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.

 

omg!! STS-115 Scorpio!

page: 1
0

log in

join
share:

posted on Oct, 10 2006 @ 06:53 PM
link   
Okay I need to calm down but I think I may be on to something here. If anyone has been paying attention to these "UFO" that appear to be luminous, i.e., "jelly fish" and the supposed "plastic bag" on the STS 115 image. Im wondering if these are some sort of messages.

www.youtube.com...

at about frame 28 a "luminous scorpion" comes floating onto the screen from the lower right hand corner. Ive seen this footage a dozen times and it didnt hit me till today. It looks EXACTLY like scorpio the constellation!!! Do you perhaps think this may be some sort of message? If this has been debunked as a lens flare, fine, Im willing to accept that, but if this is still a mysterious anomally than I would pause on the clearest frame and zoom in on it. Here are some additional photos of "scorpio" to copare

www.athenasweb.com...

dunthor.com...

nametop.co.kr...

images.google.com...:LC1u8U56_ULyxM:www.biblicalastronomy...

a52.g.akamaitech.net...

I know what you are thinking. It silly to assume that "aliens" sre trying to communicate by our astrological signs, rihgt? I mean whats the chances they even have something similar to a scorpion in there neck of the woods. This constellation is a human invention. Im hypothesising that if this is indeed an "alien anomoly" with some sort of intelligence. Its pretty safe to assume that they are speaking to us in the most simplest way they think we can understand....pictures. I mean we have to comunicate in a more simplistic way to dogs. Any comments...arguments.. etc???



[edit: all caps in title]
Mod Edit: All Caps – Please Review This Link.

[edit on 10/11/2006 by 12m8keall2c]




posted on Oct, 10 2006 @ 07:01 PM
link   
I think its a garbage bag in earth orbit.



posted on Oct, 10 2006 @ 07:01 PM
link   
files.abovetopsecret.com...[2]_20060926143701.jpg





Can't wait till STS-116 in December!

Victor K.

41'

EDIT: Alternate video source
www.zippyvideos.com...

[edit on 10-10-2006 by V Kaminski]



posted on Oct, 10 2006 @ 07:04 PM
link   
i dont really know the origins of this video, but it kind of looks like both the object and the camera are in freefall together. that weird thing at 28 seconds goes in and out of the clouds so its hard to get a clear look but it kind of looks like a skydiver. if you pause it at 30seconds you can make out two legs and outstreached arms. but it seems so out of proportion and "alien looking" like its flying under its own power. i dont know what to think.
possibly its trying to control the tank?

after a bunch more second looks, im starting to think it could something twin-prop like the Bell-Boeing MV-22B Osprey. something like the military might use to track and lift a heavy object? notice the twin rotors and the elongated centermounted fuselage configuration.




[edit on 10/10/2006 by bokinsmowl]



posted on Oct, 10 2006 @ 07:20 PM
link   
Isnt it a bit high for a heli?



posted on Oct, 10 2006 @ 07:20 PM
link   
Isnt it a bit high for a heli?



posted on Oct, 10 2006 @ 07:22 PM
link   
Rotor-craft don't work too well at 400.000 feet at 17,000 MPH outside the Earth's atmosphere but who knows eh?. It does seem to be some thing and it does seem to track the ET which is about 28 feet in diameter so it ain't exactly tiny. Bizzz-Czar-o to the max.

Victor K.

41'

[edit on 10-10-2006 by V Kaminski]



posted on Oct, 10 2006 @ 07:25 PM
link   
yeah, i guess they are pretty high up. i didn't think so at first, but now that i really observe the ground...its a loooong way.


whos actually doing the filming?

[edit on 10/10/2006 by bokinsmowl]



posted on Oct, 10 2006 @ 07:30 PM
link   
Not sure which astronaut most likely a MS, Tanner, Maclean or Piper as Fergie and Commander Jett would likely be front seat at that point.

Victor K.

41'



posted on Oct, 10 2006 @ 08:06 PM
link   
soooooooooooooooooo... does anyone see the resemblance to scorpius??
Just look at the oblong(football) shaped abdominal area. The scorpion shape It remains consistant throughout the footage. On top of all this doesnt it seem like it has almost a "ghostly" illumination?



posted on Oct, 11 2006 @ 11:40 AM
link   
I have been sniffin' around. I have found a "rumoured" vehicle that could explain the the STS-115 ET Tank Separation Anomaly, perhaps not.

I don't know "jack" about "Black projects" and even less of "techno-possibilities" that being said I put forward the notion for consideration that what was seen may have been a "Blackstar" variant.

The spade-shaped nose had me thinkin' so I put a "bot on the job" with "spade and shovel" as descriptor variables (amongst others) and this was returned about 20 minutes ago... an article from Aviation Week & Space technology.

It might "fit". Perhaps some of the ATS community members with more experience and knowledge of "possible" aerospace stuff beyond that of "the armchair variety" could take a look for us?

The link: www.aviationnow.com.../030606p1.xml

Thanx,

Victor K.

41'

[edit on 11-10-2006 by V Kaminski]



posted on Oct, 11 2006 @ 03:50 PM
link   
nice find but it doesnt explain the objects luminosity. It appears to be made of light/energy. And still in my opinion its scorpiusesque shape



posted on Oct, 11 2006 @ 03:56 PM
link   
have there been any debunking attempts in attempt to explain this anomaly?



posted on Oct, 11 2006 @ 04:06 PM
link   
Nope... de-bunkers? Explain? LOL. Oh my, no... why use a de-bunker when it can be blamed on another myth... must be what you say... or painted white or gray with sunlight on it... be nice to have some better video... oh, well. Perhaps STS-116, perhaps we'll never know beyond speculation. This is well under anyone's radar especially today.

Thanx,

Victor K.

