilots! NONE of these pilots said the was proof of aliens, but they did say they SAW IT and it was behaving unlike anything they had seen before or since. Because you don't want it to be doesn't make it not so any more than the other way around! Pullleeeaaze FIND A NEW HOBBY!!!

[@misium]

​@@hugerush7073 The fact there was more people seeing it, only means it was easy to be confused by. I don't know what exactly Fravor saw, but if it was anything like those released videos, then anyone could get confused. Its not like Fravor had a rangefinder in his eyes. All the vids show is parallax and lens glare. Actually an optical rangefinder would have helped in some of those cases, if they had one.

[@anonymous-cc6nv]

skeptics will usually use the idea that the person who saw the ufo didn't see what they thought they saw, it was a plane, bird or something else, because they aren't trained observers. but in this particular case you have a trained observer military pilot and more than one, plus radar data showing objects coming down rather rapidly, you cannot just easily dismiss all of that

[@random6033]

but we also have videos and the videos show planes and balloons and when Mick West and even NASA pointed out to the pilot who reported the GOFAST thing that it's actually at 12000 ft and not moving fast at all he straight up denied it and made absolutely idiotic arguments to support those claims, so maybe those pilots aren't that good with their judgements as you think they are

[@hedgehog3180]

There's no such thing as a “trained observer” no one is infallible and we're all prone to errors of judgement, especially when seated in a jet going close to the speed of sound at 10 km and experiencing several Gs of force, it's not exactly an environment our brains are evolved to handle. Also there isn't any radar data, no radar data has been released, there's just some people insisting that the data was definitely there but conveniently we can't see it anymore because it was deleted.

[@Beemernow]

Matt Dillahunty, a popular atheist said, some Thiest's have told him, even if he could demonstrably prove there was no creator, they would still believe there was one. After reading this comment section, no wonder we're a stone throw away from nuclear war...ffs

[@jakeyb9386]

Man can fly fighter jet but was never taught how to tell how far away things are. Seems legit.

[@allineedis1mike81]

You can't be trained to just know how far away things are. Its not an ability that human being possess. We need equipment to do that with any accuracy and its very easy to fool yourself. Even for elite pilots, they are only human.

[@jseigle]

The pilot reported that it was close but the ranging sensor could not range it. Either the ranging sensor was broken or it was too far away (>100 miles) to range and the pilot misjudged. Which one do you think is more likely? The pilot has only the parallax of his eyes to judge distance, combined with how big he thinks the object is, and under those circumstances it's not as easy as people think. After all, if you don't know either size or distance it is impossible to accurately gauge both just by looking. People on the ground misjudge distances of flying objects all the times, mostly because if they are expecting something to be close, their brains will assume it's close and everything else derives from that assumption. Next time the moon comes over the horizon, have a look and give me your ballpark estimate as to how far it is.

[@leer5858]

Forget that, it's 2020 and this is the best we got with all the cameras everywhere? It's just disappointing. If they can filmed, why is there no clear footage from any of these cameras? Just these blurry night vision BS, it will take more than that to convince me its aliens

[@jakeyb9386]

@Paul Thomas Johnson well in basic training in the army you get taught how to judge distances of objects. I imagine its even more important in a fighter jet that moves around in the air. Aye sure though, must have to be superman to judge distance.

[@chrishernandez5612]

@Paul Thomas Johnson exactly people make mistakes, like Mick West. Several experts on this flir tech have made videos showing why Mick is incorrect. Let's go with the experts who have no reason to misinform the public. But Mick does have a reason to misinform, that's what he does.

[@addim2717]

Hi. These are fantastic explanations that solve the videos alone, however they fail to account for the multiple other corroborating sources for the USS Thompson and USS Nimitz events -- pilots eyeballs, radar, *and* the IR pods all picked these things up. This video doesn't fully debunk those factors.

[@iPhown]

Adam Bender There aren’t corroborating sources though. Fravor’s testimony has no video or radar data to back it up. These videos have no eye witness testimony. There isn’t anything to cross examine. The Pacific video is from west coast 2004 and the other 2 videos are 2015 east coast. And all that’s public ally available is these videos and Fravor’s eye witness account which don’t match.

[@JeddieT]

A Jenkins ...And there were radar hits. kzbin.info/www/bejne/hoPKoJypfbegi6c

[@xoranginho]

@@iPhown stfu buddy, I get you wanna be the cool 'huh I told you its debunked bro' guy , but farvor himself said they wont release radar footage. re: the rotatging ufo, you can hear the guys in comms talking about a 'fleet' on the radar. wanna piss off now ?

[@joshuahendricks9558]

He also leaves out the fact that David Fravor is one of the most experienced pilots the US military has had. Just google him. It is incredibly improbable David would not be able to identify a Boeing

[@spiritclass3463]

@@joshuahendricks9558 and with the thousands of hours David has in the sky im certain he's seen plenty of birds and 747s. He knows exactly what they look like. This was decisively different. Plus birds and 747s aren't exactly known for flying above 80 thousand feet and dropping to almost ocean level in seconds.

[@EddieLeal]

We live in a such a large universe. I find it hard to believe we are the only intelligent life forms

[@blehblehbleh86]

Mick West agrees! That's not evidence that these videos show alien craft, though.

[@abcde1054]

Micks take on these UAPs make the most sense.

[@Kitties-of-Doom]

I made a clip dedicated to this one. You'll love it!

[@TimoDcTheLikelyLad]

you should get David Fravor on Podcast!

[@Mark-df3qc]

I respect that

[@neutrino78x]

@@ajwysopal actually a drone is quite plausible. it definitely wasn't a weather balloon or pelican.

[@Ecselsiour]

Yes, I would love to see and hear David's thousands of hours trained eyes and experienced head clash with this guy's and watch the outcome.

[@robbieh1899]

@@neutrino78x Doing 210 knots into a head wind, that's one hell of a drone!

[@enlightenedwarrior7119]

@@ajwysopal that's what is said. The thing is there is no proof of that

[@martinw245]

No context though. I recall one of these videos was the second flight after David Fravors encounter. After reporting what he saw, the next F18 to launch attempted to film it, successfully so. So context is important. And what Fravor reported certainly wasnt a bird of weather balloon. It was said to outmanouver his aircraft and accelerate away at multi mach speed. Then we have reports by radar operators of objects dropping from 80,000 feet to just above the ocean. Reports of objects seen on the Spy One radar throughout the excercise. Cube shaped objects out accelerating F18's etc.

[@MrCmon113]

You should ask yourself why everything extraordinary only appears in the "context", you can't verify. Shouldn't that ring a few alarm bells?

[@martinw245]

@@MrCmon113 Who did you address that comment to?

[@ClaytonBigsby01]

@@MrCmon113 You should ask yourself why Mick the government shill is always debunking and never verifying or anything else. yeah im gonna believe this paid shill over a top gun instructor . ok

[@Kitties-of-Doom]

@@martinw245 Taxtro is a dummy. Just like Mick. Don't worry about it.

[@Boulos-cb2un]

One of these people are wrong... A Navy fighter pilot with over 20 years experience...or some guy.

[@majorgnu]

Who cares about facts, logic and (ugh!) _thought,_ when you can just apply some good old appeal to authority! I want to believe, damn you! ↑YOU↑

[@DavidAmbro]

Watching this in hindsight is hilarious. I love that disregarding pilot testimony of what actually is happening in the videos and coming up with random scenarios from your living room is somehow considered scientific, sober and rational. 😂

[@bakedplissken7453]

Mick West would debunk his own mother giving birth to him if challenged.

