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 secret videos. The undeniable proof!

page: 4
0
<< 1  2  3    5  6 >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Feb, 12 2006 @ 01:48 PM
link   
If they are ET ships, I wonder if they are tripulated or not. they have shapes that might indicate that they are not. Like say, the spherical shape. How would one go about fitting alien, or human tripullants into one of these craft?




posted on Feb, 12 2006 @ 01:57 PM
link   

Originally posted by Cabanman

Originally posted by Briggs

Ok cabanman , take a deep breath .
apparently your easily upset by the discussion .

As for me being pissed off ?? . lol . not at all . why would i be ?.



Apparently your lack of reading and comprehension of the English language
has left you dazed and confused in some way .

If your so open Minded ? then why do you become so hostile when
someone else offers there Opion ?.

As for taking a beating ?? im not sure how you come to that conclusion .

Unless you totally lack reading and comprehension skills ?. You should go back to page 1 and re-read everything .

Again in my last post before this - I clearly stated -
I am not Debunking anything , only giving a alternative opion.

And for some reason , that makes you Upset.

did you miss your mourning meds or something ?.


Upset? I sould have to believe your thinking to be upset. since I don't believe yor thoughts, and frankly don't care about them either, this means that I can't be upset.

It's just funny how you go off on people for stating their opinions. You dirrected your anger at me cause I wrote my thoughts on debunkers. I did not mention you, But yet you call me crazy or that I have no reading skills.
Like I said before, don't bring it on me, cause I don't care! You are the upset one who wants to get your point across. don't turn your dissapointment on me.


See ya'





Ok, since you lack reading skills , i guess we should end this here
and get back to the Topic at hand .



posted on Feb, 12 2006 @ 01:58 PM
link   
Briggs ,

You can attempt to order video from NASA , but judging by the way they censor live video I would doubt you will get any of the anomalies on Video from NASA.

www.sti.nasa.gov...

[edit on 12-2-2006 by lost_shaman]



posted on Feb, 12 2006 @ 02:03 PM
link   

Originally posted by Briggs

Ok, since you lack reading skills , i guess we should end this here
and get back to the Topic at hand .



Yeah, let's do that Mr. Inteligencia!



posted on Feb, 12 2006 @ 03:50 PM
link   

Originally posted by lost_shaman
Briggs ,

You can attempt to order video from NASA , but judging by the way they censor live video I would doubt you will get any of the anomalies on Video from NASA.

www.sti.nasa.gov...

[edit on 12-2-2006 by lost_shaman]


thx Shaman , it may not be a bad idea to order a few just to see if by chance they missed something .
Or it may be a waste of time , if they sensor the vids .

I know Richard C hoglen - i hope thats how you spell his last name - is big
into Nasa Vids and Pics , maybe he knows of some quailty to look at or download .



posted on Feb, 12 2006 @ 03:54 PM
link   
Let us know if you find anything and post the links.

I think it would be interesting to order maybe a "test" video of a section of flight with an anomaly and see if the NASA copy is censored or not.



posted on Feb, 12 2006 @ 11:40 PM
link   
Ok, We are Debating a bunch of Moving white specs. On a lousy Video capture.

1) The white specs are unknown. (other wise thier stories would match up.)
2) The Video's are in such lousy condition. That You can't See any details. Except some Vague orb's In Space.

If you are going to present proof, Then at least present something that looks like proof.

Like This.

www.cun-italia.net/filmati/mexico-03-05-2004.mpg

Along with this story.

news.bbc.co.uk...



posted on Feb, 13 2006 @ 12:28 AM
link   
I think its funny that all people ever say that they want is pictures and videos.

And yet when there are hundreds of Videos and pictures from NASA no less. These are too poor quality , or they don't show E.T.s! (I'm always amazed by the way people instinctively know what E.T.s and E.T. Craft should look like.)

For the record I haven't talked about E.T.s , I've talked about the "anomalies" seen in the videos.

Why are so many of the videos of these anomalous objects so poor?

I posted several links back a while ago showing NASA deliberately adding "Artificial Snow" when objects are in picture. So if NASA is trying to hide these things and keep it a secret that they hide things from you ,then maybe these things are not normal space debris.





