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.

 

NASA Revisited - NASA cameras "set up" for giant UFO

page: 1
8
<<   2 >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Jan, 29 2018 @ 08:26 PM
link   
It's been a while since any member created a thread about space UFOs as videographed by NASA Space Shuttles. It's a thing of the past so I thought we should revisit the topic because not all NASA footage has been discussed and I don't remember seeing a thread about this particular video which was provided by Martyn Stubbs, the original creator of "THE SECRET NASA TRANSMISSION: THE SMOKING GUN", © 2000 QUEST PUBLICATIONSINT'L.

From 2005
Martyn Stubbs Secret NASA Transmissions
www.abovetopsecret.com...

This video lasts 1:57 and at 1:49/1:50 the "UFO" appears. What sets this video segment apart from the multitude of space videos is that you can see a definite and intent effort to have the camera moved to concentrate on a specific area on Earth and once centered, with multiple efforts, the camera seems to wait deliberately for "something" to happen so that it can be captured on video. I just present the video and open this thread up to you to add comments. It doesn't matter how long ago this happened. What matters is that NASA shuttle cameras are not going to explain this event as being due to ice crystals, debris, water dumps, etc. Someone in the control room had some knowledge to transmit to the shuttle crew and, specifically, the camera operator. Someone in the control room had to say: "Wait for it!


NASA cameras "set up" for giant UFO


Martyn Stubbs
Published on Aug 24, 2009
This is astonishing as NASA spends most of the clip framing the camera to catch this UFO shooting up,up & away from a city at night! From Martyn Stubbs NASA UFO Archives.




posted on Jan, 29 2018 @ 08:52 PM
link   
Interesting footage. A couple of things I found unique..... the object does not appear to move in a straight trajectory... it "wiggles". Pretty different from what you would expect a very high speed object to do in outer space. Also... the object does not appear to change size during it's movement indicating it's not getting closer (or further away). I'm not sure what it is... but it doesn't look to me like an object that is either hurtling away (or to) earth. The object does have an almost triangular looking shape followed by the tail... almost looks like a spermatozoa! LOL. Perhaps it's a reflection from the interior of the Shuttle. That's where I'd put my money....

Good find. Thanks for sharing! Would like to hear what other think!



posted on Jan, 29 2018 @ 09:01 PM
link   
Why do you say it moves 'up'? Look at the horizon. It's going straight DOWN.

edit on 29-1-2018 by JimOberg because: (no reason given)



posted on Jan, 29 2018 @ 09:02 PM
link   
That's Puerto Rico, by the way.



posted on Jan, 29 2018 @ 09:10 PM
link   
What band is this?
Could be ionosphere heating at 2–10 MHz range or something newer?

The movie Contact was shot in Arecibo and one of the major plot effects was the UFO appearance of a meteor shower type event.
Could have been an allegory for the orbital cycles of comets and meteors that have become better recorded and understood over the millennia.
Its always easier looking back at older events.
edit on 29-1-2018 by Cauliflower because: (no reason given)



posted on Jan, 29 2018 @ 09:32 PM
link   
it's the cameras movement making it look like it "wiggles"



posted on Jan, 29 2018 @ 09:36 PM
link   
thermal i think....seeing the heat through a Germanium lens...it's never detailed for size....it sees the blob sorta
edit on 29-1-2018 by GBP/JPY because: (no reason given)



posted on Jan, 29 2018 @ 09:43 PM
link   
That IS weird and I hadn't seen it before, so thanks. I can't easily grok what I'm seeing.

If a reflection from the inside of the shuttle, why was someone waiving a match around? Kidding, but it just doesn't seem like a reflection... of anything easily identifiable, anyway. Kinda has to be a reflection ...or something odd.

Best guess ... horizontal sprite? Big Puerto Rican bottle rocket? Secret spaceship? Rave night in the shuttle? Santa?

What did the debunkers say it was?



posted on Jan, 29 2018 @ 11:19 PM
link   

originally posted by: Lathroper
Someone in the control room had some knowledge to transmit to the shuttle crew and, specifically, the camera operator. Someone in the control room had to say: "Wait for it!
I don't know how you come up with that. It looks to me like the camera operator was aiming the camera on the lit area. I don't assume they were "waiting' for anything.

