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.


Space Shuttle Atlantis

page: 6
<< 3  4  5    7  8  9 >>

log in


posted on Sep, 23 2006 @ 12:02 PM
Hey lost' got any photos or videos of these flares of which you are so sure and seen so many times that you pontifically dimiss - got a degree in optics? A job? Or anything other than your words? LOL.

Victor K.

posted on Sep, 23 2006 @ 12:13 PM
Yeah here is one.

posted on Sep, 23 2006 @ 12:14 PM

Originally posted by V Kaminski

that's lovely, your only retorts are now rude and immature... any Mods outs there?

back on topic... i was looking at that second one a little closer, will try to get some different screenshots after i get home... looks like a flare, but it behaves kind of weird if ya zoom in and watch it, kind of like a small corkscrew or something... as soon as the camera fades out and the other camera fades in for the next scene, the 'object' kind of blurs into a circle-shaped thing...

[edit on 23 9Sep 06 by m3rlz]

posted on Sep, 23 2006 @ 12:23 PM
And here is another lens flare.

posted on Sep, 23 2006 @ 12:25 PM
Yup you do that m3'. No sweat off my nutz. Ban me. Make it so. Go ahead complain. Do it, do it now. Serves your purpose and agenda well. There's a button for that. Try Springer, SO, masqua, cmdrkeenkid, intrepid, World_watcher' be my guest - any you so desire. I've read all your posts - you don't play nice or even fair.

Yawn... yup, sorry I tried to help... serves me right for trusting such-likes for a fair hearing - ain't gonna happen in this world eh? LOL. Go ahead do your best/worst. Waste some more of our time... LOL. Priceless.

Victor K.

[edit on 23-9-2006 by V Kaminski]

posted on Sep, 23 2006 @ 12:28 PM
Can we maybe take all this interpersonal rhetoric to U2U, and leave the thread for the subject intended?


posted on Sep, 23 2006 @ 12:33 PM
Hey, I appreciate what you are doing for us.

You just have to ignore them, don't let them get to you.

posted on Sep, 23 2006 @ 12:43 PM
Thanx observe'. This crap is de-rigeur SOP and now you know my hesistance in sharing is heightened and long standing. Thought I'd chance it tho'. From here on out I will select the recipients of the data I have with individual specificity and "out-it", privately. Just had a great chat with a couple of other folks with similar experiences and views. Ever wonder why there's so many lurkers and so few posters? Well, now you know at least one possible reason. I have no fear - I'm old and cranky and stenotic and don't give a hoot about much 'cept truth - truth rules. Lens flare my butt. LOL.

Thanx O' made an old fellow's day!

Victor k.

[edit on 23-9-2006 by V Kaminski]

posted on Sep, 23 2006 @ 01:04 PM
lol I'm an old lady. Oops did I say LADY.

I feel the same as you, I'm to old to play games especially about this subject.

What I have discovered is you can put the truth out and it won't be believed. You have to have proof it seems with this www there is no trust and faith, what a shame.

Words, people are so picky about words these days, how sad. People are so willing to harm another if words are not stated correctly. Sadly this is what this planet has come to.

We need to just ignore some. Please don't stop sharing because a piece of the puzzle you have might fit into my/someone elses puzzle.

When we are young we are taught to share and when we are older we learn to work in teams and I think you are a good team member.

posted on Sep, 23 2006 @ 01:14 PM
V Kaminski,

Oh come on. I had a close encounter with a UFO four years ago. I'm here doing the same thing that your claiming to be here to do. The difference is that I'm willing to help educate myself and others and blow past Lens Flares and "out them as Lens Flares" in order to focus on the real and true anomalies.

IMO misidentifying normal prosaic things like Lens Flares and touting them as UFOs undermines what little credibility we have in this field. It's nothing but cannon fodder for Skepti-bunkers who think all of us are just Nuts!

[edit on 23-9-2006 by lost_shaman]

posted on Sep, 23 2006 @ 01:31 PM
I'm sure it's tough though when you have found something,and people immediately start calling you a liar.Even when you have evidence.I think that's one reason why a lot of these investigations never get anywhere....people don't trust each other.You provide evidence....they say it's photoshopped or something.Honestly I'd be a bit frustrated as well.

posted on Sep, 23 2006 @ 01:40 PM
I was raised in a time where B&W TV was new... and my Dad would listen to Radio Free-Moscow using a rhombic antennae he built from Popular Science plans and some early Heathkit stuff.

