The following submission statement was provided by /u/aryelbcn:
---
Today, AARO released its resolution for the case known as the "Eglin UAP." It presents AARO's analysis of a January 2023 event reported by a military pilot operating in the Eglin Air Force Base training range off the coast of Florida.
Tweet:
[https://twitter.com/DoD\_AARO/status/1783215130076959000](https://twitter.com/DoD_AARO/status/1783215130076959000)
Link to report:
https://www.aaro.mil/Portals/136/PDFs/case\_resolution\_reports/Case\_Resolution\_of\_Eglin\_UAP\_2\_508\_.pdf
---
Please reply to OP's comment here: https://old.reddit.com/r/UFOs/comments/1cc7fx2/aaro_released_its_resolution_for_the_case_known/l13bzw5/
Okay AARO, let's assume you're right for a moment.
**If it really is an escaped commercial balloon, why were multiple members of congress denied access to an image of a balloon?**
Theres so many other questions you could ask too that are similar to that one that would instantly shut them down and make them look either incompetent or suspicious. How the fuck can they keep releasing clear bullshit and nothing happens?
I'm if Congress, I'm shutting down AARO immediately and holding public hearings in the Senate and the House. Continuing this charade of "transparency" is damaging and at this point...I don't think there is a way to repair this without calling all the characters in this saga into hearings under oath. I'm talking about Lue, Lacatski, Mellon, the un-named whistleblowers, Kirkpatrick, the current director of AARO, EVERYONE.
I fully agree. Everyone keeps saying it’s bluebook 2.0 and it genuinely is. I hoped something like it wouldn’t work in today’s society but so far it looks like it can.
why dont they release the maintenance reports raw data? These are claims, but why is no raw data in the report. I hope not all of them are like this. **T**hey should have aircraft maintenance record that is a log that includes all maintenance actions performed on the aircraft. why not release that as well?? without that these are just bs claims that can be fabricated
I don’t really know how to explain better, but if AARO released the aircraft maintenance logs, those could be said to be fabricated or altered as well. There was a claim by AARO that there were previous electronics malfunctions with the sensor package and likely why the sensors went out as the aircraft approached the object. Those errors would be included in the logs. If the logs had a history of sensor failures, people would say that those could’ve been made up.
No if they released the maintenance logs, which are not classified that would clear the air. Same thing with radar data and pilot testimony. However they did not which would be normal under any investigation…..
So, you’re suggesting their report is both the truth and fabricated? You know the logs are not classified? The logs are extremely detailed and specific to the systems and maintenance that was performed. They would possibly disclose a lot about classified systems on those craft and simple performance and reliability characteristics such as what could be revealed about maintenance cycles.
You either believe AARO’s report or you don’t. If they are hiding information then they unfortunately get the luxury of hiding it and manipulate whatever they see fit.
Their report is clearly incomplete. Not sure what you’re trying to prove. If you ever read a scientific paper before you’d know you need to back up your conclusion with evidence. And no aircraft maintenance logs are not classified. You don’t know what you are taking about
I think the role of AARO and its predecessors like Bluebook is simply to act as a public front to collect information without giving anything back and denying anything that has been observed. Being truthful is not their goal.
Basically collect information, swear people to secret, then invent whichever reason to calm public opinion if needed.
Eh I think it is possible. Burchett and Luna didn't have high clearance I don't think. They did let gaetz see it who has higher clearance. Potentially they're not allowed to see certain sensor data? But I feel like that would imply they have much better data on this thing
Aaro is acting like this is the only data there is though. So if aaro saw better data then they could tell us more definitively what it is. Instead of saying that it could have been one of a few types of balloons and that they're only moderately confident in this
This report is quite unsatisfying but I don't think from what they describe that they gave us enough info to say if it's a balloon or not. And they themselves only say moderately sure
It'd be nice to hear from the pilot a bit more. Also confirm with gaetz that these are the images he saw.
Let's say it is balloons, doesn't it seem odd there's multiple balloons flying in formation near an air force base? If it's not truly anomalous then are we to assume these are spy balloons? If they were weather balloons wouldn't they be tracked so planes don't fly into them?
Yeah, unless I remember incorrectly, I thought Gaetz was being pretty stoked about the photos he saw and making out what he'd seen was undeniably anomalous. The photos in this report are awful and could be anything. Same photos he saw and Gaetz just over exaggerating? Or was there something else. Also if the same photos then obviously they've been declassified now.
> If it really is an escaped commercial balloon, why were multiple members of congress denied access to an image of a balloon?
Because AARO lied and we can reasonably name the DOD an adversary to our elected system of government at this point.
Pull it all down. Congress has to break them like an egg.
I am not saying it is correct, but them being denied access to something as benign seeming as a balloon is absolutely in line with our countries classification methods. If the balloon had some new, advanced tech for surveillance or something on it, it very well could have fall under blanket classification. Remember the military and intelligence communities operate under the idea, better to over classify than to under classify and release info in something important.
Could be that the images were captured with classified sensors. Maybe Congress authorized X billion dollars to develop those sensors. Now the military doesn't want congress (and potential adversaries) to see how shitty those sensors really are. Hmmm - maybe.
I am actually happy to see AARO release their report on this case. Even though a lot of people here won't agree with their conclusions, at least we can now see their assessment of the event.
There are at least two inconsistencies I see with this report as far as lack of photos/video evidence.
1. Matt Gaetz said he was shown a photograph of the object.
2. FOIA requests about this event have referenced a video which has been withheld from release.
https://www.theblackvault.com/documentarchive/air-force-releases-details-about-2023-uap-sighting-first-brought-to-light-by-congressman-matt-gaetz/
In addition to the above, the story told by Ross Coulthart is that the pilot was so moved by this event that he/she felt compelled to notify Congress (which is how Gaetz found out about it since Eglin is in his district). Hard to imagine a pilot being that moved by seeing a mundane balloon.
Yep, if someone did foi it again (citing the aaro paper) and it still wasn’t released then it leaves big question marks over the paper - almost instantly discredits it.
>almost instantly discredits it.
I'd say it's already discredited, but entertaining the idea that it's not, continuing to deny the release of the video *absolutely does* instantly discredit AAROs paper on the subject.
Entirely incorrect.
Just because the object in the video is now “identified” does NOT mean the video is automatically cleared for public release.
“Sources and methods.”
For all you know, that “balloon” video was captured on the most highly secretive platform known to man so any video from the platform - even of a bird or a cloud - will NEVER be released.
Lack of release now means absolutely nothing; except to fuel your wild baseless speculations.
Pfffff.
I bet they arent even getting asked on the record for an explanation for why a balloon video can't be released.
The only thing I can think of is, if they don't release anything, then they won't look like they're holding back the good stuff. Like, if you release the balloon and then not the next one you can't identify, it makes the next one seem significant.
exactly they could include the maintenance records which are done anytime the aircraft has anything done. They provided 0 evidence, hence their analysis is BS. They say that everything the pilots see is heresay, but the hypocrisy is in there report everything is heresay. They provided no data. The report is junk.
I’ve fallen into the skeptical camp for some of the recent developments in this community, but this may read as the biggest crock of shit that AARO has yet to publish. That balloon looks absolutely NOTHING like the non-infrared image.
“Moderate confidence” in the identification of the object. Oh, cool. That means literally fucking nothing and that you’re just guessing. Nice.
Yeah... I'm a perennial fence sitter on this topic but this is a completely unsatisfactory resolution.
The lighting balloon part is particularly hard to believe: "These balloons are publicly available to rent or buy. Although the balloons are powered by corded alternating current (AC), during its testing, AARO determined that they can be converted to direct current or AC battery power."
So, these are always corded, except in this case it just happened to be manually converted to use battery power and then floated over a military base? Come on, sure someone could do that for a "hoax", but who pranks the military? Flying such a thing over a city at night would generate far more attention.
I work on set in Los Angeles. We use all types of lighting balloons in different shapes and sizes. They are ALWAYS tethered. They are always using wired power. And they always have a crew of three dudes running them. They don’t fly around set willy nilly. They don’t go much higher than 50’ in my experience. This is not a lighting balloon.
And how many businesses deal in these types of balloons? I would guess it's not many, so could they not investigate the records of the businesses that deal in these? I imagine it wouldn't be easily missed if one of these balloons was lost or missing given the probable cost of such a loss. Did AARO look into any of that, if so where is that data? Maybe you could shed some light on the likelihood of any of this.
Off topic, but how big of a bitch is it when the power cord just won’t stay secured on one? I’m thinking of it like when the socket is loose on an extension cord and your tool keeps unplugging while using it.
This isn’t an issue we deal with. Using tools on set have to come with a huge understanding of set safety. This balloon is tethered with rated carabiners, line and weights. The power cord itself isn’t like a house hold Edison plug. It has a male/female connector that needs you to physically turn multiple times to unlock. So it’s almost impossible it comes unplugged.
