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: 7
0
<< 4  5  6   >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Jun, 27 2006 @ 01:22 PM
link   

Originally posted by whos_out_there

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


Perhaps nothing, just a qoute from my thread that I thought you might have interest in. Though remember back when I said it was not possible to get a clear photo of a true UFO whether its ours or theirs? This is part of it. Ever see a radiator or other heat souce and try to look thru it? The shimmering effect? Same goes here. Unless its parked on the ground with its motor off

Thought that kinda gave a little credibilty to those fuzzy photos you sent me to the other day


But thats okay I'll put it on another post next week.



Nothing towards you zorgon.


None implied, none taken, we all have open minds here right? Well cept that last poster?


Okay now you can't tell me THIS one is off topic. This guy has good credentials



David: There is one piece of footage in which two astronauts are repairing the Hubble space telescope, and we hear them referring to an object which is out in front of them. You then hear all these interjections from Houston Control or Alabama, telling the astronauts not to worry about it — to keep focusing on the mission.

On the film you can see this light going behind them, and later we hear some comment about a camera filter coming off.

It's so typical in these transmissions that you get ridiculous statements coming from NASA that don't make any sense at all and are just thrown out there to confuse the issue. Camera filters are one of the hardest items to unscrew by accident — it doesn't happen. I've used cameras semiprofessionally for over twenty years, and it just never happens.


Hubble Repair Astronauts Spot UFO



[edit on 27-6-2006 by zorgon]




posted on Jun, 27 2006 @ 02:28 PM
link   
Whos_out_there

Don't know if you have seen this one before, it was just posted in a new thread HERE



posted on Jun, 27 2006 @ 02:47 PM
link   

Originally posted by zorgon

Originally posted by whos_out_there

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


Perhaps nothing, just a qoute from my thread that I thought you might have interest in. Though remember back when I said it was not possible to get a clear photo of a true UFO whether its ours or theirs? This is part of it. Ever see a radiator or other heat souce and try to look thru it? The shimmering effect? Same goes here. Unless its parked on the ground with its motor off

Thought that kinda gave a little credibilty to those fuzzy photos you sent me to the other day


But thats okay I'll put it on another post next week.


well i definitely have those sites saved so i can read in peace when i get home (at work now). thank for the threads. i appreciate it.






Nothing towards you zorgon.


None implied, none taken, we all have open minds here right? Well cept that last poster?



Yea whats up with that last post, i hate when people do that, he didnt even say whos post sucked, or if the whole thread was bad. SOOOOOOOO cheesy _javascript:icon('
')

The only thing difficult about writing sometimes is u cant really feel the other persons tone or if there being sarcastic same goes for my own righting. (i guess thats why i try to use the emotion cons. But definitely enjoy the post being put on here. Mostly intelligent comments (MOSTLY lol).


PLEASE Excuse the Quote Screwup. after all this time i still get confused as to where they go when ther are too many quotes. HEHE

[edit on 27-6-2006 by whos_out_there]



posted on Jun, 28 2006 @ 12:47 AM
link   
No-one seems to want to answer my question about the uncannily manoeuvrable right-angle-turn-capable UFO. Does that mean there's no sensible answer (as I suspect is the case), or have you all just put me on Ignore?

*sniffs dolefully* Oh well, it was just a matter of time anyway.



posted on Jun, 28 2006 @ 03:03 AM
link   

Originally posted by Astyanax
No-one seems to want to answer my question about the uncannily manoeuvrable right-angle-turn-capable UFO. Does that mean there's no sensible answer (as I suspect is the case), or have you all just put me on Ignore?

*sniffs dolefully* Oh well, it was just a matter of time anyway.


Oh don't cry. Didn't ignore you I made a comment [rather long one] about photo quality and such.

Let me ask you a few questions

Which flight was that and what year....

Why is the picture so fuzzy that you can make out no detail, when all space photography I have seen, even the older 1969 moon shots are at least identifiable and in recent years crystal clear?

Have you looked at it a frame at a time? If so have you noticed the "missle" is all broken apart at the beginning? Looks a lot like a meteor like the other Nasa footage.

Why does the "missle" look like its been "fired" from the spacecraft that the picture is taken from? I was not aware that we had any armed shuttles?

[edit on 28-6-2006 by zorgon]



posted on Jun, 28 2006 @ 04:34 AM
link   

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


Actually that is my nemesis from the future attempting to subvert and cover up this thread because it is so revolutionary



posted on Jun, 29 2006 @ 01:01 PM
link   

Originally posted by zorgon

Originally posted by Astyanax
No-one seems to want to answer my question about the uncannily manoeuvrable right-angle-turn-capable UFO. Does that mean there's no sensible answer (as I suspect is the case), or have you all just put me on Ignore?

*sniffs dolefully* Oh well, it was just a matter of time anyway.


Oh don't cry. Didn't ignore you I made a comment [rather long one] about photo quality and such.

Let me ask you a few questions

Which flight was that and what year....

Why is the picture so fuzzy that you can make out no detail, when all space photography I have seen, even the older 1969 moon shots are at least identifiable and in recent years crystal clear?

Have you looked at it a frame at a time? If so have you noticed the "missle" is all broken apart at the beginning? Looks a lot like a meteor like the other Nasa footage.

Why does the "missle" look like its been "fired" from the spacecraft that the picture is taken from? I was not aware that we had any armed shuttles?

[edit on 28-6-2006 by zorgon]


Earlier in this post i stated which nasa mission and I put the link as to where you can see the video that he is talking about. It is definitely cool the way it shoot back towards the stars after it approaches the earth.


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 29-6-2006 by whos_out_there]



posted on Jun, 29 2006 @ 03:14 PM
link   

Originally posted by zorgon
Didn't ignore you I made a comment [rather long one] about photo quality and such.

