Nov 3, 2025 02:27 PM
(This post was last modified: Nov 3, 2025 02:29 PM by Zinjanthropos.)
…..never available because they don’t exist? Thought might be a good question for AI. Personally it’s getting harder and harder to look at these videos dominating the internet. So plentiful that perhaps it’s comparable to the Ludovico Treatment, violating my free will (skeptical viewpoint) by trying to make me an enthusiastic participant/believer in so-called ‘paranormal’ events. 
Well at least I have AI to ask. It gives me a fair outlook and doesn’t commit to popular opinion, afaik. Having AI around in 1971 might have ruined A Clockwork Orange or perhaps Kubrick could have made the movie with added twists. Anyways here’s AI’s take:
The scarcity of high-resolution, unambiguous UAP videos has led to a debate with two main viewpoints: the "best" videos are either unreleased/classified or they do not exist due to conventional explanations.
Arguments that the "Best" Videos Do Not Exist (or are misidentified)
Lack of Clear Evidence: Despite modern smartphone cameras capable of high-resolution recording, most publicly available UAP videos remain "fuzzy blobs". Skeptics argue that if truly extraordinary objects existed, clear footage would be abundant.
Conventional Explanations: The vast majority of UAP sightings can be attributed to misidentified aircraft, weather balloons, drones, natural phenomena (like flares or meteors), or camera artifacts.
Debunking Analysis: Analysts have effectively debunked many supposedly compelling videos, including the U.S. Navy's "Go Fast" and "Gimbal" videos, showing that the apparent extraordinary movement can be explained by basic physics, camera effects, or misinterpretation of data.
Human Error and Hoaxes: Eyewitness accounts are subject to observation and memory errors, and many videos on the internet are deliberate hoaxes.
Scientific Consensus: No official government investigation has ever publicly concluded that UAPs are extraterrestrial in origin. The lack of hard, scientific evidence for alien craft supports the idea that clear videos proving their existence are non-existent.
Arguments that the "Best" Videos Are Classified or Kept Secret
Classified Information: Some UAP videos are classified for national security reasons, as releasing them could reveal sensitive military capabilities, such as the performance of advanced sensors or the location of test ranges. There are claims that a "whole bank" of videos exists that Congress hasn't seen.
Data Loss: The U.S. Navy has confirmed that for some older incidents, the data (e.g., radar data or the original tapes) was not properly archived because UAPs were not taken seriously at the time, leading to data loss rather than a cover-up.
Government Ambiguity: The government's carefully worded statements about UAPs being "unidentified" rather than "alien" are seen by some as a way to avoid public panic or to prevent foreign adversaries from knowing what the U.S. does or does not know.
Credible Witnesses: A small percentage of sightings involve "sane and credible people," including military pilots and officials, who report objects exhibiting capabilities beyond current human technology, suggesting that something genuinely unusual is being observed, the details of which may be classified.
The conclusion largely depends on whether one trusts the analysis of skeptics and the current scientific consensus, or believes that the government is withholding definitive proof from the public for various reasons.
Well at least I have AI to ask. It gives me a fair outlook and doesn’t commit to popular opinion, afaik. Having AI around in 1971 might have ruined A Clockwork Orange or perhaps Kubrick could have made the movie with added twists. Anyways here’s AI’s take:
The scarcity of high-resolution, unambiguous UAP videos has led to a debate with two main viewpoints: the "best" videos are either unreleased/classified or they do not exist due to conventional explanations.
Arguments that the "Best" Videos Do Not Exist (or are misidentified)
Lack of Clear Evidence: Despite modern smartphone cameras capable of high-resolution recording, most publicly available UAP videos remain "fuzzy blobs". Skeptics argue that if truly extraordinary objects existed, clear footage would be abundant.
Conventional Explanations: The vast majority of UAP sightings can be attributed to misidentified aircraft, weather balloons, drones, natural phenomena (like flares or meteors), or camera artifacts.
Debunking Analysis: Analysts have effectively debunked many supposedly compelling videos, including the U.S. Navy's "Go Fast" and "Gimbal" videos, showing that the apparent extraordinary movement can be explained by basic physics, camera effects, or misinterpretation of data.
Human Error and Hoaxes: Eyewitness accounts are subject to observation and memory errors, and many videos on the internet are deliberate hoaxes.
Scientific Consensus: No official government investigation has ever publicly concluded that UAPs are extraterrestrial in origin. The lack of hard, scientific evidence for alien craft supports the idea that clear videos proving their existence are non-existent.
Arguments that the "Best" Videos Are Classified or Kept Secret
Classified Information: Some UAP videos are classified for national security reasons, as releasing them could reveal sensitive military capabilities, such as the performance of advanced sensors or the location of test ranges. There are claims that a "whole bank" of videos exists that Congress hasn't seen.
Data Loss: The U.S. Navy has confirmed that for some older incidents, the data (e.g., radar data or the original tapes) was not properly archived because UAPs were not taken seriously at the time, leading to data loss rather than a cover-up.
Government Ambiguity: The government's carefully worded statements about UAPs being "unidentified" rather than "alien" are seen by some as a way to avoid public panic or to prevent foreign adversaries from knowing what the U.S. does or does not know.
Credible Witnesses: A small percentage of sightings involve "sane and credible people," including military pilots and officials, who report objects exhibiting capabilities beyond current human technology, suggesting that something genuinely unusual is being observed, the details of which may be classified.
The conclusion largely depends on whether one trusts the analysis of skeptics and the current scientific consensus, or believes that the government is withholding definitive proof from the public for various reasons.
