Strange Object Floating Outside The ISS

Interesting images, although the sequence shots are taken a short while apart as the perspective of the station changes a little, as can be seen in the top panels each side of the craft.

The anomaly resembles a bird box to me lol

I've undertaken a few enhancements, using curves.

Plus the middle image from the set.

that flight took Italian and Russian astronauts to the ISS, a load of work was carried out, that included a transfer module, Raffaello....it might be that before the sticky tape was taken off...

For the record, there were some to ground 'comm failures' as well on the ISS at that time, as well as making power connections for other equipment,

www.nasa.gov...



files.abovetopsecret.com...

What Raffaello looks like on it's platform, very similar profile don't you think after taking away much of the fuzz and pixellation of the blowups?



files.abovetopsecret.com...

Why can't it be a cloaked object? Over years, many unusual UFO's have been spotted by our crews.

a reply to: Chadwickus

Correct, you’re looking too much into into it.

You can see the sequence of photos HERE

It only shows up in one shot, despite the fact that there a several shots taken close together.

Moving really, really fast then.

But hang on - are you seriously suggesting that such an anomalous image should be ignored because it only shows up in one of a series of photographs? That#s the most ridiculous, blatant nonsense I've ever read. Sure, a highly unusual artefact in a photograph of the ISS. But don't worry, it moved quickly & thus cannot be a legitimate concern.

Clearly, as you thankfully have reminded us, we're looking too closely into highly anomalous activities occurring within spitting distance of the Earth's only admitted space station. I feel so relieved that you've reassured me that everything is fine, that there's nothing to worry about, that to apply even a modicum of critical thought is unnecessary & unwarranted. I will sleep easier tonight, knowing that the largest part of my brain is no longer required, that I can rely on people like you to do all thinking for me. Even when it looks very much like alien craft are buzzing our only space station. Awesome.

Thanks for your disinformation.

a reply to: FlyInTheOintment

He's hoping this thread doesn't see the light of day ..

a reply to: carewemust

It can be a cloaked object, but it can also be a reflection.

Knowing that the photo was taken behind a glass I think reflection is more likely.

The fact that it looks like a reflection re-enforces the possibility of it being a reflection of something inside the Space Shuttle.

a reply to: ArMaP

If a camera spot focus than glass reflections should be blurred, as what it did on the porthole not the object in question ..

originally posted by: FlyInTheOintment
Moving really, really fast then.

Not really, the time between that photo and the photo before it is 1:46, the time between that photo and the next one is 0:29, so the possible object had 20 seconds to get out of frame. Considering we do not know the distance of that possible object, we cannot know the speed, but if it was as far away as the ISS then there was no need for it to move "really, really fast".

Thanks for your disinformation.

No disinformation on Chadwickus's post, only in your interpretation of his post.

originally posted by: 0bserver1
a reply to: ArMaP

If a camera spot focus than glass reflections should be blurred, as what it did on the porthole not the object in question ..

Sorry, I don't understand what you mean, can you rephrase it? Thanks in advance.

a reply to: ArMaP

A camera has multiple shot options, one of them is spot focus/focus spot/spot metering. Meaning its concentrated on the center field, not the surrounding fields and everything on the outside and that's closer to the the camera will be blurred

a reply to: 0bserver1

Thanks, I understand it now.

Although that's true, it's also true that the object appears slightly out of focus, and we don't know the aperture the camera was using and how that would have affected the depth of field and, in consequence, how much things closer to the camera would appear more or less out of focus.

a reply to: ArMaP

it's also true that the object appears slightly out of focus

True, but I think he wasn't focussing on the object but the ISS? at the STS-95 a Kodak Professional DCS-400 Series Digital Still SLR camera was used.

It doesn't tell that it could be the same, but it could be a later model from Kodak maybe a Nikon D1

originally posted by: Outlier13
a reply to: skunkape23

lol...do you mean the original machine that had a base plate of prefabulated aluminite, surmounted by a malleable logarithmic casing in such a way that the two main spurving bearings were in a direct line with the pentametric fan? The latter consisted simply of six hydrocoptic marzlevanes, so fitted to the ambifacient lunar waneshaft that side fumbling was effectively prevented. The main winding was of the normal lotus-o-delta type placed in panendermic semi-bovoid slots in the stator, every seventh conductor being connected by a nonreversible tremie pipe to the differential girdlespring on the "up" end of the grammeters.

They stopped making that model in the mid 70's.
The newer models have a base plate of nano-molecular retrofabulated carbonite which reduces vibrophonic feedback.
The spurving bearings have been replaced by titanonoig hyper shinglets.
The ambifacent lunar waneshaft, which worked very well, has been replaced with a metalociferacating retractacable sheath. These small changes have greatly stabilized the warp and woof of the excremeditation chamber diodes.


Otherwise, it is the same basic design.

a reply to: OrionHunterX

Im on my mobile...and whenever i zoom in or out on that image, the object in question disappears and then reappers once i stop zooming...

Looks like an artifact from a Tomb Raider game, possibly a piece of the scion.

a reply to: FlyInTheOintment

Who's saying it should be ignored, certainly not me.

In fact I did the yards to get the other images here..

a reply to: 0bserver1

What's that supposed to mean?

My first guess is a sneeze on the lens.
We can debunk it from there.

a reply to: OrionHunterX

Lets go with reflection

STS100-E-5156

STS100-E-5156 (21 April 2001) --- One of the crew members aboard the Space Shuttle Endeavour used a digital still camera to record this image of the International Space Station (ISS), backdropped against the blackness of space.

Click on image to view larger.