Strangely, his video seems to rebut his
earlier statements on Twitter. Previously he had expressed doubt as to whether a vehicle was involved and seemed to rule out a drone. Furthermore, the video does not really present new evidence, but merely reverts to a “default” explanation. Basically, the video claims that a vehicle
must have been involved because it is the only “naturalistic” explanation that is at least somewhat plausible. Yet for some reason the film does not actually analyse the footage in depth, frame by frame. Presumably the distance between each headlight could be calculated based on perspective.
Furthermore, commentators have pointed out that the “headlights” are uncharacteristically bright for a vehicle at such a distance, and that the stability of the lights suggests a considerable amount of mass involved. Some viewers have compared the lights to LEDs. There is also this video:
Some people have used this as evidence to support the “vehicle” theory, for in this film the “headlights” do appear to flash as though turning over themselves. Nevertheless, the question must be posed: why would one camera show the flashing yet another show a remarkably stable source of emission? This observation suggests that the Olson footage, which shows no flashing, is more realistic.
At the very least, therefore, the jury is still out on this.