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.

 

Proof on NASA's own tape!

page: 5
1
<< 2  3  4    6 >>

log in

join
share:
Wig

posted on Mar, 8 2006 @ 06:16 PM
link   

Originally posted by Oscillator
Yow, TrappedSoul, glad to see you back!

"Still no one explains why the same dark circle in the centre of a lighter circle is present on the light refracting on the camera lens. Making it look remarkably like the out of focus spheres."

If you would look at the pics, that answers it all. I give you proof, and you want arguments? man you are weird. But an argument could be: considering higher frequency on the spectrum, special camera making it visible, middle could be too high a frequency to be seen by that camera. There you go?


Can you explain to me why none of the REAL airy disks do NOT have notches in the side?


Already told you your obscure format pictures are not viewable, if you want to attract a large audience then don't use crappy formats.

No I can't explain the notch, but give me one of those cameras to experiment with and I'll explain it to you. "did you say "six miles wide" lol I think 6mm wide.

You have to start from what is impossible, when you know what is impssible then you look for a possible explanation.

The idea that there is an "invasion force" of 100's of 6mile wide space craft in Earth orbit is impossible.....




posted on Mar, 8 2006 @ 06:42 PM
link   
[quoteAnd these two objects suddenly flying away when they say wakeshield over the radio



When I look closely at this video I notice that some 'objects' move fast away, others move slowly, and if you look very closely others move a tiny bit whilst the rest stay still.

I think that some kind of thruster is in use and 'objects' close seem to move away fast, 'objects' not so close seem to move a bit slower etc, whilst those so far away will not move at all, when the thruster is applied.

Like looking at a passing aircraft, even though its going 500+ mph it looks as if its going nowhere.

But this is only my theory of course.

[edit on 8-3-2006 by Mcphisto]



posted on Mar, 8 2006 @ 06:57 PM
link   

Originally posted by Oscillator
lost_shaman, stop linking www.projectprove.com... . This website is clearly part of a cover-up, as I and others already pointed out in this thread. They even dare put copyright on degraded public material, it's just too obvious.


Oscillator,

Feel free to ignore any links you do not like!

Yes NASA Select T.V. is public , but if you take that public video and make a .gif image , you can copyright that .gif

Also, Jeff Challender is not part of a NASA cover-up. He's just a guy who recorded hundreds of hours of NASA Select T.V. over the years. He makes copyrighted .gif images of his archive of NASA Select T.V. publicly available for free.

Martin Stubbs does not make his archive publicly available for free.

You can cross compare "anomalies" from both these sources.

I feel that Project PROVE accurately portrays what is seen on NASA Select T.V. , because I watched live this August STS - 114 and Project PROVE accurately portrayed the things I watched live.

And Project PROVE gives a hundred times more information about the individual "anomalies" than is available just from watching the "Smoking gun" video or "the Secret NASA Transmissions".



posted on Mar, 8 2006 @ 07:12 PM
link   

Originally posted by Mcphisto

And these two objects suddenly flying away when they say wakeshield over the radio



When I look closely at this video I notice that some 'objects' move fast away, others move slowly, and if you look very closely others move a tiny bit whilst the rest stay still.

I think that some kind of thruster is in use and 'objects' close seem to move away fast, 'objects' not so close seem to move a bit slower etc, whilst those so far away will not move at all, when the thruster is applied.

Like looking at a passing aircraft, even though its going 500+ mph it looks as if its going nowhere.

But this is only my theory of course.
[edit on 8-3-2006 by Mcphisto]

I agree with you on that one

But that's the only thing I can explain as a natural phenomena.

[edit on 2006/3/8 by TrappedSoul]



posted on Mar, 8 2006 @ 11:04 PM
link   
Well, I have to admit I have not read the whole thread, but one thing caught me which I think was the tether with the object going alledgedly behind it.

This I'm fairly certain is a small amount of possibly ice, or some other dust, out of focus due to close proximity to the lens. Depending on the Cam used, the shape is caused by the aperture/shutter setting. The "hole" is the center is pretty universal, caused by lens refraction.




