NEUTRINOS: NOT FROM SPACE

Our friend and member of USPSG, Mario Torres, wrote us from Argentina with a brief but important message that deserves to be published here. We thank Mario for his contribution and we expect more comments and articles from him.

He wrote:

I have seen the news that the ANITA radio telescope

apparently detected ultra high energy neutrinos in Antarctica.

 
These neutrinos would be emerging from the depths of Antarctica.

 
This would be routine, neutrinos interact very little with matter and cleanly traverse our planet.

 
The core is that ultra high energy neutrinos are absorbed by our planet.

 
Thus, the neutrinos supposedly detected emerging from the Antarctic soil would not come from Space.

NEUTRINOS: NO DEL ESPACIO

Nuestro amigo y miembro del GEFAI, Mario Torres, nos escribe desde Argentina con una información breve pero importante que merece ser compartida aquí.
Agradecemos a Mario por su contribucióny aguardamos más artículos y comentarios de él. 
He aquí lo que escribió:

He visto la noticia de que el radiotelescopio ANITA aparentemente detecto neutrinos de ultra alta energía en la Antártida.

Estos neutrinos estarían emergiendo desde las profundidades de la Antártida.

Esto seria rutinario, los neutrinos interactúan muy poco con la materia y atraviesan limpiamente nuestro planeta.

El nudo está, en que los neutrinos de ultra alta energía si son absorbidos por nuestro planeta.

Por ende, los neutrinos supuestamente detectados emergiendo del suelo antártico no procederían del Espacio.

NAVY UFO FLIR - NO SUDDEN MOVEMENTS!

A Mick West analysis

 Mick West is a science writer, skeptical investigator, and retired video game programmer. He is the creator of the websites Contrail Science and Metabunk. He has enough experience and expertise to analyze videos and pictures.

 

It's claimed that the Nimitz FLIR video from 2004 shows an unusual flying craft performing a series of high-g maneuvers, culminating with it shooting off at an inhuman rate at the end of the video. But I think it actually shows an ordinary-seeming craft moving with a constant velocity, making no sudden moves. To help demonstrate this I made a version of the video overlaid with a timecode and larger versions of relevant information in the display. I corrected the zoom indicator changes (between 1 times and 2 times) so they happen on the actual frame of the zoom change and not a few frames later as they do in the original.   

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=U1di0XIa9RQ&fbclid=IwAR0VUryIhp4tf73nvIlrCCDrfyPsFOryeY-Tlsr-GSvMSpNA2mOZs_8mV4Q

I added indicators when there's some kind of lens change or a gimbal adjustment, or other events that cause apparent motion. The number at the top shows the heading of the camera in degrees relative to the front of the plane. This goes from 4 degrees right, to 8 degrees left. The horizon indicator in the middle shows that the plane is not turning, so this means the object has an apparent angular movement to the left. The indicator gets a bit squirrely around zero, probably due to gimbal lock issues, but if we take the 7 degree of motion from the start of 1 degree left at 44:15 to the start of 8 degrees left at 1:12:27, that's 7 degrees in 29 seconds, 12 frames, or about 4.2 seconds per degree of leftward motion. So we've got this object moving left, the camera is tracking it, so it stays in the middle of the screen. You can't see any background in the video, so there's no visual frame of reference for the motion. But it might look something like this if there were some clouds just behind it. To accurately get the speed here, I set the field of view in the 2x NARROW mode to 0.35 degrees (as found by the SCU report), so it takes 4.2*0.35 or about 1.5 seconds to traverse the frame. What would happen if the camera stopped tracking the object? The object would then just keep moving left at the same angular rate, taking about three quarters of a second to leave the Narrow 2x view. And that's exactly what we see. So why would it stop tracking? Well, the camera is tracking the object visually. We know this because every time there's a physical lens change, or a camera change, or a sudden rotation of the camera, we can SEE the lock being briefly lost, you see the bars expand as it tries to reacquire the target, and then contract around it when it's locked up. But while it's locking back on, or if never locks back on, then the object will just continue its motion to the left, looking like it's suddenly changed speed, when it's actually just the camera. So here's what happens in this video. At 0:40:29, there's a lens change from TV mode to IR mode. Lock is very briefly lost, the object goes to the left for a few fractions of a second, and then the camera catches up, and the tracking continues. At 0:43:13 there's an interruption of the video. Lock is again briefly lost, a slight leftwards movement, and then we are locked on again. At 0:49:06 The camera does a gimbal rotation adjustment to prepare for transiting zero degrees. You can see the entire scene rotates. Lock is lost and the object ends up a bit to the left, it drifts a bit more left, and then we lock back on At 0:55:20 A similar thing, with a very tight circular movement, and small movement to the left. At 1:11:28 There's a lens change from NARROW to MEDIUM fields of view. Because this is the same camera there's less blanking, so as we transfer between lenses, we see the object seem to shoot off to the bottom left. It then reappears in the center. As we've lost tracking it moves slightly to the left, the reticle expands, we lock back on and back to tracking. At 1:14:00 A similar thing going back to NARROW, but with the change more obscured. The object vanishes and reappears slightly to left of center, it's just outside of the target reticle, and we've lost lock. The reticle expands, but the object has already started to move left. The reticle expands again, but now the object is outside and moving left, so it never gets the lock back and the object drifts leftward. We're only at 1x zoom here, so it's not moving left that fast. But then At 1:14:14 the pilot switches from 1x to 2x zoom, causing a sudden jump in the apparent position of the object. It then continues to drift off to the left twice as fast as before, at exactly the speed we calculated earlier. So all the apparent movements we see are consistent with the object simply moving in a straight line to the left. So this perfectly consistent with something like a distant aircraft just flying along quite normally making no sudden movements.

