El enigma extraterrestre

I'm interested in this topic when it is not overly sensationalized, and there are many previously shows that are way over the top. Over the top in terms on how it is narrated and also is just showing very weak evidence but taking leaps in logic. So it gets a 5 star for a massive improvement in how it was presented relative to others.

I didn't like the parts of the show when meeting experts or eye witnesses at the side of roads, parking lots, etc. Getting out of the car and just start talking about it, it's like they were not taking this seriously. Possibly they didn't have a budget for a studio.

The first episode of animal mutilation I found interesting as they show some real mysteries. I also like that folks refrained from attempting to fill in the blank but providing just the facts.

On the other hand the underwater scan with non-human shapes really was a stretch and no investigative questions were asked. Often it felt that during the interviews that Knapp was looking for his own validation and not being objective in asking the hard questions.

I didn't like the AARO counter report, the attempt to find solid information was a complete miss. We already have the information, I think the Phoenix Lights itself is more than enough. Witnessed by thousands, what is needed is acknowledgement that something happened that was far, far superior to our current understanding and capability.

Overall the series was OK but due to lack of budget I assume, it needed better experts, better places to interview people (not outside your car) and less speculation and more facts.

First, I want to express sincere respect for George Knapp and his team, who produced this documentary with serious journalistic dedication and a strong sense of mission. While I enjoy sci-fi movies, I am not lost in fantasies; I am a science enthusiast, not a skeptic.

I tend to be cautious when considering witness accounts that lack supporting evidence, such as photos, videos, or other concrete documentation. While some may indeed be sharing their genuine experiences, it's easy for truth and perception to intertwine, especially given that individual perspectives can be influenced by various factors, including mental and emotional states.

I've watched numerous documentaries on UFOs, UAPs, aliens, and NHIs. Most are either sensationalized for mystery or purely for entertainment. However, this documentary felt genuinely serious, produced with the integrity of a journalist's honor, which left a strong impression. Initially, I assumed it would be like other documentaries, relying on unproven testimonies. But I was wrong; the inclusion of multiple witnesses and actual photos and videos of the incidents added credibility.

One particularly striking scene was the jellyfish-like UAP phenomenon seen near a secret government base in the Middle East-footage unlike anything I've seen before. It doesn't seem fabricated.

Yet, this documentary has limitations. For example, why did they choose to film near an isolated island at night when they could have easily captured footage during the day? They knew it was an area with frequent UAP sightings. It's likely that they shot at night because glowing UAPs evoke more curiosity. But, strangely, that episode ends without any follow-up in the next episode. Also, the scene introducing the mysterious black helicopter abruptly cuts off with no mention in later episodes. Why? As a professional journalist, further investigation should have been conducted, and as a viewer, it left me wondering.

I won't go into further detail as it could be a spoiler.

The final episode revisits the well-known incident ,the Phoenix UAP event. Although there were new witnesses, it came across as a bit of a cliché, lacking fresh information.

Lastly, unlike misidentified UAP phenomena like balloons, drones, or satellites, there is a hypothesis that some truly luminous and erratic UAPs may represent new, unexplained natural phenomena. The documentary's final episode could have focused more on scientific analyses of these phenomena. If I were an alien from an advanced civilization, I wouldn't send a glowing drone for surveillance. Why would it glow? Light implies electromagnetic activity, and there are scientific theories suggesting that glowing UAPs may result from interactions with Earth's magnetic fields or particle physics anomalies.

I've seen similar UAP phenomena in "The Secret of Skinwalker Ranch." However, there's a complete lack of interviews with quantum mechanics or particle physicists, which is surprising. Although Dr. Travia Taylor appears, he is more of a science communicator and not a quantum physicist. If they are truly interested in UAPs, they should consult with particle physicists in the future, as I believe 99% of UAP phenomena are unexplained quantum or particle physics events. I don't discount the 1% possibility of interdimensional wormholes or actual alien drones.

NASA's 2023 report on UAPs ("NASA UNIDENTIFIED ANOMALOUS PHENOMENA Independent Study Team Report") is a rare, valuable analysis. For example, it analyzed the "GoFast" video captured by Navy aviators, concluding that this was not an alien UFO but a simple misidentification of an object drifting with the wind.

Additionally, we should acknowledge that this type of documentary often features experts and individuals who are very supportive of UFO and alien theories, sometimes presenting scientifically unverified aspects with a bit of an excessive belief or conviction.

Once again, I'm not skeptical about aliens or UFOs. I simply place more trust in objective, factual evidence and scientific analysis. I hope future documentaries move beyond mere entertainment and collaborate with more specialized scientists to emphasize rigorous scientific analysis and experimentation.

As analysis and observation technology based on AI continue to advance, there's a growing need for a scientific approach beyond eyewitness accounts alone. This is essential if humanity is to uncover the truth.

Feels like a generic scripted American show, like Pawn Stars. Doesn't feel genuine at all and there's really nothing new they're adding.

It's more like they're dragging it out, trying to find someone who can add a little drama to fill their thin script.

George is trying so hard to sell this, but what new info are we really getting?

Every bit of information we get has already been talked about, you're better off going in the deep end on YouTube instead.

I don't really have much more to say about this utter horse manure, so I'm just filling up the required quota of words, just like they did with this show.

Note: Yucatán (the upper part of the tail of Mexico) is the area that the meteor that killed the dinosaurs hit...which is close to Tamaulipas. That might be the reason for the UAP activity there.

Ijust finished watching Investigative Alien on Netflix, and I'm genuinely impressed! The show dives deep into extraterrestrial mysteries with a unique approach that's both intriguing and suspenseful. Each episode builds the excitement, blending science with investigative reporting that keeps you guessing and eager for more. The investigative team is smart and relatable, making complex theories accessible while adding a touch of humor. It's the perfect mix of thriller and documentary, ideal for anyone interested in the unknown. If you're into mysteries or sci-fi, give Investigative Alien a watch - it's definitely worth the binge.

For example, with no spoilers, when you have two story lines, two investigations if you will, made to appear to take place simultaneously so we cut back and forth between the dive team and the south American team - the viewer knows this isn't serious - when we have the investigator reinact scenes and fiegn reactions as if it's the first time he's heard this - the viewer knows this isn't a serious documentary - AND IT'S A SERIOUS SUBJECT - but Knapp has been left out in the cold for too many decades and now appears to need vindication and barring that well... Noteriety for being an OG believer (oh and financial compensation apparently) but ultimately this is a 'serious reality show' and not a hard hitting objectively bent documentary. ((and don't get me started on the 'including a skeptic' tactic (let alone the 'skeptic' himself))