You should have put this part in ex tags to show you didn't write it, because if you don't so that, it makes it look like you wrote it:

Martyn Stubbs
Published on Aug 24, 2009
This is astonishing as NASA spends most of the clip framing the camera to catch this UFO shooting up,up & away from a city at night! From Martyn Stubbs NASA UFO Archives.
When the horizon is not flat and level with the video frame which is often the case on space videos, "up" in the video is not necessarily "up" relative to the horizon, a fact Mr Stubbs seems to not recognize with his comment.


originally posted by: Baddogma
What did the debunkers say it was?
Setting this video aside for a moment, some scientists have estimated an average of 40 tons of debris from space enter the Earth's atmosphere each day. Most of that is dust or grain of sand size debris that might make a faint shooting star as it burns up in the atmosphere, with such small events probably not showing up in this camera view/scale. However the space debris is not all grain of sand size, there are a fair amount of marble size objects too, but the larger, the more rare, like the 13,000 ton Chelyabinsk meteor which would also be included in the 40 tons a day average influx.

A couple of comments on the youtube page thought it could be a rock from space hitting the Earth's atmosphere, which seems more plausible if it's actually going down rather than "up" as Mr. Stubbs suggests.

edit on 2018129 by Arbitrageur because: clarification



posted on Jan, 30 2018 @ 12:07 AM
link   
a reply to: Lathroper

Here are 2 rotated screen shots to help those who can't tell up from down. The first one is a full view including the horizon.





posted on Jan, 30 2018 @ 12:29 AM
link   

originally posted by: TreetopControl
Interesting footage. A couple of things I found unique..... the object does not appear to move in a straight trajectory... it "wiggles". Pretty different from what you would expect a very high speed object to do in outer space. Also... the object does not appear to change size during it's movement indicating it's not getting closer (or further away). I'm not sure what it is... but it doesn't look to me like an object that is either hurtling away (or to) earth. The object does have an almost triangular looking shape followed by the tail... almost looks like a spermatozoa! LOL. Perhaps it's a reflection from the interior of the Shuttle. That's where I'd put my money....

Good find. Thanks for sharing! Would like to hear what other think!


Well, the object is not in outer space, it is inside the atmosphere. It's similar to a missile launch in that it first gains altitude vertically and then heads horizontally towards the target. It is not getting closer or further away, it rose to a height and then leveled off. I can't see how you deduct that it's an interior reflection, there's no connection. I think you lost your money! We can't tell what the object's shape is because it's shrouded in ...? For the shrouding, look at this photo of similar objects.




posted on Jan, 30 2018 @ 12:37 AM
link   

originally posted by: Arbitrageur

originally posted by: Lathroper
snip
What did the debunkers say it was?
Setting this video aside for a moment, some scientists have estimated an average of 40 tons of debris from space enter the Earth's atmosphere each day. Most of that is dust or grain of sand size debris that might make a faint shooting star as it burns up in the atmosphere, with such small events probably not showing up in this camera view/scale. However the space debris is not all grain of sand size, there are a fair amount of marble size objects too, but the larger, the more rare, like the 13,000 ton Chelyabinsk meteor which would also be included in the 40 tons a day average influx.

A couple of comments on the youtube page thought it could be a rock from space hitting the Earth's atmosphere, which seems more plausible if it's actually going down rather than "up" as Mr. Stubbs suggests.


My eyes do not see anything entering from space. My eyes do not see a Shuttle internal reflection. Put the video at 1/4 speed and you'll see the object appear small and grows until it shoots up into the atmosphere and then levels off.



posted on Jan, 30 2018 @ 04:56 AM
link   

originally posted by: Lathroper
My eyes do not see anything entering from space. My eyes do not see a Shuttle internal reflection. Put the video at 1/4 speed and you'll see the object appear small and grows until it shoots up into the atmosphere and then levels off.
What I see is that it's difficult to determine three dimensional coordinates of the motion of an object solely from a single two-dimensional view of the object. Therefore I can't confirm your perception regardless of the playback speed of the video.

For one example, I can see where the approximate top of the atmosphere is on the distant horizon because it forms a faint line, but there is also a top of the atmosphere closer to the orbiter and I can't see that at all because there's no visible line, yet I know it's there. In fact I also know the top of the atmosphere isn't really a line at all, because the atmosphere doesn't just stop, it gradually gets thinner and thinner. This is why an object coming from space might first appear very small when it's only in the thinnest part of the atmosphere, and then might appear to get larger and brighter as it descends into the thicker part of the atmosphere.

By the way this same illusion can occur with ground observers of some larger bolides where they think the object is moving toward them because it's getting brighter, when in fact it may not be moving toward them at all and just an illusion caused by the object getting brighter making it seem like it's getting closer. It would be hard enough to determine the 3D direction of an object in a 2D video if it had constant brightness, but when we can't assume the brightness is constant then we are subject to further possible illusions and distortions of our perceptions. I would also note that not all meteors or space rocks fall straight down but can hit the earth's atmosphere at any angle.

