It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.
Please white-list or disable AboveTopSecret.com in your ad-blocking tool.
Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.
As to the text on the screen that "estimated size of UFO 1.5 miles diameter", that's really cute -- something that size in orbit 300 miles up would be about half a degree in angular size, as big as the Moon. so -- millions of people down there on the ground, what did THEY report when they saw a moon-sized UFO drifting across their sky? What corroborating independent visual sightings are on record?
Lastly, what did the space shuttle crew say about these lights? They were the on-the-scene primary witnesses, after all.
...and it appears that the 2001 and 2001 UK images have captured the very same remarkable and monstrously sized craft. Not only does the STS-75 footage substantiate the UK images from a totally unique vantage (ie, miles above the earth with expert equipment), but one can clearly see in the Quicktime footage #2 above that whatever the bright object is being videotaped at the start of the clip, when it is seen against the backdrop of the neighborhood -- a yard lamp, house and tree for some reference -- is extremely bright and extremely large. Anyone who has ever tried videotaping at night knows stars, even the brightest, scarcely even register on tape. This object was massive in size and intense in light.
Originally posted by Leevi
I have no information about the STS-80 footage except that it was filmed on the
1 December 1996. I hope it was a broad daylight because we can see the Earth's surface..( I'm not sure if the footage was taken using infrared camera).
Originally posted by Leevi JimO, I really appreciate your point of view and I respect your rich knowledge. It's just not that I don't believe you (your explanations about STS-48 fenomena are absolutely meaningful). But you know.. there are so many events going on in space, so many videos which raise even more questions.. Do you remember a piece of footage where a crew from the shuttle couldn't find a MIR space station among so many appearing, pulsating and flying in different direction objects ? I cannot realize how is that possible not to tell a MIR space station from debris, it's just entirely incomprehensible to me. There are even more interesting pieces of footage, but I understand that this thread is not really meant to discuss them with you. Anyway, thanks a lot for your great input. [edit on 1-9-2006 by Leevi]
Originally posted by Leevi
Mr.Oberg, here is some evidence for you that these disk-shaped objects (STS-75,80 like) ARE actually seen from Earth.[edit on 1-9-2006 by Leevi]
Originally posted by JimO
Here's a list of links with background data and back-forth argumentation:
quote: Originally posted by JimO
When somebody posted an old quote of mine saying that nobody would be able to prevent me or any other space worker from going public with news of a clear ET encounter, you poohpoohed it with reference to vast secret forces that prevent such disclosure.
That's the way I interpreted your response. If you meant something else, and have actual evidence to support it, please clarify.
You don't have any confidence in the intentions and capabilities of OMNI magazine to presenting accurate information on the UFO controversy? Well, it's easy enough to prove -- just cite my an example or two of provable witness persecution that you seem so sure the magazine's team (of which I was part, but not the leader) missed?
Banning DDT may be stupid, but last I looked it had been done openly through congressional action. No secret cabal was involved, AFAIK -- but enlighten us if that view is wrong.
Keeping cold fusion from the market is an interesting claim -- how is it kept from the Brazilian market, or the North Korean market, or the Russian market, then? What power extends to each and every corner of each and every nation of the planet, in your worldview?
You seem to have had plenty of time to research space lasers when the avalanche of internet extracts could be made to seem to support an extraordinary stimulus for the video. It's too bad you now say you are 'too busy' to read evidence for a contrary view.
Is it a general rule for you, that you want to avoid reading reports on such stories, any stories, by people who have delved into them in details? Again, an interesting approach toward understanding a mysterious phenomenon.
Why would you be interested in STS-80, if -- and fair warning here -- I'm 'practiced' with that one too. Do you want to tell me there is no prosaic explanation, or -- when I present some detailed studies -- will you run away from that one too and find yet another temporary favorite?
The STS-48 and STS-80 'UFO videos' do have many similarities, the most telling of which -- and I'm betting you never knew this -- is that they both occurred in the brief interval after orbital sunrise when the shuttle and nearby objects were bathed in sunlight while the Earth beneath the camera view was still in darkness. That, in my view, is not a coincidence, it is a clue towards the prosaic nature of the images.
I missed that post -- when did I say that about you?
What do you claim that source material proves? Or suggests?
I've been involved with 'conspiracy stories' far beyond the UFO subject -- ranging from the silly Soviet-sponsored notion that the CIA sent the Korean Airlines flight 007 into Soviet airspace deliberately, to provoke an atrocity and feel out radar facilities [turns out it was a stupid accident followed by trigger-happy Soviet brutality],
to other aviation disaster fables to various interpretations of NASA space disasters, to the space-related claims of UFO nut Corso, and so forth.
If it surprises you, I think Oswald killed JFK,
a Palestinian terrorist did kill RFK,
a lone racist nut did kill MLK,
and and a fuel tank vapor explosion brought down Flight 800,
and -- while we're into conspiracies -- that Andropov DID order the murder of the Pope.
And concealed gun laws suppress criminal activity. And more -- but way off topic her
Originally posted by Access Denied
No. Ice would form (from leaking propellant valves) in the combustion chamber which you can't see from the outside... not the nozzle... any ice (frozen unburned propellants) formed past the combustion chamber would be expelled and tend to "hang around" the shuttle.
Propellant also tends to seep out the feed lines into the nozzle, where it accumulates, freezes through evaporative cooling, and flakes off during the next firing.