Pentagon UFO chief tells Senate 'very anomalous objects' need careful study (video)
"It is important to underscore that, to date, AARO has not discovered any verifiable evidence of extraterrestrial beings, activity or technology."
It's never aliens.
At least, it hasn't been yet. The United States Senate Armed Services Subcommittee on Emerging Threats and Capabilities heard testimony on Tuesday (Nov. 19) from Jon T. Kosloski, director of the Pentagon's All-Domain Anomaly Resolution Office (AARO). The U.S. Department of Defense created the office in July 2022 in order to have a single place for military and government personnel to report UFO sightings, or UAP, as they're now known. The new term, short for unidentified anomalous phenomena, encompasses not only unidentified objects or events in the sky, but also those in water, in space or those that appear to travel between these domains.
During today's hearing, Kosloski came in strong, stating that "it is important to underscore that, to date, AARO has not discovered any verifiable evidence of extraterrestrial beings, activity or technology." Still, despite having resolved hundreds of cases with prosaic explanations, Kosloski noted that his office does not believe that every UAP is a bird, balloon or drone. "We do have some very anomalous objects," he said.
Kosloski also reported on the office's latest analysis of UFO/UAP cases, stressing that his office will "continue to follow the science and data wherever they lead" and keep both Congress and the public as informed as possible — at the unclassified level, he clarified.
That stands in stark contrast to testimony presented to a U.S. House of Representatives subcommittee last week, in which a retired U.S. Navy rear admiral and a former U.S. counterintelligence officer told lawmakers that the American government is part of a decades-long coverup to conceal the fact that "we are not alone in the cosmos."
During his testimony, Kosloski gave an overview of his office's activities since it issued a report to Congress and testified in a similar setting last year. "Many reports resolve to commonplace objects like birds, balloons and unmanned systems, while others lack sufficient data for comprehensive analysis," Kosloski said, adding that "only a small percentage of reports received by AARO are potentially anomalous."
Kosloski referred to a UAP incident that occurred in 2013 near Aguadilla, Puerto Rico. The infrared video, shot in 2013 by a U.S. Customs and Border Patrol helicopter, appears to show an object flying just above the ocean before disappearing into it, or perhaps splitting in two.
Get the Space.com Newsletter
Breaking space news, the latest updates on rocket launches, skywatching events and more!
"We assessed that it was actually flying over the airport the entire time," Kosloski said. When the object appears to disappear in the infrared video that accompanies the case, it is actually the camera sensing that the object is the same temperature as the water behind it. Instead of splitting in two, it was simply two objects — balloons or sky lanterns — in close proximity that came in and out of view.
Kosloski also offered how his office was able to close the case on the infamous GOFAST video, shot by a U.S. Navy fighter jet in 2016 off the coast of Florida. In that case, the object's apparent speed in the video was actually due to the parallax effect, or the camera's perspective, Kosloski explained.
Furthermore, the AARO director showed a 2018 video captured by a drone flying over Mt. Etna that he stated is not widely known among the public. "This was a rather difficult case to solve," Kosloski said. "The object was actually 170 meters away from the plume — not flying through it."
During questioning, Senator Kirsten Gillibrand (D-New York) asked Kosloski about whether or not some individuals who have encountered UAP might be reluctant to engage with his office, referring to accusations some UAP disclosure advocates frequently level against AARO. These critics attest that the office is part of an alleged decades-long U.S. government-led campaign of "excessive secrecy" that aims to keep the public in the dark about UFOs.
In response to Gillibrand's questioning, Kosloski defended his office. "Congress has gone out of its way to create the organization AARO specifically to conduct these sorts of investigations, and has uniquely empowered them to have access to all UAP related information, whether that's historic or current, and we take that responsibility and those authorities very seriously," he said.
Gillibrand also asked about a report released by AARO in March 2024, noting that she has been told "it doesn't show any any evidence of secret programs that have aliens."
