Jellyfish UFO's captured on military weapons camera

[Professor Emeritus]

when the object changes tenperature the objects in background do not *ruling out camera fiddling)

Let me bring in some more claims you've made about this earlier in the thread:

You're acting like the source is from a tiktok vid. Do you even know who Jeremy Corbell is?

The vid is authentic.

And so we're assuming corbell didnt consult with the people who filmed this, and manned the actual device then? Because corbell is...an idiot? So we're saying that he just said this was a temp change without. Any consultation. Doesnt seem likely, but if you say hes an idiot..lol

You are CERTAIN that it isn't changing temperatures. You dismiss that you were told that thats what it was doing, which is fine I suppose, but that relies on the idea that "these are idiots and they didnt properly vett this to come to that conclusion

So your position is that if the background is clearly changing along with the object, and thus the temp change clearly isn't there, then Corbell is indeed an idiot? And he really did fail to consult with the people who took the video, or ignored what they had to say?

These two frames are about half-a-second apart. Look at the temp color of the roads and their intersection.

When the object is light, the roads are light. When the object is dark, the roads are dark. The background is CLEARLY changing color along with the object, it's just not very noticeable in the main light part of the background due to contrast settings that are keeping that portion light regardless.


With one fell swoop, you've helped me demonstrate:

#1: The object is not changing temperature, only the settings are changing.

#2: Jeremy Corbell is either an idiot or a liar, and couldn't figure out this basic fact in all the time he's had possession of this video.

#3: All your claims for Corbell's reliability and trustworthiness need to be thrown out the window.

#4: Any suggestion that you have done remotely enough background research to be criticizing other people's evaluations should be dismissed.

 

[Professor Emeritus]

@AngryBaby, you can see the obvious background changes in the very first video clip Corbell used, even though it's cropped so tightly that it becomes very difficult to see the background consistently in multiple shots. Here's a four second sequence from 0:13 to 0:17 in the OP video:

Look specifically at the edge of the house and the ground to the left of the house in the first two screenshots. As the object darkens, what was once a very light house edge is now completely shadowed, and the dark patches on the ground have become significantly darker.

By the third screenshot, the dark patches on the ground have become super dark and almost black - nothing like the ground in the first two shots. But when it starts to lighten in shot 4, those black pixelated spots on the ground have now become a fuzzy gray. And by the 5th shot, the ground is completely washed out again without a single black mark.

Look at the road and the barriers in shots 4/5. It's night and day.


You don't notice most of the change due to contrast settings - the lightest parts always stay light and the darkest parts always stay dark in every shot. But when you look at the ambiguous grays in-between, they're changing exactly together with the object. It is clearly the SETTING that is changing, not the temperature.



So you're left with two options. Either Corbell is an idiot not to have seen this despite supposedly being such a pro and having had the video for so long....or he's a grifter and purposely deceiving you.

I think it's probably some of both. But now you know why 80% of the UFO community is sick of this guy and thinks he's full of shyt.

 

[AngryBaby]

So far as "not even an insult", this is what you said:



Yeah, that clearly wasn't meant to be derisive.

Yeah, thats not related to autism lol. You specifcally said I used the autism comment as an insult. Which is what was being addressed. Instead you decided to use a completely seperate paragraph about how you are arguing in bad faithto now move the goalpast about being insulted in a general sense?

Once again...manipulative, and bad faith.

And we can kill two birds with one stone, we talked about the jellyfish plenty. I can't help that you repeatedly keep exasperating your arguments in order to use unrelated cases to justify why the military getting it wrong a few times justifies your position of it being a spider casing

 

[AngryBaby]

@AngryBaby, you can see the obvious background changes in the very first video clip Corbell used, even though it's cropped so tightly that it becomes very difficult to see the background consistently in multiple shots. Here's a four second sequence from 0:13 to 0:17 in the OP video:

Look specifically at the edge of the house and the ground to the left of the house in the first two screenshots. As the object darkens, what was once a very light house edge is now completely shadowed, and the dark patches on the ground have become significantly darker.

By the third screenshot, the dark patches on the ground have become super dark and almost black - nothing like the ground in the first two shots. But when it starts to lighten in shot 4, those black pixelated spots on the ground have now become a fuzzy gray. And by the 5th shot, the ground is completely washed out again without a single black mark.

Look at the road and the barriers in shots 4/5. It's night and day.


You don't notice most of the change due to contrast settings - the lightest parts always stay light and the darkest parts always stay dark in every shot. But when you look at the ambiguous grays in-between, they're changing exactly together with the object. It is clearly the SETTING that is changing, not the temperature.