[@fomme397]

I think, therefore I am. I do not know if my mother thinks, therefore I do not know if my mother is. Burden of proof is on my mother for proving she thinks. In the absence of such evidence, I choose to believe my mother does not, in fact, think, and thus is not, or rather, is merely a projection of myself. Conclusion: It is likely that my mother is not and could therefore not have given birth to me. Thank you, everyone (me), and stay solipsistic!

[@bajanworldstar5636]

Well if he gives actual reasons s to why his mother isn't his and he was adopted then it's not impossible lol

[@jaredbard1]

@@fomme397 lol

[@jaredbard1]

@spidy9237 are you being sarcastic or do I need to tell you how Mick's "debunking" did not cover 90 percent of the evidence. Adorable when moron Mick claims pilots with thousands of flight hours can't tell the difference between things flying in the air. Reminds me of when I was an Air Traffic Controller and pilots would sometimes correct my trainee on what type of plane is actually in front of them when my trainee misspoke. lol

[@LoreMIpsum-vs6dx]

During the "Gimbal" video, the reaction of the pilots is not consistent with Mr. West's explanation. Were they just out of flight school? They were seeing something that was extraordinary to them. Also, at one point, it sounds like one pilot says, "There is a whole fleet of them..."

[@happyhammer1]

I am extremely skeptical of UFOs but the fact that a pilot found this strange leads me to believe that something strange happened. I'm not saying it's aliens though.

[@draco_2727]

Yeah but they're not revising all the videos and interviews that were done to these pilots as they were encountering these things on several days and one of them tracked by the radar jumped from their location to the other meeting point, but I guess that's just the speed of a balloon on the wind and it can stop at will. 🤷‍♂️

[@prawnmikus]

Yeah, I think it was 5 other small craft that were in a V formation that turned back against the direction the fighters were flying. Apparently there's radar data that has not been released that verifies this.

[@irn2flying]

@@happyhammer1 , I agree. I'm a pilot with 24,000 hours, and have flown with plenty of military fighter pilots as well. I can guarantee that from their reaction as well as interviews they've had, this object WAS NOT a weather ballon or some misidentifiend distant object. The sky is our office, we KNOW what's normal and what isn't. To suggest that these highly skilled and experience fighter pilots were reacting to a ballon, is like saying they mistook a an 800 pound lion for a house cat that was in your house.

[@irn2flying]

@@prawnmikus , yes. As reported by one of the fighter jets the "balloon" was traveling against the wind at 150mph. Obviously NOT a ballon. It's insulting to the professional aviators to suggest that they misidentified this object so grossly.

[@FuhqEwe]

The gimbel explanation told you everything you need to know about this person's level of perceptive intelligence and visual deduction.

[@joeydee8902]

What about the end of the Gimbel video that's NOT "debunked" here?? . . The part when the object suddenly makes a very sharp and EXTREMELY fast turn and the object shoots off of the screen to the left. . That was the most compelling and convincing part of all 3 videos and yet they didn't even mention it 🤔🤔🤔 Perhaps because they had absolutely no explanation for this whatsoever - Because I would have made sure to "debunk" that part first before trying to debunk the rest - Simply due to it being the most difficult to explain/debunk.

[@HELLBENDER77]

so on the gimble video, the pilot didn't know that it was another fighter jet right in front of it and was never able to identify it?? this pilot never followed another fighter before???

[@jseigle]

It wasn't right in front of him.

[@robnorwood3591]

This entire clip is very insulting to the pilots and radar officers.

[@allineedis1mike81]

Probably not a fighter jet, likely a passenger jet far outside the range of their radar but close enough for the flir cam to see the plume from their engines. Its basically a point source in the camera and the camera displays that diamond shape when its a point source. It really does make perfect sense without having to make a million assumption about things we have evidence to show should be impossible. Its boring but most of these things turn out that way when looked into. Not sure why everyone finds him to be so condescending. Maybe its the accent idk. Seemed to me like they were being very careful not to insult or make fun of anyone. Unlike most of the comments here from people that would rather believe its something magical. Edit: Thanks for the love Cool Worlds. Although I seriously doubt my thoughts on this push the needle one way or the other for most people. Until we learn about basic human nature we will keep making these dumb mistakes and falling for the same old BS we always have. It's gonna be pretty ironic if it turns out one of our adversaries is collecting high value intelligence on US Naval assets with...... wait for it.......balloons. And conventional drones and we completely miss it because of cattle mutilations, anal probing and cough cough skinwalkerranch cough.... Sorry I can't resist. Its just that I'm not saying it's aliens......because it's not aliens. Nobody needs to reply to me, I think your idiots and you think i'm an idiot. So we're typical Americans, let's just leave it at that. Great video like always Cool Worlds! Thank you! We will inform the Prime One of your contributions to our colonization efforts.👽

[@gregorytimmons4777]

So, has anyone wondered where these extra planes came from? Oh and glare! Disregard all of the reports of tracking a number of these objects over a number of days. Next we will ignore the eye witness reports and the speed indicated on the radar and it becomes a balloon drifting at wind speed. So, i get it, you just have to throw out all the tech that helps you aquire information about what you have a lock on . Amazing to have the ability to nail down what something is or isn't from behind a desk looking at a video on a laptop. Bottom line: Mick's analysis only goes as far as his belief system or concept of reality. In other words: Can't be this or that because i don't believe in "this or that."

[@Jba8179]

@@allineedis1mike81 not really, hwo does a passenger jet manage to outwit a navy strike group and advance radars All these explanations rely on everyone conveniently being retarded at the exact moment and then 16 years later, for no apparent reason, they release the videos

[@gbxgbxgbx]

like NAVY pilots nevers saw a large plane far away, and anyone in pentagone specialists staff couldn't tell what it is either - please :)

[@Anjin-Sama]

I agree....what about the fact that commerical aircraft have transponders and the American military polits have more flight time and experience than almost any other nation and can tell the difference between all this "anomalies" this guy is using to dismiss experts. If the military and by extension the government is releasing things they can't explain with all their resources then this guys opinion carries very little weight.

[@gbxgbxgbx]

@@Anjin-Sama Exactly, this is the point people are missing when watching "debunkers" videos of these observations.

[@supgizmo5021]

You giving the Pentagon too much credit.

[@gbxgbxgbx]

@@supgizmo5021 lol, really? Who deserves more credit and is more proficient in the area of modern warfare and avionics, than the heart of military of the most technologically advanced country? A KZbinr/vloger XD

[@supgizmo5021]

@@gbxgbxgbx If you knew anything or anyone working there you might have a different opinion. It is not the movies.

[@MrUpsideDownWorld]

Oh man! Guess we need to start training those guys we send into the sky in state of the art technology😯

[@thunkjunk]

They are well trained. But also only human.

[@Livingrentfreeinyomind77]

Seriously, lol I don’t think people really appreciate the level of incompetence they are assuming of these pilots and other military personnel. It’s mind blowing. Either that or this is an entire elaborate ruse to fool the American public. Wildly outrageous claims! Someone needs to contact their representatives and complain about this. Who says debunkers don’t believe in conspiracies lol

[@thunkjunk]

@@Livingrentfreeinyomind77 No, it is more likely that they are simply lying or fudging the truth then. UFO stories make a perfect cover for some classified equiment that fell in the sea or something.

