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.

 

Virgin Galactic Promo Video and serious question.

page: 1
5
<<   2  3  4 >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Jul, 28 2007 @ 02:18 PM
link   
Here is the Virgin galactic promotion video, think its quite new and its awesome!!!

Someone gimme $200,000 bucks pls lol

its a great watch..



VIRGIN GALACTIC PROMO VIDEO


watch it and then answer me this question... all the videos in the test flight are superb. sharp as a pin in glorious color? space the earth etc etc ..

So why then does NASA? that is like supposed to be the best space agency always have crummy black and white pictures that are always fuzzy or crap? and there always shakey!!!

now ok maybe there all shakey coz the astronaut's are all drunk :p
but why with Nasa's massive resources do they never show us nice video footage?...

Discuss and ty for your time



[edit on 28-7-2007 by Quantum_Squirrel]




posted on Jul, 28 2007 @ 02:49 PM
link   
you know that is a good question you ask. possibly nasa only releases the 'crummy' pictures to the public while keeping the crystal clear pictures for themselves. why they would do that i'm not too sure at the moment



posted on Jul, 28 2007 @ 03:00 PM
link   
Good question Q'. Good observation too. Hmmm. Because NASA-IG's (Inspector General) won't allow it?

A whole bunch of what NASA records as video and still photography during manned spaceflight IS recorded in high definition formats. Take the video clip in my signature and watch it, more importantly listen to it. The commentator clearly states that high definition video and stills were being collected by the astronauts. Yet the public for their tax-dollars get a low resolution clip suitable for streaming at 56K... more over, what they do release often isn't posted until months after the mission is long forgotten.

NASA-IG answers to, and takes direction only from the Office of the President. It may be a "matter" the public isn't privy to for reasons of "National Security."

BTW: I like Sir Richard and the loss of those folks out at Scaled Composites (his contractor/partner) can't be underestimated.

Cheers Q',

Vic



posted on Jul, 28 2007 @ 03:03 PM
link   

Originally posted by Quantum_Squirrel
So why then does NASA? that is like supposed to be the best space agency always have crummy black and white pictures that are always fuzzy or crap? and there always shakey!!!


But they're not. There are tons of high-quality color photographs and video taken from the Shuttle, ISS, and even from the surface of the moon. Take a look at the cover of The Next Whole Earth Catalog, for example. A color picture of Earth that is absolutely stunning. That's NASA taking a bow on that one, not Virgin.

Here's an example.

[edit on 7/28/2007 by schuyler]



posted on Jul, 28 2007 @ 03:05 PM
link   

Originally posted by schuyler
But they're not. There are tons of high-quality color photographs and video taken from the Shuttle, ISS, and even from the surface of the moon. Take a look at the cover of The Next Whole Earth Catalog, for example. A color picture of Earth that is absolutely stunning. That's NASA taking a bow on that one, not Virgin.


i'll give you lots of colour pictures with great definition are out there but video is thin on the ground?

Why? every man and his dog has a half decent camcorder nowadays.. yet NASA does not??

or maybe i should put it another way..? , every NASA footage that could be a UFO (12 mile tether footage etc) is always grainy ? Why?

[edit on 28-7-2007 by Quantum_Squirrel]



posted on Jul, 28 2007 @ 03:13 PM
link   

Originally posted by V Kaminski
Good question Q'. Good observation too. Hmmm. Because NASA-IG's (Inspector General) won't allow it?


they wont allow because they know there out there possibly teaming with life? so there lieing to us.

i also like branson, his story is cool , he is brave , he aint afraid to ask someone to do something that he wouldnt do himself. you know he offered to run the Uk's national lottery for free yet they turned him down ..free as in no profits at all for virgin ..ok he gains from virgins name being advertised all the time but that was enough for him .. speaks volumees in my opinion.



posted on Jul, 28 2007 @ 03:24 PM
link   
I wonder how many strange things whoever goes will see. I assume he will have to work with norad or something, to keep them away from anything sensitive.



posted on Jul, 28 2007 @ 05:01 PM
link   
A question to space/astronomy buffs, somewhat on-subject:

Why, in ALL space videos, you see the earth in great detail, and crafts astronauts etc, however, the space around is PITCH BLACK? Shouldnt you see like stars, at the very least? Also isnt space quite colorful? Is this normal, or edited so we dont see "certain details?



posted on Jul, 28 2007 @ 06:56 PM
link   
I wonder what that is at 5:40 i know this was discussed before but I dont think its debris coming off spaceshipone



posted on Jul, 29 2007 @ 02:32 AM
link   


watch it and then answer me this question... all the videos in the test flight are superb. sharp as a pin in glorious color? space the earth etc etc ..

So why then does NASA? that is like supposed to be the best space agency always have crummy black and white pictures that are always fuzzy or crap? and there always shakey!!!

now ok maybe there all shakey coz the astronaut's are all drunk :p
but why with Nasa's massive resources do they never show us nice video footage?...


There's plenty of HQ NASA footage floating around, why you haven't seen them I have no idea, but perhaps it's because you're too busy looking for conspiracies?