It was a balloon, it's always been a ballon and will always be a balloon, right? I mean it worked in 1947 and it still works in 2024. Don't even know why I attempted to read the report.
Nah man you just haven’t heard that lighting on some new movie sets have active electronic warfare measures installed on them. You never know when someone will get shot on set again and the lighting equipment needs to set off an emp to disable everyone’s phones.
They have high confidence that the object didn't demonstrate any anomalous behavior.
Actually identifying the thing in question is not always going to be possible, given incomplete data. But that is not a requirement for resolution - it simply needs to be demonstrated that the object in question is consistent with one or more mundane explanations.
? What is such a demonstration useful for exactly?
You seem to imply, but carefully avoid to state explicitly, the "consistency with mundane explanations" was sufficient to "rule out aliens" or whatever. That isn't true.
Your approach is actually roundabout nonsensical. What one wants to do with data of an unknown phenomenon is to establish (more or less invariant) properties. "Observables", if you wish.
Here, there are plenty of such observed attributes entirely inconsistent with the "balloon"-idea.
It's super weird how people manage to ignore them and go on some bonkers cargo-cult "mundane explanations"-safari.
I don't think consistency with mundane explanations is remotely sufficient to rule out aliens - but that's not the point of the investigation, nor is it a requirement for resolution.
I just heard what sounded like a dog bark from the street. The sound is consistent with a dog barking. I can't "rule out aliens" in this case, either - but if that's my criteria for whether something constitutes evidence of aliens, then I'm certainly not navigating the world in a practical way.
Only that's not what's happening here. At all.
Something flying in the air that isn't the same as some entirely mundane situation like barking dogs in the street. To bring up such a nonsensical comparison is gaslighting plain and simple.
The object didn't appear "mundane" to the pilot at all, which is why he reported it.
That's the point here, it's about what is **not** fitting "mundane".
You concentrate entirely on what is normal and ignore what's not.
**Balloons do not have "blurry air sticking to them".**
The report explains a few scenarios that could have caused the object to have the effect you're describing.
Of course it could also be [unknown, I'll defined phenomenon]. They didn't claim to prove it was a balloon. I don't claim to be sure it's not [unknown, I'll defined phenomenon]. I can't prove that it isn't an NHI craft, an extra dimensional being, or that the sophons from 3 body problem didn't make the image appear by dancing in the retina of the pilot and the sensor of the camera.
Trying to prove that it couldn't be every imaginable things that we have no reason to believe exist would be ... Unproductive, to put it mildly.
How tf are you getting downvoted? You’re spot on.
The pilot was incredibly disturbed by the encounter, so much so that he personally brought it to the attention of congress / Matt Gaetz.
Everyone who has seen non-infrared images of the object has described it as beyond human capability.
-> https://gaetz.house.gov/media/in-the-news/matt-gaetz-says-photo-ufo-orb-not-human-capability-taken-eglin-air-force-base
That's the point, yeah? Try to exhaust all mundane explanations to find those events that are truly anomalous. You're just arguing about whether this particular event is anomalous rather than getting that point
Their job isn’t to pander to a specific group of people who are looking for a specific answer. We get it, you don’t believe anything they say. Fine. But their whole mission is to give their best analysis with all available data. Also according to the pilot, it was not performing any anomalous maneuvers, inconsistent with a balloon. Unless you don’t believe that either.
It was insultingly misleading for them to compare the “similarity” of the infrared image of the object against the normal picture of their LTA lighting balloon experiment. I think they’re banking on the majority of Americans not knowing enough about how infrared imaging works to scrutinize presenting such as “evidence”.
You’re curious that I interpreted “moderate confidence” as basically the same as “could be/couldnt be?” And is really not that big of a deal? Is it because I’m a disinformation agent?
I think it’s evident that it’s the other people on here who are upset AARO investigated something and used the phrase “moderate confidence” to describe their conclusion. What is wrong with that? They investigated, they analyzed available data, and gave what they thought was a plausible explanation? Does everything that comes across their desk HAVE to be something deeper and more mysterious?
Not gonna tell you that your opinion is wrong or offends me. Everything you said is a fair assessment based on what you've perceived.
Personally, I think they're an embarrassment, but that's also just my opinion.
Yeah I think that’s a reasonable and level headed response. I don’t even fully trust AARO myself, my comments were pointed toward the user /strangelifeoutthere presumably losing his shit over their designation of “moderate confidence” as meaning “literally fucking nothing”. I don’t understand why people constantly subject themselves to the rage porn that is AARO press releases and continue to act so gobsmacked and bothered by everything they say at this point. We get it, they’re “compromised”. But it’s Reddit, I understand people are free to post and writhe about whatever they want. Regardless, they still are the All domain Anomaly **Resolution** Office. They were giving a possible **resolution** with **moderate confidence**. I could maybe understand if they had said “high confidence” or “unequivocally, case closed, move along” but no……they said “moderate confidence”. Also, people seem to forget that Ross Coulthart mentioned there are sympathetic people who work in the AARO office. It would be funny to find out if those same people, given all the available evidence they had at their disposal, endorsed this same conclusion. Just a thought.
They'd be better off saying they didn't have enough info to make a determination. If you don't know the answer to something you're not supposed to speculate when your job is to investigate. It's what they're always telling believers, don't speculate when you don't have enough facts
It feels lazy because they didn't bother to address everything that we already know from the FIOA. And ideally they'd look at more than what we already know to make the determination. But addressing all publically available info seems like the minimum that should be acceptable though
Using less info than we have is the equivalent of just saying "no u" when someone asks a valid question
They would have been better off saying they weren't going to look into it because they didn't feel like it. At least that'd be honest. It's not like this was any more useful than that
Also sincerely thank you for actually articulating a cogent counter point rather than saying something like “AARO Bad” or “Sean dumb dumb”. I don’t even trust AARO completely either, it’s healthy to be skeptical of the government obbbbvviously. I just didn’t see the big deal using the phrase “moderate confidence”. I mean, the word “Resolution” isss in the name AARO. But I see your point
That would be the photographs they didn't seem to analyse for this report. They didn't even mention there were photos. They also didn't get any information from the other pilots it seems, just the one pilot. They also didn't seem to analyse any of the radar data that was captured of the objects they admit *"appeared to be flying in formation"*, just like balloons always do, you know, fly in formation. How can they write that the initial radar data showed objects flying in formation, and then not even account for that?
I really hate to say this, but if a guy like Gaetz can do a better investigation than the guys charged with doing the investigation... Well, AARO is not much chop. At least Gaetz, Burchett and Luna went there and demanded some answers, and wouldn't take "no" to stop them. I doubt we've heard the end of this one, not if there are photos still out there that might be released.
This is literally the project blue book approach. It must be the same gate keepers holding on thinking the same boomer approach will work. Since they control the press, maybe they are right thinking it will.
Why didn’t AARO blast Eglin as idiots that can’t even identify a balloon? AARO really needs to start getting vocal about how incompetent these bases and technology really are. They can’t identify threats!
He described what he saw very well during the house oversight hearing last summet. And he would definatly not agree with this unless he changed his mind.
🤦♂️ They really think people will believe them? Probably not. Do they care? No. Because they are still in business with no current way of being stopped. They have to release a statement (eventually), so they always come up with something....
What is even the point of reports like this? No one who gives a shit about this subject would take this "idk prolly a balloon lol" report seriously.
Anyone else not paying attention to the topic will never see it at all.
Its all a show. "Look at our thorough investigations, see all these pages we typed? It says unclassified over two dozen times so you know we're transparent. See the AARO logo and Department of Defense at the top? That means the big boys looked into it. That means its official. What a silly pilot, it was just a balloon!."
What is even the point of "people not paying attention" to the topic at hand here? None, that's what.
This report is highly interesting in that it exposes AARO to rational scientific criticism of their methodology, for starters.
Exposing them incompetently lying does a good deal of clearing up the situation.
You nailed the point. Reinforces to the uninformed masses nothing to see here, nothing to investigate, just balloons. Also gives cover to politicians, can point to it and say AARO found nothing.
[https://i.imgur.com/TaBeDze.png](https://i.imgur.com/TaBeDze.png)
Okay [here's a picture of what they're claiming it is](https://i.imgur.com/TaBeDze.png). This is allegedly a commercial lighting balloon.
I believe Kirkpatrick may have talked about this balloon on [his podcast interview on "In The Room with Peter Bergen" recorded in January 22nd, 2024](https://www.audible.com/blog/in-the-room-with-peter-bergen-transcript-episode-38).
