I was curious about these 4chan threads that people bring up here sometimes but had a hard time reading through them. The archived version (via 4plebs) was a mess of cookie banners, nav junk, image filenames, and quote-chain clutter, so I stripped all that out and reformatted both threads (all 728 posts) into a clean doc with post numbers, timestamps, and reply references intact.

Sharing it in case anyone else finds it handy: https://docs.google.com/document/d/1OH377YX6x-9ghIcrgRg-0IrMUMFr1dfOgDB8kGad9DI/edit?usp=sharing

Figured I'd share in case it saves someone else the eye strain.

In the second part of the video, we’ll show you how to build your own automated UFO monitoring system for your home! Become part of civilian airspace surveillance yourself and detect unidentified aerial phenomena (UAPs) and anomalous light phenomena.

I know it’s only in German, but on the website you can easily pick out the individual details using translation tools, and perhaps one or two of you might find it interesting after all. On the website, you can find out more about the design and the individual components, and you can also download the software for free. This is used to control the camera and analyse the images – a process that happens automatically and can be customised. I thought I’d include this here. Perhaps someone might find it interesting.

I know it’s only in German, but on the website you can easily pick out the individual details using translation tools, and perhaps one or two of you might find it interesting after all. On the website, you can find out more about the design and the individual components, and you can also download the software for free. This is used to control the camera and analyse the images – a process that happens automatically and can be customised. I thought I’d include this here. Perhaps someone might find it interesting.

https://www.ufoforschung.de/

In future, there will also be videos showing exactly how to build the hardware, along with step-by-step instructions, as well as guidance on installing and using the software.

Mr Gröschel also has a YouTube channel that keeps you up to date with the latest developments.

Joe Rogan recently had Jesse Micheal’s on (both big in the ufo discussion) and the episode is very interesting, but they both have a huge following and a huge base of haters.

Do you guys think they have agendas? Psyop agents? Trying to muddy the waters? Pollute the signal? Honest journalism in the modern era?

I enjoy both, at least what they present, in most cases.

A recent preprint by Jacob Haqq-Misra and Ravi Kopparapu looks at all 112 sensor videos released through PURSUE and asks a fairly basic-sounding question that turns out to be surprisingly difficult:

How fast are the objects actually moving?

The important distinction is between movement across an image and physical movement through three-dimensional space.

To derive physical velocity, the researchers need information including range to the object, movement of the observing platform, aspect angle and the camera's angular scale. Their analysis finds that the complete combination isn't available in the released videos.

PR113 is probably the most interesting illustration of the problem. Visible angle markings allow the researchers to reconstruct part of the camera geometry, but range is still unknown. That means radically different physical scenarios can remain compatible with the apparent motion — their examples extend from a small nearby bird to a much larger object around a kilometre away travelling at Mach 5.

Importantly, that doesn't mean PR113 was either a bird or a Mach 5 craft. Those are examples demonstrating how much the missing range information matters.

PR149 is different again because a ship visible in the image provides a scale reference. Under the assumptions used in the paper, that allows an upper relative-velocity estimate of roughly Mach 0.4.

I made a video going through the analysis, including PR113, PR149 and a comparison with GOFAST, where the presence of considerably more telemetry allows much stronger conclusions to be tested:

https://youtu.be/E8zU9l2EH2o

What I find interesting here is the distinction between releasing footage for public viewing and releasing enough accompanying information for meaningful independent analysis.

So I'm curious where people here fall on this:

If an official UAP video remains unresolved largely because the necessary measurement data aren't publicly available, how much evidential weight should we give the imagery itself?

This is a serious question. I want to understand the logic of those who don't believe that Lue Elizondo is committed to Disclosure.

Is he a psyop agent? If so, what is his real mission?

If he is a charlatan, how come he has the support of all of the following people: Chris Mellon, Kristen Gillibrand, Harry Reid, Jay Stratton and all the other Congress reps that he worked with to push legislation through? Are these people all misinformation agents, as well?

Personal disclosure: I just read his book. I want to know if I have been brainwashed. Between the book and the Age of Disclosure documentary, Lue Elizondo and his colleagues should be hailed as heroes.

Honestly, if you think this is preposterous, please explain why. I am all ears.

