Read on Twitter
Anyone accepting that the pyramid videos have been debunked by MW needs to reconcile the following unresolved points: @AFSUnidentified @JeremyCorbell @MiddleOfMayhem @JeremyUnidenti1 @dave_beaty #ufotwitter @TheUfoJoe
1. Stand issue PVS-14 NVGs used by the US Military do not have triangular apertures. It is not common practice to tape triang over lenses. Tri lens caps are not comm. available.
It is pure speculation that any of these were used by camera op. No Triangle, No Bokeh shape
It is pure speculation that any of these were used by camera op. No Triangle, No Bokeh shape
2. The primary triangular object goes in and out of focus during the video. It appears smaller and fuzzy, then larger and more sharp. This is the opposite of the Bokeh effect. See examples 2A and 2B below:
2A:
2B:
3. The points of light (Possibly Jupiter/Antares) in first seconds of the video are quite out of focus but are not large, clear, defined triangles, as would be the case if the Bokeh effect were at work and MW's assumptions in point 1 was correct. More out of focus = larger triang
Point 4:
There is a pattern to the flashes, but they have NOT been matched to any know aircraft manufacturers yet.
There is a pattern to the flashes, but they have NOT been matched to any know aircraft manufacturers yet.
Point 5:
The camera operator does not pan far enough for the secondary triangles to be Okab. Okab is about 6 times the field of view of the camera when viewing Jupiter Antares. Camera pans at most 3.5 times FOV. No stars are visible during the pan, but should be seen.
The camera operator does not pan far enough for the secondary triangles to be Okab. Okab is about 6 times the field of view of the camera when viewing Jupiter Antares. Camera pans at most 3.5 times FOV. No stars are visible during the pan, but should be seen.
Point 5A:
One star or object is seen in frame 85, but this appears to possible be Cebalrai (HR6603), a magnitude 2.75 star, half the distance from Jupiter to Okab.
One star or object is seen in frame 85, but this appears to possible be Cebalrai (HR6603), a magnitude 2.75 star, half the distance from Jupiter to Okab.
Point 6:
The secondary triangles that MW Claims are Okab and Okab Borealis move in the FOREGROUND in front of coulds and are not affected/dimmed by cloud cover. Watch video from 7 second mark. These are either additional triagular objects or lens abberations.
The secondary triangles that MW Claims are Okab and Okab Borealis move in the FOREGROUND in front of coulds and are not affected/dimmed by cloud cover. Watch video from 7 second mark. These are either additional triagular objects or lens abberations.
Point 7:
The Navy would be able to identify and track a commercial airliner. Period.
The Navy would be able to identify and track a commercial airliner. Period.
Point 8: A commercial aircraft traveling at cruise altitude in heavy cloud cover (sufficient to block all but the brightest stars) would likely not be visible to a ground observer.
Point 9: A commercial aircraft traveling at an altitude of 700ft above a destroyer would be quite loud, and we would hear engine noise over the voices in the video.