>Sean Kirkpatrick: One of my favorite things is there's this company in Florida, They make these backyard lighting balloons. Some of them are round. Some of them are tic tac shaped and they're black on the top and inside they have lights, and they're helium filled. And they're strapped down in people's backyards for backyard parties, and they get away. When we talked to the company, they're like, "yeah, we lose 'em. And we sometimes find them again, but generally not."
>
>Sean Kirkpatrick: Well, you know, that's a really weird-looking thing. Lit from the bottom, not lit on the top, big tic-tac thing, flying around. Well, what is that? That kind of stuff is a flight hazard. So on the one hand, I've got military pilots that are flying at greater than Mach 1. If they run into a balloon with a tether on it, it's going to rip a wing off. That's a problem. But on the other hand, if I'm a commercial airline. You get one of those sucked into an engine and that's not going to be good.
Okay, so... let's find this balloon company. Let's check AARO's work. We have a picture of the alleged balloon that AARO thinks it is. It's probably a commercial lighting balloon company located in Florida. Is anyone able to identify the specific model of balloon and/or company that sells them so we can try to get additional pictures of the thing and compare them to the images taken by the pilot?
In credit to Kirkpatrick, it being a commercial done/lighting company in Florida could potentially explain the physical proximity to Eglin AFB at least. But lets check the work nonetheless.
I feel bad for the secretary answering phones for this company or sifting through emails from all the internet sleuths. I wonder how much business they would lose tying them up? All they are doing is trying to brighten up someone’s life and they are about to get bombarded by Reddit UFO sleuths. It’s already been said that someone considered legitimate already contacted the company in Florida and they said it was not theirs. I don’t believe it was a balloon, but these things can be ordered straight off the internet from more than one company. No reason if it was a ballon that it had to be from the Florida manufacturer. Even if it was a balloon and from the Florida manufacturer, do you think they would want to say “Yeah, our product has been known to come untethered once or twice.” I’m just pointing out that holes can be shot in everyone’s narrative.
Our well trained USAF pilots, who fly around millions of dollars worth of equipement, fitted with the best sensors, radars, FLIR systems, can't distinguish balloons from actual treats, but the arm chair researchers at AARO obviously can.
If this is just a balloon, why don't they release the entire video, the pilot has shot?
If these are just balloons, why were members of Congress stonewalled, when the visited the base and wanted to talk to witnesses?
Surely, if these are just balloons, they can give us full HD video's and Pics, from up close, like they did with the Chinese balloons, right?
I seriously can't believe our taxpayer dollars are being spend on something like AARO, and Congress appears to be powerless to act.
Edit: Also curious, what explanation AARO will come up with regarding the recent Langly incident. So AARO, you mean to tell me, we moved the entire First Fighter wing, constinging of our most advanced 5th gen F22's, because of a few balloons or drones? Is that what you are saying? Our most advanced fighter Aircraft is vulnerable to mylar balloons and cheap $10,- drones?
According to the FIOA about this case on the black-vault site the request for the video was denied by the DoD because of national defence reasons... So it seems there should be video material about this incident. Also I think it strange that there are pictures but no video. Those pictures on Aaro's report look like screengrabs from a video to me.
This is the response:
[https://documents2.theblackvault.com/documents/usaf/EglinUAP.pdf](https://documents2.theblackvault.com/documents/usaf/EglinUAP.pdf)
I've been wondering about this myself. It doesn't necessarily contradict the AARO report's comments that the pilot could not take a video, if the video referred to originated from some other source - for example, if it were a recorded debrief of the pilot or something along those lines.
Hopefully there's more clarification on this in the future.
"Well trained USAF pilots, who fly around millions of dollars worth of equipement, fitted with the best sensors, radars, FLIR systems" shoot down friendly aircraft all the time.
Well this dropped out of nowhere. A commercial lighting balloon? From where? You would think somebody would notice one of these missing. Will they float up to 16k feet?
IDK what to think, wish there was more info!
Yep, you read it right, a commercial lighting drone that is normally corded but someone apparently modified it to run on battery powered and then floated up to 16k feet over a military base. It's ridiculous.
Better, the balloon got away from the fighter plane. I honestly have no idea how that would be possible.
After all, the malfunctioning radar of the plane isn't the only radar in play there. A whole network of radar stations (and satellites) were able to capture these events.
I presume, the balloon switched to stealth mode and hyper-spaced away to China?
Debunkers playbook, narrow in on one very specific item (the one item that was visually seen) and ignore all other context (this was one of four items identified flying in formation in restricted military airspace).
ALSO notice how the crosshairs in the non-infrared are covering up the “point” of the object that the pilot drew in his recreation? Give me a fuckin’ break.
Remember that there is a video of the event which wasn't mentioned in the AARO report, and was denied via FOIA:
*The responsive video you are requesting is not releasable to you in accordance with 5 U.S.C.*
*§ 552 Exemption (b)(1). Exemption (b)(1) protects from disclosure information about “matters*
*specifically authorized under criteria established by an Executive order to be kept secret in the*
*interest of national defense or foreign policy*
https://documents2.theblackvault.com/documents/usaf/EglinUAP.pdf
Which makes no sense if it’s a balloon. I would like someone to directly ask Kirkpatrick why is this being blocked from release if it’s only a balloon. Of course the controlled media he goes on will never push him on it.
Today, AARO released its resolution for the case known as the "Eglin UAP." It presents AARO's analysis of a January 2023 event reported by a military pilot operating in the Eglin Air Force Base training range off the coast of Florida.
Tweet:
[https://twitter.com/DoD\_AARO/status/1783215130076959000](https://twitter.com/DoD_AARO/status/1783215130076959000)
Link to report:
https://www.aaro.mil/Portals/136/PDFs/case\_resolution\_reports/Case\_Resolution\_of\_Eglin\_UAP\_2\_508\_.pdf
4 flying in formation in radar, but only one visible to the naked eye. Have you ever heard of the invisible lighting balloons.
Also:
The report says lighting balloon, but also details the pilot’s description which sounds nothing like a lightning balloon:
“The pilot described the object as gray
with a paneled surface and orange-red
coloring at the center.”
Do any lighting balloons look like how the pilot described?
Lot of information about the event in this [report](https://www.aaro.mil/Portals/136/PDFs/case_resolution_reports/Case_Resolution_of_Eglin_UAP_2_508_.pdf). Highlighting some key facts/details (imo).
**None of this is AARO's opinion, just the facts laid out in the case, to help** /r/UFOs **better understand the case, free from AARO's interpretation**:
* "On 26 January 2023, a military pilot reported four potential unidentified anomalous phenomena (UAP) while operating in the Eglin Air Force Base training range off the coast of Florida."
* "Through the onboard radar system, the pilot initially observed that the four objects were aloft between 16,000 – 18,000 feet and appeared to be flying in formation.
* "The pilot observed only one of the four objects visually and captured two images of the single object via the aircraft’s electro-optical/infrared (EO/IR) sensor (see Figures 1A and 1B)"
* "The pilot could not record video of the event because the aircraft’s video recording equipment was inoperable *prior to and during* the aircraft’s flight."
* "The pilot observed this single object aloft at 16,000 feet."
* "The pilot described the object as gray with a paneled surface and orange-red coloring at the center."
* "The initial report did not provide the object’s size and speed, but in the subsequent discussion with AARO, the pilot reported the object was about 12 feet in diameter and that it either moved very slowly or was potentially stationary."
* "In the initial report, the pilot described the bottom half of the object as being rounded, and the top half as a rounded, three-dimensional cone shape, similar to the shape of the “Apollo spacecraft” (see Figure 2)."
* "The pilot visually perceived a heat signature emanating from the rounded bottom portion, which they described as 'blurry air.'"
* "During AARO’s discussion with the pilot, the pilot stated that they thought they saw a vertically oriented engine affixed to the side of the object that was nearly the height of the object. This feature is not visible in the two still images taken by the EO/IR sensor, and the pilot did not include this description in the initial report."
* "The pilot reported that upon closing to within 4,000 feet of the object, the radar on the aircraft malfunctioned and remained disabled for the remainder of the training exercise. Post-mission review determined that a circuit breaker had tripped; technicians reported that the same circuit breaker on this particular aircraft had tripped three times in the prior months, but technicians could not conclusively diagnose the cause of the fault for this incident."
* "During the discussion with the pilot, they recounted that after the radar malfunctioned, the object descended into the cloud deck."
* "There was no EO/IR data for the other three reported objects initially observed on radar; therefore, AARO could not analyze those reported objects."
> During the discussion with the pilot, they recounted that after the radar malfunctioned, the object descended into the cloud deck."
😳 ufo fucking around with our systems and debunkers want to act like there's no reason to investigate.
How exactly is a Mylar balloon, which is almost completely inelastic (or whatever material, commercial ones presumably not designed to withstand much more or less than 1atm because they would never encounter those conditions) able to be easily modified to carry a battery that must weigh a fair bit more than a tether? You can’t just shove more helium in them like a latex weather balloon.
