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.

 

What has NASA said about this video?

page: 2
0
<< 1    3  4 >>

log in

join
share:

posted on May, 16 2006 @ 05:06 AM
link   
Found this article.

'Findings were misplaced'

"As a rule, we don't track UFOs. What we could do, and what we apparently did as experts in spacecraft in the 1960s, was to take a look at whatever it was and give our expert opinion," Steitz said. "We did that, we boxed (the case) up and that was the end of it. Unfortunately, the documents supporting those findings were misplaced."

Kean and Helfrich don't believe that explanation.

Kean said Nicholas L Johnson, Nasa's chief scientist for orbital debris, determined the object couldn't be a Russian satellite or any other manmade object, after studying the orbital paths of known satellites and other records from 1965.

Johnson didn't immediately return calls for comment on Thursday to his phone number listed on Nasa's website.

Steitz referred questions on Kean's claims to Nasa's Johnson Space Centre in Houston, which didn't immediately comment.

Witnesses claim military personnel cordoned off the site, removed the object and threatened residents who questioned the incident.

The military later called the object a meteor."

And link to article.

www.news24.com... ml

Findings misplaced??
Meteorite?




posted on May, 16 2006 @ 05:39 AM
link   
This is a must see for everyone, some really good footage here, only deepens the question, NASA are treating us for fools.



posted on May, 16 2006 @ 05:57 AM
link   
I agree totally, STS-48, STS-75 and STS-80 are indeed "smoking guns".

Everyone should watch this video too.



posted on May, 16 2006 @ 07:59 AM
link   
He does an excellent job in debunking the ice crystal etc theories.
Some amazing footage, i wonder what species actually drives those crafts, you know the dougnut shape with a little triangle cut out from one bit, as they all seem that shape.

And the part where he says that when they got the teather back they found it hads its electronic parts altered in someway, that could only be done by physically being there or a machine.

Also in the barnie and betty case, how they had radiation burns on their bodies and had to be hospitalized, thats some evidence for yer.

The whole vid is 3 hours long, im strongly suggest any person into UFO's watch this.



posted on May, 16 2006 @ 10:29 AM
link   
Wow, where do I start, he first starts talking about theories about travelling faster than the speed of light, going against eistiens theory that the more mass you have then the more energy you will need, very interesting, whether this would work is debatable but experiments have made protons travel faster than light, he uses other peoples theories as well to compare.

Now, the tether incident, is looked at very well, he debunks all of NASA’s responses, and to be honest lame ones at that.

He thinks these crafts are from the star constellation sirus, worshiped by civilisation s in the past, which said they came down and were part fish/aquatic part human.
They helped develop human evolution with technology and said they would return the sign? A star in the sky??
Anyway he connects this with the sts footage being they were over North Africa at the time, where this myth/fact originated.

It gets weirder, the next launch, sts-96 in 1999, was exactly 33.33 degrees away, to , im not sure of the direction, its at the very end of part 2, 33.33 degrees of sirus??

Is this the rulers of earth “illuminati” sending some sort of message back, we know whats this is all about, we got ur sign………etc

Could all be a load of BS, but the evidence on the footage is amazing, backed up with some of his theories seem VERY plausible.



posted on May, 17 2006 @ 02:33 AM
link   
Has no one watched this documentary?
Well worth a look.



posted on May, 17 2006 @ 03:16 AM
link   

Originally posted by ADVISOR
Alright, I watched it a few times and have concluded the object is under pulsed propulsion. That much is obvious, look how it moves and it's direction and speed.


Definitely, if you have seen the video i posted up several posts down, he goes into detail, how he believes they all use some sort of pulsed propulsion.

Going beyond the speed of light, since the nearest star constellation is something lie 4.5 light years away, would aliens really wait 4.5 years to travel to earth, probably not.

So the theory of going faster than light is possible in my mind.



posted on May, 17 2006 @ 04:00 AM
link   
You should really check into that other guy's sprite opinion, it's probably a lot more likely, they are a known atmospheric phenomenon.



posted on May, 17 2006 @ 04:09 AM
link   

Originally posted by Periphery
You should really check into that other guy's sprite opinion, it's probably a lot more likely, they are a known atmospheric phenomenon.


Sprite opinion?

Obviously natural phenomenon happens all the time, what we are looking at is obviously not natural, if you watch the video, he debunks all those theories.

I bet you haven't watched that video.



posted on May, 17 2006 @ 06:23 AM
link   
there's also an interesting part at the end where he explains that the Sphinx could actually be a dog and was once surrounded by water.

This is one of the best videos I've seen on UFOs.


Dae

posted on May, 17 2006 @ 07:10 AM
link   

Originally posted by Denied
The whole vid is 3 hours long, im strongly suggest any person into UFO's watch this.


Cheers
Ill watch it later tonight. Thanks for the warning on how long it is because if I watch it now, ill forget to pick up small child from school



posted on May, 17 2006 @ 09:26 AM
link   
I definately agree with the comments made in previous posts about NASA's mis-information on the images from the STS missions.

The lights over Africa seemed to form a Pentagon shape with a central light, definately some form of intelligence there, very impressive, although I do believe that there is some evidence to suggest that some UFO's maybe actual lifeforms living out in space/on the edge of the atmosphere.

Just about to watch part 2, definately recommend watching these episodes, I've not heard of the author before has he made any newer documentaries / books?? These documentaries were produced in 2001

Spacemunkey



posted on May, 17 2006 @ 09:34 AM
link   
The Formation over Africa is some of the best footage on there.
David Sereda is here.

