Comments by "Taxtro" (@MrCmon113) on "Breakdown of the Pentagon UFO videos with Mick West" video.

And the radar data is available or what? The evidence that actually exists is the video and the video clearly shows the gimbal camera rotating.
6
The camera lost track as you can see in the hud of the camera.
5
@Kitties-of-Doom All of the videos are explained. You just shifted the goalpost to explaining the behavior of pilots, which really isn't remarkable at all.
3
You should ask yourself why everything extraordinary only appears in the "context", you can't verify. Shouldn't that ring a few alarm bells?
3
@2760ade You can live in the firest all your life and not recognize an owl. You have massive hindsight bias having the appearances on the camera explained to you. And being "highly trained" doesn't mean you can't be confused.
3
@petedavis7970 You're just gonna turn your brain off and base your opinion on authority alone? Fighter pilots can't judge the distance, size and speed of an object they don't know just by looking at it. And their judgement of one of those things will influence the others.
3
@marcv2648 Then why not release the radar data rather than those unremarkable videos?
2
@davecarsley8773 It doesn't matter how experienced you are, you can still be confused. What has to be explained is the videos and they are explained. What someone said doesn't really have to be explained.
2
@tctopcat1981 Your insistence on following fake authority rather than reasoning sounds like nore like the previous level.
2
@ipproductions It's funny how you think that having good eyesight means you somehow identify things correctly.
2
@BroughPerkinsMedium People have been trying to make "psychic phenomena" work for over a century. Of course at some point people will roll their eyes at it.
1
@tacostuesday7530 They should show those vehicles then and not just claim that they have them. I don't think you quite understand what kind of extreme claim that is.
1
@pn4841 Is the radar data also public?
1
@jeffreygrimm2361 For all I care they could say that they saw a flying elephant. What evidence do YOU have? Those three videos. And they are better explained as above than with any tic tac.
1
@Jay-407 Of course they aren't trained to identify balloons, but even if they were, why should they be able to 100% of the time. Your understanding of "identification" is cartoonish.
1
@BroughPerkinsMedium None of that is evidence. The only evidence YOU have is those videos. You are just very credulous which makes you confuse claims with evidence.
1
@Localjadedealer Fact? You mean claim. Guess.
1
@bonysminiatures3123 You have analyzed that radar data?
1
@athithanvimalananthan344 >also Fermi paradox, aliens definitely exist It's funny when someone has no idea what the words they are using mean...
1
The camera is just a camera, it doesn't label what it's looking at.
1
None of what you said changes anything about a ballon or any similarly sized object explaining the footage perfectly.
1
When I come across a heavy rock and fail to lift it, I don't conclude that the rock is impossible to lift.
1
I will only consider the arguments by unbelievers, who have heard the voice of GOd.
1
@delatroy I raise you a thousand eyewitnesses for dozens of different miracles. And they won't say that they're unsure what they saw either. They'll tell you that mother Mary appeared directly in front of them. To establish any extraordinary claim like something moving like the supposed objects, you need better evidence than a bunch of confused pilots. The only evidence we have is better explained by completely ordinary things.
1
@jameswilliams3001 Your ability to weigh evidence is nonexistent.
1
He was on Joe Rogan before this.
1
@TomorrowisYesterday You've completely thrown out all common sense. Just because you can identify an object doesn't mean you can identify it always and under all circumstances.
1
@TomorrowisYesterday What extraordinary radar data have you seen? All you've seen is videos that are perfectly explained without anything moving super fast. >Bob Lazar That guy isn't even a physicist or engineer. Not to speak of alien spacecraft. >all lines up absolutely perfectly with what Bob Lazar described decades ago "Warp drives" have long been a thing in science fiction. Bob just copied science fiction tropes. >all match and all paint a picture of warp drive There is millions of galaxies without a sign of any civilization capable of interstellar travel. Not to speak of superluminal travel. If superluminal travel was possible, there would be even less reason to believe in any extraterrestrial visitors. Because they should be all over the cosmos.
1
@jonjo2598 You have no idea what you're talking about. You're just parroting what similarly ignorant ufo nutters told you about "military" cameras.
1
@markopolo6640 Cherrypicking? This is literally all of the evidence.
1
So for anything remarkable there is no evidence?
1
So all of the unusual stuff is hearsay and not on video.
1
@irn2flying You don't know whether it was abnormal. All the evidence you have are videos perfectly explained with common objects.
1
@based_circuit Instead of judging evidence, you're trying to find out who is "smarter". You just suck horribly at thinking. I'm correcting my professors all the time even though they're certainly way, way smarter than me. You're basically asserting the infallibility of pilots and don't even look at the evidence at all.
1
 @burtleboeuf1429 So all of the extraordinary stuff is only hearsay.
1
@keirfarnum6811 Is the radar data publicly available?
1
You insist that military pilots are perfect and never confuse anything and never exaggerate.
1
 @MontanaPDX No, he has arguments. Most of the military and scientists don't believe in alien visitation, so your moronic argument from authority doesn't even work.
1
@holdenrobbins852 >in this video he didn't mention anything about the history of experimental military technogy being reported as UFOs Why the fuck would he mention that? This is about the pentagon videos. And very obviously you have absolutely nothing to criticize about his explanations of them. Otherwise you would have brought it forth.
1
@roberthanleytortora7405 Again not a single criticism of his take on the videos. Just an appeal to authority. It's almost like you have nothing to say on the videos - which are btw the only evidence of anything extraordinary going on.
1
@ptennyson3175 You can go by the evidence you actually have or believe some document you found online about the interpretation of supposed evidence that is "classified".
1
@martinirving8959 >the object rotates but the frame of reference (the clouds) do not move. Please explain discrepancy! That's a prominent part of the video. What rotates is the glare, not any object.
1