It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.

Please white-list or disable AboveTopSecret.com in your ad-blocking tool.

Thank you.

 

Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.

 

ISS image from space has something hidden and strange phenomena.

page: 5
17
<< 2  3  4    6 >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Jul, 13 2015 @ 12:56 AM
link   
You're seeing a reflection and not the actual object. Depending on how the sunlight is hitting it, that's what you're going to see reflected back. Some parts are clear, some faded off, some aren't. You're not looking at a solid object.
The "radiosity" you keep speaking about is the strength of the background color bleeding through the transparent reflection. It's not the object transferring the colors from the aurora onto itself.

Here are three similarities between this "object" and the radiator panels.

Hinge points on the panels. They are pointing the same direction in both comparisons:

When you compare the untouched original photo, it's a stronger argument for hinges:


The "tubes" are both curved at the same basic angles.


The panels. The upper right panel is the most clearly defined.


Put them together and I think you have a close match:


It looks like the ISS panels rather than an organic... thing.
Care to explain away the three similarities?




posted on Jul, 13 2015 @ 01:05 AM
link   

originally posted by: Ectoplasm8
Put them together and I think you have a close match:

If by 'close', you mean 'perfect', then, yes, I'd have to agree.



posted on Jul, 13 2015 @ 06:17 AM
link   
a reply to: Ectoplasm8

you think its the international space station ? ok

wheres the rest of it ? out of shot ? ,

like mars photographs many rocks look like x and y and z , and when you start drawing lines all over the edges then yes they do start to form what you want them to form

www.google.co.uk...=R8mELILNL Pts0M%3A

looks little like the i.s.s to me , again why is it partially lit by the sun in some places and not others .. surely we would see the rest of that beast

have an explanation why we don't ?

funbox


edit on 13-7-2015 by funbox because: t



posted on Jul, 13 2015 @ 06:29 AM
link   
a reply to: admirethedistance

you don't see the subtle color's that been added to give the impression of the stuts being yellow ? disingenuous

you would agree with anything and everything.. as long at it fits your internal frame of reference

funbox



posted on Jul, 13 2015 @ 07:48 AM
link   
a reply to: Ectoplasm8

Dam you Ectoplasm


Why do you have to spoil this thread with logic and reasoning?

I so wanted, for once, it to be a giant space squid, or an extra terrestrial craft, hovering above our atmosphere.

Im so dissappointed.




posted on Jul, 13 2015 @ 07:55 AM
link   

originally posted by: funbox.....looks little like the i.s.s to me , again why is it partially lit by the sun in some places and not others .. surely we would see the rest of that beast

have an explanation why we don't ?


Have you considered shadowing? Where's the sun, and other ISS structure, lying outside of the field of view?



posted on Jul, 13 2015 @ 08:16 AM
link   
a reply to: JimOberg

the sun is behind the earth ,off leftish, and yes shadowing is very dark in space, but this one was a thought experiment to myself, I had no idea where the shot was taken from offset .. now that I know that its taken from the I.S.S itself, I can see now how the irony of the tip of the panel hanging down far enough into shot, that it dips far enough, to pick up bleeding from the aurora , visually interesting wouldn't you say ?




funbox



posted on Jul, 13 2015 @ 10:16 AM
link   
I was still right, no view is not non-existence. Regardless if the Unidentified object was verified to be 1000 miles out, it is still irrevocably a panel. Whether its from the ISS or a Chinese interstellar porta potty. The object is recognized.



posted on Jul, 13 2015 @ 03:44 PM
link   
a reply to: Ectoplasm8

Nicely done. It's refreshing to have sane, industrious people on this board. You jumped on that photo and explained the anomaly perfectly.



posted on Jul, 14 2015 @ 04:22 AM
link   
I see some nice progerss in the topic, for those who speak about ISS part of solar panels or whatever, I just watch over and over the original image and size of the image and the way it is taken earthobservatory.nasa.gov...
it looks very distant object, maybe a secret project? But if its truly a distant object, its enormous big for solar panels in the size of an island, to much for human resources.