There are hundreds of "NASA UFO" videos that are obvious reflections of some sort but I never said this was a reflection. A glass surface only reflects about 4% of the light passing through it so the reflection vids of internal lights in the orbiter etc are missing something like 96% of the light and the "UFOs" tend to have a "ghostly" or ephemeral appearance as a result making those fairly easy for me to spot, but other people seem to have difficulty recognizing that for some reason. If the source light was extremely bright then I guess the reflection could be brighter but barring any experiments with bright lights inside the orbiter, they are usually not all that bright. Reflected sunlight can be very bright, but a reflection from the sun wouldn't move as seen in this video so I tend to agree it doesn't appear to be a reflection.

edit on 2018130 by Arbitrageur because: clarification



posted on Jan, 30 2018 @ 04:56 AM
link   
Yeah, in what direction is this object going?
If you can't even get the perspective right when adding the object it kinda ruins the challenge of debunking.

Have to admit, my eyes were willing to follow his narrative the first time I watched the vid



posted on Jan, 30 2018 @ 08:12 AM
link   

originally posted by: Lathroper
..... It's similar to a missile launch in that it first gains altitude vertically and then heads horizontally towards the target. It is not getting closer or further away, it rose to a height and then leveled off. ....


You're not paying attention. Read earlier posts.



posted on Jan, 30 2018 @ 08:22 AM
link   
Mark Carlotto wrote about this clip some years ago.....



posted on Jan, 30 2018 @ 09:11 AM
link   
a reply to: Lathroper




This is astonishing as NASA spends most of the clip framing the camera to catch this UFO shooting up,up & away from a city at night!


up , up and away?


NO, it looks like a meteor or some debris hitting the atmosphere.




What matters is that NASA shuttle cameras are not going to explain this event as being due to ice crystals, debris, water dumps, etc.


Etc could be a space rock or some debris which certainly does point to a logical answer.




Someone in the control room had some knowledge to transmit to the shuttle crew and, specifically, the camera operator. Someone in the control room had to say: "Wait for it!


No they really didn't "have" to say anything.

The amount of things that burn up in the atmosphere on a daily basis is enormous.




Well, the object is not in outer space, it is inside the atmosphere.


It came from out of space or in orbit and once it hit the atmosphere right where the camera was pointing it light up like everything that comes into our atmosphere from out there.



posted on Jan, 30 2018 @ 11:15 AM
link   

originally posted by: JimOberg
Mark Carlotto wrote about this clip some years ago.....
I found his article, he has a couple of quotes from you in there.

Maybe he saw the same illusion as Lathroper, at least I think it's most likely an illusion.

Carlotto calculates the distance to Puerto Rico as 1328 km.

Assuming for a moment his in the right ballpark with that estimate, all I can say about the position of the object where it first becomes visible is that it's somewhere in the line of sight between the camera and Puerto Rico, which is anywhere in that 1328 km range. For some reason he seems to assume that it's originating closer to Puerto Rico, so maybe over 1000 km away, but I see no reason to rule out that it could be far closer to the camera than Puerto Rico when it first appears, and for some strange reason he doesn't seem to consider this possibility:

carlotto.us...

Perhaps the most interesting observation is a rapidly moving burst of light that appears near the Earth's surface off the east coast of Puerto Rico.


I see Puerto Rico easily enough, but I see nothing to suggest the light is first seen near the Earth's surface or near Puerto Rico. I think the illusion he's falling for is this one where two objects in the same line of sight might appear to be related when they are far apart and unrelated:



I see the man's hands near the surface of the sun in that picture, but I don't assume the mans hands are anywhere near the surface of the sun just because they have a coincidental line of sight. Reading Carvello's statement gives me the impression if he sees the object first appear near Puerto Rico it must be near Puerto Rico, and applying that same logic might mean that the man's hands which appear to be holding the sun are actually holding the sun, so it is apparently flawed logic, at least in some cases.

edit on 2018130 by Arbitrageur because: clarification



posted on Jan, 30 2018 @ 05:37 PM
link   
I somewhere read that gamma-ray bursts could trigger highly charged particles in the atmosphere because of that the magnetic field of the earth is decreasing and gamma rays increasing, maybe it looks a bit like this?



posted on Jan, 30 2018 @ 06:34 PM
link   

originally posted by: JimOberg

originally posted by: Lathroper
..... It's similar to a missile launch in that it first gains altitude vertically and then heads horizontally towards the target. It is not getting closer or further away, it rose to a height and then leveled off. ....


You're not paying attention. Read earlier posts.


You and I have always had perception problems. My vision is 20-19 and my lens implant is responsible for the 19. My eyes don't lie to me and never have for 79 years. I see an object rising from earth. The object is not manmade. We don't have anything like that nor what was seen on STS-48, 80, etc.

You have never admitted that what was and is seen and video'd from space is not human constructed. We will always agree to disagree.




top topics



 
8
<<   2 >>

log in

join