It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.

Please white-list or disable in your ad-blocking tool.

Thank you.


Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.


Breaking News: NASA tracking object near shuttle!

page: 31
<< 28  29  30    32  33  34 >>

log in


posted on Sep, 21 2006 @ 12:48 PM
the red donut was the weakest evidence we had...and debunked by us as a lens flare fairly quickly..... the other objects are of more concern

posted on Sep, 21 2006 @ 01:07 PM
Ask for answers

Our Public Communications and Inquiries Management Office is committed to providing you with a response.

NASA believes sharing information with the public increases awareness of and appreciation for our Nation’s history and inspires others to get involved in America’s space program.

Michael D. Griffin

Public Communications and
Inquiries Management Office
NASA Headquarters
Suite 1M32
Washington, DC 20546-0001
(202) 358-0001 (Office)
(202) 358-3469 (Fax)

Please allow 10-15 business days for processing. For email inquiries, be sure to include a subject and do not include any attachments.

SPACE/ADDRESSES - Contacting NASA, ESA and other space Agencies/Companies

Contacting NASA astronauts

Astronaut Office/CB
Johnson Space Center
Houston, TX 77058

[edit on 21-9-2006 by donniedarkooo]

posted on Sep, 21 2006 @ 01:12 PM
I agree that the lens flare was weakest and quickly resolved. But if we maintain weak thinking we will hit a barrier where we incorrectly identify the harder stuff. We need to keep things organized and keep our thinking clear.

It would be a crime to tell people to not voice their beliefs here. But people like me , in the sciences, will take yall more seriously if you very careafully spell out your reasons. (Unlike me, who can't spell worth a darn.)

And then, if you receive criticism, respond to it directly.

For example, there are people here using the tether incident as an example (In which there are very many interesting things happening, such as lengthwise tether traversal.) Yet the skeptics get to ignore the things they have trouble explaining by clearly demonstrating the very weak thinking made in proporting alien UFOs.

Example: Tether Incident.
The tether is very thin and 80 km away when "The Smoking Gun" claims mile-wide fluffy discs with notches are passing behind the tether.

Any scientist could show you that the tether is too thin to have a shadow projected as one or more pixel on the camera image, that the tether shadow is more likely a CCD saturation artefact, and that the discs are out of focus point sources artefacting the camera aperature.

So because we focus on the weak arguments, JimO, for example, gets to spend 50 pages proving that people are irrational, chosing an improbable explanation over a probable one. Any scientist who comes here will see 50 pages of people failing to undertand basics of CCDs and cameras.

They will never know that the objects float around the length of the tether in an oblong pattern that can't be explained by simple sources, and look like they must be 80 km away interacting with the tether.

The community kicks itself in the arse and buries the good arguments all by itself.

No professional disinformation is required. The public provides it for itself.

So rather than make these same mistakes over again, with the loose thinkers providing the community with all of the disinfo debunkers will ever need, could we please rationally, carefully, assess the results and not jump to conclusions?

That's all I ask. Well thought out arguments of any type and hypothesis are welcome. And time will tell what holds up or not. Not how many times someone spams it on the ATS boards.

I'm looking forward to careful analysis of the new events by the UFO community. Lets not let the NASA folks just shrug and tell us to go away.

[edit on 21-9-2006 by Ectoterrestrial]

posted on Sep, 21 2006 @ 01:24 PM
Is the space shuttle one of these?

Interesting comments (paraphrase):

"The object is larger than a satellite" - Fox News

"We determined that these objects are not a threat" - NASA

"Found anything yet? Nothing yet, sir. What about you? Not a thing sir. What about you guys? We ain't found Sh*t!!!" - Spaceballs

posted on Sep, 21 2006 @ 01:51 PM

Originally posted by Ectoterrestrial
Example: Tether Incident.
The tether is very thin and 80 km away when "The Smoking Gun" claims mile-wide fluffy discs with notches are passing behind the tether.

This is simply not true, the discs are not fluffy but they do pulsate with regularity.

Any scientist could show you that the tether is too thin to have a shadow projected as one or more pixel on the camera image, that the tether shadow is more likely a CCD saturation artefact, and that the discs are out of focus point sources artefacting the camera aperature.