So you're left with two options. Either Corbell is an idiot not to have seen this despite supposedly being such a pro and having had the video for so long....or he's a grifter and purposely deceiving you.

I think it's probably some of both. But now you know why 80% of the UFO community is sick of this guy and thinks he's full of shyt.

In those first couple, and last few images the background is nowhere near the transparency of that thing lol once again...all this wordy ass typing for something that you clearly are seeing differently on a subjective level.

I'd be curious if anyone else besides you in this thread feels the transparency if that object matches its background

 

[jaydawg08]

I have repeatedly said from the very beginning that I think Grusch is telling the truth on several points.

1. I believe that the military has a secret craft recovery program, or at the very least recovers various crafts (our own top-secret craft, other countries' top secret craft, etc.) and keeps much of it top secret

2. I believe that the things Grusch is saying are really things other people told him. He might be exaggerating his certainty about the conclusions, but I don't think he's making the stories up.

3. I believe that Grusch was retaliated against when he started making threats to expose secret programs.


If Grusch is being credible in his allegations of retaliation, or credible in having exposed the existence of a top secret program outside of Congressional oversight, or credible in that it has been confirmed that he was really told the stories he was told, then none of that is a surprise to me or gets us any closer to aliens. We have not seen the slightest credible evidence from anyone yet that "alien bodies and crafts" specifically or "NHI" more generally are in military possession.

I don't understand why people like yourself keep thinking that we would be given/shown evidence of "off world tech", while stating that you're aware we wouldn't be told of current on world tech cause it's so secret

Do you realize how stupid that actually sounds lol

 

[Professor Emeritus]

In those first couple, and last few images the background is nowhere near the transparency of that thing lol once again...all this wordy ass typing for something that you clearly are seeing differently on a subjective level.

I'd be curious if anyone else besides you in this thread feels the transparency if that object matches its background

Of course the "transparency" of the colors doesn't match, because they're completely different materials. The object is clearly something fairly lightweight and insubstantial, while the background is solid. That's further evidence that the object is likely just balloons or something thin like a spider molt.

What matches is the CHANGES in the color. The color of the background CHANGES at the exact same time the object changes. Watch the video and if you look at the right places in the background you can see it happening in perfect sync.

You claimed this wasn't happening:

when the object changes tenperature the objects in background do not *ruling out camera fiddling

The fact that you can't admit you're wrong on such an obvious fact, even after it's carefully explained to you with video and screenshots both, pretty much sums up the whole thread. Is even one of your fellow believers going to be the brave one who admits, "Yeah, breh, the objects in the background actually do change"?

 

[Professor Emeritus]

I don't understand why people like yourself keep thinking that we would be given/shown evidence of "off world tech", while stating that you're aware we wouldn't be told of current on world tech cause it's so secret

Do you realize how stupid that actually sounds lol

Wait, so "disclosure" isn't going to happen now? Because I'm not one of them who been claiming for years now that we're on the verge of "disclosure".

I've never said that the military would just "give' us evidence of off-world tech. I don't believe that they would be able to hide it even if they wanted to. There's no scenario in which the US military has sole possession of alien tech and manages to keep the tens of thousands of people who would have to know quiet about it for decades. And there's no scenario in which numerous world governments have alien tech and have managed to perfectly coordinate secrecy for decades. There are numerous lines of reasoning that all point in that same direction, based on the clear evidence before us. We've discussed why the evidence points in that direction ad nauseum in the other threads, no need to rehash it here.

 

[jaydawg08]

Wait, so "disclosure" isn't going to happen now? Because I'm not one of them who been claiming for years now that we're on the verge of "disclosure".

I've never said that the military would just "give' us evidence of off-world tech. I don't believe that they would be able to hide it even if they wanted to. There's no scenario in which the US military has sole possession of alien tech and manages to keep the tens of thousands of people who would have to know quiet about it for decades. And there's no scenario in which numerous world governments have alien tech and have managed to perfectly coordinate secrecy for decades. There are numerous lines of reasoning that all point in that same direction, based on the clear evidence before us. We've discussed why the evidence points in that direction ad nauseum in the other threads, no need to rehash it here.

UAPs are evidence, which we see all the time.. I feel like I'm arguing with that other dude who doesnt know what evidence means.

It's not concrete or overwhelming evidence, but evidence non the less.

You also sound ill informed on the topic, even tho it's been told again and again to you on this subject. Congress is researching and having hearings on this topic specifically because it's not controlled by the US government. They asked for eminent domain in the disclosure bill specifically because it's not controlled by the US government.

Come on man.. you gotta keep up

 

[GhostfacexDOOM]

I know a Zerg Overlord when I see one, can't fool me......