Maybe its the space that makes it feel as a distant object? But if it was near to the window ... It should be more visible is it?

edit on 14-7-2015 by Ploutonas because: (no reason given)



posted on Jul, 14 2015 @ 04:28 AM
link   
a reply to: Ploutonas

How are you determining size and distance? Answer: You're not. You're guessing.



posted on Jul, 14 2015 @ 04:29 AM
link   
a reply to: admirethedistance

we all do, because we dont know a 100% what that is

edit on 14-7-2015 by Ploutonas because: (no reason given)



posted on Jul, 14 2015 @ 04:37 AM
link   
a reply to: Ploutonas

if you grab the schematics of the iss and find out the window the photo was taken from , you should be able to know which panels dropping into shot .

should be quite easy to identify. unless the panels variate there positions frequently?

funbox



posted on Jul, 14 2015 @ 08:51 AM
link   
STARS !
you CAN see the stars.
this is the second time I have seen space pics with stars.
and all that bull about you Can not see stars in space.
AND you have the light from earth.
You Never get stars in space in the past.
even in the dark.....



posted on Jul, 15 2015 @ 01:59 AM
link   

originally posted by: buddha
STARS !
you CAN see the stars.
this is the second time I have seen space pics with stars.
and all that bull about you Can not see stars in space.
AND you have the light from earth.
You Never get stars in space in the past.
even in the dark.....


I think you should learn about photographic exposure !

How a camera will pick up star images depends on exposure the Astronauts said they could see stars it's people talking about Moon landing hoax etc that don't understand whats going on.


edit on 15-7-2015 by wmd_2008 because: (no reason given)



posted on Jul, 15 2015 @ 05:30 AM
link   
a reply to: wmd_2008

I agree, but you also forgot one critical fact, the speed of ISS as a satellite and earth rotation, while the photographer took that pic. That translates, he couldn't use very low exposure speeds! Because everything should be blurry, because of the ISS and earth speeds.

An example ; if we try to capture the moon, we cannot use long exposure speeds, because the moon moves fast, even for us from planet earth!
edit on 15-7-2015 by Ploutonas because: (no reason given)



posted on Jul, 15 2015 @ 05:36 AM
link   

originally posted by: Ploutonas
a reply to: wmd_2008

I agree, but you also forgot one critical fact, the speed of ISS as a satellite and earth rotation, while the photographer took that pic. That translates, he couldn't use very low exposure speeds! Because everything should be blurry, because of the ISS and earth speeds.

An example ; if we try to capture the moon, we cannot use long exposure speeds, because the moon moves fast, even for us from planet earth!


But you can increase the ISO rating...



posted on Jul, 15 2015 @ 05:39 AM
link   
a reply to: MarsIsRed

true to make ur capture more light sensitive, but that also means, all photos from space have high iso. So Budhha has a point.

This image turns to be a mystery more than beauty...


Also if we try to find an excuse about the high iso and stars, we also debunk that this object is a solar panels from ISS, because if the camera was able to capture stars, these panels should be more ... more... visible(?) if they are trully iss solar panels?
edit on 15-7-2015 by Ploutonas because: (no reason given)



posted on Jul, 15 2015 @ 09:15 AM
link   
a reply to: Ploutonas

The shot was taken at 8000 iso at f1.4 at 1/10 of a second focal length 24mm wide angle so you can get away with slower shutter speeds before motion blur.

The reason for Moon exposure times being short has NOTHING to do with it's speed it's lit by the Sun so exposures are similar to daytime shots on Earth.

On mobile just now but will post a Moon picture I took when I get home taken at 1/400th of a second f8 and iso 400 iirc.



NO mystery if you know about the subject






edit on 15-7-2015 by wmd_2008 because: (no reason given)

edit on 15-7-2015 by wmd_2008 because: Picture added.

edit on 15-7-2015 by wmd_2008 because: (no reason given)



posted on Jul, 15 2015 @ 08:32 PM
link   
a reply to: wmd_2008

dont try to confuse people, others say YOU CANNOT capture stars while in space, not from earth or your mobile.

8000 iso, my camera is up to 25600 iso, so what... Just pointed out that ALL astro-photography in space is captured in high iso or some times iso technology, not applicable to consumers... This picture now, captures stars. According to other members of ATS, this shouldnt happen?

D4 is not a special super duper camera, is a camera like all the rest. I personally didnt knew that you cannot capture stars while in space.

edit on 15-7-2015 by Ploutonas because: (no reason given)




top topics



 
17
<< 2  3  4    6 >>

log in

join