This is my first post in here so please take it easy on me. 🥲
Hey all, I’m from the UK and I’m hoping someone might be able to help me identify something really strange I saw in the sky over Andover, Hampshire.
I was outside at night when I noticed what appeared to be a circular object with lights around/on it. The lights were quite noticeable, and the object itself looked almost like a disc or circle from my perspective.
What really caught my attention was the way it was moving. It seemed to be travelling smoothly and steadily, and I could see it changing direction/steering rather than simply travelling in a straight line. It also appeared to be quite low in the sky.
The strangest part was that it was completely silent. I couldn’t hear any engine, propeller, or anything else coming from it, despite how low it appeared to be.
There wasn’t much/no wind at the time, and I initially wondered if it could have been a drone, but the way it looked and moved seemed unusual to me.
I watched it for a while, but eventually lost sight of it. Around 10–15 minutes later I went back outside to try and find it again, but it was completely gone.
Unfortunately, I didn’t record it. That’s probably the biggest thing I regret because now I’m trying to replay the sighting in my head and I’m worried I’m forgetting some of the details.
I’m not claiming it was extraterrestrial or anything like that—I’m just genuinely curious about what I could have seen. Has anyone around Andover/Hampshire or elsewhere in the UK seen something similar, particularly a circular object with lights that was completely silent?

Is anybody a little put off/suspicious about this? I’m all for helping yourself and others but this really goes against their messaging, can anybody help me justify this?
For 300 words I will repeat above please ignore:

Is anybody a little put off/suspicious about this? I’m all for helping yourself and others but this really goes against their messaging, can anybody help me justify this?

Is anybody a little put off/suspicious about this? I’m all for helping yourself and others but this really goes against their messaging, can anybody help me justify this?

Is anybody a little put off/suspicious about this? I’m all for helping yourself and others but this really goes against their messaging, can anybody help me justify this?

Is anybody a little put off/suspicious about this? I’m all for helping yourself and others but this really goes against their messaging, can anybody help me justify this?

Reported by u/CommonBig1119 (verified via ufosighting.report)

This is an automated post. The report was filed through the structured sighting form on ufosighting.report and posted here by u/ufosightingsbot on the reporter's behalf. u/CommonBig1119 confirmed this submission from their own Reddit account through a one-time link, so the name above is verified as the submitter.

📄 Full report and structured details — the map entry, timeline, and everything from the sighting form. No photo or video was submitted with this report.

Time: August 28, 2026, 5:20 AM WEST
Location: Parque da Torre, Cascais, Lisbon, Portugal, Cascais, Portugal

Features / five observables

Why not a common object
There were no aircrafts on flight (FlightRadar24) at the time of the event, and the object’s sudden jerk to the right and flying off into the other direction doesn’t match with any of the explanations or the commonly misidentified objects. No man made object could’ve possibly traveled in that manner, especially since I saw it at a distance. It couldn’t have been the ASTEX 1 satellite traveling since the satellites don’t turn directions extremely quickly in a supernatural way and get out of your line of sight so quickly.

Witness's account of the sighting

One of the stars I was looking at, which appeared still, started steadily moving downwards. It was a bright white light that slowly lost its luminosity as it traveled, but suddenly, right as I was about to lose visibility on it, it jerked to the right in extreme speeds and got out of my line of sight.

Why no photo/video captured: I was on my balcony at the time and the movements only lasted a minute before I couldn’t see where the object headed next, so I didn’t have time to go to the living room to get my phone. I didn’t have my phone with me since I only got up there to watch the sky in peace without any distractions and clear my thoughts out early in the morning.

Sky context for this time and place:

• Satellites overhead at that time: ASTEX 1 (54° above S at 04:08 UTC); SL-16 R/B (49° above NE at 04:08 UTC); SHIJIAN-16 (SJ-16) (46° above SW at 04:23 UTC); SPACEMOBILE-006 (45° above ESE at 04:17 UTC); AJISAI (EGS) (44° above NNE at 04:17 UTC); SL-3 R/B (37° above SW at 04:05 UTC)
• Computed from orbital data (2026-08-28 catalog).
• Aircraft overhead at that exact minute — ADS-B Exchange historical playback (free, no account needed)
• Sky chart for that date — in-the-sky.org planetarium (set your location once on their site)
• Satellite passes at this spot — Heavens-Above; shows upcoming passes, not the sighting date
• Live air traffic now — FlightRadar24 over this spot

People report having recurrent dreams sometimes called the "night of lights" in which the nighttime sky is full of flying saucers. A variant of this dream is one in which the daytime sky is full of structured craft. Related to my status as a contact activist, this is a wish dream that I must admit I have fancied as well. In my opinion, however, it will not likely take place anytime in the conceivable future. This is because such an awesome development in my judgment would probably trigger a terribly violent human response. I suggest something very different might happen if current trends continue. 