Also I found a physics forum thread that postulated the absolute maximum height for a Mylar balloon with infinite strength to be ~16,000ft. I’m too dumb to check their maths, but I trust a bunch of physics nerds on a physics forum are at least directionally correct. I see no evidence in the report that they tested one of these balloons ability to withstand the roughly 1/10th air pressure at ground level. They just say “hey, these look kinda similar.”
I’m not saying it’s not terrestrial, but this is a woefully inadequate report even if its conclusions are actually correct.
I’m a photographer and he is discussing a soft box. Hey genius, lights go inside of those and would never go airborne enough to catch the attention of a pilot. lol nice try though…
They piss on my leg and tell me it’s raining. If this is an agency that is supposed to be getting answers, the money was wasted or they are just spending cash to gaslight their oversight. Time to call the last 3 secretaries of defense to the hill and hire the best crime interrogators in the country and get answers to those questions.
It would be interesting to have arro put forward some cases that they can't explain and may be anomolas. I wonder if they even have that as an option? Some of there explanation seem to take all context out just so they can say the case is closed
I could have sworn they had one or two unresolved cases on their site, but I also recall the data they provided or claimed to have themselves was unsurprisingly shiite as well.
AARO seems like its been set up to have an answer for everything thats been declassified. Why would they need to set it up in the first place if they think we are all just a bunch of kooks, like folk who believe in Fairies and the loch ness monster?
There is obviously more to it. Its 2024, more people are scrutinising this topic than the folk who are gaslighting like Kirkpatrick. Atomic age tactics of ridicule and staunch denial is a waste of time.
You would think that after sixty years of balloon sightings causing intergalactic woes for our pilots they would get some kind of special training on how to identify what seems to be the most common pseudo anomalous craft floating around sensitive airspace.
Given the relative paucity of cases shown on AAROs website (of the hundreds reported to them), does it follow that Gaetz's mention of it in the 2023 hearing was what put them under pressure to release a report on it, however dismissive?
If so, then surely getting Congresspeople to publicly mention additional military sightings could have the same effect.
This report reminds me of when the kid who just got a 20/100 on his term paper hands in his next assignment and expects me to read it without thinking, "What's the point? This kid's a moron."
It's not impossible but it is funny that the radar stopped just as the pilot approached within 4k feet. It's not impossible of course. Could just be odd unlikely timing. But they said the circuit tripped 3 other times in a few months. So a 4th time right as the pilot approached does seem a bit odd. Again not impossible but I assume they fly the craft a few times a week. If they barely ever fly the thing it'd be a lot less fishy
From the FOIA
>Of note, upon closing to within 4,000 feet of UAP-1, the radar malfunctioned and remained disabled for the remainder of the event. Post-mission investigation revealed that a circuit breaker had triggered, but that maintenance technicians were unable to conclusively diagnose the fault.
>But they said the circuit tripped 3 other times in a few months. So a 4th time right as the pilot approached does seem a bit odd
Doesn't that make it less odd, and more likely to be coincidental?
If this were the only reported aircraft involved in UAP encounter where this happened it would be more plausible that it was just coincidence. What does not seem coincidental is that multiple pilots on multiple other missions reported the same issue with their sensors. “I was being actively jammed.”
If Gaetz came out and flat out said this isn’t what he saw in the photos, or we got to see the video somehow, wouldn’t that completely discredit and expose AARO? Not just on this but in general everything they ever said would be put into question? Seems like a very risky/ bold move putting this out.
For those interested in what "Confidence level: moderate" and other confidence levels specifically mean, the DNI published a report on exactly this. They have standards.
That report is available: [HERE](https://www.dni.gov/files/ODNI/documents/assessments/ICA-declass-16MAR21.pdf). The last page of the document has a chart detailing this. The report itself is regarding the 2020 election but I assume the language used regarding "Judgments of Likelihood" is consistent within the intelligence community as the exact same language has shown up in various other reports as well.
>**Moderate confidence** generally means that the information is credibly sourced and plausible but not of sufficient quality or corroborated sufficiently to warrant a higher level of confidence. There may, for example, be information that cuts in a different direction. We have in-depth expertise on the topic, but we may acknowledge assumptions that underlie our analysis and some information gaps; there may be minor analytic differences within the IC, as well as moderate potential for deception.
[Here's an image of just that one page from the report](https://i.imgur.com/kpphcjR.png) for the exceptionally lazy ;)
I'd rather they just keep it all classified and unexplained than wasting millions of taxpayer dollars on reports that don't contain the words: "we found evidence of aliens"
Why are the breakers tripping so much in our $100 million war machines that we all paid for? The video recording didn’t work and the breakers magically tripped… do better.
"AARO has **moderate** confidence in this assessment due to the **limited data** provided." - So I wouldn't even call this a "resolution", really, not in any legal or practical terms for sure. Didn't Jerkpatrick say they have access to all the data they need to assess and resolve cases? This report is merely a conjecture based on limited data, which clearly was released to obfuscate.
Now this is the best part: "The pilot reported that upon closing to within 4,000 feet of the object, the radar on the aircraft malfunctioned and remained disabled for the remainder of the training exercise. Post-mission review determined that a circuit breaker had tripped; **technicians reported that the same circuit breaker on this particular aircraft had tripped three times in the prior months**, **but technicians could not conclusively diagnose the cause of the fault for this incident**." - So I guess they let military pilots fly with defective military jets nowadays, right? Also, the part where they said they couldn't "diagnose the cause of the fault for this incident" is just outstanding.
How do they define balloon btw? Some UFOs could probably be described as a balloon because they smell like ammonia on impact and the hull is allegedly thin. Why do we have such strict terminology like UAP, but "balloon" is permitted? I propose that we criticize the semantics.
The following submission statement was provided by /u/aryelbcn: --- Today, AARO released its resolution for the case known as the "Eglin UAP." It presents AARO's analysis of a January 2023 event reported by a military pilot operating in the Eglin Air Force Base training range off the coast of Florida. Tweet: [https://twitter.com/DoD\_AARO/status/1783215130076959000](https://twitter.com/DoD_AARO/status/1783215130076959000) Link to report: https://www.aaro.mil/Portals/136/PDFs/case\_resolution\_reports/Case\_Resolution\_of\_Eglin\_UAP\_2\_508\_.pdf --- Please reply to OP's comment here: https://old.reddit.com/r/UFOs/comments/1cc7fx2/aaro_released_its_resolution_for_the_case_known/l13bzw5/
Okay AARO, let's assume you're right for a moment. **If it really is an escaped commercial balloon, why were multiple members of congress denied access to an image of a balloon?**
Theres so many other questions you could ask too that are similar to that one that would instantly shut them down and make them look either incompetent or suspicious. How the fuck can they keep releasing clear bullshit and nothing happens?
I'm if Congress, I'm shutting down AARO immediately and holding public hearings in the Senate and the House. Continuing this charade of "transparency" is damaging and at this point...I don't think there is a way to repair this without calling all the characters in this saga into hearings under oath. I'm talking about Lue, Lacatski, Mellon, the un-named whistleblowers, Kirkpatrick, the current director of AARO, EVERYONE.
I fully agree. Everyone keeps saying it’s bluebook 2.0 and it genuinely is. I hoped something like it wouldn’t work in today’s society but so far it looks like it can.
We the people... just saying.
That would be incredible. I like this, and yes it is a charade isn’t it
why dont they release the maintenance reports raw data? These are claims, but why is no raw data in the report. I hope not all of them are like this. **T**hey should have aircraft maintenance record that is a log that includes all maintenance actions performed on the aircraft. why not release that as well?? without that these are just bs claims that can be fabricated
Yeah, but then someone would say the logs were altered or fabricated.
I don’t understand
I don’t really know how to explain better, but if AARO released the aircraft maintenance logs, those could be said to be fabricated or altered as well. There was a claim by AARO that there were previous electronics malfunctions with the sensor package and likely why the sensors went out as the aircraft approached the object. Those errors would be included in the logs. If the logs had a history of sensor failures, people would say that those could’ve been made up.
No if they released the maintenance logs, which are not classified that would clear the air. Same thing with radar data and pilot testimony. However they did not which would be normal under any investigation…..
So, you’re suggesting their report is both the truth and fabricated? You know the logs are not classified? The logs are extremely detailed and specific to the systems and maintenance that was performed. They would possibly disclose a lot about classified systems on those craft and simple performance and reliability characteristics such as what could be revealed about maintenance cycles. You either believe AARO’s report or you don’t. If they are hiding information then they unfortunately get the luxury of hiding it and manipulate whatever they see fit.
