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.

 

Unnoticed Flying Objects During Shuttle Launch *new*

page: 12
0
<< 9  10  11    13  14  15 >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Jun, 12 2006 @ 03:18 PM
link   
I'm done with this stupid "thermal" theory, since i can't find any data to support my knowledge of the weather conditions on the launch, I know for a fact those clouds DID NOT form in that area, they were pushed there by winds..... you are GOING NO WHERE with this thermal theory. You are only supporting my view, that if those are "birds" flying that high, they MUST be going in and out of the shuttles smoke and clouds like the clearly show in the video, meaning they are BIGGER THAN NORMAL BIRDS.

In this picture below, is 3 black objects. 2 of them have just came out of the shuttles smoke, and the one on top is just now entering the shuttles smoke. You can view this on the main video, and listen for the guy to say "the car alarms are going off." You will clearly see that they are going in and out of the clouds at that height. If that is correct then we can use the clouds as a measuring device to measure the objects.




Turkey Vultures are usually 72 inches, that is 6 feet. Clearly these objects are more than 6 feet large. Also they show NO signs of any structure resembling a Turkey Vulture.

[edit on 12-6-2006 by LAES YVAN]




posted on Jun, 12 2006 @ 03:28 PM
link   
were just going over the same points over and over again, is there anything new to add here?



posted on Jun, 12 2006 @ 03:32 PM
link   
LAES YVAN,

Look at how much distortion is visible in the Plume from the Shuttle. Its all blurred and smudged and Pixelated.

Now you see that the Turkey Vultures appear on the Video as Dark Smudges with no clearly defined edges that you can use to get an accurate measurement from.

It is the Smudging effect produced by the Camera that you are actually measuring.



posted on Jun, 12 2006 @ 03:36 PM
link   
I found this while going through my threads.

www.abovetopsecret.com...

Ufo's were seen go to 2.20 on video, otherwise its boring.


Since when does a object stop and go the opposite way in space?

[edit on 12-6-2006 by Denied]


[edit on 12-6-2006 by Denied]



posted on Jun, 12 2006 @ 03:45 PM
link   
I wouldnt doubt there was alien craft of some sort watching every single move of the mission.

B.T.W. the picture above was resized using PIXEL resize, that means every pixel is how it was recorded onto video and compressed with the .mpeg format. It does NOT smudge anything, if a pixel is a certain color, it stays that color. I am simply measuring what is black/dark and what is not. Even if I made the measurements smaller to make up for some distortion, the objects are STILL BIGGER THAN AN AVERAGE BIRD AT THAT HIGHT.

Here is another picture from the video..




If you zoom in on all the objects they all appear to have a weird field around them. This one appears to be a perfect square. Sorry to say a bird at this distance wouldn't appear square, but more rectangular.

[edit on 12-6-2006 by LAES YVAN]


Xo0

posted on Jun, 12 2006 @ 03:55 PM
link   
I'd call it too close to call..



posted on Jun, 12 2006 @ 03:58 PM
link   
This one has a weird like halo around it as well.. symmetrical.




Close up of object.


[edit on 12-6-2006 by LAES YVAN]

[edit on 12-6-2006 by LAES YVAN]



posted on Jun, 12 2006 @ 03:58 PM
link   

Originally posted by LAES YVAN

Even if I made the measurements smaller to make up for some distortion, the objects are STILL BIGGER THAN AN AVERAGE BIRD AT THAT HIGHT.



The problem stems from the fact that digital cameras are very poor at recording small objects in motion at great distances.

Your assuming every darkened pixel represents the "body" of the object in question. If that were true then you should also be able to take a Digital Camera and take clean clear crisp pictures of other Vultures at altitude, but if you try you'll find that you will not end up with anything but an over-sized dark pixelated smudge.



posted on Jun, 12 2006 @ 04:03 PM
link   
can you explain the light colored pixels that are obviously separated from the main object by the darker sky behind it, yet they are symmetrical with the pixelated "blob"?




Xo0

posted on Jun, 12 2006 @ 04:06 PM
link   
yes it's called JPEG compression..



posted on Jun, 12 2006 @ 04:13 PM
link   

Originally posted by LAES YVAN
the objects are STILL BIGGER THAN AN AVERAGE BIRD AT THAT HIGHT.