Ok, We are Debating a bunch of Moving white specs. On a lousy Video capture.


You know its interesting that video taken from space is just a bit different than normal video we are used to watching on T.V. , in that in the vastness of space almost all objects tend to look like "moving specs".

[edit on 13-2-2006 by lost_shaman]



posted on Feb, 13 2006 @ 01:10 AM
link   
"This is why it is strange to see things that are changing speed and direction for no apparent reason." == lost shaman

You do ask good questions. Few folks worry about strange circumstances so they will be the ones to always see
"strange" things.

In my first post I quantified the amount of space junk present. In the second post I alluded to
the mechanics of where it is and how long it is there. In this post I will simply remind the space cadets that things
are "strange" out there. Most things that are not inertially stabilized will end up in some kind of tumbling motion
unless it is very symetrical. And the space junk is NOT randomly distributed. It is clustered along the great circle
arcs equivalent to the orbital inclination derived from the Latitude of the launch point.

Picture a pool table in three dimensions which is moving at a high velocity (rotation of the earth or in orbit, whichever is easier).
What we SEE in the NASA films are the billiards balls in our vicinity. Their relative motion, or Delta Vee for the space cadets, is
miniscule compared to their orbital velocity. But the CAMERA will register the same as our eyes, which is the
relative motion only. Lets say the eight ball side swipes a more reflective (visible) ball and we then see an immediate
pool table type of impact and result, but ONLY for one as the other is not visible. Whoaa. Wow. ET is at the controls again.

Were these impacts monumental ? No. We saw a great change in relative velocity from a few feet per second impact. But
neither object changed its orbital velocity in a very significant way at all. Its a pool table up there in the sea lanes. Anything
you can see at all clearly to be moving IS IN THE SAME ORBIT as you are and only relative motion is visible. You would
not see different orbits/inclinations hardly at all because the Delta Vee would be orders of magnitude greater. Maybe there
in one frame and just gone the next.



posted on Feb, 13 2006 @ 04:31 AM
link   
You have got to be kidding me, some of you people are trying to deny this video? Thats hilarious. Go watch the full thing (not just the second part posted on the first page), afew times. Then watch David Seredas analysis of the video. To anyone that is trying to deny that these are indeed craft of some kind, please watch it again carefully. I don't particuarily care to sway anyones opinion but I find it downright laughable that someone would dismiss this video as "white speks." Yes they are "white speks" coming and going from earth at varying speeds and turning at sudden right angles....I'm going to stop here with out getting into the physics of that statement. I dont even know why I'm bothering to post this. To each their own, but to those of you denying this video you are simply wrong. Despite the feable attempts of the various statements given, this video is undeniable evidence. Those are not "ice crystals" or "space junk" those are intelligently piloted craft. Go watch the full video and try to grasp the fact that these "tiny white spots" or whatever phrase you wish to vomit fourth in a disregarding manner, are huge. When they pass BEHIND the space tether that is extremely significant because the space tether was miles long. that means these things are huge. Go to 20:00 into this uploaded video and try to tell me that there is absolutely nothing to that other than space junk. I'm actually angry at the ignornace of some of the posts. GOOD DAY.





[edit on 13-2-2006 by Jay Weishaupt]



posted on Feb, 13 2006 @ 08:36 AM
link   
These are my observations and i, just a plain simple nobody, will NOT do the trick debunkers love to do - make a claim then chicken out or insult others to go GOOGLE or read up books to back up their claims. I will use simple laymen terms for this observation.

1. Graininess:- even though the video is grainy, the UFOs can still be seen in contrast with the black background - white shapes moving anomolously.

2.Size of UFOs:- pretty difficult to determined as mentioned, it is of a perspective view- it may be specks of dust in front of the camera or more likely, a distance away and it certainly be massive inorder to be observed.

3.Space junk theory:- what are space junk?a screw or a space station? What are the biggest space junk since mankind started flying into space? Can such junks be seen from a distance such as those in the video?

4.Water droplets on lens or shuttle portholes theory:- water droplets clings to screen in vacuum space???

5.Ice particles theory:- how big are ice particles? molecular size or space station size? Meteor size? Meteor showers? If meteors, why no records of it being viewed from Earth in corelation to the position of the shuttle?

