• Please take a moment and update your account profile. If you have an updated account profile with basic information on why you are on Air Warriors it will help other people respond to your posts. How do you update your profile you ask?

    Go here:

    Edit Account Details and Profile

UFOs?

sevenhelmet

Far from this opera for evermore...
pilot
Why is it relevant that his wingman was female?
Well, it does help narrow down who she could be, if someone were inclined to try and get her side of the story.

That said, I wouldn't be surprised if she is done talking about it. Too much potential for negative public attention.
 

azguy

Well-Known Member
None
Why is it relevant that his wingman was female?
What @sevenhelmet said. Not quite hoping someone might bite, but just that some on here must know who she is. To have been a fleet JO in 2004, she would have to be a ~20-yr CDR by now. There can't be that many female, O-5, VFA 1310s running around on active duty. I can definitely understand why she wouldn't say anything though.
 

azguy

Well-Known Member
None
I don’t dismiss it, I dismiss the idea that what they all saw was of extraterrestrial origin.
I'm willing to entertain different possibilities. At first blush, no doubt, by far the most likely explanation is some type of black program (maybe ours, maybe some other countries'). But 16 years is a long time for something like that to be kept completely quiet.
 

Hair Warrior

New Member
I'm willing to entertain different possibilities. At first blush, no doubt, by far the most likely explanation is some type of black program (maybe ours, maybe some other countries'). But 16 years is a long time for something like that to be kept completely quiet.
So what do you think?
  1. alien technology
  2. future earth technology (time travel)
  3. present day earth technology (USA/Russia/China/corporation/other)
  4. optical illusion/faulty instruments/loose weather balloon caught in wind current over an ocean geyser/magma displacement/two whales having sex
  5. elaborate hoax
  6. none of the above
I wrote the above options back in 2018. I think they hold up well, but can you think of anything I missed?

Option 1 could be broken out as 1A) alien technology operated by a human, or 1B) alien technology not operated by a human.
 

Brett327

Well-Known Member
None
Super Moderator
Contributor
Given that we, as a society have zero evidence of the existence of #1 or #2 from your list, I find it odd that they’re on your list at all. Why not list divine influence, or a plot by Bigfoot? Some of you have very active imaginations.
 

Hair Warrior

New Member
Given that we, as a society have zero evidence of the existence of #1 or #2 from your list, I find it odd that they’re on your list at all. Why not list divine influence, or a plot by Bigfoot? Some of you have very active imaginations.
Analysis of competing hypotheses has to start by encompassing all possibilities, however remote. It's a formal methodology endorsed by the IC, and you may or may not be surprised by how many IC members actually are paid to red team/ red cell this stuff. If your Venn diagram only encircles the 99.9%, it's wrong - make it 100%. The biggest IC failures of the past two decades (9/11 and Iraq WMD) resulted primarily from a lack of imagination to doubt what the consensus thought was the obvious.

All that to say: List the highly unlikely options among the list, then we use evidence and analysis to readily dismiss them (if they are so unlikely).
 

Brett327

Well-Known Member
None
Super Moderator
Contributor
Analysis of competing hypotheses has to start by encompassing all possibilities, however remote. It's a formal methodology endorsed by the IC, and you may or may not be surprised by how many IC members actually are paid to red team/ red cell this stuff. If your Venn diagram only encircles the 99.9%, it's wrong - make it 100%. The biggest IC failures of the past two decades (9/11 and Iraq WMD) resulted primarily from a lack of imagination to doubt what the consensus thought was the obvious.

All that to say: List the highly unlikely options among the list, then we use evidence and analysis to readily dismiss them (if they are so unlikely).
My issue isn’t with any given methodology, insofar as your bar napkin brainstorm constitutes any methodology other than your personal whimsy. My issue is that you’ve left out all kinds of other improbable and farcical potential causes. Why not just invent an entire list of potential mythological causes? You know, because your rigorous methodology demands it. Why weren’t dragons, Godzilla, or unicorn mating activity featured on your list? What about Flying Spaghetti Monster? That’s at least as probable as space aliens, no? I find that your methodology lacks rigor.
 

Hair Warrior

New Member
My issue isn’t with any given methodology, insofar as your bar napkin brainstorm constitutes any methodology other than your personal whimsy. My issue is that you’ve left out all kinds of other improbable and farcical potential causes. Why not just invent an entire list of potential mythological causes? You know, because your rigorous methodology demands it. Why weren’t dragons, Godzilla, or unicorn mating activity featured on your list? What about Flying Spaghetti Monster? That’s at least as probable as space aliens, no? I find that your methodology lacks rigor.
Well, of course it lacks rigor, because it's not analysis. It's a napkin. It's not my problem set and not my DIAP lane. :D

The Pentagon at one point had an office for this: AATIP. The Pentagon confirmed an uptick in unknown aircraft sightings, roughly around the same time as a major upgrade to the AN/SPY-1. The Pentagon released the videos. Who knows what it could be, but even if it's a US/PRC/RUS/nonstate actor technology, it's certainly of interest. And if it's a weather phenomena, well, it certainly fooled our radars to the point where we burned jet fuel going out to investigate the area, so that would be of interest to our radar maintainers and manufacturers. I guess we could ask CDR Fravor again what he thinks it could be, since he was the senior officer on location.
 

BigRed389

Registered User
None
Well, of course it lacks rigor, because it's not analysis. It's a napkin. It's not my problem set and not my DIAP lane. :D

The Pentagon at one point had an office for this: AATIP. The Pentagon confirmed an uptick in unknown aircraft sightings, roughly around the same time as a major upgrade to the AN/SPY-1. The Pentagon released the videos. Who knows what it could be, but even if it's a US/PRC/RUS/nonstate actor technology, it's certainly of interest. And if it's a weather phenomena, well, it certainly fooled our radars to the point where we burned jet fuel going out to investigate the area, so that would be of interest to our radar maintainers and manufacturers. I guess we could ask CDR Fravor again what he thinks it could be, since he was the senior officer on location.
Yeah...no. 2004?

CG-59's radar was as old as she was then. If you're referencing the Popular Mechanics article, I'd be 100% behind CDR Fravor in questioning the story coming off the cruiser sailors. Lot of things don't add up from just how those ships work and are run.
 

xmid

Registered User
pilot
Contributor
Well, it does help narrow down who she could be, if someone were inclined to try and get her side of the story.

That said, I wouldn't be surprised if she is done talking about it. Too much potential for negative public attention.
She's a permanent instructor at USNA, if any of our ambitious midshipman want to try to get her to give the inside scoop...
 
Top