I'm going to turn off notifications for this thread because it's devolved into a circle-jerk of personal attacks by people who don't seem all that interested in the subject.
In summary:
1. By all indications, the object is completely inanimate and does nothing at all the entire time. Whether it is close to the lens or far away we don't know, but it's just "there" either way and never does anything anomalous at any point. Ballloons far away, dead spider stuck to a web close up, who knows.
2. The claims that the object was changing its temperature rapidly were clearly a lie by Corbell that was conclusively demonstrated with videos and screenshots in this thread. EVERY time its color changed, the other objects in the shot were changing as well. It was camera settings, not actual temperature change.
3. Lies like this are run-of-the-mill for Corbell, which is why nothing else he says about the video can be taken seriously either unless it is backed by proof. As I clearly showed, even the majority of the UFO community sees him as a lying, exaggerating grifter who makes shyt up and plays dumb as a rock.
4. Grusch, on the other hand, is intelligent and likely honest, he just has some blind spots. Those blind spots likely led to the fact that when people complained to him about a top-secret craft retrieval program beyond Congressional oversight, he conflated it with other people who are complaining to him with duck tales stories about UFOs. (Some of those are even the same people - there are likely workers on the periphery of the craft retrieval program who only have half-knowledge of what is going on, and have become conspiracy theorists who see all the secrecy and thus begin to believe it has something to do with retrieving NHI craft rather than merely our own and others' top-secret craft). Many of the stories he repeats and the ways he makes his claims (being 100% certain that we have alien bodies even though he's never seen them or any direct evidence for them, repeating the 1933 Italian UFO story as fact even though the "pilots" were described as White Aryans) have made him look quite gullible, and that is in line with people on the autism spectrum. That is not an insult on his intelligence, just a simple fact about his difficulty reading other people and telling when they're bullshytting him. Despite being an intelligence officer, until this assignment he had always worked in signals intelligence and other roles on the tech or planning side of things, never doing human asset missions or personal human-level investigative work.
If you want to argue any of that, then go back and quote the posts where I actually back all of it up. But I'm not replying. I'm out because the conversation isn't even interesting anymore, instead of debating the actual evidence, it's just a bunch of people screaming about what side they're on and pissed off that not everyone is on that side.
Hopefully if I'm gone, you'll stop talking about me and start talking about the topic again. But I suspect we'll get at least one more round of comments about me.
