Frederick Portigal

I am back from my self-imposed break from the subject. A four week long "fishing" trip. Now back to it. Firstly, I have updated my blog posts titled "The Australian Department of Defence and UAP - the latest." The update includes a full Hansard transcript of the relevant discussion; and the reason why Australian Senator Whish_Wilson asked the questions he did. Secondly, occasionally on social media, someone surfaces, who has seemingly impeccable credentials, but with a fantastic account.

Enter Frederick Portigal

Recently, one Frederick Portigal surfaced. In a series of tweets dated 25 October 2021 Portigal wrote the following:

"In my last position before retiring I worked for the Air Force Research Laboratory at Kirkland AFB as a senior Research Physical Scientist in Albuquerque, New Mexico. (LinkedIn says April 2011-present -KB).

Air Force research laboratory

Space Vehicles Directorate

Battlespace Environment Division

Battlespaces Surveillance Information Center

Spectral Surveillance technologies Section.

My primary research was to support the Hypertemporal Imager (HTI) space experiment. I invented a Hypertemporal  video detection algorithm for tracking from space through sunlit cloud to the ground that has 10 times the s/n as the algorithm used in the space experiment.

I designed and carried out the developing of the Hypertemporal Imaging Spectrometer (HTIS) to support the HTI space experiment and other fascinating surveillance activity

The instrument was composed of two 10 inch telescopes one for the two high speed video cameras (VIS & SWIR) and the other for the two imaging spectrometers (VIS & SWIR.) Basically hypertemporal and spectral binoculars that cost $750,000.

After I retired the instrument went to NASIC and WPAFB for testing.

The actual name for the HTIS were the "Alien Hunting Binoculars" designed based on my analysis of telescope video of Alien Space vehicles in the atmosphere.

My agency AFRL/RVBYI new about this but kept it quiet because the DIA and NASIC were interested in the project.

Officially the instrument was the hyper-Temporal Imaging Spectrometer (HTIS) and not the Alien Hunting Binoculars (AHB.)"

LinkedIn

Partigal has an extensive LinekdIn page which provides detail about his professional career.

Here he says:

"I am an expert in the analysis of hyperspectral  imagery to solve environmental, geologic, medical and military intelligence problems in the UV, VNIR, SWIR and Long Wave."

Hyperspectral imagery

"The goal of hyperspectral imagery is to obtain the spectrum for each pixel in the image of a scene."

What does Portigal say re UAP?

He has presented two papers and associated video's, so far via Twitter; plus a number of other videos and photographs. As the two papers are quite detailed, I provide their abstracts and conclusions below:

1. 1 August 2008 titled ""Star-like object in High Atmosphere Expelling a Plasma Stream."

The paper's abstract reads:

"On August 1st, 2007 in, Albuquerque New Mexico, a star like object was observed in the western sky, 22:30 MST. The object would have been easily mistaken as a star except for the unusual spectral content and high frequency fluctuation atypical of stars. The object was first noticed by eye and confirmed through binoculars as being unusual. A series of photographs were taken showing the object moving in synchronicity with the stars leading one to believe that it was simply another bright but unusual star. Inspection of the Stellarium sky chart confirmed that there were no stars in this position that could account for the observed brightness. On inspection of these photographs a single image caught the “star” ejecting a stream of plasma as bright and wide as the object itself. This spherical object was causing ionization of the atmosphere and was of similar magnitude to that of Procyon. This warranted further telescope video investigation. After extensive processing, the telescope video revealed what appears to be a plasma-like sphere spawning off disks and other classic shapes from UFO mythology." 

Portigal concluded:

"Processing the video data revealed complex structures within the “star” with a variety of disk shapes seemingly to be spawned off the primary structures at very high frequency. The video reveals that there are at least two large craft that are illuminated as the ionization plasma fluctuates. The size of the plasma field can be estimated if one assumes that it is located in the ionosphere at about 300 km. The telescope FOV is 1 degree and the plasma is about 15 pixels in diameter making it about 800 feet in diameter. The star appears to function as a space station; disks and other classic shapes from UFO mythology are spawned off the large stationary craft at a rate greater than the 30 Hz video can temporally resolve. The plasma ejection observed in the photographs is most likely caused by one of these space vehicles leaving pulling the plasma in its wake."

The processed video itself may be viewed here. 

2. 21 May 2009. "Near Surface Plasma-Like Phenomenon Travelling at 48,000 Kilometers Per Hour."

The paper's abstract read:

"Telescope video data from January 29th, 2008 recorded extraordinary phenomena of plasma-like objects travelling at speeds that defy the imagination in the vicinity of Petroglyph National monument in Albuquerque New Mexico...Twin spherical plasmas remain stationary as giant spherical plasma passes by at an estimated speed of 48,000 Kilometer per hour. As they pass by the stationary plasmas they appear to drop off and pick up cargo...The cargo moves rapidly to and from the stationary plasma-like spheres where they instantaneously disappear from the telescope FOV."

Portigal concludes:

"The video clearly shows objects materializing within a frame or two of giant giant plasmas flying past. After transit the plasmas disappear suggesting a link with the appearance of the cargo and giant plasmas."

The processed video itself may be viewed here.

NASIC

In a tweet dated 28 October 2021 Portigal tweeted " The first two videos with papers were confirmed with NASIC through back channels to be real and very sensitive. Fortunately I created and own them thus they can be released to the public." (NASIC is the US National Air and Space Intelligence Center.)

Fact checking

1. The Hypertemporal imaging space experiment was a funded project. 

2. The object described in the 2008 papers was captured using a Nikon D40 camera, and the telescopic data via a " Celestron 8 inch Newtonian reflector coupled with a Celestron CCD Solar System Imager." The objects described in the 2009 paper were captured using a "Celestron 8 inch Newtonian reflector with a Celestron Solar System Imager. The video camera is a Celestron NextImage using the Philips Toucam without optics designed to fit the telescope eye piece." They were not captured using the Air Force Research Laboratory equipment.

3.  Social media advises that Portigal had passed around images of his US passport to verify his identity.

4. Research gate has several papers concerning spectral imaging, listing Portigal as an author. 

What do others think of the claims?

There is a long discussion on UFO Reddit. A percentage of people think one video (not the ones with papers) show car headlights; and another shows an aircraft. 

1. JunkTheRat - a Reddit user wrote concerning the videos: "What I am saying is your algorithm is simply an interpretation of the visual data...it's just your algorithm interpreting the data and providing that geometry."

2. User Vade, with a background in graphics and video processing says "I'm 99.9% convinced these "ships" are artifacts of using an image processing techniques to artificially show structure. When zoomed in to that amount, the image appears muddy, and gradients are used to create shape. Using something like a scan line processor to use luminance to create an extrusion you can get similar shapes by filming out of focus LEDs and post processing them."

3. Quite a few others agree that the processing system used, produced artifacts which have apparentt "structure." They suggest that Portigal then made his own interpretations as to what they represent.

The response on Twitter has been along the same lines, that it is Portigal's interpretation that is not correct. On 7 November Portigal Tweeted "I am sick of the lying, redirection and disinformation. I will release a bunch more then it is off my chest and I can quit Twitter. It is no place for Scientific discussion."

No doubt this debate will continue for a while.