[@harmar4181]

one thing's for sure, the moment people managed to identify what those really are, will be the end of that object being a UFO (Unidentified Flying Object)

[@Jameson1776]

The 2nd is definitely the millennium falcon

[@mikeprzyszlak5242]

I thought the same thing... "did the Russians or Chinese develop a Millenium Falcon-style aircraft?" LOL

[@TheGeekyHippie]

Anyone else notice they never brought up the radar pinging on that one? Or the distance? Supposedly it was another jet, with its engines causing that glare, but it would have had to be close enough the pilots would have been aware of what was there to do that. Not to mention this guys "recreation" in his garage had zero resemblance to the video!

[@leojames7331]

The analysis of the videos is somewhat compelling but I have two problems. Mick dismisses the reports of objects at 80,000 feet dropping to 50 feet above sea level as "radar glitches". This cannot be the case as these radar tracks were picked up by multiple platforms including the spy 1 which is extremely advanced, even after being re calibrated. On top of this, the objects were tracked submerging and travelling at 500 knots. Secondly, his explanation of fravours apparent loss of sensory perception cannot explain his version of the tic tac encounter, given that his account was corroborated by a second jet with a crew of 2 that stayed up at around 25,000 feet as fravours plane went down to intercept.

[@jjackomin]

I agree. And the worst part of it is that everything he says is pure speculation. At no point does he prove the verity of what he is asserting.

[@dpm2937]

To believe some of these things said you need to discount alot of information. To actually think everything of this is an optical illusion, tech glitch, distant airplane etc you gotta not just discount but ignore it. A specialist on the ATFLIR system confirmed that the rotation is caused by image stabilisation. So I am not saying right or wrong but there is alot of things that speak for and against arguments used by both sides.

[@syphrGB]

Multiple platforms: multiple ships, planes, and other aircraft reported the same radar tracks. Stations on shore also reported the same. Eye witnesses in different aircraft reported the same. Further, after the event, extra pilots in again new aircraft reported the same with their own eyes and recorded a video. Each and every movement the pilots witnessed with their own eyes corresponds with what is captured on radar. Mick is a fool and would graduate university with a 2:2

[@miguelangeldiaz9380]

His reasoning reminds me of the nobleman and his cronies in the movie Amadeus where he waves off Mozart's works as superficial and having too many notes🙄

[@romerider1000]

He also dismisses the human experience of the pilots

[@jessiej3991]

What Mick West does not realize is that by the U.S Navy releasing these videos actually gave them more work not less which fly's in the face of his debunking theories

[@gb5584]

What they didn't show here was the object in the first video shooting off to the left. I would of liked to hear how he would explain that.

[@MrCmon113]

The camera lost track as you can see in the hud of the camera.

[@nmarbletoe8210]

@@MrCmon113 Yup. Underwood says it lost track and he thinks it was due to sudden movement but can't be sure as it was so fast.

[@hedgehog3180]

I swear more people need to learn what parallax is.

[@jperez2087]

I think trained fighter Pilots know what they’re looking at...they would know a weather balloon or the back of another fighter jet.

[@tomedward8652]

More British troops died because of American Air Force friendly fire than they did from the enemy in the Gulf war. Pilots aren't super heroes with special powers they are human and therefore fallible lie everyone else.

[@mattwilson2499]

Sometimes they get fooled. Things can be very disorientating up there. I think with all of these videos, the pilots thought what they were looking at was was in a different location than they thought it was which let to them thinking it was doing things that aren't possible.

[@neutrino78x]

@@mattwilson2499 ok, what about the ship's radar? This isn't the 1800s....multiple sensors detected these objects. and btw...I don't know if you realize this...military officers are required to have college degrees. Many fighter pilots have degrees in physics or engineering. So these are educated ladies and gentlemen. LCDR Alexandra Dietrich has a BS in civil engineering. Commander David Fravor also was trained in the TOP GUN program. So I question that these people have no idea what they were doing or were confused. Whether this a weird natural phenomenon or some kind of black project or aliens, it's something that needs to be investigated on an ongoing basis. You can't just say "well it's probably not aliens therefore it can't possibly a threat and it's not something to investigate". Even if it's a natural phenomenon, we need to know that!!

[@neutrino78x]

@@tomedward8652 and officers in her Majesty's Royal Air Force and Royal Navy have seen UFOs too. In many cases, they are detected on multiple sensors. It's something that we needs an ongoing investigation. I agree it's probably not aliens but it's also not something to dismiss.

[@tomedward8652]

@@neutrino78x - I think one of the problems is that for what ever reason, certain people hate logical or plausible explanations. There are plenty of examples that give valid explanations but people will always resort to the name calling when they hear these explanations. And unfortunately it is usually the most mundane explanations that are most likely. I could give examples but I will immediately be shot down with comments like “yes, but the pilot SAID he saw XYZ, and therefore IT must be unexplainable”. All humans are fallible so their testimony can only go so far - like in any court case. So far there isn’t a single case that would stand up in court as evidence of aliens. But I am not denying these pilots didn’t see anything or that some issues are difficult to explain. But as you have said yourself they do require explaining as these are issues of national defence.

[@DougieBarclay]

This guy should teach the well trained fighter pilots how to use the numbers on the HUD and how to do the maths. It's simple.

[@neilburns6118]

Lol,...love it...

[@thevoid831]

:D LOL

[@crazy20legs]

He needs to work on the math. He used the gimbal angle not the gimbal + aircraft nose angle.

[@briefcandle]

A little late to the party on this one, but my take is something a bit different: I am fairly sure "they" know exactly what these videos were. I think it's much more about gaging the public's response to such phenomena on a mass scale. My reasoning is as follows: Had an alien craft landed in southern Spain 6,500 years ago, my ancestors would have thought the beings who stepped out of that craft were gods. Were the same thing occur right now outside of my house near New York City, not one person anywhere near me would think "Oh wow, a god!" They'd immediately wonder what planet they are from. I'm not saying contact has been made before. I'm just stating that at the very least, the powers that be might just think it's an eventuality, and the fact that the overwhelming response was that of wonder and intrigue is hopeful.

[@megasalexander927]

You are right. They are just preparing audience. We will see soon or later.

[@livethemoment5148]

wow....you are one of those people who love to expel a lot of words from your mouth but only imply things or gently suggest things....be CLEAR man! don't be afraid to just come out and say that you think :"they" KNOW IT IS ALIENS! AND YOU THINK IT IS ALIENS!......be clear man!!!!

[@hedgehog3180]

If contact was made or any evidence of alien life was discovered it'd be discovered by one of the hundreds of scientific projects looking for it and so it'd be released to the public the moment the paper was published without any involvement from any government. The funny thing is said projects have actually been making a ton of progress in this area yet it recieves basically no attention from the public because no one is interested in the actual search for life, just in confirming their biases. JWST recently found methane in the atmosphere of an exoplanet, it isn't a sign of life in this case because the exoplanet has an average temperature of 500 C but it shows that it can be done.

[@bahadrz6578]

Although not impossible, I find it unlikely that the military personnel at the scene would be unaware of the existence of several jets flying in formation within the airspace. It's also not clear to me why the videos are so short in length. There could be several reasons as to why they might be cutting the videos... Also, Luis Elizondo stated that these were the least startling videos among all that they have collected.