 

[AngryBaby]

UAPs are evidence, which we see all the time.. I feel like I'm arguing with that other dude who doesnt know what evidence means.

It's not concrete or overwhelming evidence, but evidence non the less.

You also sound ill informed on the topic, even tho it's been told again and again to you on this subject. Congress is researching and having hearings on this topic specifically because it's not controlled by the US government. They asked for eminent domain in the disclosure bill specifically because it's not controlled by the US government.

Come on man.. you gotta keep up

Thats why its bizarre/exhausting arguing with the guy. Just overall comes off as a grandiose lack of faith in everyone elses critical thinking ability. But tremendous faith in his own, and doctrine/websites comprised of those that will already confirm his world view.

He thinks we're the biased ones lol when hes on metabunk.

Dont worry Rhakim(dont know why you changed your name) im reading your new shyt

 

[AngryBaby]

I have repeatedly said from the very beginning that I think Grusch is telling the truth on several points.

1. I believe that the military has a secret craft recovery program, or at the very least recovers various crafts (our own top-secret craft, other countries' top secret craft, etc.) and keeps much of it top secret

2. I believe that the things Grusch is saying are really things other people told him. He might be exaggerating his certainty about the conclusions, but I don't think he's making the stories up.

3. I believe that Grusch was retaliated against when he started making threats to expose secret programs.


If Grusch is being credible in his allegations of retaliation, or credible in having exposed the existence of a top secret program outside of Congressional oversight, or credible in that it has been confirmed that he was really told the stories he was told, then none of that is a surprise to me or gets us any closer to aliens. We have not seen the slightest credible evidence from anyone yet that "alien bodies and crafts" specifically or "NHI" more generally are in military possession.

Of course we haven't. things of that nature were shown to the house in a classifed briefing. After what they were shown are they now saying he is credible. Which should be interesting to someone who isnt already biased against it.

Like you are.

 

[AngryBaby]

Of course the "transparency" of the colors doesn't match, because they're completely different materials. The object is clearly something fairly lightweight and insubstantial, while the background is solid. That's further evidence that the object is likely just balloons or something thin like a spider molt.

What matches is the CHANGES in the color. The color of the background CHANGES at the exact same time the object changes. Watch the video and if you look at the right places in the background you can see it happening in perfect sync.

You claimed this wasn't happening:




The fact that you can't admit you're wrong on such an obvious fact, even after it's carefully explained to you with video and screenshots both, pretty much sums up the whole thread. Is even one of your fellow believers going to be the brave one who admits, "Yeah, breh, the objects in the background actually do change"?

in these pics, theres images of the device in different areas than the lighter areas in the background. But it makes it LOOK like its darker with a darker background when in reality the picture is of the device in a different spot.

Thats not even the best way to demonstrate your point being how that can be manipulated. And again, why would you post pictures when we all have video? You can give a time stamp.

 

[Gritsngravy]

my people are so late...

It's been suspected that there are organisms that live in the upper atmosphere. No its not an alien or even a ship. It's a living organism. There are all types of organisms up there.

Where u hear this from?

 

[Professor Emeritus]

UAPs are evidence, which we see all the time.. I feel like I'm arguing with that other dude who doesnt know what evidence means.

The fact that you can't identify something doesn't mean it's evidence of whatever you want it to be.


Why not say that UAPs are evidence of Iraqi militant activity? Or ghosts? Or of angels? Or of other dimensions? Or secret Hindu flying technology from the Ramayan? Or just that they're great evidence of the capacity for humans to fall victim to visual and cognitive illusions?

To be evidence of something, you have to actually have some sort of positive evidence that pushes towards that conclusion. Not just "I can't identify it and therefore....

You also sound ill informed on the topic

lol - no one could be reading my posts in here and claim that I'm the one who sounds ill-informed on this topic.

Congress is researching and having hearings on this topic specifically because it's not controlled by the US government.

First off, that's blatantly false, no one in Congress has claimed the US government is not in control, they just claim that THEY haven't been let into the club.

And second, if "someone other than the US government" was in control, that makes the suggestion that they could somehow maintain perfect international operation security for 90+ years even less likely. How the fukk would some non-government entity prevent all private individuals AND all government individuals, not just from the US government but from every other government too, from coming across and putting forth conclusive proof of any random UFO crash they find?

 

[Lord Beasley]

First off the commentator is lying. You can easily tell the camera is switching between black hot and white hot. At first I'm like "looks like bird shyt on the camera, but I can't really tell because of how they're moving it


I believe in aliens, but I don't think this proves anything. There is an entity within the government that studies extraterrestrial shyt, and there are multiple entities that aren't tied to the government