> 1) This isn't a recent phenomena. People have been seeing discs in the sky for literally thousands of years.
People have reported talking to ghosts and angels for thousands of years too. People's senses and memory is fallible and can lead to misinterpretations and misunderstanding.
> 2) Aircraft can't make 90 degree turns or descend from 80,000 feet to the deck approximately instantly.
You are assuming that their reports that the objects actually made these movements are indeed correct perceptions of the movements seen.
> 3) Groups of extremely highly trained military pilots have seen them, and the video and IR data has been released from these encounters. You can't make 4 people in 2 aircraft hallucinate at the same time, and fool all the instrumentation on them (radar, IR...) and also fool the battlespace radars on the cruisers directing them. And if you could, that too would be kind of interesting to look at whatever that is.
A lot of conflation going on here. The Nimitz incident did involve 4(?) people, but not at the same time. The radar technician (radar data has not been released) did report seeing multiple objects on the radar, but not much else about them such as the rapid, physics-defying movements reported by the Fravor the pilot who reportedly saw an object with his own eyes. The IR video captured by another pilot also does have reasonable explanations (even including the on-screen display sensor readings) that counteract the claims that the object was moving as fast as they thought it was at the time, or as the video might make it seem.
And they all saw the same object from the same perspective which could have resulted in similar visual effects leading them to misjudge how far away the object was. They reported that it was very far away but the sensor readings in the thermal video and other alternate theories about what the object was suggest that it wasn't as far away as they thought. Which if true would explain why they thought it was moving faster than they thought.
I was referring to the disjoin between the radar technician, the fighter team with Fravor, and the later fighter plane that actually captured the infrared video.
I mean that they saw it from in the air at the same distance, and all most likely mistakenly thought the object was farther away from them than it actually was. Especially since they have all been in communication and crosstalk plants seeds in other people's heads. If one pilot says "hey that object looks like it's 10 miles away" then all the other people will by default have that thought, even if it is actually only 5 miles away. This is true especially when in the air because it is extremely difficult to judge distances and sizes.
Failures in visual perception for pilots and people in boats are widely known shortcomings of human eyes. We just aren't evolved to see things at that scale accurately.
People have reported talking to ghosts and angels for thousands of years too. People's senses and memory is fallible and can lead to misinterpretations and misunderstanding.
> 2) Aircraft can't make 90 degree turns or descend from 80,000 feet to the deck approximately instantly.
You are assuming that their reports that the objects actually made these movements are indeed correct perceptions of the movements seen.
> 3) Groups of extremely highly trained military pilots have seen them, and the video and IR data has been released from these encounters. You can't make 4 people in 2 aircraft hallucinate at the same time, and fool all the instrumentation on them (radar, IR...) and also fool the battlespace radars on the cruisers directing them. And if you could, that too would be kind of interesting to look at whatever that is.
A lot of conflation going on here. The Nimitz incident did involve 4(?) people, but not at the same time. The radar technician (radar data has not been released) did report seeing multiple objects on the radar, but not much else about them such as the rapid, physics-defying movements reported by the Fravor the pilot who reportedly saw an object with his own eyes. The IR video captured by another pilot also does have reasonable explanations (even including the on-screen display sensor readings) that counteract the claims that the object was moving as fast as they thought it was at the time, or as the video might make it seem.