UFO/UAP Thread

[Yazata]

Enigma Labs

https://enigmalabs.io/

https://twitter.com/enigmalabs

Merged Podcast

https://www.mergedpodcast.com/

https://twitter.com/Merged_Podcast

Ryan Graves

https://twitter.com/uncertainvector

[Kornee]

The Ryan Graves twitter link led to this one:
https://www.washingtonexaminer.com/opini...clear-labs
I post it not as some exciting new UFO/UAP incidents, it's just more of the same old same old, but as an example of the laughable inferences made in the article.
That 'drones' hovering outside of say the NIF facility could rationally represent a 'significant threat' to national security. Ha ha ha ha. How so exactly?
Hypothetical super X-raying capabilities would still reveal nothing of use. Good old cyber hacking of data bases is the way to go. And in NIF case, the prize is essentially useless.

The real value in hyped 'security threats' of the UFO incursion nature, is in creating another arrow in the lobbying quiver for ever more 'defense' industry expenditure. Emerging threats here, there, everywhere!
https://www.thenation.com/article/archiv...you-think/

[Yazata]

Just released. There's little in it that's new, it's mostly bureaucratic stuff. But once again, it's accompanied by a classified report and seemingly serves as that report's unclassified cover-letter.

https://www.dni.gov/files/ODNI/documents...rt-UAP.pdf

And this

[Image: FmTBbTnXEAcQIxa?format=jpg&name=4096x4096]

[Kornee]

From:
https://www.defense.gov/News/Transcripts...all-domai/

"UNDER SECRETARY OF DEFENSE (I&S) RONALD MOULTRIE: Thank you. Good afternoon. I'm Ronald Moultrie, the Under Secretary of Defense for Intelligence and Security. It's a pleasure to be here today to provide an update on the department's efforts to address unidentified anomalous phenomena, or UAP. In May of this year, I appeared before Congress for the first open hearing on UAP in 50 years. In my testimony, I underscored that the Department of Defense takes UAP reports seriously. You may have caught that I just said unidentified anomalous phenomena, whereas in the past the department has used the term unidentified aerial phenomena. This new terminology expands the scope of UAP to include submerged and trans-medium objects. Unidentified phenomena in all domains, whether in the air, ground, sea or space, pose potential threats to personnel security and operations security, and they require our urgent attention."

So UAP aint no longer UAP. And yet it is. Admittedly the new definition is an improvement as catch all acronym. But in reference to the 'urgent' tone, I refer to my last post here.
How can UAP of the genuine nonmundane kind be 'an urgent issue' given the White House was harmlessly buzzed repeatedly by such back in 1952?
No hostile ET 'invasion' followed, or before that or ever since. Despite numerous reliable reports of incursions at military related installations etc.

[Yazata]

Hey, MR! This was seen in the sky today, over the Gulf of Mexico! What do you suppose it is?

[Image: FuKU4X_aYAARrxN?format=jpg&name=large]

[Magical Realist]

Hey, MR! This was seen in the sky today, over the Gulf of Mexico! What do you suppose it is?

[Image: FuKU4X_aYAARrxN?format=jpg&name=large]

Good question. Looks like a uap to me!

Do you have any other information on this photo. It looks very intriguing!

[Kornee]

Place and timing narrows it down to - SpaceX Star Ship seen directly from below - before it was unceremoniously blown up following stage separation failure. Elon is not happy.

and now that I've watched it (very rare to watch the space developments stuff posted at SV), all doubt is removed: https://www.scivillage.com/thread-6544-p...l#pid57675
From ~ 0:57 onwards.

[Zinjanthropos]

Hey, MR! This was seen in the sky today, over the Gulf of Mexico! What do you suppose it is?

[Image: FuKU4X_aYAARrxN?format=jpg&name=large]

Good question. Looks like a uap to me!

Do you have any other information on this photo. It looks very intriguing!

Thanks to the G of M clue plus the timing of the launch I thought of SpaceX.

Ever try to count little dots bunched together just using free eye? Usually have to enlarge image and use your finger to scroll around while remembering where you started. I count 27 but it looks as if there’s 7 missing in the pattern.

Those seven apparent ports, do they represent misfiring of the engine(s)?

[C C]

[...] Those seven apparent ports, do they represent misfiring of the engine(s)?

https://www.scivillage.com/thread-6544-p...l#pid57657

https://www.scivillage.com/thread-6544-p...l#pid57670

[Yazata]

Hey, MR! This was seen in the sky today, over the Gulf of Mexico! What do you suppose it is?

[Image: FuKU4X_aYAARrxN?format=jpg&name=large]

Good question. Looks like a uap to me!

Do you have any other information on this photo. It looks very intriguing!

https://twitter.com/SpaceNosey/status/16...1858210818

---

Thanks to the G of M clue plus the timing of the launch I thought of SpaceX.

Ever try to count little dots bunched together just using free eye? Usually have to enlarge image and use your finger to scroll around while remembering where you started. I count 27 but it looks as if there’s 7 missing in the pattern.

It had 33 engines installed, so if 27 are burning, that leaves 6 out.

Those seven apparent ports, do they represent misfiring of the engine(s)?

Yes. Reliability of the Raptor engines is something they really need to improve.

The consensus seems to be that it lost 3 engines immediately on takeoff (or else they never started), was up to six engines out in the photograph in this thread and by the last photos obtained of it near the end, 8 engines were out (almost a quarter of them). It was losing engines one-by-one, all the way up.