3

There has been a lot of recent press about David Fravor's 2004 UFO sighting, an event also known as the USS Nimitz UFO incident. A quick Google search will verify that since December of 2017 (with another wave this week), the story has been covered by a wide variety of mainstream reputable news sources. The coverage also divulges that the incident was investigated by the Pentagon, with no satisfying conclusion being reached. I am interested in why this story is getting so much coverage and particularly whether the widespread coverage is part of a disinformation scheme by the US Government. That is, is the US Government intentionally promoting/encouraging Americans to think about this story in order to distract them from other more significant matters, which it wishes to hide.

This claim came to my attention via personal conversations, but can also be seen in various forums discussing the event, e.g. on Openminds.tv, and has been argued against on the To The Stars Academy Facebook page. More general claims about UFO stories as disinformation can be found in this Wikipedia article, this book by John Michael Greer and this BBS radio article.

To be clear, what interests me about this is not the declassified video footage or even the testimony, but the fact that the media is paying so much attention to it. If the story is not bogus, and there is no element of conspiracy or disinformation at play, it truly defies explanation. There is no publicly known phenomenon, natural or otherwise, which could explain what Fravor describes. And Fravor is a respectable source, being treated with respect by the media.

The general consensus on the phenomenon Fravor describes (according to the first linked Wikipedia article) is that it is due to one of: malfunctioning or misinterpretation of aircraft equipment, classified government technology, or extraterrestrials. If we do not entertain the possibility of disinformation, this merits further investigation (as recommended by physicist Don Lincoln), at the very least to confirm or deny the first possibility. But that investigation is no longer occurring.

closed as unclear what you're asking by Jan Doggen, tim, Oddthinking Mar 15 '18 at 14:17

Please clarify your specific problem or add additional details to highlight exactly what you need. As it's currently written, it’s hard to tell exactly what you're asking. See the How to Ask page for help clarifying this question. If this question can be reworded to fit the rules in the help center, please edit the question.

  • 7
    If you hear something 1. Moving faster than any material object imaginable; 2. Seeming to react to your movements almost predicting them, then the most obvious conclusion is that 1. it is not a material object; 2. it moves only when you move. In other words, it's an atmospheric light phenomenon. Put a mirror on your forehead and try to catch the reflection - it will be moving at extreme speeds and outsmarting you every time you try to turn your head and follow it. – sashkello Mar 15 '18 at 6:21
  • 3
    @j0equ1nn Yes, I would think that military would be familiar with how weird and deceptive atmospheric phenomena might be. I can only assume that pilots always have to record and give detailed description of any potential unidentified (enemy) aircraft, but don't have access to the investigation. Therefore, they genuinely might not know the result of such an inquiry, which in turn might be secret by default, even if the explanation is mundane. – sashkello Mar 15 '18 at 6:31
  • 4
    @j0equ1nn If you read the account closely, they did not actually observe anything moving at Mach 3. They observed a radar blip in one place, sent aircraft there to check. When the aircraft got there they could not spot anything on the radar. Then they spotted another radar blip and concluded that if this was the same object, then it could have had to move at Mach 3 to get there in that time. So please maintain the distinction between observed fact and conjecture. As a PhD in mathematics I am sure you are well aware of the folly of making hasty assumptions based on scant facts. – MichaelK Mar 15 '18 at 6:31
  • 4
    I must also say that this account absolutely doesn't sound like a unique phenomenon to me. It is quite typical. It is always cigar- or oval- shaped, metallic (in other words, reflecting the light), moving faster and predicting every movement when you try to chase it. There are several similar accounts with plausible explanations of how these phenomena might occur outlined in wonderful books by Donald Menzel, which I highly recommend to anyone interested in atmospheric physics. – sashkello Mar 15 '18 at 6:40
  • 1
    @sashkello Thanks for the reference, I will check out Donald Menzel. I expect you're probably right about the commonality of it, this story has just brought a lot of new people into the discussion due to the recent publicity of it. – j0equ1nn Mar 15 '18 at 8:32

Browse other questions tagged .