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.

 

Ok, lets hear the UFO debunkers debunk this one.

page: 4
15
<< 1  2  3   >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Jun, 28 2016 @ 01:18 AM
link   

originally posted by: Phage
a reply to: fleabit




I am saying that those objects have mass (shadows), they form a circle, the center object lights up..

They don't have shadows, unless you are talking about artifacts produced by the low light camera.
They form a "circle" only if your standards are flexible.
As far as "in the center", see the above sentence.


AOA - I doubt if not ice, they were trying to center themselves on the camera. Even then regardless, I also don't think making a perfect circle somehow proves it is more than ice. The mere fact the objects formed a fairly nice circle (and a lot better than I can draw a circle to be honest), and the center object lit up unlike its brethren is enough to spend more time investigating.




posted on Jun, 28 2016 @ 01:21 AM
link   
a reply to: fleabit

I doubt if not ice, they were trying to center themselves on the camera.
Why "if not ice?" Because you don't want it to be?



The mere fact the objects formed a fairly nice circle (and a lot better than I can draw a circle to be honest), and the center object lit up unlike its brethren is enough to spend more time investigating.

I can't draw worth a damn and I can draw a better circle than that. And place spots around it a lot more evenly. But go ahead, investigate away. Keep playing the video. I don't think you'll find anymore information than is already there.

edit on 6/28/2016 by Phage because: (no reason given)



posted on Jun, 28 2016 @ 01:25 AM
link   

originally posted by: Phage
a reply to: fleabit

I doubt if not ice, they were trying to center themselves on the camera.
Why "if not ice?" Because you don't want it to be?



The mere fact the objects formed a fairly nice circle (and a lot better than I can draw a circle to be honest), and the center object lit up unlike its brethren is enough to spend more time investigating.

I can't draw worth a damn and I can draw a better circle than that. And space spots around it a lot more evenly. But go ahead, investigate away.


Cute.. I don't "want them" to be anything other than whatever they are. It's wonderful with your analytic mind, you have already deduced they must be ice particles. But sure, I'll humor myself and continue investigating things that I feel have some merit in the UFO community. As far as the circle goes.. again.. angle of attack, but whatever. And I don't know why if there were aliens trying to say "hi," that forming a perfect circle is somehow a requirement before we'll recognize their presence.

Because you do have a clever mind, do explain the lighting situation.. I'm all ears. : )



posted on Jun, 28 2016 @ 01:38 AM
link   
a reply to: fleabit

Somewhere, sometime, on ATS someone created a diagram showing the shadow of the shuttle works. Can't find it, offhand, that's why I used the analogy of a sundial.

You are making at least two assumptions about what you are seeing; 1) You are assuming that the objects change velocity 2) You are assuming that the objects are in the same vertical plane relative to the camera, that is they are the same distance from the camera.

Avoid those two assumptions (and possibly some others) and visualize a shadow extending from the shuttle and you may be able to understand that it is entirely possible that ice crystals floating around the spacecraft, imaged by a device designed to detect very low light levels, would momentarily display such a configuration.

Take that high possibility and add the "testimony" of an astronaut who was on that mission.


Put it all together. Does it equal "critters". Well it could, sure. But does it preclude a "mundane" explanation?

edit on 6/28/2016 by Phage because: (no reason given)



posted on Jun, 28 2016 @ 01:45 AM
link   

originally posted by: Phage
a reply to: fleabit

Somewhere, sometime, on ATS someone created a diagram showing the shadow of the shuttle works. Can't find it, offhand, that's why I used the analogy of a sundial.

You are making at least two assumptions about what you are seeing; 1) You are assuming that the objects change velocity 2) You are assuming that the objects are in the same vertical plane relative to the camera, that is they are the same distance from the camera.

Avoid those two assumptions (and possibly some others) and visualize a shadow extending from the shuttle and you may be able to understand that it is entirely possible that ice crystals floating around the spacecraft, imaged by a device designed to detect very low light levels, would momentarily display such a configuration.


