Comments by "Titanium Rain" (@ChucksSEADnDEAD) on "Is the US government hiding Aliens?!" video.

  1. The craft isn't rolling. The pod is. So the mirrors and lenses are rotating to keep the horizon stable. The smudge is an artifact from the lenses which rotates to keep the image stable.
    2
  2. A corner reflector inside a balloon. The US has used those to trick Cuban radars.
    2
  3. Nobody wants to look like a fool so they double down instead of admitting they were bamboozled.
    2
  4. No. It's a contrast aid. Edge detection software creates a halo around the object to aid the pilot. You can disable this setting to make it disappear.
    2
  5.  @TinCupChalice40  No. These cameras are better than you think. You're just used to 1080p/4k cameras being used to capture people from 6-7 feet away. Now use those cameras at night to see tanks from 20 miles away. You can't. The jet fighters can. They're using state of the art optics. You can't develop better right now.
    2
  6. These cameras are made to blow up tanks from 20 miles away, at night. Not to film Hollywood blockbusters.
    2
  7.  @jorgeillueca5260  You assume they are maneuvering and travelling at speeds not possible. Meanwhile it could be just optical illusion.
    2
  8.  @paulbellino5330  footage being real just means it wasn't tampered with. Real footage of a balloon is real. Great revelation...
    2
  9.  @lance5041  If the footage was debunked, we depend on the fallible eyes and memory of the pilots.
    2
  10. No, they were looking at the pod. Object was too distant for visual.
    1
  11. There's videos inside of cockpits where the displays were filmed (perhaps accidently) and the image these pods obtain is crisp.
    1
  12. Element 115 was theorized about in science magazines before Bob Lazar started talking about it. He simply read scientific articles to sound smart.
    1
  13.  @cosmocosmandoo9074  that's still acceleration. Any change to velocity is acceleration.
    1
  14. Other military forces do not disclose it, while in the US things like FOIA requests can get footage declassified.
    1
  15. GoPros do not capture better footage and do not see the thermal spectrum.
    1
  16.  @lauramurman2642  They have good cameras. Take any camera you want and try to look at tanks from 20 miles away. At night. You're not going to see anything. The jet fighters can.
    1
  17. Or, the contrast tracker algorithm was acting up. Targeting pods are not infallible.
    1
  18. The horizon is spinning, camera has internal mirror to "derotate" the spinning. This causes horizon to appear stable, but the smear (like astigmatism) spins. The pilots are not used to these smears.
    1
  19. Because the objects are like 10 miles away. Bring the fanciest 4k camera you have, it won't even see the object.
    1
  20. Mick West has the entire explanation in his channel.
    1
  21. Chile released UAP footage from a naval helicopter. It was years ago, and Mick West and his contributors at metabunk solved it.
    1
  22. Satellite (and aircraft) spy cameras are works of art. FLIR pods are for warfare.
    1
  23. Bob Lazar worked at a print shop.
    1
  24.  @tplyons5459  Damn everyone seems to have worked with Bob in Los Alamos but nobody is willing to corroborate his stories.
    1
  25. Mick West proves that nobody is above question. Pilots are not gods.
    1
  26. No, it's a radar reflector inside a balloon.
    1
  27. Yes, it is. The image is being stabilized by mirror rotation, which causes the horizon to be stabilized but the "object" (lens smudge) to rotate.
    1
  28. No. It's a contrast aid. It's a setting on the pod.
    1
  29. Because the aircraft is spinning, and the lenses are spinning inside the pod to stabilize the footage. The smear is created by the lenses, so that object appears to spin. The rest of the image does not.
    1
  30. The optics are rotating to keep the footage stabilized.
    1
  31. Does your phone camera detect enemy tanks at night from 20 miles away?
    1
  32. Those pilots were debunked by a USAF crew chief. He actually knows how the pods work and called out Fravor for not "remembering" (aka lying) about the contrast setting.
