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.

 

Scientific Evidence of UFO's

page: 2
0
<< 1   >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Sep, 7 2006 @ 07:15 PM
link   

Originally posted by lost_shaman
Argos,

I've pointed out on other threads that the segments entitled "High Speed Turn" and "Hypervelocity object" both are caused by a zooming of the camera and are misinterpreted by Sereda. You can see these segments at 35:25 - 45:54 on Part 1.



Sorry to quote myself here , but this was brought up today in an article about this Video.


While extraterrestrial life may exist, "The Secret NASA Transmissions" video is not proof of it by Mike Adams



For example, there's one segment in this video that claims to show a UFO in outer space that zooms along at a certain angle and then it suddenly changes course and travels at a different angle. The narrator points this out very excitedly in the video, and I've heard other people talk about this particular sequence. They say, "See? Look! That object changed direction." Well, the truth is, if you look at what's happening in that video sequence -- and anybody who knows anything whatsoever about videography would be able to recognize this -- what's actually happening is that the camera is filming during a zoom function. That is, the lens zooms quickly while an object is slowly making its way across the screen from left to right.

When the zoom stops, it appears that the object that moving from left to right suddenly and miraculously changes its angle of motion. In reality, it was always moving in a straight line, it's just that our frame of reference of it was altered during the zoom of the camera lens. I can reproduce the exact same thing with any video camera. It's very easy to do, and in fact you can see in this video that the camera is zooming because all the stars in the background are zooming too. It's a very abrupt zoom of the camera lens, by the way. It starts suddenly and it ends suddenly, indicating the zoom is undoubtedly motorized (it's not a hand-controlled zoom). This is what makes the object appear to abruptly change direction. In fact, it's just some object floating out there in space, moving along in a straight line without changing direction at all.

But this all gets misinterpreted as "proof" that an object instantly changed direction in outer space. Therefore, it must be an alien spacecraft. Some people, it seems, want to believe in this "proof" so badly that their conscious minds will erase the stars in the background of the video that clearly show the starting and stopping of a camera zoom function. In other words, it's certainly not proof of aliens among us, but it is proof that some people in the UFO community are unbelievably gullible and have absolutely no common sense (or don't understand the laws of physics or basic camera mechanics).




Just remember you heard it here first.




posted on Sep, 7 2006 @ 07:52 PM
link   
l_s- you do realize who you quoted right?
www.newstarget.com...
I hardly think he qualifies as a video expert(or UFO one for that matter).

Maybe you meant to quote this Mike Adams
en.wikipedia.org...
Although he was a test pilot and no video expert as well. But at least the chances of his UFO experiences containing some kernel of truth are more likely.
I'm just sayin.



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

Originally posted by Argos
Come on ATS has anyone watched this????????????

This guy offers real scientific proof of the existence of aliens ive heard of nothing to discredit his evidence isnt anybody interested??????????


IMO, being interested does not require discrediting. Perhaps silence is more like.. crediting.

A true case for UFO's. Comprehensive, supported. Should we stop debating if they exist and actually move forward with actual questions about them? Why? When? .. WTF!



posted on Sep, 7 2006 @ 08:19 PM
link   

Originally posted by longhaircowboy

l_s- you do realize who you quoted right?
www.newstarget.com...
I hardly think he qualifies as a video expert(or UFO one for that matter).



Ha! No I don't know the guy at all he just wrote the article in question that I quoted. However, one doesn't need to be an expert to see the camera zoom in the segments I've pointed out on Sereda's video.



posted on Sep, 7 2006 @ 08:37 PM
link   

Originally posted by Argos
This guy offers real scientific proof of the existence of aliens ive heard of nothing to discredit his evidence isnt anybody interested??????????


