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.

 

How will they cover this up...

page: 6
0
<< 3  4  5    7 >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Jun, 26 2006 @ 12:35 PM
link   

I have a videotape (one of Hoagland's "structures" presentations) which SHOWS SOMETHING in space MAKING A RIGHT-ANGLE TURN TO AVOID A MISSLE FIRED IN ITS DIRECTION.


I would love to see this video tape. One question comes to mind though. WHO was shooting at it and from WHERE? Our shuttles and earlyier vehicles were unarmed. I suppose it could have come from the star wars platform ummmmm errrr but thats only been armed recently


A missle from earth taking out a UFO? I am sure UFO buffs would have mentioned this one.


When NASA was making LIVE broadcasts at Moon landings, I personally SAW and HEARD on TV, an astronaut decend the LEM ladder and say, "Gee! LOOK AT THAT BIG, WHITE BALL!" There was also an incident where the astronauts, while exploring the Moon, siad, "They're on the ridge. They are LOOKING at US!"


Sorry but this one you will have to prove, because at the time of the moon landings I was recording everything live and I never heard those comments. Which mission was it so I can double check my tapes?

Not to discourage you but stating "shooting at a ufo with a missle" needs a little backing up



There is however a Time-Life record and book set"To the Moon" that commemorated the event. On the record there is an interview with Herman Oberth stating that their will be space ships with electric engines, not of ionic propulsion. [This was made before rockets. He was Germany's top rocket scientist, taught Von Bruan everything he knew]



You can actually get 1 on ebay
To The Moon from Time Life

[edit on 26-6-2006 by zorgon]




posted on Jun, 26 2006 @ 01:50 PM
link   

Originally posted by zorgon

I have a videotape (one of Hoagland's "structures" presentations) which SHOWS SOMETHING in space MAKING A RIGHT-ANGLE TURN TO AVOID A MISSLE FIRED IN ITS DIRECTION.


I would love to see this video tape. One question comes to mind though. WHO was shooting at it and from WHERE? Our shuttles and earlyier vehicles were unarmed. I suppose it could have come from the star wars platform ummmmm errrr but thats only been armed recently


A missle from earth taking out a UFO? I am sure UFO buffs would have mentioned this one.


When NASA was making LIVE broadcasts at Moon landings, I personally SAW and HEARD on TV, an astronaut decend the LEM ladder and say, "Gee! LOOK AT THAT BIG, WHITE BALL!" There was also an incident where the astronauts, while exploring the Moon, siad, "They're on the ridge. They are LOOKING at US!"


Sorry but this one you will have to prove, because at the time of the moon landings I was recording everything live and I never heard those comments. Which mission was it so I can double check my tapes?

Not to discourage you but stating "shooting at a ufo with a missle" needs a little backing up





Im surprised you haven't heard of this video, its been on this forum over and over again, i think (im not 100% sure) it was call sts-48 video. ill throw it up here if i find the thread.


HERE IT GOES: www.qtm.net...

Check out the main website they have some pretty cool stuff there too.

main link: www.qtm.net...




[edit on 26-6-2006 by whos_out_there]



posted on Jun, 26 2006 @ 03:10 PM
link   
The question works on the premise that such things exist.

If they do, drawing attention to it by making people sign contracts would be a bad idea, sightings are so easy to debunk after all.

If they do not exist, you don't need a contract.

Either way, no contracts.



posted on Jun, 26 2006 @ 03:14 PM
link   
Would someone out there please explain to me why ALL the images are fuzzy, bouncing around and you can't see any detail, even when the earth is the background?

I am a photographer. Once in a while my shots are a little blurry, but you can still see what is in the photo. But I take several shot of each thing I shoot to make sure I get good pics.

Yes amatures grabbing a point and shoot "might" not get clear shots, but professionals in space? with all the equipment they have? Some of those clips say they were made on the Shuttle. I have seen thousands of pictures from there, not one wasn't bright and clear.