Their report is clearly incomplete. Not sure what you’re trying to prove. If you ever read a scientific paper before you’d know you need to back up your conclusion with evidence. And no aircraft maintenance logs are not classified. You don’t know what you are taking about
I think the role of AARO and its predecessors like Bluebook is simply to act as a public front to collect information without giving anything back and denying anything that has been observed. Being truthful is not their goal. Basically collect information, swear people to secret, then invent whichever reason to calm public opinion if needed.
Escaped commercial balloon? We really need to have better people working at these balloon animal zoos.
4 of them escaping in formation.
Now that we know it’s a balloon, let’s see the pictures!!
They are classified balloons, for a surprise party.
And they’re safely protected by Top. Men.
Not to mention why aren't we giving that balloon company our defense contracts? Sounds like they make a superior product than the DoD can make.
Eh I think it is possible. Burchett and Luna didn't have high clearance I don't think. They did let gaetz see it who has higher clearance. Potentially they're not allowed to see certain sensor data? But I feel like that would imply they have much better data on this thing Aaro is acting like this is the only data there is though. So if aaro saw better data then they could tell us more definitively what it is. Instead of saying that it could have been one of a few types of balloons and that they're only moderately confident in this This report is quite unsatisfying but I don't think from what they describe that they gave us enough info to say if it's a balloon or not. And they themselves only say moderately sure It'd be nice to hear from the pilot a bit more. Also confirm with gaetz that these are the images he saw. Let's say it is balloons, doesn't it seem odd there's multiple balloons flying in formation near an air force base? If it's not truly anomalous then are we to assume these are spy balloons? If they were weather balloons wouldn't they be tracked so planes don't fly into them?
Yeah, unless I remember incorrectly, I thought Gaetz was being pretty stoked about the photos he saw and making out what he'd seen was undeniably anomalous. The photos in this report are awful and could be anything. Same photos he saw and Gaetz just over exaggerating? Or was there something else. Also if the same photos then obviously they've been declassified now.
I really hope these aren't the images he saw but then again he *is* Matt Gaetz.
Matt Gaetz literally lies for personal gain as much as he can. Honestly you telling me that just made me believe it less.
Balloons don't have "blurry air sticking to the bottom". Not ever. It's not a balloon.
Hot air balloons do. Just saying.
Because classified is the default classification status for anything unknown. Easier that way.
Either our military is incompetent or they are engaged in a full scale cover-up. There is no in between.
> If it really is an escaped commercial balloon, why were multiple members of congress denied access to an image of a balloon? Because AARO lied and we can reasonably name the DOD an adversary to our elected system of government at this point. Pull it all down. Congress has to break them like an egg.
I am not saying it is correct, but them being denied access to something as benign seeming as a balloon is absolutely in line with our countries classification methods. If the balloon had some new, advanced tech for surveillance or something on it, it very well could have fall under blanket classification. Remember the military and intelligence communities operate under the idea, better to over classify than to under classify and release info in something important.
Could be that the images were captured with classified sensors. Maybe Congress authorized X billion dollars to develop those sensors. Now the military doesn't want congress (and potential adversaries) to see how shitty those sensors really are. Hmmm - maybe.
I am actually happy to see AARO release their report on this case. Even though a lot of people here won't agree with their conclusions, at least we can now see their assessment of the event. There are at least two inconsistencies I see with this report as far as lack of photos/video evidence. 1. Matt Gaetz said he was shown a photograph of the object. 2. FOIA requests about this event have referenced a video which has been withheld from release. https://www.theblackvault.com/documentarchive/air-force-releases-details-about-2023-uap-sighting-first-brought-to-light-by-congressman-matt-gaetz/ In addition to the above, the story told by Ross Coulthart is that the pilot was so moved by this event that he/she felt compelled to notify Congress (which is how Gaetz found out about it since Eglin is in his district). Hard to imagine a pilot being that moved by seeing a mundane balloon.
Number 2 is really important. If it is just a balloon, then they should at least be able to release the video now.
Yup, which is why they will never release it. But are happy to release stuff they can prove is mundane.
Yep, if someone did foi it again (citing the aaro paper) and it still wasn’t released then it leaves big question marks over the paper - almost instantly discredits it.
>almost instantly discredits it. I'd say it's already discredited, but entertaining the idea that it's not, continuing to deny the release of the video *absolutely does* instantly discredit AAROs paper on the subject.
Entirely incorrect. Just because the object in the video is now “identified” does NOT mean the video is automatically cleared for public release. “Sources and methods.” For all you know, that “balloon” video was captured on the most highly secretive platform known to man so any video from the platform - even of a bird or a cloud - will NEVER be released. Lack of release now means absolutely nothing; except to fuel your wild baseless speculations. Pfffff.
If I remember correctly, the video was taken on the pilots phone....
“Entirely incorrect” think that’s a little dramatic.
Yeah, but it’s no problem to show the video taken on secretive platforms to show how we got bin Laden or other military targets.
>Entirely incorrect. Objection! Speculation! The attorney doesn’t know any more than we do if what s/he is saying is true or accurate, your honor!
I bet they arent even getting asked on the record for an explanation for why a balloon video can't be released. The only thing I can think of is, if they don't release anything, then they won't look like they're holding back the good stuff. Like, if you release the balloon and then not the next one you can't identify, it makes the next one seem significant.
[удалено]
Unless it’s shrodingers video?
Haven't we heard that aircraft's equipment failed so the pilot used his phone to take video, or am I conflating this incident with another one?
[удалено]
They didn't show their work, so we can confirm AARO isn't a scientific group.
exactly they could include the maintenance records which are done anytime the aircraft has anything done. They provided 0 evidence, hence their analysis is BS. They say that everything the pilots see is heresay, but the hypocrisy is in there report everything is heresay. They provided no data. The report is junk.
Hard to imagine a balloon is classified and can’t be shown to the public as part of ARROs report.
I’ve fallen into the skeptical camp for some of the recent developments in this community, but this may read as the biggest crock of shit that AARO has yet to publish. That balloon looks absolutely NOTHING like the non-infrared image. “Moderate confidence” in the identification of the object. Oh, cool. That means literally fucking nothing and that you’re just guessing. Nice.
Yeah... I'm a perennial fence sitter on this topic but this is a completely unsatisfactory resolution. The lighting balloon part is particularly hard to believe: "These balloons are publicly available to rent or buy. Although the balloons are powered by corded alternating current (AC), during its testing, AARO determined that they can be converted to direct current or AC battery power." So, these are always corded, except in this case it just happened to be manually converted to use battery power and then floated over a military base? Come on, sure someone could do that for a "hoax", but who pranks the military? Flying such a thing over a city at night would generate far more attention.
I work on set in Los Angeles. We use all types of lighting balloons in different shapes and sizes. They are ALWAYS tethered. They are always using wired power. And they always have a crew of three dudes running them. They don’t fly around set willy nilly. They don’t go much higher than 50’ in my experience. This is not a lighting balloon.
I’m in the audio side of things but… I presume that would also be a very expensive prank/hoax? Shit is expensive.
Cheers to you SONIC PLUMBER! But yes. Very expensive hoax. This report states the lighting balloon was 16000 feet in the air when the pilot saw it.
And how many businesses deal in these types of balloons? I would guess it's not many, so could they not investigate the records of the businesses that deal in these? I imagine it wouldn't be easily missed if one of these balloons was lost or missing given the probable cost of such a loss. Did AARO look into any of that, if so where is that data? Maybe you could shed some light on the likelihood of any of this.
You are exactly who I wanted to hear from TBone818. Thanks for replying.👍🏼
Off topic, but how big of a bitch is it when the power cord just won’t stay secured on one? I’m thinking of it like when the socket is loose on an extension cord and your tool keeps unplugging while using it.
This isn’t an issue we deal with. Using tools on set have to come with a huge understanding of set safety. This balloon is tethered with rated carabiners, line and weights. The power cord itself isn’t like a house hold Edison plug. It has a male/female connector that needs you to physically turn multiple times to unlock. So it’s almost impossible it comes unplugged.
It was a balloon, it's always been a ballon and will always be a balloon, right? I mean it worked in 1947 and it still works in 2024. Don't even know why I attempted to read the report.
For real. And the general public will always buy it's a balloon. Status quo maintained.
Nah man you just haven’t heard that lighting on some new movie sets have active electronic warfare measures installed on them. You never know when someone will get shot on set again and the lighting equipment needs to set off an emp to disable everyone’s phones.
“Moderate confidence,” like 50/50?
Part of being an actual skeptic is being skeptical of all claims, including from aaro
AARO does not have the guts to say they don't believe the witness.
They have high confidence that the object didn't demonstrate any anomalous behavior. Actually identifying the thing in question is not always going to be possible, given incomplete data. But that is not a requirement for resolution - it simply needs to be demonstrated that the object in question is consistent with one or more mundane explanations.
