Comments by "jim oberg" (@jimoberg3326) on "Breakdown of the Pentagon UFO videos with Mick West" video.

  1. Many comments here follow the thesis of Lesli Kean that pilots are 'trained observers' and collect very accurate and reliable descriptions of anomalies. But maybe that's naïve. Several years ago, I described the ‘questionable foundation’ of Leslie Kean’s book as the naïve and unverified faith in pilot reports. She has insisted the UFOs show intelligent purpose based on the nature of their witnesses, since they behave differently when seen by military pilots than when seen by civilian pilots [when the more common-sense explanation is that different pilots report observations in terms of what they expect from their own different experience bases]. The data archives she touts as ‘unexplainable’ pilot sightings [such as the French ‘Weinstein Report’] can easily be shown to contain numerous pilot misinterpretations of unrecognized space and missile activity around the world, so who knows how many other prosaic explanations were never found by the ‘investigators’? See here: https://web.archive.org/web/20190101223008/http://www.nbcnews.com/id/38852385
    2
  2. Here are some examples of how pilots, in properly trying to react to immediate hazards, can misinterpret an anomalous visual stimulus: https://web.archive.org/web/20030502043109/http:/www.zipworld.com.au/~psmith/pilot-ufos.html
    1
  3. This characteristic of pilot interpretive biases was noticed almost a century ago, soon after night flying for air mail became widespread. 1936 REPORT ON WHY PILOTS ARE POOR OBSERVERS OF METEORS http://adsabs.harvard.edu/full/1936PA.....44...45L
    1