Blurry little dots moving on a blurry back ground convince me of nothing, cept a very bad photographer. On that site Isaw one clip with a light object moving across the screen until it gets to a road sign. Look closely... for a few frames the object goes IN FRONT of the road sign, then disappears

On another thread here about recent earth quakes in Alaska, someone posted a picture of a Volcano erupting on that day in that area. The photo was taken by an astronaut on the space station, who just happened to be glancing out the window at the right time. He grabbed HIS camera and shot THIS


What is happening to that volcano?

It's erupting!

The first person to note that the Aleutian Cleveland Volcano was spewing ash was astronaut Jeffrey N. Williams aboard the International Space Station. Looking down on the Alaskan Aleutian Islands two weeks ago, Williams noted, photographed, and reported a spectacular ash plume emanating from the Cleveland Volcano.


Source



Why is every photo ever taken from space beautiful, sharp and clear until someone claims "Its a UFO... here is the evidence"? I have seen photos with heat inhancement that can actually trace the route that the Camels took on the silk road merely by sensing the sand compression from space!

Here in Las Vegas the county assessor's office has a web site featuring a satelite image mapper that can take a picture of my house with enough detail to see if I am IN my yard, and these are just the low res pics. If I want high res I can order it for a small fee from NASA. THAT photo would be clear enough to read my car license plate!!!

Here is the Clark County satelite imager. I am sure every big city has a similar program. When you go to the site have popups "on", and click the box that says "arial photo" Use this as a street address 6535 S PECOS RD.

Satelite Image Mapper

[It also brings up history of the property like wether I paid taxes, how much I paid, who I got it from etc.
but thats another topic]

The point is photography from and off space is at its best these days... so please no more blurry stuff as "proof"




This is all publicly accessable info. I give it merely as examples of how good our cameras are these days


Just for fun, here is a nice CLEAR picture from Mars

Martian Road

[edit on 26-6-2006 by zorgon]



posted on Jun, 26 2006 @ 03:35 PM
link   

Originally posted by zorgon
Why is every photo ever taken from space beautiful, sharp and clear until someone claims "Its a UFO... here is the evidence"? I have seen photos with heat enhancement that can actually trace the route that the Camels took on the silk road merely by sensing the sand compression from space!


You also have to remember that these were taken almost 15 years ago, when technology wasn't as cutting edge as it was now. I don't even think DVD's and Digital media type medias were out yet or were in there early stages.

Plus who knows how many times this video (and all others) have been dubbed down and transferred. Nowadays we have the tools we need to preserve footage.

But i definitely agree with you that most footage is grainy, jumpy, etc., etc.

I personally think that whatever footage gets presented as proof will always be debunked. (sad but true) Until the day that a UFO lands and says hi to the camera there will never be enough proof.

Im just grateful (grainy or not) that theres something to visually see.

[edit on 26-6-2006 by whos_out_there]



posted on Jun, 26 2006 @ 06:30 PM
link   


You also have to remember that these were taken almost 15 years ago, when technology wasn't as cutting edge as it was now.


15 years isn't exactly the darl ages you know...


CANON AT OLYMPIC GAMES - 1984. In July, 1984, Canon conducted a trial of a professional color still video camera (the RC-701) and an analog transmitter at the Los Angeles Olympics. The images were transmitted back to Japan via phone lines in less than 30 minutes. They were then printed in the Yomiuri newspaper. Immediately before the Games, Canon announced its successful development of a color electronic still camera designed for commercial broadcasting use.




I personally think that whatever footage gets presented as proof will always be debunked. (sad but true) Until the day that a UFO lands and says hi to the camera there will never be enough proof.


There is a big difference between debunking a good picture, verses some one making fake ones. The problem is there are more fake ones than real and all that does is make it worse as well as harder to get credibilty if you happen to have a real one.
The other side of the coin to "never enough proof" there are those who will believe anything you show them without question because somebody has a picture.

I mentioned earlier I can tell you why you wouldn't get a clear pic of a flying UFO, [will have time next week to start that thread] BUT the background would be clear.


Don't get me wrong here. I am not saying I disbelieve, I just want people hunting saucers to spend 50 bucks and get a decent camera, and take a short basic photography course.


Its like this... even random people would get lucky and get a clear shot by accident at least once in a while.