6.Objects or space junk are supposed to be at inertia speed, at a maintained altitude following an orbital path, therefore will not vary in speeds, but those supposedly 'space junks' have the ability to vary, to stop and change speeds.

'Space junk' do not move in fleets in formation, unless those in the videos are actually a comercial for M&M chocolate sweets place directly outside the shuttle's porthole!

7.Satallites while have the ability to vary and change speeds through intelligent control like UFOs, the tether footage shows too many supposedly 'man made satallites' gathering just beneath the tether over Africa!

8. The 'pool table' analogy while proved reasonable, unfortunately it explains only the centrifugal force of an object/objects between it and Earth's gravity in orbit. Notice some of them were 'flying' away from Earth?

That would take escape velocity to happen, and inertia 'space junks' DO NOT have the thrusts to make that happen, more so when it is obviously still within Earth's atmosphere and not sufficiently out of Earth's gravitional pull yet.

Furthermore, if one subscribe to the theory that based on the shape of the objects, its orbit may alter - not necessarily true as such 'junks' orbital path is based on its mass more than its shape. There is NO wind/air in space for trapped pressure to change direction. The only time it ever changes is when its speeds achieves high velocity as it plumets to Earth's surface, leaving vacuum of space and burning up upon re-entry.

The space above Earth is closely monitored and ANY object that can be detected, espacially manmade ones, will be made known to shuttlecrew as well as project directors, but from the video, the ground crew have no clues on what they were even watching!

I do not claim to be an expert on celestial mechanics or obital dynamics, but i do know enough of what i am seeing. I dont mind being ridiculed if indeed i am wrong or even if i am right, i seek only the TRUTH, not BS.

They are UFOs. Undeniable. Unidentified Flying Objects.

- Are they intelligent controlled? - my rationalised observations are leaning to YES though to be fair, some may be in denial and are free to be in denial and free to ridicule others for thinking unlike them.

-If so, then who are controlling them? - I dont know. All i know is it aint the space powers that are Russia and US.

Edit:- while some may dispute SOME of the video footages, But do remember, it takes ONLY JUST ONE unexplained footage for the credibility of UFO hypothesis.


[edit on 13-2-2006 by SeekerofTruth101]



posted on Feb, 13 2006 @ 09:00 AM
link   

Originally posted by msnevil
If you are going to present proof, Then at least present something that looks like proof.

Like This.

www.cun-italia.net/filmati/mexico-03-05-2004.mpg

Along with this story.

news.bbc.co.uk...


Sorry to dissapoint you , but that particular video has been debunked (if i recall correctly)

More about it here www.abovetopsecret.com...
Sorry if this takes the thread OT.



posted on Feb, 13 2006 @ 09:31 AM
link   

Originally posted by SeekerofTruth101
These are my observations and i, just a plain simple nobody, will NOT do the trick debunkers love to do - make a claim then chicken out or insult others to go GOOGLE or read up books to back up their claims. I will use simple laymen terms for this observation.

1. Graininess:- even though the video is grainy, the UFOs can still be seen in contrast with the black background - white shapes moving anomolously.

2.Size of UFOs:- pretty difficult to determined as mentioned, it is of a perspective view- it may be specks of dust in front of the camera or more likely, a distance away and it certainly be massive inorder to be observed.

3.Space junk theory:- what are space junk?a screw or a space station? What are the biggest space junk since mankind started flying into space? Can such junks be seen from a distance such as those in the video?

4.Water droplets on lens or shuttle portholes theory:- water droplets clings to screen in vacuum space???

5.Ice particles theory:- how big are ice particles? molecular size or space station size? Meteor size? Meteor showers? If meteors, why no records of it being viewed from Earth in corelation to the position of the shuttle?

6.Objects or space junk are supposed to be at inertia speed, at a maintained altitude following an orbital path, therefore will not vary in speeds, but those supposedly 'space junks' have the ability to vary, to stop and change speeds.

'Space junk' do not move in fleets in formation, unless those in the videos are actually a comercial for M&M chocolate sweets place directly outside the shuttle's porthole!

7.Satallites while have the ability to vary and change speeds through intelligent control like UFOs, the tether footage shows too many supposedly 'man made satallites' gathering just beneath the tether over Africa!