    1
  33. The footage. The pods see things our eyes can't.
    1
  34. Who is this expert engineer? If he is who I think he is, he's already been countered.
    1
  35.  @xoferwalken  Mick West does not have to be an expert in ATFLIR. He has already proven with demonstrations that the effect shown is mirror rotation.
    1
  36.  @xoferwalken  Equipment specialists have backed Mick West.
    1
  37.  @Jacmac1  And Mick West did a response video: /watch?v=FG49Tpb_los Chris Lehto noticed the flaw in Dave Falch's argument. And even in Dave Falch's videos the commenters are pointing out how his footage proves Mick West right.
    1
  38. Probably. It's where the sensors would be.
    1
  39. He's right.
    1
  40. The white glow is a contrast aid. A USAF crew chief (they are certified to seat on the cockpit and use the systems) confirmed that there's a setting on the targeting pod to activate and deactivate that "glow" outline.
    1
  41. UAPs have always been acknowledged. Hence the term.
    1
  42. Chris Lehto did a poor job.
    1
  43. An 85 year old schizo published something on Substack. Wow.
    1
  44. They are viewing things outside of the visible spectrum that normal cameras can't see, and from dozens of miles away. Also, the military always blurs footage to mask their true capability. Remember when Trump tweeted a cellphone photo of satellite imagery? It was not blurred, so it exposed the US satellite capabilities - the photo was crisp enough to see individual steps and hand rails in the stairs outside a military prefab.
    1
  45. You can't get better cameras. These are state of the art.
    1
  46.  @mattgarcia440  Image is stabilized by rotating mirror, which keeps the horizon stable. "Object" is a smear (like astigmatism) which rotates due to stabilization.
    1
  47.  @williamprosser7637  No.
    1
  48.  @YoYoYoYoYoYoPeace  They didn't debunk anything. Mick West has proven himself right with his demonstrations and a USAF crew chief confirmed the inner workings of the FLIR pod.
    1
  49.  @YoYoYoYoYoYoPeace  Military rank doesn't mean anything regarding physics and optics. Radar evidence was never presented, the claims are about video footage. Stay on topic.
    1
  50.  @Screzzex  the FLIR pod shows nothing out of the ordinary
    1
  51.  @angelgjr1999  That's not how it works. We spend MILLIONS to see the invisible with neat machines that augment our capabilities, but they're still flawed. Red eyes in camera photos is not a sign of demonic posession, but tech having limits.
    1
  52.  @InTimeTraveller  They were carrying RPGs. The Apache gunner was defending a US convoy from incoming fire.
    1
  53.  @nitehawk-cg6jb  How did the pilot know it stood still? Optical illusions are a thing.
    1
  54.  @InTimeTraveller  Yeah, Wikileaks made their name off flawed reporting. If you actually look it up the men are armed. Photos of the scene taken after US troops arrived show the weapons.
    1
  55. She was right, smart girl.
    1
  56. Elizondo is a UFO nutter so he's already a biased source.
    1
  57. Hundred yards? These things are miles away. FLIR pods have zoom function.
    1
  58. Not true, the US is the only country were things are routinely declassified.
    1
  59. Didn't happen. The pod lost track and just stared into the distance. This makes the object appear to accelerate but no - the camera stopped moving.
    1
  60. Disprove Mick West, then.
    1
  61. Military forces rarely disclose anything. The US is somewhat unique in the way there's a strong civilian oversight over what the military is doing. However I think Chile declassified UAP footage recorded in a naval helicopter.
    1
  62. Because high def cameras help you see black heads on someone's skin from a few feet away, but do jack squat about picking up objects tens of miles away. These sensors are made for warfare, not netflix shows.
    1
  63. The US used drones in WW2.
    1
  64. Bob is a proven liar.
    1
  65.  @truthsayer9534  He is. He forged his documents and made errors that expose him.
    1
  66. Take a decent camera. Now try to film something 10 miles away. It's a blurry mess.
    1