Keep looking... there are some good ones out there...



posted on Jun, 26 2006 @ 09:01 PM
link   

Originally posted by zorgon

15 years isn't exactly the darl ages you know...


sorry to say in the electronic world 15 years is stone the ages. Just use a computer for an example, lets just say u have a computer from back then in your closet, i say hook it up and try using it for todays applications you'd bash your head thru the monitor if you even just tried sending a email.

i know thats a bad analogy but you get my point.. lol

But my point on my other thread was, we didnt have the technology we do today to preserve film or pictures, so imagine footage thats from a vhs or at best a beta (if its that old) and transferring it to a digital file that most people do not know how to compress.

I work as a avid editor for a advertising company, and ive worked with footage thats not even that old and you can tell the difference; time, air, chemicals and even fingerprints can cause damage.



Keep looking... there are some good ones out there...


You see that the funny thing, everybody wants the proof but nothing is ever good, and if it has been semi good quality then everybody jumps on it an dismisses it.

No one will be happy till they see a alien walking down the street with documented proof that he's a bona-fide out of this world creature . _javascript:icon('
')




[edit on 26-6-2006 by whos_out_there]



posted on Jun, 26 2006 @ 09:03 PM
link   
Right, there are good ones, even as far back as 1870!!


ufocasebook.com...

This does not mean the objects are:

1. Spaceships piloted by aliens from other worlds

2. Spaceships at all

3. From other worlds

4. Piloted by aliens

5. Delusions of people with mental problems

6. Ignorant photographers

7. Hoaxers hoping to make a killing

It doesn't take a genius to realize our reality is not what we make it out to be. The answers are outside the box, and you and I are still inside.

Over the years I have had three remarkable encounters, and in each one I had the impression that what I was watching was natural, though curious. It is when we start projecting our own perceptions of ourselves that we start drawing farther away from the reality. Humans humanize, and nature is not all human, its just the way things are!



posted on Jun, 26 2006 @ 11:11 PM
link   

The answers are outside the box, and you and I are still inside.


Na uh Told you earlier I am in that bubble floating just outside the box.


I understand about old film and storage and such, but some of those clips were from the shuttle recently and still as bad as the old ones. Logic alone dictates that even by accident someone would have a clear image.

Maybe the Matrix as Reality should be our topic?



posted on Jun, 26 2006 @ 11:19 PM
link   
Absolutely 2008 (ish
)



The entrepreneur is having five "spaceliners" built in the US by the team which launched the SpaceShipOne rocket plane last year.

Sir Richard said he himself, his children and his parents all plan to be on the first flight.

The Virgin Atlantic airline boss told the BBC's Breakfast with Frost the space travel plan "is an extremely exciting project".

He signed a £14m agreement last September with Mojave Ventures, the company set up by Microsoft co-founder Paul Allen and aviation pioneer Burton Rutan.



news.bbc.co.uk...

As above nothing to cover up. If there was why would the US let the spaceliners be built there / passengers be trained there?

Also I seriously doubt a tourist snap would be able to uncover the position / purpose of any satellite let alone a 'secret' one



posted on Jun, 26 2006 @ 11:34 PM
link   

Originally posted by Strangerous
Absolutely 2008 (ish
)



The entrepreneur is having five "spaceliners" built in the US by the team which launched the SpaceShipOne rocket plane last year
.


I assume you missed the link to Virgin Galactic


Not sure but I put it here in case. Hard to go back on a thread sometimes


mod edit: post clarity

[edit on 27-6-2006 by sanctum]



posted on Jun, 27 2006 @ 12:03 AM
link   
Yep I did miss it! DOH!

You did put it in.

I tried it via google but it didn't work for me, hence the link to the beeb. Seems I've just made the same points you did


Great minds?



posted on Jun, 27 2006 @ 03:04 AM
link   

Originally posted by Strangerous
Great minds?


Happens all the time. Sometimes I will answer a post and while I amtyping someone with faster fingers beats me to it. In that contract with Virgin they made a deal with New Mexico to build them a 200,000,000.oo Space port. Doesn't seem like cover up to me. How the hell are you going to hide a space port? I know the desert is big... but really


BTW did you see the little video of the simulated flight?


