UFOs (UAPs): Explanations?

Pilots of 15 jetliners report seeing lights and unknown objects while flying over the American midwest. The lights were observed performing maneuvers impossible for conventional aircraft, often circling in a tight "racetrack" trajectory. These pilots should be lauded for their courage in coming forward as reporting uaps is often frowned upon among commercial airline pilots.

https://thedebrief.org/any-idea-wha...s-with-unusual-racetrack-uap-in-recent-weeks/


“ANY IDEA WHAT THEY ARE?” AMERICAN PILOTS REPORT MULTIPLE ENCOUNTERS WITH UNUSUAL ‘RACETRACK’ UAP IN RECENT WEEKS

MICAH HANKS AND CHRISSY NEWTON·
BREAKING NEWSUAP
·OCTOBER 19, 2022

"Pilots and crews from more than 15 commercial aircraft say they have encountered unidentified aerial phenomena (UAP) in American airspace in recent weeks, according to eyewitness testimony and videos that detail the unusual events.

According to witnesses, the rash of incidents occurred over a seven-week period and involved sightings of bright luminous aerial objects in airspace from the American Midwest to as far west as the Pacific. The Debrief has learned that several of the objects were reportedly observed performing unconventional tight-circling maneuvers, which pilots and others involved said defied simple explanation.

The objects, which have since garnered the nickname “Racetrack UAPs” for the descriptions of their odd circular flight paths, were first reported by researcher and television personality Ben Hansen on social media and his YouTube channel, where he has featured several videos detailing the pilot encounters.

While several of the incidents were reported to air traffic controllers, no official investigations are known to have taken place, although The Debrief has learned that the events were reported to at least one Federal Aviation Administration unit tasked with responding to potential threats to American airspace..."

 

Log in or Sign up to hide all adverts.

I did not find anything in the article referring to "performing maneuvers impossible for conventional aircraft".

All I see is:
"...performing unconventional tight-circling maneuvers..."
"...odd circular flight paths..."
"...peculiar, revolving flight paths..."
"They’re going around in circles so, maybe three aircraft."

Those all sound pretty well within possibility of conventional aircraft. Can you indicate what passage of the article you inferred meant "maneuvers impossible for conventional aircraft"?

"

It's good that you bring that up. The article makes it clear that that occurred after-the-fact, and nor necessarily by anyone of the actual witnesses:

"The objects, which have since garnered the nickname “Racetrack UAPs” for the descriptions of their odd circular flight paths..."

Not only does this suggest that someone has manipulated this story before it reached publication, but it also points out how you have taken that colourization of the original story and implied it as if it were a factual part of the original account.

A fascinating example of the "Broken Telephone Game" and how they lead to the creation of tall tales. like in Irish drinking songs:

well he'd thought he'd take a trip to Italy
he thought he'd take a trip by sea
he jumped in the harbour in New York
swam like a great big old shark
he saw the Lusitania in distress
He put the Lusitania on his chest
drank up all the water in the sea and walked all the way to Italy
He was my brother Sylvest
A row of forty medals on his chest...

 

Log in or Sign up to hide all adverts.

"Neither of the principal witnesses believed that the objects they observed were any kind of conventional aircraft, based on their odd maneuvering and the speed they exhibited."

 

Log in or Sign up to hide all adverts.

"odd" is not synonymous with "impossible". You dramatically changed the story in the retelling.

I think you've proved the skeptic's point perfectly, that all stories are assumed to be modified in the retelling and cannot be trusted. If you do it, there's no reason to think that whomever came up with the nickname "Racetrack UFOs" didn't also colourize their retelling. We have no idea how many iterations of sensationalizing it's gone through before it got to us.

Well done.

 

LOL! Do you have any evidence to back up such an outrageous claim? Or is this just another blatant skeptic excuse to cherry-pick out of eyewitness accounts what you want to be true and what you don't want to be true?

 

Talking of well done.
Did you see the link ( In MR link) to Mike west's site where a member there, Flakrey, shows his evidence for why it could be the starlink satellites:

https://www.metabunk.org/threads/mu...k-flares-racetrack-illusion.12586/post-281377

Video (of Racetrack ufos') taken by the person who gave them the name 'Racetrack'
Best go to time mark 2.01

They 'pop up', they pop in to view because of 'flare up' on reaching a certain position above the horizon.

 

Uh..satellites don't move at high speeds in tight circles. Once again, skeptics cherry picking out of the accounts only what suits their narrative.

 

At what time mark in the video above (post #7405) does the captain say they are moving at high speeds in tight circles ??

 

Also, here is what the actual starlink satellites look like. They move steadily in one direction in a straight line and look nothing like uaps moving back and forth and around in circles:

Please Register or Log in to view the hidden image!