But Gillibrand pushed back on that assertion. "That's not how I read the report," the senator said. "What I read in the report is the US government took sightings extremely seriously over the last 75 years, and put some of the greatest minds together to analyze these cases, because they assessed them as some deeply unknown phenomena that may or may not cause threats — that may or may not be related to adversaries."
AARO released a report to accompany today's hearing earlier this week. The report, titled, "All-domain Anomaly Resolution Office’s Annual Report on Unidentified Anomalous Phenomena," examines UAP cases dated between May 1, 2023 and June 1, 2024 as well as historical incidents that were not included in previous reports.
But, like in its other reports, AARO found no smoking gun for alien visitation this year. "AARO has discovered no evidence of extraterrestrial beings, activity, or technology," the report notes. Out of the 485 cases that are well within the report's timeframe, 118 were solved and another 174 were slated to be closed, pending a final review.
Still, AARO's 2024 report says that many cases remain unsolved, and that the office continues to study them. However, AARO’s ability to resolve cases "remains constrained by a lack of timely and actionable sensor data," according to the report, meaning there just isn't enough data to conclusively solve cases that lack detailed or multi-sensor observations. In some cases, all there might be to analyze is a single photograph, a few seconds of grainy video or an aviator's written report. Many UAP sightings happen in the blink of an eye as an unknown object zooms past a moving aircraft, for example, so there often isn't enough time to gather photographic or video evidence.
In other cases, the capabilities of the sensors or platforms involved in the UAP sightings are themselves classified (sometimes, even their existence isn't publicly known), so AARO is unable to discuss them in unclassified reports.
Though overall, according to the 2024 report, there is enough data for AARO to state that it has has "no indication or confirmation that these activities are attributable to foreign adversaries."
Today's hearing echoed a previous hearing held last year on April 19, 2023. During that hearing, AARO's previous director Sean Kirkpatrick told the Senate Armed Services Committee that his office has seen "no credible evidence thus far of extraterrestrial activity, off-world technology or objects that defy the known laws of physics."
Similarly, the report released by AARO in March 2024 that examined historical UFO cases found "no evidence that any USG [U.S. government] investigation, academic-sponsored research, or official review panel has confirmed that any sighting of a UAP represented extraterrestrial technology."
AARO's previous report, released in 2022, examined 510 contemporary UAP reports gathered from government agencies and branches of the United States military. The report found that, while most cases were able to be resolved, 171 remained a mystery.
"Some of these uncharacterized UAP appear to have demonstrated unusual flight characteristics or performance capabilities, and require further analysis," AARO's 2022 report states.
Today's hearing concluded with a discussion of recent incidents in which unidentified drones, or uncrewed aerial systems (UAS), were seen over U.S. military bases and other sensitive installations. Those incidents, Kosloski notes, underscore the need for the United States to have "more persistent monitoring and understand that, whether it is a UAP or a counter-UAS issue, that we need to have that complete domain awareness around our national security facilities."
Join our Space Forums to keep talking space on the latest missions, night sky and more! And if you have a news tip, correction or comment, let us know at: community@space.com.
Brett is curious about emerging aerospace technologies, alternative launch concepts, military space developments and uncrewed aircraft systems. Brett's work has appeared on Scientific American, The War Zone, Popular Science, the History Channel, Science Discovery and more. Brett has English degrees from Clemson University and the University of North Carolina at Charlotte. In his free time, Brett enjoys skywatching throughout the dark skies of the Appalachian mountains.
-
fj.torres Extraordinary claims require extraordinary proof.Reply
Given the government's proven inability to keep secrets these days, claims of decades old conspiracies sound a tad...fanciful.
Besides, the "aliens" behind these UFOs (or whatever) sound pretty incompetent for folks reportedly capable of interstellar travel. Letting themselves be seen and even shot down for 70+ years?
I'd sooner believe they're time travelers from a future IDIOCRACY. -
GalileoMoment Mr. Tingley,Reply
As a journalist, you should really try not to take everything at face value. The first AARO report was a joke, and anyone with any sort of scientific background would tell you the same...if they actually read it.
