Nothing in this analysis or conclusion contradicts the radar observations - how are they being "ignored"? And it is unclear to me (as an uninitiated person) how "visual" observations lend any more credence to the story when they are just retellings of the exact same kind of footage, except impossible to further analyze/corroborate.
The core claim of this joke of a production is that it’s just lens flare.
They use weasel words to hedge their bets, but their intention is pretty clear.
The facts are that these pilots also saw these things with their own eyes and got radar locks in addition to IR. These are “targeting” pods remember? It can’t just be lens flare.
The "production" explicitly acknowledges that there is obviously a real, physical object with a strong IR signature. But all we see about the object is the lens flare. Hence, none of the apparent rotations and jerks are those of the object, but come from the movement of the camera system itself. Please feel free to re-watch.