 

And over the Pacific ocean too. The reported lack of parallax from aircraft at some distance from one another relative to constellations in the night sky suggest that if they were physical objects, they were far above the aircraft, up in space. Satellites are a possibility, except that these objects were supposedly flying in a racetrack pattern with some going in different directions than others. I don't know of any spacecraft that could maneuver like that. Perceptual errors might be a possibility, such as misjudging relative motion from a moving aircraft. But repeated perceptual errors described much the same way? It's conceivable that they were secret air/spacecraft prototypes of some unknown sort, but once again they seem too far in advance of the current aeronautical engineering state of the art for that to be plausible.

I'd be very interested to know what the Space Force's satellite tracking and missile early warning radars detected, but I don't expect that they would release that to the public.

I don't want to leap to the conclusion that they were air/space vehicles of some unknown sort, but they do sound very interesting. I certainly don't want to dismiss them with a sneer. It's conceivable that they have a familiar mundane explanation and it's conceivable that they don't. I don't know, but my interest is aroused.

https://nypost.com/2022/10/20/multi...gs-reported-by-pilots-over-the-pacific-ocean/

 

At what time mark in the video above (post #7405) does the captain say they are''speeding around in circles'' ??

 

Read Yazata's link to the NY Post article. Several pilots are on record describing the erratic movements of the objects.

"In one captivating account, a former military pilot reported seeing multiple aircraft flying above him.

“We’ve got a few aircraft to our north here and he’s going around in circles, much higher altitude than us. Any idea what they are?” pilot Mark Hulsey radioed in on Aug. 18 while flying a charter jet off the Los Angeles coast.

The confused controller responds, telling the pilot that he was not sure.

Hulsey called back 23 minutes later to say that the three aircraft he had originally reported had increased to seven, flying between 5,000 and 10,000 feet above him.Pilots struggled to describe their encounters with strange objects to air traffic officials.

“They just keep going in circles. I was an F-18 pilot in the Marine Corps, and I’m telling you, I’ve done many intercepts, I’ve never seen anything like this,” Hulsey says in the recording.

According to Hansen, the strange lights that some pilots reported as possible aircraft were “seen by upwards of 15 different commercial flights. And at least six pilots are willing to go on record with their names and everything if asked to do so by any investigative agencies,” he said."

 

Um, no, that looks like a photoshop of white circles over a photo of the satellites. i.e. if you're going to post a photo claiming to be X, please make sure it isn't a doctored version of it.

Please Register or Log in to view the hidden image!

Furthermore, that footage is of the satellites shortly after launch, before they have found their individual locations. They don't stay in that train for long, with each satellite eventually finding its own orbit. So to use footage of what they may look like shortly after launch as somehow reason to dismiss the UAP/UFO observation as not being Starlink satellites for not looking like that is... wrong. At best you can say that the UFO/UAPs don't seem to be Starlink satellites shortly after a launch. You can't use that footage to completely dismiss them from being Starlink satellites, though.

 

Show me some footage then of the starlink satellites moving in different directions and around in circles. Definitely NOT starlink.

 

My point is that you can't post a photo/screenshot of one aspect of a Starlink launch (train of satellites, and a photoshopped photo at that), as you did in #7408, and use that to dismiss them entirely. It is simply dishonest. If you want to argue that they are not Starlink satellites, that's not a problem, but your means of doing so in #7408 is fallacious.

 

Ok.. I'll take your word for it. But the argument that I made that they don't move like satellites still stands. Again, the uaps were going in different directions and in tight circles, and that completely rules out starlink.

 

According to the witnesses, at least.
Do we know if the UAPs were observed throughout such manoeuvres, or where they only inferred from when the UAPs blinked in to view, for example?
E.g. if you look at runway lights that flash in a coordinated pattern, and you didn't know there were multiple lights, you might think it one light that is moving along a straight line. So, can you rule out a similar explanation? I don't want you to guess, or assume, or to state what you believe, but I am asking if you know for sure that this explanation (multiple objects giving the illusion of a single object in motion that no actual object possessed) can be ruled out, and how you know it could not possibly be so?

 

Yeah the eyewitnesses. The people who actually saw the whole thing.

I take the experienced pilots' statements that the objects were moving and high above them, as well as the video showing they moved in time lapse, as reliable. Unlike skeptics, I'm not trying to debunk the sightings to suit some personal agenda of all uaps being mundane objects.

 

Nor do I.

But MR encourages dismissal by spinning his own wild yarns. That's how mole hills get spun into mountains.

Only a fool would not be skeptical.

But so far, nobody's actually dismissed anything. I'm simply wondering what's interesting here. Aerial craft doing unusual maneuvers and going in circles doesn't strike me as the cream of the crop for UFO sightings.

Frankly, it kind of hurts the case that UFOs are anything more than unidentified mundane aircraft seen in unusual circumstances.