[@joestewart5406]

Not only that but it was examined before being released. Does this guy really think that the military hasn’t already thought of his theory’s. He is probably a paid misinformationist.

[@2760ade]

That's what bothers me about Mick's explanation. The people filming are highly trained airmen not hysterical US citizens. They would surely know if they were looking at a plane's heat signal?

[@HkFinn83]

But you do find it likely that space aliens are playing hide and seek with navy pilots

[@annodomini7887]

Luis elizondo has already been exposed as a fraud and a liar! So don’t believe a man who has done nothing but lie and try to profit off of ufo believers.

[@ExpoLane]

@@HkFinn83 How do you know what an Alien would or wouldn't do? For all we know it could be a probe to monitor and study us. Humans spend a lot of money, time and energy studying animals, why can't they?

[@zoltaniii9534]

Damn, so navy pilots & radar interpreters have no idea what they’re looking at. Could it be that they couldn’t have accelerated their combat aircraft jets to catch up & observe these objects up close? I mean Goose & Mav would have already snapped an inverted pic by now.

[@rotteneggconcept]

a Ballon Travelling at 100mph, that's 160Kph a balloon and trained pilots don't know the difference between a balloon and a aircraft

[@rotteneggconcept]

they Debunking fake videos? this makes complete sense

[@colinp2238]

The morning after?

[@loganxman]

Google and maverick are fake movie characters real fighter pilots cant do fake movie shit

[@looktowhere]

I was thinking the exact same thing!! Where is the close-up polaroid!! :)

[@mayankraj2294]

Extraordinary claims require extra ordinary evidence.

[@safe-keeper1042]

BuT wE hAvE a ViDeO oF a BlUr AnD FiGhTeR PiLoTs R HilY TrAiNeD!!

[@make.and.believe]

Respectfully- Sagan was wrong on this. There is no such thing as an extraordinary claim, and there is no such thing as extraordinary evidence. Claims are claims, and evidence is evidence, and the scientific method can be applied to claims and use evidence to test those claims regardless of how the observer personally feels about said claims. ‘Extraordinary’ is a judgment given by an observer to a claim. Judgments, scientifically speaking, corrupt the experiment. I hope this helps. Sagan was a great dude, and generally a champion of science. But on this point he was wrong.

[@Cardan011]

Some people can literally get whacked by big throbbing extraordinary evidence right on face and they would be thinking they know better

[@minutemansam1214]

@@make.and.believe He wasn't actually wrong, you're just pedantic. If I claimed that I ate an apple, that's a rather ordinary claim. It's ordinary because apples exist and people eat them. Even if I can't demonstrate it, it's reasonable for anyone to take me on my word. If I claimed that I ate an apple while riding my pet dragon, that's an extraordinary claim. These two claims are not equivalent, and one clearly requires a higher burden of proof. Burden of proof is something that does exist in science, and some claims require higher burdens of proof. This is not unscientific, in fact it's quite in line with science as we know it. Yes, what may be an extraordinary claim today may not be one tomorrow, but that doesn't really matter. This is a case of you being pedantic instead of actually understanding what he was saying. Me eating an apple is a claim. Me eating an apple while flying on my pet dragon is also a claim. They are not equal.

[@make.and.believe]

@@minutemansam1214 to feel something is ‘extraordinary’ is to make a judgement about it, be it a claim or evidence. The argument, respectfully, is not pedantic- it is not about nit picking the wording, it is in fact an argument against bias in scientific experimentation. Bias (ie the excercise of passing judgment) has no place in the scientific method. In fact, the scientific method absolutely forbids it, as it directly corrupts the experiment.

[@richfrazier8756]

Maybe aliens traversing between star systems is like us taking a bus across town!

[@SimplySammyK]

I'm not in the category of people who here UFO and instantly thinks "Aliens". However I did have an experience when I was younger with something me and my friend could never explain to this day, I really wish I could speak to someone such as yourself about this and get your thoughts, but talking about it does it no justice, wish I could pull the memory from our minds and upload it to the internet

[@BigDaddy-yp4mi]

Yep.....dudes that can land on a pitching, rolling, and heaving carrier in a rainstorm can't tell a 747 is actually further away than they realize...by dozens of miles

[@alexanderwest4293]

I find it difficult to imagine that a pilot with significant amount of experience in the air would be misidentifying the craft to the extent that Mick is suggesting.

[@MickWest]

Harder than imagining aliens visiting and just buzzing around a bit.

[@alexanderwest4293]

@@MickWest By no means am I married to the concept that the crafts are extraterrestrial. I'm merely stating that a fighter pilot, with thousands of hours of flight time, is going to have a better idea as to what they're observing over systems they explicitly train on - than you.

[@skepticalbadger]

@@alexanderwest4293 Than him, sure. Are they infallible? No.

[@bangladesh6027]

I know right. There's a point in the video where Mick refers to the switching from white, to black hot as going from infrared to visible light. I'm guessing the pilots have a better understanding of their aircraft's system capabilities than Mick. Not to forget that Mick's sole intention is to debunk these videos and explain them as entirely normal phenomena like all the other videos he looks at. His intentions are made clear at the start of their conversation when he is asked "you were immediately sceptical about these weren't you?"

[@bangladesh6027]

@@MickWest who is to say why aliens would visit? and who is to say what they're doing (if they did) is just buzzing around a bit? You? Lol

[@alexgeorge2993]

Hey mate new to your channel , found you through Event Horizon when I heard your interview :-)

[@claymaxon]

The problem with Mick West is that he has already made up his mind what something is not. The Nimitz incident had two planes with four people at different altitudes. No one is saying little green men, but all the aviators say it was something none had ever encountered.

[@oiocha5706]

If you're coming in with the attitude to "debunk" something, then you're already biasing you're analysis.

[@therealb888]

same goes with going in trying to prove something. But more often than not debunkers do enter with a biased attitude but a justifiable biased attitude.

[@BreakTheRules2011]

@@therealb888 - No bias is justified. As a social science researcher, we do everything we can to remove ALL forms of bias, even controlling for it in our statistical analysis. For example, in regression analysis, we enter control variables first, followed by others, (usually) in order of potential influence and grouped before finally assessing the impact of the variables we are ACTUALLY interested in while accounting for those previously inserted. Unfortuately, due to the nature of his work, there isn't much he can do to remove it, but it certainly is not good practice.

[@reaebedbenyah]

You couldn't say it better💎 YAH IS LOVE

[@TimmyTues]

Exactly. His explanation for the second video is pretty terrible... It's engine glare...on the "forward looking infrared camera".

[@Timbo6669]

@@BreakTheRules2011 You should know then, we can never fully remove our internal biases. We are all bigots by human nature. WE can try to remove them, as you stated, for more accurate data but its always there.

[@PlanetEvans]

People will speculate forever on the Nimitz incident, myself included, but, assuming Commander Fravor and radar operation staff on support ships and planes like the USS Princeton and Hawkeye are telling the truth, the "object in middle of circular jet path" theory has some serious limitations. The radar target (one among many they had been picking up for weeks) disappeared when the Navy jets arrived at the intercept location, and their on-plane radar systems picked up nothing, despite visual contact. OK, fine, explained away by technical glitches, right? It seems odd, though, that no one among Fravor's crew (I believe, two jets with 2 pilots and 2 weapons officers, so 4 people) picked up the "stationary object in the middle of the circle" again. They ALL lost situational awareness together? And I'm pretty sure Fravor states they doubled back on the spot because he claims the disturbance in the water that they initially observed vanished as well. They at least had eyes on the area, if they didn't physically return to the precise point. Where did the "center object" go exactly? And, apparently, the Princeton picked up the radar target again, seconds later, at their CAP point almost 100 miles away. More technical glitches, I guess, on what was likely the most reliable radar tech known at the time. None of this proves ALIENS, of course, but it suggests SOMETHING - some phenomenon - that can't be easily explained away by 4 experienced Navy professionals and support teams operating cutting-edge systems getting carried away and lost in the moment.

