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.

 

I emailed Ray Villiard @ stsci.edu regarding UFOs in the Hubbles view

page: 1
7
<<   2 >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Jun, 28 2007 @ 03:20 PM
link   
It was noted on Hubblesite.org that he was curator for the site, So I thought I'd ask him a couple of questions...

I don't know you and we will never meet but I'm 24
> years old and I recently came across the vast
> information on Google video and decided to look into
> the Hubble Telescope and the subject of UFOs. Do you
> think Hubble has picked up any unexplained images of
> this nature and if not do you believe?
>
> Keith
> Westminster, CA

---------------------------his reply-----------------

Dear Keith

thank you for your query

HST has a number of "unidentified objects" that cross its field of view. these images are discarded as contaminated. they are liekely satellites and orbital debris.

UFOs are real in that lots of people see things is the sky they can't identify.

UFOs are NOT interstellar vehicles because.

1. most reports are of simply lights in the sky

2. there has never been a well-documented daytime sighting of a "spaceship" just think of all the footage taken on 9/11

3. there are no artifacts that point to manufacture by an advanced technology.

4. "contactee" stories are ALL ripped off from sci-fi pop culture.

5. it's very unlikely alien species would be humanoid given the varagies of biological evolution.

6. 60 years of modern UFO sightings have told us nothing new about the possibility of life in space. there has been no advances in knowledge. We've learned a lot more from exoplanet discoveries over the past 12 years.

7 manifestations of extraterrestrial intelligence would be machine, not frail biological organisms.

cheers

Ray Villard
News Chief/Public Affairs Manager
Space Telescope Science Institute
3700 San Martin Dr.
Baltimore, MD 21218

STScI space science news director for
Hubble Space Telescope,
James Webb Space Telescope

Office: 410-338-4514
Cell: 410-245-0268
Fax: 410-338-4579

email: villard@stsci.edu


===================

What is going with these people??!?!




posted on Jun, 28 2007 @ 03:27 PM
link   
4. "contactee" stories are ALL ripped off from sci-fi pop culture.????

except ppl have been talking about it before sci-fi pop culture.

and what about the children who have been documented telling their parents that they wrer takin abord ships, yet these kids do not have access to the internet or tv or so colled pop culture...


nice reply.. he's in on it haha.

these cases were documented in a book called altered states of consciousness.

[edit on 28-6-2007 by thedangler]



posted on Jun, 28 2007 @ 03:32 PM
link   
one thing that I picked up from his response is that he is well versed on the subject of ET's!

His response almost seemed to be robotic, like he has answered the question 1000 times.

Also, I'm sure someone in his position has a security clearance and is sworn to uphold all the laws to comply with it!


I guess what I am trying to say is that he is part of the cover up!



posted on Jun, 28 2007 @ 03:54 PM
link   
he clearly beleives its possible there are intelligent civs out there theyre just not visiting us. A position i agree with.



posted on Jun, 28 2007 @ 03:55 PM
link   
EXCUSE ME can someone please post this photograph??????????? I am much more interested in seeing that before I get interested in your letter.



posted on Jun, 28 2007 @ 04:00 PM
link   

Originally posted by BugZyZuncle
I guess what I am trying to say is that he is part of the cover up!


I suspect that he is only "part of the cover up" insofar as he follows the establishments predilection for discrediting the extraterrestrial hypothesis and not because he has any kind of "insider knowledge" to suggest otherwise.

His answers are interesting however, although strangely most of them seem irrelevant to the question he was asked. For example he was asked nothing about the form extraterrestrial life might take, so we did he feel the need to state answers 5 and 7?



posted on Jun, 28 2007 @ 04:07 PM
link   

Originally posted by weknowyouknow
HST has a number of "unidentified objects" that cross its field of view. these images are discarded as contaminated. they are liekely satellites and orbital debris.



Does this mean that they don't even examine them? It seems strange that they wouldn't even check them out. You would infact think that someone would be specially employed to do so. This implies to me that they are actually instructed not to examine them - ie it is official policy to 'discard' these images. This raises the question of why. I would bet if you asked the reply would mention something along the lines of 'budgetary restrictions'.