... and there is the core fault ... basing your size approximations proportionate to the SS's smoke plume, the perspective of which is distorted by the position of ALL elements within.

Again, your confidence in, and support thereof, is noteworthy, but IT'S JUST NOT THERE!

A dismissive response is expected, however "it's just not there".

BIRDS ... nothin' but BIRDS



posted on Jun, 12 2006 @ 04:17 PM
link   

Originally posted by LAES YVAN
Yes there are no doubt birds in the video... but take a look at this shortened clip of the objects CLEARLY passing in and out of the smoke trail at 11,500 feet.

Click here to watch Fast-Craft


They are CLEARLY disapearing behind the smoke trail.. That smoke trail is EXPANDING and IS LARGER THAN THE WIDTH OF THE SPACE SHUTTLE. Do some research to find out the width of the shuttle, it will explain it has a 78 foot wing span. That could give you an estimate of 100 foot wide smoke trail.

If you calculate the speed at witch it takes the UFOS to fly past and around the smoke trail you can see they are traveling at about 150 feet per second, thats about 102 MPH.

I am working on close up frames of the video.. and almost all videos of STS-114 are locked, or just dont have this angle long enough.



[edit on 12-6-2006 by LAES YVAN]


I found this one quite enlightening...

media.putfile.com...

Seriously, though...the objects moving do seem to be fairly smooth-flying. Someone stated that they are obviously birds, but I disagree...




posted on Jun, 12 2006 @ 04:19 PM
link   

Originally posted by 12m8keall2c

... and there is the core fault ... basing your size approximations proportionate to the SS's smoke plume, the perspective of which is distorted by the position of ALL elements within.



The video CLEARLY shows the objects going in and out of the plume of smoke, there is no doubt about it, if it was "birds" they wouldnt "disapear" even if they were flying towards/away from our perspective.

This image was captured useing a LOSSLESS GIF format.



I see NO SIGNS of a BIRD. Keep in mind this photo above was taken while the object wast moving upward, or towards our perspective. If this was a "bird" it would look more flat, or V shaped or ^ shaped.



posted on Jun, 12 2006 @ 04:21 PM
link   


Someone stated that they are obviously birds, but I disagree...


Like everyone my friend.

Ok if you think they are birds fine, i dont care anymore.

They are not good enough evidence for ET's so thets leave it here, birds or no birds.

If you want to carry on arguing the fact over birds then fine.

We all want the truth and we are gonna need better evidence to prove this not just to us but everyone.
Theres alot of evidence out there already.


jra

posted on Jun, 12 2006 @ 04:41 PM
link   

Originally posted by LAES YVAN
This image was captured useing a LOSSLESS GIF format.



Ummm.. you may have saved it as a gif, but the original sorce you saved it from was already compressed a fair bit. Looking at a zoomed in pixel will tell you nothing. All you're going to see is is blurry compression artifacts. Think about the hundreds (thousands?) of people seeing this live with there eyes and seeing it in much better clarity than the small, compressed video we're seeing. If they were indeed Alien ships of some kind, don't you think the people there would have noticed them and said something? There is also no way for you to be able to judge the distance and speed of those birds either.



posted on Jun, 12 2006 @ 04:46 PM
link   

Originally posted by LAES YVAN
This image was captured useing a LOSSLESS GIF format.


Thats irrelevant.

You recorded this off the TV!!!!!!

Firstly it will have been compressed by the video camera, then again when transferring it to the broadcaster, the broadcaster will then have had to convert it to a analogue format not a digital one, it was then broadcast and may have been distorted then, you computer then recieved it and......

Anyway my point is it has been compressed and converted so many times you using lossless compression is irrelevant. It doesnt help save any details as they have been lost already!!

And please stop using the plume of smoke as a reference for size!!! I have tried to explain why you can't but you seem to ignore me every time.


Xo0

posted on Jun, 12 2006 @ 04:51 PM
link   

Originally posted by gfad

Originally posted by LAES YVAN
This image was captured useing a LOSSLESS GIF format.


Thats irrelevant.

You recorded this off the TV!!!!!!

Firstly it will have been compressed by the video camera, then again when transferring it to the broadcaster, the broadcaster will then have had to convert it to a analogue format not a digital one, it was then broadcast and may have been distorted then, you computer then recieved it and......