You can note the object does appear to be in front of the "tether", due to it's effect on the tether edge, when intersecting with it. It's diffusing the edge, because it's in front of it, closer to the cam, and obscuring the tether. However, it's very small, and all we get is it's blurred image on top of the focused image of the tether.

If you take your finger along the right side of the "disc", you'll see where it's going across the tether. Not too hard to make out. You'll also notice a slight color difference in the tether at the intersection. Also note the "disc" actually obscuring a bit of the tether in the top edge.

Think it's pretty safe to say it's very small, and very close.


Wig

posted on Mar, 9 2006 @ 06:00 AM
link   

Originally posted by OscillatorAbout the argument that these things are just pieces of space junk (coincidentally all of them looking the same, pulsating, a few miles wide and not showing up on normal sub UV-cams) that starts moving (and changing direction) because of thrusters getting satellites positioned or something I say: that does NOT make objects shoot from earth and leaving orbit. I'll back this up again:

I don't remember if there where any more arguments against these being UFO's, but please post if you still have any. I want to be proven wrong, it's just that the arguments so far, are really ridiculous.


You're making a lot of unfounded assumptions there. There is no way to prove they are "a few miles wide" They are IMO a few millimeters wide in close proximity with the shuttle. When you can proove otherwise I'll start to listen. The one object in direct line with the thruster went off quickly, the other objects in screen at least one of those moves off less quickly (really slowly to be precise) but in the same general direction. IMO this is space ice/dust moving away from the shuttle.

P.S. Look at jritzmann's post above on how to post an image to the thread. use img /img commands

[edit on 9/3/2006 by Wig]



posted on Mar, 9 2006 @ 07:05 AM
link   

Originally posted by Wig
They are IMO a few millimeters wide in close proximity with the shuttle. When you can proove otherwise I'll start to listen. The one object in direct line with the thruster went off quickly, the other objects in screen at least one of those moves off less quickly (really slowly to be precise) but in the same general direction. IMO this is space ice/dust moving away from the shuttle.


Wig,

I think there is no doubt in anyones mind that many things seen are prosaic objects , like stray pieces of shuttle , bolts , nuts , and even sometimes Ice particles.

However, unless a thruster is being fired , and this can be determined , or if the object otherwise acts anomalously which is the case on many occasions we can in some cases rule out these particles. For instance Ice only flakes off the shuttle for a certain period of time after launch and then it sublimates into space.

Need a professional to tell you that ? Look at my conversation with a self proclaimed Shuttle Manager on the Space.com forum.

More NASA Video Space.com ( Self proclaimed NASA Employee argues a false statement about Ice on the Shuttle Orbiter , is shown to be misleading the public perception, confesses to being " mistaken" about his statements about ice on the Shuttle Orbiter.)




[edit on 9-3-2006 by lost_shaman]



posted on Mar, 9 2006 @ 07:34 AM
link   
Hello


Some videos clearly DO NOT show ice or dust. Because of several aspects.

Look at the STS-80 Circle Formation. Not only each light literally switches on only when it reaches its position, but the same thing occurs for the bigger central light, which starts shining intensely when it arrives right in the middle of the formation (still perfect btw). How can this be possible ? Anyone with a sense of logic will understand this is not a natural event here.




On the same video footage, look at the object on the top right. It appears from nowhere full speed, then slows down as it reaches the earth atmosphere (impossible for debris, dust, etc). And it even comes back on the right at the end.




Here we have two strong events which, scientifically, cannot be the result of ice particles or debris of any kind. I have just posted pics, but you can WATCH the full video on the STS-80 link in my signature, and simply see for yourself.



posted on Mar, 9 2006 @ 02:59 PM
link   
I'm sorry I haven't answered everything yet, but I'm very gratefull for all the GOOD arguments! I am studying the video very carefully again, and applying various filters. I have to say that untill now, I'm more amazed than ever. I will be back to post some more pictures (in jpg this time).

lost_shaman,

Alright, I gave that website another shot, but what they write here is just disinformation: www.projectprove.com...
I'm sorry but I cannot put it any other way, they conveniently leave of the fact that it's filmed with a CCD camera, and then claim that because the object then had to be "MILES" in diameter, so they had to be visible in "broad daylight" from the ground.