It has also been claimed numerous times that the reason the tether was so visible is because "something" managed to interact with the "engine" on the end of the tether causing neon gas to be expelled thus illuminating the tether.

Especially in regard to the tether incident and CCD imaging I would like to point you to a thread that I started because I placed images in it that I believe shows a remarkable similarity between the mission 75 objects and one particular object in the triangular formation from Mission 115.'

Pokey Oats

posted on Sep, 21 2006 @ 02:37 PM
Listening to MSNBC and it amazes me.

Top story Karr computer missing.

Iran Pres.
Branson and Global Warming
Yale free lectures online
Presidential doodles


Chavez again
Explosions in Phila. building
Elin Nordegren
Yad Vashem
macarena mystery

commercial.... second half of news

market wrap
mortgage rates
Border battle

Atlantis Lands Safely.... shows Atlantis land 10 seconds that's it.

Do you see anything wrong here.

posted on Sep, 21 2006 @ 02:43 PM
It may be wrong, but it is the mentality of the media to direct attentions to what sells. They keep society reading blurbs of what the media feels is news worthy.

By Monday there will be no shuttle news whatsoever. It will be back to Bush is evil and up next Brittney has a thought to share. I may be disappointed, but I am not surprised.

posted on Sep, 21 2006 @ 02:49 PM
they were showing the Flight Day highlights throughout the morning after the landing and before and after the Crew's press conference... they did show the footage of one of the objects again from Flight Day 11, ya know the one we all have seen where they highlight it in a little circle... they didn't show the triangle formation again, that sucked... i recorded the FD11 and FD12 highlights, and also the entire Crew press conference, which was about 30 minutes long... i will upload them to Google Video if anyone is interested...

on another note, how would one edit an asf, which is the format in which they were recorded? any suggestions, please U2U and i will just chop out the object footage instead of uploading the whole thing...

posted on Sep, 21 2006 @ 03:48 PM
Who pulled the trigger on this story airing? I'm fairly certain an astronaut did not call FOX News and say "Hey boys and girls, I just saw a UFO!" It looked like the news and NASA got all ramped up about "unknown objects" going as far as calling them UFO's. We all know that anything can be an UFO, yet that's the keyword that gets X-File junkies jumping. NASA has proper motivation: To get the public interested and to support space exploration. The news has proper motivation: To get the public interested and to support the news. Hmmm... tag team between the two "public affairs offices"? I hear someone laughing all the way to the bank.

[edit on 21-9-2006 by saint4God]

posted on Sep, 21 2006 @ 03:50 PM
Is Nasa preparing us for the real thing next? Is disclosure around the corner? I had to wonder when I first heard about this stuff flying around out there. My first thought is that it was legit or they were preparing us for this inevitably.

posted on Sep, 21 2006 @ 04:30 PM
I think that if NASA and the media outlets wanted to profit from the "X File freaks",they would be pushing the whole UFO/alien angle a bit more,don't ya think?

Not tin foil,and plastic bags.

If anything they just dissapoint more people,and cause the public to lose faith in the space program.Not vice versa.

posted on Sep, 21 2006 @ 04:31 PM
we can only wish......

if I get to witness an extraterrestrial with my own eyes, even if the circumstances had to be an "alien invasion" Ill die a happy man.

All seriousness aside, maybe we have beef with aliens because bush is trying to bring "democracy" to there galaxy
and we are going to be lead to believe that aliens are terrorists too...

"support "merkah"!!!!!

All jokes aside.....

is this the beginning of IT? The staged invasion??

posted on Sep, 21 2006 @ 04:34 PM
war on drugs.... war on terror.... war on ETs??? Whats next the "war on intelligence" Oh wait thats been going on for a while now. Thats the secret war.
The war on free thought...

posted on Sep, 21 2006 @ 04:38 PM
Thats what I'm thinking. NASA will probably come back to this even when they finally decide to disclose and say the truth of what they saw. We all know it wasn't debree fromt he shuttle and it wasn't anything else the we monitor so then what was it?