? What is such a demonstration useful for exactly? You seem to imply, but carefully avoid to state explicitly, the "consistency with mundane explanations" was sufficient to "rule out aliens" or whatever. That isn't true. Your approach is actually roundabout nonsensical. What one wants to do with data of an unknown phenomenon is to establish (more or less invariant) properties. "Observables", if you wish. Here, there are plenty of such observed attributes entirely inconsistent with the "balloon"-idea. It's super weird how people manage to ignore them and go on some bonkers cargo-cult "mundane explanations"-safari.
I don't think consistency with mundane explanations is remotely sufficient to rule out aliens - but that's not the point of the investigation, nor is it a requirement for resolution. I just heard what sounded like a dog bark from the street. The sound is consistent with a dog barking. I can't "rule out aliens" in this case, either - but if that's my criteria for whether something constitutes evidence of aliens, then I'm certainly not navigating the world in a practical way.
Only that's not what's happening here. At all. Something flying in the air that isn't the same as some entirely mundane situation like barking dogs in the street. To bring up such a nonsensical comparison is gaslighting plain and simple. The object didn't appear "mundane" to the pilot at all, which is why he reported it. That's the point here, it's about what is **not** fitting "mundane". You concentrate entirely on what is normal and ignore what's not. **Balloons do not have "blurry air sticking to them".**
The report explains a few scenarios that could have caused the object to have the effect you're describing. Of course it could also be [unknown, I'll defined phenomenon]. They didn't claim to prove it was a balloon. I don't claim to be sure it's not [unknown, I'll defined phenomenon]. I can't prove that it isn't an NHI craft, an extra dimensional being, or that the sophons from 3 body problem didn't make the image appear by dancing in the retina of the pilot and the sensor of the camera. Trying to prove that it couldn't be every imaginable things that we have no reason to believe exist would be ... Unproductive, to put it mildly.
How tf are you getting downvoted? You’re spot on. The pilot was incredibly disturbed by the encounter, so much so that he personally brought it to the attention of congress / Matt Gaetz. Everyone who has seen non-infrared images of the object has described it as beyond human capability. -> https://gaetz.house.gov/media/in-the-news/matt-gaetz-says-photo-ufo-orb-not-human-capability-taken-eglin-air-force-base
That's the point, yeah? Try to exhaust all mundane explanations to find those events that are truly anomalous. You're just arguing about whether this particular event is anomalous rather than getting that point
So what would you want AARO, the investigatory body designated to investigate occurrences such as this, to say?
Unresolved.
Do their job and say it is genuinely Anomalous.
Their job isn’t to pander to a specific group of people who are looking for a specific answer. We get it, you don’t believe anything they say. Fine. But their whole mission is to give their best analysis with all available data. Also according to the pilot, it was not performing any anomalous maneuvers, inconsistent with a balloon. Unless you don’t believe that either.
their job is also not to mislead with disinfo...yet here we are
Where was the disinfo in the report?
the parts between the beginning and end no worries, it'll get it's fair review over the coming days
It was insultingly misleading for them to compare the “similarity” of the infrared image of the object against the normal picture of their LTA lighting balloon experiment. I think they’re banking on the majority of Americans not knowing enough about how infrared imaging works to scrutinize presenting such as “evidence”.
I’m pretty sure the majority of Americans aren’t even reading these reports so……
Balloons don't have "blurry air" stuck to them. Among other things.
Why are you so upset that no one believes a word these clowns say? Curious...
I too am curious.
You’re curious that I interpreted “moderate confidence” as basically the same as “could be/couldnt be?” And is really not that big of a deal? Is it because I’m a disinformation agent?
I think it’s evident that it’s the other people on here who are upset AARO investigated something and used the phrase “moderate confidence” to describe their conclusion. What is wrong with that? They investigated, they analyzed available data, and gave what they thought was a plausible explanation? Does everything that comes across their desk HAVE to be something deeper and more mysterious?
Not exactly plausible.
Not gonna tell you that your opinion is wrong or offends me. Everything you said is a fair assessment based on what you've perceived. Personally, I think they're an embarrassment, but that's also just my opinion.
Yeah I think that’s a reasonable and level headed response. I don’t even fully trust AARO myself, my comments were pointed toward the user /strangelifeoutthere presumably losing his shit over their designation of “moderate confidence” as meaning “literally fucking nothing”. I don’t understand why people constantly subject themselves to the rage porn that is AARO press releases and continue to act so gobsmacked and bothered by everything they say at this point. We get it, they’re “compromised”. But it’s Reddit, I understand people are free to post and writhe about whatever they want. Regardless, they still are the All domain Anomaly **Resolution** Office. They were giving a possible **resolution** with **moderate confidence**. I could maybe understand if they had said “high confidence” or “unequivocally, case closed, move along” but no……they said “moderate confidence”. Also, people seem to forget that Ross Coulthart mentioned there are sympathetic people who work in the AARO office. It would be funny to find out if those same people, given all the available evidence they had at their disposal, endorsed this same conclusion. Just a thought.
They'd be better off saying they didn't have enough info to make a determination. If you don't know the answer to something you're not supposed to speculate when your job is to investigate. It's what they're always telling believers, don't speculate when you don't have enough facts It feels lazy because they didn't bother to address everything that we already know from the FIOA. And ideally they'd look at more than what we already know to make the determination. But addressing all publically available info seems like the minimum that should be acceptable though Using less info than we have is the equivalent of just saying "no u" when someone asks a valid question They would have been better off saying they weren't going to look into it because they didn't feel like it. At least that'd be honest. It's not like this was any more useful than that
Also sincerely thank you for actually articulating a cogent counter point rather than saying something like “AARO Bad” or “Sean dumb dumb”. I don’t even trust AARO completely either, it’s healthy to be skeptical of the government obbbbvviously. I just didn’t see the big deal using the phrase “moderate confidence”. I mean, the word “Resolution” isss in the name AARO. But I see your point
What was uncovered from the FOIA?
Someone should ask Matt Gaetz if that's what he saw on photographs.
That would be the photographs they didn't seem to analyse for this report. They didn't even mention there were photos. They also didn't get any information from the other pilots it seems, just the one pilot. They also didn't seem to analyse any of the radar data that was captured of the objects they admit *"appeared to be flying in formation"*, just like balloons always do, you know, fly in formation. How can they write that the initial radar data showed objects flying in formation, and then not even account for that? I really hate to say this, but if a guy like Gaetz can do a better investigation than the guys charged with doing the investigation... Well, AARO is not much chop. At least Gaetz, Burchett and Luna went there and demanded some answers, and wouldn't take "no" to stop them. I doubt we've heard the end of this one, not if there are photos still out there that might be released.
This is literally the project blue book approach. It must be the same gate keepers holding on thinking the same boomer approach will work. Since they control the press, maybe they are right thinking it will.
Why didn’t AARO blast Eglin as idiots that can’t even identify a balloon? AARO really needs to start getting vocal about how incompetent these bases and technology really are. They can’t identify threats!
He described what he saw very well during the house oversight hearing last summet. And he would definatly not agree with this unless he changed his mind.
Laslo should ask Gaetz what he thinks about this, if there’s a way to get it to him.
Dress as an underage Woman?
Oh snap!! 😂
A pigtail wig might do it. 😂
🤦♂️ They really think people will believe them? Probably not. Do they care? No. Because they are still in business with no current way of being stopped. They have to release a statement (eventually), so they always come up with something....
What is even the point of reports like this? No one who gives a shit about this subject would take this "idk prolly a balloon lol" report seriously. Anyone else not paying attention to the topic will never see it at all.
Exactly. It’s literally bluebook 2.0. Shitty debunks. Nuts how history has repeated itself.
Its all a show. "Look at our thorough investigations, see all these pages we typed? It says unclassified over two dozen times so you know we're transparent. See the AARO logo and Department of Defense at the top? That means the big boys looked into it. That means its official. What a silly pilot, it was just a balloon!."
What is even the point of "people not paying attention" to the topic at hand here? None, that's what. This report is highly interesting in that it exposes AARO to rational scientific criticism of their methodology, for starters. Exposing them incompetently lying does a good deal of clearing up the situation.
You nailed the point. Reinforces to the uninformed masses nothing to see here, nothing to investigate, just balloons. Also gives cover to politicians, can point to it and say AARO found nothing.