8. The 'pool table' analogy while proved reasonable, unfortunately it explains only the centrifugal force of an object/objects between it and Earth's gravity in orbit. Notice some of them were 'flying' away from Earth?

That would take escape velocity to happen, and inertia 'space junks' DO NOT have the thrusts to make that happen, more so when it is obviously still within Earth's atmosphere and not sufficiently out of Earth's gravitional pull yet.

Furthermore, if one subscribe to the theory that based on the shape of the objects, its orbit may alter - not necessarily true as such 'junks' orbital path is based on its mass more than its shape. There is NO wind/air in space for trapped pressure to change direction. The only time it ever changes is when its speeds achieves high velocity as it plumets to Earth's surface, leaving vacuum of space and burning up upon re-entry.

The space above Earth is closely monitored and ANY object that can be detected, espacially manmade ones, will be made known to shuttlecrew as well as project directors, but from the video, the ground crew have no clues on what they were even watching!

I do not claim to be an expert on celestial mechanics or obital dynamics, but i do know enough of what i am seeing. I dont mind being ridiculed if indeed i am wrong or even if i am right, i seek only the TRUTH, not BS.

They are UFOs. Undeniable. Unidentified Flying Objects.

- Are they intelligent controlled? - my rationalised observations are leaning to YES though to be fair, some may be in denial and are free to be in denial and free to ridicule others for thinking unlike them.

-If so, then who are controlling them? - I dont know. All i know is it aint the space powers that are Russia and US.

Edit:- while some may dispute SOME of the video footages, But do remember, it takes ONLY JUST ONE unexplained footage for the credibility of UFO hypothesis.


[edit on 13-2-2006 by SeekerofTruth101]



After reading your Lengthy post - I couldnt help but laugh . "wink, wink "

I wont bother to get into another post it war , Simply for the fact that we will never see Eye to eye on this Vid Subject .

But in itself is fine - people agreeing to Disagree , right .

I should add that I do agree with some of your thoughts .. but considering this Topic is a dead horse , i wont post here unless I see or Find some better Vids Or Pics .



posted on Feb, 13 2006 @ 12:20 PM
link   
I know... , don't point out the anomalies to the Sheeple! They might begin to ask questions.

First lets venture back over to the real world. For one thing there are only about 8,000 objects tracked in LEO (Low Earth Orbit). Sizes range from large Satellites to junk as small as 20cm.

hitf.jsc.nasa.gov...

The rest are micrometeoroids , and man made debris like paint chips that are very small and travelling around 17,000 m/p/h each.

hitf.jsc.nasa.gov...

The nature of the environment is one of Hypervelocity. This can be a major problem in Space. As even small objects like paint chips can cause the catastrophic failure of space vehicles.

hitf.jsc.nasa.gov...

As a matter of fact , NASA uses the example of two particles impacting each other to stress the magnitude of the threat.



In low earth orbit (LEO) man-made debris travels around the Earth at speeds of roughly 7.5 kilometers per second. That's almost 17,000 miles per hour! If two objects in orbit were to collide head-on, the impact velocity would be double: 15 km/s or 34,000 mph.


Pictures of actual impacts.

hitf.jsc.nasa.gov...

hitf.jsc.nasa.gov...

hitf.jsc.nasa.gov...

These pictures are important to see , because they show that while impacts happen they are from very small and violent collisions.

Also , it can be said that these impacts seen on Mir were accumulated over long periods of time, and the frequency of impacts seen gives you an idea of how thinly spread throughout the vastness of space these small bodies actually are.

Volume of Space.

The volume of Space in LEO (Low Earth Orbit) , around 61 miles above the surface of Earth out to around 500 miles above the Earth's surface , consists of around 247,225,175,404 Billion Cubic Kilometers of open Space. Roughly.

Conclusion.

While the hypothetical idea that these objects are micrometeoroids seen in NASA videos and they are bumping each other is hypothetically possible , it is highly unlikely that these objects ever hit one another and when they do it is likely never caught on video. And therefore cannot explain what is seen in these NASA Videos. Considering the Number of videos apparently showing objects changing speed and direction , and the vastness of the volume of space involved , micrometeoroids cannot explain the objects in the NASA videos.






