- Nov 23, 2020
- Reaction score
I have a technical question, if the triangular iris is causing the object to appear triangular, is there a reason the background stars appear to be square and not triangular?As I've pointed out elsewhere, the 'triangular' shapes of the USS Russell pyramid-shaped UFOs are caused by the triangular iris on the night vision camera. These are not flying triangles. In fact the most likely explanation for this particular clip is distant ordinary aircraft, not drones.
According to Metabunk those are not stars, but ' "noise" in the photomultiplier tube micro channel tubes. 'I have a technical question, if the triangular iris is causing the object to appear triangular, is there a reason the background stars appear to be square and not triangular?
Here is an article:Chief of Naval Operations, Michael Gilday
Possibly! But the new administration believes in global warming and a big battle is happening now. There is no reason they want to have this conversation... They should have had it a long time ago --as many have said, and are saying now.Feinman thanks for article.
A different approach that has come to mind is that our government is trying to use UFOs to get the American public to
focus on UFOs instead of a another important problem.
Like, for example, get them to think about UFOs instead of the string of the hottest summers on record killing thousands.
Quite. I guess what I’m trying to say is that new technology doesn’t necessarily mean more true and finer definition is always the case. You have to work with the technology, sensors, lens distortion, apertures, lossy formats, filters, colour grading, LUTs, chromatic aberration, focal lengths, depth of field, post effects, motion tracking, video editing software plugins and a whole load of other stuff before you can really judge what you are seeing.The 'tiny stars' aren't stars, just noise in the photomultipliers. Explained above.
... Navy just has to deal with boats and stuff dunnit?
I think this is basically what is going on. By introducing a mix of debunkable stuff at first but gradually ramping up.
False implicatures and plausible deniability:
"In each of these cases, the speaker is affording themselves plausible deniability. Trying to move a new relationship (or even an old one) in a different direction can be potentially awkward, especially if the other party isn’t as interested as you. But if you play your cards close enough to the chest, and things go awry, you can always deny you were talking about anything more than coffee, or a night spent binge-watching the latest season of House of Cards."
...The indirect approach lets you test the waters without committing yourself one way or the other. If they catch your drift, everybody leaves happy; if they don’t, well, you can hardly be found guilty for someone else misunderstanding your otherwise unimpeachable character! (More generally, shifting from one relationship type to another, like from one rooted in dominance to one that’s more transactional, can lead to tension, which is why bribing the maitre d’ for a better table can seem just as nerve-wracking, even if it’s not a crime.)
...And they can always claim they were just expressing genuine concern, as laughable as that might seem.
And, so, indirect speech — and by extension plausible deniability — has many uses, both amongst those in positions of power, and those with none. Though paradoxical on the face of it, it can provide avenues for authoritarians to obtain and maintain control,* while protecting the powerless when all other exits are blocked.**
Paddy Power is thinking the safe bet is to take all the money and if we get involved in a war with an alien intelligence, it’s game over and they won’t be in a position to pay out. Win win for them. Apart from the whole melty nutrient food tanks and the anal probe/disintegration chambers thing.Irish Paddy power odds of humankind having a war with E.T.s by 2030 is 500/1.
Paddy Power reasoning is we know they are here, but can we live together ?
They have nothing to gain by talking about UFOs unless they have too, and know that they aren't from here:Apply critical thinking not just pointing out your posts Fein but for everyone.
Why and who gains?
How about an increased defence budget with the proceeds funnelled into other projects?They have nothing to gain by talking about UFOs unless they have too, and know that they aren't from here:
Though it would be better to just tell Congress that what they were seeing was Chinese technology and that they should just cancel the report as it would reveal our intel capabilities and technology, for reasons of national security ---and to give them a tremendous amount of money to counter the threat.Now you’re getting it.
You’re getting warmer.Though it would be better to just tell Congress that what they were seeing was Chinese technology and that they should just cancel the report as it would reveal our intel capabilities and technology, for reasons of national security ---and to give them a tremendous amount of money to counter the threat.
If that is Chinese technology, then it's 'game over' for the rest of us.Here is testimony from a crew member of the Nimitz:
If that is Chinese technology then they shouldn't bother building anything else. I don't think the military is trying to fool Congress with our own tech,