Here's an article by Chris Mellon (very credible), which dissects the first report in its entirety. Frankly, it's embarrassing that the journalist community just parrots whatever AARO says...when they need to be doing what Chris is doing.
https://thedebrief.org/the-pentagons-new-uap-report-is-seriously-flawed/
AARO has clearly been a honeypot for UAP witnesses since its creation. It's basically BlueBook 2.0. Meaning that it was created to be a UAP "clearing house", meant to mostly debunk the subject and pump the brakes of any disclosure risk.
Whether or not the new head of AARO is going to take this seriously is beside the point. The organization is naturally compromised, and the first report from March proves it without a doubt. We need a new org, not a new leader for a failed org. -
GalileoMoment
Lol. Wake up.fj.torres said:Extraordinary claims require extraordinary proof.
Given the government's proven inability to keep secrets these days, claims of decades old conspiracies sound a tad...fanciful.
Besides, the "aliens" behind these UFOs (or whatever) sound pretty incompetent for folks reportedly capable of interstellar travel. Letting themselves be seen and even shot down for 70+ years?
I'd sooner believe they're time travelers from a future IDIOCRACY. -
Unclear Engineer That link is WAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAY too long and verbose to bother wading through to see if it includes ANY actual information about UFO/UAP that is convincingly a real physical craft defying known physics.Reply
Constantly calling government personnel liars and insisting that there is a secret "truth out there" is wearing very thin.
It is time for the proponents to put forward HERE, the evidence that they say they have ABOUT THE CRAFT, not their repetitive allegations of a "coverup". Don't bother trying to tell me again that somebody else has it but won't show it to us.
Frankly. my opinion is that this sort of behavior impedes actual scientific study. Even if it doesn't cause observers of the phenomena to choose not to come forward, it wastes the time of people assigned to actually look into these matters at a technical level.
And I am confident that the military will pay attention to anything they do not understand going on around military bases. But, I also don't think it is wise for them to tell the public exactly what capabilities they have, both to detect things around our own bases, and perhaps to create the appearance of things around our adversaries' bases. -
GalileoMoment
The former Deputy Assistant Secretary of Defense for Intelligence writes a thorough article to specifically address a lack of transparency and scientific rigor, and it's "way too long and verbose to bother wading through". That right there sums up the problem. People don't care, or bots / disinfo agents are telling us not to care. Either way, it sucks.Unclear Engineer said:That link is WAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAY too long and verbose to bother wading through to see if it includes ANY actual information about UFO/UAP that is convincingly a real physical craft defying known physics.
Constantly calling government personnel liars and insisting that there is a secret "truth out there" is wearing very thin.
It is time for the proponents to put forward HERE, the evidence that they say they have ABOUT THE CRAFT, not their repetitive allegations of a "coverup". Don't bother trying to tell me again that somebody else has it but won't show it to us.
Frankly. my opinion is that this sort of behavior impedes actual scientific study. Even if it doesn't cause observers of the phenomena to choose not to come forward, it wastes the time of people assigned to actually look into these matters at a technical level.
And I am confident that the military will pay attention to anything they do not understand going on around military bases. But, I also don't think it is wise for them to tell the public exactly what capabilities they have, both to detect things around our own bases, and perhaps to create the appearance of things around our adversaries' bases. -
Unclear Engineer Others can look at the report and start reading and see if they want to wade through all of the innuendo, or if they start scanning for actual info, like I did, after reading far too many pages of accusations.Reply
Anyway, just about at the end of that long report, it gets to repeating an UAP occurrence that I have already seen described multiple times before:
"Multiple accounts by all three pilots and their weapons systems operators, and multiple radar operators and technicians agree that craft they observed demonstrated almost-instantaneous high g acceleration; achieved hypersonic speed without a sonic boom; showed no evidence of friction or plasma or obvious propulsion, despite the extreme velocities it achieved (estimated peak 90,000 mph in 12 miles going from 0 to 90,000 mph to 0, all in 0.78 seconds, at 5,000 g’s acceleration). The estimated 47-foot wingless white “Tic Tac” shaped craft also thus seemed to survive g forces far greater than any aircraft, rocket, or missile of that size built by man."