This is as likely to do with them not wanting examination of possible ET sightings as them not wanting anyone to look at the number and nature of all the satellites that are up there and shouldn't be.

Interesting post.



posted on Jun, 28 2007 @ 04:17 PM
link   
#1 we didnt design & build the HST to look for flying suacers.
#2 resources are finite & if 99.99% of artifacts are debris/sattelites thats a lot of wasted resource. I would be extremely angry if they were wasting time examining tiny artifacts. Theyre paid to do deep space research.

[edit on 28-6-2007 by yeti101]



posted on Jun, 28 2007 @ 04:18 PM
link   

Originally posted by blowfishdl
EXCUSE ME can someone please post this photograph??????????? I am much more interested in seeing that before I get interested in your letter.


I think you where talking to me?




posted on Jun, 28 2007 @ 04:21 PM
link   

Originally posted by yeti101
#1 we didnt design & build the HST to look for flying suacers.
#2 resources are finite & if 99.99% of artifacts are debris/sattelites thats a lot of wasted resource. I would be extremely angry if they were wasting time examining tiny artifacts. Theyre paid to do deep space research.

[edit on 28-6-2007 by yeti101]


Thats why I asked if the Hubble telescope picked up any. If there was going to be an instrument to pick up any UFOs, it would be Hubble because of its visual strength.

Considering "UFOs come from a far off galaxy"



posted on Jun, 28 2007 @ 04:26 PM
link   
What did you expected him to say then? "Yes, we have extra terrestrial objects in our scope on a daily basis"? Even if UFO's are real he would not tell you in a email.



posted on Jun, 28 2007 @ 04:29 PM
link   
hubble isnt designed to image spaceships. it looks into deep space at huge objects like stars & galaxies. And when you'r doing that you cant image small objects in near orbit. They become "artifacts"



posted on Jun, 28 2007 @ 04:31 PM
link   
Come on now... I'm doing this out pure excitement. I get a kick out of emailing people who have their feet planeted firmly in science and space about the subject, being that its soo touchy and all... Hell if I got a reply backing with something alittle more open minded, it would bring a smile to my face. Just for kicks.



posted on Jun, 28 2007 @ 04:43 PM
link   
I emailed as well... (name, phone, and address blacked out for privacy)

Hello there, Mr. Villard,

My name is ████████, I have an inquiry.

Recently, someone on the internet sent an email to Hubble. They had an inquiry about "unknown" errors on Hubble images. In the reply, this statement was made by you (if he did, in fact, email you and you replied):
"HST has a number of "unidentified objects" that cross its field of view. these images are discarded as contaminated. they are liekely satellites and orbital debris."

When this image is discarded, it must be after processing to a view-able state. Therefor the data exists. I am NOT saying 'UFO' and I do not believe they are real. However, I am intrigued to see what sort of satellites and orbital debris Hubble may have picked up, by accident. Regardless of how clear it may or may not be. Is there anyway to arrange and acquire any future images that may be discard? Even if they are in raw, uncompressed formats or otherwise?

I understand the amount of processing it takes to get these images out to a public quality image, but these images are for personal research and interest into space debris and will not be published in a magazine or televised program. I also understand to see that if an image is corrupt: It must already be processed to some degree of view-ability. I'm curious to see what good old Hubble has found orbiting earth... the object being that close may not even be resolved, but I would still like to see where possible!

I would greatly appreciate any help in the matter,

█████████ ██████████
All Hours of the Day:█████████████
████████████████



For Public Relations, he made a lot of spelling errors in his email to the original poster. I do believe in UFOs, however, but I believe he would not directly reply to me other ways.

[edit on 28-6-2007 by Foxe]



posted on Jun, 28 2007 @ 05:45 PM
link   

Originally posted by Foxe

For Public Relations, he made a lot of spelling errors in his email to the original poster. I do believe in UFOs, however, but I believe he would not directly reply to me otherwise.