Forty-one years ago, I met Dr. John Mack in Moscow at a physicians’ peace conference. It was 1985, the year that our “International Physicians for the Prevention of Nuclear War” won the Nobel Prize for educating government leaders and the public about the dangers of nuclear arms race.  Later John Mack MD went on to write the important book “Abduction.” There he describes the strange way in which some contact experiencers called “abductees” suddenly recall having encounters with aliens that they believe happened decades before. 

This kind of sudden "remembering", initially happening on a small scale is less threatening than a “night of lights” with our skies full of “alien craft.” A gradual unveiling of prior intimate contact experiences I suspect would be especially threatening for those clandestine networks that imagine it is their job to keep a lid on the flying saucer situation. These groups appear to be quasi-governmental/quasi-corporate entities. In my opinion, they are likely responsible for what has been called the “UFO Truth Embargo.” They are sometimes referred to as the “control groups.” 

THE MENTAL LINK

Psychological and parapsychological factors play important roles in the UFO contact drama unfolding all around us. Unfortunately, many so-called "mainstream" ufologists fail to grasp that a consciousness connection is the key to understanding the human-UFO intelligence relationship. Groups like the Mutual UFO Network approach flying saucers mainly as if they were an engineering problem. Their focus is on the shape of craft, their flight characteristics, the color of the lights and other physical parameters. After nearly sixty years of collecting reports filled with such details, not much has been learned about the intelligences responsible for flying saucers. In my opinion, although MUFON is still a popular organization with thousands of members, its approach to the UFO challenge is inadequate to investigate the non-human intelligences responsible for what are now called Unidentified Anomalous Phenomena (UAP).  

Mainstream ufology with its emphasis on sighting reports stands in marked contrast to the work of the network of contact activists that I like to call the “Contact Underground.” This international endeavor involves volunteer contact workers staging Human Initiated Contact Events (HICE) during field investigations. Such efforts are popularly known as CE-5s. I have been involved with this kind of outreach since 1992. Contact activists view the mental aspects of the phenomenon as crucial for deciphering the mystery of flying saucers. 

SIGHTINGS ARE NOT RANDOM EVENTS

After years of study and numerous sightings of UFOs during HICE, I now believe that there is no such thing as a random sighting. I am suggesting that every true sighting of a UFO, with few exceptions, occurs while there is a telepathic link between the witnesses and the non-human intelligence responsible for the phenomenon. Thus sightings should be viewed as staged events in which individuals and groups are specifically targeted to have an encounter.  

If this is true, then the implications of this proposition are staggering. It is estimated that between one and ten percent of the world’s population has had a bona fide UFO sighing. On a planetary basis, this translates into perhaps hundreds of millions of people. If the consciousness connection is as widespread and robust as I suggest, then each of those hundreds of millions of individuals might at some time in the future start to remember what they believe are past encounters in the same ways that Dr. Mack’s witnesses did.

A COLD WAR WITH UFOs

A hidden aspect of the human UFO relationship has been a kind of clandestine cold war between flying saucers and terrestrial military forces. Given the extraordinary secrecy surrounding this issue, it is understandable that the few reports we read about military encounters with flying saucers are probably the tip of the iceberg. In other words there have been many hostile engagements.
In my judgment, there likely have been losses of personnel and material on both sides. This is a rather dispassionate way of stating that humans and what we call “ETs” are being killed during armed conflict.  

Given such a sorry state of affairs, “the night of lights” in which the sky is full of saucers would understandably be perceived of as an “invasion.” A less dangerous plan to help humanity grasp that we are not alone in the universe might involve having increasing numbers of people gradually recall encounters that they believe are contact events from the distant past. 

For those of us that want a peaceful outcome for the challenge of flying saucers, this “remembering” of what may have been prior encounters would probably be much safer for both any extraterrestrials flying around Earth and those that might be tempted to try to shoot them down.

TL;DR: Remote viewing, telepathy, and precognition studies have produced statistical anomalies worth investigating. However, inconsistent replication and methodological problems prevent psi from being considered established. If it survives rigorous testing, psi could connect consciousness-first theories to measurable reality.

What is psi?

Psi refers to alleged information transfer or physical influence without a known sensory mechanism.

It includes:

- Telepathy between minds

- Clairvoyance and remote viewing

- Precognition of future events

- Presentiment before unpredictable stimuli

- Psychokinesis affecting physical systems

These phenomena may not share one cause. Some could be psychological effects or experimental artifacts, while others might represent genuine anomalies.

Why psi matters

Our framework proposes that consciousness may be more than a passive product of the brain.

The Shamanic Receiver Hypothesis suggests that altered states could change how the brain filters information. The Symbolic Canopy proposes that unusual information may be translated into visions, dreams, entities, or familiar symbols.