Yeah, sorry for the rant - I'm not used to having my integrity and authenticity questioned unjustifiably - while trying to help. I just normally "Donald Trump" them-folk. I'm a HR veep in muh-day-job. 'Bout ready to retire muh-self an' can relate to "the ain't got time to waste" deal. My nite job and this "pursuit" and my gorgeous missus are plenty-fun-enough - I'm a zipper-chest club member.

You know, I thought I'd just chance it just the once you know - I've never found anything like that before where I sincerely believed I may have been first to report. Oh well.

Actually, "She who must be obeyed and collects speeding tickets" (my darlin' significant other found it) - I was lookin' for ET damage "blinders-on" full-stare and she points to the "lens-flare" on the big monitor and says - well you know, "WTF is that?" It's maybe 3 or four seconds - I totally missed it.

I've never seen a "three-legged lens-flare" or "tri-lobular self-navigating ice-crystals" before. Thought folks'd enjoy it - Oh well, just gotta have a higher squelch, and selectivity for the communication I choose. My own dang fault. I really gotta thank and apologize to Denied who got dragged into this by trying to help me get the data out. DocGonzo and you too O' get a big thumbs up from me. Lens-flare that's rich.

I have some homeys in Toronto who have done some work for NASA with IMAX and animation stuff - the new Christopher Reeve feature too. They may be able to help me on STS-116 with some graphics analysis or if we had HD Video data to get the raw frames out in higher-resolution they have some picture pattern recognition stuff that may make the frame-by-frame searches quicker too. They owe me.

Dr. Friedman has always treated me well and not made me feel lame - I'll seek his opinion for future reference on the "other" stuff. Uh, if I missed "that" whatever - what else may be lost. I'll work on it.

Victor K.

[edit on 23-9-2006 by V Kaminski]

posted on Sep, 23 2006 @ 01:56 PM
BTW: When Dr. Greer comes back to Toronto.... heh heh. Yeah read my stuff on that char' - go ahead. The fullness of time stands for much. Slingers of argument-non-sequitor. Uh, those are the first posts I've made of vid or pics and I had to seek assistance to do that. I love watching this. LOL.

[edit on 23-9-2006 by V Kaminski]

posted on Sep, 23 2006 @ 02:28 PM
VK... here is another example of the same type of lens flare as in the second video posted for you...

the first flare appears to the right of the cargo bay door, a second one on the edge of the cargo bay door and finally another one on the cargo bay door... they also fade out in the order they appear... it looks best if you resize the video to the original size...

by the way, i wasn't questioning your integrity or saying you faked the video, i was only saying the first video looked like the object was added after the fact, which i cannot prove or disprove either way... it's ony an opinion and if it came across as an attack, well sorry mang... we are all here for the same thing, to find out the truth...

i will be recording all of sts-116 as well, perhaps we'll catch some more at that time...


posted on Sep, 23 2006 @ 02:43 PM
Uh, yeah. Some are lens-flares - no doubt, some camera artifacts, some particulate junk, some "other-stuff". The whatever "it" is in the ET sep footage and jpeg frame outputs aren't flares or ice crystals in my opinion... I don't think I called it "anything" - others have - perhaps not. I ain't to find no truth but that which I... 'not worth pursuing at this time and place.

Thank you for reaffirming my distrust of humans - I shall be "longer-of-knife" in the future.

Victor K.

posted on Sep, 23 2006 @ 04:37 PM
Ok, here's a moving object, its quite faint, but as the bay doors open watch out into space, almost blinking in and out of the footage, but there, any idea's?

Its at the very start.

[edit on 23-9-2006 by Denied]

posted on Sep, 23 2006 @ 07:00 PM
This was the news link


posted on Sep, 23 2006 @ 10:40 PM
Don't be distracted by perceived insults or personal attacks. Someone may only be discounting something you're offering, but that's to be expected.

The video you supplied was great. It showed an object that appeared intelligently controlled and was following the gas tank as it passed. There are only three things to conclude from this footage: 1) That this was a government black project, 2) That this is an ET craft, 3) That this object was added to the video after the fact. From what little I know about you, Kaminski, it seems that you have been on these boards long enough that it would be unlikely that you would fabricate a story, then post an altered video.