Sorry, I must have missed the proof part. I saw a lot of camera-blur notches (where a speck floating really close to the camera compared the where it is focused turns into a notched disk and the disk part is light enough and doesn't really exist so it APPEARS that it passes behind something that DOES exist, which is the tether)... I also saw some zoom-effect that makes it look like stuff changes direction. I also saw blooming, which is where there are specks out there so bright they bleed over into adjacent parts of the picture to appear like a giant object.



posted on Sep, 7 2006 @ 08:44 PM
link   
Granted. But it would be preferred to quote someone other than a Tony Little wannabe.
Maybe someone like JR or Nullster. (they know about these things)



posted on Sep, 7 2006 @ 08:55 PM
link   

Originally posted by longhaircowboy
Granted. But it would be preferred to quote someone other than a Tony Little wannabe.
Maybe someone like JR or Nullster. (they know about these things)


For all I know the guy reads ATS and he got the tip from me here as I've pointed it out several times here on ATS. I noticed the article was on UFO Updates and I've already pointed out the same error from the Video here and on other threads in the past. That's why I said remember you've heard it here first.




[edit on 7-9-2006 by lost_shaman]



posted on Sep, 8 2006 @ 02:42 AM
link   
Yes i've seen the videos, and yes it's some of the most compelling stuff i've ever seen. What i don't understand is how skeptics are still clingling desperately to theories which have as many holes in them as a good swiss cheese.

Tell me, how can particles of dust/ice whatever, follow the contours of the earth and dissapear just as they go over the horizon?

How can you claim that a 60 degree turn is caused by the camera zooming when the proportions of the earth stays the same and no zooming is noticeable?



posted on Sep, 8 2006 @ 03:05 AM
link   

Originally posted by Mad Larkin

Tell me, how can particles of dust/ice whatever, follow the contours of the earth and dissapear just as they go over the horizon?

How can you claim that a 60 degree turn is caused by the camera zooming when the proportions of the earth stays the same and no zooming is noticeable?



If you are talking about the segments of the video I've pointed out , it is obvious from the footage itself that a camera zoom is responsible for both segments in question. All you need to do is go to the segment in question and watch the background of the video instead of paying attention to the object being discussed to see without doubt for yourself that the camera zoom explains the apparent motion.

"High Speed Turn" and "Hypervelocity object" at 35:25 - 45:54 on " Evidence: The case for Nasa UFOs Part 1" .

Evidence: The case for Nasa UFOs Part 1



posted on Sep, 8 2006 @ 07:19 PM
link   
If I was going to make a NASA UFO-validity video, I'd select someone besides the "Ghostbuster SNL Plumber" to set the stage...


Compelling arguments on both sides - but I'm still on the fence. The dusty, icy, maybe-ufo/maybe-not a ufo banter just isn't strong enough on it's own - either way.

Also - how come all of the NASA video we see like this is this grainy BW junk? We spend billion$ up there - can't we get some hi-qual, hi-res color for once (or is that only for the 'public-consumption' PR stuff? Ok, so it's I-red or whatever. Didn't the IMAX guys pick anything up? Don't we have some good, Canon-telephoto lens equipped, vari-speed film that shoots continuously so that we can analyze that? Or are we just not privvy to that?

Sedens' a good actor perhaps (but not as good as Dan Akroyd). He may even be a good scientist. But grainy, out-of-focus zooming particles or whatever can be interpreted just about any way you want - even 'scientifically'. It's not 'proof' enough. Not expecting an alien to float on up and wave into the window asking for directions or anything - but something more than a distant speck of whatever, eventually, would help.

Oh yeah - IMO it's time NASA put a panel of their own best and brightest together to give us curious inquirers something more than, "...we don't talk about it".

Nice discussion thread, though... keep it up!


Still waiting... waiting...



posted on Sep, 8 2006 @ 08:18 PM
link   

Originally posted by Outrageo
Also - how come all of the NASA video we see like this is this grainy BW junk? We spend billion$ up there - can't we get some hi-qual, hi-res color for once


Yea, kind of suspicious isn't it. But I believe the correct answer is that we are watching live footage being beamed back from space and the data rates available (especially for deep space probes) is limited because of the distances involved.