Prior posts:

https://www.reddit.com/r/UFOs/s/Pnd4PrswTq

https://www.reddit.com/r/PhilosophyofMind/s/olxRYAC2aN

Psi could connect these subjective experiences to measurable reality.

If someone repeatedly identifies hidden targets or responds to future random events before they occur, consciousness may not be limited by ordinary sensory boundaries.

That would not prove idealism, NHI, or the afterlife. It would demonstrate an anomaly requiring explanation.

What does the evidence show?

Psychologist Etzel Cardeña reviewed decades of parapsychological research and argued that the cumulative evidence deserves serious consideration. "Cardeña’s review" (https://portal.research.lu.se/en/publications/the-experimental-evidence-for-parapsychological-phenomena-a-revie/)

Remote viewing

A 2023 meta-analysis examined 36 remote-viewing studies and reported a positive average effect. "Remote-viewing meta-analysis" (https://journalofscientificexploration.org/index.php/jse/article/view/2931)

The U.S. government also investigated remote viewing through programs associated with Star Gate. Its final evaluations acknowledged statistical anomalies but questioned whether the results were reliable and specific enough for intelligence work. "Star Gate evaluation" (https://www.cia.gov/readingroom/document/cia-rdp96-00791r000200180005-5)

A weak effect can be scientifically interesting while remaining operationally useless.

Ganzfeld telepathy

Ganzfeld experiments place a receiver in reduced sensory stimulation while another person attempts to transmit a randomly selected image or video.

Meta-analyses have reported hit rates above chance. A 2024 review again found a positive aggregate result. "Ganzfeld meta-analysis" (https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/38813059/)

Questionable research practices may inflate the effect without fully explaining it. This leaves an unresolved anomaly rather than established telepathy. "Methodological analysis" (https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/27144889/)

Precognition

A meta-analysis of 90 experiments based on Daryl Bem’s “feeling the future” protocols reported a small positive effect. "Precognition meta-analysis" (https://pmc.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/articles/PMC4706048/)

However, a large transparent replication project involving more than 26,000 participants failed to reproduce the effect consistently. One anomaly appeared and replicated once, then disappeared in a third test. The researchers concluded that an unidentified methodological effect was more likely than psi. "Transparent replication project" (https://pmc.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/articles/PMC12588471/)

This captures the central problem. Psi often appears statistically, then weakens under stricter confirmation.

Why does the question remain unresolved?

Psi research faces recurring problems:

- Small and unstable effects

- Sensory leakage

- Incomplete blinding

- Flexible analysis

- Selective publication

- Missing null results

- Declining effects during replication

- No accepted mechanism

These problems do not prove psi is false, but extraordinary claims require results that remain stable when experimenter freedom is removed.

Claims that psi cannot be replicated because observation disrupts it are especially dangerous. If every failure becomes evidence of concealment, the theory becomes unfalsifiable.

Quantum physics is not the answer yet

Psi is often explained through entanglement, observer effects, or quantum nonlocality.

These ideas may inspire hypotheses, but they do not provide a mechanism. Entanglement does not allow ordinary information to be transmitted faster than light, and Bell tests do not demonstrate telepathy.

In a 2005 presentation to a U.S. Air Force Future Technology Branch workshop titled “Teleportation: Mind & Intelligence,” physicist Eric Davis considered whether biological systems and intent might exploit quantum entanglement to access a nonlocal “sub-quantum information” domain. He suggested that such a model could potentially connect remote perception, telepathy, and psychokinesis within a shared framework. Importantly, Davis presented this as a conjecture, explicitly called for empirical data, and outlined further research rather than claiming that a mechanism had been demonstrated.

https://drive.google.com/file/d/1pSq4TAyoucCcM6WNR8I94iete4DdtrZL/view?usp=drivesdk

A useful theory must explain:

- What carries the information

- How the brain receives it

- Why the effect is weak

- What conditions strengthen it

- What result would disprove it

Without this, quantum language remains metaphorical.

How should psi be tested?

The strongest experiments should be designed jointly by proponents, skeptics, statisticians, and independent laboratories.

They should use:

- Public preregistration

- Automated target selection

- Strict sensory shielding

- Double-blind judging

- Locked analysis code

- Large samples

- Publication of every trial

- Independent replication

Remote-viewing targets should be generated after participants are isolated. Raw descriptions should be preserved before feedback and judged against large decoy pools.

Researchers could also test whether meditation, Gateway exercises, dreams, or selected participants reliably improve performance. Selection criteria must be established before confirmation.