[edit on 28-6-2007 by Foxe]


Fixed


Seriously though I think you did a great job with the letter; please keep us informed as to what response (if any) you receive



posted on Jun, 28 2007 @ 05:46 PM
link   
I replied to him with:
That's a shame Ray, your not a little more open
> minded on the subject specially when there is more
> proof of UFOs & ETI than that of any god. If were to
> actually study anti-gravity propulsion systems we
> might actually go somewhere in space. What about the
> credibility of all the government and military
> witnesses & accounts... It's unfortunate why we
> can't get this technology out of the military
> industrial complex and into our scholars and
> academics. Hitler believed in the technology and he
> studied it. What if Russia or China or North Korea
> comes up with the technology that maneuvers like a
> UFO. We all know what an impact that would have...
>
> No need for a reply if necessary... I thank you for
> your time Ray...


He replied back with:

Hi Keith

I have followed the UFO phenomena for 40 years. And I don't know anything more about the possibility of life in space then when I stated reading the tall-tales in the 1960s.

this phenomenon remind me of ghosts. People have been reporting seeing ghosts for centuries. but real or not, ghosts don't tell us anything tangible about life after death.

Since the 1970s the NATIONAL ENQUIRER has offered a $1 million prize for anyone providing proof of extraterrestrial visitors. Nobody's collected yet.

All a purported UFO abductee has to do is identify a UFO's home star and list the number and types of planets orbiting it, and we could aim HST at the star to verify his claim. that would be compelling evidence.

Also, all it would take is to have a vehicle hover over a major city -- in daytime -- where there are numerous collaborating photos and witnesses. Much more rare events have been documented, such as the passage of a bollide through the atmosphere.

I know photography and purported UFOs photos are the dumbest pieces of fakery I've ever seen. I've easily duplicated a number myself.

I conservatively estimate the galaxy has tens of millions of civilizations -- based on real research. But there's lots of reasons why they'd never come here ;-)

finally, extraordinary claims require extraordinary evidence

cheers

ray


[edit on 28-6-2007 by weknowyouknow]



posted on Jun, 28 2007 @ 06:33 PM
link   
Dar Mr. ███████

thank you for your query.

actually all data are archived. when I said "discarded" I meant that in some cases the image may not be useful for the intended scientific purpose.

any satellite will leave just a streak of light because the HST images are mostly time exposures. So there is really no useful imaging information. the satellite is just a blur because of its motion across the exposure.

sincerely

Ray Villard



I knew he would say that, and he is right about Sat.

However, any 'Anomaly' that appears artificial and can still be seen on a Hubble Image would be huge...very. Or moving with the image itself.

Also: I usually do not mock spelling, but in his job, it is important... my spelling level is 'rated' at 6th grade... as proper grammar is not needed in my field of work, I do not focus on it. Visual artist for the win.



posted on Jun, 29 2007 @ 01:58 AM
link   
nice one ray tell them how it is


told you he clearly believes in alien civilizations and you cant really argue his points about spaceships.



posted on Jun, 29 2007 @ 02:42 AM
link   

Originally posted by weknowyouknow

Originally posted by blowfishdl
EXCUSE ME can someone please post this photograph??????????? I am much more interested in seeing that before I get interested in your letter.


I think you where talking to me?





Umm thats the image of your avatar!!!
I cant seem to find these images on google......please post pictures!!!!



posted on Jun, 29 2007 @ 11:16 PM
link   

Originally posted by weknowyouknow


7. manifestations of extraterrestrial intelligence would be machine, not frail biological organisms.

cheers

Ray Villard


I am sorry but I find this sentence to be hypocritical and entirely ignorant all at the same time.

Ray entirely contradicts himself. For one thing he is referring to a well known theory (which the name escapes me at the time, ha irony) of which a extraterrestrial race would send out essentially nano machines that would self replicate and wait on moons or such for signs of intelligent life.

So who is to say UFO's are not just that? The proof that we are being visited in my opinion is over whelming. Does that mean we are being visited by biological entities? I don't know but to say that as a sort of matter a fact statement is ignorant.

It is ignorant statements like those that make me realize just how far away we are from being a truly advanced civilization.



new topics

top topics



 
7
<<   2 >>

log in

join