NASA forced to deny UFO claims after UFO spotted orbiting asteroid

Objects in space behave according to pretty strict laws. One of those laws is the law that dictates that any object will move in any direction according to its primordial impulse. Unless an object is affected by a deflection, strike or gravitational field, they go in straight lines.
A fat pebble which is moving in the same orbit as a a rather fatter pebble will eventually start to be attracted by the larger body, this is physics. This means that over time it will eventually start to orbit, unless affected by a bigger/fatter body. If it shines more brightly that means simply that it is showing more of a reflective surface than the other body.
I like fat bodies in space, they make the solar system more cuddly.

originally posted by: bhornbuckle75

Apparently we've known about asteroids with small moons for a while now...

Asteroid moons were suspected as early as the 1970s based on amateur astronomer reports during stellar occultation observation campaigns. These reports surprised professional astronomers who were slow to give credence to anomalous reports from non-professionals.

Sound like a familiar pattern?

Here's the difference. Hard data continued to accumulate, instruments became sharper, professionals decided it was worth a look, and voila. A new aspect of asteroids was recognized and accepted.

I personally think it was a test run of a deep space top secret space ship and it is being put through testing phases. If it is a ship it is wonderful and would be quite a ride. I'm thinking the weather balloon excuse for Roswell, only a modern version of the story in a different light. I could definitely be wrong and I could definitely be right.

I love how the usual suspects always come out to tell us what we're seeing is NOT what we're seeing. It's getting to the point where when I see certain members join the convo, I tend to believe we're onto something.

Oh well, carry on...

a reply to: IofRa

Emmm yes I see, because what's logical is that NASA imaged the Asteroid and it's 'UFO" with radar, then instead of just not releasing the imagery or editing it they release it anyway and 'make up a story to explain it as a moon'.

Or... It's just another common occurrence of an asteroid with a moon and they released the data for public perusal.

The only 'usual suspects' are the dimwits that lack more than one brain cell and keep insisting something is what it isn't, frustrating people such as myself who are amateur and/or professional astronomers and get frustrated at seeing the world's dimwits talking crap as usual while not listening to people that actually know what they're talking about.

originally posted by: JadeStar

originally posted by: Skywatcher2011

"NASA of course goes on to say that this flat object which does not flip over end is a moon.

"Any moon this thin would be tumbling end over end. This object is keeping itself steady, flying like a ship would in space".

UFO "Sky watchers" need to go back and study Newton's 3rd Law of Motion before making UFO claims about natural bodies in space. They'd also do well to study astronomy so as not to look foolish with stories like this.

Why does it seem most of the people making these UFO claims of natural stuff are ignorant of astronomy in general and failed (or didn't even take) basic physics?

They may also want to brush up on Newton's 1st law of motion. Common sense says a flat object should 'tumble end over end' only because we're accustomed to air pressure. The difference between air pressure on one side of the object relative to the opposite end is what causes that effect. Without any gasses or other matter to provide resistance, an object in a vacuum will retain both it's momentum and orientation.

originally posted by: AgentSmithThe only 'usual suspects' are the dimwits that lack more than one brain cell and keep insisting something is what it isn't, frustrating people such as myself who are amateur and/or professional astronomers and get frustrated at seeing the world's dimwits talking crap as usual while not listening to people that actually know what they're talking about.

dimwits and crap. nice . u mad?

Would anyone care to comment on how this fits in with the belief that NASA is withholding information from the public?

a reply to: RoScoLaz4

More feeling the usual disappointment with the lack of logical thinking or willingness to learn that some people are always keen to exhibit. You can mock my irritation as much as you want, but at least there's no reason to pity me for being a bit dim.

There are many instances of multiple crater events occuring on both the Earth and moon.

Some, are caused by asteroids with smaller bodies in orbit, and others are most likely comets that have been pulled apart by tidal forces as they entered the Earth-Moon area. Here are a few:


On Earth:


The Clearwater East and West craters are the best known candidates for a double impact

Recent work indicates that crater chains may exist on Earth as well. Eight circular depressions (3-17 km wide) distributed along a 700 km line across Kansas, Missouri, and Illinois may comprise part of a crater chain (M.R. Rampino and T. Volk (1996) Geophys. Res. Lett. 23, p. 49.) Two of the eight structures (Decaturville and Crooked Creek in Missouri) are known from field studies to be impact craters ~300 Myr old.

On Moon

Two crater chains on the Moon are thought to have been formed by the impact of tidally disrupted bodies. The first is the Davy chain, a relatively fresh (i.e. post-Imbrian) chain 47 km long containing 23 craters ranging in size between 1-3 km. Even though its orientation is roughly radial to the Orientale basin, its morphology and setting imply it may not be a secondary crater chain. (H.J. Melosh and E.A. Whitaker (1994) Nature 369, p. 713)

Sources:
Chain Craters
Earth Hammers

The suggestion is that many impacts happen as multiple events, and are more common than previously thought. Many asteroids often have companions that impact nearly at the same time, as the Earth rotates beneath the incoming objects.

originally posted by: JimOberg

originally posted by: bhornbuckle75

Apparently we've known about asteroids with small moons for a while now...

Asteroid moons were suspected as early as the 1970s based on amateur astronomer reports during stellar occultation observation campaigns. These reports surprised professional astronomers who were slow to give credence to anomalous reports from non-professionals.

Sound like a familiar pattern?

Here's the difference. Hard data continued to accumulate, instruments became sharper, professionals decided it was worth a look, and voila. A new aspect of asteroids was recognized and accepted.

It's a shame UFOlogy doesn't spend more money on better data collection and instruments like meteor cams. It's not like it's broke. I saw MUFON's tax filings. They spend most of their budget on their yearly storytelling show (conference).

originally posted by: IofRa
I love how the usual suspects always come out to tell us what we're seeing is NOT what we're seeing. It's getting to the point where when I see certain members join the convo, I tend to believe we're onto something.

I agree.

These people that are claiming that what we are seeing is not an asteroid moon, but rather an alien ship, need to swallow hard and move on to the Henoch prophecies or something.

Harte