The problem I have with this report, which has been posted many times, already, is that it comes here from an obviously biased source and does not provide the details of how the speeds and distances are estimated. What specific systems were used, and how were each of the parameters of the target determined? These stupendous acceleration readings are all within less than a second of observation? In addition, the lack of sonic boom or evidence of heating, and the appearance of extreme acceleration, seem to imply a high probability of misleading assumptions about what is actually being seen/detected, with respect things like distance and direction. Having watched radar images that were from multiple reflections off real objects in different places, I have seen things appear to move faster than anything was actually moving, and, in fact appeared to be in a place where there was actually nothing.
But, the military should be proficient at deciphering such things - unless there is intentional spoofing going on. I would not expect the military to provide the details about their detection capabilities and any known vulnerabilities. And, if our military is testing ways to decoy adversaries' weapons systems by trying them on our own military assets, I would not expect them to reveal that, either.
So, the problem is, yes, we should expect some secrecy. But, it is a less improbable jump of the imagination that we are doing this to ourselves, intentionally or unintentionally, than to jump to the conclusion that it must be something from outer space if the military won't tell us all about it.
Some of the basic training for people who are given clearances for secret information is this: The best way to keep a secret is to not tell anybody that you are keeping a secret.
Which is the exact opposite of telling politicians what your secrets are.
But, some people just cannot follow that guidance, and secrets tend to come out over time, sometimes over too short a time. Which makes me seriously doubt that any government has been able to suppress sure knowledge of extraterrestrials on Earth, much less every government in the developed world succeeding in doing that for about 75 years, now.
So, if you want real answers, I suggest that you try supporting the people who are best able to produce them, rather than continuing to attack them. -
COLGeek Like it, or not, Mr. Mellon is hardly a disinterested/objective 3rd party. His agenda (not relevant) clouds reality. To date, there has been absolutely nothing "other worldly" that would pass any reasonable level of scrutiny and analysis. None.Reply
This is true no matter how badly anyone wants it to be otherwise. That is factually where we are.
Pouring resources into a wild goose chase does not serve anyone, but those on the receiving end. Please consider that in light of the reality we understand.
Folks keep assuming a nefarious plot/conspiracy is in play. Do you think, for one minute, with all these players (including their past history) that something real could be kept a secret? -
GalileoMoment
The data for the Nimitz incident was multi spectral. Here is the shortened version of the report done by Jay Stratton of the UAP Task Force. There is a longer version, but it is still classified. Why you might ask?Unclear Engineer said:Others can look at the report and start reading and see if they want to wade through all of the innuendo, or if they start scanning for actual info, like I did, after reading far too many pages of accusations.
Anyway, just about at the end of that long report, it gets to repeating an UAP occurrence that I have already seen described multiple times before:
"Multiple accounts by all three pilots and their weapons systems operators, and multiple radar operators and technicians agree that craft they observed demonstrated almost-instantaneous high g acceleration; achieved hypersonic speed without a sonic boom; showed no evidence of friction or plasma or obvious propulsion, despite the extreme velocities it achieved (estimated peak 90,000 mph in 12 miles going from 0 to 90,000 mph to 0, all in 0.78 seconds, at 5,000 g’s acceleration). The estimated 47-foot wingless white “Tic Tac” shaped craft also thus seemed to survive g forces far greater than any aircraft, rocket, or missile of that size built by man."
