This is an interesting thread for multiple reasons.
For those of you that are put off by the bashing from some supposedly open-minded proponents of the ET hypothesis in this thread, don't ignore all of
the evidence because of the stink. There really is some interesting phenomena. Yuu just have to look past the initial stuff the community seems to
The STS video footage is a tough subject for rational people because a lot of the evidence is not as convincing as the 'true believers' insist that
it is. But you are going to miss out on the good stuff if you just see some incidental scene that they throw in front of you, realize it is not much,
and then walk away. Don't do it. Don't walk away. In my opinion, disinformation wins if you don't see the more interesting footage for yourself.
There are problems with some of the STS evidence. For example, the initial Secret Nasa video showed an object changing vectors in which the narrators
claim a clear self propelling force. However, upon watching the video further, the full view version of the scene clearly shows the camera zooming in,
thus causing the apparent change in velocity. As a result, I have to be very careful when analyzing the remaining footage, because it is evident that
some of the proponents cannot distinguish motion from apparent motion, either created by thruster firings or focal length changes on the optics. They
may be right about the cause of these phenomena, but are unwilling to accept that certain video segments fall well short of demonstrating their
That doesn't mean all of the evidence is that weak. It is not. Some is quite interesting. But you have to look past the true believers who ooh and
awe at everything and look at the other phenomena, like the Over Africa Formation event, and the Tether Snapping Incident.
If you are a skeptic, do yourself a favor, if you have not already, hit the mute button on these videos (thus disabling the music and non-evidential
suggestive content of the narrators):
- watch some of these particles in the Tether Snapping Incident for a few minutes as they trace out a somewhat rounded rectangular path around the
tether. As far as I know, no relative shuttle motion would produce that pattern of motion. Something interesting is going on there.
- watch the Over Africa segment (again, muted to avoid the stupid music.) Notice that the objects appear to 'stop' moving away from the shuttle
when they hit a certain plane in coordination with the other objects. This is not anywhere near the horizon point for the camera as otherwise the
formation would continue moving away to converge to a single point. It does not. Instead, it travels on a plane away from the shuttle at a different
angle, in which the rate of 'moving away' is clearly less than when the objects entered the formation. Very strange, indeed.
- The animated at www.projectprove.com... mentioned earlier by another poster, is another good example of something
interesting going on. There is even some change in lighting on the shuttle that indicates that something is out there in the dark correlated with that
strange light. Unfortunately, the author then asserts that there is a 'shaft of light' on the arm. It may be, but looks much more like array-coupled
sensor image bleeding to me. The shaft of light, I believe, is just an artefact of lighting saturation. But thank goodness the lighting was that
bright, because you can see that the light point of interest on this video is associated in all of its movements with a change in luminosity on the
My interpretation is that a very dark, rather large object near the shuttle with a light on it is moving back and forth. What is it?
80% of the video 'proof' produced by the STS crowd on this site could very easily be space junk and is not convincing. But if you look at the three
incidents above very carefully, you will realize something very odd is going on. So look into this further on your own time, and I think you will be
suprised that it is not what it seems from first glance.
After you have seen the more convincing stuff, THEN go back and look at the footage where the camera controller (on ground?) quickly pans away from
interesting phenomena, or where the narrator gets flustered and stops talking about the scene, so as not to discuss these objects.
[edit on 14-8-2006 by Ectoterrestrial]