[edit on 27-6-2006 by zorgon]



posted on Jun, 27 2006 @ 03:12 AM
link   
I know it's a lot less exciting than breathlessly anticipating a close encounter with Richard Branson, but there's one obvious conclusion to be drawn from the fact that the world's governments seem quite happy to let ordinary citizens go into space, namely, that there's nothing untoward to see there, and therefore nothing for the authorities to cover up.

Remember Occam's Razor? 'Entities should not be multiplied unneccessarily, especially if the entities are little grey men from outer space.'

Sorry to be so boring, but we're after truth here, not excitement. Or so I'm told.

I agree with Matyas:


Originally posted by Matyas
We don't need so many hard scientists to explain the UFO phenomena, what we need is more experts of the softer sciences variety. Psychology and literature for a start. Because what we are witnessing is more of how we behave, not so much of what is really there.


A good place to start might be C.J. Jung's Flying Saucers: A Modern Myth of Things Seen in the Sky (1959, Routlege, also available in a 2002 paperback edition from Taylor & Francis). The psychology is a little outdated but the insights are pure gold, as was usually the case with Uncle Carl.



posted on Jun, 27 2006 @ 03:31 AM
link   

Originally posted by Imzadi
I have a videotape (one of Hoagland's "structures" presentations) which SHOWS SOMETHING in space MAKING A RIGHT-ANGLE TURN TO AVOID A MISSLE FIRED IN ITS DIRECTION. Urine dumps (ice erystals) don't make right-angle turns to avoid being shot at.

Neither, I imagine, do spacecraft carrying biological entities. Not if the entities in question are to retain their structural integrity. Imagine the g-forces involved -- titanic! Capable of turning even a Jovian into jam.

And even if the ship contained no living creatures, what about structural damage to the ship itself? And just think of the energy involved in such a manouevre. Where's all the reaction mass going to come from?

I'm sure someone's going to tell me it's all to do with advanced alien physics. But you're claiming this happened in common-or-garden Newtonian space, in Earth orbit no less. What did they do, shove the craft into a different universe and back out again into ours, now travelling at ninety degrees to its previous direction of motion? Why shove it back at all in that case?

Eagerly -- no, joyously -- anticipating enlightement, I remain

yours etc.

That annoying person from the Iliad



posted on Jun, 27 2006 @ 05:11 AM
link   
Hey whos_out_there

Found this just for you. Hope you enjoy it

Found this tonight.

Thought it was useful to toss in here.

Stargate Chronicles

Onion Drive

Clark C. McClelland is former ScO, Space Shuttle Fleet, Kennedy Space Center, Florida 1958 to 1992.



posted on Jun, 27 2006 @ 11:48 AM
link   

Originally posted by zorgon
Hey whos_out_there

Found this just for you. Hope you enjoy it

Found this tonight.

Thought it was useful to toss in here.

Stargate Chronicles

Onion Drive

Clark C. McClelland is former ScO, Space Shuttle Fleet, Kennedy Space Center, Florida 1958 to 1992.


Thanks for the read, i always enjoy reading something new and different.

But I'm not too sure what this has to do with the thread.

Maybe it'll make sense when i read it fully.

I just basically think this will open up more minds to accept that we are'nt the only ones in this universe. And that we do get visits from other planets.

It seems like everybody thinks they know what there talking about, but none of us do. This is all speculation from the first post to the last.

Nothing towards you zorgon. I'm just saying this to everybody.

Alright i just skimmed thru one of the articles. So are u suggesting that UFO's that people see are our own???? Cause that belongs in its own thread. AND even still, if they were ours just to play along, they still have to had gotten the technology from back engineering a disk we captured or retrieved.

[edit on 27-6-2006 by whos_out_there]



posted on Jun, 27 2006 @ 11:51 AM
link   
thats a wack post!!!!!!



posted on Jun, 27 2006 @ 11:54 AM
link   

Originally posted by nwomi
thats a wack post!!!!!!


who are you talking about??? you should be more clear to whom you are trash talking.



posted on Jun, 27 2006 @ 01:12 PM
link   

Originally posted by nwomi
thats a wack post!!!!!!


You have a right to your opinion, but here we debate it not insult each other for opposing views




top topics



 
0
<< 3  4  5    7 >>

log in

join