[edit on 13-2-2006 by lost_shaman]



posted on Feb, 13 2006 @ 12:41 PM
link   
if these are near earth ojbects how come they slow down and change direction i thought without gravity in space an abject contines to go at the same speed untill somthing else collides with it



posted on Feb, 13 2006 @ 01:27 PM
link   
here is a great Vid on this topic , that i found in another thread.

video.google.com...

its 31 min long , so sit back and enjoy .




[edit on 13-2-2006 by Briggs]



posted on Feb, 13 2006 @ 02:08 PM
link   
klain,

Thats right , objects in motion tend to stay in motion unless acted upon by an outside force.


Briggs,

That's very on topic. That Video is the one that prompted Cabanman to start this thread. I had assumed you had seen it as you've been vocally skeptical on this thread already.

As I've stated before, people have either seen the anomalies Live on NASA Select T.V., or in Martin Stubbs archive or from Jeff Challenders archive or they are privy to knowledge that isn't public. Otherwise they do not know what they are talking about.

[edit on 13-2-2006 by lost_shaman]



posted on Feb, 14 2006 @ 01:50 AM
link   
Ugh. I actually watched that piece. Hoax bait it is. I wasnt going to since I had already characterized
what I would expect to see from the discussion of the environment. Its far worse than I expected.
Most of the video is selected clips played over and over. You can tell by the thunderstorm heads
on Earth in the background. I will give them partial credit for that but not a passing grade since they
completely ignored a true phenomena in the clips. (It almost appears they captured a Sprite in one frame)

Sprites and Elves
www.rps.psu.edu...

And blue jets and super bolts
sky-fire.tv...

The music is a dead "give away". You are being sold a bill of goods. Notice the "easter egg" between
the astronaut clips and the SETI guy ? Yeah, the one where the earth horizon goes black and an indistinct
GREEN something starts dancing over the nearly black screen. Its B/W video people ! Any color there
is your BOGUS flashing "Blue Light" special. Gads, but NASA has incredible high resolution video and these
guys have to wade thru the junk to find the out of focus, "it could be anything" shots that they can try matching to the
music. I normally would not do this but that gross attempt to distort reality is upsetting. It plays on your fears,
to make an AlGore ithm.

Basic training in taking the Unknown OUT of the term UFO

PAYLOAD - we shall define this to be anything in Earth orbit that is stabilized ( usually Earth Center or inertially stabilized) And
yes we will include any ET craft around in this category cause there are navigational problems with just tumbling around.

TANK - we shall define this to be non-stabilized cylinders, usually the insertion stage of the launch vehicle and generically the
largest space junk around. (Except in cases like the de-orbit of Mir which became space junk after being abandoned.)

FRAG - any non-cylinder shape that is not a PAYLOAD. (Non-stabilized)

Now we borrow some added definitions from
www.amsmeteors.org...

A. meteor:
in particular, the light phenomenon which results from the entry into the Earth's atmosphere of a solid particle from space;
more generally, as a noun or an adjective, any physical object or phenomenon associated with such an event.
B. meteoroid:
a solid object moving in interplanetary space, of a size considerably smaller than an asteroid and considerably larger than
an atom or molecule.
C. meteorite:
any object defined under B which has reached the surface of the Earth without being completely vaporized. (not present in video,
here for clarification only)

Now folks, We have just identified EVERYTHING in that video without even beginning an analysis.

Ergo, there are no UFO's in the piece, none, NADA



posted on Feb, 14 2006 @ 03:37 AM
link   
Do let me know if anyone see the following images on the video. Thanks.
No linking, no crap, just actual pics, not drawings.

This is a shuttle's image of an electrical 'sprite'


This is a 'redsprite'



This is a 'bluejet'



This is a comparison in size between sizes - small, big.



And this is how the 'intellectually blind' 'sees'. No offense intended.



lol!..the things those in denial will do....



posted on Feb, 14 2006 @ 03:39 AM
link   
Maybe I have had one two many Coronas tonight, but I do not see your point. The images you have provided do not strike a nerve at all...

[edit on 14-2-2006 by Diplomat]

[edit on 14-2-2006 by Diplomat]



new topics

top topics



 
0
<< 1  2  3    5  6 >>

log in

join