I never said it was impossible, and I make assumptions that is mundane, before I jump to conclusions otherwise. Probability of such a configuration? hmm.. who knows. Explanation of how one object can light up when the others do not? No clue. Obviously they should all be exposed to the same light from whatever source. This was also being monitored.. why? I guess they sit around waiting for cool looking ice formations.

Again I never said a thing, other than I feel videos such as these, merit more investigation and attention, than a few stray specks that are almost certainly ice in the OP. I really do feel you are a clever fellow.. and would like to hear your opinion on how one object but not the others, can light up as it did. Length of time it brightened was of interest as well.



posted on Jun, 28 2016 @ 01:50 AM
link   
a reply to: fleabit



Obviously they should all be exposed to the same light from whatever source.

The Sun is the light source. It also causes the shuttle to create a shadow. That shadow is angled depending on the relationship between the Sun and the shuttle. Depending on its distance from the shuttle, an object may be in the shadow (and not illuminated) or out of the shadow (and illuminated). Objects drifting around the shuttle will move into and out of the shadow. Also, the shadow moves and the shuttle orbits and its relationship to the Sun changes.


This was also being monitored.. why?
No. This "thing" was not being monitored. But this was, automatically:
thunder.msfc.nasa.gov...
edit on 6/28/2016 by Phage because: (no reason given)



posted on Jun, 28 2016 @ 02:10 AM
link   

The Sun is the light source. It also causes the shuttle to create a shadow. That shadow is angled depending on the relationship between the Sun and the shuttle. Depending on its distance from the shuttle, an object may be in the shadow (and not illuminated) or out of the shadow (and illuminated). Objects drifting around the shuttle will move into and out of the shadow. Also, the shadow moves and the shuttle orbits and its relationship to the Sun changes.


Obviously. And you are assuming that the objects to the left and right.. below.. were not in shadow but the center object was, and once the shadow was removed it illuminated more brightly because.. who knows. It was icier! Or something. Although none of the other objects produced the same illumination. Unless you are suggesting they were all under shadow.. except the center object?

Supposition on your part and mine. Thus the investigation bit. You have already obviously made your mind up, and such is the mind of those folks who have already dismissed such things. Because it can't be possible. As such, explanations like "shadows.." easily come into your mind, because it's the only logical.. and in fact, the ONLY explanation you can come up with. Since I can't prove the angle of shadows produced.. or the luminosity of the object in question, can't really call you out as being wrong.. right?

I'll keep investigating if it's all the same. Since I do question things like.. the pattern of the "ice crystals" in conjunction with the illumination of the center object. And I actually assume(d) ice myself.. but won't just dismiss it quite that easily. Quite a bit of probability there that is a bit off.



posted on Jun, 28 2016 @ 02:15 AM
link   
a reply to: fleabit




And you are assuming that the objects to the left and right.. below.. were not in shadow but the center object was, and once the shadow was removed it illuminated more brightly because.. who knows
No. I'm assuming that the shuttle casts an angled shadow and the the objects are relatively near the shuttle. That's about it as far as the assumptions I'm making.

How many are required to think that this is anything more than a momentary random configuration of items floating around the shuttle?

edit on 6/28/2016 by Phage because: (no reason given)



posted on Jun, 29 2016 @ 05:03 PM
link   
a reply to: SeaWorthy

Sorry I have to bite. It's called space 101. It's pretty damn cold up there (not that I've been,mind you). So ice is easily possible.



posted on Jun, 29 2016 @ 06:38 PM
link   

originally posted by: youcanttellthepeople
a reply to: SeaWorthy

Sorry I have to bite. It's called space 101. It's pretty damn cold up there (not that I've been,mind you). So ice is easily possible.


Lol
My post was supposed to read
What kind of ice experts at high altitude are you'all?

Somehow the one word went missing...

I like your explanation though, everything up there is ice cause it's plain ole cold.



posted on Jun, 30 2016 @ 07:50 AM
link   

originally posted by: SeaWorthy
Lol
My post was supposed to read
What kind of ice experts at high altitude are you'all?