My question is, are they still tracking this debree or is it gone now....

posted on Sep, 21 2006 @ 04:44 PM
Maybe I'm wrong,but I don't think any mention has been made of tracking or spotting the "debris" since the initial encounter.

I've been wondering the same thing though.Perhaps they're keeping an eye on it in private.We'll probably never know.I'm no amateur astronomer or anything,but were/are these objects able to be spotted from Earth?

posted on Sep, 21 2006 @ 04:53 PM
Is anyone a member of MUFON? I wonder what they are saying about all of this.
What about Mr. Friedman? I value his opinion to a degree in these matters along with the other experts in the field, yet none of them have said anything publicly or on their websites.

I want either further inquiries, public acknowledgement or a damn better explanation than what has been given.

[edit on 9-21-2006 by worldwatcher]

posted on Sep, 21 2006 @ 06:07 PM
I think NASA does believe that they did give us an answer trash/litter.

You have to understand when they come up with an answer that is what it is.

You bet they are watching and know exactly what it is. What they seem to forget is the government/military doesn't pay for this we do. We the people, our tax dollars and they are supposed to answer to us, and they answered trash from the cargo bay.

We know this is not true because the shuttle has to be pristine.

We need the folks from Hungary over here to show us how they grouped together to stand up for themselves and there rights.

posted on Sep, 21 2006 @ 06:09 PM
Not hearing much new 2day... I agree with with World' - this "inconvenient truth" needs a champion of sorts... I think Dr. F. would be great... ATS has a number of folks who "ain't too shabby" either. I dunno... perhaps some sort of "crew" will spontaneously arise.

Something of this nature may require serious bucks - and ethics - and cred in spades. Who knows? Perhap's the Ansari's, Paul Allen, Sir Richard B. or pehaps Jeff Bezos or some "money" folks could "no-strings" finance the the FOI research and requests (academics cost bucks); how many photos and other spectral-evidence might be on tap? How many TB, PB of data may there be? The notion makes me "hungry". How much is "classified"?

If something floated/flipped/flopped or flew past my spaceship window I'd be collecting data in a concerted and organized manner - Job One - how about you? NASA? Hey is orbital stuff exempt from FOI?

Hmmm, this pertains to STS-115 - an international crew and not all military folk either... perhaps requests for tax-payer funded info could be tried from Canada AND the US - I'm sure there's a "Catch 22" at every turn tho'. Get all Borg-ed and bogged down in the cross-fire.

STS-115, 114, 121, 95, 75... etc. How ignorant can "we" (the public) be kept? Now that's a quotient worth whittling-away-at.

The Flight Day 12 Highlights have an interesting bit about halfway thru that I'll add to my collection... same with "baggie-fish"... the only co-orbital "floaty-bit" I thought of real concern was the first one (owing to it's solid appearance) and the others seemed "added"... what HAS me REALLY interested are the various astro/cosmo comments and whatever evidence they documented... and the mere mention of "Santas" this morning by amateur radio folks (Santas plural) reminds me of a time long ago and an astro-comment - maybe from Apollo 8 (Xmas '68);

"HOUSTON BE ADVISED: THERE IS A SANTA CLAUS" - and I'm quite sure there already is a "Santa-Clause" which we have been "sold" time and time again - are we being de-sensitized to the point where we pay it little mind and no query when an INCO changes camera field AWAY from something of (to me) obvious interest? Grrrr.

Know this - I will do my level best to try and snag what data I can on ISS Op's and intend to record every moment of NASA-TV on STS-116, can I prove anything? No, not for anyone but me... you?

Victor K.

[edit on 21-9-2006 by V Kaminski]

posted on Sep, 21 2006 @ 06:45 PM
y'all still examining the space garbage ?

are any of you guilty of having the belief the aliens shot down the one that fell to earth ?

be honest

why didn't they shoot this one down then ?

posted on Sep, 21 2006 @ 07:18 PM
I do not think an alien object hit the shuttle accidentally or on purpose.

I do believe the people in all countries have been lied to about what is going on in reference to these objects.

new topics

top topics

<< 28  29  30    32  33  34 >>

log in