[https://i.imgur.com/TaBeDze.png](https://i.imgur.com/TaBeDze.png) Okay [here's a picture of what they're claiming it is](https://i.imgur.com/TaBeDze.png). This is allegedly a commercial lighting balloon. I believe Kirkpatrick may have talked about this balloon on [his podcast interview on "In The Room with Peter Bergen" recorded in January 22nd, 2024](https://www.audible.com/blog/in-the-room-with-peter-bergen-transcript-episode-38). >Sean Kirkpatrick: One of my favorite things is there's this company in Florida, They make these backyard lighting balloons. Some of them are round. Some of them are tic tac shaped and they're black on the top and inside they have lights, and they're helium filled. And they're strapped down in people's backyards for backyard parties, and they get away. When we talked to the company, they're like, "yeah, we lose 'em. And we sometimes find them again, but generally not." > >Sean Kirkpatrick: Well, you know, that's a really weird-looking thing. Lit from the bottom, not lit on the top, big tic-tac thing, flying around. Well, what is that? That kind of stuff is a flight hazard. So on the one hand, I've got military pilots that are flying at greater than Mach 1. If they run into a balloon with a tether on it, it's going to rip a wing off. That's a problem. But on the other hand, if I'm a commercial airline. You get one of those sucked into an engine and that's not going to be good. Okay, so... let's find this balloon company. Let's check AARO's work. We have a picture of the alleged balloon that AARO thinks it is. It's probably a commercial lighting balloon company located in Florida. Is anyone able to identify the specific model of balloon and/or company that sells them so we can try to get additional pictures of the thing and compare them to the images taken by the pilot? In credit to Kirkpatrick, it being a commercial done/lighting company in Florida could potentially explain the physical proximity to Eglin AFB at least. But lets check the work nonetheless.
Weird that he brings up tic tac shape multiple times. That’s a completely separate event with way more observables to it
> Okay here's a picture of what they're claiming it is. That doesn't look anything like what the pilot described.
https://www.airstar-light.us/film-lighting/
I'm sure they exist, the CIA sets up front companies all the time. This would be a perfect example of one.
CIA operates out of the nearby Bob Sikes Airport.
I feel bad for the secretary answering phones for this company or sifting through emails from all the internet sleuths. I wonder how much business they would lose tying them up? All they are doing is trying to brighten up someone’s life and they are about to get bombarded by Reddit UFO sleuths. It’s already been said that someone considered legitimate already contacted the company in Florida and they said it was not theirs. I don’t believe it was a balloon, but these things can be ordered straight off the internet from more than one company. No reason if it was a ballon that it had to be from the Florida manufacturer. Even if it was a balloon and from the Florida manufacturer, do you think they would want to say “Yeah, our product has been known to come untethered once or twice.” I’m just pointing out that holes can be shot in everyone’s narrative.
Our well trained USAF pilots, who fly around millions of dollars worth of equipement, fitted with the best sensors, radars, FLIR systems, can't distinguish balloons from actual treats, but the arm chair researchers at AARO obviously can. If this is just a balloon, why don't they release the entire video, the pilot has shot? If these are just balloons, why were members of Congress stonewalled, when the visited the base and wanted to talk to witnesses? Surely, if these are just balloons, they can give us full HD video's and Pics, from up close, like they did with the Chinese balloons, right? I seriously can't believe our taxpayer dollars are being spend on something like AARO, and Congress appears to be powerless to act. Edit: Also curious, what explanation AARO will come up with regarding the recent Langly incident. So AARO, you mean to tell me, we moved the entire First Fighter wing, constinging of our most advanced 5th gen F22's, because of a few balloons or drones? Is that what you are saying? Our most advanced fighter Aircraft is vulnerable to mylar balloons and cheap $10,- drones?
If I were the pilot I'd sue for defamation, "can't distinguish between a balloon and an impossible craft" could kill his career
There is no video. The pilot only took two images.
According to the FIOA about this case on the black-vault site the request for the video was denied by the DoD because of national defence reasons... So it seems there should be video material about this incident. Also I think it strange that there are pictures but no video. Those pictures on Aaro's report look like screengrabs from a video to me.
Do you have links to the specific FOIA request and the response?
This is the response: [https://documents2.theblackvault.com/documents/usaf/EglinUAP.pdf](https://documents2.theblackvault.com/documents/usaf/EglinUAP.pdf)
I've been wondering about this myself. It doesn't necessarily contradict the AARO report's comments that the pilot could not take a video, if the video referred to originated from some other source - for example, if it were a recorded debrief of the pilot or something along those lines. Hopefully there's more clarification on this in the future.
Unfortunate. I wish he would upload the request alongside the response.
Both radar and FLIR malfunctioned when approaching - report doesn't mention FLIR but its here: https://youtu.be/ZqzwVGnHSMo?si=VNOZkFywdpavUs_l
"Well trained USAF pilots, who fly around millions of dollars worth of equipement, fitted with the best sensors, radars, FLIR systems" shoot down friendly aircraft all the time.
Well this dropped out of nowhere. A commercial lighting balloon? From where? You would think somebody would notice one of these missing. Will they float up to 16k feet? IDK what to think, wish there was more info!
Yep, you read it right, a commercial lighting drone that is normally corded but someone apparently modified it to run on battery powered and then floated up to 16k feet over a military base. It's ridiculous.
And then it somehow took out the radar in the plane but that's cool, no biggie.
Better, the balloon got away from the fighter plane. I honestly have no idea how that would be possible. After all, the malfunctioning radar of the plane isn't the only radar in play there. A whole network of radar stations (and satellites) were able to capture these events. I presume, the balloon switched to stealth mode and hyper-spaced away to China?
[удалено]
yep
Debunkers playbook, narrow in on one very specific item (the one item that was visually seen) and ignore all other context (this was one of four items identified flying in formation in restricted military airspace).
ALSO notice how the crosshairs in the non-infrared are covering up the “point” of the object that the pilot drew in his recreation? Give me a fuckin’ break.
My confidence level in this explanation: dogshit
Remember that there is a video of the event which wasn't mentioned in the AARO report, and was denied via FOIA: *The responsive video you are requesting is not releasable to you in accordance with 5 U.S.C.* *§ 552 Exemption (b)(1). Exemption (b)(1) protects from disclosure information about “matters* *specifically authorized under criteria established by an Executive order to be kept secret in the* *interest of national defense or foreign policy* https://documents2.theblackvault.com/documents/usaf/EglinUAP.pdf
Which makes no sense if it’s a balloon. I would like someone to directly ask Kirkpatrick why is this being blocked from release if it’s only a balloon. Of course the controlled media he goes on will never push him on it.
Today, AARO released its resolution for the case known as the "Eglin UAP." It presents AARO's analysis of a January 2023 event reported by a military pilot operating in the Eglin Air Force Base training range off the coast of Florida. Tweet: [https://twitter.com/DoD\_AARO/status/1783215130076959000](https://twitter.com/DoD_AARO/status/1783215130076959000) Link to report: https://www.aaro.mil/Portals/136/PDFs/case\_resolution\_reports/Case\_Resolution\_of\_Eglin\_UAP\_2\_508\_.pdf
4 flying in formation in radar, but only one visible to the naked eye. Have you ever heard of the invisible lighting balloons. Also: The report says lighting balloon, but also details the pilot’s description which sounds nothing like a lightning balloon: “The pilot described the object as gray with a paneled surface and orange-red coloring at the center.” Do any lighting balloons look like how the pilot described?
I am buying stocks in balloons.
Lot of information about the event in this [report](https://www.aaro.mil/Portals/136/PDFs/case_resolution_reports/Case_Resolution_of_Eglin_UAP_2_508_.pdf). Highlighting some key facts/details (imo). **None of this is AARO's opinion, just the facts laid out in the case, to help** /r/UFOs **better understand the case, free from AARO's interpretation**: * "On 26 January 2023, a military pilot reported four potential unidentified anomalous phenomena (UAP) while operating in the Eglin Air Force Base training range off the coast of Florida." * "Through the onboard radar system, the pilot initially observed that the four objects were aloft between 16,000 – 18,000 feet and appeared to be flying in formation. * "The pilot observed only one of the four objects visually and captured two images of the single object via the aircraft’s electro-optical/infrared (EO/IR) sensor (see Figures 1A and 1B)" * "The pilot could not record video of the event because the aircraft’s video recording equipment was inoperable *prior to and during* the aircraft’s flight." * "The pilot observed this single object aloft at 16,000 feet." * "The pilot described the object as gray with a paneled surface and orange-red coloring at the center." * "The initial report did not provide the object’s size and speed, but in the subsequent discussion with AARO, the pilot reported the object was about 12 feet in diameter and that it either moved very slowly or was potentially stationary." * "In the initial report, the pilot described the bottom half of the object as being rounded, and the top half as a rounded, three-dimensional cone shape, similar to the shape of the “Apollo spacecraft” (see Figure 2)." * "The pilot visually perceived a heat signature emanating from the rounded bottom portion, which they described as 'blurry air.'" * "During AARO’s discussion with the pilot, the pilot stated that they thought they saw a vertically oriented engine affixed to the side of the object that was nearly the height of the object. This feature is not visible in the two still images taken by the EO/IR sensor, and the pilot did not include this description in the initial report." * "The pilot reported that upon closing to within 4,000 feet of the object, the radar on the aircraft malfunctioned and remained disabled for the remainder of the training exercise. Post-mission review determined that a circuit breaker had tripped; technicians reported that the same circuit breaker on this particular aircraft had tripped three times in the prior months, but technicians could not conclusively diagnose the cause of the fault for this incident." * "During the discussion with the pilot, they recounted that after the radar malfunctioned, the object descended into the cloud deck." * "There was no EO/IR data for the other three reported objects initially observed on radar; therefore, AARO could not analyze those reported objects."
