Bear in mind that these apparent unusual 'powers' of the drone don't really differ all that much of the things claimed of UFOs since 1947. The issue really is that those observing events as the happen from a limited perspective start to imagine all sorts of things and thus act as they see fit. How anchored any of that is in reality is open to question. So it seems, similar to UFO reports, the percipients convince themselves within a given premise as they observe something partially, and then their minds fill in the gaps.
The problem I have with these kind theories it always seems to assume no matter the experience of the observer or observers that they always
must be in error.
Yeah, shockingly enough pilots with a lot of flight hours are going to be wrong a couple times. So what? They're human. It's natural.
There aren't many instances where UFOs were genuine super secret military aircraft chased by helicopters (or F-18s). It would be embarrassing for the developers of super secret jet planes and contra-gravity tic-tacs if their secret machines could be bamboozled by some guys with a germanium lens camera. The only time I can think of off the top of my head a UFO turned out to be something serious was Roswell when a Mogul balloon crashed and the Army had to run out and rescue it before someone sold the radar reflectors and microphones for scrap to a Soviet spy.
OTOH there are plenty more where GCI controllers and fighter-interceptors spend about 45 minutes chasing a piece of chaff that is fluttering in the wind and wondering where the target is because that's a huge reflection and if your scope is showing something and my attack radar is showing something, where is the something, because I've flown over this thing six times now.
Which one is more believable? That these sheriffs were chasing a drone that was invisible to thermal, visual, radar, and near-infrared detection, but for some reason had a nav light on it that leads to a comical chase by the cops across the skies of Arizona because the dudes who are spying on a junkyard of old ass planes that are on Google Earth left a light switch on? Or that the cops were chasing Mars, Venus, or a distant star, and getting confused because things in the sky look like they're very close to you without any visible reference to the ground (as would be on a moonless night) and tend to wobble due to atmospheric distortion?
It's not a trick question. Most UFOs tend to be either celestial objects or mundane but unintuitive things like lost chaff strips.
The relative rarity of UFO reports to flight hours is a good thing. It means that pilots aren't bad at their jobs. Having a couple UFO stories is probably natural for a pilot, assuming they bother to remember them at all, but the guy who comes back from his job of being a fighter pilot with a Big UFO story every time he takes to the air should probably not be a fighter pilot. He's either lying or crazy.
The idea that UFOs are anything more than odd misreadings of an ambiguous situation (such as chasing a satellite or some stellar object on a moonless night, not knowing or forgetting due to tiredness that the sky looks funny without a land reference, and being wrapped up in your own thinking, etc.) is pretty dangerous, though, since it stifles genuine critiques and encourages ideological thinking.
www.l3harris.com