[@skaruts]

You're being unfair by saying he's "explaining away" things. He's not trying to downplay the events, he's trying to actually explain them. He's not the one trying to come up with sensational explanations for an audience, he's the one offering the uninteresting explanations for whoever cares to consider them. If the explanation makes something insignificant, that's not his fault. It is what it is. You're also making a huge assumption there: that they're telling the truth. We could assume that, but what do we do when some of their claims are impossible to have happened? You can make that assumption but you have to weigh the claims, and see whether that's a safe assumption to make. Some of their claims, like the impossible one where the object traveled 80k feet in one second, do make a gigantic dent on their credibility, and don't make that assumption seem all that safe to make. Claims like that one really make it seem quite likely that *_"4 experienced Navy professionals and support teams operating cutting-edge systems"_* got *_"carried away and lost in the moment,"_* or simply that they're making shit up.

[@cormacb2326]

@@skaruts I don't think its impossible, it's only a tiny fraction of the speed of light. I mean if it really is an advanced alien probe that is unmanned its within the realm of possibility to get to that speed. Before you ask I'm sure they're is some hyper advanced technology that makes air resistence irrelavant, for instance they could teleport the air molecules behind the ship. But yeah lying is more likely by a huge percentage.

[@skaruts]

@@cormacb2326 No, it's impossible. Newton's 1st and 2nd laws dictate that you can't do that instantly. But even putting newton's laws aside, if that happened they'd all be dead and the whole world would've noticed it like a sore thumb. If you're a large object, you don't move at that speed without causing serious ripple effects in the air around you, and without turning into a fireball due to friction. It would be comparable, if not worse, to a atom bomb, and it would likely cause tsunamis, among other things. If they ever lived to tell, then they wouldn't forget to mention all those kinds of details.

[@johankotze727]

@@skaruts Your theory is based on the technology we have available, not based on what is theoretically possible. If it was aliens, and im not saying it is it would be very likely that they have technologies that we can only theorize. And when you say they could be lying, why on earth did the pentagon release the footage in the first place?

[@skaruts]

@@johankotze727 The videos were leaked before the pentagon released them. Why they released them, who knows. But given that they gave ZERO support for the pilots' rhetoric and the attached documents clearly stated the subjects of the videos were balloons and UAVs (I think the term was "UAV"), it's quite possible they were just trying to dispel the nonsense. Whatever technology aliens might have would still be bound to the laws of physics. But then, there's nothing extraordinary about the behavior of those objects in the videos. There's only something extraordinary in the pilots' *claims.* And let me stress that: keyword: *_claims._* If you're gonna believe claims that are impossible according to the known laws of physics, then you will believe ANYTHING. There's pink elephants in orbit playing bagpipes. True story! I'm a very experienced astronomer, why would I be lying? Screw scientific studies, I want to talk about it on FOX News so I get enough notoriety that maybe people will start paying me to give speeches about it. Of course, science says that's impossible, but science is only based on what is theoretically possible. You see what I mean?

[@lrm21]

Mick West has presented reasonable grounded arguments for why there is a terrestrial explanation to this events. If someone wants to disagree that is fine, but you need to present evidence that discounts each sensible explanation. Yet no one has any evidence that discounts this. very simple, show us the video up close of these "UAP"s or show us corresponding telemetry like radar returns tracking the same object across multiple regions, into space, massive heat signatures, corresponding data from multiple agencies, and governments. Its a bit disturbing that this is coming from the same sources and the US Navy, not a good look so far.

[@brianderiemacker5234]

I take the words of David Fravor more seriously than anything Mick West would claim Any Day!!! David Fravor was there with the other pilots involved and their recordings,radar all the sophisticated means at their disposal. Mick West wasn't there and can prove nothing that he claimed. Only discrediting those who were involved kzbin.info/www/bejne/eXPXZXaEfd50mc0

[@darkcognitive]

David Fravor just shat all over your debunks. In go-fast, the image is black hot. Black = hot. White = Cold. The dot you claim is a bird, is white, you can see how cold it is in comparison to the sea. Meaning it would be so cold it would be dead, thus not possibly a bird. He also comments on the gimbal video, claiming you don't have a clue about how the system works and says you got it all wrong.

[@nmarbletoe8210]

@@darklight2.1 cool purple penguins! but from what i see in the pics, the penguins are always warmer than the snowy background. when they are purple the background is black, which indicates colder

[@driftwood8613]

I was in the Navy, i was a navigator. I will say this much, the Navy isn't wasting time filming, chasing and tracking birds. There has never been a bird that could out maneuver and evade a military Jet. It would take a Goliath of a bird to show up on radar on a count of them not being made out of metal. You're up in the night, eating pie in the sky in the 100 acre wood if you think for a second that these are just birds. Get a life and stop trying to play people for idiots Sector "A" and sector "Q"!? This guy doesn't know what he's talking about. You don't have to "know where to look" the radars job is to show YOU WHERE TO LOOK. Do these guys even mention the fact that the there's audio of the pilots and crew actively TRACKING the objects!!?? What is this nonsense video!? I'm disappointed in Cool Worlds smh 🤦‍♂️🤦‍♂️🤦‍♂️

[@psychobear1290]

Same no mention of the radar operators opinion. Just a guy that flew a Cessna a few times

[@zaharu4375]

I’m disappointed in Cool Worlds too. They obviously did very little research for this video

[@davecarsley8773]

It doesn't seem like you actually _listened_ to anything that was said. Also, nobody cares that you were "in the Navy". It doesn't make you a God, nor does it mean you can't be just as stupid or wrong as any other human being on earth. Humans who were "in the navy" are still humans. They are susceptible to all the good AND bad traits of being human. They are smart; they are stupid; they are honest; they are liars; they give money to homeless shelters; they kidnap children; They are perfectly mentally healthy; They have schizophrenia and hear voices talking to them... They're just people.

[@driftwood8613]

@@davecarsley8773 dude chill, the only reason i said i was "in the Navy" wasn't to boast myself. It was simply to indicate that i have been around this stuff a great deal and i know what they track and what they do not track. Now i haven't watched this video in a while so i cant tell you if i missed something or not but i do remember that it sure sounded like he was just trying to dismiss this whole notion of them being anything but large birds, which i would stand by my statement as being just nonsense.

[@driftwood8613]

@@jasonsmith3202 no no no, the Chinese and Russians or anyone else stand no chance against our Navy. That i can promise you!

[@pandemik0]

While I'm quite sure the sighting was a drone or balloon or something like that, the debunking here makes some claims without enough rigor poured around them. The claim requires highly experience pilots making rather unlikely misunderstandings of the distance and movement of objects, without establishing if pilots, especially at that level of skill, make that kind of mistake. Which I suspect is highly rare. If it was this easy to debunk, especially by the Navy who would have many people on staff knowing how to interpret the images and data points, why haven't they? Frankly, this was probably a classified navy unmanned drone, which both explains it's unlikely maneuvers and the Navy's clear intent to let some UFO hysteria hide a classified operation getting spotted by people on the wrong pay grade, and leaked to the public.