FLIR del OVNI de la Armada – NO HAY MOVIMIENTOS REPENTINOS

 

Un análisis de Mick West

Mick West es escritor científico, investigador escéptico y programador retirado de videojuegos. Es el creador de los sitios web Contrail Science y Metabunk con amplia experiencia para el análisis de fotografías y videos.

 

Se sostiene que el video FLIR del Nimitz de 2004 muestra un aparato volante inusual realizando una serie de maniobras de alta-g, culminando las mismas al salir disparando a una velocidad inhumana al final del video. Pero pienso que el mismo realmente muestra a un aparato común moviéndose a una velocidad constante, sin hacer repentinas maniobras.

Para ayudar a demostrar esto hice una versión del video a la que le sobrepuse un código de tiempo y versiones más grandes de información relevante en la presentación. Corregí el indicador de cambios de zoom (de una a dos veces) de modo que ocurran en el verdadero marco de cambios del zoom y no unos cuadros más adelante como ocurre en la versión original.

Le añadí indicadores cuando hay cierto tipo de cambio de lentes o ajuste del cardán, u otros acontecimientos que causan un aparente movimiento.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=U1di0XIa9RQ&fbclid=IwAR0VUryIhp4tf73nvIlrCCDrfyPsFOryeY-Tlsr-GSvMSpNA2mOZs_8mV4Q +

El número en la parte superior muestra la parte delantera de la cámara en grados relativos al frente del avión. Esto va de 4 grados a la derecha, a 8 grados a la izquierda. El indicador de horizonte en el medio muestra que el avión no está dando vuelta, de modo que esto significa que el objeto tiene un movimiento angular aparente hacia la izquierda. El indicador se pone un poco alocado alrededor de cero, probablemente debido a problemas de fijación del cardán, pero si tomamos el movimiento de 7 grados desde el principio de 1 grado hacia la izquierda a los 44:15 al comienzo de 8 grados a la izquierda a 1:12.27, esos son 7 grados en 29 segundos, 12 cuadros, o aproximadamente 4,2 segundos por grado de movimiento hacia la izquierda.

De modo que tenemos a este objeto moviéndose hacia la izquierda, la cámara lo está siguiendo, de modo que permanece en el medio de la pantalla. No se puede ver nada de fondo en el video, de modo que no hay un cuadro visual de referencia para ese movimiento. Pero luciría algo así como esto, si hubiera algunas nubes detrás Para medir con precisión la velocidad establecí el campo de visión en el modo 2x ESTRECHO a 0,35 grados como se encuentra en el informe de la SCU (Coalición Científica para el estudio de los UAPs) de modo que toma 4,2*0,35 o aproximadamente un segundo y medio en atravesar el cuadro. ¿Qué pasaría si la cámara dejara de rastrear el objeto? El objeto simplemente se mantendría moviéndose hacia la izquierda a la misma velocidad angular, tomando tres cuartos de un segundo para dejar la vista Estrecha de 2x. Y eso es exactamente lo que vemos. Entonces ¿por qué habría de dejar de rastrearlo? Bueno, la cámara está rastreando el objeto visualmente. Sabemos esto porque cada vez que hay un cambio físico de la lente, o un cambio de la cámara, o una repentina rotación de la cámara, podemos VER que la fijación del blanco se pierde brevemente, se pueden ver las bandas expandirse a medida que trata de readquirir el blanco, y luego contraerse alrededor del mismo cuando lo conecta nuevamente. Pero mientras lo conecta otra vez, o si nunca lo reconecta, entonces el objeto continuará su movimiento hacia la izquierda, pareciendo que rápidamente cambió de velocidad, cuando es simplemente la cámara.

