AfganistánAfghanistan.Afganistán · disco en sensor IR de plataforma ISR (USAF)Afghanistan · disc on USAF ISR platform IR sensor

On November 23, 2020, during the final months of the long U.S. military presence in Afghanistan, a high-altitude intelligence, surveillance and reconnaissance (ISR) platform operating under the direction of the U.S. Air Force recorded a disc-shaped object over the border region between Afghanistan and Pakistan. The recording, made with a thermal/infrared sensor, showed an object estimated at 200 to 400 meters across moving in and out of the cloud layer and, according to those who released it, executing abrupt changes of direction. The most-debated point is what the sensor did not capture: no heat plume or signature. A thermal camera is designed precisely to detect temperature differences, so a conventional propulsion system —a jet, a propeller, a rocket— should have produced an obvious signature. Its absence is what turns the footage into an anomalous datum rather than just another aircraft.

The video stayed out of the public domain for several years and was only released in June 2025 by journalists and investigators Jeremy Corbell and George Knapp, through their podcast 'Weaponized'. Both said they had spent roughly two years authenticating the material and verifying its provenance before publishing it; Knapp stated the source was 'legit' and that they were certain it was real. The pair had previously released other military video leaks —among them the spheres and the so-called 'pyramid' captured by the Navy in 2021—, some of which were later confirmed as authentic by the Pentagon itself, giving their chain of custody a mixed but not negligible track record.

The corpus framing is deliberately cautious about provenance. What anchors the case is its nature as a military sensor datum in an active theater of operations: a thermal image from an ISR platform, not an isolated visual testimony or an amateur photo. The honest caveat is equally important: unlike the Navy videos (Nimitz, GoFast, Gimbal) officially acknowledged by the Department of Defense, this Afghan recording reached the public through a journalistic release and, as far as is public, there is no formal Pentagon confirmation or open AARO file backing it. Nor can it strictly be ruled out that an object with no apparent thermal signature is explained by the observation geometry itself, by sensor calibration or by a cold target at great distance. It is therefore included at its appropriate tier: a real, geographically-anchored sensor record, but with a weaker institutional chain of custody than the corpus's S-tier cases.

Es el primer registro de Afganistán en el corpus y extiende su cobertura a un teatro de guerra activo: no un testimonio visual, sino una imagen de sensor térmico desde una plataforma ISR de la USAF. Esa naturaleza instrumental es lo que le da peso —los datos de sensor son menos susceptibles que el ojo humano a ilusiones de movimiento o a la sugestión— y la ausencia de firma de calor en una cámara diseñada para detectarla es, de ser auténtico el metraje, el rasgo realmente difícil de explicar con tecnología conocida.

Su límite, sin embargo, debe enunciarse con la misma claridad. A diferencia de los tres videos de la Marina reconocidos oficialmente, este metraje depende de una difusión periodística realizada cinco años después del hecho, sin confirmación del Pentágono ni expediente público de AARO, y por investigadores cuyo historial de autenticación es real pero no infalible. El corpus lo trata, en consecuencia, como un dato de sensor militar geográficamente anclado y prometedor, no como un caso oficialmente validado: ancla a Afganistán en el mapa del fenómeno sin elevar el episodio al estatus probatorio de los casos S. Es un recordatorio metodológico de que la procedencia importa tanto como el contenido: una imagen extraordinaria con cadena de custodia incompleta pesa menos que una imagen ordinaria con expediente completo.

It is Afghanistan's first corpus record and extends its coverage into an active war theater: not a visual testimony but a thermal-sensor image from a USAF ISR platform. That instrumental nature is what gives it weight —sensor data are less susceptible than the human eye to motion illusions or suggestion— and the absence of a heat signature on a camera designed to detect one is, if the footage is authentic, the genuinely hard feature to explain with known technology.

Its limit, however, must be stated with equal clarity. Unlike the three officially acknowledged Navy videos, this footage depends on a journalistic release made five years after the fact, with no Pentagon confirmation or public AARO file, and by investigators whose authentication record is real but not infallible. The corpus accordingly treats it as a geographically-anchored, promising military sensor datum, not as an officially validated case: it places Afghanistan on the map of the phenomenon without elevating the episode to the evidentiary status of the S-tier cases. It is a methodological reminder that provenance matters as much as content: an extraordinary image with an incomplete chain of custody weighs less than an ordinary image with a complete file.