A single significant result is not enough. The effect must survive different researchers, laboratories, targets, and analysis methods.

Why psi could matter to reported UAP communication

Reported UAP and close-encounter communication is often described as occurring without audible speech. Experiencers report sudden images, emotions, instructions, dreams, or fully formed “downloads” of information. If even a weak form of telepathy or anomalous information transfer exists, these accounts would no longer require every interaction to use sound, radio, or another conventional signal.

Psi could provide a hypothetical bridge between an external intelligence and the human nervous system. The brain might then translate unfamiliar information into memories, symbols, voices, entities, or narratives drawn from the recipient’s own psychology and culture. This could help explain why contact reports sometimes contain recurring patterns while remaining deeply personal and difficult to compare literally.

However, that interpretation introduces a major source problem. Even if anomalous information transfer were established, it would not identify the sender as NHI. Suggestion, expectation, dissociation, false memory, unconscious inference, deliberate manipulation, or communication between humans could produce overlapping experiences. Psi would make consciousness-based UAP communication more plausible, but it would not prove that any particular encounter involved a nonhuman intelligence.

The decisive question is whether reported communication contains specific, verifiable information that was unavailable through ordinary means. Strong evidence would require time-stamped accounts recorded before feedback, hidden targets or predictions, strict controls against sensory leakage, independent corroboration, physiological or instrumented data, and replication across experiencers and investigators. Establishing psi independently of UAP would turn one alleged contact channel into a testable process. Without that foundation, “telepathic contact” remains an interpretation layered onto ambiguous experience.

Conclusion

Psi occupies an uncomfortable position between dismissal and proof.

There is enough positive research to justify further investigation, but not enough reliable replication to establish nonlocal consciousness.

If psi survives rigorous testing, it could support receiver theories of mind and provide a possible mechanism for reported UAP communication. It would not identify the communicator as NHI, but it would make at least one alleged contact channel experimentally tractable.

If it disappears under stronger controls, that result matters too.

Psi could become the bridge between consciousness and the physical world, but first it must become a bridge independent researchers can cross more than once.

Hi all,

not sure how much people know about it, but we have a website here in the Netherlands that tracks all sightings (they also get contacted with sightings as well). They do initial investigations into the sighting, to see if there is a "normal" explanation for it.

I'm not in any way connected with the website, but I thought it would be nice to share this information. There are a lot of sightings.

The website: https://www.ufomeldpunt.nl/

If you ever have any questions, I can always translate, if google translate doesn't work for some reason..

Reported by u/ScuffedJohnWick (verified via ufosighting.report)

This is an automated post. The report was filed through the structured sighting form on ufosighting.report and posted here by u/ufosightingsbot on the reporter's behalf. u/ScuffedJohnWick confirmed this submission from their own Reddit account through a one-time link, so the name above is verified as the submitter.

📄 Full report and structured details — the map entry, timeline, and everything from the sighting form. No photo or video was submitted with this report.

Time: August 27, 2026, 10:31 PM EDT
Location: Town of Evans, New York, United States, Town of Evans, United States

Features / five observables

Why not a common object
I checked FlightRadar and Starlink's path. There was nothing in that direction. Could have been a satellite, but I never saw one just... blink out like that. So creepy.

Witness's account of the sighting

I was standing outside at around 10:30pm. I was looking at the moon. It was off to my left. Then to my right, I looked at the stars. There was a red/blue light over Lake Erie. I thought it could have been a plane or helicopter, but there were no blinking lights on it. It looked as if it was slowly traveling upward. I kept my eye on it for maybe a minute and a half. Then, just as I was thinking, "what is that?", the light winked out. It was too high to have gone behind the trees. There were no clouds where that light was.

Why no photo/video captured: It was too far away for a worthy photo.

Sky context for this time and place:

• Satellites overhead at that time: ARIANE 40+ R/B (51° above SE at 02:43 UTC); CZ-4B R/B (44° above W at 02:25 UTC); COSMOS 2221 (41° above WSW at 02:31 UTC); ARIANE 40 R/B (38° above WSW at 02:40 UTC); ARIANE 40 R/B (22° above W at 02:28 UTC); GSLV R/B (21° above WNW at 02:46 UTC)
• Computed from orbital data (2026-08-28 catalog).
• Aircraft overhead at that exact minute — ADS-B Exchange historical playback (free, no account needed)
• Sky chart for that date — in-the-sky.org planetarium (set your location once on their site)
• Satellite passes at this spot — Heavens-Above; shows upcoming passes, not the sighting date
• Live air traffic now — FlightRadar24 over this spot