The #4 possibility is that this is an artifact/lens flare. But the anomalous object follows the tank so precisely, that it seems less a possiblity. Whether it's ours or "theirs" is anyone's guess, but given this footage and all of the other footage - the jellyfish, the triangular lights, the "shim", glowing donut, AND the footage I just saw as an object passed as the cargo bay was opening, I have to say this is just an active (ET wise) shuttle mission.

It's all there, and humorously there is so much that NASA denies it's just funny (and apparent). I have this image of Wayne Hale holding up that oversized, brown gumwrapper-looking plastic shim like some magic wand waving everything everyone just witnessed away. Sorry, no. Fox New Houston, CNN, MSNBC, Local 6, BBC World and every other news source may roll over and accept that that gum wrapper was visible from miles, hurtling through our earth's atmosphere, but we don't have to aid and abet NASA in this deception.

This shuttle footage is obviously peppered with lense flares, and they are easy enough to recognize. Don't get distracted. The object flying through the clouds - not a lense flare. The three objects that form the equalateral triangle, and then two of them float away - not a lense flare. The object that flips past Atlanitis when the cargo bay door is opened - not a lense flare. The jellyfish - not a lense flare. The donut shaped white glowing object videotaped over our blue atmosphere - not a lense flare. Just put these pieces together and ask NASA what the hell is going on that they can't see what's right in front of their face. The thing is - they can, but they're trying their damndest to cover all of this up, and as far as the apparently duped media, they have. That's why if we really want answers, we'll have to compile this ourselves.

Here's a link to an article that states NASA thought an object hit its wing.

We heard the audio of the scared male astronaut talking about some object passing his window - again, this is never brought up again. A poster in this thread said there was mention of a light passing the window. All of these things together create a very convincing case. So it's imperative that everything is kept together, and that people aren't distracted with name calling, insults, and lense flares. Some people may be on this thread to do just that, and sometimes it can be effective as a distraction, so be aware of that.

Who knows how many or few people are putting this stuff together, but with the saved photos, video, news reports and testimony, we are putting a case together that would be sufficient to do a mini-documentary on what really happened with the Atlantis flight. Moving triangular formation, an astronaut, "Something just flew past our window. I'm not joking." An unknown object hits the wing. An unknown object watches the detatched gas tank. And unknown object, visibly larger than a man and smaller than a football stadium, hurtles through our atmosphere. A glowing donut-shaped object slowly moves across our stratosphere, with our blue atmosphere behind. Three glowing objects float in an equalateral triangular formation, then two of the objects float away. A dark object flips past the Atlantis as the cargo bay doors are opened..keep going

posted on Sep, 23 2006 @ 11:56 PM
Thanx much Ross and OnThe'... I was skeptical of the UFO reports, but Ross's link is good enough for me to think that some have caught wind in the media and may pursue.

'Deck makes some points about the "thingy" I had not considered and makes me think "not-lens-flare" size large, colour white even more. Could a reaction control system account for the "pivotal" tracking... or are we in some sorta A-G control system-territory. NASA is very interested in ET foam loss and they were recording... what's not to say they get a little "help" every now and again from sources "other" whether human or whatever - I dunno... but Ford and GM are talkin' merger - who'd have believed that up till this year or so...

Could there be a Dark Project from the kitchen of the "Skunk and Phantom" that could do that? Do we (the human military industrial complex) have such taxpayer-dark-luxo toys? Can we build such things with current tech? I'd not be surpised if it was so and having such secret stuff would explain the need for things like a Space Command and dis-info interlopers too... and make current spaceflight efforts a bit of a joke.

Any idea of how many frames are in 20 hours of video? All of them I think. LOL. I got some stuff out using a freeware app that grinds along and locks up pretty frequently so I'll get the bulk processed by some friends who do that sorta stuff for a living. Who knows what else is buried in the "noise" of the stuff...

I wonder what else I've missed over the years.

Thanx again Ross and 'Deck,

Victor K.

[edit on 24-9-2006 by V Kaminski]

posted on Sep, 24 2006 @ 02:03 AM
"Any idea of how many frames are in 20 hours of video?" == V Kaminski

Give or take a couple, I would guess 2 million, one hundred and sixty thousand, assuming
your total time estimate is correct.

(edit spelling error)

[edit on 24-9-2006 by nightwing]

[edit on 24-9-2006 by nightwing]

new topics

top topics

<< 3  4  5    7  8  9 >>

log in