De modo que aquí está lo que sucede con este video.- A las 0:40:29 hay un cambio de lente del modo TV al modo IR [infrarrojo – N.del T.]. La fijación del blanco se pierde muy brevemente, el objeto va hacia la izquierda unas pocas fracciones de segundo, y entonces la cámara lo capta, y el rastreo continúa. A las 0:43:13 hay una interrupción del video. La fijación del blanco nuevamente se pierde brevemente, un leve movimiento a la izquierda y nuevamente estamos enganchados otra vez. A las 0:49:06 la cámara hace un ajuste de rotación del cardán para prepararse para transitar a cero grado. Se puede ver que toda la escena rota. La fijación en el blanco se pierde y el objeto termina un poco a la izquierda, se desplaza algo más a la izquierda, y entonces nuevamente hay fijación a las 0:55:20. Una cosa similar con un muy leve movimiento circular, y un pequeño movimiento hacia la izquierda. A la 1:11:28 hay un cambio de la lente de los campos de visión ESTRECHA a MEDIA. Porque en la misma cámara hay menos espacio en blanco, de modo que en tanto hacemos una transferencia entre las lentes vemos que el objeto parece dispararse hacia la parte inferior izquierda. Entonces reaparece en el centro. A medida que hemos perdido el rastreo la retícula se expande, nos reenganchamos y volvemos a rastrearlo. A la 1:14:00 sucede algo similar cuando retornamos a ESTRECHO, pero con el cambio se ve más oscuro. El objeto desaparece y reaparece levemente hacia la izquierda del centro, está apenas fuera de la retícula del objetivo, y hemos perdido el enganche. La retícula se expande, pero el objeto ya ha comenzado a moverse hacia la izquierda. La retícula se expande nuevamente, pero ahora el objeto está fuera y moviéndose hacia la izquierda, de modo que nunca se reengancha y el objeto va a la deriva hacia la izquierda. Estamos a 1x zoom aquí, de modo que no se está moviendo para la izquierda tan rápido. Pero entonces, a las 1:14:14 el piloto cambia el zoom de 1x a 2x, provocando un repentino salto en la aparente posición del objeto que entonces continúa desplazándose hacia la izquierda dos veces más rápido que antes, exactamente a la velocidad que calculamos con anterioridad. De modo que todos los aparentes movimientos que vemos son consistentes con el objeto que simplemente se mueve en una línea recta hacia la izquierda. De tal manera que esto es perfectamente consistente con algo como un avión distante simplemente volando muy normalmente sin hacer movimientos repentinos. 


Traducción especial y exclusiva de Milton W. Hourcade para UAPSG-GEFAI

LA VERDAD SOBRE LOS OVNIS DEL PENTÁGONO - por MIck West

Preámbulo: Mick West es un dedicato analista de presuntos casos OVNI,  y comparte sus conclusiones en su página web Metabunk. Aquí presentamos la adaptación de su material hecha por el colega mexicano Leopoldo Zambrano Enríquez, a quien agradecemos su contribución en el esclarecimiento de la verdad.

Hoy, la Marina liberó oficialmente tres videos de ovnis. Se llaman "Flir", "Gimbal" y "GOFAST". Internet inmediatamente tomó esto como que los extraterrestres son reales, pero los videos no son realmente nuevos. Fueron desclasificados por completo en 2017 y Tom DeLonge los publicó en la Academia de las Estrellas. Comencé a escribir sobre ellos en diciembre de 2017 y, con la ayuda de otros, llegué rápidamente a posibles explicaciones para los tres videos.

El video FLIR es muy probablemente un avión distante. El video está tomando mucho después del famoso encuentro con un Tic Tac hipersónico en zigzag por parte de pilotos del Nimitz. El objeto en realidad no se mueve en la pantalla, excepto cuando la cámara se mueve, y se parece a un plano retroiluminado de baja resolución fuera de foco. No sé lo que vio el piloto, pero este video no muestra nada realmente interesante.

El video GIMBAL también se trata probablemente de un avión, no está girando. Lo que se ve es la claridad infrarroja de los motores que son más grandes que el avión. Parece que está girando debido a un artefacto del sistema de cámara montado en el cardán. Todo esto es un poco confuso, así que hice varios videos que lo explican. El aura alrededor del avión es solo desenfoque de imagen, sucede todo el tiempo en imágenes de cámaras térmicas. No es una unidad Warp alienígena, es solo el filtro de la máscara de enfoque.