Also considering it's not a normal camera, I don't have a clue about aperture arm or how this would work with this CCD cam. I don't know, but would something like that cause the notch to appear in the same position in each disk? . But I will try to find shots of real airy disks in the _same_ footage (sts-75) this time.

I will post one thing though, before the camera zooms in on the Tether, there is one object which seems to travel in front of the tether, followed by some going behind it.














It's a luma equalizer filter btw.



posted on Mar, 9 2006 @ 03:19 PM
link   
Musclor,
Yes, there is just to much weird stuff these "ice particles" things are doing, which prooves that not all of them can be that!
But I think somebody out there don't want people to think otherwise.



posted on Mar, 9 2006 @ 03:32 PM
link   
I don't want to keep these from you:









posted on Mar, 9 2006 @ 05:23 PM
link   

Originally posted by Oscillator

lost_shaman,

Alright, I gave that website another shot, but what they write here is just disinformation: www.projectprove.com...
I'm sorry but I cannot put it any other way, they conveniently leave of the fact that it's filmed with a CCD camera, and then claim that because the object then had to be "MILES" in diameter, so they had to be visible in "broad daylight" from the ground.

Also considering it's not a normal camera, I don't have a clue about aperture arm or how this would work with this CCD cam. I don't know, but would something like that cause the notch to appear in the same position in each disk? . But I will try to find shots of real airy disks in the _same_ footage (sts-75) this time.

I will post one thing though, before the camera zooms in on the Tether, there is one object which seems to travel in front of the tether, followed by some going behind it.



Actually I'm not sure that that one page is accurate. I happen to be looking into it.

Considering that Project PROVE documents hundreds of anomalies , its not that hard to get a couple of them wrong!

I have always felt that STS -48 and STS - 75 " tether incident" were deliberately choosen to be debunked in the public domain. And 99% of the time people talk about possible UFOs in NASA video it ussually the STS - 75 or STS - 48 footage.

About CCD Cameras they also use optics and that is what causes the "Airy Disk". The Notches in the Airy Disks are caused by a piece of metal that holds the moving lens in the Camera.



posted on Mar, 9 2006 @ 09:03 PM
link   

Originally posted by Oscillator
lost_shaman, stop linking www.projectprove.com... . This website is clearly part of a cover-up, as I and others already pointed out in this thread. They even dare put copyright on degraded public material, it's just too obvious.


Originally posted by rick_y_2
Are you saying that all the objects in these movies that we see moving are Alien craft?????

Are you saying theres that much UFO traffic going on in space???

We got guests, and I'm in the process of starting getting used to the idea. Your free to do the same.



I'm a pure believer in alien life because its ignorant to think we're the only peoples in this enormous universe. But to think that theres so much traffic going on right outside our atmosphere is pretty wild.

Ofcause it is. The real fact is that mankind has always had those who could see the truth, and those who denied it till their death. I think the biggest mistake we do as humans is trying to convince those who will not and cannot grasp these things. We all have a right to choose what we think and what we believe, and we should learn to respect them and just let them be. Don't waste the time you could be exploring this fantastic reality by trying to make those who will not look to see, what you yourself already see.



Why when they speak on the videos they don't seem concerned with the objects winging across the lens?


I don't know if they are alien, but since nobody can (really!) tell just what they are, it makes them UFO's.

I have the full video called "Smoking Gun", and when you listen carefully to the STS-75 scene you can actually hear people wowing in the background, when a bright pulsing UFO slowly passes.

Also highly recommended is the "Evidence: The Case for NASA UFO's" video by David Sereda, where he tries to give a full analysis of the best scenes in all the footage he got from Martin Stubbs. He does a good job destroying the airy disk excuse.

I would say that after watching David Seredas film the case for the NASA ufo's, there really is no more point in trying to seek out others confirmation. The evidence is as clear as it will ever get, if we still refuse to realise this reality after looking through his excellent film, not even a trip on a beamship would convince us.

We have guests, look up, they are there right now.


