Comments by "Titanium Rain" (@ChucksSEADnDEAD) on "US Navy Battleship opens fire on HARASSING UFOs!!" video.

@wannabeuk Yeah, in tiny font after all the credits had rolled. After the film soundtrack is credited. Nobody watches that. You don't watch those credits. You don't actually care, you just want a reason to complain. And no, he's not passing it as his own work. At no point does the context of this video every agree with the claims made in the segments.
4
@wannabeuk Commenting on others' work is work in itself. Whenever you see a documentary or movie that uses real news clips to paint a picture of what happened do you also scoff at the director?
1
@MrBrianGenda again the point is that they are trained to visually identify enemy and friendly aircraft/ground vehicles, not unidentified phenomena.
1
@VandalAudi Plenty of pilots reported unidentified flying objects. There were investigations. There are a few reports declassified through FOIA. What were the objects? Wheather balloons, balloons that suspend the flares that act as targets for Stinger missile training and drones flying without FAA registration. That's the point. The "trained observers" can't identify a lot of regular crap floating around the air. Nor should they have to. So the justification that the "trained observers" can't identify the UFO/UAP therefore it's unnatural/paranormal is BS. They're trained to observe what they need to, not trained observers of everything in the sky. That's all.
1
@VandalAudi Yeah I'm confused in the crossfire. I agree within context, I just have started to really dislike the "trained observers" thing. Because there is such a thing as a forward air observer and they actually get training that other pilots don't get. And there is a great debate about the A-10 and how pilots in the A-10 are better observers, but ignoring that the A-10 pilot school has a lot of institutional knowledge from flying OA-10s that pilots in general do not get. The "arrow vs the indian" sort of deal.
1
Jack Strawb This is missing critical information. There's 4 or 5 brands of toilet paper in every store I go. Maybe those 113 companies aren't all overlapping in terms of distribution and if I move away from my home town I start to see other brands. That's 113 brands providing something we need while employing people so they can feed their kids. Is this wrong?
1