El video "GOFAST" probablemente muestra un globo, no se mueve rápido, no está rozando el agua y puedes verificarlo tú mismo, porque toda la información que necesitas está en los números en la pantalla. Solo necesitas un poco de trigonometría de escuela secundaria. La velocidad aparente es sólo un efecto causado por el paralaje. Durante los últimos años, he hecho una gran variedad de videos explicando todo esto. Encontrarás el enlace de la lista de reproducción en la descripción. https://www.youtube.com/playlist?list...

Si tienes preguntas, especialmente sobre el video del GIMBAL(cardán), probablemente ya hayan sido cubiertas en las diversas discusiones en MetaBunk. Si no están cubiertas, avísame e intentaré encontrar una respuesta. Todo lo que estoy explicando aquí son estos tres videos, no otros videos y no estoy explicando ningún relato de testigos oculares. Estos tres videos no son tan interesantes como parecen y todos tienen explicaciones bastante plausibles.

La Marina probablemente llegue a conclusiones similares de que se trata de cosas simples como aviones, drones o globos, pero debido a las normas de seguridad operativas vigentes, nadie puede hablar de ellas. Eso abre la puerta a toda esta especulación, con algo de suerte yo también lo he hecho un poco. Las visitas extraterrestres siempre son una posible explicación para cualquier video ovni, pero estos videos no muestran evidencia de ningún tipo de tecnología avanzada. Desafortunadamente, las explicaciones reales que se encuentran al investigar son probablemente bastante aburridas. https://www.youtube.com/playlist?list...

Mick West
Metabunk
27 Abril 2020

THE TRUTH ABOUT THE PENTAGON VIDEOS by Mick West

Preamble: Mick West is a serious analyst of UFO cases through his web-page Metabunk. Here is his analysis about the so-called "Pentagon Videos".

 

Today the Navy officially released three videos of UFOs.

They are called FLIR, GIMBAL and GOFAST. The internet immediately took this as meaning that aliens are real. But the videos are not actually new. They were internally declassified back in 2017, and immediately released by Tom DeLonge's To The Stars Academy. I started writing about them in December 2017. 

With the help of others, I quickly arrived at likely explanations for all three videos. The FLIR video is most likely a distant plane. The video was taken well after the famous encounter with a hypersonic zig-zagging tic-tac by pilots from the NIMITZ. This object doesn't actually move on screen - except when the camera moves, and it resembles an out of focus low-resolution backlit plane. I don't know what the pilots saw, but this video does not show anything really interesting. 

The GIMBAL video is also probably of a plane. .... It's not rotating. What you see is the infrared glare of the engines, larger than the plane. It looks like it is rotating because of an artifact of the gimbal-mounted camera system. This is all a bit confusing, so I made several videos explaining it. Oh, and the "AURA" around the plane, that's just image sharpening. It happens all the time in thermal camera footage. It's not an alien warp drive, it's just the unsharp mask filter. 

The GO-FAST video probably shows a balloon. It's not moving fast, it's not skimming the water, and you can verify this yourself because all the information you need is in the numbers on screen. It's just an effect caused by parallax. Over the last few years, I've made a variety of videos explaining all this. You can find the playlist here: https://www.youtube.com/playlist?list... 

If you've got questions (especially about the GIMBAL video) then I probably covered it there, or it would be covered in the various discussion on Metabunk. If it's not covered, then let me know (mick@mickwest.com), and I'll try to find an answer. All I'm explaining here are these three videos, not other videos. And I'm not explaining any eyewitness accounts.

These three videos are not as interesting as they seem and they have quite plausible explanations. The Navy probably arrived at similar conclusions - that these are simply unidentified aircraft, drones, or balloons - but because of the default operational secrecy regulations nobody can talk about it.

And that opened the door to all this speculation. Hopefully, I've cleared it up a little. Visiting aliens are always a possible explanation for any UFO video, but these videos don't show evidence of any kind of advanced technology - so, unfortunately, the real explanations, while fun to investigate, are probably pretty boring. https://www.youtube.com/playlist?list...

Mick West 
April 27,2020

62 YEARS AGO C.I.O.V.I. STARTED THE UFO INVESTIGATION IN URUGUAY

At the end of 1957, Brazilian magazine “O’Cruzeiro”, influenced by the perspective of Dr. Olavo T.Fontes (APRO representative in Rio de Janeiro) who had the belief that behind the “flying saucers” were aggressive entities, published a series of articles signed by Engineer Joao Martins.

The first series had the title “Os Discos Voadores” (The Flying Discs”), the second series went under the title “A terrível missao dos Discos Voadores” (The terrible mission of the Flying Discs).