[@JCviggen1]

Debunking in this case doesn't require to find the actual truth. It's an illustration that there are a lot of reasonable ways that _could_ explain it without resorting to something extremely unlikely (aliens). Even highly experienced pilots are humans and humans are frequently fooled by their brains. If the brain doesn't know what exactly it is looking at, or it thinks it is looking at something and doesn't question it, anyone is susceptible to seeing something different from what there actually is. Many passenger planes being flown by experienced pilots have crashed because of illusions.

[@edwardlulofs444]

I'll believe that they are aliens when one lands in my front yard. Until then, . . . noise is king.

[@perkytxgirl]

Without knowing anything about their system but being a photographer my very first thought on the second video was that it was a camera effect. The way it moved seemed consistent with that.

[@randywatson2103]

I'am a bit late to the party here but thought i'd put my 2 cents in anyway..my interest in this subject started in 2017 when Leslie Kean broke her story with the New York times. Firstly i think Mick has done an incredible job debunking these viseos and it makes perfect sense, i really enjoyed his breakdown. On the flip side after listening to CMDR David Fravour and LT Alex Dietrich on a few occasions my jaw hit the floor. The eyewitness accounts they gave of that Tic Tac were quite simply incredible. from it's movements in the water to it's size,shape, colour and speed..simply remarkable. i find it hard to imagine that these two highly qualified piolts got disoriented or did not understand what they witnessed....over to you Bob Lazar 😉

[@petergriffin383]

To be honest, Fravor has lost some credibility with me after the show he did with Lex and his terrible job "debunking" Mick... Lt. Dietrich however still holds some credibility because she has no interest in the subject and is not out doing the road show with Fravor and friends. Her time viewing the tic tac was only about 10 seconds... and we must consider that she's holding back as to not disparage her former commander. She gives just enough information to keep Fravor's account plausible, but not enough to be considered a believer.

[@make.and.believe]

How was your first question not: “now that the pentagon has released clear evidence of unidentifiable aerial phenomenon to the public, why do you insist on pretending said UAP does not exist? Do you feel yourself more qualified than Air Force pilots and the Secretary of Defense?” You started this interview from a clearly biased perspective, praising de-bunking as a methodology preferable to the scientific method. That’s where I permanently paused this nonsense. If you decide to take this topic seriously let me know, I’d watch that.

[@jseigle]

What part of his explanations were not scientifically sound? Which parts were not consistent with the evidence? The only other explanation that has been offered is, "We don't know."

[@jeschinstad]

@Don Alpha: At the time this was filmed, there was an internet fad of sending up white garbage bags as hot air balloons. The youtube videos on how to make them are still available. So when something white and the size of a garbage bags appear in the sky at the time when thousands of white garbage bags are sent into the sky, I would start with the idea that it might've been a white garbage bag.

[@LasseJ789]

Did you consider the possibility that the Pentagon just uses it as an excuse for getting more funding?..

[@CatsClaw44]

Exactly!👏🏾👏🏾👏🏾👏🏾

[@SurveyorStudios]

Lasse Jensen yeah because people definitely take aliens serious enough to fund research into them

[@mithriest1]

Why talk to a random, can't they talk to the professional pilots who where there , just saying

[@liamwinter4512]

It would have been nice to see the pilot also in this video so they could have a actual conversation with the people who were there

[@benjiunofficial]

Joe Rogan did a lengthy interview with David Fravor, one of the pilots, which completely eliminates any possibility of an optical illusion or a bird. Transcript here: medium.com/@good_scribe/joe-rogan-experience-1361-cmdr-david-fravor-jeremy-corbell-readable-transcript-badf91c2c406 Mick West kind of paraphrases Fravor's account a little bit. Fravor described a tic-tac like object moving erratically near some sort of patch of white water on the surface, as if near a submerged object of some kind. This tic-tac then rose up and circled around him, according to Fravor. Then he cut across the circle: >"I just kinda drop my nose aggressively and I cut across the circle. And it’s coming this way - because I’m trying to fly to where it’s gonna be because I wanna join on it. I wanna see how close I can get to it. >And as I’m pulling up, it’s kinda starting to cross my nose, and it starts to accelerate. And within about less than a second, as I start to pull nose on to it, and it crosses right in front of me, it just goes poof. And it’s gone. >So, I call the other airplane. I said, “Hey, you guys - you guys see that thing?” And they’re like, “Sir, it’s gone. We don’t see it at all.” > I say, “Hey, let’s turn around. And let’s go back to see what was in the water.” There’s - was there something there? So, we turn around. We’re right there. We haven’t gone anywhere. It’s gone. Water’s perfectly - there’s no white water. It’s just blue. We’re like, okay. I don't read that as it whizzing past him as he flew past it. To me it reads like it flew away crosswise. The only way to "debunk" that is to flat out say that he's making the whole thing up, which is possible I suppose.

[@Ffollies]

Might have been kind of hard to get a hold of the pilots who witnessed these things years ago as they probably have other things to do with their time. Besides, witnesses are often unreliable as any law enforcement personnel would tell you. Video is a much better way to analyze this than talking to one of the pilots.

[@1FatLittleMonkey]

_"Why talk to a random"_ He didn't. He talked to what the military call a "subject matter expert". In this case, someone with experience in analysing unusual aircraft footage. Expertise he showed in his ability to use the information given by the aircraft/camera instruments to reconstruct the moving 3D relationship between the aircraft, unknown object, and surface. Could you do that?

[@therealb888]

That's kinda harsh on this "professional" debunker but it is a fair point that this shaggy dude only called in the debunker to fit his narrative.

[@__ant__24]

FLIR video: What is the thermal signature of a civilian aircraft at 50-100 miles away? GIMBAL video: The rotation explanation is pretty good! I wonder why the pilots seem to be unaware of this. However, the same question is raised, what is the thermal signature of a plane / jet engine at those distances? GOFAST video: What would be the thermal signature of a weather balloon at 11000 - 12000 feet? If you can show me that these explanations are consistent with thermal signatures then I may be convinced that someone is trying to fool us here. But until then, these remain UFOs.

[@michaelemory552]

Glad to have selected your straightforward and learned presentation - quite far from the abundant hoofrah media. We’ve created yet more impressive imaging tech. which may mislead the user/viewer; it can be due to artifacts within the systems. The sampling rate of video cameras led people to believe there were newly discovered, foot long, multi-legged air worms when they were seeing mere moths. I once read a sci fi short story in which ‘space command’ pilots were unable to evade point images drifting to center of their cathode tube displays. The ‘bug’ was in the tube technology. The one time I spoke to an ufo enthusiast regarding these videos I used the word ‘artifact’. That had him accusing me of being, “sciency-not-listening” as he trailed invective stomping off. So it goes.

[@Pavel_Poluian]

The truth can be established by special methods of Open-source intelligence (TEXT MINING). Consider the use of "flying saucers" (UFOs) as a means of delivering atomic weapons. This is very important and relevant, due to the fact that air defense is sharpened against ballistic missiles and aircraft, and UFOs calmly overcome them. The risk threshold has decreased - an atomic war may begin. It was the phenomenon of such devices in the late 80s that frightened the leadership of the USSR. All these "UFOs over Krasnoyarsk", "UFOs over Perm" + the explosion of the Chernobyl nuclear power plant... Therefore, the leaders of Communist Party went to an honorable surrender...