No! That was the other guy! I'm so insignificant you didn't even recognize me!

*spins round and stumbles away, weeping profusely*



posted on Jun, 29 2006 @ 10:27 PM
link   

Originally posted by Astyanax
No! That was the other guy! I'm so insignificant you didn't even recognize me!

*spins round and stumbles away, weeping profusely*


Your right, I did not directly address you with that, Sorry


But my question still stands, and that is directed at you



Now if you haven't seen this one already, this is a convincing picture, taken by the SOHO satellite a million miles out from earth

PICTURE


Now as to that other one...

1] The "missle" looks just like those other streaking meteors in other Nasa footage. Look at a frame at a time... its broken up near the beginning. I would guess that the film is running in reverse...

2] Looking at it a frame at a time you will see that the frame JUST BEFORE that spot changes angle, the screen has a white out...

Conclusion... I would say this one was doctored, and poorly at that



posted on Jul, 1 2006 @ 10:17 AM
link   

Originally posted by sensfan
Or another, probably likely scenario

- There is no intelligent life visiting this planet so there is nothing to cover up.


Actually, according to modern math thats the unlikely scenario.



posted on Jul, 1 2006 @ 12:22 PM
link   

Originally posted by ravenflt
- There is no intelligent life visiting this planet so there is nothing to cover up.


Well I have yet to find intelligent life here on earth, so there better be some out there...


Oh wait! Sorry forgot the dolphins



posted on Jul, 5 2006 @ 12:22 PM
link   
www.space.com...

Here is Jeff Bezos New spaceship. So where are all the windows??? i think i see one in the pictures that were shown on this website. If this is the case, then who cares how many cameras they bring up.



posted on Jul, 5 2006 @ 12:40 PM
link   
Okay good find


Didn't know there was competition. But those pics are just prototype and test vehicles.

Lets wait and see the final design


BTW


THIS JUST IN

Picture from the latest Shuttle Mission launched today... floating near the shuttle shortly after they entered orbit


Described by Nasa officials as ice pieces...




As to seeing for yourself whats out there, you can tune in if you want to have a look at what they see and are doing out there, run this live feed

Kennedy Space Center Mission Control



posted on Jul, 5 2006 @ 02:15 PM
link   
Nice find on the live feed.

Just curious, what exactly is that pic, and how far was it from the space shuttle?



posted on Jul, 5 2006 @ 02:39 PM
link   
Okay I guess I have enough reactions

It really is a piece of ice. When they launch they cool the engines with liquid nitrogen. Seeing that the fuel they use is Liquid Hydrogen and Oxygen, with the exhaust being water, ice forming on the outside of the ship in certain places is a nautral occurance.

I think most people do not realize that water is the exhaust... all they see is flame...


I watched it live as it peeled off the booster. But the appearance of that piece looks so much like some space creature I just know months from now there will be posts of this as proof of Aliens or something...

So we got there first
They actually showed it on NBC the other night

[edit on 5-7-2006 by zorgon]



posted on Jul, 5 2006 @ 02:55 PM
link   

Originally posted by skitzo
Why is it when someone posts a topic like this, instead of working with the idea thats posted, people come out with guns a blazing sarcasm hell most fish don't know there in water till someone comes along with a worm and a hook and yanks them out

If "guns blazing" means pointing out an obviously glaring flaw in the initial assumptions of the topics, it's because the discussion is doomed to have no value from the start, so there's nothing of value to "ruin."

Every wonder why aliens have three eyes? What would be the evolutionary advantage to having three eyes, instead of just two?

See what I mean?



posted on Jul, 5 2006 @ 03:05 PM
link   

Originally posted by sensfan


Sorry, the nasa vids do not prove any idea wrong. Some people say they see ships, others say it's ice particles, etc. Hardly proof my friend.


In this universe ice particles do not make right angle turns and accelerate! Maybe things are different in your universe though.



posted on Jul, 5 2006 @ 03:10 PM
link   
Enkidu I don't know about having three eyes, but if you had three arms you could play guitar and wipe your a** at the same time.



posted on Jul, 5 2006 @ 03:58 PM
link   

Originally posted by Enkidu

Originally posted by skitzo
Why is it when someone posts a topic like this, instead of working with the idea thats posted, people come out with guns a blazing sarcasm hell most fish don't know there in water till someone comes along with a worm and a hook and yanks them out

If "guns blazing" means pointing out an obviously glaring flaw in the initial assumptions of the topics, it's because the discussion is doomed to have no value from the start, so there's nothing of value to "ruin."

Every wonder why aliens have three eyes? What would be the evolutionary advantage to having three eyes, instead of just two?

See what I mean?


What exactly does having 3 eyes have to do with this thread???

Im just curious, cause it makes NO sense. I can throw up here a million different analogies also, BUT at least id make some kind of connection.

AND as to the thread being doomed as u put it, it sure doesn't look like that, especially when u get more than 100 post (either good or bad) and alot of it was good postings, not silly post like yours.



posted on Jul, 5 2006 @ 05:21 PM
link   

Originally posted by Enkidu
glaring flaw in the initial assumptions of the topics,


Glaring flaw?
I think whos_out_there makes a good point. With puplic space travel only a few years away, if one believes there is a cover up of alien visits, how would you cover it up when all those bleeping tourist are running around all over the place with cameras? [they are a plaque here in Vegas
]



Every wonder why aliens have three eyes? What would be the evolutionary advantage to having three eyes, instead of just two?


That's simple to answer though off topic. One need only travel to Tibet and speak to the mystics and the lamas... the third eye is a psychic, or spiritual eye. Humans have a third optic nerve... right in the center of the forhead... we just forgot how to use it


Well most of us



new topics

top topics



 
0
<< 4  5  6   >>

log in

join