Does anyone have all 5 segments from the STS-48 mission?

I also really enjoyed how he explained Ultra-vilolet and the light spectrum. Great video.



posted on May, 17 2006 @ 09:39 AM
link   
Part 2 is the best part.
And yes, living entity's are very possible, why not?
Imagine growing a craft.

Well this was made after the martin stubbs video "smoking gun"

Enjoy part 2 and let me know what you thought.

Why has no one banged on the door and said LOOK! explain this, instead of the lame explanations given.
Yes obviously some can be explained, all you need is one of these cases to be of extra terrestrial origin for us to enter a new age, and NASA stop BS us.

Or whoever does know whats going on, come clean, even if its created with your own spin.



posted on May, 17 2006 @ 04:56 PM
link   

Originally posted by Denied

Yes obviously some can be explained, all you need is one of these cases to be of extra terrestrial origin for us to enter a new age, and NASA stop BS us.

As long as the masses keep taking BS fed in with a spoon i dont see anything else going to happen anytime soon.Even with the evidence presented on a silver platter we would still fail in spreading it to the rest of the world.Most wont care, others are to busy, some refuse to believe it and even more dont even have the means to communicate properly let alone state an opinion!
Lets just face it we are a minority in this quest to find proof and as long as this stays that way we will have a hard time to do so.
Someday, maybe not in our lifetime, but someday we will get answers and slowly we are progressing to that day.They know this and will try to slow it down the best they can but in the end the long race will be won by the ones that want to know and share the truth.When that happens then you will have your new age.



posted on Jun, 7 2006 @ 11:33 AM
link   

Originally posted by Denied
Found this little gem, Evidence: The Case For NASA UFO's

Part one.
video.google.com... q=david+sereda&pl=true

Part two.
video.google.com... david+sereda&pl=true

Im gonna watch this today, maybe it will shed some light on this more.
Enjoy.


I am 3/4 through the first vid (90+ minutes each) and I must say that people like this Dave Sereda who start out trying to prove a crazy theory will do anything to make it seem believable. His analysis and science used (misused more like it) is just plain faulty, and he leaps to the most spectacular conclusions for mundane occurrances. There is a great example of a video which he spends a good amount of time analyzing where two objects appear to make high speed turns. He is analyzing this video of objects outside the shuttle making "high speed turns" yet totally ignores that during these maneuvers, the Earth suddenly and tremendously increases it's rotational speed! This is much more interesting in my opinion, if I were not the only one to notice it. But take the video rec/playback speed into consideration, and the dust or whatever he thinks are UFOs become quite uninteresting. And Dan Aykroyd endorsing this? Did he lose a bet. There is so much here wrong in this analysis that could be discussed at great lengths, if we were so inclined.

Oh well, over the rest of the day I may get through the rest of this...

Live long and prosper...



posted on Jun, 7 2006 @ 11:55 AM
link   
Thanks for taking the time to watch this.




He is analyzing this video of objects outside the shuttle making "high speed turns"


At first i was amazed when i saw this, i have since heard that this may of been caused by refocusing of the camera causing an effect of it making a tight turn.

The more i get into UFO research the more i have "DENY IGNORNACE"
Its amazing how you can see something seem so amazing only to find out there is a logical answer.

Any more comment are well appreciated.



posted on Jun, 7 2006 @ 12:08 PM
link   

Originally posted by Mr Spock


There is a great example of a video which he spends a good amount of time analyzing where two objects appear to make high speed turns. He is analyzing this video of objects outside the shuttle making "high speed turns" yet totally ignores that during these maneuvers, the Earth suddenly and tremendously increases it's rotational speed! This is much more interesting in my opinion, if I were not the only one to notice it. But take the video rec/playback speed into consideration, and the dust or whatever he thinks are UFOs become quite uninteresting. And Dan Aykroyd endorsing this?



Thanks Mr Spock,

That was me who provided the "great example" your talking about on this thread here two days ago.

Dan Akroyds new video and his personal experiences


originally posted by lost_shaman

I have a link to the video and segment the statement is my own , if you watch the segment in question on the Video in question you'll see that you can see clearly by watching the background closely that the camera is zooming out when the object enters the frame and it "appears" to make a sharp turn when the camera stops zooming out. Its an effect of the camera zoom and not the object actually making a turn.

Evidence: The Case for NASA UFO's Part one

Fast Forward to 35:24 to see the segment in question.


If you keep watching through to the next segment ( 41:15 ) "Hyper-Velocity object" , you'll notice that it too originates from the Same Camera Zoom Out that produced the "Sharp Turn".

This segement as the camera zooms out Sereda concludes not that the Camera was zooming out , but that the object is actually a "Hyper-Velocity object" traveling at 900,000 m/p/h !




posted on Jun, 7 2006 @ 12:10 PM
link   
I wrote.




i have since heard that this may of been caused by refocusing of the camera causing an effect of it making a tight turn.


Thanks lost shamen


But.........

Can we debunk the rest of it?

[edit on 7-6-2006 by Denied]



posted on Jun, 7 2006 @ 12:22 PM
link   

Originally posted by Denied

But you can not say ice crystals with this one, nor meteorite.


Of course my friend we can't buy this. Since when a ice particle or crystal senses a missile being fired upon? Since when a ice crystal seems to move in a inteligent way, change direction and increase the speed in that way?
They think we're stupid?



new topics

top topics



 
0
<< 1    3  4 >>

log in

join