Now, film camera footage should have much more detail. They took a 2 1/4" film camera to the moon. I'm sure the shuttles fly with some type of hi-res camera on board. I expect anything we would see from those cameras would be "filtered".



posted on Sep, 9 2006 @ 02:22 AM
link   
Odd, I found Sereda's "Galaxy Clock" and thoughts about "Pulsed Electromagnetic Waves" as intriguing as the NASA footage (some I've seen before). Sereda's wild speculative ending (I give credit to Dark Horse for that description) leave room for John Lear's "Soul Catcher" on the moon and Sleeper's "Billiard Table" on the spacecraft, LOL! Now, If the Sirius folks would just fill those water balls with crude oil......or even better, 93 octane gasoline, and get them to earth's surface instead of splattering them on our upper atmosphere, we'd really have something!



posted on Sep, 9 2006 @ 12:12 PM
link   
Yup - after the opening with Akroyd, my next loudest alarm bell rang with the 'Water Balls in space". Just not plausible. For the really really determined, it's technically possible, perhaps, but feasibility is another question. Other threads have already dicussed at length much easier ways to acquire, store and transport H20 'out there'.

Water Balls - sheesh



posted on Sep, 17 2006 @ 03:09 PM
link   

Originally posted by Mad Larkin
Yes i've seen the videos, and yes it's some of the most compelling stuff i've ever seen. What i don't understand is how skeptics are still clingling desperately to theories which have as many holes in them as a good swiss cheese.


Mad Larkin my friend! IMO it's what we can refer to as "The Security Blanket".
Usually in pastel blue or pink! Thinking about the smooth feel of it brings us back
years! Didn't we all have one as a kid? To separate from it and to suddenly
be in a new paradigm was scary! Oh so very soft..



posted on Sep, 17 2006 @ 03:24 PM
link   

Originally posted by lost_shaman

Originally posted by lost_shaman
Argos,

I've pointed out on other threads that the segments entitled "High Speed Turn" and "Hypervelocity object" both are caused by a zooming of the camera and are misinterpreted by Sereda. You can see these segments at 35:25 - 45:54 on Part 1.



Sorry to quote myself here , but this was brought up today in an article about this Video.


While extraterrestrial life may exist, "The Secret NASA Transmissions" video is not proof of it by Mike Adams



For example, there's one segment in this video that claims to show a UFO in outer space that zooms along at a certain angle and then it suddenly changes course and travels at a different angle. The narrator points this out very excitedly in the video, and I've heard other people talk about this particular sequence. They say, "See? Look! That object changed direction." Well, the truth is, if you look at what's happening in that video sequence -- and anybody who knows anything whatsoever about videography would be able to recognize this -- what's actually happening is that the camera is filming during a zoom function. That is, the lens zooms quickly while an object is slowly making its way across the screen from left to right.

When the zoom stops, it appears that the object that moving from left to right suddenly and miraculously changes its angle of motion. In reality, it was always moving in a straight line, it's just that our frame of reference of it was altered during the zoom of the camera lens. I can reproduce the exact same thing with any video camera. It's very easy to do, and in fact you can see in this video that the camera is zooming because all the stars in the background are zooming too. It's a very abrupt zoom of the camera lens, by the way. It starts suddenly and it ends suddenly, indicating the zoom is undoubtedly motorized (it's not a hand-controlled zoom). This is what makes the object appear to abruptly change direction. In fact, it's just some object floating out there in space, moving along in a straight line without changing direction at all.

But this all gets misinterpreted as "proof" that an object instantly changed direction in outer space. Therefore, it must be an alien spacecraft. Some people, it seems, want to believe in this "proof" so badly that their conscious minds will erase the stars in the background of the video that clearly show the starting and stopping of a camera zoom function. In other words, it's certainly not proof of aliens among us, but it is proof that some people in the UFO community are unbelievably gullible and have absolutely no common sense (or don't understand the laws of physics or basic camera mechanics).




Just remember you heard it here first.

Yeah okay, we (I) agree with you on that one.
But are you trying to use that example to discredit all the other videos?



posted on Sep, 17 2006 @ 04:31 PM
link   

Originally posted by TrappedSoul

Yeah okay, we (I) agree with you on that one.
But are you trying to use that example to discredit all the other videos?


No.

Just pointing out those two segments and the fact that Sereda did miss the fact that the Camera Zoomed there.



posted on Sep, 18 2006 @ 08:18 AM
link   

Originally posted by lost_shaman
Just pointing out those two segments and the fact that Sereda did miss the fact that the Camera Zoomed there.

Yeah, that was very stupid of him and makes it easy for everyone to discredit him.



new topics

top topics



 
0
<< 1   >>

log in

join