Sincerely

Cade

[edit on 9-3-2006 by Cade]


Wig

posted on Mar, 9 2006 @ 09:10 PM
link   

Originally posted by lost_shaman
However, unless a thruster is being fired , and this can be determined
Yeah and there is a website out there which gives the timeline of the thrusters being fired and he married it up to coincide with the time this video was taken. But I don't need timelines I just believe it's a thruster anyway, it is not conclusive of any other explanation.


For instance Ice only flakes off the shuttle for a certain period of time after launch and then it sublimates into space.
I heard they flush the toilet out to space and it becomes ice particles which float alongside the shuttle.


Wig

posted on Mar, 9 2006 @ 09:18 PM
link   

Originally posted by MusclorLook at the STS-80 Circle Formation. Not only each light literally switches on only when it reaches its position, but the same thing occurs for the bigger central light, which starts shining intensely when it arrives right in the middle of the formation (still perfect btw). How can this be possible ? Anyone with a sense of logic will understand this is not a natural event here.


Regarding your first phenomenon the "circle of lights" They are particles floating away from the shuttle they enter from (relative) darkness into light hence why they all start to light up at a certain distance. IMO anyone with a sense of logic will understand my explanation to be possible and probable. I gave some timings in an earlier post how the two which come from close to the camera both take about 31 seconds to travel into the area of light.

Your next phenomenon I mentioned earlier in the thread, and agree it is interesting needing further study. But it is still not good enough evidence for me.


Wig

posted on Mar, 9 2006 @ 09:26 PM
link   
Oscillator

Nice pics
but aren't they just prooving the grey particle is infront of the tether? That's what it looks like to me. I know I saw your earlier picture with a disc looking like it was behind the tether, but I'm sorry to say I'm going to stubbornly believe that these are "airy discs" as you have called them, - I have never heard that term before but I'll go with it for now until I look it up.

And as some have mentioned the notch(es) would be explained by a characteristic of the lens what you called a lens arm I think. Why they (the notches) are not showing on the obvious light refracting on the lens.. I don't know, but as I said given one of these cams to experiment with I'm sure we could find out the reason.

Btw my mind is also open to the possibility that this tether line we see could be a scratch on the lens (or whatever) because of the way it moved up and down when he was adjusting the camera. And the real tether is not visible to us on the film.


[edit on 9/3/2006 by Wig]



posted on Mar, 9 2006 @ 10:35 PM
link   

Originally posted by Wig
Btw my mind is also open to the possibility that this tether line we see could be a scratch on the lens (or whatever) because of the way it moved up and down when he was adjusting the camera. And the real tether is not visible to us on the film.

You're not serious now?



posted on Mar, 9 2006 @ 11:25 PM
link   

Originally posted by Wig


Yeah and there is a website out there which gives the timeline of the thrusters being fired and he married it up to coincide with the time this video was taken. But I don't need timelines I just believe it's a thruster anyway, it is not conclusive of any other explanation.



I can not discourage you from believing that all there is to see is particles in thruster jets.

That is the obvious answer to all "anomalous" video from space. If you have no interests in reviewing video from space I have no problem with that.

Just consider the fact that the water from supply and waste dumps is ejected via a heated nozzle and is ejected out into space and not back onto the Shuttle Orbiter.




[edit on 9-3-2006 by lost_shaman]



posted on Mar, 10 2006 @ 05:28 AM
link   

Originally posted by Wig
Regarding your first phenomenon the "circle of lights" They are particles floating away from the shuttle they enter from (relative) darkness into light hence why they all start to light up at a certain distance. IMO anyone with a sense of logic will understand my explanation to be possible and probable. I gave some timings in an earlier post how the two which come from close to the camera both take about 31 seconds to travel into the area of light.


Hello Wig


So, in that sense, you are assuming that this formation of lights, INCLUDING the biggest one right in the center is PURELY A COINCIDENCE, aren't you ?



posted on Mar, 10 2006 @ 08:01 AM
link   
Project prove is dodgy...


But theres definitely some unexplainable objects. The 'airy disks' are probably nothing, but the objects that change direction. Can anyone explain these... other than magnetic fields or dark matter acting on some unknown natural entity. It is surely alien aircraft.




top topics



 
1
<< 2  3  4    6 >>

log in

join