Anyway my point is it has been compressed and converted so many times you using lossless compression is irrelevant. It doesnt help save any details as they have been lost already!!

And please stop using the plume of smoke as a reference for size!!! I have tried to explain why you can't but you seem to ignore me every time.


I can second that.. Not one program can make details up (duh).. It started with a few little pixels with no details at all and when u blow it up you'll get all sorts of weird things..



posted on Jun, 12 2006 @ 04:52 PM
link   
All eyes where still on the shuttle when these things were flying. Also, when all eyes are focused on a subject and small black things start flying in the corner of your eye, you brain is trained to come up with the first normal logical answer, and that would be a bird of some sort, so you ignore it.

Even then, the only people that would notice are the people there LIVE with their own eyes, if not they have tunnel vision looking through their binoculars, or zoomed in with their cameras, extra close. Keeping your head up like that for a long period of time, you would definitely look down frequently to rest the muscles then look straight up again, hardly any reason to look in the middle of the two positions. Other than that, everyone NOT there in person watching LIVE would probably see the shuttles launch on TV. Television now days can hardly stay on one frame, they usually jump from view to view, not filming anything other than the shuttle. Also, all the officials that work for NASA probably DID see them and kept quiet. Or quickly dismissed them as birds like or something other than UFOS because GOD FORBID ANYONE BELIEVE IN UFOS.


As for measuring the objects... With my close examination, a few objects appear to be moving in and out of the smoke from the shuttle. You can get a very close estimate of the size of the smoke trail just by knowing the dimensions of the shuttle. If you compare that measurement to a shot of the OBJECT just entering/exiting the smoke trail, you can get a great estimate of its approximate size.

But it seem as though the REAL QUESTION OF THIS VIDEO IS. "DID THE OBJECTS PASS THROUGH THE SMOKE FROM THE SHUTTLE?"

I say yes they did.

[edit on 12-6-2006 by LAES YVAN]



posted on Jun, 12 2006 @ 04:59 PM
link   

Originally posted by gfad

Thats irrelevant.
You recorded this off the TV!!!!!!


I did not record this off TV. It was uploaded from a camcorder onto a computer and put into an .mpeg format, from NASA's LIVE BROADCAST Down link. Later it was removed.

Although all of your "distortion", "blur", suggestions have truth behind them, the REAL truth is that even after such compression, objects are still easily identifiable. For instance the OBVIOUS birds that fly past before the UFOS. You can clearly make out lots of detail from them. I know that when an object gets smaller it can only get as small as a single pixel that can only be a single color. But these pixels are taking up more than 8 complete pixels. You can draw a LOT with 8 pixels, no matter what the compression is.



posted on Jun, 12 2006 @ 05:01 PM
link   

Originally posted by gfad
And please stop using the plume of smoke as a reference for size!!! I have tried to explain why you can't but you seem to ignore me every time.


YOU HAVE SAID THE PLUME IS MOVING. AND I ALREADY STATED IT IS EXPANDING. IT IS NOT HOWEVER MOVING AT SUCH A GREAT DISTANCE AS TO THROW OFF ANY MEASUREMENTS. IF ANYTHING THE EXPANDING AND SMALL AMOUNT OF MOVING OF THE PLUME ONLY SUPPORTS MY THEORY THAT THESE FLYING OBJECTS ARE LARGER THAN BIRDS! IF THE PLUME IS MOVING/EXPANDING THAT MEANS THE OBJECTS ARE LARGER THAN THEY APPEAR. IF IT WASNT ALMOST PERFECTLY CLEAR THAT THESE OBJECTS WERE MOVING IN AND OUT OF THE PLUME I WOULD DISMISS THIS MEASUREMENT, BUT THE FACT THEY ARE FLYING IN THE PLUME ONLY SECONDS AFTER THE PLUME WAS CREATED GIVE MES FURTHER SUPPORT THAT THESE PLUMES DID NOT CHANGE IN SIZE MY A MASSIVE MEASURMENT OBSTRUCTING AMMOUNT.


[edit on 12-6-2006 by LAES YVAN]



new topics

top topics



 
0
<< 9  10  11    13  14  15 >>

log in

join