Parabunk

Two years ago, I made a post about the Nimitz UFO incident where I compared how some details differ between the reports and witness interviews. I made one significant omission. I left out the accounts given by Princeton radar operators. I noted then that: Those accounts severely contradict all the other primary sources and contain a number of not too credible additions, e.g. multiple other intercepts and a supposed high quality video of a flying saucer. Given those accounts also lack evidence and supportive statements by the primary witnesses, I won't consider them further here.  Five months later Kevin Day himself left a comment where he stated: Don't discount the radar operators in your analysis --- right now, you look pretty silly from my perspective. Otherwise, great report and your skepticism is, as always, justified.  (See the comments section for our full exchange.) Given that I just posted my "best guess" theory about the incident, and promised to

It's been two years since I last made a post here. It was my reality check mostly about the few Pentagon UFO incidents, and some people who tried to make money out of them. I noted back then that what was then called "three of the most unusual videos" had already been debunked. And they still are that just as much. The fact that they are still being hotly debated can only mean it's been a long streak of slow news days on the UFO front. That, lack of new information, and lack of time, have been major reasons for my silence here. But the primary reason, that originally restored my interest towards this topic and led to this blog, has also been the primary reason for my fading interest in it. Yep, it's the Nimitz UFO incident. So how about the one remaining actually interesting part of the story then? That was the sentence I used in my last post to introduce the visual encounter part of the incident. And these excerpts show how I saw the overall situation. If and