41'



posted on Oct, 11 2006 @ 04:41 PM
link   
This is quite interesting to say the least. Potentially more interesting than the earlier STS where their was the object and some sort of "beam weapon" (I believe from Sept 10th 1990, can't remember STS number) Being that it is shot from the space shuttle rules out that it was helicopter or airplane.

First I would like to see some other sources of footage other than this guys to make sure that he hasn't added it to the video. If it is really on the footage, I'm guessing some will explain it is a reflection of some sort.



posted on Oct, 11 2006 @ 04:53 PM
link   
I beleive this is an entity or ET craft.

Just my opinion from everything I've seen and read.



posted on Oct, 11 2006 @ 05:37 PM
link   
I dont want to jump too soon on conclusions on this one but it is extremely interesting.

First, this thing is relativly close from the lens, we clearly see the external tank the sun reflect on it but nothing on the wierd object. My head is boiling, i wonder if its a very wierd space garbage or somekind of entity on its own nothing solid like the fuel tank. I dont see any similiraties to anything scorpionesque but the shape of this thing is out of the ordinary, if its not a garbage, but a garbage would have reflect the light like the tank did insted of beeing luminescent.

Second thing on my mind is the history of the nasa sts mission: 37, 48, 75, now 115 to name a few are very impressive, the ice particles and the garbage theory are becoming less an option with all those smoking guns so i think its rational to think its somsort of an alien.

[edit on 11-10-2006 by eagle eye]



posted on Oct, 11 2006 @ 06:02 PM
link   
I find it odd knowone sees it





"http://i2.photobucket.com/albums/y29/imprisoned_in_flesh/hf_spcwatch_scorpio_01.jpg" border="0" alt="Photobucket - Video and Image Hosting">

"http://i2.photobucket.com/albums/y29/imprisoned_in_flesh/ScorpioConst.jpg" border="0" alt="Photobucket - Video and Image Hosting">



posted on Oct, 11 2006 @ 06:45 PM
link   
I do not wish to discount the possibility of it being "not-of-human-origins". But I was trying to suss-out the why of the event and I came up with a possible earthly reasoning that could tip the balance in favour of the "works" Phantom or Skunk as being the toy-shop-of-origin. Don't mind me I'm just noodlin'...

First, what was Shuttle doing at the time? Collecting Hi-Res photos of the ET as it fell away owing to concerns of foam loss - as Wayne Hale has said publicly several times, "Remember we don't get them (the external tank) back." They burn up on re-entry and are valuless for study at that point. What has the primary concern of NASA been since STS-107? Foam loss and ET data-gathering/redesign. The idea being more data is better than less data to arrive at engineering solutions.

Second, how could NASA insure that "we've got the tank right"? Perhaps a little help from "contractors other" like Boeing or Lockheed Martin? Let's for the moment assume that was the case. How'd they collect such data? The easy way would be to have a look "in-situ" after all the rigors and stress of atmospheric ascent - just fly right up to that puppy and have a look-see at how well the ET survived ascent.

What instruments could be used from such a small platform (my guess 60 - 90 foot long craft as the ET is roughly 30 feet in diameter and about 150 feet long)... how about a 1 meter lens optical suite? Or better yet an imaging laser suite much like shuttle uses on orbit to examine itself now. That might satisfy the engineering folks to say, "Yup, Uh huh we got a good tank design now."

Well as the article I posted earlier clearly says such devices are thought to be "standard equipment" on such an XOV. The article also gives a fairly good accounting of what such a craft may look like and for me that fits. I am prepared to change my assessment any time a better explanation comes along.

The following is from an external source at
AviationNow

Mods I'm sorry but I can't figger out this external stuff... if I blow it can someone fix it for me please... thanx!

Description of Vehicle from the external article:

"During the system's development cycle, two types of spaceplane orbiters may have been flown. Both were a blended wing/fuselage lifting-body design, but differed in size. The smaller version was about 60-65 ft. long and may have been unmanned or carried a crew of two, some say. Industry engineers said this technology demonstrator was "a very successful program."

The larger orbiter is reportedly 97.5 ft. long, has a highly swept, blended wing/body planform and a short vertical fin. This bulky fin apparently doubles as a buried pylon for conformal carriage of the spaceplane beneath the large SR-3. The "Q-bay" for transporting an optics-system pallet or other payloads may be located aft of the cockpit, with payload doors on top of the fuselage.

Outboard sections of the spaceplane's wing/body cant slightly downward, possibly for shock-wave control and compression lift at high speeds while in the atmosphere, whether on ascent or reentry. The only visible control surfaces are flap- or drag-type panels on the wing's trailing edge, one section on each side of the stubby vertical fin. A relatively large, spade-shaped section forward of the cockpit--which gives the orbiter a "shark-nose" appearance--may provide some pitch stability, as well."

Imaging Suite Elements from the external article:

"The spaceplane is capable of carrying an advanced imaging suite that features 1-meter-aperture adaptive optics with an integral sodium-ion-sensing laser. By compensating in real-time for atmospheric turbulence-caused aberrations sensed by the laser, the system is capable of acquiring very detailed images of ground targets or in-space objects, according to industry officials familiar with the package."

If such a bird exists this is one way to use it... there may be others - DPRK's Lil' Kim may wish to avoid surface travel for a while...

As I mentioned earlier perhaps we could get someone familiar with aerospace history and "techo-possibilities" but not bound by NDA's or involved workin' for any official/unofficial program to have a gander and see whether shizzle or fizzle. Someone maybe like oh I don't know - Waynos? Someone not part of the "machine", who'd not have a dis-info interest or COI.

I'm still undecided as to what this "thingie" is, but so far I'm leaning to "made in USA."

Thanx,

Victor K.

41'



new topics

top topics



 
0

log in

join