Description from YouTube:
On 17 July 2024, I spoke with former All-domain Anomaly Resolution Office (AARO) director Dr. Sean Kirkpatrick. Discussion topics are listed below.
While I am grateful for his time, I was taken aback by how little Kirkpatrick knew about the three most recognizable UAP videos in the public domain.
For example, this is the second time that Kirkpatrick told me that the strong, highly anomalous infrared signature in the “Gimbal” video - arguably the most recognizable UAP footage of all time - is likely due to a “glare” reflection from the sun.
“Gimbal” was recorded at night.
Similarly, Kirkpatrick endorsed a deeply flawed NASA analysis of the well-known “GoFast” video in March, stating, “‘GoFast’ was actually explained at the NASA panel. They did a really nice job of pulling that apart.” But after I highlighted the study’s glaring errors to Kirkpatrick, he told me, “I haven't looked at NASA's analysis.”
Moreover, Kirkpatrick made assertions (e.g., that the anomalous “stepped” rotation in “Gimbal” is due to image compression) that even Mick West, the most prominent UAP skeptic, characterized as “nonsense” and “obviously wrong.”
For the former director of the U.S. government’s UAP analysis office to be so misinformed about the most recognizable UAP footage in the world (which led, in no small part, to the creation of his office) is, quite simply, stunning.
This, of course, is yet further evidence that the three Navy UAP videos are indeed truly anomalous, as our repeatable and verifiable analyses demonstrate.
Nor did Dr. Kirkpatrick address, at least to my satisfaction, why the most powerful member of the Senate, Chuck Schumer (D-N.Y.), reintroduced the UAP Disclosure Act after AARO categorically denied the legislation’s underlying allegations of unreported/illegal UAP “legacy programs” that retrieve and attempt to reverse-engineer craft of “non-human” origin. (The UAPDA, it should be noted, is arguably the most extraordinary legislation in U.S. history.)
In other words, what, despite AARO's vehement denials, compelled the Senate Majority Leader to double down on a requirement that the U.S. government seize recovered UAP and “biological evidence of non-human intelligence” allegedly held by private entities?
In a brief post-discussion email exchange, I attempted to clarify a number of items, most notably why AARO grossly misrepresented the first truly scientific study of UAP.
The study, conducted by Battelle in the early 1950s (as “Project Blue Book Special Report No. 14”), found that 33% of the highest-quality UAP reports with sufficient data to evaluate were “Unknown.”
In Vol. 1 of its Historical Records Review, AARO astoundingly - and falsely - claimed that Battelle’s scientific analysis found that “all cases that had enough data were resolved and readily explainable.”
I have not received a response.
Discussion Topics:
-The Schumer-Rounds UAP Disclosure Act (UAPDA)
-Did AARO successfully “kill” the UAPDA in 2023?
-David Grusch
-The most perplexing UAP footage Dr. Kirkpatrick saw while at AARO
-2015 “Gimbal”/“GoFast” videos (see links below)
-East Coast UAP incidents
-“Metallic orbs”
-2004 “FLIR1”/“Tic Tac” video
-Verifiable, raw data confirms military eyewitness accounts of highly anomalous incidents (“Gimbal,” “GoFast,” and “FLIR1”)
Gimbal Analysis:
I noticed that when Marik asked Kirkpatrick about NHIs and the UAPDA, Kirkpatrick immediately started using the word “extraterrestrial.” To my recollection, Marik didn’t use that word. To me, it seemed like a diversion tactic to avoid talking about NHIs, the broad term used in the act, by using a very specific term that he knows is not applicable.
There seems to be a common practice of pivoting the conversation to "extraterrestrial". Even with recent questioning of Department of Energy's Secretary Jennifer Granholm she brought up "alien" when trying to dismiss the questions on UAP.
There could be a few reasons behind this. First, there's still a stigma around the idea of extraterrestrials and it twists the conversation into sounding like nothing more than sci-fi.
Secondly, it takes investigation and proof to say with certainty that something is "extraterrestrial". Hypothetically, if the government recovered a craft with a stereotypical grey alien, they can honestly say that there is no evidence it's extraterrestrial. They can't honestly say that it isn't an NHI. It'd be clear at first sight that it's not human and is of advanced intelligence based on the craft operated. But, without investigation, they can't say what the origin is. That's not to say that there hasn't been recoveries and research that determined their origin, but spokespeople like Kirkpatrick can play the fool and not be overtly lying.
Thirdly, it is possible they know that the origin isn't extraterrestrial and is instead terrestrial, interdimensional, etc. Though, I don't recall any direct questioning of spokespeople around the other origins.
There's a reason that the UAP amendments have focused on the term "non-human intelligence"/"NHI". It's important to cast a broad net and avoid semantic games. When groups like AARO/DoD and the DoE are changing the conversation to avoid answering questions, it just goes to show the need for better oversight to understand why.