Those articles mentioned individuals and institutions dedicated to the investigation and study of UFO reports. There were mentioned NICAP, Maj. Donald E. Keyhoe, APRO, Mr. Jim Lorenzen, and Ms.Lorenzen, in the United States; Dr. Olavo T. Fontes (in Rio de Janeiro), Prof. Flávio A. Pereira and Dr. José Escobar Faría (in Sao Paulo) and CBPCOANI, all of them in Brazil.

Argentina was represented by the organization CODOVNI, and two individuals, Ariel Ciro Rietti and Christian Vogt.

And the articles referred to American cases investigated by the USAF Project BlueBook.

With that in mind, I discovered that there was a whole world of individuals and organizations –included the official ones— dedicated to the subject. And then I asked myself: who deals with this issue in Uruguay? And I realized there was nobody. Then I wondered why not me?

But obviously, I wouldn’t be able to do it all alone, and therefore I talked with my friends. It was the end of 1957, and although the first reaction was of ridicule and laughs, some of them took it more seriously after I gave them certain information and decided to join me in my very patriotic engagement.

I do remember the names of Juan Carlos Zamudio, Adolfo Terzaghi, Jorge Denevi Griera, Walter A. Cifarelli Larragoitia, and Germán Sergio Vázquez Quartiani, as the first who were interested.

With Zamudio and Vazquez we went to a broadcasting station and made an invitation to the people that could be interested in “flying saucers” to meet with us.

On the night of April 29, 1958, at the headquarters of the YMCA, around 40 people were present. We had there a short talk, said we have to take some steps to organize ourselves, asked for those who could be interested to investigate to register, and finally, a group of seven of us met at a near restaurant and have a long talk about what to do and how.

There were Vázquez, Hermann, and his brother Erwin Jegerlehner, Vicente Curci, Walter Cifarelli, Jorge Denevi, and myself.

We agree that it wouldn’t be possible to work with 40 or more people, that we need to constitute a board of directors, with the traditional structure of a President, a Secretary, a Treasurer, and Vocals.

I was elected President, and in that way, we started working. One of the first things was to read a lot of the material coming from the United States, and other countries. The other thing was to create an Interrogation Form to be filled by the investigators but signed by the witnesses. That will be the base for the following study of each UFO report and later analysis and conclusion.

After less than a year from our beginning, although there were responsibilities distributed among us, we get rid of the old structure of a board of directors to become Directive Counselors, each one with the same rights and capacity to represent the Center in our relationship with the press, other institutions, and the eventual witnesses

Over the years new people came to be part of CIOVI. Directive Counselors, like Engineer Rubens Freire, Dante Joaquín Moscatelli, Heber Carlón, Ricardo Petrissans Aguilar, Prof. Fernando Labandera, Agustín Ubal, Lucy Silva, Yamandú Romero, Sergio Olivera, Luis A.González, Gustavo Quijano; and Collaborators. I remember the names of Álvarez, Machín, Ojeda, Bottino, Daguerre, skilled people that contributed to the Center in different ways.

CIOVI was first to get in contact with the Uruguayan Air Force and share the results of its investigation; the first developing a computerized analysis of UFO cases; the first to organize the only colloquium done in Uruguay between Argentinean and Uruguayan investigators, the first to create a National Correspondents Network, the first to analyze and discard systematically that the reported “tracks” in different fields were related to supposedly landing of UFOs, the first to present in Uruguay the documentary film “UFO” and the French film “Le Ciel sur la Téte” (They watch over us from the Cosmos”); the one that organized the visit to Uruguay of Dr. J. Allen Hynek and his Secretary for Latin America, Dr. Willy Smith. The first to identify the photography of an apparent strange object near the Centenario Stadium in 1930 as a captive balloon, publicity of Michelin tires. The first to investigate and determine with a precision that former Astronaut Neil Armstrong never visited "La Aurora" farm. The first to organize a theoretical and practical course for the preparation of future investigators.

During the years of CIOVI, some of its members traveled to Argentina, Brazil, and France to get in contact with investigators in those countries.

On the other hand, the relationship with the press, newspapers, radio stations, and TV stations was very good and fluid, dealing with outstanding journalists in all that media.

And periodically, members of CIOVI gave public lectures in different institutions, most relevant among them the YMCA and the Planetarium.

C.I.O.V.I. put an end to his work after 50 years, in 2008, when it was clear that the UFO subject was no longer relevant to the public, and there was a notorious reduction in the number of reports.

If there is currently to be an official investigation, it must be based on the rigorous application of the scientific method and define its task as that of Aero-Space Identification. 

Milton W. Hourcade
Iowa City
April 29, 2020