Another ufo researcher bites the dust, page 17

originally posted by: JimOberg
Richard makes some interesting claims in this new video.

www.youtube.com...

Once again, I agree with NASA and disagree with Richard Dolan.

The video describes the UFO as a "translucent blue square". "Translucent" should be a clue, since glass transmit 96% of light and reflects 4% of it (unless viewing through the glass at an extreme angle).

So, whenever you see a "translucent" object in a "UFO" photo, the first possibility that should occur is that you're seeing something where only 4% of the light from glass is reflected and that's why it looks translucent, and not like a solid object. Camera lenses can have internal reflections too (lens flares).

At time 4:36, Richard Dolan says "It's a definite object out there". But, the narrator just described it as "translucent", and it does indeed look translucent, like a reflection, so it does NOT look like a definite object, it looks like the 4% of reflected light you get with glass, in other words, a reflection rather than an object. In this article about the "UFO" there is a quote from NASA about reflections:

Massive horseshoe-shaped UFO buzzes the Space Station – then NASA feed cuts out

NASA told Mail Online, ‘Reflections from station windows, the spacecraft structure itself or lights from Earth commonly appear as artefacts in photos and videos from the orbiting laboratory.’

That article title talks about the video cutting out after recording the UFO for a short time, and Dolan mentions that too:
Dolan continues:
"After a short time of recording it, the video just goes blue and you could think once again this is a case of NASA cutting short a transmission of something that shouldn't be there".

If NASA really didn't want people to see the "UFOs", it seems to me like they could encrypt the transmission and re-broadcast it with a delay and prevent anybody from seeing it in the first place, like the solution to the "nipplegate" fiasco to use delays to make sure nobody could ever see anything as disconcerting as a human nipple on live TV ever again. Oops strike that , only if it's a female nipple, I guess male nipples are ok for some reason.