Neal Simpson

@TrooperFozzy @JeremyCorbell @g_knapp @uncertainvector Its policy to redact data which, if combined or collated, could compromise operational parameters. Some of it seems innocuous alone, but the combined data could pose issues, which is why the analysis of the videos has not been released.

I don’t believe those videos were “leaked at all” but that’s beside the point. Why redact information like speed, altitude, direction? These are filmed by drones and craft that are public knowledge, it can’t a “national security threat”. There is no logical reason. Other than it makes it more difficult to question what is seen or claimed about the video

Nothing is planned, it’s provoked. SLEEPING DOG exists because our government chose silence over transparency for decades. Let’s see if a new era of transparency has begun. Journalism will do the job, if they won't 🥋🛸🇺🇸 syfy.com/syfy-wire/slee…

@TrooperFozzy @JeremyCorbell @g_knapp @uncertainvector See the photo of the illum flares above: if it was zoomed in where the canopy appeared that large, it would not be hidden behind the starburst. It’s just an artifact from the intensity of the object being observed.

It would disappear depending on the angle it’s filmed from. The heat from the flare is so intense, and when it comes between the parachute and camera, it is going to distort or blow out the image due to the heat it’s giving off and you won’t see what’s behind the flare due to the extreme heat

@EmnelSheprd @J2PsionicAsset The video explains the answer to your question.

@J2PsionicAsset if there no parachute why flare swings in wind and not faling straight ??? by smoke wee see it make spirals like atached to some chute... smoke in higt altitude is colder than hot ground so wee lokin from above down

I agree with this. Nailed it IMO

@sj27426 @Caspersight This is the usual representation of illum flares under canopy view through IR. You can see the chute, flare, and slag dripping.

@Caspersight Military flares use a round shaped parachute for stability and to slow it's descent. The alleged parachute in that video is rectangular. Does a video exist of other flares caught on an infrared camera to see if this matches??

So this is Rebunked. LOL See just an opinion!

@JR137777 @Caspersight It’s not a parachute, it’s a secondary optical artifact produced by the intense infrared point source interacting with the sensor’s lens assembly at changing angles.

@Caspersight Indont get it. You can see the parachute. Im confused.

@Phillip96207244 I am a retired AC-130 pilot who has seen countless illum flares of different varieties through EO/IR both CONUS and deployed.

@Phillip96207244 The dark, parachute-like shape you see moving above or to the side of the starburst is a secondary optical artifact produced by the intense infrared point source interacting with the sensor’s lens assembly at changing angles. This is the usual presentation of illum on IR.

@TrooperFozzy @JeremyCorbell @g_knapp @uncertainvector Internal optical paths can create strong axis-aligned diffraction spikes around extremely bright point sources, which is what is seen in the original footage. What the object actually looked like is obscured due to the sensor being overloaded.

@TrooperFozzy @JeremyCorbell @g_knapp @uncertainvector As for the movement, it wouldn’t be that consistent nor would it disappear in the center of the fov. This is a good example of the usual presentation of an illum flare under canopy with slag dripping.

@80wZoe @MythManwowwee @nypost @BillyKryzak has a good video demonstrating that it is not a parachute but a thermal bloom due to the angle of the lens and the object being observed.

@MythManwowwee @nypost Here is one... youtube.com/shorts/RUOhLJz…

Eight of the 46 UFO vids sought by Congress appear in new doc ahead of their official release trib.al/ugEQKQG

@TrooperFozzy @JeremyCorbell @g_knapp @uncertainvector Those of us who are used to working with EO/IR footage understand this is the right answer:

So @JeremyCorbell @g_knapp are you pair going to acknowledge the fact this has a plausible debunk to this being a flare with parachute, are you not going to question why supposed experienced airmen like Ryan Graves @uncertainvector don’t recognise such footage. Surely they’ve seen flares before. Or are you all making too much money from the subject/phenomenon and need to push the agenda at all costs. Are you not going to even question the “source” you spoke to and claimed that intelligence services are baffled by it. Yet the internet managed to give a plausible explanation within a few hrs. You need to address this as it calls your credibility into question. Either you are too stupid to realise you are being fed bullshit, or you know but don’t care as long as it keeps you in business. Either way it does not bode well for you and your chums

@CountingCoupTac @kimmono @joeljewitt @BillyKryzak @rosscoulthart Agreed, that’s what I meant by “appears to be… relative to the sensor,” either the sensor or the object are moving erratically, but we only have one perspective and can’t definitively say without additional data points.

@AnnonPhoto @kimmono @joeljewitt @BillyKryzak @rosscoulthart I wouldn’t say it’s moving erratically. I believe the sensor itself is moving, causing the “burning” effect in the optic that everyone’s saying is smoke. Similar effects looking at thermites and the sun. Same effects under night vision when looking bright lights for too long.

It's still not a parachute. Let's talk about optics. @rosscoulthart (i say equal and opposite in the video, its not equal, but it is moving in perfect opposition as i describe)

@CountingCoupTac @kimmono @joeljewitt @BillyKryzak @rosscoulthart Exactly! The intensity of the IR energy causing the starburst obscures the shape of the object itself. Unless there is more data available, pretty much all we can say from the video is it’s an intense IR energy source that appears to be moving erratically relative to the sensor.

@AnnonPhoto @kimmono @joeljewitt @BillyKryzak @rosscoulthart For sure. But, we can’t leave out the fact that it could be something else. The only individuals that know either way are the ones who were there. We need their testimony. I have seen “something” that was brighter than a flare and I was unable to figure out what it was.

@CountingCoupTac @kimmono @joeljewitt @BillyKryzak @rosscoulthart As an example, you can see the chute, illum, and slag dripping. This is the usual IR presentation.

@CountingCoupTac @kimmono @joeljewitt @BillyKryzak @rosscoulthart 💯- I’ve seen countless flares through our EO/IR and it’s never looked like that, even at relatively close range.

@CountingCoupTac @kimmono @joeljewitt @BillyKryzak @rosscoulthart Sorry for the confusion. Yes, an illum flare is inherently hot. I was not referring to that claim, but rather stating the “parachute” is an IR bloom/lens flare and not a tangible object.

@AnnonPhoto @kimmono @joeljewitt @BillyKryzak @rosscoulthart All those effects happen similarly in IR spectrum as well when looking at objects that are extremely bright. Like the sun, full moon, or flares. Also, there are no “thermal” flares. Flares are inherently hot. You know…. ‘Cause of the burning magnesium. 🤷🏽‍♂️

@kimmono @CountingCoupTac @joeljewitt @BillyKryzak @rosscoulthart It’s a thermal flare. Similar thing can happen from the sun depending on the angle of the camera to the object being observed/source of the IR energy.

@CountingCoupTac @joeljewitt @BillyKryzak @rosscoulthart Fred, any idea what that square could be? Shadow of something?

@The_Astral_ @Ryan_UFOs It mirrors the object because it’s a thermal shadow and bloom is symmetrical because of the look angle. I’ve seen countless illum flares on an EO/IR sensor and none behaved like that. Unfortunately the bloom hides the shape of the object itself.

@Ryan_UFOs The parachute movement in mirroring the object does it for me. I'm still open on it but not looking anomalous rn IMO.

Looks like the “star UFO” video released earlier today in the UFO files has been debunked.