[@wagr9824]

What about the reports that the aircraft carrier personnel had been tracking the same type of UAPs for the previous 2 weeks. The radar crew stated the strange radar images were not normal and they couldn’t identify it. I wouldn’t think their radars would have a significant operational issue for 2 weeks without the crew noticing it.

[@srelma]

1. Why not have a technical issue? It's absolutely possible especially if inexperienced operator or new kit. 2. Where is the radar footage? If all we have is someone saying they saw something, I don't believe it. That's the good thing about footages that the experts can take a clear look at what exactly the people were seeing and don't have to rely on what they claim to have seen.

[@williamst.alexis3891]

Search Results Web results Weather balloon, I heard that before; the pelican that is a good new one.

[@dougg1075]

Swamp gas man.

[@erichschinzel6486]

Yeah the Pelican thing is funny

[@brandonquinney1645]

He had nothing else good to say lmao just had to come up with a answer

[@Mark-df3qc]

I respect that

[@jonescrusher1]

The home demonstrations are especially helpful, good work, it's still such a shame to read that so many won't even entertain these explanations.

[@tctopcat1981]

believe some guy in a garage or trained military folk radar readings and observations. Your choice. Honestly I truly believe the sheer ignorance of some people is holding back the human race from evolving to the next level.

[@jonescrusher1]

@@tctopcat1981 What, the ignorance of some people choosing to believe the blatantly obvious explanations rather than immediately going for 'it's alien technology'? This 'evidence' is so incrediby shit when you actually listen to the explanations.

[@davecarsley8773]

@@jonescrusher1 The "explanations" (given by this guy who wasn't there) basically come down to: "The guy who _was_ there didn't see what he thought he saw"... There's really no explanations given besides saying that the highly trained pilots don't know what airplanes look like. I mean, he's literally saying that a very experienced pilot was looking at *another airplane in the sky* and didn't recognize that it was another airplane. Yeah... what a great, evidence-based "explanation".

[@jonescrusher1]

@@davecarsley8773 that’s all you hear? Sounds like you want to believe

[@waitwhat3547]

@@jonescrusher1 I'm sure the enitre us Navy was so stupid that it couldn't come up with an obvious explanation that mick does, mick should teach fighter pilots how to not make mistakes while flying, since the navy is clearly lacking intelligence

[@aaronjohnsheppard5745]

Marvelous. This Gentleman reminds me of Dr. Ernhardt Von Grupten-Mundt. He can disprove gravity if he tries really hard! The most amazing UFO debunk is when he mentioned skydivers jumping out of the plane flashing so called Marfa lights? And the greatest one in my humble and honest opinion is - "Sometimes the UFO is just a bird". Keep up the good work Mr. Mick West.

[@PaulBunyun]

Would be interesting to see Mick on a podcast with Fravor, but that is likely to never happen.

[@lithium23]

Mick would love that, Fravor did a response video that wasn't that good.

[@mattcall7467]

@@lithium23 it was brilliant this Mike west is an idiot .. let’s not forget the radar

[@MrCmon113]

@@marcv2648 Then why not release the radar data rather than those unremarkable videos?

[@mortyjames5897]

This guy has made a career out of shutting down any unorthodox ideas. Chemtrails and so on are easily debunked, but he fails here. Why would the US military have a concealed UFO program if footage like this is so easily debunked? Would the US military really make a conscious effort to hide this footage from people if Mr. West could debunk it from his armchair? Would they really be battling with high-ranking politicians like Harry Reid over a crock of shit? Sorry, Mr. West, but I don't buy your "rational" explanation. As if you know more about this incident than the ACTUAL pilots who were flying at the time, and the dozens of experts who no doubt looked over the footage before it was leaked.

[@PaulBunyun]

@@mortyjames5897 I hear those concerns, and share(d) many of them myself upon seeing his initial debunking. Admittedly, both Mick and Thunderf00t's explanations are lacking. However they are both disregarding the actual eyewitness accounts, and just going with the footage we have available. Thunderf00t concludes one of the videos is a duck... To play devil's advocate: There was little fight back on releasing the footage. It actually existed online for well over a decade before the NYT gave it any credence. The US made little effort to hide the footage, because presumedly they knew there was nothing here worth hiding. Perhaps they came to a definitive conclusion of what it was. It could even be one of our own craft, and the video intentionally leaked to send a message to China or Russia. This theory also supports characteristics of the encounter. Ie: happened on a training day, the Tic Tac craft knew of their vector point preemptively, and the mirrored "dogfight" behavior patterns it was described as doing.

[@Homunculas]

You'll never convince the "chem trailers" away from their conspiratorial beliefs.

[@ergohack]

@Plebeian Media /s ... ?

[@_nebulousthoughts]

Why would they use planes that are so visable? Use ships in international waters....

[@scottywills124]

What does Chemtrails have to do with UFO's?

[@planter13]

@@sayeager5559 thats got to be the dumbest comment I've ever read. Do you have any idea what you are talking about 😂😂😂

[@HumbelPie]

Chemtrails have been acknowledged and is now and in the light program. Look it up. Its been talked about by nato openly

[@ewarfare]

Mic West is as much of an expert in military weapons systems as anyone. His debunking suffers from confirmation bias and he makes too many assumptions. I find it unlikely that a billion-dollar weapons platform and supporting threat analysis system would mistakenly identify a target. I'm not convinced these encounters are alien in nature, but they are highly advanced and pose a significant threat to national security and air traffic.

[@adsteedley]

"UFOs and aliens are just a fun thing." Its why I'm here :)

[@safe-keeper1042]

Same

[@jrandallmurphy7892]

This is a very good analysis. In my mind the videos have always been suspect. However I don't buy the debunking of Fravor's firsthand visual account. We're talking about a squadron commander with years of experience who simply wouldn't make the sort of mistake that Mick suggests unless he was totally incompetent. He's obviously never seen an alien craft in real life either. Once you do, you don't have any doubt anymore. Other problems here as well, particularly their own brand of denial and confirmation bias against the evidence.

[@delatroy]

Not sure why they’ve completely omitted eyewitness testimony from 4 different people

[@sulagreen5792]

Eye witness testimony means very little. Years and years of incorrect court cases have shown this. And multiple eye witnesses don’t mean much either because people are very influenced by the power of suggestion. If one person says they see something unusual, someone else is likely to also misinterpret visual data because they’ve been influenced by the other person.

[@delatroy]

@@sulagreen5792 eye witness testimony is considered direct evidence in law

[@sulagreen5792]

@@delatroy yes and it’s why we get so many faulty convictions.

[@Admiralty86]

@@sulagreen5792 " we won't believe it until we see it and once we see it we won't believe it because we would be our own witness and witness testimony is meaningless ergo what we saw must be meaningless because we saw it and could not believe it."

[@emmanuelmahuni8163]

Guys your debunker is just poor. I understand the maths you presented but please explain frames @14:17 - @14:19, it's very short, just play it at 0.25 speed to see it properly. But what I want you to look at is the actual speed of the object against the ocean background. That thing is moving really really really fast. The camera was waiting for the object to reach the frame before it begun tracking it. The object zipped into frame and then the camera started tracking it. Can you explain how your balloon or pelican did that? In fact there was probably a reason why they started tracking it in the first place.