The problem I have with this report, which has been posted many times, already, is that it comes here from an obviously biased source and does not provide the details of how the speeds and distances are estimated. What specific systems were used, and how were each of the parameters of the target determined? These stupendous acceleration readings are all within less than a second of observation? In addition, the lack of sonic boom or evidence of heating, and the appearance of extreme acceleration, seem to imply a high probability of misleading assumptions about what is actually being seen/detected, with respect things like distance and direction. Having watched radar images that were from multiple reflections off real objects in different places, I have seen things appear to move faster than anything was actually moving, and, in fact appeared to be in a place where there was actually nothing.
But, the military should be proficient at deciphering such things - unless there is intentional spoofing going on. I would not expect the military to provide the details about their detection capabilities and any known vulnerabilities. And, if our military is testing ways to decoy adversaries' weapons systems by trying them on our own military assets, I would not expect them to reveal that, either.
So, the problem is, yes, we should expect some secrecy. But, it is a less improbable jump of the imagination that we are doing this to ourselves, intentionally or unintentionally, than to jump to the conclusion that it must be something from outer space if the military won't tell us all about it.
Some of the basic training for people who are given clearances for secret information is this: The best way to keep a secret is to not tell anybody that you are keeping a secret.
Which is the exact opposite of telling politicians what your secrets are.
But, some people just cannot follow that guidance, and secrets tend to come out over time, sometimes over too short a time. Which makes me seriously doubt that any government has been able to suppress sure knowledge of extraterrestrials on Earth, much less every government in the developed world succeeding in doing that for about 75 years, now.
So, if you want real answers, I suggest that you try supporting the people who are best able to produce them, rather than continuing to attack them.
https://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/9/9e/TIC_TAC_UFO_EXECUTIVE_REPORT_1526682843046_42960218_ver1.0.pdf
Here's another nice paper on multiple events over many decades, including the 2004 Nimitz Tic Tac event:
https://pmc.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/articles/PMC7514271/
Knuth had a great talk at the Sol conference at Stanford, which is a nice accompaniment to this paper:
HlYwktOj75AView: https://youtu.be/HlYwktOj75A
And here is a similar paper focusing on the Nimitz incident only. Very thorough.
https://1ad59488-e74b-484c-a673-93655740754d.usrfiles.com/ugd/1ad594_bdf33403d1044939845a00a5bbf6d844.pdf
The fact is, there has been a coverup for 70+ years and the government has already admitted (to itself) that's the case. The Schumer amendment wouldn't exist if that wasn't the case. The issue is that the Gang of Eight - although they've been read in - does not have unilateral ability to disclose. They can only legislate adjacently. That's how it has to work. If it didn't there would be way fewer secrets.:
https://www.democrats.senate.gov/imo/media/doc/uap_amendment.pdf
People who say the government wouldn't be able to keep a secret for that long are actually 100% right. They haven't kept it under wraps. Which is why we've been hearing whistleblowers and personal accounts and leaked documents for 70+ years. They don't even deserve the credit YOU'RE giving them.
Finally, here's Karl Nell outlining the whole controlled disclosure process at Stanford as well. We're already there, my man. You just need to read more and listen more.
-1QCFtod6i8View: https://youtu.be/-1QCFtod6i8 -
GalileoMoment
"Pouring resources into a wild goose chase does not serve anyone, but those on the receiving end. Please consider that in light of the reality we understand."COLGeek said:Like it, or not, Mr. Mellon is hardly a disinterested/objective 3rd party. His agenda (not relevant) clouds reality. To date, there has been absolutely nothing "other worldly" that would pass any reasonable level of scrutiny and analysis. None.
This is true no matter how badly anyone wants it to be otherwise. That is factually where we are.
Pouring resources into a wild goose chase does not serve anyone, but those on the receiving end. Please consider that in light of the reality we understand.
Folks keep assuming a nefarious plot/conspiracy is in play. Do you think, for one minute, with all these players (including their past history) that something real could be kept a secret?
Very scientific of you! -
Classical Motion When one observes motion, one needs to know the relative distance from observer to target, and target to background.Reply
Parallax determines what you see, not your guess. And if your instrument doesn’t know those distances, one could get space invaders.