One thing you must remember is a lot of the 'grainy footage' you guys hallucinate 'UFOs' in were taken at a time when the average guy didn't have a digital camera. Another thing you must remember is while NASA does have a bigger budget than some small countries, that budget is tightly constrained and strictly allocated. For every mission the available budget is allocated to specific scientific equipment that is required to achieve the scientific goal of that mission. NASA's mission statement is (and I quote):




  • To advance and communicate scientific knowledge and understanding of the earth, the solar system, and the universe.
  • To advance human exploration, use, and development of space.
  • To research, develop, verify, and transfer advanced aeronautics and space technologies.



It is not to take pretty pictures for conspiracy theorists. If it was you'd have nothing to whine and bitch about because you'd see there was nothing in the hocus-pocus you dream up to inflate your inane lives.



they wont allow because they know there out there possibly teaming with life?


Indeed a universe as vast and awesome as ours is bound to be swarming with life, and yes given the average level of human (un)intelligence, deluded conspiracy theorists included, there are more than likely vast numbers of beings with greater intelligence out there. But do you really think a species capable of interstellar travel would come all this way just to get embroiled in the conspiracies of backwards and archaic governments? What possible gain could beings of greater technological prowess, and thus greater intelligence, have from making a 'deal' with a conceptually inept species such as 'humanity'? I can assure you that given their ability travel vast distances they certainly wouldn't need our resources, and they certainly wouldn't need our 'expertise' or skills. There are far greater sources of the resources needed by a technologically advanced civilisation out there than there are here on earth, and given our inability to master even the most basic (relatively speaking) concepts of space travel I doubt we could be of any assistance.

Perhaps you're right, perhaps there is a conspiracy, perhaps the aliens have seen how moronic you conspiracy theorists are and have persuaded our governments not to reveal them so they can avoid associating with people of such conceptual simplicity. Or perhaps they're protecting you from garrotting your selves on your mouse cords while flailing in hyperactive excitement.

Honestly, if you took half the energy you spend deluding your selves and spent it on logic and reasoning you'd be embarrassed. And before somebody says it, no you're not clever or 'in the know', people with a clue don't waste their time concocting conspiracy theories on internet forums like little boys who never grew up.

Sorry, I don't mean to be mean, but stupidity is the bane of my life. I realise this post might incite some mod to ban me or something, I don't know, I don't indulge in the ways of this forum, in fact I only stumbled across this thread while looking for the options to stop this damn thing from spamming me, but if you do attempt to take action against my posting, just ask your self, who's committing the conspiracy now eh?



posted on Jul, 29 2007 @ 03:13 AM
link   
why do you call me a deluded conspiracy theorist? i find your remarks offensive.. if u had actually clicked on my profile u will see the majority of my posts are heavily based on science or at least current science theory.

infact the few 'ufo' threads i have posted on i have attempted to DEBUNK the claims you fool why dont u go look for your self.

Myself unless i see clear footage of a UFO with E.T waving happily at us i tend to believe hoax everytime..


because there is lots of footage HQ out there perhaps you could post some links? instead of your inane ramblings repeating the same thing over and over..



posted on Jul, 29 2007 @ 04:00 AM
link   


why do you call me a deluded conspiracy theorist? i find your remarks offensive.. if u had actually clicked on my profile u will see the majority of my posts are heavily based on science or at least current science theory.


I apologise for not making this clearer, I was not referring to any specific person when mentioning deluded conspiracy theorists, rather I was speaking in general. I'm sorry that you take offence to such a generalisation, but please do note that you are not the only person who has posted in this thread.



because there is lots of footage HQ out there perhaps you could post some links? instead of your inane ramblings repeating the same thing over and over..


I have neither the time nor inclination to go dredging for stuff than any moderately skilled internet user could find, however here are some links:

NASA
Wikipedia
Wikipedia

And a quick search on YouTube reveals:



















[edit on 29-7-2007 by himselfe]



posted on Jul, 29 2007 @ 04:00 AM
link   
How nice would it be to travel on the Virgin Galactic just to go into outer space & to feel weightless. To look down at the earth & all of its beauty it wouls be a once in a life time experience.



posted on Jul, 29 2007 @ 04:48 AM
link   

Originally posted by Quantum_Squirrel
i also like branson, his story is cool , he is brave , he aint afraid to ask someone to do something that he wouldnt do himself. you know he offered to run the Uk's national lottery for free yet they turned him down ..free as in no profits at all for virgin ..ok he gains from virgins name being advertised all the time but that was enough for him .. speaks volumees in my opinion.