[@emmanuelmahuni8163]

To top this up, if the Jet was moving at 300mph and the balloon at 40mph, wasn't the camera angle supposed to quickly change according to your maths? That non-radical changing angle proves that the jet was moving at the same or lesser speed than the object. Eyeball a person walking on the street from a moving car and feel the angle change in your eyes to get the idea, unless the person is moving faster or at the same speed as the car.

[@frankbyte]

@@emmanuelmahuni8163 of course, its a rather poor demonstration from a self-called debunker and would not pass a scientific expertise. But it sounds cool ;-)

[@att.6134]

@@emmanuelmahuni8163 I also wondered about the very same thing. You looked at the footage where the cam has targetted some spot on the water and thus seemed to be resting in the air. When now this object comes onto the scene it moves very fast. We would tend to think that what we see must be that object’s speed. Interestingly it is an optical illusion. You can try it out yourself. Focus on something that has a certain distance from you and now move, but keep that one spot focussed. Now have something between you and the focussed spot. While you move you see that object in the middle move into the scene at some good speed. So indeed Mick’s explanation works for both observations. One is: how can the object move so fast into the field of view while the cam focusses on one spot in the water, and secondly why that object is moving fast while *it* is locked.

[@autumnroxielynn2423]

@@att.6134 🤣🤣🤣🤣🤣🤣🤣🤣

[@att.6134]

@@autumnroxielynn2423 You don’t think that it is an optical illusion? Note, I am not saying that it is a balloon. I just say that the explanation about the optical illusion would work. About the object itself I can’t say much - I simply don’t know what it was, I couldn’t identify it. And combined with David Fravor’s observation I just don’t know what it was. However, besides that: if there is an airplane with a camera and the cam looks at a certain spot and keeps it central, and then between the airplane and the water there is a very slowly moving object, then it *would* look like as if the object is flying very fast. So *if* there would have been a balloon that moves very slow, and the airplane cam focusses on one fix spot in the water, then it would seem as if the balloon would move very fast. This is the only thing that I say, and not that I identify the object. But both observations can _easily_ be explained with the optical trick. One observation is that the airplane cam focusses on a fix spot of the water and the incoming object moves very fast. The other is when the object is focussed and it seems to be moving fast. However, I do not say that the object is moving slowly. It could be a pretty fast object indeed. But if it wasn’t then the airplane speed itself would be recorded, and it would look similar as in the clip. So neither is the explanation debunking a balloon nor is it proving one.

[@dpsamu2000]

That emerald shaped one was debunked over 10 years ago. Just the camera aperture.

[@bradleywillis1654]

So on the first debunk he didn’t mention the radar, which should verify the distance of a plane. If it’s close enough to be filmed, it’s close enough for radar to pick up.. and why wouldn’t these governments have experts who would come up with the correct answers? Great vid guys!

[@ahklys1321]

It was a blow fly. Stuck to the screen since lift-off

[@Living_Matrix1]

He did mention it. They probably thought it was closer than it actually was so didn't scan the right area.

[@Insidious_Rage]

I Have a hard time believing our military isnt able to discern a commercial jet on sophisticated radars. Something caused these jets to scramble

[@breadman5116]

​@@Insidious_Ragehave you ever spoken to anyone in the military? In my experience they are not very smart individuals, not even the officers

[@beenaplumber8379]

@@Insidious_Rage I have a hard time believing many things too. That's not evidence. And I'd like to know the OP's engineering background when they say something so specific as "If it’s close enough to be filmed, it’s close enough for radar to pick up." What is that camera's range? What is that radar's range? What variables affect effective radar range?

[@milesy023]

First he said it could be a plane, which it wasn’t. Then he said it could be a pelican or a balloon 😂🤣😂

[@MickWest]

There are three different videos.

[@milesy023]

Mick West & they were all the same object that they were tracking.

[@milesy023]

Mick West I’ve heard crazier theories though, someone else said it could be a carrier bag 😂

[@peNdantry]

@@milesy023 Uh, no. This discussion is about three different videos of three different events. I would suggest watching it again, and with an open mind this time, though I suspect that may be impossible for you.

[@arkeag]

I think there’s a reason they didn’t release the full video clips and for strategic purposes we might never see the rest of the videos. But the encounters Cmdr. Fravor, other pilots and radar operators described vividly can’t be cast aside by describing them being deceived by their vision because of some optical effect. All they have to do is be aware of their surroundings and maneuver and endure. If they say they‘ve seen something, I‘d believe they‘ve seen something.

[@evanroberts2771]

Yes, strategic purposes. Who's making a fool out of themselves atm in the media, and has the authority to get this released????

[@kalibr4540]

Yeah, I believe things just because I’m told them too.

[@fupopanda]

@@kalibr4540 You certainly do. There are many things you believe simply because you were told to believe them. That's a guarantee. If you've never realized that before, then you need a whole lot more introspection your life.

[@juakaliautomotive2439]

I'd trust the word/account of a veteran pilot and senior naval officer over these quacks any day...even if their maths checked out -- which they don't

[@hedgehog3180]

If flying a jet is as simple as you portrayed it why is qualifying to become a jet fighter pilot so hard and why do most people fail?

[@SMHman666]

While these videos are interesting, we need far better supporting evidence to claim extraterrestrial craft. I hope we get it as it would be the greatest discovery humans could make. Imagine irrefutable evidence for intelligent life outside of Earth ! Blurry images don't cut it and we must be a little skeptical about eye witness testimony, however well meant.

[@logiconabstractions6596]

These explanations are really down to earth and make lots of sense. It doesn't explain things without a doubt, but offers a simple, realistic way to interpret these. As Sagan aid, extraordinary claims require extraordinary evidences, and those videos & testimony aren't extraordinary evidence enough. The bit on which I do disagree is about their behavior, in case they are aliens visits. If they can travel interstellar distances, they clearly have nothing to fear from us. No more than we have to fear all the animals/insects/plants we routinely study here. Less so even. Maybe they would be able to gather whatever data/observations they want/need just by flying close to stuff. They may not have a need/desire for more direct contact. But they may not care more than we do about being seen by wildlife. They also may not be willing to study us all that specifically - maybe they would be interested about earth as an ecosystem more broadly, of which we are a part but not the sole focus. I guess ultimately, trying to guess motivations of an interstellar traveller is quite a futile undertaking.

[@TheLoneStreamer]

Who else is waiting for that colab video of Captain Disillusion and Mick West?

[@Mark-df3qc]

I respect that

[@bobsyeruncle4841]

reminds me of the father Ted cow sketch explaining to Dougal that the cows far away are smaller the cows close to him which are bigger Dougall thought there were tiny cows and big cows. Perception is a strange thing and people are so easily fooled.

[@phuklyyve8941]

now what are you thinking? lol

[@DezFutak]

...especially pilots with 18+ years of flying experience who train other pilots

[@tinkerduck1373]

Interesting elaboration; finally someone explains the numbers on the display. I think, whatever side you take, it's important to avoid quick conclusions. Collect all available data and then access it. And if there's not enough data, then the answer is just "not enough data to make a conclusion". Occam's razor should never be an excuse for being investigation- lazy.

[@SuperTonyony]

And "I Want to Believe" is no excuse to swallow tall tales without skepticism.