Somehow the one word went missing...

I like your explanation though, everything up there is ice cause it's plain ole cold.

There's that, plus ice (and sometimes debris) coming off of or venting from the ISS -- and formerly the space shuttle -- is a relatively common occurance that is known to happen. And when it does happen, it looks like that.

And it isn't necessary to be an expert, but simply a layman who is interested enough in the subject of space habitation and space travel that they follow the missions.



posted on Jun, 30 2016 @ 12:03 PM
link   
swop gas!
it gets ever ware!



posted on Jul, 1 2016 @ 11:39 PM
link   

originally posted by: nOraKat
I just saw this on the Science Channels program - NASA's Unexplained Files.

This was taken from the ISS HD surveillance cameras. The camera was cut out soon after they appeared.

I looked for the footage on the internet after seeing the show, this was the best one I could find.

I recommend muting the audio so you do not have to listen to the annoying guy.

The video shows 3 objects leaving the atmosphere.

It is reminiscent of a Space Shuttle mission video feed with similar UFO's but some people argued that it was ice coming off the shuttle after a thruster blast; but this one you cannot dismiss as ice.

Comments?


I am a debunker but an open-minded one that exercises logic, common sense and reason. I have seen this footage on the mentioned program but I don't remember the details as to the illogical explanations given by the "experts" but they usually insult intelligence with their "ice particles" bs. This is not the first time that the transmission has been halted when objects such as the ones in this video are shown.

We have to remember that it's their ball and if they want to take it and go home we are simply left frustrated.

Here, have a laugh.



posted on Jul, 1 2016 @ 11:41 PM
link   

originally posted by: Phage
a reply to: fleabit




And you are assuming that the objects to the left and right.. below.. were not in shadow but the center object was, and once the shadow was removed it illuminated more brightly because.. who knows
No. I'm assuming that the shuttle casts an angled shadow and the the objects are relatively near the shuttle. That's about it as far as the assumptions I'm making.

How many are required to think that this is anything more than a momentary random configuration of items floating around the shuttle?


Good answer, Oberg! Why the new name?



posted on Jul, 2 2016 @ 07:03 AM
link   

originally posted by: fleabit
Obviously. And you are assuming that the objects to the left and right.. below.. were not in shadow but the center object was, and once the shadow was removed it illuminated more brightly because.. who knows. It was icier! Or something. Although none of the other objects produced the same illumination. Unless you are suggesting they were all under shadow.. except the center object?

Supposition on your part and mine. Thus the investigation bit. You have already obviously made your mind up, and such is the mind of those folks who have already dismissed such things. Because it can't be possible. As such, explanations like "shadows.." easily come into your mind, because it's the only logical.. and in fact, the ONLY explanation you can come up with. Since I can't prove the angle of shadows produced.. or the luminosity of the object in question, can't really call you out as being wrong.. right?

I'll keep investigating if it's all the same. Since I do question things like.. the pattern of the "ice crystals" in conjunction with the illumination of the center object. And I actually assume(d) ice myself.. but won't just dismiss it quite that easily. Quite a bit of probability there that is a bit off.


Actually the relatively bright illumination of the center object is pretty easy to explain... it's closer.

The outer points of light (ice) are already beyond the shadow of the shuttle when the video clip starts, whereas the center point is still in shadow, as it is closer than the others. Then by when the center point comes out of shadow as it drifts away from the vehicle, it becomes brightly illuminated.

Another factor which helps the center point to appear much brighter, is that the time it appears (comes out of shadow) the limb of the earth is darker than when the outer ones drifted into view, making it's appearance more dramatic as it has greater contrast with the background.

That doesn't even take into account that the center point could be from a larger, or more uniformly angled surface chunk of ice, factors which would also affect it's brightness.



posted on Jul, 2 2016 @ 08:07 AM
link   
I believe you have been fooled along with huge numbers of other people. There is as much evidence to prove aliens exist. As there is to prove demons exist. That's a bit funny, don't you think?



new topics

top topics



 
15
<< 1  2  3   >>

log in

join