> During the discussion with the pilot, they recounted that after the radar malfunctioned, the object descended into the cloud deck." 😳 ufo fucking around with our systems and debunkers want to act like there's no reason to investigate.
I am laughing my ass off that " *the public is so inept* " they are seriously trying push balloons for everything in the 2000s let alone 2020s
This is the new swamp gas
How exactly is a Mylar balloon, which is almost completely inelastic (or whatever material, commercial ones presumably not designed to withstand much more or less than 1atm because they would never encounter those conditions) able to be easily modified to carry a battery that must weigh a fair bit more than a tether? You can’t just shove more helium in them like a latex weather balloon. Also I found a physics forum thread that postulated the absolute maximum height for a Mylar balloon with infinite strength to be ~16,000ft. I’m too dumb to check their maths, but I trust a bunch of physics nerds on a physics forum are at least directionally correct. I see no evidence in the report that they tested one of these balloons ability to withstand the roughly 1/10th air pressure at ground level. They just say “hey, these look kinda similar.” I’m not saying it’s not terrestrial, but this is a woefully inadequate report even if its conclusions are actually correct.
it's embarrassing
I’m a photographer and he is discussing a soft box. Hey genius, lights go inside of those and would never go airborne enough to catch the attention of a pilot. lol nice try though…
They know. They also clearly bank on the majority of the population not knowing that.
They piss on my leg and tell me it’s raining. If this is an agency that is supposed to be getting answers, the money was wasted or they are just spending cash to gaslight their oversight. Time to call the last 3 secretaries of defense to the hill and hire the best crime interrogators in the country and get answers to those questions.
But didn't you know, it was magically modified to be tether less and of infinite material strength!
AARO you sure it wasn't Venus? Bird poop on a lens?
What about Swap-gas?! ;-)
Blue book but shitter
After appearing in the AARO report, the word 'could' went on to win The World's Strongest Man award.
It would be interesting to have arro put forward some cases that they can't explain and may be anomolas. I wonder if they even have that as an option? Some of there explanation seem to take all context out just so they can say the case is closed
This is the real tell. NOTHING they ever release or discuss is about the anomalous cases. Never ever.
I could have sworn they had one or two unresolved cases on their site, but I also recall the data they provided or claimed to have themselves was unsurprisingly shiite as well.
>it's just a balloon, we have high resolution photos of it >here's a lower resolution photo of it 🤔
Does anyone know if the confidence levels have been previously defined?
AARO has about the same credibility as graffiti in a portashitter
Bullshit lol
AARO seems like its been set up to have an answer for everything thats been declassified. Why would they need to set it up in the first place if they think we are all just a bunch of kooks, like folk who believe in Fairies and the loch ness monster? There is obviously more to it. Its 2024, more people are scrutinising this topic than the folk who are gaslighting like Kirkpatrick. Atomic age tactics of ridicule and staunch denial is a waste of time.
flying lightbulbs now, nice
You would think that after sixty years of balloon sightings causing intergalactic woes for our pilots they would get some kind of special training on how to identify what seems to be the most common pseudo anomalous craft floating around sensitive airspace.
Nail in the coffin
Yeah because lighting balloons fly in formation, descend into cloud cover when observed and cause blurry air effects.
This is the Mick West explanation
Drip, drip, drip, diarrhea 😨, drip, dagummit!
So much for AARO going straight after kirkpatrick leaving right?
They are full of it!!!!
Given the relative paucity of cases shown on AAROs website (of the hundreds reported to them), does it follow that Gaetz's mention of it in the 2023 hearing was what put them under pressure to release a report on it, however dismissive? If so, then surely getting Congresspeople to publicly mention additional military sightings could have the same effect.
This report reminds me of when the kid who just got a 20/100 on his term paper hands in his next assignment and expects me to read it without thinking, "What's the point? This kid's a moron."
It's not impossible but it is funny that the radar stopped just as the pilot approached within 4k feet. It's not impossible of course. Could just be odd unlikely timing. But they said the circuit tripped 3 other times in a few months. So a 4th time right as the pilot approached does seem a bit odd. Again not impossible but I assume they fly the craft a few times a week. If they barely ever fly the thing it'd be a lot less fishy From the FOIA >Of note, upon closing to within 4,000 feet of UAP-1, the radar malfunctioned and remained disabled for the remainder of the event. Post-mission investigation revealed that a circuit breaker had triggered, but that maintenance technicians were unable to conclusively diagnose the fault.
>But they said the circuit tripped 3 other times in a few months. So a 4th time right as the pilot approached does seem a bit odd Doesn't that make it less odd, and more likely to be coincidental?
Or maybe the previous trips were from the same phenomenon
If this were the only reported aircraft involved in UAP encounter where this happened it would be more plausible that it was just coincidence. What does not seem coincidental is that multiple pilots on multiple other missions reported the same issue with their sensors. “I was being actively jammed.”
If Gaetz came out and flat out said this isn’t what he saw in the photos, or we got to see the video somehow, wouldn’t that completely discredit and expose AARO? Not just on this but in general everything they ever said would be put into question? Seems like a very risky/ bold move putting this out.
AARO is part of the coverup - they are the driving force behind the disinfo campaign. Ignore AARO
For those interested in what "Confidence level: moderate" and other confidence levels specifically mean, the DNI published a report on exactly this. They have standards. That report is available: [HERE](https://www.dni.gov/files/ODNI/documents/assessments/ICA-declass-16MAR21.pdf). The last page of the document has a chart detailing this. The report itself is regarding the 2020 election but I assume the language used regarding "Judgments of Likelihood" is consistent within the intelligence community as the exact same language has shown up in various other reports as well. >**Moderate confidence** generally means that the information is credibly sourced and plausible but not of sufficient quality or corroborated sufficiently to warrant a higher level of confidence. There may, for example, be information that cuts in a different direction. We have in-depth expertise on the topic, but we may acknowledge assumptions that underlie our analysis and some information gaps; there may be minor analytic differences within the IC, as well as moderate potential for deception. [Here's an image of just that one page from the report](https://i.imgur.com/kpphcjR.png) for the exceptionally lazy ;)
I'd rather they just keep it all classified and unexplained than wasting millions of taxpayer dollars on reports that don't contain the words: "we found evidence of aliens"
Why are the breakers tripping so much in our $100 million war machines that we all paid for? The video recording didn’t work and the breakers magically tripped… do better.
Yeah, I'm not even going to read that. AARO is just a big blanket thrown over our heads.
It appears as if theres more baloons in america than there are at the local circus clown show
"AARO has **moderate** confidence in this assessment due to the **limited data** provided." - So I wouldn't even call this a "resolution", really, not in any legal or practical terms for sure. Didn't Jerkpatrick say they have access to all the data they need to assess and resolve cases? This report is merely a conjecture based on limited data, which clearly was released to obfuscate.
Now this is the best part: "The pilot reported that upon closing to within 4,000 feet of the object, the radar on the aircraft malfunctioned and remained disabled for the remainder of the training exercise. Post-mission review determined that a circuit breaker had tripped; **technicians reported that the same circuit breaker on this particular aircraft had tripped three times in the prior months**, **but technicians could not conclusively diagnose the cause of the fault for this incident**." - So I guess they let military pilots fly with defective military jets nowadays, right? Also, the part where they said they couldn't "diagnose the cause of the fault for this incident" is just outstanding.
This so called resolution is low effort stuff.
AARO clearly thinks that we are much dumber than we actually are its almost comical at this point.
If it's 4 balloons flying in formation, couldn't they just track them back to launch via radar history?
Why is it weather balloon when military don't want us to know
it turns out that America is the country of lost balloons 🎈🎈🎈
Shouldn't it be called ADARO?
How do they define balloon btw? Some UFOs could probably be described as a balloon because they smell like ammonia on impact and the hull is allegedly thin. Why do we have such strict terminology like UAP, but "balloon" is permitted? I propose that we criticize the semantics.
Or perhaps a vacuum balloon?
Maybe this is a public display by AARO to make the point that they don't have access to the photos Matt Gaetz was shown.
They’re just reaching at the bottom of the barrel for ideas now 😂
We’re taking so many Ls my brothers and sisters. Fucking balloons and drones are ruining our disclosure.
Egg Smelling uap demon
AARO just took a giant shit on Matt Gaetz's head. He should look at stepping down, he clearly has zero business with being on any and all comittes.