I wonder how cool he will be when the first private space mission gets trailed by UFOs and the passengers start freaking out. Do you think the government will try to silence every passenger on his flights that sees something? I think that would be a rather difficult task. Once public space flight becomes a practical reality, disclosure will have to happen. It is easy to control the flow of information when employees of NASA that are flying into space have signed non-disclosure agreements, but this will no longer be the case when the public starts going up there. Because of this, they will have no choice but to disclose UFOs either right before the first public space flight or after the first few passengers come back telling stories. What are they going to say this time, that part of the rocket was trailing them or that it was part of foam from the fuel tank?
I think not.



posted on Jul, 29 2007 @ 04:52 AM
link   

Originally posted by himselfe

I have neither the time nor inclination to go dredging for stuff than any moderately skilled internet user could find, however here are some links:
And a quick search on YouTube reveals:


You call those YouTube videos high quality?
Good grief, Charlie Brown!



posted on Jul, 29 2007 @ 05:09 AM
link   

Originally posted by pjslug

Originally posted by himselfe

I have neither the time nor inclination to go dredging for stuff than any moderately skilled internet user could find, however here are some links:
And a quick search on YouTube reveals:


You call those YouTube videos high quality?
Good grief, Charlie Brown!


lol thats what i was thinking not to high quality however this maybe due to the nature of you tube i think it re-encodes or something?

there nice i must admit i ty for posting these himselfe.....however... as per usual there all shots at close distance of of nothing we aint seen before ..... when are they gonna swing the camera round and give us a proper view of space? eh?



posted on Jul, 29 2007 @ 06:02 AM
link   


You call those YouTube videos high quality?


yes they are compared to what the OP is talking about- like someone already said, their mission is not to take pretty pictures its to perform space science.



posted on Jul, 29 2007 @ 11:27 AM
link   

Originally posted by yeti101


You call those YouTube videos high quality?


yes they are compared to what the OP is talking about- like someone already said, their mission is not to take pretty pictures its to perform space science.


Well, go back and watch the Apollo 11 landing, and you'll see that basically the entire mission was scripted for TV.

I'm still wondering how they managed to film Armstrong stepping foot on the Moon, btw. As soon as he does, and Buzz gets down there too, what do they do?

They set up a tv camera. then they unveil a plaque. Then they plant a flag. Then they take a call from Pres. Nixon.

The whole thing was propaganda. They'd just landed on the Moon, for Chrissakes, and aside from picking up a few rocks in case they had to leave precipitously, the entire first Moonwalk was given over to mooning for the TV (avoid the bad pun).

So, I take NASA's undivided dedication to science with a grain of salt.

[edit on 29-7-2007 by gottago]



posted on Jul, 29 2007 @ 12:39 PM
link   


I wonder how cool he will be when the first private space mission gets trailed by UFOs and the passengers start freaking out. Do you think the government will try to silence every passenger on his flights that sees something? I think that would be a rather difficult task. Once public space flight becomes a practical reality, disclosure will have to happen.


And your basis for this would be?



You call those YouTube videos high quality?
Good grief, Charlie Brown!




lol thats what i was thinking not to high quality however this maybe due to the nature of you tube i think it re-encodes or something?


You guys are never happy. They are of comparative quality the actual footage of space from the Virgin video, which is the reason for this topic is it not? Besides those were only a small handful from a quick search on YouTube.



as per usual there all shots at close distance of of nothing we aint seen before ..... when are they gonna swing the camera round and give us a proper view of space? eh?


As I have already stated, and as yeti101 so kindly re-iterated, those cameras aren't there to take pretty pictures. Every single NASA owned camera in space is there for a specific purpose, most of those cameras you see the footage from are there to help ensure and maintain vehicle integrity, a job they're not going to do very well if they point them into space.



Well, go back and watch the Apollo 11 landing, and you'll see that basically the entire mission was scripted for TV.


Of course it was, that was a completely different era and an event that had never happened before, that was back in the day when space walks, let alone going to the moon, weren't every day business, going to the moon still isn't every day business. The space program was still in relative infancy and thus they had a job of justifying the use of tax payers money for such a program. Would you rather they didn't go to the moon? Would you rather we were all backward god fearing simpletons throwing stones at 'witches'? Actually don't answer that, given your level of reasoning ability I wouldn't be surprised.

I don't see anybody complaining about the fact that the Virgin footage was scripted, heavily edited 'propaganda' for the sake of Virgin's agenda, i.e selling the idea of space tourism. In fact how do you know Richard and the SpaceshipOne team aren't in on the 'conspiracy'. How do you know they didn't edit out all the footage of 'UFOs'? Personal attack removed.

Honestly, if you're going to take offence to the things I say, don't then go and prove my point, you only make fools of your selves. I'm sure it's no mistake that you completely avoided addressing the points of rationality in my post.

Tell me, why is it only ever stupid people that see UFOs? Why is it only ever 'rednecks' (not country specific) that get abducted? You'd think an Alien race travelling such a vast distance would rather reveal them selves to the brightest among us than to the mentally retarded. The first question can be answered very easily. Sure unidentified flying objects are real, they're unidentified because you don't have a clue.

[edit on 30-7-2007 by sanctum]



posted on Jul, 29 2007 @ 12:45 PM
link   
Nice video. If i had the money i'd go !!! I beleive they are gonna call the first spacecraft for passenger use Enterprise !!!! Yay !!!



new topics

top topics



 
5
<<   2  3  4 >>

log in

join