That indicates to me that the sensitive stuff is 'terrestrial origin', and is either a vehicle owned by the DoD, or a foreign power.I realize that DoD intentionally degrades photographic and video quality of sensitive stuff "as released to the public" however that said, even if the quality is NOT degraded, a two hundred dollar consumer drone has better video quality than what we're seeing.
I realize there's a lot of tension in Congress right now but the fact is, we're going to want much higher quality images.
Do we need to consult with the producer of America's Funniest Home Videos producer (Vin DiBona) or something?
That indicates to me that the sensitive stuff is 'terrestrial origin', and is either a vehicle owned by the DoD, or a foreign power.
Maybe not, but the chances of that being the case verses what they are trying to imply are much higher. Until there is more.. hum.. substantial information and evidence, I will assume it's terrestrial origin, and the DoD trying to confuse the issue.Not necessarily.
I wish I knew for sure, but as I've never contracted with the Federal Government (and in particular, DoD) to do any kind of video work, I can't say for sure but I do SUSPECT that "any and all video" has to get routed through some office that determines if a video file gets released AS IS to the public, without some form of "handling" procedure.
I'll just say that it wouldn't surprise me.
If there's a DoD policy on degrading video of this nature released to the public, there might be a special policy regarding UFO's or it may be a blanket policy that adheres to some sort of generalized master policy related to operational security, that applies to everything.
In the days of analog video it was easy, just adhere to a policy of only releasing third or fourth generation dubs, not the master tape footage.
Now with digital being what it is, generational quality loss isn't nearly the problem it used to be, unless you want to introduce such "loss".
Intentionally doing that is just a matter of transcoding to a much more compressed "lossy" file format.
Maybe not, but the chances of that being the case verses what they are trying to imply are much higher. Until there is more.. hum.. substantial information and evidence, I will assume it's terrestrial origin, and the DoD trying to confuse the issue.
That indicates to me that the sensitive stuff is 'terrestrial origin', and is either a vehicle owned by the DoD, or a foreign power.
And, of course, we wouldn't talk about it anyway.The major development recently in China & Russia have been hypersonic vehicles, not UFO-like aerial vehicles. While this doesn't rule those out, our spy satellites should have picked up vehicles of this kind years ago.
We use cookies and similar technologies for the following purposes:
Do you accept cookies and these technologies?
We use cookies and similar technologies for the following purposes:
Do you accept cookies and these technologies?